Skip’s Quips: Condemning Flashy Filmmaking

Blog Sketch 082813What is it these days with cinema pyrotechnics?

I see it all the time, most recently in Darren Aronofsky’s nearly unwatchable Requiem for a Dream. Quick cuts, splashy close-ups of eyes and drug paraphernalia, sped-up photography and so on.

Couldn’t stand it. Had to turn it off.

No, I’m not going to blame this kind of filmmaking on MTV. Fast edits have been around for a long time. Rather, I think it’s a product of directors not trusting their audiences. It’s about adding flash to a recipe in the hopes of making it palatable.

I prefer a more traditional approach. That doesn’t necessarily mean I want to see more irises and wipes, though. Instead, I’d like to see a focus more on story, on telling a tale in a linear manner, without blatant showmanship. That just calls attention to the filmmaking process, and enjoyment of a movie should be organic. It should immerse you, not alienate you. Too many flicks today do the latter.

I like Aronofsky; I think he’s very talented. But I believe RfaD isn’t a success. Too much demonstration of cinematic prowess, not enough straightforward storytelling. Can we have a little more of that, please, in the future? Special request, from me.

Skip’s Quips: I Still Like Going to the Movies

Blog Sketch 082813I have to admit: I’ve been staying at home a lot and watching films on TV rather than going to the theaters to see them.

That includes no-longer-first-run movies. These days, I generally wait until they hit pay-per-view to watch ’em.

But that doesn’t mean I don’t like going to the theaters. On the contrary. There’s something beautiful about viewing a film in the dark amid a host of unfamiliar people while nursing a bucket of artificially moistened popcorn and a strangely sweet diet soda. I like it. That I haven’t done it much lately is more a testament to my laziness than my desire to stay home.

That will change soon. I’m making a non-New Year’s resolution. I plan on going out to see more movies … as soon as I drop the remote.

No, that doesn’t mean I’m going to stop watching films on pay-per-view or the commercial channels. It just means I’ll be in the theaters more often – where movies are meant to be shown.

I may even go see a bad flick or two, just for the heck of it. Now that’s a change in philosophy if there ever was one. You gotta be dedicated to the cinema if you make a resolution like that.

Well, I am. I’m dedicated to the cinema. And I’ll be at the theaters more. I promise you.

What channel is that TV menu/guide thingy on again?

Skip’s Quips: Should Movies Be Free?

Blog Sketch 082813I think so. Why not? Sure, it would mean the collapse of an entire industry, but it might spawn others. Concession sales would boom. More people would go to the theaters.

If only movies were free.

I’m talking about movies on cable, too. You shouldn’t have to pay for anything – even good movies. Make that especially good movies. Quality should be gratis. No one should have to pay to improve his or her life cinematically.

My feeling is that everyone should have the right to enjoy a good movie … and not be prevented from doing so by cost considerations. Great films are one way we make society better. They should be distributed like medicine is in some countries.

Free.

Now, I’m not saying we should go ahead and download movies illegally. Far from it. We have laws, and we need to abide by them. But ideally, we shouldn’t have to pay for great art. It should be provided to the public, like the Smithsonian museums in Washington, DC, do. Everyone should be able to have access to cinematic masterpieces.

It’s not the case now, and I don’t think it will ever happen. It should, though. It would make the world a better place. It would make everyone a lot happier.

If only movies were free.

Setter’s ‘Spectives: The Horror, The Horror!

Setter Drawing for Blog 082613I’ve always been afraid of decomposing bodies.

Not that I’ve seen any up close, thank God. I’m talking about in the movies, where they’re as prevalent in the horror genre as chatty friends in terrible rom-coms.

So that’s why I don’t watch many horror flicks. Oh, sure, I’ll turn to them now and then if they’re on TV, but I invariably shield my eyes. It doesn’t even matter if the picture is lousy cinematically; I don’t enjoy watching zombies or any other being made up to have putrified flesh jump out at me.

A long time ago, I watched Raiders of the Lost Ark over and over again to make sure I could stand the scene where Indy and Marion are trapped in a tomb with a host of dusty mummies. Nowadays, it seems pretty tame, but at the time, it scared me out of my wits. There’s something about rotting corpses that makes me want to say, “Zoinks, Scoob!” I don’t like ’em.

I’m probably not alone. You’d be hard-pressed to find anyone who’s like “Hey, I really enjoy seeing flicks with a whole lotta decomposing bodies.” It’s not exactly an audience-pleaser, is it? Still, some movies can’t do without them, and I suppose they’ll always be a fixture of horror pictures … coming out of nowhere in the dark, with a crash in the soundtrack.

Maybe it’s the jolt I really can’t take. Whatever it is, I’m not down with rotting corpses in my films. You can keep ’em.

Skip’s Quips: ‘Sunshine’ Ain’t So Super, Man

Blog Sketch 082813Every so often when I see a movie, I get really, really disappointed that someone didn’t make it better.

That’s how I felt after viewing the Danny Boyle-directed Sunshine,  an ambitious sci-fi film that should’ve been excellent. It left me feeling dismayed at all the ticking clocks (the flick has something to do with a human space expedition to save our solar system’s dying sun, which seems to be capitulating at the very moment the picture is going on … a rather frustrating, action-movie-esque part of the plot), flashy cinematography and mumbled dialogue, despite the interesting story. We definitely need thoughtful, adventurous science-fiction films in our cinematic diet, so this one was especially problematic for me. A good idea that fell short.

I’m just wondering why director Boyle couldn’t have trusted the material more to avoid the pitfalls that race-against-time flicks often go through. There was a lot of breathlessness going ’round, and I would’ve preferred something more tranquil. Plus, the science seemed off … even to this completely unscientific movie critic. That’s an issue in science fiction, a genre in which a good movie achieves credibility however outlandish its foundations may be. In that regard, Sunshine left me cold.

Too bad. I wanted to like it. The flair, however, just wasn’t there.

Setter’s ‘Spectives: Musical Lines, Non-Parallel

Setter Drawing for Blog 082613We’re allowed to like great scores to mediocre movies, right?

I’m thinking about this as I ruminate on The Red Pony, Lewis Milestone’s 1949 film of John Steinbeck’s sad tale concerning a boy and his steed. The music, by Aaron Copland, is one of the American composer’s greatest compositions, yet it accompanies a picture that’s unfortunately just so-so.

I wish it were better.

Usually, it seems that the quality of a score reflects that of its film, but in The Red Pony‘s case, it doesn’t hold true. Frankly, I have no desire to see the film again … yet I often find myself humming the glorious, playful melodies and mulling the vibrant orchestration. Am I allowed to do this? I ask myself, half-serious. Am I able to like only one component of a full movie?

I have to answer yes, though I’m hesitant to do so. The cinema runs alongside music, and they’re often inextricable. Great directors generally know how to apply great scores by composers to celluloid, and many great composers have written for the screen. So what happened with The Red Pony? With a cast including Robert Mitchum and Myrna Loy, as well as Steinbeck’s writing chops, plus Copland’s lovely tunes, it should be a masterpiece.

It’s plodding, however, and the music is basically what saves it. Maybe this is one of the exceptions in the world of film: a picture that isn’t very good when all of the parts are added, despite one component being transcendent. At any rate, I’m glad we have this anomaly. I just hope I don’t encounter too many more.

Skip’s Quips: Movies and What to Make of ‘Uriel Acosta’

Blog Sketch 082813I’m afraid I’m none too knowledgeable about the world of avant-garde theater, so this post might lead anyone with more than a small understanding of the genre to look askance at me.

This past Saturday, I went to see the Target Margin Theater’s production of Uriel Acosta – I Want That Man! at The Chocolate Factory in Long Island City. What does this have to do with film? Well, the thoroughly bizarre performance – which had something to do with the life of the titular Jewish philosopher, the Yiddish play about him and all sorts of other related material – featured some very interesting video-centric content, including images of bearded men, Hebrew words and more projected onto plumes of smoke drifting upon the stage area. The performance also included a bit of curious puppeteering that was projected onto screens for the audience’s viewing pleasure. So there was a significant multimedia component.

Unfortunately, it didn’t stop the production from being rather dull and confusing – the many sequences during which the actors spoke their lines loudly and concurrently exemplified this issue. Still, the piece got me wondering about the future of cinema and how it could relate to live theater … how these media could be juxtaposed in creative ways. There’s no reason to think these are exclusive from one another, but while theater may include snippets of film, you’d be hard pressed to find movies outside of The Rocky Horror Picture Show where live performance forms an integral (albeit cosmetic) part of the experience. Perhaps we need more of the latter, though in a form where we’re not reacting to the proceedings onscreen but in accord with them. That somehow our decisions affect what happens in the movie.

That may sound like a futuristic idea, but it’s already been toyed with in films such as Fahrenheit 451, in which the characters participate in mundane teleplays whose characters seem to react to the outside participants. Hopefully, a new breed of this type of thing could be more involving.

There’s a chance this has already been done, by the way, and I’m just not privy to it. So if I’m wishing here for something that’s already obsolete, I apologize in advance.

From Skip and Setter’s Creator: A Brief Apology

Blog Sketch of Me 092213Hello, readers! Just want to apologize to you for not providing a new comic recently. Drawing is something that I’ve returned to after a long hiatus, and for some reason it’s more challenging to do for me than writing a post about the cinema. Not that I’m any good at drawing, anyway, but I do realize that my most recent strip has been up for a while. Plans are under way for more, so stay tuned. I promise I’ll have something new soon. Thanks for your patience.

Skip’s Quips, Part II: ‘Minister’-ing to Movie Wounds

Blog Sketch 082813Well, I saw Bertrand Tavernier’s The French Minister yesterday at Manhattan’s Walter Reade Theater.

Some amusing bits. But it didn’t feel cohesive. Undeveloped characters ran rampant in this tale, the based-on-a-true-graphic-novel-story of a young Parisian speechwriter’s encounters with his blustery foreign minister. Once-funny jokes were repeated all too often, including a running gag in which papers fly each time the public serviceman enters a room and slams the door. Yes, it was too much of a good thing. Then there was the protagonist’s love interest, who remained just that: a love interest. There wasn’t much conflict or development in their relationship as the film proceeded.

Cinematography was conservative, save a few dashing shots and screen slice-ups. And the film was overlong; much of the door-slamming could’ve been cut. Overall a decent film, but not a special one. More appetizing was the fact that Tavernier showed up and took questions afterward. A tall, white-haired gentleman, the veteran director seemed very personable and interested in talking about his film. Sadly, the movie isn’t a masterpiece, but it’s definitely different from the rest of the cinematic fare being shown on Broadway.

If only it were better.

Skip’s Quips: Off to the New Tavernier Flick

Blog Sketch 082813I have never seen a Bertrand Tavernier film. But now I’m going to watch one.

It’s called The French Minister and it’s playing at Manhattan’s Lincoln Center. My wife is coming, too.

I feel very ignorant about Tavernier’s body of work. I haven’t even seen ‘Round Midnight. I probably should.

There’s also Death Watch, which I’d heard about and am interested in viewing.

The French Minister should make good blogging material. I am curious about it. Plus, Tavernier apparently is scheduled to make an appearance afterward for a Q&A session. Sounds interesting, right?

All part of the benefits of living in a cinema-oriented world.