CMT - Frankenstein (1931)

Every work of fiction has an identity; this identity can be defined by the characters, the theme, the plot and the tone. The title of the stories, or sometimes the names of the main characters, are the labels or shorthand ways to refer to these identifying characteristics. However, if those characteristics have been changed, if the characters are rewritten, or if the plot or the theme or the tone is altered significantly, those labels are misleading. Frequently, so-called film adaptations are anything except true reflections, of the fiction that bears the same name; that's something that's as true today, as it was in the early twentieth century.

Classic Movie Trailers - Frankenstein (1931)

"Frankenstein, or The Modern Prometheus", is one of the few novels I've read more than once. I can say honestly, that a third read through is likely during my lifetime. Before curiosity compelled me to pick up the book for the first time, my only understanding of 'The Monster' or 'Creature', was that it was a big, dumb flat-headed brute, with bolts in its neck. That mental image, the popular image of Frankenstein's Monster, dates back to this film and Boris Karloff's performance.

James Whale's "Frankenstein" is not the story from Mary Shelley's novel. It isn't an adaptation and it's so "loosely-based". that I would argue it's a different animal altogether; but it is also a piece of cinematic history and it would be foolish to deny it. Every October before Halloween, Frankenstein's Monster dresses the windows of every costume shop, every Haunted House and every isle of candy, in every retail store. The flat head, the enlarged brow, the bolts, they're all there.

But have you seen the film? Have you seen Boris Karloff's performance? It's brilliant and it's definitely worth watching. Karloff didn't need words to portray his character; he had expressions and movement and feeling. The rest of the performances also come off well.

As for the film itself, it seems as if it was rushed and just left unfinished. An on-stage announcer blatantly points out the moral of the picture, before it even begins and this is good, because you could never gain that knowledge from watching it. A subplot involving a young victim, propels the movie to it's conclusion, but it does this so rapidly, that it drags the quality of the movie down. It's an abrupt end, that leaves the wrong questions unanswered.

There is enough still there, to justify the film's influence. Frankenstein is the original mad scientist, but the actor keeps him believable, as a character. The machines, the storm, the hunchback assistant and the entire process of bringing the creature to life, is fun to see play out, as it does here for the first time.

Don't expect the novel and not even the spirit of it, as it's arguably not present in this movie. Do expect a studio's heavy-handed message, slapped onto a film that doesn't support it. Do expect a short ride, as long as seventy minutes takes. Do expect good performances and for better or worse, cinematic history.

It's history that has implanted the likeness and manner of one actor, into the popular culture of America. Over eighty years later, Frankenstein's Monster is still Boris Karloff. That's a hell of an accomplishment and I can't overstate it. Ultimately,however, as a fan I'm reminded that a fictional property is more than just a name, and that this film failed to capture the fiction it claimed to aim for.

So take care reader. Whenever you enter a movie theater, expecting to see some resemblance of a story you know and love, remember how Hollywood works. Remember that the most important thing in film making, is money making, not artistic integrity and not obedience to another work of art, even if it's superior. After all, it's just a licensed property, a name that's been bought and sold.

Once that deal is signed, the studio is free to take and leave what they like. They have your attention already, just with the name. They can play with this world you adore so much, but unlike you, they don't have to care about it.

@ChannelSeals

http://youtu.be/p5HCmd-Rjvc

CMT - Blade Runner

Classic Movie Trailers: “Blade Runner” (1982)

If, as an adult, you were made aware that you had four more years to live, what would you do? You could savor every moment of life and accomplish more, in your four years, than the average person does in forty-five. Or, you could rally, war, maim and kill, for a chance to delay your ultimate fate….

What impresses me most about Blade Runner, is how well it holds up today. When you watch the film, you’re engrossed in a 1982 vision of the future. While inside of this world, you never have a moment of disillusionment, and that’s because everything you see on screen is real. Models were used, for futuristic buildings and vehicles, and there are no CG characters or stuntmen; all the players are being depicted by real, flesh and blood people.

But what about that question I posed, at the beginning? Would you accept your end, or would you end a life to extend yours? Whatever answer you'd give, would be “More Human Than Human”.

@ChannelSeals

http://youtu.be/iYhJ7Mf2Oxs

CMT - Goldfinger

As time passes and actors age, the job of portraying popular characters naturally changes hands. This may also be due, to changes in ownership of the film rights, or a new creative direction. Whatever the case, as long as there is a demand for a character to appear in film, different versions of that character will continue to accrue. Eventually, people will have a debate regarding which performance is the definitive one.

Classic Movie Trailers - Goldfinger (1964)

So, which James Bond is the best one? No matter how you look at it, that's a subjective question, that will produce a subjective answer. However, you can look at certain facts that lead to those opinions. For example, your choice for the best Bond might also be the first performer, that you saw play that role.

That actor doesn't necessarily, have to be the first one to portray the character. He may just be the first that you had seen. So, there is a familiarity and an attachment and an immediate association, that other actors will never replace. If a significant amount of time has passed since that interpretation, nostalgia plays a role as well.

It's also possible, that you've read the books that have inspired the movies. In that case, you may choose your definitive version based on how closely the actor looks, to the image that you have created in your head. That image, would be based on the book's description of the character and possibly the illustrations. Alternatively, it may be that the actor's behavior in the role, closely matches how the character would behave, according to the evidence present in those books.

That actually leads to another point. Your favorite James Bond, may have nothing to do with the actor whatsoever. It may have a lot more to do, with the quality of the production that they're in. Quality is, of course, subjective, and interestingly, your idea of quality may be, the interpretation farthest away from the original source material.

Your favorite Bond, or Batman, or Holmes, or Superman, is your favorite for objective reasons, which shape your subjective opinion. No single portrayal, is undoubtedly the clear winner, so doubt persists and debates return obstinately. As fans, we are extremely fortunate because of this. No answer is right, or wrong, so the discussion and the fun never ends.

@ChannelSeals

http://youtu.be/94UpZMvUvEk

CMT - Castle In The Sky

Classic Movie Trailers - “Castle in The Sky” (1986) [Not Recommended]

It’s much easier to pick out flaws and failures in a piece of art, than it is to create that art yourself. Criticism, when done professionally, is a craft of it’s own and there is merit to it. With so much entertainment available, someone has to guide consumers on how to best spend their hard-earned dollars. Still, storytellers and artists must be held in a higher regard, since their goals are so much harder to achieve and what they create is so much more valuable.

I respect the time and the Herculean effort put into animated films and “Castle in the Sky”, in particular. Unfortunately, the movie didn’t provide me with a good experience. The film’s length was my biggest issue; at 126 minutes, it felt like it was just over three hours. When you’re constantly checking your watch and waiting for the credits to roll, you are not having a good time watching a film and I wasn’t, when I revisited this part of my massive DVD collection.

The movie seemed to be too long, because there wasn’t enough story to justify the running time. The created world that this film presents is fantastic; the atmosphere, as shot is gorgeous and there are a lot of enjoyable moments with the characters. However, there was too much atmosphere, too many cute scenes and not enough plot. It’s like three servings of cotton candy, without the meat and potatoes. 

It also seemed to me, that the tone of the picture was somewhat confused. One villain seemed way too evil and malicious for the film as a whole. In one scene he actually made me cringe, by terrorizing a young girl with a loaded pistol. That's something I wouldn't expect to see in a film that, in many ways, reminds me of a Disney epic

I want to state clearly, that I am no movie critic. I started this feature as a vehicle, to share trailers of older movies my friends might enjoy and to practice writing. Given the nature of what I’m doing however, everything I say about these movies can’t be positive; that would be dishonest. Currently though, this film sits at 94% fresh, at rottentomatoes.com so hey, take what I’m telling you with a pinch of salt. 


Just don’t get salty!

@ChannelSeals

http://youtu.be/McM0_YHDm5A

CMT - Alien Nation

Birds of a feather, flock together... for better, or for worse.

Classic Movie Trailers  - “Alien Nation” (1988)

People tend to group together with others like themselves. Look at your circle of close friends; you’ll probably find, that the majority of them share certain characteristics with you. Those similarities may be religious or racial, political or economic. There are dangers however, if you disregard or shun people because they are different. Bigotry and the stereotypes used to keep it alive, can only survive in a state of ignorance.

The more you learn about a group a people, the harder it will be to adhere to preconceived notions about them. You can say any one statement about people, in any particular category and it will be true for some. However, as you continue to look at more and yet more of them, that statement is much less likely to apply. This is a simple fact that many of us don’t understand yet.

It is in dealing with others that we learn about ourselves and about life, in general. I’m going to submit to you the idea, that if you choose to converse with and keep an open mind regarding those that have very little in common with you, that learning process is faster, easier and more meaningful.




@ChannelSeals

http://youtu.be/q9Y8-EF4qAU

CMT - Magnum Force

The power of emotion can't be overstated. With that in mind, we must take extra care to check our emotions to the best of our abilities. Irrationality is a dangerous state to succumb to; it's infectious and it's incurable, but it is, ultimately voluntary. If we allow fear to justify the continuing of unsafe practices, we have no one else to blame but ourselves.

Classic Movie Trailers: Magnum Force - (1973)

Paranoia is an effective tool. If you can recognize it and give voice to it, you can convince people to use it as an excuse to disregard reason and common sense. Others will simply take up the flag and repeat the mantra, over and over again for personal gain. That gain may be political, or it may just be the ability to hold on to a weapon, that shouldn't be in a civil society.

It's not for "protection" and it's not for hunting; it's cool and it's theirs and they'd resent not having it. Why should a mass murderer, or three, ruin the fun for decent, law-abiding gun owners? Why should they give an inch, when reformists obviously want to take a mile? Well, the answer to those questions is our payments in lives, a consequence you may ignore, until one of your loved ones is murdered.

How many people actually believe, that one day a group of crooked cops will drive up to kill them? How many envision a race war, or a coming apocalypse? How many live in fear of descending black helicopters? Well, I'd bet the farm on that number being a very small one.

The rest of them are just being unreasonable.

@ChannelSeals

http://youtu.be/qVk8NhLhZMk

CMT - Blade

I’ve heard it said, that the best way to live life is by focusing on the present moment. Little thought should be given to the future and though we’re dependent on the past, to teach us our lessons, we should never spend time dwelling on it. Well, if I was at all capable of doing that, I’d probably agree. It looks good on paper though, doesn’t it?

Classic Movie Trailers: Blade (1998)

Before he could walk, before he even spoke his first words, Blade was victimized. He was changed in such a way, that he is necessarily apart from his fellow human beings. As a result he hates himself, but he survives because he directs his anger towards the cause of his torment. That malefactor and the demons of his past are actually demons, and the monsters of his dreams are real. So Blade straps on his weapons in heroic fashion and he fights, in order to slay them.

The rest of us don’t have that luxury. Since we live in a civil society, we have to combat the past in a different way. We’re armed with the knowledge that time heals all wounds, provided that we survive the wrongs committed against us. In order to live to see better times, we lock our skeletons in the closet, turn away and ignore the sounds of them scratching at the door.

It takes a strong will, to get out of bed and continue with daily life, when the horrors of yesterday are still fresh in the mind. Doing so is admirable however, and it is immeasurably more heroic, than running the past through with a sword. 


@ChannelSeals 


http://youtu.be/V4SZcaP_PMI

CMT - Return Of Swamp Thing

You know, it never fails. Whenever you’re up late, there never seems to be anything good on TV. You don’t get to see 'The Dark Knight Rises” at 2:00 am and there’s no “Casino Royale” at that time of night either. All you can find is some B-films and some bad horror movies and if that’s the case, you could do a lot worse than this.

Classic Movie Trailers: “The Return Of Swamp Thing” (1989)

This movie isn't pretentious. In fact, it’s intentionally lighthearted. I’m sure that the director, Jim Wynorski, knew that he didn’t have a blockbuster on his hands. There’s some really bad acting in here, a few cheesy and dated special effects and the dialogue isn’t brilliant.

But, you know what? The dialogue is funny. The effects are funny. The bad acting is really funny and the movie takes full advantage of that.

Now don’t get me wrong, the movie has some good performances. Sara Douglas (Superman II's “Ursa”) does well. Louis Jordan and the kids do a good job and there's Heather Locklear, who is charming in spite of her dialogue. She knew full well that she wasn't in “Gone With The Wind” and she just shrugged, laughed and had a good time with it and that's what this movie is, a good time.

So if you're up at 2 am. and you're flicking through the channels like you've got ADHD, I doubt you'll turn away from this. It’s just weird enough, just silly enough, just funny enough, to be really entertaining and as tired as you are at that time, you won’t fall asleep.

@ChannelSeals

http://youtu.be/z51Aobb2trg

CMT - The Woman In Green

What traits does a character need, in order to stand the test of time? What separates James Bond and Batman and Robin Hood from the rest? Well, I believe that great characters should be identifiable, and that they should be at a level that we desire to reach. That level can be mental, physical or moral; it can be embodied in the amount of wealth obtained, or in the wealth of social interactions that they achieve. We look up to great characters and we aspire to be like them, even though they never existed.

Classic Movie Trailers: “The Woman in Green” (1945)

Though I've known about the Sherlock Holmes character since childhood, my enthusiasm and fascination with him started just a few years ago. I sometimes prefer to listen to stories as opposed to reading them, and it was this fact that led me to some old radio serials, which starred Basil Rathbone, as the detective. Sherlock's powers of observation, are some of the most notable things about the character, but what impressed me the most personally, was his focus.

Holmes can look at your shoes, your clothes, your complexion and the way that you walk, and from that information he can tell a great deal about you. That outstanding talent has a meaningful purpose however, and it isn't to impress onlookers at cocktail parties. Small details and the facts that can be deduced from them, are invaluable tools in solving crimes. Sherlock Holmes is dedicated to solving crimes and he became a true master of his craft.

That's not to say that he holds no other interests. Holmes is an accomplished actor and while that fact can help him in his investigations, his deftness with the violin and his love of music can not. Still, his focus on his profession is a shining example, of what each of us are capable of. Basil Rathbone had that focus and while watching him in this picture, I'm hard pressed to tell of another performer, that embodied Holmes so completely.

@ChannelSeals

http://youtu.be/zCbL0-AI_Z8

CMT - (Rambo) First Blood

There are two common mistakes that people make, in regards to authority. I think that the most common, is the resistance or rejection of authority figures as a knee-jerk, or emotional reaction. Unfortunately, I can't say that the abuse of the power that authority gives is a rare occurrence. Both of those issues are related, and they have similar effects; they contribute to a bloated prison population, and they foster mistrust among us.

Classic Movie Trailers: “First Blood” (1982)

The role of the supervisor is a very important one. In society and in the workplace, rules are enacted in order to restrict behavior that is damaging, to everyone's interests. Without authority figures chaos emerges and the cost of chaos is loss of revenue, loss of property and loss of life. As a person in a position to either create or enforce laws, you have to understand that in order to do your job correctly, the decisions you make must benefit your subordinates, as well as your employer and yourself. The moment that your status becomes linked to your self-esteem, or when it becomes your pass to do any number of objectionable things, is exactly when your power should be stripped away.

Along those same lines, subordinates and average citizens have to realize their responsibility. In fact, those roles are crucial, because those of us in power are few and far between and that power is only there for as long as the masses allow it. So in that way, subordinates are managers as well and they have an equal part to play, to protect the well-being of us all. If you're someone that doesn't enjoy being told what to do and you immediately dislike, or mistrust someone who is tasked to do so, you should understand the danger involved in submitting to those feelings.

Authority figures must be there, and they will remain for as long as human society endures. In order to live together successfully, lawmakers have to question every law they enact and supervisors have to enforce laws with good will and conscience. That leaves the majority of us, under those laws, to abide by those that are just. We must recognize that every authority figure isn't one to rebel against, just as we understand that every one isn't worth following.

@ChannelSeals

http://youtu.be/IAqLKlxY3Eo

CMT - Dirty Harry

Ignoring financial concerns, I believe there are two main goals an author should have, when trying to tell a story. First, it's your job as a writer to create characters, settings and situations that are believable. Second, it's important to keep the audience's attention. In other words, be entertaining. After watching this film I've been reminded that sometimes, in pursuing the second goal, writers forget the first one.

Classic Movie Trailers: “Dirty Harry” (1971)

Stories are a window to another world. Whether you're looking at a comic strip, or a novel, or a movie screen, a great story will make you forget about the medium and focus on the characters and the plot. Whenever a character does something that a normal person wouldn't do, it breaks the illusion and you become painfully aware, that the scene you're looking in on is not real. One good way to separate people from the experience, is to force your character to say certain things.

Whenever character dialogue is written, the author should ask themselves whether or not the speech fits the character and the situation. Would this character say these lines, to the other character or to themselves, in the absence of an audience to view and hear them? Do the words have a meaningful purpose, other than creating sound bytes or catchphrases, that you think will become popular?

I think that, in order to be entertaining, the writer's focus should be on the plot. Action movies can have millions of dollars worth of explosions, and novels can have pages and pages of flashy dialogue, but these things can fall flat if there isn't a situation to justify them. I think of action and gore and jokes and amusing speeches as frosting on the cake; they can be sweet but they aren't substantial enough, to provide a filling experience. However, plot twists and turns if interesting, can keep the viewer's attention, as they see how the character's react to them.

It is possible to write a script, that relies on gunshots and explosions and fancy martial arts. There is nothing to prohibit the creation of a story, that favors one-liners and come backs and speeches designed to generate mass appeal. There's a lot of money to be made, by writing in that style.

There's just one question...

Do you feel lucky, punk? 

@ChannelSeals

http://youtu.be/HjBNldYiUmg

CMT - Dog Day Afternoon

A number of times, over the course of my life, I've tried to examine why I react to certain people in such a strong way. I'll think about their behavior long after each incident. A single comment, or a simple look from a certain someone, can send my head spinning and my heart racing and I don't immediately understand why. However, after giving it some thought I realize the problem; I keep making the foolish mistake of trying to use logic to explain emotion.

Classic Movie Trailers: "Dog Day Afternoon" (1975)


I think that, when people meet people, they immediately have an emotional reaction. In our everyday lives these reactions may be so slight, that they pass into the subconscious, to be soon forgotten. Sometimes however, we encounter a person that has a profound effect on us. We can move on and forget these people as well, but it takes much, much longer. Until then, we might hang on their every word and deed.

So who are these people, that we become attached to? Well, I don't think that matters. We all know who we're "supposed" to be with. We know their gender, their religion, their race, their political stance and their world view; we also know what their approximate age would be. Tomorrow though, you might meet someone that makes you think again, about one or more of those criteria.

Emotion is what it is. You're going to feel what you feel, no matter how much you try to talk yourself out of it; and you will feel that way until you simply don't anymore. When that condition does change and the tide finally ebbs, it has no more of a reasonable explanation, than your feelings did at the very beginning.

I wouldn't suggest that we all become slaves to emotion. Practical living requires that we keep ourselves under some sort of control. However, we should all recognize and respect the power that emotion has over us. So, if you see a couple together and they seem like an odd match, don't think on it overlong and don't shake your head at the pair, or belittle them. You may not understand what causes their emotions, but that's only because there's no logical answer to that question.

@ChannelSeals 

http://youtu.be/CZHS7zexXlU