CMT - James and the Giant Peach

Films often portray worlds like our own. Those worlds have similar settings, and they may have similar rules. As a result they're easy to understand, but they're subject to boundaries which limit their narrative options.

Generally, stories try to suspend our disbelief. If they're successful, we feel the drama and find ourselves engrossed. It's a tried and true way to entertain, but there's always more than one method. Fairy tales evoke a childlike amazement, to the stories that we disbelieve.


Classic Movie Trailers - James and the Giant Peach (1996)


Magic is tough for me to wrap my brain around. As a viewer I can take it as it comes, but I'm an author as well and I've had some trouble with it. If there was a way to firmly define it, I would find it more interesting. If there were concrete limits and weaknesses to know, my scientific brain would be content.

I realize that line of thinking may be missing the point. What good is the device if we cripple and restrain it? Why turn fantasy into hard science fiction? It's there to break the rules, not to be subject to them.

Alice swallowed a potion and shrunk to the size of a mouse. Then she ate a cake and grew into a giant. Did you ever wonder about the logic of Wonderland? Maybe you've tried to find some sort of reason in that madness. I doubt it exists but if it does, knowing it might ruin the fun.

I caught myself watching this film and being confused, by things I shouldn't be thinking about. I wanted to know how a flock of birds could carry a peach the size of a house. It didn't make any sense, but in the moment I failed to realize that none of it did. It took a long while, for me to finally stop expecting some logic.

I think I need to sit down with Dr. Seuss, and unlearn some ingrained habits. I'm far removed from my childhood, and I've gained wisdom with the loss of something else. My imagination is strong as ever, but it's inside a brain that wants to peak behind the curtain and expose the trick, in the magician's chest. I wonder if the Doctor will prescribe green eggs and ham.

When it comes down to it, sometimes you have to check your reasoning at the door. If we are even to enjoy musicals, critical thinking is an archenemy. People don't stop often and burst into song. When that actually does happen, they won't be singing such situational lyrics.

So if I've learned anything from "James and the Giant Peach", I've learned that you can lose your sense of wonder. I'd like to think that you can retrieve it, with constant practice and determination. What comes naturally to kids can be a trial for adults. We know knowledge will set us free, but ignorance is still bliss; it's nonsensical, but somehow it's true.



Trailer Here.


--------------------------------------

@ChannelSeals


See "James and the Giant Peach" on Netflix!

Next Week: The start of a New Year and a New Double Feature! We start with Disney's "Robin Hood", followed by Kevin Costner in "Robin Hood".  

CMT - The Nightmare Before Christmas

Films are a feast for the eyes, and as silly as it sounds, they need a balanced diet. People like variance in entertainment. If everything looks the same, everything gets boring. That isn't to say that there's anything wrong with following the herd, but when a style is dominant for a decade, it might be time to take risks.

I wonder if animation is at that point. If it's not, I wonder how much longer it will be. Technology produces wonderful artwork, but it hides the hand, which is just as talented. There is something to be said about craft, and when it's mastered, you see what you've been missing.


Classic Movie Trailers - The Nightmare Before Christmas (1993)


Recently, I saw an ad for the new "Peanuts" movie. I'm sure it's great and I've heard good things, but I can't bring myself to go and see it. I'm not one of those possessive fans, and I don't believe that they're ruining the property. It's just the context of the situation, and the loss of a style that may never return.

"Hercules" and "Tarzan" are historical pieces. It's "Frozen" now, in an "Ice Age" led by Disney/Pixar. Hand painted cells are dying off. If television follows film, they'll be nearly extinct.

It's happening subtly, and very slowly. Reruns are not being aired anymore and quality productions are shutting down fast. Shows like "Batman: The Brave and the Bold", would have had longevity ten years ago. Today, with Hollywood setting the precedent, viewers have adapted and changed their expectations.

I'm not pining for the return of VHS, and I don't want 8-track tapes back in stores. The dwindling 2D art style is not obsolete, and the prominent art style is not superior. What we're experiencing is a result, of an uncontested reign of traditional animation. There was too much of it for way too long, so the pendulum swung too far the other way.

"The Nightmare Before Christmas" shouldn't have been the exception, to a rule that started with "Steamboat Willie" in 1928. They should have produced a lot more of the same, and created more of a balance, that wouldn't have been so daunting. "Muppets" and "Sesame Street" should have blazed the way, for puppetry to play a much bigger role. We never cried for more because we didn't know the costs. The sun is setting fast and night is bringing tragedy.

It's painfully ironic to note that this film is still fresh. It provides the same relief today, that it gave to us over twenty years ago. Personally, I'll wait as long as it takes, for another stop motion marvel, to bring me back to theatres. It's beautiful and distinct and something tech can't match. The hand of CGI leaves prints, and I'm ready for a different pattern.

They're all valuable techniques, and at the end of the day, I wouldn't want a single one to go away. Even silent films have a charm that's their own, and we're poorer for their loss; we're certainly not richer. If black and white films endured past Technicolor, we would have been left with a more colorful history. Please know that we speak with wallets and views; if we don't change our tune it's going to be too late.

Do yourself a favor and go watch "Ninja Scroll". Put the kids to bed first, and then follow it with "Akira". If Japan could make those masterpieces years ago, imagine what Hollywood could do with that style today. If you find that you're still tired of drawing and painting, try sculpture, instead of going back to the same feed. "Toy Story" might provide nostalgia, but that doesn't mean you should pass on "Wallace and Gromit".



Trailer Here.


-----------------

@ChannelSeals


See "The Nightmare Before Christmas" on Netflix (Please)!

Next week Monday: "James and the Giant Peach" 

Merry Christmas  / Happy Hanukkah/ Enjoy Kwanza/ Happy Holidays!

-B.A.S.

CMT - Hercules ('97)

For many people, Disney's “Hercules” is the definitive version of the character. They may be wholly unaware, that the film's narrative strays far from established mythology. It is commonplace, for changes to be made in an adaptation to theaters. By now it should be expected, but rarely is it explained.

Movies are subject to strict time constraints, and a loose interpretation of the source material, alleviates some of the burden. However, a great number of liberties are taken by productions and they all can't be so easily categorized. Ultimately, the story is subject to the whims of the storyteller, and that person has their own motivations. The reasons may not be immediately clear, but it's helpful to remember that a tale is for its audience.

Classic Movie Trailers – Hercules (1997)

Hercules was born to Zeus and Alcmene, a mortal woman of great beauty. She was deceived by the god, who laid with her in the guise of her husband. The child was, by nature, a half-breed. He was also a living reminder of Zeus's infidelity.

Hera sent the snakes, to the infant's crib. She hated Hercules, from the moment he was conceived. It was Hera, the wife of Zeus who schemed and plotted against him. Her rage afflicted him with madness, and he killed Megara, along with their children.

So there's nothing family-friendly about those myths. Changes were going to be made, but the decisions are interesting. One of the most telling choices, is the depiction of Hades. The god of the Greek underworld is not Satan's analogue, but here they are synonymous.

In both manner and deed, the Hades of this film is unmistakably evil. Gone is his firm, fair and just hand, in favor of a fiery persona. The Devil is instantly recognizable, and his presence is easy to understand. For a modern, moviegoing audience, that isn't well versed in history, a predominant figure is a considerable comfort.

This entire take on Hercules, was possibly meant to make him more relatable. Instead of a man, that is born simply better than the masses, we're given a god that is humbled to walk as a man. He earns his name as a hero, and he strives to achieve greatness. In the end however, he abandons that goal to settle down and love.

I haven't met a person that would turn down immortality for marriage and death. It is pretty silly, when you sit and think about it, but our heroes are supposed to be those that we aspire to. That sort of resolution also casts mortality, in a more favorable light. If Hercules can choose the fate so easily, it must not be that bad.

It's a feel good movie, with a predictable ending. There are no horrible, tragic events to deal with, and the hero doesn't spend time laboring for his sins. We're allowed to eat our popcorn and cheer him on. When all is said and done, you don't have to think too much.

Personally, I was inclined to consider the work for a long while. I've come to the conclusion, that this is a different Hercules. He's akin to Frankenstein, in the Universal classic; there is a separate base for the character, but he stands on his own. Who am I to determine the definitive version? It's hard to make a qualitative statement, in the court of public opinion.

There are at least three epics, called “Lord Of The Rings”. One is in print and two are on screen. As I understand it, they are very different things, but people are going to choose the version they please. What came before doesn't matter ultimately; some will swear by the books and others will disregard them.

Mythology can be thought of, as an extension of oral tradition. How many times has the story of Hercules changed through the ages? The original tale is lost in time and it has little importance. Back then it was as it is today, with the story at the whim of the storyteller.

Trailer Here.

--------------------------

@ChannelSeals

See “Hercules” on Netflix!

Christmas Eve: A bonus look at “A Nightmare Before Christmas”

Next Monday: James and The Giant Peach

CMT - Mulan

Having been born and raised in the United States, I haven't been exposed to different cultures. When I consider the human condition, I do so with a western orientation. Individuality is counted among my virtues, and I believe in a number of human rights. I would never agree with any ideology, that forces conformation at the cost of identity.

Personal freedom means a great deal to me, but I'm aware that others don't share my opinion. Some would do almost anything, in order to be looked upon favorably. It's more than just our choice of cars and mobile phones; we dress, act and choose jobs in fear of judgement. Apparently a major concern with a possible spouse, is how we will look beside them in public. The nature of the relationship, whether good or ill, may well be secondary.

I think the important thing is to make a decision. Should you live for yourself, or live to please others? You might mean to do both, or one instead of the other, but the choice is yours and it has to be one that works. Social acceptance has a lot of benefits, but it also has a number of consequences.


Classic Movie Trailers - Mulan (1998)


They say the life of a child is care free. If that's true, it's because they don't see the pressure. From the time babies are born to their lives as young adults, they are groomed and taught and punished, to do only what is expected. Everything, from their style of dress to a lifestyle is discussed, and among all the options, they are presented with what we deem appropriate.

It starts very early. Their rooms are painted blue or pink, and clothing is assigned by gender. If their hair is cut short, they're allowed to play sports, and the rest are left with dolls and tea sets. You call it childhood, I call it training, and available roles are firmly defined.

Many of us settle into our jobs with ease. Questions are never raised and answers are never given. If the process works, the parents are proud and boastful. If it doesn't, they live their lives in fear.

What happens when people aren't suited for their roles? What happens when they find their souls were shaped in a different mold? They'll make people uncomfortable, at the very least; at most they will discover a righteous condemnation. I worry that in those situations, too many parents think about "how things look"; their first and only concern should be the child.

We look back on high school and laugh about how popularity governed all we did. I would argue that if we use that measure,  high school extends a lot farther than you think. If life is positive and you are happy with the results, I still have to wonder if I'll ever truly know you. Facades are laid on so thick it's hard to see through them, and it's fair to question happiness in chains. Those bonds are never as secure as when we lock them ourselves, nevertheless they will always be restraints.

Is it worth it? That's a question that bears frequent repeating. I imagine the answer will change from time to time. With experience and self-awareness, you can make an informed decision that suits you today. I believe there's no wrong answer to that query, but I know for a fact, that there's a wrong answer for you.

Before I conclude I must ask for forgiveness, from my eastern neighbors that will assume my arrogance. Please know that I base belief on evidence, and I place less importance on tradition. Customs are useful guidelines, only when they are not. If a system aids some of us, it is flawed for the rest.

I testify before all that dare to read, and I brave ridicule to challenge convention. If honor is meant to bring respect to a house, then the concept of honor is ill-defined. Such regard is held by the unworthy, and many are outcast despite their worth. An honorable person has integrity, and their critics are often rooted in bias.




Trailer Here.


---------------------

@ChannelSeals


See "Mulan" on Netflix!


Next week: "Hercules"

CMT - Fantasia

Red and green are complimentary colors. In the context of a painting, they can be placed side by side for an eye catching effect. The pigments viewed in parallel, appear to be loud or more intense. If you mix them, a curious thing happens; the fight for dominance ends and they cancel each other out. 

In class, the practice mystified me. They were stark in close proximity, but together they were mute. I also tried purple and yellow, and then orange with blue; each mixture produced a different gray, but the results were very similar. The best way I can describe it, is the joining of two elements to make a unique third. There is no visible clue of origin, and the parent colors lose their identities.

I think you can look at complementary art, in much the same way. Poems and paint are very different things, but with just enough of each, you can create something that stands alone. Reasonably then, we can also suppose that in juxtaposition, they become more pronounced. For proof, consider movies and music together, before imagining them apart.


Classic Movie Trailers - Fantasia (1940)


Over time, this film has developed a loyal following, but for me it disappoints in a significant way. If we could interpret the segments ourselves, we would take so much more from the experience. As it is, the meaning and origin of the art is dictated to us, before we even see it. They are interesting facts, and they add spoken word to a movie without dialogue, but they take away so much.

Had I been there, I would have argued that interpretation is vital. Movies are not lectures, and we shouldn't prepare for a test at the end. The methods behind the art are harmful distractions, and Fantasia's focus is crystal clear. Sounds and sights are happily married, in a way that is mutually beneficial.

Synchronization is nothing new. I doubt the forties dawned it's invention. If we examined cinema closely, we would see it's presence everywhere. Action and dialogue draw us away, but here they didn't have to; here, they could have followed behind.

The missed opportunity negates all the positives. Despite that conviction however, I'm convinced they still exist. Audio is never so beautiful, when devoid of matching imagery. When they are together though, no explanation is necessary.

I pray you'll forgive the same crime, but I think an admission is warranted; music inspires painting and is inspired by it. You've probably considered that, but experience is the best teacher. Revelation shines a light brighter than facts do alone. The key displayed before the puzzle steals a valuable exercise.

Consider yourself for a moment, and assume you hold a creative genius. This priceless thing is locked away and is yet to be discovered. Daily life is spent with a barrier you have failed to acknowledge. It prevents you from progressing, but a few notes can erode that strength. A simple breach could be the catalyst for an incredible breakthrough.

What we see in this movie, is artwork made under crippling conditions. Invisible chains were secured and they held the animators back. I'm dismayed by thoughts of what could have been, if they were laid aside. Unfortunately, they weren't left with a puzzle; the key was provided to them in advance and it limited all the results.

We were still treated with centaurs, and Pegasus lived alongside his family. Flora danced before fauna, and the planet was born somewhere in between. Maybe the art is more remarkable, given the limitations. Ultimately however, there is no way to know the alternatives.

What I can say, is an important note regarding creativity. Writers need writing and artists need art, but those aren't the only requirements. A medium that looks frequently inward cannibalizes itself. If the crop is to survive, there has to be cross-pollination.

I can give you the information college has given me. I can tell you about certain colors, and how they work together in equal quantities. What I can not do, is explain what happens when they are mixed unequally. Some things can't be told, and life is about discovery.




Trailer Here.


--------------------------------------------------------------------

@ChannelSeals

See "Fantasia" on Netflix!

Next Week: "Mulan"

CMT - Once Upon a Time in the West

There are few hard rules in fiction; even the three act structure isn't always adhered to. While it's true that films are generally around two hours in length, that parameter doesn't work for every final cut. Motion Pictures are constantly shipped, with running times that are much more or less than that average. The fact proves that they're unique enough, to make a greater range of creative decisions.

Though shorter films have their own challenges, I think longer films face greater scrutiny. Every minute that passes with a disinterested audience, will better the chance that the work will be unsuccessful. I often wonder about the well regarded epics, and how they are able to keep their viewers engaged. Regarding this spaghetti western, the answer to that question is apparently more questions.


Classic Movie Trailers - Once Upon a Time in the West (1968)


There is one main disadvantage, that lies at the heart of any new property. Before the story begins, the creators have all the information and viewers have none. For audiences to enjoy what they're watching, they have to understand what's going on. That means filmmakers have to provide a lot of answers.

Just the names of characters can keep people guessing, let alone the intricacies of the plot. So there's a ton of hurdles to get over, in order for everyone to get up to speed. I've often gotten the feeling, while watching a feature, that exposition is dumped on us to get it out of the way. It's like they don't know where to put the information, so they throw it out there at the first opportunity.

Before seeing "Once Upon a Time in the West", I saw the need for explanation as a major challenge. I might even have called it a "necessary evil". Never before had I considered, that critical information could be used as a tool. People want to know the facts desperately, so to keep the interest going, you can hold some of them back.

Sergio Leone and his team, masterfully told us all that was pertinent. All the minute details were cards in the hand, and they dealt them one at a time, at choice moments. In the case of the protagonist, his agenda and motivations were held to the very last second. They were the most intriguing questions and I wanted to know the answers, so I committed to giving the film my full attention. Meanwhile, the plot continued to unfold.

Things like McBain's treasure and the value of his land, became primary concerns. I also wanted to know the meaning of the miniature building set, and whether or not Frank would turn on Morton. I didn't even know Cheyenne's identity, and it took me half the film to figure it out. The most interesting thing about my experience, is that once something was answered, I had another question.

I was riveted. I was captivated, and I never looked at the time. The credits could've rolled an hour later than they did and I would have watched every moment. When it comes down to it, they had something I wanted, and while I waited I enjoyed every scene.

I'm convinced that Leone was never suited for time restraints. As a storyteller, he moved at his own pace. His style was about the tension, as much as the action that followed. I also think that he enjoyed building atmosphere.

Personally, I've always believed that content determines length. If the story is too big for a hundred and twenty minutes, forcing it is a huge mistake. Similarly, if a story only takes an hour, there's no good reason to stretch it out to two. "Once Upon a Time" is almost three and it doesn't feel padded at all.

In fact, it could have been a novel instead; each supporting character has such a rich history. Morton was definitely one of the most interesting, and though his onscreen time was limited, you could tell he'd been fleshed out. All the major players held my interest in some way, so I was more than happy to wait for all to be revealed.

For a creative person, this is more than a movie. "Once Upon a Time in the West" is a lesson. There's a lot of value in the details of a story, and what would be a clumsy mess is clay in deft hands. Sometimes, you have to let the artist work unchained; if Picasso played by the rules we wouldn't know his name today.




Trailer Here.

-----------------------

@ChannelSeals

See "Once Upon a Time in The West" on Netflix!

Next: A "Bye week" (No post on 11/30/15).

December 7th: We resume with "Fantasia".

CMT - High Noon

I won't debate the idea that more guns will keep us safe, but I question the notion that we'd welcome the results. The Old West saw lands with more pistols than lawmen; I suspect there are reasons why we don't pine for their return. Firearms might have simply added more danger, and the key to security may rest with people instead. A well armed population is not a trained militia, and the ability to shoot doesn't give one the will.

You may not agree with those sentiments and that is your right. I'm just glad we have a dedicated police force. This film shows a town unwilling to defend itself, and people that choose fear over plain obligation. I challenge you to regard your neighbors and tell me honestly, if you believe that any one would fight for your safety.


Classic Movie Trailers - High Noon (1952)


The town of Hadleyville was indebted to Will Kane, but looming danger erased that from memory. I wonder about the number of years they enjoyed the peace he worked for. I wonder how many transactions were made during that peace. Yet the time came when he needed the debt repaid, and the entire town offered nothing but excuses.

There was no gratitude. There was no sympathy. There was no courage and above all, there was no loyalty. Whatever sense of honor the town possessed, left far in advance of the twelve o'clock train.

That man fought for their businesses. That man fought for their lives. They owed their homes to Kane and still hung him out to dry. The instant their peace was threatened they wanted no part of it. Had they faced the problem together, there wouldn't have been a problem at all 

Four hoodlums are not going to fight an entire town. Half a dozen men could've had them from the windows. This movie should have been a half hour long. The bad guy should've stepped off the train and stepped straight into leg irons.

Instead they were willing to take a huge chance, with no sheriff at all. If the hoods decided to stick around, I question whether the new hire would have done the same; if so, he definitely picked the wrong place. The townsfolk acknowledged Kane's good service,  but they were willing to let his would-be killers right through the gates. The man was just married, too.

As unbelievably bad as they were, the Sheriff was remarkable. Even with all of their dodging, he accepted the task at hand. I know why Kane fought and the reason was simple; some people don't shirk responsibility. There wasn't much of a future with his wife if he ran; he also would've left the town to a danger coming for him.

I don't blame him for turning back and seeing it through. That town could've fallen to hell by the time law returned. With all those years of prosperity that he worked so hard for, I don't see how he could let it be taken away. As far as I'm concerned though, they would have deserved it.

None of the residents appreciated the lawman, and maybe that's a crime I can charge us with today. We take things for granted and we're quick to forget the costs. Our way of life depends on order which has to be maintained. It's a big and dangerous job that's handled by a few, so the rest of us can live our lives and profit from the system.

I'm part of a minority and I know the fear of injustice. I don't know fear in a lawless state and I recognize that privilege. No organization, of any considerable size, is absolutely free of misconduct; I'm still grateful for the honest public servants, and the good they provide outweigh all the negatives. If you look to your neighbors and see a force to defend and keep the peace, I'll trade and give you these quiet folk behind their bolted doors.




Trailer Here.


-----------------------
@ChannelSeals

See "High Noon"   on Netflix!

Next Monday: "Once Upon A Time in the West".

CMT Bonus - A Nightmare on Elm Street 2

Exposition is vital. It can be a real pain to sit through sometimes, but it is still important. The audience doesn't know the rules and details, and the only way to solve that is to tell them. If the storyteller is on point, the information will be dropped naturally and in appropriate places. There are a few different ways to go about it.

Voiceovers are sometimes used to clue people in on the score, but that device doesn't work for every film. Dialogue is a reasonable substitution, but you have to make sure that the characters are talking normally. A related way, is to film someone in the role of a newscaster. However you do it, it has to be done and if you don't do enough, we'll be mired in confusion.

Classic Movie Trailers - A Nightmare on Elm Street 2: Freddy's Revenge (1985)

I've overheard plenty of frustrations from fans, that have watched origin stories in multiple remakes. It is annoying sometimes, especially when the character is well known. The inescapable truth however, is some viewers don't know backstories by rote. Sure, you can glance over them, but you risk losing those that wouldn't be distant otherwise.

With a sequel, you can justify the use of visual CliffsNotes, at least to a point. I think it's tricky to draw a line, between things that explain themselves and things you have to take some time with. Fantasy stories can get away with a little bit, but worlds with fictional rules generally need explaining. If the property in question is very well established, you also have to be careful when breaking its tenets.

Looking at the second "Nightmare" here, it really doesn't take time to tell us enough. To be fair, there were some scenes in the original, that also left me scratching my head. All the issues involved the waking world and what normally happens in that setting. Dreams can be used to break the rules, but we have to know what those rules are.

Can Krueger make a phone call in the real world? Can he cause people to hallucinate? If the temperature rises, is it his fault? Does Freddy haunt houses like a ghost?

When stories are really good, plot holes sail by me unnoticed. I'll often check YouTube later, to see channels dissect film and point out flaws. It's fun to look at that stuff after the fact, and I'm pleasantly surprised when I miss something. I don't want to question a movie I'm watching though, and if I am doing that I'm not entertained.

Here, I didn't have the slightest clue about what was happening. Objects were flying around by themselves. The heat kicked into overdrive for no apparent reason, and Fred was doing a cowboy switch with the protagonist. If everything was in a dream I could have just rolled with it, but I couldn't even tell when the nightmares stopped.

Someone, at some point, has to explain certain things. I've written about the importance of illusion in films before and the audience's need for immersion. Unanswered questions can pull you out of a story, just as sure as bad acting can. The former issue can at least be solved, if it's tackled within a reasonable time. I wouldn't let a big problem linger too long though; we should be thinking about the wonderful plot.

If it wasn't for the unexplained, I would have enjoyed this sequel a lot more. The basis for the story is a really good idea and Englund's Krueger is great. I was hoping that the ending would solve the conflicts, but I question whether it matters at that point. I don't even like beginning credits, so any barrier to engagement is something I view suspiciously.

Exposition can also get in the way, if too much is dumped on us too soon. At some point, characters will be blatantly serving the story, instead of talking in a natural way. If all else fails though, put it in there. Risk is a part of the production and you can't please everyone, but there's no excuse for leaving us in the dark.




Trailer Here.

-------------

@ChannelSeals

See "A Nightmare on Elm Street 2" on Netflix!

Next Monday: "High Noon"

CMT - Barbarella

There are problems with idealism and entertainment. The most prominent issue involves the audience and what they bring to the table. Every viewer sits down with a hefty amount of baggage. We all have histories, political leanings and opinions regarding society as a whole.

The ultimate goal of fiction should be to please everyone. Of course there are financial, legal and moral considerations, but generally, there should be something for each individual. When people complain about lack of representation, they prove there's an audience that isn't being served. The trick is to remember that when movies don't suit you, the film made for someone else isn't at fault.


Classic Movie Trailers  - Barbarella (1968)


I tend to like girls that kick ass. I'm not saying I'd date someone that beats me up, or a woman that could, but I like to see the fairer sex in action. Think of Milla Jovovich in the Resident Evil films; I'm very much about that kind of content. A "damsel in distress" is a snore fest to me, but I can't say the conceit is bad, or even outdated.

In fact, I think the truth is the opposite. There are guys that prefer them and some women agree. I think it's safe to say a fair amount of fantasies, involve a girl in trouble, who then has to be saved. You can roll your eyes but it is a preference, and I've learned to simply accept it.

Barbarella isn't Batgirl or Batman. There's no utility belt on her waist, and if she's surrounded she's going to get captured. Don't expect her to fall back into Kung-Fu stance, and her guns aren't always effective. As cliche as it is, the weapon that always works, is the same one that every woman has.

Feminists may scoff at this movie, but the real objection should be the lack of more alternatives. It's true that women are strong leads in some action films, but I would certainly argue that a lot more are necessary. If you're wondering why that would be the case, the reason is that there's an audience for it. A lot of potential cash is floating around out there, and I doubt Hollywood will claim it if it sticks to "Bond girls".

Does that mean "Barbarella" is wrong? The answer from me, is absolutely not. If you don't like the movie it just isn't for you. In order to work properly, fiction has to find the right audience.

I imagine that her fans like the camp and the adventure, along with the very beautiful sets. There is a story here, but it doesn't seem terribly important. It's more about each scene as an experience, than it is about working towards a goal. Considering it further, I've also concluded, that as a feminist's nightmare, it might attract other women.

Sexuality is a fair amount of the theme, but the movie is suggestive, playful and humorous. When the actress is bound she may appeal to fetishists, but that sentiment isn't overdone. They never cross the line into full blown eroticism, and what kink there is will likely get a chuckle. 

The work that went into the scenery, was matched by Fonda's wardrobe. I'm not an authority on fashion and it isn't a passion of mine, but they keep her looking good and her outfits are appropriate. The character stumbles instead of taking charge of events, but whenever she feints at least it's done in style.

When the film ended, I felt puzzled and divided. The action had been downplayed, the story seemed thin, the heroine wasn't heroic, but I was still entertained. I wouldn't go so far as to recommend it to others, but I think its cult status is well deserved. When you're given the opposite of what you're looking for, it isn't every day that you can still leave satisfied.

I may be unique in seeing both sides of the debate. I could also be cooling a lot with age. Whatever the reason, I don't recoil from different views. I'm also patient enough to wait for significant change.

The lack of female super spies isn't Bond's fault. It's Hollywood's fault in general, but that doesn't fall on one film. If they want to do another Captain Kirk movie, don't demonize them because they didn't pick Janeway. The audience for him is rightfully being served; hopefully, when it's said and done they'll start looking at all of us.




Trailer Here.

----------------------

@ChannelSeals

See "Barbarella" on Netflix!

Next Week: A look at "High Noon".

Wednesday: A Bonus look at "Nightmare on Elm Street 2".

CMT Announcement #4: Disney December

... because I just can't help myself.

Apparently the brain likes organization. That's the best explanation for me doing another theme month so soon. This time around, I'll be looking at four classics from the Walt Disney Company: Mulan, Fantasia, Hercules and James and the Giant Peach (all on Netflix). If time allows, I'll throw in something extra on Christmas Eve, but only if you're good boys and girls.

I've got a couple of other announcements to make this week, but first I need to show some appreciation.

Thank You.

October was an outstanding month for this blog. Views skyrocketed for the essays on "Interview with the Vampire" and "The Omen". Generally though, every post saw a significant bump up. My thanks for spreading the word and continuing to tune in.

One benefit of producing weekly content like this, is that I'm able to provide readers with choices. Your level of interest may change based on what movie I'm looking at, but if I can't hook you every time there's always next week. Feel free to browse all my work, or just what you fancy and no more.

November Genre Packs.

While I was searching for a good follow up to "Conan the Barbarian", I decided that it'd be cool to cut the month in half. The first double feature is Sci-Fi/Fantasy, and it ends with "Barbarella" next Monday. The second genre focus is Western Classics, beginning with "High Noon" and ending with "Once Upon A Time in The West".

That last film is two hours and forty-five minutes. I'm interested to see if it can justify that running time, but according to RottenTomatoes.com, it's the greatest thing since sliced bread (98% Fresh). The film was directed by Sergio Leone ("The Good, The Bad and The Ugly"), and it stars Henry Fonda, Charles Bronson and others. With "Fellowship of The Ring", I was so into the story that I didn't realize the movie was long; hopefully that happens again.

Bonus Horror.

I just stumbled upon the first "Nightmare on Elm Street" sequel, while I was browsing Netflix. I watched it, and the subject for a companion piece hit me right away. After it was completed, I realized that I was in deep. With the original movie and "New Nightmare" done, why not look at the rest of the series?

There are four other direct sequels, ending with "The Final Nightmare". That venture will take me out of Netflix, but I do want to look at them anyway.  Freddy's a part of film history and I want to see where he's been. I don't expect to like every film, but it should be interesting regardless.

The first Bonus essay, on "Freddy's Revenge", is dropping a week from today. No word yet, on when I'll finish the others, but I hope to revisit the series every couple of months, at least.

Better Communication.

Effective immediately, the end of all essays will have a note, informing you  about the next movie to be highlighted. I also plan to start a Facebook business page in the future, which you can simply 'Like' to get all the info on what I'm up to.

Sweet Dreams.


That's all for now. We'll talk to ya.


B.A.S.

-November 2015