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

CMT - Conan The Barbarian ('82)

The adult film industry, is a double-digit billion dollar enterprise. I’m sure I don’t have to explain the reasons for its success, but pornography serves its customers in more ways than one. If you look past the arousal and the naughty fetishes, what you have is an audience living their fantasies through someone else. Porn stars do more than just engage in “the act”; they do it with with the kind of people we want, in the way we want, with the body that we want to have.

“The Incredible Hulk” actually serves a similar purpose. While it’s true that comic book movies reach for a different end goal, we still use the characters for certain experiences. If we really just wanted to be heroes ourselves, we’d go and join the police force. The real desire, is the power to leap tall buildings in a single bound and the strength to crush a car with bare hands.

Although Conan isn’t a superhero, he’s pretty far from being just a human. In size and stature he’s more than exceptional, and his skill with a sword is something to be desired. Additionally, the man is desirable himself. He’s the guy that girls want to be with and the one that guys want to be.


Classic Movie Trailers - Conan The Barbarian (1982)


I’ve read comics for a very long time. The general consensus from the peanut gallery, is that the men inside are equally sexualized. Apparently Superman’s butt in tight red underwear, is somehow equal to Ms. Marvel in a thong. For those of you that aren’t so gullible, the truth of the matter is, that people view the genders differently. Heterosexual males aren’t turned on by pecs, and the feeling they do get is markedly different.

The fact is, every guy doesn’t have a six-pack. We all want to model in our tighty-whities, but reality has a way of intruding.  When we see Bruce Wayne’s impressive body, we respect and admire him but that’s not all. There is some part of us that walks in his shoes, and daydreams replace him with our ideal selves.

Of course, some men are fit and sharp. They also can be fortunate to be very successful. The thing is, they’re probably not cool vigilantes, and they might not have the dangerous life of a wandering marauder. Presently, day traders and business owners are a little more common.

Still, Conan’s physique isn’t easy to obtain; he has a figure that leaves healthy men envious. Arnold’s body building brought an uncommon tool, which Hollywood used to bring that ideal to life. There’s a lot of other big guys they could have filmed, but if they couldn’t act on his level, they were too limiting. So the Austrian was good for the role, even with his accent, and the role was absolutely perfect for him.

Schwarzenegger was The Barbarian, and I don’t know of another character that fit him quite as well. When he was by the stone columns praying to Crom, I actually forgot the man behind the character. In other films I simply see him as Arnold, so I do wish that he would have stuck with the franchise longer. The real foil for the series though, was the fact that the star got famous; there was a lot of demand for what he could bring, and no one else in Hollywood provided that same feeling.

Stallone was cut, but he was never Arnold big, so putting him in the same loincloth wouldn’t have worked. They had a rivalry with each other in the past, and that was a pleasure to live through and watch. Those actors appealed to us in different ways, but ultimately they served the same purpose. It really comes down to what we all prefer; would you rather be a super soldier, or a sword wielding warrior?

I’m not really qualified to speak on male attractiveness, so I’ll leave it to my readers to say who was sexier. From the perspective of guys like me, that wasn’t really important. It’s more exciting to see who got the most action. Swinging a sword is cool, but swinging like Bond is cooler; fortunately, Conan gives 007 a run for his money here.

And that was rather the point. They knew full well what they were doing. The film plucks all the right strings, and if you know the song it’s still enjoyable. The appeal actually works on a subconscious level, so to reap the rewards you don’t have to recognize the tunes.

The payoff is in dreams, which come while we’re asleep or awake. A coffee break from a boring day job, can lead to a world with giant snakes. As long as we can slay the villains and sleep with our coworkers, a spy and a superhero are just as good as a viking. Some guys say that in entertainment, a muscular man without a shirt is just there for women. If you actually believe that, I’ve got a photo of a unicorn I want you to see.




Trailer Here.

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

@ChannelSeals

See “Conan The Barbarian” on Netflix!