MOVIES! BY GOD, MOVIES!

Sorry I haven't been keeping "up-to-speed" with this blog - but I've been REALLY busy. Both at work and at home.

Bottom line: I'm trying to sell a script.

Other bottom line: I have work to do.

So I've seen a handful of movies since I last posted about films:

"Silent Night - Deadly Night"
"Panic"
"Messiah of Evil"
"The Blancheville Monster"
and
"Ed Wood"

A couple films I want to point out of this group:

"Ed Wood" was WONDERFUL. A great hilarious film. What makes it so much fun is that I had previously read a book about Ed Wood and I had read the screenplay of the film. The film was great.

The other film I want to mention is: "Messiah of Evil" which was your typical "zombie" film. What made it interesting was that it was written and directed by Willard Huyck and produced by .... Katz (first name escapes me). They wrote "Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom" and produced "More American Grafitti" and other noted films (including the debacle of "Howard the Duck." "Messiah" wasn't that bad - but had a really weird convoluted story line and an opening song that was supposed to be like a hit Joan Baez tune. Weird.

"Ed Wood?" Great. Rent it.

I'm a bad man...

Okay, Friday night we go out to the Aquasox game. For those of you who DON’T know, the Aquasox are a “Single A – Short Season” baseball team mostly made up of hottie 17 & 18 year old boys who hope to make it to the “bigs” someday. But, for now, they put up with the indignities of playing to 3,000 people in Everett. Still, beats shuffling paper for a living.

So we’re there for Miriam’s birthday and my father-in-law’s birthday/father’s day present. The weather is beautiful, the game is going well (we lost). There’s free hats! And we’re RIGHT BEHIND HOME PLATE in seats that cost a whopping $13.

We’re enjoying the game and sitting to my left are two women. One is reading a manual on how to use a new cash register and the other gal is paying bills. Now, I’m a thong/butt man like most men. But the woman paying bills is REALLY large and every time she stands up to cheer, you see the red cord of her thong and the little triangle thingy. It just looked, well, odd.

Anyway – by the 7th inning they had paid their bills and studied their manual and off they went to home.

Now there’s 3 seats between me and the next group of people on my left. Two women, a guy and a little boy. The boy is cute, not even two yet, but walking back and forth between us and his parents.

Well, I soon notice that the woman sitting the closest to us, is wearing a loose fitting shirt and she’s a bit attractive and I wonder to myself: “If she bends down and picks up this child, will I be able to see her breasts?” To achieve this theory, I decide to start interacting with the child.

Again, he’s a cute little kid and these parents are all happy that I’m playing with the kid and Miriam thinks I’m being cute and she’s interacting with the boy. Well, lo and behold, her comes “Mom” and she bends down to get the boy and VIOLA! Two huge mounds of breast become very clear to me. Granted, I’m not seeing the ENTIRE breast as she IS wearing a bra. But I’m seeing 85% of boobage.

So for the next half hour, I keep interacting with the kid MOSTLY so the mother comes down and picks him and takes him back to his seat – only to have him come back down and interact with me – in my hopes that she’ll come back and bend over and pick him up and take him back to the seat with her.

All in all, I got, probably, 7 or 8 full on breast moments.

I’m a pathetic bad man.

Sympathy Sex...

After watching a pretty good futuristic scary movie "Virus" with a stellar cast (Chuck Connors, George Kennedy) - I've watched two more films that defy logic (but most of these films do).

But one common theme in both films is the "dumb character who gets the ladies." Now, I don't know where this fits in the world of sexual fantasies, but both films have male characters who are, basically, mentally challenged and both are hit on by the ladies (foxy hot ladies at that). Is it a power and control thing. Do women just find me with IQs of 20 hot? I don't know.

If I had "dumbed down" myself in high school - would I have bettered my chances with Ms. J? Probably not. But you wouldn't know it by films like "Devil Times Five" or "Funeral Home."

Still...I wonder.

The Revenge of Dr. Munich

I used to watch Saturday morning television. Well, mostly cartoons whenever they would come on. Saturday morning, 3 p.m., whenever.

I remember one time watching the animated G.I. Joe cartoon. Now, imagine if you will, 20 minutes of mindless, stupid, violence where no one gets hurt and then, at the VERY END, G.I. Joe would show up and tell “Billy” that he needs someone to hold the ladder if he’s going to climb the house. What this told me was that it’s okay to have 20 minutes of violence – as long as you spend 15 seconds giving some stupid kid a lesson.

That’s how I felt after watching “Munich.” I love Stephen Spielberg. I would have his baby. I would be dirt in one of his films. I would allow him to sit on me instead of a Director’s chair but I was highly disappointed by “Munich.” It’s not that the film isn’t good. It’s actually a great film in terms of pacing, photography, action, suspense. SS is the only guy I know who can make a 2 hr and 40 minute long film, seem to go by in about 90 minutes. The man knows what he’s doing and he does it so very well.

What my problem is, is that this is a basic propaganda piece. It’s not so much that I have a problem with THAT as long as I know going in. If I watch porn, I don’t expect there to be much of a plot. But when this film came out the critics and others were saying that this film really took a hard look at the Israeli/Palestinian conflict and that it was, well, “Balanced.” Ha! It’s as balanced as Rush Limbaugh.

The problem that I have with it in terms of it’s balance is the same problem I had with “G.I. Joe.” The “Balance” comes in when the guy at the end questions what he’s done. Oooh, never saw that before. Besides not really having a third act, the script does the cop-out of letting us revel in the violence and gore and brutality and then has us question the main character as the main character questions his actions. It’s only THEN does the “moral” of the story come out. Which bothers me. It also bothers me that the death of these 11 athletes, as horrifying as it is, seems to weigh especially heavy on the main character (to the point he thinks about their brutal killing while he’s having hot monkey sex with his wife – not something I usually think about). Maybe this is to represent something deeper in his soul or something – I don’t know. I found it a bit disturbing. Is this act of violence (as horrific as it is) really that much of a driving force behind this main character. Really? Maybe I thought that it would make more sense to have one of the athletes be his brother, or his father or a second cousin twice removed – something that would draw him MORE to the core of his soul as he’s taking out the “bad guys” (who are BAD GUYS we never see them in anything resembling three-dimensional characters – one guy tells stories, another has a family – as if that’s enough for us to think about them).

Maybe if I was Jewish. Maybe if I was Palestinian. Maybe.

I also watched: “The Revenge of Dr. X” – a 60’s movie about a mad scientist who, basically, creates a carnivorous plant out of a venus flytrap and some underwater seaweed. The plant, like “Little Shop of Horrors,” wants blood and wants it now. But this plant walks around all buffed out like a Mr. Universe. All the while, Dr. X, yells at his assistant and then compliments her and then yells at her again. Though he works for NASA and this is his “vacation” – he’s hell bent on creating this plant.

Best line: “The earth is your mother, the rain is your blood!”

About two thirds through the otherwise G rated film, the assistant, seeking some dive help, runs over to a group of topless hot Japanese women who bounce on up and listen to the mad scientist tell them where to dive. The scene goes on for quite a bit of time. Who cares that the assistant always wears a swimsuit top.

I’m feeling better now.

Tons of Movies

How many movies have I seen - that is the question.

Too damn many. That's what I get for being sick.

It is becoming completely obvious to me what makes a movie good.

Is it the direction?

Is it the acting?

Is it the story?

Well, yes, it’s all three above but, most importantly, it’s the dang story. And that’s come through in all these films I’ve recently seen:

“Sisters of Death”
“The Witch’s Mountain”
“Attack of the Robots”
“Cars”
“Munich”

And still a few others…

“Sisters” was pretty stupid with a lame story (see story comment above) that’s supposed to have a great little twist at the end which resulted in a ho-hum response. Acting sub-par, and no nudity or anything like that to enjoy (the film was rated PG).

“Witch’s Mountain” was some obscure European film that made no sense at all. Did you know that Witches hang out on mountains and dance around? Isn’t that exciting? Oh and they listen to music REALLY REALLY loud.

“Cars” was wonderful. A bit too obvious in some parts and you knew, pretty much, how the movie was going to end after the first 5 minutes – but still a fun ride.

“Munich” is very good. I’m only an hour and a half into it.

Now, here’s the rub.

“Attack of the Robots” is an hour and 39 minutes long. This had to be one of the WORST movies ever made. Starring Antonio Sabato (father of Jr.) it’s a “Space Opera” made in 1978. You’ve got to figure that “Star Wars” had come out just a year prior to this piece of garbage and the Special Effects were STILL terrible. And I won’t even get into the writing/acting/costuming/dubbing, etc. There’s one character who is supposed to be from Texas and the guy dubbing him has nothing that sounds like a Texan accent. The robots in question wear gold lamme suits and blond wigs (I don’t know who created these robots but they obviously had a thing for Sandy Duncan). The movie, as bad as it was – fell into the “so bad it’s good” category (like “Robot Monster”). Anyway, I dreaded spending the next hour and a half with this tripe and it felt like 3 hours (same with “Witch’s Mountain” – 80 minutes and “Sisters of Death” – 90 minutes).

But then I watch a film like “Munich” which is 164 minutes long and I’m riveted to my couch. I can’t stop watching. I’m drawn in. Yes, the story, the pacing, the directing, everything. But REALLY it’s the story that is holding the film together. I’m not saying that Steven Spielberg doesn’t have anything to do with the story. But John Landis or John Hughes or John Huston could have directed the film and I’d still be pulled in because of that story.

Damn interesting. I must say.

Sick...

I've been sick. All weekend and Monday and Tuesday of this week. I carry a roll of toilet paper around in lieu of Kleenex.

I've watched a number of films which I will touch on soon.

Sorry for the delay.

Three More Movies...

So I finished "Haunts" and it all turns out to "be in her mind." Which is a real "cop-out" if you ask me. Someone actually DID get killed with evil scissors and, well, THEN she went psycho and ended up killing herself after saying that her uncle was burying bodies and the local thug had had his way with her (though it was "confirmed" that she's a virgin - how?). But, of course, the creepy uncle shows up well - then it got weird and confusing.

I followed this with a 1962 B & W film entitled: "Werewolf in the Girl's Dormitory" - which was surprisingly stupid - but with some good atmospherics. At LEAST they showed the transformation OUT of becoming a werewolf. So many times in these cheapy-ass films you get the guy going into the closet and then coming out as a werewolf. Though I had hoped for some really hot girl's dormitory nudity and sex, none was forthcoming. But the death count rose quickly and the dubbing wasn't too bad. One of the best lines:

"He can't be a werewolf. He has a dog. Dogs hate wolves."

After that I started the film "The Driller Killer" which sounds pretty damn evil and bloody but after the first 20 minutes it's dang boring. Not a nary bit of blood and just a couple shots of drills being used - for like hanging things and home improvement. The main character (a hippie slacker artist) is really missunderstood. And there was some creepy guy in a church who knew his name and phone number (looked it up in the phone book?) and called him - or something. Various artisitc shots of homeless men sitting ont he street. Oooh.

About the best thing I can say about the film is that the main character has a BEAUTIFUL girlfriend who is HOT HOT HOT. We'll see what happens over the next 70 minutes.

Fun with numbers...

A friend of mine once said that if you put a checker on the first space on a checkerboard and doubled it, and kept this up, by the time you got to the last space, you would not have enough checkers in the world to place on that space. I thought I would find out. Here's what I found out:

A Checkerboard has 64 spaces.

So:

1: 1
2: 2
3: 4
4: 8
5: 16
6: 32
7: 64
8: 128
9: 256
10: 512
11: 1,024
12: 2,048
13: 4,096
14: 8,192
15: 16,384
16: 32,768
17: 65,536
18: 131,072
19: 262,144
20: 524,288
21: 1,048,576 (million)
22: 2,097,152
23: 4,194,304
24: 8,388,608
25: 16,777,216
26: 33,554,432
27: 67,108,864
28: 134,217,728
29: 268,435,456
30: 536,870,912
31: 1,073,741,824 (billion)
32: 2,147,483,648
33: 4,294,967,296
34: 8,589,934,592
35: 17,179,869,184
36: 34,359,738,368
37: 68,719,476,739
38: 137,438,953,472
39: 274,877,906,944
40: 549,755,813,888
41: 1,099,511,627,776 (trillion)
42: 2,199,023,255,552
43: 4,398,046,511,104
44: 8,796,093,022,208
45: 17,592,186,044,416
46: 35,184,372,088,832
47: 70,368,744,177,664
48: 140,737,488,355,328
49: 281,474,976,710,656
50: 562,949,953,421,312
51: 1,125,899,906,842,624 (quadrillion)
52: 2,251,799,813,685,248
53: 4,503,599,627,370,496
54: 9,007,199,254,740,992
55: 18,014,398,509,481,984
56: 36,028,797,018,963,968
57: 72,057,594,037,927,936
58: 144,115,188,075,855,872
59: 288,230,376,151,711,744
60: 576,460,752,303,423,488
61: 1,152,921,504,606,846,976 (quintillion)
62: 2,305,843,009,213,693,952
63: 4,611,686,018,427,387,904
64: 9,223,372,036,854,775,808

Now, here's the next question. If each space has that corresponding number, how many TOTAL checkers are on the board? Someone want to figure that out?

And if each checker is a half of an inch high, how high would the stack on the last square go?

If each checker is a half an ounce, how heavy much weight would the last square have to withstand?

More normal blogging later...

Good and Bad?

“Haunts” --- oooooh, stupid people doing stupid things.

“Syriana” --- oooooh, smart people doing stupid things involving oil and money.

You really can’t get too films that are nearly direct opposites.

“Syriana” was excellent but a film that I wonder how it got made. Again, we’re looking at a very interesting award winning film (WITH TORTURE!) and some big stars but no real discernible plot, nothing REMOTELY “High Concept” (write to me if you want to know what that is), filmed in foreign countries with oodles of subtitles and complex story lines. And Clooney “slumming” it for an Oscar (see Charlize Theron in Monster). Great film but, again, a film that breaks the mould when it comes to what makes a “successful” film and/or successful film-going experience.

“Haunts” is just, well, stupid. Hot blond women, with Swedish accent, with some sort of “past” is haunted by some guy who kills people with…wait for it…SCISSORS! Yes, if I want to murder someone I’m certainly going to do it with scissors. Well, she’s threatened and raped by this guy with scissors but it looks like there’s another guy who’s killing with scissors (what a co-ink-a-dink! Did they start a club? Get drunk one night and find two pairs of scissors?). I’m over an hour through the film and one has been killed and the other is, I think, hiding out. What I find unintentionally hilarious is that the woman has been attacked, she’s found a dead friend in a chicken coop, but she STILL goes out at night, in the dark, alone.

Hmmm. Idiot?

A True Story?

Okay, I knew going in that watching these 50 “Chillers” there would be films that I would find disturbing if not down-right creepy.

Most films that I watch I can gloss over certain things but this latest film was bit more on the “disturbing” side. The film, entitled “Naked Massacre” made me think it was going to be a bit of “romp” with a silly title like that. With, of course, hoped for sex and nudity along with campy acting and ketchup style blood.

This film, though, being a foreign production, upped that ante by setting it during the IRA issues of the early 70’s and bringing in a Vietnam Vet suffering from PTSD. So that, right there, makes it more interesting.

Then, there’s the house full of sexy young nurses who are all hot (one particularly hot for another) and you’re right there for the “sexy romp.” What follows, though, is this man’s systematic torture and brutality of these women. Which falls into the YUCK category which brings me to the deeper, more fundamental question of why do these films show SO MUCH VIOLENCE towards women.

So the film progresses and he goes more psycho and he kills this one and strangles that one and blood, etc. And, by an hour into the film, I pretty much had checked out and figured this was done and by the time he takes a knife to his arm to either kill himself or to remove a tattoo (“Born to Raise Hell”) I didn’t care.

But then…the film showed 8 photos of young women. Not the women in the film (like the photos in “Capote”) but 8 DIFFERENT women. Was this a TRUE STORY?

So I go onto IMDB and there is a note in there saying that it was based on the “Richard Speck” murders.

A couple of clicks away I found “crimestory.com” which went and described most of what happened but not in a succinct way (more lurid and creepy – I wanted cold hard facts).

Finally, on Wikipedia it described Richard Speck and yes, indeed, he killed 8 nursing students in Chicago. Not Ireland. And it was a particularly brutal killing.

So what’s more disturbing? The fact that this actually HAPPENED or the fact that someone made a film about it in 1979.

Interesting….

A True Story?

Okay, I knew going in that watching these 50 “Chillers” there would be films that I would find disturbing if not down-right creepy.

Most films that I watch I can gloss over certain things but this latest film was bit more on the “disturbing” side. The film, entitled “Naked Massacre” made me think it was going to be a bit of “romp” with a silly title like that. With, of course, hoped for sex and nudity along with campy acting and ketchup style blood.

This film, though, being a foreign production, upped that ante by setting it during the IRA issues of the early 70’s and bringing in a Vietnam Vet suffering from PTSD. So that, right there, makes it more interesting.

Then, there’s the house full of sexy young nurses who are all hot (one particularly hot for another) and you’re right there for the “sexy romp.” What follows, though, is this man’s systematic torture and brutality of these women. Which falls into the YUCK category which brings me to the deeper, more fundamental question of why do these films show SO MUCH VIOLENCE towards women.

So the film progresses and he goes more psycho and he kills this one and strangles that one and blood, etc. And, by an hour into the film, I pretty much had checked out and figured this was done and by the time he takes a knife to his arm to either kill himself or to remove a tattoo (“Born to Raise Hell”) I didn’t care.

But then…the film showed 8 photos of young women. Not the women in the film (like the photos in “Capote”) but 8 DIFFERENT women. Was this a TRUE STORY?

So I go onto IMDB and there is a note in there saying that it was based on the “Richard Speck” murders.

A couple of clicks away I found “crimestory.com” which went and described most of what happened but not in a succinct way (more lurid and creepy – I wanted cold hard facts).

Finally, on Wikipedia it described Richard Speck and yes, indeed, he killed 8 nursing students in Chicago. Not Ireland. And it was a particularly brutal killing.

So what’s more disturbing? The fact that this actually HAPPENED or the fact that someone made a film about it in 1979.

Interesting….