Happy Halloween!

In a world...

...where everyone is parading around dressed as either the Dark Knight or the Joker, and with the most important election this country has had in almost 50 years just on the horizon, we need someone now more than ever to stand as a shining beacon, illuminating the ideals upon which this nation was founded. 

A true American Hero for our times.

Ladies and Gentlemen, complete with home-made shield, I give you CAPTAIN AMERICA:

Uh, Cap?  Turn around so Daddy can see you, okay?

This Happy Halloween message was made possible by a joint effort between Geek Monkey and Captain America.

The Shining (1980)

Being Film #12 in Hail Horror 2008

Can anyone frame a shot like Stanley Kubrick could?  I thought about this as I watched THE SHINING again, mesmerized at how deliberate, how measured each shot is, not one second shorter or longer than it needs to be.  And I think a large part of the reason THE SHINING is still as terrifying as it is has as much to do with this pacing, and Kubrick's ability to move you along with the scenes at exactly the speed he wants you to, as it does with Jack Nicholson's maniacal performance as Jack Torrance.

More of a distillation of the famous Stephen King novel than a direct adaptation, THE SHINING tells the story of Jack Torrance, who has been hired to be the caretaker for the Overlook Hotel, an enormous resort that closes for half the year due to the deep snows of Colorado.  Jack, a recovering alcoholic with anger issues, brings his wife Wendy and their young son Danny with him as company while he attempts to gather his thoughts around a novel he's attempting to write.  Danny is touched with "the shining," a kind of mental power that allows his to hear the thoughts of others, and manifests itself in the imaginary person of Tony, the little boy who lives in Danny's mouth and warns him of the evil that lurks in the hotel, and eventually in his father as well.

The camera in THE SHINING is as much as character as anyone actor in the film, moving very purposefully through each scene, sometimes following characters, sometimes leading them, and sometimes simply observing them, always moving in the same slow, steady pace.  It also acts as our guide through the story, often moving beyond the action to alight on some sign, some action that foreshadows a later event.  Married with the ominous score by Wendy Carlos and Rachel Elkind, the movie takes on an almost dreamlike quality, pulsing and moving like a thing alive.

But when it does move quickly, it does so with a clinical precision, as when the image of the two little girls (disturbing just when they're standing there) intercuts with their mutilated bodies, their blood splattered over the walls:

Kubrick downplays many of the mystical elements of the novel in favor of watching the downward spiral of Nicholson's sanity.  And who wouldn't?  Even close to 30 years later it's still a frightening presence to behold.  In the beginning of the film we see Jack Torrance, hat in hand and obedient as a penitent sinner as he interviews for the caretaker position.  It's only through the side story of Danny's fainting spell, as the doctor questions Wendy Torrance (Shelly Duvall in an outstanding role) that we learn of Jack's drinking, and his temper that broke Danny's arm almost six months prior.  So Jack's state of mind is completely set up by the time we get to the Overlook, and the slow erosion of what's left of jack's mind is punctuated by the hollow echoes of a tennis ball as he hurls it across a large, empty room.  The "writing room" where Jack spends most of his time looms over everything like a death shroud, and shows us the isolation that pervades THE SHINING as much if not more so than the location shots of the hotel in the middle of the blizzard:

Danny's presence in the film tells us that the ghosts and spirits that haunt the Overlook hotel are definitely real, and as frightening as those scenes are, Kubrick time and time again brings the real horror back to the Torrances.  As Jack is driven deeper and deeper into the evil of the hotel, his lashings out at his wife become more and more startling, and he seeks solace with Lloyd, the ghostly bartender who refuses to accept Jack's money for the drinks.  "Your money's no good here, sir.  Orders from the House."

And speaking of the house, the art direction is a wonder to behold.  From the bright reds and greens of the more haunted areas, brought alive by Jack's presence, to the vivid carpet that Danny plays on and rides on, every color and light is tweaked to provide a maximum amount of unease.

Everything comes to a head in the closing half hour as Jack takes axe in hand to "correct" his wife and son.  Watching it again I'm amazed at how effective Shelly Duvall is during Nicholson's "I'm not gonna hurt you" speech.  Her utter confusion at what's going on, the horror and terror at the situation is right there in her saucer eyes, and her constant ending of everything she says with a question, something Nicholson picks up on in his mockery of her.  Later Kubrick relentlessly picks up the pace as Jack pursues Danny into the cold and dark garden maze.  The final scene of Jack frozen in the snow, his spirit now joining the rest of the "residents" of the Overlook Hotel, is just another in a series of lonely, isolated shots - people isolated from each other and from themselves.

Cold, disturbing in its images and shocking in its sudden bursts of rage, THE SHINING is a prime example of horror in its most unsettling forms: the dread of being truly cut off from the world, the unnamed fears of a child, and the terrible insanity of a broken mind.

Taking Inspiration Where You Can

I've written before of my admiration for Roger Ebert as a film critic and as a writer, not just of film but of anything.  He has a rare voice that can strike cleanly into any subject with a clarity and enthusiasm that has been a joy to experience regardless of the delivery method: an insightful audio commentary on Ozu's FLOATING WEEDS, a comprehensive look at the work of a brilliant director in his most recent book Scorsese, or the more personal musings that have been appearing with regularity in his new online journal.

Last week he posted an article titled "I think I'm musing my mind" that talks about how the loss of his voice has brought about a new focus and awareness to his writing.  But it's more than that.  It speaks to the power of writing, to the determination of not giving up, not giving in and finding your voice using any avenue available to you.  It's an incredible inspiration to me and I wanted to have a link to it here for anyone else interested.  

Here it is.

Take a few extra minutes to go through the comments.  They've been recognized by Computerworld Magazine as, "about the best you'll see on a blog."  It's an excellent community, and as I continue to struggle with defining myself by my writing Ebert is someone I come back to time and again.

Mary Shelley's Frankenstein (1994)

Being Film #11 in Hail Horror 2008

Two years after the bloody, beautiful mess that was BRAM STOKER'S DRACULA, Francis Ford Coppola moved into the producer's chair for MARY SHELLEY'S FRANKENSTEIN, handing the directing reigns over to Kenneth Brannagh, who had great success with his two previous Shakespeare adaptations, HENRY V and MUCH ADO ABOUT NOTHING.  So I imagine there was a certain logic to letting him tackle Shelley's horror masterpiece, a novel about the search to become our own God, and the folly of reaching for the Eternal without owning up to the responsibility that comes with it.

Boasting an enormous cast, including Robert DeNiro as the creature, and taking a grand, operatic cue from Coppola's DRACULA, FRANKENSTEIN strangely suffers from the same points that brought Brannagh's Shakespeare adaptations to such vibrant life.  It's odd that what worked for for one didn't when applied to something seemingly so similar, but the in-your-face score reeks of melodrama, and an over-the-top, dandified performance by Brannagh as Victor Frankenstein, who brought such passion in his earlier roles, here strives for tortured but instead falls to slightly foppish and silly.

The screenplay follows the events of the novel very closely.  It opens on the ice, as a group of explorers frozen in the Arctic comes across the world's most famous mad scientist, pulling himself along on a makeshift sled as a fearsome howl rages behind him in pursuit:

Echoing the past, Brannagh uses some of the famous images and scenes from films like the James Whale FRANKENSTEIN and even some of BRIDE OF FRANKENSTEIN with it's almost surreal locations, but everything is shot with an eye to being over-dramatic: scenes are filmed at odd angles and oftentimes use deep focus or fish eye lenses for effect, actors emote to the point of jumping out of the frame, and the score by Patrick Doyle screams each feeling and theme instead of implying them.  Nuance is in short supply, and each beat of the movie feels like it bludgeons you on the head when sometimes a tap would suffice.

But probably the most laughable moment comes during the famous "birthing" scene, where Victor finally brings his creation to life.  Stripped down and greased up, Brannagh jumps and prances about the lab, flexing his muscles at every opportunity and essentially creating a moment of hilarity instead of solemnity.  The one moment of true levity, when Victor continuously slips in the amniotic fluid that's spilled all over the floor as he tries to help up his creation, provides a more truthful moment that the "It's Alive!" sequence that came before it.  The creation of the monster is the point where Victor marks his own destruction, but the effect here is just a chance to show off where a majority of the film's budget went.  Allow the glory of YouTube to take you there:

If anything really works in FRANKENSTEIN, it's DeNiro's portrayal of the Monster.  Although it won't cause anyone to forget Boris Karloff's iconic performance, it does come closer to mirroring the book than any other film adaptation I've seen.  This is still a period when DeNiro was completely immersing himself in his roles, and he brings a quiet dignity to the Monster, even when he's at his most destructive.  It helps that Frankenstein immediately becomes an utter prick as soon as he realizes the Monster is alive, screaming and running away, instantly abandoning the Monster to his own devices.  Once the story becomes his, FRANKENSTEIN moves along at a much better clip.  At its heart FRANKENSTEIN is about the doctor's folly, and the question of responsibility to what he's created.  And DeNiro's Monster uses the eloquence of a Shakespearean character to drive this point over and over again to Victor throughout the movie.  It's a heart breaking performance, and one that should have gotten more credit at the time.

When these scenes are occurring, Brannagh finds the soul of the film, and everything begins to work.  It's here that his eye and ear for the theatrical really work for the film instead of against it.  It's jut too bad there isn't more substance in the rest of the movie.

Bram Stoker's Dracula (1992)

Being Film #10 in Hail Horror 2008

This is a review from the drunken heart of a geek, written just after the Witching Hour with loud music playing in his headphones.  And as such it should perhaps be taken with a grain of salt.  I originally saw BRAM STOKER'S DRACULA in the theater with a number of college friends, including my girlfriend at the time.  The experience was significant because our impatience with what Francis Ford Coppola was trying to accomplish with the movie led us to revile and actively disparage it at the time, and also, on a more personal note, led to what my now wife refers to as, "the worst date you ever took me on."

Luckily that date turned into many more (and, ultimately, marriage), and luckily I grew up a little (okay - a lot) and took the time to watch and learn a lot more about film than I knew before, which helped immensely when I revisted the film via the recently re-issued DVD, which has been remastered and contains audio commentary by Coppola.  Seeing again with older, more experienced eyes, I'm now able to see DRACULA for the wonderful, beautiful mess that it is.

Understand, it's not perfect by a long shot.  The script is bloated and some of the performances, particularly Winona Ryder and Keanu Reeves, just don't work for the grand, theatrical style Coppola's going for, which is a shame because if anything can be said for the film it's that Coppola directs the Unholy Hell out of it, working in homages to dozens of films and directors, including F.W. Maurnau and his immortal NOSFERATU (reviewed here), Jean Cocteau and his telling of BEAUTY AND THE BEAST, Stanley Kubrick's THE SHINING and even SNOW WHITE AND THE SEVEN DWARVES.  In addition, he automatically gets bonus points for including one of my favorite performers, Tom Waits, as the insect-obsessed Renfield:

I won't bother to re-cap the plot of either the film or the famous novel it's based on - there are liberties to be sure, but the story is essentially the same as every adaptation has used over the years.  The big difference in this version is the love story used as both a new lens to view the legend of the vampire as well as a framing device for the film.  Much of Gary Oldman's excellent portrayal of the Count is based on his eternal love for his dead wife, who killed herself after wrongly hearing of his death at war.  When he sees what he believes to be her reincarnation in Ryder's Mina Murray, the horror and melodrama are all colored by his longing to be reunited with his lost love.

Oldman is gleefully devious as the title character, giving a very broad performance meant to distance itself from previous incarnations of Dracula, particularly Bela Lugosi's immortal version.  Using various guises (bat, wolf, rats, mist) Oldman runs through the entire gamut of vampire lore.  But my favorite is still his aged, slightly effeminate Count of Transylvania, though the credit is as much costume designer Eiko Ishioka's as it is Oldman's.

But the real star of the film is Coppola, and this is really the last film (excepting the recent YOUTH WITHOUT YOUTH) where he pulls out all the stops and slams his vision onto the piece.  Partnering with his son Roman Coppola (a gifted filmmaker in his own right; see CQ), who handles second unit directing as well as the amazing effects, everything is shot with an eye to the past, even as the future constantly makes its presence felt.  Almost all of the effects are done in camera: matte paintings, double exposures, pixellated cameras - Coppola makes DRACULA sing with the love and attention of hundreds of films that came before it.  Everything is filmed on sound stages, the acting (especially Oldman and Anthony Hopkins as a mad, devilish Van Helsing) is purposefully broad, as if it's being projected from the stage.  The visuals are sumptuously Gothic (if that makes sense), and the gore and violence, when it comes, is shocking.

BRAM STOKER'S DRACULA is a film where you're rewarded with multiple viewings.  If at all possible ditch the old discount DVD or VHS and seek out the newly remastered 2-disc set.  You get an amazing commentary by Coppola, where he details many aspects of the film from pre-production to the fights with the studio, as well as four new documentaries detailing every aspect of the film's visuals and performance stylings.  There are few filmmakers who can really carry a commentary: Scorsese comes to mind, but Coppola's frank assessment of the production is a wonderful companion piece to this movie, a luscious platter of love and blood.