Sketchin’ 18

So yesterday I had a little free time and pulled out the old Apple Pencil and looked around for a new subject to draw.

I found one and here it is:

Actor and inventor Hedy Lamarr (1914-2000) is my latest subject.

She was an incredible beauty, easily among the most beautiful women to grace the screen.  Some may find her name familiar, perhaps due to Harvey Korman’s hilarious character “Hedley Lamarr” in the film Blazing Saddles (she sued for the use of her name and the case was settled out of court).  But what made Ms. Lamarr all the more fascinating beyond her many roles and her breathtaking beauty was this fact, which I’ve cut and pasted from IMDB:

(Hedy Lamarr) was co-inventor (with composer George Antheil) of the earliest known form of the telecommunications method known as “frequency hopping”, which used a piano roll to change between 88 frequencies and was intended to make radio-guided torpedoes harder for enemies to detect or to jam. The method received U.S. patent number 2,292,387 on August 11, 1942, under the name “Secret Communications System”. Frequency hopping is now widely used in cellular phones and other modern technology. However, neither she nor Antheil profited from this fact, because their patents were allowed to expire decades before the modern wireless boom.

That’s right, ladies and gentlemen, Hedy Lamarr was one of the two people to create what would become our manner of using cellular phones!

Sadly, she joins the list of far too many people who created/invented great things in their lifetimes but didn’t live to see their ideas/creations become well known.

Here’s to you, Ms. Lamarr.  Beauty and brains.

Incredible.

Logan Lucky (2017) a (how about that?!) on time review

When I saw the first trailers for the new Steven Soderbergh directed film (his first after declaring he was retiring from direction several years before) Logan Lucky, I was intrigued.

Why?

Two words: Daniel Craig.

Seeing Daniel Craig, who for far too many years acts in films -like the James Bond films, natch- that required him to be so serious and dour, acting in this …unhinged… looking manner had my complete attention.

So this weekend, when my wife and I found ourselves with –gasp!– some free time after a far too grueling month of moving our kids into their apartments, decided to head out to the theater and watch a film.

But, what to see?

The choices boiled down to The Hitman’s Bodyguard and Logan Lucky.  The Hitman’s Bodyguard, alas, has been taking a beating from critics and, to be very honest, after that grueling month I’ve been through, I didn’t want to waste my time and Logan Lucky was certainly getting a lot of critical love.

So Logan Lucky it was.

The film’s story is pretty clearly laid out in the above trailer.  The Logans, Jimmy (Channing Tatum), Clyde (Adam Driver), and Mellie (Riley Keough) join forces with the hilarious Joe Bang (Daniel Craig, natch) and his redneck brothers to pull off a heist at the Nascar raceway.

Why?

The spark, apparently, for the action was Jimmy a) being fired from his job because of a knee injury sustained when fighting for the army and b) finding out his ex-wife Bobbie Jo Chapman (Katie Holmes in what amounts to a cameo) and her current husband are going to move to another state and, therefore, take their daughter with her.

So Jimmy wants/needs cash (perhaps… I’ll say no more), and he presents his plan to his brother, then together they visit Joe Bang in prison and we’re off and running.

Logan Lucky is far from a perfect film.  In fact, the first act, before the arrival of Daniel Craig’s Joe Bang, is kinda dull.

But once the actors are in their place and we’ve moved on to the actual heist, things get fun -and funny- and we’re having ourselves a good time.

It helps, by the way, that almost all the characters presented are decent people.  The only big exception is Seth MacFarlane’s Max Chilblain, a shallow Nascar promoter who is a narcissist and may wind up being the proverbial fly in the ointment when it comes to the heist going as planned.

Even Katie Homes’ Bobbie Jo and her silly new husband, who could have been presented as far more antagonistic, are instead shown to be caring parents in their own way, even if their means far outstrip Jimmy Logan’s.

So, if you can patiently wait a few minutes for the film to find its legs, you’ll have fun with Logan Lucky.  It may not be one of the most scintillating comedies or heist films ever made, but its a fun piece of work and, if nothing else, its worth seeing for Daniel Craig’s hilarious turn as Joe Bang.

Recommended.

Jerry Lewis & Dick Gregory…

Two people who have been in my life one way or another have passed.

Jerry Lewis was 91 years old and, toward the end of his life, was rather notorious in his later years as a (let’s put it kindly) a crank.  His style of comedy, I must admit, wasn’t to my taste but it is undeniable he left behind a large legacy and plenty of comedians who were guided/inspired by him.

My greatest memories of him is for the muscular dystrophy telethons, which took over the TV back in the 1970’s and into the 1980’s and lasted for a solid 24 hours.  Mr. Lewis, toward the end of these telethons, was sometimes barely coherent but given the good he did during these events, one can’t help but admire him for that.

Dick Gregory also passed away.  He was 84 and also leaves behind a large legacy though, like Mr. Lewis, his biggest contributions to culture came a little before my time.  An African American comedian who was one of the very first to be able to perform in front of white audiences.  He was a civil rights activist and, occasionally, actor.

While neither individual personally touched me as they did so many others of the generation(s) before mine, its nonetheless worth given them their due.

Rest in Peace.

Movie costume design…

Interesting article regarding costume design in movies and how it serves to further the story in subtle ways:

I was particularly intrigued with the analysis of the costumes in the original Star Wars film.

Those who have followed this blog for any length of time know that I’m not a huge fan of Star Wars, both the original movie and series of films.  I don’t begrudge everyone else’s enjoyment of them, but they just never worked for me in spite of the fact that I was of the right age at the right time and went to see the original film in 1977 in a packed theater and… it just didn’t work for me like it did for so many others.

Yet the analysis of the dress/costumes in the film as presented in the above video is spot on.  It is a far trickier thing to create “original” costumes that are futuristic and fit into the setting of a film like Star Wars yet are grounded enough in things we as an audience may recognize -even if subconsciously- to understand what we’re seeing.  Thus, the military style outfits of the Empire are recognizably so, even if they don’t necessarily look like any military we are familiar with.  Similarly, Princess Leia’s outfit is regal, hinting at her royalty, yet original/futuristic enough to make us both recognize it for the royal aspect and the sci-fi aspect.

And Luke Skywalker’s outfit… I have to say, I never thought of it the way it was explained above but what’s presented is a brilliant observation.  (No, I don’t want to spoil it)

Good stuff.

The Blackcoat’s Daughter (2015) a (mildly) belated review

Directed and written by Oz Perkins, son of actor Anthony Perkins who is best known today for the role of Norman Bates in the Alfred Hitchcock directed Psycho, The Blackcoat’s Daughter sure does play out like a Hitchcockian horror film.

Here’s its trailer:

I found it humorous to see, after the fact, a couple of videos also on YouTube “explaining” the film and, in my opinion, the explanations are sometimes quite off.

Which leads us to The Blackcoat’s Daughter’s (BD from here on) biggest problem: It presents a story in a very non-linear manner (nothing wrong about that) but fails to be clear enough about what we’re seeing and, worse, getting us to care enough about it.

Which is not to say BD is a total bust.

Mr. Perkins has clearly sucked in Alfred Hitchcock’s oeuvre and if nothing else this film reflects his love for that thrill master’s work.  BD is elegant, measured, and when it gets bloody it certainly reminded me of the film Psycho.

However, the story presented simply doesn’t take you in as it should and while the final reveal (another Psycho inspired element?) is made, you must have seen it coming from a long way away.

In a nutshell, BD goes like this:

At an upscale Catholic boarding school Freshman Kat (Kiernan Shipka) awaken from a nightmare where she walks through a snowy parking lot and sees a crashed vehicle which clearly has some victims within it.  That day in late February (which, by the way, was the original name of the film), the school goes on break and parents are supposed to pick up all the kids for a week off.

Kat is clearly disturbed by this vision and somehow appears to know that her parents will not come to pick her up.  Even more eerily, she has a strange attachment to the school’s headmaster and is bothered that he won’t be around for her piano recital given on the date of the parental pickups.

Meanwhile, fellow, but older, student Rose (Lucy Boynton) is a more rebellious student who fears she is pregnant.

When the parents show up to pick up the kids in the boarding school, neither Kat nor Rose’s parents show up.  Kat, who had the premonition of his parent’s death, is very disturbed they haven’t shown up.  Rose, on the other hand, played her parents and told them the pickup date was later that week.  This was done so she could talk with her boyfriend and tell him of her possible pregnancy.

Meanwhile (part deux), a mysterious young woman named Joan (Emma Roberts) is taking a bus to a mysterious destination.  After arriving at her destination, she sits on a bench in the winter cold and a kindly man named Bill (James Remar), realizes she looks lost and cold and offers her a ride.

Bill and his wife Linda (Lauren Holly) take Joan in and, it turns out, they are on a very sad journey.

I don’t want to get into too many more details here (though I will after the SPOILER ALERT), but suffice to say these five characters and their stories will intersect before we reach the film’s end.

BD is, as I stated before, an elegant, well acted and well filmed movie which presents an admittedly fresh story… but, sadly, when all is said and done the film fails to sufficiently draw in this viewer (at least) and while I appreciate the care and thought behind the movie, it simply doesn’t present enough -and present it clearly enough- to get me to care.

Still, there is meat here and while I may feel this film is ultimately a whiff, Mr. Perkins shows considerable talent behind the camera, even if he’s a little better a director than a writer (again, IMHO).

So I can’t recommend BD even as I can commend Mr. Perkins for giving us something relatively new and interesting, even if it fails in the end to this viewer.

Now, on to…

 

SPOILER ALERTS!!!

YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED!!!!

 

Still there?

You have been warned!

BD presents, in the end a very non-linear story.  It offers us scenes and then returns to them later in the film from a different character’s viewpoint which reveals to the audience just what was going on.

For example, Kat has a strange relationship with the heat furnace in the school’s basement, which is called back to later in the film.

But the one biggest reveal, which as I said before falls into Psycho territory, is that we find that “Joan” is not really who she says she is.  It turns out this woman strangled a woman in a bathroom and took her ID, which was indeed “Joan”.

For this “Joan” is Kat, nine years later.

Kat, it turns out, at the time her parents didn’t show up to get her all those years before, descended into some kind of a breakdown or -and this is where the film kinda lost me- was possessed by a demon.

Kat in time goes on a killing spree and takes out the two headmistresses/nuns living just outside the school before killing Rose who, moments before and in the bathroom had a period -again, something implied more than “shown” although in this case I’m OK with that!- and realized she wasn’t pregnant after all.

So nine years later Kat has managed to escape the insane asylum and is making her way back to the boarding school.  The people who picked her up, ironically enough, turn out to be Rose’s parents.  They are still in deep grief and are headed in that general direction to pay tribute to their lost daughter, unaware they have just picked up her daughter’s killer and will soon become victims of her just as their daughter was.

And Kat’s ultimate goal?

In the concluding moments of the film it is revealed that shortly after Kat was subdued a priest performed an exorcism on Kat and banished the demon that possessed her.

But Kat didn’t want it to go!

So she’s returning to the now boarded up school with her fresh victims (her first while “on her own”) and when she gets to the school and returns to the furnace where she first encountered the demon directly, she finds… nothing.

The furnace where she worshiped her personal demon is long cold.

The demon is long gone, banished forever.

And the disturbed Kat wandered back out to the road and cries.

Fin.

When watching the videos “explaining” what the movie is about, both I watched miss completely the fact that Rose finds out she’s not pregnant.  One of them seems to think that Kat and the school knew her parents were dead already (they most certainly did not) and missed the fact that when the headmaster and police officer come to the school later in the film, they’re obviously doing so to tell Kat her parents are dead, only to find Kat has gone on her bloody rampage.

Anyway, it doesn’t matter all that much. Indeed, the whole subplot involving Rose and her pregnancy/non-pregnancy are, in the end, not really all that important to the story, which makes me wonder if maybe this is yet another tribute to Psycho (Janet Leigh’s character’s story, which initially draw the viewer in, winds up being something of a red herring in the end).

So there you have it folks, a decent and potentially intriguing film that just missed for me.

Sketchin’ 16

Moving from a genuine hero in Flash Gordon to perhaps my favorite “anti” hero…

Of all the characters presented within the movies John Carpenter made, my favorite is easily Snake Plisskin, as portrayed by Kurt Russell.

While I feel Escape From New York, the movie that gave us that character, is far from perfect, there’s little doubt that Snake Plisskin is the real deal.  Love, love, love the character.

The issue I have with the film is that it starts so damn well but seems to run out of steam in its later third.  I feel part of the problem is that the movie’s budget caught up with John Carpenter’s vision and he wasn’t able to make the extravaganza he was hoping for.

Still, Escape From New York is nonetheless a favorite film of mine, if only because of Kurt Russell and that crazy bad ass Snake Plisskin.

For a man so many thought was dead, he sure has a hell of a lot of life in him!