One of my favorite “slow burn” films is the 1968 Steve McQueen classic Bullitt. The movie features a dense plot and urges its viewers to pay attention to what’s going on. Steve McQueen himself, as the title character, appears at times to be almost sleepwalking through the proceedings, ever watching and paying attention to what’s going on around him. In the end, we realize he knows only too well what’s happening and has played his cards just right, dealing with his superiors and his superior’s superiors while faithfully solving a perplexing case.
I’ve long maintained that the movie’s one “superfluous” sequence is perhaps it’s best: The justifiably famous car chase sequence through the hilly streets of San Francisco. This sequence didn’t have to be in the film, yet it was there, a cheery on top of the cake, which for a moment made a “day in a policeman’s life” drama into an exciting action film.
To me, all this works to make an absolutely smashing film.
Fast forward forty four years and last night I popped the 2011 version of Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy (from now on I’ll refer to it as TTSS to save on typing) into my DVD player and gave it a whirl. TTSS is an adaptation of the classic John Le Carre Cold War spy drama and, like the book, is set in the early 1970’s. You wouldn’t think such a work would have all that much in common with Bullitt, a police vs. the mob film from 1968, but you’d be surprised by the elements they do share.
In the case of TTSS, like Bullitt you’re dealing with a thoughtful protagonist who’s called in to solve a sticky situation. Bullitt’s sticky situation involves the mob and a witness who the higher ups want him to protect so that he will get to testify before a jury. TTSS involves a semi-retired spy who is called in to find out who among his closest ex-allies is a Russian mole. The protagonist in both films quietly observes all that goes around him, often realizing more than others realize. Both films also present the material almost blandly, showing us the routine of each day in a mostly realistic fashion.
But while Bullitt held my attention throughout, TTSS ultimately never really catches fire. Years before I recall seeing the original TTSS television mini-series with Alec Guiness in the title role, but I recall very few of the details. What I do remember is that it, unlike this new film, held my attention.
While the acting within this new TTSS movie is uniformly good and the presentation of early 1970’s London is quite spectacular, the direction and pace of the film borders on the outright boring. I suspect the people behind the film were trying their best to make an “anti”-Bourne type spy film, but one wonders why they decided to present virtually everything in such a sedate way.
And, no, I wasn’t hoping for an exciting -though perhaps superfluous- car chase in the middle of the film.
Might have helped, though!
In the end, I simply cannot recommend the theatrical version of TTSS. A real shame, given the talents involved.
As an interesting comparison, here’s a sequence from the original TV version of TTSS:
There have been quite a few nice tributes written for the late director Tony Scott, who committed suicide last week and was recently laid to rest.
His career was varied and productive, not unlike his (perhaps) better known brother Ridley Scott. Unlike his brother, however, Tony Scott’s films never quite achieved the higher critical reaction that his brother Ridley received for at least two of his films, Alien and Blade Runner.
Nonetheless, Tony Scott was behind the director’s chair for such commercial -if not always critical- hits like Top Gun, Beverly Hills Cop II, Crimson Tide, Enemy of the State, Man on Fire, Spy Game, and, most recently, the remake of The Taking of Pelham 1, 2, 3 and Unstoppable. The films mentioned above were all, in my opinion, reasonably popular entertainment, but I suspect there are few who would all or even most “classics” that will stand the test of time.
Of these, the two that I find the most intriguing are Enemy of the State and Spy Game. These two films, along with the Michael Bay directed The Rock, formed a trilogy of “pseudo” sequels to very famous films. As a great bonus they also featured the same actors playing very similar roles to their more famous original films. In the case of The Rock, for example, it was clear Sean Connery was playing an older James Bond. In the film he was described as a top British spy who had run afoul of -and was betrayed by- the people he worked for. A relic of the Cold War. Enemy of the State featured Gene Hackman reprising his role from the Francis Ford Coppola classic The Conversation, while Spy Game featured Robert Redford reprising his character from Three Days of the Condor. While none of these pseudo sequels rose to the level of the originals, I felt it was an intriguing idea and made for some entertaining, if not quite classic, films.
Of the films Tony Scott directed, I personally consider The Hunger and True Romance his two “best” films. When originally released, The Hunger was way ahead of its time, a romantic/erotic vampire story that was much more influential on what followed than it was successful upon its release. True Romance, which featured a screenplay by Quentin Tarantino, proved an entertaining and very wild ride, with a large cast of actors doing some great work.
While I don’t consider myself a huge fan of Tony Scott’s overall body of work, there is no denying that for the past several decades his presence has most certainly been felt. His death comes as a shock and one can’t help but wonder what might have come next.
The other day I picked up a bargain BluRay disc featuring two Bruce WIllis films, Last Man Standing and the Tony Scott directed The Last Boy Scout. The one and only time I saw The Last Boy Scout was when it was originally released back in 1991. Back then I didn’t think all that much of it but nonetheless recalled one bit of dialogue between Bruce WIllis’ character and a police detective/ex-friend. If memory serves (and it certainly might not!) Willis’ character’s wife left him for that now ex-friend and the meeting was salty, painful, yet surprisingly down to earth.
Perhaps I’ll revisit it when I get a chance.
Rest in Peace, Mr. Scott. While not all your films were my cup of tea, considering all the works you were involved in, you nonetheless provided me with hours of entertainment.
Heard plenty of good things about The Raid: Redemption, and being a fan of action films, I just had to give it a try.
Filmed in Jakarta, Indonesia, The Raid: Redemption starts out really, really well. In fact, the opening of the film reminded me in a very pleasant way to what I consider one of director John Carpenter’s very best films, Assault on Precinct 13 (the original 1976 version, not the pretty lame 2005 remake).
The plot of The Raid is simple yet very effective: A group of young SWAT officers is tasked to silently enter a fortified building within the Jakarta slums. Their mission is seek out and apprehend the crime lord that runs that building and bring him to justice. However, halfway up the building the hunters become the hunted when the many criminals residing within the building target the SWAT team.
There are a few other plot flourishes I won’t get into but suffice to say the film is a lean, mean action adventure that should satisfy most fans of this type of genre.
If there are any quibbles I have with the film, it is that there are several martial arts-type fights that, frankly, took me out of the nitty gritty nature of the film. Allow me to elaborate. In the movie’s early going, the sense of claustrophobia and the real fear of sudden death lurking behind any corner were very effective. You had a sense that the SWAT members were trapped in a hell where they would have to claw their way to freedom.
However, by the time the remaining SWAT members were down to using their fists and knives against the many villains they faced, the protracted fight scenes unfortunately resembled more typical martial art films and removed me from the more noir elements present up until that point.
Please note, though, that this is a relatively small quibble. There is word that producers in the United States are working on a remake of the film. I’m not terribly surprised. This is the type of feature that should be easily translated for American audiences. There is very little that need be changed.
So if you’re in the mood for a solid action film, you could do far worse than spend some time watching The Raid.
I still have pretty vivid memories of first seeing the poster for a then upcoming film that was scheduled to be released in 1981 called Escape From New York.
Perhaps you’ve heard of it?
Back then in the stone age of 1981, there was a great possibility movies you never heard of at all would suddenly “appear” before you either as posters (as was the case with that film) or via movie trailers. Nowadays, of course, we hear about, and sometimes even see clips of films as they’re being made. The element of surprise is, for the most part, gone.
When I finally saw Escape From New York, I had a curiously paradoxical reaction to it. I absolutely LOVED parts of it, from the clever storyline to actor Kurt Russell’s bizarre Clint Eastwood-talking Snake Plissken. But the film seemed to lose steam as it went along and I felt that as good as certain elements of it were, overall the film didn’t thrill me as much as I hoped it would.
Over the years, my opinion of it has changed, albeit slightly. I’ve grown to appreciate more of the film and realized, in retrospect, that much of my disappointment might well have been due to the film’s very low budget. The fact is that most of the special effects are presented at the start of the film while the rest of it features our characters running around dark streets that might well have been anywhere and, as it turned out, most of the city scenes were indeed not filmed in New York!
However, the good stuff stuck with me and when rumors came out that director John Carpenter envisioned making more Snake Plissken films, even one he wistfully (or perhaps jokingly?) called Escape From Earth, I was certainly all in favor of seeing that.
In the end Escape From New York proved something of a box office dud. Given its budget, it certainly made its money back and then some, but it took many more years -fifteen in fact- before Escape From L.A. was released in 1996. Sporting a far greater budget and the same lead and director, Escape From L.A. nonetheless proved a box office flop, earning less than its cost.
And that, it appeared, was that.
Until, that is, this year when producer/writer/director Luc Besson released Lockout. Produced and co-written by Mr. Besson, Lockout is, essentially, Escape From Earth as envisioned by him. Guy Pearce stars as Snow, a somewhat more gregarious version of Snake Plissken while Maggie Grace stars as Emile Warnock, the daughter of the President of the United States. The plot is a mild variation of both John Carpenter Escape films: The daughter of the President goes to an orbiting penal colony, the prisoners manage to escape and take over, and Snake…er…Snow goes in to find and free her. Oh, and the clock is ticking.
When I first saw the trailer for Lockout I was intrigued. My younger, more strident self (as opposed to the more mellow person I’ve since become) might have been furious that Mr. Besson (who is also listed in the credits as having the “original idea” of this film!!!!) would so cavalierly rip off another person’s concept.
Then again, the John Carpenter Escape property is, let’s face it, dead. Kurt Russell isn’t as young as he was before and I suspect he can’t pull off the character of Snake Plissken anymore (there was talk, by the way, of a remake of Escape From New York with new actors in the central roles, so obviously the studios already feel that Mr. Russell may be too old for the part). And John Carpenter, as big a cult movie director as he is, hasn’t made a “big” feature in a very, very long time…and I suspect studios aren’t exactly lining up to front him big money to do another Escape movie.
So when Mr. Besson and his “original” story idea for the film Lockout appeared, I couldn’t be too terribly upset. In fact, I was hoping that Mr. Besson and company captured some of the Escape magic -the good stuff versus the bad- and made some mindless piece of entertainment that I could sit back to and enjoy.
However, early reviews of the film were not very positive. In fact, most of the reviews I read were quite negative (the film scored an unimpressive 37% positive among critics and an almost equal 40% positive among audiences at Rottentomatoes.com).
Still, I wanted to see it. Yesterday, I finally got the chance.
Long story short (if that’s possible at this point): Lockout is a mediocre film. If you’re curious to see someone else’s take on the Escape films, you won’t come away impressed with what’s here, but neither do I think you’ll be begging for the pain to go away.
Guy Pearce is mostly good in the role of Snow, but I felt at times he wasn’t terribly invested in his role. He appeared to be…and I could be guilty of mind reading here…uninterested in most of what was happening. His delivery of lines was one-note and it appeared he was doing the bare minimum required. It’s a tough thing to say of an actor’s work, especially one I happen to like quite a bit (he was absolutely terrific in both Memento and L.A. Confidential, among other films). Maggie Grace, on the other hand, seems to realize the nature of this film and, for the most part, delivers in her role. That’s not to say she saves the film, only that at the very least she stands toe to toe (and sometimes ahead!) of the movie’s actual protagonist.
Unfortunately, where the film mostly fails is in its all too busy plot. Lockout starts with a strange bust gone bad. The action sequences here aren’t quite as terrible as some have stated, yet not enough explanation and context is ever offered to what exactly our hero was doing here…or what it was he was hoping to get his hands on. Even by the end of the film, we’re still not sure what exactly was so terribly important to his character in those early sequences.
When the movie moves to the prison colony satellite, the jail break sequence proves way, way too easy. MILD SPOILERS: Essentially one man gets his hands on one gun and manages to free the nearly 500 homicidal prisoners in minutes. Did the people behind this penal colony not have any decent security designs? And did they really have to put the “Get the prisoners out of stasis” button only a few feet away from an interview room he escapes from?
Very silly stuff.
Once those opening sections of the film are over, however, it does manage to move along decently. It’s a silly affair, but I’m glad I was able to satisfy my curiosity without feeling the need to fling my remote control at the TV set.
Still, it could -it should– have been so much better.
Now that the new version of Total Recall has just been released to movie theaters, I’ve noted a batch of “Best/Worst Movie remakes” articles appearing on the web.
I can’t disagree with much of what they list. If I were to pick my personal favorite remake, I’d probably go with The Maltese Falcon. What is most amazing about that classic film Humphrey Bogart film is the fact that it was actually the third version of that film! The first version, also titled The Maltese Falcon was released ten years earlier in 1931 and featured Ricardo Cortez in the role of Sam Spade. Bette Davis would appear a few years later in Satan Met a Lady (1936), the second version of the story that instead of a Maltese Falcon featured the hunt for a valuable “French Horn.” Both films can’t hold a candle to the quality of the Humphrey Bogart version.
As far as worst remake…there are just so many examples of retreads that were either inadvisable or silly. Not listed in the above article, for example, is the remake of the classic 1973 horror cult movie The Wicker Man. The original film was an incredible and very unique work, which featured some very sharp jabs at something I believe no big time studio would dare approach in this day and age: Religion. When I heard a remake was in the works, I simply couldn’t believe that the makers of this remake would dare to approach the subject matter in the bold way the original did.
I was right. The 2006 version of The Wicker Man stayed very clear from the more potent religious themes present in the original film and the result was proved what I expected, a bland, ultimately silly and meaningless film that couldn’t hold a candle to the original.
Another film that I personally found hard to take was the 2006 film Superman Returns. I am a HUGE fan of the 1978 Richard Donner directed Superman film. To this day, I still consider it the very best superhero film ever made. Director Bryan Singer obviously loves it too, but when he directed Superman Returns, I believe that love wound up hurting the overall product. When Superman Returns was originally released in 2006, I was led to believe it was a sequel to the first two Superman films. However, while there were some new ideas presented here and there (Lois having Superman’s baby), the movie was in reality a not so stealthy remake of Richard Donner’s Superman.
And it just didn’t have the majesty, the humor, or the charisma to pull it off. Now, there are many who disagree with that assessment. My local paper’s film critic was blown away by the film upon its release and gave is three and a half stars and proclaimed it one of the best films released up to that point in 2006. The film appeared to be a modest success, so at the very least film audiences were divided.
Now, the quirkiest movie remake of them all: Airplane!
Few may realize this, but Airplane! is a hilarious remake of the very serious 1957 film Zero Hour!, complete with exclamation point on the end. The video below presents wonderful examples of the similarities between both movies. Enjoy!
The Hollywood reporter offered an interesting article that focused on the possibilities of sequels to films released this past summer, given their box office success/failure:
The bit that fascinated me was about what was probably one of the most disappointing films released this summer (indeed, considering how eager I was to see this and the high hopes I had for it, maybe the most disappointing film in many summers!), Prometheus. This is what they had to say about the possibility of a sequel to that film:
(FOX) studio’s big summer bet was Ridley Scott‘s Prometheus, June’s sort-of Alien prequel. The $130 million-budgeted film grossed a solid but not spectacular $303 million globally, putting it right on the franchise bubble. Fox confirms to THR that Scott and the studio actively are pushing ahead with a follow-up (stars Michael Fassbender and Noomi Rapace are signed) and are talking to new writers because Prometheus co-scribe Damon Lindelof might not be available. “Ridley is incredibly excited about the movie, but we have to get it right. We can’t rush it,” says Fox president of production Emma Watts, who also has overseen the successful reboots of the X-Men and Planet of the Apes franchises. A Prometheus sequel would be released in 2014 or 2015.
Despite my feelings regarding the film, I have to admit that I’d be open to a sequel. I might -might!- even become excited to see such a thing, provided the story this time around is a good one and not the messy (though undeniably ambitious) story we had with Prometheus.
Going over the reprinted blurb above, the people who did enjoy Prometheus and are eager to see the sequel should note that nowhere in this piece does it say that this potential sequel is a certainty. Indeed, note how the article states the movie’s gross was “solid but not spectacular” and that because of that it is on a “franchise bubble”. Yes, director Ridley Scott is “excited about the movie” and is working on a sequel, but Fox president of production Emma Watts does not come out and say this sequel has been greenlighted.
Perhaps I’m reading more into this very short blurb than I should, but I get the impression that the people at Fox are well aware of the disappointment audiences had to the film and realize the Prometheus could have flopped badly. While it made them money, they may feel they dodged a bullet and whatever profit they made was in spite of the movie’s weak story. This is further reinforced by the fact that they are talking to other writers about the sequel because screenwriter Damon Lindelof “may not be available”. One gets the sense that this is a polite way of saying they may not want him back.
However because the movie did make a profit, FOX studios are willing to give the film’s makers a chance to present a sequel concept/treatment/screenplay. If this presentation excites them enough, they’ll go ahead with the sequel. If it doesn’t…
Then again, the DVD/BluRay of the film will be released soon enough, and if that proves to be a success they might just warm up to the sequel idea a little bit more.
When I first heard about Attack the Block, a quirky British alien invasion/Our Gang mash-up, the word was mighty positive, indeed.
Our Gang eventually inspired The Goonies, which this film is probably a bit closer in theme to Attack the Block than the far more innocent Our Gang shorts of the early 20th Century.
As mentioned, early word was very positive about this film, and it was on that basis alone that I became curious to see it. I think the film is indeed a good one, but it has some issues, particularly in the first fifteen or so minutes of the film, that almost made me want to eject it from my DVD player before going much further.
The problem -at least for me- is that when our “heroes” are first introduced, they’re engaging in something that borders on Clockwork Orange territory (without the sexual assault). I suppose its a bold move to present troubled youth in such an unflinching way early on in the film, but given I’m not sure if giving the audience such a negative first impression was a wise move.
What follows, the meat of the story, is what I mentioned before: An alien invasion. This invasion, too, is presented in a mostly unflinching way. There is blood shed and lives are lost. The alien invaders, while not quite on the scary level of the Alien or Predator creatures, are nonetheless a force not to be trifled with, and the eventual resolution of the storyline is quite clever.
Which is a long way toward saying I recommend this film but urge viewers to stick through the opening act which may make you think you’re about to see a very different film from what follows. Once Attack the Block gets rolling (roughly at the point where our protagonist is arrested), things move briskly, leading to a good wrap up.
There was no intention on my part to watch both Alien (1979) and Outland (1981) one after the other. That is, however, what happened. I like both films, and as I mentioned in my blog entry noting the then upcoming release of Outland on Blu Ray (you can read about that here) I always felt that that film was heavily inspired, at least from a visual standpoint, by Alien as much as its plot was inspired by the famous western High Noon.
Starting a couple of nights ago I sat down and watched Alien from start to end. The next day, I did the same for Outland. While I’ve seen bits and pieces of both films over the years, I don’t think its much of an exaggeration to say I haven’t seen either film, from beginning to end, in perhaps two or possibly more decades.
Revisiting films is an interesting experience. Sometimes, a movie that blew you away in your younger years simply doesn’t do much for you years later. There are myriad reasons this might happen. If you like action films, you have to realize that movies have become “quicker”, and their thrills have become bigger and bigger spectacles.
In the case of Alien, when I originally saw that film back in 1979 (or maybe 1980), it quite frankly scared the shit out of me. The film was incredibly beautiful to look at, but its heart was as dark as could be. I loved several things about it: The dread of finding that lost alien ship and its deadly cargo. The chest bursting scene (who didn’t?!), the revelation of what Ash was, and, of course, the surprise “hero” of the piece.
It’s hard today to point out how daring and fascinating a film Alien was. Indeed, while many justifiably focused on the frights, there was a cleverness to the script and story that should not be overlooked. Tom Skerritt’s Dallas, for example, was presented to audiences as the “hero” of the piece. He was the captain of the ship, after all, and the commanding officer. Despite his outward scruffiness, he looked and talked the part of the hero. Yet in a very clever bit of screenwriting, it was his actions that may well have resulted in the tragedy that followed. He was the one, after all, who ignored sterilization protocol and insisted the “infected” Kane be brought back into the ship.
The character of Ash was also a very clever piece of writing. The big reveal of who he was, in my opinion, was every bit as memorable as the chest bursting sequence. What an interesting, unique, and ultimately horrifying way to show a robot!
However, like comedy, the genre of horror often relies on “surprising” the viewers. With the passage of time and the cribbing of ideas, often this element of surprise simply loses that uniqueness with the arrival of sequels and other movies in that vein.
In the case of re-watching Alien, I realized just how much damage that film’s sequel, Aliens did to the original work. In Alien, you have the single creature mercilessly, stealthily, wiping out one cast member after the other. In Aliens, we have the protagonists face an army of such creatures. Suddenly, what was a stealthy being, a creature that hid incredibly well in the shadows and picked off its victims one after the other…a creature that showed evil malice and almost supernatural “hunting” skills, was reduced to the equivalent of an angry wasp. The alien creatures buzzed around, getting swatted here and there, drawing fear from their numbers rather than evil intent.
Mind you, I’m not knocking Aliens as a movie. I think it remains a terrific thrill ride. However, while watching Alien for the first time in so many years it was difficult to get myself in that same frame of mind I had when I first saw it and the alien creature was such a unique and terrifying movie villain. To put it bluntly, it was hard to once again feel terrified of a single creature attacking while, in the back of my mind, I couldn’t help but recall the army of such creatures faced -and defeated- in Aliens.
I still love Alien. I still think it remains one of the greatest horror/sci-fi hybrids ever created. However, I would be lying if I said that subsequent works haven’t somewhat diminished the shocks one originally felt while watching this film.
So, the next night I watched Outland. Clearly, the impact of Alien, released only a couple of years before, was on the mind of the movie’s makers. The visuals, indeed the film itself, could fit comfortably within the Alien universe, though it does not feature any alien creatures at all.
Sean Connery is Marshall O’Niel, a somewhat washed up man sent to the mining colony on Io (a moon of Jupiter) where he comes upon a mystery involving the apparent suicides of various miners. As mentioned before, Outland’s story becomes a rather large “homage” (or, if you’re less forgiving, “rip off”) of High Noon, especially in the film’s last acts. While the film was successful, I suspect the knowledge that it so blatantly used High Noon’s story framework made many dismiss it. Today, the film isn’t nearly as well known as Alien, and it was only last week that the Blu Ray edition was finally released. For those interested, the Blu Ray presents a beautiful picture and sound. It is, however, a fairly “bare bones” release. The only extras present are a theatrical trailer and director comments. The director comments are worth checking out. The previous bare bones DVD edition was apparently of very, very poor quality, so this is pretty much the first time modern audiences get to see this film in such nice shape.
And you know what? It actually holds up after all these years.
Mind you, I was one of “those people” back then irritated by the High Noon parallels. Upon re-watching the film, I was far more forgiving and just went with it. What I found was a pretty exciting piece of action cinema, with Sean Connery delivering a damn good multi-faceted performance. In fact, this could well be one of his more complete acting jobs, as he’s called upon to be alternately tough, vulnerable, desperate, sarcastic, and, yes, even on rare occasions quite humorous. Frances Sternhagen goes toe-to-delightful-toe with Mr. Connery as Dr. Lazarus (I’ve got to groan at that waaaay too symbolic name!), his only real ally in the space mining outfit. The movie builds its plot nicely, and the only bit of silliness the audience has to accept (and I’ve mentioned it in my previous entry) is that given the sensitive nature of this station, the idea that there could be any gun play at all is pretty damn ridiculous.
However, again, I could go with the flow and accept it.
As far as the visuals and effects, considering we are dealing with a thirty plus year old film, they remain quite good. Yes, there are some effects that look a little creaky here and there but, frankly, there was very little to complain about.
In the end, watching Alien and Outland back to back proved an interesting experience and a definite blast from the past. While one can’t entirely forget what came afterwards, it was interesting to revisit these two films which presented a decidedly darker view of science fictional worlds.
One of the more fascinating things, at least to me, is finding out that a famous or even iconic movie/TV roles might have gone to another actor or actress who was first pursued for that role.
In the following link, you have a group of TV roles that were originally considered for other actors/actresses:
Perhaps the one that intrigues me the most of those mentioned in this article is Matthew Broderick, Mr. Ferris Beuller himself, was originally considered for the title role that went to Bryan Cranston on Breaking Bad. But, thinking about it a little…I can kinda see where the producers of the show were going. After all, the character of Walter White, as originally presented in the show, was originally presented as a meek, innocent man who decided to take a very dark path. I suppose Mr. Broderick could have pulled that off, but what a different show it probably would have been!
By the way, a couple of my favorite movie role “what ifs”:
Clint Eastwood’s iconic turn as Dirty Harry was originally targeted for…Frank Sinatra?!
Harrison Ford’s iconic turn as Indiana Jones in Raiders of the Lost Ark was originally meant for…Tom Selleck!? In fact, the only reason that Mr. Selleck wound up not getting the role was because the producers of Magnum P.I., the TV show he was doing at the time, wouldn’t allow him the time off to make the Steven Spielberg film!
Of course, sometimes an actor takes on a role for tragic reasons. I’ve always wondered, for instance, what type of career Paul Newman would have had if James Dean hadn’t died back in 1955. The next two movies Mr. Dean was supposed to act in before his untimely death were Somebody Up There Likes Me and The Left Handed Gun. Both movies were made, with Mr. Newman in the title role. In the case of Somebody Up There Likes Me more than The Left Handed Gun, that role proved a great success for Mr. Newman, and may well have given his then very early career a much needed boost. Mr. Newman’s only previous feature film, indeed, his film debut, was 1954’s The Silver Chalice. This film was a huge flop, and when the film was aired years later on TV an embarrassed Paul Newman famously paid for and published a full page apology and request for people not to see the film in a trade magazine!
Not to sound too terribly geeky, but much of the material presented was familiar -the one big exception being all those numerical items. I may be a fan of the character, but to have all that data at my fingertips would have been…scary.
Of all the items presented, this is the one I found the most surprising and had never heard of before:
Fifteen years (after the 1949 Batman series) came Batman Dracula, a little-seen avant-garde oddity written and directed (without the approval of the comic publisher) by a rising young artist named Andy Warhol.
As it turns out, some of that (very bizarre) material can be found on YouTube:
