Regisseur Martin Scorsese dürfte wohl einer der einflussreichsten Filmemacher Hollywoods sein. Mit einer Liste von Filmen wie “Taxi Driver”, “Godfellas” oder “Gangs of New York” – man könnte die Liste ewig weiterführen – hat er sich einen Namen gemacht. Und bei einem solchen Mann ist sich die Hollywood Foreign Press Association (eine Organisation die sich aus Journalisten unterschiedlicher Nationen zusammensetzt und u.a. für die Verleihung der Golden Globe Awards verantwortlich ist) wohl sicher, das er den diesjährigen Cecil B. DeMille Award bekommen sollte. Der Award ist benannt nach dem verstorbenen Regisseur Cecil B. DeMille, der z.B. den Film “Die zehn Gebote” aus dem Jahr 1956 inszenierte. Der letztjährige Preisträger war Steven Spielberg, der bei der Golden Globe Verleihung 2010 die Aufgabe haben wird, seinem langjährigen Freund Scorsese diesen Award zu überreichen.

Scorsese hat bereits zwei reguläre Golden Globes in seiner Sammlung: Einmal für seine Regiearbeit bei “The Departed” und einen zweiten Globe als Regisseur für “Gangs of New York”. Dazu gesellen sich eine ganze Reihe von weiteren Nominierungen. 2007 bekam Scorsese den Oscar als bester Regisseur für “The Departed” von Steven Spielberg, Francis Ford Coppola und George Lucas überreicht. Man darf gespannt sein ob diese Zeremonie übertroffen werden kann.

Die Golden Globe Verleihung wird im nächsten Jahr am 17.Januar stattfinden. Durch die Veranstaltung wird der britische Schauspieler Ricky Gervais führen.

"Expulsion from Eden", Pastel.

Nora Othic
Torah! Torah! Torah!

11 a.m.-6 p.m.

The Late Show
1600 Cherry Street
Kansas City, Missouri
816.474.1300; 816.359.7174

Hours: 11 a.m.-6 p.m. Wednesday-Saturday.
Runs through: Nov. 28.

I realize that the recommended reading list for today’s post might be a bit daunting, but there’s no getting around it: It’s impossible to have a full appreciation for Norah Othic’s Torah! Torah! Torah! without reading the first five books of the Bible.

The Torah. The Pentateuch. The books written by Moses: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy.

Okay, fine. You can skip the last three. Othic draws exclusively from the first two for her exhibition of pastels at The Late Show, offering her take on stories ranging from the Fall to the Flood to the giving of the Law. (There’s one source violation, though: Othic depicts Adam with a crossed-out “Lilith” tattoo, while the notion that he had a wife before Eve is found not in the Bible but in Talmudic lore.)

This is no staid, traditionalist show, however. It’s short on Cecil B. DeMille and long on Grant Wood, John Steuart Curry and Thomas Hart Benton.

For some time now I have been referring to myself as a Neo-Regionalist, Othic writes. It is my own term and somewhat tongue-in-cheek, but also an accurate description. I am combining the subject matter and bravura attitude of artists like Benton and Wood with the elevation of everyday life and objects to an iconic status that is characteristic of the Pop movement. I throw in bits and pieces of Baroque, Modern and cartoon art … anything is fair game.

That fair-game list includes the Bible. Othic’s versions of its characters are gritty, careworn and anything but grand.

Moses smokes, has a tattoo of a burning bush and wears a trucker hat. Noah is a tattooed sailor. Joseph’s coat of many colors is now a Hawaiian shirt.

Even God is not exempt from Othic’s re-imaginings, being made to look like an aging Jerry Garcia in The Creation of Eve and like Denver Pyle in Expulsion from Eden — today’s featured piece.

Looking at my own work over several years, my interest in the ordinary aspects of life, particularly that of rural areas or small towns, has not changed, Othic writes. What has evolved is a growing confidence that allows me to make the work as abrasive, humorous and/or energetic as I want it to be.

But is that abrasive, energetic humor appropriate here? Is this a collection of clever takes on well-known material, or gross blasphemy?

Each viewer will have to decide, although there’s no obvious irreverence in Torah! Torah! Torah! Quite the contrary, really. Othic displays a regard not only for the Bible but for the people who lived its stories– people who, after all, were quite ordinary in many ways and human in every possible way.

Noah worked with his hands and precipitated a family crisis by getting passed-out drunk. Moses was a killer on the run, a royal official hiding out as a herdsman. Jacob built his inheritance through trickery, worked seven years for the wife he didn’t want and seven more for the one he did, and wrestled God to a near-draw.

To see those frailties and rough edges depicted in Othic’s work  is, perhaps, to marvel at the grace extended to — and the things achieved by — imperfect people.

And, maybe, to hope for the same for ourselves.

In the gutter

How refreshing to experience a film so critical of the system that undergirds film itself. And how fitting that Hollywood is located on the West Coast of the US, the land of the setting sun. Norma Desmond, the embodiment of the silent film star – really the aging film starlet – pathetically races the sunset, attempting to undo the death of her career. The allusion to Great Expectations at the film’s beginning is utterly appropriate, especially when one recalls the mansion set in David Lean’s film of that name, which must have been an influence on the set design of the house in Sunset Boulevard. There are so many perfect aspects to this film, it’s difficult to know where to begin. There is the pulpy nature of the narrative, wed to a noirish atmosphere. The voiceover by the dead man lends a grave fatalism to the film; it’s over before it’s started. That the protagonist is a writer (a screenwriter, no less) in a sense validates the film and also creates a conflict of interests. The almost cliché style of voiceover not only serves (1) to confirm Joe’s status as a screenwriter, narrating his own story, but (2) attempts to ground the narrative of this film in something verbal, something concrete. The very fluid and non-concrete nature of the film, however, corresponds to the place of Joe’s demise: the water of a swimming pool. In this era of America, where but in L.A. could a man be shot, then fall into and float in a swimming pool until finally being fished out? Joe’s inability to wield any power of his story through narration is a failure fundamentally similar to his screenwriting career. He has ideas but he can’t pen them, or he pens something void of worthwhile ideas.

Over and under

The term “self-reflexive” only begins to describe Sunset Boulevard’s own extreme awareness of what it is and how it fits into the broader history of cinema. The death of the stars is as certain as the daily death of solar light; if it survives through the night, it’s only via a pale reflection from another, lesser cosmic body. This film refers so unceasingly to film itself that it almost feels like too much. Parables are not to be concerned with their own semiotic reference points. Cameos from Buster Keaton and Cecil B. DeMille, and numerous mentions of Alan Ladd, Greta Garbo, and Gone with the Wind make Sunset Boulevard simultaneously as insecure with itself as Norma is with herself, and confident in its critique of the blind embrace of fleeting and ultimately empty Hollywood values. At the risk of overkill, does Norma’s obsession with the notion of the “star” connect, as its name implies, with her home address? While the times change in this world, the people who fill it do not; new films and new types of stars will become popular while others are phased out, but whether it’s Norma’s self-obsession or Buster Keaton’s victim complex, they are doomed to live as they are. The impossibility of Joe’s successful shift from the no-good screenwriter he is to a live-in companion to a lonely and rich ex-star illustrates his own inability to become something different.

Relics

Then there is the gender issue. It would at first seem like Sunset Boulevard would not – could not – have worked had it been about a dimming male Hollywood star. Something about the cinematic male gaze and the nature of the woman as objectified (either through idealization or punishment) makes the starlet ripe for the portrayal of Norma. Norma traverses the fine-line boundary between idealization and punishment, moving through her career from the former to the latter without realizing it. One kind of exploitation is fine; she’s been trained for it. The other is a less subtle kind of objectification and one that forfeits her previous image as the actress ideal. Further, it would seem that DeMille’s presence in this film as a still-active member of Hollywood’s elite implies that men are immune to the inevitability of women in Hollywood. DeMille’s success in the film blurs the distinction between fiction and non-fiction, since the set used within Sunset Boulevard for DeMille’s film was the actual set where he was directing a film at the time. However, Buster Keaton’s cameo is more than a cameo. He and the other actor present at the bridge game signify a sad egalitarianism. They may not be on the verge of madness like Norma, but they are washed-up, wrinkled, and gray. Keaton’s only two words spoken in the film are: “Pass. Pass.” His pitiful expression, so familiar from his earlier features, confirm that his career, too, has passed, perhaps like his card hand, despite attempts to succeed again. Perhaps the male gender is no more immune to the Hollywood actor/actress career death than the female. If we want to get all Mulvey here, though, all we need to point out is this: despite Norma’s apparently successful power grab at the end, killing Joe and returning to her castle, Joe’s verbal power dominates the film through narration despite his death. Norma is deprived of a voice in the end, and her madness in the presence of the Hollywood press is perhaps the most humiliating (read: punishing) fate she could have met.

Replacing

Grave

Image-ining

Passed

Darling

Chaps

DeMan

Distracted

Descent

Fading

70 The Glen Miller Story

I’m a big fan of Jimmy Stewart and I love big band & jazz music, so this movie provides an irresistible combo. Stewart is quite the Miller doppelganger, which I assume is a prime reason he was cast in the film. June Allyson provides perky support as Miller’s wife, and a pre-MASH Harry Morgan plays Miller’s best buddy. The story follows Glen Miller from his struggling musician days through his rise to fame to his untimely demise in a presumed plane crash during World War II. I decided to watch this movie years ago simply because I had become a fan of Stewart and wanted to see as many of his films as possible. But the movie made me a Glenn Miller fan and I continue to enjoy his music immensely.

69 The Shrek Trilogy

I have to admit…I didn’t see any Shrek films until all three were already out and available on video, so I’m fairly new to the Shrek universe. I didn’t bother with them at first because I assumed they were kiddie films. However, I decided to watch one on television a few years back and have since seen all three. I was both right and wrong in my original assessment. They are undoubtedly geared toward an demographic far younger than I, but on the other hand sometimes it’s okay to temporarily feel like a kid again. For anyone unfamiliar (which I assume would only be folks who, like me, are both single and childless because anyone with children is surely familiar with Shrek), this animated trilogy follows the adventures of a surly but loveable ogre, his talking donkey sidekick, and the ogre’s lady love. There are a host of other characters. Lending their considerable voice talents to the three films are an all star team of folks such as Mike Myers, Eddie Murphy, Antonio Banderas, Cameron Diaz, John Lithgow, Justin Timberlake, John Cleese, Rupert Everett, and many more. Most of the visual humor and jokes in the series parody well known fairy tales, which is a huge part of the charm for me…I love parodies and who doesn’t appreciate childhood fairy tales. The animation is computer generated, which far exceeds the animation most of us grew up with. These movies need to be viewed in high definition to really get the full effect.

68 The Greatest Show On Earth

Once again my favorite actor Jimmy Stewart is paired with something cool. This time it’s the circus. I think this is one of Stewart’s best performances. It is certainly low key and subtle, as he spends the entire film in clown makeup. The bigger draw for most people, I suppose, would be Charlton Heston in one of his finest performances as well. Heston kind of became a sad parody of himself in the latter part of his career, but this is one of his earlier movies and he shows why he was once one of the top box office attractions in the world. Directed by famed auteur Cecil B. Demille (I’m ready for my close-up…indeed), the story follows the Ringling Brothers/Barnum & Bailey Circus as it travels from town to town. We meet several of the performers and become involved in their lives behind the big top, so to speak. That behind the scenes view reveals a lot of romance, intrigue, drama, and tragedy. Basically it’s a soap opera set at the circus. Demille is known for his lavish, over-the-top, extravagant productions, and he doesn’t disappoint with The Greatest Show On Earth. Like so many beloved memories of yesteryear, the circus has almost slipped into being a remnant from a bygone era. Sure they are still around, but they are no longer an event. Even when I was a kid not that long ago it was a big deal when the circus came to town. Nowadays kids are into their video games and computers and iPods and couldn’t possibly care less about the circus. But watch this movie and you will be reminded of just how extraordinary it used to be.

67 Ocean’s 13

In 2001 George Clooney, Matt Damon, and Brad Pitt teamed up to remake the 1960 Rat Pack romp Ocean’s 11, about robbing a Vegas casino. The remake was a smashing success and unlike the original spawned sequels. The first movie will be dealt with later in this list. The second movie, Ocean’s 12, was poorly written and quite forgettable. The third movie was Ocean’s 13, and it’s a nice rebound from its disappointing predecessor. This time the gang returns to Las Vegas and they don’t actually rob a casino as much as they…turn the odds in their favor through uniquely nefarious means. The bad guy is played by Al Pacino, which automatically makes this a must see. As with the other Ocean’s films, don’t try to interject logic or make sense out of the proceedings. This is pure popcorn cinema, escapism at its best.

66 The Frat Pack Three Pak (Anchorman, The 40 Year Old Virgin, & Wedding Crashers)

Anyone who grew up in the 80’s is familiar with The Brat Pack (Molly Ringwald, Emilio Estevez, Judd Nelson, Andrew McCarthy, Rob Lowe, and a few others). And while imitation is the sincerest form of flattery I would not necessarily call the modern Frat Pack imitators. The only similarity is the name homage, which was itself a takeoff on the 1960’s Rat Pack of Frank Sinatra and his pallies. The Frat Pack is generally thought to be comprised of Vince Vaughn, Ben Stiller, Will Ferrell, Owen and Luke Wilson, Steve Carell, Jack Black, Paul Rudd, and Seth Rogen. Some combination of those actors has starred in a host of films together with a wide array of results. Zoolander and Starsky & Hutch…not so good. Old School and Blades of Glory…much better. But for me three Frat Pack films stand head and shoulders above the crowd and have stood up to numerous repeated viewings. Anchorman: The Legend of Ron Burgundy stars Ferrell with Carell and Rudd in very amusing supporting roles. Vaughn, Stiller, Black, Rogen and Luke Wilson all have brief cameos. Ferrell plays an over-the-top misogynistic 70’s news anchor whose world is turned upside down when he’s forced to share the anchor desk with a woman. Anchorman is among the most quotable movies of the past two decades and is just pointless yet harmless fun. The 40 Year Old Virgin stars Carell as the titular character, with Rogen and Rudd in vital supporting roles that really make this film work. It’s hilarious but sweet, with more quotable dialogue and a few really memorable scenes. I really like Rudd in this film. Wedding Crashers, starring Vaughn and Owen Wilson, is a movie I really like but probably not as much as some people. I don’t think it’s really any better than any other Frat Pack film, which doesn’t mean anything negative it just means my praise seems to not rise to outlandish and undeserved peaks of hyperbole. Will Ferrell makes possibly one of the best cameos of all time, and to say that Rachel McAdams (who I someday intend to make my bride) is quite fetching may be one of the biggest understatements I could conceive. Plus there’s Christopher Walken and that’s just the cherry on top.

The Greatest Show on Earth

Pais: EU
Año: 1952
Género: Aventuras. Circo Duración: 153 min.
Dirección: Cecil B. DeMille
Guion: Fredric M. Frank, Barré,Lyndon, Theodore St. John (Historia: Fredric M. Frank, Theodore St. John.
Música:Victor Young
Producción: Paramount Pictures

Reparto:
James Stewart, Charlton Heston, Betty Hutton, Cornel Wilde, Dorothy Lamour, Gloria Grahame, Lawrence Tierney.

Descripción:
Con el fin de conseguir una exitosa temporada, el empresario circense Brad Bramen, contrata al famoso trapecista Sebastián para emparejarlo con Holly, una de las trapecistas favoritas del público.

Críticas:
1952: 2 Oscar: mejor película, mejor argumento.

Vuelvan a contemplar el mayor espectáculo del mundo!!
Maravillosa película sobre el mundo del circo. Todos los intérpretes de la película tienen actuaciones memorables en especial Botones,el payaso, interpretado por el gran James Stewart .Película con una gran ambientación y gran cantidad de extras que nos refleja la dura vida de la gente del circo. Una película extraordinaria en todos sus detalles que no se hace pesada en ningún momento a pesar de sus dos horas y media de duración. Me ha encantado el final que nos invita a contemplar junto con nuestros familiares de nuevo ” el mayor espectáculo del mundo”. Yo, sin duda , lo haré.

El mayor espectáculo del mundo.
La película es fiel reflejo del título. De lo mejor de Cecil B.de Mille, el gran director de la espectacularidad. Fantástica ambientación, gran movimiento de masas, e incluso escenas espectaculares para la época, como la del accidente del tren. La historia es correctísima, y de la actuación de sus protagonistas no se puede objetar nada. Por desgracia el circo en la actualidad, en total declive, está muy lejos de la magia con la que se vivía en aquella época. Aunque de larga duración, se hace muy entretenida y no le sobra ni un minuto. Fantástica.
–
DE TODA LA VIDA
Una de esas películas que hemos visto de pequeños y que nos han hecho amar el cine y amar el mundo del circo. El que busca espectáculo lo tiene, el que busca interpretaciones las tiene, el que busca una historia de amor la tiene, el que busca tensión la tiene. Que más se puede pedir si ademas puedes dejarla ver a los niños.
–
El mayor espectáculo del mundo: el cine
El cine, como el circo en esta obra maestra de Cecil B. DeMille, es el mayor espectáculo del mundo. Un medio mágico que nos puede mostrar mundos sin descubrir, violencia, amor, aventuras…
Multitud de personajes interpretados por actores en estado de gracia (Heston, Stewart,Grahame..) desfilan con total naturalidad ante nuestros ilusionados ojos. Una exagerada sinfonía de colores nos tranporta a los entresijos del circo y el regocijante sentido del espectáculo de Cecil B. DeMille nos brinda una serie de escenas de nítida simplicidad que en su conjunto resultan crear una obra redonda donde la inocencia y el drama más amargo pueden convivir sin estorbarse.
Algunos, llenos de prepotencia irónica posmoderna, creen que El mayor espectáculo del mundo no es tan valiosa porque según su opinión es inocente, infantil, enfocada al espectáculo, acartonada y carente de interés en la actualidad. Todo lo contrario, El mayor espectáculo del mundo es una película igual de vigente en la actualidad que en aquella época pues trata numerosos temas sin dejar de entretener y divertir: nos muestra el valor del esfuerzo humano, el drama da algunos hombres cuando pierden aquello que aman, la importancia del sentido del deber y de la profesionalidad, la ilusión de los niños y de los padres ante espectáculos grandiosos, historias trágicas de celos, codicia y muerte…
El mayor espectáculo del mundo nos hace soñar y resulta finalmente una muestra contundente de cine, del mejor cine; aquel que nos maravilla, aquel que hoy en día no existe debido al estúpido relativismo y apagada creatividad que acartona el arte contemporaneo.
–
Todo sea por el mayor espectáculo del mundo.
Cecil Blount DeMille un experto en construir películas de larga duración donde la espectacularidad no falta ni por un momento, aquí consigue con creces hacer un homenaje al mundo del circo y a su entorno.

La fotografía de George Barnes está muy avanzada para la época, y la música de Victor Young nos deja canciones agradables y populares. Lo que no me gustó mucho es ese toque “negro” cuando llegamos al final, aunque es necesario para conducirnos a ese final que lo dice todo, y es que todo sea por el mayor espectáculo del mundo.

Datos técnicos:

I Parte
Tamaño:  1,39 Gb
Duracion: 01:18:00
Vídeo codec: Xvid (doble pasada)
Resolución: 608 x 448
Bitrate: 2170 Kbps.  Qf: 0.319
Audio codec: 0×2000(AC3, Dolby Laboratories, Inc) AC3
Bitrate Castellano/Inglés: 48000Hz 192 kb/s total (2 chnls)
Subtítulos : Castellano-Inglés]

II Parte
Tamaño:  1,04 Gb
Duracion: 01:08:18
Vídeo codec: Xvid (doble pasada)
Resolución: 608 x 448
Bitrate: 1794 Kbps.  Qf: 0.263
Audio codec: 0×2000(AC3, Dolby Laboratories, Inc) AC3
Bitrate Castellano/Inglés: 48000Hz 192 kb/s total (2 chnls)
Subtítulos : Castellano-Inglés]

Capturas:

Película 1ª parte

Película 2ª parte

Subs.es-en

Carátula dvd

I’ve been a huge fan of the Movie & Broadway show “Sunset Boulevard” ! So naturally I’ve been mesmerized by the actress Gloria Swanson’s glamourous looks, unique acting skills & her life story.

Gloria Swanson was born in Chicago on March 27th, 1897. Her real name is Gloria Josephine Mae Swenson. She began her career 1913 at Chicago’s Essanay Studios. Back then she was known as Gloria Mae. In 1916, she married Wallace Beery, another Essanay player, and the newlywed couple moved to Hollywood. He was to be the first of six husbands. She then shifted back-and-forth between two studios, Triangle and Paramount, where she appeared in roles that captured audiences hearts, making her a major box-office draw of the silent era. Her first lead role was in Cecil B. DeMille’s Don’t Change Your Husband (1919). DeMille would direct her in six of her box-office triumphs.

In 1925, after returning from France where she filmed Madame Sans-Gene and married her third husband, Marquis Henri de la Falaise, she teamed up with Joseph P. Kennedy, patriarch of the political clan, and began producing her own films. The two had a extra-marital affair, which was effectively hidden from her fans. Her first production effort went over budget and was not successful; but her second, Sadie Thompson (1928), was a commercial and critical success. It was daring for its time: She played a prostitute who was reformed then raped by a religious fanatic. For that role, she received her first Academy Award nomination for Best Actress.

The following year was a tumultuous one for Swanson’s professional career. Although she received her second Academy Award nomination for her role in The Trespasser, her production company also embarked on the ambitious project Queen Kelly, directed by Erich Von Stroheim. Von Stroheim created a financial mess, with numerous reshoots and the injection of erotic and perverse touches into the film. Although he was subsequently fired, the damage had been done. Although given a few screenings in Europe, the film was never shown in the United States. It marked the end of Von Stroheim’s directing career.

She retired in 1934, but attempted several comebacks. Her most successful was her critically lauded star turn in Billy Wilder’s Sunset Boulevard, where she played a role with many parallels to her own life.

What they don’t realize is how close “Sunset Boulevard” cuts to the bone. Not just in terms of the fickle system of Hollywood fame, and the ephemeral and illusory nature of Hollywood glamour, but to its specific references to the people involved. Audiences in 1950 would have been able to recognize Gloria Swanson as an ex-silent film star. When she goes to a backlot to visit Cecil B. DeMille, DeMille plays himself, and is actually working on his real film “Samson & Deliliah” (1949). Seeing as “Sunset Boulevard” takes place in flashback, this would have been exactly the film DeMille would have been working on. We’re asked to watch an old silent film of Norma’s at one point, and it is actually “Queen Kelly” (1929) starring Gloria Swanson.

Gloria plays Norma Desmond brilliantly! She is also infected by love. Love of romantic, abstract things. Things like “the spotlight”, “the little people”, “the cheers”, and most of all “the fame”. As a teenager, Norma Desmond was taken under the wing of Cecil B. DeMille. She was a lovely doe. Ready to display her beauty and charm to audiences the world over. Her films were hits, and she became very, very rich. But, as happens so often with teenage stars (from Judy Garland to Britney Spears), the fame went to her head. When she began to fall out of the public eye (due to dwindling roles and the inevitable onset of age), she as no prepared to live life a rung down. She went mad. In her mind, the fame never faded, and the world still wants her, needs, her, adores her, awaits with baited breath her great comeback.

One of her famous line in the movie was : “I am big!” She insists in all seriousness. “It’s the pictures that got small.” ( Dont’ we all have that bitchy diva in al of us? haha )

After a long career in Hollywood, she received her third Academy Award nomination for that film. Her final film appearance was in 1974’s Airport 1975, where she played herself. She died on April 4th, 1983. What an amazing actress and the life she had lived! After watching the “Sunset Blvd” again, I can’t help it to think….. and I am sure all of you agrees with me that Hollywood advertises itself as the Place Where Dreams Come True. The city where streets are paved with gold, and all it takes is a single famous director to recognize you, and you are instantly transported into a world of luxury, adoration, large mansions, swimming pools, and endless money. Not in any ad copy, mind you; it’s just the grand illusion of the place.

Countless young writers and actors have moved to Los Angeles over the decades in the hopes of cashing in on this dream. The joke goes that, to this day, you can go into a restaurant in Hollywood, and ask any given waiter or waitress for their resume and 8×10 glossy, and they may have it for you. Just convince them that you are a legit producer first. It is kinda sad but a reality in LA.

Does the world of high-paid acting really offer more than money? Does it truly offer that ineffable thing we call glamour? Well, to a degree, yes it does. In the minds of the people who still want the dream, and to those who have bought into it, it still lives on. But it’s easy to see that “Fame” and “Glamour” are fleeting things at best, and completely false at worst. Hollywood does not care for you, it only cares for who is most bankable at any given moment. The movie biz is where ineffable things like dreams, glories, and art, mix the most closely with the callous world of high-profit business.

It’s easy to take the glamour seriously. It’s comforting and plush and beautiful. The smart ones prepare for when the paychecks begin to whither. The rest either sink into lower tiers of fame, or they go mad. Going mad is, I think, more common than we assume.

Here is the most famous scene of the movie, the grand finale…… Mr. DeMille, I am ready for my close-up !!! Click on the media player below to see the clip.

I don’t want “Sunset Boulevard” to sound like a depressing resignation of personal tragedy though. Despite the tragic elements, “Sunset Boulevard” is refreshingly alive. We may feel the emptiness in Norma’s soul, but Swanson is able to take the role of this strange woman and make her into a full realized character who is interesting to watch. All the fabulous clothings, the sets & the over the top melodrama, made this dark comedy, a deeply moving tragedy, and a hugely satisfying film experience.

I was so fortunate to received this original Gloria Swanson autographed photo as a farewell gift from my co-workers when I left my at Carmen Marc Valvo as an associated designer in that company. I now hang this beautiful framed photo in my office so I can see it everyday!

I have seen the Sunset Boulevard Broadway Shows 3 times with all four different leading actresses: Glenn Close, Betty Buckley & Patti Lupone! Here is a video of Glenn Close’s performance, simply amazing !

In conclusion of this blog about the movie Sunset Blvd & Gloria Swanson, what an amazing movie! and an amazing actress! Here is a video paying tribute to this fabulous woman Gloria Swanson!

Untill next time, put on your “Gloria Face” and be ready for your “Close-Up” at any time, ’cause you never know who are you gonna meet ! haha

XOXO

Alan + Mei-Mei the pug

também poderia ser traficada, pra salvar minha vida em momentos de pura abstinência.

I just returned from an uproarious under-the-stars screening of Sunset Boulevard, which I hadn’t seen before but which I now love a lot. We cheered and laughed and piled sloppily on blankets, but we were given pause when we thought of our Norma Desmond, our Norma Jean, our MJ, whose post-gender iridescence won fans but whose streak of sideshow desperation, embodied by his beloved Bubbles the Chimp, lost many. And owning a chimpanzee, after all — changing its diapers, mourning its passing, picking out the “white, pink, bright flaming red” satin that will line its child-sized casket — tends to be associated with feelings of loneliness and alienation, a desire for an otherness otherwise afforded only to primates.

As Mr. DeMille says, looking particularly wise with tortoise shell frames hanging about his gnarly digits, “Thirty million fans have given her the brush. Isn’t that enough?” OR, as it’s said in the weird parlance of  our greatest media colloquy, “Wasn’t nothing strange about your daddy. It was strange what your daddy had to deal with.”

I didn’t particularly mean to watch this movie at all. As a Cecil B DeMille epic, it isn’t the sort of thing that normally appeals to me, since I tend to like movies which are on a smaller scale. But I noticed in the TV listings that James Stewart played a clown, which seemed like such surprising casting that I was tempted. So I turned it on as background viewing while doing some paperwork – and within a few minutes the paperwork was thrown to one side.

I suppose the initial attractions for me were the lavish costumes and the amazing Technicolor, which add up to a breathtaking mixture and make it hard to tear away your eyes from the screen. There is also masses of circus action – with the whole film almost seeming to be one long parade and series of stunts, and the human dramas just happening in snatched moments in between.

The main story revolves around the circus struggling to stay on the road despite financial pressures and manage to run a full profitable season. Charlton Heston plays Brad, the workaholic ringmaster who seems to be married to the circus. To ensure its success, he brings in a famous trapeze artiste, handsome womaniser The Great Sebastian (Cornel Wilde) – but this infuriates Brad’s on-off girlfriend, also a trapeze artiste, Holly (Betty Hutton), who is thrown into Sebastian’s shadow. She is determined to prove she can outdo him, and the two begin a series of reckless stunts high above the crowd, night after night -  inevitably leading to disaster, when Sebastian plunges to the ground and is badly injured. These scenes of rivalry on the high wire are compelling to watch, probably the most exciting sequences of the whole film, with the stunts seeming to go on and on. Surely parts of these scenes must have been performed by expert members of the Ringling Brothers/Barnum & Bailey’s circus, but on the screen it’s all seamless and looks as if it really is Wilde and Hutton doing it all. And, of course, there was no CGI, so it is all really happening.

Charlton Heston and James Stewart in his full clown make-up

I don’t think I’d seen any films starring Betty Hutton before, so I was slightly surprised to see that she gets top billing in this star-studded production. I’m not sure a woman would get top billing in an epic production like this nowadays (assuming one was made in the first place!), so it’s good to see that it could happen in the 1950s.  As well as Hutton getting top billing, I find it impressive that her character is shown as truly loving her job and absolutely dedicated to it – she talks about how much she loves being so far above the earth, and how only another “flyer” can really understand it. At the end of the film Holly is still performing gleefully, rather than being brought down to earth – and in fact it’s up to her character to ensure that the show goes on after a dramatic train crash leaves preparations in ruins and several stars injured.

A dramatic scene after the train crash

Having said all that, I don’t quite see why Hutton was such a big star at the time. Yes, she is beautiful and she has a distinctive, breathy speaking voice, but, at any rate in this film, she doesn’t seem to have all that much personality, and her occasional songs soon start to grate – as does the love triangle between Holly, Brad and Sebastian, with her apparently unable to make up her mind between the two men.

Although James Stewart must be the most famous name in the cast and was at the height of his career at the time, he’s not given top billing , so presumably was attracted by the opportunity to take a featured role and play against type. His clowning scenes are beautifully performed, and it’s soon clear that his character, Buttons (I’m not sure if we ever learn his real name) is a clown crying inside. He wears his greasepaint all the time, in and out of the ring, and it becomes apparent that he is doing this to hide a secret.  There’s a scene where he is doing his best clowning, with his huge painted smile, while his mother, in the crowd, whispers to him how worried she is about him and how she fears he will be caught.

It seems the clown is a top surgeon on the run,  after the mercy-killing of his sick wife. There’s a short scene where he talks to Holly about love, without telling her his own story, but quoting Oscar Wilde’s ‘Ballad of Reading Gaol’ – “Each man kills the thing he loves” . He doesn’t say he is quoting, but recites two or three lines from the poem and it makes a powerful impression. I’m now trying to remember other scenes in classic films where characters recite poetry. 

One aspect of the movie which is probably worrying to many modern viewers is the  use of performing animals – especially in the visually stunning train crash scene, where big cats are seen slowly climbing out of the wrecked carriages.  I wouldn’t  go to see a circus which used animals nowadays, but, in all honesty, this aspect didn’t ruin the movie for me.

All in all, I found this Paramount Pictures production, which also stars Gloria Grahame as Holly’s love rival, and Dorothy Lamour as another member of the circus, an exciting epic to watch, although I don’t quite see why it won the Oscar for best film.

Actress Kathy Garver joins Ed and Frankie as they discuss her new book, The Family Affair Cookbook, her work with Brian Keith and Sebastian Cabot in the long-running CBS comedy Family Affair, as well as her early movie roles in Night of the Hunter, The Bad Seed, Kiss Me, Stupid and The Ten Commandments:

http://media.podcastingmanager.com/9/3/5/3/3/142636-133539/Media/063009tvc24_1.mp3

The main reason I rented Cecil B. DeMille’s Four Frightened People is to get acquainted with Leo Carrillo’s filmography.  It doesn’t appear Latinos are very aware of classic Latino Hollywood history so I’d like to highlight many Latinos in my blog.  It’s a wonder he’s not more famous amongst Latinos since he afterall has Leo Carrillo State Park named after him.  He often played stereotypical Latino or other stereotypical ethnic roles but he came from an well-established  and respected multigenerational California family.

Carrillo plays a Malay claiming to be English because he owns a tie.  When he decides to fight a tribe believing they won’t kill him because he’s “English,” he’s tactfully warned that he may be killed because he’s gotten too “sunburned.” Chris Pin Martin, portraying a native boatman, is another Latino actor. Tetsu Komai, a Japanese-born minor actor from the 20s-60s, plays the native chief. Another Japanese-born actor, Teru Shimada, most famous as a villian in You Only Live Twice, plays a native. In Hollywood, it appears anyone of Latin or Asian descent played Malay.

This is such a dumb movie but I can’t help but like it. Claudette Colbert transforms from a meek schoolmarm to  Sheena Queen of the Jungle. Married Herbert Marshall and radio journalist William Gargan initially scorn Colbert until they see her bathe naked.  While held for ransom in exchange for a bag of rice, zany socialite Mary Boland leads a  woman’s suffragist movement on an isolated Malay Island.

I’ve used the telephone game to teach the gospels a number of times, but it troubles me. Here’s why.

On the one hand, of course teaching the gospels by playing the telephone game makes perfect sense: what we have in the New Testament today does not reflect what actually happened in 0 to 35 C.E. Apart from the fact that some of it was made up from scratch, the stories that weren’t fabricated were transmitted orally, a method by which stories are altered and added to. Second, even after they were written down, the stories were copied by scribes who altered the text—textual transmission is just as subject to changes as oral transmission. (However, it is worth nothing that textual transmission may leave alternate editions that permit comparison—to my knowledge historians won’t be able to compare existing texts to oral tellings until they have time machines.)

One can illustrate this point by playing the telephone game: read just a single verse from one of the gospels and have the students pass the message up and down the rows by whispering it to one other. By the time it gets to the end it won’t be the same as it was when it began. You could even do the exercise again but make them text message the verse along—it will still probably change in its iterations.

So, if this is such a great way to teach the way stories are changed as they’re handed down, why is it problematic?

In sum, I’ve found that most students leave with the impression that this process is merely a negative one. They learn that iterations over time degrade an original, pure message. This is problematic for three reasons:

1. It reinforces the idea that what is at the origin is what matters the most. The telephone game sits too snugly with nostalgia for origins narratives that posit some pure origin to the Christian message, which we need to get back to—you know, prior to its corruption.
2. Similar to the previous idea is the conspiracy theory type of crap you see in movies about how some secret truth is hidden in these texts, if only we could find it. Don’t you know that over at the Vatican they have the secret key to unlocking the true, hidden treasures of the text, but they’re unwilling to share that key with us? According to this view, the truth is right in front of our faces, but it is hidden behind the corruptions or alterations. We only need to find a way of separating the wheat (=the secret truth) from the chaff (=the corrupt changes).
3. Last, the idea that there is a pure origin that is either covered over, corrupted, or degraded, misses the most important point I think worth making: each retelling of the gospel narratives is not a degradation but a production of something new and interesting in its own right! So, for instance, we shouldn’t read the gospel of Matthew with an eye to the extent to which it preserves the original message of Jesus, but with an eye to the problems his community was facing some 40 to 60 years after Jesus died, and how he hoped to resolve those problems by writing up some new propaganda. As Cecile B. DeMille suggests at the beginning of The Ten Commandments, the movie is really about capitalism and communism, not about Israel and Egypt! You’re missing the point if you’re evaluating the film by comparing it to the book of Exodus. What you should do instead is see how the book participates in a propaganda war between McCarthyism and commie pinkos.

In a couple of previous bloggeries, I spoke of finding ideas, and how many thousands of ideas need to be accumulated to create a story. Ideas for characters — both believable and unbelievable — can come from real life. And not necessarily your own life.

In the 1973 book Cecil B. DeMille by Charles Higham, Higham talks about DeMille’s problems with Victor Mature while filming Samson and Delilah.  DeMille, who chose Victor Mature to be Samson because of his role in Kiss of Death, was horrified when he first saw Mature at a costume test. He was badly out of condition, with fatty, flabby muscles. DeMille sent him to a gym for weeks of severe training until he lost thirty pounds. But that’s not the interesting bit.

Once shooting began that fall, Mature turned out to be even more problematica. He was a victim of numerous phobias: fear of water, fear of lions, fear of swords, and practically everything else as well. His genial, charming personality was far too weak for DeMille’s severe and stoical taste. When  Mature appeared in the battle of the jawbone in which a great wind swept through the studio, he took fright at a particularly violent, machine-made gust, and fled, hiding in terror in his dressing room. DeMille had him brought back like a naughty boy who had run away from school. He picked up his megaphone, and in a voice icy with disgust, shouted in full hearing of the immense cast and crew: “I have met a few men in my time. Soem have been afraid of heights, some have been afraid of water, some have been afraid of fire, some have been afraid of closed spaces. Some have even been afraid of open spaces — or themselves. But in all my thirty-five years of picture-making experience, Mr. Mature, I have not until now met a man who was 100 percent yellow.”

A few notes about John Wayne from the same book: John Wayne hated horses. He was a good chess player. He got straight “A”s toward the end of high school. The sand in the batch of cement outside Grauman’s Chinese Theater where John Wayne put his prints came from Iwo Jima. Also, John Wayne only had to read his lines one to memorize them. He was a voracious reader. 

These are the kind of ideas I like, the ones that make us think of characters in a different light: the hero who is afraid of everything; the big, physical man who is a great reader.

: : : : : : : : : : :

We continue on our path with a set of five disparate films that show just how eclectic my tastes can be. By now faithful readers are probably gaining some insight into my psyche, atleast so far as what entertains me. Please don’t hesitate to provide feedback, positive or otherwise. I claim no monopoly on defining quality amusement and always welcome the insight of others.

95 Uncle Buck
One of the most regrettable losses in American cinema during the past two decades was the untimely death of John Candy due to heart disease. Not really an A-List star or leading man, Candy nevertheless had an impressive career and brought joy to millions in such films as Spaceballs, National Lampoon’s Vacation, and Stripes. And while the majority of his roles were supporting and bit parts, there are two significant lead roles that stand out, one of those being in Uncle Buck. Buck is a slovenly bachelor who is unexpectedly called upon to babysit his nieces and nephew. The kids are a real handful, especially the eldest daughter, a rebellious teenager, but Buck has his own unique brand of parenting and discipline. Hilarity ensues. I’m not usually a fan of overly schmaltzy conclusions…..”heartwarming” mishandled triggers the gag reflex. But Uncle Buck does it right and has fun along the way, without resorting to the foulness so omnipresent in many modern films. It is also a departure of sorts for director John Hughes, known so well for his 80’s teen hits. It seems odd to say, but I believe Hughes is one of the most underappreciated writers and directors out there. This movie also introduced the world to Macaulay Culkin, who would become a 10 year old megastar just a year later in Home Alone.

94 Hook
One of my sincerest beliefs in pondering the topic of movies is that the actual movie viewing experience can have a significant impact on one’s opinion. Where the movie is seen, who one is with, what one may be experiencing in life at the moment…..all can enhance (or in rare cases be a detriment to) the enjoyment and long term memory of a particular film. I saw Hook while in college in an old, historic theater with two of my best friends. We were literally the only three people in the theater and we had a blast. It’s one of my fondest memories. The fact that Robin Williams is one of my very favorite actors (and Dustin Hoffman isn’t exactly a slouch) also plays a part in my high opinion. Though not a critical success, and not without some issues (Julia Roberts as Tinkerbell?? please), I find Hook to be a perfectly logical update of the Peter Pan mythology, the story being that he grew up and is now a Type A workaholic that doesn’t spend enough time with his family. It’s a very 90’s kind of theme and it works.

93 Honeymoon In Vegas
A movie’s setting and its music are two key elements to success. Think Jaws and that haunting theme, Grease and its 1950’s high school motif and awesome soundtrack, The Blues Brothers with its Chicago backdrop and bluesy vibe, or Saturday Night Fever and disco. A perfect example of this vital relationship is Honeymoon in Vegas. Would Honeymoon in Myrtle Beach or Honeymoon in the Bahamas have worked?? Probably not. Now, I must admit that I’m a sucker for all things Vegas and have been planning a trip there for awhile, but looking at it as objectively as possible it cannot be denied that the Las Vegas backdrop just seems to work. Ocean’s Eleven (and Ocean’s 13), Bugsy, Rain Man, Casino, Swingers…..one could compile quite an impressive Vegas filmography (and yes, I’m conveniently ignoring Showgirls…..they can’t all be gems). The cast is superb, headlined by Nicolas Cage and James Caan, with solid performances by the always vivacious Sarah Jessica Parker, Pat Morita of Karate Kid and Happy Days fame, and a group of skydiving Elvis impersonators. Speaking of The King, the soundtrack is made up of Elvis covers done by a variety of artists including Bruce Springsteen, Billy Joel, and John Cougar Cougar-Mellencamp Mellencamp and ain’t bad at all.

92 The Ten Commandments
If it weren’t for the ever increasing hatred of Christianity in America I’d say The Ten Commandments is a perfect candidate for a big budget remake. The only problem with the original is the now antiquated special effects. Imagine what CGI and other modern tricks of the trade could accomplish in scenes like the parting of The Red Sea or Moses encountering the burning bush? Of course the other issue (besides liberal Godlessness) would be replacing Charlton Heston as Moses…..certainly no easy task. Anyway, until that day comes…if it ever comes…we have the original and it’s just fine. Is it Biblically accurate? Not exactly. There is a certain amount of poetic license taken by director Cecil B. Demille. But it isn’t offensively out of bounds either. Heston sadly became a caricature in the last couple decades of his life, but at one time he was among the most highly esteemed actors of his generation, and nowhere is he better than in The Ten Commandments. Surprisingly the film continues to be an Easter tradition on ABC television, giving millions an ongoing opportunity to enjoy and embrace its greatness.

91 Pride of the Yankees
The story of baseball legend Lou Gehrig is atleast somewhat familiar to even non-fans. This film chronicled his life just a few short years after his death caused by the disease that now bears his name. I first saw Pride of the Yankees in college during a sports films class (yes, such a class exists…and it was an easy A and a lot of fun) and loved it, even though I’m not a big Yankee guy. The real story is touching and emotional, and the movie does it justice. Gary Cooper is perfectly cast, as is Teresa Wright, and actress that never became a big star much to the surprise of anyone who sees her as Gehrig’s chipper wife Eleanor. It is the love story of Lou and Eleanor Gehrig that is the true soul of the movie, and that’s just fine, even in the eyes of a person like myself who doesn’t usually gravitate towards sentimental romance. Some of the scenes involving Lou’s German immigrant parents might seem a bit corny to modern audiences, but that minor infraction can be forgiven. Of course it all culminates with Gehrig’s legendary speech at Yankee Stadium where he declared himself “the luckiest man on the face of the Earth”. Not long ago I read a superb Gehrig biography by Jonathan Eig entitled Luckiest Man and I recommend it to anyone who enjoys this movie.