Tuesday, May 30, 2023
Sunday, May 14, 2023
Sunday, May 7, 2023
On this day in music history - Symphony No. 9, by Ludwig van Beethoven (1824)
Symphony No. 9
by Ludwig van Beethoven,
was first performed in Vienna on May 7, 1824.
Choral symphony in four movements.
Opus 125, in D minor.
Composed: 1822–1824.
Ode to Joy is based on the 1785 text by
Friedrich Schiller.
Thursday, April 27, 2023
On this day in movie history - The Raven (2012)
The Raven
directed by James McTeigue,
written by Ben Livingston and Hannah Shakespeare,
was released in the United States on April 27, 2012.
Inspired by the poem The Raven by Edgar Allan Poe, published in 1845.
Music by Lucas Vidal.
Cast:
John Cusack, Luke Evans, Alice Eve, Brendan Gleeson, Kevin McNally, Oliver Jackson-Cohen, Jimmy Yuill, Sam Hazeldine, Pam Ferris, Brendan Coyle, Adrian Rawlins, Aidan Feore, Dave Legeno, Michael Cronin, Michael Poole, Michael Shannon, Ian Virgo, Michael J. Fourticq, Jasmina Ilic, Teodora Uveric, Kristof Farkas, Luka Mijatovic, József Tálos, Matt Devere, Sergej Trifunovic, Milos Djuricic, Mike Kelly, Bojan Peric, Ana Sofrenovic, Steve Agnew, Malina Nikolic, Miklós Kapácsy, Andrew Hefler, Pierre Boris Jaurdin, Tamara Krcunovic, Jason Ryan, Antal Publik, László Konter, Mark C. Phelan, Krisztián Peer, Annamaria Ordog, Ádám Földi, Dejan Cubrilov, Máté Haumann, Péter Fancsikai, Sava Rapic, Charity Wakefield, John Warnaby, Matt Slack.
Sunday, April 9, 2023
Monday, April 3, 2023
On this day in movie history - Madame Bovary (1991)
Madame Bovary
directed and written by Claude Chabrol,
based on the novel by Gustave Flaubert,
was released in France on April 3, 1991.
Narrated by François Périer.
Music by Jean-Michel Bernard, Matthieu Chabrol and Maurice Coignard.
Cast:
Isabelle Huppert, Jean-François Balmer, Christophe Malavoy, Jean Yanne, Lucas Belvaux, Christiane Minazzoli, Jean-Louis Maury, Florent Gibassier, Jean-Claude Bouillaud, Sabeline Campo, Yves Verhoeven, Marie Mergey, François Maistre, Thomas Chabrol, Phillippe Abitol, Henry Ambert, Jean-Marie Arnoux, Henri Attal, Gilette Barbier, Dominique Clément, Olga Colin, Claire Dalsace, Catherine Deville, Etienne Draber, Julien Dubois, Pierre-François Dumeniaud, William Clément, Michel Dupuy, Marie Guyot, Jean Joulin, Jean-Jacques Lagarde, Louis-Do de Lencquesaing, Rene Marjac, Pierre Martot, Bernard Mazzinghi, Mona Muche, Christine Paolini, Claude Pascadel, Christian Paumelle, Valerie Soudant, Tina Sportolaro, André Thorent, Aleksandr Vatkovic, Philippe Verquin, Dominique Zardi, Jacques Dynam, François Périer, Pierre Vielhescaze, Thierry Marcos.
Sunday, March 12, 2023
Poltergeist (1982) vs. (2015) - no contest!
Review
by Jack Kost
We love to watch movies, and when they’re over we discuss them in depth, probably more in depth than most people.
We also enjoy discussing books, music, art, et al … also in depth.
My wife loves to paint, I love to write and sketch.
Our recent viewings of the 1982 and 2015 versions of Poltergeist turned from a fond, nostalgic chat about the former, to a “why did they bother” rant about the latter.
I’ll start with the original 1982 version, released in the United States on June 4, 1982:
It
was produced by Steven Spielberg, based on his own story, and directed by Tobe
Hooper.
For us, the 1982 original is a cinematic treat.
Hooper may have helmed the direction, but this has all the heart, feeling, emotion, humor, and suspense of a Spielberg movie.
We – the audience – see the family dynamics, their neighbors, and the history of the ever-expanding housing development.
The movie may be thirty-four-years-old, as of this writing, but it’s still the thrill-ride Spielberg has entertained fans with for decades.
The original is one of the best of the haunted house genre; an eerie and memorable light-show with a perfect end scene.
For us, the 1982 original is a cinematic treat.
Hooper may have helmed the direction, but this has all the heart, feeling, emotion, humor, and suspense of a Spielberg movie.
We – the audience – see the family dynamics, their neighbors, and the history of the ever-expanding housing development.
The movie may be thirty-four-years-old, as of this writing, but it’s still the thrill-ride Spielberg has entertained fans with for decades.
The original is one of the best of the haunted house genre; an eerie and memorable light-show with a perfect end scene.
The
high entertainment value reminds us of why we watch movies in the first place.
Spielberg knows how to engage and hold his audience.
Spielberg knows how to engage and hold his audience.
Then we experienced the miserable let-down of the 2015 remake:
This
was our post-Thanksgiving movie.
As usual, we discussed it after the end credits rolled, our discussion fueled by disdain!
We compared both versions, and shook our heads at how dreary and painful the remake is.
It felt like a by-the-numbers run-through for the actors in it, who seemed content to show up, recite the dismal script, and pick up their pay checks.
Not many movies have actually pissed me off, but this one made the list.
Absent is the charm and quality scripting of the original.
It simply goes through the motions without any of the character development, tension, or suspense of the original.
I watched it feeling bored after the first fifteen minutes, hoping it would pick up, get better, curious as to how it would unfold in a new retelling, being more disappointed as each scene unfolded.
I’m a fan of Sam Rockwell, but this was another example of how even a fine actor can’t save a lousy script.
We see some flashy effects, as we expect to see in this modern CGI-heavy age, but there’s nothing behind it, no depth or reason to care about what we’re being presented with.
The scene with Sam Rockwell regurgitating black goo into the sink, then seeing his reflection in the faucet, sores opening on his face, is a reworking of the scene in the original: Marty (Martin Casella) seeing maggots swarming on a chicken drumstick he’s just taken a bite out of, then his own face coming apart in the mirror.
It’s a great scene, even with the dated animatronics, with far more impact than the insipid 2015 version:
As usual, we discussed it after the end credits rolled, our discussion fueled by disdain!
We compared both versions, and shook our heads at how dreary and painful the remake is.
It felt like a by-the-numbers run-through for the actors in it, who seemed content to show up, recite the dismal script, and pick up their pay checks.
Not many movies have actually pissed me off, but this one made the list.
Absent is the charm and quality scripting of the original.
It simply goes through the motions without any of the character development, tension, or suspense of the original.
I watched it feeling bored after the first fifteen minutes, hoping it would pick up, get better, curious as to how it would unfold in a new retelling, being more disappointed as each scene unfolded.
I’m a fan of Sam Rockwell, but this was another example of how even a fine actor can’t save a lousy script.
We see some flashy effects, as we expect to see in this modern CGI-heavy age, but there’s nothing behind it, no depth or reason to care about what we’re being presented with.
The scene with Sam Rockwell regurgitating black goo into the sink, then seeing his reflection in the faucet, sores opening on his face, is a reworking of the scene in the original: Marty (Martin Casella) seeing maggots swarming on a chicken drumstick he’s just taken a bite out of, then his own face coming apart in the mirror.
It’s a great scene, even with the dated animatronics, with far more impact than the insipid 2015 version:
Zelda
Rubinstein’s portrayal of Tangina, the psychic brought in to rescue their
daughter and “clean” the house, is one of the high points of the story.
Her
monologue to the family and investigators about what is really going on is
chilling.
The character is also reworked for the 2015 version, changed for the contemporary audience, but giving nothing new or remarkable.
Running at roughly thirty minutes shorter, the remake has omitted the best elements of the original – to its own detriment.
Gone is the steady build-up of the original, as the 2015 version cuts directly to the shock-free plot markers.
Gone also are the comedic elements with the death of the pet canary, and the neighbor’s battle with the TV remote controls, parts of the story that developed the set-up and made us care more about the family and their predicament.
The character is also reworked for the 2015 version, changed for the contemporary audience, but giving nothing new or remarkable.
Running at roughly thirty minutes shorter, the remake has omitted the best elements of the original – to its own detriment.
Gone is the steady build-up of the original, as the 2015 version cuts directly to the shock-free plot markers.
Gone also are the comedic elements with the death of the pet canary, and the neighbor’s battle with the TV remote controls, parts of the story that developed the set-up and made us care more about the family and their predicament.
The key scene of the malevolent force entering the home, via the static of the TV set, is also changed, but as animated as the original was - it still had significant shock value to a first-time viewer:
It
felt like the 2015 version had been made quickly and rushed out the studio
door, nothing more than another vacuous money-making product.
The 1982 original has rightfully earned its place in cinema history – a classic of its genre; the 2015 rehash deserves nothing more than to be ignored and forgotten.
Thanksgiving: a time to give thanks.
Along with everything else we have been blessed with, we gave thanks for the fact that we hadn’t wasted money at the cinema box office for yet-another pointless, lazy, half-assed, cash-grab.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)