Greetings,
Yes, I know that Mother's Day was a week ago, and a much more appropriate day to do this. I had, in fact, intended to do this thing last Sunday, but reasons, as usual, interfered. Still, it seemed like a good way to get back into doing reviews here on the blog. Talking about something that is completely underrated, unappreciated and something in which no one can see the brilliance. Just like me! Anyway, Mommie Dearest.
Mommie Dearest is a 1981 film that tells the story of Joan Crawford by way of the 1978 book of the same name written by her adopted daughter, Christina Crawford. Now this is not exactly a biopic, as we don't follow Joan throughout her entire life, but rather it covers the alleged abuse that Christina and her brother, Christopher, suffered at the hands of their mother. That's right. This film, which has become a cult classic, is considered "camp" and was once re-marketed as a dark comedy, is all about child abuse. Hilarious! But more on that, and some specific scenes, later.
Seriously, this film gets a really bad rap, even getting the Razzie Award for Worst Film of the Decade. It was not! I certainly don't know why it gets all this hate, and I absolutely don't know why the lovely and talented Faye Dunaway, who portrays Joan Crawford, gets the brunt of it. In my humble opinion, I thought she was phenomenal. It actually might be her greatest acting job ever. But, of course, some people often refer to the performance as over the top, as though it's a bad or inaccurate thing. I mean, do they know anything about Joan Crawford? She was over the top. Oh, and what's with all the jokes they make about Ms. Dunaway's physical appearance in the film? THAT is how Joan Crawford looked. These criticisms are akin to someone saying that Jamie Foxx played Ray Charles too much like a blind guy.
Look, I could spend a long time raving about this performance, but I would remiss if I didn't mention everything else. This was a well-written, well-acted, and overall well-made movie. Everyone in the cast did a fine job, but I must speak specifically about Mara Hobel and Diana Scarwid who play child Christina and adult Christina, respectively. First, Mara Hobel did one of the best kid acting jobs I've ever seen, and I've seen some bad ones. She really held her own against a pro like Faye Dunaway, as did Diana Scarwid. On to her performance, while much of it was understated, certainly by comparison, when it came time to let the emotions go full speed ahead, she pulled it off quite nicely. Really, this story is about these two women and their relationship, and they conveyed that to the audience very well.
Oh, and speaking of the cast, we get a little "What's up?" from Xander Berkeley as adult Christopher at the end, and also an appearance by Belita Moreno. You may know her as George's mother on The George Lopez Show. If you've seen her on that show and if you've seen this movie, you'll get the irony of this.
But let me take a moment to get back to that elephant in the room. Anyone who has ever, well, been alive most likely has seen some kind of parody of the infamous "No wire hangers ever!" scene. I won't judge you for laughing; I may have done it myself. However, let's think about that. These jokes spring from a very unsettling scene of a child being beaten. What is wrong with us? And how about some other scenes in the film? The all out, mother-daughter brawl, complete with the smashing of a glass table or the crazy chopping down of the tree with an ax, which are often taken out of context and if you see what led to them, you can see them in the correct light. Still, how can anyone miss the quieter scenes of the movie, like the ones where Joan and Tina legitimately behave like two people who seem to care about each other or, perhaps, what I consider the greatest scene, where Joan laments losing her contract and the way she is being treated in Hollywood. Three words: Bravo, Faye Dunaway.
Speaking of which, let me say, once again, that I love Faye Dunaway in this movie. I've heard that, due to all the negativity surrounding it, she doesn't like to talk about Mommie Dearest. It's kind of a shame. Not that I think she'll ever see this, but if she does, I hope she knows that those of us who can recognize brilliance when we see it, recognize it in her and this performance.
Bottom line, if you haven't seen Mommie Dearest, please do so. And go in without the blinders or preconceived notions of what you've heard about it. It does not get the respect it deserves. Some people call it ridiculous; it's not. It's actually very good. Find out for yourself.
Love and full moons,
Becky the Writer
Sunday, May 15, 2016
Saturday, May 7, 2016
Theatre in the Theater
Greetings,
When I hear someone come up with a good idea that I agree with, I can't help but share it. I recently found a video on the YouTubes and, for the life of me, I cannot remember who made it. Sadly, I can't give credit for said idea to the actual person. I will, however, correct this mistake should I ever find it. But I digress. The point is the idea and, as you may have guessed from the title of this post, the idea is theatre in the theater. Allow me to explain.
There are a boatload of theatre loving people in the world, like full on "people on the stage only getting one take" theatre. And what better place to find that than Broadway. Sadly, though, many fans will never be able to go to NYC to check out a classic, long-running show, and even more can't head there every month or so to catch the latest productions. So, is there any remedy for this so those who can't see this great shows due to finances or personal reasons or any reasons, really? Perhaps.
As I mentioned, this was not my idea, but what about showing live theatre in movie theaters? Yes, I know they do this occasionally with Fathom Events and whatnot, but they don't do it nearly enough. Also, the shows they present, in my opinion, aren't usually ones that can drum up much interest. But I am talking about doing events where shows currently running on Broadway are recorded and shown in movie theaters around the country. Not eight times a week, of course, like they're done in NYC. Just once or twice per production, so the actual, live shows won't lose a crap ton of money. Just for the people who really won't ever get the chance to go to the city see them. Actually, if you factor in that, they might even make more money. And despite what some people may believe, I don't think this will stop anyone from going to Broadway all together, as when they do they, it tends to be for the entire NYC experience, not only theatre.
Now, look, I can admit that I know zero about the logistics of doing something like this, but I'm sure someone does. And I get it. Maybe my believing that this could happen is insane. Maybe this is something that really could never happen. But for everyone who sits at home only ever being able to hear the news of the wonderful shows on Broadway, or have a singular performance at the Tony awards as the best they'll ever get from them, I certainly hope it does.
And my apologies to the YouTuber whose name I can't recall. I do know it was a guy, though. Does that narrow it down?
Love and full moons,
Becky the Writer
When I hear someone come up with a good idea that I agree with, I can't help but share it. I recently found a video on the YouTubes and, for the life of me, I cannot remember who made it. Sadly, I can't give credit for said idea to the actual person. I will, however, correct this mistake should I ever find it. But I digress. The point is the idea and, as you may have guessed from the title of this post, the idea is theatre in the theater. Allow me to explain.
There are a boatload of theatre loving people in the world, like full on "people on the stage only getting one take" theatre. And what better place to find that than Broadway. Sadly, though, many fans will never be able to go to NYC to check out a classic, long-running show, and even more can't head there every month or so to catch the latest productions. So, is there any remedy for this so those who can't see this great shows due to finances or personal reasons or any reasons, really? Perhaps.
As I mentioned, this was not my idea, but what about showing live theatre in movie theaters? Yes, I know they do this occasionally with Fathom Events and whatnot, but they don't do it nearly enough. Also, the shows they present, in my opinion, aren't usually ones that can drum up much interest. But I am talking about doing events where shows currently running on Broadway are recorded and shown in movie theaters around the country. Not eight times a week, of course, like they're done in NYC. Just once or twice per production, so the actual, live shows won't lose a crap ton of money. Just for the people who really won't ever get the chance to go to the city see them. Actually, if you factor in that, they might even make more money. And despite what some people may believe, I don't think this will stop anyone from going to Broadway all together, as when they do they, it tends to be for the entire NYC experience, not only theatre.
Now, look, I can admit that I know zero about the logistics of doing something like this, but I'm sure someone does. And I get it. Maybe my believing that this could happen is insane. Maybe this is something that really could never happen. But for everyone who sits at home only ever being able to hear the news of the wonderful shows on Broadway, or have a singular performance at the Tony awards as the best they'll ever get from them, I certainly hope it does.
And my apologies to the YouTuber whose name I can't recall. I do know it was a guy, though. Does that narrow it down?
Love and full moons,
Becky the Writer
Monday, March 21, 2016
Straight From the Theater Review. - The Ten Commandments 60th Anniversary Re-release
Greetings,
There's something very special about getting to see your favorite movie on the big screen for the first time. Well, yesterday, I finally got to do that. In honor of the 60th anniversary of its original release, The Ten Commandments has been re-released just in time for Easter, as always. As soon as I heard about this, I knew I had to be in attendance. Now I won't be talking so much about the actual movie as I normally do in my reviews, mostly because I traditionally reviewed this a few years back. And since that particular post was quite long, like loooooong, I probably will keep things fairly short today. I will be speaking mostly of the experience, and it was a wonderful experience.
The Ten Commandments has been my favorite movie from the time I knew I was allowed to pick one. I've been watching it every year since I was a little girl. I remember always being in awe of it, the way it looked, the way it sounded, all of it. In fact, I would say that the way the script was so beautifully written was what truly made me fall in love with words. Those superb actors saying those sentences and paragraphs sounded like a symphony to me, and it still does. And the vivid pictures that the whole film creates has always been a wonder to me, like a huge painting that has come to life. It's practically perfect to me, cinematically speaking. Though all of this, I've had to enjoy it by way of my television at home. I was curious to see how different it would be for me to see it in the theater.
Of course, with some films, the theater experience can be one that enhances even the greatest works of art, and that was certainly the case here. While nothing could ever lessen the feelings I get when I watch this alone on a small screen, it was a thrill to see all the amazing care that was put into this movie on a much bigger canvas. The massiveness that it always holds just because of the heart and soul contained within was now something I could see physically, and it was unbelievable. I wonder if this is how those people felt back in 1956 seeing this masterpiece for the first time ever. I've always envied them for that.
But now I've had the pleasure of getting something close to that experience. I don't think anything could ever make me love this movie more than I already do, but getting to see it in a different way just adds to the whole lifelong relationship I've had with it and will continue to have with it. Again, if you want me to say something more detailed check out my previous review, which was more like a retrospective, if I'm being honest. I suppose the bottom line to all I have to say today is that, if you haven't already seen The Ten Commandments, see it. It gets shown every Easter on TV, like I said, or you can rent it anytime, or if you have the chance, catch it on the big screen for the Fathom Event. No matter how you feel concerning the religious aspects of it, this is a brilliant piece of film making. It's just plain legendary. On a more personal note, this is a powerful story and it has been told in a powerful way. It has always meant so much to me, as many of the stories from the Bible do, so I hold this work in a special part of my heart where it will live as long as I do.
Love and full moons,
Becky the Writer
There's something very special about getting to see your favorite movie on the big screen for the first time. Well, yesterday, I finally got to do that. In honor of the 60th anniversary of its original release, The Ten Commandments has been re-released just in time for Easter, as always. As soon as I heard about this, I knew I had to be in attendance. Now I won't be talking so much about the actual movie as I normally do in my reviews, mostly because I traditionally reviewed this a few years back. And since that particular post was quite long, like loooooong, I probably will keep things fairly short today. I will be speaking mostly of the experience, and it was a wonderful experience.
The Ten Commandments has been my favorite movie from the time I knew I was allowed to pick one. I've been watching it every year since I was a little girl. I remember always being in awe of it, the way it looked, the way it sounded, all of it. In fact, I would say that the way the script was so beautifully written was what truly made me fall in love with words. Those superb actors saying those sentences and paragraphs sounded like a symphony to me, and it still does. And the vivid pictures that the whole film creates has always been a wonder to me, like a huge painting that has come to life. It's practically perfect to me, cinematically speaking. Though all of this, I've had to enjoy it by way of my television at home. I was curious to see how different it would be for me to see it in the theater.
Of course, with some films, the theater experience can be one that enhances even the greatest works of art, and that was certainly the case here. While nothing could ever lessen the feelings I get when I watch this alone on a small screen, it was a thrill to see all the amazing care that was put into this movie on a much bigger canvas. The massiveness that it always holds just because of the heart and soul contained within was now something I could see physically, and it was unbelievable. I wonder if this is how those people felt back in 1956 seeing this masterpiece for the first time ever. I've always envied them for that.
But now I've had the pleasure of getting something close to that experience. I don't think anything could ever make me love this movie more than I already do, but getting to see it in a different way just adds to the whole lifelong relationship I've had with it and will continue to have with it. Again, if you want me to say something more detailed check out my previous review, which was more like a retrospective, if I'm being honest. I suppose the bottom line to all I have to say today is that, if you haven't already seen The Ten Commandments, see it. It gets shown every Easter on TV, like I said, or you can rent it anytime, or if you have the chance, catch it on the big screen for the Fathom Event. No matter how you feel concerning the religious aspects of it, this is a brilliant piece of film making. It's just plain legendary. On a more personal note, this is a powerful story and it has been told in a powerful way. It has always meant so much to me, as many of the stories from the Bible do, so I hold this work in a special part of my heart where it will live as long as I do.
Love and full moons,
Becky the Writer
Thursday, March 17, 2016
Thoughts on Criminal Minds: Beyond Borders
Greetings,
So, have I mentioned that Gary Sinise is my favorite actor? I may have once or twice. Well, it's a joy for anyone when they hear that their favorite actor is working on a new project, though the anxiety of waiting to see if it's good or not can be a bit of a headache. No worries for me, currently, because last night, I got to watch the latest endeavor from Mr. Sinise, a spin-off of the very successful Criminal Minds series called Criminal Minds: Beyond Borders. Here are some very quick and not too detailed thoughts about the premiere.
As evident by the title, this show takes us to other countries where a special team of FBI agents help out and/or rescue American citizens. The cast consists of the aforementioned Gary Sinise, Alana de la Garza, who I know best from Law & Order, Daniel Henney, who was in the sadly short-lived series Three Rivers that I really liked, Tyler James Williams, who we no longer hate...because he used to play Chris on Everybody Hates Chris, and Annie Funke, who I don't recall having seen in anything, but I thought she was a delight in this first episode. In fact, I'm happy to report that I enjoyed every cast member and character, a rarity for me. Okay, that was obviously the discussion on the "Who"s, now how about the "What", as in "What did I think of this introduction?"
Now, I never actually watched the original Criminal Minds, so I can't really speak on the show in comparison. But if that one is as good as this one, I may have to start catching up. I was quite intrigued by the episode last night. It had a decent story, it kept me interested to the very end and of course, it was acted very well, which is always important. Was it perfect? No, but I didn't expect it to be. Pilots tend to be flawed. Even the first few episodes of a new series can stumble until it finds its footing. The good news is that the potential is certainly there. It has enough great things that should sustain it with the audience until it becomes a well oiled machine, and with good old Gary at the helm as both lead actor and producer, I have no doubts that it will happen quickly.
So, will I be tuning in next week and Beyond for this new show? I think I will. And believe it or not, it's not just because I am ecstatic to see Gary Sinise again on a regular basis. Sure, he pulled me in, but if the show was not good, I would not stay. Therefore, I think I'll be sticking around with the team on this one for a while.
Love and full moons,
Becky the Writer
So, have I mentioned that Gary Sinise is my favorite actor? I may have once or twice. Well, it's a joy for anyone when they hear that their favorite actor is working on a new project, though the anxiety of waiting to see if it's good or not can be a bit of a headache. No worries for me, currently, because last night, I got to watch the latest endeavor from Mr. Sinise, a spin-off of the very successful Criminal Minds series called Criminal Minds: Beyond Borders. Here are some very quick and not too detailed thoughts about the premiere.
As evident by the title, this show takes us to other countries where a special team of FBI agents help out and/or rescue American citizens. The cast consists of the aforementioned Gary Sinise, Alana de la Garza, who I know best from Law & Order, Daniel Henney, who was in the sadly short-lived series Three Rivers that I really liked, Tyler James Williams, who we no longer hate...because he used to play Chris on Everybody Hates Chris, and Annie Funke, who I don't recall having seen in anything, but I thought she was a delight in this first episode. In fact, I'm happy to report that I enjoyed every cast member and character, a rarity for me. Okay, that was obviously the discussion on the "Who"s, now how about the "What", as in "What did I think of this introduction?"
Now, I never actually watched the original Criminal Minds, so I can't really speak on the show in comparison. But if that one is as good as this one, I may have to start catching up. I was quite intrigued by the episode last night. It had a decent story, it kept me interested to the very end and of course, it was acted very well, which is always important. Was it perfect? No, but I didn't expect it to be. Pilots tend to be flawed. Even the first few episodes of a new series can stumble until it finds its footing. The good news is that the potential is certainly there. It has enough great things that should sustain it with the audience until it becomes a well oiled machine, and with good old Gary at the helm as both lead actor and producer, I have no doubts that it will happen quickly.
So, will I be tuning in next week and Beyond for this new show? I think I will. And believe it or not, it's not just because I am ecstatic to see Gary Sinise again on a regular basis. Sure, he pulled me in, but if the show was not good, I would not stay. Therefore, I think I'll be sticking around with the team on this one for a while.
Love and full moons,
Becky the Writer
Sunday, March 13, 2016
Ordinary People - Movie Review
Greetings,
So, is it possible for a movie that had high acclaim at one time to also be very underrated? Well, it might be rare, but I say the answer is yes. Especially when certain movies win certain awards and some people think that other certain movies should have won instead. And they still think that over thirty-five years later. Seriously, let it go. But today I will be talking about the first of those two certain movies, an extraordinary film called Ordinary People. See what I did there?
Ordinary People is a 1980 film that was named the Best Picture of said year, and as I mentioned, some people, to this day, feel as though it did not deserve to win. It kind of makes me question if they even saw it, because it is one of my favorite movies. Mostly it is that because it makes me feel...a lot! But more on that later. It stars my beloved Timothy Hutton as Conrad Jarrett, a teenager dealing with PTSD after being involved in a boating accident that killed his older brother, Buck. After a suicide attempt and a stint in a psych hospital, he begins to see Dr. Berger played by Judd Hirsch. His parents, Calvin and Beth, played by Donald Sutherland and Mary Tyler Moore respectively, are dealing with all of this, or not dealing with it, in their own ways. Calvin is doing his best to try and understand the feelings of his surviving family members, whilst Beth seems to be in complete denial about everything that has happened, attempting to do the impossible - live in a past that no longer exists. Oh, and by the way, I must give a bit of a warning. You know how there some people who no one can ever hate, like Betty White or Mr. Rodgers or Grimace? And also Mary Tyler Moore. Everyone loves her. Well, prepare yourself. It may seem impossible, but for much of the duration of this film, you will probably not like her very much. You might even hate her. I know I did. Granted, I understand why she is behaving as she is, but still. Again, more on that later.
Basically, the plot is just watching this family trying to figure out what to do in a situation that no one is equipped to handle. I know that may not seem like much, just watching people live through a tragedy, or to be more accurately, its aftermath, but trust me, this is one of those films that carries out a somewhat simple story in a brilliant way. And the brilliance comes mostly from the actors. In addition to those I already mentioned, keep an eye out for some other familiar faces in smaller roles, like Dinah Manoff, Elizabeth McGovern, M. Emmet Walsh and Adam Baldwin. Everyone is fantastic in this. Of course, when it comes to those four main actors I spoke of earlier, they all bring something extraordinary. There's that word. again. I can commend Judd Hirsch, playing a doctor who has seen people's hardships from the outside and tries desperately to help, or Donald Sutherland, portraying a father who is trying to hold together what he has left, or Mary Tyler Moore, as a woman fighting to oppress reality so she does not have to deal with life's most excruciating pain. But if I'm being honest, the sun of this film rises and sets on the performance of Timothy Hutton. Hard to believe he did this when he hadn't even reached the age of twenty. No doubt about it, he is absolutely exquisite, and he breaks my heart every time I watch this. And that really is the sign of serious mastery in film making. When you can watch something or someone over and over again, and the effect never diminishes. And speaking of mastery in film making, I would be remiss if I didn't mention the director here, Robert Redford. Yeah, that's right. He has directed TWO of my all time favorite films. This one included, obviously.
So, are there any other reasons why I love Ordinary People so much? Why, yes, and it kind of lies right there in the title. I've always loved movies and stories that are very character driven. I love seeing how people are and how they live and how they deal with everyday life, even when everyday life changes for them. Look, I'm fine with films that take people away to a fantasy world, but to me, there's nothing more moving than being confronted with a reality that is not your own but that very well could be. What happened to the family in this film could happen to any of us. That's what makes it so compelling, fearful even. And honestly, we need to be reminded of what could be for us, so that we can more appreciate the blessings we have and not get complacent about them. If I may make an analysis on the mother character here, I always felt as though she had such a good life, perhaps one that was near perfect, that her gratitude for it turned into a kind of entitlement. She may have begun to feel that this perfect life was a guarantee, so when it was taken from her, the only reaction could be one of anger, of "How dare anything or anyone ruin what the life that is owed to me!" Trouble is, she had no idea how to deal with that anger or grief, so instead of pulling close what family she had left, she dug a canyon between herself and them. All the while, we sit and watch, wondering if they'll build a bridge to one another so they can heal or all fall over the edge. It's a grim set of thoughts, but I think they are things we all need to think about sometimes. So, yes, I am grateful for films like this that help us do that.
I suppose I should wrap this up. I am absolutely recommending that everyone take a look at Ordinary People. No, it's not always easy to watch. In fact, it's not mostly easy to watch, but as I said, it will make you feel something. It will make you think. And hopefully, it will make you appreciate what and who you have.
Love and full moons,
Becky the Writer
So, is it possible for a movie that had high acclaim at one time to also be very underrated? Well, it might be rare, but I say the answer is yes. Especially when certain movies win certain awards and some people think that other certain movies should have won instead. And they still think that over thirty-five years later. Seriously, let it go. But today I will be talking about the first of those two certain movies, an extraordinary film called Ordinary People. See what I did there?
Ordinary People is a 1980 film that was named the Best Picture of said year, and as I mentioned, some people, to this day, feel as though it did not deserve to win. It kind of makes me question if they even saw it, because it is one of my favorite movies. Mostly it is that because it makes me feel...a lot! But more on that later. It stars my beloved Timothy Hutton as Conrad Jarrett, a teenager dealing with PTSD after being involved in a boating accident that killed his older brother, Buck. After a suicide attempt and a stint in a psych hospital, he begins to see Dr. Berger played by Judd Hirsch. His parents, Calvin and Beth, played by Donald Sutherland and Mary Tyler Moore respectively, are dealing with all of this, or not dealing with it, in their own ways. Calvin is doing his best to try and understand the feelings of his surviving family members, whilst Beth seems to be in complete denial about everything that has happened, attempting to do the impossible - live in a past that no longer exists. Oh, and by the way, I must give a bit of a warning. You know how there some people who no one can ever hate, like Betty White or Mr. Rodgers or Grimace? And also Mary Tyler Moore. Everyone loves her. Well, prepare yourself. It may seem impossible, but for much of the duration of this film, you will probably not like her very much. You might even hate her. I know I did. Granted, I understand why she is behaving as she is, but still. Again, more on that later.
Basically, the plot is just watching this family trying to figure out what to do in a situation that no one is equipped to handle. I know that may not seem like much, just watching people live through a tragedy, or to be more accurately, its aftermath, but trust me, this is one of those films that carries out a somewhat simple story in a brilliant way. And the brilliance comes mostly from the actors. In addition to those I already mentioned, keep an eye out for some other familiar faces in smaller roles, like Dinah Manoff, Elizabeth McGovern, M. Emmet Walsh and Adam Baldwin. Everyone is fantastic in this. Of course, when it comes to those four main actors I spoke of earlier, they all bring something extraordinary. There's that word. again. I can commend Judd Hirsch, playing a doctor who has seen people's hardships from the outside and tries desperately to help, or Donald Sutherland, portraying a father who is trying to hold together what he has left, or Mary Tyler Moore, as a woman fighting to oppress reality so she does not have to deal with life's most excruciating pain. But if I'm being honest, the sun of this film rises and sets on the performance of Timothy Hutton. Hard to believe he did this when he hadn't even reached the age of twenty. No doubt about it, he is absolutely exquisite, and he breaks my heart every time I watch this. And that really is the sign of serious mastery in film making. When you can watch something or someone over and over again, and the effect never diminishes. And speaking of mastery in film making, I would be remiss if I didn't mention the director here, Robert Redford. Yeah, that's right. He has directed TWO of my all time favorite films. This one included, obviously.
So, are there any other reasons why I love Ordinary People so much? Why, yes, and it kind of lies right there in the title. I've always loved movies and stories that are very character driven. I love seeing how people are and how they live and how they deal with everyday life, even when everyday life changes for them. Look, I'm fine with films that take people away to a fantasy world, but to me, there's nothing more moving than being confronted with a reality that is not your own but that very well could be. What happened to the family in this film could happen to any of us. That's what makes it so compelling, fearful even. And honestly, we need to be reminded of what could be for us, so that we can more appreciate the blessings we have and not get complacent about them. If I may make an analysis on the mother character here, I always felt as though she had such a good life, perhaps one that was near perfect, that her gratitude for it turned into a kind of entitlement. She may have begun to feel that this perfect life was a guarantee, so when it was taken from her, the only reaction could be one of anger, of "How dare anything or anyone ruin what the life that is owed to me!" Trouble is, she had no idea how to deal with that anger or grief, so instead of pulling close what family she had left, she dug a canyon between herself and them. All the while, we sit and watch, wondering if they'll build a bridge to one another so they can heal or all fall over the edge. It's a grim set of thoughts, but I think they are things we all need to think about sometimes. So, yes, I am grateful for films like this that help us do that.
I suppose I should wrap this up. I am absolutely recommending that everyone take a look at Ordinary People. No, it's not always easy to watch. In fact, it's not mostly easy to watch, but as I said, it will make you feel something. It will make you think. And hopefully, it will make you appreciate what and who you have.
Love and full moons,
Becky the Writer
Sunday, February 28, 2016
Drew: The Man Behind the Poster - Documentary Review
Greetings,
A while back, the wonderful Cecil Trachenberg of GoodBadFlicks did a video on "What Happened to Movie Posters?" He pointed out a lot of the unoriginality, repetitiveness and general lack of artistic merit that they hold. And even though I was aware of that, it's not until someone shows you example after example, right in a row, that you realize how big the problem is. So, today, I am happy to be talking about something that celebrates a man who was the antithesis of that problem, a documentary called Drew: The Man Behind the Poster.
The titular Drew is Drew Struzan, a person who any cinephile knows. He was the creator of countless, legendary movie posters from Star Wars to Back to the Future to Hook and so many in between and beyond. He is basically the master of this particular art, and this 2013 documentary hones in on how he came to be that. Sadly, it also chronicles how the lack of appreciation for that art has grown in the film industry over the decades. But we'll discuss that travesty later.
This documentary has that quality I tend to look for which is that it feels very sincere and very personal. It's not one of those unauthorized things you see sometimes, nor does it feel like one. Much of this film is taken up by interviews with Drew Struzan himself, as well as his lovely wife, Dylan, and their son, Christian. The family tells the stories of all the struggles they had to endure whilst Drew was waiting for his big break, something he achieved through great dedication, persistence and, of course, an amazing gift. There is so much that I learned about him through this. Though I've always been a fan of his movie posters, I was unaware of how many album covers he did. Oh, sorry. Youngsters, "albums" are things that we used to buy that had music on them, and they came with little books filled with the words of the songs and usually a wonderful picture on the front. I'm actually a bit floored that I didn't know about this. I mean, I am someone who tends to devour liner notes, and since Mr. Struzan did the art work for one of my favorite Bee Gees' albums, Main Course. I can't believe I didn't notice. Better late than never?
Besides the inside stories from the family, we also get a lot of interviews with people who have been connected to Struzan's artwork by way of the films. We hear from people like Michael J. Fox, George Lucas, Stephen Spielberg, Harrison Ford and Guillermo del Toro. They have nothing but praise for the man as well as what he has created. As well they should. However, one can easily recall what those first four men I named would be taking about, movie wise, including posters for the films I mentioned earlier, but it's a bit different for Mr. del Toro. In fact, what he has to say has much to do with less of the past of Struzan's work, but more the recent past, present and possible future. Oh, spoilers coming up...I guess.
While del Toro does speak highly of those works of art that he grew up with, those that contributed to his love of cinema, he also represents, by proxy, what has happened to the attitude toward this creativity. On more than one occasion, del Toro asked Struzan to make posters for his films, and they are absolutely stunning. No surprise. Sadly, though, they were rejected by the studio, who did not want to pay for it. Del Toro ended up paying for the art himself, as well as giving some as limited edition collector's items for his fans. I guess it's no shock that one of the only directors these days that I can truly call an artist has a great respect for the art of someone else. What should not be a shock to anyone is that precise reaction to the most recent work of Drew Struzan.
I know I'm not the only one who has come to notice the lack of artistic integrity in the film industry. Not to say there is absolutely none, but it has become difficult to find. So, of course, if the industry has little need for artistic merit in the very medium it creates and distributes, why should it want for that when it comes to another? Maybe if they decided to take one more closer look at the current work of Drew Struzan, they might want to recapture some of that magic for themselves.
Look, I don't want to end on a sour note, so I have some good news. First, this is a great documentary, and if you're an art lover, definitely check it out. Second, it's clear that, though certain people are ignoring the work of a great artist, many people have not forgotten. This film shows that their are still so many admirers of Drew Struzan and what he has created and continues to create. You can see that he is so grateful for that. He makes art because it is in him to do so, and he'll never stop, I believe. It's not about collecting a check or approval from a studio. It's for himself, first and foremost, and for everyone who still is in awe of what he does.
Love and full moons,
Becky the Writer
A while back, the wonderful Cecil Trachenberg of GoodBadFlicks did a video on "What Happened to Movie Posters?" He pointed out a lot of the unoriginality, repetitiveness and general lack of artistic merit that they hold. And even though I was aware of that, it's not until someone shows you example after example, right in a row, that you realize how big the problem is. So, today, I am happy to be talking about something that celebrates a man who was the antithesis of that problem, a documentary called Drew: The Man Behind the Poster.
The titular Drew is Drew Struzan, a person who any cinephile knows. He was the creator of countless, legendary movie posters from Star Wars to Back to the Future to Hook and so many in between and beyond. He is basically the master of this particular art, and this 2013 documentary hones in on how he came to be that. Sadly, it also chronicles how the lack of appreciation for that art has grown in the film industry over the decades. But we'll discuss that travesty later.
This documentary has that quality I tend to look for which is that it feels very sincere and very personal. It's not one of those unauthorized things you see sometimes, nor does it feel like one. Much of this film is taken up by interviews with Drew Struzan himself, as well as his lovely wife, Dylan, and their son, Christian. The family tells the stories of all the struggles they had to endure whilst Drew was waiting for his big break, something he achieved through great dedication, persistence and, of course, an amazing gift. There is so much that I learned about him through this. Though I've always been a fan of his movie posters, I was unaware of how many album covers he did. Oh, sorry. Youngsters, "albums" are things that we used to buy that had music on them, and they came with little books filled with the words of the songs and usually a wonderful picture on the front. I'm actually a bit floored that I didn't know about this. I mean, I am someone who tends to devour liner notes, and since Mr. Struzan did the art work for one of my favorite Bee Gees' albums, Main Course. I can't believe I didn't notice. Better late than never?
Besides the inside stories from the family, we also get a lot of interviews with people who have been connected to Struzan's artwork by way of the films. We hear from people like Michael J. Fox, George Lucas, Stephen Spielberg, Harrison Ford and Guillermo del Toro. They have nothing but praise for the man as well as what he has created. As well they should. However, one can easily recall what those first four men I named would be taking about, movie wise, including posters for the films I mentioned earlier, but it's a bit different for Mr. del Toro. In fact, what he has to say has much to do with less of the past of Struzan's work, but more the recent past, present and possible future. Oh, spoilers coming up...I guess.
While del Toro does speak highly of those works of art that he grew up with, those that contributed to his love of cinema, he also represents, by proxy, what has happened to the attitude toward this creativity. On more than one occasion, del Toro asked Struzan to make posters for his films, and they are absolutely stunning. No surprise. Sadly, though, they were rejected by the studio, who did not want to pay for it. Del Toro ended up paying for the art himself, as well as giving some as limited edition collector's items for his fans. I guess it's no shock that one of the only directors these days that I can truly call an artist has a great respect for the art of someone else. What should not be a shock to anyone is that precise reaction to the most recent work of Drew Struzan.
I know I'm not the only one who has come to notice the lack of artistic integrity in the film industry. Not to say there is absolutely none, but it has become difficult to find. So, of course, if the industry has little need for artistic merit in the very medium it creates and distributes, why should it want for that when it comes to another? Maybe if they decided to take one more closer look at the current work of Drew Struzan, they might want to recapture some of that magic for themselves.
Look, I don't want to end on a sour note, so I have some good news. First, this is a great documentary, and if you're an art lover, definitely check it out. Second, it's clear that, though certain people are ignoring the work of a great artist, many people have not forgotten. This film shows that their are still so many admirers of Drew Struzan and what he has created and continues to create. You can see that he is so grateful for that. He makes art because it is in him to do so, and he'll never stop, I believe. It's not about collecting a check or approval from a studio. It's for himself, first and foremost, and for everyone who still is in awe of what he does.
Love and full moons,
Becky the Writer
Friday, February 19, 2016
Remembering Harper Lee and Why What We Write Needs to Matter
Greetings,
There are some people who, even though you or I may not know them or if they are public figures who choose to be not so public, make us glad that they are, at the very least, still out there in the world with us. Sadly, we lost one of those people, and it was Harper Lee.
If you don't know who that is, and I'm sad for you if you don't, Harper Lee was the author of To Kill a Mockingbird, arguably one of the greatest books ever written. She just passed away at the age of 89, a mere seven months after her second book, Go Set a Watchman, was released. That one, the world had waited on for over fifty years. Yes, someone considered one of the best writers of our time only released two books in her long life. I haven't had a chance to read that second one, and I've heard that it was actually a first draft of Mockingbird, to which Harper made drastic changes, obviously. I don't know, but even if it was, it's probably better written than anything on the shelves these days. Still, if To Kill a Mockingbird had remained the only book that Harper Lee released or wrote, it would not have mattered. That one book was enough, because it mattered.
Now when I say it mattered, I mean that it did so in the most important way. She wrote a book that pretty much changed the world, and it certainly changes most of the people who read it. If not everyone who reads it. Interestingly enough, I don't think she set out to do that. I think she had something to say and set out to write a book that was good. However, like anyone who creates a masterpiece, she did not plan to create one. And yet, she did.
You see, a masterpiece is not something for which one can plan. It's something that happens because the person who is behind anything that exceptional somehow manages to do everything just right. Everything falls into place and some people are blessed enough to be the vessels for what is the result. Harper Lee was one of those people. She had a story to tell, and she demanded greatness of herself, which led us to this wonderful book. Considering how she seemed to shy away from as much "celebrity" as she could throughout most of her life, I imagine that she never could have predicted what an impact her writing would have on the world. Maybe that's why so many of us see her as brilliant. It's because she wasn't trying to be. She just was.
If there's one thing I really notice about Mockingbird when I read it, it is that I can so clearly see the care that Harper took as she was writing this story. She worked hard to make it the best that it could be, for herself and for anyone else who was going to read it. She perfectly took us to another world, let us see through the eyes of another person. As I said before, she wanted it to matter. So, as a writer myself, I try to make what I do matter, and Harper Lee is a shining example of that. She should be that example for all writers.
Look, I'm not saying that every book has to be To Kill a Mockingbird or any other legendary novel. In fact, some writing is meant to be fun and light, and they serve a purpose by letting our minds relax. We need those books in the world. But that is, again, their purpose, and those authors are aware of it. Speaking for myself as a reader as well, I can always tell when an author cares, and I can certainly tell when they don't. It does not take much to understand and feel what drives certain people to write certain books. Anyone can sense when someone is doing it for fame or money or to jump on a popular bandwagon, and whilst those people might have managed to achieve those things, think about what they haven't achieved. Things like respect. I know that in the past decade or so, many of us have joked and laughed about how many poorly written books have become popular and made boat loads of cash, and if that's what those authors were after, good for them, I guess. But if I was making money from a book that was terribly written and pointless and gave little to anyone who read it, I would not be happy. Because to a true artist, fame and money might be good things to attain, but without being respected as a writer, without being that artist, it's all worthless. In fact, when I finish laughing at all those aforementioned jokes, I actually feel kind of sad. I feel sad for the state we seem to be in when it come to the written word and art in general.
I have walked through many bookstores and libraries in recent years, and I do so with one question: "What is the point?" This is only my opinion, of course, but I just feel like there are so many people who want to be writers for the wrong reasons, and they build a body of work that is unbelievably futile. None of us should have to wonder what a writer has to say if we've read their book, and sadly, I've read quite a few books where I'm left empty, because, though they've put words on paper, the author has said nothing. As someone who loves words and stories and who loves to create them, I can't think of anything more devastating, in that context, than for people to read what I've written and feel nothing. I honestly want all writers to be passionate. I know some are, and I am grateful for them, but many are not. I want everyone who dares to call themselves a writer to not only want to put words on paper and collect a check, but I want them to have a desire to create entire worlds, to make a difference in the lives of their readers, even if it's a small difference. I want them to want to make their readers feel something, whether it's joy or pain or anything in between. Let it be something. We need to make them feel alive. That's what we're supposed to do. That is our contribution to the world. And it is exactly what Harper Lee did.
So, as we say goodbye to this amazing artist, I hope that all of us, especially the writers, choose to carry on a legacy that people like her began. A legacy of creating things that will reach people, that will change them for the better and that will last forever.
Love and full moons,
Becky the Writer
There are some people who, even though you or I may not know them or if they are public figures who choose to be not so public, make us glad that they are, at the very least, still out there in the world with us. Sadly, we lost one of those people, and it was Harper Lee.
If you don't know who that is, and I'm sad for you if you don't, Harper Lee was the author of To Kill a Mockingbird, arguably one of the greatest books ever written. She just passed away at the age of 89, a mere seven months after her second book, Go Set a Watchman, was released. That one, the world had waited on for over fifty years. Yes, someone considered one of the best writers of our time only released two books in her long life. I haven't had a chance to read that second one, and I've heard that it was actually a first draft of Mockingbird, to which Harper made drastic changes, obviously. I don't know, but even if it was, it's probably better written than anything on the shelves these days. Still, if To Kill a Mockingbird had remained the only book that Harper Lee released or wrote, it would not have mattered. That one book was enough, because it mattered.
Now when I say it mattered, I mean that it did so in the most important way. She wrote a book that pretty much changed the world, and it certainly changes most of the people who read it. If not everyone who reads it. Interestingly enough, I don't think she set out to do that. I think she had something to say and set out to write a book that was good. However, like anyone who creates a masterpiece, she did not plan to create one. And yet, she did.
You see, a masterpiece is not something for which one can plan. It's something that happens because the person who is behind anything that exceptional somehow manages to do everything just right. Everything falls into place and some people are blessed enough to be the vessels for what is the result. Harper Lee was one of those people. She had a story to tell, and she demanded greatness of herself, which led us to this wonderful book. Considering how she seemed to shy away from as much "celebrity" as she could throughout most of her life, I imagine that she never could have predicted what an impact her writing would have on the world. Maybe that's why so many of us see her as brilliant. It's because she wasn't trying to be. She just was.
If there's one thing I really notice about Mockingbird when I read it, it is that I can so clearly see the care that Harper took as she was writing this story. She worked hard to make it the best that it could be, for herself and for anyone else who was going to read it. She perfectly took us to another world, let us see through the eyes of another person. As I said before, she wanted it to matter. So, as a writer myself, I try to make what I do matter, and Harper Lee is a shining example of that. She should be that example for all writers.
Look, I'm not saying that every book has to be To Kill a Mockingbird or any other legendary novel. In fact, some writing is meant to be fun and light, and they serve a purpose by letting our minds relax. We need those books in the world. But that is, again, their purpose, and those authors are aware of it. Speaking for myself as a reader as well, I can always tell when an author cares, and I can certainly tell when they don't. It does not take much to understand and feel what drives certain people to write certain books. Anyone can sense when someone is doing it for fame or money or to jump on a popular bandwagon, and whilst those people might have managed to achieve those things, think about what they haven't achieved. Things like respect. I know that in the past decade or so, many of us have joked and laughed about how many poorly written books have become popular and made boat loads of cash, and if that's what those authors were after, good for them, I guess. But if I was making money from a book that was terribly written and pointless and gave little to anyone who read it, I would not be happy. Because to a true artist, fame and money might be good things to attain, but without being respected as a writer, without being that artist, it's all worthless. In fact, when I finish laughing at all those aforementioned jokes, I actually feel kind of sad. I feel sad for the state we seem to be in when it come to the written word and art in general.
I have walked through many bookstores and libraries in recent years, and I do so with one question: "What is the point?" This is only my opinion, of course, but I just feel like there are so many people who want to be writers for the wrong reasons, and they build a body of work that is unbelievably futile. None of us should have to wonder what a writer has to say if we've read their book, and sadly, I've read quite a few books where I'm left empty, because, though they've put words on paper, the author has said nothing. As someone who loves words and stories and who loves to create them, I can't think of anything more devastating, in that context, than for people to read what I've written and feel nothing. I honestly want all writers to be passionate. I know some are, and I am grateful for them, but many are not. I want everyone who dares to call themselves a writer to not only want to put words on paper and collect a check, but I want them to have a desire to create entire worlds, to make a difference in the lives of their readers, even if it's a small difference. I want them to want to make their readers feel something, whether it's joy or pain or anything in between. Let it be something. We need to make them feel alive. That's what we're supposed to do. That is our contribution to the world. And it is exactly what Harper Lee did.
So, as we say goodbye to this amazing artist, I hope that all of us, especially the writers, choose to carry on a legacy that people like her began. A legacy of creating things that will reach people, that will change them for the better and that will last forever.
Love and full moons,
Becky the Writer
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)