skip to main |
skip to sidebar
I know this film back to front. I have no idea how many times I've seen it. It's not one of Fred Astaire's better known films, in fact it's toward the end of his career as a dancer. For some reason though, of all the films that my father showed me from the Astaire catalogue, I watched this one more times than any other. I love the behind-the-scenes nature of it, and the in-jokes (such as the digs about Charisse's height or Astaire's career).
Astaire was in his early 50s when this film was made, and as a result his dance numbers are more on the restrained side. That's not to say that they're lacking in style or class, not by a long shot. It's odd I guess that my favourite Astaire movie isn't one that really showcases what he's known for.
Whenever I watched this film with my father, he'd be in raptures over the "Dancing In The Dark" number. And "Shiny Shoes" is a joy, and the closest in style to a young Astaire. The shoe shiner in that number was apparently a real life shoe shiner, known for his rhythmical technique, and my father always wished to see more of him. And I just can't take my eyes off Nanette Fabray. To me, vaudeville trained performers were incredibly engaging, in a very particular way that you don't see much in modern films. Their style wouldn't really suit modern film, to be fair, but there's something so refreshing about it that I wish it was more common today.
Final Thought: At the time of writing this, The Bandwagon is available on DVD in Australia, but, despite my searching, I can't find ANY of the Astaire/Rogers catalogue. They were released on VHS when I was a kid, but I don't understand why I can't get them anywhere today on DVD. It's beyond frustrating.
Up Next: Basil, The Great Mouse Detective (1986)
Within in the first five minutes of this film, I was struck by how gentle it is. I can't think of a better word for it. This film is gentle. This feeling stays throughout, even in the dramatic moments, because the protagonist is a shy creature and it wouldn't suit his story to present it in another way.
This was yet another Disney movie that I didn't see while young. So many people say that they were shocked and devastated when Bambi's mother meets her fate, but I already knew of her demise before I saw the film for the first time. As a result, I almost feel like I'm missing an essential part of what it is to watch Bambi, because her death wasn't a shock to me. For such a thing to happen in what is mostly such a peaceful film was quite traumatic for many viewers, I believe.
Although I didn't watch the film as a child, I once again must have somehow got my hands on it's related picture book, because I sure did know that I liked Thumper. I was actually thrilled on watching the movie for the first time to discover that Thumper's character is even more charming than I'd imagined.
The presence of man as an ever present but never seen threat is disturbing, and apparently didn't sit well with audiences in the original theatrical release. We're shown the idyll of Bambi's world, and then pretty bluntly told that humans constantly threaten to destroy it. In the current age this is more acceptable, with more people environmentally aware, but back then it would have been pretty confronting. In fact it's now common for hunters to be portrayed as villains, whereas back then it was quite a commercial risk to make such a connection.
Final Thought: I really love when animators take care to accurately portray the movement of animals.
Up Next: The Bandwagon (1953)
I was initially going to write two separate entries for these films, but each time I went to write it, I found myself wanting to put them together in the one post. I then kept questioning that impulse but ultimately decided that I am just going to go with it, because it's my blog and I can do what I want.
Part II: I never saw the second half of this film growing up. I possibly never even saw the first half. I certainly remember the moment of the shark hologram swallowing Marty, but I think that's because they enjoyed using that moment when advertising the movie, back when the gag of that many Jaws sequels was more relevant.
I find the second half of this film the most interesting, once they head back to the 1950s and have to dance around the plot of the first movie. The way that previously central plot moments can become peripheral when observed from the perspective of a parallel story is interesting to me. (I'm likely to go in to that in much more depth when I get to Rosencrantz And Guildenstern Are Dead in my collection).
Part III: And then, for me, here's where the series gets a bit weird. Throwing them in to the Wild West was a bit of a longshot, despite the idea being planted early on. I don't know what I would rather have seen though, I haven't given it enough thought.
Final Thought: The
Seamstress was accepting of every ludicrous plot point in these films,
only to take issue with a flying train. Because, you know, that's just
ridiculous.
Up Next: Bambi (1942)
Anyone who grew up in the 80s has seen Back To The Future stacks of times, purposefully or not. This movie, and its sequels, was screened on television so many times, it might as well have been part of the regular line-up (...perhaps it was...?) I saw fragments of this film in passing enough times that I could probably have pieced it together without having to sit down and watch it right through.
When I moved out of home, one of my housemates had the Back To The Future trilogy, and I decided to watch it to find out whether I had actually seen the films in full. And the answer was no. I had actually seen fragments of all three films, and stitched them together in to one giant film in my mind.
I think the reason the Back To The Future films work is that the time travel is the central plot point, with the rest of the events revolving around that, rather than the time travel being a means to catalyse the plot. As a result, the audience is less inclined to try to catch them out on any time travel mistakes, and more prone to wonder "Ooh.. I wonder what they're planning to do with that plot point..." I like a film where small details and lines are planted to recur and pay off later.
I also like a film with great music, but just how much is my opinion
of a film's theme music influenced by feelings of nostalgia? Because,
man, this movie has some great theme music. Music that heralds ADVENTURE!!
Final Thought: That comment above about the music heralding adventure got me thinking about other great sweeping adventurous music (Indiana Jones theme, Jurassic Park theme...), which then got me thinking about how those adventure movies died out somewhat after the 90s. I think they've been replaced with comic hero adaptations, which are often great, and I love them. But I loved those rollicking adventure movies... Bring them back.
Up Next: Back To The Future Part II (1989)
When I was in primary school, my mother would take me to a local library on the way home from school. It was a modest library, but with beautiful grounds overlooking the water, soft manicured lawns for skipping around in bare feet, ponds, fish, dragonflies, weeping willows and a sundial that fascinated me due to its being placed in the shade and therefore completely lacking in functionality. The slope of the library's location meant that it spread over two levels. The upper level was the main, adult library, and the lower level, to my delight, was purely for kids and completely separate from the (what I then considered to be) boring, adult section.
So I would roam the children's library without complaint, choosing books to add to my regular rotation for reading. If a book became a favourite, it would be borrowed pretty much whenever I had the opportunity, and at times I would take it as a personal affront if someone else had the nerve to borrow it before me.
My criteria for being interested enough to read a book for the first time was pretty simple: if there was an animal on the cover, I was likely to be interested. That is how I found "The Sheep-Pig" by Dick King-Smith. I can still remember picking it up and reading the blurb on the back for the first time. I was particularly drawn to this one as it mentioned sheep dog trials, and it quickly became one of my regular reads.
Having grown up with the book, I was naturally intrigued but tentative when I heard a film was being made. I felt protective of the narrative, and the fact that they'd changed the title did not sit well with me. If they were going to change that, for no reason that I could tell, what else would they change? As it turned out, the sheep password, which I had memorised from the book (Just in case. I hoped one day to be able to talk to animals like Doctor Doolittle), was also completely wrong. Unfortunately I can no long remember what the original was, but I still maintain my outrage from my childhood over that one.
Despite my hesitancy, this film is a pleasure. James Cromwell is perfect. So absolutely perfect, it makes me joyful. I quickly forgave the changes mentioned above, and reveled in the other little touches throughout the film (Singing field mice!). It's a beautiful, simple film and it will never lose its charm.
Final Thought: Were the opportunity ever to arise, I would snap up a chance to work with the animal trainers for this movie. It's really quite amazing what they did. Hint hint, Universe.
Up Next: Back To The Future (1985)
Not to be too much of a fangirl about it, but Joss Whedon's work is pretty great. I remember watching the original Buffy movie any time I had a sleepover with my friends as a teenager. Then when I heard that there was going to be a TV show, years later, I counted down the minutes until the first episode. I faithfully watched and recorded every show (I still have the collection of VHS) and, as it was moved to later and later timeslots, I enlisted my father to carry on the taping for me (though once I got a TV of my own, I'd sneakily watch it anyway in the middle of the night).
This loyalty carried on to Angel when it started. Then Firefly came, and I was skeptical, plus it screened at 1am on a school night in Australia, so I only got around to seeing that on DVD before going to see Serenity, and I wished I'd seen it sooner. Dollhouse took a few episodes to convince me, but convince me it did. And don't get me started on The Cabin In The Woods... I'll talk about that when I get to it in this project (which I am planning to time precisely to coincide with the DVD release so I can include it).
Anyone who is a fan of Joss Whedon has absolute trust in any project he takes on, occasionally blindly so. But in our defense, we're yet to be given a reason why we shouldn't.
Thankfully, The Avengers continued his trend of quality products.
It's oh so fun.
There was a lot of pressure, poor guy, because they've been setting up for this film for a long time, what with all the individual hero movies to introduce us to the characters.
I don't really feel qualified enough to comment much on the characters themselves, not having read the comic books. But I will say two things:
The last two incarnations of the Hulk have been so tortured - it's really nice to see the character romp around and have (violent) fun. I'm not an authority on the Hulk, but for me think that's why it works.
And, as an Aussie, I love how good Chris Hemsworth is as Thor.
Final Thought: Stan Lee's cameos just get better and better.
Up Next: Babe (1995)
This film is a bit melodramatic for what it is. There's a great deal of gazing in to the middle distance, much dialogue delivered in an is-he-about-to-cry-oh-I-guess-not fashion, lots of longing. That could be part of why I watch it with a degree of cynicism, because it takes itself a bit seriously. It presents itself with the sort of gravity you'd see in a film about cancer. The characters seem perpetually overwhelmed by something they're not quite explaining to us.
It's always frustrating for me watching a film where at least one protagonist is meant to be an accomplished musician, because the actors are rarely cast with that in mind. I've already ranted about this in my post about The Artist, though in that case it was related to dancing. But the same applies here. Musicians can tell when a performer is faking it, and it's sometimes insulting that filmmakers don't think we'll notice.
For instance, in this film, there's a moment when August encounters a piano for the first time, and in his fascination he plays three notes. The three notes we see him play ascend the scale. The three notes we hear descend the scale.
...Really?? Come on!
Prior to that moment, I was thinking that the actors did a decent job at playing their instruments. Keri Russell has
something of a cellist vibe about her, and I would hardly be surprised
if Jonathan Rhys Meyers strummed out songs on guitar occasionally. They seemed really mindful of trying to make it realistic, so I almost forgave whichever sound guy it was who on numerous occasions apparently thought it unimportant to sync up what we hear with what we see played*.
Despite his being the title character, I think I would enjoy this film more if the focus was more on August's parents. So why is it in my collection? I got it out of curiosity, because I liked some of the actors, who coincidentally happen to be the ones playing August's parents.
Final thought: Robin Williams' bitter Bono-inspired cowboy is not my favourite thing about this movie.
Up Next: The Avengers (2012)
*Call me crazy, but I would have thought that if you're making a movie about people playing music, you'd make note of how it's meant to look when music is played.
_DVD_boxart.JPG)
