The Mighty Dump

ShareThis

Quantum Of Solace

Let’s just call a spade a spade and say that the new James Bond movie Quantum Of Solace sucks. It’s confusing, dizzying, generic and, worst of all, boring. The movie is as dull as the title in confusing. The title is taken from an Ian Fleming short story but the movie has nothing to do with that short story. Or Fleming’s character of Bond for that matter.

In his second outing as Bond, Daniel Craig does little to change the Moose’s low opinion of his Bond. Once again, he plays Bond as a construction worker thug with an English accent. You would be forgiven if you thought this Bond was the guy you hired to pave your driveway. While there was some depth to Craig’s performance in Casino Royale, his performance here is more one note. Bond is out for revenge and nothing more. He barely finds any time for bedding women.

Some people have noted that James Bond has become a British Jason Bourne. There is some truth to that. Like Bourne, Bond has and is no fun. He’s a stuntman posing as an action hero. Take a moment to think about James Bond. What pops into your head? Tireless playboy who beds anyone without a Y chromosome, vodka martini shaken not stirred, classic introduction (Bond…James Bond). Without the mannerisms and stylish flourishes that Bond is known for, the character becomes little more than your generic action hero that could be played by any muscle bound meathead with an English accent.

But what about the story? Well, it’s both simple and incomprehensible. At its core, it’s basically Bond looking for revenge against the people that killed Vesper. But in the hands of Monster’s Ball director Marc Forster, it’s a confusing, convoluted mess that wants to be both realistic and fantastical. And did I mention stupid?

The villains are a super-evil organization named Quantum that has people everywhere. Why do I say that they’re super-evil? Because instead of world domination, they want to become a utility company. That’s right, the whole motivation of the bad guys in this movie is to become the sole water supplier of Bolivia. Very exciting stuff. The bad guys are headed by a goggle-eyed, effeminate, tofu eating Frenchmen Dominic Greene in a tuxedo who Bond somehow has trouble defeating in a fight despite the fact that he can take out rogue MI6 superagents and an army of evil militants with no problem.

As for the Bond girl, only an incompetent idiot would take a beautiful Ukrainian model (Olga Kurylenko) and cast her as an unsexy Bolivian out for revenge armed with a pout and a bad haircut. Oh, hello Marc Forster. Are you the one that decided to place the boring finale in a luxurious hotel that looks like a Motel 8 in the middle of the desert? That makes about as much sense as the rest of the movie.

ShareThis

The AFM calls itself the “Home of the Independent” and it’s true. This is the one main places where independent film deals get put together. However, it’s not the type of independent film that you’re most likely familiar with. These are not the independent films that rule Sundance. You’re not going to find movies starring Parker Posey, Sam Rockwell or whatever indie darling that is currently in vogue. No, the AFM is where you find the other type of “independent” film, the straight to video movie.

The straight to video world is a completely different universe than Hollywood. These are the movies that line the shelves at your local Blockbuster or other video store. This is a world where action, horror and franchises rule the day. Where the biggest stars are Steven Seagal and Dolph Lundgren and the biggest franchises may be ones you’ve never even heard of.

This is a different world operating on a completely different margin. Movies here are made for a fraction of what your typical Hollywood film budget is. The companies that attend these markets operate under the model of making movies cheap enough with desirable elements (action, nudity, more nudity) so that they can be sold to the international market. Quality is not as important as marketability and genre. Drama and comedy are more dependent on dialogue and cultural influences and thus are harder to sell. But boobs and blood will sell anywhere. That’s why action and horror are king at the AFM.

Some of you may ask, why doesn’t quality matter? It’s because the AFM has no pretense of art. The movies here are nothing more than widgets to be sold. You see, America has a thriving film industry. Most countries do not. Sure, the UK makes a fair amount of movies as does France and Asia, but the majority of the world just do not have the infrastructure nor the economy to support a prolific film industry. But that doesn’t mean that the rest of the world doesn’t need content to fill their movie theaters or to program their television networks. And that’s precisely the market for these schlock, straight to video (in the US) movies that are made and traded for the American Film Market. Making a quality film with a good story takes too much time and energy. It’s much easier for the companies that rely on AFM to make movies to a formula. Recycle the plot from this movie, change the setting, add some boobs, maybe an alien monster and that’s about all the innovation that you’re going to get here.

So how does the American Film Market work? To oversimplify it, there are sellers and there are buyers. The buyers are people who represent distributors (theatrical, TV or DVD) from the US and other countries. The sellers are either production companies trying to sell their finished product or pre-sell their future product or individual producers trying to the same. The AFM represents a place where all of these buyers and sellers come together with the hopes and intent of commerce taking place.

In a future post, the Moose will talk more about how an independent filmmaker can use the AFM to help find financing for their film. In the meantime, enjoy a sampling of the movies that are made for and sold at the AFM.

ShareThis

Writer E.M. Forster once wrote in Aspects of the Novel, defined a story as ‘a narrative of events arranged in their time sequence.’ Forster wrote: ‘it (a story) can only have one merit: that of making the audience want to know what happens next. “The king died and then the queen died” is a story.’

‘A plot’, Forster wrote, ‘is also a narrative of events, the emphasis falling on causality.’ Thus, ‘“The king died and then the queen died” is a story.’ But ‘“The king died, and then the queen died of grief’ is a plot. The time-sequence is preserved, but the sense of causality overshadows it.’

Confused? That’s ok. The Moose is here to explain the difference between plot and story in a less abstract manner. To put it simply, “plot” is the sequence of events that happen in a story. On the other hand, “story” is what the work is all about. Another way to put it is that plot is what happens, story is what it is about. Still a little abstract, I know. That’s why I’m going to illustrate these concepts with the following three examples. Let’s start with one of the Moose’s favorite movies, Rocky.

Rocky

Plot:

The champ, Apollo Creed, needs a new opponent when his scheduled opponent pulls out due to injury. In a decision of promotional genius, Creed gives a title shot to down-on-his-luck journeyman Rocky Balboa on the country’s 200th anniversary. Rocky goes on to shock the world by going the distance with Creed in a competitive fight.

Story:

Rocky, the underdog, overcomes great odds to find love and self-worth in going the distance with the champ.

The Godfather

Plot:

Michael Corleone, the son of Mafia kingpin Don Vito Corleone, returns home from the war. In a meeting with other mob bosses, Don Corleone refuses to get into the heroin business. Someone attempts to murder Don Corleone who is shot several times in the attempt. Don Corleone’s top man, Tom Hagen, is abducted and an ultimatum is issued to Sonny, the oldest Corleone son. Sonny retaliates by killing the son of another mafia boss.

Michael, the lone Corleone son who stayed away from the family business, volunteers to kill a mob boss and a corrupt cop to avenge his father and succeeds in doing so. Michael is sent to Sicily for his protection and Don Corleone is distraught to learn that Michael has taken up the family business. Sonny is gunned down at a toll booth. Don Corleone meets with the mob bosses and agrees to back the drug trade in an effort to end the mob war.

Michael returns from Sicily and takes over the family business. He promises to his girlfriend Kay that he will legitimize the family business within five years. Michael attempts to get into the casino business and is forced to resort to tactics even more brutal than his father’s to get his way. He also confronts his older brother Fredo, who was passed over because of his weakness, and warns him to never again takes sides with anyone against the family.

Vito passes away from a heart attack. Michael arranges for the murder of the heads of the Five Families. This completes Michael’s rise to power as the new “Godfather” and finishes his revenge against those who attacked his family.

Story:

The movie is about the corruption of Michael Corleone as he takes over the family business replacing his father after his death.

Sling Blade

Plot:

Karl Childers, a simple, bordering on retarded man, is released from the psychiatric hospital where he was committed for the murder of his mother and her lover. He wanders back into the town he was raised and befriends a young boy named Frank. Karl becomes a kind of father figure for Frank and moves in with him and his mother Linda and soon meets Linda’s abusive boyfriend Doyle. Realizing that Doyle’s abusive behavior will bring unending misery for Frank, Karl kills Doyle and turns himself in. He is returned to the psychiatric hospital from which he was released at the beginning of the movie.

Story:

A simple man bonds with a young boy, becoming the father figure and protector the boy never had.

Final Thoughts:

As you can see from the examples above, plot is almost aways more complicated and long winded than story. Plot is nothing more than the logical progression of events that is used to tell the story. Story is what the movie (or book, etc.) is about. Very rarely are the two ever the same. Some of the Bond movies come to mind as examples when plot and story are the same. When in doubt, just remember that plot is what happens and story is what it is all about.

Feel free to leave comments or your own examples of movie plots and stories.

ShareThis

Let The Right One In

It’s difficult to make a good vampire film. Why? Because vampires have lost their mystique. From The Count on Sesame Street to the campy vampires on Buffy The Vampire Slayer, vampires are not only accepted but embraced by the public consciousness. It’s hard to be scared or moved by vampires anymore in a traditional horror or creature feature film.

Leave it to the Swedish to turn vampires on their head and make them fascinating again. Adapted from him own novel Let the Right One In, writer John Ajvide Lindqvist and director Thomas Alfredson have crafted a unique vampire movie unlike any other I have ever seen. Instead of cheap thrills and loud action and Eurotrash seduction, this movie is smart and literate and resonant. It’s part horror film, part coming of age film and part love story, yet the whole is greater than the sum of its parts.

The story of Let The Right One In deals with the relationship that forms between 12 year old milquetoast Oskar and his new friend Eli, who just happens to be an age old vampire stuck forever at the awkward age of 12. Both Oskar and Eli are lonely and damaged and their friendship and budding romance help bring out the life in each other, even after Oskar realizes that Eli is a bloodsucking vampire.

Let The Right One In is not your traditional horror film. The movie is not about the plot or the events that unfold. It’s a story of awakening and love and acceptance. It’s about the awkwardness of adolescence. The director Thomas Alfredson doesn’t shy away from the darkness of the violence, yet he does not linger on it as one would expect in a traditional horror film. Instead, the movie’s horror is brought out by the atmosphere and the no-nonsense, realistic approach the director takes the supernatural elements. He plays to the emotional impact of the horror as opposed to the shock factor.

Compared to most movies in theaters today, Let The Right One In is a breath of welcome fresh air. The movie is paced perfectly and avoids the fast cutting and over-the-top stylistic flourishes that plague most American movies. There is also a return to classical compositional framing that burns the stark images from the movie into your mind. You could freeze frame the movie at any point and be left with an image as haunting as a painting by Johannes Vermeer. And there is a stillness in the movie that only accentuates the depth of the moving relationship between Oskar and Eli. Let The Right One In is a movie that will stay with you after you have seen it. The Moose thinks that this is not only the best vampire movie of the year, sorry Twilight fans, but also one of the year’s best movies.

ShareThis

Well, for starters, you can’t really go wrong with the ones listed above. Also this question generally refers to actors that people have heard of or are stars. Some of the best acting in movies today are done by unknown character actors or bit players. Beg to differ? While many critics often argue about the believability of stars in certain roles (Harrison Ford as a Russian submarine captain?), how many arguments have you heard about whether or not the actor playing the garbage man is believable. Sure, the role may not be large enough or memorable enough, but if that actor was not believable in their performance you would notice. So for the sake of argument, let’s stick with actors or movie stars who are well known or famous.

If you were to use the Academy Awards as a measuring stick, the winner would be Jack Nicholson who has 3 Oscars for acting. But, the Academy Awards are as much about politics and popularity as they are about quality so that should not be the lone factor in determining our answer. In fact, I think we shall only use the Academy Awards only as a starting point for discussions about who the best actor is. Our main criteria will be memorable roles and believability. So let’s start with the usual suspects

Jack Nicholson

Argument For:

Jack is so well known as an icon and bad boy that people sometimes forget what an amazing actor he is. A winner of three Academy Awards (Best Actor for One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest and As Good As It Gets and a Best Supporting Actor for Terms of Endearment), Jack has had more iconic movies and memorable performances than other actors have had roles on their entire resume. Easy Rider, Five Easy Pieces, Chinatown, The Shining, A Few Good Men… the list goes on.

Argument Against:

A tendency to overact and chew the scenery when allowed, Jack has oftentimes been blamed for just playing himself instead of creating a character. Also, his larger than life persona can sometimes overpower the story and hijack the movie.

Be Sure To Check Out:

The Crossing Guard, The Pledge, About Schmidt.

Al Pacino

Argument For:

If anyone can match Nicholson in terms of iconic movies and roles, it’s Pacino. His resume reads like a critics Top movies list. The Godfather, Serpico, The Godfather Part II, Dog Day Afternoon, Scarface, Glengarry Glen Ross, Donnie Brasco, The Insider… . It’s hard to imagine another actor doing all these roles. And he does Shakespeare too! Is there another actor as good at delivering monologues?

Argument Against:

Hooya! His post-Scent of a Woman roles often come in two varieties: loud and louder.

Be Sure To Check Out:

Looking for Richard, The Merchant of Venice

Dustin Hoffman

Argument For:

A brilliant actor capable of tackling a diverse range of challenging roles and making you believe him. The Graduate, Midnight Cowboy, All the President’s Men, Lenny, Marathon Man, Kramer vs. Kramer, Tootsie, Rain Man.

Argument Against:

Has a reputation for being difficult to work with. Hasn’t really seemed interested in pushing himself since Rain Man.

Be Sure To Check Out:

Straw Dogs, Papillon.

Robert De Niro

Argument For:

An intense actor known for his extreme Method preparation for his roles. Gained over 60 pounds to play Jake La Motta in Raging Bull where he won an Oscar for Best Actor. Also won an Oscar for Best Supporting Actor for The Godfather Part II. His best roles include Taxi Driver, The Deer Hunter, Raging Bull, The King of Comedy, Once Upon a Time in America, Heat. He can almost make a Martin Scorcese movie tolerable.

Argument Against:

Limited range. Doesn’t do comedy well. De Niro’s great at playing intense characters prone to violence and psychopathic behaviors. Anything else and he often resorts to mugging for the camera (best seen in the Analyze This and Meet the Parents movies). Now he’s only a paycheck actor. Don’t believe me? How else can you explain Hide and Seek and The Adventures of Rocky & Bullwinkle?

Be Sure To Check Out:

The Untouchables and Cop Land.

Tom Hanks

Argument For:

Good in both comedy and drama, Hanks has shown an increasing range over the years. Impressive in finding the human element in his characters and showing the audience what that character is thinking. He also has the ability to anchor an otherwise silly movie and make you believe in the story. Best roles include Splash, Big, Philadelphia, Forrest Gump, Apollo 13, Toy Story and Saving Private Ryan.

Argument Against:

Range. Tom Hanks has nailed the Everyman role and regular Joe type parts but has yet to prove that he can go darker or tougher.

Be Sure To Check Out:

Cast Away

Kevin Spacey

Argument For:

He’s won two Oscars for acting starting with a Best Supporting Actor Oscar for The Usual Suspects and followed up with a Best Actor win for American Beauty. Spacey’s at his best when he’s slinging bile and venting his anger. His memorable performances include Glengarry Glen Ross, Swimming With Sharks, L.A. Confidential and Seven.

Argument Against:

Pay It Forward, K-Pax and Beyond the Sea

Be Sure To Check Out:

See No Evil, Hear No Evil, The Negotiator

Robert Duvall

Argument For:

A naturalistic and versatile actor, Robert Duvall excels at creating memorable and quietly powerful characters. Capable of playing in almost any genre, Duvall often disappears into his role and makes you remember the character while forgetting who he is. Performances to check out include: To Kill a Mockingbird, The Godfather, The Godfather Part II, Network, Apocalypse Now, Lonesome Dove and Tender Mercies.

Argument Against:

Hasn’t had the challenging roles that many of his contemporaries have had. Doesn’t have as powerful a presence as some of his contemporaries.

Be Sure To Check Out:

The Apostle, Assassination Tango, Open Range

Denzel Washington

Argument For:

Strong presence. Good teeth. He’s won an Academy Award for both Best Actor (Training Day) and Best Supporting Actor (Glory).

Argument Against:

This racist actor has very little range. He takes himself too seriously and is only good at playing strong, proud black characters. Can’t play anything else and has a tendency to overact. With rare exception will he allow himself to look bad or weak on screen. Cries racism if his performances fail to win awards and garner critical support.

Be Sure To Check Out:

Man on Fire

Sean Penn

Argument For:

Powerful and intense performer that is well respected by his peers. Often called the best actor of his generation. Isn’t afraid to look bad. Standout performances include: Fast Times at Ridgemont High, At Close Range, Carlito’s Way, Dead Men Walking, Mystic River and 21 Grams.

Argument Against:

Takes himself too seriously. Can’t play comedy (see We’re No Angels). Often lets his politics inform his roles. Has trouble playing non contemporary roles.

Be Sure To Check Out:

Bad Boys, The Thin Red Line

And the winner is…

Gene Hackman

Argument For:

An impressive resume with brilliant terms in both comedies and dramas. Won an Oscar for Best Actor for The French Connection and an Oscar for Best Supporting Actor for Unforgiven. While Gene Hackman has been in his share of bad movies, he is never bad nor unbelievable. Even in tepid crap, his acting is simple and naturalistic and he often steals the movie from bigger stars without ever having to overact or chew the scenery. The Moose can’t think of a single bad Gene Hackman performance. Memorable performances include: Bonnie and Clyde, I Never Sang for My Father, The French Connection, The Conversation, Superman, Reds, Under Fire, Twice in a Lifetime, Hoosiers, Mississippi Burning, Unforgiven, Narrow Margin, Crimson Tide, Get Shorty, The Royal Tenenbaums

Argument Against:

None.

Be Sure To Check Out:

Scarecrow, Young Frankenstein, The Birdcage, Heist

ShareThis

I’ve been working as a co-producer on a film that is set to shoot in China at the beginning of the year. Exciting times, I hope to bring you updates to the progress and process of producing this film. The Moose has also completed the first draft of a MMA (mixed martial arts) movie. I hope to finish a second draft by the end of the year and to look for financing to begin production sometime next year.

I laughed this summer as box office pundits (who are these jokers, anyway?) predicted that The Dark Knight would surpass Titanic as the highest grossing movie of all time only to have it fall short both domestically and internationally. How close did it come? Titanic grossed $600 million in the US alone. Add another $1.25 billion dollars internationally for a grand total of $1.85 billion dollars. The Dark Knight grossed $526 million in the US and a paltry by comparison $463 million internationally for a worldwide total of $989 million, less than half of Titanic’s massive total. In other words, close but no cigar.

And what did the Moose, a noted critic of director Christopher Nolan, think of The Dark Knight? Dreadful. And boring. And many other adjectives that have also been used to describe the movie Beverly Hills Chihuahua.

The Duke City Shootout, the script to screen contest that the Moose first wrote about earlie