Stanislaw Lem's novel Solaris is one of those novels that proves how difficult science fiction can be to adapt to other mediums. Two filmmakers separated by a generation have taken a crack at it and both missed the point.
As a story Solaris is as simple as it gets. A research station orbiting an alien planet experiences some trouble and a psychologist is dispatched to determine if the project should be shutdown.
What the psychologist discovers is just how alien alien contact is. The planet Solaris has been attempting contact with manifestations of people or things from their past. Our psychologist must attempt to understand why when his dead wife returns to him.
Both versions of the films follow this template to the letter. Andrei Tarkovsky's 1972 version proves to be more faithful than Steven Soderburg's version in 2002. At least in terms of whole scenes lifted verbatim from Lem's novel. Both films emphasize a love story and that was never the point of the book.
A film professor I studied under maintained that people go to movies to experience an emotion. I think he is correct. Both films hang on the love story as that is probably an easier hook for an audience than anything else. Science Fiction doesn't deal in terms of those emotions as much. What science fiction excells at is Wonder.
And Wonder, despite the ability for filmmakers to craft any image, is seemingly hard to convey. Lem's novel is all about Wonder. Humans attempting to understand an alien intelligence through any means necessary and failing utterly.
All that said I don't think either of these films fail as an experience. These are vehicles for the filmmakers own ideas that they took from Lem's novel. Tarkovsky's version in particular seems to understand better not only why the humans misunderstand the nature of the contact. But the planet itself seems to understand where it went wrong.
Soderberg's version deviates the most only because it follows a more Hollywood like plot structure including a third act twist to produce a villian and an action sequence. It also only plays lip service to some of the greater ideas from the book. I think it succeeds in making the wife a little more human than the Russian version. It also can't hold a candle to those long philophical arguments that Tarkovsky loves.
I think what I find most curious about this is even with the original text (translated of course) and two different interpretations of the book filmed the ultimate answer is still waiting to be uncovered. And Stanislaw Lem would probably appreciate that.
Saturday, November 29, 2014
Wednesday, November 5, 2014
HORROR BETWEEN CULTURES. Re-experiencing The Ring.
Recently my littlest sister and I were having a movie night and she wanted a
list of good scary films. I looked at the list on her phone and made
suggestions accordingly while we waited for our pizza.
Something struck me about the titles I suggested for the list. All of them
were remakes of foreign horror films. "Quarantine", aka "REC"; "Silent House";
"The Ring" aka "Ringu"; "The Grudge" aka "Ju-on"; "Let Me In" aka "Let the
Right One In." The film my sister picked that night was "The Ring", the american version of
the japanese hit, "Ringu." She liked it and it had been long enough between
viewings that I got a new perspective on it. This also allows me to make a
larger point about what happens when you adapt source material for different
cultures.
Let's start with the original novel. Published in 1991 as "Ringu", Koji
Suzuki's novel about a reporter's quest to uncover what killed a family member
struck a chord in it's home country. It's a good cocktail of urban legend,
technophobia, and that old staple of Japanese horror the vengeful female ghost.
The title comes from the neverending cycle of this cursed videotape that kills
you in a week. The novel's protagonists are two men, the reporter and a friend
of his who's basically a nihilistic sociopath. The nature of the girl at the
center of the curse is different and there's a better explanation in the novel
for the need to copy her endlessly.
"Ringu," the 1998 adaptation of the original novel takes some liberties with
the book beyond the basic plot. They changed the gender of the reporter and
the nihilistic sociopath is the ex husband of the reporter. The nature of the
tape is basically the same. The ex husband has some psychic abilities that act
as a visual shorthand to get the info you need across at times. The fate of
the girl and her family have changed the most between the book and the film.
They basically made it palatable for a bigger audience without losing the main
idea behind the story. This isn't the first time this has happened and it
won't be the last. The novel "Let the Right One In" was similarly neutered but
for it's benefit. The nature of the monster in that story was changed by not
revealing a few key points from the book. The horror is lessened but still
effective on screen. The American remake "Let Me In" simplifies it even
further without losing the impact of the story.
"The Ring" most directly adapts the 1998 feature and the original novel. The
protagonists and the plot turns are basically the same. I will say that the
American version has a slight edge in atmosphere but I think that's mostly
because "Ringu" feels like a TV movie by Hollywood standards and "The Ring" is
a big budget studio feature. There is a lot more shocks in this film and set
pieces that goose the audience. I got the impression that the filmmakers
didn't trust the audience to stay awake or something.
But here's where I think the cultural differences come in. There's a
difference in running time between the two features of about twenty minutes.
That extra twenty minutes in the American version is devoted to those
unnecssary shock scares and the dreaded "Jake the Explainer" roles. And yet,
with all that explanation on the screen I still had to explain to my sister
what was going on in the ending. Believe me it wasn't just her. I saw this in
theatres in 2002 and you could feel half the theatre go "Huh?" I saw the
japanese version later and only THEN did I get what was happening in the end.
The novel does a better job explaining all of this.
I think horror works best when the reasons for WHY this is happening to people
isn't really spelled out. This is why I tend to enjoy the first film in a
franchise rather than the sequels. One of the complaints I remember about the
american version is once that countdown starts you're just sort of waiting for
the end to see if how they get out of it. To be fair that's a problem with the
set up for both versions. But japanese culture has a different relationship to
ghosts than western culture. Japanese culture treats spirits as part of the
scenery. They only become dangerous if they become something else. A ghost by
itself wouldn't necessarily be scary--just something to be respected.
American culture tends to treat a ghost as a problem to solve. "How do we help you
pass on?"
The American version also spends much more time using the scientific method to
break down what this is and what it isn't. It feels like a quick class in
video production in some of these scenes. That is completely missing from the
Japanese adaptation but is pulled liberally from the original novel.
I can recommend both versions of this movie as I think they represent two
responses to a classic ghost story. More films and books are in this franchise
and while I haven't seen or read all of them they go in wildly different
directions and beyond the scope of this piece.
list of good scary films. I looked at the list on her phone and made
suggestions accordingly while we waited for our pizza.
Something struck me about the titles I suggested for the list. All of them
were remakes of foreign horror films. "Quarantine", aka "REC"; "Silent House";
"The Ring" aka "Ringu"; "The Grudge" aka "Ju-on"; "Let Me In" aka "Let the
Right One In." The film my sister picked that night was "The Ring", the american version of
the japanese hit, "Ringu." She liked it and it had been long enough between
viewings that I got a new perspective on it. This also allows me to make a
larger point about what happens when you adapt source material for different
cultures.
Let's start with the original novel. Published in 1991 as "Ringu", Koji
Suzuki's novel about a reporter's quest to uncover what killed a family member
struck a chord in it's home country. It's a good cocktail of urban legend,
technophobia, and that old staple of Japanese horror the vengeful female ghost.
The title comes from the neverending cycle of this cursed videotape that kills
you in a week. The novel's protagonists are two men, the reporter and a friend
of his who's basically a nihilistic sociopath. The nature of the girl at the
center of the curse is different and there's a better explanation in the novel
for the need to copy her endlessly.
"Ringu," the 1998 adaptation of the original novel takes some liberties with
the book beyond the basic plot. They changed the gender of the reporter and
the nihilistic sociopath is the ex husband of the reporter. The nature of the
tape is basically the same. The ex husband has some psychic abilities that act
as a visual shorthand to get the info you need across at times. The fate of
the girl and her family have changed the most between the book and the film.
They basically made it palatable for a bigger audience without losing the main
idea behind the story. This isn't the first time this has happened and it
won't be the last. The novel "Let the Right One In" was similarly neutered but
for it's benefit. The nature of the monster in that story was changed by not
revealing a few key points from the book. The horror is lessened but still
effective on screen. The American remake "Let Me In" simplifies it even
further without losing the impact of the story.
"The Ring" most directly adapts the 1998 feature and the original novel. The
protagonists and the plot turns are basically the same. I will say that the
American version has a slight edge in atmosphere but I think that's mostly
because "Ringu" feels like a TV movie by Hollywood standards and "The Ring" is
a big budget studio feature. There is a lot more shocks in this film and set
pieces that goose the audience. I got the impression that the filmmakers
didn't trust the audience to stay awake or something.
But here's where I think the cultural differences come in. There's a
difference in running time between the two features of about twenty minutes.
That extra twenty minutes in the American version is devoted to those
unnecssary shock scares and the dreaded "Jake the Explainer" roles. And yet,
with all that explanation on the screen I still had to explain to my sister
what was going on in the ending. Believe me it wasn't just her. I saw this in
theatres in 2002 and you could feel half the theatre go "Huh?" I saw the
japanese version later and only THEN did I get what was happening in the end.
The novel does a better job explaining all of this.
I think horror works best when the reasons for WHY this is happening to people
isn't really spelled out. This is why I tend to enjoy the first film in a
franchise rather than the sequels. One of the complaints I remember about the
american version is once that countdown starts you're just sort of waiting for
the end to see if how they get out of it. To be fair that's a problem with the
set up for both versions. But japanese culture has a different relationship to
ghosts than western culture. Japanese culture treats spirits as part of the
scenery. They only become dangerous if they become something else. A ghost by
itself wouldn't necessarily be scary--just something to be respected.
American culture tends to treat a ghost as a problem to solve. "How do we help you
pass on?"
The American version also spends much more time using the scientific method to
break down what this is and what it isn't. It feels like a quick class in
video production in some of these scenes. That is completely missing from the
Japanese adaptation but is pulled liberally from the original novel.
I can recommend both versions of this movie as I think they represent two
responses to a classic ghost story. More films and books are in this franchise
and while I haven't seen or read all of them they go in wildly different
directions and beyond the scope of this piece.
Friday, September 12, 2014
Big Hero 6 and the Lost Audience
WHAT HAPPENS WHEN AUDIENCES CROSS OVER:
I wish I could say the news about THIS was surprising but in the business of Hollywood it's not. I think it illustrates something about audience crossover between media. In brief, massive success in one medium doesn't always translate to bigger numbers when accessing the adapted source material. I'll try to outline why here.
Big Hero 6 (TRAILER HERE) is a Disney Animation adaptation of a somewhat obscure Marvel comic. As the article above states Marvel Comics won't be reissuing the older material except for a short mini from 2008 and that's only in digital form. What we will be getting is a manga adaptation of the film. The article is HERE. Irony abounds because Big Hero 6 was initially conceived as aping Japanese comic book conventions in superhero form.
The article above points out why Marvel is doing this and it's not surprising. Disney gets to make the property their own while Marvel Studios focuses on it's ever expanding superhero roster of films. The money keeps getting made and this is a good thing. Guardians of the Galaxy was the biggest success of 2014 because it was well made and everybody involved had a good time. But I can nearly guarantee that those that enjoyed the film won't attempt to seek out the inspiration.
An author I like works in both novels and comic books. In one case he wrote three novels featuring characters from his comic book series. They weren't adaptations but original stories. He said something that stuck with me during one of his signings. He found that the comic book readers of that series sought out the novels featuring the same characters. But the novel fans did not seek out the comic books. I am sure he was painting with a broad brush there but the point remains. Fans appear to seek out anything. But the average audience won't. And if this ARTICLE'S stats haven't changed much the audience is there but it's rather small.
I think there are two reasons for this audience disconnect. The first is pure economics. Comics are insanely expensive these days for lots of reasons. When I got into comics as a kid they were slightly easier to find but they were also less expensive. Average cover price was about $.75. Now they're $4.00 or so. Per issue. You'd also think that trade paperbacks of collected material--the only way comics get into bookstores these days--would be cheaper. Not so. Digital comics mimic their paper counterparts in price and that's not going to change anytime soon. Film ticket prices have been going up but it's still cheaper to get two hours of entertainment than about twenty minutes of a comic book for the same price.
The second reason requires some training. Some people don't understand how to read a comic. Panels flow in a particular order to convey the story and if a writer and/or artist doesn't understand how that works you get an incomprehensible mess. Scott McCloud wrote and illustrated a graphic novel called "Understanding Comics" that explained the theory behind how a comic works, how it's put together as well as the history of the medium itself. It's fascinating reading but one critic I remember pointed out that unless you knew how to read a graphic novel it wouldn't work. This isn't just learning to read a comic. This also applies to reading subtitles on a screen. Some can't do it. This is why we'll get a new English dub on foreign material.
The economic reason can't be fixed but the education reason can. Those that create the source material that gets adapted into something else have a responsibility then to make it the best it can be. A good film will pay for itself and then some. As will good source material. I want graphic novels (and superheroes are only one part of this medium) to be on the same shelf as all the other things we read in bookstores and online. I want it to catch up to the rest of pop culture. It's getting there. Slowly.
I wish I could say the news about THIS was surprising but in the business of Hollywood it's not. I think it illustrates something about audience crossover between media. In brief, massive success in one medium doesn't always translate to bigger numbers when accessing the adapted source material. I'll try to outline why here.
Big Hero 6 (TRAILER HERE) is a Disney Animation adaptation of a somewhat obscure Marvel comic. As the article above states Marvel Comics won't be reissuing the older material except for a short mini from 2008 and that's only in digital form. What we will be getting is a manga adaptation of the film. The article is HERE. Irony abounds because Big Hero 6 was initially conceived as aping Japanese comic book conventions in superhero form.
The article above points out why Marvel is doing this and it's not surprising. Disney gets to make the property their own while Marvel Studios focuses on it's ever expanding superhero roster of films. The money keeps getting made and this is a good thing. Guardians of the Galaxy was the biggest success of 2014 because it was well made and everybody involved had a good time. But I can nearly guarantee that those that enjoyed the film won't attempt to seek out the inspiration.
An author I like works in both novels and comic books. In one case he wrote three novels featuring characters from his comic book series. They weren't adaptations but original stories. He said something that stuck with me during one of his signings. He found that the comic book readers of that series sought out the novels featuring the same characters. But the novel fans did not seek out the comic books. I am sure he was painting with a broad brush there but the point remains. Fans appear to seek out anything. But the average audience won't. And if this ARTICLE'S stats haven't changed much the audience is there but it's rather small.
I think there are two reasons for this audience disconnect. The first is pure economics. Comics are insanely expensive these days for lots of reasons. When I got into comics as a kid they were slightly easier to find but they were also less expensive. Average cover price was about $.75. Now they're $4.00 or so. Per issue. You'd also think that trade paperbacks of collected material--the only way comics get into bookstores these days--would be cheaper. Not so. Digital comics mimic their paper counterparts in price and that's not going to change anytime soon. Film ticket prices have been going up but it's still cheaper to get two hours of entertainment than about twenty minutes of a comic book for the same price.
The second reason requires some training. Some people don't understand how to read a comic. Panels flow in a particular order to convey the story and if a writer and/or artist doesn't understand how that works you get an incomprehensible mess. Scott McCloud wrote and illustrated a graphic novel called "Understanding Comics" that explained the theory behind how a comic works, how it's put together as well as the history of the medium itself. It's fascinating reading but one critic I remember pointed out that unless you knew how to read a graphic novel it wouldn't work. This isn't just learning to read a comic. This also applies to reading subtitles on a screen. Some can't do it. This is why we'll get a new English dub on foreign material.
The economic reason can't be fixed but the education reason can. Those that create the source material that gets adapted into something else have a responsibility then to make it the best it can be. A good film will pay for itself and then some. As will good source material. I want graphic novels (and superheroes are only one part of this medium) to be on the same shelf as all the other things we read in bookstores and online. I want it to catch up to the rest of pop culture. It's getting there. Slowly.
Sunday, May 18, 2014
SCIENCE FICTION PURITY TESTING
A recent post of mine on FB sparked a conversation about the "purity" of science fiction in films. Christopher Nolan's "Interstellar" posted a trailer HERE and I remarked that Hollywood was releasing a "pure" science fiction film and I hoped audiences would embrace it.
A friend asked for a "purity scale" and I just used an arbitrary 5 point system. It would measure how close a film adheres to science fiction concepts without aping other genre conventions. Just based on the trailer and what I've heard about "Interstellar" this film looks at best to explore a human's place in the universe or perhaps some variation on a first contact type of situation. I gave it a four out of five.
For contrast I used James Cameron's "Avatar" as a counterpoint for something that looks like science fiction but is clearly a western instead. The alien NaVi are the Native Americans. The humans are the calvary. Jake Sully is the officer that goes native and joins the war against the oppressors while trying to make his CO see where he's wrong. (He's also stealing from Edgar Rice Burroughs' "A Princess of Mars" but everybody steals from that book so he gets a pass there.) Avatar gets a 1 out of 5 on this scale.
My friend's next question prompted this entry. "What's 5 out of 5" on this scale?"
Before I dive into that I need to clarify a few things. Science Fiction revels in exploring really big ideas--explaining the origin of life, our place in this universe, what being human really means. It's a great strength and sometimes a weakness in that sometimes the concept outshines the characters. Asimov, as great as he was, was a better idea man than a character writer. I think this is part of the reason that science fiction isn't embraced as easily by some audiences. You need to care to have an emotional reaction. It's no accident that Interstellar is focusing on that main family in that trailer. The heart latches on. The head will follow.
Let's stipulate that story, whatever it is, trumps everything but in telling that story sometimes genres cross. Films do this less than books but that's primarily a matter of time. Urban Fantasy seems to borrow from everywhere--horror, science fiction, romance, mystery.
With that in mind here's a few films that rate a 5 out of 5 for the most pure science fiction films out there. Order doesn't indicate preference and these are limited to what I've seen.
Robert Wise's Star Trek: The Motion Picture: Yes, this is the one that everyone seems to hate and you can lob a lot of critcism on it for it's pacing, stiff acting and such but in terms of pure science fiction this film is the closest out of the dozen that have been made. It's a first contact story even if the alien turned out to be our own creation. It embodied everything that made the original Trek such a phenonenon. What happens when we actually discover new alien life?
Stanley Kubrick's 2001: Another alien contact saga filled with multitple interpretations that required a sequel (2010) to explain what happened in this one. I'm going on some very vague memories here but I don't know if this film is known more for what that alien presence was trying to teach us humans or Hal 9000s homicidal rampage and the perils of messing with artificial intelligence.
Ridley Scott's Prometheus: A group of scientists attempt to unlock a mystery about what seeded the Earth with life. They are essentially trying to find God (in a plot that Star Trek V only wish it had) and they get more than they bargained for. Yes, this is part of the "Alien" series and ironically it was the least well received out of the series despite being the only one that qualifies as science fiction.
Alex Proyas' Dark City: Lots of science fiction deals with that perception of reality and how we relate to it. This story of a man trying to figure out what's hunting him in a city that changes every night is fascinating in just how much is held back until the ulitmate reveal. Others I know figured it out before I did but I didn't and I was thrilled for it.
I've barely scratched the surface here but I'll close with a list of honorable mentions and why they didn't quite make 5.
Ridley Scott's Blade Runner: No matter what version you've seen (there are technically seven) they are all wrestling with that question of "What makes us human?" This film is a noir thriller in science fiction dress and plays like a Raymond Chandler novel.
Christopher Nolan's Inception: Even though this is wrestling with things like memory, reality, dreams and such it's a heist film only instead of knocking over a bank they are knocking over a brain.
James Cameron's The Terminator: Despite the time travel, apocalpytic trappings this is a horror film. The Terminator is an unstoppable killer and Sarah Connor is the babysitter running up the stairs into the closet.
Danny Boyle's Sunshine: A group of scientists attempt to use a nuclear device to restart the sun when the first expedition doesn't succeed. The science is plausible but this is a horror film once they get where they are going.
Kathryn Bigelow's Strange Days: A very misunderstood picture with stomach churning violence but despite the tech trappings is a psychological thriller about an ex-cop trying to uncover the identity of a serial killer.
A friend asked for a "purity scale" and I just used an arbitrary 5 point system. It would measure how close a film adheres to science fiction concepts without aping other genre conventions. Just based on the trailer and what I've heard about "Interstellar" this film looks at best to explore a human's place in the universe or perhaps some variation on a first contact type of situation. I gave it a four out of five.
For contrast I used James Cameron's "Avatar" as a counterpoint for something that looks like science fiction but is clearly a western instead. The alien NaVi are the Native Americans. The humans are the calvary. Jake Sully is the officer that goes native and joins the war against the oppressors while trying to make his CO see where he's wrong. (He's also stealing from Edgar Rice Burroughs' "A Princess of Mars" but everybody steals from that book so he gets a pass there.) Avatar gets a 1 out of 5 on this scale.
My friend's next question prompted this entry. "What's 5 out of 5" on this scale?"
Before I dive into that I need to clarify a few things. Science Fiction revels in exploring really big ideas--explaining the origin of life, our place in this universe, what being human really means. It's a great strength and sometimes a weakness in that sometimes the concept outshines the characters. Asimov, as great as he was, was a better idea man than a character writer. I think this is part of the reason that science fiction isn't embraced as easily by some audiences. You need to care to have an emotional reaction. It's no accident that Interstellar is focusing on that main family in that trailer. The heart latches on. The head will follow.
Let's stipulate that story, whatever it is, trumps everything but in telling that story sometimes genres cross. Films do this less than books but that's primarily a matter of time. Urban Fantasy seems to borrow from everywhere--horror, science fiction, romance, mystery.
With that in mind here's a few films that rate a 5 out of 5 for the most pure science fiction films out there. Order doesn't indicate preference and these are limited to what I've seen.
Robert Wise's Star Trek: The Motion Picture: Yes, this is the one that everyone seems to hate and you can lob a lot of critcism on it for it's pacing, stiff acting and such but in terms of pure science fiction this film is the closest out of the dozen that have been made. It's a first contact story even if the alien turned out to be our own creation. It embodied everything that made the original Trek such a phenonenon. What happens when we actually discover new alien life?
Stanley Kubrick's 2001: Another alien contact saga filled with multitple interpretations that required a sequel (2010) to explain what happened in this one. I'm going on some very vague memories here but I don't know if this film is known more for what that alien presence was trying to teach us humans or Hal 9000s homicidal rampage and the perils of messing with artificial intelligence.
Ridley Scott's Prometheus: A group of scientists attempt to unlock a mystery about what seeded the Earth with life. They are essentially trying to find God (in a plot that Star Trek V only wish it had) and they get more than they bargained for. Yes, this is part of the "Alien" series and ironically it was the least well received out of the series despite being the only one that qualifies as science fiction.
Alex Proyas' Dark City: Lots of science fiction deals with that perception of reality and how we relate to it. This story of a man trying to figure out what's hunting him in a city that changes every night is fascinating in just how much is held back until the ulitmate reveal. Others I know figured it out before I did but I didn't and I was thrilled for it.
I've barely scratched the surface here but I'll close with a list of honorable mentions and why they didn't quite make 5.
Ridley Scott's Blade Runner: No matter what version you've seen (there are technically seven) they are all wrestling with that question of "What makes us human?" This film is a noir thriller in science fiction dress and plays like a Raymond Chandler novel.
Christopher Nolan's Inception: Even though this is wrestling with things like memory, reality, dreams and such it's a heist film only instead of knocking over a bank they are knocking over a brain.
James Cameron's The Terminator: Despite the time travel, apocalpytic trappings this is a horror film. The Terminator is an unstoppable killer and Sarah Connor is the babysitter running up the stairs into the closet.
Danny Boyle's Sunshine: A group of scientists attempt to use a nuclear device to restart the sun when the first expedition doesn't succeed. The science is plausible but this is a horror film once they get where they are going.
Kathryn Bigelow's Strange Days: A very misunderstood picture with stomach churning violence but despite the tech trappings is a psychological thriller about an ex-cop trying to uncover the identity of a serial killer.
Friday, March 14, 2014
Horror Films and Christian Expectations
I recently viewed a film called "Seance: The Summoning" which prompted a curious reaction in me. I wanted to like it much more than I did. I applaud it for the ambition it was straining under but it was hard to call it a success.
In this horror story of four friends breaking into a hospital to prove the supernatural abilities of their Santeria practicing witch they conduct a seance that leaves one of them dead, the other possessed by a demon that wants the witch for itself. During the long night of bloody mayhem the witch and her friend, newly converted to Christ must call on Christ to keep them alive to fight the demon.
That setup is ripe for some fun and perhaps a few questions to make you think and it was heartbreaking to watch this film throw most of it away. I think all of its problems point to a misunderstanding of its audience. A film like this can do two things: entertain those of this faith and hopefully not embarrass their friends who don't believe. The problem is it's gory enough for the typical horror film crowd but kind of cheesy otherwise even for the low budget roots. I don't know if the audience that made Mel Gibson's Passion of the Christ the monster hit that it was would embrace this kind of film
It plays fast and loose with both Santeria and Catholicism but does a good job not breaking it's own rules. I admired it for sticking with the idea that only by relying on Christ could they survive. And who's left standing is actually a surprise I won't spoil here. Some didn't like the unsubtle nature of the story and that's fine.
This film reminded me of a much better executed film called "The Prophecy" from 1995 or so. It was written and directed by Gregory Widen, the man responsible for the original "Highlander" film and Ron Howard's "Backdraft." It spawned a few odd sequels. In this story a former priest turned detective investigates a murder only to find himself caught up in a war raging in Heaven and on Earth. The angel Gabriel wants a soul that's apparently the most evil on the planet and it's taken up residence inside a little girl that becomes the detective's charge. How they get there is a mess but it's a lot of fun watching it. Even Satan himself makes an appearance.
What we eventually learn is that Gabriel wants this soul to lead his armies against God the way Lucifer did back at the start. Gabriel and other angels like him are angry over God elevating humans over the angels. Later on there's a confrontation between the ex priest and the angel and the priest genuinely asks him, "If you wanted to prove your side was right why didn't you just ask Him? Why didn't you just ask God?" Gabriel replies, "He doesn't talk to me anymore."
See, it's a moment like that when a film, whatever it's intentions, can hit both believers and non believers between the eyes. Mileage will vary of course but I remember being stunned that a moment like that even existed in a mainstream movie.
It's easy to mock a film for what it does wrong. I think it's more useful to find the moments that work and see if they can tip the scales to greater enjoyment.
In this horror story of four friends breaking into a hospital to prove the supernatural abilities of their Santeria practicing witch they conduct a seance that leaves one of them dead, the other possessed by a demon that wants the witch for itself. During the long night of bloody mayhem the witch and her friend, newly converted to Christ must call on Christ to keep them alive to fight the demon.
That setup is ripe for some fun and perhaps a few questions to make you think and it was heartbreaking to watch this film throw most of it away. I think all of its problems point to a misunderstanding of its audience. A film like this can do two things: entertain those of this faith and hopefully not embarrass their friends who don't believe. The problem is it's gory enough for the typical horror film crowd but kind of cheesy otherwise even for the low budget roots. I don't know if the audience that made Mel Gibson's Passion of the Christ the monster hit that it was would embrace this kind of film
It plays fast and loose with both Santeria and Catholicism but does a good job not breaking it's own rules. I admired it for sticking with the idea that only by relying on Christ could they survive. And who's left standing is actually a surprise I won't spoil here. Some didn't like the unsubtle nature of the story and that's fine.
This film reminded me of a much better executed film called "The Prophecy" from 1995 or so. It was written and directed by Gregory Widen, the man responsible for the original "Highlander" film and Ron Howard's "Backdraft." It spawned a few odd sequels. In this story a former priest turned detective investigates a murder only to find himself caught up in a war raging in Heaven and on Earth. The angel Gabriel wants a soul that's apparently the most evil on the planet and it's taken up residence inside a little girl that becomes the detective's charge. How they get there is a mess but it's a lot of fun watching it. Even Satan himself makes an appearance.
What we eventually learn is that Gabriel wants this soul to lead his armies against God the way Lucifer did back at the start. Gabriel and other angels like him are angry over God elevating humans over the angels. Later on there's a confrontation between the ex priest and the angel and the priest genuinely asks him, "If you wanted to prove your side was right why didn't you just ask Him? Why didn't you just ask God?" Gabriel replies, "He doesn't talk to me anymore."
See, it's a moment like that when a film, whatever it's intentions, can hit both believers and non believers between the eyes. Mileage will vary of course but I remember being stunned that a moment like that even existed in a mainstream movie.
It's easy to mock a film for what it does wrong. I think it's more useful to find the moments that work and see if they can tip the scales to greater enjoyment.
Monday, February 3, 2014
THE PERILS OF BEING A MEDIA COLLECTOR
The problem with collecting media in physical form these days is how easy it is to lose the opportunity to get it. This is true of anything with a limited shelf life or a short print run or a specific edition that may no longer be available. This is especially true of foreign media which has a shelf life even shorter than most. So here's a list of mostly forum and some domestic media I'd like to grab that will cost me various parts of my soul to access.
1. MAISON IKKOKU. This Japanese produced animated and print property from Viz Media has been around since manga switched over from the comic book format to these digest versions that populate our shelves. In it's animated form it's been around since the VHS days. It's 96 episodes long and 15 volumes of manga. Both are very hard to find. This story of an apartment manager and one of her tenants falling in love is sweet without being cloying and real without pandering. There has been movement lately on Artist Rumiko Takahashi's other work for reissue. My hope is this series gets another chance to run and I will have the funds to get it at the time.
2. BATTLE ANGEL. This is known as Gunm over in Japan and is currently split between two publishers. An earlier 9 volume run that is difficult to find and an 18 plus retelling and expansion currently in print from Kodansha. The OAV made back in the 90s is still kind of in print. I hope that the earlier run gets a reprint. If James Cameron is to be believed he wants to make this as an adaptation after the next Avatar trilogy is finished. I will believe that when I see it.
3. CHUNGKING EXPRESS. The OOP dvd is fairly easy to find. The OOP Criterion Blu Ray or DVD is not. The latter has the best special features and the best visual quality. My brain hurts watching the price rise.
4. JOHN WOO'S THE KILLER. This thing has been out multiple times but I would like the long out of print Criterion version as visual quality of the video doesn't change much between the blu-ray and various dvd versions.
5. NODAME CANTABILE. This is an animated, live action and print franchise that I wish someone could pull together. 16 of the 25 manga volumes are here in English but were not finqished when Kodansha continued Del Rey's catalog. The live action version never had a stateside physical release. The anime is available streaming through Sony's Crackle service but only the first season. This romantic comedy doesn't have a chance because it features students at a prestigious music college and features classical music.
6. YOU'RE UNDER ARREST. This is a Manga and Animated Franchise ( and one live action feature) that needs to be collated. The animated film is way oop and the second release with better quality is quite expensive. While the later second and third seasons are readily available the first season is oop but has the distinction of two of its volumes being impossible to find for no earthly reason. 37-44 of Season 1 must be more hilarious than the others. The manga only has 2 of 22 volumes here in English and that depresses me. No stateside release of the live action film.
7. ROBOT CARNIVAL. This anthology film never received the DVD treatment here and the vhs copies are dinosaurs. I wish Japan would remaster a blu ray. I'd gladly import it as we share the same region code.
8. THE LEGEND OF BILLIE JEAN. For a long time this wasn't available but a print on demand DVD exists and the visual quality is murky at best. This is dying for a remastered blu ray or hell even just a remastered DVD.
9. SANCTUARY. This 9 or so volume manga is way out of print and was released flipped originally. I'd like to see a re-release unflipped. Marketing this would be tough as it is very much of its time and aimed at adults.
10. READ OR DIE. The best way to get all of this is through a long oop blu ray set that mimics the Japanese pricing structure. I've priced out what would happen if I tried to get the original domestic DVDs and depending on the secondary vendors you're not really saving that much money. I am saving my pennies now.
Looking over this list I am surprised to see that most of the print side on this list is from one company Viz media. Battle Angel's case is unique as the artist jumped publishers and Viz only prints things from its Japanese counterpart. Dark Horse holds You're Under Arrest and they tend to do a good job keeping their stuff in print but You're Under Arrest must have had especially cringe worthy numbers for sales to kill it after two volumes.
The overall problem with seeing any of this come back is no one outside of the publisher knows exact sales numbers and how that squares with the licensing and production costs. Maison Ikkoku has a chance to come back only because they are bringing back Ranma 1/2. The latter had a lot more popularity due to the broad comedy. MI has a devoted fan base hence the crazy prices for the manga and anime but that may not translate for another dip in the well.
A lot of these things only get one shot before going away forever. The only lesson learned is if you love it, support it and vote with your wallet.
1. MAISON IKKOKU. This Japanese produced animated and print property from Viz Media has been around since manga switched over from the comic book format to these digest versions that populate our shelves. In it's animated form it's been around since the VHS days. It's 96 episodes long and 15 volumes of manga. Both are very hard to find. This story of an apartment manager and one of her tenants falling in love is sweet without being cloying and real without pandering. There has been movement lately on Artist Rumiko Takahashi's other work for reissue. My hope is this series gets another chance to run and I will have the funds to get it at the time.
2. BATTLE ANGEL. This is known as Gunm over in Japan and is currently split between two publishers. An earlier 9 volume run that is difficult to find and an 18 plus retelling and expansion currently in print from Kodansha. The OAV made back in the 90s is still kind of in print. I hope that the earlier run gets a reprint. If James Cameron is to be believed he wants to make this as an adaptation after the next Avatar trilogy is finished. I will believe that when I see it.
3. CHUNGKING EXPRESS. The OOP dvd is fairly easy to find. The OOP Criterion Blu Ray or DVD is not. The latter has the best special features and the best visual quality. My brain hurts watching the price rise.
4. JOHN WOO'S THE KILLER. This thing has been out multiple times but I would like the long out of print Criterion version as visual quality of the video doesn't change much between the blu-ray and various dvd versions.
5. NODAME CANTABILE. This is an animated, live action and print franchise that I wish someone could pull together. 16 of the 25 manga volumes are here in English but were not finqished when Kodansha continued Del Rey's catalog. The live action version never had a stateside physical release. The anime is available streaming through Sony's Crackle service but only the first season. This romantic comedy doesn't have a chance because it features students at a prestigious music college and features classical music.
6. YOU'RE UNDER ARREST. This is a Manga and Animated Franchise ( and one live action feature) that needs to be collated. The animated film is way oop and the second release with better quality is quite expensive. While the later second and third seasons are readily available the first season is oop but has the distinction of two of its volumes being impossible to find for no earthly reason. 37-44 of Season 1 must be more hilarious than the others. The manga only has 2 of 22 volumes here in English and that depresses me. No stateside release of the live action film.
7. ROBOT CARNIVAL. This anthology film never received the DVD treatment here and the vhs copies are dinosaurs. I wish Japan would remaster a blu ray. I'd gladly import it as we share the same region code.
8. THE LEGEND OF BILLIE JEAN. For a long time this wasn't available but a print on demand DVD exists and the visual quality is murky at best. This is dying for a remastered blu ray or hell even just a remastered DVD.
9. SANCTUARY. This 9 or so volume manga is way out of print and was released flipped originally. I'd like to see a re-release unflipped. Marketing this would be tough as it is very much of its time and aimed at adults.
10. READ OR DIE. The best way to get all of this is through a long oop blu ray set that mimics the Japanese pricing structure. I've priced out what would happen if I tried to get the original domestic DVDs and depending on the secondary vendors you're not really saving that much money. I am saving my pennies now.
Looking over this list I am surprised to see that most of the print side on this list is from one company Viz media. Battle Angel's case is unique as the artist jumped publishers and Viz only prints things from its Japanese counterpart. Dark Horse holds You're Under Arrest and they tend to do a good job keeping their stuff in print but You're Under Arrest must have had especially cringe worthy numbers for sales to kill it after two volumes.
The overall problem with seeing any of this come back is no one outside of the publisher knows exact sales numbers and how that squares with the licensing and production costs. Maison Ikkoku has a chance to come back only because they are bringing back Ranma 1/2. The latter had a lot more popularity due to the broad comedy. MI has a devoted fan base hence the crazy prices for the manga and anime but that may not translate for another dip in the well.
A lot of these things only get one shot before going away forever. The only lesson learned is if you love it, support it and vote with your wallet.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)