Corman's World: Exploits of a Hollywood Rebel

Film: Corman's World: Exploits of a Hollywood Rebel [2011, usa]
Where I saw it: Los Angeles @ LACMA
Who with: SJ
In appearance: Roger Corman, Julie Corman, Alex Stapleton, Elvis Mitchell
Rating: ****

In a few days I write about Blood Beach in a "Los Angeles Cinema" post and will talk about how B films from my youth were so comforting and fun for me to watch. Well, Roger Corman is the undisputed king of the B film in modern cinema [although, he doesn't really want that title]. While Corman has made a long career out of B movies [and you can even go down a letter or two with some of the budgets he's dealt with], he's also been involved in the early development of some of the most important names in film over the past few decades by giving them chances to make movies before anyone else will. Do the names Peter Bogdanovich, James Cameron, Francis Ford Coppola, Jonathan Demme, Ron Howard, John Sayles and Martin Scorsese mean anything to you? All of them were given film projects of varying budgets very, very early in their careers. Corman's involvement with young filmmakers has been dubbed the "Corman Film School" because so many people have worked with Corman.

Corman's World: Exploits of a Hollywood Rebel is a new documentary that chronicles Corman's career and legacy in his six decades in the movie business. Corman has been involved in so many films it is hard to keep track of the number. It is roughly 400 movies as director and producer with a couple of my favorites, Cockfighter [1974] and Death Race 2000 from 1975. Pretty much everything Corman has ever been involved in has involved sensationalist titles, lurid posters and adult subject matter. Corman films aren't subtle, that's for sure. They are marketed to a particular kind of film fan that wants sex, violence, revenge, murder and monsters--often all in the same film!

The documentary has most of the previously mentioned names as well as Corman fans and friends such as Jack Nicholson, Robert De Niro, Eli Roth and others as they recount what it was like to work on the Corman set. The early portions of Corman's World is pure fun, as we get a crash course in what it was like to make no-budget movies in the 1950s and 1960s. It looked like so much fun. The film moves into the 1970s when Corman's company, New World, unleashed primal exploitation cinema into the grindhouse and drive-in. Wow, a lot of those 1970s films I missed, but really need to watch now. Check out the trailer for 1972's The Hot Box to see what I'm talking about. This film has sex, lots of nudity, violence, shootouts, romance, revenge, torture, rape, and who knows what else, all in the trailer!

What's surprising about Corman is just how nice and professorial he comes across when he's talking about his films and life. He seems like the perfect gentleman, but he did produce some intense stuff over the years, so there must be a darker demon lurking beneath the surface. There's a rawness to the 1970s exploitation films that will never be re-created. Never. These filmmakers pushed the boundaries of the amount of sex, violence and cinematic mayhem they could film. In these years before mass-produced pornography, exploitation films titillated audiences who were interested in entertainment from the margins of society. Corman's New World was one of the key pervaders of this kind of cinema and Corman's World is the extremely entertaining documentary that looks at his career and legacy.

***Left to right: Roger Corman, Alex Stapleton, Julie Corman, Elvis Mitchell; Los Angeles, California @ LACMA; November 2011***

Beyond the Black Rainbow, Carre Blanc and Rampart at AFI Festival

The American Film Institute [AFI] film festival hit Los Angeles this past week and they have something that is about as populist as it comes for a film festival: free tickets! Yes, all screenings are absolutely free. I couldn't believe it when I found out about that fact. I just wish I'd have known about it earlier, as I waited too long to reserve some screenings and couldn't get into to a bunch of films I wanted to see due to other people already snatching up available tickets. Here's some short reviews of the films I did get to see--two out of the mainstream, visually extravagant science-fiction films and Rampart, a dirty cop in Los Angeles film starring Woody Harrelson that I didn't like so much.

Beyond the Black Rainbow. I read about this mind-bending, dark, science-fiction film from Canada and director Panos Cosmatos a few months ago. The trailer is an indecipherable series of outlandish visuals and that pretty much sums up the entire film. There's not much of a plot to Beyond the Black Rainbow. It's set in 1983, in what feels like an alternate and futuristic world at the same time. There's a mad doctor type of guy who is keeping a young woman in an empty, start room and interegating her repeatedly. The woman can't talk, but can transfer her thoughts via telepathy. That's as much plot as you are going to get from this puzzling, uber-art film exorcise. I actually enjoyed the movie as a pure form of science-fiction in design, style, photography and all-out weirdness. I also really loved the score from Sinoia Caves [Jeremy Schmidt from Black Mountain], a collection of washes, pulses and throbs using analogue synthesizers circa the late 1970s and early 1980s. Incredibly out of the mainstream, Beyond the Black Rainbow is one of the most gloriously weirded-out movies I've seen in a long while. The programmer who introduced the film described it accurately as "an injection of cinema into your eyeballs." Then, Cosmatos gave a brief, cryptic hint at the mindset it takes to get into the movie by saying, "I hope you are as screwed up in the head as you watch this as I was when I made it." Check out the amazing poster and the trailer below for evidence of that. I'm going to try and book this for a midnight screening at the Circle in March or April when the film makes it to theatres. Rating ***1/2

Carre Blanc. After watching Beyond the Black Rainbow the previous night at midnight, I thought I was done with the edgy, not-so-commercial filmmaking. I was wrong. Carre Blanc, a French film from director Jean-Babtiste Leonetti, is an intense, uncompromising vision of an urban, dystopian future society, where the population is controlled by authorities and all facets of society is regulated. Work, leisure, socializing and even who can and when to have children for the state [the earlier the better!] is all tightly monitored by the unseen level in power. Thankfully, there's more of a plot to Carre Blanc than in Beyond the Black Rainbow [not a knock against Beyond the Black Rainbow, it's just nice to have a little bit of plot some of the time], but it is still a quagmire to mentally wade through as it unfolds. This is not an easy film to watch, with its overt brutality punishing the characters [and the audience as well], but there is a surprising layer of dark humor running through the film. Uneasy laughter could be softly heard from the crowd, unsure of they should be laughing at such material. I happen to really love dystopian set literature or cinema, so Carre Blanc is right in my sweet-spot. I loved the unrelenting shades of grey in the film's photography, the empty, artificially lit concrete buildings and streets and the never-explained series of "games" that selected citizens might be forced to endure that could literally kill them. Carre Blanc is relentlessly bleak, stylish and directed with a raw intensity by Leonetti and it's not for everyone, but this is my kind of hopeless, Orwellian style film that I love. Trailer below if your interest is piqued. Rating ****

Rampart. Oren Moverman's first directorial effort was 2009's much lauded drama The Messenger. I liked that film as it looked into the emotional destruction endured by a pair of Army officers tasked with notifying a soldier's families that someone has been killed in action. It was a simple, direct, spare, no-frills production that rightfully concentrated on the power in the story and the quality of the acting [Woody Harrelson, Ben Foster]. In the short span between The Messenger and Rampart, it seems someone has been whispering in Moverman's ear telling him he needs to be a "real director" and drastically change the style he employed. Maybe I'm completely remembering The Messenger wrong? Well, if you want to watch a movie that is unbelievably over-directed, is Rampart ever the movie for you. Moverman takes every opportunity to use unnessecary camera movement, distracting lengthy shots of reflections and even obscuring the actor's faces during scenes. I couldn't believe what I was watching as Moverman's horrible choices were invading scene after scene after scene. It's too bad as Harrelson gives an epic performance of self-loathing as a rogue Los Angeles cop whose life is spinning out-of-control in a downward spiral. The rest of the cast [Robin Wright, Ned Beatty, Steve Buscemi, Sigourney Weaver and others] are all people I want to see act, not keep getting distracted by flashy direction by Moverman. The script, penned by crime writer James Ellroy and Moverman, also feels overly-written all too often. Had Rampart utilized a spare hand, letting the story and actors carry the weight, it would have been light years better. The best thing about watching this film was I got to see it in the amazing Grauman's Chinese Theatre. Wow. Built in 1927 and one of the most famous movie theatres in the world, it's a glorious place to see a film! Even watching Rampart in such a setting couldn't save it from being a near total dud.     Rating **

J. Edgar

Film: J. Edgar [2011, usa]
Where I saw it: Los Angeles @ LACMA
Who I saw it with: SJ
Rating: **
Rating for being in the presence of Mr. Clint Eastwood: *****!

If I were to list my three least favorite film genres, it would go something like this: action films, drug-related  films and the bio picture. I've kind of sworn off the drug movie as I have just had enough of seeing junkies and other addicts destroy their lives while they battle their weakness for whatever chemical they desire to have running through their veins. While I'll watch an action film every so often, I tend to avoid the vast majority of them, whether they are the endless releases connected to comic book heroes or straight up explosion fests. Michael Bay? I think you've heard me refer to him as the anti-christ of cinema at least once or twice. He's the devil!

J. Edgar is the sort of biographical history of a famous person that makes me loathe the genre so intensely. Directed by Clint Eastwood, starring Leonardo DiCaprio and attempting to tell five decades in the life of J. Edgar Hoover, the film is a bloated, lifeless, dull and unfocused story of Hoover's life. How can any two hour movie tell the story of a man such as Hoover without feeling like a cribbed-note exercise? As I often do in these films, I just kind of sit and wait for all the key moments that I know about to make it to the screen. When that happens, I check that off and wait for the next big moment that is surely coming. J. Edgar, like others in the biopic genre, is so weighed down by the formulaic parameters of having to tell the "greatest hits" of a person's life that its lost in a predictable quagmire that never surprises, moves or pulls the viewer in.

Another problem with a biopic such as J. Edgar is the fact that actors have to play a character with a wide-range of ages. DiCaprio plays Hoover in the 1920s AND 1970s and had to endure 5-7 hours in a make-up chair for the varying ages he was playing. Co-stars Arnie Hammer and Naomi Watts also underwent extensive make-up work to give them appropriate ages. The older the characters get, the more make-up seems to be applied to give them jowls, wrinkles, sun spots or other characteristics of old age. Unfortunately, with each layer to the actors' faces, it seems to limit their ability to talk and move their faces naturally. By the time Hoover is near death, DiCaprio's face is a mess of prosthetics that allows pretty much just his lips to move as he says his dialogue. The same can be said for Hammer's scenes as an old man. It's distracting to say the least.

The only thing that made up for the fact I didn't like this movie very much was the post-screening Q & A with Clint Eastwood, Leonardo DiCaprio, Arnie Hammer and screenwriter Dustin Lance Black. I could leave three of those folks, I was there to bask in the close proximity of Eastwood as he took the stage munching on a cookie picked up backstage. Eastwood is one of my all-time cinematic heroes, so even though I didn't like the film he just directed, I was happy to see the man from a fairly close distance. 81 years old and he's still a bad-ass.

Los Angeles Cinema: L.A. Story, The Cool School + Valley Girl

Ever since SJ and I decided to move to Los Angeles, we've decided to try watching movies set in and around the city we now live in. Considering Los Angeles is home to the movie industry, and has been since the late 1910s, there's going to be a lot of choices for us. What's cool about watching these movies is they run the genre gamut from drama to horror to comedy. Every kind of movie has been made using Los Angeles as a backdrop and we're going to drown ourselves in some locational method viewing. There's the obvious choices that we'll watch [Chinatown, Blade Runner, Pee Wee's Big Adventure] and the not-so-obvious [documentaries]. This is the first installation of a series of posts that I'm cleverly dubbing: Los Angeles Cinema. Very creative, I know. Check out a couple of trailers below for two of the films in this post and you might have to consult a glossary when you read my Valley Girl review as I do the review in "valspeak"! If you leave comments about Valley Girl, please do so in the appropriate vernacular for all to read.

L.A. Story. We might as well start off with a real Los Angeles charmer from renaissance man Steve Martin [comedian, novelist, playwright, actor, art collector and banjoist] penned this gentle satire set in the city he's lived in his entire live. Since Martin has such a long-term relationship with Los Angeles, he's got a lot of material to put in regarding the quirks of local culture and people. Martin mainly mines the 1980s fads that are natural targets [explosion of popularity of plastic surgery, nightmarish traffic on the freeways, never being on time, fashionable foods] while telling his story of a zany weatherman [Martin] who meets two opposite romantic partners. There's the buzzing with youthful energy in SanDeE* [Sarah Jessica Parker; yes, that's how she spells her name in another jibe at the locals] and the quirky, English appeal of a woman closer to his age in Sara [Victoria Tennant; Martin's wife off-screen from 1986-1994]. While L.A. Story has conventional romantic comedy roots, it has elements of fantasy [a talking electric road sign!] and is chock full of so much clever satire that the romance is used many times just to knock the way Los Angeles residents live. I loved the combination of elements and probably enjoyed the movie more this time than when I originally saw it in Tulsa in 1991. I'm going to have to re-watch a lot of these "Los Angeles Cinema" series and hope the second viewing of other films will be as rewarding as this. L.A. Story is a delightful and enchanting movie. Rating: ****

The Cool School. Los Angeles has always been in the shadow of New York City when it comes to art. New York, as it often does with other topics, likes to inflate its importance as the epicenter of the cultural world. "If you aren't an artist in New York, you can't be a real artist," that kind of mindset. Well, a group of artists in Los Angeles in the 1960s rejected that idea and stayed in their hometown and made the same sort of work that would have greatly increased their stature had they been in NYC. The Cool School is an entertaining documentary that looks into this all-male group of artists, the era they created in and the groundbreaking gallery [Ferus] that exhibited their work. I've missed out on knowing who any of these guys are, I'd only heard of one of them: Ed Ruscha. I know who he is because he's a fellow Oklahoman. The rest of them I hadn't the foggiest who they were, yet the documentary does a terrific job blending their life story, their style and their personality with the larger focus of the collective. There's also a lot of archival footage of Los Angeles in the 1950s through the 1960s that give a flavor of the city at the time. It's a much different place now than then and I wish I could have been around it when it was less compact, less crowded and much more of a cultural wasteland. Being from Oklahoma has instilled in me an attraction to places that are off the grid, forgotten, ignored or seen better days, and Los Angeles in the 1950s/1960s had pockets of the city that were definitely connected to those elements. It wasn't all glamour, glitter, reality shows, wealth and Hollywood stars on every street corner. It's probably not like that now, but perceptions of the city are kind of overwhelming. The Cool School is recommended for art fans and people who want to see a different side of Los Angeles portrayed than what bombards current popular culture. Rating: ****

Valley Girl. Now here's one I haven't seen since the mid 1980s that is about as good example of what "80s culture" is all about: valley girls! Released in 1983 and directed by Martha Coolidge, Valley Girl capitalizes on the craze at the time regarding "valley girl" slang known as [like totally awesome you know?]. It was the first Hollywood release to tap into the world of "valspeak" and is the quintessential movie for this sort of thing. Valley Girl is more than a document of "valley" culture though, it's a molotov cocktail of pure '80s culture that sent me back to moments of my youth that I could not believe I was witnessing. The hair, the clothes, the accessaries, the music, the slang! This movie could be viewed as a documentary it nails the early 1980s teenage lifestyle so completely. Like, seriously, you know? Here's my short review, in appropriate language for the "vals" who read CineRobot religiously.

So, like, Nicholas Cage [like, before he got his teeth done. His teeth used to be so grody! Gag me!] plays the totally bitchin' punk rocker "Randy." He's a gnarly dude with a boffin' bod who meets "Julie" [Deborah Foreman] and they start a romance despite the fact that she's from the valley and he's, like, from Hollywood. I'm so sure. Anyways...this is an epic romantic culture clash that rates right up there with what it would happen if, like, a Jew dated a Muslim in Jerusalem, like, during an intifada, for sure, you know? Totally. "Julie" is torn, there's her ex mang "Tommy" all her ditzy friends [like, whatever!] want her to get back together with to be tre Mr. and Mrs. Popularity, or the totally radical "Randy"? What's a girl to do, you know? Oh my God! So, like, how could "Julie" stay with "Tommy" when "Randy" is around? Like, barf me out! As if! I'm, like, freakin' out just thinking about it. Seriously, so this is a way cool movie that shows a certain segment of '80s culture with awesome tunes, bitchin' slang, tubular fashions and it will make you feel, like, awesome when it ends. For sure? Totally. Rating: ***1/2

Valley Girl trailer

The Cool School trailer

The Tingler

Film: The Tingler [1959, usa]
Where I saw it: Los Angeles @ Cinefamily
Who with: SJ
Rating for complete film experience: *****!

For film lovers, the name William Castle should conjure up visions of the B-movie era of the 1950s and 1960s when there were a glorious slew of low-budgeted films marketed toward the young-adult matinee audiences. I've been waiting to see a Castle movie the way they are meant to be seen for decades. I finally got to knock that small goal in life from my list of things I want to do before I die. Small victories! Castle was the master of what could be thought of as "gimmick" cinema. Interactive movie watching is in vogue right now with sing-a-longs, quote-a-thons and there's even the text-friendly program MUV Chat that let's the audience's texts appear on-screen as the film runs. Castle should be thought of as the godfather of interactive movie watching.

It helped Castle's Vincent Price starring The Tingler that it was being shown at Cinefamily on Halloween night. The house was stuffed with 175 people with at least half of them in costume which added to the festive atmosphere. I saw "Frank Booth" from Blue Velvet, lots of zombies, members of the SAMCRO motorcycle gang Sons of Anarchy, the Black Swan ballerina, a human beaver creature and an assortment of naughty costumes with [mostly] female flesh on display. A movie like The Tingler is going to be a lot more fun with a crowded theatre full of rambunctious people ready to have a good time, and this audience was ready to laugh, scream and enjoy the campiness of The Tingler.

The Tingler was one of Castle's early gimmick pictures known for being filmed in "Percepto". That pretty much means that the seats of the theatre were rigged with electric shocks that go off during specific moments of the film to really rile up the audience. It doesn't hurt, at least these at Cinefamily didn't. It's just a slight buzz of electricity vibrating from the seat. Had I not known it was going to come at some point and if I would have been a teenager in 1959, I can only imagine the sheer fun and delirium in the audience when the theatre is urged to scream together as the electric shocks are going off on the seat.

Some of Castle's other gimmicks he did to bring people to the theatre and whip them into a frenzy were taking out $1,000 life insurance policies from Lloyd's of London in case anyone died from watching the Macabre [1958]. He really ramped this one up as he'd have nurses in the lobby and even hearses outside the theatre to haul off the dead if someone died of fright during the screening. House on Haunted Hill [1959] was filmed in "Emergo," a glow-in-the-dark skeleton that floated over the audience on wires during key moments. "Illusion-O" made an appearance in 13 Ghosts [1960] and involved colored strips that could remove the ghosts if you were too frightened. 1961's Homicidal had Castle coming up with the "Coward's Corner," which was a series of public humiliations administered by bewildered theatre employees. Castle's movies might not have been actually "good" in the old-fashioned sense of the word, but you can not deny the fact that events such as these were tremendously fun.


At least I finally got to see a Castle movie, as I've longed dreamed of, and it was everything I expected and more. The Tingler is actually a very clever movie the way it engages the audience to pull them into the film with a twist that involves a projection booth, an on-screen movie theatre and theatre goers screaming their heads off. Cinefamily did this screening right by having an audience member go nuts during one key scene. The house lights come on as a old-school, dressed in white nurse comes running down the aisle to help this person to their feet so the film can start again. Castle was known for pulling stuff like this and encouraged it as the film goes black with a voice over urging the audience on in their shared frenzy.

The Tingler was such a fun experience, I wish that Cinefamily would try a few of Castle's other interactive films that I listed earlier. Check out Joe Dante's 1993 film Matinee if you want to see a semi-recent movie that uses Castle as inspiration as John Goodman plays a Castle-like film maker who has brought his film to Florida during the Cuban missile crisis. I had such a great time at this and loved the spirit of the event, I'm probably going to become a member of Cinefamily even though I'd need to go 2/3 times a month to screenings to make it worth it. They seem to have a bunch of interactive styled screenings and bring in a lot of guests and it's very close to where I live. Now, I'll have New Beverly and Cinefamily to tempt me regarding how I spend my time.

October movies

October was more like it after seeing only six films in September. That was one of the all-time low total months since I started tracking my movie watching in 1998. Throw in the fact I got to see some unique movies or stuff with the cast present--Martha Marcy May Marlene or Ghost Story [make-up artist Dick Smith in attendance]--and the month was a fun one. I ended the month on a good note by getting to see William Castle's 1959 horror film The Tingler in "percepto"! Next post will be about what that means if you don't know Castle or some of his gimmicks. And, I'm not even counting the live script read of The Breakfast Club that was my favorite thing I did all month...not counting the Orchestral Manoeuvres in the Dark concert in downtown Los Angeles obviously!

Point Blank---2010---france   ****
The Skin I Live In---2011---spain   ****
Copyright Criminals---2009---usa   ***1/2
Moneyball---2011---usa   ***1/2
Martha Marcy May Marlene---2011---usa   ***
Went the Day Well?---1942---england   ****
Strange Powers: Stephin Merritt and the Magnetic Fields---2010---usa   ***
Ides of March---2011---usa---***1/2 [$16?!]
The Falcon and the Snowman---1985---usa   ***
The Cool School---2007---usa   ***1/2
L.A. Story---1991---usa   ****
Ghost Story---1981---usa   ***
Straight Outta L.A.---2010---usa   **1/2
50/50---2011---usa   ****
The Tingler---1959---usa   ****

I am not Josh Peck

If you are familiar with the world of teen sitcoms you might have come across a show called Drake & Josh. It aired on Nickelodeon from 2004-2007, but can be seen in the re-run format somewhere I'm sure. It apparently was a popular little show although I've never had the pleasure of watching a single second of it. What brought it to my attention years ago is that the "Josh" in the title referred to a chubby teenage actor named Josh Peck. Same name as me, not me.

Having this other Josh Peck has never entered into my life, especially since that Josh Peck is more known for being a teen-actor who is now trying his hand in more serious fare after slimming down. So we have the same name, who cares. Since I've moved to Los Angeles though, evidently there is some kind of online celebrity information dispenser that has confused that Josh Peck with the Joshua Peck that I know as me. Maybe people see my name, number and city I reside in and think I am the other, famous Josh Peck who just happens to have a mobile phone listing? Then they call me.

The first time I got a phone call asking to speak to Josh Peck was before 7am. The number that came up on my phone was an international number and I thought it might by my good friend Scott who lives in London and will call me from time to time with the strange string of numbers from whatever location he is calling from. It wasn't Scott, although the person on the line seemed to be asking to speak to me.

"Is this Josh Peck?" A youthful voice with an slight accent asked me.
"Yes. Who is this?" I responded.
"This is Ocha. Is this Josh Peck?"
"Yes. What do you want?"

I loathe phone solicitors and am usually on the rude side to any stranger who phones me out of the blue until I find out this unknown person is not selling something.

"My name is Ocha and I am watching Drake & Josh and wanted to talk to you."
"Uhm, I'm not that Josh Peck. I didn't have anything to do with Drake & Josh. Sorry."
"Oh."

The phone line goes dead. I guess Ocha disconnected it with a sad obliteration of his dream to talk to the right Josh Peck, not some doppelganger with a drawl and brusque attitude at 6:50 in the morning.

Then I got another call wanting to speak to Josh Peck. It was a female voice this time and her name was Sandy. After she asked, "Is this really Josh Peck?" I realized we had another phone stalker at work and told her I was Josh Peck, just not the right Josh Peck. She too sounded a little crestfallen that she wasn't talking to the person she hoped to be talking to. Ocha and Sandy probably spent days mustering up the courage to call Josh Peck and talk to him and within a few seconds, those fantasies had been crushed.

A few minutes after I got off the phone with Sandy I realized I had an opportunity if and when this happens in the future. I have always loved pulling practical jokes and the opportunity to prank some random Josh Peck fan is impossible to pass up. Here's what will happen if I'm called again: I will pretend to be the Josh Peck that these people are calling and see what they have to say. I have read Josh Peck's Wikipedia file to familiarize myself with his career and background. If they ask why I sound different than on TV or in movies, I will say I'm preparing for a role and am trying to stay in character. You know, method acting. Our phone conversations might go into strange, unexpected places for the people calling me as Josh Peck might be getting up to some shenanigans that he might not be aware of.

Any suggestions of things I can tell the future callers? Any ideas for the movie I can claim to be working on? Any weird or off the wall topics that we should discuss? I'm hoping to get some more of these calls just to see if I can fool these fans of the other Josh Peck and entertain myself for a few minutes. Details of those conversations will be posted if it happens again.

Suspiria poster

We used to have an alternate poster for Circle Cinema's midnight movie series designed by Dan Fritschie, but we stopped doing those last year due to both my busyness to put them up and Dan's time to create them. This month we have a new take on Suspiria done by Aaron Mankekar. Suspiria is a 1977 Italian horror movie from director Dario Argento and will play at midnight at Circle Cinema on October 28 and 29.

$16 matinee?

Evidently that's the going rate to see a Sunday matinee at the Arclight Hollywood movie theatre in Los Angeles. Shocking, isn't it? I'd been to the Arclight before to see the  recently reviewed on CineRobot Attack the Block and The Skin I Live In and was ready to fork over the usual $13.50 to see a 4:20 screening of The Ides of March. I informed the Arclight employee that we needed two tickets and when I was told it was going to be $32 thought there was some kind of confusion on his part.

"I want two tickets," I attempted again.
"It's going to be $32 for two tickets," he blankly responded. I'm sure this befuddlement on my part was nothing new to this person regarding ticket prices on a Sunday.

Basic math skills destroyed by sticker shock as if I was facing my own personal kryptonite, I still wasn't able to figure out that it was going to be $16 a ticket to see a matinee of this movie. Five seconds later, my brain was able to register the simple division of 32/2 = 16. Understanding the math didn't mean I liked what I was hearing.

"$16 a ticket? You have got to be kidding me. I paid $13.50 last time here. Do you not have a matinee price on weekends?"
"On Sundays, every screening is $16."

After a short debate with Sarah, we got two tickets. I'm not a cheap person and even though $13.50 is crazy high for a movie, I still would have paid it. But, $16 for a Sunday matinee? That is sheer lunacy. Did I mention the fact that we were going to have to pay $3 in parking costs? So, our 100 minute screening of The Ides of March cost us $35. Sarah wanted to get something at the concession stand, but resisted due to the fact that the tiniest purchase would have vaulted us over the $40 mark.

Among many things wrong with paying $16 to see a movie, at the forefront is the fact that there is a lot of pressure on that film to actually be good. Every five minutes during The Ides of March, I flashed back to the number of "16" in my head and began to think, "Is this movie worth $16?" That can't be a wise marketing element to the movie going experience and is just one more thing that the movie industry is doing wrong. If I was going to one movie every couple of months, I'd pony up the $16 whilst grousing to anyone within earshot of how I [or rather we, the movie going public] was being unfairly gouged, but I go to a lot of movies and the $16 per ticket amount that might require the selling of my plasma if I was to keep up my current pace of paying to see films in a theatre. I happen to be unemployed at the moment--I can't afford that! I guess I won't be seeing that many new releases with the $13.50 price being the lowest on offering in Los Angeles for a new release.

More Netflix and $7 double feature New Beverly screenings for me it looks like. It just doesn't make great business sense to me. You'd think the theatres [and the movie industry as a whole] would want as many repeat viewers to see a multitude of movies as possible, not feel cheated by paying an exorbitant price for a Sunday matinee. What makes more money? Ten screenings at $12 or five screenings at $16? Even my woeful basic math tells me that 120>80 every time. Granted, those numbers are just pulled out of the air by me, but there is no way I'll be going back to the Arclight and paying $16. They just lost a customer and that means they are losing money instead of making the large amount I might have paid to see films there with fair pricing.

To end this distressing post on a much brighter, happier place--here's a photo of me walking Mozi in our Los Angeles neighborhood! I think she's lost a couple of pounds due to the walks and the going up and down the stairs to the second floor apartment.

Live reading of Breakfast Club screenplay

Well, this was an unexpected treat. Director Jason Reitman [Juno, Up in the Air, Thank You for Smoking] has come up with the idea of live readings of classic scripts with alternate castings. Genius. Pure genius. The first incarnation of this new series at LACMA? The Breakfast Club. The cast? J.K. Simmons, Patton Oswalt, Jennifer Garner, Aaron Paul, Mindy Kaling, James Van Der Beek and Michael Chiklis. Even though I sat toward the back, I was lucky to score tickets to experience a beloved film from my youth in a completely fresh and interesting new way.

It's no secret I have great admiration for John Hughes. It's hard for anyone who didn't come of age during the 1980s to not be permanently attached to multiple films he did. I wrote a small post when Hughes died here. I'm shocked that Hollywood hasn't pilfered the man's creative ashes in watered down, piece of sh*t cash-in remakes for the younger set, which kind of gives me reason to worry after watching the live read. Slimy Hollywood producers might have had a lightning bolt moment as the crowd lapped up the classic dialogue performed on stage with this alternate cast: "Hey, let's revisit The Breakfast Club and make it up to date for kids in 2012." Ugh. No, thank you.

I find the current onslaught of remakes disgusting. I've written about it before and will likely write about it in the future. But, the idea of a live, on-stage reading of a script is an exciting idea that combines elements of low-key theatre and the actual movie itself. The Breakfast Club script is so completely self-contained [most of the action takes place in a library with five major characters], that it is a great choice for this kind of exorcise. Plus, it's a wonderful script from Hughes, full of anger, humor, awkwardness and a heavy dose of '80s slang.

Among the actors who I felt did the best with the material were Patton Oswalt and Aaron Paul. I was kind of surprised by Oswalt as he's not someone that I've been a huge fan of, but he completely got the tender pain of the "geek" character and even executed a perfectly timed spit-take [I'm a huge lover of the old-school spit-take!] that seemed to be unplanned and unexpected by the rest of the cast. Paul, playing the flashiest role in the script as "Bender" [Judd Nelson's role in the original film] also delivered an edgy performance that combined the appropriate raging while literally slouching in his chair when apathy and disgust were needed.

There are five planned readings in this program curated by Reitman. I don't know what November's film will be, but I'll be in the theatre and we already have our tickets. I have heard a rumor of one of the hopefuls and if true, I might be more excited to see this one than I was to see The Breakfast Club. I don't want to spoil it in case it doesn't come to fruition, but it's another movie that is in my all-time top 100.

***Photo from left to right: Jason Reitman, JK Simmons, Patton Oswalt, Jennifer Garner, Aaron Paul, Mindy Kaling and James Van Der Beek. October 2011 @ LACMA, Los Angeles, California.


***Image credit: Vivien Killiles/Film Independent/WireImage.com

Went the Day Well?

Film: Went the Day Well? [1942, england]
Where I saw it: Los Angeles at New Beverly
Who with: loner style
Rating: ****
Nazi killing gratification: ****1/2

My graduation thesis at the University of Oklahoma was a forty-page paper on the use of propaganda in Soviet Union cinema during the 1930s. I watched a bunch of highly slanted films that portrayed life in the Soviet Union as the best place on earth. I also watched a lot of propaganda films from WWII era Hollywood as the studios tried to up the sense of duty by inspiring the home front to join, work and support the war effort that existed on such an epic scale. An interesting thing about the American propaganda films during the war was how friendly they were regarding the Soviet Union. That would soon change when the war ended as comrades become the enemy.

Despite my binge in propaganda cinema from this era more than a decade ago, I'd never heard of the 1942 English film Went the Day Well? from director Alberto Cavalcanti. What a treasure this movie is! Went the Day Well? is one of the more rousing examples of propaganda cinema that you are likely to see due to the fact that it was filmed in England during an actual war. The plot of Went the Day Well? is something that the English people were truly worried about as a possibility: Germans invading. Although the threat of German invasion was lessoning in 1942, Nazi spies in villages or troops crossing the channel was still very much in the public consciousness. This adds a tremendous amount of heft to the unique viewpoint of Went the Day Well?.

Based on a story by Graham Greene, a group of English troops arrive in a sleepy village with claims they are training. They are lying. These are German soldiers who will knock out the communication for an upcoming larger invasion by more German troops. At first, the locals offer up their bedrooms, kitchens and give the soldiers every hospitality. When the Germans decide to make their true identity known, they herd the locals into a church at gun point and are brutal to anyone who attempts to escape or fight back. No one is safe from the evil Germans--not elderly ministers, not women and not children.

Of course, the people don't just sit in the church and do nothing. The entire town, men, women, elderly and children, rise up against the bastard Nazis and fight back with relish and deadly force. To see the English band together and take up arms is thrilling, exciting and very effective and propaganda at its finest. I can only imagine what it was like to see Went the Day Well? in an English movie theatre in 1942 as the townsfolk start killing the Germans in their midst. There were cheers at the New Beverly and we're nearly seventy years removed from the film's release.

The most surprising thing about Cavalcanti's film is just how it relishes the violence and extremity of both the German and English actions. Yes, the combat scenes are dated judged against today's standards, but the sheer evil of the Germans [they kill or will kill anyone in town without pause] and the pleasure the English take in striking back is a joy to witness. To see an elderly woman use a pick ax with the ferocious intention of killing a man without thought is a primal thing to witness. There's plenty of bayoneting, shooting, knifing, strangling and other on-screen deaths. Awesome stuff.

Went the Day Well? works not only a propaganda film about home-front resistance, it is a wonderful WWII movie that shows English paranoia manifesting in a cheeky, dark, violent little movie. There's a tinge of black comedy running throughout and the movie is just as subversive as it is rousing to get the English blood boiling against the no-good Germans.  Highly recommended.

Went the Day Well? trailer

Martha Marcy May Marlene

Film: Martha Marcy May Marlene [2011, usa]
Where I saw it: Los Angeles @ LACMA
Who with: SJ
Rating: ***; SJ ?
Rating for post-screening Q & A: ****

This is why I was eager to move to Los Angeles right here. Free tickets [SJ works at LACMA now] to see an early screening of Martha Marcy May Marlene with the writer/director and a big chunk of the cast for a post-screening Q & A. Even if the movie didn't blow the doors off, just being able to do this kind of thing in the future really excites me. Between LACMA and some other places around town, I hope to see and hear a lot of people talk about their films and others. A cool thing for people who regularly read CineRobot is since I'm in LA, I might have early reviews of films just out that haven't gone wide yet, like Martha Marcy May Marlene and The Skin I Live In from a couple of days ago.

I'm not too fond of the title of this movie as it's a mouthful and a tongue-twister. Martha Marcy May Marlene made me think this was a drama about a disturbed young woman with multiple personalities when I saw the trailer. It's not that at all. It's a drama all right, but it's about a woman who gets entangled in sort of a rural cult. John Hawkes plays "Patrick," the charismatic leader of the cult,  but in the post-screening Q & A, he pointed out that in his mind this wasn't a "cult" but a "community." I can see his rational for thinking that as an actor, but this was a cult, with people doing things against their will for the benefit of their leader to risk being ostracized in their new "family."

Elizabeth Olsen [yes, sister of the Olsen twins. I almost feel sorry for her since that is going to get mentioned in every single review of this movie. Including CineRobot!] plays the multiple-named title character who gets taken in by "Patrick" and his group of young followers. Very early in the film, she runs away through the woods to escape the group and is picked up by her older sister [Sarah Paulson] and the movie begins to jump back and forth between how "Martha" got into the cult, her day-to-day activities there and then her present life with sister, trying to forget all the psychological damage that was done to her from the cult.

Martha Marcy May Marlene is a mixed bag and a missed opportunity for something pretty good from first time director Sean Durkin. The story is powerful, the acting is excellent and the film has a strange quiet intensity to it that is to be applauded. I absolutely hated the disjointed non-linear aspect of how the film was edited between past and present. It felt clunky and even a bit of a gimmick to manipulate the audience's perceptions and feelings toward the characters. Less flashbacks would have helped, or just longer periods of time between the flashbacks might have increased my feelings for it greatly.

It's a shame that I didn't like this more as I have a long-held interest in cults from when I was nine year's old and Jim Jones' Peoples Temple mass suicide dominated the news in 1978. I was completely transfixed by the macabre story of these people in Guyana, Jones and the 1980 Powers Boothe starring TV movie Guyana Tragedy. I watched every second of that movie and sought out anything else I could find about cults. In the 1990s I was flying home from Seattle and had just purchased a copy of Time or Newsweek from 1978 that was an entire issue dedicated to the mass suicide. If you want to be left alone on a cross-country flight, whip out a cult-centric magazine and read it transfixed before and during the flight. Needless to say, no one spoke to me. Not sure I'd recommend that tactic in the post 9/11 world as you might get pulled aside by security after they notice your keen interest in doomsday death cults, ha.

I've actually put down "cult leader" on forms from time to time when someone is wanting to know about my private business when I've felt they didn't need to know. I might as well make a weird confession: I think I'd make a really good cult leader! I'd merge my fire and brimstone Southern Baptist roots with a luddite message that would definitely go the end times route. I don't see the point being a good cult leader if you aren't going to preach a message of the world ending.

Back to the movie. I was the prime audience member for Martha Marcy May Marlene due to my interest in cults. I did enjoy the scenes of "Martha" in the cult and the fact that it was just kind of a normal group, isolated from society, cut-off from the world, yet living this warped existence. The film would have been so much more powerful had it been primarily in one time period with less flashbacks though. Worth seeing and I'm curious to see what Dirkin does next, but a missed opportunity to deliver a scary bit of realism concerning what it would be like to live in a cult.

***Left to right in photo: Sean Dirkin, Elizabeth Olsen, Sarah Paulson and John Hawkes***

The Skin I Live In

Film: The Skin I Live In [2011, spain]
Where I saw it: Los Angeles @ Arclight Cinema
Who with: loner style
Rating: ****
Rating for Pedro Almodovar's bad-assness at age 62: *****!
Rating for paying $13.50 for a matinee: *

You really have to hand it to Spanish auteur Pedro Almodovar. He's been making feature length movies since the late 1970s and recently turned 62, yet, he's a complete and utter bad-ass who is still unleashing his vision on the audience, no matter how prickly the subject matter might be. His latest, The Skin I Live In, is an example of his bold, brave and twisted viewpoint. This movie is not one that the masses will probably enjoy. For example, if this played in my recently departed [and beloved] home state of Oklahoma and people had no clue they were watching an Almodovar movie, I bet that there would be much derision and hostility in the audience. It would be palpable in that darkened theatre. Heck, I sensed some of that at the screening I saw here in Los Angeles and these big-city folks are supposed to less prone to shock and controversy. But, people who love the craft of moviemaking and want to see something a little dangerous, a little bit out of bounds and unexpected, you will greatly enjoy The Skin I Live In as Almodovar delivers another intoxicating dose of Spanish cinema that will leave a strange nervousness in your stomach when the credits roll. And, yes, that's a good thing.

Antonio Banderas enters the world of Almodovar for the first time since 1990's Tie Me Up and Tie Me Down [which was one of the first ever nationally released NC-17 films] and there's an odd parallel between these two films for Banderas. In both movies, he plays a man who kidnaps someone. Yes, for entirely different reasons [love v. revenge] but a kidnapping is crucial to both plots. In The Skin I Live In Banderas plays Roberto, a prominent plastic surgeon who is dealing with the death of family members while trying to create a new kind of skin that will be superior than normal skin. For his experiments, he has imprisoned Vera [Elena Anaya, who was also in the recently reviewed Point Blank] as she lays around in a lush setting, but the doors and windows are still locked, it's still a prison for her. The film jumps back to tell Vera's story as it merges with Robert's painful memories of wife/daughter and just how we got to the present with this person held in the room. Vera's story is where the film gets kind of kinky and twisted.

The Skin I Live In works as a kind of low-burn "Frankensteinian" inspired horror film, but Almodovar is making some bigger statements with this one. The question of self-identity and the malleable form of the human body in this 21st century world of surgical procedures are two big issues for The Skin I Live In. Look at the poster. The two leads have a rubberized, overly processed look that almost makes them seem like artificial creations. That's intentional. Roberto is the "madman" looking to create the perfect woman by every sort of method that goes against the accepted ethical laws of science. He doesn't care, completely driven by his obsession that could cost him his career and possibly his life.

The Skin I Live In is one that will stick with you for a few days. I keep thinking about it in weird moments, such as when I'm doing the dishes or waiting at a stop light. It's one of those movies that invades your thoughts long after it is over. As I said in the introduction, that's a good thing. With The Skin I Live In, Pedro Almodovar proves once again that he's one of the most interesting, provocative directors working in cinema. And, luckily for us as movie lovers, he shows absolutely no sign of watering down his style or message. He's going to keep making "Almodovar" films, another very good thing in this climate of safe, mainstream moviemaking.

Movie tickets #25

Point Blank

Film: Point Blank [2010, france]
Where I saw it: Los Angeles at New Beverly
Who with: loner style
Rating: ****
Rating for watching movies at New Beverly with no talking/texting: a million stars!

I'm finally off the zero movies in Los Angeles mark. It took a recent French thriller and a theatre only a ten minute walk from my apartment to get me out of my drought, but I'm glad I ventured to the theatre as Point Blank is an adrenaline rush that doesn't let off the gas pedal the entire movie. In 2007, one of my favorites was another French thriller called Tell No One, and a few years later, the French have nailed this genre again with the gripping, edge of your seat Point Blank. It's not quite on the level that Tell No One is, but it's a fun blast of entertainment, offering up twists, chases, shootouts and violence. Everything you want in a good thriller.

The film has a simple premise that gets the full-throttle treatment form director Fred Caveye. A nurse witnesses an attempt on an unknown man's life during the night, he foils the attempt, but draws himself and his pregnant wife into the criminal lair. Wife gets kidnapped and the nurse must begin to desperately do what the kidnappers ask him to do if he wants to see his wife again. As he gets deeper into the mix of danger, violence and lack of knowledge of if his wife is alive, he gets more and more desperate and will cross the line if that's what it takes to rescue his wife.


Point Blank's opening seconds start with a chase through the darkened Parisian streets. This is a sign of what is to come as there are a lot of good chase scenes throughout the film. Don't expect any vehicle chases though, these are strictly of the variety of men running from pursuers through buildings, narrow alleys, hospitals and other urban environments. Like a lot of thrillers, there are some moments in Point Blank when you think--what?--as plot holes begin to appear in the story, but this is a genre that can survive plot holes if it is riveting enough. Point Blank is certainly that as I watched it with a quickened pulse. Maybe it was so effective due to the fact I haven't watched any movies lately? No, it is a good movie and recommended if you like gritty thrillers. I nearly posted the trailer, but thought, like most trailers, it gives away too much of the story. To not spoil the twists, Point Blank is best appreciated cold.

***Footnote. This is the second movie I've watched at New Beverly Cinema and in two screenings let me tell you how many times I saw someone text or heard someone talk during the movie: zero. That's right. Two entire films with neither of those abominations to the theatre going experience. How absolutely refreshing! 

Movie watching drought

There's a major drought in certain parts of the country--Oklahoma for one. So, it makes sense that my move to the west coast has created my own kind of drought when it comes to watching movies. I was going to do my usual post where I list all the films I've seen in the month of September, but when I consulted Kinetoscope realized quickly I'd seen very few movies. September was a frantic month that saw me coming to Los Angeles looking for a place to live, returning to Tulsa to deal with selling my house, a bunch of small/big projects related to work or finishing Dead Cinema or just boxing up everything we owned worth putting into the Pod. Two of my usual standbys, books and movies, took kind of a back seat to something called "life."

I haven't watched a movie in nearly two weeks! I know, highly unusual behavior for me. I've got to get my self back in order quick. The last thing I saw was a midnight movie at Circle on September 28. That was kind of fun, a text-friendly screening of Napoleon Dynamite where the audience could text their hearts out and they would appear on the screen. It was Oklahoma's first pro-texting screening. Basically, it was history being made in a small, small way. I saw only six films in September and one of those I saw two times [Drive]. That's actually one of my favorites for 2011 by the way. Loved it.

We're close to being completely unpacked and settling in now, so, my drought will not last much longer. I've got a few screenings at New Beverly and LACMA in the calendar as well as trying to catch up with some new releases. Although I will be dealing with "Welcome to LA" items such as a parking ticket on the FIRST day we got here! SJ got one too so lesson learned: do not screw with these Los Angeles meter maids as they will dish out a $68 dollar ticket.

Giving Jon Voight directions

I'm back. Finally. We've been in Los Angeles a week now but haven't been able to do any posts due to the fact that our "Pods" shipment was four days late. What a disaster. We were staying in a completely empty apartment for three full days. Toss in the fact the city screwed up our gas order and that means we had no hot water either. Pretty miserable. But, onward! Here's my first post as a Los Angeles resident and my first encounter with a bonafide celebrity: Jon Voight!

We live near the Farmer's Market and spent a lot of time there the first few days since we couldn't cook food at our apartment. There's lots of small restaurants in there and has kind of a retro '50s vibe to me. I've already found a couple of places I really like--for example, Gill's Old Fashioned Ice Cream in the photo to the right. The guy makes a mean limeade! I was making my way to the exit in the early evening when this tall, older man walks right up to me and asks me, "Do you know where the Wood Ranch BBQ is?"

I kind of pride myself on giving strangers directions no matter what city I'm in and whether I really know what I'm talking about. I've dosed out directions to locations I wasn't entirely sure were accurate on more than one occasion. This time there was added pressure due to the fact I recognized the lost man in front of me as Mr. Jon Voight, best known for roles in Midnight Cowboy or Deliverance or that particular Seinfeld episode about George's used car or for being Angelina Jolie's father. I paused for a few seconds thinking of where I'd seen the Wood Ranch.

 "I'm pretty sure I just saw it over in that direction," I told Voight and gave a vague point over my shoulder that might or might not be the correct area I saw it. I wanted to finish my sentence but was brusquely cut-off by Voight.

"I guess you don't really no where it is then?" He challenged me in kind of a curt tone.

Uhm, not really, but neither do you, I thought to myself a few minutes after the exchange. I couldn't waver on where I thought it was after Voight's confrontational tone and kept on talking to him.

"I'm pretty sure, but ask this man right here [referring to the guy selling keys at a kiosk who I happened to be talking to as he cut my keys] as he probably knows more certainly than I do."

Voight asked him and got the right directions. I was happy to find out it was in the exact spot I had told Voight it was at! Voight left to go have dinner and I was left with the key-cutter at his stall.

"Do you know who that was?" I asked him.
"No. Who was it?"
"That was Jon Voight. He's a famous actor, big in the 1970s. I bet you know who his daughter is though. Angelina Jolie."
"Oh, yes. I know Angelina Jolie," he replied.