Speech of the Week #37

Welcome everyone to a weekly column here on YDKS Movies entitled Speech of the Week! Every week, I will post a new scene from a movie that features a speech of some sort being given. After all, there are a lot of famous scenes in film where characters give an influential speech of some sort. Then again, there are also a lot of scenes where characters give a speech and it just comes off cheesy and lame. In this section, you will see both kinds. That's right, people, I'm giving you the good and bad of film speeches all wrapped up in one great big package. I hope you all enjoy.

This week's speech is terrible. It's basically the moment where, if Episode I: The Phantom Menace didn't kill Star Wars for you, this did. In this scene, Anakin kills a bunch of sand people because they enslave his mother and cause her death. After massacring them, Anakin gives a speech to Padme about how he should be all-powerful and how ruthless he was in killing them all.

This should be a powerful scene. It's a turning point in the story of Anakin Skywalker and his turn to the dark side of the Force. However, terrible on the nose writing by George Lucas and awful acting by Hayden Christensen make it laughable. My friends and I tend to quote this scene quite a bit. We like to say "I killed them all... but not just the men... but the women... and the children! They're like animals! I hate them!" in our most whiny / emo voice possible. 

This was the scene that made Anakin into an emo kid. Because of Lucas' writing and Christensen's performance, he just comes off as a whiny little bitch instead of a badass villain. Way to screw up one of the coolest villains of all time. 

The only thing that saves this scene from being completely unwatchable is the fact that he doesn't spend time whining about how much he hates sand. That's because he did this earlier in the movie. Seriously... how did this screenplay get approved?

The Wolfman Trailer Is A Lot of Fun

While everyone's been talking about the Avatar trailer, a much better trailer was also released today. The trailer for Joe Johnston's remake of The Wolfman is now online. Despite all the film's setbacks over the past year or so (the loss of original director Mark Romanek, arguments over the level of gore and the use of CGI, reshoots and pushed back release dates), I think that it looks like a really good time at the movies. I'm a huge fan of the original Universal Studios monsters and the The Wolfman was always one of my personal favorites.

For those who do not know, actor Benicio Del Toro has always dreamed of playing the Wolfman (something that was subtly brought into his Jackie Boy role in Sin City). Now that he's finally getting his chance, I'm excited to see it finally unfolding on the screen. From what I've heard, the screenplay by Seven and Sleepy Hollow scribe Andrew Kevin Walker is pretty much perfect (and surprisingly violent). It's nice to see that Johnston's visuals seem to be matching up nicely with the much lauded screenplay. The visuals in this trailer are pretty beautiful and really give the feel of an old, classic monster movie. I particularly loved the shot of the Wolfman stalking the girl in the fog-covered woods at the end. Really classy stuff.

It's also nice to see that the transformation scenes should be handled nicely. Special effects master Rick Baker (of An American Werewolf in London fame) did the practical effects in the film. The combination of Baker's practical effects and CGI seems to be handled in a nice, well-rounded manner. 

Overall, I'm excited for this movie. There are many things riding against it (all the set backs mentioned above) but I'll definitely be there to see it opening night. Let's just hope we're getting Rocketeer-era Joe Johnston and not the Joe Johnston that made Jurassic Park III. God, that movie sucked...

Watch the trailer below.

Source: Trailer Addict

Avatar Teaser Trailer is Meh

Today, the long-awaited Avatar teaser trailer was released on Apple. For those living under a rock, Avatar is James Cameron's return to filmmaking employing "revolutionary" CGI and a photorealistic 3-D alien world with an epic science fiction story. Basically, this thing has been shadowed in secrecy and has been supposed to changed the face of film forever.

Well, after looking at the teaser trailer, I don't think it's going to live up to the hype. First off, it must be stressed that this trailer is only avaliable online in 2-D. I have heard that seeing Avatar footage in full Digital 3D is a much more powerful experience. However, seeing it in 2D did not impress me much. In fact, a lot of the CGI looked completely unconvincing and a little cheesy.

The best way I can describe the trailer is that it feels like a mixture of Fern Gully and Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within. I'm not saying that this going to be a bad movie-- in fact, I am looking forward to watching it in full Digital 3D. I'm just saying that, after all the hype, I'm not sure if it's going to be what we've been promised for all of these months. Cameron said that the CGI was going to be so photorealistic that we would be convinced that humans and aliens were co-existing together. As far as I'm concerned, director Neil Blomkamp already pulled that off in his brilliant District 9.

Also, I kind of feel like furries are going to love this movie.... and man... I really hate furies.

Watch the trailer below and feel free to agree with me or argue that this is going to be as revolutionary as Cameron has been saying it was going to be.

*Update: Trailer now fixed*



Source: Trailer Addict

Speech of the Week #36

Welcome everyone to a weekly column here on YDKS Movies entitled Speech of the Week! Every week, I will post a new scene from a movie that features a speech of some sort being given. After all, there are a lot of famous scenes in film where characters give an influential speech of some sort. Then again, there are also a lot of scenes where characters give a speech and it just comes off cheesy and lame. In this section, you will see both kinds. That's right, people, I'm giving you the good and bad of film speeches all wrapped up in one great big package. I hope you all enjoy.

This week's speech comes from a movie I had real mixed emotions for: Be Kind Rewind. While I enjoyed the "sweded" films and certain sections of this movie, most of it feel flat for me. Its tone was all over the place and it was too weird for its own good. That and the theatrical trailer unfortunately gave all of the swedes and, since that was kind of the highlight of the film, most of the good stuff was already given away.

With that said, there were some sections of the film that kept me from completely disregarding it. One of these sections is the speech below. Here, three of the main characters are eating in a diner when someone brings up The Lion King. This sparks a diner-wide discussion about how awesome that movie was and how messed up it was for a children's film (the film's Shakespearian elements are brought up).

Even though I really liked all the creative swedes that they did of other movies, this scene might be my favorite part of Be Kind Rewind. Despite the fact that I've only seen this movie one time years ago, this scene still remains embedded in my mind. 

Unfortunately, I could only find a version of this scene that was recorded off of someone's computer screen. Therefore, the quality is pretty bad. Still, it's better than nothing. Watch the speech below. 

Villains Need Color Too

The following is something I wrote for my final in Analysis of Discourse my sophomore year of college. I re-wrote it recently for my Senior Seminar portfolio this past spring.

For our final, my teacher presented us with a variety of books, most of them children's books, to analyze and write an essay on in the course of two hours. I selected a children's coloring book focusing on Disney villains. 

Even though this essay is written on the analysis of a coloring book, the Disney villains are an important part of film history so I felt like it would be alright to post it on here. Plus, I make many references to other films and the concept of a film villain throughout the essay.

I wrote this essay really fast and just had fun with it. With that said, I still really enjoy reading it. I enjoyed it enough to put it in my Senior Seminar, which was supposed to demonstrate my strength and variety as a writer.

I hope you all enjoy the essay below.

*Please note: This essay was written in December of 2007. This was before Heath Ledger's death or The Dark Knight was released*

Villains Need Color Too

An Essay By

Wesley Caldwell

On the cover of Disney Villains: Giant Book to Color stands some of Disney’s most recognizable and colorful evil-doers: Captain Hook, Hades, Ursula, the Evil Queen, and Shere Khan. Each has menacing or suspicious looks on their faces, an act of evil not too far away. Underneath their images lies the print: “Diabolical Deeds!” What does this marketing say to the parents who buy this coloring book for their children? What is so marketable about famous villains from a variety of Disney classics? Deep down, the coloring book is appealing to the love and affinity people have for monsters and villains from cinema and famous literature, no matter how evil, tragic or flawed they are.

Everyone loves a good villain. But why do we? In most classical Disney stories, good is set against evil. Whether it is Aladdin against Jafar or Simba against Scar, these films and their stories usually set out to tell a tale of morality and how good overcomes evil. But what’s a good versus evil story without a good villain? Whether we like to admit it or not, we all love a good villain. We all love someone to hate. The best seem to be the ones that are the most colorful or sinister in nature. But these aren’t just limited to Disney movies. They can come from all kinds of cinema or literature, whether it’s the boogieman-like Michael Myers from Halloween, the hideous yet sympathetic Frankenstein monster, the giant, fire-breathing, Japanese rubber suit that is Godzilla, or even the psychotic hit man Chigur from the recent Coen Brother’s film No Country for Old Men. When the movie is over, the thing that usually stands out in our minds is the villain.

Exiting the theater, we’ll stand outside with our friends and we’ll say: “Yeah, the movie was great and all… but how cool was that villain?”

Most people get excited when a new villain is announced for a new comic book movie such as Spider-man 3 or the upcoming The Dark Knight. When it comes to these comic book movies, the villain is everything. Who’s playing him? What’s he going to look like? A buzz shot through the Internet like an out of control rocket when it was announced that fan favorite villain Venom would be appearing in Spider-man 3 last summer. As he was cast and pictures of him leaked online, fans critiqued every delicate aspect of the character. Was he too small? How big was his tongue? What was his voice going to sound like? How much screen time was he going to get? The same thing is happening now for The Dark Knight, which is the sequel to Christopher Nolan’s much acclaimed Batman Begins. As soon as Heath Ledger was announced as the infamous villain the Joker, people started critiquing. Was he going to be able to capture the essence of this iconic Batman villain? How was this going to work? It just shows how much the villain matters to people. In the end, the villain has to be perfect. He is just as important, if not more, than the good guy we’re supposed to be rooting for.
 

Villains are so important that they get their own coloring book. If I’m not mistaken, it probably sells even more than the book featuring the heroes on the cover. But should kids be coloring a book that is dedicated to famous Disney villains? Is there any harm in this?

As one goes through the book, they find a small section dedicated to each of the famous Disney villains. Each section follows the villain around as they do the advertised “diabolical deeds.” The section on Captain Hook follows him kidnap and capture Tiger Lilly, Wendy, and Tinker Bell. At the end of this section, he battles Peter Pan and then is left to be eaten by the giant, monstrous crocodile. In this section, the book follows the classical good versus evil standard, with the good guy triumphing over evil. As the kids color on, they will find their dastardly villain Hook paying for his crimes at the teeth of a vicious, hungry crocodile. Nothing wrong with that. If they are looking for a good message, it is all there for the picking. However, this is not the case for all the sections of villains. The section on Scar, the villain from The Lion King, has him intimidating a young Simba and taking up his evil reign over the land. In a disturbing last picture to color, Scar’s face takes up the page with an evil smile. The words under his image simply say: “It’s good to be king.” This section advocates evil triumphing over good, which is presented as weak and easily defeated. Of course, in the complete story of The Lion King, Simba goes away to grow strong and comes back to defeat Scar, retaining order in his kingdom. However, this is not presented in this way in the coloring book. This time, the bad guy wins.

In a strikingly different section, the story of Prince John, the villain of Robin Hood, is presented. Here, Prince John is shown being robbed by Robin Hood and unmasking the hero with a sword. The last two pictures to color show him demanding gold and sitting on a throne of wealth. There is no defeat from Robin Hood and no victory for him. However, something much more disturbing is presented. In the last two pictures, Prince John is presented as a slave to his own greed and wealth. In the end, it is he himself that is his own opponent. The last picture shows him sitting on his throne, a look of menace on his face as gold surrounds him. A fire blazes in the background. It is his fire of greed. It is still burning strong. The text under the picture states: “Gold and power— the sweet life for a sourpuss.” In the end, it is the gold that is the real villain.

So, in the end, what does this coloring book really say about villains in pop culture and the kids that buy it? According to the sections in the book, it is not always a certainty on who will be the victor. The good guy is not always going to win. However, it never shows the villain as the one in the right. Despite the villain sometimes winning, they are not necessarily portrayed as being happy or living productively. Just look at the case of Prince John. As portrayed in the coloring book, he just as a slave to his own greed. He is not happy. As it turns out, the villains have their own problems as well. Maybe this just adds to why we love them so much.
 

But we’re thinking too much aren’t we? The fact is this: villains will always be cool. No matter what they do, who beats them, or how much we hate them, they’ll always hold a place in our hearts. Kids will always want to color them in coloring books, draw them in class when they are supposed to be paying attention, or play them in video games. The bad guy represents something out of the ordinary. The villain can break all the rules and live outside of the law. There’s something deep down that is attractive about that. They usually represent everything we’re not.

So, the next time you are in Wal-Mart looking at coloring books, feel free to pick up your kids a coloring book dedicated to villains. They will probably think it’s cooler than the one dedicated to the heroes. Sure, the good guy may not always win in it but the kids probably are not looking for messages anyway. If they are, however, they will see that the villain does not really have it good either.

Just remember— villains need color too. After all, the more colorful they are, the more memorable they will be.

Watch Zombie Girl: The Movie For Free

Zombie Girl: The Movie is a documentary that I heard about a few months ago and one that I have been wanting to see ever since. It is currently being offered for free on Snag Films and Hulu through August 20th. I've embedded the Snag Films version below. 

Zombie Girl: The Movie follows 12-year-old Emily Hagins has she ambitiously attempts to make a feature length zombie film called Pathogen (which I just ordered online for 10 dollars) with the help of her sixth grader friends and her mother. The film follows Emily's struggles to make her first film at such a young age. Like most 12-year-olds, Emily is disorganized and has trouble communicating what she wants most of the time. The film shows many of the pitfalls of trying to make such a difficult film at such a young age and the growth and strain it puts on Emily's relationship with her mother.

I identified with this movie on various levels. For one, being an independent filmmaker myself, I really could identify with what Emily was going through a lot of the time. I've been involved in film shoots that just don't go right and it's kind of hard to savage it and keep your faith in what you are doing. I could also identify with the restlessness that comes up in a lot of the film shoots that go behind schedule (something that pretty much always happens in independent filmmaking). On an amusing side-note, I was happy to see that Emily was using the exact camera that I used to use for all of my movies before I got my 

Canon XH A1 1.67MP 3CCD High-Definition Camcorder. Emily, you need to invest in a new camcorder. That thing really isn't that great... especially when it comes to sound (a problem that she talks about a lot during the editing process).

Another important aspect of this film is that it addresses the phenomenon of independent digital filmmaking. In today's world, young people have access to all the tools you need to make movies. Digital filmmaking is much easier and accessible than making movies on film and, because of this, pretty much anyone with a bank account can become a filmmaker. The film ponders whether this is a good or bad thing. Now more people are able to make movies but, most of the time, the movies are pretty bad. Plus, making a movie on a digital level is not the same as making it on a traditional film level. Being a digital filmmaker myself, I can see both the good and bad sides of this issue. I definitely prefer the look of film and I think that filming digitally on a larger film scale is a bad idea (the digital look of Public Enemies just about killed that movie for me). However, because I do not have access to film and because I am comfortable with digital filmmaking, I will continue to make films digitally until I get more experienced or get into the position to start shooting on film. 

As for the point of a lot of people making bad movies on a digital level, I don't see that as necessarily a negative thing. Bad movies are made in Hollywood everyday and they cost a lot of money. I feel that the best way to learn how to make a film is just to go out and do it. I've made bad films before. I do not regret this. Every film I have made has been an incredible learning experience. If people can learn by getting a bad film out of their system in a format that can be relatively inexpensive, then they should do it. They will only become stronger filmmakers in the process.

One of the most important sections of the film explores the relationship between Emily and her mother. Her mother really goes all out to help Emily with the film, whether its making a fake head that is chopped off an actor with an axe or holding the boom mic. The two have a close bond that is formed because of their love for movies and it's really heartwarming to see this. However, the film also explores the many strains that are formed in their relationship due to the difficulties of making the movie. Emily and her mother have many different creative views on the film and this causes a lot of tension between the two. The long shoots and many delays that occur also really cause her mother to wear down, causing fights to break out between the two. 

Overall, I'd recommend that you all watch this movie, especially if you have any interest in digital independent filmmaking. I cannot tell you how identifiable this film was for me, even though Emily did have certain advantages that I didn't have when starting out (living in Austin, Texas where digital filmmaking has taken off; being friends with the guy who owns the Alamo Drafthouse and Harry Knowles). The fact that Emily is able to make a feature length zombie movie at the age of twelve is pretty astounding. While independent filmmaking is a lot of fun, it is a very exhausting process that is incredibly time consuming and that causes a lot of stress, tension and self-doubt. I didn't make my first film until I was 16 or 17. Even if Emily's first movie isn't a good one, she's gotten a good start, has learned a lot and has been a real inspiration to independent filmmakers like myself. She can only go up from here.

7/10

Be sure to watch Zombie Girl: The Movie soon if you plan on watching it. It will be taken off the Internet on August 20th. Watch the Snag Films version below. Watch it on Hulu here.

Goodbye, John

Out of all of the many celebrity deaths that have occurred this year, none have really upset me the way the death of John Hughes has. When his death was announced on August 6th, I was kind of in disbelief. It just seemed too weird to be true. I started to have the urge to do an update on here about it but it just didn't feel right at the time.

In a bizarre twist, I had been thinking about Hughes a lot that week before his death was announced. We had been filming scenes for Bags and Boards Episode IV a few days earlier and I had worked in a few lines of dialogue into the script about The Breakfast Club. Before we filmed the scene, we all sat around the store and talked about how much we loved that film and just how awesome it was, no matter how dated it had become over the years.

A month before that, a similar conversation had been sparked during the filming of a scene in Episode III when Steven does a fist pump similar to John Bender's iconic fist pump at the end of the aforementioned film. As we filmed the scene, my brother Austin (playing the character of Bruce) started to do a Breakfast Club inspired dance in the background of the shot (though you can't really make it out in the final cut). We all then started to sing Simple Minds' "Don't You (Forget About Me)" in between takes.

Also during the week of Hughes' death, I had been re-watching Donnie Darko for the first time in years. I watched the theatrical cut and then watched the Director's Cut with the commentary by Richard Kelly and Kevin Smith. In that commentary track, they talk about Hughes' influence (because there's obviously a lot of it in Donnie Darko with it's 1980's setting) and what it would be like for him to come out of retirement and just make one more movie like he used to. It was a stirring thought. What if Hughes did come out of retirement? Could he make movies like he used to?

After thinking about this, I realized that for some odd reason I didn't own Breakfast Club on DVD. I made a mental note that I needed to go out and buy it. That same day, I got online to see that Hughes had just suddenly passed away.

Even though I was not born until 1987, I grew up watching John Hughes movies because of my parents. Because of that, I associate Hughes and his films with my childhood and teenage years. I grew up on Weird Science, Sixteen Candles, The Breakfast Club, Ferris Bueller's Day Off, Planes, Trains and Automobiles, Uncle Buck and the Hughes produced / scribed Home Alone. These films are all a huge part of what I consider my life. Even though Hughes was not an incredibly stylistic or artistic director, he was able to do something that most directors cannot even think about doing. He captured a time period. For me and many others, John Hughes and his films represent the 1980's. They represent the 1980's style, look and emotions. His films are all special in their own way and I can honestly see myself watching them for the rest of my life.

A few days after the announcement of Hughes' death, I went out and finally purchased The Breakfast Club on DVD. It had been years since I had seen the movie. Re-watching it, I saw that the movie was in fact dated (though in a charming way) and, at times, melodramatic. With that said, I still think it's a pretty brilliant film. Out of all of Hughes' films, it's definitely his most personal and emotional. I was taken back by just how raw the film could be, even after all the years that had passed since it was made. The scene where most of the characters explain why they are in detention is one of the most emotionally charged scenes I've probably seen in a movie period. The entire film has energy to it that most films wish they could achieve. Everything feels legitimate and nothing feels forced. Even though there are moments of silliness that take away from the film at times, it still stands up today as just a great film experience.

When I exited the store today after a few hours of filming, I had a surprise waiting on me. My friend (and actor) Blossom had gone to run a few errands and, when he came back, he presented a Breakfast Club poster he had gotten for me. I'm big on collecting and framing film posters for my dorm room. I am proud to say that this poster will be displayed on my wall along with many other classic film posters.

I realize that this article has been very rambling and loose in its structure. But all of this is just how I feel right now about Hughes' death. It's really sad that he has had to go at such a young age, especially with the thought that he could have had a comeback to filmmaking that could have easy surpassed his valiant run in the 1980's. In the end, his death is truly tragic and I hate it but I'm happy that we will have his films forever and they will never go away.

In closing, I leave you all with my favorite scene from Planes, Trains and Automobiles. The brilliance of this scene is the fact that the F-word has not been uttered for the entire movie until this scene. After this scene passes, the F-word is not delivered again. This movie received an R-rating for this one scene alone. It could have easily been cut. In fact, if it had, the movie would have gotten a PG-13 rating and would have probably made more money. However, Hughes was ballsy and true to his vision and left it in there. And it works beautifully. I cannot help but admire the man for that.

Goobye, John. Thanks for all the movies.