Monthly Archives: July 2008

Vintage Sketchy Details

Catalog Rec: What Ever Happened to Baby Jane?

Leave a comment
It’s a cop out, ladies and gentleman. My brain is shot after putting out fires all day long at a talent show for grades 2-5. So, I’m stealing from my book for the entry.
Catalog Rec: What Ever Happened to Baby Jane
“One of the most significant yet ignored aspects of What Ever Happened to Baby Jane is the original score by Frank De Vol. The core essence of the music is Baby Jane’s trademark song, “I’ve Written a Letter to Daddy.” While the song itself appears in its original form more than once in the film, every aspect of the score is either a continuation or a variation of this number.
Each character in the film has [their] own theme music that defines [their] personality. “Blanche, the former Hollywood star, is accompanied by rich orchestrations of strings and winds to create the highly emotional, evocative style of melodrama based on the basic key and arrangement of “Letter.” As her situation becomes more desperate, the transitions become more erratic, the tempo increases, and the style matches the isolation she feels in her own home. “Baby Jane, slowly losing her grip on reality, is marked with highly percussive, heavy, sharp, repetitive patterns of demented vaudevillian vamping [that's a mouthful right there].
Every time she mimics Blanche or inflects a new torture upon her sister, the music swells up to a chilling crescendo of mental distress. “Finally, playing off Victor Buono’s sheer size and presence, De Vol creates a bumbling, bouncing comedic anthem tagging pianist Flagg with a natural naivety surrounding his involvement with the Hudson sisters.”
As the characters become more involved with each other, the score combines the three distinct themes and trademark song to create a disturbing, penetrating sense of unease. While traditional orchestral scoring is used to supplement onscreen events, De Vol composed music that truly helped create a psychologically disturbing film, with traces of the songs ingrained in the collective psyche of the viewers.”
So there you have it. Watch the film.

Labels: Catalog rec

Vintage Sketchy Details

DEAR/Contemporary: Best New Horror ed. Stephen Jones

Leave a comment
Quick entry today and apologies for the brevity. DEAR/Contemporary Rec: Best New Horror ed. by Stephen Jones If there is one annual literary event that never fails to entertain me, it’s the release of the yearly horror short story anthology Best New Horror, edited by Stephen Jones. This collection includes some of the old staples every year: Tannith????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? ??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????psychics???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? b e s t n e w h o r r o r e d i t e d b y s t e p h e n j o n e s ????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????’??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

Labels: ??????????????????????????

Music

Double Feature: Midnight Recs (Passing Strange Soundtrack)

Leave a comment
The new computer is wonderful, though I’m still adjusting to some of the stranger Linux commands (what the heck causes the t e x t t o a u t o m a t i c a l l y s p r e a d o u t l i k e t h i s ? and in a different font than I’m working in?) Two recs for today, cause I can’t pick just the one.
Midnight (Mini) Rec: X-Files: I Want To Believe
Yes, it’s been critically panned. And that’s because people didn’t have realistic expectations. It’s not an extension of the overlaying conspiracy story from the TV series; it’s a monster of the week extended to feature length. The twists are genuinely unpredictable (I didn’t realize the ending until one scene before the final twist was revealed), though there are plenty of clues scattered throughout to get the mind moving.
Sure, the argument of faith versus science is the same as it always was in the series, and even with the acknowledge few year absence, Mulder and Scully fall into the same exact roles.
And yes, the show has done psychics. And disappearances. And interactions with God. And even more of the plot than I’m willing to reveal.
To that I say: so what? The film works if you realize what you’re watching. It’s fan service, and better than most fan service tends to be (it’s no Serenity, but it’s certainly not as unbearable as the Sex in the City movie).
Midnight Rec: Passing Strange soundtrack
You might remember that really out there rock performance at the Tony Awards? The one that resulted in the front part of the audience reaction being a collective wtf? This one right here?

Yeah. That show was Passing Strange. It’s incredible. Mostly because the music is so good. The complete show (more or less, I’m not going back anytime soon to sit there with a stopwatch and count any cuts) is presented on the live release.

Stew’s storytelling musical sounds as good as it can outside of the theater. This blog is about the writing, so let’s get to it. The rhymes are great: natural, and unforced. It’s also very emotive without being sappy. And not just a sad song or a happy song; these songs run the gamut of emotion within a song. There’s sex, there’s drugs, there’s racism, there’s rage, and it feels right. A lesser writer would have made a mess of all Stew covers over the course of the show.

The Tony win was right: Stew wrote an incredible book for this show. The album does it justice, though nothing can top the live experience. And there was no chance it would last a long time. I’m shocked it went as long as it did.

Labels: Midnight Rec

Film

With Trepidation: Box Office Rec: The Dark Knight

Leave a comment
The new computer came yesterday. So far, so good. I just need to adjust to the tighter keyboard configuration and it will work out very well indeed. Nice clean Linux interface with Firefox already installed as the default web browser.
Understand that today’s post is as late as it is not because of computer issues, but because of my own reluctance to discuss the following film. It’s a recommendation, but not as strong as previous entries. Be warned: there will be flip flopping and some harsh words about the film.
Box Office Rec: The Dark Knight
My first bone of contention with the film is all of the hype surrounding Heath Ledger’s performance. He’s very good in the film. I can’t deny that. I just think he got screwed over by very flat characterization.
The Joker’s a crazy anarchist. That’s well established in the DC universe. I get it. He has no motivation other than to destroy society. And he does it with a permanent smile on his face. That’s not an excuse to write a one-dimensional character that works the same way in every scene.
He has a big unexpected entrance that gets a laugh.Then he tries to charm the other characters on screen and use a little logic. Then he messes with their minds. Then he fakes them out with the threat of an attack. Then he strikes. That’s every appearance on screen without exception. None.
The Joker’s character arc is actually a circle, and a poorly drawn one at that. Which is why Heath Ledger’s performance is that much more admirable. At least he tries to bring something different to every scene, even if every scene is the equivalent of a Batman Madlibs.
I wish in the most sincere way possible that Jonathan and Christopher Nolan could express mental illness in broader strokes than the following equation: mania + violence = mental instability = The Joker.
Now it sounds like I didn’t enjoy the film at all. I did. The action sequences were very well plotted and the Harvey Dent story was phenomenal. I almost wish so much emphasis hadn’t been put on the Joker so there could have been more exploration of Dent trying to take down all the organized crime in Gotham City.
The dog, cat, mouse, and cheese game between Dent, Gordon, Batman, and the mob was wonderfully entertaining. So were the glimpses into the fine line between Wayne Enterprises, the man, and the Batman. The references to Bruce Wayne’s wealth being used to acquire information for his night work was handled perfectly. Then watching the interactions with Dent, Gordon, and Rachel Dawes cooperating with Wayne Enterprises when only one knows the truth of Batman was as close as a superhero movie could ever get to a quiet drama of manners and society.
I know people are applauding Nolan’s direction, and a lot of the film is great. But there are things that make me question what he was thinking at all. For example, Maggie Gylenhaal is a powerhouse actress capable of fine nuance and making awful characters seem human. Whatever Nolan told her to do with Rachel Dawes made the character insufferable. I was hoping that every scene she had was her last because the Dawes came across as awkward and almost not real. Nolan might as well have pulled the split personality card ala Identity and claimed nothing in the Batman universe ever really happened with how poorly Dawes and other supporting characters came across.
I know I’m being critical, but that’s the problem with so much hype. There’s going to be a let down eventually. Much like recent crowd pleasers Juno and Little Miss Sunshine, inevitably, The Dark Knight will grow to be resented for its success over other films that don’t receive a huge press junket. Many of the people who claim it to be the best film ever made will be the most vocal critics when awards season starts up. They will be the ones to cry “J’accuse! It is only a superhero movie!”
I recommend seeing it for yourself. It’s far more of a movie than any superhero movie that came before, if that makes any sense. It’s bigger than the crime fighting. It’s a complete picture. Love it, like it, or hate it, at least Nolan realized he was making a film, not a comic book. The mediums often cross, but rarely meet in a way that does justice to both. The Dark Knight finally shows a proper match.

Labels: Box Office rec

Vintage Sketchy Details

DEAR Rec: Hell House

Leave a comment
New computer arrives Thursday, in time for the Midnight Rec on Saturday.
DEAR Rec: Hell House by Richard Matheson
First, a quick note on why I read this book. The IMDB horror board is attempting to start up a sort-of monthly book club through the site. The first selection was Hell House. The discussion begins on 25 July. Exact details are here. We’d be glad to have more participants than have already signed up. “I’d rather die than leave.”
Hell House is one of those novels that people familiar with the genre know of, but may know more about the film adaptation (The Legend of Hell House adapted by Matheson himself) than the actual book. Even more people are probably familiar with the similar novel The Haunting of Hill House by Shirley Jackson (released about 20 years earlier), which ostensibly functions in the same way. And even more people probably know those film adaptations (both called The Haunting, one in 1963 and one in 1999).
All of this is truly a shame. What Matheson accomplishes on the page is truly admirable. By 1971, even the gothic haunted house film was becoming passe, let alone the gothic-styled novel, a favorite form of authors in the 19th century. He tips his hat to the history of the haunting novel while innovating the format with the extreme content that was becoming more common place in modern horror films.
Take, for example, the simple action of lighting a candle that went out. Matheson manipulates the language in the same way Hell House manipulates its visitors: “He declined his candle to relight hers.” It feels old fashioned, almost like a lost turn of phrase from the height of the house in the 1910′s/20′s. The phrase also flows naturally in the text, as the house slowly wraps the new tenants in the present time, the 1970′s, under its control.
Sure, there are sloppy moments that don’t work as well: “Standing, she walked across the rug.” It’s great he specified that she didn’t sit and walk across the rug. Still, I’d rather see an author experiment with too much description done in artful ways than receive too few details.
For every clunker like that, there’s something truly beautiful: “Now he was emotionally crippled, a latter-day Samson, self-shorn of might.”
If I have one complaint about the novel, it’s my own fault for knowing too much horror writing that came afterwards. The final twist of the ending comes across as predictable today, old hat, passe. I can’t fault Matheson for it – he lays out everything you need to know to buy the shifts without throwing in too many extras. There are red herrings, dead ends, and seemingly dropped plot points that pop up at the least expected times. A modern reader might have difficulty reconciling the ending.
Acquire a copy however you can. I know my local library didn’t have a single novel by Matheson, though other libraries in the county did. It also appears the most recent edition of the book came out in 1999, though there’s a new illustrated adaptation. I can’t speak for how they handle the material at all. Try to find a copy, but be warned – the content is at times very graphic, both in violence and in sexuality. This is not a kind, gentle ghost story. It’s one that kicks you in the teeth after providing you with a free cleaning at the dentist’s office.

Labels: DEAR rec

Film

Updates & Midnight Rec: Hellboy II

Leave a comment
Update: Macgate 2008: Screw it. I ordered the new Asus eeepc yesterday instead of fixing it right away. By Thursday, I’ll be working off of Linux until the time I see fit to schedule an appointment (seriously? with no one in the store?) for a repair. And by repair, I mean they were willing to say that they have to re-install everything. So, in concept, I’ll have two new computers for the fall semester, what with all the upgrades they’re going to force on me.
Midnight Rec: Hellboy II: The Golden Army
I’ve written it before, and I’m sure I’ll have to write it again: someone had to write this thing. God bless them for the effort. There are fight scenes in this film that probably filled ten+ pages of screenplay because of everything involved. And no, I doubt massive fights taking place in rotating gears or over NYC streets with gigantic fantasy creatures were choreographed on the spot by a stunt fighter.
If you’re a fan of Hellboy and haven’t seen it, I’m very disappointed in you. Can’t the Dark Knight wait a couple days? Is Mamma Mia drawing you in that badly? Can you only buy one movie ticket a month and are waiting for X-Files: I Want to Believe? Ok, the last one’s a valid answer.
If you’re not a fan of Hellboy and haven’t seen it, don’t be afraid. Sure, the film will elude you at times with questions popping up like: How does the fish guy gain the ability to breathe outside of water by putting on a pair of contacts? There are even bigger logic questions than this but they are pretty major spoilers. They also make less sense.
If you can look past big jumps of logic (even for a superhero movie, though not quite as big as Hancock’s bizarre plot twist), it’s an enjoyable fantasy film.
Yes, a fantasy film. As in: an ancient war between magical creatures and humans resulted in the development of a golden army with no remorse and no mercy. The truce made them dormant, though the son of the king wishes to resurrect the force and reclaim the Earth as magical domain. Now that’s a solid fantasy plot right there.
Throw in bizarre creatures (like hungry tooth fairies), love stories, campy humor, and twins ala I Know Who Killed Me (that they are connected in thought and pain, not strippers) and you have a good time at the movies. Darn pretty, too.
If you liked Pan’s Labyrinth or del Toro’s less known work (if the latter applies, I’m disappointed that you haven’t seen this film), give it a shot. I think it’s worth it. And no, you don’t need to see the first one to understand the second. It couldn’t hurt, though.

Labels: Midnight Rec

Film

Computer Issues & Catalog Rec: Matilda

Leave a comment
Sorry this post is coming in, oh, about 12 hours late. My Mac died. Even after re-installing the OS and following all the tech support instructions, it won’t start up.
Thankfully, I noticed some major problems yesterday and backed everything up onto my external hard drive.
Unfortunately, it does mean that I lost some in-development website data, a short film I was working on, and some of my best music software.
Then, this would have been up sooner, but I pulled my calf going up the stairs to my room to fix my computer and no one in my house was responding to my calls (both vocal and cellular) for some assistance. After three hours on the floor, I crawled down the stairs head first, wrapped my leg, and hobbled out to buy supplies for the camp’s talent show in two weeks.
Catalog Rec:
Matilda I’m very much against adapting popular literature without care. What makes the print work so well rarely translates to the screen in a way that reflects the cause of success. Matilda is one of the exceptions in children’s literature adapted for film. Nicholas Kazan and Robin Swicord managed to capture the feel of the book without sticking 100% to what’s on the page.
The result was a film that acts as a perfect compliment to Roald Dahl’s beloved book. All the major highlights are there: the hammer throw, the chocolate cake, the newt in the pitcher, even Miss Honey’s cottage. Indeed, just following the major events of the film could have resulted in a palatable experience, bland without staying power.
The real strength of the film’s writing comes in the new material. Matilda’s family, in the book, is developed solely as the opposition that causes Matilda’s mental development. The film adds much more. Harry and Zinnia Wormwood come alive on screen with the new details.
Perhaps the best example is emphasizing Zinnia’s bingo addiction and desire to not be caught up with matter’s of family. The added focus on the government agents staking out Harry, resulting in growing paranoia, is strong as well. I think you can never go wrong with Matilda to kill some time. It will surely put a smile on your face and make you long for the simple pencil sketches of Dahl’s book.

Labels: Catalog rec

Vintage Sketchy Details

Announcements and DEAR Rec: Daisy Miller by Henry James

Leave a comment
1. I’m moving things around here a little bit. The Box Office Rec is too limiting, so I’m putting the same condition as the Contemporary Rec – last five years.
2. I strongly encourage you to join up with the website PaperBackSwap. Basically, you list 10 books in your collection you no longer want. This gives you two credits. Each credit is good for a free book listed by anyone else on the site. If someone wants one of your books, you pay for shipping (USPS media mail or first class) and earn another credit.
At this point, I’m getting all of my textbooks for the upcoming semester for cheap. Either view it as free books or $2.50/book, that’s cheap. There are quality conditions in place to ensure the books sent out are in good condition. If they’re not, the person doesn’t receive a credit.
SwapaDVD is the sister site for DVDs. There’s a CD one as well, though I question the legality of that system with the ease of copying CDs on most computers.
3. Thank you for your kind words and thoughts over the past week. My family appreciated it very much. Onto the meat of the matter.
DEAR Rec: Daisy Miller by Henry James
Some would argue that Daisy Miller is Henry James’ most well known and renowned work. If not that, then certainly The Portrait of a Lady or The Turn of the Screw (though that might be better known because of film adaptations).
Whatever the reason, the acclaim is justified. I’ll keep it short and simple today. Is it a comedy of manners? A sharp take on social status? A reflection of still standing prejudices amongst Americans and Europeans? Yes. Yes it is.
In just under 70 pages, James covers a significant amount of ground with great style and wit by focusing on impressions, not facts, of all that’s mentioned in the book. You can spare the hour or so it takes to read this. It’s always worth a read. Outside of some reference books I’m always clawing away at, Daisy Miller is perhaps the most read book in my collection. I don’t think you could ever go wrong with it.

Labels: announcement, DEAR rec