Actually, the picture below may very well perfect our Bad Hollywood Idea trifecta. Who is it? What’s it from?

Check back over the weekend for the answers…

Following up on yesterday’s Bad Hollywood Idea comes word of the Coen Brothers’ next project: a remake of the John Wayne classic True Grit. According to Cinematical:

According to Variety, the Coen Bros aren’t aiming for a traditional remake — they want to return to the original Charles Portis novel, and make a more faithful adaptation. Their version will be told from Mattie’s point of view, as the original novel is, and keep Cogburn as a side player. The Coens will undoubtedly amp up the Biblical tone and include the darker elements … like what really happens to her after the snakebite.

Plans to remake True Grit have apparently been in the works for some time — it originally begun at DreamWorks, but was left behind when Steven Spielberg and his shingle split with Paramount. Undaunted by the task, the Coens are tackling it before their adaptation of Michael Chabon’s The Yiddish Policeman’s Union.

Well, I suppose however you feel about it, you’ve gotta admit the brothers have grit… (Yeah, DS, I went there..)

Here it is, the first trailer for the Spike Jonez adaptation of Maurice Sendak’s Where the Wild Things Are:

Thots?

Not a lot of time for a big post at the moment, but I thought I’d give ya these teaser pics that have come across the ol’ moose desk the past couple of days… What’re they from? I’ll give ya a hint, Easter’s looking busier and busier… Full explanations (or at least as full as I know at the moment) tomorrow…

I’ve written often of my fondness for the card sharp Ricky Jay. Another all time favorite is Bill Malone - how often do you get to see someone use an entire deck of cards in one trick? Well you will today, as Malone tell the story of Sam the Bellhop:

Ok, so a couple of weeks ago I teased you guys with a short clip called “The Doom of Dracula” (if you missed it or forgot, you can check it out here) and said it was an example of this week’s topic (well, ok, at the time I’d planned to do it sooner, but, hey, as someone once said, “life happens”… anyway…). So where did the clip come from? Simply put, it’s an example of the output of Castle Films.

“Yeah, ok,” you say, “but what’s Castle Films?”

Well, to answer that we once again have to travel back to the pre-dinosaur days of the 1950’s and 60’s. Once again, we’re talking about a time without hulu, without redbox, without even netflix or blockbuster or dvd’s or even vcr’s. We’re talking about a time with 3 or 4 channels on the tv and if you wanted to see a particular movie you just had to wait and hope that it would eventually come on tv or maybe be re-released to the theaters. Or…

Or, if you were a real monster kid (or for that matter a fan of comedies or westerns or sports or any other genre, for that matter), you could save up your money and buy an 8-mm “adaptation” of your favorite movie from Castle Films. Basically what Castle did was to take a regular feature film and edit it down to about 9 minutes (the most that would fit on one reel of 8mm film) and then sell these abridgements for use in people’s homes.

Why would somebody want to buy only nine minutes of a feature film? Much of the answer lies in the quality of the abridgements and the skills of the Castle editors:

“I never saw a bad editing job on one of those Castles,” said John Stosfopf of Redford, Michigan, another Castle collector. “It was amazing what they could cram in there in that amount of time. You felt like you saw the whole movie!”

“They’re so good because they’re so short, you get all the good stuff right there,” Aaronson said. “They pack all the good scenes back to back. Your audience couldn’t possibly get bored. You almost wish, with the movies they come out with now, that they would cut those up.”

Castle abridgements were not mere collections of highlights from their parent films. Each digest stood on its own merits. The best Castle Films serve as shining examples of the art of film editing. Even routine Castle shorts were reliably entertaining, sometimes more so than the films they abridged. (Nine to 12 minutes of, say, The Deadly Mantis should be enough to satisfy anybody!)

The craftsmen who deftly whittled full-length features into 4-, 9-, and 12-minute shorts labored in anonymity. Although the digests usually included title cards, the abridging editor received no screen credit.

The guiding priority for these mysterious artisans appears to have been ensuring that each abridgement would contain a complete story, however rudimentary. In many cases this meant excising a great many sequences, including all subplots and, often, major characters.

Take, for example, Castle Films’ Dracula. In some respects, this 9-minute digest is superior to its full-length source. It avoids all the pitfalls of Tod Browning’s sometimes ponderous feature…

Castle’s editors also displayed remarkably good taste in what they preserved. Often editors would let a particularly powerful sequence remain virtually unedited and build the rest of their abridgement around that single scene. That’s the case with the Castle version of Frankenstein Meets the Wolf Man. The feature’s eerie opening sequence of the film, wherein grave robbers inadvertently reawaken the werewolf, consumes nearly three-quarters of the digest’s running time. Even screenwriter Curt Siodmak’s lycanthropic limerick (”Even a man who is pure at heart and says his prayers at night…”) remains, recited in subtitles.

-from Mark Clark’s excellent article on the subject “Little Giants”, available here.

next: a look at the history of Castle Films - but first, here’s a great example of the Castle editing skill in a short entitled “Rocket and Roll”, castle’s abridgement of the feature Abbott and Costello Go to Mars in which the boys wind up trapped in a runaway rocket headed… well, actually to Venus:

One of the things we are extremely supportive of down here in the basement is those people and groups who not only see the potential in the new media landscape opened up by the proliferation of the internet, but embrace it and explore what can be done. One of those people is Ed Brubaker. Known primarily as a comic book writer, Ed obviously has much more on his plate than just comics, as shown in his new created-for-the-internet series Angel of Death. Starring Zoe Bell (yep, the stunt chick from Tarantino’s Death Proof), Brubaker and his team show how much can be done on an extremely limited (well, by Hollywood standards, anyway) budget.

So what exactly is Angel of Death? Here’s the official description:

Nobody looks for the Beretta, when all they see is a slinky chick in a cocktail dress. Noir comic book legend Ed Brubaker cuts deep with the story of Eve, a hot woman with a heart of ice. Zoe Bell steps in as an assassin haunted by visions after a bloody encounter with a very big knife. In this, the most ambitious web series ever created, Zoe makes bare knuckle boxing a thing of beauty, and a head wound as sexy as sin. Lucy Lawless, Doug Jones, and Ted Raimi all show up for the ride, but few come out alive. If the sight of blood bothers you, just keep your eyes on her other assets, and remember she can grab your heart with her looks or her hand, your choice.

Angel of Death is being released as a 10 part web series. Each part runs between 7 and 9 minutes, and a new one is being released each weekday. The story began last Monday, and is scheduled to finish up this Friday. You can actually catch episode one just below and then head over to crackle.com for the rest. Oh, there’s also an interview about the project with Brubaker at Newsarama.

Fair warning, though, Angel pulls no punches and would definitely at least be “R” rated if it were in the theaters. Fortunately (for now at least) we don’t have to worry about that here on the internets. Ok, enough ado, let’s get on with the show:

(Oh, one more thing, I really recommend going full screen with this one if you’ve got the bandwidth. It definitely looks better that way. Oh,and crackle really doesn’t give you any indication that it’s loading, but just be patient and it will start. Ok, I’ll quit adoing now)

Just for fun… here’s a spot from a 1966 Carol Channing “special” which was sponsored by General Foods and apparently featured Carol popping in on the stars of other General Food sponsored programs. Yep, from what i can tell, the entire program was a series of commercials for various GF products. Of course, this was also back in the day when a program would usually have only one sponsor and often the commercials would be integrated into the show (this was even more common in radio) and done by either the stars of the show or the show’s announcer.

BTW, they keep saying that Dream Whip has “more than just the flavor of whipped cream”, but they never say what more. Anybody care to take a guess?

Like I said earlier, catching up today:

ComingSoon.net has just published a set visit report and interview with Robert Downey Jr and Jude Law concerning their upcoming turns as Sherlock Holmes and Dr. Watson. Guy Ritchie is directing the film, and considering Downey’s recent wonderful takes in Iron Man and Tropic Thunder, this should definitely be one to look forward to.

A short excerpt from the interview:

Downey Jr.: This is my take on it: Arthur Conan Doyle in a movie has to be Watson because unless you’re doing this story about Charles Dickens talking about Victorian London, but you’re not. If you’re doing a story about Victorian London and these characters, then the writer has to be the person who started writing. So it’s that kind of thing where I really feel that there’s a lot of similarities with both where they’d been schooled and influences on Conan Doyle, wasn’t it a Scottish doctor or something like that? But the mythology–not to get too Joseph Campbell about it or anything–is that if there’s an origin story to be told, it’s at what point did these friends realize that one of them has to, if for a bunch of reasons, just to get it off his chest or because no one will believe it…

Law: There was a line you found that said, you know, early on when Holmes asked, “What are you going to do? What are you doing with all those notes?” And he said, “If I don’t write something, someone else will. So I have to write.” Just as Robert said, it’s clear that the storyteller, maybe Conan Doyle, maybe the audience, but it’s Watson’s POV because Holmes’ brilliance being – he’s so special that it has to be observed as opposed to seen through his eyes if you like.

Downey Jr.: But like “Huck Finn” and “Tom Sawyer,” everybody knows – who’s the one who’s getting people to paint fences? It’s Tom Sawyer. Everybody knows the guy who you’re like, “You know what? It’s kind of f*cked up that he does that, but you wouldn’t ’cause most of live these lives in the center where we’re–present company excluded… well included lately–where you’re objective enough to say, “Well, I couldn’t live and be in that extreme. I couldn’t just have a life dedicated to nothing, but date and tracking down criminals.” It’s like a half-psychotic workaholic, but the idea that he keeps throwing Watson into adventure I think again, that brings me back to what Watson represents, the aspect of people who have done their time in “society,” whether you want to use military or being essentially a blue collar worker, being a doctor, being someone who aspires to the Hippocratic Oath. All these things that we buy into that also has a sense of adventure that I think Conan Doyle was using both these guys to say, “Look, there’s this other thing. It shouldn’t be the mainstay of your life.” Watson is settled enough, he has a proper job and he’s happily married midway through their stories, but they have the adventures, you know?

Law: And there’s a wonderful sort of moral code that they both keep. I think some of that may be… with Holmes it’s a sort of fascination, it’s a science, and with Watson it’s a much more human sort of approach to scum, but it’s not vigilante, it’s almost sort of a law enforcing element to the two of them.

Downey Jr.: They’re not bound by the same things that typical law enforcement would be and also we’re talking about a time where law enforcement was still different, and forensics was still kind of not quite where it’s at.

Sounds like Warner Brothers may have quite a Christmas present in store for us Holmes fans…

part one / part two / part three

Hmm… Looks like Tuesday’s gonna be catch-up day around here. Actually, this one was gonna go up yesterday, but “the rhino ate the dog that ate my homework” as it were, so… still, let’s get on with it, shall we? As we hit the back end of the year, this is gonna be more of a list with occasional comments and previews than the sort of in-depth look we were doing before. After all, we’ll have plenty of time to explore these more as they get closer. And, of course, I’m sure we’ll be adding more to the list as info comes in. These are just the biggies that are on our radar right now. So, picking up where we left off, let’s take a look at movies coming out in

August
7th - GI Joe - The Rise of Cobra - This one kinda surprised me when I saw the preview during the Super Bowl. Partly just because they had put together a preview, but also because it really looks like it might be better than I was thinking. Here, take a quick peek:

14th - Final Destination: Death Trip 3D - Another one? Really?

21st - Inglourious Basterds Quentin Tarantino remakes yet another movie no one has heard of - so you know it’s at least gonna be interesting. Trailer time:

28th - H2: Halloween 2 - Well, ok, so it’s actually, what? Halloween 11 or so. But this is the follow-up to last year’s remake by Rob Zombie, so apparently we get to reset the numbering, too. Moving on.

September
4th - Pandorum - Don’t know much about this one yet, but the trailer looks intriguing. Take a look for yourself:

9th - 9 - Yep, that’s the name of it. The post-apocalyptic fate of humanity lies in the hands of a motley band of rag dolls. It’s animated. Tim Burton is one of the producers. What more can I say?

11th - Daybreakers When almost everyone’s a vampire, where do they get their food from? hmmm…

- Whiteout - Adapted from the graphic novel about a murder in Alaska

25th - Fame - Yep, you read that right, and no, I didn’t stutter. They’re calling this one a “re-invention”.

- The Crazies - Interestingly, comingsoon.net also called this one a re-invention, and it also stars Danielle Panabaker. Personally, I think it might have been more interesting if they’d done the full crossover and had George Romero direct the Fame remake.

Ok, in order to leave some time for a few other posts today, we’ll pick up with holiday movies (October, November, December) tomorrow… hopefully.