Vampiric Romance to Southern Hardships

Yep, I'll be talking about Twilight. Deal with it.

To be honest, I have never found these movies worthy of the ardent fury lavished upon them. Yes, the fans of the series are naive schoolgirls with little idea of true romance. However, I think the anti-fans are much more numerous. Therefore, they are also more annoying.

I have never watched one of the Twilight movies (I have seen three, thank you) and thought, "wow, that was the worst film I have ever seen." I found them all painful and mediocre, but hardly deserving of hatred. Maybe this is merely a result of my wide cinema experience. I have simply seen worse.

Oh, the painful memories of "Babe 2: Pig in the City"...

Anyway, this latest iteration sees the oft-troubled Bella and Edward dealing with the consequences of their marriage and honeymoon. Bella gives birth to a half-vampire child (a process that nearly kills Mrs. Cullen), Edward must deal with his family problems, and third-part-of-the-love-triangle Jacob Black brings unforeseen and shocking developments. In other words, cue angsty melodrama.

This week, I am stretching all the way back to 1939.

As a male, romance movies are not my forte. However, I know a good one when I see it. The worst thing about Twilight is the poor production value, not the story or the characters. In better hands, I don't think these films would have been so polarizing. So let's take romance and melodrama, but put them with better productions.

This week, I will speak about "Gone With the Wind."

"Gone With the Wind"... I feel like a synopsis would not be fair to this massive romance. Viewers follow Scarlet O'Hara into adulthood, starting right at the beginning of the Civil War. She lives in Atlanta, Georgia, so all her beaus are going off to war with the North. Throughout the war, she uses men and circumstances to her constant favor. However, Rhett Butler, a slimy gentlemen, decides to control Scarlet through his own nefarious means. The pair end up together as the war ends, but their private battles continue long after the slaves are freed.

First, I will address the cinephiles that decry my comparison. If you don't believe these movies can be fairly compared to each other, look at the pictures I provide. Tell me they are not strikingly similar.

Okay, now that I have that out of the way, I will compare the films themselves. "Gone With the Wind" has an epic story with large characters, real people who have flaws (major flaws, in the case of the two main characters) and epic triumphs over adversity. Twilight has a complicated and interesting setup, but that story is carried by bland characters played by bland actors. It doesn't work great, but the casting is the job of production. And therein lies the biggest rub.

Twilight is atrocious in production value. Shaky cameras and close-ups should be accentuators, not main features. The color palette is uninteresting, and the special effects look like cheap computer graphics. "Gone With the Wind," on the other hand...well, just watch it. Everything is perfect. Period. I would describe my adoration in specifics, but there is too much in this 3-hour film. Let's just say it never feels like a 3-hour film, a testament to great and energetic editing of great actors.

The Final Stretch:
Romance is not dead. Anyone can find a good romance film, no matter the gender. Too often, I think people associate romantic movies with schmaltz and contrivance. This could not be further from the truth. Classic films are great sources for complicated drama and heart-melting moments. I could have easily written this post about many 50-year-old movies. However, modern romance has devolved into teenage angst, making the result seem hollow and dull. Romance can be bigger than life, and movie-goers should be able to distinguish masterpieces from mediocre melodramas.

Bloody Visuals to Clever Claymation

A brutal king, murderous armies, and long expositions about fate. Monsters, myths and brave men willing to fight against both. Ah, where would we be without ancient Greece?

This weekend, we are reminded why these classic tales get so many iterations. This particular tale is that of Theseus and his battle against the bloodthirsty King Hyperion. The wicked king has gathered an army of monsters, all hellbent on finding a fabled artifact to make themselves masters of the world. It seems nothing can stop him, until a young stonemason named Theseus vows to avenge his murdered mother. He gains the aid of an oracle and a small band of loyal followers, embracing his destiny in a desperate battle against an evil tyrant.

This week, I am stretching all the way back to 1963.

I believe in the power of Greek myths, but have grown weary of the special-effect-infused nature of modern iterations. Modern directors have warped the stories to fit action movie stereotypes, so I wish to distance myself from such laziness. Instead, I will look at a film that follows the original story while still attempting to dazzle. Keep in mind that impressive in 1963... well... it is a bit different for us.

This week, I will speak about "Jason and the Argonauts."

Now, you may notice that gold emblem in the bottom left of the picture. That denotes the involvement of special effect wizard Ray Harryhausen, an auteur with few equals. His art... well, let's just say it doesn't hold much weight in modern cinema.

There is a reason we don't see claymation too much anymore.

There are exceptions, but nearly all are children's movies. "Jason and the Argonauts" is not too appropriate for the youngsters. They can watch it and enjoy it, but the themes will sail over their heads. However, the action scenes are undeniably charming. The hydra and skeleton fights have gone down in cinema history for being far beyond their time. Both required meticulous effort and hours to produce (imagine moving each head of a hydra in minute increments, trying to make stills look like they are moving. Yeah). Sure, they don't look real now, but the old-school charm is enough to make them shine.

However, the effects are not the only thing here. The movie also has substance, as the topic of fate is pretty directly addressed. This is a dressed-up literature class, and that makes this move special. In fact, nearly every movie that has the "Ray Harryhausen Emblem" effortlessly combines weighty topics with the oft-dismissed art of modeling clay.

The Final Stretch:
I have a problem with movies that rely on effects. In our technological advancements, average movie-goers have become more inclined to follow a film with bigger effects and set pieces. This has forced studios to pour all their money into such profit barrels, and this is woefully tragic. I have no problem with the occasional mindless action movie, but the market is more oversaturated now than ever before. Movies like "Jason and the Argonauts" were considered mindless entertainment in their day, yet they approach weighty topics with a delightful sense of whimsy. Modern bloodbaths approach nothing of substance, and rely only on spectacle to pull cash from pockets. Meanwhile, "Jason and the Argonauts" gets ignored because it does not possess a grandiose sense of gory realism. This is the way film and time work, but nothing suffers quite as much as special effect spectacle. After all, in 30 years, we will look back at "Immortals" and laugh at the underdone effects.

Comic Capers to Botched Robberies

This weekend, Ben Stiller and Eddie Murphy star in "Tower Heist," a comedy caper on par with "Oceans 11" or "The Italian Job." Seeking revenge on a a Wall Street swindler, a group of luxury condominium workers plot the ultimate revenge. The evil broker has stolen their life savings, and the only way to get it back is a heist of monumental proportions.

Seems perfect for the disillusioned "Occupy Wall Street" group, eh?

To be brief, this movie is not the first of it's kind. "Tower Heist" has been receiving decent reviews, but mostly just because this formula is hard to mess up. I'm sure you can think of a film that gathers of group of "specialists" in order to take down some corrupt official. It has been done, and it has been done well (the two I mentioned in the opening paragraph are great examples). The formula is a crowd-pleaser, and this seems the perfect thing to appeal to audiences. However, the best examples of the formula are those that subvert it, changing something about it to keep it fresh. The classic I will discuss does just that.

This week, I am stretching all the way back to 1992.

Heists make for good cinema, so I'm keeping that. However, the whole "friendship" thing needs to go (man, that sounds cruel). I want to pit my heist members against each other, and grow their suspicions to a boiling point.

This week, it's one of my favorites: "Reservoir Dogs."

"Reservoir Dogs" looks at what happens before and after (but not during) a botched jewelry robbery. We meet the players before the film begins, all given cryptic code names. Mr. White is a career criminal who tried to put his storied past behind him. He shares the bulk of the film with the young and rebellious Mr. Orange, a fellow criminal who was shot during the robbery. One of them is bleeding to death, but they have the diamonds. However, no one else is showing up to the meeting spot.

Mr. Pink, the weaselly loner of the group, stumbles in and states there is a traitor among them. Behind him is Mr. Blonde, a terrifying sadist who went nuts during the heist. Their fifth cohort, Mr. Blue, is missing in action. The color-men wait and deliberate, eventually joined by their bosses. By exploring the past and the present, the criminals work to oust the rat among them.

This movie launched the career of Quentin Tarantino, the auteur director who gave us "Kill Bill," "Pulp Fiction" and "Inglorious Basterds." In other words, you can expect a lot of timeline jumps and sudden cuts. That, and violence. Lots of violence. "Reservoir Dogs," though, is probably the purest movie to encapsulate his style. This movie is tense and confusing all at once, and that makes it all the more fun to analyze and deconstruct. Once all the pieces are on the board, everything falls into place.

The Final Stretch:
I like this kind of movie. The "band together for a greater cause" mantra is something I find interesting, and I can watch these movies all the time. "Tower Heist" takes the formula into comedy, and that is a valid choice. Watching colorful characters bounce off each other in light comedy is a great time. However, I love "Reservoir Dogs" because it shows how these heists actually are. To place comedy in these instances is a pretty big stretch. They are fun, but reality can be strikingly powerful. After all, real heists are between terrible people, criminals normally colored a bloody crimson.