Passion of Film's Past

The Robe

1953

D: Henry Koster

**********

 

 

         This forgotten classic is from a time when Hollywood consistently made Christian-themed movies as blockbusters.  Often these would be re-tellings of Biblical stories, and sometimes they would be creative spin-offs inspired by Biblical figures.  The latter displayed creativity in the context of a Christian society.  The Robe is also significant for being the first major movie released in CinemaScope.

          The story revolves around a Roman tribune named Marcellus Gallio (Richard Burton), who wins an auction against long-standing rival Caligula (a wonderfully scene-chewing Jay Robinson) and obtains Demetrius (Victor Mature) as a servant.  The tension is exacerbated by an encounter with Diana (Jean Simmons), Gallio’s childhood crush who is currently betrothed to Caligula.  Caligula responds to the loss by assigning Gallio to Jerusalem, a humiliating post. 

           While there, Demetrius is enamored by the arrival of Jesus (Cameron Mitchell) and attempts to warn him of a plot to kill him.  He momentarily encounters a depressed man (Michael Ansara) who is clearly meant to be Judas.  The man's identity is effectively conveyed with a well-framed shot in which the use of color draws the eye to a twisted tree outside a portal that Judas will inevitably hang himself from.  Unfortunately, the subtlety is needlessly ruined by Demetrius’ asking his name and Judas responding with “i’M jUDaS!” with a cheesy scare chord.  Good cinematography by Leon Shamroy gone to waste, right there. 

         Demetrius pleads for Jesus’ life when He is captured, but Pontius Pilate (Richard Boone) has already made his decision and orders Gallio to conduct the Crucifixion.  Gallio wins Jesus’ robe in the dice match, but it causes him physical pain to the touch.  Demetrius calls him out on his cowardice and abandons him, taking the robe.  Gallio returns to Italy, but is haunted by nightmares.  A medium tells him that he must destroy the robe to rid himself of them.

        Upon entering Cana, Gallio encounters a group of Christians strong in their faith despite their hardships.  He meets the charismatic Justus (Dean Jagger) and Peter (Michael Rennie).  In a very amusing scene, Justus tells a crowd an account of the Passion in which he claims that Peter never wavered in his courage.  Peter is tries to correct this, but backs down shyly when Justus tells him not to interrupt his speech.  Justus is then immediately put down by Roman archers. 

        Gallio confesses his guilt and becomes a Christian.  He is condemned by Caligula as a traitor for not worshipping the Emperor, and hijinks ensue involving imprisonments, daring escapes, and a clandestine healing of Demetrius by Peter. At his trial Diana defies Caligula and joins Gallio as they march together to their inevitable execution.  True love. 

        The Robe is a movie definitely worth watching, and a relic of when Cinema utilized its best and brightest for religion, and as such the writing reflects the insight on the inevitability of Christ and the fear it inspires in secular authorities. The acting is solid, and Jay Robinson is extremely entertaining as a fragile, megalomaniacal villain.  Richard Boone in his short, memorable scene captures the world-weary nature that is appropriate for Pilate.  Peter’s apprehensiveness in the Bible is faithfully depicted here as well.  The movie’s also revolving around a second-class relic is a plus.  The cast includes Torin Thatcher, Betta St. John, Jeff Morrow, Ernest Thesiger, Dawn Addams, Leon Askin, and a young Harry Shearer 

 

The Original Antifa

The Keep

1983

D: Michael Mann

**********

 

      Being a fan of Michael Mann, I was definitely intrigued by the idea of his making fantasy/horror epic, especially one taking place during World War II.  The Keep lives up to the stylistic expections, but it suffers from a studio butchery that removed much of the story.  It ranks pretty highly among movies with hidden director’s cuts that desperately needs to see the light.

      Based on the book by F. Paul Wilson, the movie takes place in a village in German occupied Romania as a Wehrmacht unit commanded by Captain Klaus Woermann (Jurgen Prochnow) adjusts to new management under an SS force led by the villainous Erich Kaempffer (Gabriel Byrne).  Like most normal Germans, Woermann and Co. are not too keen on entertaining these infamous busybodies, and, sure enough, Kaempffer makes a complete ass of himself by ordering the execution of a few local civilians to prove a point. 

      The local priest (Robert Prosky) convinces them to retrieve crippled Jewish historian Dr. Theodore Cuza (Ian McKellen) and his daughter Eva (Alberta Watson) from a concentration camp in order to translate the runes on a massive ancient structure by the village.  Soon after setting up camp inside the citadel, two German soldiers (John Vine and Jona Jones) inadvertently free an evil entity named Radu Molasar (Michael Carter), who begins to regenerate by slaughtering soldiers one by one.  At first, he seems like a stand-up guy, killing Nazis, saving Eva from rape, and curing Theodore of his disability, but he has ulterior motives.  His plan is to use Theodore to obtain a talisman so that he can escape the Keep and unleash unimaginable terror onto the world.

       This causes our hero Glaeken (Scott Glenn) to sense trouble and sail to the area to defeat Molasar using a magic scepter of strangely minimalist design.  Being the focused type, he wastes no time in having creepy, passionless sex with Eva (Keep in mind, this was the 20^th Century and people could not conceive of simply not having gratuitous sex scenes in movies.  Disney animated movies were excepted, but it’s likely there was discussion on that).  He then defeats Molasar with said scepter, but not before Kaempffer kills Klaus and Cuza rejects Molasar.

        It’s become a tiresome cliché to cite Blazing Saddles as a movie that could not be made today for ideological reasons, but The Keep is definitely a great candidate for such status.  While Molasar initially appears to be a righteous hunter of Nazis, he intentionally exploits this angle as a pretext for manipulating others into allowing his to begin his own reign of terror, and it’s pretty obvious how this can be applied to current political trends.  The Keep preemptively subverts and deconstructs the Reddit Carnage seen increasingly unserious movies about World War II consumed by people who would call you a Nazi for something as innocuous as your favorite car color.  Moreover, the movie draws a clear distinction between the Nazis and other contemporary Germans (Kaempffer and Klaus have debates on the subject), a decision that is poisonous to progressive revisionism.

        Of course, this not a completely fair comparison.  Antifa would never save a woman from getting raped.

        The movie is less theologically sound.  Fighting sorcery with sorcery can be fine in a fantasy, but The Keep unfortunately adds the context of Christianity’s being useless.  Despite being a good man, the priest is spiritually vulnerable to Molasar’s power and rendered temporarily insane simply by being in the same vicinity as the fiend.  This also cheapens the moment in which Kaempffer makes a last-ditch effort to ward off Molasar with a crucifix despite his malice and faithlessness. There might be a regrettable appeal here for the narcissistic sideshow that is right-wing paganism that is reinforced by the aforementioned loveless sex scene.  Then again, that may be confounded because it involves a Jewish person.

         The movie’s greatest problem is the studio-mandated cut from 3 hours to 1.5.  The Keep is an easy watch because of how short it is, but I was definitely ready for a slow burn.  What’s more is that the Glaeken, whom I assume most of the cut material is about, is described as a pensive hero who struggles with his destined role as such.  In other words, he is the exact type of protagonist that Michael Mann is good at depicting.  This problem comes to head in the third act in which he ends up at the bottom of a ravine while the clock is ticking, and the movie feels it necessary to take the time to show how much he struggles to climb back up.  Without the characterization to provide context for empathy, there is no aesthetic justification for this moment; it’s nothing more than just tedious faux-suspense.  It’s rather clueless to cut out all of a hero’s characterization and then include a climactic payoff that’s completely dependent upon it.  There might have been some actual romance between him and Eva to lead up the aforementioned creepy sex scene for all I know.  Klaus is the closest thing the movie has to a relatable protagonist, and Cuza is somewhat sympathetic despite his screw-ups.

         From a visual standpoint, the movie does not disappoint.  Mann’s usual atmosphere is facilitated by Alex Thomson’s cinematography and Tangerine Dreams’ score.  Molasar himself is a great character design as he develops from a skeletal horror to a stone-faced demon.  The red glow coming from his eyes is a nice touch, but it seems that the proportions on the suit put Michael Carter’s head in the neck area despite his height.  Unfortunately F. Paul Wilson apparently doesn’t know an awesome character design when he sees one and complained about, and from what I gather the faithful version resembles Snape from Harry Potter.  I haven’t read this book series, but Molasar’s design makes sense in the movie because it is a plot point that he gets mistaken for a golem.

          You’d think that if we could get director’s cut released of a Zack Snyder movie, surely we could have a successful campaign for someone like Michael Mann.  Then again perhaps that’s the opposite of how it works.  Maybe people with good taste cannot muster the hive-mind mobilization required for such an undertaking.  Either, way it doesn’t look as if will ever happen.  

          The movie also stars W. Morgan Sheppard, Wolf Kahler, and Bruce Payne.

 

 

QUOTES

 

MOLASAR: You have…death around you.

CUZA: Your hands!

MOLASAR: No.

CUZA: Then what you sense is my fate in a death camp.

MOLASAR: A place where people gather to die?

CUZA: A place where people are murdered.

MOLASAR: My people are murdered?  

CUZA: Yes!  And others, from all over Europe!

MOLASAR: Who does this?

CUZA: Their leader, in Berlin, and the soldiers in black.

MOLASAR: I will destroy them!  …I will…consume their lives.

       

         

      

Loona Rolls a 20

“Seeing Stars”

Helluva Boss

Episode 2:2

October 19, 2022

Below Average

 

 

         After a hiatus, I’m going to return to the fray and review Helluva Boss episodes.  It’s a bit overdue since the second season has crossed the line from standard carelessness to woke-induced nonsense.  With some exceptions the show is preoccupied with trying to convince us that Stolitz is actually good.  It doesn’t help that Viv is fishing for compliments from the craziest corners of her fanbase.  I’m not sure I’m ready to tackle “The Circus,” so for now I’ll settle for reviewing the second worst episode of the series.

           The episode begins with a flashback of Stolas’ promising Octavia that they’ll watch a special meteor shower at a predicted date.  In the present day, Octavia, excited that the day has finally come, attempts to remind Stolas, who is too busy arguing with Stella over the phone.  After Stolas absently brushes her off and implies he’ll be too busy arguing with Stella to do anything with her all weekend, which credits Octavia’s later question of “Why does he hate her more than he loves me?”  I also can’t help but notice that Stolas also physically abuses the family butler, which is has been cited as one piece of evidence for Stella’s being an irredeemable monster. 

            Frustrated, Octavia impulsively sneaks into IMP headquarters in order to obtain the Grimoire so she can see the shower herself, and her idea of “sneaking” is one of the few funny parts of the episode.  Just prior to this, Blitzo had finally confronted Loona on her rudeness toward the customers, and her anger with him probably explains why she just let Octavia break into the office and take the Grimoire.    

           This confrontation establishes the link between Loona and Octavia’s arcs, which would be paid off in the episode’s climax.  While Blitzo’s request is reasonable, one might understand Loona’s rage considering that he makes the mistakes of threatening to un-adopt her (Moxxie's approval of that is a rare dog-kick from him) and not talking it out in private (the M&M’s treat it as a spectator sport).  It also doesn’t help that Blitzo, due to his overprotectiveness, keeps her out of field work in favor of a customer service position she lacks the social skills for.  Erica Lindneck’s read of “I am a people person” does a good job implying that Loona desperately wants to be that, but is too traumatized by life experiences to pull if off.

           Octavia uses the Grimoire to vanish before IMP can stop her, and they end up doing the thing they should have done in “Truth Seekers:” call Stolas.  Heartwarmingly, Blitzo does not throw Loona under the bus despite the incident’s being her fault, and they decide use Stolas’ still poorly-articulated ability to come to earth without the Grimoire to find her.  Loona’s sense of smell from the residual portal informs her that they went to LA, which she explains in a decidedly force joke.  Octavia, not knowing where she was going, simply ordered the Grimoire to take her “to see the stars.”

 

...which could have gone a lot worse for her.

         After Stolas and the IMP arrive in LA, they split up.  Stolas and Blitzo are almost immediately abducted in a panel van by a sitcom procucer (Lyle Rath) who has mistaken the latter for their Brandon-Rogersesque guest star.  This would be a perfect opportunity for them to kill their unwitting captives and appropriate their transportation for the search but instead they go along with it for no reason.  It’s funny how Stolas only goes into full demon mode once in this episode as a lame throwaway joke, not only sullying one of the most epic moments in the show, but also betraying some bad priorities.  He can track down his boy-toy and murder humans for him, but not so much for his lost daughter.  Guess he does have a Gaydar. 

          Instead, he and Blitzo simply allow themselves to be driven to a set so that the latter can act out a scene in the sitcom.  In the middle of the shoot, Blitzo has a flashback of his adopting Loona from a hellhound pound run by an apathetic hellhound (Monica Franco).  In it he encounters her in a dingy prison cell crying and cringing after having defended herself from an apparently murderous cellmate and is informed that she will age out very soon.  He pities her more than the less photogenic hellpups (who disgust him) and he adopts her.  I like sad scenes as much as the next person, but I always pictured something less melodramatic, like Loona’s having accepted her fate for years until, this shady eecentric presumed to come out of nowhere and call her her father.  In the light of the new canon, I think it would make more sense for Loona to look more confused/frightened in this adoption photo than annoyed. 

            Then the show demonstrates one its recurrent flaws: disrupting good character moments for the sake of edginess.  The flashback triggers a murderous a spree in which Blitzo impulsively shoots random bystanders in the studio.  The only humorous moment is a fulfilled brick joke in which Stolas unwittingly burns someone with the local tap water, which was earlier the subject of a public warning poster.  It would have been more logical to have him vent his frustration on Stolas, accusing him of not caring enough for his own daughter.  This also would have had a more effectively funny effect as it would be in front of a whole bunch of contextless mortals.  

            This problem is repeated at the end of the episode during his reunion with Loona.  Overcome with emotion, he rushes over to embrace her, only for her to kick him brutally in the groin despite having more than enough time to recognize him and after having talked to Octavia about how she understands him.  This has been justified by stans as Loona’s not being ready to be touched due to her built-up anxieties, but that does not warrant violence.  Assuming that was not a calculated, vindictive punishment, it makes her look more like an uncontrollably violent animal than a person (see also: Loona’s impulsively attacking Moxxie because she’s disturbed by an hellquake in “CHERUB”).  It’s also at odds with her correct and comparatively measured use of violence in the pound.   

            They should have simply followed through on the emotional moment with a loving embrace between them, which would have uncomfortably emphasized to Octavia and Stolas how much better their father-daughter relationship is than their own.

           Leading up to this is Loona’s lone search for Octavia.  While the others screw around, she uses her detective skills basic common sense by tracking Via’s social media posts.  She eventually finds her at the LA Observatory and they have a heart-to-heart.  I’m all for heart-warming moments, but only when they’re well earned.  Loona basically trivialized Stolas’ home-wrecking by giving Octavia some “dad’s mess up, but they’re trying” platitude.  The scene definitely deserves a lot more attention as an ironic meme than Steven Universe's "She said she was sorry" moment.  What makes it even worse is that Loona is an accessory to and beneficiary of the sex/murder scheme that is responsible for Octavia’s problems, and the episode makes it clear that Octavia knows this.  Imagine how much more of an impact it would be if she called Loona out on it, triggering an epiphany in which the latter realized how much of a villain she is and it starts a redemption arc in earnest.  It seems that Octavia, because of this and her rash runaway, is being sympathetically strawmanned in order to help sell Stolitz: she only thinks it’s bad because she doesn’t know better.  I tend to think the popular theory that she’s asexual might also be a reason to explain away to lack of understanding. 

          The surrogate sister dynamic between Loona and Octavia is a relatively endearing symptom of Stolitz, but it ignores how much the two characters are foils for each other.  Loona grew up in squalor without love, and is now adjusting to being part of a family as a young adult.  In contrast, Octavia had a privileged upbringing in which she thought her parents loved each other, only to face her home life’s crumbling in front of her.  Reflective of how Stolas broke his family for sex with Blitzo, while Blitzo forces sex with Stolas to make a better life for his own.  

          Another annoying thing about this episode is that it clearly didn’t know what to do with the M&M’s.  What should have happened was that they go off on a comically wrong trail because Moxxie overthought it, or they simply should have been absent (perhaps they figured out how to get time alone without Blitzo’s finding out).  Instead, we get this dreadfully unfunny and out-of-character sequence in which Moxxie wastes time trying to buy a useless burned CD from a talentless street artist.  I think he’d be the last person to get such tunnel vision when there’s a lost child that needs to be found. 

         The episodes humor is pretty weak, and really peppered with the type of forced edginess that the show is often derided for.  There’s a child actress who does cocaine (Juliana Sada), and the show once again does the Family Guy death pose, which is the basically the new Wilhelm Scream, and I don’t mean that as a compliment.  At one point they make a second attempt at the stupidly-obvious password joke, only not as funny as the one in "Truth Seekers."  Even the usually funny background signs are disappointing despite the ample opportunity.  Still, the animation and timing help somewhat with some of the lines and visual jokes, especially during Blitzo’s intervention with Loona.  I also like how Stolas displays real owl mannerisms when exasperated.     

[Loona allows Octavia to sneak into IMP and she disappears with the Grimoire]

BLITZO: LOONA-

LOONA (OFFSCREEN): Oh yeah, you have a visitor.

 

BLITZO: Shit, shit, shit shit, what the fuck am I supposed to tell Stolas?!

MOXXIE: Well, he seems to like you, Sir.  Maybe he would understand if-

BLITZO: Ok, my dick is good, but it is not that good, Moxxie.

 

SIGN: PUBLIC HEALTH WARNING: New study finds LA water to be 2% sewer overflow and 98% literal acid. NO OBVIOUSLY DON’T DRINK THAT SHIT!!

 

[Stolas and Blitzo just got loaded into the van]

STOLAS: Blitzo, we don’t have time for this.  Via could be anywhere.  She could be in danger.

BLITZO: Don’t worry, I’m on it.  [smashes van windshield]  LOONY, GO FIND VIA, WE’LL CATCH UP SOON.  YEAH, WAY TO BE A TEAM PLAYER SWEETIE. 

[Blitzo is erroneously on a sitcom set]

ACTOR: Well, if it isn't our neighbor Ronny!  You feel that earthquake earlier?

[Blitzo freezes]

STOLAS: [whispering] Say something!

TELEPROMPTER: That was just my wife rolling out of bed.

BLITZO: Oh, yeah, yeah!  "That was just my wife rolling out of bed." 

[audience laughs and it goes to his head]

BLITZO: Yeah, yeah, and then that BITCH hit her head on the way down and shattered her skull! [Stolas giggles]  There's blood everywhere, peed her pants...

 

[Blitzo deletes “NOT TOPIC” from map search while looking for Octavia]

 

[Millie’s Sinstagram while contacting Blitzo at the end]

MILLIE: [under picture of ball-gag] Moxxie Be into this you think?? 

-read 2 weeks ago

BLITZO: B1TCH were u @?

MILLIE: Near the Alley!  Portal Plz :) <3

BLITZO: kk I gotchu

BLITZO: Mackin Stols do it now

What Finn Should Have Been

Soldier

1998

D: Paul W. S. Anderson

**********

 

 

       With the dominant trend of enforced mediocrity resulting in things like the Star Wars sequel trilogy, it’s become commonplace to reevaluate disreputable movies from the past.  Some might say that this is from nostalgia and the soft bigotry of low expectations, but it’s definitely valid to question a critical consensus that has proven itself unreliable.  Soldier is a movie I disliked when I first saw it years ago, partially due to its flawed director, but I found it much better after a recent viewing.

       I once found it moderately annoying that this movie was supposed to be a spin-off of Blade Runner, but now I believe it to be a creative addition to the franchise, even if it might not be “canon.”  In fact, I believe it does for more justice than Blade Runner 2049, which, enjoyable as it was, seemed bit too much like a rehash that sullied the excellent finale of the Blade Runner Director’s Cut.  While BR2049 boasts vastly superior cinematic technique, Soldier works as part of the universe while still being a distinct story.  It is slightly cheesy in comparison, but it has an old-school charm and many of the stylizations are quite nice, which is possibly because of help from cinematographer David Tattersall.  The action is decent, and nothing in it is annoyingly tacky in a way that detracts from the experience.  It does have the occasional moment of surprisingly unobtrusive CGI and some pretty good miniature effects.  It has good production design with some a few edgy designs for the vehicles, but it’s not completely perfect: I’ve never understood, for example, how 80’s/90’s sci-fi directors got the impression that the Franchi LF-57 looked “futuristic” when it actually looks like the 50’s submachine gun that it is.

        The movie’s introduction involves the automatic induction of orphaned infants into a special military training program in 1996.  They are desensitized to death and executed for failure to perform and comply in a brutal regimen akin to the one I assume Moe’s put its employees through to ensure that they reliably say “Welcome to Moe’s” when you enter the restaurant.  They come out of the training with no apparent emotion and are willing to execute any civilian if it is efficient.  The protagonist, a soldier named “Todd” 3465 (Kurt Russell) later admits that he still feels the fear that the indoctrination is based on; he grapples for any other emotion to counter it and the only thing he could come up with is “discipline.”

         The plot begins when Todd and his comrades are replaced by an improved batch of soldiers that are heavily implied to be replicants.  These newcomers prove to be physically superior to Todd’s batch in virtually every way, and, when defeated by one of the replicants named Caine (Jason Scott Lee), Todd is dumped onto junk planet Arcadia 234, where he is adopted by a small community of struggling exiles.  The movie does a good of showing his character grappling with newfound emotions that are being validated for the first time as he struggles to fit into the community.  He remains awkwardly stoic and borderline mute, but he develops loyalty for the people and is protective of a mute child (Jared & Tayler Thorne).  There is some skepticism from the group, but he is backed up by Mace (Sean Pertwee).  He is momentarily exiled due to a misunderstanding, but he returns to help when the director of the soldier programs, Col. Mekum (Jason Isaacs) selects the colony for a purge.  Todd uses his experience and cunning to believably fight the replicant soldiers, and acquires help from his old unit, who have been reduced to menial roles.  Eventually he succeeds in escaping the planet with the colonists and his comrades as the villains are left behind with an armed nuke.  It’s a fresh twist on the outside-rescues-village archetype.  

           The cast is strong.  Kurt Russell, always charismatic, shows further versatility by nailing the role of a stoic character who’s trying to grasp newfound emotions; his normally blank expression still betrays the suppressed terror that motivates him, and his body language is abrupt and efficient the few times he does move. Unlike Finn from The Force Awakens, he actually acts like someone who has been trained since early childhood to be a remorseless killing machine.  Jason Isaacs is memorably slimy as the villain, and Gary Busey, despite being part of a malicious soldier program, comes off as strangely grandfatherly in a corrupted way.  The solid cast includes Connie Nielsen (as Sandra), Jesse D. Goins, K.K. Dodds, and Michael Chiklis.

           The movie is well-executed, fun, and stylish.  In an example of one’s favorite thing’s not necessarily being the best thing, I find myself listing a Paul W.S. Anderson movie as my favorite from a year that gave us true classics like The Big Lebowski, Saving Private Ryan, Dark City, Mulan, and Prince of Egypt.  It goes to show that sometimes it’s good to rethink your priors. 

MEMORABLE QUOTES 

 

SANDRA: Sgt. Todd…what’s it like?  What’s it like being a soldier?  What do you think about?

TODD: …

SANDRA: You must think about something.

TODD: …

SANDRA: What about feelings, then?

TODD: …

SANDRA: You must feel something.

TODD: …

[Sandra begins to leave]

TODD: Fear.

SANDRA: Fear?

TODD: Fear and…discipline.

SANDRA: Now?

TODD: Always. 

 

[Todd is prepping for battle]

SANDRA: How do you know they’ll be back?

TODD: Because they’re soldiers, Sir.  Like me.

SANDRA:  Why are they doing this?

TODD: They’re obeying orders, Sir.  It’s their duty.

SANDRA: Do you know how many there will be?

TODD: Seventeen more, Sir.

SANDRA: Oh my G-d, you can’t fight seventeen more on your own, you have to organize us.  We’re not cowards, we’ll do as you tell us.  We’ll fight.

TODD: No.

SANDRA: Why not?

TODD: Soldiers deserve soldiers, Sir.

SANDRA: But one soldier against seventeen…What are you going to do?

TODD: [stops and looks at her] I’m going to kill them all, sir.            

        

 

Oo-De-Lally

Robin Hood

1973

D: Wolfgang Reitherman

**********

Pros: Story, Voice Case, Most of the Animation

Cons: Some Recycled Animations, Some Overly Goofy Moments

 

 

        Robin Hood is one of my biggest nostalgic Disney films, and it’s also a great testament to the cultural power and influence that the company possesses.  There was talk about adapting the legendary Reynard the Fox, a character of great mystique since at least the Middle Ages.  However, since Reynard was too ambiguous a character for Disney’s wholesome image, they eventually hit upon the idea to turn Robin Hood into a fox.  The narrator, Alan-a-Dale (Roger Miller), is possibly depicted as a Rooster as a reference to Chanticleer.  As a result, Reynard never got a 20^th Century revival in mainstream, and this 1973 movie remains the definitive version of Robin Hood to many people.  In fact, to this day I stubbornly refuse to acknowledge the idea that Robin Hood is anything other than an anthropomorphic fox.

        The story is a straight-forward telling of the legend, with Prince John (Peter Ustinov, an effeminate, maneless lion) taxing the poor of Nottingham with Robin Hood’s (Brian Bedford) thwarting him.  Robin’s lifelong friend and sidekick Little John (Phil Harris, a bear) plays the rational straight-man to our hero’s cunning romantic, which I find preferable to more recent depictions of him as a big idiot.  Apparently, the intelligent version of Little John is the more traditional one, so that’s one more hit for the Disney version.  The Prince is aided by the lupine Sheriff of Nottingham (Pat Buttram), who is a bit too fat and comical for the role, despite Buttram’s memorable voice.  

        A particularly intriguing character is Sir Hiss (Terry-Thomas, complete with his distinctive tooth gap).  In addition to being a typically cute cartoon snake, he’s also the least naturally malicious of the villains; he mostly goes along Prince John’s plans out of cowardice/ sycophancy despite his occasional amusing, constructive nagging of Prince John for his stupidity.  He’s clearly the most intelligent of the bunch, seeing through the good guys’ tricks while getting no regard for it.  Almost as if to underscore his banal villainy, he doesn’t have a mean bone in his body: he’s horrified at the Prince’s decision to execute Friar Tuck (Andy Devine) and is overjoyed to see Robin Hood survive the movie’s very suspenseful and effectively thrilling climax.  At the end he seems fully acceptant of his just punishment.

        Maid Marian (Monica Evans) is also a notable character.  Beautiful yet modest, she displays kindness toward the peasant children and is a loving fiancée for Robin.  She displays bravery by pleading with John for Robin’s life and defecting to Sherwood Forest without being an obligatory modern action girl.  Still, she’s a bit more open to love than real-life potential tradwifes from what I hear.  Then again, she didn’t have a diet of chick-flicks to teach her whatever vague rules women judge men by.  Her lady-in-waiting the amusingly robust Lady Cluck (Carole Shelley, a hen), provides an effective foil for her.  It strange that one of the most traditional, yet balanced and developed Disney princesses is a furry.

        Overall, the voice cast is very good and appropriate for the roles.  I generally prefer voice actors over celebrities in cartoons, but I admit that the latter ages like wine.  What seems faddish and cheap at the time grows into a nice bonus for dedicated cinephiles.  It especially helps that some of them are character actors with very distinctive voices like Peter Ustinov, Pat Buttram, Andy Levine, and Terry-Thomas.  Ustinov also displays some legitimate VA chameleon skills when he voices King Richard (a maned lion).  Other cast members include George Lindsey and Ken Curtiss as the henchmen Trigger and Nutsy (vultures), John Fiedler and Barbara Luddy as two church-mice, Candy Candido as a crocodilian captain, and J. Pat O’Malley as a bloodhound blacksmith.

        The animation is overall solid.  I know a lot of people complain about the xerography method that dominated this era of Disney, but I think it as a valid and practical innovation.  Unfortunately, it did make it easier for Disney to shamelessly recycle some of its earlier animations from prevous movies and Robin Hood is guilty of its share of that.  That’s really my greatest complaint about the movie; the only other moment of cringe is Lady Cluck’s football rush during the archery tournament battle.  The music is passable and has some memorable moments.

        Because Robin Hood himself is such an effective, admirable, and charismatic hero, everyone wants to adopt him as an ideological mascot.  Left-leaners celebrate how he stole from the rich to give to the poor, while libertarians more cogently point out that he was rebelling against unjust taxation and was a skilled archer who used the skill for very 2^nd Amendment-adjacent reasons.  Still, pretty sure the Trads have the best case considering that he was a Catholic integralist in a movie which had a positive depictions of the Middle Ages.  

        One of the reasons why Robin Hood has stood a test of time (despite Disney’s mild embarrassment of it) is that it’s the most straight adaptation in modern cinema that most of us grew up with, although it doesn't go into the rivalry between the Normans and the Saxons.  Every subsequent adaptation has been somewhat unfaithful and deconstructive.  Even if Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves (1991) is much more entertaining movie than people give it credit for, it’s hardly definitive.   Robin Hood is an earnest, fun modern swashbuckler and an unapologetic depiction of traditional heroism, which is why it’s remained with us to this day.  That’s why it’s so refreshing in a sea of deconstruction, and that’s why it’s one of the iconicanthropomorphic stories out there.                    

 

 

         MOVIE PITCH: ROBIN HOOD 2

 

    Despite not trusting modern Disney with anything now (especially Robin Hood), it would be cool to see a traditionally animated sequel to this movie.  Years later, Robin Hood and Marian are married with children, but trouble arises when The Sheriff of Nottingham comes back for revenge.  In this movie, he’s far more intimidating: he’s lost weight and a good bit of sanity from his long time in prison, and he’s out for blood. Reynard the Fox (possibly Will Arnett) could show up as an antagonist who means to manipulate the Sheriff’s vengefulness as a power grab.  

     Robin has to go back and fight, with a tearful separation from Marian.  Marian, not going down the action girl route, remains to tend to the kits while using her position in royalty to handle the political aspects of the conflict (a la Princess Leia in the Legends Universe).  At one point she’s cornered into using some modest combat skills to protect the children.

       There could also be a redemption arc involving Sir Hiss, who’s been spending years in a monastery atoning for his past.  He holds some key information, and the heroes have to learn to trust his perceptiveness (unlike John), and he learns to find his courage.  

        The voice acting could have some challenge with mimicry, but the Sheriff’s voice could be channeled into something creepy while not being off-model.  There could be some well-researched sword-play.    

 

 

 

QUOTES

 

ROBIN HOOD [as a fortune teller]: Your name will go down, down, down in history, of course.

JOHN: Yes, I knew it!  I knew it!  You hear that, Hiss?  Oh, you can’t.  He’s in the basket.

     

HISS: I knew it!  I knew this would happen!  I tried to warn you, but no, no, no, you wouldn’t listen.  You just had to.  Ah, Ah!  Seven years bad-   

[John smashes a mirror over his head]  

HISS: …luck.  That’s what it is.  Besides, you broke your mother’s mirror.

JOHN: Ah! Mommy! [sucks his thumb] I’ve got a dirty thumb. 

 

LITTLE JOHN: You know something, Robin?  You’re taking too many chances.

ROBIN: Chances?  You must be joking!  That was a bit of a lark, Little John.

LITTLE JOHN: Oh yeah?  Take a look at your hat.  That’s not a candle on a cake.  

ROBIN: Hello!  This one almost had my name on it, didn’t it?  They’re getting better you know.  You gotta admit it, they’re getting better.

 

SKIPPY: That old Prince John doesn’t scare me!

TOBY: I’m scared of Prince John, he’s cranky.

 

CLUCK: Absence makes the heart grow fonder.

MARIAN: Or forgetful.

 

[Robin has just burned a pot of food]

ROBIN: Sorry, Johnny.  Guess I was thinking about Marian again.  I can’t help it.  I love her, Johnny.  

LITTLE JOHN: Look, why don’t you stop moonin’ and mopin’ around?  Just, just marty the girl.

ROBIN: Marry her?  You don’t just walk up to a girl, hand her a bouquet, and say, “Hey, remember me?  We were kids together.  Will you marry me?  No, it just isn’t done that way.

LITTLE JOHN: Aw come on, Robbie.  Climb the castle walls.  Sweep her off her feet.  Carry her off in style.

ROBIN: It’s no use, Johnny.  I’ve thought it all out, and…it just wouldn’t work.  Besides, what have I got to offer her?

LITTLE JOHN: Well, for one thing, you can’t cook.  [sniffs at what’s left of the food and sneers]

ROBIN: I’m serious, Johnny She’s a highborn lady of quality.

LITTLE  JOHN:  So she’s got class, so what?

ROBIN HOOD: I’m an outlaw, that’s what.  That’s no life for a lovely lady.  Always on the run.  What kind of future is that?

[Enter Friar Tuck]

FRIAR TUCK: Oh, for heavens sake, son.  You’re no outlaw.  Why someday you’ll be called a great hero.

ROBIN: A hero?  Do you hear that, Johnny?  We’ve just been pardoned.

LITTLE JOHN: That’s a gas, we ain’t even been arrested yet.

 

JOHN: I sentence you to sudden, instant, and even immediate DEATH.

 

HISS: Well, I tried to warn you, but no ,no, no, you wouln’t listen.  Your traps just never work.  And now look what you’ve done to your mother’s castle.

 

 

2023 Movies Ranked

<< 2022    2024 >>

14. Oppenheimer

D: Christopher Nolan

**********

13. The Boy and the Heron

D: Hayao Miyazaki

**********

12. Beau is Afraid

D: Ari Aster

**********

11. The Super Mario Bros. Movie

Aaron Horvath, Michael Jelenic

**********

10. Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3

D: James Gunn

**********

9. Mission Impossible: Dead Reckoning, Part 1

D: Christopher McQuarrie

**********

8. Five Nights at Freddie's

D: Emma Tammi

**********

7. Nefarious

D: Chuck Konzelman, Cary Solomon

**********

6. Suzume

D: Makoto Shinkai

**********

5. The Whale

D: Darren Aronofsky

**********

4. Puss in Boots: The Last Wish

D: Joel Crawford

**********

3. Godzilla: Minus One

Takashi Yamazaki

**********

2. Sound of Freedom

D: Alejandro Monteverde

**********

1. John Wick: Chapter 4

D: Chad Stahelski 

**********

<< 2022    2023 >>

The Even Odd Rule Actually Applies

Star Trek Into Darkness

2013

D: J.J. Abrams

**********

Pros: Villain, Effects, Action, Music

Cons: Some Logical Problems, Forced Fanservice, Rushed Ending

 

 

         Simon Pegg, being a company man, asserted that the Star Trek reboot broke the Even/Odd Rule, but a more absurd lie could hardly be told.  Not only is it untrue of the odd-numbered movies of the original run (whose reputation largely suffered from their not being crowd-pleasers), I believe this rule ironically applies to the reboot movies far more.  I seem to be in the minority, but I thought Star Trek and Star Trek Beyond were unwatchable pieces of garbage while finding Into Darkness pretty fun.

        Much of this is due to Abrams’ own interests and passions.  Abrams admitted that he was always more of a Star Wars fan, which explains his reducing Star Trek to a phoned-in attempt at a Hero’s Journey.  This also explains why The Force Awakens, as bad as it is, was at least watchable.  However, even most non-Trekkers enjoy The Wrath of Khan, which Into Darkness is inspired by.  As such, Abrams was able to muster enough interest to develop characters, even though the very idea was a reflection of his lack of imagination.  At least he mixed up the story a little bit, unlike TFA.

       Perhaps what makes such a big difference between Into Darkness and the other two reboots is the presence of a charismatic, nuanced villain whose motivations actually make sense.   In Star Trek we had a supposedly complex normal person driven mad by the destruction of his home and family, and instead of taking the opportunity of time travel to fix the problem, irrationally blames Vulcan and wants to murder everybody; he is effectively one-dimensional in the context of the movie’s conflict and plot.  In Beyond, the villain blames society for subjecting him to dangers that he consented to as a space explorer and wants to murder everybody; he is effectively one-dimensional in the context of the movie’s conflict and plot.  Both characters are played by actors usually good at playing human beings, but are too restrained by heavy makeup and bad writing to actually act.  

       In contrast John Harrison (later revealed to be Khan Noonien Singh) is played by Benedict Cumberbatch in all his glory.  His performance is stylized a bit to maximize his wonderful baritone, but his performance is still nuanced and charismatic.  In this timeline, he was awakened early by Alexander Marcus (Peter Weller), who uses him as a consultant in designing a battleship able to fight the Klingons in a war he was anticipating, using Harrison’s crew as a bargaining chip.  When Harrison escapes, he understandably projects his own savagery onto Marcus, assuming he has murdered his crew in retaliation, and begins a campaign of homicidal revenge.  While clearly villainous and acting on violence, you can feel for him when he utters an effectively simple line that our hero can relate to: “My crew is my family, Kirk (Chris Pine). Is there nothing you would not do for family?”

       This provides an effective foil for Kirk, who must face the reality of making sacrifices for the good of his crew and his ship.  He does so without resorting to the murderous methods his enemy does, his civilized morality's contrasting with the villain's barbaric and tribalistic (but still human) one.

        Unfortunately, Marcus’ reasoning makes little sense.  It’s made clear that Marcus needed Harrison’s “savagery” to design a ship like a warrior.  Why would you need a barbarian to think to put some guns on a ship?  In fact, this also goes against the a subtle theme in the franchise in which the Federation, which values creativity and innovation, ends up making more effective warships than the Klingons.  It’s the same paradox that was reflected in the Spartans vs. the Athenians and the North vs. South Koreans.  Harrison even reinforces the buffoonery by asking Spock (Zachary Quinto) how he can break bone when he cannot even break a rule, oblivious to the entire concept of justifiable violence and extenuating circumstances.  

        Strangely enough, The Wrath of Khan itself preemptively deconstructs this!  For all his intelligence, Khan's lack of experience in space tactics makes it difficult for him to think 3-dimensionally; he ultimately succumbs to Kirk's hard-earned expertise.  Then again, he might just be a match for the reboots relatively green itnerpretation of "Kirk."

        The resultant plot is fun enough.  Kirk and Harrison form an unsteady alliance against the rogue Marcus culminating in a delightfully gruesome death for the admiral.  A better way to make an alternate timeline version of this iconic rivalry is for Harrison to show mercy to Kirk and his crew, demonstrating a sense of gratitude and honor while having an interesting twist: imagine a universe in which these two characters ended up being friends of a sort.  Instead, the villain decides to murder Kirk and Co, which lacks the personal drama of the original timeline. This plays out in the far lazier twist we’ve grown to expect from Abrams: the same thing happens except with Spock and Kirk’s roles reversed.  After the villain’s ship is crashed into the water, (the opening sequence has the Enterprise's hiding in a lake for apparent reason than to cut a misleading trailer in which it seems to reemerge like a phoenix after the crash, much like the trick of showing Finn’s holding a lightsaber at times) and without the sacrifices made in Star Trek III, Kirk is revived using the villain’s blood, which is tested on a tribble, another bit of fanservice for pseudo-Trekkers.  In the end, our villain is harmlessly frozen, a moral victory for a civilization that values mercy and due process.  I like the theme and the intriguing plot, even if it is a reflection of the writer’s being a 9/11 truther.

         Another moment I liked is when Scotty (Simon Pegg) refuses to sign off on cargo that is not properly inspected, which turns out to be part of Marcus’ conspiracy.  He displays integrity by forfeiting his job, but the movie displays its characteristic ignorance of military structure by having him being replaced by an ensign (Anton Yelchin’s Chekov) as CHENG.  Spock and Uhura’s (Zoe Saldana) questionable romance continues, but there is a good line in which Spock explains to her that he purposefully shut down his emotions when he thought he was going to die because he cared so much for his loved ones and did not want to feel grief; sometimes one has to be emotionally distant to care.  

         The movie has great production value that enhances its action and makes it really fun to watch.  People don’t often talk about how important sound design and mixing are to this, and Michael Giacchino’s theme helps as well.  I like the sinister design of the Vengeance, as well as its intimidating buzz, and of course I love the design of the AU Enterprise.  The design falls flat when we see a Klingon ship; I’ve always loved the look of their craft, but this one has the “generic spiky green alien ship” look.  The Klingons themselves are flat, and Uhura tries to appease them with generic mentions of the word “honor.”  While most people complained about a bikini scene involving Carol Marcus (Alice Eve), even more egregious was how the Caitians fell victim to normie thirst. 

        Star Trek Into Darkness, despite its flaws, is a fun, well-paced movie with plenty of twists, and I was invested in the conflict.  The confrontation on Kronos, which could only be interpreted by the Klingons as an act of war, also sets the stage for the subsequent war, which we obviously could not have because that makes too much sense and would be too interesting.