According to a recent article from TIME, Universal has canceled the American release of a new horror movie - called The Hunt - following two separate mass shootings that happened in America a week ago. "Now is not the right time", was part of the reasoning. From watching the The Hunt's trailer, it looks to be an ultra-violent film dealing with people who hunt people for sport. The trailer also seems to spoil who gets killed off; it looks like Amy Madigan's character does early (I like her, so to see her mercilessly terrorized and shot does not seem like fun to watch). The movie also features Hillary Swank and Emma Roberts; I don't know what their roles are, but I've read this film is supposed to satirical.
In 1994, I remember seeing Oliver Stone's satirical film Natural Born Killers, and I thought of that movie in the last week after the news of these shootings. I didn't like that film it at the time; it seemed to be presenting a society that idolizes serial killers, a concept I find really disturbing. I can't imagine anyone idolizing these latest killers in the news. I haven't watched that film in 25 years, but was thinking about rewatching it again sometime in the future. If I do I will post my thoughts about it. It was given 4 stars by Roger Ebert in his 1994 review.
Among the older films on my list to watch was Targets, which was released in the summer of 1968. It was Peter Bogdonovich's first feature film as director. The posters for Targets at the time showed an assassin/sniper, and like in the trailer for The Hunt, also warns the audience to expect violence and gives away some of the killings. I can only imagine the advertisers at the time trying to promote this film. Targets was released just a few months after Martin Luther King Jr and Senator Robert Kennedy were shot, and one year before the horrendous murder of movie star Sharon Tate and others in her home.
Eating a sandwich before a killing spree.
What a Tarantino character might do?
I watched the movie over the weekend. It's OK. It's actually not entirely about the assassin to my surprise. He plays a major role, but the film doesn't explore his motivations and at the end we're left to our own interpretations. His dad and mom appear in a few scenes; the father is a hunter who has his own collection. The assassin's wife is depicted as hardworking, and they all watch TV together in the living room (they all live under the same roof). We don't get much background about the killer other than he's obsessed with guns (has a whole collection of them at home and in his trunk) and visits guns stores regularly, and that he's deranged. His age isn't specified, but we assume early 20s. There's no mention of him having any prior convictions, and no one acknowledges that he has a mental disturbance, or holds any political grievances. I'm amazed at how easy it was to buy his guns and ammunition at the various shops he goes to.
He basically kills people for sport, which is what he does in the film, and it's pretty disturbing to watch when he does it.
We are also are introduced to another main character, an aging horror-film star named "Orlock" played by Boris Karloff. It's not until the end when the two characters come together; the film builds up suspense until then. I liked Karloff's performance in this. Most of his sequences are comical in tone, hinting that this is a satire. Some of his dialogue, reactions, and expressions are funny, and he even plays drunk in one scene. My favorite part is when someone knocks on his door and he quips in his unmistakable voice, "Who's that knocking at my chamber door?" (a clear reference to 1967's Who's That Knocking At My Door). He also is shown watching some of his old movies various eras of his career (which are real Karloff films; I liked these meta references).
While watching Targets, I wondered if Tarantino saw it, and wondered if it in some way inspired him while envisioning his latest movie, Once Upon a Time in Hollywood.
I found similarities in the two movies.
For example, in OUATIH, we also are introduced to an aging star who feels useless and washed-up (like Orlock). The Sharon Tate character in OUATIH also watches her latest film like Orlock does in this movie. The killer in Targets (played by Tim O'Brien -- he had a short career before dying early) drives around LA in his Ford Mustang convertible with the radio playing 60s music and DJs, similar to Pitt and DiCaprio in OUATIH.
By the end of Targets, it seemed a bit more clear me that this movie isn't solely about the assassin. In fact, I think it's more about the Orlock character - a horror film veteran who faces real-life horror on the verge of retirement.
An interesting article from Slate that talks about the making of the film, and how Roger Corman and Samuel Fuller helped shape the film. Really interesting.
At the beginning of Gloria, a young boy escapes from the mob after his entire family is killed; the killers want the boy, too, but Gloria (Gena Rowlands) steps in to protect him.
The movie was filmed entirely on location in New York, which is almost a third main character. At one point I caught of glimpse of a Barnes and Noble bookstore, which was neat to see. And in the subway there's a billboard for a radio station with Kenny Rogers' picture on it (he was a big deal in that period of time).
It took some getting used to the actor who plays the orphan. As I understand, the child was not a professional actor, and not the best actor, either. Apparently he "won" a "Razzie" for Worst Supporting Actor that year, unfortunately. It really does feel like the child was miscast, and he usually feels unprepared and unmotivated to act or deliver his lines. However this might have been a smart casting choice on the part of director John Cassavetes. Since the character's entire life is shaken to its core in a matter of minutes, there's an edge to the boy, and after awhile I got used to him.
In Peter Bogdanovich's book "Movie of the Week", Peter talks about how John Cassavetes - the film's writer-director - originally wanted Peter to direct and Barbra Streisand to star. Barbra didn't want to do it because she didn't think anyone would believe her in the role.
Gena is great Gloria, a complex character that is fascinating to watch. There's a touching scene in the middle of the film when Gloria takes the young boy to a cemetery and teaches him the importance of saying goodbye. She says to him (paraphrasing), "Your parents are not here, but you can still talk to them here. Pick any stones - those look like nice ones. Say whatever comes to your heart". The scene made me break down emotionally. Gloria cares about the boy even though she's connected with the mob herself. She has a sense of decency. The ending of the film is also a tearjerker.
I also watched another movie with a similar mother-son theme, Trucker from 2008. It stars Michelle Monaghan as a young trucker who is reluctantly reunited with her 10 year old son when the father becomes terminally ill. After a number of arguments, the two both learn to accept each other. This film also has a few heartbreaking scenes including one involving the sick dad (Benjamin Bratt) trying to explain to his son he is going to die. I recommend this movie, which co-stars Nathan Fillion as an unhappily married man who loves Michelle.
In the early years of the twentieth century, the term "nickelodeon" had a few meanings. It could refer to a number of various types of music "jukeboxes" - the kind you might find in a penny arcade (immortalized in the famous Teresa Brewer pop song). There were also cinema nickelodeons, usually converted/renovated storefronts serving as theaters. They featured short silent films and seated usually up to 100 or so people. The price of admission was usually a nickel.
By the way, if you ever get the chance to visit downtown Chicago (where I'm from), you can actually step back into time into a replica nickelodeon cinema (and view a short silent film) at the Museum of Science an Industry's permanent Yesterday's Main Street exhibit. This, along with Colleen Moore's Fairy Castle, are two must-sees for any classic film buff who visits the city.
Nickelodeon cinemas became less and less popular after 1915, the year DW Griffith's full-length feature film The Birth of A Nation was released. This was a dawn of a new era, when long, epic films competed against each other, and when grand movie palaces started to go up.
Writer-Director Peter Bogdonovich was fascinated with this era, and for a long time wanted to make a period film about the making of silents. By 1976 he had established himself as a credible film historian and author, and had interviewed many legends of Hollywood filmmaking, such as Orson Welles and John Ford, just to name a few. He received acclaim for his B/W period films The Last Picture Show and Paper Moon (starring Ryan and Tatum O'Neal), and paid homage to several film genres such as screwball comedy (with What's Up Doc) and Astaire/Rogers type musicals of the 30s (with At Long Last Love, which starred Burt Reynolds).
Was the world ready for a film about the silent era in 1976? No matter what, the dream project was going to happen. Interestingly, a silent movie was a hit that summer: Mel Brooks' madcap spoof Silent Movie sort of paved the way for another silent-themed film. And when it was time to cast the picture, Bogdonovich turned to actors he already worked with, including Reynolds (who also was in the Mel Brooks film, ironically) and Tatum, who had a hit that summer with Bad News Bears. Many were anxious to see her re-teamed with her father on the screen, and Nickelodeon would be that film. But since then, they have yet to appear together on screen again.
Nickelodeon, co-written and directed by Bogdonovich, was released during the Christmas season in 1976 and takes place between the early cinema years 1910-1915. For authenticity, Bogdonovich wanted his film to be in B/W, but apparently the studio was against it for box-office reasons. I've seen both versions; the DVD has the Director's Cut (with commentary) and is in B/W, a version which I personally prefer. But there's value in the original theatrical color version as well; Laszlo Kovacs' beautiful cinematography brightens the period sets and costumes, and many scenes have a sepia-tone look.
There is alot to be learned about the history of cinema from watching this film (and from listening to the director's commentary on DVD, which I highly recommend!) I first watched it with a group of film students at a screening at the Gene Siskel Film Center at the School of the Art Institute of Chicago (The original theatrical, color version was shown) The professor speaking about the film was author and film historian Virginia Wright Wexman Her lecture before the screening helped me to appreciate this film all the more.
It was brought up in the lecture that during this time, many folks who who never intended to pursue a career in films ended up doing so anyway, and often, were very successful. The characters in the film of Reynold's "Buck" is a stuntman who ends up coming a movie star by complete accident, and Ryan O'Neal plays a failed-lawyer who also stumbles into the movie business when he meets an independent film producer (played by Brian Keith, in an over-the-top performance). Leo pitches a few story ideas to him, and he's soon on his way into movies.
All these characters and scenarios are based on real life incidents, as told to Bogdonovich in a number of interviews he conducted with film directors of the pre-sound era, including Allan Dwan (who was a stagehand before becoming a writer-director), Raoul Walsh (who really was a stuntman before his directing career), and Leo McCarey (who really was a failed lawyer). In fact, almost every scene is inspired by a priceless, true story, or is an homage to an earlier film or director (the DVD's director commentary is a must-hear).
There isn't much of a plot to the film; mostly it's a series of scenes that center around one theme: "galloping tintypes", as they called movies back then. Often I just wanted to sit back in awe of what I experiencing; I really felt like I had been transported back in time. There are a few love triangles that give the film some romance. And providing the film with a sense of suspense and menace, the audience is introduced to the Motion Picture Patents Company, a group of studios formed to protect the invention of Thomas Edison's camera against copycats. But they could not stop a crop independents from making films with non-Edison cameras. The "Patents" often went to extreme measures to halt production on these independents, sometimes sending out goons to destroy the cameras. Nickelodeon features a number of scenes recreating some of these events. In one humorous scene, a Patent shoots a camera and a character exclaims, "He just killed a box!".
Leo sets out to a secluded California town to make movies for his independent film company (a patent is on his trail). His crew, whom he never met, awaits him. The first person he meets is Tatum, whose unexciting character is a child prodigy called upon to be the head writer. John Ritter, in an early role, is great as a cameraman. Stella Stevens and model-turned actress Jane Hitchcock (in her screen debut) play leading ladies (Hitchcock, who is good in this, never appeared in another film, unfortunately). George Gaynes plays one of the lead actors, and he seems to be warming up for his future role as "Dr. Brewster" in Tootsie. Burt Reynolds comes in a bit later as the dashing leading man, playing all sorts of silent film characters. He is quite good in this role, and turns out an impressive comic performance, probably my favorite ever of his. There are a few small bit parts played by a few veteran western stars, including James Best and Harry Carey Jr., who has ties not only to westerns, but to the silent cinema, as his father was a silent film star.
In one fun scene, the cast and crew travel to the big city and check out a nickelodeon theater, which happens to be showing one of their films (not a complete film, actually - you'll have to see the film). They are then followed out of the theater by fanatics (or, I should say, "fans") who recognize them and ask them for a souvenir. When they don't have anything to offer, the fanatics start ripping their clothes. Typical.
And here's another neat scene, which shows how several short silent movies were made at once, by one film company.
One of the best scenes is toward the end, which recreates the opening day of DW Griffith's The Birth of a Nation in 1915, a film that changed movies forever. The Los Angeles premiere had a full orchestra and even sound effects men behind the screen. Leo and company attend the premiere, which was called at first, "The Clansman". We are shown several extended clips from the actual movie, and Bogdonavich often cuts to audience reaction shots to demonstrate the incredible impact. At the end of the screening, the audiences is silent for a moment, then applause. Then a standing ovation by all, except Leo. He sits, and we wonder what he thinks. Is he jealous? Is his sad? Is he stunned? Then, the director of the epic - DW Griffith - walks out on the stage to take a bow, and Leo rises. A good scene.
The film didn't become a box office hit. Perhaps it was too history-heavy. There are a couple of potentially cringe-inducing scenes, one where white actors have to put on black makeup to play African tribal members, and another scene set at an original stage production of "The Clansman" featuring a stunt man in a white sheet and a burning cross. Historical, yes, but perhaps enough to turn off sensitive viewers. Also, advertising may have been a problem: the posters for this movie showed Tatum in a hot-air balloon, but there's no such scene in the film. And though it contains plenty of slapstick, it's heavily nostalgic. It certainly was a different kind of film for action star Burt Reynolds. Overall, it wouldn't be fair at all to call the film a failure, yet critics did have mixed feelings. Roger Ebert only gave the film two stars out of four (read review), commenting that 2/3 through the movie, it turns "from comedy to elegy". I could see his point; it did turn out to be a more serious film than I expected it would be. The last scene shows all of the main characters in a solemn state, pondering the future, and what the new age of films would bring.
Finally, I want to mention one more scene, which comes close to the end, and it sort of broke my heart. At a Christmas party, an open canister of one of Leo's films is carelessly placed on a table and someone mistakes it for an ashtray. In this scene, we see how flammable nitrate film was, as it almost burns an entire room filled with people. Sad to think of it, but this sort of thing surely happened to many films of this era. In fact, over 80% of all films made between 1894-1930 are lost forever. More must be done to ensure that surviving silent films are preserved, restored, and viewed, so they can be discovered and
enjoyed for all time. Among the efforts: 2010 For the Love of Film: The Film Preservatation Blogathon taking place now through Feb 21, hosted by The Self-Styled Siren and Ferdy on Films.
For more perspectives on the film "Nickelodeon":
Alex wrote a critical review of this film not long ago from his blog Critic Picks (I enjoyed the movie much more)
