Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Malevolent
2018 ***1/2 It's 1986 for some reason, and a team of paranormal investigators are making a big name for themselves all over Scotland. ...
-
I’m sure none of you except for JPX knows that I’m a bit of a germ-a-phobic. It’s annoying, but manageable. Though, since I met JPX and list...
42 comments:
Okay, this is one of my favorite topics!
And, the website's whole attitude makes me mad ("a ton of useful information about screenwriting" my ass) because it's all presented in this snide fashion like saying the title is some kind of problem or mistake. That's bolstered by the guy's remark about how "it will make you think twice" about doing it (all you busy screenwriters out there) and the comments about "What if you don't know it's the title?" etc. Idiotic.
Because saying the title is one of the single most effective techniques in drama, fiction and movies. In the moment when the title is spoken, mystical forces are unleashed in the reader's/viewer's head with all the subtlety and power of a belt of fine scotch; the kaleidoscopic elements of storytelling align together like a flock of birds changing direction in unison. I've always loved the effective use of this technique, and I've worked as hard as I can to do it properly myself.
Just from the montage, Sgt. Horvath (Tom Sizemore) saying "Part of me thinks that maybe saving private Ryan may be the only..." etc. is a perfect, perfect cinematic moment that is immune to parody. Obviously, Doc Brown yelling out "We're sending you back to the future!" while pointing heroically at the camera is somewhat campy, like everything in that gloriously nutty movie. There are all different ways to do it. (And really bad examples, like James Cromwell saying, "You're all travellers on some kind of star trek" in Star Trek First Contact...ugh.)
I love when James Fox gets into a car in London and tells his driver, "The Russia house," before slamming the door. I love "Forget it, Jake -- it's Chinatown" (who doesn't?) I love the prison guard yelling "Dead man walking!" as they finally lead Sean Penn towards the lethal injection room. I love when the President suddenly says, "Dr. Strangelove!" 2/3 of the way through the movie, revealing the evil doctor's presence at the table (especially since they're both Peter Sellers). I love the old guy saying his line about how years ago the plan was put in place to save Pepperland with "this yellow submarine" (Octo will remember the exact line). I love Tom Cruise lost in thought, suddenly remembering his childhood: "When I was scared the rain man would come protect me." I love the Berlin cops telling Joseph Cotten, "There was a third man." I love James Spader mumbling as he translates alien hieroglyphics: "This...is....your...stargate...stargate." I love Jack Black peering around fiendishly and repeating "The school of rock. The school of rock!" ("And we shall teach rock n' roll...") I love Dennis Quaid telling a reporter, "I only met one pilot who really had the right st..." before trailing off. I love Keanu Reeves muttering "What is the Matrix?" in Carrie-Anne Moss' ear.
I could do this all day. The title is like a spell or incantation, empowering the magic.
I love when Nicholson quietly remembers, "We had to do this piano recital...five easy pieces." I love when Tommy Lee Jones yells, "Listen up, people! Our fugitive is on foot..." I love when Russel Crowe rasps, "My name is Gladiator." I love when Clarence tells Jimmy Stewart, "You see, George, you really had a wonderful life." I love when Danny Glover tells Mel Gibson, "They ought to classify you as a lethal weapon!"
I love Leo G. Carroll and Cary Grant walking across the tarmac at the airport, and suddenly passing in front of an enormous, brilliantly-lit airline sign that says "NORTHWEST."
Dude, you thought of so many! None of them were in the montage. Nice. I truly believe you could go all night.
I don't share your interpretation of the blog's tone, though. I don't think "a ton of useful information about screenwriting" is meant with no irony, not when his current lead article is "The purpose of drama, and its relationship to Cameron Diaz’s ass." Presenting the reel that way was a misfire, sure, but I didn't see anything snide about it.
Most of the (first dozen) comments are in favor of stating the title. I especially liked this one:
"Years ago I read an interview with Penn Jillette in which he said that whenever a character says the title of a movie, he and his friends applaud."
I liked this comment too:
The Upright Citizens’ Brigade did a bit about this. Something about a guy in a video store claimed he was in Star Wars and had the titular line. The video store guy called him on it, and he said he could prove it. He brought in some tape where he had spliced in a video of himself (I think in some kind of home-made aluminum space suit?) saying “Gee, I sure am tired of all these STAR WARS”. Then later in the episode he had a video where he said “I sure am glad to be OUT OF AFRICA”.
Unfortunately by now I find myself not all that impressed with the movies in the clip reel. I was already dubious of the ending lag created by the framing speeches for Basic Instinct and The Breakfast Club, but after Jordan rattled off so many better examples I'm all "meh."
I'd hate to be in a theater with Penn Jillette and his friends.
Obviously I don't know from that blog. I just was instantly put off by the "it will make you think twice" comment. Saying the title is good, not bad!
Furthermore, the tag of The Breakfast Club (when Brian's narrating and he says, "Yours sincerely, the Breakfast Club" as the final line of the movie) gives me chills each time. It's fucking great. How can anyone think that's bad?
I love it when the movie title is stated within the movie but for some reason it annoys me when a band's song lyrics contain the name of the band. Of course I can't think of a single example at the moment but perhaps after a few cups of joe.
Isn't it funny how outdate the whole "You got mail" thing is today? I would be annoyed if my email announced this every time I received a new message.
This clip also reminded me that I can't stand hyper Robin Williams movie roles (but I love serious Robin Williams movie roles).
"really bad examples, like James Cromwell saying, "You're all travellers on some kind of star trek" in Star Trek First Contact...ugh.)"
Yes! That always annoyed me, it just feels so forced.
I make the following point about Robin Williams:
Some comedy is visual, and some is auditory. A good standup comic is a master of auditory comedy. A good film comedian has the opportunity to be both a master of auditory comedy and a master of physical comedy. (Alternatively, a good film comedian can be both a master of auditory comedy and a good actor, and somebody like Eddie Murphy falls somewhere in this zone.)
If you listen to a Steve Martin album, it'll crack you up. The man is funny. Likewise a Woody Allen album (there's really only one: Standup Comic, from the late 'sixties). Very funny records. You can't see a thing, and you're doubled over laughing.
If you listen to a Robin Williams record, it's funny.
If you watch a Woody Allen movie or a Steve Martin movie with the sound off, you'll still be laughing (Particularly if it's early stuff like Sleeper or The Jerk.
But if you watch a Robin Williams movie with the sound off, you'll get...nothing. Absolutely nothing, because physically, he's go no talent. All he does is stand around hunched over with his head jammed down on his neck, eyes half-open, not making eye contact, with this weird mushy look on his face. (Even in that Good Morning Vietnam clip, he's got the same mush-faced, wandering-eyed Robin Williams facial expression he has in every scene of every movie he's ever made.) The man is incapable of emoting or moving gracefully...physically, he's like cement. He only gets laughs through the soundtrack. (That's why his best role was Aladdin, because Disney's animators did all the acting for him.)
By contrast, Woody Allen and Steve Martin (and Jim Carrey, and Steve Carrell, and Simon Pegg, and Ricky Gervais) are Chaplin-level physical talents. They don't need any stinking soundtrack; they could bring the house down in silent movies. That's my withering dismissal of Robin Williams.
I have trouble taking Steve Martin in a "serious" role because just looking at his face makes me laugh. Recently Whirlygirl and I caught him in concert in Boston. We had lousy seats but because the show had a lot of good seats still available we were able to steal better seats closer to the stage. Martin was promoting some banjo album he just put out. He was hilarious in between songs, of course, but even watching him play his songs made us smile.
Years ago I stumbled across Robin Williams working on a scene from Good Will Hunting in Boston. At the end of the scene he was working on (sitting on the bench with Matt Damon), he just let loose a torrent of manic behavior. It's as if he just can't contain his manic energy, ever.
PS. He had really bad B.O.
PPS. Good point about Aladdin.
I also love it when a novel is divided into several overarching 'parts" or "books" (possibly subdivided into chapters) and they each have actual names...and the name of the last "book" is the name of the novel itself.
Stephen King has a particular mastery of this. For example: The Stand has three "books". When you start, a title page reads "BOOK I / CAPTAIN TRIPS / June 16-July 4 1980." That gets you all the way through the superflu, and ends with the extended anecdote of Fran, Harold and Stu meeting on the road. Then you get "BOOK II / ON THE BORDER / July 5-September 6 1980" -- covering the characters meeting in Vegas and Boulder, and all the dramatic events that ensue. At the end of Book II, Mother Abagail sends the four men on the road to Vegas, and they start walking West. King writes, "They went on, leaving Boulder behind them. By nine that night tehy were camped in Golden, half a mile from where Route 6 begins its twisting, turning course along Clear Creek and into the stone heart of the Rockies. None of them slept well the first night. Already they felt far from home, and under the shadow of death." (A deliberate homage to the final lines of The Fellowship of the Ring, in my opinion.) Then you turn the page and see "BOOK III / THE STAND / September 7 1980-January 10 1981." Yeah.
He does that in his Dark Tower series as well.
Absolutely! And there's a really innovate example in The Shining:
The book's chapters (of which there are about 60) all have individual names, which are uniformly terse, and which appear in boldface all-caps. (Kubrick picked up this motif with his intertitles in the movie.) So when you start the first section ("PART ONE: PREFATORY MATTERS"), you see
<<1>> JOB INTERVIEW
which is a brief, ten-page chapter. Then you get
<<2>> BOULDER
which cuts to Wendy at home, looking out the kitchen window at Danny, sitting on the curb waiting for "his daddy" to get home. Etc. All these chapters are very brief, including <<4>> SHADOWLAND which is after nightfall, as King introduces us to the dark imagery in Danny's head.
We move briskly along to "PART II: CLOSING DAY" which brings the Torrances to the Overlook for the first time (again, Kubrick mimicked this exactly). Then Halloran and Danny meet and Hallorann asks Danny to help him bring his bags out to his car (obviously, because he wants to talk to him). King writes
"I'll send him right back in," Hallorann said.
"Fine," Wendy said, and followed them to the door. Jack was still looking around for Ullman. The last of the Overlook's guests were checking out at the desk.
Chapter ends; you turn the page and see
<<11>> THE SHINING
which is, of course, the discussion between Danny and Hallorann (in the front seat of his car; in the movie, the same discussion, almost verbatim, occurs in the hotel kitchen). But, way to deploy the title. So fucking effective!
I love how his final Dark Tower book is, "The Dark Tower VII: The Dark Tower" (!)
Yeah, exactly!
You agree with me about my The Shining example, right? It's the one that comes closest to the movie examples above.
Another great example, revealing that some filmmakers are total idiots but remain masters of structure: the three acts of Independence Day.
The movie starts with three animated title cards that say 20TH CENTURY FOX PRESENTS / INDEPENDENCE DAY / JULY 2 (beginning the first act of the story). The first act climaxes very dramatically, with the synchronized destruction of all the world's major cities (How many first acts end like that?). All the big blasts are coordinated, including the White House and the Empire State Building. Then we're with Vivica Fox in that Los Angeles tunnel; the dog leaps through the door (and the audience cheers) as the lightbulb smashes, plunging us into darkness.
Silence...and then the second act begins with a title card (JULY 3) and fades in on the toppled Statue of Liberty and, in the background, the gun aperture on the spaceship slowly gliding closed. Everything proceeds to get worse and worse; the disastrous air attack on the aliens; the Area 51 stuff; the telepathic sequence when the President learns of the aliens' real plans and reacts ("Nuke 'em") and the complete, catastrophic failure of the humans' nuclear strike, which sends Jeff Goldblum into a mad despair. All seems lost...except that Goldblum is by himself, drinking and thinking. The last straw is Mary McDonnell dying (a very quiet scene); the little girl asks, "Is Mommy sleeping?" and Bill Pullman chokes back a sob and whispers, "Yeah...Mommy's sleeping."
Quiet fade to black...silence...and then the next title card: JULY 4
And you get a chill as you remember the trailers ("The Day We Fight Back") and realize that the endgame's come...whatever happens, whatever way the humans turn the tables; it happens today. Superb.
I haven't read The Shining in many years but that is a terrific example. There's something very potent about driving home the point of your story by using the title as the climax of a chapter (or book). I've aid it before but I love how the title "Halloween" pops up when the film ends, it gives me shivers every time.
Yeah, exactly! "HALLOWEEN" at the end. That's another really potent trick.
Soderburgh's remake of Solaris (which is really good) starts with no opening titles after the studio logos, so, after the final fade out you're totally expecting the old "DIRECTED BY STEVEN SODERBURGH" as the first closing title. Instead, the screen fills (and I mean FILLS) with one enormous word: "SOLARIS" (in a beautiful typeface). It's great.
Solaris was, believe it or not, a collaboration between Soderburgh and James Cameron (so it's a Lightstorm movie). What a crazy marriage! The DVD's commentary track is by both of them, which is seriously weird. "Hi, I'm Steven Soderburgh." "And I'm James Cameron." At the end, they actually discuss the closing titles. Soderburgh says, "Yeah, I didn't put the title at the beginning, so I realized I wanted to do it very, very large at the end in Helvetica Neue Ultra Light." Cameron says, "No kidding...are you a font geek?" And Soderburgh says, "Oh, absolutely." (And I'm like, Yay! Yay for font geeks!) (And then, God, I have to start making movies immediately...)
I've never seen either version of Solaris ) I've been scared by comments describing it as a "glacially paced" story). Having said that I love what you describe for the end title, that's potent!
Have you seen MOON yet? I'd be interested in your opinion. I really enjoyed it.
The first one is pretty fucking hard to sit through. Octo and I discussed how we each had to start over about five times, and I've still never made it through. It's good, don't get me wrong: just glacially paced. The basic idea (from the Lem novel) got stolen as one of the bases for Event Horizon (the reconstituted memory business, minus the Lovecraftian horror).
The remake is very good, because 1) It's an attempt to re-do it respectfully, removing the "made by a broke Russian" problems but keeping the good stuff; 2) These days, it's not back-breakingly expensive to make a space movie, so somebody like Soderbergh (I spelled his name wrong before) can do it without having to worry about snagging the teenage audience; 3) It stars Clooney, Jeremy Davies (Saving Private Ryan/LOST) and Viola Davis, the Academy Award Nominee from Doubt. Great stuff.
I haven't even got through all these comments yet, but JPX's comment about a band's song lyrics containing the name of the band reminded me of the band Talk Talk, whose one real hit was "Talk Talk."
I always thought that was the stupidest move. Album named after band? Sure. Song and album with same name? Sure. But band and song with same name? Whuaahhh? It's like they wanted to be one hit wonders.
I feel like I have a "book title in the book" example on the tip of my brain, but my brain needs to wake up.
I've heard Jordan make this Robin Williams point before, but never in writing. This part totally cracked me up:
"All he does is stand around hunched over with his head jammed down on his neck, eyes half-open, not making eye contact, with this weird mushy look on his face. (Even in that Good Morning Vietnam clip, he's got the same mush-faced, wandering-eyed Robin Williams facial expression he has in every scene of every movie he's ever made.)"
Here's the final shot (a slow double-lap-dissolve) and the first closing title of Solaris:
(Spoiler-free.)
http://www.jordanorlando.com/solaris
I'm so glad you reminded me of that "Title at the very end" trick! It's so good.
Something wrong with that link? Trying again:
http://www.jordanorlando.com/solaris
That Solaris title shot is great! Nice screen grabs, dude, that's like magic to me.
No only did Talk Talk name their album Talk Talk, their first (and only?) single was "Talk Talk". I hate it when bands self-title an album. I eagerly awaited a new Cure album a few years ago and when it finally came out it was called "The Cure". That makes me mental for so many reasons but mostly because it makes it difficult to search for information about the album on the internet. If you type in The Cure you get a thousand pages on the band. It takes extra time to narrow the search to "The Cure by The Cure" or "The Cure self-titled".
Yeah, having 610 movies in my house (and being able to pull any scene or any frame from any of them and put them on the web in five minutes) is like heroin to me. 12-year-old Jordan would come over to my house and stay awake for three days and nights. (If I could pry him away from the iPhone.)
I admit: I just opened my new book (our new book, by myself and Barney, my writing partner for this project), went to the page where we strategically deploy the title...and smirked to myself gleefully.
Awesome! When is it being published?
July 13.
Check it out!
Wow, congrats!!! It sounds terrific (and complicated). I'm impressed that you wrote a mystery, I imagine it's a tough genre to tackle.
God, that Solaris title is gorgeous! So stark. I should see that again; I was having a hard time staying awake at the end of it (which was all about "new baby," not "slow movie"). Anyway, I definitely missed the title at the end. Very nice.
Drag Me To Hell also uses that technique to great effect.
Here's the trick about the original Solaris. If you can make it through the first 25 minutes, you're home free. All the glacial stuff is packed in at the beginning.
I remember my third and last failed attempt to watch it. The shot was a slow pan moving from the foot of a bed up to the head of the actor sacked out on the pillow. As the shot began and crept from left to right, Hans and I looked at each other and by sudden mutual agreement realized we couldn't take any more. If we had hung on another ten seconds, the movie would have gotten WAY more interesting, interesting enough to keep us going to the end.
So hold on! It is worth it.
Also, if you've made it that far, you've already seen one of the best "what the hell?" moments in cinema.
JPX, conveying the (unusual) thriller structure in that blurb was a real headache. I hope you're not just being polite and that you find that text appetizing!
Jordan I say it with all sincerity! If Horrorthon has taught me anything it's that very few can pull off a good mystery and attempting to summarize the plot of the good ones is always a chore. I can't wait to read this and congrats again, it's quite an achievement.
Yeah, Solaris is pretty damn fine. I gave it short shrift the first time I saw it.
(Remember the cop in The Phantom Tollbooth whose name was "Short Shrift"? He was also the judge and the jailer; everything moved way too fast. I didn't get the joke as a kid.)
Thanks, JPX. I wouldn't be fishing for the compliment if 1) we hadn't gone nuts painstakingly going over that synopsis with our editor and 2) anyone else I knew had seen it. The plot is one of those double-switch-back-fake-out mobius strips of the "Don't give away any of the twists!" variety.
Earlier this evening, while trying to take a nap, rather than "counting sheep," I tried to remember every "say the name of the movie in the movie" example I gave above. (I was soon asleep.)
I would expect nothing less from you, Jordan. Counting sheep isn't your style =)
Post a Comment