E.R. Torre's Blog, page 82

Sketchin’ 54

So the other day I’m wasting some time online and find the novel Are You In The House Alone?: A TV Movie Compendium 1964-1999 by Amanda Reyes and, to make a long story short, I picked that sucker up quick.

The book deals with TV movies of this period of time, including some favorites like Steven Spielberg’s Duel, the wild William Shatner/Andy Griffith Pray For The Wildcats and assorted other films I recall seeing way back when on TV and, frankly, recall very fondly.

The subject of this piece is self explanatory, the excellent Dan Curtis (Night Stalker) directed, Karen Black starring (and, in the case of the picture, Richard Matheson written) Trilogy of Terror.  A great trilogy of tales of terror/horror with the standout being the final tale, presented here.

[image error]

Eh… I remain skeptical. The fate of Emelia Earhart, part three

One of the great mysteries of the 20th Century revolves around the ultimate fate of pioneering female aviator Amelia Earhart.

As I’m certain most people out there know, in 1937 she attempted to be the first female aviator to fly around the world.  However, in early July of that year she disappeared over the central Pacific and, since then, no one knows what has become of her.

Last year there was an intriguing -though ultimately proven very false- “discovery” that she might be in a photograph discovered in the U.S. archives and taken years after her disappearance (I wrote about that here and the fact that it was very quickly proven false here).

Anyway, the latest bit of news involves a re-examination of bones found in 1940, three years after her disappearance, and on a South Pacific island named Nikumaroro, some 400 miles from Earhart’s intended route.  Rachael Leah in an article posted on Salon.com reports on this:

Scientist says bones found on Pacific Island belonged to Amelia Earhart

Here’s the thing, though, and I know I’m spoiling the article but, hey, it is what it is:

The bones found in 1940 have long ago disappeared.  The person who found them who originally examined them thought they belonged to a man but measurements were taken and those notes still exist.

Going by the notes and the measurements within them, anthropologist Richard Jantz in the journal Forensic Anthropology determined that…

The data revealed that the bones have more similarity to Earhart than to 99 percent of individuals in a large reference sample.

How did Mr. Jantz come up with this?  By using photographs and the actual clothing of Ms. Earhart to come up with detailed measurements of her size and then compared these measurements with those of the bones found on that island in 1940.

Now, I grant you this: It is a very strong statement to make that the bones found on that island have such a strong similarity to Ms. Earhart.

However…

The fact remains that the actual bones are long gone and we have to assume the measurements used are indeed very accurate (there is no evidence to suggest they are or aren’t).

I feel, though, that with only those measurements as a guide and not the actual bones to examine we’re speculating an awful lot.

Not to degrade those who found and examined the bones back in 1940, but they believed at the time that the bones belonged to a MAN and not a woman.  If they did indeed belong to a woman (or, as Mr. Jantz speculates, Amelia Earhart herself), is it possible other errors were made back then, too?

And if so, it feels like quite a leap to assume we may indeed have her bones.

About those Oscars, redux…

So word comes that the 2018 Oscars didn’t do that well, ratings-wise.

As usual, our “President” decided to make an issue of it (he’s nothing if not content to make everything about him) and was promptly slammed by its host, Jimmy Kimmel but, frankly, this is side-issue stuff.

The thing that intrigues me is the fact that the Oscar rating are down and, like our “President”, I’m going to make it about me…

(Sorta) Kidding!

I noted when I first wrote about the Oscars (you can read that here) the following:

I missed the whole thing.  Like, everything.  I knew it was on.  I usually catch at least a minute or two here and there.

The bottom line, though, was that I completely and totally missed the whole thing.

I opined that maybe my lack of interest in seeing the Oscars was related to the movies that were being honored and in the running.  I certainly think this is a pretty big factor.

But there’s another thing: Times change and what was once an interesting event can become something that simply isn’t all that interesting anymore.

There was a time that roadside parades were a HUGE thing in cities.  Perhaps they still are in many of them.  But I don’t think they’re as popular as they were.

Movies, too, have changed, at least in the way we see them.

Used to be we’d see them in theaters and, at least when I was much younger, I was incredibly eager to see what was about to be released and what I could catch.  Nowadays, and because things get to be so damn busy, I’m lucky if I find the time to catch them.  Further, if I do miss the films in theaters, all I have to do is wait a few months and -voila- the movie becomes available on home video.

Suddenly, seeing a new film in theaters during its release isn’t such a big deal anymore.

There are, of course, exceptions to this.  The recently released (and big hit) Black Panther was eagerly anticipated by many before its release and people are flocking to theaters to see it.  Same, a little before that, with The Last Jedi.

Nonetheless I would argue such movies are increasingly becoming the exception rather than the rule.

The last film I saw in theaters, Game Night, I didn’t know anything about until I read the review of it in my local paper on the day of its release!  And I didn’t know about it because, I suspect, I didn’t actively look around at what films were coming out.

In effect, I didn’t much care about films being released and figured I’d read about them as they come out.

Could this indifference extend to things related to movies, such as Oscars?

Obviously, what I’m musing about here is my own personal experiences/opinions, but I can’t help but wonder if others don’t feel the same thing.

Times do, as I mentioned before, have a way of changing things.

Zack Snyder’s Justice League, part deux

A few days ago (you can read it here), I wondered about the increasing appearances and statements coming from director Zack Snyder via his Vero account concerning his film Justice League.

The film is about to be released on home video, so one might be forgiven in thinking he’s trying to get people excited to buy the film.

Not so.

As I mentioned in that previous post and for those living under a rock until now, Zack Snyder left work on Justice League some six months before the movie’s release.  His adopted daughter had committed suicide and, he stated, he couldn’t continue doing this work.  Thus the film was completed by Joss Whedon and this was the version that was released to theaters.  Mr. Snyder, it should be noted, kept a very low profile through all this and though the theatrically released film had his name on it as director, he attended no promotions or red carpet affairs.  Further, he even noted at one point after the movie’s release that he hadn’t seen it.

To those who saw Batman v. Superman: Dawn of Justice, Zack Snyder’s previous film leading into Justice League, it was quite clear that Mr. Whedon made considerable changes before Justice League was released.  While I liked the film overall, I nonetheless could tell that Justice League was more of a Whedon work, in the end, than a Snyder work.

Since then, fans of Mr. Snyder’s work have clamoured for the release of “his” version of the film versus the one that was released to theaters.

The big question is: Is there an actual Zack Snyder “cut” of the film?

In that previous blog post, I noted Warner Brothers eventually released a “Donner Cut” of Superman II.  This despite the fact that Mr. Donner didn’t actually finish making that film back in the late 1970’s.

Unlike Mr. Donner, Mr. Snyder completed all principle photography of Justice League.  He was working on some reshoots when he left the film but rumor has it a three hour “cut” of the film assembled before he departed.  How complete -or good- the cut was is the question.

Regardless, several days have passed since my original posting and if nothing else, it appears that more and more people are thinking that Mr. Snyder is hinting at an existing “Snyder Cut” of the film.

Over at polygon.com Julia Alexander wrote the following article, which examines that building feeling people have that just maybe there is something to the rumors:

Fans are convinced Zack Snyder is using an app to tease Justice League Snyder Cut

One of the arguments made against Snyder’s Cut of Justice League ever appearing is that he didn’t complete the work or that there are too many effects to be done or something along those lines.

However, I will repeat: A “Donner Cut” of Superman II was eventually released to home video even though by the time Mr. Donner was fired from the movie he stated he had filmed only some 60% of it.

Again: Zach Snyder completed all principle photography.  He was working on reshoots when he left the project.  Further, it appears many of the effects were indeed completed, at least based on early trailers for the film which feature scenes that were not included in Joss Whedon’s cut:

And here’s a more detailed examination of some of the scenes found in the trailer or mentioned by cast yet didn’t appear in the film:

There most certainly is work to be done if a “Snyder Cut” of the film is to be released, but I strongly suspect if Warner Brothers/DC allows it, we will eventually get it.

As I stated before, my only hope is that it won’t take 26 years, the length of time before the “Donner Cut” of Superman II was released, before we see it.

Zach Snyder’s Justice League, part deux

A few days ago (you can read it here), I wondered about the increasing appearances and statements coming from director Zach Snyder via his Vero account concerning his film Justice League.

The film is about to be released on home video, so one might be forgiven in thinking he’s trying to get people excited to buy the film.

Not so.

As I mentioned in that previous post and for those living in a rock until now, Zach Snyder left work on Justice League some six months before the movie’s release.  His adopted daughter had committed suicide and, he stated, he couldn’t continue doing this work.  Thus the film was completed by Joss Whedon and this was the version that was released to theaters.

To those who saw Batman v. Superman: Dawn of Justice, Zach Snyder’s previous film leading into Justice League, it was quite clear that Mr. Whedon made considerable changes to the film before it was released.

Since then, the people who are fans of Mr. Snyder’s work have clamoured for the release of “his” version of the film versus the one that was released.

The big question is: Is there an actual Zach Snyder “cut” of the film?

In that previous blog post, I noted they released a “Donner Cut” of Superman II.  This despite the fact that Mr. Donner didn’t actually finish making that film back in the late 1970’s.

Unlike Mr. Donner, Mr. Snyder completed all principle photography of Justice League.  He was working on some reshoots when he left the film but rumor has it that before he left there was a three hour “cut” of the film assembled.  How complete -or good- the cut was is the question.

Regardless, several days have passed since my posting and if nothing else, it appears that more and more people are thinking that Mr. Snyder is hinting that a “Snyder Cut” of his film exists.

Over at polygon.com Julia Alexander wrote the following article, which examines the building feeling people have that perhaps, just maybe, there is something to the rumors:

Fans are convinced Zach Snyder is using an app to tease Justice League Snyder Cut

I will repeat: A “Donner Cut” of Superman II was eventually released to home video even though by the time Mr. Donner was fired from the movie he had filmed some 60% of it.

Again: Zach Snyder completed all principle photography.  He was working on reshoots when he left the project.

There may be work to be done, but I strongly suspect if Warner Brothers/DC allows it, we will eventually get a Zach Snyder cut of Justice League.

The risks of movie-making…

It’s fair to say that one of the more popular actors around is Jennifer Lawrence.  For several years, she’s starred in films that have been both critical and commercial darlings.

However, if there’s one thing that one realizes is that as incredible as it is to see someone reach the proverbial tip of the mountain in their career, there is always the danger, and possibility, that the stay there is short lived.

The other day Ms. Lawrence was being interviewed on the Howard Stern Show.  I have the Stern Show on my Sirius radio subscription and though in the past I followed it of late I have not.

(Quick random thought: The first time I heard the Howard Stern Show was waaaaaaay back in/around 1985 and I found it bold and incredibly funny.  Years later and before he moved to Sirius, his show appeared on a local radio and I listed to it now and again and found it was still quite good, especially when interviewing celebrities.  When he moved to Sirius, I checked him out now and again and, as before, I still really like his celebrity interviews.  This, more than the controversial aspects about him, is IMHO his grand forte)

So the other day I clicked on the show while Ms. Lawrence was being interviewed and stuck around to hear what she had to say.

She struck me as someone well aware of her status in the entertainment industry, even noting at one point that she realizes her success is a limited thing.

She was on the show promoting her latest film, Red Sparrow, which was released last week and, while not a bust, looks to be at best like it will be a mild/moderate money-maker.  However, this film follows the very controversial -and not very successful- mother! which in turn followed the successful (at least at the box-office) film Passengers.  That film, though, was met with controversy due to its plot, which essentially took the protagonist’s highly questionable actions and somehow tried to make them look “cute” in a romantic way.

Regardless and despite the financial success of that film, I strongly suspect there are few today who would point to Passengers as some great Jennifer Lawrence vehicle.  In fact, I wouldn’t be surprised if that winds up being one of those films that gets, for the most part, forgotten in time.

mother!, on the other hand, has its defenders but they seem to be very few.  What is unquestionable, however, is that the film was a box-office bust and Red Sparrow, which looks to do a little better, nonetheless looks to be far from a blockbuster.

Rich Juzwiak at themuse.com noted the last films Ms. Lawrence has been involved in and asks:

How many more risks like Red Sparrow can Jennifer Lawrence’s career afford?

Sadly, I think his question is quite legitimate.  As good and successful as Ms. Lawrence -or any currently big name entertainer- has been, there is always the risk that if you deliver works that either don’t interest audiences or, even worse, turn them off, your high flying star may come crashing down.

In the 1970’s, Burt Reynolds was one of the biggest movie stars out there.  Smokey and the Bandit, released the same year as that little, now forgotten film Star Wars (I kid, obviously!) was second in terms of box office take.

But Mr. Reynolds made some bad choices going into the 1980’s, the biggest of which was reportedly rejecting the role of Garret Breedlove in the very well received/Oscar winning film Terms of Endearment -a role that went to Jack Nicholson- in favor of starring in the box-office and critical bust Stroker Ace.  He reportedly took the later role as a favor to its director Hal Needham, who had directed Mr. Reynolds in Smokey and the Bandit.

From that point on, Mr. Reynold’s career spiraled further and further downward and one notes that Ms. Lawrence, though perhaps not quite at that level of danger, nonetheless may be wise to consider her next roles.

Then again, I highly doubt Ms. Lawrence entered any of those films thinking they would ultimately end up as they did.  That’s the great unknown regarding doing works of art.

What might be a big success on paper might result in a big failure when all is said and done.

About yesterday’s Oscars…

…I missed the whole thing.

Like, everything.

I knew it was on.  I usually catch at least a minute or two here and there.  But this time around?

I know, I know.  I’m sounding like that cranky old “get off my lawn” guy.  But the truth’s the truth: I haven’t seen any of the films nominated for best picture, though I did pick up the digital copy, via VUDU as it was on sale, of Dunkirk.  Alas, I haven’t had the time to watch it as of yet.

Here’s the cold hard reality of my situation: I haven’t seen any of the films on the major lists nor am I all that interested in seeing them.  A good friend of mine highly recommended the big winner of last night’s Oscars, The Shape of Water, but I dunno.  As I said, I have Dunkirk but I’m not in a huge rush to see it.

Enough, though, of the negativity.  Author Sam Adams over on Slate.com points out one of the better stories coming out of the Oscars, something even a crumudgeon like me could appreciate:

Roger Deakins broke one of Oscar’s longest losing streaks

The above mentioned Mr. Deakins, as it should be obvious from the article’s title, won an Oscar last night for his cinematography on the film Blade Runner 2049.  Mr. Deakins, as the article further notes, was previously nominated in this category a whopping 13 times between 1995 and 2017 and, as Mr. Adams further notes, in 2008 he was nominated for best cinematographer twice.  It goes without saying but until last night, he hadn’t won for any of those nominations.

Unlike the best picture nominees, I have actually seen Blade Runner 2049 and, though I feel the film was too bloated for its own good, there is absolutely NOTHING negative I have to say about the look of the film and the cinematography.  Indeed, it is quite brilliant and worthy of the adulation it has received.

Good going, Mr. Deakins.  This cranky old man totally agrees you deserved this Oscar… even if he hasn’t seen too many of the other nominated films.

Sketchin’ 53

After doing as many of these pieces as I have, sometimes it takes a while to figure out which celebrity to take on next.

And sometimes inspiration comes to you instead of you looking for it.

Over on Turner Classic Movies they were playing the charming, romantic, and suspenseful 1963 film Charade, starring Audrey Hepburn and Cary Grant, a film I’ve seen countless times and could see countless others. Known by many as the best Alfred Hitchcock film Alfred Hitchcock didn’t make, the film features a spectacular turn by Ms. Hepburn, who is at her charismatic best playing the freshly widowed Regina Lambert. Her husband, she finds only after he’s gone, was likely involved in hiding nearly a quarter of a million dollars stolen during the late stages of WWII.

At the man’s funeral, strange characters appear out of the woodwork, including Cary Grant -quite wonderful- as a man who may or may not have her interests at heart. The film also boasts early appearances by Walter Matthau, James Coburn, and George Kennedy. It’s a great film and, unfortunately, was re-made, not well at all, in 2002 as The Truth About Charlie.

Stick with the original and forget the remake was ever made.

And now, Ms. Hepburn…

[image error]

By all that’s holy…

I will give Trump this much credit: By having so many catastrophic-sounding things happening in one day, as a voter one is so overwhelmed it’s hard to focus on any one thing!

For the record, among other things we’ve had happen is: Longtime aid Hope Hicks -who many thought would be the last one to leave Trump’s side- resigns one day after a grueling congressional testimony session, its finally made clear that Mueller’s investigation is going directly after Trump, there was a meeting with Senators regarding gun control and Trump noted -among other things!- he would go after guns (I can’t help but chuckle about this one… it made many a pro-NRA people/Republicans’ heads explode), Trump goes after Sessions (I suppose this is low hanging fruit), Kushner’s security status downgraded -it was announced his family received perhaps billions of dollars in loans from foreign run companies- and people are now wondering what’s still keeping him there and why he hasn’t resigned…

What else?

I feel like I’m missing a couple hundred things!

There is, however, one thing I find a positive development: It appears the massacre at Parkland, the latest example of one person with a weapon of war killing far too many people, looks like it finally –finally!– has moved the needle regarding awareness of, and perhaps lowering tolerance for, assault weapons.

To date, many companies have reacted, from no longer giving discounts to the NRA for their services to Dick’s Sporting Goods stating they will no longer sell such weapons while Walmart stated they will no longer sell weapons or ammo to anyone under 21 years of age.

Some have noted Dick’s barely do sell assault weapons to begin with so this might be more of a PR move but, given their public statement, I do believe its a brave thing to do.  Same with Walmart.  I use neither company all that much, but I do salute their moves.

Corrosive Knights, a 2/27/18 update

This is one hell of an exciting day.

After far too long, I’ve finally, FINALLY finished up the fourth draft of Book #7 in the Corrosive Knights series.

This is a very big thing and a huge step forward.

The first three drafts of the book were far from complete, missing as they were a lot of elements which I was putting in with each subsequent draft.

With Draft #4, I had almost everything put down and almost everything that was left, I hoped, I’d be putting in this draft.  While there still remain a few missing elements, they’re minor compared to the big chunks of material added in this draft.

What does this all mean?

I’ve mentioned this before, that there are several stages to writing a book, at least for me.  First I have a concept and, often times, I have a strong beginning and end envisioned and I have to then work out the middle sections, connecting everything together in a way that makes sense and, hopefully, is original and entertaining.

In the case of Book #7, there was the added work involved in wrapping up all the various plot threads into this conclusion.

At certain points I feared the book would prove too long and that I’d have to break it in two.  I realized, much to my relief, that I could finish the book without breaking it apart.  Nonetheless, the book now runs to 147,148 words over 288 single spaced pages.  This is easily the longest of any of my novels, which often ran around 110,000 words, give or take.

So, what’s next?

I’ll print this behemoth out and its on to draft #5.  Here’s the thing: I’m now moving from creating new scenarios and scenes and going into revision.  At this stage, I’ll be looking into the writing itself and making sure the grammar/spelling is good.  I’ll also be streamlining any things that need to be streamlined while expanding whatever requires it.

The beauty of this is drafts will be completed far more quickly now that I won’t be as focused on creation of new material.

The big question: When will the book be ready?

While its impossible to offer a solid release date, suffice it to say today’s completion of Draft #4 brings me a HUGE step closer to getting the whole thing done.  I’ve long felt this book could be ready later this year and, so far, there’s no reason to change that (admittedly vague) prediction.

Regardless, I’m moving along so for those who are waiting, have just a little more patience… Book #7 will be here before you know it!