Capitalism - Feudalism without the Kings
Tax the Rich
Tax the Rich
Movie Monday
I know you don't want to hear me grouse but I've spent the last 1/2 hour editing my Friday post. I had a few things I wanted to clarify better and some errors like "aware" when I meant to say "awkward." But then I discovered that every time I used "&" instead of "and" like in W & T, the code "amp" got put in mysteriously. Like, 15 times. I can't believe I missed this when I proofed the published copy on Friday and now I'm wondering if it's only on this computer which is different from the one I used on Friday. Talk about conspiracy theories!
Maybe I should just go on grousing because I saw so few movies for reviewing last week. I do have an Ewan MacGregor movie, Perfect Sense, (2011) recorded, which looks interesting. He's a chef and she's an epidemiologist during a virus which is mysteriously robbing people of their senses, one at a time. It sounds like something to think about but it'll have to wait for another week.
Disney/Netflix/Starz etc., etc., are really lousing me up with all the deal making and breaking going on. At one time, Starz had a new, "hotish" movie early Saturday. Now, I'm lucky to get this once a month. HD Net which seems to have before-theater flicks twice a month is beating them out, and that's a basic cable channel.
Well, I'm too lazy to be driven into the movie houses by this move so I may be doing a lot more reading or thinking about making the Monday posting focus on a whole new topic. But I love movies and have since I was a wee tot. Oh, well.
So I think I'll ask a question using The 39 Steps as my background. First, T39S in 1915 was one of the first man-fleeing-from-police-to-prove-innocence books which later became an early Hitchcock classic (don't miss his 1936 Sabotage for another classic) in 1935 and a PBS Modern Classic about two years ago. The book synopsis reads like a "man's book"; that is, a quick read of the plot brings up no major female characters. In 1935, Hitchcock may have pandered to the movie draw of a love angle by adding Madeline Carroll as the beautiful blonde who helps and hinders Robert Donat, as the beleaguered Hannay, in his flight from the police. However, he also adds some master touches to this movie version such as Peggy Ashcroft as the farmer's young wife and realistic pacing of dialogue in the opening music hall scene. (There's more; watch it.)
However, the PBS version is the horse of a different color. Here, we have the modern day, PC (politically correct) version of T39S. Not only is Hannay's female companion bright, clever, resourceful and emancipated (as much as she could be at the time since, as the novel, it's still set just before WWI) but she becomes the linchpin of the story, not Hannay. So much so that the final revelation (and there are earlier ones also) concerns her, not him.
So my question is: Should period piece source material be updated to fit the sensibilities/memes of the contemporary world? There is no question the PBS T39S is a rousing adventure, well-acted and paced but what about John Buchanan's original work? OK, writing in 1935, he understood that Hollywood changes things but did he, who didn't ever include a heroine in his work, want the audience to come away from the movie thinking "clever woman" instead of "clever man"?
And I guess the second question would be: Would it have been possible for Hollywood (and remember I use that word generically) to remain true to Buchanan's purpose and still make it palatable to a contemporary audience? Of course, I'm removing money making from this question and just asking if you could make the movie, not caring that w/o tremendous CGIs or modern day tweaks no one may come.
Hitchcock was able to do this in the 1935 version but he was a master director who could take dross (Torn Curtain and the farmhouse oven scene) and find pearls.
Just something I think about time to time.
Let me leave you with some tag lines from movies:
Tag lines identify an individual or organization, or a movie. Reading them I do remember the movie plots so I think they're pretty good. What do you think? Oh, and I'm reading this as "66 great movie taglines" not "66 great movies."
See you next week.
No comments:
Post a Comment