Category: movies

Monday Musings: Finding the Right Forum

Posted onAuthorcahwyguy2 Comments

userpic=yorickIn the comments for my write-up of “Inside Llewyn Davis”, Peter Reiher made an interesting statement in response to my opinion that there were some films that were better for the small screen (television), and some that were better in the cinema:

Honestly, though, I find almost all films play better on the big screen than the small, even little B movies like old noir films. On the other hand, there are clearly properties that work on stage live and don’t work on film very well.

This got me thinking about the differences between the three venues: stage (“theatre”), the big screen (“theater”), and the small screen (television).

First, let’s look at budget and reach. Take a really expensive musical — Spiderman: Turn off the Dark. This musical cost $75M, not counting the cost of each show. It’s reach is much much smaller — for the most recent week, 12,755 people over 9 performances, averaging about $94 a ticket, for a gross of $1.2M.  Much of that gross goes to the weekly salaries and theatre rental; it certainly hasn’t returned a profit to its investors. Let’s compare this to the movie: Spiderman 3 cost $258M to make. On the other hand, it has brought in a lifetime gross, foreign and domestic, of $890M. Furthermore, the main movies costs are upfront on the production end as opposed to theater rental; for the stage (especially musicals), it is the ongoing costs (salaries for actors and musicians) that are a big factor. The small screen is similar on the cost side with large upfront production costs; the income side is different as it depends on advertisers and redistribution fees. The main point I’m getting at here is the reach: both cinema and television have an audience overall that numbers in the multiple-millions, who are seeing the exact same product that was filmed. Live theatre has a much smaller reach (only a truly long-running production will be seen by an audience numbering in the millions, and each performance is different). As a result, the amortization of the upfront cost is vastly different, and this is reflected in the different nature of the final product.

Next, let’s think about the experience. Live theatre depends on the audience reaction. When we saw “Humor Abuse“, it was noted that every performance is different because the actors play on the audience. Theatre permits a certain amount of reaction and variance. This is what makes live theatre unique and special. The energy of the audience is reflected by the actors back into the performance. The cinema also depends on the audience reaction, but in a different way. In the cinema, the audience reaction doesn’t affect the filmed behavior of the actors. They are completely oblivious and draw no energy from it (in fact, it is hard for them to even draw energy from the character’s arc, as the stories are not necessarily filmed sequentially). However, the audience itself draws energy from the audience: comedies are funnier when people around you are laughing. Peter noted this in his comments when he said:

Comedies almost invariably work better in social settings than alone. Having other people to laugh with you amplifies the fun of a good comedy. Laugh tracks for sitcoms are meant to fool you into thinking that there’s an audience around, after all, and that’s why many TV comedies are filmed in front of a live audience.

So, given that, why do dramas and action adventures work better in the theater? I think one reason is the screen size — large screens immerse you in the drama and make you feel as if you are there. Television is more detached. There is also the audience reaction of gasps and such (as well as screams) that amplify the emotions.

So given all of this, what works best on the small screen? I’d opine that it would be stories that aren’t worth immersing yourself in — certainly reality television, news, and small-scale episodic stories. I still believe that some movies just aren’t worth the big screen effort — the shared humor may be such that audience amplification isn’t required, or the story may just not be worth the large treatment.

I’d be curious about your thoughts on this subject. What do you see as the differences between theatre, theater, and TV, and do you think there are types of production best for each? Are there movies you see that you go: that didn’t belong on the big screen?

Share

The Times, They Were A Changin’

Posted onAuthorcahwyguy3 Comments

Inside Llewyn Davisuserpic=moviesThose who know me know that I love folk music of the 1960s. I started out as a Peter, Paul, and Mary afficianado, and then moved to the Kingston Trio, the Limeliters, the Weavers, Joan Baez, the Chad Mitchell Trio, and of course Tom Paxton. So when Tom, at his last concert, mentioned that one of his songs was being used in an upcoming movie… and recommended that movie.. suddenly “Inside Llewyn Davis” was on my radar.  So today saw me at my second movie in a week, together with my uncle Tom (who knows folk music well), learning about Llewyn Davis.

“Inside Llewyn Davis” is the Coen Brother’s touching tribute to the pre-Dylan scene in Greenwich Village in New York, when venues such as the Gaslight introduced (or reintroduced) new and upcoming folk music acts such as those I named above, along with folk like Pete Seeger, the Clancy Brothers, Jean Ritchie, Mississippi John Hurt. It was a time of artistic creation, a time when folk music — and places like the Gaslight and the Hungry i in San Francisco, were shaping music. The story of Llewyn Davis is based roughly on the story of Dave Van Ronk, a folk musician of that time, although many things were changed. There are hints in the various acts of other folk groups, but none are explicitly names.

So let’s talk about the movie and what works… and what doesn’t. What works is the music… mostly. The selection of folk music on the soundtrack is great to listen to. Nice performances, nice voices, and some good selections. There are a few problems. The one I noticed was anachronistic — they included songs such as Tom Paxton’s “The Last Thing On My Mind” that were written in 1962-1963… on performances that were supposedly in 1961 by someone other than the author. My uncle noted that it gave a very somber and downbeat image of folk music — much of the music was much more energetic and bluegrassy than what was portrayed. Again, look at the initial albums of Peter Paul and Mary, the Kingston Trio, the Weavers, or Tom Paxton for an idea of that energy. That energy wasn’t in the soundtrack song selection.

Another thing that works well are the performances. Oscar Davis is very strong as Llewyn — both performance-wise and singing-wise. The supporting actors are all very strong, in particular Max Casella, Ethan Phillips, and surprisingly, Justin Timberlake. John Goodman has an interesting role, although I think he is both literally and figuratively wasted in the movie. Yes, his performance is great… but if he wasn’t there, how would it change Llewyn’s trajectory through the story?

What doesn’t work is the story. To be blunt: it is boring and there is no character growth. We start with a scene where Llewyn is beat up for criticizing another performer at the Gaslight. We then move back in time to the week before, and observe a week in the life of Llewyn. We see him trying to get work in the folk music field… and failing. We see him homeless and sponging off of peoples couches. We see him interacting unsuccessfully with people. We see him carrying a cat around. What we never see is Llewyn learning anything about himself, or how to be successful in his field. We see others passing him by, moving onward and upward while he sabotages himself. At the end, we even see Dylan at the Gaslight, again upstaging Llewyn (as Dylan did to Van Ronk in real life). Llewyn never wins, and this makes the audience walk out wondering why they sat through this story. As someone somewhere else said about this movie: The journey of the cat is more interesting than Llewyn’s journey.

I’ve read other reviews praising this film and its artistry. That artistry is there: it is shot beautifully, it evokes great images, it establishes a mood. But… but… it’s ultimately all shadows and mood. You get to watch someone fail. You get to see someone ping-pong through life, never quite making the hole. Playwrights have long learned that the story is critical, and they have dramaturgs there to hone the story and make sure it tells what it is supposed to tell. What we were supposed to see from this story — well, I couldn’t figure it out. It was a beautiful movie, but it also didn’t touch my soul or affect me as it could have done had it been honed a little better. I wanted so much more here — to see why folk music succeeded, to see perhaps how Llewyn might not have been successful, but he might have been that catalyst for others. But it wasn’t there. Llewyn was a true anti-hero, and he just couldn’t succeed.

The artists behind this movie did a wonderful job of getting the atmosphere of the Gaslight and Greenwich Village correct; of establishing the feel of New York; of establishing what the early folk scene was like. What they didn’t capture was the energy. Tom Paxton talks in his concerts about playing the Gaslight, and then keeping the music going with folks like the Clancy Brothers at the local bars until the wee hours of the ‘morn. That energy is missing here.

If you like folk music, and have an interest in how the 1960s folk revival began, “Inside Llewyn Davis” may be worth seeing. If you are looking for an engaging story line that has characters you care about, then think twice. If you like the music, I suggest just getting the sound track… or even better, getting the excellent Smithsonian Archive’s album of Dave Van Ronk.

Previews: Of course, what is a movie without previews. Here’s what was previewed and my thoughts:

  • Cesar Chavez: An American Hero. A bio-pic on Cesar Chavez and his movement. Could be interesting, but I’m more likely to watch it on Shotime than in the theatres.
  • The Grand Budapest Hotel. The comic adventures of a hotel concierge in a famous European hotel. Didn’t draw me in, but looks cute.
  • American Hustle. The story of a 1970s con-man. Not interested in this at all.

[Ob. Disclaimer: I am not a trained critic; I am, however, a regular audience. I’ve been attending live theatre in Los Angeles since 1972; I’ve been writing up my thoughts on theatre (and the shows I see) since 2004. I do not have theatre training (I’m a computer security specialist), but have learned a lot about theatre over my many years of attending theatre and talking to talented professionals. I pay for all my tickets unless otherwise noted. I believe in telling you about the shows I see to help you form your opinion; it is up to you to determine the weight you give my writeups.]

And with that, the 2013 year of entertainment comes to a close. We probably saw one live theatre performance a week, on average, plus two to three movies. There were also some concerts along the way. It was a fun year, and you can read about it all by just following the review-2013 tag. Hopefully, 2014 will be just as fun. Entertainment — preferably live, but even filmed — enriches the soul and doesn’t clutter the house. Go to the theatre, or the theater, if you must, today.

Upcoming Theatre and Concerts:  Our first ticketed performance in January 2014 is a concert performance of MooNie and Broon (FB) at The Colony Theatre (FB) on January 11. The first scheduled theatre is on January 18: “Mom’s Gift” at The Group Rep at the Lonny Chapman Theatre (FB) in North Hollywood. The following weekend, January 25, brings the first show of the REP East (FB) 10th season: “I Love You, You’re Perfect, Now Change“ (which we last saw at REP in 2006). February 1 may also bring “Vanya and Sonya and Masha and Spike” at the Mark Taper Forum, depending on Hottix availability (alternate dates are 2/2 and 2/9). February 8 will bring “Forever Plaid” at Cabrillo Music Theatre (FB). The following weekend, February 15, is being held for Lysistrata Jones at The Chance Theatre (FB) in Anaheim. The last weekend of February, February 22, is currently being held for Sutton Foster at the Broad Stage (FB) in Santa Monica (if I can find discount tickets). March brings “Sex and Education” at The Colony Theatre (FB) on March 8, and “Biloxi Blues” at REP East (FB) on March 29. It may also bring “Harmony” at The Ahmanson Theatre (FB) on March 22. The end of the month (actually April 5) bring “In The Heights” at Cabrillo Music Theatre (FB). As always, I’m keeping my eyes open for interesting productions mentioned on sites such as Bitter-Lemons, Musicals in LA and LA Stage Times, as well as productions I see on Goldstar, LA Stage Tix, Plays411.

Share

Battling for a Vision

Posted onAuthorcahwyguy

Saving Mr. Banksuserpic=moviesMarket research firms for movies hate me. They call regularly, and ask what movies I’ve seen. I tell them I don’t go to the movies; I go to live theatre. They usually hang up at that point. But I do go to the movies — I always go on Christmas Day, and perhaps one or two other times  during the year. Yesterday was Christmas. Guess where I was, and what I had for dinner :-).

The movie we chose for yesterday was “Saving Mr. Banks“, from Walt Disney Pictures, directed by . I chose this movie for a number of reasons: first, it was getting good buzz from people I respect on that side of the story, such as Floyd Norman, who worked with Walt himself (his blog, if you’re into animation, is a must read). It was also getting excellent reviews. Most importantly: it was an interesting story: How did Walk Disney get the reclusive P. L. Travers to give permission to make the musical “Mary Poppins” (which in many ways was a groundbreaking film achievement, especially in the mixing of live action and animation). I have read some of the original Mary Poppins books, and have (of course) seen both the movie and the musical (which was impacted by the movie — and this story — in many ways).

“Saving Mr. Banks” stars  as Walt Disney and as P. L. Travers.  It tells the story of the negotiation between Disney and Travers for the rights to make the movie “Mary Poppins“, as well as the story of how Travers was involved with the shaping of the final product. It also tells, through flashbacks, Travers’ childhood story and how that influenced the Mary Poppins story. Ferrett Steinmetz over on Livejournal had an insightful observation on this conflict: What made it interesting was that it wasn’t the expected conflict between corporate behemoth and artist fighting for the rights. Instead, it was a conflict between two artists who wanted to tell and protect the story that they loved, but each was seeing the story differently. They could move ahead only once they agreed on what the story was.

Discovering this agreement is where the flashbacks came in. These demonstrated how the characters in the story mapped to people in P.L. Travers (Helen Goff)’s life — in particular, how Mr. Banks was a mirror for Travers Goff, her father. Understanding that relationship — and the similar relationship between Disney and his father — was the key to the story.

Is the story presented true? From my understanding, it mostly is. I have no idea the truth of the flashback sequences and the extent to which Goff’s childhood influenced her writing as P. L. Travers. Given how she reacted to children (she never had any of her own, although she adopted), she may have been aiming the story more as an allegory for adults than amusement for children. I do know that certain elements of the portrayal of Disney were whitewashed a little — in particular, the Disney organization specifically requested that Walt never be shown inhaling cigarettes.

More importantly, the movie whitewashed Travers reaction at the end. One walked out feeling that she accepted Walt’s final product. In the end, she really didn’t — she tolerated what was done to the story, but completely rejected the combination of animation and live action. She wanted no cutesy animation in the story. As a result of this, she refused additional rights to Disney for movie adaption; further, when she permitted Cameron Mackintosh to make the stage version, she stipulated that no Americans were to be involved with the creative side (and this is why the Sherman Brothers, who were both still alive at the time, had no involvement with the development of the new songs in the stage “Mary Poppins”).

The movie didn’t touch on one thing I have always heard about the movie “Mary Poppins” and its music: that Walt Disney considered the song “Feed the Birds” to be the heart and soul of the movie. “Saving Mr. Banks” makes it appear as if that soul was found in “Let’s Go Fly a Kite”, a redemption song for Mr. Banks. It’s an interesting question about which is more the heart of the movie.

When I go see movies, I note the things that make the movie special. I think this was a story that wouldn’t work as well on stage (but I could be wrong). This was something that benefited from its period. It also had some excellent cinematography and special effects — I particularly noticed this in the transactions between “present day” and the flashbacks. I also noted the attention to detail in the historical Southern California sequences: the sequences on Laurel Canyon, the sequences at Disneyland, the sequences at the Chinese. I understand they did redressing of the current sites, which makes this even more remarkable. I also appreciated the historical LAX, which was in the period when the “new” LAX had just opened.

I’m not going to list all the credits for the movie — you can find them on IMDB. I will say that both Tom Hanks and Emma Thompsen gave excellent and believable performances, as did all the other leads. With film, you find that the actors focus on the performance; the joy of performing that one sees in a stage performer just does not come across.

Previews: Of course, what is a movie without previews. Here’s what was previewed and my thoughts:

  • Muppets Most Wanted. Another in the new Muppet series of movies, this time pitting a bad Kermit vs. a good Kermit. A possibility because my wife loves the Muppets, but I want to see the reviews first.
  • Million Dollar Arm. Another Disney movie — this time about recruiting Indian baseball players. Innocuous, but not something that would draw me to the theatre.
  • Divergent. A science fiction movie based on a young adult novel. It didn’t particularly grab me.
  • Son of God. A movie version of the life of Jesus. I don’t think I’m the audience they are going for, but I’m sure it will play well in the heartland.

[Ob. Disclaimer: I am not a trained critic; I am, however, a regular audience. I’ve been attending live theatre in Los Angeles since 1972; I’ve been writing up my thoughts on theatre (and the shows I see) since 2004. I do not have theatre training (I’m a computer security specialist), but have learned a lot about theatre over my many years of attending theatre and talking to talented professionals. I pay for all my tickets unless otherwise noted. I believe in telling you about the shows I see to help you form your opinion; it is up to you to determine the weight you give my writeups.]

Upcoming Theatre and Concerts:  All that remains in 2014 is one more movie: I’m seeing “Inside Llewyn Davis”  on Sunday, December 29. Looking into January: Our first ticketed performance is a concert performance of MooNie and Broon (FB) at The Colony Theatre (FB) on January 11. The first scheduled theatre is on January 18: “Mom’s Gift” at The Group Rep at the Lonny Chapman Theatre (FB) in North Hollywood. The following weekend, January 25, brings the first show of the REP East (FB) 10th season: “I Love You, You’re Perfect, Now Change“ (which we last saw at REP in 2006). February 1 may also bring “Vanya and Sonya and Masha and Spike” at the Mark Taper Forum, depending on Hottix availability (alternate dates are 2/2 and 2/9). February 8 will bring “Forever Plaid” at Cabrillo Music Theatre (FB). The following weekend, February 15, is being held for Lysistrata Jones at The Chance Theatre (FB) in Anaheim. The last weekend of February, February 22, is currently being held for Sutton Foster at the Broad Stage (FB) in Santa Monica (if I can find discount tickets). March brings “Sex and Education” at The Colony Theatre (FB) on March 8, and “Biloxi Blues” at REP East (FB) on March 29. It may also bring “Harmony” at The Ahmanson Theatre (FB) on March 22. The end of the month (actually April 5) bring “In The Heights” at Cabrillo Music Theatre (FB). As always, I’m keeping my eyes open for interesting productions mentioned on sites such as Bitter-Lemons, Musicals in LA and LA Stage Times, as well as productions I see on Goldstar, LA Stage Tix, Plays411.

Share

Movies, Marketing, and Minions

Posted onAuthorcahwyguy

Despicable Me 2userpic=moviesIn the theatre, especially for musicals, sequels never work. I can count on one hand the number of sequels that have been produced for the stage, and I can’t think of one that has actually been successful. Perhaps this is because the original production was written as a one-off, and any sequel is an after-the-fact attempt to expand in the same universe and replicate the success. In other mediums, it is very different. Books often have series set in the same universe, and some stories are so long that they require multiple books to sell. In the early days of movies (read the 1930s through 1950s), movies had fewer sequels, but there were series and serials that told episodic stories. But starting in the 1960s and 1970s, sequels hit the movies, and suddenly movies with explicit number in their names started showing up.

Today, any production company worth their salt loves sequels, especially those that turn into successful franchises that they can mine again and again. This means that when a movie is made that takes off, the studios look to see if a sequel is possible. Sometime it can’t be done, but the studio makes it anyway (usually to disasterous financial results). Sometimes it can be done, but the followon effort is mediocre at best (this has happened with many Pixar films — Toy Story being the exception — most recently Monsters University). There are a few times that the sequel is actually stronger than the original — Toy Story 3 being a great example of that.

Back in 2010, Universal Studios distributed the Illumination Entertainment movie Despicable Me. This movie was a financial success, and provided not only a series for Illumination, but an animation success associated with Universal. Naturally, work was started on a sequel, which was released Wednesday.

Now to the reason I’m writing on this. My wife and I discovered Despicable Me when it was shown on the cable pay channels, and we enjoyed it quite a bit. Knowing that my wife enjoys movies like this, and needing to get out of a house filled with teenagers after a July 4th party, we went out to see it yesterday afternoon (our first movie of the year). So I thought I would share my thoughts with you on whether this is a sequel that works. I’ll note that the LA Times had a nice article on the sequel debate.

First, I’ll note that DM2 seems to be a marketing bonanza. Illumination discovered with the first that they had a success with the comic “minion” sidekicks, and they amped them up in the second movie. This reminds me of Gremlins — you know there would be plush toys galore, of both the good and bad variants. Yes, bad minions, created by feeding them water after midnight, are in DM2. Well, the water after midnight part isn’t true, but the minions — both good and bad — are part of the story.

Second, I’ll note that animation in DM2 was excellent. I’m not talking now about the main character animation — which is great — but the little things. What caught my eye was the texture of all the clothing. Although there was no need for the detail, you could see the weaving of the fabric and watch it move. That’s attention to detail from the animation team, and it then carried forward throughout the movie — to the little details in the background of the mall, to the people behind the leads in the scenes, to the animation of the minions, and to the animations of the main characters themselves. It is worth watching the movie multiple times to see these details .

Oh, the story. The story itself was surprising. After all, in the original movie the lead character was transformed from a villain who wanted nothing to do with children, to a father with three adopted girls who had given up villainy. The sequel picks up on this: the lead, Gru (voice by Steve Carrell) is enjoying fatherhood — organizing birthday parties for his girls, taking care of them — while trying to get a legitimate business making jellies started (aided by his evil lead scientist as chief cook). But that is not a story. What make the story is conflict — in this case, an evil villain who has stolen a formula that can turn sweet-and-cuddly-things into evil-things-of-destruction. The Anti-Villains League needs to stop him, and so they send agent Lucy to recruit Gru because he understands how the criminal mind works.

I think you can see where the story is going, and can probably guess what some of the sweet-and-cuddly-things that are turned into destroying monsters. Hint, it’s not the adopted girls. In my mind, this storyline is just for marketing purposes. What makes the story work — and what makes the movie successful — is the underlying story: Gru as father to the girls, and the girls trying to find a wife for Gru so that they have a mother.

[A slight digression here: Why is it that there is the need to turn a single-parent household into a traditional two-parent household? Perhaps it markets it better to traditional America, but I found it a little off-putting that a statement couldn’t be made that a single-parent household can be just as good and loving. Further, all the mothers were portrayed primarily as mothers, not having careers in the world of their own. Is there an attempt to brainwash little children here?]

In any case, you can now guess what happens in the substory: Gru falls not for all the different women he is set up with, but for Lucy, the semi-competent and cute female anti-villain. This is what drives the story on, and what makes the story ultimately work. There are also other family aspects, such as Gru facing the notion that his oldest daughter is interested in … boys. That subplot is played more for comic effect than anything else.

I’d expect to see this series continue. After all, the Minion Movie has already been announced. I can also see this setting up an animated Spy Kids variant with Gru, Lucy, and the kids. Of course, the subplot will be the oldest daughter actually falling in love. Of course, until that happens, expect to see yellow minions everywhere. They are so cute and cuddly.

As the movie started, I started to get a headache. I think this is another advantage of the live theatre approach — you’re dealing with things in scale — humans on a stage in real-size, as opposed to images 70′ tall. This is made worse at the multiplex that is essentially a 99 seat theatre with a 1,200 seat theatre-sized stage and actors that are gigantic.

As for the previews… This was a kids movie. Almost all of them were animated movies, with the exception of R.I.P.D.

  • R.I.P.D. seems to be a cop-ripoff of Dead Like Me, played for humor.
  • Planes looks like a so-so sequel to Cars, but I was never into Cars. It will probably move a lot of merchandise.
  • Everytime I read about Turbo, I think about the snail in A Year with Frog and Toad.
  • Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs 2 is another sequel — this time to Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs — and just seemed overly cute.
  • The Lego Movie seems like an idea that shouldn’t be made. It may entertain the little ones, but I don’t see good from this.

One last note: DM2 is also showing in 3D, and there are only a few places where you can see the design for 3D. This is most obvious in the credits, which are worth sitting through.

Upcoming Theatre and Concerts:  July starts with a musical we had originally planned for Fathers Day weekend: “Ionescapade” at the Odyssey Theatre Ensemble. That will be followed by “9 to 5 – The Musical” at REP East on July 14, and “Legally Blonde – The Musical” at Cabrillo at the end of the month. July will also (hopefully) see us as OperaWorks at CSUN. August is currently completely open due to vacation planning, although we may see a show at the Lawrence Welk Resort in Escondido at the end of the month (depending on price), or at another venue in San Diego.

Continuing the look ahead: September may bring Sarah Ruhl’s “In The Next Room or The Vibrator Play“ at the Production Company/Secret Rose and “Blue Man Group” at the Hollywood Bowl, as well as “God of Carnage” at REP East. October is open, but should the Cabrillo production of “Kiss Me Kate” somewhere, as well as “Dirty Rotten Scoundrels” at Actors Rep of Simi. November will bring “Play It Again Sam” at REP East as well as ARTS’s Nottingham Village (a one-weekend ren-faire-ish market). The fall should also bring a production of “Carrie – The Musical” by Transfer Theatre. As always, I’m keeping my eyes open as the various theatres start making their 2013/2014 season announcements. Lastly, what few dates we do have open may be filled by productions I see on Goldstar, LA Stage Tix, Plays411, or discussed in the various LA Stage Blogs I read (I particularly recommend Musicals in LA and LA Stage Times).

Share

Entertainment Chum: Grand Park, Dr Demento, Surviving Risk, and Bad Reviews

Posted onAuthorcahwyguy1 Comment

userpic=televisionToday’s news chum brings you three articles all related to media and music, in some form:

  • A Grand Park. Last Sunday, we took Metro to the Ahmanson. When we got out downtown, there was this wonderful party going on in the new Grand Park.  There were people enjoying themselves to free music, kids rocking out on their dad’s shoulders. There were food trucks and kids playing in fountains. Only later did I find out what it was: Sunday Sessions at Grand Park. I must say that it was delightful, and it was really neat to see my city doing this.
  • Dr. Demento. Growing up, I regularly listened to Dr. Demento on KMET (followed by Flo’ and Eddie by the Fireside). The Daily News has a nice article on what the good doctor is doing today. It discusses the death of novelty records, and the ability to do anything “novel” on radio today. The doctor, not surprisingly, has moved to internet broadcasts. He’s using a paid subscription model, and I’m not sure novelty records would be enough to entice me.
  • Surviving Games. Here’s an interesting idea: Someone is bringing together reality TV stars from Survivor and Big Brother… to play boardgames. The notion, developed by a former Survivor player turned podcaster, is to take some of the top players and pit them against each other. This could be entertaining…. but the game they have chosen is Risk (bleh). To my eyes, it would be much more interesting to bring these people together and have them play Diplomacy. Watching these players take their skills at strategy and negotiation (as well as alliances) could be quite entertaining. I’ve always viewed Survivor as a real life version of that game. But Risk? That’s just dice rolling.
  • Bad Reviews. I’ve written in the past how bad reviews can be entertaining. Given that we have a new M. Night Shyamalan movie, expect to be entertained — not by the movie, but by the reviews. The LA Times says, of “After Earth”: “There is no small irony that this sci-fi action adventure is about surviving a serious crash. The scorched earth left behind by “After Earth” is sure to leave a scar on everyone involved.”. It gets better. How about: “Speaking of overkill, flashbacks, thousands of them, become things to be feared as much as any space alien.” Or perhaps “As Gen. Cypher Raige, Smith has never seemed stiffer, like Patton without the personality. It’s as if his Ranger suit were two sizes too small and he’s trying to just deal with it.” The reviews conclusion? “If you’re still wondering whether “After Earth” is a disaster, the question is not if, but how big?” If you were thinking that’s just one review, here’s what the Atlantic has to say: “So I feel it’s incumbent on me to note that with his latest offering, After Earth,the writer-director seems to have arrested his precipitous decline. This movie is no worse than his last two.”
Share

Impacts of Technology: Movies, Radio, Lectures, and Powerstrips

Posted onAuthorcahwyguy2 Comments

userpic=frebergEarlier this week, I wrote about the negative impacts of the Internet on society. Today’s news chum deals with a similar subject: the impacts of the Internet and technologies on industry and academia:

 

Share

Entertainment News Chum: Pierced Ears, Smash, & Ticketmaster Competition

Posted onAuthorcahwyguy

userpic=masksToday’s lunchtime news chum brings together a collection of stories all about the entertainment industry:

  • A Period Problem. A recent LA Times article explored a growing problem in period movies: Period actors who don’t look period. The problem is that audiences these days expect their movies to correctly reflect the period, even in high definition. Everything must be exact. Now combine this with actors who actually have good diets, visit the dentist, have tattoos and piercings, and you have a problem. Somethings you can cover with makeup. Others you can. The article gives the example of Daniel Day Lewis’s pierced ear, and Brad Pitt’s pecs, but I’m sure there are others.
  • A Smashing Problem. Tonight, Smash returns to the schedule. Many people thought the first season turned into a train wreck. I actually enjoyed the first season, but do agree that some of the subplots were simply silly and some of the musical numbers made absolutely no sense (such as the Bollywood number, which I enjoyed anyway). BuzzFeed has a very nice article exploring the first season of Smash, and presenting their opinion as to why the first season became a train wreck. From everything I’ve read, the new showrunner is doing a good job bringing the show back to where it should be.
  • A Ticketmaster Problem. When I went to purchase tickets for Elton John, Caesars was using a ticketing service I had never heard of: AXS. They still added outrageous service charges, so I put them in the same book with Ticketmaster (I use them only when I must). The LA Times had an interesting article on who is behind AXS: Evidently, AXS is AEG’s competitor to Ticketmaster. AEG is moving to use AXS at all of its Los Angeles venues — including the Staples Center (and for all Staples sports tenants). The transition from Ticketmaster will slowly be moved out. Only two venues I frequent use Ticketmaster (Pantages and Thousand Oaks Civic Arts Plaza). I avoid fees at the first by going to the box office in person; I avoid fees at the second by being a season subscriber.

 

Share

Digital Impacts

Posted onAuthorcahwyguy3 Comments

userpic=moviesMovies were movies when you paid a dime to escape… and when you paid that dime, the movie was presented in a traditional way: a very bright light was shone through a film print of the movie provided by the distributor, and projected onto the “silver screen” (which actually was a little silver so as to reflect more light). Nowadays, we pay two orders of magnitude more (approx $10) to see a digital projection of the movie, which is delivered on a DRM-protected hard disk. Hollywood is expected to stop distributing traditional 35-millimeter film prints to all U.S. theaters later in 2013. Conversion costs to the new system are expensive, on the order of $70,000 or more per screen. These costs are impacting different types of theatres in many ways. Today’s lunchtime news chum looks at just a few of the impacts:

  • Drive In Theatres. Whereas most chain multiplexes have converted to digital with support of the studios, one segment that hasn’t is the drive-in theatre. These theatres typically bring in less revenue per admission, and haven’t been supported by the film industry in their conversion. As a result, it looks like many drive-ins will close rather than convert. According to an industry trade group, 90% of drive-ins have not converted. At the peak of the drive-in, there were more than 4,000 drive-ins, accounting for 25% of the nation’s movie screens. Today, that’s down to 1.5%. Successful drive-ins survive on cost-conscious families who can see double features or first-run movies at half the price of the hardtops.  Drive-ins also have unique needs. The booth typically sits more than a football field away from the screen, so the projector needs a much more powerful bulb to carry the image. Booths with a digital projector also need to be retrofitted with special glass, more vents, stronger air-conditioning and an Internet connection. Projectionists who used to put film onto reels will instead insert a jump-drive into a server the size of a refrigerator. Patronize your local drive-in while you can.
  • Base Theatres. Another class of theatre that cannot afford the cost of conversion are those on military bases, such as the one at Ellsworth AFB. They also aren’t supported by the film industry, show films at a lower admission cost, and are opting to close instead of converting.
  • Art Houses. Art houses are also being impacted by the conversion to digital. The biggest challenges for these houses are fundraising, attracting younger audiences, marketing their films, and converting theaters to digital projection. One operator noted that the audience will pay for new seats before they pay for digital projectors. Only the threat of closure will open the pockets. As noted above, this is complicated by the fact that some movie distributors are no longer shipping out bulky 35mm prints – opting instead for digital copies of their films. For example, last Halloween, 20th Century Fox indicated they would send only digital copies of “The Rocky Horror Picture Show” to theaters aiming to screen the midnight cult classic. However, I will note that digital projectors are not the reason behind the closure of the Laemmle 7 at the Fallbrook Mall in West Hills. The reason there is simple greed from the landlord, who wants more rent than the art house can support. Laemmle has indicated they are considering other opportunities in the area… especially those where they can own the facility instead of renting.

Music: Rock of Ages (2009 Original Broadway Cast): “Heaven/More Than Words/To Be With You”

Share