Unsung Heroes: The Props of "This is Spinal Tap"

Michael C here from Serious Film this week to throw a little love to the technical support who help make it possible for the geniuses in front of the camera to change comedy forever.

I do not for one think the problem was that the band was down. I think the problem may have been that there was a Stonehenge monument on the stage in danger of being crushed by a dwarf. That tended to understate the hugeness of the object. -  David St. Hubbins

One of the things that makers of Hollywood spoofs and satires seem to have forgotten is that it is important to first establish the reality of the story, and then, and only then, does one proceed to twist and subvert the conventions of the genre. Kubrick knew to let Dr. Strangelove play out with stark simplicity for the whole opening act before the big laughs started to creep in. Mel Brooks knew to let Young Frankenstein feel like a convincing horror classic before the monster started putting on the Ritz. And Rob Reiner clearly knew that his off-the-charts hilarious This is Spinal Tap would be dead in the water if every detail didn’t ring true. The prop work and set decoration placed the bar for mockumentaries at a level that has rarely been approached since.

Everything here is exactly the right level of awful. The crappy plastic pod that captures Shearer’s Derek Smalls and the crappy plastic demon skull that looms over the stage are both just good enough to allow the band to delude itself into thinking they're awesome. The legendary amp that goes to eleven displays that extra level with the perfect degree of carelessness, as if a disinterested roadie hastily tacked on the elevens in order to placate the band. One of my favorite bits is the series of briefly glimpsed past albums. The blindingly tacky cover art lets you know in an instant precisely the type of horrible band Spinal Tap is.

And what words can do justice to Stonehenge? That henge has a lot of buildup to fail to live up to and it delivers spectacularly at failing to deliver. Yet one can still spot the faint glimmer of the awesome spectacle the band imagined it would be.

It occurs to me I may be going overboard handing out credit. The wonderfully cheap look of Spinal Tap’s props may simply be a fortuitous result of the movie’s limited budget and shooting schedule. But even if that were that case what difference would it make? Would it be more praise-worthy if Spinal Tap had a prop department the size of Lord of the Rings and the budget of Avatar? The question comes down to how much more perfect could every minor detail of Tap, from the tiny bread on Nigel’s refreshment tray to the cucumber in Derek’s trousers, be? And the answer is none. None more perfect.

Link Roundup (and Lint Roundup From Navel Gazing.)

Towleroad. Jodie Foster has limits. Michael Fassbender doesn't. Bradley Cooper stars in Limitless.
I Need My Fix clips and poster for Jodie Foster / Mel Gibson film The Beaver.

Also do you like this Midnight in Paris Vincent Van Gogh lift painting? I can't type Vincent Van Gogh in connection with a Woody Allen movie without thinking of Manhattan's "Hall of the Overrated"

Yahoo Answers "Who danced worse? Elaine on Seinfeld or Michelle Pfeiffer in Scarface?" LOL
Us Weekly Lea Michele kissing on Ashton Kutcher in New Year's Eve.
The News Gazette has very uplifting info about the Ebert Fest Lineup. I don't really worship him in the way most movie-obsessives do but Roger Ebert is really a very cool person

Finally,  E! Online posted a rather drooling "ohmygoditshappened!" in response to the filming of the Armie Hammer / Leonardo DiCaprio smooch in J. Edgar. This is worth reading just for the annoying reminder (in the comments) that homophobia is still alive and well and still refuses to call itself "homophobia". It's just like all those stupid racists who always preface racist comments with "I'm not racist" People are so annoying! Ah well. Best to just keep on celebrating cool people instead. Who is cool? Who do you think has been worth cheering lately?

Sorry I'm in a terrible mood. This is one of the reasons Reader o' the Day has been fun. It's cheerful. And a sense of community is important. For reasons I've never fully grasped it's kind of a lone wolf site. The other movie sites and/or awards sites are constantly referencing each other like a tennis match but we're just off to the side doing our thing, day in and day out. Sometimes we'll do something brilliant and no one will notice and it's kind of a bummer. Other times we'll notice total press release regurgitations going truly viral from other sites and we're like 'why? There's no there there? It's just the press release!' This is not to diss other sites -- there are fine ones out there and every site be it great, good, mediocre or below average has its weaker days and its stronger ones (including this one) -- we just find it odd is all. And we're feeling contemplative. It's tough to do original content day in and day out (like The Hit Me With Your Best Shot feature for example) and have it go nowhere and sites that just do press releases and trailers and casting rumors all day are hugely popular. I was discussing this the other day with Glenn at Stale Popcorn, one of my personal favorite blogs. And it is frustrating for sites that try to have an original voice. Sometimes you feel like you're shouting into the abyss and you'd be better off just posting trailers and posters and quoting other blogs for all your posts.

Anyway... [/boring pity party]

My point is: I really appreciate the community The Film Experience has from you, the loyal readers. The ones who are here year 'round and not just when the Oscar noms and Oscar night happenings happen (always the two biggest days, traffic wise). Are you liking the Reader o' the Day feature? We're doing it for the rest of the month. Maybe it should be a weekly feature hereafter? We'll see.

Awards Brief
The Producer's Guild has announced their awards night date for this film year. It's January 21st, 2012. One date down... dozens more to go.

Distant Relatives: Hamlet and The Dark Knight

Robert here, with my series Distant Relatives, where we look at two films, (one classic, one modern) related through a common theme and ask what their similarities and differences can tell us about the evolution of cinema.

The Laughing Fishmonger

Of course I’m not the first person to notice a similarity between Batman and Hamlet. While the Caped Crusader of Gotham officially owes more of his inception to Zorro, the themes of his story, the conflicts that keep us coming back owe much to Hamlet, if not directly than indirectly as a model of the same story of a man driven by the “virtue” of vengeance.

Outside the stories, as cultural institutions, these two tales have much in common. Both have inspired endless versions across multiple media. Both are told over and over and over again (demand for more is considerable). Both provide endless fodder for investigations into the human psyche. These two films are stories of heroes and villains that force us to wonder really: what is a hero?

Cape, cowl, tights, temper

We can start with the superficial similarities: two silver spooned children, dead parents, promises to seek retribution, manic dispositions put upon, villains everywhere, corrupt cops (if you’re so inclined to consider Rosencrantz and Guildenstern). There are similarities to be found everywhere if you wanted to stretch hard enough. You could find an equivalence between Hamlet’s third act travelling players ploy and the Gotham police department’s fake funeral plan. Two “shows” of reality meant to make the bad guy drop his guard.

But why the 1948 Laurence Olivier version and the 2008 Christopher Nolan interpretation? Olivier’s pared-down story lacks over-conceptualization or ornateness making it a good starting point, it’s almost the “control group” of Hamlets. More important to the comparison though is The Dark Knight, which kicks into high gear a concept hinted at by Batman Begins. That is to suggest that the super-villainy bubbling up is a direct result of Batman’s existence. Sure, other cinematic adaptations have played a bit with the “you made me” paradox but quickly dismissed it (suggesting The Joker killed young Bruce Wayne’s parents isn’t criminal because it rewrites Batman canon but it does whitewash the complexity of the character and underscore his hero status.) But Nolan is almost primarily interested in the ripple effect of Batman’s quest for justice and how like Hamlet’s vengeance it sends everything spiraling out of control.

"You've changed things... forever. There's no goin' back"

An equal and opposite reaction

What is the worst result, the highest tragedy of this downward spiral? The death of the innocent, most specifically the love interest of course. Ah, the love interest, Rachel Dawes and Ophelia, pushed away by our hero, caught up in the whirlwind of chaos he has created. The story needs a sacrifice and they’re it. And in both cases, their deaths propel us into another theme that Hamlet and The Dark Knight want to explore. The corrupting influence of grief sends both Harvey Dent and Laertes into the hands of evil just as easily as their tragedies propelled Bruce Wayne and Hamlet toward good... or should we say “good?” since all involved are feeding on their emotional instability to fuel their hunt for those who they consider responsible. The line between good and evil depends entirely on your perception of the big picture (and whether you see something more forgivable about an unjust death in the pursuit of justice than one in the pursuit of power.)

This is probably why the Hamlet and the Batman tales have such staying power. Because these questions have plagued humankind through centuries of the war, terrorism, crime, punishment, and the pursuit of justice. Yet neither of these films intend to give us moralized answers. There are no Gandhi lessons about an eye for an eye leaving the world blind here. Sure, we can see the results for ourselves, but our heroes are still meant to be heroes. What’s the last thing said about Hamlet? He’s called a “noble prince.” The last thing said of Batman? He’s called “the hero Gotham deserves.”

Hamlet would have illegally wire tapped all of Denmark's phones if he'd had the technology

There are, of course, differences between the two as well. Batman has more explosions. Batman has cooler villains more intent on anarchy (although Claudius’ apathy toward the Fortinbras threat isn’t exactly the model for great leadership). What Hamlet has, that Batman does not is doubt, at least according to Olivier who pegs his protagonist's problem as constant waffling declaring upfront that “This is the tragedy of a man who could not make up his mind.” Batman has no such qualms. Perhaps that’s the power that makes him a superhero, his superhuman determination that what he’s doing is unquestionably right. In that sense maybe Hamlet holds the moral high ground. Then again later interpretations of the character, unbound by the Hayes Code were more singular in their bloody thoughts and Hamlet himself is still directly responsible for several deaths while Batman has a code against killing, and so the pendulum swings back the other way.

Perhaps the one thing we can take from the comparison is that the audiences of 2008 just like the audiences of 1948 or 1600 for that matter really are looking for a complex hero, an honest story, and a good fight at the finale.

Ten Reasons Aronofksy Really Left "The Wolverine"

(not really)

By now you've heard the news that Darren Aronofsky has left the director's chair of The Wolverine, leaving Fox and Hugh Jackman scrambling for a new leader. They're going to move aggressively to replace him. Aronofsky cites a year away from home (presumably in Japan) as the reason for his departure. Sad. Just when we had totally acclimated ourselves to the idea of Aronofsky's madness servicing Wolverine's berserker rages, too. Who didn't want to see Hugh Jackman challenged again by an auteur -- and not just to up his protein consumption -- particularly the auteur that wrestled his best performance out of him?

We think there's way more to the story that Aronofsky and Fox just aren't telling. I was talking to Joe about this and perhaps our imaginations are just overactive but wouldn't any studio simply adjust their current plans to accomodate a director who has a proven track record of upping their star's game and of creating amazing visuals with $1.57 in petty cash that outdo their million dollar investments. Plus, Aronofsky is just off a huge surprise worldwide success.

So herewith...

TEN (IMAGINARY) REASONS ARONOFSKY REALLY LEFT WOLVERINE

10. Darren prefers pencil moustaches to mutton chops.

09. Fox demanded a Halle Berry / Storm cameo.

08. Studio objected to scene Darren referred to as "Uncle Hank's Cigar Challenge"

 

07. Fox insisted that Coney Island was not a suitable stand-in for Tokyo exteriors. Not even with CGI embellishments.

06. Fox demanded a Black Swan Reboot option added to Darren's contract.

05. Hugh Jackman refused to allow actual steel blades to be placed in his arms. Wuss. Mickey Rourke was totally okay with the staples!

04. Aronofsky couldn't stop giggling every time "X-Men Origins: Wolverine" was uttered in studio meetings.

03. Wolverine's mutant healing prevented all attempts to dramatize self-mutilation, Aronofsky-style. Aronofsky to Fox: "Booooorrrring!"

02. Fox rejected new costume concept involving Wolverine in a natty scarf.

01. Hugh Jackman wanted Benjamin Milipied to 'choreograph' the fight scenes.

Maybe you can think of more reasons in the comments?

Reader of the Day: Walter

For Reader Appreciation Month, we're having mini interviews with readers. Here we have have Walter.

Nathaniel: Do you remember your first moviegoing experience or first obsession?
Walter: The first theater-going experience I remember is sitting in the movie theater with my aunt watching The Nightmare Before Christmas -- I was four years old and absolutely aghast at the final battle between Jack and Oogie Boogie and the end result. God, that was terrifying. And AWESOME.

According to my father, though, the first time I ever sat up was to watch a movie on TV. Babies get distracted; he claims I stayed with the story until they turned it off. I wish he remembered what movie it was, because it was clearly the beginning of a beautiful friendship.

When did you start reading The Film Experience?
Spring 2006, I want to say. Fresh off the 2005 Oscar Season, the first one I really got into, I Googled 2006 Oscar Predictions. Film Experience and many others came up, and I still follow the Big Four: Hollywood-Elsewhere, Awards Daily (it was Oscar Watch then), In Contention, and this one. I visit, like, three times a day, because I never know if there's an article I've missed, or I want to visit something, or I want to freshen up on my Film Bitch Trivia.

Have you ever dressed up as a movie character for Halloween?
Well, here's where I answer the "or" part of the very first question. My most memorable Halloween costume was Bela Lugosi, my first movie star obsession, in third grade. Not Dracula: Bela Lugosi. I had just seen Ed Wood, so I got a cape, a felt hat and a walking-stick, and my dad took me to a late-night screening of the Lon Chaney Phantom of the Opera. It was AMAZING.

Has any movie character as dressed as you?
William Hurt as James Leeds in Children of a Lesser God. We had the same elbow-patched blazer. I loved that thing, and I left it in the trunk of a friend's car...a friend who later moved away. Damn them!

Two fearsome and formidable icons: Bela & Maggie

Your 3 favorite actresses. Go
Maggie Smith is my all-time favorite actress: we watched The Secret Garden in second grade, and when my friend asked me who my favorite character was, he was appalled when I said the old woman. "But she's so mean!" he insisted. Well, yeah, but I also loved the way she cowered before the master of the house, and the subtle power plays she tried, and the smackdown she put on the maid. I love her so much. Meryl and honey-kissed Patty Clarkson are the other no-brainers for me.

What does your movie diet consist of these days?
I haven't seen a movie in a theater since February...and I work in one! Hopefully, that will all change this month: Jane Eyre calls. Mostly, I've been watching movies on TCM and Netflix Instant, the latter especially.

previous readers of the day: Paolo, Leehee and BBats