Now on DVD: Dean Martin Roasts — the Bawdy Show Business Insult Hit of the 70’s

Posted on October 11, 2013 at 3:59 pm

It started at the very exclusive, men-only (until 1988), Friars Club for comedians, singers, and other performers and show business professionals.  They were known for raucous and bawdy humor and in the late 1940’s they held their first “roast,” a dinner that “celebrated” a star with hilarious insults.   It was entertainer and television host Dean Martin who first put a roast on his show in 1973 so that the public could see it.  It was so popular that it became a regular series for about ten years and now continue on Comedy Central from time to time, most recently “honoring” James Franco.  The comedians try to outdo each other, challenging the group to see who is the funniest and who is the most shocking.  Generally, everyone strives to be both.

A new 6-DVD set from StarVista has issued the Dean Martin Celebrity Roast-Collectors Edition, featuring roasts honoring Bob Hope, Johnny Carson, Jimmy Stewart, Sammy Davis, Jr., Jack Benny, Lucille Ball, Kirk Douglas, Michael Landon, Jackie Gleason, Don Rickles, Joan Collins, and the man himself, Dean Martin.  Roasting them are a full collection of 70’s luminaries, including Muhammad Ali, George Burns, Florence Henderson, Bette Davis, Phyllis Diller, and Milton Berle.  A warning on the package cautions that the racial and ethnic humor of the era may seem inappropriate by today’s standards (on the other hand, if those folks ever heard the jokes at today’s events, they would be very surprised by the explicitly raunchy humor).  “Keep in mind the tenor of the times, the bawdy party atmosphere, and the fact that many of these celebrities were friends who loved to give and take a good shot.  The cigarettes are real, the drinks are free, and the camaraderie is heartfelt.”

The DVD set also includes lots of extras, with bonus comedy sketches, two more Dean Martin specials, featurettes, interviews, and home movies.

 

Related Tags:

 

Television

Interview: Dustin Putman on The Fright File: 150 Films to See Before Halloween

Posted on October 11, 2013 at 12:42 pm

It was a special treat to interview my friend Dustin Putman about his new book, The Fright File: 150 Films to See Before Halloween. As horror director Scott Derrickson says on the cover, “Dustin Putman knows the horror genre inside and out!”

What’s the first scary movie you remember seeing?photo-3

A lot of my early childhood memories run together, but I do distinctly remember watching “Friday the 13th“ with my older brother, Rudy, one Saturday afternoon shortly after my family got our first VCR. I must have been four or five. It was also quite a personal triumph for me the first time I watched the macabre 1985 Disney sequel, “Return to Oz,” by myself. What an amazingly creepy film! Disney likely would never release something like that nowadays.

There are a lot of different kinds of scary — suspense, psychological, gory, monster. What makes each one work and which do you like best?

The great thing about the genre is that all of the above can work as long as there is a definite vision behind them, they are done well, and the filmmakers do not insult their audience. Passionate horror fans are actually quite discriminating, and when one works it can be one of the great movie-watching experiences. Supernatural horror can be fascinating and scary because it deals with the unknown—things that often cannot be explained. There is really nothing like psychological horror, especially from the 1970s, when studios were making films for adults rather than teenagers. 1973’s “The Exorcist,” and that same year’s unforgettably complex, chilling “Don’t Look Now,” directed by Nicolas Roeg and starring Donald Sutherland and Julie Christie, are two of my favorites. 1973 must have been a banner year. I also do still have a soft spot for slasher flicks, as well, probably because while growing up those were the ones I most gravitated toward. I should say there is a VERY fine line between a smart, scary, suspense-laden slasher and a lazy, derivative, throwaway one, which is what they tended to become as a result of the success of 1978’s “Halloween.”

There are a lot of horror/thriller movie series, including “A Nightmare on Elm Street” and “Halloween.”  Which is your favorite?

When people ask me what my favorite horror movie is, I always have the same answer: John Carpenter’s “Halloween.” It is pretty much the epitome of perfection to me in cinema, a low-budget production made by talented young artists that relied on atmosphere, classical building of tension, memorable characters, frightening situations, fluid camerawork, and a brilliant instrumental score to tell a simple story brilliantly. It should also be mentioned that “Halloween” has little violence and almost no onscreen blood. These kinds of films quickly became more gory and almost pessimistic. “Halloween” cared about its characters and delivered a thrilling, inspiring experience.

Who is the all-time greatest horror movie villain and why?  Which one has the best motive?

I will have to piggyback on my previous answer and say the killer from “Halloween,” Michael Myers. Before the sequel devised the whole brother-sister angle between he and Laurie Strode (Jamie Lee Curtis) and Rob Zombie tried to throw cockamamie explanations into his inferior 2007 remake, the most terrifying thing about Michael was that there was no motive at all. As psychiatrist Dr. Samuel Loomis (Donald Pleasence) explains in the film, he is “purely and simply evil.” This is much scarier to me because Michael isn’t just a mentally disturbed man, but, for all intents and purposes, the boogeyman.

Who is the all-time greatest horror movie director?

There are a lot of directors I admire, usually from different periods in their careers. 1970s/’80s-era John Carpenter is certainly up there (in little more than a decade’s time, he made “Halloween,” “The Fog,” “The Thing,” “Christine,” “Prince of Darkness,” and “They Live”). Wes Craven is responsible for two of my favorites, “A Nightmare on Elm Street” and “Scream.” More recently, Ti West is, for me, a modern-day master. His movies are all different in story, but very specifically his own style. It is quite telling that every film of his that has been released, to date, made it into my book, “The Fright File,” including 2005’s underseen gem “The Roost,” 2007’s even more underseen thriller “Trigger Man,” 2009’s “The House of the Devil,” and 2011’s “The Innkeepers.”

Without giving it away, which movie has the best twist ending?

There are two that come to mind, and they are both impossible to forget for anyone who has seen them: 1983’s “Sleepaway Camp” and 1999’s “The Sixth Sense.” I can’t give them away, obviously, but they were both impeccably constructed in a way that surprised upon first viewing and hold up on successive revisits even after you know the “truth.”

TFF_FrontCoverOnlyHow do American horror movies differ from those made in other countries?

My temptation is to say that horror movies from other countries are smarter than American ones, but this would actually be a gross generalization. There are plenty of outstanding U.S.-made horror efforts, and a lot of foreign titles that aren’t very good. One distinction, I think, is that genre movies from other countries tend to be more courageous and cerebral and trend-setting, while American horror is perhaps more concerned with the bottom line and trying to recreate past successes. This is why we see so many remakes these days, and went through a phase a few years back where every Japanese horror title was being redone in the States.

Horror movies get remade a lot — which is the best remake?  Which is the worst?

Best remakes: 2004’s “Dawn of the Dead,” directed by Zack Snyder, did a fabulous job of updating the story and putting a fresh spin on the subject while still adhering to the spirit of the Romero classic. Also, I thought 2010’s “Let Me In,” a remake of “Let the Right One In,” actually improved upon the acclaimed Swedish original by adding underlying layers involving the political climate and so-called “Satanic Panic” of the 1980s.

Worst remakes: 2005’s “The Fog” and 2006’s “The Wicker Man.” Both of these were disasters, missing the entire points of their predecessors. Every possible bad decision one could imagine seemed to be made tenfold when these updates were put in front of the camera. At least Rob Zombie’s “Halloween,” which I am not a fan of, had an undeniable vision behind it. “The Fog” and “The Wicker Man” were two examples of remakes made by committee, with zero creative insight.

What do you love most about horror?

The horror genre is one of a kind in the way that it can play so heavily on the viewer’s deeper emotions. An effective horror film can be an incredibly cathartic experience, and a whole lot of fun. Also, because many of them deal with very extreme situations and ideas, there is more room to explore different themes and use fantastical or frightful subject matter as metaphor for larger universal topics. This is why, I believe, so much has been written on the subject of horror; its scope, and where filmmakers can take their stories, is boundless. 

Dustin’s reviews of hundreds of movies in every genre are available at DustinPutman.com

Related Tags:

 

Books For Your Netflix Queue Horror

List: What are the Best (Fictional) Movie Concerts?

Posted on October 11, 2013 at 8:00 am

The A.V. Club has a great discussion about the all-time best fictional movie concerts.  Of course there are many unforgettable documentaries about real concerts like “Woodstock” and “The Last Waltz.”  But what about those left to the imagination in feature films?  They’ve gone some of my favorites here, like Waynestock in “Wayne’s World 2.”  I’d love to see that “Get Him to the Greek” concert at the Greek, and more from Spinal Tap and “The Mighty Wind” folks (I did get to see them play in a real live concert here in Washington, D.C. and it was awesome).  What would you pick?

Related Tags:

 

Lists Music

Captain Phillips

Posted on October 10, 2013 at 6:00 pm

B+
Lowest Recommended Age: High School
MPAA Rating: Rated PG-13 for sustained intense sequences of menace, some violence with bloody images, and for substance use
Profanity: Strong language
Alcohol/ Drugs: Drugs
Violence/ Scariness: Intense, graphic, and disturbing violence including threats, torture, and guns
Diversity Issues: Diverse characters
Date Released to Theaters: October 11, 2013
Date Released to DVD: January 21, 2014
Amazon.com ASIN: B008JFUNKU

captain phillipsMemorable movie villains tend to fall into two categories: volatile and violent or sociopathic and megalomaniac. Both kinds are caricatures, sketched in exaggerated terms to justify our feeling of triumph when the hero prevails. But in “Captain Phillips,” the true story of a US merchant ship taken over by Somali pirates, the villain is far more real and far more terrifying. Somali native Barkhad Abdi stars as Abduwali Abdukhadir Muse, the leader of a group of four teenagers sent to hijack ships for ransom money by elders in their village. Muse is the scariest of villains, someone with no other options and nothing to lose. Abdi’s performance in his first acting role is stunning, terrifying, and heartbreaking.

An awkward opening scene shows Captain Phillips (Tom Hanks) is at home in Vermont, preparing for his trip and driving to the airport with his wife (Catherine Keener), with some clunky, exposition-heavy dialog intended to foreshadow upcoming unrest.  Once he gets to the boat, called the Maersk Alabama, director Paul Greengrass locks into the taut, intimate style he showed in “United 93” and two Bourne movies.  The ship has a crew of 20.  They have been warned about the possibility of pirates and have had some training in how to respond.  Phillips orders a surprise drill to make them practice their defensive tactics.  But this is not a military ship. They are carrying 17 metric tons of cargo.  Their primary tactics are diversion and their primary weapons are their firehoses.

At first, the firehoses work.  But then the Somalis get close enough to the ship to attach their ladder and climb aboard.  “I’m the captain now,” says Muse.  His lack of affect is chilling.

Director Paul Greengrass has an intimate, documentary style that keeps even those who remember the details of the real story on edge.  The pirates search the ship, looking for the crew like a nightmare game of sardines.  Phillips leads them around, genial and cooperative on the surface, but always thinking about how to impede them without making them angry.  When their boat is destroyed, they take one of the lifeboats, more like a capsule than a ship, and they take Phillips as hostage.  For four grueling days, Phillips has to try to keep calm and do what he can to help the US Navy, which is assembling its response.  Hanks goes deeper than he ever has before, ultimately reaching a place of wrenching vulnerability.

After a shaky start, Greengrass and his talented cast make this into more than a story of courage and resilience.  While he clearly has a point of view and never pretends that the pirates are justified, he allows us to understand their desperate circumstances.

Parents should know that this is the true story of a pirate attack on a US ship, featuring intense and disturbing scenes of threats, torture, and violence with some graphic images and dramatic emotional breakdown.

Family discussion:  What was Captain Phillips’ most difficult decision?  What was the most difficult decision for the US military in responding to the pirates? Do you disagree with any of their actions?

If you like this, try: “United 93,” another true story from the same director and Captain Phillips’ book, A Captain’s Duty: Somali Pirates, Navy SEALS, and Dangerous Days at Sea

Related Tags:

 

Based on a true story Drama DVD/Blu-Ray Pick of the Week Thriller

Romeo & Juliet

Posted on October 10, 2013 at 6:00 pm

William Shakespeare’s “Romeo and Juliet” is the most-filmed play of all time, with dozens of versions and variations from the sublime (the Franco Zeffirelli and Baz Luhrmann versions, “West Side Story” and “Shakespeare in Love”) to the outlandish (the cute Gnomeo and Juliet, the robot short “Runaway Robots! Romie-O and Julie-8”) and the downright ridiculous (Norma Scherer and Leslie Howard were in twice the age of the characters they were playing).  The story of the “star-cross’d lovers” has immediate appeal — impetuous teenagers, disapproving parents, missed messages, and swordfights.  All it needs to succeed is leads with a lot of chemistry and the ability to adapt to the rhythms of iambic pentameter and the glorious language of the greatest writer in the history of English.  This movie fails on all three.  The leads have no chemistry with each other or with the glorious poetry of the dialog.  And “Downton Abbey’s” Julian Fellowes has mangled the adaptation, changing some of the lines and scenes.  It is not a terrible movie, but it is not an especially good one and with so many better alternatives it is an unnecessary one.

It begins with a useless added scene in which the Prince (Stellan Skarsgård) holds a tournament to settle once and for all the dispute between the feuding Montagues and Capulets.  It doesn’t work.  Soon a fight breaks out between the servants of the two houses that are “alike in dignity” (the play’s first scene) and the Prince is furious.  If they cannot keep the peace, there will be trouble.  Romeo (Douglas Booth), a Montague, is in love with a Capulet cousin named Rosaline.  When he finds out that the Capulets are having a masked party and Rosaline will be there, he and his friends attend the party so Romeo can see her.

Romeo-and-Julliet-romeo-and-juliet-2013-34909054-500-333But Romeo sees the Capulet daughter, Juliet (“True Grit’s” Hailee Steinfeld), and they are instantly struck by love.  In the play, their perfect unity is demonstrated by their first conversation, witty flirtation in the form of an exquisite sonnet.  It is one of the best-loved pieces of writing in history.  Yet this version mangles it by ramping up the intensity of the attraction right from the beginning so there is no sense of build-up.  More important, the utter lack of chemistry between the very pretty but bland Booth and the game but not up to the task Steinfeld makes us long for Bella and Edward or even Bella and Jacob.

There are some strong performances, unfortunately just making the two main characters look worse by comparison.  Lesley Manville (“Topsy Turvy”) give the nurse a warmth that is often lost in the usual caricatured portrayals.  Natascha McElhone is a sympathetic Lady Capulet and Paul Giamatti is superb as Friar Laurence.  The standout, though, is Christian Cooke as Mercurtio, whose energy is much missed once he is out of the picture.

Most appallingly, Fellowes has decided to make the text more “accessible” with some trims and edits to the language.  The slight gains in “accessibility” are overwhelmed by the loss of the music in the words and the poetry of the rhythm.  I bite my thumb at him.

Parents should know that this movie includes Shakespearean sword-fighting with many characters injured and killed, sexual references and non-explicit situations, and suicides.

Family discussion:  Did the novice make the right decision?  Why couldn’t Romeo and Juliet tell their parents the truth?

If you like this, try: the other versions by Baz Luhrmann and Franco Zeffirelli and adaptations like “West Side Story” and “Warm Bodies,” a zombie romance where the characters are named R and Julie)

 

Related Tags:

 

Based on a play Classic Date movie Drama Remake Romance Stories about Teens Tragedy
THE MOVIE MOM® is a registered trademark of Nell Minow. Use of the mark without express consent from Nell Minow constitutes trademark infringement and unfair competition in violation of federal and state laws. All material © Nell Minow 1995-2024, all rights reserved, and no use or republication is permitted without explicit permission. This site hosts Nell Minow’s Movie Mom® archive, with material that originally appeared on Yahoo! Movies, Beliefnet, and other sources. Much of her new material can be found at Rogerebert.com, Huffington Post, and WheretoWatch. Her books include The Movie Mom’s Guide to Family Movies and 101 Must-See Movie Moments, and she can be heard each week on radio stations across the country.

Website Designed by Max LaZebnik