The Original Version: The Secret Life of Walter Mitty

Posted on December 23, 2013 at 6:06 pm

Humorist James Thurber’s most famous short story is “The Secret Life of Walter Mitty.” Like most of Thurber’s male characters, he was a milktoast, shy, repressed, and hen-pecked. On a shopping expedition with his wife, he daydreamed of adventure and triumph, picturing himself as a brilliant surgeon, a military officer on a dangerous mission, and a marksman on trial for murder, being cross-examined by the district attorney.

“You are a crack shot with any sort of firearms, I believe?” said the District Attorney, insinuatingly. “Objection!” shouted Mitty’s attorney. “We have shown that the defendant could not have fired the shot. We have shown that he wore his right arm in a sling on the night of the fourteenth of July.” Walter Mitty raised his hand briefly and the bickering attorneys were stilled. “With any known make of gun,” he said evenly, “I could have killed Gregory Fitzhurst at three hundred feet with my left hand.”

In 1949 it was filmed with Danny Kaye in the title role.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ntATWJl6Yl0

And this week there is a new version starring Ben Stiller and Kristin Wiig. It is less like the original story than it is like the play and movie “Dream Girl,” a romantic comedy rather than a bittersweet meditation on a constricted life with no opportunity for change. Like J. Alfred Prufock, Walter has not dared to disturb the universe. He has no answer to the “been there, done that” question on a dating website because he hasn’t been anywhere or done anything worth noting. When that changes, it makes for a very enjoyable film.

This classic cartoon is based on another Thurber story, on a similar theme, “The Unicorn in the Garden.”

Related Tags:

 

Books Original Version Shorts

Interview: Nicholas Britell, Composer of “12 Years a Slave”

Posted on December 23, 2013 at 8:00 am

One of the most powerful moments in the extraordinary film 12 Years a Slave has its main character, Solomon Northrup (Chiwetel Ejiofor) joining with the other slaves to sing a spiritual.  It was a great pleasure to speak with the talented young composer, Nicholas Britell, who wrote “My Lord Sunshine (Sunrise)” and “Roll Jordan Roll” as well as three traditional fiddle tunes on the soundtrack.  He painstakingly researched this lost form of music, which was never recorded and in many cases never written out, in an effort to bring the most accurate musical representation and help to tell this story.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8PGeyMfdGag

Tell me a little bit about the research that you did to create music of this period.

It was a really unique challenge because the main character is a violinist and the movie itself, we knew, was going to have so much music in it, literally onscreen in the world of the characters.  And it’s interesting because the 1840s is such a long time ago that we don’t have recordings, obviously until 50 to 60, 70 years later.  And then on top of that, the spirituals themselves in the 1840s, there was really no music notation that was ever done of those songs.  We only started getting people attempting to notate the songs of the slaves around the Civil War time.  And even then, all the notes that they tried to write down, they all talked about how difficult it was, and how Western notation wasn’t really able to notate the sounds that they were hearing, people singing in the fields.  Today, we can imagine that it was because of the unique rhythms, the syncopations, the African rhythms, all of the different cultural influences of those people who were there in the field.  On the one hand, there is much as possible about whatever there was to be known but then we had to attempt to, essentially, recreate and re-imagine the sound because we’ll never really know what it actually sounded like in the 1840s.  So I went to the library, I read everything I could, I looked at primary source texts.  And there were two angles of the research: one was figuring out what was the music that Solomon would have played, and then what the slaves’ music would be.   So the first question is really “What would an African-American violinist have played in New York in 1841?”  Very interesting,  very specific question.

What I discovered was there is much more research on the string music traditions certainly that goes back many hundred years so I was able to ascertain pretty well that the music that he probably would have been settling was very influenced by Scottish and Irish folk tunes.  He wasn’t playing Beethoven but, interestingly, by way of re-imagining that world because it was so close to that era, this was within 12 years of Schubert’s death, essentially.  That’s where we’re talking.  Mendelssohn was still alive in Europe.  Schumann was composing in Europe so some of the music that might have been coming over was some of this classical music and I imagined Solomon was a very accomplished violinist.

That was the starting point of mine.  And because of that, I imagined that he might have had knowledge of a lot of different music potentially.  So, on the one hand, while he was playing some of his Irish and Scottish folk tunes, I actually worked very hard with the violinist Tim Fain, an amazing violinist.  We worked very hard to sort of imagine a unique sound for the violin that actually had elements of almost classical technique but not really.  We wanted it to have a different feel than what we imagined fiddling sounds like today just to really kind of re-imagine that sound and give it a unique quality so we even did things like, there’s research that indicate the fiddlers would have held the violin more low-slung on their shoulder, the tuning would have been different.  So we really tried to incorporate all of these thoughts into the way that, not only, the music was arranged and written because some of those are actually totally new songs that I wrote, some are arrangements of traditional songs that the research indicated might very well been played by Solomon.

But then the big thing was the sound.  We really wanted to make sure that it had a very interesting quality to it.

Where is this research?  Where do you go to look that stuff up?

I went to the library, I went on the internet, I spoke with people.  We spoke with many on the violin side.  I worked with Tim, the violinist, very closely.  We know a lot of people in the string music world so there were many different angles on the question but, frankly, a lot of it is just going back to very old books and history books.  It’s interesting because, actually, not that much was written on the music of the 1840s specifically.  There’s a lot more music history written, it seems, on the Colonial Era.  And then on the Civil War Era.

But the 1840s was an interesting period where, certainly, there was a lot of music going on in America.  This was a world in America where every town had its own sort of like brass band.  It was a very unique and fascinating musical world but, again, there just wasn’t much specifically on that decade so it was interesting.  The more challenging side was really with the spirituals because the spirituals themselves and the work songs are something that, just by their nature, weren’t being notated.  I think one thing I tried to be very conscious of was how much music changes in very short periods of time.  Even 20 to 30 years can be a long time stylistically in music.  It’s basically 20, 30 years between what the classical era of music and the romantic era of music.  It’s 30 years between the height of Jazz and then Rock ‘n’ Roll really.   So if you then imagine how different music would be a hundred years apart that I try to be very conscious of the responsibility of it.   I tried to balance and really come up with very strong rationale for why I was thinking in a certain way but interestingly, there is a lot that you can find.

There’s a lot of research on the lyrics.  It’s a lot easier to find information on the lyrics than the music itself.  So lyrically, certain things are true that there was definitely quite a bit of Biblical influence and also, lyrically, every culture has work songs going back to the dawn of time where these were songs that were sung to get through the day and actually to functionally sort of help you do your work.  So the work songs in the fields are like the song I wrote “My Lord Sunshine.” I spent a lot of time, not only lyrically trying to get it right and musically imagining it but rhythmically to figure out even just the tempo of it so it matched the swinging of the cane chopping which was another sort of variable to think about.  There were a lot of different sort of variables to get right and that song lyrics really were there’s Biblical influence.  And while I was writing, I felt like I tried to put myself in the mind of if you were working 10, 11 hours a day under the hot sun, what would you have been singing to get through that day.  I think that I imagined the Biblical influence of “my Lord.”  But also the sunshine is such an omnipresent element to that so the lyrics, things like “it’s late, it’s hot, my Lord Sunshine” things like that so it all felt very true to life to what might have been like.

 

Related Tags:

 

Composers Interview Music

2013 at the Movies: The Best, The Worst, Breakthroughs, and Special Mentions

Posted on December 22, 2013 at 6:00 pm

As I think back over the past year, these are the films I remember best:

Top ten:

Inside Llewyn Davis

The Kings of Summer

The Way Way Back

The Wolf of Wall Street

American Hustle

20 Feet from Stardom/Muscle Shoals

No

Gravity

12 Years a Slave

Nebraska

Honorable mention: Before Midnight, Museum Hours, In a World, Frozen, The Spectacular Now, Her, Much Ado About Nothing, Short Term 12, Don Jon, Fruitvale Station, Enough Said, Upside Down, Philomena, 56 Up, The World’s End, Still Mine, Rush, What Maisie Knew, 42, Trance

 

Best ensembles:

What Maisie Knew

American Hustle

Kings of Summer

The Wolf of Wall Street

Best romantic couple: Celine and Jesse

Runners-up: Beatrice and Benedick

Worst romantic couple: Romeo and Juliet

Best Superhero: Iron Man

Best Supervillain: Loki

MVPs: Benedict Cumberbatch is this year’s Jessica Chastain, with lead roles in five major films plus the narration of the 3D IMAX “Jerusalem”  Runners up: Louis C.K. and Jennifer Lawrence for outstanding work in two roles each and Brie Larson for three

Breakthroughs: Lupita Nyong’o, Michael B. Jordan, Ryan Coogler

Overdue breakthroughs: Oscar Isaac, Brie Larson, Lake Bell, Tom Hiddleston

Everything old is new again: Black and white cinematography in “Nebraska,” “Frances Ha,” and “Much Ado About Nothing”

Still getting better: Dame Judi Dench

Just Plain Fun: Now You See Me, The Secret Life of Walter Mitty, About Time, Populaire, Austenland

Worst: Identity Thief, Out of the Furnace, After Earth, Free Birds, Getaway, Lone Ranger, The Host, To the Wonder, Gangster Squad, Romeo & Juliet, Escape from Planet Earth, Burt Wonderstone, Hangover 3, Only God Forgives, Broken City

Related Tags:

 

Lists

Battle Over “Love Actually”

Posted on December 22, 2013 at 8:00 am

“Love Actually” has become a Christmas tradition.  The assorted stories of romance, from comic to tender to bittersweet, take place at Christmastime, with a rousing performance of “All I Want for Christmas is You” from Olivia Olson.

My friend Christopher Orr does not like “Love Actually.”  He explains why, in great detail, in The Atlantic.

I think it offers up at least three disturbing lessons about love. First, that love is overwhelmingly a product of physical attraction and requires virtually no verbal communication or intellectual/emotional affinity of any kind. Second, that the principal barrier to consummating a relationship is mustering the nerve to say “I love you”—preferably with some grand gesture—and that once you manage that, you’re basically on the fast track to nuptial bliss. And third, that any actual obstacle to romantic fulfillment, however surmountable, is not worth the effort it would require to overcome.love actually

Of course, there are many people who feel differently and it seemed that most of them responded in writing.  In Mother Jones, Ben Dreyfuss wrote a piece called “Why ‘Love Actually’ Matters,” noting that he had seen the film at least 40 times.  “In ‘Love Actually,’ as in life, people fall in love for crazy reasons…Is the movie a meaningful blueprint on how to meet your life’s love and make it last with them forever? Of course not. But is it romantic? Yes! Romance is the big gesture. Romance is the love that erupts without a spoken word.”

In ThinkProgress, Alyssa Rosenberg wrote:

I like “Love Actually” not because I think it’s a compelling celebration of love, or because it’s a good holiday movie, but because of how sad the film often is…. can be painfully clear-eyed about how difficult it is not to have access to that bounty of affection, and to what are supposed to be happy endings.

Emma Green responded to Orr in The Atlantic as well, calling on C.S. Lewis to back her up:

“Love Actually” shows awkward, charming, complicated entanglements that can be very instructive in thinking about love.  To help explain why, I hereby declare my second in this duel: C.S. Lewis. Although a mid-century Christian apologist might seem like an bizarre choice for back-up in a battle about a romantic comedy, his book The Four Loves provides a helpful framework for examining the big question “Love Actually” asks: What is love, actually?

Well, for starters, it’s a lot more than romance. Some of the movie’s most “aww!”-inducing moments do involve big, dramatic declarations of the heart (more on that later), but the most interesting of the movie’s nine or 10 subplots are those that don’t quite fit the expected rom-com mold. That’s because they’re not romantic at all: They’re versions of the first two kinds of love Lewis writes about, affection and friendship.

Orr doesn’t give up.  He responded to everyone with a closely-reasoned piece of analysis that could almost serve as a Supreme Court brief or doctoral dissertation.

I think there are two flaws common to many of the defenses of “Love Actually” I’ve seen in comments, on Twitter, and elsewhere on the web. The first is attempting to defend each subplot on an individual basis. I agree that (with one notable exception) any given storyline is perfectly defensible on its own merits. The problem, rather, is the patterns that emerge when you consider the film as a whole. One subplot about an older man wooing a much-younger subordinate? Fine. But three? And on it goes: not one, but two gags (three, if you count the Colin subplot) about how the only possible way a man could overcome heartbreak is with the assistance of one or more supermodels; two storylines in which women (never men) see their romantic lives shattered by obstacles that ought to be surmountable; and, most important, upwards of half a dozen subplots in which characters go directly from initial physical infatuation to (presumed) happily-ever-afters, without remotely bothering to get to know one another in between. These repeated themes are not coincidental.

The second mistake is trying to defend the Keira Knightley storyline, which is flat-out indefensible. Cut it loose, “Love Actually” fans! It’s an anchor that can only bring you down with it.

I “actually” found this debate more entertaining than the movie, which I find problematic but still fun to watch.

Related Tags:

 

Commentary

Contest: Journey to a Christmas Star

Posted on December 21, 2013 at 2:17 pm

christmas starNorway’s most beloved Christmas story is directed by Academy Award nominee Nils Gaup. It is the story of a courageous girl who sets out on a hazardous journey across a gorgeous winter wonderland to find the Christmas Star in order to free the kingdom from a curse and bring back a long lost princess. She makes some friends along the way, including Father Christmas, but some mighty foes try to stop her.

I have a copy to give away! Send me an email at moviemom@moviemom.com with Star in the subject line and tell me your favorite star or constellation. Don’t forget your address! (US addresses only). I’ll pick a winner at random on December 31, 2013. Good luck!

Related Tags:

 

Action/Adventure Based on a book Contests and Giveaways Fantasy For the Whole Family Stories About Kids Talking animals
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