Welcome to the Playpen, our space for ferrety banter and whimsical snippets of things that aren't quite long enough for articles (although they might be) but that caught your eye anyway.
@Alice - why would they make coffins from lead? And it does sound rather creepy - we don't know what's in it, so we'll just cut it open. Said every horror script ever. :)
However, traditional techniques, such as X-rays and Cat scans, will not work due to the lead casing and scientists will only discover who is inside once they cut it open.
Was anyone else's immediate thought: "yeah, this is going to end well..."?
Looking forward to the article, anyway!
Funny though..."unrealistic expectations" is key thematic element of this movie...and played into its critical reception.
Tomorrow I will write something I have wanted to write for at least a year.
It will not be about those six movies. Those are just research.
Gunna be a looong day.
In Branagh's version (which I've seen years ago and actually liked, in a mindless fluff sort of way), they are played by Branagh and Emma Thompson, wheras Hero was played by some bland young actress and I can't even remember her male counterpart.
Kate Beckinsdale and Robert Sean Leonard, iirc.
(Okay, this is old, but the concept tickled my funny bone.)
He's not the Captain Archer Trek fans need, but he's the Captain Archer we deserve.
Completely without proof, I could imagine that Shakespeare possibly even *intended* H & C to be the alpha characters, but got carried away with how enjoyable writing B & B scenes and dialogue was. (Or random actor dynamics might have figured into how everything turned out, as Robinson says. I do tend to regard Shakespeare's plays as I do TV programs -- one big name on the package at the end, many people's input, critique, and tweaking along the way.)
Honestly, though, I look at this like one of those university thesis topics that could be argued either way, if one has the time and focus, and still get good marks.
Cheriola: I suspect the directors nowadays want to focus more on the romantic comedy aspect of the play rather than the melodrama, because, well, "I don't want to marry you anymore because they told me you're a slut" is not exactly going to endear the audience to the romantic lead these days, or make that relationship look like a True Love worth rooting for.
Well, yeah, but then again, the version I saw was by Joss Whedon - melodrama's his middle name, and he certainly milked it for all it was worth in this movie (and to his credit, I think it worked better here than just about any other examples I can think of from his works). He even mentioned in one of the articles I read that one of the things which drew him to the play was this dark and twisted subtext to it. And yet I think even he concluded, in the end, that Beatrice and Benedick were the main couple of the story.
Their story sure feels like a comic relief subplot, but it also seems to dominate the story even in the original script. *shrug*
I believe Nothing has multiple (proposed) meanings
Even the title has many themes!
It's just that B/B are a lot more fun to play, so they attract better actors. In Branagh's version (which I've seen years ago and actually liked, in a mindless fluff sort of way), they are played by Branagh and Emma Thompson, wheras Hero was played by some bland young actress and I can't even remember her male counterpart.
And I suspect the directors nowadays want to focus more on the romantic comedy aspect of the play rather than the melodrama, because, well, "I don't want to marry you anymore because they told me you're a slut" is not exactly going to endear the audience to the romantic lead these days, or make that relationship look like a True Love worth rooting for.
Alasdair: Holy crap, I came out of my my writer's block and wrote 6500+ words for Ferretbrain in the space of a week! And I have this man to thank for it!
If your goal for this post was to perk my interest for when the second shoe drops, mission accomplished, Alasdair.
In other news, I saw Whedon's Much Ado in the theater today (still not seen Branagh, though, so I can't compare). I think it suffers from a number of flaws and plot holes which are carry-overs from the text, but I loved the creative stage-directing, and overall, I thought it was quite fun.
I was talking it over with one of my sisters (the newly anointed Shakespeare scholar of the family), and there's one thing we still can't figure out between us - are Beatrice and Benedick actually supposed to be the main couple, or are they just natural show-stealers?
That plot summary honestly sounds like Underworld with only minor cosmetic changes: 2 factions of supernatural species at war and hunting after a single superspecial supernatual to find out about his superspecialness. This time without the love interest in skintight leather. (Or rather, I'll bet she'll be there, she just won't be a central character.)
Yeah, I sort of read that press release as translating to "contract negotiations for Underworld 5 have broken down so Lionsgate are doing this instead."
Granted, if they base the "vigilant gargoyles vs. ferocious demons" part on the disney cartoon Gargoyles (with all its dramatic pathos, Shakespearean characters and villainous "Xanatos Gambits"), it could actually still be worth the bother. If only because fans of that show have been hoping for a revival for years and are in the prime nostalgia market audience group by now.
Since I gotta say, I like the premise of "silly white people go up above the Arctic Circle to bother a homunculus made of corpses who's been stomping around for 200 years and is still mad as hell."
I love that Frankenstein ends with the creature moping off in a huff to be grumpy and lonely in the Arctic. It's like Mary Shelley not only invented modern SF, she also created Marvin the Paranoid Android.
His father must be so disappointed in him. You expect your son to follow in the family tradition and fight the Republic, and he goes and breaks your robot-lizard heart by making terrible comic books about classic literature.
On the subject of Frankenstein, I've been seeing this found-footage horror movie called The Frankenstein Theory floating around lately, and I'm wondering if anyone else out there knows if it is any good? Since I gotta say, I like the premise of "silly white people go up above the Arctic Circle to bother a homunculus made of corpses who's been stomping around for 200 years and is still mad as hell."