Anna reads Jezebel. I’m not quite sure why, and any time I inquire I’m met with obtuse and what I assume is profane language about her lady bits and my inability to understand them or the deep relationship between them and certain forms of journalism. Yuck, typing that just sounds perverse. But today Anna introduced me to something utterly astounding, and it is all thanks to this Jezebel article.
For those to lazy to click the link, it about a woman named Amy Wolfe that is an objectum sexual (a person who falls in love with objects) and she is one of the subjects in the documentary film Strange Love: Married to the Eiffel Tower, which focuses on this rather strange sect of fetishists.
I’d say more, but I’ll let these clips (here and here) of Amy covering her self in axel grease and then giving a gondola what appears to be some sort of oral … uhhh … I don’t even know. I didn’t even want to know, but since now I do you have to suffer through this with me.
And if you want to see more, you can actually watch the documentary online here.
In the recent film Watchmen, Zack Snyder attempted a near shot-for-panel adaptation of the iconic comic, resulting in numerous scenes from the comic that clearly wouldn’t work on film not working on film. While the film kept the basic plot framework it eliminated so many of the messy and complicated details that made the comic such a rich character study and substituted in its place gratuitous violence and the occasional laughable sex scene. All this results in a film that is more a recreation then an adaptation. Accurate enough for the studios to feign deference to the rabid fanboys, yet empty enough so that it might be consumed by the masses without making their brainpan hurt. Really the highest compliment I can pay the film is that it is decent enough that it seems to be convincing people to read the original comic.
But rather then continue to get frustrated over such a lost opportunity, I decided to come up with a few film adaptations that often stray wildly from their source material, whether the source is books, plays, television shows or comics. While I know there are plenty of people who seem to be claiming that this is the best Watchmen film anyone could reasonably expect, I would much rather watch a film take a chance at creating something different and unique for film rather then simply try to be an accurate recreation of its source. That and I am often quite unreasonable.
So I give you my 6 gutsiest adaptations:
Howard the Duck
Fans of the foul mouthed, philandering, alien water fowl had to be scratching their collective heads when they found out George Lucas would be executive producing an adaptation of the often racy Steve Gerber comic Howard the Duck, into a children’s movie. The 80’s weren’t exactly known for children’s films loaded with social satire either, making for what had to have appeared to be a horrible fit. The result is what one would expect, a watered down version of the comic, but credit must be given for the ample duck nudity, as well as the film portraying alien bestiality in a positive, if incredibly awkward, light. How that got past the ratings board, I have no idea.
So I found out early yesterday afternoon that my theatrical pick this week, Fears of the Dark, was dropped from the release schedule. According to our buyer the film might still be released in December, but for now it is totally off the booking sheet, which is an ominous sign.
Evidently the film simply didn’t do very well in other markets (ie New York and Los Angeles) so the decision was made to ax the film instead of releasing it. This in spite of the heavy promotion it has received at all three Landmark Theatres (The Uptown, Lagoon and The Edina) over the past few months. It is pretty rare that a film that has been this heavily invested in by our company will be so unceremoniously dropped. It has happened before, but Fears of the Dark is the first one that I can recall that was dropped after being promoted at all three theatres.
But what really got my goat was when I discovered what Fears of the Dark was being replaced with at The Lagoon, that being Quantum of Solace. Now the decision to play Quantum of Solace at The Lagoon had been made several months ago, and one that has plenty of regulars irked ever since Landmark decided to have both The Dark Knight and Mamma Mia play on two screens this past summer.
Now The Dark Knight is at least defensible, as it made massive amounts of money all across the land and The Lagoon was relatively slow at the time, but Mamma Mia? But bunlike the rest of the world, both ended up doing rather mediocre business at The Lagoon, even the vaunted Dark Knight, and early signs are that Quantum of Solace won’t meet expectations either.
But what is most frustrating, is that Quantum of Solace is on two screens. That means the largest theatre chain in the US that is dedicated to Independent film simply dropped a foreign Independent film for a second screen of the massively mainstream James Bond. It was strictly financial decision, and one that had already backfired at this location in the past, to ax a film that had been garnering decent buzz from their regular clientel just so they could possibly draw in crowds for a film that is decidedly different from the rest of their yearly fare.
Do the expect those customers who come to see Quantum of Solace to return for other films?
Do they expect their regulars to be excited about losing an impressive looking Independent film just so Quantum of Solace can be shown every hour?
I know what my decision is. I won’t be watching Quantum of Solace. Not at The Lagoon, or anywhere else for that matter.
And if anyone else is as bothered by this as I am, feel free to visit landmarktheatres.com and let them know what you think.
You see The Women is a movie that doesn’t have a single male in its cast, and when it was originally made in 1939 this was viewed as pretty progressive stuff. But with a plot that is entirely dependent on these women talking about the men in their lives as if they can’t do anything or go anywhere or talk about anything else except men, it now has the detrimental effect of making women look like shallow idiots who are incapable of being independent from the male members of their lives. And that isn’t all.
In a stunning display of idiocy that I can scarcely comprehend, who should play the role of Mary Haines, a woman who is struggling to recover from the news her husband is having an affair as her friends rush to her aid in a time of crisis, but none other then Meg Ryan. A woman who was publicly vilified for … wait for it … cheating on her husband Dennis Quaid with saucey Aussie Russell Crowe on the set of Proof of Life.
But it’s not like anyone will remember that right? Sure Meg Ryan utterly sunk her career as one of the biggest stars in Hollywood with that collosal blunder, and yes she totally fled the Hollywood scene in an attempt to not have to continually hear about her adulterous ways but I’m sure women have totally forgot about it by now. I mean, it is not like women are known for remembering such betrayal, and they certainly wouldn’t remind you over and over and over again about it to make sure you know that they know that you know that they know that Meg Ryan is a slut.
I mean, even the slightest measure of due diligence should have come to the conclusion that remaking The Women may not only not be a very good idea, but is just plain stupid.
Anna reads Jezebel. I’m not quite sure why, and any time I inquire I’m met with obtuse and what I assume is profane language about her lady bits and my inability to understand them or the deep relationship between them and certain forms of journalism. Yuck, typing that just sounds perverse. But today Anna introduced me to something utterly astounding, and it is all thanks to this Jezebel article. 
Entries (RSS)