Tag Characters

Three on a Match

Michael 3 Comments

I just finished rereading a Phillip Marlowe mystery. Philip Marlowe is the hard boiled detective invented by Raymond Chandler in 1939 in the novel The Big Sleep. You might have seen Humphrey Bogart play Marlowe in the movie version. If you did, you saw a man do some serious detecting. And some serious smoking. Well, it was the time. Between the wars. A manly man. In a manly field. Doing a manly job. Smoking like a man.

Last week one of the movie channels replayed the 1985 film, St. Elmo’s Fire. A bunch of kids just out of college, working their entry level jobs, drinking their every level cocktails, loving and hating their entry level lives. And smoking. Wow, they smoked a lot in that picture. When they drank they smoked. When they partied, they smoked. When they drove, they smoked. When they danced, they smoked. When they attempted suicide, they smoked. When they thwarted suicide, they smoked. When they broke up they smoked. When they made up, they smoked. I don’t remember if they ever ate.

I mentioned a couple of posts ago that I had been watching Bond, James Bond movies during a month long marathon of the classic spy stories. One of the things about the early 1960s offerings that you might notice is how much they smoked. Everybody smoked. The spy, the counter spy, the henchmen, the femme fatale. Bond, James Bond. Everybody smoked. Some of Bond, James Bond’s best secret weapons were built into cigarette lighters. Others into cigarette cases. Some even into cigarettes.

NoSmokingFrom the 40s through the 60s to the 80s, everybody smoked. By the time we got to the 2000s people just stopped smoking. Movies today even have disclaimers at the end of the credits stating nobody, but nobody involved in the production of the just viewed movie got any financial, moral, or athletic support knowingly, unknowingly, or even accidentally from anybody, any corporation, or any organization supporting or even involved with the tobacco industry. Often the disclaimer is more prominent than the notice of what type of camera used to shoot the film and the union local responsible for driving the caterer from location site to location site.  In the most recent Bond, James Bond volumes nobody smokes. Not in the bars, not in the casinos, not on the stakeouts. Not just the spy and the supporting spy people. No body. No where. No Smoking. They must have all gone cold turkey.

Amazing the strides they made in 20 years. The Surgeon General would be proud of Mr. Bond, James Bond. Now if we could just get him to drive a little safer.

 

See the Movie, Read the Book

Michael Leave a comment

I do a lot of reading. I always did. Sometimes I go through a book in a day. Sometimes I’ll wait for the movie. Most times I’ll do both.

Sometime over the past week among the books I read was an oldie but goodie, Hopscotch by Brian Garfield. You might remember this international thriller from the 70s. Or you might remember the movie with Walter Matthau and Glenda Jackson from the 80s.  If you saw one or read the other without reading the one or seeing the other then you really don’t know both stories. Even though they have the same characters, the same general plot, and the book and the screenplay were both written by the same man, they aren’t the same story. Not that one was better than the other, just different.

A more recent example is Silver Linings Playbook, a 2008 New York Times best seller and debut novel from Matthew Quick, and an Academy Award winning movie from 2012 (Best Actress, Jennifer Lawrence). Again, if you just read the book you missed a great movie and if you just saw the movie you missed a terrific story. Both really good. And both really different.

Sometimes the differences between book and movie are very small, except they stop partway through. Sort of like the movie is an abridged version of the book. I first noticed it when Three Days of the Condor starring Robert Redford was released in 1975. A nifty spy thriller based on James Grady’s book, Six Days of the Condor. What happened to the other three days?

Redford pops up again in my list of movies that “follow the book closely enough but not necessarily enough of the book” when he starred in this year’s “Walk in the Woods” movie adaptation of Bill Bryson’s 1998 book of the same name. Just like the condor’s missing three days, this movie is missing half of his trek along the Appalachian Trail. What’s there is fairly close to the book (even though the characters on the screen seem to have aged the 17 years between book and movie release), it’s just that the whole book isn’t represented on the screen.

People or studios buy rights and get to do what they will with them. Most often they end up with a pretty good visual representation of the book or play or whatever it is that they bought. There are times when there’s nothing in common but fortunately those aren’t all that common. And every now and then they end up with a really great story that seems familiar but might be more of a sequel to the native version than an adaptation. And that’s not so bad. That way you can still read the book, or see the movie, and not always know how it ends.

That’s what I think. Really. How ‘bout you?

Nobody in the Middle

Michael Leave a comment

Not so many days ago, He and She were watching television by telephone.  That’s when we’re each watching the same program, in this case movie, at our own houses while discussing the proceedings by phone for the duration.  It’s a perfectly acceptable alternative to side by side viewing when either of us is quite comfy staying right where she or he (or She or He) might by, and/or neither of us wants to go out in the cold and snow.  There are added benefits.  Either of us could also read the paper, play a computer game, or watch the deer outside the window and not distract the other.  On particularly hungry days it’s also possible to eat a full meal without the other being wise to the extra caloric consumption going on so long as the meal doesn’t consist of crunchy tacos.  Surely we’re not the only ones who do something like that.

But we digress.  We were watching an old movie starring among others, Patricia Neal.  A very young Patricia Neal.  A 1950’s vintage Patricia Neal.  Whenever we watch old movies we seem to end up playing that game “I wonder what ever happened to her.” Or him.  Although we could recall other movies featuring a young Patricia Neal, neither of us could recall anything in which she was featured after the late 50’s other than an occasional coffee ad on television.  She had entered the dreaded Middle Age Zone, one from which there is no available film character regardless of the talent of the star.  Not until card carrying members of the Screen Actors’ Guild pass through the donut hole and become older, character actors do we ever see them again.

We know that most movie goers are young adults and most young adults want to see other young adults on the big screen.  But there are some older (over 35) people still with disposable income who go to the movies.  Must they also be content watching children cavort in digital splendor?  Surely there is room somewhere for a middle age character other than mom or pop for 10 or 15 minutes throughout the movie.  (That’s twice we used the word “surely” so you know we really mean it.)

It is still acceptable for “older” actors to be featured in movies.  A great example is “The Best Exotic Marigold Hotel” which starred nobody but older actors.  These are people everybody relates to.  The older movie goer remembers them as young actors when the movie goers themselves were young.  The young movie goers saw the older actors hosting Saturday Night Live a month before the release of the movie.  And even the middle age movie goers sort of remember their parents speaking of these people as fine actors or their children recounting how cool they were on SNL last week.

There are exceptions.  “It’s Complicated” featured Meryl Streep, Steve Martin, and Alec Baldwin well past young actorhood but not yet in their golden years.  You might say they were smack in the middle of the Middle Age Zone.  These sorts of movies are rare but when they come along they are usually quite entertaining and end up making somebody quite a bit of money.  Never a bad thing in business.

So why doesn’t somebody exploit these people while they are traversing the donut hole from youngster to eccentric?  That could be the question of the decade.  Or at least for a few more years until a few more of our favorite former young actors join the eccentric crowd and we can now answer, “I wonder what ever happened to her.” Or him.

Now, that’s what we think. Really. How ‘bout you?