On balance I like the look of the film, and the scale of it seems impressive for an indie production. Obviously the cooperation of the military was critical here. My understanding is that Act of Valor began as a documentary-style production about SEAL operations and then gradually morphed into a more conventional narrative – and the trailer certainly has a hybrid, docudrama feel to it. In any case, it looks like something that will be worth seeing in IMAX when it’s released in that format come February of next year.
By Jason Apuzzo. •I had the chance recently to read the screenplay for The Thing, which opens next Friday, Oct. 14th. To sum up my reaction in a nutshell: I liked it, given that the film’s basic requirement is to serve as a direct prequel to John Carpenter’s 1982 thriller. I frankly would’ve preferred a totally new interpretation of the original story, instead of a prequelized version of Carpenter’s; be that as it may, my sense is that if you’re planning on seeing the film next Friday, and aren’t otherwise bothered by the new film’s lack of star-power – or the kind of intense, sci-fi gore associated with Carpenter’s original film – you’re likely to have a good time.
This new version of The Thing, which is set back in 1982, sweeps you into the story quickly and efficiently, introducing a variety of new, relatively low-key characters – including, most importantly, young paleonthologist Dr. Kate Lloyd (Mary Elizabeth Winstead) and helicopter pilot Sam Carter (Joel Edgerton) – who along with several others travel to the Norwegian ‘Thule’ research station in Antarctica, where a mysterious saucer … and an even more mysterious occupant of the saucer, frozen in ice … have been discovered by the Norwegian research team. If you’re familiar with the original Carpenter film, you already know what ends up happening to the Thule station, discovered by Kurt Russell in the original. If you don’t already know, I won’t spoil it for you – but suffice it to say that ‘things’ go badly, as it were.
This new, prequelized version of The Thing feels like it has a lot in common with Ridley Scott’s original Alien, in the sense that the story is built around a thoughtful young woman who keeps her wits about her while the rest of her team descends into hysteria, paranoia or is otherwise carved into pieces like so much whale blubber as the alien ‘thing’ slowly wreaks its havoc in the isolated station. Much as with Sigourney Weaver’s Ripley in Alien, Kate Lloyd here doesn’t really do very much or assert herself prominently until about halfway through the story – she simply keeps her eyes open, while others pursue their various agendas, largely blind to the danger in their midst. It should be a good role for Mary Elizabeth Winstead; I hope she makes the most of it. (Winstead talks about the parallels between her role and Weaver’s Alien role here.)
Truth be told, I’ve only recently become a fan of John Carpenter’s 1982 version of The Thing, which I went back and re-watched a short while back. Although the film is moody and atmospheric, with some nice performances from Kurt Russell and the supporting cast, I still strongly prefer Howard Hawks’ original – although it’s basically true that Carpenter’s film is more ‘faithful’ to the original conception of the morphing, imitative creature in John W. Campbell’s 1938 short story, “Who Goes There?” For my taste, Carpenter’s film gets a little lost in its gore and disgusting excess – losing its suspense every time we’re forced to watch the creature transform into some repulsive new hybrid of man and beast. Alas, expect more of this sort of thing in the new film – no doubt amped-up by digital technology.
What Carpenter’s film has going for it, however, is a genuine sense of terror and dread that has been lacking from a lot of sci-fi alien invasion films of late. So many of the current alien invasion projects (Battle: Los Angeles, the Transformers movies, Skyline, Falling Skies, Battleship, etc.) are basically sublimated war films of one kind or another. John W. Campbell’s original story, along with Carpenter’s telling of it, introduce the much more terrifying notion that an alien might be right beside you – a shape-shifter, ready to destroy and/or assimilate you on a moment’s notice. This new version of The Thing re-awakens the primal fear associated with not trusting someone, that creeping sense that the person next to you might not even be fully human – an eerie, paranoid notion that is actually what much of 1930s and 1950s sci-fi was based on.
Can she deliver? Mary Elizabeth Winstead in "The Thing."
So what should you expect, in terms of what will be different about this film in comparison to the original? Truth be told, relatively little – with just a few exceptions, as the new film’s screenplay really does fit Carpenter’s film like a glove. (Incidentally, it’s cool to read a screenplay that says: “Cue Morricone’s score.”) On the positive side, and without spoiling too much, something’s that’s been unexploited by the two previous versions of The Thing (1951 and 1982, respectively) has been the saucer by which the creature arrives. Expect to spend more time around and also inside the saucer in this new version; what happens there is intriguing and suspenseful. On the neutral side, the ‘test’ for determining whether someone is really human or not is clever – but doesn’t necessarily provide as suspenseful a moment as there was in the Carpenter version. On the negative side, I thought that this new Thing screenplay really lacked something that both the Carpenter and (superior) Howard Hawks versions had: crackling humor. This new Thing is a very sober, straight-forward, dour-‘Norwegian’ telling of the story – a telling that really needed the kind of humor you get from having a group of wise-cracking American characters around. Humor is a great way to relieve fear and tension, and I’m concerned that this new film will be lacking it.
• Speaking of Alien and alien-related prequels, there’s been a lot of chatter recently about Ridley Scott’s Prometheus, although none of it as exciting as the leaking in August of images from the film’s Comic-Con showreel. I’ve seen those images, by the way, and would love to post them here – but I’m not eager to be contacted by Twentieth Century Fox lawyers about it, so you’ll just have to go someplace like here to see at least a few of them. In any case, what these images reveal are two things: 1) the film already is looking extraordinary in terms of its dark, retro-design, really pulling you back into the murky, claustrophobic world of the original film; 2) Prometheus is quite obviously an Alien-prequel, Sir Ridley’s coy assertions aside. This is really looking like a film not to miss next summer.
• Entertainment Tonight recently did a cheerful little behind-the-scenes feature on Battleship, which you should make sure to see. Much as with the Hasbro-Michael Bay Transformers, it looks like director Peter Berg received a lot of assistance from the military on this film, and Berg otherwise talks about working on the film here. We also now have the first official photo of Rihanna appearing in the film, cast members Alexander Skarsgard and Hamish Linklater are out talking about Battleship … and, of course, most importantly, we finally have the first official photo of Brooklyn Decker in the film (see below). She’s looking a little frosty.
Brooklyn Decker glares at her fiancé in "Battleship."
By Jason Apuzzo. As a brief tribute to Steve Jobs and his remarkable legacy, I thought we’d take a look back at Apple’s famous 1984 ad introducing the Macintosh, an ad directed by Ridley Scott. It was this ad, run only once – during 1984’s Super Bowl – that introduced the Macintosh to the world.
The ad is, of course, a succinct and marvelously effective little riff on George Orwell’s original 1984 – although somehow I don’t remember any busty blonde athletes in that novel, do you? (Jobs & Co. really knew how to sell.)
In any case, enjoy it, reminisce, and perhaps even learn something from it. The ad very much captures Jobs’ innovative spirit, which we’ll certainly miss.
By Jason Apuzzo. Steve Jobs, America’s greatest modern innovator, passed away today after a long battle with cancer. He has been a personal hero of mine for the past thirty years, ever since the time when I owned a little ‘Fat’ Mac back in the early 80s – called ‘fat’ at the time because the little machine had a whole 512K of memory. I still own it.
I suspect Steve Jobs was probably a hero to many Libertas readers, as well.
I think we all knew this day was coming, sooner rather than later – but that doesn’t make it any easier when a visionary and deeply inspiring American of this magnitude passes. If you have any thoughts or memories you wish to relate, feel free to do so in the comments section below. It may be a while before I can write about Jobs with proper clarity; for people of my generation, frankly, we all feel like we grew up with this person. I know that he certainly drove so many of us to think more creatively and ambitiously than we might otherwise have. That’s a truly uncommon legacy.
As a passionate Macintosh user and former Palo Alto and Menlo Park resident, where Apple’s innovate spirit seems to flow in the water, this is a tough day. Our condolences to Steve Jobs’ family, and to the larger Apple community.
Libertas, of course, is produced on a Macintosh. We wouldn’t have it any other way.
By Jason Apuzzo. I mentioned Showtime’s new Homeland series in our first Terror Watch update; Showtime recently made the entire first episode of the series available free on-line and I’ve embedded it above.
Having watched the episode, what I can tell you is that the series appears to be a somewhat clunky updating of The Manchurian Candidate for the era of the War on Terror, with some extraneous melodrama mixed in. Frankly, given the comments the producers have been making about the series of late (see here and here), I was expecting a somewhat more politically aggressive, stridently left-of-center show. There are certainly hints that the show may head in that direction in the future, but so far what we’re getting here instead is something more ambiguous and interesting (whether it’s entertaining is another matter). And, much to my pleasant surprise, the villains of the piece are actually Al Qaeda! Fancy that. I wasn’t sure Showtime had it in them.
Did hubby get brainwashed by Al Qaeda?
Homeland follows the return of an American soldier back to the United States after the soldier’s 8-year captivity at the hands of Al Qaeda. Quirky, non-conformist CIA case officer Claire Danes has reason to believe the soldier may actually have been brainwashed by Al Qaeda for mysterious ends, although the producers of Homeland have hinted that the plotline will involve the soldier’s eventual run for political office. (My suggestion? He should run for Governor of California. We’d never know the difference.) The theme of the show is quite obviously ‘paranoia’ – i.e., when or whether it’s justified in the post-9/11 era. Thus far the answer from this series – one episode in – is a resounding ‘yes.’
Whether I’ll actually follow this series, of course, is another matter. Homeland thus far looks a little dry and conventional, and Claire Danes (who spends a lot of the first episode popping anti-psychotic pills) doesn’t really excite me very much, although it’s good to see V‘s alien queen Morena Baccarin back in a new series.
What made John Frankenheimer’s original Manchurian Candidate work, of course, was its razor wit, sophistication with respect to its depiction of the Cold War, extraordinary photography from Lionel Lindon – and some extravagant, signature performances from Angela Lansbury, Laurence Harvey and Khigh Dhiegh. It can safely be assumed we won’t be getting anything like that in Homeland, but you may want to give the show a whirl if you have a free hour and wouldn’t otherwise prefer The Playboy Club. Also: feel free to catch this interview conducted by The Wall Street Journal with Claire Danes, whose character in Homeland is apparently based on a real-life CIA officer she was able to meet at Langley.
By Jason Apuzzo. I wanted to briefly comment today on two releases of note. First of all, the 1959 classic Ben-Hur is getting a lavish new Blu-ray release that arrives in stores tomorrow. I’ve embedded the Blu-ray trailer above, and you can read here about the details of this fabulous-looking set – which includes a documentary featuring newly-discovered behind-the-scenes footage from the set of the film provided by Fraser Heston (Charlton’s son). The Blu-ray set will also include a reproduction of Charlton Heston’s set diary, along with behind-the-scenes photographs taken by Heston’s wife, Lydia. All in all, it looks to be a wonderful release for one of Hollywood’s landmark films of the 1950s – an epic tale of one’s man’s struggle to regain freedom for himself, his family and for his people.
The new "Ben-Hur" Blu-ray box set.
Govindini and I had the pleasure of attending the recent exhibition of Debbie Reynolds’ costume-and-props collection, at which we saw Charlton Heston’s, Stephen Boyd’s and Sam Jaffe’s costumes from Ben-Hur – along with a variety of props from the film. It was an incredible experience seeing these things in person, with the film having been such a favorite of ours over the years. I’m not certain what’s happened to those items since, in terms of whether they’ve already been auctioned; whatever their fate, it seems a tragedy that Reynolds’ collection couldn’t have been kept together. In any case, after so many years it was a thrill to see items from Ben-Hur, at all. (Amazingly, Reynolds’ collection even included Francis X. Bushman’s winged helmet from the original 1925 Ben-Hur) I hope this Blu-ray release further burnishes the film’s legacy for a new generation.
In other news, according to the LA Times today the Red Dawn remake has finally picked up a distributor, FilmDistrict (Drive). As regular Libertas readers know, Libertas is still the only media outlet that’s seen the original, uncensored version of the film (see our exclusive review of the new Red Dawn) that featured the Chinese communist People’s Liberation Army as the villains. The forthcoming, digitally-altered version of Red Dawn – which apparently features some sort of generalized Asian communist menace, led by North Korea – will now likely be arriving in theaters sometime in 2012.
Chris Hemsworth and Adrianne Palicki lead the cast of the new "Red Dawn."
Somewhat lost in the controversy when we initially published our review of Red Dawn was that we actually liked the film, and were simply disappointed at the corporate decision to re-edit it in order to placate the Chinese. I still don’t like MGM’s decision to re-edit the film because of what that decision implies about freedom of speech in Hollywood, particularly at a time when many of China’s own ‘D-Generation’ (‘digital generation’) filmmakers are currently risking their lives and careers (see our review of Once Upon a Time Proletarian from just this week) in telling truthful stories about China’s oppressive regime. The re-editing/censoring of Red Dawn is a much bigger deal than, say, whether Han or Greedo shot first in the Mos Eisley cantina – because it has broader implications for what can and can’t be said by mainstream American filmmakers about the human rights situation in China.
As Charlton Heston himself used to say, “Film is our best export next to freedom,” and it’s best when the films America exports also say something about freedom. Red Dawn had that opportunity – an opportunity to say something sharp, poignant and specific about one particularly tyrannical modern regime (in the same way John Milius’ original Red Dawn had) – but the makers of the film apparently flinched when corporate profits were on the line.
That’s not a very inspiring example, certainly not in the way Ben-Hur was.
