A while back I've read a script whose Act 1 - the whole set-up of characters and situation, conflict - made it seem to be utterly predictable. I continued reading despite the sea of red flags mainly because the writer is a pretty good writer so I wanted to see where this was going. Stop. I didn't just continue reading. I scrolled down and read the last two pages. It didn't go where I had feared it would go (I could tell from who was still alive in the end;) so I continued reading, somewhat less alarmed. Something like that happened again with another script, a WIP.
This time I didn't know if I could trust the author or not, I wasn't familiar with his work at all. So I wanted to know where this was going. I was told about "red herrings" and that my assumptions would turn out to be wrong. Well, good. Or is it?
[Disclaimer: I'm not talking about romcoms. Of course we meet the destined-to-be-a-couple early on and hopefully we'll root for them to get together or back together or whatever. But romcoms are a different ballgame. We want to know and see how they get to that place, not if.]
Back to other genres. Author # 2 thought he was terribly clever by designing his Act 1 to look predictable and lead the reader/audience astray. I don't know if Author # 1 also did this intentionally or not.
I think it's a bad idea.Why?
1. If I don't know the author, I will most likely not read on. Part of those predictable set-ups were familiar chars and situations. In other words - not all that exciting. If I feel like it, I skip to the ending and read the last couple of pages and then decide if it looks worth my time/interesting.
Call me full of it, but if I feel and act this way, one or the other reader might do the same. Especially if s/he isn't required to read the whole thing.
2. If a script starts out like that I'm prejudiced against what will come. Of course I am, why wouldn't I be? I'm bored, I feel bad, I'm already worried if I just wasted 20 minutes or so of my life on a total stinker, Not just something that needs tweaking, snip here tuck there. So this script now has to work hard. Oh, it has to work so many times harder than any other script now. Act 2 has to be mindboggling. Nothing short of fascinating. How else would it get me out of my Act-1-induced funk? I hate it and it has to make me fall in love with it. Good luck.
Often you hear people say stuff like: read the whole thing, don't judge it by the first 10, 20, or 30 pages. Question: why would I assume that the rest is any better? Or different?
Or people complain "the reader must've only read Act 1! That's outrageous". Gee, I wonder why. If it was anything like those two above, I wouldn't blame the reader. Even if it's their job to read, they don't get paid to endure torture.
If those poor souls (not talking about the few pompous f-ucks who get annoyed by the littlest things - usually simply their own personal pet peeves - things that don't even have anything to do with story, plot, structure, character arcs; not anything story-related. Not talking about those PFs, but the others.) are required to finish the read and cover the thing, they might resort to skimming which may not help the falling-in-love part.
I'd say that all that speaks against predictable-by-design-Act-1. Don't you?
[Example for strong set-up with a decline so steep it feels like you just jumped off a hi-rise: John Grisham's Skipping Christmas. This was, for reasons I cannot comprehend, not for the life of me, made into a movie. Christmas with the Kranks. It didn't go over so well with audiences, either. It helps to be literate. Those black thingies are the letters. Read the bloody book and weep. Sober up. The world doesn't need crap like that. Thanky. Grumpy]
98°F ... NO A/C anywhere...
Thursday, July 20, 2006
Tuesday, July 18, 2006
Juggling Two Projects?
The plan was clear and quite simple: let script A (romcom) sit in the drawer. Rework outline of B (thrillerish) start translating and adapting it into novel form, see how that goes (well. Great benefit.). Rewrite B. Get feedback. While waiting for feedback, rework outline of A, b/c it's just not working (too long, subplotitis etc). Rewrite A. While waiting for feedback on A, consider notes for B, rework outline of B, rewrite B. If initial feedback was encouraging to begin with, submit new draft to a contest and see if it does anything.
So. Where are they now?
During new outline of B, main char of A shows up and throws me a nice scene. I'm not biting. I refuse to even jot it down. What am I, an idiot? Girl, you've just got to wait your turn.
Next day. Says she.. New Character could show up. Oooh, the possibilities. Comedy, tension, whatnot.
Whatever. I'll keep it in mind. I'm not interested in writing in a new character, you see.
Next day: there she is again. More details about New Character and the benefits. Explains how that supports the theme/main plot etc. Okay, I create a new doc and jot down that stuff.
Mistake: read blogs.
Look here, she says, that would work with New Char. Plus, consider giving them a diff. backstory to strengthen Male Lead's motivation.
You're nuts, honey. I want to tighten, cut, pace differently. Not add scenes to the beginning. Get lost.
Major mistake: watched some flicks. Especially bad: one was a romance. Shoot me. Oh shoot me now.
That's an interesting technique! Now if you VO'd that one supporting char--
No VOs honey.
Only in the beginning and end. And make him a (insert superb suggestion), that could work well and save time and would add a blahblahossa hossa and there are additional benefits to this, let me explain.
She does and unfortunately I can see her point. Spent a couple of nights fighting and losing and started to rewrite the outline - of A, the romcom, grr.
I'm starting the outline for A from scratch.
Yep, no diddling with the old one. Brandnew. See how the sequences come together incorporating new technique, perhaps (it may not be necessary at all) writing in VO for reworked char, see if New Char, who shows up in second half, works out and what damage NC can do, how and if NC increases tension.
While I do this... if there are scenes I simply forgot (as I'm not consulting draft or previous outline) I then can evaluate their purpose/worth etc. more objectively. Not coming from a "ah, this is so good, it has to stay" point but rather "I forgot this was in there. Hm. Is it worthy?" sort of biased-against-it POV.
I'm wondering if this (working on two very different projects more or less simultaneously) is a good idea to begin with. I know some writers advise against it. Nevertheless, they are not me.There's only one way to find out: The Trial Run. I set a deadline and will evaluate then if it works for me or not.
So. Dunno what it is - does she feel that life in a non-working draft or her unfinished life sucks? I do hope that once A is rewritten we're done, though. Ideally, she'll make some new and more interesting friends. Like, pro readers, agent, producer, actor and the like.
So. Where are they now?
During new outline of B, main char of A shows up and throws me a nice scene. I'm not biting. I refuse to even jot it down. What am I, an idiot? Girl, you've just got to wait your turn.
Next day. Says she.. New Character could show up. Oooh, the possibilities. Comedy, tension, whatnot.
Whatever. I'll keep it in mind. I'm not interested in writing in a new character, you see.
Next day: there she is again. More details about New Character and the benefits. Explains how that supports the theme/main plot etc. Okay, I create a new doc and jot down that stuff.
Mistake: read blogs.
Look here, she says, that would work with New Char. Plus, consider giving them a diff. backstory to strengthen Male Lead's motivation.
You're nuts, honey. I want to tighten, cut, pace differently. Not add scenes to the beginning. Get lost.
Major mistake: watched some flicks. Especially bad: one was a romance. Shoot me. Oh shoot me now.
That's an interesting technique! Now if you VO'd that one supporting char--
No VOs honey.
Only in the beginning and end. And make him a (insert superb suggestion), that could work well and save time and would add a blahblahossa hossa and there are additional benefits to this, let me explain.
She does and unfortunately I can see her point. Spent a couple of nights fighting and losing and started to rewrite the outline - of A, the romcom, grr.
I'm starting the outline for A from scratch.
Yep, no diddling with the old one. Brandnew. See how the sequences come together incorporating new technique, perhaps (it may not be necessary at all) writing in VO for reworked char, see if New Char, who shows up in second half, works out and what damage NC can do, how and if NC increases tension.
While I do this... if there are scenes I simply forgot (as I'm not consulting draft or previous outline) I then can evaluate their purpose/worth etc. more objectively. Not coming from a "ah, this is so good, it has to stay" point but rather "I forgot this was in there. Hm. Is it worthy?" sort of biased-against-it POV.
I'm wondering if this (working on two very different projects more or less simultaneously) is a good idea to begin with. I know some writers advise against it. Nevertheless, they are not me.There's only one way to find out: The Trial Run. I set a deadline and will evaluate then if it works for me or not.
So. Dunno what it is - does she feel that life in a non-working draft or her unfinished life sucks? I do hope that once A is rewritten we're done, though. Ideally, she'll make some new and more interesting friends. Like, pro readers, agent, producer, actor and the like.
Monday, July 17, 2006
New Leaf
While it's the same-old-same-old out (read: unbearable heatwave, 90+ and no A/C thankyouverymuch), change is happening elsewhere. Re: Links: They got lost during conversion together with my prog bars. Uggboots. All should be back up within a week.
Don't worry, this blog will stay advertising-free. No paid product-placements and especially no paid product pics. I'm not blogging for money.
My job is in marketing/advertising. Around here I'm A.M. Mensch. Should my situation worsen financially I'll let you know and put up a donation/collection box or some in-your-face visible/recognizable ads. Not gonna pull one over you.
It's a personal decision. I know others (who aren't exactly starving or struggling, oddly enough) have made different choices, that's become rather obvious. Even I didn't get it for a while, thought it was a kind of Brett Easton Ellis-ish personal style. Of course it's each individual blogger's own decision to work hard and try to increase their "traffic" and /to cash in on that. It's also each individual blog-reader's personal decision how they feel about this and if they want to support it and/or the individual blogger.
Scott The Reader had a post re: writing for some burger franchise recently. I'll say something about writing to sell merchandising/rides in movies and TV one of these days.
In the end it's up to each individual what they support with their Dollars or Euros or Rupees. If those flicks make good B.O. then there will be more assignments along those lines. Be prepared. Bill Martell had a nice Tip on that, by the way. It was titled something like Writing for Toys.
Now I'm gonna have some *****Russian Vodka with no-brand Bitter Lemon over a mountain of ice cubes.
Don't worry, this blog will stay advertising-free. No paid product-placements and especially no paid product pics. I'm not blogging for money.
My job is in marketing/advertising. Around here I'm A.M. Mensch. Should my situation worsen financially I'll let you know and put up a donation/collection box or some in-your-face visible/recognizable ads. Not gonna pull one over you.
It's a personal decision. I know others (who aren't exactly starving or struggling, oddly enough) have made different choices, that's become rather obvious. Even I didn't get it for a while, thought it was a kind of Brett Easton Ellis-ish personal style. Of course it's each individual blogger's own decision to work hard and try to increase their "traffic" and /to cash in on that. It's also each individual blog-reader's personal decision how they feel about this and if they want to support it and/or the individual blogger.
Scott The Reader had a post re: writing for some burger franchise recently. I'll say something about writing to sell merchandising/rides in movies and TV one of these days.
In the end it's up to each individual what they support with their Dollars or Euros or Rupees. If those flicks make good B.O. then there will be more assignments along those lines. Be prepared. Bill Martell had a nice Tip on that, by the way. It was titled something like Writing for Toys.
Now I'm gonna have some *****Russian Vodka with no-brand Bitter Lemon over a mountain of ice cubes.
Friday, July 14, 2006
Poseidon
Having a crappy day or even a crappy week? Watch a movie where stuff gets blown up and people have to run, jump, crawl, climb, swim, dive or kill an innocent nice guy in order to survive. Watch Poseidon. This works. I'm not kidding. This isn't even tongue in cheek. Nope, I came out of the theater with a big grin on my face. It was an epiphany. I went in expecting nothing. Okay, perhaps some notes on what to avoid when writing a script. Came out a surprised and happy camper. Go figure. [Disclaimer of sorts: Have not seen The Poseidon Adventure. So I'm totally unbiased. Yeah.]
There are a lot of people who will give me strange looks when they hear me talk excitedly about Poseidon (despite it being sexist. Mea culpa).
But the character development sucks!
Didn't matter. What's there was enough for me and I even missed the first couple of minutes.
But it's all about blowing up stuff - and that's all it is!
And, man, it's beautiful.
I'll wait for the DVD.
Well, if you got a movie-theater-size screen at home, go for it. If not, you're cheating yourself out of the experience.
First, the bad: Poseidon movie stills. I've seen stills in three different mags - lackluster, boring, godawfully bad. Especially the one where the cast stands looking at something. ET in the closet among other toys? Backdraft-y-Kurt Russell with the fire-extinguisher, Josh Lucas next to him doing - hey, what exactly? That's the trouble with all the Poseidon action stills - the source of danger isn't in the pictures. Yeah, weird, ain't it? Lucas holds Dreyfuss' hand - no Rodriguez, no view of how deep they would fall. The film looks fantastic. The stills look blah. And they sport oddly washed-out colors to boot.
[Why exactly was there one of Fergie (without Braugher, WTF) with the orchestra? And why was that the best picture in terms of color and composition (she doesn't have any limbs cut off, you see.)? I was glad when the water came and one could be sure not to have to see her (or her boobs or that horrible red dress) or hear her again, thankyouverymuch.]
Then, the other bad: women characters.
Jacinda Barrett - mother and love-interest for five seconds or so.
Emmy Rossum - daughter (of Russell's char) and fiancèe (of Mike Vogel's char)
Mia Maestro - stowaway, Catholic, designated scaredy cat
Put them in a Victorian novel and they wouldn't stick out. Perhaps they all did astonishing and awesome and 21st century things in the beginning that I missed. Let me know. But they didn't get to do or say much during what I saw. Look scared, act scared, act motherly. Look good while swimming. Doubt the men's courage/decisions but only for half a sec. Let them save you.
Here's a thought: Why couldn't Emmy's char be in the swim team and thus perform the task Mike Vogel's char did? (Hire Jessica Alba, if weak-looking Emmy can't do it.) Would be nice if their roles would reflect reality more, if they could play more active parts in groups like this one. Say, they could've managed to free Vogel's character. BTW: That bit, where he comes to and then realizes he's stuck and looks as if he's in pain - that flew by under the radar of the Bad Acting Police, didn't it? Hint: I can be half unconscious and still feel pain. It doesn't suddently occur to me - oops! - now that I'm fully conscious I realize that I'm in pain? Or did he only make a pained face but wasn't in real pain, only scared b/c stuck? Later he seemed to be fine. ?
Okay, so what was it I dug so much?
Of course I'm no expert on films where lots of stuff blows up. Perhaps some of those experts have seen this or that already. For me, OTOH, Poseidon was exciting on that level. I felt like I got to see where every single one of those 160 million bucks went. Awesome spectacle and the score (thanks to theater for revving that up, too) worked well with it.
The tempo. When the other ship went down, you know, the Titanic, I wanted to cut some stuff out (especially the interruption with old Rose, call me shallow). Titanic seemed to want to show us things in real time, like long tiring walks through water. Drama or not, it still was slow going at times - even for me. Poseidon nailed the action pace. For example, the kid isn't caught in this cage-thing for 10 minutes while they search around for tools to cut it open and then try and try to cut it open and then, oops, the water is so high, can we make it out? No. They milk this scene for the emotional drama - my God, will he die? Josh Lucas says he can't find a way in. Nice moment of mother and son interaction. For a moment I'm wondering if they kill the kid? This would be a first. And then - tada - Hero Josh has the kid. Even though - I totally hated, hated, hated the kid. Glad this scene was as short as it was.
They know that we know the whole group isn't gonna die all at once early on, so they keep those moments where the whole group is afraid of what's behind the next door, will it kill them, very brief. Quick action is followed by what-we-gonna-do-now moments or something to catch breath, and on we go.
The stunts. Wow, looked awesome. And again - they're not so in love with their own work that they draw these out like look here, aren't we great? No. They show their stuff and on to the next step. Kewl.
Shocks. There were some nods to horror. Some tongue-in-cheek-like (the two corpses lifted up by Russell, I think) others came over as unexpected side-notes. Time and time again I caught myself thinking: why wasn't this in Titanic? We should've seen this in Titanic! It should've been in there as well. Weird.
Character shocks. Get rid of him or you both will die. Say what??? Wait a minute, so Josh isn't the good guy? And what's Dreyfuss doing there, just minutes after he wanted to kill himself? Man! That gave me something to chew on. I later had to admit that if I'd been the leader, both Dreyfuss and Rodriguez would be dead. Still, it took a long time for me to digest that. Once in a while a hero has to make a shocking choice. One that makes you doubt him. It worked. I'm not sure it worked for Dreyfuss' char that well. He got over it a tad too quickly. But then he was busy trying to save his own ass. So.
Josh Lucas. My. God. When he was around the casino area and in flirting mode, took the champagne flutes - I thought hey, looky here. Bond, James Bond.Why was it they had to settle for that other guy whose face will have to grow on us and who doesn't exactly have a bod to die for, either? Never mind. Realization: Josh Lucas, IT-Boy.
Dreyfuss in a role where I didn't hate him (as in: not arrogant guy hitting on nice lady or just egomaniac). I don't know what it is. Must be something like Anthony Perkins Syndrome (Psycho, duh) or the Robert Duvall Effect (The Handmaid's Tale). Dunno what film did Dreyfuss in for me.
Andrè Braugher. Too bad he was the capt'n and had to stay with (coughcough) Fergie and the rest. I would have loved to see him in the team. Did I miss him sing in the beginning? He has such a nice voice!
Kurt Russell for some reason recalled Backdraft for me. This was kinda cool, too. Too bad that now, at the other side of 50, he finds himself (read: his characters) on the can-be-sacrificed list. Shucks.
Conner, the kid. Sorry, but I would have preferred to let him die in the cage. This was a ridiculous character from the get go just there to annoy me. I don't buy that in circumstances just as these kids would act out their curiosity and wander about. No. They would be even more annoying clinging to their mothers' ball gowns every single second on the way out and cry and be scared shitless. Endanger their mothers by not letting go.
Who's gonna die? Kids do not die. That's a law. People over 50 die. Gladly. That's another law. Seems that usually they volunteer to give their lives for their kids/the greater good/society. Aweeee. Under water, in space, doesn't matter. By now that makes chars over 50 seem "disposable". We can do without them. They're missed the least, lived their lives... What have they got to live for? Depends and bingo? (that's sarcasm, BTW) I say: if the kid's gonna live, let grandpa live, damnit.
Killing off the jerk. Now, it's awfully tempting to kill off the jerk/slime ball/most hated character in a fashion that borders on gratuitous. Well, in a fashion that is a payback. Little aside: I saw Kindergarten Cop I think in a US-Army theater. People applauded when Schwarzenegger beat up, quite brutally to a pulp - who was it, the evil lady principal or something? - they applauded! I was stunned. Might say more about GI's than the film, but still that scene could've been handled differently. In Poseidon we have such a probably (I wouldn't know, see above) clichéd thing. Let the jerk die doing something heroic, how about it? I don't like to feel good when a char gets killed.
As I said, it was fireworks, a visual feast, and it was exciting. I was on the edge of my seat, stunned and generally in awe. I cared about the characters. Perhaps I'm easy - give me a couple of really hot guys (yeah, counting in Russell, he's still got it, bite me), and I'm rooting for them. Lucas as the Bad Boy with definite leadership skills and Russell as a more sensitive mature guy and both seem to be available. Sounds good.
Here's another thought: Perhaps if the filmmakers had put in some interesting women, this flick would've worked better for guys, too. A mother, a Catholic scaredy cat and a little chick princess who only has eyes for her beau - dunno - is any of that considered sexy in Testosteronia? Are they supposed to happily fill the role as protector and savior and then, oops, they're still not getting any? Yep, they forgot to develop the romance, just a tiny bit, even our engaged couple only got a moment so other, more important things could happen. Could Dreyfuss get any in Gaylandia? You tell me. Braugher in Dreyfuss' role - ooooh.
So - popcorn flick, guilty pleasure, whatever. It works on that level and sometimes that's just what the doctor ordered. (Worked better than the physical therapy I had to endure all week that made things worse.)
There are a lot of people who will give me strange looks when they hear me talk excitedly about Poseidon (despite it being sexist. Mea culpa).
But the character development sucks!
Didn't matter. What's there was enough for me and I even missed the first couple of minutes.
But it's all about blowing up stuff - and that's all it is!
And, man, it's beautiful.
I'll wait for the DVD.
Well, if you got a movie-theater-size screen at home, go for it. If not, you're cheating yourself out of the experience.
First, the bad: Poseidon movie stills. I've seen stills in three different mags - lackluster, boring, godawfully bad. Especially the one where the cast stands looking at something. ET in the closet among other toys? Backdraft-y-Kurt Russell with the fire-extinguisher, Josh Lucas next to him doing - hey, what exactly? That's the trouble with all the Poseidon action stills - the source of danger isn't in the pictures. Yeah, weird, ain't it? Lucas holds Dreyfuss' hand - no Rodriguez, no view of how deep they would fall. The film looks fantastic. The stills look blah. And they sport oddly washed-out colors to boot.
[Why exactly was there one of Fergie (without Braugher, WTF) with the orchestra? And why was that the best picture in terms of color and composition (she doesn't have any limbs cut off, you see.)? I was glad when the water came and one could be sure not to have to see her (or her boobs or that horrible red dress) or hear her again, thankyouverymuch.]
Then, the other bad: women characters.
Jacinda Barrett - mother and love-interest for five seconds or so.
Emmy Rossum - daughter (of Russell's char) and fiancèe (of Mike Vogel's char)
Mia Maestro - stowaway, Catholic, designated scaredy cat
Put them in a Victorian novel and they wouldn't stick out. Perhaps they all did astonishing and awesome and 21st century things in the beginning that I missed. Let me know. But they didn't get to do or say much during what I saw. Look scared, act scared, act motherly. Look good while swimming. Doubt the men's courage/decisions but only for half a sec. Let them save you.
Here's a thought: Why couldn't Emmy's char be in the swim team and thus perform the task Mike Vogel's char did? (Hire Jessica Alba, if weak-looking Emmy can't do it.) Would be nice if their roles would reflect reality more, if they could play more active parts in groups like this one. Say, they could've managed to free Vogel's character. BTW: That bit, where he comes to and then realizes he's stuck and looks as if he's in pain - that flew by under the radar of the Bad Acting Police, didn't it? Hint: I can be half unconscious and still feel pain. It doesn't suddently occur to me - oops! - now that I'm fully conscious I realize that I'm in pain? Or did he only make a pained face but wasn't in real pain, only scared b/c stuck? Later he seemed to be fine. ?
Okay, so what was it I dug so much?
Of course I'm no expert on films where lots of stuff blows up. Perhaps some of those experts have seen this or that already. For me, OTOH, Poseidon was exciting on that level. I felt like I got to see where every single one of those 160 million bucks went. Awesome spectacle and the score (thanks to theater for revving that up, too) worked well with it.
The tempo. When the other ship went down, you know, the Titanic, I wanted to cut some stuff out (especially the interruption with old Rose, call me shallow). Titanic seemed to want to show us things in real time, like long tiring walks through water. Drama or not, it still was slow going at times - even for me. Poseidon nailed the action pace. For example, the kid isn't caught in this cage-thing for 10 minutes while they search around for tools to cut it open and then try and try to cut it open and then, oops, the water is so high, can we make it out? No. They milk this scene for the emotional drama - my God, will he die? Josh Lucas says he can't find a way in. Nice moment of mother and son interaction. For a moment I'm wondering if they kill the kid? This would be a first. And then - tada - Hero Josh has the kid. Even though - I totally hated, hated, hated the kid. Glad this scene was as short as it was.
They know that we know the whole group isn't gonna die all at once early on, so they keep those moments where the whole group is afraid of what's behind the next door, will it kill them, very brief. Quick action is followed by what-we-gonna-do-now moments or something to catch breath, and on we go.
The stunts. Wow, looked awesome. And again - they're not so in love with their own work that they draw these out like look here, aren't we great? No. They show their stuff and on to the next step. Kewl.
Shocks. There were some nods to horror. Some tongue-in-cheek-like (the two corpses lifted up by Russell, I think) others came over as unexpected side-notes. Time and time again I caught myself thinking: why wasn't this in Titanic? We should've seen this in Titanic! It should've been in there as well. Weird.
Character shocks. Get rid of him or you both will die. Say what??? Wait a minute, so Josh isn't the good guy? And what's Dreyfuss doing there, just minutes after he wanted to kill himself? Man! That gave me something to chew on. I later had to admit that if I'd been the leader, both Dreyfuss and Rodriguez would be dead. Still, it took a long time for me to digest that. Once in a while a hero has to make a shocking choice. One that makes you doubt him. It worked. I'm not sure it worked for Dreyfuss' char that well. He got over it a tad too quickly. But then he was busy trying to save his own ass. So.
Josh Lucas. My. God. When he was around the casino area and in flirting mode, took the champagne flutes - I thought hey, looky here. Bond, James Bond.Why was it they had to settle for that other guy whose face will have to grow on us and who doesn't exactly have a bod to die for, either? Never mind. Realization: Josh Lucas, IT-Boy.
Dreyfuss in a role where I didn't hate him (as in: not arrogant guy hitting on nice lady or just egomaniac). I don't know what it is. Must be something like Anthony Perkins Syndrome (Psycho, duh) or the Robert Duvall Effect (The Handmaid's Tale). Dunno what film did Dreyfuss in for me.
Andrè Braugher. Too bad he was the capt'n and had to stay with (coughcough) Fergie and the rest. I would have loved to see him in the team. Did I miss him sing in the beginning? He has such a nice voice!
Kurt Russell for some reason recalled Backdraft for me. This was kinda cool, too. Too bad that now, at the other side of 50, he finds himself (read: his characters) on the can-be-sacrificed list. Shucks.
Conner, the kid. Sorry, but I would have preferred to let him die in the cage. This was a ridiculous character from the get go just there to annoy me. I don't buy that in circumstances just as these kids would act out their curiosity and wander about. No. They would be even more annoying clinging to their mothers' ball gowns every single second on the way out and cry and be scared shitless. Endanger their mothers by not letting go.
Who's gonna die? Kids do not die. That's a law. People over 50 die. Gladly. That's another law. Seems that usually they volunteer to give their lives for their kids/the greater good/society. Aweeee. Under water, in space, doesn't matter. By now that makes chars over 50 seem "disposable". We can do without them. They're missed the least, lived their lives... What have they got to live for? Depends and bingo? (that's sarcasm, BTW) I say: if the kid's gonna live, let grandpa live, damnit.
Killing off the jerk. Now, it's awfully tempting to kill off the jerk/slime ball/most hated character in a fashion that borders on gratuitous. Well, in a fashion that is a payback. Little aside: I saw Kindergarten Cop I think in a US-Army theater. People applauded when Schwarzenegger beat up, quite brutally to a pulp - who was it, the evil lady principal or something? - they applauded! I was stunned. Might say more about GI's than the film, but still that scene could've been handled differently. In Poseidon we have such a probably (I wouldn't know, see above) clichéd thing. Let the jerk die doing something heroic, how about it? I don't like to feel good when a char gets killed.
As I said, it was fireworks, a visual feast, and it was exciting. I was on the edge of my seat, stunned and generally in awe. I cared about the characters. Perhaps I'm easy - give me a couple of really hot guys (yeah, counting in Russell, he's still got it, bite me), and I'm rooting for them. Lucas as the Bad Boy with definite leadership skills and Russell as a more sensitive mature guy and both seem to be available. Sounds good.
Here's another thought: Perhaps if the filmmakers had put in some interesting women, this flick would've worked better for guys, too. A mother, a Catholic scaredy cat and a little chick princess who only has eyes for her beau - dunno - is any of that considered sexy in Testosteronia? Are they supposed to happily fill the role as protector and savior and then, oops, they're still not getting any? Yep, they forgot to develop the romance, just a tiny bit, even our engaged couple only got a moment so other, more important things could happen. Could Dreyfuss get any in Gaylandia? You tell me. Braugher in Dreyfuss' role - ooooh.
So - popcorn flick, guilty pleasure, whatever. It works on that level and sometimes that's just what the doctor ordered. (Worked better than the physical therapy I had to endure all week that made things worse.)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)