Remakes, Sequels and Sequels of Sequels

I suppose this is my exhortation on why we need to slow down on the remakes, sequels and trilogies. Personally, I do not mind that people remake certain films. Some films are not perfect and are lacking or sometimes they adapt from a book and take too many liberties. So, based on these grounds I can understand remaking a movie. To better make a good film that was not rendered true justice in its final cut or to redo an adaptation that more closely follows the book.

Let me give an insteresting example... Hitchcock's "Psycho" is an adaptation of a book titled the same and written by Robert Bloch. The novel is (somewhat) based on actual events. The Hitchcock adaptation does not follow the book very well at all. However, Hitchcock's vision is perfect in its own right. If someone came to me saying they wanted to remake "Psycho", I'd tell them to turn to the book and forget everything Hitchcock did because his version is perfect the way it is. You cannot improve upon it. Sadly, there is a remake of "Psycho", which I refuse to watch, but the film is verbatim the same script and shots from Hitchcock's vision. With two exceptions I know of... the audience gets to see a guy's butt and it's in color. What a waste of time, I say.

I will confess, as a filmmaker, there are some movies I would love to remake. They are movies that I can truly call some of my favorites. One of them, "The Thin Man", is even to my left in my top 10. You may ask, "What's wrong with 'The Thin Man?'" I say, "NOTHING!" The adaptation of Dashiell Hammett's novel starring Willam Powell and Myrna Loy is gold. The only thing is that there are some things that were changed because of censorship and for other reasons of which I'm unsure of that I would like to see returned to the more truthful vision of Hammett's novel. Mainly the censoring of more of the more serious issues Hammett dealt with in his book (i.e., child abuse). On the other spectrum, I could probably argue that there are some things that could be done better in Hithcock's "Vertigo" but so much of it was genius and perfect there really is no point in touching it with even a 10ft. pole. Lame cliche!

When it comes to sequels and trilogies, I have a pretty straight forward opinion about it. If a movie is made without the intention of a sequel, then when the credits role the story is finished. And technically, not even just then! If you film the entire film knowing "this is it", then there is no sequel to be made. I say this, because if the story is original and there is no more to the story you can only be grasping at straws to choose to decide to continue the story. Or, if you end your movie with a "beginning" or "open ending" (which is always a nice touch), you are destroying the ending of that good movie. Any sequel that comes after the story has already been told is pure blasphemy to the original film that was loved. So, please, let's not get carried away with the money issue.

If you set out to make a movie and know there is more, that's different. If you set out to make a movie knowing full-well that this one movie isn't the entire story, that there must be more to fully resolve; then that's great. When you develop a story, you usually know how long it needs to be to get the story told. Sometimes, a story just needs to be a short film. Sometimes a commercial. A full-length film. A trilogy, a movie with a sequel, a TV mini-series and even a TV series. But please, just know before you start writing if there is more to the story or if "this is it" and stick to it. Too many times we take it too far and then we tarnish the image of the original movie.

In closing, all these remakes, sequels and triologies are starting to drive me nuts. Usually, as soon as I hear there is a sequel to a movie I liked as it was, I become upset and avoid the sequel like the plague. Namely, though, I say we need to be coming up with our own stuff. Nobody likes to watch the same plots, characters and production techniques used over and over. Innovate and create. Have we not learned our lesson from "Citizen Kane"? Or did we just say to ourselves, "Yeah, that's cool. Let's do that"?

"Yo, Adrian! I did it!"

So, I had never seen the "Rocky" movies. I had seen bits and pieces on cable, because that's what cable is for. My wife on the other hand had watched them all growing up. We recently rented them all and watched them all straight through from the beginning concluding with the latest installment, "Rock Balboa." Instead of having a seperate blog for each movie, I'm gonna hit them all up in this one entry. So prepare for the hits. LAME.

The first film was fantastic and I obviously had no idea what I was getting myself into. I had my predisposed opinions about these movies and the first one changed that. The characters were very well devloped and the story was nicely put together. The writing in general was very top knotch. And since the first one came out in 1976, it instantly stands out for me. I'm a 70s fan, myself.

The second one is a little less than the first, but it is a worthy sequel. That's about all I'm gonna say on this one, I'm not gonna get too detailed, because I have a lot of ground to cover and in general I think if you are gonna watch one you have to watch them all anyway. Even if there are some that are a little worse for wear.

In the third film, Mr. T (a childhood icon for me) pops in to take some potshots at Rocky. This one may be my favorite, next to the first one. I hate to say it, but even if Mr. T does manage to "pity the fool", he really did an amazing job as the crazed fighter. This was a very exciting film, because of the energy of Mr. T and the energy between the two. I really enjoyed this one much, probably too much since my brothers and I loved Mr. T as kids.

In "Rocky IV" (that's "4" for all you non-Romans), tragedy strikes when figher Apollo Creed (a close friend of Rocky's) dies in a match against a Russian fighter. This one is pretty stinking cheesy, especially with its (what I'll call) "over the top" patriotism coupled with political "niceness." Still, though, it's an exciting movie and still worth the watch. All of these movies are worth the watch, by the way.

Well, but then there is the "first last one." "Rocky V" was pretty bad. It was pretty stinking cheesy and... well, not too great. Rocky ends up training in this a figher after his family is forced to move from the nice home and money back to the old neighborhood. It was a little shameful, but knowing there was a 6th one already, I wasn't too worried. I figured the 6th one was in existence to take care of that bad taste this one left.

"Rocky Balboa", which came out in 2006, does make up for the 1990 "Rocky V." Stallone did a wonderful job playing the now old and washed up, but still remembered fighter. There are many great moments in this film, but to be perfectly honest there was something I was hoping for that didn't happen. So, be forewarned, I'm going to insert a spoiler--

SPOILER ALERT! SPOILER ALERT!

I warned you. You have no excuse.

In the film, there was a lot of concern that fighting again might result in death for the aged fighter. I had a feeling it would, that he would go out as his good friend, Apollo Creed, went out. I was hoping that he would, because it would have been a very formatible way for the character to go. And I'll confess, I might have cried. With the way they keep his story going, it ain't over until it's over. And since he didn't die, I feel as if it ain't over. I just really wished he would have died and we could have put Rocky to rest, it would have been very nice and beautiful. Instead, it was a happy ending with more life ahead. Which, is not what I think we needed. We needed an appropriate ending. Anyway, that's my opinion. It would have felt more resolved, for me, if we would have got to put him to rest alongside his wife, Adrian. And, if he would have gone out like Apollo Creed... in the ring and fighting when the towel should have been thrown. But, that's just my two cents. Other than that, the film was very admirable and enjoyable as was the entire series.

Well, I'm gonna fly now. LAME.

Did you hear they are remaking...why?

I know usually on this blog Nathan and I focus on a particular movie, however I would like to focus on a particular group of movies this time. Remakes are something that just really annoys me. I suppose if it is done right a remake can be a beautiful thing, but 99.9% of the time the remake of a movie pales in comparison to the original and that is putting it nicely.

A perfect example of this is "The Pink Panther." The original of this movie was released in 1963. The original starred Peter Sellers who was an absolute comic genius, if you do not believe me check him out sometime, he was in a lot more than just "The Pink Panther." He was in fact a bumbling and clueless detective, however it was very funny and witty. When it was remade in 2006, Steve Martin replaced Sellers and the results were tragic. Instead of coming off funny and witty he came across as silly and annoying. Please do not get me wrong, I have nothing against Steve Martin and I do believe he is very talented, but this movie should have been left alone. It was perfect the first time around, the second time around you had the distinct impression that the studio was just trying to milk the movie for all it was worth. Lets all hope the remake of "Get Smart" is not as bad.

With the mention of "Get Smart" that brings me to the next topic of remakes. That is the TV show remakes. These can work two ways, one the TV show is such a hit they make a movie out of it. The second way is the movie worked so well they decide to make a TV show out of it. An example of the former is "The Dukes of Hazzard." An Example of the latter is "My Big Fat Greek Wedding" which was made into "My Big Fat Greek Life." On both of these examples the original far outshines the remake. Moving mediums like this does not usually work, in fact it usually fails miserably.

Another genre of remakes is foreign films. Take for example "The Departed," this was originally a Japanese movie "Mou Gaan Dou." This is one of the exceptions to the rule, this movie was great both in the US and in Japan. The major argument I have about these are; Why can't we leave well enough alone? The Japanese make wonderful movies, especially Horror movies. "The Grudge"(Ju-on), "The Ring"(Ringu), and "Pulse"(Kairo) are all remakes of Japanese Horror films. I have no idea what makes us think we should remake all of these great foreign movies. I fully believe we should show them here in the US the way they were meant to be seen. They have a much better effect that way.

The final remake I would like to discuss is the remake masquerading as an original. I was watching TV tonight and I saw a trailer for a movie called "Made of Honor." This movie is about a man that has lots of friends but only one best friend. No surprise this best friend is a girl and she tells him she is engaged and would like him to be her maid of honor. Soon he realizes he is in love with his best friend and accepts the offer to be able to break up the engagement and stop the wedding. Now I remember this movie from a few years ago, it was called "My Best Friend's Wedding." This is the type of remake I truly despise, the non-remake remake. Do they really think they can fool us by switching the genders of the main characters. The sad thing is and it sounds really mean but it must be said, Patrick Dempsey is the main character in this movie and thousands of McDreamy's fans will flock to see it. Could the movie studio not find him something rather original to be in.

Bottom line is, remakes are a bad bad bad bad idea. They exist though, I remember talking to a girl not too long ago that thought "Psycho" was made originally in 1998. She had no idea who Alfred Hitchcock was or that the original "Psycho" was one of the greatest movies ever made. This is the danger of remakes, there is a whole generation that needs to know the originals of these movies were great and we need to make them aware to keep the movies alive. So, please do your part, next time you go to the rental store or the movie theatre, remember the film that made the one your seeing what it is, there is almost always one of those.

One Lovely Christmas Holiday

There are a few things I am a sucker for in movies. One would be a good romantic comedy, not the typical "chick flick," but the romantic comedy that anyone can appreciate, even a guy. Another thing would be a movie that delivers perfect performance by all involved, this includes a remarkable script and score. The final thing would be, a movie that makes me feel that I can totally identify with the characters, ones that can remind you of your own life.

I have mentioned more than once that I believe there is a formula to making a successful romantic comedy. There has to be conflict, a break of the relationship because of that conflict and finally a resolution and a happily ever after. There is one movie in recent years that achieves this supremely and it is "The Holiday." The script was written only after the four main stars agreed to do the movie. Nancy Meyers wrote this movie and the four main characters in it especially for Cameron Diaz, Jude Law, Kate Winslet, and Jack Black and it shows. Each of the characters fit their own actor perfectly. Also the score of the movie was written by Hans Zimmer, he writes a beautiful score that fits every moment so perfectly. Now I can't say that this movie is without flaws, there is no movie that is absolutely perfect. There are production flaws and a few continuity flaws but if you are not specifically looking for them you would never notice. The movie's story outweighs all these in the long run.

Amanda (Diaz) is a movie trailer maker living in L.A., when she breaks with her boyfriend she decides to go on a trip over the Christmas holiday. She logs on to a vacation website and soon finds Iris (Winslet), a newspaper writer that has been in a relationship for several years with a man that does not love her back. Both women switch houses and soon find they can find love even without looking for it. They also in the process find out more about themselves than they ever expected. Now with that out of the way I can get to the good stuff, what helps to make this movie so appealing. Amanda, being a successful movie trailer maker, sees the events unfolding in her life as a movie trailer. Iris meets the man that lives next to Amanda, who is a retired film writer. He convinces Iris that she is worth while and a leading lady by recommending several (a whole list) of movies with all of these powerhouse women in it. Jack Black also delivers a great performance in this movie as a movie score writer. He provides a light heart and sweet side to this movie, and relates all things in life to movie scores. I love all of these factors of this movie, because if you have worked in production at all you will find that your mind gets wrapped up in it. Every time you see a new house you think, this would be great on film. You here a story and you think what an awesome script idea. Or even music you think that would be perfect for this type of scene.

I highly recommend anyone that loves romantic comedies, loves movies, or just anybody really to see this movie. It is a well written and beautiful movie, I have to thank Nancy Meyers for writing it and I hope she will provide us with many, many more.

Enchant this!

Okay, okay... so I watched "Enchanted". Truth is, I knew very little about it going in and I wasn't expecting much. I was mainly hoping it would be somewhat entertaining, but I mostly feared I would feel pretty silly. Why did I watch it, you ask? Because my wife and I were wanting to grab a meal and watch a movie with some friends. Our friends wanted to watch "Enchanted" and being as it was the theatre was showing "Hitman", "This Holiday", "Fred Claus" and "Enchanted" I didn't really have any better suggestions.

All that said... boy, was I wrong. I was very much entertained. The opening sequence alone had me laughing pretty good, as it was an animated sequence that pretty much made fun of all things Disney. Were there cheesy moments? Yes. Did it have some cheesy elements? Yes. But with what little cheesy stuff it did, it was so much fun and genuinely funny. Dare I say, "Good, clean fun?" I dare.First things first, the animated parts were (in my opinion) a lot of fun, because they channeled the old school Disney animation. The film even started with the "opening of the book" and narration. Yes, in true classic Disney fashion. However, my personal favorite element was Amy Adams. Amy Adams plays the lead female, Giselle, who is about to marry her Prince Charming in the animated world, but the stepmother has other plans in mind and so sends her to a world where there are no happy endings or something... of course, this would be normal, non-animated world. You know, the one we live in. The one with accountability and consequence. I'm sure you've heard of it. Alas, I digress. Her portrayal of the "once animated", happy-go-lucky, naive girl and princess-to-be was priceless. There was even a touch of the Jane Fonda quality from the "Barefoot in the Park" days about her. Her ridiculous innocence contrasted with her new male counterpart (Patrick Dempsey) in the "real world" (no, not a VH1 show... or MTV or whatever), because he was dead stuck on the "reality of life." For example, like buying his young daughter a book of "the most important people in the world" or something instead of "that fantasy book" she wanted. And as it is when I find something extremely funny I go into cackling laugher (a genetic defect, I'm afraid), I often found myself cackling out loud in our not-so-crowded crowd. Truly, one of the prime examples of this hilarious contrast between the two characters was when Giselle starts to sing a song in Central Park while he tries desperately to get her to stop (because in "real world", it ain't no musical, Fool). Unfortunately, for him, but fortunately for us some other local park musicians join in with her and before you know it we have a full-blown musical production number in Central Park. The scene was nicely done and reminded me of Gene Kelly's adaptation of "Hello Dolly".

The short and skinny of this review, is that "Enchanted" is absolutely delightful and funny. And not too adult for the kids. And besides, what could be more entertaining than a very eccentric Susan Sarandon? So, I say: If you need a laugh and some delightful entertainment, go watch "Enchanted". After all, it may be one of the most original things Disney has done in the past 10 years or so. But, I make a prediction... since it seems to be a success, I'm sure Disney will try to cash in on it for as much as they can. I'm predicting right now that they will make an "Enchanted 2" that has the realistic male counterpart traveling into the animated world, for the opposite effect. If they do, you owe me. I truly do not understand why Disney can't just let a good thing be. Seriously, wouldn't we all had been appalled if Orson Welles tried to cash in by directing "Citizen Kane 2: Kane's Revenge"? If you make something good, leave it be. That's all I'm saying.

Die, Die My Darling... no, seriously, DIE!

If you've ever seen the movie "Die, Die My Darling" (or "Fanatic") from 1965, then you know where I'm coming from...

This was the first film I'd watched with Stefanie Powers; I'd recently become interested in seeing her work since a friend of mine was apparently named after her. However, this isn't why I had the movie in my house, I got it as a birthday present along with a lot of other DVDs this past October.

We'll start from the beginning, because a song in movie (I can't stand) once told me its a good place to start. As my wife and I watched the opening credits, it took me a few seconds but I eventually realized what was going on and shouted, "It's a game of cat and mouse!" The opening credits played a piece of music that was very out of place for a horror flick and showed footage of a cat chasing around a mouse. The opening credits, I feel, would have been better suited for a family movie. In the end of the opening credits, the mouse gets away and I shouted, "Oh, no! The mouse got away, this will end up being the entire movie!" Prepare to be spoiled: I was right. And you can't be mad at me, because the opening credits would have given it away anyhow.

On to some good points, though, after the opening credits I began to feel a bit better about this movie. The first scene was with Stefanie Powers and her (what I thought to be sexist) fiance driving. The dialogue was pretty bad, but I took note of some interesting cinematography techniques for the time period. I'm pretty certain they were actually driving in traffic, as opposed to driving in front of a screen. This made me feel better about the film, though at their destination some dialogue ensued that made plenty of sense but would have made Powers's character look much more intelligent if she would have used some real life terms of reasoning, instead of just going, "It's just something I have to do" or whatever. I kept thinking to myself during this dialogue, "Just say it is the only way you can truly resolve the matter and get it over with!" Oh, right... I was suppose to be talking about good points.

In the beginning of the film, the cinematography did some very innovative stuff for the time period and the shot where Powers's character drives up to the crazy, old lady's house for the first time is prime example of this. However, the cinematography soon took on a standard, painful turn and the script kept bombing and Powers's character constantly irritated me, because she was the biggest wuss ever! I mean, come on, in the first scramble of the movie she falls on her own briefcase and is rendered useless. She holds herself, grunting and moaning in pain like she broke her rib on her padded, 60s briefcase. Um, DOUBT IT!

The movie truly saddened me, because the actors were truly talented actors but they were selling out to melodramatic measures for a script with little substance (basically a kind of reverse/retelling of "Psycho"). Not that "Psycho" didn't have substance, but it seemed to steal from it and then didn't deliver much on its own. A young Donald Sutherland was fun to watch (as he always is), turning in probably the only non-melodramatic role in the movie.

There were a few redeeming qualities, like sometimes a fantastic concept for a suspenseful scene would begin and I often found myself getting excited and thinking, "This is like a Hitchcock scene!" But, in the end the scenes just didn't deliver the masterful finish like Hitchcock's scenes do.

Oh, random note, I love how Stefanie Powers changes out of her day outfit into her white gown

for a nap, then into an evening outfit after the nap and then into a red gown for night sleeping. How many outfits can one woman bring on a trip, seriously? And in two briefcases?! And do you really need separate gowns for naps and bedtime at night? Well, they just wanted her in as many outfits as possible before she wore one for the rest of the movie, I guess. Not that she wasn't styling or anything, because she was... it was all very retro and classy, but a little over the top.

In closing, the look Stefanie Powers is making in the picture above is often made in times of violent turmoil. It was like the director told Stefanie Powers (our heroine) she was doing a comedy (so she went for the Jack Sparrow approach to violence) and then the director turned around and told Tallulah Bankhead (our villain) that she was in a horror film. The result: Huh?

(aside) Just as I was about to publish this peachy review, I switched to another browser which still had Tallulah Bankhead's http://www.imdb.com/ profile showing. As I closed the browser, the year 1968 caught my eye and I recognized it being near her date of birth or date of death. Knowing there was no way it was her date of birth, I opened another browser and went back to her profile. Sure enough, Tallulah Bankhead died only three years after this movie was released of pneumonia and influenza. So, now I realize I feel a bit bad spending so much time bashing her second to last film. Her last credit was as Black Widow in two episodes of the original "Batman" series. In light of this, I will say that despite some melodrama in this movie, there is one scene in particular where she truly stood out. Its a strange scene where you see a fantastic glimpse into her character's grief and inner struggle to honor her dead son, keep on the path of what she considers right and not give in to what she considers sin (which most people consider every day norms). I remember being sucked in as she cried and screamed, torn to do wrong and even giving in for a moment. In that one scene, I think she truly shined despite the screenplay's faults. And as I noted earlier about this movie, "the actors were truly talented actors." Indeed, she was. The picture on the right was taken, obviously, from when she was much younger. At death, she was 66 years old.

Headed Home for the Holidays?

Every once in a while I find a movie that I just love. Maybe it is the actors or maybe the director or even the style (lighting, mood, setting) better yet, maybe the script. Perhaps it is a combination of all of these factors. There is just something about a movie where everything just works together to make a truly terrific movie. The movie I am referring to is "Home for the Holidays."

This movie somehow reminds me of my own life. Not that I am nearly as attractive as Holly Hunter, I don't live a plane ride away from my family, and certainly my family does not have all the same odd quirks as this one. However, we all have families with weird quirks, we all look forward to the family get together and we are all thankful when the big mess is over. Your family can drive you crazy like no one else can, but they are your family and you love every one of them even though sometime you are not so sure why. We all have that strange Aunt or Uncle, or the person in the family that thinks they are better than everyone else, or the family member that is living a life that not everyone approves of. This movie manages to portray all of this without going over the top. So many movies try and fail in an effort to show families for what they are, strange.

As I mentioned before there are many elements that make this movie just right, so I will not waste your time by mentioning them all, here are just a few. The cast - This movie has really strong performances by all involved but I did find that Cynthia Stevenson did a superb job with her role as the overbearing, perfect and controlling older sibling. Robert Downy Jr. also was great in this movie and I was really surprised to find out that during the shooting of this movie he was using drugs pretty heavily, he plays the part of the sibling that is living a life no one approves of. The script was written strongly and is very witty, there are some great lines in this movie that will stick with you, you can remember them when you are stuck at Thanksgiving Dinner this year.

"Who are these people? Where did I even come from?" -Claudia Larson (Holly Hunter)

"If I just met you on the street, if you gave me your phone number, I'd throw it away," Claudia's sister Joanne tells her. (Cynthia Stevenson) "We don't have to like each other," Claudia answers. "We're family."

"I'm giving thanks that we don't have to go through this for another year. Except we do, because those b*****ds went and put Christmas right in the middle, just to punish us." - Adele the Mother (Anne Bancroft)

The only major problem I have with this movie is location. At the beginning of the movie when we are introduced to Holly Hunter's character we are led to believe that she lives in Chicago except all the things around her are located in Baltimore. If you had never been to either place or seen pictures of these places, this would not be a problem at all. There are also a few other mistakes in this movie, but the movie itself far outweighs the mistakes in production. I think this is a fun and warm movie that you should see, it might just remind you of your own Thanksgiving Holiday nightmares.

Find your Path, Loser

Yes, I watched "Pathfinder". And it gave me exactly what I was craving at the time. I was craving something that would take me away from reality and that would be exciting or "action-packed" as people often put things. It delivered. I'm pretty certain it wasn't the deepest story or characters ever written, but it was entertaining and that was good. It met a craving and that's good, too.

Sometimes we as an audience get overly analytic sometimes (myself included). Sometimes we just need a movie to met a basic human need: laughter, comfort or escape from reality. Some movies deliver comedy that will warm any down-drodden heart, and though we could reem their overall production value it doesn't lessen their value in society. "Pathfinder" (for me, anyway) met a basic need, to escape from reality. It sucked me in, took me for a ride and that was good enough for me. Honestly, I want to watch it again (with my analysis powers on), because I really didn't analyis this movie at all. I just watched. Which isn't bad, it's good.

I must admit, I was thoroughly surprised and joyed to find that Brother Justin was in it (or Mr. Krabs to some). I am speaking of Clancy Brown, a fine actor who constantly shows his versatility. It still amazes me that the same actor can play Mr. Krabs in "SpongeBob SqaurePants" and Brother Justin Crowe in HBO's amazing series "Carnivale". So anytime I stumble across this fine actor, it brings a smile to my face. And now, he's in fantasy-action flick so I'm further amazed by his talents.

Of course, Karl Urban is always fun to watch, as well. He does so much without opening his mouth; that stern face says so much. Although, I do recall that seeing him peaceful at the beginning of this movie seemed a bit awkward. And of course, he was absolutely fantastic in "The Bourne Supremacy".

Okay, so I'm not really talking much about the movie this time. I just had fun with it and I think that's about all this movie is good for. I'm remembering now, though, that a lot of the dialogue was pretty cheesy or predictable. I think the key thing is that this wasn't a well-written script, but the finished product was entertaining. Although, I do remember being a little thrown off by the action scenes at first because it was amazingly jumpy. The movie will show our hero in one place cutting someone's head off or something, then the next clip is him swinging from a tree or something, and then the next clip is him on a horse with a different weapon. But, I got into it later. It still doesn't seem like an extremely effective way to shoot action scenes, because your purposely filming a bunch of random stuff. At any rate...

Long story short, I recommend watching it but don't go in wanting to analyze it. Just watch it for what's worth: Entertainment. Don't forget that movies are still considered a part of the Entertainment Industry. Anyway... be entertained.

A Trilogy of Romance

I realize that we usually talk about just one movie, but what the hay, I feel like talking about three and maybe a mention of a forth. The three movies I would like to discuss are "Pillow Talk," "Lover Come Back," and "Send Me No Flowers." If you are not familiar with these titles they are the three movies that Rock Hudson, Doris Day and Tony Randall stared in together. I have to say that I am a huge Doris Day fan, actually sitting here I can't think of a single movie I have seen with her that I have not liked. However, this is not a review for praising Doris Day, what it is though is a review to praise the team of Rock Hudson, Doris Day and Tony Randall.

Although Rock Hudson and Doris Day alike made many romantic movies in their career, I would argue that the best ones by far are the ones that they made together. The two had what a perfect on-screen chemistry and once you add Tony Randall to the mix you have a fabulous comedic team.

In "Send Me No Flowers," Rock Hudson plays Doris Day's husband and also happens to be a hypochondriac. In one of his many trips to the doctor's office he mistakenly thinks he only has two weeks to live. Loving his wife so, he decides to set out and find her a new husband, only for her to think he is having an affair. "Lover Come Back" features the couple playing competing advertising executives. Doris Day gets tired of Rock Hudson wining and dining his way to the top, and comedy and romance ensue over a manipulation on Rock Hudson's part that goes wrong. And last but not least, "Pillow Talk," which is my personal favorite of all three of these movies. Rock Hudson and Doris Day play two people that share a phone on a party line. They frequently annoy one another until one day when Rock sees Doris and becomes quite smitten. He invents a new character called Rex, a smooth talking southern gentleman that quickly romances Doris. All goes well of course until Doris finds out the scam. "Pillow Talk" was the first movie of this comedic trio and has set the bar for so many other romantic comedies to come. This movie uses split screen shots to tell a good deal of the story, which only adds to an already outstanding script. The scenes where Rex and Jan (Doris' character) are talking on the phone are really a remarkable sight. In one scene where they are talking on the phone, both characters are in a bath, through the use of the split screen they touch their feet together. Oh well I guess you should just check it out to see what I am talking about. If you need immediate visualisation this was done in "Down with Love," this movie was nothing more than a type and shadow of a Rock Hudson and Doris Day movie.


Almost all romantic comedies follow a certain formula, this is present in all three of these movies and so many movies have been styled after this method since their release. For example, there is always a conflict for the main characters, an explosion of the relationship resulting from the conflict and finally resolution and happily ever after. Now I know that not all romantic comedies follow this, but the vast majority of them do. Tony Randall creates the Best Friend aspect of these movie, this is always an important element to romantic comedies. The best friend is always an aide in resolving the conflict and brings much needed quick witted humor to the story. Yet I would have to say that the humor he brings to these movies is just an added bonus, because the banter that goes on between Rock Hudson and Doris Day is laugh out loud hilarious. Also, I have to point out that the style of this movie, wardrobe, set design and cinematography were to become mainstream as well.

I would highly recommend that you see these three movies. Maybe they will not appeal to all people, but if they do you will be adding three really good movies to your favorites lists. I will leave you with a particularly funny quote from "Pillow Talk," this quote came from http://www.imdb.com/ :


[Jan and Brad are on the phone discussing a phone schedule]


Jan: We're just going to have to live with each other...


[Jan pauses, waiting for a response]


Brad Allen: Well?
Jan: I was waiting for you to say some off-color remark.
Brad Allen: Is that all you have on your mind?
Jan: Never mind my mind! You just stick to your half hour and I'll stick to mine!

Vertigo

Okay, I couldn't take it or something. It's about time for me to digress from talking about random movies and really talk about one I love with a seething passion.

Here's the thing about "Vertigo":

• It's directed by Alfred Hitchcock
• It stars Jimmy Stewart and Kim Novak
• It takes place in and around San Fransisco and other amazing sites and places
• The score is by Bernard Herrmann
• Um, it's amazing!

"Vertigo" is utterly mesmerizing for a million different reasons. I'll focus on a few I can't help but notice.

The visuals and score. Herrmann's score complements Hitchcock's vision so much, it boggles my mind. I don't know if visuals and music have ever been so chic together, but I think this fine couple can shack up any time. Okay, that was a bit creepy, but seriously... the cinematography is so beautiful, the locations are so memorable and elegantly brought to the screen and the 90s restored version of the movie really helps us enjoy this masterpiece by the master of suspense.

Stewart really out does himself in the role of Scottie. He really captures everything the music, the locations, and the cinematography were trying to convey. Especially since there is a considerable amount of time where he is on screen and there is no dialogue, just visuals and music. Novak also does her part in these moments. They really aid in creating an eerie and surreal mood that takes you on a wild journey that will have you wondering what in the world is going on. And I love it.

And it's not just the acting and it's not just the music and the cinematography... it's the story as well. It's very well crafted. If you do any little bit of dabbling around on the Internet, you'll find people studying all the different aspects of "Vertigo". I could never do justice to try and remember or conjure up all the connections in "Vertigo" to Greek mythology and all the other ancient works people often associate with "Vertigo". It's really very deep and emotional. The word I like using the most to describe this favorite of mine is intoxicating. That's how I always feel about it. It sucks you in like an addiction and won't let go. And don't worry, no hangovers. Oh, my... lame.

So, basically, I think everyone should watch this movie because I love it so. Although, it probably won't be everybody's cup of tea. I strongly recommend not watching with a group of friends, because you probably won't be able to get into it that way. Either cuddle up with a honey or watch on your own. And alas, I leave you with a quote from the film to tease you:

Do you believe that someone out of the past - someone dead - can enter and take possession of a living being?