With the the planned randomness of these challenges I was a little surprised that I got one of the fun ones, Snow White, this early. Not that I’m complaining at all.
I had second choices about the composition choice minutes into doing it. Liking to think myself as a modern guy I have a bit of discomfort that most of the story Snow White is the dwarfs’ domestic. (as far as the “Dwarves” vs “Dwarfs” argument is concerned, I’m using “dwarfs” to make a distinction between the little guys in northern European fairy tales from Tolkien’s badass (albeit short) warriors) But since for me the story is all about the dwarfs it was either that or her dead in the glass casket.
All in all I believe it came out better than I thought it would fifteen minutes in.
Okay for day two of this challenge we have The Goblin and the Huckster. This one threw me off for a bit. The first was because it was one I wasn’t familiar with so I had to look it up. The second reason was because this turned out to be a Hans Christian Andersen story I couldn’t find it in the Grimm Fairytale Index I was using. (you can tell I didn’t have my coffee yet.) Finally I was thrown off by not knowing what a huckster was in the context of the story. (Turns out Andersen meant Grocer but it was mistranslated in the English)
After that the trick was how to include the Goblin (you got to have the goblin he’s in the title) in what is the most important image of the story when he was looking at it through a keyhole. My solution was to make the goblin really small so the keyhole was a window to him… I’m not sure how well it worked but I’m happy with the lighting.
Well I decided to be stupid again and inflict another sketch challenge on myself. This time the theme is Grimm Fairy tales (with a little bit of Hans Christian Anderson to fill out the Gaps.) The rules one sketch a day using a ten point marker (I am indeed a masochist) I am going to try to maintain a film noir vibe (though since half the time it feels like that means sticking a fedora on everyone that one’s not written in stone, but I’ll try to stay in period)
We start with the Story of Snow White and Rose Red.
I think this was okay start (the first few are always the weakest) I kind of flubbed the bear’s head but otherwise I’m mostly pleased with it.
In honor of the final week of March Madness I decided the perfect choice for this week would be some basketball films I’d been curious about for who knows how long. I figured this was as good an excuse to finally force myself to watch them.
The first film on my list, Hoosiers, was a film that was completely different than what I thought it was about. Based on the name I just assumed it was a film about college basketball… presumably the University of Indiana… it was not.
Gene Hackman plays Norman Dale a former basketball coach who has been hired to be the basketball coach for a tiny high school in small farming community in rural Indiana.
It’s a challenging hob. Not only does he initially have only five player to work with but he also has most of the town playing backseat driver to his coaching technique.
This was a good solid film even if it was pretty much by the numbers as inspirational stories about underdogs persevering go. It even had the final big game in slow motion.
My next film, Love and Basketball tells the story of Quincy(Omar Epps) and Monica (Sanaa Lathan), two kids who fist meet when Monica moves into the neighborhood when they are 11. They form a fast friendship that gradually becomes more than that with their shared love of basketball. Throughout the movie we watch them progress from high school, college and professional careers all the while showing the constant balancing act between their passion for the game and each other.
This is a sweet film. probably a little sappy for my tastes, (but then I’m an annoying cynic) Epps and Lethan have fantastic chemistry together and watching them grow from best friends to lovers is a pleasure. I also liked the feeling of dedications where in the process of showing of the love of the sport, Basketball becomes far more than a sport. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tKXP-KrY2UYhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tKXP-KrY2UY
This week I decided to touch on films about Ballet. My feeling about ballet is mixed. Half the time I regard it almost more of a sport than an art form and judging a lot of the incredible things the dancers are doing up on the stage on points.
Though one thing I’ve found to be consistent in a lot of films is that most of them focus on the the obsessive dedication and scrifice it takes for the art to work.
The problem is that she is expected to perform the duel roles of the White swan and the black swan and while she is perfect for the role of the demure white swan she has trouble giving herself to her inner urges that the role of the black swan requires. To make matters worse when a new outgoing dancer, Lilly (Mila Kunis) arrives who dances the role of the black swan perfectly. Now it has turned into a competition and the pressure is getting to Nina.
This was an interesting and challenging film that I frequently found difficult to watch. The thing I found interesting were the deliberate parallels to this film and Swan lake. Along with the obvious, Nina as the White Swan, Lily as the black, we also have the director, (played with wonderful smarminess by Vincent Cassel) who fills the role of the Magician Rothbart trying to transform Nina into his newest “Little Princess”
And behind all of this we are shown the underside of the ballet world with ballerinas clawing there way to the top in a feild that chews them up and spits them out and (in this case) dying for your art is quite literal.
The next film on my list was The Red Shoes by Michael Powell. It’s about a dancer, Vicky Page played by Moira Shearer), who has just joined the prestigious Ballet Lermontov run by Boris Lermontov (played by Anton Walbrook) a driven perfectionist who is driven by the desire to create the perfect performance. She quickly grows to become the company’ lead dancer for their brand new ballet, based on the Hans Christian Andersen fairy tale, The Red Shoes. But when she falls in love with the ballet’s composer Julian Craster (played by Marius Goring ) she is forced to choose between her artistic career and true love.
This movie deserves all of the acclaim it has been getting for years the dance and the performances. The best bit about it though is the Red Shoes Ballet itself standing out in the center of the film as a wonderful fifteen minutes of pure fantasy. In the process it nails down Anderson’s metaphor of the red shoes as something personally destructive that you can’t give up
I confess this week I was kind of scraping the barrel for ideas this week (that and one of the films for my plan A list was out) But I still thought that my idea for films about boxing scams had possibilities. Besides since the whole point of this exercise is to force me out of my film viewing comfort zone, the phrase “they can’t all be winners is a feature not a bug. Though considering the “tradition” of boxing being crooked, I’m surprised I couldn’t find more of these. (Though in hindsight I suppose Pulp Fiction counts, even though Bruce Willis’s scam is a subplot that occurs offscreen.)
Despite never hearing anything good about it I’d been curious about the sequel to the Sting for some time, because Jackie Gleason was in it. So I decided to chance it.
It’s seven years after the last film and the mark from the last film, Doyle Lonnegan (played by Oliver Reed), is out for revenge huning down the grifters who scammed him before. While trying to avoid this grifter Jake Hooker (Mac Davis) is summoned by King of the Conmen Fargo Gondorff (Gleason) to get back at Lonnegan as well asother financier using a crooked boxing match based on pretending that Hooker is going to take a dive in the ring.
This film was pretty much a mess. I went in expecting Gleason to be playing a variation of his Minnesota Fats character from The Hustler instead he was mostly flat and whatever classiness he might have had was spoiled by bursts of broad slapstick. The rest of the film, regrettably wasn’t much better. In the original film half the fun is the anatomy of the Sting itself which challenges us to notice everything that they’re not telling you with the final reveal still coming as an amazing surprise. In the sequel the reveal comes off something they just pulled out of their ass.
I’d been aware of our second film, Diggstown when it first came out mainly because I’d been a fan of Louis Gossett, Jr. at the time and while I certainly made a note of it’s existence the description didn’t pique my interest enough to actually watch it.
James Wood stars as Gabriel Caine a con man who’s just getting out of prison with a plan to travel to the town of Diggstown and bet the man who owns and controls most of the town, John Gillion (Bruce Dern) that his guy can beat ten boxers in twenty four hours. To do this he first has to get his guy, Honey Roy Palmer (Gosset) to agree to come along. He does and then the action ensues with each side doing everything they can to rig the proceedings (and even then this is the ultimate endurance test for Palmer)
While this was no great masterpiece, this was an enjoyable film with good performances from Wood and Gossett with Dern turning smarminess into an art form. If anything my biggest problem with it was there were just a few too many variables in Caine’s plan to make this feel like a true sting.
With the the planned randomness of these challenges I was a little surprised that I got one of the fun ones, Snow White, this early. Not that I’m complaining at all.
