THANK YOU! And no, it didn't shock her at all. It was my use of the word "mounting" that she found perhaps a bit degrading. But she never saw it finished, with the Family Channel joke so I think it's just fine now.
And most of that movie was stupid but I love Oldman as the Count. But Coppola takes the movie in so many different directions visually and constructs the story from the book so haphazardly that I find it difficult to actually make it through the movie without terminal boredom setting in.
And Keanu Reeves could not have been more lifeless as Jonathan Harker. I'm assuming in their scenes together Oldman constantly had to resist the urge to punch him. I know from acting that the hardest times I have ever had onstage is when I'm playing against a weak actor. You get nothing to play off of and it makes your job more difficult. Reeves wasn't suitable for a high school production in that movie.
I agree with everything you just said. I bought that special edition that came out a little while ago, largely out of nostalgia, and I find it tough to get through. What in the world, outside of studio pressure, could have made Coppola cast Reeves is beyond me.
I remember seeing a segment on "Siskel and Ebert" about DVD (or maybe it was laserdisc) extras, and one of the first movies to have any of note, apparently, was Bram Stoker's Dracula. They talked about this one extra that had different takes of one of Reeves's line readings. They showed three of them. If memory serves, it went like this:
It really is hard to get through. When a story feels disconnected and disjointed it's like your watching a long trailer instead of a film and after a while you get frustrated and bored and just want a flow to develop. That never happens here.
Actually, joking or not, I just realized the last sentence (which of course was referring to Bram Stoker's Dracula) could be construed to mean Cinema Styles. Which is crazy because we all groove to the flow here in a major, totally awesome super cool way!
Don't worry, it was a butter knife anyway. I'm not allowed anything sharper at work ever since that ill-conceived knife throwing contest a couple of years back intended to boost morale in the office. Hey I thought it would be fun! You know, the boss gets tied to a spinning wheel and everyone throws knives. Good times all around. It never occurred to me none of us knew how to throw knives, and that half didn't even care. Then I get the blame when cops and ambulances show up. Like that was my fault or something!
I just thought I'd point out that your "Frankenstein's Monster" picture of James Dean makes him look more like James Franco than James Franco already looks like James Dean. Which is not to say that Franco looks like a creature made up of stitched-together body parts. I guess it's just that removing the top of Dean's head somehow accentuates their similarities.
Actually, Voorhees, I thought it WAS James Franco. How's THAT for cinephile cred?
And I completely agree about your assessment of Coppola's Dracula (guess I won't have to trash it over at my place) except that I love Oldman in it. But Reeves screws up everything he's in.
As a matter of fact, I'll add his name to the list from your post yesterday of here in this one of who I'd like to kill: Keanu in anything he has ever been in. Anything he's almost been in. Anything that's been cast with him in it, and then thought better of it (which must be an extremely long list).
Francis Ford Coppola's Bram Stoker's Dracula is watchable as a grab bag of camera trickery but the uneven loading of acting talent makes the thing unseaworthy. I'll never forget the hubris, the hubris, of Coppola or maybe James Hart claiming in an press junket that Stoker's novel was, as-written, unreadable. Yeah, it might seem so if you're flying on coke, but if you're a normal human being and semi-literate it's actually a fucking good time.
Oh, right! I forgot about that picture. I saw it in the book The Monster Show, by David Skal. Was that Dean just goofing around, or was he trying to get a role? I can't remember.
I don't remember the comment about the book but it reminds me of a comment made by Jay Wolpert in an interview talking about character and story improvements he had to make with The Count of Monte Cristo because Dumas had "missed" things, like the reason Mercedes really married Mondego was because she was pregnant with Edmund's son. He actually looks at the camera and says, "Why would she marry someone she doesn't love unless she were pregnant with Edmund's child? Dumas - How did you miss that?"
It made me angry watching him. Mercedes marrying out of loneliness and then Edmund wishing Albert was his son and the three going separate ways in the end is a part of what makes it a great story and not the worthless soap opera Wolpert would like it to be.
Thanks Fox! Just when it seems no one gives a flying shit about the effort put into these pictures you show up. I greatly appreciate it. Really I do. I've already nixed more than half of the ones I was going to put up anyway. Thanks again for noticing.
Why nix them? Is it b/c you think they get modest reactions? I think your regulars are just uncomfortable with giving compliments. Maybe they weren't hugged enough as teenagers.
I mean, I think it's pretty obvious that you're Bill's hero.
I've never understood the Winona Ryder thing. Really. Even when I was a kid she didn't appeal to me. I was much more into Alyssa Milano and Nicole Eggert. I guess I wasn't goth enough, or whatever.
I wouldn't nix them because of no praise but I don't think doing as many as I originally planned makes for as thrilling and mixed up a kill fest month. Like I'm relying too much on just throwing up the pictures. But I am glad you like them Fox, I am.
And Marilyn, I use photoshop knock-offs that run around 40 to 60 bucks. There's no way in hell I'd ever have enough money to actually buy the real version which is currently... One Thousand Dollars! I downloaded a demo which was good for 30 days just to see if maybe it was a whole new magical world I was missing and I really found nothing different from it and the knock-offs. So save yourself 950 bucks and get the cheap photo manipulation softwares.
And no offense to some Ryder fans out there, I know there are plenty I've seen around the blogs but I'm with Fox. I find her average as an actress and seriously lacking in onscreen charisma.
Marilyn, I Use Paintshop Pro 8 (I don't know what the version number is now) which is now sold by Corel, which can be had for about $90. It does everything Photoshop can. If you use a PC, that is ...
And I agree doubly with Fox. Ryder is beautiful, but can't act.
Coppola's hubris has gotten him into trouble before, see one "Apocalypse Now"
I've used Paintshop, Photo Explosion Deluxe, Photo Suite, Photo Morph, etc. over the years. I swear, I thought they were cheap imitations of Photoshop until I downloaded that PhotoShop demo. After that, I simply can't believe they stay in business selling software for a thousand dollars.
As an actress, you can keep Winona Ryder. But as a woman in a practically see-through nightgown running down the steps shortly before the shot Jonathan used in his previous banner...that Winona Ryder I'm happy to see any time.
You know what moment I'm talking about, Jonathan. Don't pretend you don't.
[And if somebody wants, I can stick the old, out of date Paintshop on a server so they can "evaluate" it if they want to see if they want to upgrade and pay the money.]
Got it Strangler, no worries. Another thing the gets me with Photoshop is I've talked to people who have it in school or work who think because it's Photoshop that automatically their work will be better. It's not the software, it's what you bring to it.
I could go to the best art supply store in the country, buy the best mixed oils available, the finest hand crafted brushes and the most exquisitely constructed canvas and my wife could go to a toy store, buy a beginners oil set, grab a piece of construction paper and outdo me in two seconds.
It's not like you can open Photoshop, put in a picture of Bing Crosby and then type, "Turn into devil" and it magically does it.
Lapper, you do incredible work (everybody... check out my new "31 Days, 31 Screams" banner, courtesy of our Wizard of Ahhs) but I'm wary of blowing too much smoke up your ass for fear of singeing the peach fuzz.
Thank you Arbo. Really, I know I sounded self-pitying (which was intended - but in a joking way!), it was more of a feeling that people were perhaps a bit bored with too many pictures and I desperately want to entertain. I am now and always will be onstage. If I were born two hundred years ago I'd be travelling town to town dancing and performing juggling acts. So it's more of my need to entertain than anything. I don't want to let anybody down.
41 comments:
That's the banner that shocked your wife? But -- and this is no knock on your banner -- that scene was stupid!
THANK YOU! And no, it didn't shock her at all. It was my use of the word "mounting" that she found perhaps a bit degrading. But she never saw it finished, with the Family Channel joke so I think it's just fine now.
And most of that movie was stupid but I love Oldman as the Count. But Coppola takes the movie in so many different directions visually and constructs the story from the book so haphazardly that I find it difficult to actually make it through the movie without terminal boredom setting in.
And Keanu Reeves could not have been more lifeless as Jonathan Harker. I'm assuming in their scenes together Oldman constantly had to resist the urge to punch him. I know from acting that the hardest times I have ever had onstage is when I'm playing against a weak actor. You get nothing to play off of and it makes your job more difficult. Reeves wasn't suitable for a high school production in that movie.
I agree with everything you just said. I bought that special edition that came out a little while ago, largely out of nostalgia, and I find it tough to get through. What in the world, outside of studio pressure, could have made Coppola cast Reeves is beyond me.
I remember seeing a segment on "Siskel and Ebert" about DVD (or maybe it was laserdisc) extras, and one of the first movies to have any of note, apparently, was Bram Stoker's Dracula. They talked about this one extra that had different takes of one of Reeves's line readings. They showed three of them. If memory serves, it went like this:
"We can be married when I return."
"We can be MARried when I return."
"We can be married when I reTURN."
"We CAN be married when I return."
And so on. It was hilarious.
It really is hard to get through. When a story feels disconnected and disjointed it's like your watching a long trailer instead of a film and after a while you get frustrated and bored and just want a flow to develop. That never happens here.
What never happens where? Sorry. I'm just bored and frustrated.
Actually, joking or not, I just realized the last sentence (which of course was referring to Bram Stoker's Dracula) could be construed to mean Cinema Styles. Which is crazy because we all groove to the flow here in a major, totally awesome super cool way!
We do? Oh wait, yes, we DO. WE do. Of COURSE we do. Put down that knife Jonathan.
Don't worry, it was a butter knife anyway. I'm not allowed anything sharper at work ever since that ill-conceived knife throwing contest a couple of years back intended to boost morale in the office. Hey I thought it would be fun! You know, the boss gets tied to a spinning wheel and everyone throws knives. Good times all around. It never occurred to me none of us knew how to throw knives, and that half didn't even care. Then I get the blame when cops and ambulances show up.
Like that was my fault or something!
I just thought I'd point out that your "Frankenstein's Monster" picture of James Dean makes him look more like James Franco than James Franco already looks like James Dean. Which is not to say that Franco looks like a creature made up of stitched-together body parts. I guess it's just that removing the top of Dean's head somehow accentuates their similarities.
And his last name was Franco! As in Franco-Stein. It's a perfect fit all around.
Actually, Voorhees, I thought it WAS James Franco. How's THAT for cinephile cred?
And I completely agree about your assessment of Coppola's Dracula (guess I won't have to trash it over at my place) except that I love Oldman in it. But Reeves screws up everything he's in.
As a matter of fact, I'll add his name to the list from your post yesterday of here in this one of who I'd like to kill: Keanu in anything he has ever been in. Anything he's almost been in. Anything that's been cast with him in it, and then thought better of it (which must be an extremely long list).
Groove to the flow of what?
Groove to the flow of what?
The flow of Frank "Disco Dan" Langella cuttin' it loose with Kate Nelligan to the tune of Stayin' Alive of course.
YOUR BUTT!
Zing!!!!!
Francis Ford Coppola's Bram Stoker's Dracula is watchable as a grab bag of camera trickery but the uneven loading of acting talent makes the thing unseaworthy. I'll never forget the hubris, the hubris, of Coppola or maybe James Hart claiming in an press junket that Stoker's novel was, as-written, unreadable. Yeah, it might seem so if you're flying on coke, but if you're a normal human being and semi-literate it's actually a fucking good time.
And there is, of course, floating around (I've seen it reproduced online) a photo of James Dean actually made up as the Frankenstein monster.
Flawless photoshop jon on Dean, Lapper! Seriously... it's so fleshiliy real that it's eerie!
Oh, right! I forgot about that picture. I saw it in the book The Monster Show, by David Skal. Was that Dean just goofing around, or was he trying to get a role? I can't remember.
I don't remember the comment about the book but it reminds me of a comment made by Jay Wolpert in an interview talking about character and story improvements he had to make with The Count of Monte Cristo because Dumas had "missed" things, like the reason Mercedes really married Mondego was because she was pregnant with Edmund's son. He actually looks at the camera and says, "Why would she marry someone she doesn't love unless she were pregnant with Edmund's child? Dumas - How did you miss that?"
It made me angry watching him. Mercedes marrying out of loneliness and then Edmund wishing Albert was his son and the three going separate ways in the end is a part of what makes it a great story and not the worthless soap opera Wolpert would like it to be.
This Dean is kind of Frankensteiniain in real time... the neck, the voice, and, of course, "the shreik".
DISCLAIMER: This is not a political point or provocation, just a fun time, so slow your pulse down, FREAKS!
Thanks Fox! Just when it seems no one gives a flying shit about the effort put into these pictures you show up. I greatly appreciate it. Really I do. I've already nixed more than half of the ones I was going to put up anyway. Thanks again for noticing.
Why nix them? Is it b/c you think they get modest reactions? I think your regulars are just uncomfortable with giving compliments. Maybe they weren't hugged enough as teenagers.
I mean, I think it's pretty obvious that you're Bill's hero.
If he gives me a bootleg copy of Photoshop, I'll praise him. I can be bought.
Seriously, a guy I used to know watched "Bram Stoker's Dracula" about 50 times because he had a thing for Winona Ryder.
I've never understood the Winona Ryder thing. Really. Even when I was a kid she didn't appeal to me. I was much more into Alyssa Milano and Nicole Eggert. I guess I wasn't goth enough, or whatever.
I think it's an Irish thing.
I wouldn't nix them because of no praise but I don't think doing as many as I originally planned makes for as thrilling and mixed up a kill fest month. Like I'm relying too much on just throwing up the pictures. But I am glad you like them Fox, I am.
And Marilyn, I use photoshop knock-offs that run around 40 to 60 bucks. There's no way in hell I'd ever have enough money to actually buy the real version which is currently... One Thousand Dollars! I downloaded a demo which was good for 30 days just to see if maybe it was a whole new magical world I was missing and I really found nothing different from it and the knock-offs. So save yourself 950 bucks and get the cheap photo manipulation softwares.
And no offense to some Ryder fans out there, I know there are plenty I've seen around the blogs but I'm with Fox. I find her average as an actress and seriously lacking in onscreen charisma.
And a random blog update is coming soon... as I warned on Saturday. New banner and public service announcement to go up shortly.
It's information you need to know!
Marilyn, I Use Paintshop Pro 8 (I don't know what the version number is now) which is now sold by Corel, which can be had for about $90. It does everything Photoshop can. If you use a PC, that is ...
And I agree doubly with Fox. Ryder is beautiful, but can't act.
Coppola's hubris has gotten him into trouble before, see one "Apocalypse Now"
And oh, by the way,
Eight out of ten Ghouls agree: "Cinema Styles is the greatest!"
I've used Paintshop, Photo Explosion Deluxe, Photo Suite, Photo Morph, etc. over the years. I swear, I thought they were cheap imitations of Photoshop until I downloaded that PhotoShop demo. After that, I simply can't believe they stay in business selling software for a thousand dollars.
As an actress, you can keep Winona Ryder. But as a woman in a practically see-through nightgown running down the steps shortly before the shot Jonathan used in his previous banner...that Winona Ryder I'm happy to see any time.
You know what moment I'm talking about, Jonathan. Don't pretend you don't.
PS - Thanks for the extra link on your sidebar!
Me neither ... talk about hubris.
[And if somebody wants, I can stick the old, out of date Paintshop on a server so they can "evaluate" it if they want to see if they want to upgrade and pay the money.]
oops ... that last comment was directed at Jonathan, not you, Bill ...
Got it Strangler, no worries. Another thing the gets me with Photoshop is I've talked to people who have it in school or work who think because it's Photoshop that automatically their work will be better. It's not the software, it's what you bring to it.
I could go to the best art supply store in the country, buy the best mixed oils available, the finest hand crafted brushes and the most exquisitely constructed canvas and my wife could go to a toy store, buy a beginners oil set, grab a piece of construction paper and outdo me in two seconds.
It's not like you can open Photoshop, put in a picture of Bing Crosby and then type, "Turn into devil" and it magically does it.
Yes, but you do a pretty good job, even though you profess not to be all that good (trust the art, not the artist ... see the thread over at Bill's).
Lapper, you do incredible work (everybody... check out my new "31 Days, 31 Screams" banner, courtesy of our Wizard of Ahhs) but I'm wary of blowing too much smoke up your ass for fear of singeing the peach fuzz.
Thank you Arbo. Really, I know I sounded self-pitying (which was intended - but in a joking way!), it was more of a feeling that people were perhaps a bit bored with too many pictures and I desperately want to entertain. I am now and always will be onstage. If I were born two hundred years ago I'd be travelling town to town dancing and performing juggling acts. So it's more of my need to entertain than anything. I don't want to let anybody down.
And now I have to go pick up my daughter from the bus stop where I will ask her if I am fun to be around. Oh god, I hope she says "yes."
She probably won't.
She said, "Yes" so there.
Post a Comment