jacc in the box - options
"I guess I'm out of a fucking job!"
- Jen*
In the action thriller Zero Dark Thirty,
Maya, the character of the story who
represented the real to life CIA agent
committed to running down bag-o-shit
Osama Bin Laden, was cheated out of
delivering the 'line of the century.'"Frankly my dear, I don't give a damn!" stood out in the 20th
Century but the line above would have defined the 21st, and
if you don't believe me then [click here] to get an ear full...What we got was the obligatory...compulsory mutherfucking
mandatory 'must have' emotional break! What is wrong with
filmmakers? Even when they're not held to all the film school
alumni bullshit they insist on crowbarring in a painfully inane
and artificially concocted 'emotional moment' all too placate
what a stratified Hollywood elite believes to be necessary for
us emotionally stunted common folk—and it is nauseating!
Yea, I'm gonna bag on Katheryn Bigelow for just a spell...
No, she didn't write the thing but she produced, and directed,
and held creative control if not full fucking control with an iron
fucking fist! So, sitting in the theatre watching a movie that I
was genuinely enjoying but always looking for that lie, and at
timestamp 02:27:00 I watched that lie unfold before my eyes!
Sure, I didn't know it per se, but it sure as shit was obvious.
It wasn't even close to Hotel Rawanda's comedically staged
'meltdown in the lockerroom' scene that was so off-putting the
real Paul Rusesabagina, in an effort to save face, denounced
the filmmakers in interviews saying, "That never happened."Paul was insulted by the lie, and the memory of him through
a film that should represent him honestly, a true to form hero,
the filmmakers failed to stick to the 'truth of the moment!'The memory of CIA's Jen [pseudonym] will forever be lost to
us mere mortals who slog along doing average shit through a
life we feel stuck in, and for the love of God we would give up
our right nut (or tit) and 20 years off the top of our life for just
one three-day weekend living as Paul or Jen or anybody who
makes a difference...when we already do and fail to see it?"What we do in life echoes for eternity" is purported to be a
mythos from ancient Rome, but as a line in a script it's depth
holds true as much today as it would for them—because every
one of us makes a huge difference, for good or bad, and if one
wields kindness, gratitude and simple generosity then THAT
shit flows for a long fucking way in your wake!It is said that people go to the movies to escape the troil an'
drudgery of daily life but, fact is, this is not exactly the case.
Action films like John Wick fur shnizzle sure, but those that
depict historical events then it's no! The ticket for that ride is
never for an escape. They're coming for truth, facts, to learn,
to mentally connect, to emulate or maybe aspire to. As with
Zero Dark Thirty entertainment was the last thing on our tiny
little common folk minds when paying for that seat!The state of the movie industry for quite some time is best
described as a "red asphalt" of failure upon pending failure!
When NASA said 'failure is not an option' they had an explicit
impact on that desired outcome! For Hollywood this is some
dyscognitive primal mantra lost when they are pathologically
risk adverse in an industry where it's critical to take risks!To aproach Jane and John Q. Public (JQP) and straight up
ask them what it is they want for entertainment, what they'd
be willing to pony up for, would be (in defence of the industry)
very much akin to ceding upon Homer Simpson carte blanche
in designing the car of his dreams. Outside of the controlled
'preview house' experience JQP is purdy-much out of that loop
yet, then again, very few from that crowd actually know how to
articulate what it is they want—except to point out the endless
dreck the industry has been re-regurgitating for decades and
shout to the heavens at the top of their lungs, "NOT THAT!"Now to you, that being the Hollywood you...
In an industry where holding to metrics on trends, a priori,
via collage indoctrinated dipshits have failed you again and
again, where cramming DEI, ESG and limitless shovelfuls of
nonsensically moronic post-modernist wishful thinking down
our retching throats has failed you...when ya could've simply
asked a small few who DO know what it is we want!They are out there, they always have been! With the internet
there're many to chose from but to narrow it down for the time
being [Nerdrodic], [Critical Drinker] and [Doomcock] would
be a nice start. Yea, it'll be a hippo tail-spin full of ridicule and
funhouse mirror self-reflection but...you fucking deserve it!And here we turn to you, the audience you...
The purse string is what controls the film industry and, if you
know anything about finance and banking, those brazen imps
who control said strings are celebrated for their lack of integrity
and backbone. When Obi Wan warned Luke about Mos Eisley
then that is what I convey to you!I used to live on the periphery of that wretched hive of scum
and villainy. I took to screenwriting—never to gain traction or
favor and, yet, when I finally got a bite for this property I was
long gone and oh-so glad to be out of there!Reachin' into the clue bag, Hollywood purposefully has zero
respect for the movie going public. It's not to say they hate
ya but they might as well? They hold you in bitter contempt
and, to top it all off, they sure as shit resent and blame you
when you fail to support their efforts to "entertain" you!And, curiously, they wonder why we despise 'em?
____________
Fear and Loathing in Tinsel Town...
"The book was better"
- Carl Sagan
Conservatively speaking, in the last half century I do not think I
have gone (on mean average) more than a half a year without
hearing someone express that very same sentiment with those
very same words verbatim. Tis shocking, no?'The book was better' is a truism that is so commonplace that to
attribute it to Carl Sagan is okay by me 'cause billions-an'-billions
think he's an okay guy—so I say let that stand without challenge!
The thing is, this adage (or cliché in the mind of the industry) is
not an absolute by any stretch of the metrics! As a truism this is
only substantively true 'round 'bout 95% of the time?If someone takes a seat to watch a movie knowing it's based on
a published work (id est, book with spine or book as in playscript)
and if they happen to be a fan of that IP then they already have a
chip on their shoulder before the lights dim and you cycle through
the previews. The air is already thick with disappointment full well
knowing that Hollywood has taken liberties with it and sullied your
memories and joy in reading that book or watching that play.The hopeful expectation is that they didn't fuck it up too much?
It is a true oddity, that is en sauf de rares, where the industry fails
to disappoint! Altering the plot or the premise, or the outcome, or
swapping race or gender is all a bad start before the set goes hot.
Trashing the core and soul of an original IP is encouraged by this
industry where the author holds little control or influence after they
sign and everyone else gets their self-absorbed dicks in the mix!Where on Broadway the author has final say, in Hollywood it is
historically the director...mostly. Now, honestly, I can get behind
that because in film too many things transcend the written word,
but on many an occasion the producer or the purse, or an errant
star can muck up the works by having an opinion to share...Influence is one thing, but the coercive flex these guys may wield
is beyond disruptive by an obviously leftist possessed subculture!
When out to champion a social issue, or in favor of some political
narrative, it is never a good idea when those ideas are not sourced
from the source material. This is especially true when those ideas
are not and never to be shared by the target audience at large. To
virtue-signal or morally gaslight your social/political opponents will
always take a bite out of the box office in a predictible manner.Many films have been sabotaged by seemingly good intentions!
Now, giving you examples that would directly illustrate the point
I'm making, well, that would be too damned easy! What we are
gonna do is flip that cart and talk 'bout three films (1) where the
director totally fucked 'round with the source material and yet he
produced a far superior story, then (2) a gorgeous but mediocre
film series that left the bulk of the story behind yet prints oodles
of money in spite of itself, then (3) lastly one that 'test screened'
and averted budgetary disaster only to struggle at the box office
all because of casting, projection and sloppy framing...NOTE: Oh, remember when Heath Ledger slid down a pyramid
of money and took a match to it? That was supposed
to be a metaphorical depiction of lunacy but in 2026 we
have Christopher Nolan doing it for real? The Odyssey
he has congered up for a July release is clearly a sign
of the industry touching a match to itself! It makes you
wonder how this up-n-comin' dumpster fire got green lit?
The casting alone is so absurd it makes me wonder if its
some elaborate troll, Rick-roll, or...it may signal the end
for Hollywood and the DNR was optioned? Anyway . . .
01001011-01001111-01010100-01001000 (King Of The Hill)First up is The Shining, from 1980, and this here is a film that
speaks for itself. Kubrick pushed back on the 'Murder She Wrote'
esthetic of the book and wove a horror vibe into the structure that
has been puzzled over and over-analyzed to death even after 45+
years since the movie was first released.Every one of Stanley's projects goes through a blurry adaptation
phase, some fluidity in casting, but once pre-production is behind
you, you then enter the 'nine-rings' of shooting-from-the-hip hell.
Cinematography is a neverending chaotic mess where only Stan
is privy to his Quixote like dialectical vision with the cast and crew
as the spiritual embodyment of 'Sancho Panza' and Shelly Duvall
where, instead of being uplifted as the idealized Dulcinea, slogged
through a Kubrickian short-order/grease-pit slap about that forged
our mousy Wendy Torrance into the heart and soul of the film.Take issue with [Stanley's methods] all you want, and I do, but the
performance he painfully extruded out of Shelly Duvall deserved
both accolades and an Oscar! Looking back at this total snub by
the Academy is a standing indictment of the industry as a whole.Now, where both the book and film adaptation of Doctor Sleep
may have improved upon the story (and dramatically so) there
was no anchor like Wendy for us to root for. In Dr Sleep all of
the characters were offered up as expendable...oh well?We could bang-on-an-on about The Shining but we count our
blessings that Kubrick had pushed back on the "battle topiaries"
from the book—which could have worked as a stop-action but
we were dished up the ominously sinister "Hedge Maze" where
Danny used his wits to get away. Thank God that CGI was not
a thing back then 'cause that would have ruined it.Come to think of it...why bring up The Shining if it doesn't fit the
narritive? Well, it does directly because Stanley Kubrick, as the
Jackson Pollock embodiment of filmmaking, when given enough
time thowing shit at a canvas—instead of The Moon Woman up
on screen we end up with the Sistine Chapel? The maths says
this should not ever work, but with Stanley it worked. No matter
how desperate I could ever be to sign - I would never let anyone
like Kubrick touch JNTB, and that brings us to the next guy...NOTE: Exiting the theatre back in '80 and the person I was
dating at the time was having a real hard time trying
to reconcile the fact that, as a Steven King fan, this
movie was far better than the book. For once in her
life she couldn't say the book was better!
01000011-01010010-01001001-01010000 (Community Resistance In Progress)Now we have DUNE, starting up in 2021, and this film series
is the worst cherry-picking from the source material I have ever
seen in the history of the industry! Where most directors pad a
screenplay up to the gills with content galore, Denis Villeneuve
flips the script and has stripped out everything he could!Denis has excised too many of the critical story elements all to
establish an overwhelming sceanic visual—but this effort only
ablates away at a now very underwhelming storyline.Where DUNE '84 was a two-cubic yard trash compactor of
'Weirding Module' cranial overload, and the 2001 miniseries
managed to plug in most of the pivotal story elements from
the books (not all but more than the 1984 effort), Denis has
taken a metaphorical flamethrower to all the many subplots
thereby leaving only the Bene Gesserit to carry water...What Denis produced cannot hold a candle to the nostalgia
porn over that which never was—Jodorowsky's Dune! Now,
go watch Alejandro's magnum opus 'The Holy Mountain' and
maybe that'll give you people a vague idea what would have
been in store for us. A movie suitable only for gay Nazis and
gasping masochists! (Ligatures? Razor blades? Anyone?)
It's good to know that shit never happened, but what's tragic
is that I'm probably the only sane person that believes it!So, Denis, babe, as a fan it's hard to admit that DUNE is an
utterly terrible scifi property! What makes it work are all the
character arcs woven into the intrigues and infighting from
within and in between all the Houses and the Guilds. What
pisses us DUNE Groupies off is your focus on visceral eye
candy and leaving the mutherfucking story behind!Stripping out all the story elements kinda ruins it for us fans,
and when we all heard that there was some 5-hour preview
screening going around for the first film, well, that shot us all
into low-earth orbit knowing we would never see it...And while we're at it, ever hear the phrase, "Han shot first?"
Yea? Good to hear because it's applicable to your DUNE!
We don't know exactly what's on Denis mind when he goes
and fucks around with a beloved character's arc, id est Alia,
'cause that tends to piss us fans off! Yea, that was amazing
when, in utero, Alia asks, "What is happening, mother?"The sheer jaw-dropping simplicity of that moment is lost when
one realizes that it is Alia who had to kill the Baron—not Paul!
Alia wouldn't give Vladimir two shakes of piss if she didn't Gom
Jabbar his ass herself, and for Alia to "host" the Baron later in
the story, and close her arc in the most shockingly unexpected
way imaginable, she has to be drawn towards him like a moth
to flame! So, who the fuck knows what Denis has in mind?NOTE: Exiting the theatre back in '21 and I was having a
dificult time trying to reconcile my brain to the fact
that I was actually split on this film! I was not split
to the fact that this effort would have been better
suited to episodic streaming with ALL of the story
elements in the final edit, so . . . aaah, fuck it!
01001101-01000001-01001001-01000100 (Medical Assistance In Dying)Now let us touch on Little Shop of Horrors, from 1986,
before we close out, and to start things off we want to point
out a direct correlation between LSoH and JNTB, that being
they both started out as a screenplay! Where Roger Corman
was able to shoot his little horror romp, the offer for my IP as
a screenplay was $0 high that my agent in Palm Springs was
twisting my fricken arm to write the book...so I did!The LSoH film that could (1960) had a cult following where
a musicial stageplay was puked out by Alan Menken (music)
and Howard Ashman (book and lyrics) that was so damned
crazy successful a storied Frank Oz saw the thing and said,
"Ya know, what we need here is a movie!"So, with rights secured they go to town and produce one of
the most polished stage-to-film projects ever made...only to
be cock-blocked by one of those villainous test screenings!
Why did they hit the breaks you ask? Well, the ending they
filmed kinda blew up in their faces...Here is where I'm gonna offer my very own sour-puss of an
opinion on the subject because the test audience hated the
ending they were shown!Why? Well, in the play...Audrey II won! The plant ended up
eating the cast and in the finale we were witness too at the
[Westwood Playhouse] back in '83, when the vines dropped
in from the ceiling, implying the audience was on the menu,
we shit ourselves stupid while laughing our guts out!It was a delightful and engaging ending to a funny-ass play
that really does not translate well to film when your goofy
and campy (and short) end-cap of a song turns into some
mutant patriotic dirge that drones on and on with post-war
shots of botanical Kaiju tearing the country apart—which
was way-too fucking dark when your comedy stage-show
starts off as breezy, lite and fun!Then again,as a rabid fan of the play the theatrical ending
made me feel like my wife cheated on me with the school
janitor however, some giant plantoid gnawing on the face
of the Statue of Liberty is sorta off-putting and not a thing
I could cheer on—even if it were tax day!This whole controversy ends decades later (2012) when
the Director's Cut is released with the originally intended
ending given an equal shot! I did see the B&W cut from
the DVD so I bought it last night an' streamed that ending
and here I can say...neither of 'em really work?So, my take: From the Director's Cut time stamp 01:30:20,
instead of the opening to "Patton" you cut to the inside of
Mushnik's store and, to a quiet-subliminal violin-screechy
plant like rendition of [Raymond Scott's Powerhouse] that
is driving the staff to loading AudreyII cuttings to trays and
packing them into trucks, you have green-ambulatory plant
Seymour stopping to ask plant Audrey, "Taking root soon?"
Where she smiles, "Tonight! Care to get dirty with me?"After they kissy-face their two plant children race by and
Seymour gruffs, "No running or we pinch back!" Where
Audrey follows with, "They branch out so fast!" And while
panning away you see Mushnik filling out a thousand-cut
order for the Girl Scouts of America and the Rotary Club!
Then to top it off, all the customers coming into the store
do not see Mushnik's staff as green-plant people and this
goes "whoosh" right over all thar heads—with our lil' sista
Greek Chorus belting out 'Don't Feed the Plants!'If mapped out properly that would have a Looney Tunes
vibe to it and not the black cloud of The Body Snatchers
that snuffed the Director's Cut but...we'll never know!Now we come to the inconveniant disscussion...
Back in film school, learning to write screenplays, the
lecture that has stuck with me (since 1982) was about
audience projection onto the characters. So, whenever
there is a potential romantic tie-in established between
characters, the audience members will ALWAYS, in the
back of their mind, project themselves onto the actor(s)
matching their gender—with the hope of acquiring said
desired-romantic person of interest by proxy. Note that
a target would be the actor, the corporeal embodiment
of said character, and not the character themself!At best this is messy however—the professor made it
fun by presenting this as an algebraic equasion, and I
could kick myself for not taking the mutherfucking time
to jot this equasion and legend down...Yea, he's an idiot!The point is, in context to LSoH, the maths don' wurk!
The cast for this film was absolutely legendary! Every
one of them was at the very top of their game when the
cameras rolled but...the math didn't work? Remember,
when the audience is "projecting" it comes down to the
actors and never is it ever the characters in mind! For
the stage it's the reverse, but in film it's an absolute!A movie can be boosted or have it's back broken at the
box office along simple casting choices! LSoH (movie)
had struggled through its theatre run and just squeaked
by when it should've busted a block or two! Why?NOTE: LSoH actually made a killing on the VHS / Beta
release of the film but that's another discussion!In the "blame game" that follows a failure the production
team will (inevitably) point the blame towards the cast but
on this movie we have...crickets! Lots and lots of crickets
and nobody will talk about it because the answer itself is
way too dificult for the production (both cast and crew) to
reflect on or admit too. The math didn't work...When Ellen Greene from the [Off-Broadway Tour] was
cast as Audrey I actually cheered out loud! I thought she
was incredible on stage so she'd be perfect for the film!
And when I hear that Rick Moranis was cast as Seymour
my brain seized up because—how can that work?Individually they were the perfect Audrey and Seymour
but when audience is mentally "shipping" these two into
a potential romatic ménage à deux then everything falls
apart! No guy can project themself onto Rick Moranis
with the hope of scoring Ellen Greene all because it ain't
possible in any universe! In good turn no gal could ever
project themself on Ellen Greene and thank their lucky
stars that they can get on their back for Rick Moranis!This incompatibility would be a mental meshing of gears!
When watching characters on screen realize their union
going forward, it's not that Ellen and Rick were anywhere
near uncomfortable and stiff in their performance; no, we
were stiff and uncomfortable in their performance. As for
'tactile chemistry' the moments are too granular for us to
go over here but, suffice it to say, the math didn't work!Now, I have always been solidly in the 'keep Ellen' camp,
but the second I heard that Cyndi Lauper was considered
for Audrey my preference simply unraveled! I did not like
Cyndi's music back then, I still don't, but two things stood
out making her the perfect Audrey to Rick's Seymour.First off, the girl could sing! Second, she was cuter than
pigshit! Sure, Cyndi wasn't anywhere close to the tall and
sinuous Ellen Greene, but she was so 'in a heartbeat' cute
that, when we bounce her off of Rick Moranis' masterfully
performed Seymour, well, the math actually works!Could feisty little Cyndi Lauper dumb herself down to play
Audrey as written? Who the fuck knows but I would have
dropped all my money on that formula! Then consider all
her fans that would swarm the box office? An' with that in
mind ya gotta ask...how the hell did that fall apart?NOTE: I was gonna bang on Star Wars instead of LSoH
because would'a, should'a and could'a is always
fun for a laugh but, seriously, the sequel should
have been before the prequel! And when I was
about to write—I find out [what George planned]
for the sequals (with Darth Maul and Talon) and
I was thoroughly dumbfounded that both Disney
and Kathleen Kennedy pushed back? I'm not a
fan but WTF! Then can you imagine if someone
would've been able to convince Lucas to make
bumbling [Jar Jar Binks a Sith Lord] this whole
time? Can you imagine sitting in some theatre
for that reveal! Oh, to dream...
____________
Because the Bible tells me so...
"The book is a film that takes place
in the mind of the reader"
- Paulo Coelho
We'll be finishing this article when we get chapter 119
posted. Somewhere in mid June thru early July?
(Yea, this animated .gif is sooo 1998)
copyright © nicholas ralph baum - all rights reserved [contact us]
