Maybe because of the approaching holiday, or maybe because I figured, "Hey, it's been almost a year since I taped it; maybe I ought to watch it already," I sat down the other day to watch "The Hound of the Baskervilles," which I'm pretty sure was the only Basil Rathbone/Nigel Bruce Sherlock Holmes flick I had never seen.
Some of the Holmes flicks are ubiquitous, but others, like this one, are rarely on the tube anymore, and since Netflix long ago exiled the DVD to its version of the Moors (also known as the dreaded "SAVE" status in my queue), I was thankful TCM aired it as part of its Sherlock festival last Christmastime. Uh...so thankful I waited till Halloween to watch it.
I like this series, but I must say the entries all blur together. For some reason, I forget most of the particulars within hours after watching one, so for me, these atmospheric movies make good late-night viewing. I sort of drift in and out mentally and just kind of take them in rather than fully engaging with them.
"Baskervilles" is considered one of the finest in the series, and I won't argue that, but as a first-time viewer, I must register a slight complaint: Holmes is hardly in the blamed thing! Nothing against our dear Watson, but a little more of the big guy would be nice. Apparently this was the first Rathbone picture, and nobody really knew quite what they had yet.
The other thing that jumped out at me was the final line of dialogue, Holmes telling Watson, "Oh, Watson, the needle!" Now, as I said, these films often put me in a dreamlike state, so I was skeptical I really heard that. But sure enough, that's the line, and no less an authority than Leonard Maltin even cites it in his movie guide and links it to Holmes' cocaine use (though the guide entry inserts the word "quick" for "Oh").
Is this the most notable movie of the classic Hollywood era to end with a blatant drug reference? I don't recall Bogart telling Claude Rains, "I think this is the beginning of a beautiful friendship. Now let's go do a few lines." Nor do I remember Carl Denham asserting at the end of King Kong, "It wasn't the airplanes; it was that speedball concoction that killed the beast."
Thursday, October 28, 2010
Wednesday, October 27, 2010
Hey, AMC, can we "demand" more of this?
There is some cool stuff on AMC (formerly American Movie Classics, now more commonly known as %$#& in film lovers' circles) right now, but the catch is that it ain't on the actual channel. No, it's in the On Demand section as part of the "Fearfest" theme for October. I was hoping there would be more than 5 old-school zombie movies available throughout the month*, but at least these ones are there, and they ARE old, uncut, and commercial-free. There are a few spots promoting the new "Walking Dead" series, but they are before and after the movie.
You can see how this is a departure for the modern AMC.
The other day, I watched 1959's "Teenage Zombie," a B-movie that is cheap, poorly made, not particularly well acted, and, at least in this print, looks like AMC stuffed it in the back pocket of its blue jeans and forgot it was there when it threw the pair into the washing machine.
In other words, this is EXACTLY the kind of thing we need more of on AMC!
I'd love to see B-movies on the channel again, not exiled to the website or to 4:45 AM screenings in the middle of the week, but I do appreciate the On Demand thing. To be truthful, "Teenage Zombies" isn't a great genre movie, and it doesn't even provide a lot of "so bad it's good" moments--in fact, it's kind of dull in spots--but it's the kind of crap I like to see every now and then.
The film opens with great promise, giving us a bunch of goofy "teenagers" acting like adults thought teenagers acted like in 1959, but it doesn't really deliver on the zombie action. It's more like Teenagers Held Prisoner with the Goal of Eventually Turning Them into Zombies. However, there is some fun here if you're in the right mood. The plot has real potential, with a female mad scientist--her gender in itself offering a nice change of pace--planning to inject the kids, then EVERYONE, with a nerve gas that will essentially turn them into zombies. While the screenplay doesn't quite live up to that cool premise, it does manage to cram in spies, a gorilla, and what I consider a pretty cool twist at a pivotal moment.
I'm not going into a lot of detail, but the movie itself isn't the thing, but rather the fact that AMC has my expectations so low that it can give fans a real treat with a simple seasonal offering like this and the other 4 flicks on demand right now. AMC didn't exactly dig too deep for Bela Lugosi's "White Zombie" or Vincent Price's "The Last Man on Earth," but they're free. "King of the Zombies" always deserves a chance to be seen, and while 1936's "Revolt of Zombies" is no classic, either, I'm just glad to see a movie from 1936 associated with AMC.
You can find "Teenage Zombies" all over the Internet, but it's nice to see it on TV, even if it's not conventional TV. I can only hope that AMC will serve up a big Turkeyfest for November and unleash some of the B-movies it streams on its website.
*This is what FIOS-TV has, anyway. There's a lot more at AMC's website, so maybe your cable provider has more in its On Demand section.
You can see how this is a departure for the modern AMC.
The other day, I watched 1959's "Teenage Zombie," a B-movie that is cheap, poorly made, not particularly well acted, and, at least in this print, looks like AMC stuffed it in the back pocket of its blue jeans and forgot it was there when it threw the pair into the washing machine.
In other words, this is EXACTLY the kind of thing we need more of on AMC!
I'd love to see B-movies on the channel again, not exiled to the website or to 4:45 AM screenings in the middle of the week, but I do appreciate the On Demand thing. To be truthful, "Teenage Zombies" isn't a great genre movie, and it doesn't even provide a lot of "so bad it's good" moments--in fact, it's kind of dull in spots--but it's the kind of crap I like to see every now and then.
The film opens with great promise, giving us a bunch of goofy "teenagers" acting like adults thought teenagers acted like in 1959, but it doesn't really deliver on the zombie action. It's more like Teenagers Held Prisoner with the Goal of Eventually Turning Them into Zombies. However, there is some fun here if you're in the right mood. The plot has real potential, with a female mad scientist--her gender in itself offering a nice change of pace--planning to inject the kids, then EVERYONE, with a nerve gas that will essentially turn them into zombies. While the screenplay doesn't quite live up to that cool premise, it does manage to cram in spies, a gorilla, and what I consider a pretty cool twist at a pivotal moment.
I'm not going into a lot of detail, but the movie itself isn't the thing, but rather the fact that AMC has my expectations so low that it can give fans a real treat with a simple seasonal offering like this and the other 4 flicks on demand right now. AMC didn't exactly dig too deep for Bela Lugosi's "White Zombie" or Vincent Price's "The Last Man on Earth," but they're free. "King of the Zombies" always deserves a chance to be seen, and while 1936's "Revolt of Zombies" is no classic, either, I'm just glad to see a movie from 1936 associated with AMC.
You can find "Teenage Zombies" all over the Internet, but it's nice to see it on TV, even if it's not conventional TV. I can only hope that AMC will serve up a big Turkeyfest for November and unleash some of the B-movies it streams on its website.
*This is what FIOS-TV has, anyway. There's a lot more at AMC's website, so maybe your cable provider has more in its On Demand section.
Tuesday, October 26, 2010
Fun with TV Listings
Sometimes reading the on-screen programming guide is more than just a way to get info; it can also be a source of entertainment. Well, at least it can for simpleminded folk like myself.
Each weekday, my listings, not having specific episode info, describe "Quincy" with this generic series summary:
Each weekday, my listings, not having specific episode info, describe "Quincy" with this generic series summary:
Then there's this description of The Greatest Cable Channel Known to Mankind's screening of "The Babe Ruth Story" later today:
"A misunderstood oaf becomes one of the greatest men to ever play professional baseball."
OK, so the Babe was a bit oafish, but should that be the lead when you're talking about the Bambino? Even considering William Bendix plays him in the movie, "oaf" is a little negative. Maybe "lug" would be appropriate. All I know is I read that description and busted out laughing because it sounded like some guy walked out of the forest with a giant club he gnawed out of an oak tree, lumbered over to a baseball diamond, and started hacking away at random pitches while onlookers debated whether to just admire his power or call the police.
Or maybe I'm reading too much into it. But, hey, I like those TV listings sometimes.
Oh, yeah, Baby Names Bible? Well...same to you!
As Mrs. Shark and I prepare for our second "blessed event," we are considering various baby names, and since nothing mutually agreeable jumped out at us right away (Yes, we ruled out "Jaws," "Great White," and "Bruce"), we picked up "The Baby Names Bible" by Pamela Redmond Satran and Linda Rosenkrantz.
I'm flipping through the boys' names when I get the bright idea to look up my own handle. That's when I got a brutal reminder of how snide these authors can be. These ladies have the nerve to call Richard a "far from stylish old Norman name, with a rich royal history, still clinging to the Top 100."
Far from stylish? Well, at least they got the "rich royal history" in there. I prefer to think of it as a solid presence in any Top 100. But they continue: "All the possible nicknames--Richie, Ricky, and especially Dick--are so over."
I beg your pardon? I'm not going to defend the use of the nickname "Dick" in modern society, but I happen to find "Rick" a particuarly appealing name, thank you very much. Not so the authors, who claim it was "last cool when Bogie roamed Casablanca."
Even Ricky, they assert, is "gone with Richard and Rick."
I appreciate the no-holds-barred approach this book takes in warning parents away from names they feel are passe or too far out there. But they go way too far here!
After all, "Baby Names Bible" is hardly the trendiest book title out there, ladies. Couldn't you have gone with "Manual" or "Guide" or something a little more, I don't know...stylish?
I'm flipping through the boys' names when I get the bright idea to look up my own handle. That's when I got a brutal reminder of how snide these authors can be. These ladies have the nerve to call Richard a "far from stylish old Norman name, with a rich royal history, still clinging to the Top 100."
Far from stylish? Well, at least they got the "rich royal history" in there. I prefer to think of it as a solid presence in any Top 100. But they continue: "All the possible nicknames--Richie, Ricky, and especially Dick--are so over."
I beg your pardon? I'm not going to defend the use of the nickname "Dick" in modern society, but I happen to find "Rick" a particuarly appealing name, thank you very much. Not so the authors, who claim it was "last cool when Bogie roamed Casablanca."
Even Ricky, they assert, is "gone with Richard and Rick."
I appreciate the no-holds-barred approach this book takes in warning parents away from names they feel are passe or too far out there. But they go way too far here!
After all, "Baby Names Bible" is hardly the trendiest book title out there, ladies. Couldn't you have gone with "Manual" or "Guide" or something a little more, I don't know...stylish?
Sunday, October 24, 2010
Brooks on Books: Reggie Jackson: The Life and Thunderous Career of Baseball's Mr. October
There is kind of a potential problem with this book. First, let me say it's a great read, and the fascinating character that is Reggie Jackson always makes an intriguing subject. Perry covers the big issues and explores the contradictions and complications that are as much a part of the slugger as his massive home runs and famous "Mr. October" moniker.
Perry opens with an exciting account of the 1977 World Series game 6 in which Jackson belted 3 homers on 3 consecutive pitches. It's a gripping section, richly detailed with amazing insights into what Jackson himself was thinking as he experienced that awesome night. Impressed, I assumed Jackson cooperated heavily or at least submitted to some long interviews, and I flipped to the back to determine the extent of the slugger's involvement.
Here's the extent of the slugger's involvement: Nil. Reggie declined invitations to participate in this project. Problem is, Perry, as he admits in an author's note at the end of the book, goes beyond just perusing secondary sources and interviewing associates to get into Jackson's head. He puts himself into Jackson's head, based on his research, to produce what he feels confident are accurate descriptions of the star's thoughts.
Now, I will say that Perry does a good job throughout the text of explaining his theories on Jackson's frame of mind, and also this kind of projection lessens as the book goes on. He assures us that all "quotes and statements of fact are sourced and verified." However, Perry is still doing a lot of armchair psychoanalysis on issues like Reggie's conflicting attitudes towards race, and he may go far beyond what some readers are willing to accept.
If you're willing to accept this aspect of the book, you'll enjoy a solid account of a remarkable career, particularly the wild and successful year with the A's dynasty and the Yankees machine. There is enough detail of specific games without bogging down the narrative, and the highs and lows are well covered. One thing reading this book makes you want to do is go get biographies of colorful owners Charlie Finley and George Steinbrenner. I want to make special mention of how this bio reminds us what a turd Steinbrenner could be. Many of us decided to kind of look the other way when he passed away this year, perhaps rightfully so, but, man, the dude was capable of some petty, despicable actions, like leaking blatant lies to the media to discredit his enemies (such as on/off enemy Jackson).
I like how Perry is willing to explore the myths and legends attached to Mr. October's persona and evaluate their veracity. I wish Perry went a little deeper sometimes--for example, in Jackson's stay in Oakland, he was quoted as making some controversial comments regarding amphetamine use, comments he later disavowed, and the author bailed him out by accepting blame. Is that poor sportswriter still around? Perry interviews a lot of writers for this book, and in fact seems to rely on them heavily, but this story just kind of sits there. It seems clear that the guy fell on his sword to help out Jackson, but we don't get much beyond the surface.
Another quibble I have is the lack of material on Jackson's post-Yankees and especially his post-baseball career. Reggie is still a visible public figure, and I'd like to know more about his life after leaving the game. And one could question the definitiveness of any Jackson biography that fails to delve into his classic guest shot on "The Jeffersons" when George botched an easy grab of a home run ball and humiliated himself on television.
Still, Perry does his job here, crafting an entertaining account of a memorable life. It may not be the single definitive word on Mr. October, but it's a fine place to start for novices and a solid additional read for hardcore fans who have already consumed a lot of info on those legendary A's and Yankees teams.
Perry opens with an exciting account of the 1977 World Series game 6 in which Jackson belted 3 homers on 3 consecutive pitches. It's a gripping section, richly detailed with amazing insights into what Jackson himself was thinking as he experienced that awesome night. Impressed, I assumed Jackson cooperated heavily or at least submitted to some long interviews, and I flipped to the back to determine the extent of the slugger's involvement.
Here's the extent of the slugger's involvement: Nil. Reggie declined invitations to participate in this project. Problem is, Perry, as he admits in an author's note at the end of the book, goes beyond just perusing secondary sources and interviewing associates to get into Jackson's head. He puts himself into Jackson's head, based on his research, to produce what he feels confident are accurate descriptions of the star's thoughts.
Now, I will say that Perry does a good job throughout the text of explaining his theories on Jackson's frame of mind, and also this kind of projection lessens as the book goes on. He assures us that all "quotes and statements of fact are sourced and verified." However, Perry is still doing a lot of armchair psychoanalysis on issues like Reggie's conflicting attitudes towards race, and he may go far beyond what some readers are willing to accept.
If you're willing to accept this aspect of the book, you'll enjoy a solid account of a remarkable career, particularly the wild and successful year with the A's dynasty and the Yankees machine. There is enough detail of specific games without bogging down the narrative, and the highs and lows are well covered. One thing reading this book makes you want to do is go get biographies of colorful owners Charlie Finley and George Steinbrenner. I want to make special mention of how this bio reminds us what a turd Steinbrenner could be. Many of us decided to kind of look the other way when he passed away this year, perhaps rightfully so, but, man, the dude was capable of some petty, despicable actions, like leaking blatant lies to the media to discredit his enemies (such as on/off enemy Jackson).
I like how Perry is willing to explore the myths and legends attached to Mr. October's persona and evaluate their veracity. I wish Perry went a little deeper sometimes--for example, in Jackson's stay in Oakland, he was quoted as making some controversial comments regarding amphetamine use, comments he later disavowed, and the author bailed him out by accepting blame. Is that poor sportswriter still around? Perry interviews a lot of writers for this book, and in fact seems to rely on them heavily, but this story just kind of sits there. It seems clear that the guy fell on his sword to help out Jackson, but we don't get much beyond the surface.
Another quibble I have is the lack of material on Jackson's post-Yankees and especially his post-baseball career. Reggie is still a visible public figure, and I'd like to know more about his life after leaving the game. And one could question the definitiveness of any Jackson biography that fails to delve into his classic guest shot on "The Jeffersons" when George botched an easy grab of a home run ball and humiliated himself on television.
Still, Perry does his job here, crafting an entertaining account of a memorable life. It may not be the single definitive word on Mr. October, but it's a fine place to start for novices and a solid additional read for hardcore fans who have already consumed a lot of info on those legendary A's and Yankees teams.
Thursday, October 21, 2010
Antenna TV looks like a winner
The cynic in me wants to say, "Enjoy this while it lasts because it'll take about 3 weeks for it to totally change and get rid of the old stuff," but classic TV lovers need to head over to Sitcoms Online pronto because Pavan has posted the launch schedule for Tribune Media's digital programming service, Antenna TV, which debuts in January.
Seriously, go there yourself, but let me just say this: Weekdays at 1:00 P.M., two episodes of "Burns and Allen!" Then "Hazel!" And the freakin' "Farmer's Daughter!" "Father Knows Best!" Even our beloved RTV isn't this committed to black and white, which is why I'm afraid this lineup will be scrapped by February in favor of more modern fare like "King of Queens." But in the meantime, I'll be there, assuming FIOS doesn't take forever to add it as it did RTV. Looks like I won't be getting caught up on my backlog of DVR'ed movies in January, either...
Seriously, go there yourself, but let me just say this: Weekdays at 1:00 P.M., two episodes of "Burns and Allen!" Then "Hazel!" And the freakin' "Farmer's Daughter!" "Father Knows Best!" Even our beloved RTV isn't this committed to black and white, which is why I'm afraid this lineup will be scrapped by February in favor of more modern fare like "King of Queens." But in the meantime, I'll be there, assuming FIOS doesn't take forever to add it as it did RTV. Looks like I won't be getting caught up on my backlog of DVR'ed movies in January, either...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
