Sibling Cinema

Reviews of movies and various other nonsense.

[siblingcinema]

Too Cool for Film School by Too Cool for Film School on iTunes

Download past episodes or subscribe to future episodes of Too Cool for Film School by Too Cool for Film School for free.

I guess two years off is long enough, right? 

INTRODUCING: TOO COOL FOR FILM SCHOOL A new podcast from the creators of Sibling Cinema and AudioJump. On Too Cool for Film School two film professionals and a man with many opinions talk about film and storytelling. They may not have formal film education, but they make up for it with real world experience, enthusiasm, and loudness.

Andrew is heading up the podcast with two of his hollywood friends but expect all the siblings to be in rotation on various episodes. 

Episode 1 discusses Rogue One, Star Wars, and the shape of stories. IT should be available on all podcasting platforms but let us know if there’s one you use that doesn’t have it and let us know what you think!

[siblingcinema]

We're working on something Top Secret. Keep an eye out.

[siblingcinema]

Amy Schumer, I love you.

FRIENDS! I’ve started writing for another film website (I’m not a traitor, I swear). I will still work on pieces for this blog, but it won’t be my only outlet. Below is my Trainwreck review, originally published on FilmTakeout.com.

Trainwreck

Overall Score: 95%

A rom-com that is anything but a trainwreck.

Currently, this is Amy Schumer’s world and we are all just living in it. Star, writer, director, and producer of the wildly popular Inside Amy Schumer, she is currently owning Hollywood with her unabashedly feminist point of view. Unafraid to talk about her body, her sexual escapades, and the way women behave makes her refreshing in a world of reality tv gone mad. Schumer is now taking her writing and acting to the big screen in Trainwreck. THANK GOODNESS.

Surprise, surprise – the lead character’s name is Amy. From a young age, Amy has been told by her wandering father (played brilliantly by Colin Quinn) that “monogamy isn’t realistic”. Being a daddy’s girl, she takes this to heart and lives a life that is free from romantic ties. Things become a bit more complicated when she meets a sports doctor Aaron (the incredibly charming Bill Hader) who happens to be BFFs with LeBron James.

While the film follows many of the common romantic comedy plot structures, Schumer is able to breathe life into an increasingly stale genre. Surprising characters pop up throughout the film that make it enjoyable from beginning to end. Where else are we going to see a closeted John Cena or a tan Tilda Swinton? The answer is nowhere. There are so many laugh out loud moments that my sides hurt by the end of the movie. But what is even more surprising are the touching moments littered throughout the film. Amy’s relationship with her sister Kim (Brie Larson) and father play a significant part of the story and I found myself with tears in my eyes a few times.

Bill Hader and Amy Schumer have wonderful chemistry with each other. Hader plays Aaron so sincerely; he’s just a nice guy who hasn’t had the best luck with women. He’s smart and kind and it’s easy to see how any girl could fall for him. Naturally, baggage is a part of any relationship and seeing Aaron and Amy work through their own issues gently prods the audience to examine their own. The film easily moves between humor and romance without feeling forced. Even when the typical rom-com montage happens, Amy’s constant snarky narration helps to keep the film from becoming too sappy.

The best part of the film for me personally was LeBron James playing LeBron James. Now, I’m not a sports person, especially not basketball. But Trainwreck made me a fan of this tall, beautiful, funny man. I love when people play caricature versions of themselves and this is maybe a new favorite performance. As a Downton Abbey obsessed, romantic advice giving BFF, James steals every scene he is in. His deadpan style matches Amy’s quirkiness perfectly and the scenes of them together are my favorite.

At the helm of Amy’s sharp, hysterical, and surprisingly poignant writing is Judd Apatow, director of comedies like The 40 Year Old Virgin and Knocked Up. This is my new dream team. Both seem to have a love of dirty jokes – these are endless. But the beauty of this team is that both members want to convey an actual message through the comedy. Apatow has matured in his directing and it is noticeable here. With age comes some understanding and Apatow is no exception. Trainwreck is not just about making us laugh, although you will do plenty of that. It’s about learning to love the broken people in our lives, including (and maybe especially) ourselves. The important thing is that we have to try. Never working on ourselves to be better is easier, but it’s no way to live.”

Directed By: Judd Apatow

Written By: Amy Schumer

Starring: Amy Schumer, Bill Hader, Colin Quinn, Brie Larson, LeBron James

Running Time: 2 hours, 2 minutes

Release Date: July 17, 2015

[wienerlicious]

Okay but can we talk about exactly how bullshit Quicksilver’s death was in Avengers: Age of Ultron?

Earlier in the film, Clint fires a handgun at the glass Pietro is standing on.  We see it at the speed Pietro does, which is slow as fuck.  Clint’s sidearm is a Heckler & Koch P30, whose standard muzzle velocity (the speed at which the bullet exits the gun) is 1181 feet/second.  This is a gif of the exact speed we see in the movie, which is what it looks like to Quicksilver:

Later in the film, Pietro dies, taking the bullets that Ultron had fired at Clint and the civillian child.  Ultron was firing the minigun mounted on the Quinjet, which is a GE GAU-17/A.  Its standard muzzle velocity is 2800 feet/second.  That is 237% the speed of Clint’s handgun.  Here is exactly what that speed would look like to Quicksilver:

And not only does he somehow get shot by bullets going this slow, he gets absolutely fucking riddled.  Which is fucking bullshit.  Here’s what veraamber has to say on that:

The General Electric GAU-17/A minigun fires 4,000 bullets per minute, according to this page. That works out to about 67 bullets per second, or about 15 milliseconds between bullets (which is possible because it’s a Gatling gun and has six barrels). That’s pretty fucking fast, but here’s the thing: like Nat points out, the muzzle velocity of the GAU-17/A is about 2,800 feet per second.

So when a bullet leaves the gun, there’s a full 15 ms before the next bullet does. In those 15 ms, the first bullet travels 42 feet. (There’s multiple ways you can figure this out, and here’s how I found it: divide 2,800 ft/s by 67 bullets/s.)

Let me fucking repeat that: There’s initially 42 feet between each of the bullets. This distance probably does decrease slightly (the longer a bullet’s in the air, the more it slows down due to air resistance, but I am not calculating that shit). But it doesn’t decrease enough to justify getting hit with six bullets. Look! You can count them! There’s at least six.

(I’ve checked all my math, so I don’t think any of it is incorrect, but let me know if it is, or if I misunderstood some of the information from the page I linked to.)

The amount of time it takes for 6 bullets to fire from the GAU-17/A is 90 damn milliseconds. To put that in perspective, if you disregard air resistance, there’s about 250 feet between the first bullet and the sixth. So, basically: this is complete bullshit.

[siblingcinema]

I’m sorry but I hate things like this that totally sidestep the narrative. I’m not saying quicksilver HAS to die as a plot device (although he totally did and Whedon winkingly swapping out Hawkeye’s inevitable impending doom for Quicksilver at the last second only to LITERALLY EXPRESS OUR WTFness of the situation is one of my favorite things in AOU). I’m talking about the fact that Quicksilver didn’t ‘accidentally’ get shot. He didn’t forget to be fast, he sacrificed himself. He threw that car in front of Hawkeye and the kid knowing full well he couldn’t make it in time to save himself. It’s not a plot hole is a freaking PILLAR OF HIS CHARACTER GROWTH. Argue the numbers all you want but its basic misunderstandings of narrative and plot devices like this that are causing so many people to go all torches and pitchforks on what I thought was a fantastic movie.

[siblingcinema]

The Best Movies Are On Television

As Angela wrote a few months ago, some of the best writing you'll find in the entertainment world is on television right now, most specifically on cable television.  What struck me in the last couple of days though is that the shows that are acclaimed today might be the reason that there is such a shortfall in great dramatic movies in recent years.  The so called “golden age of television” could be a result of ideas that would have made great films in years past.

The reason this idea got stuck in my head was the most recent episode of Game of Thrones, entitled “Hardhome.”  I won't go into the minutia of the episode because it won’t make sense if you don’t watch the show, but it was an incredibly well-acted and well executed episode that would have made a great section of a big budget movie.  

The books the show Game of Thrones is based on, known as A Song of Ice and Fire, would have been the perfect platform for a big budget movie franchise similar to The Lord of the Rings or Harry Potter.  But a story so rich and full of interesting characters (and frustratingly still incomplete) would have probably received a hatchet job in trying to adapt the scale of the books into a presentable two hour and fifteen minute movie.  Even if the lamentable trend of splitting books into multiple films were used, it would still be very difficult to fit the story in such a brief period of time.

Game of Thrones has been consistently one of the best made shows on television and it’s been a favorite of mine since the day it premiered.  I think that David Benioff and D.B. Weiss could have adapted the books into good movies, but instead they made them into a great TV series.  While the show hasn't been without controversy, I would put it up against anything else on television for the quality and consistency of the show.

Another show that would probably have made a great film is the severely underappreciated Orphan Black.  The story of a group of clones that discover each other and the secret organization Dyad which was responsible for their creation.  It’s a great sci-fi series, but it would have also made a great sci-fi thriller film.  It has all of the makings of a great film, but the development of the story and the different clones personalities is something that has blossomed as the show has gone on.  (Side note: TATIANA MASLANY DESERVES ALL THE EMMYS!)

One of the things we lament here frequently is that there is a stunning lack of creativity in movies (and I would argue in most network television, but that’s a different post), but maybe those who would make the films we want to see are unwilling to make the compromises they need to get films made.  Or maybe writers are seeking out television because it’s easier to discover a character or a story over time than to try to develop an idea completely like you would for a film.

There is a lot of groupthink and lack of creativity from movie studios.  And, to be honest, television is far from a perfect medium.  But I think a lot of the creative juices that have driven the movie side of the entertainment business are being used in television right now.  While that may mean that you have to scratch your head frequently when trying to find a movie to watch on Saturday night (I’m looking at you Aloha, you giant turd that is another stain on Cameron Crowe’s reputation), it does mean that come Sunday night there’s probably something that you can’t wait to see.

-Phil

[siblingcinema]

Or maybe the problem is that Hollywood doesn't see older woman as viable options for dating older men?

That’s what I think, Vulture.

-Angela

[siblingcinema]

The World Needs Star Trek

As someone who spent a fair portion of our 365 Days of Movies project covering the Marvel Cinematic Universe it truly pains me to say this but… I’m kind of over comic book movies: at least for the moment. As much as I heart Marvel and as much as I hate DC, I’m just… I’m good on the comic book front for a while. I’m a bit shell shocked from these larger than life struggles watching characters that are essentially gods use their magical powers and chemically enhanced talents to save space time forever while straining to save their personal relationships in the B line.

It’s fun, it’s been brilliantly executed (at least by Marvel), and I want more of it, just… not yet. I love the grounded realism and the honest human relationships that the MCU has built their success around but sometimes I want some subtlety, some nuance, and most of all some optimism.

The world of comic book movies has been a dark and serious place over the last decade and for the most part, that’s a great thing. Grounding such fantastical characters such as Thor, Loki, and even Superman in a realistic modern world with concrete motivations, abilities, and limitations is exactly what needed to happen for the medium to thrive in our present day. But in a world where death can rain from the sky at any time be it aliens through wormholes or planes through buildings, even the smartest, snarkiest, and bravest of SUPERHEROES can’t avoid a healthy dose of PTSD. So where does that leave US? Where can we turn when the ominous pressure of looming apocalypse gets to be too much? I believe the answer is the same now as it has been for the last 50 years.

The world needs Star Trek.

Now to be clear, I don’t mean JJ Abram’s masterful re-envisioning of the Star Trek Cinematic Universe, if you will. Although I love it and have literally received permission from my wife to name our first-born son Abram, the Star Trek television series have always dug deeper and swung harder than their big screen counterparts.  While most casual viewers will remember Star Trek for it’s wild costumes and seemingly endless configurations of almost human foreheads, real Trekkies/Trekkers appreciate it for its deep geopolitical roots, it’s philosophical quandaries, and it’s glimpse into an ideal human future where the best weapons are our words, our integrity, and diplomacy. Maybe with a photon torpedo or two for flavor.

Trek has always been a home for morality, exceptionalism, innovation, and humanity. It asks questions that don’t always have cut and dry answers. As much as I love seeing city destroying robots take a hammer to the face, sometimes I want to see Captain Picard trying to explain to Data why terrorism is effective, and sometimes it’s the only choice, but that still doesn’t necessarily make it right. I know we still have seven whole seasons of TNG to get into that stuff but for one, I’ve seen them all, and secondly, we live in a very different world than we did twenty years ago.

We have new problems and new questions. We have technology (thanks largely to Trek in the first place) whose ultimate ramifications we may not fully understand. Of course there are elements of these issues in modern storytelling. Black Mirror for one does a jaw-dropping job of taking our current cultural and technological obsessions to their logical futuristic extremes. But coming from the mind of biting British satirist Charlie Booker leaves the entire series with a decidedly pessimistic tilt. Game of Thrones has a huge expanse of characters and settings but their politics are largely driven by scandal and flashy reveals. House of Cards is the closest we come to the geo-political aspects but it centers entirely around the sociopathic power grab of a literal murderer. In a world run by Frank Underwoods, we need a Captain Picard.

We need something to help us explore these issues in a way that doesn’t just pretend we can pound these problems into the ground. We need to see people ask questions, think them through, collaborate, and innovate their way to the kind of solutions that Trek always makes us believe are possible. We need a new signpost to the best possible versions of ourselves and that’s what Trek has always been. I need Star Trek. The world needs Star Trek.

[siblingcinema]

Book or Movie

So everyone knows as good as movies are they almost never live up to the books they're based on. Whether its a matter of taste, commercialism, or just limitations of the format its a hard bar to reach. What are some of the best examples of this, in your opinion? And on the other hand what are the movies that do the best job nailing or even bettering the books?

[siblingcinema]

Five Years!

Well friends, we have done a fantastically horrible job of posting on our blog the last few months. We have a few plans in the works for some new posts, so hopefully we’ll get ourselves back in the swing of things.That being said, today marks the 5 year anniversary of our little blog. It’s been quite a journey for us as siblings, writers, and film lovers. We hope to keep things going for quite a while and hope you’ll stay along for the journey!

-Angela

[siblingcinema]

An Oscar Recap

Last night was the Super Bowl for movie fans, the 87th annual Academy Awards.  It's the end of awards season and the biggest and most prestigious award show of them all.  While the Golden Globes may be the drunk uncle of awards shows, the Oscars are more like your classy (and somewhat unintentionally racist) grandfather.

I was excited for this year's show because award show host extraordinaire Neil Patrick Harris was the host.  Fans of NPH were not disappointed right off the bat when he opened with a musical number written by Frozen songwriters Robert Lopez and Kristen Anderson-Lopez and help from Anna Kendrick, Jack Black, and a drunken Benedict Cumberbatch.  Harris is a natural at hosting and is the kind of multi-talented song and dance man that usually shines at the Oscars.  I thought he did a wonderful job, but after checking Twitter and other recaps opinions on his performance are very mixed.  The only thing that I thought fell a little flat was the running gag about the locked box with his Oscar predictions. Harris did have the line of the night when commenting off the cuff that it took a lot of balls for documentary filmmaker Dana Perry to wear this dress:

(Hint: Perry is not the one in the red dress.)

As much as I enjoy and look forward to the Academy Awards every year, I find that I strongly disagree with their choices more and more often.  This year, the movie Selma was quite publicly snubbed with only two nominations and both lead actor David Ayelowo and director Ava Duvernay failing to get any recognition by the Academy for their work.  Selma is not a perfect film, but it's a powerful one with a masterful performance by Ayelowo.  So going into the show I was already disappointed.

The major categories went to the expected winners with the only real drama coming in the Best Actor category where the field was pretty even.  There were some fantastic acceptance speeches including J.K. Simmons' plea for children to call (not text or email) their parents and tell them you love them, Graham Moore's admonition to "Stay weird. Stay different.", Common and John Legend's reminder that the struggle depicted in Selma is one that is still continuing, and Patricia Arquette's impassioned and awesome speech about wage inequality which has been a hot topic in Hollywood in the aftermath of the Sony Pictures hacks.

Some of the best highlights were the musical numbers, which is odd since this is a movie awards show.  Tegan and Sara along with The Lonely Island had a huge performance of Everything Is Awesome including appearances by Will Arnett in a Batman costume and Questlove.  On the opposite end of the spectrum, Common and John Legend performed their incredible song Glory from the movie Selma under a recreation of the Edmund Pettis Bridge.  The crowd was in tears after their moving performance and they took home a well deserved Oscar.  Lada Gaga also performed a medley from The Sound of Music commemorating the film's 50th anniversary.  Gaga showed off vocal talent that many people didn't realize she had, and even Julie Andrews was impressed when she came out to present an award immediately after.

The only real drama of the night was the Best Picture category where Boyhood and Birdman were neck and neck going into the evening.  Birdman ended up taking home the Oscar, which made Angela so mad she cut her finger.  I thought Boyhood was a fantastic film that is so dramatically different from anything ever attempted in Hollywood that I would have been very happy if it had won.  (But I will admit that I have not seen Birdman so I can't judge which was better in my opinion, but I hope to watch it some time this week.) 

All in all it was a good night for the Oscars, but the night could have been better.  While the Academy tries to tweak its rules to remain relevant, it's membership is mostly old white dudes and they consistently seem to make bad choices in handing out nominations and awards.  I have long held that Academy voters are too easily swayed by marketing and studio campaigns and not by the quality of the films themselves.  Too often movie fans are left scratching their heads or yelling at their television screens instead of celebrating great movies.

Here's hoping for another great year of movies in 2015 and an even better Oscars next year!

-Phil

[siblingcinema]

And the award should go to...

This Sunday is the Academy Awards aka my favorite day of the year. Not only is a night to celebrate filmmaking excellence, it's a night to watch Neil Patrick Harris be the amazing host we all know he is. (I love you, NPH!)

This year seems to be a close race for many of the categories. I know my choices aren't always the winners, but granted I'm not an old white man which makes up the majority of the Oscar voters. But I do want to go through my personal picks for the major categories and my reasoning behind them.

Best Actor: Benedict Cumberbatch - The Imitation Game

Now, my real winner would be David Oyelowo because no performance was as strong as his in Selma. Alas, the Academy didn't recognize it. Of the nominated performances, I absolutely loved Benedict Cumberbatch as Alan Turing. His performance was a powerful portrayal of a complicated man. Cumberbatch plays the role with such sincerity and subtlety that I was completely enraptured the entire film. It could have been easy for him to play it close to his Sherlock character, but there was a deeper sadness here that made his performance simply stunning.

Best Actress:  Reese Witherspoon - Wild

To be fair, I haven't seen all of the performances of the actress nominated. I have a feeling from what I've read I would probably lean towards Julianne Moore in Still Alice had I seen it. With that being said, I do think Reese Witherspoon gave a solid showing of her talent in Wild. Known for her sweetness, this was a role that seemed outside of her typical wheelhouse. It was nice to see her stretch herself as an actress and give a heartfelt performance about a woman finding herself through drugs, affairs, and ultimately one very long hike.

Best Supporting Actor: Ethan Hawke - Boyhood

I'm 100% biased when it comes to Boyhood. With it's incredibly creative premise and gut-wrenching performances, I'm in love with it all. I've always been a fan of Ethan Hawke even during his bad movie choices. Luckily, whenever he teams up with Richard Linklater, magic happens. Hawke is particularly engaging as a father trying to figure out how to be a good dad after a divorce. He often fails, but he learns from it and grows as a person. Hawke is wonderful in this role and it will probably be my favorite of his for many years to come.

Best Supporting Actress: Patricia Arquette - Boyhood

Easily her best performance to date, Patricia Arquette really anchors Boyhood. Yes, the son is the main character (and he's phenomenal), but without the actions of Arquette the movie would not move forward. Whether it's having bad boyfriends, going back to school, or just trying to deal with the troubles of raising two kids on her own, Arquette brings life and truth to the story. She changes a lot throughout the film and I'm happy to see a role that depicts a real life woman as she changes as she ages.

Best Director: Alejandro González Iñárritu - Birdman

This category is a tough one for me because of my deep love for Boyhood. Despite how unique and compelling Boyhood is, I cannot discredit the amazing directing in Birdman. Filmed to look like one continuous flowing shot, the artistry of the film was stunning. Timing was key and under Iñárritu's direction, it feels flawless. Yes, it's chaotic and manic and strange and makes you feel like you're on drugs, but it's also moving and funny and important.

Best Animated Feature: Big Hero 6

GUYS. This movie was SO FREAKING GOOD. Full of humor, tragedy, awesome female scientists and nerdy male scientists, a super genius kid, and just about the cutest robot since Wall-E, this movie had me from the start. Visually, it's absolutely stunning. Animation has gotten so good that it blows my mind. But it doesn't end with the visuals. With a story that had me tearing up in the theater because I was overcome with emotions, it is a movie that has the ability to convey deep truths. It was perfect.

Best PIcture: Boyhood

Surprise, surprise. Right? Ha. I'm obsessed and I don't care who knows it. I don't often use the word masterpiece when describing films, but I'm not afraid to use it now. Boyhood truly is a masterpiece of cinema history. I have no doubt that film schools will be teaching about this film for the rest of time. It is completely unique and so special. Watching a family change and grow as years pass is not an uncommon story. Boyhood takes it to a new level of authenticity, one that leaves you thinking about your own life. I was moved so deeply even though my own personal experiences have virtually nothing in common. Identity is a huge part of the human experience and watching Mason figure out his own identity speaks to the deepest part of ourselves. Each of us must become our own person and the journey is often difficult, beautiful, strange, and completely our own. No film captures this as well as Boyhood.

So...what do you think? What are your favorite movies of the nominations?

-Angela

[siblingcinema]

Rom-coms 4eva

Happy Valentine’s Day!

I totally get that rom-coms are not for everyone. And there are plenty of REALLY BAD ones out there. Sometimes they’re so terrible that I get legitimately angry (I’m talking about you Something Borrowed - you are the WORST). As a feminist, there is another layer that I find disconcerting about how females are often portrayed in these types of films: shallow, naive, insecure, mean, fickle, not in control of their own mind, or a host of other underdeveloped traits. A lot of times, they end up looking like this:

Luckily, Enchanted turns stereotypes around after spoofing them. Even with the issues of creating unrealistic expectations about romance, poor gender stereotypes, a lot of borderline stalker-type behavior, and a laundry list of cliche things, I can’t help but cozy up this time of year and watch movies about love. Because well…I love love.

The reason the world as a whole pretty much loves rom-coms is because our culture is heavily influenced by the Romantics. Their writings and ideas about love, sex, and relationships has formed the basis of our modern world. We’re told from a young age that finding love is the most important thing we can do. We watch these movies where people fall in love, overcome obstacles, and then end up together.

A film like The Way We Were where a couple’s romantic relationship does not survive the film is much more true to life, although far less applauded than many of its counterparts. A movie where the couple doesn’t end up together makes us mad. “Real life is hard enough, I want to see happily ever after.” I’ve heard that from a number of people. And I get that to an extent. Movies are often used as an escape, to pull us out of our boring, romanceless worlds into a place where the guys are all Ryan Gosling and the girls are Emma Stone.

With all the drawbacks of these types of films, we can also find some moments of shocking realism, heartbreaking sadness, and just plain ridiculousness. That doesn’t sound that far off from most our real life experiences. Most of us have had our hearts broken. It feels pretty safe to say that almost all of us have acted stupid when we have a crush on someone.

Before I feel too cynical, I think rom-coms help us to keep hope. Being a single adult can feel difficult at times and being reminded that people really do fall in love can keep us from getting too depressed. We want to believe that we are capable of being loved and loving people in return. These films can help people who have been together a long time remember what it was like when they first had those experiences and why it’s important to celebrate the relationship that they have.

So, just give in for a little bit. Indulge the sappy part of yourself and enjoy the optimism and hope found in the never-ending supply of romantic comedies. As for me, well, I’m gonna go watch You’ve Got Mail for the 1,000,000th time.

-Angela

[siblingcinema]

It's Called "Show Business" For A Reason

Many casual movie fans don't really understand how movies get made from a business perspective.  I've touched on the thinking of movie studios and executives in my last two posts, but I want to look at a recent example of what makes the business side of making movies (and television series) so complex.

Have you ever read a book (or even a comic) and thought to yourself, "This would be a great movie!"?  One of my personal favorites and the story I have been waiting to see on the screen was the legendary fantasy series known as The Wheel of Time written by Robert Jordan until his death in 2007.  Fellow fantasy author Brandon Sanderson took Jordan's story outline and sample chapters he had been working on and finished the final three books finishing the series in 2013 more than twenty years after the first book in the series (of fourteen books) was published.  It's an amazing and epic story with memorable characters and and a plot so thick with different storylines it makes Game of Thrones look like a children's book.  I started reading the books in high school and I have looked forward to some adventurous movie studio taking on the job of turning the books into films.  And in the era where Game of Thrones is a huge success and other studios are looking for the next big thing to copy a successful show, The Wheel of Times is a great choice.

When a book (or a stage play/musical, life story, magazine article, etc.) is popular enough for movie and television companies to get interested in adapting them, they have to purchase the rights to the source material.  This is typically referred to as buying the "option."  There is no guarantee that the studio will do anything with it, but they pay for the rights and no other studio can develop those stories into films or TV shows without their permission (and probably paying a premium price for the privilege).  Most of these contracts come with an expiration date where the rights revert back to the original author on a given date if the studio doesn't meet it's obligations.  That situation leads us to my reason for writing about this today.

WARNING:  Do not watch the above clip if you value your time and/or sanity.

Fans of The Wheel of Time were surprised to wake up on the morning of February 9th to learn that a TV pilot of the series had aired overnight on the cable channel FXX with no fanfare, advertising, or advance notice of any kind.  The pilot was shot, edited, and "special effects" were added in just three weeks.  The result is, quite simply, a freaking disaster.  The pilot was made by Red Eagle Entertainment without the knowledge or approval of Robert Jordan's wife or estate.  Red Eagle rushed the pilot into production to try to retain the rights to The Wheel of Time which were set to expire on February 11th.  

Complicating things even further is the fact that Red Eagle didn't have the rights to The Wheel of time itself.  Universal holds those rights and Red Eagle's agreement to develop the series was with Universal and not with Jordan's estate.  This is a desperate attempt to keep the rights to a potentially lucrative franchise by a company that is clearly in over its head.  As Vox's Todd VanDerWerff wrote the other day, it's a sad and messy situation.  It's also an example of how complicated it can be to get these projects made.  

Another example is the movie Selma which portrayed the life of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. but the filmmakers didn't have the rights to any of his speeches because they had already been optioned to another studio.  So the screenplay had to write dialog that was similar to the speeches Dr. King actually gave without using any of the actual lines that many remember.

As much as we may, as the consumer, wish to have our favorite books or plays turned into movies with relative speed and good quality, the process of making a film can often be much more complicated.  Plus, the extra time or compromises required to get a film or TV show produced can suck the life out of it as evidenced by the Wheel of Time pilot.  Sometimes projects sit on a shelf for years or the option is sold several times before a film is actually made, as is the case of Into The Woods where the film version took more than 25 years to finally make it to the big screen.

It's helpful to be reminded that while movie and television studios exist to entertain us, many are also huge multi-national corporations where the primary concern is whether a film or television show will be good for business.  What Red Eagle Entertainment tried to do with their awful Wheel of Time TV pilot was obviously a business decision and not a creative one.  But the damage could already be done on that front.  

It's unclear if the rushed pilot even satisfies the terms of the contract and Robert Jordan's widow seems very upset by the process.  If the situation is resolved and the rights return to Jordan's estate, I fear that this bonehead move will mean that fans of the series may end up waiting for much longer for the story of Rand al'Thor and his friends to begin production, if it ever happens.  But as Bob Sugar put it, "It's not 'show friends' it's 'show business.'" 

-Phil

[siblingcinema]

2nd Annual RIPTcademy Awards Posters

All February these awesome designs are available at RIPT Apparel: https://www.riptapparel.com/products/stores/riptcademyposters2015/

[siblingcinema]

TV Shows Are The New Movies

I've been a total slacker as far as writing in the new year. When you write consistently for a year, sometimes you need a little bit of a break before you get back into the swing of things. The time off has been nice and given my mind a chance to recoup. I've thought a lot about what kind of topics I want to explore. One thing that keeps rolling around in my brain is just how amazing television writing has gotten over the last decade.

Now don't get me wrong. There have been shows on television for many years that have had solid writing. Going back in time, we've got M*A*S*H*, I Love Lucy, and The Dick Van Dyke Show. Cheers, Frasier, NewsRadio, and a number of other wonderfully written sitcoms popped up in the 80s and 90s. The 90s also started to showcase good dramatic writing on television. One of my personal favorites from then was the one-season-but-should-have-lasted-longer beautifully written and acted show My So-Called Life.

For a long time, the most skilled writers worked in film. As time has gone on, the film industry has gone through some significant changes. Major studios have increasing tunnel vision. They seem only interested in movies that will be blockbusters - mainly franchises, Oscar worthy biopics, or big action movies. It's become much harder for mid-sized films with modest budgets to get made. A lot of writers who would have worked in this arena have made their way over to television.

HBO has created some of the most iconic shows of all time, including The Sopranos, Oz, The Wire, Six Feet Under, Entourage, and Sex in the City. Recently, it's entered into a new golden age with shows like Game of Thrones, Boardwalk Empire, Girls, and the critically acclaimed True Detective. Since there are no television standards they have to maintain as a paid subscription channel, a diversity of writing on television has exploded that would most likely have been on the big screen in years past. The writing is so strong that sometimes it's hard for me to watch anything but HBO. HBO not only writes wonderful shows, they've also made some spectacular movies. Those mid-budget films that studios wouldn't invest in become the bread and butter of HBO films. And they're continuing to knock it out of the park.

As HBO's writing continues in strength and creativity, cable television took notice and decided to step up their game.Now, I'm not saying that AMC is the only cable channel this applies to, but they are without a doubt one of the most changed networks in the past ten years. AMC used to be a constant cycle of "American Movie Classics", not really providing new content. It was just a place to watch Top Gun for the millionth time. But AMC took some chances by creating some of the most well-written shows of all time. Mad Men, The Walking Dead, and of course...the best written television show of all time, Breaking Bad.

Breaking Bad changed television. The writing was the best I've ever seen, not just on television, but in all arenas. The last season...I can hardly talk about it because it's so freaking good and I just want to explode with feelings. The writing draws you into this ever-increasingly dark world and wrecks you. It's hard and painful to watch, but good writing does that. It makes you feel deep in your bones. If you can watch all of Breaking Bad and not have all the feels, you're dead on the inside. Having a show that was so dark and so raw be on cable television was a game changer. Writers have become bolder, unafraid to explore new territory and trusting that their audiences are smart enough to really get it. It's been a catalyst for a new generation of television writers.

Even network channels have really stepped up their game. There are a lot amazing shows with sharp writers who make us and laugh and cry and feel every emotion in the span of a show. My favorite favorite favorite sitcom Parks and Recreation is coming to a close after a run of seven seasons of hilarious jokes, heartwarming friendship, and plenty of feminist ranting (hey-yo! Leslie Knope is my hero.). Shows like Parenthood and The Good Wife show that quality drama still exists on network tv. And let's all bow down to the genius of Shonda Rhimes who has created and written some of the most compelling, diverse, and dramatic shows of the past decade.

There will always be movies that we love because they are smart, funny, moving, and well written. But those qualities don't just belong to them anymore. Television is embarking on a new frontier. It's a wide space that allows for so many different stories, writing styles, jokes, speeches, and so much more. And I love every minute of it.

-Angela

[siblingcinema]

Movie Franchises (Part Two): Reboots, Remakes, and Adaptations

I wrote a couple of weeks ago about movie franchises and how they can be awesome if done right or terrible if done wrong.  Today I want to expand on that theme and talk about some other trends that studios have been using to try to cash in.

The first trend is the reboot, which has a spotty track record.  There are some franchises that have been rebooted with much success and critical acclaim.  The ones that jump immediately to mind are The Dark Knight trilogy reboot of the Batman franchise and the J.J. Abrams Star Trek movies.  Both of these reboots took well known and well traveled characters and storylines and breathed new life into them which led to commercial and critical success.  However, there are plenty of reboots that fail to achieve the success of their predecessors, both at the box office and from the critics.  

Things get even more insane when franchises get rebooted multiple times.   The Spiderman franchise  had some success with Tobey Maguire as Peter Parker and then the reboot did pretty well with Andrew Garfield.  Now there are rumors that Spiderman will be rebooted yet again with another new star.  James Bond has been re-cast so many times I've lost count and, other than the recent Daniel Craig movies, it hasn't been a boost to the quality or success of the franchise.  Hollywood will try to squeeze blood out of a stone and every last dollar out of a potentially lucrative franchise.  

The second trend in Hollywood is the remake, which is slightly different than the reboot.  A remake is when a well-known film is copied as the framework for another film but many of the settings, characters, and plot points are changed or updated.  A recent example of this is the remake of the 1982 classic musical movie Annie, which was (quite unnecessarily) remade in 2014 with a new plot, new characters, and several new songs.  

Remakes can sometimes be great.  Ocean's Eleven is a remake of a "rat pack" film from the 60's and it's one that I enjoy considerably.  The Coen Brothers remake of True Grit is another that I thought was well done and added a new dimension to the John Wayne starring original.  But the remakes that match or exceed the original films they are based on are rare, and too often they lose what made the original films so special and loved.

The last trend I'm going to talk about today, and the one that I really can't stand, is the trend towards increasingly absurd adaptations.  It's not uncommon for TV shows to be adapted to films, and sometimes with a lot of success.  Batman was a television show first.  21 Jump Street was a television show first.  There would have been no Serenity without the television show Firefly.  And of course the wonderful films of the Monty Python comedy troupe would not have been possible without the television success of Monty Python's Flying Circus.  There have been plenty of duds too, but it's not the worst thing that Hollywood has done.

But the trend is spiraling downward recently with more and more absurd adaptations.  Disney turned a relatively popular theme park attraction into the Pirates of the Caribbean franchise, which is sadly still continuing long past it's expiration date.  Video games have been adapted into several films, none of which were as good or as popular as the games they were based on.  In recent years, sanity has been stretched to the point where board games like Battleship, Monopoly, Candy Land, and the Ouija Board have been adapted into films or are at some point in the development process.  I'm just waiting on movie studios to adapt crappy television commercials or cell phone games into movies.  It's going to happen.

It's hard to generalize and say that reboots, remakes, and adaptations are a good thing or a bad thing.  When done with care and craft they can be great to watch and successful financially.  However, as I said in part one of my thoughts on movie franchises, I think that the lack of creativity and over-reliance on proven commodities is one of the reasons that people aren't going to the movies as often.  Plus there is more competition for our time and money with the increased quality of television and online entertainment.  Angela will have more thoughts on that in the next few days.

One of my friends commented that there seems to be a wealth of huge blockbuster franchises and an explosion of low budget independent films but the "middle class" movies are getting squeezed out.  I don't have exact figures, but my initial reaction is that he's on to something.  I know studio executives want to try to minimize risk and maximize profits by creating films that can be cross-marketed and have a wealth of merchandising opportunities, but the primary reason for making a movie should be because it's a good movie.  When movie studios figure that out, maybe they will see the business grow.

[cinemotionpicture]

Behind the scenes photos from some of your favorite movies pt. 2

[emcmxciv]

this is probably my most favourite photo set