My Life In Movies Flashes Before My Eyes: The King's Speech, 2010

So, earlier this year, I did an Oscar special on The King's Speech and I feel as if everything I said still stands so it seems redundant to go over it again, so find it here.

But, some thoughts, have you noticed Colin Firth's posture? Also, Colin Firth wants to be on Doctor Who. Why are we wasting time on River Song when Colin Firth wants to be on Doctor Who? It would be awesome. Maybe we could save it for the fiftieth anniversary. Now, what if there was some way to get him and the Tenth Doctor in the same thing? I could be happy for a month off that.


Obviously, I meant something else. Try to put Catherine Tate in it. Preferably written by Richard Curtis. Or I could write it, either way, really.

My Life In Movies Flashes Before My Eyes: Love Actually, 2003

You know how you see a movie with a lot of different storylines and at the end it just ends up being a pile of crap? This is the time that did not happen thanks to the skill of writer-director Richard Curtis. Love Actually is something of an epic romantic comedy, it has a stellar cast and more plotlines than I will even be able to go into here. It's structured to where you have just enough story for each plot: a beginning, a middle and an end. Let's go over some of the cast, representing most of the British Isles: Hugh Grant, Emma Thompson, Alan Rickman, Liam Neeson, Bill Nighy, Thomas Sangster, Rowan Atkinson, Laura Linney, Chiwetel Ejiofor, Keira Knightley, Kris Marshall, Colin Firth... The list goes on and on and on. We start the film out with this thesis...



Six weeks before Christmas in London, we meet our characters all in the midst of relationships of their own. Hugh Grant plays the new Prime Minister who finds himself attracted to his office assistant, Natalie, played by Martine McCutcheon. This is complicated by the arrival of Billy Bob Thornton doing just about the best American president ever written by a British writer. Now, this is a tangent, but every time I watch Doctor Who and they have an American president come on, it's just not right. I'm not saying you can't write the American president like an asshole, not at all, but let's make them realistic assholes! In no possible world does the President of the United States walk in and start lecturing the Prime Minister about the UN Protocol for alien first contact and then give a really bad speech to the world, I know it turned out to be Toclafanes, but in the real world the Master would have been shot because the Secret Service would never leave POTUS alone with bunch of miniature Death Stars! Yes, that was definitely a tangent. I am discussing The Sound of Drums in case you were wondering.

Okay, so back to Love Actually. The American president does the Bill Clinton sleazy thing and the PM thinks something happened between he and Natalie. He makes this wonderful speech which you have to click on the link for because I couldn't embed it. I know, I'm annoyed too. You can watch this, though.


Okay, there's also Emma Thompson and Alan Rickman as a married couple, confusing to anyone who clearly remembers Kate Winslet getting together with Colonel Brandon at the end of Sense & Sensibility. Anyway, Alan is struggling with the prospect of having an affair with his secretary. This is demonstrated comically with this scene with Rowan Atkinson, who is so effectively deployed in this film.


There's also Bill Nighy (who was in Vincent and The Doctor) as an aging rock star, who has remade one of his classics into a novelty Christmas track.

Richard Curtis surprises us here, because he tells us an unconventional love story, about a down and out superstar who realizes that the greatest love of his life is actually his manager.

I would be remiss if I didn't show you this scene with Mark and Juliet. Juliet thinks Mark doesn't like her, then discovers Mark likes her way too much. And we get this scene that just about tears your heart out and stomps on it because Richard Curtis is a freaking genius when it comes to using pop music in films, which he shows multiple times in this film.


Okay, Colin Firth. First scene we find out his brother is sleeping with his girlfriend and I'm all like, why? You already had Colin Firth. Then he goes to the south of France to write a book, falls in love with a Portuguese girl and comes home, learns Portuguese and then decides on Christmas Eve he must propose to her.


Also, we meet Liam Neeson who is stepfather to a boy played by Thomas Sangster (the kid from Human Nature/Family of Blood on Doctor Who) who is struggling with his wife's death and worries about his stepson. It turns out that his stepson is just in love with a girl at his school who doesn't seem to know he exists. He learns to play the drums to impress her resulting in the craziest Christmas Nativity ever and this...

It also results in a magnificent chase scene through Heathrow Airport.

There is so much good stuff in this film, discussing all sorts of love, amazing. There's also Kris Marshall who has figured out he can seduce American girls based entirely on his accent which is pretty much an accurate theory resulting in a great scene with Elisha Cuthbert, January Jones and Shannon Elizabeth. His best friend is played by Abdul Salis, who was also in the Doctor Who episode Fear Her with Nina Sosanya, who is also in this film playing the Prime Minister's assistant. Yes! I think I got every Doctor Who connection in this film!

And of course the magnificent ending, solidifying Richard Curtis' thesis. Those opening and closing scenes were actually filmed using real people at Heathrow Airport. Also, if you ever get to listen to the commentary track for this it is hilarious and you can listen to Hugh Grant kvetch about Colin Firth every time he shows up onscreen. So, any comments on Love Actually? The genius of Richard Curtis who actually writes watchable romantic comedies? Did I miss a Doctor Who connection? Let me know.

Made Then Remade: The Thomas Crown Affair, 1968 & 1999

Obviously, it's been a while since my last post for which I apologize. I would like a moment to explain. First, an oversaturation of Paul Newman which I never knew could happen, but apparently it did. I'm still baffled. Second, a series of migraine attacks, which if you don't know suck. Like really suck. Third, the San Antonio Spurs and the NBA Playoffs. The mourning period attached to said playoffs and the reaffirmation of my new hatred for the Memphis Grizzlies. Fourth, I got sucked into Doctor Who. If you want my opinion read on and otherwise skip to the next paragraph: Eccleston sucks, Tennant is awesome, Smith is pretty good, I think Rose is way too stupid to be travelling through time, I don't trust that River Song chick, the new Daleks look like Dyson vacuums and I really want to see an episode about Space Florida. Like, what happened? Did Florida get rebuilt in Space? Why? Are there mosquitoes?

Okay, so that brings us to our new topic: Remakes. I feel there are two basic results for a remake. The first is what is conventionally thought by most serious film people: they're a travesty and sacrilege and the actors from the first film are rolling over in their graves. The second? They end up being quite good because we realize the first film wasn't that great to start with.




That is what I think is the case with the film in question. I'm going to admit some biases now. First, Steve McQueen: not my favorite. Second, Faye Dunaway: not my favorite. Third, Pierce Brosnan: favorite. Fourth, Rene Russo: favorite. By the way, I was wondering what happened to her and apparently she's Thor's mom or something. Hollywood is not kind.

So, The Thomas Crown Affair has the same plot in both films. Thomas Crown is a bored rich guy who steals things for fun. He gets investigated by a a sexy insurance investigator with an amazing wardrobe. And that is pretty much what they share. That and a song that will get stuck in your head FOR DAYS, possibly weeks. It also won an Academy Award. Never try to figure out what the lyrics mean, don't even attempt it.

But here's the thing that puzzles me. There are a lot of similarities between our two Thomas Crowns, but to me, Steve McQueen comes off like a bored rich asshole who needs Ritalin. Pierce Brosnan, not so much. Remember, this film was in the height of his James Bod days. Remember back when James Bond wasn't blond? My God, I hate Daniel Craig in that part. Why is he so hung up on that Vesper chick? I've wandered off topic again. Then again this could be because Steve steals money with a gun, which he doesn't need, but Pierce steals a Monet in a really clever way. They are a lot the same, they even say the same lines, however I really hate McQueen. If somebody could pin down why I hate Steve McQueen, I would appreciate it.

Then there are their leading ladies. Faye Dunaway is still not my favorite actress, but I found I didn't mind her too much. As mentioned, she and Rene Russo both have fabulous wardrobes, though I think Faye wore too many pairs of white tights. I mean, what was that about? I never saw that on Mad Men. Wait, is that next season? Stupid AMC. Rene Russo's wardrobe was designed by Michael Kors and she has an Hermes tote. How much do I love an Hermes tote? Both of the wardrobes are pretty amazing. Then the women are pretty cool. Faye was a symbol of the just burgeoning Feminist movement and social change. Rene is the other side of the coin, a working woman who finds herself somewhat disillusioned by the promises of feminism and the sexual revolution. Also, Rene is about the same age as Pierce in their film, Steve and Faye are eleven years apart, the former of which was noted at the time.

Central to both is the love story, which at times, doesn't seem much like one. Take the damn chess scene in the original. Okay, I get it. The chess is a metaphor for sex, sex is a metaphor for the game they're playing, why are we sitting here for days sucking on chess pieces and what is with the stupid kiss with the 360 degree thing going on? I feel like I'm saying this a lot, but we're not doing Shakespeare here. There's no need to be so damn dramatic. (I would have given you a clip, but apparently the scene is too damn precious to be on YouTube) They avoid this mistake in the remake. Instead of the chess scene, we have a dance sequence followed by some of the most impossible sex ever. Now, tip, if you're at a hotel, don't order the remake on the in-room movies and then have housekeeping walk in at the exact damn moment that scene takes place. They will think you have ordered something else and you will be trying to act like you don't see anything at all. "What, you mean this isn't The Lion King?" So, that's a drawback.



Then there's the ending and changing the ending is usually where you really piss off the purists. The 1968 one ends with Faye betrays Steve and he knew she would. The 1999 edition ends with Rene thinks Pierce has left her, then he really hasn't and we have a happy ending. Oh, I forgot the climax, which is very good.



By the way, if anyone knows John McTiernan, I still want to know how he stole the second painting. I listened to the commentary, he said that they eliminated a sequence explaining it, but I would like to know. Not to mention the art instead of the money gives the film a whole new level of interest and this is an art form based on spectacle. I get that the Faye Dunaway ending is sad and about the character, but I really don't care because at that point I was bored and pushing pause on my Roku remote every two minutes to see how much I had left. It's just one of those films I do not get and it's just the style, revolutionary in its days, hackneyed and tired in ours until Steven Soderbergh cleverly revived it for the Ocean's trilogy. Also, much like the Ocean's trilogy, this film gets a new layer of fun from the supporting cast notably Denis Leary and Frankie Faison as the cops working with Rene.

So, obviously, I've lost my mind, right? You probably love the original. Okay, tell me in the comments why the original is so much better. And why I hate Steve McQueen.

Also, just realized that everything I know about art comes from movies and TV. So, here's a video someone made from the Van Gogh episode of Doctor Who, which was written by Richard Curtis, who I wish would write more or at least let me know where to find his new stuff. So, again, if you know Richard Curtis, let him know.