“The Moral Landscape of the STAR WARS Saga” – Introduction

Below is the introduction to a series of small articles I plan to write about the moral landscape in the “STAR WARS” saga, created by George Lucas. Each article will focus the moral makeup of each character or group of characters: 

“The Moral Landscape of the STAR WARS Saga”

Introduction

Morality has always seemed to be a tricky subject with humans. Probably more so than we care to admit. We like to pretend that the majority of all human societies have basic rules when it comes to morality. But I suspect that is nothing more than an illusion. I believe that each individual . . . or each group has his/her or its own moral compass. What one individual is prepared to tolerate, another is not. It all depends upon our individual feelings regarding a certain matter.

I could probably say the same about the “STAR WARS” saga, created by filmmaker, George Lucas. Many “STAR WARS” fans love to claim that their own interpretation of the moral compass of the saga’s major characters exactly matched Lucas’ intentions in his films. I wish I could say the same. But in the end, I realized that each person has his or her own interpretation of an artist’s work. And sometimes, that interpretation might also be different from the artist’s. Having expressed this view, I decided to express my own view of the moral landscape presented in the six movies of the“STAR WARS” saga.

I am going to make a confession. When I first saw the original “STAR WARS”, I did not like it very much. In fact, I barely liked it at all. You must understand that I was rather young when the movie first hit theaters in 1977. I suspect that it blew my mind so much that I was inclined to reject it, instead of becoming a fan. This dislike did not extend to “THE EMPIRE STRIKES BACK”, when I first saw it. I was a little older and was able to appreciate what George Lucas was trying to do. And yet . . . I did not embrace this movie, as well. But I must admit that I found it difficult not to think about it. Han Solo’s fate and Darth Vader’s revelation had taken me by surprise and I found myself thinking about it all summer long. Ironically, “RETURN OF THE JEDI” became the first STAR WARS movie that I fully embraced. I say this with a great deal of irony, considering that it is now my least favorite movie in the franchise. During the late 1980s and the 1990s, I slowly became a major fan of all three films. And by the time I saw the first of the Prequel Trilogy movies, “THE PHANTOM MENACE”, I had fully embraced the saga.

I realized that the Prequel Trilogy has been met with nothing but scorn and derision by many STAR WARS fans and the media. However, I have never shared their feelings. If anything, the Prequel Trilogy made me appreciate Lucas’ talents as a storyteller. It also made me realize that the producer had presented moviegoers with a very emotionally complex saga.

However, this article is not about my basic feelings regarding all six films in the franchise. This article is about my opinions on the morality and characterizations presented in the films. One of the things I have always enjoyed about the Prequel Trilogy and movies like “THE EMPIRE STRIKES BACK” was Lucas’ revelations had pretty much revealed both the virtues and FLAWS of individuals. The characters in the Original Trilogy were flawed, but I do not believe their flaws had not been portrayed with as much depth as those characters in the Prequel Trilogy. And judging from the many articles, blogs and message boards I have read about STAR WARS, many fans seemed to dislike the less idealistic and more ambiguous portrayal of the PT’s main characters.

The following article will focus upon the Jedi Order and some of its senior members. I hope to discuss some of their actions and how it affected the Galactic Republic in the Prequel Trilogy and their impact upon the character of Luke Skywalker and the Rebellion against the Galactic Empire in the Original Trilogy.

Advertisements

“NORTH AND SOUTH: BOOK I” (1985) – Episode One “1842-1844” Commentary

northandsouth 1.1

 

“NORTH AND SOUTH: BOOK I” (1985) – EPISODE ONE “1842-1844” Commentary

The year nineteen eighty-two saw the publication of “North and South”, the first novel of John Jakes’ trilogy about the United States before, during and after the U.S. Civil War. This first novel, set during the United States’ Antebellum Era, was adapted into a six-part miniseries in 1985. 

This first miniseries, “NORTH AND SOUTH: BOOK I”, told the story of two families during the years before the Civil War. The Hazards are a wealthy family that owns a successful iron foundry in Lehigh Station, Pennsylvania – not far from Philadelphia. Just as wealthy are the Mains, a family from the low country of South Carolina that owns a cotton plantation (a rice plantation in the novel) called Mont Royal. George Hazard and Orry Main first meet in New York City in the summer of 1842, as both make their way to commence upon their four years as cadets at West Point, the U.S. Army Military Academy. The two become fast friends, despite regional differences, as they endure trials and tribulations during their four years at the Point and the violence of the Mexican-American War. Due to the perseverance of their friendship, George and Orry’s families also form bonds, leading to the friendship of another Hazard and Main at West Point in the 1850s and marriage between two members of the families. By the end of miniseries, George and Orry’s friendship, along with the bonds formed between their families are tested by the growing conflict between Northerners and Southerners and the outbreak of the Civil War.

Episode One of “NORTH AND SOUTH” is set between 1842 and 1844. It is more or less an introduction of the two main characters, their families and the entire saga. Although it is not my favorite episode of the miniseries, I must admit that director Richard T. Heffron, along with the series’ staff of screenwriters (that includes John Jakes), did a solid job in setting up the miniseries. I noticed that some significant differences were made from Jakes’ novel. One, the writers excluded the novel’s prologue altogether, which had introduced the Hazards and Mains’ family founders in the 1680s. Unlike the novel, the miniseries began with Orry Main’s departure from Mont Royal, the family estate; and his first meeting with his future love, New Orleans-born Madeline Fabray. Actually, what the writers did was switch the Hazard family’s introduction with the Mains, Madeline Fabray and Justin La Motte (neighbor of the Mains). Whereas Orry first met all of the Hazards in 1842 New York City in the novel, he did not meet them until his and George Hazard’s three-month furlough in 1844 in the miniseries. The character of Elkhannah Bent underwent a physical transformation. He went from an overweight and unattractive Ohio-born man in the novel to a handsome Georgia-born young man in the miniseries. But the character remained insane and maintained his hatred of both George and Orry. As it turned out, the television Bent was a combination of the literary Bent and a character from the second novel, “Love and War” called Lamar Powell. The miniseries also allowed viewers to experience the venal Justin La Motte’s courtship of Madeline during the two years between her first meeting with Orry and his 1844 furlough. Because Orry and Madeline met two years earlier than they did in the novel, the pair exchanged letters until their correspondence was secretly interrupted by Madeline’s father, Nicholas Fabray. He was determined that Madeline marry La Motte.

I also noticed that Orry’s attitude toward slavery seemed to be less conservative than it was in the novel. I suspect that the writers decided to delete the character of Cooper Main, Orry’s older brother, while incorporating some of his moderate political views into Orry. They had no problems with transferring all four Hazard siblings – George, Stanley, Virgilia and Billy – from the novel to the miniseries. Yet, they failed to do the same with the Main siblings. Only Orry, Ashton, Brett and Charles made it from the novel to the miniseries. Cooper remained missing until the third miniseries, “HEAVEN AND HELL: NORTH AND SOUTH – BOOK III”. I found this strange. Why did the screenwriters feel it was necessary to delete Cooper’s character from the miniseries?

There were some other differences that did not sit right with me. One, the episode featured George and Orry’s journey from New York City to West Point via the railroad. There was no railroad service between New York City and the West Point Academy in the 1840s. In fact, there is still no rail service between the two locations. The miniseries also featured a swordfight between the two friends’ cadet drillmaster, the insane Elkhannah Bent and Orry – with the latter defeating the older cadet. Both the novel and the miniseries made it clear that Orry struggled with his studies. Because of this, Jakes made it clear in his novel that Orry was never able to become an accomplished swordsman. Yet, Orry defeated Bent in the miniseries because he was a member of the Southern planter class. The screenwriters utilized a cliche to make Orry an accomplished swordsman. And to this day, I am still puzzled at Orry’s lack of reaction to his eight to ten year-old sister Ashton’s knowledge of overseer Salem Jones’ sexual tryst with house slave Semiramis. Surely, he would be upset that his young sister would not only know but openly discuss such a topic.

But I was impressed by how the episode revealed the political conflicts that permeated the country during the early to mid 1840s. The miniseries mentioned such topics as the country’s conflict with Mexico over Texas, Western expansion and its impact on the institution of slavery. I noticed that the Hazard family – George included – did not seem particularly concerned over the idea of Texas joining the Union as a slave state. Even more interesting was the family’s contemptuous dismissal of Virgilia Hazard’s pro-abolition stance. In one scene featuring Orry’s dinner with the Hazard family at their Leigh Station home, the male members of the family tend to ignore Virgilia’s comments altogether, until she was finally forced to raise her voice. The Hazard family’s reaction to Virgilia’s abolitionist stance seemed a true reflection of most Northerners’ cool attitude toward the abolition of slavery. Another scene that took me by surprise featured a brief mention of Oberlin College in Ohio by Elkhannah Bent. During the 1830s, it became the first college institution to integrate blacks and women into its student body. Being a bigot, Bent naturally mentioned the college with a great deal of contempt.

Anyone familiar with Jakes’ literary trilogy would probably realize that the saga’s main topic centered around American slavery and its impact upon the country’s political and social scene between the 1840s and 1860s. There were four scenes that perfectly emphasized not only the horrors of slavery, but also the growing conflict between North and South. One scene in the episode’s second half featured Orry’s return to Mont Royal during his furlough. In this scene, he comes across the plantation’s new overseer, Salem Jones, whipping a slave named Priam. Priam happened to be the older brother of Semiramis, the house slave whom Jones has coerced to be his slave mistress. Not only did the sight of the whip being cracked across actor David Harris’ back filled me revulsion, but also Jones’ reason for authorizing the whipping in the first place – to guarantee Priam’s obedience. However, a scene featuring Madeline Fabray breakfasting with Justin La Motte during a visit to the latter’s plantation, Resolute; proved to be even equally effective. In the scene, a house slave named Nancy spills coffee on Madeline’s sleeve. While the latter disappears into the office to change clothes, a tense moment ensues when La Motte punishes Nancy with a brutal slap and a warning.

The conflict between North and South first reared its ugly head in a confrontation between Orry and a Ohio-born cadet named Ned Fisk, who resented the financial competition that his father faced from Southern planters who used slave labor. But I thought there were two scenes that I believe more effectively conveyed the conflict between the two regions. One featured a scene in which Orry toured the grounds of Hazard Irons during his visit to Lehigh Station and commented rather negatively on the white immigrant labor used by the Hazard family at their foundry. His little comment nearly sparked the first argument between the two friends. But Virgilia’s confrontation with Orry during a Hazard family dinner scene not only emphasized the Hazards’ disregard toward the abolitionist movement, but also the conflict between abolition and the country’s pro-slavery faction . . . especially in regard to American politics in the 1840s.

Production wise, Episode One looked gorgeous. Archie J. Bacon did an excellent job in bringing Antebellum America to the screen – both North and South. The miniseries was shot mainly in South Carolina and Mississippi and cinematographer Stevan Larner did justice to the locations, providing scenes with sharp color and elegance. I was especially impressed by the tracking shot that not only kick-started the miniseries, but also gave viewers a sweeping view of the operations at Mont Royal. Vicki Sánchez’s costumes were beautiful to look at. I was especially impressed by the following dress worn by Lesley-Anne Down in one scene:

tumblr_m1yn9bza6b1rt697ao1_500 tumblr_m1yoli6nSe1rt697ao1_1280

The cast provided solid performances in the miniseries. Mind you, the performances by some of extras struck me as rather wooden and amateurish. But the main cast seemed to know what they were doing. Both James Read and Patrick Swayze formed a perfect screen team as the two best friends – George Hazard and Orry Main. I enjoyed Lesley-Anne Down’s portrayal of the New Orleans-born Madeline Fabray. Although she had decent chemistry with Swayze, I was never a fan of the Orry-Madeline romance. It always struck me as a bit too ideal or Harlequin Romance for my tastes. David Carradine was both smooth and menacing as neighboring planter, Justin La Motte. Andrew Stahl nicely balanced both Ned Fisk’s resentment toward the Southern planter class and wariness toward Elkhannah Bent. Olivia Cole provided solid support as the Fabrays’ free housekeeper, Maum Sally. And Lee Bergere gave a subtle performance as Madeline’s manipulative, but well meaning father, Nicholas Fabray. But the two performances that really made me sit up and notice were Philip Casnoff’s intense portrayal of the borderline insane Elkhannah Bent and Kirstie Alley’s equally intense performance as the dedicated abolitionist Virgilia Hazard.

So far, “NORTH AND SOUTH” seemed to be off to a good start. Mind you, there were a few setbacks in regard to historical accuracy and characterization. With the episode ending with Orry and Madeline’s declaration of love for one another, along with her marriage to Justin La Motte, viewers were bound to be drawn to the next episode.

“A NIGHT TO REMEMBER” (1958) Review

image

 

“A NIGHT TO REMEMBER” (1958) Review

There have been many versions about the April 1912 sinking of the R.M.S. Titanic. Many versions. And I have personally seen at least five of them. One of them happened to be the 1958 movie, “A NIGHT TO REMEMBER”.

Directed by Roy Ward Baker, “A NIGHT TO REMEMBER” is based upon historian Walter Lord’s 1955 book about the historical sinking. Since the 1958 movie was based upon a historical book instead of a novel, Baker, producer William MacQuitty and screenwriter Eric Ambler approached the film’s plot in a semi-documentary style. Even the movie’s leading character turned out to be the Titanic’s Second Officer, Charles Lightoller, who was portrayed by actor Kenneth More. The movie also featured other historical figures such as J. Bruce Ismay, Thomas Andrews, Captain Edward J. Smith and Margaret “Molly” Brown. Due to this semi-documentary approach, “A NIGHT TO REMEMBER” is regarded as the best movie about the Titanic.

I cannot deny that there is a great deal to admire about “A NIGHT TO REMEMBER”. Not only do I feel it is an excellent movie, I could see that Roy Ward Baker did his best to re-create that last night aboard the Titanic. He and Ambler gave the audience glimpses into the lives of the ship’s crew and passengers. The movie also went into great detail of their efforts to remain alive following the ship’s brief collision with an iceberg. Some of my favorite scenes include the Irish steerage passengers’ efforts to reach the life boats on the upper decks, the wireless operators’ (David McCullum and Kenneth Griffin) efforts to summon other ships to rescue the passengers and crew, and passenger Molly Brown (Tucker McGuire)’s conflict with the sole crewman in her lifeboat. But my favorite scene has to be that moment when the Titanic’s stern rose high before the ship sank into the Atlantic Ocean.

For a film shot in black and white during the late 1950s, I must admit that “A NIGHT TO REMEMBER” looked very handsome. Legendary cinematographer Geoffrey Unsworth’s phtography struck me as sharp and very elegant. I do not know if Yvonne Caffin’s costume designs for the movie’s 1912 setting was completely accurate, but they certainly did add to the movie’s late Edwardian atmosphere. Especially those costumes for the first-class passengers. I do have to give kudos to the special effects team led by Bill Warrington. He and his team did a superb job in re-creating the ocean liner’s historic sinking. I am even more impressed that their work still manages to hold up after fifty-four years.

The cast of “A NIGHT TO REMEMBER” was led by Kenneth More, who portrayed Second Officer Lightoller with his usual energetic charm. More was ably supported by the likes of Laurence Naismith as Captain Smith, Michael Goodliffe’s poignant portrayal of ship designer Thomas Andrews, Frank Lawton as J. Bruce Ismay, George Rose as the inebriated survivor Charles Joughin and Tucker McGuire’s colorful portrayal of American socialite Molly Brown. The movie also featured future “AVENGERS” and Bond veteran Honor Blackman; David McCullum of “THE MAN FROM U.N.C.L.E.” and “N.C.I.S.” fame; and Bernard Fox, who will also appear in James Cameron’s 1997 movie about the Titanic sinking. But despite the numerous good performances, I honestly have to say that I found nothing exceptional about any of them.

Like many others, I used to believe that “A NIGHT TO REMEMBER” was the best movie about the Titanic. After this latest viewing, I do not believe I can maintain that opinion any longer. In fact, I am beginning to suspect there may not be any “ultimate” Titanic film. And “A NIGHT TO REMEMBER” is not perfect, as far as I am concerned. Many have applauded the filmmakers for eschewing any fictional melodrama or using the sinking as a backdrop for a fictional story. Personally, I could not care less if a Titanic movie is simply a fictional melodrama or a semi-documentary film. All I require is a first-rate movie that will maintain my interest.

“A NIGHT TO REMEMBER” began with a montage of newsreel clips featuring the Titanic’s christening in Belfast. One, the ship was never christened. And two, I could see that the newsreel footage used in the movie dated from the 1930s. The movie tried its best to allow the audience to identify with some of its characters. But due to “A NIGHT TO REMEMBER” being a docudrama, I feel that it failed to give an in-depth study of its more prominent characters . . . making it difficult for me to identify with any of them.

I realize that “A NIGHT TO REMEMBER” was a British production, but I was amazed at the low number of American passengers featured in the cast. The 1953 film, “TITANIC” suffered from a similar malady – the only British characters I could recall were members of the crew. I do remember at least three Americans in the 1958 movie – Molly Brown; Benjamin Guggenheim, portrayed by Harold Goldblatt and a third passenger, whose name escapes me. I was satisfied with McGuire’s performance as Molly Brown and the nameless actor who portrayed the third American passenger. But Goldblatt portrayed Guggenheim as a member of the British upper class in both attitude and accent. It almost seemed as if the filmmakers wanted Guggenheim to be viewed as a British gentleman, instead of an American one.

Walter Lord’s book made it clear that one of the last songs performed by Titanic’s band was NOT “Nearer My God to Thee”. Yet, the filmmakers chose to perpetrate this myth in the movie by having the remaining passengers and crew sing the song en masse before the ship began to sink in earnest. This pious attitude continued in a scene aboard the R.M.S. Carpathia, in which the survivors listened to a religious sermon. Instead of projecting an air of melancholy or despair, the survivors, thanks to Ward Baker, seemed to project an air of the British stiff upper lip cliche. I feel that a melancholic air among the survivors would have made the scene seem more human.

I cannot deny that “A NIGHT TO REMEMBER” is a first-rate look at the sinking of the R.M.S. Titanic. More importantly, the movie and especially the visual effects still hold up very well after half-a-century. But the movie possesses flaws that make it difficult for me to regard it as the best Titanic movie ever made. Perhaps . . . there is no best Titanic movie. Just bad or well made ones.

“How Do You Solve a Problem Like the Charmings?”

Once-Upon-a-Time-Grimm-twist-fairy-tales-GOGE9Q9-x-large

I first wrote this article before (2.10) “The Cricket Game” of “ONCE UPON A TIME” aired on January 6, 2013:

“HOW DO YOU SOLVE A PROBLEM LIKE THE CHARMINGS?”

I will be the first to admit that I have become a diehard fan of ABC’s “ONCE UPON A TIME”. It was not easy for me. The concept of fairy tale characters existing in the modern world because of a magical curse really appealed to me. However, I had some difficulty in maintaining interest in the series, due to what I felt was the slow introductions of the major characters and slow pacing in the first half of Season One.

In the end, it took episodes like (1.11) “Fruit of the Poisonous Tree”(1.12) “Skin Deep”(1.15) “Red-Handed” and (1.18) “The Stable Boy” to maintain a strong interest in “ONCE UPON A TIME”. By the time protagonist Emma Swan broke the curse (somewhat) in the first season finale, (1.22) “A Land Without Magic”, I was a diehard fan. Then Season Two arrived and the series’ hold on my interest continued. Some critics and fans have complained about the storylines and characterizations featured in the first half of Season Two. Many complained about Emma and Snow White’s adventures in Post-Curse Fairy Tale Land, frustrated by Snow and Charming’s new period of separation. Some have complained about the minimal attention toward the Rumpelstiltskin/Belle romance. Some have complained about Regina Mills/Evil Queen’s redemption arc, demanding that she remain a non-redeeming villainess. And some have complained about the revelation of Dr. Whale as Dr. Victor Frankenstein, a character from literary horror.

If I must be honest, I had an easier time enjoying Season Two’s first half than I did the first half of Season One. The pacing seemed faster. Unlike many others, I had no problems with the idea of Emma and Snow White being stuck in Post-Curse Fairy Tale Land. The sequence re-introduced memorable guest character Cora Mills/the Queen of Hearts as a more memorable recurring character and a new spin on Captain Hook. I certainly had no problems with Regina Mills’ redemption arc, and my instincts tell me that the character is in for a long and difficult road ahead. And Dr. Whale’s revelation did not bother me one bit. Yes, I had a problem with the writers’ handling of the Mulan and Princess Aurora characters, even if I did like them. Rumpelstiltskin and Belle did not strike me as interesting as they were in Season One. And I was not impressed with (2.07) “Child of the Moon” and its handling of Red Riding Hood’s wolf nature or the King George/George Spencer character. But the one aspect of Season Two that I found truly annoying were the characterizations for the members of the Charming family – Snow White and Prince Charming, their daughter Emma Swan, and her biological son Henry Mills (Regina’s adoptive son). I found them more than annoying. There were many times when I felt bile rising up my throat.

Snow White and Charming were not much of a problem for me during Season One, especially their cursed Storybrooke alter egos – Mary Margaret Blanchard and David Nolan. Superficially, Mary Margaret and David seemed like slightly boring personas. But at least their affair, which really hurt David’s alter ego wife Kathryn Nolan (aka Princess Abigail), made them interesting and somewhat corrupted. Last year, I had viewed the affair as inoffensive, especially since they were really husband and wife in real life. But as far as the pair knew in their cursed state, David was married to Kathryn . . . and that did not stop them from hurting her with an affair. It took a second viewing of Season One to make me realize this. I found the affair distasteful, but I also believed it made Mary Margaret and David more interesting than their Fairy Tale Land counterparts.

After the couple regained their memories of their true selves, Snow White and Charming became very annoying. Season One introduced the idea of Snow White being an action woman. But the writing in Season Two took this concept to ridiculous heights in two particular episodes in Season Two. In (2.03) “Lady of the Lake”, Snow White made a big deal about the dangerous aspects of ogres. Yet, when an ogre threatened Emma, Snow killed him so easily that I found her warnings rather ludicrous. Writers Andrew Chambliss and Ian Goldberg did not even bother to make it difficult for Snow to kill him. I found the ogre’s death anti-climatic and disappointing. The writers’ handling of Snow White in (2.08) “Into the Deep” really pissed me off. One, her fight with Mulan left me shaking my head in disbelief. I realize that the years of evading Regina had transformed her into some kind of action woman. But honestly . . . I really found it difficult to swallow the easy manner in which she got the best of Mulan in a fight over the compass that could lead them to a portal. Mulan was a trained warrior, who had more experience in combat. Yet, the audience was supposed to believe that Snow could easily best her in a fight? This was a fairy tale of the worst kind. Snow’s intitial compassion toward Aurora disappeared real fast after Mulan took the compass to trade it for the younger princess’s life. Even worse, she tried to kill Mulan for the compass. While most fans bashed Mulan for being concerned enough about Aurora to take the compass, I was too busy being disgusted by Snow’s murder attempt. And guess what folks? Her act of attempted homicide has been swept under the rug and quickly forgotten.

Charming has been a real pain in the ass in Season Two. Remember the finale of the Season Two premiere, (2.01) “Broken”? I do. The Charmings had learned that Rumpelstiltskin had sent a wraith after Regina to kill her in retaliation for Belle’s incarceration during the curse. They prevented the wraith from killing Regina, but it dragged both Snow White and Emma into Jefferson’s magical hat and Fairy Tale Land. What happened next? An enraged Charming shoved Regina and threatened to kill her if she did not bring back Snow and Emma. Regina retaliated and nearly killed him using magic. Guess which act Henry conveniently appeared to witness? Not Charming’s attack, but Regina’s.  And Henry threatened to never talk to her again if she did not bring back his mother and grandmother. How convenient for Charming. And the self-righteous bastard never admitted that his attack on Regina led to her to retaliate, thanks to Horowitz, Kitsis and their writers. Charming proved to be an ineffective guardian for Henry. Even though he knew how to be the kid’s best friend and promised to train him in the arts of being a knight, he never really bothered to discipline Henry. When Regina informed him about a resurrected Daniel in (2.05) “The Doctor”, Charming’s only method in getting information from her was to threaten her with jail time. Honestly, I found the scene laughable. However, I was not laughing in the scene in which he punched Dr. Whale for the latter’s one night stand back in Season One. I was simply disgusted. Whale pointed out that his brief affair occurred during the Curse, when everyone believed that Charming was married to Abigail (Kathryn Nolan). But Snow’s husband had to prove his manhood with a move that left me viewing him as a dick. A good number of the fans shared my views. But there were many others – especially male fans and critics – that crowed with delight over Charming’s punch. The incident merely lowered my opinion of him a step further. His decision to use the sleeping curse in order to communicate with Snow White via dreams struck many as infantile, especially since he discovered that he could not be awakened by her in the dream state.

As I had stated earlier, Emma Swan and Henry Mills have been a problem since the series’ premiere. I personally believe it was a big mistake for Horowitz and Kitsis to make Henry the biological son of Emma. I suppose the pair needed him as a means for Emma to “somewhat” break the Curse with a mother’s kiss. But honestly? Their storyline has been a problem since Day One. One, how on earth did the 10 year-old Henry get from Storybrooke, Maine to Boston, Massachusetts on his own? To this day, I am still flabbergasted by the idea of Emma, who had given up her son while in prison, remaining in Storybrooke to keep an eye on both Regina and Henry. All because Regina had insisted that she stay away from the boy. This was Emma’s excuse? It is only natural that the parent of an adopted child would want the biological parent to stay away . . . especially if the child was a minor. I do not believe that Regina’s antipathy toward her was a good excuse for Emma to remain in Storybrooke. Regina could have easily filed a restraining order against Emma for harassing her and Henry. She even threatened Emma with a restraining order once, but she never made good on her threat, thanks to the writers. And are we really supposed to believe that Regina was an abusive parent? Henry has never exhibited signs of being an abused child. The worst Regina ever did to him was hint that he may be emotionally or mentally unstable in order to maintain the secret of the Curse in the first season, and use magic to keep Henry with her in (2.02) “We Are Both”. Regina may have been a bit of a disciplinarian, but I found that a lot more admirable than the Charmings’ penchant for indulging Henry’s habit of skipping school or putting himself in dangerous situations. I still recall one Season One episode in which Emma allowed Henry to skip school without Regina’s permission in one of the early episodes . . . a habit that Charming occasionally continued in Season Two.

Ever since the character was first introduced, Emma has boasted of her ability to sense when someone was lying to her. I found this boast a joke, especially since newspaper editor Sidney Glass/the Magic Mirror in Season One and Regina’s mother, Cora Mills in Season Two; have both been able to successfully lie to her. Many fans have also complained of Emma’s talents as a law enforcer. If I must be frank, I have not been that impressed myself. Think about it. She has no real experience or training to be a police officer, let alone a town sheriff. She spent her adolescence either as a thief or a prison inmate. And she spent the rest of her years before her arrival in Storybrooke as a bails bondsman. Emma was qualified to find a missing person, not police a small town, let alone a city neighborhood. And how did the writers ensure that Emma would maintain her job as sheriff? By having her run in an election against Sidney Glass, the town’s newspaper editor? Who were they fucking kidding? It got worse in Season Two. After her first encounter with Cora in“Lady of the Lake”, Emma regained her ability to sniff out a liar when she met Captain Hook for the first time in “The Doctor”. She first proved that she was her mother’s daughter by killing Maleficent in dragon form in “A Land Without Magic”. I found the scenario of a bail bondsman successfully killing a dragon just as implausible as her father Charming killing his first dragon with ease in(1.06) “The Shepherd”. Although Emma displayed a lack of familiarity in Fairy Tale Land during the season’s early episodes, she became another ideal action woman – like her mother Snow White – in episodes like (2.06) “Tallahassee” and“(2.09) “Queen of Hearts”. The latter episode featured a sword fight between Emma and Hook before she and Snow White jumped into a portal in order to return to Storybrooke. I realize that Emma had difficulty in defeating Hook. I simply had difficulty in believing that she was able to defeat him at all. He is an experienced swordsman. The series has never hinted that Emma knew anything about sword fighting. Hook should have sliced her up in bits within a minute. I do not know how to explain this phenonemon. Perhaps his feelings for her led him to merely toy with her. Between Snow White and Emma, the producers and writers seemed to believe that portraying the Charming women as badasses, while maintaining near ideal personalities is a sign of good characterization. Audiences also discovered in this episode that being the offspring of “Twu Luv”, Emma’s heart is impregnable from being ripped out by magic. Oh God! I guess no one can spare me from this ridiculous crap. Some fans and critics found this revelation brilliant, romantic or both. When I saw Cora fail to rip out Emma’s heart because she is the emodiment of “Twu Luv”, I merely rolled my eyes in disgust.

I have saved the worst for last – namely Henry Mills, Emma’s biological son, Snow and Charming’s biological grandson and Regina’s adoptive son. God, I cannot stand him. I really cannot stand him. Henry has to be one of the most unreal child characters I have ever come across in recent years. I have discovered that in one-and-a-half seasons, he has not developed as a character one whit. He has remained the same, self-righteous child with a desire to be a fairy tale hero. How did he discover that Emma was his natural mother, let alone discover that she lived in Boston? The series has never revealed this and honestly, his possession of the Fairy Tale storybook is not much of an excuse. And not only do I find his ability to track down Emma in Boston and travel to said city without his stepmother’s knowledge implausible, I also find his ability to identify nearly every citizen of Storybrooke with their Fairy Tale Land identity hard to accept. Did the fairy tales book in his possession provide him with this information? I became increasingly weary of his penchant for skipping school. His self-righteous claims of “magic has a price”got on my nerves. To be honest, I got tired of many characters – especially Rumpelstiltskin/Mr. Gold – making the same claim. I also became weary of Henry’s constant and self-righteous “good always defeat evil” declarations. Are we, the viewers, supposed to regard this ten year-old as the voice of morality? Dear God! I hope not. But what really irks me about Henry is that he seems to be the driving force of many of the actions of the major characters. Regina decided to redeem herself in order to win Henry’s love. It was Henry who lured Emma to Storybrooke so that she would act out her role as savior. It was Henry who reunited Jefferson/the Mad Hatter with his daughter. It was Henry who drove Emma to finally break the curse. It was Henry’s dreams that provided Rumplestiltskin with the opportunity to communicate with Emma and Snow so they could return to Storybrooke. Henry, Henry, Henry! I am so sick of him. Then I remembered. Both Horowitz and Kitsis used to be among the staff writers for “LOST”. And that series did a piss poor job in its portrayals of children characters. With Henry’s characterization, the tradition continues.

Adam Horowitz and Edward Kitsis need to do something about the Charmings. By mid-Season Two, they have become ridiculously ideal and at times, self-righteous. I get tired of certain fans wallowing in the crimes or mere mistakes of other characters, while making excuses for the mistakes of this increasingly annoying family. Please do something. Provide the family with some real character development or moral complexity, instead of portraying them as badasses and ideal leaders. And please have another character call them up on their bullshit. Just for once. As for Henry Mills, the only change in his character that will truly please me is his death. Yes, I realize that I sound cruel. But that damn brat simply brings out the worst in me.

POST SCRIPT: Judging from the last scene of the Season Two episode,(2.15) “The Queen Is Dead”, Snow White has plans to kill Cora Mills, Queen of Hearts; in revenge for the death of her mother, Queen Eva. Alas, Horowitz and Kitsis barely explored this dark turn in her character.  Not surprising.

“THE HOBBIT: AN UNEXPECTED JOURNEY” (2012) Review

kinopoisk.ru-Hobbit_3A-An-Unexpected-Journey_2C-The-1762935

 

“THE HOBBIT: AN UNEXPECTED JOURNEY” (2012) Review

I had nothing against the news of New Line Cinema’s attempt to adapt J.R.R. Tolkien’s 1937 novel, “The Hobbit” for the screen. But I had no idea that the studio, along with Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer and Warner Brothers would end up stringing out the adaptation into three movies. Three. That seemed a lot for a 300-page novel. The first chapter in this three-page adaptation turned out to be the recent release, “THE HOBBIT: AN UNEXPECTED JOURNEY”

Peter Jackson, who had directed the adaptation of Tolkien’s “Lord of the Rings”trilogy over a decade ago, returned to direct an earlier chapter of the author’s tales about Middle Earth. He nearly did not make it to the director’s chair. Guillermo del Toro was the first choice as director. However, del Toro Del left the project in May 2010 working with Jackson and the latter’s production team, due to delays caused in part by financial problems at Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer. He did remain with the project long enough to co-write the movie’s screenplay with Jackson, Fran Walsh, and Philippa Boyens. To my utter amazement, the efforts of the four screenwriters and Jackson’s direction has produced a good number of negative backlash against the film. Ironically, most of the film’s backlash has been directed at Jackson and cinematographer Andrew Lesnie’s use of high frame rate for the film’s look. Others have simply complained about the movie’s length and its inability to match the quality of the “LORD OF THE RINGS” Trilogy released between 2001 and 2003.

“THE HOBBIT: AN UNEXPECTED JOURNEY” began on the elderly Bilbo Baggins’ 111th birthday (shown in the 2001 movie), when he decides to recount the full story of an adventure he had experienced 60 years ago, for his nephew Frodo. Bilbo first reveals how the Dwarf kingdom of Erebor was taken over by a gold-loving dragon named Smaug. The Erebor Dwarves are scattered throughout Middle Earth. The Dwarf King Thrór was killed by an Orc, when he tried to settle his people in Moria. His son, Thráin II, was driven mad from one of the Rings handed over to his ancestor by Sauron before dying. Thráin II’s son, Thorin Oakenshield, became determined to not only recover Erebor from Smaug, but also recover their treasure. At Gandalf the Gray’s suggestion, Thorin and his followers traveled to the Shire to recruit Bilbo’s help in achieving their goals (they need the Hobbit to act as a burglar in order to get their Arkenstone back). At first, Bilbo was reluctant to join their quest. But he caved in at the idea of an adventure and eventually joined the Dwarves and Gandalf. Their adventures led them to an encounter with three Trolls; pursuing Orcs who want Thorin’s head for cutting off the arm of their war chief, Azog; a respite at Rivendell, due to the hospitality of Lord Elrond; and deadly encounters within the Misty Mountains with Goblins and for Bilbo, the current Ring bearer Gollum. The movie ended on the slopes of the Misty Mountains with a deadly encounter with Azog and his orcs.

How do I feel about “THE HOBBIT: AN UNEXPECTED JOURNEY”? Well for one thing, I still believe it was unnecessary for a three-movie adaptation of Tolkien’s 1937 novel. It is simply not big enough, despite the fact that this first film is shorter than the three “LORD OF THE RINGS” movie. I really do not see how Jackson would be able to stretch an adaptation of the novel into three movies, each with an average running time of 160-170 minutes. Judging from the movie’s first 30 minutes, I see that Jackson is going to stretch it as much as he can. Many people have commented on the new high frame rate that Jackson and Lesnie used for the film. Yes, the movie has a sharper and more colorful look. In fact, the film’s visual look reminded me of the use of Blu-Ray DVDs. Do I care? No. Hollywood critics and moviegoers have a tradition of ranting against any new film innovation – sound, color, digital cameras, CGI . . . you get the point. It has been ten years since George Lucas first used digital cameras for “STAR WARS: EPISODE II-ATTACK OF THE CLONES” and people are still bitching about it. Did I have a few problems with “THE HOBBIT: AN UNEXPECTED JOURNEY”? Sure. Although many people have problems with the movie’s first 20 to 30 minutes, claiming that the Shire sequence seemed to stretch forever. I only agree with that criticism to a certain extent. I had no problems with Bilbo’s humorous first encounter with the Dwarves. But I thought Jackson lingered unnecessarily too long on the sequence featuring the elderly Bilbo and Frodo. And although I enjoyed the mind game between the younger Bilbo and Gollum, I have yet to develop any fondness for the latter character. And if I have to be brutally honest, I found Howard Shore’s score for this movie less memorable than his work for the“LORD OF THE RING” films.

Despite the conflict over using three movies to adapt Tolkien’s novel and Jackson’s use of a new high frame rate, I have to say that I enjoyed “THE HOBBIT: AN UNDISCOVERED JOURNEY” very much. In fact, I enjoyed it more than I did the second and third movies from the “LORD OF THE RINGS”trilogy. Like 2001’s “LORD OF THE RINGS: FELLOWSHIP OF THE RING”, this new movie is basically a tale about a road trip. And there is nothing more dear to my heart than a road trip. Because Tolkien’s 1937 tale was basically a children’s story, “THE HOBBIT: AN UNEXPECTED JOURNEY” featured a good deal of more humor than was found in the “LORD OF THE RINGS” films. A great deal of that humor came from twelve of the thirteen Dwarves, whom Bilbo and Gandalf accompanied. Four of the funniest sequences turned out to be the Dwarves’ arrival at an increasingly irritated Bilbo’s home in the Shire, the traveling party’s encounter with three Trolls obsessed with their stomachs, the Dwarves’ reactions to Elvish food in Rivendell and Bilbo’s mental duel with Gollum. Like the “LORD OF THE RINGS” movies, “THE HOBBIT: AN UNEXPECTED JOURNEY” also featured some outstanding action sequences – especially the flashbacks about the downfall of the Erebor Dwarves; the traveling party’s efforts to evade the Orc hunting party with the assistance of a wizard named Radagast the Brown; and their battles with both the Goblins, and Azog and the Orcs.

The movie featured some solid performances from the cast. It was good to see Cate Blanchett and Hugo Weaving as Lady Galadriel and her son-in-law Lord Elrond again. Although I am not a fan of the Gollum character, I must admit that Andy Serkis gave another memorable performance of the malignant changeling. However, I am a little confused by his portrayal of Gollum with a split personality, since the character’s moral compass was not challenged by any acts of kindness in this film. Ian McKellen was commanding as ever as the wizard Gandalf the Gray. And it was also nice to see Ian Holm and Elijah Wood as the elderly Bilbo Baggins and Frodo Baggins again. I was a little taken aback by the presence of Christopher Lee reprising his role of the wizard Saruman, but merely as a supporting character and not as a villain. But I have to give kudos to Lee for revealing certain aspects of Saruman’s personality that made his eventual corruption in the “LORD OF THE RINGS” saga.

But there were four performances that really impressed me. I really enjoyed Martin Freeman’s portrayal of Bilbo Baggins. He did an exceptional job of projecting the character’s emotional development from a self-satisfied homebody to the adventurer who wins the respect of the Dwarves with his heroic actions by the end of the movie. I first noticed Richard Armitage in the 2004 television miniseries, “NORTH AND SOUTH” and have been impressed with this actor ever since. I realized that his character Thorin Oakenshield is being compared to the Aragon character from “LORD OF THE RINGS”. I would not bother. Thorin is a more complicated character. And Jackson chose the right actor – namely Armitage – to portray this heroic, yet prickly and hot tempered Dwarf. Thanks to Armitage’s superb performance, it was not hard to understand Gandalf’s frustrations over the character. If I must be honest, my memories of the twelve other Dwarves is a bit shaky. But there were two of them that stood out for me. Ken Stott was very effective as the elderly Balin, who provided a great deal of wisdom in the story. And I really enjoyed James Nesbitt as Bofur, who injected a great deal of charm and liveliness not only in his role, but also in the story.

I realize that “THE HOBBIT: AN UNDISCOVERED JOURNEY” has been receiving mixed reviews from critics. And honestly, I do not care. Mind you, it is not perfect and I see no need for a three-movie adaptation of Tolkien’s 1937 novel. But I really enjoyed watching the movie. It reminded me of the joy I had experienced in watching the first “LORD OF THE RINGS” movie, “Fellowship of the Rings”. And I believe that Peter Jackson and a first-rate cast led by Ian McKellen, Martin Freeman and Richard Armitage did an excellent job in adapting part of Tolkien’s novel.

Boston Creme Pie

857955_300

Below is a brief look at and recipe for the famous New England dessert called the “Boston Creme Pie”

BOSTON CREME PIE

Judging by the name of this famous dessert, one would assume that the Boston Creme Pie was created in Boston, Massachusetts. And one would be right. However, there is a slight confusion over the dessert’s origins. According to John F. Mariani’s 1999 book, “Encyclopedia of American Food and Drink”, the Boston Creme Pie originated during the Early American period and was known as either the “Pudding-Cake Pie”; or when made with a raspberry jelly filling, “Mrs. Washington’s Pie”.

But the current dessert that features the chocolate topping is known as the Boston Creme Pie. And according to many cookbooks, Armenian-French chef M. Sanzian created the dessert at Boston’s famous Parker House Hotel in 1855 or 1856. Like the Pudding-Cake Pie and Mrs. Washington’s Pie, the Boston Creme Pie is actually a pudding and cake combination that comprises at least two or three layers of sponge cake filled with vanilla flavored custard or crème pâtissière. In the case of the Boston Creme Pie, the cake is topped with a chocolate glaze called Ganache. The Commonwealth of Massachusetts declared the Boston Creme Pie as its official dessert in 1996.

The following is a recipe for the dish from thehungrymouse.com website:

Boston Creme Pie

Ingredients

Cake
1/2 cup butter (that’s 1 stick), softened on the counter for 20 minutes or so
1 cup sugar
3 egg yolks
1 tsp. vanilla extract
3/4 cup milk
2 cups cake flour
2 tsp. baking powder
pinch of salt

Cream Filling
1/2 cup sugar
4 egg yolks
6 Tbls. flour
1 1/2 cups milk
2 tsp. vanilla extract

Chocolate Frosting
4 oz. semisweet chocolate, chopped
1/2 cup heavy cream
1 Tbls. butter

Preparations

Cake
Preheat your oven to 375 degrees. Spray 2 8-inch round cake pans with oil, then line with circles of parchment paper. Set them aside. Combine the sugar and butter in the bowl of your mixer. Beat them together until well combined. Add in the egg yolks. Beat again until well combined and kind of fluffy. Scrape down the sides of your bowl with a spatula. Add the milk. Combine the flour, baking powder, and salt in a small bowl. Stir them together with a whisk to combine well. Toss the dry mixture into the butter/sugar in the mixing bowl. Mix on medim-high for maybe 20 or 30 seconds to combine, just until the batter comes together.

The batter will be relatively thick and stiff. Give the batter a stir or two with a spatula to be sure that it’s mixed well and no dry ingredients remain in the very bottom of the bowl. Divide the batter evenly between your two prepared cake pans. Smooth it down with a spatula so it fills the whole pan and is relatively even. Bake cake the 2 cakes for 20-23 minutes at 375 degrees.

They are done when they are golden brown on top and feel firm (not jiggly) in the middle when pressed with a finger. When inserted in the center, a toothpick should come out clean. Cool the cakes in the pans for about 10 minutes. Then, gently run a knife around the whole edge to loosen it, and remove each cake from the pan. (Because you lined each pan with parchment paper, this should be easy). Set the cakes on a rack to cool completely. If your cakes wound up a little crusty on the edges, like this, don’t worry. You’re going to trim those crisp edges right off when you assemble your Boston Cream Pie.

Custard
Fill a medium-sized pot with a few inches of water. Set it on the stove over high heat to bring it up to a boil. Then put the sugar and egg yolks in a large heatproof bowl. Whisk together until well combined. Add the flour. Whisk to combine. Pour in the milk. And the vanilla. Whisk to combine. When your pot of water is boiling, drop the heat to low. Set the bowl on top of the pot of water. Whisk it constantly for 5-7 minutes until it starts thicken. Keep whisking until the custard gets very thick. It’s done when it coats the back of a spoon. Give it a taste. It should have a nice custard-y taste, without any hint of raw flour. When it is done, take it off the heat. Cool it on the counter to room temperature, then pop it in the fridge to chill it completely.

Chocolate Frosting
Fill a medium-sized pot with a few inches of water. Set it on the stove over high heat to bring it up to a boil. If you are making the frosting right after the custard, just use the same pot of simmering water. Chop up the chocolate. Put it into a large heatproof bowl. Pour in the cream. When your pot of water is boiling, drop the heat to low. Set the bowl on top of the pot of water. Toss in the butter. The chocolate should start to melt almost immediately. Whisk to combine. Keep whisking until all the chocolate is melted and you have a uniform mixture. Set the chocolate frosting aside to cool. As it cools, it will thicken up. If you put it in the fridge, keep a close eye on it. It can go from nice and thick to solid fudge in no time flat.

Assemble the Dessert

Do not do this until all of your components are completely cool. If you try to put it together when any piece is warm, you will wind up with a slippery, drippy mess.

Start by trimming your cakes. Carefully set them one on top of the other. With a serrated bread knife, cut the edges off. Go slowly and press down on the top of the cake with one hand to keep it from ripping. Should you have an accident with one of the cakes, like this, do not fret. Just use that cake as the bottom layer. The custard filling will help glue the whole thing together once it gets cold in the fridge.

Set one cake on your serving platter, bottom side facing up. Do this so that your custard goes on a flat—not slightly domed—surface. Grab the custard filling from the fridge. It should be nice and thick. Spoon it out onto the cake. Reserve a few spoonfuls of custard for later, to help stick the almonds to the side of the cake. Spread the custard to the edges with a rubber spatula. Put the second cake right on top. Grab your chocolate frosting. Spoon it out onto the top of the cake. Spread it around until the top of the cake is covered. Pop two toothpicks into the cake to hold the layers together for now, until it’s completely chilled. With your finger, brush the leftover custard onto the edges of the cake, so it’s covered in a thin layer.

Note

According to this recipe, the Boston Cream Pie is best served on the day that it is put together. The dessert has three parts – the cake, the custard filling and the chocolate frosting. Following the preparation of all three parts, they need to be completely cooled before the dessert is assembled.

“EVIL UNDER THE SUN” (1982) Review

EvilSun11

 

“EVIL UNDER THE SUN” (1982) Review

For many years, I tried to pretend that Agatha Christie’s 1941 novel, “Evil Under the Sun” was a personal favorite of mine. I really tried to accept this opinion, knowing that it was a popular favorite of many Christie fans. But for some reason, any deep interest in the novel’s plot failed to grab me. 

Produced by John Bradbourne and Richard Goodwin, and directed by Guy Hamilton; this “EVIL UNDER THE SUN” is basically about Belgian-born detective Hercule Poirot’s investigation into the murder of a famous English stage star, while on holiday in the Adriatic Sea. The movie begins with an unidentified female hiker reporting her discovery of a murdered woman named Alice Ruber on the Yorkshire moors. The story jumps to London, where Poirot is asked to investigate the circumstances of a millionaire’s diamond that turned out to be fake. Poirot’s investigation leads him to millionaire Sir Horace Blatt, who had originally given the diamond to his former lover – stage actress Arlena Stuart Marshall. After receiving the diamond, she eventually dumped him and married another. Sir Horace reveals that Arlena and her new husband plans to visit Daphne’s Island, an Adriatic Sea island resort owned by former showgirl Daphne Castle. During his holiday there, Poirot eventually discovers that there are others who have a grudge against Arlena:

*Daphne Castle – a former professional rival of Arlena, who had fallen in love with the famous actress’ husband, before he met the latter

*Kenneth Marshall – Arlena’s wealthy new husband, who is unhappy over Arlena’s extramarital affair with another guest and her bitchy treatment of his daughter; and who is also in love with Daphne

*Linda Marshall – Arlena’s stepdaughter, who detests her

*Patrick Redfern – a school teacher, who also happens to be Arlena’s current lover

*Christine Redfern – Patrick’s mousy wife, who resented Arlena’s affair with her husband

*Odell and Myra Gardener – husband and wife stage producers, desperate to cast Arlena in their new play

*Rex Brewster – a witty writer and theater critic who had written an unauthorized biography of Arlena

After two days on the island, Arlena sets out on her own for a private boat ride around the island. She is found strangled to death on one of the island’s secluded beaches, nearly two hours after Poirot saw her depart on a small paddle-boat. Daphne recruits Poirot to unveil the murderer before the local police can being their own investigation.

I recently watched the 2001 television adaptation of Christie’s novel. Aside from some changes, the movie more or less followed the literary version. This 1982 version, which featured Peter Ustinov as Poirot, featured more changes to Christie’s tale. Screenwriters Barry Sandler and Anthony Schaffer (who had also co-written 1974’s “MURDER ON THE ORIENT EXPRESS” and written 1978’s “DEATH ON THE NILE”) changed the story’s location from the coast of Devon to an exclusive island resort in the Adriatic Sea (filmed in Majorca, Spain). Linda Marshall’s age was reduced from sixteen years old to at least twelve to thirteen years old. Although this reduction in age made it impossible for Linda to be considered a genuine suspect, she still played a major role in Poirot’s investigation. Sandler and Schaffer also glamorized the movie’s setting by allowing some of the suspects to reflect Arlena’s show business background. The Gardeners were transformed from mere American tourists to theater producers. The screenwriters transformed spinster Emily Brewster into writer/theater critic Rex Brewster, with the theatricality and wit of Noel Coward. Horace Blatt went from a slightly wealthy braggart to the garrulous self-made millionaire industrialist Sir Horace Blatt. Dressmaker Rosamund Darnley transformed into former showgirl-turned-royal mistress-turned resort owner Daphne Castle. And characters such as Stephen Lane and Major Barry were completely written out of the story . . . thank goodness. If I must be brutally honest, Schaffer and Sandler’s revamp of Christie’s novel made the story a lot more interesting and entertaining for me.

“EVIL UNDER THE SUN” was not perfect. It had a few flaws that either confused me or I found unappealing. One, I never understood why the insurance papers regarding the Alice Ruber case were in Poirot’s possession during his stay at Daphne’s Island. I understood that he was investigating Sir Horace’s fake diamond on behalf of the same insurance company. But why bring along the files for another case . . . even if that case proved to have a connection to Arlena’s killer? Although I enjoyed most of Anthony Powell’s colorful costume designs, there were a few selections I found either mind boggling or extremely tasteless. In one scene, both Maggie Smith and Diana Rigg wore outfits with material from the same source – white something with gaudy, colorful baubbles. Take a look:

vlcsnap-1792935

And in another scene, Sylvia Miles wore the following costume:

Costume Anthony Powell 1982

A black evening gown with reddish-pink and white polka dots, a plunging neckline and puffy sleeves? What on earth was Powell thinking when he created this costume for the actress? However, I still enjoyed the rest of Powell’s creations, which perfectly captured the movie’s comedic and slightly campy tone. I especially enjoyed the salmon-colored gown Rigg wore during Poirot’s second evening on the island and the black-and-white number that Miles wore during the detective’s first evening. And the costumes for the men – especially the evening wear – struck me as well tailored. Powell’s costumes were not the only artistic contributions to the film that I enjoyed. Christopher Challis’ photography of Majorca, Spain; which stood for the French Riviera and Daphne’s Island; struck me as colorful, sharp and very beautiful – a perfect reflection of sunshine elegance. And music arranger John Dalby make great use of various Cole Porter tunes in the movie

Most of my observations regarding “EVIL UNDER THE SUN” are definitely positive. It is one of my top favorite Agatha Christie adaptations of all time. Thanks to Schaffer and Sandler’s revisions in Christie’s tale and Guy Hamilton’s elegant, yet lively direction, “EVIL UNDER THE SUN” proved to be the wittiest Christie movie I have ever seen hands down. Nearly every character – including Emily Hone, who must have been in her early teens at the time – had some juicy lines. And I consider it to be twice as entertaining and superior to the 1941 novel. Between the show biz background of some of the characters – including Arlena Marshall, the witty dialogue and the movie’s exclusive setting; “EVIL UNDER THE SUN” managed to beautifully recapture the ambivalence of the cafe society between the 1930s and 1950s that included celebrated wits, actors and actresses, musicians, writers, and well-known high society figures. This was especially apparent in scenes that featured the evening gatherings of the guests in the hotel’s main drawing room. The apex of these scenes featured an entertaining and rather funny rendition of Cole Porter’s “You’re the Top” by Diana Rigg (along with an interruption or two from Maggie Smith).

As for the murder mystery itself, it does not have the same emotional resonance as “MURDER ON THE ORIENT EXPRESS” or “DEATH ON THE NILE”. There is no real emotional connections between the victim and the killer. This does not mean that I regard the 1982 movie inferior to the other two. “EVIL UNDER THE SUN” is simply a different kettle of fish. The murderer is too cold-blooded and the victim is too self-absorbed for any emotional connection. And the movie has a comedic, yet elegant that makes it a lighter fare than its two predecessors – like a delicious, yet fulfilling souffle.

As for the cast . . . ah, the cast! How I adore every last one of them. Every time I watch “EVIL UNDER THE SUN”, I am constantly surprised by the chemistry between James Mason and Sylvia Miles, who portrayed the producing husband-and-wife team, Odell and Myra Gardener. It still amazes me that two performer with such different backgrounds and acting style should click so well on screen. Jane Birkin, who appeared in “DEATH ON THE NILE” with both Peter Ustinov and Smith, did an excellent job as the cuckolded wife, Christine Redfern. She managed to effectively combined Christine’s mousiness and penchant for nagging with great ease. I have a confession to make. I was never that impressed by Nicholas Clay’s performance as Sir Lancelot in 1981’s “EXCALIBUR”. But I really enjoyed his performance as the charming and slightly roguish Patrick Redfern, who loved his wife, but enjoyed having a good time with Arlena. This was the second time he had portrayed an adulterer. And honestly? He was a lot sexier in this film. Denis Quilley, who was stuck in a one-dimensional role in “MURDER ON THE ORIENT EXPRESS”, had a better opportunity to shine as Arlena’s dignified, yet cuckolded husband, Kenneth Marshall. And he also had a nice chemistry with Smith. Like Quilley, Colin Blakely had a better role in “EVIL UNDER THE SUN” than he did in “MURDER ON THE ORIENT EXPRESS”. He was deliciously sardonic and earthy as the slightly embittered Sir Horace Blatt, the millionaire whom Arlena made a chump.

The bitchfest between Maggie Smith’s Daphne Castle and Diana Rigg’s Arlena Marshall turned out to be a moviegoer’s dream. Both were absolutely delightful as the warm and pragmatic Daphne and the arrogant and self-absorbed Arlena, the former rivals who resumed their conflict with delicious verbal warfare and one-upmanship. Roddy McDowell’s portrayal of writer/critic Rex Brewster turned out to be the biggest bitch on the island. The actor had some of the best lines in the film. His response to the Gardeners’ suggestion that he go play with himself had me in stiches for at least two to three minutes. Surprisingly, novice actress Emily Hone engaged in her own bitchfest with McDowall’s Brewster . . . and did a great job in the process. I was surprised by her ability to hold her own with the actor and other members of the cast despite her age and lack of experience. Pity that “EVIL UNDER THE SUN” proved to be her only work in films.

Peter Ustinov returned for a second time as Belgian detective Hercule Poirot and seemed better than ever. Mind you, I was very impressed by his performance in “DEATH ON THE NILE”, but in this film he seemed more relaxed . . . enough to include more of his personal style in the role. Like the rest of the cast, he had his own memorable lines. But the one sequence in which he really impressed me proved to be the scene in which Poirot reveals the murderer. The murderer revelation scenes has always been among my favorites in any Christie adaptation. But Ustinov really outdid himself in the one for “EVIL UNDER THE SUN”. I was so impressed by the actor’s pacing and use of both the dialogue and his voice that this movie ended up featuring my favorite murderer revelation scene of all time.

“EVIL UNDER THE SUN” is not my favorite Christie adaptation movie. And I found a few flaws in both the screenplay and Anthony Powell’s costumes that has left me scratching my head. But I cannot deny that the 1982 movie is among my top five favorite Christie movies. From my point of view, I would attribute this to Anthony Schaffer and Barry Sandler’s witty screenplay, Guy Hamilton’s well-paced direction and hilariously outstanding performances from a cast led by the very talented Peter Ustinov. I could watch this movie over and over again.