Movie Rant: 20 years from now, will Jaws still be considered a classic?

Steven Spielberg with "Bruce."

Last month, during the Easter long weekend, my two young cousins told me that they'd recently watched Jaws for the first time.

"Yeah?! And?" I asked. "What did you think?"

The elder cousin said, "It was kind of cheesy and not even scary" while the younger one shrugged and said "the shark looked so stupid and fake."

I'm not gonna lie: I was a little crestfallen. I'd never heard someone say that before about Jaws or "Bruce", the famously malfunctioning shark robot.

"Well, it was fake," was my lame response. "You have to remember the time in which it was made."

I asked them what their friends thought of it and they responded with, "they also thought it was boring and fake."

Now, maybe it was a bit naive on my part to assume that they would gush and swoon over what many consider to be one of director Steven Spielberg's greatest film achievements. They are only 15 and 10 years old, after all. But, still. These girls are pretty patient with "older" films (i.e. movies that were made before the rise of Kristen Stewart or Channing Tatum) -- they even expressed their recent love for Titanic even though it's, and I quote, "pretty old." So, the fact that they were so quick to dismiss Jaws surprised me a little. Even when I was a kid in the '90's, it was still considered a really cool movie.

I mean, the 1975 underwater horror classic is the reason we have blockbuster movies today. Without Jaws there would never would have been an Indiana Jones, an Avengers, a Lord of the Rings or even a Star Wars (although George Lucas may take issue with that). For that reason alone, it deserves its place in film history books. What makes it so great is the fact that we so rarely get a glimpse of the shark -- it goes back to the whole notion of how what we don't see is often scarier that what is shown to us.

In this increasingly digital age, though, what does this say about the future of certain film classics if the next generation of film fans brush off older flicks because of what they consider to be clunky technology? We assume that once a film is a classic and revered in film circles around the world, it will always be so. And, for many, that will remain the case. But what about the old-school thrillers or movies that rely heavily on computer technology? I just feel that, more and more, an emphasis on technology and special effects is at the top of moviemakers' lists -- so where does that leave Jaws?

Roy Scheider battles the Great White.

There are certain classics that I don't worry about -- their fates are sealed and they are destined to age gracefully. I'm thinking of The Godfather, a towering cinematic achievement that doesn't have to worry about technology and gadgets that will (unintentionally) prematurely age and outdate it. I would even argue that Star Wars is relatively safe what with Lucas' incessant tinkering, nit-picking and re-releases. Ditto anything directed by James Cameron, the George Lucas of a new generation.

I know comments like the ones my cousins made are inevitable and probably not all that uncommon (I'm just in denial, clearly). I'm also probably being crazy and reading too much into it -- but, once I started thinking about it, the more I realized that Jaws' of the film world may struggle to survive and retain their relevance and cultural significance down the road.

Of course there will always be film buffs to defend it and discuss it, but I'm talking about the average moviegoer. Will it be remembered ...or ignored?

But I guess this is how people felt when black and white receded into the background and colour became the "next big thing." While today's generation of kids likely wouldn't be caught dead watching a black and white film, there are still plenty out there who appreciate them.

But, in the age of torture-porn like the Saw franchise and Rob Zombie horror adaptations, Jaws apparently just doesn't cut it anymore. There has to be blood splattered to engage an audience or there has to be massive explosions to provide thrills. Somehow, I feel like it will be different this time around -- it won't be quite like the disappearance of black and white films.

As for me, I still think "Bruce" looks pretty damn realistic.

Celebrity Birthday: Marlon Brando

"To the end of his life, Marlon Brando insisted that he had done nothing special. In his view acting was a trade like plumbing or baking. The only difference was that he played characters instead of unclogging drains or kneading loaves of bread. This was not false modesty; he believed what he said. But what he believed was untrue."
~Stefan Kanfer (opening passage from Somebody: The Reckless Life and Remarkable Career of Marlon Brando)

Today would have been Marlon Brando's 88th birthday. I thought I'd mark the occasion with a little post and video link because, really, the man was an artist -- and my favourite actor. Ever.

I became a fan of his eight years ago -- in 2004, the year of his death. Months before he passed away I saw The Godfather for the first time. Up until that point, Brando had been little else to me other than some strange, reclusive actor that was super-famous once. Not only did I wind up absolutely loving the film but I was struck by how Brando had an almost unnatural ability to command the screen and steal every scene. A couple weeks later I watched A Streetcar Named Desire. Then The Wild One. Then On the Waterfront. Followed by Last Tango in Paris. I have since seen the majority of his films (with the exception of the couple of his more obscure, hard-to-track-down titles).

After reading Stefan Kanfer's biography in 2008, I realized that Brando was so much more interesting than even his craziest character incarnations. He used the Method when performing, well before it was mainstream. He was an activist at heart, battling racial segregation in America in the 1960s and providing a public voice for struggling First Nations actors. He remained loyal to family and friends who stuck by him through thick and thin, including maintaining long-term friendships with neighbours Jack Nicholson and Michael Jackson. He had plenty of Hollywood rivals, including an ongoing feud with Frank Sinatra. He had volatile relationships with women, marrying three times and fathering (at least) 10 children. He never abused drugs or alcohol, yet often fell prey to his weakness for food.

If you haven't read it already, I'd recommend Kanfer's biography or even Brando's own 1994 autobiography Songs My Mother Taught Me, although I've only read snippets of it online because it's out of print.

So, happy birthday to my favourite actor. As film historian Molly Haskell once wrote, "there is only one Brando."

The famous hour-long 1994 Larry King interview.

30 Day Movie Meme: Day 19

Day 19 : FAVOURITE FILM FROM YOUR FAVOURITE ACTOR AND ACTRESS

Marlon Brando in The Godfather (1972)

This wasn't a hard decision, seeing as The Godfather is both my favourite film and the movie that first introduced me to Marlon Brando. I was a late bloomer, having only seen the film for the first time in 2004, the year of Brando's death. I credit the film, and Brando's performance, with jump-starting my classic film viewing binge for the last six (almost seven) years. It was the first time I realized how remarkable a film can be and how powerful a person's performance. On those occasions when both the film and lead actor are equally worthy of each other, it can solidify a viewer's love for film, as it did mine.

Members of the Mafia don't have my sympathy. They ensure, through their violence and dominance, that corruption will endure. The Mafia wipe out those, big or small, who stand in their way or offend their family's honour. With Francis Ford Coppola's groundbreaking direction and Brando's iconic and influential performance, The Godfather and the character of Don Vito Corleone remain compelling examples of what a thoughtful script and an effective performance can do for a film about an illegal underground operation that maims and kills.

I don't have a lot of love for Michael Corleone because he becomes everything his father was not (but I love Al Pacino in the role!). Vito is a different story. Coppola and Brando managed to convey the life regrets of an aging Don; a once indomitable man who now fears the old adage "the sins of the father are to be laid upon the children." He slowly becomes a broken man as he loses one child ("Look what they did to my boy."), only to have the other follow in his blood-soaked footsteps.

Bette Davis in Whatever Happened to Baby Jane? (1962)

My mom showed this film to my sister and I when we were children. I was probably 10 or 11, at the most. The fact that my mom managed to make two young girls watch a black and white film from the 1960s was a remarkable feat in and of itself, made all the more incredible by the fact that we loved the film so much we'd watch in often enough to recite dialogue. While this isn't necessarily the best Davis film (that would probably go to All About Eve or even Now, Voyager), it's my absolute favourite. Not only was it my introduction to Davis, much like The Godfather introduced me to Brando, but her performance is probably one of my favourites, ever.

Whatever Happened to Baby Jane? is an odd little film, part-horror and part-camp. You don't know whether to laugh or cringe and the fact that it can consistently make you do both is a big part of why I love this film so much. Joan Crawford is wonderful as the wheelchair-bound Blanche, older sister to former child star, Jane (Bette Davis). But make no mistake, this is Davis' film and her performance is outrageous and over-the-top. Those might sound like bad qualities in a performance, but who wants subtlety when you have Davis in your film? She's perfect as the off-her-rocker, crazy-jealous former star who wants nothing more than to regain the glory days of the fleeting fame she experienced as a child.

My favourite scene also conveys the internal conflict of this aging beauty: Jane starts singing a song from her youth she once sang at the peak of her fame. Wearing a dress that is identical to the one adorning the doll version of her younger self, Jane's child-like nature comes through, only to come to an abrupt halt when she looks in the mirror and comes face-to-face with mortality and the passage of time.

30 Day Movie Meme: Day 14

Day 14: FAVOURITE FILM SEQUEL


It's rare to find a sequel to a film that either equals or surpasses the excellence of its predecessor.

Fans of The Godfather films are usually divided into two camps: (1) Those who cite the original one as the crowning achievement of the series or (2) those who believe that the sequel, simply titled The Godfather: Part II, is greater than the original due largely to the presence of Robert DeNiro and his role as young Vito Corleone.

The Godfather: Part II is my favourite film sequel. It continues the Corleone saga with a well-structured and tightly wound script. It boasts some of the trilogy's greatest scenes and proves that sequels don't always suck. Instead of appearing as a cash grab or an attempt to capitalize on the success of the first film, The Godfather: Part II is a legitimate and engrossing continuation of a dark and fascinating family drama. Gangsters never looked or sounded so badass. Forget The Sopranos: who could be scarier than Don Vito and Michael Corleone? They would crush Tony Soprano with their thumbs and those classy suits.

That being said, The Godfather: Part II is not my favourite film of the trilogy. My heart still belongs to the first film, but I'll save that debate for another day.

All in all, The Godfather: Part II is likely the most flawless film sequel you will ever come across (which makes the uneven The Godfather: Part III all the more tragic because it ruined what would have been the rarest of occurrences in the world of cinema: a perfect trilogy).

I believe the reason The Godfather: Part II makes such a great sequel is because it was made in the days before overkill. Back in the day when, for the most part, films were made for film fans. Back in the day when sequels weren't churned out year by year, with no apparent purpose or any evident effort. The fact that The Godfather: Part II is just as solid and well-made as its predecessor speaks volumes to that fact.

Sure, T2: Judgement Day was a great sequel that improved on the first film. Ditto The Dark Knight the Star Wars sequel, The Empire Strikes Back. Some might even argue that The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers trumps The Fellowship of the Ring.

But they aren't on the same level as The Godfather: Part II.

Favourite Film Scenes: The Godfather (1972)

THE GODFATHER
DIRECTED BY: Francis Ford Coppola
STARRING: Marlon Brando, Al Pacino, Robert Duvall and James Caan

BASIC PLOT: Based on the novel by Mario Puzo, it follows the lives of the Corleone family. Set in 1950's New York, when patriarch Don Vito Corleone (Marlon Brando) is at his height of power in the Mafia underworld, the plot trails the passing of the torch between Don Vito and his second-oldset son, Michael (Al Pacino). Business remains all in the family.

FAVOURITE SCENE: The restaurant scene when Michael meets with rival Mob leader, Sollozzo, and the dirty cop, McCluskey. Michael's father, Don Vito, has been the target of an assassination attempt and Michael, who is Ivy League-educated and a decorated Second World War veteran, wants vengeance for the actions taken against his father. This is the first time Michael is involved in the "family business" and while he may seen soft-spoken and willing to co-operate with Sollozzo, there is barely concealed anger in his eyes. Will he kill the two men or won't he?

WHY? Francis Ford Coppola lensed countless memorable moments in his masterpiece, however, the restaurant scene leaves a lasting impression due to the fact that, once Michael commits the two murders, there is no turning back for him. It's the start of his journey that will eventually see him move up in the ranks into a leadership position himself.

The scene starts off with a glass of wine and a business discussion in Italian. There are no subtitles to translate the conversation, therefore, the audience is left to come to their own conclusions as to what is being said based on tone of voice, body language and overall expressiveness. The audience is in the same position as Officer McCluskey; left alone outside of the conversation, waiting to see how it will all pan out.

When Michael excuses himself to use the washroom you know that, in actuality, he's looking for the gun that was left for him behind a toilet bowl. The only sounds that can be heard are that of a passing train; reflecting the inner turmoil and brief hesitation we see in Michael as he discovers the gun.

Coppola's decision not to use a background score (until after the murders take place) adds to the building tension in the scene. You can clearly hear the conversation, as well as city sounds in the background. One can perceive that the lack of a musical score at this time reflects Michael's emotional state; he's calm and focused and nothing will distract him from what he's come to do. Only after he's brutally shot the two men at the table, does the score kick in, as though to reflect the release of Michael's tension.

The scene is beautifully executed (no pun intended) and Al Pacino instills Michael with fire and brimstone beneath a calm exterior. In that brief moment we see the man that Michael will become and we understand that, for his character, there is no turning back. His fate was cemented the moment he show Sollozzo and McCluskey as an act of revenge for his father's near-death experience. 

Every subsequent Mafia film has tried, and failed, to capture that same amount of tension and realistic violence Coppola has in his film classic.

Method Men: Marlon Brando and Jimmy Dean

About six years ago I caught Rebel Without A Cause on t.v. late one night. I was exhausted that day. I had planned to go to bed but I was struck by the image of James Dean, lying on the ground with a wind-up toy monkey, in the opening credit sequence for the film. I recognized the iconic red jacket. It was around this time that my obsession with classic film was just starting to really peak and take off so I decided, despite my exhaustion, to watch this much-beloved teen classic. I hadn't counted on actually being able to stay wide-awake into the wee morning hours.

The film itself is significant to 1950s film history. While parts of it may not have aged very well it still deserves its place amongst the Hollywood elite. This, in large part, is thanks to the performance of Dean. I was intrigued by his performance. He had reminded me so much of a young Marlon Brando.

Around this time I'd only recently become enamoured with Marlon Brando (the previous year I'd watched The Godfather for the first time and fell in love with Brando's talent). Dean reminded me of Brando, despite their differences in acting style. Dean clearly idolized and tried to mimic Brando, yet he managed to make all three of his film performances unique. From the inspiration he got from Brando he came up with his own style and helped revolutionize acting in film in the 1950s. Drawing from real life experiences and tragedies, Dean utilized these emotions when creating a character so that the audience could relate and sympathize with someone like Cal Trask in East of Eden, my favourite Dean film and performance.

Brando and Dean were both amongst the first to use the Method Approach in film acting. It originally started out as a theatre movement in the 1930s in which actors attempt to seek out the emotional "truth" of the character they are portraying. In order to effectively present these emotions and psychological torment, actors were often forced to look to themselves and their personal lives for inspiration. Brando was famous for remaining in character on set, even going so far as to remain in the character of Terry from On the Waterfront for the duration of filming, both on and off set.

Rarely do I watch a film only to walk away from it absolutely fascinated and in awe of the talent before me. Young actors today rarely go out of their way to bring something fresh and original to their performances, which is why they (hopefully) won't have the enduring cult power of Jimmy Dean. Or have millions of loyalists who declare Brando as the greatest actor of all time.

Marlon Brando and Jimmy Dean embodied the charisma, beauty and talent that most actors can only dream of achieving for themselves. They were the epitome of masculine-cool. Both were ahead of the game in the way they portrayed conflicted young rebels. They helped make it okay for male characters to cry in film. Gone were the days of the alpha-male, like John Wayne; all blazing guns and snarls. Dean and, especially, Brando helped usher in a new generation of young, Method actors who saw performance as an art form worthy of sweat and tears. With trailblazers like Brando and Dean, would we have had the likes of Daniel Day-Lewis and Viggo Mortensen today?

It's been fifty-four years since Dean's death in a car accident, yet time has not diminished his star. To some people he may be a product, just another young dead celebrity face on a poster or a purse, but to his real fans he was a first-class movie star.

They don't make celebrities like Marlon and Jimmy anymore.

~Laura~