Showing posts with label the bucket list. Show all posts
Showing posts with label the bucket list. Show all posts

Monday, February 3, 2025

Getting in touch with the zeitgeist in 2025

I tried to find some directors with exactly six films remaining in their filmography that I hadn't seen. I really did. 

If you don't know what I'm talking about, when I finished last year's bi-monthly viewing series Audient Outliers, I said that in 2025 I wanted to return to finishing off the final six films I hadn't seen by some great director, which I have now done, in some form, in four different years. (I say "in some form" because one year I split the task between two directors who each had three, Kathryn Bigelow and Jane Campion.) 

But I couldn't find the right candidate. Some people I thought would be great candidates had well over ten films I hadn't seen, and in some cases it was closer to 20. I got one person down to eight, and though I did do this sort of series for Spike Lee (the first time I did it) when he had eight films I hadn't seen at the time -- the last two of which I still haven't seen -- I feel I'm a bit more rigorous nowadays.

I may just sneak in two films by that filmmaker in 2025 in order to make them the focus of my bi-monthly series in 2026. We'll have to see about that.

In the meantime, another idea had to take its place.

To tell you how I got my inspiration would ruin one of my selections, and for some reason I don't want to do that at this juncture. I'll do it when the movie actually comes up for viewing. For now, I'll just tell you what the idea is:

Every other month starting in February, I'm going to watch movies that have a known role in the zeitgeist but which I haven't seen. 

I'll give an example of what I'm talking about from a movie I have seen: The Bucket List. Which you may have guessed from the poster above.

Rob Reiner's film came out 18 years ago, in 2007. Before that, none us knew what a bucket list was because the concept didn't exist. In the 18 years since, everyone knows -- and that movie was not even very good. (I thought it might have been adapted from a novel, but it turns out screenwriter Justin Zackham came up with the concept himself.)

In 2025, I'm going to watch movies like that. 

So yes, it will be six movies whose titles have a larger place in our cultural, for whatever reason. It could be because people talk about their central concept in the same way they talk about the central concept of The Bucket List. It could be because the plot has something famous about it, leading screenwriters in other films to have their characters talk about it, in addition to us talking about it in the real world. It could be because the movie itself accomplished some record feat as a flop or a hit, meaning it has become a cultural touchstone for that reason.

This is not to be confused with watching great movies that I should have seen before now, because everyone knows and talks about them for their greatness. In fact, I don't expect many of the movies in this series to be great, though some could be. 

The thing I really like about this idea is that I will let the culture I otherwise consume in 2025 give me options to flesh out the series as the year goes on. I already have three titles that are short-listed, but the third could actually drop out if it needs to, if other better options come along. (In fact, each of the three choices conforms to one of the three ways I characterized a zeitgeist film two paragraphs ago.)

So the idea will be to watch these, just to have watched them, but also to come up with thoughts on whether the reason these are in the zeitgeist is valid. Like, should we really still be talking about these films, in some cases all these years later?

The series will be called Audient Zeitgeist, and as it is now February, it could start any day now. 

Thursday, June 10, 2010

Shoehorning a classic


I'm reviewing The Bucket List for my website, and as I plopped it into my DVD player yesterday, I came across this ridiculous public service announcement, a "classic" that I'd laughed at many times before.

For those of you who don't want to follow the link to youtube, it's part of the anti-piracy campaign that you've seen running on DVDs before the trailers in recent years. You may remember the other really prominent one, with the overwrought music and the grainy images of shady customers buying shady videos from shady street vendors. ("You wouldn't steal a car, you wouldn't steal a purse," etc.)

The absurd thing about this particular one is that it uses famous scenes from Casablanca -- scenes whose dialogue has nothing whatsoever to do with pirating DVDs.

That should be perfectly obvious, Vance. Casablanca was made in 1942, and DVDs did not exist until the late 1990s.

Right, but the dialogue doesn't have anything to do with any kind of theft of anything.

Here are the lines from the movie they use:

Bergman: "Richard, we loved each other once. If those days meant anything at all to you--"

Bogie: "I wouldn't bring up Paris if I were you, it's poor salesmanship."

Bogie: "I wouldn't believe you no matter what you told me. You'd say anything now to get what you want."

Bergman: "There's so much at stake, all you can think of is your old feeling."

Bogie: "Go ahead and shoot. You'll be doing me a favor."

And here are the title cards in between these quotes, using an incredibly low-rent font that resembles a kids show on Nickelodeon more than one of cinema's most beloved films:

RICK IS REALLY UPSET.

THE WOMAN HE LOVES IS PIRATING DVDS.

NO MATTER HOW YOU SAY IT ...

PIRATING IS STEALING

RICK'S FEELINGS TELL HIM PIRACY IS WRONG.

DEEP DOWN ILSA FEELS IT TOO.

MAKING TIME WITH VICTOR'S GIRL: GOOD

PIRATING DVDs: BAD

Now, other than the fact that Casablanca is one of the most universally recognizable cinematic properties out there, who in their right mind thought that this footage was a logical match for this message?

I'm not opposed in principle to repurposing classic footage like this, as long as the usage of it is clever. But in this case it is beyond lazy. Although I've seen Casablanca only once (for shame), I'm willing to bet that these weren't even the best passages they could have chosen from Casablanca to peddle their anti-piracy message. And surely, other films would have yielded far more relevant results, not to mention having far more easily attainable rights.

It's simply laughable.

Note to self: If you are a Boston fan and are the least bit superstitious, it's probably not a good idea to watch a Jack Nicholson movie on the same day as an important game in the NBA Finals between the Celtics and the Lakers. (Final score: Lakers 91, Celtics 84. D'oh!)