So here's my story: When I was a kid, around 11 or 12, I turned on the TV and caught the last five minutes of this movie. It blew my mind and I was outraged that I had missed the whole thing. The next day at school I asked all my friends if they'd seen it. No one had.
Back then, in rural British Columbia, we only got two television channels, so it was inconceivable that none of my friends -- NONE OF THEM -- had seen it.
Looking back, maybe there was a big hockey game on the other channel, I don't know. Nevertheless, for years I doubted that I had actually seen it. I convinced myself that I'd dreamed it or something.
Then I started hearing about it on the internet. It was real! I hadn't dreamed it! Then yesterday I found a VHS copy in my local thrift store. I picked it up and last night I forced my family to watch it.
Well, it was entertaining, but not without its problems. It's very dated and certainly NOT politically correct. The film was produced in 1967 by Saul Rankin and Jules Bass, the same guys who made Rudolph the Red Nosed Reindeer and Frosty the Snowman. It was co-written by Harvey Kurtzman who wrote for MAD Magazine.
The film features Baron Boris Von Frankenstein, voiced by Boris Karloff, gathering all the monsters at his castle to retire and pass on his secrets. The other monsters, Dracula, The Mummy, the werewolf, the creature, etc, realize that he is going to give his secrets to his nephew, Felix. Each wants the secret for himself and chaos ensues.
The film has some good performances and some bad ones. The animation is really clunky and Phyllis Diller plays, Phyllis Diller, which can get old pretty quick.
Some of the musical numbers are good and some are terrible -- I mean really bad! And the attitudes are very dated. The female lead, Francesca, wants the secret for herself and hates Felix until, in a moment of hysteria, Felix slaps her around. Then she falls in love with him! Wow! Not cool!
Should you see it? Yes, particularly if you are old enough to have potentially seen it as a kid. It's loaded with nostalgia. If you are younger it probably will mean little to you without the cultural context. This is stop motion animation -- NOT CGI.
Anyway, now that I have finally seen the thing after waiting for 36 years, I can cross THE MAD MONSTER PARTY off my bucket list. Yay!
Frank Frazetta and Ralph Bakshi got together and made Fire and Ice back in 1983. Using his rotoscoped animation technique Bakshi tried to make the paintings of Frank Frazetta come to life. The results were mixed at best.
Now director Robert Ridriguez wants to use the same cinematic techniques he used to bring Frank Miller's Sin City to the screen to film a live action remake of Fire and Ice.
“I want it to look like you just stepped into one of his (Frazetta's) paintings, where you get to see his world, and how he saw people, anatomy, and composition and color,” Rodriguez said. “It will feel like it’s real, but not real. It’ll be his reality. He saw things differently. He painted from his imagination. He didn’t take a photograph and just paint it.”
Here is some of the concept art:
Can this happen? Pleeeeease!
I've been here and there. I've drawn a lot of pictures. I've written a bit, too. I'm not good at this self-promotion thing. Look, you want to know about me? just visit these websites. Okay?
www.mdjacksonart.weebly.com
http://mdjackson.deviantart.com
http://community.imaginefx.com/fxpose/mdjacksons%5Fportfolio
So last night I started watching DaVinci's Demons, a British-American series which presents a highly fantastical representation of Leonardo Davinci's early adult life as an artist, inventor, idealist and intellect and Florence under the Medici's. The series is conceived and written by David S. Goyer.
Described as a historical fantasy, the series explores the untold story of DaVinci "inventing" the future at the age of 25, at a time in history when “thought and faith are controlled...as one man fights to set knowledge free.” The young DaVinci struggles with his inner darkness “tortured by a gift of superhuman genius. He is a heretic intent on exposing the lies of religion. An insurgent seeking to subvert an elitist society. A bastard son who yearns for legitimacy with his father.”
I was not expecting much with this show so I was pleasantly surprised at how good it is. It strikes the right balance of history and fantasy. DaVinci is presented as a sort of Florentine Sherlock, his unique vision and insights highlighted by moments of slow-motion and animated DaVinci drawings.
In fact, if you're waiting impatiently for the new season of SHERLOCK in October (and, let's face it, who isn't?) then this just might be the series to tide you over. Visually it is very lush with beautiful scenery and costumes and, as this is Starz, there are enough expletives, boobs, bums and dicks on display to satisfy the GAME OF THRONES/SPARTACUS crowd. There is also enough action, sword fights, spurting blood, clever chases and explosions to satisfy attention deficit viewers.
Tom Riley does his best Benedict Cumberbatch/Johnny Lee Miller as Leonardo. He is difficult, a womanizer, a drunkard as well as a man of frenetic action and tortured genius. The rest of the cast is good and mostly British. DEEP SPACE NINE fans will recognize Julian Bashir -- Alexander Siddig as Al-Rahim and SHERLOCK aficionados will recognize Irene Adler -- Lara Pulver as Clarice Orsini.
I'm only two episodes in but I'm enjoying it enormously and I would recommend it based on the opening two. There are only eight episodes in the first season but it has been renewed for a second. It's certainly worth a look.
I've been here and there. I've drawn a lot of pictures. I've written a bit, too. I'm not good at this self-promotion thing. Look, you want to know about me? just visit these websites. Okay?
www.mdjacksonart.weebly.com
http://mdjackson.deviantart.com
http://community.imaginefx.com/fxpose/mdjacksons%5Fportfolio
Freehand sketch, no references -- something I have been doing far too infrequently lately.
I think I need to do more of this -- just pure drawing with no expectation of what it's gonna look like once it's done. It's very freeing.
I've been here and there. I've drawn a lot of pictures. I've written a bit, too. I'm not good at this self-promotion thing. Look, you want to know about me? just visit these websites. Okay?
www.mdjacksonart.weebly.com
http://mdjackson.deviantart.com
http://community.imaginefx.com/fxpose/mdjacksons%5Fportfolio
Here is the awesomely awesome Bella Von Doom as Catwoman.
This is the second time I have worked with Bella and once again I had a blast. She is a fun person, a fantastic model as well as a terrific artist herself.
Go visit her tumblr and give her a shout out. (Just be warned that her tumblr can get very NSFW). Check it out here.
I've been here and there. I've drawn a lot of pictures. I've written a bit, too. I'm not good at this self-promotion thing. Look, you want to know about me? just visit these websites. Okay?
www.mdjacksonart.weebly.com
http://mdjackson.deviantart.com
http://community.imaginefx.com/fxpose/mdjacksons%5Fportfolio
So here is the trailer for the second instalment of the movie adaptation of The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug.
Now, honestly, I love Sylvester McCoy. I thought he was terrific as Doctor Who back in the early 90's. And I love how he played Radagast the brown in the first movie and I am happy to see him back in the sequel. But his character is NOT IN THE BOOK.
I love Evangeline Lilly. She's beautiful, she's a great actress and she is a fellow Canadian. She hails from Fort Saskatchewan, Alberta. She plays an elf named Tauriel who looks like she will kick ass. But her character is NOT IN THE BOOK.
I like Orlando Bloom. I thought he was great as Will Turner in the Pirates of the Carribbean movies. I though he played Legolas excellently in the three Lord of the Rings movies. He was great as Legolas. I'm glad to see him play the role again. But that character is NOT IN THE BOOK.
Clearly this is not The Hobbit. It is, but it has been messed with, expanded, encumbered, even, with stuff that seems to be required for big-budget 3D blockbuster filmmaking. A freaking dragon, the dreaded Smaug (who IS in the book) Gandalf the Grey, thirteen dwarves and one hobbit are not enough, it seems for modern moviegoers.
Well, at least they haven't taken anything out. It just seems a shame while they're adding characters left right and centre that they couldn't have included Tom Bombadil, Goldberry, Farmer Maggot and Gan Buri Gan who were cut from the original trilogy. If you're going to be bringing characters in Willy Nilly, why not them?
Mind you, this is nothing new. I suppose L. Frank Baum purists would have complained about the musical numbers carelessly shoe-horned into The Wizard of Oz, or the pointless addition of distracting cameos of big name stars in Mike Todd's technicolor adaptation of Around the World in 80 Days. Or perhaps the awful travesty of taking Isaac Asimov's Susan Calvin, a central character in his robot stories, and making her a stiff sidekick to Will Smith's wisecracking detective in the execrable adaptation of I,Robot.
The raping and retro-fitting of classic literature to suit Hollywood's need for extravaganza is nothing new, but it still rankles deep in the guts of many a book lover.
It's kind of like taking a bedazzler to a Faberge Egg.
Yeah. Think about that.
I've been here and there. I've drawn a lot of pictures. I've written a bit, too. I'm not good at this self-promotion thing. Look, you want to know about me? just visit these websites. Okay?
www.mdjacksonart.weebly.com
http://mdjackson.deviantart.com
http://community.imaginefx.com/fxpose/mdjacksons%5Fportfolio
