A Little Push - Thoughts on the Hollywood Machine 05.16.09

Posted by Rick Tym on 05.16.2009

Thoughts on Star Trek, the trailer for and discussion of The Road, yet another remake (this time combining horror and comedy) and news about a Sinatra biopic in this week's edition of the Push!

To Boldly Ignore Some Minor Nitpicks and Have a Good Time at the Movies

The Push is a confirmed J.J. Abrams fanatic. Liked MI: III a lot, was a big fan of Alias up until it got just a little too kooky, even followed some Felicity back in the day. And Lost? Don't even get me started. I know it's really Cuse and Lindelof's baby now but I feel bad for the ABC president that got fired over green-lighting such an expensive pilot, because it rocked and so does the show which shows no sign of losing steam as it heads into its final season. (2010? Boo-urns!) Don't ask me about Fringe, though—I'm waiting for that puppy to come out on DVD so I can catch up. Still, all reports lead me to believe that it definitely grew into its own as it approached the end of its first season. Plus it had the great Leonard McCoy in the finale! How cool is that? This little tidbit allows me to segue way nicely into this week's lead-off topic of discussion, the reboot of Star Trek.

I am not a Trekkie or Trekker or whatever the proper term is these days. (No offense to those who are; I just keep reading that one or the other is the right way of designating über-fans.) Still, like any self-respecting geek I have some passing knowledge of Trek lore, having watched late night reruns of the original series with my grandfather as a youth. Never really got into The Next Generation that much but really liked what Deep Sapce 9 had to offer. As far as Voyager and Enterprise are concerned? Eh. Not so good—at least, to me. The movies however were always an event, whether it meant watching The Wrath of Khan for the tenth time that month on pay cable (PRISM—Philly represent!) or going to the theater to see The Undiscovered Country. Even TNG movies were enjoyed (except for the lame way they killed off Kirk) regardless of unfamiliarity with the television series. Still, no one—fan, foe or those well-versed in the Klingon language—could deny that the property had hit a creative funk. Enterprise was the first series cancelled prematurely and the last TNG movie left a lot to be desired. Paramount had for years (decades, actually) been planning on showcasing the adventures of a certain young Starfleet crew and the time had finally come to pull the trigger in hopes of resurrecting the franchise. The result? The sometimes nonsensical but full of gusto and supremely enjoyable definition of summer movie spectacle. Ladies and gentlemen, I (like every other internet writer on this site and others) have seen the lens-flared light, and it was good.


Yup, it was a good ‘un.
First let's talk about the cast. I'm not going to go into too many specifics but almost everybody hit their marks. Chris Pine and Zachary Quinto in particular were great, honoring the classic characters of James T. Kirk and Spock while managing to make them their own. All of the supporting work (Karl Urban as Bones in particular) was excellent as well with everyone playing their parts to near perfection, adding the correct weight at the right time to balance out the scales of drama and comic relief. Heck, I even enjoyed Cho's take on Sulu, didn't mind the zippy portrayal of Chekov by Anton Yelchin and wasn't even slightly bothered by Scotty's (played by Simon Pegg) little alien buddy. The only people I really would've loved to see more of were Bruce Greenwood as Captain Christopher Pike and of course Eric Bana as Nero the Romulan antagonist. I know that the prequel comics shed much more light on Nero's back-story, but the film moved so quickly that I don't think it would've suffered from the addition of another fifteen minutes or so to truly flesh out the character on the big screen. After all, supplementary material should be just that, not a required primer for going to see a film. It kind of reminds me of people saying you had to read the prequel Southland Tales graphic novels to truly "get" what Richard Kelly was trying to say. However, the comparison is not particularly apt since Tales was "blah" (sorry, Rock) while Trek rocked, so let's just pretend I never made it.

The story had a solid foundation that was unfortunately mired by some plot holes, but such contrivances served the purpose of getting the Starfleet cadets where they needed to be to take on the big bad and the Push had no major problem with them. It doesn't matter too much why Spock Prime is on the ice planet that looks like Hoth (nor does it matter to this viewer that the glacier ball in question isn't really a proper Vulcan moon as dictated by Trek canon) or that Scotty is right up the street in a Federation outpost. These little coincidinks do not offend, although the writers (Roberto Orci and Alex Kurtzman of Transformers fame) could've simply flexed a little of the old brain muscle to render such nitpicks moot. The Push also couldn't help but wonder why the Enterprise didn't simply photon torpedo that drilling apparatus the first time around as it made its way to the planet Vulcan's molten core. After all, Spock (Not Prime) shot it while flying the vessel previously piloted by himself in the future (Spock Prime). And wouldn't the Earth of the future, capable of building huge starships and deriving equations for the light speed travel of said interplanetary craft, have some kind of defense system that would at least take a shot at the mysterious piece of machinery delving into the planet's crust? Some type of star wars defense system to attack Nero's mining ship?

Uh-oh. I said "star wars" in a Star Trek-related piece. Is that still taboo on this site?

Ah, no matter. The Push is thinking about these things now but wasn't when propped up in its movie theater chair, cherry Pepsi and popcorn at the ready. Instead it was smiling like a kid at the sights onscreen, marveling how the prologue managed to elicit a little bit of the old eye duct seepage as we learn the fate of Kirk's father and the sacrifice he made. (Also awesome was the few seconds of footage that showed someone being sucked up into space in the silence that is the final frontier's vacuum.) Of course the drill wasn't shot at first because there would be no story, and also because there wouldn't have been that nifty space/sky diving sequence to behold. No more spoilers here for those that haven't seen it—and if you haven't, you really should—but Star Trek was a hell of a lot of fun, and Abrams and company have made it their own while opening up Trek to the masses, something I think the late creator himself Gene Roddenberry would've been glad to see. Plus they manage to sidestep the landmine of continuity by implementing an altered timeline that allows the voyages of this crew to continue without negating the classic tales of the original series or movies. The word on the street was correct; this ain't your daddy's Star Trek but all previous incarnations are still there for the world to discover, and I think that this film will actually serve the purpose of doing so. Isn't that what true Trek fans have always wanted?

One thing I would ask Abrams if I could: what is up with your own internal ideal of continuity amongst your creations? I mean, the ice planet monster didn't really look like the Cloverfield one, but Uhura was ordering Slusho along with Classic Budweiser at that bar. Plus I know I've seen that "red matter" stuff somewhere before…


The Rambaldi ball from Alias. Look familiar?
What say you, J.J.?


Wait ‘til you see the Lost series finale!
Oh, that wily Abrams. Seriously, though, Star Trek is great summer entertainment that just begs for a sequel. For the first time in a long time I walked out of the theater immediately wanting to see what happens next. Considering some of Abrams's other creations (Lost, specifically) I guess it shouldn't have been much of a surprise to feel that way. The man has earned his stripes and the Push can't wait to see what he brings to the table with the inevitable follow up. With the success of Trek and The Dark Tower adaptation looming on the horizon, the big red Hollywood ball is definitely in his court these days.

As long as he doesn't bring back Khan.

Viggo Mortensen Hits The Road

Hot off the presses, here's the full trailer for the adaptation of Cormac McCarthy's Pulitzer Prize-winning 2006 novel of the same name. Take a looksie and we'll discuss afterwards…



The Push has a somewhat complicated history with the novel The Road. Like some, I came late to the Cormac McCarthy party, jumping on the bandwagon by reading No Country for Old Men before seeing the film adaptation. The book is excellent and reads more like a ready-made script than a novel, mostly due to McCarthy's keen use of long conversational sequences to tell his tale. (My favorite exchange from the book and film? "Where'd you get that gun?" "From the gettin' place." [I'm paraphrasing the first part of that so forgive me if I mucked it up.]) Simply a fantastic piece of fiction that can easily be devoured in one sitting, No Country translated particularly well to the big screen, even though some confusion still abounds concerning the fact that it was primarily the "old man's" (Sheriff Ed Tom Bell, played by Tommy Lee Jones) story being told; in the novel this was conveyed via his italicized thoughts that preceded most chapters detailing the game of cat-and-mouse between Llewelyn Moss and Anton Chigurh, while the movie does not particularly follow suit. Having read the book first led, I think, to a better understanding of the adaptation, especially the abrupt ending, and the Push remains fond of the Coen brother's cinematic retelling. I still think that There Will Be Blood should've won Best Picture that year, though—that film, my friends, is an example of cinema as one of the highest forms of art. Still, when talking about No Country? Great book, satisfactory movie, good times.

The Road, however, eschews any good times to be had for a level of bleakness that the Push found almost enraging upon first reading. The story follows a father and son trying to reach the coastline in a post-apocalyptic world (the reason for this "state of the union" is never given) and the proceedings are alternately depressing, only somewhat uplifting and absolutely soul-crushing. I've tried to express to people why they should read this book with caution because it is just so morally affecting. There is no happy fairy tale ending and the search for "the fire" stays with you long after the last page is turned. So it baffles even me when I struggle to justify my use of the term "enraged" to describe my feelings after finishing it. Was I mad at Cormac McCarthy for making me feel so, I don't know, shitty is the only word I could use to convey my mood after reaching the conclusion? Maybe. Was I at a loss because there was no silver lining to the black clouds that reined down ashy remnants of whatever changed the landscape of this future America? Definitely. Did I pick up on the not-so-subtle environmental warning associated with the current squandering ways of the world made so uniquely personal through the tale of a father's role of provider and protector and how it pertains to a child in the most trying of times? You betcha. But after over a year of contemplation I've decided that this is why Mr. McCarthy has a Pulitzer Prize for Fiction sitting on his shelf and I write an online entertainment news report. The author reached through the printed page, grabbed my heart and mercilessly squeezed it, and that caught me completely off-guard by exposing vulnerability not usually felt while reading a piece of popular fiction. I haven't revisited it since then but I plan to soon to see how it reads after having some distance from it.

I'll also be seeing the adaption when it comes to the big screen on October 16th. Even before I reread the source material I have some concerns about the things I see in this trailer—for as anyone who has read it can tell you, The Road is not a straightforward suspense or action-driven story. There are just as many internal conflicts as there are external as the father tries his best to be guardian and guider to his son as they walk along, and hopefully the extremely important ideas conveyed within these moments of conversation and introspection are not lost. There shouldn't necessarily be a problem with explaining why the landscape came to be scorched or the wife character (Charlize Theron) having a greater presence in this interpretation (and it shouldn't be as sources say her expanded role is relegated to flashbacks), but my fear is simply that the elements of The Road that make it such an important piece of contemporary fiction remain intact to deliver another example of…you guessed it…cinema as the highest form of art.

Speaking of Revisiting, Here Comes Another Horror Remake

This time it's Fright Night, the 1985 cult horror classic that actually shouldn't really be considered quite so "cult" since it was the highest-performing horror release that year besides the horrid A Nightmare on Elm Street 2: Freddy's Revenge. DreamWorks will be developing the revamp (sorry, couldn't resist) with Michael De Luca, Michael Gaeta and Alison Rosenzweig producing, says The Hollywood Reporter. No writer has been hired, but the Reporter informs us that "the updated version will keep the comedy-horror tone while modernizing the effects."


Yet another casualty of remake-o-rama.
The original Fright Night is a fun little romp detailing a teenager, the mysterious vampiric neighbors who just moved in next door and an over-the-hill star of yesteryear's horror films who leaves the relative safety of his gig hosting late-night local access scary movie reruns to aid in dispatching the undead. Even though the Push jokingly states above that this is just another fallen soldier in the war against needless remakes, the updated version has the potential to be entertaining as long as they allow the spirit of the 1985 effort to remain intact. Rather than having to dumb down an existing horror franchise for mass teenage consumption (see: any PG-13 horror remake released over the last few years) this can actually remain kitschy and tongue-in-cheek while still appealing to the likely target demographic. After all, the first one (and its sequel) was made for the ‘80s teenage crowd. So why not make on for the ‘00s kiddies?

I say give Joss Whedon a whack at that script. The man knows vampires and pop culture like no other. That way, the best of all worlds—including a nostalgic update, current relevance and the general kick-assery that he brings to his projects (except for Dollhouse, but that's Fox Television's fault, not his)—can easily be attained. Or is the mastermind behind Buffy and Angel sick of such fare? Ehh, it's probably nothing more than a pipedream anyway.

Scorsese to Helm Sinatra Biopic

And the Push says it's about damned time.

News broke late in the week that Universal Pictures has acquired a feature film project from Mandalay Pictures detailing the life of the famous singer and Hollywood star Frank Sinatra entitled, quite aptly, Sinatra. Academy Award winning director Martin Scorsese will be taking the reigns on the biopic. Oscar-nominated screenwriter Phil Alden Robinson (Field of Dreams) will direct. Universal Pictures and Mandalay Pictures have been developing the project, after securing the Frank Sinatra life rights and music rights from Frank Sinatra Enterprises (FSE) - a joint venture of the Sinatra Estate and Warner Music Group, reports darkhorizons.net.


A movie about the life of Ol' Blue Eyes will be roughly three billion times better than the Ocean's 11 remake—and that film was darn good in its own right.
This is extraordinary news. Who better to bring the life of Ol' Blue Eyes to the screen than Scorsese? However, there is a bit of a wrinkle when it comes to casting the lead in the film. It seems that while the director wants to use his current go-to guy Leonardo DiCaprio, Universal is pushing for Johnny Depp to play the late but still great one, according to Deadline Hollywood. Since the music rights to the body of Sinatra's works have been secured neither would need to sing for the role, so it all comes down to director versus studio favoritism. A lot of people have immediately given their support to Depp, but anyone who reads A Little Push knows that DiCaprio is a personal favorite and I personally think he would have no problem stepping into the crooner's signature suit for Sinatra. More on this as it develops.

Outtro

Summer movie season is in full swing with Star Trek looking to retain the box office throne as Tom Hanks steers Angels and Demons into theaters this weekend. Using Dan Brown's novels as a template, A&D certainly has the better story when compared to The Da Vinci Code and the appeal of Robert Langdon cannot be denied. Still, the Push will be waiting for DVD rental because Brown ain't no McCarthy and Ron Howard's previous adaptation left a lot to be desired. Go see Star Trek again instead if you haven't already.

And how about that Lost finale? Whoa boy. Join Ben Piper as he graciously allows me to help recap and analyze "The Incident" next week right here on 411mania.com. We'll be going over all the big events in an effort to make sense of it all as we ponder the last long hiatus before the show wraps up in 2010. So if you haven't watched it yet, fire up those DVRs and join us, won't you?


Destiny found. Waiting for it? Long.

That'll do it for this week. As always, enjoy yourselves this weekend and the days beyond until we meet again. Thanks for tuning in to this edition of A Little Push.

***Be sure to bookmark A Little Push and/or 411mania.com for all your pop culture needs—and wants!***