The next five...

...are watched and ready for commentary.  This is actually a whole lot of fun.  I hope you've enjoyed the first three installments of this little journey, and I hope you will stay with me throughout the balance of the year.

As you may know, I've watched 50 of the films on the AFI Top 100 (2007 version) prior to the undertaking of this project.  That means, conveniently, that I can do these in chunks of five, starting with five movies I hadn't seen, then going to films I had, and so on.  I may come to a point toward the end where I realize I got my math wrong...but so what?  I'm going to be close.

We are on films 11-15, which means these are films I hadn't seen prior to this time.  I suppose that's all the preliminary information we need.  No sense in beating around the bush.  Oh. One other thing.  I am admitting to not having seen these films previously.  Please don't beat me for it...

Films 11-15


11.  "Mr. Smith Goes To Washington."  Jimmy Stewart, amazing, likeable, everyman actor takes another star turn on this list.  Look.  I'm no film student.  I've watched another Capra/Stewart film a whole bunch of times, and I guess so have a lot of other people.  I'm not going to classify something as "Capraesque" because I cannot speak to that with any authority.  I'm just a guy with a DVR, a Netflix subscription, an Amazon Prime subscription and a collection of DVD's.  Oh, and thank GOD for TCM, or this quest would be EXPENSIVE.  Well, not steakhouse EXPENSIVE, but expensive.

I've gotten off the rails.  I'm not really certain how I feel about "Mr. Smith Goes To Washington."  I can certainly understand its importance, and have enough knowledge of eras to view it with perspective...but...I prefer a little subtlety.  I know, this is Randy Knott saying he prefers subtlety, but I do.  Jimmy Stewart was wonderful in this, as was Jean Arthur, and everyone else.  I could sit and watch Claude Rains do just about anything, I bet.  Yet, this film left me a little flat.  The good guy was impossibly naive and good.  The bad guys...well...they ran kids off the road in one scene.  Come on.  Then we have the corruption, the deals, everything that Congress is STILL guilty of to this day...and I don't know.  It just felt too black and white.  I prefer my villains to be painted with a little grey.  I think the chemistry between Jean Arthur and Jimmy Stewart was phenomenal.  It is always great to see a really good female character...then...she falls in love with him, and writes it in a note?  Huhwhat?! Come on.  Just...come on.  This is a big, important film.  It belongs in the top 100.  I get it.  And I don't.  Oh.  And the ending sucked.  Just...sucked.

The bit at the Lincoln Memorial was stirring, though.

One other thing.  As Robert Osborne was introducing this on TCM, he said that many think that Jimmy Stewart won his Oscar for "The Philadelphia Story (1940) " for his work on this film (1939). He was nominated for his work in 1939, yet did not win.  I disagree.  I'm not going further than that, but I believe the next year's accomplishment was a greater achievement.

That's me.  I'm glad I watched it, but I'm also glad I don't have to do so again.  I'm also glad this duo made that other film.  I like that one a whole lot better.

You may boo me...

now.



12.  "The General."  I must admit, although painfully, that I am not that versed in the work of Buster Keaton.  Yes, I've seen lots and lots of clips of him doing amazing work in individual gags/stunts...but I hadn't sat and watched a whole film of his before I watched "The General."  Ever.  That will be changing soon, I can assure you.

This is a tremendous film.  I watched it twice, once by myself, and then I showed it to my sons.  They loved it.  It held their attention throughout, and I think they even laughed harder than I did.  That's probably because I couldn't laugh with my mouth agape.  I've seen the clip of Buster Keaton standing as a house collapses on him, with him, conveniently standing in the open window.  That clip has fascinated me for a long time.  This film...well.  There were a lot of those moments.  Keaton jumps from car to car on a moving train, he stands atop it, he uses his own body (briefly) as a connection between two MOVING FUCKING TRAIN CARS.  And the whole time, he never flinches.  No double takes, no wild, bug-eyed looks.  Just that stone face.  Amazing.

There was more about this film that I loved.  The scale of it thrilled me.  The armies of men, all uniformed, marching back and forth across the country...and the final...big moment.  I'm not going to spoil it.  It's spectacular.  I cannot imagine who said...yeah, we can *REDACTED* and I'm sure it will work great.  Especially if we don't tell the extras.  Apparently, the extras were not informed of the *REDACTED.*

This is a great film.  It wasn't on the inaugural Top 100 list, but was slotted on this one in the top 20.  Yup.  That's just about right.  Take an hour and a half and entertain yourself.  Screw that.  Let Buster Keaton entertain you.  I guarantee he will.



13.  "Chinatown."  Hey, Jack Nicholson is back.  A couple of films ago, I mentioned that the ending of a movie sucked.  This one is guilty, too.  I'm going to talk plot, etc. on this one, because it's vital to my case that the ending sucked.

A neo-noir film, "Chinatown" is the twisted story (p'raps a mite too twisted) about a private eye who is hired to spy on a woman's husband whom she is sure is being unfaithful.  Except that's not the wife.  Then, lots of people get involved, and eventually Jake is paired with Faye Dunaway as they try and stop her evil father from...what...controlling the water in Los Angeles?  Oh, and on the way, we learn that the "mistress" of the now dead aforementioned husband is, in fact, Faye Dunaway's sister. And daughter.  This is another film founded on a whisper thin story, that just happens to contain some absolutely brilliant acting, and as such, is worth watching.  It might even be great.  Except the ending SUCKS.

The final line in the film, after Faye Dunaway is killed trying to escape from her father with her sister/daughter, and the daughter is dragged away by the father...is "Forget it, Jake, it's Chinatown."  Chinatown is BARELY PART OF THE MOVIE.  There is no reference to it EXCEPT THAT IT'S THE SETPIECE FOR THE LAST LITTLE BIT OF THE MOVIE. But, incestuous fathers can drag away young women after their other daughter has just been shot through the eye...and the lead character is supposed to somehow chalk that up to some mystical force that Chinatown possesses?  Bullshit.  Just bullshit.  That's a cheap ending.  It's a copout.  It sucks.  Know what?  I wouldn't do this normally, but check out the FAQ page from IMDB about this film and the question about what the last line's significance is.  That is just stupid.

I liked the movie, otherwise.  Although I think the plot is way too convoluted, and takes too many twists on the way, Nicholson is terrific.  As is John Huston.  As is a lot of the cinematography.  It's just that damned ending...

I guess this is an important film.  It's #21 on the list.  I'd rather see "The Exorcist" or "Amadeus" on this list.  I don't know that "Chinatown" belongs.



14.  "The Maltese Falcon."  Yes.  I'd never seen "The Maltese Falcon."  I have now.  Another film noir.  As I look on it, "Chinatown" is everything that "The Maltese Falcon" is...twists and turns, escalation of the original action into a plot that...well...where the hell did that come from?  Lots of people wanting to get at the leading man...and...well.

I like this one better.  I think it's hilarious that I chose to do two films so similar back to back.  P'raps I should watch "Saving Private Ryan" and "Platoon" back to back as well.  No.  I'm not going to do that.  This was an accident.  I'm veering off the rails again...

Bogie is great in this.  His ability to seemingly think on his feet (yes, it's scripted, but that's a hard thing to do) was amazing in this.  He always had the answer, was always ready for the next thing out of anyone's mouth, always ready to get the people off his back he needed of his back.  Great role.  Great acting.  Peter Lorre was his usual creepy self, and Sidney Greenstreet was hilarious...and terrifying...and hilarious.  I'm not certain how good Sidney Greenstreet was as an actor, but he must have been a hell of a fun person.  He plays guys who laugh at themselves, while always...having a smug sense of "I'm smarter than you...", yet, there he is, once again, laughing at himself.  Great character.  He had that character down cold.

The plot, as I said, has a lot of twists.  I'm not sure they made sense.  Sam Spade always made it sound as if they did, and that was the thrill of watching this film, for me.  Mostly, this film was a study in acting.  Yes, there were some great shots, but it's San Francisco...can't we get a few shots of something besides the Golden Gate Bridge?  It's a BEAUTIFUL city...and it has a Chinatown.  Bah.  Never mind.

I'm sure you've probably seen "The Maltese Falcon."  Now I have.  I'm really happy that I did.  Plot twists out of nowhere don't necessarily thrill me, but this movie got me.  It had me from the beginning and held me until the end.  I would have liked it if Mary Astor had at least ONCE looked at Bogie in the initial meeting.  I'm all for letting the world know one is lying...but she could have looked at him ONCE to let us know she was trying to pretend NOT to be lying.

Bah.  Great film.  John Huston and Bogie.  Gosh.  That combination sounds familiar.  Oh yeah.  "THE AFRICAN QUEEN."  Seriously.  Get that film off the list.  The two are better represented all kinds of places.  This is one of them.



15.  "Sunset Boulevard."  Or is it "Sunset Blvd.?"  The title card says "Sunset Blvd.," so I think that is, technically, the title.  Bah.  Semantics.

Quick. Know what the last 4 films have in common?

The leading man is in every scene.  Well.  Almost.  Keaton is not involved in a scene with some spies from the North in "The General."  Bogie is not there when his partner is shot.  And William Holden is not in the scene (but present right outside) when Norma Desmond has her time in the studio with Cecil B. DeMille.  From what I read somewhere, that's a classic noir technique.  Keeping the main character in every scene...as the audience's eyes.

I had watched the beginning of this film several times, but had never made it past about the first half hour, usually because I tend to watch films on DVR entirely too late at night.  I finally did, and I'm exceedingly happy that I did.  This is a terrific movie.  I regret taking so long to get to this one.  I have a connection with William Holden, because...well...this is ridiculous, but I played Paul in "Born Yesterday," a film released the same year as "Sunset Blvd.," and one in which he played...Paul.  When I watched the film version of "Born Yesterday," (after the show I was in had been but a memory) I was astonished by how much I did that he did.  Or maybe I shouldn't be.  It's all on the page, right?  Anyway.  I have a connection with him, and I feel like when I watch him, I'm watching a teacher showing me how I'd do it.  Is that weird?  Yeah.  That's weird.

Gloria Swanson was a marvel in this.  I did a little research and found out that she had been a silent film star, so watching her histrionics in this were somehow more...poignant.  She conveyed a hell of a lot with those eyes.  How she ever lost the Oscar to Judy Holliday and the aforementioned "Born Yesterday" is beyond me.  This was a dynamic, powerhouse performance.  It was even a little playful...as pictured in the photo I've included above.  I'm trying to find photos that I feel sum up a very powerful moment of a movie to me, for whatever reason, when I do these entries.  This scene was one of those.  The self-loathing yet complete surrender that William Holden portrayed...wow.  Just wow.

I should also mention that scene with DeMille.  Heartbreaking and stirring and yet...happy all at once.  The star...shining in her galaxy...just one last time.  Amazing.

Oh.  And Buster Keaton was in this.  And he made me smile a great big smile.  Billy Wilder made a great film with this one.  I enjoyed the hell out of it.



Know what?  If I stop this project right now, I will have seen 10 movies that I'd never seen before, all of which are considered great.  Even though I don't agree with that term being used for all of them, I have expanded my knowledge and my...database(?).  That cannot be a bad thing.

Well.  That's it for this installment.  Films 16-20 are plotted out, and I'm only watching one that is in black and white.  I need a little technicolor for a while.  I may, also (spoiler!), need a bigger boat as I view something that's no moon as raindrops keep falling on my head in a jury room where, well, Zed's dead, baby.

The journey continues...

...and continues.  Know what?  100 Movies is a LOT of friggin' movies.  Thank you to those who have already read the previous two posts.  Thanks for stopping by this one.  I'm still gestating this idea, and the last film I'm going to discuss today inspires MUCH more than I'm going to write about it today, and I may do so.  Then again, I may not.  I'm not that educated.  I'm a guy with a keyboard and web access.  That doesn't make me a qualified writer.  It makes me a writer.  On my silly little blog.  About my silly little quest to watch an arbitrary list of films by the end of a calendar year.  Bah.  And again, for the record, I'm watching them all.  Even the ones I've seen a dozen times.  Part of this is the experience of immersion.

As I stated last time, I'm digesting these films and writing about them in blocks of five.  The first five were films I'd never seen, this five I had, the next five (I'm through 13 total as of this writing) I haven't seen, and so on.  I think that takes care of the preliminaries.  Let's get on with the show.

Films 6-10


6.  "The Graduate."  I love this movie.  I have for a long time.  When starting on the list of films I'd seen, it seemed like a nice starting point.  Couple of things really stood out to me when watching this film.  1.  I'm older than either Murray Hamilton or William Daniels were when the film was made.  I cannot fathom that.  I don't think either of them looked out of place as the fathers of college age children, nor as longtime business partners.  It made me think perhaps this life of mine is going quicker than I think...that has nothing to do with the film.  2.  Anne Bancroft is HOT.  Well.  Was.  I'm sorry, but the sexiness (and that is the proper term) with which she portrays Mrs. Robinson is steamy.  Steamy.  3.  Plastics.  Cliche, but it's still funny.

What were my reactions?  Mike Nichols made a really great film. He made a film, that, while decidedly of its era, is still relevant today.  There are lots of great camera techniques, there are lots of moments that are decidedly "artistic."   I love the isolation in the SCUBA suit, especially.  Also of note is the montage of Benjamin and his inability to move, blended seamlessly with scenes of himself and Mrs. Robinson and their affair.  Other great things:  Buck Henry's performance.  Seeing both Richard Dreyfuss and Mike Farrell.  Yup, BJ Hunnicut is a bellhop.  Didn't know that before.  It's kinda cool watching a film with "X Ray" by IMDB on the Wii U controller.  It's a rolling service that spotlights each actor on the screen.  Mike Farrell popped up.  I knew Dreyfuss.  Never saw Farrell.  Oh.  And the soundtrack is pretty OK.

As with any film, there are flaws, and there are a few I noticed, and bothered me.  1.  I do not believe for a second that Benjamin would come upstairs simply because Mrs. Robinson chastised him for being ridiculous in the initial seduction.  I really don't believe he'd unzip her dress.  No way, no how.  2.  I know Benjamin was trying to make Elaine have a miserable time.  I can think of a whole lot of easier ways to do it than the path he chose.  3.  The whole experience in Berkeley falls flat for me.  It kills a lot of momentum. I don't know how it could be fixed...but it's deflating. It's vital to the plot...but something about it seems out of place.  4.  The friggin' door to the church is locked.  With people inside.  I know, "Maybe they thought Benjamin would show up..." Bullshit.  It's just a hackneyed plot device to get a better shot.  I know a little bit about directing.  I've got a couple of moments like this in the show I just directed.  Things I did to make something better later.  Know what?  If someone calls me on them, I'll say, "yup, that moment was wrong.  Sorry."

I love "The Graduate," though.  If you've never taken the time to watch it, please do.  It's a great film.




7.  "Forrest Gump."  It's hard to believe that a film that is nearly 20 years old can be considered "Modern," but this is the first real "modern" film I watched.  By the way...there are precious few others on this list.  Yet "African Queen" is still here...bullshit.  Still pissed I had to watch that as part of this.

Back to "Forrest Gump."  Know what?  This is a great film.  It has been derided over the years because 1994 happened to be the year of a couple of other great films ("Pulp Fiction" and "The Shawshank Redemption" - and "Quiz Show" is pretty goddamned good, also), and people tend to think "Forrest Gump" isn't on par with the first two...and that may be true.  It may not.  I'll have to see how I feel as I watch those two again.  "Forrest Gump" won the Oscar for Best Picture over those two.  That is not the film's fault.

I assume most everyone reading this has seen this film.  I encourage you to watch it again.  Yes, the fantastical is just that...fantastical.  I'd love to meet a man who met JFK, LBJ, Nixon, Elvis and John Lennon.  I'd love to meet a man who was in on the ground floor of Apple.  I'd love to meet a man who was not only a collegiate All American Football Player, but a Congressional Medal of Honor winner, a world champion ping pong player, a shrimp tycoon, and a long distance runner.  No such man exists.  Yet...he does.  And that is what is central to my viewing of "Forrest Gump" this past month.  Forrest is all of us.

Here's what struck me this time through.  The acting in this film is really, really solid.  Gary Sinise is a dynamo. Mykelti Williamson, Robin Wright Penn, Sally Field...the kid who played young Forrest Gump (not the Hayley Joel Osment version, the kid who grew into Tom Hanks), all of them are committed, real, characters.  But mostly, it's Tom Hanks.  Want an acting lesson?  Watch the introduction of Jenny to Lieutenant Dan on Jenny and Forrest's wedding day.  I'm sorry.  That's bloody well brilliant.  See the knowing glance that passes between Sinise and Hanks, knowing Jenny's fate...yet acknowledging the happiness of the day.  It's a clinic.  I learned from it.  You can, too.

Technically, this film was right on the cutting edge.  Yes, the mouths don't move quite right, and there is a certain "Clutch Cargo" feel to them when Forrest is intertwined with old footage of actual celebrities...but holy crap, what a chance Zemeckis took.  And it worked.  It's enthralling.  It's engaging.  Hell.  I still believe Sinise's legs were really gone.  That was BRAND FREAKING NEW TECHNOLOGY when this film was made.  Kudos for it holding up 20 years later.  So.  It's no "Pulp Fiction."  I'm not necessarily convinced that's a bad thing.  It's still a hell of a movie.  Enjoyed it tremendously, and sometimes, that's what a movie needs to do.  Entertain.



8.  "Easy Rider."  This was one of the surprises on the list when I perused it.  If you sat me down, before I watched it again, and asked me to name my personal "top 100 films" list, I can pretty much guarantee that this film would not be on it.  I watched this film during my brief stay at college.  I had taken...a drug which may or may not be associated with a long stretch of road on Chicago's lake shore the night I saw the film.  It was 1986.  It was a different time.  My impressions of the film were hazy and hallucinatory...but I remember the ending really bummed me out.  "They were just trying to be free..."

That was 1986.  What do I as a sober, upstanding, nearly 46 year old man think of "Easy Rider?"  I think it's a hell of a film.  I think it's quite revolutionary, given context.  I think the ending still bums me out.  I think the choices Hopper made as a director were interesting, to say the least, and I applaud his vision.

Other impressions:  Jack Nicholson is not that great in this.  He's talked about a lot when this film is discussed, but he just wasn't that exciting to me.  It was also fun to see a young Toni Basil (yes, the woman who recorded "Mickey" - I understand he was so fine he blew her mind), now that I know she was in it.  The hallucination scene wasn't that great.  The soundtrack is amazing.  The transitions into new scenes are pretty cool, but it gets old after like 3 times.  Again, when you are trying something revolutionary, occasionally it becomes revolting.  Oh.  And the ending is a bummer.  No other word.  Bummer.

I think this film is very important.  I think sitting down with great films is making me look for things I wouldn't normally look for...I see why it is on the list.  I encourage you to watch it and find out why that is as well.



9.  "King Kong."  Awesome.  This movie is amazing.  It belongs in the top 100, hell, it might belong in the top 10.  What was accomplished in this film technically is nothing short of miraculous.

I had watched this as a child on WLS Channel 7's afternoon movie.  I hadn't seen it in at least 33 years.  Here's what struck me as I was watching it.  I calls 'em "observations:"

1.  Kong could not possibly have encountered, and defeated that many LARGE ASS CREATURES in a day every day.  That wore a little thin.  The idea of filming those scenes with stop motion...however...was thrilling.
2.  Bruce Cabot is a STIFF.  As was Robert Armstrong.  That was a lesson in BAD acting.  Fay Wray was sexy as hell, and actually quite good, considering the beasts she was asked to play opposite.  And I'm not talking about Kong.
3.  HOLY CRAP.  How the hell did they do this?  How did audiences react?  This is an amazing piece of filmwork.
4.  Um.  We've seen several people die.  Carl Denham, when identified at the end as that man by A POLICE OFFICER isn't dragged into the streets and arrested/beaten/torn to shreds?  Nope.  He just gets to say a kick ass line.  Bastard.  No acting piece of crap, getting to deliver a line like that.
5.  Damn, this movie is good.

Watch it.  Please.  It's corny.  It's not very modern.  At one time it was.  Try to keep that in perspective.



10.  "Citizen Kane."

OK.  I put the number one movie on the list in the the first 10 films I watched.  My favorite film is "The Godfather."  I also LOVE "Casablanca."

This is the greatest film ever made.  My opinion.  Shared by others.  I have a deep, abiding love of what Orson Welles accomplished with this.  This could be a whole film school.  This could be a whole entry in this blog.  Know what?  I think it's going to be.  I'll comment on "Kane" when I have an hour to write about it, and probably go scene through scene.  It's that freaking great.

Quick impressions on Randy Knott, ordinary guy:

1.  Joseph Cotten's singing of "Charlie Kane" is haunting.
2.  My GOD, this is great.
3.  Orson Welles was only TWENTY FUCKING FIVE WHEN HE MADE THIS?!
4.  I can't.  I have to go MUCH longer on this one.  I have to sit and do this while I watch it again.  I won't be sad about having to do so, I can assure you.  I'm going to "live blog" this as I watch it again.

Please watch this movie.  Please.  Please understand that not everything you will see will be spoon fed to you.  Damn.  Damn.  This is a film.

I'm one short of the next 5.  Getting there.  Thanks for reading.

And off we go...

...on my quest to watch all 100 films in the 10th Anniversary Edition of the AFI Top 100 Films.

In starting this journey, I was trying to figure out how best to accomplish the task of writing about this, while (hopefully) remaining interesting.  So, I came up with a couple of ideas.  I went through the list and checked off all the films I had seen.  Turns out the number was exactly 50.  I'd seen half...and an idea came to me...I'll watch them in sets (always with the MATH) of 5.  Start with 5 I haven't seen, then go to 5 I have, and so on.  That allows me to watch one of the top 5 as the last film, as I have seen all of them.  So.  The icing on the cake will be "Casablanca." (even though "The Godfather" is my favorite film - but it only makes sense to sit down and watch the two "Godfather" films in one weekend - and no "Citizen Kane," because although I love it, ending with number 1 is too cliche for me...)

I then pondered how to write about it.  Hmmmph.  You know what?  That whole sets of 5 thing works quite nicely for that, as well.  I do intend to live blog one night, if enough people actually take an interest in this.  Which means, of course, that you too, the reader, will be able to share in REAL TIME my thoughts on a film as I watch it.  I think p'raps I'll do that twice.  Once for a film I haven't seen, and once for a film I have.

I am doing these in no particular order.  It's starting with films I own or have access to through Amazon Prime.

Enough lead in - let's get this started, shall we?  These are in the order in which I watched them.

Films 1-5


1.  "The African Queen."  OK.  This was an inauspicious beginning.  I, for the life of me, have no idea how this film is in the top 100 and other, FAR more worthy candidates like, oh, say, "The Right Stuff," or any other number of films are not here.  I can't even justify the star power of the director (he's kinda well represented in the top 100 with "The Maltese Falcon," nor the stars...Bogie is not only in "The Maltese Falcon," but "Casablanca" as well.  Katharine Hepburn is also well represented on the list, especially with "The Philadelphia Story."  So.  What are my thoughts?  1.  The opening scene is entirely too long.  The out of sync soundtrack (the Brother character's singing never matches the music), and the overall length of the church scene just started this off badly for me.  2.  We then go to a fairly well acted scene where tea is had.  And Bogie's stomach growls noticeably throughout.  I guess it's supposed to show how hungry he is...but there is really nothing done to remedy it, nor any acknowledgement that, FUCK YES, I'M HUNGRY.  3.  The village is then burned, World War I begins, and our protagonists find themselves left all alone.  What do they do?  They decide to hop on Bogie's boat and go down the river.
 
For an hour and a half.

Now.  I'm a big believer in context.  I understand that sometimes what seems very unsophisticated to us was quite revolutionary at the time.  Not this hunk of crap.  It's an obviously drunk Bogie doing very little stuff as Katharine Hepburn pretends to have interest in him.  The film is a travelogue.  Come to Africa!  You might see CROCODILES!  OR LEECHES!  MAYBE A MONKEY!  Seriously.  That's about the only thing I can find of merit in this.  Don't get me wrong.  I think the film's story teeters on interesting at times, and Katharine Hepburn, in her day, was one hell of a woman.  And how can you not love Bogie?  (wait, didn't you just call this a hunk of crap?)  I just don't see greatness.  I did like trying to figure out where I'd seen the German Boat Captain before.  Yup.  Russian ambassador, "Dr. Strangelove."  This time the "big bored" was me.  If these films are going to continue like this...I might be pretty happy that I've only watched 50...

Boo.  Bad, bad start.  "The African Queen."  Watched it.  I can say I've done that.  I never want to do it again.



2.  "The Apartment."  Whew.  At least this film I enjoyed.  When I was in high school, my folks rented "Irma La Douce," a film pairing Jack Lemmon and Shirley MacLaine.  I remember thinking that was a pretty damned good movie.  I had always intended to watch "The Apartment," but never got to it.  I'm very glad I did.  I don't think I'm going to spend a lot of time talking about the films' plots.  You want those?  Go to Wikipedia. This is about my reaction to what I watched.  My thoughts:  Jack Lemmon's performance in this is heartbreakingly complex.  The subtle, tiny movement that his face does when he discovers that his boss's mistress is the woman with whom he is in love is something only a skilled craftsman can execute.  Sure, there is a lot of Lemmony mugging in this, but DAMN, that man could act.  Shirley MacLaine is wonderfully natural, wonderfully naturally beautiful, and matches Lemmon in the subtlety department.  P'raps it was Billy Wilder, but a lot of the things that happen in this film could have been played for melodrama.  What I saw was real.  And real good.  This film was given the Oscar for Best Picture, and I'm not going to look up what films it beat, but I can get it.  It's a great story, a great bit of acting, and a great bit of directing.  

It's telling, I think that the film's central plot...is still somewhat sophisticated.  Watch it for your self and you can almost see this story happening today.  Well.  The drunken Christmas party orgy probably isn't quite the same now, but I think the point was made...



3.  "On the Waterfront."  Now, this, THIS is a fine film.  A young, GOD HELP ME IS HE SEXY Brando, Eva Marie Saint making her (Oscar winning) debut, Lee J. Cobb, Rod Steiger, Karl Malden, FRED GWYNNE!  This is a film.  Something that I've already noticed while doing this is just how fleeting a story is.  "On the Waterfront" is a great film...but ultimately it's just one tiny fragment of an idea that is made into a story.  That fragment?  There is corruption in the world, and occasionally those who are oppressed rise above it.  Now, we all love that story.  I watched masterful direction by Elia Kazan helping to make that story into a gritty, sumptuous film.  Another thought, on a more base level.  HOLY CRAP Eva Marie Saint was gorgeous.  Not film star gorgeous, but accessible, interesting, might actually have a thought in her head gorgeous.  She also did one hell of a job in this, holding her own against the madness that was Brando.  She was incredible, just incredible.  In fact, as an actor, that's what struck me the most watching this film.  Everyone in it was looking at the other person and speaking the truth.  Great study in acting.  Again, I think the story, ultimately, wears a little thin, but how can you not enjoy watching Brando and Steiger sharing the back of a car?  That's one of those moments where you can just see the talent/dedication/craft dripping off the screen.  It doesn't hurt that Brando is delivering one of the great speeches in film history (or was the speech made great by a gifted actor?).  Yeah, he coulda been a contender.

I wholeheartedly recommend the film "On the Waterfront."  It is what great filmmaking should be.



4.  "North by Northwest."  Hmmmmmph.  Eva Marie Saint again, and the first appearance of a Hitchcock film.  There are 3 others on the list, but I've seen all of them previously, and well, I wanted to make sure to watch a film of his as early as possible in the list.  Now.  There is something I should say at this point in the proceedings.  I've fancied that this process will be a bit like what Ebert and Siskel had to go through on a weekly basis.  I have to watch an average of 2 films a week to accomplish my task.  Wanna know what Ebert and Siskel DIDN'T HAVE TO DO?!  They didn't have to watch two "top 100" films a week.  I'm whining, to be sure, but a little of this is difficult.  I'm getting to see great film all the time.  Eventually...that will get old.

Bah.

Hitchcock.  "North by Northwest."  Cary Grant.  I must admit I've not watched a lot of Cary Grant.  He always struck me as the classic definition of someone who might say "I'm not an actor, I'm a MOVIE STAR!"  His performances seem wooden, and he always just appears a little too cool.  "North by Northwest" may start to change that perception for me.  While watching this, I perused IMDB a bit, and discovered that Jimmy Stewart thought he was going to get the role.  I love Jimmy Stewart.  The right guy got the role.  Of course, you have a lot of Hitchcock standards, the shot from the above as Cary Grant parks his car at the U.N., the brief (and TERRIBLE) cameo, the soft focus shots of Eva Marie Saint, etc.  But you also had a noticeably gay Martin Landau, James Mason playing it cool, and a really cool set piece for the film's climax.  I'm sorry, but if the idea of just walking up and saying "We're on top of the monument" at Mount Rushmore doesn't appeal to you...I'm not sure anything can.  That's a fun thought.  This film is great fun, well acted, (although someone REALLY needs to explain the auction scene to me) and gorgeous to watch.  Everything a Hitchcock film should be.  I'm very glad I put this high on the list.  We've had 3 winners so far.  I'll take a .750 batting average any ol' day.



5.  "The Philadelphia Story."  Cary Grant again.  Jimmy Stewart.  Katharine Hepburn being everything that "The African Queen" teased (but failed to deliver upon) that she was.  I was going to watch "The Bridge on the River Kwai" in this spot, but Amazon took it off Prime before I got to it.  I decided to punt, based simply on running time.  I'm glad I did.  Again, I think this a paper thin idea of a story...but somehow it makes for a compelling two hours.  It doesn't hurt that Jimmy Stewart turns in a PHENOMENAL performance.  His cynicism, his natural mannerisms, and most importantly his DRUNK are all great in this.  I've been a long time fan of "My Favorite Year" (didn't you reference that talking about "North by Northwest?").  Peter O'Toole's Alan Swann has long been my favorite film drunk.  No more.  Watch Jimmy Stewart scream, "Oh, C.K. Dexter Haaaaaven!" and see the NOT over the top nature of it, and you'll understand.  Actually, while watching it, I thought of something else as well.  See if you don't think of Sheldon Cooper talking about Amy Farrah Fowler.  It's hard not to see it.  Katharine Hepburn was beautiful in this film, not only physically, but in spirit.  I can't imagine her "Red" was that much of a stretch for her.  Indeed, I think this was Hepburn just being Hepburn.  And she's fascinating.  And beautiful. And feisty.  And desirable.  "The Philadelphia Story" isn't the cinematic piece of art that "North by Northwest" was, but it's a great film.  I'm glad I switched.  I think "Bridge on the River Kwai" is going to tickle my fancy to no end as a piece of art.  "The Philadelphia Story" just tickled my fancy.  Sometimes that's what a great film needs to do.

Whew.  That's FIVE!  I did it!  I've already gotten through numbers 6 and 7...so hopefully I'll be back in a week with 5 more.  In the mean time, thanks for reading.  I really love doing this.  I hope you enjoy it, too.

Not a lot of deep thoughts thus far.

What do you think?  Should I write more?  Do you want to know other things about the films?  Is this too vague?  Let me know.

Hey Strangers...

So.

I'm not doing a year in review this year.  I'm also dragging this blog out of mothballs.  I need this.

For those unaware, Amy and I were divorced this year.  There is no commentary on that necessary, and I will edit any out of the comments section.  Doing a year in review seems...silly..and not really something I want to discuss...this year.

I, however, have started a new adventure.  A lot of you went on the steakhouse tour.  I thank you for that. This is one that I've been bandying about for several years.  I like lists.  I like tangible goals.  This is one.

I have started to watch every single film in the AFI Top 100 (10th Anniversary Edition).  The goal is to finish by December 31, 2014.  I'm 3+ into it today (I have to re-watch one - see below).  I will be posting thoughts about the films, but more importantly, I think, my thoughts on the process.  I will also post about my thoughts on whether I feel the film is worthy of the list, or if there are arguments that can be made to eliminate it ("The African Queen" has already been viewed...and this is going to be discussed...).  It's a monumental undertaking, I think.  Well.  Maybe not that monumental, but a fun one.  Writing about it makes it challenging.

Now.  The ground rules.  I've seen 53 of these films as of today.  I thought it was more, but it's not.  Many of the ones I haven't watched are films that I've had on various DVRs for months and never watched.  Many are movies that I've watched dozens of times.  Even at that, I'm watching all 100.   I want a perspective on all of them that is current.  Yes, I watched "Gone With The Wind" - when I was a teenager.  I think I might have a completely different perspective on it.  Among the films I am NOT looking forward to (and I've managed to avoid these two so far in life) are "Schindler's List" and "Sophie's Choice."  It will be nice to be able to, you know, actually discuss those with some amount of authority...but I don't relish the idea of what will be a very painful few hours.

Preliminary thoughts on the list:

1.  I've seen "A Night at the Opera" and "Duck Soup."  The Marx Brothers are worthy of our admiration, and certainly carve a huge niche in the annals of film.  Their talent, timing, comedy, well, everything...is historic.  Do I really think they deserve 2% of the total top 100 films of all time?  No.  I do not.  I wonder, given time, if we won't feel the same way about "Anchorman" or "Caddyshack" in the future.  Brilliantly quotable.  Lots of individually very funny scenes.  Not necessarily the most cohesive of films.  Bah.  That's probably blasphemy.  Call me a blasphemer.

2.  I'm not sure that Charlie Chaplin is represented enough.  "The Kid" is not on the list, and neither is "The Great Dictator."  I dast say "The Great Dictator" deserves it just because of the chutzpah in making it.  It certainly addressed the horrors we didn't know want to know about at the time in WWII better than "Casablanca" did.  AND, it did it before America was even in the war.

3.  Black films appear to be underrepresented.  I think "Boyz N The Hood" might belong, and "Malcolm X" was a brilliant film.

4.  There is also a lack of respect given horror/scare films.  My sister rightly pointed out that "Night of the Living Dead" probably belongs.  No "Alien."  "Frankenstein?"  "Dracula?"

5.  "The Rocky Horror Picture Show" is a terrible movie...but it belongs in any list about the top 100 films of all time just for what it continues to do to audiences.  I'm reasonably certain the funding was American...so come on.

6.  "The Sixth Sense" is on the list...and that twist ending was shocking.  However, didn't "The Usual Suspects" have as good, if not a better, twist?  It was made first, too.

That's all for today.  I've watched "The African Queen," "The Apartment," and "On the Waterfront" thus far.  I started "North by Northwest," pretty much watched about 75% of it...but fell asleep.  I'll post about those in the next couple days.

some days...

....

I've wandered around with nothing more than time on my hands
I was lost in the night with no sight of you
And at times it was so blue and lonely
Heading for the light

Been close to the edge, hanging by my fingernails
I've rolled and I've tumbled through the roses and the thorns
And I couldn't see the sign that warned me, I'm
Heading for the light

Oh - I didn't see that big black cloud hanging over me
And when the rain came down I was nearly drowned
I didn't know the mess I was in

My shoes are wearing out from walking down this same highway
I don't see nothing new but I feel a lot of change
And I get the strangest feeling, as I'm
Heading for the light

Oh - my hands were tired
Jokers and fools on either side
But still I kept on till the worst had gone
Now I see the hole I was in

My shoes are wearing out from walking down this same highway
I don't see nothing new but I feel a lot of change
And I get the strangest feeling, as I'm
Heading for the light

I see the sun ahead, I ain't never looking back
All the dreams are coming true as I think of you
Now there's nothing in the way to stop me
Heading for the light

Now there's nothing in the way to stop me
Heading for the light...




Thanks, George. 

It's been a while...

...and this may veer off the road uncontrollably, but I gotta do this. 

No links, no humor.  This is my diary.  I'm writing the next chapter. 

I don't know where to begin, so I'll begin at the inane.

Friday night, I took my nephew to go see "Green Day's American Idiot."  It is not the greatest show ever.  I'm not even sure it's great.  I like it, but I could find a lot of flaws in it.  I'm not here to review the show.  I'm here to talk about why this event is significant.  I took Josh to see the show because I'd seen it before, and I thought he would enjoy it.  He had been listening to the album for a while, and I figured it was a good way to spend some time with him. 

When I saw the show the first time, I went home and bought the soundtrack for the show.  I started listening to it.  I enjoyed it.  As with any other music, I found myself singing along.  As I'm an actor, I found myself starting to "act" while singing along.  That's when something happened.  And now we get to why I'm writing this.

I came home one night and told my wife that I could no longer relate to music.  That I could sing along, but that I was just faking it.  I should have seen a red flag.  As an actor, my philosophy has always been that I'm just play acting.  Still, somewhere, I have to be able to relate to what I'm saying, and I have to find those emotions and bring them to the audience. 

"I can't relate to music anymore." 

Unreal.  Music touches my soul in ways that I cannot describe.  I can hear the pick scraping the string of a guitar.  I can hear the layers upon layers of background noise embedded in most songs.  I can pick up the subtle fills that bass players throw in, and the often subtle strummings of a good rhythm guitar player.  Yet, in this moment, I couldn't relate to it any more.

And that's where it started. 

I had a very traumatic, self-imposed event happen at my job that I'm not getting into here, but for which I was suspended.  It snapped me back into line.  It made me stop and look at myself.  Most importantly, it made me realize that the reason behind this event was something that I could no longer be party to, and that the disease behind it needed to be treated. 

I started therapy. 

Again. 

Again, I probably don't need to get into the details publicly.  These are changes that I just need to make and let the chips fall where they may.

The public part of this is this:  I have become, over the past several years, a punchline.

This idea of Randyville or Randystage, or whatever you want to call it...it doesn't work for who I am.  Not the real me.  The bravado, cocky, arrogant guy?  Yeah, that's not real.  You probably already know that.  There's part of me that is him, but the greater part is a scared, cowering child who can't let anyone see the truth, or he's convinced they will abandon me. 

So.  This event that happened at work?  It happened the day of callbacks for "Full Circle."  Lots of other stuff happened as a result of that event, none of which I'm getting into today, but let's just say that things haven't been that great. 

As you probably know if you're reading this, I was cast in "Full Circle."  The character I was playing, and the tact the director took required me to abandon the idea of "play acting" and to, you know, FIND IT.  Based on the reactions I got from people, and from my own haze while performing, I guess I found it.  I didn't do this for glory.  I didn't do what I did to show off.  I did what I did because that's what was required of an actor.  Any actor. 

I'm veering.

I'm not sure where I'm going with this, short of saying that the Randy Knott that has existed for too many years now had to go.  It became obvious during "A Little Night Music," when comments about my arrogance and ego, which were constant (especially from yours truly), finally started to hurt.  When it was obvious that I was just a punchline. 

How had I allowed myself to become that?  I care deeply about people.  I always have.  I do an absolutely horrific job of showing it.  Probably because, again, I'm afraid of getting hurt.  How to combat that:  make myself appear invulnerable.  Well.  I'm not.  Being a punchline sucks.  Yeah, I did that to myself, so don't feel sorry for me, but it sucks. 

I'm doing everything I can manage to do to not be the punchline any more. 

I hope it's not too late. 

For those whom I may have hurt while shielding myself (if there are any), I'm sorry.  I wish I had been honest enough to let you know how much I valued you. 

So.  Fashionable I guess to write this down.  Perhaps there's a little of the old Randy present in making this public.  Perhaps not.  I don't know.  Like I said, this is my diary.  If nothing else, I will re-read this and judge myself with it. 

Thank you for reading this. 

I promised...

...that I would give a written review of "War Horse" here.  So, here it is. 

I'm not going to give away too much of the plot, I hope, but there were a lot of things about the show that deserve commentary.  It's important enough as a piece of theatre, I think, to warrant me doing this.  Or maybe I just like hearing myself sound important.  I'm guessing it's the latter.

You can Google search the origins of the show, I'm not going to talk about that here.  What I'm talking about is what I SAW, felt, and heard.  That's it.  Enough with the prelims.

"War Horse," at its heart, is a fairly simple story.  And that's precisely where the show went off the tracks for me.  It's about a boy who gets a horse.  It happens to be a magnificent horse, capable of things that it should not be capable of for its breed.  The boy lives under the roof of a very proud, very stubborn, and very insecure Irish man.   The man bid his mortgage for the horse as a colt at auction, just to keep his brother from getting it.  He's got some problems.  Long story short, the idea is that the horse, once it matures, will eventually be sold for what was paid, and the debt will be paid.  The horse is a racer.  The man is a farmer.  The horse is of no use to him.  So, the man's brother goads him into trying to make Joey (the horse) a farm horse capable of pulling a plow.  If, in a week's time, the horse can pull a plow, the brother will give the man the 37 pounds he paid for Joey, and the man can keep the horse.  The boy is promised that if Joey can do it, the horse will be his forever.  Joey pulls the plow.  All is right.  Except that the bell starts tolling.  Meaning that World War I has begun, and that the men of the town are headed to war.

I'm getting too plot intensive.  The British need horses for the cavalry.  Joey, who was promised to be the boy's, is sold for 100 pounds to the war effort.  100 pounds is a hell of a good price.  The boy, at 16, runs away to find his horse by joining the army.  We see the struggles of the horse, being passed from British soldier to British soldier as they are killed, then the horse winds up in the hands of the Germans, then is finally reunited with his owner.  We see the boy and his struggles in the war.  The boy is weak, the horse is weak, but they make it home.  Happyish ending. 

Let's get on with what is wrong/right. 



See that guy by the head?  Looks like he's helping the horse, doesn't he?  Know how weird that is in a war zone?

The 800 pound gorilla for anyone interested in the show is the puppetry of the horses.  Magnificent.  They move like real horses.  They are simply amazing.  At one point, they walked it up the aisle, to the applause of the patrons.  Unfortunately, it was not the aisle we were close to, but it was cool.  I was astounded by what the bits of plastic/wood/whatever material they used were able to accomplish.  The horse seemed to breathe.  It had horse mannerisms.  If I had one complaint, it was that the puppeteer manipulating the head was outside the costume, and although he was "part of the horse" he looked like he was petting the horse's head at times rather than making it move.  It was odd to have a guy so calmly standing next to the horse when big drama was happening around him.

Also right:  when we met the Germans, the British had just mounted a charge across no man's land.  It failed.  Joey and one other horse made it through.  The rest were tangled in barbed wire, and had to be put down.  A German soldier is screaming at the British, in English, about how stupid they were to ride against machine guns and into barbed wire.  The British are screaming back, in English, that they don't speak German.  It was very effective to be able to understand what both sides were saying without them actually communicating.  Very good choice.  No subtitles.  Just English language.  Proving that neither side was really "evil."  Just misunderstood.  Nice.  There was awkwardly comedic scene later as a result of this, but at that point, we needed a little levity.

Now.  What's wrong. 

An 11 year old girl is introduced.  We never learn her fate.  We can assume she dies, but we never see it.  You cannot put a child in a war zone and not show us what happened.  That's not fair.  I know it's "real," but the horse was a puppet.  I'm sitting in a theatre seat, and the cannonball that killed the British Lieuntenant was a flashlight on a stick that someone walked into his chest.  It's not real.  So.  Tell me what happened to the girl.

The show is at least half an hour too long.  There is a very long, drawn out scene about moving some cannons.  It keeps going, and going.  Yes, we knew it would work out OK.  We didn't need it to take that long.  It would have tightened things up. 

Now for my biggest criticism.  Read a book.  Go get some information about World War I.  There are not many things that were more stupid, cruel, senseless, and just flat out wastes of human lives as that war.  World War II killed more people, mostly because the machinery had gotten so good at it.  World War I was just a meat grinder.  Trenches that didn't move, where every day, someone new would try and get to the other side, only to be beaten back after losing just about all their men.  They called it a "war of attrition."  That is disgusting.  Kill everyone on the other side.  Beyond wasteful.  I'm getting off the beaten path.  I know World War I was awful.  The play is designed to make us sympathetic to a couple of characters to show us how awful it was.  Except that the story isn't good enough to justify that.  At least it wasn't to me.  "All Quiet..." tells me that much better.  Watching a horse struggle to move a cannon doesn't help illustrate that.  It's a major flaw.  In my opinion, anyway. 

Overall, I think "War Horse" is a piece of theatre worth viewing, if only for the horse.  And, unfortunately, that's about the best I can say about it.  I'm glad I saw it.  I think everyone who sees it feels the same.  I'm just not sure I'd ever want to see it again. 

2012...

Actually sunrise, but it's like the sunrise of a new year...

...in review.

This year was a good one.  They all are, but I've felt particularly good this year.  Since this is my diary, it's time for a little perspective...

In 2012 the following affected me or my family:

Each of the boys got to drive a boat for the first time.

Them thar's Burnt Ends.  They are better than they look.

Lost the first of my uncles or aunts.  At 44, and with a total of 5 sets (4 sets and 1 divorced set), that's pretty fucking amazing.

Got to sing "Who Can I Turn To?" for a paying audience.

Renewed a friendship that had been lost.

Watched my oldest son go to second grade.

Watched the sun rise on Kroon Lake in Lindstrom, MN.

For that matter, set foot in the state of Minnesota for the first time.

Took in a baseball game with Nolan Ryan and George W. Bush.

Visited the Texas Book Depository.  Or the Sixth Floor Museum as it's called now.

Found Lee Harvey Oswald's grave.  And Clyde Barrow's, and Bonnie Parker's.

Spent two months with a ridiculous mustache.

"Black Comedy" - the most fun I've ever had directing.

Added Burnt Ends to my resume.  You'd understand why that's momentous if you tried them.

Got to sing at a surprise party for a dear friend.

Watched my wife get fired into a promotion.  Amazing where opportunities arise sometimes...

Saw yet another Republican kowtow to the insane portion of the right to the loss of his own Presidential Campaign.

Helped my youngest celebrate his third birthday.

Lost our full-time babysitter as a better opportunity for her and her family arose.

Got to ball games at Minute Maid Park in Houston, Rangers Ballpark in Arlington, Wrigley Field, US Cellular Field, Miller Park and Target Field.  That's 6 stadiums and, if memory serves, 13 ball games.  I really hate baseball.

Count Carl-Magnus Malcolm and the Countess. 

Tried Harold's Chicken.  I'm not eating chicken anywhere else real soon.

Took in a ball game with some LONG AGO friends in September.

Went to a practice round of the Ryder Cup at Medinah.  Got some pretty amazing photos of the losing team.


Used GPS guidance technology for the first time while in Texas.  I'm converted.

Directed "Black Comedy," a farce, in the spring.

Appeared in "Broadway Ballot," a cabaret featuring a bunch of the most talented people in the community theatre scene in August.

Appeared as Carl Magnus in "A Little Night Music" in the fall.  Got to sing a duet with someone I've been waiting a LONG time to sing a duet with...while meeting some great people.  P'raps one of the easiest/most in my wheelhouse roles I've tackled.  Fun to really look like you know what you're doing....

Played the character of the host of a "radio broadcast" of "It's A Wonderful Life" at Christmas.  I did a lot of theatre work this year.

Assembled.

Probably spent too little time with my in-laws.  Not that I didn't want to, but I was pretty busy with theatre.

Probably spent too little time with my family that doesn't live with me.  Not that I didn't want to, but I was pretty busy with theatre.

Guess who his daddy is.

Saw "War Horse."  More to come on that in the coming days.

Took my son and nieces to "Blue Man Group."  Third time for me.  First time for them.  Still a great night at the theatre.

Met Tom Ricketts.  And Jose Cardenal.  And Starlin Castro.  And Rick Monday.  And Steve Trout.  And Lee Smith.  And Keith Moreland.  And Anthony Rizzo.  Talked to Theo Epstein.  For a moment, but it counts.  Shit.  I met a lot of Cubs.  I may be a fan.

Saw "Million Dollar Quartet."

Celebrated nine years of marriage in style.

Managed to not pick up my golf clubs once.

Dropped 25 pounds at the end of the year.  Got more to go.

Took Brady to see "The Wiggles" on his birthday.

Both boys loved fishing in Minnesota.

Took my family on a vacation.  Much needed, and it WILL be repeated annually.  Brady's old enough to go now.  Won't skip time away like that again.

Used my smoker a LOT.

Had my oldest nephew get accepted to college.

Made a lot of new friends.  Really like them, and feel really blessed to know them all.

Marked 24 years without drugs or alcohol.

Made a lot of visits to the Museum of Science and Industry.

Did not make any visits to the zoo.  Gotta change that in 2013.

Led a canoe trip with a group of friends for entirely too long a distance down the Fox River before the drought hit.

Had far too many thoughts of tragedy befalling strangers, friends, and family.  I never expected to get through this life unscarred.  I think we all could use a year of less loss. I don't expect that, now that I'm getting older, but it would be nice.

Tried my best to maintain perspective on my life, my love, my family, my job, and my world.  Often lost that perspective.

Spent far too little time on this blog.  I'm going to try and change that in 2013.  No promises.  P'raps I'll still suck at this.

Thanks for reading.  Blessings or whatever you call them in 2013.  Let's make it a good one.  Without any fear.

Perspective.  A smiling family, good food in our bellies, and a
baseball game in our memory from that afternoon.  Photo taken by a friend.
I think that pretty much nails everything that's truly important. 

Poking around...

Yeah.  Apparently, this guy could hit a little.

...a bit on Baseball-Reference.com.

Ted Williams.

He took the three years off from ages 24-26 to serve in WWII.  He hit 521 home runs in his career, while TAKING THREE YEARS OFF.  Oh.  Wait.  There's more.

He averaged 97 games a season his last 9 years in the league.  In fact, over his career he only played in 78% of the games available to him WHEN HE WASN'T OUT KILLING PEOPLE IN THE WAR.

Let's do some math on that, shall we?

He played in 63% of the games available to him for the last 9 years of his career, and TOOK THREE FULL FUCKING SEASONS OFF.  And still hit 521 home runs.  Babe Ruth averaged 128 games a year for his last 9 seasons.  If Williams had just played at his average output for 128 games per season in his last 9 years,  he'd have hit another 63 HR's.  Add in the approximate 105 or so he would have gotten over the THREE FULL FUCKING SEASONS HE WAS FLYING PLANES IN THE WAR, and you're looking at 689 HR's for his career.  As a left handed hitter playing half his games in Fenway.  I've been there.  Lefties don't get cheap home runs in the park.  It's a LONG way to the power alley in right field.  Sure, you can wrap one around Pesky's Pole in right, but that's a weird way to hit a home run...and as good as Teddy Ballgame was, I can't imagine he was able to manipulate ball flight that much.

Oh wait.  There's more.

His On Base Percentage was .488.  He was on base basically every other plate appearance. His Batting Average was .344 for HIS FUCKING CAREER.  He had 2654 hits.  While playing only two thirds of the games his last nine years and TAKING THREE FUCKING SEASONS OFF IN THE PRIME OF HIS YOUTH TO FIGHT IN THE WAR.  Extrapolate a bit, and he's EASILY in the 3200 hit club.

Babe Ruth will ALWAYS be the greatest player...and until someone wins a World Series game or two as a pitcher, while batting .342 for his career, hitting 714 HR's and having an OPS of 1.164, he will ALWAYS be the best.

Ted Williams might have been the greatest hitter.

Maybe.

Musings....

Theatre is something that is so vital to me, yet I try so hard to pretend that I can take it or leave it.  However, when an opportunity/experience like "A Little Night Music" enters my life, well, I get all..."oh yeah." 

I had a wonderful time doing the show.  Sometimes it was hard on my family.  I cannot ever express to them how much I know they give up for me.  Selfish, I am.  A less selfish man would probably stop.  Like right now.  Likewise, a more selfish man would probably not even acknowledge the amount of time it does take.  For now, I am still struggling to find that balance.  Oft times, I get wrapped up in my own stuff.  Randy, Randy, Randy.  You know the way it is with me.

Other times, I get out of my way, and realize that I do this not only selfishly, but unselfishly.  Unselfishly sounds silly when there is so much "glory" involved with this.  But, I need it in order to be a better husband, a better Daddy, and a better Randy.  Many times I get that wrong.  Eventually, I hope, those that care about me realize why I'm there.  Sometimes, that fails. Striking the balance is something that I struggle with, and for that, I apologize.  Yikes, this is getting maudlin. 

I had a wonderful time doing the show, meeting new people, strutting, being "on."  Hard as it may seem to believe, I really liked the people I was playing with.  Overly talented, overly nice, overly patient, and overly qualified; the cast was a delight.  Plenty of kudos to go around.  Everyone was just great. 

Years have taken their toll on me.  One show after another has blended into each other.  Unfortunately, I've become jaded.  Like so many others, it loses its magic at times.  I need to say a big thank you to the people I worked with for helping me remember why I love it so.  Kidding aside, you were a wonderful group of people.  Every one of you. 

I won't soon forget it.

Thank you.

Wanna see something sexy?

I'll bet you do. 

Today I'm writing about my favorite sex scene in any film I've watched.  Even a couple of films of a more adult nature.  You know, the VERY FEW that I've watched. 

I'll be showing the clip below, but first the inevitable talk show question:

"Tell me, Randy, does this clip need any set up?"

YES.  Yes it does.  I'll go long form.  The film is hardly available any more, and you probably will never see it. 

The name of the film is "The Music Teacher."  It is a Belgian film that was nominated for Best Foreign Film at the Academy Awards.  It is a sumptuous, delicious feast dedicated to the love of music.  And the love of love.  And the love of lust.  Not so much lust, but more the love of love.

The film begins by showing an aging baritone (played by Jose Van Dam - someone with whom THE AUTHOR has performed) named Dallayrac performing in a recital.  In attendance is an old rival of his, Prince Scotti.  Prince Scotti, it turns out was once a bit of a performer himself, until, when in competition with Dallayrac, his voice broke, and he was never the same.  As Dallayrac is singing, a note becomes strained just ever so subtly.  Scotti bolts upright in his seat.  Dallayrac stops the performance and announces that his (previously unplanned) retirement begins that evening. 

Flash forward a bit.  Dallayrac is sent a GORGEOUS (and I mean GORGEOUS) woman to whom he is requested to give voice lessons.  Sophie is 18, played by Anne Roussel, and she is gorgeous.  I LOVE European women.  Something about licentiousness yet faith just drips off of them.  It should also be noted that Dallayrac's wife, Estelle, played by Sylvie Fennec, has a similar hotness, but not quite the same physical beauty.  She's still sexy as hell.

Sorry.  Had to towel off.  I'm back.

Dallayrac proceeds with the lessons for Sophie.  It is established that Sophie immediately starts to fall for her teacher.  It is also established by Estelle that despite how hard he is being on Sophie, he will fall in love with Sophie, and that the wife understands this.  Sophie is also made aware of the coming crush. 

As he is walking the market one day, Dallayrac hears a handsome, but poor beggar/pickpocket (it's been a while, I can't remember if he was a thief), Jean (played by Philippe Volter), singing softly to himself while strolling amongst the people.  Nothing astounding, but Dallayrac hears something in his voice.  He tells him he will make him into the world's greatest tenor if he's willing to give in to his teaching.  How Dallayrac knew the quality of his voice is mysterious, but it lends itself to the magical nature of the movie.  Eventually the two young pupils are introduced, and immediately smitten.  But she is still in love with Dallyrac, and Dallayrac is most assuredly in love with her.

Flash forward some more.  Prince Scotti has a pupil of his own, an incredibly cocky, arrogant tenor with a BAD haircut. A competition is being held, in which the three pupils will all be competing,the two tenors against each other, and Sophie on her own.  It is a showdown between Dallayrac and Scotti.  Not to spoil the whole ending, but the video below shows Sophie performing her piece in the competition.  She is joined (carefully hidden behind a curtain) by Jean in song.  This is the sex scene.

I've seen sex.  I've seen lots of sex.  I've seen lots of seduction leading to people throwing their clothes on the floor, devouring each other in whatever manner they see fit.

I'd never experienced in film before the sheer joy/seduction of singing with another human being.  Watch this scene.  It is wonderfully acted.  It is full of desire, lust, love, satisfaction, empowerment, care, giving, sharing, just EVERYTHING that sex is.  And not a single garment is dropped.  Not a single body part is kissed.  Not a single appendage is touched.  It's just sex.  In its most heady form.  And I absolutely love it.  It's right. It's sexy.  It's HOT.

I hope you like it too.

The old guy at the table is Scotti.  The young man with the bad haircut is the other tenor.  Jean is behind the curtain.  Sophie is singing.  Jean and Sophie are the two that make love.  Dallayrac is at home with his wife.

Enjoy.

I'm not linking to it...

...but it's here somewhere. 

There was a blogpost I wrote in an angry state. 

That friend and I have renewed our friendship.

I'm lucky. 

Like a week...

...to go and there's a lot to do.

And not.

I've had a very good time doing this show thus far.  It's been a long time since I've acted in a show I hadn't done before, and it's been longer since I've had to wait backstage at any point in a show.  In fact...I'm not sure when the last time that happened was.

I believe this was built shortly after Mark, Stan
and I did "1776" together back in 1985.

I should complain...

I've been fortunate this time around to get to meet some great people.  I've also been fortunate to get to reconnect with some LONG TIME friends/fellow performers, etc. etc.

Three of us in this show acted together in 1985.  We all look exactly the same, of course.

I'm rambling.  Hey.  Maybe that's what I'm supposed to be doing.  I got on Twitter this week.  My handle is @frayed_knott.  So.  I get to be hilarious in 140 characters or less.

The truly important I'll save for here.

Wait.  This is a fluff piece.

Dammit.

Can't wait for next week.

I've tried to remain out of it...

...but I can't help myself.

Why, oh why, do the Republicans continue to nominate people for the office of President?

The last two elections, in a nutshell:

Fox News, Rush, Hannity, Savage, Beck, Coulter, Malkin, et al  all line up AGAINST the presumed nominee in the primaries.  They throw their weight behind ideologues who couldn't win a general election if they tried.  They did it to McCain in 2008, and they did it again to Romney in 2012.  The sane portion of the GOP votes in primaries for the candidate that they believe might actually win, because THEY'RE PROBABLY THE MOST PROPERLY SKILLED FOR THE JOB.  McCain was in 2008, and Romney certainly appeared that way in 2012.  Romney may have a lot of John Kerry in him, but McCain was an astute choice. 

So, the hard right faction goes hard after the centrist candidate during the primaries.  The centrist candidate wins the nomination, because that's HOW IT SHOULD BE.  Then, something completely inexplicable happens.  All the hard right faction lines up behind the nominee once it is obvious who it is...WHO THEN PANDERS TO THE HARD RIGHT LINE OF BULLSHIT, making themselves completely unelectable.

Why? 

Barack Obama has been impressively beatable in both the last two elections.  The pandering, pendantic choice of Sarah Palin in 2008 nuked McCain's chances, and Romney's inability to be himself at any point in this election once it was obvious he was the candidate, all the while making buffoonish and clownish gaffes and pleas to those who control the will of the GOP (well, at least the radical portion of it). 

This is a party which is in desperate need of an enema. 

And what will happen?

Romney is going to lose.  He's going to lose an easily winnable election.  Afterward, the GOP will blame the candidate, not their own party's ideology.  And they will be horribly, horribly wrong.

And they will continue to lose, until they figure out what is plainly in front of their own noses.  Most of America is in the middle.  They used to appeal to those people. 

Apparently, for the big job, they no longer feel that's necessary. 

Welcome to Clinton 2016.  'Cause you know that's what's coming. 

I'm back...

Yeah, that guy looks like a
REAL big stretch for me.

...after a LONG delay.

I have to confess, the steakhouse thing took a lot out of me, creatively.  While it was a pleasure to write so much, and a pleasure to share, it was also a task.  I'm whining. 

There is much to share, and I plan to do so, but I need to talk about something funny today.

I have been cast in the show "A Little Night Music" at Village Theatre Guild in Glen Ellyn.  I am playing the role of the dragoon, Count Carl-Magnus Malcolm.  Yes, it was important to put all those names/titles in there. 

The show is populated with insanely talented people that I have either worked with before, known through reputation and been waiting to work with, or new people that I've never met.  It is a big ol' mutual admiration society, and I'm proud to be involved.

Where am I going with this? 

Right here.  The character I'm playing is not that much of a stretch, in some regards, and in others exactly the opposite of me.  I attended my first rehearsal last night.  Since I do not like to burden a director with too many questions about character early on (ever), I've been doing a lot of pondering about the role.  I am a firm believer in the story of your character being in the text.  Listen to what others say about you.  Listen to what you say.  Think about their station in life.

Carl-Magnus is an insufferable, vain, arrogant, self-absorbed prick.  That part is not the stretch for me.  That, I'm fairly certain, I can find.

The part that I'm struggling with today (AFTER ONE REHEARSAL - Dear God, I am whining), is that he is also clueless, or at least seems to be a little slow.  But is he really?  I'm struggling with whether he is just a man of faith, who always believes himself to be right, who believes that no one lies to him, and trusts in himself and life.  Or, conversely, is he clueless?   Does that make it easier on the audience?  Believe it or not, this matters.  

I have always looked for the deeper moments in any character I play.  I, as a director, will often cast someone based on what I believe to be the most important moment and which of the candidates I believe will be able to show me that convincingly.  It sometimes comes down to one sentence, as it did for me when I cast Dierdre in "I Hate Hamlet."   

So, in my quest, there are several references to Carl-Magnus and his military service.  I Googled "Carl-Magnus in war."  Know what I found?  FAN FICTION.  BRILLIANT FAN FICTION.  I'm not sure I can use any of it, as ultimately my role will be shaped by the director, but I am enjoying the hell out of the research. 

This has rambled a bit.  I'm looking forward to this production.  I'm looking forward to forwarding my research.  I'm looking forward to the moment when I can ask the director what he sees, and IT'S NOT AFTER ONE REHEARSAL AND WAY TOO SOON.  Since this is public, I believe I just did. 

Anyway, it's good to be back.  More to come...