Thursday, April 29, 2010
Many people, including myself, have noted that the armoured "amp suits" in Avatar bear a striking resemblance to the load-lifting mechanism that Ripley used to defeat the Queen Alien in Aliens (1986). But James Cameron's love of mechanized extensions to the human body goes back even further -- to his low-budget short film Xenogenesis (1978). Watch it below, and note what happens at the 7:12 mark in particular:
Avatar and religion -- a few thoughts.
Avatar came out on Blu-Ray and DVD last week, so now is as good a time as any to post the following article, which I wrote for the March issue of the Anglican Planet after they asked me to expand on some ideas that I had hinted at in my review for the January issue of BC Christian News:
- - -
By Peter T. Chattaway
James Cameron has given many interviews over the past few months, promoting Avatar and discussing the ground-breaking technology that went into it. He has even defended the film from those who take issue with its politics or its depiction of the military.
But I have yet to see an interview in which anyone encourages Cameron to talk about his religious influences.
This is a shame, as Cameron's films have often been peppered with religious names, symbols and story elements, and Avatar -- which quickly became the top-grossing film of all time worldwide since opening in mid-December and is now nominated for nine Oscars including Best Picture -- represents his most explicitly religious film to date.
This is not to say that the film advocates a specific religion, per se, but it does raise questions that are essentially religious in nature, about our relationship to Creation, to one another, and ultimately to some sort of spiritual reality that is higher than us.
The film, which takes place in the year 2154, concerns a crippled former marine named Jake Sully (Sam Worthington) who takes part in a program on an alien moon called Pandora. A human corporation has set up a mining operation there, and a team of scientists have created hybrid bodies called "avatars" -- half human, half alien -- that allow them to move around in the planet's atmosphere, which would otherwise be poisonous to them.
The scientists operate these "avatars" by a sort of remote control, projecting their minds into these genetically-engineered bodies -- and Jake is initially drawn to the project because it means he will be able to use his legs again, or at least the legs of his "avatar".
In theory, Jake is supposed to be working for the scientists, whose team leader bears the interesting name Grace Augustine (Sigourney Weaver). But the "colonel" who leads the corporation's team of mercenary soldiers -- a man by the name of Quaritch (Stephen Lang) -- is gearing up for war, and so he gets Jake to spy on the native aliens for him.
In turn, one of these aliens -- a race of blue, ten-foot-tall humanoids called the Na'vi -- is on the verge of killing Jake when a signal from their deity persuades her not only to let Jake live but to save his life from some predatory animals. Before long, this woman, Neytiri (Zoe Saldana), is teaching Jake about the ways of her people; and Jake, for his part, not only falls in love with her but begins to defend her people against the corporation that hired him.
One of the movie's central conceits is that the Na'vi are "connected" to their planet -- and to each other -- in a very literal way, through tendrils that emerge from the back of their heads. Through these tendrils, the Na'vi form bonds with the animals they ride and with the luminescent trees that are said to contain the memories of their ancestors.
And one of the key points of the film is that Jake eventually tries to defend Pandora and its natural environment against the mechanized assault of the humans -- but he doesn't do it alone. Instead, he prays to Eywa, the "mother" deity of Pandora, for help -- and just when Jake's efforts seem to have come to nothing, the planet itself rises up and fights back.
The fact that Mother Nature herself becomes Jake's ally has led some people, such as New York Times columnist Ross Douthat, to say that Avatar is a long "apologia for pantheism". But I think that line of interpretation may be pushing things just a tad.
Certainly the movie's title and the fact that the Na'vi are coloured blue would seem to be suggestive of Hinduism, as Cameron himself has admitted. But rather than promote any particular religion, it seems to me that Cameron is using a generic sort of sci-fi mysticism as an allegory for a much broader idea, namely that we need to be stewards of Creation.
Avatar also raises some interesting questions that Christians can appreciate, about the difference between objective study of a belief system and the subjective experience of it.
In one scene, Grace Augustine declares that Na'vi spirituality is "real" and not some sort of "pagan voodoo" because, she says, it can be "measured". But later on, Grace has an experience that transcends her measurements and makes Eywa real to her.
"I need to take some samples," she says, almost out of habit, but we know she's found something better now. Watching this scene, I was reminded of how Thomas Aquinas abandoned his work on the Summa Theologica and said his scholarly work now seemed like "straw" to him, after a mystical experience that he had near the end of his life.
In addition -- spoiler alert! -- the film even suggests that Grace, like the canonized saint for whom she was named, intervenes with Eywa on behalf of the Na'vi after her death. Yet Eywa remains sovereign; it was her intervention, after all, that drew Jake into the Na'vi community in the first place, thus paving the way for Grace to join them too.
These are just a few of the spiritual mysteries that can be teased out of Avatar, and it is worth noting that, unlike many films in which a member of the establishment finds spirituality among the natives and turns against his former allies, Avatar does not take any shots at "organized religion". Instead, the film finds common ground between pre-modern and post-modern kinds of belief and pits them against modern materialistic skepticism.
For those who can approach the film on its own allegorical level, and with the right kind of discernment, there is definitely something we Christians can work with here.
Tuesday, April 27, 2010
Canadian box-office stats -- April 25
Here are the figures for the past weekend, arranged from those that owe the highest percentage of their take to the Canadian box office to those that owe the lowest.
Alice in Wonderland -- CDN $35,660,000 -- N.AM $327,537,023 -- 10.9%
The Last Song -- CDN $5,880,000 -- N.AM $55,459,487 -- 10.6%
The Back-Up Plan -- CDN $1,280,000 -- N.AM $12,201,710 -- 10.5%
Oceans -- CDN $887,175 -- N.AM $8,525,488 -- 10.4%
Clash of the Titans -- CDN $14,180,000 -- N.AM $145,563,557 -- 9.7%
Date Night -- CDN $5,820,000 -- N.AM $63,332,819 -- 9.2%
How to Train Your Dragon -- CDN $15,880,000 -- N.AM $178,345,927 -- 8.9%
Kick-Ass -- CDN $3,070,000 -- N.AM $34,708,222 -- 8.8%
The Losers -- CDN $815,740 -- N.AM $9,406,348 -- 8.7%
Death at a Funeral -- CDN $1,660,000 -- N.AM $28,471,939 -- 5.8%
Alice in Wonderland -- CDN $35,660,000 -- N.AM $327,537,023 -- 10.9%
The Last Song -- CDN $5,880,000 -- N.AM $55,459,487 -- 10.6%
The Back-Up Plan -- CDN $1,280,000 -- N.AM $12,201,710 -- 10.5%
Oceans -- CDN $887,175 -- N.AM $8,525,488 -- 10.4%
Clash of the Titans -- CDN $14,180,000 -- N.AM $145,563,557 -- 9.7%
Date Night -- CDN $5,820,000 -- N.AM $63,332,819 -- 9.2%
How to Train Your Dragon -- CDN $15,880,000 -- N.AM $178,345,927 -- 8.9%
Kick-Ass -- CDN $3,070,000 -- N.AM $34,708,222 -- 8.8%
The Losers -- CDN $815,740 -- N.AM $9,406,348 -- 8.7%
Death at a Funeral -- CDN $1,660,000 -- N.AM $28,471,939 -- 5.8%
Friday, April 23, 2010
Canadian box-office stats -- April 18
Here are the figures for the past weekend, arranged from those that owe the highest percentage of their take to the Canadian box office to those that owe the lowest.
The Bounty Hunter -- CDN $7,050,000 -- N.AM $60,261,888 -- 11.7%
Hot Tub Time Machine -- CDN $4,610,000 -- N.AM $42,449,935 -- 10.9%
Alice in Wonderland -- CDN $35,090,000 -- N.AM $324,131,301 -- 10.8%
The Last Song -- CDN $5,220,000 -- N.AM $50,187,855 -- 10.4%
Clash of the Titans -- CDN $12,750,000 -- N.AM $132,600,220 -- 9.6%
Date Night -- CDN $4,310,000 -- N.AM $48,666,799 -- 8.9%
How to Train Your Dragon -- CDN $13,960,000 -- N.AM $158,251,066 -- 8.8%
Kick-Ass -- CDN $1,480,000 -- N.AM $19,828,687 -- 7.5%
Diary of a Wimpy Kid -- CDN $4,240,000 -- N.AM $57,090,186 -- 7.4%
Death at a Funeral -- CDN $852,172 -- N.AM $16,217,540 -- 5.3%
A couple of discrepancies: Diary of a Wimpy Kid was #10 on the Canadian chart (it was #11 in North America as a whole), while Tyler Perry's Why Did I Get Married Too? was #7 on the North American chart (it was #18 in Canada).
The Bounty Hunter -- CDN $7,050,000 -- N.AM $60,261,888 -- 11.7%
Hot Tub Time Machine -- CDN $4,610,000 -- N.AM $42,449,935 -- 10.9%
Alice in Wonderland -- CDN $35,090,000 -- N.AM $324,131,301 -- 10.8%
The Last Song -- CDN $5,220,000 -- N.AM $50,187,855 -- 10.4%
Clash of the Titans -- CDN $12,750,000 -- N.AM $132,600,220 -- 9.6%
Date Night -- CDN $4,310,000 -- N.AM $48,666,799 -- 8.9%
How to Train Your Dragon -- CDN $13,960,000 -- N.AM $158,251,066 -- 8.8%
Kick-Ass -- CDN $1,480,000 -- N.AM $19,828,687 -- 7.5%
Diary of a Wimpy Kid -- CDN $4,240,000 -- N.AM $57,090,186 -- 7.4%
Death at a Funeral -- CDN $852,172 -- N.AM $16,217,540 -- 5.3%
A couple of discrepancies: Diary of a Wimpy Kid was #10 on the Canadian chart (it was #11 in North America as a whole), while Tyler Perry's Why Did I Get Married Too? was #7 on the North American chart (it was #18 in Canada).
Saturday, April 17, 2010
Verhoeven on The Surrogate.
Paul Verhoeven has been making the rounds the last few weeks, promoting his book Jesus of Nazareth. (It was a big hit in the Netherlands when it first came out a couple years ago, but it didn't come out in the United States until earlier this month.)
The MTV Movies Blog has now posted several snippets from their interview with Verhoeven, and none of them are particularly newsy -- certainly not their "exclusive" report that Verhoeven put Christ-figure imagery in his sci-fi classic RoboCop (1987), which is old news to anyone who has listened to the DVDs' audio commentaries or read the summaries thereof.
But one of the clips did jump out at me, namely this one, in which Verhoeven discusses the status of an in-development thriller called The Surrogate. It has been nearly a year since it was first announced that Verhoeven would direct this film, based on a book by Christian novelist Kathryn Mackel. But this interview marks the first time I have seen Verhoeven himself discuss his take on the project, however briefly.
True to form, he says the film will be "kind of provocative and basically sexual", and he then goes into his standard spiel about the lack of eroticism in current Hollywood movies. But while the MTV write-up that accompanies this video interprets these two statements as a sign that Verhoeven intends to push the envelope with this film just like he used to do in the '90s, I am not convinced that this is, in fact, what Verhoeven was suggesting.
Rather, it seems to me that Verhoeven was trying to describe the film in a way that suited his aesthetic, but without giving too much away -- and then the interviewer jumped in with a comment about Verhoeven's reputation for salacious fare, which prompted Verhoeven to go off on one of his favorite tangents.
At any rate, this interview makes me just that much more curious to see what sort of film this will turn out to be in the end -- assuming the filmmakers (one of whom, producer Ralph Winter, is one of the better-known Christians working in Hollywood) can find the $30 million in financing that Verhoeven says the project will require before the cameras can start rolling.
The MTV Movies Blog has now posted several snippets from their interview with Verhoeven, and none of them are particularly newsy -- certainly not their "exclusive" report that Verhoeven put Christ-figure imagery in his sci-fi classic RoboCop (1987), which is old news to anyone who has listened to the DVDs' audio commentaries or read the summaries thereof.
But one of the clips did jump out at me, namely this one, in which Verhoeven discusses the status of an in-development thriller called The Surrogate. It has been nearly a year since it was first announced that Verhoeven would direct this film, based on a book by Christian novelist Kathryn Mackel. But this interview marks the first time I have seen Verhoeven himself discuss his take on the project, however briefly.
True to form, he says the film will be "kind of provocative and basically sexual", and he then goes into his standard spiel about the lack of eroticism in current Hollywood movies. But while the MTV write-up that accompanies this video interprets these two statements as a sign that Verhoeven intends to push the envelope with this film just like he used to do in the '90s, I am not convinced that this is, in fact, what Verhoeven was suggesting.
Rather, it seems to me that Verhoeven was trying to describe the film in a way that suited his aesthetic, but without giving too much away -- and then the interviewer jumped in with a comment about Verhoeven's reputation for salacious fare, which prompted Verhoeven to go off on one of his favorite tangents.
At any rate, this interview makes me just that much more curious to see what sort of film this will turn out to be in the end -- assuming the filmmakers (one of whom, producer Ralph Winter, is one of the better-known Christians working in Hollywood) can find the $30 million in financing that Verhoeven says the project will require before the cameras can start rolling.
Monday, April 12, 2010
Newsbites: The C.S. Lewis edition!
Just a few quick updates, if I may -- belated though one or two of them might be.
1. Eagle Eye co-writer Travis Adam Wright has been hired to write the script for Warner Brothers' adaptation of Here, There Be Dragons, a novel that casts real-life authors C.S. Lewis, J.R.R. Tolkien and Charles Williams as heroes in a fantasy adventure of their own. When I first mentioned this project nearly four years ago, it was going to be produced by Harry Potter producer David Heyman and The Dark Knight scribe David Goyer, but the only producer named in the current news story is Rick Porras, a co-producer and second-unit director on Peter Jackson's Lord of the Rings adaptation (2001-2003).
2. The Chronicles of Narnia: The Voyage of the Dawn Treader is hopping on the 3D bandwagon. The film, which was shot in two dimensions, is one of at least two that 20th Century Fox will convert to 3D before their release in December. (The other such film is Gulliver's Travels, starring Jack Black.)
In other news, CT Movies ran a curious story last month that gave the makers of Dawn Treader several opportunities to assert that they had learned their lesson and would be more faithful to Lewis's novels following the box-office disappointment that was Prince Caspian (2008). The thing is, no less an authority on these films than co-producer Douglas Gresham had said only a few months earlier that the changes to Prince Caspian were justified but the changes to Dawn Treader might not be so justified. If CT Movies was aware that the filmmakers have been sending out mixed signals like this, they didn't bother to pursue that angle.
1. Eagle Eye co-writer Travis Adam Wright has been hired to write the script for Warner Brothers' adaptation of Here, There Be Dragons, a novel that casts real-life authors C.S. Lewis, J.R.R. Tolkien and Charles Williams as heroes in a fantasy adventure of their own. When I first mentioned this project nearly four years ago, it was going to be produced by Harry Potter producer David Heyman and The Dark Knight scribe David Goyer, but the only producer named in the current news story is Rick Porras, a co-producer and second-unit director on Peter Jackson's Lord of the Rings adaptation (2001-2003).
2. The Chronicles of Narnia: The Voyage of the Dawn Treader is hopping on the 3D bandwagon. The film, which was shot in two dimensions, is one of at least two that 20th Century Fox will convert to 3D before their release in December. (The other such film is Gulliver's Travels, starring Jack Black.)
In other news, CT Movies ran a curious story last month that gave the makers of Dawn Treader several opportunities to assert that they had learned their lesson and would be more faithful to Lewis's novels following the box-office disappointment that was Prince Caspian (2008). The thing is, no less an authority on these films than co-producer Douglas Gresham had said only a few months earlier that the changes to Prince Caspian were justified but the changes to Dawn Treader might not be so justified. If CT Movies was aware that the filmmakers have been sending out mixed signals like this, they didn't bother to pursue that angle.
Other films still can't hold a candle to this!
One of my favorite discoveries at last year's VIFF was an animated short called Lightheaded. At the time, the five-minute film itself was not online, so all I could post was a 40-second trailer. But now, at long last, the film itself has been posted in its entirety up at YouTube. Thanks to Jerry Beck at Cartoon Brew for the tip.
Canadian box-office stats -- April 11
Here are the figures for the past weekend, arranged from those that owe the highest percentage of their take to the Canadian box office to those that owe the lowest.
Avatar -- CDN $93,100,000 -- N.AM $743,688,973 -- 12.5%
The Bounty Hunter -- CDN $6,410,000 -- N.AM $55,916,622 -- 11.5%
Hot Tub Time Machine -- CDN $3,990,000 -- N.AM $36,969,649 -- 10.8%
Shutter Island -- CDN $13,440,000 -- N.AM $125,001,481 -- 10.8%
Alice in Wonderland -- CDN $34,220,000 -- N.AM $319,009,518 -- 10.7%
The Last Song -- CDN $4,200,000 -- N.AM $42,255,196 -- 9.9%
Clash of the Titans -- CDN $10,260,000 -- N.AM $110,226,524 -- 9.3%
How to Train Your Dragon -- CDN $11,480,000 -- N.AM $133,404,438 -- 8.6%
Date Night -- CDN $2,000,000 -- N.AM $25,207,599 -- 7.9%
Diary of a Wimpy Kid -- CDN $3,940,000 -- N.AM $53,636,368 -- 7.3%
A couple of discrepancies: Avatar and Shutter Island were #9 and #10 on the Canadian chart, respectively (they were #12 and #11 in North America as a whole), while Tyler Perry's Why Did I Get Married Too? and Letters to God were #4 and #10 on the North American chart, respectively (the former film was #15 in Canada, while the latter film was nowhere in the Canadian Top 20).
Avatar -- CDN $93,100,000 -- N.AM $743,688,973 -- 12.5%
The Bounty Hunter -- CDN $6,410,000 -- N.AM $55,916,622 -- 11.5%
Hot Tub Time Machine -- CDN $3,990,000 -- N.AM $36,969,649 -- 10.8%
Shutter Island -- CDN $13,440,000 -- N.AM $125,001,481 -- 10.8%
Alice in Wonderland -- CDN $34,220,000 -- N.AM $319,009,518 -- 10.7%
The Last Song -- CDN $4,200,000 -- N.AM $42,255,196 -- 9.9%
Clash of the Titans -- CDN $10,260,000 -- N.AM $110,226,524 -- 9.3%
How to Train Your Dragon -- CDN $11,480,000 -- N.AM $133,404,438 -- 8.6%
Date Night -- CDN $2,000,000 -- N.AM $25,207,599 -- 7.9%
Diary of a Wimpy Kid -- CDN $3,940,000 -- N.AM $53,636,368 -- 7.3%
A couple of discrepancies: Avatar and Shutter Island were #9 and #10 on the Canadian chart, respectively (they were #12 and #11 in North America as a whole), while Tyler Perry's Why Did I Get Married Too? and Letters to God were #4 and #10 on the North American chart, respectively (the former film was #15 in Canada, while the latter film was nowhere in the Canadian Top 20).
Saturday, April 10, 2010
Rome producer tackles the Pharaohs
Variety reports that John Milius, co-creator of the HBO series Rome (a feature-film version of which is still in active development, by the way), has signed on to produce another ancient-history series called Pharaoh:
I don't subscribe to those theories any more, and I certainly don't expect this new series to go in that direction, but I am still kind of excited by the possibility that this rather obscure part of Egyptian history (obscure from a pop-culture perspective, that is) may finally be getting some dramatic attention.
For a better sense of what the series will be about, here is another excerpt from the Variety story:
Like "Rome," "Pharaoh" homes in on one dramatic period: the New Kingdom that began in 1479 B.C. with the reign of Queen Hatshepsut, a rare female pharaoh, who ruled as regent until her nephew, Thutmosis III, took the throne.This is very interesting to me, as I read quite a bit about Hatshepsut (pictured above) and Thutmose III when I was 14 years old, as research for a "novel" that I wrote back then about the early years of Moses' life. Most fictionalizations of Moses' life have linked it to the reign of Rameses II, who lived in the 1200s BC; but at the time, I was persuaded that Moses had lived a couple hundred years earlier than that, and I even toyed with the idea that Hatshepsut herself had been Moses' adoptive mother.
The mighty warrior pharaoh created the largest empire ancient Egypt had ever seen, an international super-power sprawling from southern Syria to northern Sudan.
I don't subscribe to those theories any more, and I certainly don't expect this new series to go in that direction, but I am still kind of excited by the possibility that this rather obscure part of Egyptian history (obscure from a pop-culture perspective, that is) may finally be getting some dramatic attention.
For a better sense of what the series will be about, here is another excerpt from the Variety story:
"Pharaoh," like "Rome," will mix "characters at all levels of life," says Milius, historical and fictional figures, common people with which audiences can identify.Sounds fascinating. I'm already looking forward to the DVD and all the inevitable history-oriented bonus features.
One will be a tomb-robber, Milius suggests, others a priest, soldiers and merchants, says Sichler.
Milius believes today's auds will identify with much of the ancient Egyptian lifestyle.
"Egyptian civilization is remakarbly modern. Egypt's dealings with other powers, the Syrians, Metannites, Babylonian civilizations, are strikingly contemporary in their arguments, their distrust for each other, their building up of separate cultures," he says.
"Pharaoh" stands apart in some ways from "Rome," however.
"What's important in Egypt compared to Rome is the mysticism, the relationship to death, mummification, to life after death," says Sichler.
Thursday, April 08, 2010
Pixar and its toys come full circle.

In the first Toy Story (1995), the big threat faced by the toys was an abusive boy next door who blew toys up and scrambled their identities with malicious glee.
In Toy Story 2 (1999), the big threat was... Well, there were two threats, actually. On the one hand, there was a collector who valued certain toys so much that he never really played with them; instead of allowing the toys to live and move and have their being in the hands of the children for whom they were made, he reduced the toys to commodities suspended in a state of perpetual perfection. On the other hand, there was also the looming likelihood that entropy would one day overtake these toys, and that those who didn't benefit from the protection of a collector would end up falling apart and rotting away in some landfill.
Come to think of it, the dilemma posed by Toy Story 2 is somewhat reminiscent of the opening lines to Woody Allen's famous 'Speech to the Graduates': "More than any other time in history, mankind faces a crossroads. One path leads to despair and utter hopelessness. The other, to total extinction. Let us pray we have the wisdom to choose correctly." But I digress.
Based on the trailers for Toy Story 3, which comes out in June, it seems the big threat this time -- or one of them, at least -- will be children who are neither overly hostile to the toys nor overly protective of them. The big threat, in other words, will not be little gods who are too loving or too cruel, but little gods who, being toddlers, are little more than blind forces of nature: happy, careless and utterly ignorant of the effect that they are having on these vintage playthings.
On one level, being putty in the hands of these preschoolers could fulfill the toys' purpose in a way that sitting on a collector's shelf never would; if nothing else, it would give the toys something to do. But then, how much "purpose" can a rampaging toddler really give his playthings in the first place? Is the unthinking chaos of the daycare centre really preferable to the more tranquil desolation of the landfill? It seems to me that neither of these things, ultimately, can bring rhyme or reason to the lives of Woody, Buzz and their friends.
Anyway. If Toy Story 3 really does play up the children-as-happy-monsters angle, then it seems Pixar will have come full circle in its treatment of the toy world. And no, I do not mean that Pixar will have returned to the themes of the original Toy Story. Instead, I mean that Pixar will have gone, in spirit, all the way back to the short film Tin Toy (1988), which was heralded at the time as the first computer-animated film to win the Oscar for Best Animated Short.
Tin Toy, as you can see in the clip above, concerns a toy one-man band (hmmm, shades of another Pixar short) who is fresh out of the box and chased all over the living room by a drooling infant or toddler -- and the child in question is often shot from low angles to emphasize how he must appear to his toys, as a looming, threatening, Godzilla-like monster. Which is not unlike how the children at Sunnyside Daycare seem to be portrayed in the trailer for Toy Story 3.
As it happens, the link between Tin Toy and the Toy Story franchise runs a little deeper than the fact that they both concern toys. As Jim Hill has explained at some length, Tin Toy was originally going to be turned into a Christmas-themed TV special, but the concept was shelved because it would have cost too much to produce; a year or two later, however, an opportunity arose for Pixar to make its first feature film, so the concept was dusted off and gradually transformed into the Toy Story that we now all know and love.
So, whenever my kids and I watch the Toy Story movies, I like to start with Tin Toy -- partly because I have very fond memories of seeing it on the big screen at animation festivals back in the late '80s, but also partly because I have a theory that the baby in Tin Toy is identical to the boy named Andy that we see in the Toy Story movies.
True, we do not see any of the other Toy Story characters in Tin Toy, but given how incredibly young the baby is here, there would certainly be time for him to accumulate new playthings by the time Toy Story takes place. In fact, even though Toy Story 2 revealed that Woody is an heirloom or hand-me-down who has been around since the 1950s (which begs the question of when and how Woody's memory got wiped, but that's a subject for another post), the original Toy Story specifies that Woody has only been Andy's favorite toy "since kindergarten". So presumably Woody and many of the other toys wouldn't have been a part of Andy's life just yet.
In any case, Toy Story 3, as you can see from the trailer above, is partly about how Andy has grown up and is about to go to college; it is, in other words, about how Andy, the boy from the previous films, is now on the verge of manhood. So I like to think that Tin Toy takes us back to his earliest days and gives us an even better look at how the child -- the infant -- has become the man. The movies have played very strongly on the notion that Andy loves his toys, but it is worth remembering that even he, too, was no doubt a threat to them once. Things change. People change. And the love that people have for things changes as they grow.
Monday, April 05, 2010
Robin Hood and the Magna Carta, redux.

Two months ago, I wondered if the new Robin Hood movie might turn its hero into one of the barons who forced King John to sign the Magna Carta in 1215. Today, I discovered that director Ridley Scott has directly touched on this point, and the answer is, well, maybe, but not quite yet. To quote the Sunday Times:
For this Robin Hood, Crowe and Scott reach back across history to the earliest written sources, long before Ivanhoe and then the Victorians sprinkled Robin’s legend with their own romantic garnish, to cook up a character that is closer to the vigorous outlaw of the early ballads. Theirs is an origins tale (think Batman Begins), carrying Robin up until the point that he is outlawed. “It is the beginnings of how the man becomes known as Robin the Hood,” explains Scott. “You don’t really get that until the last few minutes. When you realise that ‘Ah, this is who he is’.” Scott smiles. “Let’s say we might presume there’s a sequel.” (Again, think Batman Begins, which launched a monster franchise). “Honestly, I thought why not have the potential for a sequel, particularly if it is a genre that you absolutely love and has never been fully explored? If there were to be a sequel to Robin Hood, you would have a constant enemy throughout, King John, and you would follow his reign of 17 years, and the signing of Magna Carta could be Robin’s final act.”It's difficult to tell how serious Scott is about the sequel because he has never actually made one before -- at least not to one of his own movies. He did direct Hannibal (2001), the sequel to Jonathan Demme's Silence of the Lambs (1991); and there has been some talk lately to the effect that he might make a prequel to his own sci-fi classic Alien (1979) -- but for now that's just one of several projects that Scott has in development. And that's about it.
Then again, the fact that other people have made sequels to Alien over the years does raise the possibility that other filmmakers could follow in Scott's footsteps here, too.
In any case, the Times has many other details about the film as well, such as what it does with King Richard. Check it out.
Canadian box-office stats -- April 4
Here are the figures for the past weekend, arranged from those that owe the highest percentage of their take to the Canadian box office to those that owe the lowest.
She's Out of My League -- CDN $3,680,000 -- N.AM $28,712,974 -- 12.8%
Avatar -- CDN $92,690,000 -- N.AM $742,332,678 -- 12.5%
The Bounty Hunter -- CDN $5,400,000 -- N.AM $48,853,453 -- 11.1%
Shutter Island -- CDN $13,110,000 -- N.AM $123,440,937 -- 10.6%
Alice in Wonderland -- CDN $32,810,000 -- N.AM $309,733,753 -- 10.6%
Hot Tub Time Machine -- CDN $2,840,000 -- N.AM $27,910,213 -- 10.2%
The Last Song -- CDN $2,230,000 -- N.AM $25,395,041 -- 8.8%
How to Train Your Dragon -- CDN $7,590,000 -- N.AM $92,135,916 -- 8.2%
Clash of the Titans -- CDN $5,250,000 -- N.AM $63,890,110 -- 8.2%
Diary of a Wimpy Kid -- CDN $3,370,000 -- N.AM $46,013,347 -- 7.3%
A couple of discrepancies: Avatar was #8 on the Canadian chart (it was #13 in North America as a whole), while Tyler Perry's Why Did I Get Married Too? was #2 on the North American chart (it was #12 in Canada).
She's Out of My League -- CDN $3,680,000 -- N.AM $28,712,974 -- 12.8%
Avatar -- CDN $92,690,000 -- N.AM $742,332,678 -- 12.5%
The Bounty Hunter -- CDN $5,400,000 -- N.AM $48,853,453 -- 11.1%
Shutter Island -- CDN $13,110,000 -- N.AM $123,440,937 -- 10.6%
Alice in Wonderland -- CDN $32,810,000 -- N.AM $309,733,753 -- 10.6%
Hot Tub Time Machine -- CDN $2,840,000 -- N.AM $27,910,213 -- 10.2%
The Last Song -- CDN $2,230,000 -- N.AM $25,395,041 -- 8.8%
How to Train Your Dragon -- CDN $7,590,000 -- N.AM $92,135,916 -- 8.2%
Clash of the Titans -- CDN $5,250,000 -- N.AM $63,890,110 -- 8.2%
Diary of a Wimpy Kid -- CDN $3,370,000 -- N.AM $46,013,347 -- 7.3%
A couple of discrepancies: Avatar was #8 on the Canadian chart (it was #13 in North America as a whole), while Tyler Perry's Why Did I Get Married Too? was #2 on the North American chart (it was #12 in Canada).
Friday, April 02, 2010
Does Junior always know best?
There are many reasons to like the work of Steven D. Greydanus, film critic for the National Catholic Register, DecentFilms.com and various other outlets. For me, one of the most enjoyable is his ability to take two contemporaneous movies and set up a dialectic between them, noting the various things they have in common or, alternatively, the radically different approaches they sometimes take to the same basic premises.
I first remember seeing him do this back in 2003, when he compared and contrasted The Fighting Temptations and The School of Rock, noting how the film that was marketed to churches at that time was not the film that espoused the better values, for lack of a better word. More recently, in his review of 2012, he compared and contrasted the filmographies of Michael Bay and Roland Emmerich going back to the mid-1990s.
And now he's done it again, with a fascinating piece on "Junior Knows Best" movies such as How to Train Your Dragon and The Secret of Kells, both of which are currently in theatres, at least south of the border. He also finds a way to bring Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs, possibly my favorite animated film last year, into the picture as a sort of counterpoint. Check it out.
P.S.: The promo screening for How to Train Your Dragon marked the first time I took one of my kids to a sneak preview. (They have seen several movies at the neighbourhood theatres, but until now, none of them had never seen their dad "at work", as it were.) And for the record, my four-year-old daughter loved the film and has been drawing pictures of fire-breathing dragons ever since.
I first remember seeing him do this back in 2003, when he compared and contrasted The Fighting Temptations and The School of Rock, noting how the film that was marketed to churches at that time was not the film that espoused the better values, for lack of a better word. More recently, in his review of 2012, he compared and contrasted the filmographies of Michael Bay and Roland Emmerich going back to the mid-1990s.
And now he's done it again, with a fascinating piece on "Junior Knows Best" movies such as How to Train Your Dragon and The Secret of Kells, both of which are currently in theatres, at least south of the border. He also finds a way to bring Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs, possibly my favorite animated film last year, into the picture as a sort of counterpoint. Check it out.
P.S.: The promo screening for How to Train Your Dragon marked the first time I took one of my kids to a sneak preview. (They have seen several movies at the neighbourhood theatres, but until now, none of them had never seen their dad "at work", as it were.) And for the record, my four-year-old daughter loved the film and has been drawing pictures of fire-breathing dragons ever since.
Thursday, April 01, 2010
Ben-Hur mini-series -- the actors speak!
I was beginning to wonder why I hadn't seen any local coverage of the new mini-series version of Ben-Hur, the first part of which premieres this Sunday on CBC. But then a couple of interviews popped up in my news feed.
The first, from the Globe and Mail, revolves around Joseph Morgan, who plays the title character -- and in his intro, writer R.M. Vaughan describes the mini-series by saying that it
It is also interesting to hear Morgan say that Judah "forgives" Messala, and not just the Romans in general, in the end -- since I'm not sure that that's quite what happens in the existing films. Will the mini-series place a greater emphasis on reconciliation than the other adaptations did? We shall see.
In the meantime, the Canadian Press has an interview of its own with Emily VanCamp, who plays Judah's wife Esther -- though she doesn't say a whole lot about the mini-series itself. Instead, she talks about her career in general and how hot it was to shoot Ben Hur in Morocco and various other things of that nature.
APR 4 UPDATE: The Montreal Gazette also interviews Morgan.
The first, from the Globe and Mail, revolves around Joseph Morgan, who plays the title character -- and in his intro, writer R.M. Vaughan describes the mini-series by saying that it
offers lots of sex, manly, bare-chested combat, a spectacular Roman battleship sequence, more sex, lepers and centurions, underdressed lady pagans, a murderous chariot race, and Christ Himself (looking suspiciously like Jeff Bridges in The Big Lebowski).Oh-kay. The interview itself is fairly quick and superficial, but it does include one noteworthy aside about the possible religious implications of this new adaptation of Lew Wallace's story:
Is Judah Ben-Hur a Jewish hero, or an early-adaptor Christian?It will be interesting to see how that last bit plays out. The two major big-screen versions of Ben-Hur have also made Jesus a key part of Judah's enlightenment, so to speak, but they have differed on what sort of influence, exactly, Jesus had on him. The 1925 version (which also had a bit of nudity, for whatever that's worth) ultimately emphasized Judah's religious belief, but the 1959 version made him more of a humanist or pacifist in the end than a Christian, per se. (For more on this topic, see my review of the four-disc DVD set that came out five years ago.)
That’s interesting. I think he undergoes a change. In our version, the reason why he forgives [his enemy] Messala, and understands forgiveness, is because of Jesus Christ. So I guess you could say he is maybe a Jew turned Christian, in the space of the story.
It is also interesting to hear Morgan say that Judah "forgives" Messala, and not just the Romans in general, in the end -- since I'm not sure that that's quite what happens in the existing films. Will the mini-series place a greater emphasis on reconciliation than the other adaptations did? We shall see.
In the meantime, the Canadian Press has an interview of its own with Emily VanCamp, who plays Judah's wife Esther -- though she doesn't say a whole lot about the mini-series itself. Instead, she talks about her career in general and how hot it was to shoot Ben Hur in Morocco and various other things of that nature.
APR 4 UPDATE: The Montreal Gazette also interviews Morgan.
Ben-Hur mini-series premieres this Sunday!

Remember that new version of Ben-Hur that was being produced as a four-hour mini-series? I last mentioned it here almost a year ago, but since then I hadn't heard much about it. Now, however, Matt Page and a few of his readers have discovered that the CBC is showing the first part of the mini-series this Sunday at 8:00pm (or 8:30pm in Newfoundland). As far as Matt can tell, the mini-series hasn't been shown or scheduled in any other country (though a trailer that was apparently shown on Spanish TV can still be seen here), so the Canadian broadcast could be a world premiere.





