Snakes, so the good book tells us, have been around for a while. These creatures slithers on their bodies and give many a person the willies. Like Indiana Jones. "Why did it have to be snakes?"
Snakes on a Plane is perhaps the most eagerly anticipated film this year. But not because people expect it to be any good. This is the anti art-house film. No costume dramas. No profound messages about racism in the United States. No cowboys out on the range. It is what it is. Snakes on a plane. And of course, Samuel L. Jackson.
Snakes on a Plane (SoaP) introduced the power of the blogosphere, in particular, one blogger, Brian Finkelstein, who started up a blog called Snakes on a Blog. He had one objective while waiting for the movie to come out. Get invited to the premiere. A successful objective.
In particular, they wanted to rename the film to Pacific Air Flight 121 a name that most would-be fans felt was a bit too lame compared the infinitely superior Snakes on a Plane. Even Samuel L. Jackson wanted that name.
Why did Jackson want to star in this film? Originally, Ronnie Yu was set to direct this film. Yu has directed Hong Kong films (being from Hong Kong), most notably, Bride with White Hair, which Jackson had seen. He figured whatever happened in the film, it would be weird and fun. Alas, the executives didn't think so. In particular, when Yu appeared as if he weren't ready to make a PG-13 film, he was let go.
David Ellis was hired to take over. He had directed Cellular and Final Destination 2, a film Samuel Jackson had admired (apparently, most of his career was spent as a stuntman). Jacksong figured he'd stay with the project.
The blogosphere forced the filmmakers to add a scene for the audience to savor, but which wasn't in the original film. "I'm tired of these MF snakes on this MF plane!" utters Jackson in disgust! Having audiences change the film is not uncommon, but this is perhaps the first time it's been egged on by the blogoscenti.
People are going to attend this film mostly as a guilty pleasure. People want to go see a "good" film. But people also want to see a good "bad" film where you can check your brain at the entrance, and just enjoy the sheer ludicrousness of what's going on.
But you know what? It's hard to make a good "bad" film. The one guy that's allegedly famous for this is Ed Wood who directed Plan 9 From Outer Space. Russ Meyers may also fit the bill (indeed, once in college, I caught a back to back Wood/Meyers film. It was Glen or Glenda, a short semi-autobiographical film about being a transvestite, and Faster Pussycat, Kill, Kill about three tough women who kidnaps a girl and takes them to a farm run by an old coot, his powerful but not too bright son, and his other, more sensible son.
I can't exactly recall that last good bad film I saw. It might be Latter Days. I shouldn't have enjoyed the film as much as I did. Now, this is hardly a traditional good "bad" film. In fact, many people were profoundly touched by this film about a gay Mormon who is rejected by his family and church when he is outed.
The reason it works is that it has a pretty earnest idea. It believes in "true love", the love that has meaning, and how this plays with the shallow pretty boy who sees the Mormon as a conquest.
But a good "bad" film where people would agree it's bad? Bad, but fun. Hmmm. A lot of Jackie Chan would normally fit the bill. You can't say Jackie Chan makes good films, for the most part. And yet, he's so creative in his stunts that you're willing to overlook that. The best of this is his attempt to do Raiders of the Lost Ark in a film translated as "Armour of God: Operation Condor 2". Even its title is deliciously awful. There's a fight sequence in a wind tunnel. Even as you can't believe what's happening, it's really fun.
The reviews have been mixed. Some feel it achieves all anyone who is suitably prepared want. Certainly, the reddit guys agree as they've made their daily picture "Snakes on a Reddit".
Coming off the heels of the mass British arrest, this should provide some light fun for air travelers.
Three opinions on theorems
-
1. Think of theorem statements like an API. Some people feel intimidated by
the prospect of putting a “theorem” into their papers. They feel that their
res...
5 years ago
No comments:
Post a Comment