Movie News Blog

Bollywood may have taken a backseat but Hindi entertainment channels are undeterred by the Indian Premier League (IPL) craze that will hit the small screen Friday. Most of the channels have launched new fiction shows to keep their regular audience hooked.

One channel has launched two new shows – “Jamunia” and “Kashi”- and another has started “Godh Bharai”, with all three having aired their first episodes on International Women`s Day on Monday.

One of the channels kickstarted Indian satellite`s first silent comedy series “Gutur Gu” earlier this month and others have recently started airing shows of “Sasural Genda Phool” and “Behnein” respectively.

The channels feel cricket won`t take their core audience away.

“The IPL is no big deal. It comes and goes and is a matter of just six weeks. But our shows run for a much longer time. IPL doesn`t really take away what we believe is our hardcore audience. People will still come and watch our channel as much during IPL as they do at any other time. It doesn`t affect us,” Gaurav Banerjee, head (Content Strategy), of a channel told reporters.

Anooj Kapoor, the business head of an entertainment channel, is nonchalant about the effect that IPL could have on his channel.

“Fortunately, in the last two seasons of IPL, we haven`t got affected. I think that`s probably because there is a section of audience that wants humour irrespective of IPL.

And whether or not the viewers come more fleetingly during IPL, they never go away. That`s the reality of our channel and so we have no apprehensions,” said Kapoor.

According to Shailja Kejriwal, executive vice president (content), of a TV channel, IPL will affect the viewership of entertainment channels only when they have lots of new shows or if most viewers have single TV homes.

“IPL could have a 15-20 percent effect on any new show that a channel may have launched. Not on a show that a viewer has been watching for over a year or so because once the event is over, viewers will bounce back for old shows.

“Also, in single TV homes, men want to watch cricket; so it is possible that women, who make our core audience, can`t watch their favourite shows,” she said.

Meanwhile, a leading channel has safeguarded its Television Rating Points (TRPs) by joining hands with IPL to launch a series of new entertainment initiatives around IPL and its players.

“With our IPL entertainment, we are sure a lot of cricket lovers will want to experience the thrill of `cricketainmnet`. Last year IPL did dent our viewership a bit, but that was expected considering it`s one of the most anticipated sports events of the year,” a spokesperson from the channel told reporters.

Starting Saturday, the channel will see the launch of “IPL Rockstar” – a music competition to be held in the cricket stadiums. It will see 12 singers competing to be IPL Rockstar 2010 and will be judged by ace crooners Sukhwinder Singh and Kailash Kher.

Colors will also have a special IPL edition of “Fear Factor – Khatron Ke Khiladi” in which various cricketers will compete with one another in adventurous tasks. To be hosted by Bollywood star Akshay Kumar, it will be showcased later in the year.

An “IPL Awards Night” is also in the pipeline as part of the special offerings by a TV channel.

Bollywood Actress

Priyanka Chopra’s Twitter obsession has been curbed. And it’s all owing to her latest film producer Sajid Nadiadwala who has banned the actress from posting any kind of information on the social networking site.

So while most filmmakers are still looking for ways to approach their actors on the issue, Nadiadwala has taken stringent steps to assure that no member of the cast or the crew will leak any kind of details about his project ‘Anjaana Anjaani’ on any networking site.

The producer took the strict decision after he saw a constant inflow of pictures and information being put up on the said site. And with his both lead actors Priyanka Chopra and Ranbir Kapoor being active users of the site, Sajid had little choice but to impose his will.

Confirming the news, Sajid told a daily, “I actually took the decision to forbid my cast and crew from putting any information on websites after an incident that happened with Sajid Khan, my director of ‘Housefull’. We were doing a photo-session with the film’s stars. We weren’t even finished and Sajid Khan had already put one of the pictures on the site. I was horrified. That’s when I decided it was time to make the confidentiality clause a legal issue in all my contracts.”

Regretting the lack of privacy among stars, Sajid further added, “I remember when my father produced JP Dutta’s Ghulami, we’d stand outside Dharmendra’s van for hours waiting for him to emerge so we could see what he wore, how he styled his hair, what watch he had on, etc. Today the stars volunteer all this information on the social networks even before the director takes his first shot. I think all of us need to make confidentiality compulsory for every film."

Well, looks like Piggy Chops will have all work and no play on this one!

Bollywood Actress

URL: http://www.wehavebeards.com/
Site Name: We Have Beards
Categories: Reviews, General, Lists, Music, Television, Literature
Rating: PG-13

What is the main focus of your site?
The main focus is film. But we have contributors writing about music, television and literature.

What are your blogging goals, personally and/or professionally? In other words, what, if anything, are you trying to get out your blog?
We want to make the focus of film on the quality that is being produced and keep Hollywood in check. Making sure that they know when they make something truly awful.

Do you prefer an interactive community for your blog or are you the teacher and your readers the students?
It’s all about the conversation. We love to be corrected and being told that our opinions are wrong. We should be forced to defend out perspective.

How long have you been movie blogging for, and how frequent do you post updates to your site?
Been blogging since December of 2009. We try to write something once a day.

Name up to three of your favorite movies (and no more).
Seven Samurai
The Road Warrior
Rocky.

How did you hear about the LAMB?
Google search.

Any additional comments, or give yourself an interview question that’s not listed above.
The smartest people you know have beards. Well we have beards.

The Hollywood Reporter has posted that Kevin Dunn is “in negotiations to reprise his role as [Ron] Witwicky in the third “Transformers” film.” Key word in this case is “negotiations” as it gives rise to the possibility that a return may not occur. Doubtful but strange things can happen when an issue of money is involved. Assuming it all works out, this indicates that the Witwicky parents will return for more hijinks. In this case, the issue at hand may be about money but scheduling conflicts as Kevin Dunn recently signed on to join the new HBO’s new drama “Luck” which star’s Dustin Hoffman. It should be noted that when it comes to sequels, while most actors sign up for the typical three movies, re-negotiating the contract is common. As with all things involving Transformers, only time will tell. Thanks to Christopher for the link.

The Oscar ceremony wrapped a mere 72 hours ago. If you look closely you can probably still see the impression of Sandra Bullock’s grip on her Oscar. So it’s time to start thinking about next year’s Best Actress.

Would that I were kidding! Oh the life of the obsessive. Now, I won’t be unveiling TFE’s annual year-in-advance predictions until April 1st (April 1st… April Fools. cuz it’s foolish, get it?) as is the tradition but that doesn’t mean I haven’t started thinking about them. And whether or not I’ll do some sort of contest this year, despite the stumble last year. So I thought I’d share this brief chat I had with Guy Lodge (In Contention) as a sidebar during The Oscar Symposium a couple weeks ago.

Guy: All I’ll say is that I’m CONVINCED I’ve seen two of next year’s Best Actress nominees already.
Nathaniel: Which ones?
Guy: Jennifer Lawrence in Winter’s Bone and whichever of The Kids Are All Right ladies comes out on top.
Nathaniel: I can’t believe I didn’t see that [Winter's Bone] at Sundance. Dumb me.
Guy: Small distributor needs to push hard there but it’s such a mammoth performance, plus she’s young and hot… it was all people were talking about at Berlin.
Nathaniel: Young and Hot plus Mammoth = winner.

But I’m not convinced about The Kids Are All Right. I think there’s so many things that could go wrong there, campaign wise.
Guy: Yeah, but I think they’ve done the right thing going for a summer release.
Nathaniel: I’m rooting for The Bening.
Guy: I prefer Moore.
Nathaniel: I don’t know if you read my review but was I wrong in freaking out over that last closeup from Mia Wasikowska? She just killed me. What a perfect ending that was.
Guy: Yeah, she’s terrific. Hopefully Alice doesn’t damage her too much. Julianne’s line reading of “But I shall return!” [edited to remove spoilers] …just pitch-perfect coming timing. She’s so rarely allowed to be that funny.
Nathaniel: I was in a weird mood when I saw it and Julianne in comedy always makes me tense. I loved the Joni Mitchell scene so much.

Annette Bening and Julianne Moore as “Nic & Jules” in The Kids Are All Right

Guy: Bening’s scene on the couch reacting to [edited to remove spoilers] is one of the best things she’s ever done.
Nathaniel: Yeah. And some of the little details were so funny and warm. Like the way they’d both stretch out their arms like one super-fusion mom. ha ha
Guy: I know! But that’s the thing… they ARE one super-character. I think Focus needs to bite the bullet, accept that it’s a two-lead Thelma & Louise type deal and let the votes fall where they may.
Nathaniel: I do too. Hey… maybe you’ve seen three of next year’s Best Actress nominees already.
*

LOL

I absolutely love the musical score (so perfect) and that we get a cameo from Lesley Ann Warren at the end. And that her tittaes are less perky, haha. Surely you know how I feel about Lesley Ann Warren.

In semi-related news, here’s another short film entry in her actual endorsement deal (for Dior) that we first told you about in last May. This time she’s singing (yay!) and getting sahxy in a hot red dress. Yum. No, I’m not ready to consider my feelings about La Vie En Rose. Leave it be!

There is a rare side to Kareena Kapoor that we seldom get to see. The actress who is known for her fat paychecks recently donated a cheque of Rs 3 Lakh to bring smiles to the residents of a remote village in Madhya Pradesh, who live in abject poverty.

Kareena was saddened to see the plight of the villagers, mostly weavers, when she visited it during the promotional campaign of her movie 3 Idiots.

In their true ’Atithi Devo Bhava’ spirit, the villagers, though poor had shown tremendous hospitality by giving her an exquisite black sari with golden embroidery.

Bebo was also moved by the fact that the village had no electricity and the weavers worked at night in candle light. So she decided to make a donation of Rs 3 lakh to raise a solar energy plant and within two months the village will have electricity.

Confirming the news to a leading daily Kareena said, “I was a little shocked to see how these people work. At the end of the day it’s our country and I learnt that there are about 100 villages in the country which have no electricity. I have handed over a cheque to the concerned authorities to build a solar energy plant.

"It’s a nominal amount but it can bring smiles to many faces, which is why I wanted to do this. I am told that in about two months, the plant will be built and there will be electricity in Chanderi. I am also going to ask my friends in the film industry to come forward and make a difference,” she added.

Bollywood Actress

Irrfan Khan, popular for his serious and comic roles in Bollywood, is increasingly making inroads into the western world with projects like `A Mighty Heart`, `Slumdog Millionaire` and even an American TV show. He admits that being an international actor gives him a high.

"It`s always an inner wish of every actor to reach out to maximum audiences. I am lucky that the western world chooses me to play roles in their movies and television, whatever language it maybe. It surely gives you a high to be an international actor with quality work," Irrfan told reporters.

His first international film was London-based director Asif Kapadia`s "The Warrior". Irrfan played a lead in the film that was shot in Himachal Pradesh and Rajasthan. Released in 2001, "The Warrior" was applauded at international film festivals and made Irrfan a known face on the global arena.

In the recent past, the 48-year-old was seen in international projects like Angelina Jolie-starrer "A Mighty Heart" (2007) and Hollywood venture "The Darjeeling Limited" in the same year. He then got a role in British director Danny Boyle`s multiple award-winning film "Slumdog Millionaire" and is also working in Jennifer Chambers Lynch`s "Hisss".

He is now set to feature in American television show "In Treatment".

Apart from his overseas ventures, Irrfan has quite a few interesting Hindi films in hand. At the moment he is gearing up for the release of "Right Yaaa Wrong", produced by Subhash Ghai.

Irrfan said he had to unlearn acting for the film that is slated to release Friday.

"I had to unlearn acting and act as a real man behind dramatic situations in life of this cop who has to go against his best friend to arrest him. I learnt how to go through heavy dramatic emotions with controlled calmness. Every scene was a question to me as an actor," he said.

The thriller revolves around two cops – Ajay Shridhar (Sunny Deol) and Vinay Patnaik (Irrfan). Their intense rivalry leads them on a battle for supremacy.

Earlier, Irrfan has played a cop in films like "Rog", "Slumdog Millionaire", "Gunaah" and "New York".

Asked why he decide to take up this role, Irrfan said: "I like challenging roles. Playing a police officer is boring, but playing a human in a police officer`s uniform with complex emotions was tough. That was the reason to accept this well-defined role."

After "Right Yaaa Wrong", Irrfan will also be seen in Tigmanshu Dhulia`s "Paan Singh Tomar".

Bollywood Actress

I’ve reviewed the ceremony in the thematic / abstract for Tribeca. So let’s get a little more specific here for this first half of the big roundup (tomorrow: most wonderful moments and the dresses ~ finis!). Worst and Weirdest Moments coming at’cha now. Whether you disagree or agree, I’d love to hear the moments that left you scratching your head or pissed off.

6 Oscar’s Weird Relationship To Youth. The Oscars have never been a youthquake. Institutions are primarily for adults and for kids who dream of growing up to become adults. Certain Young Hollywood stars fit right into the glamour — the history even — of the industry’s big night. You can’t have the movies without both the old guard and fresh faces, after all. Cue Lion King music… “It’s the circle of life!” But you need to have the type of young stars that don’t require mental gymnastics on the part of the audience when they see them inbetween closeups of true legends and A-List names. There’s something about some young stars — Amanda Seyfried or Dakota Fanning for example — that exude “one day I may well be Old Hollywood”. This is the type of young star that Oscar should embrace if it wants to reexert and maintain its own institutional force. Miley Cyrus has precious little to do with the cinema and it’s hard to imagine that she actually cares about the history of Hollywood and her place in their pantheon. What can she possibly bring to the table that they need? Taylor Lautner did fine with the presenting — he’s a young professional — but they were giving him closeup reactions like he was an actual movie star and he looked confused or nervous when he wasn’t on stage, like someone who had stumbled in from a nearby prom.

I don’t want to come off like an old grouch here. It’s a nuanced point. The Oscars should have a smattering of young stars, but since it’s an Establishment event… it kind of needs the young stars who are, well, Established. And not (potentially) one-role wonders that they’ve been told are the cool kids. I’m not saying “don’t invite Taylor Lautner”. I have nothing against Taylor Lautner. I’m saying “Invite Taylor Lautner when he’s proven himself.” Kristen Stewart can stay. I’m obviously not a fan but I won’t pretend that she hasn’t earned it. She’s been directed by Sean Penn and David Fincher. She’s carried whole movies. Some people think she’s really talented. She can hold her own while locked in tiny claustrophic spaces with Jodie Foster. Etcetera.

5 Pete Docter’s speech. It started off well “Never did I believe making a flipbook in my third grade math class would lead to this” but one thing sours his wins for me. Why does he never acknowledge his fellow nominees in any of his speeches? When you sweep (as UP has) it starts to seem ungenerous. In such a rich year for animated films (Coraline and Fantastic Mr Fox would have made completely valid winners) it seems self-absorbed at best and extremely bad form at worst to act as if other great movies don’t exist.

4 Oscar’s Shame. At first I was excited that Oscar was explaining the difference between sound editing and sound mixing to the audience at home (and the audience in the Kodak… who *ahem* need the same education). But The Dark Knight? Why not illustrate with, um, this year’s nominees?!!! Stay focused, Oscar! You could see the phantom image of the Academy’s collective tail, still stuck between its legs. Exactly how many years are they going to apologize for passing that one up? The Academy makes a lot of bad choices, sure, but don’t we like the Academy better when they aren’t so obviously sheepish. Confidence –even when its unearned — is often sexy. Groveling and pandering never are.

The John Hughes Club: Matthew Broderick, Macauley Culkin, Ally Sheedy,
Molly Ringwald, Judd Nelson, Jon Cryer and Anthony Michael Hall

3 The John Hughes tribute. He definitely made an impression on my generation. I’d never deny that. I grew up reciting The Breakfast Club and I love it to this day. But the Academy doesn’t even do lone tributes for Oscar winners after they’ve died and John Hughes was never even nominated. It was an uncharacteristic moment, immediately casting strange shadows on cinematic giants that they’ve never given this treatment too. Yet another instance of the Academy protesting too much… “see, we DO like Popular Films! We DO!”

They’re just so scared to be themselves these days.

2 Interpretative Dance. They gave up Best Original Song or the honorary Oscars….for this? Clue to the producers: This is the type of thing you can AND HAVE done before during the Best Original Song performances. Why omit one to have the other? Especially when interpretative dance numbers have even less to do with the movies than the aborted songs. And especially when you don’t even know which movies you’ve decided to interpret. Why were you doing a tribute to WALL•E during the UP score? That’s what the robot dance was for, right? Because there aren’t any robots in UP. Was this a biting satirical jab at Pixar? “Your movies are interchangeable!”

1. the worst… Screw Old People! Roger Corman, Lauren Bacall and Gordon Willis. We see you… even if Oscar won’t. Legends deserve better than standing and waving to the camera. F**k you producers!

6 The Notably Absent. Old Hollywood and New Hollywood were amply represented but wasn’t it weird that Legendary Hollywood and Current Hollywood weren’t? Perhaps I should explain. Old Hollywood greats (roughly speaking the senior citizens) like Meryl Streep, Helen Mirren and Morgan Freeman were very present. So were newbies like Amanda Seyfried, Zac Efron and Carey Mulligan. We already know that the producers feared the wrath of teenagers should Lauren Bacall open her opinionated mouth. She had to go! But what about Current Hollywood? Was it just me or was there a distinct lack of the big stars in their mid 20s to early 40s? You know… the age range of stars that get the bulk of the leading roles? Maybe I was imagining it (possible) but the whole night felt a little like the demographic of the Best Actress category (minus Sandra Bullock).

5 Fact-Checking … Anyone? Anyone? You’d think a show with a gargantuan production budget and phalanx of writers wouldn’t have this problem but why did Samuel L Jackson get the details wrong about Beauty & The Beast (1991)? No, Samuel, Beauty & The Beast was not nominated for both Animated Feature and Best Picture. The animated feature category did not exist back then. And no Taylor Lautner, The Exorcist was not the last horror film to win favor with the Oscars. That scripted gaffe (not Taylor’s fault obviously) was even stranger, followed as it was by a montage of “horror movies” (loosely defined) that included many Oscar favorites that were released AFTER The Exorcist… movies like Carrie, Silence of the Lambs, Jaws, and The Sixth Sense.

4 Amanda Seyfried + Miley Cyrus. Who thought to pair them? I’m convinced they’re from different universes and I’m not talking about the light years between Pennsylvania and Tennessee. I loved Anthony Lane’s bit in the New Yorker about their odd couple demeanor

Cyrus, who wore a perfectly respectable bustier but had inadvertently forgotten to put anything over it,came on to present an award in the company of Amanda Seyfried, and, in so doing, fluffed her lines. “We’re both kinda nervous, it’s our first time.” So saying, she tried to corral Seyfried into the fluff, inviting her to share the pain, but Seyfried, wisely, was having none of it, and shied backward, as if to say, “Enough with the both, sister.”

3 Fisher Stevens is an Oscar winner!
For those of you who are like “who?” It’s okay. Perfectly understandable. But it was a weird moment for me. You see during the peak of Michelle Pfeiffer’s career from roughly Fabulous Baker Boys through Batman Returns he was her boyfriend. Fisher withstood frequent hateful media comments, presumably for dating someone deemed so far out of his league. And he was further vilified when they broke up, presumably on account of infidelity.

But that’s all ancient tabloid history. Now he is an Oscar winner and Michelle Pfeiffer is still… not.

Stevens, who won for the dolphin-killing exposé The Cove, is obviously well connected and I didn’t know this either. On the way to the stage for his thank you Woody Harrelson grabbed him and he exchanged looks with Meryl Streep. Who knew.

2 The Presenter Rut. What is with the Academy’s utter inability to shake things up presenter-wise. They don’t actually employ the same producers every year so why is it that we get the same presenters? What is it that makes Ben Stiller so attractive to them versus dozens of other famous comics? What is it that makes Cameron Diaz a “must have!”? Why is Queen Latifah the one black actress they regularly care about? Why do Tom Hanks and Barbra Streisand get so many chances to present biggie prizes? I’m not trying to be dense. I JUST DON’T GET IT. That town is swimming with legends. Los Angeles is where celebrities live. Tom Hanks and Barbra Streisand are not the only instantly recognizable cross generational celebrities on the planet. We’ve offered the producers numerous suggestions of very very famous people they’ve never used for Best Picture and they never take our advice. I mean Christ Almighty they’ve never even let actresses as famous as Meryl Streep or Jane Fonda do it. Or why not someone like Maggie Smith who is loved by the older generation as well as the young kids (see Harry Potter).

1…the weirdest. Sean Penn’s AdLib.
It went like so…

I…um. I never became an official member of the Academy but the Academy and I do have in common that we manage to — neglect to acknowledge the same actress in our own ways two years running. So I — I’m going to start fresh with the Academy and acknowledge these wonderful actresses.

Maybe someone else has already explained this online but what the hell is he talking about? I have no idea. None. And I watch the Oscars religiously every year, and usually more than once!

Explain it to me in the comments, please!

Tomorrow we put all this behind us with the best moments and a few fashion comments. Thanks for sticking it out!

MARCH 8, 2010

GENRE: MAD SCIENTIST

SOURCE: DVD (OWN COLLECTION)

It seems I am reaching the home stretch when it comes to seeing all of the traditional Universal Classic Monster movies. I’ve seen all of the Dracula, Wolf Man, Mummy, and Frankenstein ones (except for the Abbott and Costello versions – I’ll get to those eventually), and there are only three Creature From The Black Lagoon films, ever. And that just leaves The Invisible Man, which has 5 films on the set, but one is a comedy and another is a spy movie. Even the original is probably the lightest on horror of the entire stable, but it’s also one of the better ones, so it evens out.

Now, when I say lightest on horror, I mean in the traditional sense. He’s not really a monster like the others, and several of his antics are played for laughs instead of scares. But on the other hand, he’s probably the most villainous of the whole Universal lineup – dude kills quite a few people directly over the course of the movie, and at one point sends an entire train full of people to their deaths. He even kills the guy that in any other Uni movie would be the hero/love interest for the obligatory girl (played here by Titanic’s Gloria Stuart), harshly trapping him in a car and then pushing said car down a cliff. He’s also the only one of the era to threaten rape. In other words – how the hell did all of this stuff make it past the censors and producers? Hollow Man didn’t even rack up this high of a body count.

This of course is part of what also sets the film apart from many of the others – he’s not really that sympathetic. I understand he’s even MORE of a scoundrel in the H.G. Wells source novel, but he’s still the Antichrist compared to Frankenstein’s monster, the Mummy (first one anyway), or Larry Talbot. Hell even Dracula had that romantic thing going for him, but Griffin barely seems interested in his love interest (she’s only in a few scenes, and not involved with the climax at all). If not for his occasional practical gags, like when he runs around in circles, chased by FOUR policemen (none of whom seem to consider merely running in the other direction and trapping him) laughing in a comical (as opposed to maniacal) manner. He’s a delightful murderer.

Speaking of the climax, it’s kind of half-assed. Like some other Uni movies, it sort of peters out instead of building toward a great finale. He’s done in by people we barely know/care about, and he doesn’t fight anyone either. And I know that the assumed reason for this would be that they didn’t have the effects ability to pull off such a thing, but the effects in the movie are still quite astonishing. You can see the strings on a few of the object motion shots, but any scene where he still has clothes on looks just as good as the stuff in Memoirs of an Invisible Man (if not as ambitious, obviously). But they don’t do any big effect for the end, just a few footsteps in the snow (actually shoeprints, which is an error, but OK) and then he is shot dead by the posse.

It’s also a weak finale when you consider that that is literally all they do – they shoot him. For the entire 70 previous minutes (another cool thing – he’s already invisible when the movie starts), they never thought to just shoot at the guy? There are times when he is clearly more or less confined in a room, throwing glasses at the crowd or whatever, but they always run away instead of rushing him. He’s not a ghost, go get him! Also, he’s not really doing much when they kill him, just sleeping in a barn. I was hoping for a traditional science lab ending, possibly even a (somewhat) tragic one where he was about to cure himself only to be taken down by the mob. They try to go for the tragedy by working in some nonsense that once he dies he will become visible again, so once he’s dead we see his face for the first time and see that he’s just a normal guy, but it doesn’t quite have the impact due to the fact that his death scene was so lax.

But otherwise, again, it’s one of the better ones in the “franchise” for sure. The aforementioned lack of censorship gives it an edge that the others never had, allowing it to play out more like a Hammer film than anything else. And by not having the traditional love triangle stuff, we stay with the characters we care about (i.e. the monster) more often than usual. You may never see his face, but Claude Rains has more screentime in this film than Lugosi or Karloff ever had in their respective films, I think.

I just wish the transfer was as above average. It’s actually pretty spotty, and the color temperature keeps changing from blue to green (though this may be a defect on my DVD, as I haven’t seen it mentioned elsewhere). King Kong and other 1933 films seem to have been better preserved and/or remastered; maybe if they mount a reboot (David Goyer has been attached to do one for quite some time) they will give it another release. Otherwise, it has the traditional treatment, a retrospective and a film historian commentary. I wish Tom Weaver (who did The Wolf Man’s track) did this one instead of Rudy Behlmer though. Behlmer certainly knows his stuff, but he just rattles off facts the entire time. Weaver did that but also would comment on the actual scene every now and then, and didn’t seem to be reading everything he said off of a teleprompter the way Behlmer does. The documentary (35 min) is also chock full of info, but it also seems to be trying to provide a bio of James Whale as much (if not more) than a look at the film itself. The effects, for example, aren’t given as much screentime as Ian McKellen talking about Whale in relation to his performance in the Whale biopic Gods and Monsters. The context is fine and even necessary, but I wanted more about the film and its legacy. Either way, it’s well put together and informative, and unlike the commentary, it didn’t put me to sleep three times.

If anyone has seen them, do you think I can count The Invisible Woman or Invisible Agent as horror movies? Keep in mind my review for Memoirs Of An Invisible Man was for my non-horror October Extras series; otherwise I’d never even consider it for HMAD purposes despite the Carpenter connection.

What say you?