the groundhog day project

Imagine a sequel, Groundhog Day 2: The Quickening perhaps, or Groundhog Day 2: Electric Boogaloo . The latter is funnier, but the former makes more sense for the point I'm about to make. Imagine Phil Connors, back living day-to-day, but occasionally, he bounces into another day, so while he's living a normal life, he often has inside information on what's coming. It's interesting, but it's already not an appropriate successor to Groundhog Day . But, there's more. There's no Juan Sanchez Villa-Lobos Ramirez coming back from the dead, no planet Zeist, but there is apparently an Adjustment Bureau -style behind-the-scenes illuminati that are driving all the time bouncing, which negates everything we know from the previous stories... Oh, I'm not talking about Groundhog Day , but imagine it. Some secret organization, of which it turns out Rita Hanson is a member, were manipulating the time loop all along, training Phil to be able to loop on his own whene...

1973, Richard Lupoff publishes "12:01 P.M." in The Magazine of Fantasy and Science Fiction . In it, Myron Castleman is trapped in a time loop that lasts only an hour. It and the 1990 short film based on it are rather bleak because, well--SPOILERS (even though the story is four decades old and I've written about it in this blog before )--Myron doesn't escape the time loop. Actually, I should call it a time bounce when talking about "12:01 P.M." Three years ago, Lupoff published the first of two sequels to the story. I've got a few responses--and there will be SPOILERS obviously. First, the little things: I don't like that Lupoff (and by extension, Castleman) doesn't call the repeated days "resumptions" in the new story. I liked that word. I've used that word since reading "12:01 P.M." in my discussions of Groundhog Day . I actually had a weird moment of cognitive dissonance when I realized the new story, "12:02 P...

Got busy grading exams and watching Caprica episodes today and never got around to reading Lupoff's first sequel to his 12:01 P.M. story. I've also got a syllabus (or something like it) for a college class dealing with Groundhog Day that I've been meaning to read through, but I didn't get to that today either. I am once again a blogger without a plan today. As Phil marches through the snow to talk to the "commander" about the blizzard, I sit here with nothing in particular to say. The thing is, that's okay. Not every blog entry has to be about something, just like not every moment needs to be about something, not every day needs to be about something. Sometimes, life is just life, and a moment is just a moment, and a blog is just a blog... Oh, who am I kidding. I wish I had something prepped, something meaningful because those are the best topics for me. Sure, I like the funny ones and the weird ones, but meaningful--that is what I love. Right now, ...

This evening I read a short play my daughter Hayley’s reading for class— Sure Thing by David Ives. It’s about “Bill and Betty, both in their late twenties” who meet in a cafe. As simple as that sounds, it immediately made me think of Groundhog Day because, well, when the conversation between these two turns sour, a bell rings and the conversation resets back a bit. It plays a bit like the “date night” sequence in Groundhog Day (even more like the original trailer ‘s version of the “date night” with the alarm buzzer). For example, the first time, after Bill asks Betty, “Is this chair taken?” she tells him it is. Bell rings and Bill’s back to asking if the seat is taken. Another time, Bill’s been explaining how much he loves Faulkner and Betty tells him she thinks The Sound and the Fury (which she’s reading) is boring. Bell rings and Bill’s asking her what book she’s reading again. Mel Gussow at The New York Times describes the play: In this delightful little one-act..., the man.....

I just noticed that kid at the bottom right last night. That was Day 76 and there was still something new to see in Groundhog Day . (And, sorry the screencap is so blurry. The copy I've got of the movie on my iPad is not nearly as clear as the DVD copy I'm watching right now. If I remember, I will replace that image later) Things to note: He's wearing blue , even has a blue sign. He's facing away from the camera, which at first I thought was awkward. But, then I figured it was a way of getting in the shot without being too obvious about it But, then I thought, what if he's not even a real boy? What if he's a ghost? Or a Ted Danson cutout? Another supernatural element wouldn't be too out of place, after all. I mean, aside from the obvious supernatural bit... the time loop, there's also the devil in the red hat at the Tip Top Cafe and God serving drinks at the local bar. And, if you don't get those references, that is so very very sad... fo...

Subtitle: notes on the original (and mostly I’ll probably just harp on the voiceover), because I never really did that yet. I can’t tell you when it began, other than to say “on groundhog day.” And I can’t tell you why it happened to me, other than to say I deserved a break in my career, and this was certainly it. So begins Phil’s forgotten voiceover. The time loop is already in effect, he’s already been mouthing the DJ dialogue and answering Mrs. Lancaster’s questions before she’s quite asked them. And, here you also see a bit of how Phil was different in the original, i.e. before they cast Bill Murray; Phil was young. While that “break in my career” becomes a break from his career in the time loop, what Phil is getting at is this is his first time in the field, not Rita’s. Though Rita is “about Phil’s age,” she’s a much more seasoned producer than he is a reporter in this version. The voiceover continues: How do I know these things before they happen? You may call it cheating,...

Today, I think I’d rather stay in bed and recite the movie to myself than watch it. Fortunately, as I recently mentioned, watching the movie can fix a bad mood. Anyway, as I press play on the film, it occurs to me that it’s not my personal circumstances getting me down, per se. It’s that today is Day 33 and I still can’t play piano, still don’t speak French (though, neither, probably does Phil), can’t ice sculpt, won’t be going home with a nice dorky girl like Rita from a nice energetic party. In fact, I won’t be doing much of anything today. I should be throwing a Groundhog Day Project party to celebrate making it as many days as Phil does ( on screen, anyway ). I mean, a whole week was nice, making it a month a few days ago was great. But, this is a milestone—there won’t be another milestone for a while, the point at which I can definitively say “It’s like I said, I love this film; I’ve seen it over a hundred times.” I should mention, however cheesy and on-the-nose the lyrics a...

We see the clock turn from 5:59 to 6:00 numerous times in Groundhog Day , but if you believe a complaint—I’m having trouble figuring out if they ever actually sued or just threatened to—from back in 1993, the film owes a great deal to the time 12:01. “12:01 P.M.” was a short story by Richard Lupoff, published in 1973. Then, in 1990 there was an Oscar-nominated short film made from it, and in 1993—the same year as Groundhog Day --there was a TV film made from it as well. At the time, I think, this was my first time noticing how TV films seemed so conveniently timed with similar theatrical releases, something that happens all the time now; for example, when Battle Los Angeles from Columbia Pictures was coming out a couple years back, we got Battle of Los Angeles from The Asylum premiering on television. Call them knockoffs or knockbusters or mockbusters or what have you, they capitalize on similarity in name recognition and at least a vague similarity (generally) in plot. The Los A...