Posts

Showing posts with the label lethal weapon

and nothing that you did mattered

Image
Davies (1995) tells us that Groundhog Day "ignor[es] considerations of race and gender politics" (p. 215). But, in no uncertain terms, Davies is wrong. Well, somewhat wrong. Well, actually mostly right on the side of race. Gender is a different story. Take a "rom com" of any era and it will tell you something about gender politics at the time it was made. It's harder for the film to have anything to say about race when there are only two people in the cast who are not white and have lines. I argued in a media studies class once that Phil is effectively put in the position of the disenfranchised (as evidenced in his conversation with Ralph and Gus at the bowling alley bar) in that the regular rules of so-called civilized society do not apply to him anymore. Money has no value. His work has no value (though he does continue to work at least most days because Rubin wanted that check-in to sprinkle through the original script). Because this is a mainstream comedy ...

this is where your life is

Image
So, I did get some work done today, got some stuff ready for the upcoming winter quarter. I also managed to oversleep, go for a walk, and watch... Technically, this-- Go is on right now, because I wanted a classic Christmas film--is my fifth movie in 24 hours. I watched the Star Wars: The Clone Wars animated movie--which is nowhere near as good as most of the episode of that show that I have seen. I watched Steve Jobs . I watched Spectre . And, I just finished Brooklyn . The quick rundown before I (probably) get distracted by some tangent and forget all about the specific films in question: I've seen the Clone Wars thing before, as well as a lot of episodes of the series... For whatever reason, I never kept up consistently, but I've had Star Wars on my mind of late, for some weird reason. This theatrical release was a edit of a few episodes with a self-contained story, and it's pretty kid-friendly--baby Hutt nicknamed Stinky--and pretty weird--a Truman Capote-sequel...

so long, pete mitchell

Image
[EDIT: If anyone is coming to this blog from the Believer article, welcome. To find the daily pieces on Groundhog Day you've got to look at August 2013 to August 2014. And, I will be watching Groundhog Day and writing an entry related to it later today--today being February 2. The piece below was posted late last night for February 1st. For the month of January, I watched 5 action movies from the 1980s. Enjoy.] Let us get the most important item out of the way first off on this last day with Top Gun : There’s a question on Quora — In Top Gun , why was Jester allowed to fly below the “hard deck,” but Maverick and Goose were reprimanded for it? But, I’ve got a better question—if the “hard deck” was 10,000 feet and Maverick gets in trouble for flying below said altitude, what were both jets doing flying so low well before the moment in question? I mean, look at this: Does that look like they are above 10,000 feet? (It’s so low, it reminds me of the opening titles sequ...

these guys eat too much red meat

Image
Maolsheachlann raises an interesting point as comment to yesterday 's blog entry: "You could be a pacifist and a rugged individualist, though... Radical libertarians tend to be very distrustful of armies and wars." My response (and it leads into today's topic or I would just put it in the comments section): 1) I don't think--and I'm risking a True Scotsman logical fallacy here, but I'm going to go for it anyway--a true pacifist could ever be a rugged individualist. To me, pacifism comes hand in hand with collectivism. There is no point to peace without other people. 2) While I suggested--and still do suggest--that rugged individualism favors the use of force, that force does not have to come from a State's army, nor does it have to come in the form of war. Maolsheachlann continues: My problem with the standard critique of masculinity and femininity in movies is that movies show us ideals. They inevitably (and desirably, in my view) simplify every...

no relation

Image
John McClane was born in 1966 and his name was Joe Leland. He was born in the pages of a novel called The Detective by Roderick Thorp. In 1968 he would be played by Frank Sinatra in a film adpatation. In 1979, Thorp would publish a sequel called Nothing Lasts Forever in which Joe Leland was trapped in a building taken over by terrorists. Supposedly, Sinatra had a clause in his contract for The Detective that made him the mandatory first offer to play the character in a sequel. I'm not sure when that happened, but at some point, Sinatra turned down the role. The script was reworked as a sequel to Commando but Arnold didn't like it... I should mention, since I probably will not have cause to cite specific passages that I am going by information from Ryan Lambie's Den of Geek piece, "The strange history of the Die Hard movies," 24 November 2011; Andrew Barloq's I Choose To Stand blog entry, "Retrospective: Die Hard with a Vengeance (1995)," 10 De...

who said we were terrorists?

Image
Start with a plane landing, let us know this guy's from out of town. Nice start. Setup him taking his shoes off, so he's a little off kilter later... ( Chekhov's bare feet ?) But, let's talk commonalities. Like Lethal Weapon the year before, it's Christmas (Christmas Eve, actually, if tech guy Theo can be trusted). Got a white cop and a black cop (though a much smaller part for Reginald VelJohnson than Danny Glover). The family here is mostly absent, and definitely "broken." Of course, the marriage is as Hollywood-magically fixed as Martin Riggs' depression. (Actually, that's not fair. I suppose that John McClane has realized that he can kill bad guys in California just as much as he can kill them in New York, so moving out here now to be with his family has become something easier to do. The marriage itself actually seems relatively okay--he and Holly do seem to miss each other before they start arguing about her using her maiden name.) ...

mama says policemen shoot black people

Image
Let's just start with a frank, honest truth. Roger Murtaugh is not black. And, I don't mean to be a smartass about the color versus the race, that "black" people are generally shades of what we'd call brown or whatever. I mean that, in Shane Black's script, race is not mentioned. Except for the title of today's entry (and one other instance I'll get to in a moment). Alfred says that to Murtaugh. And, the line may resonate a little more in the script because Murtaugh is not said to be black. He's just... Murtaugh. In fact, race is not an issue at all in the course of this film. Murtaugh just happens to have been cast black. Burke--the guy who tells Murtaugh he's breaking in a new partner--is only described in the script as "Rail-thin, nose like a beak." The actor cast as Burke just happens to be black. Okay, maybe not "just happens to be." Maybe the casting director, Marion Dougherty, deliberately chose to cast black actors...

we've got his little girl

Image
EXT. VIEWSITE - NIGHT A black Camaro is parked at the side of the road. The city twinkles beyond. INT. CAR - SAME Two teenagers, engaged in a first-rate makeout session. One of them is Roger Murtaugh's daughter Rianne. The other is MARK, he of the hilarious dimples. They are kissing when Rianne suddenly pulls away: RIANNE Mark, I gotta get home. MARK Would you quit worrying? Your mom thinks you're asleep and your dad's busy shooting crooks. RIANNE He said he'll shoot you if we have sex. MARK Some things are worth dying for. Interrupt this forgotten scene to ROLL EYES. He leans in and kisses her. Passion, horniness. Something. He runs a hand inside her sweater. She starts to resist. Gives in. RIANNE Wait. She takes out her gum and sticks it to the steering wheel. Leans over to kiss him again. FACE comes INTO FRAME. Right outside the window. Crewcut. Shirt and tie. No less than Mr. Joshua himself, as we -- CUT TO: (p. 79-80) I can't decide if it's...

the world's lousiest christmas turkey

Image
So, consider yesterday a part one to today's part two about the character of Martin Riggs. We are not accounting in any way for Lethal Weapon 2 or 3 or 4 , just the original. Also, consider this a part... whatever part it may be to my original Kozlovik post about Phil Connors in Groundhog Day . Yes, ladies and gentlemen, it's that time of the week again in which we compare our protagonist to Jesus Christ. Let us just get into it--taking our list from Kozlovic (2009) as usual. (And stick around for the twist ending.) #1 - tangible... yes, Martin Riggs is a real guy in the movie. (1/1) #2 - central protagonist... he shares it with Roger Murtaugh, but I will give him the point. (2/2) #3 - outsider... Martin Riggs has been rejected by vice, and as he explains, no one wants to work with him. So, check. (3/3) #4 - arrives through outside intervention... this one may be a stretch, but Martin Riggs is transferred into Roger Murtaugh's life just as a new case arrives and he ...

there's no more heroes left in the world

Image
Shane Black's Los Angeles is "a bargain basement Promised Land." He likes sunny days and rainy nights. He likes to juxtapose domestic normalcy with the seedy underbelly. And, he likes to put flawed men at the center--these are the damaged angels for which the city is named. In Lethal Weapon we have two of these men as our protagonists: Roger Murtaugh and Martin Riggs. RM and MR. Mr short for Mister, but one must wonder is Black suggesting that Martin Riggs or Roger Murtaugh is the quintessential male, or at least the quintessential 80s male, or at least the quintessential 80s action male. The interesting thing is, as the story goes, in Black's script--I don't know what draft I have, but it's not the first--a little more than in the film, Murtaugh becomes a little more like Riggs along the way and maybe, just maybe, Riggs becomes a little more like Murtaugh in exchange. Imagine the partnership if Mr. Joshua and the General had managed to kill (after perhaps ra...

way behind the times

Image
(A note or two: I had intended to write about Shane Black's script but I neglected to read it today because, New Year's Day and all, I got caught up in a Mythbusters marathon on TV, dismantling a LEGO thing I made at the end of summer and haven't had time to take apart yet, and playing some Smash Up . Also, I have decided to give Lethal Weapon seven days, and reduce to only six days a different action film later in the month--I won't spoil it completely by listing off every movie... and I had to doublecheck whether or not I had already listed the five action movies in my recap post the other day; I did not. I must interrupt this lame parenthetical to point out that, from what I read, the "car" you see as Amanda Hunsaker falls toward it is not actually a car but rather a painting of a car and part of the street on top of an airbag, so they could film from above as she fell. I read about this when I was looking up Dar Robinson, to whom the film is dedicat...

what the hell have we gotten into, here?

Image
A few questions must be answered before moving on to bigger things. For example, the obvious one: why Christmas? (And, I need to get my nitpicks out of the way early with this movie because they are actually few.) Shane Black has a tendency, as it were, to set movies around Christmas (from Lethal Weapon to Kiss Kiss Bang Bang to Iron Man 3 ). Ivan Radford at Vodzilla last year, said it like this: In 1987, Lethal Weapon blew Christmas wide open. It turned out that Christmas films didn't just have to be festive and feel-good; they could be both of those things and feature guns, swearing and prostitutes too. Happy fucking holidays. First, a nitpick: Lethal Weapon does not feature any prostitutes. One prostitute, Dixie, has a couple lines at the beginning of the film. That's it. Porn stars and strippers get some screen time, but not really prostitutes. But, moving past that, yeah, a Christmas movie doesn't have to be festive... Except, allow me to nitpick again. Thi...

i think i'm an eighties man

Image
Start us off with "Jingle Bell Rock" and we know it's Christmas time. Give us a half naked woman who seems a little high and we know... What do we know? Close on the cocaine she snorts and Christmas lights reflected off the glass of the table, and Christmas becomes a setting for something twisted. And, we don't even have dialogue yet in this, one of the greatest Christmas movies ever-- Lethal Weapon . Character introductions: Roger Murtaugh (Danny Glover) introduced naked in a bathtub, his family comes in to wish him a happy birthday. Martin Riggs (Mel Gibson) also introduced naked. Nakedness is important. Present us with dangerous men at their most vulnerable and we should know there is something a little different going on here than your usual cop movie. I think of movies like the Dirty Harry films or the Death Wish films. The suburban life of one of our leads is one notable difference. The lonely trailer life of the other... I'm trying to remember if we eve...