Showing posts with label Albert Whitlock. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Albert Whitlock. Show all posts

Sunday, December 26, 2010

Albert Whitlock Is God




Friends of The United Provinces of Ivanlandia know we are big fans of “old school” special effects (and that includes superior gonzo makeup effects, as well!), that is to say, pre-CGI glut effects.

Anything that showed craftsmanship and ingenuity, of a level of engineering or artistic knowledge beyond simply one skill, well, that’s the stuff!

Effects that looked like they were hard work to accomplish—something that looked like it took effort and sweat, despite limited budgets.
Effects that oftentimes needed our willing suspension of disbelief—our desire to believe in the story—

Our heroes are L.B. Abbott, Derek Meddings, Dick Smith, Gene Warren, Willis O’Brien, Wally Veevers, Rick Baker, Eiji Tsuburaya, Doug Trumbull, and a host of others, not least of all,

The Fabulous Albert Whitlock (1915-1999).
Mr. W is the matte painter’s matte painter.
More than super-scientific recreation, with a few strokes of the paintbrush, he created moods.
Albert Whitlock was a special effects man of the old school, and
there is a beauty and a grace to Whitlock's work that I've really yet to see in CGI flicks--not that they haven't come close sometimes, but whoever
was paying ILM or WETA that week still hasn't learned that some FX
shots NEED the camera to stand still.

Just because you can do a 375-degree flyby of the castle doesn't mean it should be done.
When approaching some large building, when was the last time you did a 375-degree flyby?
Right, never.

New Zealand Pete is the world’s biggest matte painting fan, and at his site he’s had several super-informative posts on Whitlock and his art (and yes, I did swipe several jpegs from NZP:
thanks!):

Whitlock & Mel Brooks’ History of the World Part One
(there are more effects in this picture than you thought!)

An exhaustive scrapbook (this will amaze you)

Other New Zealand Pete entries on Whitlock include:
Whitlock & MacArthur

And
Whitlock & Earthquake (BTW: Much in the same way old school miniatures wizard L.B. Abbott—
who worked on ALL of Irwin Allen’s flicks: Abbott inferno’ed the tower, flipped the Poseidon, and piloted the Seaview—was in charge of in-house effects for Twentieth Century Fox,
Whitlock was the in-house genius for Universal Studios—which is why Big Al W.
got a major credit on a lot of flicks that only had one or two matte painting effects, like Michael Winner’s The Sentinel,
Michael Ritchie’s The Island, Eliot Silverstein’s The Car, John Carpenter’s The Thing, or Paul Schrader’s Cat People.

Not to say that Whitlock’s work wasn’t always welcome, and not trying to begrudge him some public recognition, but for example—I remember when I was a troubled youth going to see The Thing on its opening weekend (the same weekend as Blade Runner—which I went to see the same afternoon!), and being a tad disappointed that with such large credit placement (Whitlock was mentioned on The Thing’s poster!),
he only contributed to about one scene:
the flying saucer discovery—which is still awesome, and is perhaps a bad example to use,
but my point is that with such a prominent credit placement, mentally disturbed adolescents with a special effects fixation (me!) would feel disappointed that,
after his effects-laden work in flicks like Earthquake, The Wiz, The Hindenburg (more on that in a moment) and 1981’s History of the World Part One,
these other flicks would only have one or two matte shots, and sometimes, as in The Sentinel, the FX are completely unobtrusive and almost unnoticeable (which is to his credit, I’ll admit; Whitlock painted a series of apartment buildings and other outdoor locations to make it seem as if the film was all shot on location).

And this is after knowing that Whitlock often provided a slew of paintings and effects for a film, like Colossus: The Forbin Project, and only gets a tiny credit—
if one at all (Whitlock’s work in Diamonds Are Forever is uncredited, as are his great efforts in Hitchcock’s The Birds).
Anyway, blah-blah-blah; I always need to complain about something…

Whitlock really loved those castles (and mental institutions and Air Force radar installations) by the sea….






Star Trek owes much of its intergalactic architecture to Whitlock





“Oh, the humanity!”
The Hindenburg (1975)
Cast & Credits


The Robert Wise-directed The Hindenburg, released at the tail-end of the early- and mid-1970s “Disaster Movie” trend (a glorious genre of flick, if you ask me!),
is undoubtedly
Whitlock’s masterpiece.

His effects for Earthquake were flashier, and his later effects were “better,” but The Hindenburg really shows Whitlock's elegance.

Wise and Whitlock had worked together previously on the another Universal release, The Andromeda Strain (1971).

For The Hindenburg,
I’d say 99% of the shots of the mighty zeppelin, both inside and out, were matte paintings.
And they are perfect—in the sense that the matte paintings aid in transporting us to a bygone day of air travel that will never exist again; Whitlock’s matte paintings aren’t just details, they are moods and memories.

The film is a great/cheesy disaster/suspense/soap opera movie, based on a screen-story by the creators of Columbo.
George C. Scott is restrained as a "good" Nazi, Anne Bancroft is a hoot as an opium-smoking contessa, and there's practically every character actor you can imagine in a part (but no Elisha Cook, Jr! What the?!?).

The script strives for a "Casablanca of the Air" feeling, and sometimes succeeds.
Most of the exposition can be tuned out, and you can sit back and enjoy familiar faces sliding through a wonderfully designed film—
with several genuinely suspenseful, effects-heavy sequences.

Definitely one of the last products of the "Old" Hollywood—
director Robert Wise, a Hollywood veteran, brings a strong 1940s vibe—
The Hindenburg is especially worth a look for any nostalgia buffs.

Wednesday, September 23, 2009

Maybe some people should be run over…


If you like watching a mess of horror movies around Halloween time (38 more days till Halloween, Halloween, Halloween, 38 more days till Halloween—Silver Shamrock!), here’s one to check out…



Honk-honk!
Vrooooooom!
SPLAT.

Never claiming to be anything more than a B-movie,
there is a lot of awesome about The Car—but also a lot of awful.

The Car (1977; Universal)
Directed by Elliot Silverstein
Produced by Marvin Birdt and Elliot Silverstein
Screenplay by Michael Butler & Dennis Shryack and Lane Slate

(Slate’s the creator of the short-lived super-ultraviolent 1981 TV show Strike Force; subject of a future DVD MIA article)
Story by Michael Butler & Dennis Shryack
(These two were the screenwriters of Clint Eastwood’s awesome The Gauntlet, also 1977) Music by Leonard Rosenman
Cinematography by Gerald Hirschfeld
Editing by Michael McCroskey
Visual effects by Albert Whitlock
Car built by George Barris
Starring
James Brolin, Kathleen Lloyd, John Marley, Ronny Cox
R.G. Armstrong, and a bunch of roadkill pretending to be actors





If you’re willing to wade through some badly acted, poorly written scenes of fake jocularity and “happy normal life,”
with grannies yelling, “Cat poo!”,
you’ll be rewarded with a bleak, mean-spirited supernatural thriller that’s pretty damn cool.
I mean, how can you not like a flick that starts off with a quote from Anton Szandor LaVey?

"Oh great brothers of the night, who rideth out upon the hot winds of hell, who dwelleth in the devil's lair; move and appear!"

(Although, that is a pretty lame quote; hardly one that instills fear or dread, and certainly not very thought provoking. The quote should have been something like “The Devil appears as something familiar to you, something you use every day, and Satan will crush you with it,” or something. But despite my gripes, it is pretty cool that they used a quote from a fringe character rather than The Good Book.)

The Car absolutely needs lots more gore and destruction, but it is almost a must-see for one grand, sick moment that really “breaks the rules.”
I’m not telling what it is, but it’s at roughly the one-hour mark. (But at the cool site Monstrous Calientes, there are some righteous frame grabs of the sequence in question—as well as some of The Car’s cool overseas posters.)




Universal Studios
in-house effects wiz Albert Whitlock provides
some appropriately hellish opticals at the conclusion
(above, snagged from Monstrous Calientes),
and I really liked the minimalist art-deco Nazi hot rod look of the car:
It’s really simple, almost to the point of dumb,
but it works!


Look out!
Here comes
Satan’s
Super-Sonic
Cadillac!


And I loved the fact that the vehicle itself wasn’t possessed by a demon—
—it is a demon! (That’s my interpretation anyway.)

(And I also love the fact that the Car’s powers keep showing up, like rabbits being pulled out of a hat—one of my fave scenes is when the Car has somehow let itself into Sheriff Brolin’s locked garage; huffing and puffing and blowing its horn like a dinosaur, the black vehicle seems quite diabolical.)

Re-re-released in early 2008, The Car is not perfect, hardly
but definitely worth a look for fans, especially those into quasi-satanic horror. (And check out Kathleen Lloyd’s hip-huggers! Wow.)


Originally released in Spring 1977, forces were at work to make sure The Car was not destined for great financial success—although the flick looks cheap enough that Universal Studios probably recouped its bread, and made enough of a profit to be remembered fondly by the bean counters; why else the re-releases this movie gets?

Star Wars opened on May 25, 1977, and that was a Wednesday.
That Saturday, my family and I went to see the flick in one of the six or so theaters it had opened at in NYC (really; it’s not like today—even when Star Wars went “wide” in August, it was only in eleven theaters in the five boroughs of The Big Apple).

Already a film snob at 11, I was disappointed the flick wasn’t at the Ziegfeld, but as it turned out Loews Astor Plaza (RIP), B’way & 44th, off Times Square, was just as great a place to see Star Wars.

[Randomness: but do people realize that Star Wars, when it first came out, was considered, at least by the people around me who could have these sorts of opinions, to be a stoner flick? Or at least, the height of camp? I mean, my mom thought Star Wars was a hilarious parody of old movie serials!]




So there we were that Saturday, May 28, 1977, waiting on line for Star Wars. We’d arrived at the theater early for the noon show, around 11 (even though we drove, we must’ve left the house around 9:30~10:00am), and were promptly informed that that show was sold out, but we could get on line for the 2 o’clock show.

That line went around two corners of the block, out onto Broadway. Across the street was the National Theater, later the National Twin (RIP), and they were showing The Car.

Because their marquee was large, I recall, they could have little silhouettes of the car and its victims (images taken from the poster) there.
(Later that year, I remember the National showed Friedkin’s awesome, but doomed, Sorcerer—wow, I guess the National didn’t have too good a batting average…
(Although this review of Friedkin’s Bug says Sorcerer opened a week before Star Wars, that’s not how I remember it—the facts be damned! Ha-ha!)



But no one was going into the theater, it seemed.
Once, a guy with two kids, a small boy and a girl my age, walked by our line, seemed to be grumbling to himself or the kids, then crossed Broadway, past the recruiting station, and dragged his kids to see The Car instead: “I ain’t waitin’ an ’our in line for no damn space movie! Yeah, yeah, sure, you kids can have as much popcorn and soda as ya want! Just shaddup will ya?!?”

But other than that sad trio, I don’t remember anyone else going into the National to see The Car….

I saw The Car a few years later, on CBS-TV, I think, on their Saturday night movie. That Monday at school, it turned out quite a few other boys saw the movie, as it was a hot topic of discussion.
We all thought that the original motion picture, the un-edited for television version, would be much gorier and blood splattered—
Ha! Were we wrong!

OMIGAHD!!!
The Car has made it to the big city (as predicted by the flick’s end credits—although the metropolis zooming by in the background against the looming locked-down-camera close-ups of various parts of the monstrous automobile, like its wheels or the grill, in the foreground, looks like Los Angeles—showing that the second unit director was demonstrating more style than director Silverstein),
and it’s been sighted on New York City’s Lower East Side!
Look out!

Honk-honk!

Vrooooooom!SPLAT.

Wednesday, July 1, 2009

Yes, Don Knott’s “The Love God?”! A recommendation by the National Film Board of Ivanlandia



The Love God? (1969)
Written & directed by Nat Hiken
Cast: Don Knotts, B.S. Pully, Edmund O’Brien, Anne Francis, James Gregory


One film that I think is truly deserving of a cult following is 1969’s The Love God? —and yes, the question mark is part of the title.

This flick is an unholy mess that’s worth renting for weirdness value alone:
Released by Universal in 1969 (snicker!),
and a brightly-colored mutant love child of Walt Disney and Russ Meyer,
The Love God? is squaresville trying to make sense of the sexual revolution—
and becoming extremely schizophrenic for its efforts.

And then there’s bizarre musical montages! You get to see Don Knotts, as one blogger put it, “prancing and mincing and mugging
his way through a big production number called ‘Mr. Peacock.’ "
Oh yeah…



Holy Moly, The Love God? is something else! I may only have “liked” this film, but there are several scenes I love. It’s a 2/5 star movie with many 5/5 star comedic scenes.

So if you’re a comedy fan who’s happy if you get six or seven really hilarious scenes in a flick as long as the comedy is stitched together with at least a semblance of intelligence or flair (like in Anchorman or Old School or Harold and Kumar Go to the White Castle), then by all means rent The Love God?!
I was happy I did.



Don Knotts
and his brand of goofball-loser comedy is The Love God?’s greatest asset and liability: in some scenes, Knott’s comedic acting is transcendent, absolutely brilliant and spontaneous.

But in others, he pulls out the now-stale Barney Fife routine.
(Was that shtick ever funny? I find it extremely uncomfortable to watch. Sometimes Knotts acts so incomprehensibly in The Love God? that the only way I could rationalize his actions in any sort of logical way was to assume that his character was mentally challenged.)

But The Love God? is hardly a dumb movie: lots of topical issues are satirized, some better than others. In addition to sex, student unrest, First Amendment rights, women’s lib, the ACLU, media manipulation of public opinion, and the corporatization of the mob are all poked fun of.
(Speaking of the mob, B.S. Pully’s performance as J. Charles Twilight is fantastic! Gee-whiz, rent the movie just to watch him.)



The Love God? could easily be on a double bill with either Otto Preminger’s outrageous Skidoo which it shares part of the “Squares Failing at Making Sense of the Counterculture” subgenre, or
Elia Kazan’s A Face in the Crowd (which stars Knotts’ pal Andy Griffith, and takes a much darker look at media manipulation and the erosion of civil rights).


From Stuart Galbraith IV 's nifty review at DVD Talk:
The film has [writer-director Nat] Hiken's style all over it. Pulley had appeared regularly on Hiken's "Car 54, Where Are You?" and Billy Sands, Pvt. Dino Paparelli in Bilko's platoon (on "The Phil Silvers Show"), was an associate producer and appears unbilled.
More obviously though, is that at least two of the main characters in The Love God?, Edmund O'Brien's nudie publisher and James Gregory's defense attorney, play as if each part had been written with Phil Silvers in mind.
Sadly, what might have been a nostalgic reunion of great talent was not to be, and the film was Hiken's last -- he died in December 1968, almost a full year before The Love God? went into release.


The Love God? was a box office flop, and had director Hiken lived, he may have come up with a different promotional angle for the flick.


The Love God?
is a flick that’s perfect for a remake—in the right hands, though:
How about a “reimaging” of The Love God? written and directed by John Waters, starring Steve Buscemi?
Or vica versa?

Better yet, let’s one-up Luis Buñuel and remake The Love God? in the style of That Obscure Object of Desire (1977), where the film is written and directed and acted by Waters and Buscemi, both playing Don Knotts character, the two switching off the role between scenes, hopefully with no rhyme or reason.


“Look at his body - thin, wasted away by the dissipation and debauchery of a life of unspeakable orgies and depravity!”
The DA about Don Knotts character in The Love God?


From IMDB: commenter Curtis Martin (from Bothell, Washington) wrote a heartfelt essay about The Love God?—
As a part of film history, "The Love God?" is uniformly dismissed as just another goofy, formulaic Don Knotts romp--and in many ways it does follow the Knotts formula pretty closely. But this time the Knotts formula was turned in on itself.

In actuality "The Love God?" is one of the best mainstream American social satires of the 1960s, just behind recognized classics such as "Dr. Strangelove" and "The President's Analyst." Knotts plays his usual character, this time named Abner Audubon Peacock IV.

Abner is the editor of a bird-watching magazine in financial trouble. His dying magazine, The Peacock, is taken over by a pornographer while Abner is in South America looking for a rare bird.

Abner returns from his safari to find that the Peacock has been turned into a cross between Playboy and Hustler. He also finds himself arrested and a defendant in a constitutional battle over "his right" to publish "dirty pictures" in The Peacock.

Abner only wants to have the truth be known--that he had his magazine shanghaied without his knowledge. But instead his case comes to the attention of a self-serving Civil Liberties attorney who wants to use his case as a free-speech landmark. Abner wins his case, but is not satisfied that he is represented as a "filthy degenerate sex fiend" (in a hilarious courtroom sequence).

After his victory Abner wants the truth to come out, but he is convinced by the interest groups and his own money-sniffing relatives that it is his patriotic duty to keep publishing pornography as a freedom of speech issue.

The attention draws big money to The Peacock, and Abner is further convinced that, in order for the magazine to be a success, he must play the part of the Sex God libertine.

In true Knotts style, Abner gets totally carried away with the role of pseudo Hugh Hefner. But of course, the truth eventually comes out and Abner/Don eventually comes to his senses and of course triumphs over the bad guys.




From Interesting Ideas, written by William Swislow:
In The Love God?,
“incomprehension gives Knotts what virility provides others. It ultimately allows this painfully thin hayseed to stand up for himself in the face of odds that would send any sensible person scurrying. His weakness lets him triumph.

That makes Knotts one of the few leading men of his time who truly deserved to be called anti-hero.


Nicholson, Hopper, Eastwood and the others may have abandoned the moral virtue once de rigueur in Hollywood protagonists, but they were cut from the same sexual cloth as Humphrey Bogart, Gary Cooper, Henry Fonda and the rest.

Don Knotts, though, was everything these guys weren't.
Terminally wimpy, ridiculously stupid and sexually repulsive, he was the true negation of the Hollywood he-man ethos.



The Donaldian Knotts—get it? From Gordonian Knot!
And knots, like links, you know, URLs!
It was, but it wasn't!
Ohhhhh, never mind!

Go to Music for Maniacs to catch a really groovy tune called “Don Knotts” that sounds like it’s the theme song to a TV variety show that never got made—in this dimension, anyway.

Here’s a link to an excellent article looking at the political differences between Sheriff Andy Taylor and Deputy Barney Fife, how one is a negotiating Libertarian and the other a big-government proto-fascist? You won’t be surprised!

And how to get along with real life Barneys...
[image from The Onion]

Give it a chance; The Love God? is worth a rent.
And the DVD is a double feature!
But you don’t have to look at the DVD’s companion feature, The Shakiest Gun in the West. The flick’s opening credits are cool (because awesome special effects expert Albert Whitlock probably worked on them), with a goofy C&W song that’s catchy, but after that, The Shakiest Gun in the West is strictly snoozeville.