The Top 10 Historical or Legendary Male Figures on Film: as chosen by the viewers of this blog
The results of the poll are in! A great turn out this time. Thanks to everyone who cast their votes. I wish each and everyone who checks in on this blog from time to time a happy and safe Holiday, as well as a prosperous and healthy New Year!

The Number One Pick (with a wopping 4 votes!):

1. T.E. Lawrence (as played magnificently by the great Peter O'Toole in David Lean's epic Lawrence of Arabia, 62). Simply put: one of the greatest performances of a historical figure ever put on film.


The next two picks recieved 3 votes each (not too shabby):

2. Hunter S. Thompson (as played by Bill Murray in Art Linson's under-rated Where the Buffalo Roam, 80 - and by Johnny Depp in Terry Gilliam's Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas, 98). Hey, isn't it weird that Murray and Depp were both up for Oscars last year in the Best Actor category? And they both appeared on screen together in Tim Burton's masterpiece, Ed Wood (also playing real-life characters). No, not weird at all - they're both brilliant actors. Duh.


3. Mohandas K. Gandhi (as played by Ben Kingsley in Richard Attenborough's classic Gandhi, 82). Sir Ben Kingsley is so good it hurts. He may have won the Oscar for Gandhi, but don't miss him in: Betrayal (83), Maurice (87), Bugsy (91), Sneakers (92), Searching for Bobby Fischer (93), Schindler's List (93), Sexy Beast (the best movie of 2000) and House of Sand and Fog (03 - mind blowing). He's set to star in a whole slew of films that are about to come out and one thing's for sure - he even makes the bad one's interesting: Death and the Maiden (94), Species (95), What Planet Are You From? (00), The Triumph of Love (01) and Thunderbirds (04) just to name a few. He also just happens to be one of the greatest living actors of our generation.


The rest of the picks recieved 2 votes each. They appear in no particular order:

4. Bela Lugosi (Martin Landau in Ed Wood, 94 - Oscar winner for Best Supporting Actor) One of the all-time greatest performances in a feature film. Period.

5. Antonio Salieri (F. Murray Abraham in Amadeus, 84 - Oscar for Best Actor) I love Abraham in this film. He went up against co-star Hulce (as Amadeus) that year, and both men deserved it. But Abraham maybe deserved it just a little more. Okay, alot more.

6. God (George Burns, Alanis Morissette, Morgan Freeman, etc.) Burns is still the guy I want to greet me on the "other side." Well, him and my Uncle Murray.

7. Gen. George S. Patton Jr. (George C. Scott in Patton, 70 - Oscar winner for Best Actor, he famously refused to accept the award, stating that competition between actors was unfair and calling it a "meat parade.") May God rest his soul.

8. Andy Warhol (Crispin Glover, Jarred Harris, David Bowie, etc.) Glover is still my favorite, from The Doors (91) but Bowie may have brought the most heart to the role, from Basquiat (96).

9. Ed Wood (Johnny Depp in Ed Wood, 94) What can I say? Depp is in the Top 10 twice. You know what else? Out of everyone in the Top 100, he deserves to be.

10. Charlie "Bird" Parker (Forest Whitaker in Bird, 88) Clint Eastwood directed this labor of love about the man, and not just the legend. It is truly one of the most haunting performances I have ever seen, and I'm glad it made the Top 10.


Special Mention:

Doc Holliday (Victor Mature, Burt Lancaster, Jason Robards, Stacy Keach, Val Kilmer, Dennis Quaid, etc.) Officially he got 2 votes, but Dr. John Henry "Doc" Holliday has always remained one of the most interesting historical characters to ever grace the silver screen. My favorite is still Jason Robard's, Jr. in John Sturges' little-seen but brilliant western, Hour of the Gun (67). It's the story of what happened after the gunfight at the O.K. Corral. It's sort of a sequel to Sturges' prior film starring Kirk Douglas and Lancaster, but the difference between the two films (besides the casting of the two leads) is like night and day. Hour of the Gun is about one thing: vengeance, and how to go about getting it at any cost. James Garner (as Wyatt Earp) was never better, but Robards stole the show.


William Shatner (William Shatner in Free Enterprise) Hey, he got 2 votes. I swear. Check the comments. Best lines from the film:

[Shatner just asked Robert why he started the fight.]
Young Robert: "Well...it was something he said."
Imaginary William Shatner: "What'd he say?"
Young Robert: "You really don't want to know."
Imaginary William Shatner: "I really do want to know!"
Young Robert: "He said that Han Solo was cooler than Captain Kirk."
[Pause]
Imaginary William Shatner: "Kick the little fucker's ass."

solitary men

Richard Condon wrote a novel that was eventually made into a feature film, written for the screen by George Axelrod, and directed by John Frankenheimer. The year was 1962. The title of the film was, The Manchurian Candidate. The film was released just at the time of the Cuban missile crisis, and consequently, just before the assassination of President Kennedy. The film itself, like the book, was many things to many pepole. Above all else, it was an arresting (though skewed) view of the modern political world of it's era. The fact that the original film has not managed to age in over 40 years is a testament to it's greatness, and it's importance as one of the true classic films of all time. The film starred Frank Sinatra (in probably the best role of his acting career), Laurence Harvey and Angela Lansbury. Sinatra was already a big star by 62 and was well on his way to infamy as the king of all lounge lizards, or more to the point - the leader of the Rat Pack. But in this sterling film performance, he sheds every ounce of the entertainer that he had become (and the legend that he was forming into) and gave one of the most humanistic performances I have ever seen. It is actually one of my favorite film roles of all-time. Laurence Harvey (better known in his native land of England) and Angela Lansbury became something like over-night stars after the film's release. Lansbury, who gave the perfromance of a lifetime, played Harvey's domineering (and lethal) mother in the film. She was only 3 years his senior at the time. They are both memorable in the film, but Lansbury was undeniably unforgettable. So, without ruining the plot if you haven't seen it (as so often the plot of this film is prone to have been revealed) why then do you think it was necessary to re-make one of the greatest cold-war, political, dark-humored, satirical, surrealistic and tragic films ever made? I don't have the answers to everything (contrary to popular belief) but I can tell you, that director Jonathan Demme's re-make (or rather, re-invention) of the original story and film is absolutely stunning, and classic in it's own right.

I can tell you, like everyone else familiar with the original film, I had my suspicions that Demme's film was going to be a disaster. He unwisely chose to re-make the classic romantic-caper film Charade (63) a couple of years ago with Mark Wahlberg and Thandie Newton in the roles that Cary Grant and Audrey Hepburn immortalized. I don't even think that the original choice to play "Joshua Peters" (Will Smith) would have made any difference. The film was destined to flop from the get go. Like all Demme films however, he manages to always get a few things going thematically at once, and managed to at least provide a few sparks here and there. The fact that the entire film was in itself an homage to the French New Wave (it even has a wonderful bit with Charles Aznavour as himself) proves that Demme is a film-maker who is always willing to give his film a little extra heart. The heart of The Manchurian Candidate (04) is not it's star, Denzel Washington (as one might expect) but it is the script itself. The screenplay was written by Daniel Pyne and Dean Georgaris. In a brilliant conception, they chose not to follow the original story scene by scene, and instead they set about to re-invent the Condon-wheel, as it were. Condon's novel is a masterpiece. Sinatra was smart enough to seek it out and acquire the film rights back in the early sixties (the re-make was co-produced by his daughter, Tina Sinatra) and put it in the hands of the right people: namely Axelrod and Frankenheimer. Pyne and Georgaris actually managed to improve upon some of the ideas exposed in the original film and crafted the new version into an intelligent, entertaining and extraordinarily original concept. I am seriously in awe of what these writers have accomplished. I could go into the details, but that would detract from you enjoying the film for the first time. It is after-all, one of the greatest thrillers there ever was.

While the original film was daring and unique for it's time (and remains so to this day), the new version takes some chances in it's own right - but still keeps everything pretty tight and straight-forward. The fact that the Frankenheimer film features one of the most truly original and nightmarish sequences ever shot on film (the extended "garden party" sequence) still keeps this one ahead of the new version. There is nothing quite as exhilerating in Demme's film, as some of the now classic moments from the 63 version, but Demme does provide us with some honest chills (like the kayak scene and the final "conference" between Mother and Son) and injects the project with an arresting visual style. He can get away with a little more now, literally, then they could have back in the sixties (watch the way Streep touches her leg in her first scene in the film). Some things were more implied in the original, and that may in fact have added to it's charm and grace. Close-ups play an important role in both Manchurian Candidates, so does friendship. That's probably the only thing I saw missing from Demme's film - the bond between Marco (Washington) and Shaw (Liev Schreiber). There is alot more development of both characters in the Demme version. But there is also an old saying, "less is more." I am not criticizing the film too much however, because it makes up for these minor short-comings by being one of the most enjoyable thrillers to have come along in years. There were times where I found myself a little giddy watching the Demme version. Meryl Streep hammed it up (chewing "ice" and on her way to a Supporting Actress nomination) to such a degree that I almost forgot I was watching "Meryl Streep." She simply became Eleanor Shaw. High praise considering this is still Lansbury's signature role. Schreiber was also tremendous in an almost starring role as the tortured Raymond - war hero, or no war hero. The usual gallery of Demme character actors were also along for the ride (faces you will no doubt pick out from several of his prior films) and everyone in the picture looked like they were perfectly at home with the material.

Demme directed one of my favorite films of all-time, Melvin and Howard (80). He also won an Academy Award for The Silence of the Lambs (91). This is also his masterpiece, but The Manchurian Candidate is a close second. See the film for the wonderful cameo roles by Jeffrey Wright and Bruno Ganz. See it for the incredible cinematography by (Demme regular) Tak Fujimoto. See it for the skilled and daring performances of Washington and Streep, even if both veer off into the extreme at times. See it for the wonderfully stalwart Liev Schreiber, who deserves to be a leading man one day (if he isn't already). And see it for that intelligent, clever and insightful screenplay - that is like a breath of fresh air amidst the other mainstream films that Hollywood has been churning out of the meat-grinder lately. I know I said I wasn't going to reveal any of the plot to you (if you haven't seen it) but I do have to comment on just a few things about the script. They were smart to not include the "solitaire" business from the original. The role that the media plays in the new film is essential to the paranoid nature at the heart of the story. Besides making Marco a candidate for the Vice-Presidency, and his Mother an actual Senator (a bold and rewarding move on their part) the film goes one step further by making it crucial to our political times. Just as the original was a treatise on Cold-War propaganda (Shaw's step-father who's removed from the Demme version, was a thinly-veiled Joesph McCarthy) the new version replaces all that with something far more terrifying. A gaint "corporation" is the true enemy of the film, Manchurian Global, that has more than a few things in common with Halliburton and the Carlyle Group. If you've never heard of those monsters before (get thee to a Michael Moore film) and get with the program. 4 1/2 out of 5 stars

Bennett Marco (Frank Sinatra): "We'll see, kid. We'll see what they can do and we'll see what we can do. So the red queen is our baby. Well, take a look at this, kid... [fans deck and keeps holding up the cards] 52 of them! Take a good look at 'em, Raymond, look at 'em, and while you're looking, listen. This is me, Marco, talking. 52 red queens and me are telling you... you know what we're telling you? It's over! The links, the beautifully conditioned links are smashed. They're smashed as of now because we say so, because we say they are to be smashed. We're busting up the joint, we're tearing out all the wires. We're busting it up so good all the queen's horses and all the queen's men will never put old Raymond back together again. You don't work any more! That's an order. Anybody invites you to a game of solitaire, you tell 'em sorry, buster, the ball game is over."

the title of this post is: I would love to say that Keira Knightley was good in the film, but I didn't get to any of her scenes because it was such a piece of shit that I had to stop watching, or: maybe I'll give it a second chance when I get hit over the head one day or become a total amnesiac like Harrison Ford in Regarding Henry and I'm too stupid to know the difference anymore bewteen an entertaining movie and a poorly made self-indulgent piece of Hollywood flatulence

I would love to tell you that Antoine Fuqua's King Arthur (04) is a guilty pleasure movie, but sadly, it was so terrible that I chose to abandon it at about the 35 minute mark. At least it seemed like 35 minutes or so - actually, it was like a fucking eternity. I wont bore you with a play by play of the pros and cons of the movie. Basically, it's another bullshit Jerry Bruckheimer movie - just like the package says. Actually, it says (on the DVD): from the producer of Pearl Harbor. Wow. Is that really something we're proud of, Jerry? Okay, I wont be too sore about this - since I do know alot of people who saw the film and enjoyed it - but this movie is so utterly disappointing, that I seriously thought of giving my opened copy of the DVD to someone for christmas, but then again, I wouldn't want to spread the filth around anymore than it has already been spread.

So, instead of pointing out anything of interest in the film, I decided instead to write a little about Kevin Costner's The Postman. There's a movie that should have been better than it was (just like King Arthur) only the difference is: I actually enjoy watching The Postman. It has heart, and it doesn't act like a real fucking movie (too much). But first, back to King Arthur for a moment. There were 5 fucking people involved with the music for the film. I don't just mean 5 musicians, I mean 5 fucking composers or "music contributors." So answer me this: why then does the movie sound like the same score to Con Air? I can't stand this disingenuine selling-out of creativity that's propogated by the Jerry Bruckheimer's of the industry. I mean, what the fuck? Why don't they just get 5 actors to play a single part in the film? You know, just in case one particular actor is better suited for a certain type of scene? Or better yet, 5 different directors, and then we could have another Casino Royale. Actually, Casino Royale is a much better film than King Arthur. Most movies are.

King Arthur Director Antoine Fuqua: we all make mistakes

Okay, so in The Postman, Kevin Costner stars and directs. I have alot of respect for creative people who wear all sorts of hats in their own productions. I think if Kevin Costner had not won an Oscar for Best Director for Dances With Wolves (a masterpiece) than the bar would not have been raised so high for him. In the case of King Arthur (I digress again) Mr. Fuqua was coming off the critical high of films like Training Day (which garnered Denzel Washington an Oscar for Best Actor) and the under-appreciated Tears of the Sun. When King Arthur was initially released, I had read several reviews comparing it to Fuqua's prior film, Tears of the Sun. This was an unfortunate and an uneducated comparrison. The significant difference being that Tears of the Sun was actually a good movie; unlike the dismal drek that was made of the story of Arthur. I will not turn this into a history lesson, since I am the wrong person to lead a discussion on the matter - but what the fuck were they thinking? The Postman has more historical relevance than King Arthur and it takes place in the fucking future! Robin Hood: Men in Tights had a more "authentic" historical feel. Yikes.

I'm not done with King Arthur quite yet (as you can tell). I really like Clive Owen, and he really tried with the material, but he was sadly miscast. Shall I keep going? Ioan Gruffudd sucked ass. He was terrible. Let me repeat that if you didn't get it the first time: Ioan Gruffudd sucked ass. He just proved why he can't, wont and shouldn't play James Bond. Ever. Ray Winstone was great, of course. Too bad this was to be his first big-budget Hollywood studio film exposure. See anything this great and under-rated actor is in (especially Sexy Beast and Scum). Stellan Skarsgård was wasted yet again. Til Schweiger looked like a stunt double for one of the guys in the heavy metal band, Anthrax. Ivano Marescotti was so fucking bad I wanted to forget his name. Actually, wait a minute - I already have. Only Mads Mikkelsen as Tristan, managed to impress me. He will no doubt have the same impact on you - he fortunately has the least amount of lines in the film. But he was rather interesting. Keira Knightley, well, to be honest - I didn't get to her yet. Isn't that awful of me? Does that discredit this whole review, that I bailed even before Keira Knightley came on the scene? I don't think so. I liken this review to an old blind sage standing outside of a movie theater, who looks you dead in the eye and tells you to go home and watch Dude, Where's My Car? on DVD instead of seeing this miserable puss-infected boil of a movie. Fuqua should be ashamed of himself. Director's Cut? Director's fuck. Does Jerry Bruckheimer have to corrupt every single talented director he gets his hands on? Michael Bay aside - Bay was shit to begin with.

The Men Behind the Myth: Pearl Harbor Producer Jerry Bruckheimer and Director Michael Bay. These guys make the creative teams behind some of the Ernest movies look like real artists. Pearl Harbor is afterall, the Battlefield Earth of War Films.
So, what have we learned? Basically, Richard Lewis would have done better with this material than half the actors in the film. The fight scenes (that I saw) were pretty well-staged and extraordinarily violent (that was a good thing by the way). The Postman is worth owning on DVD if it costs you less than ten dollars. King Arthur, well, I wouldn't let my dog lick the DVD case if it had peanut butter smeared all over it - which is what I did to mine after watching the first 35 minutes (or so). I've enjoyed episodes of Murder, She Wrote more. Skip it. You'll thank me later.

Prince John: "Such an unusual name, 'Latrine.' How did your family come by it?"
Latrine: "We changed it in the 9th century."
Prince John: "You mean you changed it TO 'Latrine'?"
Latrine: "Yeah. Used to be 'Shithouse.' "
Prince John: "It's a good change. That's a good change!"
- Mel Brook's Robin Hood: Men in Tights (93)

The Top 100 Historical or Legendary Male Figures on Film: a poll
Choose your Top 5 from the list below (write-ins are welcome)

1. Frank Abagnale Jr.

2. Muhammad Ali/Cassius Clay

3. Marc Antony

4. Reinaldo Arenas

5. King Arthur



6. Sir James Matthew Barrie

7. Jean Michel Basquiat

8. Thomas à Becket

9. Ludwig van Beethoven

10. Alexander Graham Bell

11. Steve Biko

12. Capt. William Bligh

13. Napoleon Bonaparte

14. William Bonney/Billy the Kid

15. Ben Bradlee

16. Christy Brown

17. John Brown

18. Lenny Bruce

19. Claus von Bülow

20. Al Capone

21. Casanova

22. Butch Cassidy

23. Ray Charles

24. George M. Cohan

25. Gerry Conlon

26. Cyrano De Bergerac

27. Clarence Darrow

28. The Devil

29. Benjamin Disraeli

30. Wyatt Earp

31. Thomas Edison

32. Elephant Man/John Merrick

33. Jaime A. Escalante

34. Father Edward J. Flanagan

35. Larry Flynt

36. Mohandas K. Gandhi

37. Jim Garrison

38. Lou Gehrig

39. John Glenn

40. God

41. Woody Guthrie

42. Henry II

43. Henry V

44. Henry VIII

45. Henry Hill

46. Adolf Hitler

47. Jimmy Hoffa

48. Doc Holliday

49. Buddy Holly

50. Howard Hughes

51. Jack the Ripper

52. Jesse James

53. Jesus Christ

54. Prince John

55. "Shoeless" Joe Jackson

56. Andy Kaufman/Tony Clifton

57. John F. Kennedy

58. Ron Kovic

59. Jake La Motta

60. T.E. Lawrence

61. Abraham Lincoln

62. Bela Lugosi

63. Merlin

64. Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart

65. Malcolm X

66. Glenn Miller

67. Sir Thomas More

68. Jim Morrison

69. Eliot Ness

70. Richard M. Nixon

71. Lee Harvey Oswald

72. Papillon/Henri Charriere

73. Charlie Parker

74. Louis Pasteur

75. Gen. George S. Patton, Jr.

76. Matthew Poncelet

77. Cole Porter

78. Steve Prefontaine

79. Elvis Presley

80. Richard the Lionheart

81. Richard III

82. Robin Hood

83. Rob Roy

84. Knute K. Rockne

85. Antonio Salieri

86. Sherriff of Nottingham

87. The Sundance Kid

88. Alan Shepard

89. Bugsy Siegel

90. Oskar Schindler

91. Hunter S. Thompson/Raoul Duke

92. Charles Van Doren

93. Vincent Van Gogh

94. Sid Vicious

95. Mike Wallace

96. William Wallace

97. Tony Wilson

98. Ed Wood

99. Andy Warhol

100. Chuck Yeager

return of the condor

The Interpreter (05) directed by Sydney Pollack, starring: Sean Penn, Nicole Kidman, Catherine Keener and Sydney Pollack

From imdb: "Political intrigue and deception unfold inside the United Nations, where an FBI agent (Penn) is assigned to protect an interpreter (Kidman) who overhears an assassination plot. This is the first film ever to be shot inside the United Nations Headquarters - locations include the General Assembly and the Security Council, as well as regular corridors and hallways of the complex. The cast and crew filmed on weekends in order not to disrupt the regular work week of the Organization. During a scene where a shot is fired at an actor, real blanks were not allowed due to a security council meeting that was taking place. Despite the high security at the U.N. and terror alerts, crew members were allowed to bring in knives for their work."

Could this be another Three Days of the Condor (75) for director Pollack?

Could this be another Mystic River (03) for Penn?

Could this bring another Oscar for Kidman - without the aid of a prosthetic nose?

An interview with Sydney Pollack (from countingdown.com): "Kidman's character comes from a fictional African country called Matobo "with a lot of civil strife, ethnic cleansing, a country whose leadership has changed fairly radically," Pollack said. Penn plays a secret service agent trying to prevent the leader of a country from being killed.

The two see the world through different eyes: the interpreter "believes very much in the power and sanctity of words, and ... believes that if they're used properly they can be as powerful as bullets or weapons; the agent has "the mentality of a cop" who only reads people through behavior and has contempt for words, Pollack said.

In addition to entertainment, he said, every film has an underlying theme.

"It's a film that very much is anti the use of violence for settling problems between people and between countries," Pollack said.

Asked whether Penn's strong stand against the U.S.-led war in Iraq could taint the movie, Pollack said, "He's taken very strong positions about the Bush administration and about the war in Iraq. Whether that will have anything to do with an audience reaction to the film or not, that remains to be seen. I don't know."

Alot about this film is still being kept a mystery. Filming began back in March of 2004, but very little has been done by Universal to promote it. Pollack, while still a very active producer (Searching for Bobby Fischer 93, Sense and Sensibility 95, The Talented Mr. Ripley 99, Iris 01, The Quiet American 02, Cold Mountain 03, Leatherheads 05 - to be directed by George Clooney, Appearances 05 - a portrait of the Booth family, who include some of the most renowned actors of the 1800s, as well as John Wilkes Booth, Abraham Lincoln's assassin) as well as quite a skilled actor himself (Tootsie 82, The Player 92, Husbands and Wives 92, Eyes Wide Shut 99, Changing Lanes 02, to name but a few) is still badly in need of a hit. His last two films as director were: Random Hearts (99) and Sabrina (95). He won a much deserved Academy Award for Best Director for Out of Africa (85) and some of his best films include the now classics: They Shoot Horses, Don't They? (69), Jeremiah Johnson (72), The Way We Were (73), Three Days of the Condor (75) and Tootsie (82). There are other films that I like by Pollack that are more on the under-rated (but near-brilliant) side: The Scalphunters (68), Castle Keep (69), The Yakuza (75), Absence of Malice (81) and The Firm (93). Then there are his interesting mis-fires: Bobby Deerfield (77), The Electric Horseman (79), Havana (90) and Random Hearts (99). It will be interesting to see where The Interpreter fits into all this.

Pollack as talent agent George Fields, with Dustin Hoffman in his Academy Award nominated performance in Tootsie. Pollack also produced the film, as well as a little-seen Sean Penn picture, Up at the Villa (00). Penn's co-star was Kristin Scott Thomas who later starred in Pollack's romantic thriller, Random Hearts, with Harrison Ford (who also worked with the director in his update of the classic Bogart film, Sabrina).

As Pollack no doubt tweeks The Interpreter into a modern political-action masterpiece, the rest of us will just have to wait. But, in the meantime, check out the trailer. It looks like a tight, little suspense film; Penn and Kidman have great chemistry so half the battle's already won.

Tobin Keller (Sean Penn): "Of all the people I've looked into since this thing started, the one with the darkest history, is you."