It’s hard to believe that it was over six years ago that I and some ex-TV-Squaders started CliqueClack. We had some pretty high hopes at the time, that we could go out on our own and show AOL what it really meant to be writer-fans of television. It was an incredibly ambitious goal that we never came close to, but we quickly learned that that didn’t matter to us. What did matter was that we had an outlet to write what we wanted, when we wanted, for people who continued to engage in discussion with us.

It’s pained me all these years to never have earned enough with ads and Amazon referrals to pay our writers regularly. We’ve certainly lost some great folks because of it, and I don’t blame them at all. Some have gone on to continue writing for paying gigs, full-time, and that’s been awesome. With the declining frequency of posts comes declining traffic, which results in declining ad revenue … you get the picture. Maybe that’s a bit TMI, but I thought being up-front about where we were at was something I owed you.

This will likely be the final post here at CliqueClack, but there is a silver lining.

For quite some time now, Chuck Duncan and Ivey West had been heading up editing duties for the site. Chuck, I know, very much wants to continue writing. I didn’t want to simply hand over CliqueClack to someone else, though, partly because I’m just not ready to give it away and, primarily, I thought it made more sense to let Chuck have something that was truly his own. That’s just what he’s done.

Friday, April 3, Chuck launches his own site, Hotchka.com, to continue where CliqueClack left off. You’ll see some new and familiar faces there, writing about movies, TV, pop culture, and anything else Chuck might want to throw into the mix. He and his partner, Carl, have already done a fantastic job putting the site together, and I think you’re really going to dig it.

• Check out the site at www.hotchka.com.
• Follow them on Twitter @hotchka
• Facebook
• Google+
• Tumblr
• YouTube

As for CliqueClack, my plan is to keep all of our 11,000+ posts around for as long as I’m possibly able, even if they are thrown in straight HTML and image files in a searchable archive somewhere. I think it’s criminal when sites decide to completely wipe away all traces of past content when they shutter, and dammit I’m going to do my best to make sure that never happens here.

Thank you so much to the writers and, of course, to all of you readers who’ve stuck with us all these years.

When Fifty Shades of Grey made its way through my circle of friends back in 2012, I picked it up and read it mostly so I would know what it was all my friends were talking about on Facebook. I was mildly curious, and it was this mild curiosity that kept me reading it until the final page. However, by the time the novel was over, I felt a closure with the characters. I didn’t care enough about their fates to pick up either of the two sequels. It was this same mild curiosity that caused me to accept the review invitation for the film, released today by Focus Features, and I have to say watching the film adaptation was even more painful to sit through than reading the first novel.

I think my biggest problem with Fifty Shades of Grey is that it’s billed as this great, sweeping love story that couples should want to watch unfold on the big screen this Valentine’s Day weekend. It’s about as romantic of a notion to me as Pretty Woman. Much like I never understood why a story about a rich man using a prostitute to his advantage and then taking her off the streets on a whim is considered an epic romance, I don’t understand why this one is billed as such either.

The relationship between Christian Grey and Anastasia Steele isn’t romantic, nor is it even healthy. But I get the way it’s romanticized on the big screen because it’s an escapism/fantasy for some and it begins innocently enough like a conventional love story for others. Anastasia is an awkward but intelligent college senior majoring in English lit who fills in on an interview with the successful Christian Grey as a favor for her sick roommate. It turns out that not only is he the incredibly rich and powerful owner of his company, but he’s also young and handsome. He is the type of man with a commanding presence, beautiful eyes and a boyish smirk that can make a woman swoon just by passing her by. Once you throw in that he can also pilot his own private helicopter to fly you to a different city to wine and dine you, I can see why that would make most women weak in the knees. To that end, he was cast well. Actor Jamie Dornan is easy on the eyes. I really didn’t have a problem with Dakota Johnson cast as Anastasia. She’s awkward but pretty like her parents (Don Johnson and Melanie Griffith). She bites her lip in a suggestive way during the appropriate scenes, and overall I think she’s a better young actress than the one they found to be in the Twilight films. She’s capable of showing a range of emotions, reacting to things like she was an actual human being and not just a caricature of one.

Anastasia is drawn to Christian because she finds him enigmatic and mysterious. Behind all the wealth and the prying eyes of the public is a man who shields the secrets of his private life to even those who are supposed to know him best. In turn, Christian is drawn to Anastasia because she’s like a blank slate waiting to be filled – in more ways than one (terrible pun inserted because it’s really nothing more than a terrible story line that you’d find in a poorly written porno). It seems Christian is a control freak with a capital “C.” His need to dominate trickles all the way from the boardroom of his corporate empire down to his personal relationships. This intense desire to be in control carries over to the bedroom, as Anastasia soon discovers.

Christian introduces Anastasia to the world of BDSM: doms and subs, whips and chains, handcuffs and playrooms filled with sex toys designed to inflict pain and desire until they’re maddeningly one and the same. However, their relationship is not even considered a healthy dom/sub relationship according to the rules of the BDSM community. Both individuals have to know upfront clearly what is expected of them and be comfortable with their roles. Anastasia is clearly not comfortable in her role, and I can’t say that I blame her. I don’t care what kind of upbringing he had or how much of a control freak he is, there are no excuses for the way he treats her in the book or the film. You don’t treat someone you love in that manner. Christian comes across as very one-dimensional and selfish. Anastasia is seen as an object of lust to dominate in his “Red Room” instead of a strong, intelligent, beautiful woman. I realize three things about Fifty Shades: (1) the sex has been watered down for consumption by the masses (even the old ladies next to me were not terribly offended), (2) it does not depict how the BDSM lifestyle probably really is (based on mutual consent) and (3) I don’t understand why anyone would want the “Christian Grey Experience,” which is apparently a thing now. If the experience is anything like it is in the film, it’d be awkward, frustrating and degrading.

One of the biggest problems plaguing this film is the coming together of Dornan and Johnson as Christian and Anastasia – they lack chemistry during the sex scenes. This is a pretty unforgivable blunder when like a third of the film is them having sex. Another major hurdle is making the story believable in an unabsurd kind of way, something I think it does a poor job of in the final product. Scenes that should be emotionally charged and powerful come across as nothing short of ridiculous, and I think this is perhaps heightened by the ultra-serious musical score provided by Danny Elfman. I love Danny Elfman, but in this particular case, his music just didn’t seem to fit certain scenes quite right. The lines are often corny and delivered so woodenly by the actors you’re not sure if they don’t understand what they’re saying or if they just didn’t want to be there that day. The negotiations for the contract between the two makes the entire thing so stilted that it takes all the spontaneity and excitement out of the relationship. Wait, isn’t marriage itself a contract that also takes some of the spontaneity and excitement out of some relationships? The jury is still out on that one.

However, all things considered, I do not feel this is the “worst film of all time.” The awkwardness of it makes it actually kinda funny in spots. The audience laughed at things that were probably not meant to be funny and there were some “hot and bothered” audience members in my showing who would shout out unexpected exclamations that also made it a funnier experience. But it is my humble opinion that the best thing about Fifty Shades of Grey is its soundtrack. It’s full of haunting refrains from the likes of Annie Lennox, AWOLNATION, Ellie Goulding and Beyonce. Leave it to Beyonce to take a Beyonce song and actually make it a better Beyonce song. It’s sort of like a musical Inception. What she does with the new arrangement for “Crazy in Love” left me breathless. I think people will be talking about the music much longer than they will be talking about the acting or the story. The only thing worse than the abrupt ending is the knowledge that there are two more novels lurking out there, and presumably, two more films waiting to be released.

With the new film Fifty Shades of Grey coming out for Valentine’s Day, many couples will be tempted to spend their hard-earned cash to see it. Instead, lets look at why 2002’s Secretary is the smarter alternative.

To start, lets look at story. A young woman meets an older man in a position of power named Mr. Grey, the two become attracted to each other and embark on a BDSM relationship. Yes we just described both films with that one simple sentence. Two movies dealing with intense sexual relationships, focused primarily on BDSM, and having the male leads named Mr. Grey. The films diverge from here and show two very different takes on this lifestyle. Fifty Shades puts all the power into the man’s hands and focuses on the purely sexual side, making the female lead little more than a toy for his amusement. Secretary concerns itself with showing a fairly traditional love story, boy meets girls, boy and girl flirt, something goes wrong, girl tries to get boy back … but dressing such a traditional idea with an untraditional relationship. At it’s core Secretary is still a love story where Fifty Shades is a lust story.

Now lets look a little closer at the characters. Fifty Shades presents us with Christian Grey, a rich wildly successful businessman, and Anastasia Steele, a naive college student and virgin still finding her place in the world. In Secretary we meet Lee Holloway, a smart but damaged young woman, lacking in social skills and just out of the hospital for self harm, and E. Edward Grey, an odd, socially awkward attorney, who while successful is modestly so. The imbalance in these relationships becomes apparent immediately. Where on one side we have a rich powerful man towering over a shrinking violet, on the other hand we have two socially awkward people looking for someone who can appreciate them for their odd behavior and taboo desires. Where Christian Grey almost forces Anastasia into a new and frightening lifestyle, E. Edward Grey pulls back from Miss Holloway and she becomes the pursuer. Secretary is not only the more balanced story, it’s the one that empowers women.

This brings us to a fundamental problem with Fifty Shades of Grey. From what I’ve read of the BDSM community, a driving force seems to be that both parties enter into it with full knowledge and desire of what is going to happen. Whether through safe words or  agreement ahead of time, everyone involved knows their boundaries and they all sought out what they are getting into. Anastasia may be curious about what she is presented with but she’s really satisfying Grey’s desires, not any pre-existing ones of her own. Again Secretary shows us both parties enjoyed BDSM activities prior to meeting, they are satisfying both of their desires.

Next, lets look at our talent. Fifty Shades brings us Jamie Dornan, whose biggest role to date was the sheriff on Once Upon a Time, and Dakota Johnson who has only had some small film roles and one failed sitcom. They are brought together under the eye of director Sam Taylor-Johnson in her second full length feature. While they all seem to have some talent, they are by and large untested and unproven. Secretary also has a director with a limited body of work, Steven Shainberg, who boasts just a small handful of directing and producing credits over a twenty year career. He had the luck however of having two strong lead actors in Maggie Gyllenhaal (who had already been in ten feature films by 2002), and James Spader, whose performances are always deliciously odd but fascinatingly so. Despite being seventeen years apart in age the two of them work wonderfully together, bringing both an odd, socially inept, weirdness as well as a sweet childlike sensitivity to their characters.

Both films are adaptations of existing works, Secretary is an adaptation of the short story “Bad Behavior” by Mary Gaitskill. Fifty Shades of Grey started its life as Twilight fan fiction titled “Master of the Universe” which E. L. James published under the pseudonym “Snowqueen’s Icedragon.” Yes, that last sentence is a real thing which I just typed and you have just read. For many people the words “Fan Fiction” and Twilight will be all it takes to deter you from seeing the film. Kudos to you for being so smart.

While I’m sure people will flock to theaters to see Fifty Shades of Grey, I can only hope that a few people will take that time and watch (or even rewatch) a much lesser known film which tells a beautiful if unconventional story. Plus while the average movie ticket costs eight dollars, Secretary is available streaming for a very reasonable $2.99, money well spent.

  

Mankind has long held a fascination with eerie things that go bump in the night and the mysterious fraternal orders that are bound by duty to keep us safe from such creatures. In Universal Pictures’ latest offering Seventh Son, we’re introduced to The Wardstone Chronicles (UK)/The Last Apprentice (US), a young-adult series written by author Joseph Delaney. This book series follows the supernatural adventures of Thomas “Tom” Ward (Ben Barnes), who is the seventh son of a seventh son, and therefore the apprentice of Spook John Gregory (Jeff Bridges). In this fictional world, a Spook is the title given to a knight who is bound by duty to fight against supernatural evil.

Only the seventh son of a seventh son is deemed strong enough to fight the good fight against a gaggle of ghosts, ghasts, witches, boggarts and the like. It seems this is a dying breed, as Gregory is the last of the Spook Masters. All of his apprentices have ultimately failed, having been killed by dark forces during their extensive training process. This is all bad enough for Gregory to contend with, but when you throw in the fact that the blood red moon is rising – an event that only happens once a century – and Mother Malkin (Julianne Moore) is once more free and gathering her evil minions to take over humanity, well it becomes a dire situation not for the faint of heart indeed. Mother Malkin is the evil queen of the witches. She is very powerful and dangerous with bloodthirsty, vengeful feelings for the Spook. She will stop at nothing to see that the Spook and his young apprentice fail their quest to undermine her uprising.

After Gregory’s latest protégé (Kit Harington) is killed by Mother Malkin at the beginning of the film, he is tasked with finding a suitable replacement immediately, for the ominous blood red moon is coming in just a week’s time. His travels lead him to young Tom, who is the seventh son of a simple farmer who was also a seventh son. There is more to Tom than meets the eye. He has haunting visions – mostly about Mother Malkin – that he doesn’t understand. One gets the impression that destiny has brought the Spook to his last apprentice, for maybe, just maybe, he is the key to Mother Malkin’s undoing.

While I haven’t read any of the book series, I was instantly drawn to the character of Tom. I love stories about humble, reluctant heroes; stories about people coming of age, meeting their destinies and embarking upon a noble quest or two. I think we all like to believe there is something deep-down special about us and that’s why we look to these types of heroes. I’m also a sucker for just about anything supernatural. When you throw in a good monster or two, I’m definitely down for the fight.

Seventh Son throws an abundance of monsters on the screen to delight the audience. Some of them are funny, some of them are creepy and some of them are cool to look at. The 3D effects enrich the overall experience, but it felt like the effects could have been better at times. When Mother Malkin summons her evil cronies, one is almost overwhelmed by the variety of creatures being presented. There’s Urag (a man who transforms into the most vicious-looking bear you’ve ever seen), Radu (the fearsome leader of a band of ninja assassins who also transforms into a dragon), Sarakin (a lady who transforms into a fierce jaguar), a four-armed, sword-yielding maniac known as Virahadra and Mother Malkin’s twisted witch sister, Bony Lizzie, who also (yawns) transforms into a dragon of a different color. By the end, it feels more like a dragon fight instead of a fight between good vs evil.

A friend of mine suggested I go into the film picturing everything Jeff Bridges says in his Dude voice from The Big Lebowski to make it more enjoyable if my interest started to wane. I don’t have the heart to tell him that this would be almost impossible because Bridges’ character mumbles almost unintelligibly throughout the film and sometimes I’m not even sure what he was saying, yet alone did I have the time to picture someone else saying it.

That’s not to say I didn’t like Seventh Son. I’d be lying if I said that my inner 10-year-old who often ponders such questions as “what do monsters have nightmares about?” wasn’t satisfied on some level. There are elements to it that interested me, and I especially enjoyed the fact that Ben Barnes was in it. In fact, I just crushed on him a couple of weeks ago in the historical television miniseries Sons of Liberty in which he played the affable Sam Adams. There’s also a love angle involving Tom and one of the witches (Alice played by Alicia Vikander) that is tender and playful and provides nice breaks from the effects-heavy action sequences. I also believe the villains were all well cast, especially Djimon Hounsou as Radu. He was a badass.

However, much like The Hobbit, I think some of the richness of the fictional world was perhaps lost in this film adaptation. While I enjoyed it, I felt it never quite managed to transcend into the film it possibly could have been given the imaginative subject material (and perhaps some of the higher-ups felt this too, for I read the film’s release date was pushed back). Upon reading an online synopsis of the first book, it seems the story was almost completely changed (including the addition of new characters), and I’m not sure it was for the better. While I won’t bash the film as much as some of the other reviews I’ve seen, I can certainly understand why fans of the book series might be disappointed with the final product. I think Seventh Son had lofty goals of being the next great supernatural fantasy, but it fell more than a little short of the prize. If you’re looking for a cheesy fantasy a la the ones of your childhood, it should be right up your alley.

 [easyazon_image align=”none” height=”30″ identifier=”0060766204″ locale=”US” src=”https://cliqueclack.com/p/files/2015/02/51RhtXoedIL.SL30.jpg” tag=”cliqueclack-20″ width=”20″]

ALL PASSES HAVE BEEN CLAIMED! COMMENTS ARE CLOSED.

CliqueClack has partnered with Universal Pictures to offer readers in Baltimore, DC and Virginia Beach an opportunity to attend an advance screening of the new fantasy film Seventh Son starring Jeff Bridges, Ben Barnes, Alicia Vikander, Kit Harington, Olivia Williams, Antje Traue with Djimon Hounsou and Julianne Moore.

In a time of enchantments when legends and magic collide, the sole remaining warrior of a mystical order (Bridges) travels to find a prophesied hero born with incredible powers, the last Seventh Son (Barnes). Torn from his quiet life as a farmhand, the unlikely young hero embarks on a daring adventure with his battle-hardened mentor to vanquish a dark queen (Moore) and the army of supernatural assassins she has dispatched against their kingdom. Based on the book series The Last Apprentice by Joseph Delaney.

The screening will take place Wednesday, February 4, 7:30 PM at Regal Majestic (DC), Cinemark Egyptian (Baltimore) and AMC Lynnhaven (VA Beach).

Passes will be available on a first come, first served basis. To be eligible, please read and follow the directions CAREFULLY. There will be no exceptions.

• Comment on this post ONLY with DC. Do not include anything else in the comment box. If you make a mistake, do not edit your comment because it will not register. You must submit a new comment.
• Include your FULL NAME (First and Last) and email address on the entry form (NOT in the comment box!). Double check your email address before submitting. If your email address is misspelled, you will not receive passes.
• ONE entry per person or couple will be accepted. CliqueClack has the right to discard any duplicates or comments that appear to be duplicates. Multiple comments from a single person will result in complete disqualification. Keep these offers fair for everyone!
• Winners will be contacted by email and will receive ONE ADMIT TWO pass. Please make sure to set your filters to accept email from @cliqueclack.com.
• Check your calendar before commenting. If you have no intention of using the passes, please don’t leave a comment. If the studios see that passes we are given to award to our readers are not being used, they will not want to offer us passes for future screenings. Please be considerate!

Please note that passes do not guarantee seats at the screening. Seating is first come, first served so plan to arrive early. CliqueClack has no control over the total number of passes distributed, and is not responsible for seating arrangements at the theater.

Seventh Son is rated PG-13 for intense fantasy violence and action throughout, frightening images and brief strong language. The movie opens February 6.

THIS OFFER HAS EXPIRED. COMMENTS ARE CLOSED.

CliqueClack has partnered with Universal Pictures to offer readers in Boston an opportunity to attend an advance screening of the new fantasy film Seventh Son starring Jeff Bridges, Ben Barnes, Alicia Vikander, Kit Harington, Olivia Williams, Antje Traue with Djimon Hounsou and Julianne Moore.

In a time of enchantments when legends and magic collide, the sole remaining warrior of a mystical order (Bridges) travels to find a prophesied hero born with incredible powers, the last Seventh Son (Barnes). Torn from his quiet life as a farmhand, the unlikely young hero embarks on a daring adventure with his battle-hardened mentor to vanquish a dark queen (Moore) and the army of supernatural assassins she has dispatched against their kingdom. Based on the book series The Last Apprentice by Joseph Delaney.

The screening will take place Wednesday, February 4, 7:00 PM at AMC Boston Common.

Passes will be available on a first come, first served basis. To be eligible, please read and follow the directions CAREFULLY. There will be no exceptions.

• Comment on this post ONLY with BOSTON. Do not include anything else in the comment box. If you make a mistake, do not edit your comment because it will not register. You must submit a new comment.
• Include your FULL NAME (First and Last) and email address on the entry form (NOT in the comment box!). Double check your email address before submitting. If your email address is misspelled, you will not receive passes.
• ONE entry per person or couple will be accepted. CliqueClack has the right to discard any duplicates or comments that appear to be duplicates. Multiple comments from a single person will result in complete disqualification. Keep these offers fair for everyone!
• Winners will be contacted by email and will receive ONE ADMIT TWO pass. Please make sure to set your filters to accept email from @cliqueclack.com.
• Check your calendar before commenting. If you have no intention of using the passes, please don’t leave a comment. If the studios see that passes we are given to award to our readers are not being used, they will not want to offer us passes for future screenings. Please be considerate!

Please note that passes do not guarantee seats at the screening. Seating is first come, first served so plan to arrive early. CliqueClack has no control over the total number of passes distributed, and is not responsible for seating arrangements at the theater.

Seventh Son is rated PG-13 for intense fantasy violence and action throughout, frightening images and brief strong language. The movie opens February 6.

The atrocities of war are ugly, but the resiliency of the human spirit to survive against all odds is nothing short of beautiful. Based upon the remarkable true story of Louis Zamperini, Universal Pictures’ Unbroken has taught me these life truths. If you ask me, it couldn’t have come at a better time than Christmas, a time of the year when we’re supposed to care about the plight of our fellow man – even if that plight and suffering occurred some 70 years ago.

Directed by Angelina Jolie, Unbroken is based upon the 2010 bestseller Unbroken: A World War II Story of Survival, Resilience, and Redemption, which was written by Laura Hillenbrand (who also penned the bestseller about Seabiscuit). Although Louis Zamperini died this past summer at the ripe old age of 97, his spirit lives on – reaching an almost legendary status – thanks to the book and film about his life.

The film begins up in the puffy, white clouds over the vast Pacific Ocean, where we’re first introduced to Louis: a young, charismatic World War II bombardier (portrayed by Jack O’Connell). One of the strongest attributes about Unbroken that I observed from its beginning is its convincing realism. It’s as if you’re actually right there in the cockpit with Louis and crew, part of the dizzying action of the war, wondering if (or when) this rickety plane is going to finally be submerged into the watery depths waiting below. In fact, the effects were so good at the beginning that if this film had been shown in 3D, I’ve no doubts I might have thrown up in my theater seat.

While Louis’ fate in the plane hangs precariously in the balance, we’re given flashbacks from his youth, which are designed to give you insights about his character and the likely causes for his unbroken spirit in the film’s latter half. The son of Italian immigrants, it seems Louis led a troubled youth full of thievery, underage drinking and fighting because he was constantly being bullied due to his immigrant status. However, his older brother Pete was always looking out for him. After observing how fast he is able to run away from the bullies, it’s Pete who encourages him to try out for the school’s track team. A natural athlete, Louis sets all kinds of records for running and is deemed good enough to represent the United States in the 1936 Olympic Games in Berlin. He was slated to return to the 1940 Olympics in Tokyo, but of course, World War II cancelled those and caused Louis’ life to take a different direction. Enlisting in the war was what most able-bodied, patriotic young men of the 1940s did, and Louis was no exception.

This brings us back to the surmounting action on the plane. After Louis’ plane goes down in the Pacific, he spends 47 days in a raft in shark-infested waters, only to be rescued by the Japanese. Considered an enemy of Japan, Louis is sent to a prisoner-of-war camp. It’s hard to say which is a worse fate: the days spent starving, dehydrated, sunburned and almost stark-raving mad while drifting aimlessly about on the tiny raft with two of his fellow survivors (Domhnall Gleeson and  Finn Wittrock) or the days spent freezing, malnourished and beaten – either for information about the Allies or just for the seeming sheer fun of it – while he’s a prisoner in the camp. One thing I didn’t enjoy was the seemingly endless torture/beatings. It felt like Louis was never going to get a break.

Because of his “celebrity status” as a former Olympic athlete, Louis is quickly singled out by the camp’s ruthless leader, Mutsushiro “The Bird” Watanabe (portrayed by musician Miyavi), to endure additional hardships on his cruel whims. It seems “The Bird” is angry because he comes from a life of privilege and he feels it is beneath him to be the commander of a lowly prison camp (he wants to be promoted). I’d never heard of the musician Miyavi, but he gives an amazing performance as the film’s villain. You will truly grow to hate him by the climax. I didn’t read the book, but I overheard some women discussing it after the film ended. While they enjoyed the film, they felt that the character of “The Bird” didn’t come across as clearly from the book to the film adaptation. It seems they were left wanting more. If that’s the case, perhaps I’ll be reading the book next year.

My personal take on “The Bird” is that he is oddly fascinated by – and begrudgingly respectful of – the resiliency of Louis’ spirit. He attempts to break him because I think he perceives that Japan is losing the war and Louis has become a sort of twisted symbol of his hatred for the Allies at-large. In a weird way, I think “The Bird” almost feels like the two of them are equals or friends, and perhaps he secretly wishes he possessed more of Louis’ inner strengths. While he gets frustrated that he cannot break him, I think inwardly he respects that. If he were to break him, I think it would expose fragilities about himself and the rest of mankind that he is not willing to face.

While undergoing the routine tortures of “The Bird” and his men, Louis becomes almost a mascot to his fellow prisoners. As long as he remains strong of character in the unrelenting face of adversity, it gives them a flicker of hope. His mantra, “If I can take it, I can make it,” resonates true for all of the prisoners in the camp. While it’s not really fair to expect one individual to be that brave, it’s a fact of life that sometimes we all need a hero to cling to so that we do not give up and lose all hope in the darkest of times. Louis is remembered as a hero to many in his generation, and his inspirational story has introduced him to millions of people in a new one. Perhaps “A minute of pain is worth a lifetime of glory.” However, I can’t say that with any unwavering certainty.

What I found most remarkable about this film is the fact that it hadn’t already been made. I read on IMDb that Universal secured the rights to Louis’ story for a film all the way back in 1957, when they were eyeing Tony Curtis to possibly portray him. Imagine what that film would have been like!

Unbroken is probably the best film I watched in a theater in 2014 (although at times it can be cringe-worthy). I’m sure it’s not perfect, and if you read the book, you might not feel it deserves quite as much praise. But I think it’s beautiful to watch for the scenery and the overall message about not giving up, and the musical score is equally alluring. What I found most interesting about Louis is the fact that he was able to eventually forgive his captors and go back to Japan to be a torch-bearer in a later Olympics ceremony. I’m sad knowing he passed away this year before the film came out. It would have been nice to have seen him at the premiere being celebrated for being such an extraordinary human being.

Editor’s note: Zamperini was able to see the film privately before he died. He and Jolie became very close friends and she downloaded a copy of the film to her laptop and drove to the hospital to watch with him.

[easyazon_image add_to_cart=”default” align=”none” asin=”0812974492″ cloaking=”default” height=”160″ localization=”default” locale=”US” nofollow=”default” new_window=”default” src=”https://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51m7P%2BbJfAL._SL160_.jpg” tag=”cliqueclack-20″ width=”106″] [easyazon_image add_to_cart=”default” align=”none” asin=”B00PTJGMIQ” cloaking=”default” height=”160″ localization=”default” locale=”US” nofollow=”default” new_window=”default” src=”https://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51LYgnJ%2BPlL._SL160_.jpg” tag=”cliqueclack-20″ width=”159″]

I have a semi-disturbing question for those of you who are married or in serious relationships – how well do you really know that person sleeping beside you? Their deepest desires, darkest secrets and inner workings and capabilities of their mind may surprise and/or scare you, if Twentieth Century Fox’s chilling thriller Gone Girl is any indication.

Starring Ben Affleck as Nick Dunne, the husband who finds himself thrust in the spotlight of suspicion when his wife Amy (Rosamund Pike) turns up missing on their anniversary, Gone Girl is based on a novel written by Gillian Flynn. Flynn also penned the screenplay, so I presume it must follow the plot of the book fairly closely, although I haven’t read it.

Similar to his other films Zodiac, Fight Club, Se7en and The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo, director David Fincher keeps the audience engaged and guessing about the many plot twists and turns as Gone Girl unfolds. The dark, almost melancholy backgrounds, Affleck’s haunting opening monologue about wanting to crack open his wife’s skull to spill forth her secrets, the stark-looking film credits and the eerie musical score by Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross wonderfully set the tone for the next two and a half hours. Gone Girl is like a beautiful but bizarre jigsaw puzzle that takes its time getting put together. It can be at times frustrating, at times predictable, at times outrageously absurd and at times so enlightening and/or frightening to ponder in its rich layers of complexity that probably no two people will share the same exact theater experience.

What I appreciated most about this film was being able to see the investigation from all sides. Society seems to have a macabre fascination with cases involving missing persons, especially when it’s a husband under suspicion for the disappearance and/or murder of his wife. Anybody else remember the media circus that was the Scott and Laci Peterson case? Gone Girl is a very similar story but you get to see it develop as a behind-the-scenes spectator beginning on the day of the disappearance and working forwards and backwards from there.

July 5, 2012, begins normally enough – Ben Affleck’s character goes for a drink at the bar he co-owns with his hilariously sarcastic twin sister Margot (Carrie Coon) and then he returns home to find his wife missing. He promptly notifies the police when he suspects foul play. It’s interesting to watch Kim Dickens and Patrick Fugit dig around for clues – Kim’s police detective is very shrewd while Officer Patrick adds the necessary comedic elements to their yin-yang partnership. Each day presents new information about Amy’s disappearance and the case slowly but steadily building around Nick, as you also glean some of the more intimate details about the couple as seen through flashbacks about how Nick and Amy met, fell in love and got married as told through Amy’s diary entries. It’s hard to know which person is more at fault for the unravelling of their once-happy marriage.

The missing persons case quickly warrants national attention because it turns out that Amy is not your ordinary housewife. Amy is none other than the “Amazing Amy,” the daughter of two famous authors who penned an entire series of books revolving around her childhood and “amazing accomplishments.” Tyler Perry puts in a solid performance as Nick’s Johnnie Cochran-like defense lawyer, Tanner Bolt, who clearly specializes in cases of this celebrity and magnitude. There is a scene in which he coaches Nick on what to say for a national television appearance in order to make the public more sympathetic about the nature of his character after he’s made several incriminating faux pas. It was a fascinating study in human nature and how body language can convey so much about a person’s attitude. Also look for Neil Patrick Harris as Amy’s uptight ex-boyfriend Desi Collings and Casey Wilson as nosy neighbor Noelle Hawthorne – they’re both stand-outs in the film.

At about two and a half hours, Gone Girl felt a little long. While I thoroughly enjoyed the first three-fourths of it, it was the final fourth that left a bitter taste in my mouth. I won’t go into detail and reveal plot spoilers, but I will say I was not the only member of the audience left sitting there in an almost angry, bewildered cloud of confusion after it ended. It almost makes me want to read the book because I want to know more about what these characters were feeling and thinking inside their heads. Maybe then, and only then, will I find peace because the end felt so flawed and full of holes it didn’t make sense to the shrieking rational side of my brain.

I recommend Gone Girl if you’re looking for a film that makes you think about the ties that bind, how men and women relate to one another or if you’re looking for something a little out of the ordinary. There’s almost an artsy element to its cinematography. However, if you’re about to get married, it might make you think twice. Abraham Lincoln once said, “Marriage is neither heaven nor hell, it is simply purgatory.” Abraham Lincoln was a wise man but Gone Girl felt like a marriage made in the darkest circles of hell, not purgatory. Ben Affleck and Rosamund Pike are both excellent in their roles.

[easyazon_image add_to_cart=”default” align=”none” asin=”0307588378″ cloaking=”default” height=”160″ localization=”default” locale=”US” nofollow=”default” new_window=”default” src=”https://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41yZreG2lcL._SL160_.jpg” tag=”cliqueclack-20″ width=”97″] [easyazon_image add_to_cart=”default” align=”none” asin=”B00CJMILBM” cloaking=”default” height=”160″ localization=”default” locale=”US” nofollow=”default” new_window=”default” src=”https://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51YFuhtS2hL._SL160_.jpg” tag=”cliqueclack-20″ width=”160″] [easyazon_image add_to_cart=”default” align=”none” asin=”B0007DFJ0G” cloaking=”default” height=”160″ localization=”default” locale=”US” nofollow=”default” new_window=”default” src=”https://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51ORyncmJAL._SL160_.jpg” tag=”cliqueclack-20″ width=”119″] [easyazon_image add_to_cart=”default” align=”none” asin=”B003Y5H5HY” cloaking=”default” height=”160″ localization=”default” locale=”US” nofollow=”default” new_window=”default” src=”https://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51-FyO1b1fL._SL160_.jpg” tag=”cliqueclack-20″ width=”148″]

Henry Wadsworth Longfellow once observed, “The heights by great men reached and kept were not attained by sudden flight, but they, while their companions slept, were toiling upward in the night.” Have you ever tried to look for a needle in a haystack for the one you love? Maybe you have, but I’m betting most of you out there haven’t. We go about our daily routines toiling our lives away to achieve a piece of that poetic greatness Longfellow described, only maybe occasionally taking time out to make those we love smile.

Several months back, I was blogging about a space cartoon (Hanna Barbera’s Space Stars) and reminiscing about a title whose name had escaped me. I erroneously thought it was titled The Third Planet from the Sun and was frustrated that I couldn’t find ANY evidence of it on the Internet. I hadn’t seen this cartoon since I was maybe 12. I knew I wasn’t crazy or making it up. I’m happy to report that my boyfriend finally found it for me on the Internet – its correct title is The Mystery of the Third Planet and the entire cartoon can be found on YouTube (in English and Russian, but we’ll get to that later).

As soon as that bittersweet-sounding music cued up and the narrator began the tale, “This is the story of an adventure that will take us beyond our universe to the third planet in the system of the sun of Alderaban, where strange creatures are to be found, where we hope to solve a mystery,” I got a little misty-eyed as the memories of watching this repeatedly at my grandparents’ house flooded over me in nostalgic waves. It represents a time in my life in which I couldn’t get enough of anything involving space exploration, for it was my childhood dream to be an astronaut.

The animation on The Mystery of the Third Planet is bizarrely beautiful and highly imaginative, which sums up my style pretty well. To put it simply, it looked different than any of my other cartoons. To this day, I still don’t think I’ve ever seen anything quite like it. There are a lot of reasons why it didn’t look like anything else I was watching as a child. Upon doing some Internet research, The Mystery of the Third Planet (a.k.a. The Secret of the Third Planet and Tayna tretey planety in Russian) is an animated feature from 1981 that was produced by the Soyuzmultfilm Studio in Moscow and directed by Roman Kachanov. What are the odds that my beloved cartoon came from Cold War-era Russia with love? It’s based on a children’s science fiction novella titled Alice’s Travel from the Alisa (Alice) Selezneva book series written by Kir Bulychov. While considered a cult classic in Russia, I’m betting most other U.S. children of the ‘80s do not share my affinity for this movie – and that’s truly a shame.

The year is 2186, and the plot revolves around a girl named Alice, her father Professor Seleznyov and his right-hand man Captain Green who embark upon a space expedition to gather rare animals from across the universe for a planned space animal zoo on Earth. Along the way, they get caught up in the world of espionage and a mystery involving the disappearance of Captains Kim and Buran, as well as the extinction of speak birds, who only speak the truth and mimic everything they see and hear (imagine how popular these would be in real life!).

For some inexplicable reason, the main characters were renamed Kristen and Professor Adam Steele in the English-dubbed version that I am familiar with, although Commander Green was not renamed. It was released in the United States first in 1987 and again in the 1990s on VHS. According to Wikipedia, Alice and the Mystery of the Third Planet was also released on a 1999 DVD collection and various other DVDs with different cover art. I would love to own a copy of this in my personal collection, but it seems hard to come by unless you order it on Amazon or a like site.

One of the most interesting characters is introduced early on – Ramos, the loud-mouthed colorful “person” with wild, green hair, googley eyes, a bulbous nose, multi-arms and roller skates found on the planet Bluke who is also an expert in rare animals (pictured above). Some of the more elusive figures include Dr. Bentley, Kim and Buran, and Nobody, a pig-like creature that looks and sounds like a throwback to Peter Lorre, down to his laugh and mannerisms. The planets’ backdrops and inhabitants are so visually wild they’re not to be missed – especially that planet at the end, which is exactly where I would want to live out the remainder of my days minus those ugly, menacing spear birds. That flora and fauna look so enchanting! Where else but this movie will you see a purple flying cow, a diamond turtle, mirror flowers, robots waiting tables in a diner offering “Earth breakfasts” or rocks that are capable of projecting images from the past? Those who know me best will probably have little difficulty understanding why this was one of my childhood favorites.

If you’re looking for an animated movie that is as vibrant and imaginative as it is obscure, you can’t go wrong with The Mystery of the Third Planet. It moves at a fast pace with lots of twists and turns along the way that translate into it not being everyone’s cup of tea. But it was certainly something I really enjoyed as a child that I’m happy beyond belief to be able to share with others today as part of this unusual Throwback Thursday installment of CliqueClack. Sometimes when you go looking for a needle in a haystack, you can make a person’s day with the smallest amount of effort.

//www.youtube.com/watch?v=NWTPMCD3SeQ

If you watch the 1995 version on YouTube (Alice and the Mystery of the Third Planet), it has a different dialogue and the names haven’t been changed. This leads me to believe that it might more closely follow the Russian translation. However, this is not the movie and dialogue I remember from my youth. I find the variances in the different versions further add to the tale’s mysterious charm.

//www.youtube.com/watch?v=3lEoewc7Yns

[easyazon_image add_to_cart=”default” align=”none” asin=”6304190417″ cloaking=”default” height=”160″ localization=”default” locale=”US” nofollow=”default” new_window=”default” src=”https://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/516aTvEeTvL._SL160_.jpg” tag=”cliqueclack-20″ width=”85″]

First published in 1991, Diana Gabaldon’s series of Outlander books are, to the excitement of fans everywhere, finally being adapted for television. The show, premiering August 9th (though the premiere is available to watch online now at Starz.com) stars Sam Heughan as Jaime Frasier, Caitriona Balfe as Claire Randall (nee Beauchamp), Tobias Menzies as both Frank and Jonathan Randall, Graham McTavish as Dougal MacKenzie, Lotte Verbeek as Gellis Duncan and is executive produced by Ron Moore. We sat down with them during this year’s San Diego Comic-Con, and learned about the show’s first season.

The books have a lot of fans, so there’s a corresponding amount of pressure

Fans have been waiting for twenty-three years to see these characters brought to life. “I think there is definitely pressure to get this right. But we’ve been very lucky that we’ve been supported by Diana from pretty much the beginning … so you’ve got this wealth of knowledge to draw upon” says Heughan, who plays Jaime. “ What we have to focus on is our character, and being true to that” adds his co-star Balfe.

Scotland is almost a character in and of itself

There is no place else on the planet that they could have filmed this show. The settings are absolutely stunning. McTavish – a native Scot – is appreciative of the cinematography and care with which the filming is done. The first episode opens with a long shot that, if it does nothing else, hits viewers over the head with the idea that Scotland is an incredibly beautiful place. “We would spend all day setting up shots, because they were so particular how it was lit and how the set was decorated; it was amazing to be there” says McTavish.

The cast is proud of the show and were almost nervous about sharing it with audiences

Filming on location in Scotland, the cast has been isolated from the public as the premiere has grown closer. Between the TCA Summer Press Tour and San Diego Comic-Con, they’ve only recently “peeked over the parapet” to see how the show’s buzz has developed. Heughan: “There’s an element of sadness, yesterday [at the premiere screening] releasing this … we’ve been working on this for a year, giving our heart and soul into it, and suddenly we have to give this over to people.” You can tell they are nervous, but having seen the first episode, they have no reason to be.

The show will follow the books fairly closely

“The first two episodes set up the story, much like in the book, but then the journey begins. Each episode has its own feel to it, like a chapter almost, and it really turns it on its head.” Heughan also hinted that Ron Moore will play around with perspective to tell the story (The series used a growing number of POVs as each book was released, though Claire is the only true first person perspective).

This means they are not skipping any of the darker material

The cast teased that this season’s story includes some pretty dark moments. “It’s a major thing that happens to [Jaime], and it will probably test his character … he questions everything. He questions who he is and what he’s always believed about himself,” says Heughan. They’ve not yet filmed the scenes in question, but it sounds like the show isn’t shying away from the darkness; a good thing, as subsequent books are full of them as well.

It was important, however, to focus more on Frank Randall in the first episode

There is more Frank in the series than in the book, helping to fill out the relationship between he and Claire. They wanted to develop Frank and Claire as a relationship that has real depth. At some point Claire has to make a choice, and the show wants audiences to be more torn than perhaps they were when reading the book.

Menzies did a good deal of research into the two different time periods in an attempt to draw the differences between the two characters (Frank and Jonathan “Black Jack” Randall). Ron Moore shared an important note with the actor, that “both Frank and Jack are two men shaped arguably by their experiences at war … with very different results. Frank, by the love of a good woman, has survived … whereas Jack has gone to a very dark place.”

Filming a period piece provided for some fun with horses and costumes

“[Horseback riding is] actually one of my favorite parts … it just feels great. It’s the stuff that you dream of when you’re a kid,” says Balfe. She and Heughan apparently have developed a competition on who can get the horses to like them best. “It’s not a competition; it’s my horse and she keeps feeding him sugary treats!” protested Heughan. (I commented to them both at this point in the interview how their dynamic even at the table proves just how good their chemistry will be on screen.)

Becoming accustomed to wearing kilts regularly has provided some fun moments. Balfe says that “she gets flashed quite a lot,” a problem that the cast and crew have just gotten used to throughout the production. Once the actors have grown accustomed to the … erm … freedom, it is tough to go back: “It is actually very comfortable riding a horse in a kilt. I recommend it,” says Heughan.

Why Ron Moore wanted to bring this story to life

The character of Claire is one of the main reasons Moore was interested in doing Outlander as a series, “I thought she was smart, strong and interesting. I liked her voice all the way through the book.” As a history buff, he also thought doing a piece on the specific historical period would also provide for compelling storytelling. In the books, “the period was realized with a great deal of detail and authenticity, and the plot itself had a lot of twists and turns and reversals of fortune that I didn’t see coming” that would be great for television.

There are plans for future books, and the challenges those stories might bring

If the show lasts a couple of seasons, they have a plan on how to handle changing times, ages and locations. Most importantly, there is no plan to recast any of the actors (though sadly, wee Rodger did not show up in the premiere). But the changes mean good things are coming. “There’s a lot of interesting casting still coming up, because there’s so many characters we haven’t gotten to in book one,” says Moore.

But the actors know what the following books bring for their characters?

Most haven’t read past the first book. Menzies has started in on the second, Balfe is looking forward to finishing filming this year so she can start on the second (she flew through the first book in a weekend), Heughan is nearing the end of book two. “I’ve read the first one. I didn’t want to get ahead of myself … but people keep telling me things that happen,” kids McTavish. Considering how much we learn about the backstories of certain characters in later books, series author Diana Gabaldon played an important role in helping fill out the characters for the actors.

The show has a great title sequence

Moore is proud of the main title sequence. “Bear [McCreary] did a great job scoring it, Raya [Yarbrough] sings … we shot some stuff that was specific for the title and other pieces were outtakes or unused angles from other episodes. It was a process; it took a few weeks to pull it all together.” While many shows are eschewing these sequences – often for time – there has been a small resurgence with shows – TURN for example – and Outlander continues in that trend. “It takes you to this place and to this world in a very nice way, and keeps the two periods alive and reminds you of the time travel aspect with it becoming all about that.”

Menzies has recently joined the cast of two fan-favorite adaptations

Menzies has played roles in both Outlander and Game of Thrones this year. He complimented David Benioff and Dan Weiss on the sophistication with which the Thrones adaptation has been brought to the screen. But getting on the “ground level,” as with Outlander, is fun as he’s had the ability to weigh in on a variety of decisions, including apparently his costume.

Adapting a story is a different process than writing something new

Outlander differs from Moore’s previous work on Battlestar Galactica in that there’s a very specific roadmap fans will expect the show to follow. On BSG Moore was unafraid to let the story develop organically and take turns not necessarily envisioned in the breaking process. “It’s very different; it’s been an interesting exercise just in terms of that, in writing and structuring a show in the writer’s room because normally on an original piece you are sitting there tossing out ideas all the time … you don’t do that here; we try to stay in the lane. We start with the order that’s laid out for us in the book … It’s a different task intellectually.” Diana Gabaldon has been a tremendous help, making sure that fan favorite lines didn’t end up on the cutting room floor.

Gellis and Dougal are characters that should be interesting to watch

Gellis Duncan is not at all what she seems, but Verbeek promises that we’ll learn more and more about her over the course of the first season, “We see everything from Claire’s perspective, so everything we see of Gellis is what she actually gets to know about her.”

With Gellis, there’s a lot of game playing; she shows different faces to different people. She always seems to know a bit more than everyone around her. “When push comes to shove, she actually shows her true colors, which I thought was great to get to play all of that” says Verbeek. McTavish thinks Dougal is a complicated character, “He does bad things … I guess you could describe them as bad possibly … but he does good things. His relationship with Jaime is evidence of that complication.” Both have very specific motivations and goals that are not immediately evident at the beginning of the story.

Fans of the Loch Ness Monster will not be happy

There was a lot of discussion about the decision to leave out a scene from the book where Claire encounters the famed Loch Ness Monster. Moore says that while it was a great passage in the book, translating that scene to the screen might have felt out of sync with the rest of the show …  but Menzies teased that he remembered that sequence in a script at some point during production.

Moore plans on recording podcasts for Outlander

It was a fan at the autograph signing at San Diego Comic-Con who reminded Moore of the podcasts that he did for Battlestar Galatica. The recordings, which served basically as commentaries that could be played in sync with each episode, were a great window into the production of the show. Thus, everyone needs to send a thank you note to the fan that brought a nice bottle of Scotch (Moore’s refreshment of choice during recordings) to the signing.