Best Movie Ever!

lael

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 16, 2007
Messages
827
Reaction score
3
A strange, hooded figure nervously wanders through a crowded train station. His bizarre appearance catch the attention of a group of rowdy boys, who begin to harass him. As he desperately tries to escape the taunting, the hooded figure inadvertently knocks over a small girl. An angry mob forms, and chases the man, one of them pulling off his hood, revealing an oversized head and deformed face. He is finally cornered. Terrified, the man shouts I am not an animal! I am a human being! I...am...a man! He collapses.

The above scene comes from The Elephant Man (1980), a drama based on the life of Joseph Merrick (1862-1890), a man born with a rare congenital disorder known as Proteus Syndrome, a disorder that causes skin overgrowth, atypical bone development, and tumors over half of the body. Merrick suffered from a severe case of Proteus Syndrome (not elephantiasis, as has been claimed), with large facial tumors and deformity on every inch of his body, save for his left arm. His skin had a grayish hue, "resembling" that of an elephant's. Merrick had performed in sideshows, exhibited as a "freak," before he was taken under the care of Frederick Treves, a brilliant young physician. After caring for Merrick, and helping him speak through a series of operations for his severaly deformed mouth, Treves gave Merrick a permanent home at London Hospital. There, he became a celebrity in Victorian high society, befriending actors, noblemen, the Princess of Wales and even Queen Victoria herself. Merrick would later travel (in a carriage with the blinds drawn) to various homes of important people, and was greeted as a welcome guest. Joseph Merrick died in 1890. Due to the enormous weight of his head, he could only sleep sitting up. He tried to sleep horizontally, and ended up accidentally suffocating himself. He was 27.

For a while Merrick's skeleton was exhibited at the Royal London Hospital (and no, contrary to a very popular myth/urban legend, Michael Jackson did not, nor did he attempt to buy Merrick's bones--it's just a sick rumor). Treves wrote The Elephant Man and Other Reminiscences in the 1920s, bringing Merrick's story into the 20th century.

In 1979, The Elephant Man opened on Broadway, and ultimately won a Tony Award. The play blended fact and fiction, but what was probably the most remarkable aspect of the production was the fact that the actor playing Merrick doesn't wear prosthetics in his portrayal. But it is still a difficult role, as the actor must contort his body to approximate Merrick's crippling deformity. Merrick (called John instead of Joseph in the play) was originally portrayed by Philip Anglim. Later, actors such as Bruce Davison, Billy Crudup and even David Bowie would play the title role.

The play faced competition, when, around the same time, a film based on the life of Merrick was in the works. The producers of the play had nothing to do with the film, and the filmmakers had nothing to do with the play. It was simply strange timing. Looking at both today, both play and film are extremely different, both taking different approaches to Merrick's life and times.

The film version of Merrick's life was based on Frederick Treves's memoris, The Elephant Man and Other Reminiscences and Ashley Montagu's The Elephant Man: A Study in Human Dignity. It was produced by none other than Mel Brooks. The Mel Brooks of Blazing Saddles and Young Frankenstein fame. Because Brooks wanted the public (obviously) sold on the film as a drama, he eleminated his name from the credits.

Brooks hired a radical new filmmaker, David Lynch, to helm the film. Brooks had seen Lynch's first feature, the stark, nightmarish Eraserhead (1978), and thought the young filmmaker had the chops and sensibility to bring Merrick's story to the screen. Lynch accepted, and co-wrote the screenplay with Christopher De Vore and Eric Bergren.

Cast as John (again, not Joseph) Merrick was actor John Hurt, who had recently been seen as the psychotic Caligula in the miniseries I, Claudius (1977) and as the unfortunate astronaut who has an alien burst out of his stomach in Alien (1979). The brilliant make-up was devised by Christopher Tucker, who made casts of the actual Merrick's preserved body at the Royal London Hospital. The final result is staggering, especially when one compares the original photographs of Merrick with Tucker's work. The Motion Picture Academy was so impressed, they created a new category, Best Make-Up.

Hurt is absolutely outstanding in the role. His features hidden, his speech severely slurred, his body grotesquely twisted, he delivers a true acting tour-de-force. Merrick starts out as a sideshow attraction, and ultimately attends the theatre, in white tie and tails. It's a gut-wrenching and emotionally exhausting performance. Every time I see this film, by the end I'm a blubbering mess.:cry: Within a few minutes of meeting Merrick (who is first introduced in the shadows), the viewer tends to forget his deformities, and instead cringe at the cruelties and inhumanities heaped upon him by his (fictional) sadistic, alcoholic "manager" (Freddie Jones) who treats his "property" like an animal.

Anthony Hopkins plays the sympathetic Treves, who rescues Merrick from the sideshow and gives him permanent residence in his hospital. Hopkins delivers an exceptional, humane performance, and his scenes with Merrick are warm and comforting, compared to the beatings and embarrassment John is put through earlier in the film. But is Treves another exploiter of Merrick? True, he has saved him from his former nasty life, but once Treves helps Merrick speak, and dress him in the finest clothes, inviting society into his home and hospital to visit Merrick, is he an exploiter as well, albeit a much more sympathetic, upper-class one?

The cast is made up of such veterans as John Gielgud as Carr Gomm, the Governor of the hospital, who at first believes Merrick to be an "imbecile," until he hears him reciting the 23rd Psalm. Wendy Hiller (who played Eliza Doolittle in the 1938 film of Pygmalian) plays the crusty matron of the hospital. Anne Bancroft (Brooks's wife) portrays actress Mrs. Kendall, and Hannah Gordon is Mrs. Treves, in one of the film's most powerful scenes.

After Merrick has made friends with London society, Treves has him visit his home. He leaves his wife and Merrick alone. At first Mrs. Treves is nervous by her guest, but Merrick soon puts her at ease by remarking what a lovely family she has, and by showing her a picture of his beloved mother. Merrick explains his mother abandoned him after she gave birth, but says he hopes that she would love him now, because he has made so many wonderful friends. Mrs. Treves begins to weep because of the way she initially perceived Merrick, and because of his touching words, but Merrick is able to gently calm her.

In addition to co-writing the screenplay, director Lynch also did the musical direction and sound design. The film was nominated for several Academy Awards, including a well-deserved one for John Hurt, but Hurt lost out to Robert De Niro in Raging Bull. The film was shot in glorious black and white by famed cinematographer Freddie Francis.

The reason why Merrick is wrongly called John instead of Joseph comes from Frederick Treves himself. Treves's memoirs were published in 1923, many years after the fact. Treves, who worked so closely with Merrick, misidentified him as "John," in his pages, and John it remained, as several books and articles written about Merrick often used Treves's book as a starting-off point of reference. Shortly after Merrick died, Carr Gomm wrote an official document, correctly identifying Merrick as "Joseph."

The Elephant Man is a powerful film. It is highly recommended, and should be watched with a box of tissues close at hand.
I love this film. I recommend it as well. I saw this movie long, long ago with my much older sister at a young age and it has stuck with me to this day. not many movies have such an affect on me as this one has. Like you I cried. my little heart felt as tho it would burst. I was used to my daily cartoons and happy go lucky playtime. it was the first movie that actually made me feel. My parents had not been too happy with my sister for taking me to the film. I am glad she did. I've been looking for this film for quite some time. I'll find it one day.

Erasurehead was an amazingly surreal film. Again, my sisters influence. The cottage-cheese-cheeked-dancing-lady & the worms & the radiator, freaked me out. Again, still looking for this one. My sister also spawned my interest in John Waters films.
 

Ilikemuppets

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 8, 2005
Messages
15,138
Reaction score
25
Um... I'm talking about the 1994 movie with Bug Hall as Alfalfa, and cameo appearances by stars like Mel Brooks, Daryl Hannah, Whoopi Goldburg, Donald Trump, et cetera.
That's the last one made but that's the one I'm talking about.
 

Winslow Leach

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 22, 2007
Messages
3,620
Reaction score
13
I really enjoy Frank Oz's Little Shop of Horrors, as well as the Roger Corman original.

I thought there was going to be a re-release, either theatrically or on DVD last year, as it was the film's 20th anniversary. Producer David Geffen had mentioned it as a possibility, but nothing came of it.

I don't like the happy ending that Oz was forced to shoot and slap onto the film, per Geffen's request. As Little Shop fans know, the play ends with the plant devouring Audrey and Seymour, then taking over the world.

Oz shot this ending, and spent a considerable amount of moolah on the finale, which almost plays like a Godzilla/King Kong style rampage, as the plants destroy cities around the world. Test audiences loathed this ending, and wanted Seymour and Audrey to live, so Oz scrapped his costly, effects-heavy ending, re-assembled Rick Moranis, Ellen Greene and two of the three "Doo-Wop" girls (Oz says in his DVD commentary one of the girls couldn't make it, so he used a double, shooting her from the waist down) long after the film was completed, and shot the alternate ending we have today.

In 1998, Warner Home Video put out a Little Shop SE that included the infamous, original finale. It was a rough work print, in black and white, and missing some (but not all) sound effects, dialogue and music. Within a month, producer Geffen requested all of these discs pulled, as he apparently didn't authorize the extra footage. The discs were recalled, but the ones that did sell have become hot collector's items, and turn up on ebay at pretty high prices. I didn't have a DVD player at the time, but I'm sure I would have grabbed a copy. A couple years later, it was re-released on DVD, sans the original ending, but with apparently all of the other extras intact (Oz mentions the original ending frequently in his commentary, and says something to the effect of "you can see for yourself the ending I originally shot as an extra on this DVD").

There are still rumors the original will see the light of day. Whenever Warner holds an online chat with fans, Little Shop is one of the most requested titles. The rep from the last chat said "we're looking into it" (as a possible DVD release).

I finally saw the lost footage on youtube not too long ago, and looking at it, it IS a shame it was scrapped. It's actually a pretty powerful, scary ending. Someone obviously posted the work print from their DVD, but everything is clear and easy to see. Plus, it includes an extra actor, not seen in the official release version. The missing footage runs about 23 minutes. Here's a quick rundown:

Seymour plans to leave skid row with Audrey. The plant is hungry. Seymour goes out to pick it up some ground round (this is in the theatrical cut).

With Seymour gone, the plant calls Audrey, who is packing, on the phone, and lures her into the shop, singing a reprise of "Suppertime" (this is in the theatrical cut).

Audrey, in the shop, attempts to water the plant, who is still singing "Suppertime." It wraps its "tentacles" around her and pulls her toward its gaping mouth (this is in the theatrical cut). Alternate dialogue NOT heard in the theatrical cut has the plant telling Audrey not to be afraid, that her dentist boyfriend and Mr. Mushnick are already inside.

Seymour enters the shop, with the meat for the plant, and sees Audrey's legs frantically kicking from the plant's mouth. Seymour manages to pry the plant's mouth open, and pull Audrey out, where they run out of the shop, leaving the plant laughing behind them (this is in the theatrical cut).

--now here are the drastic changes--

Seymour and Audrey are in an alley. Audrey, mortally wounded, collapses from the plant attack. Seymour begs her to hold on. Audrey tells Seymour she is dying, and her final wish is to be put into the plant, so that it will be even more beautiful. She sings a reprise of "Somewhere That's Green," and dies. Seymour picks Audrey up in his arms, and carries her body to the plant, which opens its mouth. Seymour places Audrey into the plant, and it swallows her.

Seymour runs out of the shop in tears, and climbs a building. He stands on the edge and is about to jump, when he is interrupted by a sleazy entrepreneur, Patrick Martin, who is played in this version by Paul Dooley. In the theatrical cut, Dooley is replaced by Jim Belushi for some reason (maybe Dooley wasn't available?) Dooley's dialogue is actually closer to the character's in the stage version. Basically he wants to market the Audrey II (the plant) to people across America, predicting it will be "bigger than hula hoops." Seymour forgets suicide, and realizes he must destroy his creation before it's too late.

Seymour returns to the flower shop, and angrily confronts the plant (the theatrical cut had some slight tweaking of dialogue, omitting mention of Audrey's death--because she survived her wounds in the re-shot version--but otherwise this is the same as the theatrical cut).

The plant sings "Mean Green Mother From Outer Space" (written specifically for the film), while it sprouts "mini Audrey II's." Seymour attempts to destroy it, but is thwarted at every turn. The plant demolishes the flower shop, then pulls down the pillars holding the shop up, the debris falling onto Seymour (this is in the theatrical cut).

--again, here are drastic changes--

The plant rummages through the debris, and picks up Seymour. It pulls Seymour closer and closer to its mouth, and chomps down on him. After a beat, the plant spits out Seymour's glasses.

Cut to a montage of people buying their own Audrey II's. We watch them grow, and overtake their owners.

Next there's a creepy sequence of giant plants roaming cities, causing havoc, with people fleeing in terror.

The "Doo-Wop" girls sing the warning "Don't Feed the Plants" as the plants go on their rampage.

The final image of the film is the grinning, laughing Audrey II. The camera pans closer and closer into its open mouth, as if the audience is being pulled in. Finally the screen turns to black, as we are "inside" the mouth of the plant. Cue end credits.

This is how the play ended (on stage, vines from the plant would fall from the ceiling, and pop out of hidden places during "Don't Feed the Plants"). This is how the screenplay ended. This is what Frank Oz wanted. But the man with the money (Geffen) ultimately said no when test audiences gave it a thumbs-down. So after "Mean Green Mother," Seymour miraculously survives the shop crashing down on him, and electricutes the plant. It explodes. Seymour and Audrey embrace, and live happily ever after. The re-shot ending not only gave us a sugar-coated finale, it also shortened the running time to about 90 minutes.

Other than the new ending (and the always funny dentist scene with Bill Murray, which was added as a homage to the Corman film, in which Jack Nicholson played the masochistic patient) Frank Oz's Little Shop is very close to the play. Hopefully we'll get a proper release of this otherwise excellent film.
 

Teheheman

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 9, 2006
Messages
3,430
Reaction score
203
What they SHOULD do is remake Little Shop with the technology they have now WITH the original ending. I mean, now not that much is sugar coated as far as endings go. OR when they re-release it(if ever) they put the extra ending on and make it like it was supposed to be. With the sound and stuff like that. I think that would be cool.

Daniel
 

Winslow Leach

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 22, 2007
Messages
3,620
Reaction score
13
What they SHOULD do is remake Little Shop with the technology they have now WITH the original ending. I mean, now not that much is sugar coated as far as endings go. OR when they re-release it(if ever) they put the extra ending on and make it like it was supposed to be. With the sound and stuff like that. I think that would be cool.

Daniel
Yeah, well, the plan is if Little Shop IS ever re-released, Frank Oz or whomever does the restoration will go back to the original workprint. As I said, it's all there. Even the climactic "destruction" sequences have most of the F/X completed. That's why when I first heard about the reshoots I was puzzled. Okay, the test audiences wanted a new ending. But a great deal of $ was already spent on the spectacular finish.

But yeah, most of it is already there. There certainly doesn't have to be any re-shoots with the cast. This isn't like the recent re-release of The Good, the Bad and the Ugly where about 20 minutes of silent footage was found, and Clint Eastwood, Eli Wallach and other actors were brought in 40 years later to loop their old characters (and subsequently spliced back into the film). The 23 minutes of Little Shop has its soundtrack, including the music and vocals for the last two songs. It has most of its special effects. Remember, it WAS shown to the public, so most of it is complete.

The Paul Dooley cameo is much funnier than Jim Belushi's. They're both playing the same character, but Dooley's lines are funnier, and he's pushier than Belushi. The end credits give Dooley a "special thanks."
 

anytimepally

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 21, 2005
Messages
4,931
Reaction score
91
This isn't like the recent re-release of The Good, the Bad and the Ugly where about 20 minutes of silent footage was found, and Clint Eastwood, Eli Wallach and other actors were brought in 40 years later to loop their old characters (and subsequently spliced back into the film).
they had to do this with some scenes from Lawrence of Arabia as well, and due to the fact that Jack Hawkins had died, his lines were dubbed by Charles Gray, who also did Hawkins' dialogue for his last few films after he developed throat cancer

The Paul Dooley cameo is much funnier than Jim Belushi's. They're both playing the same character, but Dooley's lines are funnier, and he's pushier than Belushi. The end credits give Dooley a "special thanks."
I'm a Paul Dooley fan! .. for that alone, they should restore these scenes! :smile:
 

Winslow Leach

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 22, 2007
Messages
3,620
Reaction score
13
they had to do this with some scenes from Lawrence of Arabia as well, and due to the fact that Jack Hawkins had died, his lines were dubbed by Charles Gray, who also did Hawkins' dialogue for his last few films after he developed throat cancer
Interesting. I know Lawrence was restored around 1989 or so, but had no idea Charles Gray dubbed Jack Hawkins.

I know Anthony Hopkins dubbed some scenes for the late Laurence Olivier when Spartacus was restored.

In the case of The Good, the Bad and the Ugly, we were fortunate to get Clint Eastwood and Eli Wallach back to dub Blondie and Tuco respectively, 40 years after they played the characters. Again, the footage existed, but not the dialogue tracks. For the Italian westerns, the actors, who came from America, Italy, Germany and Spain, spoke their own native languages on set. Their dialogue was recorded in post-production, different languages for different countries. The "new" scenes in GBU stand out mostly from an audio standpoint, because Eastwood and Wallach are now obviously older, and sound effects, such as gunshots have been "sweetened" and sound more sharper than they did in the original prints. The late Lee Van Cleef, who played the "Bad" is dubbed by another actor in the new scenes, as are smaller bit roles.

In Trail of the Pink Panther (1982), released two years after Peter Sellers's death (the Clouseau footage was cobbled together from outtakes of earlier Panther films, and a double stood in for Clouseau in certain scenes), Rich Little dubbed David Niven's voice. Niven had starred in the original Pink Panther, but by 1982, was suffering from throat cancer, and couldn't speak.
 

lael

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 16, 2007
Messages
827
Reaction score
3
I would love to see the original footage.
As for the updating Little Shop with new technology. . . I have my reservations about it.
A little CG here and there is kinda the norm these days but I like the nonCG Audrey II.
The nonCG Audrey II is in keeping with the tone and feel of the movie.
IMO, adding CG wouldn't take away from the movie, but at the same time not really add to it either. Just my two bits.
 

Winslow Leach

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 22, 2007
Messages
3,620
Reaction score
13
I would love to see the original footage.

As for the updating Little Shop with new technology. . . I have my reservations about it.
A little CG here and there is kinda the norm these days but I like the nonCG Audrey II.
The nonCG Audrey II is in keeping with the tone and feel of the movie.

IMO, adding CG wouldn't take away from the movie, but at the same time not really add to it either. Just my two bits.
Yeah, I wouldn't like to see it updated with new CGI. That's part of the charm of Audrey II. It was a puppet. The footage is well-preserved, so a trip to the editing bay should really be all it takes to incorporate it back into the film proper.
 
Top