The Curse of the Trilogy: Why Hollywood Loves the Crap Story

Spiderman 3.

It delivered in its usual schizophrenic, riveting way, and despite clocking in at almost two and a half hours, I was surprised that the heavy amount of subplots and interweaving of characters did not bore, but actually kept me involved. However, if Raimi, Maguire, Dundst and the rest of the cast ever do decide to make a fourth installment, I fear the opening of 4 might need to include a Left Behind-like list of characters in order to keep things straight. But, hey, that's a comic book movie for you, which is yet another reason why Left Behind was absolute crap fiction. If only Jerry B. Jenkins had been more like that Isaac guy on Heroes...

So, thankfully, 3 was not the source of disappointment last night at the cinema. However, I was unable to escape the Edwards without something annoying me (blame it on my cynicism, but I have to chalk this one up to bad filmmaking/storytelling). Thankfully, Spiderman 3 did not commit what I believe is one of the chief sins in movie-making these days. My annoyance came instead from the much anticipated full-length trailer to Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End. And, you know, as soon as I recognized it, I felt my internal organs gearing up for a short bout of gagging.

The Lord of the Rings is indeed my second favorite movie of all-time (see my profile for the first), and as much of a cinematic blessing I feel Peter Jackson's trilogy was, there is a dark side that swirls around that trilogy, affecting all films during and after its five year production and release. It seems every movie that even remotely displays similar characteristics to an "epic" story now aims at telling that story in trilogy form. Some do it well (Back to the Future, the original Star Wars), others have such an episodic difference between the stories they can hardly be called a true trilogy (The Karate Kid, Spiderman, Mission Impossible, Rambo), and then there are those trilogies that, let's face it, just plain suck (Scream, Star Wars Episodes 1-3, The Matrix). Unfortunately, Pirates seems to be setting sail on a bearing for the latter. In fact, I fear it will become the seafaring equivalent of The Matrix, becoming more and more confusing, existential, and cluttered by CGI. The trailer itself seems to hint that I'm right.

Why must every trilogy become some epic, cinematic barbaric yawp? Why must everyone from children and lions, humans dwelling deep within the earth, mutants, and now pirates make some sort of "last stand" against their enemies? Does anyone remember what made the first Pirates movie good? It was the tightness of the story, the fact that it had a satisfying resolution (devoid of a cliffhanger), and the fact that, when it came out and drew in audiences, no one was immediately thinking the T-word. That thought was only planted in our heads once the film company realized how much money the movie made and realized that movie-goers are suckers for a trilogy. And so, the writers sat down and hammered out a story that they swear they had planned all along. Guess what? That is rarely true in Hollywood. Almost every film is made on a probationary basis - by that, I mean that production companies don't always plan for sequels to original stories unless they have very little doubt the film will succeed. This is why The Matrix and Pirates of the Caribbean did not have a "Part One" tacked onto their name when first released. This is also why the second and third Matrix installments (and, yes, the subsequent Pirates films) had stories that confused and frustrated much more than they entertained.

I am almost positive that Pirates, had they, in the second film, revisited the same formula that worked on the first film, made just as much money as the cliffhanging Dead Man's Chest made - and it wouldn't have pissed so many ticket-buyers off that the story sucked. Things would have been wrapped up, a good romp would have been had by both filmmaker and filmwatcher alike, and if someone had gone out and interviewed people leaving the theaters two summers ago, movie-goers would have responded, "Yeah! I'd love to see another one!"

I guess the root of my laments and questions is this: "Why must we sacrifice the quality of story for the risky rush of a cliffhanger?" In the end, it rarely holds up to original, well-encapsulated stories. I mean, look at Lost, the mother-of-all-cliffhanger television shows. They're losing their audience, not gaining it. Even 24 knows better than to make their season all about the cliffhanger. If anything, most of the plot of the season is resolved by the final episode, and the cliffhanger is only a parlay into the next season. Here's hoping Heroes follows Jack Bauer's lead rather than those lame island-dwellers...

And here's hoping we all, who are so ensorcelled by the power of a good story, will not so easily shirk our principled love of a well-rounded tale for the titillating bedazzlement of a yarn that is ultimately capsizing.

The Envelope Report 2007: Al Gore Invades the Oscars

There were two themes touted supremely at last Sunday's 79th annual Academy Awards. The first was a much more serious celebration of the nominees as opposed to only the winners (Nice!). The second was Al Gore.

Now, of course, the environment was actually the second "theme," but Al Gore kept popping up so much (audience shots, on stage, presenting, in gushing thank-yous from award winners, etc.) that I seriously began to think he might be able, by the end of the night, to claim he also invented the Oscars, and people might actually believe him this time. Seriously, I'm not trying to be partisan here, nor am I trying to rip on Gore and his concern for the environment. Truthfully, I'm impressed by some of the things he has done, and even though I have yet to watch the now award-winning An Inconvenient Truth, (it just doesn't seem to be that feel good movie you want to rent on a Friday night after a long week), I do indeed plan on viewing it soon.

However, is it just me, or is anyone else sick of watching Hollywood fawn all over their favorite politicians, as well as pretend to be the leaders in cultural and political change, as if they know so much more about how everything works - at the highest levels - than the normal American? As much as I do believe global warming is a serious issue that should be dealt with more deeply and actively, I find it hard to listen to Hollywood affirm Gore's words, which were spoken from the stage after he co-accepted the Best Documentary award when the actual director became too choked up with worshipful affirmations for the former Vice President that he had to let Gore take over the thank-yous. He called global warming a "moral issue" rather than a "political issue." True. And I'm glad Hollywood, with their first-ever "green" broadcast of the Academy Awards, could make sure we Earth-dwellers would come out of our pollutive stupor to wise up and stop destroying the planet. It is interesting, though, that the ones preaching to us about this are Hollywood elite, who cause uber amounts of waste in trash, fumes, electricity, etc. on every movie set they work on. As Jon Stewart added on Monday's The Daily Show, Los Angeles is a town filled with so much smog and waste-mindedness that it staggers the mind when one finds him or herself taking their moral lessons about the environment from one of its representatives.

Rant over ... for now. All in all, it was an interesting, if not slightly boring, Academy Awards show. Ellen DeGeneres did well when they gave her time to talk, and most of the people that won deserved the win, though Melissa Etheridge taking home a Best Original Song award was a bit of a surprise for a song that sounds more like she is singing from the perspective of someone who has been "woken up" for years and is scolding the rest of us for our complacency.

Finally, the biggest shock of the night, in my opinion, was not the announcement of winners, but the complete snubbing of the film, Wonder Boys, from the film montage compiled to illustrate the life and struggles of writers. An Oscar nominee itself, it was totally left out of the montage despite the fact that several key scenes and/or lines would have fit perfectly. Granted, I'm a huge fan of the film, but come on, some films got six or seven clips in, and Curtis Hanson's amazing flick is shut-out?! Someone must pay...

Well, until next year, this concludes my reflection on the Academy Awards. Nothing left to do now but start searching for the stand-out films of 2007. Best early bets look to be on Reno 911: The Movie.
________________

Below are my picks of the winners - the ones I got right, and the ones I got wrong:

Correct - Best Supporting Actress, Best Original Screenplay, Best Adapted Screenplay, Best Sound Mixing, Best Sound Editing, Best Short Film - Live Action, Best Makeup, Best Film Editing, Best Documentary Feature, Best Cinematography, Best Animated Feature, Best Actress, Best Actor, Best Director

Missed - Best Visual Effects, Best Original Song (surprise), Best Supporting Actor (surprise), Best Short Film - Animated, Best Original Score (should have known, but he ripped off music from Michael Mann's "The Insider"), Best Foreign Language, Best Documentary Short, Best Costume Design, Best Art Direction, and, of course, Best Picture

Click on this link to watch the hilarious musical sketch by Will Ferrell, Jack Black, and John C. Reilly.