The Broadway Melody of 1929

"100% All Talking! 100% All Singing! 100% All Dancing!"

-Publicity Slogan for The Broadway Melody of 1929

Much as I'd like to pick a quote from the movie itself, I thought this slogan best fit this 2nd winner for "Best Picture."  While I was thrilled to at last have some sound, the movie serves better as a history piece than anything else.  It's clear that movie studios were so thrilled to have sound, it didn't really matter too much if people could sing, or act, or if the movie had any real plot at all.  Not a complete waste, though.  I did enjoy myself.  But not something I would watch again any time soon.

The Plot:
The movie opens on a cacophony of sound.  Eddie, played by Charles King, works in a music publishing studio, where several groups are rehearsing and creating their own new songs at the same time. (See movie goers!  Sound!)  Eddie has written a sure hit, The Broadway Melody, and is thrilled to be performing it in producer Frances Zanfield's new show (obvious take on producer Florenz Ziegfeld).  He convinces his fiance and her sister to join him in New York City and be part of his show, giving up their small town tours.  Hank, his fiance played by Bessie Love, is excited to advance their career, but Queenie, her sister played by Anita Paige, is unsure about life in the big city.  But Queenie always listens to her older sister, and Hank convinces her they will be fine.

The sisters audition, but hot-tempered Hank causes Zanfield to ignore her and focus on her sister.  Sweet, beautiful Queenie begs the producer to take them both, however, but to never tell Hank this.  Eddie overhears, and realizes he is falling in love with Queenie, while he regards short, spunky Hank as more of a friend.  Queenie ends up reluctantly getting more of the show's spotlight, while Hank gets pushed out a few numbers.  At the same time, Queenie realizes that Eddie loves her, and that she might have feelings for him.  Terrified at hurting Hank, she quarrels with them both and goes out with Jock Warriner, a "Stage-Door-Johnnie" that they both disapprove of.

The weeks pass and Queenie consistently quarrels with both Hank and Eddie over Jock Warriner, who is showering the lovely Queenie with presents.  Hank is distraught, having never fought with her sister before.  Eddie is angry, as he cannot fight Jock for Queenie the way he wants to.  On Queenie's birthday, Eddie sings a song he wrote for her, You Were Meant for Me, and confesses, again his feelings.  They almost kiss when Hank walks in.  Queenie angrily pushes him away, claiming that no one will stop her from seeing Jock.  Queenie goes to a lavish birthday party thrown for her by Jock instead of staying home at the party thrown for her by her friends and family.  Hank, distraught and confused, decides that maybe she will just marry Eddie and leave show business for good.  She cries, telling Eddie he is the one good thing left in her life just as he is about to confess everything.

It is one of the last shows.  Tensions are running high, and Queenie is threatening to take Jock up on his offer to live alone in an apartment he has bought for her.  She doesn't really want to date him, and knows he will never marry her, but she cannot be around Eddie without hurting her sister.  Hank, upon hearing that Queenie is planning on moving, begs her not to go.  Eddie comes into their dressing room and grabs Queenie telling her not to go.  She leaves anyway, but Hank has seen enough to know that Eddie is really in love with Queenie.  Hank pretends that she was only using Hank to get the job, and calls him a coward for not going after her.  Hank collapses crying after he leaves.  Eddie goes to the apartment and pulls Queenie away from a lechorous Jock, before getting punched and thrown out of the apartment.  Jock sees that Queenie loves Eddie and lets her go to him as the two reconcile and marry. Hank finds another girl to join her and puts on a brave face as she leaves her newly married sister to go back to small town tours.

The History:

In 1929, the Academy attempted to clean up the awards, dropping the "Best Artistic Picture" award, the "Best Engineering" award and the short-lived "Best Title Writing" award.  They also decided not to announce the winners ahead of time.  This time the nominees wouldn’t get scrolls; you either won or went home empty handed.  1929 was a frenetic year in Hollywood.  With the advent of money making talking pictures, everyone was jumping on the bandwagon, and silent movies were a thing of the past.  Unfortunately, the technology was very new, and not everyone really knew how to work it.  The Broadway Melody is perhaps one of the best efforts of the time; newspapers raved at the ability of the director to get the sound equipment into small areas and still allow the actors such mobility.  The Broadway Melody is known as a movie without much plot that won while studios were still confused by new technology.  Most of the films of that year were mediocre, with technology being far more important than other cinematic devices.  While the film has faded into obscurity, it is probably best recognized as the film that was the inspiration for Gene Kelly’s smash hit, Singing in the Rain.

The Verdict?
While the movie might have stunned people at the time, the effect is more comical on audiences today.  There are moments where the actors clearly move away from the sound boom, causing their words to get much quieter.  There are still title cards, almost as though the director can’t help himself, to show changes in time or scene.  It also appears as though the director, Harry Beaumont, is saying, “Look!  Sound!  See, we can hear people sing and talk!”  Every opportunity for the audience to hear sound, and lots of it, is taken.  For example, the opening sequence is filled with different musical acts all playing at once.  What we’re not supposed to notice, however, is that not everyone can sing.  Certainly both of the lead actresses do not have the best voices, and their few warbles are like nails on chalkboard.

This movie is completely harmless, a mildly amusing story of showbiz and love triangles.  What makes it more interesting is the transition it shows between silent films and talking pictures.  The movie is an amalgam of both.  It has the drama of a silent film with the sound of later pictures.  The actors seem confused, the plot is slightly off-kilter, and everyone still seems blown away by the fact that they are speaking to be heard.  It’s clear why no one made it big after this picture.  But it is 1929, the beginning of The Great Depression, and the ushering in of a decade that would change the world in more ways than one.  Mary Pickford, queen of silent film, won an Academy Award for best actress that year for her first (and pretty much last) talking film.  The film, The Coquette, wasn’t very good, and afterwards people grumbled that her win was completely political.  But it marked her way out of films, and the end of an important era.  Films were changing, the world was changing, and Mary Pickford would never be nominated for anything, ever again…

The 82nd Annual Academy Awards!

The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences really tried to shake things up this year.  I had heard this before, and it didn’t come as surprise.  What did surprise me was my reaction to it.  I didn’t mind the changes.  In fact, this was my favorite Academy Awards to date!  Read on for my break down of the night.

Recent History:
The Academy has not done so well in recent years.  According to the Los Angeles Times, the Awards show reached an all-time low in 2008 with only 32 million people watching.  This was the year that No Country for Old Men won, which I think contributed to the sense of apathy.  While it may have been a good movie (never seen it) it is certainly not a crowd pleaser.  The Academy was getting a little artsy on itself, and the public was losing interest.  So this year the Academy switched things around, picked hosts with a track record of pleasing a wide spectrum of viewers, asked winners to cut short their thanks (the lowest rated part of the show) and expanded category nominees to 10 choices instead of only 5. 

The result?  A 14% increase in viewers from last year, with 41.3 million people watching.  This is the highest number of viewers in 5 years.  I think there will be some people, including myself at first, who will see this as selling out.  Especially choosing movies that are more appealing to wider audiences rather than those that were strictly critical successes and staging large scale musical opening numbers.  But if you read my earlier post about the creation of the Awards and the Academy itself, you’ll see that the reason it was created was “to improve the image of Hollywood to the public.”  Well that, and to beat down the unions.  The original Awards were an attempt at PR for Hollywood, as well as recognition for all those in the industry who had made any great achievements throughout the past year.  And that’s exactly what this ceremony was.  A return to what the true purpose of the Academy Awards is.  It was never meant as a highbrow ceremony aimed at those who had achieved the most "intellectual” movie of that year.  Not that we should sacrifice quality, but Louis B. Mayer, father of the Academy, purposefully fought against movie winners that weren’t crowd pleasers.    The Academy even dropped the award for best “Artistic Production.”  They were far more concerned with the best production itself. 

Bottom Line:  If you want artistic, go to Sundance.  I don't mind the musical numbers.

My Favorite Changes:
I have to say that I love the fact that the speeches this year were kept short and sweet.  The Academy asked the nominees this year to keep their speeches short and to save us the long lists of people that we neither know nor care about.  Thank your mom, fine.  Thank your associate producer’s best friend’s boyfriend?  Not interested.  Nominees were told that they would have time immediately after their award was given to go backstage and talk into the brand new “Thank You Cam,” which would then be broadcast on http://oscar.go.com.  The nominees, surprisingly, for the most part agreed.  They kept their speeches short and heartfelt, choosing to focus more on the emotions involved in winning an award than specifics.  (see Sandra Bullock below)

Another thing I appreciated?  For the best actor and actress categories, instead of showing clips of their nominated films, the Academy decided to choose one person for each actor/actress and have them give a short speech on that particular nominee.  For example, co-star and friend Stanley Tucci spoke for Meryl Streep, saying that she had better enjoy this now, because he was going to start a campaign for the Academy to put a cap on the number of nominations allowed per actress.  Cute.

Funniest Moment:
Who doesn’t love Alec Baldwin and Steve Martin?  As a comedy team they did a fantastic job, from the opening act to the small quips along the way.  (What was with the George Clooney stare though?)  I loved their jibes at Meryl Streep and other Hollywood bigwigs.  My favorite moment with them had to be their appearance in a two person snuggie. 

Amazing.

have to give it up as well to Neil Patrick Harris.  Boy, does that guy know how to make a comeback.  Another opening musical number for an awards ceremony, but instead of seeming overdone, it came off as fresh, funny, and self-deprecating.  And let’s not forget Tina Fey and Robert Downey Jr.’s presentation or even Cameron Diaz and Steve Carrell.  Both deserve a nod (and not just because I’m secretly in love with RDJ).

But hands down, the absolute funniest moment of the night goes to Ben Stiller.  There are no words.  So I will show this clip.  My friends and I were literally rolling on the couch with laughter.

Incredible.   Perfect timing.  Good job Ben.

Most Awkward Moment:
Does anyone know who that woman is that jumped onto the Thank You speech for “Best Documentary?”  We all thought we had another Kanye moment on our hands.  Why is it that the award for "Best Documentary" almost always turns the podium in a radical, uncomfortable soap box?  I most enjoy the look of chagrin on the director's face.  See for yourself:

Still have no idea.  Weird.  Get off the stage, crazy lady in the purple satin mumu.

Most Heartwarming:
I am SO happy Sandra Bullock won for "Best Actress".  I really thought she deserved it.  I got a little nervous when Oprah came out and spoke for newcomer Gabourey Sidibe, because obviously Oprah has the golden touch.  But to my happy surprise, the award went to the person I thought deserved it. 

Beautifully done.  Funny, sweet, and heartwarming, this speech is also pure Sandra Bullock.  Fantastic dress too, by the way.  Quite possibly my favorite.  While I don’t know if this role was the most serious or the most taxing, Sandra Bullock became her character in The Blind Side.  I just hope she tackles more roles like this in the future.

Worst Academy Award Moment:
What was up with the dance troupe?  I’m sure that they’re a very good dance troupe.  But almost every number seemed the same.  I get Fantastic Mr. Fox…but how do you turn The Hurt Locker into a dance?  It was weird.  And lest we forget…why?  This is “Best Original Score,” not America’s Best Dance Troupe.  It was long, repetitive, and completely unnecessary.  I’m not even going to show a clip.  That’s how pointless it was.  I appreciate all the changes, but bring back the best song performances.  I actually enjoyed those.  And leave the dancers at home.

Saddest Moment:
Obviously this is always when they do the tribute.  For John Hughes in particular, I was especially sad.  Ferris Buehler’s Day Off was part of my childhood.  For a lot of people of my generation who aren’t particularly film buffs, seeing that montage was a great way for them to realize just how many great movies he was a part of.  I wouldn’t have minded knowing exactly who every person giving the tribute was, although I will mention that Macaulay Culkin’s presence riveted every girl I was in the room with.

Notable absences include:  Farrah Fawcett, Bea Arthur, Gene Barry, and former Oscar nominee Richard Todd.  The excuse given for the first three was that they were mainly television actors, and the salute to Farah Fawcett at the Emmy’s was more appropriate.  Really?  So that’s why Michael Jackson was honored?  Because of his incredible and Oscar-worthy performance in The Wiz?

Best and Worst Dressed:
Well I’m not People magazine, but I did have my favs.  Rachel McAdams, Sandra Bullock, Cameron Diaz and Penelope Cruz rank as some of my top dresses.  And though I wasn’t a fan of Meryl Streep’s dress, it did grow on me.  It seemed very her.  And designed by Project Runway alum Chris March!  Let’s be honest, Meryl could wear a potato sack and still be fabulous.  I think everyone was going in a very 1940s direction, apropos of the whole “old Hollywood” idea.  I think I like the Kathryn Hepburn/Lana Turner look.

Less impressed?  Jennifer Lopez-stop trying to have a comeback.  You look like you’re pooping pink organza.  I’m also less and less in favor of Miley Cyrus.  She looked like she was wearing a gold 1980s Madonna wannabe top.  Also, you can’t be a Disney star and show that much cleavage (plus tan lines).  Zoe Saldana would have looked less like a pom-pom if the dress hadn’t flared as much, and Sarah Jessica Parker looked cute from the front, but bizarre from the back.  What’s with those silver flowers?

The guys, as usual, don’t really count.  Sorry!

Finally…
A good time was had by all, even though the ceremony did begin to drag towards to end.  But with good stars, great writing, and a bathroom break during the dance troupe, my friends and I really enjoyed watching it.  And eating the wings.  JL’s feta puffed pastries were pretty great too.  Sorry WW, but I think we’ll have to try again with your cake balls.  I liked the wine though!

I’ve also decided that next year I’m putting money on the winners.  After all this researching, I’ve become eerily good with my predictions.  But I would have lost everything on Best Picture and Director.   I thought James Cameron would win “Best Director” for Avatar, and Precious for “Best Picture.”  Much to my surprise when The Hurt Locker won both!  It think it’s great for feminism and everything, but whether the movie deserves it remains to be seen.

Thanks it for now!  Comment please and get ready for The Broadway Melody..and sound…

Home Wings vs. Store Bought--The battle begins...

As anyone who knew me in college will know, I have an incredible fondness for wings.  Strangely enough, however, I hadn’t even considered it for a recipe until a good friend (thanks SFR*) recommended it.  I know, I’m slow on the uptake.  But I’d never considered wings because they seemed to me to be one of those things you just don’t make on your own from scratch.  Like pizza, or funnel cake.  But it turns out they are surprisingly easy to make, and just as delicious.  To make sure I didn’t end up hungry (and disappointing my hungry friends), I decided to make two different types of wings, and then order two types of wings from THE BEST WINGS PLACE EVER.  Yes, for those of you who went to college in Boston, you may have heard of Wing It, my absolute favorite place for drunk food.  Wing It has wings of any type or flavor, and amazing fries.  I’ve definitely spent the end of many an ill-advised night there.  Could my wings compete?  I’ll let my friends be the judge.

Wings Recipe # 1: Honey Mustard Wings

You’ll need:
5 chicken wings, rinsed and patted dry
1/2 cup mild honey
1/3 cup Dijon mustard
1/2 tsp kosher salt
1 ½ tsp butter, melted

1. Preheat oven to 325 degrees F.
2. You can buy chicken wings already cut and ready from any major grocery store.  I got Perdue chicken, but it’s entirely up to you what chicken to buy.  Place the rinsed and now dry wings in a shallow baking dish.
3. Mix honey, mustard, salt and butter together and pour over wings.
4. Bake for 1 hour, turning them half-way through.  They’re done when they appear browned, but just make sure they don’t burn.  You can save the extra sauce and pour over the wings.

Wings Recipe # 2: Garlic Pepper Wings

You’ll need:
5 chicken wings rinsed and patted dry
1 egg
2 tbsp milk
1 cup all purpose flour
1/4 cup canola oil
3 tbsp olive oil
1 tbsp white wine vinegar
4 cloves garlic, minced
2 tsp fresh cracked black pepper
2 tsp kosher salt
1/2 tsp garlic powder
1 tbsp lemon juice

1. Preheat oven to 425 degrees. Line a baking sheet with aluminum foil. Set aside.
2. In a small bowl whisk together egg and milk. In a larger bowl combine flour and 1 tsp salt.
3. Dip wings in egg mixture then transfer to the flour to coat. Transfer to the baking tray and allow to set for 15 minutes.
4. Drizzle the wings with canola oil. Bake in preheated oven for 20 minutes. Turn and cook for another 15 – 20 minutes or until browned and cooked through.
5. Meanwhile, while your wings are cooking, in a large bowl whisk together olive oil, white wine vinegar, minced garlic, pepper, remaining salt, lemon and garlic powder. Let sit at room temperature for about 25 – 30 minutes to let the flavors mingle.
6. Once wings are cooked, use tongs to transfer hot wings to bowl with garlic pepper mixture. Toss to coat.

Who Won?
 

To be honest, they were all pretty good.  From Wing It, I ordered the old standby, Buffalo wings, and my favorite, Boneless Honey BBQ wings.  I do love my boneless wings, but because I baked rather than fried the other wings, I believe I like them better than the buffalo ones.  I served them all with Bleu cheese dressing and celery.  The Honey Mustard wings were simple, and so easy to make.  They also reminded me of how I have normally had wings in the past, with a different twist.  The Garlic Pepper wings were completely different, having been breaded in flour.  They scared off JC, who thought the garlic chucks looked a little weird.  WW was a little more open minded, and she actually thought those were her favorite.  I like the way they were crunchy and had some texture.

In the end, I learned that making wings is as easy as making a chicken breast.  And if I bake them I’m probably saving myself unknown calories (or at least that’s what I tell myself.)  Remember to bring the wet naps though, the Honey Mustard ones were particularly sticky!  And watch out for the bleu cheese, it tends to make a mess when you’re not paying attention…


*To protect their privacy, I’ll refer to my friends by their initials.

Wings

 "Small town 1917 - Youth and dreams of youth."

-Opening Title Card from Wings

I take it all back.  No more silent films!  I actually prefer Sunrise now, after having seen Wings.  Okay, okay, it could have been worse.  The plot did move a lot faster than Sunrise’s did.  There were enough cheap thrills to keep me engaged.  But—I will explain myself.  Picture any generic war movie.  Saving Private Ryan, Braveheart, Top Gun even Forrest Gump will do.  In particular, I would like to use Pearl Harbor.  So, picture Pearl Harbor.  Now remove all the sound and color. Replace the sound with one continuous score where an organ is the only instrument.  And then, any time there is any narration or dialogue in the script, insert a title card.  Now drag it out for 140 minutes.  I don’t think I’m intellectual enough for this.

The Plot:

We begin in small town America, where two young men are getting ready to enlist in World War I.  Jack, played by Charles “Buddy” Rogers, is eager to leave, having wanted to be a pilot his whole life.  David, played by Richard Arlen, is more somber, but believes this is right thing to do.  Both are in love with the prettiest girl in town, Sylvia, though she has eyes only for David, who is from the wealthiest family in town.  Meanwhile, Jack’s neighbor, Mary, played by Clara Bow, is desperately in love with Jack, though he doesn’t realize it.  Before they leave Sylvia, played by Jobyna Ralston, is preparing to give David a locket with her picture, but Jack gets there first, tells her he loves her, and takes the locket, thinking she meant it for him.  Afterwards, Sylvia apologizes to David and explains that she felt bad for Jack.  But while he may have the locket, David has her heart.  Mary attempts to give her picture to Jack, but is saddened by the way he simply pats her on the head and waves farewell.

Both boys head to training, and though Jack hates David at first, they become best friends after they beat each other up.  Men.  Anyway, the two best friends fly through danger and death, honored with medals and becoming famous pilots.  Meanwhile Mary has joined up as well, and is driving a truck with medical supplies to the various camps in France.  While stopped in Paris, she hears that Jack is there on leave but that all the men are being immediately recalled for one “final push.”  Worried that Jack won’t hear and be court-martialed, Mary searches the bars in Paris until she finds Jack and David, drunk on champagne with their arms around loose women.  Jack doesn’t recognize her (because his vision is blurry and all he sees are bubbles) so Mary decides to change into a sparkly flapper dress and see if that will attract him.  It does and she manages to get him to his room where he passes out.  She unbuttons his shirt and sees the locket with Sylvia’s picture, which upsets her further.  She starts to change behind a screen back into her uniform, but his commanding officers open the door and see her changing, leap to all the wrong conclusions, and cause her to be discharged.

Later, it is the final push for the Allies, and David charges Jack with bringing his things home to his mother, convinced he will not make it.  He tucks letters into his jacket bearing love from Sylvia while Jack insists he is crazy.  Jack then says that he wants to be straight with his friend and shows him the locket, claiming that he and Sylvia are in love.  As he shows the locket, he drops it, and the picture flies out.  David hastily grabs it and asks to put it back in, so that Jack won’t see the inscription to David.  Jack refuses, and David rips it up rather than hurt his friend.  Jack runs out in a rage, angry at David.  They fly, and David is shot down.  Jack is riddled by guilt and sorrow and the next day hunts Germans with a fierce determination.  Unfortunately, he ends up shooting down his best friend, who, having survived his crash, had stolen a German plane and attempted to fly back to safety.  Jack cradles his friend in his arms as David dies telling him not to blame himself.

Jack goes through David’s possesions, realizes the truth about Sylvia, and heads home to deliver his things to David’s parents.  There is a parade in Jack’s honor, but the only thing he cares about is forgiveness from David’s parents, which they grant.  He goes home, finds Mary and realizes he loved her all along.  They stare up at the stars and kiss, planning their future.


The History:
Wings won Academy Awards for “Best Picture, Production,” and for “Best Engineering Effects.”  It is one of only three films in the history of the Academy Awards to win for “Best Picture” but not even be nominated for “Best Director.”  It was a major box office success at the time, largely because of a fad for aviation perpetuated by Charles Lindbergh.  The movie was praised for its realistic aviation scenes, and actually both actors flew their own planes in the movie.  Richard Arlen was a real pilot in World War I, but when he flew for the movie he and Buddy Rogers had to fly, act and operate the camera all at the same time.  Richard Arlen met and ended up marrying his onscreen love interest, Jobyna Ralston, in 1927.  Despite the number of air crafts in the air, there were only two incidents, one involving the injury of a stuntman and the other a fatal injury for a United States Army Air Corps consultant.  Wings has faded very far into the past, and is actually one of two “Best Picture” films that is still not on DVD.  Though it is now considered the sole winner of the “Best Picture” award of 1927 by most critics and historians, it is mainly remembered for launching the career of film star, Clara Bow.  The movie is also notable for its first onscreen male-on-male kiss (albeit in friendship) and for its nudity (you can see Clara Bow’s breasts for an instant while she’s changing.)

The Verdict?
Like Sunrise, I had to watch this film in 10 minute clips on YouTube.com.  Yes, someone actually found a way to upload Wings onto YouTube.  I would like to meet this person.  So that in itself is a little irritating.  On the positive side, the plot did move a lot faster than Sunrise.  I was slightly more interested in the plot line, and the love triangle was fun.  So was Clara Bow, and it was interesting to see one of the biggest sex symbols of the 1920s play the girl next door.  I can also appreciate, if you were in the audience in 1927, how exciting it would be to see actual planes flying.  It’s still exciting to realize that there are no green screens or computer effects, and the shots of the actors flying planes are real.

HOWEVER

This movie was over two hours long.  That’s over two hours of an organ playing.  Two hours of title cards instead of dialogue.  And this is also coming from the girl who fast forwarded through the battle scenes in Braveheart.  I’m not extremely interested in battle scenes.  In Sunrise, I believe that the silent film aspect actually added to the film itself.  I couldn’t imagine a talking version, or if I could, there just wouldn’t be that much dialogue.  But this movie would be so much easier to watch if there was actual sound.  I mean, picture a war movie without even sound effects!  But at least I have become very good at reading lips.  And the guys were cute.  So I guess that’s something.  But that’s it!  No more silent films.  My next movies with have sound.  And no organs.  Can’t stand the organs.

The bright side would be the food I got to make for this movie…

PS:  And this is a side note:  Can anyone else who's seen this movie comment on whether you thought the bro-love was a little intense?   I mean I understand David is dying, but the mouth on mouth was a little much.  And look at that picture up there.  Don't just think the two guys have the best chemistry over all?  Just saying.

What else...Popcorn!

What’s the best movie snack ever?  Day old rotating pretzels? Nope.  Gross nachos with artificial cheese?  Absolutely not!  I think you know where this is heading…Popcorn!

Popcorn actually became popular around the turn of the century because it could be bought so cheaply.  People would buy popcorn from street vendors and attempt to sneak the food into the movie theaters to enjoy during the movies (clearly not much has changed.)  Movie theater owners did not appreciate this, but popcorn was difficult to make as it required the corn to be popped in a wire cage over flame.  A man named Charles Cretors, however, came up with a solution.  He created and patented the first portable popcorn machine utilizing a steam engine in 1893.  After 1912, popcorn was the staple snack food in movie theaters across the country.

Movie goers be warned—popcorn at theaters is not the healthy snack it is at home.  According to a study done by the Center for Science in the Public Interest in the mid-90s, “Movie Popcorn” is incredibly bad for you.  Because they use coconut oil to pop the corn and then top it with butter or margarine, “a medium size popcorn contains more fat than a breakfast of bacon and eggs, a Big Mac and fries, and a steak dinner combined.”  A large popcorn contains as much saturated fat as six Big Macs and with butter, eight.  Anyone else hate themselves right about now?

Luckily for us, there is a solution!  Sneak in your own popcorn!  Well…maybe not.  But if you want to have some at home try these recipes for a twist on an old idea.  Also—pop your own popcorn!  I swear it’s so much easier than it sounds!

First Step:  Pop the Corn.
I know, I know, this is what microwaves were made for.  But humor me for a second.  If you are still inwardly cringing at the nutrition facts above, popping your own corn allows you to decide just how many saturated fats you are letting into your snack.  And it’s actually surprisingly easy.

You’ll need:
½ cup of popcorn kernels
3 tbsps extra virgin olive oil

1. Grab a large pot with a lid, and add the oil to the bottom.
2. Turn the heat on high, and put three kernels in the pot.
3. When the first one pops, add half a cup of kernels and put the lid on.
4. Wait until there are 2-3 seconds in between pops before taking the popcorn off the heat.  Enjoy!

Cheesy Popcorn
For something different, try this trick.

You’ll need:
Around 8 cups of popped popcorn
1-2 tbsps olive oil
1/3 cup finely shredded parmesan cheese (think the powdery kind)
Kosher Salt and freshly ground pepper, to taste.

1. After you pop the corn, drizzle the oil and toss to coat.
2. Add the cheese and toss again.  I find it helps if you use a bowl with a lid and shake it up.  Tin foil works too.
3. Add kosher salt and freshly cracked pepper if you want a little kick.  That’s it!  Pretty easy, huh…

Black and White Popcorn
I got this recipe from http://thewholekitchen.wordpress.com/2010/02/20/black-and-white-popcorn/.  I thought it might be fun to try something new, and I love anything covered in chocolate.  I would be careful though, this popcorn is very rich; I could only eat a little at a time.  So enjoy with friends!

You’ll need:
Around 8 cups air popped popcorn
3 tbsps butter
2 ½ tbsps brown sugar
¼ tsp cinnamon
1 ½ tbsps good quality cocoa powder
¼ tsp kosher salt

1. Melt the butter, cocoa powder, brown sugar and butter in small bowl in the microwave on low. Watch it carefully so that it doesn’t burn or bubble over.
2. Stir with a spoon to meld everything together. When the sugar and butter have melted together, drizzle over the popped corn, and toss quickly to coat.

My favorite recipe?  A little oil and a lot of garlic salt.  Low in calories and super yummy.  But the lesson here:  definitely pop your own corn.  And avoid movie popcorn unless you want a heart attack.

Sunrise: A Song of Two Humans

"This song of the Man and his Wife is of no place and every place; you might hear it anywhere, at any time.  For wherever the sun rises and sets, in the city's turmoil or under the open sky on the farm, life is much the same; sometimes bitter, sometimes sweet." - Opening Title Cards for Sunrise: A Song of Two Humans.

Well it wasn’t entirely what I expected, but I can’t be sure if I liked it or not.  Actually, given the opportunity to watch it again I probably wouldn’t.  I think I have just been too conditioned to look for actual sound, so that the subtly of silent film escapes me and I find myself tapping my toes.  There is sound, and actually if the movie hadn’t come out after The Jazz Singer, the public would have been a little more receptive.  There are sound effects, and a score of music that runs all the way through.  Amusing moments occur, however, like when a woman tries to whistle and all the audience sees is the pursing of her lips.  And of course no one has any names in the movie.  Why would they need them?  No one is talking.  It is surprising how little words are needed, though, to get the general point across.  But I should backtrack. 

The Plot:
This story takes place in a country village, separated from the Big Bad City by some sort of body of water.  It is a happy village, until the camera pans to the vampy evil seductress, played by Margaret Livingston, from The City, who is having an affair with (and consummately corrupting with lust) a young farmer, played by George O’Brian.  She convinces him to drown his wife and make it look like an accident so they can run away together to The City.  His beautiful, sweet faced wife, played by Janet Gaynor, cries herself to sleep while clutching their child.  The next day, looking dark and tortured, the man takes his wife on an outing on the water—side note: this man is almost constantly tortured looking.  And he stomps a lot.  And rends his hair.  And chokes people.  In case we missed the fact that he is tortured.

His wife, though happy at first at the thought of reconciliation, is horrified when she sees her husband standing over her with grim purpose in his eyes.  He, in turn, is horrified at himself.  They dock the boat and she runs from him into The City.  After he chases her and apologizes, she eventually comes around.  They watch a couple being married; the man realizes how far he has fallen and looks tortured in his wife’s arms.
The rest of the movie involves the couple about town as they get to know each other again and play in The City.  In the boat ride home she falls asleep in his arms as he steers, the image of idyllic bliss.  Until—CRASH!  Lightening strikes!  No, seriously.  There’s a massive storm.  The man frantically tries to get them home, but to no avail.  He ties the bundle of floating reeds to his wife’s body, ironically the same reeds he was going to use earlier to save himself.  They clutch each other in terror.

Once the storm settles, the man washes up on shore, sans wife.  He immediately sets up a search, but all he can find is a shawl amongst some reeds.  He stomps home rending his hair, not knowing that the evil woman-from-the-city has seen the search.  Thinking she has won, she whistles for him outside his home, expecting a joyful assignation.  He runs out to meet her, but instead begins to choke her in his rage.  Before he can kill her, their housekeeper yells from the house.  They’ve found the wife and she is alive.  Abandoning the frivolous flapper, he rushes home to his wife’s side, while she lies in bed and looks up angelically at him, her blonde hair spread across her pillow like a halo.  As the sun rises on a new day the couple kiss and are reconciled as the seductress leaves the village forever on the back of a cart, taking her lustful corruption with her.


The History:
As we know, this film won an Academy Award for best “Artistic Production.”  Incidentally, Janet Gaynor, who I believe was the best part of this film, won for “Best Actress.”  Sunrise also won “Best Cinematography,” and was nominated for “Best Art Direction.”  The director, F. W. Murnau, was German, and a leading light in the German film movement of Expressionism.  He was brought in by William Fox, of Fox studios, to make an Expressionist film in America.  This means a film that uses art design for symbolic effect.  Sunrise was not popular in the box office, in part because Janet Gaynor went blonde for the role, rather than her traditional brown locks.  The other part was the advent of talking films in the form of The Jazz Singer only a month earlier; this movie would be the death knell for silent films.  This was unfortunate for Murnau, as he had spent a fortune making the move, creating elaborate sets and music.  His further attempts at films were greatly curtailed as a result.  Since then, however, it is considered one of the best silent films ever made,  and is now #82 on AFI's 100 Years...100 Movies.

The Verdict?
While I don’t think I’m going to become a silent movie lover anytime soon, I do think there is something to be gained for watching one.  Once.  Let’s not overdo it.  But without any dialogue, the viewer to forced to focus on the actions of the actors.  Janet Gaynor is particularly good at this.  She never has to say a word, and in fact, you hardly see her speak at all.  Unlike George O’Brian, who conveys his grief by rending his hair and bugging out his eyes, Janet Gaynor conveys her emotions by simply fluttering her eyelashes or turning her head.  You immediately connect with her, and can telling that the slow, methodical way she deals with the dishes is indicative of a broken heart.  Any dialogue is unnecessary.  She conveys emotion by the nuance of movement. 

In the time we are in now, a film needs incredible special effects to catch our attention.  I will admit myself that I have so many distractions in my life at one time that it takes something truly extraordinary to catch my interest.  But I think subtly is valuable and we forget how much can be said with no words at all.  We don’t need Janet Gaynor’s character to extrapolate on the effect of her husband’s infidelity; we can see it in the way her shoulders slump as she rests her head in her hands.  The people don’t need names.  This story is, as the title suggests, the story of two humans, and the trials of everyday life.  I can appreciate the basic humanity it represents.  Which is something I should keep in mind as I move into my next (and my last) silent film.

Stay tuned for the foodie portion…

A Brief History of Louis B. Mayer...I mean the Academy...

Less than one week left!  I can’t wait to start watching…but I’m a little unsure about the silent movie thing.  I’ve only watched one silent movie in my life, Daddy Long Legs, and I didn’t make it all the way through.  In this day and age, with special effects films of the likes of Avatar, it’s hard to connect to a film where sound is considered a special effect.  When I imagine a silent movie, the movie I think of is an over-acted pantomime, with grainy pictures and title cards to carry the plot.  But I’m happy to be proved wrong.   This weekend I will be watching Sunrise on Saturday and Wings on Sunday, followed by the Academy Awards themselves.  Why two movies?  Well, according to my research, both were Best Picture winners in the first ever ceremonies in 1929.

A Little Bit of History…
At the end of 1926, Louis B. Mayer, studio boss of MGM, decided labor unions were ruining the country.  So he invited some powerful Hollywood friends over for Sunday dinner and they came up with the idea of an elite club, one that would help to both mediate the ongoing labor disputes and clean up the image of Hollywood.  A few months later, in 1927, Mayer organized a group of people from the industry’s five branches (actors, directors, writers, technicians and producers) for a dinner at the Ambassador Hotel , during which "The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences" was born.  After it became a legal corporation in May of 1927, the first president, actor Douglas Fairbanks, suggested that “awards of merit [be given] for distinctive achievement.”  A year later a voting system was established and categories created.  13 awards were given in varying categories.  The winners would receive a newly designed statuette and the nominees would get a scroll, to tempt them to actually show at the awards.  The winners knew of their awards ahead of time, and while exciting, they were only a small part of an evening that included other Academy business, a sit-down dinner, dancing, lectures and socializing.

Fun Facts

• The “Oscar” statuette is of a naked man stabbing a sword into a film reel, with five holes representing the five branches of the film industry.  The Academy members wanted to represent a strong, united Hollywood.
• The technicians had a difficult time coming up with an award for their branch.  In the end, they simply lumped everything together into one all-purpose category: “Best Engineering Effects.”
• The 1st Academy Awards was the first and only time an award was given for “Best Writing, Title Writing.”  Yes, “Title Writing”, the writing of those cards between silent acting that clues the audience in on important dialogue or action.  The recipient, Joseph Farnham, was also the first Academy Award winner to die; Farnham succumbed to a heart attack just two years later.
• The Jazz Singer, a Warner Brothers sensation and the first truly successful talking picture, was briefly considered for the categories.  But the Academy members felt that it was impossible to compare this new media with all the silent films.  They therefore decided to award the movie its own Honorary Award for revolutionizing the industry.  Little did they know.

And finally…
The reason for the two movies?  When award categories were decided, the Academy made two winning “Best Picture” categories.  One was for “Best Picture, Production” and the other for “Best Picture, Artistic Quality of Production.”  The difference?  The first would go to “the most outstanding motion picture considering all elements that contribute to a picture’s greatness,” while the latter would be awarded to “the Producing Company, or Producer, who produced the most artistic, unique and/or original motion picture without reference to cost or magnitude.”  I’m having trouble distinguishing between them myself, but I’ve decided that the first award is more like “best blockbuster,” while the second is closer to “best indie flick.”  Whatever the difference, the Academy decided to award the artistic award to Sunrise, while Wings got best overall production.  The Academy members originally wanted to award The Crowd the artistic award.  But Louis B. Mayer, lord of Hollywood and king of the Academy, despised this depressing, realist film about a lowly man who never amounts to much in the crowds of New York City despite his best efforts.   He thought it directly contradicted the Academy’s aim: “It will encourage the improvement and advancement of the arts and sciences of the profession by the interchange of constructive ideas and by awards of merit for distinctive achievements.”  A film about a man who works hard but still achieves nothing, shot on a small budget and distinctly unglamorous, could hardly be considered “constructive.”  Nor could this movie promote the “improvement and advancement” of films.  The judges, exhausted, finally gave in.

This motto, however, is something to consider.  Do all these films follow those aims?  In what years did the Academy stray from its ideals?  And how much depends on who is running the show?  Things to consider.  In later years, the Academy only awarded one award for “Best Picture,” and Wings came to be regarded as the sole winner of 1927-28.  But I feel that that wasn’t the Academy’s original intent, so I’ve decided to watch both.  Alright—I’ve lectured enough!  Please keep reading!  On Saturday, I’ll watch Sunrise, the story of a married farmer who is lead astray from his wife by a woman from the city (damn those wily city women).  And on Sunday, I’ll watch Wings, a war epic about two friends from a small town who fight in WWI, and the women who love them.  Any suggestions on food?  Hmmmm…..what could I make for a movie called “Wings”...