Vic Sage

David Daniel Kaminsky was a child of Ukranian Jews living in Brooklyn. He became a Borscht Belt entertainer and a vaudevillian in the 1930s before starring on Broadway in Lady In the Dark (1941, K.Weil / I.Gershwin) and Lets Face It! (1941, Cole Porter). Both were successful productions, allowing Kaye to use all his comedic and musical gifts. The fast patter songs (many later written by wife Sylvia Fine) became a staple of his performances. He would only appear on Broadway once more, 30 years later in the failed Richard Rodgers show, Two By Two (1970). Also during the 1940s, he had his own radio show, The Danny Kaye Show (CBS, 1945�46), made hits records with the Andrews Sisters, but mostly he spent the decade becoming an international movie star. Up in Arms (1944) - This dated service comedy co-starred Dinah Shore and got Oscar nominations for a Harold Arlen song and for its score. It also had Virginia Mayo, who would later co-star with Kaye in many of his films. Wonder Man (1945) - Playing twins (one a ghost), up against gangsters, with Mayo and Vera-Ellen. The twin theme, where Kaye plays both a coward and a hero, was a common trope in his films. More music nominations, and some songs by wife Sylvia Fine. The Kid from Brooklyn (1946) - With Mayo and Vera-Ellen again, this time as a milquetoast milkman who becomes a boxing champion. He continues to develop his screen persona as a weak male who unexpectedly backs into heroism and wins the girl. Kaye performs a Sylvia Fine song, �Pavlova�, but otherwise it's not a strong score. The Secret Life of Walter Mitty (1947) - This time Kaye is a daydreaming, henpecked milquetoast whose fantasies cause him to stumble into a spy ring and save Mayo again. Many of Fine's funny patter songs, including �Anatole of Paris�. The films was a big hit, with a still-strong critical reputation, but it was not one of my faves. A Song Is Born (1948) - Howard Hawks' musical remake of his earlier Gary Cooper film �Ball of Fire� with a script by Billy Wilder, stars Kaye as a shy musicologist who falls for a girl (Mayo) hiding from gangsters. This familiar setup features supporting performances by the leading jazz musicians of the time (Benny Goodman, Louis Armstrong, Tommy Dorsey). But Kaye had separated from his wife, Fine (he had been having an affair with Eve Arden), and she would not write songs for the film, and Kaye wouldn't perform anyone else's songs, so he didn't sing in the film. Needless to say, it was a flop. The Inspector General (1949) - The cowardly Kaye impersonates a govt official in a small corrupt town. Fine is once again writing his songs (though technically remaining married, they stayed separated from then on). They songs comprise a terrific score, particularly "Happy Times". The twin personality trope is in full bloom. This is one of his very best. After "The Inspector General", Kaye cemented his international appeal with command performances for England's royal family at London Palladium. In 1952, Kaye's fame was such that he hosted the Academy Awards that year. Having left the nest of his long-time producer Sam Goldwyn, he created his own production company, and some of his best films were still to come. On the Riviera (1951) - A hit he made for Fox, this "backstage musical" has Kaye once again playing twins (lookalikes, actually), this time in Paris, opposite Gene Tierney, with songs by Ms. Fine. More music nominations resulted, but a ragtime oldie, "Ballin' the Jack" was the hit. Hans Christian Andersen (1952) - Back with producer Goldwyn, Kaye stars in this entirely fictionalized "bio" (offered as more of a fairy tale than a historical work) of the Danish storyteller, with a script by Moss Hart and a terrific score by Frank Loesser. Garnering 6 Oscar nominations, this is one of the best films of Kaye's career. Maybe THE best. Knock on Wood (1954) - Kaye produced this one; a neurotic ventriloquist falls for his psychiatrist and goes on the run from a spy ring, with songs by Fine, but the formula is getting old here. Still, it was a hit in its time. And the co-writers (Melvin Frank & Norman Panama) got an Oscar nomination for their script, and they co-directed as well; this was the first of 3 films they would do with Kaye. White Christmas (1954) - This service comedy/buddy movie/Rom-Com teams Bing Crosby with Kaye in a holiday musical for the whole family, co-starring Vera-Ellen and George Clooney's aunt Rosemary. It's saccharin, but the Berlin numbers are winning, and it has become a holiday staple (and a seasonal touring stage production). The Court Jester (1956) � In their 3rd try, The Frank/Panama team turns out one of Kaye's best in this Robin Hood spoof/homage, with Kaye as a cowardly jester hypnotized into becoming a dashing hero to save the kingdom (and Glynis Johns) from the evil Basil Rathbone. It features some of Fine's best songs, written with Sammy Cahn (including the lovely "I'll Take You Dreaming"). Though a financial bomb on its initial release, it became a TV staple and was selected for preservation in the National Film Registry by the Library of Congress as being "culturally, historically, or aesthetically significant." After all, the vessel with the pestle has the pellet with the poison... After the pinnacle of �The Court Jester� its lack of financial success signaled a turn in Kaye's career, and his final films left much to be desired. Merry Andrew (1958) - Musical misfire about an English professor and a circus, with songs by Johnny Mercer, and directed by famed choreographer Michael Kidd. Me and the Colonel (1958) - Kaye�s first non-musical, this WW II comic drama adapted a Broadway play about anti-semitism in Europe and was originally well received (Kaye won a Golden Globe for his performance) but has become largely overlooked since. The Five Pennies (1959) � this overly sentimental biopic about 30s� big band trumpeter Red Nichols garnered some Oscar nominations, and has Louis Armstrong, too, but hasn�t stood up. On the Double (1961) � Kaye goes back to the well once too often with this totally derivative �service comedy�, with Kaye playing lookalikes (a coward and a British general), as D-Day approaches; naturally, he becomes a hero and gets the girl. Fine's songs don�t help. The Man from the Diner's Club (1963) � Frank Tashlin,(Jerry Lewis�s collaborator) directed this awful grand finale for Kaye�s movie career. No songs, just slapstick. Telly Savalas steals the show. Kaye�s films no longer made money so he started to transition to television in 1960. His first solo effort was a 1-hour special produced by Sylvia Fine, with similar specials in 1961 and 1962. He then hosted a variety hour on CBS television, The Danny Kaye Show, from 1963 to 1967, which won four Emmy awards and a Peabody award. In 1976, he did excellent TV musical adaptations of Peter Pan (with songs by Bricusse and Newley) and Pinocchio (co-starring Sandy Duncan), and a few years later, did the TV drama, Skokie (1981), for which he was nominated for a Golden Globe. After that, all he did was guest appearances on various TV episodes. His later years were primarily involving charitable work he did with UNICEF, conducting orchestras, becoming a professional quality chef, flying planes, and living life. He died in 1987. As a poor kid from Brooklyn who never finished high school, he made himself into a modern renaissance man, as an actor/singer/dancer/comedian/tummler/philanthropist/chef/pilot/ambassador, who was successful in clubs, on stage, on records, on radio, in films, on TV, in concert halls, in kitchens, at the UN, and in the sky� without a peer in his time. But his wide range of talents and interests was not demonstrated by a long list of great films; there weren't that many (15 films over a 20-year movie career, before moving on to TV), with most of them following a narrowly defined formula, and only a few still worth seeing today. But the complete range of his creative life is still something special to appreciate. Best of: Wonder Man (1945) The Secret Life of Walter Mitty (1947) The Inspector General (1949) Hans Christian Andersen (1952) White Christmas (1954) The Court Jester (1956)

i loved Danny Kaye movies and didn't even care for his version of this, so a Stiller version has no appeal for me. Danny Kaye movies... hmm.... I'll get on that. on edit: And here's the Kaye filmography: viewtopic.php?f=11&t=21384

i hate Stiller and this looked awful.

funny how they sell THE TRAIN as an action film in that trailer; i guess it is, but i never thought of it like that. And they never say (or even imply) what's on "the train", unlike the promos for MONUMENTS MEN, which directly took on the philosophical questions related to the value of art and its cost in human lives.

eh. see Frankenheimer's THE TRAIN with Burt Lancaster for a MUCH more compelling version of a similar story.

RealityChuck wrote: [*]Shaun of the Dead -- A horror film that's actually fun to watch. I considered adding SHAUN to my list, but i've arbitrarily classified it as comedy/horror rather than SF. Comparing it to the 2 other Zombie movies on my list, SHAUN never says why the dead are rising, using instead the Romero zombie approach (which is a horror approach) that "it may have been this or that, but it doesn't matter... run!" But both 28 DAYS LATER and ZOMBIELAND give specific scientific explanations for the spread of a zombifying virus and are also much more about the post-apocalyptic world created by the cataclysm (a common theme of SF) than it is about surviving the cataclysm itself (NIGHT OF THE LIVING DEAD). Like i said, its an arbitrary distinction, but lists are all about drawing lines and making distinctions; that process is always going to be somewhat subjective and, therefore, seem arbitrary.

I really liked Cloverfield, and District 9 was cool. I thought Wall-E was awful. This is literally the first time I have ever seen or heard that sentiment expressed. Vic: you found LOOPER convoluted... but you ranked INCEPTION? If anything, I'd say the first gives you more meat for the chew required. You don't agree? First, I liked WALL-E very much, but it wasn't the greatest thing since sliced bread. Still, its deserving of its place on the RS list. The culture has spoken on this film and has moved on [e.g., metacritic = 94-critics / 8.9-users; Rotten Tomatoes = 96%-critics / 89%-users] (these are unusually high numbers). And, politics aside, it's a moving love story. I'm a sucker for a good robot love story. Secondly, I didn't rank INCEPTION; Rolling Stone did, and i didn't reject it (this was more a matter of "tie goes to the runner" deference than an expression of my own preference). As for LOOPER, i disagreed with them about it, so i didn't keep it on my list. I found both stories convoluted, and wasn't crazy about either of them at the time i saw them, but INCEPTION had other qualities i appreciated more on subsequent viewing (original imagery, excellent performances, more profound philosophical questions), and it has had a greater overall impact on filmmaking and the popular culture. Other storytellers are still referencing it (either visually, conceptually, or literally), whereas LOOPER, while perfectly entertaining (perhaps more than INCEPTION, since it has a more traditionally satisfying conclusion), has been largely forgotten. It was not memorable or impactful to the same degree, and so doesn't warrant inclusion on my list, where the similarly flawed INCEPTION does. I do think LOOPER is a good film and a legitimate case to be made for it, and I would put it on a list of honorable mentions. But I would also understand if some of the films on the RS list that i didn't see (THE HOST, MOON, PRIMER, SUNSHINE) knocked either or both off the list entirely, since I'd put both of them nearer the bottom than the top. As a side note, 12 MONKEYS kicks LOOPER's ass all over the playground and takes its lunch money.

Thanks for the ADELE recommendation. I've liked some Luc Besson films; i'll give this one a shot. And i just saw SHAUN OF THE DEAD this weekend; it was excellent. I really like Simon Pegg's films.

DAYS OF FUTURE PAST was an excellent way to retrofit X3 out of the existing X-MEN continuity. Overall, though, the movie is a little slow and talky (the sentinel action is dull and repetitive) but there's a lot of good character stuff and Quicksilver steals the show. 3.5 ****

i just saw THE ISLAND (2005) on cable over the weekend, and it deserves an honorable mention at least. Ewen McGregor and ScarJo are clones on the run from the evil corp that grew them for their spare parts. Good action, good perfs, thought-provoking.

I would have guessed that Hellboy and Unbreakable were 20th Century films. They seem like a long time ago HELLBOY (2004), but whether UNBREAKABLE (2000) was a 20th century film depends on whether you say 2000 was the last year of the 20th century or the 1st year of the 21st century. Rolling Stone included DONNIE DARKO (2000) on their list, so i followed suit.

Rolling Stone came out with a "top 20 sci fi films of the 21st century" list: http://www.rollingstone.com/movies/lists/the-top-20-sci-fi-films-of-the-21st-century-20140515/under-the-skin-2013-19691231 There are some good choices here, but I have some quibbles. First, I don't think you should include on this kind of a list (where one is trying to rank �the best� of a particular period, rather than just one�s favorites) movies that have come out recently, because of our natural bias toward the new and the lack of historical perspective on such films. Secondly, if you�re going to include foreign films (like THE HOST), then you have to consider ALL of world cinema, and that�s just too daunting a task. So, here's my list -- 20 Best English-language SF features / 2000-2009 (listed chronologically): [Note that I have limited myself to only 1 superhero movie, since I distrust my own judgment about them (I tend to like them even when they�re terrible)] (movies on the Rolling Stone list are noted with a *) From the Rolling Stone list � DONNIE DARKO � MINORITY REPORT � SERENITY � CHILDREN OF MEN � CLOVERFIELD � WALL-E � DISTRICT 9 I have not seen THE HOST, MOON, PRIMER or SUNSHINE, but they seem promising. But REIGN OF FIRE, while some fun, is a piece of crap. Plus: UNBREAKABLE � Shamalayan�s exercise in superhero realism; sad and fascinating PITCH BLACK � Vin Diesel introduces Riddick in this thrilling little piece of horror/sf A.I. � Spielberg + Kubrick; an SF Pinocchio with great performances 28 DAYS LATER � A game-changer in the �fast zombie� sub-genre ETERNAL SUNSHINE OF THE SPOTLESS MIND � Philosophical, romantic; Jim Carrey in �serious actor� mode V FOR VENDETTA � underrated adaptation of Moore�s comic; power to the people! IDIOCRACY � Mike Judge�s hilarious and prescient satire about our intellectual decline as a species THE FOUNTAIN � Aronofsky�s flawed but ambitious study in the metaphysics of love and loss BATMAN: DARK KNIGHT � If I only get 1 superhero movie for the decade, this is it. Nuff said. STAR TREK � JJ Abrams successfully relaunched and rebooted the moribund franchise AVATAR � Cameron pushes the limits of color and 3D to retell the archetypal story of the warrior going native to preserve the natural world from Man�s destructive nature THE ROAD � McCarthy�s classic; an austere, deeply felt adaptation ZOMBIELAND � Hilarious revamp and update of the zombie apocalypse Honorable Mentions: FREQUENCY, X-MEN, X2, HELLBOY, A SCANNER DARKLY, RENAISSANCE, MAN FROM EARTH, IRON MAN, WATCHMEN, 9, MR. NOBODY, BLINDNESS And now here are 10 films from 2010-2014, for early consideration on the 2010-2019 list (but I may feel differently by 2024): � INCEPTION � ATTACK THE BLOCK � THE WORLD�S END � GRAVITY � HER I have not seen MONSTERS or UNDER THE SKIN, but LOOPER is convoluted. Plus: X-MEN: FIRST CLASS � This prequel to the series surpasses the original trilogy RISE OF THE PLANET OF THE APES � a successful reboot, and a remake (of sorts) of ESCAPE and CONQUEST but much better. SAFETY NOT GUARANTEED � A funny, romantic indie � is it time travel or insanity? SEEKING A FRIEND FOR END OF THE WORLD - Funny/sad romance with great perf by Steve Carrell MAN OF STEEL � Thoughtful reconsideration of Superman in his best film adaptation Honorable mentions: PAUL, CABIN IN THE WOODS, MELANCHOLIA, AVENGERS, THE DIVIDE, OBLIVION, EUROPA REPORT, HOT TUB TIME MACHINE

my daughter watched it repeatedly; i've never had any desire to watch it.

i think people generally either like Wes Anderson's films or they don't; not in every case, but i think his movies have a certain identifiable style that either appeals to you or does not. On the other hand, he's such a unique filmmaker, people can love one of his films and hate another. So i guess i'm contradicting myself. Nevermind. As for me, I loved RUSHMORE, LIFE AQUATIC, and liked MOONRISE KINGDOM, but hated DARJEELING and TANNENBAUMS, so i'll give this one a try at some point, despite that its premise doesn't really appeal to me. I also still want to see MR. FOX.

yes, shoehorning in that love story was unnecessary but they do it all the time.

The ambiguity comes from the Snow Queen first being thought of as a villain, but evolving into a co-protagonist over the course of the story, as we learn its the "prince" who is the real villain of the piece, and as Elsa is ultimately redeemed by her sister's love. And I had no problem with that at all. Elsa is a child torn by guilt over her powers and the danger they posed to everyone (particularly the little sister she almost kills because she can't control it). She is raised in total isolation, ruled by fear... her parents' fear, and then fear of herself, and never able to let herself be who she really is. How awful is that? How fucking awful? And when her people discover who she really is, she is forced to flee, once again facing complete isolation from her home, her people, from her sister. But at that moment, heartbroken, she is finally able to fully embrace her own power and sings a homage to that power. It has the same "girl power" energy of Elphaba's song "Defying Gravity" and struck the exact same cultural chord in the tween-girl marketplace that launched both works over the moon. And like Elphaba, she owes no one any apologies. Elsa is a dangerous force of nature, and it is her own sense of responsibility that makes her isolate herself. Her actions later are in self-defense, but the injury to her sister is accidental, once again plucking the deep note of guilt she has always carried about endangering her baby sister. But make no mistake; while not a "villain", Elsa is not the hero either. Anna is the protagonist of the story. She makes the heroic quest, she acts out of pure love, and ultimately she redeems her sister, finally changing her sister's physical nature and saving the kingdom. And Elsa couldn't be happier about it. The story spins alot of the standard hero/villain cliches around by first making us think that Elsa will be the hero, then seeming to make her the villain, before revealing the handsome prince to be the real villain. And the rebuffed little sister never gives up, rising to become a hero by loving her powerful sister in the face of nature's fury and thus, relieved of that burden of isolation, the snow queen becomes Anna's loving human big sister once again. Disney has done alot worse by a lot better pre-existing fairy tales. By just using SNOW QUEEN as a jumping off point, and introducing a mature notion of ambiguity, they were able to create a really moving story of sisterhood for the modern tween girl audience and, as a result... cachiiiiing.... hit the jackpot.

Disney's already working on the stage version, with those songwriters, Bobby and Kristen Lopez.

No, there's no room for him. the Mets would rather have 40-year old Bobby Abreu on their bench.

Crowe has a pretty unique talent for making chick flicks that guys can sit through I like Crowe movies and Broadway musicals... should i be worried? Am i living a lie? NTTAWWT

Edgy MD wrote: My issues weren't technical. They remain, as usual with these thingies, writing that's both incoherent and uninspired. I don't get how this is missed. It's one thing when these films are composed on a storyboard. It's another when they are composed in the editing room. I find myself watching a scene, understanding where they are trying to get to, and re-writing the dialogue in my head as it happens. Technically, these things tend to be brilliant, even when flawed, but all so meaningless. yeah, i have no idea what you're talking about. I get that you don't like superhero movies; you've made that point (sometimes elliptically, but consistently) in many similar threads. And gosh darn it, i'll defend to my death your right to not like them, and to say so. But why "meaningless"? There's plenty of meaning, or at least as much meaning as in any other action film... I'd even go so far as to say sometimes MORE meaning. In this case, we've got a guy, one of the "greatest generation", trying to come to terms with modern post-9/11 America, where presidents kill via drones and we've traded our privacy and freedom for the illusion of security. And wearing a flag on his chest, he decides to bring down the police state into which he thinks our country is descending. Without becoming a political treatise or diatribe, it still offers plenty of fucking meaning for an action film. The plot crosses `70s era political thrillers like 3 DAYS OF THE CONDOR (hence the iconic presence of Redford, to underscore the connection) and PARALLAX VIEW with modern SF like MINORITY REPORT and X-MEN (finding and punishing "criminals" before the crime has been committed) to create a vast conspiracy for the symbol of America to bring down with his mighty shield. The storytelling is far from perfect, with too much plot and too many chases, but there are some meaningful relationships. Steve meets Sam Wilson, a fellow veteran helping his comrades with PTSD, and it gives Rogers' experience more context, and allows him to open up to the first man he felt could understand his situation. Its the beginning of his first real friendship since Bucky "died" 70 years ago. And the Black Widow offers a sisterly surrogate, providing teasing affection as well as a comrade in arms. And Rogers going to see his old love, Peggy Carter, dying of old age and lapsing in and out of memory, adds poignancy to this man out of his time. I think they could've done better and more to mine the rich vein of that character arc -- a soldier with PTSD trying to reconnect to a new world which is in dire contrast to the one he left behind -- but it's there, and they had to get to the shit blowing up, i guess. And alot of the blowing up is repetitive and tedious, but some of the hand-to-hand that Cap engages in (particularly early in the film) really capture the super nature of this hero's fighting skills in a way that the prior 2 films (CAP 1, and AVENGERS) never really did, and is quite thrilling in its own right. I do wish they had done more with the Shield Agent 13 / Sharon Carter; if they were going to use her, they should've made the connection with her Aunt Peg, and set up her future relationship with Steve. Again, its there a bit, but just barely. Yeah, i preferred the first one's retro WWII era style and "origin story" plot, but on the whole this one did just fine as a follow up. Or maybe i just like meaningless movies. could be. particularly if they have ScarJo in red hair and black leather.

Wallowing in depravity for 3 hours didn't entertain me. I have nothing against depravity, mind you... certainly not while i'm indulging in it. I just don't find 3rd-party depravity entertaining. The repetitive, over-the-top farce made me weary; DiCaprio's inspirational monologues were not thrilling (like Baldwin's in GlenGarry) or charming (like Burt Lancaster in Elmer Gantry), or even particularly funny, they were just self-conscious and heavy-handed "this-is-what-these-people-were-about" moments, to underline the themes; and the comeuppance for this collection of despicable cretins was entirely unsatisfying. And by failing to even attempt to explain the massive and institutional criminality of Wall St (then and now), it really lets the whole industry off the hook and chalks it all up to just the excesses of some greedy psychos. But what the movie chose not to do is a separate issue. It's just that what it did choose to do was repulsive and tedious more than it was funny and/or insightful. As for the ongoing DiCaprio/Scorsese collaboration, I have no problem with director/actor relationships. It worked for John Ford and John Wayne, Hitchcock and Stewart, Scorsese and DeNiro, and i even like alot of the Burton/Depp films, to name just 4. But I've never really liked a single Scorsese / DiCaprio movie. Whatever is good in GANGS OF NY is good despite DiCaprio; AVIATOR is just awful; SHUTTER ISLAND is interesting but ultimately disappointing, and DEPARTED is OK, thanks to Nicholson, but not up to Scorsese's other gangland movies. I just don't think DiCaprio's boyishness enhances Scorsese's brutal, dark POV, and vice versa.

my original ALMOST FAMOUS/Cameron Crowe essay, for the sake of posterity. Little did i know that ALMOST FAMOUS would be his last good film... ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- EATING CROWE A Review of Cameron Crowe�s ALMOST FAMOUS an his career to date By [Vic Sage] February, 2001 Oscar nominations came out recently and guess who didn�t get a best picture nod? Only the best picture of the year, ALMOST FAMOUS, written and directed by Cameron Crowe, who was similarly un-nominated for his direction. �So what?� you may ask. The history of the Academy provides a veritable �Who�s Who� of overlooked talent. Nothing new there. It does provide an excuse, however, to re-examine one of the most neglected great movies, and great moviemakers, of recent years. If you look closely, you can see the arc of Cameron Crowe�s films as they mirror his own journey from precocious adolescent (FAST TIMES AT RIDGEMONT HIGH, SAY ANYTHING, SINGLES) to successful professional (JERRY MAGUIRE), with music always marking the trail he has taken. Now a successful 40-something, Crowe does what we all do at that stage. He looks backwards, with longing. And so, in ALMOST FAMOUS, he offers us a loving reflection on his youth and the music that lit the way. With this picture, Crowe does the impossible� he makes us nostalgic for the 70s. Somehow, thanks to Crowe, the era has taken on that burnished glow that only memory can endow. For this he should be damned and praised. Crowe starts his film with credits... not an unusual technique. Except these credits are being written in pencil on a yellow note pad by a disembodied hand. The hand writes out each name, even misspelling �Frances McDormand� then erasing the error and fixing it. The credits have not even finished and I already love this movie. This in not some generic, Hollywood story, measured and sliced with a cookie-cutter called �market research.� This is a personal story being told by somebody. And a young somebody, to boot� inexperienced, but gamely writing as fast as he can, fixing his mistakes along the way. If the credits are this good, what will the movie be like, I wonder. Crowe was a writer for Rolling Stone magazine in the 70s, before his FAST TIMES adventure. I didn�t read Rolling Stone then, other than the occasional Hunter S. Thompson article, because Rolling Stone stopped being cool because music stopped being cool (disco... yikes!). But Crowe was a teenager who wrote rock criticism for them, and it is that period of his life that provides the basis for the movie�s plot. Cast as the young Crowe is Patrick Fugit, an unknown kid with a couple of episodes of TOUCHED BY AN ANGEL under his belt. He is Crowe as a decent, nerdy, talented boy (William), who is barely surviving his loving, overbearing mother. As the mom, [crossout]Francis[/crossout], um, Frances McDormand is simultaneously unnerving and endearing in her Oscar-nominated performance. William�s loving but irritating big sister (a typically odd Zooey Deschanel) clashes with mom, and sis takes off with her boyfriend to become a stewardess. But, in an effort to save him from mom�s influence, sis leaves behind her record collection. That pile of vinyl opens up a whole new universe for William. He is an �un-cool� high school kid, isolated and in pain, father-less, sister-less� but Rock n Roll becomes his world and his salvation. William becomes a writer, precociously penning music criticism for local papers. He is befriended by the burned-out editor of Creem Magazine, Lester Bangs, brilliantly played by Phillip Seymour Hoffman. Hoffman has been a ubiquitous presence in films since BOOGIE NIGHTS and his dual/dueling Broadway performances in the recent revival of Sam Shepard�s TRUE WEST was an electrifying experience. Now he creates a curmudgeonly mentor for William, a sort of ghost of Christmas-yet-to-be, ranting that �Rock is dead� and providing other such heartening insights, while also giving him a willing ear and an encouraging word. Though based on an actual figure, Hoffman�s Les Bangs is an original film creation� a Rock prophet-guru-nerd who, seeing his end in sight as he slouches toward Bethlehem, can�t help but try to pass the torch. William is offered the chance to cover a touring band on the rise (the group is a bit preciously named �Stillwater�) for Rolling Stone magazine by an unsuspecting editor that doesn�t know the kid is only 15. William joins the tour while his worried mother screams to anyone who�ll listen that �musicians have kidnapped my son!� She has only let him go because she knows how much he needs this adventure, yet she is deathly afraid of losing her last child. Upon boarding the tour bus (bearing a sign: �the ALMOST FAMOUS Tour�), young William/Cameron journeys like Dante into the inferno. He is doggedly pursued by worried messages from mom (�Don�t take drugs!�) and accompanied only by his yellow note pad, his long-distance calls to mentor Bangs, and the �Stillwater� family that teaches him about who he is and who he can become. Still waters run deep, indeed. One of his Virgils is the band�s enigmatic guitarist, Russell, brought to vivid life in actor Billy Crudup�s breakthrough performance as the Rock n Roll hero with feet of clay. The other is the siren Penny Lane, the beautiful free spirit who, as a �band-aid�, acts as both muse and sex toy for Crudup. She is ephemeral and damaged, leading other girls into a romanticized life of self-delusion, living in devotion to the music but not the musicians they service (or so they claim). Of course, the Russell-Kate-William triangle is an eternal one, resulting in pain and growth for all concerned. Kate Hudson�s Penny Lane is a magical character, and it�s a star-making performance, worthy of her Oscar. But the key, supporting player in Crowe�s tale is the music. There is a moment in the movie when everyone is on the bus, and it has been a long, bad night. Emotions are frayed. The mood is fragile. Elton John�s song �Tiny Dancer� is heard and, one at a time, everyone starts to sing along. Music heals. Families can injure, but they can heal, too. Like his earlier films, music is the heart and soul of this film, both in the dramatic moments and concert scenes, dramatizing the effect on both the players and the audience as together they create, for a moment, a surrogate family for all who need one. It seems at first a small story to build a movie on. Nothing blows up. The sex is mostly off-screen. Like all of Crowe�s other pictures, ALMOST FAMOUS is a character study in the coming-of-age genre. But, when seen through the context of his career to date, you realize it�s about Crowe coming of age, as much as the characters in the film. When you look back at his movies, first you find FAST TIMES AT RIDGEMONT HIGH. Like ANIMAL HOUSE a few years earlier, FAST TIMES was a touchstone for a generation. Aside from talented young actors who got their starts in that film (Forest Whitaker, Nicolas Cage, Anthony Edwards, Judge Reinhold and Eric Stoltz), it featured Phoebe Cates and Jennifer Jason Leigh (80s icons of teen lust), and Sean Penn�s star-making turn as the stoner-surfer dude, Spicoli. It was one of the first honest movies I�d ever seen about high school life. Being raised on Godard, Andrew Sarris and the auteur theory, I initially credited first time director Amy Heckerling for the film�s wonders. Time has not borne out that gross conclusion, as her career has included JOHNNY DANGEROUSLY, EUROPEAN VACATION, LOOK WHO�S TALKING (One and TOO), and the aptly titled LOSER. Little attention was paid to the fact that someone actually wrote the movie (not only wrote it, but based it on his own book). A kid named Cameron Crowe (�was that his REAL name?�) went under cover in a Southern California high school, wrote a book about what he observed, then adapted it as a screenplay. The movie based on this piece of gonzo journalism/screenwriting still provides insight into both the period of the late 70s-early 80s in America and the eternal period of adolescence. Then, Crowe went behind the camera to create a series of excellent movies as both writer and director. SAY ANYTHING, with Jon Cusack, is a tragi-comic tale of young love that has taken on a passionate cult following. When asked by the girl�s father what he wants to do for a living, with a nod to THE GRADUATE, Cusack says: �I don't want to sell anything, buy anything, or process anything as a career. I don't want to sell anything bought or processed, or buy anything sold or processed, or process anything sold, bought, or processed, or repair anything sold, bought, or processed. You know, as a career, I don't want to do that.� After FAST TIMES at High School, SAY ANYTHING said everything about that scary time right after graduation. Crowe�s next picture, SINGLES, talked about relationships amongst 20-somethings, during and after college, in the era of Seattle grunge garage bands. It�s a flawed movie, but he got one of the very few great Matt Dillon performances ever recorded on film, showing once again his great skill in directing actors. The use of music in FAST TIMES, SAY ANYTHING and SINGLES is integral to the characters, not just an excuse to release a soundtrack album. When Cusack stands outside his girl�s apartment in SAY ANYTHING, he holds a boom box over his head blasting Peter Gabriel while standing in the rain. Using music to communicate from his soul, Crowe creates one of the most moving, romantic moments from any movie in the last 20 years. Writer-director-producer Crowe then created JERRY MAGUIRE, his first breakout-commercial Hollywood mega-hit. Despite that reputation, the movie is really about a young urban professional guy finding some personal commitment and professional redemption (or was that professional commitment and personal redemption? It works either way). It�s actually a small, personal film at heart. Except, you know, with Tom Cruise. And once again he launched starry careers, providing great showcases for Renee Zellweger and Cuba Gooding, Jr. As a filmmaker, Crowe is unlike such contemporaries as writer-director Kevin Smith, who tells us true and interesting things about our popular subcultures, but in a cinematically clumsy way; or the Coen brothers, who say nothing but with a delightful visual style; or Spike Lee, who is wildly inconsistent and political, rather than personal. Crowe is a both a writer and a director, both literary and visual, and he makes movies about himself and about human relationships. Unlike film-school filmmakers, he doesn�t make films about films. He makes movies about life. And so, he tells stories about us. They are stories worth telling and he tells them wonderfully well. Too bad those Oscar nominators missed that fact, as they rushed headlong over a cliff to recognize such stereotypical Hollywood fodder as TRAFFIC (wow, there�s a drug problem in America! Who knew?), ERIN BROCKOVICH (big screen episode of THE PRACTICE), GLADIATOR (beautiful, stupid and hollow), and CHOCOLAT (Miramax marketing overcomes a slight truffle of a film). HIDDEN DRAGON, of course, is a marvel, certainly worthy of consideration, but Crowe got only a screenplay nod and supporting actress nominations for McDormand and Hudson. And so, Crowe remains our stealth genius. ALMOST FAMOUS, indeed. Like all of Crowe�s other films, ALMOST FAMOUS is a tale both personal and universal. It made me reconsider the era I grew up in, and the person I was then and am today� goddamn it. That�s the power of a great storyteller and, make no mistake, Crowe is perhaps the foremost auteur of his generation. But it looks like it may be up to future generations to realize it.

Fie on you, sir! Fie, i say! I can re-post my Crowe essay if its been lost.

i gave it a 7. I agree the first one was better, but i would've given that one a 9. I'm sorry, but if your going to have Scarlett Johansson kicking ass in a black leather jump suit, with red hair and her sly, knowing smile, then i'm your willing slave... do with me what you will.

So we shouldn't have an opinion about his earlier career, and his relative status among his peers as a result of that work, for fear of his taking it too much to heart and thus becoming a mediocre sellout resting on his laurels? And that if we do make such an assessment, we've somehow encouraged his bad choices? I think we're entitled to "label" him (i.e., have an opinion about him) however we want without bearing an iota of responsibility for his choices or their consequences. That's completely and entirely on him.