Austinpussy

I have to take a moment to acknowledge what I never thought I’d do before. When I was browsing through all the blog posts written this semester and came across “Austinpussy,” I plowed my way to blackboard, convinced that someone would have beaten me to this gem. Alas, I found that I did indeed have the chance to address it, and am eternally grateful to Drew for making it a part of the equation.

For now, I will skip over the complete absurdity of the sequence, as I think it was illustrated well in the original post. What I do want to talk about is a broader question about short films that I think this clip addresses in some ways, or at least serves as a catalyst for questioning.

I am wondering what to do with sequences within film. By this I mean, stretches of video that could stand on their own, which have a narrative structure within them and, most importantly, are somewhat isolated in the film. I will not go into an argument here that all features are composed of linked short films; however, I do not completely disagree with that idea either.

Where I feel we tend to see these types of sequences are during title/credit sequences. I chose Austinpussy because it has a very exaggerated opening sequence, which, while it happens to be a farce, is a good illustration of what we have become used to seeing. Especially in action films, there is this standard for extremely intense, action-packed opening sequences, which rarely ever have a direct connection to what will pursue in the film forward.

We have talked about short films as a means by which directors can take risks. The idea of the opening sequence being extremely ridiculous, as in “Austinpussy,” is interesting. Now while this entire movie is equally ridiculous, the opening sequence is a great avenue to be extra-creative without worrying too much about overall risk. It seems to work like short films here. In this case, just because the title sequence is bizarre, I have come to expect that this part of the film may not be completely representative of the whole. Again, because it may stand on its own, it need not fit into the narrative structure of the rest.

To take this concept a bit broader, what do we do with title sequences for television shows? Immediately I think of “Arrested Development,” where the opening credit sequence gives you the back-story of the family. The style is very different from the style that the show is shot in. The director here was able to take a risk in format, because it is in short format. While I wouldn’t want to necessarily watch an entire half hour or hour of a show in an opening sequence format (which tend to be fast-paced and non-formulaic), these pieces do seem to have a entirety to their format; that they are independent creatures from the film/television show that they are attached to.

Obviously, “Austinpussy” is playing with the action-film norm of the intense, action-packed opening sequence. However, in doing so, it brings up the question, are these unrelated beginnings short films within themselves? If they are, it explains why they can take so many risks here, and why the viewer forgives so easily. I’m still not sure if I can forgive anything about “Austinpussy,” but that’s a discussion for another day.

Austinpussy

Austinpussy (from Austin Powers in Goldmember)
Directed by Jay Roach
2003, USA

Never in my wildest dreams did I ever think I’d blog about Goldmember in an academic setting, but sometimes the gods of bad cinema shine their light upon thee, and it’s all one can do to take advantage of this moment. There are very few shorts within a feature that seem like a non-sequitur to the rest of the film, but then again there are very few films that seem to be composed of a string of non-sequiturs itself. Austin Powers in Goldmember could be defined as so, a post-modern clusterfuck that sheds more insight into the way Hollywood perceives the general public’s notion of entertainment than the average big-budget abomination. The opening Austinpussy, without having relevance to the plot (which is flimsy at that,) actually instills the tone for the rest of the film, as the audience is treated to a movie within a movie for the first and not the last time throughout.

Grounding most of its action film parody in Mission Impossible 2-era John Woo, the film’s style is notably different than any from the previous episodes of the franchise. Helicopters explode, a high-speed chase ensues through the badlands, and Austin Powers skydives into action. Basically, this is not anything likely the comedic style of the first two films. However, it all makes sense when the main characters are revealed to be various mega-stars, such as Tom Cruise, Gwyneth Paltrow, Kevin Spacey, and Danny Devito. Before the audience is able to grasp the situation, it’s revealed that it’s a clip from the Steven Spielberg directed Austinpussy, and the real movie begins.

These are the first images of the film, and they star none of the actors who dominate the next 90 minutes. This parody is more indebted to the previous films in the series than Interestingly enough, compared to The Larry Sanders Show or Tropic Thunder, the humor isn’t in how these Hollywood superstars lampoon themselves, but in how they satriize characters the audience is familiar with. Cruise doesn’t even attempt to affect a British accent, toothily smiling his way through a “yeah baby.” Paltrow, pre-Chris Martin’s daily inspiration, fills the role of vapid but dangerous femme fatale with the thinly-veiled double entendre of a name. Spacey laughably hams it up as Dr. Evil and Devito is short, so he makes a perfect fit as Mini-Me. As if the audience doesn’t know who these celebrities are, they add titles to a freeze-framed image of each. We laugh because we know who these people are, and they don't belong in an Austin Powers film.

Numerous reviews of the film commented that there was more quality comedy filmmaking in the opening parody than in the rest of the film. And they’re right— there’s something inspired in these three minutes of absurdity, as if the filmmakers themselves took a step back from joylessly force-feeding absurdist tripe, and enjoyed the scenario they present: a star-filled Austin Powers sequel that actually exceeds expectations. What does it say when the peak of a feature film is a short parody of said film? I wouldn’t go so far as to say that we might look more fondly on Goldmember if it just consisted of the aforementioned three minute short— then we wouldn’t have so many great Pepsi Twist and Beyonce musical numbers— but what it does call to question is the relationship between short and feature, one we’ve delved into numerous times this semester. Especially the idea that of importance attributed to each; if the feature is supposed to be what brings audiences in, why was the word of mouth revolving around the cameos in the opening short likely the inspiration to those on the fence about paying to see another Austin Powers film?

The final twist regarding their relationship is when at the end of the film, the main villain Goldmember, played by Mike Myers throughout, turns around and reveals himself to be played by John Travolta. We’re back to Austinpussy, and even the characters of the film are watching. Has the feature actually been within the short? WHY IS AN AUSTIN POWERS MOVIE SO COMPLEX?

Thanksgiving

Grindhouse--Fake trailer
Directed by Eli Roth



Thanksgiving is one of the five fake trailers featured during Tarantino's /Rodriguez's feature exclusively called Grindhouse. The double feature consists of Rodriguez's Planet Terror followed by Tarantino's Death Proof. I have a pretty good feeling most, if not of all of this blog's viewer's have at least heard of this gruesome duo, so I'll restrain from getting into the gory details of either film.

The great part of this nearly 3 hour double feature wasn't the crazy, disgusting, almost vomit inducing special effects, but instead, the advertisements for fake trailers that are featured before each segment. According to Rodriguez, the original plan was to make both films fake trailers reflecting those of the early 1970's, but clearly that didn't happen.

The trailers were all shot in two days, but the short time spent on these films doesn't reflect their quality, whatsoever. (wink)

The trailer I chose was for the fake slasher movie called Thanksgiving, directed by Eli Roth. The trailer was produced in the style of holiday type slasher movies like the well known Halloween.The trailer stars jeff rendell as a killer who stalks and kills people as if he is carving a thanksgiving turkey. Jordan Ladd, Jay Hernandez and Roth himself play Rendell's intended victims.

Not only is the voiceover ( Roth, himself) extremely creepy, but the mere sound that the killer's weapon makes as he kills each of his victims makes me close my eyes in disgust every time. The worst scene, by far is the last scene of the actual thanksgiving meal where all the family is gathered around the table and..well.. you'll see when you watch the trailer yourself.

Itchy and Scratchy (from the Simpsons Movie)

Itchy and Scratchy (from The Simpsons Movie)
Directed by David Silverman, United States, 2007, running time 2:24
20th Century Fox

This short comes at the beginning of the highly anticipated Simpsons Movie. The Simpsons television show had been around for many years before this and though there were previous talks about making a movie, they never panned out, until this. With a cult following surrounding the television show, there were a lot of expectations seeing these characters on the big screen for the first time. Ironically the first images we see are not the Simpsons themselves. Instead the movie opens with an Itchy and Scratchy short film.

For an epic movie release, the filmmakers decided to open with an epic feat: a moon landing. Dramatic music paired with dramatic visuals sucks the audience in right away. Just as Itchy and Scratchy are about to claim the moon in peace, Itchy (the mouse) uses the flag to stab Scratchy (the cat) in the chest repeatedly before hitting and breaking his astronaut helmet causing his eye to bulge and seemingly die. Itchy returns to Earth and is framed as a hero. He “did everything he could to save cat” and eventually runs for President with Hillary Clinton and wins. While in office he looks up at the moon and panics. He sees the cat, who is still alive, hold up a sign that reads “I’m telling.” After a bit of Nixon-esqe worrying, pacing, and thinking he has an idea. He moves painting to reveal the nuclear missile control board, sets it to “accidental launch”, and presses the button that sends countless nukes towards the moon. The cat panics and when he screams all of the missiles except one enter his body making him bigger than the moon itself. Then the last war head stops in front of him, and opens its front to let a small boot kick him causing a huge nuclear explosion. As the spectacle of the short sets in we hear Homer booing the short and he address the fictitious movie theater saying, “I can’t believe you paying to something you get on TV for free, everyone here is a giant sucker,” and then he looks directly into the camera, “especially you.” Then the familiar Simpsons title sequence begins.

This is a welcome treat for Simpsons fans and serves as a great opening for the film. It is very cinematic and sets up an epic frame that is immediately destroyed which lets the audience know that it will be the same old Simpsons. Also, I look at this a masterful pivot point into a movie that has so much expectations and fan fare. I think it would be impossible to start the movie with the title sequence like the television show. This separates it as a movie event, and acts as a sort of ice breaker for the audience. This serves as an interesting parallel when held up to Warner Brothers’ playing of Looney Tunes before features in the past. Although it’s not exactly the same, because Itchy and Scratchy are in the show and the short isn’t held up as its own entity, it works in a similar vein. It is a source of small non-linear laughs that engage the audience.

The humor is classic. Think of it as Tom and Jerry on steroids. It is basically the escalation from one physical gag to another. It starts with an unprovoked physical attack and ends in blowing up the moon with nuclear weapons. Of course, being the Simpsons, there are pop-culture references that make us laugh. When Itchy runs for office he runs with Hillary Clinton, which is a quick, simple, and contemporary bit of humor. They then hold is in suspense before the ultimate gag, the explosion. Also, during the landing, the juxtaposition of the calmness and epic nature associated with going to the moon and the unprovoked and over the top physical violence provides a great source of laughs. Overall, this short is entertaining in and of itself, but it also serves the greater good of the feature in which it resides.

Tropic Thunder Fake Trailers

Tropic Thunder Fake Trailers
Ben Stiller
2008

Tropic Thunder is a movie about making a movie, similar to Singin’ In the Rain. Tropic Thunder is the story of actors on location making a movie about the Vietnam War. When the director is unhappy with his leading actors, he takes the advice of the film’s consultant, a Vietnam veteran, and rigs up a number of cameras in the jungle. The actors are flown via helicopter into the jungle, with no creature comforts, and are left to act out the movie. However, a local drug lord becomes convinced they are not actors but Drug Enforcement Agents. A series of comedic misadventures ensues. Dramatic irony plays a large role in the film; the audience knows a great deal more about what is happening than the characters in Tropic Thunder.

While the film is a feature, it begins with four short films. The short films are designed as a form of exposition, to alert the viewer as to the diverse cinematic backgrounds of the leading characters in the film. The short films are in the form of trailers for each of the actors most recent film. Based on the trailers, the audience of Tropic Thunder knows instantly what type of celebrity each of the main characters in the film is.

Alpa Chino is a rap star, with his own line of energy drinks. His commercial resembles a hip-hop music video, complete with female dancers in skimpy outfits. The next is a trailer for Tugg Speedman’s new film "SCORCHER 6: Global Meltdown," an action movie. The trailer mentions the previous movies in the Scorcher series, which implies that it is a long-running franchise. This trailer is followed by Jeff Portnoy’s "The Fatties: Fart 2." Based on the number of fart jokes in the trailer, it is quite apparent that it is a gross-out teen comedy.

The final trailer is for “Satan’s Alley,” which stars Kirk Lazarus, an actor who was won multiple Academy Awards. It features many medium close-ups of Kirk Lazarus and Toby McGuire. The music is highly dramatic, setting the movie apart from the others advertised in tone. The plot concerns a homosexual relationship between monks. There is a two shot which shows one of the actors playing with the others rosary beads, which acts as a form of flirting. This film has the distinction of winning the Beijing Film Festival’s Crying Monkey. This fictitious film festival and award sets up the idea that Kirk Lazarus is a serious actor, unlike the other cast members in the film within a film.

What these trailers demonstrate is that only are the types of film they advertise instantly recognizable genres, but also that the trailers themselves have a high degree of familiarity. A parody only works if the audience is familiar with the material being gently mocked. This series of short films points to the idea that trailers are their own genre, and that trailers could be considered short films

Rain Shower (From My Sassy Girl)

Directed by Jae-yong Kwak, Korea, 2001, approximately 2 minutes

A short film Sonagi, Rain Shower in English, appears in My Sassy Girl, one of my favorite Korean romantic-comedy films. My Sassy Girl tells the story of a male college student, Gyeon-woo (Tae-Hyun Cha), and the girl (Ji-hyun Jun) who is never named in the movie. The girl is an aspiring scriptwriter and keeps sending her scripts to film companies. Throughout the movie, three different short films from different genres are played, and Sonagi is one of them. Sonagi is a short story by Soon-won Hwang and is made to a film in My Sassy Girl. In Sonagi, the rain shower symbolizes the short but heart-rending love between the boy and the girl. They like each other, but they cannot tell what they cannot express what they feel. One day, they spend some time together and are caught in a shower on their way home. The girl, who has weak health, catches a serious cold and soon dies. Before she dies, she asks her grandfather to bury her with her clothes on, the clothes that she was wearing on the day she met the boy.

In My Sassy Girl, the girl writes a new version of Sonagi, in which changes the end. She says that it should not end like this as Gyeon-woo mentions that the Koreans love sad films because of Sonagi. She comes up with a wild perversion of the short film. The dying girl in Sonagi asks that her lover be buried along with her even though he is still alive. The resulting situation is not only quite humorous, but also shows the girl's unusual personality well. In addition to that, Sonagi gives a hint about the girl and Gyeon-woo's love story.

The girl in My Sassy Girl is very pretty and seems sweet and nice. In fact, the actress Ji-hyun Jun, who plays the girl, is always mentioned in the list of Korea’s most beautiful actress. However, contrary to her appearance, her personal characteristics are out of the common. For example, she makes her boy friend put on her high heels just because her feet hurt and she wants him to feel the same. Gyeon-woo cannot say no and puts on the heels without any complaint. She also slaps Gyeon-woo's face in the subway when he loses their bet. As the original Korean title That Bizzare Girl says, she is bizzare. The plotline of Sonagi is supposed to be very romantic, and has made a lot of Koreans cry because of the boy and the girl's touching love story. Nevertheless, the girl changes the ending into something like a horror film. That moment is the one of the scenes that clearly shows how bizzare she is.

In addition to that, the short film Sonagi also implies the short love story of the girl and Gyeon-woo. However, although Sonagi has a sad ending, My Sassy Girl ends with a happy ending. In the original version of Sonagi, the girl and the boy cannot confess their love to each other, and their love story ends as the girl dies. Their love is as short as a rain shower that soaks them on their way home. In My Sassy Girl, Gyeon-woo and the girl love each other but do not say it. They just hang out together like friends. The movie consists of Part One and Part Two, and in Part Two, the girl and Gyeon-woo break up because of the girl's father's demand although they have liked each other for a short period of time. Nonetheless, the story does not end in the way Sonagi does. They meet two years later by chance in a blind date through Gyeon-woo's aunt's mediation and live happily ever after.

Sonagi in My Sassy Girl appears about only 2 minutes in the movie. Still, the short film affects the story of My Sassy Girl. It provides a hilarious scene, as well as describes unusual personality of the girl by changing the ending of the film. No one would imagine the ending of Sonagi in that way. In addition to that, the film insinuates the relationship between the girl and Gyeon-woo. The story of Sonagi makes the viewers think that they will not get together and the movie will not end happily. However, in spite of Sonagi's sad ending, My Sassy Girl ends happily, and that makes the viewer satisfied after watching the movie.