Discussion of BRAINSTORM Split off in it's own thread from Today's News Stories - admin



R_F_Fineman wrote on Nov 18^th, 2011 at 9:25am:

Her death occured after the wrap party to "Brainstorm" which has not played since SF-9. The tragedy overshadowed what I recall was a good SF movie, with a good cast: she costarred with Christopher Walken and the underrated Cliff Robertson. It had a good premise, a memory recording/playback device, which would be retreaded in "Strange Days" (and probably some other titles if we were to put our minds to it.) I have not seen it since anywhere, and a whole generation of moviegoers have no idea that Walken was not always the professional creepy guy or that Natalie Wood actually had a career after the 1960's.

I remember it being a pretty good movie too. It showed up recently on Comcast so I watched it for the first time since the marathon...

:-?

It...has not aged well.


kirok wrote on Nov 18^th, 2011 at 12:58pm:

what kind of wood doesn't float?

Non-witch wood? Lignum Vitae?

kirok wrote on Nov 18^th, 2011 at 12:58pm:

what kind of wood doesn't float?

Natalie Wood!

R_F_Fineman wrote on Nov 18^th, 2011 at 9:25am:

The tragedy overshadowed what I recall was a good SF movie, with a good cast: she costarred with Christopher Walken and the underrated Cliff Robertson.

     You left out Oscar-winning Louise Fletcher!
     I ran this flick in 70mm at the old Cinema 57, where they set the lenses up incorrectly for the format.  Couldnt do anything about it, because it wasnt my booth.


Quote:

It had a good premise...

     Actually, it's a pretty bad movie (Trumbull never could direct), but the SFX are top-notch (as you would expect).
     The film was shot in both 35 & 70mm (the latter being reserved for the "brainscan" sequences).


Quote:

We'll probably have to put "Brainstorm" down among the titles never to be seen on the big screen again for lack of a print.

     Be great if a 70mm print existed!  Love to run that!
     But the movie still blows....

Lousie FLETCHER, not Lasser.

I haven't seen BRAINSTORM in quite a while. I found it a pretty invigorating film at the time. I never did see it in 70mm, though.

And, the best news is that 70mm prints have played both in London and L.A. in the past 5 or so years, with the London screening only last year.

L.A. Connection wrote on Nov 19^th, 2011 at 12:07pm:

Lousie FLETCHER, not Lasser.

     Right, right: too many Louises floating around in my head...


Quote:

And, the best news is that 70mm prints have played both in London and L.A. in the past 5 or so years, with the London screening only last year.

     Theres a chance that the first phase of the 70 install will begin next month.  Cross your fingers!

Of course running a good movie in 70mm would be even better still.  Brainstorm...

Frank wrote on Nov 19^th, 2011 at 11:30pm:

Of course running a good movie in 70mm would be even better still.  Brainstorm...

I'd take Brainstorm over Zardoz. Though maybe a nap or a meal over either.

Metaluna wrote on Nov 19^th, 2011 at 11:59pm:

Frank wrote on Nov 19th, 2011 at 11:30pm: Of course running a good movie in 70mm would be even better still.  Brainstorm... I'd take Brainstorm over Zardoz. Though maybe a nap or a meal over either.

Can we have a Brainstorm costume contest?

Quite curious why folks are so down on BRAINSTORM. It's a pretty well regarded SF film overall. Like I said, I haven't seen it in decades, but I thought it was darn good at the time.
I recall at the time there being a split between critics who saw the film visually and those who seemed to only take it literally. Trumbull, of course, was the mastermind behind the effects of 2001, and, though not as profound, Kubrick's influence on him is evident. SILENT RUNNING is a flawed film, but it's visuals have a poetry about them.

http://content8.flixster.com/photo/11/06/38/11063802_ori.jpg

zardoz and silent running must reprise at the marathon at some point. brainstorm...meh.
[|;{|
   3

Caleb451 wrote on Nov 20^th, 2011 at 11:57am:

Metaluna wrote on Nov 19th, 2011 at 11:59pm: Frank wrote on Nov 19th, 2011 at 11:30pm: Of course running a good movie in 70mm would be even better still.  Brainstorm... I'd take Brainstorm over Zardoz. Though maybe a nap or a meal over either. Can we have a Brainstorm costume contest?

Maybe a recumbent bike race.

L.A. Connection wrote on Nov 20^th, 2011 at 12:22pm:

Quite curious why folks are so down on BRAINSTORM. It's a pretty well regarded SF film overall. Like I said, I haven't seen it in decades, but I thought it was darn good at the time.

I liked it decades ago. Did not like it as much a few months ago. Looks like if you have Comcast it's available to watch online if anyone wants a second look.

I'm not really one to use the term "dated" like its it an expletive. I'm sure the technology isn't up to date, but, like COLOSSUS: THE FORBIN PROJECT, I would like to think the film works on a dramatic level.
I am one who rarely re-sees a film years later and completely flips my opinion of it. Good drama is good drama (or comedy or SF) regardless of advances in special effects, scientific discoveries or social norms. One has to look at the film in the context of when it was made. If you are unable to see movies (or books or music) in that way - it's your loss.


Metaluna wrote on Nov 20^th, 2011 at 1:39pm:

L.A. Connection wrote on Nov 20th, 2011 at 12:22pm: Quite curious why folks are so down on BRAINSTORM. It's a pretty well regarded SF film overall. Like I said, I haven't seen it in decades, but I thought it was darn good at the time. I liked it decades ago. Did not like it as much a few months ago. Looks like if you have Comcast it's available to watch online if anyone wants a second look.

L.A. Connection wrote on Nov 20^th, 2011 at 2:49pm:

I am one who rarely re-sees a film years later and completely flips my opinion of it. Good drama is good drama (or comedy or SF) regardless of advances in special effects, scientific discoveries or social norms.

     Well, sweetie, what if youre someone who thought it blew chunks at the time?  Can that person maintain his opinion?  The story was frail & the denouement was ridiculous, cliched, & eye-rollingly stupid.  In fact, it was almost exactly the same as a similarly dumb SF movie called The Black Hole.


Quote:

One has to look at the film in the context of when it was made. If you are unable to see movies (or books or music) in that way - it's your loss.

     Creative works either stand the test of time or they dont.  I'm sick of this crap that you have to look at aging swill like Strangers on a Train in the "context" of the time it was made.  The film has dated.  Badly.
     On the other hand, La Strada is as good as it ever was.
     Brainstorm, I have little doubt, would fail that test!
     Again on the other hand, the SFX probably DO hold up: there were some matte shots in that movie that were so clean, you couldnt tell they were matte shots.  Really impressive technical work.

FWIW, The first time I saw it I must have been about 13 years old. I don't like Bonne Bell lip gloss anymore either.

Metaluna wrote on Nov 20^th, 2011 at 3:22pm:

FWIW, The first time I saw it I must have been about 13 years old. I don't like Bonne Bell lip gloss anymore either.

To expand upon that...

I think it's inevitable that something that seemed really profound at 3 in the morning when I was 13 wouldn't strike me the same way uh..."several" years later. If the concept hadn't seemed so deep I can't believe I would have endured an hour and a half of Walken and Woods going on and on about their relationship.

I originally had planned to watch this as a "double feature" with Strange Days. I think Brainstorm kind of fades a bit after seeing that. I think SD did something more interesting with the same concept.

Something of a guilty pleasure movie for me (well I don't really feel guilty but I realize it's pretty cheezy) that deals with "going toward the light" is Flatliners. There are a lot of things about it that are very silly but I find it so much fun to watch. I love the creepy if unrealistic abandoned medical building and the preposterously roomy apartments these students live in.

There is also the "marathon effect" that makes drivel like Evolution actually a kind of enjoyable movie. I don't object to showing Brainstorm but I don't think it would be all that well received by the current crowd.

I'll make a couple of final points for now awaiting the opinion of others who haven't chimed in yet.

First, BRAINSTORM got an unjust negative reputation upon release because of the Wood tragedy. A scene had to be shot that her character was written for. It was done with another actor (plus, some body double work on other shots and sequences, etc.). This lead to reports of the movie as a troubled production. Heck, you'd have thought the film was referred to as "the troubled production BRAINSTORM" as much as "Douglas Trumbull's BRAINSTORM". And, virtually every review referred to the drowning.

More importantly, BRAINSTORM is - like SILENT RUNNING and his effects work on 2001 and CLOSE ENCOUNTERS OF THE 3RD KIND - very much a theatrical experience. Few Sfx pioneers have better understood the medium as much as Trumbull. I would agree that a film should work no matter how you see it, but, watching BRAINSTORM off of cable or on the internets or, heaven forbid, on an iPhone just isn't the same.

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_FY2687dO59c/TC4Fc96TWdI/AAAAAAAABvk/Ma72PD-TeLs/s400/brainstorm3%5B1%5D.jpg

Quote:

Creative works either stand the test of time or they dont.  I'm sick of this crap that you have to look at aging swill like Strangers on a Train in the "context" of the time it was made.  The film has dated.  Badly.

"strangers on a train" aging swill?? the ending was a little kookie but the tennis scene is thrilling on the big screen. the portrayal of granger's first wife was 20 years ahead of it's time and it got by the censors only because hitchcock is a master storyteller.

kirok wrote on Nov 20^th, 2011 at 5:59pm:

"strangers on a train" aging swill?? the ending was a little kookie but the tennis scene is thrilling on the big screen.

     Boooooooooooring!  Do you have any idea how many times Ive seen this movie?


Quote:

the portrayal of granger's first wife was 20 years ahead of it's time and it got by the censors only because hitchcock is a master storyteller.

     We completely disagree, and, whats more, you help to make my point: saying something is "ahead of its time" is typical for the defenders of aging swill.  They select small things -- this was the first time this was ever done -- but thats all besides the point: it's whether that first thing holds up as the years go by that determines whether it is timeless or not.
     Lets take an easy example from the so-called "master storyteller" (you can tell I'm not Hitch's greatest fan, right?, though it's mostly due to his fawning hagiographers): the lightning cut of the maid's scream to a train whistle in The Thirtynine Steps.  That was considered to be rather innovative in its day, & absolutely no one would think a thing about it now.  Thats because it was just a clever trick (& very typical of Hitch, who is on the record saying he would put such tricks in his movies for the critics to notice) that was put in for its own sake: if you cut it out, it would make no difference to the narrative.
     On the other hand, there are an overwhelming welter of cinematic techniques in Citizen Kane, & those hold up to an astonishing degree, despite the fact that people have been ripping that movie off for seventy years.  Thats because Welles's devices were put in the service of the story, & are so thoroughly integrated that if you were to try remove them, entire chunks of the narrative would come out with them.  Thats the difference.
     You see Ive spent way too long thinking about these things!

L.A. Connection wrote on Nov 20^th, 2011 at 5:38pm:

First, BRAINSTORM got an unjust negative reputation upon release because of the Wood tragedy. A scene had to be shot that her character was written for. It was done with another actor (plus, some body double work on other shots and sequences, etc.). This lead to reports of the movie as a troubled production. Heck, you'd have thought the film was referred to as "the troubled production BRAINSTORM" as much as "Douglas Trumbull's BRAINSTORM". And, virtually every review referred to the drowning.

     Thats all quite true, but hasnt anything to do with my dismissal of the movie.  I thought it was weak right from the get-go, & the climax is just unbelievably gonzo!
     But I wouldnt mind running it in 70 at the thon.  Ah, the groans we'll hear....


Quote:

More importantly, BRAINSTORM is - like SILENT RUNNING and his effects work on 2001 and CLOSE ENCOUNTERS OF THE 3RD KIND - very much a theatrical experience. Few Sfx pioneers have better understood the medium as much as Trumbull. I would agree that a film should work no matter how you see it, but, watching BRAINSTORM off of cable or on the internets or, heaven forbid, on an iPhone just isn't the same.

     You read the part of my post where I said the effects would hold up, right?
     By the way, you left out Bladerunner in your list: he worked on that as well.

dave, your comparison of citizen kane to strangers on a train reminds me of the old joke:
a man is auditioning his act to some theater managers. he plays the violin while riding a unicycle on a tight rope and simultaneously juggling 3 steak knives with his toungue. one manager says to the other "so what do you think?" the other manager says "he ain't no yasha heifetz"
there's plenty of that cinematograhic sh!t in soat. the mastiff at the top of the staircase, and there's that great scene where the girl drops her compact on the police detectives crotch. (that girl was hitchcock's daughter btw)
surely you can find a better example for the label of aging swill. mildred pierce comes to mind.

Please take the Hitchcock stuff to another thread should you must.

And, yes, Trumbull's involvement in BLADE RUNNER is another feather in his cap. To think that one person had a critical input on the look of 2001, CLOSE ENCOUNTERS and BLADE RUNNER is astounding. That trio are amongst the handful of most influential special effects filled films of all time (and all Pre-CGI).

Brainstorm does not stand the test of time.  Hell, but for the connection to the Natalie Wood tragedy the movie would be all but completely forgotten. 

I recently revisited BRAINSTORM for the first time in ten years.  Does it have some hokey moments?  Sure.  But the ideas and effects sequences are still interesting, and Walken is compelling in his own eccentric way.  I'd be up for a screening come February.

and can we have a christopher walken impersonation contest?

Joe Neff wrote on Nov 28^th, 2011 at 9:28pm:

I recently revisited BRAINSTORM for the first time in ten years.  Does it have some hokey moments?  Sure.  But the ideas and effects sequences are still interesting, and Walken is compelling in his own eccentric way.  I'd be up for a screening come February.

     Only if the 70mm is up & running & Garen can be convinced to rent a print!