POP-CULTURE COLUMN: Disclosure Day better be a CE3K sequel
By Dan Brown They say there are too damn many sequels. I don’t agree – in at least one case. If Disclosure Day isn’t a sequel to Close Encounters of the Third Kind, I’m gonna be pissed. The new Steven Spielberg-directed motion picture about aliens is set to land in theatres on June 12, and I so want it to be the second part of 1977’s Close Encounters. CE3K was the first Spielberg movie I saw in a movie theatre. It blew my nine-year-old brain. Although UFOs were a big deal in the 1970s, it was about more than that: The mystery of the unknown, obsession, belonging, asserting the right of the individual to leave their family. I was sold. So I’ll take a Close Encounters sequel any way I can get it. It doesn’t even have to be a particularly great movie! You may be wondering: How come Dan doesn’t know if Disclosure Day is a sequel or not? You would think, since its debut is only a few days away, I – along with the general public – would understand that much about the plot. But the team behind Disclosure Day is being cagey. No one has said it’s a direct sequel to Close Encounters. However, we do know from the trailers it’s about aliens coming to Earth in flying saucers. And some people connected with the film have been dropping enticing hints. “There are definitely questions posed by Close Encounters that are answered in Disclosure Day,” Emily Blunt told the movie magazine Empire. Blunt, by the way, has been getting positive advance notices for her performance as a TV weather girl who gets up in an unraveling conspiracy. Also, there’s at least two shots in the Disclosure Day trailer that evoke Close Encounters. One has a UFO emerging from a bank of clouds hat, to me, looks like an homage to the climax of CE3K, when the giant mothership descends in full view on Devil’s Tower in Wyoming. There’s also a white house in the woods that looks an awful lot like the one where the little boy gets abducted in Close Encounters. Some are speculating that Disclosure Day is a spiritual sequel – in the same way 1982’s E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial was a spiritual sequel to Close Encounters itself. But that’s not enough for me. You may recall how Star Wars hit theatres about six months before Close Encounters back in the 1970s. I was so jazzed by the combination of these two event movies in close proximity, the combined impact literally changed my life. But looking back, I realize just CE3K on its own would have been a game-changer for me. It sparked my imagination. The characters were so compelling. It made me fall deeper in love with movies. It felt plausible. And it made me . . . optimistic. The message that aliens were here to help us, not hurt us, ran counter to every other alien flick I’d seen by that point. I see more movies at home these days than in the theatres. But a Spielberg film about aliens is a premise I'm not able to resist – and if it’s a sequel, my prayers will have been answered. Dan Brown has covered pop culture for more than 33 years as a journalist and also moderates L.A. Mood’s monthly graphic-novel group.
POP-CULTURE COLUMN: I Hate To Say It, But Spaceballs Isn’t Funny
By Dan Brown As you may have heard, there’s going to be a sequel to Spaceballs, the Mel Brooks Star Wars parody that debuted a long time ago in 1987. Brooks and the cast (a mix of old hands and newcomers) have been doing publicity to drum up interest in the upcoming film, dubbed The New One, which will land in theatres April 23 next year. Providing movie theatres still exist. I suppose, as a sci-fi fan, I should be eagerly anticipating The New One, which promises to bring more Star Wars jokes and new pop-culture references to the big screen. But can I let you in on a secret? I don’t find Spaceballs funny. It might be familiar. It might even be fun to watch. But it ain’t funny. You likely have fuzzy memories of the gags written into the Spaceballs script. For instance: *Pizza the Hutt, the alien glutton who finds himself delicious.. *Barf, a half-human, half-dog alien hybrid who is his own best friend. *Dark Helmet . . . a villain played by Rick Moranis who has a giant helmet. *Daphne Zuniga’s Vespa is a Druish princess. *The Yoda figure is called Yogurt. *The Schwartz is a mystical power derived from merchandising dollars. And so on. Jokes like these are fine. Some of them even bring a half-smile to my face. But not a one of them is hilarious. Spaceballs has certainly achieved a kind of cultural staying power. Somewhere on this planet, on some channel or network, Spaceballs is playing right now. And by dint of ubiquity, it is one of those so-so motion pictures that we convince ourselves is remarkable. Like the Austin Powers films, it achieves influence just by enduring. But it’s not a comedy that achieves greatness. It’s not even the greatest Mel Brooks comedy. It doesn’t break new comedic ground like, say, Blazing Saddles. There’s nothing in Spaceballs to compare to the Blazing Saddles campfire scene where cowboy after cowboy farts until the joke is beaten into the ground, then they let more farts rip and it becomes funny all over again. Talk about audacious for the times! The Star Wars spoof also lacks a weirdly intense lead character, like Gene Wildern, who turned in such a great performance in Young Frankenstein. Besides, if Brooks had been itching to take on Star Wars, he wouldn’t have waited until four years after Return of the Jedi appeared in theatres. By then, the George Lucas trilogy was already retreating from the public consciousness. (Spoiler for younger readers: Star Wars came back!) It’s certainly not the greatest Star Wars parody, either. In fact, you could argue that the definitive comic spin on Star Wars still has yet to be made. There’s been a long history of attempts. The 1978 short film Hardware Wars was the first try, followed when the internet was in its infancy by the 1997 online short Troops. The slam against Lucas is that he takes his space opera too seriously. Look at the fact he never mocked his own creation the way the Star Trek brain trust does with its animated series Lower Decks. At least Trek’s producers realized the comedy potential of poking fun at themselves. (Granted, Seth MacFarlane’s The Orville beat Lower Decks to the punch by three years) Of course, some crusty Star Wars fans would likely say the Book of Boba Fett itself was an inadvertent self-parody! There’s no shortage of Star Wars material to work with, so how about it, Hollywood? Just mocking The Phantom Menace on its own could inspire so many laughs! Dan Brown has covered pop culture for more than 33 years as a journalist and also moderates L.A. Mood’s monthly Graphic-Novel Group book club.
I Hate To Say It, But Movie Dinosaurs Are Not Real
By Dan Brown Dinosaur movies are a thing of the past – and the future. Specifically the near future. This July will see the release of Jurassic World Rebirth, the latest chapter in the long-running series about the prehistoric creatures running amok in our time. This year will also see the debut of Primitive War, which is set in 1968 and fuses the dino flick with the Vietnam War genre (no release date has been set as of this writing). Then, down the road a little bit, Flowervale Street is among the Mesozoic Era offerings coming to the silver screen next year. There have been so many dinosaur pictures, you could trace the history of Hollywood using them, from the age of stop-motion animation to today’s CGI. They’ve gone from clumsy clay creatures to sophisticated computer creations. And that’s the problem. However much time and money the FX wizards in Tinseltown spend to convince us these monsters look like the genuine article, please refrain from calling them “real” or “lifelike.” We can do without any online comments this summer along the lines of, “The T-Rex in Jurassic World Rebirth is so realistic” or “I can’t believe how real that brontosaurus looked!” Because how would we know? There is no one alive on the planet today who has seen a velociraptor or stegosaurus in the wild. There are no photos of dinosaurs. There is no video. No primary-source records exist of how actual dinosaurs actually appeared. There are no dinosaurs in zoo settings for us to observe. They lived in the distant past, and while we have unearthed fossil proof of their existence, none of them left any Polaroids which humans can use to judge the “realism” factor of these movies. Unlike, say, the cowboys who populate the Western genre of movie – film fans can say with some confidence if a motion picture such as Tombstone or Wyatt Earp comes close to the mark. Photos of cowboys from the 1800s do exist. Now, to be fair, the people who say things like, “Steven Spielberg has created some authentic-looking dinosaurs” might not mean it literally. They might mean something else, such as “The dinosaurs in this movie accord with what experts currently theorize about the appearance of dinosaurs.” (And the emotions the screen lizards evoke – like fear and excitement – are certainly real.) But here’s the thing: Dinosaur experts who have predicted what these creatures looked like (and what the planet’s surface looked like back then) don’t always agree, nor do their opinions stay static. The thinking changes, and our shared concept of how dinosaurs appeared also changes. I am not a paleontologist, but I do recall there was a moment in the history of studying dinosaurs when the conventional wisdom changed – dinosaurs had more feathers, the media-consuming public was told some years ago. So the dinosaurs on screen changed with that shift in thinking. Guys like Spielberg want to get it right, they want to be up on the current theories. But experts can be wrong. I’m not trying to be conspiracy-minded. However, if the plot of Jurassic Park ever does come to pass in the real world, and humankind somehow manages to resurrect dinosaurs, it’s a safe bet we will discover that the conventional thinking is wrong in some important ways. For all we know, the fire-breathing Godzilla may be the most accurate depiction of a dinosaur that the movie industry has ever come up with. In which case, they better evacuate Tokyo as soon as possible! Dan Brown has covered pop culture for more than 32 years as a journalist and also moderates L.A. Mood’s monthly graphic-novel group.
