Classicism in film

Classicism in Film.

                I was once told that a classic was defined by the fact that it was something that had been around for more than one hundred years.  When I was born the film industry had only existed for over fifty years, talking pictures (pictures with sound) only twenty four. Now that I am sixty years old the industry has finally passed its centennial, and films such as The Great Train Robbery (1903) can truly be called classics in a more traditional sense.

                Culturally this is a novelty. In the 1890s the invention of the moving pictures was truly a new idea. Theater had been the only existing form of dramatic art ever since the ancient Greeks had first put on the plays of Sophocles, Euripedes and Aristophanes. The trouble with Theater is that the artistry of it can only survive in our memory. We only know that Edmund Kean, David Garrick, Edwin Booth and, before them, Richard Burbage, were great actors because someone wrote that they were. We only have written accounts of their performances to inform us of the tricks that they would use to capture the attention of their audiences.

                That all changed with the advent of film.

                Now, by way of moving picture, we could see how the divine Sarah Bernhardt could emote on stage-never mind that we couldn’t hear her. There it is, trapped on film seemingly forever for the ages. But even that, at one time, was transient. Sadly, the nitrate stock used for film at the time had a tendency to deteriorate over time.  When this was discovered nitrate stock was abandoned for superior technology, celluloid and then plastic, which lasted considerably longer.  Then movies went from black and white to color, and, whereas the former has a tendency to last a long time, color fades faster.  Three strip Technicolor, however, was a process that allowed for accurate restoration, and had a more permanent lasting image than other (and, unfortunately, subsequent) processes.  And that was the way things stood until the 1990s.

                The future of the art was drastically changed with the advent of television (and later, computer) technologies. We didn’t know it at the time (the 50s, when TV came into play), but these technological advances would prove to be the saviors of film, guaranteeing it a future well into the coming centuries possibly. Currently an old movie can have its images transferred to computer and with digital techniques restored to its former glory. We have seen the beauty of this with restorations of films such as Gone With The Wind, The Wizard Of Oz, King Kong and Casablanca.

                The fact that I can watch Orson Welles throw a temper tantrum in Citizen Kane in 2013 is mind boggling to me.  To see King Kong in the form that it was originally intended to be seen is a miracle of modern science.  By all rights these films should have faded away years ago, and in many cases almost did.  Instead, a technician can digitally scan a film and remove dirt that has been accumulated over the years.

                Think on it; what would we have lost? Can you imagine a world without Bogie looking into Ingrid Bergman’s eyes? Or how about losing the scene of the Dwarves crying over Snow White’s immobile form? Would you miss the visual image of Leonardo Di Caprio showing Kate Winslet how to really experience the movement of air around her at the bow of the Titanic, unaware of the coming tragedy that will end their short relationship?

                In 1925, via The Lost World, and 1993, in Jurassic Park, we were able to see before our very eyes how a dinosaur might actually look and act via the magic of special effects photography. In 1956 we could sit in a theater and watch as Michael Todd took us on a journey Around The World In Eighty Days, exposing us to sights and vistas we might never see otherwise as long as we live. In 2009 we were able to see, by way of Avatar, what an environment on an alien planet might be like. And in every film that we can save we will have records of performances, such as George C. Scott’s in 1970’s Patton and Vivian Leigh’s in 1939’s Gone With The Wind, that will truly stand the test of time; largely because we can see it right there on the screen of whatever device that we have to watch movies on.

                And the truly amazing thing is that we have the promise that we will be able to do this one hundred years from now, because the technology will allow it.

Walt Disney and Nazism.

(This was a letter to a friend in response to his comments about Walt Disney liking Hitler.)

Walt Disney and Naziism

I have been thinking about our conversation regarding Walt Disney the other day in which you referred to him as a Nazi. Because of certain controversial viewpoints he held I can’t entirely disagree with you, but I feel that term is a little strong. A more accurate terminology would be fascistic because you can be a fascist without being a Nazi, but you can’t be a Nazi without being a fascist. Moreover, Disney, based on evidence, was no Nazi.

Here is why I say this.

I am also a fan of the comics’ artist Windsor McKay. McKay is famous for drawing the first animated cartoon “Gertie the Dinosaur”, as well as drawing the highly surrealistic strips for the Hearst papers, “Dreams of a Welsh Rarebit Fiend” and “Little Nemo” (“Little Nemo” was the source of inspiration for the animation in Tom Petty’s “Running down a Dream” video). I was alarmed to find out that McKay, as well as his employer, William Randolph Hearst, was a fan of Benito Mussolini. When you mentioned that Disney was a fan of Hitler, I was able to put this into perspective. Both men (Mussolini and Hitler), early in their career, would appeal to children of immigrants in this country, because through self-determination and discipline they would rise above the poverty level that they were born to, and achieve what could be called success. (This would also appeal to many Americans in terms of “the American Dream”, which, most obviously, is represented in the story of Abraham Lincoln. In fact, Lincoln was so much a hero of Disney’s, that he not only built the Audio-animatronics presentation “Great Moments with Mr. Lincoln” at Disneyland; he included in the ticket books an extra ticket for the show, so that everyone could experience the show essentially free.) At the time that their careers as powerful leaders were starting no one, of course, dreamt of the actual darkness that resided in their souls.

If Disney admired Hitler early in his career, he certainly didn’t when the beginnings of World War II rolled around. Disney willingly turned over part of his studio to the Army during wartime, and went on a goodwill tour of South America in 1941 that is credited with helping to stem the tide of Nazism in the countries that his group visited. To be truthful, the reason that he did these things wasn’t altogether altruistic; the failure of “Pinocchio” and “Fantasia” had plunged the studio into financial chaos, and through the agreement with the government, Disney initially hoped for government funds that would save his studio from ruin. He ultimately didn’t need them; the trip provided inspiration for two highly profitable films, “Saludos Amigos” and “Three Caballeros”, which saved the studio (see the film “Walt y El Grupo”). But the Studio’s contribution to the war effort is well documented; they, as well as Warner Brothers, contributed many educational cartoons for the military, as well as cartoons used for propaganda purposes.

You criticized Disney for using only Germanic fairy tales as a basis for his films, as proof of his Nazism. There are two things wrong with this. Primarily, the blame for America’s fascination with Germanic fairy tales doesn’t reside with Walt. He was only making films based on stories that almost everyone in the United States had, and has, grown up with. The blame resides with the Brothers Grimm. When they published their book based on their research into folklore, their success was worldwide; this means that their book was a success in Europe, and therefore in the British Empire and its colonies. And, as Victoria was the world power in those days, and the United States was only a “wannabe”, if the book was read in Britain, it was read in the States also.

Secondarily, Walt only made two movies based on Germanic fairy tales; “Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs” and “Cinderella”. Although the tale of “Sleeping Beauty” is to be found in “Grimm’s Fairy Tales”, Disney was actually inspired to make the film by the Tchaikovsky ballet; so much so that the ballet’s music was used on the soundtrack. Tchaikovsky based his ballet not on the Grimm’s retelling of the story, but on the version by Charles Perrault, a Frenchman, which Disney also went to as a source. Furthermore, “The Sorcerer’s Apprentice” in “Fantasia” is a tale that dates back to Roman times (as is “Ferdinand the Bull” which is one of the studios shorts), the Nutcracker Suite section (of course) uses music based on the Russian folk tale of the same name, and the “Pastorale” section uses imagery from Greek Mythology. Although “The Little Mermaid” was finally filmed in the mid-eighties, Disney was drawing up plans to make it as a film just after the release of “Pinocchio.” Hans Christian Anderson (a Dane), of course, wrote “The Little Mermaid”, and “Pinocchio” was by Carlo Collodi (an Italian).

 I don’t disagree with you regarding Disney’s attitudes, however. He was a fanatical anti-communist (who probably participated in the ‘50s blacklisting, and used the term “pinko” freely in conversation), was profoundly anti-union (he had been badly hurt by a strike in the early ‘40s), and was part of the group of studio heads that L.B. Mayer had called together, that decided to run Orson Welles out of town on a rail for what he was doing to William Randolph Hearst in “Citizen Kane”. Most of the other studio heads had reason to be afraid of Hearst; Louella Parsons had a little black box that contained incriminating information on some of the biggest stars in Hollywood, which she used to blackmail Mayer into taking action against Welles. Disney, from what I can see, had no such problem. At the time, the studio was only making animated pictures, not live-action ones, and so (to me) his judgment is suspect.

I hope you understand that this is not argumentative, it is sent in the spirit of clarification.

Script for Montlake Passage

Originally this was entitled "Ship Canal Passage" because the boats pass through the Ship Canal in Seattle. "Montlake Passage" had a better sound to it.

Video: Ship Canal Passage
By
Patrick S. Poplin.

Location: Lake Union, the Ship Canal, and the Montlake Bridge.

The video should have a slow, lyrical, waltz-like feel to it. Musical underscoring can either be classical (such as “The Blue Danube”), movie score (such as “Love Theme” from Dances With Wolves), or pop song (such as David Crosby singing “On The Delta). We start with an Extreme Close-up of the Space Needle (the beach at Gasworks Park POV), and we slowly pull back to a Long Shot that reveals all of Lake Union, with sailboats cutting gracefully through the water, and yachts doing the same.

Cut to-

Medium Shots of boats cutting through the water. This is a montage of different boats going different directions, and should feel like a dance. Consider using dissolves to cross-fade between images.

Dissolve to-

LS of Lake Union, Ivar’s Salmon House barge POV. Pan Left, gracefully, to reveal the entrance to the Ship Canal, with the University Bridge in the background. Zoom in slowly on the canal as it goes under the bridge, if it is possible, to give the feel of sailing under it

Dissolve to-

Extreme Longshot of the Montlake Bridge, center of the University Bridge POV. Boat in foreground, and we watch as it moves toward Montlake.

Dissolve (cut?) to-

MS of Montlake Bridge, University of Washington Medical Center POV. Consider a Tracking Shot -style camera move to reveal the bridge-maybe coming around a tree or bush to reveal it.

Cut to-

LS of traffic on the bridge, Husky Stadium POV.

Cut to-

Tracking Shot –style camera move along eastern sidewalk of the bridge, starting from the stadium, and continuing toward the bridge tower. Pan Up to a MS of tower, and then back to street again.

Cut to-

LS of northeastern side of the bridge (across the canal), southeastern side of bridge POV. Pan Down slowly to walkway under the bridge.

Cut to-

LS, sidewalk underneath northern side of bridge POV, of Sailboat as it slows to a stop and signals bridge tower that it wants to pass.

Cut to-

MS of bridge tower, as it clangs the bell announcing that the bridge will soon raise.

Cut to-

Close-up of traffic light going from green to red.

Cut to-

MS of guard rail descending, and bridge starting to rise.

Cut to-

MS, UW Medical Center POV. The bridge is rising.

Cut to-

CU, sidewalk underneath northern side of bridge POV. The bridge, overhead, is still rising.

Cut to-

LS, UW Stadium POV. The bridge rises to its fullest height and stops.

Cut to-

LS, sidewalk underneath bridge POV, of Sailboat as it starts up and moves forward. Consider panning along with it.

Cut to-

CU of gap in bridge as Sailboat passes through.

Cut to-

MS, sidewalk underneath northern side of bridge POV, of Sailboat from the rear as it continues moving through the canal. Pan with it.

Cut to-

LS, Husky Stadium POV. The bridge starts to lower.

Cut to-

CU, sidewalk underneath northern side of bridge POV. The bridge, overhead, is lowering.

Cut to-

MS, Trail from boathouse on northeastern side of bridge POV. The bridge comes back together.

Cut to-

MS of guardrail ascending.

Cut to-

CU of traffic light going from red to green.

Dissolve to-

LS of the rear of the Sailboat as it continues through the canal. Pan with it and Zoom out slowly, to reveal Lake Washington in the distance.

Cut to-

Fade out. Allow music to play out.

The City and the Sea at the Edge of Night

The City meets the Sea
At the edge of night,
And they speak in low whispers.
The things of which they tell
Would make the mountains blush,
If they only knew.

I came to the water's edge
And overheard them mumbling.
It was an argument I'm sure,
For the City boasted of its vibrancy,
Of how it shone through the mists
Rising from the jagged, glistening rocks,
That scattered over
the ever-reaching beach,
And how a beautiful aura dazzled
Therefore.

And I'm sure that all the Sea
Answered back was;
"Peace,
Beautiful peace."

Food Marketing in the Inner City.

Answers to essay questions in a quiz in Introduction to Marketing class;

What I see here are four ethics questions. They seem easy to answer at first, until you start taking action to resolve the problems. What I see is not a question of right or wrong; it is a question of how to implement the necessary changes.

Question 1 states the problem as being one where the inner city grocery stores are making a profit by selling to its consumers food that is not necessarily healthy for them. First of all, is any packaged food which is sold over the counter really healthy for you? This is a question that has raged ever since I was a kid, and before that. Packaging involves the use of preservatives, which, at best water down the overall quality of the food, and at worst put toxins in our bodies that are harmful. Aside from that, the problem becomes educating the local consumers to the fact that the store now carries quality food. 7-Eleven, Inc. has faced that on a grand scale ever since the 1990s. For one thing, Alcoholic beverages, cigarettes, and candy are high profit items, and are, therefore, the company’s bread and butter. Secondly, 7-Eleven had a reputation for poor quality food, which was brought on by the fact that hot dogs were very often left on the grill rollers too long (among other things). Since 2001, 7-Eleven has been trying to change people’s opinion of the stores by bringing in fresh foods on a daily basis. They are depending heavily on word of mouth to promote this idea (but I judge that this is only moderately successful); yet they still rely on the old standbys of beer, cigarettes, and candy for high profits. Therefore, in answer to the question, the biggest problem is that profitability is the biggest driver for stores, such as those inner city ones, and until they are willing to take a little bit of a loss (and advertise heavily), in order to build a long range reputation for quality, that is the way things will stand.

Question 2 states the fact that food costs more than it does in the suburbs, and wants us to place the ball squarely in the backyards of either the marketers or government and the church. I see a problem here. Primarily the fact that food costs so much in the inner city is directly related to the facts stated in Question 1. If food, as a product, doesn’t move as fast as it ought to, it has to be thrown away. That is because food has a limited shelf life. Therefore the marketer has to swallow whole the cost of the food item, as well as missing out on whatever profit the item would have brought in. Does the marketer have any responsibility to sell quality, healthy food? Sure he does, but it is profit that puts bread on the table. And if we are talking about major retailers like Safeway, Kroger’s, or Albertson’s, then we have to understand that the design of the system means that each individual store supplies its shelves out of the daily profits that store brings in. The corporation gleans off the top, while the individual store does all of the work. Now, as in the case of 7-Eleven, it can become the company’s mission to change the image and supply quality foods to its franchises and outlets; but in order to keep the price low, the company would have to eat the cost of the wasted food product, and that would (and does) eat into their profits.

Well, if the corporation will not lower the price, then maybe we can pass some laws that put a ceiling on the price tags of the food items. The companies would naturally balk at this idea, unless they were reimbursed for this by the government, and that ain’t gonna happen, Charley, because that would mean a tax hike, which the voters won’t go for. In addition, demanding that nonprofit organizations such as churches contribute isn’t likely to happen either, because you can’t force people to give when they don’t want to. Now churches and nonprofits often do establish things like food banks and soup kitchens for the homeless on their own accord, but it shouldn’t be expected of them. Once again, the answer is for the markets to educate the people that they will be carrying quality food that they will want to purchase and eat. This also answers Question 3, which asks if these institutions (government, schools, churches, etc.) should take over the function of getting nutritional food to the poor. The answer, for all of the above reasons, is no, unless, of course, they offer (and are willing) to do it.

Question 4 asks what I would do in this case if I were a grocery store owner. There is one point I haven’t mentioned, and that is that the kind of store that deals in sales of beer, cigarettes, and candy, often attracts what might be called an undesirable element. This element tends to scare away people who might otherwise be interested in buying a better quality food item. Many storeowners are scared to lose this clientele because of the money they spend. In actuality, however, providing better quality food is more likely to attract a better kind of clientele that will spend more money. Once again, this means educating the local consumers as to the fact that you are carrying a better quality of food. Jack-in-the-box suffered greatly from bad press about the quality of their food. In the 1980s, they tried to change their image with the “Food is better at the box” ad campaign. It took time, but they have succeeded to a great degree in the end. Now, if they could only improve their service.

Therefore, the issue isn’t really what is ethically right; it is how to achieve those goals. It takes time, money, and effort; which, translated, means great cost to the company. The company, using Jack-in-the-box as a model, needs to realize that the investment is harsh, but worthwhile in the end.

The Good Guy (A Play)

The Good Guy is a play that I wrote in high school (Homestead High, in the picture), inspired by my friendship with a developmentally challenged (what we used to call “mentally retarded”) boy named John Emanuel. In recent years I updated it, only to find (when I was through) that over 80% of the play was what I had originally written. John and myself are represented by the characters of George and Younger Henry (there is also an older version of the character) in the play, and in this excerpt they are about to meet.


(Lights come up full onstage, as the spotlight on George fades out, and he circles around to the center of the main stage as if he’s walking to class. Hecklers 1, 2 and 3 enter; one from stage right, one from stage left, and one from center. The third one is silent, weaving in between the other actors and making faces and obscene gestures at George.)


1st Heckler: Hey guys! Look over here! Do you see what I see?

2nd Heckler: Yeah, the “Brain!” (They laugh and begin to circle George.) Why don’t we push him and see if he fights back?

(The 3rd Heckler pushes George, who tries to ignore it.)

George: Hey!

1st Heckler (Taunting voice.): Ah! He doesn’t want to fight!

George: Shut up!

2nd Heckler: Hey, listen to the Man! C’mon and fight me, “Brain!” (He clenches fists and assumes mock fight position.) C’mon and fight me!

George (Indignant.): What’s with you?

(Younger Henry enters stage right, carrying textbooks, and overhears this.)

1st Heckler: Hey! Answer this question: what is two times two?

George: Uh . . . Four.

2nd Heckler: Spell “antidisestablishmentarianism!”

George: I can’t!

Younger Henry (starting to run toward the 3 Hecklers ): Hey you! Scram!

(The 3 Hecklers, taken by surprise, run off the stage, and exit through the audience.)

Younger Henry (A bit nervous about meeting George, to himself): Well, here goes nothing! (Crosses to George.) You shouldn’t let them treat you like that!

George (Still a bit shaken): Yeah, I know. But if I try to stop them they beat me up! And I don’t like to fight people!

Younger Henry: It kind of makes you mad, doesn’t it?

George: Yeah.

Younger Henry: If they tease you like that, just ignore them. You shouldn’t have to answer their stupid questions! In fact, don’t!

George: I don’t know why they do that though!

Younger Henry: Well, you really shouldn’t even worry about it. However, I look at it this way; They call you an M.R., but look at them! Look at how they act! They’re jerks! They’re worse than anything that they can call you!

George (Not shaken anymore, but quiet and thoughtful): Yeah, I suppose so. (After a moment:) Have you ever had people treat you like that?

Younger Henry: Yeah. I guess so. At one time.

(George looks at Younger Henry.)

George: What’s your name?

Younger Henry: Henry.

George: Mines’ George. (Pause.) Do you think that you could keep a secret?

Younger Henry: Yeah.

George (backing out): No, I really shouldn’t tell you.

Younger Henry: No, I can keep a secret! Come on and tell me!

George: You might not like me after I say this.

Younger Henry: Hey, try me.

George (hesitating): Wel-ll, promise you won’t laugh at me?

Younger Henry: I promise.

George (squeezing it out in a whisper): I-I have brain damage.

Younger Henry (normal volume): So?

George (surprised): Y-you mean it does not bother you that I have brain damage?

Younger Henry: Why should it?

George: It’s just that sometimes it bothers people.

Younger Henry: It doesn’t bother me. I like all sorts of people. It doesn’t make a difference to me whether they’re like everyone else or not. In fact, I prefer people who don’t fit in with all the rest. They’re more real, you know what I mean? So, why should it matter to me if you’re brain damaged? What is important to me is that you’re a nice person. That’s what matters!

George (smiles): Cool!

(The school bell for class rings.)

George: Well, there’s the bell to go to class! I’ll see you again some other time.

Younger Henry: Yeah, nice meeting you!

TV and Video practicum analyses of "The Mask Of Zorro"

The Mask of Zorro is a film which came out in 1998. It was a property which had been in development for eight years. The property is owned by Zorro Productions, a company owned by John Gertz and his sister Nancy. Their father, Mitchell Gertz had been the agent of author Johnston McCulley who had created the character of Zorro, and had subsequently become owner of all rights regarding the character. Upon his death, the rights passed to his children.

In 1990 the Gertzes started exploring the possibilities of a new feature film involving the character. As is usual in Hollywood, the script was kicked around until it crossed the desk of Steven Spielberg, who happened to be a Zorro fan from way back. At that point, the project was greenlighted. Amblin’ (Steven’s production company) and Zorro Productions would co-produce, and Tri-Star Pictures would distribute a film called The Mask of Zorro.

The story is a mixing of two legends, the legend of Zorro as created by the original author, and the legend of Joaquin Murieta and his brother Alejandro. In the 1820’s Don Diego de la Vega, the alter ego of Zorro, is robbed of his wife (through murder) and child (by kidnapping) by the departing governor of California, Don Montero, and is left to rot in prison. Twenty years pass, and Diego escapes from prison when he learns that Montero is returning to California. At the same time the Murieta brothers, Joaquin and Alejandro, have been parading around like California Robin Hoods, robbing from the rich and giving to the poor, when they are apprehended by a United States calvary officer who has teamed up with Montero, named Captain Love. Alejandro escapes, only to see his brother commit suicide and be beheaded by Captain Love. The story which follows is a passing-of-the-torch story, in which Diego and Alejandro team up to fight Montero and Captain Love, in order to save California. Added into the mix is the fact that Diego’s daughter, Elena, has been raised by Montero into a fine young woman who does not know who her real father is (nor what her supposed father is planning to do), and has fallen for a scruffy bandit, Alejandro, who will become the new Zorro.

As a character which has been around for the better part of a century (the first Zorro story appeared in print in 1919), Zorro brings some baggage with him. Although Antonio Banderas (Alejandro) is the first Hispanic actor to play the part in the movies, the character has come to represent a positive role model to the Hispanic people the world over. Even though this film is purely melodrama, the Gertzes made sure that elements of this were a part of the point of view of this film. This is high adventure, with clear cut heroes (Diego and Alejandro) and a heroine (Elena), as well as clear cut villains (Montero and Captain Love), but all through the picture there is the sense that this is about an entity, Zorro, who is a hero to pre-statehood Californians. This is, indeed, what has always attracted me to the character; he does things simply because he believes in right and wrong, and not because he has deep, dark, psychological underpinnings (such as Batman has been portrayed in recent years). Zorro dresses in his black costume because he is a classic outlaw; meaning that the mask obscures his face so he cannot be recognized, and the color is black because it blends in with the night, and for no other purpose.

As stated, Antonio Banderas starred, along with Sir Anthony Hopkins (Diego), Catherine Zeta Jones (Elena), Stuart Wilson (Montero), and Matthew Letscher (Captain Love). The production crew consisted of Steven Spielberg, Walter Parkes and Laurie MacDonald (co-executive producers along with John Gertz), Martin Campbell (director), Ted Elliott, Terry Rossio and John Eskow (screenwriters), Phil Meheux (Director of Photography), Cecilia Montiel (Production Designer), Michael Atwell (Art Director), Graciela Mazon (Costume Designer), and James Horner (Composer). Also of note, Bob Anderson, who had started teaching Errol Flynn, and even played Darth Vader in some scenes of the Star Wars movies, was fencing master.

Martin Campbell stated that he wanted the film to look “like one of those big Hollywood epics-with tremendous action, romance, and a lot of fun.” The look of the film, then, is somewhat bright, and full of color, as opposed to the dark, moody look typical of many of today’s action films. The production was filmed in Mexico, according to producer David Foster, because “It was important that the locations reflected the era in which our story is set.” Great expanses of land and several haciendas were what was needed, and Mexico fit the bill. Celia Montiel concentrated on historical accuracy by researching the period heavily (Pictures and paintings of Mexico from the late 1700’s to 1860’s were highly influential). One of her most phenomenal designs was a mine set which you would have thought was a model, but was built full scale, and then had to be blown up. She worked heavily with costume designer Graciela Mazon to create a rich textured look on the screen, using heavy materials. Alejandro as Zorro has an outfit that fits into his environment, which flows with his movement to make it part of the surrounding space.

When Spielberg saw what Campbell had filmed, he proclaimed that he was the best action director that he had seen. Campbell, in the opening scene, in which a crowd is forced to watch an execution (subsequently stopped by Zorro), hoped to evoke the panic and chaos of the fall of Saigon. He did this effectively by intercutting medium shots of the crowd in uproar, with expansive shots of Zorro swinging over the heads of the crowd by his whip. Campbell knows exactly what action the audience wants to see, and the way they want to see it. A prime example is a duel between Alejandro and Elena (referred to by the cast as “sexy swordfight”), which is full of double entendres, light sexual play, and action; which is very satisfying as entertainment. One of the toughest problems in sound editing, incidentally, is matching the sound of swords clashing to the image on the screen. The team received an Academy Award nomination for their work, I believe, as well as for the quality of the sound, too.

The target audience for any action film is the fifteen year old male, but I think the producers also wanted to target audiences that had watched Douglas Fairbanks, Tyrone Power, and Guy Williams. Especially since they had Catherine Zeta Jones playing Elena, this would also mean a heavy female interest that was important to the core popularity of the films dating as far back as Fairbanks. The marketing certainly reflects this, because the final song, “I want to spend my life loving you,” sung by Marc Anthony and Tina Arena, was a big hit.

The marketing has been interesting. There have been no toys associated with the movie (to my surprise), which indicates that they wanted to touch an older audience. As has been mentioned, there have been CDs of the soundtrack available (I believe you still can get them). There was a novelization of the movie (this was followed by a series of juvenile novels which, although featuring Don Diego as Zorro, were definitely spurred on by the movie), posters, and no less than 3 variations of the film on DVD. Definitely look for Blu-ray. I have hanging on my wall two plastic epees, a mask, a hat, and (in my closet) a cape; all of which was marketed as a Halloween costume.

The DVD provides a link to the Zorro Productions online website. Here you can get information about the movie, as well as information about past Zorros. There is some merchandise available here, such as the DVDs (there was a sequel-The Legend of Zorro- which I liked, but it tanked at the box office), books, CDs, and posters. Also, you can rent the film online from Netflix, and can probably download it from there, too.

As far as my personal opinion of the film’s quality and impact, if you haven’t guessed already, I loved it! A Zorro fan’s dream come true! I love the fact that Antonio Banderas, himself, is a fan and says “There is a message here in ‘Zorro’ for the entire Hispanic community. He fought for justice. He fought against poverty. This is an especially important model for kids, especially today, and especially here in Mexico.” He understands that Zorro is a role model, and it shows in his portrayal of the character. He is Zorro!

Z