Movie blooper Internet sites spawns interest in film-nitpicking
Movie blooper Internet sites spawns interest in film-nitpicking
By Vishnu K. Mahmud
JAKARTA (JP): It is one of the most tragic scenes ever filmed.
A young mother tucks her children to bed in the third class cabin
of the Titanic, knowing that they are all doomed. In another
room, an elderly couple embraces on their bunk as the icy cold
waters of the Atlantic begin to rush into their cabin. As the
audience begins to weep, we see Leonardo DiCaprio and Kate
Winslet frantically consider their options. But wait! What is
there in the background? Isn't that the same doomed young family
and old couple from the Third Class floors (that we've cried
about earlier) boarding a First Class lifeboat?
Film Bloopers (mistakes in a movie) are the scourges of the
entertainment industry. Movies are supposed to present an
escapist environment for the audience as a diversion from their
"real" lives. It is a domain where the characters are drop-dead
gorgeous (always), the stories have happy endings (occasionally)
and the plot is never predictable (rarely). Thus said, the
creation and presentation of a feature film should be executed
flawlessly to entertain the audience.
But for the observant audience member (the one with the
Sherlock Holmes observations skills), bloopers can be a major
distraction. Take the ever-popular Matrix for example. In the
beginning of the film, Trinity is on the phone and we see the
computer doing a telephone trace. She is tracked and the police
arrive along with the dreaded "Agents" in the crisp warm night.
They try to catch her and the battle ensues. But did anyone
notice the time of the trace? Feb. 19, 1998 at 13:24:18. Or 1:24
p.m. As in the afternoon. Oops!
Another example is Star Wars: A New Hope. R2-D2 projects the
holographic message of Princess Leia on Obi-Wan Kenobi's table.
Along with her miniature projection are three items arranged
neatly on the table. When the frame changes for a close-up of the
Princess, there are only two objects left on the tabletop.
Even the venerable classics are not immune. Consider
Casablanca, arguably one of the best films of all time. Rick
Blane waits for his love in the rainy Paris train station. His
trench coat is drenched. He gets the message stating that Elsa
cannot join him for reasons unknown. His heart shattered, he
throws away the message as the train begins to pull out of the
station. Wearing a DRY trench coat.
The Internet is the ideal information depot for such trivial
pursuits. The Nitpicker's Site (http://www.nitpickers.com) is one
sample of the treasure troves of information online. The website
offers various films that have anomalies, blunders and bad
editing. Apart from the technical aspect of movie making,
Nitpickers also provides a forum for historical and scientific
inaccuracies (for which Hollywood is always famous -- explosions
and sounds in space, a vacuum, is just one of them). The site
also invites web surfers to share their insights and information
on their favorite movies.
Movie Bloopers.com (http://www.moviebloopers.com) is another
site worth stopping by, although it lacks the hundreds of titles
that Nitpickers have. For those who enjoy Indian movies,
BollywoodBloopers.com (http://www.bollywoodbloopers.com) may
tickle your fancy.
The acclaimed Internet Movie Database (http://www.imdb.com) is
still the ultimate source for movies, although they lack blooper
reels or discussions. It is, however, an excellent resource to
find a movie you once saw but whose title you can't remember.
For those who are extremely picky about what movie to watch
(good reviews, bad reviews, even worse editing), you can go to
Rotten Tomatoes (yes, the one with Vice President Quayle's "e")
at http://www.rottentomatoes.com for all viewpoints on the planet
to help you decide if you want to see a particular movie or skip
it. Most Internet portals (such as Yahoo! or Astaga!com) or
newspaper websites (The New York Times or The Jakarta Post) also
have movie reviews.
Why even go to these sites? Why not just enjoy the movie?
You could. You can still watch The Titanic over and over again
but this time you can be looking for something new, something
that was missed. It would be like spotting Alfred Hitchcock in
his movies (the acclaimed director is famous for being an extra
in his own films). It would give the average viewer a more
critical eye for details, thus limiting the amount of
inaccuracies (and junk) dished out by Hollywood.
The world can only take so much empty plot lines, boom
microphone sightings or characters mysteriously changing clothes
in the same scene. By being more demanding, the film industry
would have to be more careful in what it produces.
Why careful? Take "historical" films such as U-571, the
gripping drama of an American World War II submarine out to
capture an enemy encryption device. Producers (and Hollywood in
general) have a tendency of using historical facts and altering
them to make the story more interesting and sellable. The major
historical inaccuracy in U-571 is that the British were the ones
who grabbed the enigma decoding machine, months before the
Americans joined World War II. Why is their story less bankable
compared to the American point of view?
The classic science fiction film 2001: A Space Odyssey is also
filled with inaccuracies. Commander Dave Bowman was trapped
outside the Discovery ship in his mini space pod and forgot his
helmet to do a space walk to enter the ship. He had to jettison
himself out of the pod into an airlock and close the doors. Not
only did he survive the vacuum exposure (which should have frozen
him almost immediately), but also his space pod did not move at
all during the violent decompression.
Do we really need to know all this? Probably not, but it does
help. Knowing bloopers can help teach kids (and adults) about
real scientific and historical facts instead of accepting what
the film industry decrees. You may even learn a little bit about
filmmaking. But the most important thing is that the facts are
accurate. After all, the suspension of reality can only go so
far. You should see what physicists said about Mission
Impossible: 2! vmahmud@yahoo.com