Bobs-9

This one is kind of hard to find, but worth seeking out. After seeing it years ago on a cable channel here in the USA, I spent a long time unsuccessfully trying to find an out of print French DVD collection of short films that contained it, and finally snagged a copy. It's very nice to see it again. It has a sort of retro look and surrealist atmosphere that admirers of Terry Gilliam's "Brazil" will appreciate, and the made-up language spoken, besides resembling French and German, contains the odd English word or phrase tossed in at times. It's an outstanding little film with great style and imagination. It probably wouldn't have wide appeal, but it's a tasty tidbit for a film connoisseur.

I've certainly seen a lot of people carping about the quality and quantity of the special effects here, and complaints about "CGI nerds," etc. But having seen this film on DVD yesterday, I can't really get behind their often annoyingly whiney point of view. I never did see this on a huge theater screen, and that might make a big difference in how the FX register, but I really found them great fun to watch even without having my disbelief entirely suspended. I see King Kong as a film fantasy, and shackling the storytellers into utter fidelity to the laws of probability, physics, gravity, trauma medicine, the hypothetical tensile strength of wholly fictitious plant species, etc. might make for an interesting academic exercise, but I'm not sure how entertaining the result would be. Talk about CGI nerds? Some of the negative reviews I've seen here are about the nerdiest things I've EVER read!

But purely in terms of dramaturgy some of them do have a point. I did find the subplot about Hayes and Jimmy a bit pointless, and some of the characters were not particularly well fleshed-out. Still, I'm not sure it's wise to hold up the 1933 original as a standard. Don't get me wrong – I love that film – but the acting and dialog in THAT film were pretty wooden as well, and in proportion to their differing run-times, I don't think the original got to the adventurous parts all that much quicker.

In case it's not obvious, I enjoyed this film a lot. I also get annoyed with people who blithely make statements like "avoid this film at all costs." Really? Can you actually guarantee that I'll share your own jaded viewpoint? Do get over yourselves.

I very well remember the bad press this film got because of the producers' court order against Clayton Moore using the name "Lone Ranger" or donning his black mask at personal appearances. Quite apart from any consideration of the film's quality, this was the absolute height of nearsighted arrogance and stupidity on the part of the producers and their attorneys. And I suspect that the lesson was well-learned after this film tanked, which was widely perceived as some sort of karma for the jerks responsible for the court order against Moore.

In more recent times it has become the custom, when reviving a legendary film or TV project, to invite the original star or stars for cameo appearances, and rightly so. Show some respect, you idiots! And even if they turn up their noses at the prospect, which has happened, at least the offer was made. This is proof positive that film producers, studio executives, and entertainment attorneys are not quite too stupid and arrogant to be taught by example.