Thaddeus Pringle's lost Masterpiece

A few fun facts about Thaddeus Pringle, reputed to be the absolute worst poet and playwright of the English Renaissance. Born the 13th child of a blacksmith and a fishwife in Warwickshire England (around 1564-1565 A.D.~the records are unclear about this) and having been found stone dead (of syphilis they say) in 1603 A.D. in a sheep pasture outside of Paris, France, it is fair to say that Pringle was quite a prolific writer in his (approximately) 38 years of life. Although many of his poems and sonnets have survived to this day (see the Pringle's Poetry Place entries in this Blog), only one of his plays still exists. As the legend goes, most of his work was destroyed by various angry mobs, but a copy of this play was found clutched in the hands of a blind madman in Bedlam asylum in 1652 and kept as an oddity by the English Royal Family. It should be noted that this play received sponsorship by none other than Master Arthur Curdly, the famed cheese baron of Warwick. And now here, printed for the first time in America, is that very play...

~

The Tragedy of Nigel & the Frog
A Tragedy
by
Thaddeus Pringle: Traveling Poet
(A cautionary tale concerning the dangers of inter-species romance)

ACT THE FIRST (AND ONLY): ENTER NIGEL, A FINE COUNTRY GENTLEMAN FROM WARWICKSHIRE, ENGLAND.

Nigel: Dierdre! Where for art thou, Dierdre?

ENTER DIERDRE; A BULL FROG.

Dierdre: Croak!

Nigel: Oh Dierdre... My sun... My moon... My amphibious amour. My love for thee is as pure as cheese. Fine Warwick cheese, not that Shrapshire offal. For one sweet kiss from thy emerald froggie mouth, I would gladly forswear cheese. Aye, sweet cheese which I love as no other victual, and I would toss it into the fiery pits of Hell! All for one brief taste of that sticky frog tongue.

Dierdre: Croak!

Nigel: Oh, Dierdre, dost thou really mean it? Sweet, sweet, Dierdre... My joy is as cheese! Dripping, sticky, cheese! Fermented in the famed cheese vats of Warwickshire! Kiss me, Dierdre!

ENTER LARRY; NIGEL'S FATHER. A VERY BAD MAN.

Larry: What in the name of the Ragman's befouled chamber pot transpires hither?

Nigel: I love her, father! I love Dierdre and we are to be wed. Though I be but a humble dung shoveler, and she a frog, our love will prevail! For true love is stronger than cheese, father... Stronger than delicious, delicious cheese!

Larry: Beshrew me! My boy and a French woman! Not in this lifetime!

Nigel: Nay, father! Unstuff thy wax-pots! Not a French woman! A frog! I have love for a frog!!

Larry: WHAT!?!

IN A FIT OF PIQUE, LARRY TRODS UPON DIERDRE. THERE IS A RESOUNDING "SQUISH!"

Nigel: DIERDRE!!!!!

Larry: Well now, that takes care of that.

EXIT LARRY. NIGEL RUSHES TO THE SIDE OF HIS BELOVED DEAD FROG.

Nigel: Speak to me, Dierdre!

Dierdre: "..."

NIGEL WEEPS (LIKE UNTO A GIRLY-MAN), GNASHES HIS TEETH, AND BEATS HIS BREASTS.

Nigel: Howl! Howl! Howl! Oh fie fie fie on my black deceased soul! Oh lamentable day! Lamentable, lamentable, lamentable day! Woe woe woe is me! Dierdre is a dead frog now... And I shall ne're eat cheese again.

~THE LAMENTABLE END~

~

This is an original Thaddeus Pringle (AKA John Michael Decker) play.
Please be aware that this is copyrighted material
and not to be used for sale or publication without my express written permission.
=====
"And I'd have gotten away with it too if it wasn't for those meddling kids!"
John Michael Decker

The Dark Knight done Right!

While watching Batman Begins at the Regal Cinema in the Wilton Mall last night, the same thought kept running through my head as when I first saw Star Trek II: the Wrath of Khan. "This should have been the first one!"

Now, before I go on, there are a few things about the 1989 Tim Burton Batman film that I liked better than the Christopher Nolan directed Batman Begins. First of all no super hero movie has ever topped that Danny Elfman soundtrack. The villain's in Batman Begins weren't nearly as interesting as Jack Nicholson's Joker (although that was also one of the problems with Batman, Nicholson was so over the top he completely overshadowed Michael Keaton's Dark Knight). I also miss the sleeker batmobile and Burton's super Gothic art direction. But other than that Batman Begins is infinitely superior to Batman in every conceivable way. And Batman was far better that Batman Returns, Batman Forever and the psychedelic pile of crap known as Batman and Robin (the less said about this Joel Schumacher embarrassment, the better). Up til now the animated Batman: Mask of the Phantasm was the only Dark Knight flick which I felt really got it right.

The coolest thing about Batman Begins is the fact that they made Bruce Wayne interesting. I'm not just talking about Bruce in his bat suit or the playboy fop persona that he puts on in public. I'm talking about the private Bruce Wayne. This film traces Bruce's heroes journey from his time as the happy son of a rich man to guilt-ridden young man to angry vengeance-obsessed adult and finally to the unstoppable instrument of justice that he is destined to become. And as the Batman, he is actually scary. You can understand why the criminals of Gotham would start trembling and check their ranks as the mention of his name. To them he is a monster. An elemental force who bleeds in and out of shadows to punish the guilty. As Batman/Bruce Wayne, Christain Bale grounds the role in reality and makes the drama work as well as the action. He has an excellent intensity that is tailor made for the Batman role. And if you like his performance here, than I could also suggest that you rent American Psycho, Equilibrium and the Machinist to see some other great Christain Bale performances.

The supporting cast is also excellent. Michael Caine is a fine successor to Michael Gough as Alfred the Butler (Gough was the best part of the Burton/Schumacher Bat-Flicks). And finally we have a Jim Gordon who isn't a big pussy, thanks to the acting talents of Gary Oldman. We now understand why Batman would need someone like Gordon as an ally in his war on crime. Morgan Freeman is great as Lucius Fox, who in this film becomes the gadget supplier to Bruce Wayne (sort of like his "Q"). Katie Holmes works well as the chick du jour that they seem to feel they need in every super hero film, but here she serves an important part in the plot and isn't just hanging around to be put in danger (although, of course, that happens). My favorite supporting character is Henri Ducard played by Liam Neeson as, sort of, a darker version of a Jedi Master. Ducard is very effective as he helps focus Bruce's anger in the early scenes. The weakest supporting character was Cillian Murphy as Dr. Jonathan Crane AKA the Scarecrow. He was just a little too man-pretty to be playing the psychotic Scarecrow for my taste. He looked like he came out of central casting at the WB. I mean, he worked well enough, but I always envisioned Jonathan Crane as more of a physical misfit. But fortunately this movie isn't about the villains, it's about Bruce Wayne's journey and as envisioned by Christopher Nolan and screenwriter David Goyer, it works wonderfully.

Batman Begins is the comic book movie that I would send non-comic fans to see.

Decker out...

Drew & John Review "Revenge of the Sith"

SPOILERS!!!!
DO NOT READ THIS POSTING IF YOU HAVE NOT SEEN STAR WARS EPISODE III: REVENGE OF THE SITH!

YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED.

Andrew Gronosky's review of Star Wars: Episode III: Revenge of the Sith:

It has been a long time since the last C-G movie review and "C" and "G" are now living in different states, but in case you are living in a plastic bubble or caring for a young child and have not yet seen Revenge of the Sith, here is what I think of it.

The rating: Mitigated ass. Like so many others.

"Revenge of the Sith" is a weak movie. Not an apallingly bad movie, just weak. Don't get me wrong - there are apallingly bad parts, or rather aspects, of the movie, but there are mitigating factors. Extensive mitigating factors, in this case.

First, the bad aspects. The plot is way too busy. Anakin's slide from being the Jedi golden child to telekinetically-strangling Lord of the Sith could be a compelling story - if told by someone other than Lucas. Time that should be spent on developing Anakin's character and adding some depth that foreshadows his fall, instead is squandered on patching numerous holes in the plot of the other five movies. We end up with a film that should have been titled, "Star Wars: the Lame Apology." To Lucas's credit, he does provide a believable motive for Anakin to turn to the Dark Side, but when it happens it's like flipping a switch - poof, now I'm EVIL. Lucas proves himself stunningly inept at pathos even when it is called for. Lucas should not be allowed to write dialogue. Ever. Fortunately there is less of it than in the last couple of movies. The fight choreography sucks. That is a damning indictment of a movie that is supposed to be about, and predominantly comprised of, lightsaber duels. The duels are stupid and boring. Watch the Darth Maul battle from Phantom Menace and compare with Obi-Wan vs. Darth Vader.

Now, the mitigating factors. First and most importantly, you get a lot of what you expect from a Star Wars movie. Big explosions, space battles, lightsaber battles, rampaging Wookies, panoramic alien vistas. Eye candy, and lots of it. It would be better if there were some attention paid to getting the audience invested in the characters - I
felt so detached from the Wookie battle it was like watching my nephew play a video game - but first and foremost this is a special effects picture, and it doesn't disappoint. I suggest you find a theatre with a really good sound system. It makes a difference. More surprising to me is that Lucas got artistic on us. Not in a purely visual way, either. In my opinion, the difference between pulp entertainment and actual art is that art has some kind of relevance to social or intellectual matters: it has meaning. There is a point behind "Revenge of the Sith," and while Lucas drives his point home with all the grace and subtlety of a battering ram, there really is an idea he is trying to communicate. This elevates him and his movie considerably in my esteem. For whatever that's worth.

So there you have it. The movie is totally predictable, and goes off on so many tangents to tie up loose ends that it feels like a scavenger hunt, but now I at least know what Lucas was talking about when he made that flap about having a story to tell. There are those who will think the theme of his is dumb, but then I thought "The Matrix" was extraordinarily heavy-handed and lots of people thought it was brilliant and deep. There's no accounting for taste, especially when the lowest common denominator is involved. Let me just say, I'm glad he had the guts to use his last movie to actually say something to the audience. Spielberg could have done it in one movie, but then there would not be enough CGI.

Over and out,

-Drew

John Michael Decker's Review of Star Wars Episode III: Revenge of the Sith:

While I must admit that I largely agree with most of Drew's comments regarding Star Wars Episode III: Revenge of the Sith, I still must confess to enjoying the film far more than he did. In fact, I would go so far as to say that, in many aspects, I found it more satisfying than Return of the Jedi. After the disappointing Attack of the Clones and the nearly unwatchable Phantom Menace, I have to confess I went into the movie with my expectations pretty low. I knew that Lucas was going to have to scramble to connect the dots between Revenge of the Sith and A New Hope at the cost of the story. I knew that he is not the most gifted person in regards to writing dialog ("Oh Ani, hold me like you did by the lake on Naboo." Shudder). And I knew that Hayden Christensen's performance as Anakin was both whiny and annoying. Not to mention the fact that there is zero chemistry between Christensen and Natalie Portman. I knew all this going in. And yet, despite all those things, I found myself having fun. That's what you're supposed to do at the movies, right?

My first pleasant surprise was the fact that Lucas has returned to the tradition of balls to the wall action that permeated Episode's IV, V and VI. Could the lightsaber duels have benefited by the chirography of the great Ray Park (AKA Darth Maul)? Sure, but I still found the fights fun and diverting (especially the duel between Obi-Wan and General Grievous). Even the Yoda fight worked for me this time. I can't even say exactly why. It just did. The lightsaber fights are a strange animal. Hell, the best lightsaber duels were in the Phantom Menace (the worst of the Star Wars movies) and the most uninteresting duel (chirography wise) was in A New Hope which was my second favorite film in the series. And although it could have been longer, all the Wookie stuff was very cool. Chewbacca rules!!!

My next pleasant surprise was the fact that apparently George Lucas has dusted off his copy of Hero With a Thousand Faces and returned to the kind of archetypal story telling that was so sadly lacking in episodes I and II. I speak specifically of the myth of the boy hero who goes to God (or in this case, Yoda) to ask if he can have the power over life and death (with the best intentions, to save a loved one), but is told that is beyond him. So the hero then makes a deal with the Devil (Palpatine) and ends up getting burned. Literally in this case on the lava planet, which I think is intended to pass for Hell or the river Styx. Sure, Lucas is ham fisted in his approach (Anakin goes from being concerned about Padme to slaughtering children pretty rapidly), but Lucas only had two and a half hours to tell his story. Perhaps if he didn't squander so much film on crap like Jar Jar Binks in Episode's I and II he could have shown this transformation more gradually, but he didn't, so there you go. My point is that although Anakin's decent into the dark side was sloppy, I let it work for me in the context of this morally black or white, serialized universe.

My next pleasant surprise was Ian MacDiarmid's performance as the evil Palpatine. I love a villain who is willing to totally let go of his human dignity and grovel like a little girl until he gets the upper hand. That kind of scenery chewing in the grand tradition of Space Opera is quite enjoyable and made my inner geek smile. I also found his seduction of Anakin to be very well done. Palpatine was listening to Anakin's concerns in a fatherly way while the Jedi council had their heads up their collective asses. Too concerned with the war that Palpatine had engineered to see the evil unfolding right under their Jedi noses. They were just asking to be wiped out by all the Boba Fetts.

Is this a perfect film? Of course not. Is it a flawed gem that is worth your time and money if you are willing to just let yourself have some goofy fun? I say, hell yeah. Just one geeks point of view...

Decker out...