The Broadway Theatre of Pitman

So apparently the folks in charge over at the theater in Pitman continued to take volunteers during the summer. There was no deliberate effort to get volunteers like there was for that clean up day in April – in which I participated. These people just showed up and offered supportive help to the restoration workers. Actually, some of those people were also volunteers, professionals offering their experience as help.
I would have liked to be one of those volunteers offering supportive help. That day I spent helping at the theater in April was a very good day. I missed the opportunity to continue helping because, well, I’m not sure: The summer just seemed so hectic and was gone before I knew it.
Well, the major work is complete. Peter Slack (owner), Pat Mangano (theater director) and the rest of the board of trustees hosted a special grand reopening gala last week on the 23rd. And just a few weeks before that, there was a special event – impromptu – for the relighting of the marquee. I missed that one because of that blasted GRE and I missed the gala because I couldn’t afford the tickets. Anyway, this Saturday, the 30th, the theater will be reopened for the public at 10 am. No special events – that I’m aware of – just an open house so the public can see the product of the summer’s renovation efforts.
I plan to be there. I’m curious to see what they were able to keep and what had to be made brand new. Some of the old chairs had to be removed to make way for wheelchair access. However, I do know that a deliberate effort was made to keep as much original as possible.
There will be movies, mostly classics and some cult favorites, starting in October. I did purchase a movie plan card and I hope to make great use of it. During Halloween 2003 and 2004 I watched the silent version of The Phantom of the Opera at the theater and fell in love with the sound of the pipe organ. It was an amazing event – both times – that I hope will occur again starting this Halloween. I’d love for something like that to be a part of my Halloween tradition.
Live theater events will begin in January 2007, starting with Gypsy. Other shows include The Odd Couple and Disney’s Beauty and the Beast. The managing director worked at the Ritz Theater in Audubon; I’ve heard good things about that place so my confidence in Pat is strong.
As I mentioned before, the first time I went to a movie theater was this place. Because of that and my general interest in history and preservation, I’ve been particularly interested in what happens to this theater. Back in 2003 another old theater, called The Century (which had been operating as the dance and costume shop Capa’s for years), was torn down and a large Eckerd drug store was built in its place. Not even a year later that store closed. Now, despite my interest in history and preservation, I am also interested in new technology and progress. This, however, was not progress. I don’t know what to call it, except sad and pathetic. Unfortunately, another old theater will soon be lost, this time to a Walgreen’s.
The Harwan in Mt. Ephraim will soon be demolished to make way for a Walgreen’s store only ½ a mile away from another Walgreen’s (and across the street from a CVS). This theater isn’t as visually interesting as the theater in Pitman (I know little of The Century), but I did have good times there. They served Pennsylvania Dutch Birch Beer! Bruce Campbell, famous from the cult favorite horror series Evil Dead (directed by that guy who di the recent Spiderman movies) made an appearance there and stayed until dawn to sign autographs for everyone who got in line.
Again, tearing down an old building, something that is part of that community's cultural identity and could still be useful/productive in some way, just to add to the glut of mega-drug stores in the area is not progress, just pathetic.
I read something in a film journal called CINE Action that struck me emotionally:

If we lose the past, we lose the future.

I will be sad to see the Harwan go down. But I am grateful Pitman's theater has been saved. And now that we are back to our original subject, I should tell you that the theater in Pitman has a new name: The Broadway Theater of Pitman. Apparently the previous owner still owns the rights to the old name, Broadway Theatre, hence the rewording.
There are also some Web links I’d like to share with you:
The official Web page of The Broadway Theater of Pitman
Video clip: Relighting the Broadway
Recent Courier Post article: Theater dusts off cobwebs
Article about the Harwan: No happy ending
Also, if you want to go to the open house this Saturday, September 30, 2006, doors open at 10 am. I’ll be the one in the Muppets t-shirt.

I am sick and tire of these lame old blog entries and this lame old vlog!

Sorry it’s been so long since I’ve updated the Web site. It had to go on hold while I:
• Got a new computer and reinstalled all the software and dealt with other set-up issues (ongoing)
• Prepared for the GRE (don’t ask) and worked on the application process for grad school.
I have some video that I want to put up here. Unfortunately, I’m having a problem with Windows and the external hard drives where these videos are stored. Meanwhile, how about reviews of the movies I saw this summer:

Idlewild
A musical from OutKast? The best review I’ve read or heard comes from a British movie/entertainment magazine called Empire. The online review is a bit shorter than the hard copy. Overall, I found the movie enjoyable despite its flaws. I appreciated the efforts of the filmmakers; they had a very distinct vision. However, their execution in creating this vision was unequal to their ambition. The music was pretty good, and the dance sequences were a lot of fun. I liked the suits and dresses the characters wore – the costuming department did a fine job. Even though the overall film quality was less than desirable, I would definitely see another movie involving any or all of the people involved with the making of Idlewild. I think if they are open to positive criticism and are willing to learn from more experienced and successful filmmakers, they could improve – there is potential.
I may be giving the movie a better review than it deserves because I was excited about revisiting the musical genre. Moulin Rouge helped a little with re-energizing this genre and I was hoping Idlewild would help provide more energy and revision. However, I don’t think Idlewild will find the same commercial success as Moulin Rouge.
Supposedly there have been some complaints that OutKast chose to make a movie about black people and illegal prohibition activities and that this is a bad thing. I guess if the movie were exploitative in some way there could be a good argument there. But I don’t see how it was exploitative or suppressive or otherwise inappropriate. There is a significant lack of stereotypical gansta-rapper, uh, stuff. Not that there was a complete lack of any kind of stereotyping. Well, maybe stereotype isn’t the right word: The characters were all familiar, we’ve seen these types in other movies from the same era and we’ve seen these characters as white and black.
Maybe there is something wrong about Idlewild. And maybe I will someday come to see what that is. But as of right now, my opinion is that this is far from perfect yet still entertaining.

The Illusionist
When I first heard of this film, I thought, “Ooo, this has a kind of fantasy/sci-fi feel to it, it could be good.” Then I learned that Jessica Biel was in it; I just never liked her as an actress. Hence, my expectations sank a tiny bit.
I almost decided not to see this movie until my friend Cory convinced me to just give it a chance. So, we went and I hoped the good stuff would be good enough to help me overlook Biel’s usual inadequacy.
It turns out that Biel can actually act. Still, she didn’t “own” the role like very good and great actors do; it was enough not to detract from the overall quality. I suppose credit should go to the director or the more experience actors who probably helped her learn something about the craft? The performances of the other main actors were all superb. I really enjoyed the performances from Rufus Sewell and Paul Giamatti – Ed Norton was very good, but Sewell and Giamatti were so much better. Sewell and Giamatti owned their characters.
The film as a whole was entertaining. I appreciated the older Victorian era fantasy/sci-fi/horror elements. However, the movie was much more love story than anything else. Those other elements only provided background and support for the love story. The love story was a bit Romeo and Juliet, which I usually don’t like because I don’t find that play by Shakespeare to be romantic. Fortunately, the R&J aspect was a bit different than usual and was only a small part of the love story. Unfortunately, the plot was a little predictable. No, it was the story that was predictable, the plot (how the events of the story unfold) was good, even intriguing.
The scenery was beautiful. I’m pretty sure the exterior scenes were shot in Prague and not some backlot in LA or Vancouver. The costumes were especially nice. They seemed to my untrained eye to be historically accurate. Each character looked sharp, attractive and with his/her own style coming through.
The filmic tricks I’m not sure about. Film was a brand new medium during the era in which this story takes place. There was a visual style that was popular even then. This movie used some of those tricks, or new tricks meant to look like those old ones. In some scenes those worked, in others they were a bit distracting. The blurriness was good. It added to the “everything is an illusion” feel.
This is a movie I can recommend to just about everyone I know, except the young and impatient. There is nothing particularly graphic – kids could probably find similar adult themed stuff on many TV shows that are considered a little inappropriate for some ages but not aggressively so. To the impatient it could seem slow. It requires that the viewer pay attention, not at the same level as movies like Syriana or Constant Gardener, but more than the usual “popcorn flick.”

Little Miss Sunshine
This may be my favorite movie of the summer. It was funny and surprisingly heart warming (in an odd way). The actors in this movie all owned their roles. The writing was also top-notch. I love everything about it.
This isn’t a Steve Carrell movie that follows in the steps of 40-year-old Virgin or Anchorman. There were moments that were silly, outrageous and perhaps deserving of an “R” rating. But there was also clever sarcasm and wit (other Carrell movies had these but those movies were more known for the goofiness).
Giving it some thought, I think maybe the movie could have been PG-13. Or better yet, maybe something that is between PG-13 and R – if such a rating existed. The content seemed to fall right on that line that distinguishes the two ratings.
I also found the movie to be oddly unconventional yet conventional at the same time. That seems contradictory, but probably only to those who haven’t seen it. Let me explain it a bit:
We know these character types, the plot devices – but there is something about them here that is a little different from the ordinary. This is interesting to me because the movie is about basically ordinary people with mostly ordinary lives but given a weird set of circumstances. And even those circumstances, as weird and extreme as they were, seem entirely possible. This made the film wildly entertaining, unique yet also relatable.
Little Miss Sunshine was just fantastic. It was probably one of the better movies I’ve seen all year, not just this summer.

Snakes on a Plane
Wow! OK, cheesy title – sort of. It is direct and honest, and better (imo) than the original title: Pacific Flight blah blah blah … too boring for me to even remember it. With the title Snakes on a Plane, you know exactly what you are going to get: Samuel L. Jackson kicking butt!
The movie was a lot of fun, which was all it attempted to be. Alright, it was also exciting and gory. The gory stuff is not for those who have a fear of snakes, uneasy stomachs or are under 16 (maybe 15, 14?).
The plot and story are simple. You’d think the acting may not have to be stellar, but while “Oscar caliber” wasn’t needed, a certain kind of attitude was required to help with the suspension of disbelief. I think most in the movie accomplished that.
I also appreciate the work of the crew, working with a set that is supposed to be a small place (relative to the settings of most movies, almost all of it takes place, well, on a plane). The music and sound was also pretty good. Most of the snake CGI was pretty good, too, although sometimes the quality of the snakes was questionable.
This is the kind of movie you see when you want action and belly laughs (and you find some gross things entertaining). Snakes on a Plane is a lot of fun, but really deserves that R rating.

Clerks 2
This movie shares with Snakes on a Plane the “just sit down and have fun” motif. It is a pretty good follow-up to the first Clerks movie. There are a lot of in-jokes that would be understood only by those who are familiar with Kevin Smith’s Viewaskew-universe movies. But, there is enough goofiness for those less familiar.
This movie is crude. The filmic quality is adequate, but not much better (and almost even less than adequate at times). We don’t go see movies like Clerks/Clerks 2 because of the filmic quality, though. If we go, we go because they are crude.
Clerks 2, like its predecessor, is obnoxious and gross. I laughed a lot. I recommend this sequel to those who enjoyed Clerks 1 and/or other movies by Smith. However, it is not as memorable as the first one.

An Inconvenient Truth
Everyone on the planet should see this movie. Put aside your presumptions about Al Gore. He is engaging, he is smart, he is serious and he is passionate. Best of all, he is not condescending.
Global warming – the state of our environment – is serious. We are all affected. Gore shows scientific proof that something bad is happening at a rate that is unnatural. And there is plenty of evidence that we humans are a significant cause of this problem.
However, there are things we can do to fix this problem (or at least make it less bad), and Gore tells us about some of those things. Perhaps he could have said more about those things, but I think he and the filmmakers were hoping we viewers would be motivated to look up what we could do ourselves – they do provide information about the resources we need to get ourselves involved (see the Climate Crisis.net Web site). After all, our actions and involvement are really the only way to appropriately address the problem of global warming.
The documentary is not all scientific facts and theories. There is a personal element, too. Gore talks of his personal life, relating basic human things to the study of global warming and activism.
As a film it is very good. The photography/cinematography, editing and sound all came together in a way that makes for an engaging documentary. All elements flow together logically and smoothly. Nothing distracts form the intent, only adds. This is the most important movie I’ve seen all summer. Along with Munich, Syriana and Good Night and Good Luck, this is one of the most important movies I’ve seen all year.
I think everyone should see these movies. Munich is probably too intense for younger viewers so maybe they should wait a few years (although some of the topics could possibly be discussed with them by parents and teachers). With the appropriate adult supervision, most younger viewers could get something from An Inconvenient Truth (12, 13 year olds) and teens (especially those interested in journalism, American history, civil rights and politics) could appreciate Good Night and Good Luck. Most of these are available on DVD/VHS now, An Inconvenient Truth soon will be.

Pirates of the Caribbean 2-Dead Man’s Chest
I liked it – that simple. It had what I was looking for: Jack being Jack, visually interesting and fun sword play, nice looking sets and FX. It was fun and it was nice to visit characters I found enjoyable in the first movie.
Sure, it wasn’t as unique and innovative as the first. That would require something almost miraculous. I also don’t think that was the point – out doing the first. I think the filmmakers just wanted to continue a fun adventure story. I think of this movie as a bridge between the first and the third. Although, I suppose after three years it could have been better as far as FX are concerned.
All I wanted was to see the characters I enjoyed in the first movie back together again. I found their reunion often exciting. Certain elements were intriguing. And it did look good. Once again, I liked the music, too. I look forward to, and even anticipate, the third one.
Don’t be so cynical. Can’t you just sit back and here a tale? Just factor out the inadequate performance from Orlando Bloom. Now, isn’t that better? I wonder if the problem is that he tries too hard. I don’t think he allows himself to really feel his characters. I would have thought that working on films with the likes of Ian McKellen (excuse me, Sir Ian McKellen) during Lord of the Rings and Johnny Depp during Pirates, Bloom would have learned something about his craft.

Superman Returns
I may have liked the “return” of Batman a little more. I still haven’t decided. However, the return of Superman is most welcome. This was a good movie – not great, but good. I heard that Brian Singer wanted the movie to feel like a continuation of the first two Superman movies starring Christopher Reeve; I think he succeeded. [One more CR site to visit: here]
Superman Returns is meant to be a sequel to those earlier movies and I think it helped the overall story for them to feel similar. But, this wasn’t a mere copy. Singer managed to make the movie feel modern as well as familiar. I think his real intent was to make homage to the first two Superman movies.
I liked the updated costume for our man of steel. It wasn’t so different that it would have been upsetting to the (reasonable) serious fans, yet it was not so much the same that it was just cheesy and ridiculous.
The movie in general wasn’t the same raucous fighting and action FX galore seen in the recent X-Men, Batman or even Spiderman movies. There is some of that, but this superhero movie is mostly story-driven. Yeah, there was actually a story and the plot was fairly solid, too – relative to other superhero genre films. OK, to be fair, the stories and plots of the other films were not exactly terrible, but the FX and action could and often did distract from the stories and weakened the plots.
Like The Illusionist, Superman Returns is a love story; the genre (superhero-action) is the background. Here though, the plot is almost equally predictable as the story. No problem, because you sort of want those predictions to be correct.
Kevin Spacey’s Lex Luthor was better than Gene Hackman’s version, I thought. Spacey was closer to scary and menacing and less caricature.
It was a solid film worthy of a follow-up. If you are more into the beat-the-heck-outta-the-bad-guys superhero movie type, you may not enjoy this one so much. But, if you want a different kind of superhero – who can still operate in the beat-em-up world – this movie is worth your time.

Over the Hedge
Adorable. That is the best description for this movie. This is a Steve Carrell movie for the children! His character, Hammy, stole the show. Everyone was great, but he was my favorite.
I did wonder though, when did it become the suburban dream to live in an environment devoid of little animals? That’s one of the things I like about living in the suburbs. Maybe the human characters in this movie were extreme characterizations. I hope so. But still, I suppose there is a message in there about humans being a bit more responsible about how our actions affect our ecosystem (see above review of An Inconvenient Truth). I wonder how the kids will adopt this message?
I did find it odd, considering what the message of the movie seemed to be, that Wal*Mart – infamous for a lot of wrong-doing – was a sponsor of the movie. That was really weird. I guess Wal*Mart wanted some good PR along with an opportunity to sell cheap toys. I suppose the filmmakers just really needed the money to produce the movie and suspect that the kids could probably pick up on the message, equate Wal*Mart with the idea that we should be more responsible regarding how we treat each other and our environment and when they become adult consumers, expect better from Wal*Mart than it’s current behavior. Well, I can dream.
Regardless of these issues, I really enjoyed this movie. It was entertaining and well put together. The animation wasn’t unique but it was vivid and I think appropriate for this movie.

X-Men 3-The final something
Really? The last one? Even with that little scene at the end of the credits? I think they could have done better. I didn’t dislike the movie; it was OK. However, I don’t think anyone really reached his or her potential. Well, Sir Ian McKellen and Patrick Stewart were, as expected, really darn good. With a better story, dialogue and direction, they could have been fantastic.
Actually, I like the story. Make that stories. Mashing up the two stories about the “cure” and Phoenix was a mistake. Both are good and deserved their own movies. Mashing them up made the plot ridiculous. Maybe the studio thought making four X-Men movies would be too much? That seems silly. Some franchises do go too far, but I think with solid stories four X-Men movies would have been possible. I know this much, I am much less inclined to see any breakaway movies like the expected Wolverine movie.
Final analysis: if you saw the first two, this one may be worth your time just to see how it ends. But don’t have your expectations too high. If you set them to expect adequate you may enjoy at least some of X-Men 3.

OK, so those were the movies I saw this summer. Since writing and editing these reviews, I have since seen Flyboys and This Film Has Not Yet Been Rated. I should have reviews for them soon, along with some information on The Broadway Theater in Pitman. As for those video clips, let’s hope the guys at Computer Run can help me!!!