Monday, April 17, 2017

Fairy Tale Media Fix: The Tale of Tales (2015)

Okay, back in the blogging saddle!

The Tale of Tales!  Matteo Garrone’s 2015 film inspired by stories from Giambattista Basile’s fairy tale collection of the same name.  The film stars such talents as Salma Hayek, Toby Jones, John C. Reilly and Vincent Cassel (huh.  Cassel was in a surprising number of European fairy tale movies around that time).
While Basile’s book was a much longer, more complicated affair featuring a framing structure and five days of stories being told, Garrone’s film is just three tales that sort of touch alone the edges.  The first story is about a queen who is so desperate to have a child that she resorts to eating the heart of a giant sea serpent to get it.  The second story is about a bored king who becomes preoccupied with raising a flea until it’s the size of a calf.  The third story is about a lecherous king and two elderly sisters who will go to great lengths to become his next conquests.

This movie is not like most other fairy tale films you’ll see out there.  First of all, it’s rated R.  In fact, it’s the first R-rated fairy tale movie I’ve ever reviewed/reacted to on Fairy Tale Fandom.  And as this is a fairy tale film aimed squarely at adults, he expects the audience to do more work in figuring out what the whole thing is about.  In family fairy tale films, the themes are usually outright stated or even sung.  However, if you ask me, what Garrone has put together is a fantasy film about the costs of obsession.  The obsession with having a child.  The obsession with sating one’s own lust.  Even the obsession with raising a giant flea.  It’s a very different approach for a fairy tale film, focusing instead on characters’ faults and failings rather than on their triumphant “happily ever after”.  All of the characters in question make choices related to their obsessions that have unexpected negative consequences for those around them.

I’d like to say this movie is a good representation of Basile’s book, but I’m not sure I can.  Like I said, the movie cherry-picks certain stories that fit a specific theme.  The essence of Basile’s book came through in its framing story and the power of the storytelling depicted therein.  Also, Basile’s book had a kind of bawdy, rustic sense of humor to it (I mentioned the use of toilet humor in another post).  The movie plays everything about as seriously as a heart attack.  Though, the sight of the giant flea is funny in kind of a strange way.

The movie itself is fine.  The stories are faithful to the originals in content if not always in tone.  The actors do a fine job playing their roles.  I liked the creature effects for the sea serpent and the giant flea, though I think they could perhaps have been more creative with the ogre they had in one of the stories.  I will say that the way the stories changed from scene to scene could leave you a little lost, but maybe the director was just trying to make sure you were paying attention.

The Tale of Tales is not a fun movie.  I wouldn’t necessarily recommend this for a fun Friday night on the couch.  However, it’s also not really a bad movie.  It was good enough and interesting enough and different enough that I thought it would be a shame not to have a copy for my own movie collection, if just to use as a reference for future posts.  Whether any of you, my faithful readers, will like it is down to personal taste.

Friday, March 31, 2017

Fairy Tale Media Fix: Charming, with special director Q&A.

Prince Charming.  The name has stuck with us for ages.  The earliest appearance of it may be in Catherine D’Aulnoy’s “The Blue Bird”, in which a character is referred to as “the Charming King”.  Later, when Andrew Lang retold D’Aulnoy’s “Story of Pretty Goldilocks”, he transliterated the name of the prince Avenant (meaning “Fine” or “Beautiful”) into “Prince Charming” and changed “the Charming King” in his translation of “The Blue Bird” into “King Charming”.  Since then, the name Prince Charming has become the catch-all term for the fairy tale prince.  Whether they’re from “Snow White”, “Cinderella”, “Sleeping Beauty” or “Rapunzel”, they’ll all get called “Prince Charming” by someone.  But as time has gone by, we’ve seen the character depicted, reinvented and lampooned.  He’s been a paragon of virtue in some stories, but he’s also been reimagined as an unfaithful cad and a vain, spoiled narcissist.  Now, a new award-winning independent short film is coming out soon that places Prince Charming in a much more unusual role: the hopeless romantic.  And through the magic of modern internet technology, I got to have a chat with the co-writer, director and star of this film, Mr. Tom Albanese:

Q. So, how did you get the idea for Charming?

A. I was studying in New York City at the Neighborhood Playhouse School of the Theatre in 2012, and we put on a production of 'Into the Woods'. I played Cinderella's Prince, had a blast and wanted to know more about who this prince dealing with the 'agony' of his love not wanting him was. So I took the screenplay I was writing about a guy whose heart had just been torn into pieces by the girl of his dreams and made him Prince Charming. It suddenly had a great hook and I was stoked to write it.

Q. You mentioned 'Into the Woods'. I've noticed that some big media projects like 'Into the Woods', the 'Shrek' films and 'Enchanted' take a bit of a dim view of the Prince Charming character, making him either a cad or a fool. That's why I was quite impressed seeing that your film went another direction and made him a hopeless romantic.  Was that ever in your mind while making the film? That you were depicting the character in a way that was a little bit different?

A. Good points, well when my writing partner Chris and I were originally writing 'Charming' as a feature, we wrote the character as a big ego, bufoon, Gaston-type character. A lot of it was really funny, but it's tough to get an audience to really connect with a spoiled guy like that, which is why that type of character archetype is usually better suited for a supporting type or villian role. We had a note from the producer we worked on with the feature (when it was optioned in '13) saying that "Prince Charming has to be charming".  He was right. Chris and I turned him into a hopeless romantic type a la Hugh Grant back in his rom com prime. He was Prince Charming, but still a bumbling guy trying to find love, which both ourselves and an audience could connect more with.

Q. As I understand it, it was a bit of a long road getting Charming made into a film. Is there anything you can tell us about that process and what you learned from it?

A. Yeah, it got stuck in development as a feature and we ultimately got the rights back. I then took elements of the story and turned it into a short film. Biggest thing I learned was 'just do it'. You can always hope someone with more connections finds the passion for it you have, wait around for more money, etc. But you've got to keep moving forward. There's never going to be that 'perfect time'. You've got to create it. And I didn't want this story to sit in someone's inbox anymore. So I asked for some help from the people in my life and took the resources I had to make 'Charming'. And I'm very happy I did.

Q. To be fair, the market's a bit saturated in fairy tale films at the moment.  I hear there are two other Prince Charming movies in development right now.  Anyway, are there any scenes in the film that are your favorites?  Doesn't matter if it's in terms of writing, acting, directing, etc.

A. True, but for good reason. Most of these stories are in the public domain and established IP, so studios and companies realize they've already got a built in audience. And as long as the movies are good and entertaining, people will keep seeing them. "Beauty & the Beast" will gross over $1B. Yes, one of the Prince Charming films has been in development for a while and the animated one is trying to find distribution. There's a ton to explore with that character.

As for a favorite scene? Well, I love the scenes by the tree with Charming and Gus, as well as the transition to Hook’s bar and the scene with Cinderella. I remember rehearsing with Karla (Cinderella) a few days before we shot, saying if that scene didn’t work the movie wouldn’t. And she killed it. There’s some funny stuff in there, but my favorites are always the ones that poke at a theme and tug at the heartstrings.

Q. Now, how about more of a fun question?  Fairy tales are kind of a staple of our culture, especially when we're young.  Did you ever have a favorite fairy tale?

A. Haha, absolutely. For me as a kid it was mainly Aesop's Fables and the Disney fairy tales. 'Beauty and the Beast' was my number one. I've only recently got to reading all the originals, and while there's much more fantastical stuff like monkey butlers and evil fairies in 'Beauty', it's still a great story with great characters. Most of the classic fairy tales were originally geared for adults, right?
Now I'm curious about you! What's your favorite fairy tale?

Q. You've read my blog at least a little.  You've got to know I've got at least a half dozen.  But my philosophy has always been that most people should have at least two favorites.  One favorite that is well known and popular, and one favorite that takes a little more digging to find.  My standard childhood favorite is always "Jack and the Beanstalk".  I liked it as a kid because it didn't waste any time on romance.  But it's ultimately about a kid trying to crawl his way out of poverty and do right by his mother at the same time.  My favorite obscure one is a Grimm story called "How Six Men Got on in the World" which is about a soldier who recruits five men each with a specific super-power to trick and defeat a cruel king.  There are others too.  I'm partial to some stories that come all the way from China and Japan.  There are so many great fairy tales out there that you can't find in movie or TV form because they just won't work that way.  Either they're too weird or they follow their own fuzzy "fairy tale logic" or they just don't fit standard cinematic story structure.

Now, another question: Are there any other classic stories you'd like to tackle in film form someday?

A. I like that thinking. I've got to check out 'Six Men'. And yeah, you're absolutely right on how many work on paper and not film. I've got a ton of reading to do.

Re-imagining classic stories and characters excites me. I have a feature I'm working on that puts a twist on Bram Stoker's "Dracula". Not sure if it'll be the next thing or not due to budgetary reasons, but the odds of my next project having some fantastical creature or element is pretty good.

Q. Okay, well I know you’re a busy man what with acting, directing, writing and all that.  So, I think we’ll wrap this up with one more question.  I know you’re just about set to launch Charming online.  Where and when will my readers be able to see it?

A. Charming will be released next Tuesday, April 4th. Go to and it'll be available via Vimeo.

It was a real pleasure to talk with Mr. Albanese.

As for the film itself, I have watched it and liked what I saw.  It’s a little rough, as independent films tend to be.  If you’re used to watching Hollywood films, you’re going to want to check your expectations for production values at the door.  This film was made by a group of friends with the resources that were available to them.  I’ll also say that the film may rely a little too much on the Disney incarnations of the characters than I usually like.  However, I understand the need to play on familiarity.  But one thing the film really has going for it is piles and piles of heart.  I’m also just glad to see a film that takes a different approach to the Prince character.  I think as our culture has taken a fresh look at these stories, the Prince has become a bit of an easy target for parody and ridicule.  The cliché handsome prince is too easily turned into a vain, womanizing jerk.  And we’ve seen that in Into the Woods, Shrek 2, Fables and a whole host of others.

So, check out Charming when you get the chance.  Also, go over to The Willow Web to read Amy-ElizeBrown’s interview with Tom Albanese.  Amy’s a friend and true blue fairy tale fan and I’m sure she’s thought of some great questions to ask Mr. Albanese.

See you in the next tale.

Sunday, March 26, 2017

Beauties and Beasts in Different Places with Different Faces.

Alas, my friends, Beauty and the Beast Month is coming to a close.  And there are so many other places I could have taken this because there are so many other takes on “Beauty and the Beast”.  I still haven’t touched on the ‘80s soap opera version starring Ron Perlman and Linda Hamilton.  Nor have I reviewed the low-budget Cannon Films version (which I actually own on DVD).  Or Alex Flinn's Beastly, either in book or film form.  But I thought that in order to wind up the month, I should really go back to the story itself and its many variants.  “Beauty and the Beast” is one of those stories that has wound itself in and out of both folk and literary culture.  The most standard versions may have been purposefully written by certain upper-class French women, but that didn’t stop the story from travelling elsewhere.  So, with the help of D.L. Ashliman’s Folktexts site and my own experience, I decided to do a bit of a literature review and pick five noteworthy versions and post some thoughts on them.  Note that this isn’t a “Top Seven”.  There’s no ranking involved.
So, here we go:
)      “The Springing, Singing Lark” (Germany)
This one is a Grimm story from their rather sizable collection of German folk tales.  The story starts out like “Beauty and the Beast”, with the merchant going off on business and asking his daughters what they want him to bring back.  In this case, the youngest doesn’t ask for a rose but for a “springing, singing lark” (hence the title of the story).  He then finds out that the lark belongs to a lion who threatens to eat him if he doesn’t bring him the first thing to meet him when he gets home.  But after that part, the story takes certain turns that turn it into a completely different type of fairy tale.  That’s the thing that I find so noteworthy about this tale.  The interesting thing about this story is that it uses what I like to call “modular storytelling”.  It’s something that can be used in fairy tales but very few other types of stories.  You see, in certain situations, you can take different fairy tale motifs and fit them together as sort of “storytelling Legos” to form other stories.  “The Springing, Singing Lark” starts off as a “Beauty and the Beast” type of story and then turns into a completely different sort of Animal Bridegroom tale that’s more like “East of the Sun, West of the Moon” in which the heroine has to search for her beloved.  Then, when that’s over it turns into a “True Bride” tale.  And all of it really does work together.

  “The Singing Rose” (Austria)
This one is interesting because the “Beauty” herself is the one who goes searching for the rose.  It starts with a king telling his three daughters that his successor will be whichever of them can bring him back a singing rose.  So, right away we have young women embarking on adventures and potentially being placed in a position of power without having to marry into it.  A pretty refreshing start for a European tale.  The youngest princess eventually finds the singing rose in a castle garden deep in a pine forest.  However, in order to get the singing rose, she has to make a deal with the master of the castle who is an old man with a long grey beard.  The deal is that in seven years he will come take her away to live there in his castle with him.  So, it happens just this way with the Beast part being played by the old man.  But the princess’s stay in the castle is punctuated by slightly different events with different conditions attached to them.  Also, the ending is different from any “Beauty and the Beast” type of tale I’ve seen before.

      “Beauty and the Horse” (Denmark)
This Danish story sticks out because of just what animal the beast is.  There are many different animals taking the Beast role in these stories.  There are bears and frogs and dogs and serpents.  One story even made a point of noting that the dog in question was a poodle.  But this one I think takes the cake.  The Beast is a horse.  It doesn’t specify if it’s a wild horse or a tame horse.  Or even what color the horse is.  I’m not going to lie, I had thoughts of both Mr. Ed and Nell’s relationship with Dudley’s horse in the Dudley Do-Right cartoons while reading this story.  The rest of the story follows most of the “Beauty and the Beast” motifs with some slight tweaks to them.  But it just sticks out because the Beast is a horse . . . of course, of course.

      “The Fairy Serpent” (China)
By now, people should know that I have a soft spot for tales from China and Japan.  I can’t explain it too much, seeing as I’ve never been to either country.  Maybe it’s some of my otaku tendencies shining through.  Anyway, this follows many of the same “Beauty and the Beast” motifs with certain tweaks.  The father in this case was not asked to pick any flowers but sought them out himself so his daughters could use them as patterns for their embroidery.  Also, the serpent who plays the Beast here seems more upset about the trespassing than any theft (Huh.  Kind of like the Beast in the animated movie).  Also, all three daughters are offered the option of being the serpent’s bride.  Another interesting thing is that the family kind of drags its feet in bringing the youngest daughter to the serpent, so that the serpent has to send a swarm of wasps to convince them.  There’s more to it, but I won’t list it all here.  It’s just interesting that these motifs and archetypes extend that far beyond Europe.

       “A Rosy Story” (Scoharie, New York)
This is my own contribution and a story that you’re not going to find on the internet.  I may have mentioned this in another post before.  It comes from an old book entitled Folk Lore of the Scoharie Hills that I found in the local history section of a local library.  For those who don’t know, Scoharie is part of Upstate New York (in other words, my own stomping grounds).  The interesting thing about this story other than its location and seeming rarity is that it splits the Beast’s role in two.  The being that demands the merchant’s daughter return to the house/castle is depicted as a ghostly headless man who confronts the merchant when he steals the rose.  However, the cursed prince himself is depicted as a giant toad who acts as a servant in the castle.  If the two characters were meant to be one and the same, it’s never stated in the story.  But then, the story itself was pretty rough in the form I found it.  I had to polish it a good deal before I made it into a decent storytelling performance.

So, that’s it.  There’s a good chance I haven’t done these stories any justice here, so check out the Folktexts website.  Heck, check out Sur La Lune’s “Beauty and the Beast” page too while you’re at it.  Also, you might want to check out the Facebook group Fairy-tale Forum.  They just launched and they’re having a big Beauty and the Beast giveaway.

This ends Beauty and the Beast Month, but I’ve got some more big stuff planned so stay tuned.

Monday, March 20, 2017

Fairy Tale Media Fix: Beauty and the Beast (2017)



I’m getting ahead of myself.

I recently went to see Disney’s latest adaptation of the fairy tale “Beauty and the Beast” starring Emma Watson and Dan Stevens and directed by Bill Condon.  And as the centerpiece of Beauty and the Beast Month, I present my reaction/review of it.  Beware, for there may be SPOILERS ahead.

Before I go any further let’s acknowledge something about this movie: it does not reinvent the story of Beauty and the Beast.  This movie follows the same basic plot as the 1991 animated movie.  If you’re looking for a “twist” on the story, this isn’t that movie and it’s not trying to be.
When it comes to adaptations of well-known stories like this, the more important thing is the details and how they’re handled.  And if you want my opinion, this film handles those details very well.

This version of Beauty and the Beast even makes a point of fixing some of the holes in the original film like why the Prince’s servants are cursed too, how old the Prince was when he was cursed and how people managed to just forget about a member of the royalty after he was cursed.  And all these things are woven into the story in a way that doesn’t halt the story or take anything away from it.  In addition, we learn more about our main characters.  The reason for the Beast’s heartlessness when he was human comes forward.  We learn more about what happened to Belle’s mother.  Overall, the entire movie just offers a deeper look at what the animated movie set forth.

Heck, even some of the most unexpected side characters get some depth.  Take LeFou, for instance.

Yes, LeFou.  The guy who’s had this whole controversy surrounding him because the movie depicts him as gay (for the record, I don’t care).  In the animated film, LeFou was a tiny comical toady who followed Gaston around and did his bidding.  He was the human equivalent of an animal sidekick in a movie where most of the sidekicks are housewares.  His crowning accomplishment in the animated film is that he sang the song “Gaston”.  In the live action film, he starts as Gaston’s sidekick but is quickly shown to be a man with a conscience but a weak will.  He even finds the nerve to change sides later on.  LeFou is one of the characters that had the most growth in the move from animation to live action.  And his sexuality ,or the tiny hint there is of it, really kind of pales in comparison to the fact that he actually feels like a character now.

Gaston himself shows his malicious side a lot sooner in the live action film.  Whether you like that or not is likely going to come down to personal taste.

There are other things I like.  For example, the Beast and Belle actually bond over Shakespeare in the live action film.  And it’s not just “I love that book too”.  They actually disagree about it.  Score a point for intelligent conversation.

The production design is gorgeous.  They really seemed to go all-in for the French Baroque opulence on the Beast’s castle.  The designs for the enchanted objects are all entertaining and interesting.  I especially like the birdlike design of the Plumette the feather duster.  There’s even a nod to the Cocteau film with two lamps held up by arms outside the entrance to the castle.  Though, I think that detail may have been in the animated film too.

The film has all the songs from the animated film except the reprise of “Gaston”.  There are also three new songs.  “How Does a Moment Last Forever” is the new end credits song and both Maurice and Belle get to sing a bit of it.  “Days in the Sun” is a song primarily sung by the enchanted servants about their hope to be unenchanted.  And “Evermore” is a torch song for the Beast.  And these are all really new songs.  I checked to see if they were ported over from the Broadway production and they weren’t.  The new songs are all pretty good.  One little issue about the music, though.  You can tell that some of the actors aren’t really singers.  They’re not terrible, but you can tell that they’re not really vocalists by profession.  They still commit themselves admirably to the task.  It didn’t bother me, but it might bother other people.  It certainly didn’t stop me from buying the soundtrack.

There are other flaws.  The reasoning for the Beast’s cruelty when he was human is introduced and moves by very quickly.  That moment probably could have been given some more exploration and time to breathe.  Also, while it was great to learn more about Belle’s mother and Belle’s desire to know more about her does connect to one very important scene, that importance is maybe a little too understated .  Also, Ewan MacGregor’s French accent as Lumiere is pretty bad.  But these are minor things, really.  Even with these flaws, it’s hardly Disney’s worst Beauty and the Beast production.
Well, I guess that really is it and I . . . oh wait, I forgot about the rose scene.

Now, this is a part of the film that doesn’t necessarily make it a better movie, but makes it a slightly better fairy tale adaptation in my book (after all, I’m not a professional film critic so take my assessments with a grain of salt).  But one of my biggest pet peeves about the 1991 animated film is that they dropped the part about Belle asking her father for a rose.  In the fairy tale, when Belle’s father is going on a business trip he asks his children what he should bring them back.  Belle’s sisters ask for jewels and finery but Belle asks for a rose.  Belle’s father then gets lost and gets treated to some mysterious hospitality at the Beast’s castle.  But on the way out he picks a rose for Belle.  This angers the Beast who accuses him of stealing and that kicks off the main action of the story.  Now, the animated film cut that part out.  Probably because they also cut out Belle’s sisters and that negated the point of her asking for a humble gift.  The rose was repurposed as a symbol of the Beast’s imprisonment and the story’s proverbial ticking clock.  But it’s still an awful shame to cut that part.  It’s one of the most iconic parts of the story.  The live action film reintroduces the rose request, but how do they do it without Belle’s sisters being put back into the mix?  They make it a symbolic connection to Belle’s long lost mother.  I don’t know about anyone else, but I think it works.

Overall, I think this is a highly entertaining film.  It’s beautiful, adds depth to some established characters, has some entertaining songs and tugs on the heart strings.  It’s maybe not going to please everyone (for example: if you still see the whole story as an ode to Stockholm Syndrome, this film is not going to change that.  Sorry).  But I think if you like Disney’s previous reimaginings of its classic properties then I think you’ll like this.