FilmDailies.com - A filmmaker’s blog

The Headsman starts pretty much as I’ve expected - a slow pan of life in the Middle Ages. It stops when it reaches two young boys on the way to an execution. Not theirs naturally. Fast-forward fifteen years and we see them reconnect after so many years - once has become a soldier, the other a prelate at the abbey.

Martin (Nikolaj Coster-Waldau), the soldier, falls in love with the executioner’s daughter (Anastasia Griffith). She’s shunned by the townspeople - illustrated by a scene in which a seller at the marketplace refuses to sell her anything. They eventually marry and Martin finds himself in the same position: an ex-soldier who cannot find a job because he’s related to the executioner. Luckily, the executioner dies, so this most coveted position becomes Martin’s only choice.

At the beginning of the film, we are treated to a narration that builds certain expectations about the clash with religious fanatics. Director Simon Aeby and scripters Susanne Freund and Steve Attridge take the road often travelled and make it a revenge flick, the difference is it’s set in the Middle Ages.

Vladimir Smutny’s camerawork is excellent and the production design is good as well. The acting is pretty much as you might expect - mostly average with a few good scenes on the shoulders of the supporting actors (Berkoff). The music score is adequate as well which is admittedly a tough job for any period piece. Kubrick had the decency to use classic pieces in Barry Lindon, I think this movie could’ve done the same.

If you like period pieces, you might find The Headsman is well worth the DVD rental. Personally, I’d preferred it to be grittier, darker, and less conventional. The same critique that I have for Beowulf and Grendel.

No pleasure in this movie.

The guy behind it, Andrzej Sekula, is the cinematographer who shot Reservoir Dogs and Pulp Fiction for Tarantino. His directorial efforts are nothing to be sneered at either - my favorite of the bunch is American Psycho. Christian Bale’s performance is so amazing, it carries the movie.

This time he paired with first-time screenwriter, Adam Haynes, who takes the monumental task of weaving together three separate story lines. IMHO, first-time and weaving shouldn’t be in the same sentence and this movie confirms it.

It moves slowly and its sense of direction is questionable. I couldn’t feel sympathy (or empathy for that matter) for Lauren Holly or anyone else. I was surprised to see Jay (Clerks, Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back) but it was only a cameo, so it became a disappointment.

The cinematography focuses too much on close-ups which feel wrong. If you examine the close-ups, you’ll notice two nasty shadows in the background. I find them distracting and I can see no reason why a few lights weren’t pointed at the background.

I should’ve said it right in the title - it’s a review of the remake of The Producers, not Mel Brooks’ original.

I love the original Producers. It has Brooks’ stamp all over it. He went on to direct Blazing Saddles and Young Frankenstein - both hilarious comedies.

Roger Ebert has this story to recall about Mel:

Mel and I were in an elevator in New York at the time of the original film, and a lady got on, looked at him, and said “Sir, I have seen your film and it is vulgar!” Brooks replied: “Madame, my film rises below vulgarity.”

The vulgarity in The Producers remake doesn’t rise to the occasion, unfortunately. To put things in perspective, this is a movie that’s based on a musical which was based on a movie about a musical. Susan Stroman, the director, copies the original almost scene by scene, extending the ones that have singing to the edge of my patience (and sometimes beyond). I haven’t seen the musical itself so I assume most of the singing scenes are taken from it.

I’m a firm believer that adaptations only work if you use the original piece as a spring board. It’s naive to think that pointing a camera at a musical or a play will produce a movie.

Or, in the words of Ogilvy, when asked about research: “I notice increasing reluctance on the part of marketing executives to use judgment; they are coming to rely too much on research, and they use it as a drunkard uses a lamp post for support, rather than for illumination.” Same thing here.

Here’s a short list of the things that I missed the most in the new movie:

• Gene Wilder: I miss his hysteria, Matthew Broderick tries hard, too hard.
• The real, non-singing Ulla
• Lorenzo St. DuBois (L.S.D.) and his “baby”

In short, the remake falls short of a movie, and it’s probably not a musical either. If you’d like to see “the” movie, I suggest you rent the original. I own the collectors edition DVD and I love the interviews that come with it. If you’re an aspiring filmmaker, I think you gonna love Mel Brooks’ interview. After all, that was his breakthrough movie!

There’s two genres that have an IMMENSE potential to disappoint me: 1) swords and sorcery; and 2) Sci-fi. In the former category, my worst-of-all-time is Dungeons & Dragons. Even Jeremy Iron’s travesty couldn’t save it.

A big part of the reason why I’m easily disappointed is the amount of good genre books I’ve read - both fantasy and sci-fi. In my mind I pictured things differently, certainly not as cheesy as Merlin’s Apprentice.

The movie’s been produced as a mini-series so budget has been severely tilted towards cheap costumes and disjoined narration. Miranda Richardson graces the screen for a few seconds though she quickly falls victim to special effects (right).

Some of the most “offensive” moments come from total disregard of plausibity. One example: Barbarian hordes (albeit lacking in extras) wheel in ballistas when ambushed near a river ford. The Saxons (?) operate them with such cunning that other plot devices fall silent for the next 10 minutes or so when ballistas take care of cast no longer vital for the plot. (right)

Merlin’s Apprentice is an earnest effort to dislodge Dungeons & Dragons from the top position. It matches it in terms of star power (Miranda Richardson), special effects, and plot. It doesn’t score high on the dragon scale though - I miss the pointless flocks of golden, red, black, emerald, etc. dragons that plague D&D. Merlin has to settle for silver (or even bronze).