Mommy where's daddy?

AS I SIT HERE  in my writer's garret, finishing my third novel, HARTFORD 1944,  I had an epiphany.  Why is it that a  disproportionate number of young girls depicted in movies are either orphans or come from a dysfunction one parent family?  Often times if the girl does have parents, they are decidedly absent or neglectful. This seems to be a common theme in literature and movies. Good story-telling always involves conflict, and a child without parents is perhaps every child's worst fear. The plot device allows the girl to venture into the dangerous world and  have adventures and develop traits of self-reliance and bravery without the comfort (or hindrance) of parental supervision.

The literary formula seems almost universal and unavoidable and is true for boys as well as girls. However with the boys, the trend less often depicts  them forming a bond with a “mother” figure. The girls by contrast invariably seem to end up befriending some curmudgeonly man whose motives are usually purely altruistic and platonic.  They say there are only seven basic stories you can tell, and the tale of the young girl who comes of age under the wing of a “father” figure appears to be a standard formula. 

          In my first novel TESSA CLAIBORNE, The year is 1878, and Tessa’s father is dead and her mother sells her daughter into indentured servitude. Thirteen-year-old Tessa flees the London textile mills and disguises herself as a boy and joins the army.  She has all sorts of unsupervised adventures in  South Africa.

          In HARTFORD 1944 Janie McConaughey enjoys both parents, not withstanding, she escapes parental authority by running away and joining the circus where she makes friends with a clown Walter who serves as her parental father figure and mentor.

 

Here's my list of young girl orphan movies, I compiled to make my point. The list is intended to be neither comprehensive nor exhaustive.  It's just a short list. I'm sure there are some glaring omissions.

 

PAPER MOON (1973), Tatum O’Neal is Addie Pray an orphan child on the lam with a man who may or may not be her father.

BAD NEWS BEARS (1976), Tatum O’Neal is shepherded by a beer swilling cigar smoking Water Mathau.

ORPHAN (2009), Isabelle Furhman is a homicidal 9 year-old orphan girl who seduces her step-father.

TRUE GRIT (1969, 2010), Mattie Ross is effectively orphaned, her relationship is with an aging gunslinger Rooster Cogburn.
WALKABOUT (1971), Schoolgirl Jenny Agutter and her brother become stranded in the Australian outback when their father shoots himself.  Girl walks around in the wilderness naked . . .   
KICK ASS (2010),  Chloe Moretz plays a pint-size vigilante/assassin and she talks dirty too!  Hit Girl has no mother, only a father.

LAWN DOGS (1997), Ten-year-old Mischa Barton plays Devon, a girl neglected by her parents.  She develops a crush on the lawn mower guy.

THE PROFESSIONAL (1994), Natalie Portman is orphan girl who adopts a hit man as her father figure with a decided Oedipus subtext.

          Jodie Foster frequently put in work as the little girl lost.
 

TAXI DRIVER (1976), Iris is a runaway prostitute who has a relationship with a psychotic taxi driver.

CANDLESHOE (1976), Jodie Foster plays an orphan street urchin.
ALICE DOESN'T LIVE HERE ANYMORE (1974), Jodie is Audrey, a wisecracking, shoplifting, wine-guzzling tomboy who's mother is a prostitute.

THE LITTLE GIRL WHO LIVES DOWN THE LANE (1976), Jodie is an orphan with an unsavory relationship with Martin Sheen.



         Dakota Fanning  has played her share of wastrel waifs.

 

I AM SAM (2001) Dakota has no mother, and her father is retarded.

WAR OF THE WORLDS (2005), The Martians are attacking Dakota, and she has Tom Cruise for a father, I don’t know which is worse.

HIDE AND SEEK (2005), Dakota’s mother is murdered, only a father.

MAN ON FIRE (2004), Dakota has two parents, but they are neglectful, she develops a strong parental bond with Denzel Washington her bodyguard.

HOUNDDOG (2007), Dakota has no mother, and she plies the neighbor boy with kisses to show her his winkie.
 

          Shirley Temple was almost always depicted as an orphan or a waif.
 

HEIDI (1937) Heidi is an orphan child sent to live with her grandfather.

SUSANNA OF THE MOUNTIES  (1939)  Shirley is the orphaned survivor of an Indian attack in the Canadian West, she has thing for Mounties.

LITTLE MISS MARKER (1934) Shirley is abandoned by her father and used as collateral to cover a bet on a horse race.

BRIGHT EYES, (1934) Shirley is an orphan, again.

CURLY-TOP (1935) Wealthy Edward Morgan becomes charmed with a curly-haired orphan Shirley.

CAPT IAN JANUARY (1936) Shirley lives with a lighthouse keeper who rescued her when her parents drowned.

 

  

Angelica dancing to "The Witch Doctor."

 

     Isn't she just the cutest little ol' thang?  Angelica (age 7) dances to "The Witch Doctor."   I love this video, you can see lots more of Angelica on her own channel.

 

 

 

Here's another super cute Angelica video for your enjoyment. The guy playing the guitar seems just as smitten with Angelica's charms as we are.

Dakota goes au naturel

          “I don't know, twenty-two dollars!”  Jim Paradise wasn’t exactly sure . . . he stood nervously awkwardly in the young misses department at G. Fox’s department store. Three dresses later, he felt less like he was buying a pair of work boots and more like he was playing with paper-dolls.

         Janie put on a pout.

 “Oh, Janie, I didn’t mean it like that. I love it, the dress, I think you’re beautiful. What do you think Frau?”  
        “Ja, Herr Paradise, ze jung mädchen is very attrativ.”
        “There still seems to be something missing, she needs . . . ah, something more.” Jim gestured helplessly; Frau Detweiler came to the rescue. She knew exactly what was missing; the one article of clothing every young girl requires to aspire to feel feminine.
       “Ach, und büstenhalter!”
       The attentive clerk at G. Fox whisked Janie off to the fitting room. When she emerged, she felt very shy but very grown up.  Janie did indeed look pretty; her bright face beamed, never in her whole life had she had so many adults give her such attention. She pirouetted, twirled and struck a pose like Betty Grable. Jim didn’t know quite what to say, he managed a weak, “mein fräulein.”  Jim smiled nodded and added under his breath . . . ach, that was what was missing.

*     *     *

 

HARTFORD 1944

Chapter Thirteen

The Dilly Girl

Steven Mc Allister © 2010 all rights reserved

 

 

 

 

Kiki "Delivers"

Kiernan “Kiki” Shipka (b. 11.10.99) is an American child actress best known for playing Sally Draper on the AMC drama series Mad Men.

     Kiernan has just recently completed filming in Brooklyn, New York. The film is called Very Good Girls and it stars Dakota Fanning, Elizabeth Olsen and Demi Moore.  Kiernan plays Dakota’s younger sister Ellie. VGG is set for  released sometime in 2013.

     Kiernan began acting in commercials at age six, including a TV spot for Cambell’s soup. As a member of the Mad Men ensemble cast, she won the Screen Actors Guild Award for Outstanding Performance by an ensemble cast in a drama series in 2008 and 2009.  In 2012 she was awarded Best Scene Stealer by Young Hollywood.

     Kiernan is currently featured in a spread for Vanity Fair Magazine (May Issue) along with a group of young stars from popular TV shows. The spread is basically a snapshot of a Child Star Slumber Party.

     Kiernan has played Sally Draper the troubled daughter of Don (Jon Hamm) and Betty (January Jones) for the past five years.  We have literally watched little Kiki grown up on television. The role of Sally is a very challenging one for Kiernan where she has to deal with many adult themes—struggling with the broken marriage of her parents and entering preteendom in the tumultuous 60s.

“I’m not allowed to watch the show. My mom will tape it and then show me the scenes she feels are appropriate. [...] I’m very method when I’m on set. It’s just kind of thinking the thoughts of Sally, and I pretty much just become her. It’s a character that I’ve known for a really long time, so it’s pretty easy. [...] I don’t think she’s a bad kid at all. She’s going through a rough time. Don is absent and Betty has never once catered to Sally’s emotional needs, so I feel that they’re not the best parents.”

— Kiernan Shipka

 

Swing low, Sweet Chariot!

I DON'T KNOW QUITE WHAT TO SAY. I love Dakota, I respect Dakota and for the first time her public behavior has left me, well speechless. I guess I somehow knew this day would come. I must be loosing touch with what is considered socially acceptable in America. Call me old fashioned, but I considered this unnecessary display of girl-flesh crass and tasteless.

“Dakota is a sexy girl.” These words and comments like them echo from the most recent blog files. Two months ago such an honest comment would have gotten you tarred and feathered and run out of town on a rail. Does anyone really understand how ridiculously stupid and specious such comments really are? Please tell me what has suddenly changed in the last two months? Was Dakota a hideous and horrible slug two months ago who has suddenly transformed into a beautiful butterfly? Or are these people just some specious, disingenuous predatory cads who were waiting, cowering in the wings for Dakota to turn eighteen and so you could suddenly proclaim their pent up ephebophilic frustrations “normal” and they could feel less than sleazy than before.

Yeah, right, gotcha.

DAKOTA IS A BEAUTIFUL GIRL, A SEXY GIRL, SAY THE WORDS. TAKE A DEEP BREATH. FEBRUARY 23rd ABSOLVES YOU OF NOTHING. IT CHANGES NOTHING. YOUR LUST THAT WAS, STILL IS.

These days it seems that a public display of plumber's crack is now less of an unfortunate social faux pas more and more of a new-age fashion statement. This was clearly done as an exhibitionist stunt, “Look at me, I’m eighteen and I can dress like a slut.” Let’s show the world what a bohemian-free-wheeling-college-student I’ve become. My God, we can practically see to Glory! One does not stare into the face of the Gorgon and live. While I considered myself a refined admirer of the more classical aspects of the Dimples of Venus, this is too much. Please Dakota, put some clothes on!

NOW IS GOOD, First Look

NOW IS GOOD (2012) Well, it appears first out of the gate of a spate of new post-turning-eighteen Dakota Fanning movies will be the UK tear-jerker "Now is Good." A story about a girl dying of leukemia who compiles a bucket list of things she wants to do before dying. Topping the list is her desire to lose her virginity. This makes two "loosing-her-virgininty" films for Dakota Fanning, that's esenially the same the plot of "Very Good Girls," (minus the dying part) with Elizabeth Olsen. Hmm, I wonder what's on Dakota's mind these days?

     Directed by Ol Parker and co-stars Jeremy Irvine.  You may remember him from the over-wrought Steven Spielberg Christmas flop, "War Horse."  Two very different posters, I like the first one better, but the second one is probably the official poster.  "Now is Good" is scheduled for a May release.   

    

Dakota too young for Cosmpolitan?

DAKOTA DOES COSMOPOLITAN  . . . Oh, boy does she ever! I don’t read Cosmopolitan. Probably my single most salient exposure to the torrid world of Cosmo is from a Seinfeld episode, the one where George’s mother catches him masturbating in the living room with an issue of Cosmopolitan. This magazine seems like a trashier more lurid version of Woman’s Day. Instead of casseroles and how to decorate your home for a Crack’n Kwanzaa Christmas. We are offered up a plethora of non-stop sex. Sex, sex, sex, this month’s issue seems to be no exception.

       Honestly folks, I’m more than a little bit disappointed with Dakota. Do they know the girl is still only 17?  Cosmopolitan seems like such a trashy tacky tatty vehicle to unveil her new found sexuality.  I always thought  she possessed a bit more je ne sais quoi. Personally, I’d be embarrassed  to be associated  with such scandalous salacious tag lines as: “Um, vagina are you okay down there?” and “His best sex ever.” *sigh* It’s with a wink and a nod and no amount of calculated cynicism the editors of Cosmo chose to wait until the strategic month of February before allowing Dakota to  grace their cover.

     Surprise! Dakota turns eighteen on February 23^rd    2012. What an amazing marvelous  wonderful zeitgeist one month makes! Prior to February Dakota was nothing more than jail bait, the mere lust and fantasy of  frustrated ephebophiles everywhere. Apparently eighteen makes all the difference. Open the flood gates! Do I see a Maxim spread anytime in the future? Perhaps a bawdy revival of Oh Calcutta? Daniel Radcliffe certainly couldn’t wait to shed his Harry Potter image and appear naked in Equus.

     I find this whole turning eighteen thing a  highly specious, laughable convenient contrivance.  It isn’t like a girl’s sexuality is a light-switch, off one moment and suddenly on the next. Oh, in case you haven't noticed, Dakota is a beautiful girl; do I dare say she was a beautiful girl in 2001. I knew she was a beautiful girl then and she’s grown up, blossomed to become a beautiful and sexually attractive young woman. Nothing really changes on February 23^rd @ 12:01 except a few disingenuous people out there will suddenly feel a whole lot  less creepy—finally free to express their pent up sexual frustration.  

         

Fanning sisters for W magaizine

            One of our favorite pictures. Dakota and Elle turn up the heat for W magazine. Why these two girls haven't made a movie together is beyond me. It seems such an obvious casting choice, the two sisters certainly generate plenty of chemistry as well as do I dare say enough concupiscent passion to raise a few eyebrows. Elsewhere, there's trouble across the pond. Dakota finds herself embroiled in a advertising scandal over her Oh Lola! campaign.  The ads for Marc Jacob were  banned by the UK Advertising Standards Authority for being “salacious,” too sexually provocative.

     Then there's 14-year-old Chloe Moretz, who doesn’t shy away at all from her jail bait image. I might even go as far as to say she revels in it. The poor dear doesn't seem to be able to go near a red carpet without flashing that ridiculous duck face “come hither” salacious pout. What’s up with young girls these days? Do I detect a greater trend here? We find ourselves in the grips of a forbidden epidemic: The  sexualization of our American youth. What with the marketing of slutty Bratz dolls to our  pre-teens, the  message is clear: You can look but do not touch. I should  think neither Miss Fanning nor Miss Moretz is so naive as to not know exactly what they're doing. *sigh* Sometimes I pine for the good ol’ days. I miss the old Dakota. Whatever happened to my fresh-face pig-tailed Fern? Excuse me while I go get some ice. 

TOMBOY, First Look

TOMBOY (2011) Laure (Zoé Herán), is a 10-year-old girl who is the new kid on the block,  she's just moved to a new neighborhood outside Paris with her parents and little sister Jeanne (Malonn Lévana). Because she is in need of new friends and does not know anybody, Laure impulsively introduces herself as “Mickael.”  She becomes close to Lisa, who does not know her new best friend is not a boy. 

I Hate Dakota Fanning!

I HATE DAKOTA FANNING! There now, I've gone and said it.  I thought that just might make you sit up and take notice,  now that I have your attention, let me elaborate.  Dakota Fanning, is the most important and influential child star of the new millennium  and is poised to embark upon a new career as an adult actress. I can count on the fingers of one hand the child stars that stand in her shadow: Margret O’Brian, Shirley Temple, Tatum O’Neal and Jodie Foster.  Did I ever tell you how much I hate Dakota Fanning?
     Dakota Fanning, (Gwad how I hate her!) So what's not to like?  She’s  young, smart, beautiful, a talented actress.  Dakota is a funny girl. Generous to her fans,  she involves her self in numerous worthy charities like Walk-fit, Stand up to Cancer, PSA for (RED), Alzheimer association, Shane’s Inspiration, St Jude’s children research hospital, children’s health and voter education. By all estimations Dakota is a good girl, she gets good grades, is enrolled in NYU. She doesn’t drink, smoke or do drugs─Neither has she been to rehab nor become embroiled in a Hollywood tabloid scandal.

      Yet the haters persist. WHY? I’ll tell you in a single word: Jealousy. Just what are some of the Dakota Fanning haters saying? “Dakota Fanning is like in every single movie involving children ever.” This common accusation is obviously as stupid as it is un-true. A variation on this theme is that Dakota Fanning is the “Go to” child actress, that she is the mastermind behind a vast Hollywood conspiracy and she diabolically usurps or “steals” roles from every other (and presumably more deserving) aspiring young actress in Hollywood. That argument amounts to nothing more than sour grapes. It seems that I recall Annasophia Robb was cast in Because of Winn Dixie (2005). Abigail Breslin managed to land the role in Kit Kittredge: American Girl (2008), and Nim’s Island (2008), so much for that steaming load of bunk.

      One of my favorite criticisms and the one the “haters” seem to feel has the most traction: Dakota’s perceived obnoxious screaming in War of the Worlds (2005).  One poster summed it up thusly: “Dakota Fanning has to win for worst child actor. Between this and her screeching ear splitting screaming in War of the Worlds, I would prefer not to see the movie she is in. She overacts and thinks histrionics means good acting.”  All I can say is, if the Martians ever did invade planet earth . . . I’d probably pee my pants and scream like a little girl too.

      “Dakota acts too mature, in every interview she behaves like a miniature adult.” This  common criticism is a case where the haters want to have it both ways. I can only imagine the hue and cry if Dakota were perceived as bratty and spoiled and immature.  Dakota has always possessed a precocious propensity to behave beyond her years. I think for me that was part of her allure, her charm so to speak. Even at eight-years-old, Dakota was poised, a charming and intelligent guest. It was a marvel to watch her hold her own in a conversation with venerable talk-show host Jay Leno. Jay was smitten, and so were we. I know children, I work with children everyday and it is an exceptional child who speaks plainly, a child who is both polite and intelligent is a rare delight and one to be treasured, not derided for their precociousness.

      It’s a cruel fact in Hollywood, that producers, directors and screen-writers like their kids young and cute. Somewhere in the age range of eight to twelve, that is the golden age for child actors. Much beyond that age limit, unless they go to Disney or Nick there are just not that much opportunity for early teens. To make matters worse, when producers DO cast those parts, they usually go with actors much older, playing younger than their years. For example, Jennette McCurdy is 19 playing a 15 year-old! This has many advantages, not the least of which directors are no longer fettered with strict shooting hours for minors. When Dakota shot The Cat in the Hat (2003),  the director would set up all the shots, shoot Mike Myers in total, and only then would the clock start, they’d zoom the kids on set and frantically shoot Breslin and Fanning close-ups, stop the clock, whisk the kids off set.   Set up for the next shot  . . .     
     This brings us to the most scurrilous charge and the one that makes me the angriest. A lot hay was  made a few years back about Dakota and her management and the movie Hounddog (2007). The big lie is that Dakota only took on the role because she “thought” it would garner her Oscar nomination, that Dakota appears naked on screen  and touches a boy's privates.  There is absolutely NO truth to any of this.  A BIG lie, hatched by the "haters" themselves as part of a smear campaign against Dakota in an attempt to sabotage Hounddog.  The miss-information surrounding this movie was  so clouded by preposterous preconceived prejudice and hate-mongering that this little independent film was never able to  secure a national distributor. The facts are, this lie was hatched by people who were influenced by Blue Line Radio who told an equally big lie about Dakota and the final screen content of Hounddog.

      It is true, somewhere between the years 2003-2006 Dakota was as they say the Hollywood "IT" Girl. Time passes, children grow up, and Dakota is for practical purposes an adult. I'm starting to see numerous posts from people who think she’s a thing of the past, a dinosaur like the Olsen twins. Dakota has made choices that weren't as career-propelling as other actresses in her age range. Saoirse Rohan has made some better choices. I don't think this puts Dakota out of the game. Yet I see many posts from people who think she’s over and done with because of a 2-3 year slump in her transitioning phase.

      The awkward years, no longer a cute child, not yet an adult, this is a fearful perfect storm that oftentimes is disastrous undoing to any former child star’s career (Dana Plato comes to mind). Even a venerable child actress of the stature of Jodie Foster was not immune.  Poor Jodie got fat, suffered the unwanted publicity of John Hinckley and then suffered the ultimate humiliation of actually having to do a screen test to land the part of Clarice Starling in Silence of the Lambs (1991). Jodie had the last laugh and went on to win an Oscar.

     Dakota needs a movie, a big movie. She was wonderful in her breakout performance I am Sam (2001) Man on Fire (2005) and Charlotte’s Web (2006). All that success is in the past. Dakota is seventeen now, in a few short months she will be eighteen and free of Hollywood’s self imposed (indeed) all of societies arbitrary restrictions on minors. Dakota will truly be able choose her own path as an adult actress. I personally see nothing but great things ahead for this fine young actress. Dakota will bounce back. Not necessarily as the “it” girl compared with her contemporaries, but undoubtedly she will continue to act all she needs is the right script the right vehicle. Sandra Bullock, Kirsten Dunst and Kiera Knightley will need to move over because Dakota Fanning is in the house!

O Tessa, wherefore art thou Tessa?

I BEGAN THIS DAY not knowing what to write. They say in writing, the blank page is the scariest of all demons. That has never been my problem, give me a blank page and a subject and I can whack out 4000 words about nothing easy.  It wasn't that I was scared, my problem was I had this  crawling sensation in the back of my head,  I knew exactly what it was I wanted to write. I rejected the idea out of hand, I didn't  want to write that!  I took my dog for a walk, hoping that I'd come up with a brilliant  new idea.  Nothing came. I knew sooner or later I had to write something, after all I’m a writer and writing is what I do.  

      I have what you might call a confession to make.  I don’t know whether to chalk it up to happenstance, coincidence, or foul chance. These are the kinds of things that only happen to me. I mean what are the chances?  I could get struck by lightning twice and still not have another swipe at such a foul turn of events.
     Growing up; my brother David and I would play marathon sessions of Monopoly. I remember one game in particular. I was winning; David was on the ropes, down to one property, Boardwalk with hotels.  A wounded beast is the most dangerous foe, but I was sitting pretty, I knew it was only a matter of time before I crushed him. All that changed when I landed on Boardwalk. It took all my cash reserves, I was forced to mortgaged all my available minor properties and hand over the two-thousand dollars rent. My railroads were gone, my utilities in hock.  I tried to convince myself that this represented only a minor set-back; I still had hotels on the reds and the greens. I was cash poor but I was still winning; it was only a matter of time. What I hadn’t counted on, was that I had rolled doubles, which means you get a second turn. This normally is a good thing, however in Monopoly, in the late stages of the game, strategically, this is a bad thing, the more turns you take, the more opportunity you have to land on the other guy's property.  I wasn't worried, I was free and clear, nothing but undeveloped purple, light blue and orange.  I rolled the dice with smug confidence, not knowing just how bad my luck was.  The dice came  up three. One, two, three, pass GO, collect two-hundred dollars, all right so far. Three landed me on CHANCE . . . no worries, maybe I'd win a $10  second prize in a breauty contest. I drew my card and in an instant I knew I was ruined!  ADVANCE TO BOARDWALK.

     What sort of evil karma must I possess to bring me to such ruination?  In one throw of the dice, I was bankrupt! There was no way I could come up with two-thousand dollars a second time.  As strange as it might seem, this was a life changing moment for me. It was in that moment I had an epiphany of sorts. That’s a long story and quite the round about way to make my point.  This is why I never play the lottery or go to the casino.  At just ten-years-old and I knew in that moment I was forever cursed with abysmal bad luck. 

    *Sigh* This was bound to come out sooner or later, so I might as well be upfront about it. I still can’t quite believe it myself. Just what is this post all about?  I'll tell you, Dakota's new movie,  NOW IS GOOD (2012).  Dakota Fanning  plays a girl dying of leukemia who compiles a list of things she'd like to do before passing away. Topping the list is her desire to lose her virginity . . . alright so far.  Okay, here comes  the bombshell, are you sitting down? The name of Dakota’s character is Tessa Scott! Could this be any worse? What am I supposed to say? How am I supposed to respond? To make matters worse, Dakota has her hair cut short and she looks like a boy! I guess it could be worse; her name could be Tessa Claiborne.

     In 2006 I began work on what was to become my first novel,  RUFF STUFF.  A story about a  private investigator Lea Swift and her sometime tumultuous relationship with  her grandfather, a war criminal, a Nazi hunter who also turns out to be a shape shifter. These stories represented   just a  compilation of tales of my past characters from previous role-playing games turned into a novel.
      In '07 I began work on a new novel, an origial  novel about a subject I was passionate about. A story I wanted to tell. Set against the backdrop of nineteenth century British imperialism, TESSA CLAIBORNE tells the story of a young Welsh girl who escapes poverty and indentured servitude. Tessa disguises herself as a boy joins the army, where she finds herself in Africa, inexplicably intertwined in some of the greatest colonial battles in history. Tessa Claiborne is an historical novel, a hero’s journey about love, loss and ultimate redemption.

     Well, that's all I got to say about that. It's impossible to know whether to call it foul coincidence or cruel happenstance! You can be the judge yourself who came first, Tessa Scott or Tessa Claiborne.  Here's the link to my web page  TESSA CLAIBORNE.COM   Where you can watch the book trailer. You can read my a preliminary draft of my novel on Wordpress @  TESSA CLAIBORNE the novel .

MAN ON FIRE

MAN ON FIRE (2004)─In Mexico City, a former CIA assassin swears vengeance on those who committed an unspeakable atrocity against the little girl he was sworn to protect. Directed by Tony Scott from the novel by A.J. Quinnell, screenplay by Brian Heigeland. Man on Fire stars Denzel Washington, Christopher Walken and Dakota Fanning.

 

     After a wave of kidnappings sweeps through Mexico City, there is a growing sense of panic among the wealthier citizens, especially parents. In one six-day period, there are twenty-four abductions, leading many to hire bodyguards for their children. With this back story established, we first meet John Creasy (Washington), a burned-out ex-CIA operative, who has given up on life. Creasy’s friend Rayburn (Walken) convinces him to give it one last try and come to Mexico City to be a bodyguard for nine-year-old Pita Ramos (Fanning), daughter of a wealthy industrialist. At first Creasy rejects the idea out-of-hand, he’s not interested in being antibody's bodyguard, least of all to a little girl. After some convincing, he accepts the assignment. At first Creasy keeps his distance, barely tolerating the precocious child and her pestering questions about his dark past. But slowly, Pita works her wiles and begins to chip away at his rough façade The two learn to trust and the pair become bona fied friends, there exist a genuine chemistry, a bond between the little blonde white girl and the damaged black man with a deadly 9mm Glock. For Creasy, his new found relationship is redemption, then in one catastrophic instant his friend, his charge, Pita is kidnapped.

     I recently watched a broadcast of Man on Fire on Spike TV, I hadn’t seen this movie in five years and everything that I ever loved about Dakota Fanning suddenly came flooding back. What an absolutely wonderful performance. Dakota was at the height of her prowess, after a disastrous turn in the god-awful Cat in the Hat (2003) Dakota was back, a vulnerable wispy mercurial waif, with baby teeth intact. I don’t know if he knows it or not, but Tony Scott needs to get down on his knees and thank God that he cast Dakota Fanning in this movie! Dakota is awesome, she more than holds her own against the venerable Washington and even steals the show.

 

     Man on Fire is not an easy movie to like, it’s also a hard movie not to like. This is not what you call a perfect film, principally due to Tony Scott’s penchant for schizophrenic direction and head-ache inducing herky-jerky camera work. Man on Fire fails mostly in part as an action movie owing to its fragmented construction. When the movie works it works well.  One thing that does work well is Harry Gregson-Williams’ south-of-the-border Spanish guitar score is enhanced by soundtrack splashes of Chopin, Debussy, and even the Linda Ronstadt classic 1977 country-rock version of “Blue Bayou.”

       Man on Fire is really three movies in one. The first third of the movie is your basic introduction, the “set-up.” We are introduced to Denzel Washington’s character the hired bodyguard of little Dakota Fanning. This is the best part of the movie, the unfolding relationship between the little girl and the assassin. To Tony Scott’s credit, he takes time to develop this relationship, there’s no 30 second montage of Dakota and Washington frolicking on the beach and then *bang* you’re dead . . . 30 seconds is not enough time to invest in the characters and Scott understands this. No, the movie devotes some serious screen time to develop the quiet and intimate relationship between the gruff assassin and the little girl.  Washington and Fanning are wonderful together and establish a screen rapport that reaches the level of Hepburn and Bogart.  This sets the stage for the tragedy yet to unfold.  I personally, really enjoyed the Dakota sequences; the scenes with Dakota and Denzel are so good and so strong that I caught myself wishing the entire movie was about their relationship. Seriously folks, not since Ryan and Tatum O’Neal have I seen a movie about a relationship between an adult man and a 9-year-old girl that was this good.

 

     Sadly, the Washington-Fanning relationship was less than a third of the move. The second act of the film is about Pita’s kidnapping and Creasy’s obsession to exact revenge on her abductors. It's in this second act that the movie goes haywire. You tend to feel, with all the camera tricks, captions with a mind of their own, and jerky, over-the-top direction that the director was trying to obscure the fact that he didn’t know how to tell the story in this part of the movie. Scott calls attention to himself much too often his advant-guarde directing style. The middle part of the film lapses into cliché. I thought I was watching Charles Bronson in “Death Wish,”  about a character hell-bent on seeking revenge.  This only serves to drag the movie down. The third act of the film is more of a mix of the first two parts. There are some good moments, and some not so good, when it works, it works well, and when it doesn’t, it doesn’t work at all.         

    One of my favorite Dakota Fanning stories is a classic. Dakota is invited to appear on the TONIGHT SHOW with Jay Leno. Dakota’s comedic talents are greatly underrated. She told this story . . . On a day trip to the Aztec pyramids during the filming of Man on Fire. Dakota and her family, including her grandmother Mary Jane, took a bus tour to visit the ancient sites. Apparently, Mary Jane is very talkative. All during the time the tour guide was trying to explain some of the more important aspects of the ruins; Mary Jane kept up a constant chatter. Finally, in frustration the Mexican guide turned to Mary Jane and said (in his not-too-good-English):

“Mary Jane, if you would just shut-up a little, you can hear the jaguars.”

     Dakota tells it better than I─

Man on Fire (2004) ** ½

      

    

    

THE GIRL WHO LOVED TOM GORDON

“♪♪ Who do you call when your windshield’s busted? ♪♪” Trisha sang softly.
“♪♪1-555-54-GIANT. ♪♪”

THE GIRL WHO LOVED TOM  GORDON by Stephen King © 1999 Scribner. When  ten-year-old Trisha McFarland gets lost in the woods, she has only a boiled egg, a tuna fish sandwich and her Sony Walkman for comfort. She is a huge fan of Tom Gordon, a relief pitcher for the Boston Red Sox, so she listens to the games and he becomes an imaginary character in her mind. I found this book to be a thoroughly enjoyable read and I highly recommended it. Since I pictured Dakota in my mind as the little girl Trisha McFarland, it was a little bit like having a new Dakota film playing in my head. The novel is part spook story and part survival story, with the baseball subtext woven into the fabric of the narrative so cleverly that the imaginary Tom Gordon becomes an integral character. As Trisha becomes more lost and her deprivation becomes more severe, the little girl’s misery descends from tears into abject terror―baseball itself becomes a metaphor for Trisha’s very survival. TOM GORDON is really a lot less of a scare novel than it is a coming-of-age story similar to King’s Stand by me.

     I should preface all my comments by stating emphatically there is no movie there never was any movie and all comments made here are merely the musings and reminiscence of the wishful author.

     In the spring of 2004 there was a substantial rumor that Dakota Fanning was going to be cast in a movie called The Girl who loved Tom Gordon. At first I was horrified, Stephen King, didn’t he write ghost stories and movies about teen-age proms drenched in buckets of blood? Besides, what an absolutely clunky, unmanageable title, I had serious flashbacks to the ‘70’s and another clunky title, The Little Girl who lived down the Lane. There was the cool poster with the little girl beside the grave and spade, it was all spooky. Unfortunately, for Jodie Foster the movie tanked.

     As far as The Girl who loved Tom Gordon, it’s a quick read and comes in at slim 260 pages. The baseball theme is incorporated so seamlessly, so exquisitely that to separate the two would be impossible. I was instantly transported back to my glorious baseball youth: “THE ROAR OF ’84.” The year the Detroit Tigers won the World Series. I truly do remember the power and glory of Milt Wilcox, Alan Trammel and Jack Morris. Who could forget Kirk Gibson’s climatic home run? Baseball has that effect on people. After reading the book, all my childhood baseball enthusiasm came flooding back to me. Stephen King has somehow transformed baseball into the perfect metaphor for Trisha McFarland’s survival. I don’t know how he does it. I guess that’s what great writing is all about. A little girl lost in the woods all of a sudden comes down to a three and two pitch in the bottom of the ninth. I’ve read In to Thin Air, a great survival story if there ever was one. The Girl who loved Tom Gordon  is not so much a great survival story as it is a great baseball story. I’m not a big fan of George Romero. Maybe he’s matured. Maybe this is his own personal coming-of-age picture after reading the book, after reading the book I could think of no other title better than The Girl who loved Tom Gordon.

     The Girl who loved Tom Gordon represents one of the greatest could have been, what if, casting missed opportunities in movie history. Dakota would have been absolutely perfect for the part. At the time, Dakota was ten-years-old, exactly the same age as Trisha the girl in the book. The part of Trisha is very physical, and the scares mostly psychological. Since a great deal of the story’s narrative takes place inside the girl’s head, it was a chance for Dakota to flex her considerable narration skills. Little girl as action hero?  If you think about it, how often are ten-year-old girls really allowed to be brave? Certainly not Penny Robinson, every time a shambling bush monster appeared out of the woodwork all she ever did was scream, run away and fall down. I think that's what I like most about this story, Trisha McFarland is brave. The part of Trisha requires Dakota to hike, climb, and sing. “♪♪ 1-800 GIANT ♪♪” and get slathered in mud (you got to love a girl covered in mud)! Aside from the imaginary Tom Gordon, Trisha McFarland is principally the only other character in the novel. The whole weight of the film was to be on Dakota’s shoulders. I think she’s could have done well in this part.

     There was some controversy about the part. Trisha does indeed resort to some profanity during her ordeal lost in the woods. The obscenities come first during the middle act of the narrative when things for our heroine have gone from bad to worse (what could possibly be worse?) Trisha looses her shoe in the mud, and is desperate to retrieve it. The cursing is well within the context of the story and comes not without moral compunctions. Trisha stands up, still holding the rescued sneaker in her hand, and looked ahead.

“Oh fuck!,” Trisha croaked. It was the first time in her life she had said that
 particular world out loud . . .

     I consider the ramifications of the fact that our ten-year-old Dakota was going to have to use some very naughty words in her screen portrayal of Trisha McFarland. However I feel within the context of the story the dialogue is well justified and not gratuitous. This is not a case of the use of profanity for profanity sake. Trisha is essentially a very good girl. Under normal circumstances she would never talk that way, but Trisha’s circumstances are anything but normal and her use of bad language is used by King to illustrate the profound depth of her decent into misery and despair. The cursing comes at a time when Trisha comes to the full realization of the dire straight in which she finds herself.

     We will never know why this project failed. I suspect that perhaps the director was wrong, George Romero. When it was announced that Dakota was pulling out of the project, the movie remained with out a Trisha and ultimately was never filmed.  I’ve always felt this to be one of the great missed opportunities in movie history.  It is still a great story, a great book and I sincerely hope it is made one day, sadly, just not with Dakota.

(Let me organize a few pitchforks and torches) . . .

WAR OF THE WORLDS

WAR OF THE WORLDS (2005) Not what you might call a great movie.  My expectations entering the theater were extremely high and my anticipation was nearly insatiable. My trepidation was equally inconsolable. I felt really nervous for the success of this picture. After suffering a string of less than sterling movies over the past three years ranging from unmitigated failures of Cat in the Hat (2003) to Hide and Seek (2005), I felt desperate. Dakota really needed this movie. I knew that Dakota had done her best, but I felt she was being sabotaged at every twist and turn by idiot directors, producers, and worst of all co-stars. Case in point: Tom Cruise’s crazy romantic antics coupled with his spooky Scientology hokum. I felt that Tom had done the promotion of WOTW a huge disservice by creating a spectacle that shifted the focus of media away from the movie and on to Tom Cruise jumping on the couch.

     Dakota herself has never failed to deliver; she always managed to elevate what ever project she is attached to from what amounts to mediocre hack, to something special. I don’t think the poor girl knows she is surrounded by idiots. However it is enough to say that a couple of Dak’s past movies have missed the mark. I felt this WOTW was a make or break affair. If WOTW tanked, well . . . I wasn’t really prepared to contemplate failure.

     This is a movie doesn’t fool around, after a brief introduction to Ray the worlds shortest Newark dock worker, dead-beat-dad with the automobile engine in his living room. The action starts. Dakota is absolutely adorable on her arrival with her little zebra backpack and toy horsies. The visibly real-life pregnant Miranda Otto does well establishing the good and caring mom vs. the motor-head New Jersey Dad. Then the lightning comes and it is truly terrifying. At first amused by the spectacle, Ray beckons Rachel outdoors to view the unnatural phenomenon. Dakota delivers a chilling understated line: “I want to go inside.” She is convincing as a girl who wants to be with her dad but instantly recognizes that this is scary stuff. The lightning it turns out is only a precursor to further death and destruction as a massive electro-magnetic pulse renders (most) electronic devices useless.

     The Martians are truly terrifying, with their monstrous walking-machines, flailing tentacles and fog-horn calls of destruction that seem oddly mono-syllabically reminiscent of the five-note melody of universal harmony from CLOSE ENCOUNTERS. Instead this time the sound is malevolent: “I am going to kill you.”
      So what about Dakota? Dakota is absolutely superb. Who can resist a girl covered in mud? She doesn’t have a lot of time in the opening moments to establish character but she does the most with what precious few seconds she has. When she orders humus from the health food store or when initially she balks at getting into a strange car I could hear echoes of her suburban perfect I’ve-finally-married-up mother: “Whose car is this? Whose car is this?”
     Dakota manages to covey terror so convincingly it’s almost painful to watch. The sheer terror and confusion created when Ray tells her to wait by a tree while he goes to confront her brother. The kindly misguide couple who try so hard to abduct her for her own well being and half-realizing that he’s loosing his daughter but absolutely certain that he will loose his son. The total terror of Ray knowing that he can’t save both children at the same time and having to choose who to save. This is one of the movies most powerful scenes. Then there are the quiet scenes of terror when Dak wipes the spider from her face. The quiet, sweaty close-ups of her with a blindfold, while she knows full well her dad is going to kill the strange man who is up to this point has been their benefactor. Soon enough Dak is confronted with the hideous mechanical eye of the alien and she emits what has to be a modern classic movie scream to rival Janet Leigh in the shower. So good, infact she was ask to re-inact it on the TODAY show!
     I don’t have nearly as many problems with the ending as many of the movie critics to review this movie before me. I really can’t say that I liked the ending or it was satisfying in the same way that the last line of MASTER AND COMMANDER was perfect: “After all Steven, it is a flightless bird . . .”  I really can’t say I hated the ending. It was pretty much the way the book ended and the 1953 movie ended. The Martians die of the flu. It could have been more poignant, I think I might have like it to be a little bit more pan-dramatic, and as this was WAR OF THE WORLDS. Instead, Steven Spielberg chose to keep it intimate, one family’s reunion. Sure it was sappy, but I don’t go to the movies to leave feeling bad.

  

     H.G. Wells, an Englishman, a founding father of modern science fiction writing was considered in his day a left-wing radical who wrote his 1898 novel of Martian invasion as an indictment of English imperialism. Ironically, Orson Wells chose to update this theme for his 1938 audience as a warning of the coming of Nazis. Again in the 1953 movie, the bad guys were harbingers of the Russians and the Cold War. Spielberg has followed his predecessors and once again updated this theme when Dakota ask: “Is it the terrorist?”


WAR OF THE WORLDS  (2005) ** ½