This is a DVD on 50's schlock producer Ed Wood, starring Johnny Depp as Wood and Martin landau as Bela Lugosi. I think this is new out on DVD. I had not heard anything about this until I saw it on CNN this morning. It may be of interest to the monster fans and 50's horror sci-fi fans out there!

http://edition.cnn.com/2004/SHOWBIZ/Movies/10/19/landau.legosi/index.html

Huzz

Tim Burton's best movie in my opinion. I can't imagine any other director doing this story justice to the degree that Burton was able to do. Depp is perfect as Ed Wood and Martin Landau's Oscar winning portrayal of Lugosi is both funny and poignant at the same time. The transfer on this DVD is gorgeous and there are a lot of extras. If you are a true Burton fan, then you are probably an Ed Wood fan too - and you need this DVD.

I picked this up yesterday and checked out the transfer. Haven't really watched it yet because I got quite a few movies yesterday.

Looks like a VERY nice disc. It's got a BOAT LOAD of extras: deleted scenes, behind the scenes featurette, "Making Bela" featurette, "Pie Plates Over Hollywood" featurette, audio commmentary with Tim Burton and Martin Landau...and more.

It's got DD 5.1 Surround Sound and, of course, it anamorphic.

I only checked about 5 minutes of it. From a technical standpoint, the parts of the transfer that I saw were outstanding. If there is a SLIGHTLY negative note, there was a touch more print wear than I would have expected. I saw more flecks and specks than I would have hoped for. But Touchstone did an exceptional job of getting the film on disc. It's very sharp and I could see no artificla edge enhancement. Very highly recommended*

*Subject to further review. I'll probably watch the whole thing today.

This one travelled under my radar. Thanks for the heads-up on this release.

I am not a big fan of Burton at all. His efforts are definitely hit and miss. This one is my personal favorite. On a whole, I feel he is vastly overrated and one of those personalities who is eccentric simply for the sake of being eccentric and the accompanying publicity.

It's amazing that he can make films like Ed Wood, Big Fish, Nightmare Before Christmas or even Edward Scissorhands. Then, he churns out train wrecks like Planet of the Apes, Mars Attacks or Batman/Batman Returns.

I am encouraged by his helming Charlie and the Chocolate Factory. That seems like a good fit.

This one travelled under my radar. Thanks for the heads-up on this release.

I am not a big fan of Burton at all. His efforts are definitely hit and miss. This one is my personal favorite. On a whole, I feel he is vastly overrated and one of those personalities who is eccentric simply for the sake of being eccentric and the accompanying publicity.

It's amazing that he can make films like Ed Wood, Big Fish, Nightmare Before Christmas or even Edward Scissorhands. Then, he churns out train wrecks like Planet of the Apes, Mars Attacks or Batman/Batman Returns.

I am encouraged by his helming Charlie and the Chocolate Factory. That seems like a good fit.
Totally agree that Burton is very hit and miss, but as you say - when it's a good fit his sensibilities really work - and they work very well on "Ed Wood". And all props to script writers Scott Alexander and Larry Karaszewski for their great script and adaptation of Rudolf Grey's fascinating biography of Wood - "Nightmare of Ecstasy".

It's a great movie but don't take it as gospel. Vampira, Bela Lugosi Jr. and Wood's ex-wife have all gone on record that most of the story is made up.

It's a great movie but don't take it as gospel. Vampira, Bela Lugosi Jr. and Wood's ex-wife have all gone on record that most of the story is made up.


Just about everyone on the excellent commentary acknowledges a lot of the facts were fudged, rearranged, or whooly made up for dramatic reasons.

They also point out the movies biggest distractors now make a living telling stories about Ed Wood.

THANK YOU Python! Everyone and their cousin just LOVES Keaton's Batman and feels he was the best actor chosen...BLAH! Keaton is NOTHING like the comicbook Batman! Burton's pick was very bad.

It's a great movie but don't take it as gospel. Vampira, Bela Lugosi Jr. and Wood's ex-wife have all gone on record that most of the story is made up.
I haven't listened to the commentary on mine (which I got last Spring when the DVD was/wasn't released) but I have read the biography "Nightmare of Ecstasy" several times. While just about any historical screenplay will move events around and/or meld characters, I'm not aware of much outright fiction in the screenplay. At least, none that really matters. Of course, the screenplay mercifully stops with Plan 9 - Wood suffered an alcoholic decline in the following years that is harrowing to read about and very sad - he really was a loving spirit but he just couldn't handle the world as it was. I highly recommend the book if you can find a copy of it. You come away from it with a genuine affection for Wood and a certain admiration for his belief - almost to the very end - that he was capable of making great movies - if he could just get that one big break.

I haven't listened to the commentary on mine (which I got last Spring when the DVD was/wasn't released) but I have read the biography "Nightmare of Ecstasy" several times. While just about any historical screenplay will move events around and/or meld characters, I'm not aware of much outright fiction in the screenplay. At least, none that really matters. Of course, the screenplay mercifully stops with Plan 9 - Wood suffered an alcoholic decline in the following years that is harrowing to read about and very sad - he really was a loving spirit but he just couldn't handle the world as it was. I highly recommend the book if you can find a copy of it. You come away from it with a genuine affection for Wood and a certain admiration for his belief - almost to the very end - that he was capable of making great movies - if he could just get that one big break.

It's been awhile since I listened to mine,(I've got the old version to, from Target before they pulled them off the shelf) but IIRC they said the Orson Wells scene was completely fictional, and thru out the movie the writers point out "Well, this really happened later", "we combined two storys here", "Vampira says this happened but Paul Conrad says it was like this", etc,etc.

And they glossed over and ignored some of the seamier and depressing aspects of Wood's life, and rearranged the chronological order, so it would be a more positive sell.

While it might not be a documentary, it's pretty faithful to legend of Ed Wood. I first heard of him, like many people, when he won "The Lifetime Achievement Award for Directing" in one of the Medveds "Golden Turkey" books from the seventies. Their description of Ed Wood's life was remarkably similiar to the movies.

Yeah - forgot about the Orson Wells scene. And you're right - "The Golden Turkey Awards" really did put Wood on the map. But he deserves it in a way the book didn't intend. A very talented filmaker I once worked with said; "You know, except for a few misdirected synapses - Ed Wood could have been David Lynch". I know what he meant.

i've got to get this DVD . got to be one of my favorite Burton films .
Landau's perfomance is stellar . watching it on TV the other day i was thinking it would be cool if someone did a kit of ML playing Lugosi .
hb

This DVD was released about eight months ago -- and promptly recalled due to music clearance issues (oops). I was lucky enough to snag a copy of the initial version, although from what I understand there is no difference between it and the version released yesterday.

"E.W." was a labor of love for those involved, and it shows (I do think it's Burton's best film). I went to school with Scott A. and Larry K. and can attest to the fact that they had originally conceived a short (student film) "mockumentary" about Ed Wood back in 1985. Even in outline form it was a funny and original idea.

I've always thought Tim Burton was a low budget filmmaker trapped in the body of a big budget A-Lister. Though he's known for his visual stylings, his real gift is for bringing quirky, fringe-dwelling loners to life in amusing and endearing ways. When the canvas gets too large he looses his focus, and the result is a soulless mess like "Planet of the Apes."

It'll be interesting to see what Burton and Depp cook up with "Charlie and the Chocolate Factory". The book was a childhood favorite, but I was never a big fan of the 70's movie version. Despite Gene Wilder's wonderful turn as Wonka, and the clever production design by Harper Goff, the film suffers from a bad case of The Cutes. Having read the script to Burton's re-make I can confirm that it's extremely faithful to Dahl's book, the biggest difference being the addition of a rather unnecessary back-story for Willy Wonka. My hope is that Burton will connect with, and be inspired by, the characters this time out. If so, the results could be a lot of fun. If not, well... there's always "Nightmare Before Christmas".

Vampira claims a couple of scenes with her character never took place. Same with the ex-wife. Her biggest gripe is that Sarah Jessica Parker smokes throughout the movie and she has never smoked. She also never wore the sweaters. Where everybody is yelling and throwing stuff at the screen during a showing of Bride of the Monster never happened. All scenes inside the drug rehab between Wood and Lugosi were also made up. Wood may have actually visited him but the inside of the hospital was totally diffferent. Dramatic license is necessary for the scenes between Lugosi and Wood because nobody else was there. I think the changes make a better movie, more fun too. More "The World of Ed Wood" than a biography. Fascinating as he was, a straight factual story of his life would be pretty dry viewing.

It's great entertainment. Burton captures the era quite well, and, whether factual or no, provides fascinating characters that are fun to watch.

I was also lucky enough to snag an earlier release of the DVD. Great film.

i've got to get this DVD . got to be one of my favorite Burton films .
Landau's perfomance is stellar . watching it on TV the other day i was thinking it would be cool if someone did a kit of ML playing Lugosi .
hb
I'd buy one.

- GJS
"Pool de Schvitch! Pool de Schvitch!" - Martin Landau as Bela Lugosi

Rick Baker's make-up for Landau is interesting. Landau doesn't look much like Lugosi - and fortunately Baker chose not to go heavy on prostheses. That's a good thing because Landau could convince us he was Lugosi with no make-up at all.

Rick Baker's make-up for Landau is interesting. Landau doesn't look much like Lugosi - and fortunately Baker chose not to go heavy on prostheses. That's a good thing because Landau could convince us he was Lugosi with no make-up at all.
Yeah Scott,
I'd be interested in seeing this part of the dvd. Landau DOESN'T look much like Lugosi - in fact, in Landau's first scenes in the movie where he's purchasing the coffin, he doesn't look much like Lugosi at all! But, as the movie progresses, he becomes more and more convincing. I'm especially fond of the Halloween night scene where he and Ed Wood are watching White Zombie together and frightening Trick or Treaters with Landau in full DRACULA regalia ( and the Lugosi Painting hangs on the wall behind them ).

- GJS

I love that scene too. And Landau/Lugosi's jealous assessment of Karloff is probably the funniest line in the movie.

"Karloff! That c###s###er doesn't deserve to smell my s##t!!"

Actually, it's "Limey c###s###er" and it is one of the great movie lines of all time.

At least I spelled c###s###er right. :thumbsup:

"Pool de Schvitch! Pool de Schvitch!" - Martin Landau as Bela Lugosi
As long as we're splitting hairs, the line is "Pool de Schtring! Pool de Schtring!" :lol:


THANK YOU Python! Everyone and their cousin just LOVES Keaton's Batman and feels he was the best actor chosen...BLAH! Keaton is NOTHING like the comicbook Batman! Burton's pick was very bad.
Kevin Smith (actor/director) told a story about an "encounter" with Burton. It seems Smith used the "Ape Lincoln" image (from Burton's "Planet of the Apes", for those who don't know) in one of his comic books years before. When he saw Burton's film, he jokingly made a comment about contemplating legal action in a local newspaper. Burton took it seriously, and part of his public response was, "Anyone that knows me knows I don't read comic books," to which Smith replied, "Well, that would explain Batman."

Guess we'll have to wait and see if Christian Bale does any better.

Lugosi in "Bride of The Monster":

"Do not fear Lobo! He is gentle as a kitchen."

The problem with Burton's "Batman" is not Michael Keaton; it's Jack Nicholson, whose over-the-top performance stalls the plot at every turn, leaving poor Michael Keaton the burden of having to jump-start the narrative ("Remember me?... Batman?... the protagonist?...). Don't get me wrong; I love Nicholson, but in this instance his scene-stealing theatrics were allowed to de-rail what could have been a more dramatically compelling story.

The problem with Burton's "Batman" is not Michael Keaton; it's Jack Nicholson, whose over-the-top performance stalls the plot at every turn, leaving poor Michael Keaton the burden of having to jump-start the narrative ("Remember me?... Batman?... the protagonist?...). Don't get me wrong; I love Nicholson, but in this instance his scene-stealing theatrics were allowed to de-rail what could have been a more dramatically compelling story.
Totally agree. I love Nicholson too - but by the time he did Batman he was pretty much phoning it in. He's bloated and his performance is bloated. You can't blame Burton or the studio for using him - he guaranteed box-office and it seemed like perfect casting. And it would have been - if we had gotten the actor we saw in "The Last Detail" or "Chinatown" or "One Flew Over The Cuckoo's Nest". James Woods was floated as a second choice. That would been a different - and better movie. I have a lot of admiration for the first two Batman installments although I agree that they both have problems - the first with pacing and the second with character-overload, but I still think Keaton was the best Batman of the three.

You know, it's not even Nicholson's performance that bugs me so much as the way his performance is edited. It's as if the editors were instructed to include EVERY USABLE FRAME of the Joker, only cutting to Batman if there was no other choice. Given the bold (i.e. risky) decision to cast Michael Keaton in the title role it is perhaps not surprising that producer Jon Peters hedged his bets by playing the Joker card at every possible opportunity. From a commercial standpoint it was probably the right move, but I've always felt it hurt the pace and rhythm of the film.

I saw Batman opening night; it was a huge disappointment. Little did I know that fifteen years later it would rank as one of Hollywood's better comic book adaptations.

Oh, well... I'm sure "Fantastic Four" will be really good.

Oh, well... I'm sure "Fantastic Four" will be really good.
Couldn't possibly be as good as "Daredevil".;)

No, I mean `good' in that special "Catwoman" sorta way.

You gotta remember that Nicholson/The Joker is the star of the movie, not Batman. Even though it is called Batman. Nicholson gets top billing.

I could never get past the Prince music.

However, Ed Wood had one of the finest soundtracks to ever grace the silver screen. It perfectly captured the mood as well as the era of the film. It's been some of my favorite listening music for ten years now. Great stuff. Theremin and bongos combined make for pure listening pleasure.

The Prince tracks are some of the worst music he ever recorded (and I'm a Prince fan) and really bog down the Joker's march/entrance into the museum and The Joker's parade toward the end of the film (Burton's direction of these two scenes doesn't help a bit).

I saw Batman opening night; it was a huge disappointment. Little did I know that fifteen years later it would rank as one of Hollywood's better comic book adaptations.



I have the same revisionist opinion of "Batman", it looks real good now compared to some of the later sequels and other superhero films.

I agree Nicholson was both over-the-top and over-used. and Zorro nailed a perfect example of what I disliked about the movie, Nicholson's entrance to the Prince music was just badly done and called too much attention to itself. The sub-par Prince music and flourescent colors didn't help much.

Also, Kim Basinger was either poor casting or poor acting, depending on your view. But she was just a little too bland imho.

The Tim Burton-Kevin Smith fued is discussed on the uneven-but-worth-watching "An Evening with Kevin Smith" DVD. While it's a little long and rambling if you aren't a huge Kevin Smith fan, the part about Tim Burton is hilarious, but even more hilarious is Smith's account of meeting with producer Jon Peters about the "Superman" movie, in which we learn Barbara Streisand's ex-hairdresser-ex-husband considers himself very "street", is obsessed with the "Discovery Channel", spiders,and polar bears, wants to make a Superman movie but without him flying or wearing the Superman suit, and thinks Superman or Lex Luther needs a "jive talkin' " robot sidekick. It's all quite a hoot, but explains why the later movies were so awful. Interestingly, it also explains a major plot point in the horrible Peters-helmed "Wild Wild West" remake!

You gotta remember that Nicholson/The Joker is the star of the movie, not Batman. Even though it is called Batman. Nicholson gets top billing.

Nicholson received top billing because his agent was able to negotiate it as part of his deal. The fact that Nicholson is a bigger box office star than Michael Keaton doesn't make "Batman" the Joker's movie. Unlike, say, "Amadeus", which is in fact Antonio Salieri's (fictionalized) story, "Batman" is supposed to be about Batman. By spending so much screen time on a villain with no discernable through-line or motivation, the filmmakers (i.e. Jon Peters) took a perfectly decent screenplay and compromised the hell out of it.

Reading Sam Hamm's shooting script was something of a revelation to me. Having already seen -- and been disappointed by -- the film, I kept hearing from friends how good the screenplay was. I was skeptical, but morbid curiosity compelled me to give it a read, and I must say I was shocked at how good it is (by today's standards it's the comic book movie equivalent of "Hamlet"). Even more surprising is the fact that, for the most part, Burton shot what's on the page. In this rare instance the problems with a big budget comic book adaptation are not due to sloppy, muddled, written-by-committee screenwriting. "Batman" is a mediocre film because the filmmakers lost confidence in their protagonist and decided it would be a good idea to try and edit the film around him.

And the Prince songs don't help.

For the record, my favorite comicbook movie is "RoboCop". I know, I know, the title character is not based on an actual comicbook character, but that film comes closer to capturing the soul and essence of the pulp superhero than anything else I've seen.