Tuesday, August 29, 2017

A reflection on my visit to the Gropius House



When Walter Gropius, founder of the Bauhaus movement, arrived in the United States in February of 1937, he was given what many architects would dream of having at their disposal: $20,000 (equivalent to almost $345,000 in 2017) to build his house, and 5 acres of land in rural Lincoln, Massachusetts to build it on.  He would live at this house from its completion in 1937 until his death in 1969; his widow lived there until her own death in 1983, after which the house became a museum.

When I took a tour of this house last Saturday, one thing I was struck by was just how well-planned, designed, and built it was.  What did Gropius do with the design that made it so great?  Here are some things I noticed, either during the tour or upon reflection after the tour.
  • He kept the size reasonable 
 Looking around the outside of the house, I was first struck by how small it was, especially for what was an architect's home.  At 2,300 square feet, it's 600 square feet smaller than the 1790 farmhouse I grew up in (and which my parents still live in), not to mention most contemporary McMansions (or even what are considered average sized houses).  However, when taking a tour through the interior, you see that not a square inch of space is wasted; there are no redundant or unnecessary rooms, like having 2 living rooms or similar spaces (the only thing approaching redundancy is the fact that the house had both a ground-level screened-in porch and an observation deck on the 2nd floor; however, those 2 locations give very different views of the surrounding area).  In that 2,300 square feet, Gropius managed to design a house that had room for 3 bedrooms (including a master bedroom with a large dressing area), a maid's quarters, a home office, living room, dining room, kitchen, pantry, screened-in porch, and observation deck.  Part of how Gropius managed to fit all of that into such a small space was by not wasting any area with hallways; all of the rooms were reached through a central entryway with a spiral staircase (which used less space than a regular staircase, and which echoed the spiral staircase on the outside of the house)*.

It also makes sense that he kept the size modest, considering that this house was as much an experiment as it was a residence; with a larger house, he might have bitten off more than he could chew.  In addition, it was the goal in Bauhaus to make designs (including housing) which could be mass-produced and affordable for almost all classes and income levels; a house like the Gropius House was intended to be affordable for most middle-class families.
  • He incorporated elements of existing architecture into the house
In designing this house, Gropius didn't simply take a German Bauhaus design and copy its design in Massachusetts; the Gropius House incorporated several traditional New England architectural elements, including the use of clapboard siding**.  However, he didn't use it in a completely traditional manner; first of all it was mounted vertically on the house (the Gropius House is a rather horizontal design to begin with, and using horizontal siding would have probably produced the same effect as what happens when an overweight person wears a horizontally-striped shirt), and it was also mounted inside the entryway, to make it easier to hang up and rearrange art:

In this way, Gropius made a house that was innovative but one which also had traditional elements.  Also, the lighting fixture in the above picture was an existing design, but normally used in places like movie theaters and department stores; much of the materials and fixtures being used in this house (like the glass bricks) had already been used in industrial and commercial applications.  What the Gropius House did was to use these for the first time in a residential environment.

  • The layout of the house is extremely well-designed
To simplify plumbing, all four bathrooms are located in a cluster, with 2 right next to each other and directly above the other 2.  This greatly simplified plumbing, so that all of the house's toilets and baths could be supplied from a single vertical "column" of pipes.  Other examples of good design include the use of glass bricks to form the wall between the home office and the dining room; this allowed sunlight to pass through the house's large windows and into both rooms.
 

The glass bricks in the wall also echo the glass bricks on the outside of the house:
 
Another element of the house which deals with sunlight is this overhang over the second-floor deck and rear of the house.  This overhang is positioned in such a way that it shades the windows below from the sun in the summer (when the sun's high in the sky) but allows sunlight to heat the windows in winter when the sun is lower to the horizon.



Yet another way that space in the house is well-used is the use of curtains in the interior to create temporary partitions in rooms.  Like the use of shoji screens in Japanese architecture, these allow rooms to be reconfigured as needed.  One place that uses a curtain is the living room/dining room; without the curtain, the area is one large L-shaped room, but with the curtain in place the living and dining rooms are separate locations.  He could have put in a wall or sliding door, but that would have made the two rooms look smaller and more cramped (and there would have been no possibility of configuring room in its "open" L-shaped state, if, for example, there was a large number of guests there).  Another place where it was a good idea to use a curtain instead of a wall and door was in an alcove in the second floor entryway; with a wall and door, this space would have probably been little more than a closet, but with a curtain it became a favorite spot for Ise (Walter's wife) to do her sewing.

  • The house suits the landscape and the landscape, the house
When Gropius got the property he built his house on, there was already a working apple orchard on the premises.  Gropius designed his house to feature a prominent view of the orchard through the large picture window in the ground floor living room, and from the upstairs deck.  Looking out the opposite direction when Walter and Ise lived there would have shown a well-tended garden along with surrounding fields and forests.  The screened-in back porch would have given different views of the landscape as well. 
 
  • Everything in the house complements the architecture
In addition to the design of the house itself, the furniture and artwork, and even objects like appliances and table settings fit the house perfectly.  Considering that a major element of the philosophy of Bauhaus was the importance of good design in everyday objects***, and that Bauhaus sought to be an all-encompassing school of design, it's worth thinking of the objects inside the Gropius House as part of the house's architecture.










  • It's an example of modern architecture that looks good and functions well
When people talk about hating "modern architecture", they often picture buildings like the hideous and dysfunctional Brutalist Boston City Hall (or buildings with similar attributes found on numerous college campuses****), or Frank Gehry's various postmodern designs, which dump piles of snow over the emergency exits, or which blind motorists and treat pedestrians like ants under a magnifying glass.  In contrast, the Gropius House is built on a human scale, with a well-thought-out floor plan and no wasted space (and conversely, no small, cramped rooms) and whose structure seems to still be holding up well today after 80 years.  It's modern architecture that works.
  • It's a modern house that looks like people actually lived there
All too often when viewing a modern house, one gets the impression that living there would be a sterile and austere existence.  The preservation society did an excellent job of demonstrating the house as a pleasant place to live, in part by making it look like the Gropiuses are still there.  Ise's hats and coats still hang in the entryway, there are logs in the fireplace, the dining-room table is set, the kitchen has an open cookbook on the counter and (plastic) food being prepared, and Walter and Ise's desk is covered with their work (the two often collaborated in their work).  Photographs displayed around the house show images of everyday life, like Walter playing ping-pong on the screened-in porch.



Finally, I must say that probably the biggest reason I liked this house so much was that this house in many ways is an antidote to the kind of house I lived in for much of my adolescence and adulthood, and the houses I was surrounded by while living there.  I lived for many years with my parents in a former farmhouse built in 1790 (with a large extension added on in the early 20th century).  It was a large, rambling house with several small and cluttered rooms.  Surrounding our house were several subdivisions of McMansions, which were also what this house was not; large houses on small lots with overly complicated rooflines and poorly thought out floor plans (often with great quantities of wasted space), houses which used expensive materials when it came to surface appearance (like using expensive marble countertops in the kitchen) but cutting corners with structural materials and quality with the result that many of those houses were falling apart less than 10 years after they were built.

The Gropius house is everything the above houses are not: with its reasonable size, high quality of construction, well-planned layout, and the way it fits in with the surrounding landscape, this house really resonated with me from the moment I saw it.

*The spiral staircase on the outside of the house was one of Walter's adopted daughter Beate ("Ati")'s requests; she wanted to have a way to access outside from her room.  It's worth noting that the banister for the interior spiral staircase is the only custom-made item in the entire structure; all of the other fixtures and components were existing designs.
**Although this house was sometimes described as "International Style", Gropius always objected to the term being applied to this house.  He said that he would have never designed this house in Europe, with its different construction materials and architectural traditions; this house was specifically designed for this location.
***Perhaps the best example of this outlook on design is the the Bauhaus movement's philosophy that "It is often more difficult to design a first-rate teapot than to paint a second-rate painting."
****Note: this comic brings up the oft-repeated myth that colleges used Brutalist architecture to suppress student riots.

Tuesday, June 20, 2017

A Look at The Simpsons, Season by Season

Note: A more-than-passing familiarity with The Simpsons is probably necessary for enjoying this post, or at least understanding it.

     To say that The Simpsons has been a major influence on me would be an enormous understatement; from an early age (apparently, my second-grade teacher told my parents that I shouldn't be allowed to watch The Simpsons; after all, it taught dangerous concepts like "those in power are often malevolent, clueless, or both"), The Simpsons shaped me in terms of my outlook on things, my sense of humor, and in many cases, I saw things being parodied on The Simpsons before I even saw what they were parodying; among other things, this caused me to nearly burst out laughing during my high school American Government class when I saw the library scene in All the President's Men for the first time, after having seen Sideshow Bob Roberts:
To this day, the classic-era Simpsons remains one of my favorite shows, with my still-growing collection of Simpsons DVDs being among my most prized possessions.

Here's my opinion on The Simpsons, season-by-season.  If you want an episode-by-episode recap and review, then I'd recommend Mike Amato's excellent blog, Me Blog Write Good.

  • Season 1: To a certain extent, this season was more of an experiment than anything else; the show was in many ways still finding its feet as a full-length show after being previously featured as a series of shorts on The Tracey Ullman Show.  As a result, for fans of the classic (and modern) era, watching the first season can be a jarring experience; Homer's Walter Matthau-esque voice, the bizarre animation, and several moments of out-of-character behavior can at times make it seem like you're watching a different show.  Despite all of this, you could still begin to see the classic Simpsons take shape; so while it may have been unusual to see Marge getting drunk in There's No Disgrace Like Home (and Homer being so embarrassed by his family's behavior that he pawns the TV to pay for therapy while Marge tries to talk him out of it), there are other parts of that episode that ring true, like seeing Mr. Burns' enormous mansion (and Burns informing his guests that the hounds will be released).  Elsewhere in season 1, you see many other classic elements of The Simpsons for the first time, such as:
    • The Simpsons satirizing both sides of an issue; in Bart The Genius, both regular public schools and elite gifted schools get made fun of.  Also in that episode is the first example of "art shift", with Bart's mental imaging of an overly complicated math word problem being animated in a much different style from the regular animation.
    • The first travel episode, The Crepes of Wrath.
    • The Telltale Head introduces the population of Springfield as an easily-swayed mob.
    • Moaning Lisa shows how Lisa's intellect and creativity is unappreciated, especially in a place like Springfield
    • Krusty Gets Busted: The first Sideshow Bob episode, which means Kelsey Grammer's first appearance.  It also shows the extent of Krusty's merchandising empire, his sordid personal life, and one of the first really dark jokes in the show: when Krusty has a heart attack on-air, the children in the audience laugh because they think he's making funny faces.
    • Albert Brooks' first appearances, in The Call of The Simpsons and Life on the Fast Lane.
  • Season 2:  The first season that could really be called "classic", the voicework, animation, and characterization is much truer to form, but there are still some niggles; Flanders, for example, in this season is more of a yuppie than a religious extremist; he even mixes and serves drinks at a party in the War of the Simpsons.  Important milestones for this season include the first Treehouse of Horror episode (and the only one actually taking place in Bart's treehouse), and the first appearances by Phil Hartman as Lionel Hutz in Bart Gets Hit by a Car and as Troy McClure in Homer Vs. Lisa and the 8th Commandment, and the first flashback episode in The Way We Was (which also features Arnold Schwarzenegger parody Rainier Wolfcastle in his first appearance as McBain).  Itchy & Scratchy & Marge is the first episode to use show-within-a-show Itchy & Scratchy as an episode-long commentary for The Simpsons (and, just like in Bart the Genius, parodying both sides of the issues of things like cartoon violence).  Lisa's Substitute shows that The Simpsons can also have genuinely heartfelt episodes that aren't sappy or overly sentimental.
  • Season 3:  More classic Simpsons.  While the first 2 seasons were fairly grounded in reality, from this season on the show starts getting more and more outlandish.  Milestones include: Mr. Lisa Goes to Washington, the first travel episode in which the entire family goes somewhere together (The Crepes of Wrath had Bart going to France alone), Like Father, Like Clown, introducing Krusty's Jewish background (and making his earlier endorsement of Krusty-Brand Pork Products even more hilarious in retrospect), Michael Jackson's uncredited appearance in Stark Raving Dad (which also doubled as a perfect parody of One Flew Over The Cuckoo's Nest), and the amazing coincidence of Bart The Murderer being first broadcast right around the same time Goodfellas came out (given the turnaround time needed to make an episode of The Simpsons compared to a show like South Park, there's no way they could have seen Goodfellas and then made the episode), and Sideshow Bob's first return in Black Widower
  • Season 4:  This is the first season of The Simpsons I (vaguely) remember seeing when it came out (resulting in the above teacher's admonition to my parents not to let me watch the show).  Things get even zanier, with the widely-acclaimed Marge vs. The Monorail being possibly the most outlandish of any episode of the classic era.  Other highlights of the season include A Streetcar Named Marge (which included a song whose lyrics led to Bart writing "I will not defame New Orleans" on the chalkboard in the next episode's opening credits), the show's first flash-forward in Itchy & Scratchy: The Movie, New Kid on the Block having quite possibly the best B-plot of any episode (Homer at an all you-can-eat restaurant, and his subsequent lawsuit after he's thrown out), Mr Plow, and Last Exit to Springfield, which is frequently cited as the best ever episode of The Simpsons.
  • Season 5:  This is the first season I remember seeing in detail, and the most outlandish.  It's also one of the most consistently hilarious seasons of The Simpsons; if I was only allowed to view one season of The Simpsons, I would choose this one without any hesitation.  Nearly every episode is packed with terrific moments from start to finish, but the ones that stick out for me are Homer's Barbershop Quartet, Burns' Heir, Homer and Apu, Deep Space Homer, Rosebud, Homer Goes to College, Bart Gets an Elephant, Homer Loves Flanders, and The Boy who Knew Too Much.  One thing I liked about this season was how many of the episodes focus on individual characters, including those from outside the Simpsons family such as Mr. Burns or Apu.  Much of this season's humor comes from being by this point a well-established show with familiar characters.  That way, Homer's sudden friendship with Flanders is funnier since it's coming after 5 seasons of enmity, as is seeing Bart bond with Skinner outside of school after having had an antagonistic relationship with him both before and after this episode.
  • Season 6:  I find this season to be something of a breather after Season 5, but still a very good season.  It's not that outlandish things don't happen in this season (they do), it just doesn't feel quite as filled with wall-to-wall insanity the way the 5th season did.  This season has my favorite travel episode, Bart vs. Australia, and two of my 3 favorite Lisa episodes: Lisa's Rival, and Lisa on Ice.  It also features the first episode in which a significant portion takes place in the future (Lisa's Wedding), as well as part 1 of Who Shot Mr. Burns, the only 2-part episode of The Simpsons.  Other favorites of mine include Homer the Great, Sideshow Bob Roberts, The PTA Disbands, Homie the Clown, Bart's Comet, and Lemon of Troy, which contains quite possibly my favorite bit of animation: Homer's Shelbyville rival biting into a lemon like it's an apple. 
  • Season 7:  Another good season, it starts strong with part 2 of Who Shot Mr. Burns.  Other episodes I particularly like are Lisa the Vegetarian (my favorite Lisa episode, with my favorite Troy McClure film: Meat and You – Partners in Freedom [a Meat Council film, part of the "Resistance is Useless" series]), King-Sized Homer, Mother Simpson, Two Bad Neighbors, Homer The Smithers, Bart on The Road, and A Fish Called Selma.  Special mention needs to go to 22 Short Films About Springfield, for its bold (and successful) experiment in structure and the fact that it gives so many otherwise peripheral characters some time in the limelight, as well as the CGI-animated Homer³ sequence from Treehouse of Horror VI.  A milestone in CGI animation, it premiered a month before Toy Story came out.  The animation of this sequence was spectacular then, and still holds up well today; a particularly well-done sequence is when Homer (and later Bart) pass the boundary into "the Third Dimension" and you can see them transition before your eyes from 2-d to 3-d.  On the season 7 DVD, there's a well-made featurette on the making of this sequence that's really worth watching.  Another episode worth mentioning is the fourth-wall-breaking 138th Episode Spectacular.
  • Season 8:  This is the last season I'd consider a classic from start to finish, but some of the issues that would plague later seasons began showing up in this season.  Some of the episodes started out strong but kind of faltered or petered out in the 3rd act; other times, there would be a solid B-plot but weak A-plot (or vice-versa).  That said, this season does feature my favorite Treehouse of Horror episode (VII), with my 2 favorite sequences being The Genesis Tub and Citizen Kang.  Other favorites of mine from this season include You Only Move Twice, Bart After Dark, The Twisted World of Marge Simpson, Simpsoncalifragilisticexpiala-D’oh-cious, Homer Vs. the Eighteenth Amendment, Lisa's Date With Density, In Marge We Trust, and the ever-controversial Homer's EnemyEl Viaje Misterioso de Nuestro Jomer is almost on that list; the first-act sequence of Homer's Guatemalan Insanity Pepper-induced freakout is nothing short of amazing, but it's too hard of an act to follow; the 2nd and 3rd acts of the episode have their moments but ultimately pale in comparison (compare this with the Homer³ segment, which was placed at the end of the episode).
  • Season 9:  The first season I'd consider as having a significant drop in quality, it nonetheless has several terrific episodes.  As a lifelong resident of the New York metropolitan area, even if all of the other episodes were complete trash, I'd still feel that The City of New York vs. Homer Simpson made up for all of them by itself.  Fortunately, there are still quite a few good episodes in here, including Lisa's Sax, The Trouble with Trillions, Realty Bites, The Cartridge Family, King of the Hill, and The Last Temptation of Krust.  The episode The Principal and the Pauper is an especially controversial and despised episode among fans, but I think it had potential, but needed several rewrites (and possibly being made as a 2-part episode).  I'll probably write a separate blog post about this particular episode sometime in the future.
  • Season 10: More bad than good this season, but when they made a good episode it was still almost on par with classic-era episodes.  Bart The Mother, D'o'h-in' in the Wind, Lisa Gets an "A", They Saved Lisa's Brain, and 30 Minutes Over Tokyo are quite good, but surrounded with filler.
  • Season 11:  I stopped regularly watching new episodes of The Simpsons in the middle of this season, so there's a chance some of the episodes I haven't listed are quite good (but I'm not holding my breath).  Of the ones I've seen, I remember Brother's Little Helper, Guess Who's Coming to Criticize Dinner?, E-I-E-I-D'oh, and Behind the Laughter being the better episodes of this season.
  • Season 12-15:  By this time, my viewing of new episodes was sporadic at best but every now and then I'd see a fairly good episode.  Trilogy of Error, I, D'oh-Bot, She of Little Faith, The Lastest Gun in the West, I am Furious (Yellow), Moe Better Blues, and Margical History Tour are the best of a bad lot.
  • Season 16+: Who cares? I pretty much stopped watching new episodes at this point.  Every now and then I'd see one from these seasons, but it would invariably remind me of better episodes with a similar theme; for example, Goo Goo Gai Pan and The Regina Monologues reminded me of much better travel episodes from the classic era.  Don't Fear the Roofer, The Debarted, and The Italian Bob were OK, but 24 Minutes was probably the only episode from this era that I thought was genuinely good without any other qualifications (for example, I feel that The Debarted is an excellent episode if you've already seen The Departed, but probably a confusing mess if you haven't).
  • It goes without saying that I saw The Simpsons Movie; I thought it was like watching 4 season 9-quality episodes back-to-back.  While some of the jokes fell flat, I still thought the writers tended to hit more than miss and felt the movie was quite good overall.  One thing it did not do, however, was get me to start watching the TV show again.
 Thus ends my Simpsons season-by-season retrospective; before writing this post, I knew that the 5th season was my favorite one overall, but otherwise I tended to think of The Simpsons on an episode-by-episode basis rather than thinking in terms of seasons.  To those of you reading this, what's your Simpsons experience been like?  Are there any die-hard fans who started watching from the classic era that still watch new episodes when they come out?  Did anyone reading this start watching during the Ullman era, when The Simpsons was a series of shorts on that show?

Friday, June 2, 2017

The Book Vs The Film: An Introduction

     As both an avid reader and film enthusiast, I enjoy watching films made from books and seeing how they've been adapted to the screen.  Given that both media have their own strengths and weaknesses, one thing I find interesting is after a comparing and contrasting both versions of a story after a book's been made into a film.

The main reasons for changing elements of a story when adapting it to film include:
  • Length.  A book can be read in installments, but a movie has to be able to be viewed in a single sitting.  Adapting most full-length books (as opposed to short stories or novellas) requires a considerable amount of compression in this regard if an 8 hour-long movie is to be avoided.  Most of the time, this is possible, with characters being combined or omitted and the plot being trimmed down so that any extraneous side plots are removed.  This can be a double-edged sword: at best, this can straighten out a meandering plot, or trim down a bloated plot; at worst, it can omit so much of the book's plot that the movie is almost incomprehensible unless the viewer has read the book first.
  • Cost.  Making a film is an incredibly expensive process.  If you can combine characters, or omit a scene which would require the construction of a new set (especially if the set was only going to be used for one scene or it would be overly expensive or complex to build).  Often, this results in the filmmaker "killing two birds with one stone" and removing scenes and/or characters results in both cost and length being reduced.
  • Special effects limitations.  Sometimes filming a scene exactly the same way it's written in the book would require special effects too advanced for the time the film was made, or it might have the effect of destroying the audience's suspension of disbelief by looking too fake.  In horror films, a special effects failure can make a scene or monster laughable when it's supposed to be scary; if that's the case, then a change is probably for the best. 
  • A scene doesn't translate well to screen.  For whatever reason, a scene that works well in a book would just be boring or confusing on screen, especially for those who haven't read the book.  Conversely, a scene might be added to the film that wasn't in the book, but is well-suited to the screen.
  • Other.  Sometimes, if a film is an adaptation of a popular book, the film might make a major change to the ending or plot twist to surprise fans of the book.  This isn't especially new; the deaths of Cordelia and Lear in Shakespeare's King Lear were a surprise ending for those familiar with the stories that inspired the play.  Other times, the director of a film wants to make the film "their own", and makes changes for the sake of making changes.
When watching a film adaptation of a book, I really try to evaluate the film on its own merits rather than just say something like "the book was better".  For me, one of the most important things to consider is its accessibility to someone who hasn't read the book: would they be able to see the film and understand what's going on?

As far as faithfulness to the source goes, that's not a particularly high priority for me; I'd much rather see a good film that's a loose adaptation than a terrible film that adheres closely to the book.

With this in mind, I am starting a series of blog posts called The Book vs The Movie, in which I will look at adaptations of books to screen (I will probably not be writing about any reverse instances, like the novelizations of various films, or books and films that were written concurrently, such as 2001: A Space Odyssey).  What I will be looking at is how closely an adaptation follows the book, how good of a film it is, and how well it stands on its own.

The first work I will be reviewing is The Dogs of War.

PS: It goes without saying, but these reviews will be full of spoilers.

Sunday, May 7, 2017

Languages in film: an overview

In films that have people speaking different languages in the story, there are some different ways it's handled on screen.  Here are all of the ways it's been handled that I can think of:

  • Authentic: Both sides speak the language they would actually be speaking in real life.  Examples include: Stalingrad, The Longest Day, The Battle of Britain, A Bridge Too Far, Downfall, and Tora Tora Tora.
  • One side speaks English, the other side speaks its own language: In reality neither side would be speaking English, but in the film one side does.  Examples include Cross of Iron (Germans speak English while Soviets speak Russian), The Pianist (Poles speak English, Germans speak German), and The Beast (AKA The Beast of War: Soviets speak English while Afghans speak Pashto)
  • Both sides speak English: examples include The Train, The Blue Max, and Enemy at the Gates.
  • Accent equals language: Used in the long-running Britcom 'Allo 'Allo; everybody speaks English on the show, but whatever accent they're using signifies which language they're speaking.  In Gorky Park, British-accented English stands in for Russian (more specifically, characters speaking Russian as their native language), while American-accented English represents American characters speaking fluent Russian, albeit with a heavy American accent.  In The Fourth Protocol, it's reversed; American-accented English represents Russian, while British-accented English represents English.
  • Switch to English: The film starts with characters speaking another language, but after a few lines they start speaking English (while implying that they're still speaking the other language).  Examples include The Hunt For Red October and Valkyrie.  In The Hunt For Red October, the Soviet characters switch from Russian to English, then back to Russian when they encounter Americans.
  • Other: Sometimes films have a language situation that doesn't fit into the above categories.  For example, in Reunion, a Jewish boy growing up in Nazi Germany eventually flees to America, returning to Germany four decades later.  While he's growing up there, everyone speaks English, but when he returns, everybody speaks German, which he now only speaks haltingly; this shift represents his loss of proficiency in his original language after decades of speaking another language.  In The Odessa File, English is spoken throughout in scenes taking place in the "present" (except for the song Schwarzbraun ist die Haselnuss), but unsubtitled German is spoken in flashback sequences.
Sometimes (like in The Blue Max*) songs get translated, while other times they don't, so in Valkyrie and Cross of Iron the German characters speak English but still sing in German and in The Beast the English-speaking Soviet tank crew plays a Russian language song** on the radio.

*A translated version of Das Polenmädchen
**The song "Trolleybus" from the band Kino

Blog intro

Hi, everybody!

I've started this blog to cover topics other than the Britcoms I discuss on my other blog, A Yank Watches Britcoms.  Topics discussed here will include, but not be limited to:
  • The Book vs. The Film: a look at film adaptations of books, discussing both how close of an adaptation a specific film is and how good it is.
  • Random Episode Recaps:  A look at various episodes of TV shows; unlike my other blog, these will mostly be standalone recaps, rather than recapping an entire series.
  • Head to head: Comparing and contrasting 2 films, TV shows, etc. that have a similar setting, plot, or premise.
  • Other notes and observations.