The NeverEnding Story
On Facebook, one of my friends who just did a monster event said, "I am looking forward to doing nothing soon" in reference to relaxing for a while. My first thought was, "The Nothing.. that's from The NeverEnding Story.. I haven't seen that in years!" So I re-watched it.
As a result, this is yet another one of those movies I watched as a kid and am now seeing it again as an adult with different eyes.
The first thing I'm going to say up front, which I'm sure some would disagree with, is that this movie is for girls. Boys such as myself were outright fooled into thinking this was going to be some cool awesome adventure flick. Nope. While this movie does have adventure in it and boatloads of fantasy, it's a drama first. Once you realize that, you're thinking, "Ugh.. girl's movie." Yep. That's what this is. The boys all got had with this flick something awful.
This movie is not bad, but it does have a decidedly feminine angle to it and I'll describe that in more detail in a moment.
I WILL BE MENTIONING SOME SPOILERS, so if you haven't seen this yet, watch it first then read this.
The NeverEnding Story, which I'll abbreviate as TNS because it's easier to type, was released July 20, 1984. I was still in single-digit age at the time and I'm pretty sure I saw this in the theater originally. If not, I definitely know I saw it on TV a bunch of times either as a home movie rental or affiliate-run thing by the TV networks during the summer months.
I see this movie now as art, much in the same vein as I see The Dark Crystal, meaning the visuals and music are more important than the actual story itself.
Movies like TNS are really, really tough to pull off. This movie was especially tough because it has mountains of special effects, mountains of special costumes/makeup, monster-sized animatronics and monster-sized sets. Every single trick in the book concerning a special effect at the time was thrown into this movie, save for computer animation of which this movie has none.
The standard problem you have with a movie that has crazy amounts of special effects is that the story suffers, and TNS is no different. You have to watch this film at least three times just to understand what's going on. The first time through, if you say to yourself, "I get it, yet I don't get it", don't be surprised.
I'm not going to explain the whole movie, but just certain parts of it that stick out to me.
Bastian's girliness; laughing at his despair
In the breakfast scene, the movie really wants to you know that Bastian doesn't draw horses, he draws unicorns. That's girly. When I was his age, I didn't know anyone else my age that was my gender that drew unicorns. We were drawing anything but horses, never mind unicorns. Maybe it's different in today's world and boys do draw unicorns now, but in 1984? I don't think so. And to note, girly doesn't mean "wrong", it just means girly.
What I'm about to say will tick off any girl who's seen TNS. The girliest scene in the movie is when Atreyu's horse, Artax, dies. Every girl who watched this scene cried their eyes out, and they still cry today when they see it. Boys on the other hand when they saw Bastian's face full of tears upon reading this part of the story were chuckling. This is because he was crying over a book, and we're saying to ourselves, "Dude.. man up, will ya?" And I know, I know I'm not the only one who snickered at this scene. Believe me, it makes girls mad-mad-mad if you dare make fun of that particular part of the movie.
Best characters
All the best characters in the movie are the ones you see the least.
The Rock Biter
This guy rules. He's a friendly old giant, and the most disappointing part is that you really want to know more about him, see where he lives, see others of his kind and so on, but you never do. An entire movie could be made around this guy alone. For all I know, maybe it has as I've only seen the original TNS and none of the sequels.
Gmork
This guy is pure evil, as he's written to be. We learn almost nothing about him, but that's actually okay here because it adds to his mystique. He's evil, he wants to kill Atreyu and that's all you need to know. Awesome bad guy.
Engywook and Urgl
The home these two lived in was an insanely good set and still holds up to this day. These two gnomes were yet two more characters you really wanted to know more about, much like The Rock Biter. At no time did you ever feel like these two actors were acting. You really believe these two gnomes are real.
Holes, screw-ups and breasts
Missing the obvious course of action
At one point Atreyu wakes up right at the place where The Southern Oracle is. Right. How did he get there? Falkor flew him there. Right. We've established that Atreyu knows that Falkor can fly as the dragon does in fact say, "...as the dragon flies." Right. Atreyu has to pass the first gate but there's a genuine danger than he may get shot by eyeball lasers. Right. That being the case, why didn't Atreyu just hop on Falkor and fly OVER the gate? Or even AROUND the gate?
And don't even tell me, "Read the book and you'll understand." No. The movie is what matters. In the movie, there's an obvious solution to a problem, and it isn't used. Big. Gaping. Plot. Hole.
What you're saying isn't what you're saying, dude
Falkor's mouth animatronics are horrendous. Yeah, I know the crew did the best they could with the technology available at the time, but you can totally tell Falkor isn't real as the words don't even match up with the mouth movement half the time. At best, Falkor speaking looks like a Disney attraction in desperate need of repair.
Sphinx breasts
For whatever reason, the sphinxes all have ginormous breasts on them. On the first two (the gold ones), not only are they ginormous, but completely exposed with pointy nipples in plain sight; they stick out so much they have shadows under them.
Every boy who watched this movie zoned right in on the huge rack, because seriously, how could you not.
Other odds and ends
There's a few parts of the flick where the green screen didn't work very well and you can obviously tell the actor is in front of one. Basically, this accounts for any scene where Falkor is flying around.
In other parts, particularly in the Swamps of Sadness, you can tell the actor is in front of a backdrop and not a real environment. The crew tried really hard to hide it, but in some parts it just didn't work.
Some of the miniatures that are supposed to represent huge things sometimes don't work. The sphinxes are an example of this, because they zoomed in WAY too close where you could tell it was just foam (or whatever it was) and not stone.
The overall story is hard to keep up with at times because they tried to cram so much story into 102 minutes. Yes, this movie is short and isn't even 2 hours long. It's short because it cost an estimated 27 million to put the movie together. That's over a quarter-million dollars per minute of screen time using the deflated dollar values of the 1980s. Crazy to think about, isn't it? But it's like I said, this movie is more about visuals and sound than actual story, so yeah, the story's flow is a bit hard-edged in some places.
Didn't perform well in the theater but was a home movie rental smash
TNS did not do well at the box office and did not make a dime from being in the theater. However, as a home movie rental it did stellar. This was one of the movies that was always rented every Saturday by families everywhere.
Somewhat dated, but watchable
The filmmakers smartly did not show too much real-world environment before diving into the world of Fantasia. As such, you really don't see too many obvious things that date it too badly.
It's the flubbed-up special effects that date this film more than anything else, but if you can see past that, it's a good film to relive old memories of the 80s for adult, and is still a solid title for kids under 12 today.
retro casio watch stuff - part 4
I'm not getting the LDF50 watch. I received this email today from the seller:
I apologize-it appears I made a mistake on the inventory of this watch and do not have any at this time. I did try to procure from am alternate source- but zero was available.
He offered a full refund, which I accepted.
Oh, well.
retro casio watch stuff - part 3
Slight change of plans.
I decided to return the W59 because it really irked me that the display doesn't show the month and day but rather just weekday and day. I did however keep the F-28W; it turns out the band just needed a little breaking in to become more comfortable and now it doesn't bother me at all.
The W59 does not show the month at top right of its display. I find that really annoying. If I'm doing something as simple as writing out a deposit slip at the bank, the W59 doesn't give me the info I need to write out the correct date on the slip. The whole point to showing the date on a wristwatch is for fast, instant and complete info and the W59 just doesn't do that.
And yes I do have a legitimately difficult time remembering a month's number. I'll remember "April", but not the fact April is month #4 of the year.
I also changed my mind about the LDF50 and decided to buy it. The MSRP was $30 but I was able to score it on eBay for significantly less than that - even with shipping included.
Even though the watch is 25g in weight, there were two things that convinced me to go for it.
First is that the band is wide, and that should make the weight of it much more comfortable.
Second is the fact I could find this watch absolutely nowhere locally. Stores where you would ordinarily buy wristwatches simply do not have this particular model. There are only a handful of these on eBay. This either means the LDF50 is selling very well, or it's a limited run from Casio. I'm pretty sure it's the latter. The LDF50 could be a collectible - but that's not the reason I bought it.
I purchased this watch because the likelihood of anyone else having it, much less wearing it, is very slim. I seriously dig the fact the LDF50 isn't easily found, so even if someone wanted it, they couldn't just run into the nearest K-Mart and pick one up. Having uniqueness like that in a timepiece - especially an inexpensive one - is pretty darned cool.
I don't have my LDF50 just yet as it has to be shipped out. Hopefully I'll receive it before the end of the week.
One final note: There's some debate on whether the LDF50 is a men's or a women's watch. It's neither. Technically it's a unisex watch. Casio has no literature stating it's specifically for men or women - and in promo photos you see for this timepiece, both men and women are wearing them. The only thing that makes any LDF50 distinctively "men's" or "women's" is the band/case color. The LDF50-1 (what I bought), LDF50-4 and LDF50-7 can be men's or women's. The LDF51-4A and Casio LDF51-7C on the other hand, while the same watch, are decidedly 'girly', but only because of color.
Casio does typically trip over lines between what's considered men's or women's watches. If you look at the MTP1165A series for example, the instant reaction is "Women's watch!" Nope. Men's watch - but certainly doesn't look like one.
Casio is just weird like that.
retro casio watch stuff - part 2
I decided to see if I could actually find and buy a few of those old-school Casio watches new.
The F-28W and W59. Cost for both after tax: Under $30. Cheap enough, so I bought both.
Two things bother me however. The F-28W's band is a bit stiff, and the W59 even though it has more features does not display the month - even though you can set the month. Yeah, weird.
I have thought about swapping out the band from the W59 to the F-28W as it really wouldn't be that difficult and I know it would fit, but I'd like to keep these all-original.
Right now I'm wearing the W59 because the band is more comfortable. I don't know if I'll be wearing it with any sort of frequency because as I said in my last post, I'm not a wristwatch person. If I decide to not wear either, they're still cool little conversation pieces I can use as knickknacks. :)
retro casio watch stuff
I'm not a wristwatch person. In fact, I find them annoying to wear; this is mainly because most watches are heavy, cumbersome and the designs look stupid. But that may change soon.
Early 1980s Casio watch designs were frickin' awesome, and wouldn't you know it, Casio still makes two very classic models - both of which are under $20.
Casio F-28W
I swear I owned at least two of these as a kid. It is the most basic digital watch you could possibly own. When I say basic, I mean basic. No alarm. No nightlight. No chronograph. No ability to beep - for anything. What you see on the face above is all you get. That's it - and that's awesome.
Casio W59This one has more features. Compared to the F-28W, it does have a nightlight, alarm, chronograph and hourly beep that you can have on or off. The resin band also has that tank-track look to it.
In comparison to the modern...
There is one newer-design Casio made that I dig because.. well, just look:
Casio LDF50This watch is pretty much guaranteed to be a conversation-starter wherever you go. It's also nice the LDF50 is only 30 bucks.
The style doesn't come without two drawbacks though. The first is that it only has a 3-year battery while the two above it have 7-year, and the second is that it weighs 25g while the above two both weigh only 14g.
Weight for me is the deal-breaker concerning the LDF50. I like wristwatches that are feather-light. The older-style models accomplish that easily while the LDF50 doesn't.
If you're thinking, "Only 11 grams heavier? Does the weight really make that much of a difference?" Yeah, it does. Think of it like the difference between using a plastic capped pen and a clicky pen. Both weigh next to nothing, but you definitely feel the weight difference between the two when writing.
An interesting factoid is that most watches are at least 30 grams in weight, so you can imagine how light a 14g wristwatch really feels. When you type on a computer keyboard as often I do, lighter is always better.
The Casio WV58A for example is nice modern digital watch - but it weighs 48g, more than three times the weight of the F-28W or the W59.
Sometimes modern isn't always better.