Z
MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland poland@moviecitynews.com

Video: Harry Hanrahan’s Hit By A Bus (NSFBOAS)

NSFBOAS – Not Safe For Backing Onto A Street

9 Responses to “Video: Harry Hanrahan’s Hit By A Bus (NSFBOAS)”

  1. Triple Option says:

    There are so many of these! I never realized. It’s the modern day equivalent to slipping on a banana peel. I didn’t get a chance to watch the whole thing but kinda surprised that even though I know generally what’s coming on some I was still cracking up.

  2. YancySkancy says:

    Amazing how many of these cheat the sound of the approaching vehicle, a tradition that goes back at least to the 1942 CAT PEOPLE.

    Has there been a supercut of a related trope, the sudden smashing of a vehicle from the side, shot from inside the car? These days, anytime I see a shot through a side window, I brace myself for the sudden impact.

  3. berg says:

    I kept waiting for the Margaret clip …. Star Trek was good too, The City on the Edge of Forever is my favorite episode (although the camera cuts before the connect) next to Mirror Mirror … the first time I remember seeing this full-on effect was in Meet Joe Black

  4. cadavra says:

    Just proves how tiresome this cliche has become, even when it’s intended satirically.

  5. Lex says:

    LOL, pretty funny… Its sister cliche (even more tired and nowhere near as funny) is the “car getting hit at full speed on the passenger side,” which is always always telegraphed by a really terrible matte shot of the actor in the passenger seat that gives you just enough time to tense up at the lens-flared headlights before the ear-shattering crash.

  6. YancySkancy says:

    Lex: That’s what I said a few posts up, but you said it more concisely. It’s not always on the passenger’s side though. I think the first time I saw that one was in ADAPTATION.

  7. Lex says:

    Damn, I didn’t read Yancy’s comment, sorry.

    I always think of THE FORGOTTEN with Julianne Moore as one of the first big ones of that, but it seems to happen in just about everything now.

  8. etguild2 says:

    Pretty good. Hanrahan’s clips are the best…”100 Greatest Insults of All Time” is still the best.

  9. christian says:

    OFFICE SPACE did it before ADAPTATION…

Leave a Reply

The Hot Blog

Z

Quote Unquotesee all »

“The core fear is what can happen to you, personally. Your body. That’s what horror films deal with, precisely. We are a very thin skin wrapped around a pumping heart and guts. At any given moment it can come down to that, be it diseases, or somebody’s assault, or war, or a car wreck. You could be reduced to the simple laws of physics and your body’s vulnerability. The edged weapon is the penultimate weapon to disclose that reality to you.”
~ Wes Craven, 1996, promoting Scream

MAMET
Well, that, to me, is always the trick of dramaturgy; theoretically, perfectly, what one wants to do is put the protagonist and the audience in exactly the same position. The main question in drama, the way I was taught, is always what does the protagonist want. That’s what drama is. It comes down to that. It’s not about theme, it’s not about ideas, it’s not about setting, but what the protagonist wants. What gives rise to the drama, what is the precipitating event, and how, at the end of the play, do we see that event culminated? Do we see the protagonist’s wishes fulfilled or absolutely frustrated? That’s the structure of drama. You break it down into three acts.

INTERVIEWER
Does this explain why your plays have so little exposition?

MAMET
Yes. People only speak to get something. If I say, Let me tell you a few things about myself, already your defenses go up; you go, Look, I wonder what he wants from me, because no one ever speaks except to obtain an objective. That’s the only reason anyone ever opens their mouth, onstage or offstage. They may use a language that seems revealing, but if so, it’s just coincidence, because what they’re trying to do is accomplish an objective… The question is where does the dramatist have to lead you? Answer: the place where he or she thinks the audience needs to be led. But what does the character think? Does the character need to convey that information? If the answer is no, then you’d better cut it out, because you aren’t putting the audience in the same position with the protagonist. You’re saying, in effect, Let’s stop the play. That’s what the narration is doing—stopping the play… It’s action, as Aristotle said. That’s all that it is—exactly what the person does. It’s not what they “think,” because we don’t know what they think. It’s not what they say. It’s what they do, what they’re physically trying to accomplish on the stage. Which is exactly the same way we understand a person’s character in life—not by what they say, but by what they do. Say someone came up to you and said, I’m glad to be your neighbor because I’m a very honest man. That’s my character. I’m honest, I like to do things, I’m forthright, I like to be clear about everything, I like to be concise. Well, you really don’t know anything about that guy’s character. Or the person is onstage, and the playwright has him or her make those same claims in several subtle or not-so-subtle ways, the audience will say, Oh yes, I understand their character now; now I understand that they are a character. But in fact you don’t understand anything. You just understand that they’re jabbering to try to convince you of something.
~ David Mamet

Z Z