In Entertainment today, we hear two reviews of The Simpsons Movie – yes,after 400 TV shows, America’s most famous dysfunctional cartoon family –Homer, Marge, Bart, Lisa and Maggie – step up from the television to the bigscreen for the first time. ‘Dysfunctional’ means not functioning, or working,properly. ‘A dysfunctional family.’
The Simpsons series has been running on TV since 1989. The Simpsons Movieis 87 minutes long – much longer than a TV episode, and everything about thefilm. He also explains that it’s a big production – it’s ‘on an epic scale’.
As you listen, try to catch any of the extremely positive adjectives Nick uses todescribe how the film looks.
Nick Newman‘I think it looked absolutely stunning visually. It’s on an epic scale of the kind that watching iton a 26-inch television you can’t believe – I mean, you go pan over Springfield and all of that,I didn’t have a problem with any of that. I thought it was all dazzling. It was very funny, butfor those who have seen hundreds of episodes – of which there are 400 odd! – a lot of thejokes seemed quite familiar!’
Amber: Nick says the film looked great – it was ‘absolutely stunning visually’. And hethought the film was ‘dazzling’ – it was spectacular. For example, the camerapans over Springfield – ‘to pan’ means to move a camera in such a way thatyou get a broad view of a scene. Exciting stuff.
Listen again and notice the informal expression Nick uses to say that he wasrather indifferent to, in other words - he didn’t mind, the way the film looked.
He says ‘I didn’t have a problem with …’ the epic look of the film.
Nick Newman‘I think it looked absolutely stunning visually. It’s on an epic scale of the kind that watching iton a 26-inch television you can’t believe – I mean, you go pan over Springfield and all of that,I didn’t have a problem with any of that. I thought it was all dazzling. It was very funny, butfor those who have seen hundreds of episodes – of which there are 400 odd! – a lot of thejokes seemed quite familiar!’
Amber: Next, the journalist Andrew Billen gives his opinion of The Simpsons Movie.
He’s impressed – he says it’s ‘very funny, very silly at points, but not actuallytrivial.’ If something is trivial it lacks seriousness or importance.
Well, the film has some ‘surreal’, or strange, moments – Homer falls in lovewith a pig! And that’s what leads to the environmental threat to Springfield.
This is obviously ‘a low point’, a difficult time, for Homer – when he ‘reachesrock bottom’! But in Andrew’s view, the film exactly fits – it’s ‘absolutelybang on’ – the archetypal, or typical, popular American story. Can you catchwhat that plot is?
Andrew Billen‘Well, yeah, Homer reaches rock bottom doesn’t he when he does fall in love with a pig!
There was an American critic who once talked about all popular narrative being one plotbasically which is the family is threatened and the family is reunited and effectively you haveto do this by restoring daddy to the head of the table, his rightful place. And I thought in thatsense this movie was absolutely bang on the archetype and that was why it was so satisfying.
It was very funny, very silly at points, but not actually trivial.’
Amber: So a family facing threats then coming together with the father back in control– ‘at the head of the table’ – makes for a ‘satisfying’ – a pleasing – film. Listenagain.
Andrew Billen‘Well, yeah, Homer reaches rock bottom doesn’t he when he does fall in love with a pig!
There was an American critic who once talked about all popular narrative being one plotbasically which is the family is threatened and the family is reunited and effectively you haveto do this by restoring daddy to the head of the table, his rightful place. And I thought in thatsense this movie was absolutely bang on the archetype and that was why it was so satisfying.
It was very funny, very silly at points, but not actually trivial.’
2011年2月16日星期三
The Painted Veil
Hello, I'm Amber and you're listening to bbclearningenglish.com.
In Entertainment today, we step into the dynamic world of contemporary dance.
We hear parts of an interview with two of the world's leading dancers: Sylvie
Guillem and Akram Khan. We meet them backstage at the Sadler's Wells
theatre in London. They talk about dancing together in a new show called
Sacred Monsters. The piece is a 'duet' (a dance for 2 performers) accompanied
by a live band. And watch out - Sacred Monsters is about to go on a world-
wide tour!
As we'll hear, the show is an exciting challenge for both dancers who trained
in very different styles of classical dance.
Sylvie Guillem is a ballet dancer, a ballerina. She caused a sensation at the
Paris Opera when, at the age of just 19, she was promoted to the role of star
dancer by her teacher Rudolf Nureyev. She then caused a storm of outrage in
her native France when, just six years later, she left the Paris Opera and joined
the Royal Ballet in London.
Akram Khan was born in the UK and is of Bangladeshi origin. From a young
age he was trained in the Kathak style of dancing (the classical style of north
India) and he is now one of the most innovative modern dancers working in
Britain.
First here's Sylvie Guillem talking about why she was drawn towards
contemporary dance and away from the classical 'repertoire', the complete
range of ballet works. As you listen, try to catch the expression she uses to
refer to the fact that she began performing classical ballet roles when she was a
very young dancer.
Sylvie Guillem
'I already decided for a long time not to dance a lot of roles from the repertoire because I
started classical very young and I had time to do all of the repertoire and many, many, many,
many times! So I was born on stage and I was really asking myself: But what am I doing here?
Because there was a lack of weight in what I was doing and then it was only physical, and so I
was not interested by that any more. I spent sometime doing that, and now I want to spend
some time doing something else.'
Amber: Did you catch it? Sylvie Guillem says 'I was born on stage'!
Listen again and notice the expressions 'to spend time' doing something, and
'a lack of weight'. Sylvie says she was drawn towards contemporary dance
because she felt there was 'a lack of weight' in her classical ballet. In English,
if we say something is 'weighty', we mean it is serious or important.
Sylvie Guillem
'I already decided for a long time not to dance a lot of roles from the repertoire because I
started classical very young and I had time to do all of the repertoire and many, many, many,
many times! So I was born on stage and I was really asking myself: But what am I doing here?
Because there was a lack of weight in what I was doing and then it was only physical, and so I
was not interested by that any more. I spent sometime doing that, and now I want to spend
some time doing something else.'
Amber: Sylvie Guillem and Akram Khan have very different bodies. Sylvie is
famously tall with very long limbs, and Akram Khan is smaller and stronger.
Here's Akram talking about how his body remembers the very many
complicated moves in the show Sacred Monsters – he says it's his 'muscle
memory' at work as well as his mind! And the dancers have to be sensitive
to each other's movements so the piece does not become too 'mechanical' –
as if it were being performed by machines!
Akram Khan
'I think it's the muscle memory, but your mind is also working. If it's not working, then the
piece doesn't live – it becomes mechanical. And so we're constantly thinking - always
adjusting and negotiating with each other. If it's too perfect, or if it's mechanical, then it
doesn't live and so the piece has to live.'
Amber: So the dancers are constantly 'adjusting and negotiating' with each other – they
make small changes and they work around each other successfully.
Now here's a list of the language we focussed on in the programme today.
In Entertainment today, we step into the dynamic world of contemporary dance.
We hear parts of an interview with two of the world's leading dancers: Sylvie
Guillem and Akram Khan. We meet them backstage at the Sadler's Wells
theatre in London. They talk about dancing together in a new show called
Sacred Monsters. The piece is a 'duet' (a dance for 2 performers) accompanied
by a live band. And watch out - Sacred Monsters is about to go on a world-
wide tour!
As we'll hear, the show is an exciting challenge for both dancers who trained
in very different styles of classical dance.
Sylvie Guillem is a ballet dancer, a ballerina. She caused a sensation at the
Paris Opera when, at the age of just 19, she was promoted to the role of star
dancer by her teacher Rudolf Nureyev. She then caused a storm of outrage in
her native France when, just six years later, she left the Paris Opera and joined
the Royal Ballet in London.
Akram Khan was born in the UK and is of Bangladeshi origin. From a young
age he was trained in the Kathak style of dancing (the classical style of north
India) and he is now one of the most innovative modern dancers working in
Britain.
First here's Sylvie Guillem talking about why she was drawn towards
contemporary dance and away from the classical 'repertoire', the complete
range of ballet works. As you listen, try to catch the expression she uses to
refer to the fact that she began performing classical ballet roles when she was a
very young dancer.
Sylvie Guillem
'I already decided for a long time not to dance a lot of roles from the repertoire because I
started classical very young and I had time to do all of the repertoire and many, many, many,
many times! So I was born on stage and I was really asking myself: But what am I doing here?
Because there was a lack of weight in what I was doing and then it was only physical, and so I
was not interested by that any more. I spent sometime doing that, and now I want to spend
some time doing something else.'
Amber: Did you catch it? Sylvie Guillem says 'I was born on stage'!
Listen again and notice the expressions 'to spend time' doing something, and
'a lack of weight'. Sylvie says she was drawn towards contemporary dance
because she felt there was 'a lack of weight' in her classical ballet. In English,
if we say something is 'weighty', we mean it is serious or important.
Sylvie Guillem
'I already decided for a long time not to dance a lot of roles from the repertoire because I
started classical very young and I had time to do all of the repertoire and many, many, many,
many times! So I was born on stage and I was really asking myself: But what am I doing here?
Because there was a lack of weight in what I was doing and then it was only physical, and so I
was not interested by that any more. I spent sometime doing that, and now I want to spend
some time doing something else.'
Amber: Sylvie Guillem and Akram Khan have very different bodies. Sylvie is
famously tall with very long limbs, and Akram Khan is smaller and stronger.
Here's Akram talking about how his body remembers the very many
complicated moves in the show Sacred Monsters – he says it's his 'muscle
memory' at work as well as his mind! And the dancers have to be sensitive
to each other's movements so the piece does not become too 'mechanical' –
as if it were being performed by machines!
Akram Khan
'I think it's the muscle memory, but your mind is also working. If it's not working, then the
piece doesn't live – it becomes mechanical. And so we're constantly thinking - always
adjusting and negotiating with each other. If it's too perfect, or if it's mechanical, then it
doesn't live and so the piece has to live.'
Amber: So the dancers are constantly 'adjusting and negotiating' with each other – they
make small changes and they work around each other successfully.
Now here's a list of the language we focussed on in the programme today.
the new fashion designers
Hello, I'm Amber and you're listening to bbclearningenglish.com
In Entertainment today, we find out why pop stars are the new fashion
designers – in other words, why there's a trend for pop stars to start their own
clothing labels or brands. For example, the drummer with the chart-topping
band The Arctic Monkeys has just launched a line of leisure wear, and this
follows designs launched by Madonna a short while ago.
Here's the first part of an interview with Lisa Armstrong, the fashion editor of
the Times newspaper. She says this trend is an obvious, 'a blatant', move by
pop stars to make money! But it's also an attempt, 'a stab', at staying famous
for longer! 'To get a bit of longevity' – 'longevity' here means the length of
someone's career. And for the model Kate Moss, launching her own clothing
label is a sensible next move, it's 'a logical step'.
As you listen, try to catch the expression Lisa uses to describe how the stars of
today are smarter than pop musicians in the 90s - when it comes to making
money from fashion - because they are marketing their own designs, not those
of big, established designers.
Lisa Armstrong
'Yeah, I mean, it's clearly a blatant attempt to make money – why not?! But I think also, for
some of them, it's a stab to get a bit of longevity, you know, careers are very short, and for
someone like Kate Moss, in particular, it's a logical step. I think also in the '90s, musicians
traditionally got friendly with Versace or Armani – got free clothes, sat in the front row – now
they're just cutting out the middle-man!'
Amber: Did you catch it? Lisa says that pop stars today are 'cutting out the middle-
man' – they are marketing their clothes directly to their audiences. To cut out
the middle-man. Listen again.
Lisa Armstrong
'Yeah, I mean, it's clearly a blatant attempt to make money – why not?! But I think also, for
some of them, it's a stab to get a bit of longevity, you know, careers are very short, and for
someone like Kate Moss, in particular, it's a logical step. I think also in the '90s, musicians
traditionally got friendly with Versace or Armani – got free clothes, sat in the front row – now
they're just cutting out the middle-man!'
Amber: Next, Lisa talks about Madonna's range of clothes for the high-street store H &
M. She isn't impressed – she says the range was 'a bit of a flop', a bit of a
failure. She says what fans wanted was the outrageous, the 'camp', kind of
clothes that Madonna wore on stage – 'conical bras', for example, bras shaped
like ice-cream cones! But according to Lisa, the clothes were 'period', a polite
way of saying old-fashioned! They were 'mum-sy', they were like the kind of
safe, frumpy clothes a mother, who was not fashion-conscious, would wear.
Listen.
Lisa Armstrong
'I think when it doesn't work … I mean, Madonna's line for H & M was a bit of a flop
because we wanted conical bras, we wanted all that camp, fabulous Madonna, and what we
actually got was late, period, mum-sy Madonna, and that doesn't tie in with the H & M
customer.'
In Entertainment today, we find out why pop stars are the new fashion
designers – in other words, why there's a trend for pop stars to start their own
clothing labels or brands. For example, the drummer with the chart-topping
band The Arctic Monkeys has just launched a line of leisure wear, and this
follows designs launched by Madonna a short while ago.
Here's the first part of an interview with Lisa Armstrong, the fashion editor of
the Times newspaper. She says this trend is an obvious, 'a blatant', move by
pop stars to make money! But it's also an attempt, 'a stab', at staying famous
for longer! 'To get a bit of longevity' – 'longevity' here means the length of
someone's career. And for the model Kate Moss, launching her own clothing
label is a sensible next move, it's 'a logical step'.
As you listen, try to catch the expression Lisa uses to describe how the stars of
today are smarter than pop musicians in the 90s - when it comes to making
money from fashion - because they are marketing their own designs, not those
of big, established designers.
Lisa Armstrong
'Yeah, I mean, it's clearly a blatant attempt to make money – why not?! But I think also, for
some of them, it's a stab to get a bit of longevity, you know, careers are very short, and for
someone like Kate Moss, in particular, it's a logical step. I think also in the '90s, musicians
traditionally got friendly with Versace or Armani – got free clothes, sat in the front row – now
they're just cutting out the middle-man!'
Amber: Did you catch it? Lisa says that pop stars today are 'cutting out the middle-
man' – they are marketing their clothes directly to their audiences. To cut out
the middle-man. Listen again.
Lisa Armstrong
'Yeah, I mean, it's clearly a blatant attempt to make money – why not?! But I think also, for
some of them, it's a stab to get a bit of longevity, you know, careers are very short, and for
someone like Kate Moss, in particular, it's a logical step. I think also in the '90s, musicians
traditionally got friendly with Versace or Armani – got free clothes, sat in the front row – now
they're just cutting out the middle-man!'
Amber: Next, Lisa talks about Madonna's range of clothes for the high-street store H &
M. She isn't impressed – she says the range was 'a bit of a flop', a bit of a
failure. She says what fans wanted was the outrageous, the 'camp', kind of
clothes that Madonna wore on stage – 'conical bras', for example, bras shaped
like ice-cream cones! But according to Lisa, the clothes were 'period', a polite
way of saying old-fashioned! They were 'mum-sy', they were like the kind of
safe, frumpy clothes a mother, who was not fashion-conscious, would wear.
Listen.
Lisa Armstrong
'I think when it doesn't work … I mean, Madonna's line for H & M was a bit of a flop
because we wanted conical bras, we wanted all that camp, fabulous Madonna, and what we
actually got was late, period, mum-sy Madonna, and that doesn't tie in with the H & M
customer.'
A passion for cricket
In Entertainment today, we listen to extracts from an interview with JohnMajor, who was the British Prime Minister before Tony Blair. He's written athbook about the history of cricket from the 18 century to the First World War –it's called More Than a Game – the Story of Cricket's Early Years, and, aswe'll hear, there's plenty to say about the ways politics and cricket meet.
First, here's John Major talking about how cricket used to be very 'class-ridden'. In other words, it followed the class divisions of society. He agreesthat cricket was very bound-up with class, but that was becoming less true, itwas 'beginning fade', when he fell in love with the game, as a boy growing upin a working class family. He says there were meaningless, or 'absurd',practices, such as men of different status having to enter the pitch throughdifferent gates and use different dressing rooms!
As you listen, try to catch the expression John Major uses to describe howcricket was very slow to accept or 'to come to terms with', the fact that societywas changing, it was becoming less divided by class.
John Major'Yes, it was, I mean, it was beginning to fade then, but only just beginning. And of course forth thmost of the 19 century and before, it was a very class-ridden game. Until well into the 20century, you found professionals and amateurs entering the pitch from different gates - it wasan absurdity - and not sharing the same dressing room. It was very slow in many ways tocome to terms with the real world.'
Amber: Did you catch it? John Major says cricket was 'very slow in many ways tocome to terms with the real world.' 'The real world' – the set of situations mosthumans have to deal with in their lives, rather than what happens in stories,films, and so on.
John Major'Yes, it was, I mean, it was beginning to fade then, but only just beginning. And of course forth thmost of the 19 century and before, it was a very class-ridden game. Until well into the 20century, you found professionals and amateurs entering the pitch from different gates - it wasan absurdity - and not sharing the same dressing room. It was very slow in many ways tocome to terms with the real world.'
Amber: In his book, John Major admits to feeling very sorry that, when he was PrimeMinister, many playing fields, especially school playing fields, were sold. Thisprevented many people from playing cricket in a land where the modernversion of the game was born!
He says 'in retrospect' – when he thinks about the past in the light of theknowledge he has now – he thinks he should have made it harder for playingfields to be sold. He should have put in place a 'blanket-ban'. A blanket-ban isan unlimited ban, affecting all cases. So, does he feel guilty?
John Major'I do. I mean, I did stop some of them and I did make it harder for them to be sold. I think inretrospect it would have been better to have had a blanket-ban on the sales.'
Amber: And will John Major be publishing other books? And why does he write?
Listen.
John Major'I've always enjoyed writing. I still have drafts of bits of several novels, but I wrote all thetime. I write a lot of poetry, not for publication, but privately. I find it very cathartic to pickup a pen and to write – it's particularly cathartic at moments of stress.'
Amber: Well, we don't know if he'll be publishing other books but he has written'drafts of bits of several novels' – a draft is a first or rough version - and hewrites a lot of poetry, but this is private.
And he writes because he finds it 'cathartic', calming and purifying, especially'at moments of stress', or difficulty.
John Major'I've always enjoyed writing. I still have drafts of bits of several novels, but I wrote all thetime. I write a lot of poetry, not for publication, but privately. I find it very cathartic to pickup a pen and to write – it's particularly cathartic at moments of stress.'
First, here's John Major talking about how cricket used to be very 'class-ridden'. In other words, it followed the class divisions of society. He agreesthat cricket was very bound-up with class, but that was becoming less true, itwas 'beginning fade', when he fell in love with the game, as a boy growing upin a working class family. He says there were meaningless, or 'absurd',practices, such as men of different status having to enter the pitch throughdifferent gates and use different dressing rooms!
As you listen, try to catch the expression John Major uses to describe howcricket was very slow to accept or 'to come to terms with', the fact that societywas changing, it was becoming less divided by class.
John Major'Yes, it was, I mean, it was beginning to fade then, but only just beginning. And of course forth thmost of the 19 century and before, it was a very class-ridden game. Until well into the 20century, you found professionals and amateurs entering the pitch from different gates - it wasan absurdity - and not sharing the same dressing room. It was very slow in many ways tocome to terms with the real world.'
Amber: Did you catch it? John Major says cricket was 'very slow in many ways tocome to terms with the real world.' 'The real world' – the set of situations mosthumans have to deal with in their lives, rather than what happens in stories,films, and so on.
John Major'Yes, it was, I mean, it was beginning to fade then, but only just beginning. And of course forth thmost of the 19 century and before, it was a very class-ridden game. Until well into the 20century, you found professionals and amateurs entering the pitch from different gates - it wasan absurdity - and not sharing the same dressing room. It was very slow in many ways tocome to terms with the real world.'
Amber: In his book, John Major admits to feeling very sorry that, when he was PrimeMinister, many playing fields, especially school playing fields, were sold. Thisprevented many people from playing cricket in a land where the modernversion of the game was born!
He says 'in retrospect' – when he thinks about the past in the light of theknowledge he has now – he thinks he should have made it harder for playingfields to be sold. He should have put in place a 'blanket-ban'. A blanket-ban isan unlimited ban, affecting all cases. So, does he feel guilty?
John Major'I do. I mean, I did stop some of them and I did make it harder for them to be sold. I think inretrospect it would have been better to have had a blanket-ban on the sales.'
Amber: And will John Major be publishing other books? And why does he write?
Listen.
John Major'I've always enjoyed writing. I still have drafts of bits of several novels, but I wrote all thetime. I write a lot of poetry, not for publication, but privately. I find it very cathartic to pickup a pen and to write – it's particularly cathartic at moments of stress.'
Amber: Well, we don't know if he'll be publishing other books but he has written'drafts of bits of several novels' – a draft is a first or rough version - and hewrites a lot of poetry, but this is private.
And he writes because he finds it 'cathartic', calming and purifying, especially'at moments of stress', or difficulty.
John Major'I've always enjoyed writing. I still have drafts of bits of several novels, but I wrote all thetime. I write a lot of poetry, not for publication, but privately. I find it very cathartic to pickup a pen and to write – it's particularly cathartic at moments of stress.'
Gene Wilder
Hello, and welcome to Entertainment, I'm William Kremer. Today, I'm veryexcited, because we're going to be hearing from one of my very favouritecomedians – Gene Wilder. If you're a fan of the crazy comedies of Mel Brooks,you'll know Gene Wilder by his great mop of curly hair. Gene Wilder workedwith Mel Brooks on films including Blazing Saddles, Young Frankenstein andThe Producers.
Recently, Mel Brooks made The Producers into a stage musical, and it was ahuge success in New York and London. It was, we would say, a 'hit' a 'hitmusical'.
Now Mel Brooks is working on a stage version of Young Frankenstein. We'regoing to hear a clip from an interview with Gene Wilder, who wrote thescreenplay for this film and who starred in it. In this clip, he describes whathappened when Mel Brooks told him about his plans to turn YoungFrankenstein into a musical. See if you can work out what Gene Wilderthought about the idea…Gene Wilder: I thought, 'Over my dead body.' And I thought 'Don't do anything to desecratein any way the film of Young Frankenstein', which is my favourite … favouritefilm that I've done.
William: Well, the answer is that he really didn't want Mel Brooks to go ahead with theproduction. At the start of the clip, you might have heard quite a commonphrase which we use when we really don't want something to happen…Gene Wilder: I thought, 'Over my dead body.'
William: 'Over my dead body'. This means, if you want to do that, you will have to killme first. When people say it, they aren't really ready to die! But they usuallyare very angry about something.
Gene Wilder: I thought, 'Over my dead body.'
William: Gene Wilder was worried that if Mel Brooks made his musical, he would spoilthe original film of Young Frankenstein.
STINGWilliam: These two old friends, Gene Wilder and Mel Brooks, started to argue aboutYoung Frankenstein. As you listen to the next clip, see if you can hear what themeaning of Borscht Belt is….
Gene Wilder: And he got on the phone, he started hollering, yelling, 'Well you can't…‘ andtelling me all the things why, and I told him why, 'You're a Borscht Belt comicand a genius, but this is not, I didn't write Borscht Belt - ' Borscht Belt means,in the Catskills, there… all the comics used to go there to try out their materialand, a lot of Jewish comics, and they all drank Borscht, so it's called 'TheBorscht Belt'. But I said, 'That's not my kind of humour…'
William: The Borscht Belt is a place in the United States, in the Catskill Mountains. Butwhere does the name come from?
Gene Wilder: Borscht Belt means, in the Catskills, there… all the comics used to go there totry out their material and, a lot of Jewish comics, and they all drank Borscht, soit's called 'The Borscht Belt'. But I said, 'That's not my kind of humour…'
William: Jewish comics used to go to the Catskills to 'try out their material'. In thiscontext, 'material' means their routines, their jokes. These comics would tryout their material in the Catskills, and they would all drink Borscht, a soupwhich is usually made from beetroot. So, the Catskills are sometimes called'The Borscht Belt'.
OK, I know this isn't very useful English, but it's interesting isn't it?
Borscht Belt comics have their own kind of very fast, clever, humour. GeneWilder told Mel Brooks that Mel was a great Borscht Belt comic, but, he said,that wasn't his kind of humour.
Before we hear the next clip, do you remember what the word for a verysuccessful production, or a very successful movie or song was? A 'hit'. Nowlet me tell you what the opposite of a hit is – a 'flop'. A production which is aflop doesn't make enough money. There's also a verb form – we can say, 'theproduction flopped'. OK - now see if you can work out what Gene Wilderdecided to do:
Gene Wilder: And I thought: 'What am I saying? I want him to be happy and he needs towork. If he really wants to do this, I have nothing to lose, because if it flops,they're not going to blame me, but if it's a big hit, Mel said “So you'll make afew bucks”'
William: Gene Wilder decided to let Mel Brooks turn Young Frankenstein into a musical.
He said he wanted Mel to be happy. He also said he realised he had nothing tolose – if the stage version of Young Frankenstein flopped, no one would blamehim, but if it was a hit, he'd make some money, or as Mel Brooks said, he'dmake 'a few bucks', a few dollars….
Recently, Mel Brooks made The Producers into a stage musical, and it was ahuge success in New York and London. It was, we would say, a 'hit' a 'hitmusical'.
Now Mel Brooks is working on a stage version of Young Frankenstein. We'regoing to hear a clip from an interview with Gene Wilder, who wrote thescreenplay for this film and who starred in it. In this clip, he describes whathappened when Mel Brooks told him about his plans to turn YoungFrankenstein into a musical. See if you can work out what Gene Wilderthought about the idea…Gene Wilder: I thought, 'Over my dead body.' And I thought 'Don't do anything to desecratein any way the film of Young Frankenstein', which is my favourite … favouritefilm that I've done.
William: Well, the answer is that he really didn't want Mel Brooks to go ahead with theproduction. At the start of the clip, you might have heard quite a commonphrase which we use when we really don't want something to happen…Gene Wilder: I thought, 'Over my dead body.'
William: 'Over my dead body'. This means, if you want to do that, you will have to killme first. When people say it, they aren't really ready to die! But they usuallyare very angry about something.
Gene Wilder: I thought, 'Over my dead body.'
William: Gene Wilder was worried that if Mel Brooks made his musical, he would spoilthe original film of Young Frankenstein.
STINGWilliam: These two old friends, Gene Wilder and Mel Brooks, started to argue aboutYoung Frankenstein. As you listen to the next clip, see if you can hear what themeaning of Borscht Belt is….
Gene Wilder: And he got on the phone, he started hollering, yelling, 'Well you can't…‘ andtelling me all the things why, and I told him why, 'You're a Borscht Belt comicand a genius, but this is not, I didn't write Borscht Belt - ' Borscht Belt means,in the Catskills, there… all the comics used to go there to try out their materialand, a lot of Jewish comics, and they all drank Borscht, so it's called 'TheBorscht Belt'. But I said, 'That's not my kind of humour…'
William: The Borscht Belt is a place in the United States, in the Catskill Mountains. Butwhere does the name come from?
Gene Wilder: Borscht Belt means, in the Catskills, there… all the comics used to go there totry out their material and, a lot of Jewish comics, and they all drank Borscht, soit's called 'The Borscht Belt'. But I said, 'That's not my kind of humour…'
William: Jewish comics used to go to the Catskills to 'try out their material'. In thiscontext, 'material' means their routines, their jokes. These comics would tryout their material in the Catskills, and they would all drink Borscht, a soupwhich is usually made from beetroot. So, the Catskills are sometimes called'The Borscht Belt'.
OK, I know this isn't very useful English, but it's interesting isn't it?
Borscht Belt comics have their own kind of very fast, clever, humour. GeneWilder told Mel Brooks that Mel was a great Borscht Belt comic, but, he said,that wasn't his kind of humour.
Before we hear the next clip, do you remember what the word for a verysuccessful production, or a very successful movie or song was? A 'hit'. Nowlet me tell you what the opposite of a hit is – a 'flop'. A production which is aflop doesn't make enough money. There's also a verb form – we can say, 'theproduction flopped'. OK - now see if you can work out what Gene Wilderdecided to do:
Gene Wilder: And I thought: 'What am I saying? I want him to be happy and he needs towork. If he really wants to do this, I have nothing to lose, because if it flops,they're not going to blame me, but if it's a big hit, Mel said “So you'll make afew bucks”'
William: Gene Wilder decided to let Mel Brooks turn Young Frankenstein into a musical.
He said he wanted Mel to be happy. He also said he realised he had nothing tolose – if the stage version of Young Frankenstein flopped, no one would blamehim, but if it was a hit, he'd make some money, or as Mel Brooks said, he'dmake 'a few bucks', a few dollars….
The Royal Festival Hall
finest music, the greatest singers and players to be heard, and to give pleasureand refreshment of the soul to generations of Londoners yet unborn.
William: Hello, I'm William Kremer and that was Clement Attlee, who was the BritishPrime Minister after the Second World War. The clip you just heard wasthrecorded on 12 October, 1949. Mr Attlee was making a speech at the start ofwork on building a great concert hall – the Royal Festival Hall, which nowstands on the South bank of the River Thames. Today's programme is all aboutthe Royal Festival Hall.
Mr Attlee's speech was in quite formal English… he said that he hoped the hallwould long endure – that is, that it would exist for a long time – to give theopportunity for the finest music, singers and players to be heard. He also used alovely phrase – 'to give pleasure and refreshment of the soul'. Listen again.
Clement I hope that this concert hall will long endure to give the opportunity for theAttlee:
finest music, the greatest singers and players to be heard, and to give pleasureand refreshment of the soul to generations of Londoners yet unborn.
William: Did you notice, listening to that clip, how differently British people spoke justfifty years ago? It's a way of speaking that one associates with the BBC! – but,it sounds quite old-fashioned now.
STINGThe Royal Festival Hall took two years to build, finally opening in May 1951as part of the Festival of Britain. The building brought a striking Moderniststyle to the Thames. It was in service for over fifty years – and it became hometo four orchestras! Famous singers of many different styles sang there,including Maria Callas, Louis Armstrong and Lou Reed.
But, in 2005, the hall closed once again for two years. Why? It was beingrefurbished. 'To refurbish' – it means to improve a building or object and makeit like new. There's a noun form too – 'refurbishment'. The refurbishment ofthe Royal Festival Hall took two years and cost ninety-one million pounds. Itfinally opened its doors last week.
We're going to hear now from Peter Mandelson. Mr Mandelson is currently theEuropean Union Commissioner for Trade. But his grandfather, HerbertMorrison, had the original idea for the Festival of Britain and the Hall back inthe 1940's. What does Peter Mandelson make of the refurbishment? In this clip,Mr. Mandelson mentions a key development. Used as an adjective, 'key'
means 'most important'. This is quite a common word in modern, formalEnglish. What does Peter Mandelson see as the 'key development' in therefurbishment of the Royal Festival Hall?
Peter It's been refurbished, repolished, buffed up, made more comfortable, theMandle-carpeting brought back to life… but I think the key development is theson:
liberation of… liberation of space. There are parts of the original Festival Hallwhich the public never went to – I don't quite know what they were used for –offices or workshops or whatever – but the whole effect is to bring more, morelight and spaciousness into the hall, with wonderful views of Westminster andThameside.
William: He said the key development is the liberation, or freeing of… of what?
Peter It's been refurbished, repolished, buffed up, made more comfortable, theMandle-carpeting brought back to life… but I think the key development is theson:
liberation of… liberation of space. There are parts of the original Festival Hallwhich the public never went to – I don't quite know what they were used for –offices or workshops or whatever – but the whole effect is to bring more, morelight and spaciousness into the hall, with wonderful views of Westminster andThameside.
William: Hello, I'm William Kremer and that was Clement Attlee, who was the BritishPrime Minister after the Second World War. The clip you just heard wasthrecorded on 12 October, 1949. Mr Attlee was making a speech at the start ofwork on building a great concert hall – the Royal Festival Hall, which nowstands on the South bank of the River Thames. Today's programme is all aboutthe Royal Festival Hall.
Mr Attlee's speech was in quite formal English… he said that he hoped the hallwould long endure – that is, that it would exist for a long time – to give theopportunity for the finest music, singers and players to be heard. He also used alovely phrase – 'to give pleasure and refreshment of the soul'. Listen again.
Clement I hope that this concert hall will long endure to give the opportunity for theAttlee:
finest music, the greatest singers and players to be heard, and to give pleasureand refreshment of the soul to generations of Londoners yet unborn.
William: Did you notice, listening to that clip, how differently British people spoke justfifty years ago? It's a way of speaking that one associates with the BBC! – but,it sounds quite old-fashioned now.
STINGThe Royal Festival Hall took two years to build, finally opening in May 1951as part of the Festival of Britain. The building brought a striking Moderniststyle to the Thames. It was in service for over fifty years – and it became hometo four orchestras! Famous singers of many different styles sang there,including Maria Callas, Louis Armstrong and Lou Reed.
But, in 2005, the hall closed once again for two years. Why? It was beingrefurbished. 'To refurbish' – it means to improve a building or object and makeit like new. There's a noun form too – 'refurbishment'. The refurbishment ofthe Royal Festival Hall took two years and cost ninety-one million pounds. Itfinally opened its doors last week.
We're going to hear now from Peter Mandelson. Mr Mandelson is currently theEuropean Union Commissioner for Trade. But his grandfather, HerbertMorrison, had the original idea for the Festival of Britain and the Hall back inthe 1940's. What does Peter Mandelson make of the refurbishment? In this clip,Mr. Mandelson mentions a key development. Used as an adjective, 'key'
means 'most important'. This is quite a common word in modern, formalEnglish. What does Peter Mandelson see as the 'key development' in therefurbishment of the Royal Festival Hall?
Peter It's been refurbished, repolished, buffed up, made more comfortable, theMandle-carpeting brought back to life… but I think the key development is theson:
liberation of… liberation of space. There are parts of the original Festival Hallwhich the public never went to – I don't quite know what they were used for –offices or workshops or whatever – but the whole effect is to bring more, morelight and spaciousness into the hall, with wonderful views of Westminster andThameside.
William: He said the key development is the liberation, or freeing of… of what?
Peter It's been refurbished, repolished, buffed up, made more comfortable, theMandle-carpeting brought back to life… but I think the key development is theson:
liberation of… liberation of space. There are parts of the original Festival Hallwhich the public never went to – I don't quite know what they were used for –offices or workshops or whatever – but the whole effect is to bring more, morelight and spaciousness into the hall, with wonderful views of Westminster andThameside.
Amazing Grace
Here at BBC Learning English dot com, we're running a short season of
th
programmes marking the 200 anniversary of the abolition of the slave trade.
This significant anniversary hasn't been ignored by Hollywood either. A new
film, Amazing Grace, tells the story of the campaign in the British parliament
for an end to the slave trade. It stars Ioan Gruffudd as William Wilberforce, the
British politician who is traditionally seen as largely responsible for stopping
the slave trade.
I say 'traditionally' because Wilberforce's role in the campaign for abolition is
now quite controversial – some historians say that by always looking at British
politicians, we ignore the actions of the slaves themselves.
So, is it OK for Amazing Grace to focus on white politicians, or should it pay
more attention to the lives of the Black slaves?
Let's listen now to the film critic Mark Kermode. As you listen, try to answer
this question: How is the story in Amazing Grace told?
Mark: It's not a story told from the perspective of the slaves, it's told from the
perspectives of the white Englishmen, who are debating the nature of slavery.
William: Listen again.
Mark: It's not a story told from the perspective of the slaves, it's told from the
perspectives of the white Englishmen, who are debating the nature of slavery.
William: Mark says that Amazing Grace is told from the perspective of white
Englishmen and not slaves. Perspective – this generally means a way of
thinking or a general view on life. We use it for expressing our opinions about
things. For example, you might say, 'From my perspective, learning English is
a very important skill' – this means it is your opinion, your view of the issue.
Note the use of 'from'. 'From your perspective', 'from my perspective', 'from
a scientific perspective', 'from a historical perspective'.
Now, if you want to say what the issue is that you're talking about, you need to
say 'on'. For example, 'His perspective on international affairs is really
interesting.'
When we talk about perspective in films or books, we're talking about the view
on life of the characters in the film – their opinions, experiences and feelings.
Mark Kermode says that story of Amazing Grace is told from the perspective
of white Englishmen, not slaves. So it's their opinions and experiences which
are highlighted in the film.
Let's listen to Mark again – this time, see if you can hear a word which means
the same as 'perspective':
Mark: It's very easy to criticise a movie for what it isn't, and there's a big thing at the
moment about criticising movies about, you know, issues movies, that are seen
from the viewpoint of, you know, of white men – another example would be
Blood Diamond, for example.
William: 'Viewpoint' means the same as 'perspective' and we use it in much the same
way.
'Viewpoint' is a shortened form of a very common phrase, 'point of view'.
Like 'perspective' and 'viewpoint', we use 'point of view' to talk about the
experiences of characters in books and films, and also to express opinions. For
example, you can talk about 'a feminist point of view' or 'a scientific point of
view' as well as your own point of view!
th
programmes marking the 200 anniversary of the abolition of the slave trade.
This significant anniversary hasn't been ignored by Hollywood either. A new
film, Amazing Grace, tells the story of the campaign in the British parliament
for an end to the slave trade. It stars Ioan Gruffudd as William Wilberforce, the
British politician who is traditionally seen as largely responsible for stopping
the slave trade.
I say 'traditionally' because Wilberforce's role in the campaign for abolition is
now quite controversial – some historians say that by always looking at British
politicians, we ignore the actions of the slaves themselves.
So, is it OK for Amazing Grace to focus on white politicians, or should it pay
more attention to the lives of the Black slaves?
Let's listen now to the film critic Mark Kermode. As you listen, try to answer
this question: How is the story in Amazing Grace told?
Mark: It's not a story told from the perspective of the slaves, it's told from the
perspectives of the white Englishmen, who are debating the nature of slavery.
William: Listen again.
Mark: It's not a story told from the perspective of the slaves, it's told from the
perspectives of the white Englishmen, who are debating the nature of slavery.
William: Mark says that Amazing Grace is told from the perspective of white
Englishmen and not slaves. Perspective – this generally means a way of
thinking or a general view on life. We use it for expressing our opinions about
things. For example, you might say, 'From my perspective, learning English is
a very important skill' – this means it is your opinion, your view of the issue.
Note the use of 'from'. 'From your perspective', 'from my perspective', 'from
a scientific perspective', 'from a historical perspective'.
Now, if you want to say what the issue is that you're talking about, you need to
say 'on'. For example, 'His perspective on international affairs is really
interesting.'
When we talk about perspective in films or books, we're talking about the view
on life of the characters in the film – their opinions, experiences and feelings.
Mark Kermode says that story of Amazing Grace is told from the perspective
of white Englishmen, not slaves. So it's their opinions and experiences which
are highlighted in the film.
Let's listen to Mark again – this time, see if you can hear a word which means
the same as 'perspective':
Mark: It's very easy to criticise a movie for what it isn't, and there's a big thing at the
moment about criticising movies about, you know, issues movies, that are seen
from the viewpoint of, you know, of white men – another example would be
Blood Diamond, for example.
William: 'Viewpoint' means the same as 'perspective' and we use it in much the same
way.
'Viewpoint' is a shortened form of a very common phrase, 'point of view'.
Like 'perspective' and 'viewpoint', we use 'point of view' to talk about the
experiences of characters in books and films, and also to express opinions. For
example, you can talk about 'a feminist point of view' or 'a scientific point of
view' as well as your own point of view!
订阅：
博文 (Atom)