Drive In '77

"Robo Pram" - Help Bring My Comic Book To Life!!

Hello internet!!  I have launched a campaign over on Indie Go Go to help raise the start up funds for a comic book project I've been tossing about for awhile now.  Too long, really, but I need your help to get the ball rolling!!

It is called "Robo Pram" and is an all ages comic about a young boy and an alien who fight the cuddliest versions of Earth's invading hordes!  It's like Transformers meets Lone Wolf & Cub!  Click this link to go to the campaign page and please donate anything if you can or pass along the word to your friends.   Thank internet, I <3 you;)

Film Log: June 2012

 6-1: X-Men First Class, Hatfields & McCoys (ms)

6-8: The Chronicles of Riddick, Aladdin

6-12: The Sitter

6-16: In Time, Shaun of the Dead, Vegas Vacation, Office Space, Cars

6-17: The Bliss of Mrs. Blossom

6-19: Amazons of Rome, Jeff Who Lives at Home, This Means War

6-20: The Girl Next Door

6-21: The Adventures of Tintin

6-23: Bridesmaids, Black Death, Ironclad

6-24: Brave, Easy A

6-25: Kung Fu Panda 2

6-26: Immortals, 21 Jump Street

6-28: Bad Teacher

6-30" Bigfoot: "A SyFy Original Movie"

Total Films: 26

Year to Date: 170

Film of the Month: Shaun of the Dead

You know, I really liked a fwe movies this month, but I just gotta go with an old favorite in Shaun.  I never get tired of this film and even on this, my like 15th or so viewing, I was still laughing at all the right parts.  Brilliant stuff.

Favorite Poster: The Bliss of Miss Blossom

Hey, it has some simple line art, a horrible tag line, and Shirley MacLaine's face on a bra!  If I was in the theater in 1968, I'd be sold!!

Okay, so long June, we hardly knew thee!!  Now we move into the meat of the summer season and there's a bunch of interesting smaller films releasing, so here's to some AC in the old arthouse!!  See ya next month!

In Time

Okay, I just wanted to chat about this film a little bit while it's in my head.  I just finished screening it and I have no idea how to process my opinions, so this will be a writing exercise!  At it's core, In Time is the kind of science fiction movie I really enjoy.  It tackles social issues and addresses the political and economic pitfalls of our existence.  But on the other hand, it comes across as a bit heavy handed in both message and production and has the smell of too many cooks in the kitchen.

If you're unfamiliar, In Time stars Justin Timberlake as Will and Amanda Seyfried as Sylvia, two twentysomethings from different sides of the tracks.  It is sometime in the future and the "tracks" are time zones, that is, zones where the people who posses the most wealth live seperated from those who are living day to day, the concept of which is heightened by the fact all humans now have a clock on their forearm counting down to their death.  Currency is time.  Rent is time.  Food is time etc. etc.  And like all good fractured capitalist models, the welath gap is widening.

The concept is unsettling.  I mean, even in Logan's Run you had to give yourself over to carusel, but here you see your life jumping forward and backwards almost constantly.  How they don't go mad is beyond me!!  And for those with priveledge (or the occasional David Beckham-esque gangster), the lure of immortality is within their grasp.  You stop aging at 25, and from there, it is just a matter of keeping that clock going

Okay, gripe session.  First off, the use of the word "time" to replace money or to refer to where you live (time zones) etc. is so prevelent, it felt like an SNL skit.  Saying you're "born of time" instead of born into money is a bit silly, but understandable.  It's not a huge complaint, just was a little over done for my taste, a little too cutesy.

Another major distraction was a combination of script and editing.  The editing is easy to explain.  In five words: it should have been tighter.  At nearly an hour and 50 minutes, you gotta be careful how a film flows considering the characters are checking the time on their arms every 90 seconds!  It made me hyper aware of the pace of the movie, a pace that, especially in the first couple reels, could've been streamlined considerably.  The mom (Olivia Wilde) for instance could've been a line from Will and we first see her on the bus with not enough time/money to get home.  The idea of aging was well established elsewhere and as long as we know it's his mom, we get the emotional impact. 

As for the script, the shooting draft must have been a beautiful rainbow of colored pages.  There was clearly a "punch" sessions because there are some genuinely funny one liners ("he must have thought it was a drive thru" and "you tend not to sleep in" to name two) that are so sporadic they suck you right out of the moment.  Timberlake is a charismatic guy, but if you're gonna let his character take the foot off the gas to relax and show his humanity, be more consistent.  There is also way too much time setting up the movie before Will hits the rich time zone and the adventure with Sylvia begins.  Those two are the meat of the plot should've been thrust together sooner.  The wait virtually cuts the movie into two distinct tones that only partially work together. 

My biggest problem, however, is painting Will and Sylvia as this cross between Bonnie and Clyde meets Robin Hood.  Their theft is for the good of mankind etc.  Now, I can get behind their motives, even wishing this came out to be more of a heist film than the second half gave me, but this moral high ground of "is it really stealing if it's already stolen" rings hollow.  There's no set up that something truly nefarious is occuring.  There are allusions, but for the most part the gap between the rich and the poor is the result of the economics of using time for currency.  That's enough to wrap your head around as a viewer without trying to infer the rich are stealing.  They might be manipulating, but just because the stakes are higher (death) than today's folding money paradigm, it doesn't necessarily qualify it as "stealing."  It's just the way things are.  So instead of writing "can't steal what's already stolen," why not just make Will and Sylvia crusaders for equality?  I sound like such a nitpicky a-hole, but it's the small decisions that can make or break great sci fi.

I also, just for shits and giggles, would've loved to have seen the roles reversed.  Will as the rich kid yearning for change and Sylvia as a strong, compassionate "ghetto" girl who leads the way to their evolution as characters.  In a way, she does that as is, but this could've been a fun time to mix up the gender stereotypes and write a really powerful female lead.  Just spitballing....

What I liked?  It's a great concept.  Unnerving, uncomfortable and for this guy, the ticking clock is like something out of a horror film.  The casting was solid even if the direction left some characters flat.  Amanda Seyfried is an absolute knockout, I could stare at her all day in that wig, and Sylvia is a lot of fun when she lets her mischievious side loose.  I love the L.A. locations and the blank slate style of the vehicles.  I also liked how their was clearly a basic design for the "capsules" and "readers" that handled time transactions but there were different models and perhaps layers of technical design that seperated time zones and establishments such as the casino and the limousine. 

All in all, I'm glad I started writing this because I do feel better about the movie now.  It was good, could've been better, but I think an enjoyable ride.  Now, how long before they do an In Time 2 with an 1/8th of the budget and really crappy actors taking up Sylvia and Will's bank robbing crusade?  The answer: as long as it take me to write it;)

Grade: B -

Film Log: May 2012

May Day!  May Day!! May Day!!!

May was destined to be a slim month.  With almost two weeks scheduled out to travel, I knew my movie watching would suffer.  However, it started with a bang as I attended the AMC theaters Marvel marathon leading up to the premiere of The Avengers.  Six movies, roughly 15 hours plus travel time to and from the theater, three large popcorns, two theater hotdogs, Fuddruckers chicken fingers, botomless soda, and a broken air conditioner.  It was magic.  Stinky, sweaty, slightly uncomfortable magic.  (Read about it here.)

I did manage to see some interesting stuff like the new Audrey Tautou and finally getting to screen The People Vs. George Lucas, which was a very well made doc.  I was worried it would be a bunch of whiny fanboys, but it is a fair examination of the reaction to the prequels.  Even Country Strong surprised me!  I'm not in a hurry to watch it again, but it was not what I expected and I enjoyed my post lunch viewing.  I also got to the actual theater three times.  I'm an economy booster!!

May is only three letters, and this list is seemingly as short.  List me!!!

5-3: Marvel Marathon: Iron Man, The Incredible Hulk, Iron Man 2, Thor, Captain America and.....

5-4: The Avengers (it was midnight!), Horrible Bosses

5-5: Arsenic and Old Lace

5-6: Topaz

5-7: Delicacy (La Delicatesse)

5-25: Hall Pass, JFK, Star Wars

5-28: The Avengers

5-29: Country Strong, The People Vs. George Lucas

5-31: Colors

Total Films: 17

Year to Date: 144

Film of the Month:  The Avengers

I actually wrote that down on Cinco de Mayo afer Free Comic Book Day 'cause I just knew there was nothing in May that would equal the experience of my all day Marvel marathon followd by a very rare (for me) midnight screening of The Avengers.  Not only was the whole event special, not only is the accomplishment of Marvel Studios impressive, but the film kicked serious hardcore buttocks!!  The Hulk in the final act is everything you could ever want from a comics character on film.  In fact, more so than any other comic book movie to date, this actually felt like a comic come to life!  The kinetic energy of the fight sequences, the flow between characters and action is world class filmmaking.  Looking at you, Mr. Joss Whedon.  And *SPOILER ALERT*, when Banner says "I'm always angry" and then Hulks out and punches that space whale.... holy shit balls!!  That is my favorite super hero on film moment ever.

Favorite Poster:  The Avengers

I'm not always a big fan of the Mondo line of reimagined poster art.  Some of them are a little too trite; monochromatic rehased versions of 60s themes, but this one by Tyler Stout caught my eye.  Maybe it's the idea of a drawn style to contrast the live action comic book movie, maybe it's the use of the Avenger "A," but whatever it is, I like it more than the theatrical posters.  I mean, if you gave me the Scarlett Johanson character one I might be able to find a spot for it.....  I'd like to have a smaller version of this one to hang by the computer.

Favorite Poster Runner-Up: Delicacy

In case the first cannot perform it's duties, then Audrey Tautou will glady step in and take the crown!  I had to put this in here because it so wonderfully French and Audrey is just so cute.  Plus, I love how Damiens is kind of blurred in the background.  The poster really is a wonderful representation of the story. so for May, I have two one sheets.  Err.. two sheets?  Nooooo!!

Bring on June!!  Nothing like some cool theater houses on hot summer days!

My Avenger Initiative

It is 8 am.  Normally, not a remarkable time of morning to be up and on the computer, but considering I got home at 4 am after a 15 hour marathon of movies in a theater.... I'm practically my own super hero. 

It all started about a month ago when my buddy and fab artist Spencer Brinkerhoff linked to the AMC event page on Facebook announcing "The Ultimate Marvel Marathon."  My first reaction was cool, it's on my best friend Russ' birthday, maybe I can con him into going!!  Alas, with a baby on the way, Russ couldn't commit.  My wife however, took one look and said, I quote, "We have to that."  I was mildly floored by her assertation and warned her that this was going to be like 14 plus hours.  It was going to be like sitting in Hall H at San Diego Comic Con all day, which I subjected her to once and she hated.  But no, she didn't waver and I bought two tickets that night.  A friend of hers is housesitting for us soon, so I bought another ticket for her and our little trio of super nerds was go.  May 3rd; six movies and major, major popcorn breath.

7 am wake up call and the day started out with me burning my finger from a faulty match head, but got much hotter.  Much, much hotter.....

Our trio assembled for the hour or so drive over to Emmeryville to the AMC Bay Street 16.   I chose this one because parking in San Francisco would be outrageous since it's the same lot I park in for WonderCon.  But it was also an entirely new theater for me and I'd heard it was not unlike the AMC in Burbank which I've been to more than a few times.  Anyhoo... the drive over was relatively easy and parking was a breeze but of course, the nervous Irishman in me kept thinking what if there was a huge line of nerds who got there at like 2 am and we'd get stuck with horrible seats!!!  Nooooo!!!

A few flights of stairs later, we were in.  No lines, no craziness and no questions about our overstuffed bags of spare clothes and hidden food;)  The staff was super nice from the get go.  We got a nice lanyard for the event which let us go in and out of the theater, a limited edition pair of 3D glasses for the last three movies, a horrible Avengers comic book that was an ad for some hotel and a schedule.

Notice the little Iron Man on the lanyard?  That did not come from AMC!  It is a Tokidoki Marvel Frenzie, a blind box mini figure.  I picked up a few at the comic book store (Comics FTW yo!) as what I dubbed "Car Door Prizes."  I let the ladies pick first and then we opened them up and I got Iron Man!  Pretty sweet.  My wife pulled Red Skull and our friend Karah nabbed The Punisher... grrr.  The lanyard was a great idea and I was super happy AMC did that for us.  It hangs proudly with all my Con lanyards now!

There were quite a few people there by the time we strolled in, roughly 10:45, but plenty of good options on seating.  We opted for a small row of five in the back.  You know the ones designed for wheelchairs next to them?  Directly to our left was a little exit that lead to a mysterious relaxation area, but more on the later.

Reva, Karah, and Mini Thor (clearly eyeing the popcorn) before the first movie (Iron Man):

Food was a major concern, but we brought a few snacks and opted for the refillable giant popcorn and soda.  Why anyone in the theater didn't do that is beyond me!!  I think it was $12 bucks and we filled the popcorn twice and the soda like 4 or 5 times.  A necissity with all the heat....

Okay, I keep referencing the heat because the absolute worst part of the whole event was our theater's air conditioning seemed to be broken.  "The Mighty Trio" prepared with sweatshirts and even a blanket to combat the normally frigid confines of a movie theater only to be greeted with the "hovering horde" of musty, warm, sweat filled air.  My jab at this being just like Hall H had become a self fulfilling prophecy!!  It made for a long haul later in the marathon.  You know, liek around hour 12;)

That little scrap of Photoshop photocopying by some theater employee came in real handy as we sat our way through the day!

Iron Man was and is a great way to start this marathon.  The film still holds up, outside of a stray MySpace reference, and I knew from the start that this was gonna be a fun day.  Why?  Because there was no casual fan in the house.  These were comic book geeks, willing to drop $40 on a ticket to sit in a theater for 15 hours to watch superhero movies.  Everyone there was part of the same tribe, so when Tony Stark emerges from the cave in the Mark I and spews fire, the place erupted in cheers and the enthusiasm never stopped.

Of course, I should've known given all the awesome costuming that was going on.  Lots of Thors including some bad ass helmets, a fully horned out Loki, a black Thor, multiple Captain Americas, at lest one Hulk, a Black Widow that could use some gym time if you know what I mean, and plenty of Nerf Mjolnir.

I've been saying for awhile that this is a minor miracle of focus and vision on the part of Marvel Studios, and seeing it unfold before me was even more impressive.  Especially by the time we got Iron Man 2 because, while they are all gearing towards are midnight premiere of The Avengers, it was really in IM2 that you saw the boulder top the hill and start speeding towards the bottom.  The universe tightened up and I felt more engrossed in the world it presented. 

With Thor came three dimensions!  You had the option of Thor, Captain America, Hulk, or Iron Man themed glasses when you entered.  My co-horts both went for Thor for what is an obviously Hemsworth shirtless informed decision!  I went with Iron Man because they A) looked cool, and B) seemed to cover the sides more, hence blocking out the world around me.  None of them were particularily comfortable for 7 plus hours!!  My buddy Jeero shows off my Iron Man's....

I know some poeple who think Thor is a kind of hokey film, but I love it.  I think it's super funny and obviously a very important piece of the puzzle for The Avengers.  The best part was we had a 45 minute break before Thor so the girls went to Fuddruckers and I took a mini nap!  Lunch was hot dogs, but dinner was smuggled chicken strips from said Fuddruckers;)

By this time, the A/C situation was becoming dire.  I could feel sweat on my back.  The in and out priveledge of the lanyard was now a life saver!  But we also failed to discover until after Thor was the aforementioned "break area" to our left.  I saw people going out the hallway exit, but thought it was just some outside air or something.  Instead, once we finally looked, we found what was essentially the hallway where the employees gain access to all the projection rooms.  Our theater and the IMAX theater has doors to it and there was a single "family" bathroom out there and a big hallway where you could kind of decompress and stretch the legs.  Damn, why didn't I look earlier!!  Still, it was nice to escape from the movie sauna we were suffering inside.  It would've been even better if AMC staffed a little cart of snacks up there, but I digress.

Outside of the heat problem, I do think AMC understaffed a little for the day.  And when the other people came in for the 5 or so midnight screenings outside of the marathon.... it was a madhouse.  Overall they did a good job and there were some giveaways between films and it was a good experience.

When midnight rolled around, everyone went apeshit.  The natives were restless for the premiere and more than one could not handle the quantity of previews tanding between them and Assembledness. 

As for The Avengers itself, marvelous.  And no, that is not a play on Marvel, although that would've been very Shallet of me.  Whedon nails it.  There are so many fun moments, they're hard to count.  I don't want to give anything away with for those who didn't make it the biggest opening weekend ever, but Hulk, for me, steals the show.  He was awesome.  It's a long one, but what strikes me most is how it never pandered to the lowest common denominator.  They rely on the stories being universal enough to appeal to the casual fan, but so much of it is absolutely dedicated to the hardcore fan.  I love that.  I always thought, why keep telling us Batman orgin stories, just tell a good Batman story, people will get it.  The knew they essentially had five origin stories for The Avengers already, so they just started the roller coaster and boy was it a ride!

When it was done, I kept thinking how I wanted more.  Like, really wanted more.  Iron Man 3 (with Hulk please!!), Captain 2, Thor 2, Avengers 2, Black Widow... all of it!  I left feeling upbeat and positive about the future of these movies.

By the way, if you see a midnight movie at the AMC Bay Street, be aware they basically lift the gates on the parking garage and maybe you shouldn't pay the parking machine before noticing.  There goes that $12! 

Proof of (no)life for May 3rd:

Notice the times on the parking stub.  16 hours and 16 minutes parked at that theater!!!  And with drive time, a good 20 hour day.  Phew!!  And to think, they could offer this again some day?  My butt says nooooo!!!!

And if you ask, my favorite part of the whole marathon..... Clark Gregg!! 

Film Log: April 2012

WTF April?  Oh yeah, let's see.... NHL playoffs started, got a new computer that is no where near the big TV, and like three trips to Disneyland.  Yep, that would explain the appalling lack of movies screened in April 2012!!

19 is the final tally and I am quite embarrassed.  Even the selections are odd, but I can proudly say I enjoyed everything I watched which is not the usual outcome.  Morgan Spurlock's Comic Con doc stands out and as you'll see, with a 48 hour On Demand rental, I watched it twice.  As a 15 plus year veteran of the Con, it was fun to see his take on the 2010 edition.  The Iron Lady was the let down, but I'm still glad I watched it, just not blown away by the narrative choices or editing.  Finally, rounded April out with a real live trip to the movies to see Emily Blunt and Jason Segal in Five Year Engagement.  I agree with the masses, needed some editing, but totally liked it and the Elmo/Cookie Monster argument between Blunt and Alison Brie is amazeballs.  Anyhoo, on to the list!

4-4: Easy A, Eurotrip, Good Burger

4-5: Ferris Bueller's Day Off

4-10: Comic Con Episode IV: A Fan's Hope

4-11:  Comic Con Episode IV: A Fan's Hope

4-18: The Breakfast Club, Green Lantern

4-19: Super

4-21: The Groomsmen, Great Expectations (2012) (ms)

4-22: Killing Bono

4-23: The Iron Lady, Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy, The Birds

4-24: Ultimate Avengers, Ultimate Avengers 2

4-25: Topaz

4-30: Five Year Engagement

Total Films: 19

Year to Date:  127

Film of the Month:  Killing Bono 

Why?  Because this movie got me to sit there and be interested in something that is essentially about U2, one of the most overratted, overplayed, "grates on my brain" rock bands in history.  I cannot stand U2, and yet, I am a total sucker for the history of music and this take on what could've been for one guitarist who unknowingly ends up struggling with his halfwit brother in club bands instead of living it up on the international stage with U2 is utterly enthralling.  Hell, I even liked the guy playing Bono more than the real life version!!  Can we replace Bonos?

Favorite Poster: Five Year Engagement

If you know me, you know why.  I wanna be Jason Segal!  But no, really it is Emily Blunt.  Okay, it's the cake!  Actually, I just found out I even know the guy who made the cake for this poster, so that's even better!!  I will add it to my collection of posters featuring cake. 

Okay, I pinky swear I will up the movie count come May.  Already I know I'll be six deep come the weekend because I have my Avengers movie marathon at the AMC this Thursday!!  Holy crap is that going to be an epic day of heartburn and bottomless popcorn.  I predict sicky in the bathroom!  But more on that experience later.  Wish me luck!

Star Wars Disney Vinylmation Adventure!

I'm a member of a "Disney" household.  Disneyland and trips to Anaheim have been a part of my routine since I was very young and got lost in the shadow of the Matterhorn.  (Note: my family denies this happened, but I know better!)  While I would love to purchase an Annual Pass every year, we tend to pick one up every two or three years and then overload on DL excitement and plenty of Bengal BBQ.  Banyan Beef yo!!

Of course, this means the lure of fun Disney merchandise is not lost on my wallet.  I started pin collecting on my honeymoon in Disney World in 2001 but when the House of Mouse entered into the custom vinyl action figure craze, I was intrigued.  I love the idea of combining what is arguably the most famous and recognizable profile in the world (Mickey Mouse) with other famous imagery such as rides and holidays.  The Mickey template is a great launching point for creativity.  So, we bought a few over trips to Downtown Disney etc., but now we have a pass again.... and a discount!!

Rewind a bit to a conversation with my buddy Kris who owns Comics FTW in Santa Rosa.  He carries a number of vinyl, "blind packed" figures and I offered to pick him up the Star Wars line of Vinylmation next time I was in Anaheim.  They don't distribute to stores, so he's never brought them into the shop, but hey, with my AP discount, why not try!

Before I left, I searched YouTube for some videos of case breaks.  People really do film everything these days and turns out, there were a number of guys who videotaped the entire process of opening their case and the arrangement of the figures inside.  With a blind pack, you're not supposed to know what you get, but all these videos showed one thing: the exact same placement in every box!!

Basically, from back to front, you got:

Darth Vader / Darth Vader / Lando / Lando / R2-D2 / R2-D2

Boba Fett / Boba Fett / Leia / Leia / Chewbacca / Chewbacca

Stormtrooper / Stormtrooper / Stormtrooper / "Chase" / Yoda / Yoda

Han Solo / Han Solo / C-3PO / C-3PO / Luke / Luke

Okay, now I was getting excited.  I bought one SW figure a few weeks back and got Han Solo.  Han rules, but I really wanted R2-D2.  When you enter the store, people have moved boxes around, so this info is only really helpful if you're buying an unopened case.  Guess what?  I was about to!

I'd never have the money or the excuse to do this myself, but on the Comics FTW dime I got to buy a full case.  I must admit, it was a lot of fun plucking it off the shelf and plopping it down on the counter.  Especially when the discount rolled the final price back;)  Even then, to sign off on over $200 worth of toys was just what my inner child desired.  The cast member wished me luck in finding the variant chaser and I was off back to the comic shop for the next day's experiment.

After double checking the videos and writing the placements down, Kris and I pulled off the plastic wrap and reached straight for what I hoped was an R2 unit.  Bingo!!  I was gonna pick three more (even though I wanted to just get them all I was a mostly good boy) and I went for Boba Fett.  Pay dirt!!  The videos were paying off!!  What next?  Stormtrooper?  Yoda?  No, Vader!  He has a lightsaber and was sitting there in his box right where the chart showed he would be.  I mean, I know this takes some of the fun out of the mystery, but damn it all I was not gonna get stuck with the lame Luke!!  For my last one, the curiosity of whether or not the chaser (old Ben Kenobi) was the even more rare Ghost Kenobi got the better of my Stormtrooper desire.  It was not, but at only one chase per case, it is still a good pull.

Added to my Han Solo, my Star Wars Vinylmation collection now looks like this:

The only problem now is I have enough to risk doubling up if I grab one at the park.  Secretly, I hope we do this again soon and there are still cases to be had so I can grab that Stormtrooper and probably Yoda.  If not, I am over the moon that this worked and I got the ones I have.  Many thanks to my fellow nerds who thought to video tape their case breaks for the knowledge!!

 

 

Film Log: March 2012

Well, March was a slow down in my movie watching.  I shifted gears and spent a lot of my viewing time on ABC's Lost, a show I didn't partake in upon initial broadcast.  I got through about 64 episodes, which if you wanted to think about, is roughly 32 films!!  And, a big shout out to BYU TV for being the only station to show Darby O'Gill and the Little People on St. Patrick's Day!  Seriously networks, have we forgotten what my homeland's beloved holiday is all about?!  Thanks to a bad back, I did manage to squeeze in some last minute titles at the end of the month to bring up the total, so here be the graveyard of my movie watching, March 2012 edition;)

3-1: Cyrus, Fast Times at Ridgemont High, Fargo

3-4: Flakes, Love's Kitchen, Greenfingers, Ong Bak: The Thai Warrior, Chocolate

3-6: Love Don't Cost a Thing, Sucker Punch, Cedar Rapids, Good Hair

3-9: Footloose (2011)

3-11: Tilly Trotter (ms), Being Elmo

3-16: Game Change, Darby O'Gill and the Little People, Chasing Leprechauns

3-18: Step Brothers, Game Change

3-23: The Hunger Games

3-25: The Hunger Games

3-29: The Muppets, True Grit

3-30: Special When Lit: A Pinball Documentary, Chasing Ghosts: Beyond the Arcade

3-31: The Hollywood Complex, Strictly Background, The Golden Gong

Total Films: 29

Year to Date: 108

Film of the Month: Being Elmo  

I know, I know, how can I not choose the juggernaut of The Hunger Games?  I think expectations won (or lost) out there where as Being Elmo surpassed any idea I had about a documentary on a Muppet.  Don't get me worng, I love The Muppets!!  Jim Henson is a hero to me and I firmly believe you can trace the downward spiral of society to his passing, but I'm more of a Muppet Show guy than a Sesame Street guy, so Elmo is not in my wheel house.  Being Elmo turned out to be a remarkable documentary filled with footage that lead me to believe this doc was in the works for 30 years!!  An amazing story about a man who found his destiny early and worked hard to achieve his goals.  It's rare to see someone doing what the universe meant them to be and Being Elmo is such a glimpse into cosmic kismet.  

Favorite Poster:  To hop bandwagons, for this one I will go The Hunger Games!

I actually really do like this "coming soon" one sheet.  It nicely arranges familiar imagery from the books to depict both the first film and hint at what is to come (mainly the idea of the Districts looking up to the "Mockingjay" for inspiration and guidance.)  It was also part of a fun and innovative "puzzle hunt" release in which 100 different websites were each given a small piece of the poster and fans had to collect them and arrange them to see the finished image.  Of course, the lazier among us (myself) just waited till some co-ed with time on their hands posted it.

Such was March my friends!  I see more (the end?) Lost in April as we chug along towards, believe it or not, the Summer movie season!!  I already have my tickets for the all day, six movie, Avenger marathon on May 3rd!!  My butt hurts already. 

The Hunger Games

As I walked out of the theater, and during most of my screening to be honest, the thing that struck me most about The Hunger Games was how difficult it is to adapt a book, even one as lean as Suzanne Collins' tale of Katniss Everdeen.  To call it a quick and addictive read is an understatement.  Even the slowest readers I've heard from finished it in three days.  The prose is concise and to the point.  The pacing is frantic at times and if anything, as a reader you're left wanting more.  It's brilliant technique really, but how does that translate to the screen?

Well, they certainly gave it time.  At 2 hours 22 minutes, I could probably read the novel in two viewings, but even at such a length, I was just amazed at how much they had to leave out, how much they had to tweak and massage it for the visual medium of film.  Voiceover in this kind of world would be too clunky to work, so gone is Katniss' inner monologue that fuels much of the written narrative.  Gone is much of the detailed prep between the reaping and the arena, gone is much of Haymitch and Cinna, and gone is the puzzle that Katniss plays in her mind as she fights for survival. 

However, added are moments behind the games.  As I read the book (written entirely and blindingly from Katniss' point of view), I kept thinking how much I'd like to know more about the machine behind the scenes as sponsors are procurred and fires are lit in the forest.  So, I was very pleased to have moments with the game master in the control room or Haymitch at a party schmoozing.  It's a give and take.

To make up for the loss of Katniss' thoughts, Director Gary Ross uses a combination of flashbacks, commentary from Stanley Tucci's Ceaser Flickerman, and in the case of the sponsor gifts, little messages from Haymitch.  The style works for me even if it omits certain things like say, the entire structure of the love triangle in the series.  Through simply the eyes of the film, you're left with no idea of how Katniss feels about either Peeta nor Gale and would probably think everything is chugging along in Peeta's corner.  As a reader, you know different.

My other major problem was the quick cut, hand held style of a sizable portion of the movie.  I know for younger generations it is just part of their vocabulary, but for me, it diminshed moments, especially in the arena.  I understand it though.  It's a budget thing.  Staying close and tight and "raw" keeps costs down.  Big action set pieces are reduced and so are bottom lines.  However, the style was also in the hands of Tom Stern, know primarily for a more "quiet" style in his many collaborations with Clint Eastwood.  His stamp was all over the movie, but he might not be the guy to exectue the "shakey-cam."

 I think what a lot of people will forget when they see a film based on such a popular property like Hunger Games, is that this is Lionsgate.  They don't have a ton of money to throw at this film.  Maybe if it makes enough they'll up the ante for "Catching Fire", but even then they need to temper their excitement with some fiscal responsibility.  They cannot afford to absorb the kind of loss Disney will with their recent John Carter stumble.  These financial conerns will probably haunt Hunger Games from beginning to end.  It's not a crippling blow, but there were a number of artistic and script decisions that, to me, were obviously influenced by the bottom line, like the camera.

The other way to think about it is this; it's a marathon, not a sprint.  They plan four films, so maybe some of those moments I felt were missing will come back around in the future.

What I did like was the art direction and set design.  A lot of what I pictured in my head as a reader was challeneged in the film and pleansently so.  The Captiol set extensions were great and the overall costume design was rich if not a little safe.  But again, we may see the crazier side of The Captiol come later installments.  I also enjoyed the use of silence in District 12.

I thought the cast was just right.  The first scene of Woody Harrelson as Haymitch (my favorite character and one I always suspected of having a much deeper back story than we were ever given) is not great, but then he settles in nicely.  Jennifer Lawrence and Josh Hutcherson are wonderful as Katniss and Peeta and even Lenny Kravitz brought me around to the idea of him as Cinna.  Tucci is of course, Stanly f'in Tucci!  I had some casting doubts, but in the end I think it all went really well.

I guess the important note for Hunger Games fans is how does it hold up to the book?  Well, I've heard discussion both ways, but I will stop short of the cliche "the book is better."  I actually think they are quite complimentary.  I wouldn't advise you to be mutually exclusive towards one or the other, but rather to accept them both as important tools in the telling of the story.  In fact, as I drove home I kept thinking about picking up the Kindle and re-reading the first book again.  They are two pieces of media that will ultimately be tied together, much like the Lord of the Rings saga.  If you're first exposure is the book, then you carry an insight into the story as you watch.  If the movie is your first time, then you can look forward to revelations when you read the novel.  Either way, they go hand in hand.

While I toss out a lot of concerns in this review, overall I enjoyed it.  I think they hit the key points and 90% of the changes make a lot of sense from a cinematic standpoint.  Did it grab me and shake me like the book?  No, but that's probably an unfair comparrison to begin with, so I'm satisfied with liking it instead of being "blown away."  I think the real test will be in the final product after the entire series is released.  If they can travel the plot with similar success, it should be a very memorable and enjoyable ride.

Grade: a solid B

Film Log: February 2012

Got off to a slow start in February until I got a bee in my birthday month bonnet and decided to concentrate on watching some of my favorite films instead of the new and unfamiliar.  Sometimes you just need the comfort food.  Hence, the first film of February, Scott Pilgrim Vs. The World!!  I watched it this time with the French subtitles on to practice my foreign language skills;)  So congrats Bryan Lee O'Malley, France has virtually no words to properly translate your verve!!

Last month I watched 39 films.  This month I watched 40 films.  I'm sensing a pattern.  That puts me on pace for over 450 movies in 2012.  Pathetic!  I've got to step up my game;)  Probably would've cracked 45 this month if it wasn't silly old short month February... wah wah.  

On to the log, and of course, some random awards await after the list.  Enjoy your accolades people who made these movies whom I will never speak to nor will ever read this blog!!!

2-4: Scott Pilgrim Vs. The World, National Lampoons European Vacation, State and Main

2-6: War and Peace

2-7: Almost Famous, Mystery Alaska

2-8: High Fidelity, Yes Man, The 40 Year Old Virgin, Get Him to the Greek

2-9: LOTR: The Fellowship of the Ring Extended Edition

2-10: Knocked Up, Win A Date with Tad Hamilton, LOTR: The Two Towers Ext. Ed.

2-11: Coming To America, LOTR: The Return of the King Ext. Ed., Something Borrowed

2-13: Dick, Galaxy Quest

2-14: My Best Friend's Wedding, Batman Begins, Prom, Chasing Amy

2-15: Nollywood, American Pie, My Big Fat Greek Wedding

2-16: Trekkies, Trekkies 2

2-19: Ghost World, Punch Drunk Love, Radio Rebel

2-21: Battle Royal

2-23: Darkon

2-24: Oklahoma!

2-27: Goon

2-28: Youngblood, The Contender, The Last King of Scotland

2-29: Drive, What's Your Number?

Total Films: 40

Year to Date: 79

Film of the Month: Drive

Until the last day of the month I was going with Almost Famous because I'd forgotten how much I love that film and watching it again after a few years was pure joy.  It was great to revisit a lot of movies in February, but ultimately, Drive blew me away.  I'd been getting so many recommends from trusted cinema friends and boy were they right.  It's terrific, a wonderful slice of genre pie that steps up the game on heist films.  Plus, it was shot in Los Angeles.  Take that runaway production!  Very well cast, I love Brooks as a gangster, and beautifully shot, it's a buy for me.  

Favorite One Sheet:  Yes Man (German)

I threw in the Mondo Drive poster up top because I love the nod to 80s esthetics throughout the film and while I'm not a huge Mondo fan, they do come up with something once in awhile I really enjoy.  However, not an official release one sheet, so it doesn't win this month.  

Instead, I was intrigued by this German release for one of my favorite comfort films, Yes Man.  I'm always fascinated by the little changes films have to make for international markets.  In this case, if you compare it to the U.S. version, the scooter's headlight is on, Carrey has a different pose which makes me curious about shying away from the big "victory pose" and it's relation to Nazis, and Zooey Deschanel has a black jacket on and is turned towards Carrey.  Which is also turned away from the "viewer."  Did they think Zooey wasn't part of their marketing in Germany?  Are Germans not down with my girl?  Blasphemy!  Those are the kinds of international publicity decisions that fascinate me and made this my favorite poster for the month.  

Favorite Dialog: "Why are you crying?  Did you just watch Rudy?!" - Doug from Goon

Alrighty then.... good month.  Lots of familiar faces and a few new shows, I enjoyed my February quite a bit.  Let's hope I can get out to the actual cinema in March.  I know tickets are secured for one screening already, The Hunger Games on the 23rd!!  I hope it's as fun as the books.  Keep screening my friends!!

Goon

A few weeks back I got an email from Gongshow Gear, a clothing company dedicated to funny hockey inspired shirts and hats etc.  It announced the coming of apparel for a new movie called Goon.  I liked the hats and sought out the film's website.  It took all of 10 seconds of the trailer to know I couldn't wait to see it.  A) I'm a hockey nut, and B) it looked funny as hell.  Both things remain true.

Seann William Scott plays Doug "The Thug" Glatt, a simpleton bouncer struggling with his place amongst a successful family of doctors.  His life is definitely stalled out until his best friend Ryan (Jay Baruchel) takes him to a local minor league hockey game where he beats the living crap out of a player that jumps the boards to come after Ryan.  The local coach takes note and even though Doug literally cannot skate, he makes the team for one reason and one reason only, to fight.

For those not into hockey, the roll on a team of a "goon," more commonly known as an "enforcer," has been a part of the sport for as long as most can remember.  Players would police themselves so to speak.  If one team targeted a star player or there were some cheap shots going around, you'd see the respective enforcers take the ice and drop the gloves.  Despite the brutality at its core, this type of fighting was agreed upon and approached by the combatants with a sense of nobility.

That is one of the things Goon got right.  Scott's performance is so great because he displays that pride while, as the poster says, he is the nicest guy you'll ever fight.  He thanks his opponents, takes care of his teammates and his courtship of Eva (Alison Pill) is too adorable for her to resist.  I called him a simpleton, but he's more than that, he's just a good guy lost.  You can recognize, and maybe empathise with Doug as a human being looking for his place in the world.  He might not be proud of his calling, but he's proud to be useful.  He's proud to be part of a team.  It's a message that rings loud in today's economy and shifts Goon from a simple hockey/sports film into the story of a working class hero.

Of course, all that is the film school version of my review.  The reality for most will be to sit down and watch a very funny movie from the guy behind Superbad.  Doug's journey starts in the minor league's minor league and sees him rise up to eventually square off with one of the greatest fighters of all time.  He finds romance and becomes the emotional leader of his team and yes, scores a goal with his butt.  

Now, I'm not so blinded by my undying affection for hockey that I fail to recognize the flaws.  Firstly, writer/actor Baruchel is hard to watch.  I get it, he's a scrawny, super minor league hockey fan with a potty mouth, but he cusses so much you just want him to shut up.  He plays it way over the top, too much so, ignoring basic rules of decorum in every situation and while Doug might admit he's dumb, Ryan is clearly the biggest idiot of the bunch.  His character has no arc, and really, after the first reel no purpose in the film.  Even his "let's cheer my buddy up" speech ends in a swear word tirade and "let's get drunk!"  He's a caricature, I get that, but I found him too annoying and eating up too much screen time.

My super nitpick comes from me as a goalie and representing the brotherhood of goaltenders.  How in the hell do you have a locker room full of hockey players, hockey fans and Canadians of all things, and yet the guy playing the back up goalie sitting next to Doug and prominently in the frame is putting his goalie pads on the wrong legs!!  Seriously?  You should all have your maple leaf tattoos removed.

My biggest complaint though comes as a devoted ambassador of the game.  As a coach, a player and a fan, I've been battling the bloated public perception that our game is nothing more than a series of fights punctuated with some goals.  I've seen the "give blood, play hockey" bumper stickers and the images of guys with missing teeth while slouched shit faced in a pile of beer cans.  They are stereotypes and while there are segments of our game that even to this day embrace that image, the reality is entirely different.  I hope that people understand the hyperbole of Goon and enjoy it for that silliness and not as a historical record of minor league hockey.

The movie also faces quite a battle in that, considering the wave of anti-fighting and concussion awareness that has swept over the NHL recently, as well as most major sport, a movie that glorifies the goon stereotype will get no play with the big league.  This isn't Miracle or Mystery, Alaska.  too much of the feel good of Goon is squeezed out by the pure brutality of the fight sequences.  This is an adult hockey player film, not a youth hockey player film.

With all that said, I really like the movie.  Flawed, yes, but highly enjoyable.  Scott is very funny and likable, as are his teammates.  You wanna cheer for these guys and when the final fight arrives, they've established there will be no real loser.  Both men honor their trade and both men achieve success in what they set out to accomplish.  It's a win win!  Goon won't dethrone Slap Shot as the funniest hockey movie ever, but it is a worthy assistant captain.  

Grade: B+

Fav. Quote:  "Why are you crying?  Did you just watch Rudy?"

2011: My Favorite Movies

Over the years that I've done this, I've never really set myself to a specific number for my "Top" list.  Sometimes it's 10, others 12, it's even been up to 25.  Sometimes I list a favorite documentary or animated movie, it basically comes down to me trying to arrange the movies that I feel strongly enough about to make them "list worthy."  For example, this year I'd say Bridesmaids came in at #16, but I didn't think the movie was strong enough to be on my year end list, so I stopped the list at 15.

Honorable Mention: Rare Exports.  Although a 2010 film, it was very limited in the U.S. and really wasn't accessible till the DVD release in 2011.  If it was a pure '10, I would have to put it in my Top 5 as Rare Exports has also become one of my favorite Christmas movies of all time.  It is twisted and unique and bursting with the ambience and sensibilities of Scandinavian film that I've grown to love.  Come December, you owe it to yourself to add it to your holiday film list. 

Okay, on with the show!!

15. The Devil's Double

14. Paul

13. One Day

12. Win Win

11. Captain America/Thor

10. Crazy Stupid Love

9. The Trip

8. The Guard

7. Our Idiot Brother

6. Midnight In Paris

5. Beats, Rhymes & Life: The Travels of A Tribe Called Quest

4. Cedar Rapids

3. Moneyball

2. The Muppets

1. Super 8

 

Alright, who wants to throw the first flame ball?  I think more so than any other year, my list is quite different from what I've been reading.  Although, 2011 seems to be a year of varying opinions.  that could be a good thing, or it could be the sign of a weak year.  Either way, what you see is what I enjoyed and there was quite a lot to enjoy in '11.  

For me, The Muppets is a very personal pick.  If I had to ditch all other properties and fandoms and concentrate on only one, 9 times out of 10 I'd pick Muppets.  But it was trumped by one thing, and that was the magic of Super 8.  A movie I knew would be at the top n opening day.  I guess I shouldn't be shocked it didn't pop up on any of the major lists since it is so easy for the blogosphere to dismiss something so grounded in the purity of entertaining filmmaking, but you know what?  I am shocked.  Super 8 is a fantastic film and one that made the 8 year old me, the 12 year old me, the 16 year old me, the 22 year old film school me, the 30 year old dude, and of course, the current 36 year old me fall in love.  If you think I'm an idiot, then I'm glad we're not friends, but Super 8 is far and away my favorite movie of 2011.  

And with that, here's to 2012!!!

 

 

Film Log: January 2012

Last year, about the middle of February, I started making a list of all the movies I would watch daily.  I left out TV and mini series or else it would've been more depressing than informative!!  Somewhere around August, I stumbled and lost some days and had these enormous gaps in the list and just gave up.  I knew I wanted to come back to it however, and so here, in 2012, I will attempt once again to catalog my movie watching experience, only this time, I'll post once a month instead of a big long list that makes one's eyes glaze over.  The only bad part is I watched some awesome movies in the final days of 2011 that I can't list!!  

So here is my first Film Log for 2012.  Some call it January.  There's a couple of "awards" at the end.

Note: If I managed to watch an entire mini series in one day, I've decided to include it here.  Therefore, any title with (MS) after it denotes a mini series marathon and no doubt, a sore bottom;)

1st:  Straw Dogs, The Greatest Movie Ever Sold

2nd: Midnight in Paris

3rd: Hangover Part 2, Cowboys & Aliens

4th: The Debt

5th: Waking Sleeping Beauty, No Strings Attached

6th: Beats, Rhymes & Life: The Story of A Tribe Called Quest, Hesher, The Guard, 30 Minutes Or Less

7th: Hanna, The Devils' Double

10th: Win Win, Rise of The Planet of the Apes, Moneyball

12th: Take Me Home Tonight, American Mystic

17th: Beginners

18th: The A-Team, The Ides of March 

19th: Lombardi

20th: The Dilemma, Caravan of Courage: An Ewok Adventure, Battle for Endor

23rd: The Girl with The Dragon Tattoo (Sweden), Land Girls (MS)

24th: The Incredible Shrinking Woman, Fog City Mavericks, Last Night

25th: 50/50, Young Adult

27th: A Summer in Genoa, Those Redheads from Seattle

31st: Catfish, Black Swan, Namath, Dylan Dog: Dead of Night

January Totals: 39

Film of the Month: Midnight In Paris 

It's a tough call this month.  Moneyball was great, so was the Tribe doc and I enjoyed the hell out of The Guard and Young Adult, but Paris was just a special brand of filmmaking.  I'm not one to bow to Woody Allen, not so much because I don't think he's any good, but mainly because I have a hard time connecting to his characters.  This film was different, both entertaining and stimulating.  It surprised me more than any other film this month, so it wins.

Favorite One Sheet:  Young Adult

This pre-release one sheet for Young Adult makes me smile.  I love the blending of the literary and the cinematic and the pose of our protagonist pretty much sums up the film!  I also love loved Dominic Cooper and the gold craziness of The Devil's Double poster, but it was mostly a nice bit of photoshop so my nod goes to Reitman and Cody's latest. 

Only 39 movies?  I'm gonna have to crack 40 next month!!

Beats, Rhymes & Life: The Travels of A Tribe Called Quest

Holy smokes!  Michael Rappaport got skillz!  This is easily my favorite documentary about hip hop ever and Top 10 for music in general.  For me, that is a statement.  I love music docs.  Music docs are an obsession and I 've watched even mediocre ones a dozen times, but Beats, Rhymes & Life makes me want to go buy the Blu Ray, hook up the stereo, and crank the dial.  It is a mix of old school hip hop history, the persistence of artistic vision, and the story of a group so influential they've become almost impossible to quantify.

Directed by the aforementioned Michael Rappaport, an actor and notorious hip hop aficionado known for his roles in flicks like Higher Learning and his time on Boston Public, this film tells the story of A Tribe Called Quest.  If you neither know nor own any of their music, chances are you will by the end of this movie.  As a drummer, it was these "Native Tongue" and early hip hop groups like Run DMC that I always gravitated towards when I was searching for grooves to lay under rock and roll.  Tribe might have been the best.  Their loops were always tight and bottom heavy but without all the over tweaked low end you get on modern rap albums.  They carried with them a soul that changed the game and transcended the genre.  They were jazz, they were R&B, they were street, they were poetry and it's about time their story was on film.

For a first dip into the feature film pool, Rappaport displays a keen knowledge of how to capture life and infuse it with history, a skill required for good documentary filmmaking.  He lets the players talk (and they do!) and tell their story all while following them through a new resurgence of performance.  They're a group that has over two decades of history, and no stone is left unturned.  The beauty of the way the collection of images, old and new footage and interviews is assembled is the power of Tribes music.  Throughout, you cannot help but bob your head and feel the flow of their tracks whether it lays underneath the scene or is cranked up in the mix.  Everything is tied together with a perfect bow as if it was that dream Christmas gift you didn't even know you'd asked for.

I don't know what else to say without sounding like some schill blowing endless smoke up this film's arse.  You have to see it.  You must do yourself the favor of seeing it.  If you grew up in the 80s it is required viewing.  A fantastic doc from beginning to end.

Grade: A+

A Farewell to Wizards of Waverly Place

Some of you are no doubt curious why a thirtysomething year old male is writing a piece on the series finale of a Disney Channel show.  Well, simply put, Wizards of Waverly Place is one of the most enjoyable TV shows I've watched in the last decade.  

I'm not saying its the smartest or the most original, rather I enjoyed it immensely.  It has all the elements that have drawn me to Disney shows since the Even Stevens days, mainly a lack of pretense.  These are family shows, harkening back to a bygone era of sitcom and their simplicity and production value remind of a different time before the angry, loud reality programs that shout at me every night.  It might not be the coolest thing about me, but I'm past the point of caring.  For me, WOWP represents 100 plus episodes of quality TV and if we're going wizard for wizard, I liked it more than the Harry Potter series.

After 4 seasons, the show came to a close last Friday night with a spot on finale that wrapped everything with a nice bow and gave fans what they wanted.  I applaud the efforts of cast and crew for all their hard work.

The show was brilliantly constructed from the beginning.  There was a clear departure point (not unlike How I Met Your Mother, but a little easier to get in and out of) of this "Family Wizard Competition.  The premise being each wizard family can have only one actual wizard with powers.  All others remain human and powerless.  The three Russo children spent the series learning magic and growing up with wizard powers knowing that some day, they'd have to battle it out to see who gets to keep them.  Interesting side note, David Henrie appears in both Wizards and in Mother as the son being told the story.  Is Henrie the key to a good finale arc?

As a viewer, you knew it was coming, but there were no set rules for it, so the producers could dangle it always out of reach until the day they needed to execute.  Fans knew it was to be the finale, so there is no room for disappointment.  It was a finale based on satisfying the story from the start, unlike a lot of sitcoms that go through awkward finales.  There was no suddenly two characters are getting married, or weak "someone's moving away" type ending.  It was always about the competition, so we expected nothing more, nothing less.  It was a clear arc that always promised resolution instead of hiding behind "what-ifs" and unnecessary blind sides.

And I know I'm not alone.  Wizards became the longest running Disney Channel Original Program with 106 episodes and a made for TV movie.  It was so popular, it clocked in nearly 10 million viewers for the finale!  They averaged in the high 3's all season, so that is a huge bump of live viewers, making it the current #1 scripted cable show for the season.  In fact, Wizards outpaced the Hannah Montana finale by well over 3 million viewers and we all know how big that girl got in the tween zeitgest.  All of this goes to support my long standing theory: to succeed in TV, you need either a Carradine or a DeLuise!  David DeLuise, wizard family father... boom.  Ratings gold.

Now, addressing the actual finale, it was excellent, but if you factor in the 4 or 5 episodes running up to it, it was superb.  They managed to return popular characters and tie up story lines that have been building for years in the "final 6" which only added to the satisfactory conclusion.  The final hour long episode was all about the wizard competition, a contest both veiled and disclosed to its competitors.  It portrayed the power of family without getting preachy and left us with a fan satisfying double wizard exception.  Was it a cop out to have Alex and Justin receive wizard powers?  Not in the context of Disney family sitcoms.  It is what viewers would want as both characters have endeared themselves through the years.  And it was logical.  It's not like they said "well you both did so well so..."  It made sense, for the characters and the world they inhabit.

If you don't like this type of programming, I don't expect you to run out and start watching Wizards and fall in love.  You need to be predisposed to this type of sitcom, but the weird thing is, I think I'm more into them now than I would've been 15 or 20 years ago.  I appreciate their charm and can enjoy them without the need to over analyze their every move.  Wizards of Waverly Place is my favorite so far.  

Thankfully the show is very rewatchable and I know I'll continue to enjoy favorite episodes for years to come.  From the pilot "Crazy 10-Minute Sale" directed by Fred Savage, to their crossovers and multi episode stories about vampires, there are memorable moments abound.  My favorite might be their ode to silent movies but I love the Mr. Laritate scenes and Harper's crazy outfits as well.

So, that's it.  Me talking about a kids show for 900 words.  I can't help it, I loved Wizards and I thank them for making me smile.  

The Greatest Movie Ever Sold

 Morgan Spurlock returns to feature length documentary with an examination of the not so veiled world of product placement in movies.  Spurlock loves to be the guinea pig in his movies, so along the lines of his hit Super Size Me, where he tried to kill himself with McDonald's for a month, this time out he decides to turn his film into a giant billboard of product placement, selling time in the film, wearing a NASCAR inspired suit covered in patches, and even awarding a primary sponsorship which makes the full title of the movie Pom Wonderful Presents The Greatest Movie Ever Sold.

Throughout the movie he meets with potential sponsors and advertising pros to pitch his idea to fund his doc entirely through product placement.  Spurlock cites big time blockbusters, particularly Iron Man, as the framework for his journey, looking at fast food, clothing, cars etc. to explore and exploit for money.

The problem with his thesis is he's not making a blockbuster.  There's no A-List celebrity attached, there is no giant billboard planned on the Gower St. walls of Paramount.  He's not making that kind of film so he cannot attract the kind of people involved in that level of product placement in order to get the scoop on how it works.  Pom Wonderful is great and all, but it's no Coca Cola.  So, while it's intriguing to see the types of products Spurlock can attract to this project, it is in no way indicative of the business of studios and product placement.

It's not a bad film, it's actually quite good, but it is far from an honest one.  It's arc is flimsy, even for a documentary, and there's that little issue of you will not get a real look inside the very odd business of theatrical product placement.  I wanted to know more, I wanted details on the process and to see, like his example of Iron Man, how a big budget movie squeezes financing from corporations.  I didn't get it.  A terse overview of product placement is scattered over the first third, after that it is basically an uncomfortable mix of advertising and a behind the scenes on the making of this movie, which actually kind of never really becomes a movie. 

That's what it is!!  This is a weird EPK for Morgan Spurlock's new film, not the film itself!!  When's the movie coming out?  Oh....

Okay, that's hyperbole, but aside from some entertainment value, there's minimal substance to this doc, and for me, that's not good enough.  It's a neat idea, but as a movie, no.  A big expose in Vanity Fair, sure.  Some webisodes, maybe.  Not a major motion picture.  I will still look forward to what Spurlock does down the line despite my disappointment in The Greatest Movie Ever Sold, but I cannot recommend this to anyone outside of die hard documentary fans.

Grade: C

Straw Dogs (2011)

In a word: ugh.  

Straw Dogs is a remake of the 1971 Sam Peckinpah film of the same name starring Dustin Hoffman Susan George.  It was itself based on a novel, but this rabbit hole is getting too deep already!  Basically, Peckinpah faithful consider this one of his best efforts, a tricky mix of violence and psychological thriller set in a sleepy (fictional) Cornwall town.  The remake is a tricky mix of violence and scenery chewing.

This time around Hoffman's David Sumner is played by James "Cyclops" Marsden which makes me miss his turn in The Box.  His wife Amy is Kate Bosworth and this time around the two are a Hollywood A or B list couple (screenwriter and actress.)  Joining them are that big tall Nordic Vampire from True Blood and James Wood in one of his most uninspired performances ever.

This film lost me about 5 minutes in with the heavy handed characterization of the locals as backwoods Southern idiots.  I'm not even from the South and I was offended by the lazy and over the top stereotypes smeared onto the screen.  Then you had the "Hollywood" couple and their white pants and "fancy ways" and the vitriol that was directed at them just for showing up to the town was ridiculous and presented without motivation.  The line that killed the whole thing was in an early scene  where a waitress tells David she can't accept his credit card because they only take cash and she punctuates it with (paraphrased) "you know cash, that stuff us poor people use."  It came from nowhere with no prior setup and was completely misplaced dialog.  The writer should be lashed for such clunky a clunky exchange.  I've heard better lines on "Real Housewives."

After that, Straw Dogs and I were at opposite ends.  I wasn't a big fan of the original either, but everything from the blocking to the script to the score were grating on me this time around. 

David's character is probably the biggest flaw.  Hoffman's portrayal 40 years ago was a man flirting with madness and pulling himself away from his wife through his intellectual pursuits.  There was a decent and a logical connection of dots to get from reel 1 to the end credits.  Marsden plays a bit of a twat and replaces the educational obsession with a few scenes of him working at a desk.  This does nothing to set up the infamous rape sequence that punctuated the original.  That time around you could believe Amy's choice to both give in and silently reject what was happening to her, but this time it just felt hollow.  There was no gravity to David so there is very little gravity to the pulse of the movie.  Basically, I could care less about anyone.

I also could not believe David was a screenwriter.  First of all, you wouldn't write your scene list on a big chalk board labeling each one "Sc 1" or "Sc 12" etc.  He knows its a fucking scene, he doesn't need the chalk equivilent of a file extension.  And do I need to say it, "chalk?"  Also, a Harvard sweatshirt?  What screenwriter came from Harvard?

Honestly, I watched the last hour of the movie in fast forward and even at a new image for every minute or so of film, I understood the whole story and it sucked.  Motivation was kicked aside in favor of getting the Nordic vampire to strip whenever possible and then there's a random killing and some fire bombs and a bear trap and we're done.  Which, is pretty much how the first film went too, so I guess I can't dock it too many points!

The original never really stuck with me either, but it was much better at the atmospheric tones and slow pitch storytelling.  I think people shy from remakes because of half ass jobs like this one.  Does it simplify the story?  Yes, which can be a good thing, but in the end it was cast improperly and the technical achievements were limited.  Unless you need to satisfy a raging curiosity, I'd avoid it.

Grade: D

Torchwood: Miracle Day

I'm basically writing this post for my friend Jess, who I know is curious about what I thought of this show but I didn't want to rant on her Facebook wall for 1200 words, so here we are on the blog.  The short answer is I am very "meh" about it.  So if you have better things to do, you can stop here.  Otherwise, read on suckers!

Historically, I like the Torchwood world and Barrowman owns the role of Jack Harkness so completely, but honestly, after Children of Earth (aka S3), I lost most of my emotional connection to the show.  For me, the first two seasons were Torchwood and now, they're just kind of treading water.  I find Gwen a little inconsistent in her actions and have never thought of her as one of my favorites, so with only two team members left, I only like half of Torchwood anyway.  They did add members this time, but it took me 5 or 6 episodes to get into what Mekhi Phifer was doing, and he's not exactly written as "likable."  And Esther?  I'll save her for my gripes.  Which shall begin now...

My first gripe with Miracle Day is at 10 episodes, it is too long.  I wasn't a huge fan of Children of Earth either, but its four episodes certainly did amp up the urgency of every moment.  Miracle Day could've used some of that urgency and a lot more focus.  A lot more focus.  The whole flashback episode was a waste of time especially when there was no pay off to the relationship other than "this is how they got Jack's blood."  Could've been a 10 minute flashback, not a whole episode. The story could've been leaner and brought in at 6 or 7 episodes and I would've liked MD a lot more.   The same could be said for the cast.  Which brings me to...

Gripe #2 is the excess of characters, or rather the misuse of characters.  I love Bill Pullman, but his death row inmate pedophile turned Miracle Day poster boy arc did absolutely nothing for the story.  Come the finale, he was what, a giant bomb?  Anybody could've been the giant bomb (strap Gwen to some plastique), so why build up Oswald and give him all that screen time so he could be some mcguffin while Jack and Gwen discover and debate "the blessing?" (gripe on that coming shortly)  I honestly thought that since Oswald's was the first non death we saw, that he'd hold the key to the mystery, but instead, he was a glorified suicide bomber.  Pullman did a great job with the character, but the writer's didn't use him properly.

Enter Esther, the CIA analyst that goes from resourceful investigator down in the Indiana Jones "hide the ark of the covenant" sized file room to a complete wreck to a tactical moron back to smart analyst then to an "in the way" damsel in distress and then somehow earns the respect of her team by the time she gets shot.  I cannot think of a character so hot and cold in recent television history.  I mean, she works at the CIA as an analyst but can't figure out to call someone else, anyone else when Dr. Juarez won't answer her phone due to a "being burned alive" situation?  (Juarez was a great character by the way because she served a purpose and then got the hell out of the story!)  But Esther was there the whole time doing nothing except blindly following Rex around and blowing her cover to "Soul Man" C. Thomas Howell so she could visit her crazy sister who was another entire waste of screen time.  Her dialog was a wreck, the performance was a wreck, there was no concrete motivation to anything Esther did, she was a complete waste of time.  If you're gonna write in a girl to be Gwen when Gwen isn't there, at least treat her with the same respect in the writer's room.   She's actually probably the first character in Torchwood history that I didn't care *spoiler alert* died.  And I'm going back to Indira Varma as Suzie in the pilot for that one!!  I was seriously bummed she went out so soon because her character had more development in 40 minutes that Esther did in a full season!!  My apologies to Alexa Havins, but you know, that soap opera training didn't help you turn Esther into anything worth while.  

The third character I hated, although loved, was Lauren Ambrose as Jilly.  Loved her because, like a member of "the family" pointed out, she was a hugely over the top cartoon like character in her appearance and a red head to boot, but hated her because again, a really hot and cold character that in the end had very little to do with the outcome of the story.  It seemed, especially with her little coda in the finale, that Miracle Day for Jilly was just a way to set her up for future seasons.  It felt like they gave Jilly dialog they needed to cram in to highlight their themes and not dialog that Jilly needed to be a part of the story.

My third and final big gripe for Miracle Day was the finale.  Russell T. Davies is given a lot of credit for his work, and while my overall impression of him is positive, I've always felt he resolves his conflicts too quickly for the amount of set up he gives them.  (A trait that Stephen Moffat has gladly attempted to double in the 11th Doctor era!!  Don't blink, the show's over!)  He is a man with a delightful first act, a stretched out second, and then a third that hangs around just long enough to get the point across.  It's his style, no biggie, especially when you consider the amount of quality character development he usually fits in to that second act.  But in Miracle Day, all of a sudden Davies takes the elongated "villain explaining his diabolical scheme to James Bond scenario" and pulls it thinner than taffy on the boardwalk.  When that dude shot Esther I was like "finally!"  The Family has been letting Jack and Gwen and Rex blabber on for like 15 minutes, just throw some fucking blood into the blessing already!!  

I mean, if they were confidant that Jack's blood was only in one spot and that it wouldn't matter if they killed him and his blood got in the China end, then just kill him.  Then you could've had Rex handle his big "a-ha" moment in Buenos Aires with a big fuck you, I've got his blood dumbass and he could've sacrificed himself to save everyone, save the world.  Instead, it was a snail's pace of dialog and an open radio channel the Family gave Torchwood to figure out how to defeat them?  Yawn.

I also hated that Jack and Gwen didn't really know how to solve the problem until they were standing there, which really helped the stretched feeling of the resolution that annoyed me so.  This is where Oswald could've lent some knowledge to the team (he did meet the Family after all) so they would know what to do before descending in the elevator.  Remember how the A-Team loved it when a plan came together?  Torchwood apparently loves it when a plan materializes out of thin air on the brink of destruction and although it shouldn't work, somehow always does!  Not me, I would've loved to see a confidant Jack and Gwen going in to, excuse the pun, spill some blood!  I take it back, don't excuse that pun, I liked it;)  I wanted ass kicking, not "hey, we figured it out!"  Torchwood was like the kid who got a participation ribbon, not the one holding the 1st place trophy.

Don't get me wrong, all gripes aside there were plenty of enjoyable moments in Miracle Day.  Although, I do wonder about Barrowman's contract because he sure got laid a lot in this season!!  Perks of the job I guess.  Gwen had a couple great lines about being Welsh and there were some clever plot devices and nods to hard core Torchwood fans, so yes, it was overall a fun time.  However, it could've been great.  It could've been tightened up and trimmed turned into a lean, mean fighting machine but instead, it was just a little flabby around the waist and wasn't hitting its best lap times.  And that is what is so frustrating about Miracle Day.  It was too Americanized, too slavish to the idea of 10 episodes, too weighed down with the kind of excess story lines and character arcs (or non arcs in this instance) you'd see in a 24 episode drama season to be a great Torchwood tale.  It's almost like it was stuck between a lean mini series and a big full season where you can wander and play on your way to the finale.  They wandered a little, they rushed a little, but they never hit their stride with Miracle Day.  If you love Torchwood, watch it, if you don't, go on a picnic or something.

Final Grade: C.  "I'll let you pass this class, but you need to work harder."

Hockey Hump Day: Dropping the Puck

Opening face-offs for the 2011-12 are tomorrow!!!!  I am so ready for another hockey season to begin.  Some years I'm a slow starter, waiting till maybe December before I really get into it, but this year I've spent all summer doing more research on prospects and roster moves than I have in a decade probably.  I have also started up my own fantasy hockey league!  Instead of playing with strangers, I set up my own on Yahoo! and invited a ton of people.  I ended up with 8 teams, which is good.  Would've liked 12, but people are lazy/busy.  I'm going to get a little trophy for the champ and hopefully make this a regular thing.  And I must admit, I got a really good team!  Let's just say my defense right now is Dan Boyle, P.K. Subban, Shea Weber, and Chris Pronger.  Boom.

So, has anyone heard what's going down with the New York Islanders goalie situation yet?  I was scouring their site and the Yahoo! NYI page earlier, but I can't find any announcements on which two keepers they are starting the season with.  The rundown is former University of Michigan standout Al Montoya who performed very well for the Islanders last season, reluctant waiver victim Evgeni Nabokov, and super contract holder porcelain doll Rick DiPietro.  All three deserve to be in the league and with Nabby finally in camp, the Isles need to make some decisions.  So what are they?  It looks like they might roll all three!  That's not really great for any of them, but considering how fragile DiPietro has been (a real shame because he is a super talented goaltender) they seem to be covering their bases.  But they'll have to move Nabby before the trade deadline or lose him to UFA, which means they need to play him to entice teams and remind them of his skill level.  If I had to bet, Montoya will get the short end of the stick early on.  Any way you slice it, Newsday had this great quote from DiPietro, "I've been here with four on the roster," he said. "Nothing changes my approach, unless I'm rehabbing an injury. There's only two things you can control: How well you prepare and how cool your equipment looks."  And Rick does always seem to have some cool looking gear!

Keeping it in New York, I just read that Sean Avery has cleared waivers for the Rangers.  No doubt he will be loaned out to a European club or sent down to the Connecticut Whale in the AHL.  Either way, they move his salary off their cap which could see the Rangers more active come the trade deadline as they pump up the roster around Brad Richards for a playoff run.  I would think Rangers fans would be happy about losing Avery, who has always been more of a circus act than a quality hockey player.  Sure he had some productive season, but his antics overtook his work ethic and his attitude has become a burden on the league.  Hence, no takers on the waiver wire for Sean.  Avery appeared to care more about dating celebrities and trying to position himself as some sort of hockey version of David Beckham than playing hockey.  The difference being, despite your opinion on soccer in general, is that Beckham is a hard worker who contributes to teams.  Avery became a clown.  To his credit, it bought him some time in the league, but you have to wonder how much more time, quality time, he could've had if he just buried his head and worked hard.  And didn't sucker punch so many goaltenders....

Finally today, a little update on my Drew Doughty comments from last week.  Drew got his deal, the Kings caved and gave him a long term contract for $7 million a season.  That makes Doughty the third highest paid defenseman in the game, behind only Shea Weber and Brian Campbell.  Which of course brings me to the idea that Brian Campbell is waaaay more overpaid than Doughty!  Good for Drew, he didn't flinch.  Boo on the Kings, they did.  Not only did they flinch, they waited until the plane was leaving for their Euro opener to do it!  Why?  They wasted all that time, kept Doughty practicing with a junior team and not with his teammates for what?  The answer is nothing.  If they could find the money now, they could've found it in August.  On this deal, the Kings get a big fat FAIL.

Alrighty then!  Let's get this season started!!!  I can almost smell the eternal hope of a Sharks v. Flyers finals.  It is closely followed by the bitter scent of disappointment;)  Have a great season everyone!!

Hockey Hump Day: Doughty & Bail Bonds

As part of my new approach to Drive In '77, making it more personal, I will be blogging about the NHL and hockey in general every Wednesday.  So let's drop the puck!!

Doughty Face

As much as we like to talk about free agent signings and trades, the drama behind hold outs is even more enticing.  This season it is all about the Los Angeles Kings and Drew Doughty.  Reports vary, but essentially Dean Lombardi and the Kings are offering him a long term contract that averages about $6.8 million a year.  This would put him as the 4th highest paid D-man in the league and on par with Anze Kopitar as the highest contract in team history.  Doughty apparently wants upwards of $7 million instead and is working out with a junior team in London, Ont.  I've seen London and I've seen the toyota Sports complex where the Kings practice.  I'm gonna have to go L.A. on this one!

The thing is, and I expect to get flamed by King fans everywhere for this, that Doughty, as talented and skilled a player he's been, is still only 21.  That means upside.  That means he should... should get better.  D-men are much like goaltenders, they get better with age.  The prime for defense is right in the 28 to 34 range.  Even if he plays out the offer on the table, he will just be coming to that golden age.  Think about the greats like Lidstrom, Stevens, Langway, Bourque, Neidermayer, Chelios, these guys all played and played well late into their careers, into their 40s!  Experience is earned, not given.  Chara could not have led a team to a Stanley Cup 5 or 6 years ago and neither can Doughty.  He's just not there yet with the best defensemen in the league.  Analysts want to say he is because of his numbers, but there is no way, in my book, that Doughty is a Top 5 D-man in the NHL today. 

In order to consider this young star in the Top 5, who do you leave out?  I mean, you wanna argue Top 10, I'll listen, but otherwise your telling me that a relatively untested D on a team without any banners under his watch, is better than Chris Pronger, Shea Weber, Dion Phaneuf, Dan Boyle, Keith Yandle, Christian Ehrhoff, Mike Green, Chara, Duncan Keith, Kris Letang, Nicklas Lidstrom, Kiklas Kronwall, Brent Seabrook, Lubomir Visnovsky, P.K. Subban, Kevin Bieksa or his own teammate Jack Johnson?  Is my point made?  The NHL is littered with talented D, most of whom have more experience and more playoff success that Drew Doughty.  

It's simple math and the Kings are making a great offer to a young player and that player has a crappy agent telling him to holdout.  I would argue it is too much, but if they can afford it, and they're willing to bet on his continued potential, then Doughty is an idiot to let $200k, more than I've made in the last decade, a year get in the way of what could be a terrific season for an up and coming club.  Drew, ditch your agent and sign the bloody deal.

Shark Tank'd 

The other weird situation popping up this week is the case of my beloved (and aggravating) San Jose Sharks vs. Bad Boys Bail Bonds.  God, I hate those Bad Boy Club t-shirts.  Seriously, could that little rat faced no neck logo get any more annoying?  I actually saw a dude with that tattooed on his arm and he'd pose like the guy when you asked him about it!  But I digress.

What's happening in San Jose is Jeffrey Stanley, the owner of the bail bonds company, has a block of seats behind both benches at the Shark Tank and likes to have him and his guests wear his company's shirts to the games.  With TV coverage etc. this can be viewed as either shrewd or taking advantage of a situation.  He's getting a certain level of advertising from the placement of his shirts in the arena after all.  Now, the Sharks have issued a new policy that prohbits ticket holders from using their tickets to promote their business.  Stanley is pissed and consulting lawyers.

Honestly, I can see the reasoning behind the idea of the new policy.  It's about abuse.  I can guarantee that if some guy bought tickets behind home plate at Yankee stadium and wore the same shirt with his business logo on it every night, he would be talked too.  I think the issue here is the frequency and volume of the shirts.  If everyone in his group is wearing them 41 games a season, then clearly he is using the tickets as a means of advertising.  I doubt he would adhere to the same dress code if his seats were in the upper bowl.  But it is a slippery slope and it will come down to equal and clear enforcement.

Regardless of where you fall in the argument, the mistake the Sharks are making is in the delivery of the message.  The email in the article is hot and cold and seems to hint at making an example of Stanley, or at least singling him out.  Did all season ticket holders get this email?  I don't know, damn economy forced me to give up my seats three years ago... grumble.  But like my theoretical Yankees example above, I would imagine a personal phone call about their concerns would be more in line with keeping a season ticket holder happy and coming to a more responsible conclusion to the problem.

There is also an implication of "payback" because he cancelled his one year of advertising he purchased from the club last season.  One year of $70,000 for a penalty box ad.  Seriously?  Do you think an NHL franchise A) has a problem getting advertisers and B) gives a shit about losing $70k from a bail bonds company?  Not one bit.  It's also not a an issue of freedom of speech. FOS is about the ability to speak your mind without repercussion.  Stanley is speaking his mind about the situation, good.  It is not about the freedom to advertise which he may or may not be trying to do with his shirts.  Of course, we all know he is right?  The Sharks are just handling it all wrong.

That's about it for my first Hockey Humpday.  It's been great watching the preseason even if I did watch Owen Nolan's last shift in the NHL.  I'll miss ya Buster!!  One of my all time favs for sure.  I'll never forget witnessing that called shot in the All-Star game.  What a moment!  The good was seeing Evgeni Nabokov back on NHL ice, even if that Islanders jersey looked a little strange.  Enjoy your hockey week everyone, I'll be back next Wednesday to spout my unsolicited opinions!

Star Wars Blu Ray Mega Battle Nerd Rage Spectacular Response Bot!!

Last week news hit the internet that George Lucas was adding even more changes to the original Star Wars trilogy for the Blu Ray release, coming in just 10 days from now on September 16th, 2011.  Apparently the Ewoks can now blink.  Okay, whatever.  Can't say it was ever a point of contention for this nerd, but I guess George has been annoyed by the potential impact of Logray overcharging his fellow Ewoks for Visine for the last 30 years.  But the big rumble amongst the bloggers came in the form of a very long "Nooooooooo."

I haven't found any motivation to actually watch the video of the change online, but it seems the cry of "no" uttered by the freshly minted Darth Vader at the end of Episode III has now been added to Darth's body slam of the Emperor aboard the Death Star in Return of the Jedi.  To call back to my Ewok eyelid stance, okay, whatever.  I just don't care anymore, but I seem to be in a minority.

The volume and intensity of nerd outrage was felt from Skywalker Ranch to the bottom of New Zealand.  The jokes and one liners, the insistent need for every film blogger to throw in their two cents (although that's mostly just hit farming), my Twitter feed was littered with shouting and all over what?  A "no?"  Listen, we're nerds, we've heard the word no before, although usually from that cheerleader in our high school science class.  Just me?  Moving on...

Honestly, I think fans are more upset over the horrific cry of "noooo" from Episode III, which was a low point in the film, being used in Jedi or even just being reminded of it, than they are of actually inserting a line of dialog into the movie.  So Vader says "no," who cares.  It's not like they dubbed in a whole line of dialog like "hey there Emperor!  Stop killing my son you wrinkled old bag of bones!"  Now that would be ridiculous, but what amounts to a guttural moan of defiance?  Simmer down nerds, we'll live.

Then there are those who are trying to define their outrage by claiming how much they loved the silent defiance (they're words, not mine) of Vader's act.  Listen, it's not like they couldn't dub in a "no" in the early 80s.  The tech was there.  When I see that scene, I see an oversized plastic costume helmet that allows the actor no chance at emotion and I see the menacing Darth Vader perform what amounts to a comedic double take.  I'm not trying to rob anyone's opinion of it, but frankly, that moment where Vader looks back and forth always came off as comical to me.  Maybe it does to George as well and this is his answer.  Right or wrong, regardless of his past actions or opinions or comments about art, it's still his film.  If you want to relive your childhood, if you're upset that you're in your 40s and have a gut, don't hold a film or a stranger accountable for your crisis.

 This brings me to the impending Star Wars BD release.  Do I want to buy it?  For the extras, absolutely.  For the movies?  Not at all.  I have them.  I have the DVDs and they look good and they sound good.  You know what else I have?  The laserdiscs, and if someone would make a new LD player with an HDMI cable, they'd look as good if not better than the Blu Ray versions.  And they're completely unaltered, pre special edition.  If you want to cry over the changes all day long, get off your ass, spend some cash, and you too can have fantastic copies of the original trilogy on laserdisc.  

Should Lucas make the original, theatrically released versions of the films available?  Absolutely.  He can special edition Lando white and no one would care as long as they had the original cuts!  Will he?  You know it will happen and he'll make a ton of money off of us once again.  Even if we have to wait till after he dies, it will happen.  If not, for a large pizza I again say, I have the laserdiscs.  Come on over.

Nerd Rage Bonus Feature!!

P.S.  To satisfy your need for anger, all this is to say, I still really, really hate that Lucas put Hayden Christensen at the end of Jedi! The other changes, I can work around or ignore, but that one makes zero sense to me from a storytelling perspective.  Supposedly Lucas said it was because they appear as Jedi and since Anakin became Vader and turned to the dark side, we should see Anakin and not old Vader (David Prowse).  Bullshit.  The entire point of RETURN of the Jedi is that Anakin redeems himself and abandons the dark side of the Force to become a good Jedi at the end of his life.  Therefore, he dies a fucking Jedi so he should appear in the Ewok rave as old Anakin.  Period.  Changing it negates an entire film and betrays the story.  Digital blinking, whatevs.  Altering the story, bullshit.

 

The Curse of High Definition

With each new wave of format technology, we get the drawn out release of catalogue titles.  Sometimes it takes forever, like getting The African Queen on DVD.  Sometimes it happens quick as popular titles with proven sales records are first to hit the market.  Then there are the big guns, like Star Wars, that wait just a little bit till there are enough pieces of hardware in homes to warrant a big release with extra features etc.

While I understand the desire to own beloved films on the new formats, I theorize we've reached our limits.  New transfers are at the point where we don't need to replace our existing copies anymore and that dates back to DVDs.  Sure, a really good audio update with a mix designed for 5.1 instead of the 4 speakers at the local cinema circa 1982 is a welcome addition, but digital scrubbing and turning every gorgeous piece of actual film stock into the monotone world of the high definition look is not only uneccessary, but in my mind, it's also unwelcome.

It will not be long before all processed chemical film stock disappears from the industry.  We're on to digital tape and hard drives and with the cost reduction and "quality" of the image (I use the quotes because that is a debatable subject when it comes to the interpretation of art) we're never going back to clapper loaders taping off giant magazines of stock or the 1st AD yelling "check the gate!"  And unfortunately, the lust for new shinies, and greed, and an overwhelming amount of disc producers with no clue how to treat films with a respect to their timeline is ruining a lot of beautiful camera work.

This is the curse of high definition.  Now, don't get me wrong.  I love my Blu Ray and for modern films (2000 and beyond let's say) with a lot of CG work in both character and extension, the HD quality combined with my HD TV creates an exhilirating home viewing experience.  But for older films, why bother?  

I purchased Bullitt and the Errol Flynn Robin Hood on BD because they were cheap, super cheap, but other than that, my 30+ other BD titles on my shelf are all films from the last 3 or 4 years.  I don't want to see a Coppola film or a Kubrick film in super re-mastered high def.  I want to see the grain, I want to experience the lighting and the faults the way they were tackled in the era in which the film was produced.  Sure, clean up the blacks a little, make sure the image is properly compressed for the frame rate of your HD TV, but the moment watching Apocalypse Now feels like I'm watching Avatar, I'm out.   I don't want to recreate the experience of being on set and seeing "real life" in front of me (as high def promises), I want to experience going to a movie.  It's kind of the same problem I have with 3D.  I know what movies are, I get it and I like it.  Let me enjoy going to a movie.  If I want to blow up aliens on another planet, I'll arrange for that in the real world.  Maybe that's a bad example, but you get my drift.

It's really the same argument vinyl aficionados have given since the birth of digital music and even CD fans have given for small mp3 files; cleaner and newer isn't necessarily better.  Jazz on a 45 with a good needle has the ebb and flow of the spinning records and the crackle of time.  Miles Davis on a CD brings out more bass than the artist intended for you to hear.  It's all about art and the respect to its creation.  The ease of high def transfers threatens that respect.

As we lose the ability to watch films on older formats like laserdisc or VHS, there is a need to transfer them to the new technology, but that doesn't mean we should tweak the crap out of them to bring them up to some modern digital standard.  Today's cinematography all has the same polished look.  It's vivid, but it's bland.  I would even venture to say that HD cameras do a lot to negate on set lighting, preferring instead to add CG lighting effects in post.  That will never look the same, or "right" when compared to the way a light bulb bounces off each individual's skin tone or reacts with various shades of blue.  So when you take it too far, you lose the individuality of the film, you lose the art.  

Think about Disney and the fact they used to employ a small army of people who mixed paint colors for artists.  The colors in Snow White's dress look the way they do because a human hand was involved in their creation.  Now, artists just click on a selection of colors in the computer and run with it.  I don't want some HD transfer of Snow White where the blue in her dress is suddenly 4 shades darker because that's what's in the computer, you know?  Nitpicky?  Sure, but not entirely without merit.

High definition is great, and as we move forward in cinema, the talented directors and filmmakers will figure out ways to manipulate it and create their art, but for the geniuses of yesterday, who are we to pass sentence on their work?  For all we know, Hitchcock might rise up from the grave, pop in a Blu ray of Psycho and then promptly waddle his way over to the studio and bitch slap everyone there for ruining his film.  I'm just saying, do we really want zombie Hitchcock walking around with a grudge?

So that's my old man rant for the day.  It's a useless argument really because progress stops for no man, but maybe if we can all be a little more aware, maybe if we can all let the studios know that we care about the visual integrity of the original film, maybe we can secure a more accurate record of our movie legacy for the future and an appreciation for the process of film production.  Maybe.

Rachel Getting Married

(Forward: Oh my God I could not wait to get the blog up and running so I could throw my two cents in on this picture!!  I’ve had to sit through months of hack jobs and know-it-all's proclaim how fucking amazing this film is and guess what?  It aint’t!  So now you know how I feel, read ahead or don’t, but thankfully I can finally chime in!)

About halfway through this film I was obsessed with whether or not Demme was trying to make us empathize with the lead character’s pain and agony by forcing us to experience every excruciating moment of an actual wedding.  The scenes in Rachel Getting Married are long, and long, and then a little longer.  When nature called during the rehearsal dinner, I was already 5 minutes in.  I went to the can, was in there too long, plunged, and then came back to like another 5 minutes of rehearsal dinner!!  This movie had all the editing prowess of a French film from the ‘70’s. That is to say, none.

 Aside from the pacing issues, what did I really think of Rachel Getting Married, the rookie screenplay from Jenny Lumet?  One word: nepotism!!  If this script crossed the desk of some USC cinema professor, he’d scribble a C+ on the top and demand rewrites.  Jenny comes from Hollywood and got a shot because of the work of her father.  Period.  End of story.  Is it a horrible script?  No, it has some moments, but ultimately the technique screams “look at me, look at me, look how clever I am in revealing information!”  She fails in attempts to hide the whole story in snippets of dialogue like a big game of Clue, but unlike a well crafted piece, say The Usual Suspects, the impending outcome is predictable and derivative.

The real weight around the ankles of Rachel is the ensemble of characters.  Excluding a couple that had no lines, and the father, I found every character to be annoying and an asshole.  The problem with that becomes, I don’t care.  I don’t care about any of them or their petty little family problems.  Why then would I want to pay attention to the ending of this movie?  The only interesting way to end this would be a for a team of sasquatch ninjas to descend upon the reception and take everyone out with homemade throwing stars crafted from the teeth of river otters.  I would pay double for that ending, but it did not come.  Boo hoo.

Jenny Lumet’s style is, look, this happened to me, I am going to write about it!!  Seems to be the mantra for the script.  Yes, you should write what you know, but you should also know when to hold them and know when to fold them.  Case in point, the dish washer loading competition scene.  To quote the youth of today via text message, WTF?!  Apparently the dad is a dish washer loading magician or something, but that is never set up and now we’re stuck in another painfully protracted sequence where dad and future son-in-law are battling it out over who can fit more dirty dishes in the dishwasher.  W....T.....F.  Hey, Demme!  Did you want to cut your running time at all, cause I found enemy number one deep in the second act for ya!

I hate to pile up on a girl who has gotten the chance to see her work made real, but you hear actors talk all the time about how if it isn’t on the page, it will never be on the screen.  Rachel Getting Married just is not on the page.  It could be, mind you, but not the way it was shot.  The dialogue is stale and the McGuffins come at you with the subtlety of Godzilla strolling through Tokyo.

Some of the fault lies with Demme of course, whose apparent self imposed exile into documentary filmmaking has left him a little too rusty to tell a dramatic story the way it demands.  Many of the scenes feel unrehearsed and jerky, like the cast is participating in some sort of improv workshop.  Conversations don’t seem to flow naturally, rather lines are spouted on cue or perhaps a couple seconds after.  There is an unmistakable odor of the amateur floating about the screen which becomes twice as offensive when you consider the resumes of some of those involved in the stink.

Deserving of much credit is the casting.  I’ll give them that.  Not just the main characters, but all the supporting as well.  Demme has an interracial ensemble like too few before it and more so, the story doesn’t rely on any of it.  Race, religion, age, none of it carries any weight in this film.  All are welcome and all are represented.  It is nice, if not a little too utopian, but in an industry where minorities complain daily about the roles available/offered to them, Rachel attempts to right some of that wrong all on her own.

Listen, I don’t want to bag on this movie all day.  Plenty of critics and audiences have enjoyed the flick and maybe a younger more indie me would have lauded its existence, but the me of today just found it boring.  I’m not going to tell you not to see it, but if you do, rent it... or better yet, catch it on HBO.  Rachel Getting Married simply breaks no new ground and does so in a horribly tedious manner.  If I’d paid to see this, I might be pissed off.

Screened: Acadamey Screener (DVD)

Director: Jonathan Demme

Script: Jenny Lumet

Cast: Anne Hathaway, Debra Winger, Fab 5 Freddy, & about 300 others

Fav. Quote: "I'm your harbinger of doom this evening"

Grade: F

Moog

In general I am a documentary junkie. I love the idea of educating myself, and with a good doc, I can feel a sense of accomplishment at the end credits, like I just aced an extended education class down at the learning annex. Toss in the subject of music and the documentary, or the “rockumentary,” becomes irresistible. I’ll watch it a dozen times even if it is about a band or person I don’t like. In fact, two of my favorite films in recent years are about Death Cab For Cutie and the Dixie Chicks, neither of which I even listened to before seeing those docs. In short, I love me some musical education!

Recent years have been quite good to the “rockumentary,” so it was with a little bit of glee that I sat down to screen Hans Fjellstad’s Moog, a doc about the creator of the Moog synthesizer, Dr. Robert A. Moog.  Have I said "moog" enough yet?  He’s a bit of a genius, starting out assembly theramins and then basically inventing electronic music as a genre and a companion to traditional music with his monster of a machine of circuits and wires named, like Frankenstein’s Monster, after its life giver.

The subject alone seems like a knock it out of the park opportunity, but unfortunately, in a rare case of musical doc disappointment, Moog fails to assemble itself into anything quite as magnificent as the synthesizer itself. I’m not quite sure what the movie was supposed to be about, the man or the machine? I don’t believe the filmmakers knew either. The lack of direction contributes to a feeling of distraction, failing to tie me down to my seat waiting for the next moment to flicker across my eyes. The final edit feels like a box of found footage. There’s no real cohesive theme that holds the story together, rather a collage of conversations, live performance, and historical film clips.

It’s too bad really, because some of those old clips and the concert footage from a Moog celebration concert event really are interesting. Getting to see the artists playing and tweaking their Moogs to create a cacophony of sounds was the most intriguing part of the show. It seems like that idea, the idea of the Moog as machine, would have made a great documentary. So would the exploration of Moog the man and how and why he created what he did. Where he came from, the genesis of ideas, all would make a great documentary. However, here we get both, but not enough of either. I leave the film without an increased knowledge of Bob Moog and without the satisfaction of just watching musicians work.

A particular pet peeve of this production is the use of subtitles to identify the people on the screen. Their appearance is inconsistent in that they pop up when someone famous or well-known first comes on screen, but not for some of Bob Moog’s old colleagues or friends. He had an entire conversation with someone who was one of his first salesmen and it was fascinating. He explained how he tried to demo the Moog to music stores and the general confusion as to what it did and all that. It was a great series of moments between these two old colleagues and I still don’t know his name! Thankfully the conversation clued me in to who he was, but a little help would have been nice. Same goes for the musicians who populate this film. Rick Wakeman shows up to tell a funny story about buying his first MiniMoog, but unless you are really familiar with music or have a computer on your lap, you have no idea he is from the seminal progressive rock band Yes. Same goes for Keith Emerson, Money Mark, or the mind altering talent of Bernie Worrell. Any layman would recognize who these musicians have played with, so why not tag them instead of alienating and confusing your viewers? Seems like a lazy choice to me.

My favorite part is watching Bob Moog struggle with a taiko drumming video game in Japan. Maybe not the best part, but, even if accidental, it draws a nice line between the man who gave the world the idea of musical creation through electronic means and the mass consumption of circuitry based rhythm gaming.

Listen, if you’re a music nerd like me, than it won’t kill you to watch Moog, and at 72 minutes it will all go by pretty quickly. You get some neat anecdotes here and there and possibly some motivation to go search out some of the artists that you hear in the live segments. However, for the casual observer, Moog fails to captivate or educate and will probably become quite boring after about 10 of those 72 minutes.

Screened: rental-ville (DVD)

Director: Hans Fjellestad

Grade: C

The Brown Bunny (worst movie ever)

I thought I'd revisit an old film that isn't worth my time reviewing and neither is it worth yours for watching and hopefully no one will even pay any attention to this cause they are too busy swinging from their webs and wishing Venom was a more developed character. That’s a Spiderman dig.

The movie I am talking about is, of course, Vincent Gallo's indulgent piece of shit, The Brown Bunny. This is hands down the worst movie I have ever seen. Well, actually, fast forwarded through. We all rented it for the same reason, so don't lie, but even that scene is about as interesting as a cinder block. This is a film I dare people to watch and few can without skipping over huge chunks of time. It starts nowhere, heads somewhere else at the rate of a wounded slug, and then arrives at the corner of self-absorbed filmmaker and experimental boredom. If IMDB would let me rate this lower than a single star I would.

Nothing about this steaming pile is worth saving.  Let's burn every copy and erase it from the human record because it is highly embarrassing.  When aliens discover our rotted out husk of a planet thousands of years from now, I pray they do not have the capability to play this on DVD!!  Someone on IMDB called this a "radical American masterpiece." As a (mostly) liberal, I hate to squash other people's opinions, but "cinefillia" of Los Angeles, you are a total fucking moron. I bet you beat off to time lapsed photography of floating kelp paired with a theramin soundtrack and write blogs about the experience being "an undiscovered journey into the radical mind of mother Earth." What's your second favorite film, the bloody Cherry Orchard?!

I cannot even include my favorite quote because there was no dialogue that I can remember. It took 35 minutes for a word to be uttered and damn it all if it was significant. The script for this thing must have been three pages. The opening sequence is a super long shot of Gallo (who stars, directs, writes, scores, produces, blah blah blah everything) riding his rice rocket around some race track. The shot is akin to a 1980's model Sony Handycam with a mind boggling 4x zoom sitting atop the cheapest Ritz Camera tripod available. And it goes on forever!!!!!!!! See those exclamation points? Literally, forever. I have seen purgatory now. Thanks Gallo, you prick!

This is when my 32x fast forward DVD action came into play. I think I watched maybe eight minutes of the 90 plus. Less than 10%. Not a great ratio. And the infamous Chloe Sevigny blowjob scene? Snooze. I think she was supposed to be an angel or illusion or something. I have no idea. If I want to see some dome action, I'll pick up some quality hardcore, not this art house reject bullshit.

And that is the scariest part of this clusterfuck, It's an experimental art house cinema type of project and even those dorks couldn't stand this thing!! Well, except for our philosophy major dropout I mentioned earlier. It fucking failed to be obscurely artistic! How do you do that?! I could pile some pidgeon poop onto a game of LIfe board and claim it was symbolic of the degradation of higher education in North America due to globalization and I'd be praised. The Brown Bunny is less relevant than that!!!

I've seen some horrible films in my years, but this is the absolute bottom feeder. I won't even mention any credits because old Vinnie The Auteur did everything anyway. I can understand how he might have trouble finding even junior college students to work on this thing. The Brown Bunny is not good for any resume. Join me in raising the cash to launch it into the Sun.  Sorry Sun, I know you've been good to us over the years, but your rays inadvertantly lit this film as Gallo used no lighting package whatsoever, so you can help out by burning it into oblivion for the sake of all life in the universe.  Good grief, where's the eye bath so I can wash my baby blues clean of this atrocity.  

If I had a ratings system, it would receive a 0 out of 10.

Director: Vincent Gallo

Script(?): Gallo of course

Cast: guess who... Gallo, Chloe Sevigny, Cheryl Tiegs

Fav. Quote: never has a category been so N/A

Grade: F x .0000000000000000000001 = should be eradicated from existence