Potpourri

et-vs-predator2 copy We get alot of good conversations going in the comments about all kinds of random shit. I’ve been thinking maybe I should do some “blog posts” about the nerd news of the day, like today it would be the AVATAR trailer or INGLORIOUZ BASTIRDZ is coming out or whatever and then we could all discuss it. Maybe I’ll start doing that sometimes, maybe I won’t. Nobody knows. But for now here’s a place to comment on whatever you damn well feel like.

I couldn’t find a good picture of the Jeopardy category “POTPOURRI” so instead enjoy this fine ET/GVP poster art.

3 people like this post.

Unlike

crap to click on:

Nerd shit

Tags: posts done just to keep people on topic in other comment threads

This entry was posted on Friday, August 21st, 2009 at 2:56 am and is filed under Blog Post (short for weblog). You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

660 Responses to “Potpourri”

CJ Holden
August 21st, 2009 at 3:12 am

Don’t care for Basterds, liked the Avatar trailer without being overwhelmed by it, fucking LOVED the Wolfman trailer, although the idea behind the transformation scene seems to be much better then the execution. I hope they fix that till February. (But the one shot with the fingers still creeps me out. You know which one I mean, when you saw it.)
Mondowray
August 21st, 2009 at 3:29 am

I would love to hear some thoughts on Basterds, I saw it at an advance screening last week and didn’t really enjoy it that much. I’m going to see it again this week because I’m still in shock that it didn’t really gel with me.
Vincent
August 21st, 2009 at 3:32 am

Avatar looks like an old fashioned Métal Hurlant comic. That´s good for me.
Paddy
August 21st, 2009 at 3:54 am

I watched the Avatar Trailer a few times yesterday without sound (i don’t get it at work)..aligned to the fact it was in 2D i’m still hopeful this might be a fun movie. However at the time i just thought “Phantom Menace”. Even the human characters look CGI which i found a bit weird.
Danny
August 21st, 2009 at 5:10 am

I agree with CJ that the Wolfman trailer absolutely blew my mind. I’m obviously not the first to say this, but I think Avatar is a lose-lose situation. Everyone who’s seen it keep saying we need to lower our expectations a big, but I for one can’t quite seem to do it. I thought the CGI in the trailer was strikingly well done, but most of it was clearly CGI. I don’t know why I was under the impression that Avatar would provide me with CGI characters who tricked me into thinking they were real, but because of the James Cameron association I just sort of assumed they would “fuck my eyeballs”. I’ve gotta think that after watching them for two hours on screen I’ll be identifying with the characters and their slight imperfections won’t matter quite so much.
CJ Holden
August 21st, 2009 at 5:19 am

I don’t even think that the creatures in Avatar looked unrealistic. It’s just the blue color that makes it look unrealistic in some people’s eyes. It’s the same problem as with Ang Lee’s Hulk. Audiences were so distracted by the bright green, that they totally overlooked how realistic Hulk looked, how natural he moved, how you could see the muscles move under his skin, how the sand in the desert scene was dripping off of him and so on. So when they gave him a more “natural” looking, darker green in the next movie, people thought he looked more realistic, although his animation was inferior to the one in the first movie.
Maybe when we all see Avatar on a big screen, they will look more realistic and detailed.
Sabreman
August 21st, 2009 at 5:23 am

I thought I should just mention that ET/GvP _NEEDS_ to be made.

{g}
Brendan
August 21st, 2009 at 5:57 am

Wolfman trailer was pretty cool, but wha’s with all the fucking CGI? I’m not an anti-CGi zealot, but they had Rick Fucking Baker itching to top himself from American Werewolf and they decided ‘Nah, let’s just do it with computers.’ I mean it’s not like he’s turning into a Van Helsing style cartoon, it’s looks like they just put Del Toro in fur and ragged clothes and let him run around.
One Guy From Andromeda
August 21st, 2009 at 6:01 am

Vincent, those were my thoughts exactly. The teaser made me think of french comics from the 70s – so i am sold.
GoodBadGroovy
August 21st, 2009 at 6:22 am

I loved a lot about IB. The trailers (and QT over the past 10 years) really miss sold it as a “men-on-a-mission” WW2 film, when it wasn’t that at all. It was mostly made up of a series of escalating conversations where one set of characters weren’t sure how much the other character knew. Sometimes it meander too much, but sometimes it hit fucking gold with awesome tension.

A lot of that thanks goes down to Christopher Waltz who plays the shit out of Hans, the jew hunter. You’re never sure how much he knows, how much he’s playing the other person. His polite attitude completely disarms the other person and it’s amazing.

Oh and props to QT for letting the germans speak german, and the french speak french etc. I’m tired of films that think having an actor speak english with a foreign accent isn’t distracting and silly.

The Avatar trailer left me cold. Ignoring the CG issues (and there were a few) I just didn’t like the 8ft tall cat people/blue furries designs. And the plot sounds paper thin and cliche. (aliens are planet natives, humans are evil corporation, we invade, good guy human joins the natives via his avatar).

Also I find it quite funny that some of the people defending the visuals with “well you need to see them in 3D so you’re an idiot for criticising them” etc are the same kind of people that will have criticised T4, Wolverine, TF2 etc as being nothing but visuals and that Hollywood standards are slipping etc.
GoodBadGroovy
August 21st, 2009 at 6:30 am

Oh and I really like the idea of doing some blog posts about recent filmic news so people can shoot the shit over it Vern. As it does sometimes crop up in other review comments, so it’d be cool for it to have its own space.

Though yeah I’d keep it casual, only if there’s some particularly intersting film news or just once a week or whatever. We’re all here for your reviews afterall, the other conversations are just a happy sidebar to it. And there’s no point in posting about shit you don’t particularly care about just because it’s news that week.
CJ Holden
August 21st, 2009 at 6:46 am

Even if I seriously do not care fo Inglorious Basterds, I’m happy to see that Christoph Waltz gets so much recognition. He’s a well known character actor over here and although it’s now something like 15 years ago, I remember how much he creeped me out in an episode of “Komissar Rex”. (That’s a back then very popular crime show about some austrian cops and their dog) He played a serial killer who dressed up women as dolls before he killed them. And I remember one scene, where he is dragging one of his victims through a lonely street at night, until he notices that a little girl is watching him hrough her window. So he looks up to her and says with a kid-friendly voice something like: “Don’t worry, she’s not real. It’s just a doll. You like to play with dolls, too, don’t you?”
(And I think later he comes back to kidnap and successfully kill the girl, but this might be a different episode.)
Mode_7
August 21st, 2009 at 7:00 am

I think the nerds are unduly hard on Avatar because deep down inside they’re all hoping that it’ll somehow heal the pain inflicted by Lucas all those years ago. All the hate directed towards it is some kind of self defence mechanism to guard against disappointment. Kinda like how someone needs to learn to love again after a bad breakup.

In the interest of full disclosure I should note that I am not, in fact a qualified psychologist.
Brendan
August 21st, 2009 at 7:05 am

Guys I’m like 90% sure Vern’s going to review IB so why don’t we save thoughts on that for that post? Is no one else’s mind blown by the idea of Vern advertising stuff on his website? Now, who can we get to direct ET/GVP? Get Edgar Wright on that shit and cinema will never be the same.
Brendan
August 21st, 2009 at 7:18 am

And I stand by my stance on the Avatar trailer reaction: That Cameron created a level of expectations and hype that could never be met, so this backlash isn’t shocking. All the people who are saying that it looks like great CGI and nothing else are correct, and people should lower those expectations. But the reasons people are bitching that there aren’t photo-realistic aliens is because CAMERON SAID THERE WOULD BE. When Moriarty wrote that post about how some people would be incapable of enjoying Avatar, and he was just happy to go to Pandora’s Vagina or whatever the fuck they’re calling the planet, it pissed me off. Of course the vast majority of people want to see a great James Cameron movie, he’s part of the legacy of filmmakers that define genre cinema for my generation. If his point is that there are whiny cunts in the talkbacks that could never be pleased, then yeah, obviously that’s true. But the tone of the responses isn’t ironic smarminess to distant to allow for a visceral, emotional reaction to anything, it’s one of tremondous heartbreak and disappointment, the feeling that once again, we have been burned. I don’t think that’s the case but I had read Quint and Devin’s reaction to the footage at Comic-Con, and when they said lower those expectations, I did. Some people had to see with their own eyes before they would let their hopes go.
SDAL
August 21st, 2009 at 7:20 am

But on to more important things, how freakin’ cool is it that Bruce Willis is going to be in The Expendables? I can’t believe how cool this cast was already, and now Bruce Willis is in it as well? Forget Inglorious Basterds, I want The Expendables now.
But while we were talking about Inglorious Basterds, I think the problem I had with it, and it sounds like maybe other people did as well, is that it’s too much Tarantino. I felt like I was just watching Kill Bill, with a different cast in a different country. Which is fine, but it’s not Kill Bill, it should feel like it’s own movie. I think I’m suffering from QT fatigue.
Apart from that I loved it.
Mondowray
August 21st, 2009 at 7:26 am

Brendan, you’re right, jumped the gun a bit but I’ve been running the film through my head for a week now with no one who’s seen it to talk to!

Over at AICN, I noticed one talkbacker moaning about Del Toro’s lack of an English accent, well I like to think it’s a tribute to amount of effort that went in to Lon Chaney’s in the original. None. And to be fair, I noticed that in the original and the trailer for the new one, it is pointed out that he’s been away.
Mode_7
August 21st, 2009 at 7:48 am

The very fact that Cameron is making a sci-fi movie creates a level of hype that probably can’t be met, I don’t think he can be blamed for that, the movie was gonna be over-hyped no matter what he did. I’m not sure I remember reading an interview in which he imply’s that the CG is gonna be all that revolutionary either. Most of the interviews I’ve seen it’s the 3D stereoscopic (sp?) technology he seems to want to talk about, not the CG.
Mr. Majestyk
August 21st, 2009 at 8:02 am

This is what kills me about the Internet. Cameron doesn’t have to do this shit. He could have made any fucking movie he wanted after Titanic. Literally. No man in Hollywood has ever wielded that much power. But he didn’t want to squander it on any old project, so he sailed the seas, found Jesus (literally–he’s got his corpse in his den), and tried his hand at acting (he’s funny!). Then when he felt that he had something to add to cinema again, he came back and killed himself to push the technology forward in ways that we probably won’t appreciate for several years (a la The Abyss). But are the nerds grateful to have such an uncompromising craftsman and artist working in the oft disparaged and hack-ridden blockbuster genre? Are they willing to cut him any slack for a slightly underwhelming trailer to see if his skills at storytelling and characterization (which are more far important to the longstanding impact of his films than the special effects) shine through in the finished film. No. Instead of “He has never failed me before so I will trust that he knows what he’s doing,” we get “It lokks like Fern Bully its gay I hope it FAILS.”

In conclusion, fnerds used to be the people whose love for pop culture knew no bounds. Now they’re just joyless, pampered brats whose only pleasure comes from being the first to hate something.
Stuntcock Mike
August 21st, 2009 at 8:23 am

How about Predator vs. John McLane?

I’d be in.
geoffreyjar
August 21st, 2009 at 8:35 am

Bastards:

I plan on seeing Bastards tomorrow or Sunday as I have work today.

Wolfman:

I don’t think Wolfman is untouchable. While entertaining the movie is far from perfect and in my opinion is pretty far down on the list of the Universal classic monsters. It’s one I think can be bettered.

The movie has had a pretty rocky behind-the-scenes in pre-production (the original director, the One Hour Photo guy, left/was fired) and post-production (’apparently’ the studio didn’t want practical effects they wanted CGI, so they had to re-fillm many/all the effects shots).

The trailer looks good and it has a very good cast, Hugo Weaving is enough to con me into seeing anything. I hope Anthony Hopkins is at least going to try because when he (and Liam Neeson) are not ‘into it’ they do their damndest to make the most boring and uninvolved character imaginable. So it would be nice if he gave a good performance.

Avatar:

Yeah I saw the trailer… it SUCKED!!11 Just like everything Cameron has ever done EVA!!11 *crosses arms* I knew it was gonna suck!! Looks like Episode 1! Looks like Delgo! There are cartoon people in it!! Sure he did Terminator, T2, Aliens, Abyss, True Lies, Strange Days, Solaris, that Spider-man scriptment that was even better than the three movies we got, but what has be done? Yeah that’s right Piranha 2 & Titanic (which are not all that bad of movies)! The fucker got lucky is all! I hope he gets AIDS, cancer, and his family is killed!!
-is what I’d say if I were a typical internet nerd

Mr. Majestyk

Couldn’t have said it better myself. So very, very true.

As I believe you said youself in another talkback:
Cameron. New film. Okay I’m sold.
telf
August 21st, 2009 at 9:01 am

Vern – this is a great idea. Seems pretty much impossible for us to stay on topic anyway (credit to how interesting your TBers are, I think).

Mr M,

That’s pretty much how I feel about this.

However, I had high expectations and I still thought the trailer was amazing. My girlfriend had no expectations (although Cameron is one of the few directors she’s heard of) – and she just kept saying “wow”, and she doesn’t like “space stuff”. I also think my neices and nephew are going to go ape for it. Photo-realism, or the lack thereof, doesn’t seem such a deal-maker-or-breaker for most people.

I mean, I get that people might feel let down if they were expecting it to look like real life (which is weird when you think about it – even live action movies rarely look like real life due to lens, lighting, make up and post prod noodling) – but that is an issue of context. The Wolfman movie had loads of negative buzz (delays, switching director, etc) so when it actually looks fun people are happy to overlook the substandard CGI in the trailer – I guess because they didn’t see that as THE sales point of the whole enterprise.

I think that the nerd audience is also, strangely, less likely to be impressed by all the visuals because of all the extra sci-fi they’re into that isn’t quite mainstrem (video games and comics, cartoons and such) – whereas it’s actually pretty rare for a major sci-fi fantasy film to get produced, so this will seem a lot more original and “new” to audiences. Also, it is more of an action/adventure film than most Sci Fi (structure-wise at least), which Star Trek (and D9 to a degree) perhaps proved is more palatable to mainstream audiences.
telf
August 21st, 2009 at 9:04 am

Speaking of Avatars (at length, sorry, always looks like so much more when it been submitted…), can someone explain to me how to put one next to my comments? I think it’s time I got one… ta.
clubside
August 21st, 2009 at 9:20 am

to telf and anyone else who missed the instructions before: WordPress takes advantage of a global avatar system called Gravatar which, when linked to the email address you use, will display your selected avatar on any site supporting them. Just go here:

http://gravatar.com/

As long as you use the same email address when posting here (and pretty much every other WordPress site, and many others) your avatar will show up, even past posts!
Brendan
August 21st, 2009 at 9:35 am

Can someone confirm for me whether the Expendables is PG-13 or not? Some article from a while back said that that was the rating they were shooting for, and I was wondering if anyone had heard anything else on this.
geoffreyjar
August 21st, 2009 at 9:39 am

According to my local newspaper, it’s poster ad in my newspaper and various other websites it’s rated-R

So we should be good
geoffreyjar
August 21st, 2009 at 9:50 am

I guess I should thank clubside for the avatar thing as that would be the right thing to do.

Thanks.

-meant to put this in the big post
CJ Holden

I’m glad someone else appreciates the Hulk character in Lee’s film. I thought he was a marvel (no pun intended) to behold. Coming out of the movie all I heard is how he was an abomination (no pun intended). Now he has become the poster child for what not to do with a CG actor along with Jar Jar (though from a technical pointof view Jar Jar is quite impressive in context, as a character he’s annoying though). But I think Lee’s Hulk deserves a hell of a lot more credit than he gets.
GoodBadGroovy
August 21st, 2009 at 9:56 am

Cheers Clubside!
CJ Holden
August 21st, 2009 at 9:57 am

I still say that the Avatar aliens look great and even photorealistic, but are too blue for many people’s brains. Just look in the scene, when he wakes up in hospital, at the soles of the blue guys’ feet. They are not as dark blue as the rest of his body and really look like more realistiv than the rest of the body.
CJ Holden
August 21st, 2009 at 9:58 am

And you’re welcome, Geoffjreyjar.
PacmanFever
August 21st, 2009 at 10:09 am

My brain can never feel its getting too much blue. My love of the colour blue is rivaled only by that guy that directed I Know Who Killed Me.
Brendan
August 21st, 2009 at 10:37 am

CJ Holden when you first started showing up with that avatar I almost popped a blood vessel in my brain trying to figure out what the fuck it was and where I had seen it before. Cheers to Arrested Development!
neal2zod
August 21st, 2009 at 10:43 am

Call me a pussy but I actually kind of want Expendables to be PG-13. Mainly because I’m afraid that if Stallone makes it R, it’ll be RAMBO R, and I can only stomach one of those movies per lifetime. I saw Rambo again on Showtime HD the other day and how it didn’t get an NC-17 is beyond me.
Brendan
August 21st, 2009 at 10:59 am

Probably because it was in the context of a real-world war, like Saving Private Ryan. I don’t know man, I would just rather see an R rated action movie then a PG-13. When it’s PG-13 you can’t really create any sense of tension or give any of the action and peril any sense of weight seeing as how no one seems all that affected when they get shot or injured. They just fall down, end of story.
And I can’t really feel to bad about people not enjoying the ultraviolence of Rambo because (A) the violence and carnage was the only thing that the Rambo trailers seemed at all interested in showing and (B) within five minutes Stallone makes it completely obvious what the level of violence is that we’re going to be dealing with, so it’s not like audiences were walking in blind.
Vern
August 21st, 2009 at 11:06 am

AVATAR – Until I saw Telf’s posts I thought maybe I was the only one that actually did think the Avatar trailer looked amazing. I don’t give a shit about if it’s an effects landmark or not, I’m just excited to see this director of some of my favorite movies returning after so many years. But as a bonus I do think the effects look beyond anything we’ve seen before. The shot that looks the most impressive to me actually is the kiss at the end. Something about the imperfections in their hair and… I don’t know, maybe they look like dummies or something, but they look like they’re really standing there.

To me it looks like ALIENS meets DARK CRYSTAL, but hopefully not as boring as DARK CRYSTAL.

Yeah, Cameron can be blamed for getting hopes up, but when has he not been a blowhard? If he had promised it would fix the economy and I believed him I think I’d still be thinking, “Well, I wish it would’ve fixed the economy, but at least we get a new James Cameron movie!” One of these days I gotta write an essay about my theory that people these days have a need to turn on their heroes.

WOLF MAN – It looks pretty cool, nice look to it. I even like the CGI. But I don’t have much hopes for this just because of the background. It started with a visionary director who may or may not have pulled it off, but then was taken over by a guy who in a long career has never mustered more than “pretty good.” If it’s his first great movie it would be a miracle.

HULK – I think the face looks better on the newer Hulk but I like the Ang Lee one better because the animation is so much better, so much more nuance and personality. And I like the shade of green they chose.

ET/GVP – I don’t know if I mentioned this before, but the pivotal scene is when Gizmo must decide whether or not to eat E.T.’s Reeses Pieces after midnight and try to wield his dark gremlin power against the Predator.
CJ Holden
August 21st, 2009 at 11:06 am

I think PG 13 would work fine, considering how hard some PG 13 movies already are these days. You can even have a high bodycount in PG 13, you are just not allowed to show explicit headshots or blood splattering, when someone gets shot. And in the end it ends up with a “Not under 16″ rating here in Germany anyway, so I don’t care that much.
Vern
August 21st, 2009 at 11:12 am

Oh yeah, THE EXPENDABLES: MTV recently referred to it as “ultra-violent” or something like that, but Stallone has always said it would be PG-13. The producer said they would do R and PG-13 cuts and test screen them. The posters I can find online don’t have a rating, other than a fake fan made one which says R. So the fake fan made version at least will be R.

It will be great to see Willis in there, but based on the character in the script I don’t think he’ll get to be a smartass like McClane. What’s exciting to me is that according to rumors Schwarzenegger is no longer playing himself, but a retired Expendable. That would leave it open for him to kick ass in a part 2. (Unless they replace them all with Sasha Mitchell.)
Brendan
August 21st, 2009 at 11:36 am

If we had a ratings system like that, that’d be cool, but everything is either PG-13 or R, so it gets tricky toeing that line. With a movie like Dark Knight, PG-13 is fine, but with a balls-out action extravaganda, R is (to me) the only way to go and have the movie turn out satisfying.
I actually vastly prefer the Lee Hulk to the new one (the character not the movie). When he’s out in the desert, just walking around, looking at stuff, then dodging helicopters and blowing them up, that’s about as good a usage of CGI in a movie as we’ve gotten.
I’m pretty happy to see that that movie is developing a cult following since it got spurned on the release. I may not think it totally clicks as a movie, and the Hulk dogs are fucking awful, but it did try lot’s of different stuff, and seeing as how most of the superhero stuff, even one’s I like, even love, have been kind of same-y, it makes that movie age all the better.
Brendan
August 21st, 2009 at 11:37 am

ET/GVP: Get Verhoeven to direct it!
telf
August 21st, 2009 at 11:48 am

Vern – seriously, write a movie. Even though you’re joking, the little Gizmo/gremlin vs predator scene you just described sounded fantastic.

And thanks for the info Clubside – now to choose…
Dave
August 21st, 2009 at 12:03 pm

If it’s raining that predator doesn’t stand a chance. For at least two reasons.
Dave
August 21st, 2009 at 12:04 pm

Also ET cannot die.
CJ Holden
August 21st, 2009 at 12:12 pm

I think the Predator would find a way to kill E.T.
CallMeKermiT
August 21st, 2009 at 12:28 pm

Damn , I was out of here for a few days , and , BOOM !!! AVATAR Trailer ! Man , that was a surprise ! I’m actually pretty fucking impressed , but I’m also a jackass without the technical know-how to really understand all the little touches and details in that trailer . I’m not kidding , I was expecting a CG movie , but similar to Ice Age , not Jurassic Park ! To tell you guys the truth , I avoided , when possible , all information for this return of Cameron to SF , for the surprise factor.That not only looks like a Métal Hurlant comic , but like a Metal album cover ! Imagine one of the action shots in the jungle with “Manowar” or something written over it , and , that’s it , the cover for the greatest hits ! Niiiiiice!
CallMeKermiT
August 21st, 2009 at 12:36 pm

ET/GVP: Also , Gizmo , in Gremlins 2 , is pretty fucking badass in a John McClane way . Using improvised weapons and guerrilla tactics . He even builds a bow like Arnold in Predator , so he already knows how to kill that bastard.
CallMeKermiT
August 21st, 2009 at 12:43 pm

And since we are talking about Avatars and Gravatars here’s the origin of MY Gravatar ! Prepare for an IQ lowering experience !

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WHu6VD5nQOM
travis-dane
August 21st, 2009 at 12:50 pm

Sasha Mitchell needs to be in everything! He is the fucking Codeman!
Mr. Majestyk
August 21st, 2009 at 1:02 pm

Kermit, you just referenced Manowar in a positive light. This is the story we’ll tell people of how we became best friends.
Mode_7
August 21st, 2009 at 1:08 pm

Boring? DARK CRYSTAL was fucking excellent. As a long time fan of yours Vern I feel I am owed an apology and I demand that you retract you’re previous statement.
Mode_7
August 21st, 2009 at 1:09 pm

your

bah you know what I mean…
Mr. Majestyk
August 21st, 2009 at 1:13 pm

The Dark Crystal is fucking creepy, which is why it’s awesome. I’ll take it over Labyrinth anyday.
CallMeKermiT
August 21st, 2009 at 1:25 pm

Mr. Majestyk : I know , usually the classic Manowar cover is some kind of Conan warrior holding a sword or breaking chains , like in The Triumph of Steel cover , but that’s the “feel” of the trailer , for me . This movie is going to be fucking METAL !

I also like the robot suits , but maybe because I’m a fan of books like Starship Troopers and The Forever War . Speaking of The Forever War , is Ridley Scott’s movie adaptation still on ? Or the Alien prequel is going to delay it ?
GoodBadGroovy
August 21st, 2009 at 1:26 pm

Some sad news for any Scorsese fans:

http://www.hitfix.com/blogs/2008-12-11-awards-campaign-2009/posts/august-surprise-leonardo-dicaprio-s-shutter-island-moves-to-2010

Shutter Island pushed back to 2010, damn. I was really looking forward to it. Reasons for it seem mixed, but the main issue comes down to money. Either they didn’t have enough money left this year to give it the commercial push, or they wanted it in the 2010 slot because they don’t have many big pics to make them cash next year.
Brendan
August 21st, 2009 at 1:26 pm

Labryinth has David Bowie. Do not offend The Sovereign. You have been warned.
Mr. Majestyk
August 21st, 2009 at 1:30 pm

Now I want to see a fantasy film that ditches all the hobbits and wizards and just kicks it full-on tits-and-battleaxes style. Everybody’s got furry underpants and big knockers, even the musclemen, and all they care about is glory, carnage, and ale, in that order. We’ll call it Iron Slaughter or Blood On My Steel or something. It will have more guitar solos per minute than any movie in history, including the Woodstock documentary.
Mr. Majestyk
August 21st, 2009 at 1:31 pm

I have long been a fan of the Muppet who played Bowie’s codpiece. I expected it to start singing at any minute.
Mode_7
August 21st, 2009 at 1:32 pm

GoodBadGroovy

Man that is bad news, I was really looking forward to seeing that. On the upside it gives me time to forget that unbelievably spoilery trailer that I’m fairly sure gives away a major plot twist.
Jacks Lack of Motivation
August 21st, 2009 at 1:46 pm

The Skeksis are creepy but like them the Dark Crystal takes a loooooong time to get anywhere. Jesus, now I’m tempting fate to remake it with fast Skeksis, I have become the thing I hate.
CJ Holden
August 21st, 2009 at 1:51 pm

What happened to the Dark Crystal sequel by Genndy Tartakovsky? Is it still coming?
Brendan
August 21st, 2009 at 1:51 pm

Apparently David Gordon Green’s next movie is a fantasy film where the special effects are all designed to evoke Krull and those kinds of flicks. One of the points he made in the press conference was that the creatures and monsters would all have (visible) genitalia. Minotaurs, centaurs, the works. Can’t. Wait.
Jacks Lack of Motivation
August 21st, 2009 at 2:32 pm

Thanks to clubside here too. Cheers.
CJ Holden
August 21st, 2009 at 2:40 pm

I just showed my sister the Avatar trailer and she really liked the anime fairy tale vibe of the quiet scenes and the look of the aliens. Looks like Cameron made a movie for boys and girls.
(Note that I didn’t turn it into a Cameron-makes-chick-flics-rant, like so many other internet people would do.)
Mode_7
August 21st, 2009 at 3:04 pm

I’d take the slightly cartoonish vibe of Avatar over the creepy dead-eyed more realistic look of Beowulf any day.
Vern
August 21st, 2009 at 3:08 pm

The Dark Crystal is amazing, but I fall asleep when I try to watch it. I mean the comparison as a compliment to both Dark Crystal and Avatar. We could use more crazy non-human fantasy shit like that, even if they’re not using puppets.
Mr. Majestyk
August 21st, 2009 at 3:19 pm

CJ, isn’t that what Cameron has always done? His secret weapon was that he would make totally badass ’splosion-heavy movies that always had a little something for the ladies, and not in a pandering way. I, personally, have watched Alien and T2 with several ladies who have enjoyed the hell out of it. Even beyond the obvious use of women as strong heroic characters, he made romance central to both Terminator and True Lies, and The Abyss was all about getting Bud and Lizzy back together. Not saying that all women care about is lovey-dovey crap, but it definitely takes the action out of boys-only territory when the characters actually care about each other.
Mode_7
August 21st, 2009 at 3:26 pm

I get the impression that JC is a pretty big anime fan, and has been for his entire career. I’m really looking forward to Battle Angel Alita which he was supposed to be making before Avatar. To be honest I was pretty disappointed when he decided to make Avatar first, but maybe he wanted to get back into his groove before taking Battle Angel on.
RRA
August 21st, 2009 at 3:32 pm

Mr. Majestyk – You’re absolutely right. In that regard, I think of Cameron as holding the emotionalism/sentimentality of Spielberg, mixed with the love for guns of John Milius.
RRA
August 21st, 2009 at 3:34 pm

AVATAR – The geek backlash, with many in the friggin CHUD forums calling Cameron a “souless FX director*”. ….I’m reminded of when George Miller was going to direct JUSTICE LEAGUE, and many of the same geeks questioned his action skills. Because what does the director of THE ROAD WARRIOR know about action, right?

Besides, this is a shocking concept, but the trailer ISN’T the movie. I know, holy shit, what a revolutionary thought. Hell look at the teaser for the original TERMINATOR:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8UjGt45uChk

My god, watch as that cinema velvetta cheese melt!

Vern – Speaking of BASTERDS, I’m surprised you never got around to reviewing WHERE EAGLES DARE. I mean Clint Eastwood killing Nazis. It can’t get any better than that, and I’m certain DARE was Tarantino’s chief influence for BASTERDS. I’m certain because he called it (and 3,711 others) his favorite movie.
Mode_7
August 21st, 2009 at 3:41 pm

Did anyone see Tarantino’s top 20 movies of the last 20 years list? Surprisingly mainstream, with a few notable exceptions.

http://kottke.org/09/08/quentin-tarantinos-top-20-movies

Nice to see Battle Royale and Blade on there.
Bad Seed
August 21st, 2009 at 3:50 pm

Personally the Avatar teaser hit me like it should, raising my curiosity about the film and making me mark December 19th on my calendar. That I wasn’t actually surrounded by 7-foot tall blue aliens, or wasn’t transplanted into the body of a 7-foot tall blue alien, didn’t detract from the experience. I think Vern’s right about Cameron: yeah, he’s a blowhard, and yeah, the hyperbole came thick and fast on this one, but this guy created some of my all time favorite films, and this looks like a return to form after True Lies and Titanic. I’m willing to give him the benefit of the doubt, as we won’t really have the full experience until we’re in the theater; then we’ll know how true all the talk has been about this being a game changer. Frankly, that isn’t as important to me as being engaged by the material; my eyeballs getting fucked would just be a nice bonus.

And since we’re talking about it, wouldn’t it be weird if Cameron slipped some Dark Crystal into the background? People would definitely rethink hitting happy hour before seeing another movie after that.

Wolf Man: I thought it looked good too. Very atmospheric, and Benicio looks to be in fine form.

Basterds: Anyone interested in hearing a smart review should check out Mark Kermode on the BBC. Personally I love almost everything QT’s done (Death Proof didn’t quite do it for me), but Kermode makes a good point about how, even though individual scenes are strong, that the end result feels bloated when cut together. On the flip side, QT has a good statement (I can’t remember where) about how people come to his movies with certain expectations, only to have those expectations turned on their ear by what’s on the screen. He claims it takes at three viewings for people to appreciate his films for what they are. So there you are, two points of view to consider when seeing Basterds.
Brendan
August 21st, 2009 at 4:04 pm

I hate Kermode. He’s the kind of hateful, self-obsessed dick that pollutes so much of the critical field. Watch his interview with Defoe about Antichrist, and he basically comandeers the whole thing for the last two minutes to talk about himself and his tastes in movies. Hey asshole, fucking Willem Defoe is talking about his acting process and what he feels his movie meant, who gives two fucks that you got kicked out of Cannes for booing a movie.
Bad Seed
August 21st, 2009 at 4:15 pm

I hear where you’re coming from. For me I think he can be very insightful, making salient points about a lot of films. I can see where he can rub you the wrong way (the man rarely takes it under 11), but for me just the sheer speed at which he formulates his arguments always entertains me. Plus, my exposure to him is his broadcasts with Simon Mayo, who often takes the piss out of him. That might make him more bearable then when he’s on his own.

Personally even if you hate him I’d recommend the interview where Herzog got shot in LA; he catches either a low caliber bullet or high caliber BB above the waist, and then dismisses it as “an inconsequential bullet.”

Classic.
Mr. Majestyk
August 21st, 2009 at 4:38 pm

Hold on, what? Herzog got shot? Really? That’s awesome! I just recently became acquainted with his works, and I’ve sort of become obsessed with him in a very short time. (It’s very unlike me. There’s no murder or titties or car crashes or nothin’.) Everything I hear about him makes him seem more and more like the most badass filmmaker of all time. Of all non-kung-fu directors (many of whom are kung-fu masters in their own right), Herzog is the one I would pick to win in a fight. He survived an about-to-erupt volcano, an African jail, and Klaus Kinski. How can you hurt him?
Bad Seed
August 21st, 2009 at 4:52 pm

It’s pretty wild—and on camera. Kermode was interviewing him on these hills overlooking Hollywood, and phew, there you go. Looks like it was an air rifle, but . . . well, I’ll let you see for yourself. Here’s the video, pure badass:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ylXqc8TQ15w&feature=PlayList&p=CBAD155F10190054&playnext=1&playnext_from=PL&index=9

Hope the link works. If not just type Kermode Herzog and you’ll find it on youtube.
geoffreyjar
August 21st, 2009 at 5:18 pm

CJ Holden

The Dark Crystal sequel is dead. Something like funding feel through or something, not sure.

Tartakovsky is kinda like the David Fincher of animation: constantly attaching himself to projects that loose funding or just never happen for some reason.

Did you know he was attached to Astro Boy a few years back as well? That would have been interesting.
Brendan
August 21st, 2009 at 5:19 pm

Well my only real exposure to Kermode is the youtube videos of his reviews that he does for the radio. I will agree that he often has good points but they are oftern absolutely buried under this attitude of smugness and self-satisfaction that he gives off to me. I mean, I get that critics like to dig into movies pretty brutally, it lets off stress. But when he was talking about Pirates 3, he made a point of constantly calling Keira Knightley: Ikea Knightley. What the fuck does that mean? What the fuck does that add to film discussion? Shit like that drives me nuts. It was pretty cool when Herzog got shot. That was badass.
proper
August 21st, 2009 at 5:37 pm

Vern,well done for the work you and your crew have done so far this year,I’m in it and read up every week,damn your making the rest look old [not old school],Strive for excellence 4 reallllllll.Thats all I have to say right now.
Chris
August 21st, 2009 at 7:20 pm

Did anyone else think the Inception teaser was incredibly overblown? Like it was the loudest and most trumpeted dose of non-information ever, what with all the “dun!”s every five seconds. They even squeezed an extra “dun!” in at the end. And so far for all we know Nolan made a remake of The Matrix. Which is fine by me, I love the Nolanmeister.

I thought Basterds was awesome, but I’m a sucker for Tarantino I suppose. I feel a pavlovian response to ennio morricone music cues, especially when used well.
RRA
August 21st, 2009 at 7:50 pm

“Did anyone else think the Inception teaser was incredibly overblown?”

Than that teaser did its job if it caught your attention like that.
Chris
August 21st, 2009 at 8:48 pm

hey, anything related to that movie right now will get my attention. I’ve been a Nolan mark since Memento. But the teaser just made me laugh in the way it so incredibly trumpeted such little information.
telf
August 21st, 2009 at 9:03 pm

I dunno Chris – for a teaser it really blew my skirt up. And I loved the wall running, seemed to be done with a rolling set (ala 2001) instead of cgi. I got pretty excited to be honest.
Rusty James
August 21st, 2009 at 10:30 pm

@ “Instead of “He has never failed me before so I will trust that he knows what he’s doing,” we get “It lokks like Fern Bully its gay I hope it FAILS.”

I can’t agree with you enough Myjestik. I’m kind of disgusted with the online film community’s reaction to this trailer. It seems like we’ve become a spoiled, demanding group less interested in film and more interested in nit picking something to death on twitter.
It’s a well put together trailer and at the very least it’s premature to dismiss the film based on two minutes of footage.
RRA
August 21st, 2009 at 11:21 pm

More like the Geek Internet worried about shit that just fucking doesn’t matter ultimately.

Ebert saw that 15 minute preview, wasn’t impressed either but unlike that juvenile Geek Internet, he’s at least got perspective to seperate the preview/trailer from the fucking movie. And isn’t that fair at least?

http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090819/REVIEWS/908219995
heimp
August 21st, 2009 at 11:33 pm

Meh, I was kind of disappointed with how the Avatar aliens looked. Too skinny, too light blue, too human. But, whatever, it still looked pretty sweet. Can`t frikking wait.

Hey Vern, make sure you check out a little French crime flick called Black. I have a feeling you`ll like it.
http://www.blacklefilm.com/
Chopper Sullivan
August 22nd, 2009 at 1:06 am

It was a boring trailer. I love Cameron. I’ll be there the second his film comes to my theater, but it was boring. It’s just bad advertising.

Basterds is great. Really great. Almost JACKIE BROWN great.
rewrite
August 22nd, 2009 at 2:59 am

Completely unrelated, but has anyone seen the trailer to The Tournament? Seems to have all the right ingredients so far. Though it kinda gives me the Long Kiss Goodnight vibe to it, and I don’t know if thats good or bad. All it needs now are a few gremlins, ET and a predator.

As for the other stuff. Well, I can’t really say much about what has been said so far.

AVATAR – Excited Yes. Expectations lowered? just a little. Though I have really no idea what those expectations were to begin with other than it being James Cameron’s new movie. With all the stuff I was reading about throughout the years, I was close to thinking that it wasn’t even a movie anymore but something close to idea of it curing cancer and us finally being able to live on the moon. Who knows maybe it will, maybe it won’t but at least they’ll have something good to come out of it. Though one thing bugs me, Robert Zemeckis, James Cameron, Steven Spielberg and Peter jackson are all in this phase to make these 3D movies for some reason. Which is great to experiment, but I just wish we got back to what they’re really good at. The 3d idea isn’t bad, but its distracting me from considering these movies as a part of their library. I know they’re trying to cover new ground but there are still limits to be broken and excitement to be had within film. Without them making good movies, we’re left to think movies that are substandard to be groundbreaking. The standard has been lowered, and these filmmakers have the power to wake it up again not by technology but by just telling good stories again. But they’re not getting any younger, which is the sad part.

On what it is to be a fanboy nowadays – I really don’t understand it. But all of a sudden they’ve become stockbrokers as well. They keep track of opening weekends and records like its the freaking Dow losing a point. One movie hits 20 million or less, and we’ve got ourselves a failure. It was good that the dark knight accomplished what it could. But using that as a reference to where all should be met is stupid. To hurry up and say that this movie earned how much does not make the movie any worse or better than it is. Wow, have the times have changed. There should be a montage of this with bob dylan playing in the background for these sad times.

Wolfman – I was really looking forward to this when Romanek was involved. I kinda lost the hype when Johnston stepped in (I like him, but JP3 still leaves a bad taste with me for some reason). At least the cast and the atmosphere seem to be there. Not sure if its a good thing, but I get a “From hell/Sleepy Hollow” feel to it. Though regardless, it is still refreshing to see a movie like this come out. I hope it turns out well.

Ninja Assassin – Shit, wasn’t expecting “300″ asian style but I’m still hyped up for this movie for some reason. My expectations have lowered in avatar proportions, but I still have hope. Though The Ninja movie with adkins movie looks like the better ninja movie now. oh well.

Book of Eli – Not feeling it at all sadly. But I just want to see the hughes brothers do something at least.

(sorry added those two in there, cause I haven’t had time to comment in recent months)

Inception – Anyone find a link yet? I’m tired of seeing people describe it!

CallMeKermit – yatterman is great! I’m not sure why I didn’t know of him before. But I’ve been playing tatsunoko vs capcom for awhile now, and hes really good in it. The takashi miike movie also looks interesting in a speed racer kind of way.

You know I’ve missed out on just about all the movies this summer. But one thing i’ve kept coming back to are these reviews. And they’ve been the best, good times vern.
CallMeKermiT
August 22nd, 2009 at 8:18 am

rewrite : Yatterman ( Yattaman here in Italy ) is a cartoon show , very popular over here , especially during the ’80s . I always liked the crazy designs of the machines and the humor ( in the clip above , the Italian opening , there’s a robot with a bell at 0:46 , but since the animation is so poor , it looks like he’s masturbating !).Also look at 0:41-0:44 : the most uncomfortable robot ever ! I’m VERY interested in the Miike movie, let’s see how that turns out , even if the trailer is not that good. Also , there’s a Yattaman videogame ?
telf
August 22nd, 2009 at 8:24 am

Still can’t figure out this gravater thing. It’s saying there is already a user called”telf” on wordpress – do I really have to change my username?
Jam
August 22nd, 2009 at 8:37 am

I like the DARK CRYSTAL, but after seeing the trailer and half-remembering that treatment that went online a million years ago, I’m guessing AVATAR is going to be more like ALIENS meets DANCES WITH WOLVES.
Jam
August 22nd, 2009 at 8:38 am

I like the DARK CRYSTAL reference, was what I meant to say, although I really do like that film also.
Mr. Majestyk
August 22nd, 2009 at 10:03 am

I saw IG, and I fucking loved it. Don’t hold me to this, because I might change my mind next time I watch Jackie Brown, but my kneejerk reaction is it’s Tarantino’s best since Pulp Fiction. Kill Bill had more awesome stuff, but in terms of storytelling and filmmaking, I think Basterds is superior. And as a guy named Marcel who doesn’t get to see his moniker represented in film very often, seeing a badass black Frenchman who’s boning the hot blond Nazi-killer who owns a movie theater was a real treat. Second coolest Marcel ever.

Also, the Avatar trailer is much more exiting on the big screen. I was always looking forward to it, but now I can’t wait.
Mr. Majestyk
August 22nd, 2009 at 10:12 am

I meant IB, not IG. Inglourious Gasterds is what Scarface from the Batman comics would call it.
CJ Holden
August 22nd, 2009 at 10:49 am

Slightly Off Topic: You remember that episode of that crime show with the dog that I mentioned, where Christoph Waltz played a creepy serial killer? (If not, scroll up. It’s in this talkback.) I just looked it up and learned that the episode was even directed by Oliver Hirschbiegel, who later directed “Das Experiment”, “Downfall”, was offered the director’s chair of “Blade 3″ and then got locked out of the editing room by Joel Silver and the Wachowsky’s during his work on “Invasion”.
Vern test
August 22nd, 2009 at 1:27 pm

this is a test
Vern test
August 22nd, 2009 at 1:29 pm

Telf – I wasn’t sure but as you can see in the above test the avatar just goes by your email. So if you have your user name as “theoriginaltelfisbetterthanthefakeone” or something you can still just write “Telf” for your name here and that’s what will show up on the posts no matter what your user name is.
Mode_7
August 22nd, 2009 at 2:39 pm

Hey Telf, are you the same Telf I had a conversation with on AICN in which you said you auditioned for the Ozymandias part in watchmen? What did you think of Matthew Goode’s performance?
travis-dane
August 22nd, 2009 at 4:32 pm

I am pretty sure that Ninja Assassin will kick ass!
And Ninja will kick ass too.
Good year for Ninja fans.
So, we need some kind of Dudikoff cameo in one of them. or at least Franco Nero…
telf
August 22nd, 2009 at 5:13 pm

Thanks Vern – that was really cool of you to work that out for me. Serious pressure to find a good avatar now…
telf
August 22nd, 2009 at 5:25 pm

Mode 7,

Yeah, that’s me mate. Good to see you over here.

I think Goode is clearly seriously talented, but I didn’t understand the choices he/Snyder made. I felt it kind of hurt the movie to have Ozy be so snide and imperious – my girlfriend never read the comic (or any comic…) and was in no doubt that he was the murderer/sort-of-villain. She was surprised when I told her it was supposed to be a twist and was quite a shocking revelation in the books. I also didn’t buy him physically in the role. But, for the record, I should say i didn’t think i was right for the role either : )

But I liked a lot about the film – I thought he and Malin were the only ones who didn’t nail their roles – but only by my own expectations of how I had envisioned them in the book.
telf
August 22nd, 2009 at 5:43 pm

Badass juxtaposition personified?
Darth Irritable
August 22nd, 2009 at 8:55 pm

Off topic from Avatar -> I just landed in Australia and they are promoting the Channing Tatum debacle fighting here as an upcoming release. Fighting raped my eyeballs, and not in the good Flesh + Bone way, but in the American History X prison shower way. Why in God’s name would you release this POS in cinemas when it only made like a buck fifty in the US. Why is Universal punishing our strangely accented cousins? Isn’t it enough that they’re Australian?
Lawrence
August 22nd, 2009 at 9:28 pm

Did I get my post deleted? Probably for the best since it was really graphic. I’m sure Vern wouldn’t delete it because I talk bad about Harry Knowles. So sorry for being crude.
Outlaw Vern
August 22nd, 2009 at 9:38 pm

I didn’t delete it Lawrence, but I got my eye on you now, troublemaker.

Darth – uh oh, I’m probaly gonna watch FIGHTING tomorrow night. We’ll see what happens I guess.
telf
August 22nd, 2009 at 10:27 pm

Love to hear your thoughts on Fighting. It’s got my man Cung Le in it – haven’t seen it yet though. A compare/contrast with Lionheart (AWOL to non-American TBers) would be some nice added value…
RRA
August 22nd, 2009 at 10:53 pm

Actually I would compare FIGHTING more with the Walter Hill effort HARD TIMES with Chuck Bronson and James Coburn.

And I liked FIGHTING. Me and 7 others who saw it total in theatres did too. Convinced me of Channing Tatum’s potential, and GI JOE convinced me this shit wasn’t the way to go for him.
RRA
August 22nd, 2009 at 10:56 pm

Darth Irritable – Because they need to recoup their investment? They aren’t allowed to do that.

I don’t know about Australian laws, but last I checked, nobody is holding a gun at your head to watch FIGHTING. But imagine if Oz did have such a rule.

“Ma’am, if you don’t watch MR. MOM in the next 30 days, you’re spending the night at the slammer!”
telf
August 23rd, 2009 at 11:01 am

Who wouldn’t want to watch Mr Mom? “Megan and I are starting to watch the same TV shows… And I’m liking ‘em.”
Vincent
August 23rd, 2009 at 11:32 am

Ok, i saw that Avatar Day thing last friday and yes, the movie looks great. It looks just like a James Cameron movie. I´m not into CGI, but who cares? What i saw was good action and drama. And that Blue Sigourney cat was amazing.
Mode_7
August 23rd, 2009 at 3:26 pm

The more I watch that Avatar trailer, the more impressed I find myself. If you go though it frame by frame it really hits you just how good the CGI actually is. Head and shoulders above the star wars prequels and a sizeable improvement over LOTR and the Pirates movies.
telf
August 23rd, 2009 at 4:12 pm

Yeah, that bit where the alien girl lunges towards frame holding a torch is incredible. Can’t wait.
RRA
August 23rd, 2009 at 4:50 pm

IMDB did some snap poll and 40% voted that they wouldn’t go see AVATAR simply because of the trailer.

Fox might have a tiny tad problem here.
Darth Irritable
August 23rd, 2009 at 6:27 pm

RRA – I just don’t see the profit recoup. It’ll cost them a million or so to market I would think, and I doubt it’ll make that much. Hell, only about 20% of Australians have learned not to get scared when they see the giant people on the screen :).
But the movie itself has just… nothing to recommend it. I can see that somewhere under the mess, Tatum can act. I just can’t see any really likeable characters or anything vaguely resembling interest…. I watched it on the plane over, and comparing it even to DTV greats like LionHeart (Wrong Bet in NZ), or even the Sasha Mitchell epics (I really kept expecting him to go “whoah! I just totally creamed Tong Po”) it’s got nothing. Seems like such a waste of talent.
RRA
August 23rd, 2009 at 7:14 pm

Well was what FIGHTING’s budget anyway?

Just saying, it’ll break even on DVD. If not already.

Maybe.
Vern
August 23rd, 2009 at 11:15 pm

I’m gonna have to disappoint you Darth. I really liked FIGHTING. I’ll try to make the review extra persuasive so that all the Australians will go see it.
Darth Irritable
August 23rd, 2009 at 11:51 pm

Looking forward to it Vern.

I guess I just had trouble buying that Tatum, who from fight one, struggled with the preppie Cyclops-looking guy (without even the benefit of red eye blasts, but seemingly relying on the power of the pout) was able to start an immediate beat down on the 300 lb sasquatch, and then destroy Cung Le, the freaking middleweight Strikeforce champ…

It’s like Rocky, but without much real emotional resonance, and not even a decent training montage.

Hell, I don’t recall Terrence Howard coming up with anything even halfway close to eating lightning and crapping thunder.
RRA
August 24th, 2009 at 1:35 am

Darth Irritable – Don’t hold Tatum’s stripper past against him.

And no, I’m not making that up.
telf
August 24th, 2009 at 2:08 pm

Did anyone catch the bat-shit insane LEGION trailer before DISTRICT 9 – I know I’m probably late to the party on this one but that shit looked bananas.
dtroyt
August 24th, 2009 at 4:29 pm

Vern-

I saw a movie this weekend on a whim that I really think you should check out. Basically, I got my hands on a pre-release copy of “World’s Greatest Dad” starring Robin Williams and written/directed by Bobcat Goldthwaite. I went in completely cold and came out blown away by this original and unusual movie. It is the darkest kind of dark comedy, which Bobcat’s connection makes it seem like no surprise. I don’t wanna spoil any of it, because I think it really works if the story is allowed to play out at its own pace. I tried to find a release date, but haven’t been able to. Anyway, keep your eyes peeled for this one… it’s better than Mrs Doubtfire, I promise.
Darth Irritable
August 25th, 2009 at 4:00 am

You’re shitting me? Tatum’s a stripper? Since when is Fetal Alcoholism attractive?
RRA
September 4th, 2009 at 5:51 pm

Boondock Saints 2 trailer:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KM_Qo8-NRhk

And yes, I can’t believe its actually here. didn’t like the first one, but many do so….that’s good?
RRA
September 18th, 2009 at 12:36 pm

Eastwood is shooting a ghost movie HEREAFTER with Matt Damon next, after that South African sports movie of theirs comes out in December.

Yes, Dirty Harry fighting ghosts.
Mr. Subtlety
September 18th, 2009 at 1:15 pm

RRA – weird, ain’t it? Eastwood’s filmography is all over the place, but I honestly can’t really imagine what his “ghost movie” would look like. As far as I can tell MIDNIGHT IN THE GARDEN OF GOOD AND EVIL is the closest thing he’s ever done to horror (and the horror elements there are as akward as the rest of the movie) so I’m gonna assume this is actually just a drama which has ghostish plot elements, you know, like BELOVED. But it would be kind of cool to see him take on a new genre so late in his career. His movies are inconsisent for my taste, but occasionally he can really get a nice atmospheric groove going which could be a recipe for a great, slow burn classy ghost story. Gotta say I’m betting against it at the moment, though.
Mr. Subtlety
September 19th, 2009 at 1:32 pm

Guess this potpourri catagory need a link on the main page if its gonna get traffic
Brendan
September 21st, 2009 at 7:02 am

Anyone see the ‘Taken’ guys’ new movie trailer, From Paris with Love. Looks like a pretty good, goofy action movie with set pieces and explosions and whatnot. At least it seems like he put the camera far enough away from a huge fireball so we can see it. Plus, I love Travolta when he’s in crazy mode. It always makes for an entertaining experience, even if the movie licks dog turds.
RRA
September 21st, 2009 at 8:23 am

Brendan – Weird how TAKEN did good overseas, but became a sleeper blockbuster hit in America. How the fuck did that happen?

And as much as I did enjoy TAKEN, Mamet’s SPARTAN with the same story is better and just more epic. Yet that one had a limited theatrical engagement, and shit how many people actually saw it in theatres and not on DVD?
Brendan
September 21st, 2009 at 8:26 am

“How the fuck did that happen?” People love their Liam Neeson.
Brendan
September 22nd, 2009 at 2:02 pm

Justin Lin has been announced as the director of the Highlander, reboot/remake/thing. Discuss.
telf
September 30th, 2009 at 4:16 pm

VERN! Maybe you are aware of this, but if not : http://blog.canoe.ca/scrapyard/2009/09/30/dmx_to_make_mma_debut !!!!

Brendan – I think Lin is a better choice than I was really expecting. Now, who should play Connor?
Vern
September 30th, 2009 at 4:23 pm

Holy shit! I did not know about that. I hope he’s careful though after what happened to Roc Raida.
Bixby Snyder
October 1st, 2009 at 8:28 pm

This seems like a good place to point something out which may not have been pointed out before. I have almost nothing but disdain for the service called ‘Twitter’, but it has brought an awesome piece of information to my attention. Please check out this twittering by user ’schwarzenegger’, come back here and tell me that’s not cool:

http://twitpic.com/f92jm

Can you imagine the persuasiveness this adds to every argument? “Ja, okay, I see yoa point, but do you know the riddle of steel?”
Outlaw Vern
October 1st, 2009 at 10:17 pm

Thank you Bixby, I would have to say that that is amazing. I still think that California’s quarter design should’ve been the poster for T2.
Mr. Subtlety
October 4th, 2009 at 12:39 pm

I almost hate to bring this sorry subject before you fine people, but I suppose I am just too baffled to keep it to myself any longer. So, what the fuck is the deal with some of my favorite writers and directors lining up to defend Roman Polanski? The Washington Post linked to the following URL with a list of folks who signed the “Free Roman” petition.

http://community.livejournal.com/ontd_political/4207963.html

What in the Hell are they thinking? I mean, Polanski’s an indisputably great artist, and even made two films with consistently feature on my must-watch every Halloween list (ROSEMARY’S BABY and REPULSION). But the way I see it, his rape case is not even close to a gray area. How you can drug and rape a 13-year-old, admit it, and then decide you don’t want to go to prison and flee the country, and then have a slew of folks (including, painfully, folks like Martin Scorcese and Terry Gilliam) jump to your defense as if you’re the persecuted one? It boggles my mind. I mean, please, I’d love to hear that somehow I’m wrong on this one, but I just can’t imagine what possible defense of this man there could be?
CJ Holden
October 4th, 2009 at 12:53 pm

Aw crap, even Fatih Akin? :’(
What’s wrong with these people? I’m not denying that Polanski is a great artist and I don’t even doubt that he might be a good friend and/or deeply regrets what he did, but we all know WHAT he did! And he didn’t even spent the last decades home- and moneyless or suffering from a painful desease, so that we could say that he has already been punished somehow! He was walking around, in front of everybody’s noses, making award winning movies with some of the greatest stars of our times!
Andy C.
October 4th, 2009 at 2:51 pm

I don’t know but I think even the victim wants to let this rest. Although I can’t bring myself to defend him that much. There are some shady things that went on like plea bargains that were not honored and other things that escape me at the moment. Elia Kazan got applause at the Oscars one year so there will always be suprising supporters no matter what you do.
Mr. Subtlety
October 5th, 2009 at 9:09 am

Andy — yeah, there seems to be some noise that he thought his plea deal wasn’t going to be honored, but hey, you’re never gaurenteed that a plea deal will be honored. And if he really thought he’d been treated unfairly, hey, that’s what appeals court is for. I know the victim (who already recieved a cash settlement from him) would rather just let it go, but jeez, I mean, Vern didn’t flee the country and hide out when it looked like he’d have to do actual time. I don’t see why successfully evading justice long enough should mean that we all ought to let it go (um, except in statute of limitation cases, but this isn’t one).*

Guy’s had some hard luck in his life but I still think Seagal would break his wrists and kick him in the balls a couple of times. Actually, I might accept that as suitable punishment. Show me that petition and I’ll sign it.

All I know is that if Jeff Fahey signs the Free Roman petition, I’m never watching another movie again as long as I live.

* I know you’re not really trying to defend the guy so sorry about the rant. Just trying to wrap my head around this weirdness.
Andy C.
October 5th, 2009 at 1:50 pm

I also think he should have stayed and handled it back then. No worries about the rant Mr. Subtlety. I know where you are coming from. By the way I think you are one of the best commentaters on here.
RRA
October 5th, 2009 at 4:40 pm

I dont care much at all about the Polanski thing. Those that engage in that debate just want another jerk-off to the Culture Wars. Because we haven’t had them enough.

The dude made some classics, and PIRATES, which isn’t one of them. CHINATOWN was cool. He also (probably) cornholed a kid without consent. Not cool.

It’s like the classical Chris Benoit Paradox: Maybe the greatest Pro Wrestler of his generation, also murdered his wife and kid before hanging himself off his gym equipment. Also changed the ending fate of an important character from THE SHIELD. Thanks alot Chris.

Then again, I thought Polanski should have gone to jail for his RUSH HOUR 3 appearance. How the fuck did he start up a friendship with Brett Ratner of all folks? Anyway, some of you heard Ratner plans to make a documentary “defending” Roman? Surely it’ll be better than AFTER THE SUNSET. Maybe.
Mr. Subtlety
October 5th, 2009 at 6:10 pm

RRA -Actually having the Rat make a film about you might be worse punishment than prison. Really, though, what gets me is not Polanski himself — I’m comfortable with loving the guy’s work secure in the knowledge that I’ll never meet him personally. Feel the same way about Mel Gibson, Quintin Tarantino, etc (although obviously child rape is a somewhat more serious personality flaw than just being a nut or a jerk). But whatever, I can dissociate his life and work. But its weirder to me to see a bunch of folks whose work I love take what I consider to be such an inarguably wrongheaded moral position on this. Their lives are different than their work too, but taking a public position on issues like this seems like kind of an extension of their public works, rather than their private lives. In the same way that, for instance, Oliver Stone’s public positions on things will always be a part of his art.

Or at least it feels like that to me. So I’m trying to figure out how to contextualize this with my previous understanding of the meaning of their work. I dunno, maybe it amounts to the same thing and it’s just an unusual situation which is reading differently. I certainly don’t want to start or be part of any culture wars (dear god, no. I wouldn’t touch this topic with a 20 foot pole on most boards) but I do think its worth talking about the relationship between an artist’s public works and public art, or if it’s even worth differentiating from private lives. Guess that’s what I’m struggling with now, trying to decide how much, if at all, it changes the way I perceive SHUTTER ISLAND or something. Or if it should.

Andy — thanks pal. You made my day. And hey, thinking about Seagal kicking Polanski in the nuts made me remember that he’s actually a cop now. How epic would it be if Roman got extradited to Louisiana and Seagal had to take him into custody? And maybe drive him across the US to his trial, while rival gangs tried to kidnap him for their own purposes?
RRA
October 5th, 2009 at 8:08 pm

Mr. S – What happened with SHUTTER ISLAND? Did Leo Dicaprio murder a hooker or something? Did Scorsese finally slap him one too many times?

BTW off-topic but people presist in asking why the fuck Scorsese has been making all these consecutive movies with Leo, and asides from perhaps they like working with each other or whatever…

It ties into a fact that there aren’t that many Hollywood “stars” who are mega-stars in America alone. Maybe Will Smith, but who else? Maybe Depp, but that’s debatable. Either way, your Pitts and Jolies and DiCaprios and Bale and Matt Mother Fuckin’ Damon….all them are stars in America, but totally superstars overseas.

So yeah, Leo gives a box-office punch to get Scorsese working. But really, why the fuck can’t he just do SILENCE? Thats the shit I want to see. Not a Frank Sinatra biopic* or another DeNiro teamup or whatever. I want more religious angst man!

*=Though Clive Owen would be great. He lost out on James Bond, but he gets Blue Eyes instead.
Mr. Subtlety
October 6th, 2009 at 5:28 am

RRA- Nothing against SHUTTER, it looks pretty good, its just that Scorcese was one of those guys who signed that petition which almost makes me wonder if I really understand the things he’s trying to say in his movies. Got no beef with him for making films with Leo, though. Aside from keeping him working, he’s gotten some fantastic performances out of the guy which really anchor his films. And Leo seems to have surprisingly wide range of characters he can play, so it doesn’t seem to be limiting the kind of film he makes (though if he gets cast as Sinatra, I’ll smell a rat).
RRA
October 6th, 2009 at 8:15 am

Mr. S – You ever see that TCM doc SCORSESE ON SCORSESE?

When RAGING BULL comes up, Scorsese brings up how at that time many “liberal movies” had tried to explain “problem people” with simple explainations like daddy used to beat him or he came from a ghetto or whatever. And Scorsese didn’t want that shit in his BULL.

He just wanted a fucked-up guy, without necessarily easily explained by armchair psychology.

Maybe thats why he is defending Polanski? Not that being a Holocaust survivor of Poland (where 1/3rd its population was exterminated) or his wife getting murdered by the Manson crew excuses the underage without-permission cornholing. But life is sorta complicated.
Mr. Subtlety
October 9th, 2009 at 6:21 pm

Holy shit, I just saw the trailer for Black Dynamite, and now I’m confused… why is it that I’m not watching it right now?
Outlaw Vern
October 9th, 2009 at 7:12 pm

Did you see the BLACK DYNAMITE trailer on TV or before a movie? I hope so. They’ve been promoting it forever on the internet (which can lead to unmet expectations) but I haven’t seen any ads on TV, in print or before movies (which means most of the world doesn’t know it exists). Plus it’s opening against WHERE THE WILD THINGS are which I can actually confirm is fucking incredible. (I’m taking my time on the review because it deserves it.)

Anyway, I know I always preach against box office tallying, but I’m hoping BLACK DYNAMITE does well enough for either a sequel or a Michael Jai White career boost. I’m positive it’ll at least catch on on DVD, but it was fun to see with an audience.
Mr. Subtlety
October 9th, 2009 at 7:56 pm

Sorry, on the internet. I’d been holding off on looking at the trailer as I sometimes do with movies I already know I’m going to see, but then I happened upon the trailer and figured what the heck. And I’m glad I did. That put a big ol’ smile on my face.
Outlaw Vern
October 9th, 2009 at 9:34 pm

That one on the website with the Dolemite style narration cracks me up. They even imitate Dolemite’s “rated arrah!” at the end. I’ve really been looking forward to seeing it again, but watching that trailer again I thought, “Wait, this movie is more awesome than I remembered!”
CJ Holden
October 10th, 2009 at 12:41 am

I saw a few weeks ago something about Black Dynamite on ARTE, which is a German/French art TV channel. (And maybe the coolest channel in the world, because they now that “art” can mean everything from “experimental short film” to “classic silent movie” and “well made documentary”, right up to films from Russ Meyer. Not to mention that they even aired films like “Street Trash” for the first time on German TV!)
They didn’t say much about it. It was a short interview with the director, together with some (damn hilarious) clips from the movie and of course the inevitable explaination what “blaxploitation” is.
As far as I know it has still no release date here in Germany and I’m 99% sure it will go straight to DVD, but I really wanna watch it.
Mr. Subtlety
October 10th, 2009 at 12:35 pm

Vern – yeah, that’s the one I saw. The great thing is it’s not like a parody of that style– it just IS that style. “He’s super cool, and he know Kung Fu.” That about sums it up, don’t it? And the business at the end about it being filmed in “cinenaphonic quadrovision” is just too glorious for words. It’s just so damn perfect I hardly know what to do about it.

CJ — well, if it makes the wait easier, here’s the trailer I’m talking about. It’s so perfect in itself maybe it will provide some solace during the long wait.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6-wqmnJrOFM
Vern
October 10th, 2009 at 1:05 pm

Also, that bit where they call Michael Jai White “all star running back Ferrante Jones” – that’s not Black Dynamite’s secret identity, that’s supposed to be the actor playing Black Dynamite. That’s not established in the movie, but I’ve seen him say in interviews that he approached it as a famous football player trying to act.
Mr. Subtlety
October 10th, 2009 at 4:32 pm

Yeah, the thing I love about the trailer is just that the details are so spot-on, like the idea that they’d get a football star for this role. Seriously, I’m in love with this trailer. If the movie was never seen by anyone, I’d still say it was worth the time and money of all involved just for the trailer. If it were a fake trailer for GRINDHOUSE, I honestly would have wanted them to make the full thing long before I’d have asked for a full version even of MACHETE. I’m just giddy as a schoolgirl over this thing.
Brendan
October 14th, 2009 at 8:53 pm

So…Mel Gibson has a new revenge movie coming out. The trailers on line now. It’s directed by the guy who made Casino Royale, aka the best studio action movie of this decade. So yeah…MAD MAX IS BACK MOTHERFUCKERS! Also, I look forward to the movie where he is obsessed with a hand puppet, that should be pretty good.
rewrite
October 23rd, 2009 at 11:50 am

I’m not sure if anyone has seen this yet, but the trailer to Undisputed 3 is finally out

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5tTduaZZI-s

probably not as exciting as the ninja trailer, but exciting nonetheless

Oh and vern please do a review of the tournament when you get the chance. Adkins, Sebastien Foucan (parkour dude from casino royale), and some nice little set pieces make this a pretty solid action movie. And thats only a small bit of the content inside. I’m not sure if this would be considered a true dtv, but if it is then its pretty damn ambitious.
Brendan
November 1st, 2009 at 8:21 pm

All right, I was the one in this talkback saying that Avatar was overhyoed and Cameron was talking out of his ass about the brilliance of the special effects. I have now seen the second, 3 and 1/2 minute trailer, and y’know what? I was wrong. I think Avatar is going to be the movie he said it was going to be and it will represent the next level of technology. So congratulations James Cameron, you’re still and asshole, but this time it was at least kind of justified.
RRA
November 1st, 2009 at 8:29 pm

Of course James Cameron is an asshole. I mean how many guys you know of who could make Ed Harris (allegedly) cry after one too many bad shooting days?

That’s Hall of Fame worthy there.
Brendan
November 1st, 2009 at 8:42 pm

Well, I get that, but for me there’s a difference between a filmmaker that takes his shit very, very seriously and someone who is just a toxic human being. I’m not going to say Cameron’s one or the other having never met the man, but did you read the LA Times piece Chud linked to? Jesus Christ, parts of that were physically uncomfortable to read, like something out of the Ricky Gervais Office.

So yeah, talking about his history and upcoming stuff can be rough.
RRA
November 1st, 2009 at 9:03 pm

Brendan – Oh yes, and I remember that ENDER’S GAME author’s description of him. “He was only nice to me because I wasn’t working for him and could leave.”

Ouch

Total asshole. But its amazing how when its Michael Bay, we use it as an excuse to bury that hack. But if its Cameron or David Fincher, we excuse them.

Anyway haven’t been to CHUD in years. I take it they went from kissing his ass as an idol as geeks for Lucas pre-SW prequels…to slaying him because some trailer of some movie didn’t rape their eyeballs. Or something.

Right?
Brendan
November 1st, 2009 at 9:53 pm

Uh, yeah, pretty accurate. To be fair to Devin and the boys, that whole cynical approach they take to everything is at least consistent. That just genuinely seems to be how they approach everything, same way Harry and his lot’s constant since of hope and optimism is how they approach films and life. Its not like a pose they’re striking for the crowd. But sometimes I do need to spend time away from that site just to escape from that attitude.

But you should check out the link to that article at least. For one thing it gives you an incredible look into the process of making ‘Avatar’ and the insane intention to detail that goes into world-building. For another, it gives you a peak into James Cameron’s mind, and that’s a strange place to be.
Brendan
November 1st, 2009 at 9:55 pm

*sense of hope
RRA
November 2nd, 2009 at 9:13 am

Brendan – Thanks for the link.

And maybe this is why I love this web sight. We get good discussions without the bullshit community mentality, or moderators’ egos, get in the way.
Brendan
November 2nd, 2009 at 9:31 am

Yeah it’s a pretty sweet set up. Did you see that new Avatar trailer? That thing is fucking amazing. I’m still not all that hot on the design of Na’Vi (they look like something out of a kid’s movie) and I still think the story looks like some weird cross between Dances with Wolves and Ferngully, but despite all that, it looks fucking amazing.
dieselboy
November 2nd, 2009 at 2:27 pm

I have to disagree with you on this one Brendan, and i don’t find myself at odds with your opinions too often.

I do not get the comparisons this movie has been getting to Fern Gully at all other than they both apparently take place near a jungle for some scenes.

If I’m missing something what is it? It seems to me people have just been actively wanting to dislike this movie since before it even began filming.

On any talk back on any sight(other than here) you can’t go 3 comments without someone jumping in with “GO TO 1:47 IN THE TRAILER AND IF U PAUSE AND SQUINT YOU CAN TELL THOSE CLEARLY AREN’T REAL BLUE FAIRY CREATURES, THIS MOVIE FAILS. AND ALSO, FUCK JAMES CAMERON”

Cant believe you took it the Fern Gully route bro, but your still cool in my book.
Mr. Majestyk
November 2nd, 2009 at 2:30 pm

I prefer Dances With Thundercats, myself.
Brendan
November 2nd, 2009 at 2:49 pm

For the record, I was mostly kidding, I seriously doubt that James Cameron ever saw a wacky Robin Williams starring cartoon about fairies. I was mostly referring to the plot which in that cartoon was about a contruction worker who with his crew is tearing down a forest, much to the anger of the magical creatures that live there, so he winds up getting shrunk down to their size, and sees the conflict from their side, experiences crazy adventure, falls in love and eventually leads them in stopping his former allies. The only real reason I brought it up was because the trailer showed lots of deforestization machines and lots of tree carnage. The actual inspiration was likely a lifetime of reading stuff like John Carter of Mars and reading Moebius comics and stuff like that, so I’m not accusing Cameron of plagirizing obscure children’s fantast films. Its just weird how certain stories elements overlap.
CJ Holden
November 2nd, 2009 at 2:56 pm

That reminds me that I never found out how Ferngully ends. We watched it once in school, backin 1993, when our teacher wasn’t there and our substitute had nothing better for us. But we couldn’t finish it before the bell rang.
Brendan
November 2nd, 2009 at 3:14 pm

Well the tar monster thing is feeding off the oil or whatever, and so the main fairy dashes in and does something magical with a seed which causes the tar/oil thing to start sprouting branches and stuff like that and eventually it turns into a giant tree. Everyone is pumped but then they realize that the good fairy is dead, only then they pull her out and she’s OK somehow. She restores the hero guy to his normal height and when his dumb buddies ask him where he’s been he just cryptically hints at the whole shrinking thing. Then he plants a seed and they walk off through the forest. They brought about its destruction, but now life can be restored and nature can once again reign.

All of that was from memory. There is no way this movie is not on youtube.
RRA
November 2nd, 2009 at 3:22 pm

Oh God, FERNGULLY. A good example that unless you add a human concern to the environmentalist cause, nobody will give a shit or concern about the environment. See DAY THE EARTH STOOD STILL remake.

Brendan – Actually, AVATAR always came off as being DANCES WITH WOLVES in Outer Space. Now that could be good (DANCES WITH WOLVES) or quit…not. (LAST SAMURAI)
Mr. Majestyk
November 2nd, 2009 at 3:25 pm

Did no one catch my amazing Dances With Thundercats joke? Pay attention to me, dammit!
RRA
November 2nd, 2009 at 3:28 pm

If one has nothing good to say…

and for the record, you should have said Dances with (Random sci-fi Alien race) because Thundercats is too post-modernistic/Nostalgia Critic/AVGN/AICN/CHUD/RetroJunk to make the joke work.

At least for me.
Mr. Majestyk
November 2nd, 2009 at 3:31 pm

For the record, I don’t care what any of those acronymed douches say. I’ll be there stickfighting nerds for their 3D glasses opening night. If my eyeballs get fucked, so be it. The way they were dressed, they were asking for it.
RRA
November 2nd, 2009 at 3:34 pm

Your eyeballs were flirting with the movie. They deserved to get their brains bashed in.

Also the Bible says so.
Mr. Majestyk
November 2nd, 2009 at 3:44 pm

Average tale of woe circa 1939:

“Well, after all the topsoil blew away on the farm, Poppa had to join the army to get some insurance for Floyd’s medicine so his jawbone wouldn’t lock up again. Mama got a job at the factory making bullets, and even though her back hurts real bad she cuts hair on the weekends so Sally could buy a dress to get married in. Timmy and I helped out by hunting squirrel, which was a godsend, what with the discount Mama got on ammunition. They were the best years of my life.”

Average tale of woe circa 2009:

“This movie that nobody’s forcing me to see looks different than I expected it to look. No one has ever suffered more.”
M. Casey
November 2nd, 2009 at 5:51 pm

You guys might be interested in this recent New Yorker piece on Cameron. Long, but interesting.

http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2009/10/26/091026fa_fact_goodyear
Brendan
November 2nd, 2009 at 6:04 pm

That’s the piece I was talking about, except I thought it was LA Times, not New Yorker. Whoops.
RRA
November 3rd, 2009 at 6:52 pm

WWE Films is producing a direct-to-DVD movie about the Undertaker.

No Paul Bearer, No Deal.

http://www.prowrestling.com/article/news/14210
RRA
November 8th, 2009 at 11:41 am

Toxic Avenger V coming! http://www.dvdtalk.com/horror/blog/toxies_back.html
RRA
November 8th, 2009 at 11:43 am

Steven Tyler quit Aerosmith

http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2009/nov/06/joe-perry-steven-tyler-has-quit-aerosmith/

And that is your Dinosaur Rock News for today. Tune in for something about Oasis next week.
telf
November 11th, 2009 at 3:37 pm

Well shit: http://sports.yahoo.com/mma/blog/cagewriter/post/DMX-fight-update-Rapper-is-out-because-he-wante?urn=mma,201463

That is some weak sauce right there.
hamslime
November 20th, 2009 at 9:45 pm

Given the director’s past, I don’t see how this can be any good, but the cast has me intrigued.

Vinnie Jones
Tom Berringer
Ernie Huddson
Michael Parks

I actually like this cast better than the original Smokin’ Aces.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1319743/
Mr. Majestyk
November 20th, 2009 at 10:02 pm

Holy fuck I loved Bad Lieutenant: Really Long Title. It’s like arthouse Crank, but better. It’s hilarious, badass, weird as fuck, and actually kind of sweet. It’s both low key and completely over the top. It keeps forgetting about the plot so it can follow Nic Cage around playing Klaus Kinski playing Nosferatu playing a completely joyous trainwreck. The only sad part is when his girlfriend stops using drugs. And Brad Dourif! And Faruzia Balk in her underwear! And sharks! And the last line! Oh God, the last line. What a world where such a thing can be. I should really get to work on deserving it.
Brendan
December 2nd, 2009 at 12:59 pm

Vern, do you think you’ll do an end of the decade list, like Beaks is doing over at AICN?
RRA
December 2nd, 2009 at 9:57 pm

Saw FANTASTIC MR. FOX.

I dont know what this sight thinks of Wes Anderson. Not his biggest fan, but certainly I always got a lift of spirits from watching his unique pictures. Have a sneaking suspicion they won’t hold up in a repeated viewing, but whatever.

Point is, I might have actually enjoyed FOX more than any of Wes’ other works. Charming, creative funny little “kids movie” that adults will get more out of. If you hate Wes’ stuff, well FOX won’t change your mind.

Interesting year really for we got two respected filmmakers in Wes and Spike Jonze making their own very good, semi-great movies adapted from beloved children’s books. And both ignored by a public who would rather take their ADD-kids to the latest Dreamworks mediocre piece of shit.

Fuck the public.
Brendan
December 2nd, 2009 at 10:18 pm

I like Anderson. Not Zissou so much, and Darjeeling is definitely a ‘minor’ work, but I never understood the huge amount of venom that many people have expressed for them. And even if they *aren’t* that great, Bottle Rocket, Rushmore, and Royal Tenenbaums are original enough and executed well enough to give the guy enough artistic leeway for years to come. If he chooses to spend it on in-jokes involving nautical explorers or on felt puppets dancing to Rolling Stones (or whatever) more power to him.
RRA
December 9th, 2009 at 12:59 am

I reviewed ARMORED.

http://filmcinemamovie.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=1990s&action=display&thread=2899
Brendan
December 11th, 2009 at 2:37 pm

Over at Chud Nick Nunziata has a review of Avatar. Short version: masterpiece.
RRA
December 11th, 2009 at 4:10 pm

Isn’t CHUD the same website where Devin Farraci for months on the message board claimed AVATAR was doomed and not worth the saliva to talk about?

Funny. No wonder I like Nick more.
Gwai Lo
December 11th, 2009 at 4:56 pm

Yeah, Faraci has had it in for Avatar for months now. He can’t seem to mention it, or anything else for that matter, without expressing his doubts in Cameron and Avatar. It will be interesting to see if he

a) maintains the scorn
b) does a total 180 and loves it
c) doesn’t eat as much crow as he should and compromises with a 7 to 8 out of 10 rating, a la The Dark Knight
RRA
December 11th, 2009 at 6:37 pm

Gwai Lo – We should chide him for now on as Devin FullofShit. The last “t” is silent.
Mr. Majestyk
December 11th, 2009 at 7:24 pm

Man, am I glad I have never visited this site of which you speak. It sounds like Talkbacker: The Website. How dare this pompous cock besmirch the CHUD name. That’s CHUD II: BUD THE CHUD’s job.
Mr. Subtlety
December 11th, 2009 at 8:58 pm

btw, regarding that New Yorker article on James Cameron from a bit up this comment section… finally had a chance to read it (the grading period is nearly over, huzzah!) and its absolutely chock full of classic quotes. Most memorably, the greatest zen koan of the decade,

“It’s all just an excuse to do helicopters versus pterodactyls,”

I also like the hilariously classy take on talkbackers:

The message boards on Ain’t It Cool News, a fanboy site that started tracking “Avatar” a decade ago, logged bitter disappointment. The fans there had anticipated “eyeball rape.” One wrote, “My eyeballs were merely fondled without permission.”

Bet you didn’t think that shit’d end up in the New Yorker.
travis-dane
December 12th, 2009 at 1:19 am

Nah, CHUD is a good site, Dellamortes Box Office stuff is allways great, their TV section is miles better then AICN’s, Nick is a good writter and Devin comes up with good stuff too, his Devin’s Advocate column is mostly to the point. The CHUD lists are really funny in most cases.
So overall it’s a good movie site.
And they have a great videogame section (MCP) too.
Gwai Lo
December 12th, 2009 at 4:03 am

I read CHUD every day, I’m not going to lie. It’s a great site. Nick is a goof but in a good way. The site seems to cultivate a revolving door of thoughtful film analysts. The news always has a more polished delivery than “The Ain’t It Cool News”. CHUD just happened to form like Voltron and Devin was the head. He’s a sharp writer. He runs circles around your average internet film critic. But he can be a goddamn contrarian sometimes. He loves to push buttons. I think he likes to stick it to the breed of fanboy that is too self-serious to appreciate fun pulp, but he takes this impulse so far that he’s forced to be a stupid asshole to defend some of his contrarian opinions. He constantly harps on internet-journalistic integrity but then turns around and writes ten Devin’s Advocates on why The Dark Knight and/or Avatar are for philistines, before he even watches them. I like when he champions good films because he’s usually right, but then he’ll turn around and rail on something (Twilight is fine, but…) needlessly to provoke the ire of his readers. CHUD has some of the most hostile talkbacks on the interweb (more hostile per capita than AICN and that’s saying something) and I’m pretty sure it’s because Mr. Faraci loves sticking it to emotional nerds. Devin: your last hurdle as a journalist is to stop making fun of the people who read you. Take a note from Vern’s talkbacks, nothing but civility here, because coming in here and causing a ruckus would feel like walking into your friend’s house with dogshit on your boots.

I’m going to bed, I’m drunk.
RRA
December 12th, 2009 at 6:12 am

Gwai Lo – You hit the nail right on the head with Mr. Devin FullofShi(t).

He’s really a geek who hates “the geeks,” then turn around and have that silly Harry Potter column series of his. It’s one thing to be a prick, because sometimes it takes a prick to tweak someone’s nose to make point clear.

But indeed, to be contrarian for the sake of it, like Armond White* that son of a bitch…well, why bother with you Devin?

Vern aint one of those “geeks” either, at least not the usual sort which clogs up the Internet. But you don’t see him pissing on them every other review/posting. I mean when is the last time for Vern, outside of that legendary TRANSFORMER review of his from years ago?

*=He’s President of the New York Film Critics group. How the fuck he land that gig? Was Ben Lyons too busy?
Toxic
December 13th, 2009 at 4:01 pm

I don’t know if random suggestions are welcome, but just in case you haven’t seen them already, I think you might enjoy the two MESRINE movies by Jean-François Richet, KILLER INSTINCT and PUBLIC ENEMY N1. It’s probably the closest thing to Badass Cinema we have here in France and Vincent Cassel is really good as famous French gangster Jacques Mesrine.
hamslime
December 13th, 2009 at 4:46 pm

Vern – I just saw The Beast with Jason Patric (It was pretty sweet) and I came here to see if you had written anything up on it. To my surprise I don’t believe you’ve written a review on any Jason Patric movie. Sleepers, Lost Boys, Rush, NARC, not even Solarbabies.

I’m not complaining. I just found it odd is all. I assumed there would have been something on Sleepers or Lost Boys at least.
Mr. Subtlety
December 16th, 2009 at 5:43 pm

OK, so I took in Jennifer Lynch’s SURVEILLANCE. Not at all what I was expecting. I genuinely think its supposed to be a kind of weird dark comedy. Either that or its not very good. But I am kinda inclined to think its more the former than the latter. Bill Pullman might finally get his own mega-acting award for this one, but its pretty memorable and (I guess) all in good fun. What do you think, is it Jennifer Lynch’s version of KAOS or is it a some kind of nihilistic comedy?
hamslime
December 16th, 2009 at 7:56 pm

I forget which board some of you guys kept bringing up Outland but I came across it at the video store the other day and watched the thing. I figured since everyone was fawning over it, I might give it a try. (I’m not a big Sean Connery fan so there’s no way I would have watched this on my own)

Good call fellas. That was a pretty sweet movie. A thanks is owed to all who mentioned it.

Thanks.
Brendan
January 3rd, 2010 at 4:27 pm

I don’t know if there are any Stephen King fans (or haters) trolling this site, but I just finished Under the Dome (fucking fantastic except for the very, very ending, but this is Stephen King we’re talking about so that’s to be expected and accepted early on) and would like to know what any one else thought about it. Here’s hoping Spielberg actually makes that TV show (probably never happen but whatever, you never know) because I need some kind of serialized genre show to become obsessed with now that Lost is wrapping up.
ChopperSullivan
January 3rd, 2010 at 10:18 pm

I’m not a huge King fan, and I kind of hated CELL, but I got UNDER THE DOME for Christmas and finally opened it this afternoon. I’m no speed reader but I cranked out the first hundred pages in no time. I am expecting a poor ending but so far this one looks like a winner.

On a different note, I saw THE LOVELY BONES. First Peter Jackson film I didn’t like. I think he needs to pull a Raimi and go back to his roots.
odo19
January 3rd, 2010 at 10:25 pm

Hey Brendan, big King fan here. I finished the novel about a month ago myself and also loved it. My thoughts are pretty similar to your own. The book was excellent until(spoiler coming up!!!) they find the generator….then it’s all down hill. The ending should have been epic and instead came off like some shitty 3rd season Star Trek episode. I also had a problem with the beyond absurd(again SPOILER!!!) frame job they pull on Barbie. No matter how much I try I cannot convince myself that any group of people would be THAT gullible. What kind serial killer leaves any sort of identification at the scene of the crime like that? Besides the ending at that though I loved it. One of the best villains in any King book and some of his most vivid characters.

(END SPOILERS) Also, and this actually something to do with this sight, anyone notice the strong similarities between Barbie and the usual characters Seagal portrays in his films?? It was bugging me the enire time I read the novel. If this was the late 80s or early 90s I would start a petition demanding Seagal play Barbie.

Exhibit A: He’s a cook. A good one. People are constantly complementing him on his skills in the kitchen. Especially his enemies who usually refer to him as “that cook”. Remind anyone else of another cook who happened to be in the Navy?

Exhibit B: Shadowy ex-military past. Like a Seagal character he used to be in the military in some fashion and also like Seagal it’s not made clear exactly what he does until close to the end of the story.

Exhibit C: Like Seagal in either of the Under Siege movies when the shit goes down he’s the man on the inside that the government can trust and gets in contact with to resolve the situation.

Exhibit D: Pacifism. Like most Seagal characters Dale “Barbie” Barbara goes out of his way to avoid a fight…..at first. He only fights when pushed into one and there is no other alternative.

There might be more but it’s been a while since I’ve read it.
Brendan
January 3rd, 2010 at 11:26 pm

Yeah, I’m not to sure about that either odo. I let that slide simply because I think it fit into the really, really bleak portrait King was painting, and I would guess that you’re sort of supposed to think the story Big Jim comes up with is stupid. Everyone who takes two seconds to think about it realizes immediately that it is a frame up, and I think I remember someone ever saying exactly what you said, about how Barbie could possibly not have noticed that he’d lost his dog tags.

I think the idea behind the central truth of the Dome is good, but there’s almost no way to execute it in a manner that isn’t a massive cheat (and if there is, King didn’t find it) and I think King is sort of aware of it, because he seems to go out of his way to not have characters spend to much time actually dealing with the Dome.

SPOILER
I would disagree with you about how everything goes downhill once they find the cube. I think the destruction King brings down on the denizens of Chester’s Mill is downright Old Testament with King himself as the pissed off Yahweh handing those who refused to stand against evil a healthy dose of ragin inferno. I think it’s some of the most emotionally satisfying stuff he’s written in a long time.
Having said that, a few things about the last stretch annoyed me:
1) The Dome revelations, as discussed, and
2) The completely off-handed way he offs several major characters in the closing stretch. SUPER FUCKING SPOILER It’s one thing to have people go out with little to no fanfare, but the characters got over the death of their comrades faster then the Firefly crew got over Wash. And that’s fucking saying something. At one point someone mentions that not one, but TWO young children are dead and people just shrug it off.
3) Is sort of the same problem. He has this huge cast that I was interested in, but as the book wa winding down and really got into the home stretch he put the focus on a couple of the surviving group and was so tied to them that I kept forgetting that certain characters had joined up and were in the final group. It wasn’t that I lost track of characters, it was that he didn’t fucking mention them for fifty pages and then they said one line. Oh shit, the New Age-y lady survived and hung around? Good for her.
4) I’ll be really vague about this, but it concerns a major resolution. I think Big Jim Rennie is King’s best villian ever. He’s as diabolical as a Randall Flagg and as stark raving bonkers as Carmody. And he feels so fucking REAL. I mean, Rennie’s a cartoon, (he’s not just a Republican he’s also a used car salesman AND a kooky Christian AND a heedless father AND a drug kingpin AND he’s really, really stupid) but while he falls into several King-isms (why does EVERY crazy person have to be a Christian? I mean, really?) his motivation is what grounds him in the real world. He’s not after World Domination, or a secret treasure or a super weapon, he’s motivated by his own bloated self-worth and his belief that he really is the town’s only chance. I think that’s how the real Rennie’s operate (seeing has how King blatantly modelled him after Cheney, I feel like I’m on the money). These guys aren’t Bond villians, they’re David Brent if he got into politics and thye fuck everything up.
Anyway, all I meant to say is that I hated Big Jim and was looking forward to something really really bad happening to him and his, and while King certainly punishes them, it lacks any real sense of closure and triumph. I guess the ignoble end is the fitting end, Hitler and all that, but come on. I waited 1,000 pages for this fucker to get it and then he goes out with a mighty whimper. Talk about blue balls.

All that said, I still have no trepidations saying that I loved UNder the Dome and I’m glad I could talk to you guys about it.
Mr. Subtlety
January 13th, 2010 at 7:18 pm

Hey folks, took a look at DAYBREAKERS. Most of you probably already decided you were going to go see it, but if you haven’t I feel pretty comfortable saying that if you do you won’t regret it. It’s not that it’s a home run, exactly (its middling narrative deflates a bit in the final act) but it’s exactly the kind of movie I think most of us wish were made more often. A stylish, committed B-movie that takes itself seriously but isn’t afraid to have a little fun either. Add to that a few mildly original ideas, some very light subtext, and a fun cast and you’ve got something which I’d support on general principle. I can’t imagine it’s going to enjoy a terribly long theater run so get out there while you can. The Spierig Brothers have come along way since their first film, UNDEAD, where a guy punches a zombie fish.

Interesting side note, on the way out of the theater I was behind a teenage girl and her mom who were just going on about how terrible it was and what a waste of time and money etc etc. I was so baffled I walked behind them awhile to figure out what in the world there was to not like about it, exactly up to the point they said, “Well, the new TWILIGHT movie will be out pretty soon, right?” “Thank God! This wasn’t like the other two at all!” No, I’m guessing this one’s a little heavier on the beheadings than the first two TWILIGHTs, and no glitter either. What a wasted opportunity.
Mr. Majestyk
January 13th, 2010 at 8:24 pm

Saw a press screening of THE BOOK OF ELI tonight. Didn’t like it. It’s not bad for the majority of the running time but by the end I realized that it was pretentious and disingenuous and not nearly as deep or as badass as it thinks it is. But it’s bound to get a good discussion going so I hope Vern reviews it.
Brendan
January 14th, 2010 at 12:00 am

Majestyk- Do they actually play around with the Bible or is it more a fantasyland take on religion and faith and etc?
clubside
January 14th, 2010 at 6:46 am

I agree we need more genre movies Mr. Subtley, but Daybreakers didn’t do it for me. Even getting past the ludicrous premise, there’s just too little action and gore. It’s hard to think about what they could have done to make it more interesting for me given the setup, but overall it was just too meandering, I kept waiting for it to kick into gear and it didn’t. Great laugh with the first “test subject” of the synthetic blood, but overall too boring. It was nice to see the cast doing such a film, but in the end that’s just not enough. Given the success of Snyder’s Dawn remake you would hope there would be place to genre cross-overs, but it appears Hollywood is either lacking in the ideas or doesn’t recognize the potential. I guess Land of the Dead could have cancelled out any feeling about Dawn’s general success, but there is a spot for these relatively low-budget flicks.
Brendan
January 14th, 2010 at 7:14 am

I love Land of the Dead. The ending is sort of choppy and weirdly paced but otherwise it is a great Road Warrior style examination of civilization after the Apocalypse. You gotta love the weird deformed guy who talks like Lenny from Of Mice and Men but shoots like Sergeant York. Or at least I do.
rainman
January 14th, 2010 at 8:07 am

I am finally getting around to watching the BOURNE series on Netflix (my girlfriend insists, I think she’s a keeper) and I can’t believe Vern never reviewed these. Unless he’s hidden them in another review somewhere or just wants his “shaky cam” comments elsewhere to count as one.

BOURNE IDENTITY was pretty good, nice suspenseful story with a good satisfying ending but it also leaves so many open questions. The fight scene in his house where he (SPOILER) stabs the guy with a pen was awesome, in that he completely manhandled the guy who was obviously also a total badass. At the end of this 3-4 minute long fight Bourne is standing there breathing a little hard and the other guy is laying on the floor covered in blood and knows he is totally screwed. If you’ve seen 40 YEAR OLD VIRGIN this scene is in the background at one point at the electronics store.

BOURNE SUPREMACY was also good and the complete story is coming together, and it has a standout action scene in the car chase at the end with pretty believable car wrecks in the tunnel (although that is one tough taxi cab). A lesser movie would have had the incidental cars blowing up, or launching 10 feet in the air, or flipping over 5 times, but here the wrecks look realistic and scary and it’s spectacular.

ULTIMATUM is coming up and I hear it’s just as good. Nice job Matt Damon.
GoodBadGroovy
January 14th, 2010 at 8:53 am

I find Ultimatum the weakest, mainly due to the conclusion of the storyline not really concluding anything imo. Will wait to see what you think.
Mr. Majestyk
January 14th, 2010 at 9:12 am

Brendan: No, it is totally the Bible. They call it “the book” most of the time but it’s just the Bible. That should have allowed for some interesting extrapolation about the value and/or danger of religion in a burgeoning society, but the movie isn’t interested in that. It’s interested in how awesome everybody looks in their 30-years-old-but-scratch-free shades.
Brendan
January 14th, 2010 at 10:26 am

Is it wrong that I’m kind of glad? I think religion COULD and SHOULD be explored using genre metaphors, but most of the time the end result is simplistic and one note and cause for much speechifying and overacting. Ifying. Take the Mist: Great movie, but I think I stand for the majority when I say that Marcia Gay Harden’s screaming psycho was a weak link. So my stance I guess is that unless you really really have something to say (like Stephen King with the Stand) and are able to wrap your ideas naturally into the narrative and character arcs (like Stephen King with the Stand) you should just leave it alone. That’s just my opinion. Were the fight scenes good?
Mr. Subtlety
January 14th, 2010 at 10:40 am

Mr M – thats a shame. I keep wanting the Hughes to hit a home run (other than AMERICAN PIMP) because I always feel like their films have some great things about them. I do get a bad vibe from ELI though, and not just because I’d argue that the bible is the LAST thing a post-apocalyptic society might need.

Clubside — see, I found the basic premise inherently interesting and the movie actually lost a little interest for me when it got to the action (which is definitely fairly slight, though well executed). The look of the film and the clever little details of the vampire society really got me going more than the car chases and bow fights. I agree it’s not a classic, but I bet I’ll remember it fondly a few years from now, which puts it on par with a lot of the great forgotten B-movies that me and most of the folks here cleave to. Sorry it wasn’t your cup of tea, though. Maybe ELI will deliver the action goods for you? I’m still pulling for it.
Mr. Majestyk
January 14th, 2010 at 10:41 am

I get what you’re saying. I’d have been cool with it if it were just a kickass action flick with some religious trappings mixed in. But that;s not what this is. It’s a standard-issue Man With No Name story with delusions of grandeur. The whole movie is ABOUT religion, but it has nothing to say about it. The fight scenes are good but brief. Some show-offy camera moves and well-integrated CGI beheadings, but nothing special. Which is weird, because the action seems to be the only thing the directors were interested in, besides the costume design and oh-so-gritty desaturated photography. I never thought I’d say this, but the ideas the movie brought up were interesting enough that I would have sacrificed an action scene or two if it meant they had time to explore them with a little more depth and ambiguity.

I have more to say about it, but I’ll save it for the actual review. Which should be forthcoming, right, Vern, hint hint?
Brendan
January 14th, 2010 at 11:11 am

What a weird month. First Daybreakers, then Eli, and Legion next week. Seriously, when did January become weird genre movie month? I mean besides Cloverfield. Oh and Tooth Fairy comes out soon! That’s on everybody’s radar right fellas? Guys? Guys…?
Brendan
January 14th, 2010 at 11:28 am

rainman- I think Ultimatum is the best in the series. To me, it is the perfect combination of character, story and bone-shattering action. I think it is the culmination of everything that Liman set up in Identity and Greengrass improved on with Supremacy. There’s at least two all time classic chase sequences, an epic performance by Albert Finney, and Joan Allen being as badass as popular without threatning to make someone shit on a sidewalk (read the Death Race review). The only thing that I don’t totally like about it is that Greengrass keeps up the kinetic camera work even when people are standing in a room having a conversation. That was a bit much, but I thought during the action scenes he had a great system worked out.
Mr. Subtlety
January 14th, 2010 at 11:29 am

I have to say I’ve been excited about LEGION from the first trailer because even more than DAYBREAKERS and ELI it just looks like the craziest fucking thing ever. Its pretty ballsy to make an acton/horror pic where the main villain whose plan must be foiled at all costs is…. God. That’s the kind of what-the-fuckery that I can easily support with my hard earned cash.
Mr. Majestyk
January 14th, 2010 at 11:33 am

The LEGION trailer just gives off a too-good-to-be-true vibe to me. I want it to be as crazy as it should by all rights be, but I know it probably won’t. I call it “The ZOMBIE STRIPPERS Syndrome.”
clubside
January 14th, 2010 at 11:46 am

While “realism” isn’t the right word, it best expresses something I prefer in genre movies. As I am in the middle of a zombie novel reading spree this issue was really at the forefront when I watched Daybreakers. When it comes to vampires I can enjoy the cheese of The Lost Boys, the mythology and demonic undertones of Buffy/Angel, and the underground society of Blade.

The rest of this may be SPOILERY but I’ll try to keep it light. The premise of Daybreakers is that vampires have overrun the entire planet to the point of human extinction. Two big problems with that: unlikely given human technology and vampire vulnerabilities, and the vampires themselves wouldn’t be so dim-witted as to get themselves into such a situation as to be pressed for a blood substitute so long after it would be necessary rather than convenient. Even the ridiculousness of The Matrix’s premise showed some logic in the machine’s preparedness for a renewable energy source, yet billions of vampires rose up and just thought, hey, we’re immortal, no problem? I can live with the vampires needing human blood to ward off mutation, but if that was a known reality would they not have policed themselves to prevent the crisi they face in Daybreakers? Sure, this is just me overthinking it, but if they weren’t going for an action and gore-filled genre movie, why not have the rest make sense, even the simple twisted sense of something like They Live?
Mr. Subtlety
January 14th, 2010 at 11:51 am

Clubside – well, I think the situation is meant to be analagous to our current dependence on oil. Maybe the vamps are cutting it little closer than is realistic, but I think the film isn’t set in 2019 by accident. If we don’t have a magic substitute for oil by then we’ll start to feel a lot like Sam Neill – - and I’m betting we’ll be just as delusional about the gravity of our situation until the shit really hits the fan. At least, I think that’s what the film is trying to say.
rainman
January 16th, 2010 at 10:40 am

I saw BOURNE ULTIMATUM last night and to tell you the truth I’m having a hard time remembering much about it. That’s not good. Actually the biggest impression of it right now is that Scott Glenn looks like he’s 200 years old. I guess it’s been 20-25 years since he was in HUNT FOR RED OCTOBER (and BACKDRAFT?) but jeez. Guess I haven’t seen him in anything since.

So I guess I am kind of disappointed that I wasn’t blown away, not that I was blown away by the first two, they were just well done in a non-show-offy low-key story-driven kind of way. I was hoping for some more novel twists in this last one. He did that “I’m on the phone with you but also behind you on a rooftop spying on you through your window” thing again, which was not nearly as cool the 3rd time.

Wait there was one scene that was particularly well done. SPOILERS beware…. Bourne has a flashback to when he was dunked in water during his training, intercut with a flashback of trying to give mouth-to-mouth to his dead girlfriend underwater, intercut with a passionate kiss with said girlfriend. Tying together the torture / death / kissing / sex thing, MUNICH style.

But yeah, I did get a little sick of the MAN ON FIRE camera movement.
Sabreman
January 16th, 2010 at 11:55 am

“The only thing that I don’t totally like about it is that Greengrass keeps up the kinetic camera work even when people are standing in a room having a conversation.”

One scene in “Ultimatum” (I recently watched the trilogy again myself the past week, btw — and I keep wanting to call the 3rd film “The Bourne Ultimacy”, just to make it synch with the other titles {g}) takes this to a truly ridiculous extreme.

It happens right after a car crash, the action is over, the camera is looking at the result from a few dozen yards away, the point of view is in the middle of the road on solid pavement… AND THE FRICKING CAMERA IS STILL SHAKING! And not in a cinema-verite sort of way either; it’s still shaking in a ‘faking the Enterprise being shot at’ way, like the cars are supposed to still be shaking the riders around.

FOR GOD’S SAKE MAN, GET OFF THE COKE! — OR THE METH OR WHATEVER!!

I love the trilogy, but I agree that the 2nd movie is the high point; the 3rd movie, while still fine (and better than many other movies), has too many places where they feel like they’re dittoing high points from the 2nd movie but in a lesser fashion. Plus the plot tends to anticlimax, which is realistic in a way, but not very satisfying. Also, the first time I watched it I couldn’t help but feel cheated that the story didn’t seem to be connecting in any way with the final scene of the 2nd movie (but that’s because three-quarters of the 3rd movie happens between the last and the next-to-last scene of “Supremacy”.) Making Albert Finney’s character look like Uncle Argyle (I can’t remember the actor’s name at the moment, so I’ll go with his unspeakably awesome semi-cameo role in “Braveheart” {g}) from the first two films, was a thin choice, too. Although I’ll grant that Finney’s freakish alien vocal tones and speaking cadences work well.

In short, the 3rd film (unlike, for example, Matrix Revolutions) doesn’t feel like the climax to a trilogy per se. It only feels like what it probably originally was (in print): another chapter added because the first two were popular. (While also feeling, due to its organic structure with “Supremacy”, like it’s the second part of a sequel duology to an original standalone first work; like the two other Pirates of the Caribbean films.)
Brendan
January 16th, 2010 at 12:38 pm

Do you mean Brian Cox?

I still think Ultimatum is the best. I think Greengras and his team took everyhting that was interesting and entertaining about the first two, stripped off every inch of fat and ‘Hollywood’ and crafted a lean, mean machine of set-ups and pay offs playing out over the course of two hours across the globe. To me, the Bourne series is exactly how a major franchise should be handled and I hope they manage to convince Greengrass to come back for a fourth one (it’ll never happen but a guy can dream).
Brendan
January 19th, 2010 at 10:35 pm

Mr. Majestyk- Just saw Eli. Well I really, really liked it. Not a great movie by any means and I was bothered by how familiar some of the beats were, specifically to Children of Men. One of the things I was actually really happy with was how simple they kept it. I think if they had started ladling on the religious talk really thick it would have ruined the movie. I think the Hughes chose the better option, they give the audience all the pieces so we understand Eli’s quest and what drives him and gives him faith, but it never actually stops cold and spoonfeeds you exactly what is going on. I’ll say more if Vern reviews it.

SUPER SECRET SPOILER SECTION:

One last thing: How did you not love that last reveal about Eli’s ’situation?’ When Oldman is left staring at the Braille, utterly defeated and the Hughes do that slow-zoom into Denzel’s fogging up eyes, my jaw was on the floor. Me and my buddy were trying to figure it out afterwards and we realized just how carefully they had laid out the truth, teasing it out.
Mr. Majestyk
January 20th, 2010 at 5:46 am

I’ll admit that it’s not a bad movie if you manage to not take it seriously (which is difficult, because it wants to be taken really, really seriously). It’s one of those movies I didn’t notice I didn’t like until the very end. I kept hoping that I was wrong, that this wasn’t an uncritical celebration of the awesomeness of vague religiosity, that there was something the least bit subversive going on, but that twist ruined it for me because SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER it asked me to believe that reading the Bible gives you superpowers. A guy in the theater behind me was complaining about the obvious symbolism, but I don’t think there was any symbolism at all. The Bible LITERALLY lets blind men shoot with deadly accuracy and makes them bulletproof (until they no longer have it on their person, of course). It also apparently keeps your iPod functional for 30 years in the post-apocalyptic desert even though I’ve never had one that lasted longer than two. Nope, sorry. I can buy Zatoichi or Blind Fury because that’s the point of those movies. “Invincible blind swordsman” is the concept I have to swallow right at the outset. Book of Eli waited until the very end to drop the bomb that Jesus makes you Daredevil, and it was just horseshit to me. If this was some kind of fantasyland, sure. It’s magic, why not? But this was supposed to be the real world. In the real world blind people are lousy shots and bullets hit religious zealots whether they have their favorite book with them or not.

But forget the twist. Mostly the movie just disappointed me because I found its premise of a the value and/or danger of religion in a spirituality-free world intriguing, and it did fuck all with it. I wrote a much more detailed critique of the movie here: http://www.avclub.com/articles/the-book-of-eli,37086/#2085049 Just scroll down and look for my comment (same name). You can’t miss it, it’s the really long one. P.S. I apologize for reusing some of the lines. It’s too early to come up with fresh material.
Brendan
January 20th, 2010 at 6:36 am

Totally respect your points man and can’t really argue with you on the central premise, either you buy into it or you don’t. But let me say this for it: I think the ending works because it makes Eli’s story into what I refer to as “small miracle” Bible tale, a story where God’s prescence is expressed briefly in one or two acts of making the impossible possible. If you think of Eli’s blindness as similar to Daniel surviving the lion’s den or David being able to stand against Goliath, I think it makes more sense and holds more water.
Mr. Majestyk
January 20th, 2010 at 7:09 am

It’s true, you either believe in miracles or you don’t. I guess I don’t. Or I do, but it’s got to be the kind of story where a miracle can happen. For instance, I really like The Passion of the Christ, because the ground rules are pretty clear from the outset: It sucks to be the son of God sometimes. I didn’t think Book of Eli was that kind of story, and when it became one, it kind of pissed me off. I view religion as philosophy, not magic. It’s all about the usefulness of the advice it gives, but all Book of Eli had to say was “The Bible is awesome because God is totally real and he can make you a total badass.” If you don’t actually believe in God, it doesn’t give you much to work with.

I’ve said before on these boards that I’m an atheist, but I’m open-minded enough to appreciate good arguments about the practical value of religion. They’re pretty rare, though, because you just get hit with that faith macguffin again and again. “But why?” I ask. “Just have faith,” they say. “Faith in what?” I ask. “Faith in faith,” they reply, then throw down a smoke bomb and run away. Faith is like the Force: It can paper over any plothole without ever having to be explained. Then again, look what happened when they tried to explain the Force, so maybe I’m off-base on this one.
RRA
January 20th, 2010 at 7:29 am

I thought DAYBREAKERS was actually pretty good. Works kinda like a John Carpenter movie from the 80s would. Minus a kickass soundtrack.
Brendan
January 20th, 2010 at 7:43 am

Majestyk- I don’t think it’s a question of believing in miracles. One of your points is that the movie takes place in the “real world” so having a SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER blind man be given increased senses is cheating. But I think of the movie as taken place in a post-Revelations chapter of the Bible. If you read the interviews with the Hugheses over at Ain’t It Cool, at least one of them declares themselves as a non-believer. I’m not an atheist but I really don’t have much use for organized religion or movies that try to cram their morality down my throat (I’m looking at YOU fucking Narnia). I have to live with enough Catholic guilt as is without other people trying to tell me how badly I may or may not be living my life. I just think that if you place Eli’s story and the “miracle” that is his abilities in the context of other Bible stories it actually works beautifully. That’s just me though.

Also it was cool to see the Punisher cutting a deal to buy Mila Kunis. Can’t really blame the guy. Also, Dumbledore as a machine gun wielding cannibal? Stunt casting at its best.
Mr. Majestyk
January 20th, 2010 at 8:38 am

I don’t mean you actually have to believe in miracles for the movie to work. I just meant that the possibility of miracles has to exist in the interior logic of the movie. I mean, you don’t have to believe in Greek mythology to like Clash of the Titans, but if the whole movie had been a historical drama like Gladiator and then the Kraken showed up at the end, well, you might have some issues with it. Then again having the Kraken show up at the end of Gladiator would have been a huge improvement in my opinion.

But you’re right, viewed as a Biblical parable, sure, Book of Eli works, I guess. I just didn’t want that kind of movie, especially since they try to have it both ways by showing the Torah and the Qu’ran at the end. So there’s all these other religions too, but do they give you superpowers? It doesn’t surprise me that one of the directors is a non-believer. The movie just feels disingenuous when dealing with its subject matter. It tries to have this big emotional push at the end but I just didn’t buy that anyone involved in the making of the movie actually believed in it. That’s kind of the Hughes Brothers’ style, actually. They make these movies that are ostensibly about serious issues, but it’s just window-dressing. All they really care about is making everything look awesome. Look at Menace II Society. It pretends to be all about how terrible gang violence is, but really it’s all about how cool the Hughes Brothers can make gang violence look. Look at what they did to From Hell. They use a stark, serious, meticulously researched black-and-white serial killer procedural and use it as an excuse to make Ian Holmes’ eyes glow. I think they’d be great exploitation filmmakers if they just owned up to it. Instead, they gotta pretend that their movies actually mean something. I haven’t seen Dead Presidents, though, so maybe that’s the one where they show some depth.
Brendan
January 20th, 2010 at 8:53 am

I can’t speak at all for their other movies. To me the very very end of the film works SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER as a reverse Raiders of the Lost Ark. With that movie it was a really cruel punchline to all the horror that had come before, all the lives ended and destroyed and then the Ark was just stuck with a bunch of other junk. With this movie, the Bible and the ideas contained within are preserved and placed alongside other volumes and ideas with no precedence given to any of them. The ideas live on and are shared, not bastardized into an agenda.

But like I said, either you buy into the movie or you don’t. I bought into the reality they created, you were left cold. Doesn’t make you a bad viewer, doesn’t make Eli a bad movie. This is a pure agree-to-disagree type scenario. If nothing else, as vaguely explored as the films themes are, it gave us an interesting dialogue about the film. If every movie merited a thoughtful discussion of its themes and ideas, the film industry would be in a much better place, quality wise anyways.
Mr. Majestyk
January 20th, 2010 at 9:05 am

Totally. I still want Vern to review it just to participate in the conversation. I actually liked a lot about the movie, even if I kind of hated it as a whole. I could happily watch an entire movie of Denzel and Tom Waits hanging out, and Gary Oldman was awesome (obviously). I wish Ray Stevenson had had a better exit, though. I thought he was gonna draw down on Oldman because he knew that Oldman was gonna kill Mila Kunis for pulling that stunt with the grenade. That would have given him a little depth, like he didn’t just want her because she was the hottest chick around, but because he actually cared about her, even though she tried to kill him.

But anyway. It’s funny that I’ll be much harder on a movie that has potential and fails than I will on a movie with no potential that succeeds. I don’t mind a stupid action movie that doesn’t insult my intelligence by pretending it has any, but I can’t stand a movie that pretends it has something to say and then leaves me hanging. There are noble failures that bite off more than they can chew, and then are failures that take a big mouthful and then don’t even try to chew it. Eli’s the second kind, for me.
Brendan
January 20th, 2010 at 9:17 am

100% agree pal. Movies that exist as teflon, as product to be consumed and then forgotten are the worst kind of culture-lowering garbage. If a movie tries and fails, even if it pisses me off and makes me rant and rave and foam at the mouth so much they have to bring in a rabies shot, then I’ll at least give the film credit as being able to get under my skin and bring out a response, even if that response is very very negative.
Mr. Subtlety
January 20th, 2010 at 11:41 am

Shit, DAYBREAKERS got killed this weekend. I swear, guys, you should go see it. If there’s any segment of the population which could appreciate something like this, its the people here.
Mr. Majestyk
January 20th, 2010 at 2:58 pm

HOLY SHIT I NEED HELP! I may get to interview Wesley Fucking Snipes! What the fuck am I gonna ask him? Jesus Christ, he’s gonna eat me alive! Vern, everyone, give me awesome questions to ask!
Mr. Majestyk
January 20th, 2010 at 3:03 pm

UPDATE: It might now come down to a choice between the Wesley interview and a Don Cheadle interview. They’re both in BROOKLYN’S FINEST, the marketers of which are reaching out to the magazine I work for. I’m a little torn, honestly. I’m mean, both are awesome in totally different ways, but Wesley Snipes is a fucking icon. He’s pretty goddamn intimidating. I’d have to ask him about the tax thing and then he’d have to break my face off. That’s the way it works.
Brendan
January 20th, 2010 at 3:45 pm

Ask Wesley about how much input he had in creating Blade’s fighting style, persona and all that iconic stuff. I have to manage he had a large hand in forming the character.
Vern
January 20th, 2010 at 4:56 pm

Shit, that’s tough. One possible topic is playing James Brown for Spike Lee, and how he would approach that physical transformation. Also, which other comic book character would Blade most enjoy beheading?
RRA
January 20th, 2010 at 5:50 pm

Mr. Majestyk – I envy you. I got stuck having to interview Jonathan Mostow (BREAKDOWN, U-571, SURROGATES, that Terminator movie about talking to the hand).
rainman
January 20th, 2010 at 7:38 pm

Ask him who would win, Simon Phoenix or Blade. Then duck.
hamslime
January 20th, 2010 at 8:47 pm

You should ask if him and Mario Van Peebles are going to complete the trilogy they started with New Jack City and (The not as great but I still liked it) Hard Luck. Maybe they could call it Two Jack City?
RRA
January 20th, 2010 at 10:36 pm

How about Jack Off City?
hamslime
January 21st, 2010 at 1:16 am

This is off topic (if you can get off topic in a thread called potpourri) but I just finished watching the first season of Sons of Anarchy. Given the cast, subject matter, and the fact that it’s just an awesome show I’m surprised it isn’t mentioned on this sight at all. I do realize that movies are primary topic of discussion but if you’re late to the game like me with Sons of Anarchy, I say give it a shot.

To bring it back to the topic at hand… Mario Van Peebles I think will be directing another episode or two and I think Wesley Snipes would make a sweet addition to the show, if only for an episode or two. Majestyk – You should plant that seed and see if it grows. Just sayin’.
Mr. Majestyk
January 21st, 2010 at 8:53 am

Thanks, fellas. I’ll definitely ask about the James Brown project, and I’ll bring it back to New Jack City because he’s also playing a crime boss in BROOKLYN’S FINEST, which I saw last night and is pretty solid. You WIRE fans ought to like it (it’s even got Omar in it), it’s all about how the cop business and the crime business are both dead-end gigs. It’s nothing special, but the characters are believable and their problems are relatable, even when they’re blowing each other away. And it’s about time Brooklyn got some love again.
hamslime
January 21st, 2010 at 7:34 pm

Any chance you can put up a link when it’s finished? I’d like to read this.
Mr. Majestyk
January 21st, 2010 at 8:04 pm

I’ll see what I can do, but until then, it is going to be published in an actual magazine on real paper and stuff. SMOOTH Magazine, Issue #45. Ray J and a couple of big-booty chicks on the cover. On newsstands end of March.

Maybe I’ll post a link to my interview with Scott Sanders on the Black Dynamite thread, though.
hamslime
January 21st, 2010 at 9:55 pm

That’s cool. I guess I’ll pick up Smooth Magazine, Issue #45 at the end of March then. Now if only I could find a damned newsstand…
Mr. Majestyk
January 26th, 2010 at 10:06 pm

Boys, I would like to unequivocally recommend EDGE OF DARKNESS as the kind of no-frills badass picture all of us would agree the world needs more of. I caught a press screening tonight and the audience applauded seven or eight times, often just from the look on Mel’s face or the tone of his voice. That’s what being a movie star is all about in my opinion. The movie offers no surprises and there’s no major action, but the filmatism is on just the right side of workmanlike (anonymous direction, smooth cinematography, unobtrusive score) and it hits its marks perfectly, whipping the crowd up in a positive, cathartic way. It makes even the ladies in the audience cheer when the evil motherfucker gets his. This is righteous fury at its finest, and as much as I like AVATAR, I hope this is the one to knock it off its throne.
Mr. Majestyk
January 27th, 2010 at 2:32 pm

UPDATE: Sadly, my interview with Wesley Snipes fell through. We couldn’t schedule it in time for my deadline. Now I’ll never know who he thinks would win in a fight between Passenger 57 and Simon Phoenix.

Also, I want my mini-review of EDGE OF DARKNESS to get its due on on the front page. It deserves your support.
Stu
January 29th, 2010 at 4:11 pm

The Losers trailer:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o_K6y8ihyi8
Between this and Expendables (and maybe A-Team), is 2010 the year of the ensemble team action movie’s comeback?
RRA
January 29th, 2010 at 6:15 pm

Saw MONEY TRAIN as part of a 99 cent iTunes rental, and yeah its a totally disposable Wesley Snipes vehicle. The only good thing, asides from Jennifer Lopez showing off her tits, is the Snipes/Woody Harleson chemistry.

In short, this is WHITE MEN CAN’T JUMP but without a real script, real people, real director, real humor, nothing really good.

Which is odd since MONEY TRAIN was shot by Joseph Ruben, who also made DREAMSCAPE and (original) THE STEPFATHER. Both were good.
RRA
January 29th, 2010 at 10:49 pm

My review, so you can feel better about your movie criticism skills.

http://filmcinemamovie.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=1990s&action=display&thread=2953
Brendan
January 29th, 2010 at 10:57 pm

Just say Edge of Darkness. Really, really liked it.
Grain of salt #1: I also loved the Departed which doesn’t extend to everyone here, and this movie and that one share a narrative voice (they share a writer) and style that may be offputting to some people.
Grain of salt #2: I love films that properly use Massachusetts as opposed to ones that use it as some bland backdrop (see Kingdom, Forbidden and Gates, Surro) or as some excuse for cheap accent jokes (Rock, 30). Darkness uses the state perfectly and even spotlights places that are personally relevant to me. (No shit, if you go see the movie, watch for the scene like 10 minutes in where Gibson spreads his daughter’s ashes at the beach. If director Martin Campbell had shot Gibson from the front, you would have had a clear shot of the two bedroom beach house me and family spend a weekend or two every summer. In that scene you will also see (two) outcroppings of rocks, me and my brothers go crabhunting there every summer and once when I was six I fell off and almost drowned).

Having said that, I feel confident in recommending it. It’s just solid all the way through. Good story that veers off into intersting directions, good characters you care about and who act in rational manners, solid fight scenes with no shakycam bullshit (IT IS NOT AN ACTION MOVIE, BUT STILL), great tough guy dialogue and back and forths. Danny Huston is great as a Danny Huston-esque scumbag and Ray Winstone owns the movie as a great Ray Winstone-y shady guy. And Gibson is great. Regardless of what you think of his personal life, the guy can bring it when he gives a shit. And bring it he does. Gibson plays Det. Craven as a human being, not an unstoppable human being, and he shows you all the cracks that his daughter’s death has opened up and he’s genuinely affecting in places. And when he is called on to bring the badass he delivers in spades. His final, snarled out line is a stand up and cheer moment. Like I said, solid all the way through.

And I’m going to give the lion’s share of the credit to William Monahan. I can’t say I’m a fan of his other stuff (by which I mean I don’t like Body of Lies) but when he’s working with Massachusetts based crime stories, the guy has the goods in a major way. Darkness doesn’t have the holy-shit confident-as-all-fuck filmatism of Departed, but Campbell’s more workmanlike style is perfectly suited and deployed (and there’s nothing as fucking stupid as that godawful state house view that never fails to piss me off when I watch the Departed, which is often). The script is funny, tough and does a beautiful job of maintaining tension and energy inbetween explosions of extreme violence.

Also Gibson’s accent is stronger then anyone in the Departed not named Mark Wahlberg, and he had the homefield advantage. He never approaches Amy Ryan in Gone Baby Gone, but he does a really good job.
Brendan
January 29th, 2010 at 11:01 pm

Also there were a bunch of good trailers for movies coming out soon. The Losers looks like a good, goofy spy movie, and Brooklyn’s Finest looks like a solid crime drama (and it gave Omar some work, how could we not support it?). Could 2010 be shaping up to be a really strong, memorable movie year? Better be.
Mr. Majestyk
January 30th, 2010 at 7:16 am

Brendan, BROOKLYN’S FINEST is pretty solid, too. It’s like three or four generic cop movies in one, but the juxtaposition of the various plot threads makes sure you never get bored. The acting is solid, the filmatism is clean and unshowy, and the characters are morally compromised without ever being unrelatable. Like EDGE OF DARKNESS, everything pretty much plays out how you expect, but the ride is satisfying.
GoodBadGroovy
January 30th, 2010 at 7:36 am

Finally finished ‘The Wire’ yesterday, holy shit if it isn’t some of the best 60 hours of anything I’ve ever watched. I know other people have said the same but I seriously think you should check it out Vern, I’m sure you’d love it and with each season being like one long film I think it wouldn’t be too complex to review each season seperatly. Though I understand 60 hours is a lot of time to sink into anything.

Still unsure whether the overall ending is cynical or not, it’s definitely got a “the more things change the more they stay the same” message, with the cyclicial nature of the ending, and that even though there are people who want to do good and help, there’s always bad people out there trying to stop it from happening, and most often it’s the system itself that’s causing the problems. But at the same time we have moments of happiness for the characters, some make it out, some move onto better things, and maybe that’s all we can hope for, for now.

Overall I’d rank the seasons:
4>1>2>5=3

I think everyone can agree that 4 is just fucking fantastic.

Season 1 I loved just for the introduction to the world Baltimore, the cop/drug dealers storyline, especially D-Angelo and the troubles of middle managments drug dealing, and the almost genre film atmoshpere of them bringing together a team of misfits who have secret talents to help take down the bad guys.

2 is underrated, I think it got a lot of stick for moving away from the streets, but i think it’s one of the most important storylines in the series and Frank’s is the saddest.

I’m one of the few people who wasn’t that keen on season 3, I liked the last 4 or 5 episodes, but other than that I was starting to feel wiretap fatigue, the first half of the season felt like a retread of the first season, and I was kinda bored by it. Though i did love the story arc of Dennis ‘Cutty’.

5 is mixed, I think it’s a fantastic end to the series, it brings together so many of the points so well, and I loved the newspaper stuff. But I’m still unsure how I feel about the central plot point, and I understand why others find it too far fetched compared to the rest of the show.

The whole show is filled with so many fantastic characters it’s hard to pick out who I love the most. Omar has to get some love obviously. Bunk is great as well. McNulty for his completely fucked up self destructive ‘loose canonn cop’ personality. Prezbylewski for being the unluckiest guy on the force. Stringer Bell for just wanting to be a buisness man. Bubbles for having the most uplifiting story in the series.
Brendan
January 30th, 2010 at 9:40 am

Goodbadgroovy- I see what you’re saying about season 3, but to me the whole “Red Ribbon Killer” was so ridiculous and such a departure from what made the show so different and important, that I can’t help but feel let down by it. The Wire at its weakest is still better then 99% of everything else that gets produced, so I can’t complain that much but still.

If I have one complaint about The Wire is that we never got the season six where that rat fuck Templeton got found out and lost everything. Seriously, fuck that guy.
RRA
January 30th, 2010 at 9:56 am

Brendan – I believe that was the point.

I mean its like OZ and all those years, the narrator never got out of jail. Hell (unless my memory is fading worse than ever) he got murdered.
Brendan
January 30th, 2010 at 10:15 am

Oh I get that RRA, I’m aware that him not getting caught is the whole point of what Simon and his team were saying about newspapers and journalism and whatnot, I just hate that guy so fucking much and you KNOW he’s going to end up going the way of Stephen Glass and all the other lying pukes that have tarnished print journalism. I just really wanted to see that snivelling little fucker get brought down, but obviously that would’ve been counter-intuitive.

I have never seen OZ, my only exposure to it was that time on Arrested Development when they showed that George Michael had watched it once as a siz year old, thinking it was the Wizard of Oz. Childhood trauma, classic.
GoodBadGroovy
January 30th, 2010 at 10:24 am

Any recommendations of what TV series to get onto next? I’ve completed The Shield, Arrested Development and The Wire. And I’m up to date with Mad Men, Dexter, Breaking Bad.

I’m thinking Rome or Deadwood next. Maybe The Sopranos.
Brendan
January 30th, 2010 at 10:40 am

LOSTLOSTLOSTLOSTLOSTLOSTLOSTLOSTLOSTLOSTLOSTLOSTLOST.

In case you didn’t get my ohso subtle hint I think you should watch Lost.
GoodBadGroovy
January 30th, 2010 at 11:31 am

Ha, way ahead of you man, been watching that since it started and excited as hell for the final season this coming week.
Brendan
January 30th, 2010 at 12:03 pm

Fuck yeah. I am so excited and terrified for how it’s going to end.
RRA
January 30th, 2010 at 12:13 pm

GoodBadGroovy – I would suggest VENTURE BROS.

LOST can kiss my ass.
Stu
January 30th, 2010 at 12:28 pm

SUPERNATURAL. It’s a action-horror show on the CW about two brothers who’ve been raised to be demon/ghost/monster hunters by their father after their mother is killed. It’s got a good mix of action and horror (it can be pretty gory at times), and some humour, with a big overarching storyline, but made up mostly with standalone episodes often based on real folklore. The current season had been dealing with the coming of Lucifer (played by the same actor Jacob from Lost) and how the brothers are part of the apocalypse and the plans of both heaven and hell. It also, surprisingly for a CW show starring two young good looking guys and casting so many young good looking women in it, doesn’t really come across like it’s aimed at a younger audience, with the show (mostly in the earlier seasons when they had the money) using a lot of classic rock in it’s soundtrack and much of the stories being set in small towns out in more rural america (in actuality vancouver).
Mr. Subtlety
January 30th, 2010 at 2:38 pm

Goodbadgroovy — have you seen all the FUTURAMAs? That’s a worthy investment of time. If you haven’t seen the X-Files, that’s worth doing too — even the later seasons sans David Duchovny have lots of great moments, though it ultimately ends with a letdown.
Mr. Subtlety
February 1st, 2010 at 10:36 am

OK, so I just watched THE IPCRESS FILE and HOLLOW POINT. They were in my movie queue so even though I couldn’t remember exactly why I wanted to see ‘em, I assumed that I must have had a good reason. Having watched them, I got a faint flash of memory that someone here told me to watch em as part of a discussion of the fantastically-named Sidney J. Furie.

But that’s all I can remember. Would the person who told me to watch those kindly remind me why and what, if anything, I was supposed to be looking for (other than Donald Sutherland winningly turning it up to 11, and then 12, in HOLLOW POINT, totally justifying the existence of the film). Thanks!
M. Casey
February 1st, 2010 at 1:06 pm

RRA,

I had VENTURE BROS. recommended to me and I watched the first two seasons. I don’t want to put you on the spot, but what makes it so good? Do you have to have a background in comic strips to get all the humor?

I thought it was okay. It held my interest. But to some people (it made avclub’s top 25 of the decade) it’s the best thing ever. Why?
CJ Holden
February 1st, 2010 at 2:09 pm

M. Casey: While I belong to the people who think that The Venture Bros is one of the greatest show of the last decade, I also think that most people praise it a little bit too much, just because the fact that there is an Adult Swim show, that doesn’t rely on potty humor and cheap popculture gags only*. They expected nothing and got a lot.
But to be fair, what makes The Venture Bros so great is that it started as just another pop culture cartoon “for adults”, but then established this universe or relatable characters with well elaborated backstories and story arcs. Seriously, I remember when Season 1 was finally over and I caught myself not just wanting to see how the big cliffhanger would be continued, but even more what would happen now to the Monarch and Dr. Girlfriend! Not too mention that the opening of episode 2.01 has the best use of a crappy dance-coverversion of a cheesy popsong every and gets me teary eyed every single time I used it.

*not saying they don’t use it ;)
CJ Holden
February 1st, 2010 at 2:12 pm

The last part was supposed to be: “…has the best use of a crappy dance-coverversion of a cheesy popsong EVER and gets me teary eyed every single time I SEE it.”
(Still recovering from a crazy weekend.)
Brendan
February 1st, 2010 at 2:28 pm

I love the Venture Bros. That is all.
Mr. Majestyk
February 1st, 2010 at 2:44 pm

CJ, I have long wondered what the big deal was with The Venture Bros. Since I am a sucker for stories that start out seemingly inconsequential and episodic and then starts drawing the disparate parts together, thus forcing you to take the whole affair more seriously, you have convinced me to give it a shot. Ride on, bananaman.
RRA
February 1st, 2010 at 4:15 pm

M. Casey – VENTURE BROS. is a true cult program in that those in the joke love it, and the rest…well, they don’t get the fans.

I guess why VB is quite great is because those guys with their outlook, pop cultural knowledge made a TV show for them and their 70s/80s youth generation. Like SIMPSONS was made by (and for) people who grew up in the 50s/60s.

Another guess is the humor at how these characters are for the most part, had fucked-up childhoods and basically reliving their kiddie bullshit as adults. Nevermind the show takes a piss on superheroes and villains with their endless henchmen and fortresses, how they all make no sense logically. And those characters know that, yet they still persist in playing that daffy game.

Also, its always fun when Brock Samson kills people in the most creative ways. I mean Season 3 had him decapitate someone with a runaway shark. YES ITS AS AWESOME AS IT SOUNDS.
RRA
February 1st, 2010 at 4:31 pm

CJ Holden gave another big reason why VB is fucking great. Through 3 and half seasons, its established its own fascinating universe with a rich backstory and colorful unique characters. The Monarch, Dr. Girlfriend, Brock, Dr. Venture, the boys, Henchmen #21 and #24, Jonas Venture, Captain Sunshine, the Ghost Captain, the (dysfunctional) Impossible Family, Orpheus, the Alchemist, Jefferson Twilight, Shore Leave, Hunter Gathers, Molotov Cocktease, Johnny Action, Baron Underbeicht, Girl Hitler, and so forth.

I mean shit you have nerds still bitching at the VB guys to bring back “Kim.” Those characters really have been developed as running clever jokes and its been to see how Doc Hammer and Jackson Publick have taken risks and fucking kicked ass beyond expectations.

I suppose you dont need to see the whole run to enjoy the jokes even more, but dammit it helps.

I mean seriously, how can you not dig a show where that show’s Legion of Doom-stand in is run by the “Sovereign” David Bowie? And I must admit, my favorite might be Sgt. Hatred, the well-meaning but complete fuck up bodyguard / reformed pedophile.

I guess in short, its THE SIMPSONS of the Adult Swim catalogue.
telf
February 1st, 2010 at 5:06 pm

The thing about Venture Bros for me is the story-telling. They always manage to include some well-earned emotional heft along with all the in-jokery and referential acrobatics. Like the one where Dr. Killinger comes to the Venture compound and slowly reorganizes the place into a shining example of super-villainy – more in keeping with Rusty’s true self. I found that unexpectedly moving.

And the jokes are tremendous: Like the Captain Sunshine/Ghost Robot exchange – that killed me.
Harker
February 1st, 2010 at 5:43 pm

Telf – Yeah that Killinger episode kinda got me as well, when Doc stops and thinks for a second, “Wait, I’m not a bad guy… am I?” The show could have done a 180 right then with Doc going on as a villain and it would have been 100% earned. And the fact that he realizes that he’s a shitty hero, but would probably be a great villain and still turns the offer down is about as close to noble as Doc ever gets.

And to anyone who isn’t sold on the Venture Bros, my pitch is that it’s the only cartoon I’ve ever seen that gets better the more you invest in it and think about it. It really is one of the best written things on TV. Also Brock Samson is a one-man master’s thesis in badassery.
Stu
February 1st, 2010 at 6:15 pm

One thing I really love about VB is all the red tape and formality the Heroes and Villains have to go through which allows them to interact in hilarious ways you don’t see these characters usually do, like when Rusty basically calls a “timeout” when The Monarch has him captured, obligating Monarch to babysit one of the boys and Brock, or the Yard Sale episode where all the villains show up to peruse Rusty’s junk.
M. Casey
February 3rd, 2010 at 11:33 am

Okay, maybe I’ll keep going with the show. Ya’ll seem committed and it’s rare that I disagree with the consensus over here (yeah but JCVD was still kinda lame).

There was one opening that I thought could’ve been completely genius.

SPOILER
In the first episode of the second season, when the kids are dead, the opening is of the Venture Brothers–but this time it’s Rusty and Jonas Venture Junior.

Could’ve been absolutely brilliant had they stuck with it. If they actually shifted the show to the old guys the show would’ve won me over for life. But they didn’t have the balls to stick with it.
M. Casey
February 3rd, 2010 at 11:35 am

HEY VERN IF YOU’RE LISTENING…

Could you please make another catch-all thread? This one is getting a little long in the tooth and I can never remember how to spell potpouri to search it out
Mr. Subtlety
February 18th, 2010 at 5:50 pm

Not to be a huge asshole or anything, but this is the single worst plot summary I’ve ever read, and I’ve read the back of DTV screeners. It’s like it was written by a drunk middle schooler. WTF, Atom?

http://www.apple.com/trailers/sony/chloe/
RRA
February 18th, 2010 at 7:12 pm

Vern, bothered with FROM PARIS WITH LOVE yet?
Dan Prestwich
February 18th, 2010 at 8:16 pm

Don’t blame Atom; the movie itself looks good. Also, Amanda Seyfried gets naked in it so, um, you know, ticket sold.
Stu
February 19th, 2010 at 7:49 am

Saw SOLOMON KANE today
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lalm_kkczVM
Not read any of the source material, so I don’t know how faithfull it is, but I thought it was good, though a little odd. For 100 minutes long, it feels very packed, and with it a bit rushed in some areas, but in others, slow.
Vague, non-descriptive spoilers follow:
After an opening sequence about Solomon’s past that’s about 10 or 15 minutes long, we then spend quite a while on how Solomon’s trying to live a life of peace, and the action only kicks up again 45 minutes into the film. Given the overall runtime, this would seem a bit too much of a wait, but it builds the character and Purefoy does a good job of showing the conflict and struggle Solomon goes through to try to change. We then get a bit of Solomon in action, before something akin to a second act plot twist that feels a wee bit redundant before we get back to Solomon kicking arse. The action scenes are well done, not too erratically edited or anything. There’s some decent special effects when called for, but the overally grimy, grim atmosphere of winter-ravaged/rain-drenched england is the most effective part of the film visually. If there’s one thing the film falls down at worst, it’s in providing a villain. Jason Flemyng is presented as the ultimate badguy here (save the devil), but he only shows up at the end for about 10 minutes, while up till then, a bunch of interchangable raiders, some “infected” and one mute masked brute are all Solomon is played off against. The CGI giant monster you see him fight in the trailers could really have been removed altogether without it having much effect on the movie. The most effective villain in the film turns out to be Solomon himself in the opening scenes, much to Purefoy’s credit. And maybe that was the intent, to the make the film about Solomon coming to terms with the evil in himself rather than around him, and while they do a good job with that, they could have given him more of a challenging opposite.
I do think there’s a lot of good in it, and it’s perhaps tarnished by the Studio mentality of putting in things like the “end boss” monster as the SFX review puts it, while otherwise it’s a pretty gritty, low budget, well-done adventure.
Stu
February 19th, 2010 at 7:50 am

SFX=a UK sci-fi/fantasy mag. I was copying it over from my post on their forums and forgot to take the reference out.
Mr. Subtlety
March 3rd, 2010 at 2:10 pm

On an unrelated note, it looks like everything I was afraid of about Burton’s astonishingly ill-concieved ALICE IN WONDERLAND is coming true… I know Devin Faraci’s known for sometimes indulging in a haterade binge, but this looks too close to exactly what I was afraid of to be bunk…

http://chud.com/articles/articles/22779/1/REVIEW-ALICE-IN-WONDERLAND/Page1.html
RRA
March 3rd, 2010 at 2:50 pm

Mr. S – Yeah ALICE seems to critics to either be Tim Burton’s worst since PLANET OF THE APES (*shivers*) or an OK if indulgent pointless exercise.
Mr. Majestyk
March 3rd, 2010 at 2:55 pm

As a once and (hopefully) future Tim Burton fan, I really want him to develop an original project and get out of this cover-band phase of his career. He’s like the Tom Jones of film at this point, taking tired old shit and layering his own little schtick on top of it. Tim Burton plays all the hits—Burtonized!
Mr. Subtlety
March 3rd, 2010 at 3:19 pm

I wouldn’t mind Burton’s covers if he seemed like he had the slightest interest in telling a story anymore. In fact, I was surprised to find that SWEENY seemed to actually wake him up from his frou frou art direction to remind him that you’ve got to care about the things that happen in a story. But other than that and to small extent BIG FISH, his movies have all felt completely lifeless going back, wow, to like ED WOOD (which is fucking fantastic). I’d love to have Buton get back in gear and was really hoping SWEENY signled a return to form, but ALICE just looks like the worst excesses of charmless modern Burton melded with the worst cliches of the post-LOTR filmmaking period.

And that’s before I lament the fact that the whole thing is on the face of it a complete negation of everything that made the source material unique and interesting. If you want a fantasy film, can’t you just make up your own characters and not rip them off at the most superficial level from a classi source (also, looking at you Guy Ritchie)? The moment I heard the Mad Hatter has a backstory and a swordfight, I pretty much gave up on this turkey. I may not even go see it.
Mr. Majestyk
March 3rd, 2010 at 3:25 pm

I will say that I still love SLEEPY HOLLOW, although that was the film that started him on his current path.
hamslime
March 14th, 2010 at 1:11 pm

FYI – Most of you may know about this already but if not, John Carpenter’s ELVIS is finally on DVD.

It took some searching to find a copy (I finally found a Best Buy that had ONE copy left) so if you want to buy it you may have to search a bit or do the order it on the internet thing but I assure you it’s available.

On a spoiler note…

*SPOILER ALERT*

They used American Trilogy as the final song in the movie. That, to me, is perfection!

*END SPOILER*
RRA
March 14th, 2010 at 2:20 pm

hamslime – ELVIS is a basic biopic with TV movie budget limitations…but yeah I would definately consider it worth watching if because Carpenter and Russell make something out of it.
hamslime
March 14th, 2010 at 2:29 pm

I’m well aware of the history behind it. I saw some of it on Youtube but stopped because the video quality was shit.

Kurt Russell is pretty damned good in this not that I should be surprised. Definitely the best Elvis movie I remember seeing.

One problem I have with it (Not a deal breaker by any means) is that they should have either had Russell doing the singing or used actual Elvis recordings. The guy they had sing the Elvis songs did a pretty decent job, but it just seemed unnecessary to have him re-record the songs.

But again…

*SPOILER ALERT*

American Fuckin’ Trilogy! Awesome. Kentucky Rain was missed but I can’t tell you how pleased I was to hear American Trilogy.

*END SPOILER*
Brendan
March 16th, 2010 at 5:57 pm

Anyone else planning to watch Justified tonight? The ads make it look like BADASS: The Series, so I’m pretty excited
Brendan
March 16th, 2010 at 8:43 pm

Yup, it’s BADASS: The Series. Hope it lasts.
Vern
March 16th, 2010 at 8:56 pm

Damn, you ruined my illusions. I always thought it was really Kurt doing the singing, but sure enough IMDb has somebody else credited.

I haven’t watched the DVD yet but I’m excited that it’s the full version, about 50 minutes longer than the movie length VHS one I reviewed a while back.
RRA
March 17th, 2010 at 12:16 am

Vern – you reviewing GREEN ZONE or wait for DVD on that?
hamslime
March 17th, 2010 at 5:07 pm

Vern – Sorry, man. I didn’t think that was spoiler material.

I’m assuming it’s the full version. The dang thing is 170 minutes long! It kinda feels long too, but more in the “epic life story” way, not the “Fuck! Is this thing ever gonna end?” way.

*MAYBE A SPOILER ALERT BUT IT WASN’T IN THE MOVIE SO IT MIGHT NOT COUNT AS A SPOILER ALERT, ALERT*

It would have been neat if they had a scene where Elvis was shooting the scene in It Happened At The World’s Fair where 8 year-old Kurt Russell kicks him in the shin and then later cock-blocks him.

*END MAYBE A SPOILER ALERT BUT IT WASN’T IN THE MOVIE SO IT MIGHT NOT COUNT AS A SPOILER ALERT, ALERT*
Mr. Subtlety
March 19th, 2010 at 1:05 pm

Hey, anyone read Ebert’s review for BOUNTY HUNTER? He’s almost getting into Vern’s territory with his hilarious breakdown of the cliches.

http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20100317/REVIEWS/100319979
hamslime
March 19th, 2010 at 9:03 pm

Whoops. I thought it was a review for Bounty Hunters with Michael Dudikoff. I guess it wouldn’t make much sense for Roger Ebert to start reviewing Dudikoff movies now, but you did mention getting into Vern’s territory. (Not that Vern reviews many Dudikoff movies either)

Bounty Hunter does seem like a neat premise though. Add to that, my brother and I have been watching and enjoying a LOT of bad romantic comedies lately (Couples Retreat was pretty funny, in my opinion. The Last Kiss was really good too and Casey Affleck was even better in it.) so I’ll probably end up watching this when it comes out on DVD.
RRA
March 19th, 2010 at 10:58 pm

Mr. Subtlety – Ebert is witty and quite awesome when he’s PISSED OFF by a bad one. His TRANSFORMERS 2 is almost on par with Vern’s TRANSFORMERS review. Maestro please…

“”Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen” is a horrible experience of unbearable length, briefly punctuated by three or four amusing moments. One of these involves a dog-like robot humping the leg of the heroine. Such are the meager joys. If you want to save yourself the ticket price, go into the kitchen, cue up a male choir singing the music of hell, and get a kid to start banging pots and pans together. Then close your eyes and use your imagination.”

God. Damn.
GoodBadGroovy
March 22nd, 2010 at 10:46 am

Watched ‘I Love you Philip Morris’ and ‘From Paris With Love’ over the weekend. The first was a lot better than I expected, very funny and an excellent con man film, very similar in tone to ‘Catch Me if You Can’. The final big con, that I don’t want to spoil, is awesome in its audacity and fucked up-ness.

The latter was just ok, it’s a bit tonally sparodic – it can’t seem to decide whether it wants to be a lighthearted buddy film, or a more action packed ‘Training Day’. John Travolta is mostly terrible and his character annoying rather than funny. My friend pointed out that it seems like Travolta has forgotten how to act, it genuinly seems like that’s the case, what’s happened to the effortless cool from Pulp Fiction? Now he’s making shoddy Royale with Cheese jokes? “Hi audience! Remember that scene from that film, the one that’s better than this?” Not a great thing to do. Jonathan Rhys Meyers american accent is really distracting because he sounds just like Matthew Broderick, unintentionally funny because it’s as if Ferris Bueller has grown up to be a spy. However the action scenes are fairly well put together, and it’s the kind of action film that we don’t see as much of anymore, there are a couple of interesting scenes involving spy paranoia/scenes changing in an instant.

I’ll be checking this out as soon as I can, I’m loving the recent explosion of martial arts films from the ‘other’ (anywhere that’s not China/Japan) asian countries:

http://twitchfilm.net/news/2010/03/merantau-gets-a-uk-trailer-the-music-makes-it-dramatic.php
Virgin Gary
March 22nd, 2010 at 2:51 pm

i agree that it seems like travolta has forgotten how to act (though i haven’t seen FROM PARIS… ). i watched CARRIE on halloween, which i think was his first movie, and it was really surprising to see how natural and good he was in it. and though i haven’t seen them in a while, he was obviously great in SATURDAY NIGHT FEVER and BLOW UP. i’m not sure if we can count PULP FICTION though because most actors seem really good delivering tarantino dialogue. not that christoph waltz wasn’t excellent, but i think a lot of people underestimate how much our love of the hans landa character comes from how he was written and directed. though, again, waltz brought a lot to that role. but travolta had already forgotten how to act long before PF, and i’m not sure if he’s given a truly good performance since then.
Virgin Gary
March 22nd, 2010 at 2:58 pm

p.s. personally i watch FACE/OFF for nic cage, and travolta’s over-the-top mugging and nic cage “impersonation” are somewhat irritating to me (though it is arguably his most entertaining performance since PF, excepting BATTLEFIELD EARTH for the wrong reasons).

btw, a friend and i today came up with the idea of John Travoltron, a robot formed when five smaller scientologist celebrities (tom cruise, beck, etc.) join together.
Brendan
March 24th, 2010 at 5:31 pm

Man, I love Kevin Smith, I think he’s a really funny, interesting guy and I’ve enjoyed all his movies, shit I was even mildly amused by Cop Out, but then he had to go write stupid shit like this:
http://chud.com/articles/articles/23105/1/THE-DEVIN039S-ADVOCATE-KEVIN-SMITH-MAKES-BAD-MOVIES-HATES-CRITICS/Page1.html
And come across like the whiniest, most immature punk ever. The hilarious part to me is that by the time the dude does his panel at Comic-Con this year, he’ll be ripping that flick ten times as hard as any critic, and he’ll probably go back and say he was just kidding about all his anti-critic screed.
Seriously Kevin, you made a movie a bunch of people didn’t like. It happens. Take as much of it as constructively as possible, put your head, and try to prove them all wrong next time at bat. But these temper tantrums you throw after one of you movies doesn’t go over that well has been tired since MALLRATS, and that was 15 FUCKING YEARS AGO. Grow up.
hamslime
March 26th, 2010 at 8:16 pm

I agree with Kevin Smith. I don’t see a problem with charging people to watch his movie. Everyone else has to pay, why not them?

The only drawback is that critics will choose not to review his movie and good or bad, reviews are like free advertising. If they choose not to acknowledge it, the movie may go unnoticed be some people who may have went to see it otherwise.

Or not.

Bottom line is they’re his movies and if he doesn’t want to preview them to spiteful cynics, that’s his prerogative.
Brendan
March 26th, 2010 at 9:13 pm

“Spiteful cynics?” I’m not sure I follow you there Hammy. I mean, isn’t Smith the guy always going on and on about how unambitious and poorly made his movies are? Isn’t he the one who compared his big studio cop movie to RETARDED CHILD?

It’s like if we went to an art gallery and I pointed to a painting and said that it was ugly, and then you said, “Yeah it’s lousy” and then I bitched you out in front of an entire room full of people.
Mr. Subtlety
March 26th, 2010 at 9:46 pm

I think Kevin may be confusing critics with talkbackers. That scene really is so grindingly negative that it’s hard to really want to be part of it. But most pro critics didn’t really savage COP OUT, just said it wasn’t really all that good. Sorry Kev, I think that’s their job. I know it sucks to have negative things said about something you worked hard on, but it seems like the pro critics are pretty civilized and fair. Or at least, in comparison to the dark heart of the faceless internet.
hamslime
March 26th, 2010 at 10:19 pm

Kevin Smith is a self-deprecating guy. He bashes on his own movies but it’s more in a light-hearted fashion.

I don’t know what review or reviews he read that set him off, but the main focus of what he was talking about seemed to be people who hate movies (Your typical AICN talkbacker, IMDBer, or the guy who coined the phrase “torture porn” for instance) He doesn’t seem to have a problem with people giving him a bad review, but I think he may take issue with a reviewer who is unfairly out for blood.

Your painting simile seems a bit off the mark since I don’t think Kevin Smith thought that Copout was a shit movie. If the general consensus turns out that Copout is shit, he’ll play along I’m sure, just as he did for Jersey Girl (Which is his most underrated movie in my opinion) but you also have to understand that as with any artist, their projects are personal to them one way or another. If someone were to give fair criticism on a project, it can be helpful in future projects. If someone says, “That’s a piece of shit” and leaves it at that it hurts. If that person that said “That’s a piece of shit” gets to watch your movie for free only to shit on it because they have a prejudice against you, your genre, or just because they can, and that’s their profession…fuck ‘em. Let them buy a ticket just like everyone else.

In the case of those people it becomes clear that they don’t do it because of their love for movies. They do it for the purpose of trashing people for whatever reason. I think Kevin Smith is tired of catering to those people and he has every right not to cater to them.

You also have to consider that this might be one of those deals where he was just pissed off, twittered some shit and got over it. Unfortunately people don’t take rants like that for what they are – A human being venting. You do it. I do it. Kevin Smith does it. Fortunately for us, since we’re not famous, we can vent our frustrations without people holding it over our heads indefinitely. (Sadly, it’s one of the reasons Paul Thomas Anderson doesn’t do commentaries on his movies anymore)

Venting or not, though, I found some truth in what he was saying.
CJ Holden
March 27th, 2010 at 4:08 am

I think how CRITICS* blew everything what Smith said way out of proportion proves what he said. He was technically just bragging about how different the tastes of critics and “normal” audiences usually are and always have been. I heard from many people how much they enjoyed Cop Out (and I’m not just talking about the guys who contact Smith on Twitter and probably just want to say something nice to a celebrity) while most “professional” reviews I read, tore the movie a new one or called it mediocre at best. The German western slapstick comedy “The Shoe of Manitu” (Der Schuh des Manitu) was seriously HATED by critics, but became the most succesful German movie ever! I know that there are even at least two regular visitors of this websight who enjoyed Transformers 2!
And here we have the conflict: It’s the job of critics to know how good movies work. They are there to warn us normal moviegoers whenever we are about to spend money on a bad movie. But often the normal moviegoers like these bad movies! I’m not saying that every movie, that is succesful at the box office is automatically good, but movies usually don’t make the big money because everybody watches it on the first weekend and then hates it. They do because the first audiences like it, recommend it, watch it again and so on.
So what does it say about these people? Are they fucking morons, like the angry talkbacker, who thinks that Geroge Lucas raped his childhood usually says? Are critics pretentious pricks who have their heads so much up their own asses, that they forgot how to enjoy a good movie? Whose opinion is worth more?
This question exists since the day, when someone had for the first time a different opinion on someone elses work and I doubt we will get a good answer so quickly.
So what, when a director like Kevin Smith says “I don’t make movies for critics”? What’s so bad about it? Because every year even many critics complain about movies that are made for critics! Why can’t we just get along? Everything has fans. Rob Zombie once said: “I saw the trailer for this new RomCom with Sandra Bullock and I would rather rip my eyes out than watch this shit, but I’m sure many other people will, some of them will like it it and it will even become the favourite movie of somebody, but I’m okay with that.”

*Seriously! The normal internet users seem to be mostly okay with what he said, but the critics are furious like he talked about locking them up in concentration camps!
GoodBadGroovy
March 27th, 2010 at 4:10 am

That kind of “oh it’s just a movie! I’m not making schindler’s list so why criticise it!” is the kind of argument I really hate, it’s the kind of argument that lets shit like Transformer’s make billions, as if blockbuster/comedy/genre films aren’t real “films” and should be enjoyed no matter how crap they are. Kinda suprised to read Smith shit on genre films like that. Though I’m genuinly curious what reviews he read that gave him this reaction, I know there’s a cliched opinion that internet bloggers hate everything and film reviewers on blogs hate films and shit on them any chance they get, but it’s rarely true, as others have said you’re more likely to find it from the “general audience” on IMDB or AICN.

Devin still needs to change his writing style, calling it the “cancer killing cinema” is ridiculous.
GoodBadGroovy
March 27th, 2010 at 4:12 am

Oh and as a film student graduate, I’m a little offended at his insult directed at us, as if film analysis only makes us hate film more and only want to watch Kurosawa and Godard films. I love genre films just as much as ‘arty’ films, and if anything think studying film analysis has made me love genre films more, because I see so much more in them now than just the fun action.
CJ Holden
March 27th, 2010 at 5:18 am

I hate the “It’s not Citizen Kane/Schindler’s List/whatever, so stop hating it” argument too, but on the other hand why do critics think that comedies/action/horror/movies with Special Effects in general are lesser movies than bad Oscarbait like “Crash”?
Kevin Smith was really proud of “Cop Out”, then the critics hated it, which broke his heart*, then he heard from many people that they liked the movie, which cheered him up, but made him even more angry at critics. That’s a normal reaction.
Even I, as the normal viewer that I am, stopped listening to critics, because they have often completely different opinions than me. (Just look at what “they” generally think about Tarantino and what I think of him!) There are just a few whose opinon I seriously respect (with Vern being #1) but in the end even if he hates a movie, it won’t stop me from watching it if I wanted to anyway or probably even enjoying it. (I am one of the aforementioned people who enjoyed “Transformers 2″!)
Like I said, the whole “are critics always right” debate is going on like forever and definitely will go on for the same amount of time, but that the critics feel so unbelievable offended by what Smith jokingly said on Twitter, makes them feel even less sympathetic for me. They live from critizising other people’s work, but if one of their “victims” is critizising them back, it’s not okay? Yeah, fucking right.

*Especially because several critics seemed to hate it because they thought it felt too much like a 80’s cop movie, which was ironically exactly what Smith tried to achieve.
Brendan
March 27th, 2010 at 7:07 am

I guess I’m confused as to what you guys are arguing. No, critical opinion doesn’t really impact how or what I watch these days, but I still think film criticism is important and useful. There are critics who I want to punch in the face, coughcoughMarkKermodecoughcough, but there are an even greater number who I think are still in love with movies and try to be fair.

Smith is clearly talking about professional, paid critics, not dipshit talkbackers. The reason I think Smith’s rant is incredibly self-destructive is because has there ever been a director who so completely relied on critical opinion as him? The only reason Clerks made any money, the only reason he has a career, is because critics saw it at festivals, loved it, and spread the word about the movie and the hot young voice behind it. So to see him turn around and shit in his own cereal, it’s disappointing.

Especially because his next movie is a politically themed horror movie that is going to be made incredibly cheaply. There’s a movie that will desperately need strong word-of-mouth to make any money back. So way to go pissing off the people who are ground zero for getting that kind of word out, real smart move champ.
Brendan
March 27th, 2010 at 7:08 am

In other news, Michael Bay said something vaguely sensible:
http://chud.com/articles/articles/23132/1/MICHAEL-BAY-IS-FIGHTING-THE-3D-POWER/Page1.html
Edgar Vagas
March 30th, 2010 at 4:16 pm

Go Daddy promo code bulletin. Many of the existing Go Daddy promo codes just changed. These are official coupons that are working. These coupons will be working thru 2011. $7.49 Domain names and renewals – Use Go Daddy promo codes GOO3, OK9, or ZINE10. 25% discount on orders of $100+ – Use Go Daddy coupon OK25. 30% Discount when you buy any com domain – Use Godaddy coupon code OK30. $12.99 SSL Certificates – Use Godaddy coupons GOOSSL, OKSSL, or ZINESSL. Host Plan Promo Code – 20% Off Hosting – Use Godaddy.com coupons OK20H, ZINE20H1 or GOO20H. 10% off any size order – Use Go Daddy coupons OK7, GOO1 or ZINE8. $5 Off $30 or More – Use Go Daddy coupon codes GOO2 or ZINE9. 20% Off Any order of $50 or more – Use Go Daddy promo code OK8.
Brendan
March 30th, 2010 at 4:48 pm

Have any of you guys ever seen the movie JOINT SECURITY AREA? I bought it from my video store during its going out of business sale, based solely on the act that it was made by the guy who did OLDBOY and Tarantino named it as one of the twenty best movies made since he’s been active. I thought it was awesome, an absolutely beautiful, haunting meditation on frienship, honor and pride. The final image, a slow camera move around a picture, made my jaw drop and has been rolling around my brain since I saw it.

Just brilliant.
Vern
March 30th, 2010 at 6:29 pm

I just caught up with this Kevin Smith conversation. I don’t know, I understand some of the stuff he says at the beginning, but then he just gets stupider and stupider. I’m not like other critics, I actually do usually pay to see movies unless I go to a preview screening, in which case I get there early and wait in line with everybody else. So the part that bugs me is I actually was planning to pay money to see COP OUT, as a Bruce Willis fan. Now I have the director of the movie saying that it’s not fair to expect it to be good because it’s called COP OUT. Oh well, BROOKLYN’S FINEST looks better anyway.

I also got a problem with his attack on critics in general. Again, you guys know that I have a huge problem with many different styles of hack criticism, both on paper and on the internet. So I’m not defending all of them. But when there’s a guy who supposedly loves movies and he doesn’t even understand what the point of criticism is, what the fuck is that? How are you a guy in your forties who lives your life to make movies and you never had a point in your life where there was some critic you liked to read or a review that pointed you to a movie you never heard of but turned out to love or that made an interesting point about a favorite movie that made you think about it in a different way? For him to say that “random twitterers” are equal to people who are passionate and experienced at writing about movies is like saying that anybody off the street can direct a movie as well as anybody in the business. And I won’t make the easy joke about that being true in his case. It’s not true.

I don’t really get that guy anyway. I actually thought the last one “Zac and Miri Making Porno” was alot better than most of his previous ones I’d seen and even seemed to have been shot by professional camera operators. But I see him talking shit about the movie all the time. And then he gets thin skin when other people criticize him. I remember he also had a big vendetta against Joel Siegel or somebody for walking out of his movie. Well, that was kind of funny. But he seemed to take it way too seriously.

This time he was probly just caught up in the heat of several hours of passionate twittering or whatever, but it would be funny if he actually went through with this. It seems to me like most critics have been giving him a free ride for years because he seems like a cool guy and does good interviews so why bother savaging his movies? But critics who have to go to those things to pay their bills tend to get pissed at the studios when they don’t do critic’s screenings, this one they might even take more personal. Should be funny.
Brendan
March 30th, 2010 at 6:52 pm

Exactly Vern. As a Smith fan that paid money to see Cop Out and was vaguely amused by it, how am I supposed to feel when he compares it to a retarded child? Kind of like when he apologized for Mallrats, or trash talks Jersey Girl, or dismisses Zack and Miri. I don’t understand why this guy seems so dismissive of movies he spends years of his life working on.
RRA
March 30th, 2010 at 8:28 pm

Brendan – I think Smith is like Spielberg was at times wanting to be liked by the mainstream/fans by bashing his own “failures.” Except the Beard in the last decade or so has grown more comfortable with himself (i.e. grown more balls), and really gets into heated talks whenever his MUNICH or A.I. or EMPIRE OF THE SUN come up for discussion. You can tell he’s still hurt that people threw bricks* at those movies.

People call Oliver Stone a whiney bitch for being rather vocally defensive about his flop ALEXANDER. But I would rather have that sort of person give a shit (still) about something they obviously cared about then someone playing the currents.

Hey Kevin, your MALLRATS was pretty funny. Stupid and maybe a tad too Hughes/Landis derivative, but so what? Better than some of the last few movies those two made. Never saw JERSEY GIRL, and well I enjoyed ZAC & MIRI. His COP OUT was ok, too disposable for my taste

I suppose Smith’s subconcious problem is that he wants to be taken more seriously, get more respect, get invited to more dinners, make more money, whatever. Notice his last two movies (especially COP OUT), he refused to sell his name in the marketing. Like he’s afraid that folks may confuse COP OUT as CLERKS 3 or something.

Reminds me of that whole BENJAMIN BUTTON nonsense. That shit was below David Fincher, and yes it was a technically well-made movie, got him another hit and scored some Oscar nominations. Its like also how THE DEPARTED is among Scorsese’s his weakest efforts, yet it won him his Oscar. You know, toning down your gifts so to appeal to the mainstream to get your precious votes.

Then someone like Kathryn Bigelow does it her way, and wins.

*=Like some retarded posters at NeoCon blogs calling MUNICH “Anti-Semite propaganda.” Even though the Beard is The Jew in Hollywood, but whatever.
Brendan
March 30th, 2010 at 8:41 pm

Well, see there’s sort of a distinction in my mind. I don’t mind filmmakers being self-deprecating, or owning up to mistakes. I can respect a director who looks back at their works and cops to some of their choices being wrong. But where Smith pisses me off is he gets pissy when OTHER people criticize his movies. He spends all the promotional time for his movies talking about how bad he is at his job, how little skill he has, how not to get your hopes up. Then when people don’t flip for the movies, he freaks out and makes a big stink.
Outlaw Vern
April 1st, 2010 at 1:58 am

I would like to announce that I just saw Jesse Ventura on late night TV talking with Carson Daley about his love for The Autobiography of Malcolm X, why he thinks 9-11 was an inside job and that he has changed his mind and no longer believes he could waterboard Dick Cheney into confessing to the Sharon Tate murder because he thinks Cheney’s heart problems would kill him first. Turns out that’s what comes on after Jimmy Fallon.
CJ Holden
April 2nd, 2010 at 4:41 am

Did you see the new A-Team trailer? It completely sold me on the movie, after I was worried that they would go the “dark & serious” route. After the efibrillator scene I just think it’s impossible that it’s all dark and serious.

http://trailers.apple.com/trailers/fox/theateam/
GoodBadGroovy
April 2nd, 2010 at 9:16 am

Man I had the opposite reaction CJ. I’m up for a fun action film, but the humour looked/sounded dreaful to the point of distracting.

Although talking about “80s style soldier’s of fortune films” the new trailer for The Expendables worked for me.

You wait for one 80s inspired soldier’s of fortune film then three come at once, curious to see whether A-Team, Expendables or The Losers works the best.
CJ Holden
April 2nd, 2010 at 9:49 am

I’m sure that the rumor WILL rub some people the wrong way, but for me, an almost life-long fan of the silly series, who grew up in a country that shows it since something like 20 years in an endless loop on weekends, it totally works. Because it just feels like a big budget version of The A-Team, instead of the action movie, that has nothing to do with it except that the characters wear the same name, that we all expected it to be.
The trailer even indicates that they got seriously rid of the horrible script, in which Face betrays everybody in the beginning and becomes the main villain of the movie! Seriously, so far I’m 100% sold on the movie. (Okay, I hate the poster, but only because they took the worst possible photo of B.A.)
CJ Holden
April 2nd, 2010 at 9:51 am

BTW I liked the Expandables trailer too.
CJ Holden
April 2nd, 2010 at 10:05 am

And of course I meant HUMOR, not Rumor. grmble.
Lynne Dupoux
April 6th, 2010 at 7:05 am

Consider & Hold your iPad for F-r-e-e! -> http://bit.ly/cFBuis
RRA
April 6th, 2010 at 7:40 am

Vern – You found that Charles Bronson appearance on Johnny Carson where Bronson coldly and seriously said he would kill anyone and everyone who attacked his family? How fittingly, that happened around time of DEATH WISH.

I’ve had luck finding that clip so far.
Mr. Subtlety
April 7th, 2010 at 10:08 am

OK guys, I started watching the Wire. I’m on episode 8 now. And you know, I don’t know what the heck you guys were talking about, this show’s aight but nothing too great.

..

..

nah, just fucking with ya, it’s amazing. I watched all eight episodes in two days. Thanks for pushing me into it, fellahs, it’s pretty much the best thing ever.
does sports betting champ really work
April 8th, 2010 at 2:54 pm

So pleased to digest such a interesting article that does not depend on cheap rhetoric to get the topic fulfilled. Thank you for a great read.
Mr. Subtlety
April 8th, 2010 at 3:28 pm

I can’t believe I posted about the W-re and the only person who responded was does sports betting champ really work.
Mr. Majestyk
April 8th, 2010 at 3:35 pm

Yeah, but does sports betting champ really work makes some good points. It really is refreshing that Vern was able to write a paragraph inviting us discuss random topics on this post without resorting to childish name-calling or puerile strawman arguments the way others writers would. I mean, I know it’s hard to be completely objective when dealing with the loaded ET and Gremlins vs. Predator debate but somehow Vern managed to walk that line.

P.S. I am totally on ET and Gremlins’ side and anyone who disagrees is a socialist.
Brendan
April 8th, 2010 at 5:21 pm

Subtlety- It’s hard to talk about the Wire without getting into spoilers for people who haven’t seen it. I’m terrified to say anything for fear that I’ll ruin the ride. I’m really glad you’re enjoying it man, keep us posted on how stuff is progressing so we can all break it down. It’s going to be a bumpy fucking road man, so strap in.
Mr. Majestyk
April 16th, 2010 at 12:53 pm

Are you boys aware that there’s a STRAW DOGS remake coming out next year set in the Deep South and starring everyone’s favorite nonentity James Marsden? You know, to capitalize on all those teens out there who love Sam Peckinpah movies and gender politics.
Mr. Subtlety
April 16th, 2010 at 1:41 pm

Well, duh, its a movie that exists, of course they’re going to remake it. Although I hate to encourage this sort of thing, setting it in the deep south might add an interesting racial dimension to the conflict, especially if its a bunch of black guys with Marsdan’s cracker wife (played by Cameron Diaz, who’s been practicing her hilariously broad Southern accent since THE BOX).
Mr. Majestyk
April 16th, 2010 at 1:51 pm

It looks like the only black guy with a major role plays a cop, so I doubt race will be a factor, sadly. It’s probably just going to be a slightly-more-rapey-than-usual killer hillbilly flick. But then again James Woods is in it so there’s bound to be some large-caliber mega-acting at least.
Mr. Subtlety
April 19th, 2010 at 1:44 pm

Ebert claims video games can never be art. Usually I think Ebert is one of the sharpest, most thoughtful guys out there, but this just seems like a kind of cheap semantical arguement and an utter failure of imagination about the potential different media forms have to play with storytelling and art in interesting ways. You’d think the guy might be more excited about the possibilities a new form might afford artists, but he pooh-poohs a few examples of things which are at least genuinely interesting, and then claims that no game has as much artistry and imagination as a Melies film. I figured I’d let you fellahs take a look at it and see if you think Roger makes any valid or useful points in there. To me, its a pretty poor and almost… petty arguement.

http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/2010/04/video_games_can_never_be_art.html
Mr. Majestyk
April 19th, 2010 at 2:19 pm

Nah, he’s just being a prick. Video games can have everything that movies have, but with the added benefit of user participation. What Roger fails to realize is that while chess and other games are merely competitive, video games have actual stories that were created by an author. The themes of these stories can be discussed and analyzed just like the plot of a movie, while the manner in which they are told is as varied as any other narrative form, leaving room for individual expression, which I would argue is the only factor in determining whether or not something is art. It can be good or bad art, just like in any other medium, but it’s still art. It’s just not art that Roger Ebert likes.
CrustaceanHate
April 19th, 2010 at 4:35 pm

Ebert’s major beef with video games is that their interactivity prohibits meaningful storytelling on the level of movies/books etc. It really does seem like a failure of imagination on his part. Interactive art installations have been around for decades. Of course, they do require interaction and his essays make it clear that he hasn’t played any of the games he’s discussing and has no desire to. So, you know. Whatever.

Speaking of video games/cinema/art, anyone played that game HEAVY RAIN on PS3? I finished it over the weekend. I liked what it was trying to do, but man, the plot was terrible and the acting was excruciating in some parts. You’d think if you were touting your game as “interactive cinema” then you’d hire some native English speakers and tell a story that’s a little more ambitious than a dodgy SE7EN knock-off.
GoodBadGroovy
April 19th, 2010 at 5:00 pm

Yeah he’s come across as a bit dickish in this debate, along with posts he’s made on twitter. For me, the issue of whether he’s right or not that games are/can be an artform is irrelevent, he admits to not playing games and having no interest in them therefore he’s basically admitting to giving a completely uninformed opinion. And like you say it seems to come down to a semantics argument over how you classify art (even though he claims it’s not). His discussion of the games offered up as art is incredibly dismissive and condescending, he seems to have made his (self admitted uninformed) opinion and is going to stick to it.

His most recent tweet on it kinda depressed me as I hate to think that Ebert could make such a snarky comment:

“I’m not too old to “get” video games, but I may be too well-read.”
Darryll
April 19th, 2010 at 5:27 pm

The thing about Ebert is, in the past, he’s really gotten behind big world-building type pictures like DARK CITY, for example. He’s a fan of films that portray fully realized fictional worlds that require sound and visual designers and special effects artists etc. This is the type of thing modern video games are excelling at over any other medium. If he would just play a couple of these excellent games he might see the merit in them. The MYST games, while kinda’ dated by modern gamer standards, would be an excellent place for him to start.
RRA
April 19th, 2010 at 5:53 pm

Guys Ebert has a point. Name one good movie based off a video game.

I mean a really really really good one. Books have been basis for damn good movies (Fight Club, The Godfather), plays too (Hamlet, Streetcar Named Desire), even a rock album or two (The Wall, Tommy), Television, etc.

But video games? Name a really good one. Some of you will inevitably toss out DOOM or MORTAL KOMBAT or one of those RESIDENT EVIL pictures….all sucked or we like them on some stupid visceral subconcious level.

So sorry guys I know Ebert said something that you disagreed with*, but I do get his point of why he doesn’t respect video games on that level.

As for the storytelling in games….you know what matters most to me for games? The controls, the playability, etc. Plowing baddies, solving puzzles, etc. The story is an unconsequential element that people really seem to care about more than they should. A movie needs some sort of plot to connect the scenes together.

A game….well did we ever find out why we had to stack those fucking TETRIS bricks and they fell faster & faster after we stack them? Why does Princess Peach always get kidnapped that stupid bitch? Why didn’t Link ever get any poontang from Zelda? Why is Pac Man always hungry?

I understand your point Darryl, but look at Ebert. He’s what, in his 70s? Also he’s not exactly I suppose in the best of health or shape to nerd out with such games. He came from a generation that actually read. Cracked.com was right in that the past decade was the first since…well, maybe ever…when a book didn’t culturally so much make an imprint beyond your inevitable future movie properties.

*=Besides if you want to really get pissed at the guy, read up his thumbs down review on DIE HARD. Weird too since he gave thumbs up on #2 and #3.
GoodBadGroovy
April 19th, 2010 at 6:10 pm

RRA your “bad video game films therefore video games not art” argument seems a bit …odd. I doubt you could turn the Mona Lisa into an entertaining film but that doesn’t stop it being art. Just because there haven’t been successes at tranfering one into the other (which if you think about it is quite odd) doesn’t stop video games being art.

As for storytelling in games it all depends on the game really and how it’s presented. Half Life has probably one of the greatest video game storytelling techniques because it doesn’t try and crib from films by inserting lots of badly acted cutscenes, but isntead tells it all from your POV. You can argue about whether most people were that bothered about it, but for me it certainly left me feeling more involved in what was going on and propelled my actions more than just “shoot the bad guys to get to the next level”. And many RPG games like Fallout3 rely heavily on story as being more than just something to link the action together, and whilst morality systems are still in their infancy, many RPGs are pushing towards this idea of your actions affecting you and the world around you.

I won’t deny that a large majority of games are the equivilant of action films, the plot is just there to link the action together. But A) that’s nto true of all games and more and more will try and do more than that, B) “storytelling” is not the only aspect of art and C) just because it’s not necessary to be a deep or complex plot doesn’t mean that a good one doesn’t improve games a lot.
RRA
April 19th, 2010 at 6:59 pm

GoodBadGroovy – I didn’t say that was my argument, I was just saying try to understand it from his point.

And really, for such a culture of ours who hold video games beyond mere button smashing….why can’t we produce a good movie from them then?

I mean really, why?

Why?
Mr. Subtlety
April 19th, 2010 at 8:18 pm

The big fail on Ebert’s part is to see that not only can a video game be another way of telling a story, but it can be a profoundly different way of approaching storytelling. Its not just that there’s an interaction involved, but the fact that that interaction take take place in so many different ways. Things like world-building games, RPGs, music games, and hard-to-classify stuff like “Braid” aren’t the equivalent of different genres, they’re ways of communicating artistically which are fundamentally unique. They may or may not hold some of the same characteristics of film (acting, writing, design, pacing) but as a means of communication they’re almost revolutionary — and the format’s wide open for more ideas no one has yet considered. It’s not just about storytelling, it’s about creating opportunities for new perspectives and ways of experiencing media. I personally truly believe we’re going to experience — in our lifetimes, easily– a renaissance of video games which will produce truly great works of art.

Now, I also don’t think we’re quite there yet? Why hasn’t it quite happened yet? Well, for one thing, the possible applications of film may have been more obvious and less revolutionary when the medium first appeared. We all know that it took almost two decades for film to move from a gimmicky novelty to a fully realized medium for communication, and in the Melies days, the way that transition was accomplished was by applying the principles of the stage to film. Video games, with their vast array of modes, resist such an easy transition of the principles of one art form to another. As CrustaceanHate points out, video games may have more in common with interactive art than they do with the kind of storytelling that film and books tend to center on. But really, they’re an entirely new artistic paradigm, especially when one considers the scale they’ve taken on in our society even now. So, yes, I believe the art form is still in its infancy, and as such has yet to really find its true geniuses. There are a few; Shigeru Miyamoto will almost certainly be remembered as a genius of the form, someone who had an innate ability to elegantly master the specific language of the art form effortlessly — a kind of VG D.W. Griffith. There are a few others, but mostly we’re still working with form. Content is kind of lacking from a lot of stuff these days, as the storytelling side of things has been slow to catch up with the paradigmatic shifts. Most games remain clumsy and derivative narratively and, often, in design. But there’s not particular reason why this must be; games like “Bioshock” and “Silent Hill 2″ are loaded with symbolism and meaning, and are told deftly while still making the most of VG’s unique characteristics.

It’s possible Ebert simply doesn’t realize that video games have been about more than high scores and level bosses for a long time. And it is true, I don’t know that there has yet been a truly great artistic achievement within the medium yet (although something like “Mass Effect” –while not exactly “Crime and Punishment”– seems to me to have ten times the artistry of, oh, say, Burton’s PLANET OF THE APES) but I believe we’re on the verge of it now. We’ve finally hit a critical mass of gamers in all walks of life, and people are ready to really get into something great. Ebert does point out that as of now, it’s an even more profit-driven industry than film, with less independent distribution and creation (though that’s changing rapidly) so that may not help. But I truly believe the great visionaries of our time are likely to work in Video Games or other type of new media.

And you’re right Darryll, someone needs to send Roger a copy of MYST. It’s as engrossing, atmospheric, artful, and insightful as any film — and much more so than most. It’s dated, sure, but if the guy can get into the Lumiere Brothers he should have no problem seeing the confident artistry on display in something like that.

RRA– I’ll admit that the video game adaptations have been almost uniformly unbearable (SILENT HILL being the only one with any claims to legitimacy), but then again, the film industry along with mainstream culture has been slow to come around to the idea of video games having any artistic merit. They get treated now like comic book adaptations got treated over the previous couple decades: hack genre fare. I think that perception is changing now, and we’re likely to get some much more dignified adaptations in the near future (well, fuck, not that near in the future, judging from the upcoming adaptations wikipedia lists). Juan Carlos Fresnadillo’s BIOSHOCK movie is going to kick all our asses, though.
CrustaceanHate
April 19th, 2010 at 9:39 pm

I loves me some BIOSHOCK, but I’m extremely leery of a film adaptation. So much of that game is about loneliness and isolation; exploring Rapture and piecing together the mystery with only a disembodied voice over the radio for company. The protagonist is just a cipher, he doesn’t even have a voice, and the big reveal at the end is as much a meta-commentary on video games as it is a plot twist. I think it will end up like the SILENT HILL movie: dripping in atmosphere, but narratively a complete mess.
Mr. Subtlety
April 20th, 2010 at 12:05 am

Could be. Writer John Logan has done some decent work in the past, though (GLADIATOR, THE AVIATOR, SWEENY TODD). I figure all he has to do is come up with something simple that makes sense and stay out of my boy Fresnadillo’s way (you know, the opposite of what Roger Avary did with SILENT HILL).
CJ Holden
April 29th, 2010 at 9:38 am

I found this very interesting interview with Danny Trejo about his career and thought I should share it.
http://www.avclub.com/articles/danny-trejo,40541/
Mr. Majestyk
April 29th, 2010 at 10:48 am

Remember yesterday when we were talking about the all-time great “NOOOOOOOOO!”s? Well, how about this one?

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

http://www.avclub.com/articles/remember-when-they-promised-to-remake-commando-las,40611/
Giuseppina Colker
April 30th, 2010 at 2:19 am

I am normally not the kind of person to submit my opinion on people’s sites, but for your article I just had to do it. I have been cruising around your website a lot nowadays and I am really impressed, I think you might really emerge as the main voices for your market. Not sure what your load is like in life, but if you began devoting more time to writing here, I would bet you would begin getting a bunch of traffic soon. With ads, it could become a sweet second income source. Just a concept to ponder. Good luck!
Dan Prestwich
May 6th, 2010 at 8:29 am

Just thought I’d steer people towards Roger Ebert’s review of THE HUMAN CENTIPEDE:

http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20100505/REVIEWS/100509982

It’s the most interesting thing he’s written in a while. He gives it no stars. Not “zero stars,” he simply can’t classify it with a rating. I haven’t seen the movie yet, but it seems like a fair, earnestly conflicted assessment.
Mr. Majestyk
May 6th, 2010 at 9:00 am

I feel that I have little choice but to go see THE HUMAN CENTIPEDE very soon. It’s not that I have a burning desire to see three people sewed ass-to-mouth, but how can I live with myself knowing that such a movie exists and I haven’t seen it?
Dan Prestwich
May 6th, 2010 at 9:10 am

The premise has tunneled its way into my brain and laid eggs there. I can’t stop thinking about it. The eggs have hatched and the little baby human centipedes are crawling around my mind giving me all sorts of sick thoughts about what MIGHT happen in the movie. I think the only way they’ll go away is if I see the movie and find out for sure.

Of course, then the exact same thing will happen again with HUMAN CENTIPEDE: FULL SEQUENCE.
Mr. Majestyk
May 6th, 2010 at 9:27 am

Yeah, I feel you, Dan. While I’m no longer always on the hunt for the MOST FUCKED UP THING EVER the way I used to be, I am always on the lookout for something that can creep me out in a new way. Most EXXXTREME!!!! horror movies just want to go further than the ones that came before by doing the same old shit but in greater detail or for longer periods of time (”I SPIT ON YOUR GRAVE had three rapes but we have FOUR! By evil clowns! We have opened the fucking Doorway!”), but very few try to veer off in a new direction and find different shit to freak people out with. The last one that did it was MARTYRS. It’s not like I think that what horror really needs is to be so disgusting that you can’t even bear to watch it, but I’m glad there’s somebody out there pushing the boundaries.
Darryll
May 6th, 2010 at 10:30 am

I found MARTYRS, especially the last half hour or so, about as exciting as watching bread bake. I hate it when the story comes to a complete stop in order to show you something gross or painful. It’s a bore; more so if you don’t know or care for the characters being subjected to said punishment.

I believe Ebert is trying, with this HC review, to get back in with the cool kids after his KICK ASS review and the video game debacle.
Mr. Majestyk
May 6th, 2010 at 10:44 am

I don’t know, Darryl, I think you might have missed the point. The movie’s concept is “What if someone was tortured so much that they saw the face of God?” How can showing that torture to you in a prolonged but artful (at least to me) fashion be considered stopping the story just to show you something gross or painful? That IS the story. It’s what the movie’s about. If you can’t witness the pain and empathize with it, how are you supposed to buy the transcendental state of grace the character enters at the end? If you say you felt no empathy for the character, that’s one thing. That’s in the execution, which apparently didn’t work for you. But how else could that story have played out? That was the least gratuitous and most essential-to-the-plot torture scene of all time, in my opinion. With the possible exception of the entirety of The Passion of the Christ.
Dan Prestwich
May 6th, 2010 at 11:02 am

Majestyk,

I don’t agree with Daryll’s assessment either, but to be fair, he can reject the concept as well as the execution.

Further, from a viewer’s perspective, MARTYRS didn’t have to go the way it did… considering its a film with a weird plot or structural twist every 15 minutes, and that the whole suffering to see the face of god angle doesn’t really come up until the final act, there were an infinite number of ways the movie could have gone. The final act didn’t HAVE to be about a woman being endlessly tortured.

You say that that’s what the movie is about, but it’s not exactly a concept that’s introduced early on. More a twist during the last chapter that the movie only slowly built towards.

I thought the last act was stomach churning (in the good sense), clearly Daryll did not. But I think it’s a fair complaint on his end that he didn’t like, for what had been a much more intense and kinetic thriller up until that point, that the movie turned into one long, slow torture sequence.
Mr. Majestyk
May 6th, 2010 at 11:11 am

I understand that. It’s cool if he doesn’t like it, really. (I hope I didn’t come off like I was saying you HAD to like it, Darryl, or that there’s something wrong with you if you didn’t.) What i was objecting to was the idea that the final act of the movie, which is where it reveals itself to be more than just a standard “victim gets revenge” picture, was the story stopping for some gratuitous disgustingness. It might not have been the story you wanted, but it was the story the filmmakers wanted to tell. Based on their intent, was there a better way to get at it?
Darryll
May 6th, 2010 at 1:02 pm

I hear what you guys are saying and, believe me, I’m not coming at this from a moral stance but from a narrative point of view. Torture on film is kinda’ like a sex on film. I’m certainly not bothered by it, but get on with it, you know. I was somewhat engaged with the film up till then, though I found both girls way to spastic and frenzied to really empathize with them in any way but then it stopped. And I had to wait for, what, twenty minutes, for the story to start up again. And no, I didn’t buy the transcendental state of grace. I thought it was an awfully long way to go for a weak pay-off. I think a few scenes of torture and then a card, saying something to the effect of, 30 days later… would have been much more expedient. I know we, the audience, need to feel her pain but after a while I’m gonna start looking at my watch.
Darryll
May 6th, 2010 at 7:39 pm

One thing about HUMAN CENTIPEDE I do find intriguing is that I can’t remember the last time we got an honest to goodness mad scientist movie. Seriously, I’m thinking maybe THE FLY (1986) or RE-ANIMATOR (1985). Have there been any since?
odo19
May 23rd, 2010 at 10:36 pm

Breaking Bad fans out there…..I really hate this term but anyone else think the shark was officially jumped tonight?? Spoilers for anyone who didn’t see it btw. I was actually embarassed/depressed watching Jesse and Walt chasing after a fucking fly in their lab like the fucking Three Stooges. I mean holy shit, this is one show I thought would never sink into slap stick. I’ve been telling anyone I can get a hold of about BB for months and I can’t stop thinking about what they would think of me if they tuned in tonight. Fuck.
ChopperSullivan
May 23rd, 2010 at 10:46 pm

I thought it was pretty great. Breaking Bad isn’t subtle with its symbolism, but I thought Walt trying to kill the fly (his overwhelming guilt) was good, and I liked that they devoted an episode to just Walt and Jesse’s relationship.
odo19
May 23rd, 2010 at 10:53 pm

Chopper, yeah I get the symbolism and I liked that they tried an episode without shoot-outs devoted to further developing their relationship towards the end but the execution was really lacking with the first half imo. It was definitely played for laughs and for my part I didn’t laugh once. I just angrily sighed a lot.
ChopperSullivan
May 24th, 2010 at 12:16 am

I get you. I wasn’t sure where the hell the episode was going at the start. But I like that they took a step back to show a little of Walt and Jesse dealing with all the shit they’ve been through, and I thought Walt’s “perfect moment” speech to be heartbreaking. I guess it’s a way to ditch all of the subplots for a second and bring it back to what the core of the show is about.

But even if you didn’t like it, I can’t help but think this is the calm before a storm. Maybe not an actual firestorm like the end of the second season, but I have no doubt something’s going to happen to fuck with what I expect from the show. That’s what I love about it, it’s constantly changing what the point is.
GoodBadGroovy
May 25th, 2010 at 1:45 pm

Just watched Undisputed 3: Redemption. Great fun, love the old school tournament vibe with each of the fighters having a unique fighting style, Marko Zaror gloriously hams it up and there’s really brutal, excellently shot and choreographed fight scenes. Hell even the acting is good, Adkins is much better at the angry russian than he is the noble ninja.

I wish Florentine would get work as a second unit director on action films, his talent was sorely needed in Prince of Persia.

Looking forward to a Vern review.
Vern
May 25th, 2010 at 3:55 pm

I don’t feel like doing a full-on review, but that movie MACGRUBER that is busy being crushed by the farting green ogre cartoon is actually pretty damn funny. It’s not BLACK DYNAMITE good but I think many people here would enjoy its accurate but non-specific homages to ’80s action tropes. It even has an opening along the lines of RAMBO III. I don’t think it has much to do with the Saturday Night Live sketch it comes from and it’s really more Chuck Norris than McGuyver.
Mr. Majestyk
May 25th, 2010 at 4:03 pm

Vern, I was on the fence (SNL movie based on a skit I’ve never seen on one side, Val Kilmer, Powers Boothe, and torn-out necks on the other) but you convinced me. I’m seeing it.
Jareth Cutestory
May 25th, 2010 at 9:08 pm

Vern: Did you like MACGRUBER more than HOT FUZZ?
CJ Holden
May 26th, 2010 at 12:29 am

I heard now from many people that the MacGruber movie is actually very funny. But of course you can’t expect to get audiences excited over a movie that is based on a lame parody of a series, that was relevant 20 years ago. I’m sure that if they had removed all MacGruber references from the script, it had been more successful.
Vern
May 26th, 2010 at 2:13 am

Jareth – maybe?

I don’t know, man. It’s been a while since I saw Hot Fuzz. Neither are movies I’ll watch over and over again. But I think I do prefer a dumbass in a fake action movie world (MacGruber) to a fake action movie guy in a regular world (Hot Fuzz).

I don’t think my tastes in comedy are the same as most people around here. The comedy I’ve gotten the most mileage out of in recent years is probly Talladega Nights. It seems to be on cable every weekend and I accidentally turn it on around the time his Crystal Gale shirt is ruined by the cougar.
ChopperSullivan
May 26th, 2010 at 2:49 am

So you gotta at least be a STEP BROTHERS fan right? Because I don’t dig a lot of Will Ferrell’s stuff but by far the funniest part of TALLADEGA NIGHTS was the dinner scene where Ferrell and Reilly riff, and STEP BROTHERS is a brilliant feature of that one scene.
Virgin Gary
May 26th, 2010 at 7:11 am

hey vern and friends, sorry if you already discussed it and i missed it, but have you seen the clip from UNDISPUTED III that is available online?

i saw it at CHUD: http://chud.com/articles/articles/23827/1/A-PEEK-AT-THE-ASS-KICKING-IN-UNDISPUTED-III/Page1.html

(vern’s probably working on a post about it as we speak… type/read?)