NBC newbies

Network fall lineups will be unveiled this week and NBC was first up today. While most of were interested in hearing whether or not Chuck would be back, it appears we're going to have to wait longer. NBC execs said they wouldn't make an announcement on the fate of Chuck, Medium, My Name is Earl, Law & Order, or Life until May 19th. Aarrgh! Why must they continue to torture us.

Anyways, here's the descriptions for the 6 new shows that NBC has picked up for the fall. See if any of them look like a show that will help NBC's struggling ratings.

PARENTHOOD
From the executive producers of the box-office hit "Parenthood" -- Ron Howard and Brian Grazer (Oscar winners for "A Beautiful Mind"), and writer/executive producer Jason Katims ("Friday Night Lights") -- this contemporary re-imagining of the blockbuster film depicts the colorful and imperfect Braverman family -- four grown siblings sharing the headaches, heartaches and joy of being parents. The star-studded cast includes Peter Krause, Maura Tierney, Craig T. Nelson, Dax Shepard, Bonnie Bedelia, Monica Potter, Erika Christensen and Sarah Ramos. When Sarah Braverman (Tierney, "ER"), a financially strapped single mother, returns home to her parents and siblings in Berkeley, Calif. after packing up her Fresno apartment and uprooting her two inconvenienced kids, Amber (Mae Whitman, "In Treatment") and Drew (Miles Heizer, "ER"), she is greeted by her opinionated father, Zeek (Nelson, "Family Stone," "Coach"), and strong mother, Camille (Bedelia, "Heart Like a Wheel"), who are privately dealing with their own marital issues. As Sarah is reunited with her siblings -- sister, Julia (Christensen, "Traffic"), and brothers Crosby (Shepard, "Baby Mama") and Adam (Krause, "Six Feet Under") -- all struggling with issues of their own, it's clear that the Braverman reunion is just what they need to face the everyday challenges of modern family life.

TRAUMA
Executive producer Peter Berg (NBC's "Friday Night Lights") delivers "Trauma," the first high-octane medical drama series to live exclusively in the field where the real action is. Like an adrenaline shot to the heart, "Trauma" is an intense, action-packed look at one of the most dangerous medical professions in the world: first responder paramedics. When emergencies occur, the trauma team from San Francisco General is first on the scene, traveling by land, by sea or by air to reach their victims in time. From the heights of the city's Transamerica Pyramid to the depths of the San Francisco Bay, these heroes must face the most extreme conditions to save lives -- and give meaning to their own existence in the process. Starring in "Trauma" are Derek Luke ("Notorious"), Cliff Curtis ("10,000 B.C"), Anastasia Griffith ("Damages"), Aimee Garcia ("George Lopez"), Kevin Rankin ("Friday Night Lights") and Jamey Sheridan ("Law & Order: Criminal Intent").

MERCY
"Mercy," a new medical drama with a unique point of view, portrays the lives of the staff at Mercy Hospital as seen through the eyes of those who know it best -- its nurses. Nurse Veronica Callahan (Taylor Schilling, "Dark Matter") returns to Mercy from a military tour in Iraq -- and she knows more about medicine than all of the residents combined. Together with fellow nurses Sonia Jimenez (Jamie Lee Kirchner, "Rescue Me") and Chloe Payne (Michelle Trachtenberg, "Gossip Girl"), Callahan navigates through the daily traumas and social landmines of life and love both inside the hospital and out in the real world. The cast also includes: James Tupper ("Men in Trees") as Dr. Chris Sands, a new doctor at the hospital who complicates Veronica's life; Diego Klattenhoff ("Supernatural") as Mike Callahan, Veronica's husband; and Guillermo Diaz ("Weeds") as Nurse Angel Lopez.

DAY ONE
From executive producer/writer Jesse Alexander ("Heroes," "Lost," "Alias") and director Alex Graves ("Fringe," "Journeyman"), "Day One" tells the story of life on earth following a global catastrophe that has devastated the world's infrastructures. Beginning with the immediate aftermath of the cataclysmic event, an eclectic band of survivors -- played by Adam Campbell ("Date Movie"), Catherine Dent ("The Shield"), Julie Gonzalo ("Eli Stone"), David Lyons ("ER"), Derek Mio ("Greek"), Carly Pope ("24"), Thekla Reuten ("Sleeper Cell") and Addison Timlin ("Cashmere Mafia") -- strives to rebuild society as they unravel the mysteries of what happened and face their uncertain future. The group, all residents of one apartment building in suburban Van Nuys, Calif., embarks on a quest for survival and discovers that hope is found in small victories -- and heroes are born every day.

100 QUESTIONS (fka "100 Questions for Charlotte Payne")
Emmy winner James Burrows ("Will & Grace," "Friends") directs "100 Questions," a new comedy series written and executive-produced by Christopher Moynihan ("For Your Consideration") that provides hilarious answers to 100 questions about love. Charlotte Payne (Sophie Winkleman, "Peep Show") is looking for love and has rejected multiple marriage proposals -- but she has yet to meet Mr. Right. When she joins a popular online dating site, she gets a little help from her dating counselor Ravi (Amir Talai, "The Ex List") – who requires her to take a 100-question compatibility test. The questions aren't easy for Charlotte to answer, and each one requires her to recount a poignant and humorous time in her life with friends Leslie (Elizabeth Ho, "Women's Murder Club"), Jill (Joy Suprano, NBC's "Law & Order"), Mike (Christopher Moynihan "For Your Consideration") and Wayne (David Walton "Quarterlife"). The test becomes a journey of self-discovery for Charlotte who begins to realize what she truly wants in a relationship.

COMMUNITY
From Emmy Award-winning directors Joe and Anthony Russo ("Arrested Development") comes "Community," a smart comedy series about higher education -- and lower expectations. The student body at Greendale Community College is made up of high-school losers, newly divorced housewives, and old people who want to keep their minds active. Within these not-so-hallowed halls, "Community" focuses on a band of misfits, at the center of which is a fast-talkin' lawyer whose degree has been revoked (Joel McHale, "The Soup"), who form a study group and end up learning a lot more about themselves than they do about their course work. In addition to McHale, the series also stars: Gillian Jacobs ("The Book of Daniel"); Yvette Nicole Brown ("Rules of Engagement"); Danny Pudi ("Greek"); Alison Brie ("Mad Men"); and comedy legend Chevy Chase ("Saturday Night Live").

Grand Theft Daughter

The summer movie season is underway, but I'm still slumming it at the budget theater for the time being. This time, I caught this past January's surprise hit, Taken.

The film centers around Bryan (Liam Neeson), who has recently retired from being a government agent in order to spend more time with his 17 year old daughter, Kim (Maggie Grace). While talking to her father from Paris, Kim is abducted. Hearing everything, Brian suddenly goes back into agent mode in his quest to recover his daughter.

The setup to this film is its weakest element. None of the family moments really work, primarily due to the film's casting. Neeson doesn't come off particularly fatherly and Grace is too old to be playing an immature teenager. Even though it's not meant to be a surprise, the film beats you over the head that something terrible is going to happen to Kim as a result of the naivety of so many of the main characters.

However, once Kim is grabbed the film kicks into high gear. Neeson transforms into a badass using all of his skills to find out who is behind the abduction and where they have taken her. The plausibility of how he obtains some of his information is somewhat suspect, but the film doesn't dwell on it, so you just go along with it and enjoy the ride. Even if it isn't realistic, you enjoy the ingenuity shown in order to track Kim down.

As Neeson tracks down the abductors, the film suddenly becomes a real life video game. You get a little bit of story set-up followed by Neeson kicking ass and killing anyone in sight. This is first movie I've seen that has blended that point and shoot mentality into a sophisticated adult thriller. This direction has me torn, however. It's makes for an exciting film, but also seems a bit cold and callous. Neeson kills anyone and everyone in his sight with reckless abandon, making it difficult to sympathize with the character. Yet, there is something primal about the way he goes about hunting these guys down that you can't help but enjoy. While you're not sure how to feel about Neeson's character, the film makes sure that all of the people involved in this abduction are depicted as European scum. It may not be right, but you can't help seeing these slimy characters get some comeuppance.

There is a lot of action in this film and all of it is well done. The fight scenes look good without dragging on for too long. However, there's no real meaning behind them because of the film's failure to do a better job of establishing that connection between father and daughter. The violence just becomes senseless after a while, which can be entertaining but doesn't have a lot of merit.

In an odd way, the film felt very similar to 24, which like this movie also happens to be produced by FOX. On that show, Jack Bauer senselessly kills a lot of terrorists for the sake of his country. He also has a daughter that he has a strained relationship with, yet would do anything to protect her. Just like on that show, it seems that Taken tries to use fatherly love as a mask for that desire to hurt bad guys. No matter how much they claim they want to be away from that lifestyle neither Jack Bauer nor Neeson's character can help themselves from getting involved whenever evil threatens us.

While it makes the effort, this is not a moving film. You don't really get any joy or appreciation out of seeing Neeson rescue his daughter. By the time it happens, it's practically an afterthought. When the film ends, you'll likely have one of two responses. Either you'll have really enjoyed it for it's non-stop barrage of action or you'll feel ambivalent because there was nothing satisfying to you about seeing one fight scene after the other. This is not a great film, but it's surprisingly entertaining given that it was released in the dregs of January. As it comes onto DVD in a couple of weeks, it may be worth a look if you're seeking for some mindless action. Neeson is a capable actor that gets to show off his badass nature on the side of good for once. Enjoy this action thriller for all its mindlessness and don't go hunting for any deeper messages. Grade: C+

Toy stories

Here are the new trailers for Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen and G.I. Joe: The Rise of Cobra, respectively:

Casual Friday deleted scenes

#2


#1

Island hopping

From EW.com:

Rather than canceling the struggling serialized murder mystery Harper's Island, CBS announced today it will move the show from Thursdays at 10pm to Saturdays at 9pm, starting May 2. According to a network release, the 13-week limited series showed improvement in DVR and online viewership, an indication that it had enough of an audience to sustain the show through the end of its run.

It's a shame it's getting shunted to the weekends, but at least we can hopefully take this as a sign that CBS is determined to keep this on the air all the way through. So if you're a viewer, make sure to adjust your DVRs accordingly.

Good luck Chuck

As we get closer to network's announcing their fall schedules, most of the news hasn't been good regarding the fate of NBC's Chuck. However, there was a glimmer of hope today when this story broke: Best Bet That Chuck Will Come Back

The article mentions the Subway campaign that's going on today to help fans show their support for the show. If you enjoy Chuck and would like to see it come back for a third season, please do yourself a favor and buy a Subway sandwich today. And then please tune in for tonight's season finale.

I hate begging, but desperate times call for desperate measures. The Nerd Herd needs you!

Aging beauty

The temperature has begun to rise here lately, so I decided to take a few hours to cool off by watching The Curious Case of Benjamin Button over at the budget theater.

This was a film that I was highly anticipating when it came out late last year. It had a pedigree cast, a superb director and an interesting story. Obviously the film did something right as it managed to score quite a few Oscar nominations. However, it scored only a few actual wins and I think the Academy like me, felt there was just something missing that prevented it from being better than what it was.

Given all of the elements I listed, it seems like this is a can't miss yet somehow it didn't quite make it's mark. In many ways this a great film. Most of the credit belongs to director David Fincher. Fincher continues to get more ambitious and daring with his projects and succeeds each time. This is a beautiful looking film, which is doubly impressive given the scope of the story. Fincher properly conveys the varying times depicted in the film and also adequately handles all of the genres that make up this complex narrative. Fincher, along with Christopher Nolan, is quickly becoming one of the greatest directors of the modern era.

A seperate mention is deserved for the visual effects that depicts Brad Pitt from 80s to his 20s. It is truly remarkable how they were able to do that and make it seem realistic that we were watching a senior version of Pitt on the screen. I have no doubt we'll being to see more of this technology used in other films in lieu of the ridiculous makeup currently used to try and convey age in actors.

Speaking of the actors, both Pitt, who plays the titular Button and Cate Blanchett, who plays Button's love interest, Daisy, turn in great performances. Neither actors tries to do much with their characters, when it could have been easy to make them over-the-top; Pitt, in particular. They also have a good chemistry, which is important to the story. You also have excellent supporting work from people like Tilda Swinton and Taraji P. Henson, who was nominated for her role as Button's adoptive mother.

What bothered me about the film is that I didn't feel more after it was over. At close to three hours, this films tells a long story about Button's interesting life but it never really drags. Yet, when it was finally over I wasn't sure how to react. Without spoiling too much, Button lives a full life and gets to enjoy love and adventure. Despite the oddity of aging in reverse, Button doesn't seem to suffer too many setbacks from it. It ends up the problems you have when you're very young are similar problems when you're very old. The way the story plays out, Benjamin Button could have led the exact same life had he aged like a normal person.

If the film had a larger metaphor, then that was lost on me. The film is structured so that we learn about Button's life through a diary that is being read by Daisy's daughter while Daisy is on her deathbed. There could have been potential for some grander meaning to come from this, especially since that part also involves a unique clock and Hurricane Katrina. But I never really got the importance of any of that and it seemed to simply be a narrative device.

The movie is similar in a lot of ways to Tim Burton's Big Fish. But I felt that story did such a better job of providing an emotional punch and expressing the importance of life, happiness and familial bonds. Benjamin Button strolls along telling one unique event after another in his life with no real payoff. You keep waiting for these moments to matter, but it never occurs.

I still want to stress that this is a very well made movie. Oddly enough, however, I thought the best scenes in the film were the few action-oriented scenes. Moments like Button fighting during World War II or even the imminence of the hurricane are very cool and well done. Having seen them here, I would be really interested in seeing Fincher attempt a war film. And that's coming from a guy who typically doesn't appreciate that genre. But back to this film, I credit it for being a technical masterpiece, but fault it for failing to move me.

This movie comes out on DVD next week and it may play better on the small screen. Watching such a long film from the comfort of your own home may allow you to better connect with the characters and story. I know it certainly didn't help me having a screaming infant behind me and a need to pee starting about halfway through the film while I sat in the theater. Maybe without those diversions I could have enjoyed this too. But I don't know for sure, so I just have to report what I felt. Marvel at the film's style, but don't worry about having a box of kleenex nearby. Grade: B+

Tragic action figure

So after several aborted attempts, I finally was able to see The Wrestler last night through Netflix. The Wrestler gained a lot of mainstream attention during awards season thanks to Mickey Rourke's comeback performance. I, of course, had a vested interest in it due to my nearly 20 year love of "sports entertainment".

All of the praise centered around Rourke's portrayal of Randy "the Ram" Robinson is warranted. This is a gritty, emotional, and realistic performance of a professional wrestler who's still out there performing despite the fact that his heyday was 20 years ago. Even though his body is broken down and he's playing in front of only a couple hundred people, he still wants to be out there.

The tragedy of the film is that despite opportunities to live a normal life outside of the ring, he cannot help but toss it all aside in favor of continuing to wrestle. In theory it works, but I felt like the film could have done so much more to emphasize why this would be a difficult decision for someone like The Ram. Near the end of the film, he gives a speech where he tells the fans that he continues to do this for all of them, yet there are not enough scenes which show the fans reciprocity. They had opportunities to show fans' appreciation of the pain Randy puts himself through, but didn't capitalize on them. Scenes involving Randy wrestling or attending autograph signings are either too short or focus on other aspects of the story.

Perhaps being so closely connected to pro wrestling was a detriment for me watching this film. Because I am so familiar with the industry, the film didn't really reveal anything new to me. All it did was depict the rise and fall of a wrestler and I've unfortunately seen that all too often in real life to appreciate it here. I give director Darren Arrenofsky credit for accurately portraying the industry from the wrestler's perspective, but he didn't show enough from the fan's side of thing to make Randy's desire to perform understandable. Yes, those independent shows may draw small crowds, but the people that attend them are die-hard fans who want to continue watching their idols perform.

Despite being called The Wrestler, the film spends a lot of time outside of the ring. We see Randy attempt normalcy through his relationship with a stripper (Marissa Tomei) and his estranged daughter (Evan Rachel Wood). The subplot with his daughter isn't very developed, but does enough to establish how Randy continually puts his career before his her. The more interesting part of the story is Randy's relationship with Tomei. Tomei, despite being naked for the majority of her screen time, turns in an excellent performance that makes you just as interested in what will happen to her by the end of the film. The film does a very good job of creating parallels between their lives and showing the difficulties they have of breaking free of their jobs. I have no problem with Tomei receiving a nomination for her role here; a performance that's certainly more Oscar-worthy than My Cousin Vinny, which she actually won for.

One final point I'll make is in regards to the overall look of the film. On one hand, I credit Arronofsky for giving this film a gritty look as I feel it sets an appropriate tone for the film. However, that grittiness made it difficult to see and appreciate some of the smaller part of the film. For example, after a hospital stay Randy receives a note from the promoter, yet you could barely read it. Something like that could have gone a long way to creating that emotional tie Randy has to the profession, but the audience doesn't get a good chance to appreciate it. I'm sure if I went back I could see what it said, but that kind of defeats the purpose.

I'll recommend the film based on the strong performance by Rourke. He absolutely steals the show with his portrayal of Randy the Ram. It's nice that he was given this chance to remind the world of his talent as an actor. And I shudder to think how this film would have been had Nicholas Cage, who was originally set to play the role, played The Ram. I would be interested to hear from someone who isn't a pro wrestling fan and see how they react to this film. It very well could be that this film works on a completely different level for them. As for me, the film is too tragic to be enjoyable, yet not tragic enough to make me empathatic. A solid film, but I was certainly hoping for more. Grade: B+

Broke deleted scenes

#3


#2


#1

NMR: Being John Malkovich

After enjoying Malkovich in a couple of recent films, I decided to go back and check out this trippy film from 1999 directed by Spike Jonze and written by Charlie Kaufmann. This film still seems ahead of it's time and it's now ten years old. All of the acting is decent, but I particularly enjoyed Catherine Keener's work. Cameron Diaz, who's practically unrecognizable here, turns in a nice, understated performance. It's a shame she hasn't taken on more roles like this recently. I found the film's dark subject matter to be a bit disturbing at times. However, this is a dense, layered film that really explores a lot of interesting topics and makes you think, which I always appreciate. It's also very funny at times, particularly Malkovich himself who wasn't afraid to poke fun at his image. If you're looking for a more complex film, I'd recommend this one to you. Rating: ****

Too little, too late

FOX's latest cartoon Sit Down, Shut Up was created by Mitch Hurwitz, who also created Arrested Development. The show also features the voice work of Jason Bateman and Will Arnett. In an effort to promote the show, FOX made this promo video where they apologize for cancelling Arrested Development. A cute trick, but it didn't work on me. I would have watched this show (which debuted last night), but the ratings are terrible and I wasn't impressed with the animation, so I decided to skip it. The only way FOX can truly apologize is if that Arrested Development movie ever gets made. Otherwise, they'll have to continue admitting they made a huge mistake by taking that show off the air.

TV death watch

It's that time of the year again where television's grim reaper begins to rear his ugly head. Here's an article from Hollywood Reporter indicating which shows are on the bubble and which you can already wave goodbye to:

With the broadcast networks' upfront presentations less than a month away, it's do-or-die time for bubble series.

Not all shows that haven't been renewed yet are in jeopardy: For such series as CBS' "How I Met Your Mother," which traditionally gets picked up at the last minute, and ABC's "Ugly Betty," the orders are just a formality.

But that can't be said for a dozen or so other series anxiously awaiting their fate.

CBS has the most, including a quartet of long-running procedurals -- "Without a Trace," "Cold Case," "Numbers" and "The Unit" -- along with freshman drama "Eleventh Hour."

For all of them -- especially the two oldest, Warner Bros. TV/Bruckheimer's "Trace" and "Case" -- the decision is tied to the shows' economics, as the network pays most or all of the production costs at this point.

The odds for "Trace" and "Case" are considered 50/50 right now, with one of the two expected to come back.

The CBS Par-produced "Numbers" looks good to return for a sixth season, as does that series' Friday night companion, ABC Studios' "Ghost Whisperer," which would enter its fifth cycle.

The prospects for "Hour," meanwhile, do not look good. The military drama "Unit" also had been considered unlikely to come back, but in a hopeful sign, executive producer Shawn Ryan has been asked by the network to present ideas for a fifth season.

Of Fox's two bubble series, "Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles" and "Dollhouse," sophomore "Terminator" is considered all but gone, while freshman "Dollhouse's" chances are 50/50.

Along with Fox's sci-fi duo, the most discussed bubble show online is NBC's "Chuck," which finally showed a ratings uptick this past week but is still performing marginally despite a strong fan base. The dramedy's chances also have been hurt by the promising start of NBC's police drama "Southland," as the network will have only few hourlong slots in the fall when Jay Leno takes over the 10 p.m. hour every night.

Another NBC Monday series, the modestly rated but reliable procedural "Medium," is said to have slightly better odds to return than "Chuck," while the quirky cop drama "Life" is expected to join "Kath & Kim" on cancellation row.

Meanwhile, the original "Law & Order" series is expected to return for a record-tying 20th season, matching the run of "Gunsmoke," though its order will probably not for a full 22-episode season.

Neither of ABC's midseason entries have broken through, but while "Cupid" has been pretty much written off, the comedy "Better Off Ted" and the dramas "The Unusuals" and "Castle" are still in consideration as ABC brass is said to be happy with the them creatively.

"Unusuals" has a major test this week: To boost its chances, the network has scheduled a second original episode of the show after the "Dancing With the Stars" results show in addition to its already prominent regular airing after "Lost."

Over at the CW, "Reaper" is gone, while the prospects for "Privileged" have improved, and the show is now considered for a possible midseason order.

Heavy Competition deleted scenes

#2


#1

NMR: Uncle Buck

I love John Candy movies and I used to watch them all when I was kid, however my parents would never let us watch this one. I always wondered what could be so bad about this seemingly innocent family comedy. Well I found out quickly when I saw the opening 10 minutes basically composed of a profanity-laced rant by children. How was this movie PG? A people complain about the ratings board now! Anyways, I wasn't only protected from adult material, but I was also protected from a lousy movie. I just did not enjoy this at all. It tries to present the usual John Hughes schmaltz with an undertone of dark humor that doesn't work at all. Most of the characters were loathesome and I was just waiting for it to end. John Candy tries his best and his presence is the only salvageable thing in this otherwise lousy movie. Once again I thank my parents for showing keen judgment by preventing me from seeing this for so long. Rating: **

RIP keyboards?

Apparently this video is more than a year old, but it was new to me. It's a guy describing Dasher, a one finger user interface that allows text entry without a keyboard. I don't think I could see myself using this, especially not for my dissertation, but it's interesting nonetheless. Check it out...

Mr. Sand(ler)man

I took a brief respite from the heavy Oscar films and caught Adam Sandler's most recent film, Bedtime Stories through Netflix. Despite the fact that it had the taint of "Disney family film", I was still interested in seeing this as I tend to still enjoy Sandler's films.

I don't know if I just caught this one at the right time or what, but I ended up really enjoying this one. Yes, the humor isn't as crass as it is in most of his previous films, but I found myself still laughing quite a bit throughout the film. A handful of Sandler's regular sidekicks (i.e. Rob Schneider) appear here, but the film is really helped by some of the additional cast, namely Aisha Tyler and Russell Brand, who plays Sandler's friend.

If you didn't see the commercials, the film's premise is that Skeeter Bronson (Sandler) is asked to babysit his niece and nephew. Every night he tells them a bedtime story and the following day the events of the story end up coming true. The film does a nice job of coming up with a variety of cliched bedtime stories (cowboys and indians, fairy tale, outer space tale, etc.) and weaving in elements that will work with the events in Skeeter's life.

As we see the bedtime stories unfold, everyone in the cast gets a chance to have fun playing characters in the story. This gives the film an added level of energy that prevents the film from ever becoming boring even if the plot is pretty familiar. Unlike Night at the Museum, this film has a liveliness to it that makes it more appealing to a wider audience. I never found myself embarassed that I was watching a "kids film" because it never felt like I was.

Yes, Bedtime Stories employs some tired plot devices and has a deus ex machina conclusion, but I didn't mind it here. Those are the things you tend to absolutely loathe when the film is bad, but also tend to ignore when you're having a fun time. In this case, I was able to look past those flaws.

I should mention once more how refreshing Russell Brand was in this film. He steals the show with his usual bag of wackiness that fits right into this movie. I also enjoyed Keri Russell, who plays the potential love interest. She doesn't do a lot of films, but I'd like to see her do more, especially in these 'girl next door' type of roles. I'd be neglectful if I forgot to also mention Guy Pearce. Here's another actor who isn't in a lot of films (outside of one my favorite all time films, Memento) but works nicely as Sandler's foil here.

I wouldn't say that you need to rent this immediately, but if you stumble across it, you may want to give it a look. It's a fun film that's likely to be enjoyed by people of all ages. I certainly hope that this doesn't mark Sandler's permanent move into family films, but on this occassion he showed he can do nice just as well as naughty. Grade: B+

Michael Scott Paper Company deleted scenes

#4


#3


#2


#1

Yet another reason to hate Texas

Wow, could this opening series have gone any worse for the Indians? Getting swept by the average Rangers? Unacceptable. Our starting pitching just looked dreadful and our offense was pretty anemic until it didn't matter. It seems insane to think everything is over already, but I really need to see a drastic change in this weekend series against Toronto if I am going to believe we have any chance of being contenders this season. As if I didn't have enough reasons to want Eric Wedge fired, this start just fueled that fire even more. I just pray we turn things around because I do not want to have to go through this summer having nothing to enjoy. Go Tribe!

Dream Team deleted scenes

#2


#1

Lacking faith

The Oscar parade continues this week as I just got Doubt through Netflix.

Doubt boasts an impressive cast of Meryl Streep, Philip Seymour Hoffman and Amy Adams, all of whom were nominated for their work here along with Viola Davis. It's important to note though that even with these four acting nominations, the film did not receive a nomination for Best Picture. After seeing the film it became abundantly clear why that was the case.

The film, set in the 1960s takes place at a Catholic church where the pastor (Hoffman) is suspected by Sister Aloysius (Streep) of innapropriate acts with the only African-American boy attending the church's school. Already leery of the priest's modern attitude, the nun begins a witchhunt in order to take him down. As a result we get some really good, intense scenes between the actors as they debate the story's key points and try to make the other crumble.

If you didn't already know, as you watch the film, you'll quickly pick up on the fact that this story was originally designed for the stage. The film is very dialogue-heavy, which is fine given the story. However, the few artistic touches that the director adds seem heavy-handed and unnecessary. They detract from the film rather than add anything, which makes me question why they bothered turning this into a film in the first place. There's nothing here that film medium adds to this story.

Perhaps though this was the only way to get top notch actors involved with the story. And if that was the case, well then I'm thankful because they are all great here. Streep is perfect as the prim and strict Mother Superior. As for Hoffman, here's a guy who I couldn't stand for a long time, but have recently begun to appreciate his talent and he shines again here. He plays this role in such a way that makes it so easy for you to understand why someone would be suspicious of him, despite the lack of evidence proving anything. And while I think Amy Adams can be too precocious for her own good at times, that works in her favor with the naive nun she plays here. I would be remiss if I didn't mention Viola Davis too, who may turn in the best performance of everyone, even though she's really only in one extended scene. Playing the victimized boy's mother, she runs through a gamut of realistic emotions while discussing the situation with Sister Aloysius.

While I may not have been alive during the 60s, so much of this film felt realistic to me. Having grown up Catholic and attended a Catholic grade school, I saw a lot of similiarities that rang true to me. It probably helped that nothing was new in my school and the building looked like you were still living in the 60s. I'm getting away from the point though. I just wanted to commend the film for giving such an authentic feel to the church and school scenes.

I was really into this movie until the very conclusion. The final scene (not unlike this year's Wrestlemania) completely negates all of the goodwill that the film had built up. Regardless of who you side with in the film, you won't feel satisfied by the conclusion. It's ambiguous and completely undercuts several of the film's main characters. The final line of the film sounds so hacky, like it came from the screenwriter of a bad off-Broadway show. It's meant to be profound and powerful and instead it's cringeworthy.

I hate not recommending the film, because the performances here deserve to be seen. I'll just say don't have anything loose lying around as you watch this because you'll likely want to throw something at the TV as the film concludes. Go ahead and see this movie because it can produce a lot of good discussion, even if it is just to debate how bad the finish is. Though not a perfect film, it's a good one to enjoy watching great performers do what they do best. Grade: B

Office Space part deux?

Check out the trailer for Mike Judge's latest workplace comedy, Extract that stars a lot of familiar, funny faces...

Good news, bad news

First, the good...reports came out today that two new Michael Crichton books are set to be released this year, even though the author passed away last year.

From comingsoon.net:

HarperCollins is readying for publication two new novels written by the late author, who was behind the hit Jurassic Park films and "ER."

The action adventure "Pirate Latitudes," set in Jamaica in 1665, hits store shelves Nov. 24, while a yet-to-be-titled technological thriller will bow late next year.

"Pirate Latitudes" was written before Crichton's death last year and discovered in his files by an assistant, while the untitled book will be completed based on the writer's notes.

"Latitudes" revolves around plans by a notorious pirate named Hunter and the governor of Jamaica and to raid a Spanish galleon filled with treasure.

As for the bad news...a story was published today indicating that Reaper may not make it past this season.

From The Hollywood Reporter:

The CW's devilish TV show, Reaper, is starting to show signs of atrophy. News leaked out today that the show's producers have inked a deal with another studio, so is Reaper headed for the pit?

According to the trades, Michele Fazekas and Tara Butter are in a two-year deal with 20th Century Fox TV. So is it back to the salt mines for the good looking and sometimes funny cast? Most likely.

If Fazekas and Butter take this deal, they would have to leave Reaper for Fox, and seeing as no one else is stepping up to the plate, we're betting against Reaper. Under the seven-figure pact, the duo will join a Fox TV series and develop projects for the studio.

NMR: Crimetime live

A pair of crime movies to review today based on my recent Netflix viewing...

Entrapment: This was a fun, albeit forgettable heist thriller starring Catherine Zeta-Jones and Sean Connery. It's nice see Connery still trying here (I still believe that was a robot that looked like Sean Connery in The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen) and he has a lot of fun as the aging thief. The film has a lot of twists and turns, but a lot of it already feels dated; particularly the Y2K subplot. I didn't quite get the film's end due to some scratches on the disc preventing me from seeing everything, but I got the gist of it. A fun diversion, but nothing more. Rating: ***

Once Upon a Crime: A 1992 mystery comedy starring John Candy and directed by Eugene Levy. Given those two names, I thought this would be fun, but I was wrong. Like the far superior Clue, this is about several characters being possible suspects in a murder. Unlike Clue, all of the characters here are shrill and unlikeable. You end up wishing they all were the killer so they could all be locked up for good. Candy does his best to milk some laughs out of this dud, but it's not enough. Rating: **

Easy money

So the 2008 Best Picture winner decided to skip the budget theater and go straight to DVD. Luckily for me, I was able to snag a copy quickly through Netflix and can still do a normal review for it.

Slumdog Millionaire is certainly one of the most unlikeliest films to win top honors at the Oscars, but that certainly doesn't make it a bad film. I'm hard pressed to say it was worthy of the award since I haven't seen any of the other nominees yet. However, I can see how a lot of people got caught up in this movie. It has a theme the resonates in our economically troubling times. It's also an uplifting film that is presented in a unique style.

If you've lived under a rock for the past few months, I'll tell you that the film is about a young Indian boy who grew up in the slums of Mumbai. Through a series of events in his life, he winds up on India's version of Who Wants to be a Millionaire with a chance to win the big prize. Before he can answer the final question, he's accused of cheating and we learn how he came to be on the show via flashbacks and he's interrogated.

Let me get out of the way my biggest complaint about the film, which may sound like an odd nitpick. For some reason, director Danny Boyle chose to display the film's subtitles in a rather small font and have it randomly displayed on the screen instead of fixed at the bottom. With my glasses, I have fine eye sight, but I struggled trying to read everything. I was able to get the jist of most of the story, but it would have made things a lot better had I been able to follow along with the dialogue. While this may seem like a small thing, it made it difficult for me to get lost in the story, which is not a good thing.

Though I didn't care for the font, almost everything else from a visual standpoint works. The film provides you with a very close look at the slum lifestyle that so many people in that country must endure in real life. Boyle also has a lot of cinematic flare that prevents the film from ever getting dull. In many ways, it's shot in a way unlike most films, which gives it that something special that you would want in a best picture nominee.

As for the acting, the cast is made up of mostly children so it's hard to really evaluate. None of the performances were bad, nor were any of them amazing (as proven by the fact that the film didn't receive any acting nominations). What I can say is that the actors did enough to have you maintain your interest in the story.

And while the story is engaging, I still felt somewhat detached from it all. That may have to do with the film's central theme of destiny. I hate to use the word crutch, but in a sense destiny is used that way here. It's a plot device that I'm not fond of because there's no appealing end result. You either try to prove that destiny does not exist, which is depressing. Or if you stick with destiny well then the outcome is obvious because you've had your characters say what will happen throughout the film because "it's our destiny!". I suppose depicting that destiny exists is the lesser of two evils, which is what this film opts for. It may not be the most surprising of conclusions, but it should make you feel good nonetheless.

I personally would have liked more scenes to have taken place while Jamal (Dev Patel) was on Millionaire. The game show has worked in real life because of the tremendous drama that is built into it. The film wisely tapped into that by making it a part of the story, but I thought it could have been used more to provide some added drama. The best scene of the film for me is when he uses his phone a friend. I won't go into details on it, but it perfectly captures the drama of the show while also paying off so many of the plot points that had been developed over the course of the movie.

I'm not sure how this movie will be remembered down the line. It's a wonderfully appealing movie, but I think a lot of the connections people have with it are rooted in our present time. I don't know if it has that universal quality to it that will have people looking at it fondly 10 or 20 years from now. I definitely recommend the film though as it's well done and enjoyable to watch. And for most, it's a film unlike many you've probably seen, so it works as a nice change of pace. Too many of the Best Picture winners are either too dark or too cerebral to be appreciated by a wide audience, so it's nice to see a film win that is so accessible and easy to appreciate. Grade: B+

Back to reality

Hope everyone enjoyed my April Fools' Day reviews and anti-On Notice board. Everything's back to normal today. To get things back on track, here's a couple new trailers for two summer releases.

NMR: Best movies ever!!!!

Got a couple of great movies I recently saw...

Sex and the City: Wow, usually movies based on TV shows aren't very good but this one was just fab-u-lous!! All of the witty banter and stylish outfits from the show are here and then some. I was in tears during the breakup scene, but I knew it couldn't last. I cannot wait for the sequel!! Rating: *****

Twilight: Talk about perfect casting. All of the actors are perfect in their roles. I really felt the tension when the girl had to choose whether or not to date a vampire. The themes of the film really spoke to me. Watching the movie just makes me want to read the books over and over again. Rating: *****

Two weeks deleted scenes

#3


#2


#1

Booby prize

I had another opportunity to see a sneak preview at the campus theater. This time it was Adventureland, which is coming out on April 3rd. As with any of my early reviews, spoilers ahead!

Having spent several summers working at my city's recreation center, I know a thing or two about lousy summer jobs. They're low paying, thankless, and usually involve you having to work alongside a bunch of other deadbeats. But somewhere amongst that misery, you find you gain a lot of good stories and fond memories. You may not want to have that job for the rest of your life, but you end up grateful for the opportunity nonetheless. I was hoping to see a similar situation emerge in Adventureland, the new film directed by Superbad's Greg Mottola.

The film, set in 1987, centers around James Brennen (Jesse Eisenberg), a recent college grad whose plans for a trip to Europe over the summer are dashed when his father receives a demotion. In order to make money so he can go to grad school, Brennan takes a job at the local amusement park.

The park employs a number of interesting characters including SNL's Bill Hader and Kristen Wiig, who run the place, Ryan Reynolds as the park's maintenance man, and Martin Starr (Knocked Up). All of these characters are great in their limited roles. There are even a couple other lesser known actors who also shine in their brief appearances. Each of these characters in their own way provide a lot of humor to their scenes.

If only the film had managed to stay in the park longer, this would have been an instant classic. Instead, the film opts to place most of its attention on Brennen's attraction to Emily (played by Kristen Stewart), who also works at the park. I have no problem with including a love story into the film as a subplot. I also wouldn't have minded if it was the central focus if you provide the audience with a rooting interest in the characters. However, in this film the romance really drags the film down.

The central flaw in this love story is the character flaws of both characters. Brennan is an indecisive virgin who unnecessarily opens up to anyone who will listen. Emily comes with a ton of baggage and may not be as pure as Brennan thinks she is. If done right, you can make a romance between flawed characters work, but their flaws just seem incompatible. By the end of the movie they seem smart enough to recognize their flaws but eschew improving on them and instead just settle with being together.

Brennan's lack of growth is particularly frustrating. You would think that with the way the story is structured, his time spent at Adventureland would have provided him with the life lessons needed to improve himself and better handle this relationship. Instead, it appears the carnival setting was just a mere prop to inject some humor into a film centered on a flimsy love story.

It's hard to be completely critical of the film because when it chooses to be funny, it really succeeds. Mottola once again shows that he can create realistic depictions of teenagers that are embarassing, awkward, and still hilarious. I just wished he would have embraced it more. This almost seems like two movies put together. The stuff at the carnival works, everything else doesn't.

In the end, the film is just like the rigged games you'd find at an amusement park like Adventureland. You're easily drawn in by the flashy lights and big prizes, but once it's over you feel like you've been ripped off. I'll give the film a mild recommendation based on the strength of its hilarious supporting cast. However, you may be best to wait until DVD for this one. I have a feeling a lot of good stuff found its way onto the cutting room floor so that more time could be spent on a mopey romance that fails to set off any Fourth of July fireworks. Grade: B-

In the beginning...

You saw the teaser during the Super Bowl, now here's the first full trailer for the prehistoric comedy, Year One, starring Jack Black and Michael Cera and directed by Harold Ramis due out this summer.

Movie magic

Three movies came out this past weekend that I put on my Top 30 to see in '09 list, yet I ended up seeing something else this weekend. Thankfully, I wasn't disappointed. The Great Buck Howard is currently out in limited release in theaters, but it's also available already On Demand through your cable provider, which is the way I saw it.

Those that know me, know that I have been a fan of pro wrestling for almost all of my life. Being a fan, I'm frequently asked why I bother watching it. I've heard all the complaints and criticisms, and yet I still watch it. I've given up trying to rationalize it, I simply say that I'm a fan and will always be a fan. I thought about my love for a fake sport as I watched The Great Buck Howard.

Buck Howard, played by John Malkovich, is a aging mentalist who's main claim to fame is that he performed on The Tonight Show 61 times. Even though, he doesn't receive the coverage he once did, he still performs in tiny theaters around the country. We see this latter part of his career through the perspective of Troy (Colin Hanks), a law school dropout who is hired as his road manager in order to make some money.

Malkovich does a great job with this character providing him with the right amount of showmanship energy that makes it realistic that he could still entertain audiences. Of course, like most beyond their time celebrities, there's also this bubbling anger that occassionally emerges when he's not treated with the celebrity status he believes he still has.

Colin Hanks does a nice job of responding to Buck in the same way most people watching the film would. Buck brings us to the brink of repulsion but keeps drawing us back in by creating a sense of whimsy and awe over the tricks he's able to do. As a result, I found myself drawn to Hanks' character and interested in how he would continue dealing with such a combustible boss.

The film is strengthened by a couple of decent supporting roles as well. Emily Blunt does a nice job as the love interest for Troy. In the few things I've seen her in, I've been impressed and I hope she continues to get larger roles, as I feel she definitely has a future. She provides a good balance of cute and confident. Colin's father is played by his own father, Tom Hanks (who also has made out with Emily Blunt on screen, in Charlie Wilson's War). In a small role, he comes in at just the right moments to urge him to go back to law school, which only helps remind him why he's taking this thankless job in the first place. That reason being is that he's on a search to find something that he loves to do.

That brings me back to my point about being the wrestling fan. The film does a good job of establishing the message to do what you love to do. Troy doesn't want to be in love school because he doesn't love it. Seeing Buck refusing to retire even though convention says no one cares about him anymore inspires Troy to eventually get his dream job of being a writer.

This is a message that easily could turn the film into a schmaltzy mess, but that never happens. You find yourself getting caught up in Buck's, and by extension, the film's magic. The film takes you on a fun ride and leaves you feeling happy afterwards, something that should be seen in more films these days.

The film is a little too small in scale to truly feel significant. But for a smaller film, it succeeds at virtually everything it sets out to do. Buoyed by some great performances, The Great Buck Howard is a real treat. It doesn't take a mentalist to figure out why this a fun film. I have no doubt that if you see it, you too will quickly be engaged by the magic of Buck Howard. Grade: B+

KU's Cole = UD cold

The Flyers' tournament came to a close earlier today after losing to Kansas. I have mixed feelings over the game. Our defense played great, but we just couldn't get anything going on offense, thanks mostly to Kansas' Cole Aldrich just dominating the middle and blocking everything in sight. I wish UD could have gone further, but they had their first NCAA tournament win in almost twenty years, so I'm happy about that. There were a lot of positive things about this season for UD, so I'm hoping that they can build on this and have an even better season next year!

New boss deleted scenes

#3


#2


#1

NMR: Nick and Norah's Infinite Playlist

Wow, I cannot recall the last time I saw a movie this bad. This was just downright terrible. There were several times where I thought about just shutting it off, but I kept waiting to see if things would get better. Thankfully the movie was only 90 minutes, although it felt much longer than that. This movie was just a representation of everything that I'm not: indie music, New York nightlife, teenage drama. The whole thing was just an unappealing mess. About the only thing I enjoyed were the random cameos by SNL cast members like Seth Meyers and Andy Samberg. I get why there are some that would be really into this movie, but if you're anything like me, you will not enjoy this in the least. Strong recommendation to avoid this one! Rating: *

Shall we dance?

March Madness is upon us once again! And while I'm excited, it's been tempered a bit by the fact that I've got so much work to do and probably won't have time to watch many of the games outside of Dayton's first round game Friday afternoon. Here are my Final Four picks though: Louisville, Missouri, Villanova, and Oklahoma. I have Louisville beating Oklahoma in the finals.

And if you're not excited about the tournament yet, here's a video to get you in the mood. If students are putting that much on the line in a meaningless game for the College Basketball Invitational, just think what they'll do when everything is on the line.

Quick review: Better Off Ted

So after weeks of quirky promos for the show, I decided to give ABC's latest sitcom, Better Off Ted a chance last night. I haven't watched a sitcom regularly on ABC since the heyday of TGIF back when I was 10. Well scratch that, I did watch The Knights of Prosperity back in 2007 for all 6 of its episodes that actually aired. Anyways, this show about a mysterious company Verdian Dynamics and the people that work there provided enough laughs for me to give it a second shot. I'm always happy to see Arrested Development cast members get work, so it was nice to see Portia de Rossi here as Ted's blunt boss. And even though it's cliched, I bought right in to the office romance that's developing between Ted and Linda (Andrea Anders). This is not a perfect show, but probably the best new sitcom this year. If you missed it, you can watch the first episode on ABC.com and the show airs regularly on Wednesdays at 8:30, right before Lost (which had another killer episode last night. I'm loving the new take charge Sawyer, or excuse me, LaFleur).

NMR: Super terrific review

I have never really seen the original Superman movies in their entirety and since almost all of them were available for instant viewing on Netflix, I decided to partake in a little marathon.

Superman: The one that started it all. You can see why this one is still used as a standard bearer to compare newer comic book films. Director Richard Donner just did a fantastic job here. The cast was absolutely perfect. Reeve does a great job of doing nerdy as Clark and heroic as the Man of Steel. The star though is Gene Hackman who is awesome as Lex Luthor. I used to think that 2006's Superman Returns was bad because Superman is an uninteresting character, but this film has a great energy level to it, making Returns just a bad movie. This may not have the visual sophistication of today's comic book films, but it's still a great movie. Rating: ****

Superman II: Still a fun movie, but definitely a notch below the original. It's really apparent, at least to me, that there were changes made mid-stream during this film. If you're unfamiliar with the backstory, director Richard Donner got into a fight with the studio and was replaced halfway through. As a result, Marlon Brando is completely gone from the film and Gene Hackman is missing from a large chunk in the middle. I plan on seeing the Donner cut that was released a few years ago to see how significantly different it is. FYI, this is the only one for some reason that is not available to instantly view. Rating: ***

Superman III: The quality level significantly drops off here. After the Donner incident, Gene Hackman didn't return for this one and Margot Kidder (who played Lois Lane) is only in it for literally five minutes. In place of them we get Robert Vaughn, Richard Pryor, and Annette O'Toole. They're all fine actors but sorry replacements for the characters we've come to love. The story here is really stupid and the whole film is way too comedic. That is for one of the final scenes where a woman is turned into a machine. I saw that scene when I was a kid and it scared the shit out of me and seeing it today still gives me the willies. Overall, this is just a plain awful movie. Rating: **

Superman IV: The Quest for Peace: This provided the death knell for the series and is often slammed, but I found myself enjoying this one a lot more than III. Most of the original cast was back and they all seem to still be giving it a go, which helps. Sure, the film comes off a bit preachy with its whole nuclear disarmament storyline, but I wasn't bothered by it, maybe because I'm seeing it so long away from the time when this was a major issue. The battle between Superman and Nuclear Man is also pretty cheesy, but I've also seen worse. One thing that's surprisingly though is that the visuals in the film look really cheap. Visually the films seemed to regress over time, which isn't a good thing. I also felt the story could have been bolstered more; this is the only film in the series that clocks in under 2 hours. So while it's an imperfect film, I'd recommend it over III. Rating: ***

Also available for instant viewing on Netflix is a 1 hour documentary that aired last year on the Starz channel called Starz Inside: Comic Books Unbound. It covers the history of comic books and their film adaptations. It's an interesting look at the genre with a lot of interviews with people from the industry. At only an hour long though, the coverage is fairly superficial. It may not provide a lot of surprising information, but it's still a cool look at a genre that was once ignored by Hollywood and has now become one of its biggest cash cows. It's worth a look if you've got the time.

Golden Ticket deleted scenes

#3


#2


#1

NMR: Beerfest

I know this movie has already reached cult status with certain viewers, but I just wasn't digging it. Perhaps I needed to be on something to enjoy, but being stone cold sober, I just didn't find it particularly funny. I thought the coolest part was seeing all of the different competitive events that were part of Beerfest, but those are really only seen in the last fifteen minutes of the film. The whole training for the competition, which is the bulk of the film didn't make any sense and just drug on forever. I didn't find any of the protagonists to be funny, nor did they make me have a rooting interest in them. If you want a funny, wacky sports tournament movie, just go re-watch Dodgeball for the millionth time. Rating: **

and the trailers keep rolling in

I tell you, this is the week for new trailers. Here's a sample of some previewing some of this summer's biggest releases:

Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince


Up


Star Trek


The Hangover

Beauty and the bleak

As mentioned before, I decided to go see the midnight screening of Watchmen. I should have remembered before I bought my ticket that this movie was 243 mins. long, because I may not have been as eager to catch such a late showing. Luckily though I'm a night owl (no pun intended) so I made it through all right.

Full disclosure upfront, I have never read the widely loved graphic novel which the film was based on. I had minimal knowledge of the characters and story, but I always enjoy an event film, so I wanted to see why this was such a big deal for comic book fans. To say I was shocked by what I saw would be an understatement. This film earns every bit of its R rating as it is bloody, gruesome, and sometimes downright vile. And what's most shocking is that many of these deplorable actions are committed by the 'heroes' of the story.

If, like me, let me set up the premise of the story. The year is 1985, but very different from the one we remember. After winning the Vietnam war, Richard Nixon remains president of the United States. The country, however, is still entrenched in a Cold War with Russia and nuclear holocaust seems imminent (this is represented by a Doomsday clock set at five minutes to midnight). While there used to be several superheroes protecting our country, the President has banned all masked heroes and now most of them are retired. The film starts with the murder of one of the former superheroes and it appears someone is trying to kill them all off. The remaining heros band together, somewhat, in order to figure out who's behind this.

That's a lot of story, and yet it barely scratches the surface of what this film covers. Director Zach Snyder (300) is to be commended for making such a strong effort to remain faithful to the original story in this film. Again, while I've never read the comic book, based on what I've read this seems to closely resemble the novel's events. This is a mixed blessing for the film. While it is likely to please rabid fans, it gives the film too much of a structured feel. You can tell where segments of the book began and finished as the film covers each of the main character's backstories. At times it plays more like an anthology than a fluid narrative.

And while most of the characters are fleshed out through their histories, the story still seems somewhat incomplete. There were parts of the film that I wondered why the scenes were included and other plot points that I wished were explained better. The story itself is not terribly confusing, but for a neophyte to these characters, it can be difficult to get into the story.

The other problem for outsiders that I briefly mentioned before is the shock factor. Watchmen puts the graphic in graphic novels. There are scenes of dismemberment, mutilation, and abuse of women. There's also an extended sex scene that didn't really have to be included as well. Given that so many of these acts are done by the superheroes themselves, you begin to wonder who you're supposed to have a rooting interest for in this movie. The more you know about this story and these characters before watching the movie, the better off you'll be.

I ended up having a similar detached feeling while watching this film as I did watching the Lord of the Rings films. In both cases, I had never read the source material before seeing the films. I was also able to see why the stories were loved by fans because of the rich characters and intricate themes that the respective authors had created. While gruesome, Watchmen does provide a lot of interesting discussion points on issues like nuclear war, religion, responsibilty, and corporate greed.

As important as those issues are to discuss and unpack, I don't feel the film allows for that as much as the book. Unless you're already familiar with the material, you're more likely to be consumed by the visuals of the film than its themes. This is not necessarily a knock against the film. It should be noted that this is an extremely well made film. The production is top notch and is visually stunning. The final product is the end result of someone who was clearly passionate about this project.

The acting here is a mixed bag. Some deliver solid performances. For instance, Jackie Earle Hayley brings an amazing about of intensity to his performance as the enigmatic Rorshach. Other actors are subpar at best, like Patrick Wilson as the nerdy Night Owl. His performance reminded me too much of Bob Odenkirk, which in this case wasn't a good thing.

In the end, this is a well made film but a difficult film to enjoy. If you have read and loved the novel, you don't need me to tell you to run out and see this. You've waiting a long time for this film and you likely won't be disappointed. For the rest of the world, brace yourself. This is an acquired taste that may not sit well with everyone. If you're the squemish type or if you just don't want to see the concept of what is a superhero turned on its head, then you may want to enjoy it. As for me, I'm glad I saw it, but I'm not likely to be making any repeat viewings of it in the near future. Grade: B-

Blood Drive deleted scenes

#3


#2


#1

The German job

I would have had this review up last night, but I chose to instead also see the midnight showing of Watchmen, so look for that review up later today. But for now, our next review is of Tom Cruise's latest, Valkyrie.

I had a hard time figuring out what to expect with this film. Originally set to open last July, it went through a number of release dates before settling on last December, a time that didn't seem to fit with the tone of the movie. Then despite that, and despite Cruise really, the movie ended up doing fairly well at the box office.

Valkyrie marks director Bryan Singer's first film since his overbloated, boring Superman Returns. Thankfully, this is a better effort although still not a great film. The plot centers around General Claus Stauffenberg (Cruise) and several other German officers devising a plan to kill Hitler. Unhappy with the way Hitler was running things, Stauffenberg and company planned to kill Hitler and then fake a coup in order to stage their own coup.

While the basic events are based on one of the several attempts at Hitler's life, the movie plays like a true Hollywood film. The film lacks the authentic feel to create a sense that you're watching history unfold before your very eyes. From the dramatic soundtrack to Cruise's cartoonish eyepatch, the film is more Indiana Jones than History Channel documentary.

Clearly, the filmmakers were more concerned with making a good movie than trying to thrust the audience into 1940s Germany. This is perhaps best evidenced by the decent supporting cast that the film boasts. Valkyrie includes great actors like Tom Wilkenson, Bill Nighy, and Kenneth Brannagh, yet none of them, nor Cruise, speak with a German accent, let alone actual German. If Hitler were not the target, this film could have easily taken place in any other country around the world.

Now while I'm quick to criticize the film for lacking authenticity, I cannot aruge that it does do a good job of creating drama and tension. Every attempt that this crew makes to off Hitler comes off well and would be really suspenseful if you didn't know how it ended. I knew the events and still found myself on the edge of my seat a few times.

The film takes a while to get going as we're introduced to a bevy of characters that were at times difficult to keep straight. But once we get into the actual assassination attempts, things pick up nicely. It's a shame the aftermath of their actions wasn't longer or more interesting in real life, because I felt the film could have used a bigger ending.

One wonders, though, why a film about this was even made. It's not like this was the only attempt to kill Hitler (although it was the last). You could make some crude comparisons between Hitler and Bush and the idea of standing up against power for what you believe is right. But they aren't fleshed out enough to make it a worthy consideration.

Given the way the film plays out, I almost wished they would have just created a fictional story of about a Hitler assassination. If the producers want a Hollywood war movie, why restrain yourself with historical facts. You just box yourself into a corner doing that.

The bottom line here is that the movie is entertaining. It has enough action and drama to keep anyone entertained. And if you haven't seen many World War II films or aren't real familiar with the events, then the film's historical accuracy won't be a big problem. If you're looking for something with a little bit more meaning, then you may want to pass on this one. Valkyrie is nothing more than the fast food equivalent of a history lesson. Grade: B

Sink your claws into this

The latest trailer for the new Wolverine movie has just hit the net. It could be good, but for a film that supposed to be an origin story, this seems to have a whole lot of bang and not a lot of talk.

NMR: Trifecta

No regular movie review today, so instead, here's a trio of brief reviews for films I recently caught through Netflix.

Bigger, Stronger, Faster: This was the documentary on steroids released last year that caught the attention of a lot of wrestling fans. The film was made by Chris Bell, who along with his two brothers, was a bodybuilder. Bell lays it out early on how torn he is on the subject because he didn't feel it was right to take steroids but he kept discovering all of his childhood heros (Ah-nuld, Hulk Hogan, Sly Stallone) had all taken them. Bell does a really good job at presenting arguments on both side of the issue. However, Bell's own non-commital stance on the issue grows wearisome as the movie progresses and you'd like him to pick a side. This is not a great documentary, but if you have any interest at all in the subject, it's probably worth a look. This one is available to watch instantly. Rating: ***

The Invasion: This was yet another remake of Invasions of the Body Snatchers that came out back in '07. I was initially interested in it as it was going to be one of Daniel Craig's first post-Bond films. However, the film kept getting delayed and there always seemed to be more re-shoots. Soon the writing was on the wall that this wasn't going to be very good, and for the most part that's true. There are a handful of good scares in the film, but it provides nothing new to this classic story. There are hints of what could have been (the idea of the possibility of world peace if the pod people completely take over), but all of that is loss for generic action scenes. The end result is a film that had more knives put to it than Joan Rivers. Rating: **

The Heartbreak Kid: Another '07 release that had some promise but turned out to be a dud. Ben Stiller re-teamed with the Farrelly brothers in this remake of a 1972 comedy. While providing some occasional laughs, this one ends up being too crass and stupid. It's another one of these Three's Company comedies where simple communication would have prevented all of the conflicts. The film doesn't do itself any favors by including in its supporting cast unfunny guys like Carlos Mencia and Danny McBride. Little known actress Malin Ackerman (soon to be seen in Watchmen) seems talented though, so hopefully she'll continue to get more roles. This film, however, is totally skippable. Rating: **

#1 with a bullet

The first trailer for Michael Mann's new movie, Public Enemies. From the looks of things, I'd say I was justified in putting this so high up on my must see list. Can't wait!

Unwelcome visitor

Back to the movies we go and this time it's for the remake of the 1951 sci-fi classic, The Day The Earth Stood Still.

When I first heard that this remake was coming, I was generally intrigued. A lot of that was due to the fact that I had just seen the original in a film class. I was impressed with the way that film, like so many of the sci-fi films of that era used out of this world creatures as an apt metaphor for the Red Scare. It fed into audiences' fear of the unknown to make a truly scary movie. With all of the important issues going on in our world today, I was interested to see how they would make this update appropriate for our current time. Unfortunately, they decided to forego coming up with an appropriate methaphor and focused on more important things like finding a cool way to depict the destruction of Giants stadium.

As in the orignal, Klaatu (Keanu Reeves) arrives in an alien spacecraft on Earth with a warning to the human race. Jennifer Connelly plays Helen, the astrobiologist who first meets Klaatu and strikes up an odd bond with him. She's hopeful of finding a way to convince Klaatu not to destroy all of humanity. Also along for the ride is her step-son Jacob (Jaden Smith) who is not as willing to listen to what Klaatu has to say.

You see, Klaatu is going to kill off all human life because they are detrimental to themselves and the planet. In the 1951 version, you can see how the fearmongering and Communist witch hunts would appear to an outsider like humanity was destroying itself. And today, there are certainly plenty of reasons why you could blame humanity for the way the world is. Things like the war on terror, global warming, and addiction to technology all reveal the dark side of humanity. If this film had chosen any one of those and focused on it, the message would have more resonance. Instead the film takes a generic, humans are bad and must be eradicated approach.

Rather than trying to make the audience think, the film distracts you with a bunch of superflous visual effects. Sure the glowing orbs across the earth and the nanobot storm eating any non-living thing look cool but they don't add any gravitas to the film. If I wanted eye candy, I would just go watch a Roland Emmerich film. At least there, I know I'm not getting any substance, so I won't be disappointed.

The one cool visual that does add to the film, though, is their version of Gort, the robot that protects Klaatu and his ship. While the 1951 film had a guy in a silver rubber suit (I don't think metal bends that way), this director creates a visually stunning creatures that truly elicts the fear that the original should have, but didn't. Their interpretation of Gort is the best thing about the film (although I rolled my eyes over the fact that Gort this time is an acronym created by the Army).

But for as much as I liked their interpretation of Gort, I was equally dismayed by their treatment of the Professor Barnard character. In the original, Barnard is the voice of rational thought in an irrational situation and also helps Klaatu better understand humanity. Here, his inclusion is shoehorned into the story and doesn't really add anything. John Cleese is wasted here in the role neither providing any comic relief nor any real words of wisdom to justify the character's inclusion. If you had never seen the original, you would wonder why this scene was even included in this version.

As disappointed as I was about the film's failure to pick an issue to use drive its message, that can be overlooked if the film does a good job at providing an emotional and meaningful climax to the story. But as you may have guessed, this doesn't do it. First of all, the action that causes Klaatu to change his mind about humanity is so basic and ordinary, you begin to wonder why it took so long for him to figure out that humans have the capicity to be compassionate. The film builds things up to make it seem like there's something special about Helen and/or Jacob that Klaatu will see, but their actions are not unlike most average humans. It's truly baffling why that moment creates the change in Klaatu's perspective.

Then as the film ends we aren't given a proper sense of the aftermath. Will humanity change? What, if any, lessons have they learned from this experience? The whole climax is as emotionless as Klaatu himself. I'm left wondering what I'm supposed to take away from any of this.

Like a lot of movies that came out this past Winter, it seems this one may have been a victim of the writer's strike. There were just too many poorly constructed or underwritten scenes. You feel like if the script had gone through one more revision, a lot of the problems could have been tightened up. While I can give some other films some slack for this, this film shouldn't haven't had those problems. First, it's a remake, so you already have the core script ready. Secondly, the film was originally supposed to be released in the summer, so this may have been a case of too much tinkering instead of not enough.

Regardless of the reason, this is a disappointing film to anyone who saw the original. And if you haven't, I can't see it being very enjoyable for you either. The whole thing has a very dour tone that never eases up. This film is neither scary nor uplifting. This alien invasion feels more like your mother-in-law having an overextended stay. You just want them to leave so we can go back doing our regular thing. Everyone will be better off just going out and finding the original rather than wasting your time with this disappointing redux. Grade: C

Change we apparently can't believe in

False positive

So it's spring break this week and while I've still got plenty of work to do, there's a ton of movies over at the budget theater that I need to catch up on, so I'll try and get to as many of them as possible. So be on the lookout for more reviews as the week progresses.

We'll start things off though with Jim Carrey's latest comedy, Yes Man. I'll admit that nothing really stood out to me from the previews for this one. The premise seemed similar to Liar Liar and I didn't find myself laughing that much. It turns out that my instincts ended up being fairly accurate.

The premise here is that Jim Carrey plays Carl, a pessimistic banker who jumps at the chance to say no to every offer put in front of him until he takes a motivational seminar in which the guru gets him to start saying yes to everything asked of him. Hopefully in reading that sentence some warning bells should already start ringing in your head that this sounds like a pretty flimsy concept.

First of all, we're never really given an adequate explanation as to why Carl is so pessimistic. There is some mention of a failed marriage, but that idea isn't really explored enough to make us buy that as the justification. After this brief introduction into the character, Carl runs into a Contrivance #1 aka John Michael Higgins character. These two supposedly know each other, but we're not told where they know each other from. Higgins' encourages Carl to attend this positivity seminar and soon we're thrust right into the main plot.

Of course, all of the things asked of Carl seemed like they'll go terrible if he agrees to them, but he does and then end up turning out great for him. The best thing is he ends up meeting Contrivance #2, Allison (played amicably by Zooey Deschanel). Being a free spirit herself, she really likes how spontaneous and optimistic Carl is. We then spend the crux of the film watching them do zany things like breaking into the Hollywood Bowl or flying to Lincoln, Nebraska. Any of this sound exciting yet? All the while, we're supposed to be laughing at Carrey's zany, spur-of-the-moment antics, but instead it just appears that this character has some sort of mental deficiency.

Carrey's character is flawed in so many ways that it basically ruins the entire movie. Aside from acting like a lunatic, he doesn't come across as likeable when he pessimistic or optimistic. It's hard to root for someone who is so stupid to believe that saying yes to everything is the answer to all of life's problems. By the end of the film, he learns the lesson that while it's important to be positive, major decisions require critical thought, not just blindly agreeing to everything. How hard was that to figure out? The audience figures this out waaaaay before the main character does, which just makes for a frustrating experience.

There are an assortment of subplots introduced that could have been potentially interesting like Carl's friends abusing his inability to say no, or the fact that Carl works at a bank and is suddenly giving loans to everyone who asks for one. In our current financial times, this could have been particularly pertinent, but it's abandoned for more wacky Carrey antics.

Any of these minor stories are spurned in favor of the cliched romance which of course involves Contrivance #3 causing Allison and Carl to briefly break up when she realizes he's 'not the man I thought he was' only for them to quickly reconcile by the movies end.

Nothing in the movie feels real or genuine. Perhaps the best example of that is one of the final scenes, which in a way mirrors one of the final scenes in The 40-Year Old Virgin. Without giving too much away, they both involve the main character on a bike chasing after their love interest. If you do see this movie, you'll understand how cheesy and lame this scene comes off as in comparison to the emotion that's packed into the scene from Virgin.

I was excited to see Carrey come back to the genre that brought him, the slapstick comedy, but this was not the right vehicle for him. The film tries to put a fresh spin on a tried and true method of storytelling, but fails completely. Nothing rings true about the story or the characters or the message. If I were you, I don't see a need to waste your time renting it. It'll probably show up on the USA channel fairly quickly anyways, so if you're really a big Jim Carrey fan and you haven't seen it, you can watch it then. Otherwise, just say no to Yes Man. Grade: C-