Monday, January 26, 2009
Temporarily closing up shop
It's with a heavy heart that I have to announce that there won't likely be any new posts on here for at least a month. Late last week I had a meeting with my dissertation advisor and learned that I basically have to be done writing my dissertation by the end of February if I want to graduate in May. As you may guess, I'm currently nowhere near done, which means I have to devote every waking moment from here on out on it so that it can be done. It won't be easy, but if I've got any chance of doing it, it will take eliminating all fun distractions like television and blogging. I've put up a number of posts today to somewhat compensate for my absence, but I know it'll barely tide you over. I'm sorry to all my readers that you too have to suffer from this drought. But the good news is is that if I succeed in finishing this thing by the end of February, it will mean I will have practically nothing to do come March, April, and May, which will be sweet! So goodbye for now, but please now that I will be back soon enough...and with a vengeance!
Quickie Royal Rumble thoughts
I don't usually share wrestling thoughts on here, but since I plunked down money on this show, I figured I might as well spout off on what I thought about it:
ECW title match - This was my first real chance to see new ECW champ, Jack Swagger in action and I'm moderately impressed. It seems that while he may not have the flashiness of a true WWE superstar, he appears to have a lot of raw talent. I'm not sure if making him a 'world champion' five months into his tenure is a wise move, but let's face it, ECW clearly is a glorified developmental league at this point, which is fine for the most point; it's just unnecessary for them to have a World champ. Anyways, the match itself was well worked and it provided the necessary storytelling seeds for what was to come later.
Women's title match - Why oh why take the title off of the Glamazon, especially when you don't factor Santino or Rosa Mendez into the finish even though you've been using them as major factors in the build to this feud. There is no reason to give the title to Melina when I haven't seen her wrestle one match where she doesn't blow several spots. I don't know how many times it has to fail before Melina realizes that she cannot properly sell a sidewalk slam. The highlight of the match comes from Beth literally (and I'm not using that term like Gorilla Monsoon uses it) literally was beating Melina with her own foot. You have to see it to believe it. Aside from that, it was you typicaly subpar effort from the women.
Cena vs. JBL - They had even set up so perfectly. JBL said he would pay HBK in full plus guarantee him a spot in the Rumble if he guarantted him a title victory. What is the downside to this?!?! Hurting Cena's feelings? Disappointing a handful of 10 year olds? Shame on Shawn for not seeing this through. Of course he had to superkick both of them and then leave before seeing everything play out. And of course Superman Cena was able to 'overcome the odds' and still leave as champ. A fully disappointing outing, but one that I've come to expect from all Cena matches.
Hardy vs. Edge - And so the Hardy experiment ends as his first title defense also is his last. I'm torn here as I like Edge and am always glad to see him win the title, but I'm not sure if now was the best time for it. Seeing Matt Hardy turn on his brother and cost him the title was and was not a surprise. They've planted the seeds of jealousy, but we've been expecting a returning Christian to be behind this all along. His no-show was certainly a disappointment. Overall this was an entertaining brawl but nothing memorable.
Royal Rumble match - The Rumble match suffered the same problem that the previous two also suffered from. There have just been too many guys in there without sufficient eliminations. It's like they can't figure out how to tell decent mid-match stories and they're too afraid to make anyone look weak, so they'll have practically everyone stay in until the end and then do a mass exodus before finishing things off. There were a couple of nice moment this year including several guys doing awesome jobs of avoiding elimination (Mysterio, John Morrison, Chris Jericho). You also had a returning RVD, which was a shocking surprise and I have no idea if it was a one time deal or leading to a full time return. Orton winning it was pretty disgusting and apparent about halfway through the match. I would be more upset about it, but I've learn that it's pointless to get worked up over something that has been a long-time that has no apparent chance of being rectified. Once again Orton manages to find a way to back himself into a top spot (this time thanks to Batista's injury). This guy truly is the epitome of failing upwards.
ECW title match - This was my first real chance to see new ECW champ, Jack Swagger in action and I'm moderately impressed. It seems that while he may not have the flashiness of a true WWE superstar, he appears to have a lot of raw talent. I'm not sure if making him a 'world champion' five months into his tenure is a wise move, but let's face it, ECW clearly is a glorified developmental league at this point, which is fine for the most point; it's just unnecessary for them to have a World champ. Anyways, the match itself was well worked and it provided the necessary storytelling seeds for what was to come later.
Women's title match - Why oh why take the title off of the Glamazon, especially when you don't factor Santino or Rosa Mendez into the finish even though you've been using them as major factors in the build to this feud. There is no reason to give the title to Melina when I haven't seen her wrestle one match where she doesn't blow several spots. I don't know how many times it has to fail before Melina realizes that she cannot properly sell a sidewalk slam. The highlight of the match comes from Beth literally (and I'm not using that term like Gorilla Monsoon uses it) literally was beating Melina with her own foot. You have to see it to believe it. Aside from that, it was you typicaly subpar effort from the women.
Cena vs. JBL - They had even set up so perfectly. JBL said he would pay HBK in full plus guarantee him a spot in the Rumble if he guarantted him a title victory. What is the downside to this?!?! Hurting Cena's feelings? Disappointing a handful of 10 year olds? Shame on Shawn for not seeing this through. Of course he had to superkick both of them and then leave before seeing everything play out. And of course Superman Cena was able to 'overcome the odds' and still leave as champ. A fully disappointing outing, but one that I've come to expect from all Cena matches.
Hardy vs. Edge - And so the Hardy experiment ends as his first title defense also is his last. I'm torn here as I like Edge and am always glad to see him win the title, but I'm not sure if now was the best time for it. Seeing Matt Hardy turn on his brother and cost him the title was and was not a surprise. They've planted the seeds of jealousy, but we've been expecting a returning Christian to be behind this all along. His no-show was certainly a disappointment. Overall this was an entertaining brawl but nothing memorable.
Royal Rumble match - The Rumble match suffered the same problem that the previous two also suffered from. There have just been too many guys in there without sufficient eliminations. It's like they can't figure out how to tell decent mid-match stories and they're too afraid to make anyone look weak, so they'll have practically everyone stay in until the end and then do a mass exodus before finishing things off. There were a couple of nice moment this year including several guys doing awesome jobs of avoiding elimination (Mysterio, John Morrison, Chris Jericho). You also had a returning RVD, which was a shocking surprise and I have no idea if it was a one time deal or leading to a full time return. Orton winning it was pretty disgusting and apparent about halfway through the match. I would be more upset about it, but I've learn that it's pointless to get worked up over something that has been a long-time that has no apparent chance of being rectified. Once again Orton manages to find a way to back himself into a top spot (this time thanks to Batista's injury). This guy truly is the epitome of failing upwards.
Browns hire their new GM
Browns hire Kokinis
I don't know what the feeling in Cleveland has been over how the Browns have handled their new hires in this off-season, but from where I stand they have bungled things royally. First of all, they should have hired a GM first before their head coach. Secondly, they rushed into hiring the 'Mangenius' and there have been other, better coaches which have come available in the meantime. Then they finally hire their GM and it's another ex Baltimore Raven. Did they learn nothing from the debacle of Phil Savage? I would have really liked for the Browns to right the ship after their house cleaning, but these moves just prove that I should only care about the Indians and the Cavs for the foreseeable future. If you see any silver lining in this dark cloud, please share so I can have some hope restored in this franchise.
I don't know what the feeling in Cleveland has been over how the Browns have handled their new hires in this off-season, but from where I stand they have bungled things royally. First of all, they should have hired a GM first before their head coach. Secondly, they rushed into hiring the 'Mangenius' and there have been other, better coaches which have come available in the meantime. Then they finally hire their GM and it's another ex Baltimore Raven. Did they learn nothing from the debacle of Phil Savage? I would have really liked for the Browns to right the ship after their house cleaning, but these moves just prove that I should only care about the Indians and the Cavs for the foreseeable future. If you see any silver lining in this dark cloud, please share so I can have some hope restored in this franchise.
NMR: Documentary Duo
The Aristocrats: If you're not familiar with the age-old joke, The Aristocrats starts with the premise of a man pitching his family's variety act. It's then up to the person telling the joke to come up with the most vulgar act possible and then at the end of the joke, proclaim that the act is called 'The Aristocrats'. This documentary chronicles over a hundred different famous comedians discussing the origins of the joke, how it's crafted and their own versions of telling it. It's a unique concept and at times really provides some insight into the creative process of a comedian. Unfortunately, the premise doesn't hold up for 90 minutes. A lot of it has to do with the unrelenting nature of hearing all of these loud, fast-talking comedians speaking at their filthiest. There are occassional moments of both hilarity and intrigue, but ultimately it gets tiresome rather quickly. Rating: ***
Man on Wire: Recently nominated for an Academy Award for Best Documentary and deservedly so. This is the film which chronicles high wirewalker Phillipe Petit and his attempt to walk across the Twin Towers during the 1970s. It doesn't seem like it would be that engaging of a premise to sustain itself for a full film, but it does. A large part of that is due to the wonderful storytelling skills that Petit and the crew that helped him achieve this feat possess. At times the films plays like a real life Ocean's 11. The film is equal parts high risk adventure tale and love story to the World Trade Center buildings. It would be easy to dismiss this film, but I'm confident that if you give it a chance, you will quickly get wrapped up in the story. If you're at all interested, it's currently available to watch instantly on Netflix, so give it a look and see for yourself. Rating: *****
Man on Wire: Recently nominated for an Academy Award for Best Documentary and deservedly so. This is the film which chronicles high wirewalker Phillipe Petit and his attempt to walk across the Twin Towers during the 1970s. It doesn't seem like it would be that engaging of a premise to sustain itself for a full film, but it does. A large part of that is due to the wonderful storytelling skills that Petit and the crew that helped him achieve this feat possess. At times the films plays like a real life Ocean's 11. The film is equal parts high risk adventure tale and love story to the World Trade Center buildings. It would be easy to dismiss this film, but I'm confident that if you give it a chance, you will quickly get wrapped up in the story. If you're at all interested, it's currently available to watch instantly on Netflix, so give it a look and see for yourself. Rating: *****
Monday, January 19, 2009
NMR: More '08 leftovers
Righteous Kill: This was supposed to be a big deal because it reteamed DeNiro and Pacino for the first time since Heat. But the September release date should have tipped you off that something wasn't right. This is just a terrible movie filled with cop movie cliches and a narrative that's all over the place. Worse of all, I figured out very early on who the killer was. It's no fun sitting through a bad movie knowing what the inevitable outcome is going to be. It's surprising that the script is so bad considering it was written by the same guy who did Inside Man. I will say that DeNiro and Pacino seem to be having a lot of work playing off of each other here, but it's not enough to warrant a recommendation from me. Grade: D+
The Visitor: Sometimes you don't need big name stars to make great films, and this is an example of that. It stars Richard Jenkins, who you may not have known before but had a big '08 with this, Step-Brothers, and Burn After Reading. His performance is what makes this film so great. It's about a man who visits his apartment in New York and finds it's been illegally rented to a couple of illegal immigrants (one from Syria, the other from Senegal). From this bizarre set of circumstances, he strikes a friendship with the two and gains a new outlook on life. Now that description may sound very hackneyed, but the film rises above those common conventions. I think it really struck a chord with me because Jenkins' character is a college professor, so I'm familiar with that world and felt it was authentic. This is a quiet film that will stir a mix of emotions in you as you watch this character change throughout the course of the movie. Jenkins deserves an Oscar nomination for this, but I worry he'll get passed over in place of bigger, flashier names. Still, I would recommend giving this one a rental. Grade: B+
The Visitor: Sometimes you don't need big name stars to make great films, and this is an example of that. It stars Richard Jenkins, who you may not have known before but had a big '08 with this, Step-Brothers, and Burn After Reading. His performance is what makes this film so great. It's about a man who visits his apartment in New York and finds it's been illegally rented to a couple of illegal immigrants (one from Syria, the other from Senegal). From this bizarre set of circumstances, he strikes a friendship with the two and gains a new outlook on life. Now that description may sound very hackneyed, but the film rises above those common conventions. I think it really struck a chord with me because Jenkins' character is a college professor, so I'm familiar with that world and felt it was authentic. This is a quiet film that will stir a mix of emotions in you as you watch this character change throughout the course of the movie. Jenkins deserves an Oscar nomination for this, but I worry he'll get passed over in place of bigger, flashier names. Still, I would recommend giving this one a rental. Grade: B+
Saturday, January 17, 2009
The Business of Being Porn
I finally caught Zach and Miri Make a Porno last week at the budget theater, but for various reasons, am just writing about it now. Let's hope I still remember everything I wanted to say about it.
I've never been a huge Kevin Smith fan. I've seen some of his films and found them to be funny, but not worthy of the cult status some people have placed upon them. His fan-base though seemed to be losing faith in though recently with a series of disappointing films. However, when I heard this one was going to star Seth Rogen and Elizabeth Banks, I had high expectations and for the most part it delivers. Smith was smart in infusing some of the Apatow magic into his films by recruiting a few of his crew to star in the film. If nothing else, it guaranteed getting a few more people to watch the movie, who normally would have dismissed it.
Playing the titular characters, Rogen and Banks are great at playing the characters that they're familar with. Rogen works as the fat, schlubby, but likeable guy and Banks has that wonderful girl next door quality that still possesses a naughty side. They not only play their characters well, but they also work well with each other. While seeing Seth Rogen date Katherine Heigl in Knocked Up might have seemed a bit of a stretch, you can totally believe that he and Banks would be best friends (and maybe a little bit more) here.
One of the things that Kevin Smith does well in this and a lot of his films is create a realistic atmosphere. While Apatow may do a better job at creating characters and placing them in realistic situations, Smith provides settings for his films that seem authentic and gritty, yet also ordinary. Here, you really get a sense of the poverty and dire situation that these characters are in that would drive them to an outrageous idea like making a pornographic film for money. From the decrepit apartment, to the dead-end job at a coffee place, to the brutal cold of a Pittsburg winter; all of these things do a nice job of adding the layers needed to make the films' premise work.
Sometimes that realistic grittiness is taken a big too far. I was surprised as to how much sex was actually in the film, especially when it's being done by less than savory characters (including Smith regular, Jason Mewes). But there's one seen that is so disgusting that I'll forever have nightmares about it. I won't spell it out here, but you'll definitely know what I'm talking about when you see it.
That raunchy style of humor is found throughout most of the film, and for the most part it works. I found myself laughing throughout the movie and all the great one-liners. However, I felt that there were times where it was just raunch for the sake of raunch. A lot of it didn't feel organic or natural, but rather just an exhibition in filth. I found myself enjoying more the jokes that were clever observations on real life like Zack and Miri's conversation about Julia Roberts' Sleeping With the Enemy. Four-letter word rants can be funny, but sometimes in this film it can be a bit much.
Criticizing the film's dirty humor may seem hypocritical considering the praise I give to the Apatow films, which also typically feature a lot of r-rated laughs. But here's the primary difference and why this film, while good, doesn't match up to those. In a film like The Forty Year Old Virgin if you took away the dirty jokes, you still have a well told story about a man searching for love and friends that care enough to help him find it. If you take the dirty humor out of this film, you're left with a cliched romance that doesn't really tell us anything that we've haven't heard before.
And in that way, maybe this film really is like a pornographic movie. In both cases, you realy don't watch for the story, but rather for the sex, or in this case, sex jokes. Smith takes familiar tropes and just surrounds them with fresh faces and new jokes. If you laugh, then the movie works and if you don't, then it's a bust. Luckily, I did laugh, which is why I'll recommend this film. Unless you're really uptight and wouldn't appreciate the raunch, you'll likely find this to be a very funny film. It's definitely one of Smith's better efforts in recent years. If you're a fan of his films, you should definitely check it out. Grade: B+
I've never been a huge Kevin Smith fan. I've seen some of his films and found them to be funny, but not worthy of the cult status some people have placed upon them. His fan-base though seemed to be losing faith in though recently with a series of disappointing films. However, when I heard this one was going to star Seth Rogen and Elizabeth Banks, I had high expectations and for the most part it delivers. Smith was smart in infusing some of the Apatow magic into his films by recruiting a few of his crew to star in the film. If nothing else, it guaranteed getting a few more people to watch the movie, who normally would have dismissed it.
Playing the titular characters, Rogen and Banks are great at playing the characters that they're familar with. Rogen works as the fat, schlubby, but likeable guy and Banks has that wonderful girl next door quality that still possesses a naughty side. They not only play their characters well, but they also work well with each other. While seeing Seth Rogen date Katherine Heigl in Knocked Up might have seemed a bit of a stretch, you can totally believe that he and Banks would be best friends (and maybe a little bit more) here.
One of the things that Kevin Smith does well in this and a lot of his films is create a realistic atmosphere. While Apatow may do a better job at creating characters and placing them in realistic situations, Smith provides settings for his films that seem authentic and gritty, yet also ordinary. Here, you really get a sense of the poverty and dire situation that these characters are in that would drive them to an outrageous idea like making a pornographic film for money. From the decrepit apartment, to the dead-end job at a coffee place, to the brutal cold of a Pittsburg winter; all of these things do a nice job of adding the layers needed to make the films' premise work.
Sometimes that realistic grittiness is taken a big too far. I was surprised as to how much sex was actually in the film, especially when it's being done by less than savory characters (including Smith regular, Jason Mewes). But there's one seen that is so disgusting that I'll forever have nightmares about it. I won't spell it out here, but you'll definitely know what I'm talking about when you see it.
That raunchy style of humor is found throughout most of the film, and for the most part it works. I found myself laughing throughout the movie and all the great one-liners. However, I felt that there were times where it was just raunch for the sake of raunch. A lot of it didn't feel organic or natural, but rather just an exhibition in filth. I found myself enjoying more the jokes that were clever observations on real life like Zack and Miri's conversation about Julia Roberts' Sleeping With the Enemy. Four-letter word rants can be funny, but sometimes in this film it can be a bit much.
Criticizing the film's dirty humor may seem hypocritical considering the praise I give to the Apatow films, which also typically feature a lot of r-rated laughs. But here's the primary difference and why this film, while good, doesn't match up to those. In a film like The Forty Year Old Virgin if you took away the dirty jokes, you still have a well told story about a man searching for love and friends that care enough to help him find it. If you take the dirty humor out of this film, you're left with a cliched romance that doesn't really tell us anything that we've haven't heard before.
And in that way, maybe this film really is like a pornographic movie. In both cases, you realy don't watch for the story, but rather for the sex, or in this case, sex jokes. Smith takes familiar tropes and just surrounds them with fresh faces and new jokes. If you laugh, then the movie works and if you don't, then it's a bust. Luckily, I did laugh, which is why I'll recommend this film. Unless you're really uptight and wouldn't appreciate the raunch, you'll likely find this to be a very funny film. It's definitely one of Smith's better efforts in recent years. If you're a fan of his films, you should definitely check it out. Grade: B+
Friday, January 16, 2009
Thursday, January 15, 2009
From the department of bad ideas...
Here's a couple of movie-related news items that have bad idea written all over them:
Jackie Chan joins The Karate Kid remake
Yes, they are doing another Karate Kid movie. This time with Chan in the Mr. Miyagi and Will Smith's kid in the titular role. Why can't they just leave this franchise alone? I dread the day when someone wants to try a Back to the Future remake.
McG to direct 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea
Despite it's title, this is not a remake per se, but rather a prequel of sorts that looks at the origin story of Captain Nemo. You know, not everyone deserves to have an origin story made about this. Nemo isn't Batman for goodness sakes. And I'm sure with McG directing, Nemo's origin story will somehow involve a lot of explosions and techno music.
Michael Cera still not signed on for Arrested movie
If Cera doesn't agree to do the movie, he'll be the one muttering 'I've made a huge mistake'. Everyone else is on board, so what's taking him so long. He was too integral to the show to be left out. Let it be known that if he doesn't sign on, he'll be put on the 'On Notice' board immediately and you do NOT want that pal.
Jackie Chan joins The Karate Kid remake
Yes, they are doing another Karate Kid movie. This time with Chan in the Mr. Miyagi and Will Smith's kid in the titular role. Why can't they just leave this franchise alone? I dread the day when someone wants to try a Back to the Future remake.
McG to direct 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea
Despite it's title, this is not a remake per se, but rather a prequel of sorts that looks at the origin story of Captain Nemo. You know, not everyone deserves to have an origin story made about this. Nemo isn't Batman for goodness sakes. And I'm sure with McG directing, Nemo's origin story will somehow involve a lot of explosions and techno music.
Michael Cera still not signed on for Arrested movie
If Cera doesn't agree to do the movie, he'll be the one muttering 'I've made a huge mistake'. Everyone else is on board, so what's taking him so long. He was too integral to the show to be left out. Let it be known that if he doesn't sign on, he'll be put on the 'On Notice' board immediately and you do NOT want that pal.
The Office/non-Office news
First, some casting news for our favorite workplace comedy from Variety:
And then we also have news on the show that was originally meant to be an Office spinoff, but will now be a completely seperate show that's just being run by the same people in charge of The Office. This news comes from Zap2It.com:
Having worked for a recreation department for many years, this concept probably intrigues me more than most people. Still, I think we're all interested to see if this show turns out as well as The Office. Rumor has it that we can expect to see the first episode of this new show sometime in April
Idris Elba has been cast on "The Office" as a new rival to Dunder Mifflin regional manager Michael Scott (Steve Carell), reports Variety. Elba will appear in six episodes later this season. He'll play a no-nonsense hire at Dunder Mifflin's corporate office who will throw Michael Scott into turmoil.Well it's about time we got some new conflict from corporate. Ever since Jan left, Michael really hasn't had to worry about his actions. I'm not familiar with the actor, but I like the idea of this new character.
And then we also have news on the show that was originally meant to be an Office spinoff, but will now be a completely seperate show that's just being run by the same people in charge of The Office. This news comes from Zap2It.com:
Once billed as The Office spin off -- which we now know is not a spin off, yet still created by The Office's producers -- I'm not sure what to call Amy Poehler's upcoming NBC sitcom. However, I do have exclusive details on the concept of the series, which has been kept under wraps for quite some time. Are you ready? A couple nosy moles tell me that, like The Office, it's basically documentary style. Set in the parks & recreation department of a local city government in some podunk town, Poehler will play a delusional employee, totally unaware that she doesn't work in high ranking politics. And of course there will be supporting players around to make fun of her foolish idiocy. Sound too much like another show we already know? Well, I'm hearing that the writers are currently tweaking the concept a bit, but this is the general idea. Any thoughts? I'll give anything with A.P. a shot.
Having worked for a recreation department for many years, this concept probably intrigues me more than most people. Still, I think we're all interested to see if this show turns out as well as The Office. Rumor has it that we can expect to see the first episode of this new show sometime in April
Wednesday, January 14, 2009
Survivor: Tocantins cast revealed
Well that didn't take long. Here's a video from CBS.com briefly previewing this season's castaways.
Tuesday, January 13, 2009
NMR: 2008 leftovers
I'm going through a bunch of films from 2008 that came and went from the budget theater before I had a chance of seeing them. Since they're so recent, I'll give my traditional letter grade, but do condensed reviews.
The Mummy: Tomb of the Dragon Emperor Man, Brenden Fraser once again gets the shaft when it comes to a full length review from me. While there are enjoyable elements to this third installment in the series, the movie is probably coming out three years too late. Too much time has past since The Mummy Returns and since then there have been too many other movie franchises created that are so much better. I liked the idea of a Chinese mummy, so the main plot worked for me. What I didn't care for was the advance in time so that the O'Connell's son is now in his twenties. It just looked silly and out of place. I was also not impressed with Rob Cohen taking over directing duties for Stephen Sommers. The movie looked really fake at times and most of the fighting scenes were edited poorly. Enough of the franchise remains that if you enjoyed the first two, you'll probably find enough to like here. But if you're new to the Mummy scene, this probably isn't worth your time. Overall, everyone is probably better off saving your money and just waiting until this comes out on the USA network (probably about a year from now, haha) Grade: B-
Traitor: This is the film that Body of Lies should have been. Once again, Muslims and the war on terror are used as the plot of a film, but this one is more intriguing and entertaining. Don Cheadle plays Samir Horn, an American muslim who has been recently linked with a terrorist organization that has been behind bombings all over the globe. Both Cheadle and Guy Pearce, playing an FBI agent investigating the bombings, give strong performances here. Unlike most films, I was still guessing through a large portion of the film as to where Samir's allegiances really lied. And even after that's revealed, the film still delivers some surprises that caught my off guard, something I can't say about a lot of movies. While a bit slow at times, this is a solid thriller that was mostly overlooked by American audiences when it came out last August. If you're looking for something in this genre, I'd highly recommend you give this a look. Grade: B+
The Mummy: Tomb of the Dragon Emperor Man, Brenden Fraser once again gets the shaft when it comes to a full length review from me. While there are enjoyable elements to this third installment in the series, the movie is probably coming out three years too late. Too much time has past since The Mummy Returns and since then there have been too many other movie franchises created that are so much better. I liked the idea of a Chinese mummy, so the main plot worked for me. What I didn't care for was the advance in time so that the O'Connell's son is now in his twenties. It just looked silly and out of place. I was also not impressed with Rob Cohen taking over directing duties for Stephen Sommers. The movie looked really fake at times and most of the fighting scenes were edited poorly. Enough of the franchise remains that if you enjoyed the first two, you'll probably find enough to like here. But if you're new to the Mummy scene, this probably isn't worth your time. Overall, everyone is probably better off saving your money and just waiting until this comes out on the USA network (probably about a year from now, haha) Grade: B-
Traitor: This is the film that Body of Lies should have been. Once again, Muslims and the war on terror are used as the plot of a film, but this one is more intriguing and entertaining. Don Cheadle plays Samir Horn, an American muslim who has been recently linked with a terrorist organization that has been behind bombings all over the globe. Both Cheadle and Guy Pearce, playing an FBI agent investigating the bombings, give strong performances here. Unlike most films, I was still guessing through a large portion of the film as to where Samir's allegiances really lied. And even after that's revealed, the film still delivers some surprises that caught my off guard, something I can't say about a lot of movies. While a bit slow at times, this is a solid thriller that was mostly overlooked by American audiences when it came out last August. If you're looking for something in this genre, I'd highly recommend you give this a look. Grade: B+
Looks like I've found my calling
Check out this job opportunity reported on Yahoo news today:
Getting paid six figures to be lazy on a tropical island? It was the job I was born to do!
SYDNEY (AFP) – An Australian state is offering internationally what it calls "the best job in the world" -- earning a top salary for lazing around a beautiful tropical island for six months.
The job pays 150,000 Australian dollars (105,000 US dollars) and includes free airfares from the winner's home country to Hamilton Island on the Great Barrier Reef, Queensland's state government announced on Tuesday.
In return, the "island caretaker" will be expected to stroll the white sands, snorkel the reef, take care of "a few minor tasks" -- and report to a global audience via weekly blogs, photo diaries and video updates.
The successful applicant, who will stay rent-free in a three-bedroom beach home complete with plunge pool and golf buggy, must be a good swimmer, excellent communicator and be able to speak and write English.
"They'll also have to talk to media from time to time about what they're doing so they can't be too shy and they'll have to love the sea, the sun, the outdoors," said acting state Premier Paul Lucas.
"The fact that they will be paid to explore the islands of the Great Barrier Reef, swim, snorkel and generally live the Queensland lifestyle makes this undoubtedly the best job in the world."
Lucas said the campaign was part of a drive to protect the state's 18 billion Australian dollar a year tourism industry during the tough economic climate caused by the global financial meltdown.
"Traditional tourism advertising just doesn't cut it sometimes and we are thinking outside the box by launching this campaign."
Queensland Tourism Minister Desley Boyle said some people might question whether it was risky to let an unknown person become an unofficial tourism spokesperson for the state.
"I think the biggest risk will be that the successful candidate won't want to go home at the end of the six months," she said.
"This is a legitimate job which is open to anyone and everyone."
Applications are open until February 22. Eleven shortlisted candidates will be flown to Hamilton Island in early May for the final selection process and the six month contract will commence on July 1.
Job-seekers can apply on .
Islandreefjob.com
Getting paid six figures to be lazy on a tropical island? It was the job I was born to do!
Friday, January 9, 2009
Globe-plodding
I've been really proud of myself as this new semester begins as I've been focused and getting a bunch of work during the day and then still being able to catch the late movie at the budget theater in order to catch up on all the movies I want to see. But you don't want to hear about that, you'd rather just read my review (if you even want to do that), so let's get to it.
Next up here is Body of Lies, a political thriller that came out last October. Starring Russell Crowe and Leonardo DiCaprio and directed by Ridley Scott, this seemed like a sure-fire hit. But what it was, was a complete miss. The movie just rolls on looking for a voice and never finds it. They basically just cobbled together a bunch of random concepts related to the war on terror and hoped their collective effort would create some sort of message.
DiCaprio plays Roger Farris, a CIA operative on the hunt for a terrorist who has been behind a series of recent bombings. Crowe plays his boss, who doesn't share his same philosophical viewpoints on how to handle these situations. If the film would have been that straight-forward, it might have been decent. But there is so much excess baggage attached to this plot that you can't keep straight what is important and what is mere filler.
The big selling point for a lot of people I think was getting to see the showdown between Crowe and DiCaprio. Seeing them verbally spar over morality and secrecy in the war on terror could have been really perplexing, but it never reaches that status. Crowe, who's usually so good in these roles seems like he's phoning it in here, no pun intended considering he spends the majority of the film on a phone. And as for DiCaprio, he seems to fade in and out of character during his speeches. You can tell what is Roger Farris and what is DiCaprio simply spouting off his own liberal agenda. The debates between these two come off more juvenille and frivolous rather than engaging or thought-provoking.
With the dialogue here completely neutered, one would hope you could fall back on the action to get you through the movie, but that too is a failure. The whole plot about trying to capture this terrorist doesn't work because the audience is never given sufficient justification to want to see him taken down. The bombings he orchestrates have no direct impact on the main characters, nor do they take place on American soil. Now I don't mean to underscore the action, but if you're going to center a film around a villain, more needs to be done to make us want to see his comeuppance.
Perhaps one of the most nauseating things about this film is how they shoehorned a romance subplot between DiCaprio's character and a Palestinian nurse. As soon as I saw DiCaprio being treated by her, I knew they would have him fall for her. And it seemed the only reason this was included was to make the statement that people from the Middle East are human beings too and we shouldn't discriminate. And that is a fine statement to make, but it has become a complete cliche in film now. It added nothing to the film and was used merely for plot device.
Now Body of Lies was based of a novel by David Ignatius. You probably would have guessed it even if I hadn't told you it. The events in the film are very segmented to the degree that you could probably tell where each chapter begun and ended in the book. Like so many film adaptations before this, I believe this was a case where the written word simply did not translate well to the big screen. I'm sure the conversations between the characters in the book were a lot more meaningful and impassioned, whereas here they were stilted.
Maybe I'm sure a bit fatigued, like so many Americans, with the war on terrors and films about it. With so many of them out there, you really need something special and unique in your film, otherwise it's just a grim reminder of what's going on in the real world. This did not possess that special trait and as a result I was bored to tears watching this.
I'm having difficulty finding a justification to give someone to watch this. I guess if you're a hardcore Crowe or DiCaprio fan or if for some reason you really love this subject matter, then you may want to see it, but I think even those people will be strongly disappointed with this film. If I were to say something positive, it would be that the film is an accurate metaphor for the war on terror. While our soldiers are fighting an ambiguous enemy, viewers of this film are watching a movie with an ambiguous plot. This movie just doesn't work and that aint no Lie. Grade: C-
Next up here is Body of Lies, a political thriller that came out last October. Starring Russell Crowe and Leonardo DiCaprio and directed by Ridley Scott, this seemed like a sure-fire hit. But what it was, was a complete miss. The movie just rolls on looking for a voice and never finds it. They basically just cobbled together a bunch of random concepts related to the war on terror and hoped their collective effort would create some sort of message.
DiCaprio plays Roger Farris, a CIA operative on the hunt for a terrorist who has been behind a series of recent bombings. Crowe plays his boss, who doesn't share his same philosophical viewpoints on how to handle these situations. If the film would have been that straight-forward, it might have been decent. But there is so much excess baggage attached to this plot that you can't keep straight what is important and what is mere filler.
The big selling point for a lot of people I think was getting to see the showdown between Crowe and DiCaprio. Seeing them verbally spar over morality and secrecy in the war on terror could have been really perplexing, but it never reaches that status. Crowe, who's usually so good in these roles seems like he's phoning it in here, no pun intended considering he spends the majority of the film on a phone. And as for DiCaprio, he seems to fade in and out of character during his speeches. You can tell what is Roger Farris and what is DiCaprio simply spouting off his own liberal agenda. The debates between these two come off more juvenille and frivolous rather than engaging or thought-provoking.
With the dialogue here completely neutered, one would hope you could fall back on the action to get you through the movie, but that too is a failure. The whole plot about trying to capture this terrorist doesn't work because the audience is never given sufficient justification to want to see him taken down. The bombings he orchestrates have no direct impact on the main characters, nor do they take place on American soil. Now I don't mean to underscore the action, but if you're going to center a film around a villain, more needs to be done to make us want to see his comeuppance.
Perhaps one of the most nauseating things about this film is how they shoehorned a romance subplot between DiCaprio's character and a Palestinian nurse. As soon as I saw DiCaprio being treated by her, I knew they would have him fall for her. And it seemed the only reason this was included was to make the statement that people from the Middle East are human beings too and we shouldn't discriminate. And that is a fine statement to make, but it has become a complete cliche in film now. It added nothing to the film and was used merely for plot device.
Now Body of Lies was based of a novel by David Ignatius. You probably would have guessed it even if I hadn't told you it. The events in the film are very segmented to the degree that you could probably tell where each chapter begun and ended in the book. Like so many film adaptations before this, I believe this was a case where the written word simply did not translate well to the big screen. I'm sure the conversations between the characters in the book were a lot more meaningful and impassioned, whereas here they were stilted.
Maybe I'm sure a bit fatigued, like so many Americans, with the war on terrors and films about it. With so many of them out there, you really need something special and unique in your film, otherwise it's just a grim reminder of what's going on in the real world. This did not possess that special trait and as a result I was bored to tears watching this.
I'm having difficulty finding a justification to give someone to watch this. I guess if you're a hardcore Crowe or DiCaprio fan or if for some reason you really love this subject matter, then you may want to see it, but I think even those people will be strongly disappointed with this film. If I were to say something positive, it would be that the film is an accurate metaphor for the war on terror. While our soldiers are fighting an ambiguous enemy, viewers of this film are watching a movie with an ambiguous plot. This movie just doesn't work and that aint no Lie. Grade: C-
Thursday, January 8, 2009
30 Must See Movies for '09 (5-1)
Sorry for the extra day wait, but I had so much good stuff to post yesterday I didn't want another post to cause everything to get lost in the shuffle.
5. The Informant (Sept. 19)
Plot: What was Mark Whitacre thinking? A rising star at agri-industry giant Archer Daniels Midland (ADM), Whitacre suddenly turns whistleblower. Even as he exposes his company's multi-national price-fixing conspiracy to the FBI, Whitacre envisions himself being hailed as a hero of the common man and handed a promotion. But before all that can happen, the FBI needs evidence, so Whitacre eagerly agrees to wear a wire and carry a hidden tape recorder in his briefcase, imagining himself as a kind of de facto secret agent. Unfortunately for the FBI, their lead witness hasn't been quite so forthcoming about helping himself to the corporate coffers. Whitacre's ever-changing account frustrates the agents and threatens the case against ADM as it becomes almost impossible to decipher what is real and what is the product of Whitacre's rambling imagination. Based on the true story of the highest-ranking corporate whistleblower in U.S. history.
Personal opinion: With Matt Damon and The Soup's Joel McHale in the cast, I was already sold. This is being directed by Steven Soderbergh, who hasn't done anything great lately, so he's due. You may not be able to tell from the plot description, but this is supposed to be a comedy thriller. This sounds like it's either going to be brilliant or terrible. Of course, by me putting it this high, I'm banking on it to be the former. By the way, Matt Damon put on 30 pounds for this role and you can barely recognize him. Take a look:
4. Public Enemies (July 1)
Plot: In the action-thriller "Public Enemies," acclaimed filmmaker Michael Mann directs Johnny Depp, Christian Bale and Academy Award® winner Marion Cotillard in the story of legendary Depression-era outlaw John Dillinger (Depp)—the charismatic bank robber whose lightning raids made him the number one target of J. Edgar Hoover's fledgling FBI and its top agent, Melvin Purvis (Bale), and a folk hero to much of the downtrodden public.
Personal opinion: Having Bale and Depp in the same film is a dream team. Having Michael Mann (Collateral) direct it is just the cherry on top. Let's just hope though that unlike in American Gangster these two acclaimed actors actually share the screen for more than five minutes. This doesn't seem like your typical 4th of July release, but I can't wait for it nonetheless.
3. Funny People (July 31)
Plot: Over the past few years, writer/director Judd Apatow ("The 40-Year-Old Virgin," "Knocked Up") has shown that nothing—not even losing your virginity or the miracle of childbirth—is sacred. About his third film behind the camera, he says, "I'm trying to make a very serious movie that is twice as funny as my other movies. Wish me luck!" Apatow directs Adam Sandler, Seth Rogen and Leslie Mann in "Funny People," the story of a famous comedian who has a near-death experience.
Personal opinion: After a string of varying in quality films produced by Judd Apatow, the comedy king is finally back directing again. The 40 Year Old Virgin is just an amazing film and Knocked Up was pretty good too, so I'm very excited to see what he has in store for us now. This one seems to have a more serious tone, but I don't know for sure yet. And casting Sandler seems odd since he's not considered part of the Apatow mafia, but I trust Judd and know that he'll get the best out of him. This right now is the can't miss comedy of the year.
2. Sherlock Holmes (November 20)
Plot: In a dynamic new portrayal of Arthur Conan Doyle's most famous characters, "Sherlock Holmes" sends Holmes and his stalwart partner Watson on their latest challenge. Revealing fighting skills as lethal as his legendary intellect, Holmes will battle as never before to bring down a new nemesis and unravel a deadly plot that could destroy the country.
Personal opinion: Robert Downey Jr. could not be hotter right now and I'm eager to see what he has in store for his interpretation of the famed detective. I'm a bit worried by the fact that Guy Ritchie is directing it because I've never seen any of his films and really don't know his style. However, I can't deny that I love a good mystery and this should do nicely. It's helps having a good supporting cast with Jude Law and Rachel McAdams included. In case you weren't aware, this will be the first of two different movies about Holmes coming out. The other starring Will Ferrel and Sasha Baron Cohen does not yet have a release date.
1. Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince (July 17)
Plot: Voldemort is tightening his grip on both the Muggle and wizarding worlds and Hogwarts is no longer the safe haven it once was. Harry suspects that dangers may even lie within the castle, but Dumbledore is more intent upon preparing him for the final battle that he knows is fast approaching. Together they work to find the key to unlock Voldemort's defenses and, to this end, Dumbledore recruits his old friend and colleague, the well-connected and unsuspecting bon vivant Professor Horace Slughorn, whom he believes holds crucial information. Meanwhile, the students are under attack from a very different adversary as teenage hormones rage across the ramparts. Harry finds himself more and more drawn to Ginny, but so is Dean Thomas. And Lavender Brown has decided that Ron is the one for her, only she hadn’t counted on Romilda Vane's chocolates! And then there's Hermione, simpering with jealously but determined not to show her feelings. As romance blossoms, one student remains aloof. He is determined to make his mark, albeit a dark one. Love is in the air, but tragedy lies ahead and Hogwarts may never be the same again.
Personal opinion: Was there any doubt that this would be #1? It is kind of sad though that my top film for '09 was actually supposed to be released last year. Still, it's obvious I and many others love this franchise and are excited about this film, particularly because it's based on one of the best books in the series. It's a shame the director from Order of the Phoenix is doing this one as well, but let's hope he learned from his mistakes and won't cut out so much material in this one. Even if you aren't a Potter fan, you can't deny that this will be one of summer's biggest movies.
So there you have it, all 30 have been revealed. Now let's just quickly get through the dregs of January so that we can start watching some of these!
5. The Informant (Sept. 19)
Plot: What was Mark Whitacre thinking? A rising star at agri-industry giant Archer Daniels Midland (ADM), Whitacre suddenly turns whistleblower. Even as he exposes his company's multi-national price-fixing conspiracy to the FBI, Whitacre envisions himself being hailed as a hero of the common man and handed a promotion. But before all that can happen, the FBI needs evidence, so Whitacre eagerly agrees to wear a wire and carry a hidden tape recorder in his briefcase, imagining himself as a kind of de facto secret agent. Unfortunately for the FBI, their lead witness hasn't been quite so forthcoming about helping himself to the corporate coffers. Whitacre's ever-changing account frustrates the agents and threatens the case against ADM as it becomes almost impossible to decipher what is real and what is the product of Whitacre's rambling imagination. Based on the true story of the highest-ranking corporate whistleblower in U.S. history.
Personal opinion: With Matt Damon and The Soup's Joel McHale in the cast, I was already sold. This is being directed by Steven Soderbergh, who hasn't done anything great lately, so he's due. You may not be able to tell from the plot description, but this is supposed to be a comedy thriller. This sounds like it's either going to be brilliant or terrible. Of course, by me putting it this high, I'm banking on it to be the former. By the way, Matt Damon put on 30 pounds for this role and you can barely recognize him. Take a look:
4. Public Enemies (July 1)
Plot: In the action-thriller "Public Enemies," acclaimed filmmaker Michael Mann directs Johnny Depp, Christian Bale and Academy Award® winner Marion Cotillard in the story of legendary Depression-era outlaw John Dillinger (Depp)—the charismatic bank robber whose lightning raids made him the number one target of J. Edgar Hoover's fledgling FBI and its top agent, Melvin Purvis (Bale), and a folk hero to much of the downtrodden public.
Personal opinion: Having Bale and Depp in the same film is a dream team. Having Michael Mann (Collateral) direct it is just the cherry on top. Let's just hope though that unlike in American Gangster these two acclaimed actors actually share the screen for more than five minutes. This doesn't seem like your typical 4th of July release, but I can't wait for it nonetheless.
3. Funny People (July 31)
Plot: Over the past few years, writer/director Judd Apatow ("The 40-Year-Old Virgin," "Knocked Up") has shown that nothing—not even losing your virginity or the miracle of childbirth—is sacred. About his third film behind the camera, he says, "I'm trying to make a very serious movie that is twice as funny as my other movies. Wish me luck!" Apatow directs Adam Sandler, Seth Rogen and Leslie Mann in "Funny People," the story of a famous comedian who has a near-death experience.
Personal opinion: After a string of varying in quality films produced by Judd Apatow, the comedy king is finally back directing again. The 40 Year Old Virgin is just an amazing film and Knocked Up was pretty good too, so I'm very excited to see what he has in store for us now. This one seems to have a more serious tone, but I don't know for sure yet. And casting Sandler seems odd since he's not considered part of the Apatow mafia, but I trust Judd and know that he'll get the best out of him. This right now is the can't miss comedy of the year.
2. Sherlock Holmes (November 20)
Plot: In a dynamic new portrayal of Arthur Conan Doyle's most famous characters, "Sherlock Holmes" sends Holmes and his stalwart partner Watson on their latest challenge. Revealing fighting skills as lethal as his legendary intellect, Holmes will battle as never before to bring down a new nemesis and unravel a deadly plot that could destroy the country.
Personal opinion: Robert Downey Jr. could not be hotter right now and I'm eager to see what he has in store for his interpretation of the famed detective. I'm a bit worried by the fact that Guy Ritchie is directing it because I've never seen any of his films and really don't know his style. However, I can't deny that I love a good mystery and this should do nicely. It's helps having a good supporting cast with Jude Law and Rachel McAdams included. In case you weren't aware, this will be the first of two different movies about Holmes coming out. The other starring Will Ferrel and Sasha Baron Cohen does not yet have a release date.
1. Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince (July 17)
Plot: Voldemort is tightening his grip on both the Muggle and wizarding worlds and Hogwarts is no longer the safe haven it once was. Harry suspects that dangers may even lie within the castle, but Dumbledore is more intent upon preparing him for the final battle that he knows is fast approaching. Together they work to find the key to unlock Voldemort's defenses and, to this end, Dumbledore recruits his old friend and colleague, the well-connected and unsuspecting bon vivant Professor Horace Slughorn, whom he believes holds crucial information. Meanwhile, the students are under attack from a very different adversary as teenage hormones rage across the ramparts. Harry finds himself more and more drawn to Ginny, but so is Dean Thomas. And Lavender Brown has decided that Ron is the one for her, only she hadn’t counted on Romilda Vane's chocolates! And then there's Hermione, simpering with jealously but determined not to show her feelings. As romance blossoms, one student remains aloof. He is determined to make his mark, albeit a dark one. Love is in the air, but tragedy lies ahead and Hogwarts may never be the same again.
Personal opinion: Was there any doubt that this would be #1? It is kind of sad though that my top film for '09 was actually supposed to be released last year. Still, it's obvious I and many others love this franchise and are excited about this film, particularly because it's based on one of the best books in the series. It's a shame the director from Order of the Phoenix is doing this one as well, but let's hope he learned from his mistakes and won't cut out so much material in this one. Even if you aren't a Potter fan, you can't deny that this will be one of summer's biggest movies.
So there you have it, all 30 have been revealed. Now let's just quickly get through the dregs of January so that we can start watching some of these!
Wednesday, January 7, 2009
Eye carumba
There's a handful of movies at the budget theater that I need to see, so I decided to catch one last night before the semester began, that being the latest Shia LaBeouf film, Eagle Eye.
Now anyone that knows me knows that I have never been fond of Shia since his rise to superstardom. The dislike for him began mostly out of spite, but as I continue to see more and more of his films, I feel that my criticisms are actually valid. Watching him here, I am beginning to see a pattern in his films where he is falling into what I call Tom Cruise syndrome. This is where the lead actor's character in a film acts like a complete douchebag the entire time, yet we as the audience are supposed to root for him because he's the protagonist. In this case, LaBeouf plays Jerry Shaw, who is an unmotivated, selfish jerk. I sat through the entire movie wondering why I should care whether he lives or dies. And of course, I don't think I'm giving much away by saying that of course he lives and also gets the girl; which was particularly frustrating because the female lead in this case (played by Michelle Monaghan) kept boasting how she had swore off men because her ex-husband was unmotivated and selfish, yet she falls for Jerry, who seemingly has the same qualities.
To be fair, most of these criticisms are about the character and not Shia himself. His acting isn't bad (it's not great either though), it's just that he never seems to play likeable characters. So really the fault lies with the writers for not making a more compelling character. Although, you could say that Shia is somewhat to blame for continuing to choose these characters.
OK enough ranting about Shia, let's get to the plot of the film, which is a doozy. If you saw the commercials, then you know that there is a mysterious person who is constantly calling Jerry and telling him what to do, all the while controlling all of the technology around him in order for him to complete the tasks set out for him. This is all about the concept of Big Brother and our love affair with all things technological. But don't be confused into thinking that this is some insightful commentary on Orwell's theories. This is a mindless action thriller that used the Big Brother idea as window dressing to string along a series of action sequences.
By the time it's revealed who (or what) is calling Jerry and controlling everything, you'll be too busy laughing to think of any deep philosophical implications about our reliance on technology. Sadly, things continue to become more elaborate and ludicrous from that point. What makes all of this even worse is the fact that it seemed like a lot of it could have been prevented a lot sooner than it was. The movie basically plays like an episode of Three's Company on steroids. Nobody actually communicates with each other or stops for a second to think rationally about what's going on and come up with an explanation for it in order to stop everything. The fact that Jerry continues to obey the phone caller and run from the government is mind-boggling.
For as dumb as the plot is, the action sequences that it does string together are pretty exciting. If your measure of a film is based solely on car chases and explosions, then chances are you'll probably really like this film. Even though this came out in September, the quality of the action here is equal to that of any summer blockbuster, which is probably why this did fairly well at the box office. As for me, while I do enjoy good action scenes, I need something a little bit more substanitive in my movies in order for me to recommend them.
If I were to point out one highlight in the film, it would have to be the performance by Billy Bob Thornton, who plays government agent Thomas Morgan. He's about the only one who shows any life in the film. He easily has the best lines in the film and seems to enjoy acting like a big shot, especially when he's interrogating Jerry. While his character was meant to be more antagonistic, I found myself rooting for him moreso than for anyone else. It's a shame he wasn't in the film more, because about the only time I really cared what was going on was during his scenes.
I feel sorry for those who paid top dollar to see this in the theaters, but as a rental it's probably not that bad of a choice. The action scenes will look and sound good in your home theater and you can just shut your mind off and enjoy some mindless entertainment for a couple of hours. Eagle Eye certainly isn't for the intellectual crowd, but it does serve a purpose. Now if only Shia could find a different purpose in life. I keed, I keed. Grade: C
Now anyone that knows me knows that I have never been fond of Shia since his rise to superstardom. The dislike for him began mostly out of spite, but as I continue to see more and more of his films, I feel that my criticisms are actually valid. Watching him here, I am beginning to see a pattern in his films where he is falling into what I call Tom Cruise syndrome. This is where the lead actor's character in a film acts like a complete douchebag the entire time, yet we as the audience are supposed to root for him because he's the protagonist. In this case, LaBeouf plays Jerry Shaw, who is an unmotivated, selfish jerk. I sat through the entire movie wondering why I should care whether he lives or dies. And of course, I don't think I'm giving much away by saying that of course he lives and also gets the girl; which was particularly frustrating because the female lead in this case (played by Michelle Monaghan) kept boasting how she had swore off men because her ex-husband was unmotivated and selfish, yet she falls for Jerry, who seemingly has the same qualities.
To be fair, most of these criticisms are about the character and not Shia himself. His acting isn't bad (it's not great either though), it's just that he never seems to play likeable characters. So really the fault lies with the writers for not making a more compelling character. Although, you could say that Shia is somewhat to blame for continuing to choose these characters.
OK enough ranting about Shia, let's get to the plot of the film, which is a doozy. If you saw the commercials, then you know that there is a mysterious person who is constantly calling Jerry and telling him what to do, all the while controlling all of the technology around him in order for him to complete the tasks set out for him. This is all about the concept of Big Brother and our love affair with all things technological. But don't be confused into thinking that this is some insightful commentary on Orwell's theories. This is a mindless action thriller that used the Big Brother idea as window dressing to string along a series of action sequences.
By the time it's revealed who (or what) is calling Jerry and controlling everything, you'll be too busy laughing to think of any deep philosophical implications about our reliance on technology. Sadly, things continue to become more elaborate and ludicrous from that point. What makes all of this even worse is the fact that it seemed like a lot of it could have been prevented a lot sooner than it was. The movie basically plays like an episode of Three's Company on steroids. Nobody actually communicates with each other or stops for a second to think rationally about what's going on and come up with an explanation for it in order to stop everything. The fact that Jerry continues to obey the phone caller and run from the government is mind-boggling.
For as dumb as the plot is, the action sequences that it does string together are pretty exciting. If your measure of a film is based solely on car chases and explosions, then chances are you'll probably really like this film. Even though this came out in September, the quality of the action here is equal to that of any summer blockbuster, which is probably why this did fairly well at the box office. As for me, while I do enjoy good action scenes, I need something a little bit more substanitive in my movies in order for me to recommend them.
If I were to point out one highlight in the film, it would have to be the performance by Billy Bob Thornton, who plays government agent Thomas Morgan. He's about the only one who shows any life in the film. He easily has the best lines in the film and seems to enjoy acting like a big shot, especially when he's interrogating Jerry. While his character was meant to be more antagonistic, I found myself rooting for him moreso than for anyone else. It's a shame he wasn't in the film more, because about the only time I really cared what was going on was during his scenes.
I feel sorry for those who paid top dollar to see this in the theaters, but as a rental it's probably not that bad of a choice. The action scenes will look and sound good in your home theater and you can just shut your mind off and enjoy some mindless entertainment for a couple of hours. Eagle Eye certainly isn't for the intellectual crowd, but it does serve a purpose. Now if only Shia could find a different purpose in life. I keed, I keed. Grade: C
Iron Man 2 villains announced
From ComingSoon.net:
I don't know enough about the Iron Man comics to know whether these villains are good choices. However, from an actor perspective, I've always thought Sam Rockwell was highly underrated, so it's nice to see him get a high profile gig. And as for Rourke, he's white hot right now with the praise he's getting for The Wrestler. It'll be cool to see this past year's two big comebacks (Rourke and Downey) share the screen together.
Mickey Rourke (The Wrestler) and Sam Rockwell (Frost/Nixon) are in talks to star as the villains in Marvel Studios' Iron Man 2, being directed by Jon Favreau from a script by Justin Theroux, according to Variety and The Hollywood Reporter.
THR says that Rourke would play a tattooed Russian heavy named Ivan who becomes a man with deadly, technologically enhanced coils. Variety adds that Rourke would play the Crimson Dynamo. "He's considered to be an evil version of Iron Man because he battles the superhero in a nuclear-powered suit of armor," says the trade.
Rockwell would play Justin Hammer, a multibillionaire businessman and a rival of industrialist Tony Stark, AKA Iron Man, being played by a returning Robert Downey Jr.
Rourke and Rockwell would be joining a cast that also includes the returning Gwyneth Paltrow and Don Cheadle, who is replacing Terrence Howard.
Another part -- one for Stark's assistant Natasha -- is still open.
The project is eyeing a spring start in Manhattan Beach. Paramount will release the movie May 7, 2010.
I don't know enough about the Iron Man comics to know whether these villains are good choices. However, from an actor perspective, I've always thought Sam Rockwell was highly underrated, so it's nice to see him get a high profile gig. And as for Rourke, he's white hot right now with the praise he's getting for The Wrestler. It'll be cool to see this past year's two big comebacks (Rourke and Downey) share the screen together.
Tuesday, January 6, 2009
30 Must See Movies for '09 (10-6)
10. Angels and Demons (May 15)
Plot: When Robert Langdon (Tom Hanks) discovers evidence of the resurgence of an ancient secret brotherhood known as the Illuminati - the most powerful underground organization in history - he also faces a deadly threat to the existence of the secret organization's most despised enemy: the Catholic Church. When Langdon learns that the clock is ticking on an unstoppable Illuminati time bomb, he jets to Rome, where he joins forces with Vittoria Vetra, a beautiful and enigmatic Italian scientist. Embarking on a nonstop, action-packed hunt through sealed crypts, dangerous catacombs, deserted cathedrals, and even to the heart of the most secretive vault on earth, Langdon and Vetra will follow a 400-year-old trail of ancient symbols that mark the Vatican's only hope for survival.
Personal opinion: I'll be the first to admit that The Da Vinci Code was a flawed film. But Hanks and director Ron Howard are smart people and probably understood the problems people had with the film. I think they can correct those problems and make a much better sequel. Helping their cause is the fact that Angels and Demons was a much better book. I have my trepidations about this, but I want to believe it one will be good.
9. I Love You, Man (March 20)
Plot: Peter Klaven (Paul Rudd) is a successful real estate agent who, upon getting engaged to the woman of his dreams, Zooey (Rashida Jones), discovers, to his dismay and chagrin, that he has no male friend close enough to serve as his Best Man. Peter immediately sets out to rectify the situation, embarking on a series of bizarre and awkward "man-dates," before meeting Sydney Fife (Jason Segel), a charming, opinionated man with whom he instantly bonds. But the closer the two men get, the more Peter's relationship with Zooey suffers, ultimately forcing him to choose between his fiancee and his new found "bro," in a story that comically explores what it truly means to be a "friend."
Personal opinion: I pretty much gave my two cents on this a few weeks ago when I posted the trailer. If you look at the cast, it has an all-star lineup of comedic actors. I don't see how this can miss. What will be interesting to see though is that this is the third film on my list scheduled to come out on March 20th. Either one of those films is terrible or someone will be changing dates. Only time will tell which it is.
8. State of Play (April 17)
Plot: Oscar® winner Russell Crowe leads an all-star cast in a blistering thriller about a rising congressman and an investigative journalist embroiled in an case of seemingly unrelated, brutal murders. Crowe plays D.C. reporter Cal McCaffrey, whose street smarts lead him to untangle a mystery of murder and collusion among some of the nation's most promising political and corporate figures in "State of Play," from acclaimed director Kevin Macdonald ("The Last King of Scotland").
Personal opinion: This is a remake of a British miniseries which was widely acclaimed. So with solid source material and an A-list cast which also features Ben Affleck, Rachel McAdams, Jason Bateman, and Helen Mirren this seems like it'll be an excellent thriller that comes out just before the summer season begins. Based on the trailer, it seems like this is a perfect role for Crowe, who almost always does great work.
7. Year One (June 19)
Plot: When a couple of lazy hunter-gatherers (Jack Black and Michael Cera) are banished from their primitive village, they set off on an epic journey through the ancient world in Columbia Pictures' comedy "Year One." Harold Ramis directs. The screenplay is by Harold Ramis & Gene Stupnitsky & Lee Eisenberg ("The Office") from a story by Harold Ramis. The film is produced by Judd Apatow, Harold Ramis, and Clayton Townsend.
Personal opinion: If you're not already sold based on that plot description, then I present this photo from EW to seal the deal:
Case closed. I cannot wait for this one!
6. The Taking of Pelham 1 2 3 (June 12)
Plot: In "The Taking of Pelham 1 2 3," Denzel Washington stars as New York City subway dispatcher Walter Garber, whose ordinary day is thrown into chaos by an audacious crime: the hijacking of a subway train. John Travolta stars as Ryder, the criminal mastermind who, as leader of a highly-armed gang of four, threatens to execute the train's passengers unless a large ransom is paid within one hour. As the tension mounts beneath his feet, Garber employs his vast knowledge of the subway system in a battle to outwit Ryder and save the hostages. But there's one riddle Garber can't solve: even if the thieves get the money, how can they possibly escape?
Personal opinion: This is a remake of a 1974 film. I never saw that one, but I'm really intrigued by the plot. When you factor in big name stars like Washington and Travolta, it seems like you have the formula for a winner. It also helps that Washington is working once again with director Tony Scott. That combination almost always produces a film that I want to see. Amongst a summer full of noisy action movies, I'm hoping this will be the smart thriller that works as effective counter-programming.
Plot: When Robert Langdon (Tom Hanks) discovers evidence of the resurgence of an ancient secret brotherhood known as the Illuminati - the most powerful underground organization in history - he also faces a deadly threat to the existence of the secret organization's most despised enemy: the Catholic Church. When Langdon learns that the clock is ticking on an unstoppable Illuminati time bomb, he jets to Rome, where he joins forces with Vittoria Vetra, a beautiful and enigmatic Italian scientist. Embarking on a nonstop, action-packed hunt through sealed crypts, dangerous catacombs, deserted cathedrals, and even to the heart of the most secretive vault on earth, Langdon and Vetra will follow a 400-year-old trail of ancient symbols that mark the Vatican's only hope for survival.
Personal opinion: I'll be the first to admit that The Da Vinci Code was a flawed film. But Hanks and director Ron Howard are smart people and probably understood the problems people had with the film. I think they can correct those problems and make a much better sequel. Helping their cause is the fact that Angels and Demons was a much better book. I have my trepidations about this, but I want to believe it one will be good.
9. I Love You, Man (March 20)
Plot: Peter Klaven (Paul Rudd) is a successful real estate agent who, upon getting engaged to the woman of his dreams, Zooey (Rashida Jones), discovers, to his dismay and chagrin, that he has no male friend close enough to serve as his Best Man. Peter immediately sets out to rectify the situation, embarking on a series of bizarre and awkward "man-dates," before meeting Sydney Fife (Jason Segel), a charming, opinionated man with whom he instantly bonds. But the closer the two men get, the more Peter's relationship with Zooey suffers, ultimately forcing him to choose between his fiancee and his new found "bro," in a story that comically explores what it truly means to be a "friend."
Personal opinion: I pretty much gave my two cents on this a few weeks ago when I posted the trailer. If you look at the cast, it has an all-star lineup of comedic actors. I don't see how this can miss. What will be interesting to see though is that this is the third film on my list scheduled to come out on March 20th. Either one of those films is terrible or someone will be changing dates. Only time will tell which it is.
8. State of Play (April 17)
Plot: Oscar® winner Russell Crowe leads an all-star cast in a blistering thriller about a rising congressman and an investigative journalist embroiled in an case of seemingly unrelated, brutal murders. Crowe plays D.C. reporter Cal McCaffrey, whose street smarts lead him to untangle a mystery of murder and collusion among some of the nation's most promising political and corporate figures in "State of Play," from acclaimed director Kevin Macdonald ("The Last King of Scotland").
Personal opinion: This is a remake of a British miniseries which was widely acclaimed. So with solid source material and an A-list cast which also features Ben Affleck, Rachel McAdams, Jason Bateman, and Helen Mirren this seems like it'll be an excellent thriller that comes out just before the summer season begins. Based on the trailer, it seems like this is a perfect role for Crowe, who almost always does great work.
7. Year One (June 19)
Plot: When a couple of lazy hunter-gatherers (Jack Black and Michael Cera) are banished from their primitive village, they set off on an epic journey through the ancient world in Columbia Pictures' comedy "Year One." Harold Ramis directs. The screenplay is by Harold Ramis & Gene Stupnitsky & Lee Eisenberg ("The Office") from a story by Harold Ramis. The film is produced by Judd Apatow, Harold Ramis, and Clayton Townsend.
Personal opinion: If you're not already sold based on that plot description, then I present this photo from EW to seal the deal:
Case closed. I cannot wait for this one!
6. The Taking of Pelham 1 2 3 (June 12)
Plot: In "The Taking of Pelham 1 2 3," Denzel Washington stars as New York City subway dispatcher Walter Garber, whose ordinary day is thrown into chaos by an audacious crime: the hijacking of a subway train. John Travolta stars as Ryder, the criminal mastermind who, as leader of a highly-armed gang of four, threatens to execute the train's passengers unless a large ransom is paid within one hour. As the tension mounts beneath his feet, Garber employs his vast knowledge of the subway system in a battle to outwit Ryder and save the hostages. But there's one riddle Garber can't solve: even if the thieves get the money, how can they possibly escape?
Personal opinion: This is a remake of a 1974 film. I never saw that one, but I'm really intrigued by the plot. When you factor in big name stars like Washington and Travolta, it seems like you have the formula for a winner. It also helps that Washington is working once again with director Tony Scott. That combination almost always produces a film that I want to see. Amongst a summer full of noisy action movies, I'm hoping this will be the smart thriller that works as effective counter-programming.
The Tribe continues to make moves
From MLB.com:
This is a low-risk venture in my opinion. No one expects much from Pavano after his injury-plagued run in New York, but if it can produce in the role of veteran starter, then it's a bonus for the Tribe. We have plenty of options for the 3-5 spots in the rotation, so we're bound to find three that will work.
I will say this though, the Indians may not have made the flashiest moves this offseason, but Mark Shapiro has addressed every weakness that he identified when last season ended. If these moves work out, he'll be heralded as a genius. And if they don't work out, then this team may be forever doomed. I'm hoping for the more positive outcome.
By the way, just about a month until pitchers and catchers report for spring training! :)
Looking to bolster their starting rotation, the Indians are taking a chance on Carl Pavano.
Pavano and the Indians have agreed to a one-year Major League deal that was to be announced Tuesday afternoon. The deal does not include an option. Financial terms were not immediately available.
Pavano, who turns 33 on Thursday, is coming off a disappointing, injury-plagued four-year stint with the Yankees. With New York in 2008, he appeared in seven games and was 4-2 with a 5.77 ERA in 34 1/3 innings.
Over the course of his four-year, $40 million deal with the Yanks, Pavano appeared in just 26 games. He threw 145 2/3 innings over a four-year span. He missed all of 2006 because of injury. He broke in with the Montreal Expos in 1998.
The Indians designated first baseman Mike Aubrey for assignment to make room for Pavano on the 40-man roster.
This is a low-risk venture in my opinion. No one expects much from Pavano after his injury-plagued run in New York, but if it can produce in the role of veteran starter, then it's a bonus for the Tribe. We have plenty of options for the 3-5 spots in the rotation, so we're bound to find three that will work.
I will say this though, the Indians may not have made the flashiest moves this offseason, but Mark Shapiro has addressed every weakness that he identified when last season ended. If these moves work out, he'll be heralded as a genius. And if they don't work out, then this team may be forever doomed. I'm hoping for the more positive outcome.
By the way, just about a month until pitchers and catchers report for spring training! :)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)