Baby Shower deleted scenes

Clip #3



Clip #2



Clip #1

War Machine gets a facelift

From comingsoon.net...

Don Cheadle is stepping in to replace Terrence Howard in Marvel Studios' Iron Man 2, says The Hollywood Reporter.

In the first film, Howard played Col. James 'Rhodey' Rhodes, Tony Stark/Iron Man's best friend and future armor-clad hero War Machine.

The trade says Marvel had no comment, but sources close to the deal said negotiations with Howard fell through over financial differences, among other reasons.

Marvel, which had wanted to work with Cheadle, then decided to take the role in another direction and approached the actor, who is shooting Antoine Fuqua's Brooklyn's Finest.

Justin Theroux is writing the screenplay for Iron Man 2, coming to theaters on May 7, 2010. Jon Favreau is returning as director, and Robert Downey Jr. is expected back as Stark/Iron Man. Gwyneth Paltrow also is expected to be back as Pepper Potts.

I didn't mind Howard, but if he's not in, Cheadle seems like a suitable replacement. Although, I heard the best idea over on a message board; Robert Downey Jr. should just don black face again and play both roles. Ha!

Here's an attack ad we can all get behind!

I'm sure everyone is sick of the political attack ads that are flooding our TVs right now and we still have 3 more weeks of this, so whenever you get tired of them, just watch this and a smile will form on your face.

Goldeneye (1995)

Plot: Pierce Brosnan ignites the screen in his first adventure as the unstoppable James Bond. When a powerful satellite system falls into the hands of a former ally-turned-enemy, only 007 can save the world from an awesome space weapon that - in one short pulse - could destroy the earth!

Firsts: Brosnan as Bond, Samantha Bond as Moneypenny, and a female M (Dame Judi Dench), post-Cold War Bond film

Gadgets: Pen grenade, belt with rappelling gear, piton gun, laser watch, and loaded Aston Martin and BMW

Girls Bond slept with: Caroline (the psychatrist) and Natalya Simonova

Elaborate murder attempt that Bond escapes: Trapped in a helicopter and train car as both are set to explode.

Personal review: And now we come to Pierce. Over the next few weeks, we'll cover his quartet of films and their various pros and cons, but let me just say that I always thought Pierce, himself, did a great job as Bond. In many ways it was only natural that he play the part and I'm glad he got a chance after he backed out of doing The Living Daylights. He knew how to have fun with the role, but got serious when it was time to take care of business.

Now onto this film in particular. In general, it was a fairly decent start to the Brosnan era. Having a double-crossing double O agent seemed fresh and Sean Bean did a great job of being evil without being over the top. He really was an excellent foil to play off Brosnan. I actually would have liked him in more scenes, but between delaying his reveal and the large group of associate villains, it just wasn't possible.

There are also some big-time action sequences in this one. The film kicks off with that breathtaking bungee jump scene and also has that crazy dive into the airplane. Later on you have the tank scene which is crazy and probably Bond's most reckless chase scene, which is saying something. Given how impressive those scenes were, the film's climatic action sequences are somewhat of a letdown (especially Trevelyan's death scene), but still servicable.

The final strength of this film that I'll mention is Tina Turner's performance of the title song. She just knocks it out of the park and it is easily in my top 5 of Bond themes. Associated with that, I love the improvements Daniel Kleinman made with the opening sequences. Maurice Binder's work will always be iconic, but Kleinman did a great job of updating this while still keeping a lot of Binder's core concepts (i.e. silhouetted women).

Speaking of updates, the film tried to do a lot of that, most of which to annoying results. My biggest complaint of Goldeneye is its insistent reminders that we are living in a different world and era now. The film's political correctness just feel out of place. The James Bond character is timeless regardless of the fact that the Cold War was over. Thankfully, they would ease up on this as the franchise went on.

The one positive move that came out of this was making Judi Dench as the new M. She brings the right amount of steeliness to the role and doesn't make a big deal out of the fact that she's a woman.

The other interesting recurring cast members in this one are Joe Don Baker as Jack Wade and Robbie Coltrane as Zukovsky. I found it interesting that they brought Baker back in a different role, but don't understand why it was as a CIA agent. Why eliminate the Felix Leiter character? Coltrane on the other hand was a fun addition. I would love to see him make another appearance, but between the series' new direction and Coltrane's Potter schedule, this seems unlikely.

Finally, let's talk about the Bond girls, something that was problematic during the Dalton era. First, Famke Janssen is great as henchwoman Xenia Onatopp (great name!). It's been a while since we've seen a henchman with a unique method of murder, so that was a welcome return. As for Izabella Scorupco as Natalya, she's a mixed bag. You could tell she was pretty, but she was never what I would call sexy at any point in the film. She also was typically the one that kept forcing the PC issue with her bitching about "boys and their toys" which got annoying after a while. On the other hand, she was a lot more competent than a lot of Bond girls, so at least she had that going for her. One odd complaint about both Bond girls was their incessant screaming. Onatopp's primal yells and Natalya's shrieks of fear sounded the same and both hurt my ears.

Overall this is a solid start, but still had plenty of room to grow. Even though this film is now 13 years old (can't believe that), it still feels modern to me, unlike all the previous Bond films. That is, except for whenever they mention technology. Hearing Natalya's checklist at the computer store now is pretty funny. Anyways, I'm sure most people have seen this one, but if you haven't and you're interested in starting on this franchise this one isn't a bad one to start with. 8/10

Business ethics deleted scenes

Clip #3



Clip #2



Clip #1

NMR: Smorgsbord of movies

I've been sick since Sunday, so I've been checking out a bunch of movies on Netflix's online service and here are some quickie reviews for them:

Open Water: We'll begin with the one I actually rented first. 2004 was such an amazing summer of movies that something was bound to slip through the cracks and this just happened to be it. Billed as Jaws meets The Blair Witch Project, this is a short film based on true events about a married couple who accidentally get left behind by their boat while scuba diving. The majority of the film then focuses on these two trapped in the middle of shark-infested waters. It's a cool concept with lousy execution. The film looks as if it has the production value of skin flick on Cinemax. Also, the two lead actors aren't likeable in the least, so you're just hoping that the sharks eat them. Finally, I just did not feel the thrills and chills it set out to achieve. Perhaps watching this in the middle of the afternoon in my living room isn't the right setting to enjoy this type of film, so with the right setting this may be better than I'm giving it credit. But from my perspective, this one's a dud. Rating: **

Armed and Dangerous: I have seen this film before, but you can never go wrong with a John Candy movie in my opinion. This one involves him and Eugene Levy who recently lost their jobs and decide to become security guards. They discover that the union overseeing their company is corrupt (I know, shocking, right?) and they try to take them down. The film also features a young Meg Ryan in her first film. The film doesn't reinvent the wheel, but has its share of laughs. This is the film equivalent of comfort food. Rating: ***

My Kid Could Paint That: An interesting documentary from last year that could have been so much more. It deals with a 4 year old girl who is supposedly a modern art prodigy. Her work generated mainstream buzz until a 60 Minutes piece implied that she didn't really create the paintings. The film is rich with possible topics including how does one define art, showbiz moms and dads, the evils of hype and others. Unfortunately, the director is such a wuss he doesn't really probe at any of these issues. It's one thing to not take a side on the issue, but it's another to simply provide a superficial look at the subject. The film is worth a look because it will provoke a lot of debate amongst those who have seen it, but in terms of quality filmmaking, this movie is lacking. Rating: ***

Get Smart: Bruce and Lloyd Out of Control: This was the spinoff to the new Get Smart movie that came out this summer. This one focuses solely on the two gadget techs (Masi Oka and Nate Torrence). While it could have been a neat idea, the thing just screams cash grab. The plot is paper thin and the jokes are mostly obvious. I can't criticize it too much since it's just a straight to DVD release and doesn't try to pretend it's any better than it is. And it does seem like most of the people involved had fun doing this. I especially liked seeing Masi Oka and Jayma Mays on screen together again (They played Hiro and Charlie from Season 1 of Heroes). Still, this is only worth a look if you really enjoyed the new Get Smart movie and want to see more of these characters. Rating: **

The Comedians of Comedy: Live at the El Rey: I've talked about this group before, but in case you don't know, this group of stand-ups include Patton Oswalt, Brian Posehn, and Maria Bamford. This was a documentary made specifically for Netflix I believe which showcases one of their particular shows. If you've seen their act before, there's no real reason to see this as there's nothing new here. If you haven't, I wouldn't necessary recommend this either. Go watch one of their other specials. You get a more behind the scenes look at their humor plus it'll likely feature the hilarious Zach Galifinakis who is glaringly absent on this show. Bottom line, the comedy is funny but there are better representations of their work out there. Rating: ***

Licence to Kill (1989)

Plot: James Bond (Timothy Dalton) takes on his most daring adventure ever when he turns renegade and goes head to head with one of the international drug cartel's most brutal and powerful leaders. This time, he's fighting not for country, not for justice...but for revenge!

Firsts: Bond goes rogue, an actor returns to play Felix Leiter (David Hedison)

Gadgets: Video camera that turns into a rifle, toothpaste explosive with cigarette detanator, cummerbund with repelling gear, and Polaroid camera with laser flash

Girls Bond slept with: Pam Bouvier and Lupe Lamora

Elaborate murder attempt that Bond escapes: Placed on a conveyor belt leading to a grinder.

Personal review: I don't recall especially enjoying this one in the past, but this time around, I thought this was a really solid effort. Had Dalton been able to produce a couple more films like this one, he might not have gotten such a bad reputation as Bond. He still plays the character a bit too serious, but it was definitely an improved effort here. I think more so than being too serious, Dalton's greatest flaw was that he never seemed to be much of a ladies man. He didn't bring enough suave to the character, which I think is a major element needed for an actor to work as Bond.

The strongest part of this film I felt was the action. There are several really good scenes and most of them felt unique as well. The capturing of Sanchez to begin the film is one of the series' best openers. Then you have some quality stuff with Bond jetskiing to catch the plane and the concluding stuff involving the oil tankers. These were exciting scenes and really well done.

The film's other strong suit is Sanchez's cadre of henchmen. I don't know if there has been any other Bond film that had such a large cast of sleazy, slimy characters. You have Milton Krest, Hiller, Professor Joe and Dario (a young Benecio Del Toro) all playing pretty despicable guys. But perhaps worst of all is Truman-Lodge who is your typical 80's yuppie scum (Trivia note: This is the same guy who played 'Jimmy' on that infamous episode of Seinfeld). His character is so damn annoying and loathesome that I was hoping for a more elaborate death for him than simply having Sanchez shoot him.

Speaking of Sanchez, Robert Davi did a fine job in this role. I really liked how they played up the character's paranoia. We finally got to see Bond use some of that British intelligence to mess with his head instead of simply being a killing machine. I will say though that as fun as it is for Bond to feed into Sanchez's paranoia, it seems a bit farfetched for him to be able to remain undercover for as long as he did. I mean, where was Dario for most of the movie?

One of the more intriguing elements of the film is the fact that Bond breaks orders to do this mission. A rogue Bond has all sorts of potential, but they really didn't do enough with it. Given that this seems to be a plot point in the new Bond film, I hope they do a more adequate job of playing it up.

The film only has one major flaw and that is a terrible Bond girl. Carey Lowell is probably my second least favorite Bond girl behind Jill St. John and there are several reasons for my dislike of her. First, I cannot stand that boyish haircut she gets that so many women of the 80s seemed to have. Totally unappealing. Second, I never like it when the Bond girls get all chummy with the rest of the MI6 crew, in this case Q. It makes it seem like anyone could hang out with these supposed 'secret' agents. Finally, this girl is a stage five clinger. Seeing her mope whenever Bond wouldn't pay attention to her or flirt with Lupe was so annoying. Throughout the film, I was begging Bond to choose Lupe over her, but alas he didn't. After the yawner that was Olivia D'Abo in his previous film, Dalton really needed a stronger Bond girl here and didn't get it.

If you've never seen Dalton as Bond, do yourself a favor and definitely see this one. Even though the plot and feel of the film is very much rooted in the 80s, it is still a decent action flick. Dalton may get a bad rap for his portrayal of Bond, but there are certainly worst Bond films than this one. It's a shame he never had an opportunity to build off of this performance and legitimize himself as Bond, but just like Bond had his license to kill revoked in the film, Dalton had his license to play Bond taken away from him. Next up, the Brosnan era. 8/10

Voting pains

http://view.break.com/581805 - Watch more free videos

NMR: Double feature

Batman: Gotham Knight: If you're unfamiliar with this, it's a collection of six animated shorts that were released earlier this year. The shorts are meant to be a bridge between Batman Begins and The Dark Knight. Although I will say that the bridge is more thematic than plot driven. Nothing in these shorts will help you understand the plots of either film. These six shorts vary in their quality. Some are really neat stories that feature some of the lesser known Batman villains, while others are a real bore. The other irksome thing for me was the animation. It's well done, just not in a style that I particularly enjoy. If you're a true Batman fan, you'll probably enjoy this. Otherwise, you can skip this. Rating: ***

88 Minutes: I didn't want to believe the reviews. I couldn't accept that a thriller with an interesting hook starring Al Pacino could be as awful as they said. But it's all true. This is a sloppy, incomprehensible piece of film and it makes me wonder how it got greenlit in the first place. Apparently, some people did have reservations. The film was set in 2006, indicating it's been sitting on the shelf for a while. This thing just keep piling on the plot twists and you quickly just want the film to end so that they can try and explain everything, even though it's impossible. Avoid this one at all costs. Rating: *

The Living Daylights (1987)

Plot: Timothy Dalton is suave and lethal as superagent James Bond in this turbo-charged action/adventure that pulls out the stops for excitement. Armed with a gadget-laden Aston Martin and his license to kill, Agent 007 must stop a terrifying weapons conspiracy that may be linked to the Soviet military high command!

Firsts: Timothy Dalton as Bond, Caroline Bliss as Miss Moneypenny

Gadgets: Loaded Aston Martin, key chain with knockout gas and explosives, and binocular eyeglasses

Girls Bond slept with: Girl on yacht (presumed), Kara Milovy

Elaborate murder attempt that Bond escapes: None really, although Bond did hang out of a cargo plane while fighting a henchman

Personal review: I feel that Dalton often gets a bad rap as Bond, but then I watch his films again and he makes it so difficult for me to defend him. And it is easy to lay the criticism on his seriousness. Even if it's not intentional it always looks like he has a scowl on his face. That makes it difficult to enjoy when he's delivering lines about salt corrosion is to blame for a police car's dismantling after he destroyed it with a laser. But I feel like a lot of the criticisms that are often put on Dalton, could be said about Daniel Craig, except that I think Craig has been an excellent Bond thus far.

So where does the blame lie? Well Dalton was done no favors here with the story. The evil plot is strong from a relevancy perspective here. I felt like I was watching Charlie Wilson's War again with the whole Afghan/Russia arms issue. But the nuts and bolts of the story aren't really explained well and seem overly complex.

Along with that the villains are a major disappointment. Joe Don Baker as crazed arms dealer Brad Whitaker and Jerden Krabbe as Georgi Koskov are decent character actors, but they aren't menacing enough here. I think worst of all is that they really have no major beef with Bond. Bond goes through this film relatively unscathed. Things are much more interesting when the villain is equally concerned with killing Bond and completing their evil scheme.

The disappointment with the villains though are nothing compared with the film's choice for its Bond girl. Maryam D'abo as Kara Milovy is a personality vaccuum. She's neither sexy nor tough, which just leaves helpless; the worst category of Bond girls. The fact that Bond is smitten with her from the get go and never fools around with anyone else makes it even more depressing. How can we root for this Bond when he's not hated by his villains and has such terrible taste in women?

I thought the action in here was solid. The opening scene involving Bond fighting the assassin in the flaming jeep was good. And the stuntwork done during the scenes where they are fighting outside the cargo plane is top notch. But the exciting action is offset by the dull locales. Vienna, Tangiers, and Afghanistan aren't the most exciting locales for a film.

There just ends up being nothing in this film that truly gets you amped up. This is clear from the get-go with the lifeless and forgettable Living Daylights theme. Even though most of the Bond trademarks are in this film, this felt very generic and could have been any action film. The film avoids any eye-rolling bad moments, but if I'm going to pick a Bond film to watch for fun, I'm not apt to choose this one.

One final thing, in the scene where Koskov is 'captured' after defecting, what happened to Bond, M and the Minister? They are all talking to him and then in the next scene, their headquarters is attacked, Koskov is taken and none of them are seen. Did I miss something here or was this poor editing on the director's part. 7/10

Deleted scenes for Weight Loss

#3


#2


#1

Monday TV thoughts

Oh it's so good to have new television again. I have a renewed sense of energy, yet I'm doing less work if that makes any sense.

The Big Bang Theory: The show probably played it best by not dwelling on the actual date between Leonard and Penny and instead had the story centered around the aftermath, which allowed for a lot more screentime for Leonard's fellow geeks. Sheldon in particular was the star of this episode. And unlike in certain episodes last season, they did a really good job of finding a way to make Sheldon likeable and still funny. At times, he was a little cruel in his narrow-mindedness last season. This time he was hilarious from his efforts to unwillingly keep a secret, to bunking with his various friends and annoying them to no end. As for the future of Penny and Leonard, I think playing off their incompatibilities is the right move. There can remain that attraction, but these two should not become fated loves like Rachel and Ross. If they go down that road, things will just become nauseating and turn me off to the show. The return of Leslie Winkle next week should hopefully help in preventing things from getting to that point.

How I Met Your Mother: Not an overwhelmingly hilarious premiere, but a suitable one in advancing the stories that we were left with at the end of last season. I really like the pairing of Ted and Stella, but I think we're beginning to see that once again Ted has found a great woman who won't end up being the mother. How can this show be so cruel to us. They keep offering these great mates for Ted and then they all vanish. How can the actual mother ever top them? And as for the Barney/Robin relationship, it was nice for now to see a different side of Barney. But ultimately, I hope they find a way to have Barney remain his awesome self and still have a relationship with Robin. A long-term kind and nice Barney simply won't do. One last thing: Marshall really needs a job, but I'm loving his unemployed antics anyway.

Heroes: OK, where to begin here. This show is remarkable in that it has the ability to pull me in during the time that it's on. But the more I think about the show after its over, the more flaws and faults I find with it. This is definitely a turn off your brain show in order to maximize enjoyment.

The two hour premier was a definite improvement over much of last season, but I'll reserve judgments on how the season will play out as a whole for now. After all, they had 9 months to come up with this episode. Let's see what they do with a little less time as the season goes on.

Unlike last season's snail's pace, they threw a whole bunch of stuff at us; some of which worked, others didn't. Here's some bullet point thoughts on everything that went down last night:

- I hated that after building the whole first season on protecting Claire from Sylar, he managed to get what we wanted from her so quickly here in this season. But on the other hand, I loved seeing him at work and also making a comment about the brain-eating speculation.

- I really like the cast of new villains and cannot wait to see what havoc they wreak on the world. My only complaint is that The German looks too much like HRG.

- Mohinder continues to reign supreme as the dumbest person on television. Who here couldn't see a mile away that injecting himself was only going to turn out bad. I'm interested to see where they go with him and their homage to The Fly. By the way, I was surprised to find myself not hating Maya last night and also found her to be pretty hot.

- It seems like they got rid of a lot of dead weight. Molly, Micah, West, Monica: GONE!! Glad to see they put the kids to bed and decided it's time to let the grownups play.

- Also thrilled to see some of the better characters return. I was pumped to have Linderman back in whatever form it is (hallucination, ghost, shape shifter). But it just shows the show's lack of forethought by having him killed in the first place and now brought back under contrived reasons. On a similar level, I'm glad to see Claire's mom is back, but is she really the best person they could find to protect Claire? Where was the Haitian?

- Loved Bob and Elle's brief scene together. I cannot believe they killed him off. I'm sure they'll regret that later too and bring him back in some ludicrous way. I cannot wait to see what Elle does now that she's on her own. I think her electric attack on Sylar is just a glimpse of what she's capable of. And speaking of her showdown with Sylar, was anyone else singing The Man With The Golden Gun during that scene?

- Can they just kill off Matt Parkman already? I am going to hate every scene he's in while in Africa. Completely pointless.

- The Hiro/Ando/Daphne stuff was fun. I particularly liked the Batman/Catwoman trap they set. I'm glad Hiro was upfront about what he saw in the future. So many other shows who have strung that out and had this unspoken resentment between the two characters. It'll be interesting to see how it plays out and who actually is the hero and villain in that relationship.

-I'm calling shenanigans on Angela Petrelli being Sylar's mother. Something just doesn't add up there and hopefully we'll find out the truth to that next week.

There is plenty more I could talk about, which just shows you how much was packed into those two hours. But for now I'll leave it at that and let the rest of you voice your opinions.

New pricing game: Gas Money

For the 37th season premiere, The Price is Right debuted a new game yesterday called Gas Money. It's especially notable for a couple of reasons: It's the first new game to debut since Drew became host and it's the last new game created by recently ousted producer Roger Dobkowitz. The concept is pretty simple, but effective. The look of the game is great and I especially love the old tyme gas pump sound used when someone earns money. Check out its first playing here:

NMR: The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford

This is probably the lone, high-profile, well-reviewed movie from 2007 that I had not seen yet, which is why I put it in my queue. Unfortunately, I wasn't impressed. The movie has a strong cast who deliver some fine performances. And the film is beautifully shot. But despite those strengths, I can't recommend this film because it's just plain dull. The movie plays like a PBS special with a big budget. Based on a book, the film picks and chooses random points in the relationship between James and Ford to highlight their strange working relationship. Given that you know what happens based on the film's title, there is too much time spent leading up to that moment. I would have preferred if the entire movie would have focused on the aftermath of the incident. The film briefly shows Ford's quasi-celebrity status and eventual backlash for killing James and I wish that had been explored more in-depth.

If you like moody westerns, you'll probably love this movie. Someone made a comparison to McCabe and Mrs. Miller, which is accurate; too bad I hated that film too. As a critic, there is a lot to applaud in this film. However, as a movie fan, I would say not to bother with this unless you're trying to cure insomnia. Rating: **

This week in inappropriate comedy

You know when Jerry Springer is gonging your act things are pretty bad.

Are you ready to 'Come on down' again?

It's finally here...premiere week!! And things get started proper in the morning with the Season 37 premiere of The Price is Right. Drew's back for another season and in preparation for another season full of big wins, here's a look back at some of the great moments from Drew's first season.

A View to a Kill (1985)

Plot: Agent 007 (Roger Moore) races against time to stop a power-mad industrialist (Christopher Walken) who plots to kill millions in order to corner the world's microchip supply. From the Eiffel tower to the top of the Golden Gate Bridge, James bond can't be stopped!

Firsts: Oscar winner to play a Bond villain, Bond actually seen on Russian soil.

Gadgets: Microchip tracker, electric shaver that detects microphones, sunglasses that see through tinted windows, ring that takes photographs, check copier, and credit card that unlocks windows

Girls Bond slept with: Kimberley Jones, May Day, Pola Ivanova, and Stacy Sutton

Elaborate murder attempt that Bond escapes: trapped underwater in a car, trapped in an elevator on fire

Personal review: I may lose my Bond cred for saying this, but I actually really enjoy this movie. In my opinion, there are only two major flaws; one being that Roger Moore was too old at this point. And I'm not sure if he had work done before this film, but his face always looks like he's surprised throughout the film. If he does this a few years earlier or if it's done by a different Bond, it would have improved things tremendously. The other is Tanya Roberts as the shrill Stacy Sutton. Not since Jill St. John has there been such an annoying Bond girl. Isn't it interesting how they both came during the final Bond films of Connery and Moore. Roberts' shrieking throughout the movie gets annoying very fast. I mean Bond tells her "hang on" or "I'll be right back" and she's still yelling at him like he's abandoning her. At that point I probably would have left her to burn in the San Francisco City Hall.

But now let's focus on what I like about this entry. First, you gotta love the choice of Christopher Walken as your villain. He brings an excitement to the villain role that had not been seen for a while. It helps that he's more active than most of the villains and we get a significant backstory to understand why he is the way he is. He also surrounds himself with a decent cadre of henchmen. Dr. Mortner is sufficiently creepy as the steroid doctor. And then there's May Day who works really well as a female villain. However, I could have done without the sex scene between her and Bond. They had a problem with Bond sleeping with Bibi and not her?

I also love the addition of Peter Macnee as Sir Godfrey Tibbett. You could tell that him and Moore were having a lot of fun working together. Their whole master/servant schtick produces a lot of laughs.

Kudos for the production team for coming up with a couple of new venues for some epic scenes. The Eiffel Tower and Golden Gate bridge scenes are impressive and feel different than a lot of the Bond action scenes.

The film does drag a bit in the middle with a lot of tangential scenes (Bond cooking quiche (how manly!), sharing a hot tub with the Russian agent, the fire truck chase scene), but they aren't enough to damper the fun of the overall film.

Finally, I must say that Duran Duran's theme is one of the best in the series. It does a great job of kicking the film into high gear right from the start. And I always love when the song and the opening credits do a good job of connecting with the film's theme. Unlike the generic ones that just have silohuetted girls dancing around, this one sticks in your mind with the day-glo motif and the fire and ice symbolism.

I recognize that the film has its flaws, but for me this one is just altogether too enjoyable to rate it negatively. Unlike Octopussy, which seems new everytime I watch it since I never remember anything from that film, I can recall everything from this one. I'm glad that Moore left after this one as opposed to his previous work. 8/10

TV Roundup

Premiere week isn't until next week, but there was still enough new content this week to warrant a post.

House: The cranky doctor is back and the premiere is ... just ok. I personally thought the House/Wilson stuff was fantastic, but the patient of the week and everything surrounding her was pretty 'meh'. It'll be interesting to see how long they play out this House/Wilson stalemate. Given how well defined these characters are, this latest blow to their friendship should keep them strained for a while, but you know the writers and the viewers will get impatient and want to see them conversing in their usual banter before long. Back to the POTW, I never care for the ones that have to directly influence the doctors' personal lives. In this case it was 13. You know it's funny...for a character who's supposedly created to be this enigma, we sure know more about her than we do the other two newbies. I like 13, but we already had a pretty girl with issues in Cameron, so why do we need her. At some point, the writers are going to need to address this issue and eliminate some people.

Fringe: This week's second episode earned it a permanent spot on my DVR. The pilot had some pacing issues and wasn't the most captivating television. A lot of it felt like a been there done that. However, now that I'm beginning to see how a typical episode will play out, I feel a little bit better about the show. What really works for this show is the cast. Each of them are unique and make you interested in what they are saying and doing. I also like the fact that this show is trying to make its episodes more stand-alone and not be bogged down by some grand mythology. Yes, there is this whole "The Pattern" business, but I think it's just a unifying theme rather than some elaborate mystery. As long as they can keep coming up with unique scientific anamolies I'll remained hook. I do have one plea to the writers though: Please don't try to create some romantic tension between Joshua Jackson and Anna Torv. We saw it on X-Files, Bones, and all sorts of other shows like this. Please don't fall into that trap. It's not needed on a show like this.

Mythbusters: Another fun episode this week, although not a oddly engaging as last week's phone book friction episode. The water stun gun seemed doomed from the beginning based on the science of the matter, but I still enjoyed seeing Jaime and Adam go through all the different ways to try and make it happen. Jaime really seemed into this myth and whenever he's excited about one, it makes for a better episdoe. With the fire myths that the build crew took on, again, there wasn't much in the way of surprising results. Rather, the fun was in watching the reactions of the team to the results. The way the team was shocked by the fire extinguisher explosion was hilarious. And as for the walking on hot coals, I think we've seen enough people do it to know it's not something mystical. Still, it was damn funny seeing Adam not know the proper way and get burned in the process.

NMR: The Bank Job

This a another film from this past spring that eluded me. Unlike 21, however, it did not do big business at the box office, but it did earn some decent reviews. The film is based on true events surrounding the biggest bank robbery in the history of London. A lot is still not known about the heist, so this is somewhat speculative fiction. I think that helped this film as it is able to create a lot of good drama and suspense. I've never thought much of Jason Statham based on most of the roles he chooses, but he was surprisingly good as the leader of the small-time crooks. The film is more interesting than a typical heist film as there as connections to politics, racism and pornography associated with this crime. Best of all, the film has a wholly satisfying conclusion. Whenever a film ends strong, it always helps boost its rating in my book. If you enjoy this genre of film, this one's probably worth a rent. Rating: ****

Never Say Never Again (1983)

Quick note: I had no intention of including this film in the Bond countdown. Since it wasn't released by MGM, it's considered to be the red-headed stepchild in the franchise. However, since they pushed Quantum of Solace back a week, I had a week to fill in my countdown. It should also be noted that this was my first time watching this movie, so my review may not be as detailed as most.



Plot: When two atomic warheads are hijacked by the evil SPECTRE organization, British superagent James Bond (Sean Connery, in his final performance as 007) jumps into a frantic race to save the world from nuclear terrorists. With Largo (Klaus Maria Brandauer), Blofeld (Max von Sydow) and Fatima (Barbara Carrera) bent on destroying the world, Bond is never far from death in director Irvin Kershner's Golden Globe-nominated action flick.

Firsts: It's an unofficial Bond, so pretty much everything is a first.

Gadgets: Pen loaded with explosives, wristwatch that shoots lasers, and a loaded mini-bike.

Girls Bond slept with: Nurse at Shrublands, Fatima Blush, woman in Bahamas, and Domino Petachi

Elaborate murder attempt that Bond escapes: suited with a device that attracts sharks, left to be killed by vultures

Personal review: Given it's unofficial status, I really wanted to hate this film but it's not completely terrible. It helps that it is essentially a remake of Thunderball, which had a decent story. What truly hampers the film is the limitation McClory had with what he could make. He could use character names, but missing are the opening credit sequences, the music, and most of the other trademark actors.

I think one of the film's biggest problems is how set in the 80s this film feels. I don't know what it is about that decade, but most films from that era do so many things to root them in that time period, unlike films from the 70s or 60s. And I'm not talking about production values. I'm talking about scenes like Bond and Largo playing a video game. They are at a casino, why do they need to be playing video games? At least make that scene relevant by having Bond use his newly gained video game knowledge to help him stop the nukes from exploding at the end of the movie.

As for the cast this time, Klaus Maria Brandauer is actually decent as Largo. He plays him more realistic instead of overly dramatic, which works within the context of this film. Kim Basinger unfortunately is pretty bland as Domino. And I was sorely disappointed to see Max Von Sydow have so few scenes as Blofeld. From what I read, a lot of his scenes were cut. They must have been pretty terrible for them not to be included. And Barbara Carrera is your stereotypical 80s empowered female villain aka uber-bitch.

Of course, Connery is back again in this one and he really shouldn't have been. Not matter how good of shape he was in, he did not belong here. It's painful having to watch so many action scene shot so far away or involving something on Bond's head to help mask how much the stunt doubles did in this film. I understand Connery needed the money, but all he did was tarnish his legacy with this film.

If this was a generic action film, I think most people would enjoy it. But because there's so much attached to the Bond franchise, this was doomed to fail. I really wish I could have been older in '83 to see the public response as this and Octopussy came out within mere months of each other. I'm glad people chose the true Bond film, even if that one is pretty terrible; which begs the question, why the people at EON didn't try harder to make a better film. Or maybe they did, yikes. Anyways, there's no real reason to check this one out, beyond the curiosity factor. Do yourself a favor and just watch Thunderball instead. 6/10

Oh this is gonna be good

Looks like we're store for some big things this season and I can't wait!

Revealing roots

Before it left the budget theater for good, I managed to sneak in a showing of You Don't Mess With a Zohan; a film which proved that Adam Sandler still has a faithful fanbase. Despite a shaky (at least by my account) premise, this film still managed to do $100 million at the box office this summer.

Zohan (Sandler) is an Israeli Special Forces Soldier who has grown tiresome of the ever-going few between his people and the Palestines. So he decides to fake his death and move to America to live out his true dream; becoming a hair stylist. If you saw any of the ads for this film, you saw how most of them focused on his crazy antics as a hairdresser. and if you're like me, when you saw them, you second-guessed whether this movie would be any good.

Well it turns out I was partially right. The hair stylist elements of the film are rather unfunny. However, the film is also about the real-life feud between Israelis and Palestinians and how in many ways they are two sides of the same coin. It is this aspect of the film that is unseen in the ads, yet provide some decent material. To explain the dichotomous nature of the film, let me appropriately use a hair metaphor.

This film is like a bleached-blond woman. The woman gets the dye job in order to improve her looks and become more appealing to men. Knowing that a comedic take on the Israeli/Palestinians feud is a tough sell to a mass audience, this film also tries to improve it's look with this hair stylist subplot. Both the dye job and this subplot work on a more primative audience because they are simple, familiar, and appealing. To those with a more discerning eye, both come across as phony, tired, and unappealing. Thier focus is on exposing the true nature of the woman/film. Beneath the shiny veneer is a more intriguing, unconventional choice. In Zohan, that refers to this unique look at how Israelis and Palestinians live in America.

During these moments of the film, we see how similar they are. They share the same bizarre tastes in foods and music. They can laugh and crack wise at each other's stereotypes. And they both suffer from the same ignorant hate from whitebread Americans. It is in these moments that the film rises above its familiar unfunny territory.

It's unfortunate that it takes so long for the film to get to this point. The first part of the film is focused solely on Zohan and developing his character. The initial scenes introducing his character don't work at all. It's not made clear as to why he's a super soldier or a sexual being. It's not until later in the film that I realize so many of his quirks are more cultural rather than unique to him (maybe this is my ignorance revealing itself). Once Zohan hits America, the film takes too much time on scenes involving him in the salon styling and boning old women. There was absolutely nothing fresh about any of that material.

Finally, things start picking up once Rob Schneider, playing a Palestinian taxi driver spots Zohan and tries to have him eliminated. From there the film somehow evolves into the Israelis and Palestinians teaming up to take down a greepy corporate mogul (played by Michael Buffer) who's trying to tear down all of their shops so he can build a mega-mall. While the story may seem like a stretch, it produces some of the best laughs of the film.

This second half of the film is buoyed by a cavalcade of cameos; some from Sandler mainstays and others you would never expect. The best of the bunch is Dave Matthews who has a few scenes playing an uber-redneck. Seeing him play against type is a lot of fun. The same cannot be said for Mariah Carey's guest spot which couldn't have been flatter even if they had been treated with an iron (ok, I really need to stop with the hair metaphors).

One final point I'll mention is the casting of Entourage's Emmanuelle Chiriqui as the love interest for Sandler. The comedy is Sandler's films may be uneven, but he always seems to get really hot women who seem down-to-Earth enough to make it believable that they would be romantically linked to his characters. This holds true once again for Chiriqui who is both beautiful and sweet in this role.

I understand why there wasn't more of a focus on the Middle Eastern conflict aspect of this film, due to its lack of commerciality, but that is the only part of this film that works. I'd like to think that that was the part written by Judd Apatow, who received a co-writer credit on this script, but I can't know for sure. Even if the film couldn't have solely dealt with this issue, the film still could have worked if it had found something better than the hair stylist subplot. Those scenes just drag on and provide nothing new to the audience.

I think for Sandler fans, if they missed this in theaters, they'll enjoying watching this at home. However, most people can probably skip this as the jokes are outnumbered by the duds and the overall plot is just too bizarre to be enjoyed on a simple level. I give Sandler credit for trying something a little different, but this one just didn't cut it. (Get it, cut, hair, ha!) Grade: C

The glorious return of the Netflix movie review: 21

So now that I'm finally getting a paycheck again, I decided to renew my account. With all luck, you should be getting a pair of reviews from me each week again from here on out.

We mark the return of the NMR with last spring's moderately successful film, 21. It's ironic that the last Netflix film I rented before shutting down my account also had to do with Vegas and playing cards (The Grand). I never intended for that, but it ends up being a nice case of symmetry.

If you unfamiliar with the premise of 21, it's loosely based on a real life story about a group of MIT students who create a system of counting cards to win big at Blackjack. And just like the students learned how to figure out what card was coming next, this movie was made in a way that I knew exactly what was coming next. Everything about this movie breeds familiarity. While this isn't the worst quality in a film, it's still disappointing because I feel like I'm watching a rerun. There is one semi-twist at the end, but if you think hard, you can even figure that one out too. Despite its obviousness, the film had a chance to rise above it had it been able to succeed on the cool factor. Unfortunately, they play things straight forward, and doesn't have any of the hipness that you would find in a film like Ocean's Eleven. All of the acting performances are fine, but nothing that is truly memorable. This movie ends up being the epitome of average. Nothing bad about it, but nothing special about it either. Netflix rating: ***

Could another iceberg be looming for Titanic?

Warner Bros. plans Dark Knight rerelease

News came out today that The Dark Knight will be heading back to theaters, at least IMAX that is, in January. Warner Bros. rationale is that they want it back out to help its awards chances. However, it also gives them an added opportunity to potentially overtake Titanic as the best domestic grosser of all time. So given that The Dark Knight currently sits at $513 mil and isn't done with its current run. Do you think the rerelease will be enough to push it over the top?

Taking Solace in a new Bond trailer

We got a nice little surprise today with the release of a new Quantum of Solace trailer. Watching this put a big smile on my face. You can enjoy it below or go to 007.com for a better version.

Octopussy (1983)

Plot: James Bond (Roger Moore) may have met his match in Octopussy (Maud Adams), an entrancing beauty involved in a devastating military plot to destroy detente. From the palaces of India to a speeding circus train in Germany and a mid-air battle on the wing of a high-flying jet, only Agent 007 can stop the nightmarish scheme!

Firsts: Robert Brown as M, appearance by Penelope Smallbone, and a Bond girl appearing in two films.

Gadgets: mini-jet, pen with acid and earpiece, wristwatch with homing device, wristwatch with TV monitor

Girls Bond slept with: Magda, Octopussy

Elaborate murder attempts that Bond escapes: released into the jungle to be hunted, death by yo-yo saw

Personal review: Bond is literally a clown in this film, which I think is pretty symbolic of the joke that this film is. I guess they felt that For Your Eyes Only's more serious tone failed because they were right back to their wacky hi-jinx in this one. This one may hold the record for eye-rolling one liners. And that's saying something considering the typical level found in a Bond film. And this time it's not just Bond spouting them off, but characters like Vijay and Kamal too.

Speaking of Kamal, he's one of two villains here, which I think is an odd choice. Depending on who you ask, different people will say who the real villain of this film was. General Orlov definitely had the grander scheme in mind, but Kamal is the one who receives the final death and has more screen time. I think this approach really undercut the dramatic impact behind their villainous plot.

That is, if you can decipher the plot. I've seen this film at least five times now, and I still haven't figured out the connection between the jewel smuggling and the nuclear bomb attack. I also could never keep straight which were the real and which were the fake jewels. Maybe they should have just cut out the Octopussy subplot.

Oh but then we wouldn't have the film's clever title or the return of Maud Adams (that's sarcasm, by the way). Adams is sexy enough, but I never understood how see out of all the Bond girls was able to get a second appearance. Her inclusion just reeked of laziness and it just confounded the plot even more than it needed to be.

I will admit that the action sequences on the train and the plane are pretty thrilling, but they deserved to be in a better film. I can find those thrills in any of the Bond movies, so their inclusion here doesn't really boost the films score.

Finally, I just want to point out that the film really insults the viewers' intelligence with the bomb countdown sequence. I know films always take liberties with these type of scenes, but for us to believe that with 5 mins. left on the countdown Bond was able to put on full clown makeup and still stop the bomb from going off is absolutely unrealistic. I like Diamonds Are Forever less than this, but this probably was the low point in the Bond franchise. 5.5/10

Quiz time

Some interesting sequel news for several high profile, popular films has come across the wire in the past few days. Here are the updates:

Inside Man 2 moving forward

Raimi and Maguire set for Spider-Man 4?

Sony moving forward with new Ghostbusters

So the question I pose to all of you is which of these projects do you think is most likely to see the light of day and which will wallow in development hell? And are you excited about each of these or do you not care if some of these actually get made?

Now it's time for what we all came to see...hardcore nudity!

Well, not really. But it is the red band trailer for Kevin Smith's new film, Zach and Miri Make a Porno, which actually looks pretty funny. Check it out...

Warning: NSFW!

For Your Eyes Only (1981)

Plot: When a British ship is sunk in foreign waters, the world's superpowers begin a feverish race to find its cargo: a nuclear submarine control system. And 007 (Roger Moore) is thrust into one of his most riveting adventures as he rushes to join the search...and prevent global devastation!

Firsts: Film without M, Bond theme singer shown in credit sequence

Gadgets: Burglar protected Lotus, Identograph

Girls Bond slept with: Lisl Von Schlaf, Melina Havelock

Elaborate murder attempts that Bond escapes: Death by remote control helicopter, dragged behind a motorboat

Personal review: To me this is one of the most confusing entries in the Bond cannon. After reaching the height of wackiness with Moonraker, I can understand the producers wanting to try a more grounded approach because there was no way to top an intergallactic fight with laser guns. But if they were going to take a new approach, then they shouldn't have gone halfway with it. As much as I enjoy Roger Moore's Bond, he seemed out of place here.

First off, you have the opening sequence referencing Tracy Bond and showing an appearance by Blofeld; two characters which have never been seen or mentioned since Moore took over. You also have the Russians back to being the primary villains here. After The Spy Who Loved Me, it seemed odd that they would use General Gogol here trying to get the ATAC. In fact that whole scene at the end of the film between Bond and Gogol is really weird. When Bond smashes the ATAC, Gogol acts like it's no big deal and leaves (then why was he so desperate to get it in the first place) and Bond doesn't even attempt to arrest or punish Gogol for his actions. Weird.

Of course, the film's actual villain is Kristatos who may be one of the most forgettable Bond villains in history. You don't learn he's the villain until over an hour into the film and then he only has about one 'evil' scene. This is not a guy bent on world domination and is really nothing more than a glorified courier since he has no intentions of using the ATAC itself.

Then there is an odd collection of Bond girls. Melina is fine in her role. Plus 10 for the producers choosing someone who looks authentically Greek, but -20 for forcing us to look at her mustache for the entire film. There's also the Countess in what has to be one of the more superfluous Bond girl roles ever. Really, Bond gained nothing by sleeping with her that he couldn't have figured out elsewhere. And then there's the one he doesn't sleep with, Bibi. Seeing Bond choose not to sleep with someone is just bizarre. Some say the character is supposed to be underage, but that's never made abundantly clear in the film and the actress portraying Bibi was in her 20s. I have a feeling either Moore or the producers felt it looked odd seeing Moore sleeping with someone that young, which is another reason why I think a new, younger Bond would have been better here. And since Bond doesn't sleep with her, Bibi's presence is really grating. She serves no other purpose to the plot and has a shrill personality.

The action sequence are decent in here, but nothing truly memorable. I also think they could have been better served being shot by a different director. John Glen has an annoying habit of doing jump cuts and loud noises to produce cheap scares (i.e. the parrot screeching when the Havelocks are murdered). I'll also give credit to Sheena Easton as 'For Your Eyes Only' is one of the better Bond themes. Sure, it'll be stuck in your head for days, but it's still a decent theme.

Overall, there's just too much disconnect for this to be rated highly. It seemed as if they were ready for a change, but couldn't quite commit to it. To me, this is Moore's Diamonds are Forever 7/10

Buzz killed

Continuing on in my quest to try and catch all of these summer comedies, I got a chance to see the latest from the Apatow factory; Pineapple Express. You'll forgive me though if my details and review are a little thin as I saw this last Sunday and my memory may be a little fuzzy. The premise for this comedy is about a process server named Dale who enjoy a little herb. While partaking in his favorite activity, he accidently witnesses a murder. The killer (played by Gary Cole) finds out who he is and chases Dale and his pot dealer (James Franco) trying to off them as well.

For a while, this follows along like most stoner comedies. As I watched it, I found some part to be very funny, but I also got the distinct feeling that there was an additional level of humor that I was missing out on by not being a pothead myself. This has been true of Harold and Kumar, Dude Where's My Car, and any other film from this genre. I can accept that and even appreciate it on a certain level. I know that there are a lot of people who don't 'get' the dry, subtle humor of a show like Arrested Development. Comedy certainly isn't universal, so we should accept all forms of humor. It's just that I may not rate those comedies as high as I would others.

Unfortunately for this film, though, it abandons that laid-back comedy styling and morphs into a violent action picture about half-way through. And when I say violent, I mean violent. The final scene becomes a shoot-out between all characters with everyone firing guns at each other with reckless abandon. Now I'm not some prude who can't take violence, but it just seemed unsettling and out-of-place here. It was the equivalent of watching a kids movie and halfway through seeing the kids begin to discuss the latest advancements of astrophysics.

Speaking of kids, young people have a bizarre presence within this film. There's one scene involving Dale and Saul (Franco) selling weed to junior high kids. And there's also a subplot involving Dale dating a high school girl and getting her involved in his mess. Both scenes, in theory, could have been used for laughs, but for the most part, they are played pretty straight, which ends up making them a little bit more unsettling. Dale's relationship with his high school girlfriend is particularly bizarre because there's absolutely no closure to that subplot. It makes you wonder what it's purpose in the film was.

In fact, for a lot of the film I began to wonder why they chose the direction they did with the story. The violence, the high school girlfriend, the nonsequitar scenes, none of it made much sense. The best I could surmise is that all of it seemed self-indulgent. These guys wanted to make the type of movie kids want to make when they are in high school or stoners want to make sitting on their couch eating FunYuns. I'd imagine that in every pothead lies an action hero waiting to burst out, if only they had the energy to do so. And every burnout thinks they can still attract hot young blonds.

On one hand, I can't completely fault them. Guys like Apatow and Seth Rogen have earned enough goodwill that they can be allowed to do something for themselves every once in a while. It's like Jim Carrey doing drama. Sure the movies typically aren't good, but you can't blame a guy for wanting to occassionally dream that he can still be a legitimate actor. Likewise, Seth Rogen is never going to be cast in roles meant for The Rock or Vin Diesel. So he went out and put himself in one. That's fine, it just didn't necessarily make for an enjoyable time at the movies for myself.

The sad thing is that one little fix could have made things a lot better. I think if at the end of the film it would have been revealed that everything we just saw was all in Dale and Saul's minds as a result of being completely baked, I think I could have tolerated it a lot more. And they certainly had a couple of opportunities at the end of the film to do so and didn't. Some may argue that ending the film that way would be a copout, but because everything before it was so over the top and unrealistic, I felt it would have been justified. Who knows, maybe that'll be an alternative ending on the DVD.

The one bright spot in the film is James Franco's performance as pot dealer Saul. He's able to rise above the dark tone of this film and deliver a fun performance. He finds a good balance of portraying a realistic pothead without venturing into stereotypes. I think I would have rather just had 90 minutes of watching him sit on the couch and watch a 227 marathon.

Pineapple Express does contain some decent laughs, particularly in the first half of the film. And if you come in expecting a violent action movie, then perhaps the second half will seem tolerably. But for me, this didn't do much. I just hope Rogen and co. got their jollies out with this film and can go back to producing the high quality comedy that we've come to know and love from them in the near future. Grade: C

Gabon up on the new castaways

So after what seemed like a long time, CBS finally revealed the castaways for the new season (17th!!) of Survivor. The cast photo is above. You can read the castaways bios here and watch some exclusive interviews with the contestants here.

Also, in case you hadn't heard...the season premiere date has been pushed back. Instead of starting on Sept. 18, Survivor will begin on Sept. 25 with a two(!!!) hour season premiere.

Growing Pains

Trying to catch up on the glut of summer comedies I have yet to see, I saw Step Brothers earlier today; the new Will Ferrell that once again has him teamed up with his Talledega Nights co-star, John C. Reilly. As you can surmise by the title, the two comics play step-brothers, who both still live at home with their parents and try to find ways to deal with each other.

The film ends up living and dying by this premise. Seeing Ferrell and Reilly playing the epitome of the man-child produces some truly funny moments. However, it also take the film down a road that it can't seem to navigate. Once it's been established that these two are overgrown versions of unruly children, there's only two basic outcomes. Either they remain these immature boobs or they grow up and mature. Since having them remain childish doesn't lend itself to any sort of natural conflict, the filmmaker naturally opted to have them try to grow in some way. Unfortunately, the film doesn't really pay off that eventual outcome either comedically or from a story perspective.

I began to wonder what point they were trying to make with this movie. Ferrell and Reilly's performance as the brothers is so over the top that it takes it beyond simply looking at the concept of arrested development; a theme which has been covered extensively in recent comedies. These two truly act as if they are children, which their out-of-breath delivery and their overusage of superlatives. It seemed at times if they were almost trying to do some sort of conceptual piece that was making a commentary on the unruly nature of today's children. But I think that would be giving the film too much credit.

The film introduces a lot of potentially interesting side stories, but never really does anything with them except use them for comedic purposes. For example, more could have been done with the parents, played by Mary Steenburgen and Richard Jenkins. It could have explored what it's like for people who are ready to retire, yet are forced to still play the role of parent. Instead, they're there just to yell and look exasperated. There is another blood brother who's used to create some conflict, but it's never done in a very natural way.

Ultimately, it feels as if this film couldn't give the audience enough credit. I would have loved if they would have spent more time developing a story and making us understand these characters instead of trying to take every plot device and somehow turn it into a joke. With the way this film was produces, it made you feel as if these two characters were originally created in an SNL skit and they tried to stretch the concept into a 90 minute film. At times, there are naturally going to be genuinely funny moments, but in terms of narrative, everything is just a mess.

With the speed with which this and Semi-Pro came out this year, it appears that these films were not given the care and time they deserved. Both films had solid premises, but were put together in a slap-dash manner that hurt their overall quality. The time spent making both of these should have been combined to make one really good film. And speaking of low-quality, this film has a cheap, gritty look to it that I wasn't overly crazy about. It did seem to be for stylistic reasons, so I'm not sure why it was made that way.

Does Step Brothers have some high quality laughs? Sure. And I will admit, after not caring for most of John C. Reilly's work, he's enjoyable here and clearly enjoys playing off of Ferrell. However, at the end of the day, I need something more that just cheap laughs from a Will Ferrell film. He's made too many good films for me to accept subpar material. When this is what they offer, I would be just as happy and entertained with watching Anchorman for the 50,000th time. Will, call me when you've made a film that makes me laugh and also has a cohesive story strung throughout. Then we'll be back in business. Grade: C+

Moonraker (1979)

Plot: Agent 007 (Roger Moore) blasts into orbit in this action-packed adventure that takes him to Venice, rio de Janeiro and outer space. When Bond investigates the hijacking of an American space shuttle, he and beautiful CIA agent Holly Goodhead (Lois Chiles) are soon locked in a life-or-death struggle against Hugo Drax (Michael Lonsdale), a power-mad industrialist whose horrific scheme may destroy all human life on Earth!

Firsts: Bond in space!

Gadgets: Wristwatch equipped with lethal darts and explosives, digital safecracker

Girls Bond slept with: Corinne Dufour, Holly Goodhead, and Manuela

Elaborate murder attempts that Bond escapes: Death by centrifuge machine, Death by python, trapped under space shuttle

Personal review: I am so torn on this one. There is a lot of potential here. But it seems that they undercut every potential exciting moment, with cheesy or corny comedy spots. To wit, the opening skydiving scene is really awesome until it ends with a thud, metaphorically and literally as Jaws crashes through the circus tent. Later on, you have a decent chase scene involving Bond's motorized gondola, which is cool, until they decide to have it also have a innertube underneath that allows it to drive on water. The ridiculousness of that scene is capped with a pigeon taking a double take. I'm not kidding.

Of course, the most laughable scenes come at the end with the big showdown in outer space. I'm sure when they were making the film, they felt that this climax would be on par with scenes like the underwater fight in Thunderball. Unfortunately, this had neither the realism nor the sufficient visual effects to make it work. Instead, it comes off looking like a cheap knock-off of Star Wars, which has been a major criticism of the film for years. But while those complaints are valid, it should be noted that it worked as this was the most financially successful Bond film to date.

Speaking of ripping off material, this film was seemingly thrown together so quickly, they decided to pay homage to several clasic films including Star Wars, Close Encounters of the Third Kind, The Magnificent Seven, and even From Russia With Love! You can call this film a lot of things, but original isn't one of them.

As for some of the key players, they too are a mixed bag. I think Lois Chiles physically is in the top 5 of hottest Bond babes. She's also got a great name in this film. But from an acting standpoint, she's pretty terrible. Hugo Drax, as the film's primary villain seems to be just like Stromberg from the last film. He's a rich, loner weirdo who wants to start a new population of people. The only difference is that Stromberg wanted to do it under the sea and Drax wants to do it in space. Just like Stromberg, Drax lacks a certain charisma that I look for in a Bond villain. And Jaws makes a rare second appearance and receives complete character assassination. This time he's basically the coyote to Bond's road runner. He also falls in love which is the death knell of any character. Why they decided to bring him back only to treat him in this manner is beyond me. I should also note that this was the final performance of Bernard Lee as M. He passed away before the next film.

One interesting note about this film. In recent years, Bond films have been noted as especially egregious when it comes to product placement. I would like to point out that I believe this film is where that trend truly started. There are a few ridiculous scenes where the advertising for other products is really blatant. Now, these scenes play like they are parodying product placement, but when the film first aired they were intended as legitimate means of advertising.

There's a lot to criticize about this film. However, I'm still giving it a halfway decent score. The primary reason for this is because unlike the previous two Moore outings, this one at least kept me entertained for the entire time. Sure, the entertainment may not be of the kind that a Bond film should have, but it's entertainment nonetheless. I'm certainly glad that not all Bond films are like this, but every once in a while, a more jokey Bond film is ok. 7.5/10

Another year, another new crop of faces

So as I joked on my Facebook page, today marks my 23rd first day of school. And hopefully my last in terms of being a student. As I've remarked before, there's still something about the first day of school that gets me excited. I could barely sleep last night, which wasn't a good thing since I'm teaching an 8:30am course this year.

And while a lot of today is very familiar, there are a couple of new twists on this school year that I'm particularly looking forward to. First, I'm not taking any classes. It's just data collection and dissertation writing. I'm not sure if I'm getting a fair trade off on that. We shall see. The other thing that I'm really excited about is that for the first time, I'll be teaching a class of primarily students that I've already had before. They were a good group of students and it's nice that they valued me enough to want to take me again.

Well I can't blather on for too much longer, it's about time I go manipulate, I mean, mold some young minds.

Heroes alternate ending

In case you were only going to buy Season 2 of Heroes on DVD for the alternate ending to the season, save your money; here it is courtesy of YouTube. Had the writer's strike not happened, this is likely how things would have turned out on the show.

Fall Film Preview

With the major summer movies behind us and Entertainment Weekly's Fall Movie Preview issue coming out this past weekend, I decided to preview the film's I'm most interested in seeing. The links send you to Comingsoon.net for the film's core info and then I add my personal thoughts afterwards.

1. Quantum of Solace (Nov. 7)
Personal thoughts: With the new Harry Potter movie moved back to July '09, this has become the movie to see this fall. There's no chance that I'm not in the theater to see it opening weekend.

2. The Curious Case of Benjamin Button (Dec. 25)
Personal thoughts: It's got a unique concept, a great director and a solid cast. This is either going to be big come awards season or a spectacular failure.

3. Body of Lies (Oct. 10)
Personal thoughts: Political movies have been the kiss of death lately. But if anybody can bring people into the theaters it's Crowe and DiCaprio. Let's just hope they share more screentime than Crowe and Denzel did in Ridley Scott's last film, American Gangster.

4. Burn After Reading (Sept. 12)
Personal thoughts: There was a time where this would have been dismissed as another kooky Coen brothers movie. But they're hot right now after No Country For Old Men. Plus it's got a stellar cast which gives this a more must-see feel to it.

5. Frost/Nixon (Dec. 5 in limited release)
Personal thoughts: This one seems like a can't miss. This has succeeded on Broadway and with Ron Howard doing the directorial duties, it seems like the perfect combination. It may not be a big box office hit, but it'll likely rack up a bunch of awards next year.

6. Zach and Miri Make a Porno (Oct. 31)
Personal thoughts: Kevin Smith could use a hit, or at least a good movie and this looks like it could be it. Having Seth Rogen and Elizabeth Banks in the lead roles is a good start.

7. Eagle Eye (Sept. 26)
Personal thoughts: Most know I'm not a big Shia LeBeouf fan. However, in a barren wasteland like September, this looks like it might be a decent thriller. This will be a true test to see if Shia can lead a film that's more directly aimed at adults.

8. Righteous Kill (Sept. 12)
Personal thoughts: It's hard not to get excited about seeing DeNiro and Pacino on the same screen. And unlike Heat, they'll actually spend a significant amount of screentime together. But the fact that this is coming out in mid-September makes me wonder if it'll be anything more than a sub-par crime thriller with a decent cast.

9. The Brothers Bloom (Oct. 24)
Personal thoughts: This looks very similar to Dirty Rotten Scoundrels, which isn't a bad thing. I'm always down with a good con movie as long as the con isn't on the audience. The cast is good, but none of them have been known to carry a film, so it'll be interesting to see if this does any business.

10. The Day The Earth Stood Still (Dec. 12)
Personal thoughts: I first got interested in this film after seeing the original 1950s version for a class last year. Since then, my interest has dwindled as they keep pushing back the release date (never a good sign). The trailer also makes it seem like this will be more of a dreary film with a message than a fun revisit to a B-movie classic. Let's hope they prove me wrong.

11. Bedtime Stories (Dec. 25)
Personal thoughts: Seems to be a film in a similar vein as Jumanji or Night at the Museum. Those can be fun films and it's likely to make decent money. But if it's too gentle or kid-friendly, I may end up skipping it.

12. Role Models (Nov. 14)
Personal thoughts: This is another man-child type comedy that are all the rage right now. It also stars Paul Rudd, Stiffler, and McLovin. All signs point to this being a winner, but the trailer didn't really instill a lot of excitement in me for seeing this. Hopefully it's funnier than the teaser seemed to indicate.

13. Nick and Norah’s Infinite Playlist (Oct. 3)
Personal thoughts: My thoughts are pretty similar to Role Models. This teen comedy starring Michael Cera has potential, but the trailer made it seem more sappy than hilarious. So for now, the jury's still out on this one.

14. The Road (Nov. 14)
Personal thoughts: This is a story of an adult and child in a postapocalyptic world, which seems awfully familiar (Children of Men, Babylon A.D., etc.) However, it's based off of a Cormac McCarthy novel (who also wrote No Country for Old Men), which was named by Entertainment Weekly as the best novel of the past 25 years. If this one is as good as No Country we could have another Best Picture contender on our hands.

15. Four Christmases (Nov. 26)
Personal thoughts: We couldn't have a list and not include at least one holiday film on it. This is a romantic comedy starring Vince Vaughn and Reese Witherspoon about a couple who must spend time with each of their separated parents. For me to check it out though, this will need to be more comedy than romance.

WTF?!?

The Spy Who Loved Me (1977)

Plot: James Bond (Roger Moore) and the beautiful Soviet Agent Anya Amasova (Barbara Bach) team up to investigate missing Allied and Russian atomic submarines, following a deadly trail that leads to billionaire shipping magnate Karl Stromberg (Curt Jurgens). Soon Bond and Anya are the world's only hope as they discover a nightmarish scheme of global nuclear Armageddon!

Firsts: Appearances by Jaws and the Minister of Defense, film not to be based on a Fleming novel, and M's first-name being mentioned (Miles)

Gadgets: Ski-pole gun, portable microfilm camera, amphibious car, and portable jetski.

Girls Bond slept with: 'Log Cabin girl', one of Shiekh Hosein's women (presumed), and Anya Amasova (aka Triple X)

Elaborate murder attempts that Bond escapes: Any encounter with Jaws, trapdoor leading to shark tank, and long-barreled gun underneath the table.

Personal review: The film is so strongly centered behind the Bond/Triple X relationship that your opinions of the film depend on your feelings of their chemistry. Personally, I find Barbara Bach, while beautiful, to be painfully dull here, which sours my feelings of the film. They tried to go with the whole sexual tension vibe that existed in On Her Majesty's Secret Service, but Bach is no Diana Rigg. In fact, I would have prefered if Bond had forgotten about Anya and hooked up with Stromberg's henchwoman, Naomi instead. Now she was hot! But back to Bach, not only does she not work as a good sexual foil for Bond, but she's pretty lousy as a spy as well. No wonder the Russians lost the Cold War.

Because so much of the time is spent on their relationship, the film's main villain, Carl Stromberg is treated like an afterthought. That just adds to the forgettable nature of this creepy villain who's out to create a whole new world under the sea. The fact that Bond merely shoots Stromberg instead of giving him a more elaborate death just cements his status as one of the weaker Bond villains. As an aside, I always laugh when the British secret service first begin to suspect the villain and someone like Q will exclaim, "Stromberg? Why he's one of the richest shipping moguls in the world!" As if being rich would eliminate someone from being considered as a villain. If anything, that would make me more suspicious of the person.

While Stromberg is forgettable, we do get a decent henchman in Jaws. I really wish they would have left him as is here instead of bringing him back, but we'll touch upon that next week. For now, we can just place Jaws alongside guys like Oddjob in the annals of classic Bond henchmen.

One other thing I'll point out is that the soundtrack (created by Marvin Hamlisch) is really annoying in this film. I'm not fond of the opening title and his wocka-wocka version of the Bond theme stinks too. In general, most of the music is too loud and overbearing in this film. Then again, maybe I just noticed it more because of my boredom with the main romance.

I will say that the action does pick up nicely near the end. The shootout in the Liparus is some top-notch action. And while it may seem hokey now, I can still appreciate the amphibious car for its creativity. These scenes make this feels more like a Bond film than The Man With the Golden Gun, but there still not enough to rise this one from mediocrity. 7/10