Business Trip deleted scenes

Clip #4



Clip #3



Clip #2



Clip #1

An Exercise in Stupidity

Day 3 and still going strong (I feel like I'm in a prescription medicine commercial). Last night's film was Burn After Reading, the latest film from the Coen brothers. To call a film like this odd, would seem like a negative critique unless you are the Coens. It is amazing how these two continue to produce such diverse and quirky films and be successful at it. If you didn't know any better it would be hard to tell that this movie was made by the same people who did No Country For Old Men.

While the Coens' quirkiness has prevented me from seeing some of their work (I'll probably get stoned for saying this, but I've never seen The Big Lebowski), I found this one to be much more accessible, thanks in part to the all-star cast. Aside from headliners like George Clooney and Brad Pitt, the film boasts an amazing lineup of great character actors including Frances McDormand, John Malkovich, Tilda Swinton, JK Simmons, Richard Jenkins, and David Rasche. All of them are wonderful here.

What is particularly fun to watch in all of these performances is how spectacularly stupid each character is. In a lot films, dumb characters can become real annoying. You sit their frustrated, watching them do one stupid move after the next. But in this case, it's actually pretty exciting. You know that their stupidity is eventually going to cost them, but you don't know exactly how and therein lies the fun. It's also fun to see so many of these great actors play against type to be so stupid. Each one seems to relish in this game of 'can you top that' idiocy?

As good as everyone is, I must single out Brad Pitt. He often gets dismissed as an actor because of his celebrity status, but he is really great in this film. He is the dim bulb who shines the brightest. He steals every scene he is in and I wish he would have been in the film more. Seeing his performance here, makes me all the more interested to see what he'll do next month in The Curious Case of Benjamin Button.

I'll try my best to explain the film's plot if you're not familiar with what it is about, but it is somewhat complicated. Pitt and McDormand are employees at a local Washington DC gym and happen to find a disc that potentially has government secrets belonging to Osbourne Cox (Malkovich), a CIA agent who recently quit/was fired. Malkovich is married to Tilda Swinton, who's having an affair with Clooney. As the film progresses the lives of these five people become intertwined as they stumble through life trying to get ahead. There's a lot more to that, but that's the basic gist.

I found the film was a bit slow early on. I give them credit for trying to establish these characters. But because the film is only 96 minutes long, that early character development short changes the rest of the action once the film's plot really kicks into high gear. The early parts aren't boring, just a bit frustrating because you're anxious to see where everything goes.

At times, the story may seem inconsequential. However, any concerns about that are allieviated in the final scene of the film. The scenes provides the perfect coda for everything that has happened in the film and it's damn funny to boot. It's interesting how both this and No Country For Old Men end with a scene of dialogue when you would expect something more action-oriented. But unlike No Country, this ending is way more satisfying. Its ending is as brutally honest and straightforward as No Country's was random and ambiguous.

Now just because the film ends with dialogue doesn't mean there isn't some violence thrown in. If you've seen any Coen brother film, you know that they can produce some violence scenes that are equally gruesome and realistic in their depiction and this one is no different. I knew going in that I could expect to see some pretty shocking deaths, but it still wasn't enough preparation for when the murders actually took place.

In case it hasn't been made clear, this is truly a Coen brothers movie. If you're a fan of their work, I easily can recommend you see this film. Then again, given their cult status, I'm sure most fans of the Coens have already seen this. Fro everyone else, I feel this is a more accessible film than some of their other works and I would recommend you watch it. If for nothing else, then you can enjoy a lot of A-list stars having a lot of fun playing off-the-wall characters. And if you're not laughing during that final scene, something is wrong with you. Grade: B

Time to start thinking about summer

The first snow is falling in parts of the U.S. around now (More in some places than others, sorry South Dakota), but if you're Hollywood, you're all ready to start talking summer movies. Here are a couple of new trailers slated for next summer.

First is Up, the latest entry from the people at Pixar:


And then there's Roland Emmerich's 2012, which might as well be called The Day After Tomorrow 2:

Hybrid cartoon

Day 2 of my week of movies rolls on as I saw the latest entry from the folks at Pixar yesterday. After the underwhelming Ratatouille, Pixar has rebounded nicely with the beautiful WALL-E. This is an amazing piece of animation that at times makes you forget you're actually watching a cartoon.

WALL-E is about a trash compacting robot who is left to clean up a now uninhabitated Earth. One day he comes across EVE, a robot sent to analyze the planet's conditions. WALL-E quickly becomes smitten with EVE, or at least as smitted as robots can be. Without giving too much of the plot away, the two embark on an adventure that could potentially save the planet and make it safe to live on again.

What is surprising about this film is that it actually has a very strong political message. Themes of environmentalism and activism are very prevalent, although they're likely lost on the younger audience. I wasn't bothered by it, especially since it's a positive message for all of us to remember, but it was surprisingly nonetheless. The folks at Pixar have never really been this political before, so it will be interesting to see if this trend continues or if they just felt it fit nicely in with the story they were trying to tell here.

While the themes of the film may catch people off guard, what's not shocking is the quality of the animation. Pixar continues to raise the bar with each film they produce as it relates to the animation. The textures are rich and precise, the action is seemless, the characters finely detailed; everything is just a wonder to the eyes. And because a large portion of the film takes place on the uninhabitable Earth, there is a gritty, realistic feel to the movie. A lot of the landscape made it seem like this was any other live action postapocalyptic film.

There is one new element added into the animation here; live people. There are a few scenes which actually show video of real human beings. For instance, WALL-E is seen watching a video of Hello Dolly. Even more interesting is Fred Willard doing a cameo as the CEO of a large Wal-Mart-like corporation. He speaks via video to the captain of the ship that is currently housing all of the remaining Earthlings. This was an odd choice because the rest of the human beings are computer animated. I'm not sure why they decided on this break in continuity, but it didn't really negatively affect my opinion of the film; especially because Fred Willard's brief appearance provides some decent laughs. I'll be curious to see if they continue blending live action and computer animation in their future films.

As I just mentioned, Fred Willard's character does provide some humorous moments in the film. But sadly, there isn't a whole lot more laughs beyond that. That's not really a fault of the script though. This film is a bit more serious and focused on the "love story" between WALL-E and EVE. So while I would have liked a few more laughs, they probably would have negatively changed the tone of the film. WALL-E's antics do provide some smiles, but this isn't like Toy Story where you have characters constantly wisecracking.

Having a film try to create a love story between two robots could have been extremely difficult, but the Pixar people manage to pull it off. Even though these robots have a very limited vocabulary, they are still able to communicate with each other and to the audience the connection they've formed. You'll become invested in these character and want to see them succeed in their quest. It's the mark of a good film when you can ignore the absurdity of a premise like robots establishing a relationship and simply get wrapped up in good storytelling.

For adults, I'm not sure if this one has the replay value that some of the other Pixar films have. As much as I enjoyed this, I'm not going to make any special effort to see it again. Kids, of course, are different and will likely gobble this up with a spoon like they do with most computer animated films. But everyone should do themselves a favor and at least see this once. Since this will be arriving on DVD soon, you'll probably really enjoy this if you have a quality television to play it on. Once you watch it, you'll agree with me that Pixar has created yet another masterpiece that they can add to their ever-growing library. Grade: A-

Reno's finest shall return

Big news on the return of Reno 911 for season 6...

Comedy Central announced Monday that its law enforcement comedy Reno 911! is returning for a sixth season along with two new cast members, Ian Roberts (Sergeant Jack Declan) and Joe Lo Truglio (Deputy Franky Rizzo).


Production on the series will resume this month, and the new 10-episode season will debut on March 12, 2009.


The creators of the half-hour comedy, Robert Ben Garant, Kerri Kenney-Silver and Thomas Lennon, also star in the series as cops on the beat in Reno, Nevada.


“We could not be more excited to have Ian Roberts and Joe Lo Truglio join the cast of Reno 911! We’ve taken the show up a notch,” said Garant, Lennon and Kenney-Silver in a statement.


La Truglio previously worked with Garant, Kenney-Silver and Lennon on MTV sketch comedy series The State, which was canceled in 1995.

If you're not familiar with these two new additions, Roberts was the literal doctor on Arrested Development and Truglio was the guy who hit Jonah Hill with his car in Superbad. In my opinion, both sound like great additions to the cast.

Meta is betta

This may be a bit ambitious on my part, but there are a handful of movies I want to see right now at the budget theater and this is the last week I'll have before things get really hectic with school and the holidays, so I'm going to try and have a week of big movie reviews here, culminating in seeing Quantum of Solace this Friday. But for today, we kick things off with the last of the big summer comedies I had yet to see, Tropic Thunder.

Directed by and starring Ben Stiller, this film is about a bunch of primadonna actors who are filming a war movie. Fed up with their attitude, the director leaves the actors out in the middle of the Vietnamese jungle to toughen up, all the while telling them that they are out there to shoot scenes for the movie. Don't worry, the movie is more straight-forward than I'm making it out to be.

Of course, one of the most talked about aspects of this movie before it was released was Robert Downey Jr.'s controversial role. He plays Kirk Lazarus, an award-winning Australian actor who undergoes a radical surgery in order to turn his skin black so that he could play the African-American sergeant. No doubt, you saw him featured prominently in the commercials for the film. Not only does he have the funniest moments in the trailer, but that is true of the whole film. This has truly been one amazing summer for Robert Downey Jr. and it is capped off with this masterful performance. He not only does a great job portraying a black man, but he has a really good Australian accent too. Seeing his performance is probably worth the price of admission alone.

But if you're looking for more beyond Downey's performance, the film ends up being a bit more hit and miss. I found this to be very similar to Zoolander, which not surprisingly, was also directed by Stiller. When the film is focused on satire, whether it be Hollywood here or the fashion industry in Zoolander, the film is extremely funny and smart. Stiller is very good at picking up on the nuances of the target of his satire and pointing them out in very comedic ways. This film opens with a series of trailers featuring the various actors in the film. Each are completely different, but they all perfectly capture the style and look of real trailers in that genre. There is also an Access Hollywood segment in the film which could easily have been about a real film; it is spot on.

However, once the film moves beyond satire and settles into its own actual story things start to fall apart. I just felt that the narrative wasn't strong enough here, even though I really liked the concept. For starters, most of the actors realize pretty quickly that they aren't filming a movie anymore and are in actual danger. While it's realistic, it took away a huge part of the film's humor. Only Stiller's character maintains the illusion that it is all part of the movie and a lot of his humorous interactions with the real environment are wrapped up in a montage. But for the rest of the characters, it just becomes a survival story which isn't all that interesting. Part of the problem there is that they've spent the first part of the film establishing that these actors are primadonnas, which doesn't make the audience really become invested in seeing them make it out alive.

A prime example of this is Jack Black's character, who is an overweight comedian with a heroin addiction. Personally, I didn't really enjoy the character or his portrayal of him. Now I realize the role was originally meant for Owen Wilson until he ran into his own personal problems, so I'm not sure if my attitude would change if he had actually been in the movie. Overall, I felt Black's portrayal was too real to be funny and too funny to be taken seriously, if that makes sense. I guess what I'm saying is that he needed to take it to one extreme or the other.

While the film lags in the middle, it does somewhat redeem itself in the end. There are some nice parrallels between how this movie ends and how their fictional movie was supposed to end; although this again seemed confusing because it appeared that they were mocking the ending of the Hollywood film, but wanted you to treat the end of this film seriously. Like Black's performance, the entire film needed to do a better job of seperating the meta references from their own actual plot.

One thing I would be remiss if I didn't point out is that there are several fun cameos throughout the film; something that is becoming the norm in today's comedies. There's Danny McBride, last seen in Pineapple Express, as an overzealous pyrotechnics expert. I previously had not found him particularly funny, but he has a lot of good lines here and his wardrobe is hilarious as well. Matthew McConaughey shows up as the agent to Stiller's character and has a funny running gag regarding TiVo. And finally, an unrecognizable Tom Cruise plays a crass executive. Cruise has some funny moments, but I wish the character would have played things a little bit more straight (no pun intended). Seeing Cruise as a balding, pot-bellied guy would have been funny enough. However, they added on some odd character traits that weren't as funny. It was as if the movie was trying to hard to make everyone think "Wow, look at how funny and cool Tom Cruise is being". It's a fun cameo, but they would have been better off with the 'less is more' mantra there.

There is one other small criticism I have with the film that may not matter to most people. But for some reason, I found it difficult to understand a lot of the lines that the characters were saying. Either they were too softly spoken or said so quickly, I couldn't process what they said. When you have a comedy where half of your jokes are of the verbal kind, this isn't a good thing. There may have been even more humor I missed just because of their delivery. Perhaps, this would have been avoided with a more polished director.

I think there is enough here to give this a recommendation. The Hollywood satire is top notch and Downey gives a hell of a performance that gives him an outside chance at an Oscar nomination. The film suffers from some story problems, but if you're just looking to be entertained, then that probably won't matter to you. Comedy is such a subjective concept as it is, that it is difficult to properly evaluate these films. I personally didn't find this as funny as some of the recent Apatow comedies, but I know that won't be true for everyone. That's why I made the Zoolander comparison earlier in the review. That's probably the best barometer for you. If you enjoyed that film, you'll likely have a good time with this one as well. Grade: B

Casino Royale (2006)

Plot: Casino Royale introduces James Bond before he holds his license to kill. But Bond is no less dangerous and with two professional assassinations in quick succession, he is elevated to '00' status. M sends the newly-promoted 007 to his first mission that takes him to Madagascar, the Bahamas, and eventually leads him to Montenegro to face Le Chiffre, a ruthless financier under threat from his terrorist clientele, who is attempting to restore his funds in a high-stakes poker game at the Casino Royale. Le Chiffre's cunning and cruelty come to bear on Bond and Treasury official Vesper Lynd (Eva Green) in a way that he could never imagine and he learns his most important lesson: Trust no one.

Firsts: Craig as Bond, appearances by Mathis, Mr. White and Jeffrey Wright as Felix Leiter, gun barrel sequence does not appear at the opening of the movie

Gadgets: Tracking device implant, personal defibrillator

Girls Bond slept with: Vesper Lynd; Would have slept with Solange had business not gotten in the way

Elaborate murder attempt that Bond escapes: Spiked martini, tortured with a knotted rope to the balls

Personal review: After 22 weeks, we've finally reached the end, which is ironic because this is the film that brought us back to the beginning. The Bond producers decided to reboot the franchise and the decision seems to have worked. I absolutely love this movie and have found Daniel Craig to be an excellent Bond thus far, even though many people weren't very confident in him when the announcement was originally made.

Not only is Craig a good Bond, but this is a really good movie too. Who knew Martin Campbell, who directed Goldeneye, could create such a beautiful and exciting picture? The action sequences are top notch, the locations are stylish and the movie manages to still have some fun too.

Part of what makes Craig such a good Bond is the way the character is written. Instead of being portrayed as some sort of superman, the character approaches situations in a way most people would. Take for instance, the opening chase sequence with the parkour artist. That guy leaping around like a frogman, but they have Bond slip and stumble in his jumps or just bust through walls instead of being able to leap over them. There are a lot of small touches like that which just make this an above average film.

Another one of the little things that I love about this film is how they withold many of Bond's trademark stuff until the end of the movie. If you notice the Bond theme and the 'Bond, James Bond' line are not used until the scene with Mr. White, as if to say he truly didn't become 'Bond' until after the Vesper incident. The way the film ends is just an amazing scene. The fact that this next film will start right where this one ends, makes me even more excited Quantum of Solace.

Speaking of the villains, Le Chiffre is all right, but not within the top eschelon of Bond villains. He's got the cool bloody tears and has some fun torturing Bond, but isn't truly significant. But knowing he was just a minor player within a larger organization makes it all right that he wasn't more memorable or evil.

And as for Eva Green as Vesper, she's certainly not the sexiest Bond girl. However, she brought an important vulnerability to the role which worked and made it believable as to why Bond would fall for her so hard. It appears that while she may not be the best Bond girl ever, she's likely to have the most significant impact on the franchise.

The lone common complaint about this film is that some feel it drags a bit and is too long. Those who believe this, typically point to the poker scenes as the parts that could have been cut. I don't really agree with this argument, but if there was an area that I would edit, it would be the Bond/Vesper scenes that occur after the tortune scene. I understand their purpose to advance Vesper's storyline, but they brought the film more to a halt than the poker scenes in my opinion. But like I said, in general, I really don't think the movie drags in the least.

I really feel like I could go on and heap more praise on this one, but I don't think its necessary. With it being the most recent and also likely seen by most people who read this, it seems like I don't really need to go into great detail as to why this is a good movie. Most will agree that Craig has been the right choice to take over the franchise after delivering such a knockout debut performance. I think all Bond fans are anxious to see what he now does for an encore. 10/10

Lost sets its premiere plus casting news

From EW.com...

We don't know where the Island went -- but now know when we'll be seeing it again. ABC insiders say that the fifth season of the Emmy-nominated cypto-drama will premiere with a two-hour event on Jan. 21, 2009, at 8 p.m. That's a Wednesday, in case you don't know next year's calendar by heart, which means that Lost will be returning to its original day-of-the-week slot. (Last season, it aired on Thursday nights.)

While plans are still being finalized, sources indicate Lost will launch with its first two episodes aired back-to-back, not a single, two-hour opus like its season finales. (Should ABC reconsider the plan, look for the first hour of the two-hour event to be some kind of recap special.) Still TBD: if Lost will be making 8 p.m. its weekly Wednesday berth. An 8 p.m. start means the show will be competing against (gulp) Fox's American Idol. At 9 p.m., Lost will be tangling with Fox's new House-meets-The Mentalist procedural, Lie To Me, which will premiere the same night as Lost's return. When we get the regular time slot thing nailed down, we'll let you know. -- Additional reporting by Michael Ausiello and Lynette Rice

UPDATE: Look for Lost to make 9 p.m. its regular time slot, according to a source, albeit with the caveat that plans aren't 100 percent finalized.

NEW UPDATE: The Lost season five premiere will actually be a three hour event! An hour-long recap special will air at 8 PM, followed by the first two episodes from 9-11 PM. The series will air thereafter at 9 PM on Wednesdays.

And this comes from Yahoo news...

Reiko Aylesworth is in negotiations for a major recurring role on "Lost," which returns to ABC in early 2009.

She will play Amy, a smart and successful professional woman with a love for the outdoors who is looking for the right man. The actress played ill-fated federal agent Michelle Dessler on "24," recurred on NBC's "ER" last season.

This is all good news from my perspective. Let the countdown to January begin!

Customer Survey deleted scenes

Clip #4



Clip #3



Clip #2



Clip #1

RIP Michael Crichton

From CNN.com...

Michael Crichton, the best-selling author of Jurassic Park and creator of the TV series ER, has died at the age of 66, according to a statement from his public relations firm. The release said the author died unexpectedly after a "courageous and private battle against cancer."

Wow, that is sad and terrible news. I always loved his books and Jurassic Park was one of the first adult novels I read when I was growing up. It's a shame we'll won't get a chance to read another tale from this inventive and intelligent author.

Heroes bombshell

and I don't mean Sylar going nuclear like we saw a few weeks ago.

From Comingsoon.net:

Variety says there was a big shakeup behind the scenes of NBC's "Heroes" on Sunday as writers/co-executive producers Jesse Alexander and Jeph Loeb were fired.

The duo had been with the show since its first season and were known to have led the day-to-day production operation under the direction of creator/executive producer Tim Kring.

"Heroes," produced by Universal Media Studios, has struggled in the ratings its third season. It's understood that Alexander and Loeb were let go because of NBC executives' frustration with the creative direction of the show.

The trade added that the show is also said to have been dealing with hefty budget overruns this season that are going well beyond its already sizable $4 million per-episode pricetag.

I haven't really spoke on here this season about my thoughts on Heroes. But in general, I've felt the show's been wildly uneven. I think the best comparison would be to Vince Russo's writing tenure in the WWF(E). At the moment when you're watching the show, there's a lot going on and things are very exciting. But once you've been away from it for a few hours, you realize a lot of things don't make sense and are a narrative disaster. Characters don't act based on who they are, they act based on what the storyline needs them to do. In addition, everything is kept very superficial, so you never really learn anything about these character or get to care for them in anyway. I have really hated how they have casually killed off so many villain characters this season with no fanfare, yet continue to have too many heroes that nobody wants to see (coughMattParkmancough).

I'm not sure if this firing was warranted, but if it can help bring some focus to the show, I'm all for it. Of course, we won't see the effects of this move for a while as they have quite a few episodes already done that haven't aired yet. As for the two guys that were fired, I wouldn't shed a tear for them. Both are accomplished writers and will easily find other work. For now, we just need to hope this show is able to find its mojo and return it to season 1 greatness.

Howard's End

Here's more news from EW.com on why Terrance Howard won't be back as Col. Jim Rhodes in Iron Man 2:

When a summer blockbuster grosses more than $300 million, putting together a sequel is typically as simple as throwing buckets of money at your stars and signing a few pieces of paper. That hasn't been the case with Iron Man 2. It took months for Marvel Studios to lock in director Jon Favreau for the sequel. And reports that Don Cheadle will replace Terrence Howard as Col. Jim Rhodes — a supporting character who seemed poised for a big role in the follow-up after he muttered ''Next time, baby'' to Iron Man's steel suit — hint that IM2 isn't quite as infallible as the superhero at its center.

Hollywood insiders believe the exit stems from Terrence Howard's difficult behavior on the set of Iron Man. But those with intimate knowledge of the situation suggest a far more dramatic backstory: Howard was the first actor signed to the film and, on top of that, was the highest-paid. That's right: more than Gwyneth Paltrow. More than Jeff Bridges. More than Robert Downey Jr. And once the project fully came together, it was too late to renegotiate his deal. It didn't help that, according to one source, Favreau and his producers were ultimately unhappy with Howard's performance, and spent a lot of time cutting and reshooting his scenes. (Favreau could not be reached for comment, while Howard's publicist says: ''Terrence had a tremendous experience working on Iron Man.'')

As such, when Favreau and screenwriter Justin Theroux went to map out the sequel they found themselves minimizing Howard's story line. Once Marvel learned that Favreau was thinking of curtailing the role, the studio went to the actor's agents with a new and drastically reduced offer — a number that's similar to what supporting cast members were paid for the first movie. The agents, according to sources, were so taken aback by this new figure — estimated at somewhere between a 50 and 80 percent pay cut — that they questioned it. Why did they blanch? Multiple sources say that Marvel execs never told Howard's reps that they had issues with the star's on-set conduct. (Marvel would not comment for this story.)

It's unclear whether Howard's team walked away first, or if Marvel ended the discussion at that point. Either way, the studio moved quickly to secure Cheadle and the story leaked out the next morning, Oct. 14. And alas for Howard, there will be no next time.

Die Another Day (2002)

Plot: When his top-secret mission is sabotaged, James Bond (Pierce Brosnan) finds himself captured by the enemy, abandoned by MI6 and stripped of his 00-license. Determined to get revenge, Bond goes head-to-head with a sultry spy (Halle Berry), a frosty agent (Rosamund Pike) and a shadowy billionaire (Toby Stephens) whose business is diamonds...but whose secret is a diabolical weapon that could bring the world to its knees!

Firsts: Bullet coming at you in gun barrel sequence, story being told during opening credit sequence, singer of Bond theme having a role in the film

Gadgets: Surfboard with stowaway weapons, wristwatches with lasers and detonation devices, fully loaded Aston Martin with invisibility, ring with sonic agitation

Girls Bond slept with: Jinx and Miranda Frost

Elaborate murder attempt that Bond escapes: Chased by a laser harnessing the sun's power

Personal review: This is a very polarizing film, which may be appropriate given the large role ice plays in the film. Get it, polar, ice. Oh never mind. Anyways, in what would turn out to be Brosnan's last film as 007, there is a lot to like about this entry, but also a lot cringe-worthy aspects as well.

I really dug the opening sequence and the concept of Bond getting caught and tortured. It made the character a bit more falliable without ruining his credibility or reputation. Associated with that, even though it was far-fetched, the whole gene therapy to give the primary villain a true extreme makeover worked for me. It was just over-the-top to work in the Bond universe, plus it provided an added level of animosity between Bond and Moon/Graves that typically isn't found in these films. All of the scenes in Cuba were fun and did a nice job of calling back to older Bond films. Finally, Graves' ice palace was a great addition in the pantheon of classic Bond villain lairs.

In general, this is another action-packed adventure that is enjoyable to watch. However, as I said there are a few things that really drop the film a few notches. First off, I cannot stand the Jinx character. There was no reason to try and create a female Bond. The one-liners and bad-assery just don't work coming from Berry. It may be misogynist of me, but the Bond girls should remain eye candy and as damsels in distress to me. Unless, they're a villainous Bond girl, like Rosamund Pike's Miranda Frost, who I thought was awesome in this film. Sexy and evil in one little package. But back to Jinx, for a second; as sad as I was to see Brosnan leave before I thought he was done as Bond, if it meant putting the kibosh on the rumored Jinx spin-off movies, then I'm glad he chose to hang it up.

Now I mentioned before about the gene therapy being a bit over-the-top, but it's nothing compared to some of the gadgets and stunts in this film. First, there's the invisible car. Now I'm not as critical as some are of it, but it is pretty ridiculous. Still, I can only imagine how people in the 60s reacted to Bond's ejector seat car in Goldfinger. So maybe we shouldn't be too critical of that. The worse offender though is the chase scene with the Icarus laser that ends with Bond turning a jet car into a parasail. Bond has done some extreme stunts before, but this one was not only over-the-top but also looked really bad from a visual standpoint. Take for instance, the scene in Goldeneye where leaps off the cliff and somehow freefalls into the plane. Completely ridiculous, but it was filmed in a way to make it look like it actually happened. Compared to this parasailing scene which looks completely computer generated and phony.

Speaking of the look of the film, I was not fond of Lee Tamohori's direction as all. It seemed like he tried to infuse a Matrix-style of filmmaking into this movie and it just didn't work at all. Shots like the one with Zao (who by the way looked awesome with his 'world's most expensive acne') flipping his jacket in slow-motion as he prepares to torture Jinx was just silly and unnecessary.

In the end, this film really tried to merge old-school Bond with modern filmmaking and it ended up clashing instead of coming together harmoniously. There is enough fun and action in here to not call this a bad Bond film, but there are too many unlikeable aspects in it to consider it one of the best entries either. This one isn't as insulting as The World is Not Enough, but falls below Brosnan first two attempts. 7.5/10

First look at Tom Hanks' second try at Robert Langdon

Here's a look at the first teaser trailer for next May's Angels & Demons (the prequel to The Da Vinci Code; although the film may treat it more like a sequel):

I'm tired of the waiting game...let's play Hungry Hungry Hippos!

So my first round of job applications went out a few weeks ago and now all of my reference letters have been sent as well. At this point, the ball is in their court now as I nervously await to hear back from them. It's been a long time since I've had to do the whole job application scene, so it's been a stressful time, but I'm now excited about all of my prospects. If you haven't heard, here are the seven schools that I've applied at:

Hiram College (in Ohio)
Muhlenberg College (in Pennsylvania)
University of Wisconsin-Whitewater
The Catholic University of America (in Washington D.C.)
University of Puget Sound (in Washington state)
Colorado State University
DePaul university

I'll hopefully be meeting with representatives from all of these schools when I attend the NCA conference in San Diego in a few weeks. As soon as I hear more from any of these schools I'll be sure to share it with you here.

Employee Transfer deleted scenes

Clip #3



Clip #2



Clip #1:

NMR: Word Wars

This is another documentary along the lines of Spellbound, which focuses on people involved in a hobby competition. In this case, it's a film about four people competing in the National Scabble competition. These film are an easy thumbs up for. I love seeing these little slices of life and the passion displayed by the people involved. This one isn't quite as good as other similar documentaries though for a couple of reasons. 1) The narrative isn't as strong in this film. While it primarily focuses on these four guys' quest to be Scrabble champ, the film frequently takes these diversions that produce interesting information, but take away from the film's main concept. 2) Related to this, there really isn't a clear cut hero or villain amongst the profiled players. These guys each have winning and unlikeable characteristics about them. Still, if you're like me and you enjoy these types of films, you should definitely give this one a look. Rating: ****

It's better than nothing

I'd rather having the new Harry Potter film opening this Nov. like it was supposed to, but since it's been pushed back until next July, this new trailer will have to tide us over in the meantime.

The World is Not Enough (1999)

Plot: When the suave Agent 007 (Pierce Brosnan) is assigned to protect a beautiful oil heiress (Sophie Marceau), he is catapulted into a passionate, adenaline-charged adventure that pits him against one of his most deadly adversaries: Renard (Robert Carlyle), a ruthless anarchist whose total imperviousness to pain makes him a virtual unstoppable enemy. The unrelenting suspense, breathtaking action and sly wit never let up in this explosively entertaining thriller.

Firsts: Appearance of R, main villain is a female

Gadgets: Fully loaded BMW, eyeglasses with detonation device, amphibious jet boat, jacket with inflatable shield, x-ray sunglasses, credit card with lock pick, wristwatch with grappling hook

Girls Bond slept with: MI6 doctor, Elektra King, and Christmas Jones

Elaborate murder attempt that Bond escapes: Chased by helicopters with logging saws, trapped in an ancient torture chair

Personal review: We're getting close to the end now folks. In Brosnan's third outing as 007, things unfortunately take a turn for the worse. After a fun adventure in Tomorrow Never Dies, this one is a muddled mess.

It didn't appear that way initially. The pre-credit sequence involving the money pickup and the jet boat chase is just phenomenal. It also harkened back to the old Bond movies involving the typical scene of flirting with Moneypenny before entering M's office. This was just classic Bond all around.

But then once we get into the main plot, the excitement dies down. There are certainly plenty of good action sequences like the ski chase sequence and the scenes involving Bond being attacked by the logging helicopters. However, all of the business with oil and plutonium was too confusing and uninteresting.

The film's greatest weakness is the two female leads. There's no sense going on in detail about how ridiculous it was to have Denise Richards playing a nuclear scientist named Christmas Jones. There have been less likeable Bond girls than her, but she probably was the worst actress to play a Bond girl. Then you have Sophie Marceau as Elektra King. I give them credit for finally having a female lead villain, but she just doesn't pull it off very well. She had the sexuality needed for a Bond girl, but there wasn't enough of a mean streak shown by her to make her a worthy villain.

The weakness of Marceau's Elektra is only emphasized by the hokey Renard. The whole bullet lodged in the brain preventing him from feeling anything would work for a Bond henchman, but he's meant to be the co-main villain. He just doesn't have enough gravitas for his standing within the film. Two weak co-villains do not equal one good villain.

Thank goodness for the return of Robbie Coltrane as Zukovsky. He provides some decent comic relief; emphasis of relief. His scenes are a welcome break for the rest of the film's inanity. As an aside, I also loved his cane that doubled as a rifle. That's pretty badass.

And since there isn't a whole lot of positive things to say about the movie as a whole, let me take the opportunity to say how nice it was to see Q get a proper send off. They had no way of knowing Desmond Llewelyn would die in a car accident before the next Bond film, so they were fortunate enough to include a wonderful scene that would ultimately be his final moment as the classic Q. The character had become synonymous with this franchise and Llewelyn's portrayal of the character is a main reason for that. I'll be curious to see if the character ever reemerges and in what capacity now that the Daniel Craig era has begun.

In the end, this was in my opinion, the worst film from the Brosnan era. But let's face it, they can't all be winners. Sometimes you need a dud in order to truly appreciate the good ones. 6.5/10

Crime Aid deleted scenes

Clip #3



Clip #2



Clip #1

Fist of Furry

I actually saw Kung Fu Panda last week, but have been so busy, I'm just now getting to the review. If it's a little shorter than most of my reviews, it's because the film isn't as fresh in my head.

When it comes to computer animated films, unless it's a Pixar film, I tend not to rush out and see them. Coming from anywhere but Disney, computer animated films vary greatly in their quality. You can have something real clever and fun like Monster House or something that is an insult even to children like Shark Tale. So I usually take a wait and see attitude when it comes to this genre.

For Kung Fu Panda, nothing immediately jumped out at me from the trailers that made me think this was going to be anything special. However, once positive reviews started rolling in and it started raking in some decent money at the box office, I decided to give it a try and I'm glad I did.

This is the first computer animated film that I felt rivaled the quality of Pixar films. Now there have certainly been other films, particularly from Dreamworks animation, that have looked as good or been as successful as the Pixar films, but that's not what I'm talking about. What I mean, is that for the first time, I saw a computer animated films produced outside of Disney where it was apparent that they worked hard to make a quality film and not simply a cash cow. Films like Shrek or Bee Movie rely on big stars and trendy jokes to draw in audiences. Kung Fu Panda is more concerned about story and character development.

Now does Kung Fu Panda have a large celebrity voice cast? Sure. But unlike in Bee Movie where it was just Seinfeld doing his schtick as a bee, the voice actors in this film really try to embrace their characters and make you care about them and not the voice behind them.

The cast is lead by Jack Black as Po, a panda who dreams of being a karate master and by a fluke accident is chosen to become the leader of a bunch of karate fighters. The rest of the cast includes Dustin Hoffman as Shifu, the karate sensi put in charge of teaching Po karate. Some of Shifu's other animal students are voiced by Angelina Jolie, Seth Rogen, Jackie Chan, David Cross, and Lucy Liu. These characters are part of a group known as the Furious Five. They all add something to the film, but I actually would have like more scenes with them. However, given their pedigree, they may not have been necessarily available to do more dialogue.

That's fine because Black and Hoffman really shine in their portrayals of Po and Shifu. You understand Shifu's frustration over having to teach someone who is seemingly ill-equipped to become a karate master. And you really root for Po to succeed. His poor physique is offset by his fanboy love of karate. You believe that this is his dream and thus you hope he'll achieve it, even if convention says he can't

In addition to the top-notch performances, the animation here is superb. The fighting sequences really look amazing and are extremely detailed. The animators have to be given additional credit for giving the film the look of classic martial arts movies. They do this stop-action animation that looks really neat and also plays for some good laughs. The quality of the animation just adds to that sophistication that is typically only found in the Pixar films as I mentioned before.

This is not an overly hilarious movie, but most of the jokes work. Often with these films there are either a lot of bad jokes or jokes that only a 5 year old would enjoy. I felt this film did a nice job of keeping those embarassing jokes to a minimum. They had just the right balance of physical humor and jokes of a verbal nature. I didn't find myself laughing a lot, but there was a perpetual smile on my face.

About the only weakness I found in the film was the rewatchability factor. As enjoyable as this was, I would be content if I never saw it again. I'm sure that's not true for everyone. I'm sure kids will play it ad naseum once it comes out on DVD. However, for adults one viewing is sufficent. You appreciate it for what it's worth, but then look for something with a little bit more substance afterwards.

Given how impressed I was with Kung Fu Panda's quality, I am dismayed by the news that a sequel is already in development. I know it's only natural when a film does as well as this one has to go forward with a sequel. But I feel that a second story can do nothing but tarnish the goodwill built up by this film. This film had a stand-alone story and we don't necessarily need to know more about these characters. Pixar has only attempted one sequel, but it just happened to be one of their best efforts. So here's hoping that if Kung Fu Panda 2 does happen, they can rise to the challenge and make another great film. For now, I would recommend you check this out once it comes out on DVD and see for yourself how it's possible for other studios to make a great animated film for both kids and adults, just like Pixar has done for the past 13 years. Grade: B+

It's time to go back. But where? And when?

The first promo for season 5 of Lost. A little over two months to go...

NMR: Catch up edition

With Netflix's increased library of online movies, I've been catching up on a lot of movies that I had never seen before.

Vacancy: A fairly run-of-the-mill horror thriller that gets an upgrade thanks to it's somewhat high profile cast. I'm not sure what Luke Wilson and Kate Beckinsale are doing in a film like this, but it sure improved its watchability. The premise isn't revolutionary; estranged couple trapped in a creepy motel. However, it has enough decent thrills to make it entertaining. Be forewarned, as with most horror movies, the characters are pretty stupid to allow all the terrible things to happen to them. In reality, most people probably would have escaped and/or avoided this situation a lot sooner than the people in the film do. So if you like to think or analyze character motivation, this may not be the film for you. Rating: ***

Spellbound: This is a documentary from 2002 on the National Spelling Bee; an event which has for whatever reason risen in popularity over the past few years. The director does a great job of chronicling 8 different kids in their quest to be champion. I thought it was a glaring omission though not to have a home schooled kid represented in the film considering they always seem to do well in these events. I've certainly seen a lot of the Bees and always find them interesting, but I was glad I didn't know who had won this particular one as it made it more engrossing to see which of the kids profiled would emerge victorious. It was a nice bonus to see a portion of the film to then Bee moderator, Dr. Alex Cameron, who I had as a professor at the University of Dayton. Dr. Cameron passed away a few years ago and I always regret not knowing when I had him as an instructor that he was the Bee moderator because I would have loved to talked to him about it. Overall, the film is really well done and if you have any sort of interest in this subject, I would recommend you see this film. Rating: *****

The Ice Harvest: This was a noir comedy that was largely ignored by audiences when it came out a couple of years ago. Directed by Harold Ramis, it stars John Cusack and Billy Bob Thorton as a couple of crooks who try to steal money from the main mob boss in Topeka, KA. As usual, everything goes wrong and there are a number of double-crosses along the way. The cast here is particularly good, but the film kind of meanders and doesn't do enough to draw you in. A lot of the beats seem familiar and there are a number of scenes that could have been eliminated; which isn't good when your film is only 89 minutes to begin with. Unless you're a big fan of the film's leads, you can probably skip this one. Rating: **

Harland Williams: What a Treat: I typically don't bother with stand-up films unless I really love the comic. In this case, I had never seen Harland's stand-up before but he was always such a great and hilarious guest on Conan O'Brien that I figured it was worth a luck. Unfortunately, it wasn't the same thing. I think a lot of Harland's worth is having someone to play off of. His humor is bizarre and off-the-wall, so watching someone like Conan bewildered about what he's discussing adds to the comedy. In his special, however, the jokes don't work as well. In addition, he uses a lot more colorful language, which can be effective with the right jokes, but seemed unnecessary here. Maybe I just wasn't in the right mood that day, but I didn't find a whole lot of it to be funny. What a Treat? More like What a Shame. Rating: **

Walk Hard: The Dewey Cox story: I ended up avoiding this one in theaters, even though it had a lot of promise. Judd Apatow co-wrote the script and it features a lot of actors typically found in his movies. However, I've just never been fond of John C. Reilly as an actor and the trailers just didn't offer enough humor to entice me to check it out. But since it was available online at Netflix, I decided to give it a look and I'm glad. This is a very sharp and funny look at the musical biopic, which has become popular recently with films like Ray and Walk the Line. It nails all of the cliches that are typically found in these movies. There are also a number of songs, which are all very clever and yet catchy too. Perhaps what is most remarkable about the film is that it still comes off a bit inspirational. Yes, they are mocking the genre. Yes, it's about a fictional character. But they really explore the character and make the audience actualy invested in how it plays out. Even if this genre isn't to your liking, there are enough fun cameos sprinkled throughout the movie to keep you entertained. This is a solid movie that probably deserved more viewers than it had in theaters. Rating: ****

Britney's new music video!!

Call me crazy, but I think this one is going to be HUGE!

Tomorrow Never Dies (1997)

Plot: A deranged media mogul is staging international incidents to pit the world's superpowers against each other. Now 007 (Pierce Brosnan) must take on this evil mastermind in an adrenaline-charged battle to end his reign of terror and prevent global pandemonium!

Firsts: Bond working with a female Chinese agent. I know it's a stretch, but there's isn't much to work with here.

Gadgets: Fully loaded BMW, multi-function cell phone including remote control to the BMW, cigarette lighter explosive, and wristwatch with detonation device

Girls Bond slept with: Danish professor, Paris Carver, and Wai Lin

Elaborate murder attempt that Bond escapes: Left at the mercy of Stamper and his Chakra torture devices

Personal review: It may not be a popular opinion, but I really love this entry and it's my favorite of the Bond franchise. I think a lot of it has to do with the fact that I study the mass media, which plays such a large role in this film.

Having a media mogul as the primary villain of the film was inspired. It felt current and to a certain degree realistic. It helps that Jonathan Pryce does a fantastic job as Elliot Carver. He has moments of pure madness, but then he also exhibits some levity by trading one-liners with Bond and his karate mockery after capturing Wai Lin.

And it always helps when the main villain surrounds himself with good help. Carver's got a decent group of henchmen. Some are good because they've got great names to yell out; Stamper! Gupta! And others like Dr. Kaufman are just plain creepy and evil.

Even though this was only his second attempt, Pierce seemed pretty comfortable in the role and continued to play it right. As for the rest of the returning cast, I liked that they made an effort to make M more likeable by having her spar with Admiral Roebuck; in fact, I thought that aspect of the story could have been developed more. Samantha Bond also really began to shine as a Moneypenny who was still smitten with 007 but wasn't afraid to call him on his BS either.

The action scenes, as usual are top-notch. I particularly like the plunge down the banner and the motorcycle scene. The remote control car scene is fun, but gets a bit ridiculous. The final shootout upon the stealth boat, seems very reminiscent of some previous Bond climaxes, which is a good thing.

Now let's talk about a few weaknesses. I've got mixed feelings on Michelle Yeoh as Wai Lin. Her actions scenes are fantastic and provide a new dynamic to the 'Bond girl'. However, she's had next to no chemistry with Brosnan. I would have liked it if she had just remained a colleague and/or was killed off so that there would have been room for another girl to ride off into the sunset with Bond.

The other disappointment is Sheryl Crow's theme which is dull and lifeless. The song over the closing credits is even better than that one. I'm not quite what happened there, but it certainly didn't do its job in setting the mood of the film.

Overall, most will find this to be an average outing, but I have a strong connection with this one. It's a fun ride and firmly established Brosnan as the right guy to be playing 007 at that time. 8.5/10

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