Halloween 2: A Rotten Apple Full of Razor Blades

In the twenty plus years of seeing films at the theater I have NEVER walked out of a movie. I have given it serious consideration a few times: Book of Shadows Blair Witch 2, A Guy Thing, Down to Earth, and Ballistic Ecks vs. Sever all come to mind. Well now it seems that I can add Rob Zombie's Halloween 2 to this short list. To give this film a proper synopsis would suggest that there is something in it resembling coherency, so I will not be doing that. One might ask: Why did you even bother to see it? Call it a bad decision mingled with a desire to battle intense boredom. Cleaning up houses pelted with rotten eggs and wet TP would have been more entertaining. The murders are sadistic, brutal, and never-ending much like the film itself. To wrap this one up early I'll just call it the worst film I've seen this year... so far. F

John's Missed Masterpieces

My "missed" list will be deeper and longer than Allen's or Nilay's, I'm quite sure:

- My Biggest Movie Heresy: I've never actually seen the Godfather or Godfather Part II all the way through. I'm sure that I've seen a majority of both movies, but I've never actually sat through either from beginning to end.

- Cool Hand Luke, The Sting, Butch Cassidy & The Sundance Kid, The Hustler. . . I think I see a pattern.

- Anything by Kurosawa. I will go commit seppuku now.

- Lawrence of Arabia, Out of Africa. Too "sweeping" and "epic" for me, I think.

- The Piano. The Pianist. I did see Shine, though.

- Life is Beautiful -- I just can't do it. I've already seen Schindler's List and Son of the Pink Panther -- isn't that enough?

- Satyricon, and basically anything by Fellini -- it's just so . . . indulgent.

- Army of Darkness and all the other Raimi/Campbell collaborations. (I'm bracing for attack!)

- I'm really embarrassed about not seeing: The Deer Hunter, Midnight Cowboy, MASH

- I'm not embarrassed about not seeing: Rocky (1 through 5000); Rambo (First Blood through 5000)

Couple quickies

Saw a few of these over the past few weeks (some on the plane to and from Italy, and one last week).

1) The Soloist: Downey, Jr., plays a writer who meets a schizophrenic classical musician. He helps to get him back on track. The characters are fairly honest and the bleak view of the streets is, sadly, realistic. Still, it has a sense of the Cliffnotes version of the events. Plus, the makers try to make a story out of the editor (Keener), the writer's ex-wife who is jealous that the writer seems to care more about the musician than he did about their marriage. Totally fictional, totally useless.
If you dare, find the podcast from the NPR show Fresh Air. The real Steve Lopez talks about their entire relationship and it's actually a great 60 minutes of listening (a little less, actually, but seems a much fuller story than the movie).
Kudos to Downey, Jr., and Foxx. B+

2) X-Men Origins: Wolverine: It's an action flick. Don't expect much more than that. Jackman does a fine job as Wolverine (though they've given up trying to make him look short). Schrieber is like Laurence Olivier playing Frankenstein's Monster - almost too much "talent" for the job, but still he does fine. The Scott Summers storyline is a waste of effort but doesn't detract. Taylor Kitsch's Gambit may be the weakest part, but even he's OK.

To critics: This is not high cinema. There are no lofty goals. You've been ruined by Spider-Man 2; that was a great flick, but it's the exception, not the rule.

For what it is, entertaining, but not a buy. B/B-.

3) Julie and Julia: Allen's summary is fine. You like Julia Child and her story; Streep and Tucci pull that story off perfectly. As much as I like Amy Adams, I just didn't care about Julie. She's an almost-failed writer who gets too self-centered about her cooking blog. When her husband blows up at her, most of us felt he was entirely justified. Just hard to care about her.
To come to Child's defense, in real-life, when asked about the Julie/Julia Project, privately said simply that Julie must not be much of a cook if she was having difficulties with her recipes, and publicly had basically no comment. She didn't hate her. She simply didn't really care much about her - given Child was 91 at the time, can't really blame her.

I digress. The movie is entertaining enough, and the food is funny to watch. Most of the other characters in New York (Julie's world) are vapid at worst and extraneous at best, but you're willing to put up with it to see the rest of Julia's story. Rental, maybe a matinee. B, plus extra points for going with the wife.

Sins of a Moviegoer

Bless me movie-fathers (in this case, I largely mean Gene Siskel, RIP), for I have sinned:

1) I, too, am a fan of Nic Cage (he's not infallible, but he's not evil either).
2) I believe you can like anime and sci-fi and not be ostracized as an outfit-wearing, detail-obsessed geek.
3) I liked all the Alien movies, including Resurrection.
4) I liked all the Matrix movies, including Revolutions.
5) I have never seen Gone with the Wind.
6) I don't like musicals (Hedwig and the Angry Inch is a rock opera and deserving of praise; Grease is a cinematic sin).
7) I don't like John Travolta. Even when he does respectable work (once a decade, on average), I still don't like him.
8) Ditto on Zooey Deschanel.
9) The Simpsons jumped the shark about a decade ago.
10) I liked Planet Terror more than Death-Proof.
11) Jay Leno is not funny on TV. He certainly isn't new comedy.
12) Jimmy Fallon isn't funny. I hope he isn't the new comedy.
13) CD's are better than MP3's, still. Mainly for liner notes/artwork. Film is better than video or even digital film.


That's enough for now.

Cinema Allen Skipped

I watch a lot of movies, some might say way too many. People ask me all the time: "Is there any movie you haven't seen?" That actually got me thinking how many movies (notable/popular/classics) have I neglected to see? I thought the list might be longer, but I know there are a few here that may shock film devotees like myself. In a lame attempt at self redemption I've tried to explain myself, but in the end this might inspire me to finally see what everyone else already has.

Something 'Wilder'

• The Apartment
• Witness for the Prosecution
• Some Like It Hot

There honestly is no real excuse for this because I adore Billy Wilder. Sunset Blvd. and Stalag 17 are classics and two of my all time favorites. Might have to hit up the video store this weekend.

Kubrick Classics

• Dr. Strangelove: Because I love Fail Safe too much to see a parody of it.
• Spartacus: I've already forked over twenty five bucks to own it, now I just have to devote three hours to watch it.

Missed Musicals

• The Sound of Music
• Saturday Night Fever
• West Side Story

I love musicals about homicidal barbers, red windmills, and man-eating plants. But nuns & Nazis, disco dancing, and Romeo + Juliet immigrants. No thanks.

Part Porn

• The Last Tango in Paris
• Breaking the Waves
• The Piano

Sometimes celebrity skin soft-core stuff does not sound like a good idea.

Zzzzzzzzzz

• 8 1/2
• Gosford Park

I've tried watching them on several occasions, but always manage to fall asleep in the middle. Guess it just wasn't meant to be.

Skipped For a Single Scene

• Five Easy Pieces: Saw the impressive 'diner' scene. Was told to pass on the rest.
• The Crying Game: I know how it ends and don't care to see how it begins.

Weepies

• Terms of Endearment
• Dead Man Walking
• The Straight Story

I feel if I see these and end up crying over them, it might make me less of a man. Plus on Straight Story I'm terrified to see a Lynch movie that actually makes sense.

Time and a Place

• Adventures in Babysitting
• Labyrinth

Growing up in the eighties I was all about the Goonies and Gremlins while these two managed to pass me by. I was twenty before I saw Howard the Duck and when I did I vowed to never watch eighties kids movies that I didn't see in the eighties when I was a kid.

I'm sure there are others (I've seen a lot of movies, but not everything), but looking at numerous best lists some of these popped up multiple times. Be sure to let me know if a pass was the right call or if I'm missing out.

Note: Gone With the Wind and Dirty Dancing came in just under the wire. They both jumped form one list to another. GWTW is one one of the best movies I've seen. DD is one of the worst.

John's Film Contrarianism

Like Allen, I too have unpopular opinions. Here are some of them:

- I absolutely hated Almost Famous. And I hate pretty much everything that Cameron Crowe and Amy Heckerling ever did. That's right, even Fast Times. These people write characters so one-dimensional and with such odd mid-film personality changes, that sometimes I wonder if they've ever met any real people.

- I'm a fan of Nicolas Cage.

- I really don't like everybody's favorite indy chick, the "it" girl of the moment, Zooey Deschanel. She is getting close to becoming Catherine Keener Jr. for me.

- I didn't really think Armageddon was that bad.

- I like Coen Bros. films, but I hated the ending of No Country for Old Men and I hated the entirety of Burn After Reading. Sorry, I usually like movies to have some resolution and to be about something.

- I think Ratatouille and The Incredibles were better than WALL-E and Up.

- I don't enjoy Neil Gaiman film adaptations. They're just so awful. Like turds with glitter on them. Maybe I just don't like fantasy in general. See my reviews for Coraline and Stardust.

- I kind of like Matthew McConaughey.

- I thought Pineapple Express was offensively unfunny. In fact, Danny McBride stopped being funny to me about an hour after I saw Hot Rod.

- I have appreciated pretty much everything that Woody Allen and David Mamet ever did.

- I think The Simpsons is overrated. I don't dislike it, I just think everybody else likes it too much.

- I actually enjoyed two of the most reviled movies of all time, Hudson Hawk and Ishtar. I can't say that they're high-quality films, but if I had a choice between watching them and say, The English Patient, I'd take them.

- This is probably my most unpopular opinion: I watched parts of Pan's Labyrinth in my periphery while Bree was watching it. I didn't like anything I saw, and I didn't think it was especially clever. Because it was really just about fascist brutality, and I think it is a cop-out to pretend a nihilistic war film is something it's not because it's got Henson-Gilliamesque monsters and fantasy that takes place in some little girl's mind. Not to mention that the imaginary sequences didn't even make any sense and were totally irrelevant to what was going on in real life. Maybe I need to rewatch it, but based on what I saw, I don't think I could manage it.

I'm sure I have more and possibly even more unpopular opinions than these, so I will update in the comments. Thanks for tolerating me!

Adventureland (DVD): A Love Roller Coaster That Won't Make You Vomit

Two years ago director Gregg Mottola made a huge splash with Superbad. The raunchy and hilarious story of three high school students on the verge of graduation, and their lone night of chasing booze and the possibility of sex. His follow-up Adventureland may lack the lowbrow gags, but manages to score major points by being both perfectly nostalgic and undeniably heartfelt.

Jesse Eisenberg stars as James. He is about to go off to college only to discover that his parents can't afford it, and a summer job on his part is required. After exhausting all of his options, James takes a job at the one hiring gig in town. A Low-rent and shabby theme park called Adventureland. The customers look as though they have stumbled out of their trailers (James is nearly stabbed over a "big ass panda"), the pay sucks, and there are several romantic entanglements and complications.

In fact, the relationship drama is where the heart of Adventureland lies. James becomes smitten rather quickly with Em (Kristen Stewart), who seems to slightly share his feelings of attraction. Naturally there is a problem. Em is already secretly sleeping with the theme park's older, not to mention married, repairman Mike (Ryan Reynolds). James also becomes slightly distracted by Lisa P (Margarita Levieva). The local girl who has most likely been ridden more often than the ferris wheel.

The performances are much better than one might expect given this cast. Eisenberg is excellent as the nerd you desperately want to see get the girl. He has such a believable quality of being a brainy and awkward dork you just can't help but back the guy. Stewart is also quite good as the conflicted heroine. It really is a shame her biggest claim to fame is with the Twilight series. To me, it is the only bad role she's done. Her work here along with Panic Room, Into the Wild, and even Zathura is exceptional. Reynolds even managed to sneak up and surprise me. If (like me) you expect him to play the jock ready to fight Eisenberg for the affections of Stewart, you would be wrong. In an inspired move Eisenberg and Reynolds begin as friends and confidants, and even kind of remain so during the whole ordeal. There never is any malice between the two characters. It was decisions like this that make Adventureland stand high above most other films of this genre.

I must also mention the film is set in 1987. There are plenty of perfectly placed subtle references to the decade without being overly obvious about it. In fact the only time it does go too far ended up being one of my favorite moments. The gang goes to a night club called Razzmatazz, where the collars are popped, pink spandex clings to thighs, and Expose's "Point of No Return" blares out of the speakers. It honestly felt great to be drowning in this sea of nostalgia.

Speaking of the music (all 80's of course) there are a few scenes worth mentioning that were magical simply because of the moment, and the perfect song accompanying it. The fireworks moment sparks when set to Crowded House's "Don't Dream it's Over" and The bumper cars montage scored to The Cure's "Just Like Heaven" is lovely. It is four months later, and the soundtrack is still playing in my car.

With the recent passing of John Hughes my recommendation and love for this film has gone even higher. Like m any of his films this one presents teens as smart, likable, and confused people looking for love in a difficult world. Although Hughes had nothing to do with this film, his presence is felt all over it. I'm sure he would have been proud to call it one of his own. A-

Bonus: Bill Hader and Kristen Wiig steal many a scene as the cooky husband and wife team owners of the park.

Putting Out the Fire With Gasoline

Now I know I can't seem to shut up about this, but standing alone on Inglourious Basterds got me thinking of other instances of being the lone voice of opinion in both positive and negative ways. So as painful as this might be to some (myself included when/if I get responses), I decided to give a few other examples of previous stand alone recommendation.

• Wayne Kramer's The Cooler is far superior vegas film to Martin Scorsese's Casino. Casino is nothing more than a Goodfellas (best mafia movie ever) clone moved out to sin city. The Cooler has characters you actually care about.
• When it comes to zombie attacks spanning a duration of time equal to that of 28. I will take Weeks over Days any day of the week.
• Virginia Madsen was robbed best supporting actress for Sideways. Instead they gave it to an actress playing an actress who had already won four times before. I call shenanigans.
• M. Night has not lost it. Granted The Village, Lady in the Water, and The Happening are nowhere near great films, but they do not deserve the venom they received. I respect that the guy at least tried to do something different.
• Terrance Malick and Roman Polanski films for the most part bore me to tears.
• The car chase in Bullitt is hardly the best ever. The only reason people believe it is, is because it's McQueen behind the wheel.
• The Onion Field and The Constant Gardener are two of the most overrated films I've ever seen because of their bleakness, but Arlington Road and The Mist are two of the most underrated for the exact same reason.

Blasphemous isn't it?, but the gloves just had to come off. Let me know where you stand.

Note: I thought of mentioning how much I admire AI: Artificial Intelligence, but thought that might get me kicked off this blog. Who knows, the M. Night comment might do just that anyway.

Basterds: Glourious

What I am about to say may shock you: Inglourious Basterds may be Tarantino's best film yet. He takes a REALLY well-worn topic -- WWII -- and creates a wholly original, completely suspenseful creature that plays with history, genre archetypes, and dramatic tension in a way that marks his complete maturation as a director. The plot is simple -- two unrelated contingents seek to achieve a single goal, both facing considerable obstacles and a shared villain. Tarantino doesn't need stars or gimmicks -- he succeeds with a cast full of no names (the biggest name, Brad Pitt, is probably also the weakest link) and produces no outlandish "bring out the gimp" moments (though there is plenty of violence). Rather, the film is a construct of build-up and pay-out, stocked with more refined characters than you're used to in Tarantino's films, and with a focus on tonality rather than parody. Novelty, precision, and art: That's what Basterds brings to the table.

You may have read some negative or mixed reviews. The problem with critics is that when a movie is Tarantino's they either want it to be "a Tarantino movie," which they have defined in a certain way, or they don't like "Tarantino movies," and so won't like it no matter what it is. Meanwhile, unsophisticated fans may expect to see pure genre parody, such as the kung-fu and spaghetti western pastiche in Kill Bill (Note how such fans weren't pleased with Death Proof because it exceeded those constraints). However, if you want a director who merely alters a template built from other artists and speckles it with profanity and "Royale with Cheese" dialogue, I don't think Quentin's your guy anymore, or that he ever was in the first place.

Instead, perhaps, our love affair with QT was never about the dialogue, but about the characters and the moments between them. This movie has no shortage of interesting characters: the loquacious Hans Landa, performed playfully, but with edge, by Cristoph Waltz; Melanie Laurent's steely Shoshanna, a tragic figure, successor to Beatrix Kiddo as the next in the long line of powerful Tarantino heroines; the reticent German Nazi-killer Hugo Stiglitz; the colorful Brit Lt. Archie Hicox; Diane Kruger's out-of-her-element double-agent actress; even the cartoony "Brad Pitt and Eli Roth Show" was enjoyable in small hiccups. And the moments between them are all about the confluence of conflict, danger and humor. It's not the one-liners we love, but those dramatic moments: Mia and Vincent, Butch and Marcellus, Jules and Ringo, Bill and Beatrix, Mr. White and Mr. Pink -- they're more than fluff, and that's why QT is a great director.

In summary, this is not your father's Tarantino movie -- yes, that's true. But if you love movies and you value originality, I can't see how you won't be as blown away as I was. See it.

Now, if that's not enough to persuade you, I am going to rebut Allen's negative review point-by-point, numbered and in italics:

1. 'slow-boil bore.' Every single scene in this movie carries a momentum within the dialogue which could lead to the death of the characters who are speaking. Every word, every mannerism, is substantial enough to transform the talk into action. That, my friends, is the very definition of suspense. So much so, that I dealt with a nagging nervous bowel from the very beginning of the movie to its very end. So much so, that when I knew the climax was fast approaching, I thought to myself: "No! Not yet! It can't be the end yet!" I actually wanted more out of a two and half hour movie, which may be a first.

2. 'a talker.' Yes, this movie is about conversations and interrogations, about hiding information and trying to ascertain information. I concede the point that this movie has a lot of dialogue, and that almost none of it has to do with cheeseburgers. But, as I said above, every word is precious. I can say with all confidence that this is not the movie for you if you think G.I. Joe and Transformers contain an appropriate balance between meaningful dialogue and meaningful action to keep you interested. For me, nervous words, facial expressions, expectations and reactions are the aspects of filmed human interaction that keep me interested: it's the difference between The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly and Wild Wild West. Plus, in addition to being a "talker," it's mostly in French and German (which I liked), so if you can't stand a movie with subtitles, I guess you'll have to wait for the dubbed version. Personally, I hate it when movies that should be in different languages settle for accents, or worse, everyone sounding vaguely British. It's a cop-out.

3. 'Basterds are a no show.' You might feel gypped by the trailer because you thought it would be a parody of The Dirty Dozen. But Allen is plainly incorrect to assert that the Basterds are 'supporting.' As I explained before, there are two equal storylines that connect with a single climax. These are the chapters: (1) a Shoshanna exposition, (2) a Basterds exposition, (3) Shoshanna's plan and its obstacles, (4) The Basterds' plan and its obstacles, and (5) then the climax, which joins the two plots. The first chapter is all Waltz's, the second Pitt's, the third Laurent's, the fourth Fassbender's and Kruger's, and the last belongs to all those who are still standing.

4. 'not nearly enough action.' Not nearly enough action, as compared to what? Was there more action in Die Hard, one of the greatest action movies of all time? I don't know: I remember maybe three set pieces in Die Hard -- the rocket-launcher bit, the broken glass bit, and the climax. But you know what the best part of Die Hard is? The part where Hans Gruber pretends to be American and has a conversation with John McClain.

That being said, there are no less than four violent climaxes in this movie and the body count is in the hundreds. Maybe that's not enough for some people.

But yes, I concede, this is not an "action movie". Please refer to my response to #2 for more on this.

5. 'very little suspense.' See #1 and #2.

6. 'entire length of the film [should be] like the final ten minutes.' So I guess if the entirety of Silence of the Lambs had been Clarice shooting into the dark chasing after the penis-tucked Ted Levine instead of having pleasantly chilling chats with Dr. Lecter, that would have been better, right? Basterds has a highly suspense-building plot, peppered artfully with small doses of violence and comedy. Parts are nail-biting (the french cabin, the underground bar), parts are delicately played (the apple strudel), and parts are downright gory (scalps). It ends in spectacular fashion, but if you extrapolated the ending out over the entire movie, you'd have a different creature. A less diverse, less interesting, one-note film. This is not that film.

Let the discussion begin.

Basterds: Wait For It

Haven't seen it yet, because I've been out of town. Expect a review tomorrow afternoon. I'm amazed that Allen didn't like it, considering he's a QT fan. I may be a bigger QT fan, so my viewing will be the test of all tests. Bring it, Quentin.

Inglourious Basterds: Kill Thrill

Unlike the film, I am going to cut right to the chase by saying that Quentin Tarantino's Inglourious Basterds is a slow-boil bore. This is not the Dirty Dozen knock off that the trailers, ads, hell even the title would have you believe. Instead this film is a talker. This still shouldn't be a bad thing when it is in Tarantino's personal language, but in this case his words fell on deaf ears.

Inglourious Basterds is NOT the story of Lt. Aldo Raine (Brad Pitt) and his hand picked squad of Jewish Nazi killers. They do however manage to get one great scene or chapter all to themselves early in the film. This scene begins with the questioning of a captured Nazi squad, and ends with a bloodied baseball bat. Raine and Sgt. Donnie Donowitz (Eli Roth) pop up again in the last half hour or so, but other than that the rest of the Basterds are an absolute no show. What the hell is that about?

Now that we have established that this film does not coincide with it's title. Let me try to establish who or what this film is exactly about. If the Basterds are the supporting story line, then the majority of the story involves SS Colonel Hans Canda (Christoph Waltz) A.K.A "The Jew Hunter" and Shosanna Dreyfus (Melanie Laurent). He is the crafty, but more odd than intimidating Nazi officer that has a gift for investigating crime scenes and sniffing out Jews in hiding or enemy spies. She is the Jew that escaped his reign of terror, and has spent the last four years in hiding by running a movie theater. Once word gets around that her theater will be used for the premiere of a new German propaganda war film, and in attendance will be several high ranking German officials (including old Adolf himself). She decides revenge using highly combustible 35mm film might be in order.

One of my major problems with this film is that there is far too much talk, and not nearly enough action. No, the characters do not talk about interesting things like foreign cheeseburgers or foot massages. Instead an obscene amount of time is spent on cat and mouse interrogation scenes that are a little difficult to define. You can feel that there is a form of building tension in words and uneasy mannerisms, and yet simultaneously there is very little suspense. I was unaffected by these scenes, felt they stretched on, and I just really wanted someone to pull the damn trigger already! (Valkyrie was more suspenseful, and we already knew how that turned out)

Speaking of rewriting history. Most of the complaints this film had received were because of the liberties it takes with altering historical fact. I was fine with that, and in fact hoped QT would have taken it even further. If the entire length of this film had been like the final ten minutes, then I would be calling this a classic right up there with Pulp Fiction, Grindhouse, and Kill Bill.

Inglourious Basterds is not a bad film, but it is a major disappointment. I wanted the thrill, the style, the flash, the sharp dark humor. I never feel more brought to life from watching a movie than I do when watching a Tarantino film, but to be quite frank this one is pretty dull. In conclusion I can sum up Inglourious Basterds using the writer's own words: "Now what we got here is a little game of show and tell. You don't want to show me nothing, but you're telling me everything." C

Note: Outside of Hogans Heroes has there ever existed a stupid Nazi in the world of Hollywood, or are they always as sharp and cunning as they are evil? This film is no exception.

Rolling Thunder: Strikes Like Lightning

With the release of Inglorious Basterds only a few days away (hopefully my next review). I decided to track down this hidden cult film, which is supposedly one of Quentin Tarantino's favorite action films, and is one of his major inspirations. I clearly can see why.

Rolling Thunder (1977) is a depressing and dusty 70's revenge drama that deserves comparison to Walking Tall (1973) and Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Garcia (1974). William Devane and Tommy Lee Jones play war buddies that have just returned home after being tortured for seven years in a Vietnamese POW camp. Devane's wife has met another man thinking her husband was dead, and his son doesn't even know him. During a welcome home parade Devane is given a box full of silver dollars, one for every day he was in the camp. One day thieves come calling for the loot. When they can't find it they torture the poor guy by beating him, putting his hand in a garbage disposal, and murdering his family. Unfortunately for them this soldier has grown quite hard, and reveals the way to defeat torture is to learn to love it. He never breaks.

The rest of the film depicts Devane's recovery, preparation, tracking, and eventual execution of the men responsible. The film was written by Paul Schrader, the same screenwriter of the classic Taxi Driver. Some of the similarities of the two films are uncanny. The montage of Devane sculpting his seemingly useless prosthetic limb into a sharp weapon, and his loading up numerous firearms reeked of Travis Bickle (a compliment). Plus, in Taxi Driver fashion the whole film works as a slow boil build to the final showdown. An explosively violent shootout (one of the best I've ever seen) in which limbs are blasted off, bodies fly out of windows, naked hookers run out screaming (it's in a Mexican brothel), and every character ends up taking lead.

Rolling Thunder is a bleak, tough, and gritty film that is a must for exploitation fans and vengeance thrill seekers. Be warned: there is no humor. This is all dead serious, very sad, and there are dry patches here and there. However your patience will be rewarded, not with silver dollars but with entertainingly over-the-top carnage. A-

August's Other Offerings

Now that we are well into August A.K.A Hollywood's dumping ground, here is a brief listing of some films you might miss while flocking to see aliens get treated like refugees, or what is sure to be a Nazi-scalping good time.

The Goods: This film was on comedic fire for the first half hour or so, but it kinda runs out of fuel (laughs) faster than an overpriced, gas guzzling SUV. Don Ready (Jeremy Piven) and his crew of sleazy salesmen have got three days to sell over 200 used cars, or risk loosing the lot of their employer. Piven could play this slick-doucher in his sleep. It is getting old, but he is still good at it. Ed Helms is an embarrassment as a boy band member that serves as the film's villain. Tony Hale and Ken Jeong are humorous, but vastly underused. It's Kathryn Hahn who becomes the film's standout as the scene-stealing slut. Between this and her role in Step Brothers, I feel she could command her own movie. I was on the verge of saying "walk away from this dealership" until a certain funny man popped up as a sky diving Abraham Lincoln who is later accompanied by a small choir of foul mouthed angels. This inspires some major last minute laughs. So is The Goods any good? See it, but be sure to pay way less than blue book value. B-

Ponyo: Something this bizarre yet beautiful could have only come from studio Ghibli or Japan's Disney. Ponyo is a fish with a human head that manages to escape her ocean home, and land into the care of Sosuke. Once she gets a tiny taste of his blood, she manages to become fully human while retaining a few magical powers. Meanwhile Ponyo's father searches for his missing daughter because her absence is causing the moon to gravitate close to earth and is massively disrupting the tides. The good news is that the film is gorgeous. It is so full of color, life, and imagination. The voice talent is pretty superb as well. Tina Fey and Liam Nesson are naturals at voice overs, and should do it more often. I only have one glaring problem with Ponyo, and it's a big one. I just can't tell who the hell this film was made for. Kids will marvel at the pretty colors, but I guess will lose interest after about five minutes. Some of this material will go way over their heads. Adults have to put up with five year olds as the leads, and they act only as appropriate as their age allows them to. (They coo and get overexcited a lot, and it's a little annoying.) Still, Ponyo is a small treasure. If you have never seen a studio Ghibli film before this would make a fine starting point. B

Julie & Julia: Respect and admiration were the only reasons I decided to see this one. I respect Meryl Streep, and admire Amy Adams (see Doubt). This is a light and pleasantly passable way to spend a slow Sunday afternoon, but nothing special. Julia Child (Streep) and Julie Powell (Adams) have relocated for the sake of their husbands, and they need a hobby. They both land on cooking food, and writing about it. Julia writes a world famous cookbook, Julie writes a blog about Julia and her book. The rest is a whip cream blend of: food, sex, martinis, writing, meltdowns, and successes (but not in a Skanks in the City way). Stanley Tucci is the film's unsung hero as Julia's warm and supportive husband. I was a bit surprised at the ending. Instead of the typical happy meeting of the two characters complete with hugs, smiles and laughs we learn that one on these women is a stuck up bitch that doesn't have time for the little people that worship them. That hurt. Plus I also disliked the way these women pout and whine when they don't get book deals and offers right away. I thought (in both cases) this was supposed to be a time filler not a launching pad for a new career. This is one meal I didn't have to choke down because it goes down smooth, but I wouldn't go back for seconds. B-

Michael Haneke Channels Edgar Wright

Apparently, The White Ribbon, directed by controversial German director Michael Haneke (the great but infuriating Cache, Funny Games, and various other works of art-house torture-porn) won the Palme d'Or this year at Cannes.* The movie has been summarized as follows:

A village in Protestant northern Germany, 1913-1914, on the eve of World War I. The story of the children and teenagers of a choir run by the village schoolteacher, and their families: the baron, the steward, the pastor, the doctor, the midwife, the tenant farmers. Strange accidents occur and gradually take on the character of a punishment ritual. Who is behind it all?

Is it just me, or does this sound an awful lot like the plot of Edgar Wright's Hot Fuzz? I mean, not exactly, but very similar. Just me?

*IT IS NOT pronounced CAHN, like James Caan, but closer to CAN, like that can of baked beans in your cupboard.

Assorted Links: Mamet on Frank

- David Mamet will write and direct a new Anne Frank project. Ricky Jay to star as Anne Frank. Just kidding. I hope.

- Not just View-Master and Monopoly, but LEGO now, too! Coming soon: Slinky, the Movie.

- You can watch the pilot of NBC's new fall comedy, Community, by becoming its Facebook friend.

District 9: This Land of Prawn Has Brains & Brawn

District 9 is a film that is easy to respect, but might be a little harder for audiences to enjoy. It is very bleak, very jittery, and very weird. These are traits not commonly found in summer films, and that may be the bulk of why I admired this one.

This is a tale of aliens who have not come in peace, but have just come to leech. The film opens in a faux-documentary style, but does not continue that way. We learn that these aliens landed in Johannesburg twenty years ago, live in segregated camps like refugees, and crave canned cat food. It also depicts the promotion of Wikus Van De Merwe (Sharlto Copley). He has been assigned to go into District 9, and inform all of the the alien squatters that they have been evicted form the area. They don't take the news well.

While investigating one of the shacks Merwe finds a silver tube container, and is accidentally sprayed with a manufactured chemical that begins to transform his body into an alien one. This is a fascinating find for Merwe's corporation who want to dissect him, and learn more of the metamorphosis. It also piques the interest of the local war lord who also wants to dissect Merwe only to eat his alien limbs. The reasoning behind that is the aliens do have powerful and advanced weaponry, but it only responds to alien DNA. Merwe decides to flee into the slum that he was there to clear.

The amount of changing emotions this film portrays is very impressive. I laughed at the cat food thing, and hearing the aliens tell the evicting agents to "fuck off" in their own language. I was horrified during the scenes of transformation because they were very Seth Brundle-esque (fingernails and teeth fall out easily). The action scenes are very intense and violent. Aliens get blasted with bullets, and numerous humans are vaporized leaving the spray of whatever remains all over the camera. The special effects are not perfect (the aliens look a little sketchy), but some things do stick out. The awesome mechanical device that Merwe operates in the final action scene deserves comparison to Aliens (the yellow lifter) and Robocop (ED209).

First time director Neill Blomkamp has worked with this material before. Be sure to check out his excellent short films on YouTube that follow the same format of this film. I really love the notion that this film refuses to play by conventional rules. In a typical Hollywood film of this nature the refugee angle would be dropped, the violence would be watered down, and it would have had a few famous faces thrown into the mix. This could have easily just been Independence Day 2.

District 9 is a unique experience. I doubt that the word "fun" will be thrown around when describing this movie. It will surely provide an interesting subject for debate since this will probably divide audiences. I am on the positive side. While not excellent it manages to be enough of everything to be both entertaining and thought-provoking. If it is successful I will be very interested to see what Blomkamp can do with next possible gig: Halo. B+

Matinee (DVD): Worth Full Price

Last weekend I came across this rare OOP (out of print) gem that I have been searching years for. It cost me about twice as much as the newest release, but this is a charmer that's worth every penny. I've watched it about three times in the last few days, and every time my mood manages to skyrocket. This is hands-down, flat-out, one of the best movies about movies EVER! We are in a Grindhouse or Ed Wood league of excellence here. I've mentioned this one to numerous people, and very few have even heard of it. That inspired to write a full review for this seemingly forgotten favorite.

It is 1962 and the Cuban missile crisis is in full swing. The threat of annihilation hangs over the heads of the residents of Key West, Florida which is a mere 90 miles from Cuba. Little do the local residents realize that death from an A-Bomb is not the only thing they have to fear: Lawrence Woolsey is coming to town.

Woolsey (John Goodman in his second best role next to Walter Sobchak) is a schlock filmmaker that knows how to wow an audience. He is a gimmick master that uses his own signature inventions "Atomo-Vision" and "Rumble-Rama" to put an audience inside the show. His newest creation is a wonderful little Fly knock-off called MANT!: Half-Man, Half- Ant! We are shown random scenes of this film throughout the course of the second half of Matinee. If you've ever seen a cheesy 50's B-movie before, you have to admit it has been re-created to perfection.

Part of the genius of this film is the way depicts a simpler time for entertainment. There is even a hilarious live action Disney wannabe called The Shook Up Shopping Cart containing a cameo by a then unknown Naomi Watts (the kids are less than impressed, they want their monster mash). I love the way Woolsey uses fear and bad publicity to shake up attention and put butts into seats only to zap those same butts with electronic buzzers. Woolsey hires actors to protest the film, and then gives out free passes to stir up interest letting the viewers "make up their own mind."

Then there is the finale of MANT! which may be one of the most ingenious ways to end a movie of this nature that you could imagine. If an ending that perfect and terrifying had been dropped on me at the time, I would have been as crazed as this fleeing audience. This guy sure knows how to clear an auditorium.

This is my favorite film from Director Joe Dante (Gremlins, The Howling), the man has a natural gift for fun horror flicks. You really can tell that a lot of love went into this one recreating the look and feel of life in the early 60's. The fashion is spot-on, and you can see the budding attitudes of both beatniks and feminists in a few of these characters. I can't give Matinee a high enough recommendation. It is smart, funny, authentic and just immensely likable. I might watch it again tonight. This is essential viewing for people who love movies. A

Note: I also recently watched The Incredible Shrinking Man (1957) on TV the other night. Another gem about the effects of radiation that is smarter and bleaker than most other films of it's kind. If it is ever released on DVD I might need to review it as well.

See A Perfect Getaway

Allen says this movie is "kind of enjoyable." This movie was frickin' awesome. See it. See it for Milla Jovovich's great acting. See it for Timothy Olyphant's and Steve Zahn's dueling crazy eyes. See it for Kiele Sanchez's southern accent.* Yes, the flashback is a little long and parts are unnecessary, and the climax is frenetic and kind of ridiculous. But highly enjoyable. Perfect for the big screen.

*Here, the term "southern accent" is code for "ass"

Assorted Links: Derivative Madness

- Jim Henson's son has a Fraggle Rock movie in development. Poor Doozers.

- Remakes galore: Stooges, Wall Street, Red Dawn. They. Must. Stop.

- Pirates of the Caribbean. Transformers. G.I. Joe. Monopoly. View-Master?

GI Joe: Now With Kung-Fu Action Slip

I have to admit, at first I believed GI Joe: Rise of Cobra was going to be one of the worst films of the summer. The fact that it isn't really surprises me, but that still hardly means it's a winner. What it does do is mindlessly blow things up with semi-futuristic weapons in typical summer movie fashion, and gets by on doing just that for about half the time. After an hour of this I got tired and was ready to move on.

The plot involves the bad guys wanting to steal and use a weaponized version of practically the same material seen in last winter's The Day The Earth Stood Still: Little nano-tech 'bugs' that devour entire cities, only this time they are a mossy green color. It is up to the Joes to stop them. They are an elite military branch that only accepts the top of the class. Ninjas, sharp-shooters, and Intel experts are all part of this diverse group of all-American heroes from all around the world. (I know that sounds incorrect, but just go with it.)

The massive use of slightly futuristic weapons, most notably the accelerator suits (head to toe covering body armor that has the amazing ability to turn a flesh and blood actor into an unrealistic looking special effect) reveals this film's desire to be this summer's Iron Man. It comes up short. I must note that I felt like I had seen the big ten minute chase in another film already. You see the terrorists are racing to destroy Paris starting with the Eiffel tower. The Joes pursue them with the suits and motorcycles, blowing up plenty of the city along the way while traveling at impressively high speeds. It's actually pretty fun stuff that ends with the city being saved, but not before the tower gets demolished. Then it hit me: I had just witnessed an expensive live-action recreation of the opening scene of Team America World Police. I was both amused and insulted.

Like I said, I was able to go along with this brainless summer fun for about an hour, but the whole infiltrating the underwater base and seeing the heroes square off with their equal yet opposite rival (black ninja fights white ninja etc.) just gave the film a sense of blandness that I couldn't ignore. There are no surprises, and not a single hero loses their section of the fight. It's boring.

Is it really necessary to make films based on children's toys? (even worse: Transformers 2) The only real upside that I can think of for this is that since children don't really play with plastic toy action figures anymore that this is one genre that most likely will not survive for very long. Kind of reminds me of when turning Disney theme rides into movies seemed like a good idea Pirates = success while Haunted Mansion = failure. How many more of those have you seen lately?

I recommend this film pretty much for anyone under thirteen years old. I guarantee that the kiddies will have a blast. Dumb summer movies can be a lot of fun if done the right way. I might have been spoiled last year by so many summer action films that were quite intelligent, but still had stuff go boom. GI Joe: Rise of Cobra only manages to get the second part right, at least it does so with a vengeance. C

Addendum: 'Summer' Lovin

There are people in life you might fall in love with regardless if they feel the same about you. That is the dilemma facing Tom (Joseph Gordon-Levitt) and his relationship with Summer (Zooey Deschanel) in (500) Days of Summer. He is sure he's in fate's hands, and is positive she is the one. She sees them as just friends that re-enact shower scenes from porno movies. This really is a relationship that was not meant to be, even with amazing chemistry.

Nilay makes the valid point of saying that this film is not really fresh or original, and cribs from plenty of other romantic dramedies. On the surface it is just a boy meets, loves, and loses girl story. However, I found this film incredibly whimsical, charming, heartbreaking and just plain wonderful. Perhaps it was fate that I fell in love with this picture.

The performances from the leads are pretty fantastic. Levitt has got both incredible range (see The Lookout) and an immensely likable presence. It is true he is not a flawless character, but he did such a good job I didn't really understand why she decided to end their relationship. When it comes to Deschanel I must agree that this character is rather cold, yet this role feels like it was made for her. Beautiful and unattainable. A character that will change your life forever, but is also so flighty.

I loved the way the story is disjointed, and jumps from day to day. Day 1-250 are the happier times, and day 251-500 are all about the fallout. The film opens on day 488 and then jumps back to 1. It will stay on day 183 for thirty seconds, and land on day 49 for twenty minutes. Some people might find this jarring, but it kept me on my toes. I never got bored or tired with this gimmick, and it seemed to bring this film to life.

Speaking of life, I wanted to hug whomever came up with the musical number sequence scored to Hall & Oates' "You Make My Dreams". It is pure magic and one of the best scenes of any film I've seen all year. I also loved the Bergman recreations, and the way the (real/inspirational) former girlfriend got slammed before the opening credits... Bitch.

(500) Days of Summer manages to avoid ending on a stereotypical note. It may hurt like hell, but so does life sometimes. I guess the point that this film makes is that it might be better to focus your memories on the good times, and hope fate delivers the real love of your life just around the corner. A

Assorted Links

- RIP John Hughes, creator of the teen comedy genre.

- Ridley Scott may be making A Brave New World with DiCaprio in the leading role.

- Admission of failure: no screening of GI Joe for critics.

A Perfect Getaway: The Couple That Slays Together...

Here we have a twisty little tropical thriller that in all honesty is far from perfect, and is even downright ludicrous at times. Against all odds I still found it kind of enjoyable. A Perfect Getaway focuses on three couples vacationing on the Hawaiian islands. Hiking, swimming, and even a little murder are all on the schedule.

The main sheltered yuppie couple Cliff and Cydney (Steve Zahn and Milla Jovovich) are on their honeymoon, and are looking for a little adventure. They meet up with Nick (Timothy Olyphant) who appears to be a pro at survival scenarios, and is at times a little off putting to the timid pair by reciting crazy stories. He also makes the couple a little less than comfortable when he introduces them to the metal plate on the back of his head, not to mention his knife named Gilligan or "Little Buddy", get it? Olyphant's girlfriend Gina (Kiele Sanchez) is pretty laid back (she is nude when first introduced), but also knows how to gut a goat. Any red flags on this couple yet? There is also a third couple Kale and Cleo (Chris Hernsworth and Marley Shelton), but they mostly stick to the shadows.

Word starts to spread around via other tourists and Google that a pair of murderers might be bumping off couples and island hopping. This is where the suspicion angle kicks in as the couples and the audience try to figure out which is the killer couple.

The casting is quite unique, and a major benefit for this film. Zahn plays the wormy goofball so well that I was reminded of his very good performance in Joy Ride. This guy acts with his eyes, they convey frightened or frenzied better than any line or action he delivers. Olyphant might be the standout here. He seems so worldly wise and yet creepy and untrustworthy at the same time. There are moments where I couldn't tell if he was just messing with Zahn, or if there was something more sinister beneath the surface. Making a movie that does not involve the slaying of zombies seems to suit Jovovich, she should try it more often.

Without giving anything away I must mention the major transition this film makes once the killer couple has been outed. There is about ten minutes of back story and flashbacks showing how and why the couple are killing people, and how it has related to the rest of the film. Then the hunt begins, and the style becomes very energetic even Crank-like. The main scene that comes to mind involves a three way chase in the jungle that uses comic book wipes to show each character chasing the other, and then all three in separate panels. A little extreme, but the style pulled me in. There are also numerous moments of painful looking stabbings and shootings. You literally see a knife get pulled out of flesh at least three times.

I went into this one not expecting too much, and walked out a little shocked by how much I enjoyed myself. A Perfect Getaway has very beautiful and exotic locales, some surprisingly good tricky acting, and an overly energetic and violent final act. This vacation spot is worth a visit. B

Assorted Links

- Spielberg to remake Harvey. Bets on whether Tom Hanks will take the Jimmy Stewart role?

- Apple is hosting a new clip from Mike Judge's upcoming Extract.

- Best Week Ever with 15 movies (yet to come out in 2009) to be excited about.

Addendum: Funny People: More is Less

1. OK, so I was wrong about the ending, but I was right about the fact that the trailer gave away everything. In fact, the trailer even goes farther than that: it shows multiple scenes that weren't in the movie (Sandler's joke about sex: "that's just how I do it"; Rogen's guitar hero joke; I'm sure there were more). Not to mention that we only see the fake movie scenes for Re-do, The Champion and MerMan, and none of the other funnier ones. We also don't get to see the better standup routines that were taped for the movie -- most of the good stuff ended up on Comedy Central last weekend (especially Randy's routine).

2. I like Leslie Mann and all, but Apatow's promotion of his family has now officially become obnoxious. First, this whole movie was like a love letter to Apatow's wife (C'mon guys, she was just a small-time actress, but ain't she great? She coulda been something!) Yes, Judd, we know, you're the dorky regular-looking funny guy who scored the hot chick. Let's move on. In the olden days, she was like Hitchcock's daughter, with a small role in every Apatow production (See Virgin, Knocked Up, Drillbit Taylor) -- now she's suddenly Mia Farrow. Second, Apatow's kids are now in the mix, and are given a lot of dialogue. We even get to watch Apatow's daughter sing "Memories" for like three minutes (she was good, I admit). Take it down a notch, Judd.

3. Apatow the Producer is so much better than Apatow the Director. First, his films really fall apart in act three. Rewatch 40 Year Old Virgin -- it stops being funny with about 30 minutes left to go. Second, all of his movies are disjointed -- they seem like they are edited in a rush. Virgin sometimes feels like a series of comic vignettes that are only somewhat related. Third, Funny People is way too long, and it stops being funny after the first hour and a half (and the part after that is not all that interesting). Again, editing.

4. Speaking of editing: The pivotal dramatic moment of the movie takes place offscreen. At some point, George Simmons (Adam Sandler) is an irredeemable asshole, and then at the end of the movie he decides to be nice. How or why this transformation takes place is a mystery -- we're left to assume that merely watching Ira's (Seth Rogen's) comedy routine changes Simmons' mind. But we see no conversation, no contemplation, no moment of clarity. Instead we get a character Deus Ex Machina.

5. Apatow is the Robert Altman of comedy -- dozens of famous comics were in this movie, many of which in one-line cameos, very few of which are funny (Sarah Silverman's vagina demonstration was hilarious, as was Norm MacDonald's AIDS joke). In fact, at times it felt like a dramatization of the much better and more interesting film, the documentary Comedian, by Jerry Seinfeld. In that film, the uber-successful Seinfeld decides to start his routine over from scratch beginning at the very bottom of the circuit and tries to win over club crowds without relying on his fame. I recommend it in place of Funny People.

6. Sandler's performance was quality, but Rogen's was not -- it consisted of probably a hundred dumbly-innocent-faced reaction shots. That being said, it is much more pleasant to watch Rogen play a nice guy (Knocked Up) than a jerk (Pineapple Express, Observe and Report, Virgin, to an extent)

(500) Days of Summer: This film seems familiar

I'm concerned that critics have lowered their expectations. More on that later.

My wife and I saw this, wanting to see something more lighthearted (she blamed me for having to suffer through Moon, though I gave her the option on that one). I heard pleasant things about this one, and we gave it a shot. On the whole not a bad date night, but still ...

Synopsis: Tom Hansen (Joseph Gordon-Levitt) and Summer Finn (Zooey Deschanel) are sitting on a park bench. He's in a suit. She has a wedding ring on. They smile pleasantly at each other. This was day 488. Flash backwards. Tom and Summer meet, and he starts falling for her.

The rest of the film consists of 500 days, give or take. We see Tom falling for Summer, then being dumped by her (this is not a spoiler - we are told up front that this is not a love story). We see the courtship, then his suffering after the breakup. We see ebb and flow, interspersed. And we finally get an explanation for the first scene, and what follows.

On the whole, it is an entertaining film, with literally a little something for everyone. This is not a love story, nor is it a story about love (as the poster would have us believe). This is a film about one man alone, Tom, a young man who has yet to figure out what love really is. It's a film that many men of my age can sympathize with. But it is a film that represents a time that, luckily, many of us have grown past.

Still, this is a largely one-sided view of things. Summer is not turned into a villain, mind you, also more a plot point. Don't expect fleshing out of her views, her background. We hear brief descriptions toward that end, but nothing of substance. Like Fight Club and the Apatow films, this is a film about guys by guys.

There are real upsides here. Gordon-Levitt performs quite sharply through the various phases of the his character - ever likable but not saintly. There are a few supporting characters - his buddies Mackenzie (Geoffrey Arend, of Supertroopers) and Paul (Matthew Gray Gubler of Criminal Minds) play the foils of men on either extreme. Rachel (Chloe Moretz) is the wise pre-teen sister that tries to guide Tom through his idealized relationships as they crash and burn. Vance (Clark Gregg, nice character actor) is the boss at the card-writing company where Tom and Summer work - not Tom's enemy, just the nice guy that a boss tries to be.

Deschanel, she is a different matter. She's cold. She's fairly one dimensional. Her diction gives an odd tweak, almost squeaky in a way that makes you wonder if she believes a word she says - or, worse yet, that she does believe the words she says. I don't think this is her fault. I think this is the character, and it serves the film's purpose.


Past that, you have to look at the crafters of the film. The writers are brand new and, sadly, have The Pink Panther 2 to their credit. The director, Marc Webb, has a background in music videos, which serves him well here for the fast-action series of clips are form the film. None have a wealth of experience. As a result, they borrow, heavily.

All during the film, I kept feeling like I had seen it before. The voiceovers used periodically remind me of Amelie. There is a fun musical number, the day after Tom and Summer have consummated, that is clearly all in Tom's head and homage to big musicals. There is a very funny sequence in which Tom sees himself in an artsy Bergman-like film (where Cupid tells him "better luck next time ... bitch") - reminiscent of Bergman as well as Amelie. There are throwbacks to Garden State, to Say Anything. All good films, but homage can only take you so far.

There will be a generation of young filmgoers for whom this might be an iconic film. For me, it's a good time but I don't know if it is a film that will linger. B+

Return of the Prodigal Son - Nilay's Back

Hello to all. It's been a busy few months - wedded in April, settling back into life and work. Thanks to John and Allen for keeping this alive (and sorry for being out of touch - been a helluva time these months). Still, here are a few one-offs, then a full review to follow.

1) Ghost Town - Gervais shows he can be funny in a sarcastic fashion (oh wait, he does that regularly). Tea Leoni is a pleasant and real character. A little Sixth Sense made romantic. On the whole, a good time: B.

2) Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen: Funny stuff, even if they don't mean to be. Megan Fox admits in an interview that "it isn't about the acting," to which Michael Bay claims to have earned Nic Cage his Oscar. Anyway, it's not about the acting. It's about lots of big machines with loud battles. Not as good as the first. Upsides: John Turturro is actually entertaining, Megan Fox does her job, Optimus Prime and Bumblebee are what they should be. Downsides - very long, Tyrese can't act, and the "Leo" character makes Jar Jar Binks lovable (There are so many times one can stand to hear a college kid "I don't want to die!"). C-, but about where you'd expect.

3) Moon : Interesting concept, though the mystery of what is happening should and could have been obscured a bit longer into the film. More than anything, an interesting look into the ways one man develops through life, as seen through the many versions of him. Probably not as good as everyone said it would be: B-.

4) Ran: The epic Kurosawa film, King Lear meets feudal Japan. Worth seeing, eventually. Plan accordingly. See his other films first, usually in the context of a film class. Does have one of the best villainesses of all time. B+.

5) Eureka: Fun series on SyFy. There's a town in the Rockies that is the center of all scientific advances of the last 100 years. No one pay for anything; the diner runs on cold fusion. And the most grounded person is the sheriff, Carter (Colin Ferguson). Things go wrong with experiments each week, usually due to scientists who run amok. The sheriff, with the help of the smartest scientist, his house that talks, the boss of the corporation who he has a thing for, and his daughter, fix the problem with simple solutions that you don't need a PhD to create.
It's actually better than that sounds. The series is pretty good about having a storyline for each season as well as each week's experiment. Fun time, though it is a SyFy show. B.

6) Oscars go to 10 Nominees: Who really cares? The choices tend to be political as the Nobels. Adding more names won't matter unless they decide the Best Picture category should be truly international as well as made of movies that are truly good, not just "worthy."

7) Benjamin Button: Interesting film; could have been a miniseries to more effect. Like so many epics like this, lots of investment in the story upfront, then zip through the last 30 minutes. Technically good; Taraji P. Henson demonstrates she has some talent again (between this and Hustle and Flow, I'm looking forward to whatever she'll be in next).

Good to be back.

'Locker' Hurts So Good

John already gave The Hurt Locker a more than fair review that hit pretty much all the major points. The minor avoidance of plot, the use of a mostly unknown cast ( I still loved every single cameo especially David Morse), and the way the film dodges a political slant. Yet I was so excited to see this film, and was so impressed by the results that I thought it necessary to offer my opinion.

The Hurt Locker plays like a combination of two films. It has the look and fast paced action feel of The Kingdom (2007) mixed with the edge of your seat thrill of The Wages of Fear (1953). Deciding to have an Iraq war film that revolves much of it's time around defusing bombs is a masterstroke of an idea. You can feel the tension in every bead of sweat, every snip of wires, and in the eyes of the onlookers (one who just might be carrying a switch).

I also must mention Jeremy Renner's performance. I haven't seen a character who lives on the edge that I have liked this much since William Petersen's amazing role in To Live and Die in L.A. (1985). This is a soldier that realizes he was born to die. Putting his life on the line is fun for this guy. It is a sport, a rush, a way of life. I also found his sharp quips to walk the thin line between smoldering wit, and stubborn smart-ass. His acting ability was a bright spot in an already terrific film.

In a summer full of big budget and star studded blockbuster misfires, it is really pleasing to see that this is the little thriller that could. James Cameron's protegee and director Kathryn Bigelow has created her strongest work to date. The Hurt Locker is explosive entertainment by being an endlessly intense, well acted, and even occasionally funny war film. A