Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? (The "Watchmen" review)

The above question was first asked by the Roman poet Juvenal, which translates to "who watches the watchmen?" or "who guards the guardians?" Socrates also was asked the question, and in Plato's The Republic, his answer is simple: they will guard themselves against themselves.

But the real question is, who will guard me against mediocrity?

I have a soft spot for Watchmen. The graphic novel, that is. It really opened doors for me, showed me how unconventional fiction can be, how the structure isn't always limited to simple words and paragraphs, but can unfold right before your eyes. I remember finishing it for the first time, about six years ago, breathless and shaking and refusing to believe it was over. This, I thought, is the Great Modern Novel everyone's always talking about, right here in my hands, all 416 pages of it.

When they announced a film adaptation, I was psyched for a split second before I realized that they were going to allow an industry that doesn't believe in making films for the sheer art of it to film an unfilmable subject.

Needless to say, I wasn't too thrilled with the film.

Yes, to the haters who will probably hunt me down and firebomb my car, it was practically panel-for-panel. But that can limit a film, especially when you're also lifting dialog that just doesn't translate well from the page to the screen. Rorschach's narration was awkward and unbelievable at times. Each scene worked if you viewed them individually, but not as a whole. The direction and flow of the movie was so disjointed that I actually stopped caring at one point. Cohesion? Why would you ever need that in a film?

Don't even get me started on the laughable soundtrack. Or the uncomfortable sex scene (which Zach Snyder seems to just LOVE putting in his films... Remember 300?). I was disappointed in the lack of character development, too.

There were some character changes that I just didn't enjoy. One of which being Rorschach's coherence. In the novel, he's rather... um, fucking insane? Is that the word I'm looking for? Yes, I do believe it is.

I also didn't enjoy how sinister Veidt was. In the novel, he always seemed at least a little human, but in the movie he really came off as cold and calculating. Even his rationale about the detonation and the resulting fallout was just so... inhuman. I was really upset that the "I did it!!" scene from the novel never made it in, since it was such an emotional reaction. But sacrifices must be made in the transition from page to film.

Dr. Manhattan's character was changed, too. And he was also hung like a friggin' draft horse.

However, errors and bad decisions aside, the casting was rather brilliant, Jackie Earle Haley and Matthew Goode in particular. Both slipped into their roles with frightening ease and really stole the show. Patrick Wilson, who is a fantastic actor, really sold me as Nite Owl II, not afraid to show the audience that boyish charm and conscience that we see in the novel. However, it was Carla Gugino as Silk Spectre I and Jeffrey Dean Morgan as The Comedian who really captured my attention. Casting JDM was a stroke of pure genius -- he's exactly as I pictured The Comedian in my head, right down to the jaunty gait and his smoke-over-gravel voice. Ms. Gugino shone as the aging hero, the bitter quirk to her lips telling of a lifetime of unhappy stories and countless disappointments. She was fantastic.

My only qualms were with Malin Akermann and Billy Crudup as Silk Spectre II and Dr. Manhattan, respectively. Akermann definitely had the look down, but I couldn't stand her. Her acting was dry and lifeless, and she showed no facial expressions whatsoever. Even after learning a very important secret, there was no emotion. I watched her, thinking, "Fortunately Snyder wanted no reaction from her in this movie". As far as Crudup goes... I don't know what it was, but he rubbed me the wrong way. Which is funny, because I'd normally let that man rub me however he wants. I just don't think he was right for the part, although he definitely looked like Ostermann, pre-accident.

The opening credits left me breathless, though. I thought they were absolutely perfect and will probably go down in history as the best of their kind. Kudos, yU+Co Design & Animation!

Overall, the film kept me rather detached throughout and I didn't actually leave satisfied as so many Watchmen fans did. Which is a shame, because I really wanted to. That being said, as many faults as it has, I think this is as good of an adaptation as we'll ever get.

The unfilmable film still remains as such.

I give Watchmen 3.5 out of 5.

T-1000 in "Terminator 5"?

Seems so, kids! Fan-favorite Robert Patrick is in talks to play a scientist in Terminator 5, which would be ALL TOO COOL BECAUSE HE NEEDS TO BE IN EVERY MOVIE EVER.

"I like the idea in a prospective next picture that you meet Robert Patrick the way he looks today, and he’s a scientist that’s working on improving cell replication so we can stay healthier and we can cure juvenile diabetes and all these things that once again sound like good ideas — and once again live as an idealized expression of ourselves. So imagine seeing a sixty-year-old Robert Patrick and knowing, ‘Holy shit! That’s gonna be the T-1000 – who comes back perfect, lean and the whole thing.’ I haven’t concluded that, but Robert and I had dinner the other night and talked about it."

Maybe they'll end the franchise with 5. Or maybe McG will beat it to death. Either way, ROBERT PATRICK!!


Source

Hollywood Needs a Shot of Originality, Part II

Matt Reeves (Cloverfield) is remaking Tomas Alfredson's hit, Let The Right One In. You know, the Swedish vampire film that came out LAST YEAR?

This is ridiculous. Is nothing safe? Is nothing sacred?

IS THERE NO INTEGRITY LEFT AMONG HOLLYWOOD'S DIRECTORS?

Discuss.


Source
Source
Source

Hollywood Needs a Shot of Originality

I've been working up to this for a long time, ever since I started keeping a tally on all of the announcements on Oh No They Didn't. A very long time. When The Fugitive was one of them, I could feel myself boiling over. And then The Neverending Story joined the list and I exploded all over the fucking walls.

About five minutes ago, I compiled a list of remakes, sequels, and adaptations that just SHOULDN'T HAPPEN. I understand that some movies need to be remade because they were so horrible the first time, but seriously? Can't we let masterpieces be?

The answer is, of course, no. Because Hollywood is run by a bunch of pansies who are too afraid to try something new, so they enlist writers (and they're all a bunch of sell-outs for going along with this) to make "reboots" of franchises with nary a care for respecting some of the movies they're murdering remaking.

For those who are protesting my words because they loved the remake of The Amityville Horror just so fucking much, let me ask you: would you remake The Fugitive, nominated for an Oscar for Best Picture and winner of Best Actor (Tommy Lee Jones, 1993)? I'm hoping your answer is no. What about My Fair Lady, Audrey Hepburn's most famous film and winner of 8 Oscars including Best Picture and Director? How about the Japanese fan-favorite, Battle Royale?

Well, guess what? They're ALL being remade! Mm, makes you die a little inside, doesn't it?

It's not just remakes, either. As I'm sure you've noticed, they're churning out sequels and adaptations faster than I can type this rant. Remember when everyone went up in arms about the Donnie Darko sequel, S. Darko? They didn't stop there. You can add Tron 2 and Monsters Inc. 2 to that list. Yes, that's right. Pixar's jumping on the sequel-making bandwagon, although you can expect cinematic gold from them (Toy Story 2 was a hit and possibly better than the first one, but will Toy Story 3, due out in 2010, be as good?).

Video Games, classic novels, and old TV shows have been adapted for the big screen ever since Ang Lee had the brilliant idea to take The Incredible Hulk and turn it into suck. This was soon followed by video game adaptations of Hitman, Street Fighter, and the upcoming Tekken. For those fans of Jane Austen's work and have enjoyed the adaptations of Pride and Prejudice, Sense and Sensibility, and Emma, I'm sure you'll be thrilled to hear that an adaptation of Pride and Prejudice is being made... with the Predator aliens. No, you read that right.

There are some adaptations I'm looking forward to, such as Max Brooks's World War Z, but there are some things that should stay as they are. Like, Twilight. Should it have been made into a movie? Absolutely not. A shitty book series can only beget shitty movies.

But Hollywood doesn't even seem to be trying anymore. It's as if all of the good ideas stopped as soon as 1997 came and went. The 1970's were prime and produced some of the best movies ever made. But the 2000s have only proven that Old Hollywood is over and this new commercialized Hollywood will only kill movies as we know it.

Look at the new Dragonball movie and tell me I'm wrong.

So, I think it's time for a whole new generation of writers to set things straight. More studios need to pick up indie films to balance out the shit that is being thrust into the theaters. It's all about money now, not the art.

Hollywood needs a shot of originality; someone get me a syringe.

Remakes (Recent and Upcoming):
- The Neverending Story
- The Fugitive
- My Fair Lady
- A Nightmare on Elm Street
- Hellraiser
- Total Recall
- Clue
- The Last House on the Left
- Battle Royale
- Race to Witch Mountain
- Wolfman
- Day of the Triffids

Upcoming Sequels:
- Scream 4
- Cloverfield 2
- Monsters Inc. 2
- Toy Story 3
- Little Fockers
- Tron 2
- Donnie Darko 2 (S. Darko)

Adaptations
- Pride and Predator (I seriously am not kidding)
- Dragonball
- Tekken
- Avatar: The Last Airbender
- Blood: The Last Vampire
- Halloween 2
- The A-Team

Sources:
The Neverending Story remake
The Fugitive remake

Twilight: Coldly calculated to pander to *your* shrieking demographic

AHHHH! DO NOT WANT. D:

It was brought to my attention today in Classics II, during a discussion about why Teri Hatcher should be cast as Sin in any adaptation of Paradise Lost, that I should make a blog and rant about the ubiquitous "Twilight" series.

Ten steps ahead of you.

"Twilight" came to my attention in 2006, when the "Harry Potter" series was close to ending and I was looking for something to read that would satisfy my inner twelve-year old. Some friends of mine told me that they were reading this great book series about vampires and I should really check it out. So, forgetting that some of these people thought "X-Men 3" was cinematic gold, I went out and bought the first book. Because I am an idiot.

I got to page 60 before throwing it across the room. And promptly bringing it back to Barnes and Noble. Where the clerk on duty and I subsequently burned it behind the store. True story.

This series proves that publishing houses will do ANYTHING for a dollar, up to and including putting out a series that not only gives teenage girls the impression that guys are really like that, but also takes the English language and SETS IT ON FIRE.

Have all the other writers died? Is that what this is? There's no one left, so we have to publish the drivel that's still lying around?

"Twilight" is about an annoying girl named Bella (of course) and the teenage vampire with whom she falls in love. During the span of four books, we have a virgin vampire (which is an oxymoron, because all vamps are giant sluts) that can walk around IN BROAD DAYLIGHT, crazy vampire enemies, werewolves (because why the hell not?), love triangles, a hellspawn, and a white wedding.

Also during the four books, we have a main character who sets the Women's Movement back about 75 years, a vapid love interest I would stake in a heartbeat, another love interest whose presence I frankly can't understand, a plot so convoluted that I stopped reading and had to put my head between my knees and wait for the braincells to regenerate, and an author in need of an afternoon of electroshock.

For those of you playing the home game, Twilight is brought to you by Stephanie Meyer, crazy Mormon extraordinaire. Hell, that she's a Mormon is purely incidental in this case! But the fact that she's crazy remains a FACT. She's 27, still lives with her parents, and is the biggest child I've ever seen. Everything she says and does makes me seriously wonder if she's ever left the comfort of her mall-goth bedroom and gone outside.

** On one memorable occasion, a fan asked Ms. Meyer if Edward (the vapid virgin vamp) goes a bit stir-crazy whenever Bella gets her period. Because blood is the ONLY source of sustenance for a vampire, and Bella is his twu wuv. I, personally, think it's a very valid question. And Ms. Meyer's response?

"Eww! That is so gross! I can't believe you'd ask me that! You should probably leave."

What kind of CHILD shuts down a fan like that?**

And the fans of these books are INSANE. It pains me to admit that my sister is one of them, proving that I have not only failed in my duties as an older sister, but also as a future English teacher. Has anyone ever tried talking to a "Twilight" fan? My best friend's sister is a HUGE fan and every time she talks to me about Edward Cullen, all I can think is, "Fuck. I don't have enough breadcrumbs to get home."

And desecrating the written word wasn't enough, but they had to go and make a movie adaptation. My best friend saw it and said that if they'd muted the whole thing, it would've been good. And they got the most unpleasant, blank-eyed potheads to play the leading roles. Way to go, Goldcrest Pictures.

Unfortunately, as it has been made clear to me, I am in the minority when it comes to hating these books. Maybe 1 out of 10 people are rational individuals who understand where I'm coming from. The other 9 watch "Lord of the Rings" as if it were a documentary.

I'm not entirely sure how to end this rant, because trying to wrap my mind around the success of this series normally causes blood to shoot out my nose. But understand that I've been writing all of my life. I was a creative writing major for two years, studying under some of the best writing professors the country has to offer. I'm a semester away from doing my student-teaching in England, and I have a 3.8 GPA. I'd like to think I know what bad literature looks like.

And from here? It looks like "Twilight".

http://shinga.deviantart.com/art/Head-Trip-Twilight-Sucks-85504254

The "Revolutionary Road" review (or the one in which R.C. wants to KILL herself)

Every once in a while, two amazing actors will come together for what is purported to be the film of the year. So, naturally I nipped over to the theater, desperate to taste the fruition of 11 years. Kate Winslet and Leonardo DiCaprio, together again. There's no way you'd walk out disappointed. Or suicidal.

My ticket to Revolutionary Road should have come with a revolver.

I don't remember the last time I ever walked out of a movie so incredibly depressed. The audience filed out of the theater in complete silence to the soundtrack of the soft piano that played alongside the rolling credits. They called it Revolutionary Road. I called it A Nightmare on Elm Street, because I wanted to KILL MYSELF after watching it.

The film was based on Richard Yates's novel of the same title, and as far as I can tell stayed true to the source. According to those who have read it, the book was just as bleak as the movie. Even Yates agrees. In the October 1999 issue of the Boston Review, Yates was quoted on his central theme: "If my work has a theme, I suspect it is a simple one: that most human beings are inescapably alone, and therein lies their tragedy."

Um, wow. Excuse me while I go HANG MYSELF from the light fixture.

Now, don't get me wrong. I am all for sad. Sad is great! Hell, I use it more than I ought to in my writing. But this? This was bleak. This was worse than bleak: this was hopelessly empty. THEY EVEN SAID IT IN THE MOVIE!! While I can appreciate a dressing down of the fluffy portrait that the 50's painted, I can't deal with films that claim to have a purpose. This film had no such thing. It was just one incredibly long piece of total and complete OSCARBATION. (Although I'm feeling a bit vindicated, as it was not nominated for an Academy Award for Best Film.)

However, Leo and Kate do not disappoint as Frank and April Wheeler, a pencil-pusher and a failed actress. Both are at the top of their game, and their relationship will put you through the wringer. The ending scenes will literally leave you broken, as shattered as one of Kate's shiny ceramic dishes. And you will never look at rubber tubing the same way again. There is a sense of extreme awkwardness that permeates their relationship, despite their best efforts.

The one character I really enjoyed was Michael Shannon's John Givings, a once-brilliant mathematician who is in and out of a mental institution. Having endured 37 electroshock treatments he's forgotten all his math. However, he is blunt and does not abide by the unspoken conduct rule of that time, asking explicit questions and revealing the ugly truths about marriage, and the Wheelers, themselves. His performance was amazing and he totally deserves his Oscar nom.

But the successes of the film do not outweigh the failures. It was long, it was draggy, it served no purpose, and its conclusion felt far too forced and abrupt. I realize that it was working off of the novel, so perhaps my issues lie with Yates.

Either way, I would suggest popping a couple of Zoloft before seeing this film. You'll need it.

I give Revolutionary Road 2.5 out of 5.


"Wow. I'm seeing my wrists in a whole new light."

It's happening. Oh, it's HAPPENING! Zack is coming!!!

::convulses with joy::

http://www.slashfilm.com/2008/12/04/world-war-z-will-be-a-huge-scale-zombie-movie/

Marc Forster, I don't care if you're a crazy action!movie director who butchered the Bond franchise with Quantum of Solace. I'm willing to overlook that. But if you fuck up this movie, so help me... I'll be on you faster than a mob of zombies after a school bus full of trapped kids.

7 Balls to Rule Them All...

I'll admit it: I was one of those geeky 12-year olds that watched Dragon Ball Z on Toonami every day after school. I mean, come on, who didn't want to shoot light from their hands at that age?

Well, long after the DBZ craze, some idiot decided to make a movie. You know, now that no one gives a shit.

I just watched the teaser trailer. As Perez Hilton would say: SHITEOUS!!

WATCH IT HERE:
http://www.joblo.com/video/joblo/player.php?video=dragonballtrl1

Holy Update, Batman! (And speaking of... Here's the "The Dark Knight" review)

It's been a small eternity since I reviewed a movie, or, uh, said anything, but the new semester has begun and I'm already at my wits end! So, why not write a review while my emotional state is a volatile one?

I saw The Dark Knight opening day at the IMAX in Reading. I walked out in complete silence. I saw it twice more, still leaving in total silence, unable to formulate a word or opinion of any kind.

My thoughts have finally come together enough for me to write this review.

The Dark Knight is a comic book adaptation, as well as the sequel to the critically-acclaimed Batman Begins, which re-launched the series and pushed Batman once again into the spotlight. However, as much as it is a comic book movie, it works just as well as a crime drama, one of the best I've seen in years.

There are several storylines that play out in this film, all of them intertwined and important, and the way they unfold is nearly perfect. Brothers Christopher Nolan (director, writer, screenplay) and Jonathan Nolan (screenplay) knew exactly what they were doing when writing the screenplay for this movie. There is not one plot hole to be found -- everything is tied up by the end of the movie. But they manage to make it exciting and a complete thrill; the 152-minute you take is never a boring one. Tedious, maybe, but never boring.

I'll start off with the talk of the town: The Joker.

Heath Ledger, who will win a posthumous Oscar if the Academy doesn't want angry fans burning Hollywood to the ground, portrays this iconic villain as a man without morals or even a plan, just someone "who wants to watch the world burn". From the minute you see him standing on a street corner, back to the audience, you know something is not quite right -- just his stance alone conveys the important and messy role he plays.

Now, I'm a huge Batman fan. HUGE. I grew up watching the animated series, which prompted my older brother to introduce me to the comics. Even before Batman Begins brought life back to the franchise, I knew something was terribly wrong with all of the Batman films that had come before, one problem being Jack Nicholson's Joker.

I have nothing against Nicholson. He's an amazing actor. But in the 1989 Batman movie, he wasn't the Joker. He was Jack Nicholson with make-up on, dancing around and camping it up. His was not the mind of a psychotic killer.

Ledger's performance is up there with Kevin Spacey's in Se7en, or Sir Anthony Hopkins's Hannibal Lector. Ledger's Joker is twisted, insane (the "we the jury find the defendant" kind of insane), but more than that, he makes you believe that he is, in fact, an agent of chaos. Every wrong turn, every point of confusion, every horrifying bump in the dark on screen is caused by the very reminder that all clowns laugh, but some for all the wrong reasons.

He sold me on his Joker, with every snicker, every nervous tic, every hilarious one-liner -- he re-made this villain. WHY'D HE HAVE TO GO AND O.D.?!

Well, he'd better get that Oscar, or there really will be chaos.

Aaron Eckhart's D.A. Harvey Dent was perfect. Perfect. I love Aaron Eckhart, I really do, and he didn't disappoint. I was a bit nervous, as this was the first time that Harvey Dent and Two-Face were to be in the same movie, but Eckhart carried his character with much aplomb and really convinced me that the Joker was bringing him down a spiraling path. And then, of course, the big reveal.

Christian Bale, I love him. But would somebody give him a fucking lozenge?

And then, of course, there were Michael Caine and Morgan Freeman. Snappy, sarcastic, smart, and all those other good S words. While they were minor characters, you never forgot their presence, even when they weren't on-screen.

The soundtrack was amazing (Hans Zimmer and James Newton Howard = WIN), and I want to have sex with Wally Pfister, the cinematographer. The editing was flawless and make-up? Um, yes please.

All in all, Mr. Nolan, I think you have a perfect movie on your hands, or as close as you can get to one. Congratulations. Let's hope you don't puss out when it comes to the third and final installment of the series.

And Sid Ganis? All eyes are on you, buddy. ::glare::

I give The Dark Knight a 5 out of 5.

Still Not Dead...

I keep forgetting that I have this stupid thing.

AND NOW FOR MORE QUICK, QUICK REVIEWS!

1. WALL-E


I'm convinced that Pixar sold its collective soul to the Devil in exchange for brilliant movies that will make millions at the Box Office. There's no other explanation.

In Pixar's seventh consecutive bit of GENIUS, WALL-E (the little robot that could, can, and will) manages to subtly tell us that we're fucking up our planet (take some notes, Shamalan) while reminding us that love isn't born from big gestures, but rather something as simple as holding hands. And the robots are SO. CUTE.

It's a movie with heart, amazing visuals, humor, and a message for all of us to ponder, regardless of age.

I saw it four times. I'm not kidding.


2. Wanted


Did Die Hard 4: Live Free or Die Hard not satisfy your taste for ridiculous and impossible action and humorous quips? Then this is the movie for you, my friend!

A rags-to-riches (or peon-to-assassin) story in which a young man disinterested in his sorry excuse for a life is recruited by a fraternity of assassins (aptly named "The Fraternity") to train and kill the rogue assassin that killed his father.

Crazy violence, crazy amounts of F-Bombs, and there's a Russian guy that hooks rats up to explosives. Which really made me kind of upset. There's no story (I mean, these people take contracts from a "Loom of Fate", and by "loom" they mean "linen-maker"), but as far as action movies go I've definitely seen worse.

It's bullshit, but fun bullshit.

And James McAvoy is in it, so yay! Oh, and that Angelina chick's in it, too.


3. The Happening

I'm laughing too hard to even write a scathing review. Just don't bother.


4. The Incredible Hulk

gratuitous edward norton shot

Obviously a vast improvement on Ang Lee's thinker, this movie is what it's supposed to be: a comic book adaptation. Edward Norton was fantastic as Bruce Banner, and Tim Roth was fucking frightening as Emil Blonksy (aka: the bad guy). Liv Tyler was so breathy throughout the movie that I was so sure she was having an asthma attack, and William Hurt is getting old. But there were cameos by Lou Ferrigno and Bill Bixby!

But the dialog was great, the CGI didn't take away from the action, although the Hulk looked like a baby-faced monster that I wanted to put in my pocket.

TONY. STARK.


This is about all I can write for now -- I hurt. Last night, we filmed a huge chunk of the student movie I'm starring in. I'm sunburned, I have a sprained wrist, bruises from where I was choked with a piano wire, whiplash, and water lodged way up into my ear canal.

Go me.

More to come soon. aka: THE DARK KNIGHT

The Chronicles of Eye Candy: Prince Look At Me, I'm Gorgeous

I took myself to the 12:00 showing of The Chronicles of Narnia: Prince Caspian this afternoon... it was me, a mother and son, two older (and creepy) men, and a couple.

So, I was basically the only person in the theater over the age of 5, but under the age of 40.

The movie fulfilled all my expectations and even exceeded a few. I was pleasantly surprised at the more intricate plot, the political intrigue, and the EPICness that were all missing from the first movie.

And Ben Barnes. ::melts:: Oh, Ben Barnes. You can point a sword at my throat any time.

The four Pevensie kids from the first movie find a way back to Narnia via the Tube (why didn't that happen when I went to England?) and are shocked to find 1300 years or so have passed. Narnia is overrun by ruins and a race of people called Telmarines, who were apparently sent from Spain. The Caspians have ruled for 9 generations, and numero diez is one Prince Caspian, whose claim to the throne is threatened when his aunt gives birth to a son, which -- as we all know -- always drives the evil uncle into a murderous state of mind.

As the prince escapes into the woods, he blows the "Help" horn, which brings the 4 kids back. The prince reluctantly joins forces with the Narnians to take back the throne -- and the rest of the world.

The story was really well-done, and so was the acting, especially since the kids are older. Although there's something really annoying about that Anna Poppelwall. I'm sure she's a lovely girl, but I couldn't stand her as Susan in this movie (or the last). And it wasn't even because she was Caspian's love interest. It's too bad, because I loved Georgie Henley as Lucy and Skander Keynes (Edmund) OWNED the screen. Keynes totally out-acted everyone else, and he's a little cutie pie.

Anyway, great battle scenes, especially the one between Peter (William Moseley) and that bastard King Miraz. It was epic, even with the lack of blood. For a PG movie, it was pretty bad ass.

AND PETER DINKLAGE AND EDDIE IZZARD WERE BOTH IN THE MOVIE!!! ::convulses with joy:: When I saw Peter Dinklage's name in the opening credits, I practically spazzed in glee. I love him. He's so talented. And, of course, Eddie. ♥

And Ben Barnes. Oh, Ben Barnes. The hottest breakout of 2008. And he's a decent actor, himself. I mean, Bigga Than Ben wasn't anything special, but Ben was great, nonetheless. (For those of you who've asked, I found the movie online. Don't ask.)

My only complaint was that the movie could've ended sooner. 2 hours and 20 minutes is a long time for a kids movie.

Anyway, Prince Caspian was a fun, surprisingly deep movie -- small kids might be rattled by the battle scenes, but they'll get over it once they remember that the animals talk.

I give The Chronicles of Narnia: Prince Caspian 4 out of 5.

"That's right, bitches."

Cars, Skulls, and Lions -- Oh My!

So, I thought about going to see Speed Racer this weekend, but I was able to watch the first 8 minutes of the movie online and decided to skip it before I became any closer to having a seizure. It was like they let loose 100 six-year olds onto the set with crayons and paint, and told them to go wild.

My eyes...


Anyway, I've been reading some of the reviews for the upcoming Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull, and sadly it's not looking good. Some of the reviews make me want to cry, others aren't quite as bad... although they're not good. But since I've had the Indy theme as my ringtone for the last 3 years, the least I can do is ignore Shia LaBouf, squeal over Cate Blanchett's German accent, and form my own opinions on the film.


Remember: May 16th. Prince Caspian. I have half a mind to write to the Disney marketing people about the billboards of Ben Barnes I see when I'm driving. Do you know how distracting they are? I look up, see him, start to drool, and lose control of the car. People have nearly died so the movie can get good publicity. Not cool, Disney. Not cool.

But, er, can I have one of those billboards when you're done? I mean, if you've finished using it and all...


::dies::

Iron Man isn't iron... He's GOLD.

1. Robert Downey Jr, I know I've said this millions of times, but please divorce your wife and marry me.

2. Damn.

Now that I've got that out of the way, I must say that I had high expectations for this movie (especially with RDJ in it), and Iron Man didn't disappoint. At all. Like, in any way. Except the Gwyneth Paltrow thing, but other than that I walked out of there with a huge grin on my face. Seriously, the ticket-checker lady and a loitering police officer both gave me odd/suspicious looks.

Let's get one thing straight. It may have been a fun movie with a solid script and great effects, but it was Robert's show. They could have called it that with a little 'Ironman' footnote beneath the title and it would STILL rake in millions, I guarantee it.

RDJ didn't become Tony Stark. Tony Stark became RDJ.

Okay, first, Marvel finally got it right. It wasn't camp city like it was with Spiderman, and it wasn't mediocre town like it was with X-men (no offense, Mr. Singer), and it didn't plain suck like The Hulk, The Punisher, The Fantastic Four (both of them), Ghost Rider, Daredevil, Elektra, and whatever else they've thrown at us. This movie really defied the convention.

First, of course, there was Tony Stark/RDJ. Robert made you hate him and love him. He's fast, glib, painfully smart, and undeniably sexy. Those are the same comments I made during Kiss Kiss Bang Bang and everyone looked at me weird. That won't be the case after this weekend, between you me. RDJ did a beautiful job portraying Stark as an arrogant prick at the beginning of the movie; you could feel the smarminess oozing off the screen, practically. But as Stark began to change and focus on protecting the people instead of manufacturing weapons, you believed that he was genuine, mostly because he never lost the sarcasm and the fast-pacedness that was uniquely RDJ Stark. GodDAMN, what a performance. But then again, it's RDJ, were we expecting anything less?

Terrence Howard was decent and Gwyneth Paltrow was whiny and forgettable (as per), but Jeff Bridges made one hell of a bad guy. I mean, as soon as I saw him I thought 'there's the douche', but he fooled me up until the middle. Bridges is the man (see: KPAX, but I never saw him as the villain. He was good. Really good. But the minor character that stood out for me was Yinsen, played wonderfully by Shaun Toub. I've never heard of Toub, but I'll be scourging the internets for more information on him. I really enjoyed his character and was really sad to see him die; he played such a crucial role and I understand why his death was necessary, but I hoped he would escape with Stark. But you know what they say about hope! It's dumb.

The script was fantastic and I know that RDJ improvised a few things here and there (as per), which made it more real and a lot more funny. And the effects were great. The CGI was terrific; it was well-done and didn't take away from the movie at all.

omfg rdj.

I am totally going to see this again. And it's been a long time in coming but I think it's finally safe to say that KICK-ASS ACTION FILMS ARE BACK!

I give Iron Man 5 out of 5.

Go see it.

Tragedies as Cash Cows? Or Simply Paying Homage?

Last night, I was watching United 93 and sobbing like a little kid with a skinned knee when I thought back to the day in 8th grade that I was forced to watch The Perfect Storm. And despite me falling asleep during the first 20 minutes, it was after the fact that I decided the movie was a failure as an adaptation of a tragedy.

So, fast forward several years to last night, where I'm still crying as the passengers rush the terrorists to try and take control of the cockpit. This movie is a hard one for me to define. As a movie, it's fantastic. The characters are real people, just innocent bystanders waiting to get home to their families. I really enjoyed that there weren't any big names in the film. I think it made it a little more genuine to not have Brad Pitt or friggin' Lindsay "please oh please go the hell away because no one wants to see you act or sing or breathe" Lohan taking up the screen. And after the terrorists make themselves known, it's just a jumble of fear, confusion, and helplessness. It's well done, as far as a film goes.

But what about the subject matter? The fact is, I'm still reeling from 9/11. I watched the second plane hit, and the first building go down. I sometimes have dreams where I'm on United 93, talking on the phone to my mother and telling her that I love her and not to worry, because we have a plan.

9/11 was a fucked-up day for all of us. It was the day that America was emasculated, the day that my parents didn't have answers for me, the day I was dismissed from school because we feared Boston was next. Every time I heard an airplane -- which, living next to an airport, was like every 10 minutes -- my heart would skip a beat. Even today, when I see a low-flying plane, I sometimes think this is it.

I remember when they were making United 93. In fact, they made two adaptations: Flight 93, which was made for TV, and United 93. The country was divided on making them: one side believed it was too soon, that these people had finally been put to rest and suddenly their final hours were going to be paraded on screens across America for profit. The other side felt these heroes' story needed to be told.

I, too, was divided. How could you make a movie about an event where no one survived and no one really knew what took place? We have snippets of phone conversations and last goodbyes to loved ones, the famous "Let's roll", and whatever was gleaned from the black box. But no one knows how it went down. Just that the normal, innocent passengers stood up together in an attempt to stop the hijack. That's it. And as far as remaining true to the event, that's hardly enough to go on.

It's the same with The Perfect Storm, as disappointing as the movie was. No one knew what happened.

So, what is it? It is paying homage to a tragedy, or is it exploitation? A little of both?

Thoughts?

Hells bells, they even shot the dog! (the No Country for Old Men review)

After seeing Charlie Bartlett, I had a small freak-out, thinking that No Country for Old Men would leave the theater within 24 hours, so I went Sunday afternoon to see it. And boy howdy, I'm glad I did.

No Country for Old Men is the movie that everyone wished they'd thought of. Or the story everyone wished they'd written. And then everyone wishes they were the Coen brothers, but they're not, so too bad. Life sucks. This movie doesn't. It was the perfect blend of simplicity, action, gratuitous violence, and psychology, and it was completely deserving of Best Picture. I'm a bit miffed that it didn't get Best Cinematography (it went to There Will Be Blood), but I suppose that Best Picture, Director, Adapted Screenplay, and Supporting Actor will have to suffice.

Man, where do I begin? The opening lines, a voice-over spoken by Sheriff Ed Tom (the always awesomely deadpan Tommy Lee Jones), capture the viewer's attention right away, nostalgia and exhaustion dripping from every word. Cut to an arrest, which turns sour as Anton Chigurh (Javier Bardem) brutally murders the arresting officer, takes his little oxygen tank, and goes on his merry way. We are then introduced to Llewelyn Moss, a man in the wrong place at the right time who finds the aftermath of a drug deal gone wrong, as well as a case with $2 million inside. He takes the money, which brings Chigurh onto his trail, along with a whole lot of mayhem and ridiculously fascinating deaths and mind games. All for money.

The movie was an absolute dream. I mean that seriously; that shit was surreal. The shots of the landscape, especially when there was a storm on the horizon, were just incredible, giving me a look at a part of the country I barely knew existed. Once again, they lost Best Cinematography. That really frosts my cookies.

The performances were fantastic. Tommy Lee Jones never disappoints, and was so world-weary that you couldn't help but feel the weight of life that he carried. Josh Brolin was an unsuspectingly great anti-hero. I really empathized with him and was very sad when he met an unsuspecting fate. He was smart, he was witty, and he was relatable. Woody Harrelson, not sure what the hell you were doing in the movie, but you were funny ("As compared to what? The bubonic plague?") and annoying and I'm sorry your ass got shot.

Okay. Finally, we get to the talk of the town. Javier Bardem not only deserved Best Supporting Actor, but he also should've been given the Scariest Motherfucker EVER award, because what. the. hell. No, it wasn't just the haircut that terrified me (the hair should've been given Best Supporting), but it was his eyes, totally devoid of any emotion or regard for life, or the stiff way he walked, like a machine. It was his mindfucks (I sat through the scene in the convenience store with the entire cast of ER on standby, because I swear I was gonna have a massive coronary), his silk-over-gravel voice, and it was his damn coins. CHRIST. What a performance. Javier, eres fantastico! Te admiro mucho! Espero que te veré en más peliculas muy pronto!

Shut up. I know Spanish. (If any of that's incorrect, I don't want to hear about it.)

Regardless of the movie not winning Best Cinematography or whether or not my Spanish is half-decent, No Country for Old Men is truly cinema at its best.

Although, what can you expect? It's the Coen brothers.

I give No Country for Old Men 5 out of 5.

ima mess you up.


** I'd like to make a correction from my earlier post regarding the weapon used by Javier Bardem's character. It wasn't a tire iron, it was an oxygen tank. Who fucking knew?

"Never attack a drunk guy with a gun." (The Charlie Bartlett Review)

I went to see Charlie Bartlett only for the sake of seeing Robert Downey Jr. I was pleasantly surprised by the rest of the cast, as well as the way the story unfolded.

Charlie Bartlett is about a wealthy, smart and mature boy of the same name (played by Anton Yelchin) who has been kicked out of every private school he's attended -- the latest offense making fake (but very authentic-looking) driver's licenses. His mother (Hope Davis -- who owns), a careless woman who sings showtunes while taking klonopin with wine, sees him as an adult instead of the teenager he is. It is decided that Charlie will attend public school, and after a very rough start, he is accepted by his peers when he sets up a psychiatrist's office in the boy's bathroom, complete with prescriptions for their ailments. However Principal Nathan Gardener (Robert Downey Jr, never a disappointment in any movie he's ever been in) finds himself at odds with Charlie, especially when the boy starts dating his daughter (Kat Dennings).

This movie, no matter what some critics have to say, was thoroughly enjoyable. It wasn't another movie about an arrogant teenager, or a film a la Ferris Bueller, but a real look at the problems high school kids have, ranging from promiscuity to homosexuality to suicide. And Charlie Bartlett bears the burden of his desired popularity with great aplomb, even when in the face of expulsion and other not-fun things.

Anton Yelchin really shone in this movie, to the point where I felt like a pedophile for being so impressed. Plus, he's a real cutie. I really enjoyed his performance as the charismatic Charlie, and never for a second did it fall flat, or was I not fully on board with it. He was that cute everyman that we all went to school with, who never belonged to one group and was friends with the entire school because he did some amazing thing that keeps everyone in awe. Yelchin kept me raptured and even made me wish that someone like Charlie had gone to my own high school; we would have been a lot happier if he had.

Robert Downey Jr. stole every scene he was in. He was funny, he was tragic, he was a total dad. Downey Jr. is one of my favorite actors. There's just something about him that you can totally relate to, no matter the role, whether he's a thief stealing shit (Kiss Kiss Bang Bang) or a reluctant superhero (the upcoming Iron Man). As the alcoholic Principal Gardener, you felt his pain, how his life was destroyed when he was given the position of principal and left his position as a history teacher. He doesn't understand his daughter, and doesn't see that his drinking and "hobby" (driving a remote-controlled boat around his pool) is hurting her. The climax scene between him and Charlie is just... I sat there in shock and awe, thanking Elsie Downey for bringing him into the world. There isn't a more talented and versatile actor out there (except for maybe Nathan Fillion and Sean Biggerstaff, but I'm biased).

The rest of the cast, the student body, were great, especially Tyler Hilton as Murphy Bivens, the bully-turned-business partner. I really enjoyed his character and couldn't see him played by anyone else. I hope to see more of Hilton (no relation to THE Hiltons, thank god) in upcoming films. He's on the CW's One Tree Hill as Chris Keller.

The movie flowed well and moved quickly. I was surprised when it ended. The ending, come to think of it, was probably the weakest part of the movie. However if that's all it's got against it, it's doing pretty well.

I give Charlie Bartlett a 4 out of 5.

Mass Movie Biz?

Well, I must say, my state's better than yours. We were the first to kick tea off a boat. We started a revolution. We had the first shopping mall in the country. We were the first to legalize gay marriage.

And now? We're getting a movie studio, yo.

A formal naval base will be converted into the biggest movie helm in New England, called This Studio Complex. They're planning for 14 sound stages, making it the biggest in MA. It'll take $300 million to build, but I'm sure the movie industry won't care when state tax credits reduce the studio costs by 25%.

I personally think it's a great idea! It'll create tons of new jobs, which will stimulate the economy, and I have plenty of ridiculously talented friends who will hopefully take advantage of this opportunity and maybe use it to sling-shot themselves to stardom. Maybe I'll even submit screenplays. Or hell, act! It'd be fun to act again.

Of course, they're shooting to start building in 2009, but I can't imagine it taking that long. Good things are looming on the horizon!

Contact your representative and tell them you give it a big, hearty HELLZ YEAH!

http://www.mass.gov/?pageID=gov3utilities&sid=Agov3&U=Agov3_contact_us

I can has good moviez?

Apparently not.
Apparently not.
Apparently not.
Apparently -- are you getting sick of seeing that?

Yeah. That's how I felt in Vantage Point, which I had the misfortune of seeing this past weekend.

Christ, what a bad movie. I haven't seen a movie this bad since... hm, let me think back... Well, Meet the Spartans was a big black hole of SUCK, but I'd have to say since I was forced to sit through The Neverending Story 3: Escape from Fantasia.

Yes, I hated Vantage Point that much.

The acting was terrible, the story was supposed to be a "puzzle" but was more like a rat that couldn't find the end of a maze and DIED, the car chase was so crazy that it was stupid, the dialog was ridiculous ("I've got you, Mr. President"), there was no resolution to the "plan", and the audience groaned at every different vantage point, of which there were 8. The movie was pretty much swallowed by a plot hole.

I contemplated walking out of the theater several times, but then remembered I'd paid $12.75 to sit in the Director's Hall to see the damn thing.

If you think this review is a bit crap, then it totally fits the movie.

I give Vantage Point 1 out of 5.

if you have the opportunity to see this, don't.

An Open Letter

Dear In Bruges,

Please, please, PLEASE come to my theater. I need to see Brendon Gleeson be amazing. Right now.


Hugs and kisses,
R.C.

A Bastard in a Basket (the "there will be blood" review)

If Daniel Day-Lewis doesn't get an Oscar for his performance as Daniel Plainview, I'm going to the Academy with a pick-ax.

There Will Be Blood has restored my faith in Hollywood. For a while, at least. It was long, yes, but I never once wondered what time it was or even got up to go to the bathroom (even when my back teeth were practically floating). It moved right along, the plot was interesting, I became emotionally invested in the characters, and the score is now the rightful owner of my soul. As my good friend and fellow film-lover Justin said, "It was a great reminder of how much we take advantage of special effects and crappy acting, and then this movie comes out and it's like, 'oh yeah! That's what a movie is supposed to be!"

Let's start with Daniel as Daniel, shall we? I haven't seen a performance quite like that since Dick Cheney mistook a buddy for a quail. Damn, he was convincing. Daniel, not Cheney. I know that Daniel is very big on method acting and preparation to the point of exhaustion, but jeez, he must have smoked 200 packs an hour and developed cirrhosis and bathed in bacon fat for this role. He was charismatic, he was smooth, he was smart, he loved his son very much and very hard, and he was monumentally fucked-up. And he did it so well. Every moment he was on screen, it was as if Daniel Plainview (who didn't have a plain bone in his body) was a living and breathing man, standing right next to me, sweating whiskey and willing to do anything -- including joining some crazy evangelist church. The end scene alone should have every actor EVER on their knees with their mouths open.

Paul Dano -- the mute kid from Little Miss Sunshine -- has really come into his own. I was thoroughly impressed by his portrayal of craaaaaazy priest Eli. What with the pentecostal 'exorcisms' and the very quiet way he had of manipulating people. The scene with him covered in mud at the dinner table had my heart pounding. His delivery was perfect, just perfect.

The cinematography was fantastic. Every shot held something symbolically for me, especially the shots when dealing with fire and shadow. Every shot was epic. It was like Paul Thomas Anderson was bringing back the glory days of old Hollywood with his establishing shots and points of view.

The dichotomy of power and humanity was fascinating. Daniel's absolute loathing for mankind was an amazing thing to witness, especially when cast against his love for H.W., his foster son. His hatred was palpable, climaxing not once, but twice in this film, both times horrible and yet totally necessary. The religion aspect of it was twisted and delicious and really makes you wonder just what there is to believe in.

I really can't wait for the Academy Awards, to see how this will fare against No Country for Old Men. Daniel'd better win, that's all I can say. Because I'll be watching, Sid Ganis. I'll be watching.

I have a distinct urge to learn the violin now.

I give There Will Be Blood 5 out of 5.