The Curious Case of Benjamin Button is just that, a curious tale of a man that ages backwards. It really is a beautiful movie about love through time. Now, it's not love through time like Orlando, The Red Violin or The Fountain. This movie really is a tale of true love: meeting the person in an awkward situation, trying to court them against others wishes, 2 people's lives taking different directions and then paths crossing again when they can actually be together. This is all just made more awkward by Benjamin being and old man to start with and being more age appropriate for his live only when they are in their 40s.
F Scott Fitzgerald's original short story is more of a commentary on people being born and dying in the same state: small, weak and simple. This film does the same but the visuals at the end are heart-wrenching. An elderly woman taking her 70-something husband for a walk in the body of a 2 year old, holding hands and leaning down to give a kiss made my heart explode. It made me, in one instant, miss my kids at home, pray that they never had to lose someone, miss my wife at home, pray that we stayed together forever and hope that it never comes to one of us taking care of the dimentia ridden other one. It's a beautiful movie that spans generations of looks and styles and tells a story of true love. Just take tissues.
Friday, December 26, 2008
Monday, December 15, 2008
the kids are testing me
It's nice when the teacher stops you to compliment your 4 year old's sense of humor.
It's another thing when she stops you to say "you are in charge. He is strong-willed, and smart. Make sure he knows you are in charge"
Oh crap.
Again, it's nice that others in positions of authority see that he is smart. But to warn me about it, that's scary.
But it also puts me on my guard and makes me questions whether or not that milk cup got knocked over or if he's getting revenge. I don't want to question my babies' motives. It's nice that they are smart enough to have motives but why can't I assume they are still innocent?
Just for a little while more, please.
It's another thing when she stops you to say "you are in charge. He is strong-willed, and smart. Make sure he knows you are in charge"
Oh crap.
Again, it's nice that others in positions of authority see that he is smart. But to warn me about it, that's scary.
But it also puts me on my guard and makes me questions whether or not that milk cup got knocked over or if he's getting revenge. I don't want to question my babies' motives. It's nice that they are smart enough to have motives but why can't I assume they are still innocent?
Just for a little while more, please.
Wednesday, September 24, 2008
Writing isn't just hard for me...
To get the right word in the right place is a rare achievement.
-Mark Twain
-Mark Twain
McCain wants to wait to debate!
Because they don't have a plan!
This is the political equivalent of sitting at the restaurant saying, "Go ahead, I'll order last"
Then, after your dinner partner lays out what they want, he says, "Yeah, I'll have that, but... less environmentally sound and with more white people."
This is the political equivalent of sitting at the restaurant saying, "Go ahead, I'll order last"
Then, after your dinner partner lays out what they want, he says, "Yeah, I'll have that, but... less environmentally sound and with more white people."
Tuesday, September 23, 2008
I LOVE television.
I've always liked televesion. Everyone does, right? It passes the time and hopefully gets you thinking about a good story rather than the harsh realities around you.
But, we live in a time where TV is actually great! There are a lot of good shows on now. I think I am recording something like 50 TV series in any given year (53 over 2 HD DVRs, I checked)
Now don't get me wrong, I don't sit at home and only watch TV. Many of these shows are not on during the same season.
I.E. there are several summer series (Kitchen Nightmares, So You Think You Can Dance, Psych, Eureka...)
shows that are sporadic at their series airings (Battlestar Galactica (the last season has taken 2 years to air, isn't that 2 seasons?) The Simpsons, Family Guy, American Dad (between football and NASCar it's amazing these shows get seen)
Shows that don't start until midseason (24, Lost...) that replace shows that were on the first half of the year.
So I record all these shows but it's a rotation of old shows out, new shows in.
But back to my original point. There is a lot of good television. And much of it is getting a chance. FINALLY TV is getting a chance by TV...
For years, executives looked only at next day numbers from Neilsen and made decisions based on that. Those numbers suck, they looked at who was watching live only. There were no check boxes for VCR data collection. If a shows numbers were bad, it got cancelled right away or maybe shifted to another night to "find an audience."
But, unfortunately, for those that found the show the first night, they had to hunt for it if they wanted to see it again. Then the show that needed to find and audience, lost the one it had. And then got cancelled.
For the 2007-08 season, Neilsen and the networks, seeing the deeper penetration of DVRs into the mainstream (28% as of Sept '08) decided to take a chance and look at "live + 3". That's everyone that watched the show air and eveyone that watched it within 3 days of the original airing. The data was so much harder to parse that the networks admitted that it would take at least 4 weeks to gather the informaiton and see what it meant. And so, shows that wouldn't have had a chance the year before, got to find their audience and the audience could find the show the second week.
Now, there is a lot of good TV on. Interesting stories that are getting time to unfold and more genre shows because, duh, geeks into Sci-Fi have DVRs and watch that stuff when they get to it (after a Halo party)
The best part about these stories is that they are making themselves big but finite. Some of these new shows are probably only going to last 3-5 years (if they get to play out) but at the end, they will have told the whole story. Lost is begining it's 5th of 6 seasons and, though more questions are being asked than answered lately, we the viewer know that everything will be answered. Fox's new JJ Abrams show Fringe had it's season premiere and talks about 46 documented events that are being referred to as "The Pattern". Well, let's do the math.
[
46 events
+ 1 current case/event
+ unknown number of new events
- multiple events being part of the same mystery
+ minimum of 5 episodes that deal solely with the conspiracy behind it all
]
divided by 18 episodes (because that's what JJ has to do for Lost due to high production demands)
______________________________
3 seasons
Then boom, it's wrapped up.
It's a great idea to work with. So great that we didn't even invent it. The Brits did, near as I can tell. They do short seasons (6-12 episodes) and run for a couple years only. They don't do things Friends or Seinfeld style, running endlessly until enough cast gets tired they leave or ratings drop so low, the network has an albatross around it's neck.
But these shows are great. They are being written by true storytellers. These people have complete thoughts and ideas and have a way of crafting them to create suspense and anticipation yet not go down season after season only to have one whole season not count because it was a dream or have it prattle on because no one cares about the characters anymore because they have become a self-referential joke of themselves.
I am getting lost in my own ideas now, so just give TV a chance, I think you'll like it.
So far the only new show I can truly vouche for is Fringe but the new season of Heroes is kicking ass already and I am looking forward to Chuck and Lost.
But, we live in a time where TV is actually great! There are a lot of good shows on now. I think I am recording something like 50 TV series in any given year (53 over 2 HD DVRs, I checked)
Now don't get me wrong, I don't sit at home and only watch TV. Many of these shows are not on during the same season.
I.E. there are several summer series (Kitchen Nightmares, So You Think You Can Dance, Psych, Eureka...)
shows that are sporadic at their series airings (Battlestar Galactica (the last season has taken 2 years to air, isn't that 2 seasons?) The Simpsons, Family Guy, American Dad (between football and NASCar it's amazing these shows get seen)
Shows that don't start until midseason (24, Lost...) that replace shows that were on the first half of the year.
So I record all these shows but it's a rotation of old shows out, new shows in.
But back to my original point. There is a lot of good television. And much of it is getting a chance. FINALLY TV is getting a chance by TV...
For years, executives looked only at next day numbers from Neilsen and made decisions based on that. Those numbers suck, they looked at who was watching live only. There were no check boxes for VCR data collection. If a shows numbers were bad, it got cancelled right away or maybe shifted to another night to "find an audience."
But, unfortunately, for those that found the show the first night, they had to hunt for it if they wanted to see it again. Then the show that needed to find and audience, lost the one it had. And then got cancelled.
For the 2007-08 season, Neilsen and the networks, seeing the deeper penetration of DVRs into the mainstream (28% as of Sept '08) decided to take a chance and look at "live + 3". That's everyone that watched the show air and eveyone that watched it within 3 days of the original airing. The data was so much harder to parse that the networks admitted that it would take at least 4 weeks to gather the informaiton and see what it meant. And so, shows that wouldn't have had a chance the year before, got to find their audience and the audience could find the show the second week.
Now, there is a lot of good TV on. Interesting stories that are getting time to unfold and more genre shows because, duh, geeks into Sci-Fi have DVRs and watch that stuff when they get to it (after a Halo party)
The best part about these stories is that they are making themselves big but finite. Some of these new shows are probably only going to last 3-5 years (if they get to play out) but at the end, they will have told the whole story. Lost is begining it's 5th of 6 seasons and, though more questions are being asked than answered lately, we the viewer know that everything will be answered. Fox's new JJ Abrams show Fringe had it's season premiere and talks about 46 documented events that are being referred to as "The Pattern". Well, let's do the math.
[
46 events
+ 1 current case/event
+ unknown number of new events
- multiple events being part of the same mystery
+ minimum of 5 episodes that deal solely with the conspiracy behind it all
]
divided by 18 episodes (because that's what JJ has to do for Lost due to high production demands)
______________________________
3 seasons
Then boom, it's wrapped up.
It's a great idea to work with. So great that we didn't even invent it. The Brits did, near as I can tell. They do short seasons (6-12 episodes) and run for a couple years only. They don't do things Friends or Seinfeld style, running endlessly until enough cast gets tired they leave or ratings drop so low, the network has an albatross around it's neck.
But these shows are great. They are being written by true storytellers. These people have complete thoughts and ideas and have a way of crafting them to create suspense and anticipation yet not go down season after season only to have one whole season not count because it was a dream or have it prattle on because no one cares about the characters anymore because they have become a self-referential joke of themselves.
I am getting lost in my own ideas now, so just give TV a chance, I think you'll like it.
So far the only new show I can truly vouche for is Fringe but the new season of Heroes is kicking ass already and I am looking forward to Chuck and Lost.
Friday, September 12, 2008
Has anyone considered this?
God made us in his image. But Dinosaurs were here first. Even Sarah Palin can admit that (Probably 65,000,000-230,000,000 years ago, not 4,000).
What if we got to Heaven and there was a giant Tyrannasaurus Rex sitting there?
And Jesus was sitting at the right hand of the father, trembling in fear because, "Holy Crap, my dad's a dinosaur!"
What if we got to Heaven and there was a giant Tyrannasaurus Rex sitting there?
And Jesus was sitting at the right hand of the father, trembling in fear because, "Holy Crap, my dad's a dinosaur!"
Really, this is what their options were?
I don't know what makes a vagina worth voting for, but I don't like what's attached to Sarah Palin's vagina. Namely Sarah Palin.
Like a Tropic Thunder chasing the retarded wind...
So I loved Tropic Thunder.
I actually think that people that thought there was too much "retard" talk are overly sensitive. I understand that plenty of people out there have handicapped family and it strikes a nreve with them. But then don't see it. You don't have to go see something because "you need to know for yourself." You are going into it knowing that you are going to be mad. And as self fulfilling prophecies go... bingo, bango, bongo: you're mad.
Others have complained that the movie is too "inside" the industry. I consider my self a filmmaker at heart and an avid learner of the industry. But I thought it was damn funny stuff regardless of the "inside" bits. And I think those who don't get it, just don't get it.
Overall it's a great comedy. A little slow at times and oddly paced in general but great performances from everybody on screen, especially Tom Cruise. So much so, I have faith in Tom Cruisse again adn never once thought, Oh yeah, I hate $cientology.
I actually think that people that thought there was too much "retard" talk are overly sensitive. I understand that plenty of people out there have handicapped family and it strikes a nreve with them. But then don't see it. You don't have to go see something because "you need to know for yourself." You are going into it knowing that you are going to be mad. And as self fulfilling prophecies go... bingo, bango, bongo: you're mad.
Others have complained that the movie is too "inside" the industry. I consider my self a filmmaker at heart and an avid learner of the industry. But I thought it was damn funny stuff regardless of the "inside" bits. And I think those who don't get it, just don't get it.
Overall it's a great comedy. A little slow at times and oddly paced in general but great performances from everybody on screen, especially Tom Cruise. So much so, I have faith in Tom Cruisse again adn never once thought, Oh yeah, I hate $cientology.
Monday, August 4, 2008
I Wanted you... to want... me!
Wanted is the story of Wesley Gibson. A regular guy in a nothing job that hates his life. Cheery.
He quickly finds out that things in his life are not as they seem and the nobody he think hs is is actually somebody of great significance.
Wanted, as everyone will tell you, is based on the "groundbreaking" "action-packed" graphic novel by Mark Millar. Well. sorta.
Wanted the movie has the same name as a comic book mini-series. That's totally true.
Wanted the movie has characters with the same names as a comic book mini-series. That's totally true.
Wanted the movie has guns and sexy ladies just like a comic book mini-series. That's totally true.
Wanted the movie could have easily been called
The Fraternity or
Sloan's Army or
Kill One, Save A Thousand or
Justifiable
and it would have been just as good and not needed to be "based on the graphic novel"
Why? The Graphic novel wasn't that good.
It's interesting. You have to buy into it's truths just as the Wesley character does, but it get's uber-sadistic pretty fast. It's not for kids. Or even teens that haven't seen ALOT of TV and comics before this. If they pick it up thinking it's the comic version of the movie, they are going to have a rude awakening.
Here's a quick rundown of what the comic has that the movie doesn't:
Super-villains
costumes
rape
revenge killings of otherwise innocent people
5 crime syndicates bent on overthrowing each other to either protect or enslave the world
a shit monster
Here's what the movie has that the graphic novel doesn't:
A Fraternity of Assasins
A Loom of Fate
binary code
double-crosses
deception
Curving the Bullet
A positive outlook on the world
A hero that wants to be good despite having the ability to be bad
Angelina Jolie (you are lying if you don't think she's the hottest)
Now, Millar actually did everything in his book deliberately and it's all spelled out why things happen and it's not a hero story. It's a bad guy story. And it's honest to his vision and it works for what it is. But it's not Hollywood.
And the movie is a large part of the book fit into a different story with similar aspects... but the two entities named Wanted are not interchangable. And that's OK. Just don't be surprised when you pick up the graphic novel like I was.
That being said: Wanted is a totally fun movie. Lots of violence, kinetic energy, tracking shots that go on forever and have mountains of visual information...
It's fun to see what sort of power can come from the choices we make and what choices we make when given power.
He quickly finds out that things in his life are not as they seem and the nobody he think hs is is actually somebody of great significance.
Wanted, as everyone will tell you, is based on the "groundbreaking" "action-packed" graphic novel by Mark Millar. Well. sorta.
Wanted the movie has the same name as a comic book mini-series. That's totally true.
Wanted the movie has characters with the same names as a comic book mini-series. That's totally true.
Wanted the movie has guns and sexy ladies just like a comic book mini-series. That's totally true.
Wanted the movie could have easily been called
The Fraternity or
Sloan's Army or
Kill One, Save A Thousand or
Justifiable
and it would have been just as good and not needed to be "based on the graphic novel"
Why? The Graphic novel wasn't that good.
It's interesting. You have to buy into it's truths just as the Wesley character does, but it get's uber-sadistic pretty fast. It's not for kids. Or even teens that haven't seen ALOT of TV and comics before this. If they pick it up thinking it's the comic version of the movie, they are going to have a rude awakening.
Here's a quick rundown of what the comic has that the movie doesn't:
Super-villains
costumes
rape
revenge killings of otherwise innocent people
5 crime syndicates bent on overthrowing each other to either protect or enslave the world
a shit monster
Here's what the movie has that the graphic novel doesn't:
A Fraternity of Assasins
A Loom of Fate
binary code
double-crosses
deception
Curving the Bullet
A positive outlook on the world
A hero that wants to be good despite having the ability to be bad
Angelina Jolie (you are lying if you don't think she's the hottest)
Now, Millar actually did everything in his book deliberately and it's all spelled out why things happen and it's not a hero story. It's a bad guy story. And it's honest to his vision and it works for what it is. But it's not Hollywood.
And the movie is a large part of the book fit into a different story with similar aspects... but the two entities named Wanted are not interchangable. And that's OK. Just don't be surprised when you pick up the graphic novel like I was.
That being said: Wanted is a totally fun movie. Lots of violence, kinetic energy, tracking shots that go on forever and have mountains of visual information...
It's fun to see what sort of power can come from the choices we make and what choices we make when given power.
D* Ric Rolled me...
I got off the phone with DirecTV after ordering another HR-2x. I got one free a couple months ago and the best they would give me (after 3 rounds of CSR roulette) was $99 and free shipping.
I figured that my HDVR2 was $435 on sale 5 years ago, my HR10 was $899 3/4 (I forget) years ago and my SD-DVR80 was $100 around that same time. Then my first HR21 was free. So I am OK with $100. I know people have gotten better deals but if the buyer is happy, isn't that all that matters... I digress.
The CSR talked me through the whole thing and put me on hold for 7 minutes to set it up. And I didn't have my laptop out at the time. She expalined, 199 fee plus tax, minus 100 credit plus tax plus 19.95 shipping , minus 19.95 spiing credit. Total 104.99.
GREAT!
A couple hours later, I hopped online and looked at my account to double check. Total: 209.99
Whisky, Tango, Foxtrot.
I call customer service... it's 10:15. Closed. I call the next day. An equally nice lady is helping me out.
Yes.
Yes.
Yes.
It says it all here in the notes. She just didn't do the second credit.
Great.
She can cancel it and we can start over.
great.
But it's already in queue to ship.
Great.
She's just going to add the credit after the fact...
GREAT!
...and it should appear on my account within 7 business days.
great
Should I add a poll to this to guess how many times I am going to have to call back to get my $100 credit?
Like I said in the title, it's like getting Ric Rolled. I am offered a deal that I am very comfortable with and then BAM... not what I signed up for.
Never gonna give you up, never gonna let you go...
I figured that my HDVR2 was $435 on sale 5 years ago, my HR10 was $899 3/4 (I forget) years ago and my SD-DVR80 was $100 around that same time. Then my first HR21 was free. So I am OK with $100. I know people have gotten better deals but if the buyer is happy, isn't that all that matters... I digress.
The CSR talked me through the whole thing and put me on hold for 7 minutes to set it up. And I didn't have my laptop out at the time. She expalined, 199 fee plus tax, minus 100 credit plus tax plus 19.95 shipping , minus 19.95 spiing credit. Total 104.99.
GREAT!
A couple hours later, I hopped online and looked at my account to double check. Total: 209.99
Whisky, Tango, Foxtrot.
I call customer service... it's 10:15. Closed. I call the next day. An equally nice lady is helping me out.
Yes.
Yes.
Yes.
It says it all here in the notes. She just didn't do the second credit.
Great.
She can cancel it and we can start over.
great.
But it's already in queue to ship.
Great.
She's just going to add the credit after the fact...
GREAT!
...and it should appear on my account within 7 business days.
great
Should I add a poll to this to guess how many times I am going to have to call back to get my $100 credit?
Like I said in the title, it's like getting Ric Rolled. I am offered a deal that I am very comfortable with and then BAM... not what I signed up for.
Never gonna give you up, never gonna let you go...
Friday, July 18, 2008
He ain't heavy, he's my Batman
First things first. I previously wrote that Wall-E was the best movie of the year.
Let's me quickly qualify: Best Romantic Comedy.
Best Cartoon Romantic Comedy.
Best Futristic Cartoon Romantic Comedy.
Whatever. It's still great. 5 stars.
Now.
This
is
the
best
movie
of
the
summer.
I saw the 12:01AM show last night. Credits rolled at 2:45AM. I would have gone another screening right then.
This movie is MAGNIFICENTLY crafted. This movie is so good that it will make people stop wanting to make movies because so much prefect is on screen, it clearly can't be topped.
But, god willing, Christoper Nolan will in another 3 years.
I won't go into a plot synopsis, because I never do. But also because it is a disservice to the viewer of the movie. You know it's Batman vs the Joker. But what is amazing about the writing of this story is all that isn't put on screen. There is no Joker origin story. In fact there is a running dialogue gag, referring to that. And every event in the plot feels like a spoiler because every event pushes Bruce Wayne along his journey into right vs wrong and where this movie starts is not where it ends up. And I want everyone to see it fresh for themselves..
The Joker is an absolute force that only wants one thing: chaos. And that is a truly beautful thing.
He wants chaos in all aspects of Gotham. Even in the heart of the Batman. And that is where the writing really takes off. And I am not really sure of where the Joker's brillance is derived, the script or the actor. Surely the writing is always the jumping off point, but what Heath Ledger puts on screen is a treat. It is a perfect performance of a (now) perfect character that is a horribly flawed man. Heath Ledger will receive an Oscar nomination. Sadly, it may because Hollywood "feels they should" but, he really, really deserves it. It is mindblowing.
My mind has been blown.
Christian Bale, again, delivers a Bruce Wayne that we want to see. We want to know how he ticks and what he'll do next. My only problem with Batman in this series is this, he's sometimes hard to hear. Bruce Wayne puts on a gravelly voice when caped-up as to further hide his identity. Sometimes that voice is actully difficult to understand when there is alot of background city noise. But that is my only (stupid) criticism. Bale delivers on all fronts and I know my wife will, yet agian, be hot for him when we go to our Saturday screening.
Morgan Freeman and Michael Caine are two wonderfully cast actors that serve as Wayne's mentors and moral sounding boards. Thank god they were cast originally and Chris Nolan has a vision that he is unwavering from. I don't know that I would have thought of them but we are better off since he did.
Aaron Eckhart is a choice I would have never thought of. And, again, it is inspired and amazing. Harvey Dent's stroy arc is familiar to the fans of the Batman in all his incarnations. But his story here really has you rooting for him and feeling bad all the while since you know what his inevitble outcome is. And the most amazing part is how far they take his story in this movie. It's almost like we get a bonus movie inside this one.
Like you would expect, the stunts are amazing, the gadgets kick ass, the sets are expansive... this is huge and only going to get bigger. And it almost didn't get made. Warner was skeptical after Batman Begins because, though it did well, it didn't blow the doors down. And truly, honestly, unfortunatley, maybe the best thing that happened to this movie was Ledger's death. People really do want to see what he did. And they will be satisfied. But they will get a fantastic movie for the price of admission.
I can't give enough praise to this film.
Let's me quickly qualify: Best Romantic Comedy.
Best Cartoon Romantic Comedy.
Best Futristic Cartoon Romantic Comedy.
Whatever. It's still great. 5 stars.
Now.
This
is
the
best
movie
of
the
summer.
I saw the 12:01AM show last night. Credits rolled at 2:45AM. I would have gone another screening right then.
This movie is MAGNIFICENTLY crafted. This movie is so good that it will make people stop wanting to make movies because so much prefect is on screen, it clearly can't be topped.
But, god willing, Christoper Nolan will in another 3 years.
I won't go into a plot synopsis, because I never do. But also because it is a disservice to the viewer of the movie. You know it's Batman vs the Joker. But what is amazing about the writing of this story is all that isn't put on screen. There is no Joker origin story. In fact there is a running dialogue gag, referring to that. And every event in the plot feels like a spoiler because every event pushes Bruce Wayne along his journey into right vs wrong and where this movie starts is not where it ends up. And I want everyone to see it fresh for themselves..
The Joker is an absolute force that only wants one thing: chaos. And that is a truly beautful thing.
He wants chaos in all aspects of Gotham. Even in the heart of the Batman. And that is where the writing really takes off. And I am not really sure of where the Joker's brillance is derived, the script or the actor. Surely the writing is always the jumping off point, but what Heath Ledger puts on screen is a treat. It is a perfect performance of a (now) perfect character that is a horribly flawed man. Heath Ledger will receive an Oscar nomination. Sadly, it may because Hollywood "feels they should" but, he really, really deserves it. It is mindblowing.
My mind has been blown.
Christian Bale, again, delivers a Bruce Wayne that we want to see. We want to know how he ticks and what he'll do next. My only problem with Batman in this series is this, he's sometimes hard to hear. Bruce Wayne puts on a gravelly voice when caped-up as to further hide his identity. Sometimes that voice is actully difficult to understand when there is alot of background city noise. But that is my only (stupid) criticism. Bale delivers on all fronts and I know my wife will, yet agian, be hot for him when we go to our Saturday screening.
Morgan Freeman and Michael Caine are two wonderfully cast actors that serve as Wayne's mentors and moral sounding boards. Thank god they were cast originally and Chris Nolan has a vision that he is unwavering from. I don't know that I would have thought of them but we are better off since he did.
Aaron Eckhart is a choice I would have never thought of. And, again, it is inspired and amazing. Harvey Dent's stroy arc is familiar to the fans of the Batman in all his incarnations. But his story here really has you rooting for him and feeling bad all the while since you know what his inevitble outcome is. And the most amazing part is how far they take his story in this movie. It's almost like we get a bonus movie inside this one.
Like you would expect, the stunts are amazing, the gadgets kick ass, the sets are expansive... this is huge and only going to get bigger. And it almost didn't get made. Warner was skeptical after Batman Begins because, though it did well, it didn't blow the doors down. And truly, honestly, unfortunatley, maybe the best thing that happened to this movie was Ledger's death. People really do want to see what he did. And they will be satisfied. But they will get a fantastic movie for the price of admission.
I can't give enough praise to this film.
Wednesday, July 9, 2008
Silence is golden, Wall-E is priceless.
Wall-E is the best movie of the year.
That's it.
Maybe some more. Wall-E is the most sensitive, heartwarming, tear jerking, inspiring, thought provoking movie this year. Maybe this decade, I can't remember what's come out.
Pixar has out done themselves again.
This little square robot has you following his every move with excitement and anticipation. He is so well written, that I could have watched a 1:45 movie where EVE hadn't even gotten there yet.
The heart that went into Wall-E (figuritively, it's not a cyborg movie) makes you love him right off the bat. But when he starts interacting with EVE (a female scout robot) and then the humans in space, you can't help but want to be like him. He affects every life he touches. And though, curiously at first, sometimes, always for the best. Granted, it's a kids movie. But why should that fact denegrate the idea of being kind to all those around you and curious about everything? If anything, we need to be more like Wall-E.
Some people I know told us that we shouldn't take our kids to see this. Their reasoning (besides the fact that they are 26 year old single people) was that the movie was too quiet and not a lot of talking happens for the first 20 minutes. They're sweet. And naive.
Movies started being made a long time ago. Then after they had been around a while, people started thinking about how to add sound. Originally, sound was on a record that was synched up to the film. It's kinda why film has a countdown with beeps, so you can line it up. But even before sound, people went to movies. And the best part about a movie like this and little kids, the kids get it. Emotional beeps and boops convey all the information that needs to be heard. And Wall-E being a robot, allows over gestured reactions and faces that put the point home even faster. KIds who don't talk yet, like mine, communicate through babble and gestures. They get Wall-E too well. My son thought one of his boops was so hilarious, he mimicked it 5 or 6 times, right there at full volume (3pm matinee with 400 other kids and at least a few were doing the same, and I was reminding him of inside voices. I'm not that guy).
This movie has a myriad of things going for it, even a vicious plot to keep the humans from returning to Earth. There are plenty of reasons to take your kids to see this movie or go alone, but my god, see this movie. You can't help but be moved by it.
That's it.
Maybe some more. Wall-E is the most sensitive, heartwarming, tear jerking, inspiring, thought provoking movie this year. Maybe this decade, I can't remember what's come out.
Pixar has out done themselves again.
This little square robot has you following his every move with excitement and anticipation. He is so well written, that I could have watched a 1:45 movie where EVE hadn't even gotten there yet.
The heart that went into Wall-E (figuritively, it's not a cyborg movie) makes you love him right off the bat. But when he starts interacting with EVE (a female scout robot) and then the humans in space, you can't help but want to be like him. He affects every life he touches. And though, curiously at first, sometimes, always for the best. Granted, it's a kids movie. But why should that fact denegrate the idea of being kind to all those around you and curious about everything? If anything, we need to be more like Wall-E.
Some people I know told us that we shouldn't take our kids to see this. Their reasoning (besides the fact that they are 26 year old single people) was that the movie was too quiet and not a lot of talking happens for the first 20 minutes. They're sweet. And naive.
Movies started being made a long time ago. Then after they had been around a while, people started thinking about how to add sound. Originally, sound was on a record that was synched up to the film. It's kinda why film has a countdown with beeps, so you can line it up. But even before sound, people went to movies. And the best part about a movie like this and little kids, the kids get it. Emotional beeps and boops convey all the information that needs to be heard. And Wall-E being a robot, allows over gestured reactions and faces that put the point home even faster. KIds who don't talk yet, like mine, communicate through babble and gestures. They get Wall-E too well. My son thought one of his boops was so hilarious, he mimicked it 5 or 6 times, right there at full volume (3pm matinee with 400 other kids and at least a few were doing the same, and I was reminding him of inside voices. I'm not that guy).
This movie has a myriad of things going for it, even a vicious plot to keep the humans from returning to Earth. There are plenty of reasons to take your kids to see this movie or go alone, but my god, see this movie. You can't help but be moved by it.
Saturday, June 14, 2008
Beej SMASH! Hulk ENTERTAIN!
I managed to sneak out and see the Incredible Hulk under the cover of night and an elaborate disguise that the Impoosible Missions Force would have trouble seeing through.
Actually I asked KT to go to the midnight movie on Thursday. She said yes.
But, I'm glad I did.
The Incredible Hulk is good. The direction, production and storytelling is GREAT. Sounds like the same thing, no. It's not.
The story that happens on screen is very good. Son't get me wrong, watching Banner on the run, dealing with hiding and still being in love and trying to protect everyone from himself is great. Watching Tim Roth's creepy performance and vicious transformation is breathtaking. But the tools the writers, director and editor used are near perfect. EXPECIALLY for this reboot/reworking/reimagining... whatever it is called this week.
First and foremost, the most entertaining sequence really has to be the opening titles because they do 2 HUGE things here.
1. They give all the backstory you need, what happened, how it happened, etc. It basically gives you the origin movie in 4 minutes.
2. The better part of the footage is direct copies of the HULK TV series intro! Just with the new actors. Bad haircuts and all. It is a brilliant piece of work and the movie you came to see hasn't even started!
So everyone should know by now that Bruce Banner was working with Gamma Ray radiation experiments and thought that it was time for live human testing. He put himself in the chair and zapped himself. Now when he gets angry or excited, he turns into a 10 ft, 1500lb, bullettproof, green giant.
Skidoosh.
The government wants him back to weaponize him and he wants to create an anti-serum. Neither are working. Banner has been secretly contacting a fellow scientist working in Gamma Radiation, trying to create the antidote. The gov't has been bringing in international soldiers to put together a super hunter team.
The big bad General Thunderbolt Ross (Bruce's girlfriends dad) is the man in charge of the hunt and the program that Banner didn't know he was working on. Oh you lying generals, when will you learn? It turns out the program he's running here is actually a reboot of Project: Rebirth, the program that bore Captain America. He also gives the Super Soldier Serum to one of his international soliders, Emil Blonsky, who can then keep up with Hulk. Then Blonsky goes coo-coo for Cocoa-Puffs.
Banner manages to hook up with Dr. Stearns, the man online trying to help him create a cure. In their experiment, they manage to surpress Banner's Hulk-out. But has it cured him or just surpressed this one incident. Bonus: it has given Banner control.
Blonsky manages to get his hands on some other "juice" and turns into an "Abomination" of what the Hulk is. The fight that ensues between the two is truly spectacular. And probably the loudest 15 minutes of the summer movie season.
The film is really well designed, too. There is a storytelling tool used in a "Days Without Incident" clock that lets the audience follow the gaps in the story. This is brilliant.
Also there are some great nods to the Hulks that preceeded this one. Lou Ferrigno has a great cameo that sent the audience into applause and Stan "the man" Lee has his cutest cameo yet.
Over all, I totally dig The Incedible Hulk. It's way better than the Ang-Lee movie and has a nice tie-in to Iron Man that is making me more and more excited for The Avengers movie.
Actually I asked KT to go to the midnight movie on Thursday. She said yes.
But, I'm glad I did.
The Incredible Hulk is good. The direction, production and storytelling is GREAT. Sounds like the same thing, no. It's not.
The story that happens on screen is very good. Son't get me wrong, watching Banner on the run, dealing with hiding and still being in love and trying to protect everyone from himself is great. Watching Tim Roth's creepy performance and vicious transformation is breathtaking. But the tools the writers, director and editor used are near perfect. EXPECIALLY for this reboot/reworking/reimagining... whatever it is called this week.
First and foremost, the most entertaining sequence really has to be the opening titles because they do 2 HUGE things here.
1. They give all the backstory you need, what happened, how it happened, etc. It basically gives you the origin movie in 4 minutes.
2. The better part of the footage is direct copies of the HULK TV series intro! Just with the new actors. Bad haircuts and all. It is a brilliant piece of work and the movie you came to see hasn't even started!
So everyone should know by now that Bruce Banner was working with Gamma Ray radiation experiments and thought that it was time for live human testing. He put himself in the chair and zapped himself. Now when he gets angry or excited, he turns into a 10 ft, 1500lb, bullettproof, green giant.
Skidoosh.
The government wants him back to weaponize him and he wants to create an anti-serum. Neither are working. Banner has been secretly contacting a fellow scientist working in Gamma Radiation, trying to create the antidote. The gov't has been bringing in international soldiers to put together a super hunter team.
The big bad General Thunderbolt Ross (Bruce's girlfriends dad) is the man in charge of the hunt and the program that Banner didn't know he was working on. Oh you lying generals, when will you learn? It turns out the program he's running here is actually a reboot of Project: Rebirth, the program that bore Captain America. He also gives the Super Soldier Serum to one of his international soliders, Emil Blonsky, who can then keep up with Hulk. Then Blonsky goes coo-coo for Cocoa-Puffs.
Banner manages to hook up with Dr. Stearns, the man online trying to help him create a cure. In their experiment, they manage to surpress Banner's Hulk-out. But has it cured him or just surpressed this one incident. Bonus: it has given Banner control.
Blonsky manages to get his hands on some other "juice" and turns into an "Abomination" of what the Hulk is. The fight that ensues between the two is truly spectacular. And probably the loudest 15 minutes of the summer movie season.
The film is really well designed, too. There is a storytelling tool used in a "Days Without Incident" clock that lets the audience follow the gaps in the story. This is brilliant.
Also there are some great nods to the Hulks that preceeded this one. Lou Ferrigno has a great cameo that sent the audience into applause and Stan "the man" Lee has his cutest cameo yet.
Over all, I totally dig The Incedible Hulk. It's way better than the Ang-Lee movie and has a nice tie-in to Iron Man that is making me more and more excited for The Avengers movie.
Wednesday, May 21, 2008
Dude! That's my Crystal Skull!
Thanks to my crazy awesome wife and her pretty interesting work, we went to a screening of Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull last night, Tuesday. Because of babysitting arangements and my own personal desire to see certain movies with certain people, I am also going tonight, Wednesday at midnight for the first public screening.
And the quickest way to review this movie is this, I have already seen it and I am looking forward to going!
This is a great movie! Now, caveat time, it's not Raiders. That movie is and forever will be the ultimate in Indiana Jones lore. But this is a quality film. Indiana is the rugged, smart, take-no-crap-from-the-bad-guys archaeologist that we have grown to love.
I am not going to give a breakdown of the events of the film because so much happens so fast that telling you what happens in the first 15 minutes will ruin the other 105. But I will say this, we open at area 51 and there is a point that we find out for sure that we have actually scene this space before.
Through madcap adventure, Indy gets tossed around the Nevada desert and eventually ends up in the not so protective grasp of some G-men. The most interesting part about this scene is that we find out several things that have happened over the 19 year gap. Most importantly, Colonel Jones was an early member of the OSS. I actually think that is very awesome.
Truly that little nugget just made me want more about the missing episodes! Temple of Doom actually takes place a couple years prior to Raiders. How I would love for Ford to dye his hair and shoot another Indy taking place a few years back.
This movie does play up the campiness of the '50s serial sometimes and left me wondering who really wanted that particualr gag in. Listening to Lucas, Speilberg and Ford talk up the need for a script that they coupld all agree on before rolloing makes me think that David Koepp had his hands tied sometimes. There are a few goofy moments but I think they all involve Shia LaBoeuf. And I am not prjudiced against him. Geez, I saw Holes. I like the kid. But the goofy things always involved him: swinging on vines, getting repeatedly hit in the crotch... I rest my case.
But for those things that are its flaws, it it still a solid film. There are a couple "A-ha!" moments in the presonal Indy stroy and the overall Crystall Skull story that would have actaully been "A-ha!" moments had the pesky interweb not gotten in the way. I won't confirm anything but if you have ready everything, there has been no disinformation.
The only part of the film that actually had me cringe was the last scene, too much is handed to the audience on a silver platter. It's as if they aren't sure whether on not there will be a fifth film and they don't want people e-mailing questions. OK, let the people have what they want. But don't get upset when we get upset. There are ways that this couold have been handled, granted in the first 20 minutes of the next film but, isn't it nice to leave the audience wanting more?
This is a wonderful summer film and a great addition to the tales of Indiana Jones. I can't wait for the Blu-Ray!
And the quickest way to review this movie is this, I have already seen it and I am looking forward to going!
This is a great movie! Now, caveat time, it's not Raiders. That movie is and forever will be the ultimate in Indiana Jones lore. But this is a quality film. Indiana is the rugged, smart, take-no-crap-from-the-bad-guys archaeologist that we have grown to love.
I am not going to give a breakdown of the events of the film because so much happens so fast that telling you what happens in the first 15 minutes will ruin the other 105. But I will say this, we open at area 51 and there is a point that we find out for sure that we have actually scene this space before.
Through madcap adventure, Indy gets tossed around the Nevada desert and eventually ends up in the not so protective grasp of some G-men. The most interesting part about this scene is that we find out several things that have happened over the 19 year gap. Most importantly, Colonel Jones was an early member of the OSS. I actually think that is very awesome.
Truly that little nugget just made me want more about the missing episodes! Temple of Doom actually takes place a couple years prior to Raiders. How I would love for Ford to dye his hair and shoot another Indy taking place a few years back.
This movie does play up the campiness of the '50s serial sometimes and left me wondering who really wanted that particualr gag in. Listening to Lucas, Speilberg and Ford talk up the need for a script that they coupld all agree on before rolloing makes me think that David Koepp had his hands tied sometimes. There are a few goofy moments but I think they all involve Shia LaBoeuf. And I am not prjudiced against him. Geez, I saw Holes. I like the kid. But the goofy things always involved him: swinging on vines, getting repeatedly hit in the crotch... I rest my case.
But for those things that are its flaws, it it still a solid film. There are a couple "A-ha!" moments in the presonal Indy stroy and the overall Crystall Skull story that would have actaully been "A-ha!" moments had the pesky interweb not gotten in the way. I won't confirm anything but if you have ready everything, there has been no disinformation.
The only part of the film that actually had me cringe was the last scene, too much is handed to the audience on a silver platter. It's as if they aren't sure whether on not there will be a fifth film and they don't want people e-mailing questions. OK, let the people have what they want. But don't get upset when we get upset. There are ways that this couold have been handled, granted in the first 20 minutes of the next film but, isn't it nice to leave the audience wanting more?
This is a wonderful summer film and a great addition to the tales of Indiana Jones. I can't wait for the Blu-Ray!
SPOILER BELOW
I leave you with this, the best part of the film: Mutt Williams never puts on the fedora.
Friday, May 16, 2008
She's got a ticket to ride and Hollywood don't care.
We the movie-going, popcorn-eating, Five dollar soda drinking public need to stand up to the producers of films and tell them once and for all, "I don't care what it cost and I don't care what it made."
What? What does this mean?
Riddle me this: What movie has had more people see it in the theatre than any other movie to date?
Trick question. It's really too hard to tell. Most people will tell you it's Gone With The Wind. But MGM hasn't kept the best of records. And then all the re-releases in theatre and on video are lumped in... and most people say "and tickets only cost a nickel!" Well in 1939 the average US ticket was 23 cents. So the best infor we have is that opening weekend: 4.1million people saw GWTW. And it did have a very long run in the theatres.
But how about now?
I think studios should report number of tickets sold, not gross revenue.
Wouldn't it actually help the studio in marketing? If 15million people see a movie in 3 days, doesn't that mean more than 100million in gross revenue? It does.
It does because many theatres in the US still have cheap tickets (read: the heartland) and many theatres have matinee prices still.
If you take 100million and divide it by the average ticket price in the US ($7) you get 14million+ tickets. But that doesn't take into account lower cost tickets where people might actually get to see two movies in the stix for the price of one in NYC and matinees where again, lots of money can be discounted. Just for grins & giggles, assume 1million people aren't getting counted in this recording method. Their money is but their voice isn't.
Wouldn't 1 million people be able to convince you of something, even if it was as trivial as seeing a movie?
The box office numbers are advertising. The studios aren't worried about making money back. Between the foreign markets and the HUGE DVD sales in the US, they always make their money back. It's almost impossible not to. There's a Punisher sequel in the can and the Golden Compass sequel is about to be greenlighted (not lit). Did you see those doing huge numbers? No. Hell, the Punisher movie had a Special Edition DVD and then a Director's Cut DVD with a newly animated opening sequence added! They don't throw money at something that doesn't throw it back! And DVD throws back. But I digress.
The total amount of money the movie has made is supposed to attract you to see the movie. A sort of: "How could this many people be wrong?" Well wouldn’t that number be just as impressive if we knew exactly how many people that was?
Couldn’t it also help movies? Take, for instance, kids movies. How many kids are really at the 10PM show? Not many. But they are piled up in the early shows, many of which are discounted. Or at least the kids tickets are. The studios are selling themselves short on these! If a kids ticket is 25-30% off the adult ticket, they are shorting themselves in 25-30% of bandwagon advertising!
What? What does this mean?
Riddle me this: What movie has had more people see it in the theatre than any other movie to date?
Trick question. It's really too hard to tell. Most people will tell you it's Gone With The Wind. But MGM hasn't kept the best of records. And then all the re-releases in theatre and on video are lumped in... and most people say "and tickets only cost a nickel!" Well in 1939 the average US ticket was 23 cents. So the best infor we have is that opening weekend: 4.1million people saw GWTW. And it did have a very long run in the theatres.
But how about now?
I think studios should report number of tickets sold, not gross revenue.
Wouldn't it actually help the studio in marketing? If 15million people see a movie in 3 days, doesn't that mean more than 100million in gross revenue? It does.
It does because many theatres in the US still have cheap tickets (read: the heartland) and many theatres have matinee prices still.
If you take 100million and divide it by the average ticket price in the US ($7) you get 14million+ tickets. But that doesn't take into account lower cost tickets where people might actually get to see two movies in the stix for the price of one in NYC and matinees where again, lots of money can be discounted. Just for grins & giggles, assume 1million people aren't getting counted in this recording method. Their money is but their voice isn't.
Wouldn't 1 million people be able to convince you of something, even if it was as trivial as seeing a movie?
The box office numbers are advertising. The studios aren't worried about making money back. Between the foreign markets and the HUGE DVD sales in the US, they always make their money back. It's almost impossible not to. There's a Punisher sequel in the can and the Golden Compass sequel is about to be greenlighted (not lit). Did you see those doing huge numbers? No. Hell, the Punisher movie had a Special Edition DVD and then a Director's Cut DVD with a newly animated opening sequence added! They don't throw money at something that doesn't throw it back! And DVD throws back. But I digress.
The total amount of money the movie has made is supposed to attract you to see the movie. A sort of: "How could this many people be wrong?" Well wouldn’t that number be just as impressive if we knew exactly how many people that was?
Couldn’t it also help movies? Take, for instance, kids movies. How many kids are really at the 10PM show? Not many. But they are piled up in the early shows, many of which are discounted. Or at least the kids tickets are. The studios are selling themselves short on these! If a kids ticket is 25-30% off the adult ticket, they are shorting themselves in 25-30% of bandwagon advertising!
And the best part is... Total Ticket Sales never have to be adjusted for inflation! The ticket prices are just going to go up. Someday a crappy movie that barely anyone saw is going to surpass Titanic. But the tickets were $100 each. Matinee.
Oh holy crap don't even start me on these supposed "luxury movies" where it's going to be $30-$45 a ticket but you get a waiter and reserved seat. How is that going to play into revenue charts?
Thursday, May 15, 2008
I am Iron Man and you should be, too!
I saw Iron Man on opening night. Katie and I went out for dinner with Todd and Marilee and had a great night.
But this wasn't a "sum of the whole evening" I loved the movie, this was a "Sweet merciful crap, this is an amazing experience" movie.
By now, everyone knows the premise of the movie. Billionaire Tony Stark is an industrialist who has made the bulk of his fortune just as dad did, weapons manufacturing for the US Government. After showing off his latest invention, the "Jericho Missle" to an Army R&D battalion in Afghanistan, the convoy gets attacked. It turns out, attacked with Stark Industries weapons.
But Tony is hit hard. Hard with shrapnel in the chest. When he awakens in a mountain cave, he has a car battery hooked up to his chest and a roommate. He explains that the battery is powering an electromagnet that holds the shrapnel in place and prevents it from causing Tony a coronary.
Tony and his new friend, Yinsen, are charged by their captors with building a Jericho missle for them-Yinsen acting as translator and assitant. Tony agrees to save their lives but begins by building himself a miniturized arc reactor to power his heart and hold the shrapnel. He then plans the construction of the Mark I armor. Tony busts out and returns home.
But all this has changed Tony. He has a new perspective on life and decides to take his company in a new direction. No weapons. Of course, this pisses off lots of stockholders and board members, including his right hand man, Obidiah Stane. Shortly, Stark is removed from the board. But all the while he plays in his basement shop building the Mark II and Mark III armor with the hopes of creating something that he can right the wrongs he has done and stop the spread of insurgents, militias and all those that hurt others for their own gain.
This is your typical origin story for modern times. I say that because movies like Batman Begins and Spider-man have really upped the ante on the origin movie. Iron Man holds strong. We are given a man and shown his many flaws. We are given a life altering situation that he triumphs over. We are given a quest to find out who he is now and what it means to him. And in the end we are given a villain that only he is now equipped to deal with. But it all WORKS. And the only reason it works is: Robert Downey, Jr. is one charming guy.
There was talk of hiring an unknown. And there was talk of hiring a younger actor. But Tony Stark is a guy that is well into his career. That's why it works. Yes, he is the teen genius that graduates early form MIT. The story could have picked up there or 10 years from there and we could have had some 20-something playing the role. But Downey works because he has a lot of life under his belt as Stark does.
One of the themes of the original comic series is Stark's alcoholism and how he overcomes it. There is even a point where he stops being Iron Man and Jim Rhodes has to take over. (now do we understand the "Next time, baby!" scene from the movie?) Robert Downey, Jr. has had a well documented fight with drug and alcohol abuse. And has been priviledged his whole life. So has Stark. Downey brings a realism to the character that is a breath of fresh air. When I watched The Punisher, I had to tell myself to suspend my disbelief for the first 10 minutes because I couldn't buy into Thomas Jane right away. When I watched Spider-man for the first time, I saw the Wonder Boys kid on screen at first (that one was easier to fall into). But when I watched Iron Man, Tony Stark came on screen. Downey didn't have to fit into the role, he put it on like a comfortable leather jacket. For all it wear and tear, it fit well and he knew where all the pockets were and witch ones still had a lining. He is tony Stark.
The best thing about this movie is that it isn't an effects movie. My newest hero, Jon Favreau, is a man after my own heart. He likes to shoot practical as often as possible. Now, are there effects, you bet your bippy there are. But they never detract from the scene. They are tools to help the director expand what he visualizes, not the reason the movie was getting made. This isn't the "let's come up with a loose plot to tie these crazy effect scenes together" tentpole that some studios put up.
This is a great movie that handles the origin story superbly and is wrought with wonderful performances. Do yourself a favor and see this in the theatre. 5/5
But this wasn't a "sum of the whole evening" I loved the movie, this was a "Sweet merciful crap, this is an amazing experience" movie.
By now, everyone knows the premise of the movie. Billionaire Tony Stark is an industrialist who has made the bulk of his fortune just as dad did, weapons manufacturing for the US Government. After showing off his latest invention, the "Jericho Missle" to an Army R&D battalion in Afghanistan, the convoy gets attacked. It turns out, attacked with Stark Industries weapons.
But Tony is hit hard. Hard with shrapnel in the chest. When he awakens in a mountain cave, he has a car battery hooked up to his chest and a roommate. He explains that the battery is powering an electromagnet that holds the shrapnel in place and prevents it from causing Tony a coronary.
Tony and his new friend, Yinsen, are charged by their captors with building a Jericho missle for them-Yinsen acting as translator and assitant. Tony agrees to save their lives but begins by building himself a miniturized arc reactor to power his heart and hold the shrapnel. He then plans the construction of the Mark I armor. Tony busts out and returns home.
But all this has changed Tony. He has a new perspective on life and decides to take his company in a new direction. No weapons. Of course, this pisses off lots of stockholders and board members, including his right hand man, Obidiah Stane. Shortly, Stark is removed from the board. But all the while he plays in his basement shop building the Mark II and Mark III armor with the hopes of creating something that he can right the wrongs he has done and stop the spread of insurgents, militias and all those that hurt others for their own gain.
This is your typical origin story for modern times. I say that because movies like Batman Begins and Spider-man have really upped the ante on the origin movie. Iron Man holds strong. We are given a man and shown his many flaws. We are given a life altering situation that he triumphs over. We are given a quest to find out who he is now and what it means to him. And in the end we are given a villain that only he is now equipped to deal with. But it all WORKS. And the only reason it works is: Robert Downey, Jr. is one charming guy.
There was talk of hiring an unknown. And there was talk of hiring a younger actor. But Tony Stark is a guy that is well into his career. That's why it works. Yes, he is the teen genius that graduates early form MIT. The story could have picked up there or 10 years from there and we could have had some 20-something playing the role. But Downey works because he has a lot of life under his belt as Stark does.
One of the themes of the original comic series is Stark's alcoholism and how he overcomes it. There is even a point where he stops being Iron Man and Jim Rhodes has to take over. (now do we understand the "Next time, baby!" scene from the movie?) Robert Downey, Jr. has had a well documented fight with drug and alcohol abuse. And has been priviledged his whole life. So has Stark. Downey brings a realism to the character that is a breath of fresh air. When I watched The Punisher, I had to tell myself to suspend my disbelief for the first 10 minutes because I couldn't buy into Thomas Jane right away. When I watched Spider-man for the first time, I saw the Wonder Boys kid on screen at first (that one was easier to fall into). But when I watched Iron Man, Tony Stark came on screen. Downey didn't have to fit into the role, he put it on like a comfortable leather jacket. For all it wear and tear, it fit well and he knew where all the pockets were and witch ones still had a lining. He is tony Stark.
The best thing about this movie is that it isn't an effects movie. My newest hero, Jon Favreau, is a man after my own heart. He likes to shoot practical as often as possible. Now, are there effects, you bet your bippy there are. But they never detract from the scene. They are tools to help the director expand what he visualizes, not the reason the movie was getting made. This isn't the "let's come up with a loose plot to tie these crazy effect scenes together" tentpole that some studios put up.
This is a great movie that handles the origin story superbly and is wrought with wonderful performances. Do yourself a favor and see this in the theatre. 5/5
Friday, May 2, 2008
Patricia Townsley was Right. Damn it all.
I have been thinking about it to some degree for a long while.
And what I realized was... Spiderman 3 sucked.
Yeah, this is a review that's like 362 days late. I know it. You know it. Stop reading if you want but I won't be long.
Tricia saw it opening night and I think I made it the next night or so.
I distinctily remember her saying, "it was alright but not great" and something to the effect of "too much going on."
When I saw it I actually disagreed with her. My arguement was "for having 3 villians and bridging the relationship with Peter Parker and Harry Osborn, it was really good."
I was wrong and here's how I know. I own the DVD and I don't really care to watch it again. I keep thinking that the story was really thin and I won't even be able to stay awake. Now I know I'll get to it eventually but I feel no rush.
This movie is truly the thrid in the series. That is to say, when a franchise gets settled in, they seem to go overboard. This isn't actually at all surpriseing. If a fillm has released and garnered 2 sequels, the audience, by now, knows what they are getting into. I think writers or, worse yet, producers think that at this poiint in the franchise, the story itseelf doesn't have to drive the film, just the grandeur!
And what I realized was... Spiderman 3 sucked.
Yeah, this is a review that's like 362 days late. I know it. You know it. Stop reading if you want but I won't be long.
Tricia saw it opening night and I think I made it the next night or so.
I distinctily remember her saying, "it was alright but not great" and something to the effect of "too much going on."
When I saw it I actually disagreed with her. My arguement was "for having 3 villians and bridging the relationship with Peter Parker and Harry Osborn, it was really good."
I was wrong and here's how I know. I own the DVD and I don't really care to watch it again. I keep thinking that the story was really thin and I won't even be able to stay awake. Now I know I'll get to it eventually but I feel no rush.
This movie is truly the thrid in the series. That is to say, when a franchise gets settled in, they seem to go overboard. This isn't actually at all surpriseing. If a fillm has released and garnered 2 sequels, the audience, by now, knows what they are getting into. I think writers or, worse yet, producers think that at this poiint in the franchise, the story itseelf doesn't have to drive the film, just the grandeur!
So we know Peter Parker by now. He is super-smart, probably listens to Emo bands, is trying to make it all work (job, love, super-hero). But now in the next installment there is trouble i.e. the new villian. Well now, hold on. Spider-man had a samrt guy getting picked on in school, got powers, had to work through life, love and new super status. And he dealt with a badguy. That was made harder by it being his new best friends dad. Whoah. 3 parts drama and 2 parts action led to a $114 million open. $403 million domestic.
How do you top that? Spider-man 2 kept the formula because it worked, right. OK. Love drama, living with Uncle Ben's death drama, Harry Osborn getting nutty over dead dad drama... check, check and check. Doc Oc = action AND drama and then more action! It's perfect! RIght? A cautionary tale of power and ambition! And a $116 million open... but $373 million domestic.
Step 1. Blame internet pirates.
Step 2. Throw out formula that had critics raving that it was one of the best movies of the year and of all comic movies.
Step 3. Step it up.
Now, just shy of turning your friendly neighborhood Spider-man into a street dancer, revamping was done. Mostly in the formula. This time, 2 parts drama (Love is easy, guilt is cheap) Then an extra half part of drama (Harry Osborn wants to avenge father's death) but quickly turn that into action (New Goblin fights Spidey). Now the tricky part, add action but tell people it's drama. OK, enter new photographer and son of another character astronaught. And black ooze. Make black ooze turn not dramatic photog into overly actioned anti-spidey. And why the hell not, let's introduce another character that has no reason to be here right now and very little back story. Wait let's just make him the real killer of Uncle Ben. Then we can mask action as drama. PERFECT!
Then tie it all together in A CAGE MATCH! Here the cage is a construciton sight but we know how producers think. Or how they flip through channels and make writers stick things in.
This is actually a movie that if it were 2 movies, 1 with Venom and Harry and 1 with the Sandman, it woul dhave worked SO much better. But this was 2 tons of crap in a 1 ton bag.
So more than anything, I am saying, "Tricia, you were right"
Stay tuned as next week I hope to review "Barbarella".
Seriously.
Wednesday, March 12, 2008
I have the greatest wife in the world!
It's Wednesday night. We leave for Italy tomorrow. It's our five year anniversary on Saturday. I am getting over a cold/flu/punched in the sinuses by an elephant thing... the kids have been trying to kill me and Katie has worked late every night for something like 2 weeks.
But now we are all home. The kids are getting baths. We are packing. Laundry is drying so we can have a full trips worth of clothes. My mom is excited (at least she tells us) to have the kids.
We feel liek we are actually going to get a break.
No one to report to.
No one to wake us unnecessarily early.
No one to ask her to do one more thing before she goes.
Just the 2 of us in Tuscany.
And this isn't great because of the break from the kids and work and everything else.
It's simply because after 10 years of knowing her and 5 years of marriage, she's still my best friend.
So I thank her.
But now we are all home. The kids are getting baths. We are packing. Laundry is drying so we can have a full trips worth of clothes. My mom is excited (at least she tells us) to have the kids.
We feel liek we are actually going to get a break.
No one to report to.
No one to wake us unnecessarily early.
No one to ask her to do one more thing before she goes.
Just the 2 of us in Tuscany.
And this isn't great because of the break from the kids and work and everything else.
It's simply because after 10 years of knowing her and 5 years of marriage, she's still my best friend.
So I thank her.
Saturday, January 19, 2008
So this happened. And now... I am... a blogger?
So my daughter is having her 12th birthday sleepover tonight since her birthday falls shortly after Christmas. That being the case, no one can come to a party over the holidays and we let her have MLK weekend to throw down!
My wife is upstairs snuggling our other 2 kids and I am on "stay up and see what they are doing" duty. Hence I am online and was following JoBlo.com's link to the new Rotten Tomatoes site... then I saw that National Treasure: Book of Secrets got a low rating... I rated it and it threw me to the sign up page... and then this Journal page... then I figured if I am going to blog, I should blog where everyone blogs... and here we are.
First off, this party.It's ten girls, all twelve years old. Like 6 of them have cell phones. They are in sixth grade. Who needs a cell phone in sixth grade? They aren't Doogie Howser (my kid and half those girls are in the Gifted and Talented school but they aren't saving lives when they're on call.)
I know for some of these kids, it's the leash the parent has when they are at the other parents house. The cell phone industry is booming off of divorced parents getting their kids phones under the guise of "so you can talk to me whenever you want" or "so you can call your father when you want" or even the idea of "knowing I can get in touch with you"But do they?Their parents all dropped them off and said "have a great night. see you tomorrow!" When is this checking in happening? Is it when they are at the mall? When they are at the movies at the mall?
If you call your kids at the movies to check in, you deserve to die. Why should I pay money to have you gabbing at the kid you can't trust sitting next to me?
Are these kids really calling their dad (assuming that over 90% live with mom) just to say hey? Let me tell you: this 12 year old of mine, is my step-daughter. Her dad calls every day. Every. day. She doesn't need a cell phone to talk to him. But when we are on a trip or she hasn't heard from him for some reason, we are the good guys and ask, do you want to call. No, she doesn't. So she has her fix of talking to him during the week and she sees him every other weekend.
So if she had a cell phone to keep in touch-would she?
I guess its a per kid scenario. But I know these dads are at the soccer games every weekend, whether it's "their" weekend or not. I am at the games too. I see them there. I know who's divorced.
Also, I know the amount of work these kids have. It's kinda outrageous. and I know that when she's done with her 8th grade math (in 6th grade, mind you) and her current events reading and response and her history reading and science write up and mandatory 30 minute "free reading" that when she plops down on the couch, she doesn't want to deal with the debaucle of should I veg-out with mom and step-dad and brother and sister or should I spend more time trying to connect with bio-dad?
She veges. And that's OK. So she wouldn't need the phone for that. And if she really wanted to, she can use the hard-line!
So if dad is buying the phone to instill the "whenever you want" idea, I think he'll be waiting by the phone for a while. But if mom is buying the phone, she is probably just trying to buy the love from her kids. I'm sorry but, that's it. You have a house phone. You can let your kids use it whenever you see fit. You could tell your kids, I know he's still your dad and you can call him whenever you want. Done. Everything should be copacetic. You buying her a phone to do the same thing is buying a one up trinket.
So if we are to believe that all parents are even keeled and don't try and buy their kids love, it must be the "just in case" scenario that these parents are buying into.These girls in my basement must have parents that want to get in touch with them "just in case".
Just in case:
- They forgot where they dropped the kids off (they can't drive, they aren't telling you one thing and doing another)
- They need to double check where they are because the kids got someone to take them elsewhere (you don't need a cell phone to find your kid, you need to raise your kid to tell you what the hell they are doing)
- They need to know when you are coming home (didn't you tell them what time to come home? Do you know what time the movie is? Add 2 hours)
Again, don't call during the movie. Your dumb kid that you can't trust, is bothering me.
My daughter can have a cell phone when she can drive or buy it herself. I may be some sort of old-fashioned that way buy I didn't get a phone until I graduated college in 2000. When I moved to Chicago. And had a car. And a job.
But I am willing to get her a phone when she drives. I think the worst thing is to break down. Granted, I take care of my cars. It shouldn't happen. But nothing is perfect. Raditaor tubes blow. Rods get thrown. Batteries explode on ignition (no really, they do sometimes) Tires get flats. But my kids will change their own. For god's sake people, learn to change a tire. Do the whole thing in 15 minutes or wait for AAA for up to 2 hours?
Cell phones are tools. Yes they have crazy cool features. But it's a phone. When do you really need to have that tool at your disposal? Not 12, says I.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)