Barack Obama:
John McCain:
Friday, July 11, 2008
Monday, July 7, 2008
WALL-E
I went into WALL-E blind--hurry and do the same thing while you can. The movie contained robots. That I knew. I knew, also, that the lead robot was very cute, and had heard from reliable sources that its voice was provided by the guy who played R2-D2. And it was Pixar, which meant it'd be worth seeing. So I went.
Sorry, but I won't be able to pen a humorous take-down or contrarian rant about this movie. WALL-E is close to a masterpiece. Its first act, at least, is perfect cinema, and I can understand how the movie loses some people, or how it could seem overlong. A lot of that is the fault of Andrew Stanton and crew for creating an opening sequence that is at turns beautiful, tear-jerking, funny (never side-splitting, but never less than cute), and compelling. We open on planet Earth in an unspecified year. Something is wrong with the planet, straightaway. From space it looks brown and gritty. There's grey detritus where there should be water. We get closer, and the skyline of New York is doubled by massive, skyscraper-shaped piles of garbage. A robot labeled "WALL-E" skids along the ground, playing a showtune on his built-in tape deck, picking up trash. The facts rat-a-tat out with no dialogue: Some time ago the planet got so polluted and over-consumed that the humans all died out. Or left. Or something.
Without spoiling the rest of the movie (and I haven't even discussed the emotional core that made me tear up about, oh, seven times), I can say that this isn't a new plot. E.M. Forster wrote "The Machine Stops" nearly 100 years ago and showed readers a menacing future where humanity doomed itself by handing over its fate to computers. It's been more than 50 years since Ray Bradbury wrote "There Will Come Soft Rains," about a futuristic house that purrs and prepares for the day for a family that's long been exterminated by some kind of war. There is not much new about WALL-E except for the brilliant animation, which is the least surprising part of the whole endeavor. But damn, does it ever work.
Sorry, but I won't be able to pen a humorous take-down or contrarian rant about this movie. WALL-E is close to a masterpiece. Its first act, at least, is perfect cinema, and I can understand how the movie loses some people, or how it could seem overlong. A lot of that is the fault of Andrew Stanton and crew for creating an opening sequence that is at turns beautiful, tear-jerking, funny (never side-splitting, but never less than cute), and compelling. We open on planet Earth in an unspecified year. Something is wrong with the planet, straightaway. From space it looks brown and gritty. There's grey detritus where there should be water. We get closer, and the skyline of New York is doubled by massive, skyscraper-shaped piles of garbage. A robot labeled "WALL-E" skids along the ground, playing a showtune on his built-in tape deck, picking up trash. The facts rat-a-tat out with no dialogue: Some time ago the planet got so polluted and over-consumed that the humans all died out. Or left. Or something.
Without spoiling the rest of the movie (and I haven't even discussed the emotional core that made me tear up about, oh, seven times), I can say that this isn't a new plot. E.M. Forster wrote "The Machine Stops" nearly 100 years ago and showed readers a menacing future where humanity doomed itself by handing over its fate to computers. It's been more than 50 years since Ray Bradbury wrote "There Will Come Soft Rains," about a futuristic house that purrs and prepares for the day for a family that's long been exterminated by some kind of war. There is not much new about WALL-E except for the brilliant animation, which is the least surprising part of the whole endeavor. But damn, does it ever work.
Saturday, March 1, 2008
George Romero's Diary of the Dead
"Shoot me." Those are the final words of Jason Creed (Joshua Close), burbled through a bloody larynx to Debra (Michelle Morgan), near the close of George Romero's Diary of the Dead. And Debra understands. With one hand she lifts the camera Creed had been using to film the end of civilization, rolling tape even as his friend grappled with zombies and fought to keep from getting bitten and joining their number. With another hand she handles a gun and aims it at his head. Point, click, shoot. Creed's demise becomes the penultimate scene of his documentary, The Death of Death, which Debra will finish editing as the undead beat on the doors of the panic room where she's taken refuge.
You want subtlety? Too bad: You get stuff like this. Romero's fifth zombie film breaks completely from his decades-spanning Dead series. The zombie awakening did not happen in 1968. It is happening right now, in the dorm rooms and suburbias of Broadband America. Everyone has videocameras, and hip, happenin' hackers get their info not from the mainstream media—lies, lies, lies!—but from MySpace and "YouTube message boards."
This "Internet," as the kids call it, is powerful enough to be accessed from camera phones, from panic rooms, and from safe houses in the hard heart of rural Pennsylvania. The first evidence of the zombie attack, a live news shot that the networks have mangled into all-is-well-propaganda, is uploaded without edits, and the panic is enough to evacuate entire cities. Jason Creed's video, uploaded in chunks to his MySpace page, goes viral faster than a Chris Crocker rant. When Debra confronts him about messing around with Final Cut while Harrisburg burns, Creed stands his ground with a stirring speech about page views: "72,000 views in eight minutes! 72,000 views! By the end of the day it'll be a million! By tomorrow, who knows?" Ooh! Ooh! I know! A dwindling number of fear-crazed people scrambling to survive on a dying planet?
In this post-Max Brooks era, when every horror fan has thought through the logistics of a zombie attack (after the movie I hung out with a few people who hadn't even seen it, and conversation turned at one point to a Kentucky house that could be easily fortified in the occasion of this terrible event), this stuff just doesn't wash. Romero's craft hasn't grown much from film to film, but his anger has. And just as David Simon produced his weakest episodes of The Wire when he turned his focus on the media, Romero has produced his weakest, wateriest social commentary with this focus on citizen filmmaking. Early on he takes a shot at the new wave of movies that feature fast-moving zombies, as Creed shoots a corny horror film with a mummy that's walking too fast. "You're dead! You can't run!" Creed snaps. "Your ankles would snap in half!" You don't get the point? Wait until the end of the movie, when the actor who played that mummy, now a zombie, lurches after the same actress he was chasing in the faux movie. "I told you they don't move fast," Creed says... as the actress runs for her life from a murderous zombie.
Most of Romero's commentary is just as muddled, and much of it is put into the mouth of Debra, narrating over the footage she grabbed from Creed's cameras. She pronounces the mainstream "dead" says it's up to hackers and bloggers to share the truth of things. Seconds later she pooh-poohs the idea of hackers and bloggers getting out the truth: "the more voice, the more spin." It's clear that Romero loves this new way of telling a story, and it's equally clear that he's torn over what he thinks of it. That seriously hobbles the stabs at profundity that crop up at least every 10 minutes.
But if you forgive Romero that he's put together an enjoyable b-movie. The low-wattage cast have been instructed to ham it up, and they deliver. Scott Wentworth, who plays the hard-drinking Prof. Maxwell, delivers a masterful camp performance, full of non sequitors about his British upbringing and the horrors he saw "in the war." (The Falklands?) It fall to him to deliver the inevitable Romero point about people grasping onto the old, dead world as they reject the new and dangerous one. He finds a copy of A Tale of Two Cities: "A treasure!" He clasps the book to his chest and sighs. "It was the best of times, it was the worst of times." It's not quite Dennis Hopper's Kaufman hoarding cigars in Land of the Dead; actually, it's hilarious. Like the moment when the black vigilantes brag about "having the power now," or the rednecks shoot at a corpse they've tied up with a lynchin' rope, it's an old Romero theme flattened out and reduced to parody.
Everything that needed to be said about zombie films was said in Tim Cavanaugh's exhaustive 2007 reason feature. If Romero had read that, and realized how well-trod this territory had become, I think he might have come up with a better movie.
You want subtlety? Too bad: You get stuff like this. Romero's fifth zombie film breaks completely from his decades-spanning Dead series. The zombie awakening did not happen in 1968. It is happening right now, in the dorm rooms and suburbias of Broadband America. Everyone has videocameras, and hip, happenin' hackers get their info not from the mainstream media—lies, lies, lies!—but from MySpace and "YouTube message boards."
This "Internet," as the kids call it, is powerful enough to be accessed from camera phones, from panic rooms, and from safe houses in the hard heart of rural Pennsylvania. The first evidence of the zombie attack, a live news shot that the networks have mangled into all-is-well-propaganda, is uploaded without edits, and the panic is enough to evacuate entire cities. Jason Creed's video, uploaded in chunks to his MySpace page, goes viral faster than a Chris Crocker rant. When Debra confronts him about messing around with Final Cut while Harrisburg burns, Creed stands his ground with a stirring speech about page views: "72,000 views in eight minutes! 72,000 views! By the end of the day it'll be a million! By tomorrow, who knows?" Ooh! Ooh! I know! A dwindling number of fear-crazed people scrambling to survive on a dying planet?
In this post-Max Brooks era, when every horror fan has thought through the logistics of a zombie attack (after the movie I hung out with a few people who hadn't even seen it, and conversation turned at one point to a Kentucky house that could be easily fortified in the occasion of this terrible event), this stuff just doesn't wash. Romero's craft hasn't grown much from film to film, but his anger has. And just as David Simon produced his weakest episodes of The Wire when he turned his focus on the media, Romero has produced his weakest, wateriest social commentary with this focus on citizen filmmaking. Early on he takes a shot at the new wave of movies that feature fast-moving zombies, as Creed shoots a corny horror film with a mummy that's walking too fast. "You're dead! You can't run!" Creed snaps. "Your ankles would snap in half!" You don't get the point? Wait until the end of the movie, when the actor who played that mummy, now a zombie, lurches after the same actress he was chasing in the faux movie. "I told you they don't move fast," Creed says... as the actress runs for her life from a murderous zombie.
Most of Romero's commentary is just as muddled, and much of it is put into the mouth of Debra, narrating over the footage she grabbed from Creed's cameras. She pronounces the mainstream "dead" says it's up to hackers and bloggers to share the truth of things. Seconds later she pooh-poohs the idea of hackers and bloggers getting out the truth: "the more voice, the more spin." It's clear that Romero loves this new way of telling a story, and it's equally clear that he's torn over what he thinks of it. That seriously hobbles the stabs at profundity that crop up at least every 10 minutes.
But if you forgive Romero that he's put together an enjoyable b-movie. The low-wattage cast have been instructed to ham it up, and they deliver. Scott Wentworth, who plays the hard-drinking Prof. Maxwell, delivers a masterful camp performance, full of non sequitors about his British upbringing and the horrors he saw "in the war." (The Falklands?) It fall to him to deliver the inevitable Romero point about people grasping onto the old, dead world as they reject the new and dangerous one. He finds a copy of A Tale of Two Cities: "A treasure!" He clasps the book to his chest and sighs. "It was the best of times, it was the worst of times." It's not quite Dennis Hopper's Kaufman hoarding cigars in Land of the Dead; actually, it's hilarious. Like the moment when the black vigilantes brag about "having the power now," or the rednecks shoot at a corpse they've tied up with a lynchin' rope, it's an old Romero theme flattened out and reduced to parody.
Everything that needed to be said about zombie films was said in Tim Cavanaugh's exhaustive 2007 reason feature. If Romero had read that, and realized how well-trod this territory had become, I think he might have come up with a better movie.
Thursday, January 31, 2008
A quick movie update
Since the last update on this blog--about a month ago--I caught up on a bunch of 2007 releases and my first film of 2008, Rambo. Reviews on the way:
- Sweeney Todd
- Stardust
- There Will Be Blood
- Amazing Grace
- Rescue Dawn
- Away From Her
- The Hoax
- Sweeney Todd
- Stardust
- There Will Be Blood
- Amazing Grace
- Rescue Dawn
- Away From Her
- The Hoax
Tuesday, December 25, 2007
Charlie Wilson's War
Look, I understand why people thought Aaron Sorkin was the right guy to adapt George Crile's history bestseller Charlie Wilson's War. The last time he packaged a political story for the screen was in The American President, and that turned out fairly well. I understand why Mike Nichols looked like the right guy to direct it: He put Neil Simon's memoir Biloxi Blues on the screen, and adapted Catch-22; when it would have been very, very easy to botch.
So how did this become a mediocre-to-poor movie? How did one of the most adaptable stories of recent nonfiction--the story of a drinking, leching congressman who bent the rules and funded the Mujahadeen to victory over the Russians in Afghanistan--become so small and trite?
The problems start with the casting. Charlie Wilson was six-foot-four, closer to seven feet from the bottom of his cowboy boots to the top of his hat. He was a backslapping country drunk with flashes of depression and an insatiable hunger for poon. And he's played here by... Tom Hanks. Watching the saintly Forrest Gump ogle backsides and seduce 20-year olds is more silly than it is credible. And Julia Roberts makes his casting look inspired. She makes a great entrance, thrusting and sashaying through her mansion trailed by two show dogs... and then she opens her mouth. Her accent never convinces and her dialogue, which depends utterly on her accent, comes out like flat champagne.
That's two knocks against this movie already, but there are larger and smaller problems. Larger: The plot is rather inexplicably compressed. Oddball events from the lives of Wilson and rogue CIA agent Gust Avrakotos (a well-cast Phillip Seymour Hoffman) are junked. If you were trying to convey a listless-but-energetic congressman's knack of self-destruction, would you cut out a scene in which he drunkenly rams another car, drives back to his apartment, and uses the rules protecting congressmen to avoid arrest so he can fly to Pakistan? It really happened to Wilson, but Sorkin cuts it. The movie runs only 100 minutes, shorter than the average blockbuster, way shorter than the filler-chocked Transformers, and it isn't boring political intrigue that got lost - it's madcap adventures that would have looked great onscreen.
Ah, but how great would Nichols have let it look? The smaller problem: The movie looks cheap. Of the $70 million reported budget, I'd say half was spent on stars and a quarter shows up onscreen. Wilson's office looks like a dingy insurance salesman's nook, not a congressman's office. (I've been in lots of them.) Afghan refugee camps look substantially sillier than the ones that appeared in Richard Attenborough movies 25 years ago. The stock footage was borrowed, I'd guess, from an underfunded high school's AV room.
This is a surprising misfire. Maybe I'd like it more if I didn't know the story -- but since I know the story I can't explain the mistakes and bad choices of the filmmakers.
My rating: 5/10
So how did this become a mediocre-to-poor movie? How did one of the most adaptable stories of recent nonfiction--the story of a drinking, leching congressman who bent the rules and funded the Mujahadeen to victory over the Russians in Afghanistan--become so small and trite?
The problems start with the casting. Charlie Wilson was six-foot-four, closer to seven feet from the bottom of his cowboy boots to the top of his hat. He was a backslapping country drunk with flashes of depression and an insatiable hunger for poon. And he's played here by... Tom Hanks. Watching the saintly Forrest Gump ogle backsides and seduce 20-year olds is more silly than it is credible. And Julia Roberts makes his casting look inspired. She makes a great entrance, thrusting and sashaying through her mansion trailed by two show dogs... and then she opens her mouth. Her accent never convinces and her dialogue, which depends utterly on her accent, comes out like flat champagne.
That's two knocks against this movie already, but there are larger and smaller problems. Larger: The plot is rather inexplicably compressed. Oddball events from the lives of Wilson and rogue CIA agent Gust Avrakotos (a well-cast Phillip Seymour Hoffman) are junked. If you were trying to convey a listless-but-energetic congressman's knack of self-destruction, would you cut out a scene in which he drunkenly rams another car, drives back to his apartment, and uses the rules protecting congressmen to avoid arrest so he can fly to Pakistan? It really happened to Wilson, but Sorkin cuts it. The movie runs only 100 minutes, shorter than the average blockbuster, way shorter than the filler-chocked Transformers, and it isn't boring political intrigue that got lost - it's madcap adventures that would have looked great onscreen.
Ah, but how great would Nichols have let it look? The smaller problem: The movie looks cheap. Of the $70 million reported budget, I'd say half was spent on stars and a quarter shows up onscreen. Wilson's office looks like a dingy insurance salesman's nook, not a congressman's office. (I've been in lots of them.) Afghan refugee camps look substantially sillier than the ones that appeared in Richard Attenborough movies 25 years ago. The stock footage was borrowed, I'd guess, from an underfunded high school's AV room.
This is a surprising misfire. Maybe I'd like it more if I didn't know the story -- but since I know the story I can't explain the mistakes and bad choices of the filmmakers.
My rating: 5/10
Friday, December 21, 2007
Five-Minute Movie Update
I've been neglecting this site lately (still heartbroken over the failed Halloween podcast, but we'll try again with a 2007 roundup show if everyone's game) yet I haven't stopped watching movies. A quick roundup
Ocean's Thirteen - Like canned Pabst, this tasted great going down and left a seriously acrid taste. Fast-moving plot, funny cast, funny situations... wait a second, those situations weren't so funny. Torturing the hotel critic? Seducing Ellen Barkin with a fake nose and hormones?
Juno - As delightful as everyone says it is, although the dialogue by Diablo Cody is as precious as you'd expect from her name. The first five minutes, worringly so. There is no reason for Rainn Wilson to call someone "homeslice." After that it takes on a pleasant, Linklater-ish rhythm and follows a cliched plot structure without getting predictable.
Eastern Promises - Suffers in comparison to A History of Violence even with a higher-minded plot. A little old-timey, a little gimmicky.
Ocean's Thirteen - Like canned Pabst, this tasted great going down and left a seriously acrid taste. Fast-moving plot, funny cast, funny situations... wait a second, those situations weren't so funny. Torturing the hotel critic? Seducing Ellen Barkin with a fake nose and hormones?
Juno - As delightful as everyone says it is, although the dialogue by Diablo Cody is as precious as you'd expect from her name. The first five minutes, worringly so. There is no reason for Rainn Wilson to call someone "homeslice." After that it takes on a pleasant, Linklater-ish rhythm and follows a cliched plot structure without getting predictable.
Eastern Promises - Suffers in comparison to A History of Violence even with a higher-minded plot. A little old-timey, a little gimmicky.
Wednesday, November 21, 2007
Guilty Pleasures?
I was listening to my favorite podcast from the Hollywood Saloon, and they were discussing "guilty pleasures" or as they dubbed them, "The Theater of Shame". They were discussing if these movies exist; and if so, is that bad and what are they?
My opinion, and you can agree with me or not but it is my opinion, is that there are movies dubbed "guilty pleasures" but there shouldn't be. No one should have to defend what they like. Canadian Comedian, Doug Nagy, once said, "you like what you like, and you should never have to apologize for it." I hold to that mantra like John 3:16. However, we live in a world wherein people feel their personal opinion constitutes objective fact; and as a result, many people spend time invalidating the opinion's of others in order to more validate their own. They say, "Well, you have bad taste because you like this, but I have good taste because I like this." Sorry, that's crap. Even movies that 99% of people think are excellent, some people think are pretentious crap; and some movies that few if any people think are "good" objectively, alot people enjoy.
Anyway, that's my take. The only reason "Guilty Pleasures" exist is because people have the potential to be jerks and attempt to invalidate other's opinions in order to make themselves feel smarter or cooler. Whatever. I say, like what you like; and if someone gives you crap, then tell them to go drown themselves. However, lists are fun, so I figured, I'd take a minute to give movies that some people would say are "Guilty Pleasures", but I would say just rock my socks off like a hurricane. So, here ya go.
POINT BREAK
YOU GOT SERVED
ROCKY IV
ROCKY V
DAREDEVIL
STREET FIGHTER (Yes, the Van Damme one)
RAPID FIRE
LIONHEART (Yes, the Van Damme one)
Got your own? Give us a shout.
.
I like a few of CJ's pics (Point Break, Rocky 4-5, Lionheart) and groan at others (Roadhouse, Daredevil) I will allow pain to befall me with this list of Guiltiness.
.
The Beautician and the Beast (Starring the bewitching Fran Dresher)
Bedazzled (The Brendan Fraser version)
Crocodile Dundee 1 AND 2 (Paul Hogan is my dad incarnate)
Darkman
Ernest Goes to Jail
F/X 2 (This movie is greatly unknown)
The Ice Pirates
Jaws 4 - The Revenge (Even if only for the backstory to the great NES classic)
Kuffs
Lock Up (One of many Stallone guilty pleasures)
The Long Kiss Goodnight (Geena Davis/Action Hero? Yes.)
Mindhunters
Predator 2
Star Wars Episode 1 (The Best Prequel)
Tango and Cash (Another Stallone)
They Live (Not just for the best fight of all time)
Walking Tall
.
Dean - Sorry my picture isn't working for some reason, how about red text...like Jesus.
Dean, I will back you up to the death on Kuffs and Walking Tall. Good Job. Saturday, November 17, 2007
Beowulf
For a certain sort of person Robert Zemeckis's The Polar Express (2004) was an instant Christmas classic, an unexpected adaptation of a flimsy children's book* brought to life through magical motion-capture CGI. For others (like me), it was creepy: Tom Hanks' face scaled off his skull and morphed into plastic-looking people like a silly putty death mask. So I laughed at the first previews but I was willing to buy into Zemeckis's new Beowulf. If your characters are already going to look terrifying, why not make half of them monsters and the other half vikings?
I guess I won't spoil the plot--even though it's edging into its 1000th year of telling, the story still got some "whoas" and "oh shit"s from the crowd at Gallery Place. And the plot doesn't entirely follow the letter of the poem, anyway, although few adaptations have. Screenwriters Neil Gaiman and Roger Avery depart from the Middle English (the only characters who speak in it are Grendel and his mother, and she only uses it speaking to him) and write in scenes of vikings ogling bouncing boobs, Anthony Hopkins' king yelling for "MEAAAAD" as his toga tumbles off, and Angelina Jolie's gold-encrusted camel toe.
Does that sound ridiculous? It sort of it is. But this is a movie whose ridiculousness must me embraced full on, with both arms, like a teddy bear or a drunk you're trying to tackle to the ground. You probably need to see it as I did, with $2 3-D glasses (included in your ticket price) at one of the 3-D screenings. There are lots of superfluous shots of rats running down woodpiles and arrows flying at the screen that will seem silly unless you're enveloped in the experience. The non-silly stuff -- the battles with Grendel, a fight with sea monsters, a ride on a dragon -- probably work even without the glasses. They start with the sort of action that would seem snug in an old Harryhausen film and then go all Keith Richards-in-the-70s on you -- I can't reach this monster's heart with my sword, but what it I cut off my arm and use my increased mobility to punch it? Stuff like that.
The higher-minded themes that Gaiman and Avery add in -- the rise of Christianity, the "sins of the father," the impotence that comes with kingship -- well, I don't think they resonated among all the brutality and CGI. But they make a guilty pleasure a bit less guilty.
Rating: 7/10
*not bad, just really brief
I guess I won't spoil the plot--even though it's edging into its 1000th year of telling, the story still got some "whoas" and "oh shit"s from the crowd at Gallery Place. And the plot doesn't entirely follow the letter of the poem, anyway, although few adaptations have. Screenwriters Neil Gaiman and Roger Avery depart from the Middle English (the only characters who speak in it are Grendel and his mother, and she only uses it speaking to him) and write in scenes of vikings ogling bouncing boobs, Anthony Hopkins' king yelling for "MEAAAAD" as his toga tumbles off, and Angelina Jolie's gold-encrusted camel toe.
Does that sound ridiculous? It sort of it is. But this is a movie whose ridiculousness must me embraced full on, with both arms, like a teddy bear or a drunk you're trying to tackle to the ground. You probably need to see it as I did, with $2 3-D glasses (included in your ticket price) at one of the 3-D screenings. There are lots of superfluous shots of rats running down woodpiles and arrows flying at the screen that will seem silly unless you're enveloped in the experience. The non-silly stuff -- the battles with Grendel, a fight with sea monsters, a ride on a dragon -- probably work even without the glasses. They start with the sort of action that would seem snug in an old Harryhausen film and then go all Keith Richards-in-the-70s on you -- I can't reach this monster's heart with my sword, but what it I cut off my arm and use my increased mobility to punch it? Stuff like that.
The higher-minded themes that Gaiman and Avery add in -- the rise of Christianity, the "sins of the father," the impotence that comes with kingship -- well, I don't think they resonated among all the brutality and CGI. But they make a guilty pleasure a bit less guilty.
Rating: 7/10
*not bad, just really brief
Friday, November 2, 2007
Podcast Snafu
Apparently something went wrong with the podcast and it only recorded Dave and not me and CJ. A one sided conversation would likely be extremely boring so the promised Halloween podcast may be lost forever. However, we will endeavor to fix the problem and create more podcast entertainment soon.
Dean
Dean
Monday, October 29, 2007
Dean's Top 50 Horror Movies
Here at Cinemabun, we have been working on increasing our output and have begun to experiment with Podcasts. Last night me, Dave, and CJ recorded one talking about horror movies before the upcoming holiday and hope to have something uploaded for you before Wednesday. To tide you over I have compiled my list of the top 50 Horror movies, feel free to chime in on the comments with your own pics.1. Jaws
2. The Exorcist
3. Poltergeist
4. Dawn of the Dead (Original)
5. Alien
6. The Ring
7. Saw
8. The Descent
9. Evil Dead 2
10. The Lost Boys
11. Frailty
12. The Exorcism of Emily Rose
13. It
14. Fallen
15. Misery
16. Halloween
17. The Shining
18. Dawn of the Dead (Remake)
19. The Texas Chainsaw Massacre (Original)
20. Cube
21. Silence of the Lambs
22. Identity
23. The Blair Witch Project
24. Resident Evil
25. The Thing
26. Pitch Black
27. Seven
28. Aliens
29. The People under the Stairs
30. Evil Dead
31. White Noise
32. The Invisible Man (1933)
33. Arachnophobia
34. Event Horizon
35. Scream
36. The Monster Squad
37. Pan’s Labyrinth
38. The Invasion of the Body Snatchers (Original)
39. A Nightmare on Elm Street
40. The Birds
41. An American Werewolf in London
42. Pet Cemetary
43. Psycho
44. From Dusk till Dawn
45. Hellraiser
46. Darkness Falls
47. In the Mouth of Madness
48. Ghostbusters
49. Land of the Dead
50. They Live
Monday, October 8, 2007
The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford (6 out of 10)
After Robert Ford (Casey Affleck) murders Jesse James (Brad Pitt) he's handed the world's easiest job: A nightly play in which Ford and his brother Charlie (Sam Rockwell) re-enact the deed. It is, as envisioned by director Andrew Dominik, as campy as anything Lili von Schtupp could stage. Charlie stalks the stage like a dinosaur and drunk-yells his lines. Robert, in sticky pancake make-up, grinningly narrates every step of the incredibly mundane murder.
"That picture looks mighty dusty!" says Charlie-as-Jesse. He's dropped his holster and guns and is walking with his back to Robert Ford.
Robert turns to the audience. "It was then that I knew I had to take my chance!"
This is sort of a brave scene, as Dominik is reminding us in very bold, bright colors of his film's crucial flaw: Exposition. Over-exposition. Way too much narration. Dominik, adapting the wordy, Chabon-ish* novel by Ron Hansen, makes the odd decision to heave entire paragraphs and scene-settings from the page to the screen. The honest-sounding Hugh Ross (who played Erwin Sutherland in 1994's super-similar Wyatt Earp) is the first voice we hear, intoning weedy Hansen sentences that describe every action in a languid Brad Pitt montage. Pitt sits in a rocking chair. Voiceover: "He would sit for hours in his rocking chair." Pitt moves his mutilated hand through a field of wheat. "He was missing two knuckles on the middle finger of his left hand."
Is this a nitpick? I don't think so: The extra-faithful reliance on the source novel renders the movie more pretentious, and more jarring, than it should be. Dominik fades from well-acted scenes to spotty narrations, back to well-acted scenes in completely different settings, and we slowly intuit that Wood is trying to kill Richard Liddel or that Ed has betrayed Jesse. It robs the film of momentum and makes it feel like a ropey anthology piece.
If I sound churlish it's because the rest of the movie worked so well. The acting by two leads who are never taken seriously enough, Pitt and Affleck, is spellbiding. Affleck makes more with Ford than Pitt does with James, cracking his voice when he's supposed to be angry, slumping or straightening his tie when he's clearly trying to get his courage up. When he first meets Ford, sneaking up behind him in a forest, Frank James (Sam Shepard) takes in his pathetic begging, narrows his eyes, and says he's giving him "the willies." That's about right: Ford is a sociopath in the tradition of Norman Bates, more relatable but emanating that same sense of naive evil. Pitt's James is a bit too raffish and funny to generate the same emotions, but that's the point: He has charisma, and Ford hates him for rising so high with this unattainable, unlearnable advantage.
There are only maybe one or two acted scenes that don't work. For the first act, especially, I really wanted to love this movie. As it is I can recommend the movie with some reservations. Expect some pretention and awkward writing, but try and sift through that for some truly haunting acting, beautiful photography, and a true story that'd be hard even for Uwe Boll to ruin.
It's some how a consolation for me to know that not all Afflecks are as awfull as Ben. The Western genre has always been a favorite of mine and it's good to see it continue to garner more interest.
"That picture looks mighty dusty!" says Charlie-as-Jesse. He's dropped his holster and guns and is walking with his back to Robert Ford.
Robert turns to the audience. "It was then that I knew I had to take my chance!"
This is sort of a brave scene, as Dominik is reminding us in very bold, bright colors of his film's crucial flaw: Exposition. Over-exposition. Way too much narration. Dominik, adapting the wordy, Chabon-ish* novel by Ron Hansen, makes the odd decision to heave entire paragraphs and scene-settings from the page to the screen. The honest-sounding Hugh Ross (who played Erwin Sutherland in 1994's super-similar Wyatt Earp) is the first voice we hear, intoning weedy Hansen sentences that describe every action in a languid Brad Pitt montage. Pitt sits in a rocking chair. Voiceover: "He would sit for hours in his rocking chair." Pitt moves his mutilated hand through a field of wheat. "He was missing two knuckles on the middle finger of his left hand."
Is this a nitpick? I don't think so: The extra-faithful reliance on the source novel renders the movie more pretentious, and more jarring, than it should be. Dominik fades from well-acted scenes to spotty narrations, back to well-acted scenes in completely different settings, and we slowly intuit that Wood is trying to kill Richard Liddel or that Ed has betrayed Jesse. It robs the film of momentum and makes it feel like a ropey anthology piece.
If I sound churlish it's because the rest of the movie worked so well. The acting by two leads who are never taken seriously enough, Pitt and Affleck, is spellbiding. Affleck makes more with Ford than Pitt does with James, cracking his voice when he's supposed to be angry, slumping or straightening his tie when he's clearly trying to get his courage up. When he first meets Ford, sneaking up behind him in a forest, Frank James (Sam Shepard) takes in his pathetic begging, narrows his eyes, and says he's giving him "the willies." That's about right: Ford is a sociopath in the tradition of Norman Bates, more relatable but emanating that same sense of naive evil. Pitt's James is a bit too raffish and funny to generate the same emotions, but that's the point: He has charisma, and Ford hates him for rising so high with this unattainable, unlearnable advantage.
There are only maybe one or two acted scenes that don't work. For the first act, especially, I really wanted to love this movie. As it is I can recommend the movie with some reservations. Expect some pretention and awkward writing, but try and sift through that for some truly haunting acting, beautiful photography, and a true story that'd be hard even for Uwe Boll to ruin.
It's some how a consolation for me to know that not all Afflecks are as awfull as Ben. The Western genre has always been a favorite of mine and it's good to see it continue to garner more interest.
Tuesday, October 2, 2007
</a>I have begun the difficult task of ranking my favorite movies, and I have decided to split them by genre for several reasons. The most important though is that I have a hard time judging genres against one another. I will try to put out 1 list per week starting with my top 75 Comedies. Ranked according to my own tastes which empasized uncontrollable laughter, repeat value, and quotability.Monday, October 1, 2007
Ouch! This Movie Hurts
The Onion AV Club is out with another one of its always-fun pop culture list, but this one is conspicuously not-fun:Not Again: 24 Great Films Too Painful To Watch Twice
As the DVD era has marched on and film collecting has gotten easier and cheaper, this has become a real quandary for movie geeks. You catch a great film, you cry, you're changed, you want to share it with a friend, maybe. And then you see it on the DVD rack at Positively Records or CD Cellar or California Video and you twitch. "Do I really want to sit through that scene again?"
The AV Club's list breaks down into two categories: Films that are physically disgusting or films which are emotionally unbearable. Some, like the 1997 sadomasochist documentary Sick, are terrifying for their entire runtime. Fifteen minutes in you know you'll never want to visit these scenes again. Some, like 2002's Irreversible, are generally disturbing all the way through but have a last-minute twist that render what you've just seen 100 times more disturbing. (It's an old movie so I'll spoil it: In an opening scene we see an angry man ask a man in a suit where to find the man who raped his wife, and the man in the suit points out a guy whom the angry mean murders with a fire extinguisher. An hour later we find that it was the man in the suit who committed the rape, and we suddenly remember his smirking face watching an innocent man get murdered as he walks away from his crime, forever.)
All the movies on this list have something in common: Bold directors who get a thrill from making you upset. But some flicks with "happy" endings, meant to soothe us after the horror we've just witnessed, don't quite get there. Take Saving Private Ryan (1998), a much-loved film that I've never wanted to own because of this scene:
Anyway, here's the question: Is a great film that makes you uncomfortable, makes you not want to watch it twice, immediately more powerful than a great film that makes you happy?
Tuesday, September 4, 2007
Challenge - Dream Cast
I am putting forth a challenge to my fellow writers, and to my one reader.
Pick your perfect cast with this criteria
Hero - The Main Lead of the Movie
Villian - Some sort of nemesis, of any kind
Love interest - Most likely of a differing gender from the Hero.
Comedic Scene Stealer - The quirky side kick or some other comedic presence in the movie
Wiseman - A character of some experience who is to have some wisdom imparting, teaching role
The Innocent - Perhaps a victim, young child, someone who is in peril, or is lauded for their purity.
The Best Friend - Self explanatory
Odd Enough. Good...Here's mine
No repeating me.
Hero - Nathan Fillion
Without a doubt the greatest unappreciated actor, he gets the lead or this movie doesn't get made.
Villian - Tony Jaa and Monica Belluci
Tony Jaa needs a big film to bring him into the US and this film does it, but he needs some support to fill out the acting shoes and so I take Monica Belluci to pull the strings like no other.
Love Interest - Catherine Zeta-Jones
I am not actually a big Zeta Jones fan but next to Fillion you need someone who can bring the banter and she is also age appropriate, and fully capable despite the genre.
Comedic Scene Stealer - Michael Keaton
Haven't seen as much of him lately and he has stayed away from comedy, but I would love a good funny bit part from him in my movie.
Wiseman - Samuel L. Jackson
Wouldn't be much of a movie without him.
The Innocent - Zooey Deschanel
I touted her as my favorite up and coming actress so I ought to back it up by casting her in my movie. Possibly as the daughter or Niece of someone, most likely Fillion.
The Best Friend - I was torn between Jean Reno and Sean Bean. Sean Bean may be more age appropriate but I will actually go with Jean Reno who can work in either an action or comedic way depending on how I take the movie.
There you have it, the cast of my "probably would be an Adventure film" in the vein of Indiana Jones. I feel it has excellent international appeal with Jaa, Reno, Belluci, and Zeta Jones. The action could go anywhere with Jaa, Fillion, Jackson, and Reno. And the Comedy is fully viable with Keaton, Fillion, Reno, Zeta Jones, and Deschanel. Plus, plenty of Sex Appeal for both genders, this is the best non-existent movie ever.
Who's Next?
I'll play your game, you rogue. Though you stole Jackson and Bellucci from who would be in my dream cast, I will still put together the following:
Hero - PATRICK "PAIN DON'T HURT" SWAYZE. That's RIGHT! SWAYZE!!!! (from Roadhouse and Point Break)
Villian - MICHAEL CHIKLIS. He's practically a villain in The Shield and he'd be intimidating as crap. Henchmen will include Snoop Dogg, Mark Dacoscos (Mani from Brotherhood of the Wolf), Noel Gugliemi (Hector from Fast and the Furious), Raymond Cruz (Sniper Chavez from Clear and Present Danger ) and, of course Nick Chinlund (from Con Air and Chronicles of Riddick). Danny Trejo will also play a bounty hunter named "HOUND".
Comedic Scene Stealer - DAVE CHAPPELLE. ( of Chappelle's Show fame)
Wiseman - LANDO CALRISSIAN...I mean, Billy Dee Calrissian...oh wait. BILLY DEE WILLIAMS.
The Innocent - EMMA WATSON (Hermione Granger of Harry Potter fame.)
The Best Friend - JOHN GOODMAN
Oh, and I have a pitch for the movie. Patrick Swayze stars as a down-no-his-luck Bus Driver, Martin Ward, who has no direction in his life. That is, until his friend Ramses (GOODMAN) gets him a job driving a cargo fan for local small businessman RANDALL JOSS (CHIKLIS) from Southern California to the Canadian Border. During his first drive, however, Ward gets a flat and goes to grab the spare out of the back (in the cargo hold) only to find that his cargo is young women, being transported for the sex trade. After talking to the self-apoointed ring-leader of the girls, wannabe moviestar SAM (WATSON), he realizes he has to help them. Going rogue, Swayze is pursued by Chiklis and his henchmen in The Road Warrior fashion. During the action, he transfers the girls from his destroyed truck to the rig of his trucker buddy, SMOKES (CHAPPELLE), who gives him the lip the whole time about getting him "mixed up in this Bu!!$hit!!". Along the way, they also receive help from FRANKY BANKS (WILLIAMS), a retired US agent on the trail of Joss. The movie is titled, "SLAVE TRADERS MUST DIE"
Villian - James Caan Another favorite who would be the perfect counterpoint for Oldman's hero; similar in age, proud, charismatic and able to add some humor.
Villain - Christopher Walken Time and Time again this man portrays some of the best villains ever. Max Zorin anyone?
Women Parts - Laura Prepon, Jessica Biel, Jessica Alba, Jenna Fischer. I changed this from Love Interest, there does not have to be love involved in every movie plot, especially with Mr. T involved. This movie is so good, we need FOUR good looking women.
Wiseman - Tom Petty. Did anyone else see "The Postman" besides me? His role is brilliant.
Comedic Scene Stealer - Rick Moranis Do I really have to explain this?
Innocent - John Krasinski - You know him as Jim from the Office, he's the man today.
Best Friend - John Cusack - He's the man of the 80's and 90's, also John Krasinski's mentor.
Cameo - Sylvester Stallone - Could Play himself, I don't really care
Cameo #2 - Norm MacDonald - Some Jerk on the street, good for a laugh or two
Director - CJ Stunkard
Writers - Chris Chandler / Dean McCarthy
Musical Score - Jason Estock
Marketing Promotion Team - Dave Weigel /Robert Jones
Soundtrack Artists:
Tom Petty & The Heartbreakers
Justin Timberlake
Aerosmith
R.E.M.
Matt Pond PA
Gin Blossoms
Issac Hayes
Beck
The Advantage
Pick your perfect cast with this criteria
Hero - The Main Lead of the Movie
Villian - Some sort of nemesis, of any kind
Love interest - Most likely of a differing gender from the Hero.
Comedic Scene Stealer - The quirky side kick or some other comedic presence in the movie
Wiseman - A character of some experience who is to have some wisdom imparting, teaching role
The Innocent - Perhaps a victim, young child, someone who is in peril, or is lauded for their purity.
The Best Friend - Self explanatory
Odd Enough. Good...Here's mine
No repeating me.
Hero - Nathan Fillion
Without a doubt the greatest unappreciated actor, he gets the lead or this movie doesn't get made.
Villian - Tony Jaa and Monica Belluci
Tony Jaa needs a big film to bring him into the US and this film does it, but he needs some support to fill out the acting shoes and so I take Monica Belluci to pull the strings like no other.
Love Interest - Catherine Zeta-Jones
I am not actually a big Zeta Jones fan but next to Fillion you need someone who can bring the banter and she is also age appropriate, and fully capable despite the genre.
Comedic Scene Stealer - Michael Keaton
Haven't seen as much of him lately and he has stayed away from comedy, but I would love a good funny bit part from him in my movie.
Wiseman - Samuel L. Jackson
Wouldn't be much of a movie without him.
The Innocent - Zooey Deschanel
I touted her as my favorite up and coming actress so I ought to back it up by casting her in my movie. Possibly as the daughter or Niece of someone, most likely Fillion.
The Best Friend - I was torn between Jean Reno and Sean Bean. Sean Bean may be more age appropriate but I will actually go with Jean Reno who can work in either an action or comedic way depending on how I take the movie.
There you have it, the cast of my "probably would be an Adventure film" in the vein of Indiana Jones. I feel it has excellent international appeal with Jaa, Reno, Belluci, and Zeta Jones. The action could go anywhere with Jaa, Fillion, Jackson, and Reno. And the Comedy is fully viable with Keaton, Fillion, Reno, Zeta Jones, and Deschanel. Plus, plenty of Sex Appeal for both genders, this is the best non-existent movie ever.
Who's Next?
I'll play your game, you rogue. Though you stole Jackson and Bellucci from who would be in my dream cast, I will still put together the following:Hero - PATRICK "PAIN DON'T HURT" SWAYZE. That's RIGHT! SWAYZE!!!! (from Roadhouse and Point Break)
Villian - MICHAEL CHIKLIS. He's practically a villain in The Shield and he'd be intimidating as crap. Henchmen will include Snoop Dogg, Mark Dacoscos (Mani from Brotherhood of the Wolf), Noel Gugliemi (Hector from Fast and the Furious), Raymond Cruz (Sniper Chavez from Clear and Present Danger ) and, of course Nick Chinlund (from Con Air and Chronicles of Riddick). Danny Trejo will also play a bounty hunter named "HOUND".
Comedic Scene Stealer - DAVE CHAPPELLE. ( of Chappelle's Show fame)
Wiseman - LANDO CALRISSIAN...I mean, Billy Dee Calrissian...oh wait. BILLY DEE WILLIAMS.
The Innocent - EMMA WATSON (Hermione Granger of Harry Potter fame.)
The Best Friend - JOHN GOODMAN
Oh, and I have a pitch for the movie. Patrick Swayze stars as a down-no-his-luck Bus Driver, Martin Ward, who has no direction in his life. That is, until his friend Ramses (GOODMAN) gets him a job driving a cargo fan for local small businessman RANDALL JOSS (CHIKLIS) from Southern California to the Canadian Border. During his first drive, however, Ward gets a flat and goes to grab the spare out of the back (in the cargo hold) only to find that his cargo is young women, being transported for the sex trade. After talking to the self-apoointed ring-leader of the girls, wannabe moviestar SAM (WATSON), he realizes he has to help them. Going rogue, Swayze is pursued by Chiklis and his henchmen in The Road Warrior fashion. During the action, he transfers the girls from his destroyed truck to the rig of his trucker buddy, SMOKES (CHAPPELLE), who gives him the lip the whole time about getting him "mixed up in this Bu!!$hit!!". Along the way, they also receive help from FRANKY BANKS (WILLIAMS), a retired US agent on the trail of Joss. The movie is titled, "SLAVE TRADERS MUST DIE"
Sorry for taking so long on this one Dean.
Villian - James Caan Another favorite who would be the perfect counterpoint for Oldman's hero; similar in age, proud, charismatic and able to add some humor.
Love Interest - Parker Posey (Superman Returns, Christopher Guest films including Waiting for Guffman and For You Consideration) The eccentric yet endearing female of the story who is optimistic through all kinds of hardship, a quality that is attractive to the hero since he struggles with depression.
Comedic Scene Stealer - Michael Cera (Superbad, plays George Michael of Arrested Development) The son of the story's villian, who try's too hard to fill his father's shoes and makes himself look ridiculous in the process.Wiseman - John C. Riley A failed and burned out ex-con who helps the hero come to grips with his role as the hero of the story and to understand that he needs to save his love interst from the villian or else he will become just like the wiseman's charracter, miserable and always regreting missed oppurtunities.
Innocent - Ricky Gervais (Extras, Stardust, UK version of The Office) The clueless exchange student who has been in college for so long because of so many failed semesters, but he chooses to never give-up, mostly because college is all he knows. He becomes wrapped up in the villians heinous plot and is used as a contrast to the villian's questionable morals. He's also really funny.Best Friend - John Schneider (Bo Duke of Dukes of Hazzard, Smallville) Who deosn't want John Schneider as their best friend.
<-- The Real Deal, some of you may have seen an imposter in the comments below. Here are my delayed picks:
Hero - Mr. T. Come on. Who wouldn't want Mr. T as their hero? I sure would.Villain - Christopher Walken Time and Time again this man portrays some of the best villains ever. Max Zorin anyone?
Women Parts - Laura Prepon, Jessica Biel, Jessica Alba, Jenna Fischer. I changed this from Love Interest, there does not have to be love involved in every movie plot, especially with Mr. T involved. This movie is so good, we need FOUR good looking women.
Wiseman - Tom Petty. Did anyone else see "The Postman" besides me? His role is brilliant.
Comedic Scene Stealer - Rick Moranis Do I really have to explain this?
Innocent - John Krasinski - You know him as Jim from the Office, he's the man today.
Best Friend - John Cusack - He's the man of the 80's and 90's, also John Krasinski's mentor.
Cameo - Sylvester Stallone - Could Play himself, I don't really care
Cameo #2 - Norm MacDonald - Some Jerk on the street, good for a laugh or two
Director - CJ Stunkard
Writers - Chris Chandler / Dean McCarthy
Musical Score - Jason Estock
Marketing Promotion Team - Dave Weigel /Robert Jones
Soundtrack Artists:
Tom Petty & The Heartbreakers
Justin Timberlake
Aerosmith
R.E.M.
Matt Pond PA
Gin Blossoms
Issac Hayes
Beck
The Advantage
Tuesday, August 21, 2007
The Constant Gardener (7 out of 10)
It's been far too long since I have posted and I apologize to my fellow Cinemabun writers and what little readership we may have. I thought I would post a short review in order to stay involved.I recently watched The Constant Gardener, A film by director Fernando Meirelles who made the fascinating City Of God. Though not as innovative and raw as City Of God, The Constant Gardener’s visuals can be stunning, the story and plot are strong, and Ralph Fiennes’ characters’ journey and transformation are inspiring. I can understand the critical accolades this film has received, but it just isn’t my type of movie, I only partially enjoyed it, though overall, it was a rewarding experience.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
