WTF

Um...thoughts anyone?

Reactions to Pirates

I'm sure everyone saw it. Here's the place to take your shots.

Personally, I hated it with a passion - and I liked the first one, and even found stuff to like (much like Spider-Man 3) in the second.

But this third entry was just awful from beginning to end. I couldn't pick out a single thing I enjoyed about the movie and I was squirming in my seat after 15 minutes. The painful knowledge that I still had two and a half hours left from that point only made it that much worse.

Depp tries his hardest to keep everyone entertained, but by this point he's playing a magician and he's just got too many balls in the air to keep them up. Geoffrey Rush was the only other part that I didn't loathe.

With as bad as Keira Knightley, Chow Yun-Fat, Orlando Bloom and the rest of the assortment were, worst of all is the story. The writers of this monstrosity had absolutely no idea what they were doing. It wanders all over the place, and for a pirate movie these guys stand around explaining shit to one another way too often. Say what you will about Dead Man's Chest but at least it felt like we were headed somewhere. During At World's End I felt like everyone's heads had been chopped off and they were just running around aimlessly with weapons in hand.

Oh, and I wanna thank the creators for treating us to the 30-or-so hangings we witness to kick the movie off. Nothing like the mass killings of people devoid of their rights to a trial. Really gets you in the mood for the brainless wonder you're about to behold.

Trailer Bulletin: John Rambo

Your thoughts?

On the Lot

As I'm sure some of you have been doing, I've been sitting here for the last half hour completely hating myself for watching the show "On the Lot." Being aspiring filmmakers and lovers of film, you guys have to have heard about this show, right? Produced by Steven Spielberg, they gather a group of 50-or-so filmmakers and put them through the ringer to see who's the best director.

First mistake the show makes... it's entirely a 'reality show.' I felt like I was watching "The Bachelor" or "Joe Millionaire" or some shit. It was terribly staged. I hated myself simply because it was totally, 100% reality crapola. I hate to watch people dance around for a camera and act like it's real life. The minute they add a camera to the mix, it's staged. I don't care what it is. "American Idol" or whatever, it's staged. I've been a big advocate of the fact that "American Idol" would be just as interesting as solely a radio show - still completely uninteresting - but besides that, it wouldn't lose anything but the 'Prom Queen' factor of voting... the voting for the prettiest, most appealing candidate. If there's anything that Peter Jackson, Alfred Hitchcock and Quentin Tarantino prove, it's that, "hey, ugly dudes can make pretty damn good films." They need to find a way past that, and they completely failed in every aspect of the show.

Second, the first episode is dedicated to 'The Pitch.' I'm sorry, but 'The Pitch' has absolutely nothing to do with who can make the best film. They're actually going to eliminate people because of this shit? I don't even want to address this. This is so asinine as to be laughable. Eliminating a director for something unrelated to what's a part of his footage is ludicrous. It's all about the film, people.

Third, they assign ideas. I mean, at this point you're losing brainpower.

And then lastly, besides all that (and even ignoring the annoying host of the show), we get... 'The Three Judges.' Garry Marshall. The world's most hit-or-miss (and mostly miss) director. He did Pretty Woman. He did Beaches. He did Overboard. Other than those three, mostly mediocre films, he's done shit. Hell, last week he released the roundly derided Georgia Rule. And the last film of his I saw? Raising Helen. Not a single thing worth remembering, I'm still trying to forget Kate Hudson was even in it.

And Carrie Fisher. Immortalized in Star Wars and forgotten in absolutely everything else.

And - of course - fuckin' Brett Ratner. Yes, Rush Hour/Red Dragon/X-Men 3 Brett Ratner. The guy has yet to make a SINGLE good film. Worse yet, he has this egotistical approach to his work like he's actually accomplished something - besides the astounding fact he actually got money to make a film. I blame Spielberg. Not only did he give Ratner the money to make his student film (thank you "Entourage" for that bit of info), but now he's producing a show that lets Ratner mug for the camera? Every time this guy winced at a pitch, I wanted to punch him in the face and say "hey, fuckhead, this is what it's like to sit through most all of your films."

I guess payback is hell. "On the Lot" is a squandered idea followed through with brutally terrible execution.

Now and Then

Mulligan brought this up in one of his comments, and I had been kicking around this idea for a post myself. Mulligan had recalled rewatching "Rookie of the Year" the other day and how it left a bad taste in his mouth. As a kid, he loved the movie, but now as an adult, it was just plain bad.

Obviously what makes you laugh as a kid doesn't necessarily carryover to maturity. I ask you to tell us of any nostalgia classics that you now wish you hadn't seen again. Ones that having seen a second time has now destroyed what fond memories you had for it.

Some examples I can think off the top of my head include nearly all Pauly Shore films. I caught "Encino Man" the other day. I had loved it as a kid and thought Link was the coolest cat. But now, my memory has been tainted. It really is a film of the '80s because it simply doesn't hold up. The friendships seemed fake. The jokes stale. Everyone was so oblivious to what was going on. The plot is so over the top, I cant believe I was ever able to suspend my disbelief for it. To be honest, I see the Wayans Bros. remaking it. They could even combine it with one of the their own flicks and make "Little Cave Man." In order to steal a dinosaur egg, Marlon must go undercover as a cave baby and infiltrate the wealthiest caveman in quarry. Oh dear god,..the suicide rate will be too much for our country to bare.

Also "Naked Gun 2 1/2." I loved all Leslie Nielsen films when I was younger. I since revisited all of the Naked Guns, and that second one is just bad. Not funny at all. Very disappointing because I thought I would still love it even today. At least the first is still terrific and the third is pretty good too.

So what films have you since rewatched and now you wish you had just hit the eject button. Oh and no "HOOK." That is just way too obvious.

Inspiration

I got to reading about some of my favorite directors and not so favorite directors and despite my love or hate for them, I have something in common with them. A love for film and aspiration to create movies. And something that always interested me was what movies inspired them. What movies inspired everyone here to come to love and admire movies?

For me it was The 7th Voyage of Sinbad. I don't particularly love the movie though I do own it and let it play in the background on occasion just because, but I remember sitting on my dad's lap and watching it when I was at least four or five and thinking, "This is so awesome. How did they do this?" Soon after I remember seeing the Terminator 2 trailer and all of a sudden movies were important to me.

So that's the question, what movie made you love movies?

Recent Watches: May 2007

I'm gonna get in the habit of posting a topic at the beginning of each month dealing solely with what we've recently watched. For me, one of the most interesting things is learning what other people are catching up with on DVD or which classics that they're seeing for the first time.

I'm gonna start that here. So feel free to kick in with whatever you've watched in theaters, on TV, on DVD, whatever. There are no restrictions.

Also, I'm just a little disappointed that it seems like the conversation on the site has come to a standstill. I have no problems being responsible for the main page, but I figured the comments section would be where the real heart of this site was as we could debate back-and-forth on topics. The last three posts have a grand total of 10 replies. The post before that had 11 all by itself. I dunno. C'mon guys, let's show that movie passion.

Film Script's Top 7 - Comic Book Movies

I know the topic comes entirely out of left field but with Rotten Tomatoes recently compiling the rankings of Comic Book films from 1-94, I figured our own Top 7 lists (feel free to throw in honorary mentions as well) were in order. And it's Top 7 because Top 5 is just too short and Top 10 is just too long.

So let's begin with my own - surprisingly one-sided - list:

6 & 7.) Spider-Man and Spider-Man 2
The reasons Spider-Man 3 was such a disappointment is plainly observable by rewatching the first two films. Director Sam Raimi has Peter Parker run the gamut of comic book hero storylines... origin, to underappreciated figure, to our finally recognized hero. Maybe that's why 3 felt like a lot of stalling - the movie equivalent of spinning your tires - because Raimi felt there was no place for the character to go. Besides, these films are trim, lean and iconic. There are images still burning in my mind from these two while 3 already begins to fade away.

5.) Batman Returns
The only movie that I remember my dad and I walking out on when I was a child... and a movie I avoided pretty much relentlessly until I finally gave in and gave it another chance a couple years ago. I'm glad I did. Maybe my 10-12 year old self wasn't ready for the darkness of the film and Burton's decision to focus the film around its villains instead of our hero, but nowadays - and maybe this says something about the older, more cynical me - but I revel in it. There's gotta be something to a film that so totally scares the hell out of its producers that they lose a Burger King sponsorship and bag the director. Unfortunately, it's also primarily responsible for the fiasco that became Schumacher's films, but you can't blame it on Burton.

4.) Sin City
Easily more entertaining and replayable than Frank Miller's 300, while still as much of a visual, jaw-dropping feast. Sin City establishes character in a way that 300 ignores, while also playing off the old noir pictures of Hollywood's yesteryear. Also, by crisscrossing from story to story, the film plays like a series of vignettes - each story interesting and unique enough to stand on its own. I'd actually love to see this film broken down and watch each story unfold in and of itself. While not perfect - like most Rodriguez' pictures the film is practically devoid of emotion outside of the 'wham, bam, thank ya ma'am' action school style of filmmaking - the film is by far his most roundly complete. Plus, with a cast list this deep you're drawn in for every second.

3.) Batman Begins
Christopher Nolan reboots the franchise after it nearly fizzled into extinction with Begins and, appropriately, tells the story of Bruce Wayne's origin over your typical Batman tale... a story that had thus far been largely ignored, even by Burton's twosome. It's fascinating and adds a depth to a character that had been fairly shallow to that point. With the exception of the casting of Katie Holmes (a mistake already addressed in a recasting for The Dark Knight), Begins is the best of the Batman films - giving him back a pulse, and an audience.

2.) Batman
Yes, the 3rd Batman film on my list - and still largely considered 'the' Batman film. Burton hit it out of the park on his first swing with the bewildering (at the time) casting of Michael Keaton as Batman and letting Jack dance in the pale moonlight. I don't even know what to say about it besides the fact it was the first pure comic driven movie that I'd so thoroughly enjoyed. Maybe it's something about the Wayne Mansion... or that Batman really has no superpowers so he's always wholly a human figure but he's definitely the best superhero and he generally shows the most emotion, teetering on the brink of vengeance over justice. Love it.

1.) The Crow
The ultimate hero figure. Part rock n' roller. Part supernatural. And intensely scary - even to evildoers. He has the ability to regenerate from gunshot wounds. And he's even a romantic at heart, with a backstory that kills... love destroyed, he's given the chance to set things right for one night on the eve of Halloween. Forget any of the sequels, but the original is pure comicbook genius. Dark and dynamic. It's still widely known for the tragic death of Brandon Lee, but what a way to go out. He was a God for a moment in this film. Always left me wanting more.

honorary mentions to: Hellboy, Superman: The Movie, X-Men, Blade, X2: X-Men United, Superman Returns and Blade 2: Bloodhunt

*note: I eliminated such films as A History of Violence and Ghost World because while technically deriving from a comic or graphic novel, they don't fit in with the whole aura of a pure comic book film (namely costumes and villains).

Edemic Arachnophobia- Fear of Bloated Spiders

I have literally been dreaming and thinking about Spider-Man 3 ever since I saw the midnight showing. Spider-Man is perhaps the greatest superhero ever in my opinion, one whom we all can relate to. He is awkward with women. He must juggle job and school. He must fight inner demons of jealousy, ego, and lack of self confidence that we all have fought at one time or another. He was the superhero for our generation of misguided and misunderstood misanthropes. It is with great disappointment that I must say Spider-Man 3 does not deliver.

Let me first tell you what is good in this movie. Bruce Campbell is genius. His role brought the “fun” back into the movie that I was missing so dearly. The villains are pretty good, if undeveloped. Thomas Hayden Church is great. He looks the part. He acts the part. The character’s back story is fleshed out enough to where you really fall for the guy and his own inner turmoil. Topher Grace was a ballsy choice to play Eddie Brock and I think it was inspired. He gives the movie a much needed dose of energy. He is a great “dick” to watch. Tobey Maguire is once again, capable of pulling off a convincing Peter Parker. He wasn’t on the top of his game, but he was more than willing to give us a believable show. JK Simmons needs his own J. Jonah Jameson movie entitles “Daily Bugle: Die Harder.” He is the only character to have been consistent throughout every movie, and he has stolen every scene he is in every time.

Now on what is bad in this film. Kirsten Dunst cannot sing, period. Why did I have to hear her twice? Bryce Dallas Howard is wasted. Gwen Stacy becomes a plot device and not a character. She is used, much like Venom, simply to geek out fan boys at her appearance, but really never once bringing anything to the table. What the hell was James Cromwell doing in this film? James Franco has this damn smile throughout the movie that seemed so forced and fake. The Sandman is gone for too long. Venom sucked. This is where it was wrong to cast Topher. He just doesn’t have the menace to play the classic Venom. Venom also did not look good whatsoever. He looked fake and rubbery. For the most expensive movie ever made, why could they not simply go get Weta to do Venom right, and give him the depth he deserved, both physically and emotionally? To avoid even needing Weta, they should have got rid of Venom all together. Develop the Eddie character this movie, and bring him back for the forth, and do Venom right. Raimi has always said he didn’t like Venom, and you can tell that was the case. He was probably forced to put him in the movie simply for marketing sakes, and not because he makes sense for the story. The action scenes were uninspired, and too CGI heavy, which you could tell. They took you out of the film when they should have you firmly planted in your seats. None of them ever came close to the terrific train battle, or the final showdown with Doc Ock in Spider-Man 2.

***Spoiler Warning***

Also the plot hinges on too many conveniences in order to set up the story. The meteorite happens to land ten feet from Peter, but doesn’t attack him till much later on in the film, Harry comes down with short term amnesia, Harry’s butler shows up out of nowhere to resolve his daddy issues, the terrible newscast that informs us and Peter of the quick developments of a hostage situation was so hokey and lazy story telling, Flint happens to fall into a particle accelerator while on the run, Gwen happens to be modeling for the latest “copier” ad in a building 62 stories in the air when a crane goes out of control, oh and yes, a crane goes out of control because of a electrical malfunction. All of these things were too hard for me to suspend my disbelief for because the other films didn’t have them or at least weren’t nearly as glaring.

The most glaring misstep in this film though lasts for roughly 15 to twenty minutes. Once Peter Parker first obtains the black suit, apparently everything is fair game. Peter suddenly becomes the newest member of Panic-at-the-Disco. Spider-Man has officially jumped the shark. The scene is so out of place that it was as if Joel Schumacher jumped in the direct this scene. It just couldn’t have been Raimi. He is too smart to have done this. Test screenings were done. Did nobody tell him that he had just fucked up the middle part of the flick so haphazardly that the rest of the movie could never regain the momentum that the first part had built up? Apparently our idea of cool, must be telling women to get us cookies, covering one eye with emo hair, wearing the latest in European gigolo attire, and then becoming a dance/pianist aficionado. The jazz sequence is straight out of Jim Carrey’s The Mask. Once again, it is so out of place that I have to believe Raimi had his life threatened if he didn’t put it in there. One review compared this whole sequence of events to the equivalent to “having the greatest sex of your life, and than she looks at you and asks if you called your mom today.”

Finally, I hated the schmaltzy ending. Flints lines, while delivered well, really were saccharine. Peter lets him go all because his daughter is sick. The guy not only killed your uncle, he is an escaped convict, and he just probably killed a bunch more during that whole finale. Why let him go Spidey? Because you forgive him. What kind of hero are you. I also didn't care for the MJ/Peter resolution. So because they danced together at the end, we should expect that she forgives him. He frickin hit her and kissed another woman. Doesn't matter. I had little respect for MJ anyways.

***Spoiler End***

I know I will get quite a bit of negative feedback about this review already, but I must say this,...X3 was better. I know it is so easy to pick on Brett Ratner and X3 had a lot of problems, but it took chances. Besides when you compare there Tomato scores, X3 had 57%, while Spidey currently sits at 62%. This movie was just lazy story telling for most of the film. It juggled too many subplots, which made it bloated and contrived. X3, while not great, kept the film within the universe Bryan Singer had created. Spider-Man 3 did not maintain the same feel as the first two. It is akin to the differences in Burton’s Batman and Schumacher’s Batman. I just can’t believe this was the same director. I think some of you may be blind to its faults. I like you, wanted to love this movie. I really did. This review does not fill any sick fantasy of mine. I’m saddened to write it, but it is truly how I feel. So nobody better call me a biased douche bag. But honestly, if Ratner made this movie, would you feel the same about it?

Burning Bright, Flaming Out

Between the years of 1987 and 1990, John McTiernan crafted three highly respected and top-caliber action pictures in quick succession. He started with Predator, a balls-to-the-wall pure testosterone picture. It has a look and a feel that most action movies can't match, and honestly it has nothing more on its mind than its man vs. alien premise. To this date, Predator is one of the easiest movies for me to sit back and watch in repetition - to the point that I like it best out of McTiernan's 'trilogy'.

Most would disagree, leaning towards the also awesome Die Hard in 1988 as his masterpiece, and really its hard to argue. The film was a starmaker for Bruce Willis (a film whose popularity he's still milking nearly two decades later with Live Free or Die Hard). Also, it has a human element that Predator avoids by putting families at risk, and it spawned an entire wave of action pictures placed within a certain set including The Negotiator and its own less-effective (but hilariously titled) sequel Die Hard 2: Die Harder.

Then McTiernan follows it up with The Hunt for Red October and by this point father's all over the country are tipping their beers back in appreciation for the action movie genius that is John McTiernan. Each film veers away from the last, but maintains a pace, an adrenaline and an interest that most action movies don't or can't.

After that though? Well, what the hell happened?

From Medicine Man in 1992 through Basic in 2003, McTiernan dropped almost entirely off the map with a decade worth of average-to-terrible flicks. Hell, Last Action Hero in 1993 was awful to the point of legend, forcing McTiernan to crawl on his knees back to the Die Hard franchise he had previously started and abandoned...

So my question is this - what other actors or directors have had such a high period of success that follows with such a spectacular crash? And why do directors seem to hit a certain peak that for some reason is horribly difficult to recapture once they fall?

And yes, this topic was inspired by another recent watching of my beloved Predator. I don't know about you guys, but I miss the action genius.