Thursday, June 28, 2007

Top 10 Actors in Hollywood

Here are two of them



Compiling a list of the best actors in Hollywood is no easy task. New actors burst onto the scene, hot actors fade away. And let’s not forget the fact that as a whole, Hollywood is simply producing dumber movies.



Ranking the Top 10 Actors in Hollywood

Please mark this moment in time. It’s the end of June in 2007, and this is a list of who I think are the best actors in Hollywood. I ask you to mark this point in time because this is such a fluid list. So many things can change so quickly. New actors burst onto the scene, hot actors fade away. And let’s not forget the fact that as a whole, Hollywood is simply producing dumber movies. Tough to locate some strong performances between Saw 4 and Georgia Rule.

So without further adieu, here are my top actors in movies TODAY – not all time. The list is in no particular order:

Tom Hanks
Actually in danger of falling off the list. Began a brilliant 10 year run with consecutive Oscars for Philadelphia and Forrest Gump. Also been nominated for Saving Private Ryan and the underrated Cast Away. He’s in danger of falling off because of a few recent clunkers: The Da Vinci Code and The Terminal among them.

Clive Owen
Clive has some mo. Beginning in 2004, he’s on a very strong run, with an Oscar nom for Closer and strong performances in King Arthur, Derailed, and Inside Man. He got absolutely robbed for not getting a nomination for his superb work in Children of Men. And don’t forget Sin City. Look forward to more work from Clive.

Daniel Day-Lewis
Admittedly, Day-Lewis probably isn’t eligible for this list because he doesn’t work enough. Dude dropped out of acting to become a freaking COBBLER in Europe. But his ability is indisputable: He won an Oscar for My Left Foot, and was nominated for In the Name of the Father and for his spine-chilling turn as Bill the Butcher in the vastly underrated Gangs of New York. That’s 3 Oscar noms in 9 films, and many feel he should have been nominated for his work in The Boxer.

Sean Penn
It pains me to admit this because, in his private life, Penn is an idiot. But his acting skill is undeniable. He’s been nominated for 4 Oscars since 1996, for Dead Man Walking, Sweet and Lowdown, I Am Sam, and finally winning for his performance in Mystic River. And don’t forget his strong work in 21 Grams and The Assassination of Richard Nixon. Dude takes himself way too seriously, but hey, whatever works for you.

Ben Kingsley
Surprised? You shouldn’t be. Kingsley has been very good for a long time. Starting with a Best Actor statue for Ghandi, he’s also been nominated for his work in Bugsy, Sexy Beast (in the best villain performance since Anthony Hopkins’ Hannibal Lecter, and the best since), and House of Sand and Fog. Sir Ben is the type of actor through which a movie receives instant credibility.

Johnny Depp
Has there been a more daring actor in the last 20 years? Depp’s choice in roles is downright strange, but it’s a tribute to his talent that he makes the roles work. It may surprise you that he’s only been nominated for two Oscars: Pirates of the Caribbean (Curse of the Black Pearl) and Finding Neverland. But he seems to have escaped Oscar attention for so many other fine performances, including Ed Wood, Chocolat and Blow.

Charlize Theron
Proving she’s not just a pretty face, Theron has racked up the accolades in short time, including her Oscar win for Monster and another nom for North Country. Unfortunately, Aeon Flux is on the resume as well.

Judi Dench
Dame Dench is the best actor working today. Listen to this impressive list of Oscar noms: Mrs. Brown, Shakespeare in Love (she won), Chocolat, Iris, Mrs. Henderson Presents, and Notes on a Scandal. That’s 6 nominations – in 9 years. Wow.

Hilary Swank
An Oscar win for Boys Don’t Cry. Another one for her brilliant performance in Million Dollar Baby. A strong performance in The Gift and fun turns in The Core and Insomnia. Swank is always a threat to take home a statue, and doesn’t appear to be going anywhere anytime soon.

Leonardo DiCaprio
He started out as a precocious child actor but has since turned into one of the best thespians working today. He was nominated for What’s Eating Gilbert Grape, The Aviator and Blood Diamond, but also turned in great performances in The Departed, Catch Me If You Can, and Gangs of New York. There’s plenty more to come from Leo.

Threatening to enter the Top 10:

Christian Bale
Bale is starting to put together a pretty strong resume. His work in American Psycho was brilliant and underrated. He was terrific in The Machinist, very good in The Prestige, and has easily been the best Batman.

Phillip Seymour Hoffman
Hoffman’s a newcomer to the list, but he’s been around a while. Everyone knows about his brilliant, Oscar winning turn in Capote. But he was also quite convincing in Mission Impossible: III, and did some underrated work in both Talented Mr. Ripley and Along Came Polly.

Read More...

Wednesday, June 27, 2007

Angelina may join Topkapi

You know what would be a great heist? Angelina stealing my pants.

The Topkapi Affair is the sequel to the Thomas Crown Affair remake, and it's a heist film I really want to see get made. Brosnan has been trying to get it into production for a while, using the heist classic Topkapi as the source material. Until now he hasn't had much success, but this new bit of news just might finally get the wheels turning.


Moviehole has posted a rumor that Pierce Brosnan has offered Angelina the opportunity to co-star with him in the Topkapi Affair. Thomas Crown featured a sexy cat-and-mouse game between Brosnan and Rene Russo (perhaps her most sexy role other than that scar-comparison scene in the Lethal Weapon series), but Russo declined to come back for the sequel.

It feels like we've already seen this movie before, and yet I can't wait. Come on, people! The Thomas Crown series is as much about sex as it is about stealing things that don't belong to you. forget the precious art- I'm hoping Brosnan manages to steal her skirt.

True to the original, the Topkapi Affair will be filmed in Turkey where the story is set. Let's hope that Angelina's participation is enough to get this movie into production.



Read More...

Netflix Review - Hannibal Rising (2007)

Shoes Not Filled


It should come as no shock that Hollywood couldn’t leave well enough alone. They just HAD to try to turn a profit on the Hannibal Lecter name, didn’t they? This was about as surprising as a Lindsay Lohan coke binge – and about as annoying.

Hannibal Rising


Suggested Netflix Queue Position: 277, right behind the remake of Psycho



It’s already been 16 years since Silence of the Lambs burst onto the scene, sweeping all 5 major Academy Awards (one of only 3 films to do so) and permanently etching Hannibal Lecter into the pantheon of cinematic villainy.

In fact, Anthony Hopkins’ turn as the chilling psychiatrist has been so enduring that his career has never really been the same. I don’t say that lightly. This is one great actor. Consider that Hopkins has been nominated three times for Oscars since Silence and still has failed to live up to the standard he created. Simply put, Hopkins’ turn as Lecter is one of the best single acting performances of all time. Hell, even his own reprisals of the role (in Hannibal and Red Dragon) have failed to live up to the original.

So it should come as no shock that Hollywood couldn’t leave well enough alone. They just HAD to try to turn a profit on the Hannibal Lecter name, didn’t they? This was about as surprising as a Lindsay Lohan coke binge – and about as annoying.

And so it is against this backdrop of studio greed that I reluctantly agreed to watch and review Hannibal Rising. How did I get up the courage? I just told myself that John Travolta wasn’t in it. It’s all about perspective.

I started this review with the Hopkins perspective so I could illustrate just what an impossible task lay before Gaspard Ulliel, the actor chosen to portray Lecter in his youth. And Ulliel, a French actor in his first American film role, is in way over his head. So is director Peter Webber, whose only significant credit is that he directed Girl With a Pearl Earring.

I’m not sure who to blame for the fact that Ulliel’s Lecter is completely inconsistent with the later model. Look, I wasn’t expecting Ulliel to be as good as Hopkins; I was ready to cut the kid a break. But it’s clear that he was just aching to be psychotic, to the point where I think he overstepped where Lecter would have been at that age.

Ulliel’s Lecter is a bitter, sullen bully who can’t get along with other kids. The fact that he constantly wears a psychotic grin on his face seems overcompensation. Later versions of Lecter (don’t forget that Brian Cox played him in Manhunter) betray hardly any emotion on their faces. And wasn’t that the scary part? Lecter could be cordial and charming, but underneath was a man who wanted to eat you.

Enough discussion of Ulliel’s portrayal – no need to bludgeon the kid.

The movie’s plot isn’t going to baffle any Rhodes scholars. It’s a good old fashioned tale of revenge. But it doesn’t have to be brilliant or complex if character rings true. It doesn’t; I simply don’t see a lot of connection between Hannibal Lecter (as we knew him) and this film.

It seems as if the life portrayed here is lived by some other serial killer. Lecter grows up in a castle in Lithuania, learns to use a Samurai sword – no, that is not a typo – nearly bangs it out with his Asian aunt, all the while exacting revenge on some war criminals who did his family wrong. If this is the history of Hannibal Lecter, perhaps the producers would have been better off casting Dennis Hopper.

The point is, throughout the film, one just can’t reconcile this crazed teenager with the cool psychiatrist in Baltimore.

To be fair to the movie, it seems to have been pretty true to the book. I thought the Samurai Training School was a Hollywood plot device – and who could blame me? Hollywood has done much worse. But it turns out that non sequitur is straight from Thomas Harris’ novel of the same name. Not so coincidentally, Harris wrote the “screenplay.” What a shame. Silence of the Lambs was not only a terrific film but an incredible book. Red Dragon was also a fine novel. But who can resist the temptation to write a bland, senseless exploitation of a fine character when piles of money are thrown at you by the studios? Clearly not Thomas Harris.

No matter. This latest profiteering effort isn’t worth your time. Move on to the next exploitation of a brand name, like I, Robot 2.

Read More...

Tuesday, June 26, 2007

Netflix Review - Ghost Rider (2007)

What should we do with Nick's hair?


...this sounds about right.


I actually saw this about a week ago. I’ve since been to church, therapy, and to visit the grilled cheese sandwich that looks like Jesus, located in Oklahoma (where else would it be?).


Ghost Rider

Suggested Netflix Queue Position: How Many Movies does Netflix Carry? Take that number and add 1.

I tried to get out of this. I pleaded with Foley and Moxon. We drew straws, we flipped coins, played rock/paper/scissors – hell, I even threatened to quit the blog. None of it worked – I was the one chosen to review Ghost Rider, the film version of the comic book of the same name.

I actually saw this about a week ago. I’ve since been to church, to therapy, and even to visit the grilled cheese sandwich that looks like Jesus, located in Oklahoma (where else would it be?).

If it sounds like I’m exaggerating, then you need to watch Ghost Rider. The “film” stars Nick “Call me Cage” Coppola, as a motorcycle daredevil who makes a pact with the devil to save his father, only to realize he got more than he bargained for.

Nick stars as Johnny Blaze, a budding stunt rider who works alongside his Dad in a circus. Johnny’s dad has developed lung cancer through years of smoking – a fact Johnny discovers as he’s rummaging through the garbage in their trailer, coming upon a form letter informing the senior Blaze he has cancer. Is that how it works? Really? What kind of bastard doctor sends cancer notification form letters to his patients? Dr. Kevorkian? I guess it wouldn’t have dawned on Johnny otherwise, having watched his dad hack and wheeze his way through several conversations.

The devil, played by – you’re not going to believe this – Peter Fonda, shows up and offers Johnny what he truly wants: to cure his dad of cancer. All it costs is his soul. Johnny is about to sign the pact when his finger is pricked accidentally, spilling his blood on the contract. That’s good enough, according to the devil. I guess we’re now supposed to sympathize with Johnny because he inadvertently signed the pact, but he was about to anyway. Whatever.

One of the true accomplishments of this movie is the producers’ ability to locate Peter Fonda, who was probably cleaning ashtrays at the Golden Nugget Casino in Reno, the great scripts not exactly rolling in for the underachiever of the Fonda family.

That accomplishment was way more impressive than landing Sam Elliot – fresh off of blockbuster projects The Alibi, Avenger, and Barnyard. No, I’ve never heard of those, either. Not sure there’s any truth to the rumor that next to Elliot’s name in the movie’s budget was listed “Hand job and a sandwich.”

Capping off this incredible cast is Eva Mendes, who is so believable as a reporter you can’t stand it. I don’t know about you, but when I think of Eva Mendes, I think “journalist.” Let’s send her to Gaza right now. And yet, one can totally understand why she was cast in Ghost Rider. It’s not like she was competing against Judi Dench and Meryl Streep for this role. They needed a semi-recognizable hard body, and Mendes fits the bill. No danger of her bringing down the movie when it started there in the first place. She spends the movie with her cleavage busting out of her shirt, which I’m sure was accidental. On the surface, I’m not complaining. But cinematically that doesn’t do much for your career in the long run. But who are we kidding? Mendes won’t be playing Queen Victoria when she’s 50 or anything.

I’m not even going to go into the ridiculous plot details – why bother? Why trouble with telling you about how the motorcycle catches fire, burns miles of city street, can ride down the side of a skyscraper, and yet its tires don’t melt? Why go through the effort of telling you how Nick has to fight a crew of archangels in the form of Water, Dirt, and Air. What, did Earth, Wind & Fire threaten a lawsuit?

Why bother with telling you how, instead of drinking – like any self-respecting stunt rider would – Blaze instead eats jelly beans...from a freaking martini glass? Was that supposed to make me laugh? Intentionally, I mean? Or was the laughter supposed to come when I found out that Blaze listens to the Carpenters?

The writing is awful, but you knew that. But just so you’re thoroughly convinced, I’ll quote Blaze: “He may have my soul. But he doesn’t have my spirit.” I’m serious – that’s actually a line from the movie.

And of course, there’s Nick. Good old Nick. I’ve heard that his chest is CGI enhanced in this movie which, considering the magnitude to which your sensibilities are assaulted by the rest of the film, is perfectly plausible. And you know what? It’s OK. I’ll forgive him that, because he’s got bigger problems on his hands, like picking up his career after Next and whatever terrible script he’s about to choose.

And you know what’s really going to suck? I’ll have to review it.

Read More...

Hitman Trailer now available



The first Hitman Trailer is here! Check out the assasination goodness after the jump...




Joblo scooped the first release of the trailer. Its pretty small, but definitely worth a look. I think Luc Besson has done a nice job making sure to stay true to the Hitman franchise, especially with Ave Maria playing through the trailer.

My only complaint? I still think Jason Statham should have had the role instead of Timothy Olyphant...

Check it out for yourself...


Read More...

Monday, June 25, 2007

We, Robots (I, Robot 2): Future Review

Total pansy sissy Mary baby cry-cry


We, Robots (I, Robot 2): Future Review


Zero Opposable Thumbs up (Out of Five) and a Poo Fling

(From the Monkey Time Machine - 2010)

Good God, what happened here? I enjoyed "I, Robot" even though, as an Asimov fan, I felt mildly outraged. But now? Shit, I want to kill something. With my bare hands. Then drink its blood. And eat its skin.

Sorry. Sometimes bad movies make me angry, and "We, Robots" is a very bad movie.

Joel Schumacher, who directed "We, Robots," has made some great films: "Phone Booth", "Falling Down" and, uh, "D.C. Cab". He's also the guy who put nipples on Batman's suit, for which he will never be forgiven.

There is a decent conflict in this movie, I have to admit: it's humanoid robots like Sonny (from the first movie) vs. billions of dumb miniature robots. The minibots are run by something called "swarm intelligence" which is the same process that lets ants, bees, and termites build incredibly complicated societies and structures even though the individuals have IQs of about 0.000001. The more minibots there are, the smarter they become. Nine minibots are easy to deal with. Nine billion minibots will develop warp drive before you're finished with breakfast. It's a good concept for a nasty, faceless enemy.

But even a cool concept doesn't save this movie from the dreaded Monkey Poo Fling. Why? It hurts to even type this:

The robots cry. And then they sing a sad little robot song. I swear to god. They fucking CRY and SING.

*sigh*

You don't really need to know anything else. You don't need to know about Will Smith, whose character has had so many accidents and rebuilding he's more of a wise-cracking Robocop than anything else. You don't need to know about the battles in low earth orbit, because at that point, the robots have wept tender tears in a minor key, the movie is irrepairably ruined, and you just want everyone to die.

Did I mention the movie is three hours long? It's three hours long.

Read More...

Friday, June 22, 2007

Men in Black 3: Future Review


Surprisingly not full of suck

Men in Black 3: Future Review


Monkey Score: Four Opposable Thumbs Up (out of Five)

(From the Monkey Time Machine - 2011)

"Men in Black 3" is far better than "Men in Black 2" for one reason - it takes the characters into new territory, instead of the shoot-the-alien-before-it-destroys-earth plot we saw the first two times out.

Since you may not remember way back to 2002, the Men in Black are an alien-tracking organization so secret the government doesn't even know about it. But, inevitably, a 100-foot slug decides to ingest an office building and dozens of humans see this. The MIB use a special pen-sized device called a neuralizer to erase people's memories of the event. The neuralizers are the only things that keep people feeling safe about their lives, the MIB doctrine goes.

So, of course, in MIB3, the neuralizers stop working. It's in all the trailers, so I don't think I'm giving anything away.

Tommy Lee Jones and Will Smith reprise their roles as Agents J and K, as they try to figure out what the problem is, and quarantine the growing number of witnesses. Agent J wisely decides to tell the witnesses everything and even give them a tour of the MIB facility, mostly because it calms them down. And since they plan to restart the neuralizers, why not?

Smith and Jones find themselves up against a devious alien shape-shifting trickster, Koli (anagram of "Loki", which I don't think is an accident). Koli is played with shocking ferocity by hot-with-a-side-of-crazy-eyes Amy Poehler, taking a leave of absence from Saturday Night Live. Apparently, she has a device that's causing the neuralizers to stop working. Even when she's eating an entire police squadron, she's so damn likable that it's hard not to root for the villain. But then she switches to crazy-batshit-mean in about half a second and it's clear she must die.

Meanwhile, the number of alien sightings go through the roof. President Gore appears to make a cameo, but the filmmakers are tight-lipped as to whether the appearance is real or computer-generated. However, Gore has previously shown himself comfortable in the presence of movie cameras ("An Inconvenient Truth", "Global Warming is Hot!" with co-star Paris Hilton).

An audience favorite is the gang of gross but cocky worm-bugs set loose on the streets of New York. Successfully seducing drug-addled club girls (especially those on the new "Foxy" drug) is so convincing that it might persuade a few hot young things to stay away from the harder stuff.

Like the other MIB films, the emphasis is on goofy fun. Coming off the unfortunate stinker "We, Robots" (I, Robot 2), Will Smith makes good in another futuristic action movie, but one that plays well to his humor. Word is he took a break from directing the 24th Bond movie to shoot this sequel.

Again,Tommy Lee Jones' businesslike sternness and logic plays well against Smith's more spontaneous, freewheeling style. And the surprisingly clever game of cat-and-mouse between Smith & Jones and Koli keeps the movie racing along, even as the general population begins to panic over the large number of aliens.

As soon as the MIB figure out how to get the neuralizers working, they stop again. How is Koli doing it? Are we sure it's still her? All signs point to her, and she doesn't discourage the attention.

I won't reveal the ending, except to say it's not the one you expect.

Read More...

Tuesday, June 19, 2007

Batman Spy Report!


An anonymous source has posted information on the filming of two big scenes for Batman: the Dark Knight. Caution- SPOILERS ahead...



That's right, someone was on the set during filming of two scenes- the main one being a fundraiser event for Harvey Dent, in which the Joker shows up with some henchmen looking for Dent. According to the spy, the Joker does not look as grotesque as he does in the picture above (at least not in that scene). He has long hair with green highlights, and a purple coat and gloves...

I'm going to let you read the rest of the spy news over at JoBlo, who originally landed the scoop.

Another major SPOILER- Film Ick is reporting confirmation that Anthony Michael Hall is none other than Edward Nygma in The Dark Knight. So we have the characters that become the Riddler (Nygma) AND Two-Face (Harvey Dent) in the same Batman movie again? Well hell, why doesn't he just break out Robin and the codpieces as well?

You're treading on thin ice, Nolan.

Read More...

Stone of Destiny: Another heist film plots to steal my money?

I'm counting on Kate to take me out if I try to see this heist film...



A new heist film is in the works- Stone of Destiny, about the actual heist of the famed Stone of Scone, which was used for centuries in the coronations of Monarchs of Scotland and England. Is this a great movie in the making, or another elaborate plan to steal my money?


Hey, I'm all for heist film goodness, even comedic heist films. But this one is written and directed by Charles Martin Smith. He's better known as a bit actor and has been in movies such as the Untouchables, but it's probably more relevant to note that he was the director of Air Bud. Yes, THAT movie about the dog that can play basketball. Dark Horizons reports that the heist movie has been greenlighted with a $6 million budget, and will star Kate Mara (above) and Charlie Cox. I know you've never heard of them, but trust me, they're HUGE stars in Japan.

Did I mention that this film is about 4 students who steal a friggin' ROCK?

Read More...

Monday, June 18, 2007

UPDATED! The REAL Bat Cycle Revealed! NOW WITH VIDEO

Damn that looks dangerous to ride... and MUCH cooler than that other bike

UPDATE! VIDEO AVAILABLE AFTER THE JUMP
Let's face it- I was fooled by that false Batcyle in a previous post (I wasn't the only one). But the good news is that that over-the-top bike isn't from the Dark Knight. My faith in Nolan has been restored.. More info and another photo after the jump.



UPDATE: MSN has a clip from the Today show of the new bike.
check that out at MSN, via the always excellent Film Ick.

The LA Times has an article on the new bike, called the Bat Pod. It's worth checking out. All I have to say is thank god they aren't using that other bike. I really like this less stylized look over the over-the-top crap from the first round of Batman movies...

Read More...

3:10 to Yuma: A Western worth seeing

Bale continues to impress...

I'm not normally a big fan of Westerns, but 3:10 to Yuma has me intrigued. It's got Christian Bale and Russell Crowe (as the bad guy, no less). Now you can check out the first trailer...



First Showing has the trailer up. It's a solid trailer (though not amazing), and the cast is hard to ignore. It seems like it's been a while since we've had a good western out, so I'm looking forward to this one. Skip on over there to check it out.

Read More...

Box Office Results


what did we learn? 13 year old boys rule the box office, and they'd rather watch crappy space surfing instead of sophisticated Vegas heists...


Box Office results are in for the weekend and Silver Surfer did some damage, knocking Ocean's crew out of first place:

MOVIE Weekend Gross Total
1. FF2: Silver Surfer $57,400,000 $57,400,000
2. Ocean's Thirteen $19,105,000 $69,810,000
3. Knocked Up $14,535,000 $90,482,000
4. Pirates 3 $12,024,000 $273,757,000
5. Surf's Up $9,300,000 $34,671,000

Read More...

Friday, June 15, 2007

Batman’s new suit revealed, and the Evolution of the Batman costume

The evolution of the bat...


Entertainment Weekly has the first pic of the Dark Knight’s new batsuit….
We’ve got the pic after the jump, as well as a rundown of the evolution of the Batsuit....


You know, I warned you about this when I discussed Batman’s new vehicle—Is Nolan taking the Batman franchise down the same road to hell? While the new suit still retains that ‘body armor-like’ quality that is less comic-booky and more realistic, it’s pretty obvious that they still feel the need to keep changing things up and adding more crap.

Let’s take a look at the evolution of Batman’s suit through the movies, culminating with the latest redesign:


That ain’t a joke, kids. For those of you too young to have ever seen this- this was the actual batsuit worn on the campy Batman and Robin tv show from the 60’s. I think the eyebrows painted on the mask were an excellent touch.


Ah yes, the first Batman movie. That’s a helluva improvement over the tv show. The suit was impressive and simple, though it was so stiff Keaton looked like he was fighting in a body cast. I still can’t figure out how the hell Keaton got selected for the role.


The first suit redesign. I think this was actually a step in the right direction- the suit looks more armor-like, and actually simpler than the first one.


What exactly were we supposed to infer from this redesign- that Batman came out of the closet and got himself a boytoy? Was director Joel Shumacher living out his inner fantasies here? I’m an openminded guy, I know Robin was always part of the comic, and I’ll even grant you that Val Kilmer is kind of sexy in all that skintight latex, but this isn’t the movie I thought I was buying a ticket for. Yeah, this one pretty much marked the beginning of the end. I actually didn’t mind Val in the titular role, but adding Robin was the proverbial shark that Batman jumped. Fuck you, Joel Shumacher.


I think it’s great that Batman finally got in touch with his inner feelings, and isn’t afraid to be himself. And can I just say… Fab-u-lous! The bulging codpieces? The molded-in nipples? De-lish! Do you think George Clooney ever puts this suit back on when he’s bangin’ one of his model/girlfriends?



This is a costume from the lessor-known 1998 adult film- BatBoobs. Ironically, it’s still better costume design than the crap that Joel Shumacher put up.



This is me lookin’ fly for a New Year's party I went to. Notice how I went for the old-skool Batman aesthetic? I put this together in 15 minutes after taking a couple monster bong hits, and it still looks better than that clusterfuck Clooney had to wear. Although I have to admit the latex pants and glowing codpiece would have come in handy later that night…



This is possibly the worst Batman mask I have ever seen- what are those, antennae?
Yep, STILL better than Shumacher’s crap.



Ah, back to basics- the Batman Begins costume. This one harkens back to the Batman Returns costume, and I think we can all agree this has been the best suit so far. It doesn’t hurt that Bale has been the best Batman as well (other than myself at New Years). But here’s the $64,000 question- will Nolan start heading down the same path of overdesigning the suit?


There it is- the newest Batsuit. This is a scan from Entertainment Weekly, originally scooped by Aint it Cool (and kudos for that score). As for the suit- I really like the fact that it actually looks like body armor, almost football pads. But it’s starting to get a little busy, and almost too techy. Notice the text- razors on the forearms, multi-functional cape… Could this be the beginning of a Robocop-inspired design direction for future Batman sequels? Let’s hope not. I don’t want to see batarangs shooting out of his wrists or a friggin Inspector Gadget helicopter popping up out of his head, dammit.

Read More...

Thursday, June 14, 2007

Sunshine is Gonna Kick Ass

Can You Feel the Heat?


Let’s ignore the science of this concept for the time being; I really can’t tell you whether detonating a bomb in the Sun is reasonable or not. OK, it sounds unreasonable. But it also sounds interesting, doesn’t it?


Flying Into the Sun

If you’ve been reading my posts at all, you’ve probably come to realize that I’m a bit of a curmudgeon. OK, I’m downright bitter. Don’t ask me about what – the internet isn’t big enough to hold that post.

But I do enjoy some things and I get excited about others. Take the upcoming movie Sunshine, the latest Danny Boyle film coming out on July 20. You can watch the trailer here.

There isn’t a lot of sci-fi these days. We’re mostly inundated with formulaic romantic comedies, Bruckheimer explosion manifestos and animated portrayals of {insert animal or insect here}. While I can understand the general criticism that sci-fi is geeky, the genre is usually capable of producing thoughtful visions of the future, sometimes with very relevant permutations of present day concerns. Perhaps the fact that it’s thoughtful is exactly its problem. But that’s another post.

It is into this void that Sunshine steps. It’s 50 years in the future, and the Sun is being destroyed from inside out by a form of matter that renders nuclear fusion impossible. Of course, if the Sun dies, so does man. So mankind’s only hope is to send a team of astronauts to detonate a massive bomb to destroy this strange matter and restore the Sun's natural state. OK, that isn’t quite a present day concern, but it’s pretty original, as movie conflict goes.

Let’s ignore the science of this concept for the time being; I really can’t tell you whether detonating a bomb in the Sun is reasonable or not. OK, it sounds unreasonable. But it also sounds interesting, doesn’t it?

IMO, this movie’s success will likely hinge on special effects, tone, and character.

* Special Effects – we’re dealing more with the Sun here than in any movie I can remember. It will be interesting to see the different ways they portray the great star, and its effect on the characters.
* Tone – will this be a dark, bleak film? You would have to anticipate that, given the subject matter and the fact that Boyle has made Trainspotting and 28 Days Later. If he went light and airy on this, you’d have another Armageddon on your hands, and nobody wants that. Hell, nobody deserves that.
* Character – who are these people? We know they’re astronauts, but who are they really? we’re looking at a very grim situation: the Sun is dying, and so might man be. We’ll see if Boyle is able to make us care by how well he attaches us to the characters. Boyle tends to cast some relatively unknown actors, but that’s never worked against him, IMO. Ewan McGregor and Cillian Murphy (who is in this film) have done fine work for the director and elsewhere.

I’m highly anticipating this movie. Let’s hope my expectations don’t sabotage my reception.

Read More...

The Joker has a new ride too: UPDATED!

The Joker's car: Strike 1 for Nolan?


UPDATE: Word around the net now is that this car is NOT actually the joker's car. Latino Review has taken down the image, so hopefully this is true... This would be great news.


OK, so Batman has his new ride, and I guess now the Joker's got his own as well.
Ummm, ok. A purple beater? Really? More info after the jump.

Latino Review scooped this shot of what appears to be the Joker's clown car. I gotta say, I'm underwhelmed. On the other hand, you KNOW it could be worse. Nolan seems to be trying to keep things as restrained as possible, but still. Wouldn't a purple caddy have been a better car choice? Nolan's did a great job with the first one, so I will definitely reserve judgement until I see what the grand vision is.

On the other hand, some of the alternate choices that didn't get selected were spotted as well...












God that last one is hideous. Maybe Nolan didn't make such a bad choice after all.


They've got a little more info if you follow the link.




Read More...

National Treasure 2: More Inside Dish

It's Coming, Like it or Not


The studio execs felt optimistic that the Coppola kid could turn on his special, bad-acting charm and win over the locals. Didn’t quite turn out that way. The Monkey photog gathered this dish from the event.


National Treasure 2: More Inside News

Foley uncovered some nice Czechoslovakian dish on Natty Treasure 2, the upcoming (and latest) Nick Coppola disaster.

Well, guess what? There’s MORE inside buzz to be shared about NT2, uncovered by yours truly. It turns out there was a pre-advanced preliminary screening in Wichita, KS last night, and the Monkey has gotten its opposable thumbs on what REALLY happened at the event.

Held in a rickety barn near the water tower, the screening was highly anticipated by studio execs as a way to gauge audience reaction prior to the December 21 release. Strangely, the town folk didn’t share the studio’s excitement. When announced, reactions could only be classified as mixed:

* Doc, the Barber: “National Treasure 2? I guess that means there was a first one?”
* Gus, the Blacksmith: “Are you kidding? After they poured lemon juice on the Declaration of Independence?”
* Nancy, the town slut: “I liked the first one, but I wasn’t watching the screen the whole time.”

Still, the execs felt optimistic that the Coppola kid could turn on his special, bad-acting charm and win over the locals. Didn’t quite turn out that way. The Monkey photog gathered these pics from the event:



"Don't ever show that movie here again!"



It wasn't the theater nachos, folks.



A local on her way to the screening


So as you can see, it’s a pretty rocky start for Natty Treasure 2. To be fair about the Monkey Trade, we’ll post news from the AVP2 advanced screening as well.

I’m in for a world of hurt.

Read More...

UPDATED! Batman's got a new ride

UPDATE: The bike in this post turned out to be bogus. Go here to check out the real Bat Bike...

This post is kinda SPOILERLY- consider yourself warned.
See The Dark Knight's new ride after the jump.




Plenty of rumors are floating around that the Batmobile aka 'the Tumbler' get's destroyed in the Batman sequel, and it makes sense- that allows him to build a more 'Batmanish' (that's a real word- look it up) Batmobile, just like they burned down his mansion at the end of Begins, too allow them to upgrade the cave for the sequel.

Except, from the looks of this bike, maybe we won't get to see a new batmobile after all. Could it be that Bale will just be riding around on this thing after the Tumbler goes down?

You know, it's not bad. But I still have a bit of a bad taste in my mouth from the first round of Batman movies, when they redesigned everything for every movie, and things just got out of control. I guess in that context, this bike is fairly restrained. But they are still moving down that same road. How much longer before the dark knight has red LED nipples and pants with the cheeks showing?

Read More...

Wednesday, June 13, 2007

Indy 4 official title and other news

Indiana Jones and the Final Paycheck

I think you already know our position on this film here at the Monkey. But we're still keeping tabs on progress, in case they actually pull this thing out of the nose dive its in. And the official title is...


Um, it's Indiana Jones and the City of the Gods. Damn that's a mouthful, ain't it?
It's also completely misleading since the movie is about aliens at Area 51. But whatever.

Also, Sean Connery is NOT coming back as Indy's dad. Damn, that's harsh when Connery is turning down your script. You may have heard that he's officially retired from acting, but you still have to wonder how bad it has to be for him to walk away from a payday like the first Indy movie in almost 20 years.

In other Indy news, this movie is going to suck.

Read More...

National Treasure 2 Sneak Peek!


What you are looking at is a first look at one of the sets of the upcoming National Treasure 2, which as you may know is a key component of the infamous Monkey Trade. Wanna see some more?

What's funny is that these pics were originally thought to be a set from Indy Quattro, and the internet community was going ballistic. Fanboys were wetting their pants, women were fainting, it was mayhem.

Then Universal Studios put the word out that no, it's not an Indy 4 set. It's for Natty Deuce. Indy 4 is about space aliens, not ancient tombs, you dumbasses.

Anyway, you can see the rest of the pics over at Filmpub, who still apparently think the pics are from Quattro. But hey, the entire site appears to be in Czechoslovakian, so they could have the solution to world peace, the cure for cancer, and next week's winning lotto numbers up and I'd wouldn't be any wiser.

Little bit of trivia- Indy 4 was originally part of the Monkey Trade, but the deal fell through. You can probably imagine why...it's about friggin aliens!

Read More...

The Monkey Predicts... a new Celeb Hottie on the Horizon

Who is this hottie and why am I talking about her? Glad you asked...



I've got a 6th sense. No, I don't see dead people. I see hot people.


I have the ability to spot hotties in crappy movies who are going to turn into big celebrity stars. And I've got a new one for you to watch.

Trust me, you'll be seeing a lot more of her soon.

How did I acquire this mutant power? I really don't know. I wasn't bitten by a radioactive spider, or subjected to gamma rays in a failed experiment. I do know that the first time I discovered I had this gift, I was 15. I spotted an unknown actress named Sharon Stone in a crappy movie called King Solomon's Mines, and I knew at that moment that she was going to be a megastar. Keep in mind, this is before she had done Police Academy 4. I'm not some bandwagon groupie.

There have been other occasions where I have spotted future hottie celebs- in '92 I spotted Monica Bellucci in Bram Stoker's Dracula, and then spotted her again in Brotherhood of the Wolf. There was no doubt in my mind that she was going to go big. A few years later? She's in Matrix Reloaded, and a future of superstardom awaits her, thank you very much

My newest vision? Noureen deWulf. 'Who?' you are saying, and that's exactly my point. She hasn't done much so far, mostly some tv and a couple small roles in crap movies like National Lampoon's Pledge This! But she had one brief scene and one line--ONE LINE--in Ocean's Thirteen (she was one of the Expo Girls- didn't even have a name). And my sixth sense went off for the first time in a long time.

Now, you get to enjoy my talent as well. Soon, you will be seeing her everywhere, and you will be able to brag 'I knew about her way back when she was playing roles that didn't even have a name'.

Don't worry, I'll let you know when my sixth sense goes off again with someone new.

Read More...

Tuesday, June 12, 2007

Live Free or Die Hard - Monkey Preview

Yippee-Ki-Yay, Movie Goer!


Look, I’m going to try to go into this with an open mind, but how can I? The first Die Hard, while good, didn’t win any Oscars for a reason. And every installment since then has been worse. So you’ll have to excuse my pessimism.



Live Free or Die Hard – Monkey Preview

Just let me go on record as saying that we need another Die Hard movie like we need to reintroduce the Slinky. It’s quaint and nostalgic, but after it slinks down a few stairs, we’ll be done with it.

Similarly, after we get into Live Free or Die Hard for a bit, I think we’ll see why there hasn’t been one of these films since 1995 (Die Hard with a Vengeance).

As with most sequels that occur after a long layoff, there’s a mutual need. The studio wants to cash in on the brand name. No surprise there – studios are willing to do anything to profit off of a preexisting brand. It reduces marketing expenses or gains automatic viewership, or both.

So what better way to leverage that brand name – and the Brinks truck that comes with it – than to trot out 52 year old Bruce Willis, who hasn’t been on the greatest run recently, and a bunch of stiffs? Timothy Olyphant is the second billed star here. Unless you watch Deadwood, you probably don’t know who he is. What does that tell you? It tells you that this is a money grab, that’s what. Hell, the second star is actually the special effects, if the budget would tell you anything.

Willis has made some good films: 12 Monkeys, The Sixth Sense, Pulp Fiction, Unbreakable. He’s also made some clunkers: Hudson Hawk, Tears of the Sun, and Hart’s War, to name a few. It’s just that more of those clunkers have come recently. So it probably shouldn’t be surprising that this recent run, plus the tens of millions offered by the studio (since they don’t have to pay a lot to anyone else) made this project an easy, if not artistic, choice.

Live Free or Die Hard is directed by Len Wiseman, who directed Citizen Kane, Annie Hall and The Godfather. Just kidding. But his resume is almost that impressive. To wit: Stargate, Godzilla, Independence Day, Men in Black and Underworld. What does it say when Underworld is the best film he’s directed? It says that we’re in trouble. Still, Wiseman knows how to make a mindless blockbuster, so the studio seems to have hired the right guy – for their purposes.

Let me heap some more salt in the wounds: Mark Bomback wrote this movie – his only significant credit is Godsend, the forgettable 2004 film starring Robert DeNiro and Greg Kinnear. I assume that he’s responsible for this masterful exchange that we’re seeing in the Live Free or Die Hard trailers:

Matt: “You just killed that helicopter with a car!”
McClain: “I ran out of bullets.”

Witty. Very witty.

Look, I’m going to try to go into this with an open mind, but how can I? The first Die Hard, while good, didn’t win any Oscars for a reason. And every installment since then has been worse. So you’ll have to excuse my pessimism.


Read More...

Ocean’s Thirteen- Analog players in a Digital world.

The crew is back for more shenanigans

Clooney, Pitt, and the rest of the crew were apparently unsatisfied with themselves for the disappointment of Ocean’s 12, so they decided to come back and make a suitable sequel. Do they deliver? Hell yes. Two heists. New cons. and a Mexican factory revolt. What's not to love?


By now you may have heard that this one is about friendship at heart—leave the women at home, this one is about loyalty between friends. These movies have always been self-referential, and this probably parallel’s the actors themselves again- you’ve got a crew of buddies that have a lot of fun together, but other than these movies they probably don’t get to work together very often. You can see the fun they are having making the movie, and as usual it’s contagious.

There was another theme that resonated with me in Thirteen- to put it simply, its a nostalgic comparison of ‘old school’ vs ‘new school’—the new Vegas compared the the golden age when Sinatra was running around. There’s a scene in the movie where Roman (Eddie Izzard) tells Danny and Rusty “You guys are analog players in a digital world”. He’s talking about the high-tech security systems being too sophisticated for them to beat, but it’s also a bigger metaphor of the movie. The movie is literally peppered with references to this old school/new school dichotomy. Rusty and Danny are reminiscing on the strip about the old casinos that have long been replaced, and about their early days in Vegas, and how it was back then. In other scenes, characters reference the guys that “shook Sinatra’s hand”—a reference not only to those who have been around that long, but also to a code of honor where a handshake was good enough to seal a deal. It gives you something to think about in a world where everything is about the newest technology and MTV soundbites. What happened to style, craftsmanship, design? What happened to old ideals? Friendship. Loyalty. The human bonds that enrich life.

I may be extrapolating a little far- this is, after all, a heist film.
Anyway, on to the heist:

I actually enjoyed 12, right up to the point where they pull the Julia Roberts-pretends-to-be-Tess-pretending-to-be-Julia Roberts fiasco. To be fair, it was a risky move. They had to know that premise would either be considered hilariously inventive or bomb completely. But my biggest complaint with 12 was that most of the crew spent most of the movie sitting in jail. That is definitely not the problem in Thirteen—each member of the crew is given their own tasks and sub-missions to pull off the heist, so all the characters get plenty of fun screen time. On top of that, several fun characters from the previous movies get screen time as well.

Thirteen twists the standard heist convention slightly. We already know the crew, so there is no need for that usual setup. The movie jumps right into the planning of the heist, which is a critical piece of any heist movie. And plenty of time is devoted to the planning. But what I really enjoyed was that as they went through the preparation of the heist, the crew runs into several dead ends and has to come up with alternate ideas. That was a very fresh take on the heist convention. How many times have you seen a Mission Impossible type movie featuring an incredibly complicated plan, only to watch it go off without the slightest inconvenience or hitch, EXACTLY as planned? Where's the fun in that?

The theme of analog players in a digital world also shows up here in the heist- the Bank Casino is billed as the most technologically sophisticated Casino in the world, with state of the art security, all monitored by an artificially intelligent computer. Yet Danny and the crew plan to beat it with a plan as old school as it gets- loaded craps dice, a trick roulette ball, and modified blackjack machines. There is a secondary heist thrown in as well- stealing Willie Bank’s personal collection of diamonds from hotel awards he has won. This heist has its own set of challenges to be dealt with.

Ultimately the heists play out with great fun and complication.

As a heist purist, there were two things that disappointed me, both involving the secondary jewel heist. I don’t want to give anything away, but suffice to say the crux of that heist, as well as some of the events, were completely out of character for the personalities established in previous movies. The Ocean’s franchise isn’t just about stealing things, but doing it with style, panache, and a clever plan. The second heist ultimately lacked that sense of style and sophistication. But this is a very minor complaint that most viewers probably won’t even notice. Overall, I thought the primary heist was an inventive take on the genre, which is a helluva lot more than I can say about most heist movies.

A couple minor complaints:

The movie felt rushed in the beginning, partly because it wasted no time getting into the heist planning. That’s not necessarily a bad thing, but much of the first half of the movie feel slow, largely because there is a lot of exposition, but not much humor. In fact, the entire movie felt much longer than its actual running time (which is under 2 hours). I have to say, as much as I enjoyed Thirteen, I can’t say I feel this was a great editing job. The movie felt longer and slower than it was, and ironically I think adding a couple more humorous scenes would have actually made the movie move along faster.

My last complaint is that there was never really an element of tension or suspense to the heist. What was great about 11 was that you didn’t see the critical aspect of the heist (getting out) until after the fact. The movie had you wondering how they were going to pull it off, like a magic trick, only revealed after it was performed. In Thirteen it is all spelled out so cleanly, that when the heist actually happens there is no element of surprise or tension. To continue with the metaphor, it’s like explaining a magic trick before it is performed, so there is no sense of wonder or build up of drama in watching it. But hey, it's not like you were seriously thinking they weren't going to pull it off anyway. The whole point is to just roll with the fun.

There is a minor attempt at a ‘twist’ near the crux of the heist, but the audience never really falls for it. Perhaps this is partially the burden of being a third sequel- audience is familiar enough with the Ocean’s gameplan to expect that everything has been thought of ahead of time. And to be fair, we’ve all seen what happens when a director keeps trying to pull the same trick over and over. Just ask M. Night Shyamalan.

But really, these complaints are minor. For the normal moviegoer, this film is entertaining, funny, and enjoyable romp with some very likeable characters.

It’s like going on a road trip with a bunch of old college buddies- you’ve heard many of the jokes before and you’ll probably end up at some of the same ol’ places, but you have a great time anyway just because its good to hang with the old crew again.



Read More...

Monday, June 11, 2007

AVP: A VERY late Netflix review

AVP: Whoever wins, You won't care.



I have to tell you guys, I finally saw AVP yesterday.

The first half of the movie (before any aliens
showed up) I was thinking
' Damn, this movie is actually pretty cool.
Shifting pyramid, arctic expedition, predators spying on the expedition.'



I'm going to breeze right over the fact that there
was a whaling station built EXACTLY on top of the pyramid. That is as bad
as Cage finding the ship nameplate in two minutes of digging.

Still, I liked where the movie was going.
Especially the early stuff in the pyramid.

Then, the aliens showed up and everything went to
hell. Talk about ruining a franchise- first, this movie had no
suspense at all.
Second, the director reduced the aliens into little more
than freakin enraged monkeys, they were completely stripped of any
terror- I could have been watching tom and jerry or the WWF- that's what the
combat was like. And don't even get me started on the queen communicating
with the other aliens. I'm sorry, but they just revealed too much.
Part of what was so cool about these franchises is the mystery behind
the characters. The aliens were portrayed better as dangerous,
crafty animals fighting for their survival.

How can you say the predators are dominant when they all got
whacked by one alien? Just because they use guns
and bombs when they start losing the battle? lame, lame, lame.

The final insult was the predator teaming up with the chick. WHAT?
Humans have been nothing more than slaves and hosts
for alien eggs for centuries, and suddenly this predator decides to
become best buddies with the chick after whacking her entire expedition?
That sucked. And did you notice that despite being 2 feet taller and
4 time stronger than the toughest man, that predator could barely run as
fast as the woman at the end? Stupid. Why would he hang with her at
all? He's a hunter, she's bait..

And how laughable that they send a 12 man expedition
down a 2000 feet shaft, but the only way back out is a 2-person
rocket sled that literally launches them out the tube through the air
at the surface.

And in the end the predator couldn't even kill the
queen- the chick has to get it done. SO weak. Then this giant ship from
Close Encounters shows up, and the predator elder gives her a spear.
Whatever.

I'm beginning to question my own deal. AVP 2 could
be really bad. At least natty 2 has a legit director (ok, not a great
one, but at least one with some experience), THREE oscar winning
actors, and 2 more actors nominated for Oscars. On the other hand, the
screenwriter is pretty bad.

Like the tagline of AVP says...
Whoever wins, WE lose.

At least I do.

Read More...

Thursday, June 7, 2007

AVP 2 for National Treasure 2: The Monkey Trade

Would you trade this...

...for this?



OK, so trading National Treasure 2 for Alien vs. Predator 2 is not exactly the most newsworthy development in Hollywood, but I’d like you, the reader, to understand the significant pain that will be bartered here.


Alien vs. Predator 2 for National Treasure 2

A significant trade has gone down here at the Monkey.

As you may or may not already know – and you do if you’ve read about the authors – Foley is a huge fan of the heist film genre, to the point where it’s an obsession. Hell, it’s to the point where he classifies movies as heist films even though they’re not. Movies like Die Hard and Reservoir Dogs, just to name a couple.

So you can imagine my consternation when it was announced there would be a sequel to National Treasure, the terrible 2004 film. I knew that Foley would want to see it, and I knew that no one else would be willing to see it with him.

At the same time, however, I know that I have a penchant for time travel & robot movies, and I have burdened many a (former) friend by asking them to endure them with me.

So it is with these two obsessions as a backdrop that Foley and I have arranged a trade: I will see National Treasure 2 and, in return, Foley will see Alien vs. Predator 2, which is the closest thing to a robot/time travel movie I could find in 2007.

OK, that’s not exactly the most newsworthy development in Hollywood, but I’d like you, the reader, to understand the significant pain that will be bartered here.

In seeing National Treasure 2, I am getting the short end of the deal. First of all, it stars Nick Coppola, one of the worst actors in Hollywood (Travolta gives him a run for his money). Secondly, the original National Treasure had more holes than a cribbage board. Consider:

* Coppola, who played Benjamin Franklin Gates (I only wish I was making up that character name), travels to the arctic to look for an old shipwreck called the Charlotte. Dude, jumps off a snowmobile, takes a couple of hacks at the ice, rubs it with a rag, and poof! There it is. Not only is the frozen ship lodged 2 feet under the surface of the ice, the name plaque is the part showing.
* Gates steals the Declaration of Independence because there is apparently a map hidden on the back of the document. In order to read the map on the back of it, he decides to douse the ancient paper with LEMON JUICE and then dry it off with a HAIR DRYER. That’s not the worst part. No, the worst part is that he is doing this under the supervision of the museum’s CURATOR.

There’s simply not enough space on this blog to cover the rest of the absurdity spewed out by this movie.

Alien vs. Predator 2 has its own problems, not the least of which is two tarnished legacies. Alien, a groundbreaking film, and Predator, at least a very fun movie, just couldn’t be left alone. Jim Cameron did Aliens (sequel to Alien) justice, but the series went downhill after that. It is in Predator 2, however, that the whole Alien vs. Predator debate arose.

At the end of that movie, a trophy case containing the skulls of various conquests is visible in the background of the Predator’s spaceship. One of the skulls is that of an Alien. This sent a shockwave throughout the geek world, and eventually became the impetus for the whole AVP idea.

AVP was a decent film. The acting and script, not surprisingly, each left something to be desired. But one doesn’t go to see AVP for an Oscar turn. One goes to see two creatures fight, and I must admit that there wasn’t enough fighting. Perhaps that will change this time around.

Just rest assured that each film will be reviewed in detail afterward. Assuming we’re not in therapy.


Foley’s Response:

Before I even TOUCH this discussion- I need to clarify the record of this vicious slander being propagated.

I do not consider Die Hard and Reservoir Dogs to be heist films. They’re not, in the classic sense of the genre. There is no debate here. To suggest that I include them in the same genre as Rififi, Topkapi, and Ocean’s 11 is simply not true.

They do, however, feature heists as the backdrop and McGuffins for both movies, a fact most movie-lovers have completely forgotten when thinking about these movies. In Dogs, though the heist itself is never shown, the whole point of the suspicion within the group is that someone tipped the cops off about their heist. And Die Hard actually features a fully detailed heist plot- the thieves take over an office building masquerading as terrorists, make completely unreasonable demands to stall for time (a technique used in many true heist movies, such as Inside Man), break into the safe, then blow up the top of the building (and the hostages) both as a distraction and to lead authorities to believe that the terrorists died in the blast, and then drive away in an ambulance dressed as EMT’s. It’s really a genius plan.

Genius plan aside, the point of the movie is really about the action and one-liners. We all know that. And the fact that there are heists involved does increase my enjoyment and attraction to these movies. They may not be Heist films in the strictest sense, but they are films which feature heists- much like Mission Impossible was not a heist film, but was better because of the heists. It is for that reason alone that I want to see National Treasure 2- the movie will feature some unusual heists that I will have to see, Nick Cage be damned.
So let’s dispense with those ridiculous barbs cast at me and move on.

As for the trade….

Well, I have to admit that Farrell pretty much hit it on the head. Frankly, I out-negotiated him on this one, as I clearly got the better end of the deal.

Do I WANT to see AVP2? Not really. I absolutely LOVE the first two Alien movies, found things to appreciate about David Fincher’s underrated (yet ultimately disappointing) third, and the series just flat out went into the tank from there, barring perhaps the one scene in Resurrection where the Aliens are swimming. As for Predator- I really enjoyed the first one and found the second to be pretty weak.

A bit of trivia regarding the famous scene in Predator 2 featuring the Alien skull- it is widely believed that that scene spawned the idea of merging the franchises, but in reality Dark Horse Comics actually published an Alien vs Predator comic a full year before Predator 2 was released. Still, that scene is probably what brought the concept to the majority of sci-fi fans. I digress.

Back to the deal-
My point is that I’d love to see this franchise combo, if it was done well. But the first one got trashed by reviewers, worked with a low budget, spent no time on script, and we’ve all seen what has happened to the Aliens franchise when done poorly. Please don’t pretend you think the first AVP was worthy of these franchises. Come on, it was directed by Paul W.S. Anderson, creator of gems like Mortal Combat, Resident Evil, and Event Horizon. Are you telling me you don't think AVP could have been so much better?

AVP2? Yet another no-name, no-talent cast, and directed by not one, but TWO first time directors who were previously special effects guys. What does it say when a film needs 2 directors? It’s pretty fair to assume the entire budget is going to FX, but at the expense of any kind of cool script or talent. So what we are going to get is some good effects in extremely lame scenes. By the way, how big of a budget do you think these 2 first-time directors are going to get to work with? I promise it's not nearly as much as a movie like this needs to really do great FX...

Oh by the way- this time the Predators will be fighting Aliens in a small town in the Midwest. The franchise is being fundamentally transformed from sci-fi to horror. That’s not my opinion- AVP2 art director Andrew Li says himself- “It’s a horror movie”.

Um yeah, great call. Let’s take the science fiction out of the Sci-Fi movie. Everyone loves science fiction movies set in the FRIGGIN MIDWEST.

Face it- AVP2 is destined for disaster.

And still, I’m probably getting the better end of the deal. I’m the first to admit- wanting to see National Treasure 2 is indefensible. It doesn’t even qualify as a heist movie, but it features enough heist-moments and conspiracy theories to hook me anyway. There’s no pride in that last statement, believe me. And I share Farrell's hatred of Nick Cage, which doesn't help the situation.

On the other hand, I almost had to see Fantastic Four 2 to get this trade through. THAT would have been a deal from hell.

Read More...

Wednesday, June 6, 2007

Shoot em Up Trailer now online


"I'm a British nanny, and I'm dangerous."

There is finally a trailer for the action thriller Shoot Em Up, starring Clive Owen, Monica Bellucci, and Paul Giamatti. Helluva cast, don't you think?



The movie is about Mr Smith (Owen) who stumbles into a situation where a hitman is trying to kill a woman and her newborn baby. Bellucci is DQ, a prostitute who specializes in lactation fetishes. Hilarity ensues, I imagine. Or a lot of ass-kicking. As for the trailer, I don't know. Some parts look great, some parts look a little silly. But Clive's got a great track record of picking films, so it's hard to go against anything he's in.

IGN has the trailer. Check it out and decide for yourself.

Read More...

Transformers now opens July 2!

I hear the special effects are TIGHT.


It's official- Transformers will now open on July 2nd, at 8pm. So you can get in there early if you just can't wait to see an alien robot turn into a... camaro.


Slashfilm first predicted this and now has confirmation.

Read More...

Tuesday, June 5, 2007

On the Lot is a Craptastic Train Wreck

The one redeeming feature of this show...




Holy crap, On the Lot is bad. Historically bad. I'll tell you what--the director of On the Lot should be kicked off his own show, because this show is a friggin tutorial on how NOT to entertain people.

And what's really sad is that the first two episodes were actually good. Really good. Tell-your-friends good. I was in. This show had tremendous potential. Then they pulled the bait and switch on me and drove the show off the tracks, into the gutter.

Let's run down the points here:

- Let's start with episode 3: THEY COMPLETELY SKIPPED IT. That's right, they ended episode 2 by setting up the next episode, then completely blew that episode off so they could jump to a new "American Idol" style format, where the audience (what's left of them) votes via phone. Dude, what happened to episode 3? I was looking forward to that. Suddenly some of the contestants are missing, the show format has changed, and no one knows what happened. Which brings me to...

- the new format: it sucks.
Look, it works fine for American Idol but frankly it sucks for a show about film making. The movies are fine, but far from the most interesting part of the show. People want to see the moviemaking process, not just vote on the final results.

- the Host: ok, this is the one thing they got right. Sure, she can barely recite her lines and her jokes fall flat. You know what is not flat? Her fantastic RACK. Give the wardrobe person a raise for constantly putting those tits front and center.

- the Judges: My god, Carrie Fisher is a disaster. For someone billed as a screenwriter, her advice is worthless. Porn stars could give better filmmaking advice. And what happened to Ratner? Brett Ratner was a judge on the first two episodes, then mysteriously disappeared. Was he canned? did he see how bad the show was going to be and quit? I think you have to assume he was fired--would anyone really walk out on a tv show produced by Spielberg? As for Garry Marshall, the guy just sounds like a senile grandpa who got lost in the studio.

So now we have guest judges every week- this week? Michael Bay, who coincidentally has a movie coming out July 2nd.
People, you have the director of PEARL FUCKING HARBOR giving directing tips. WTF? This is like Lindsay Lohan teaching Driver's Ed. And yet, strangely, he made the most sense- that's how bad the regular judges are.

- the contestants: Is this really the best America has to offer? No wonder guys like Michael Bay make it in Hollywood. Sure, there are definitely talented directors here, but some of these movies are just flat out horrible. Really, how good can a 3 minute movie made in 5 days on no sleep be? 12-year-old kids are making better films with a bottle of diet coke and a pack of mentos. These films would be completely buried on Youtube, and it doesn't help that we know almost nothing about these people, and don't even get to see any footage of the making of their movies each week. Is movie making really that boring? Its impossible to care about these crappy movies without any backstory on the making of the film, which was by far the most interesting part of the first two episodes.

- finally, does EVERYTHING have to be a product placement opportunity? Half the movies feature closeup shots of the same exact Verizon phone- was that really a coincidental creative choice by the directors? Ford is beating me over the head with blantant product shots as well- Hey Ford, how about spending less money on advertising and more money making better cars?

Bottom line- this show had potential, but obviously the ratings were low because they keep changing the show trying to generate interest. They are only making it worse and losing the few viewers they had in the first place. Way to go, Fox.

No seriously- kick the director off his own show.

Read More...