Charles Widmore, you scoundrel! First you fake the Oceanic Flight 815 crash site, now you dupe the Bolivians with your fake crash footage? What's your angle, Chuck? Trying to purge the poor Bolivians of their soybean market and making a mockery of their obviously stellar journalistic instincts? What did they ever do to you?
bxAv110
bxAv110
bxAv110
Monday, June 29, 2009
Thursday, June 25, 2009
Michael Bay Wants To Punch You in the Face With His New Movie
Michael Bay thinks robot testicles are a hilarious idea. He has many, many other bad ideas as well, all of which can be found in his new five-hour opus, "Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen," and you can read my review of it here.
And speaking of eating shit, there's a scene in "Year One" where Jack Black, yes, eats shit. Find out if the rest of the movie is just as hilarious.
bxAv110
bxAv110
bxAv110
And speaking of eating shit, there's a scene in "Year One" where Jack Black, yes, eats shit. Find out if the rest of the movie is just as hilarious.
Revenge of the Tylenol
I suppose whether or not you should see "Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen" depends on what you're seeking in a film. If you want a headache and to hear so many explosions that all sounds become meaningless, this film is for you. If you're looking for an entertaining—or simply coherent—story, compelling characters, well-played drama, funny gags or thrilling action, go elsewhere.
Of course, director Michael Bay's previous "Transformers" film was a gigantic hit despite resembling a gigantic shit, and the director's reputation for incomprehensible, fast-cut, noisy action has long followed him.
His new film's prehistoric prologue illustrates Bay's storytelling missteps. Some spear-armed hunters discover a giant alien ship with the founder of the Decepticons, whose name is The Fallen (or maybe just Fallen? Did he have a different name before he fell, or was it one of those self-fulfilling thingies?). Then the Fallen stomps on our ancestors. Admittedly not much of a scene, but the only part of it that matters is the surprise of the hunters when they find the Decepticons. The revelation comes via clunky editing and voice-over when it should offer some sort of magnificent reveal, or at least a good reaction shot. Instead it looks like this: hunters hunting, wide shot of of space ship and the Fallen (short for Fallonious?), various loud noises and smashing of your great-great-great-great-great-great granddad. It pains me to see Steven Spielberg's name under the Executive Producer credit and think that the master of the reveal shot didn't at least suggest an alternative approach.
I can muster up enough faint praise to say that some of the action scenes in the sequel are slightly easier to follow than in its predecessor. The underwhelming improvement derives from a few wide shots that actually follow the action long enough for the viewer to discern it (which isn't to say you won't see plenty of Bay's trademark awkward angles, meaningless close-ups and hack assemblies).
Unfortunately, he makes up for any mild visual improvements with some of the most grating scenes of all time. The film oscillates between over-serious pomposity and fourth-rate sitcom humor. I could spend pages describing everything wrong with the scenes depicting hero Sam Witwicky (Shia LaBeouf) as he prepares to leave for college while his dad acts giddy and his mother cries like a lunatic, or after he arrives at his dorm and his mom accidentally eats brownies with…well, I don't want to ruin the surprise. I could discuss the solemn gravity with which the film treats deaths whose permanence feels tenuous at best. But what's truly remarkable is how poorly the two elements mingle. Either Bay shovels nonsensical melodrama at full speed or he bashes us on the head with painfully unfunny bits, sometimes scrotum-inspired, delivered by either obnoxious, pretty people or obnoxious, ugly robots.
The ineptitude at work in these alien robots' character-design cannot be overstated. An extremely unpleasant feeling washed over me with every close-up. They're like dully lit vomit after an all-you-can-eat surplus-parts buffet. I wouldn't blink if you told me they were designed by the same second-graders who continue to add details to their drawings simply because empty space remains on the page. Yes, I realize I'm supposed to be blown away by every computer-generated nut and bolt, but I'd be much more amazed to detect some genuine emotion on the face of one of these drones.
So lifeless are the characters visually that they can't even match the weak caricatures suggested by the screenplay and voice-work. I'm sure no one could forget the Black Robot from the first film (and there were two yellow ones!), but the sequel tops his vaguely stereotypical dialogue with a pair of compact-hatchback-ad-bots who speak in hip-hop slang, have gold teeth and cop to illiteracy. It was near-impossible to distinguish most of the bots from one another in the first film, so instead of refining their design, Bay went and added a bunch more. It's generally impossible to figure out who's who, what they want or why they want it.
This film creates a rule about a mystical key in one scene and contradicts it less than 10 minutes later. It expects you to care about things when it hasn't given you a reason to. And the process takes two and a half hours. Take into account travel time and trailers and you could spend the time it takes to see "Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen" watching any of these films, among many others: "Nashville," "Lawrence of Arabia," "Magnolia," "The Big Parade," "Goodfellas" and "2001: A Space Odyssey." It's possible you've seen all these. I suggest you watch one of them again.
bxAv110
bxAv110
bxAv110
Of course, director Michael Bay's previous "Transformers" film was a gigantic hit despite resembling a gigantic shit, and the director's reputation for incomprehensible, fast-cut, noisy action has long followed him.
His new film's prehistoric prologue illustrates Bay's storytelling missteps. Some spear-armed hunters discover a giant alien ship with the founder of the Decepticons, whose name is The Fallen (or maybe just Fallen? Did he have a different name before he fell, or was it one of those self-fulfilling thingies?). Then the Fallen stomps on our ancestors. Admittedly not much of a scene, but the only part of it that matters is the surprise of the hunters when they find the Decepticons. The revelation comes via clunky editing and voice-over when it should offer some sort of magnificent reveal, or at least a good reaction shot. Instead it looks like this: hunters hunting, wide shot of of space ship and the Fallen (short for Fallonious?), various loud noises and smashing of your great-great-great-great-great-great granddad. It pains me to see Steven Spielberg's name under the Executive Producer credit and think that the master of the reveal shot didn't at least suggest an alternative approach.
I can muster up enough faint praise to say that some of the action scenes in the sequel are slightly easier to follow than in its predecessor. The underwhelming improvement derives from a few wide shots that actually follow the action long enough for the viewer to discern it (which isn't to say you won't see plenty of Bay's trademark awkward angles, meaningless close-ups and hack assemblies).
Unfortunately, he makes up for any mild visual improvements with some of the most grating scenes of all time. The film oscillates between over-serious pomposity and fourth-rate sitcom humor. I could spend pages describing everything wrong with the scenes depicting hero Sam Witwicky (Shia LaBeouf) as he prepares to leave for college while his dad acts giddy and his mother cries like a lunatic, or after he arrives at his dorm and his mom accidentally eats brownies with…well, I don't want to ruin the surprise. I could discuss the solemn gravity with which the film treats deaths whose permanence feels tenuous at best. But what's truly remarkable is how poorly the two elements mingle. Either Bay shovels nonsensical melodrama at full speed or he bashes us on the head with painfully unfunny bits, sometimes scrotum-inspired, delivered by either obnoxious, pretty people or obnoxious, ugly robots.
The ineptitude at work in these alien robots' character-design cannot be overstated. An extremely unpleasant feeling washed over me with every close-up. They're like dully lit vomit after an all-you-can-eat surplus-parts buffet. I wouldn't blink if you told me they were designed by the same second-graders who continue to add details to their drawings simply because empty space remains on the page. Yes, I realize I'm supposed to be blown away by every computer-generated nut and bolt, but I'd be much more amazed to detect some genuine emotion on the face of one of these drones.
So lifeless are the characters visually that they can't even match the weak caricatures suggested by the screenplay and voice-work. I'm sure no one could forget the Black Robot from the first film (and there were two yellow ones!), but the sequel tops his vaguely stereotypical dialogue with a pair of compact-hatchback-ad-bots who speak in hip-hop slang, have gold teeth and cop to illiteracy. It was near-impossible to distinguish most of the bots from one another in the first film, so instead of refining their design, Bay went and added a bunch more. It's generally impossible to figure out who's who, what they want or why they want it.
This film creates a rule about a mystical key in one scene and contradicts it less than 10 minutes later. It expects you to care about things when it hasn't given you a reason to. And the process takes two and a half hours. Take into account travel time and trailers and you could spend the time it takes to see "Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen" watching any of these films, among many others: "Nashville," "Lawrence of Arabia," "Magnolia," "The Big Parade," "Goodfellas" and "2001: A Space Odyssey." It's possible you've seen all these. I suggest you watch one of them again.
Lessons in Film Directing From Michael Bay
This column, now missing somewhere inside In Utah This Week's intertubes, coincided with the release of the first "Transformers" film and is, I think, a helpful primer on the director's work.
There are many people who knew everything there was to know about the characters in "Transformers" before the film came out. I must confess, however, that I am not one of them.
While I hoped that "Transformers" would be a fun showcase for its much-hyped special effects, I knew little about the shape-shifting robots who are sentient alien beings (or whatever). So I relied entirely on the filmmaking techniques of director Michael Bay to entertain me and bring me up to speed.
But Bay didn't make it easy to follow the characters or, in most cases, even tell them apart. I figured out the semi-truck Optimus Prime thanks to the tacky paint job, and the lovable loser Bumblebee because he had the most screen time. But it was still hard to discern Bumblebee from the other yellow one ("There was another yellow one?" a colleague asked at the end of the screening). And although all the evil Transformers (Decepticons) used cool army vehicles as their disguises, the only one who had any personality was the little one who pretended to be a boom box and a cell phone.
William Shakespeare put it best when he wrote about a Bay film, "It is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing" (or was that a Tony Scott review?). How does Bay turn even the simplest silly popcorn movie into a headache? He spent years developing his technique, fine-tuning it from the slick, over-blown, in-your-face action of "The Rock" to the disorienting nonsense of "Armageddon." Through an intense study of his films—and in the case of Bay films, "intense study" doesn't imply multiple viewings—I have uncovered a few of his filmmaking secrets.
Character development: The trick is to wait until a robot dies, then have another robot call him "brother," to signify a deep, meaningful connection. It's so much easier than making the characters interesting throughout the whole film. Also, a love triangle makes a historic bombing much more engaging.
Sound design: By cranking up his sound mix with so many ear-shattering clanks and explosions, Bay deftly removes any sense of dynamics from his films, hence depriving the audience of a sense of surprise or importance when the bigger dramatic moments arrive. In "Transformers," he even ruins what should be a funny gag about a phone operator who refuses to put a soldier through to the Pentagon, insisting on a constant barrage of background explosions instead of carefully placed comedic punctuation. Bay may have outdone the barrage of "Armageddon" with the last hour of "Transformers," which is simply one big high-volume drone. It even outdoes "The Island," which had an intriguing start before Bay punished the audience for being interested.
Constant cuts and unclear compositions: Bay matches his love for loud, piercing noises with loud, piercing visuals. Watch any clip from "Armageddon" and see a bunch of random shots work against each other to deprive the audience of any sense of what's happening. The trick is never to stop, thus never giving the audience time to realize that nothing happened. What should be a cool shot of a Transformer running, jumping and turning into a a car before hitting the ground loses its awe due to an arbitrary angle and a cut that actually makes it harder to see the wow moment. After watching "Transformers," I saw an ad for the "Transformers" video game and got more of an impression of how the characters look and move than I did in all 144 minutes of the movie.
Cool shots, no point: Bay has devised some rather remarkable visual ideas, but he doesn't let that diminish his reputation as a Hollywood hack. He usually finds a way to use his ideas to detract from whatever story he's allegedly telling. In "Pearl Harbor," there's a rather amazing shot over the top of a bomb as it drops on the U.S. naval fleet. But rather than use the shot for the first bomb that dropped, or another bomb that had a significant impact on the film's characters, Bay buries it amongst a collection of meaningless explosions. During a "Transformers" fight scene, the camera rattles around inside the car of two characters who have nothing to do with the movie. The important action is barely visible through their window. Remarkable.
Dialogue: No matter who wrote the screenplay, Bay will make sure there are a few classic lines. From "Pearl Harbor:" "It's your nose that hurts." "I think it's my heart." From "Transformers:" "We were deceived by the Decepticons." (Yup—you'd think they'd have seen it coming.) Honorable mention goes to, "Put the cube in my chest," which Optimus Prime repeats five times in as many minutes. A different phrase kept repeating in my head: "Sneak out and see and see what else is playing in the multiplex."
bxAv110
bxAv110
bxAv110
There are many people who knew everything there was to know about the characters in "Transformers" before the film came out. I must confess, however, that I am not one of them.
While I hoped that "Transformers" would be a fun showcase for its much-hyped special effects, I knew little about the shape-shifting robots who are sentient alien beings (or whatever). So I relied entirely on the filmmaking techniques of director Michael Bay to entertain me and bring me up to speed.
But Bay didn't make it easy to follow the characters or, in most cases, even tell them apart. I figured out the semi-truck Optimus Prime thanks to the tacky paint job, and the lovable loser Bumblebee because he had the most screen time. But it was still hard to discern Bumblebee from the other yellow one ("There was another yellow one?" a colleague asked at the end of the screening). And although all the evil Transformers (Decepticons) used cool army vehicles as their disguises, the only one who had any personality was the little one who pretended to be a boom box and a cell phone.
William Shakespeare put it best when he wrote about a Bay film, "It is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing" (or was that a Tony Scott review?). How does Bay turn even the simplest silly popcorn movie into a headache? He spent years developing his technique, fine-tuning it from the slick, over-blown, in-your-face action of "The Rock" to the disorienting nonsense of "Armageddon." Through an intense study of his films—and in the case of Bay films, "intense study" doesn't imply multiple viewings—I have uncovered a few of his filmmaking secrets.
Character development: The trick is to wait until a robot dies, then have another robot call him "brother," to signify a deep, meaningful connection. It's so much easier than making the characters interesting throughout the whole film. Also, a love triangle makes a historic bombing much more engaging.
Sound design: By cranking up his sound mix with so many ear-shattering clanks and explosions, Bay deftly removes any sense of dynamics from his films, hence depriving the audience of a sense of surprise or importance when the bigger dramatic moments arrive. In "Transformers," he even ruins what should be a funny gag about a phone operator who refuses to put a soldier through to the Pentagon, insisting on a constant barrage of background explosions instead of carefully placed comedic punctuation. Bay may have outdone the barrage of "Armageddon" with the last hour of "Transformers," which is simply one big high-volume drone. It even outdoes "The Island," which had an intriguing start before Bay punished the audience for being interested.
Constant cuts and unclear compositions: Bay matches his love for loud, piercing noises with loud, piercing visuals. Watch any clip from "Armageddon" and see a bunch of random shots work against each other to deprive the audience of any sense of what's happening. The trick is never to stop, thus never giving the audience time to realize that nothing happened. What should be a cool shot of a Transformer running, jumping and turning into a a car before hitting the ground loses its awe due to an arbitrary angle and a cut that actually makes it harder to see the wow moment. After watching "Transformers," I saw an ad for the "Transformers" video game and got more of an impression of how the characters look and move than I did in all 144 minutes of the movie.
Cool shots, no point: Bay has devised some rather remarkable visual ideas, but he doesn't let that diminish his reputation as a Hollywood hack. He usually finds a way to use his ideas to detract from whatever story he's allegedly telling. In "Pearl Harbor," there's a rather amazing shot over the top of a bomb as it drops on the U.S. naval fleet. But rather than use the shot for the first bomb that dropped, or another bomb that had a significant impact on the film's characters, Bay buries it amongst a collection of meaningless explosions. During a "Transformers" fight scene, the camera rattles around inside the car of two characters who have nothing to do with the movie. The important action is barely visible through their window. Remarkable.
Dialogue: No matter who wrote the screenplay, Bay will make sure there are a few classic lines. From "Pearl Harbor:" "It's your nose that hurts." "I think it's my heart." From "Transformers:" "We were deceived by the Decepticons." (Yup—you'd think they'd have seen it coming.) Honorable mention goes to, "Put the cube in my chest," which Optimus Prime repeats five times in as many minutes. A different phrase kept repeating in my head: "Sneak out and see and see what else is playing in the multiplex."
Tuesday, June 23, 2009
I Suppose a 'Goes Up to Eleven' Reference Would be too Obvious
Recorded 6/20/09, episode 11 of The Same Dame Podcast opens with a bout of depression (re: "Year One") and somehow devolves into a discussion about unorthodox procreation practices. In between, we discover Jeremy’s burgeoning second career as a lasso-clad porn star and take a look at fellow professional lover Sasha Grey’s least-penetrative role to date in "The Girlfriend Experience."
Be sure to subscribe to the podcast (via iTunes if you like) so you won't miss our next thrilling episode.
bxAv110
bxAv110
bxAv110
Be sure to subscribe to the podcast (via iTunes if you like) so you won't miss our next thrilling episode.
Monday, June 15, 2009
Criterion Restores 15 Minutes of Lost 'Marienbad' Fart Jokes
When Alain Resnais released "Last Year at Marienbad" in 1961, he was under extreme pressure to keep the running-time at 95 minutes or less. At the end of a heated editing-room fight, his producers forced him to cut a full 15-minutes of fart jokes, which for the past half-century were believed lost. But the Criterion Collection's new, director-approved DVD and Blu-ray release of the classic masterpiece restores this legendary cinematic treasure trove, oft compared with the missing footage from "Greed" and "The Magnificent Ambersons." Criterion managed to keep it a secret for some time, but made the big announcement in a new ad on The Awl:
As of publication, you can still see the ad on The Awl. Try refreshing the page a few time if it doesn't pop up the first time (because an ad for "Paul Blart: Mall Cop" appears instead).
Having spent a little time with the DVD, which comes out June 23rd, I can tell you that not only is the transfer gorgeous, but the restored footage is 100-percent on the same level as the previously known cut. Every new fart joke had me on the floor. Bravo, Renais, and congratulations to Criterion for this momentous discovery.
A quick sample Alain Robbe-Grillet's dialogue, to get you excited:
bxAv110
bxAv110
bxAv110
As of publication, you can still see the ad on The Awl. Try refreshing the page a few time if it doesn't pop up the first time (because an ad for "Paul Blart: Mall Cop" appears instead).
Having spent a little time with the DVD, which comes out June 23rd, I can tell you that not only is the transfer gorgeous, but the restored footage is 100-percent on the same level as the previously known cut. Every new fart joke had me on the floor. Bravo, Renais, and congratulations to Criterion for this momentous discovery.
A quick sample Alain Robbe-Grillet's dialogue, to get you excited:
-I've never farted in anyone's face.
-I remember it clearly. It was in the gardens at Frederiksbad. I was sitting alone, beside a statue. I noticed you along the balustrade. You were alone, to one side. You came towards me now, but you didn't seem to see me. I told you you looked alive. Then you looked at me, turned around, spread your cheeks, stuck your ass in my face and let one rip.
-But I've never been to Frederiksbad.
…
It was evening. The last evening probably. It was almost dark. A faint shadow moved slowly through the dusk. Even before I could make out your features, I knew it was you. I couldn't mistake the remarkably strong, slightly sweet stench that had wafted from your behind. When you recognized me, you stopped. We stood there, a few yards apart, without speaking. The only sounds we made came from our anuses—mine so faint you weren't sure I made them until you caught the oh so deadly scent, yours as loud as a tugboat. You stood in front of me, waiting perhaps, as if unable to take another step forward or turn back.
Wednesday, June 10, 2009
Talk About Final Destination 3-D
If you don't like to make jokes in bad taste, it's best to just avoid this article.
(tip: Joe Beatty)
bxAv110
bxAv110
bxAv110
An Italian woman who arrived late for the Air France plane flight that crashed in the Atlantic last week, killing all 228 on board, has died in a car accident, Italy's ANSA news agency reported.
(tip: Joe Beatty)
Tuesday, June 9, 2009
SDP Joins Commandments, Fingers, Toes, Kieślowski and Bo Derek with Perfect 10
Recorded 6/7/09, episode 10 of The Same Dame Podcast features news on Carradine, Waldo, Ghostbusting, Archie, Brüno and other fictional characters. And we review "Up," "Drag Me to Hell," "Land of the Lost," "The Hangover" and "Brothers Bloom." Unfortunately, this episode was so packed that we had no room for special guests, but we'll try to remedy that in the future.
Be sure to subscribe to the podcast (via iTunes if you like) so you won't miss our next thrilling episode.
bxAv110
bxAv110
bxAv110
Be sure to subscribe to the podcast (via iTunes if you like) so you won't miss our next thrilling episode.
Monday, June 8, 2009
Drag Me Up to the Limits of Salvation....uh....Smithsonian.
See what I did there? I made an entire sentence out of words from movies I recently reviewed. And the sentence made perfect sense, too. Go ahead, read it again.
I'm waiting....
Rolls off the tongue, eh?
Well, now that I've procrastinated long enough, here are five tasty reviews. From best movie to worst:
"Up"
"Drag Me to Hell"
"The Limits of Control"
"Terminator Salvation"
And for this last one...I'll let you choose between two different reviews for "Night at the Museum: Battle of the Smithsonian." The first is mine at IGMS; the second is Peter Bart's at Variety. While you're making your decision, let me offer this promise: I won't repeatedly refer to "Night at the Museum" as "surrealism" (I don't think this is what Breton, Bunuel, etc. had in mind), AND I will not - I repeat, NOT - refer to Shawn Levy as "a fabulously talented director," and I will NOT argue that a sequel to a movie that made $575 million worldwide, and which follows virtually the exact same plot formula as the original, is somehow "daring."
bxAv110
bxAv110
bxAv110
I'm waiting....
Rolls off the tongue, eh?
Well, now that I've procrastinated long enough, here are five tasty reviews. From best movie to worst:
"Up"
"Drag Me to Hell"
"The Limits of Control"
"Terminator Salvation"
And for this last one...I'll let you choose between two different reviews for "Night at the Museum: Battle of the Smithsonian." The first is mine at IGMS; the second is Peter Bart's at Variety. While you're making your decision, let me offer this promise: I won't repeatedly refer to "Night at the Museum" as "surrealism" (I don't think this is what Breton, Bunuel, etc. had in mind), AND I will not - I repeat, NOT - refer to Shawn Levy as "a fabulously talented director," and I will NOT argue that a sequel to a movie that made $575 million worldwide, and which follows virtually the exact same plot formula as the original, is somehow "daring."
Friday, May 29, 2009
Number Nine, Number Nine, Number Nine
Recorded 5/24/09, episode 9 of The Same Dame Podcast features reviews of "Terminator Salvation" and "Angels and Demons." Our friend George Lucas also joins us to talk about the CG Arnold and its termination skills. After that, we recap a Cannes Film Festival we didn't attend and check in on the latest news, including at long last…"Ghostbusters 3."
Be sure to subscribe to the podcast (via iTunes if you like) so you won't miss our next thrilling episode.
bxAv110
bxAv110
bxAv110
Be sure to subscribe to the podcast (via iTunes if you like) so you won't miss our next thrilling episode.
Monday, May 25, 2009
VIDOR SILENTS ALERT!!!!
Praise be to the King! In the next couple weeks, Turner Classic Movies will air two essential pieces of filmmaking that you can't get on DVD. While director King Vidor is known largely for his work on sound pictures, the pinnacle of his work came with his two silent-era masterpieces, "The Big Parade" (1925) and "The Crowd" (1928).
First off, tonight at 2:45am, "The Big Parade" caps off TCM's Memorial Day weekend tribute to WWI. If that doesn't knock you on your ass, wait tell you see the triumph of visual storytelling that is "The Crowd," which airs 9pm on Wednesday June 3, as part of a day devoted to Vidor.
It's been four years since these films aired, and while Warner has been promising to release them on DVD soon, they've been promising that for years.
bxAv110
bxAv110
bxAv110
First off, tonight at 2:45am, "The Big Parade" caps off TCM's Memorial Day weekend tribute to WWI. If that doesn't knock you on your ass, wait tell you see the triumph of visual storytelling that is "The Crowd," which airs 9pm on Wednesday June 3, as part of a day devoted to Vidor.
It's been four years since these films aired, and while Warner has been promising to release them on DVD soon, they've been promising that for years.
Thursday, May 21, 2009
Know Thine Enemy
A film must understand the nature of its villain. The code it operates by, its physical abilities and limitations, its ultimate goals—all these factors determine the kind of force that our hero will square off against. If the director and screenwriters don't understand these basic principals (or at least make clear that they can't be understood), there's no hope for the audience.
"Terminator Salvation" not only misunderstands its villain, it blatantly contradicts its own descriptions of it. Here is a film so confused about what it's doing that it gives its title twice during the opening credits. We're told one thing in expositional dialogue, but see another when the robotic bad guys come out to fight.
The self-aware computer/machine Skynet (not to be confused with the relatively benign Sky Network in the UK) created robots called Terminators, but a more apropos name would have been "Throwerators." These super-strength robots were created for one task: killing humans. But whenever they get their hands on one, whose neck they could easily break, whose heart they could rip out, whose brain they could squash, whose spine they could snap, they merely throw them against something (usually a wall). And don't get me started on their aim when they actually decide to shoot their laser guns at people.
There's a reason that the first two Terminator movies were primarily chases, and particularly tense ones: If the robot got close enough to its targets, it would kill them. Director McG missed that factor when he designed "Terminator: Salvation's" fight scenes, which are based on hand-to-hand combat against robots undeniably superior in strength. Even if the scenes were well-done (they more often tend toward mediocrity), it would be hard to shake the feeling that apocalyptic prophet John Connor should have died the first time a Terminator grabbed hold of him.
Played by Christian Bale in this installment, Connor has lost all the piss and vinegar of the young lad portrayed by Edward Furlong in "Terminator 2: Judgement Day." He now acts resolutely somber and repeats the same three or four lines of character points without humor or energy. Sure, he's living in a desolate wasteland inhabited by robots who want him dead (incompetence notwithstanding), but come on mate, give us a smile.
Sam Worthington as Marcus Wright proves that not everyone acts like such a mind-numbing spoilsport in the future. Marcus donated his body to science while on death row in 2003. Imagine his surprise when he wakes up in an empty, destroyed Los Angeles in 2018, looking the same age.
Under seige, he meets teenager Kyle Reese (Anton Yelchin), the character played by Michael Biehn in the first "Terminator." From that film, we know little Kyle will grow up to travel through time to protect and impregnate Connor's mother, assuming the future and/or past don't change. Kyle teaches Marcus about the Skynet robots, and Marcus serves as a father figure to the lad. Oh yeah, I almost forgot: A randomly thrown-in mute girl named Star travels with them as well.
Just when the Reese-Wright relationship starts to get interesting, the film abandons it to propel its nonsensical plot. McG continually loses sight of his film's greatest assets to focus on silliness like Skynet's Holocaust-esque human-transport machine. Skynet is wasting resources to move humans when its only known goal is to kill them. One would think that the resistance would at least investigate why the machines are going through all this trouble. Instead, the humans stand around bored, waiting for another robot attack so they can ineffectively smack the mechanical behemoths who want nothing more than to throw them against walls.
Sunday, May 17, 2009
SDP08: Where No Podcast Has Gone Before…
Recorded 5/13/09, episode 8 of The Same Dame Podcast is all about "Star Trek." Well…for the first 10 or 15 minutes anyway. It's all about "Star Trek" and the Cannes Film Festival lineup. No, wait…I guess, we talk about other news and review some more movies as well. It's all about "Star Trek," "X-Men Origins: Wolverine," "Rudo y Cursi," "Tyson," the Cannes lineup and other news items. That about sums it up.
But wait! We also have a special guest who chronicled the giants of American cinema and made some iconic masterpieces of his own. He also does a lot of audio commentaries.
Be sure to subscribe to the podcast (via iTunes if you like) so you won't miss our next thrilling episode.
bxAv110
bxAv110
bxAv110
But wait! We also have a special guest who chronicled the giants of American cinema and made some iconic masterpieces of his own. He also does a lot of audio commentaries.
Be sure to subscribe to the podcast (via iTunes if you like) so you won't miss our next thrilling episode.
Wednesday, May 13, 2009
Yacking About 'LOST' for an Hour (SDP 7)
Recorded 5/12/09, this very special episode 7 of The Same Dame Podcast is devoted entirely to "LOST," which airs its fifth season finale Wednesday night. Joined by special guest Jessica Mathews, we go through the twists and turns that define the series, the actors, writers and directors who make it so damn addictive and the mysteries that perplex the shit out of us. We don't know anything about the finale, and we won't spoil it!
This is one of two podcasts this week. The next will follow our usual format.
Be sure to subscribe to the podcast (via iTunes if you like) so you won't miss our next thrilling episode.
bxAv110
bxAv110
bxAv110
This is one of two podcasts this week. The next will follow our usual format.
Be sure to subscribe to the podcast (via iTunes if you like) so you won't miss our next thrilling episode.
Friday, May 8, 2009
In the beginning ...
May has brought us a pair of origin stories for popular movie franchises - in fact, you can tell one of them is an origin story because the word "origin" is right there in the title. See, look: "X-Men Origins: Wolverine," directed by recent Same Dame Podcast guest and professional storyteller Gavin Hood. The second, and much better, origin story unfortunately isn't as clear about its intentions, as the word "origin" is nowhere to be found in the title. It's called "Star Trek."
Oh, and you can also check out semi-recent reviews of "17 Again," "Sleep Dealer" and "Obsessed." Yes, that's right - I saw "Obsessed." I had my reasons.
bxAv110
bxAv110
bxAv110
Oh, and you can also check out semi-recent reviews of "17 Again," "Sleep Dealer" and "Obsessed." Yes, that's right - I saw "Obsessed." I had my reasons.
Tuesday, May 5, 2009
American Apparel Manufactures Clothing, Irony
Remember a year ago when American Apparel used Woody Allen's image in a billboard, without paying him any endorsement money, and Allen sued? Well that case is on its way to court now, and American Apparel's lawyers have worked up a brilliant defense. Slick lawyer Stuart Slotnick explained it the Associated Press:
Certainly, our belief is that after the various sex scandals that Woody Allen has been associated with, corporate America's desire to have Woody Allen endorse their product is not what he may believe it is.
They also, for some reason, want Mia Farrow and Larry Flynt to testify at the trial.
It's simple, really. Allen is a scandal-ridden loser with no friends. His image would serve no use in an ad campaign. He couldn't sell a special one-of-a-kind 10-disc Blu-ray edition of Annie Hall to Chris Bellamy for $5.
I can't think of any holes in this argument. Oh, except for one thing…
SOMEONE AT AMERICAN APPAREL THOUGHT IT'D BE A GOOD IDEA TO PUT HIM ON A FUCKING BILLBOARD TO ADVERTISE THEIR FUCKING PRODUCT. YOU FUCKING IDIOTS.
SDP 6: Landmark Crank Criticism, Russell and Bale On Set and Newspapers
Who could ask for a more amazing podcast than this?
Recorded 4/29/09, Episode 6 of The Same Dame Podcast contains a conversation that will no doubt go down in the history of film criticism. Scholar Ben Zalkind joins us to discuss the artistic achievement of "Crank: High Voltage." You won't find this in-depth conversation anywhere else, folks. And while George Lucas couldn't join us this episode, he did help us digitally simulate what a set with Christian Bale and David O. Russell will be like. We also look at what may be the last gasp of newspapermen in the movies with reviews of "State of Play" and "The Soloist." Oh, and Chris made us review "Sleep Dealer."
Be sure to subscribe to the podcast (via iTunes if you like) so you won't miss our next thrilling episode.
UPDATE: Bellamy and Zalkind's original essay.
bxAv110
bxAv110
bxAv110
Recorded 4/29/09, Episode 6 of The Same Dame Podcast contains a conversation that will no doubt go down in the history of film criticism. Scholar Ben Zalkind joins us to discuss the artistic achievement of "Crank: High Voltage." You won't find this in-depth conversation anywhere else, folks. And while George Lucas couldn't join us this episode, he did help us digitally simulate what a set with Christian Bale and David O. Russell will be like. We also look at what may be the last gasp of newspapermen in the movies with reviews of "State of Play" and "The Soloist." Oh, and Chris made us review "Sleep Dealer."
Be sure to subscribe to the podcast (via iTunes if you like) so you won't miss our next thrilling episode.
UPDATE: Bellamy and Zalkind's original essay.
Friday, April 24, 2009
It's Five!
Recorded 4/14/09, Episode 5 of The Same Dame Podcast offers the most insightful, analytical review of "Hannah Montana: The Movie" that you've ever heard, from two guys who obviously watched the film very closely. We also review "Observe and Report" and two Sundance films, "Sugar" and "Sin Nombre" before our esteemed news desk tackles a delightfully dull news period. We touch on Twitter and piracy before a certain Oscar-winning director joins us to talk about his latest work and how digital pirates violated it. I'd tell you who he is, but then it'd ruin the surprise!
Be sure to subscribe to the podcast (via iTunes if you like) so you won't miss our next thrilling episode.
bxAv110
bxAv110
bxAv110
Be sure to subscribe to the podcast (via iTunes if you like) so you won't miss our next thrilling episode.
Thursday, April 23, 2009
McG ‘shattered’ as mammarian dreams get nipped
LOS ANGELES – Visionary cinema has taken a staggering blow.
Noted auteur and breast enthusiast McG is reportedly “inconsolable” after word leaked that he has lost his grueling battle with Warner Bros., re: Moon Bloodgood’s breasts. In confirmation of what has long been rumored, his newest opus, “Terminator Salvation” – the fourth and, it appears, least naked of the long-running film series – has been given a paltry PG-13 rating by the MPAA’s Classification and Ratings Administration.
“My grand vision has been terminated by tyranny and oppression!” McG cried sadly. “Tyranny and oppression ... of tits! Those precious and glorious tits, captured in 35mm, have been terminated. And I feel like I, myself, have been terminated.”[bxA]
According to the studio’s official web site, the rating is for “intense sequences of sci-fi violence and action, and language.” Nowhere in that description, one will notice, is the word “nudity” included – nor “toplessness,” “breasts,” “mammaries” or “tit-fucking.”
The unveiling of the PG-13 rating – a first for the “Terminator” series, whose first three installments were all awarded the more ass-kicking “R” tag – brings a conclusion to what has been a long-standing duel between Artist and Financier that has seen Internet message boards flooded with speculation.
The heart of the matter lies in McG’s determination in showing us “Moon Bloodgood’s tits in all their glory, WOOOOO!,” according to a written statement from the renowned filmmaker himself. In the film, Ms. Bloodgood plays a pilot who is fighting alongside John Connor (Christian Bale) in the resistance against the Machines, man-made cyborgs who as we all know became self-aware on August 29, 1997.
McG has long stood firm in his convictions, stating that Ms. Bloodgood’s character is an “homage to Linda Hamilton,” who famously played the heroine Sarah Connor in James Cameron’s original two masterworks, baring her body and soul for the camera. McG has eschewed the “soul” element, emphasizing more of the “body” part of the equation, arguing that Bloodgood’s bosoms are “the physical embodiment of her soul.”
“Just like Sarah Connor, Moon Bloodgood’s character, Blair, is a sexy, beautiful, feminine woman, who is also totally strong and fierce and independent,” McG explained recently, adding, “and has great tits.”
As such, McG’s vision could only be complete with the aforementioned breasts salvaged in the final product. He has gained significant support in his quest to preserve his artistic intentions, most notably at a recent WonderCon appearance. The director reportedly rallied the frenzied crowd of sweaty, virginal adolescents, galvanizing them in his cause for breast preservation, which the studio has been long attempting to quash.
McG went further, explaining his precise plans to a fanbase suddenly united in its fervor: “First I start with a close-up of her feet and then I slowly pan up her whole naked body, until finally the right nipple makes its first appearance. Then I glide over, only she turns around seductively to go kick some ass. Then I changed my mind halfway through the shot, and for the rest of the scene I just do a bunch of quick cuts and show her cans from all different angles. Then a sexy female Terminator comes along and motorboats them! It’s totally rad!”
Added McG: “Tits are fuckin’ awesome.”
However, the removal of said tits has brought this fight to an ugly conclusion. Insiders worry that a lack of promised breasts in “Terminator Salvation” will permanently compromise both McG’s artistic integrity and street cred – and, hence, his authorial autonomy.
“Breasts are a symbol of motherhood!” McG pleaded. “‘Children of Men’ was all about motherhood and my film is just like ‘Children of Men!’ And ‘Children of Men’ had tits! My entire movie is filtered through the veneer of the Madonna-whore complex, represented by human female mammaries! But the censors-that-be at Warner Bros. have brought down their iron fist on my masterpiece. The true Terminator in this movie is Warner Bros. – and they have terminated art!”
Ms. Bloodgood’s breasts could not be reached for comment.
bxAv110
bxAv110
bxAv110
Noted auteur and breast enthusiast McG is reportedly “inconsolable” after word leaked that he has lost his grueling battle with Warner Bros., re: Moon Bloodgood’s breasts. In confirmation of what has long been rumored, his newest opus, “Terminator Salvation” – the fourth and, it appears, least naked of the long-running film series – has been given a paltry PG-13 rating by the MPAA’s Classification and Ratings Administration.
“My grand vision has been terminated by tyranny and oppression!” McG cried sadly. “Tyranny and oppression ... of tits! Those precious and glorious tits, captured in 35mm, have been terminated. And I feel like I, myself, have been terminated.”[bxA]
According to the studio’s official web site, the rating is for “intense sequences of sci-fi violence and action, and language.” Nowhere in that description, one will notice, is the word “nudity” included – nor “toplessness,” “breasts,” “mammaries” or “tit-fucking.”
The unveiling of the PG-13 rating – a first for the “Terminator” series, whose first three installments were all awarded the more ass-kicking “R” tag – brings a conclusion to what has been a long-standing duel between Artist and Financier that has seen Internet message boards flooded with speculation.
The heart of the matter lies in McG’s determination in showing us “Moon Bloodgood’s tits in all their glory, WOOOOO!,” according to a written statement from the renowned filmmaker himself. In the film, Ms. Bloodgood plays a pilot who is fighting alongside John Connor (Christian Bale) in the resistance against the Machines, man-made cyborgs who as we all know became self-aware on August 29, 1997.
McG has long stood firm in his convictions, stating that Ms. Bloodgood’s character is an “homage to Linda Hamilton,” who famously played the heroine Sarah Connor in James Cameron’s original two masterworks, baring her body and soul for the camera. McG has eschewed the “soul” element, emphasizing more of the “body” part of the equation, arguing that Bloodgood’s bosoms are “the physical embodiment of her soul.”
“Just like Sarah Connor, Moon Bloodgood’s character, Blair, is a sexy, beautiful, feminine woman, who is also totally strong and fierce and independent,” McG explained recently, adding, “and has great tits.”
As such, McG’s vision could only be complete with the aforementioned breasts salvaged in the final product. He has gained significant support in his quest to preserve his artistic intentions, most notably at a recent WonderCon appearance. The director reportedly rallied the frenzied crowd of sweaty, virginal adolescents, galvanizing them in his cause for breast preservation, which the studio has been long attempting to quash.
McG went further, explaining his precise plans to a fanbase suddenly united in its fervor: “First I start with a close-up of her feet and then I slowly pan up her whole naked body, until finally the right nipple makes its first appearance. Then I glide over, only she turns around seductively to go kick some ass. Then I changed my mind halfway through the shot, and for the rest of the scene I just do a bunch of quick cuts and show her cans from all different angles. Then a sexy female Terminator comes along and motorboats them! It’s totally rad!”
Added McG: “Tits are fuckin’ awesome.”
However, the removal of said tits has brought this fight to an ugly conclusion. Insiders worry that a lack of promised breasts in “Terminator Salvation” will permanently compromise both McG’s artistic integrity and street cred – and, hence, his authorial autonomy.
“Breasts are a symbol of motherhood!” McG pleaded. “‘Children of Men’ was all about motherhood and my film is just like ‘Children of Men!’ And ‘Children of Men’ had tits! My entire movie is filtered through the veneer of the Madonna-whore complex, represented by human female mammaries! But the censors-that-be at Warner Bros. have brought down their iron fist on my masterpiece. The true Terminator in this movie is Warner Bros. – and they have terminated art!”
Ms. Bloodgood’s breasts could not be reached for comment.
Thursday, April 2, 2009
The Same Dame Podcast Episode 4…in 3-D!
Recorded 3/31/09, episode four of The Same Dame Podcast takes on the disturbing push toward 3-D exhibition. After Chris and I discuss this impending disaster, our very favorite guest, George Lucas, shares his plans for the medium.
We also review "Monsters Versus Aliens," "Knowing," "Duplicity" and "I Love You, Man" and check in on the latest Hollywood news.
Be sure to subscribe to the podcast (via iTunes if you like) so you won't miss our next thrilling episode.
bxAv110
bxAv110
bxAv110
We also review "Monsters Versus Aliens," "Knowing," "Duplicity" and "I Love You, Man" and check in on the latest Hollywood news.
Be sure to subscribe to the podcast (via iTunes if you like) so you won't miss our next thrilling episode.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
