Hulk vs Wolverine a nice slice

It may have been a while since I wore a Wolverine t-shirt, but I used to be a die-hard Wolvie freak, back when most people wouldn't have known who he was and thought that my custom license plate that read "Wolvie1" was for the Michigan State football team.

I studied his history, and read everything I could get my hands on about him. So let's just say that - despite a few zillion brain cell deaths since then - I'm still a fountain of Wolverine lore. Thus, when I watched the short animated movie Hulk vs Wolverine (part of a newly-released Hulk vs DVD where he also faces Thor), I was seeing it through pretty critical eyes.

I mean, if you know anything about Wolverine you know that his history and origins have been monkeyed with more than Spider Man, which is saying a lot given the web-slinger's whole "clone" debacle a few years back. So while I was anxious to check out the film, I wasn't so anxious to see too many historical errors.

Briefly, since few care about Wolverine's history who'll actually watch the thing, it is a few points off the historically accurate mark, but not bad. Technically the "Weapon X" team isn't even around when Wolvie confronts Hulk back in 1983, and the Hulk is a little busy fighting a creature called Wendigo at the time (his reason for being in town, if you will).

When Wolvie is unable to hurt the Hulk too badly (technically he can't pierce the Hulk's hide), he turns on Wendigo and pretty much puts him down for the count, but back to the film.

The characters are very well portrayed. While Logan's attitude and demeanor were spot on, it's Bloodpool who really steals the show, with his constant joking and (relatively) foul mouth, Nolan North (no stranger to great voice work) does a superior job of acting him out. The inherent skill level of each character - a very important facet of any comic book portrayal - is likewise right on.

The art is good enough. That's not to say that it is the highest caliber I've seen, as in, say, the first season of Spider Man's animated series or several of the X-Men's animated show, as well. But hey, look at Batman the Animated Series: the art might not have been perfect, but the show was amazing and no worse for any lack of artistic detail.

The action is pretty sweet, with slow-mo, acrobatics, and pretty fluid movements in general. There is a little too much guy-gets-knocked-twenty-miles-away moments a la the Hulk's overzealous desire to "smash," but that's his MO and I guess he's stickin' to it.

All told, this short flick deserves the solid IMDb score it received and certainly deserves renting or even buying if you have a single comic-loving bone in you. If you just liked seeing Hugh Jackman with his shirt off, you might be a little let down, but that's what you get for not reading the cover.

Throwback Thursday: "Omega Man"

I don't know what it is with Charlton Heston flicks lately, but this Thursday's throwback is Omega Man, inspired by my enjoyment of I Am Legend - the book and the movie.

Omega follows Richard Matheson's novel about as much as Will Smith's I Am Legend, which means there are various interpretative liberties - some of which are good, some maybe not. For those who have seen or read Legend: in Omega, the "vampires" are more like albino Amish, with about as much of a fear factor.

The enemy of self-assured "last man on earth" Heston, the albinos refuse to use the machines of war to out Heston's character, Dr. Robert Neville. To me - this would have been a welcome handicap to accelerating their extinction, but Heston's Neville - much like Matheson's - mostly gets drunk and talks to himself.

Omega also does a good job of portraying the book Neville's, ahem...yearnings, shall we say, that would be pretty substantial after a few years of no Internet porn.

The film is from 1971, and for the time period, they do a fine job of showing empty streets, isolation, mass death, and broad shots using clever camera tricks that we take for granted now that there's so much technology to facilitate it. Heston is a believable Neville if not a little creepy when he smiles.

This may be a childhood riddled with Planet of the Apes movies talking, but this felt eerily similar. While the albinos are a little off simian, I'd venture to guess that if you like Apes then you'll like Omega.

I strongly doubt there were any Oscars won for acting, but the period special effects are good, the story is pretty solid, and it's got some decent action sequences.

So, if you’re looking for another take on what World War Z author Max Brooks calls LMOEs (Last Man on Earth) type stories, which I favor, admittedly) then give Omega Man a go.

Nine Hollywood Tropes Moviegoers Loathe: Part Five

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.

"The Reader" thoughtful and sublime

I'm still reeling a bit, having just come from the theater, as The Reader certainly gives moviegoers a lot to mull over...if they choose to, that is.

I went into the Grandin Theater, which was packed to the gills, having heard very little about the film - not a preview or a review. I liked it that way, since I was pretty convinced, given the actors and the buzz it has already generated, that it wasn't going to be a waste of my time.

The movie really is a pleasure: perfect timing, witty, and with a solid flow that carries you through the spectacular sets. The jumps from this time to that might confuse some people, though I was able to follow along.

The subject matter, which my speaking of should betray very little of the film's plot, surrounds questions of justice and redemption after Nazi Germany: not exactly brand new content for Hollywood.

I must say that some judgments made in the film, notably by protagonist David Kross (younger Michael) and Ralph Fiennes (older Michael), surprise me. In life and film, I find that judgment should be reserved to the law, and that whatever judgment the law makes is as far as anyone can judge the guilty - or else, for what, indeed, do we have law at all? Granted, this comes from someone who has been blessed by not having to make choices of who deserves redemption and who does not.

More to the film, the various zeitgeists portrayed through several key periods in our recent history are quite well done, and - while I wasn't looking for any - I found no anachronisms to speak of.

Suffice it to say that Reader is well worth watching and thinking on, so much so that I intend to read the book as well, though I'm not in the habit of reading books after movies (to be clear, the book did come first).

So, while pivoting off of a trite plot of post-Nazi Germany, Reader is fresh in its ideas and invites viewers to devise much of the unraveling for themselves.

Day of the 'Dog: "Dogville"

Honest, I didn't choose Dogville just because of the title - it really is an underdog. Even with a smokin' IMDb score of 7.9 and winning mad lower-vis awards, just ask yourself: "Have I seen it." Unlikely.

What you'll first notice in the film is the complete lack of a set. This is not like in Kill Bill where it will suddenly go from black and white back to good 'ole color; No, there really isn't a set.

However, this demands a completely different level of imagination, and - while it might seem a little funky at first - your brain will align with it and soon you'll begin to see walls and furniture and windows. Or, if you have no imagination, just go with it...and then work on that imagination thing in your spare time.

Why is deserves 'dog status: Well, Dogville's lackluster success might be due to the immediate expectations of exotic sets, larger-than-life heroes, and lots of stuff blowing up, but it's really no surprise that a film without a set flew under the radar. What some would call inventive, others will claim is "low-budget" or "boring," though that kind of implies big-budget, action-packed blockbusters like Hulk are automatically good, and I think we all know better than that.

In essence, Dogville encapsulates a sort of Lord of the Flies type of society where each transgression enables someone else to react in kind and even push the moral envelope further in a nefarious direction. Thing is, this is not an island full of children, but a small town full of adults. At heart, the film implies that any weakness can and will be exploited if given enough time.

The voice over is immaculate, with poetic lines such as: "...respect for cultivation, harvest, and fruit could be directly measured in provision of carnality." Man, that's like something a founding father might have said.

The use of light also did a lot to communicate the decline of the town, along with sparse props, sound, and pregnant pauses in the music.

While not exactly a film about tea and crumpets (Chloë Sevigny is an even bigger sadist than in Big Love), Dogville deserves crazy props for its innovations, is sure to entertain, and might even make you consider the ever-lurking shady side in all of us.

DVD: "Babylon AD" not a bad ride

A future filled with violence, war, and gladiators...and Vin Diesel's right in the middle of it. What could go wrong? Well, I guess that while Bablyon AD had a great formula for success (see Blade Runner and Cyborg) there's always the chance that a movie will biff a solid plot (see Ultraviolet and Aeon Flux).

But allow me to lay out the cards and you can judge for yourself if new-to DVD Babylon is worth a rental.

Babylon's main character, Toorop, is a little like Xander Cage's great-grandson from XXX. He's a bad ass with a gun who gets ample opportunity to kick butt and take names. Unlike XXX, though, Babylon retains a solemn tone throughout, fitting considering the setting - a Cold War-esque landscape of black markets where its every man for himself. It rang of late-bloomer hit PC game STALKER: Shadows of Chernobyl where you can't find a decent meal and vodka is worth more than gold, but technolgy shows up amid firearms that could lay waste to Robocop.

While sporting a bleak view of the future, Babylon doesn't feel implausible, and I quickly found myself pulled in and genuinely interested in the characters. There is some excellent camera work to support the feel of the film, with little to break your immersion - a wise move by director Mathieu Kassovitz. Nothing spoils dreary more than punny one-liners or sight gags.

Okay, so why didn't more people like it? Well, it did coalesce into something a little less than the sum of its parts. I don't know what kind of ending I was expecting, but I felt a little let down.

I still maintain a good taste in my mouth for the film, but I can legitimately see where others gave it a tepid review (thought I think an IMDb score 5.3 is a little unfair).

Let me know what you thought, since few two opinions seem to be the same on this flick.

Throwback Thursday: "The Ice Pirates"

Prepare to time warp back to the '80s, where everything is gilded - from robots to spaceships to eyeliner.

The Ice Pirates is a comic, sci-fi film that would be called "space western" only it plays out more like an '80s Renaissance fair. Picture what would happen if The Bangles had Shakespeare's baby. The music is untouched by a wood or stringed instrument, but straight out of the '80s synthesizer lab. Amid shoulder pads and huge eyeglasses, however, at least there's no break dancing.

I admit, this is one of those films I loved in childhood and then jumped at when I saw it available for rent. Oftentimes, the result of trying to recapture youth means finding out that Silly Putty is kinda lame and that Fun Dip is really just colored sugar.

However, Pirates - despite a heightened level of cheese matched only by Nine Deaths of the Ninja - was pretty fun to experience again.

With some notable actors such as Angelica Houston and Ron Perlman, the acting isn't bad, and - if you think about it - must have taken a heightened degree of discipline to keep from giggling through every scene. But unlike campy space movies that tried and failed to be serious (Space Mutiny comes to mind), Pirates doesn't take itself too seriously, and that's a lot of its charm.

The robots - that is, low-wage actors in molded plastic - get a little exhausting, as they break down so often they must be running Vista. In pretty much every battle, just take what you know about physics and throw it out the window and you might just enjoy it.

The message - assuming there is meant to be one - is uplifting, since the water shortages of Pirates' galaxy are in complete juxtaposition to our own abundance, and the things we largely take for granted.

While rife with sexual innuendo, it's all in fun and pretty harmless, so Pirates could really be an enjoyable movie for the family - good for some laughs and never so cheesy as to be dull or tired. So, despite a pretty low IMDb rating of 5.1 and the fact that I might simply be clinging to the threads of my youth, I'd say Pirates is worth a watch.

"City of Ember" burns, though sometimes dimly

For a fledgling steampunk fan like me, City of Ember immediately draws me in, with its archaic and misunderstood technology of an age long passed. While the society smacks of Lois Lowry's The Giver so closely that I hope some royalties were paid (the same close semblance to Fallout, as well, if you're a gamer), it was enough to hold my interest.

The end was always a little transparent based on the "get you up to speed" montage at the beginning, which may or may not have been in the book; I haven't read it, I admit. The purpose of the City of Ember itself might have been better suited for a mystery the main characters - two rogue kids who share their parents' curiosity about Ember - to have to discover throughout the film. Thus, the film's progression felt a little spoon fed.

Because, in some ways, it was the elements that weren't explained (like what drove people underground to begin with) that I thought lent the most to my imagination.

I do wish I'd seen it in the theater, since many of the visuals didn't quite come through on my computer monitor. The types of people in Ember as portrayed by awesome actors such as Bill Murray (the mayor) were - albeit slightly mollified for a younger audience - pretty much the way I'd see people acting in such an environment.

You had the willfully ignorant, the curious, the thieves, the workers, and the politicians. The only trope of young adult literature that I found a little unbelievable was that it took so long for someone to get curious enough about Ember to uncover the truth. The human spirit - in many - yearns for pulling things apart and seeing how they tick, manifest in today's hackers, modders, and tinkerers. Surely a steampunk utopia such as Ember would have had more than its share and would not have been left stagnant for so long.

In the end, the film is a safe, fun ride through nice visuals, memorable characters, and an okay plot. Safe for the kiddies and still entertaining enough for the adults.

Nine Hollywood Tropes Moviegoers Loathe: Part Four

Ill computer tricks with a couple of keyboard strokes

Alright, in the ‘80s it was one thing to pull "computer magic," back when the most we had was a Vic 20 or the TI that was lucky to play text-based adventure games. You could have Wyatt from Weird Science somehow endow Kelly LaBrock with Einstein’s brain just by putting a magazine cutout of him into the computer. It was a montage, so who knows what kind of ingenious programming they were doing in the interim.

But when I saw that toolbag Gilbert I’m-too-good-for-a-sequel from Revenge of the Nerds making a likeness of him and his nerdy/hot girlfriend pop on screen with a few keystrokes, I’m callin’ BS. I get that he’s a nerd, but what the hell was I suppose to believe he typed in? T-i-r-e-d o-f h-a-n-d-j-o-b-s. N-e-e-d t-o g-e-t l-a-i-d.

And while I actually like The Transporter series, when his French sub-rosa partner gets nothing more than a pic of the bad guy and suddenly finds his file in the time it took him to eat a crepe, I’m hanging my head and laughing. And how the hell did Frank even know where to send the photo?

In a world where Microsoft makes sure that a brand new computer has a 50/50 chance of working with that new printer you bought, and your music is only your music with an approved, updated, and verified player, I’m supposed to believe that stuff works as seamlessly as a Mac in Hollywoodland?

Let’s not even talk about the asinine hacking business of alternate universes like in Hackers, where seemingly everything from your friggin' microwave to your girlfriend’s bra strap is somehow controlled via computer.

We’re a little computer-literate by now, so how about telling it like it is?

Check out Nine Hollywood Tropes Moviegoers Loathe: Part Three

Day of the 'Dog: "Saved!" Review

IMDb Score: 7.0

Why it didn't do too hot: Despite a decent IMDb score, I think that a lot of people - critics, reporters, and potential viewers - thought that Saved! was a movie about getting saved, and finding out that Christ is the way and the light.

No matter what your religious preference, such a movie would have only a narrow audience, and would even turn off some practicing Christians, let alone those with no religious preference.

Forget the subtle point that this movie had nothing to do with converting people to join the crusade of Christ. It wasn't the opposite, either.

Why it deserves dog status: Despite being hilarious by having a sort of fly-on-the-wall feel as to how evangelical Christian communities operate, peeking into their minds and seeing how their orthodox opinions manifest, it's also a story about doubt, something that seems all too demonized nowadays.

When a politician shows ambivalence on a certain issue, or shows doubt on how efficacious certain solutions are to our societal problems, s/he is immediately labeled a "flip-flopper" as if having doubts is indicative of a tepid, poor leader. Even followers, as we would be made to believe, are confined to having orthodox opinions lest they be dubbed "fence-sitters" which - particularly in religion - holds utterly negative connotations.

Saved! revolves around the lives of a group of teens who are really a random sample of American society at large: with Mandy Moore's character being the blindly orthodox (so long as it serves her) type of Christian, Jena Malone playing the truly tested, confused, and curious Christian (which there should be many, many more of), and a wheelchair-bound Macaulay Culkin being the pariah with no faith to speak of who's actually driven further away by orthodoxy.

The film remains - above all - quite funny, making light of some conventional wisdom surrounding Christ (like if he's a white guy) showing how those of the cloth have adapted to appeal to younger kids via a priest who does a flip onto the stage/pulpit, and even deals with homosexuality more from the ground level, without claiming some moral high ground or insisting on how to feel about it.

So don't think of Saved! as Jesus Camp or Caught; think of it as Drop Dead Gorgeous - with lots of Christians.

"Gran Torino" a solid Eastwood addition

At the first racial slur, the theater full of white people didn’t know whether to laugh or offer up one of those "ohhh" noises that says: "My God, what nerve; I would never use racial slurs like that...out loud." In time, Clint Eastwood's latest film Gran Torino leveled the racial playing field, laying out a deluge of harsh monikers akin to a '90s Andrew Dice Clay stand-up routine.

In a society where we can blaspheme on public television but must euphemize racial slurs by speaking only the first letter, it becomes clear that we aren't really sure what our values are anymore - just that we don't want to offend anyone. Now, don't misunderstand, the absence of staunch values is not the same as being valueless or immoral: I can't speak much to my own values, but I'm a good person who contributes to society and works everyday toward developing my character.

But, in Torino, the dialogue's potential to offend is quickly mollified by Walt's (Eastwood's) indiscriminate use of it, and the fact that his affection for his neighborhood does little to rectify his preference for the seemingly vulgar vernacular.

What speaks far louder are Walt's values and ethics, which is a wonderful picture of his era. I'm not going all Brokaw on you - I believe each generation has its strengths - but Korean War vet Walt's values include many finer things that he imbues in his atrophying neighborhood, letting the not-so-fine things such as stubbornness and distaste fall away.

While I have no beef with the long-winded nature of Eastwood's films (I rather like it, actually), some have found them a little too lengthy, but in Torino, the majority of the scenes are purposeful and add to the film; there is little I'd whack were it my job to make the film tighter.

It was also refreshing to see the total absence of the whole, trite "I'm gettin' too old for this" line from Eastwood. To be frank, it's what turned me off of the Lethal Weapon series and Space Cowboys. You can speak to the generation without speaking to the inabilities of it over and over: such facts are tacit and obvious.

Now for the downside: the acting is pretty bad - all but Eastwood, of course. This is likely due to under-directing on Eastwood's part, as it is random throughout the film who's going to act poorly next. To me, this smacks not of poor casting but too few takes, leaving some scenes stiff and hurried. While I don't have the eye of someone trained in continuity, it would not surprise me to learn that there are several continuity errors, as well, and for the same reason.

I'll not speak to the end of the movie or spoil any plot devices, but it is a work typical of Eastwood both in pace and content, but with a very human element that keeps your emotions tied to the film's development. I would say that any of Eastwood's contemporaries would greatly appreciate the film, and that there are plenty of nuggets for younger generations to glean from it, not the least of which is enjoyment.

"Bangkok Dangerous" trite, but alright

Now on DVD, Bangkok Dangerous is a film about a newly-reluctant assassin at his day of reckoning for all of the horrors he's committed, embodied in that last hit he just can't complete.

Oh wait, now I'm being far too general; that could have been the plot of about 83 different anti-hero assassin movies. Joe, Bangkok's aforementioned reluctant assassin, played by Nicholas Cage, has fallen in love with an innocent, handicapped girl who will deliver him from his evil ways...damn, there I go being general again, seeing as how - for reluctant assassins - deaf/blind/young/innocent girls are a real bull market commodity.

So let's start over: Bangkok is full of well-shot action sequences with good tension and lots of cool "whizzing bullets" effects. Amid good chase scenes, and innovative uses of light and set (who wouldn't want to see a shootout in a bottled water factory? Talk about cathartic), the film also does a spectacular job of avoiding confusion. I know who is who and what is what despite lots of characters entering the fold.

Plus, Cage has that tragic hero thing down cold from his work on Windtalkers, Con Air, and Ghost Rider, so no problem there.

Thus, if you can look past the overused plot, Bangkok is a fun film that's worth a rental. Don't expect Gross Pointe Blank or The Killer and you'll come away pleased and entertained.

I would still like to know if real-life assassins put their guns together two seconds before the assassination. Seems like you're just asking for logistical snafus, but that's just me. Any real assassins out there want to testify?

Throwback Thursday: "The Warriors"

Despite opening credits only slightly shorter than the Superbowl halftime show, The Warriors begins with an interesting idea: a few thousand gang members all dressed to the nines come together and try to make peace...only the guy proposing it gets shot.
You can guess what happens next.
Warriors is from 1979, so despite the "some time in the future" setting, this future has feathered hair, pay phones, and tape decks. The cast is riddled with memorable faces from today's tv and movie actors - just younger.
A common element I've noted in some of these throwback films is a purpose and a passion to the movements. When the actors are running (something The Warriors do a lot of as they're chased all over NYC) they are literally hauling ass. When was the last time you saw a modern action hero who looked like a Kenyan on Redbull?
No, they water down lots of modern chase scenes with slo-mo and close-ups - which can be great - but few things make you feel like the scene is real like the level of earnest some throwback actors show.
More to the film, Warriors sports an array of well-choreographed fight scenes with some sequences looking half Bruce Lee kung-fu flick and half Clockwork Orange. They are quite believable, and the perpetual miasma of violence and aggression fleshes out a lot about the main characters that would have taken lots of dialogue otherwise.
The film progresses by way of a comic book read Star Wars style at the beginning, with scene segues appearing like panels flipping by; the thick, white swipes between other scenes completes the innovative and interesting feature.
It's also nice that the music is well-timed and appropriate, not falling into the trap of overwhelming the audience with contemporaneous music and hurting a film's future-proofing.
All in all, Warriors is a throwback worthy of renting and checking out for yourself. There's nothing too gruesome, violent, or sexual to exclude viewers, either. I'm not saying leave it on as a babysitter, but there are worse "just because" movies out there so far as crowd pleasing goes.

Nine Hollywood Tropes Moviegoers Loathe: Part Three

Socio-political issues tossed completely aside

Everyone knows deep down that politics are a waste of time, but with ubiquitous 24/7 news and information, Hollywood should at least pretend to give some semblance of rationality when portraying social or political issues - even in kids’ movies.
Kids shouldn’t have to worry about affairs of state, to be sure, but making the rule of a nation no more serious than where you shop might be sending the wrong message. Plus, for the inevitable adults that chaperon (or admittedly enjoy a kids’ flick every now and then) ignoring history entirely solicits nothing but groans and eye rolls.
Remember box office flop Dungeons and Dragons? None of us was expecting Lord of the Rings after the first ten minutes paved the way to Suck Town, but when - at the end - Empress Savina surveys her people and cries: “I now declare you all equal,” I knew just how crappy a movie it really was.
The ruling elite of wealthy, aristocratic mages suddenly “equal” to thieves and paupers who have little more than cockney accents and bitter mead to contribute? Yeah, I’ll bet the land of…whatever the hell it was, is doing just fine.
And let’s not forget Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles rip-off 3 Ninjas. After defeating the current dictatorial regime, the heir to the throne - a teenage “ninja” who looked more like Zach Morris than Snake Eyes - gets up in front of his expectant, scared, and sage-seeking subjects and says: “Just have fun” and then starts dancing.
Um…yeah. What you didn’t see was five minutes later - after the credits - when the riots broke out and half the country’s rice supply is burned or stolen in bandit raids just before the worst bout of starvation in Chinese history. Good role modeling there ninja boy, and way to be satisfied with sub-par writing Hollywood.

Check out Nine Hollywood Tropes Moviegoers Loathe: Part Two

Guilty Pleasures: Wrestler Flicks

I know as much about pro wrestling as I do golf, which is just about enough to fill a thimble with a little room left over. So when I saw the WWE films logo come up before The Marine, I grew slightly worried. It's not as if I thought that - sans a production company who made the XFL - Marine was going to be some sort of masterpiece: I was watching it for the sole purpose of gleaning some mind-numbing action from it.
Let me tell ya - that's what I got. Marine begins a little too patriotic for my taste, but the Freedom Fries are relegated to the first five minutes and the fact that larger-than-life John Cena is a marine thereafter looms about as relevant as his shoe size. Its fast-paced action and barroom brawl fights are coupled with enough explosions to make The Day After look like a fireworks show.
This isn't about Marine, though; it's about acknowledging two things: that pro wrestlers make decent action heroes, and that sometimes guilty pleasures like a mindless action flick are just what you need.
Vis a vis The Rock, who recently began using his real name, whatever that might be. Let's face it: The Rundown is a treat, through and through. It would make my Day of the Dog review, but with an IMDb score of 6.6, it seems there are at least some others who feel the same way.
Let us not forget, other wrestlers cum actors' works include: They Live, The Princess Bride, and Predator - all solid performances. Granted, films with wrestler/actors are not without their stinkers, such as Kane's See No Evil and pretty much anything with Hulk Hogan.
But - by and large - it's no surprise that pro wrestlers can act: what do you think they're doing in the ring? And you don't have to worry about them being fit for the alpha male role. Who didn't recoil when hearing they chose friggin' Beetlejuice to be Batman, and yet pro wrestlers already have the look of an action hero down cold.
Aside from the occasional fan proclaiming: "It's still real to me, dammit" for all the world to laugh at, most people understand that wrestlers are there to entertain, and it seems to lend itself well to the big screen, too.
So, if you're looking for a little escape from "thinking" films, consider giving a wrestler flick a go, and just enjoy the ride. It may be a guilty pleasure, but there's something safe and fun about these types of movies that lets you get away from how serious the world takes itself sometimes.

Day of the 'Dog: Jumper Review

Day of the Underdog: Underrated films that are worth watching

This will be a new feature to Movie Tirades. Mondays will now be the Day of the 'Dog, where I will feature what I think are vastly underrated films that slid under the radar from the past and present that are more than worth checking out. I’ll go into why I think they were ignored, and what makes my opinion of them so much higher than the norm.

This week’s 'dog: Jumper

IMDb score: 5.9

Why viewers didn’t like it: Let’s face it, Hayden Christensen might not have been the best choice in the world for Anakin Skywalker. Christ knows what Lucas was thinking when he decided to write the last three Star Wars himself, so obviously his judgment wasn’t quite right altogether. But that doesn’t mean that Christensen should be a Hollywood pariah for the rest of his career. Alas, this – in theory – is the reason that Jumper took such a hit at the box office, despite Christensen being a very believable David Rice.

The movie was a blend of all three Jumper novels by Steven Gould – taking jumper snippets about the way the ability worked from each one in what was more fitting for cinematic effect.

A bone of contention among Jumper critics is the archenemies of all jumpers: the paladins. Frankly, the hazy source and ambiguous motivation behind the paladins didn’t need any more explaining than the movie offered: the ability to teleport anywhere at any time would ruffle the feathers of quite a few agencies. Meaning that, if you can accept Davy’s ability to teleport, the rest of the movie plot is quite logical.

The far off places, the implications of instantaneous travel, and the special effects of the actual teleporting are all handled extremely well. While the movie certainly has me asking: “Why didn’t he just…?” or “I would have…” it is far from the typical Hollywood hero trope of powers being granted at the film’s beginning only to have them taken away as the character is “humanized” (see Robocop, Spider Man, The Crow, Hancock).

The acting, particularly between characters Griffin and David, was as it should be in an action, sci-fi film: not DeNiro, but not David Caruso, either. It beat the hell out of Toby McGuire crying (again) over MJ, and ole' spidey didn't get as lambasted by critics.

Popular critiques also include moviegoers who felt that while the idea was spectacular, the end product could have been so much more. I think, in part, when we're presented with a great plot device, we almost expect an epic on screen, and we grow angry when the credits roll after 90 minutes. But not all films can be (or need to be) Lord of the Rings to be ejoyable.

With a fast pace, a great concept, and a solid story, I found Jumper to be a real diamond in the rough. I didn’t even read the books until after the movie had come out, and probably wouldn’t have at all if not for the film. I'm just hoping that initial sour faces over Christensen and the supposed squandered potential of the film doesn't stymie the possiblity of a sequel.

Nine Hollywood Tropes Moviegoers Loathe: Part Two

Technology that grows exponentially each sequel

Sci-fi is great and all, but nothing takes you out of the action more than catching a sequel and finding out that - to spice things up - the producers have introduced impossible leaps in technology overnight.
Peep Phantasm, which was just about scary enough to have me pooping my pants when I first saw it as a kid. I was ducking frisbees afraid for my life after seeing those silver ball suckers flying into people’s heads and having their blood and brains flying out the other side like carbonated tomato soup straight out of a paint mixer.
Then the sequel comes along and now “the ball is back” with snazzy new features like a buzz saw. Okay, I’ll buy that. Then the third turd comes along, and suddenly the ball is big, gold, and fitted with friggin' lasers. Why not just have it make toast and slice computer terminals while you’re at it? Suddenly something very scary just turned about as intimidating as friggin' Tron.
Picking on The Terminator might draw some die hard fans’ ire, but let’s face it: if Skynet could grind out upgrades as fast as the sequels portrayed, John Connor and his antiquated T-800 would be about a dangerous a match as 11-year-old boy with a Erector set.
Sure there’s the desire to put a new spin on a completely repetitious (though awesome) plot in lieu of revamping the entire project, but it makes me wonder if the next terminator they send after John will be able to slow time, teleport, or make Vista work - freakish feats that suspend my disbelief about as well as the National Inquirer.

Check out Nine Hollywood Tropes Moviegoers Loathe: Part One

Throwback Thursday: "Soylent Green"

Okay, so this movie tirade isn't exactly timely. In fact Soylent Green came out before I was born. But the name's catchy, kinda like Watership Down, so when I saw an old movie poster of it online, I found the movie and gave it a look. This will be the start of "Throwback Thursday" where - each Thursday - I'll review an old movie, for better or worse.
It's always interesting to see how the past would portray the future, like how Kubrick envisioned 2001 (soporific as his vision might have been). Green is set in 2022, where New York City holds 20 million people - a population density portrayed in the form of extras littering stairwells. How that's comfortable, I'm not sure, but I'll go with it.
With no desire to spoil the movie's plot, let's just say it's kind of like The Stuff meets 1984. If you can accept that - in '70s film - blood was orange-red, fight scenes looked like a tribute to John Wayne movies, and the women seemed to put out for no reason (I didn't see Charlton Heston complaining), then you'll appreciate that the story, acting, and camera work are all well done. It looked believable, and without many special effects.
What struck me the most is something I'm sure that's far more common in older films - not saying '70s is "old" - is that the climatic scenes - the shootouts, the fights, and chases - were almost entirely without background music. While I have fond memories of the powerful emotions that ran through me during the movies where background music seemed perfectly orchestrated (Lord of the Rings, The Matrix, and even the baseball bat beat down from Corky Romano to the tune of Twisted Sister's "We're not gonna take it"), it was nice to experience the emotions that came with seeing the climactic events unfold without music telling me how I should feel about it.
I've long despised the jump scares punctuated by sharp violin notes in cheesy horror flicks like I know what you did last summer that have no lasting effect, but merely tap into our baser fight or flight instincts and extol that some movie theater's sound systems are ridiculously loud.
Sound aside, Green is well worth watching for those who haven't seen it. Finding out it was a novel first, however, did make me wish I'd read the book beforehand, but it's not like there aren't a thousand equally-intriguing stories out there still.

Nine Hollywood Tropes Moviegoers Loathe: Part One

This is part one of a nine-part series. The tone is a little sarcastic, but don't let the cynicism detract from the humor.

When moviegoers see that films like Gigli were ever made, it’s a wonder people go to the theater at all. I mean, nowadays the trade-off is shafting your unborn son of his college education just to check out a movie a month and wash it down with some over-iced soda.
Despite that and the inevitable whining of every MPAA mouthpiece claiming the industry’s in fiscal turmoil, people still love the movies. Hell, I’ve turned my nose at every gas station that dares charge me a 30 cent convenience fee - never to return - and yet I’m so sell-out at the movie theater that George Foreman hangs his head in shame.
However, this perpetual dedication comes at a small price: the right to tell Hollywood producers how moronic some movie tropes have become and how they do little more than tick off the regulars by messing with our immersion worse than that jerk who actually answers his cell phone mid-climax. (May he suffer a face-plant sometime soon).

1. Killing off the predecessor hero in the first two seconds of the sequel

You know the feeling: you spend an entire movie slipping into the mind of the hero. You feel his pain, you crouch right beside him as he escapes death time and again. You hold you breathe as the killer stalks our hero, but you cry in victory when the hero beats the odds and walks into the sunset a bloody, victorious icon of tenacity.
And what does Hollywood do? They kill the guy in the first scene of some crappy sequel ‘cause they couldn’t scrape up the budget to pay the old star to come back.
I didn’t think I’d even like Hostel only to get fully engrossed as the protagonist narrowly escapes and even gets a little payback a la a bathroom stall shankfest. He was scared; he was maimed and in pain and he suffered, and yet he survived…until Hostel II that is, where he ate it 3 minutes in and ended up a trophy on some schmuck’s wall who wasn’t even in the first one.
Same with filmmakers sidestepping neuvo James Bond-esque Xander Cage in lame sequel XXX: State of the Union by having someone just pop up and say Xander was killed in some far-off country. We’d just seen him in XXX surviving every one-in-a-million shot scenario in the book, but yeah, sure, he was offed like a tired dog with nothing more said about him than you would an extra falling off of a wall to his death.
And there wasn’t an ‘80s kid alive who didn’t love it when Jean-Claude Van Damme’s character in Kickboxer started whopping some Tong Po ass, only to see some scab playing him take a bullet to the head in the abortion that was Kickboxer II.
Do us a favor, have your crummy sequels all you want, but leave the original guys out of it if you can’t spring for the bucks to bring them back.

Check out Nine Hollywood Tropes Moviegoers Loathe: Part Two

"Eagle Eye" on DVD well worth a look.

With Eagle Eye's recent DVD release, it's time you learned the truth about director D.J. Caruso: despite mediocre films like Disturbia and Two for the Money, the man actually can direct.
Of course, it's not direction alone that made Eagle Eye a damn good flick; it was a combination of factors. First, it lacked the transparency of most government thrillers, where your suspect list is sometimes one person long. Eagle remained suspenseful and kept you guessing until the end without much of the black and white aspects of likened films. I'll pick on Executive Decision, though it certainly doesn't stand alone. Will the terrorist annihilate the entire eastern seaboard? Umm, no, they won't. Contrastingly, Eagle keeps its cards hidden with plenty of action and intrigue to maintain interest.
It's been accused of being too fast, actually, but Shia LaBeouf's quips and Billy Bob Thorton's snippiness add flavor and a break from the action. I don't think it ranks as an "exhausting" film at all.
It's likewise been accused of being a little too close to Enemy of the State, though - aside from some camera angles and Big Brother moments - I think they are totally different films with perhaps the same demographic. In other words, I watched Eagle Eye thinking about it, not thinking about Enemy or any other films with "eye in the sky" technology and camera work.
There is a sadness to the characters that I like, as well. Kind of like in The Last Boyscout. There's something about the reluctant hero that we're drawn to, and I certainly felt it with Eagle Eye.
Far be it from me to ruin any nitty-gritty parts with spoilers, but let me just say that what seems an impossibility in the beginning begins to coalesce into a believable (though disturbing) possibility. And I welcome counter-opinions on this, though be sure to precede spoilers with a spoiler notice.
While this only sometimes holds true, I'm going to say that if you watch the preview and liked it - being, in my mind, a very fair representation of the pace and quality of the film, then you'll like the whole movie.

"Valkyrie" swoops down on conventional wisdom

Watching Valkyrie immediately makes me realize that my "survey" understanding of WWII is woefully inadequate. We have a sort of blimp's eye view of wars sometimes, where we assume that it was purely manicheistic: the bad guys wore black and the good guys wore white, and the good guys won. With real life never quite panning out like that, Valkyrie does an excellent job of showing one of the many insurrection attempts on Hitler's Germany, with politics and paranoia that smacks of V for Vendetta. Director Bryan Singer was on his A game, which means I can finally forgive him for not directing X-Men III.
What I appreciated was the amount of minutia surrounding the actual attempted coup. In some movies, such as The Perfect Storm, you have a level of circumstantial detail that builds the tension you feel and the connection you have to the characters. Yet at the end of Storm, we find out that no one lived to tell the tale. I felt completely jipped, especially when the movie touted itself as "based on a true story." Story, indeed. Now, I can't stomach the melodramatic moment in Storm, knowing they are all hearsay and guesswork.
In Valkyrie, however, those very details are true; the product of meticulous research, historical record, and even reenactments. This makes the film much more enjoyable, especially since it is surrounding such an important time in our recent history.
If you are going to Valkyrie for Mission Impossible you will be sorely disappointed. If you are going in order to see a facet of history that has almost entirely slipped through the cracks of the modern historical canon, then you will enjoy it. It is well-paced, well-acted, and has an excellent cast. That said, the only drawback I see will be felt by the producers, and that is that - given the way that the story unfolds - I don't see a huge market for repeat views, so I predict mediocre DVD sales. I would watch it twice, but I could understand how a single viewing would suffice for most.
Too, there seemed to be a slew of accents: some trying for German, some more British, and Tom Cruise sticking with, well, Tom Cruise. While it would have been nice to enforce a bit of consistency here, it was only a minute detail that goes largely unnoticed.
Any evidence to the contrary is welcome in the comments section, as are all other observations, opinions, etc.

Movie Tech Review: 3D

Checking out the previews now feels a little nostalgic. In lieu of the last several year's typical trailers (where the last few scenes flash by so many times that I fear I'll swallow my tongue, though I digress) I've seen a number of movies that will be in 3-D.
I like the feel of these trailers: they don't try to act like 3-D is something new, since it's been around since 1922 in some form. They make the trailers feel more like your watching coming attractions from the '50s or '60s, with as much coverage of the experience, crowd reactions, and the like as the movie itself. And with movie prices as high as they are (spawned almost entirely by the industry, not from the theaters, have no doubt) I think that an "experience" is exactly what movie-going should be.
With the rise of in-home theaters amid falling HDTV prices and superior sound equipment, you can see a movie in all its splendor right in your bedroom. But having an axe thrown at you by a twenty-foot-tall psycho killer and having it zip past your head is something only 3-D theater can provide.
That said, as anyone who has seen these previews may have noted, these movies require special glasses. These are not - I gather - going to be the universal type, either, but rather reflect the same moronically proprietary gear a la cell phones chargers, memory cards, etc (see Sony). If that's not the case, please let me know by posting a comment.
It would not surprise me in the least to see an added $2 - $5 charge for a pair of glasses on top of the already increased (albeit justified) price of a 3D movie ticket, only to see the glasses rendered worthless at film's end.
If each film has it's own type of glasses and all others will fail to work, then the issue there is twofold: one, while we are pioneers of waste already, this will further solidify our disposable battery, Styrofoam plate hypocrisy - seeing as how we like to think we're going green. Two, environment aside, this would ultimately hurt sales once the novelty of "new" 3D has worn off.
However, if you have only a handful of 3D glasses types and allow viewers to save a few bucks by bringing their own, but also sell them at the theater then everybody wins. (Too, I see a wave of "hacked" glasses with inter-changeable lenses coming soon to a Web site near you). The ultimate slap in the mug would be if theaters had a higher price for a 3D movie, made you pay for proprietary glasses, and then had recycle bins just outside just so they could appear green, only to sell the same glasses to more moviegoers. I remember watching Michael Jackson's Moonwalker at Epcot, and - while it wasn't cheap - they simply gave you the appropriate glasses and then collected them at the end of the movie. Hopefully theaters will go that route.
Though several production companies have pledged 3D support and as novel as 3D is, I don't see 2D going anywhere real soon. There's too much cost associated with theaters preparing for "going 3D" and no real accurate projections as to how consumers will go for it. On the plus side, when tickets are anywhere from $15 - $20 a pop, maybe that jerk that's always sitting behind me talking will decide to go to a coffee shop instead.

"Run, Fatboy, Run" fun addition to Pegg's work

After Shaun of the Dead and Hot Fuzz, actor Simon Pegg has plenty to live up to, and with the recent release of Run Fatboy Run on video, I thought it would make a nice Friday night movie to sit and enjoy without feeling the overwhelming urge to do something "productive" halfway through. Indeed, Fatboy does not disappoint.
With very witty dialogue puncuated by undertoned jabs in very British fashion, it's perfectly enjoyable without being one of those British films that has you leaning in close to try to decipher heavy accents just to get the joke. While the story progesses in a pretty typical way, it's blend of comedy amid an uplifting and likeable anti-hero makes it different enough from Shaun and Fuzz to appeal to those who weren't die-hard fans before.
I did greatly miss Nick Frost as Pegg's sidekick (with hopes he'll return in future projects alongside Pegg) Dylan Moran did a fine job as the quirky, stressless pal.
All in all, it proved quite enjoyable and one that I'll likely watch again. While it's tough to beat Shaun of the Dead (being a sucker for zombie flicks), if you're looking for a solid, ejoyable comedy, Fatboy delivers.

That's "The Spirit"...oh, wait, no it's not.

Forsaking my unborn daughter's college fund, my wife and I went to the movies last night because I just had to see "The Spirit." It wasn't the preview that hooked me or the ambiguous posters long haunting the halls of Roanoke's Regal Cinemas. No, it was the fact that the same man - Frank Miller - was responsible for films 300 and Sin City, both of which I rather enjoyed.
As usual, we had the time wrong, so we were 45 minutes early and snuck into The Curious Case of Benjamin Button for a while. It was a pleasant, interesting tale when we left it, if not slightly scarred by the jerk who answered and spoke on his cell phone for a good minute.
Well, after 5 minutes of "The Spirit" I was so tempted to return to catch Benjamin Button somewhere in his 50s that I nearly asked my wife if she was equally game. A slight chuckle at one of the movie's lamer jokes dissuaded me, however, thinking that perhaps she liked it.
Let's get to the meat of it: why did it suck and how badly?
It sucked because - despite the "innovative" camera work making me think I was looking through a keyhole, it wasn't into the ladies' washroom but at an insipid and endless quarrel between two over-actors (Jackson and Macht) that was so slopped in water and tar that I thought I was watching "Double Dare" on Nickelodeon.
The script was weak, which is occasionally forgivable despite good writers growing on trees nowadays, but unless the comic explains why the whole concept unfolds more like "Pee-wee's Playhouse" than a film, I think Miller missed the mark by a mile or so.
I could almost understand what he was trying for: old-style detective story meets the sharp contrasts and sexiness of Sin City, but The Spirit encapsulates comic book on film about as well as Schumacer did in Batman and Robin, which I can't even say out loud lest I trigger my gag reflex.
So, do yourself a favor and skip this joke of a film - even when it's in the discount bin at Wal-Mart. Even then.