screen / slant

Scott Pilgrim vs. the World

2010-08-16T16:33:00.018-04:00

Scott Pilgrim vs. the World
Release Date: August 13, 2010
Director: Edgar Wright
Starring: Michael Cera, Mary Elizabeth Winstead, Kieran Culkin, Ellen Wong, Jason Schwartzman, Chris Evans
Rated: PG-13
Runtime: 112 minutes

The Slant / The stuff that dreams are made of...

Wow! I went into this movie with limited expectations - I had never really heard of the graphic novels and I've grown somewhat tired of Michael Cera in recent outings. He keeps playing the same character in all of his movies and it began irritating me. Here, as Scott Pilgrim, Cera really shines. However, the acting (which is phenomenal all around) isn't the only thing that makes Scott Pilgrim vs. the World the most enjoyable movie of 2010 so far; the film's style really sets it apart.

Scott Pilgrim vs. the World makes no bones about what it is; a fun, stylized graphic novel adaptation that doesn't take itself too seriously. Cera stars as Scott Pilgrim, a 22-year old bassist in a fledgling band living in the frozen wasteland of Toronto, Canada. He is still struggling to get over an ex-girlfriend from a year ago who broke his heart, and to help get past his breakup woes, he has turned to dating a 17-year-old high school student named Knives Chau (Ellen Wong). Pilgrim is constantly derided by his bandmates and his gay roommate Wallace (played with wicked irreverence by Kieran Culkin). You get the feeling that Pilgrim knows his relationship with Knives is doomed to end poorly, but it beats being alone. However, everything changes when he catches the glimpse of a mysterious pink-haired girl roller skating through his dreams...

If you've seen the trailers, you know that the movie chronicles Pilgrim's battles with the Seven Exes of this mysterious girl, who we soon see in the flesh as Ramona Flowers (Mary Elizabeth Winstead). To discuss the specifics of the movie's plot would ruin some of the best scenes and lines of dialogue from the film, so I'll embark on a quick rehashing. Scott finds his dreamgirl and embarks on wooing her, only to discover that to truly have a relationship with her he must fight her Seven Deadly Exes, who have apparently organized into a supervillain group a la the Brotherhood of Evil Mutants. It doesn't matter if these exes only dated Ramona for a day or a week; they will fight any new competitor for her heart.

If that premise sounds ridiculous to you, don't worry; you're not the only one. Still, in a movie like this, things don't have to make sense. Just sit back and enjoy the ride as Scott fights the seven exes to win the right to date Ramona. All is explained in a way that renders the plot understandable, even reasonable. The amazing fight sequences are broken by great dialogue and even a heartfelt story about recovering from a difficult breakup to find new love. I wouldn't go so far as to call Scott Pilgrim vs. the World a romantic comedy in the usual sense of the term, but it definitely has all the trappings for one, though the comedic elements far outweigh the romance.

The film's only real downside is the fact that it opens so strongly and fixes a permanent grin so indelibly on your face throughout the first 3/4 of the movie, that there is a bit of a letdown in the film's final quarter. The opening fights are better than those at the end, which feel somewhat anticlimactic. Still, there is so much witty dialogue and humorous imagery strung throughout that many audience members might not even notice this small final-act letdown.

Video game and comic book nerds will probably find the most enjoyment from this movie. There are a lot of great references to nerd culture strewn throughout the film, such as Pilgrim's bass rendition of the Final Fantasy II theme and the fact that enemy baddies explode into coins after being pummeled into submission. However, this movie should appeal to more than just niche fans. The dialogue is great, the fight sequences are superbly edited, the music is loud, and the movie's style is dazzling. As earlier mentioned, the actors (particularly Cera, Winstead, Culkin, and Captain America himself Chris Evans) bring joy to their roles and really seem to be having a good time, which is infectious for those of us in the audience. I can't recommend Scott Pilgrim vs. the World more highly. It may not be the best movie of the year (see Inception), but it is the most fun. I'll be picking up the graphic novels when I have the chance!

I'm Back!

2010-08-16T16:28:00.003-04:00

After taking over a year off from my blogging activities, I've decided to give it another go. I'm going to streamline the site though, and really only post information I find interesting concerning my own movie tastes. Movie news will be less visible and I'm going to stick mostly to reviews; I might have some lists or trivia-related segments as well. It's just too much work to update daily! I'm excited to start writing again, just to get some thoughts out there. So without further ado, enjoy reading screen/slant!

David Carradine found Dead

2009-06-04T22:14:00.003-04:00

Sad news has been reported today. Actor David Carradine was found dead in his hotel in Thailand under uncertain circumstances. He was 72.

Carradine was probably best remembered for his roles as Kwai Chang Caine on the 1970s televesion series Kung Fu, the revived Kung Fu: The Legend Continues in the 90s and as the title character in Quentin Tarantino's Kill Bill Volume I and II. He's also been doing some recent YellowBook.com commercials.

I am pretty shocked by this and can't understand why Carradine would hang himself, which is beginning to look more unlikely as reports come in. It seems like he had everything going for him after Kill Bill; he revived his career, was in the limelight again, and seemed to be moving on to better things. More news is still coming in that could shed light on this event, and reports are circulating that his death resulted from a sex game gone wrong. I'm inclined to believe the latter report. Regardless of the reasons behind it, Carradine's death is a sad reminder about the unglamorous side of Hollywood stardom. My thoughts are with his family and friends.

As an aside, I greatly admired David's father John Carradine, one of the great character actors of all-time. I loved his performances in Stagecoach, The Grapes of Wrath, and The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance.

RIP David Carradine.

Pegg and Frost add Cast Members for 'Paul'

2009-05-27T10:45:00.005-04:00

A few days ago I reviewed Hot Fuzz, a hilarious comedy starring Simon Pegg and Nick Frost and directed by Edgar Wright. I mentioned that I hoped for a movie reunion of these three, since both Hot Fuzz and Shaun of the Dead were so successful. Today, I discovered that two of these Brits, Pegg and Frost, are in pre-production on a movie called Paul that shows some promise. The film stars Pegg and Frost as two science-fiction fanatics who journey to Area 51 to test their conspiracy ideas. Once there, they run into, you guessed it, an alien. Paul will not be directed by Wright, but there's no need to worry. Superbad and Adventureland director Greg Mottola should adequately fill his shoes. Pegg and Frost wrote the script and I imagine it will be full of great humor directed at movies like Independence Day and Men in Black. Not that it will be a satire of Will Smith movies, but recent sci-fi action hits.

While the fact that Mottola, Pegg, and Frost are collaborating on a film is definitely enough to get me excited, more news has surfaced today that will boost this film's appeal. Seth Rogen, Jason Bateman, Kristin Wiig, Bill Hader, and Jane Lynch have joined the cast. Rogen, who has shown his voice-over skills in last year's Kung Fu Panda, will voice the titular alien Paul. It is unclear what characters the other recent additions will be playing, but it goes without saying that they are all extremely funny people. I can't wait to see how this turns out, although I'll go on record here saying that it sounds like it can't miss. Expect Paul to hit theaters sometime late in 2010.

Source: Variety

Steve McQueen Biopic

2009-05-26T19:31:00.010-04:00

A few months ago, it was announced that a Steve McQueen biopic was in the works, with Michael Cerenzie and Christine Peters producing. According to Variety, the project will likely end up at Paramount and will cover McQueen's Hollywood career. No ETA on when we can expect this movie, but I'll be keeping my eyes open for news about this.

Steve McQueen is one of my favorite actors and his persona is extremely unique. I particularly love him in The Great Escape. His Virgil Hilts is one of the most memorable film characters ever, with the motorcycle chase sequence at the climax of the film ranking as one of the most iconic movie scenes of all-time. The big debate surrounding this movie is who will star.

Apparently, Brad Pitt may be in the mix to play the legendary actor. I think Pitt could pull off McQueen, if anyone could. They even look somewhat similar and both share a passion for motorcycles. If the producers decide to cast a major Hollywood star, I think Pitt is a good choice. Apparently McQueen's widow (his third wife) envisions Daniel Craig in the role, which could work as well. What do you think? Who would you like to see playing Steve McQueen?

32nd Anniversary of Star Wars - One Day Late

2009-05-26T18:59:00.004-04:00

Oops! Yesterday I forgot to mention why it is one of the most important dates in film history. 32 years ago, on May 25, 1977, Star Wars premiered! Obviously, the movie went on to be a great box-office success and one of the very first blockbusters. It spawned five more films, many successful toy lines, an animated feature film and series, untold numbers of video games, fabulous books, and pretty much anything else you can think of. While other movies would later knock Star Wars off its box-office pedestal, it's hard to imagine what cinema would be like today without George Lucas' seminal creation. I love Star Wars and I'm thankful for its existence. Happy 32, Star Wars!

Hot Fuzz (2007)

2009-05-25T21:06:00.014-04:00

Hot Fuzz
Release Date: February 14, 2007
Director: Edgar Wright
Starring: Simon Pegg, Nick Frost, Jim Broadbent, Timothy Dalton
Rated: R
Runtime: 121 minutes

The Slant / Made it, Ma! Top of the World!

Hot Fuzz is everything I expected from the team that produced Shaun of the Dead, and so much more. I enjoyed Edgar Wright and Simon Pegg's first outing in 2004, but Hot Fuzz is on a whole different level.

Simon Pegg stars as London Police Officer Nicholas Angel, who excels in his duties to the point that his superiors become jealous of his awards and commendations. The opening montage detailing Angel's achievements as a police officer (never call him a policemen) drags the viewer in and never lets go. Angel's superiors decide to promote him to sergeant and ship him out of their hair to the small country village of Sandford, where he will pass his days in quiet anonymity, or so they hope.

Of course, Sergeant Angel does not find a peaceful village. Sandford boasts a crew of incompetent police officers that Angel tries to whip into shape, with lackluster results. At first, it seems as if the town's quaintness and the police department's apathy will get the better of Angel, who grows bored and irritable from what he sees as incompetence among his fellows and lack of real action in the town. On his first night, he expels some underage boys from the local pub. Angel insists on taking a hard-line approach even when the pub's owners declare that they let them drink there "for the greater good," since it keeps the kids off the street and out of trouble. This kind of gray area is foreign to Angel, who follows the letter of the law in all circumstances.

Eventually, a string of deaths breaks the peace in Sandford, although everyone but Angel strives to reconcile the deaths as an unfortunate string of accidents. Angel believes something much bigger is going on and investigates further with the help of his new partner Danny (Nick Frost). They uncover a terrible, if a little ridiculous, plot that reveals the town of Sandford is not at all what it seems.

One of the most surprising aspects of Hot Fuzz is how realistic it is, at least to a point. In Shaun of the Dead, for instance, the whole movie was an over-the-top send up to zombie flicks. While Hot Fuzz gives the same treatment to cop movies, until the final shootout everything that transpires could actually happen in an English country town. To be sure, the characters would probably not be so irreverant, witty, or entertaining, but everything at least seemed plausible. Once the explosive and brilliant final showdown begins, all bets are off and Hot Fuzz really comes into its own. In fact, the movie shifts gears so abruptly that it is almost shocking. Still, the lead-up and fraternal bonding between Angel and Danny make the final clash that much more exciting and even emotional. You really feel like you know the characters and hope they make it out okay. And then you also want to see Sgt. Angel with a veritable armory strapped to his back, delivering flying kicks to elderly (and evil) women threatening to gun him down.

The movie is exquisitely cast. Pegg is brilliant as the super-cop Angel and brings an effortless humor to the role. While not as over-the-top as his recent portrayal of Scotty in Star Trek, Pegg improves upon his earlier starring role in Shaun of the Dead. His chemistry with sidekick Nick Frost seems to have grown too, and the scenes with the two of them (and there are plenty) are rife with laughs as well as tender moments. Here is another installment in the oft-repeated label of bromance movies. The supporting cast is just as great, though Timothy Dalton excels above the rest as the overly-friendly and suspicious owner of a local supermarket. He elevated the humor whenever he was on screen. Jim Broadbent also adds to the movie's levity, playing Angel's superior in such a deadpan manner that rivals Buster Keaton himself.

Hot Fuzz is one of the best comedies in recent memory. It's slow build-up might not work for some viewers hoping only for mindless action, but the film's climax should keep them satisfied while others can enjoy the first half for its dry British wit. The film is rated R, but it is most assuredly a soft R; the film could easily have been edited to a PG-13 rating if Wright had decided to throw out a few choice words. This harder edge enhances the film, however. Hot Fuzz has few dull moments and many surprises that should delight its viewers. Let's hope Wright and Pegg reunite in the near future for another classic outing.

Porco Rosso (1992)

2009-05-23T23:39:00.010-04:00

Porco Rosso
Release Date: July 18, 1992 (Japan), March 5, 2004 (North America)
Director: Hayao Miyazaki
Starring (English Dub): Michael Keaton, Cary Elwes, Susan Egan, Kimberly Williams, David Ogden Stiers
Rated: PG
Runtime: 94 minutes

The Slant / Here's looking at you, kid

I am a great admirer of Hayao Miyazaki. I've been happily (and slowly, due to the demands of graduate school) meandering through his film collection recently, thanks to Netflix. His animated films are at least rivals to the great Disney classics, while some surpass them in terms of depth and beauty. Even Porco Rosso, Miyazaki's weakest movie, is a beautiful film. It does not have as many of the fantastical elements that define his other works, like Nausicaa of the Valley of the Wind or Princess Mononoke, but it is an enjoyable yarn that draws the viewer into the world of World War I seaplane pilots.

The premise of Porco Rosso, which translates into Crimson Pig, is quite simple if not fully explained. The setting is the Adriatic Sea, circa 1929, as the Italian fascists reaching the height of their power. Porco, formerly named Marco, is an expatriate Italian fighter ace who through mysterious circumstances is magically transformed into a anthropomorphic pig. The protagonist is stubborn, "pig-headed" in the figurative sense, and a womanizer, so the fact that he embodies the persona of a pig is really just an extended metaphor. It allows Porco to exclaim that he'd "rather be a pig than a fascist." He sells his exemplary piloting skills to the highest bidder, although he refuses to contradict his honor by returning to the Italian air force. Porco bears a resemblance, both in his demeanor and physically, to Humphrey Bogart, especially since he is almost always seen speaking through a haze of his own cigarette smoke. As a devoted Bogie fan, I appreciated this homage to the American star.

Porco angers the local sea pirates and they hire a hotshot American pilot named Curtis to hunt him down. When Porco is shot down after experiencing engine problems, he enlists the aid of an old friend and his 17 year-old granddaughter to rebuild his plane. The girl, Fio, resembles many of Miyazaki's heroines. She's young, obsessed with flight, and strong-willed. Eventually, Porco and the American have a rematch and the ending wisely leaves it open concerning the pig's ultimate fate, although the audience has a pretty good idea how things turn out.

This is a departure for Miyazaki. For one thing, it lacks the focus on environmental issues that defines much of his other work. Also, Porco Rosso is geared primarily for adults, while his other movies could be enjoyed by both young and old alike. I'm not saying that children would not enjoy this movie (I mean, it's a pig flying around in a plane!), but an adult audience will better appreciate both the plot and the characters. The flying sequences, one of Miyazaki's trademarks, are superb. One gets the idea that the director made this movie almost to showcase these amazing dogfights which he is so obsessed with. If so, it works. Though it is my least favorite of the Japanese director's films, it still beats the standard animation Hollywood consistently churns out every year.

If you are a neophyte to the work of Hayao Miyazaki, I suggest starting with either Princess Mononoke or Spirited Away. If you enjoy Miyazaki's classics, then you can delve deeper into his collection and experience Porco Rosso for what it is; a high-flying adventure accentuated by beautiful animation.

Angels & Demons - An Uninspired Thriller that has its Moments

2009-05-23T11:37:00.015-04:00

Angels & Demons
Release Date: May 15, 2009
Director: Ron Howard
Starring: Tom Hanks, Ewan McGregor, Ayelet Zurer, Stellan Skarsgard, Armin Mueller-Stahl
Rated: PG-13
Runtime: 138 minutes

The Slant / Well, nobody's perfect.

Angels & Demons, follow-up to The Da Vinci Code (2006), is a forgettable detective story wrapped up in church intrigue. Still, it has its moments and keeps the audience guessing, at least for the first 3/4 of the film. Eventually the conclusion becomes readily apparent and, although I won't spoil it here, ultimately dissatisfying.

Once again, we follow esteemed symbologist Dr. Robert Langdon (Tom Hanks)as he struggles to unravel a mysterious plot involving religious motifs. This time around, instead of the Holy Grail and the Knights Templar, Langdon's adversaries are the mythical Illuminati, ancient enemies of the Catholic Church. The pope has died and the Vatican is in an uproar over his successor. The Illuminati have supposedly stolen an incredibly powerful antimatter bomb, which they will use to level Vatican City to revenge the Church's past transgressions. This secret society has also kidnapped the most prominent candidates for the papacy, stating that they will kill these cardinals every hour on the hour before detonating the explosive.

Langdon is called upon to rescue the holy men and stop the bomb, with the help of the Vatican police and Dr. Vittoria Vetra (Ayelet Zurer), one of the antimatter bomb's research developers. The Camerlengo (Ewan McGregor), the man in charge of the Church while the cardinals choose a new pope, promises to give his assistance to Langdon in any way possible. What follows is a race through Vatican City from the Catholic archives to ancient churches, with the life of every inhabitant of the city on the line. Sounds exciting, doesn't it?

And it is...for awhile. I found myself drawn into the plot and wondering about these mysterious Illuminati. I have not read the book and thus found myself enjoying this Dan Brown adaptation more than The Da Vinci Code, since I was unsure at first where the story would ultimately end. Ultimately I found it more compelling than the previous installment. Director Ron Howard does a good job balancing the ever-present forces of science and religion, portraying Langdon as an agnostic academic and the church as progressive and open to scientific scrutiny.

The ultimate reveal at the end of the film is unsatisfying and, by that time, quite apparent. As a historian and being familiar with the painstaking hours it takes to adequately conduct archival research, I found it baffling that Langdon locates his source within 15 minutes of his search. Statues pointing the way to the Illuminati's secret hideout? If only it was that easy! Of course, it is a movie and such trivialities are not terribly important.

Less forgivable are two unnecessary scenes, one at the beginning involving the creation of the antimatter bomb and another suspenseful scene halfway through that has Langdon and a hapless guard struggling to escape the archives before their oxygen runs out. Also, do we need to see the Camerlengo berating church leadership about the necessity of bringing science and religion into harmony? I think the movie could have been improved if it stuck to its guns, following Langdon through the streets of Vatican City on a race against time. When the movie stops to take a breath, the viewer's mind wanders. The movie crams a lot into its 138 minutes, but could have been trimmed.

The casting is, for the most part, adequate and in some cases, inspired. Tom Hanks, normally an actor I enjoy greatly, has little to work with here. Langdon is a pretty flat character and not incredibly likable. Hanks does what he can with the stoic symbologist. Ewan McGregor plays the Camerlengo well and is convincing in his supporting role. He was the character I found most easy to cheer for, although I could be biased due to my unabashed adimration for McGregor's acting. Ayelet Zurer's Dr. Vittoria just seems along for the ride. The always menacing and underrated Stellan Skarsgard plays the commander of the Swiss Guard with his usual detached scowl. Armin Mueller-Stahl, who I loved in Eastern Promises, gives the best performance as a cardinal with questionable loyalties.

Go see Angels & Demons if you have already seen Star Trek and Wolverine, and are looking for an enjoyable thriller that doesn't require too much mental investment. It's worth the price of admission, but you can wait for the DVD.

Troop Beverly Hills (1989)

2009-05-23T10:00:00.002-04:00

Troop Beverly Hills
Release Date: March 22, 1989
Director: Jeff Kanew
Starring: Shelley Long, Craig T. Nelson, Betty Thomas, Mary Gross
Rated: PG
Runtime: 100 minutes

The Slant / It's going to be a bumpy night.

I must have missed this movie in my youth, but I was not missing much. A few people I know busted this "classic" out last night and wrangled me into watching it. Apparently it has achieved cult status among some fans, although why this has occurred is beyond me.

To get right down to it, Troop Beverly Hills is about a group of Wilderness Girls, aka Cub Scouts for girls, that need a new troop leader. Judging by the title, you can probably tell that the group is from ritzy Beverly Hills. Phyllis Nefler (Shelley Long), a shopaholic soon-to-be divorcee and mother of one of the girls, takes the job and things spiral out of control from there. Nefler shows the girls how to brave the wilderness that is Beverly Hills, experiencing shopping, makeovers, and camp-outs at the Beverly Hills Hotel. But when the overzealous troop commandant attempts to run Nefler out of the organization, Shelley Long's character decides to fight back and teach her troop how to be real Wilderness Girls.

It's pretty much as bad as it sounds. Picture Police Academy with terrible characters, little humor, and no satire. The movie takes itself too seriously when it could have been a tongue-in-cheek portrayal of the Beverly Hills lifestyle. The random cameos are distracting and do nothing to add to the plot or the laughs.

Still there are moments of fun. Shelley Long wears about 30 different outfits int he movie, each one more ridiculous than the last. A few one-liners here and there beget a chuckle, but usually groans ensue. It has some redeeming qualities and watching it with people who clearly love it for its campiness is a good time. Hard to take seriously, yes, but sometimes the movie brings a smile to the face through its sheer ridiculousness. Maybe I'm being too critical about a movie clearly designed for a different demographic in a different era.

The film has a decent message about hard work and friendship, but I could not believe that the Neflers reconcile and decide not to divorce. Craig T. Nelson's character is a jerk and if this movie had any self-respect then Long would have walked out on him, realizing she was worthy of more from a man. But they get back together and the movie passes this off as a happy ending. Boy I would hate to see how things worked out in that marriage. Thankfully there is no sequel.

9 - New Animated Flick

2009-05-20T00:26:00.004-04:00

I had never heard of this movie until tonight and I think it looks really interesting. Apparently, in Focus Features' 9, a scientist brings life to nine rag dolls in a post-apocalyptic world, who must battle for their survival. Interesting premise and a great cast featuring the likes of Elijah Wood, Christopher Plummer, Martin Landau, John C. Reilly, Crispin Glover, and Jennifer Connelly. 9 is directed by the relatively unknown Shane Acker and produced by Tim Burton. I think it looks pretty good, as an animated movie with adult themes and plenty of action. Watch the trailer below and look for 9 on, fittingly, September 9, 2009.

Video Games - E3 2009 - Attack of the Show

Source: G4TV

Top 10 Movie Villains

2009-05-19T12:27:00.017-04:00

I've been thinking about movie villains recently, especially after watching Star Trek and really noticing its lack of a truly memorable villain. Without further adieu, I present my choice of the top 10 movie villains of all time. What do you think of my selections?

10. HAL 9000, 2001: A Space Odyssey
HAL is scary. A sentient on-board computer designed to help navigate the spaceship Discovery, HAL shows what could happen if mankind relies too much on technology and artificial intelligence, which has become even more relevant as the information age progresses. The computer wants to ensure mission success at any cost, even if it means killing the crew members on board when they threaten his disconnection...

9. Noah Cross, Chinatown
One of the most purely villainous characters in the history of cinema. Noah has no redeeming qualities and when the movie reveals how despicable his actions truly are, it comes as a great shock and with great revulsion to the viewer. He may seem like a kindly old man from this picture, but he is anything but. I don't want to spoil it for those who haven't seen the movie, but the last 20 minutes of this film really showcase how horrible human nature can be.

8. Eve Harrington, All About Eve
Eve is just so conniving and devious, all with an exterior of being this warm and good-hearted fan of her idol, Margo Channing. She is the epitome of the scheming youth seeking to supplant the older hero. What makes Eve memorable as a villain his how she starts out as a seemingly innocent fan; definitely a case of a pleasant exterior hiding something truly despicable on the inside. Everything comes full circle in the end though...

7. Phyllis Dietrichson, Double Indemnity
Dietrichson has come to fully embody the femme fatale character. Unhappy in her marriage, she seduces the seemingly innocent insurance salesman Walter Neff to murder her husband so they can be together. Of course, Phyllis' black widow character is using him. This motif has been mimicked in countless works, but the original is still the best, and creepiest.

6. Anton Chigurh, No Country for Old Men
What a chilling character. Chigurh is one of those memorable villains that scare the living bajeezus out of you whenever they are on-screen. From his coin-flipping to decide life and death, mop-top haircut, eerie bolt pistol, and distinctive voice, Chigurh is truly an unstoppable evil.

5. Nurse Ratched, One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest
Nurse Ratched antagonizes her charges in the insane asylum as an iron-fisted dictator. She even drives one inmate to suicide through her cajoling and authoritarian rule. Ratched epitomizes what happens when power and authority go terribly wrong.

4. Hannibal Lecter, The Silence of the Lambs
Ah, Hannibal the cannibal. Such a creepy villain and a truly memorable performance. His cold intellect and remorselessness make him truly feared, although he does have a soft spot for Clarisse. Perhaps that makes him even more chilling, since the viewer realizes he has the capacity for human empathy but chooses to disregard it most of the time. Failed as a believable villain in his stand-alone effort, however. Still, what he did to those prison guards in Silence terrified me and countless others. I made a mistake when I first watched this for the home alone in my basement with the lights out...

3. The Joker, The Dark Knight
A maniacal clown bent on mayhem and destruction, portrayed flawlessly. What makes the Joker such a villainous and frightful character is his unpredictability. There is no method to his madness. Some villains can be understood and thus lose some of their ability to generate fear. The Joker has a depth that makes him impossible to comprehend, which adds to his evil mystique.

2. Norman Bates, Psycho
While Norman is an insane, knife-wielding "psycho," as exemplified by the infamous shower scene, his creepiest qualities are only revealed in hindsight at the end of the film. After discussing the role his mother plays in his life, when the astonishing reveal occurs it is like a fog lifts from the viewer's eyes, and the fog is replaced by horror. Hitchcock had a knack for creating great villains, and Bates is his finest. After seeing this for the first time, I didn't shower without some anxiety for weeks.

1. Darth Vader, The Empire Strikes Back
So we come at last to the number one villain of all-time: Darth Vader. You'll notice I put his movie credit as The Empire Strikes Back, with good reason. In Star Wars, we get a glimpse of Vader's evil. His intimidating presence, striking black helmet and outfit, that iconic voice, and his merciless slaying of his old mentor easily strike fear into the viewer. However, in Empire, his villainy is revealed fully when he announces he is Luke's father. Also, who can forget him force-choking Imperial fleet officers right and left. When Vader loses his cool during his duel with Luke on Cloud City, he is truly terrifying, especially when we realize he is committing these acts against his own son. While he partially regains his humanity in the third film, he will forever be remembered as the greatest film villain of all-time.

And there you have it. I hope you enjoy. If you think someone doesn't belong or I didn't include a villain who does, feel free to discuss below!

Sherlock Holmes First Trailer!

2009-05-19T11:54:00.004-04:00

The first trailer for Sherlock Holmes has hit the web! It is...not what I expected actually. Very action heavy and lots of tongue-in-cheek humor from Robert Downey, Jr. For some reason, I was thinking it would be a serious film focusing on the drama involved, with much less explosions (and Holmes in a shirtless fist-fight?...hmm). Still, I think it has promise, even if it is not what I anticipated. Downey's Holmes has a very Bruce Campbell feel to him, which is a good thing in my book. Director Guy Ritchie hasn't had much success since his phenomenal Lock, Stock, and Two Smoking Barrels and Snatch, so this flick could bring him his first hit in almost a decade. Rachel McAdams in lingerie will probably sell more tickets than anything, with good reason. Sherlock Holmes hits theaters on Christmas Day, 2009.

Mad Max 4 - It's on

2009-05-19T11:29:00.006-04:00

Just a quick note. I'm a huge Mad Max fan. I think The Road Warrior is one of the greatest action movies ever made, with absolutely the best chase sequence in movie history. I saw rumors about George Miller making a fourth Max film awhile back, but haven't posted any details related to this yet.

Recent news states that the live-action movie is a go and that George Miller is set to begin shooting. There has been no true confirmation yet, so I'll be keeping my eye on any information related to the next installment in this epic franchise. There will be no Mel Gibson, so it will definitely be a change from the earlier films.

Here's some quick links to info about the film:
Cinematical
First Showing
Interview with George Miller

Thor's Adversary, Loki - Casting Update

2009-05-19T11:08:00.004-04:00

A few days ago, I let you know that Chris Hemsworth of Star Trek fame had been cast as the title role in Thor. Now, his nemesis and half-brother Loki has a confirmed actor attached: British thespian Tom Hiddleston will be playing the trickster. Hiddleston has worked with director Kenneth Branagh before, in the play "Ivanov" and BBC Miniseries "Wallander." One of the main reasons he was selected for this role probably stems from his familiarity with Branagh, though I'm sure his acting talents are up to the task as well. Let's just hope he can make the transition from stage to screen. Originally I thought the rumors about Josh Hartnett as Loki would come to pass, especially since he and Hemsworth resemble each other so much.

With two relative unknowns playing the roles of Thor and Loki, do you think this movie will achieve the success of other recent comic book adaptations? Many of them relied upon star power to bring in a diverse audience and propel the box office to new heights, but it looks like Thor has decided to go another route. I thought that since the Thunder God is not as well known to casual fans, they may have gone the opposite direction and tried to find big names to bring credence to the production. Hopefully this works and the movie turns out well.

Source: Marvel Studios

J. J. Abrams Talks Khan and Shatner for Trek 2

2009-05-17T10:59:00.005-04:00

Well, my original hope that the next Star Trek film will introduce completely original content seems to have evaporated as soon as I espoused it. MTV sat down with director J. J. Abrams to discuss possibilities for the sequel and his answers are far from what I wanted to hear. Abrams states that they may go down the avenue of bringing back Star Trek II villain Kahn and possibly William Shatner reprising his role of Kirk. Apparently this is what fans of the series want to see, but that doesn't really make sense to me. These are classic characters that have had their time to shine. Why mess with them? If they bring Kahn back, there is no way that Ricardo Montalban's iconic performance can be repeated. Sure, Abrams is correct in saying that the alternate timeline makes it conceivable that such characters could return, but that does not mean they should return. Hopefully the writers generate a new set of ideas that make the next Star Trek truly stand on its own.

Source: MTV

Thor - Kirk's Dad as the God of Thunder

2009-05-16T22:39:00.005-04:00

Deadline Hollywood Daily has reported that the long-debated and awaited casting of the title role for Thor has been finalized. Australian actor Chris Hemsworth, currently seen as Captain Kirk's heroic father in Star Trek, has apparently snagged the coveted role as the Mighty Thor in Kenneth Branagh's upcoming comic book adaptation. You can read the original story here.

What do you think about this casting choice? Personally, I'm not too sure he has the physical presence required of a Norse god. Still, he gave a serviceable and fine performance in the few minutes we saw him in Star Trek, so maybe he can pull it off if he spends a few months in the weight room. I think Thor is a tricky character to cast in general, so this could work. I wonder why they didn't go for a Scandinavian actor? I have high hopes for this movie though, mainly since Branagh adds a lot of gravitas and directorial chops to the project. Thor is set to be released in 2011.

In Honor of the Preakness: Top 3 Horse Racing Movies

2009-05-16T17:07:00.011-04:00

Since today is the 134th running of the Preakness Stakes, I thought it would be appropriate to share my top 3 horse racing movies of all time. Honestly, there have not been a slew of great movies on the subject. I'm not really sure why, possibly because horse racing is not as popular among the general public as some sports. Also, the stories must primarily focus on the human elements (jockeys, trainers, owners, fans) rather than the horses themselves. Without further ado, here are my top 3 best horse racing movies of all time.

3. National Velvet (1944)
An uplifting tale about Velvet Brown, a twelve-year old girl who saves a horse, dubbed "The Pie," from being slaughtered. Velvet, portrayed by Elizabeth Taylor in the role that launched her to stardom, trains The Pie for the Grand National steeplechase. Along the way, she's helped by Mi Taylor (Mickey Rooney). When the day of the big race comes around, The Pie's regular jockey expresses doubts of victory, so Velvet disguises herself as a male and runs her stallion to victory. Adapted from the novel of the same name, National Velvet is a great family movie that still delights fans over 60 years after its release.

2. Seabiscuit (2003)
This star-studded film brought horse-racing movies back into the national spotlight, although no others have replicated its success since. Nominated for seven Academy Awards, including Best Picture (winning none), Seabiscuit was modified for the big screen from Laura Hillenbrand's book, Seabiscuit: An American Legend. Placing the camera amidst the horses, the viewer feels like they are riding with the jockeys and horses as Seabiscuit and company gallop around the track. Another feel-good story. I smell a pattern among this genre of film.

1. The Black Stallion (1979)
The quintessential horse movie, the actual race is not as integral as the relationship that develops between Alec Ramsay and the Black, the horse he befriends after a shipwreck strands him on a desert isle. Alec returns to New York where Henry Dailey (Mickey Rooney again) helps him train the stallion to race. In the match race at the end of the film, Alec and the Black defeat the two heavyweights, Sun Raider and Cyclone, although everyone though their entry in the race was a publicity stunt. This movie, another feel-good tale, was also adapted from the popular novel that showcases the bond that develops between horse and rider. Roger Ebert called The Black Stallion the best movie of 1980, which is high praise since that puts it ahead of such classics as Empire Strikes Back and Raging Bull. Ebert may want to change his pick based on posterity, but he definitely singled out the greatest horse flick of all time.

Personally, I enjoy movies about horses and thoroughbred racing. I hope we see another great one in the coming years.

More Gambit? Taylor Kitsch Thinks So

2009-05-16T15:51:00.005-04:00

Big news today for fans of the Marvel Universe and comic book movies in general. Staff at Rotten Tomatoes sat down with Taylor Kitsch, who recently played Gambit in X-Men Origins: Wolverine, to discuss the possibility of Gambit's return. Apparently, Kitsch was unaware that Fox has greenlit a sequel and expressed genuine excitement about where he could take his popular character if cast in Wolverine 2.

In response to hearing about the sequel, Kitsch states, "I hadn't heard that was going to happen! You have my brain going now about what I'd love to do with Gambit! I have the tools now to do some larger fights and I'd be really excited to get a chance to do that, too. I have so many ideas in my mind right now!"

While Fox has confirmed a sequel to Wolverine, there has been no official word if Gambit will be included in the cast of characters. Since the plot will allegedly focus on Wolverine's sojourn in Japan, it is unclear how Gambit will fit in with the larger story. However, with the recently announced Deadpool spin-off, there is still the potential that Gambit will get his own vehicle as well. He is an incredibly popular character among fans of the comics, although the small glimpse viewers got of him in the recent movie might not have been enough to pique interest in a stand-alone film. I definitely hope to see more of Gambit though, even if he lost the Cajun accent for Wolverine. If there is any further news about Gambit, you can be sure I'll post it here.

Source: Rotten Tomatoes

Star Trek - Things to Avoid the Next Time Around

2009-05-15T13:41:00.007-04:00

Over at Chud.com, Devin Faraci has posted his top 5 things that Star Trek should avoid in the next movie installment. He cites the following:

5. Don't bring in Kahn
4. Leave the Bumpy Ewok out of it (Scotty's alien friend)
3. Don't tie the next movie into Lost
2. Don't start on Earth
1. Leave the original canon alone

Devin has the right idea with numbers 5 and 1. The original canon should be left alone, at least for this second movie. I think once the series establishes itself on its own merits, then there is room to bring in some of the characters and plots from the original series or movies. I would prefer a truly original mission for Star Trek 2 version 2.0 though. Kahn should definitely not appear.

In response, I have created my Top 5 things for Star Trek to avoid in the next film. Enjoy!

5. Don't mess with the original canon; as mentioned above

4. Ditch the Spock/Uhura romance. It just didn't work well in the recent movie. I think it's welcoming to have Spock exhibiting more emotions in this reboot. It adds nuance to his character and Zachary Quinto can pull it off. But his fling with Uhura felt tacked on for no real effect. Also, it made me question Spock's morals and judgment, since I gathered that Uhura was one of his students at the time. Maybe this romance will be nipped in the bud.

3. Avoid 1-dimensional villains. The best films, when pitting good versus evil, have truly believable and well-conceived antagonists. In Star Trek, Eric Bana's Nero lacked true motivation. I never bought his reasoning behind wanting to kill Spock and take revenge on the Federation. This could be improved in subsequent films. I mean, look at Star Trek II. That movie succeeds on so many levels because Kahn is a formidable and compelling villain.

2. Generic explosions around the halls of the Enterprise. How many times have we seen this? An explosion occurs in one part of the ship, sending people and sparks everywhere but the viewer is really not sure what is happening. Star Trek is not the only franchise guilty of this act; Star Wars is another prime example (like in the strafing run on the Death Star). I propose that a more detailed and realistic attempt should be made based on what would happen if a missile or laser strikes a ship in space. And another thing, do those shields actually DO anything? From watching the space battles, seemingly not.

1. Do not COMPLETELY reject the original canon. Ok, so maybe this doesn't quite mesh with what I said in #5. But what I mean here is simple. While J.J. Abrams' new franchise is a reboot, the original series and movies did in fact happen. People know these characters and they remember how acted and interacted amongst each other. While the new characters should be fleshed out and re-envisioned by their new actors, many of their personality traits should remain intact. I think the recent film did very well in this respect, with some characters hearkening back to their originals more than others (see Karl Urban's portrayal of Dr. McCoy) and others being more refreshing and new (e.g. Mr. Scott as played by Simon Pegg). Keep the integrity of the characters while re-envisioning them. A hard, but worthy task.

What do you think the next installment in the Star Trek series should avoid or add?

Scorsese's Sinatra Biopic: Johnny Depp stars?

2009-05-15T13:06:00.004-04:00

News broke yesterday that Martin Scorsese may have found the leading man for his new biopic on Frank Sinatra. Rumors have circulated the Scorsese is looking to cast Leonardo DiCaprio in the role, as the two have a longstanding relationship. But Deadline Hollywood states that Universal Pictures, the production company, may have their sights set on Johnny Depp as Sinatra.

Honestly, I think Universal has the right idea here. Physically, neither of the actors is a look-a-like for Sinatra, but that is probably the lowest priority for such a role. Can DiCaprio even sing? Depp has shown his vocal chops in Sweeney Todd and I was pleasantly surprised with the actor's singing range. I don't know if he can pull off the melodies of Old Blue Eyes, but at least we know he can carry a tune. Also, it's always good to see Depp branching out from Tim Burton and Scorsese could benefit from making a picture without Leo. Maybe the two directors should switch their stars for a movie?

What do you think? Who would be your ideal casting for Frank Sinatra? One thing is for sure, Scorsese's film has just jumped up a few notches on my movies to watch out for list.

Source: Deadline Hollywood

The Road: Trailer Revealed

2009-05-14T22:12:00.005-04:00

One of the most hotly anticipated movies of the year has released its first trailer and, I have to say, it's a good one. Directed by John Hillcoat and starring Viggo Mortensen, The Road tells the story of a father and son struggling to survive in a post-apocalyptic United States. Picture Road Warrior with more humanity and less Australian accents. Adapted from the Pulitzer Prize winning novel by Cormac McCarthy (who also penned No Country for Old Men), this trailer will have a lot of people buzzing. It looks bleak and epic at the same time. Viggo Mortensen brings an amazing intensity to the father and, even from the few short minutes of the trailer, he seems to embody the role as relayed in McCarthy's novel. It seems they've built up the part of the mother, played by Charlize Theron, but I suppose that is to be expected. I'm a little concerned that the film may play up a lot of the action elements that were missing in the book. The trailer definitely seems to suggest this. I hope that they don't add too much action to the detriment of the haunting and touching tale of a father and son struggling to survive.

The Road hits theaters on October 16. I will be there, front and center. Check out the trailer below:

Source: FirstShowing.net

Miyazaki's Latest Film

2009-05-14T13:43:00.002-04:00

If you've never heard of Hayao Miyazaki or seen one of his classics of animation, you are truly missing out on the work of an amazing auteur director. His films, including Princess Mononoke, Spirited Away, and My Neighbor Totoro, are some of the most imaginative and inspiring of any genre. His works seem to transcend the medium of animation while also highlighting the amazing breadth and scope traditional animation encompasses. He has been dubbed the "Japanese Disney," but this comparison belittles Miyazaki's originality and artistry. Miyazaki eschews the modern approach to animation, such as 3-D computer technology, focusing on hand-drawn, traditional animation and draws the majority of the cells himself. I find his approach refreshing, although it is looking backward to animation's earlier days.

His newest film, Ponyo on the Cliff by the Sea, has been released in Japan and will be coming to the United States this August. It's about a fish girl/mermaid named Ponyo and the young boy who finds her, and the movie traces their adventures together. I am truly excited for this, as it promises a heart-warming, simple tale with a good message. With the voice talents of such Hollywood notables as Cate Blanchett, Matt Damon, Tina Fey, and Liam Neeson, the American dubbing is sure to entertain, although I usually prefer the original Japanese with subtitles.

New images and a poster have surfaced and I thought I would share them. I hope this film finds a large American audience.

Source: Cinema Blend

New Writer for Grayskull: There was an old writer?

2009-05-14T13:27:00.001-04:00

Honestly, I had no idea that another He-Man movie was even in the works. But it appears that Warner Bros. and Silver Pictures are developing a new adaptation, titled 'Grayskull' at this point. After winning a writing contest, Evan Daugherty, a relative newcomer to the writing scene, has been tapped to pen the next draft. His previous credits include an unproduced screenplay, 'Shrapnel,' and...that's it. Maybe he can work up some magic for the Masters of the Universe. However, this plot description leaves me wondering:

"Warners sees the big-screen version as a gritty fantasy and reimagines Adam as a soldier who sets off to find his destiny, happening upon the magical world of Eternia. There, Skeletor has raised a technological army and is bent on eradicating magic."

This does not sound like the He-Man I remember. In fact, Skeletor is a magical being with mystical powers and fantasy creatures as henchmen...shouldn't he be on the side of magic himself? Sounds like a ripped off version of Saruman from Lord of the Rings in a way, since he destroyed the forest and environment to create industrial forges and war machines. I'm intrigued at how this will proceed, but not too excited. Still, I'll keep my eye on more information concerning 'Grayskull.'

Source: The Hollywood Reporter

Star Trek - Reinventing the Final Frontier

2009-05-13T23:52:00.015-04:00

Star Trek
Release Date: May 8, 2009
Director: J.J. Abrams
Starring: Chris Pine, Zachary Quinto, Leonard Nimoy, Eric Bana, Karl Urban, Simon Pegg
Rated: PG-13
Runtime: 127 minutes

The Slant / The stuff that dreams are made of...

Last Saturday night, I saw the second truly great movie of 2009. The first was Watchmen, which critically and commercially did not live up to the hype. I for one loved it, but the vast majority of critics, both professional and arm-chair, disagreed.

Star Trek is a completely different animal. With a 96% on RottenTomatoes and a $72.5 million domestic box-office gross in its first weekend, the crew of the USS Enterprise has reason to celebrate. Paramount has to be pretty pleased too and we will likely see a sequel in the next few years. I, for one, can't wait.

This is a great movie. It's not a perfect movie by any means, but it's so chock-full of entertainment value and superb acting that its shortcomings are easily forgiven, if not forgotten. Star Trek breathes new life into classic characters we know and love, while also being accessible for those unfamiliar with the original cast. Space opera at its finest, really.

I have to start with the best part of the movie: Zachary Quinto as young Spock, the logical and emotionless (sometimes) half-human, half-Vulcan first officer. Here, Quinto plays Spock as a man struggling to restrain his emotions while chaos ensues around him. This is much like Leonard Nimoy's portrayal of the character in the original series and its movie adaptations. Yet, with this new film conceiving Spock as a young man, Quinto makes the struggle much more difficult and his emotions get the better of him throughout the film. He creates a believable and emotional Spock, while also exuding the cool exterior we expect from the character after Nimoy's brilliant job. I think Spock is the hardest character to pull off in the franchise, and Quinto succeeds admirably. I expected nothing less after relishing his villainous Sylar on Heroes, who also travels in shades of gray between two worlds (for Sylar, though, his conflict arises between his thirst for power and doing good, with power and evil winning out most of the time).

The rest of the cast does a fine job as well, though Quinto clearly shines. Chris Pine brings the boyish charm and arrogance we expect from James T. Kirk, but makes one brilliant move. He does not play William Shatner playing Kirk, making the character more his own and moving away from Shatner's portrayal. Since Shatner's Kirk is such an iconic figure, this is really the only way Pine could play Kirk and actually act on his own merits instead of just mimicking another man's performance. Still, at times you can see a little of Shatner in Pine's Kirk, which is a good thing.

Karl Urban really surprised me as Dr. McCoy. While I liked the guy in Lord of the Rings and The Bourne Ultimatum, I was suspect of his acting chops. Here, he fully embodies the role of 'Bones,' adding the dry humor and acerbic wit that DeForest Kelley brought to the original show. This was definitely a pleasant revelation. Simon Pegg's Scotty is hilarious, as one would expect from that talented British actor. He brings humor and energy to the middle part of the film, lightening the mood after a string of serious events. John Cho gives a workmanlike performance as Sulu, but doesn't have too much to work with. I miss George Takei's memorable baritone, but was not expecting it to be replicated. Zoe Saldana's Uhura is smart and sexy, just what one would expect from her character. As the replacement of Walter Koenig, Anton Yelchin's Chekov hams up the Russian side a bit too much, as he pronounces so many v's as w's that my head began to spin. I mean, sure, nuclear 'w'essels was fun in Star Trek IV, but every other word he says doesn't have to have a V in it just for effect.

As the villainous time-traveling Romulan, Nero, Eric Bana is fine but unmemorable. He is not given too much to work with and his motivations for hunting down the Enterprise crew and Spock are suspect at best. Leonard Nimoy's return as the aged Spock is of course spot on, as one would expect in his 7th movie reprising his role.

The special effects are stunning and the space battles are workable. While Star Wars still boasts the best in ship-to-ship combat sequences, even 30 years later, the new Trek film has bolstered its image in this area. In the past, the Enterprise would face off against its Romulan or Klingon attackers, fire a few photon torpedoes, sustain some damage, and that would normally be the entirety of the battle. Here, ships are quick-moving, taking evasive action and packing much more firepower than the standard Trek vessel. Nero's "mining ship" definitely doesn't have the arsenal of one, showering impressive missiles down upon its Federation victims.

While the story is fine (evil ship approaching, regular crew members away, send in the cadets!), it is not inspiring. It doesn't have to be, since the viewer is having so much fun going along for the ride. Sure, the time-traveling elements of the story are a bit far-fetched and somewhat opaque, but the reasons behind them are sound. The writers created an alternate universe, so that they could wipe the continuity of the original Star Trek and play with the characters how they see fit. This way, no character is safe, since we don't know how things will end up. I think this is a brilliant move and the only way to give Star Trek a true reboot. They didn't have to mess with some things, though, like creating a romance between Spock and Uhura. Ah well, just a small thing.

Overall, Star Trek exceeded my expectations and I think a lot of critics' expectations as well. I predict that its second weekend box office numbers will not slip too much, with word of mouth helping it stay #1. Angels & Demons may mount a significant threat, but the sci-fi space opera will beat it out.

I am excited for a sequel and hope the crew of the USS Enterprise and the Star Trek franchise will continue going boldly where no one has gone before for many years to come.

Final Verdict: Star Trek - 9.5/10

X-Men Origins: Wolverine

2009-05-09T00:04:00.007-04:00

X-Men Origins: Wolverine
Release Date: May 1, 2009
Director: Gavin Hood
Starring: Hugh Jackman, Liev Schreiber, Danny Huston, Ryan Reynolds, Taylor Kitsch, Lynn Collins
Rated: PG-13
Runtime: 107 minutes

The Slant / Here's looking at you, kid.

*SPOILERS BELOW*

So I saw X-Men Origins: Wolverine today. Essentially, it lived up to my expectations, which weren't too high to begin with. I've never been the biggest Wolverine fan, mainly because he always just seems so aggressive and quick to anger. Plus, the fanboys just love him too damn much.

I thought the movie did a decent job establishing Logan's (Hugh Jackman) backstory, although I'll have to check out the comics to see how true to the source material it actually was. I don't really buy the whole "Sabretooth and Wolverine are brothers" aspect, but it makes for interesting interplay, especially during their fights.

The plot of this movie does not really hold up well. Logan and Victor Creed (Liev Schreiber) are essentially immortal brothers, one with bone claws and the other with a serious need for a manicure. They fight together in various wars over the centures, until Colonel William Stryker (Danny Huston) decides they should join his new team of mutants. Things start to unravel as the mutants come together, as their purpose is shrouded by myster. Wraith (Will.i.am, of Black Eyed Peas fame), the teleporting member of Team X, later informs Wolverine and us that they were tasked with rounding up mutants for Stryker's experiments. Essentially, Stryker is creating a super-mutant with all of these captives' powers to protect mankind from the other mutants...yeah I don't know either. Stryker's mutant son apparently killed his wife so he's got a grudge against the race. I won't go into the inconsistency of using a super-mutant to hunt down other mutants because it's just not worth the time.

Eventually, Logan quits the team and goes off to find love in the wilds of the Canadian Rockies. Here the movie drags. Sure, it's nice seeing Logan get some much-needed R & R and lovin', but I paid to see him slice and dice the baddies. Sabretooth and Stryker eventually spoil the fun, "killing" his love. Logan gets his adamantium skeleton and becomes Wolverine.

I could go on and on about the nuances of the plot but honestly it's not that important. Wolverine swears revenge. He goes after Stryker and Sabretooth. On their island hideout he comes face-to-face with Weapon XI. Weapon XI is the aforementioned super-mutant Stryker has been creating. He uses the body of Wade Wilson (played irreverantly by Ryan Reynolds in the early part of the movie, more on him later) to do so. Pretty good fight scene, with Wolverine emerging victorious. Then Stryker shoots him with an adamantium bullet to the brain and Wolverine loses his memories. Professor X comes to the rescue of the young mutants led by Cyclops and Emma Frost, essentially taking them to his new mutant academy. Wolverine stumbles off to his fate (and eventual sequel...sequel to a prequel...what do you call that?). Fade to darkness. End of Credits: Weapon XI, aka Deadpool, is still alive. Hooray spin-off!

The GOOD:

The best part of Wolverine is that, even with the amount of characters involved, most of them receive enough screen-time to understand their powers, their motivations, and their personalities. I was most worried about the introduction of Gambit to the film franchise. However, Taylor Kitsch's brief scenes as Remy brought that Cajun mutant to the big screen in style. I would like to see more of him, for sure. He didn't have the accent, though. The X-Men cartoon in the '90s really has me wanting a Gambit with that heavy Cajun tone.

My favorite casting was Ryan Reynolds as Wade Wilson, the Merc with a Mouth. In the first 10 minutes or so of the movie, he steals the show. His acerbic wit and pithy delivery really had me chuckling ("Okaaay. People are deaaaad."). When we leave him, I felt a sense of loss. He comes back at the end of the movie as Weapon XI or Deadpool or whatever you want to call him, but without the ability to talk he loses who he was previously. Luckily, we will see a true Deadpool spin-off with Ryan Reynolds back in command. I can't wait.

I completely bought Liev Schreiber's portrayal of Sabretooth. He made a truly villainous character seem more human than I would have thought possible. Also, he had a certain charisma that had me rooting for him, even though I knew he was not guy I should be cheering for. Same with Agent Zero. Not sure of the actor there, but good job nonetheless.

I thought the special effects were fine. The movie looked good. Fight scenes were...decent.

The BAD:

The aforementioned troubles with the plot. Pacing issues, especially during Logan's sojourn in Canada with Silverfox.

They killed off all the cool mutants! Bolt (Dominic Monaghan) who seemed to be an innocent guy just caught up with the wrong people; Wraith, played adequately by Will.i.am, is also killed by Sabretooth; Logan blows up Agent Zero in a move that seriously had me question why I should want Wolverine to win. I mean, who kills a defenseless man in cold blood like that? I guess he was a murderer, but still. I liked him! Does anyone else die that shouldn't? Guess that's about it. Oh yeah, the off-camera death of the Blob really seemed unneccessary. So if Marvel wants to bring those characters back, it can't or it just has to make up some ridiculous stories? Sorry, it just doesn't seem like a good strategy.

Hugh Jackman's Wolverine did not really inspire me. I think he was good in the first two X-Men movies, but something about him in this movie seems off. Maybe it's because we've seen the character 4 times now, and it's growing a bit stale. I don't know. I'm also biased against Wolverine from the beginning, so others might feel differently.

The fight scenes, while decent, had a little too much of the whole slo-mo/speed-up type of action. I don't know how to describe it, but the best comparison is the opening battle in Gladiator. Everything just looks...strange...during the fight. I like to see battles in real-time, but I guess that's too much to ask for.

An elderly couple takes in a nameless stranger into their home, which happens to be a bucolic, rustic farm. He sleeps in the barn. They discover him while driving their old, beat-up Chevy. No no, this is not Smallville and the nameless stranger is not Clark Kent. This is Wolverine and the nice Canadian couple who shelter him are not Martha and Jonathan. I wonder if DC will notice the similarities?

Gambit and Ryan Reynolds weren't in the movie enough :D
Hopefully we'll see Gambit again, and Deadpool will definitely be back!

Final Verdict: X-Men Origins: Wolverine - 7.5/10

Who Will Watch the Watchmen?

2009-03-03T21:43:00.001-05:00

This is the question that is on my mind today. I for one am very excited about the film adaptation of Alan Moore's epic masterpiece. However, the average moviegoer has never heard of the source material, which could be a problem come opening day. While most critics and journalists have labeled Watchmen a "comic book movie," I find it difficult (although I of course haven't seen it yet) to lump it in with the various superhero movies that have come out over the last 10 years or so, starting with X-Men and Spider-Man. In reality, Watchmen the graphic novel became a complete reversal from standard comic books, shedding many of the stereotypical motifs and themes that ran rampant throughout the industry before its publication in 1986 (along with Frank Miller's equally groundbreaking The Dark Knight Returns). Since that is the case, I wonder if people who enjoy the standard and normally simple-minded "comic book movie" will enjoy something with more of an adult-oriented narrative, focusing on character development over action. At least, that is what the movie SHOULD have, if director Zack Snyder is faithful to the graphic novel.

I'm interested to see how the movie does, both critically and commercially. So far, early reviews have been mixed, citing a few awkward line readings from Malin Akerman (Silk Spectre) and Matthew Goode (Ozymandias). Also, critics seem torn concerning the level of violence, which is supposedly quite high, and also that Snyder does not quite live up to the narrative mastery of Moore's original work. Commercially, its length, relative unknown status among non-hardcore fans, and R rating seems to suggest that it will be a modest success at best. Still, it has benefited from an amazing marketing campaign and there is a lot of hype surrounding the movie's release. Hopefully it can live up to it.

Personally, I think I'm going to love it. I already know that there will be differences from the graphic novel and I accept them. I only read the book last year and am therefore not as attached to it as, say, Lord of the Rings, something I grew up loving and cherishing. In the case of LotR, I enjoyed the movies, but continuously found flaws related to things that Peter Jackson either omitted, changed, or added (the elves coming to the rescue at Helm's Deep in The Two Towers comes to mind). I am a little more willing to give Snyder some license in what he changes from Watchmen, even though I think he will be pretty true to the work.

I can't wait to check it out and will immediately report my thoughts once I see it sometime this weekend!

A Slumdog Sweep

2009-02-24T01:46:00.001-05:00

Well, then. I did not do as well on my Oscar predictions as I thought I would. Sure enough, I got Best Picture and Best Director right, thanks to the Academy's love for Slumdog Millionaire. However, I was denied the feel-good story of the year since Sean Penn beat out Mickey Rourke for Best Actor. Kate Winslet, as predicted, took home the statuette for Best Actress. The most poignant moment of the evening came when Heath Ledger's mother, father, and sister accepted his Best Supporting Actor award on his and his daughter Matilda's behalf. I had tears in my eyes. I was surprised that the Japanese film Departures beat out Waltz with Bashir, but that's the nature of the Best Foreign Film category. I was even more surprised when Pan's Labyrinth lost a few years ago. Wall-E of course took home best animated feature, while Milk won for adapted screenplay even though I was hoping for an In Bruges victory. The ever-popular Slumdog Millionaire won for best original screenplay. Penelope Cruz won for Best Supporting Actress, beating out my longshot prediction of Viola Davis for Doubt. You can't win 'em all!

I thought the Oscars were enjoyable but nothing spectacular. This could be due to the fact that my cable has been on the fritz recently, but still, I was not that impressed with Hugh Jackman as host. I thought he did well, and carried off the night with no huge missteps. However, his musical numbers seemed somewhat phoned in and awkward at times, even though I enjoyed the fact that he made fun of how no one saw The Reader. Why the heck was that thing nominated? Give me The Dark Knight any day. Also, the In Memorium segment was disappointing since the cinmatographer kept cutting away from the screen and the name of the deceased was barely recognizable. I would have liked to see the dearly departed much better represented.

Anyway, there were some bright spots to the Oscars. I liked the format where the five former winners introduced the nominees and eventually presented the award to them. The intimate nature of award ceremony was great and made it seem like everyone was involved with the action. Jerry Lewis delivered a short but poignant speech and the Ledger family was grief-stricken yet strong. When the winner of the best animated short movie stated "Domo, arrigato, Mr. Roboto," I started cracking up. Now here is a guy who knows how to make fun of himself, have a good time, and still sound gracious.

Overall the evening with the Oscars proved enjoyable, although I would have liked to see less Benjamin Button awards and more given to The Dark Knight. Maybe the Academy will grow a brain and nominate the real best films next year.

The Oscars are Fast Approaching...

2009-02-19T20:32:00.001-05:00

Oh, Oscar season. Always an exciting time for movie fans, as well as the fashion aficionados that love to watch the celebrities strut their stuff down the red carpet. I can't remember the last Oscar telecast that I missed, but this year is definitely the first one in awhile that I'm not eagerly anticipating.

Don't get me wrong, there are a few compelling reasons to tune in to the 81st Oscars this Sunday night. For one thing, Hugh Jackman will be the host and that is cause for celebration. Jackman is sure to bring his Aussie wit and charm to the production and is sure not to disappoint the Hollywood insiders the way recent host Jon Stewart apparently has. Personally, I enjoyed Stewart's hosting, although at times he got a little too political. But it's Jon Stewart, and you expect that. His humor was refreshing after Chris Rock and Ellen Degeneres' less than stellar performances. While I haven't caught any of the Tony's that Hugh has hosted three times in the past few years, he has received stellar reviews. I expect good things on this front.

In more sobering news, the main reason I will tune into the Oscars this year is to hopefully see the late, great Heath Ledger win a much-deserved Best Supporting Actor Oscar for his role as the Joker in last summer's blockbuster, The Dark Knight. Ledger completely owned this role and in so doing, dominated the best film of 2008. I never really thought anyone could surpass Jack Nicholson's turn as the Joker in the original 1989 Tim Burton flick, but Heath rose to the occasion by bringing his all. As a passing fan of the Batman comics, he really brought a lot of the nuance and inner conflict that the Joker on the page possesses. This is the greatest portrayal of Batman's greatest villain, even better than Mark Hamill's amazing Joker from the '90s Batman Animated Series. The sad fact that Ledger has been taken away from us so young, when he had so much potential for other memorable roles, makes the Oscars a special night. Hopefully, the Academy will honor Heath with only the second posthumous Oscar in Academy history, after Peter Finch for his role in Network.

The rest of the Oscar movies and storylines are not nearly as compelling. Maybe this has to do with the fact that I have not watched any of the Best Picture nominees with the exception of Benjamin Button. I know, I know, this really discredits me as a movie blogger. However, the only one of those movies I really want to see is Slumdog Millionaire and I just haven't had the time to go to the theater lately. I think the Academy is out of touch with its audience, which shows since they did not include The Dark Knight among the nominees and instead stuck the Holocaust film The Reader in there. Of course, I'm not suggesting the Academy should "sell out" by elevating a non-deserving movie to Best Picture status, but The Dark Knight definitely belongs there. Maybe its stigma as a "comic-book movie" lost it points in Academy voters' eyes. However, I consider on par with Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King;; a genre movie that overcomes its genre's (relatively) low status in the view of serious movie fans. Well, here's hoping for a Slumdog win, and I'll catch all the movies when I have the time and can accurately report on which is the most deserving Best Picture nominee.

Still, even without seeing much of the movies, I'm going to offer some Oscar predictions. They are as follows:

Best Picture: Slumdog Millionaire
Best Actor in a Leading Role: Mickey Rourke, The Wrestler
Best Actress in a Leading Role: Melissa Leo, Frozen River
Best Director: Danny Boyle, Slumdog Millionaire
Best Actor in a Supporting Role: Heath Ledger, The Dark Knight
Best Actress in a Supporting Role: Viola Davis, Doubt
Animated Feature Film: Wall-E (Another movie which could have snagged a Best Picture spot)
Best Cinematography: The Dark Knight
Best Writing (Adapted Screenplay): Simon Beaufoy, Slumdog Millionaire
Best Writing (Original Screenplay): Martin McDonagh, In Bruges (Maybe I'm biased because I loved this one so much)
Best Foreign Language Film: Waltz with Bashir,

And there you have it; my Oscar predictions. I'm not going to go into the "lesser" categories due to time and not really knowing enough about the nominated films. We'll see how my list stacks up to the winners on Sunday, February 22. I'm actually a little more excited to watch the Oscars now that I've written this. What do you think about my list? Anything you would change or am I completely off-base? Be sure to tune in Sunday night to find out!