Henry Saw: Cassandra's Dream

So that wasn’t that bad. Why did no one see this movie?

Woody Allen’s most recent picture, it stars Ewan McGregor and Colin Farrell as two brothers who both find themselves in need of a great deal of money. McGregor has investments prospects and an expensive girlfriend while Farrell has a gambling debt to pay off. They turn to their rich uncle, played by Tom Wilkinson, who tells them if they kill someone who is causing problems at his job, that he will loan them the money. It’s a semi-standard set-up for a movie but Allen manages to make it very interesting – partially thanks to his two leads.
.
.

This is by far the best Farrell has ever been in a film. His character Terry is the more conflicted one and can’t live with the guilt of what they’re even considering doing. Somehow having Farrell playing unsure, venerable, and in a way, weak is really good for him. He is actually good at eliciting sympathy. McGregor, as the more confident Ian, has a bit of Iago in him but perhaps the more relatable (and therefore chilling) situation. Terry needs the money or loan sharks will break his legs. Ian is doing it because he wants to get rich and win over a girl. Honestly, who can’t say they relate to that? But when you extend that out to the question of whether you would kill a total stranger to achieve those goals…or if you even could kill a stranger…it becomes a very interesting question.

I thought Wilkinson was well cast as the uncle. He doesn’t appear on screen that much but he’s always in the characters’ heads. Wilkinson had to have the presence to fill that space in their bran. He also has an inherent decency he carries with him. After he tells his nephews what they have to do…they’re more shocked and disappointed in their uncle than anything. Wilkinson is a very likable actor and it works to have this terrible bargain coming from this charming man, The rest of the cast was just alright. The only other standout being Hayley Atwell, who plays Angela, the woman Ian is willing to kill for. While she doesn’t have the outrageous sex appeal that Scarlet Johansson brought to Match Point, Atwell is very pretty, and unlike Johansson, brings intelligence to the role of the sultry woman that a man would risk everything for.

In the end, it is very hard not to compare this film to Match Point. Both deal with London, family, social class and murder. Match Point is the better movie but that’s not to disregard Cassandra’s Dream. Cassandra is dealing with a different strands of Match Point’s ideas of family loyalty and what men are willing to do to achieve their dreams. In Cassandra, “Blood is blood” is one of the mantras. This is more about the nuclear family than the married one found in Match Point. And while Jonathon Rhys-Meyers’ character in Match Point sort of stumbled into his upper crust life and did everything he could to stay there, I found Cassandra’s characters striving to reach that level equally compelling.

Allen’s direction is workman-like but I would be lying if I said I was “impressed” by it. The script is pretty clever, avoids pretty much all the most annoying traits of Allen’s films, and pretty much plays it straight like Match Point did. There is one clunky scene in which the characters discuss Greek Tragedy (hint hint) but I can forgive a smart man showing off a little bit, especially because I got the reference.

If this is on, and you have 105 minutes to kill, leave it on. I can honestly recommend it. I hope I’m not raising your expectations too high…the film is far from perfect. But it deserves to be seen. I’m sure for movie fans with more years on me, this plot will seem very familiar, and yeah…it is…but I can appreciate any version of a story if it brings something new to the table. Cassandra’s Dream brought good performances from the lead actors and exploration of themes I really connected with. And honestly? This Woody Allen? The one who can make a small, thought-provoking, crime- based drama? I like him. I want him to make a few more of these before we get back to the Deconstructing Harry Woody Allen.

Grade? A very solid B

Best Scene? Farrell and McGregor reveal their problems to Wilkinson, who in turn tells them what he wants them to do.

Bet Time: Episode 2

(Someone actually has to watch this...and like it)

Well, It's that time again. Another bet, another poor soul condemned to write a positive review of some god-awful movie. In this months edition of bet time it's Sam vs. Hen again. The competition: a triathlon of sorts. This weekend Henry and I will be competing in three events: first, best of 7 Beirut, second whiffle ball home run derby, and third...thats right...a good old fashion game of Baseketball (not basketball spelled wrong, you read it right, baseketball). The unfortunate loser must watch and write about the upcoming, sure to suck, Love Guru....

Henry's Top 100: #66 - This is Spinal Tap

Another comedy. I just don't know how to do this yet. This movie is very funny. It makes me laugh. Everyone on earth knows what the movie is about...and I don't wanna tell you what about it makes me laugh because that will spoil it...so I don't know what else to say except that this is a hilarious movie.

It's funny. See it.


Best Scene? 11 is a classic. But I prefer:

Henry's Top 100: The Holocaust Edition (Numbers 68 and 67)

Numbers 68 (Life is Beautiful) and 67 (Schindler's List)

Okay here's the thing...this wasn't planned. Honestly, when I was ranking my top 115 movies, these two met at this point. I considered rearranging things so that this didn't happen. It is...a little awkward...but here we are.

These are two very different movies about the same time and place (more or less).

Life is Beautiful is an incredibly sweet movie that uses the Holocaust as a backdrop. A lot of people had a problem with this. But, I found the story of a father's love and protection of his son, in the worst of circumstances, a wonderful tale. Anyone who can't imagine that a man could rise above the horrors around him, and find a way to make his son laugh, does not have nearly enough faith in humanity in my opinion. Roberto Benigni directed and starred in Life is Beautiful and does a fantastic job in both roles. Life is Beautiful is a must-see.

Schindler's List, obviously, is one of the greatest films ever made. Liam Neeson, Ben Kingsley, and Ralph Fiennes are unbelievable. Spielberg put everything he had into this film, and he has a lot. It is, flat out, one of the best films of all time. But, I just can't watch it that often. Who can? Who comes home and goes, "The Mets have an off day today. I think I'll have some Chinese tonight. I'm gonna watch Schindler's List." It doesn't happen. It's too serious and upsetting. In tone, it is the opposite of Life is Beautiful.

These are two very different but spectacular films. One thing they share in common, other than the whole Holocaust thing, is that both are a great examinations of what man is capable of. Benigni saves his son, Schindler saves many, but each is a strong example of the best that man is capable of.

Best Scenes? Benigni in the classroom / the introduction of Schindler's character in the restaurant.

Choke..The Movie

• MTV
• Music Videos
• MTV Shows
• Entertainment News

I'm not sure how I feel about this. Chuck Palahniuk is one of my favorite authors these days, and I'm happy to see more of his novels being adapted to the silver screen, but I'm not sure Choke is the best choice. I'm worried that they will over simplify the main character and turn him into the stereotypical womanizing slacker (Van Wilder anyone?) where in the novel he is much more complex than that. If I had my choice, I would much rather see an Invisible Monsters adapted to film. Hopefully this film won't join the ever expanding list of horrible movies made from good books....DAMN YOU TROY!

Henry's Top 100: #69 - Dodgeball

Ben's Turn:

Dodgeball: A True Underdog Story

Note: Apparently this blog has readers beyond our court-appointed supervisors. Some of these mystery readers will like one or more of the old trends mentioned below; instead of getting mad, you should accept that you like something that was judged, posthumously, to suck. Be proud that you know the secret wisdom of Chingy, absurdly jingoistic anti-communism movies from the 80's or Jefferson Starship while the rest of us miss out.

There was a time when Day-Glo t-shirts, ‘Eastern Gurus’ born in Wichita, Kansas or New Kids on the Block (aka NKOTB) were each considered intensely cool. Clearly, there are a lot of ideas that seem like a good idea in the moment that, in retrospect were…well…..fucking stupid.

(Note 2: Yes yes, I’m going somewhere with this. Shut up and let me ramble for a second.)

I find it very hard to predict what trends will meet the fate of, say, “super-tight, acid wash jeans for men” when a given trend is at its height. Allow me to try and predict a soon-to-be-discredited trend now that it seems to be thoroughly on the decline: the “catchphrase comedy.”

You probably know what I’m talking about. Those movies that were, ultimately, trying to gauge their own success by how many times a college-age guy quoted them in or out of context with his buddies. Obviously, this was epitomized by the ‘Frat Pack’ (Will Ferrell, Vince Vaughn, Ben Stiller, et. al.) We were overwhelmed by these things for a while and the shtick has clearly worn thin with the taste-making movie crowd, the critics and the public at-large (roughly in that order, too). The trend now seems to have moved towards the Judd Apatow ‘real guy comedy, that’s sort-of a chick flick’. The last half of 'Wedding Crashers' seemed to handle that baton pass.

Well, I have a confession to make: my name is Ben and I love catchphrase comedies.

Not all catchphrase comedies, of course. ‘Starsky and Hutch’ is unsalvageable. Still, a lot of them are funny, despite having been quoted to death, and for me the funniest of all is


'Dodgeball: A True Underdog Story'. You can probably guess the story, but it’s a send up of the classic underdog sports movie. In this case Vince Vaughn and the borderline retarded members of his crappy gym (Average Joe’s) have just….one…last….chance to save the place before it’s taken over by Ben Stiller, owner of fitness corporation ‘Globogym’, and his crew of over-muscled goons. If you know the plot of any sports movie ever, you can guess the plot of this movie.


There are a lot of parts to Dodgeball that are just amazing. The sight gags and throwaways are often painfully funny: Bernice the roiding Girl Scout, killing a man with a dodgeball, several well-chosen cameos (by Lance Armstrong and Chuck Norris before he was cool again), the wonderful parody of ESPN. I say ‘Interesting strategy, Cotton’ more than I’d like to admit.

The actors work well too: The Mac Guy gets abuse heaped upon him. Vince Vaughn is consistently charming and amusing, he even manages to make Ben Stiller funny (“the mongrel race that comprises your membership”). I will always say ‘Yarrrrr’ at the sight of Alan Tudyk, which made ‘3:10 to Yuma’ a great opportunity to make Hen shoot beer from his nose with laughter. Why? Because Christian Bale’s be the only place for Steve. I digress…..

Look, I’m trying to make it sound like there’s a lot to like about Dodgeball and that’s true, but it misses the point. The bottom line is that Patches O’Houlihan (Average Joe’s dodgeball coach) played by Rip Torn might be the funniest character of the past 20 years. Maybe ever. I don’t know. These things are impossible to rank. But when he’s asked by the team how he’s going to teach them to dodge things thrown at them, he throws a bag down on the floor with a clank; “That’s what this sack of wrenches is for”. When he’s trying to encourage the team he urges them to grab victory and “hump it in to submission”. When he’s critical: : "you’re about as useful as a poopy-flavored lollipop.”

I have a feeling that people who have seen the movie know to love these lines and for people that haven’t they just seem inexplicable. I cannot convey Patches’ greatness. Maybe no one can. I shouldn’t even try. But I challenge you to watch this and not have a crazy old man in a Jazzy be the thing that keeps you from grouping catchphrase comedy in with disco.


Oh, and one more thing: “I’ve got some hookers in my room…..”

Uwe Boll: Not Crazy?

Honestly, I'm not shocked that Uwe actually has intelligent things to say. The man isn't an idiot, he just knows how to take advantage of negative PR and use it as publicity, and it works. I never would have heard about Postal had this whole Michael Bay thing not happened. Do I have more respect for him...yeah...am I going to see postal...probably not...well..maybe on DVD. I'd be interested to see what other people have to say after watching the interview.

Henry's Top 100: #70- Casino Royale

I'm not a James Bond guy. I really don't like the other Bond films. Goldeneye is okay I guess...and the Sean Connery movies are charming. But Casino Royale was the first Bond movie I really enjoyed. Mainly because it is a very good action movie. The plot is fine, the direction is competent, the acting is good. But I just loved the action in this movie. It felt like the action movie I've daydreamed about for years.

This movie is very cool, very slick, kinda smart. Daniel Craig does a great job. Eva Green is beautiful. But you should really see Casino Royale because its a kick-ass action film


Best Scene?

Sam Saw: Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull

Nineteen years....Well...here goes.

Hit the link for my thoughts on the new Indy.

I don't want to repeat what Hen had to say about Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull, so I'll limit myself to to idea Hen didn't mention....for the most part.

The opening scene was horrible, absolutely horrible. Totally pointless, boring, and distracting. I swear, I forgot I was in an Indiana Jones movie after two minutes of watching 50's teenagers race along side the military convoy. When we finally get back to the plot, Indy and the Russians reach area 51, things started to get better, but at the same time, a major fault of the movie first rears its ugly head.

We are re-introduced to our old pal Indy outside of area 51. Basically, we are looking at an airplane hanger in the middle of the dessert..fine, right? No. Apparently it was absolutely necessary to use a green screen here, and boy does it show. The characters look borderline ridiculous when they are set directly against the background, especially Cate Blanchett (Her rather strange costume makes her contrast even more with the background than the other cast members). Was it really too hard to film this scene in the actual setting rather than force feed us CGI? I felt like I was watching Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow, and for those of you who haven't seen it, that is not a good thing. The scene inside the hanger is even worse. Floating gun powder as well as all the CGI generated crates just look off...When are film makers going to realize that just because you can use CGI, doesn't mean you should....I, for one, would much rather see something that is actually there whenever possible. The CGI woes only continue, as it seems Spielberg and Lucas have an unhealthy obsession with out of place CGI animals. I just can't shake this image of some suit in an Indiana Jones meeting saying "Kids love animals, lets get more animals in there". There is even a gopher scene which is way,way, too close to the gopher scene at the beginning/end of Caddy Shack.

Another issue I had with the film was Karen Allen. Throughout the film, she never seems as if she is experiencing the events of the story; She looks like she is acting on a set in Hollywood. She gets kidnapped, threatened with execution, falls into quicksand, falls off three, count em three waterfalls, discovers an advanced civilization as well as the existence of Aliens, and sees what can only be described as a physical manifestation of Bhudist concepts such as a universal singular consciousness, but her acting is the same in every scene. She might as well be picking up groceries or watching TV. If you looked at her reaction shots alone, you would have no idea what kind of movie she is in.

There are also a lot of scenes where she looks unnaturally giddy. The scene where she is reunited with Shia Lebouf comes to mind. Her character has been kidnapped by Russians, forced to travel to Peru, and she sees that her son has befallen the same fate, but all we see is an actress who is overjoyed to be in a movie. Marion Ravenwood was a feisty whip of a woman who could kick your ass and then drink you under the table. She had attitude and whit, but in Kingdom of the Crystal Skull shes just a friendly middle aged woman coming along for the ride. Even more so, shes a major distraction. Whenever I felt like I was becoming immersed in a scene, she came along and took me right out of it. It's sad really, because I used to like her character a lot. She used to be a match for Indy, now I don't even know why he likes her.

So, what did this movie do right? Well, I really loved all the chase scenes. As Hen said, the one at Yale is great, and the final chase in the jungle was exciting as well, even if it was hurt a little bit by some horrible CGI animals. Harrison Ford was also great. I had my doubts that he would still be able to play Indy, what with him being rather old these days. The movie could have gone the route of Sean Connery in The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen, which would have been to just ignore the fact that he is old (bad idea) or embrace it. Thankfully, the film chooses the latter path. Harrison Ford is old, so he plays an old Indy. The only place the film seems to forget this is when Indy survives a nuclear blast without a scratch via hiding in a refrigerator. My guess is that this whole scene was contrived for the sole purpose of getting the shot of Indy in front of the mushroom cloud, which was spectacular, so, in this case the infraction is forgiven.

When I think about the movie on the whole, did I hate it? No. It has tons and tons of faults, but I had fun watching it. I really think that this is one that will get better the more you watch it. Once you get past the initial expectations of it being an Indiana Jones movie, and know where it falls short, I think it will be much easier to enjoy it for what it is, a semi-shallow adventure movie.

Grade: C+/B-

Henry Saw: Indiana Jones and The Kingdom of the Crystal Skull

Sigh...alright...let's do this...

Click the link below to read my review


So, as Sam has had fun saying, I was a bit nervous for the release of the fourth Indiana Jones film. Not only is it my favorite trilogy of all time, but they are really the only movies from my childhood that I consistently revisit. Unlike many, I don't find Temple of Doom to be too dark or The Last Crusade to be too goofy. Are they as good as Raiders? Of course not. But they're both among the best action / adventure films ever made, and that ain't bad. So, Friday night I saw the movie that many people had been waiting 19 years for.

It wasn't worth the wait.

To give credit where credit is due: Harrison Ford does a good job. I thought his first few line deliveries were awkward, but as soon as we got past the opening sequence he was Indy again. An obviously older Indy... but Dr. Jones was back.

But, the movie is just FILLED with mistakes made by Lucas and Spielberg. Let's see...we open in the Nevada desert, 1957. The first scene is a meaningless race between Hot-Rodding teenagers blasting Elvis' version of "Hound Dog" and soldiers that we learn are Russian. All I want to know is why? I mean, I know Temple of Doom opens with a musical sequence, but at least it stars one of the main characters of the film. With this film, I just don't know why they bother with that opening...was it to really let us know that this was set in the 1950's? The little subtitle that said "Nevada, 1957" pretty much did that.

The Russians arrive at a military base, kill the only four guards on duty apparently, and they pull Indy and his new sidekick Mac (played by Ray Winstone) out of the trunk of a car. Let me take this opportunity to say that Mac is one of the most useless characters I've ever encountered in film. He is merely there to advance the plot some, get Indy accused of being a Commie at one point, and...that's about it. He has none of the charm of Sallah (From Raiders) and really should have cut from the script before the film went into production.

Anyway, we find out that the military base is the same as the one we saw at the end of Raiders (apparently its Area 51...). The leader of the Russians is played by Cate Blanchett. She's always good, and she's good here, but her character never worked for me. She claims she's a psychic but never uses her powers. And she just never seems too menacing or passionate (until the very end). Again, this is the fault of the script not the acting. She tells us that she is looking for the 13 Crystal Skulls because who ever has them all gains incredibly psychic powers.



Blanchett wants Indy to lead them to a special crate that he encountered 10 years earlier. He does, in a slightly ridiculous manner, and we find out that this Indy movie will be dealing, in some way, with Aliens. Honestly, I was fine with this, but if they were going to go in this direction to reflect movies of the 50's, why not make the film a little bit more like Invasion of the Body Snatchers? More about paranoia, and everyone is against you, then trying to combine archeology with science fiction?

The first big action scene happens in the base, too much CGI is employed (a common problem in this movie), and Indy ends up miles outside the base in a mock town set to be blown up in a nuclear bomb test. How does Indy avoid burning alive? He hides in a fridge...lined with lead. He is sent flying through the air (still in the fridge), has a crash landing, and walks away completely uninjured. I'm not one to whine about the unbelievability of a movie like this...but for him to walk away completely unharmed REALLY bothered me. This scene does give us the best shot of the movie, Indy walking up a small dune, with a giant mushroom cloud in the distance. It's a beautiful shot.

I don't wanna just summarize the whole movie scene by scene, so I'll jump ahead to when Indy meets Mutt Williams, Shia Labeouf's character, who tells him he needs his help to find an old family friend, and former colleague of Indy's, Professor Oxley. Labeouf, who I was worried about, does a good job throughout the whole movie. He has charisma, doesn't over do the "obnoxious young man" role at all, and is semi-believable in the action scenes. For me, the most entertaining sequence of the film begins in a malt shop where Mutt and Indy first meet, and continues into a great chase scene between KGB agents and our heroes through Yale Campus.



It's the most "Indiana Jones" part of the whole film and has good stunts, a relative lack of CGI, and an entertaining finish. In general, the first third of the movie was okay. Not amazing, but as good as I realistically could have hoped.

The middle part of the movie has Mutt and Indy following some clues left by "Ox" to the jungles of South America. They travel to some crypt (where I still don't understand why what they found there was placed there), they get captured again, Indy is forced to look at a crystal skull for a little while (its as stupid as it sounds), and we meet Oxley who is played by a silly John Hurt. This is another character who just doesn't work. He plays the "crazy" old man who actually knows everything (apparently he looked at the Crystal Skull too long and it told him secrets but fried his mind). He is way too over-the-top, not funny enough, and is given the most important role towards the end of the film; another flaw in the script.

We are also reintroduced to Marion (Karen Allen, the original Indy girl from Raiders) who has also been kidnapped by the Russians. We learn she's Mutt's mother (you can guess what follows) and soon all the characters, including Mac for some reason, are on the way to where they think other Crystal Skulls can be found. This is where the BIG action scene happens. It is an extended chase / fight scene involving trucks and amphibious vehicle and all the principle characters.



LaBeouf and Blanchett have a sword fight while straddling two different cars. It is a clever idea but it is ruined by things like Shia getting hit in the balls by branches and Blanchett's line "You fight like a young man; eager to start and quick to finish." ...that's just not that funny.

There are other missteps in the scene...Indy disappears from the action for quite awhile, Shia ends up swinging through trees like Tarzan with CGI monkeys...sigh...and ends with a bunch of CGI red-ants that just aren't scary.

From this scene on though...the movie is basically an "F". They get to the Kingdom of the Crystal Skulls, and the movie is resolved without Indy really doing anything, and then...the movie ends. I don't wanna say what we learn once we get to the Kingdom but I was not impressed, and what's worse, none of the characters seemed that impressed either. Only Blanchett seems to get how someone might react in the situation. The very last scene...I was very disappointed they went in that direction...and it hardly is an exciting finish. When the movie ended, in our theater at least, there was an audible gasp as if we were all collectively saying "that's it?".

Was I happy to see Indy on the big screen for the first time in my life? Yes. Was the movie an abortion to the degree that the first two Star Wars prequels were? No. But, in the end, this was worse than The Mummy. Which isn't to slight The Mummy, it's a pretty fun flick, but shouldn't an Indiana Jones movie, ANY Indiana Jones movie, be better than The Mummy? In the end, the problems lie mostly on the script level as much of the movie feels like it was cobbled together from a dozen drafts. But Spielberg and Lucas aren't blameless and they just seem to have lost their magic. Spielberg's last, completely satisfying, popcorn flick was Jurassic Park which was 15 years ago. I'll always respect the man, and value the great movies he's given us, but its possible that time has passed him by. He certainly dropped the ball, or should I say fedora, on this one.

Grade: C-

Best Scene? That chase scene through Yale.

The Hour Draws Near

6:34Pm: Hen sits across from me. Beads of sweat drip down his forehead. We're waiting...waiting for the 10:25 showing of Indiana Jones and the Crystal Skull. The last time I saw Hen look like this was during the Sox world series appearance in 2005. It's the look of a man whose fate is not in his hands....George Lucas...Steven Spielberg...be kind.

\

Henry's Top 100: #71- Children of Men

The most underrated movie of 2006.

Alfonso Cuarón's masterpiece, about a world in which no child has been born for 2 generations, and then Clive Owen is charged with protecting the first pregnant woman in years.

It's an excellent, mature science fiction movie. But the plot / acting is not why it is great.

This is a movie in which the direction truly separates it from the field. Cuarón, and cinematographer Emmanuel Lubezki, created the most visceral movie ever made. The camera puts you inside the movie at all times.

This is a technically brilliant film without being arrogant about it.

If you didn't catch this movie the first time around...check it out...it's fantastic.

Best Scene? The long tracking shot towards the end of the movie. It ends with the shot shown above. You'll know it when you see it.

The Top Ten Suckiest Sequels

So in preparation for Indiana Jones 4...my most anticipated / fear-inducing movie of the year, I decided I would lower my expectations by reminding myself of how bad sequels can be. The criteria for the following are simply this:

1) The Movies had to be really bad

2) They had to be sequels to quality films. So that's why a Weekend At Bernie's 2 will not appear on the list. Why? Because Weekend at Bernie's 1 was pretty shit.

On to the list


10.
The Lost World - I don't think people actually remember that old Spielbergo directed this. It's kind of easy to forget. After all, it is really bad...and he didn't do Jurasic Park 3...so it is kind of easy to misremember who made this suck-fest. But just to refresh your memory: It stars Julianne Moore, Jeff Goldbloom, and Vince Vaughn (forming one of the most annoying core group of actors ever put on screen). Then there was the gymnastic black girl who kicked a Raptor or something. Then a T-Rex stomps through San Diego...does anyone remember anything else about this movie? I guess there was the one scene where the trucks are falling off the cliff and the glass is cracking and all that...but it is set up by the gigantic problem that was: NINJA DINOSAURS. What do I mean by that? When it was effective for Spielberg, he had the T-Rex shake the earth, cause ripples in glasses of water, etc; but when it was convenient, he would let the Tyrannosaurus sneak up on everyone. Everyone would be hanging out and then BOOM - giant dinosaur is fucking your shit up. The movie is just lame...its repetitive, derivative, and just plan bad-ative.

Hm...I saw this movie with my dad, at Fresh Pond Theater in Massachusetts, over Memorial Weekend, exactly 11 years ago. This Memorial Weekend, another Spielberg movie comes out...please don't suck please don't suck please don't suck


9.
Rocky 5 - Sorry, I would love to provide a picture and small blurb about this movie, but as every male knows...there is no such thing as Rocky 5. In some distant universe, a place I never want to live, Rocky 5 exists. And it is just terrible. And kind of sad...mostly pathetic. But we thankfully live in a world without a Rocky 5. I mean...I would hate to see an actor trying to recapture his youth by playing a character that made him famous over a decade ago...please don't suck please don't suck please don't suck

8.
Batman and Robin - I saw the end of this movie on TBS today. And I really don't think I can describe how lame the movie is. So since a picture is worth ten-thousand of my words let me make this easy on myself:

Batman and Robin

=



...a fourth movie in a series that is really bad...please don't suck please don't suck please don't suck

7.
Son of the Mask - ...Well...hm...You know the thing about a bad movie is...no...You know I actually enjoyed the Mask...nah...nope. I actually don't have the ability to describe how terrible this movie is. I'd like to think I'm not the worst writer ever, but I am not capable of stringing together the right adjectives to properly get across how fucking awful this failed, bloody, abortion of a movie is. The only reason it is so low on the list is that, in the end, what could you really expect from a sequel to The Mask with Jamie Kennedy as the star? This movie isn't so bad it is funny, it's just terrible. Avoid like the goddamn plague. ...Hm...a terrible sequel involving fathers and sons...please don't suck please don't suck please don't suck

6.

Ocean's 12 - I wanted to kick everyone involved in the making of this movie square in the balls. Ocean's 11 was an incredibly fun and upbeat heist movie. And while it had its twists, it always kept the audience in on the fun. Ocean's 12 however, was not made for you. Or me. Or anyone save for the 12 stars and their director. This movie is nothing but George Clooney, Brad Pitt, Matt Damon, Catherine Zeta Jones and Julia Roberts (with an especially maddening cameo from Bruce Willis) bumbling around Europe and kind of making a movie about it. There's not a great heist here. No cool plan. I honestly cannot really remember what the plot of the movie is. I only remember that fucking scene with Julia Roberts playing someone who looks like Julia Roberts who meets Bruce Willis who steals an egg or something. What the shit were they thinking? ...A sequel in which everyone involved thought they were above criticism and did whatever the hell they liked because they have so much clout...please don't suck please don't suck please don't suck

5.

AVP - Do I even need to bother? Fine...the first two Aliens, and the first Predator, are among my favorite movies of all time. They are, without a doubt, the best Extra Terrestrial movies ever made (Sorry, I hate E.T.). But this mash-up is just so bad that it is actually amazing. How do you mess this up? Here's how you make this movie: Group of marines go to a planet overrun by Aliens; little do they know that a small group of Predators is already there. Boom- there's your movie. What did we get instead? Some mumbo-jumbo about a temple in the arctic that changes shape a lot and some scientists go there and then they all die and then one of them makes friends with a Predator...it's just incredible. And it really makes you wonder if at no point, throughout the entire production, if anyone cared about making a worthwhile movie... Was it all about bleeding the two franchises dry? Seeing the finished result, I almost hope that's the answer. Because if anyone actually "tried" in the making of that film...then no one has ever been worse at their job in the history of ever.

Two great franchises from the 80's dug up and regurgitated for a new audience...please don't suck please don't suck please don't suck

Tied at 3.



and



The Matrix and Pirates of the Caribbean Sequels: Two of the biggest "franchises" of all time. And four of the worst sequels ever made. That's right, this entry includes The Matrix Reloaded and The Matrix Revolutions, along with Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest and At World's End. Here are two franchises that did every thing wrong, and what's funny is that they made very different mistakes.

If there is one common problem with the four movies it is that the film makers got WAY too into their own hype. With the Matrix sequels, the Wachowski brothers clearly felt like they could do whatever they wanted in the sequels. The first Matrix movie was such a phenomenon and was so damn good that the directors felt like the audience would follow them anywhere. Instead of an awesome action movie posing intelligent questions, we got two dull action movies trying to answer stupid questions.

There was obviously a great trilogy that could have been made here. But from the get-go the sequels completely dropped the ball. We end the first Matrix with Neo able to not just fly, but also completely destroy the agents from within. He is able, from what I gather at the end of the movie, to essentially rewrite the code of the Matrix. He promises to wake people up, to kick the war between man and machine up a notch...so what do we get in number 2? Neo is doing the same Karate shit against the agents, and seems more interested in powdering his vagina then going to war against any machine. It really makes no sense coming from the original film. The second Matrix is bad (the car chase scene being the only good moment) but it was how it ended that signaled the shit that was to come. The whole scene with The Architect is so bad that we all should have known that the Wachowskis had passed the point of no return. The Matrix Revolutions is a steaming pile of rhino shit. For its 2 hour run time, nothing remotely cool or clever occurs. Nothing. I don't know what could have been done to save these movies...I mean after The Matrix why wouldn't you trust the Wachowskis to make some quality sequels? But they didn't. They made 4+ hours of garbage spread out over 2 films. Such a pity...

The Pirates series has a slightly different problem. At least with the Wachowskis I believe they wanted to make a real trilogy. They had a story they wanted to tell and the success of the first Matrix let them bring that to the screen. It happened to blow ass but at least I don't doubt that they had a 3-part story mapped out in their head. The Pirates movie would have been much better going the Indiana Jones route: Three separate movies that could stand on their own. That world was simply not interesting enough to try and make the new Star Wars Trilogy for the 21st century. The only word I can think of to describe the second and third POTC movies is: MESS. Those two sequels are an absolute mess. They're both incredibly long, filled with twists that not only does no one care about, but no one can follow, and they manage to take a lot of what was great about the first film and ruin it. For instance, Jack Sparrow goes from a very charming rogue to just a bit of an asshole. I couldn't wrap my head around why we were suppose to care about him in the third one when he had done everything he could to fuck all the real "good guys" over.

Somehow, the Pirate movies were gigantic successes at the box office. What's worse, people actually liked the movies it seems. If we had just gotten two stand-alone sequels, as light and without pretension as the first, we might be talking about one of the all-time great franchises. Instead we have 2 fiascos that make me just want to drink heavily.

Self-Indulgent pricks ruin potentially brilliant franchises because they just completely miss the target...Spielberg and Lucas managed to avoid this with the Indy series during the 80's but now...please don't suck please don't suck please don't suck

2.

The Exorcist 2: The Heretic - This is actually the worst sequel ever made. There is a good reason why it is not number one, and we'll get to that, but it doesn't get worse than this. It is famous for how bad it is. The Exorcist, the first one, is the best horror film ever made. It is an astounding picture that hasn't aged a day. It's perfect.

This movie is so bad that it really is funny. It is laugh out loud hilarious at times. I actually recommend you see this movie. It's that bad. It's a perfect specimen of the kind of crap that man is capable of producing. If you are able to sit through it, you will appreciate every movie you see afterwards, because I promise you that it won't be as bad as this travesty. Check it out, it sucks so bad that its great.

I can't relate this movie in any way to my anxiety over Indiana Jones 4 but it had to go on the list. This is the worst sequel of all time.

1.
Spider-Man 3 - This is, by no means, the worst sequel of all time. But no film has ever let me down as bad as Spider-Man 3.

Spider-Man 2 is one of my favorite movies of all time. And I don't mean "I really like Spider-Man 2." I fucking love Spider-Man 2. I am already imagining writing its entry into my Top 100 (which thankfully won't be for awhile...it's very high on my list) and I don't know how I'll be able to do it. No movie, not even Raiders of the Lost Ark, lifts my spirits like that movie. Every time I watch it, every time, I have the biggest, goofiest smile on my face. Spider-Man 2 = Joy for me. So to say I was excited for Spider-Man 3 would be an understatement. It would be more honest to say that I was expecting Spider-Man 3 to be something worthy of awe. I had never been more excited for a movie, and really, don't think I ever will be again.

Why?

Because Spider-Man 3 broke my heart. I mean, that sounds a bit melodramatic...and it is...but...Spider-Man 3 really stung. When I first saw it, I walked out knowing I hadn't loved it. But I tried to sell it to myself. It felt like a comic book (a really bad comic book)...it had a good fight (one, between Peter and Harry, and Peter was acting like a Emo douche)...the effects were good (meh...seen better).

But in the end, it's faults were undeniable. There was nothing joyous about Spider-Man 3. The whole thing felt as rotten as Denmark. The action was perfunctory, nothing near the brilliance of the action scenes with Doctor Octopus from the second one. Watching Peter just be an asshole, and Harry a moron and then a villain and then a mopey hero, and MJ a rag-doll...was just not interesting. It was depressing.

And then, the movie's biggest sin, they had Peter hit MJ. And you can try to explain that scene anyway you like...they still had him do it. Look, I'm a big boy, I'm 22...I can handle seeing Spider-Man fuck up. I'm not that big a loser. But to have a movie that SHOULD be for kids include that scene...well it just drives me nuts. It was at that moment, to paraphrase Bart Simpson in "I Love Lisa", when you could actually pinpoint the second when my heart ripped in half.





So here I am, awake at 3:30 AM, less than 22 hours from seeing Indiana Jones 4...and I don't know what I'm expecting. I'm not excited so much as I am worried. I'm not worried so much about the film's quality (though that's a concern) but more in how I am going to approach the film. If I get too excited for it...it will only let me down. That's just a fact. But if I go in ready to rip it apart then I will do just that. I'll find every mistake that Lucas and Spielberg made and tear them to bits for it.

In the end, I just want the movie to be okay. Take that word for what you will. I just want the movie to be okay. I want to hear that amazing John Williams score in the theater for the first time and smile. I wanna get that feeling on the back of my neck that I got from the Temple of Doom (the fist Indiana Jones movie I ever saw) way back when. But unlike that "first time" I don't need that feeling to last for two joy-filled hours. I just need that feeling for a second. One scene, one quip, one anything. If for one moment I can sit in that theater tomorrow and feel like I'm watching a fucking Indiana Jones movie...I'll be happy.

But what do I know...I'm making this up as I go.

Henry's Top 100: # 72- Hard Candy

I can't believe Hard Candy wasn't a play first.

There are literally 4 people in this movie. And if you wanted, you could cut it to 2.

The movie is about a young girl who stalks a child molester and then cuts his penis off. Kind off. You have to see it.

Ellen Page, of Juno fame, plays the girl. And Patrick Wilson plays the guy.

To say any more would be to ruin it. The movie is very limited in scope. But it's great.

If you think you can stomach the subject matter you should see the movie. You may not want to watch it twice, but you must watch it once.

Best scene? The Castration.

The Moment of Truth

Well, it has finally come: The second coming, the apocalypse, the end of days, judgment, heaven or hell. That's right, Indian Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull is opening today. For scheduling reasons, I will be seeing the film tomorrow night with Hen. Will we walk out of the theater with a hop in our steps, smiles wide across our jubilant faces? Will I have to carry a catatonic Hen to the mental ward to begin intensive therapy? A short 2hr and 4 minutes will make this decision for us. Good luck Hen.

Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull releases today, May 22nd.

Take that Uwe

I'd just like to go ahead and mention that the brain child of Uwe Boll, which he has been shamelessly promoting for the past three months, all whilst the "Stop Uwe from making movies" petition is going on, will finally open on May 23rd....ON 4 SCREENS. Apparently the film...movie...thing...was supposed to open on 1500 screens, but the majority of them pulled out because of the political nature of the film. Of course, this information is coming from camp Boll, so it's entirely possible that this grand opening was never a realistic possibility.

I hate the idea of not showing something because of its subject matter, so lets hope theaters bowed out because the movie is a steaming pile of crap and not because they are afraid of movies with political content. Oh...wait....I seem to be remembering something....wait wait...Fahrenheight 9/11, World Trade Center, The Kingdom, Syriana, Munich, Passenger 57, United 93..it would seem that movies with political and terrorism themes have been released nationwide in the past few years. I'm gonna go ahead and guess that movie theaters care about releasing a movie that's going to make money, and with a 3.7 on IMDB and 25% on Rotten Tomatoes, postal does not look like that kind of film. Don't cry Uwe, I'm sure your recently released In the Name of King DVD is doing well....

(Story Via Kotaku)

Henry's Top 100: # 73-Amélie

I had a long article written for Amélie but then I did something stupid and accidentally deleted it.

Because I'm lazy and mad, I'll leave it at this: Amélie is lovely. And I know that word is not the most manly of adjectives or anything...but that is what it is. Amélie is a wonderful, magical, lovely film.

If you have a heart, or a soul, or anything resembling the two...you will love this film. Find a girl, or a guy, or a labrador...I don't care. Watch this movie with someone you love.

It's lovely.

Best Scene? Amélie helps a blind man cross the street.

Sam Saw: Better Luck Tomorrow

Better Luck Tomorrow, directed by Justin Lin (Annapolis, The Fast and the Furious: Tokyo Drift), is a 2002 film about a group of intelligent middle class Asian high school students from southern California who, because of the boredom of suburban life, get involved in increasingly violent extra curricular activities. Don't let the directors other work fool you into thinking this film is a one note song like either Tokyo Drift or Annapolis. This is a film centered around complex emotional and moral struggle as well as the confusion of late adolescence and the monotony of suburban life.
The plot on it's own is pretty simple. A group of smart high school students, constantly bored with their successful, yet incredibly predictable and boring lives get a taste for small time crime once they experience the temptations of notoriety after getting into a fight at a party. Their new reputation makes it possible for them to get involved in small time schemes such as selling cheat sheets for tests. Soon, they upgrade to selling drugs and robbery, and thats when things start to get serious.

What I found most compelling about the movie is its realism. The four friends, Derick, Ben, Virgil and Han do a lot of bad things, but Justin Lin avoids what I believe is a major pitfall of so many movies: inexplicable character transformation. That is to say that many films fall into the pattern of having characters completely change their personalities at the drop of the hat. How many times have you seen a movie, horror and action movies being the major perpetrators, where the female lead is a timid mess for ninety percent of the movie, and then blam, the plot demands it, and all of a sudden she transforms into Joan of Arc.....Pirates of the Caribbean.

Perhaps the best example of the sudden plot transformation is Star Wars Episode 3. Hmm, Anakin Skywalker...good guy...good husband..father to be...but, then comes the two minute fight scene with Samuel L and the Emperor and oh, whats happened? Anakin is now the apprentice to the dark lord willing to do anything, even murder children. If you walked out to pee during that scene, you'd undoubtedly be completely perplexed when you returned, although I was sitting in my seat the whole time and was still perplexed. I know I know, the dark side of the force....crappy plot device is what I say. Shame on you George Lucas for taking the easy way out and for using such a cheap trick.

But, I digress, back to the movie I'm supposed to be talking about. What makes Better Luck Tomorrow so good, is that, although the characters are involved in activities at the beginning and end of the film, that could only be described as polar opposites, they don't become different people. A lessor director would have turned all four of the boys into a bunch of gangsters and completely forgotten that they are all, at the core, smart, good kids.

One of the better examples of this characteristic of the film is the scene in which the boys get into a fight with a football player and Derick pulls out a gun, after which they beat up the jock and drive off. Virgil, the overcompensating, lackey of the group is ecstatic. He goes on and on about how amazing it made him feel to kick the jock while he was down, and how cool it was to see the fear in his eyes when Derick pulled out his gun. In a lot of movies, that would be it, Virgil would now become the sadistic psycho who gets off on hurting people (Taking Lives anyone...),but, instead of falling prey to this sort of crap film-making, Justin Lin brings us right back to reality; A second after this rant, his sense of morality comes into play, and fear kicks in ;he starts crying. He freaks out about how his dad is going to find out and that he's going to get sent to prison. It's refreshing to see a character express this type of complex emotions.

There was a lot I liked about this movie, but I do have a few complaints. For one, the movie is pretty slow getting started. I understand that the movie takes it's time in the beginning in order to establish its characters so we can more fully appreciate the subtle changes they undergo as well as to help us understand why they respond the way they do in certain situations, but I fear the movie may frustrate some who don't posses the patience to wait it out.

Another issue I had was the ending. No, the ending wasn't bad, but it did leave a lot of questions unanswered. At the end of the film, many characters are still dealing with complex issues that I would have liked to them to see through on camera.

The movie has it's flaws, but for what it is, a movie about internal struggle and conflicting emotions, it is a success. Oh, I forgot to mention that John Cho (Harold and Kumar) is in the film, and is really good. Hopefully, casting directors will look to this film rather than the Harold and Kumar flicks when considering him, and give him the opportunity to play more compelling characters in other dramatic films as opposed to just comedic roles.

A-

Henry's Top 100: #74- The Little Mermaid

This is one of the first movies I remember seeing. We were in New York City (we were living in Boston at the time) and seeing this movie in New York seemed like a big deal.

And it was. The Little Mermaid is magic. The animation, the story, the music. I know, in theory, its a girl's movie but I don't care. It stands as just a great movie.

The Little Mermaid is the only 2D animation movie on my top 100, and one of two animated movies period. This is partially because I consider it the best representative of the early 90's burst of greatness from Disney. I really like Aladdin and The Lion King, but The Little Mermaid is the best. Flounder and Sebastian...Flotsam and Jetsam...Ursula. I like that there is some dark, kinda creepy stuff in this movie. The priest has an erection. Process that. I can't think of a bad moment in this movie. Maybe I can't separate this movie from my childhood but I don't care. I love The Little Mermaid. And that's why it is on this list.

Best Scene? "Kiss The Girl" is a better song but you can't beat this scene:

Ben Saw: Black Snake Moan

After a long dry spell, I've watched a lot of new movies in the past few weeks, and so, I have a backlog to work through. Let's start with the movie that started the run and probably the movie that's stuck with me the most: Black Snake Moan. If you look at it as a normal movie, it is truly strange. Here is a word for word and in-order transcript of the texts I sent Hen as I watched the movie:

- "Enjoying it so far. Only 20 min in though."

- "Ok. Movie just got crazy."

- "Kind of liking movie again."

- "And....got weird again."

- "Ok. Liked movie a pretty good amount."

I should explain, but first a brief plot summary:

Set in Mississippi, the plot has Sam Jackson as a farmer and blues musician who has spiraled downwards after his wife left him for his brother while Christina Ricci is an emotionally tormented young woman who deals with her pain by being the (wildly sexual) town tramp, although her fairly recent boyfriend (Justin Timberlake) seems to provide her with some peace. JT is in the military though and has to ship out, leaving Ricci to breakdown until she is found, badly beaten and very high, by Samuel L. Sam tries to heal her, but she is in a fevered state and tries to run off repeatedly, leading to the chain around Ricci's body that was emphasized so much in the movie. After healing her physical wounds, Sam sets to work on the emotional ones using the time-honored tools of good ol' Southern wisdom, low-church preachin' and, most of all, mean blues playin'. It works. Timberlake returns from the military early and sets to work on everyone that he thinks has ever done his girl wrong (re: banged her), a group he wrongly includes Jackson in. See, Justin's character has problems too and, realizing this, Jackson calms him and gets Ricci and Timberlake married where, although the movie lets you know that everything is not alright, this two kids are going to heal and move forward because of each other. The end.

Ricci's descent, Jackson's chaining and periodic religious fervor, the bible talk, all of these points in the movie are at least a little bit unpleasant, uncomfortable and off-kilter; I am sure it alienated at least 3 or 4 of the 11 people that actually went to theaters to see this thing. Focusing on the plot, though, is missing the point. This is a movie about the blues and everything that happens is basically just setting the tone of the universe of the blues. It can never seem to wear the God-talk with a straight face and throws it to the winds anyway after a bit anyway, the chain (despite what the trailer shows) is on for only a fairly small percentage of the movie then ultimately serves as a hopeful metaphor and Jackson's character is very much the embodiment of a character in a blues song: wronged, humble, angry, drunk and forlorn. At the end of the day, old reels of Son House (a great blues musician) are what the movie looks to for wisdom and summary while the blues numbers serve to move the plot along and evolve the characters. If you like blues, this movie is great and if you don't then this movie feels inexplicable. I really like the blues and, accordingly, I thought this movie was awesome.

That being said, I have no idea why this movie was made.

Sure, the acting is all strong to very strong: Jackson is the runaway highlight as he puts in what is almost certainly his career best, Justin Timberlake is a perennial positive surprise , Ricci gets compellingly lost in the role and the supporting cast is all effective. BUT..... the script is shaky at points, none of the material is mass-audience friendly and, frankly, the art house picture crowd that normally would be the demographic for a movie like this probably wasn't interested in watching a movie extol the virtues of Jesus (even if it's done with a bit of a wink and a shrug) and a marginal, unloved genre of music. The bottom line is, that this is basically a blues musical and that's a questionable commercial proposition.

This reeked of a Samuel L. Jackson-driven art project given that he spent 6 months doing nothing but learning the guitar and throws himself in to the role like I've never seen him do before. No matter how admirable, the results of this vanity piece are easy to guess: a grand total domestic gross of $10 million on an IMDB-listed budget of $15 million (which doesn't include advertising). Arguably, this movie should never have been made.

But I don't mind, I really liked it despite its obvious flaws. The music is great, the blues focus is enthralling and the actual story is good if you can accept that it's mostly a parable for the Southern-noir of the blues. I doubt that many people want to see a blues musical, but if you want to see a strange, well-acted movie that tries to tell a heavy story in a novel way there's a real argument for seeing this thing.

My Grade: A-/A. More 'objective' grade: B

Henry's Top 100: #75- Terminator 2

Or T2 as it is better known. I'm sure that you can find someone who argues that this was when 21st century cinema started. The special effects in this movie still look okay. And that's very impressive.

T2 is a very good sci-fi movie. It's not the best, but its good, and its a very familiar movie. I remember when I "graduated" from eighth grade, this was one of the movies we watched at the party I had. It's a violent R-rated film, but for me, it is comfort food. It's always there. Edward Furlong is annoying, Arnold is ridiculous, Robert Patrick peaks...bad to the bone, wolfy...I know the movie like the back of my hand.

T2 is easy to like and impossible to love. Still, it was one of the first R rated movies I saw...and it does has some great stuff. It is not a movie I feel passionate about but it is a movie I have to put on my top 100.

Best Scene: The 3 way chase between John Connor on a moped, T-1000 in a truck, and Arnold on a motorcycle.

Henry Saw: The Chronicles of Narnia - Prince Caspian

I didn't love the first Chronicles of Narnia movie (The Lion, The Witch, and the Wardrobe) but I didn't hate it. In the end, it was pretty faithful to the book, a book that many love, and was a damn decent kids movie. It was too long, a little silly at times (Santa Claus?), a bit heavy on the Jesus thing (but again, that's the book) and really did feel like Lord of the Rings, but you know, for kids. Still, it had charm and entertained me for most of its duration.


Which brings us to number two in the series: Prince Caspian.

As I've done before, I will let IMDB describe the plot: "The Pevensie siblings return to Narnia, where they are enlisted to once again help ward off an evil king and restore the rightful heir to the land's throne, Prince Caspian."

First thing I'll say is that this is much better than the first movie. But, it is still very far from perfect.

The director, Andrew Adamson, has gotten better. Some shots are very well composed and the whole world feels bigger than in the first. I never, for one moment, thought something looked like cramped or screamed "SOUND STAGE". Adamson's biggest problem, and it was the biggest problem from the fist one as well, is he still hasn't learned how to properly pace one of these movies. It is surprising because the Shrek movies (which Adamson directed) move at such a brisk pace. Its not so much that scenes are in that should have been cut but instead that each scene takes a little too long. I found myself muttering "come on..." to myself multiple times. Still, who knows if moving at a faster pace wouldn't have made the movie feel rushed...in general Adamson does a fine job.

The acting is all pretty good actually. I've seen other critics say that the kids are all dull but I don't agree. They're all pretty damn good actually, with Georgie Henley as Lucy and Skander Keynes as Edmund being the standouts. Ben Barnes, as the title character of Caspian, is fine. A bit Orlando Bloom-y but I don't mean to make him sound that shit. He is forced to do a silly accent but he's okay. The real test will be if he can carry the inevitable sequel.

Eddie Izzard does his thing as Reepicheep, the ass-kicking mouse, but isn't given enough funny lines given the inherent appeal of his character. And it was fun seeing Warwick Davis in a fantasy movie again (playing a dwarf of course).

There are multiple "great" scenes in this movie. Standouts include an attack on a castle involving minotaurs, centaurs, and griffins, an actually clever way of defeating a large onslaught of charging soldiers, and an awesome scene with Tilda Swinton returning as the White Witch. Still there is a lot of filler and frustration in there. Some characters act "noble" to a silly degree, there's an ongoing thing about how Lucy is the only one who believes that Aslan will help them, etc. It's filled with little things, whether or not they were avoidable, that hurt the movie in my opinion.

There is one more thing I have to mention before I give the movie its grade. There are two moments in this film, that on the unintentionally funny scale, are tens. High tens. I won't spoil them for you but one involves someone's mother and the other involves a retarded bear. I honestly cannot tell you what the filmmakers were thinking...but I don't know if I have ever laughed so hard. They are both...amazing.

It is also interesting to think about the sub-genre that has really blossomed since the Lord of the Rings and Harry Potter series started. Also in this group are things like the Narnia movies, The Golden Compass, Eragon (that dragon movie), and The Spiderwick Chronicles. Obviously the Lord of the Rings movies are fantastic but in general I think this group of movies has been pretty disappointingly. I've only liked the third and fourth Harry Potter movies to date, The Golden Compass was not as bad as people say but it was a misfire, and I didn't even bother with Eragon or Spiderwick. I think part of the problem with these movies is the abundance of CGI...some of it is how desperate they are to be the "next" LOTR or Harry Potter... We'll see if this new wave of fantasy movies has any more gems to offer us.


Grade: As far as old Caspian goes...it probably deserves a B- or worse...but I had fun tonight. I'll go with a B...but I'm not sure I totally recommend it.

Best Scene? Retard Bear

Henry Saw: Marnie

...What the hell was that?

So it's pretty well known that Hitchcock went on an amazing run of movies starting in the mid 1950's. Within a ten year period Hitchcock directed Dial M for Murder, Rear Window, To Catch a Thief, Vertigo (which I despise), North By Northwest, Psycho and The Birds among others. That is just amazing. It is also relatively well known that after The Birds Hitchcock lost it a little bit. He fell in love with Tippi Hedren, the actress he discovered by watching a commercial and featured in The Birds, who rejected his advances. He tried to get Grace Kelly, a.k.a. the most beautiful woman who has ever lived, to come out of retirement (she had become the Princess of Monaco) for his next project but her people objected to the role so Hitch had to "settle" for old Tippi again.

Which brings us to the movie in question: Marnie.

Oh my god. I had heard this was not as strong as his other work but...dear lord was this awful. Brief plot summary: Hedren plays a pretty young blond who has a good racket going. She'll work at a business for a few months, get the combination to their safe, and then take the money and run. She goes to work for a business run by Sean Connery, who through a plot contrivance figures out her game, and blackmails her into marrying him or he will turn her in. Some other crap is in there...Marnie is afraid of the color red, her mom is kind of pathetic, Sean Connery's dead wife's sister Lil is jealous of Marnie, Marnie is "driven" to steal...it's all terrible.

For starters, the movie is 130 minutes and really could have been 100 minutes. Shots linger on faces for far too long, some scenes are just not necessary, and the big "twist" at the end is not really that big of a shocker and by that point I had completely checked out.

Sean Connery is playing Sean Connery so he has his natural charm but they make his character an absolute monster. He verbally abuses Marnie, blackmails her into marrying him...oh and then he rapes her. No shit. He fucking rapes her. And they never really have him answer for it. At all. I guess it must have been considered very bold or something at the time but it is just ridiculous.

There are many other problems...for one, I think we're suppose to believe that Tippi Hedren is prettier than Sean Connery's sister-in-law Lil (who is played by Diane Baker) but this is just not true.

Diane Baker:

Kinda Cute

Old Tippi in Marnie:


Or



There's really no contest. I mean, knowing Connery, he snogged them both...but it hurts the movie. Also, Diane Baker was Senator Ruth Martin in Silence of the Lambs so I have to say "Love the suit."

The movie has almost none of the Hitchcock flair, a bunch of missed opportunities for wit, and because for most of the movie the two leads are hating and raping each other, the chemistry is non-existent.

Look I'm sure my College Hitchcock Professor could explain to me how this is Hitchcock's smartest film, and if I read Freud I would get it, and blah blah blah. This movie is shit. Its shockingly bad and even though Frenzy is okay, if you wanna pretend that Hitchcock died after making The Birds, that's not the worst decision.

Grade: D

Top 100 Sam's Turn- #76- Battle Royale

Well, for today, I'm taking the reins as Henry is out of the office on official business. What business you ask? Well, as a result of his crippling fear of the new Indiana Jones moving being terrible, Henry is currently traveling the globe learning each of the major religions in hopes that if he prays to each and every one of their deities that one of them will answer his desperate plea and see fit to make the new Indy flick half decent. Currently, if my information is correct Henry is in the Vatican, and tomorrow will be traveling to Tibet...Good luck and Godspeed! Hen being indisposed and all, it falls to me to take over and I'm going to do just that.

Topic of the day: Battle Royal. So you read Lord of the Flies when you were in seventh grade like everyone else right? Great. After seeing it did you think to yourself, wow this would make an amazing movie? Then did your teacher decide to show you the 1963 feature film? Yeah...thought so. Ouch. The movie just doesn't come close to touching the feelings of the loss of reason and morality that the book does. Sure they kill Piggy and all, but that had to be one of the most boring most "important moment" I've ever seen.....take a gander



Battle Royal is everything that a Lord of the Flies movie should have been. The original plot may be a bit far fetched; in futuristic Japan, every year one junior high school class is forced onto an island to fight each other to the death until there is only one survivor as a deterrent to the younger generation who has apparently lost their values. But, none of that matters, because what is important about this film is that it portrays the raw emotions (fear, denial, rage, sadness, insanity) of characters forced into a desperate situation with no mode of escape. The characters act as you expect they would. They are terrified at first, and then begin to accept the situation once they can no longer deny it (via seeing classmates murdered before your eyes by their teacher). Some embrace the contest and become hunters, while others flee, some even chose to end their own lives. The movies strength is its absolute unwillingness to pull any punches as is apparent from what I think is the most powerful moment in the entire movie...the scene starts at 5:18 and goes until 6:55.



If you haven't seen this movie yet, and there's a good chance you haven't, go to your local video store and ask, they have it. This type of movie just doesn't get made in the US. Now, lets just hope they don't do an American remake and ruin it like they did with Infernal Affairs.

Bomb, Thy Name is Speed Racer

They don't make em cheap anymore. Even seemingly special effect-less movies like What Happens in Vegas cost $35 million to make. Then there are Wachowski brother movies, which are whole different story all together. Ironically, for a movie like Speed Racer which would appear to have nothing but special effects, it's budget is on the low end (for FX heavy films) costing only $120 million. Just as a point of reference, Box OfficeMojo reports that Spiderman 3, and Iron Man cost $258 and $140 million respectively. One-hundred and twenty million may be on the low end of the spectrum for special effects driven movies these days, but that doesn't mean studios are just willing to throw that kind of money away on films that will underperform. Unfortunetly, on opening weekend, Speed Racer only came up with $20 million. Normally , I wouldn't call this a terrible weekend, but given the fact that Iron Man is still going strong and the sure to be massive hit Prince Caspian, is releasing next week, followed soon after by Indian Jones, it doesn't look like there is going to be much chance for the Mach 5 to catch up (okay I couldn't resist, it was a gimme). Maybe it's because I feel sorry for the film, maybe its being I think monkeys are hilarious and if I'm not mistaken Speed has a pet monkey named Chim Chim, or maybe because I have a friend who has been dying to see the film...but I'll be seeing Speed Racer later this week. Hopefully, I'll be able to say that people are missing out and the movie isn't getting the credit it deserves....wishful thinking? Hit the jump for the details of Speed's Money making woes via Box Office Mojo as well as a trailer.






Speed's Empty Wallet

(via BoxOfficeMojo.com)

Henry's Top 100 - #77 - Alien

So, a couple weeks ago the best Superman issue of all time came out (in my humble opinion). In 22 pages, writer Grant Morrison and artist Frank Quitely captured everything there is to like about Superman. (The issue was All-Star Superman #10 for those who care). It is, in all respects, the perfect comic book. The script, art, coloring, concept, and character all meld to form a perfect thing. And yet, I don't love it. I really, really like it. But I admire it more than I appreciate it. In the end, I just don't like Superman enough to completely give myself over to any story of his, no matter how perfect.

How does this relate to Alien other than both the title characters being extra terrestrial? Well, like that issue, Alien does no wrong. There is absolutely no misstep in Alien. It is a masterpiece. I just don't love it.

It's tag-line is great: "In space no one can here you scream." I mean...that is, like the film, perfect. The shots of the ship. The cast. The tone. The script. The chest burster. The Art Direction. This whole movie is made of perfection. But its just a little cold.

And I know that's the point. But I first saw this film, after having seen Aliens, when I had a high-grade fever when I was 9. So what hit me more than the big "scares" of the film was the actual narrative. Cause when your sick, you're grasping to make sense of everything. You don't pay attention to a sudden zoom with a music swell (the classic scare tactic) but you remember when Ash goes fucking crazy and starts puking milk.

Alien is an amazing creature / horror film. It has great actors/acting, a fantastic set, and its design is beyond perfect.

But I have no love for this movie. I love its sequel...but no part of me has any affection for Alien. It's just that it is so good.

I've seen a lot of movies so to be 77 ain't bad. The only reason 76 movies are in front of it, is that I, in some manner, connect to them better. But see Alien if you haven't. It's perfect. You'll think Superman must have directed it.

Best Scene? The Chest-Burst

Henry's Top 100: #78 - The Manchurian Candidate

I of course mean the original. The one with Frank Sinatra and Angela Lansbury. This movie was way ahead of its time. For instance, it was one of the first American movies to have characters use karate in a fight. Watching it now, knowing that just one year after its release JFK would be assassinated, is slightly disturbing. It is a brilliant political thriller and has touches of Shakespearian drama.

Because the plot is pretty intricate I'll let IMDB summarize it for you:
"In Korea in 1952, a US Army patrol is ambushed by Communist soldiers. A year later the squad, having escaped, returns to the US, where Staff Sergeant Raymond Shaw (Laurence Harvey) is to receive the Medal of Honor for single-handedly saving the lives of the squad. Shaw is the son of Elanor Iselin, wife of US Senator John Yerkes Iselin, and Mrs. Iselin (Angela Lansbury) turns the return of Raymond into a political rally that brings out building hostility between son and mother over the ambitions of Johnny Iselin. But there is more involved, for the actions of Raymond Shaw are not what everyone believes they are, and the nightmares of a US Army officer, Bennett Marco (Frank Sinatra), leads to investigation of Raymond that unlocks a stunning political conspiracy that sweeps up Johnny and Elanor Iselin, and which only Bennett Marco can possibly stop."


It sounds confused but it really isn't. There is not one extra scene, and director John Frankenheimer keeps the movie moving at a breakneck speed (especially given the era in which it was made). Sinatra is great as the lead (and I'm not a big Frank fan) and Angela Lansbury is incredible as the super-creepy mother.


This is definitely one of the great movies of all time. Its not higher on the list simply because there are 77 movies I like a little bit more. But this is an A. No doubt about it.

Best Scene? The brainwashing scene which somehow mixes a bunch of old ladies at a gardening meeting with evil genius Koreans brainwashing young American GIs.