This essay has some pretty serious spoilers.
At your local theater is a film called Untraceable which, from what I've seen, is a blatant jab at Americans for being obsessed with technology and violence. It is basically telling us about the evils of the internet and the crazy people on there. We get it! The internet is the filthy old man of technology. However, the other film currently playing that suggests our culture's dependence upon technology is Matt Reeves' Cloverfield.
By using hand held personal cameras, it makes the entire world of the film that much more real. The camera used in the film out-survives the main characters. Early in the film Hud is tricked into documenting a good-bye party, but decides to have fun with it. However, as the events of the night unfold, he carries on his duty of chronicling the adventure. Several times you hear someone saying 'Put the camera down' but at no point is Hud, the cameraman, willing to stop documenting the event. In the end only the technology survives... creepy.
The most humorous example of our use/obsession with technology is when the party-goers flood onto the street and experience the head of the Statue of Liberty landing in front of them. Within seconds there are at least a dozen people using their camera phones to capture the giant bronze head. Hilarious? Yes, in a creepy 'I don't know how or why this is happening, but I have time to camera phone this crazy shit' kind of way.
When the main characters are hiding in the subway, the most emotional and disturbingly real use of the camera comes. When Rob's mother calls and he must tell her that his brother was killed, the camera stays a good distance away, giving a strong feeling of voyeurism. All I could think of while this was going on was the video I saw when they brought Heath Ledger's body out from his apartment. There are people going through an incredibly emotional time, but all other people can think is that it'll look really good on TV or in a magazine.
Earlier in the film, Rob goes to steal a battery for his phone. Hud chases after him with the camera and we see my favorite use of technology in the film. While in the store we get video footage of television... several televisions. That's reflexive. We also see Hud spin around at one point to see all the looters staring at the news. They stopped looting in order to watch TV. I know they want to know what's going on, but it's just funny to see looters taking a break in the store they're robbing to see some TV.
So those are a few of the examples I saw in the film that can be viewed as a commentary about America's obsession and dependency with technology. With a second viewing and some writing utensils I could probably write a good four to five page paper if anyone is interested in purchasing it.
Wednesday, January 30, 2008
Meet the Spoofs
It is true and I will not deny it. I saw Meet the Spartans last evening. Before you shiv me, let me give you the details. After seeing Cloverfield (which I would review, but I'd be the third) I made my way into a different theater thinking it was the bathroom. I pulled my pants down and sat down in one of the soft chairs. Before I could wonder 'Why are there so many other toilets in here?' or 'Where will my #2 go?' I was transported to ancient Sparta. Sadly, the film contained almost none of the scenes from the preview. More sadly, it did have some good parts.
There were several actors who appeared in the film that made the 101% 300 based storyline occasionally bearable. (Yes, I will admit that I laughed occasionally but mostly because of how bad it was.) The most important of these actors was Hercules himself, Kevin Sorbo. Why the hell didn't this guy do any comedy before? He was hilarious in the over buff, shirt missing demi-god sort of way. If you, like my dear friend Seth, pick it up from the $4.99 shelf at Blockbuster be prepared to laugh (one of the five times during the movie) when Hercules gets in on a "You're Momma" contest. Also appearing in this film was Carmen Electra. I never really found her all the attractive with her 'polar bear/snake face' but I was hoping so hard that her minimal clothes would somehow become even more... minimal. There was also an appearance by Ken Davitian, better known as Azamat Bagatov from Borat. He was actually the best part of the film and I vowed not to ruin it for you (two of the five times you will laugh during the movie).
It would be fair to say that the spoof genre pretty much died with the first Scary Movie, but it will continue to linger. Once in awhile there is a spoof that I can consider bearable. I personally thought that Scary Movie 4 was better than the previous two. I also thought that Not Another Teen Movie had several good moments. These films can never reach the caliber of Naked Gun and I don't think can with they type of people buying tickets to them. Scary Movie was a good spoof because the movies it spoofed were good movies. Now, the spoof films have movies like Stomp the Yard and You've Been Served and How She Move as material and as a result end up using the entire plot from one decent film and bad celebrity impersonators to fill the holes. If the films that are there to be spoofed are worth spoofing, then the spoof film will work. Make sense?
I am an intelligent man in my early 20's who spend a bit of money to learn how to make movies and I hope nobody thinks that I loved this movie and camped out the night before to purchase tickets. It was free and I never expected another Scary Movie, even though it was made by two of the writes of Scary Movie. I knew it would be crap parodying crap and that was the humor I wanted after watching Cloverfield.
There were several actors who appeared in the film that made the 101% 300 based storyline occasionally bearable. (Yes, I will admit that I laughed occasionally but mostly because of how bad it was.) The most important of these actors was Hercules himself, Kevin Sorbo. Why the hell didn't this guy do any comedy before? He was hilarious in the over buff, shirt missing demi-god sort of way. If you, like my dear friend Seth, pick it up from the $4.99 shelf at Blockbuster be prepared to laugh (one of the five times during the movie) when Hercules gets in on a "You're Momma" contest. Also appearing in this film was Carmen Electra. I never really found her all the attractive with her 'polar bear/snake face' but I was hoping so hard that her minimal clothes would somehow become even more... minimal. There was also an appearance by Ken Davitian, better known as Azamat Bagatov from Borat. He was actually the best part of the film and I vowed not to ruin it for you (two of the five times you will laugh during the movie).
It would be fair to say that the spoof genre pretty much died with the first Scary Movie, but it will continue to linger. Once in awhile there is a spoof that I can consider bearable. I personally thought that Scary Movie 4 was better than the previous two. I also thought that Not Another Teen Movie had several good moments. These films can never reach the caliber of Naked Gun and I don't think can with they type of people buying tickets to them. Scary Movie was a good spoof because the movies it spoofed were good movies. Now, the spoof films have movies like Stomp the Yard and You've Been Served and How She Move as material and as a result end up using the entire plot from one decent film and bad celebrity impersonators to fill the holes. If the films that are there to be spoofed are worth spoofing, then the spoof film will work. Make sense?
I am an intelligent man in my early 20's who spend a bit of money to learn how to make movies and I hope nobody thinks that I loved this movie and camped out the night before to purchase tickets. It was free and I never expected another Scary Movie, even though it was made by two of the writes of Scary Movie. I knew it would be crap parodying crap and that was the humor I wanted after watching Cloverfield.
Joining The Cult As A Posthumous Fan
Being born in the 80’s, there were a lot of culturally significant things that I missed. Unfortunately, before I was born there were a slew of important bands that formed and broke up, all without me being able to see them in concert. When I first heard The Doors, I fell in love. But, as I like to do with so many bands I love, seeing them live was never an option for me. The day Johnny Cash died, I saw the Bouncing Souls play at Irving Plaza in New York City. They ended their set playing “Folsom Prison Blues” as a tribute to the Man in Black, but at the time, I only knew The Simpsons’ parody of the song, which Krusty sang. A few weeks later, the singer in my band played more of Cash’s music for me, and I fell in love. It was pretty poor timing. Christmastime, 2002: I knew that “Combat Rock” was a great album, but I was just discovering how amazing “London Calling,” “The Clash,” and other albums by the seminal punk band were, when I would wake up to hear that Joe Strummer died of an unexpected heart-attack. That long sought after reunion that was finally in talks would not go off at the Rock n Roll Hall of Fame induction ceremony as planned.
Every band that I love that no longer tours or makes new music is like an opportunity missed, but for what its worth, it was out of my hands. The Clash stopped touring and making music before I even became interested in music, and Johnny Cash—though his last few albums were nothing short of fantastic—was certainly not performing the way he did back at Folsom or San Quentin. I’ve seen some “old rockers” live, and it’s obvious that I would have been better off having been born at least 20 years earlier. I defy you to find a positive review of the recent Police reunion. Even their drummer Stewart Copeland had nothing good to say.
I may have missed several opportunities, but I’ve done all I can: I’ve bought the CDs (or downloaded the tracks legally), watched the DVDs, attempted the solo stuff where applicable, watched the biopics, etc. etc. These things are out of my hands.
Other things weren’t out of my hands, and for this, I should be punished. I recently finished watching season three of Mitchell Hurwitz’s critically acclaimed TV show “Arrested Development,” and when that first credit began to stream at the end of the thirteenth episode, so did the tears from my eyes. This TV show was nothing short of brilliant, and for three glorious seasons spanning from 2003-2006, I successfully avoided it. This was no easy feat: all roommates with whom I shared living quarters during this time period were fans. I literally left the room when they would watch, because I just wasn’t interested. It wouldn’t be until it was too late that I discovered just how perfect a TV show this was, from the writing to the casting to the acting. And what really hurts the most is that it might as well have been my fault that it was cancelled. See, the show won tons and tons of awards, was so critically acclaimed that you could forget that it aired on Fox, and had some of the most loyal fans ever. Yet, it was cancelled due to lack of viewership. Imagine if I had tuned in. The difference I could have made….
I’m not sure if this is a lesson I can truly learn from. Before discovering “Arrested Development,” I took the cue from my friends and watched seasons one and two of “Lost” in time to catch the premier of season three. I bought “Heroes” season one and had a marathon viewing so that season two would fit nicely in my schedule. But these are the exceptions. I loved the first episode of “Pushing Daisies” but haven’t watched one since; after over $100 in expenses for the first three seasons of “Nip/Tuck,” I’ve abandoned it completely—and not over a lack of interest.
They call “Arrested Development” a cult classic, which is generally reserved for failures that have a small, yet extremely loyal following. Perhaps my lack of consistency comes from my fear of cults. Or maybe it’s more. Maybe I have some sort of sadomasochistic tendency that forces me to show my love for things only when it’s too late. Whatever the case may be, its clear that I have a problem. Consider this my call for help.
Every band that I love that no longer tours or makes new music is like an opportunity missed, but for what its worth, it was out of my hands. The Clash stopped touring and making music before I even became interested in music, and Johnny Cash—though his last few albums were nothing short of fantastic—was certainly not performing the way he did back at Folsom or San Quentin. I’ve seen some “old rockers” live, and it’s obvious that I would have been better off having been born at least 20 years earlier. I defy you to find a positive review of the recent Police reunion. Even their drummer Stewart Copeland had nothing good to say.
I may have missed several opportunities, but I’ve done all I can: I’ve bought the CDs (or downloaded the tracks legally), watched the DVDs, attempted the solo stuff where applicable, watched the biopics, etc. etc. These things are out of my hands.
Other things weren’t out of my hands, and for this, I should be punished. I recently finished watching season three of Mitchell Hurwitz’s critically acclaimed TV show “Arrested Development,” and when that first credit began to stream at the end of the thirteenth episode, so did the tears from my eyes. This TV show was nothing short of brilliant, and for three glorious seasons spanning from 2003-2006, I successfully avoided it. This was no easy feat: all roommates with whom I shared living quarters during this time period were fans. I literally left the room when they would watch, because I just wasn’t interested. It wouldn’t be until it was too late that I discovered just how perfect a TV show this was, from the writing to the casting to the acting. And what really hurts the most is that it might as well have been my fault that it was cancelled. See, the show won tons and tons of awards, was so critically acclaimed that you could forget that it aired on Fox, and had some of the most loyal fans ever. Yet, it was cancelled due to lack of viewership. Imagine if I had tuned in. The difference I could have made….
I’m not sure if this is a lesson I can truly learn from. Before discovering “Arrested Development,” I took the cue from my friends and watched seasons one and two of “Lost” in time to catch the premier of season three. I bought “Heroes” season one and had a marathon viewing so that season two would fit nicely in my schedule. But these are the exceptions. I loved the first episode of “Pushing Daisies” but haven’t watched one since; after over $100 in expenses for the first three seasons of “Nip/Tuck,” I’ve abandoned it completely—and not over a lack of interest.
They call “Arrested Development” a cult classic, which is generally reserved for failures that have a small, yet extremely loyal following. Perhaps my lack of consistency comes from my fear of cults. Or maybe it’s more. Maybe I have some sort of sadomasochistic tendency that forces me to show my love for things only when it’s too late. Whatever the case may be, its clear that I have a problem. Consider this my call for help.
Tuesday, January 29, 2008
I Don't Hate the Oscars This Year
Usually, I'm not that into the Oscars as there are usually a lot of films that are nominated because they are "important" issue films or overdramatic Oscar bait. (See Million Dollar Baby, Crash) This year, however, I am very interested in the awards, especially in the best picture category. I still won't watch the three hours of filler that comprise the show(if it even happens), but I'll be checking the papers the next morning with some enthusiasm. This is the first year I have ever seen all five films nominated for Best Picture, and while there is only one of them I really want to win, I could be okay with any of them.
Juno is this year's big indie film. I kind of expected a nomination for it simply based on all the Little Miss Sunshine comparisons. Basically, both films were indie films that managed to cross over to mainstream audiences and take in some big box office. While it is a quality film, I believe its these qualities that have made it a Best Picture nominee.
Michael Clayton is the nominee that I am the most surprised about, as it seemed to have garnered the least attention out of the five films. It's a great film and is very similar to Sidney Lumet's The Verdict starring Paul Newman. Michael Clayton also has my favorite final shot of 2007, featuring a steady shot on George Clooney as his cab drives around. It's very similar to the final shot in The Graduate where the camera is just running, there's no dialogue, and the effects of the events of the film are seen in the tired eyes of Clooney. Again, loved the film, but still not my pick for Best Picture.
Atonement probably has the most beautiful cinematography of the bunch and the most use of the "c" word on film. It's never actually said, but you see it typed almost a million times. That's right, a million. The previous record holder was She-Devil starring Roseanne. Joe Wright has made a film more erotic and depressing than any others this year, but I don't quite think its "the" Best Picture.
No Country for Old Men, or NCFOM as my mom called it when she confused the shit out of me with a text message, is almost my pick for Best Picture. Almost, so close. It is beautifully shot, well written, incredibly acted, but there is still one who trumps it.
There Will Be Blood is without a doubt, my favorite movie out of these nominees and quite possibly, of 2007. I had never seen a Daniel Day-Lewis movie, nor had I seen a Paul Thomas Anderson movie prior to this film. Just based on the strength of There Will Be Blood, I went out and bought Gangs of New York, Magnolia, and Boogie Nights the following week. This film is great in every way. Day-Lewis is so wonderfully single minded and insane, in anyone else's hands, it would fall flat or be seen as over the top. This is a man who hates people so much, he just wants to make enough money so he won't have to interact with anyone. Paul Dano as Eli Sunday is just as crazy and greedy, but he masks his ambitions with the church. The music is just as haunting and scary as the score to The Shining and makes a film that no one would think to classify as a horror movie feel exactly like one. The overall package is so wonderfully put together by P.T. Anderson that all I can say is that I love this movie. It deserves Best Picture, but if it doesn't get it, I won't be as disappointed thanks to the nominees this year that are almost just as good.
On a side note, it's worth noting that Atonement, There Will Be Blood, and No Country for Old Men each have a title that just scream out for a titular line in the film, yet don't fulfill the viewer's desire for one. Each would have been just a little bit better if the following lines were in them:
"This is my...Atonement."
"This is simply...No Country for Old Men."
"There Will Be Blood...oh, yes, There Will Be Blood."
That's just another point for There Will Be Blood as it had the opportunity to squeeze in not one, but two mentions of the title into one line. Hopefully, these lines will find their way into deleted scenes on the DVDs.
Sunday, January 27, 2008
Five Little Pleasures
It's doesn't take much to say you love a movie because it's so good. There's beautiful lighting, the characters are real, the acting is superb, etc. I spent four years in college and learned all about what makes a good film great. But what makes certain bad film entertaining AKA a guilty pleasure? I have chosen my five favorite not so great movies that I will always view as legendary and if I see it on TNT on Sunday at 2... that shit is staying on.
I will point out that all 5 of my top entertaining, non-award worthy films were all released in a 5 year period. Perhaps mid-late 90's to the beginning of the second millennium was just the best time for these films to prosper.
5. Anaconda (1997)
Let's start with the cast of this film: J. Lo, when her ass was still larger than her ego, Owen Wilson getting eaten by a snake, Ice Cube, and Robin Williams's dad from Jumaji (which was number 9 on this list). It's a good cast with not horrible acting ability. Wait, I forgot we also have Papa Jolie, Jon Voight, as one creepy ass dude who takes the team of documentary makers hostage and forces them to help him hunt down a giant snake just because he's crazy. Genius. The movie is full of amazingly cheap dialogs, stereotypical 1997 CGI, and pure entertainment.
4. Cable Guy (1996)
Ace Venture vs. Ferris Bueller at Medieval Times. That shit is classically stupid entertainment. I don't care if the rest of the movie is just Jim Carrey trying to one-up the kookiness of any past or future role. That's all I have to say about that.
3. Face Off (1997)
Can you pitch this movie without it sounding like the greatest plot for an action film? No, you can't. I tried. Impossible. A FBI agent switches faces with a bad guy in order to get the bad guy's brother to tell the agent where a bomb is, but things turn hairy when they bad guy gets the agent's face! There's also John Travolta making fun of his own chin, ambiguous incest tension, Nicolas Cage in one of his few awesome roles, and doves. As far as action movies go, I think this one is probably one of my favorite. Many of you have to agree, but you can also say Total Recall, which I will allow.
2. Shanghai Noon (2000)
Around the same time, Jackie Chan had started another franchise in which there was rushing and hours. However, I prefer this film since I find Chris Tuckers voice makes my ears bleed within 13 seconds. Also, Owen Wilson is a much better compliment to Jackie Chan as far as buddy comedy pairings go. The main reason I think this film is such a guilty pleasure is because it's a Martial Arts Western Comedy. The only other film that fits into that category is... nothing. Since this film is one of a kind, it deserves the second place spot in my list of guilty pleasure movies.
1. A Knight's Tale (2001)
This is not my number one because I'm dedicating it to Heath Ledger. It is number one because there are very few people, who will say 'No' to this film. In all the years of school, when I brought up that I love this movie to other film students, even though it's nothing special, everyone has always agreed that it is one of their favorite bad movies. I believe what makes this film great is that it crosses even more genres than Shanghai Noon. This film is an Historic Action Romantic Comedy Musical. I don't mean musical in the sense that there's singing and dancing, but because the soundtrack makes this film such a guilty pleasure. When else have you (or where else will you) hear Freddie Mercury belting out "We Will Rock You" during a Medieval jousting tournament? Not in The Cable Guy. This film crosses all of these genres and that is what makes it so great and more entertaining than any other guilty pleasure film. Also because it is the film that will always come to mind when you mention Heath Ledger... except very much possibly The Dark Knight (I hope).
I will point out that all 5 of my top entertaining, non-award worthy films were all released in a 5 year period. Perhaps mid-late 90's to the beginning of the second millennium was just the best time for these films to prosper.
5. Anaconda (1997)
Let's start with the cast of this film: J. Lo, when her ass was still larger than her ego, Owen Wilson getting eaten by a snake, Ice Cube, and Robin Williams's dad from Jumaji (which was number 9 on this list). It's a good cast with not horrible acting ability. Wait, I forgot we also have Papa Jolie, Jon Voight, as one creepy ass dude who takes the team of documentary makers hostage and forces them to help him hunt down a giant snake just because he's crazy. Genius. The movie is full of amazingly cheap dialogs, stereotypical 1997 CGI, and pure entertainment.
4. Cable Guy (1996)
Ace Venture vs. Ferris Bueller at Medieval Times. That shit is classically stupid entertainment. I don't care if the rest of the movie is just Jim Carrey trying to one-up the kookiness of any past or future role. That's all I have to say about that.
3. Face Off (1997)
Can you pitch this movie without it sounding like the greatest plot for an action film? No, you can't. I tried. Impossible. A FBI agent switches faces with a bad guy in order to get the bad guy's brother to tell the agent where a bomb is, but things turn hairy when they bad guy gets the agent's face! There's also John Travolta making fun of his own chin, ambiguous incest tension, Nicolas Cage in one of his few awesome roles, and doves. As far as action movies go, I think this one is probably one of my favorite. Many of you have to agree, but you can also say Total Recall, which I will allow.
2. Shanghai Noon (2000)
Around the same time, Jackie Chan had started another franchise in which there was rushing and hours. However, I prefer this film since I find Chris Tuckers voice makes my ears bleed within 13 seconds. Also, Owen Wilson is a much better compliment to Jackie Chan as far as buddy comedy pairings go. The main reason I think this film is such a guilty pleasure is because it's a Martial Arts Western Comedy. The only other film that fits into that category is... nothing. Since this film is one of a kind, it deserves the second place spot in my list of guilty pleasure movies.
1. A Knight's Tale (2001)
This is not my number one because I'm dedicating it to Heath Ledger. It is number one because there are very few people, who will say 'No' to this film. In all the years of school, when I brought up that I love this movie to other film students, even though it's nothing special, everyone has always agreed that it is one of their favorite bad movies. I believe what makes this film great is that it crosses even more genres than Shanghai Noon. This film is an Historic Action Romantic Comedy Musical. I don't mean musical in the sense that there's singing and dancing, but because the soundtrack makes this film such a guilty pleasure. When else have you (or where else will you) hear Freddie Mercury belting out "We Will Rock You" during a Medieval jousting tournament? Not in The Cable Guy. This film crosses all of these genres and that is what makes it so great and more entertaining than any other guilty pleasure film. Also because it is the film that will always come to mind when you mention Heath Ledger... except very much possibly The Dark Knight (I hope).
REVIEW: Akbar's Indian Cuisine: It's a Trap...of Deliciousness
Or How I Almost Ate A Warm Towelette
Now, for those who don't know, I started a diet several weeks ago. It's not too hard to stick to, but it's not exactly easy either. The thing is, I've allowed myself to have about two meals during the weekend where I don't adhere to the plan. I've decided that for the most part, I don't want these meals wasted on somewhere like Friday's or any of its many clones. I want to try new foods and new restaurants, which led my lovely fiancee Chrystal and me to finally trying Akbar's last night.
First off, Akbar's is a beautiful restaurant. It's very open, very bright and very clean. We might have just gone at a slow part of the night, but the service was incredible. At least 8 people asked me if I wanted something to drink before I finally ordered a glass of wine. (Chrystal had the fortitude to stick with water, I just couldn't say no to those people) As for the food, it was a huge step up for someone who had only enjoyed take-out Indian food at work. The garlic naan was fluffy and flavorful and the chicken biryani was better than I've ever had before.
After they cleared our table of all the dinner plates, the put out a plate with two rolled up white and yellow things which looked to me, like some sort of rolled white chocolate. If anyone's ever been to a Thai restaurant, you've probably had a free dessert at the end of the meal that's like a white chocolate wrapped in banana leaves. This is the kinda thing it was. Luckily, the waiter noticed me pondering the plate and said "That's for wiping off your hands." Holy crap, I almost ate a warm, moist towelette. The actual desserts we had were far more delicious than the towel would have been. I had carrot pudding, which didn't actually have a pudding-like consistency, but was more like ground up warm carrots that were incredibly sweet. As for Chrystal, she had...milk balls? They were good, but neither their texture nor appearance is appetizing. It was three brown balls sitting in honey. Three brown balls in a yellow substance. Not what you imagine when capping off your meal, but Chrystal dove in and tried them and was pleasantly surprised.
So, after 4 years of imagining the proprietor of Akbar's to be a fish-headed admiral from a galaxy far far away, I have to say that Akbar's is truly a great restaurant in addition to being a source of puns for Star Wars geeks. I can't wait til the next time we go there so I can enjoy that sweet, sweet carrot pudding again.
Friday, January 25, 2008
Unpleasant Surprise
There’s one ritual that always pretenses a weekend that contains no major plans, and that is the weekly movie check. Usually around midmorning on any given Friday, I’ll check Fandango just to see if it’ll be one of those “oh yeah, I forgot that was coming out!” moments, or, like this week, one of those “I’m less surprised by a movie that I forgot was coming out so soon, and more surprised by the very amount of total crap that they fund.”
This morning’s trip to Fandango showed me the following results for the theater near me (which is most likely typical of any theater not privately owned, that would show your basic widely released movies):
How She Move new!
Meet the Spartans new!
Rambo new!
Untraceable new!
Just the third weekend into 2008, and we’re already beginning to fill the yearly quota of stereotypes (and, all in one weekend!). Allow me to explain*:
“How She Move” is one of those MTV produced gems about attractive and talented people that either a) face some sort of adversity, b) must practice said talent in private, c) must use said talent to compete in some sort of street competition, or d) all of the above. Wild guess: it’s a d. I know these movies have their audience, and I know I’m not among them, but enough with the dancing based non-musicals!
“Meet the Spartans” is a new parody along the lines of “Scary Movie,” but is so far removed from the originality that was the first “Scary Movie” that now its just a joke. At least they changed the name from “(Genre) Movie,” or “Not Another (Genre) Movie.” Eventually they would have run out of ideas and just called it “Parody Movie.”** No, this is one of those movies that claim to be spoofing a genre, but instead is just a poorly executed parody of anything popular at the moment. Thankfully, movies like this only have a shelf life of about a month before they disappear into obscurity and onto the $5.99 previously viewed for sale rack at Blockbuster.
“Rambo” is Sly trying to capitalize on the success of “Rocky Balboa,” which was essentially Sly trying to capitalize on the success of his past, because at this point in his career, people actually appreciate him less than they ironically appreciate his brother, Frank. Some actors age and grow into new roles and find success in other ways than just playing the only characters anyone knows them for from 25 years ago. Sly seems to have been unable to do that. Shame.
From what I can tell, “Untraceable” is trying to portray the fact that the American public is obsessed with violence. They are, from what I can tell of the plot of the movie, so enamored with violence that they will watch violence even if it means killing someone. A noble message yes, but one that is lost in a movie that is just another violent movie, capitalizing on the public’s love of violence. Turns out, its just a hypocritical message. At least the “Saw” franchise isn’t on its high horse about it: people like gross, they deliver gross.
Once upon a time, any one of these movies might have been original. But it’s not that once upon a time any more. If a studio is going to fund shit, they should at least try and disguise that shit as something less contrived and obvious.
*These descriptions are based on my buying into the stereotypes that I believe these movies are trying to sell. On principle, I have no desire to see any of these films, and while I’d be incredibly surprised if my analysis on any was wrong, I invite you to challenge me (as long as you’re paying).
**Which is actually pretty clever when you think about it. Especially if it was a serious movie about the trials and tribulations that come with the failures of all of those shitty parody movies.
This morning’s trip to Fandango showed me the following results for the theater near me (which is most likely typical of any theater not privately owned, that would show your basic widely released movies):
How She Move new!
Meet the Spartans new!
Rambo new!
Untraceable new!
Just the third weekend into 2008, and we’re already beginning to fill the yearly quota of stereotypes (and, all in one weekend!). Allow me to explain*:
“How She Move” is one of those MTV produced gems about attractive and talented people that either a) face some sort of adversity, b) must practice said talent in private, c) must use said talent to compete in some sort of street competition, or d) all of the above. Wild guess: it’s a d. I know these movies have their audience, and I know I’m not among them, but enough with the dancing based non-musicals!
“Meet the Spartans” is a new parody along the lines of “Scary Movie,” but is so far removed from the originality that was the first “Scary Movie” that now its just a joke. At least they changed the name from “(Genre) Movie,” or “Not Another (Genre) Movie.” Eventually they would have run out of ideas and just called it “Parody Movie.”** No, this is one of those movies that claim to be spoofing a genre, but instead is just a poorly executed parody of anything popular at the moment. Thankfully, movies like this only have a shelf life of about a month before they disappear into obscurity and onto the $5.99 previously viewed for sale rack at Blockbuster.
“Rambo” is Sly trying to capitalize on the success of “Rocky Balboa,” which was essentially Sly trying to capitalize on the success of his past, because at this point in his career, people actually appreciate him less than they ironically appreciate his brother, Frank. Some actors age and grow into new roles and find success in other ways than just playing the only characters anyone knows them for from 25 years ago. Sly seems to have been unable to do that. Shame.
From what I can tell, “Untraceable” is trying to portray the fact that the American public is obsessed with violence. They are, from what I can tell of the plot of the movie, so enamored with violence that they will watch violence even if it means killing someone. A noble message yes, but one that is lost in a movie that is just another violent movie, capitalizing on the public’s love of violence. Turns out, its just a hypocritical message. At least the “Saw” franchise isn’t on its high horse about it: people like gross, they deliver gross.
Once upon a time, any one of these movies might have been original. But it’s not that once upon a time any more. If a studio is going to fund shit, they should at least try and disguise that shit as something less contrived and obvious.
*These descriptions are based on my buying into the stereotypes that I believe these movies are trying to sell. On principle, I have no desire to see any of these films, and while I’d be incredibly surprised if my analysis on any was wrong, I invite you to challenge me (as long as you’re paying).
**Which is actually pretty clever when you think about it. Especially if it was a serious movie about the trials and tribulations that come with the failures of all of those shitty parody movies.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)