The Way of the Future

Tiptoes

2009-11-30T00:24:00.022-05:00

Tiptoes, starring Matthew McConaughey and Gary Oldman, screened at the Deauville Film Festival in late 2003 and went straight to DVD in mid-2004. The trailer (which may or may not have been edited by Tommy Wiseau) caught a lot of attention last spring, but I was watching it again the other day and thought I'd post it for those who have yet to see it. I also recently learned how to screengrab and wanted to give that a go.

The trailer for Tiptoes speaks for itself, and but there was a YouTube comment worth noting.

Someone pointed out the people walking backwards at 1:44. That sort of epitomizes the trailer for me.

If you missed A Simple Man, consider this the next best thing. Mazel tov!

Untitled SAL LUPO Project trailer

2009-02-16T19:04:00.005-05:00

By James

Sal Lupo is a New York City cab driver and an aspiring filmmaker. Here's the trailer for his upcoming film. It's a work in progress but we wish Sal the best and can't wait to see his stuff on the big screen!

Neverland Ranch Liquidation Sale!

2009-02-16T16:58:00.017-05:00

By Rob

In an article on Guardian UK, Chris Campion writes: "The contents of Neverland are officially up for auction"

This article is around 1,000 words and I'd suggest reading it if you have the same perverse curiosity in Michael Jackson's estate as I do. At the very least you should check out the highlights:

"In April, an extraordinary auction will provide an unprecedented look into the private world of Michael Jackson. More than 2,000 items, ranging from personal effects and costumes to pieces from Jackson's private art collection as well as fittings and furnishings from his Neverland ranch, will be up for sale at a four-day public auction at the Beverly Hilton hotel in Los Angeles.

...This new auction seems to mark Jackson's severance from Neverland, his Xanadu and a symbol of his success as well as his largesse. The ranch opened as a private amusement park in 1988, with its own zoo and Ferris wheel, roller coaster and bumper cars. It was named after Peter Pan's fantasy island where children never grow up, and for years children would arrive by the busload, invited to play freely in its grounds. But following the 2005 child molestation trial - which saw Jackson acquitted of all charges - the singer never returned to the 2,800-acre property in the Santa Ynez Valley, 130 miles west of Los Angeles. There were stories of him pitching up in Dubai, Dublin and Las Vegas before he started renting a seven-bedroom mansion in Bel-Air, Los Angeles, earlier this year. The 50-year-old star was said to be defaulting on payments on vast loans, and while he is thought to retain an interest in Neverland through his involvement with a private investment company, Colony Capital, he has said that the police investigation of the premises "violated" it in his eyes.

...Before it was recently renamed Sycamore Valley Ranch, and at Jackson's request, Darren Julien and his team were brought in to scrutinise the ranch. What they found inside was the most astonishing collection of objects these experienced auctioneers said they had ever seen in a celebrity home. "It seemed as if everything he owned was made of bronze and marble and gold," says Michael Doyle, who catalogued the sale items, as well as determining their value.'"

Does he still own the rights to a significant portion of the Beatles catalog? I couldn't find any recent articles on the status of the catalog -- at least not from credible sources. Anyone?...

Anyway, it should come as no surprise that Neverland is full of some of the most "extravagant" or... "fucking crazy" stuff you'll ever see. Of the 29 items that Chris Campion takes a look at, here are my top 3 favorite:

#1. A portrait of Michael Jackson dressed as a king, oil on canvas, signed and dated 1995 and housed in an elaborate gold frame. Guide price $4,000-$6,000

#2. An electric cart featuring an image of Jackson as Peter Pan on the bonnet and Peter Pan cushions. Guide price $4,000-$6,000

#3. A painting on stretched canvas featuring iconic figures such as Abraham Lincoln and Albert Einstein wearing Jackson's trademark sunglasses and glove. Guide price $1,000-$2,000

You can see the rest here.

King James for a season or C-Webb for 15?

2009-02-16T00:37:00.010-05:00

By Rob

In my most recent post, I embedded a video: NBA TV's Top 10 Plays of Chris Webber's Career

Overall it was OK. I really liked #3 and I LOVED #2, but the rest was surprisingly underwhelming. It got me thinking about some of the other Top 10's I've seen on NBA TV and, well... I think Lebron James' Top 10 Plays of 2007 is cooler than C-Webb's Career Top 10 Plays.

Now let me establish a couple things:
1). I don't believe that NBA TV actually showed the top 10 plays of C-Webb's career. A few of the bottom 5 were on par with a half court buzzer beater to end the first half of a regular season game (a little wordy but I think you get it) and I can't fathom them being among the best plays of his career. C-Webb played in 831 games over 15 seasons.. c'mon, NBA TV! Dig a little deeper into the archives.
2). It's likely that NBA TV has compiled a more impressive single-season Top 10 for an individual player than the one for Lebron in 2007.

That being said, have a look at Lebron's '07 highlight reel:

LBJ's dunk in the Eastern Conference finals is nasty... Click here to check out C-Webb's highlight reel.

Is C-Webb Hall of Fame bound?

2009-02-15T16:03:00.024-05:00

By Rob

NOTE: All statistics were recovered using basketball-reference.com. Statistics are accurate as of Feb. 16, 2009. Certain statistical categories were not kept track of until later into the game's history.

Is Chris Webber a Hall of Famer? It's hard to say. Webber was drafted first overall in the 1993 NBA draft, voted the 93-94 Rookie of the Year, and made the All-Rookie first team. In 14 seasons that would follow (13 seasons if you choose not to count the 9 games he played in 07-08 season before calling it quits), Webber would make 5 All-NBA teams and play in 5 All-Star Games.

I can't think of a player who presents a HOF case as interesting as C-Webbs' -- it's teetering on the edge.

The Pros:
He averaged 20-10 (20.7 points, 9.8 rebounds to be exact) over his career -- a feat achieved by few (see below). Career averages of 1+ blocks and 1+ steals per game aren't as unheard of (C-Webb averaged 1.4 in both categories) but to do so in addition to 20-10? That's incredibly rare. (see slightly further below)

The Cons:
Before you begin to talk about if/how he performed in the clutch or what his post-season play was like (he's mssing some jewelry), there's another, more prevailing hurdle to be faced. I think Webber personifies the NBA superstar transitioning from the 90s to the 2000s. Not because he played roughly the first half of his career in the 90s and the latter half in the new millenium (although that is a cute touch) but because he was a very unique kind of supertstar -- at least statisically speaking. He wasn't quite a traditional 90s PF (like Malone, Sir Charles, David Robinson, etc.) nor was he the jack of all trade's SF/PF/C we're accustomed to today (KG, Shawn Marion, Lebron, etc.). He was in an "in-betweener".

He averaged 20-10 but he was never an overwhelming force on the boards or a big-time shot blocker (although his game appeared to be headed in that direction in the strike-shortened 98-99 season). He averaged 4 assists, 1 steal and 1 block per game but he shot just 65% from the foul line. He's not an easy guy to label, and I think that hurts him more than almost anything else.

Well, I'll leave the rest to you. I don't want to look too closely at his post-season play, or how he performed in the clutch, because I don't think that's what people associate C-Webb with. Sacramento's championship aspirations were dashed more than once by some unbelievable L.A. teams (most notably when the Kings fell to LA in Game 7 of the 2002 Western Conference finals) but I don't know if the voters think about the [very] GOOD teams you were on or the times you ALMOST made it... He wasn't a NBA champion and he's better remembered for calling a time out at the end of the NCAA championship game than for any positive clutch moments as a pro. His best bet for enshrinement are his numbers.

...Click here to read the rest of Rob's post

What's "G"?... Wait, what's a "Jabbawockee"?

2009-02-10T16:28:00.017-05:00

By Rob

I'm sure by now everyone who owns a TV is familiar with the recent Gatorade ad campaign, "What's G?" It's simple, mildly clever and seemingly effective.

The format is simple. Lil' Wayne narrates as the camera scrolls past athletes shot in black-and-white, from the waist up, before eventually landing on the "G" logo. There are a few versions of the commercial, starring different athletes, and some are stronger (in terms of featured talent) than others.

There's a great streak of cool athletes in this particular ad, and I don't know if it can be beat. In order, we see the following:

Derek Jeter: "Mr. November"; captain of the New York Yankees; perhaps one of the most recognizable athletes the sport of baseball has ever had... Jeter has 4 well-deserved World Series rings and is, with 9 All-Star games, a clear fan favorite. He's a Hall of Famer. Nice pick, Gatorade. Let's move on...

Bill Russell: Synonomous with the word "champion." In a 13-year career, Russell was an 11-time NBA Champion, 5-time NBA MVP, 12-time NBA All-Star, the first African-American NBA coach (2 NBA championships as a player-coach), and more... He won two NCAA championsips at San Francisco and a gold medal in the 1956 Olympics. He's a pro and college Hall of Famer. I never grow tired of seeing the big guy donning a big smile. Thanks, G.

Muhammad Ali: "The Greatest"... "The Champ"... Ali was a 3-time heavyweight champion of the world, a gold medal winner in the 1960 Olympics, and was named Sports Illustrated's "Sportsman of the Century". When you talk about recognition in sports, there's Ali and Jordan, and then there's everybody else. Bill Russell then Ali? Is this a dream? Where can I buy whatever it is you're selling? Is this enough? (dumps out wallet)

Chaz Ortiz: He's a push. Yes, he's the skateboarding prodigy (at age 14 he's the youngest person to ever win a pro contest) but where was, say, Tony Hawk or Shaun White? Too expensive? Locked up with another drink/soda? Well, admittedly, it's nice to have "the future" represented.

So OK guys, that's the commercial. Pretty neat, right? My next post will be--

Wait, what?...

There's someone else?...

The what? ...Who are the Jabbawockeez?...

A dance troupe?! Wasn't Muhammad Ali like right before them? But.. he beat up people for a living...

What is Gatorade trying to do by putting them in this? What new market are they trying to crack? Derek Jeter is a respected athlete and has dated most of the Maxim Hot 100 list. Bill Russell was one of the greatest athletes of the past century. Ali is Ali. And sure, Ortiz was questionable but he's like the next Tony Hawk. These are rising talents, true sportsmen, icons... What do the Jabbawockeez bring to the table? How very, very strange

Movie Links!

2009-02-10T00:18:00.013-05:00

By Rob

Two cool links coming from Heath McKnight at ScreenRant.com

DreamWorks Dumps Universal For Disney

It’s official: DreamWorks has entered into an exclusive distribution deal with Disney, while leaving its deal with Universal in the dust. All of this was tied to the $250 million DreamWorks needed to keep their deal with an Indian entertainment company alive.

How Is The Economy Affecting Movie Studios?

With things looking bad worldwide economically, why are movie studios hurting even though box office, TV ratings and DVD rentals are all up? Why is the big DreamWorks/Bollywood deal about to go south? With ratings up, why are networks still hurting for money? And finally, why are DVD sales being affected (aside from Netflix cannibalizing them)?

I like what they're doing with their site.

Jimmy Kimmel on Gawker.com

2009-02-09T21:37:00.012-05:00

By Rob

The video is very old (it was posted on YouTube in April 2007) but the faces made by Emily Gould, editor of Gawker.com, transcend time and space. I hate the paparazzi as much as anyone, but I'd be consider boycotting Google if this lady was representing it.

She looks genuinely surprised by every remark made contrary to Gawker. I'm interested to know what her expectations were prior to going on the show. Didn't Gawker have anyone else they could have sent? Even if the only other person working on the site is this guy, I'd take my chances with him over her any day.

O Brother, Where Art Thou?

2009-02-02T23:45:00.014-05:00

By Chris Larsen

Many of you know the story of Jesus and his affair with Mary. Many of you also can count to three, but this is not in its own unusual or special. But, I'm willing to bet you don't know the true story of Jesus' brother, Calliope. Of course you know that he was his half brother from God's first marriage, and that he was an inn keeper (magician) in Bethlehem. What you probably didn't know is that Calliope is Greek for beautiful voice, and is also a female name. How rotten of God to spite his first born like this, how embarrassed he must have been when everyone found out he was named after a vaginal species. Jesus is known for his wonderful powers, he could make the blind see, he could turn a rock into a pet rock. Unfortunately, this wasn't Jesus doing all of this, it was in fact, Calliope! He was the worlds premiere magician, doing three shows a night on the B-town strip. Calliope was so kind too. He would help out the poor all the time by throwing them from a 500 foot cliff. Wait, that's mean. No, there was a pretend magic coin at the bottom, and if the poor soul (literally) made it to the bottom alive (nobody ever did), they could keep the coin (that was a pretend magic coin).

He trusted everybody, believing that everyone was pure at heart, except his father whom he decided to get even with by emancipating himself at 4. This was ugly for a few years, he had no money and God refused to pay alimony (they were never "legally" married, but Calliope swore to his death bed God had asked). In order to make enough to pay off the bears and to buy food, he was forced to do magic on the street corners. Some days he ate a muffin, other days (he ate nothing...didn't want to say, but I had to, its tough to think about). 10 percent of the time somebody would rob him, 100 percent of the time this was Jesus. This worried Calliope, for he was beginning to see Jesus go down a path that would lead to a CROSSroads (that's an inside joke, you probably won't get it, I do however). He decided to take Jesus under his wing, to nurture him, feed him the first Gerber baby foods. Carrot, that was his favorite, but he could only get it once in a while, it was a treat, and he so badly needed the discipline.

Calliope decided to enroll him into the prestigious School of Jesus, named after a different Jesus that might have been Spanish. Too bad. So sad. It wasn't two minutes before Jesus was expelled from school for mutilating a small dwarf child. And when I say mutilate, I mean he ripped of his little pieces and hung them from a telephone wire like the lil' shoes in the "ghetto". How could they possibly have telephones back then Chris, George Washington didn't invent it yet. Well small adults, Washington didn't even invent it, and I never said they had telephones. They just needed to put the town employees to work so they made them make polls with wire connecting them. Anyways, Jesus was now beginning to prove himself a major problem to Calliope. He couldn't possibly keep both Jesus and his magic career, thus resulting in the most difficult decision in his life (he lived to age 14). Well, obviously Calliope decided to kill Jesus and hang him from a cross because of his severe allergic reaction to crosses. Jerk.

But please, before you judge him, realize that magic was really cool and just beginning, and Jesus always took credit for everything Calliope did, making him famous and Calliope a dud. In the end, Calliope became the greatest magician of his time. He could make people blind by gauging out their eyeballs, the likes of which had never before been seen. At age 10, he wrote a book titled, My Life: The Calliope Christ Story and assorted candies. At 12, he developed severe finger cuts, and at age 13, he died of old age. Calliope Christ, dead at 13 (he never made it to 14 like I previously stated. I was simply hoping for some updated information that would confirm my long held belief that he was actually older than he stated on his birth certificate, which had long thought to be a fake copy).

Chris Larsen is a beat writer for TWOTF
He has a dog, some fish, and a book of poems

Cahiers du Cinema

2009-01-24T13:41:00.013-05:00

By Luke

Cahiers du Cinema is the famous French film magazine that back in the 60's launched the careers of critics-turned-directors Francois Truffaut and Jean-Luc Godard. While it's reputation isn't quite as lofty today as it once was, I assume it's still an interesting place for film criticism (not that I can find English translations of their articles anywhere on the internets).

Anyway, Cahiers has made their top 10 of 2008:

1. Redacted (DePalma)
2. Colossal Youth (Costa)
3. Cloverfield (Reeves)
4. No Country for Old Men (Coens)
5. Two Lovers (Gray)
6. Waltz with Bashir (Folman)
7. Dernier Maquis (Ameur-Zaimeche)
8. Hunger (McQueen)
9. A Short Film about the Indio Nacional (Martin)
10. On War (Bonello)

It's an interesting departure from the usual top 10 lists we see, and it raises some interesting questions. First of all, "Redacted"? I haven't seen it, but that's because it got almost universally brutal reviews. To provide a little context, Cahiers favors specific directors like no other. "Mission to Mars" was their #4 of 2000, "Snake Eyes" was their #9 of 1998, "Mission Impossible" was their #7 of 1997, and "Carlito's Way" was their #1 of the 1990's! I wonder if even DePalma thinks those recent efforts were worth such high rankings. Somewhere, Armond White is smiling.

One of the major criticisms of "Redacted" in America was the bad acting, and I wonder if a French audience is less inclined to care about the performances in an English speaking movie. It's also interesting to see "Cloverfield" at #3, since from what I know of "Redacted," the two movies use similar "handheld" techniques, exploring the possibility that characters within the film are shooting the action. I doubt even "Cloverfield"'s biggest supporters in the US would make a case for it being a "greater" movie than "No Country for Old Men," but it's an interesting juxtaposition.

Candid photo of a French audience as they watch Brian DePalma take a dump.

The recently announced Oscar nominations have shown, at least to me, that the US hasn't quite figured out what the "best" movies of a given year are; they favor Hollywood-produced prestige dramas ("The Reader," "Frost/Nixon," "Benjamin Button") over more interesting, innovative movies. Why are we so quick to dismiss a movie like "Cloverfield"? I would have found that a much more satisfying Best Picture nominee. And are there other ways of seeing movies that Americans can't grasp, hence the love for "Redacted" and "Lady in the Water" (another recent Cahiers favorite). I want to live in a world where film criticism isn't in such lockstep, where top 10 lists aren't just the last 10 movies those critics saw in December. I don't know whether or not I'll like "Redacted," but I applaud Cahiers for finding a way into that movie and for being willing to put it at the top.

The Secret of the Grain/Rachel Getting Married

2009-01-22T15:45:00.018-05:00

By Luke

If you haven't heard of "The Secret of the Grain," you are part of 99% of America. Despite New York Times critic A.O. Scott calling it one of the best movies of the year and it winning the Cesar Award for Best Film (France's equivalent of the Oscars), it was only released in New York and Los Angeles (one theater in each city) and as far as I can tell will never get any further.

This is really a shame because "Grain" is a completely involving movie, full of intense human drama. Slimane is the elderly patriarch of a large Franco-Arabic family, torn between the wife and children (and grandchildren) he left after thirty-five years and the woman and her daughter he lives with now. To make matters worse, Slimane is being laid off from his job, a victim of modernization and, he suspects, some bias against his culture. However, all the characters have their own personal story lines, and "Grain" weaves in and out of lives young and old, male and female, never losing an acute eye for detail. Some of the conflicts are trivial (the 2 year-old won't stop using diapers), some are tragic (Slimane's ex-wife enables one of her sons to cheat on his Russian wife), but all of the characters share an awareness of their imperfections and a desire to improve their lives. "Grain" is not just a "French" movie or an "art" movie. It's not going to do "Dark Knight" or even "Milk" box office, but the way it's been buried is a travesty. All you have to do is have a pulse to relate to these characters and be drawn into their lives, and "Grain" never loses its firm grasp on the drama of the everyday.

Conversely, "Rachel Getting Married," which has been fairly popular in the US and netted Anne Hathaway a Best Actress Oscar nomination, struck me as fake and overdone. While Jonathan Demme's portrait of two families getting together for a wedding has some wonderful moments, they are overshadowed by screenwriter Jenny Lumet's need to push the Hollywood cliche of the proverbial "fuck-up" (played by Hathaway) in our faces. She has huge screaming matches with her family, then feels unwanted, makes hateful toasts at the dinner table (a classic movie device that was recently satirized in "A Christmas Tale"), then gets drunk and drives a car into a tree. In "Rachel"'s most contrived scene, a joyous full-family gathering in the kitchen suddenly goes south when Rachel's dad sees a plate drawn by his dead son. The whole movie feels manufactured to make us "feel" what family life is really like, but it's overloaded with so much melodrama (and one movie star acting like "one of us" with Oscar dreams firmly planted in her brain) that it feels removed from anything "true."

"Rachel"'s success concerns me because it's been treated as one of the great movies of the year, which is reflective of what passes for artful drama these days. People, spend some time with "The Secret of the Grain," bask in the wonderful, lifelike performances, and tell me why it can't make a blip in theaters.

Lane Kiffin's Remarkable Rise to the Top

2009-01-21T14:28:00.029-05:00

By Rob

2007-2008 NBA Rookie of the Year Kevin Durant won every award imaginable as a freshman at Texas, signed a Nike deal in 2007, has a salary of $4,484,040 for the 2008-2009 season and, at 20 years old, is something like 4-6 months younger than me. As for myself... I know someone who wears Nikes; I know that 4,484,040 is a number; and I like to watch basketball when I'm not doing homework or at my part-time job.

I now know what it's like to watch someone who's younger than you make a fortune and re-write the record books. But this is expected of athletes. It's inevitable. The next batch of great athletes are breaching 'greatness' far sooner than the 'greatest' did. Coaching, however, is fairly static. Yes, there are more coaching changes now than there were in the distant past, but the long and somewhat tedious climb up the coaching ladder has been an established expectation for some time. As the title of this post indicates, there is one extraordinary exception whose climb is of endless fascination to me... Lane Kiffin.

You wouldn't be too far off if you thought Kiffin made a name for himself overnight. It was only 10 years after graduating from college that he became the head coach of a NFL franchise.

A Miniature Timeline:

1975: (May 9) Kiffin is born (approx. 0 years old)
1994: graduates from high school in Minnesota (19 years old)
1994: enrolls in Fresno State University where he plays basketball, baseball and backup QB for the Fresno State Bulldogs (19 years old)
1997: gives up playing football his senior season; becomes a Student Assistant Coach at Fresno State (22 years old)
1998: graduates from Fresno State (23 years old)
1999: works as a Graduate Assistant at Colorado State University for one year; works with the offensive line
2000: works with the Jacksonville Jaguars as a Quality Control Assistant for one year 2001: hired as a Tight Ends Coach at University of Southern California (USC)
2002: becomes the Wide Receivers Coach at USC
2004: becomes Passing Game Coordinator; retains Wide Receivers Coach position at USC
2005: is promoted to Offensive Coordinator at USC and becomes Recruiting Coordinator; retains position as Wide Receivers Coach
2007: (January 23) hired as the Head Coach of the Oakland Raiders; the youngest Head Coach in NFL history. (age 31)
2008: (September 30) Lane Kiffin is fired as Raiders' Head Coach.
2008: named Head Coach of the Tennessee Volunteers football program (age 33)

He surpassed many of his former bosses in his quick climb up the coaching ladder. For instance, when he was a Student Assistant Coach at Fresno State, his position coach was Jeff Tedford, current Head Coach at the University of California.

From '93 to '97, Tedford was the Offensive Coordinator at Fresno State where he coached Kiffin. Then from 1998 to 2001, Tedford helped build Oregon's football program as its Offensive Coordinator. Meanwhile Kiffin was in the fast lane: he worked with a pro team and was hired by Pete Carroll to work as a Positions Coach with the best college football program in the country.
Since 2002, Tedford's been the Head Coach at Cal, and has won two Pac-10 Coach of the Year awards, so I don't mean to undermine his success. However, Tedford was in his early-40s when he won his first Coach of the Year award, and that's entirely my point.

At age 33, Kiffin will be the youngest Head Coach in Division-1 football. I'm not saying he'll be a great college coach (although when he was the Recruiting Coordinator at USC the team had the #1 recruitment class all 3 years) but I think he's capable of turning around an already talented Tennessee team (ranked 18th in preseason polls last year) after a shocking 5-7 finish last season. He's positioned to haul in a SEC Coach of the Year award in the near future, and he will do it in his 30s.

Resume Summary:
1997–1998 Fresno State (Positions)
1999 Colorado State (Positions)
2000 Jacksonville Jaguars (Asst)
2001–2006 USC (Positions/OC)
2007–2008 Oakland Raiders (Head Coach)
2009–Present Tennessee (Head Coach)

LA Times Auto Critic on "Gran Torino"

2009-01-18T15:53:00.012-05:00

By Rob

I am a big fan of Clint Eastwood's newest film, Gran Torino. I don't know anything about cars and, fortunately, you don't really need to in order to enjoy the film. However, it certainly doesn't hurt to know a thing or two going in. In an insightful article by Los Angeles Times Automotive Critic Dan Neil, the signifiance of the car itself -- Walt Kowalski's 1972 Gran Torino -- is discussed.

At one point, Dan Neil says:

You could prowl vintage car shows for years and not find an automobile that, in its malign typicality, better summarizes Detroit's fall than the 1972 Gran Torino. Let's begin with the thing itself: The car was tubby and it was awkward. It handled like a block of ice with a steering wheel. It lacked even minimum corrosion proofing and so rusted with relish in northern climates.

OK, it summarizes the Detroit's fall. Got it. But "tubby" and "awkward"? My Uncle had a 1972 Gran Torino, and my dad said that even brand new it was an awful, "ugly" car. I don't get it. As far as asthetics go, I think it looks pretty cool, and I'm very surprised to find I'm in the minority.

The article should be of particular interest to fans of the movie without a significant car IQ. You can read Dan Neil's complete article for free here. I should note that I came across the article via an online post by the Detroit Free Press.

As for the film itself:

The story is outstanding and may very well be the best of any movie I've seen from 2008. There were a few poor performances, and they came mostly from non-actors. (None of the Hmong actors in the cast had acted in a film before except Doua Moua.) I suggest seeing it ahead of just about every movie currently in release. (Run, don't walk, to see Paul Blart: Mall Cop!)

Miracle on 34th Street

2009-01-18T01:44:00.002-05:00

By Chris Larsen

Thursday's incident in which an airplane leaving New York crashed landed in the Hudson river made me do a little soul searching. After getting lost in the middle of nowhere, I asked for directions and found that I had a few questions in the back of my mind. Well, the first thing is just more of a statement that I've got to get off my chest. How can you call it the "Miracle on the Hudson" when it should so clearly be called Miracle on 34th street. I mean for publicity purposes, naming after a movie in which the girl from Matilda starred would be a hell of a place to start. Now you may be saying, "hey there Chris, that kinda sounds like an ole question to me." Well sir/madame, I've read the Bible (I haven't), and I think I've been guided a little better by The Lord than you have.

Anyway, I believe I may have gotten a wee bit off topic; oh wait, there it is (the topic silly). So yeah, "Miracle on the Hudson" is a bad name, the worst apple on the lot. It's like naming your first born Adolf Hitler Campbell, as one couple did in New Jersey. Yeah sure, its a cute name, but the backlash your going to get from that knit picking Jewish community just isn't worth it. They really should have minded their P's and Q's on this one, bad decision on their part (the couple, not the Jew's). It also brings up the discussion, exactly what are they putting in the water in New Jersey. I mean who's the last big name to come out of that town (doesn't deserve the title of an American state)? I'm putting my money on Whitney Houston (pictured at right, clearly high on life), the lovable singer actress who inspires us all. And while she's been a model citizen and savior to the doping community, there has got to be something on her I can dig up to prove my point. Well, I can't, but let us get back to that plane in the sky, er... Hudson.

So they say that "supposedly" a flock of birds flew into the engine and caused it to explode. I have learned a couple of things from this little factoid. First off, this tells me that American hunters just aren't as good as they used to be, and are clearly inferior to their European counterparts. Whens the last time a plane from Europe when down because of birds? Answer, never, they have no birds in Europe. Why? Because the hunters have killed them all. Another thing I've picked up is that being a bird just isn't as good as it used to be. I mean what happened to make all of these birds so depressed that they choose to fly towards death faster then Japs the a boat. I'm no bird, but I think in a flying zone as big as the freaking sky, I could avoid a couple engines flying around. The more I think about it, I kind of want an autopsy done on all the little birds and their body parts. I mean, imagine the commander in chief of the birds air team. He's flying along, starts to day dream about his wife and kids on the coast on Mexico, enjoying the breeze, chomping on some Mexican jumping beans, living the life. Next thing he knows, a giant turbine is 10 feet from his head. Being the skilled diver he is, he's able to avoid disaster... barely. Unfortunately, the rest of his men (and one woman lieutenant who got into the air unit through lawsuit) weren't so lucky. He led them right into their death, they never saw it coming, having complete faith in their leader. Now imagine this, you are solely responsible for the killings of several heroes back home and will have to face the family's of these brave men ( and one woman lieutenant who got into the air unit through lawsuit). I'm thinking that instead of going back home, we might find this commanders body along with the rest, only he won't be quite as chewed up as the rest. I'm willing to bet that we will find a single bird with a single BB gun pellet lodged in his head. It's a sad sad story, but somebody had to tell it. That's why this prestigious group here at TWOTF hired me to write, because I'm willing to go where nobody dare go. Well, I went there, and you are welcome.

Chris Larsen is a beat writer for TWOTF
He has a dog, some fish, and a killer smile.

24 by Chris Larsen

2009-01-14T15:31:00.006-05:00

I'm trying to find my place in this blog, and I still don't have a clue where that could possibly be. I see that Luke is the movie reviewer; Rob seems mostly into sports and concerts; James is weird; and I'm unsure where that leaves me. I guess I'm supposed to be the comic relief to these duds, but even Lance Bass has to let the cat out of the bag after holding the group together for so many years.

I'm the butter, they are the toast. Without me, they are nothing; something that is incomplete, missing a key element. My butter is that key element. Unfortunately I can't seem to find any butter in my refrigerator these days.

I want to write about random stuff, but my life seems to get more boring as the days go on. No, this isn't a suicide note, although it probably should be. Now after that wonderful introduction, you could probably tell by the title I am going to talk a little about 24 and how I've welcomed Jack Bauer back into my precious lifestyle.

So I started watching 24 in its fifth season – a little behind most followers – but I had heard much about it and gave it a shot. That was a magical season. Jack could make a rabbit disappear and reappear where ever he wished. I thought I had another show to add to my "must watch" list.

In case you are wondering: yeah, I watch a bucketlist of TV. I could sit around for days watching anything and would only occasionally forget to breathe… Other than that, I'd be happy as a clam (an uneaten clam).

Anyways, I had a wonderful new action thriller to add to my weeknights. Unfortunately, the following season tanked like Ricky Lake in her early years (see Hairspray for confirmation, and no, not the one with the adorable and impalpable Zac Efron). I could only bare to watch a few episodes of the season before I gave up entirely. 24 had lost its touch – it was crap and I had run out of toilet paper. I needed it out of my life.

For two years, I was happy, I had forgotten all about 24 with the help of many other outstanding shows, and had moved on. While Jack Bauer was getting arrested in real life for stuff Nick Nolte could only dream of, I was sleeping next to a nice Gregory House doll. And to make this clear, I don't like Kiefer Sutherland – I think he is a poor man's Daniel Baldwin (unless of course Daniel Baldwin is now a poor man himself, but you understand what I mean). He almost annoys me sometimes with his poor portrayal of an angry agent yelling at a bad guy. His deep angry “yell voice” is almost as bad as Christian Bale's take on Batman (my favorite DC Comics hero). It's the awesome stories and the usually great action sequences that made me fall in love with people attacking our country. If terrorism serves one purpose in life, it’s for others to make movies and TV shows about it, and Allah bless them for that.

So I had fallen out of love with 24; no biggy, didn't care, didn't want to care. I had already shed enough tears over the loss of the lovable Edgar in season 5 to poisonous gas. I felt like it should now be reduced to being called 23; it didn't deserve the honor of being an American day. I was done with 24 for good… or so I thought....... Dun Dun DUUUUNNNN

I went over to my bitch girlfriends’ house this past Sunday to hang with the fam, feed my fishlets, grab some grub, trims the hedges… you know, everyday stuff. So as I sitting there I find out her mother, “the bitch from Ipswich” as I calls her (she was born and raised in Lexington), was a huge fan of 24. So I'm thinking: “what the snail, I hate my life anyways, I'll put myself through this again.”

I start watching and although it didn't start off any better then it had ended, it rapidly began to get better and better. I watched the first 2-hour premiere Sunday and was excited about seeing another two hours on Monday. I watched that, was blown away at the awesomeness, and immediately fell back in love with 24.

There are twists and turns galore, and I just want more Jack. The once fat and disgusting Ricky Lake (24 - season 6) has now blossomed into beautiful talk show host Ricky Lake (24 - season 7). I just want to go on record as having known this would happen and always, always having faith in Allah (who doesn't exist).

Chris Larsen is a beat writer for TWOTF
He has a dog, some fish, and a hell of a back swing

10 Best Movies of 2008

2009-01-14T11:26:00.029-05:00

By Luke

My top ten list...with stupid quips intended to convey my main impression after each title.

1. A Christmas Tale

Too good to write about.

2. The Wrestler
The best American movie of the year. Premise is a man in suburban Jersey caught between two "families" and The Sopranos comparisons only start there.

3. Reprise A cinematic novel

4. Vicky Cristina Barcelona I don't get what people who say this is B-grade Woody see in some of his other movies that they can't find here. It's funny and fresh from beginning to end, with some very good performances.

5. Mister Lonely Lyrical is not a word I would use in real life, but it might be the best way to describe this movie. It's funny too.

6. Be Kind, RewindSort of a guilty pleasure, but Mos Def, Danny Glover, and Jack Black are all so charming and the movie has good vibes to spare.

7. Chop Shop A true "indie" movie that lives up to the "slice of life" label so many Sundance pretenders flaunt. There isn't a false note in the whole movie and it extracts some fascinating performances from local nonactors.

8. Milk

Gus Van Sant's opera.

[See Luke's review of Milk here.]

9. Flight of the Red Balloon The Indiewire critics poll is the best place to figure out what the "best movies of the year" were because of the number of high caliber critics it includes. I've lost the link to this year's list, but I know Flight of the Red Balloon was #1, which is reason enough to check it out.

10. Speed RacerClever, creative, exciting. A kids' movie I actually liked because it was too busy being insane to hit all the predictable kiddy story beats.

The next 10 (in order of appearance vis a vis the alphabet): Blindness, Burn After Reading, Che, Cloverfield, The Dark Knight, Encounters at the End of the World, The Fall, Forgetting Sarah Marshall, Gran Torino, In Bruges, Step Brothers.

Some of the significant movies I didn't see and might have liked: Waltz with Bashir, The Class, Gomorrah, Silent Light, In the City of Sylvia, The Last Mistress.

Greg Oden (Part 2)

2009-01-07T13:36:00.011-05:00

By Rob

NOTE: Statistics are valid as of December 30, 2008

Greg Oden has played in 26 of Portland’s 32 games. He’s started in 19 of those 26. What does he have to show for it? (Other than a 16-10 record, of course)

His season averages aren’t overly impressive (even for a rookie):
8.1 PPG, 53.2% FG (2.9-5.5), 7.4 REB (2.8 OFF; 4.7 DEF), 64.8% FT (2.3-3.5), 0.7 AST, 1.5 TO, 0.4 STL, 1.3 BLK, 3.8 PF

As it stands, New Jersey Nets' center Brook Lopez has been the best of all first-year big men. He's played in all of New Jersey's games and, with the exception of FG% (Lopez is shooting a more modest 45.9%) and TO (Lopez is averaging 1.7 TO per game), has Oden beat in every statistical category.

But when Oden plays 20 or more minutes, his average numbers are as good as any other rookie big man:

11 PTS, 58 FG%, 9.53 REB, 68.9 FT%, .86 AST, 1.8 TO, .3 STL, 1.46 BLK, 3.73 PF

He shoots 58% from the field and 69% from the free throw line. He averages 9.5 rebounds and 11 points per game. He turns over the ball 1.8 times and blocks 1.46 shots... Plus the Trail Blazers at 9-6 in such games.

If you removed his 21-minute performance in Portland’s December 22nd loss from the equation (a game in which Oden had only 3 rebounds) then he’d have averaged 10 rebounds per game over 14 games with 20 or more minutes.

There aren’t many guys who can shoot nearly 60% from the field and nearly 70% from the free throw line. There aren’t many guys who can average 1.5+ blocks per game while turning over the ball less than 2 times per game, either. Toss in a double-double and you’ve got a special kind of player…

How special?

26 players finished the 2007-2008 season averaging 8.0 or more rebounds per game. (8+ rebounds is a pretty common expectation for a big man, although I admit I chose it somewhat arbitrarily.)
Notable players, capable of 8+ rebounds, who otherwise would have made the list: Lebron James (7.9) and LaMarcus Aldridge (7.6). Seven more players averaged between 7.2 and 7.7 rebpg. Chris Kaman (56 games – 12.7 rebounds per), Andrew Bynum (35 games - 10.2 rebounds per) and Elton Brand (8 games – 8.0 rebounds per) were ineligible.

20 [players] of those 26 shot 60+% from the free throw line.
The 6 players eliminated: Ben Wallace (42.6%), Jeff Foster (59.3%), Andrew Bogut (58.7%), Emeka Okafor (57.0%), Tyson Chandler (59.3%), Dwight Howard (59.0%)

17 [players] of those 20 also averaged 10.0+ points per game.
Players eliminated: Joel Przybilla (4.8), Nick Collison (9.8), Marcus Camby (9.1)

10 [players] of the remaining 17 averaged 1.0+ blocks per game.
Players eliminated: Antonio McDyess (.7), Dirk Nowitzki (.9), David Lee (.4), Al Horford (.9), Antawn Jamison (.4), Carlos Boozer (.5), Lamar Odom (.9)

That’s 10 players who averaged 10+ points, 8+ rebounds, and 1+ block per game, while shooting 60+% from the FT line last season. To me, those minimums represent the basic expectations of a well-rounded center in the NBA.

Who were the 10?
1. Josh Smith
2. David West
3. Amar'e Stoudamire
4. Kevin Garnett
5. Zydrunas Ilgauskas
6. Brad Miller
7. Andris Biedrins
8. Samuel Dalembert
9. Al Jefferson
10. Tim Duncan

Even if you’re kind about the guidelines I’ve set in place, you’d have 21 players*** on that list.

*** Those on the fringe:
Lebron James was .1 rebound off. Dirk Nowitzki, Al Horford, and Lamar Odom were .1 blocks shy, while Antonio McDyess was off by .3 blocks. Marcus Camby was .9 points per game away.
Nick Collison averaged 9.8 ppg and .8 blocks. Dwight Howard shot 59.0% from the FT line; Tyson Chandler shot 59.3%, Emeka Okafor shot 57.0%, Andrew Bogut shot 58.7%.

So what? Well, there's a lot of non-believers coming out recently, and what I'm trying to do is put 20-year-old Greg Oden in context; explain through use of statistics why he's hyped up the way he is and why not to jump off the bandwagon just yet.

In a recent article by Johnny Ludden for Yahoo! Sports, Ludden sums up my point well:

...[Oden is] also a little more than two weeks shy of his 21st birthday and his NBA career has spanned all of 28 games. He spent one year in college then sat out all of his first season with the Blazers after undergoing microfracture surgery on his right knee.

Even healthy, few big men have dominated with so little experience. The same Dwight Howard who now terrorizes the league is the same Dwight Howard who averaged 12 points, 10 rebounds and 1.7 blocks in nearly 33 minutes per game as a rookie. Oden’s averages this season: 8.0 points, 7.2 rebounds and 1.2 blocks in 23 minutes per game.

Patience everyone. The time of Oden may be right around the corner.

Greg Oden's 20+ Minute Game Log:
Dec 30 (W) 35:35 – 5/9 FG, 3/5 FT, 4-7=11 REB, 3 AST, 2 TO, 0 STL, 0 BLK, 3 PF, 13 PTS
Dec 27 (W) 28:21 – 5/7 FG, 6/6 FT, 7-3=10 REB, 0 AST, 1 TO, 0 STL, 1 BLK, 3 PF, 16 PTS
Dec 25 (L) 25:25 – 2/6 FG, 0/3 FT, 2-3=5 REB, 1 AST, 3 TO, 1 STL, 0 BLK, 4 PF, 4 PTS
Dec 22 (L) 21:36 – 4/5 FG, 2/2 FT, 2-1=3 REB, 2 AST, 0 TO, 0 STL, 2 BLK, 6 PF, 10 PTS
Dec 16 (W) 21:11 – 3/6 FG, 2/2 FT, 3-7=10 REB, 0 AST, 0 TO, 0 STL, 0 BLK, 4 PF, 8 PTS
Dec 12 (L) 42:03 – 6/10 FG, 3/4 FT, 6-9=15 REB, 0 AST, 2 TO, 0 STL, 1 BLK, 2 PF, 15 PTS
Dec 11 (L) 31:53 – 4/6 FG, 0/3 FT, 4-5=9 REB, 0 AST, 3 TO, 0 STL, 1 BLK, 3 PF, 8 PTS
Dec 7 (W) 27:35 – 3/10 FG, 4/6 FT, 5-5=10 REB, 0 AST, 2 TO, 0 STL, 2 BLK, 4 PF, 10 PTS
Dec 3 (W) 31:06 – 4/6 FG, 5/6 FT, 3-7=10 REB, 0 AST, 3 TO, 0 STL, 1 BLK, 2 PF, 13 PTS
Nov 30 (W) 30:49 – 3/4 FG, 5/6 FT, 2-11=13 REB, 1 AST, 2 TO, 1 STL, 3 BLK, 5 PF, 11 PTS
Nov 28 (W) 23:53 – 0/2 FG, 1/4 FT, 3-5=8 REB, 3 AST, 1 TO, 0 STL, 1 BLK, 2 PF, 1 PTS
Nov 26 (W) 25:38 – 4/6 FG, 2/2 FT, 4-6=10 REB, 0 AST, 1 TO, 0 STL, 1 BLK, 4 PF, 10 PTS
Nov 18 (L) 29:40 – 8/12 FG, 6/8 FT, 4-6=10 REB, 2 AST, 5 TO, 1 STL, 2 BLK, 5 PF, 22 PTS
Nov 15 (W) 23:53 – 4/8 FG, 5/8 FT, 2-6=8 REB, 1 AST, 2 TO, 2 STL, 3 BLK, 5 PF, 13 PTS
Nov 14 (L) 24:10 – 3/3 FG, 5/6 FT, 1-10=11 REB, 0 AST, 0 TO, 0 STL, 4 BLK, 4 PF, 11 PTS

Don't Touch Kids by Chris Larsen

2009-01-06T21:40:00.005-05:00

I learned that lesson the hard way. Unfortunately for you, before I get into that nonsense story, I'm going to tell you a little about me, myself. I was born Chris Larsen Jr, son of Chris and Cynthia, in Concord, MA on September 7th 1988. In a bit of bad luck, I made if past the first few days of birth and was released from the hospital. Since then my parents would continuously tell me they regret not smothering me with a yellow pillow (I guess yellow is their least favorite color, or race, it's all a little fuzzy). I am a white male, and I molest children. Seems almost cliché nowadays, which is why I never cared to tell anybody. I mean, I'm just another Joe Smith getting some from little Johnny, and that just doesn't make the headlines anymore. Anyways, forty to life is the reason I tell the kids I'm Santa Claus and if they tell anyone, they won't get any presents.

On a more serious note, today was the first day I had learned about this blog. I had a tough time trying to figure out what to write about. I had a serious case of writers block, and this stone wall wasn't going to be knocked down by some David Hasselhoff, no way no how, too strong. So I asks myself, "do you write about yourself?" "No" is the proper answer. I'm a loser and I'm boring. What about a little boy on a log, thinking about his mother and adopted sister kneading dough? Well, this one I had to think out. I mean its solid, but I want to appeal to a large audience, and the child molester market is hot right now, while the dough kneading has really taken a hit with the economy in its current state of dieting. I guess in the future I'll write about my life (which sucks) or anything that may pop into my head at any given moment (which sucks), but I was forced to post on the first day, and I knew I shouldn't.

The Celtics just lost, and that saddened me, but then Adam Morrison was talking post game and that lifted my spirits. This one also goes out to my mom. Tommy Heinsohn said "The Celtics need a mental vacation," and I would like to think that he was talking about me right there. I mean, I seem to be the solution of every problem of every person; male, female, Chinese (who aren't as smart as they appear to be).

Life becomes too much to handle, and so I write... To this I write to thee, and now I will go and play Gears Of War 2 with my bro Nicholas, who got his first Mohawk today and makes a big brother proud once in a blue moon. Don't smoke pot.

Is This Reality?: "Wendy and Lucy"

2008-12-16T00:18:00.007-05:00

By Luke

Wendy and Lucy is a "small" movie. It's small in size (80 minutes with credits) and it's small on story - there's just Wendy (a girl), Lucy (her dog), and a handful of other nameless characters who occasionally appear. Wendy is "passing through" rural Oregon and headed to Alaska, and the movie documents a rough couple of days along the way. But there is no backstory or explanation for the journey, the story is too "small" for that.

What we get instead is an apathetic heroine who doesn't seem desperate so much as indifferent. When a security guard pontificates that in society, "everything's fixed" against people, Wendy replies, "that's why I'm going to Alaska," and that is as close as we get to her intentions. She phones her sister's husband, tells him simply, "I'm in Oregon," (her roots are in Indiana), which he casually accepts. Her sister comes onto the phone, says shrilly, "We can't give you anything, we're strapped," when Wendy adds that her car has broken down, the sister replies skeptically, "What can we do?" This sounds more dramatic than it is, from the way they are speaking, they might as well be discussing the weather. A moment later, Wendy's sister has already become disinterested and gotten off the phone, and Wendy tells the husband, "It sounds like you're busy, I'll talk to you later," which he accepts and they hang up.

Movies "small" in budget tend to be big on "reality," using their relatively low-tech circumstances to their advantage when creating gritty, "natural" films. But "Wendy and Lucy" feels comatose, somehow less dramatic than real life. It isn't helped by the amateur actors playing some of the supporting roles, all of whom deliver their lines with blase non-energy.

Finally, close to the end of the movie, there is a scary moment that causes Wendy to have a meltdown. The moment is shocking because we are jolted into feeling emotion again...and maybe that has been the movie's intention all along. For the first time, Wendy seems to grasp the reality of her situation, which "brings her back to earth." But, it is too late for the audience to be invested in her hardships. The movie feels like watching the aftermath of a car crash from your bedroom window...you recognize the drama, but are personally removed from the outcome.All of which leads to one conclusion. It's a struggle for me to say it because of how cliche it sounds, and because it alludes to the misconception that all movies have to make you "feel" all kinds of things...the more the better. But in this case, the conclusion holds true: Wendy and Lucy is small on heart.

Neil Young with Wilco: Live at the DCU Center in Worcester, Massachusetts (12-13-08)

2008-12-14T13:40:00.016-05:00

By Rob

NOTE: My setlist for Neil Young conflicts with that of SugarMountain.org -- the popular source for Neil Young setlists. I'm confident in my setlist. For instance, I am positive Young performed Old Man directly before Heart of Gold, whereas SugarMountain.org has Old Man following Heart of Gold. Disparities like that put faith in my setlist being the more accurate of the two. Here is the setlist, according to SugarMountain.org

A shot of Neil Young at the DCU Center in Worcester, MA (12/13/08)

On December 13th, James (fellow contributor to TWOTF) and I saw Neil Young live for our first time, and Wilco for my second time. Our tickets were for general admission on the floor, and we had an excellent line-of-sight. We caught the last two or so songs from Everest, the opener. Their stuff seemed nice, albeit slightly underwhelming. Then came Wilco... I saw Wilco for my first and only other time 4 or so years ago when they played in gymnasium at Brandeis University in Waltham, Massachusetts.

Wilco frontman Jeff Tweedy at Saturday's show in Worcester, MA

I didn't know what to expect going into yesterday's show. Neil Young has gone by the same set list for many of his recent tour dates, with the exception of three or so songs each night. Don't get me wrong, it is a spectacular setlist. It's just that both Neil Young and Wilco have done a lot of touring, and Neil Young has been playing some of the same songs for over 30 years, let alone a single tour. It was hard not to wonder whether these acts would phone it in to some extent. What happened, in short, was this: Wilco seemingly phoned it in on a few songs (see below), while Neil Young played his set like it was a going away party for the elite portion of the songbook.

The following is Wilco's setlist from last night:

* - This is an great rendition. Why would I pay $90 to hear the studio version? There has to be something special about it. In this case, there was something very special and worthwhile about this song.

1. Via Chicago*
2. Impossible Germany
3. You Are My Face
4. Spiders (Kidsmoke)*
5. Hummingbird
6. Forget the Flowers
7. Jesus, Etc.
8. Hate It Here*
9. Walken*
10. I'm The Man Who Loves You*

Nels Cline put on a great show, as is custom to a Univeristy High School (Los Angeles, California) alumnus. Any song that I've indicated to have been a strong, live rendition was made as such in large part to, if not entirely by, Nels Cline.

It took close to 40 minutes (OK, maybe it was closer to 35 minutes) to break down Wilco's equipment and set up for Neil Young. The stage looked like a stop on Antique Roadshow. One amp appeared to be at least 20 years old. I'll never forget the artist at the back of the stage who, for most of the set, had a spotlight on him while he painted. I had read that a man painted on stage during NY sets, but I hadn't thought about the logistical aspects of that. I don't want to make it sound like Kanye West at Bonaroo -- the wait for NY wasn't neither unusual nor painful ...But watching two roadies carry the painters equipment on stage doesn't help the clock move any faster.

Luckily we were surrounded by a group of characters, and the wait was actually enjoyable for us. For those who didn't have the best 35-minute wait, NY made it worth the wait...

The following is Neil Young's setlist from last night:

1. Love And Only Love*
2. Hey Hey, My My*
3. Everybody Knows This Is Nowhere*
4. Powderfinger*
5. Spirit Road
6. Cortez The Killer*
...Fantastic guitar solo and back-up vocals
7. Cinnamon Girl
8. Oh, Lonesome Me
....Introduced the harmonica for the first time in set
9. Mother Earth
....Played on organ w. harmonica (solo)
10. The Needle And The Damage Done*
....Acoustic (solo)
11. Light A Candle
12. "Cough Up The Bucks"
13. Fuel Line*
14. "Hit The Road And Go To Town"(?)
....I don't recall which song this was. I know it was a new one. A lyric I remembered: "no fear of failure for a crazy fool." If anyone has the complete lyrics for this song, I'd greatly appreciate it. (Post in the comment section!)
15. Old Man*
....Popular sing-a-long
16. Heart Of Gold*
....Popular sing-a-long
17. Get Back To The Country*
18. When Worlds Collide
19. Just Singing A Song*
....A great guitar solo -- fantastic jam
21. Cowgirl In The Sand*
....Possibly the best guitar solo of the night
22. Rockin' In The Free World*
ENCORE: A Day In The Life

In Opposition of the Chinatown "Bust"

2008-12-13T23:18:00.013-05:00

By Luke

Charles Lindbergh once said, "I'll always pick the side of the argument with a pun in the title." And he was right.

Above: Charles Lindbergh. Not to be mistaken for Tony, who has the same goggles.

Obsession in "Che"

2008-12-13T18:57:00.020-05:00

By Luke

For better or worse, Che isn't interested in either glorifying or demonizing Che Guevara (which some might classify as giving him a pass). It makes no effort to get inside Che's thoughts or motivations. For the most part, he doesn't even seem human. Even though we see his first several interactions with his future wife, there is no hint of romance or even the consideration that Che sees her as anything other than a "comrade." Che is an object of singular focus and, coincidentally, so is Che.

Benecio Del Toro at a premiere of Che: Part 1 (aka The Argentine; Che: El Argentino)

There isn't much narrative arc to Che, some critics have called it "boring" or "monotonous." There isn't much variation either, just a lot of training sequences and ambushes in the jungle (with one B&W sequence of Che in New York City mercifully showing up from time to time in Part One). There are emotions, but only a few: frightened locals, angry government regimes, and, mostly, the soldiers who are either heroic or cowards. At one point while being interviewed in New York, Che tells the interviewer that the most important quality for a revolutionary to have is "love," and the word hits you hard because you realize that's exactly what this movie has been missing.

Which isn't necessarily a bad thing. Che's personal trait that fascinates director Steven Soderbergh (below) is the same trait which guides the movie: unwavering, detail-oriented obsession, and if you wanted something else...well, too bad. Soderbergh (who serves as his own cinematographer) has shot a beautiful movie which revels in the monotonous, slowly ticking off the days even when new developments are few and far between. All of this gives Benecio del Toro plenty of time to scowl, pace, bark orders, and train, always train, in preparation for revolution. Part One focuses on the Cuban revolution, and more than two hours later, just as the first signs of victory appear, it ends. Part Two doesn't resume until eight years later when Che has arrived in Bolivia, and then that part concentrates on the (very similar) attempt to bring about revolution there. Like Che himself, the movie lives for the revolution, and isn't interested in the extraneous...or the consequences (the splendors or ills of victory). This movie is about the journey, a journey in which one has to, in Che's words, "live like you've already died." The film's MO in one sentence might be, "Rome wasn't built in a day."

Che is not for all tastes, and it makes little effort to convert the skeptics. If you criticize movies for "being too slow" or "not being about anything," this is not for you. But, if you are going to see this movie, see it in the theaters. See both parts at once (and see it during the roadshow, so you only have to pay one admission). This movie demands nothing less than your full attention, and the spell will be broken on DVD.

Personally, I found the experience worth it, it's a great showcase for Soderbergh and del Toro's respective talents and the roadshow environment (the two parts played together, with an intermission in between) is rare and exciting. But it's likely to elicit different reactions from every audience member, depending on who you are, you'll consider that a weakness or a strength.

Drama Done Right: Doubt and Milk

2008-12-12T20:15:00.017-05:00

By Luke

NO SPOILERS

Part of a continuing series of previously neglected thoughts on movies that are out or about to come out... America, it's your birthday.

Late December can be a time when theaters drown in prestigious, starry-eyed bloat. The running times lengthen and the stories get more serious (Holocaust! Terminally ill! Neglected genius!) but nothing is really gained as far as we, the viewers, are concerned. Movies are manufactured with getting Oscars in mind and the results on screen are pretty, but empty (like Rob's dream girl). Based on the reviews it's been getting, "The Reader" seems to be an early 2008 example of this phenomenon. Color me uninterested.

But really, this has been a long way of saying Doubt and Milk are both immensely satisfying Hollywood dramas, driven by ideas and images, not just big name stars or "safe" story formulas. This is Oscarbait at it's finest, which is to say it's not really Oscarbait at all.

In Milk, Sean Penn (seen right) gives the performance of the year (a premature statement considering there are probably thousands of movies I haven't seen this year, but award-hyperbole is as common this time of year as eggnog). I was very skeptical going into Milk because nothing raises my suspicions like "biopics," and only when the New York Film Critics named Milk Best Picture did I decide it was worth my time. One of the most tiring elements of biopics is the syndrome of "stars-getting-serious," which involves a movie star dressing down, doing drugs, singing songs, and getting lots of close-ups. It's an immense relief that Penn doesn't act in this movie so much as live in it, just like Marion Cotillard in La Vie en Rose, he is surrounded by a huge world of a movie, and he manages to stand out through sheer character-wattage (and therefore there are no super close-up reaction shots or break-down-crying-alone scenes or anything else of that ilk).

This is not a biopic. We don't start at Milk's birth and follow him through his misunderstood childhood and early life, etc. etc. etc. We don't cut back and forth all over his life or waste time introducing characters to perform psychiatric analysis (so, unlike biopics, no one ever says "You're not like everybody else, you're special," or "Gosh, you could be great some day!"). This is MILK, the man, the symbol, the movement, this is a Greek tragedy. Early on Harvey Milk explains his love of opera to a skeptic, saying "Listen, can't you hear all the emotion?" and opera becomes a bit of a motif throughout the movie (most notably at the end).

Gus van Sant (left) and Sean Penn (right) on the set of Milk

After exercises in minimalism (Gerry, Elephant, Last Days, Paranoid Park), Milk is Gus van Sant's opera: full of splendid color, smart performances, and most importantly, brilliant scenes that keep the story speeding at a perfect pace. Like the man himself, Milk gets a lot accomplished in a reasonably short period of time (128 minutes is nothing for most biopics) and the credit lies with both screenwriter Dustin Lance Black (who, improbably, has earned his full-screen credit in the trailer) and van Sant who has left the Hollywood formula days of Finding Forrester and Good Will Hunting (sure, it's a decent movie, but unspectacular) behind and planted his name firmly on the A-List (or my A-List anyway). I went in expecting to be underwhelmed, expecting to be led along all the predictable plot points, to be told explicitly why I should should care. I came out enthralled and thirsting for more.

Doubt isn't the epic that Milk is, but it's not trying to be. Its source material isn't a man's life, but a Broadway play which unfolds entirely on the campus of a Catholic school and church. I can't remember the last Hollywood movie to be at once this contained and this satisfying, the best comparison I can think of is Chop Shop, which also utilizes only one location and crafts an engaging narrative without much really "happening." Like the title suggests, Doubt is a movie about human uncertainty, and the fact that the main characters are nuns in a faith steeped in rules and tradition makes their inertia even greater.

It is left to the cast to bring the drama to life, and Merryl Streep, Amy Adams, and Philip Seymour Hoffman (seen below) do just that. I was pretty much alone last year when I thought Hoffman gave one of the year's best performances in Before the Devil Knows You're Dead, my guess is his comparably brilliant work here in another small, adult drama will also go ignored.

Let's hope he doesn't trade these roles in entirely for showier stuff like Charlie Wilson's War. I'd read disparaging reviews of Streep, mainly comparing her with the play's original actress on Broadway. I can't speak to that, but her role is certainly the hardest to pull off--it must be broad, but not parody. In my opinion, she just about nails it, and considering the Actress races are always less crowded than Actor, she's probably deserving of yet another Oscar nomination. Finally, Adams is solid as the innocent caught between the two titans, even if she sticks around just long enough to introduce the audience to the conflict before becoming useless and practically disappearing.

Most of the rest of the cast is kids, and if the youths can't keep up with their thespian elders...well, picking at weak spots seems needless with a movie this satisfying. It's even more time efficient than Milk (just about 100 minutes) and if it lacks the overt MESSAGE we can typically count on finding in "Oscar dramas," well, that's because with "doubt" and in Doubt, nothing is that simple.

The Unfortunate Case of "Benjamin Button"

2008-12-11T20:11:00.010-05:00

By Luke

Spoilers within (no ending ruined or anything...just reveals from the first hour or so)...

The talent attached was too tantalizing. Arguably Hollywood's best director (David Fincher), biggest movie star (Brad Pitt), best actress (Cate Blanchett), and most reliable screenwriter (Eric Roth) making a movie based on a story by F. Scott Fitzgerald, all wrapped in a huge budget (over $150 million) spent on state of the art CGI effects.

For exactly 1 act, it works.

The first act of The Curious Case of Benjamin Button might be the most "magical" Hollywood filmmaking this year, with great performances, beautiful cinematography, and breathtaking scenes. Benjamin's world is slowly, painstakingly constructed with all of the attention to detail found in Fincher's past movies like Se7en and Zodiac. The unconventional premise of a child being born with the body of an old man and physically aging backwards could have led to narrative-slowing scenes of exposition, but Fincher and Roth don't get bogged down in the details, letting the on-screen events speak for themselves.

All the movie's best characters appear in the first third...characters brought marvelously to life - like the ship captain who fancies himself as an artist or the wife of the British spy who attempted to swim across the English Channel or the old man who has been struck by lightening 7 times. By the end of the movie, these characters have all disappeared, or been fed on-the-nose monologues explicitly stating what their characters represent. But there's something "magical" (no other word conveys the feeling as well) about these people when they are allowed to be unhinged...to just "be" and Benjamin, like the audience, is content to explore them and their eccentricities.

I can pinpoint the exact moment when the movie takes a severe turn for the worse. It probably comes about 50 minutes in, and Daisy is all grown up. She is out with Benjamin alone, for the first time they are both adults. They clearly love each other, but he has been at sea and she's been in New York. Finally, they're together.

She seduces him, eventually being straight-forward and telling him she wants to sleep with him. He demurs, but we don't know why. Benjamin's voice over is a guiding light throughout the movie, but it is surprisingly absent here. He says "no," the scene is over, the audience is expected to move on, but the first false note has been sounded. Him saying "no" feels like nothing more than a plot device to keep them apart. What follows is even more dismaying. Suddenly, Benjamin's voice over is like a crutch, briskly traversing long periods of time, shown in fast montage. The movie cuts more to Daisy in the present, introducing a needless subplot between her and her daughter. WHY do movies continue to be constructed around the person telling a story on their deathbed? Does anyone not react adversely to that cliche at this point?

But faster than you can ponder this conundrum, we continue to

blur through Benjamin's history, with none of the precise timing found in the first third. Fincher and Roth seem incapable of creating a convincing romance, so they are content to just "tell" the audience what is happening instead of allowing the scenes to develop and "show." The last straw is when Benjamin reaches his "40's" and "30's" (in reverse) and Pitt's jaw-dropping good looks become a distraction. The audience was laughing (not in a good way) at how gorgeous he is.

By the end, the magic of the first third has completely worn off, causing one of the most frustrating movie experiences I've ever had. The talent attached was too tantalizing, but the groupings weren't quite right...and Button falls short of expectations.

IN DEFENSE OF THE CHINATOWN BUS

2008-12-10T05:02:00.004-05:00

written by Tony

a conclusive analysis for travelers and seekers of true wisdom everywhere. originally published on the bwog.

Charles Lindbergh once said, "If I had to choose, I would rather have birds than airplanes." Today, we have essentially two options of bus to travel from New York to Boston/Philly/DC: the Fung-Wah Bus, classically known as "The Chinatown Bus"; and a new, flashier generation of MegaBuses, BoltBuses, and other Power Rangers-influenced vehicle names. Pragmatically, stylistically, and sentimentally, the choice is clear. The Chinatown Bus is better.

First, purchasing a Chinatown Bus ticket beats the process and costs of purchasing tickets from any other bus company. To buy a Chinatown Bus ticket, you exchange a straight 15 bucks, several feet from the actual bus itself. Sometimes, mere minutes from departure time. Occasionally, seconds. The Power Ranger buses universally demand that you buy online, requiring additional Internet and service fees, locating your credit card, printing shit, memorizing reservation numbers. In a word, the Power Ranger buses expect you to plan ahead. They flaunt the possibility of $1.00 tickets, but you have to know your exact time and place at least a month ahead of the fact, and even longer before for holiday departures, to reserve these tickets. If you don't know your precise schedule this far in advance, The Power Rangers can shoot up to $25.00. And we are college students with unpredictable schedules. One of my Wednesday classes was canceled this week. Then, a professor moved the due date of an assignment forward to Wednesday afternoon. Then, my parents moved to Canada. And won't tell me why. The Chinatown Bus respects the fluctuation of life, which is why it is always and forever fifteen bucks.

The Chinatown Bus is not really that dangerous. I've taken it to and from Boston somewhere upward of twenty times in my whole life, without even the slightest problem. But don't take my word for it: check out the Wikipedia page . It lists only six notable safety issues in the bus' history to take account of, and the last one sounds like it was totally that dump trucks fault. This number is reasonable, given the tremendous number of buses are driven. People exaggerate the minor mishaps they've encountered. And even though that's pretty legitimate because I like to exaggerate too, given the statistical likelihoods of these safety problems, you'll have a comparable experience with safety on the Power Ranger buses.

While the Power Ranger buses boast about having the Internet (most often used to spend another 25 minutes reserving your return bus ticket), the Chinatown Bus amenities are actually far superior and more unique. Right next to the Chinatown Bus ticket counter rests a hidden gem - the famed hole-in-the-wall hot dog stand Jumbo Hot Dogs, reviewed as one of the best and cheapest insider hot dog joints in the city. Perfect before a four-hour trip. On the trip to Boston, The Chinatown Bus reliably stops at the biggest McDonald's rest area in Connecticut. Always incredibly well timed to a ninety-minute REM nap cycle. And most importantly, people on the Chinatown Bus are intriguing and animated. You'll find people of all sizes, shapes, colors, and ages. Sometimes, people snore loudly. Sometimes, people talk loudly about the snoring. Often, the people are kind of weird. But they make you think.

Ultimately, we need to be reminded of why we are emotionally attached to The Chinatown Bus. I believe lyrics in Bishop Allen's song "The Chinatown Bus" aptly reflect some of this sentiment:

"I remember Shanghai, how I wasn't sure just what was safe to eat.

The chickens pecked and wandered at the barefoot of the children hawking figurines of workers smiling.

What's the Chinese word for cheese?"

More than any other bus today, The Chinatown Bus revives the childhood sense of adventure and curiosity. As Lindbergh feared, transportation -- and our lives -- have become overwhelmingly no-nonsense, slick, and ordered. And though there are certainly merits in that, life is far more interesting when it's a little chaotic, messy, and mysterious.

XXL's 10 Freshmen: Hip-Hop's Class of '09

2008-12-09T11:02:00.009-05:00

James dropping by with a short post. Everybody should check out this month's issue of XXL. It's all about this year's ten breakout rappers (Wale, B.o.B., Charles Hamilton, Asher Roth, Cory Gunz, Blu, Mickey Factz, Ace Hood, Kid Cudi, & Curren$y). It's a great introduction for a whole slew of new young rappers that are worth checking out. I've been a Wale supporter for well over a year now and still can't wait for his debut album on Mark Ronson's Allido Records in Spring 2009. Asher Roth's mixtape with DJ Drama is very impressive. As a young white guy, he's getting lots of comparisons to Eminem (they sound a bit alike) but they're very different lyrically. Blu, Mickey Factz, Kid Cudi, Hamilton, and B.o.B. are all doing some cool shit too. Check out Johnson and Johnson (the collaboration between Blu & Mainframe). All of them have great mixtapes out that are worth searching for. Here are links to a few of them:

The Mixtape About Nothing by Wale
http://elitaste.com/blog/2008/12/03/ladies-and-gentlementhe-mixtape-about-nothing/

100 Miles and Running by Wale
http://elitaste.com/blog/2008/11/11/wales-100-miles-and-running-mixtape-at-61000-downloads/

B.o.B.'s Mixtapes
http://www.myspace.com/bobatl

The Greenhouse Effect by Asher Roth (with DJ Cannon & DJ Drama)
http://www.asherrothmusic.com/

Charles Hamilton's put out 8 mixtapes in the past two months!

A Kid Named Cudi by Kid Cudi
http://www.10deep.com/KIDCUDIMIXTAPE/

The future of hip hop is here!!

-- James

Greater Boston Alternative Comedy Festival

2008-12-08T16:07:00.020-05:00

By Rob

Robby Roadsteamer is a former WBCN dj who has achieved legendary status in the Boston music scene over the past 8 or so years. Chris Coxen, who is also Boston based, has what I consider to be one of the best character-based comedy routines in the country.

On December 2nd, Robby Roadsteamer and Chris Coxen (both of whom are very nice, in addition to being very talented) performed at UMass-Lowell in Lowell, MA. They put on a really fun show!

All that being said, if you haven't seen Robby or Chris, there's no better time than December 17th when they'll be performing at what has the makings of a very special event. Here's a description of the "Greater Boston Alternative Comedy Festival" found on chriscoxen.com:

Folks - there's a great comedy/music show happening in December. Here's the press release:

Greater Boston (Cambridge, Allston, Somerville, Brighton) is producing some of the best Alternative comedy acts this country has. Unfortunately in a Boston comedy scene often times focused more on traditional standup comedians a lot of these acts tend to get overlooked. For one night at The Paradise on Wednesday, December 17th, we hope to change that and give an underground scene it's due on one of the biggest stages......

"The Greater Boston Alternative Comedy Festival"
Sponsored By WFNX Radio
Doors open at 7pm... 8pm start 18+ $15

December 17th
The Paradise
Boston Massachusetts
967 Commonwealth Ave.

Shane Mauss

The Walsh Brothers

Robby Roadsteamer

Chris Coxen

Anderson Comedy

Mehran

Bethany Van Delft

Mc'd By Shane Webb

And a musical performance by The Campaign For Realtime

For more information please e-mail at
robbyroadsteamer@aol.com

This is a unique kind of show, with a unique kind of talent. If you like a). comedy and live in the Boston area, b). pretend to like comedy and live in the Boston area, or c). like comedy and pretend to live in the Boston area (creep), then you'll want to be there. I've seen The Walsh Brothers, Chris Coxen and Robby Roadsteamer and I'd quickly shell out $15 to see them again.

Here's a funny video (found on roadsteamer.com) promoting the show:

Check out the show if you can!

How I know your retarded

2008-12-07T15:16:00.001-05:00

The most obnoxious, stupidest faction of people in the world is the one that writes "you're" as "your" online. These are two completely different words that happen to sound similar like "write" and "right" or "no" and "know." Every time I see "Your awesome!" on Facebook (which is unfortunately very regularly because everyone knows I'm awesome), 1% of me dies. Well, I'm operating at 13% right now and I beg you to stop this practice. Realize that substituting "your" for "you're" means you are and forever will be an idiot. Thanks.

-The Management

Rookie Celtics Look Stellar in D-League Debut

2008-11-30T13:33:00.008-05:00

By Rob

No, this isn't a sports blog. I haven't always posted about sports and it's not my intention to keep strictly to sports. But with the recent performances by rookies Bill Walker (SF) and J.R. Giddens (SG)... I just had to spread the good word.

On Friday, Bill Walker (47th overall pick in the 2008 draft; traded from the Wizards to the Celtics for cash) and J.R. Giddens (Celtics 1st round draft pick in 2008; 30th pick overall) made their debut for the Utah Flash; a Celtics D-League affiliate.

It's hard to say who outperformed who... 6'5'' shooting guard J.R. Giddens hit the game-winning shot in overtime, and 6'6'' small forward Bill Walker, who played alongside Michael Beasley at Kansas State, had 5 steals and went 5-for-9 from beyond the arc.

Bill Walker (SF) played 41:03 minutes and, despite foul trouble (4 PF), had a tremendous stat line:
23 PTS (9-19 FGM-A; 5-9 3PM-A; 0-0 FTM-A), 8 REB (1 OFF, 7 DEF), 4 AST, 3 TO, 5 STL, and 0 BLK.

J. Giddens (SG) played 45:21 minutes and also put up solid numbers:
19 PTS (8-18 FGM-A; 1-4 3PM-A; 2-5 FTM-A), 12 REB (4 OFF, 8 DEF), 1 AST, 4 TO, 1 STL, 2 BLK, and 2 PF.

I know a lot of people consider the D-League a joke, and I wouldn't completely disagree. But after producing assist wiz Ramon Sessions, I think they've made a huge leap in proving to be a viable source of talent. If the D-League turns out to be the equivalent to the MLB's farm system, then NBA executives will look like geniuses. If not, what do they have to lose? I love the idea of bringing the NBA -- in some form -- to rural areas that would otherwise be uninterested in professional basketball.

The point I was trying to get at is this: don't discount Walker and Giddens, who could act as quality role players for an NBA team in the near future. And if you're one of the many who are quick to dismiss the legitimacy of the D-Leaguers... give it some more time.

Here's something to keep you entertainment while you wait:

An introduction to Bill Walker (interview footage mixed in with great in-game footage)

Now that you've been acquainted, here's Bill Walker's nasty slam dunk in an NBA pre-season game against the 76ers. I thought Theo Ratliff was a shot blocker... If anyone knows where I can buy the poster, please let me know using the comment section.

You may want to click on the videos so you watch them on YouTube in "high quality"

Boston Celtics: Playing Defense Like They Never Beat L.A.

2008-11-30T10:23:00.021-05:00

By Rob

Opposing Team Stats are a solid indicator of how strong a team is performing defensively. The Boston Celtics were the best defense in the NBA last year. Anyone who considers themself to be a fan of the NBA knows this, because it was one of the best defensive seasons in NBA history.

How are the Celtics faring defensively this year? Have they lost a step? At least from a statistical standpoint, it'd be difficult to argue otherwise.

Opposing Team FG%
1. BOSTON CELTICS - 40.8%
2. Cleveland Cavaliers - 42.1%
3. Dallas Mavericks - 42.1%
4. Houston Rockets - 42.8%
5. Los Angeles Lakers 42.9%
6. Orlando Magic 42.9%

2007-2008 Season: Opposing Team FG%
1. BOSTON CELTICS - 41.9%
2. Houston Rockets - 43.3%
3. Detroit Pistons - 43.7%
4. Dallas Mavericks - 44.3%
5. San Antonio Spurs - 44.4%

Opposing Team 3PT%
1. Dallas Mavericks - 29.0%
2. Houston Rockets - 30.2%
3. Orlando Magic - 30.5%
4. Milwaukee Bucks - 30.8%
5. Denver Nuggets - 32.0%
6. Los Angeles Lakers - 32.0%
....BOSTON CELTICS rank 16th (35.6%)

2007-2008 Season: Opposing Team 3PT%
1. BOSTON CELTICS - 31.6%
2. Detroit Pistons - 33.2%
3. San Antonio - 34.2%

If the Celtics finished the 2007-2008 season with 35.6% opposing team 3PT%, they would have tied for 8th best in the NBA. Not too shabby.

Opposing Team Rebounds (Offensive/Defensive; Total)
1. Portland Trail Blazers - 9.3/27.1; 36.4
2. Cleveland Cavaliers - 11.2/26.1; 37.4
3. Utah Jazz - 11.2/26.4; 37.6
4. New Orleans Hornets - 9.3/28.7; 38.0
5. Milwaukee Bucks - 9.3/30.2; 39.5
6. Phoenix Suns - 11.9/27.7; 39.7
7. BOSTON CELTICS - 10.7/29.2; 39.9

2007-2008 Season: Opposing Team Rebounds
1. Utah Jazz - 10.3/27.5 - 37.8
2. BOSTON CELTICS - 11.0/27.9 - 38.9
3. Detroit Pistons - 10.6/28.6 - 39.1

Opposing Team Turnovers
1. Los Angeles Lakers - 16.6
2. Miami Heat - 16.5
3. BOSTON CELTICS - 15.6
4. Utah Jazz - 15.6
5. Denver Nuggets - 15.6

2007-2008 Season: Opposing Team Turnovers
1. Golden State Warriors - 16.2
2. Denver Nuggets - 15.6
3. Utah Jazz - 15.4
4. BOSTON CELTICS - 15.3
5. Indiana Pacers - 15.0

Opposing Team Points Per Game
1. BOSTON CELTICS - 90.1
2. Houston Rockets - 90.2
3. Charlotte Bobcats - 92.4
4. Cleveland Cavaliers - 92.7
5. San Antonio Spurs - 93.0
6. New Orleans Hornets - 93.0

2007-2008 Season: Opposing Team Points Per Game
1. Detroit Pistons - 90.1
2. BOSTON CELTICS - 90.3
3. San Antonio Spurs - 90.6
4. Houston Rockets - 92.0
5. New Orleans Hornets - 95.6
6. Dallas Mavericks - 95.9

NBA Power Rankings

2008-11-24T17:43:00.011-05:00

By Rob

Last Updated: November 24, 2008

I don’t want to put too much weight on how teams have played the first 12 or so games of the season, so know I’m not taking the statistics I cite too seriously. Power Rankings generally lack consistency. As I’ll say again, Power Rankings aren’t about the W-L column. Teams lose games by 5 or less points, and that L isn’t the same as one suffered in a 20-point blowout.

TOP TIER

Boston Celtics
Los Angeles Lakers
Cleveland Cavaliers

I feel almost as uncomfortable putting the Cavs in my Top 3 as I do leaving San Antonio out of my Top 10. The NBA is, from top-to-bottom, the strongest it has been in years, making the #3 spot a really tough call; especially following two no-brainers like the Celtics and Lakers. But after an impressive 8-game win streak, I'm feeling a little bit more confident about my decision. Let's get one thing straight: I don’t think they could beat the Celtics in a 7-game series. I do, however, think there’s a chance of Cleveland landing the #2 seed in the East, and that they are good enough to secure the 50+ wins necessary to do so.

Phoenix Suns

Eight Suns' players are averaging 20+ minutes per game; all of whom are providing excellent contributions. They'll need their aging stars to be kept around 30 minutes per game if the team wants to be in good shape for a long playoff run. Steve Nash and Shaq are providing tremendously given their respective ages and Grant Hill is doing OK to start, but I think Matt Barnes, Leandro Barbosa, Raja Bell and Boris Diaw are going to win them a lot of games. Plus they have this kid, Amare, who is probably the most impressive offensive player west of Ohio.

Detroit Pistons
Utah Jazz

It pains me to put Utah at #6 and I’m sure they’ll make me regret it. They are the best passing team thus far into the season (24.1 assists per game; 6.8 assist differential) despite being without Deron Williams for 10 of their 12 games. Aside from Carlos Boozer (who, by the way, is opening up the season in MVP-form) the Jazz haven’t been a very good scoring team. I’m excited to see how their scoring improves when D-Williams returns.

SECOND TIER

Houston Rockets

Don’t fool yourself: the only Big Three in the NBA is in Boston. But if there is another (and it’s far too early to tell) then it lives in Houston. Ron Artest has shown flashes of brilliance, Yao has been Yao, and Tracy has shown flashes of... well, Tracy. It's tough to overlook the injuries - albeit minor, in some cases - already sustained by Houston's Big Three, and they can't be an elite team until they have a stretch of healthy performances from all 3 players.

Portland Trail Blazers

When they play at their highest level… I cry a little bit. LaMarcus Aldridge showed last year that he’s very capable of scoring big in the paint. Brandon Roy is playing on a level with Danny Granger and Joe Johnson that can only be looked down on by Dwyane Wade and Kobe Bryant. Greg Oden is the tenacious defender. So what if he can’t shoot? He’ll average 15 points, 10 rebounds, and 2.5 blocks on 55% FG and 65% FT. Mayo,

New Orleans Hornets

THIRD TIER

Denver Nuggets

The Billups-Iverson trade is still rocking my world. Who won in that deal? It’s too early to tell. It’s clear that Denver has looked like one of top 5 most dangerous teams since. It’s making me wonder if Allen Iverson is a good fit for any team looking to contend.

Orlando Magic
Toronto Raptors
Dallas Mavericks
Atlanta Hawks
San Antonio Spurs

If the season ended today, the Spurs would be the #8 seed in the Western Conference. They were 1-4 with Tony Parker, and have been 5-2 without. Was Tony Parkers’ 27.4 points-per-game weighing them down? Of course not! My point is that the Spurs are getting it done without Parker and Ginoboli. Manu has said that he expects to play tonight against Memphis. As of November 7^th, Tony Parker’s recuperation time is estimated to last 4 weeks. Say Parker returns for December 9^th at Dallas… the Spurs will have played 18 games. If they have a winning record when Parker returns, you could be looking at a Spurs team capable of winning the Southwest division and landing a #3 seed in the playoffs.

My guess is you’re thinking, “So what? The Spurs are 12 games in and at 6-6 are only back 2 games in the division.” I generally can’t find any report on the Spurs that shows my same optimistic outlook, so I feel somewhat compelled to give some reason. The fact is this: when Tony Parker, Manu Ginobili and Tim Duncan are all playing, and are as healthy as possible… the Spurs are the only other team in the same stratosphere as the Celtics and Lakers. They may even be better than that.

Philadelphia 76ers
Miami Heat

FOURTH TIER

Sacramento Kings
Chicago Bulls
Indiana Pacers
New York Knicks
Golden State Warriors

FIFTH TIER

Los Angeles Clippers

Unlike most Power Rankings, I’m not giving up on Chris Kaman, Al Thornton, Baron Davis, and Marcus Camby just yet.

Minnesota Timberwolves

Remember: these are Power Rankings, not Win Projections. A team that’s 0-10 can be better than a team that’s 4-6. It’s too early in the season for a team’s poor start to be so strongly indicative of a team’s final record.

Some people just don't understand Power Rankings...

Fox Sports (#28) said: “Yes, they're playing everyone close, but an eight-game losing streak is an eight-game losing streak. That matches Minny's longest skid last year.” Dumb

ESPN.com (#30) said: “Don't want to alarm a fan base still coping with KG winning a title in his first season away from 'Sota . . . but the previous team to lose eight straight after starting 1-0 was the 2003-04 Magic, who went from 1-0 to (gulp) 1-19.” I bet the Suns should be worried too. One time in NBA history, a team opened up 8-3, lost two straight games, and finished the season under .500! No one likes 'Sota, ESPN -- use one of the many good reasons not to.

The only one who seems to get it is NBA.com (#28): “The Wolves had three tough losses this week. They were right there in the fourth quarter of each, but lost at Golden State in overtime, to the Blazers by five and at Denver by six. Seven of their eight losses have come by six points or less. That's how you move up from No. 30 without winning.”

SIXTH TIER

Charlotte Bobcats
Milwaukee Bucks
Washington Wizards

Two All-Star players (Butler and Jamison), one win... What a shame.

Memphis Grizzles

Rudy Gay and O.J. Mayo are strong scorers. No team with Marc Gasol as their big man can be taken seriously, though.

ROCK BOTTOM

New Jersey Nets
Oklahoma City Thunder

Talk about an exciting season… Sure, Oklahoma will likely finish with the worst record in the NBA. I’d still pay $35 (plus service charge) to see Kevin Durant play from the balcony. There's a reason to see almost every team.

The Oscars '08: The Trouble Begins

2008-11-20T20:59:00.016-05:00

By Luke

This much we (I) know. Slumdog Millionaire is garbage. Today, prominent Hollywood blogger Jeffrey Wells wrote that he gets the feeling Millionaire is the current favorite for the Best Picture Oscar (he meant in a very gut feeling, not-saying-this-is-the-way-it-will-turn-out kind of way). But the fact that it is crap, and the fact that I have been reasonably happy with the last two winners (No Country and The Departed) leads me to believe something else will win. However, NO upcoming movies are exciting me.

I'll already think 2008 was a banner year even if the last month doesn't produce any classics. Reprise, Mister Lonely, Vicky Cristina Barcelona, Be Kind, Rewind, Chop Shop, A Christmas Tale, Flight of the Red Balloon, and Speed Racer are all movies that in my world are exceptionally worthy "Best Picture" recipients. If anything, it is these movies' high quality that makes the actual Oscar seem important...it has to be something at least reasonably representative of the strong 2008.

The Dark Knight continues to get mentioned as a possible Best Picture nominee. I wasn't as blown away with it as a lot of people, but it's definitely a worthy choice. It's epic enough that it isn't "just a comic book movie," and it pulls off its "epicness" more respectfully than even some past Best Picture winners.

But what else lies on the horizon?

-The Curious Case of Benjamin Button: The full gist of Wells' post was the advanced word he's gotten on Button is "meh," which makes him think it's no longer the favorite. Obviously, that is way-in-advance word and should be taken with a grain of salt. However, even among people who like it, comparisons to Forest Gump and exclamations about how much they cried seem to dot their praises. I'm worried Fincher, Eric Roth, and Co. overdid it in their effort to make a crowd pleaser and laid on the schmaltz a little too thick. I think everybody involved (Fincher, Roth, Pitt, Blanchett, etc.) are individually great, and that makes Button exciting to think about, but which of those people is going to put the breaks on if things were getting too Gumpy? Fincher doesn't seem to care too much about story, and Roth obviously wrote Gump, so we know he can go there (compare Gump to The Insider or The Good Shepherd, great restrained stories). I'm keeping my expectations low, but this could still turn out to be a masterpiece.

-Milk like the "seen: I bet Penn's really good. But this just looks-it-before" biopic. Meh. (see Penn below)

-Frost/Nixon: This is definitely a "seen-it-before." Ron Howard won't drop the ball, the performances will be good, but the chances of this movie surprising or exciting me in any way are 0. And yes, I can be certain of that without seeing it.

-Revolutionary Road: All along, this has seemed like a "more-than-they-can-chew" project for Mendes and Co., I feel like there are probably too many great things in that huge novel and the movie will end up just struggling to connect all the dots. But like Button, I'm cautiously optimistic just because of the amount of talent involved.

-Australia: I loved Moulin Rouge! This don't look like no Moulin Rouge!, unfortunately. It looks more like Baz's other two movies, which I've never had the slightest desire to see.

-Gran Torino: No. Just no. I don't see Eastwood surprising anyone anymore. This will be just OK.

-The Reader: "The Reader"? Not even TNT would approve that title. Oh wait, Stephen Daldry, Kate Winslet, Ralph Fiennes? Sounds stuffy.

-The Wrestler: By all accounts it's great, but Arnofsky has never done it for me. That said, what's it competing against so far? I'm ready to embrace this movie if it's half as good as people say.

-Doubt: Another one I'm counting on at this point. A playwright adapting his own hit play with a great cast sounds dependable to me.

Che: My most anticipated of any of these, but it's huge length means the Academy would never go near it even if it was getting unanimous praise.

So what does this mean for us? Doubt, The Wrestler, Button, and Revolutionary Road seem like the four movies that could turn out great AND end up being nominated for Best Picture. Throw The Dark Knight in there and I'll definitely be happy. More realistically, two out of those four end up being good enough to deserve it and hopefully they're nominated and I have horses to root for.

Just please no Slumdog Millionaire.

Greg Oden (Part One)

2008-11-20T00:41:00.005-05:00

By Rob

I. Love. Greg. Oden.

Consider this part one of a two part post on Oden. (I'm keeping this short because Portland is playing right now and I don't want to miss him swat another shot)

Greg Oden’s first three full games have been excellent...

Averages: 65.2 FG%, 72.7 FT%, 15.3 PTS, 9.6 REB, 3 BLK, 1 STL, 1 AST, 2.3 TO, 4.6 PF

Stat Totals: 15-23 FG, 16-22 FT, 29 REB, 3 AST, 7 TO, 3 STL, 9 BLK, 14 PF, 46 PTS

As I post, his stat line reads:
17:27 minutes, 3-7 FG, 5-6 FT, 10 reb, 3 blk, 11 pt

5-6 FT makes me giggle a little. Man... He's going to be a very, very good player.

Jon Brion/Punch-Drunk Love

2008-11-09T13:04:00.004-05:00

By James

No movie in my DVD collection owes as great a percentage of its success (in my opinion) to its score as Punch-Drunk Love. I'm always a sucker for Jon Brion's minimalist ditties, they have a way of keeping any story upbeat and afloat. Because Brion frequently doesn't use conventional "instruments" or crowd his score with more than one or two sounds at a time, he is able to blur the line between the diegetic and the nondiegetic. Heavy, "traditional" scores can distance me from a story, they reinforce the feeling "this is a movie." But Brion's scores have a feeling of spontaneity and awe, as if he's uncertain of of the sounds he's making even as they are coming out. While most scores feel structured and crafted to elicit a certain feeling, Brion's piece together scattered elements and then almost reluctantly declare, "This is music." Not coincidentally, movies like Punch-Drunk Love and Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind dwell on the intimate, piecing together disparate moments and concluding, "This is life."

Punch-Drunk Love is a movie I was pretty sure I didn't like the first time I saw it, but it's grown to be one of my most frequently watched movies. I guess that means I like it, at least a little. My one hard and fast rule for all my years of movie watching has been not to dwell on whether I like individual "elements" of a movie: score, cinematography, etc. are all irrelevant if you're not wondering what'll happen next (i.e. engaged in the story). And yet, Punch-Drunk Love has such a brilliant score, and cinematography, and staging, that the story's obvious (too obvious?) holes drown in the exquisiteness. I'm never engaged in Punch-Drunk Love's story, but I'm always overwhelmed with feeling, the movie seems to be an experiment in what happens when story "doesn't matter" (relatively, or "conventionally"). The fact that Punch-Drunk Love succeeds for me at this feat is a testament to the overwhelming charm of the score, there are new pleasures and ideas to be uncovered in Brion's scatter every time.

Burn After Reading

2008-09-14T00:35:00.003-04:00

By Luke

SPOILERS AHEAD...

Most of the events that transpire in Burn After Reading are the result of a blackmail attempt involving a CD-R that basically contains Osborne Cox's (John Malkovich) whole life on it, from his financial records to his memoir. And the irony is, the disc is worth nothing.

Burn After Reading won't be popular with everyone, probably because if you copied all the good attributes from all the characters onto one CD, there'd still be a lot of empty space left. It's not that they're "bad" people, they're just unfulfilled. Cox has buried in his problems in booze, but everyone else is taking a stab at self-improvement. Cox's wife (Tilda Swinton) is planning for divorce, Harry (George Clooney) is engaged in several affairs, and most significantly, Linda (Francis McDormand) has simultaneously entered the online dating world and outlined several plastic surgery procedures that will significantly improve her appearance.

Their environment is loaded with allusions to sex, and for all their sleeping with one another, no one's particularly satisfied in that department. The gym where Linda works is called "Hardbodies" and she pines for a "Hollywood" body, while pop culture blatantly taunts regular folks' chances for sexual fulfillment: the popular date movie is called "Coming Up Daisy" (get it?) and features two movie stars with beaming, perfect smiles on the poster; Harry's wife has a tryst with Dermot Mulroney in a dressing room as the TV shows an impeccably cheerful chef vigorously mixing a salad. Even "Cox" (another Coens joke) isn't immune from this sexualized atmosphere, follows along half-heartedly with a workout TV show starring three seriously toned bodybuilders.

Unfortunately, Harry's situation is more representative of the characters' sex lives: he hasn't "discharged his weapon" in twenty years and has resorted to frequent jogging and building a sex chair intended to pleasure his lovers as his methods for release. Still, characters swap in and out of bed with each other, as if they think their next lover will be "the one." The Coens make it pretty obvious what they think of this approach: Linda delivers multiple ludicrous speeches about the merits of "staying positive," which drew some of the biggest laughs.

Ultimately, the CIA is the only organization capable of providing any perspective on the worth of these people's lives, and they do by completely dismissing their importance despite multiple fatalities. You can't help but agree with the decision about these people's worthlessness, but the movie's achievement is you still enjoyed watching them.

The New Kings of Nonfiction

2008-09-07T15:46:00.003-04:00

By James

I'm a sucker for the Best American series that Houghton Mifflin puts out each year so I was interested in the recent collection of essays called The New Kings of Nonfiction, which was edited by This American Life host Ira Glass. Although I think Glass can be very pretentious and annoying (and I skipped through his introduction to the book), he put together a good collection of essays, although "New" does not really fit the title since many of the entries are ten to twenty years old.

Here are links to some of the highlights:

Jonathan Lebed's Extracurricular Activities by Michael Lewis (The New York Times Magazine - February 25, 2001)

Toxic Dreams: A California Town Finds Meaning in an Acid Pit by Jack Hitt (Harper's Magazine - July 1995)

Six Degrees of Lois Weisberg by Malcolm Gladwell (The New Yorker - January 11, 1999)

Power Steer by Michael Pollan (The New York Times Magazine - March 31, 2002)

Tales of the Tyrant by Mark Bowden (The Atlantic - May 2002)

Losing the War by Lee Sandlin (The Chicago Reader - May 1997)

I am too lazy to describe each of them so just give them a read.

Video entry for a Nesquik contest

2008-08-30T20:33:00.004-04:00

From Luke & Rob

A new video from the fellas at Tres Gatos! Don't bother watching it on this page as the quality is poor. Click on the video or copy-and-paste the link I've provided below. Once on the YouTube page, click "view in high quality."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g-6pUWJa0Fk

Variety recently never said, and I quote: "Let's face it... Tres Gatos is a dynamic enterprise with enough promise to suggest a climb atop Hollywood. For the time being, TG stand as precocious disciples of comedy, but soon will surely have disciples of their own. You must look out for TG, as they are no doubt a force to be reckon with!" It was nice to not get a blurb, even if it was overloaded with buzz words and some run-on's. Thanks for nothing Variety!

Excerpts from interviews with Carmen Electra and George Lucas

2008-08-26T11:01:00.014-04:00

By Rob

I thought the following story from Carmen Electra was pretty funny... really crazy, of course, but funny. I read it in an interview with moviefone.com.

Are you [and Disaster Movie co-star Kim Kardashian] able to walk around in public without being hassled? Do you ever have experiences with people coming too close to your space?
Electra: I had a weird experience when I was working at MTV. We were shooting an opening of a new restaurant or something. And we were in a different city. I flew in, and I was all by myself because it was one of my first jobs. And I didn't have anyone with me at all. I flew in, and the driver picked me up and took me to the hotel. And there was a guy in the lobby with a clipboard. He said he was from MTV and sort of had the rundown of my schedule and took me up to my room and was in my room with me. I was hanging out with this guy for the entire day. And finally the phone rings and I said, "Answer it," because I was getting ready. And the people from MTV freaked out because they didn't know who he was. It turns out he was a stalker, so they arrested him.

I also found an interview with Star Wars creator, George Lucas, who was promoting Star Wars: The Clone Wars. Again, moviefone.com gets props for a funny interview.

1. How did you come up with the idea of doing 'Clone Wars'?
When I was doing 'Revenge of the Sith,' I thought, "Gee, it's too bad that I'm starting 'Episode III' by going right into the end of the Clone Wars." So we came up with the idea of doing a little animated series for Cartoon Network.

Can you really say, "Gee, it's too bad [I didn't have this featured in the movie]" when
1) You've written, directed and produced the movie
and 2) The movie you're making has a budget of 115-million.

I mean, why didn't he write a script that featured more of the Clone Wars? He clearly makes time for everything else he'd like to see (see Jar Jar Binks) so why not the Clone Wars? I liked Revenge of the Sith and disliked Attack of the Clones. Couldn't he have worked more of it into Attack of the Clones?

2. You did two of those in 2003. Why did you decide to do yet another series ?
I started in animation in college, and then I moved to live action, but I have produced a lot of animated films and I really always wanted to get back to it. I was so enamored with the idea of doing the animated 'Clone Wars' and doing something that really wasn't focused on Anakin's problems of going to the Dark Side. So I decided that when I finished the features, I would go back and make the best animated TV series that has ever been done.

The best animated TV series that has ever been done? I get that he's promoting his movie and stuff, but that's just ridiculous. He doesn't have to be that extreme.

3. Wow, the best? Isn't that a tall order?
Well, that's the fun part! We helped evolve CG animation and we've been involved with it for a long time. I love anime, I love graphic art, I love Japanese influences. This is my chance to really have some fun and, you know, do it the best. It's not quite Pixar quality, but definitely of a quality that nobody's ever seen before.

Not quite Pixar? Is he completely full of shit? It's nowhere near Pixar. It's not quite Space Chimps. It looks like junk. It actually looks like a Clone Wars video game from the early 2000s.

I work at a movie theater, so I watched a couple minutes of The Clone Wars during my break. I'm a big Star Wars fan, but I know well enough not expect anything from this movie. I wouldn't pay to see it and even though I can see movies for free (as a theater employee) it'd be a waste of time to watch it in it's entirety. As for the parts I saw, the audio didn't really sync up with characters' lips! I think that's Animation 101.

The interview goes on and Lucas says a few more pompous things. Check it out.

Where's My DVD!? -- TV Shows Missing in Action on DVD

2008-08-24T20:51:00.005-04:00

By James

As a big fan of TV, I think that the best aspect of the DVD revolution over the past ten years has been the increased access to the complete series of TV shows from all eras. On VHS, most TV series received one or two Best-of video compilations, allowing me as a kid to see certain classic episodes of old shows. Now nearly every TV show is on DVD, including many shows that arguably have no fan base (Cathouse: The Complete Series, anyone?) while many classics are still unavailable. The following is a small list of many shows I love that are out of print or unavailable along with several shows I've never seen but would love to catch this time around on DVD.

Get a Life (1990-1992)

This sitcom, starring and created by Chris Elliott, aired on Fox for two seasons before being canceled after a meager 35 episodes. Despite its short run, it became a cult hit and seen as one of the most innovative and absurd sitcoms of all time. (The show revolved around Chris, an early thirties slacker paperboy who still lives with his parents.) In what other sitcom does the main character die in 12 episodes? The show had a notable writing staff including Charlie Kaufman and Bob Odenkirk.

In 2000 and 2002, Rhino Video released Best-of DVDs for the show that only included 8 episodes. The DVDs are currently out of print. Elliott claims that the DVD has been finished but its being held up by legal issues (possibly regarding the show's theme song, "Stand" by R.E.M.) but I say hooey. Let's get this thing out so I can finally see the rest of it. I've only seen the best of DVDs and need more!!

The State (1993-1995)

For a sketch comedy show that has spun off so many great films and shows in the past ten years (Reno 911!, Stella, Wet Hot American Summer, The Ten), MTV is still yet to release the series, which ran for 26 episodes over three seasons, onto DVD. The DVD release has been postponed and pushed back multiple times. The cast recorded commentaries and bonus features have been finished. Until the DVD release, you can check out the first season streaming for free on MTV.com

The Tom Green Show (1999-2000)

I want a complete series DVD of all the MTV episodes, including the specials (Monica Lewinsky Special and the Peabody Award nominated Cancer Special). Tom Green is hilarious and that's that.

The Larry Sanders Show -- Seasons Two through Six

Sony Pictures released the first season of the HBO classic in 2002 and rereleased it to coincide with the release of last year's excellent DVD, "Not Just the Best of the Larry Sanders Show" which compiled 23 of the series' best episodes. I've thoroughly enjoyed these two releases but I want whats beyond "Not Just the Best" -- the whole series. The show had so many great episodes throughout its run and its about time it gets a release. Until then, the show is easy to find on YouTube and in decent quality.

Upright Citizens Brigade - Season Three DVD

Comedy Central released season one on DVD in 2003 and season two in 2007. I'm not waiting another four years. I call upon them to release season three along with a Complete Series set (much like the excellent one they put together for Strangers with Candy).

The Adventures of Pete and Pete - Season Three DVD

Much like UCB, the first two seasons of this show are available on DVD but we still need the third and final season.

Now here are two series that although I never saw have always intrigued me.

Fallen Angels (1993 to 1995)

Fallen Angels was a neo-noir Showtime series that ran for two seasons (15 episodes) . Here's a quote from the show's Wikipedia entry: "The television program was produced using top-notch directors, well-known hard-boiled fiction writers, experienced screenplay writers, inventive cinematographers (who recreated the film noir images), and actors. The art direction gave the series the ambiance and historical look required of a show devoted to noir set in Los Angeles."

Episodes were directed by actors like Tom Cruise, Tom Hanks, & Kiefer Sutherland as well as notable directors like Steven Soderbergh, Alfonso Cuarón, Peter Bogdanovich, & John Dahl. Cineamtographer Emmanuel Lubezki did camera-work on two episodes. Everything about this screams "Why haven't I seen it yet?"

China Beach (1988-1991)

The show revolved around the Vietnam War and was a critically lauded show that suffered poor ratings. I don't know much about it, but have always heard good things.

Horror Movies

2008-08-20T13:00:00.008-04:00

By Rob

What inspired this post was The Blair Witch Project, which I watched today in it's entirety for the first time ever. This post was going to be about old movies I've watched for the first time just recently... but I ended up writing a lot about the state of horror movies in general.

A quick word on The Blair Witch...
The movie is a a phenomenon and is unlike any other movie I've seen or heard of. It was a product of gross advertising; basically the first movie to utilize the Internet as a way to create buzz. I wasn't sure if the movie would hold up as being scary because a lot of the mystery behind the movie has since been uncovered (ie. how real it actually is). It remained pretty scary for me. The story of the film's production is really fascinating, but I'll get to that another time.

Anyway, while watching The Blair Watch I started thinking, "what is a horror movie and what is the current state of the genre?" I don't want to squabble over semantics, but I'm always partial to horror movies that rely heavily on suspense. I know that is really the foundation of what are more commonly categorized as thrillers, and not horror, but let's keep it all under the same umbrella.

It seems that movies like Saw and Hostel are what constitute as horror movies nowadays, and they rely almost entirely on torture and hyper-violent images to scare you. I guess there is some merit to that, but at best that's to be a crutch and not the foundation of a horror movie. I don't like it when audiences has grown so desensitized that there's no longer an actual market for the suspense films I love. I truly believe others would love these movies too, if they gave them a chance.

Are there movies out there that rely on suspense? Sort of. Are they of high quality? No longer. But I'll get to what's available for a guy with my tastes soon.

Saw is designed to appease to an impatient audience, and with each film the ante is being raised in the Hollywood-wide gross-out contest; hence the desensitization. It's sort of ingenious. I used to think that if a viewer wants to be scared; truly wishes to enjoy all that the genre has to offer... then they must be patient.

What movies like Saw ask is, "why be patient when our brand of horror movies pay off early? Patience is for suckers." Why wait an hour to hear a gun fired when Saw shows you torture 10 minutes in? Nothing can be worse than being systematically killed in a dank room, right?

We obviously all have our own fears, but the most commonly shared is the fear of death; the ace that horror movies keep up their sleeves. With Saw you get death. That's for sure. What I'm questioning, from a cinematic standpoint, is whether Saw approaches the prospect of death the most effective way; if they use their ace prematurely. It's a question of pacing, really.

To me, the scariest thing is to be killed despite barely being touched. That's what a movie like The Blair Witch Project -- or most recently The Strangers -- does. It sure seems systematic, but the primary major difference is the unraveling of humanity. In Saw, I get to see someone's ribcage explode. I literally see blood, sweat, and tears running from some person in two minutes tops. But just because I see a someone's flesh pierced doesn't make them human to me. The most convincing way of proving the present of humanity on screen -- something I consider essential in a movie if I am to be made truly terrified -- is to approach the story in a slower and more eloquent fashion. If the characters aren't human, they don't prove themselves to be vulnerable.

Saw has it's merits, and I think a lot of it's overwhelming gore; the quick payoffs and all, is intended to be somewhat comedic. I can't rationalize it any other way. Still, it's box office success has (and will) influence horror movies for some years. That's a big part of the problem.

The Ring could be seen as a compromise between the gross-out brand of new Hollywood horror movies (once exclusive to exploitation films, I might add) and the endangered brand of horror movies that are heavily reliant on suspense. However, movies like The Ring (The Hills Have Eyes, The Mirror, etc.) are seriously flawed in that they try to do too much -- likely a result of being heavily manufactured -- and in trying to obtain balance, bite off more than they can chew. These movies attempt to share both a gross-out component and a suspense component, and in doing so fail to find any identity.

So, yes, like I said there are suspense films being made, but so many seem compromised or, in the case of M. Night Shymalan, based on a poor and/or thin premise. (They suck for a number of reasons.)

It sucks that so many of the horror movies made today are either remakes of foreign films for a U.S. audience and remakes of old horror movies, 30-years removed. Where's the originality? One of the few things that's available for a guy who craves suspense in horror films is a pick at any one of the handful of remakes being made. Unfortunately few of these try to reinvent the film they are based upon, and instead do a poor job of making a shot-for-shot remake. Original works seem far and few between.

The closest I've seen anyone come to maintaining that balance between excessive gore and suspense (a balance which may be unachievable) is in the work of Rob Zombie. I appreciate Rob Zombie so much. You can see his influences throughout his films, and he has developed a style that is far reaching, ambitious and unique. Original work in horror is rare, and it'd be rarer without Zombie.

For now, I'll settle for movies like The Strangers and Cloverfield when I need my monthly dose of terror, because they show craftsmanship.

Vicky Cristina Barcelona

2008-08-18T13:44:00.003-04:00

By Luke

I would put it #2 for best movies of the year thus far. The 7 really great movies this year are (in order):

Reprise

Vicky Cristina Barcelona

Be Kind Rewind

Mister Lonely

Chop Shop

Flight of the Red Balloon

Speed Racer

Those would be followed by Encounters at the End of the World, The Dark Knight, Cloverfield, In Bruges.

Vicky Cristina Barcelona felt the closest to Annie Hall of any of the Woody movies I've ever seen (there are a lot I haven't seen). That doesn't mean I necessarily think it's his second best ever, but movies like Manhattan and Hannah and her Sisters (i.e. the relationship dramadies I think Annie hall is most often compared to) don't have the same balance of charm and fantasy that makes Annie Hall so great and it was really surprising to find it here, even though VCB isn't nearly as great a movie. It's very fun and engaging, and yet there's this really potent edge to the relationships lying underneath the surface. There are laughs here, just like Woody Allen comedies, and there are the same 'true' relationship moments that can be found in Annie Hall, and a lot of people would say 'Hannah' and Manhattan as well. So it really felt like a return to form by the Woodster, plus it's full of great performances and Barcelona art.

Maybe an indicator of whether you like the movie is how you feel about the title. One review I read said the title was the first indication that Woody has gotten lazy, and he thought the movie reflected that. I think 'Vicky Cristina Barcelona' is a clever title in the same vein of Old Woody (if that's lazy, what are: "Annie Hall," "Manhattan," "Hannah and her Sisters," "Broadway Danny Rose," "Zelig," etc.?) and the movie reflects that, it's a throwback to Woody's Golden Age.

Links Links Links!

2008-08-16T23:31:00.005-04:00

By James

Time for some links to interesting reads from the best in magazines, newspapers, and blogs.

The Shorter, The Longer by Jim Emerson (The Chicago Sun Times' Scanners Blog)

Emerson has many valid criticisms about the pacing and overall experience of The Dark Knight that really resonated with me. I liked the movie but repeated viewings and time have only led me to find more problems behind the film that have continued to keep me from being able to love it.

Malwebolence by Mattathias Schwartz (The New York Times Magazine)

It's two weeks old now, but still worth checking out.

Superbugs by Jerome Groopman

Groopman is one of my favorite staff writers at the New Yorker and always worth reading.

Check It Out!

2008-08-16T22:38:00.008-04:00

By James

For my first post here, I thought I could offer some recommendations of the many things I've been enjoying lately.

TV:

Mad Men Season 2 - Sundays 10PM on AMC and ON DEMAND
This season has started slow, but the first season didn't really pick up until the last few episodes. Give it time and enjoy the gorgeous eye-candy, Christina Hendricks. Hubba Hubba!

Oz Season One - Available on DVD
Oz is probably one of the more underrated series in HBO's history. It is far more remembered for its shock value, but the show pulls you in right off the bat and is so entertaining. I saw the first season a few years ago and upon revisiting it, I can't wait for my season two DVDs to arrive. The highlight of the show is probably Dean Winters as Ryan O'Reilly, the prison's manipulative and scheming Iago. Winters also deserves credit for his great work on 30 Rock as Dennis Duffy, the on/off boyfriend of Tina Fey.

Veronica Mars - Available on DVD
I am usually hesitant about these shows with cult followings that are on shitty TV networks (ex. any Joss Whedon series) but Veronica Mars deserves its praise. The show is a whole lot of fun.

Radio:

The Best Show on WFMU - Available on iTunes or http://www.wfmu.org/playlists/bs
It's the best show on radio and it's a must-hear every week. Tom Scharpling & Jon Wurster are not only the funniest people on radio but perhaps today's best comedy duo.

Gilbert Gottfried Appearances on The Howard Stern Show - Available on http://thehsdaily.blogspot.com/
Gottfried is easily Stern's funniest guest ever and responsible for many memorable moments in the show's history. A classic example is a 2002 appearance where New York City real estate magnate Abraham Hirschfeld calls into the show from prison.

The History of Howard Stern - Available on http://lebeamer.blogspot.com/
Sirius Radio produced a 25 hour radio documentary special in December 2007 that covers everything Stern until the mid-1980s. Part two of the special will be aired in December 2008 and will cover Stern's show from 1985 until present day.

Books:

Y: The Last Man by Brian K. Vaughan
How Doctors Think by Jerome Groopman

Plays:

Blackbird by David Harrower
Oleanna by David Mamet
Frost/Nixon by Peter Morgan
The Overwhelming by JT Rogers
Talk Radio by Eric Bogosian

My Calm-a-Sutra Tea Scholarship Entry

2008-08-16T22:35:00.003-04:00

From Luke & Rob

Before you press play, I suggest you click on the video -- or copy and paste the link I've provided below -- and watch the higher quality version (I can't get that on to post) on YouTube by clicking "view in high quality" to the right of the rating. Thanks!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Wy-PO4GlYw

Anticipation Meter: 22 Movies (...and then some more)

2008-08-16T02:42:00.027-04:00

By Rob

There's always a bunch of movies I'm looking forward to seeing... So I thought I'd make a list featuring those movies. All of them are in various stages of development, and I've ranked them based on my current level of anticipation and will adjust it when that changes.

As of August 14, 2008:

1. The Curious Case of Benjamin Button (to be released: December 19, 2008)
Easily one of the top 10 best trailers I've ever seen. This movie seems as promising as they come.

2. Lincoln (to be released: sometime in 2010; filming to begin: early 2009)
Liam Neeson is one of my favorite actors. And to me, Abraham Lincoln seems to fight Howard Hughes for the title of 'most interestingly complex man of prominence in American history.' Steven Spielberg is a tremendous director. I thought that the most recent Indiana Jones was a C+ movie. But SS is still having a solid decade. He had that streak where Artificial Intelligence: AI (a solid B movie) came out in 2001, and had both Catch Me If You Can (A-/A) and Minority Report (A/A+; one of my top Spielberg movies and likely in my top 10 for the 2000s thus far) in 2002. I don't even have too many bad things to say about The Terminal or Munich. I think he's putting out movies that are just as ambitious those he had in the 90's. The bottom line is that the only thing about Lincoln that upsets me is that the film's production continues to be pushed back for Spielberg's less interesting projects. (namely Tintin)
3. Quantum of Solace (to be released: November 7, 2008)
It's nearing release is partly what gets QoS this high as it is. However, it'd still be in my top 5 if it were March. I really, really enjoyed Casino Royale and I expect more of the same.

4. The Road (to be released November 26, 2008)
5. Up (to be released May 29, 2008)
It's Pixar... What more must I say? Check out the teaser trailer.

6. Sin City 2 (to be released: sometime in 2009) & Sin City 3 (to be released: sometime in 2010)
7. Inglorious Bastards (to be released: sometime in 2009)
8. Shutter Island (to be released: October 2, 2009)
9. The World's End (to be released: sometime in 2010)
I don't really know what the movie is going to be about, although the title is probably self-explanatory. All I know is Simon Pegg and Nick Frost are starring, Edgar Wright and Simon Pegg are writing the screenplay, and Edgar Wright is going to be directing it. And that's more than good enough for me.
10. Australia (to be released: November 14, 2008)
What a trailer! The movie will be Baz Luhrmann's fourth. He takes awhile between films (four years between Strictly Ballroom and Romeo + Juliet; five years between Romeo + Juliet and Moulin Rouge!; and seven years between Moulin Rouge! and Australia) so I hope this one is worth the wait.

Sidenote: Hugh Jackman's character is named "The Drover." Sounds pretty badass to me.

11. Blood Meridian (to be released: sometime in 2009)
Another Cormac McCarthy novel is coming to the big screen. Any complaints?... No? I thought so. I like the resumes of the guys behind this adaptation a little more than I do the resumes of those behind The Road. For this round of Cormac, Ridley Scott is directing and William Monahan (who penned The Departed) has written the screenplay.
12. Funny People (to be released: July 13, 2009)
Judd Apatow goes back to the director's chair for only his third film from that spot. His best movies (Knocked Up; The 40-Year-Old Virgin) have come as a writer/director, so you can expect Funny People to move up this chart as production gets underway.
13. Tripoli (to be released: sometime in 2009)
William Monahan has written a screenplay for the film, which may be in development hell.
14. Observe and Report (to be released: April 10, 2009)
OK, look... I know I've placed this way too high up but formatting sucks. I'd tweak here and there on the second half of the list, but the order is not so off that it's worth the incredible amount of time it could take an idiot like me.

Moving forward:: Jody Hill, writer/director of The Foot Fist Way and the TV series East Bound and Down, writes and directs Observe and Report. So he's a very funny fellow and it's got a pretty funny, and talented, cast. I think East Bound and Down will go down in my book as 2008's best new TV series. Even if it doesn't run for long, I can say for certain that it has one of the best pilots I've ever seen. Check it out on HBO.
15. Nine (to be released: December 11, 2oo9)
Daniel Day-Lewis stars in Rob Marshall's film version of the 1982 hit Broadway musical, based on Frederico Fellini's 8 1/2. Yes, I'm interested. My understanding is that it's exactly like 8 1/2 but with singing. Sounds strange, but yes, I'm still interested.

16. The Hobbit (to be released: sometime in 2011) & The Hobbit 2 (to be released: sometime in 2012)

This movie is bound to jump some spots once... well, if they ever finish scripting..
17. Untitled Bruno Project (to be released: May 15, 2009)
Sacha Baron Cohen is bringing the character Bruno from his popular TV series, Da Ali G Show, to the big screen. The Channel 4-turned-HBO series had only three characters (Ali G, Borat, and Bruno), so I have pretty high expectations for Bruno; the last of the trio to make the jump from TV to film.
18. The Green Hornet (to be released: June 20, 2010)
19. Whatever Works (to be released: sometime in 2009)
Larry David with Woody Allen? It could be the Woody Allen comedy I've been waiting for. I hope Larry David has a bigger role in Whatever Works than he did in New York Stories and Radio Days. Oh, and Ed Begley Jr. has a role too, and he's a pretty funny fellow.

The big question is this: Will Larry say "These pretzels are making me thirsty"...? I can't wait to find out.

20. The Rise of Theodore Roosevelt (to be released: sometime in 2o10)
I'll know exactly where to put this as soon as I see a trailer for Shutter Island. It's Scorsesse, so assume this will hit single digits on this chart.
21. Burn After Reading (to be released: September 12, 2008)
I love the Coen Brothers but the movie is being released so soon to this list being posted. I still wanted to show it some attention.

22. Eagle Eye (to be released: September 26, 2008)
Like Burning After Reading, Eagle Eye has a release that is too near to make it worth ranking higher. I think it'll be a very fun movie, and the #21 spot isn't necessarily a slight against it.

Notable:

Untitled Alfonso Cuaron Project (to be released: sometime in 2009)
Details are scarce, but who even cares what it's about? I'll watch it with the sound off if I have to.

1906 (to be released: sometime in 2009)
IMDb breaks down the plot: "A young man discovers a series of secrets and lies that left San Francisco highly vulnerable to the fires that engulfed it in the aftermath of the historical 1906 earthquake." The story is pretty intriguing (it's an adaptation of a book) and oh, yeah... Brad Bird is directing!! Sure it's not animated, but I trust him as a filmmaker. Ratatouille was a masterpiece... I've gotta see his follow-up. This will climb the list soon.

Madagascar: Escape 2 Africa (to be released: November 7, 2008)
I enjoyed the first one quite a bit. Not top of the line for animated movies, but it was good. This should make the list.

Bolt (to be released: November 26, 2008)
It looks pretty goofy to me. It could be OK.

Tetro (to be released: sometime in 2009)
Francis Ford Coppola directs, Vincent Gallo stars. There... You've peaked my interest. Francis Ford Coppola is only 3 films removed from Jack (I'm not providing a link to that one), and it's clear he's never going to be back on his game. But at least now he's working on something interesting. The thing that could have sent the movie onto the brink of very interesting was Javier Bardem's involvement. Bardem quit the project, and later dropped from movie-musical Nine, citing exhaustion. As weird as Vincent Gallo is, I'd favor an eccentric guy such as VG to someone flat. I'm really only moderately interested anyway.
PLOT: "Follows the rivalries of an artistic Italian immigrant family." Very vague, I know. That's one of the reasons why it's on the fringe.

Star Trek (to be released: May 8, 2009)
I liked Cloverfield (I understand he didn't direct, but whatever; it was him and his team behind it) and Mission: Impossible III. I enjoy LOST. I'm interested to see what J.J. Abrams does with Star Trek.

Wartime Lies (to be released: sometime in 2009)
The story of Wartime Lies move to the big screen is an interesting one, but the short of it is this: Stanley Kubrick "was going to adapt Wartime Lies in the early 1990s, but dropped it when Schindler's List was released." [1] And now William Monahan has written a screenplay for it... I really want to see it brought to life, if only to see what the hubbub is all about. It'd be on my list, but with so few details made public it's hard to get excited.

Jurassic Park IV (to be released: sometime in 2009)
More Monahan (he's writing this, too) but it makes little to no difference. It's taken forever to get the ball rolling on this one, and with the 2nd and 3rd installments turning out to be sub par, it's no real wonder why. Spielberg has reportedly been turning down screenplays for a couple years now, and I only wonder why he didn't wait longer on the 2nd and 3rd. My expectations are low. Still... I've gotta see it! For anyone interested, you should check out the plot summary.

The Olympics and Why No One Cares

2008-08-12T00:03:00.003-04:00

By Luke

Rob, this is a follow-up to our earlier conversation...I consider it the icing on the cake.

Not only is Phelps 3 for 3 on gold medals, he's 3 for 3 on world records. Are you kidding me? Olympic sports are in the category with tennis, golf, etc....marginal sports where the technology is outpacing fan interest.

In fact, maybe that's a reason the most popular sports (baseball, basketball, football) are so great: even advancements in their equipment haven't skewed the game (obviously that's what's so threatening about steroids). While guys may hit more HR than they did fifty years ago, there is still a feeling of the ebb and flow of history and that's a crucial part of baseball. The Olympics have kicked it into high gear so fast that there is no sense of connection to earlier eras and that's how you end up with Phelps re-writing the record books.

"438-Pound Beekeeper From Wisconsin" Ran Boston Marathon

2008-08-10T13:11:00.006-04:00

By Rob

Before I go any further, he participated in the 2007 Boston Marathon, so I admit I'm reaching the well-covered story pretty late. It still remains a nice story.

His name is Jacob. He lost an incredible amount of weight in the training process and used his website -- where he documented his training and life, in general -- as a way of raising money for major charities. (No, it was not a scam. It all went to charity.)

Like I said, that was all pretty well covered. What I noticed on his website, and can't seem to get over, is all the ill-will that was sent his way. There's always going to be weird people out there who will knock down a just cause (Jacob essentially represented three noble organizations) but his site attracted some really strong hatred. Check it out here, where he has compiled a number of such messages. The bright side is that there are a lot of really nice ones in a section he calls "Hall of Fame."

Mad Men

2008-07-31T22:18:00.000-04:00

By Luke

I'm out. After six and a half episodes, there's nothing keeping me watching. It's well made, but I just can't get excited about it. And so, the world moves on without me.

Step Brothers: A Quick Response To Luke & More

2008-07-30T13:40:00.008-04:00

By Rob

After reading Luke's entry regarding Step Brothers, I wanted to mention an interview that provides some explanation as to the process by which Adam McKay and Will Ferrell wrote Step Brothers.

On July 23rd, Will Ferrell, John C. Reilly, and director/co-writer, Adam McKay, were on NPR's Fresh Air with host Terry Gross. I found the 30-minute interview to be pretty cool, and was surprised when Will Ferrell and Adam McKay said that Step Brothers was fairly script-reliant, and not as dependent on improvisation as I had imagined.

I think that it's both a fun and interesting interview. You can download the podcast version off Itunes for free by going to Podcasts>NPR>Fresh Air. The "Name" of this particular podcast is "NPR: 07-23-2008 Fresh Air"

Or you can check it out here on NPR's website.

My Take On Step Brothers:

I enjoyed Step Brothers. I enjoyed it more than any other movie Will Ferrell has had a leading role in since Anchorman: The Legend of Ron Burgundy in 2004.

That includes: Semi-Pro (8.0/10), Blades of Glory (4.5/10), Stranger Than Fiction (??), Talladega Nights: The Ballad of Ricky Bobby (5.0/10), Curious George (7.5/10), Wedding Crashers (8.0/10), Bewitched (??), Kicking & Screaming (7.0/10)

I liked him in The Producers and Melinda and Melinda, but 1) it's about the overall quality of the movie and not just his performance, and 2) he obviously wasn't a lead in either. #2 is relevant to Wedding Crahsers.

I haven't seen Bewitched or Stranger than Fiction and I really don't care to. I think they are better left disregarded, and I'm pretty sure I'll never need to see them. I know Curious George is WF as a voice-actor, but I thought I'd toss it in there anyway.

I give Step Brothers an 8.5 out of 10. It's the funniest movie of the year thus far and is one of the best WF movies... but I still favor Knocked Up and Hot Fuzz (2008's Top Comedies) to Step Brothers.

Fight Scenes

2008-07-28T23:58:00.005-04:00

By Luke

Slate has a great slideshow about the progress of the fight scene. It takes ten scenes from the history of cinema, starting with The Big Country (1958) and ending with Eastern Promises (2007). The gist is that fight scenes are becoming increasingly fast paced and hyper-edited at the expense of spacial clarity and cinematic tradition.

However, I for one vastly prefer some of the more recent scenes to the more traditional examples. The Big Country clip seems like a joke, the few edits feel arbitrary and the wide shots make the action appear insignificant. And I've never been a fan of Oldboy which is too obviously artificial and never really engages me in the action. Meanwhile, The Bourne Ultimatum and Natural Born Killers clips completely enthrall me and are exciting to watch even without the context of the story. That makes me think the progression isn't a bad thing and I wonder if some people's objections to the fight scenes in movies like Batman Begins are the result of a generational difference.

Based on those ten clips, I would say the most important element in a good fight scene is to create a sense of urgency in the viewer and make sure the fight scene is consistently moving (unlike Return of the Dragon or The Big Country, where you are literally seeing the same punch/counterpunch routine as if the fighters are running in place). The Bourne Ultimatum continually raises the stakes faster than you can even keep up with what is going on, and that challenge to the viewer is what keeps it interesting.

A comparison is made to the heavy editing of musicals today (Moulin Rouge!, Chicago) and how the old Fred Astaire movies of yesteryear relied much more on action within the frame and not so many cuts. I would say that movies used to be confined by the amount of editing and number of angles they could get as a result of technical limitations, and that movies used to be much more about spectacle...you could watch Astaire dance in a single shot and be impressed merely by his ability. But these days we are probably quicker to disbelieve what we see...CGI and special effects are so good that we assume what we're seeing is a lie. So maybe fast editing is just a way of staying ahead of our doubts and thereby perpetuating the illusion.

Step Brothers

2008-07-25T17:43:00.005-04:00

By Luke

The more I think about it, the more I think Step Brothers could have been a really good movie if Will Ferrell's crew wasn't so in love with their own shtick and didn't rely so heavily on over-the-top improvisation. The plot involving Ferrell's younger brother (and the younger brother's family) hint at a comedy that's just as funny and weird (they can keep the singing in the car scene) but a little more subversive and directly taking on issues of "growing up" and family politics. Things like John C. Reilly having an affair with the brother's wife don't go anywhere in the current movie, but imagine Step Brothers if it was Will Ferrell meets The Squid and the Whale. All the more "esoteric" visual humor worked for me: the synchronized sleepwalking, the dream sequences at the end, all the inventive clever things that you wouldn't immediately imagine when someone told you it was a movie about grown up stepbrothers. If you throw in a few more things like that and take out the "Will Ferrell says something outrageous that doesn't make sense" bits, you have a seriously trippy movie. I think Ferrell, Reilly, and Adam McKay are so funny that they can take a premise way over the top and I still like it. But if they tried for something other than belly laughs every five seconds, it could be more satisfying, and at least more interesting.

The Dark Knight: The Top Grossing Film of 2008

2008-07-17T17:38:00.004-04:00

By Rob

It was less than two weeks ago -- 10 days ago to be exact -- when I predicted that The Dark Knight would be the top grossing film of 2008. And two weeks ago, I was met by naysayers. Two weeks later, on the eve of the film's release... There's few left questioning the probability of it finishing as the top grossing film of the year, as ridiculous estimates for it's opening weekend continue to pop up online.

The most recent prediction I saw was on BoxOfficeMojo.com is for 136.7 million. That would be the second highest opening weekend ever; just barely ahead of Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest (135.6) and behind only Spiderman 3 (151.1 million) .

Note: This figure is the average estimate of 724 site members in a game called Box Office Derby, and not any sort of official estimate by the site. I have found other average predictions over the past 5 or so months to be fairly accurate. It is what it is: a prediction.

Of course, 10 days ago, there was no question that The Dark Knight would finish in the top 5 for the year, but at #1? It'd have to make approximately 320 million to do that. Well I was predicting just that: 320 million in the end. (Although what I'm reading now makes 320 sound like more of a conservative estimate, I'd stick to that until this weekend's box office results are released.)

Maybe the naysayers were wondering whether the film's dark nature would leave behind a lot of the moviegoers who turned out to watch the nonthreatening, quick-witted charm of fellow superhero Iron Man. But I don't think that was it. The biggest concern was [probably] this: Batman Begins made 205.3 million domestic and 371 million worldwide. And I completely agree. I was somewhat reluctant to predict it to be the highest grossing. But there's three big things working for The Dark Knight that I think will send it over 3oo-million-dollar edge.

1) A tremendous amount of hype surrounding the film,
2) Likely the most heavily advertised movie since Spiderman 3 or the third Pirates of the Caribbean, and
3) The positive response Batman Begins received from critics and moviegoers alike.

Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull is, of course, The Dark Knight's competition for the top spot. Indiana Jones has, to date, grossed 311.3 million, and showed it's legs by remaining in 1,664 despite entering it's 8th week. To help put things into perspective, Sex and the City -- which finished 12th at the box office last weekend -- was in 1,025 theaters in it's 7th week. I know SATC is rated R, and Indiana PG-13, but it still provides a look a the big picture.

Iron Man vs. Indiana Jones
I think Indiana will surpass Iron Man for #1 on the year. I've been ignoring it up until now, but yes, Iron Man is still the year's top grossing film with 313.8 million grossed to date. However, Indiana Jones was in twice as many theaters last week -- Iron Man's 11th week -- and will likely gross twice as much as Iron Man this weekend, and do so again the following weekend, which I presume will be Iron Man's last. Indiana Jones is currently 2.5 million behind, so yes, I'm preemptively passing along the title.

Hancock at the Box Office:

I don't like Hancock (174.5 million domestic thus far) as a movie with legs. I predicted that Hancock would finish at 190 to 200 million domestic 10 days ago, and that still doesn't seem too unfair. Current predictions for Hancock this weekend are for around 15.6 million, which would bring the film's total gross to approx. 190.1 million in 19 days of release.

But after this weekend...

Step Brothers and The X-Files are released on July 25th, The Mummy: Tomb of the Dragon Emperor on April 1st, and Pineapple Express on April 8th. All of which should cut into Hancock's gross. I think that Hancock could be looking at 15-7-5-4 million over the next four weekends. If I'm correct with those estimates, then Hancock will have grossed 206.1 million over it's first 6 weeks and could possibly use what would presumably be it's last two weeks to reach for 210 million. Maybe I'm being really hard on Hancock, but I guess we'll see what it can do.

The Dark Knight, Take 1

2008-07-17T11:06:00.001-04:00

By Luke

THERE WILL BE SPOILERS

Regardless of whether anyone likes or dislikes The Dark Knight, it is inarguably the first "comic book movie" that really exceeds that categorization....you never feel like you're watching a superhero movie. That wasn't true with Batman Begins, and I think what's so arresting about this movie is even though everyone knew Christopher Nolan wanted to make this one darker, and everyone knew Heath Ledger had gone a little crazy playing the Joker, I don't think anyone was expecting this. This movie is going to be a huge box office hit, and it's going to be incredible because millions of viewers are going to be forced to reckon with something more than what they bargained for.

While I was watching, I couldn't help but wonder if No Country for Old Men stole a little bit of The Dark Knight's thunder. Both movies go to great lengths to keep you as in the dark as possible about their serial killers' motives. What's so creepy about Anton Chigurh and the Joker is they both seem unstoppable...the audience isn't given any explanation or weakness to make the killer seems vulnerable. The Joker also shares Anton's mythical quality. There were many times during the movie where I thought Batman and the Joker's gadgetry and ability to think six moves ahead was getting a little ridiculous...but I think that's sort of the point. "Batman" isn't human (although Bruce Wayne is) and "the Joker" doesn't really seem human either. They're Gotham's cultural composites, they represent the different forces at work within that society. This is why the Joker can tell different stories about how he got his scars, and still tell Harvey Dent later that he never lies...in a way, they're probably all true.

Another significant comparison is just like we don't see Josh Brolin's character die in No Country, we're denied the big payoff with the Joker. I assume that when he's hanging upside down in front of the SWAT team, he is about to be killed. But Nolan cuts to a different scene before we actually see him dead. I think this could serve two purposes: the first is it reinforces the idea that the Joker can't really be killed ("his spirit will live on"). The second purpose is it catches us when we're bloodthirsty, it denies us our desire for the kind of "justice" Two-Face seeks out. When we don't see the Joker killed, we're disappointed, because like the Joker says we assume that's "all a part of the plan."

I didn't "love" the movie, I don't know if it's a movie you can love. It can't help but stagger under its own weight when it has so many things going on. I don't think Harvey Dent is ever really fleshed out in this movie (why was he called Two-Face?...and the Joker could not have assumed that Dent would turn bad at the end, I still don't relieve believe it), and Rachel seems like a completely different person in this one (not just because it's a different actress) which makes it harder to buy the chemistry between her and Bruce (multiple people said they were glad she was dead after the screening I went to). The fact that Gordon basically has to spell out how the Joker "won" at the end shows how deeply the movie has twisted itself inside its own logic. Heath Ledger is the glue that keeps it all together, the way he staggers in and out of focus, it seemed like even the cameraman didn't know what he was going to do next. And most of all I appreciate that Nolan and Co. didn't just make the sequel a continuation of the first movie in plot or tone, and tried for something greater instead.

The Top 10 Best Movie Villains of 2000 to early 2008

2008-07-17T01:52:00.015-04:00

By Rob

NOTE: There are some mild SPOILERS in this post.

Recently Moviefone.com posted their list of the Top 25 Best Movie Villains of All Time. They regularly put out lists that are meant to be timely (this list being a response to the upcoming release of The Dark Knight) and I enjoy them because they are regularly a little off-beat; exchanging more popular choices with one's that are reasonable, although unexpected.

I was clicking through and I indeed found some typical choices with some (semi-) surprises mixed in. Some I enjoyed; such as Dr. Christian Szell from Marathon Man. Some I found to be a little off but not quite objectionable; like Tom Powers from Public Enemy. (Side note: I don't know if any film star has ever so exclusive to their era like James Cagney was. Seriously, what's the appeal today?) Numbers 4 (Hannibal Lecter), 3 (Wicked Witch of the West) and 2 (Darth Vader) were very basic. But the #1 Movie Villain of All Time according to Moviefone.com... Lord Voldemort.

Great Movie Villain? Really? I know Moviefone has it's quirky tastes, but Lord Voldemort is a very, very dumb pick.

Let me be clear, Moviefone.com isn't exactly my go-to destination for thoughtful lists and rankings, but I had come to welcome neat their lists when I checked showtimes for movies. I gotta say, my fairly low expectations were far from met. For shame, Moviefone.com (whose contributors I'm sure are reading)... For shame..

I got to thinking, and decided I'd construct a list of my own:

The Top 10 Best Movie Villains of 2000 to early July 2008 (forget about The Joker for now)

10. Anton Ego (voice by Peter O'Toole), Ratatouille

OK, so he's not a full-blown villain. Yes, Peter O'Toole delivers a tear-jearking speech in one of the sweetest scenes I've ever scene, revealing Ego to be not as heartless as we thought. But it's hard to forget he 1) ruined Gusteau and 2) makes Linguini and Remy cower in fear! That's bad news bears.

9. Teddy Gammell (Joe Pantoliano), Momento

8. Victor Quartermaine (voice by Ralph Fiennes), Wallace & Gromit in The Curse of the Were-Rabbit

This is Ralph Fiennes at his most villainous! (at least in this decade)

7. Alexander Conklin (Chris Cooper) and Deputy Director Ward Abbott (Brian Cox), The Bourne Identity

The face of Treadstone, the organization reasonable for the plight of Jason Bourne, in The Bourne Identity was Alexander Conklin, played by Chris Cooper (below; centered). His superior was C.I.A. Deputy Director Ward Abbott, played by Brian Cox. Together they offered solid performances, and had me waiting impatiently for Jason Bourne to land his revenge.

What about Joan Allen? As actors, I like Chris Cooper and I hate Joan Allen. Aside from Cooper having a far more distinct and negative character, I couldn't possibly consider Joan Allen to be one of the "great villains" of the series' because her performance was so poor.

After Identity, my hatred for any specific character withered a little anyway. Bourne still had questions to be answered after the first film, and Conklin was only the beginning of bad (and progressively worse) guys he needed to kill or compromise if he ever wanted some peace of mind. The series was thereby made much more about an ambiguous league of villains (Treadstone, the C.I.A., "the system", etc.) than any particular one. The chase (as well as the premise) is much more fresh in The Bourne Identity than the sequels, and I think that has something to do with Supremacy and Ultimatum lacking a strong, stand alone villain like Cooper.

6. Jesse James (Brad Pitt), The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford

Jesse James and Robert Ford present a Topdog/Underdog-type conflict, where the victor isn't quite clear. I think you could make an argument for either as the villain. I felt more for Robert Ford but, more importantly, I didn't feel at all for Jesse James.

The movie did not lead me to an understanding of Jesse James for a reason. I don't think he was painted as a person capable of being understood. This much I know: he's complex and destructive. He is vicious. The movie is largely the tale of Robert Ford in his attempt to understand Jesse James. Even after James is dead, the quest to understand James continues. It proves so fruitless for Ford that the only way he reaches any resolve is by way of a bullet in his head.

5. Anton Chigurh (Javier Bardem), No Country for Old Men

4. Agent Smith (Hugo Weaving), The Matrix trilogy

The Matrix came out in 1999, and it was the inferior sequels that were released in the 2000s to qualify it for the list. (I say "inferior" but I believe they still work collectively to make a very good movie.) Agent Smith became prominent in The Matrix Reloaded, but I'm going to consider his role in the entire series.

I also wanna toss this out there: Is the fight scene in the courtyard (above) in The Matrix Reloaded the best choreographed action scene so far this decade? There's definitely a couple of contenders, but I think it might be.

3. Terry Benedict (Andy Garcia), Ocean's Eleven

Of course I'm partially rooting for Danny Ocean and co. because they are so lovable, but it'd be impossible to do otherwise with Terry Benedict as cold and despicable as he is.

2. Harlem Maguire (Jude Law), The Road to Perdition

I don't think this performance receives enough mention. Jude Law (above) is terrifying as Harlem Maguire, in a movie that also seems all too forgotten.

1. The Jews (Various), The Passion of the Christ
I'm kidding! But what a first post that would be, right?

1. Daniel Plainview (Daniel Day-Lewis), There Will Be Blood

A popular and deserving pick for the best movie villain of 2000 to early 2008.