I honestly don’t know if they were around before this or not, but I clearly remember the very first time I went to a midnight screening. It was for the most anticipated movie of my life…. Star Wars: The Phantom Menace. I was so pumped about seeing this movie that I drove thousands of miles from the city I was living in at the time (Saskatoon Saskatchewan) to go back to my home town (The Toronto area) so I could watch the movie at my favorite theater. Yes… I really am that big of a Star Wars geek.
Now keep in mind… I had never been to a midnight screening before, so I remember wondering if going was a good idea. I mean… this was the NEW STAR WARS MOVIE!!!! Did I want to risk being sleepy while seeing it for the first time? Was I going to be a zombie walking out of the theater?
Needless to say I was fine, and since I had taken time off work to go back to Ontario, it’s not like I had to work the next day, so it all worked out just fine (except for the movie itself that is).
Soon, a few other “big” film started opening on Thursday night at midnight… not many but a couple here and there. There was still a big novelty about it. When a movie would have a opening midnight screening, it gave it a sense of being an “event”. It was a big deal. This must be a special movie… cause it’s opening at midnight (at least that’s the impression they wanted you to have).
Gradually, more and more “bigger” films started catching on to this too. It got to the point that if even a remotely big film was opening, you’d just assume there was a Thursday midnight screening.
But the other week I went out to catch the midnight screening of “District 9″. I didn’t even check to see if it was playing or not, I just knew it would be. But what was surprising was that when I got to the theater, I noticed that EVERY SINGLE MOVIE OPENING THAT WEEKEND was having a midnight screening. ALL OF THEM.
- District 9
- The Time Traveler’s Wife
- The Goods; Live Hard, Sell Hard
- Bandslam
Yes… even BANDSLAM had a midnight opening. So basically, every film out there will have a midnight screening (not at every theater… but somewhere).
It’s now just a part of my Thursday ritual. I just assume that on Thursday night at midnight, I’ll be going to the theater… to see… something.
Personally, I like the midnight screenings for a couple of reasons:
1) It’s a convenient time. Think about it… I don’t generally have too much going on at midnight on a Thursday.
2) Unless it’s a major release, the theaters aren’t very full. Oh sure, still have to go an hour early to get a seat for Transformers 2, but most films aren’t anywhere near full.
3) Even if I DON’T go do the midnight show, it lessens the crowd a little bit for Friday. Using the Transformers 2 analogy, since soooo many people went to see it at the midnight show, that means a little less craziness for those of us who saw it on Friday (still insane… just a little less insane than it would have been).
4) It frees up my weekend more (since there is one less movie to see).
Obviously there is a major drawback about midnight screenings for most people… it’s a work/school night, and getting home at 2-3am when you’ve got to get up in 4 hours isn’t very appealing.
But what about you? How do you feel about midnight screenings? Do you remember the first one you went to? What are your pros and cons? Do you see just BIG films at them… or even smaller ones?
Hey there guys. Well I’m back again with another installment of my video blog. This time I’m chatting about the Ewoks. A lot of people out there dislike our little murderous flesh eating friends… but me, I LOVE THEM! I think they actually add to Return of the Jedi and do not detract from it.
Hey guys. Here’s the special “sexy” version of my video blog (I’m wearing super sexy 3d glasses… soooo sexy). Wow… they really do look horrible don’t they? I’ve never seen them outside of the theater before. Well now I know… and knowing is half the battle.
Anyway, in today’s video blog I wonder out loud about what we mean when we complain “there’s no creativity or originality in Hollywood anymore” when a new sequel or remake or movie based on a book or comic is coming out. Agree or disagree, leave your thoughts:
[Rant] Anyone who has read or listened to The Movie Blog for any period of time knows that I am a Star Wars fanatic. Seeing the original with my mother in the movie theater is my earliest childhood memory. My first pet cat I named Luke Skywalker. I played the Star Wars Role Playing Game (and not the crappy D20 version either… I played the TRUE D6 West End Games system. Gotta love the wild die!).
Go ahead… ask me how many rebel ships attacked the first Death Star. Bet you don’t know off the top of your head. It’s 30 bitches! :)
The point is, I love Star Wars. However, as most of you also know, I (like most people on the planet) were deeply disappointed with the prequels and that piece of shit animated movie they’ve put out over the last few years. Now all three prequesl had their moments… and I even liked Revenge of the Sith ok… but come one… this is STAR WARS!!!! The greatest film franchise in the history of cinema! It should have been so much more. So much better. So much less Jar Jar.
But one of the things that really bothers me in the anti-Star Wars wave that’s been going on the last few years (much of which is quite deserved) is the nonsensical way that a lot of people have blindly pointed the finger at the technology as being the problem. I’ve heard so many people lament and whine over the years about how Green Screen ruined the Star Wars franchise. That somehow modern technology take creativity and imagination OUT of the filmmaking process. That computers sapped the imagination out of Star Wars.
This (to put it in technical terms) is absolute bullshit.
This picture below has been making it’s way around the web today, supposedly illustrating the reason why the new Star Wars films were so much weaker than the originals. People have been commenting on the picture about how it symbolizes everything that was wrong with the prequels too… which is ridiculous.
Is anyone going to look at me with a straight face and tell me that the Pod Race scene in The Phantom Menace (one of the few good scenes in the movie) would have looked better with models instead of CGI? Not a chance. Can you say anything LOOKED better in the original movie than they did in the prequels? No, obviously not.
Oh sure, the nostalgic side of us would have liked to see the old Yoda puppet waddling around, but let’s call a spade a spade. The CGI Yoda looked and moved and “acted” a whole lot better than the puppet did. Don’t get me wrong, the puppet was fine back in the 80’s when that was the best option. But the CGI Yoda moved and breathed, had facial expression and an actual performance. It was, in every way, shape and form a better way to do Yoda.
But here’s the problem… a lot of people seem to confuse WHAT they decided to do with Yoda, with HOW they decided to do it. Using CGI and green screen was by far the superior way to do Yoda… but that’s just the tool. WHAT they decided to do with Yoda (his words, his actions) has nothing to do with the tool. The tool just offers options and the means of carrying out the WHAT.
Yes, there is something beautifully nostalgic about the old models they used to create the Star Wars universe, but they were the tools of the time. The magic of Star Wars wasn’t the tools. It was how they used the tools, the story the tools were used to tell. The imagination didn’t come from the tools, the tools just gave Lucas’ imagination an outlet for making it to the screen.
The tools today have changed, advanced, given filmmakers more options and FREED their imaginations to go beyond previous limitations. But like before, the imagination does not COME from the tools, nor do the tools create or limit the story. They are simply the vehicles used by filmmakers to express their creativity and imagination.
If puppet Yoda said or did something stupid, it wasn’t because he was a puppet. If CGI Yoda said or did something stupid, it wasn’t because he was CGI. He just LOOKED better saying or doing the stupid thing than he would have as a puppet.
It frustrates me a little bit when I hear some of the exact same people who lament the use of green screen and CGI technology in Star Wars then turn around and talk about how much they loved the new Star Trek (special effects done by ILM by the way… Lucas’ company), or talk about how fantastic James Cameron’s new film will be (all using heavy fx technology). How do you think they made Star Trek? Lord of the Rings? Transformers? Spider-Man? X-Men? Harry Potter? Jurassic Park? Etc. etc. etc.
Anyone who watched the very impressive DVD features for the Star Wars prequels know just how much physical visual effects and models were still used for the films. Those arts are still there… but some things call for the use of newer tools.
The bottom line is this: If there are weaknesses and mistakes in the Star Wars prequels (there are tons of them), then the fault does not lay with the tools Lucas decided to use to tell his story. The problem was the story and the story teller himself. The problems with the prequels are legion… but the tools used in the prequels are not one of them.
So let’s not put the blame (even symbolically) at the feat of technology in the film business. Quite the contrary, if you enjoy summer blockbusters or any modern effects heavy film, you should be on your knees and thanking whatever god you worship for the advances George Lucas and his companies have made in the areas of technology for film over the years. Bad effects don’t make good movies, great effects don’t make good movies. Good movies make good movies, the tools just help the process. [/Rant]
Just before the weekend I put up a little video blog laying out why I believe movie theaters here in North America should do what most other parts of the world do… allow patrons to pre-select their specific seats when going to the movies.
The discussion in the comments section was a lively one with a few people expressing why they didn’t think pre-selected seating for movies was a good idea. I decided to do a little follow up video addressing the 4 most common concerns and explain why I still believe there is no practical draw back for North American adopting this system.
We can put a man on the moon. We can watch On Demand movies on our televisions. We can access the internet from our bloody cell phones. In an age of technological wonders we are still forced to tolerate the ancient and out of date practice of not being able to pre-select our seats when going to the movies.
In this little video Blog installment I rant about why this bothers me and the obvious benefits we’d enjoy if the theater industry would just implement this simple practice.
Let me set the record straight right off the bat. I am not a G.I. Joe hater at all. I am hoping this movie rocks. If this were a sporting event, and the G.I. Joe movie was about to take the field, I’d be in the stands wearing my G.I. Joe Jersey, waving my G.I. Joe flag and cheering them on at the top of my lungs.
Then again, us Toronto Maple Leafs fans do that all the time… but the team still sucks. And no matter how much I hope, how much I cheer, G.I. Joe will (in my opinion) suck a great and powerful suck of epic proportions. And dear heavens I hope I’m wrong… but I don’t think I am.
So why have I come to the belief that this movie is destined to let us all down? There are a few very important ones that I’ll lay out here:
#1) IT’S GOING TO TARGET KIDS
When we first heard that there was going to be a G.I. Joe movie, a lot of guys my age who grew up with the cartoon and the toys and this bad ass grand vision in our heads of a great and violent G.I. Joe flick. I mean after all… Transformers had great action and violence in it right?
Well yes… but… talk to any studio person and they’ll tell you, the ratings people look at a robot getting it’s head ripped off a LOT differently than they look at a human being getting their head ripped off. We can see Jazz getting torn in half by Megatron no problem… but if it was Shia LaBeouf Megatron was tearing apart it would have been slapped with a hard “R” faster than Michael Richards career disappeared… and the toy company would not let that happen.
So for us adult fans of G.I. Joe, we are doomed to get a very soft version, because the toy company won’t accept anything less. This movie is being made to sell toys, and to do that, it’s gotta be kid friendly, which I believe will leave many of us unsatisfied.
#2) THE DIRECTOR
When they announced that Stephen Sommers was directing G.I. Joe my eyes rolled back in my head like I was the Undertaker. Yes, I sort of dig the first “The Mummy” movie… but this is the same guy who gave us the second Mummy movie (ouch), and the guy who did that horrible live action “The Jungle Book” movie back in the 90’s… but worst of all he’s the one responsible for that absolute crapfest of a movie known as “Van Helsing”. I hope I’m wrong, but I simply do not trust this guy to deliver the goods. I could write posts everyday for the next year about how bad Van Helsing is. How on earth they decided to entrust G.I. Joe to this man is completely beyond me.
#3) THE CAST
Even though I didn’t think “Fighting” looked very good, I went to see it the other week with a real curiosity because the G.I. Joe star, Channing Tatum, was also the star of Fighting and I wanted to see what we could expect from him. Folks, he’s terrible. At least he was terrible in Fighting. I’m not going to paint the dude with a broad brush and say he’ll never have a career or be any good. Maybe he’ll win an Oscar someday… but in Fighting he was just dreadful. No, it’s not just that the movie was bad… HE was bad. And this guy is supposed to be Duke?!?!?!
Will someone please explain to me what the fuck a Wayans brother is doing in this movie? Marlon Wayans?!?!? Really?!?!?! Maybe it was his ground breaking performance in Dungeons & Dragons (please note sarcasm). Maybe it was his oscar worthy role in Little Man (please note Sarcasm). Perhaps it was his breathtaking portrayal in White Chicks (please note sarcasm). Oh yeah, we was ok in Requiem for a Dream… ALMOST 10 YEARS AGO.
Joseph Gordon-Levitt as Cobra Commander?!?! Are you shitting me? Don’t get me wrong, Joseph Gordon-Levitt is a solid performer… but casting him as Cobra Commander just baffles my mind.
So there you have it. The fact that this movie has to be kid friendly, a bad choice in directors and a horrible cast unfortunately convince me that G.I. Joe is going to rot like last week’s cheese. Once again, I really hope I’m wrong… I’m going to be there opening day… I’ll be cheering for it… but I just think it’s going to let us all down.
HOWEVER…
There are a couple of little things that may be enough to give us G.I. Joe fans the slightest glimmer of hope that the movie may not be bad. Hang on dearly to these things:
1) Even though Summers is the WRONG guy to direct this… and that he’s done some horrible work in the past… the first Mummy movie was pretty good. So maybe… just maybe.
2) It’s a bad cast, but it does at least have the amazing Dennis Quaid. Quaid seems to have the ability to elevate the work of those around him. Having him as General Hawk was the only good pre-production decision I think they made about this film.
3) Trailers mean nothing… the Phantom Menace is the greatest trailer in history and look how bad that movie turned out. Still, the trailers for G.I. Joe (one is just posted below) haven’t been bad. I’ve actually liked them.
4) Ray Park and Snake Eyes vs Storm Shadow
Their going to have the ninjas in the movie. Good move. They got Ray Park (Darth Maul) to play Snake Eyes… also a good move.
None of these are enough to change my mind personally that G.I. Joe will suck… but they give us some hope to hang on to. And we need all the hope we can get.
Guess now we just need to wait and see how it turns out.
The summer is my absolute favorite season of the movie year. It’s not necessarily when all the “best” movies come out into theaters, but generally speaking it’s certainly when all the most fun movies hit the screen. The big summer blockbusters, the little gems that studios think would fit in well with the big boys and just about everything in between.
However, with every great green lawn there are inevitably also a big bunch of weeds. The summer movie season is no exception, and a whole ton of crap gets dished out to us movie fans as well. Yes my international friends, the summer movie season is to be navigated cautiously and wisely… well… not really… but we do like to try to avoid the crap as much as possible.
The summer of 2009 doesn’t look like it’ll measure up to last summer, but there is some solid looking stuff nonetheless. So now I present to you our Summer 2009 Movie Forecast. What films you should watch for, what films you should watch out for (the crap) and what film you may or may not want to put on your viewing list.
Synopsis: “Decepticon forces return to Earth on a mission to take Sam Witwicky prisoner, after the young hero learns the truth about the ancient origins of the Transformers. Joining the mission to protect humankind is Optimus Prime, who forms an alliance with international armies for a second epic battle.”
Why you should watch for it:Because its the Trans-Fricking-Formers… that’s why. The first film was filled with flaws, no doubt and certainly no argument. However, it was also one of the most insanely entertaining summer films I’d ever seen. Michael Bay returns with what only looks bigger and better than ever Autobot vs Decepticon action. Hands down the #1 movie to look for this summer.
Starring: Christopher Plummer, Edward Asner, John Ratzenberger
Synopsis: “By tying thousands of balloon to his home, 78-year-old Carl Fredricksen sets out to fulfill his lifelong dream to see the wilds of South America. Right after lifting off, however, he learns he isn’t alone on his journey, since Russell, a wilderness explorer 70 years his junior, has inadvertently become a stowaway on the trip.”
Why you should watch for it: Pixar is simply the very best movie studio in the business. Each and every film they’ve put out had been a winner and they’ve produced the highest critically rated films the last 2 years in a row (Ratatouille and Wall-E). Early word on Up is that it could be their best film ever, which is hard to imagine. It’s not your typical summer blockbuster, but the name “Pixar” alone forces this film to rank high on your “to see” list this summer.
Starring: Zachary Quinto, Chris Pine, Leonard Nimoy
Synopsis: “A chronicle of the early days of James T. Kirk and his fellow USS Enterprise crew members.”
Why you should watch for it: Summer was made for big Sci Fi movies like Star Trek… and hey… it’s Star Trek. I’ve had some major reservations and doubts about this re-boot of the franchise, but the various trailers have given a much more intense and broad scope to the film that I thought it would originally have. This movie has skyrocketed up the “anticipation” chart to our #3 spot.
Starring: Johnny Depp, Christian Bale, Marion Cotillard
Synopsis: “In the action-thriller Public Enemies, acclaimed filmmaker Michael Mann directs Johnny Depp, Christian Bale, and Academy Award® winner Marion Cotillard in the incredible and true story of legendary Depression-era bank robber John Dillinger (Depp), the charismatic bank robber whose lightning raids made him the number one target of J. Edgar Hoover’s fledgling FBI and its top agent, Melvin Purvis (Bale), and a folk hero to much of the downtrodden public.”
Why you should watch for it: A big gangster heist movies starring Johnny Depp and Christian Bale and directed by Michael Mann. Don’t need many more reasons than that to place this movie high on the list. The trailers have looked amazing. Oh, and did we mention that it also has the 2008 Best Actress winner Marion Cotillard?
Synopsis: “Set in post-apocalyptic 2018, John Connor is the man fated to lead the human resistance against Skynet and its army of Terminators. But the future Connor was raised to believe in is altered in part by the appearance of Marcus Wright, a stranger whose last memory is of being on death row. Connor must decide whether Marcus has been sent from the future, or rescued from the past. As Skynet prepares its final onslaught, Connor and Marcus both embark on an odyssey that takes them into the heart of Skynet’s operations, where they uncover the terrible secret behind the possible annihilation of mankind.”
Why you should watch for it: One of the all time Sci Fi classics returns, and for the first time without Arnold as the big robotic warrior. The buzz and anticipation for this film took a drastic ans sudden swing upwards when Christian Bale was announced as the new John Connor (a lot of people thought the news was fake at the time). If anyone other than McG was directing I might have listed this even higher… but the #5 spot is still pretty high.
Starring: Daniel Radcliffe, Emma Watson, Alan Rickman
Synopsis: “As Harry Potter begins his 6th year at Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry, he discovers an old book marked mysteriously “This book is the property of the Half-Blood Prince” and begins to learn more about Lord Voldemort’s dark past.”
Why you should watch for it: I was never a fan of the Harry Potter franchise until film 4, and then I liked film 5 even more and 6 looks like it could be the best one yet. This franchise has done a solid job with the continuity of the story and development of the characters over the years making Harry Potter an annual movie event for a young film going generation.
Synopsis: “When seasoned comedian George Simmons learns of his terminal, inoperable health condition, his desire to form a genuine friendship cause him to take a relatively green performer under his wing as his opening act.”
Why you should watch for it: If for no other reason, the fact that Judd Apatow is directing this. Judd’s name is attached to a LOT of movies… but remember, this is only the third one he’s actually directed. I’m also very happy to see Sandler do a drama/comedy since I’m sort of sick of his normal schtick in pure comedies, but love him in his dramatic roles. Add on top of that the fact that I think Eric Bana can do no wrong.
Starring: Hugh Jackman, Liev Schreiber, Ryan Reynolds
Synopsis: “Wolverine lives a mutant life, seeks revenge against Victor Creed (who will later become Sabertooth) for the death of his girlfriend, and ultimately ends up going through the mutant Weapon X program.”
Why you should watch for it: The X-Men franchise has not let me down yet (yes the 3rd one was the weakest of the bunch, but I still thought it was passable). Hugh Jackman is just a terrific performer and the trailers have looked surprisingly solid. Even buzz from the “leaked” version of the film has been much better than I anticipated. The movie may end up being bad… but it’s still the type of movie you wanna see in the summers.
Starring: Alec Baldwin, Cameron Diaz, Jason Patric
Synopsis: “Anna (Abigail Breslin) is not sick, but she might as well be. By age thirteen, she has undergone countless surgeries, transfusions, and shots so that her older sister Kate (Sofia Vassilieva) can somehow fight leukemia that has plagued her since childhood. The product of preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD), Anna was conceived as a bone marrow match for Kate-a life role that she has never challenged . . . until now. Like most teenagers, Anna is beginning to question who she truly is. But unlike most teenagers, she has always been defined in terms of her sister-and so Anna makes a decision that for most would be unthinkable, a decision that will tear her family apart and have perhaps fatal consequences for her sister she loves.”
Why you should watch for it: Damn, I’ve only cried in movies twice in my life… but this trailer and synopsis for the movie nearly made me loose it. Such a bold plot for a story, and the film looks just beautiful. Not a typical summer blockbuster obviously, but certainly one to see.
Synopsis: “In Nazi-occupied France during World War II, a group of Jewish-American soldiers known as “The Basterds” are chosen specifically to spread fear throughout the Third Reich by scalping and brutally killing Nazis. The Basterds soon cross paths with a French-Jewish teenage girl who runs a movie theater in Paris which is targeted by the soldiers.”
Why you should watch for it: The newest Quentin Tarantino film that is sure to be absolutely nuts with gore and violence… which is exactly what his fans are hoping to see out of this film. Throw Brad Pitt in as the commander of this rag tag bunch and you’ve got a potentially great summer flick.
Starring: Philip Seymour Hoffman, Kenneth Branagh, Bill Nighy
Synopsis: “”The Boat That Rocked” is an ensemble comedy in which the romance takes place between the young people of the ’60s and pop music. It’s about a band of rogue DJs that captivated Britain, playing the music that defined a generation and standing up to a government that, incomprehensibly, preferred jazz. The Count, a big, brash, American god of the airwaves; Quentin, the boss of Radio Rock — a pirate radio station in the middle of the North Sea that’s populated by an eclectic crew of rock and roll DJs; Gavin, the greatest DJ in Britain who has just returned from his drug tour of America to reclaim his rightful position; Dave, an ironic, intelligent and cruelly funny co-broadcaster; and a fearsome British government official out for blood against the drug takers and lawbreakers of a once-great nation.”
Why you should watch for it: Maybe the best and most interesting ensemble cast of any movie this summer. I mean come on… a movie set in the 60’s about a bunch of DJ’s illegally playing rock music from a boat in the sea? Who doesn’t want to see this?
Starring: Bradley Cooper, Ed Helms, Zach Galifianakis
Synopsis: “A Las Vegas-set comedy centered around three groomsmen who lose their about-to-be-wed buddy during their drunken misadventures, then must retrace their steps in order to find him.”
Why you should watch for it: Aside from the fact that for years I’ve thought Bradley Cooper has been a tragically under appreciated performer in Hollywood, this movie just looks flat out hilarious. Just a simple and great idea for a comedy… and the part in the trailer where the guy opens the car door right into the baby nearly made me spit my diet pepsi out through my nose. Can’t wait to see this one.
Synopsis: “The film follows Powell, a government employee who decides to cook her way through legendary cook Julia Child’s classic cookbook, “Mastering the Art of French Cooking” in one year’s time out of her small Queens kitchen. Powell blogs her daily experiences, gaining a loyal following along the way.”
Why you should watch for it: Ok, so I admit the fact that this movie has a strong base in blogging has influenced my anticipation level for this movie, but really it didn’t need it. The simple fact that Meryl Streep and Amy Adams are together again after both being nominated for Oscars in Doubt should make any film fan sit up and notice.
Synopsis: “When a couple of lazy hunter-gatherers (Black and Cera) are banished from their primitive village, they set off on an epic journey through the ancient world running into Old Testament Biblical characters along the way.”
Why you should watch for it: I honestly couldn’t care less that Jack Black is in this (never disliked him, but never liked him either) and quite frankly I’ve lost interest in Michael “one character” Cera after seeing the dreadful Nick and Norah… but ladies and gentlemen… if Harold Ramis is directing a comedy, you’ve got to keep your eyes out for it. The genius who directed classics like Caddyshack, Groundhog day, Analyze This and Bedazzled (a tragically underrated comedy in my opinion) is capable of busting out a new classic any minute.
But not all the films coming out this summer look like ones you have to give a try. Some of them look ify, but could possibly have potential to be half decent if you want to try giving them a shot. These ones look like they could be hit or miss. Some of them will work, some of them will be horrible. You decide which ones you wanna roll the dice with:
Synopsis: “Used-car liquidator Don Ready is hired by a flailing auto dealership to turn their Fourth of July sale into a majorly profitable event.”
Why you might want to see it: Honestly this one looks a bit lame to me, but with Will Ferrell and Adam McKay producing, you have to think it might be at least taking a shot at. Jeremy Piven is great too… so who knows..
Synopsis: “Beth Harper (Bell) is a young, successful real estate agent … but she’s completely unlucky in love. However, when the New Yorker travels to Rome to see her newlywed sister, she impulsively steals some coins from a reputed fountain of love, and is then aggressively pursued by a band of wannabe lovers.”
Why you might want to see it: Ho hum… a standard looking romantic comedy clogging up the summer schedule. Still, Kristen Bell is one of the sexiest actresses in the business right now and I loved her in Forgetting Sarah Marshall… and the whole coins from the wishing well angle seems cute. Maybe..
Synopsis: “When the lights go off the battle is on. Security guard Larry Daley infiltrates the Smithsonian Institute in order to rescue Jedediah and Octavius, who have been shipped to the museum by mistake.”
Why you might want to see it: A sequel to a film that wasn’t all that good in the first place. Not a lot of hope. Still, like the first it has an impressive cast line up and the original made more than a fortune at the boxoffice, so maybe they’ll put a little extra into this one.
Starring: Adrien Brody, Mark Ruffalo, Rachel Weisz
Synopsis: “The Brothers Bloom are the best con men in the world, swindling millionaires with complex scenarios of lust and intrigue. Now they’ve decided to take on one last job – showing a beautiful and eccentric heiress the time of her life with a romantic adventure that takes them around the world.”
Why you might want to see it: Definitely a solid cast and Rain Johnson directs his follow up to the critically approved “Brick”. Not really sure when I only have this one on my “maybe” list since it seems to have a lot going for it… guess I just get a bad vibe from it. Certainly worth taking a chance on if you feel so inclined.
Synopsis: “A loan officer ordered to evict an old woman from her home finds herself the recipient of a supernatural curse, which turns her life into a living hell. Desperate, she turns to a seer to try and save her soul, while evil forces work to push her to a breaking point.”
Why you might want to see it: While it’s true that this flick seems to have “cheese” written all over it, and a disappointing PG-13 rating, the fact of the matter is Sam Raimi knows how to do horror. The premise is pretty creepy and I’ve always liked Alison Lohman..
Synopsis: “The Pope died and the conclave has been called for. 4 candidates were chosen. However, before the voting, the 4 candidates are killed one by one. The killer leaves clues that seems to say that he/she is from the Illuminati. Strangely though, the Illuminati was long thought to be extinct. Who is the mastermind? Who revived the Illuminati? What do they want?”
Why you might want to see it: I did not enjoy the first film (The Da Vinci Code) which I thought was slow and lacked the dramatic tension the book seemed to have. Still, it’s Tom Hanks and Ron Howard. That alone may make it worth the price of the ticket.
Starring: Eric Bana, Rachel McAdams, Ron Livingston
Synopsis: “This is the remarkable story of Henry DeTamble, a dashing, adventuresome librarian who travels involuntarily through time, and Clare Abshire, an artist whose life takes a natural sequential course. Henry and Clare’s passionate love affair endures across a sea of time and captures the two lovers in an impossibly romantic trap.”
Why you might want to see it: Not a lot of buzz or confidence being shown in the film by the studio doesn’t negate the fact that this story sounds interesting, and as I previously mentioned, in my eyes Eric Bana can do no wrong..
Starring: Timothy Olyphant, Milla Jovovich, Steve Zahn
Synopsis: “Two pairs of lovers (Zahn & Jovovich, Olyphant & Sanchez) on a Hawaiian vacation discover that psychopaths are stalking and murdering tourists on the islands.”
Why you might want to see it: Could be exciting if done right. The whole “being hunted by killers for no reason other than you’re there” thing has been done a lot, but sometimes works.
Starring: Gerard Butler, Katherine Heigl, Kevin Connolly
Synopsis: “A romantically challenged morning show producer (Heigl) is reluctantly embroiled in a series of outrageous tests by her chauvinistic correspondent (Butler) to prove his theories on relationships and help her find love. His clever ploys, however, lead to an unexpected result.”
Why you might want to see it: The concept of a movie that perhaps shows that the opinions of male pigs and actually sometimes be… gasp… TRUE, is intriguing. Katherine Heigle and Gerard Butler make for an interesting on screen couple as well.
Synopsis: “Borat trickster Sacha Baron Cohen returns to the big screen to offer yet another stinging dose of sociopolitical satire in this comedy that finds him assuming the persona of gay fashionmonger Bruno, the self-proclaimed “voice of Austrian youth TV.” Originally conceived as part of Cohen’s cult television series Da Ali G Show, the character of Bruno offered a cleverly costumed Cohen the opportunity to highlight the absurdities of the fashion industry by interviewing unsuspecting fashion icons and other haute couture hangers-on.”
Why you might want to see it: Some will be surprised that I only have this on the “maybe” list, but as much as I loved Borat, I think the novelty has worn off and Bruno looks like nothing but Borat 2 just with a different accent. Still, Sacha Baron Cohen has delivered the goods before and therefore is probably worth a gamble.
In every family there is an ugly brother or nasty racist uncle. Well… the family of summer movies in 2009 appears to have its share of embarrassing cousins. Can’t say for certain if a movie is good or bad until after you’ve seen it, but you can usually take a good guess, and these following movies are probably ones to avoid. Those risking their ticket money on these films have no one to themselves to blame.
Starring: Eddie Murphy, Bobb’e J. Thompson, Thomas Haden Church
Synopsis: “A financial executive (Murphy) who can’t stop his career downspiral is invited into his daughter’s imaginary world, where solutions to his problems await.”
Why you should probably avoid it: It’s an Eddie Murphy family comedy. Do I really need to say anything more? Besides, the previews look just dreadful.
Starring: Sandra Bullock, Ryan Reynolds, Mary Steenburgen
Synopsis: “A pushy boss forces her young assistant to marry her in order to keep her Visa status in the U.S. and avoid deportation to Canada.”
Why you should probably avoid it: It just flat out looks terrible. I like Ryan Reynolds very much, I like Bullock, but I just can’t see how this one doesn’t end up as a Razzie nominee.
Starring: Matthew McConaughey, Jennifer Garner, Michael Douglas
Synopsis: “A bachelor is haunted by the ghosts of his past girlfriends at his younger brother’s wedding.”
Why you should probably avoid it: Everyone knows that I think Matthew McConaughey is a very underrated actor… when he’s not doing crap like this that is. Did you read the synopsis? Have you seen the trailer? Is there anyone on the planet that has any hope at all that this will end up being more than a 2/10?
Starring: Dennis Quaid, Channing Tatum, Marlon Wayans
Synopsis: “An elite military unit comprised of special operatives known as G.I. Joe, operating out of The Pit, takes on an evil organization led by a notorious arms dealer.”
Why you should probably avoid it: Aside from Transformers 2, there is no other movie that I SHOULD be more excited about, but just about everything we’ve seen from G.I. Joe has been one apparent bad decision after another. From the character selection, to the choice of director to the cast (aside from Dennis Quaid who just rules), nothing has been done right with this movie. Is there a chance it could pull it off? Sure, there’s a chance… but I wouldn’t bet my ticket money on it.
Synopsis: “On his latest expedition, Dr. Rick Marshall (Ferrell) is sucked into a space-time vortex alongside his research assistant (Friel) and a redneck survivalist (McBride). In this alternate universe, the trio make friends with a primate named Chaka (Taccone), their only ally in a world full of dinosaurs and other fantastic creatures. Can they all make it back to our world alive, and if so: Will Dr. Marshall can go from zero to hero with his discoveries?”
Why you should probably avoid it: I was thrilled to see how great Step Brothers was, because quite frankly I had grown tired of Will Ferrell. Sadly… Land of the Lost looks like a giant step backwards. Not once did I grin during the trailers, nor what does anything about the film look even remotely promising. Definitely one to avoid this summer.
Synopsis: “Street dancer Thomas Uncles is from the wrong side of the tracks, but his bond with the beautiful Megan White might help the duo realize their dreams as the enter in the mother of all dance battles.”
Why you should probably avoid it: As a member of the human race I’m offended these stupid modern spoof movies exist. They all suck and the fact that some people go to see them probably make alien races observing our planet think we’re a species deserving of being wiped out.
Synopsis: “Two inept criminals are mistakenly delivered a package of cocaine and think they’ve hit the jackpot, triggering a series of events that changes ten people’s lives forever.”
Why you should probably avoid it: I’m a big Donald Faison fan and have been waiting for him to get a significant break on the big screen, but not in a project like this one. I see nothing remotely redeemable about this project and plan to avoid it like a country music fan from an education.
Starring: Ashley Tisdale, Robert Hoffman, Andy Richter
Synopsis: “When Tom, Jake, and friends discover that the Aliens mind control guns do not work on kids, it is up to them to save their parents and the rest of the world from the invasion all before bed time.”
Why you should probably avoid it: Many of these kid centric movies hold a lot of potential to be cute and surprisingly good. I just don’t think this is one of them… at all.
Synopsis: “A new kid in town assembles a fledgling rock band — together, they achieve their dreams and compete against the best in the biggest event of the year, a battle of the bands.”
Why you should probably avoid it: I’m imagining a horse thats been poked with sticks all day… then I imagine standing behind that horse and having its huge powerful leg buck back and kicking me in the crotch… and I still prefer that vision than the idea of watching this movie.
Starring: Chevy Chase, Kari Matchett, James Purefoy
Synopsis: “A grieving young boy (Morrow) looks to protect his new best friend, a talking goose, from his school principal (Chase), who’s fattening up the bird for a Christmas cook-off.”
Why you should probably avoid it: Aside from the fact that it looks stupid as hell… this movie was finshed over 3 years ago. That’s right… it’s been sitting on a shelf for three years. Wow… the studio must have a lot of confidence in this one.
Starring: Malcolm McDowell, Scout Taylor-Compton, Tyler Mane
Synopsis: “Following the aftermath of Michael Myers’ murderous rampage through the eyes of the sister he hunted.”
Why you should probably avoid it: The first Rob Zombie Halloween film (which he made only 3 years after saying it was pathetic for directors to make remakes) was just not very good and there is no reason to expect that this one will be any different.
Starring: Krista Allen, Nick Zano, Mykelti Williamson
Synopsis: “Nick and some friends head to the racetrack for the weekend to watch a car race. , when the terrifying accident flys into the audience at 180 mph. People will splatter and be ripped apart, one girl gets her head knocked off by a flying tire, massive explosions, and eventually the entire stadium collapses onto the rest of the audience. Then main character “Nick” discovers it was just a vision that’s about to happen, and he gets himself and about 12 other people ejected from the stadium. But Death returns to finish off the survivors, with the freak accidents being more brutal than ever.”
Why you should probably avoid it: This is the exact same movie we’ve seen multiple times already from this poor horror franchise. No evidence to suggest the trend will change.
These lists represent the majority of the films opening up this summer. However, there are a handful more movies opening as well that I just can’t fit into the Go, Avoid or Maybe lists. Films that I just can’t seem to form an advanced opinion on. Here they are:
THE REST OF THE SUMMER OF 2009
Ice Age: Dawn of the Dinosaurs
Opens July 1st
Like the first one. Hated the second one. Haven’t seen enough to really have an opinion on the third yet.
I Love You Beth Cooper
Opens July 10th
Hayden Panettiere from Heroes is a smoking little hottie for sure… but can she act? Not sure, and this one seems like something I’ve seen a dozen time in the last 3 years… but the trailer was cute.
All Good Things
Opens July 24th
It seems like a decent enough story with a decent enough cast… but I loathe Kirsten Dunst as an actress
G-Force
Opens July 24th
3D animated hamsters are NOT G-FORCE!!!!!! I’m very bitter they stole this name from Battle of the Planets. Kids movie… might be cute.
The Orphan
Opens July 24th
Don’t like the look of this one too much, but movies about evil kids do spook me a little bit.
Battle For Terra
Opens May 1st
A sci-fi animated film, but not done by Pixar. Also have my doubts that the studio has much confidence in it considering they’re opening it against Wolverine on the same day.
The Taking of Pelham 1 2 3
Opens June 12
Director Tony Scott – Good. Denzel Washington – Good. John Travolta – WTF?!?!?!
My Life In Ruins
Opens June 5th
Nia Vardalos hasn’t had much success since her amazing “My Big Fat Greek Wedding”. She returns to Greece for this one… let’s see if it gives her any more luck.
Shorts
Opens August 7th
Director Robert Rodriguez returns to the kid genre… this one about a magic rock. Ummm… ok.
District 9
Opens August 14th
Director Neill Blomkamp’s (the guy who was going to direct the now defunct Halo movie) first feature. It’ll be interesting to see how this one works.
Post Grad
Opens August 21
A very timely movie with the economy the way it is, a lot of people are moving back in with their families.
So there you have it folks, the Summer of 2009 movie forecast. Which ones are you most looking forward to? Which one do you think will surprise people the most?
To some it may not be a big deal, but there is NOTHING in the movie industry or movie going experience that annoys me to the point of blind furious rage more than the issue of commercials that play in the theaters before a movie starts. The only thing that comes close to being as annoying are people who try to defend it. Movie Blog regulars will know that I go off on this topic about once a year… but this week I had one of the worst experiences of my life with it and just had to rant my face off and get it off my chest. Enjoy.
We’re a funny society. We are very quick to ignore, overlook and forgive massive wrongs committed by certain people if they are one of our favorite celebrities. I mean, if that guy can play guitar really well, then I’m sure he had a good reason for doing all that cocaine and beating up his girlfriend.
If that legendary baseball player hit so many home runs, there’s no need to talk about the fact that he was a womanizing, abusive drunk.
If that TV star has a hit show and is really cool, then we can just overlook that he got behind the wheel of a car after drinking and killed two kids.
And hell… if Batman becomes a self absorbed, narcissistic, primadonna little whining bitch… then it’s all cool because he’s a great actor… weather he actually assaulted his mother and sister or not.
Yes, since we all loved Batman so much, most people quickly jumped to Christain Bale’s defense when reports came out that his own mother and sister called the cops on him. People were so desperate to defend their hero, that they pointed the finger at the alleged victims. Forums were filled with people saying (before knowing any facts) that the mom and sister were just trying to get Bale’s money (It should be noted here that formal charges were never laid and the incident was dismissed.
Make no mistake about it… people only jumped to Bale’s defense because he’s Batman. Period.
Don’t believe it? Imagine if you will that the EXACT SAME INCIDENT occurred, but it was Uwe Boll instead of Christian Bale. You think people would have jumped to his defense if his own mother and sister called the cops on him for assault? No, they wouldn’t. They would have crucified Boll (again, probably before any of the official facts were known). I defy anyone to argue this point.
Again, Bale may have been totally innocent or totally guilty in the incident with his mother and sister. Neither is really the point. The point is that we as a society jumped to excuse or defend Christian Bale for no other reason than we like him in the movies… and we would have burned Boll at the stake for the same thing because he’s not so good.
Then last month came the infamous Christian Bale freak out on set of Terminator Salvation. We’ve all seen and heard it, so there’s no reason to play it again. Bale berated, embarrassed, humiliated and abused another person for over 5 minutes in a profanity laced outburst, name calling and even threatening with violence. And what was this other “lesser person’s” great sin? He walked behind the camera for a moment.
I’m sorry, I’ve been on lots of movie sets… and sometimes people do quietly move behind the camera while a scene is being filmed. It happens. It’s not a big deal. Well… it’s not a big deal unless you’re a self-perceived god-man who really believes all his own press and hype, and who just maybe actually thinks he might be Batman.
But once again, people rushed to Bale’s defense. “Everyone loses their temper once in a while” some will say. “Maybe he was just having a bad day”.
Shortly afterward, Christian Bale came out and apologized for the incident. But that was MONTHS after it actually happened and only after it was released publicly. And it should be noted that he has apparently never actually apologized to Shane Hurlbut, the target of his outburst.
Now, once again… had this been Uwe Boll, people would have been quick to point back the the alleged incident with his mother and sister as maybe detecting a pattern of behavior. But this wasn’t Uwe Boll… this was Batman… and we love batman… so we ignore it and VERY QUICKLY let it go… sweep it under the proverbial rug. I never read ANYONE bringing up the previous incident. Not once. I’m sure someone out there did… but not enough that I saw it.
Look, I’ve gone on record before that I don’t think we should allow the personal character of an actor detract from our enjoyment of their acting. Hell, I always say that Russell Crowe is hands down the best actor on the planet right now… but he’s still a jerk.
Christian Bale is not just a GOOD actor… he’s an AMAZING actor. His talent is indisputable, and not just because of Batman… he’s brilliant in just about everything he’s ever in. But this pattern I see, a pattern of self-importance, really turns me off as a fan. And it’s not just the mom or rant incidents. You can see it in his interviews too.
For me as a FAN, I’m having a hard time now looking forward to Terminator Salvation… just when I was finally starting to get excited about it. When I see Bale in the trailers now, all I see is that jackass who decided he was more important that everyone else on set. berated another human being in front of everyone and only showed any sense of remorse once he got publicly outed for his asshole behavior. Maybe it’s all just perception, but it’s still the perception I have of him at the moment.
Look, Christian Bale might be a great guy. It’s possible that he was totally innocent in the incident with his mother. It’s possible he was totally justified in his behavior on the Terminator set. The point of this post is not “Is Bale right or wrong”… the point is that I’m amazed how quickly we all just let our favorite celebrity off the hook when we would have crucified almost anyone else in the exact same situation.
FACT: If it was anyone other than Batman, we wouldn’t have so quickly swept all this under the rug.
And for me personally, I’m still hung up on it. I’m sure I’ll get over it and I totally believe everyone deserves a second chance… but right now… yeah I admit it… the whole thing is effecting my enthusiasm for Terminator, and I wish it wasn’t.
The fallout has been swift and decisive. No more than 10 minutes had past from when the official 2009 Oscar Nominations where announced to when the backlash began. 90% of the backlash was over one category. The Dark Knight failed to garner one of the five coveted spots for a Best Picture nomination.
Anger hath swept the interweb all day. A lot of people are labeling the Oscars a “sham” and a “joke” for it’s failure to give the Christopher Nolan film it’s proper, in their eyes, props… and if I had a nickel for every use of the work “snub” I’ve read or heard today I’d be a rich rich rich man my friends.
BUt just as Al Gore had to lay an inconvenient truth on us about the state of the climate… so to must someone come out and do a very unpopular thing. There is another inconvenient truth that must be spoken. And that inconvenient truth is that The Dark Knight didn’t deserve to be nominated for best picture this year.
It’s a great film. I personally had it at #8 on my best films of the year list. Perhaps in another year with slightly weaker competition it would have been nominated. There is certainly a case for arguing The Dark Knight’s merits for deserving one. But when all is said and done, as good as The Dark Knight is (I personally like it more and more each time I see it), the fact of the matter is, in my opinion anyway, it didn’t deserve to given one of the top 5 spots, and it’s absence from the Nominee List is not only acceptable, but proper.
Now don’t get me wrong… I certainly wouldn’t have complained if it had indeed been given a nomination. As a matter of fact I half expected it to get nominated.
THE MOST OVERRATED MOVIE OF THE YEAR
Let’s get this straight first. Just because something is overrated does NOT mean it’s not good or quality. It just means that it gets more praise than it deserves… regardless of how good it is. The Dark Knight is a great movie… but right from the first weekend the hyperbole pouring out about HOW great it is was nauseating. It got so bad some people were calling it the greatest film of all time, or the greatest crime drama of all time and other various nonsense like that.
Right from the beginning it felt like us fan boys had been so desperate for so long to have one of OUR films (a genre film… a comic book film) be this good, that the moment such a film appeared we wanted to crown it Caesar and heap as many accolades on it as possible. The hype for the film took on a life of it’s own and grew bigger than the movie itself. So while The Dark Knight is great, it was nonetheless tragically overrated.
TANGIBLE WEAKNESSES
With the massive euphoria surrounding the film, people on a mass scale seemed to willfully blind themselves to the obvious weaknesses of the movie (yes, even the best movies have weaknesses). It seemed like no one would acknowledge some of the more blatant mistakes of the film. Thankfully, as with most movies, I’m finding that as more time passes, people are willing to own up to some of these weaknesses. But we’re still not there yet.
It’s almost as if people fear that if you admit or acknowledge one of your favorite movies has flaws… it somehow invalidates your love for that movie. I think that’s nonsense. I wrote the following back in July to illustrate this:
“Regular Movie Blog readers know how much I loved Transformers. I bloody flipped my lid for that movie beyond all reasonable limits. I said it was the most fun summer flick I’d ever seen and I said it was the best visual effects I’d ever seen. However, if you read my stuff, or if you listened to the Transformers DVD commentary that we did, you’ll know that I openly talk about the many weaknesses of the movie. The painful dialog in places, the poor choice in certain characters they used, the horrible lack of dialog between the decepticons (how can you have a transformers movie and only have 1 single line between Megatron and Starscream?!?!) Just because I acknowledges the film had a lot of flaws didn’t mean I couldn’t still love it”
The film was too long. All the mobsters besides the Joker himself were dreadful, the boat scene was so terrible it risked ruining the grittiness of the film, the way they wasted Two-Face (not Harvey) was a joke and Bale’s Batman voice got worse than it was in the first one. These are real issues that very few seem willing to acknowledge. Just a few too many things (again, in my opinion) to make it a “lock” for an Oscar Nomination.
WAS THE DARK KNIGHT PURPOSEFULLY SNUBBED BECAUSE IT’S A GENRE FILM?
Some people, including a bunch I really respect, are suggesting that The Dark Knight was purposefully snubbed by the Academy because it’s a “genre” film. The suggestion is that the 6000 voting members all somehow collectively decided they hate genre films and would not allow a genre film to get an Oscar nomination on their watch.
The problem with that logic is summed up in 5 simple words: THE LORD OF THE RINGS. The Lord of the Rings trillogy by any definition are a set of genre flims. The ultimate geek movies really. Wizards and trolls, swords and monsters, elves in woodland kingdoms with magic rings and potions. The Lord of the Rings films are geek genre films… and yet all 3 of them got nominated for best picture and The Return of the King tied the record for most Oscar wins by taking home 11 awards (winning in ever single category it was nominated for). So please don’t try to suggest the Academy is just out to snub genre films… because that’s just silly.
ONLY 5 CAN BE CHOSEN
The Oscar is a tough award to win. Over 4000 full feature length films were produced in the US last year… and of those 4000+ movies only 5 can be nominated. Add on top of that the fact that film is subjective and each member of the Academy will have a slightly different view than the next. There can be only 5… and The Dark Knight wasn’t one of them. All things considered, I don’t think it’s all that surprising, all that unjust and realistically not a “snub” in the least.
Just my two cents on the issue. What do you think?
The Razzies are not just the Anti-Oscars, but it is a celebration of the bad. It goes one step farther than just informing you of juse how bad some films were, but it relishes in it adding another layer of mockery to the already squirming celebrities who participated in the nominated productions.
I came across a list of the nominations thanks to FilmJunk. and it looks like The Love Guru is leading in suck.
Worst Picture
* Disaster Movie and Meet the Spartans
* The Happening
* The Hottie and The Nottie
* In The Name of The King: A Dungeon Siege Tale
* The Love Guru
Worst Director
* Uwe Boll (1968: Tunnel Rats, In The Name Of The King, Postal)
* Jason Friedberg & Aaron Seltzer (Disaster Movie, Meet the Spartans)
* Tom Putnam (The Hottie and the Nottie)
* Marco Schnabel (The Love Guru)
* M. Night Shyamalan (The Happening)
Worst Actor
* Larry the Cable Guy (Witless Protection)
* Eddie Murphy (Meet Dave)
* Mike Myers (The Love Guru)
* Al Pacino (88 Minutes, Righteous Kill)
* Mark Wahlberg (The Happening, Max Payne)
Worst Actress
* Jessica Alba (The Eye, The Love Guru)
* The Cast of The Women (Annette Bening, Eva Mendes, Debra Messing, Jada Pinkett-Smith
and Meg Ryan)
* Cameron Diaz (What Happens in Vegas)
* Paris Hilton (The Hottie and The Nottie)
Kate Hudson (Fools Gold, My Best Friend’s Girl)
Worst Supporting Actor
* Uwe Boll (Postal)
* Pierce Brosnan (Mamma Mia!)
* Ben Kingsley (The Love Guru, War, Inc, The Wackness)
* Burt Reynolds (Deal, In The Name of the King)
* Verne Troyer (The Love Guru, Postal)
Worst Supporting Actress
* Carmen Electra (Disaster Movie, Meet the Spartans)
* Paris Hilton (Repo! The Genetic Opera)
* Kim Kardashian (Disaster Movie)
Jenny McCarthy (Witless Protection)
* Leelee Sobieski (88 Minutes, In The Name of the King)
Worst Screenplay
* Disaster Movie and Meet The Spartans
* The Happening
* The Hottie And The Nottie
* In The Name Of The King:A Dungeon Siege Tale
* The Love Guru
For the most part I agree with the un-accolades these films are getting however I didn’t find Dungeon Seige to be that terrible. Wasn’t awesome, but still not really that bad. However it is no surprise that the Razzies are jumping at the chance to mock Mike Myers. If it was just another bad movie no one would really react, however, after so many years of success it is a might big step down for him with the poor showing with the Love Guru. And it was a freefall for the beloved Canadian comedian.
The obvious winner in the 2009 Oscar Nominees list was obviously The Curious Case Of Benjamin Button with 13 nominations, with Slumdog Millionaire coming up 2nd with 10 nominations.
The only real shaft of the whole thing was that the very best film of the year… by a MILE… didn’t get nominated. Wall-e only got the token cop out nomination for Best Animated Film… which is total bull. Other than that, it’s a pretty solid list.
I’m a LITTLE bit surprised that The Dark Knight didn’t get nominated for best picture… but honestly I didn’t think it was one of the 5 best films of the year, so I can’t say I’m shocked.
Here are the 2009 Oscar Nominees:
Best Picture
“The Curious Case of Benjamin Button”
“Frost/Nixon”
“Milk”
“The Reader”
“Slumdog Millionaire”
Best Director
David Fincher, “The Curious Case of Benjamin Button”
Ron Howard, “Frost/Nixon”
Gus Van Sant, “Milk”
Stephen Daldry, “The Reader”
Danny Boyle, “Slumdog Millionaire”
Best Actor
Richard Jenkins, “The Visitor”
Frank Langella, “Frost/Nixon”
Sean Penn, “Milk”
Brad Pitt, “The Curious Case of Benjamin Button”
Mickey Rourke, “The Wrestler”
Best Actress
Anne Hathaway, “Rachel Getting Married”
Angelina Jolie, “Changeling”
Melissa Leo, “Frozen River”
Meryl Streep, “Doubt”
Kate Winslet, “The Reader”
Best Supporting Actor
Josh Brolin, “Milk”
Robert Downey Jr., “Tropic Thunder”
Phillip Seymour Hoffman, “Doubt”
Heath Ledger, “The Dark Knight”
Michael Shannon, “Revolutionary Road”
Best Supporting Actress
Amy Adams, “Doubt”
Penelope Cruz, “Vicky Cristina Barcelona”
Viola Davis, “Doubt”
Taraji P. Henson, “The Curious Case of Benjamin Button”
Marisa Tomei, “The Wrestler”
Best Adapted Screenplay
“The Curious Case of Benjamin Button”
“Doubt”
“Frost/Nixon”
“The Reader”
“Slumdog Millionaire”
Best Original Screenplay
“Frozen River”
“Happy-Go-Lucky”
“In Bruges”
“Milk”
“WALL-E”
Best Animated Feature Film
“Bolt”
“Kung Fu Panda”
“WALL-E”
Best Foreign Language Film
“The Baader Meinhof Complex”
“The Class”
“Depatures”
“Revanche”
“Waltz with Bashir”
Best Documentary Feature
“The Betrayal (Nerkhoon)”
“Encounters at the End of the World”
“The Garden”
“Man on Wire”
“Trouble the Water”
Best Art Direction
“Changeling”
“The Curious Case of Benjamin Button”
“The Dark Knight”
“The Duchess”
“Revolutionary Road”
Best Cinematography
“Changeling”
“The Curious Case of Benjamin Button”
“The Dark Knight”
“The Reader”
“Slumdog Millionaire”
Best Costume Design
“Australia”
“The Curious Case of Benjamin Button”
“The Duchess”
“Milk”
“Revolutionary Road”
Best Film Editing
“The Curious Case of Benjamin Button”
“The Dark Knight”
“Frost/Nixon”
“Milk”
“Slumdog Millionaire”
Best Makeup
“The Curious Case of Benjamin Button”
“The Dark Knight”
“Hellboy II: The Golden Army”
Best Music (Original Score)
“The Curious Case of Benjamin Button”
“Defiance”
“Milk”
“Slumdog Millionaire”
“WALL-E”
Best Music (Original Song)
“Slumdog Millionaire”
“Slumdog Millionaire”
“WALL-E”
Best Sound Editing
“The Dark Knight”
“Iron Man”
“Slumdog Millionaire”
“WALL-E”
“Wanted”
Best Sound Mixing
“The Curious Case of Benjamin Button”
“The Dark Knight”
“Slumdog Millionaire”
“WALL-E”
“Wanted”
Best Visual Effects
“The Curious Case of Benjamin Button”
“The Dark Knight”
“Iron Man”
Best Documentary Short Subject
“The Conscience of Nhem En”
“The Final Inch”
“Smile Pinki”
“The Witness – From the Balcony of Room 306″
Best Short Film (Animated)
“La Maison de Petits Cubes”
“Lavatory – Lovestory”
“Oktapodi”
“Presto”
“This Way Up”
Best Short Film (Live Action)
“Auf der Strecke (On the Line)”
“Manon on the Asphault”
“New Boy”
“The Pig”
“Spielzeugland (Toyland)”
Hey there folks. Thanks for checking out our Defiance Review.
When Daniel Craig burst onto the collective consciousness as the newest James Bond (and in my opinion, the best one ever), I instantly become interested in anything he was involved in. Heck, I was even up to seeing him in The Golden Compass and The Invasion (ouch… painful memory). So when I heard about him staring in a true story about Jewish warriors who lived and hid in the woods during the Nazi occupation of his homeland… I thought “Hell yeah”! My excitement got even bigger when I heard that Edward Zwick, director of Blood Diamond and The Last Samurai, was helming the project.
As Ricky Gervais pointed out at the Golden Globes the other night: “The only problem with holocaust films is that you can’t put a funny gag reel on the DVD”. So true. Not a lot of laughs expected.
THE GENERAL IDEA
The synopsis for Defiance reads something like this: “Inspired by a true story, director Edward Zwick’s epic World War II drama Defiance tells the tale of three Jewish Eastern European brothers (Daniel Craig, Liev Schreiber, and Jamie Bell) who narrowly escape certain death at the hands of the Nazis, subsequently vowing to avenge the deaths of their loves ones by launching a desperate battle against the forces that seek to exterminate their entire race. The year is 1941, and the setting is Nazi-occupied Poland. The Final Solution is in full effect, and the Jews of Eastern Europe are being slaughtered wholesale. Tuvia (Craig), Zus (Schreiber), and Asael (Bell) have miraculously managed to escape into the dense surrounding forest. Having played in these woods since childhood, the brothers have a distinct advantage over their adversaries, and soon decide that simply surviving is not enough. In order to make a difference, they must take action, but in order to take action they will need support. As whispers of their bravery take wind, others like them appear determined to lay their lives on the line for the cause of freedom. Tuvia has become the de facto leader of the group, but he’s still somewhat reluctant to take on such a heavy responsibility and his brother Zus expresses concern that his idealistic plan will ultimately bring about the group’s downfall. With winter setting in, everyone works to create a functioning community that will help them endure the frigid months that lie ahead, and Asael reluctantly finds himself caught in the crossfire of his older siblings’ rivalry. Is it possible to keep faith alive in a time when the world seems devoid of humanity and survival becomes a way of life?”
THE GOOD
There is something inherently powerful about great human tragedy that brings out the very best in human beings. It seems that when faced with our most daunting challenges that the true strength of the human spirit, the human will to survive, the human will to be… human, truly comes out. Therein lay the power of holocaust films. The movies are set against one of the most tragic eras of human history, which ultimately sets the stage for some of the greatest human stories of courage, endurance, kindness and resolve. This is were the main strength of Defiance shines. The filmmakers make my gut hurt seeing the horror and the pain and the loss all these people suffered… but in that horror, in that pain and in that loss something is birthed out of them that inspires me. It is a cold reminder about just how small most of our daily problems really are that we complain about so much and it shames me when I see stories of people facing so much more than me exhibiting so much more strength than me. More of us need these sorts of reminders I think.
When you have these sorts of human stories, it’s essential that the performers bring out that humanity. On this point I can’t say enough about the performances by both Daniel Craig and Liev Schreiber. The raw mixture of pure fear, pure anger, pure sorrow, pure rage all at different times and in different mixtures allowed me as a viewer to really FEEL their circumstances which allowed to me to them experience the story on an entirely different level. Damn, I can’t wait to see Schreiber as Sabertooth in the upcoming Wolverine movie.
One of the things that often poses a road bump for films like this is that the director gives in to the temptation to make the good guys pure good, and the bad guys completely inhuman. Fortunately the director resists this simple way and embraces the full humanity of the Bielski brothers… showing them as heroes, yes. Showing them as brave… yes. But also showing them as flawed. Real men facing the real hardship and struggles both morally and physically and faced with choices they never thought they’d have to make… and sometimes making the wrong ones… doing the wrong things. This to me made the characters even more relatable and inspiring.
THE BAD
Unfortunately, Defiance sort of misrepresents itself. The ads and synopsis tell us and give the impression that it’s about a group of warriors who take to the woods to fight the Germans. That’s not really the case. It’s about a group of scared and desperate survivors who gather together in the woods to survive and hide. Some of the ads give you the impression that you’re about to see a Jewish version of “Red Dawn“, but that really isn’t the case here.
The film is guilty of some repetitiveness. For example, I didn’t really feel the need to see a love story and interest between one of the brothers and a woman in the new hidden village. I certainly didn’t need to see a love story and interest between TWO of the brothers and women in the new hidden village. But I just had nothing left to do but roll my eyes when we had to see love interests with ALL THREE brothers. Yes, I get it… finding beauty in harsh circumstances… I get it. Oh… you didn’t hear me and you felt the need to do it twice. Ok, I get it. Oh… you still didn’t hear me and felt I was so stupid you had to show it to me 3 times. Gaaaa.
In the same vein of repetitiveness, there was a very powerful scene when new survivors would wander into the hidden village brining news of the Germans killing Jews in a certain town. A current member of the village who had loved ones in that town would hear the news and start to cry and weep. It was a solid device that hammered home the extent of the circumstances these people were in. However… about 10 minutes later they did the EXACT SAME THING. New people arrive with news of German atrocities in a town, and someone with loved ones in the town get a scene of their weeping. THEN IT HAPPENED AGAIN about 20 minutes later. Yes… I get it… move on.
OVERALL
Defiance is an inspiring story about bravery and humanity in the midst of the worst of human circumstances. Solid performances by the leads giving real substance the characters and overall giving a sense of hope. The film has weaknesses in it’s execution and repetitiveness of certain themes that become distracting and it’s really not the movie it advertises itself to be. Still, a solid film that I would recommend. Overall I give Defiance a 7.5 out of 10.
It’s a really weird spot I find myself in at the moment, but at the same time a very interesting one. For those of you who don’t know, on Feb 2nd I start shooting my first feature film. It’s a comedy I wrote called “The Anniversary” and I’m extremely pumped about it (more info on that to come later).
The thing is, I have said many times over the years here on The Movie Blog that directors should not openly criticize other directors to the media. As a matter of fact I once wrote this:
Here’s the thing. I’m all for critiquing and giving negative commentary. HOWEVER… I don’t think it’s the place of any director to bash another director that way. Nor do I think any actor should publicly bash another actor. I find it really distasteful and pathetic when a person in a field, publicly bashes the work of another person in their field. That’s pussy. You don’t do that. Let other people do that.
So this raises a very legitimate question that some people have asked me that I’m working through. The question basically is: “Is it hypocritical to be a movie blogger… whose job it is to comment, praise and criticize the work of directors (movies) and then to be a director yourself”? That my friends, is a very fair question to ask.
I guess the way I’ve approached it right now is the same way I approach the question of if I’m a “film critic”. I AM NOT A FILM CRITIC. I have never claimed to be a film critic. As a matter of fact I’ve told people over and over and over again I’m not a film critic. I’m just a guy. That’s it. I’m a guy with a BLOG who talks about my opinions on movies. Sometimes that means doing a “review”, but my “reviews” are nothing more than a film fan talking about what he did and didn’t like about a certain movie… just like anyone else on the planet standing around a water cooler. Just because a bunch of people read my thoughts doesn’t make me a “film critic”. The work of professional film critics is far above me and I don’t deserve to be called one. Which is fine… because I’m not one.
That being said, I still do engage in openly criticizing and critiquing movies openly (duh… it’s a blog). So how can I be a director, and sometimes openly criticize the work of other directors?
The answer is this: I’m not a director.
Here’s the thing. If you decide one day to paint your own living room instead of hiring a professional painter. Someone who is, by trade, a PAINTER… does that suddenly mean YOU are a painter? No, obviously not. If you put air in your own car tires, are you suddenly a mechanic? No, obviously not.
I guess the way I look at it right now is that I’m not a director. Oh sure, I’m directing my own movie that I wrote… but I’m not a director. No more than a guy who paints his own living room is a “painter”. Quite frankly, if I had the money I would have probably hired a REAL director to direct the film for me. I’m directing this because I need to direct it… and yes, to see how much I enjoy it and if I’d be any good at it.
Let’s put it this way, if The Anniversary (the name of my movie) turns out well, I enjoyed doing it and people think I have a talent for directing… then I may decide to direct more… at which time I will be a “director” and I’d have to retire from Movie Blogging because I can’t be a director and actively criticize the work of other directors publicly at the same time. That would be wrong in my opinion. But that’s just my opinion.
There are other examples out there. Some guys from Ain’t It Cool News are actively trying to get a film career going as writers and producers. John from JoBlo’s Arrow In The Head is a talented filmmaker and actor with a number of credits to his name. Jay Cheel over at The Documentary Blog and Film Junk is a gifted documentary filmmaker in his own right and is venturing into narrative filmmaking as well.
I think the bottom line here is that deep down, any movie website guy (or girl) wants to be in the movies (on screen or off screen) and be involved in the business. I’m certainly no exception… but the key, I think, is to know when you’ve actually crossed over. When you can actually call yourself a “director” or “actor” or “producer” or “writer” or whatever, and then separate yourself from the blogging.
Other people may have different opinions on this issue, and that’s cool. I’m not sure my opinion is the right one. But it is mine… and so I have to govern myself accordingly. Just a thought.
Since the comments are down right now… feel free to email me your thoughts and I’ll post them up later. You can reach me at john@themovieblog.com.
Bias isn’t a bad thing in and of itself. Bias in many cases isn’t a CHOICE. It is, more often than not, a result of circumstances someone finds themselves in. Bias enters the conversation when the person involved stands to gain or lose or has a vested interest in the result of a given situation. That’s not the person’s fault… it’s just the result of their circumstances. In that way being biased neither makes you good or bad. If your house was on fire, you would be very biased in your desire to see the fire department arrive sooner rather than later. If your place of employment was making job cuts, you would be biased in your opinion of who should be allowed to stay and who should be fired.
And, in the same vein, if you were a producer of a mega budget Hollywood movie that you stood to gain or lose a fortune on, you would, through no fault of your own, be extremely biased on any issue relating to your film getting released. Being biased isn’t a negative reflection on the character of that individual… it’s just something that the observer has to weigh and keep in mind when evaluating the opinion of those who are in the biased position.
With that being said, Lloyd Levin, producer of Watchmen, has issued an open letter to the public giving his thoughts and knowledge of the current legal battle between WB and Fox regarding the release of the movie. The following open letter comes to us through Hitfix:
Who is right? In the Watchmen dispute between Warner Brothers and Fox that question is being discussed, analyzed, argued, tried and ruled on in a court of law. That’s one way to answer the question – It is a fallback position in our society for parties in conflict to resolve disputes. And there are teams of lawyers and a highly regarded Federal Judge trying to do just that, which obviates any contribution I could make towards answering the “who is right” question within a legal context. But after 15 plus years of involvement in the project, and a decade more than that working in the movie business, I have another perspective, a personal perspective that I believe important to have on the public record.
No one is more keenly aware of the irony of this dispute than Larry Gordon and I who have been trying to get this movie made for many years. There’s a list of people who have rejected the viability of a movie based on Alan Moore and Dave Gibbon’s classic graphic novel that reads like a who’s who of Hollywood.
We’ve been told the graphic novel is unfilmable.
After 9/11 some felt the story’s themes were too close to reality ever to be palatable to a mainstream audience.
There were those who considered the project but who wished it were somehow different: Could it be a buddy movie, or a team-up movie or could it focus on one main character; did it have to be so dark; did so many people have to die; could it be stripped of its flashback structure; could storylines be eliminated; could new storylines be invented; did it have to be so long; could the blue guy put clothes on… The list of dissatisfactions for what Watchmen is was as endless as the list of suggestions to make it something it never was.
Also endless are the list of studio rejections we accrued over the years. Larry and I developed screenplays at five different studios. We had two false starts in production on the movie. We were involved with prominent and commercial directors. Big name stars were interested. In one instance hundreds of people were employed, sets were being built – An A-list director and top artists in the industry were given their walking papers when the studio financing the movie lost faith.
After all these years of rejection, this is the same project, the same movie, over which two studios are now spending millions of dollars contesting ownership. Irony indeed, and then some.
Through the years, inverse of the lack of studio faith has been the passionate belief by many many individuals – movie professionals who were also passionate fans of the graphic novel – who, yes, wanted to work on the film, but more for reasons of just wanting to see the movie get made, to see this movie get made and made right, donated their time and talent to help push the film forward: Writers gave us free screenplay drafts; conceptual art was supplied by illustrators, tests were performed gratis by highly respected actors and helped along and put together by editors, designers, prop makers and vfx artists; we were the recipients of donated studio and work space, lighting and camera equipment. Another irony, given the commercial stakes implied by the pitched legal dispute between Fox and Warners, is that for years Watchmen has been a project that has survived on the fumes of whatever could be begged, borrowed and stolen – A charity case for all intents and purposes. None of that effort, none of that passion and emotional involvement, is considered in the framework of this legal dispute.
From my point of view, the flashpoint of this dispute, came in late spring of 2005. Both Fox and Warner Brothers were offered the chance to make Watchmen. They were submitted the same package, at the same time. It included a cover letter describing the project and its history, budget information, a screenplay, the graphic novel, and it made mention that a top director was involved.
And it’s at this point, where the response from both parties could not have been more radically different.
The response we got from Fox was a flat “pass.” That’s it. An internal Fox email documents that executives there felt the script was one of the most unintelligible pieces of shit they had read in years. Conversely, Warner Brothers called us after having read the script and said they were interested in the movie – yes, they were unsure of the screenplay, and had many questions, but wanted to set a meeting to discuss the project, which they promptly did. Did anyone at Fox ask to meet on the movie? No. Did anyone at Fox express any interest in the movie? No. Express even the slightest interest in the movie? Or the graphic novel? No.
From there, the executives at Warner Brothers, who weren’t yet completely comfortable with the movie, made a deal to acquire the movie rights and we all started to creatively explore the possibility of making Watchmen. We discussed creative approaches and started offering the movie to directors, our former director having moved on by then. After a few director submissions, Zack Snyder came onboard, well before the release of his movie 300. In fact, well before its completion. This was a gut, creative call by Larry, me and the studio… Zack didn’t have a huge commercial track record, yet we all felt he was the right guy for the movie.
Warner Brothers continued to support, both financially and creatively, the development of the movie. And eventually, after over a year of work, they agreed to make the film, based on a script that, for what it’s worth, was by and large very similar to the one Fox initially read and deemed an unintelligible piece of shit.
Now here’s the part that has to be fully appreciated, if for nothing more than providing insight into producing movies in Hollywood: The Watchmen script was way above the norm in length, near 150 pages, meaning the film could clock in at close to 3 hours, the movie would not only be R rated but a hard R – for graphic violence and explicit sex – would feature no stars, and had a budget north of $100M. We also asked Warner Brothers to support an additional 1 to 1.5 hours of content incurring additional cost that would tie in with the movie but only be featured in DVD iterations of the film. Warners supported the whole package and I cannot begin to emphasize how ballsy and unprecedented a move this was on the part of a major Hollywood studio. Unheard of. And would another studio in Hollywood, let alone a studio that didn’t show one shred of interest in the movie, not one, have taken such a risk? Would they ever have made such a commitment, a commitment to a film that defied all conventional wisdom?
Only the executives at Fox can answer that question. But if they were to be honest, their answer would have to be “No.”
Shouldn’t Warner Brothers be entitled to the spoils – if any — of the risk they took in supporting and making Watchmen? Should Fox have any claim on something they could have had but chose to neither support nor show any interest in?
Look at it another way… One reason the movie was made was because Warner Brothers spent the time, effort and money to engage with and develop the project. If Watchmen was at Fox the decision to make the movie would never have been made because there was no interest in moving forward with the project.
Does a film studio have the right to stand in the way of an artistic endeavor and determine that it shouldn’t exist? If the project had been sequestered at Fox, if Fox had any say in the matter, Watchmen simply wouldn’t exist today, and there would be no film for Fox to lay claim on. It seems beyond cynical for the studio to claim ownership at this point.
By his own admission, Judge Feess is faced with an extremely complex legal case, with a contradictory contractual history, making it difficult to ascertain what is legally right. Are there circumstances here that are more meaningful, which shed light on what is ultimately just, to be taken into account when assessing who is right? In this case, what is morally right, beyond the minutiae of decades-old contractual semantics, seems clear cut.
For the sake of the artists involved, for the hundreds of people, executives and filmmakers, actors and crew, who invested their time, their money, and dedicated a good portion of their lives in order to bring this extraordinary project to life, the question of what is right is clear and unambiguous – Fox should stand down with its claim.
My father, who was a lawyer and a stickler for the minutiae of the law, was always quick to teach me that the determination of what is right and wrong was not the sole purview of the courts. I bet someone at Fox had a parent like mine who instilled the same sense of fairness and justice in them.
Lloyd Levin”
It’s a good open letter. But my thoughts on it are this: Aside from the completely biased position Lloyd is in, it’s still pretty much totally pointless.
The main thrust of the letter seems to be that Fox wasn’t going to make Watchmen into a movie. Ok, fine. The problem is that has never really been the question. That’s also never really been disputed. The question of this legal battle has NEVER been if Fox was going to make the movie. The question… the ONLY question of this dispute has been who owns the rights. PERIOD.
As I, and others have mentioned before, if you own something then you have the right to put it in your living room and use it everyday or the right to put it in a box up in your attic for 50 years never to see the light of day. It’s yours. You can do, or not do with it as you please.
At the end of the day the issue here is STILL that WB failed to do the proper diligence to ensure they actually had the right to make Watchmen. They failed to do so (as a judge has already ruled). Now this mess is here. Fox (and trust me, I like WB a lot more than Fox) is simply doing what they have the right, and legal obligation to do… protect their legal rights.
But I do take one issue with Levin’s letter. The patronizing paragraph that reads: “For the sake of the artists involved, for the hundreds of people, executives and filmmakers, actors and crew, who invested their time, their money, and dedicated a good portion of their lives in order to bring this extraordinary project to life, the question of what is right is clear and unambiguous – Fox should stand down with its claim.” I call bullshit. All those people got paid Lloyd. I’m sure this has nothing to do with the fact that no one individual stands to make more here than you… and that’s what this is really all about.
Lloyd Levin is the single most biased individual in this entire situation. And that’s not Lloyd’s fault, nor is it a negative reflection on Lloyd in the least. It’s simply the circumstances he finds himself in that make it that way. And, as I mentioned near the beginning of this post, Levin being biased isn’t a reflection on him as an individual… it’s simply something that you and I have to weigh and keep in mind when considering his opinion and comments on the matter he is biased in.
That’s my point of view. What’s yours? Share in the comments section.
I’ve mentioned a few times that there are only 2 movie moments that have ever made me cry… yes I’m man enough to admit it. I’ve never gotten choked up at the normal things that get others emotional over. Romance scenes or scenes of sadness never get to me… don’t get me wrong, I like and appreciate those scenes when they work for the movies they’re in, but on an emotional level they don’t actually get me choked up.
No, the things that get me choked up, or even make me cry (remember, just two times ever… grrrrrr… I’m a manly man) are the scenes in films that effectively portray or show amazing acts of kindness. Yeah, i know that sounds weird, but it’s true.
For example, one of the movie scenes that made me actually cry (grrrrr… manly man) was one of the last scenes in “My Best Friend’s Wedding”. No, it wasn’t the wedding that got to me. No it wasn’t the fact that Julia Roberts didn’t get to marry the man she loved. It was the scene where Roberts is at the wedding and is on the phone with her gay best friend (played brilliantly by Rupert Everett) who lives across the country because she’s hurting a bit and needs to talk to him. The catch is she realizes that he was there at the wedding too. He traveled across the country to be there just in case she needed him. Yes international friends, a friend flying across the country to be there for his friend made me cry. Shut up.
What can I say. The things that really get to me are acts that show the capacity of humanity to show beauty and kindness. Not romance. Not sadness. Not puppies.
The reason this sort of came up today is because last night I was up late and flipping through the TV stations when I came across a TV show called “Extreme Home Makeover”. You know the show? It’s the one where Ty Pennington (used to be on that “Trading Spaces” show) and a team of people find a needy family, tear down their house and build them a brand new one.
Ok, here’s the story of the episode last night. This family of a mom and 4 kids had their father suddenly die 6 months earlier unexpectedly. Apparently the whole community just loved this guy and he was a great husband and father. The thing is, the house was terrible and ready to fall apart, and with the dad suddenly gone, the family was also in a bit of a financial crisis. You had a mom at her wits end who was trying to support, raise and comfort her kids all while still dealing with the grief of losing her husband and trying to make ends meet at the same time. It was a moving story.
So in comes the “home makeover” team, send her and her kids on a week long vacation, tear down her house, get hundreds of volunteers together, tear down their house and build a completely brand new BEAUTIFUL house fully furnished with sentimental pieces from the old house scattered throughout the new house including a big portrait of the family when the dad was still alive. When the family was brought back “home” and shown their new house, they all just broke down into tears. Not the stupid annoying happy dance that people with money do when they win some game show… real tears. Tears from a family that had been though so much, struggled so much, lost so much… and suddenly out of nowhere where shown an incredible act of kindness that was really going to change their lives.
I won’t lie to you… I cried like a freaking chick watching Leo sink at the end of Titanic. I hated myself for crying… but I cried (shut up, I’ll punch you in the face).
Now here’s the thing. There are a lot of movies with heroes. Movies with characters showing acts of bravery or heroism or doing good. But where are the films that show the random acts of kindness that display the best in humanity? I for one would like to see more movies that center around these types of things. Granted, it’s not as exciting as Iron Man taking out tanks or the Joker pushing a guy’s face down on a pencil (which are both awesome by the way), but it’s still something that I think there is a lack of in movies today.
Off the top of my head (and I’ve only thought about this for a few minutes) I can only really think of one example of this sort of thing in a movie. In “As Good As It Gets” Helen Hunt plays a mom with a sick son who can’t afford to get him the sort of medical attention he needs and his condition seems to just get worse and worse. Then, along comes Jack Nicholson who arranges for a top notch doctor to personally go and care for her son and cure him. Now granted, Jack had an ulterior motive because he wanted Hunt to be at work to serve him breakfast (he has a mental illness that makes him NEED routine), but still it was sweet. A woman trapped who was set free by an act of unexpected kindness. I love it.
So where are these movies? I’m sure there are SOME others out there that have this type of theme that just aren’t coming to me off the top of my head. So tell me folks… what are some other movies that have this type of theme or scenes in them that you think might choke me up (Grrrrrr).
It’s time for the best movies of 2008. Happy New Year everyone!!! I trust last night you all had a smashing time ushering in the new set of 365 days and then proceeded to wake up next to someone you don’t know… but hot nonetheless.
As we begin this new year, it’s time to reflect back on the best movies of 2008. I’m going to list 15 of them, just to be different from the usual 10. Remember all lists, like movies, are subjective. None of you will have the exact same list as mine, so hopefully that will open the door for lots of discussion and chat in the comments section. It was a pretty damn good year for movies with lots of big and little treasures along the way.
So now I present to you, the best movies of 2008:
#15 – FORGETTING SARAH MARSHALL After “The 40 Year Old Virgin”, this is, in my opinion, the funniest and best Apatow related movie they’ve ever done. The movie is driven by the lead character who is completely sweet and you like him immediately even though quite flawed. But like any good comedy it’s driven by it’s comedy which was top notch.
#14 – VICKY CHRISTINA BARCELONA This movie initially caught all of our attentions because of the news that we’d see a threesome involving Penelope Cruz and Scarlett Johansson. Not much of a threesome, but the film made up for that horrible error with great characters, a solid story and some decent laughs.
#13 – HAPPY GO LUCKY I have to admit I wasn’t even going to see this movie until all the awards buzz started flying around about. As a matter of fact I only saw a screener a few weeks ago, and I’m damn glad that I did. Trust me, all that awards buzz Sally Hawkins is getting for her performance it totally deserved. See this when you get the chance.
#12 – BURN AFTER READING The Coen brothers are on a roll. Following up last year’s “No Country For Old Men”, they return to comedy and in my opinion hit a home run. This flick is genius, hilarious, convoluted in a very orchestrated way and was a pure joy to watch. I think a case could be made for Brad Pitt getting best supporting actor nomination for his part in this. Brilliant!
#11 – SON OF RAMBOW A movie that was a hit on the film festival circuit, but sadly never found a serious audience in its theatrical run. This is a beautiful movie that I lament more of you didn’t get a chance to see. A wonderful look at innocent in a world of filled with a lot of beautiful that only innocent eyes seem really capable of seeing. The kids in this flick were great too. Touching, funny… and you even might learn something watching it.
#10 – IRON MAN I was not at all looking forward to this flick in the least when it was first announced. I even thought doing a movie on Iron Man in general was a bad idea. But after seeing the trailer at Comic Con last year, I started getting interested, and the movie delivers. Exactly what a summer super hero movie should be. Holy crap did Robert Downey Jr. knock it out of the park. He was the perfect Tony Stark.
#9 – WANTED This will probably be the most controversial film to make my list. I know many people don’t even like this movie. Well screw you!!!!! I frigging loved it! Matter of fact… we all watched it again when we got back from the New Years party last night. This film is just over the top insanity and adrenaline inducing fun from start to finish. Never thought I could buy James McAvoy as an action hero… but I guess I was wrong about that.
#8 – THE DARK KNIGHT The more I watch this movie the more I appreciate it. One of the best comic book movies of all time with one of the most powerful performances ever by a supporting actor in any film of any genre. How the hell does Nolan top this one?
#7 – THE CURIOUS CASE OF BENJAMIN BUTTON A beautiful film that takes a look at life and the common issues we face from the radical perspective of a man who ages in reverse from the rest of us. Sweet, intelligent, profound and will probably land Pitt a best actor nomination. The visual effects in the movie are some of the best I’ve ever seen and probably the best USE of effects ever in film.
#6 – LET THE RIGHT ONE IN Oh look, another vampire movie about love between a vampire and a mortal. But hold on… this one isn’t like any other we’ve ever seen before. Erie and creepy yet incredibly human at the same time. This might be the best vampire movie since the original Lost Boys. And the BEST use of Morse Code I’ve ever seen in a movie (pay very close attention to the very end of the film).
#5 – IN BRUGES The 3 main cast members (Colin Farrell, Brendan Gleeson, Ralph Fiennes) are all beyond brilliant. The film is funny, exciting… and who knew that Colin Farrell could be such a great actor when he puts his mind to it? The film has a “Lock Stock and Two Smoking Barrels” sort of feel to it, but it’s very much its own movie.
#4 – FROST / NIXON Who would have ever thought that a movie about an interview… yes… a whole movie made about an interview, would be some engaging and dramatic? You’re drawn in by the drama right from the first frame of the movie and I was kept swept up in it until the very end. Frank Langella will get a best actor nomination for this if there is any justice in the world whatsoever.
#3 – MILK I’m not usually all that taken with biopics (especially biopics about musicians), but this one is special. Not just because Harvey Milk is an important historical figure who helped change the world, but also because of the way this story was told and some of the most brilliant performances from an entire cast we’ve seen this year. Sean Penn WILL and SHOULD win best actor for this.
#2 – SLUMDOG MILLIONAIRE I didn’t really want to see this film at first because it sounded like a cheesy concept, but man I’m glad I did. Profoundly human and in my opinion the best Danny Boyle to date. Boyle should probably win best director for this because of the amazing performances he was able to bring out a this relatively inexperienced cast to tell him amazing story. My prediction is that this film will win Best Picture at the Oscars this year. Even though the film that should win it is…
#1 – WALL-E No surprises here since I already named Wall-E the best film of 2008 in our 2008 Movie Blog Awards list last week. Hands down, no questions asked, far and away and easily the very best movie of 2008. Funny since at first it looked to me like it might be the worst film Pixar ever put out (which would still be better than 99% of other movies). I’ve raved enough about this movie so I won’t do it any more.
So there you have it folks. Our best movies of 2008. What would your list look like? Which films would you add? Which ones would you remove?
It’s a topic that comes up just about every single time a bad looking movie is about to come out. The trailers look bad, the premise seems lame, maybe it has a bad director at the helm or a bad “star” in a leading role or any number of other things. You see all the stuff and declare: “Man, this movie is going to be crap” or “This movie looks terrible” or some other variation of that sentiment.
The thing is, even though ALL OF US do this (and rightfully so), inevitably some people will jump up and down and lament: “You can’t say that, you haven’t even seen it yet. You have no idea if it’s good or bad!”.
The people who say this are, 9 times out of 10, people who are already predisposed to liking the crap looking movie in question. Maybe they’re already a fan of the director. Maybe they’re already a fan of the property the movie is based on. For whatever the reasons, some people will always come along and tell you you’re not allowed to form an opinion about if a film looks bad in advance.
The basics of what they’re saying is true. If you haven’t seen a movie you can’t definitively say the movie IS good or bad. That’s 100% correct and I’ll agree with them about that. However, you can form a predictive opinion without seeing a movie. You CAN say “That movie looks like crap” or “This movie will suck”.
This is all just a very legitimate part of building up to a movie. Even the studios know we all form predictive opinions about movies before we see them… that’s why they put out trailers. They make posters and trailers in an attempt to influence your advanced opinion about a movie. The better your advance opinion is, the more likely you’ll drop $12 to hit the theater to see the movie. The worse your predictive opinion, the less likely they’ll get your money.
Look, once in a while we can be wrong. For example, in the last couple of years there have been 2 films that I swore looked horrible for a long time. But in the end, I wound up really enjoying TMNT and Punisher: Warzone. So our advanced opinions aren’t always right. That’s a good thing. But 95% of the time I find my predictive opinion was completely accurate as I ended up hating the crappy looking movies.
The bottom line is, while it’s true that until you actually SEE a movie, you can’t outright say a movie is good or bad… but at the same time we should form advance opinions. It’s what separates what we choose to see and what we don’t choose to see. It lets us talk about and debate upcoming films. The fact of the matter is we ALL form opinions about movies we haven’t seen yet as to if we think they’ll be good or bad… even the people who yell at you not to do it.
There is only one honor this awards season that really means anything at all. It’s not the Golden Globes. It’s not the Oscars. No my friends, the one award that studios and publicists in Hollywood clamor for, campaign for… and yes… even beg for. The 2008 Movie Blog Awards honoring the best in movies for the past year.
Ok, maybe no one actually cares… but that doesn’t stop us from doing them anyway.
All things considered, I’d have to say this was a pretty damn good year for film. Yes, there was a lot of crap on the screen this year as well (as you can see from our “Worst 10 Movies of 2008″ post we did a few days ago), but overall a solid year.
So as we get ready to dive head first into the major awards season and get ourselves pumped up for the new year in film, let’s take a few minutes to look back on 2008 as we now present to you the winners of the 2008 Movie Blog Awards!
BEST MOVIE OF THE YEAR
This award is given to the best overall film of 2008
WALL-E
Easily, without question and hands down the best film of 2008. The movie is a brilliant mixture of humor, emotion and message. Never before have I seen a character so engaging, likable and emotionally investable without ever really saying a word (other than Eve a couple of times). It is the #1 critically rated film of the year for good reason, and this year’s recipient of the 2008 Movie Blog Best Movie Award.
Honorable Mention (In no particular order)
– Frost/Nixon
– Slumdog Millionare
– Milk
BEST COMEDY OF THE YEAR
This award is given to the film achieving the best and most consistent laughs
STEP BROTHERS
Like many people, I had begun to grow a bit tired of the Will Ferrell schtick, especially with the horrible Semi-Pro only coming out months earlier. However, Step Brothers seemed to tap into that intangible quality that makes Will Ferrell the funniest man on the big screen when he’s on his game, and John C. Reilly is his perfect on screen partner. Hilarious from start to finish. For our money, the funniest movie of 2008.
Honorable Mention (in no particular order)
– Tropic Thunder
– Forgetting Sarah Marshall
– Sex Drive
BEST GEEK GENRE FILM
This award is given to the best film in the Comic Book, Sci-Fi or Fantasy genres
THE DARK KNIGHT
We all thought Christopher Nolan accomplished the near impossible when he masterfully resurrected the Batman property into a new living breathing franchise. Then he faced an even greater challenge in trying to top Batman Begins. Well… he did it, delivering one of the greatest comic book films in history.
Honorable Mention (in no particular order)
– Iron Man
– Hellboy 2
– The Incredible Hulk
MOST SURPRISING MOVIE OF THE YEAR
This award is given to the film which exceeded its initial low quality expectations by the greatest amount
THE SPIDERWICK CHRONICLES
My first thought of The Spiderwick Chronicles was… well… pathetic. Just another throw away film trying to capitalize on the modern trend of converting popular children’s books into mid grade movies. The trailers looked terrible too and so my expectations for the film were below basement level. But to my shock, I ended up truly enjoying just about every minute of it. Freddie Highmore does a fantastic job playing twin brothers. The movie is magical and I found myself getting caught up in the wonder of it and feeling like I was 8 years old again.
Honorable Mention (in no particular order)
– Bolt
– Step Brothers
– Kung Fu Panda
MOST UNDER-APPRECIATED FILM OF THE YEAR
This award is given to the best film of the year that receives little to no attention or credit for its quality
DEFINITELY, MAYBE
A sweet and endearing story told from a very interesting perspective. The concept of the narrative of the movie being told by the father through a series of stories to his daughter as a game so she can figure out which woman in the stories is her mother worked surprisingly well. The movie also serves notice that when called upon, Ryan Reynolds can be one hell of an actor and in my opinion this was the best performance he’s ever given in his young career.
Honorable Mention (in no particular order)
– In Bruges
– Wanted
– The Forbidden Kingdom
BEST ACTOR IN A LEAD ROLE
SEAN PENN – MILK
Honorable Mention (in no particular order)
– Clint Eastwood (Gran Torino)
– Frank Langella (Frost / Nixon)
– Mickey Rourke (The Wrestler)
BEST ACTRESS IN A LEAD ROLE
REBECCA HALL – VICKY CHRISTINA BARCELONA
Honorable Mention (in no particular order)
– Anne Hathaway (Rachel Getting Married)
– Meryl Streep (Doubt)
– Kate Winslet (Revolutionary Road)
BEST ACTOR IN A SUPPORTING ROLE
HEATH LEDGER – THE DARK KNIGHT
Honorable Mention (in no particular order)
– Ralph Fiennes (In Bruges)
– Robert Downey Jr. (Tropic Thunder)
– James Franco (Milk)
BEST ACTRESS IN A SUPPORTING ROLE
MARISA TOMEI – THE WRESTLER
Honorable Mention (in no particular order)
– Kate Winslet (The Reader)
– Viola Davis (Doubt)
– Penelope Cruz (Vicky Christina Barcelona)
So there you have it folks. I’m sure there are a million different opinions out there for each one of the categories, so now is your chance to jump in the comments section and let us know how your “awards” would break down.
Also, are there any other categories you can think of besides the old traditional ones that you’d like to see us do a follow up post in this coming week? Let me know.
It’s a really weird spot I find myself in at the moment, but at the same time a very interesting one. For those of you who don’t know, on Feb 2nd I start shooting my first feature film. It’s a comedy I wrote called “The Anniversary” and I’m extremely pumped about it (more info on that to come later).
Bias isn’t a bad thing in and of itself. Bias in many cases isn’t a CHOICE. It is, more often than not, a result of circumstances someone finds themselves in. Bias enters the conversation when the person involved stands to gain or lose or has a vested interest in the result of a given situation. That’s not the person’s fault… it’s just the result of their circumstances. In that way being biased neither makes you good or bad. If your house was on fire, you would be very biased in your desire to see the fire department arrive sooner rather than later. If your place of employment was making job cuts, you would be biased in your opinion of who should be allowed to stay and who should be fired.
I’ve mentioned a few times that there are only 2 movie moments that have ever made me cry… yes I’m man enough to admit it. I’ve never gotten choked up at the normal things that get others emotional over. Romance scenes or scenes of sadness never get to me… don’t get me wrong, I like and appreciate those scenes when they work for the movies they’re in, but on an emotional level they don’t actually get me choked up.
There is only one honor this awards season that really means anything at all. It’s not the Golden Globes. It’s not the Oscars. No my friends, the one award that studios and publicists in Hollywood clamor for, campaign for… and yes… even beg for. The 2008 Movie Blog Awards honoring the best in movies for the past year.
