What's on the Menu (January 29 - 31)

- Posted by Rusty

Like the last couple of weeks, there aren’t that many new choices in this frame. With the exception of one film that looks interesting, the other 2 new releases this weekend don’t sound very worthwhile. Let’s look at these films in detail… [breakdown of new releases after the jump]

1. “Edge of Darkness”

The Story: Mel Gibson plays a Boston cop who, looking to avenge the murder of his daughter, stumbles upon a conspiracy of powerful players and shady government agents (including the great British actor, Ray Winstone).

The Good: Off-screen antics aside, Gibson remains a terrific actor; it’s good to see him on screen again, particularly in terra firma dramatic territory. Lethal Weapon’s Martin Rigs made him a superstar, and this film looks to play on that type of role—a desperate, emotional man with (you guessed it) nothing to lose. It helps that few could do intensity quite like Gibson too—the phone call scene/duel of threats in Ransom comes to mind, and it remains one of my favorite moments in his career. He’s backed here by the gifted Brit, Ray Winstone, who made the most of his screen time in Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull and as a CGI-ed Sean Bean look-alike in the title role in Beowulf. He could do shifty, commanding personalities at the tip of a hat.

Behind the camera, this comes from director Martin Campbell, the man who brought us two of the best Bond films, the Pierce Brosnan launcher, Goldeneye, and the exceptional Daniel Craig reboot, Casino Royale (with one of my favorite adventure films, The Mask of Zorro, squeezed in the middle). The man knows how to stage great action, and, for the most part, he makes thrillers with intelligence and taste. Finally, the script is by William Monahan, who won an Oscar for The Departed (which I wasn’t enthusiastic about) and penned Ridley Scott’s Kingdom of Heaven, a hugely underrated, beautiful epic (watch the 4-Disc Director’s Cut if you don’t believe me).

The Bad: Actually, I don’t have too much here. This film might not be a masterpiece or a future Oscar winner, but the reviews and word of mouth are quite strong (see below). However, the reviews specify that the film is not exactly a deep or thoughtful one, and the overarching conspiracies (which are, thankfully, nicely hidden from the film’s marketing) don’t hold as much weight as they should. Plus, from the sound of it, the nature of the picture is straightforward—Gibson loses his daughter, he goes out to avenge her—which might sacrifice some room for needed character development, particularly of the supporting cast. And, yes, there is a bit of the “cheesiness” factor—ie, Gibson in the trailer even specifies that he’s a “guy with nothing to lose”.

Reviews: Good, just not great. I especially like the numerous comparisons to last year’s State of Play, which, perhaps in a similar way, unfolded its mystery into a large tapestry of players and seedy motivations. It’s a good sign for me, but, to be fair, I was also one of the few to really like State of Play, so take that as a good indicator.

Overall: This is what I want to see most this weekend. It’s the best-reviewed movie of the bunch, and, I don’t know about you guys, but I’m always up for a well-acted, well-made thriller.

2. “When in Rome”

Story: Kristen Bell plays Beth, one of those standard romantic-comedy gorgeous workaholics—she’s got a great career, but is just perpetually unlucky in love. But, lo and behold, in Rome for her little sister’s wedding, she happens to meet Josh Duhamel at the reception. Sparks fly, though through a series of comic circumstances, things don’t work out the way they should, and a desperate Beth ends up plucking five coins from Rome’s magical wishing fountain. And here’s the film’s big conceit: by the “rules” of this fountain, if you remove a coin from the water, then the owner of that coin is automatically in love with you. And, so, Kristen Bell must then ward off four new suitors (the very colorfully-cast Will Arnett, Dax Shepard, Jon Heder, and Danny DeVito) and figure out if Suitor #5 (Duhamel, who also happened to drop a coin in) is actually in love with her…or if he’s just under the magic spell.

The Good: Kristen Bell. For anyone who’s seen Veronica Mars, you know that there’s nothing this girl can’t do. She’s pretty, brimming with talent and charisma, and just poised to become a major star. It’s a shame she’s not a household name yet (although, I doubt this will be the film that will make that happen). She’s also surrounded by a well-chosen group of funny guys: DeVito is always a delight to see; Shepard stole his scenes in Idiocracy (he played Frito, the lawyer who liked “sex and money”) and Without a Paddle; Napoleon Dynamite’s Jon Heder; and Will Arnett, forever the amazing G.O.B. in Arrested Development, is any film’s secret weapon. These four guys alone guarantee some laughs. Plus, Duhamel may not be a great actor (at least he hasn’t shown much range yet), but he’s a likable screen presence, and, from the trailer, he looks to share some good chemistry with Bell.

The Bad: Well, the whole movie just looks trite and extremely predictable. The trailer was occasionally cute, sure, but it seems to rely on wacky slapstick instead of well-written jokes, something I think will translate to the final film. It also doesn’t help that the conclusion looks telegraphed for miles, and, unless it has some cleverness or twists up its sleeve, I think the ending was actually shown in the AMC Extended preview (the one that plays before the trailers in AMC theaters). Like many romantic comedies, it just seems stupid and gimmicky, possibly ruining the potential for a believable romance. Plus, while I enjoyed director Mark Steven Johnson’s Daredevil (which I still think is underrated, despite its many flaws), he also made Ghost Rider, which I just can’t argue for.

The Reviews: Poor, pretty much all around. Like it looks, the critics attack its underdeveloped script and, perhaps worst of all, the notable lack of laughs.

Overall: Looks like we could easily skip this. As much as I like this cast (and rom-coms in general), there are more worthwhile films out right now. It’s probably harmless and cute, but we could really do better.

3. “Saint John of Laws Vegas”

Story: The great character actor Steve Buscemi (Fargo, Con Air, Big Daddy, Big Fish, and lots lots more) plays compulsive gambler, John Alighieri (does that last name sound familiar?). Having escaped Las Vegas once to construct some sort of normal life, he finds himself drawn back to Sin City to investigate an insurance-fraud claim with his old pal, Virgil (Romany Malco from The 40-Year-Old-Virgin). From then, what ensues is a supposedly wacky road comedy, with wonderful supporting actors popping in, like John Cho (Sulu in J.J. Abrams' Star Trek! And, of course, Harold from the Harold & Kumar movies), Sarah Silverman, and perpetual scene-stealer, Peter Dinklage (Elf, Death at a Funeral). Oh, and perhaps best of all, Dante Alighiri gets a “Story By” credit here—that’s right, the film is like a comic reworking of Dante’s Divine Comedy, with Buscemi playing the Dante role and heading off with Virgil into Inferno’s Hell (re: Las Vegas).

The Good: I love how that story sounds, and the cast is definitely full of entertaining people. Most notably, Buscemi is one of the most likable and watchable people working in Hollywood—just watch how effortlessly he takes the audience’s attention in films like Con Air and The Island.

The Bad: Well, the reviews below aren’t a good sign. It appears like the film doesn’t quite come together into a cohesive package, ending up as a sort of loose collection of comic vignettes, many of which might not be that funny.

Reviews: Pretty poor. Although, for a silver lining, Buscemi and the cast are earning great notices; it just seems like the rest of the film doesn’t rise to their caliber.

Overall: This one’s in very limited release (playing only in LA and New York for now), and it doesn’t seem like it’s worth hunting down. Still, I will rent this in the future—with that cast and its Dante’s Inferno connection, I’m very curious to see how it all turns out (even if I’m not driven to shell out upwards of $10 for it).

And there you have it. Not too exciting of a weekend, but I think Edge of Darkness looks like solid entertainment. What do you guys think? Are you up for watching Mel Gibson kick corrupt-agent ass and take some names?

Like I mentioned before, we’re in for much better-looking movie choices in February, which is now just around the corner. See you guys next week!

Clips courtesy of Trailer Addict.
Read more!

What's on the Menu (January 22 - 24)

- Posted by Rusty

This is the most packed weekend so far in 2010—there are a total of 4 new releases hitting theaters. And what’s the outlook? Well, not pretty. I saw one of these films last night, and it was downright awful (although, unintentionally, very funny). And the rest of the bunch don’t exactly look awesome either. Nonetheless, let’s take a closer look at what came out… [breakdown of new releases after the jump]

Quick note: I’m going to shake up the format to this thing a bit. I like this column a lot, but I know that I tend to make it rambly, especially if the movies are really interesting to talk about (even when they’re not good). So, I figured a more streamlined and organized approach could do the trick. Let me know what you guys think.

1. “Legion”

Story: God, in a fit of vengeance, wants to exterminate the sinful people of the Earth. But, lo and behold, his loyal archangel, Michael (the always-great Paul Bettany) rebels and vows to protect a woman in the Mojave desert, the very one bearing mankind’s future savior. Oh, yeah, and it features lots of angles firing machine guns and cursing grandmas crawling on the ceiling.

The Good: Paul Bettany. Clear and simple. I saw this last night, and I can say that Bettany, a longtime favorite of mine (see: A Knight’s Tale, A Beautiful Mind, Wimbledon), gives it his all and manages to come out unscathed from this mess. There are also about two good sequences that deliver some solid scares. Finally, and maybe this is just me, I love films that revolve around religious iconography or just Christian mythology in whole. You give me warring angels in Heaven, Lucifer, Paradise Lost overtones, all the like, and I’ll usually go for it (which explains why I like Keanu Reeves’ Constantine so much). Too bad this film barely works on that level.

The Bad: Everything else. This is the January movie—the prime example of the type of films we usually see in the beginning of the year. I’ll have a full review up next week, but, for now, just take my word that this film isn’t worth your time. Seriously, the plot’s ridiculous (with the most inept way of causing an apocalypse I’ve ever seen), the dialogue’s atrocious (I’m going to write down some of Tyrese’s thug character’s nuggets of wisdom next week—they’re priceless), most of the acting is over-the-top, accents are misplaced (we’re in California—why is the son of the main character speaking in a long Southern drawl?!), and the list goes on and on. There’s not even that much action—for the most part, the armies of bad guys seem more intent to give the characters time to talk about their problems than actually attack. It’s only grace note, though: it’s incredibly funny, almost in a so-bad-it’s-good way.

Reviews: Poor, pretty much as expected.

Overall: Don’t see this. Maybe if you want some laughs or you're a fan of Bettany, but I can’t think of any other reason to spend upwards of $10 on this. It might be best saved for a rental, and then you can get some friends together and make fun of it. (Although, in some tiny way, I hope this is a hit for Bettany, who deserves the attention and to move on to bigger and better things.)

2. “The Tooth Fairy”

Story: Dwayne Johnson (a.k.a. The Rock) stars as a hockey player nicknamed the Tooth Fairy (since he, you know, knocks out opponents' teeth). Life is perfect for him, until, accidentally, he squashes his girlfriend’s daughter’s belief in the Tooth Fairy. As punishment, the Fairy division forces him to serve as the actual Tooth Fairy, complete with tutu and wings (anyone else find it weird that we have two action heroes in one weekend with wings?). Cue the laughs and cuddly family moments.

The Good: The cast features The Rock, always likable (even though he should start doing better films), Julie Andrews, always regal and charming, Billy Crystal (great to see back on the screen), and, best of all, British comic Stephen Merchant in what I think is his first big movie role. He’s Ricky Gervais’ uber-tall better half, having co-created the British version of The Office and Extras with the genius funnyman, and co-starred in the latter series as the most hilariously inept agent you’ve ever seen. Here’s a clip below—he’s the consistent highlight of that very funny show:



Really, The Tooth Fairy might be cute and harmless, if not exactly good.

The Bad: Have you seen that trailer (embedded below)? It’s dreadful—I have no idea how the suits and filmmakers passed off on that. Even if it’s not a fair representation of the film, this still looks like something you could easily skip. The message if hammered in the trailer (Follow your dreams! Be true to yourself!) and you could probably predict most of the plot developments. The Rock is always watchable, but I think he could finally stretch his range and see what else he’s capable of (like his great role as a gay actor/henchman in Be Cool).

Reviews: Okay…though nowhere near good or recommendation-worthy. Most critics agree that it’s watchable but disposable, which is exactly what it looks like.

Overall: If you have little siblings, maybe it’s best to let them see something else (dust off a Pixar DVD, The Princess and the Frog, etc). For everyone else, I’m sure it’s better than Legion, but I’m also sure there are better things playing right now, even the flawed Book of Eli.

3. “Extraordinary Measures”

Story: Based on a true story, this film follows the exploits of the Crowley family (Brendan Fraser and Keri Russell) and how they sought to cure their children of the rare genetic illness, Pompe disease, with the help from the curmudgeonly but brilliant Dr. Stonehill (Harrison Ford).

The Good: I’m a huge fan of both of the stars, especially when they put aside their blockbuster roles for more quiet, challenging ones. (They were both even the subject of one of my first big pieces for this blog). The story also sounds like it could deliver some powerful drama. If only that's the case…

The Bad: Well, for starters, the below trailer does it no favors. It sounds like an Oscar-type picture—big stakes, big stars, heart wrenching subject matter. Instead, it comes off as a well-cast TV movie, with lots of corniness and overly dramatic scenes. I do want to see it because the story holds so much promise, and there is real hope and beauty in what the real-life scientists accomplished here (and, by the way, Dr. Stonehill never existed—the man who played the vital role in the cure for Pompe was the distinctly Asian Dr. Yuon-Tsong Chen). That aside, the word-of-mouth is mostly negative (see the status of the reviews below), with most people who've seen it complaining that the script lacks the necessary emotional impact, and that Fraser, Russell, and, of course, Ford get stuck amidst the heavy melodrama. It’s really too bad; on paper, this sounded like a winner—a nice chance for some of my favorite actors to stretch and deliver some inspiring entertainment.

Reviews: Moderate, with critics citing the film’s poor dialogue and tacky moments for ruining the potential of this story.

Overall: I had higher hopes for this. But, with the disappointing trailer and the lukewarm reviews, I think I’ll catch it on TV someday. Here’s hoping Ford and Fraser (and Russell as well, who’s far too talented to be typecast in weepy wife roles) will find more quality dramas for their next go-arounds. For now, this doesn’t look like a great choice for the theaters.

4. “To Save a Life”

Story: Jake Taylor, a popular, cocky high-school athlete must reexamine his life after an old friend (whom Jake ignored as they got older) commits suicide.

The Good: In the right hands, this could be touching and real material. I like that it’s a cast of unknowns as well, and, as long as it doesn’t get too preachy, it’s always interesting to explore how people grow up and fit themselves into (or break away from) social hierarchies.

The Bad: Its limited January release isn’t a good sign. Neither is the overdone trailer, which pushes the angsty and “make a difference” notes much too hard. I think there is potential here (Veronica Mars did wonders with honest, believable high school stories, albeit with a savvy tone and top-notch writing); I’m just not sure if this film will follow through on it.

Reviews: Completely mixed, with some praising its genuine approach to the subject matter and moving performances…and others despising its 7th Heaven-ish, hokey tone and, well, poor acting. It’s difficult to judge, but the 30% Tomatometer on Rotten Tomatoes seems to be a good indicator of the movie’s quality.

Overall: I doubt this will be any good. From the trailer, the writing looks anything but subtle, and it’s a personal pet peeve of mine whenever movies try to hit hard with their Big Lessons. I could be wrong, but this simply doesn’t look like something worth catching.

Yeah…so maybe not the best weekend for movie-going. What do you guys think? Is anyone thinking of watching Legion? (and I don’t blame you at all—I was actually kind of excited to see it) At the very least, February looks to bring some interesting new flicks, including The Wolfman, Valentine's Day (although its U.S. Love Actually approach might stumble upon itself), the could-be-good franchise-starter, Percy Jackson and the Olympians, and, perhaps best of all, a 3-D reissue of Disney's Beauty and the Beast!

Clips courtesy of Trailer Addict.
Read more!

Review: "The Book of Eli"

- Posted by Rusty


Movie: The Book of Eli

My Rating: 2 1/2 bites [out of 5]

In Short: Sporting strong visuals, solid characters, and the occasional jaw-dropping action scene, The Book of Eli is, in part, worth catching. Story-wise, however, it doesn’t quite live up to its promising set-up... [full review after the jump]

Full Review: I was talking to my crazy movie-buff friend recently, and we both agreed that the toughest films to critique aren’t the great ones (easy as pie: you just lay on the praise) or even the really bad ones (even easier: lay on the snark and complaining), but, actually, the ones in between. The types of movies that fall squarely in the middle—not finessed enough to be a good movie, and not a complete waste of time like a bad one.

The Book of Eli is such a movie. It’s well-acted, beautifully shot (the desert landscapes have a desolate, haunted look that works perfectly for the film), and, for the most part, quite entertaining. I just can’t fully recommend it, despite its preposterous—but “wow”-inducing!—final twist.

The basic story follows Denzel Washington’s drifter, Eli—a soft-spoken heroic type who’s got a killer way with a sword. He owes a great deal to old-time epic Western imagery—he’s the mysterious stranger, the broken man with a good heart, essentially the Man with No Name, albeit with insane martial-arts abilities. It’s been 30 years since the movie’s mysterious “blackout”, and all this time Eli has been walking in the ruins of North America—an endless mass of empty space, dead bodies, and hiding cannibals. He’s headed to some destination, as we learn, which brings him to a somewhat-functioning town led by Gary Oldman’s Carnegie. Carnegie then discovers that Eli possesses a special book, the very one he’s been waiting ages to find, and, from that point on, ensues the film’s central chase, with Carnegie’s step-daughter, Solara (played by the gorgeous Mila Kunis—yay for fellow Ukrainians!) falling into the mix as Washington’s “disciple”.

I can’t reveal what that book is, but, really, you might have figured it out through the film’s not-so-subtle billboards. I like the basic idea behind the movie, as well as the different reasons it presents for wanting the book—one man wants it for controlling his people, the other for its inherent power and beauty. End-of the-world thrillers are an easy sell for me too—I love the imagery involved, as well as seeing what people are reduced to faced with a world without hope and the slow, steady death of the human race. The Book of Eli works on that level, adding some interesting observations into the equation, like the types of resources that become luxuries and, in a grand scale, the rewards of faith (even if it’s not in a spiritual sense). There’s also good character work and fine performances from all three leads. Washington pretty much owns the market for playing noble, good-hearted men, especially ones put against opposing odds—he does that here with confidence and a light touch of humor. Ditto for Oldman, although from the polar opposite perspective. The chameleonic Brit is a long-time favorite of mine, especially in scene-stealing-villain mode like The Professional and True Romance. The script gives his Carnegie just the right amount of sleaze and intelligence, granting the actor enough juicy material to chew his way through the scenes with Washington. As for Kunis, while far too beautiful and clean-looking be a believable member of this society (her entrance in a rowdy bar, where she’s supposed to be an abused hooker, still screams “movie star”), she holds her own with her imposing co-stars. Coupled with her lovely turn in Forgetting Sarah Marshall, she’s clearly on the rise, and I think we’ll see a lot more good work from her in the future.

The action sequences are impressive as well. Directed by the Hughes Brothers (Menace 2 Society, the Johnny Depp thriller, From Hell), these scenes are shot with an in-your-face urgency and excitement that you don’t often see in big-budget blockbusters. There’s no shaky camera work—just some great stunt work and, of course, slice-and-dice choreography, perfectly showcased in the opening fight with Eli and a group of hoodlums.

Where the film stumbles, though, is in its overall story arcs. It’s set up to be a big ideological clash between Washington and Oldman—two of our finest actors going head-to-head on the movie’s main conflict. Unfortunately, that doesn’t really happen. The launching pad is there, but the execution is lacking, reducing itself to just a few argument scenes between Eli and Carnegie and one big shoot-em-up. Similarly, Washington’s relationship with Kunis, which takes up the second half of the film, ends up being largely incomplete. You’ll see what I mean when you watch the movie—I didn’t buy that she learned so much from Eli (how long were they even traveling? 2 days??), nor that his words had such profound effects on her. It may have been helped by more screen time, but, in whole, Solara’s journey—and its ultimate payoff—feels unearned. I appreciate that the script tried to give these people depth; I can usually forgive plot flaws if the characters and the experiences they go through are well-developed. We have that here to an extent, but it feels like the heroes changed because the script said they had to, and not because they had an organic reason to do so.

But what about that twist? Ah, that I wouldn’t dare spoil. It’s creative and bold, even if it doesn’t entirely make sense. Does it make The Book of Eli worth seeing? Well, not entirely, but it still ranks among the best surprises I’ve seen recently. It’s infinitely better that the typical horror-movie “shocking twist”—it works for the story, rewards you for picking up on some clues, and, even though it smudges “realism” in favor of “gotcha!” awesomeness, it makes for a top-notch kicker to the movie.

So, as you can see, I wouldn’t qualify this as a particularly bad film. It’s just mediocre—capable of more, but its problems prevent it from being much stronger, especially given its premise and the caliber of its cast and behind-the-scenes talent. Of the movies out right now, this is one the better ones, though I suspect some standbys and upcoming releases will strip it of that title. In the end, I’d call it a great rental—on the small screen, and watching comfortably from your own couch, the movie’s faults will be easier to swallow and you could probably enjoy the film’s accomplishments (ie, the acting, cinematography, the clever clues to the finale) with much more enthusiasm.

Image courtesy of Warner Bros. Pictures.
Read more!

Recap: 2010 Golden Globe Awards

- Posted by Rusty

Quick note: I’m sorry for missing the usual “What’s on the Menu” column this weekend. Between the Golden Globes and some of my own stuff, it completely slipped my mind. On the bright side, only two movies came out—I’ll have a review of The Book of Eli later in the week, and as for The Spy Next Door…well, let’s pretend that never happened, especially since I love Jackie Chan. And now back to the glitz and glamor of Hollywood…

The Golden Globes is my favorite award show—the stars are relaxed, alcohol flows freely, speeches run long and sometimes charmingly rambly, and the whole night often ends up being loose, funny, unpredictable, and sometimes pretty heartfelt as well. This year’s Ricky Gervais-hosted affair was no different—there were some big laughs, shockers, and plenty of highlights and pleasant surprises (yay for Robert Downey Jr.!). Entertainment Weekly has an excellent list of the Top 10 Best/Worst Moments (and check out my friend's great recap here), but I thought I’d toss in some of my own highlights and lowlights into the mix... [my list of favorite moments after the jump]

You can find the complete list of winners and losers of the 2010 Golden Globe Awards over at Moviefone.

Highlights:

The Reign of Avatar

This is going to be the year of Avatar, huh? I think we can expect lots and lots of blue-cat, ponytail-linking people at conventions from now on…

James Cameron’s sci-fi behemoth smothered the competition, winning Best Director and Picture, and, minus my own reservations about the film, I think some of that honor is deserved. It’s a strong film, visually beautiful and packing some real emotional power beneath that “wow” factor. Plus, it’s nice to see a quality film win the big prize, as opposed to a beloved weak film like Slumdog Millionaire. I haven’t seen most of the other nominees yet, particularly The Hurt Locker (which Luke swears by, and I suspect might overpower Avatar in terms of story), but Avatar looks to be the clear frontrunner as we head toward the Oscars.

Also, while I know James Cameron has a reputation for an inflated ego (this was the guy who called himself “King of the World” after all), I found him very personable and funny at Comic-Con, both shades that he displayed in his speeches at the Globes. Moreover, big kudos to him for humbly admitting that the Best Director trophy belonged to Kathryn Bigelow, his ex-wife and the director of his competition, The Hurt Locker. A classy move, and one that made me respect the visual master even more.

Best Speech, Part 1: Robert Downey Jr.:

Come on, how could I not include him? Downey’s always great to listen to—as he showed at Comic-Con and all of his interviews, he’s intelligent, quick on his feet, and in that mile-a-minute way of his, ridiculously charming and entertaining. Globes night was no different with his win for Best Actor, Comedy or Musical for Sherlock Holmes. I loved his performance, but, frankly, I was sure he was going to lose. In fact, I thought the nomination itself was the prize—recognition of one of our best performers, and another reminder that the awards committees now love him to death, post-Iron Man and Tropic Thunder. But, what do you know, The Hollywood Foreign Press dug Downey’s take on Conan Doyle’s master sleuth, and I can’t blame them at all. Actually, this reminded me of Colin Farrell’s win last year for In Bruges—both great somewhat-comic performances that would probably not be recognized among the uber-serious Oscar roles.

Already a nice surprise, Downey sealed the moment with a quick, wonderful speech where he wanted to “thank nobody”— “definitely not” his wife got him back on his feet and “told [him] Matt Damon would win”, as well as producer Joel Silver “who only restarted [his] career 12 times”. He capped it off with a sincere tribute to the genius of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle (major points in my book) and a charmingly cocky announcement that the Sherlock Holmes crew “needed” him…or otherwise Avatar would take everything on Globes night. I hope Downey continues the award-nominated roles—he’s exactly what these shows need to liven things up. As for now, where's that official Sherlock Holmes-sequel announcement, Warner Bros.?!

Best Speech, Part 2: Sandra Bullock

I’m not the biggest fan of Sandra Bullock. Sure, I loved her in Speed (and her re-teaming with Keanu for The Lake House), and I can always watch Two Weeks Notice or Miss Congeniality with a smile. But, mostly, the roles she chooses tend to be lackluster (Miss Congeniality 2? Premonition??), and, other than Crash and a few scattered movies here and there, she rarely tackles more challenging material. That’s what makes her win for Best Actress, Drama at the Globes so special. I hear nothing but good things about her turn in The Blind Side, and her speech on the night was intelligent, humble, and, best of all, surprisingly candid—it’s rare that you hear a big star admit that she doesn’t have as much talent as some of the people in this room. She didn’t go on forever thanking agents and lawyers, and, in a bit of a rarity, she seemed genuinely moved to receive the award. At the end of the day, she’s a very likable performer, and it’s nice to see her gain so much credibility. I think she’s a lock for an Oscar nomination at this point, and good for her. All of this tops of an excellent year for Bullock, who had another giant hit this summer with the rom-com, The Proposal (a flawed—but, okay, quite sweet—film). I’ll catch The Blind Side eventually (which is already a monster hit), and I hope we can expect more critically-acclaimed performances from her down the line. After however many years since her big breakthrough in Speed, I’d love to see more of the great roles that I’m sure she could pull off.

The Martin Scorcese Tribute:

I’m still working through Scorcese’s filmography (I just rented Taxi Driver the other day), but you don’t have to see it all to recognize the man’s great talent and eye for powerful drama. The night’s big award, the Cecil B. Demille Lifetime Achievement prize, started with a warm tribute by Scorsese’s two biggest collaborators, Robert De Niro (very lighthearted and funny, joking that he and Scorsese are like an old married couple now “who don’t sleep together,” and, of course, that Scorsese loves film reels a little too much) and Leonardo Dicaprio (star of his last 4 films, including the upcoming Shutter Island). After that, Scorsese, ever the entertaining character, spoke with real passion about his love for the craft and his many preservation efforts of classic films. I love listening to Scorsese talk—his enthusiasm is infectious, and his ultra-fast-talking personality gets me every time (the one good thing about the animated dud, Shark Tale, was the way it used Scorsese’s voice and persona for a scene-stealing blowfish). It was a lovely part of the show, and a fitting tribute to one of the greatest directors working in Hollywood.

P.S. Scorsese’s next film is Shutter Island, based on the terrific, twisty novel by Dennis Lehane (its only flaw is that it’s a bit gimmicky, something the film has to watch out for). From the trailers and footage shown at the Globes, it looks like it will be a must-see movie come February.

A Mixed Bag:

Ricky Gervais as host:

With all due respect to the great British comic, I don’t think this is his scene. He’s a brilliant comedian—watch the below clip from his genius show, Extras, to see both the caliber of people he recruits and how expertly he mines awkward laughs.



This is a guy who gleefully tears through Hollywood, and, on the Globes, he attacked the vanity and reputations of our biggest stars with ballsiness and a mischievous vibe of “can you believe they actually paid me to do this gig?”. I love his energy, and his now-traditional digs at his Office-boss inheritor, Steve Carrel (the deadpan star had a great moment when he mouthed “I.Will.Kill.You” to Gervais). But, as I kind of suspected, the Globes don’t need a host. The ceremony is one of the quickest-moving awards shows out there, and thus Gervais was relegated to an opening monologue (a hilarious mix of attacking Carrell and shilling out his own DVDs…not to mention a masturbation joke that must have made the NBC censors squirm) and the occasional commentary every 15 minutes or so. Unlike great awards-show hosts—ie, Steve Martin, Billy Crystal, even non-comedians like last year’s Hugh Jackman—Gervais never established any sort of tone for the show. I’m not sure if this was due to his own MO, the kind of off-the-cuff riffing that made him an awards favorite, or simply due to a lack of time. Either way, his hosting didn’t seem to add much to the show other than the occasional zingers.

But, man, what zingers they were. Personally, Gervais’ cracks at Mel Gibson (“I like a drink as much as the next man. Unless the next man is Mel Gibson”) and Colin Farrell (“One stereotype I hate is that all Irishmen are drunk, sweaty hell-raisers. Ladies and gentlemen: Colin Farrell”) made the night for me. Gervais needs to be unleashed—put him in an arena where he can be unrestrained and as free-flowing as he likes, and I think the results will be hilarious. I stand by the fact the he’s one of the funniest men alive—he got to show that in little doses yesterday, but I think, overall, the Globes proved that formal award ceremonies (or at least this one) might not be the best use of his talent.

Gripes:

Not too much, save for the pretty blatant “play the winners off” music. I get why they do that, but it’s getting pretty ridiculous that some people (like the big, “important” actors) get to talk as much as possible, while others are whisked off (ever so melodically) after a minute.

As for the actual winners and losers, I'm bummed that Glee's Lea Michele (as the super-ambitious, perky, Jewish "star" of the McKinley High Glee Club, Rachel Berry) and the amazing, scene-stealing Jane Lynch (the one, the only Sue Sylvester) got no awards love. I'm glad Glee won for Best Series, Comedy or Musical--despite its occasional story hiccups (ah, the multiple pregnancies--please don't come back again), it's a very fun show and its musical numbers are usually must-see. Still, Michele and Lynch are two of the best players in the Glee cast (particularly Lynch, who could twist a simple line into something deliciously evil), and a huge reason for why the thing works as well as it does. I'm sure they'll get rewarded another day, but it's too bad The Globes didn't single them out in Glee's award-winning, buzzy first year.

Plus, anyone else notice the weird, shaky camera moves that kept popping up? It’s like the producers had to focus on other things to distract the TV audience form the overlong speakers, but got lost on the way, resulting in glorious, swirly shots of people eating. As I mentioned, these are only tiny problems. The Globes is usually a well-oiled machine, and tiny kinks like this don’t get in the way of the fun.

Other Highlights:

*Meryl Streep—her speech was a bit on the rambling side, but the smart, endlessly talented actress once again showcased her sly sense of humor (by admitting she has no idea what she’s supposed to say, and going with the audience’s suggestions) and squeezing in a heartfelt plea to help the people in Haiti. At this point, it seems that whenever she makes a movie, it’ll most likely be nominated. Then again, since she's probably the best actress alive, it’s all the more fitting. Good to see her turn attention to an important cause as well.

P.S. If you text “HAITI” to 90999, you can contribute $10 to the Red Cross fund for the People of Haiti. It’s quick, easy, and for a great cause—the $10 will simply be subtracted from your month’s phone bill.

*Mel Gibson—Ricky Gervais’ intro for him was savage and, well, pretty awesome, but Gibson (a really sharp, funny guy, as his interviews constantly prove) played along beautifully, pretending to sway and boozily announce his category. Oh, and his category: “inglorious bastards” or, “as they’re otherwise known—directors.” It’s particularly nice to see the likable, engaging side of him resurface.

*Sir Paul McCartney on cartoons— “Animation is not just for children. It's also for adults who take drugs.” Classic.

*Michael C. Hall’s win for Dexter—Yeah, I was technically rooting for Hugh Laurie (who’s already a double Globes-winner, so we shouldn’t feel TOO badly for him), but, from my friends that watch Dexter, Hall’s victory was well-deserved. And his short, eloquent speech all the more moving since we just heard that he’s in treatment for cancer (now in remission). He’s a great actor, and his win marked a touching note for the night. Here’s hoping for a swift recovery for Mr. Hall. And I really need to watch Dexter one of these days…

*Zachary Levi and Amy Poehler—on average, the on-stage banter at awards shows is pretty dreadful (the MTV Movie Awards are especially awful at this)—you typically get two randomly-matched stars and watch them recite lamely-written jokes. The best presenters are often the ones that go off-book, perfectly showcased by the always-funny Amy Poehler and Chuck’s Zachary Levi. The NBC duo casually and very entertainingly riffed off one another: Levi said whenever he thinks of sexy, fictional city-government employees, he thinks of her, while whenever Poehler thinks of sexy spies, she thinks of…Jason Bourne. Love Levi’s reaction, and his ad-lib that, by now, he’s used to women “faking it” with him. It’s good to see Levi gain some more exposure (as Chuck continues its run of excellent episodes. Anyone catch last night? I thought it was the best so far!), and a much-needed overall reminder that, for all its late-night-talk-show drama, NBC still saved Chuck and Parks and Recreation, and those decisions are paying off with some of the best comedy on TV.

And that’s my wrap-up. Did you guys watch the show? What were your most/least favorite moments of the Globes? And did you like Ricky Gervais as host, or are you more in tune with most of the critics who say he “bombed” or just never clicked with the crowd?

Oh, and anyone else excited by Oscars coming up next month?

P.S. For a nice bonus, here's another awesome moment/guest-star from Ricky Gervais' Extras. Never knew Orlando Bloom hated Johnny Depp this much...



Images courtesy of NBC and the Hollywood Foreign Press Association.
Read more!

News Bites: "Spider-Man" franchise to be rebooted! No more Raimi and Maguire...is this really a bad thing?

- Posted by Rusty


Source: Entertainment Weekly

As you could tell by the headline, I'm not too sad about this. In fact, I think this might be just what the franchise needs... [much more thoughts and Spider-Man news after the jump]

Spider-Man 4 has been in the news for a while now. I wrote a piece on the Venom potential spin-off movie a while ago (still in development, from what I've read), and, back then, Spider-Man 4 was just in the screenplay phase. Then it changed writers. And again. And, slowly but surely, I got the sense that franchise director Sam Raimi and Sony Pictures weren't seeing eye to eye on this. It's well-known that Raimi was strongarmed into including Venom in Spider-Man 3, and the results were pretty obvious--it was a useless compromise, one that shortchanged the entire film and further jumbled the story. Actually, all of Spider-Man 3 had an ideas-by-committee feel to it--it was a messy, overstuffed-with-villains narrative, and it was all the more disappointing following the triumph that was Spider-Man 2. So, in a way, kudos to Sam Raimi for getting out of what must have felt like Spider-Man 3 redux in the development phase.

So, what are we left with, now that Sam Raimi and Tobey Maguire are officially out? What sounds like a very good idea. Sony already has a script for a reboot by James Vanderbilt (who wrote the phenomenal Zodiac for David Fincher), which will start everything from scratch. Relaunch the character, send Peter Parker back to high school, and jump-start what should be a fresh take on the Spider-Man world. I like it. I honestly do. I applaud Raimi for not letting another mess happen, and I'm not at all opposed to a new direction for the series, if that's what must happen. I loved Raimi's first two films--they had a bright, infectious energy, and, in Maguire, a pitch-perfect nerdy Peter Parker. I'm sure they'll both do fine, going on to do better, probably more interesting things. Raimi is now free to tackle his in-development World of Warcraft project (which sounds amazing), while Maguire, free from the webslinger's demanding shooting schedule, could now do more smaller-scale films (like Brothers, which is currently in release) and passion projects.

As for Spider-Man the character, he'll live on just fine. It was inevitable that he'd continue without this current filmmaking team--he's too important for Sony, and much too beloved and universally recognized to stay out of multiplexes. And, now that there's a chance, the aspect of the character I'd most like to see again is the smartass Peter Parker. Remember him? That sarcastic bastard who came alive under the mask, the one so perfectly brought to life in the 1990's FOX Kids animated series (the series' title card is my picture on top). It always felt like a natural thing for Peter--he was dweeby on the outside, but the mask gave him the confidence to unleash a much more amusing and honest side of him. True, I never read the comic books, so I can't be sure how close that skews to the original incarnation, but I was crazy for the series (which still holds up), and that show gave Peter more edge, and the whole world of villains and arch-enemies much more danger. If a new series of films can recapture that spirit and tone, the results could be incredibly entertaining--maybe even more so than the films we already had. Sony's press release says it's aiming for a "grittier" tone--while that word is overused post-Bourne, greater stakes could just what the doctor ordered for the franchise.

So, all in all, I think this is promising news. We're also in for lots of casting announcements, director appointments, and, of course, footage in the coming months, especially if Sony still hopes to make that 2011 release (a little bit doubtful, since lots of articles are tossing around 2012 guesses). Raimi and Maguire will be remembered for a great launch and one of the best sequels ever made. In time, people will probably forget all about the misfire of Spider-Man 3, particualrly if the new, rebooted film series is worthwhile. Well, best of luck, folks at Sony. Now all you gotta do is find the perfect lead (cough*Adam Brody!*cough) for Peter Parker...

What do you guys think of this news? Happy/disappointed that our original Spider-Man series is over? And who would you want to play Peter Parker when the new series takes off?

Images courtesy of Buena Vista Pictures and Marvel Comics.
Read more!

News Bites: "The A-Team" Trailer now online

- Posted by Rusty

I'll be honest--I know next to nothing about The A-Team. I never watched the TV show, and I only learned about Mr. T's catchphrase through Chandler on Friends (anyone remember Chandler's "Best Bud" bracelet from Joey? "The reject from the Mr. T Collection?!"). So, do we really need another big-budget TV-adaptation? Probably not. That said, I think this trailer makes it look like one huge, ridiculous, fun package. And that cast is superb: Liam Neeson, Bradley Cooper (fresh off the huge success of The Hangover), and, best of all, District 9's Sharlto Copley (in his first film role after that breakthrough sci-fi hit)! To top all that off, this is from director Joe Carnahan, who gave us the cool, hard-edged indie, Narc, and the underrated Smokin' Aces. Smokin' Aces wasn't too popular, but I actually dug it, narrative flaws and all. Carnahan knows how to stage great, hyper-kinetic, go-for-broke action, and he gets good performances out of his actors--it might sound weird, but Aces stars Jeremy Piven and Ryan Reynolds delivered some of their best work in that film. This looks along those lines--big, expensive action set-pieces (like that aerial fight near the end of the trailer), and a game cast. Let's hope it turns out well. If anything, this went from a picture I have no interest in to something that could be worth catching on the big-screen. Looking forward to seeing more footage! The A-Team (with their cheesy, though still kinda cool, "No Plan B" catchphrase) hits theaters this summer, June 11.

What do you guys think of the teaser? And are any of you fans of the original TV show? [end of post] Read more!

What's on the Menu (January 8 - 10)

- Posted by Rusty

…and welcome to January. Unofficially, this is known as “dump month”. January is when studios typically release the films they have the least confidence in, hoping to just make a quick buck and fade the films from memory. Still, some genuinely good movies managed to come out in the doldrums of the New Year (ie, Children of Men and Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, two of the best films of the decade, in my opinion; as well as more recent hits like Cloverfield and Taken). From the looks of it, this weekend’s new movies aren’t the most promising group, though I suspect they might make for passable entertainment. Let’s take a peek at the first batch of new movies for 2010… [breakdown of new releases after the jump]

1. “Leap Year” - Ah, Amy Adams…you and your adorableness might even make this worth seeing. Adams really is one of the most charming actresses working in any genre. She could do drama effortlessly (and has two Oscar nominations as a reward), but she’s also one of the most gifted comic actresses out there (Enchanted takes the cake, but her small roles in Catch Me if You Can and Talladega Nights were wonderful as well). And that brings us to Leap Year. Plot-wise, most of us know how this is going to play out: A city career girl (Amy Adams) keeps waiting for a proposal from her long-time boyfriend (Adam Scott, of Starz’ brilliant sitcom, Party Down). When the ring doesn’t come on the eve of their fourth anniversary, she decides to take drastic measures. With her boyfriend out in Dublin for a conference (ah, Ireland—how lucky that his conference takes place in one of the most picturesque, lushly green locations), she learns that, by Irish tradition, a woman could propose to her man on Leap Day, February 29th. Adams then takes off to Dublin, and through a series of comic obstacles, she ends up recruiting a scruffy, handsome Irishman (Matthew Goode, the talented and versatile actor from Watchmen, Match Point, and The Lookout) to drive her to Dublin. Might sparks fly? Albeit with this tall, sensitive ruffian instead of the squeaky-clean boyfriend from back home?

Yeah, it sounds mighty predictable, and, in watching the trailer, I could already guess most of the story beats. But this film does have a few things in its favor. First off, Adams is a delight in pretty much anything she makes, and I’m hoping she could bring some personality and depth to what sounds like a pretty hokey, stereotypically-written character (and premise). As for her co-star, Matthew Goode is a genuine talent—if you guys ever have the chance, see his electrifying work in The Lookout and Woody Allen’s Match Point. He’s great in the more high-profile Watchmen too, and, so far, I like that he downplays his obvious good looks to tackle more meaty character parts (you can currently see him as Colin Firth’s lover in A Single Man). He looks to bring just the right kind of swagger from the trailer, and the guy is hilarious in interviews and panels, so I’m sure he’ll handle the comedy aspects as well. Finally, this is from director Arnand Tucker, known for sensitive indies like Shopgirl and a script by writing duo Harry Elfont and Deborah Kaplan (who wrote one of the best teen movies, Can’t Hardly Wait…as well as the lame Made of Honor from last year), with a final polish by Slumdog Millionaire Oscar-winner Simon Beaufoy.

With these people involved, I’m hoping that the film overcomes the familiar story to give us something sweet and likable. More so, I really hope it doesn’t end up like Elfont and Kaplan’s last scripted movie, Made of Honor, just substituting the prettier Ireland for the former movie’s Scotland, while still retaining all the clichés of a weak rom-com. All in all, The reviews are decent, but not great (even Roger Ebert said that he couldn’t resist the movie’s charms), so it could end up being a pleasant date movie a la The Proposal.

P.S. Quick moment to plug an awesome show: I mentioned this briefly already, but co-Star Adam Scott is the star of Party Down, a brilliant sitcom that’s still relatively unheard of. It just aired its first season on Starz, and it comes back for a second (and probably last season) this April. But, even if you don’t have Starz, you can catch all 10 episodes if you’re a Netflix member—the entire first season is available for streaming, and I highly recommend you check it out. From the people who gave us Veronica Mars (itself a genius show—I just obsessively plowed through all 3 seasons during Christmas Break), it’s about a group of showbiz hopefuls who make ends meet by working in a minimum-wage catering company. The characters are all well-drawn and relatable, and the writing is top-notch throughout all 10 episodes. Plus, Veronica Mars fans get a lot of bonus goodies—not only is Mars regular Ryan Hansen (the infamous Dick Casablancas) a member of the Party Down “catering team”, but a good portion of the former show’s cast appear as guest stars (including Veronica Mars herself, Kristen Bell, in the Season 1 finale). And, lastly, it’s easily one of the funniest shows on TV—its humor isn’t obvious, but more in the vein of the witty, sometimes-painfully-awkward kind we see on The Office and Ricky Gervais’ Extras, just the kind that I love. A really great show, and one I’ll make sure to blog about when it comes back in April.

2. “Daybreakers” - Vampires are a huge pop-culture property right now—with Twilight, True Blood, and The Vampire Diaries ruling the theaters and airways, it was only a matter of time before we’d get even more blood-sucker stories. And here’s what look like a potentially interesting spin on vampire lore—a welcome entry into the overdone genre. Daybreakers presents a world where the vampires won—humans are rare and hunted for their blood, and society continues to function, albeit composed almost entirely of immortals. But here’s the rub: human blood is running out, and (though this is where the trailer gets a bit muddled), the consequences of no more blood could be devastating for all vampire citizens. Somehow, Willem Defoe’s renegades come into play, and Ethan Hawke’s (always good to see on the screen—he’s a dependably good actor) conflicted vampire hero takes center stage for some world-shaking events. I’m not familiar with writer/directors The Spierig Brothers, but, from the trailer, it looks like they created a nifty visual experience, and I like that this story explores vampires in a fresh light (and, on a quick note: thank you to the filmmakers for not making them sparkle, and having no werewolves or indecisive, poorly-written female leads in sight). I’m guessing the good (but not great) reviews are more due to story problems, since even the trailer can’t effectively explain what happens when the blood runs out…besides there being a lot of action scenes, of course. Still, the take is creative, and it looks like an overall entertaining film. Not mandatory big-screen watching for me, but I do want to catch this somewhere down the line.

3. “Youth in Revolt” - Based on the much-loved “rebellious teens” book of the same name, it looks like this movie adaptation is not too shabby, taking some recognizable plot points (ie, nerdy boy wants to lose his virginity) and turning them on their head (ie, said boy invents a suave, Frenchman, mustache-twirling alter ego, Francois, to win over the girl of his dreams). Although Michael Cera could do the stuttering/awkward/funny-guy routine in his sleep (I know it’s become a bit repetitive, but he’s still an absolute genius in this type of role), I’m actually much more interested to see his take on Francois, which should allow the young actor to show some range and quiet the naysayers who think he’s one-trick pony. The rest of the film sounds equally interesting (and quite demented too)—Nick Twisp, a horny, lonely kid from a trailer park (Cera) meets a blonde bombshell (newcomer Portia Doubleday) and vows to win her over. When he can’t do it as Nick, he invents, in a Fight Club-esque manner, Francois to swoop in and finish the job. The trailer implies a lot of crazy scenes follow, and I’m curious to see how this thing comes together (especially since I hear that the novel is epically long, with a final part that’s too out-there to put on screen coherently). Great comic actors appear in this too, including Zach Galifianakis (the scene-stealer from this year’s giant hit, The Hangover), Justin Long, Ray Liotta, Fred Willard, and the great Steve Buscemi. Could be interesting—the reviews are pretty good, and I think, of all the films coming out this weekend, I’ll probably catch this one with my friends in the next few weeks.

4. “Crazy on the Outside” - With next to no publicity, this one doesn’t seem to have much of a chance. Still, it sounds intriguing—if nothing else, I’d see it for its Galaxy Quest reunion of Tim Allen and Sigourney Weaver (who are obviously friends, and have a great rapport in the trailer), and for the fact that it’s Tim Allen’s directorial debut. I’ll be the first to admit that Allen makes a lot of horrible movies, but just watch how he lights up the screen in something like Galaxy Quest, a comedy that’s actually worthy of his talent. He strikes me as a cool, very smart guy, but one that unfortunately seems to prefer paycheck roles over making quality films. So, the fact that he took directorial reigns on this is a good sign—there might be a sneaky, dark comedy lurking underneath that bland poster and decent (but far from great) trailer. The story—about Allen’s just out-of-the-joint con man who tries to start a normal life—has promise. Even better, the actors Allen rounded up are superb: in addition to Weaver, we have the amazing J.K. Simmons (the perpetual scene-stealer of the Spider-Man films as editor J. Jonah Jameson), Kelsey Grammar, Modern Family’s Julie Bowen, and Ray Liotta. It’s only opening in a few cities this weekend, so there aren’t too many reviews to help us judge; however, the two available reviews aren’t swimming in praise. I don’t have high hopes for this, but I like that Allen is trying something new here, and it’d be great if this paves way for more intelligent comedies from him in the future.

And that’s it for the weekend. I can’t say that it’s filled with great choices, but all of them, especially Leap Year and Daybreakers, could turn out better than expected, providing some good early-January entertainment in the process. Or, of course, you could finally catch (or re-watch…ahem, like I’ve been known to) Avatar and Sherlock Holmes, two of the best films out right now. And don’t forget about awards darling, Up in the Air, too (which I’m looking forward to catching, and might just see this weekend or next)!

What do you guys hope to catch this weekend, or in the next few weeks of January?

Clips courtesy of Trailer Addict.
Read more!

"CHUCK" comes back this Sunday!

- Posted by Rusty


For all you guys who have never seen this show, you're missing out. It's funny, wonderfully written, and, not to mention, packed with crazy spy action, stunts galore, and some of the most likable characters on TV. Chuck comes back this Sunday, January 10, on NBC with a 2-hour premiere, followed by a bonus new episode on Monday, January 11 (which will become its regular timeslot). That's 3 hours of new Chuck. Anyone else excited? [more Chuck awesomeness after the jump]

Seriously, I know the concept--about a lovable nerd who manages to download government secrets into his brain, and must then go on a new mission every week--sounds silly (and NBC's typical geek-humor-heavy advertising doesn't help its cause), but don't let that stop you. The writing is sharp, the character relationships are fantastic, and starting in Season 2, the mythology behind the Big Spy Secrets more interesting than ever. Oh, and it just happens to be one of the funniest shows on the air, week after week. It's great entertainment, and, if you've never caught a single episode, now's the best time to catch up. You can watch the first episode on NBC.com and Hulu, the last half of the 1st season on TheWb.com, and rent the 2nd season on DVD (it just came out yesterday...or you could find the last 6 episodes of Season 2--including the game-changing, crazy-Awesome finale--on Hulu).

We'll blog more about the show as it starts its run. (You can also find Ace's extensive write-up of the show's Comic-Con panel here). In the meanwhile, here's a cool Season 3 preview clip to make the wait until Sunday more bearable:



And also check out the Comic-Con panel video that they showed right before the cast and crew made their epic entrance (read Ace's recap for the full details). The first part of the video is a highlight reel of Season 2's big storylines and moments, while the second part...is just pure genius, especially for Chuck fans!

Chuck - Comic Con 2009 from Kath on Vimeo.

Enjoy the clips, and we'll see you back soon for more Chuck goodness!

Images courtesy of NBC, Warner Bros., and Alan Sepinwall's "What's Alan Watching" Blog (sepinwall.blogspot.com--check it out--it's a must-read for TV fans!)
Read more!

Top 10: Favorite Hand-Drawn Disney Movies

- Posted by Rusty


Disney’s The Princess and the Frog, minus its flaws, was a charming return to the heyday of Disney animation—that of the wonderful hand-drawn style. Like I’m sure a lot of you, I grew up with these types of cartoons, and Disney churned out a whole army of classics in that format. The success of The Princess and the Frog, now a genuine hit for the studio (if not exactly a blockbuster—that would sadly be the Alvin and the Chipmunks “squeakuel”) might just mean more 2-D animated films down the line, and I couldn’t be happier. With that (and with a big thanks and tip of the hat to my friend/ brilliant-idea-man, Daniel), I thought it’d be a lot of fun to whip up a list of my favorite hand-drawn Disney features. I only had two rules for this:

1) This might seem obvious, but these had to be 2-D animated. Thus, as much as I love them (and most of these would have been good contenders for my #1), I couldn’t include Pixar’s stuff, The Nightmare Before Christmas, or even Enchanted, which was part 2-D animated and just as entertaining as some of my picks.

2) These had to hold up to repeat viewings, especially from a more “grown-up” perspective. This was a biggie for me—I grew up on Disney classics, and I could still watch films like Peter Pan, Alice in Wonderland, Sleeping Beauty, Pinocchio, and Cinderella with a big smile. However, story-wise (and even character-wise, like the more recent, still-entertaining The Little Mermaid), a good number of these leave a lot to be desired, and so I had to scrap those off my list of favorites.

And, so, with those guidelines, I set off on an enormously fun few weeks of catching up on some of my most beloved Disney memories. The result? These 10 reliable favorites, all great bits of entertainment to this day. The ones here might not all be qualified masterpieces, but, to me, they’re all excellent examples of the Disney brand at its peak, offering up films that spark the childhood imagination, while still providing clever writing that speaks to all ages.

With that, let’s get to the list. Here are my Top 10 all-time favorite Disney cartoons… [Top 10 List after the jump]

10. “The Great Mouse Detective” (1986) - Premiering just before Disney’s creative “renaissance” with The Little Mermaid, this is a somewhat overlooked effort. Well, now couldn’t be a more perfect time to re-discover it—amidst all the Sherlock Holmes fever around Robert Downey Jr.’s turn as the great detective, I really recommend checking out Disney’s excellent mouse-ified version. I’ll give that the animation is a bit dated, and the songs (what little there are) are instantly forgettable. Nonetheless, the characters here are great fun, and the entire mystery actually quite clever once it unravels. Interestingly enough, our main hero, the sprightly, quirky, gloriously odd Basil of Baker Street is more Holmesian than a good majority of Arthur Conan Doyle’s detective’s big screen incarnations. Minus the cocaine addiction, of course (which, frankly, I would love to see Disney try to squeeze in), Basil is a huge, intelligent bundle of energy, one that loves to slip on disguises, but still falls into sweeps of depression and melancholy violin-playing when his cases run out. Sound familiar? I love that it took a mouse on 221 ½ B, Baker Street to bring back some of Holmes’ wonderful weirdness. (Robert Downey Jr.’s take also reclaims all of Holmes’ more out-there characteristics that got lost in the public eye). Basil's sidekick, Dr. Dawson, is very enjoyable as well, as the noble, curious man that gets caught up in a big adventure…and ends up loving it (the scene where he’s undercover in a seedy bar as a scruffy sailor, but still can’t resist ordering a “nice sherry”, is one of the big highlights of this film for me). And, of course, the flamboyant, over-the-top Professor Ratigan, the esteemed foe of our brilliant detective (horror icon Vincent Price, doing a gleefully manic version of Professor Moriarty) makes for a memorable villain. He’s not as developed as some of the ones that will appear later in this list, but his dastardly plan actually makes sense, and his peeve about being called a “rat” gives way for a series of very good callbacks. He’s a good match for Basil, and their final confrontation on top of the Big Ben clock tower is one terrific, gorgeously animated sequence. Not Disney’s strongest film, but still a very entertaining one. It’s actually too bad this never became a franchise—here were two durable and very likable characters, ones that I would have gladly followed through a whole series of adventures and mousy-Victorian-London mysteries.

9. "The Brave Little Toaster" (1987) - I forgot how much I loved this one. It was on heavy TV rotation when I came to America, and it’s still one of my favorites to catch. Following one courageous, always-noble toaster and his talking-appliance buddies (the blanket, in particular, is easily one of the most adorable Disney characters) in a cross-country search for their old master, this one packs a lot of heartfelt moments and a great deal of charm. Moreover, it mines similar territory to the Toy Story movies—the bonds we form with inanimate objects when we’re younger. It might sound ridiculous, but there’s a truth here, and a bittersweet one at that—there is always some attachment to our favorite toys, old scraps of clothing, or even a silly thing like a spiffy little toaster (but one that makes the absolute perfect toast). This film explores that, including, with a surprising emotional punch, how those objects might feel when we outgrow and replace them. I love that story element, and, even better, I love how this film plays out those ideas, with a resolution that’s appropriately heartwarming. An absolute gem of a cartoon.

8. “The Hunchback of Notre Dame” (1996) - Probably the most challenging material Disney ever embraced—I couldn’t get through Victor Hugo’s original novel, and, from the glimpses I got, its ghastly elements never exactly screamed a “family-friendly animated adaptation”. But it works…and wonderfully so. The animation is striking, and the music lovely throughout. There’s also plenty of mature, dark themes, such as the power-hungry, racist villain Frollo’s obsession with the gypsy Esmeralda (the woman who saw the obvious goodness in our hunchback hero, Quasimodo). I think the source material was transformed for the better, adding a great deal more warmth, while never shying away from the cruelty and hatred that Quasimodo endured. Inspiring and powerful, often in ways that resonate long after the movie ends. And, finally, major props to the filmmakers for (SPOILER ALERT) having the hero not get the girl, and having that resolution make perfect sense in the context of this story.

7. "Mulan" (1998) - Disney’s official “girl power” movie, and a welcome one at that. The Chinese legend of a girl who impersonated a soldier is beautifully re-told (the invading Huns sequence is deservingly famous), and Mulan herself, who rejects society’s rules for a woman, is one of their most rounded, well-written characters. I love the songs, as well as the subtle romance between Mulan and her acting captain, Shang (who’s actually the more shy and awkward of the two). Points off for having a bland villain, though—Shun-Yu, for all his brooding, is just a one-dimensional baddie with a tiny shred of motivation. On the flip side, bonus points for Eddie Murphy’s wonderful vocal work as the feisty, fast-talking dragon, Mushu (an odd story element that works surprisingly well), and casting “Pat” Morita (Mr. Miyagi himself) as the Chinese emperor.

6. “A Goofy Movie” (1995) - A very pleasant surprise, and one of the most rewarding upon repeat viewings. It almost seems like a happy accident—there’s no villain, and barely a love interest that needs to be won by the end; instead, it’s a sweet story of a father and his son, bonding over the worst fishing trip imaginable. It also asks a question that I’ve always wondered when watching Goof Troop (from which this movie spun off) on weekday afternoons: what if Goofy was your dad? What if you parent was the well-meaning, ahh-yucking, clumsy, sweetheart of a goof? All of this is handled with a lot of heart and good laughs—I’m sure most (if not all) of us could relate to being embarrassed by our parents and wishing to look “cool” to someone we like…and failing miserably. Goofy, for all his earnest mistakes, is really just a dad trying to make his son happy, especially as his son develops other interests (hint: girls) and hits the age where he’s not quite comfortable with who he is. The movie nicely tackles such issues of growing up, especially that of a father and son finally learning to communicate again. I love Max’s big crush on Roxanne, his best buds PJ and Pauly Shore’s Jewish-surfer/whipped-cheese-lover, Bobby Zimmeruski, and, of course, Goofy and Max’s changing relationship, the delightful clincher to the whole film (“Hi, Dad” soup, anyone?). Plus, those Powerline songs are incredibly catchy! One of my favorites to re-watch.

Fun Fact: This was directed by Kevin Lima, who went on to helm the wonderful Enchanted, itself a great riff on the classic hand-drawn fairy tales of Disney’s past. He’s currently circling a remake of The Incredible Mr. Limpet, with none other than Johnny Depp potentially attached to star. At this point, with two great films under his belt, I think he’s a genuine talent, and I’m really interested to see what he’ll do next. And while I’ve never seen the original Mr. Limpet (not exactly a beloved classic), the offbeat combo of him and Depp sounds mighty interesting.

5. "The Lion King" (1994) - Lots of people I know consider this the best cartoon in Disney’s history. While my top pick is something else, it’s hard to argue with them—this is probably Disney’s strongest drama. Essentially Hamlet in the Savannah, young Simba’s journey from coward cub to heroic lion is lovely, the big set-pieces gorgeously animated, and the emotional elements hit just right the notes. There’s good laughs sprinkled throughout as well (Timon and Pumba, really one of the best talking-animal duos Disney has ever done, are an ever-clever spin on Hamlet’s Rosencrantz & Guildenstern). And, of course, who could forget that Elton John-Tim Rice soundtrack? This is in full contention with Beauty and the Beast and Aladdin for my favorite Disney score. And last (but certainly not least), in Scar, the film has the most deliciously evil villain (voiced with oily, Shakespearean brilliance by the great Jeremy Irons) outside of my #1 pick. A deserving phenomenon, and a fine example of the kind of top-notch storytelling Disney could accomplish.

4. "Hercules" (1997) - Zippily paced and very funny, this is another film that seems to be kind of underrated. It’s also (and I might be alone on this) one of the best stabs at Greek mythology on film. Sure, it’s a very sanitized version (you try making a G-Rated version of these stories, especially the Hercules one), but it captures the grandeur and massive scale of this world (beasts, gods, titans, et al), with a quirky animation style not too removed from Aladdin’s. It’s also a very well-written script, with lots of clever references (anyone catch the blink-and-you-miss-it Oedipus joke?), while still retaining both the epic tone of this legend as well as the right emotional kick to the rest of the story. And, of course, James Woods’ Hades steals pretty much the entire movie, comfortably taking his place among the best villains in Disney animation. With an improvised, mile-a-minute energy, it’s clear that Woods relishes this part, and, in turn, his Hades is equal parts vicious and utterly hilarious—as perfect a foil for a hero as one could wish for. The action sequences are fantastic, the moral (“a hero is measured by the strength of his heart”) sweet and unpretentious, and the central romance is a delightful one, with Hercules’ love, Megura, as a perfect, sardonic “standard D.I.D” ("Damsel in Distress"). Overall, it’s just smart, great entertainment, and I’m surprised it doesn’t get more attention.

3. "The Emperor's New Groove" (2000) - How is this one not more popular? It could be because the whole adventure is kind of slight, at least compared to the ultra-serious life-and-death stakes that Disney movies are known for. But, honestly, I couldn’t care less about that. This is easily the funniest film on this list, and one of the most sharp and witty things ever to come out of the House of Mouse. There’s no love story, and, in its place, we get a hip, sarcastic, lively-animated story of friendship—that between the spoiled, selfish, extra-quippy Emperor Kuzco (a brilliantly cast David Spade), and his roly-poly sidekick, Pacha (John Goodman, who could do this kind of good-hearted role in his sleep). The laughs are fast and furious, and, as weird as this sounds, Kuzco lets David Spade do some of the best acting of his career. It’s a perfect tweak of Spade’s own smartass persona, but one that allows him to show some of the begrudging sweetness and depth that marked his Emmy-nominated turn on Just Shoot Me. It’s inspired voice acting, on par with both James Woods’ Hades and Robin Williams’ Genie. As for the film itself, buried under all the well-done snark and loony set-pieces, there’s a charming lesson of the importance of actually caring about people, one that never feels overdone. Plus, in addition to Kuzco, all of the characters are memorable, with special mention going to the dim, though very well-meaning crony/talented cook, Kronk (Patrick Wharburton, the movie’s breakout vocal star) and Yzma (Eartha Kitt, clearly having a ball), the old and “scary beyond all reason” baddie, one of Disney’s all-time greats (the “great…great…great…great…aunt” scene is just priceless!).

2. "Beauty and the Beast" (1991) - What a coincidence that its main character’s name means “beauty”, huh? Of all the Disney fairy tales, this is simply the most gorgeous, best seen in the showstopper ballroom dance sequence in the middle (now so iconic and beautifully spoofed). Also, this might just be the strongest soundtrack on this list—almost every song is memorable, from the opening “Belle” to the classic “Beauty and the Beast”, sung by the amazing Angela Lansbury. Taking place in a quirky part of France where the candlesticks are rascally Frenchmen and the teapots are British, this is some of the best storytelling in Disney’s history—major props for having a smart, capable heroine (who loves to read—kudos, Disney!), a complex, interesting lead in Beast, and a killer supporting cast (particularly Lumiere—ah, how I love that charming candlestick…with a thing for French maids!). Oh, and Gaston, the conceited, moronic, but supposedly “beautiful” town hero, is a phenomenal villain—one of the few who’s just as funny as he is dangerous. There are some lovely themes in this as well, from being true to yourself to the value of kindness and tolerance, something that Belle, the ever-great role model for young girls, personifies. An all-around superb effort; this was the first cartoon ever nominated for a Best Picture Oscar, and the honor is very much deserved.


1. "Aladdin" (1992) - There might be more complex films on this list. Or more epic. Or more dramatic and deep. But, for me, nothing beats Aladdin. For a sheer movie experience, this is Disney magic at its best. I watched this for the first time when I was seven in Ukraine, and it blew me away. Years later, I think it watches even better. All of the elements are here: a great love story (with two likable, well-developed leads), an exotic, ancient setting, and a grand adventure that ably mixes thrills, laughs, and emotion. But Aladdin’s lightening-in-a-bottle energy and pizzazz wouldn’t be possible without two key essentials: Robin Williams’ Genie and my all-time favorite Disney villain, Jafar. Williams, in particular, was a man born to do animation. His rapid-fire thinking and amazing improvisation skills matched so perfectly with the quick-transforming Genie that the result was pure animated bliss. He revolutionized voice acting, and I think we are all the better for it. Plus, his Genie is a character for the ages—always shifting and spewing tons of pop-culture references, and yet you can’t overlook his great, big, proud, silly heart. His relationship with Aladdin, the first master to actually care about him, is really the soul of this movie, and it’s a partnership that only gets better the more you watch it. And, of course, Jafar is a masterpiece of a creation—angular, deeply acerbic (and actually pretty witty—his comeback of “ecstatic” to the first meeting with “Prince Abu Bu” kills me every time), armed with a killer Serpent staff, and, yeah, pretty much all-out evil, he is a villain that you just love to hate. He lights up the screen, and coupled with his scene-stealing partner-in-crime, Iago (another piece of brilliant voice casting—comedian Gilbert Godfried’s finest hour, in my opinion), I can’t think of a better match for the scrappy and cool Aladdin. He’s so memorable, in fact, that I don’t blame Disney for resurrecting him in the lackluster Direct-to-DVD sequel, The Return of Jafar. Terrible film, yes, but it was great to see Jafar wreaking havoc again.

Overall, just a brilliantly-conceived film—everything works, from the animal sidekicks (who could possibly beat Abu and the wordless, but utterly charming, pantomiming Carpet?) to the huge set-pieces (the final confrontation with Jafar is just plain awesome). And, finally, this contains one of the finest collections of songs in movie musicals, with “A Whole New World” ranking as possibly the most romantic sequence I've ever seen. I love this film to death, and can’t wait to watch it again sometime soon.

P.S. Disney has made some awful Direct-to-DVD sequels over the years (Return of Jafar included), but Aladdin and the King of Thieves is a welcome exception. It not only marks the return of Robin Williams and the rest of the voice cast, it also stands as just a good character-based sequel. Lots of threads are resolved, particularly Aladdin’s never-spoken-of parents and our mysterious narrator from the first film (who oddly disappeared by the end of the first film), and, for a restrained budget, the animation is simply beautiful at times. Also, for all my ribbing of Return of Jafar, the one good thing to come out of it was the switcheroo of sides by Iago. It was a believable turn of events, and he’s such a great character that I’m glad he joined Aladdin’s posse…and popped up for this quite good third film.


And that's it for my list. Now I turn the floor to you guys. What would you put in your Top 10 of Disney hand-drawn cartoons? Do you agree/disagree with my picks? Did I miss any of your own all-time faves? Sound off in the comments below!

Images courtesy of Walt Disney Pictures.
Read more!