How Much Is Too Much?
I try to hold off on seeing trailers as long as possible. There are a few reasons for this, but the biggest reason is that they tend to spoil too much of the film for me. It used to be that I could ignore the spoilerific content and still have a good time when I eventually saw the movie, but nothing on screen would ever truly surprise or thrill me. Never was this more glaring to me than when I watched the trailer for the Iron Man sequel coming out in May.
A movie trailer has a lot to do in the minute or two that it has in front of your eyes. It has to give you some sort of idea of the story and what the main plot is going to be while at the same time showing off just enough whiz-bang to get you into the seat. In short, trailers need to excite you. This is the rule with action, comedy, sci fi and comic book films and there are absolutely no exceptions. If Spider-man were to face the camera and talk about how awesome his new movie is going to be, would you actually go? No. You want to see the webhead dodge traffic while swinging from his white, gooey vines in pursuit of Doctor Octopus who has taken the effervescent Mary Jane Watson captive. It's these money shots that are going to get you into the film.
And it's these money shots that are making movies less fun. Back to Iron Man 2. We see War Machine in full outfit fighting side by side with Iron Man. There's one scene that will no longer impress me. There's another shot at the end of the trailer where Iron Man essentially reveals his portable Iron Man suit and steps into it on the race track. It's an impressive shot, and now completely old hat.
What's left, now that the creators have shot their load? Is there going to be something even more awesome in the film than what I've seen in the trailers? It's hard to imagine that since what I saw was already really damn cool. I hate to say it, but the chances of me going to see the movie in the theaters has dropped from 100% to about 60%. I think I might be able to wait for the DVD..
Boobs! Pirates! Jokes!

Great News! I was going to make my first post an insightful and academic essay on the state of modern music, but instead, boobs distracted me. Feel free to forgive me at your leisure.
It turns out that Disney is not interested in fake boobs--and who is, right? Right? Anyone?--for their new Pirates of the Caribbean movie. You can follow the link if you want, but I’m going to go ahead and quote the important part for you.
“Filmmakers sent out a casting call last week, according to the paper, seeking 'beautiful female fit models. Must be 5 feet 7 inches-5 feet 8 inches, size 4 or 6, no bigger or smaller. Age 18-25. Must have a lean dancer body. Must have real breasts. Do not submit if you have implants.' The potential ladies will also have to undergo a test involving jiggling and jogging to determine their breasts' authenticity, the Post says." From: http://www2.seattlepi.com/articles/417172.html
Now, obviously we, being logical and rational individuals, can deduce that, since this movie involves pirates who aren’t from Somalia, it is probably set in a time period where fake tits would be anachronistic at best and a surgical nightmare at worst, but where's the fun in that? Instead, because this story broke an hour or so ago, I’m going to get the jump on every other blog site and post every possible joke anyone can make about this situation. Click "Continue Reading" to see what I'm talking about.
Tron Legacy Trailer
Found via CBR (THANKS!):
The film looks like it will be pretty cool. I just hope it's not another Alice in Wonderland in that it's pretty but with no substance. That would just be a dick move on Disney's part, right? Also, who's the Bowie wannabe in this trailer? He seems interesting. Note: If the trailer doesn't work, just follow the link to the CBR site.
After Hours

It's official: I've discovered the most forgotten mainstream film of all time. That distinction rests with the 1985 film "After Hours". I discovered it perusing the Netflix Instant Play library. The summary sounded intriguing:
"Paul Hackett (Griffin Dunne) embarks on a trip to New York City's SoHo district in hopes of hooking up with a recent acquaintance, the beautiful Marcy Franklin (Rosanna Arquette). But Paul loses all his money, and just to get back home he must endure a night of kooks, psychotics, punks and an angry mob trying to kill him."
Whoa, so like, his whole night just unravels and gets crazier and crazier? I love movies like that!! The downward spiral that takes place over one single piece of time! Well, the movie is most certainly crazy. But the "dark" seems to overcompensate loudly for the "comedy". It's strange to watch a film vacuum any humor out of its various situations. There's suicide, awkward meet-ups with the opposite sex, punk parties, all the wacky stuff that gets punctuated by a night alone in a New York City neighborhood. And yet...nothing the characters do makes any damn sense! Awkward scene after awkward scene between people play out, all the while you're thinking, "Who would do that?" or "There's a really simple way to get out of this situation". Kinda like watching Curb Your Enthusiasm, except EVERYONE is Larry David or weirder. There ain't a single "regular" person there to contrast the weirdness.
Maybe this movie was created in another, weirder dimension and was accidentally shipped to this one. Although that'd be tough, since the director was (get this) none other than (you ready?) Martin freakin Scorsese!!! In know, right?! There are certain shots that are very indicative of his work, like quick push-ins and long, long, looooong takes in a scene. But they really don't add anything to the story; they stand out like sore thumbs, mainly because the rest of the pacing, acting, and shot composition are so slowly-paced. This came off as a practice film; each scene had waaaay too much air. And the truckloads of cameos didn't help (although it does feature both parents from Home Alone...and Cheech...and Chong).
Ideally, a dark comedy should make me feel sly or mischievous, like I've gotten away with something. Instead I felt as weirded-out as the protagonist...but maybe that was the idea? There are way too many "but maybe's" when I reflect on this movie. Perhaps it would have fared better under its original director, Tim Burton (yes, really). He really had a knack for weird, dark, 80s cult comedies. And those were actually funny.
Gawd, even the TRAILER'S pace is saggy.
Clouded Judgement

Having been bombarded with the ads for Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs all year, I think it's finally getting to me. The film looks less than stellar in my opinion, and there are some strange things going on visually. Overall I think that's my biggest hangup with this thing. The original book has a very detailed, realistic look, no? So why then render the film's characters to look like they were ripped from a 1950's UPA cartoon? Additionally, why would you place those very simplistic, stylized characters in a world being overrun with photorealistic food? Anyone else see a slight disconnect?
I appreciate that animation studios are starting to branch out from the novelty of 3D and actually using the tool to push the medium forward, but you can only go so far when you're relying on visuals to support lackluster jokes, acting, and narrative. Now I'm not knocking the source material, but let's not kid ourselves...this ain't sticking too close to the book. We've still got a ways to go before some of these studios really start thinking about legitimate artistic quality. Sure, it looks interesting, but it's just empty calories.
You need to log in to vote
The blog owner requires users to be logged in to be able to vote for this post.
Alternatively, if you do not have an account yet you can create one here.
Powered by Vote It Up







Reflections on Gremlins
Posted by thegreatredhope
We'll be watching GREMLINS tonight, as I'm sure you're aware. Let's take a little time beforehand to share some reflections of a film that owns property on a small but valuable space of my brain. What do I remember, exactly? Well, it's been a while...
- Most would classify this film as "black comedy". More accurately, I think we could label it "wow, this is a black comedy?" Maybe I was too young (read: naive, sheltered) to realize this was supposed to be funny, nay, a PARODY of monster films. Guess I needed to bone up on my cheesy monster movies first.
- For a comedy, this specimen sure is violent. As tough as the gremlins look on the exterior, they're all goo and pulp on the insides. And don't worry; you'll get plenty of chances to see what they're made of. There was something about a blender, a microwave, maybe some getting run over...
- I recall the gremlins looking too terrifying and evil to be mischievous. For all I knew they could've crawled out from the pits of hell to feast on our livestock and kidnap our children. I'm much less likely to assume, based on their appearance, that they'd be running around like Daffy Duck on steroids. I think they tried to offset this in the sequel, but the goofy ones, somehow, are infinitely creepier.
- Man, this movie scared me something fierce when I was a kid.
- Regardless, the theme song is exceptional, and it'll stick with you forever...
- Setting this during the Christmas season is a nice touch, but it only adds to the creepiness factor. When is an invasion by terrifying monsters LESS funny than during the snowy, tranquil holidays?
- When I hear about gremlin lore, I think of these gremlins specifically. Yes, I'm aware they've been around for untold years, appearing in folk tales all over the globe, but...too bad, as far as I'm concerned they're the DEFINITIVE version of the creatures.
- My dog's mother was named Gizmo. And she looked like Gizmo. My dog doesn't.
There you have it, my collection of thoughts and memories about Gremlins. Will I have my mind changed? Will it reinforce itself as a film that's much scarier than people say? Will it be a 2 hour gloppy, gory, puppet orgy of mayhem? Find out when we watch it...TONIGHT!!!!!