Flick Review: Gangster Squad

Gangster Squad

Starring:  Josh Brolin, Sean Penn, Ryan Gosling, Emma Stone, Robert Patrick

Gangster Squad was one of the movies I was most jazzed about seeing this year, although it was originally supposed to be released last year, but due to the violence in the film and the fact that it was originally going to be released in September, only a few weeks after the Aurora shootings, the film got bumped into January of this year.  This is unfortunate, as I do believe that the postponement will likely hurt it's overall box office total, especially with many of the nominated films for the Academy Awards seeing a bit of an uptake in interest.  However, it's a really good, fun film that you should probably go see if you get a chance.

Gangster Squad takes place in post-World War II Los Angeles, where east coast mobster Mickey Cohen (a real life mobster, btw), has managed to consolidate all of the vice trade in the city, and has enough crooked police and judges in his pocket to protect his empire.  Now, Cohen seeks to break away from the Chicago Outfit, and create his own mob empire on the pacific coast.  Determined to stop the mobster before he completely takes over Los Angeles, the chief of police tasks Sgt. John O'Mara, a war veteran and an honest cop, to put together a task force with the sole purpose of destroying Cohen's operation, though doing it outside of the law.  The task force, dubbing themselves the Gangster Squad, hit Cohen hard, destroying illegal gambling operations, prostitution rings, and causing mayhem to the mobster's bottom line.  As Cohen prepares for his boldest plan to ensure a steady stream of income and power to cement his hold on Los Angeles for good, the Gangster Squad has both be able to stop the mobster for good, while trying to protect their themselves and their loved ones from Cohen's retribution.

The movie is visually striking, with director Ruben Fleischer (who also directed Zombieland and 30 Minutes Or Less) making use of the a variety of objects, props, and wardrobe to make the movie feel authentic. Many of the buildings from 1940’s Los Angeles are still in existence to this day, and are still in their original form, allowing the on location areas to look genuine instead of like they were shooting in front of a blue screen. The wardrobe department did a bang up job on this film, matching many of the styles, both in terms of men and women, for the outfits, hair, and accessories. Even the advertising for some of the products is authentic, down to the Pepsi bottles and the Schlitz beer packaging.

The two main principles of the film are Mickey Cohen, played by Sean Penn, and John O'Mara, played by Josh Brolin.  We'll start with the bigger name in Penn, who looks like this film was probably a blast for him.  He plays up the role of Cohen very well, making him absolutely loathsome, starting with the beginning of the film, to establish your dislike from him and them expand on it, like an everwidening circle of hate.  He's sinister, calculating, and funny as hell when he goes off on a tear.  I like him.  Penn should play more villains more often.  He's great at it.  As for Brolin, he's a very likable character, almost the complete opposite of Penn, which is probably the biggest problem for his character.  He's too good, too devoted to the law, too much of an ideal cop.  Brolin's O'Mara is very much a throwback to the classic lawman characters of the old school gangster flicks, and he gets overshadowed by both Penn and Ryan Gosling, who steals the show.  Gosling's character, Jerry Wotters, is much more fun and realistic, showing a sense of humor and jadedness to his job, but also maintaining an overall dedication to a noble cause, and a willingness to fight for it when needed.  He's charming, debonair, a drunk, lecherous, and overall just kick ass.  Very much like myself.  The other big name in the film, Emma Stone, is lovely in this film, but she is very much just window dressing for the film, looking gorgeous as a damsel in distress with enough endearing, corny dialogue to make you take notice.  This is a shame, as Stone herself is capable of playing much more than this, but for this film, she's sadly just another pretty face.

The rest of the cast is great too.  The rest of the Gangster Squad is made up of Robert Patrick, playing Max Kennard, the old veteran of the group who is also hilarious and near unrecognizable in his makeup.  Giovanni Ribsi is excellent as Conwell Keeler, the groups tech expert and their moral compass, while Anthony Mackie and Michael Pena round out the squad, adding muscle and some great one liners.  Overall, it's a great mix of characters, and they all play off each other very well.

So, in the end, is the movie worth seeing?   Well, that depends.  If you are looking for something that is meant to be Oscar worthy, then no, you probably shouldn't.  It's not a great film, but it is a very good one.  If you're looking for something fun, both in terms of entertainment and in terms of watching some really good actors have a ball on screen, then by all means, go see it.  It's a great homage to the classic gangster films, with a modern twist to it.  It's good fun, and worth your Hamilton for your ticket.

Fifteen Movies In 2013 That I'm Jazzed About

As a movie buff, I have a ton of flicks that usually catch my interest, in a passing sense.  However, there are very few films that I really get absolutely jazzed up to go see.  Usually, this starts with a trailer, although there are a great deal of movie sites and magazines that also direct me to a film that I might decide to watch.  With that said, there was a list of 15 movies that I was really psyched up to go see this year, and here are my thoughts about each one, from what I've seen on the trailers or researched on the internet.  Hope you are entertained.

Gangster Squad

The first movie I was psyched up over was Gangster Squad, which has a great top billing, with Josh Brolin, Sean Penn, Ryan Gosling, and Emma Ston, among others.  It's the story of a secret police unit that is formed to take on L.A. Gangster Mickey Cohen, and their efforts to bring him to justice.  The movie looks great, with a prohibition gangster type feel (even though it's set just after World War II).  The wardrobe looks phenomenal, and it looks have have enough cleverly cheesy dialogue and action to keep one entertained. This movie is already out, and will be seeing it this weekend.  Yeah-ya!

Warm Bodies

What can only be described as girl meets boy-zombie, I'm really jazzed about this film.  We have very few zombie comedies that work, with Shawn of the Dead and Zombieland being the only two that come to mind so far.  And the trailer looks funny, so hey, why not?

Pacific Rim

This definetely appeals to the Sci-Fi nut inside me.  Pacific Rim deals with Aliens that have somehow managed to come to Earth, via what appears to a dimensional crack in the middle of the Pacific.  To combat this, the nations of Earth create several giant sized robots to combat the menace, with each one remotely controlled by pilots in a VR simulator.  This movie looks great, and is a bit of an homage to the giant monster movies of the past, made famous by Toho.  It also looks almost like a direct copy of the anime series, Neon Genesis Evangelion, only with the robots resembling the ones from Robot Joxx, and not the biomechanical machines from the series.  Will that deter me from seeing the film?  Hell no! 

Man Of Steel

I'm not the biggest Superman fan in the world, although I do respect his place in comics history, and do love some of the stories that he does appear in with Batman at times.  However, I will admit that I loved the original Superman film, which a good superhero film and was the standard by which such films were made until the release of the original Batman film with Michael Keaton.  However, the character itself has been in a bit of a rut since the original Reeves films were made, and that franchise itself went south once Richard Donner was unceremoniously axed from the second film.  Even the most modern entry, Superman Returns, tried to continue the Reeves' films storyline, to no avail.  This new film with Henry Cavill in the iconic blue and red tights, looks quite good, and plays to the strengths of the character: a near godlike figure with the humility of a saint and the desire to do good tries to make the best use of his gifts in the world.  There hasn't been much in the form of details about the plot leaked out, which makes us have to continue to guess as to what the film is about, but so far, it looks like the Man of Steel will be getting the proper film treatment that he deserved.

Star Trek Into Darkness

The new Star Trek franchise, directed by J.J. Abrams, did something that not many people ever thought could be done with the franchise:  reinvent it, and yet keep the essence of the original intact.  Rather than have it serve as an epilogue for a T.V. series, Abrams instead took the series in a new direction, making it it's own standalone universe that makes it relatively fresh, but also familiar.  The casting is spot on, and each cast member makes sure to pay homage to their predecessor, while doing their own thing.  This new film looks dark, with the potential for it to be nearly as epic as the original second Star Trek film, The Wrath Of Kahn.  Details are still sketch, but so far it looks like Trekkies were right to keep the faith.

Oz The Great And Powerful

I'm surprised that we haven't had a sequel or prequel to the Wizard of Oz sooner, with the only real contender to this being Return To Oz back in 1985.  However, while that movie is regarded to be an unofficial sequel, and also frightening and nightmare inducing, this new entry by Sam Raimi looks to be an actual prequel to the original 1939 Film that is regarded to be one of the greatest films ever made.  James Franco is in the flick as the aforementioned Oz, and overall, it looks to be a visual feast, with enough references to the original film to make a fan like myself happy.  I might actually pay to see this one in 3D.

Iron Man 3

I'm not going to lie, aside from Scarlett Johansson, I was very disappointed with Iron Man 2.  The heart and humor that made the original film so enjoyable were gone in this one, and it seemed that the film's purpose was less based on continuing the story of the character as opposed to further setting up the Avengers film that was coming down the pipeline.  Now that the Avengers has come and gone, the franchise appears to be going back to the personal approach of the first film, with more focus on Tony Stark, the man inside the machine, and his own desire to move from what he was to what Stark really wants to be.  The trailers look good, although I'm not a fan of the newest armor.  But we'll see. 

The Lone Ranger

I was a big fan of the Lone Ranger, and have longed to see a modern take on the Ranger to this day.  I partially got this with Dynamite Entertainment's Lone Ranger comic book series, which is one of the best comics available on the market to this day.  Gone is the lily white sensibilities of the original radio and TV programs, and instead we get a realistic, harsh look at what the west really was, as well as how a figure like The Ranger and Tonto would have survived in it.  This new film, however, looks to be a compromise between the two, with a darker Ranger, but one not completely given over to the harshness of what the west was.  Armie Hammer looks good as the Ranger, and Johnny Depp looks absolutely insane as Tonto, although I'm loving the look, to be honest.  This film has been pushed back several times, but it looks like it's coming out guns blazing in the summer.  Can't wait.

World War Z

World War Z, based on the book by the same name, comes out near my birthday, and I'm stoked for it.  While I'll be beginning the year with a zombie film, this is the main course that I've been waiting for.  Brad Pitt will be playing Gerry Lane, who is traveling the world to try and find the cure or at the very least, the answer, to a zombie pandemic that is sweeping the world.  I'm currently reading the book right now, and I'm loving it so far.  As such, I'm hoping that this film will meet the challenge of at least coming close to it. 

Despicable Me 2

I loved the original film, which was smart, funny, and had enough sarcasm and cruelty in it to appeal to my rather warped sense of humor.  I haven't seen much for this film, but you better believe I'll be in line to get my share of Gru and the minions once again.

47 Ronin

When I took a course on the History of East Asia, one of the stories that I did read as part of the assignment was the story of the 47 Ronin.  It was a story about how a band of 47 loyal samurai waited and plotted to avenge the death and honor of their master, after three years and much plotting.  There is going to be some liberties taken with the story, as it will center around the story of Kai, a half Japanese, half British warrior, played by Keanu Reeves, rather than the traditional story based on Kuranosuke Oishi.  This has the potential to be a epic movie if it is done correctly, and with a great deal of care and attention to detail.  It also can be a beautiful movie to look at, if the standard shown by The Last Samurai is followed.  Appropriately, as the 47 Ronin story is usually told around that time, it will be released on Christmas Day.  You're damn right I'm going to be there for it.

Sin City:  A Dame To Kill For 

I loved the original Sin City, as it was perhaps one of the only films based on a comic book to come absolutely the closest with it's original source material.  Robert Rodriguez (when not making absolutely shitty kids films) was a student of the original content, and the result of this intense attention to detail and Rodriguez' own knack for creating beautiful violence.  This film has been pushed back several times, but rumor has it that it's finally going to start shooting soon, and that it should be in our hot little hands in the fall.  I'm keeping my fingers crossed, but I'm also not going to get my hopes up.  Rodriguez and Co. have done this before.

The Hunger Games:  Catching Fire

I wasn't the greatest fan of the Hunger Games, and Suzanne Collins' writing style makes me want to dig my eyes out of my skull with a spoon, but the film itself was entertaining enough to make me interested in the sequel.  I'm interested in the concept, in which the surviving contestants from each district are forced to team up and take each other on, and look forward to seeing how the remaining characters from the first film progress from what was an unanticipated ending to the games in the first film. 

Note:  No idea if this is what the poster will be.  Goddamn Internet.

300:  Rise Of An Empire

 The prequel to the film 300, this new entry will instead focus on Themistocles and Artemisia, who took on Xerxes, from the first film, at the Battle of Salamis.  Wikipedia also speculates that the Battle of Marathon may also play a part, which will be cool.  However, this new 300 will also delve into Xerxes' backstory, and explain how he became King.  Not much of the cast from the first film will be returning, but the early production stills and videos on the web make this flick look pretty sweet.  It's very much a man movie, although I suspect that, much as the first, plenty of women will be there for the male eye candy as well.  August is gonna rock.

The Hobbit:  The Desolation Of Smaug

My 2012 ended with a viewing of the first part of The Hobbit, so it's only fitting that 2013 will likely end with the next part of the trilogy.  Anyhoo, I'm looking forward to this, not just to see what some memorable characters such as Smaug, Beorn, as well as seeing how the Battle of Five Armies is depicted, but also seeing how Peter Jackson takes his new emphasis on the rise of the Necromancer in this next portion of the book, which apparently will have a larger role in the events of the film.  It should be a fun ride.

So with that said, 2013 is looking to be a pretty sweet movie season, and my expectations are sky high so far.  I'm hoping that I'll catch enough intriguing indie films that will make the movie going experience to be a rewarding one, and that I'll get what I pay for.

Flick Review: Django Unchained

Django Unchaimed (2012)

Directed By:  Quentin Tarentino
Starring:  Jamie Foxx, Christoph Waltz, Leonardo DiCaprio, Samuel L. Jackson, Kerry Washington, Walton Goggins, Quentin Tarentino

Django Unchained is a movie I've been wanting to see since I saw the bootleg footage of the trailer from San Diego ComicCon.   Being a fan of Tarentino in general, I probably would have seen it anyhow, but I'm also a huge fan of the western genre, which goes back to my childhood.  As such, I made sure to see this flick within a week of it's released.  I had high hopes for it entering the theater.  It did not disappoint.

Django Unchained follows the story of Django (Foxx), a slave who is rescued by a German Bounty Hunter named Dr. King Schultz (Waltz), He reveals that that he freed Django because he can identify a gang that he is hunting, the Brittle Brothers, due to their prior work as overseers at Django’s former plantation. Schultz, who is opposed to slavery personally, comes to an agreement with his new charge; in exchange for his assistance, Schultz will give Django his freedom. The two successfully find their quarry, during which Schultz hears the sad tale of how Django was separated from his wife, Broomhilda (Hilde).  Moved by the story, the two strike an accord; in exchange for Django continuing his working arrangement with Schultz throughout the winter, the two will combine forces in locating Hilde’s current whereabouts.  After a search in the auction records, the duo find that Hilde has been sold to Calvin Candie (DiCaprio), a charming, but loathsome figure who owns one of the largest and heavily fortified plantations in the South.  With the stakes raised, the two must find a way not only to rescue Hilde, but also find a way to ensure that her freedom will be both permanent, and legal, as well as ensuring that they all live to tell the tale.

Just as he did in Kill Bill and Inglorious Basterds, Tarentino pays homage to a genre film in his own manner, the spaghetti western this time around. It’s very much the same as the Clint Eastwood films I remember watching as a kid, from the panoramic and at times desolate environments, the slightly dramatic, slightly cheesy instrumental music, and even down to the ludicrous and slightly hysterical opening scene theme. Some of the music is original, although I did detect the theme from the Clint Eastwood flick, Two Mules For Sister Sara in the film as well.

There is some wonderful dialogue in the film, with plenty of witty back and fourth, incredibly quotable lines, and some wonderfully comedic and dramatic sequences.  It's this complexity and thought that is placed into the writing that is the ultimate hallmark of a Quentin Tarentino flick.  You're guarantee to hear or see something new or unique, and crafted to perfection.

The movie is beautifully shot.  There are some wonderful snow and mountain scenes, and the action sequences are pure Tarentino, filled with bloody, beautiful chaotic action.   The costumes are near accurate for the times, and rather tasteful for the most part (I love Jamie Foxx's hat, and and looking for a similar one as we speak).  The film isn't completely historically accurate, but the movie is a work of fiction, and thus this isn't a major problem.

There are a host of memorable and wonderful characters in the film, but for the sake of simplicity, I’ll only be covering the major players in the film. We’ll start with Jamie Foxx, who plays Django. Apparently, from what I’ve read, Foxx was not the first choice for the role, as Tarentino wanted Will Smith at first to play the lead. However, after viewing the film, and some thought, I think the right actor was casted for the role. Both Foxx and Smith are excellent actors, but Foxx is able to inject a certain menace and humor to the role that I don’t think Smith would have been able to. Foxx is able to come off as slightly arrogant and haughty at a point of the film when his character is incognito. Smith, in my opinion, wouldn’t have been able to do that, as his characters are at best incredibly likable or sorrowful, almost messianic figures. Christoph Waltz returns to Tarentino’s works as Schultz, who is a complete 180 from Waltz’s previous Tarentino role of Hans Landa from Inglorious Basterds. Like Landa, Schultz is a charming, humorous energetic individual who commands your attention when he is on screen. Unlike Landa, Schultz is a kind hearted man with a strong sense of moral justice, which we see from his first encounter with Django to his eventual role in the mission to Candyland. As he did with Landa, Waltz takes the role and knocks it out of the park.

DiCaprio is the role of a villain for one of the few times in his career, and suffice to say, he absolutely rocks it.  DiCaprio looks every bit the part of the Southern Dandy that his character is, but combines this with an almost loathsome charisma and a overbearing smarmy sort of arrogance that makes you almost root for his demise.  And the funny thing is, he's far from the most evil character in the movie.  That goes to Samuel L. Jackson, who plays Candie's head slave, Stephen.  He is so obnoxious, so calculating, and embodied with a unpleasantness that progresses to being outright loathsome by the end of the film that you wish that he would suffer the most excruciating demise possible for him in the depths of Tarentino's mental chamber of horrors.  It takes a great actor to play great villains, and both do it perfectly.

All in all, Django Unchained was worth the wait since I saw that first grainy trailer.  It's arguably Tarentino's second best film (Inglorious Basterds remains my all time favorite), and it definitely holds up to multiple viewings, from what I've heard.  I'd advise you to see it, and if necessary, see it alone if you have to.  It's good enough to withstand the shame of seeing a flick alone.  After the first five minutes, you won't care that you did.

Flick Review: The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey

The Hobbit:  An Unexpected Journey (2013)

The Lord Of The Rings, when it first came out several years ago, was rather revolutionary at the time.  It took source material that was regarded to be difficult to adapt as a live action film, and was able to turn it into a film that not only appealed to the fans of the books, but also to a mainstream audience.  It catapulted several stars, such as Orlando Bloom and Viggo Morenstein, into stardom, won a bunch of awards, including Best Picture for Return Of The King, and made billions of dollars in merchandise and movie sales.  The entire trilogy is regarded to be a modern masterpiece.  But for some of the fans of the original Tolkien novels, the films felt incomplete, because of the omission of the first book, and the prequel of the series, The Hobbit.  It seemed odd to have Bilbo's story, how he got the ring, as well as some of the references made to in during the series, to not be told.  However, these fears were abated when Peter Jackson did announce that he did intend to eventually turn the book into a film.  I just didn't expect the book to be stretched into a trilogy.

The story follows Frodo Baggins' (who makes a cameo in the film) uncle Bilbo, a hobbit who has led an rather quiet life until he encounters the wizard Gandalf The Grey.  Almost unexpectedly, Bilbo finds that he has been enlisted by the wizard into the quest to reclaim the lost Dwarven Kingdom of Erebor, which fell to the dragon Smaug years ago.  Although he initially refuses to participate, Bilbo has a change of heart and joins the company of thirteen dwarves, led by Thorin Oakenshield, the heir to Erebor's throne. The journey is filled with danger, as the company encounters Orcs, Wargs, Goblins, as well as the presence of some dark power rising in the woods, as they attempt to make their way back to the Lonely Mountain to challenge Smaug.  Also, something else lies in the journey, waiting for Bilbo to find it:  a mysterious object that will affect not just Bilbo's life, but also the fate of all of Middle-Earth itself...

For the sake of full disclosure, The Hobbit was actually my favorite of the LOTR series. I enjoyed the characters more, it's entire narrative was contained in a single volume, and had enough visuals to make it a feast for the imagination. The biggest fear I had, going into the film, was what the film makers decided to do in order to extend the narrative. At the most, I thought the Hobbit could be extended into two movies, but not three. As with the Lord Of The Rings, Jackson remedies this by using some of the other supplementary material that exists to help flesh out the story, as well as pursue some of the other plotlines that exist in the original novel.  The most notable of this is the presence of the Necromancer, which was only mentioned in a few passages in the original book, but in the film is now turned into a very real and imminent danger.

Jackson also takes time to tell some backstory as well, going into the story of how the Dwarves were expelled from their homeland, as well as the source of their dislike of the Elves, which is evident at times in the relationship between Gimli and Legolas in Lord Of The Rings.  There are also some other sequences made in order to tie this trilogy in with that of The Lord Of The Rings films.  All of these additions are nice, and do serve a purpose to explain the story.  However, they do tend to drag, which when combined with The Hobbit's own slow start, does result in the film being a bit slow in the beginning.

The visuals in the film, as all LOTR's films, are stunning.  There are some beautiful panoramic shots of the New Zealand countryside.  Rivendale, the Elventown close to the Misty Mountains, returns in all of it's dreamy, ethereal majesty, and a couple of new settings, the Goblin caves as well as Erebor itself, also look absolutely stunning.  Other memorable sequences from the books, such as Bilbo's encounter with Golem, the Dwarves' frantic escape from the Goblins, and finally, the rescue by the Eagles, are all brilliantly done, much as we have come to expect from Jackson's prior work on Tolkien.

The cast is exceptional, also as we have come to expect.  Martin Freeman, who is famous for his wonderful portrayal of Dr. Watson from the BBC Sherlock series, is Bilbo.  Much as his Watson, Freeman's Bilbo comes off as likable, although prone to the occasional awkward outburst.  He's brave, loyal, and has a noble quality to him that makes you take an instant admiration and liking to him.  These are qualities that were similar to the qualities that the four hobbits had in the prior film series, except all rolled into one.  However, Bilbo's character is not strictly contained to the book, as Jackson has Bilbo choosing to be a much more active agent in his fate, as opposed to the book, where he was at first kind of just along for the ride.  This, along with other changes to the narrative that Jackson has added, show Bilbo as being With this change, there result in other additions to the narrative, give Freeman a chance to show Bilbo at his best, and he does so wonderfully.

The dwarf company replaces the Fellowship in this trilogy, and the casting is fairly dead on.  Richard Armitage plays Thorin, who is every bit as serious, noble, stubborn and unyielding as he was in the novel.  Ken Stott plays Balin, who was probably my favorite dwarf of the novel, although he's much older in this movie than he was in my memory.  Other notable dwarves are Fili (Aidan Turner), who will likely be this film's bit of eye candy, much as Legolas was in the prior film, while James Nesbitt plays Bofur, who has a small role, but somewhat fun role as an early friend to Bilbo.  I'm sure all of the other dwarves will have greater roles in time, but at the moment, the movie merely sets up the new universe, while also trying to introduce multiple new characters at one pop.

Returning the series are Ian McKellen, Hugo Weaving, Cathe Blantchett, and Christopher Lee, as Gandalf the Grey, Elrond, Lady Galadriel, and Sarumon, respectively.  Gandalf is what we expect at this point, an advisor to the dwarves, as well as a protector to the hobbits in the journey.  Unlike the Gandalf in the Rings trilogy, this Gandalf is much more of brawler, due to his powers not yet achieving the strength that they would in the later films.  Sarumon and Galadriel are in the film to possibly set up the future conflict with the Necromancer, as well as serve as another tie-in to the prior trilogy, while Elrond's role in the book was minor, but important.

In closing, the first Hobbit film is a great film, and one that you should see.  It does take a while to get started, and it is overly long in some places, but all in all, it's a movie worth the price of the ticket.

Five Of My Favorite Disaster Flicks

Tomorrow is December 21st, 2012, the latest date that doomsday fetishists have circled for our immanent demise (and also, coincidentally enough, my parents' 33rd wedding anniversary.)   Seeing as how the world could either end in a massive technological-zombie apocalypse, or more likely, nothing, I figured I would share five of my favorite post-apocalypse films that I would show for a movie marathon.  Why?  Because it's the end of the world, what else do you have going on tomorrow?

28 Days Later

A modern horror classic, 28 Days Later is, in my opinion, perhaps the most important movie in the zombie genre since the original Night of The Living Dead.   It was revolutionary for it's departure from the zombie as a shuffling, slow, but unrelenting menace, instead portraying the undead hoards (well, infected hoards) as quick moving, violent threats that had to be dealt with quickly.  It's really a beautiful film to look at, with it's grainy, almost dirty look of the film showing Danny Boyle's point of view of post-apocalypse Great Britain.  There are some beautiful scenes: the almost picturesque views of the English countryside, allowing the viewer to momentarily forget the surroundings and circumstances of the film, the view of Jim walking through a empty and devastated London, to the intimate, brutal, and gory zombie battles, in particular the final scene when Jim leads the hoards of infected to rescue Selena and Hannah.  The soundtrack is also top notch, and is perfectly integrated with the film's scenes, in particular the zombie attacks, which gets progressively more frantic and unrelenting as the movie progresses.  All in all, it's a great film, and unlike many zombie films, it has a happy, hopeful ending.

The Day After Tomorrow

The Day After Tomorrow is another disaster film favorite of mine.  Granted, it's completely unrealistic (28 Days Later's zombie scenario is at least plausible, as opposed to God forgetting to pay the heat in this film), but it also knows this and doesn't take itself seriously.  It's highly entertaining, features Emmy Rossum looking incredibly cute, Dennis Quaid bring his brand of rugged awesomeness to the film, as well as Jake Gyllenthall bring youthful enthusiasm along with his brand of mediocre acting (he was great in Jarhead, though).  All in all, if you have time to waste, don't feel like exercising your brain, and just want a popcorn movie, this one's for you.

I Am Legend

I Am Legend is another good post-apocalypse film, loosely based (very loosely)on the comic book of the same name. It’s very much in the vein of 28 Days Later, in which a virus devastates the world, leaving very few survivors (in this case, The Fresh Prince of Bel Air. No word about Carlton or Jazz). We have some great empty city shots, such as the driving through the empty city scene, as well as the mini-golf off of the aircraft carrier shot. Still, even though the source material is deviated from, it’s a good movie, and Will Smith does a fantastic job in it. See the extended cut with the alternate ending, it’s awesome.

The Postman

The Postman gets a lot of grief for being another over the top, over-budgeted Kevin Costner post-apocalypse film. Actually, though, it's not bad. The story isn't great, but it's plausible, and the cast manages to pull it off well enough to give it some believability. Costner's acting is good, and seeing him go from being a lonser to the father of civilization is oddly gratifying. And how can you not hate the Tom Petty cameo as the mayor of the dam city? The only problem I have is, didn't society come back a little too quickly at the end of the film? Other than that, it's not bad, much better than people will give it credit for.

The Book of Eli

he Book of Eli is a great film, centering around Denzel's character Eli, travelling through west coast, as he takes a Bible to Alcatraz to mass produce to the population, but is immediately set upon by raging atheists who want the book's power for their own means.  It's a gritty, dark and dirty film, but one that has some great fight scenes, and some good acting in the form of Denzel Washington and Gary Oldman.  It's another plausible survivalist tale, and a damn good one.

So, hopefully if you are having any end of the world parties, be safe, be responsible, and don't do anything stupid, because remember, if the world doesn't end, and you do something stupid, you're going to have to answer for it on December 22.

Batman On Film: How Could The Nolan Series Continue?

With the rumors that persist about Joseph Gordon-Levitt possibly being in talks to appear in the rumored to be in development Justice League movie as Batman, in a attempt to tie in both the Nolan Franchises into the project, a la The Avengers, it brings up some thoughts again as to how could the Dark Knight Series could possibly continue without it imploding into a spectacular failure as the Burton/Schumacher Franchise did.

For starters, before I address anything, let me say that I think that Gordon-Levitt would be a solid choice to be Batman.  His character, John Blake, was a capable detective, of above average intelligence, tough, determined, had a unflinching sense of justice, and was more than able of handling himself in a fight.  Provided that people are willing to see a somewhat different style of Batman, I think that he could be quite successful 

While it's possible that there could be a completely original storyline done by Warner Brothers as far as how they could continue the narrative of Batman with Blake wearing the mantle of the Dark Knight, Nolan's films do draw upon the vast and diverse amount of comic book source material available.  With that in mind, here are four different comic book approaches on how I could see any potential Dark Knight sequels progressing.

Jim Lee did the kick ass artwork above, btw.

The Batman Beyond Approach

The most popular approach that has been recommended, and probably one of the more obvious on the surface, is the Batman Beyond approach.  Batman Beyond, set in the future, is the story of Terry McGuiness, who more or less inherits the mantle of the Batman after his own father is murdered.  Guided by a elderly, but still sharp Bruce Wayne, McGuiness learns the role on the fly, over time becoming more and more skilled as his predecessor, and becoming a capable Batman in his own right.   It would work well, as Detective Blake, aside from his sharp detective skills and above average intelligence, doesn't show much in terms of the necessary fighting skill that made Bruce Wayne such a formidable opponent.  While that could be acquired, Blake is otherwise more than able for the mental rigors of being Batman, which is quite different from McGuiness for much of the series.  Plus, with Bale having all but said goodbye to the series, and his Bruce Wayne having appeared to be at peace and happy for the first time in ages at the end of the The Dark Knight Rises, it's highly unlikely that this will be the way to go.  This doesn't mean that the Batman Beyond concept should be ignored, as the series is now regarded to be a modern classic.  The writing is still excellent, the animation is on par with modern series', and it still feels innovative and fresh when viewed now.  It has aged aged remarkably well, and could be a successful film series in it's own right if Warner Brothers decided to go in a completely different direction than a reboot.  Keep this series in mind, and in the meantime, check out the series if you've never seen it before.

The Batman: Reborn Approach

In 2009, after a storyarc that resulted in the apparent death of Bruce Wayne, and a citywide fight in a chaotic Gotham City instigated by Jason Todd, Bruce's fallen Robin, in The Battle For The Cowl, the Batman titles returned to find a new Batman and Robin team gracing their pages, with Dick Grayson, the original Robin, now wearing the mantle of the Bat, and Damian Wayne, Bruce's highly skilled, but violent and socially inept son, now as Robin.  Though the pairing didn't last, as Wayne eventually returned and the entire DC Universe was rebotted after the events of Flashpoint, the concept of a different man under the mask was highly successful, and incredibly popular, much more so than DC's past failed attempt at replacing Bruce Wayne in the failed experiment of John Paul Valley as Batman.

This is probably the storyline concept that would make the most sense, as Dick Grayson was a younger man that respected the legacy of his mentor, but at the same time was not afraid to be his own man.  He had the uniform altered to fit his fighting style, as well as the technology in some cases, and had his own methods for dealing with the police and with the Rogue's Gallery (most notably the Joker, who actually disappeared during Grayson's tenure, only to turn up posing as a masked detective in the UK.)  For the concept to work, however, the writers of the film would have to consult with Grant Morrison, who planned the entire sequence of events leading to Wayne's exit and Grayson's elevation.  Morrison also operates more or less along the lines of Nolan (in my opinion) and wouldn't be afraid to find new ways to modernize and twist up the various Batvillians into the series.   This is my pic for how the series would continue.

The Three Ghosts Of Batman Approach

Another concept for possibly introducing Blake into the role of Batman would be another Grant Morrison concept, The Three Ghosts of Batman.  In this storyline, Batman stumbles upon three masked pretenders, all clad in some variation of his costume.  As the story develops, Batman uncovers that a failed Gotham P.D./U.S. Military Project to train three capable Gotham City cops, one of whom would replace him if he were ever to fall in the line of duty.  It was an interesting, and at times, twisted story, especially when you saw that the mental conditioning and trauma that would normally serve as the drive that kept Batman going had essentially driven the three insane.  It would certainly be a good approach to see in a Nolan series extension, in which Blake, newly operating as Batman, is confronted by each of the three pretenders, whom all seek to take on the role that they trained for, but was given to Blake.  The problem is that it would be an incredibly difficult concept to pull off believable, and as such, the only would who might be able to pull off the concept might be Nolan himself.  Because Nolan has moved on from the Dark Knight, that's not happening.

The Dark Knight Strikes Back Approach

The Frank Miller era of Batman isn't a new source for the Nolan Franchise.  Batman Begins was very loosely based on Batman:  Year One, and The Dark Knight Rises has elements from The Dark Knight Returns integrated into it.  So why not go back to the Miller well one more time, and use the base premise of The Dark Knight Strikes Back, in which Batman, after a hiatus and taking time to rebuild his body, arsenal, suit, and train and army of vigilantes, returns to take down the totalitarian regime that is run by Lex Luthor.   Except in this case, we can simplify it to being just Blake, having taken the time to condition his body in a manner similar to his predecessor, as well as rebuild the arsenal by collaborating with Lucius Fox, returns to Gotham to strike back at a new criminal syndicate that has formed in the absence of Batman.  It would still have the realistic, gritty appeal of the Nolan films, as well as allow for the introduction of other classic Bat villains to take part in the mayhem (Killer Croc, Harley Quinn and even The Riddler all lend themselves particularly well for the Nolan treatment).  It works from a certain point of view, but you would have to have a creative enough director and writer to pull it off.

All in all, there are several ways you can go for reintroducing a Batman into the Nolan Universe, if you are creative enough.  There are infinite amounts of possibilities, provided the director is as inventive enough as Nolan was.  It all hinges on Warner Brothers, the parent company of DC Comics, feeling on whether or not they are willing to go with a Batman without Bruce Wayne.  It would take a great deal of courage to do so, but it could be immensely successful if they so choose to go in that direction.

Flick Review: The Perks Of Being A Wallflower

The Perks Of Being A Wallflower

Directed By:  Stephen Chbosky

Starring:  Logan Lerman, Ezra Miller, Emma Watson, Mae Wittman, Paul Rudd, Nina Dobarev, and others

Well, it's been a bit dead around here, mostly due to the madness that usually comes with finals week, but with the week now officially here, I do have some time to kill, so I thought I'd tell you all about a wonderful little movie I saw a week ago. It's been out for a while, and might now still be available in your local multiplex, but if it is, I highly recommend you go catch it.

The Perks of Being A Wallflower is based off of the novel of the same name by Stephen Chbosky. It was published back in 1999, and the film certainly looks the part, with the fashions, music, and settings looking the part. However, it refreshingly go overboard with trying to recreate the period, but goes with just enough of an atmosphere to make it authentic, without making it look cliche. Surprisingly enough, the novel was published by MTV, but you'll be hard pressed to find anything of the mind numbing obtuseness that makes up modern MTV.   Chbosky also directs the film, which means the film's characters, narratives, messages, and storyline stay close to how the author intended it, a true rarity.

The film follows Charlie (Logan Lerman), a quite, intelligent, observant, thoughtful kid who is about to begin his freshman year. However, Charlie himself has his own mental burdens aside from the usual teenage issues, having lost his best friend recently to suicide, and still mourning the loss of his beloved aunt, whose death he still hasn't gotten over. It’s implied that he has sought some counseling over it, but still is troubled by both events. He begins the year a loner, lacking in basic social skills, and treated by the student population and his older sister with a mixture of disdain and occasional torment by the usual douchebags that every high school tends to have.

 This changes when Charlie introduces himself to Patrick (Ezra Miller), an outgoing, hilarious and openly gay student from his shop class, and subsequently falls in with his group of misfits which include Patrick’s stepsister Sam (Emma Watson), a intelligent, music loving girl with a bit of a slutty reputation. Charlie begins to escape his shell little by little as his newfound friends expose him to new and engaging things, including hip bands, the Rocky Horror Picture Show, drugs, and being a part of a group. However, things get complicated over time as Charlie finds struggles to cope with his increasing love for Sam, the weight of his observations about emotional attachment and people, and his own past traumas beginning to re-emerge.

The cast is excellent, and mesh well with one another, giving Charlie’s two families a sense of realism that is natural. We’ll start with Emma Watson, who is the biggest name here due to the Harry Potter films. Watson is endearing as Sam, the passionate 80’s loving emo music nut, something she shares in common with Charlie. However, she is overshadowed by several of the other cast members at times, particularly by Miller. Watson pulls off the American accent well, with only one or two slip ups. Ezra Miller, who plays Charlie’s eccentric, knowledgeable, gay and supportive best friend, rocks this film. He’s charismatic and your eyes instantly fix on him whenever he’s on screen. Some of the best one liners throughout the film are made by him, and he instantly turns every situation into a barrel of laughs, even though he does have his own insecurities that he hides beneath the surface.

Logan Lerman plays the lead as Charlie, and in my opinion, is outstanding. He gives Charlie real intelligence and thoughtfulness, as well as giving the early scenes of him as the shy outcast real believability. He also gives him a sneaky sense of humor, which is almost on par with the outrageousness of Patrick. All in all, he’s great, and a capable strong lead. In my opinion, Lerman seems to have found his niche as an actor. He always seemed miscast in the more action oriented roles like Percy Jackson and The Three Musketeers that he played earlier in his career. But as a thoughtful, cerebral type of actor, he shines.

The rest of the acting is solid, with some big names backing up the kid leads. Paul Rudd is lovable as the English Teacher/Mentor to Charlie. He’s both enough of an authority figure for a student to look up to, while also enough of a confidant for a student to confide in. He’s the English teacher we all wish we had, but very few of us got (I was lucky enough to have two, Mr. Flickenger and Mrs. Avila, respectively.) Mae Whitman, from Parenthood fame, plays Mary Elizabeth, a member of Patrick's group who is sarcastic and pushy, and yet has a softer and insecure side that she keeps hidden. Nina Dobrev, who plays Charlie's sister, Candace, gives a good, but not great performance of a sister who is self consumed in her own problems, but does have a love for her brother that emerges as the film passes. Dylan McDermott plays Charlie’s father, and does a good job, playing a man who genuinely loves and wants to help his son, but is not sure of just how to do so. Even the master of gore effects, Tom Savini, has a small cameo role as an irascible shop teacher that is memorable for the comedic foil that he provides with Patrick.

The music is excellent, bringing back fond memories of the days when friends used to be able to share mixtapes of various music on cassette. The soundtrack features a good mix of 90’s bands, with some classics tossed in for some flavor. The cinematography is good too, giving some great visuals for some of the more memorable moments, such as the tunnel scenes.

However, what I really like about the film is that it feels real, and not staged or fake. The interaction between the group is real and not forced, as are the different moments of awkwardness for the more romantic moments. It also perfectly captures the angst of having a crush on a cool, pretty girl who dates assholes, but without the creepiness that movies usually convey with it. It also has the best quote about why people get involved with people that they shouldn't or don’t deserve to be.

It also genuinely captures high school, in ways that most films fail to do (American Pie and She’s All That being some of the worst offenders.) It captures how tough high school can be for kids that are introverted, or outcasts, as well as the importance of having a loyal, devoted group of friends of the period. It covers how hard it can be to be a gay kid that has not yet come out, as well as how difficult life can be for one that has. It also gives the kids a genuine sense that they don’t all have it figured out, in spite of some outward confidence that they may. But the best part of the film may be that it’s also inspirational from the standpoint of being able to have the courage to open yourself to the world, for the good and bad. It also gives a genuine hopeful message that one can move on from tragedy, or from past traumas that can cripple a person if not dealt with, and that one can lead a happy and fruitful life. So, I highly recommend that you see this movie. It’s funny, it’s inspirational, as well as sweet, quirky and different in all the right ways. It’s a masterpiece, with enough going for it to perhaps even be timeless. I love it.

Flick Review: Lincoln

Lincoln (2012)

Directed By:  Steven Speilberg

Starring:  Daniel day-Lewis, Sally Field, Joseph Gordon-Levitt, Tommy Lee Jones, and many more

I saw this movie over the Thanksgiving weekend, so I thought I'd share my thoughts about it with you all.

Lincoln is based partially on the book Team of Rivals, written by Doris Kearns Goodwin.  The book itself is an excellent, though lengthy read, so Spielberg decided to focus specifically on the machinations and behind the scenes work that Lincoln and his cabinet undertook to pass the 13th Amendment.  The pressure is on as Lincoln must try and pass the Amendment as soon as possible, with Republican support for the bill conditional at best, and Democratic support difficult, but weak in certain areas.  Lincoln, throughout the film, must wrestle with being able to convince his supporters and his cabinet to support his cause, while at the same time having to live with the pressures coming from not just the bill, but also the rising cost of lives from the Civil War.

Spielberg did an excellent job of choosing the elements of the book that would make the movie, as well as doing something different when it came to not just the subject of Lincoln, but also of the Civil War.  For starters, Spielberg deliberately does not show much of the actual war itself, although it is mentioned many times over the course of the film.  The only real glimpses of it are at the beginning, with the soldiers marching out to deployment, and at the end, when Lincoln himself tours a battlefield on the way to meet General Grant, giving him a full glimpse of the scale of the entire conflict.    Spielberg also makes mention of the assassination of Lincoln, but instead chooses to go in another direction for showing the shock and horror of the moment when the news breaks that Lincoln has been shot.  It's highly effective, and heart wrenching at the same time.

There are some really great visuals in the movie, the best of is Lincoln's final scenes in the White House as he exits to head to Ford's Theater, where we seem the final glimpse of Lincoln: the Man before he becomes Lincoln: the Ideal.  Another great scene is Lincoln giving a speech in the Union Telegraph office, which goes well for all except for an overly serious Secretary of War Stanton.  It's really one of the highlights of the film. That same office would later be the sight of one of the greatest scenes from the movie, as Lincoln broods over a possible choice that would change the course of the war, with the office dimly lit, and Lincoln looking larger than life, but strained and worn, as if the past four years had eaten away at his being.

What helps make this movie go, and probably makes it, is the casting.  The senators are all well cast, although I did agree that the two principal senators of the democratic side came off a little too much like the evil Colonel Sanders type of slave owners for my taste.  However, the rest of the senate is well casted, with the different factions, as well as those senators that are on the fence as far as their beliefs or desires regarding slavery, all well acted.  The scene in which the Amendment is voted on is a riveting watch, and it's wonderful to see each Senator, including the fence sitters, vote and their expressions and reactions as they make their historic choice.  There is one particular senator that stands out:  Tommy Lee Jones as Senator Thaddeus Stevens.  Jones is his usual cantankerous and fiery self as the Republican Senator that believed in true equality for all races, and was not satisfied with the Amendment as it was, but would support it nonetheless.  And yet, despite his fire and anger and crankiness, you get a sense of genuine goodness and a strong sense of moral justice from Stevens, and you get a true reason for why he fought so hard for true equality at a time when the ground was still tough and hard.  

Lincoln's cabinet was well casted as well, but I'll focus on the two chief leads, Secretaries Seward and Stanton, played by David Strathairn and Bruce McGill.  Seward was the chief mover and shaker, and did a lot of Lincoln's (and later Johnson's) dirty work when it came to wrangling support for his policies.  However, you get a sense of true loyalty to the President, as Seward was always conscious to make sure that the President stayed as far away as possible.  Stanton is fairly accurate a serious man with a dedication to his duty, although I do wish it did make mention of the fact that Stanton was devastated at Lincoln's death and reportedly wept bitterly during the President's final hours.  It was Stanton himself that launched himself into the quest to capture John Wilkes Booth (which is told in the film The Conspirator, also a great film), although his now famous quote of "Now he belongs to the ages" does make the cut.

Sally Field did a solid job as Mary Todd Lincoln, showing herself to be a devoted wife, and a charming First Lady when need be, but also was able to show off some of Mary Todd's mental instability that she is known for, most especially when her son Robert (played well during his limited screen time by Joseph Gordon-Levitt) decides to enlist, and is angered at her husband's seemingly callous acceptance of it.  It's a great scene, and one in which it shows the Lincolns were just as human as we are, as opposed to the stereotypes of the Saint and the Madwoman that we have seen over the years.  Sadly, Field is outshined by Gloria Reuben, who plays her maid Elizabeth Keckley.  She gives such a dynamic performance, and gives such a nobility and grace to a character that may otherwise be overlooked, but did in fact have an long lasting relationship with the First Lady that endured with time.  Her two greatest scenes, one with Lincoln and one in the Senate, are more than enough to get her some run for Best Supporting Actress, in my opinion.

Which brings me to Daniel Day-Lewis, who plays the films namesake.   In my opinion, no matter how great the casting, you can never truly hope to recreate a person as they were, as they lived, as they breathed.  It's impossible, and no matter how critics can try and convince you otherwise, its impossible.  However, I do think that it's possible for an actor to at least capture the essence of the character that they are playing, that vital core of traits, speech, look and feel that makes that person, for that period of time, that character's shadow.  And Day-Lewis does that.  You get the feeling that you are watching at least the essence of Lincoln, in all of his greatness, all of his flaws, and all of that dry wit and ever present melancholy that seemed to haunt him in life, and most especially in his presidency.  It's probably the best portrayal of Lincoln to be done on film (although I enjoyed Benjamin Walker's portrayal in Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter), and perhaps even the closest we'll ever get to seeing what Lincoln might have been like in life.

All in all, it's a fantastic film, one that will likely be up for several awards come awards season, and probably an Oscar for Day-Lewis.  But even more than that, it's a look into one of the darker sides of our nation's history, from a different point of view than what is typically shown on screen.  And it provides a bit of a window into the life of one of our favorite and most fascinating people in our nation's history.

Battle Royale As A Show Would Work Rather Well

Well, the news coming from the weekend was that the CW was in talks about turning Battle Royale into a television series.  While there are questions as far as to just how true to the original novel that the CW would stay, or even if they know what the book is about, turning Battle Royale into a TV series rather than a movie actually would be much more effective medium of translating the book into a visual presentation of the subject matter.  Here's why:

Allows For Fully Fleshed Narrative

The original book, Battle Royale, is not a small book by any means.  It's a rather large and detailed tome that covers the horror and depths of the central characters, and the wider world of the island, within it's handsome red cover.  And while the original narrative has been covered twice in both the movie and in it's subsequent manga, the movie, despite it's attempt to cover almost all of the main events that take place within the book, does have to cut corners.  As Stephen King once said about his truncated version of The Stand, and I'm paraphrasing this from memory, it's like a classic car, but with the paint and chrome sanded off.  It goes somewhere, but it isn't, you know, boss!  And that's how I felt about Battle Royale: The Movie.  The basic narrative of the story is there, with it's highlights, but a lot of the other little details that help develop the book, and allow for what I believe is a more enjoyable experience are missing.  A TV series, while lower budget, does allow for a fantastic medium from which to tell a story.

My favorite show at the moment, Breaking Bad, while blessed with excellent writing, wonderful characters, and great visuals, would still be an incredible movie.  However, it would also not nearly be the gripping thrill ride that I experience week to week if everything was forced to be condensed into a three hour flick.  And while this isn't a bashing of movies by any means, it is an admission that movies, while wonderful, are limited in terms of how much they are allowed to bring out and flesh out their subject material.

Allows For Focus On All Characters

Another great feature of the Battle Royale novel is that every student in the doomed class is given their own moment in the sun, whether it is their own portion of a chapter, or enough of a mention in the narrative that you do get at least a small piece of the person's essence, just enough for you to feel a slight twinge of pain or slight amusement whenever you see or feel that person die in the novel.  And while each and every student is shown whenever they've assumed their end in the film, you don't get that sort of emotional experience that you get in the book.  In the end, they're simply just mindless numbers.

However, in a television series, you would not only be able to show more than just mindless death, but also genuinely get to know each person, get the gist of each student in the class, and be able to mourn and honestly feel an emotional attachment to the characters that we see on screen.  But this doesn't just extend to the characters that are involved in what is called "The Program" in the novel, but also those who are in charge of the event.  From the average soldier that is charged with simply guarding the main fortress, to the parent who has suddenly realized that they will likely never see their child again, to the average man on the street, a television series would be able to weave each of the elements into the semi-voyueristic nature of Battle Royale, allowing for not just great story telling, but also a great way of advancing a narrative.

Allows For Exploration Of Entire Battle Royale Universe

The manga is even more expansive than the novel, with a great deal of original content covering both the characters backstories, as well as the wider world outside of the Program.  It makes for a richer piece of story telling, and allows for the creation of newer characters that don't have a stake in the actual program per se, but could in the future, whether they are in favor or opposed to the purpose of the Program itself.

Going back to Breaking Bad for a moment, the center of the show's universe is essentially the adventures of Walter White and Jesse Pinkman as the two attempt to survive their very dark world of meth cooking.  However, the show is not purely about them, as it often takes detours exploring the other characters of the show, whether it is the struggles of loyal wife Skyler White, the personal vendetta of Gus Fring, the various misadventures of Jesse's fellow band of stooges, to the machinations of Mike The Cleaner and Saul Goodman.  It's more than just the two central characters.  It's the entire ensemble and the whole wide universe that makes the show what it is.  And turning Battle Royale into Battle Royale: The Series would give the narrative such a canvas from which to work.

Allows For Multiple Classes Over The Course of Several Seasons

Finally, what a television series allows is for a series of multiple classes that find themselves victims of the program.  This wouldn't be something along the lines of Saved By The Bell, where we are forced to watch a class over the course of six or seven seasons as the gradually whack each other, but we are instead treated to a single class each season, with the potential for a larger conspiracy that seeks to end the slaughter by the end of the show's run.  It's an absolutely fantastic plot element, and keeps the central theme of the show going, but without the loss of a advancing, overarching narrative that will eventually come to a head in the final seasons.  Overall, it's perfect.

In the end, it all depends on who is placed in charge of the show, how willing the CW is willing to embrace Battle Royale's beautiful chaotic core, and how willing they are to choose not to try and adapt it toward a teen or tween audience (as many of the CW's shows are).  If done right, Battle Royale could be an instant classic.  But that's still a big If.

Movie Review: The Dark Knight Rises

Before I begin, again, I'd like to send a moment to honor those that were senselessly murdered in last night's showing in Aurora, Colorado.  If you have anger, despair, or some other emotion that inspires you to even toe that line where you would do something, Stephen King said it best:  do something constructive.  Don't be an asshole.

And now, the review.

Synopsis (as spoiler free as I can make it, using the elements from the trailers):  Eight years have past since the end of the events of The Dark Knight.  Gotham has settled down into a relative peace.  Thanks to the decision to sacrifice The Batman in order to protect the work of Harvey Dent, Commissioner Gordon has virtually wiped out crime in Gotham, although the decision to do so weighs heavily on his soul.  As for the Batman himself, he has mostly become a memory, and urban legend.

All that changes with the arrival of Bane, a former member of the League of Shadows, who arrives to Gotham to essentially perform the same task that Ras Al Ghul desired to accomplish: Gotham's downfall.  Bane strikes at the fragile foundation that this peaceful Gotham has been built upon, and as the entire structure falls, and chaos reigns over the city, the city must once again turn to the protector that they once shunned, to try and save Gotham City, one last time.

Thoughts:   The Dark Knight Rises (DKR for the rest of the review), already was behind the eight ball with the expectations heaped upon it from the raging success of The Dark Knight (DK).  However, the film didn't shrink in the face of such stress, and rather than produce something that was merely average (Batman Forever, Terminator 3), or something that was absolutely steaming crap (Spider-Man 3, The Matrix Revolutions), DKR instead elevated itself to the rare platform of being a third film that successfully concluded the narrative with all the style and substance of it's predecessors, while leaving the audience feeling satisfied and saddened that the series is over, and wanting more.

The film draws upon several different Batman story arcs, mainly Knightfall and The Dark Knight Returns, with some elements worked in from No Man's Land and A Lonely Place of Dying worked into the mix.  However, these are only the most notable of the story arcs, as Nolan gathers elements from all of the Batman universe to create this movie that feels familiar, and yet is uniquely original.  There are even a few elements that are quite sneaky, but once you see them, you wonder how you missed them in the first place.

There are a great many themes at play in this film, but the two main ones being the importance of truth and loyalty. In the case of the former, the decision to hide the actions of both Harvey Dent and Rachel Dawes continue to be felt, and both still have a looming presence over the beginning of the movie. The consequences of the creation of their near sainthood weigh heavily on the two caretakers of the lie, Jim Gordon and Alfred Pennyworth. In both cases, the law of unintended consequences takes effect, as a very different outcome surrounds the original good intention of the action, and in both cases, the caretakers wonder if it was really worth it. As for loyalty, that also plays a large role in the film, as the relationships surrounding much of the early characters of DKR are ambiguous, and often come off as relationships of convenience rather than true loyalties. Only when times truly get dire do we see the intricate web of personal connections among the two different factions, including some that we never really do see coming.

Christopher Nolan does another dynamite job in this film. The visuals are stunning, maintaining that dark, gritty feel that has come to be identifiable with Chris Nolan, while also showing various other sequences meant to portray the depth of despair, the opulence of wealth, and the dark shroud in which the Batman operates all help contribute to the rich tapestry of the film. The music is fantastic, as can only be expected from Hans Zimmer, who hands down is probably one of a handful of movie composers that can legitimately tap into the soul of a film to draw out its inner melody.

Christian Bale reprises his role as Batman, making him the only member of what I believe George Clooney has dubbed “The Brotherhood” (I’m assuming from this interview on Grantland, linked here), to have portrayed the role for three films. And he certainly delivers, giving a solid performance in both halves of his role. And it also brings to mind a question explored somewhat in the comics, but never in the movies until the Nolan franchise, the physical and mental cost of being Batman. In his zeal to assume his ideal, Wayne has sacrificed and been drained of so much of himself, that at some point, there is a breaking point where he will turn up empty.

Anne Hathaway, who received a lot of scrutiny over her casting as Catwoman, delivers in her part of the film, being a sassy, morally ambiguous, that hides the shards of her humanity deep within herself in order to be able to do her job. Her action sequences are also well done, and while the outfit itself isn’t quite what one would have expected when the announcement of the role was released, it’s quite appropriate for what it’s original intended role was. Overall, she did a good job, and while I’m not quite ready to crown her as the greatest Catwoman ever, she just might be (especially considering the competition.)

Bane is excellently portrayed by Tom Hardy, and is an upgrade to the abomination that was placed onscreen in Batman And Robin.  He is close to what he was in the comic source material, that of a brute, but highly intelligent criminal, cut from the same cloth as Batman, but rather than sewn into the shroud of justice, he instead was sewn into the standard of evil.  He also symbolizes another theme in the film:  class warfare.  Without giving away too much, Bane shows little empathy for those that are in power or wealthy, and has no problems deposing and possibly disposing of them.  That said, I will admit, that it is in this department that there is some weakness in the film, but only from the standpoint that it was nearly going to be impossible to top Heath Ledger as the Joker, and almost any villain, despite how well he is implemented and created, would see slightly dimmer in the wake of that performance.


The supporting cast delivers as well, which is one of the strengths of the series that cannot be overstressed.  I loved Michael Caine in this movie, who shows again all the fatherly love that Alfred in the modern comics feels for Bruce.  In a way, you feel for him, as he knows that he cannot stop Bruce from donning the cowl again at some point, and likely wonders just how much longer he can continue to indulge Bruce's urge to place himself in danger, knowing that each night, there is a chance that the son that he never had will never return.  Likewise, Morgan Freeman returns, and again, serves as not just a trusted armorer, but also a capable operative of the Batman when necessary. There are even a few characters that you may recognize from previous films, which solicit a variety of reactions, including one that will make you laugh your ass off once you recognize him.


Gary Oldman and Joseph Gordon-Levitt also are solid in this film, and form a solid tandem.  Oldman is solid as always, and while I can't elaborate too much on his actions or role, let's just say that he continues to amaze as a man who is just as devoted and shackled to his city as the Batman himself.  Levitt is a welcome addition to the series, showing the melding of the two philosophies of both his mentors.  He's rapidly developing into one of the better rising stars of Hollywood, and I look forward to seeing his work that will be coming in the near future (I'm already making plans to see Looper.)

It was also neat to see the different technologies from the prior two films worked in.  While I'm not all that enthused about the design of the newest addition, the Bat, it does fit in with the function over style motif of the series, and, I will admit, it was an incredibly useful addition.  I loved seeing the return of both the Tumbler and The Batpod, and even what appeared to be the return of the Batman Begins batsuit, although due to sleep deprivation and a caffeine binge, I'm not certain if it was.

All in all, it was a worthy conclusion to the Dark Knight series, making it the rare trilogy in which all three of the films are legitimately solid movies in their own right. It is the final stanza of Nolan's grand opus, and in the end, we are left pleasurably in awe and probably better for the experience.  All in all, if more movies were made with the intent of telling a fantastic story, with all the quality writing and style that is available, maybe people wouldn't be so jaded with Hollywood.  It'll never happen, though, which makes these cinematic treasures all the more valuable.


Okay, Minor Spoiler:  There is no post credit scene, so go ahead and leave.

Batman On Film: From West To Bale

Some quick Batman film thoughts about each one of the current flicks before the marathon starts....

Batman:  The Movie
Batman At The Helm:  Adam West
Other Cast Members Of Note:  Burt Ward
FourWorld Review:  Classic, although highly stupid
Thoughts:  Honestly, if I were to sum up Batman the Movie, it would be something like this.  It's essentially everything that was both good and bad about the original series.  It was fun as all hell, campy, with no real dangerous or threatening characters.  It had bat gadgets galore, including the infamous shark repellant, and the campiest of campy acting ever assembled.  It's very much a time capsule of not just the series, but also of what comics were at the time: tame, fun, and non-threatening.

Batman
Batman At The Helm:  Michael Keaton
Other Cast Members Of Note:  Jack Nicholson, Kim Basinger
Four Word Review:  Trailblazing Modern Comic Classic
Thoughts:  Who'd a thought that Tim Burton could have not just successfully created a comic book movie, but also virtually wrote the template of how to make one.  While it's not a completely faithful translation, it is a great movie.  The cast is excellent, with Keaton playing a reclusive jericurled Bruce Wayne that fights crime as Batman on the weekends.  That said, the big issue I do have is that Batman does not kill, which Keaton's Batman clearly has no problems doing so.  Jack Nicholson is the outgoing criminal psychopath who is charming and deadly at the same time.  Gotham City is beautiful, art deco fantasy city that perfectly allows for the characters to run around.  And it has the greatest Batmobile of the film series, one which would replace it's predecessor as the template of the comics Batmobile.

Batman Returns
Batman At The Helm:  Michael Keaton
Other Cast Members Of Note:  Danny DeVito, Michelle Pfeiffer, Christopher Walken, PeeWee Herman
Four Word Review:  Underrated, but solid sequel.
Thoughts:  Burton returned to Gotham, continuing the saga of the universe he created.  Keaton continues to mind the cowl, and does well.  It took some balls to try and translate the Penguin into a main villain, which still is a problem in comics to this day, but DeVito's portrayal is a treat, showing a tragic figure that doesn't garner much sympathy because he is a truly evil bastard.  Pfeiffer is also excellent, portraying the Catwoman as a femme fatale that would probably make love to you in the corner of the alleyway just as like as she would slit your throat.  This is a much more violent movie, and is a lot more frightening than it's predecessor.  In fact, this is probably more of what you would expect from a Tim Burton film than Batman.  That said, while it was panned and not as profitable when it first came out, history is very kind to this film.

Batman Forever
Batman At The Helm:  Val Kilmer
Other Cast Members Of Note:  Jim Carrey, Tommy Lee Jones, Nicole Kidman, Chris O'Donnell
FourWord Review:  Better Than You Think
Thoughts:  Because of the darkness of Batman Returns, Burton stepped aside for Joel Schumacher, who took the series to a new direction.  The focus was turned to a mainstream audience, while whoring out plenty of bat merch.  Keaton left the role, disliking the direction, but Kilmer was a worthy successor, whose Batman was honestly a lot closer, though less dark, to the original comic source material.  The focus of the movie moved toward the campy, paying a sort of indirect homage to the 60's Batman series.  O'Donnell was an adequate Robin, not outstanding, but served his purpose.  Carrey stole the show, portraying a manic genius, although I do think that his master plan could have used some tweaking.  Jones was awful, and shows that sometimes even the best actors can't turn a turd into a diamond.  This film also has the ugliest of the Batmobiles, and it's mercifully destroyed toward the end.  I also hated how they decided to call into question Batman's purpose for being Batman, as there was no need for it.  I could have done without the Bat nipples, and hated the departure of Burton's Art Deco Gotham and the arrival of Schumacher's combination of Tokyo and Vegas, with some Ecstasy and LSD>  Still, it is an entertaining film. although the trilogy should have ended there.

Batman and Robin
Batman At The Helm:  George Clooney
Other Cast Members of Note:  Chris O'Donnell, Arnold Schwartzenegger, Alicia Silverstone, Uma Thurman
Four Word Review:  Fucking Flaming Shit Pile
Thoughts:  This is just a terrible writing, with too many plot lines, all of them under developed, detestible characters, and too many characters and villains.  Clooney's Batman could have been something, but instead he was given terrible writing and is also a bystander in his own movie.  O'Donnel and Silverstone are terrible, and while I would give them the benefit of the doubt just because of how rotten the writing is, it did kill their careers.  Schwartzenegger is terribly miscast as Mr. Freeze, and probably should have just been Bane from the beginning.  Bane himself is strictly cast as dumb muscle, which is an injustice to the character.  Uma Thurman sucks as Posion Ivy, losing all of her Pulp Fiction cred and being cast into show biz limbo until Kill Bill.  All in all, this is really just an extended commercial for Bat merch and it killed the franchise.  Things could have been so much better, but instead, greed and half assed effort took over. 

Batman Begins
Batman At The Helm:  Christian Bale
Other Cast Members Of Note:  Michael Caine, Liam Nielson, Morgan Freeman, Gary Oldman, Ken Watanabe, Katie Holmes, Cillian Murphy
Four Word Review:  Fantastic First Film Effort
Thoughts:  Rather than try and resurrect the basis of the original franchise, Christopher Nolan instead attempted to do a realistic and grounded film, completely trying to do a actual film with a superhero than a superhero movie.  Bale is the best of the Batmen, and is the closest to come to the comic source material.  The visuals are stunning, and the writing and symbolism are off the charts fantastic.  All in all, this is how comic movies should be made, and it looks like the studios took notice.

The Dark Knight
Batman At The Helm:  Christian Bale
Other Cast Members Of Note:  Heath Ledger, Michael Caine, Morgan Freeman, Gary Oldman, Aaron Eckhart, Maggie "That Thing!!!!" Gyllenthall
Four Word Review:  Rare Sequel Surpassing Orignal
Thoughts:  Nolan outdoes himself, giving Batman a threat that is his equal.  Multiple storylines, but unlike Batman and Robin, all are developed well and come to a satisfying resolution.  Again, the visuals are stunning, and the action sequences are top notch.  The writing is brillant, and there are acting gems to be had everywhere.  Ledger is the talk of this film, giving his Joker a sense of pure and insane deadliness, while Bale gives a solid performance of a man who is torn between his desires and his duty.  The cast is wonderful, and even The Thing is tolerable in her scenes, although I wish that Holmes had returned (Fuck You, Tom Cruise).  Eckhart does the job that Jones couldn't or wouldn't, and gives Two-Face that sense of humanity and pity that he has in the original comic source.  All in all, it's not just a great superhero movie, it's a great film period, and should have gotten more awards attention than it did. 

The Dark Knight Rises
Batman At The Helm:  Christian Bale
Other Cast Members of Note:  Gary Oldman, Tom Hardy, Anne Hathaway, Michael Caine
Four Word Review and Thoughts:  Coming soon......
. 

Third Movies in a Trilogy are a mixed bag

With The Dark Knight Rises coming out in two days, I was thinking about the history of three movies, and how they typically turn out.  So, with that said, here are some thoughts of some three movies that I have seen.  It's not at all comprehensive, as there are some notable ones (Indiana Jones, The Transporter, Nightmare on Elm Street, and others) that aren't listed.  But, let's take a look, and see what will can possibly be an outcome for the Dark Knight Rises.

Ten Of My Favorite Good Bad Movies

While I'm on the topic of movies, there are a special category of movies that exist.  A category of movies that are simply so bad, so ludicrous, that you just can't help but watch them.  These movies are just so cheesy, so poorly acted, that they're just awesome.  It never fails.  You're flicking through the channels, probably looking for something good to watch, you pass a channel on your way to History, or some Adult Swim goodness, and bam!, you're fucked.  All good sense goes out the window, along with the two hours plus commericals, and you feel entertained, though slightly dirty at the end of the experience.  What's worse, you might actually own some of these abominations on DVD, simply because, to be honest, you love that awful movie, although you'll never actually make the effort to pop it into your DVD player or Netflix.  It's simply there in the event that you do. 

With that in mind, here are ten of my favorite awful movies, in no particular order.

All images from Wikipedia, BTW.

Over The Top

Made:  1987
Directed By:  Menahem Golan
Actors Of Note:  Sylvester Stallone.
Plot, Such As It Is:  Stallone stars as Lincoln Hawk, a truck driver who arm wrestles on the side to earn some extra coin.  At the request of his dying ex-wife, he picks up his estranged son to spend time with him as they cruise across the US.  Father and son bond, but arrive too late to see Hawk's wife before she passes away.  Hawk's rich asshole former father in law, Jason Cutler, refuses to allow Hawk to keep his grandson, and after saying goodbye, Hawk heads to Vegas to compete in the World Arm Wrestling Championship.  During the tourney, Cutler offers to essentially buy his son off of him with the promise of half a million and a new semi, and Hawk's son finds out about his grandfather being an asshole by his repeated actions to drive a wedge between his parents and himself.  During perhaps one of the most constepated arm wrestling scenes you'll ever see, Hawk's son arrives at the crucial moment, giving Hawk the needed boost to win.  Father and son reconcile, grandfather gets out of the way, and all live happily ever after.
Why I Like This Movie:  It's essentially Rocky, but less athletic.  That said, it's so honestly cheesy and poorly acted, with characters that are essentially no more developed other than the cardboard cutout chick at the Circle K, that it's just awesome.  Where else can you see life and death stakes on arm wrestling, as well as Stallone performing Hawk's shifting hand grip, which was the clear give away that, oh shit, Hawk's gonna put this away!  It's a stupid movie, but damn it, I'll still watch the hell out of this movie if only because I'll laugh my ass off at half of the "dramatic sequences."
On a side note, this probably won't be the last of these movies starring Stallone, who has made a career of appearing in absolute horse shit movies, some of which are just simply bad.  Rhinestone bad!

Idle Hands

Made:  1999
Directed By:  Rodman Flender
Actors Of Note:  Jessica Alba, Seth Green, and really, that's about all you need to know.
Plot, Such As It Is:  Essentially, Anton is the typical teenage stoner, who by some odd trick of the universe, discovers that his right hand has become possessed.  Anton engages in a string of murders against his will, though he does end up starting a relationship with his cute neighbor Molly (Alba).  After severing his hand to protect himself, the hand escapes Anton's prison (his microwave) and proceeds to go on a rampage.  Eventually, the hand is defeated (humerously by getting it stoned before it is killed with a knife), and Anton lives happily ever after with Molly.
Why I Like This Movie:  To be honest, this is an absolutely stupid movie.  I've only seen this movie the whole way through once or twice.  The writing is horrid, it's premise is too stupid to work for a horror movie, and it doesn't have enough cheap yucks or zany humor for it to work as a stoner movie.  Really, there is only one reason why I even bother with this movie in spurts.  And that reason is Jessica Alba, who is quite the cutie in this film.  If I recall, the past and lamer teenage version of myself had a major crush on her at the time (I was one of the few that watched Dark Angel religiously) before I realized that she really couldn't act worth a damn.  In any case, Idle Hands makes my list simply because, really, Alba is almost worth the price of admission in this movie.  Not full weekend price, but the matinee price at the most.

Death Race

Made:  2008
Directed by:  Paul W. S. Anderson
Actors Of Note:  Actually, some solid actors here with Jason Statham, Joan Allen, Tyrese Gibson, Ian McShane, Natalie Martinez, David Carradine, and the dude from Machete.
Plot, Such As It Is:  Jensen Ames, a former professional race car driver accused of murdering his wife, is sent to compete in the Death Race pay per view event as the wildly popular driver Frankenstein, who had died in the previous race, in exchange for his freedom.  After some pretty awesome racing combat sequences, Ames discovers that he was framed, plans his escape with the other remaining driver, and rides off into the sunset.
Why I Like This Movie:  Yes, it's stupid, and it lacks the B movie violence and gore (and Sylvester Stallone) that the original had, but for the most part, there is one factor that makes this movie a favorite and a must watch:  Jason Statham.  Statham is one of my favorite actors to watch, and while he does a great deal of tough guy work, he is a fairly good serious actor too, in the limited amount of serious work he does.  Most of his work is entertaining, and worth watching, with the exception of the Crank series, which is honestly too stupid to even be considered good by bad movie standards.  In any case, Death Race has an enjoyable amount of violence, the incredibly delectable Natalie Martinez, and, while shallow, doesn't attempt to be anything more than good fun entertainment.  It's a action flick you'll never have to turn your brain on to enjoy.  Just sit back, order a pizza, and pop open a beer.  It's a couple of hours of great fun.  Spike usually runs it about once a week.

Punisher:  War Zone

Made:  2008
Directed By:  Lexi Alexander
Actors Of Note:  Ray Stevenson is the lead, and the only guy that did anything signficant is Wayne Knight, better known as Neuman from Seinfeld.
Plot, Such As It Is:  Frank Castle, the Punisher, essentially just murders his way though the mob, as penance for accidentally murdering a police officer.  Yeah, the plot is paper thin here, enough so that, really, I can't sum it up more than this..
Why I Like This Movie:  To be honest, I do like this movie mostly because it's a lot like the modern Punisher comics that have been released since Garth Ennis completely redid the character in the "Welcome Back, Frank" storyline close to ten years ago.  It's not easy viewing, but to be honest, if you like watching horror movies simply for the violence and gore, this will probably get your motor running.  This, I think, is the last of the Marvel movies before everything was redone under the Marvel Movie Universe line, which has obviously been quite successful.  Also occassionally shown on Spike.

 

Hard To Kill

Made:  1990
Directed By: Bruce Malmuth
Actors Of Note:  Steven Segal, Kelly LeBrock
Plot, Such As It Is:  Mason Storm (Segal), a honest cop, uncovers what appears to be corruption on a tape (for all we know, it could just be his taped reruns of Knight Rider on the thing.)  He is attacked, along with his partner, by corrupt cops, and survives, but is in a coma.  Storm awakens years later, but is still a target by the corrupt cop cabal.  He's saved by Lisa from Weird Science (I'm not kidding), and trains himself back into fighting form at her place.  After recovering said Knight Rider reruns, Segal fights his way to the source of the corruption, a Senator whom he recognized from before thanks to a cheesy catch phrase I can't remember at the moment, and is able to finally clear his name, and reunite with his now teenage son.
Why I Like This Movie:  It's one of Segal's only real acting jobs, and even then that's kind of a stretch to say that.  The sad part of this movie is that the potential was here for it to actually be a quality movie.  Had the producers tried to cast this with actual actors, instead of Segal, Kelly LeBrock, and the regular run of the mill martial arts bad guys, there really could have been something here.  Still, it's entertaining, and represents on of LeBrock's only real roles of note outside of Weird Science.  The dialogue is laughable enough due to the fact that this movie has one of the worsts ensamble casts outside of Double Impact and, of course, the now infamous Street Fighter.

Days Of Thunder

Made:  1990
Directed By:  Tony Scott
Actors Of Note:  Tony Cruise, Nicole Kidman, Robert Duvall, Carey Elwes, Randy Quiad
Plot, Such As It Is:  Cole Trickle (one of the best and worst names ever), a successful Indy Car Driver, is recruited to drive in the NASCAR series by Randy Quaid.  Cole has trouble finishing races, due to the change in cars, but eventually enjoys success until a massive car wreck results in Trickle sustaining serious injuries.  He winds up romancing his surgon, Kidman, while a new hotshit driver (the Dread Pirate Roberts from the Princess Bride) winds up taking over his spot on the team.  When Trickle returns, tensions escalate until he is fired for wrecking his rival into a wall.  Trickle eventually returns to racing when one of his former rivals, turn friends, asks him to pinch hit as a driver at Daytona.  In dramatic fashion, complete with mechanical failure, Trickle wins out.  End credits.
Why I Like This Movie: This is probably one of the first signs that Tom Cruise was mailing it in, in terms of movies.  Essentially, this is pretty much the framework for Top Gun, except with NASCAR and Nicole Kidman built on top of it.  The story is similar to Top Gun, in that a cocky, up and comer suffers a much need fall, dusts himself off and, once given a second chance, is able to shine and come up on top.  The acting isn't great, despite the fact that there are a great deal of quality actors in this film, and the racing scenes are fairly well done.  Overall, there are some that love this film, and others that hate it.  Personally, I see it as just what it is, namely Talladega Nights taking itself much more seriously than it deserves to.

Judge Dredd

Made:  1995

Directed By:  Danny Cannon

Actors Of Note:  Sylvester Stallone, Diane Lane, Rob Schneider?

Plot, Such As It Is: After World War III, human kind has collected in Giant cities, called Megacities (how original) which are policed by officers called Judges, which are police, judge, and executioner.  The most famous of them is Judge Dredd, who is subsequently framed for murder and exiled.  However, Dredd discovers that there is tretchery afoot, tthat his clone brother Rico, whom he had judged years earlier and had sent to prison, had engineered the entire affair to gain power and revenge.  Dredd makes it back to the city, aided by Schneider, whom he had judged earlier in the film, and is able to mount enough of a counterattack that he is able to defeat his brother and restore order to Megacity I.

Why I Like This Movie: For starters, the give away that this is going to be a terrible film is that Stallone's name is in large print at the very top of the poster.  That right there is usually a dead giveaway when it comes to terrible Stallone pictures.  As for the movie, it should be noted that Judge Dredd the comic is based more along the lines of the film Dirty Harry, in which justice is faceless, unrelenting, and eventually, successful.  There is humor, of the dark part, and even the artwork in the magazine is meant to be dark, gritty, and utilitarian.  This is not what Judge Dredd the Movie is.  While it takes itself way too seriously, the movie itself is rather hammy and corny.  Dredd fans were upset over the fact that the movie itself ignored several conventional Dredd guidelines (no romantic interests, Dredd's face can never be shown for starters), and while really that shouldn't be a large issue, it should be noted.  The large problem with this film is that, aside from it being poorly acted, there are too many agendas at work.  Is this a film about what makes a man, which is wrestled by Dredd after he discovers his origins?  Is this a film about the dangers of cloning, or the dangers of having a police state that has too much power over the lives of it's citizens?  A danger about what could eventually arise out of catestorphic war if we aren't willing to think and guide current events outselves?  Or is this just meant to be a large amount of good, cheesy fun?  No one knows, although the legacy of this film is the later.  Even Stallone admits that he may have fumbled the ball with this film.  Fortunately, while I do have a soft spot in my heart for this film, the character looks to be getting a worthwhile adaptation this fall with the movie Dredd.  On another note, one interesting nugget about the film is the inclusion of the song, Dredd Song, written by The Cure.  The reason why I bring this up is that is is probably one of their only appearances on a soundtrack that isn't set in the 1980's and is also completely out of what they would normally contribute to.

Robot Jox

Made: 1989
Directed By: Stuart Gordon
Actors Of Note:  Does it really matter?
Plot, Such As It Is:  After World War III, natural resources are scarce.  Rather than find ways to properly manage these resources, the nations of the world instead decides to distribute these precious goods over giant robot battles.  Those that pilot them are called Jocks.  The main "Jock" in the film is Achillies, who is entering his final fight, while also training, and perhaps wanting to bang his replacement, Athena.  His arch nemesis is a man by the name of Alexander, a Russian (of course, as this was made towards the end of the cold war, when the Russians were still supposed to be the bad guys.)  What happens is that Achillies accidentally kills some spectators during his final match, which haunts him until he finds out that Athena will fight in his place at the rematch.  Long story short, there are some epic robot battles, which even take place in space, before Achillies and Alexander, out of respect, stop fighting and salute each other.
Why I Like This Movie:  In terms of acting ensembles, this is one of the worst ever collected.  The plot line is absolutely horrid, and has so many holes that you could drive a fleet of mack trucks through it and not do any damage.  But why do I love this movie?  GIANT FUCKING ROBOT BATTLES!  Oh hell yes!  This is actually a movie that should totally be remade.  Imagine the possibilities, with an actual plot.  I've only seen this movie in English once, and haven't seen it in a Region I DVD.  I have, however, seen it countless times in Spanish, which I understand.  That is irrelevant, again, because of the GIANT FUCKING ROBOT BATTLES!

GIANT FUCKING ROBOT BATTLES!

Sorry, I had to say it one more time.

Double Impact

Made: 1991
Directed By: Sheldon Lettich
Actors Of Note:  Just a whole lotta Jean Claude Van Damme
Plot, Such As It Is:  Twin brothers seperated at birth, Chad and Alex, are reunited 25 years after their family was murdered by a business partner, seeking to consolodate his hold over their mutual business holdings (yeah, that sounds stupid, but I'm talking about Double Freaking Impact, so hush.)  The two subsequently are targeted by the Chinese Triads, who are in league with their parents' killers, and after some bumps along the road, the two are able to avenge the death of their parents, stop the Triads for good, and become brothers once more.
Why I Like This Movie:  This is probably the closest anyone would ever get to having a Double Dragon movie, and yes I'm aware that Double Dragon was made into a movie.  It sucked.  And this is my blog anyway, so pound sand.  This movie was trumpeted as being Van Damme vs. Van Damme, although it really never gets to that point.  There are some good action sequences, and a lot of ridiculous dialogue and T&A, which was par for the course of a lot of Van Damme movies.  However, unlike a lot of the earlier Van Damme films, like Bloodsport, Kickboxer, and Universal Soldier (the holy trinity of JCVD films), Double Impact never really had much of a hold on anyone, and exists strictly as mindless fun, and late night cable or spanish language programming.  Again, you really just watch this film to see JCVD kick some almighty ass.

A Night At The Roxbury

Made: 1998
Directed By: John Fortenberry
Actors Of Note:  Chris Kattan, Will Ferrell, Molly Shannon, Richard Greico
Plot, Such As It Is:  Two brothers, Steve and Doug Butabi, are a pair of clubgoers that are miserable failures at both getting into clubs, as well as meeting women.  By day, they work in a plant store, mostly fucking off, while also dreaming of building a club on the level of the Roxbury, which they can never enter.  Tension is also provided by the fact that their father wishes Steve would marry the aggrevating daughter of the lamp store next door, allowing them to combine the two businesses.  One day, the two finally do enter the Roxbury after meeting Richard Greico shortly after an accident, where the two meet the clubs owner, who takes an instant liking to them.  The two wind up meeting a pair of women, with whom they have awkward sex with, until they are wind up on the wrong side of the owner's bodyguard, played by Colin Quinn.  Their world falls apart after the brothers have a falling out, and Doug moves into the family guest house.  Steve ends up dating the lamp store owner's daughter, until the day of the wedding, when the two reconcile and Steve breaks off the engagement.  The two brothers end up seeing their club idea after all, and discover that they are, in fact, part owners, with the club having been constructed by the club owner from earlier in the film, and the two go on happily ever after. 
Why I Like This Movie:  The film was born of a rather hillarious SNL sketch, which probably didn't merit being made into a movie, but was.  The film's novelty wears thin quickly, resulting in the inevitable drag that terrible movies usually experience.  That said, it does have it's stupid humor in droves, and has cursed Collin Quinn with the infamous "Did you touch my ass?" line that plagues him to this day.  Sadly, it's probably one of the more successful SNL film productions ever made by the studio, and despite it being hammered by critics, it enjoys a cult following.  I won't sit through this movie entirely, but I'll catch it from time to time and watch a good 45 minutes of it.  One final note about this flick is that it's soundtrack is very much a time capsule of the time.  Anyone that remembers the house music of the 90's will identify the movie's soundtrack as fairly accurate time capsule of the era.

And that's it for now.  I don't think I can write about more awesomely bad movies for now.  Until next time....