Three weeks?! That's too long. Not that anyone is hanging on my every word, but any writer worth his/her salt really needs to keep at this thing. If you didn't water your plants for three weeks, they would die. If you didn't have sex with your girlfriend for three weeks, she'd nail the pool boy. These are SERIOUS ISSUES, and also why I don't have plants.
I started this thing cuz there were a lot of movies around, and this being January (for another day anyway), there aren't many around at present. January movies always suck. Always. I don't know why everyone else hasn't picked up on this. If it were a GOOD movie, the studio would release it during March, or June, or if it's a drama, November/December during awards season. I never consciously noticed this until the mid-00's, when studios dumped two Uwe Boll "movies," two Januarys in a row, but it's been going on forever. Remember "Leprechaun?" Sure you don't. 1993. Jennifer Aniston. And a Leprechaun. Total shit (watch it at your next Bad Movie Night). Saw it in January of '93. The tradition continues to this day. (the movie thing. not the me-seeing-them-thing).
I was inspired by a friend of mine to start a second blog; Ironically, she went and deleted all her shit last week. I suspect she'll be back (she deletes her Facebook account every couple of months), but the point is: We're all interested in more than one thing. Said Friend was blogging life, photography, and a bit of modeling (all my friends are hot), I think if I only blogged movies and TV all the time, I'd look like a fat shut-in. And while I HAVE ballooned up to 135 lbs., I'm gonna try other shit on the side.
Eventually. I was gonna see about sports, but the Super Bowl is in a week and then there's nothing interesting on ESPN until March... and then not again until late August. I mean, I dig baseball and all, but... there's 162 games in a season. The first 80 or so I can take or leave.
Also I hit up the Seattle Sci-Fi Short Film Festival this past weekend (#ssff). I don't see enough short films. Neither do you. As yet another friend said, "They are PERFECT for my attention span!"
Back in February with another tirade. No really.
...
.... February Leprechaun. That's a lot of oddly-placed R's. Or a tongue twister. Or an awful band.
Sunday, January 30, 2011
Monday, January 3, 2011
Tron Lunacy
A few weeks back I wrote an entire blog about how the new "Tron" was being insanely overhyped and later trailers looked to be a mess.... also, the entire crew was green except for The Dude (green as in "no experience," not "earth safe," though I suppose the latter could be true, too).
NOT GEEK
Clu looked like ass. The rest was pretty cool, though. Would watch again. Olivia Wilde is more than just a pretty face and out-acted everyone in the movie who wasn't Jeff Bridges (nobody out-acts Jeff Bridges).
GEEK
The writers came from "Lost," the television equivalent of a handjob from a famous person. Sure, everyone talked about that show and it garnered a huge amount of viewers, but at the end of the day, it was still a handjob. Yep, it had an ending, but only an idiot would think it was going to be a satisfying one.
That said, the writers dropped in some pretty clever things. Dillinger Jr (aka Peter Warner aka Sark)'s kid shows up in the opening minutes, played by Cillian Murphy. Bringing back Bruce Boxleitner (who is still a competent actor and was in Babylon 5, even if I didn't watch that, either). ... Wait. On second thought, those were largely casting decisions. The dialogue was nothing special or memorable, except for everything that Flynn says, and I'm pretty sure that was just Jeff Bridges' real personality. Knock on the sky and listen to the sound? Seriously? Imagine if someone said that in the 1982 original movie. Ronald Reagan's head would have exploded.
Not that there's anything wrong with Ronald Reagan's head exploding. I can say that now, on account of he's dead.
Alright, fuck the writers: cinematography, production design, costumes, all great. Acting all great, except for Garrett Hedlund (Sam Flynn) who was adequate. The 3-D neither added nor subtracted from the viewing experience. It'll be the last 3-D movie I ever see, if given the choice.
The director is Joseph Kosinski, which was my primary fear going into the movie, because he'd never directed anything but commercials. This is often a bad sign. Not that directors with his lack of experience always fail, it's just that they fail more often. This guy? Pulled his shit together. To wit:
David Fincher. Started in commercials/music videos. Now has a viable movie career. Kosinski isn't as good as this guy, but it's an example of what to shoot for (even if Fincher is merely a visual stylist. Wilde's performance in T:L shows Kosinski CAN work with actors... Fincher is hit or miss on this).
Gore Verbinski. Started in commercials/music videos, directed 3 movies before he did the first "Pirates of the Caribbean" for Disney. He knocked it out of the park and made 1.21 kajillion billon dollars. He's doing pretty okay.
Rob Minkoff. Directed "The Lion King," which was excellent, then moved to live-action with Stuart Little (pretty okay) and The Haunted Mansion, which was a steaming pile of shit. Pirates: 3 sequels. Mansion: Zero sequels. Nicely done, Rob.
My point is, even in interviews Kosinski talked about having a shorter amount of time than he'd like to shoot the movie, storyboarded things that never got to be shot, working on the script... he may not be a writer, but he took the resources available to him and made a movie that was both entertaining, and true to the original. He done good. And, granted, the grosses may be artificially inflated because of increased 3-D ticket prices, but the movie's still making a decent amount of money. His next announced project? A remake of "The Black Hole." I'm in if you are.
NOT GEEK: A-
GEEK: A
I don't know who's running Disney these days, but this is the smartest move they've made in forever. Of course, they hired a dance choreographer to direct the next Pirates of the Caribbean movie, so..... we'll see.
NOT GEEK
Clu looked like ass. The rest was pretty cool, though. Would watch again. Olivia Wilde is more than just a pretty face and out-acted everyone in the movie who wasn't Jeff Bridges (nobody out-acts Jeff Bridges).
GEEK
The writers came from "Lost," the television equivalent of a handjob from a famous person. Sure, everyone talked about that show and it garnered a huge amount of viewers, but at the end of the day, it was still a handjob. Yep, it had an ending, but only an idiot would think it was going to be a satisfying one.
That said, the writers dropped in some pretty clever things. Dillinger Jr (aka Peter Warner aka Sark)'s kid shows up in the opening minutes, played by Cillian Murphy. Bringing back Bruce Boxleitner (who is still a competent actor and was in Babylon 5, even if I didn't watch that, either). ... Wait. On second thought, those were largely casting decisions. The dialogue was nothing special or memorable, except for everything that Flynn says, and I'm pretty sure that was just Jeff Bridges' real personality. Knock on the sky and listen to the sound? Seriously? Imagine if someone said that in the 1982 original movie. Ronald Reagan's head would have exploded.
Not that there's anything wrong with Ronald Reagan's head exploding. I can say that now, on account of he's dead.
Alright, fuck the writers: cinematography, production design, costumes, all great. Acting all great, except for Garrett Hedlund (Sam Flynn) who was adequate. The 3-D neither added nor subtracted from the viewing experience. It'll be the last 3-D movie I ever see, if given the choice.
The director is Joseph Kosinski, which was my primary fear going into the movie, because he'd never directed anything but commercials. This is often a bad sign. Not that directors with his lack of experience always fail, it's just that they fail more often. This guy? Pulled his shit together. To wit:
David Fincher. Started in commercials/music videos. Now has a viable movie career. Kosinski isn't as good as this guy, but it's an example of what to shoot for (even if Fincher is merely a visual stylist. Wilde's performance in T:L shows Kosinski CAN work with actors... Fincher is hit or miss on this).
Gore Verbinski. Started in commercials/music videos, directed 3 movies before he did the first "Pirates of the Caribbean" for Disney. He knocked it out of the park and made 1.21 kajillion billon dollars. He's doing pretty okay.
Rob Minkoff. Directed "The Lion King," which was excellent, then moved to live-action with Stuart Little (pretty okay) and The Haunted Mansion, which was a steaming pile of shit. Pirates: 3 sequels. Mansion: Zero sequels. Nicely done, Rob.
My point is, even in interviews Kosinski talked about having a shorter amount of time than he'd like to shoot the movie, storyboarded things that never got to be shot, working on the script... he may not be a writer, but he took the resources available to him and made a movie that was both entertaining, and true to the original. He done good. And, granted, the grosses may be artificially inflated because of increased 3-D ticket prices, but the movie's still making a decent amount of money. His next announced project? A remake of "The Black Hole." I'm in if you are.
NOT GEEK: A-
GEEK: A
I don't know who's running Disney these days, but this is the smartest move they've made in forever. Of course, they hired a dance choreographer to direct the next Pirates of the Caribbean movie, so..... we'll see.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)