Lucky Crack Pipes n' Dancin' Souls

I don't know if there are any other movies out this year where an A-list actor such as Nicholas Cage can be found stopping the air supply to a senior citizen whilst pointing a gun at another senior citizen with the bug-shot eyes of a crack head as pictured above but you'll find it all in 'Bad Lieutenant: Port of Call New Orleans'.

I remember when I first heard about this a year ago, though I can't remember who I had the conversation with:-

"Hey, you remember that movie by Abel Ferarra called 'Bad Lieutenant' with Harvey Keitel?"

"Yeah?"

"They're gonna remake it."

"Fuck off. Who's remaking it?"

"Werner Herzog."

"What?! Fuck off! Who's acting in it?"

"Nicholas Cage."

"Fuck. Off."

It all sounded like a bad joke till I saw the teaser poster whilst they were in the midst of production and sure enough, there it was - Nicholas Cage, in a film by Werner Herzog.

Then I heard that it wasn't a remake, or a re-imagining, or whatever. It was a completely different story. Sure, it was about a lieutenant who was bad but that was the only similarity. I was still unsure what to make of it until Ain't It Cool News posted a sneak preview trailer.

(The above isn't exactly like the one that I saw, but pretty close. You can watch the official trailer by clicking here.)

Now I was curious. Though some may hate his acting style, I do enjoy my dose of the Cage, depending of course on what he's in, and he's been in some major turkeys recently. This, however, got my hopes up a bit. The thought of Nicholas Cage going crazy after tokes from his lucky crack pipe and seeing iguanas whilst humping hookers was intriguing, so when I finally got a chance to check it out I watched with a certain level of expectations.

And the verdict? Mmm... so-so.

There are some insane moments in the movie indeed, most of them glimpsed in the trailer above, but the trailer also gives the impression that the Cage would be this insane throughout the movie, which he isn't. In actuality, it's a build up in nuttiness that all starts when the Cage rescues a prisoner in a cell flooding with water during hurricane Katrina and ends up with a severe back injury which requires him to take a lot of painkillers.  From painkillers he moves to cocaine, swiped from the evidence storage room. From there, he starts stealing drugs from the people he busts. Then he goes on to crack and does even more bad things, culminating in him rolling with the drug dealer (played by Xzibit) that he was trying to lock up at the beginning of the movie.

And as the movie progresses, we are treated with random iguana and lizard cams, Cage doing drugs and assaulting a senior citizen. Not continuously but evenly peppered throughout the movie. And though the sight of Cage in those moments when he goes nuts is fun, the question remains -

What is the point of the movie?

In the original 'Bad Lieutenant' directed by Abel Fererra, the entire film was unrepentant and unflinching. From the start, Harvey Keitel is a Bad Cop.

The type of Bad Cop that would take away the money that two thieves steal from a convenience store then steal from the convenience store himself whilst the owner's making a statement at the station. The type of Bad Cop that would let two under-aged girls who are sneaking out to go clubbing get away with it as long as one of them shows him her ass and the other pretends to suck a cock whilst he masturbates to the sight of them doing so in the middle of a street. The type of Bad Cop that would make bets he can't pay for and shoots his own car radio when the bets don't work out.

And, more importantly, there's a point to the movie. As Harvey Keitel goes along with all his Bad Things, a nun is raped by two young punks and though he thinks he'll find retribution for all these Bad Things by finding and punishing those responsible he discovers that the nun is so devout that she forgives her rapists, leading to Keitel trying to figure out how he can truly find some form of retribution leading to a powerful and incredibly downbeat ending. There's a strong story amidst the Badness (along with Keitel giving a one man show tour-de-force throughout the entire movie... including getting his schlong out).

'Port of Call New Orleans' does feature Cage doing a one man show too, but I can't see the point to the movie. The underlying plot of it all. The reason for the movie's existence. The only point that I can see is that it shows how a cop can go from bad to worse but then again, not really. And the fact that we get to see this transition and the point where it all started kinda takes the power away from the badness. We sympathize with Cage's character not because of his performance making us feel for a flawed character, but because we know that he's suffering severe pain from a back injury sustained whilst saving a criminal's life. It gives the chronic drug abuse a reason, albeit a bad one.

I know that since the only relation the two movies have is the name, but I can't help but compare the two. Keitel was bad from the get go. We never know why he did so many Bad Things. He has a wife, he's got kids, yet he sleeps with whores, snorts coke, gambles and steals. We never know why. In 'Port of Call...' Cage has his back issue. His girlfriend is a prostitute but not a street walker, more an escort - and by the end of the movie she turns away from her wicked ways. Then there's his parents - mom's an alcoholic and dad's a recovering alcohol. There are so many reasons as to why he'd be taking drugs and turning to the 'dark side' and by the end of the movie he learns nothing and gains nothing and neither do we.

However, like I said, it's not entirely fair to compare the two as their both completely different movies. And, to be honest, we could do with more movies like 'Port of Call...' Last year Millennium Films released 'Rambo IV' which wasn't a great movie by any means and also didn't really have a point to it all but it was bug-nuts crazy and fun. In fact, I can't see any point at all to the movie besides watching Stallone kill a lot of people in the most gruesome, insane and illogical manner possible.

The only point in watching 'Bad Lieutenant: Port of Call New Orleans' is to watch Nicolas Cage go cookoo on crack. And there's nothing wrong with that. Especially in this day and age where movies are getting progressively sanitized and pre-packaged for megabuck opening weekends it's good to know that there are still some films out there that don't cater to the entire mass public yet featuring enough known actors that it can safely find distribution and an audience.

To quote Massawyrm from Ain't It Cool News,

The first thing you need to know about BAD LIEUTENANT: PORT OF CALL NEW ORLEANS is that it is NOT a good movie. It’s not meant to be. It’s a bad movie, a movie so WTF awful at times that you can only cock your head and shake it baffled at what you are seeing. So why are people going gaga for it? Because it is an AWESOME movie; a funny as fuck and meant to be bad every step of the way.

'Nuff said.

Hitler was screwed by Basterds

At least, according to Tarantino.

The story of 'Inglorious Basterds' has been around for so long that one wondered whether QT was ever gonna do it at all. At one point he was supposed to do it after 'Jackie Brown' but ended up doing Kill Bill instead. Then he was supposedly going to do it again but instead did 'Grindhouse'. And then, one day, he jokingly said his next movie was not going to be Basterds because every time he says it is it never happens.

So his next movie actually became 'Inglorious Basterds'.

Now, I'm not saying I didn't enjoy Kill Bill I & II. I did enjoy those movies. But it didn't leave me as reeling and as excited as usual. I loved 'Death Proof' more than 'Planet Terror' when Grindhouse came out but it still didn't feel completely like a Tarantino movie.

Then this comes along. From the moment I saw the first trailer that came out which consisted pretty much entirely of Brad Pitt's brilliant recruitment speech I was sold. By the time I saw the second trailer, I couldn't wait.

And it sure didn't disappoint.

I remember when the world first went crazy over Brad Pitt, especially the women. They raved and swooned about him, especially over 'Legends of the Fall'. I wasn't impressed.

Then 'Seven' rolled around, followed by '12 Monkeys', and I started formulating a theory that the shorter his hair was, the better his acting was. In the end, however, I just find him to be a brilliant actor and movie star. Especially after 'Fight Club'. The man is insanely talented and it's in roles like this, where he gets to shoot off larger-than-life characters such as Lt. Aldo Raine, that he is a pleasure to watch from beginning to end.

However, the most stand out actor of the lot has to be Mr. Christoph Waltz as Col. Hans Landa.

The opening scene that starts off the entire movie showcases both Tarantino's return to form at brilliant wordplay as well as the sheer genius of this actor - just two people having a conversation as the tension ratchets up with every word uttered. In most World War II movies playing the Nazi often leads to performances of pure, unadulterated evil and completely unsympathetic.

Christopher Waltz doesn't just give off the necessary menace, but we also find ourselves admiring the dude. We fear for the characters that are put on his path but at the same time we don't hate him. Whilst the SS officer in the film is your straight-up menacing Nazi that we're all accustomed to Col. Landa is a different kettle of fish. And with his multi-lingual savvy he may as well be called a different kettle of babel fish.

But what truly makes this movie great is that though it is set in World War II and it's landscape is based on history, it's story couldn't be far removed from it.

This is a film where Eli Roth's character nickname is 'The Bear Jew'...

...where British soldiers talk with that wonderfully old school matinee idol proper accent...

...where Hitler feels like a blundering buffoon...

...and where the entire war is ended in one single night with the power of cinema and the flamability of old film stock.

Though the opening scene was brilliant, there is a moment in the movie that had me loving this movie a hundred times more and had my eyes glued on the flick from then on in. After all the scenes we see of World War II, though fictional still very much plausible, we are introduced to Sgt. Hugo Stiglitz, a former Nazi who defected and joined the Basterds (played by Til Schweiger who I haven't seen in flicks since 'SLC Punk').

The thing is, I didn't get most of the explanation because I was laughing my ass off. Why? Because all of a sudden we are treated to a flashback of Sgt. Hugo... with 70's funk and a voice over by Samuel L. Jackson.

I couldn't contain myself. It was such a completely out-of-place moment of insane movie referencing that wouldn't work in any other hands but Tarantino's and I loved every minute of it. From then on, the movie became a hundred times more fun.

And speaking of laughter, there are many moments in this movie where I found myself in stitches as there's so much humor in it. Black humor, yes, but humor nonetheless amidst the cartoon violence. After all, this is supposed to be a World War II movie, right? And yet, amidst it all, we are treated to a hilarious moment that would fit any comedy where Lt. Raine and his men pose as Italian filmmakers to attend the premiere of a Nazi movie even though they can't speak Italian for nuts!

Real farcical stuff that again shouldn't work but it does. In fact, this entire movie shouldn't work, it just plain shouldn't, but it does because of Tarantino's inherent talent of knowing all the rules of movies and knowing just how to turn those rules against us in such a way that it should not be possible but still making it so.

I loved this movie. Flat out loved it. It's a Tarantino movie that I can honestly say I love without trying to make excuses for it and the last movie of his I could honestly do the same was 'Pulp Fiction'. Along with 'Star Trek', this is my favorite movie of the year so far and I don't know if any other flick of the year can match it.

Pictures taken from AceShowBiz.com and IMDB.

You Do Not Fuck With This Man

You just don't. I can't think of a single movie where it would be a good idea to fuck with Clint Eastwood. And from some of the stories I've heard about in Hollywood, it's probably not a good idea to fuck with him in real life either. Shit, even when he had a monkey for a sidekick (sorry, I meant ape) you didn't fuck with his sidekick. And Gran Torino has every bad ass motherfucker Clint's ever played rolled into one bitter old son of a bitch.

I've been watching a lot of comedies for the past two months (though for about two days last week it was violent and bleak movies), just trying to keep my spirits up. 'Mallrats' has never failed me, nor has most of Kevin Smith's work (though 'Chasing Amy' is a bit too painful to watch) but it's been getting old and a lot of the new comedies feel... cheap. The last mind-blowingly refreshingly good comedy I saw was 'The 40 Year Old Virgin' and though there've been a few since that have been good, nothing particularly exciting or surprising.

The last thing I expected was to find myself laughing throughout a Clint Eastwood drama.

Don't get me wrong - the movie's not a comedy, and I wasn't laughing at the movie as if it was so bad it was humorously good. I was laughing in surprise, in joy at watching the movie. Most of all, I was laughing in rejoice at how unabashedly badass Clint is.

Like I said earlier, this is all those characters of his that you've loved rolled into one - the political incorrectness of Dirty Harry Callahan, the no-bullshit attitude and moral code of every cowboy he's ever been from The Man With No Name to the Outlaw Josey Wales. All rolled into a man that's knocking on heavens door.

And he growls. He fuckin' growls, like a pitbull that you've just accidentally fucked with.

This is an old school man in every respect, and it's insanely refreshing to see a character like this on screen. He's not a bad man, and you can see his heart if you look past the unpleasentries. He's just a man, the way men were portrayed all those years ago, back when being a man meant something. And just watching this man go through this movie was an insanely fun ride.

And don't get me started on the direction and the script. I think anyone who's reviewed a Clint-directed movie has said the same thing - lean as fuck. Not an ounce of fat in the direction or the script, not a scene in that's unrequired, not a shot that's indulgent, just what you need and full stop.

By now you've probably noticed I haven't touched on the story at all. Why should I? There are tons of reviews out there and there's the trailer to check out. It's a movie where Clint is Clint, which is one of those things that are just a joy to watch.

Check it out. Find it. Slip it in your DVD player, sit back and enjoy. No CGI, no fancy editing, no pretty stars and starlets either banking in another paycheck or trying to prove their acting chops - just a good story starring Clint Eastwood. And if this truly is his last appearance as an actor, then it's a fitting end to a brilliant career.

Snickety-Snick, Snickety-Sucked

 

When the first X-Men movie came out, I wasn't completely blown over by it, but I was happy enough - Brian Singer had brought the characters to life. It was too much of an introduction movie for me to be completely happy about it, the same way I felt about the first Spiderman movie. And like the Spiderman franchise, I was VERY happy with the second installment. And like Spidey again, I was unsure about the third part - a bit overblown, with additional characters added in for the sake of pleasing the fanboys though adding nothing to the plot.

I wasn't sure what I was expecting with Wolverine's solo outing, but I didn't expect this.

The movie opened adequately enough, with a nod to the Origins book itself, and went on to a very cool montage showing how Logan and Creed fought pretty much every war America's been involved in.

And then, just like that, it all gradually nosedives.

Now, don't even get me started on the writing. There are so many characters added in for no fucking reason whatsoever, half of which were inspired by the past few years of X-Men comics and stuck in as if to satiate the needs of us comic geeks whilst at the same time showing how 'cool' their powers are, but are they really required? Last I checked, the movie was called 'X-Men Origins: Wolverine'. Just concentrate on fucking Logan and his relationship with Creed. Instead, we rush through Wolverine's entire story, using the moments in his life to jump from plot point to plot point in order to show sequences with a bunch of different mutants.

Seriously, why? Why is Scott Summers and Emma Frost even in this picture? Why have the Weapon XI storyline? Weapon XI is frickin' Deadpool?! I wasn't too sure about Ryan Reynolds as Deadpool, even though I think the dude's great in anything he does and sure enough, the second we meet him we get a taste of that trademark smart-aleck banter that he can do with his eyes closed, but then he dissapears for the length of the movie until the end, where they've stitched the character's mouth shut and turned Deadpool into the ultimate Mortal Kombat character - Sub Zero's looks, Baraka's blades and the teleportation powers of the other dude besides Rayden with a wok on his head. Then there's Agent Zero - a very cool character from the Morrison run of 'New X-Men' now reduced to Stryker's lackey. Joy.

The most obvious pointless inclusion award has to go to Gambit, though. What a goddamn pointless exercise. There is absolutely no reason, no fucking reason at all, for Gambit to be in the picture. He has one cool fight sequence and helps bring up some exposition before bringing Wolverine to the third act. Fucking why?! It's blatantly obvious the only reason the dude's in there is because everybody's been complaining about how Gambit hasn't been in the movies considering that he's the coolest character of the comics after Wolverine himself and Taylor Kitsch plays it well, but this is what we get? This is all we get?

And it's not any of the actors fault. Most of the casts' characterization of these comic book legends are pretty spot-on, especially Liev Schrieber as Victor Creed. The bad memory of lumbering WWE champion Tyler Mane as Sabretooth is completely removed with Liev's performance and simple make-up as compared to Mane's fluffy boa ensemble. But here's the sad fact - Tyler Mane got the movie with the better script. Liev's stuck with some insanely dumb lines, as is everyone in the cast, and everybody tries to do the best with what they have but what they have ain't much. Not all the performances are great - why is there a Black Eyed Pea in the movie? Why not cast Fergie in the movie while you're at it? - but overall everyone tries their darndest to make the lines work.

Sorry, guys - they just don't.

But let's face facts. It's meant to be a big Hollywood movie, right? We're not supposed to expect a decent script, are we? No. I'll tell you what we're meant to expect - big, cool, action set pieces.

So why, oh God why, is the CGI so fucking horrendous?

Apart from the claws coming in and out, most of the time in the X-Men movies Wolvie's claws are props attached to him. Not here, no. 80% of the time his claws are computer graphics as he fights in a CGI-enhanced background together with other CGI effects and CGI bullets and CGI mattes...

...and it was so utterly beyond crap we weren't even pissed in the cinema. We were laughing our fucking asses off.

The basic rule of CGI has always been that as time passes, each new CGI movie makes the older CGI movies look crap in comparison (except for Terminator 2 - the CGI in that movie hasn't dated one bit) but this was just terrible. Wolverine's claws are now shinier, longer and faker than ever before. I think I would have enjoyed the movie more if I bought the bootleg DVD that was making the rounds for the past two weeks with the unfinished CGI because then I could just imagine how good it could have been. Have programmers gotten lazy? Have all the good ones been bought over by the Transformers post-production team? What the fuck is going on, godammit!?

I swear, Hollywood, I'm hurt. Hurt beyond recognition. Every movie I've gone to in the cinema this year has been either dissapointing, infuriating or just plain shit. And what's more, thanks to this run of crap Kitty now thinks I'm a jinx when it comes to watching movies in the cinema because every movie I've taken her to since we've started dating has been so utterly beyond salvation. None of the smaller movies make it on the big screen here, Hollywood, only your big-ass franchises, and every single one has sucked balls. The only movie that came out in the cinemas here that I enjoyed was 'Slumdog Millionaire', and I watched that on DVD because I didn't think it was coming out (although I discovered from Col. Kurtz that it was censored pretty heavily, so I'm glad I watched it on the small screen). 'The Wrestler' didn't come out in cinemas here, I had to buy the DVD too. I doubt 'The Brothers Bloom' will be on the big screen here either. Or 'Inglorious Basterds'. Or 'Drag Me To Hell', 'Crank 2', 'Downloading Nancy', 'Paper Heart', 'Public Enemies', 'Facing Ali' or 'Soul Power'.

Instead, we get 'Streetfighter: Legend of Chun Li' and fucking 'Dragonball Evolution'.

My last hopes are left on 'Star Trek', 'Transformers' and 'Terminator: Salvation' as far as big budget movies go. I might go check out the lattest Potter flick or 'Angels & Demons' and I hope 'The Taking of Pelham 123', 'Coraline' and 'Where the Wild Things Are' come out here.

But if Trek, Transformers or Terminator suck, that's it. No more. I shall not step into a local cinema for a while. This is too fucking much. What is going on, Hollywood? Is the recession that depressing that you've forgotten how to entertain? I don't expect you to make me think, or make me marvel at how brilliantly crafted a plot is. I only expect you to entertain me for two hours. To make my popcorn worthwhile and give me the opportunity to discuss the movie with my friends at length. I am sick of stepping out of the cinema shell-shocked.

Do something. Please. Because right now the only movies I want to see I can only get bootlegged, and you have only yourself to blame.

Knowing Me, Knowing Poo

Dear God. What can be said about this movie that hasn't already been said about anal bleaching? Painful to the bum, completely un-needed but somehow it's a big thing.

There has been, in the history of cinema so far, no other movie that has caused my innards to want to burst out from my body and strangle its creators than 'Knowing'.

Some would retort: "Come on, it couldn't have been as bad as Batman & Robin! Or Indy 4!" Well, to that I tell you this. Batman & Robin was shit from the first two minutes of film. I stayed in the cinema to see whether it could get any better and was sadly mistaken. Even the close-up of Alicia Silverstone's bum couldn't make it better, but from the moment the movie started, it was shit. And Indy 4 is bad predominantly because it has three other well made movies to live up to and just flat out couldn't.

'Knowing' is bad because for three quarters of the film it's actually good. Sure, the CGI looks like the product of a first year student in animation, and if it was, that student should be applauded and his or her skills nurtured but no, this was a Hollywood film at a time where CGI has come a long way since the Nintendo 64 looking graphics of 'Species'. Regardless of this fact, the story still grips because it kicks off with an interesting premise and keeps building up on it: a series of numbers are found in a time capsule, each group of numbers signifying the date of an event that will cause the death of a number of people, the amount of people that will die and the coordinates of the location where the event will take place - 9/11, hurricane Katrina, etc, all leading up to present day. Three dates are of the future, and it's up to Nicolas Cage to figure out whether or not he can stop these events from happening and what it all has to do with him.

The kicker? The last date signifies the end of the world.

Sounds interesting, right? Pretty good so far. And whilst many in the world may not like the Cage-meister, he's done a lot of good movies such as 'Leaving Las Vegas' and 'Adaptation as well as flicks that I dig even though some may think they're wrong and cheesy like 'Con Air'.

Fuck you. The 'bunny in the box' moment is a landmark in action cinema.

Since it's a Hollywood Cage flick, certain things are required, such as running...

...and doing the classic Cage pose.

But as far as I'm concerned, that's ok. The bad CGI is ok. The story gripped me and Kitty and I assume Col. Kurtz/Papa Bear was at least mildly interested. Hell, even the fact that the projectionist fucked up causing the screen to blur a bit in the middle didn't bug me after a while even though we came to watch the movie specifically to see how a flick shot on the RED camera looked like blown up to 35mm. It didn't bug me because the story seemed very, very interesting. Especially when you pepper the flick with the random strangeness of creepy blonde trenchcoat guys.

The guys were reminscent of the director's previous work, 'Dark City'. Yes, that's right, ladies and gents, it's directed by Alex Proyas, who also brought us 'The Crow'. How could this movie be bad?

Wait for it.

As the movie progresses and heads to the end of the world, questions started popping up in the movie that, for a moment, I thought was the basis of the whole flick: "can one man change his destiny, or the destiny of others? Is the future set in stone? Is there a purpose to existence, to life?"

If it dealt with these questions, I wouldn't be writing this post.

The movie continues and it really looks like there's no way Cage can save the planet, which makes it even more interesting: by the third act, the key to saving the world should have popped up already, but it doesn't - earth will go boom, nothing you can do. There's a solar flare coming and we're more fucked than a brontosaurus looking up in the sky and said, "damn, that's a big rock coming towards us".

(Before any dinosaur experts say anything, let me be the first to admit that I cannot for the life of me remember what species of dinosaur existed when they went extinct. I don't know the periods except for cretaceous and only because it sounds cool.)

Now, before I continue, let me say this: THIS IS A BIG SPOILER. If you really want to see the movie and don't want to know what the big twist is, read something else because the twist is the reason I'm writing this in the first place, to warn the world of its coming so that no one need never experience the horrors I experienced at three o' clock in the morning in a poorly proejcted cinema. If you really want to experience it yourself, close this and go buy a ticket but I'm warning you. This movie is the fucking video from 'The Ring'.

Still with me? Very good. So yeah: the world's gonna end. No hope in sight. Meanwhile, Cage's son and the daughter of this girl Cage meets at some point but gets runover by a truck are being called by some unknown force tied to the blonde trenchcoat mafia that's been acting all spooky. Cage follows them. The kids say they've been chosen to follow them to safety. Cage looks up in his trademark Cage way...

...to discover a spaceship above him.

That's right. A fucking spaceship. From numerology and determinism to fucking Close Encounters. Close Encounters was about aliens, for fucks sake. Where the fuck did these guys come from?

But are they really aliens? God only knows, and that statement couldn't be more true, because that spaceship looks like some kind of futuristic star and the blonde guys turn into glowing aliens, humanoid shapes... with futuristic glowing angel wings.

Yes, you read that right.

The kids bring a rabbit each with them, because the aliens/angels said they could. One rabbit each. I wonder if the boy picked a male and the girl picked a female. I wonder, indeed.

Then the 'aliens' fly off as Nicolas Cage stirkes a pose:

Now, by this point I was ready to leave the cinema, as was Kitty and Col. Kurtz, but something inside us was curious to see how much more worse it could be.

And boy, does it get worse.

As Cage drives off to see his estranged parents who he had a fight with for the longest time, he drives through a city in... well, mild chaos at best. I dunno about you, but if the sun's out of control and there's a heatwave and the world's gonna end the last thing I'm gonna do is light a fucking bonfire.

Somehow, Cage gets through the crowds by driving in slow-motion and doesn't get stopped at any point. He walks in and sees his sister, and hugs her. He then hugs his mother and finally, his father, who's a pastor. The father says, "this isn't the end, my son," and Cage replies,

"I know".

Then they all hug and the world burns.

Cut to wheat - it's the random planet the 'aliens' have dropped the kids off, except they've also decided to give them new clothes made out of hemp and look like something from a hippy commune. The children run through the wheat towards something. The camera pulls out to reveal what they run towards and it turns out to be...

...a big ass, biblical looking tree. That glows.

So, in a nutshell, when the world ends, don't worry - think of God and feel safe in the knowledge that you'll be with your loved ones once again in Heaven when Armegeddon comes a calling, and the chosen few will be taken by angels onto a bright star together with two of their favorite furry creatures whereupon they will be dropped off at the Garden of Eden dressed like nature-loving-pot-heads. After all that build up of tension, all that intrigue and wonder, after all that, do you really, honestly, expect me to rejoice when this, THIS is the fucking twist ending? This movie should've been called the fucking Rapture!

Now, don't get me wrong: I am not, in any way, shape or form, trying to diss the Christian religion in any of it's forms, be it Catholic, Protestant, Presbytarian, Methodist, Calivinist, Born Again or any other form. To me religion is a good thing in any shape or form as long as it is not taken to extreme or used for one's own agenda (which happens way too much and pretty much given religion in any form a bad name). There is nothing wrong with Christianity, nor is there anything wrong with putting Christianic symbolism or using a film as an allegory for one's own beliefs. Religion can be found as the subtext of so many films. Scorcese's works are obviously driven by his own Catholic beliefs. Alex Proyas himself has Christian symbolism in subtext in almost all his works (except maybe 'Garage Days'). There's nothing wrong with any of that.

But there is certainly something wrong with using it as your third act fucking twist, and there is something definitely wrong with being so obvious in one's supposed subtext that it feels like the filmmaker is literally trying to shove his belief system down the throats of the viewers.

Why not just make a fucking movie about the End of Days, about Armageddon? Sure, those titles are taken, but you could call it something else! Why not just make a movie about those chapters of the bible as opposed to trying to 'hide' it within a mainstream movie with the subtlety of a six foot seven rapist with his engorged 17 inch hard-on tapping you on the shoulder with one finger and pointing to his cock with the other and saying, "I am going to stick this in your butt against your will".

There's nothing wrong with biblical movies. Biblical movies have been around since the birth of cinema - Ben Hur, the Ten Commandments, The Passion of The Christ - and there's never been anything wrong with that, so why this monstrosity?

And you know what the worst part is, folks? It's three day weekend opening gross was USD$24.8 million. It's the number one box office hit of the weekend, out-doing the business of movies such as Watchmen, Coraline and Slumdog Millionaire. Don't believe me? Here's the link.

I don't know what to say about Hollywood now. I wouldn't complain so much if the other not-so-mainstream movies made it to our big screens in this country but they don't. I had to watch the Wrestler on DVD and I'm glad I watched Slumdog on DVD because I heard it was censored on the big screen. I want to watch a good movie in the cinema for once this year with Kitty and both times we've been thoroughly dissapointed.

I swear, if Wolverine or Star Trek suck I don't think I'll be going to the cinema again for a while.

Chillin' With Dubya and Yoko

So I couldn't sleep last night, even though I was desperate to. It had been a pretty work-packed evening and I wanted to get some rest, but my room refused to cool down, regardless of what I did with the air conditioner.

When I woke up the next day I was still unrested and for the past week I'd been suffering some annoying aches in my shoulders, probably as a result of not sleeping properly or not in the proper position. By 3.30pm I couldn't hold out and had to take a nap where I dreamed of being in a supermarket in England buying lots of chocolates and sweets unavailable here. When I woke up, the shoulders were aching even more and I couldn't resist anymore. It was time. I had to do it. There was no other choice.

I had to venture into the world and get some Yoko Yoko.

Somehow I returned with not only the miracle cure that is Yoko Yoko, but also a tub of Haagen Daz cookies n' cream (not sure how that happened) and applied the Japanese wonder drug...

...and burned.

Seeing as I was still quite tired I popped open the ice cream and decided to pick a DVD from the unwatched stack - a pile of DVD's that I've bought over the years because I wanted to watch them, but wasn't in the mood to watch them yet. Picking one out from this stack is very difficult because it's not based on recommendation or knowledge, just feel.

And today I felt like watching 'W'.

I remember when I heard about the project and reacted with a simple "whaaat...?" Oliver Stone's directing it. "Whaaat...?" It's gonna star the jock from Goonies. "Whaaat...?" And the chick from Zack and Miri. "Whaaat...?"

Then I saw the trailer and thought, "waitaminute. Is this... is this a comedy?"

I thought it would come out in the cinemas here in Malaysia. From the looks of the trailer, why wouldn't it? The trailer pretty much made Dubya look like how the media had presented him throughout his term - a chimpanzee with the intellectual capacity of a termite's cock. It looked like it was taking the piss, and really, how could you not? How do you not take the piss out of someone who told the press, "I know the human being and fish can coexist peacefully" (Sep. 29, 2000)?

But imagine this, if you will: Imagine being at school and there, amongst all your other class mates, is the school idiot. I mean, this guy is dumb. He says so much stupid shit a single sound from his mouth guarantees laughs across the class and cafeteria. And you, being with your friends, join in. But one day you get to see him without your gang of friends and see him for what he is: not too bright, plain and simple. Doesn't mean you can't feel sorry for the guy, and you do.

Dubya's the school idiot. He just happened to also be the president.

There's a lot of fun to be had in this movie and, at least for me, I found myself caught completely off-guard feeling sorry for the guy. Now whilst all his press conferences and public appearances are all on record and the going-ons behind the scenes are probably works of fiction based on what facts the writers have, it sure makes for an interesting story about a man trying to get out of daddy's shadow.

It's not an incredible movie, by any means, and though the casting is spot on for most of the cast (Josh Brolin's come a long way since Goonies) some of the other supporting characters do tend to fall into stereotype. Even though Richard Dreyfuss and Scott Glen are brilliant as Cheney and Rumsfield respectively and Jeffrey Wright almost steals the spotlight as Powell, Thandie Newton's Condoleezza Rice feels like a comedic caricature (although kudos to hair and make-up. I had no idea it was Thandie).

And why couldn't they just hire the same guy that played Tony Blair in The Queen as opposed to Mr. Fantastic? I'm sorry, I like Iaon a lot as an actor, but for some reason throughout the one scene he has I kept thinking his arms were gonna stretch out.

Dubya's past doesn't forgive the amount of crap he's done not only to his own country but the whole world as we know it, but what do you expect when you put the class dunce in charge?

Don't "misunderestimate" this movie. "I think we agree, the past is over" and seeing these events through our own eyes over the past eight years doesn't mean there aren't any stories about it left to tell. And Dubya's an interesting character to study. There's a story there and you couldn't call it "a struggle between good and it's a struggle between evil" because we all witnessed that struggle in our lifetimes and heard the arguments. This is a story about a "poppy" and his junior and it's a fun one too.

Fuck Brains, Bring the Brawn...

In all honesty I wasn't sure what to expect from a new Hulk movie. The Ang Lee movie had an incredibly emotional story which felt a bit too long and a cool comic book panel editing style which felt quite out of place. And when the Hulk did pop up... nyahhh. I didn't hate the movie, I just didn't enjoy it as much as the other superhero movies that were coming out, and there was that overriding feeling that the filmmakers were probably thinking "this is all a bit silly, isn't it?" and trying to give it more meaning.

The meaning of the Hulk is all in the simple premise of the character. The way he's conceived is tragic enough. Dr. Bruce Banner, a mild mannered scientist, fucked up one of his experiments and you shouldn't make him angry. You won't like him when he's angry.

That was the classic tag line from the TV show, a reference point which the last Hulk movie seemed to ignore but had everything that we loved about the character - we felt for him, that theme tune made us want to bawl our eyes out at his misfortune. The dude really had the short end of the stick, moving from one town to another, all the time hoping for a cure so that he can just be another average Joe. We felt for the dude, we wanted him to get just a glimmer of hope and happiness...

...but at the same time, we wanted him to Hulk out. We wanted Banner to blow his fuse because it was something we could all relate to as well - being pushed too fucking far and desperately wanting to just let loose, without having to think of the consequences. The Hulk is that release in all of us, just a 1000 times more powerful.

And green.

That's the main problem with making a Hulk movie, isn't it? The green. Believing in a 12 foot not-so-jolly green giant. Whilst the CGI has advanced, it's still not 100% satisfactory, not in the same way it felt to watch Transformers and go "holy shit, it's Optimus Prime!" (even with the bitchin' flames).

As I watched the movie, there was first that sense of "okay..." with the first appearance of the Hulk. A kind of "he's better, but still..." feeling about the CGI. The main problem is that the Hulk is so human-like, and to believe that a humanoid being is 12 feet tall and green is a pretty tough sell unless it really looks like one. The other problem is that we all have an image of the Hulk in our heads from the TV show, and unlike other comic book adaptations at the time, we could believe the Hulk. Lou Ferrigno (here in a cameo) brought the character to life, even with the dodgy wig. We accepted him and believed him. We had never seen Optimus Prime in real life, so it gives the CGI guys a bit more room. We've seen the Hulk for quite a while, and it's not just believability that's the issue, it's breaking the mold.

But unlike the first Hulk movie, we see him for a good part of the movie and after a while he grows on you and you accept his appearance, the same way we accepted Lou Ferrigno (at least, for the duration of the movie). When Abomination pops up, though, it felt a bit more believable, which I think is because of the whole issue of believability - we've never seen Abomination, so when we're introduced a new CG character it's easier to accept. Of course, by this point we've seen a good chunk of Hulk footage to accept him too, smashing through all and sundry.

And boy, does Hulk smash.

Unlike the first movie, this one doesn't play out the drama too well. I love Edward Norton as an actor, as well as Tim Roth, but the story felt like filler, hitting the right points, pushing the story forward, but it wasn't anything spectacular compared to the brilliant scripting of sequel superhero movies like Spiderman 2 and X-Men 2. But when the Hulk pops up and starts kicking ass, he kicks ass. Most of the trademark moves of the comics are all here, and you see just how powerful a hulking green giant can be. And when he locks arms with Abomination, it's like watching Godzilla vs. Ultraman or something, a real clash of the titans crash boom bang destruction sequence that will have you cheering.

Directed by Louis Leterrier, I felt the same way about this movie as I did with the Transporter movies - I wasn't really interested in the story as much as I was amazed by the action sequences. Crazy, unique and mind-blowing action sequences from the mind of an insane Frenchman.

I wonder what Godard would say?

Indy...? Jonesy...!

Ah, we meet again, Dr. Jones...

Like most people of my era, Dr. Jones is an institution, much like Star Wars. We grew up with it, we were dazzled by it, we wanted to be Harrison Ford, just in the same way we wanted to be Han Solo and later on Dr. Richard Kimble.

What? No one wanted to be Ford in the Fugitive? I'd rather be Kimble than Jack Ryan.

Either way, I grew up on Indy. The score alone brings up a whole swell of emotions and memories of a much more innocent time, a time when I wore one of my dad's hats that vaguely resembled a fedora and made my own bullwhip out of a shit load of rubber bands linked together and practice whipping the clothes stand in an attempt to wrap it around, Indy-style. Indiana Jones was the type of hero that made you think that being a hero was possible, because the dude often got three shades of shit kicked out of him. He wasn't as acrobatic and agile and strong as other so-called heroes. He felt a bit more... real. Real, yet fantastic at the same time. I'm sure a lot of people out there felt the same way and, as much as they may not want to admit, definitely got a kick out of the thought of another Indy movie, regardless of any doubts about age.

The night before I was going to see it, Col. Kurtz buzzed me...

"Hey, I saw Indy 4 tonight."

"Yeah, how was it?"

"Answer me this: how would you put the Indiana Jones movies in order, from favorite to least favorite?"

"Well, I love all of them, but I'd put Last Crusade at the top and Doom at the bottom. I loved Doom as a kid but nowadays I totally get a kick out of Sean Connery being his dad."

"Ok. Well, this Indiana Jones movie makes Temple of Doom look like the Godfather."

He then proceeded to tell me just how shit he thought the movie was, with choice quotes such as,

"This movie made Shia LeBeouf's acting in Transformers look like Marlon Brando."

"National Treasure 2 was better than this shit."

"Ray Winstone sounds like an American trying to put on a British accent."

"John Hurt is Dumbledore on crack."

Regardless, I went and watched it last night, and yes, I totally understand where old Kurtz was coming from, but at the same time...

...that shit was fun.

Don't get me wrong: it definitely won't replace any of the slots of anyones 'top 3 Indy movies' list, but it's still fun. Silly, mindless fun, and I enjoyed it. There's fisticuffs and snakes and weird artifacts and a bullwhip and Marion Ravenwood and military bad guys and jet setting adventures. And fuck it, Shia was fun too. And the rest of the cast. It was a fun adventure movie, full stop.

Though there are two comments of Kurtz's  that did ring true...

The lighting - what... the... fuck...? There's some strange ass cinematography going on in this movie. There are some scenes where I was actually thinking "my God, I've never seen a movie so wrongly lit in my life."

The CGI - what... the... holy... fuck...? Spielberg's CGI is usually better than anything ILM comes up with for other directors, but this one just looked... supremely fake. Badly matted and composited with that blurry finish which cheaper production companies usually use to hide the errors.

And that's where the biggest gripe about the movie comes in, the main difference between this one and the previous movies - the overdose and over-reliance of CGI. One of the most consistent memories of the Indiana Jones movies was that feeling that Indy's in real trouble because those were real people riding horses and jumping on tanks and holding on to a truck with a piece of rope. I know that Doom and Crusade had some CGI but ever so slightly to enhance the whole thing. In this one, the major race set piece through the jungle was totally CGI, which kinda made it feel lesser compared to the other ones.

And it's not like stuntmen haven't been able to pull off the insane ideas the filmmakers had for Indy - in Last Crusade Indy takes on a tank on a horse. A fucking horse!

Perhaps what's going to alienate people the most is the setting - Indiana Jones was so much the product of a 40's environment that some people may not be able to follow him into the fifties, where it's no longer religious artifacts but sci-fi tinged spookiness and ruskies.

All I can say is go in without expecting any of the past movies, and you should have a decent time. Sure, Indy looks old as fuck now, but he's still Indy, and he can still throw a hook harder than any of you other cats.

Peace, daddy-o.

Rock: From Rags to Riches to Eighties Insanity

So last week I was browsing through a DVD store when I came across a find and a half - all five Rocky movies. I'd recently watched the new one, Rocky Balboa, which I thought was great. I've always felt the Rocky movies are the male chick-flick, so to speak - whilst nothing pulls a woman's heart strings more than a tale of two lovers trying to be together, whatever the adversity, nothing pulls a man's heart strings more than watching the underdog try and make something for himself and stand up for what he believes in (I will admit, with no shame, that when Rocky started training and that Bill Conti theme started playing, I shed a tear), which is pretty much what the Rocky movies are about.

Or so I thought.

When I was a kid, I couldn't appreciate Rocky I & II as much. Considering I was born in 1980, my introduction to Rocky was part III, when he not only fights Mr.T but also, in a charity fight, Hulk Hogan. Being a kid who watched the A-Team and Wrestlemania back when it was under the moniker of WWF, nothing was cooler than Rocky III. And Rocky IV? Come on... Drago! How cool is that for an eighties kid?!

But now, re-watching Rocky I&II, I finally realized how fucking good those movies are. I honestly don't think Stallone has been better as an actor or writer than in those two movies. Rocky's character is so well formed, a lovable oaf, a guy who ain't too bright but he's got that drive inside of him. And the core of Rocky I is that sweet little love story between him and Adrienne (did I spell that right?). Then there's his relationship with Adrienne's brother, Paulie. And of course, Burgess Meredith as the coach. Great character. Even his opponent, Apollo Creed, is given enough screen time and story to show his motivations. They're great movies. I cried at the end of both of them.

Hell, I don't think any other movie series has made me cry as much as Rocky. Just the look on his face at the end of Part I when all the press are trying to interview him and all he wants is Adrienne and he's crying out her name, the look on his face just made me lose it. Then, in Part II, when he finally wins and calls out for Adrienne on the TV, shouting out "I did it!"... goddamn if that ain't a male chick-flick bonanza. I ain't ashamed. It's Rocky. I'll cry as much as I goddamn want. If I started crying during 'Bridges of Madison County' you then have my permission to call me a little bitch.

So then I pop in Rocky III, the movie I remember from my childhood... and good God do things get different. I never thought of the Rocky movies as homoerotic in any way, but now... there's just this undercurrent, this really weird subtext running throughout the movie. It's so incredibly camp! I mentioned this to a gay friend of mine and he had this look in his eyes like, "you only just noticed?" You've got Hulk Hogan playing a guy named "Thunderlips", for Gods sake. Fucking THUNDERLIPS. And Mr. T wants Rocky a bit too much for his own good.

But no, that is not the most homoerotic moment in the movie. That is reserved for Rocky's relationship with Apollo Creed...

In slow-motion, they hug and clap in the sea, water spraying around them, a look of immense joy in their faces...

Yeah.

And don't even get me started on the ending where they have their plaful rematch before 'Eye of the Tiger' kicks in.

Speaking of which, why the flying fuck does Apollo Creed have to say "Come on Rocky! Eye of the tiger!" so many goddamn times!? It's fucking annoying!

Ok, so even if you forget all the homoeroticism, there's still the issue of the script. It's here where the character of Rocky starts changing. He's not as mumbly and bumbling as he was in the first two, and by Rocky IV? He's not even a semblance of the good ol' Rocky from the streets of Philadelphia.

I swear, Rocky IV's script is probably 35 pages long. 40 pages max. Ivan Drago comes to fight in America, Apollo fights him and dies, Rocky goes to Moscow to fight Ivan. That's it. Period. Full-stop. No side stories with the other characters, no sub-plots, that's all there is. So how is it filled up to a feature length? By having so many montages it makes your head spin, which is ironic when you consider a movie which is pretty much a Reagan era all-out Commie-bash against the Soviets uses the film techniques the Russians themselves pioneered.

And Paulie has a robot! A fucking robot! No one in their homes have robots like that NOW!

See, that's the weird thing about watching Rocky I to IV back to back. The change in tone between the first two and the next two is just so sudden and jarring. I still think Rocky III and IV are fun movies, but Rocky I and II are the good ones, and watching III or IV after either of those two is just a painful experience.

Incidentally, I didn't buy Rocky V because I remember the street brawl at the end, which I thought was a crap way to end a Rocky movie, but I also remember it having a good concept, and maybe after Rocky III and IV Rocky V may actually be good. Who knows...

The Curse of the Three

When X Men 3 came out, I had super high hopes combined with the tiniest of doubts in the back of my head. On the plus side, they not only were going to do the Dark Phoenix storyline, but also elements of the Joss Whedon run with the whole mutant 'cure', and Brett Ratner was still keeping in tone with Bryan Singer's style. Hell, I got nothing against Brett. I've enjoyed his past movies, ain't nothing wrong with the Brett-ster.

But there was a worry: isn't there a bit too much going on? And there was. You've got all these new characters to introduce, a huge epic storyline and two and a bit hours to not only fit it all in, but also try and find some sense of closure.

And it all felt rather messy indeed. My favorite X Men movie is still the second one - all the characters had already been introduced, there were a few new guys, true, but the main ones kept the story going and Wolverine got to go completely ape shit. The moment in the mansion when he first kills one of the soldiers all I could think was "Holy shit! They let Wolvie kill someone! They didn't even show that properly in the comic books until the whole Comics Code thing got lifted!"

And I rejoiced.

But X Men 3 was another kettle of fish. So much shit was going on that nobody got a chance to breath, least of all the audience. I mean, come on! Scott (Cylcops) gets killed and nobody seems to bat a fucking eye lid! What's up with that?! It seriously felt like the studios were nudging their wicked ways, saying "the first one made money, the second one made more! We need to keep it up! Stick everything in these damn books inside!" And what do you get? An unfocused mess. And Vinnie Jones as the Juggernaut.

I recently bought the two disc DVD and watched the deleted scenes - there are so many cool battle shots that weren't used, probably because they were running out of time. But who knows? Maybe it would have paced it better? Or maybe they could have just chucked out a bunch of the sub-plots and streamlined the whole damn thing.

Spiderman 3 suffers the same problem, but in a way, worse. You can't even say it was the fault of a new director or writer because it's pretty much the same team working on it, but there are so many elements in that movie that feel chucked in purely because the studio wants to please the fans so that more will come to the cinemas - look at this! There's Gwen Stacy! Venom! Sandman! Harry Osborne's story arc! Tons of stuff!

And where does it lead to? Incredible coincidences. A meteorite containing the venom symbiote just happens to land nearby Peter. I know that trying to do the whole 'Secret Wars' storyline would be a bit too much, but that's just taking the piss! And Eddie Brock? I had no problems with the casting, I fucking love Topher Grace's work, but doesn't it all seem a bit too much that he wants to kill Peter Parker just because he found out he photoshoped a pic of Spidey? And what the fuck was the point of Gwen Stacy? She was just 'the other girl', but they didn't play anything from her original storyline, making her nothing more than a redundant blonde who just happened to be in Peter's line of sight. They could have used the secretary as the love interest. They played on it before, dammit. And it's been in the comics too, no meandering of the storyline there.

And, seriously, what was the point in having Sandman there?  Visual FX? That's it?! He pops up, turns into the Sandman, does some cool sandmonster shit, then repents.

The bad guy I thought they should have stuck with was Harry. His story's been built up over the past two movies, and in this one, he gets to kick some serious ass in the first fight scene with Peter, a huge improvement on his daddy's fight with Spidey in part one.

But, amongst all of this, I still watched it, and will probably watch it again, the same way I watched X Men 3 again - because there is some fun to be had in watching these characters come to life and beat the crap out of each other just like we read about it in comics. The scriptwriting is bad, but in my opinion, the script was pretty bad in the first Spiderman movie too. At least now, the second time I watch it, my hopes won't be so high.

And besides, both movies still kick the shit out of the infernal turd that was the Ghost Rider movie.

Dead Man's Chest: The Art of Overselling

Anyone who saw Pirates of the Carribean no doubt has been looking forward to the sequel - Dead Man's Chest. Especially me. I'm a big fan of Johnny Depp, I reckon he's the coolest cat in Hollywood and he's always had a knack of making characters his own, none more so than Captain Jack Sparrow:

Story goes, when the exec's at Disney first saw the rushes of Depp's portrayal, they were scared shitless. Why isn't he being all cool and macho? What is up with the 'Keef' Richards impression. Depp knew what he was doing and it paid off as he stole the show.

That's the problem with Pirates 2. The execs no doubt thought 'hey, Depp sells! Let's let him run the show!' Sounds like a good idea, right?

Wrong.

The reason why Depp's Jack Sparrow worked so wonderfully and stole the show was because he was, effectively, the Han Solo of the movie. But Han Solo never lead Star Wars. The story was always about Luke, the true 'hero' in a very mythical sense.

But it looks like the exec's are having none of it. They've stuck Depp front and center, Kiera Knightley a close second and Orlando seems to be there purely for continuity (poor fucker). The couple are given about less than five minutes to establish their story and then it's straight to Jack. Haha! Look at Jack! He's funny! Haha...! Ha... ha... hmmm... is this going anywhere?

The thing is, if it was written well this wouldn't be so bad. But Depp's story arc is the least interesting to follow. In part one his story arc was not JUST about treasure: he wanted his ship back from those that took it from him and he wanted revenge, hence even though he may not be a noble man there was something morally noble about his actions. Now? Now he's just plain selfish. Sure, they try to give him some sense of nobility at the end but it's too little too late.

Actually, you know what this movie reminds me off? The Matrix sequel. You're waiting and waiting for it, you loved the first one so much, you want to feel the same as the first one, then you go in and it looks like the filmmakers went "ok, what did the audience like last time? Let's stick more of that in!" So the Matrix had MORE flo-mo action sequences and kung-fu, MORE philosophising and... it sucked. A bunch of cool scenes in an uneven movie.

Pirates 2 is the same: MORE swashbuckling, MORE Jack Sparrow, MORE supernatural underwater shenanigans (and like the Matrix, just when things get interesting and a cool twist is revealed, the movie fucking ends, ensuring you'll be first in line at part three no matter how much you were dissapointed by part two).

Sure, there are incredible set pieces, and the FX are stunning, but FX with no story equals no goddamn point! And bringing back all the characters you loved from the first one is one thing, but bringing them back via the elusive ghost in the Hollywood scriptwriting machine is just annoying.

There's also a 'development' in Kiera's character between her and Johnny Depp which further shows who they're pushing the spotlight on: the two more bankable stars. Yes, Orlando hasn't had much stardom post-LOTR, but he's still the Luke Skywalker of the story. Let him lead it, godammit!

Sigh... I know I'm going to watch part three, and odds are, it'll probably redeem part two, just like Matrix 3 did.

I just hope they don't make Captain Jack Sparrow Jesus.

You Will Believe A Man Can Fly (and Make Women Wet)

Before you ask, it's tough to compare the new one to the old one because of the advances in technology. For example, in the original Christoper Reeves version the mere fact that they could make him look like he can fly was incredible? Now? Supes goes all out (and looks a whole lot better than when Neo took to the skies). In the past, he deflected bullets. Now, he deflects the entire magazine of a gattling gun AND a 9mm in the EYE.

So how do you compare it? Well, the new one has improved on Lex Luthor, that's for sure. I always found it hard to take the Gene Hackman Lex seriously because he was surrounded by absolute morons, making the bad guys look like an updated version of the Three Stooges. Kevin Spacey's Lex and goons may still have the comedic element (which, in my opinion, works better this time) but now Lex is really evil.

I like.

The story is steeped in the same traditions as the first two to the point that even the opening credits are the same (well, except for the cool CGI planet wizardry).

So here's the main question: how was the new Superman himself? Brandon Routh? Well, one thing's for sure - he's hot.

Now, I'm not saying this from personal observation. No matter how in tune I am with my feminine side I can't visually see another male as hot. Cool, yes. Hot, fuck no. But I have been told by many reliable sources that he is hot. Super hot. Hell, it was the first thing my girlfriend said about the movie, to the point where I knew she was thinking, "if they really did CGI his 'package' to look smaller, imagine how big it really is..."

(Come on. It's Superman. Why shouldn't Superman have a Superdick?)

But as great a Superman he was, his hottness is what, to me, proved to be his weakness. Why?
Because as Clark Kent, he couldn't hide it.

He just couldn't. Christoper Reeve did such a good job of playing Clark Kent you could believe that nobody noticed that Clark and Supes had the same build, same weight, same facial features, etc. Brandon just can't hide it. That's the only flaw for me when it came to the new Superman. Supes wasn't the problem. It was Clark. Clark just wasn't... Clark enough. Superman? Superman was a badass. But why nobody bothered scribbling glasses on his pictures to discover the truth is beyond me.

I also think this is the first time I've seen a guy on screen since Brad Pitt who has the ability to make women unanimously, all over the world, salivate from more than one orifice.

Humans Suck. Kong Rules.

I really wanted this movie to be the ultimate 2005 film. I really did. But it didn't do it for me. Not as much as I wanted it to. Why?

Because of those goddamn humans.

Kong was great. Kong was wonderful. Andy Serkis once again brings life to a CG character like no other. You feel for him, you care for him and understand him. It's understandable why so many girls went to see this movie and bawled their eyes out when Kong dies.

But Kong's only in the movie for half of its running time, and this is a three hour flick so we have to put up with the humans.

Those damn dirty humans.

That was my problem with the movie. I couldn't relate, feel and more than anything care for these poor excuses of life. Carl Denham, is a grade A exploitative asshole. Jack Driscoll is dull. Hayes and Jimmy? Who gives a flying fuck about Hayes and Jimmy. All these characters, and you don't give one iota as to whether they live or die, yet you follow them as they're chased by dinosaurs and fucked up bugs. How are you supposed to feel the thrill and suspense when you don't give a damn whether they get squished?

And the girl, Anne. What a goddamn tease. Make Kong smile, tell Kong no. Cuddle up to Kong, then get ready to leg it the second a human is in sight. And what does she do when Kong plummets to his doom? What is the first thing she does? Hug Jack. A tease, I tell you! Kong deserved better!

Godammit. Looks like Episode III was the best blockbuster of the year for me. Bring on 2006.

You Know It's Hard Out Here For A Pimp

WATCH THIS MOVIE.

I'm serious. You think I'm joking? I'm not joking. This movie is fucking brilliant. I haven't felt this 'wow-ed' by a movie in a long time. After years of so-so hip-hop and ghetto based rags-to-riches tales, finally there's a movie filled with character, emotion, intensity and integrity.

It's genius is both its script and its casting - Terrence Howard is balls to the wall A-class amazing and any one of the girls from this pimps stable - from Taryn Manning to Taraji P. Henson to Paula Jai Parker - have more character and dimension than any $10 million lead female in your standard Hollywood fare. Then there's the rest of the cast: Anthony Anderson finally sheds the 'funny fat black guy' stereotype and Ludacris can act like a motherfucker.

And let's face it, boys & girls, when you think pimp you may think Snoop Dogg but the reality is a pimp isn't the most savoury of characters on the block. To have a movie where your main character is a pimp (and not a rich Jay-Z mofo at that), complete with all the anger, frustration and propensity to smack a ho down and yet get the audience to feel for his journey, to want him to get somewhere, that's a real accomplishment. You feel for it because in essence it's the archetypal story of fighting and sacrificing to make a dream come true. Done right, everybody's a sucker for it. Especially me.

One thing I especially liked and could relate to (you know it's good when a Malay kid can relate to a hip-hop movie set down South) was the entire process of trying to record their demo. From DIY soundproofing to shitty mikes to make-shift pop-filters and even the little touches are focused on, like switching off the fan before a take. And the way they make the song and the sound evolve is entirely realistic - from rhymes on a pad and trying to get that beat to practising, from trying to figure out what the hook is to finding the magic touch you were looking for - and by the time all the glitches have been sorted and Anthony Anderson presses the 'record' button you willbe hooked by that song and you will truly share the same feeling of elation the characters experience.

Just remember this movie isn't all happy-happy-joy-joy. It's a pimp. It's his ho's. It's a shitty run-down house in Memphis and the pimp's ride isn't even one whole colour. a fuck in the front is $20 and a fuck in the back is $40 and, in case you didn't know, these girls aren't enjoying it. Terrence Howard's 'DJay' isn't a selfish character who wants out from the pimping business, he's a caring character that wants to bring everybody he loves out of the pimping business and whatever dead-end jobs their in: his ho's, his producer's and finally himself.

8 Mile almost became the definitive movie of this genre, but whilst Eminem has some real and incredibly original flow (and he could act pretty good, surprisingly) Terrence Howard has got character by the bucketload and baggage by the carriage. Watch this movie. It won't dissapoint. I guarantee it.

S.H.H.H.I.T.

As part of my research for my future filmmaking endeavours, one of my recent initiatives has been to buy (at original prices, no less) local films and study them. Sometimes I don't make it past the ten minute mark and start pressing the forward button. This is one of those movies...

Have any of you guys seen a local movie called S.H.3.?

If you haven't, I don't blame you.

The title stands for Skateboard Hip-Hop Handphone. According to FilemKita.com, "The movie focuses on college student Khairul, who is a skateboarding freak who tries to gain the attention of Nelly. Khairul’s efforts to woo Sally is unfruitful and to top it all, he injures himself just before a major skateboarding tournament."

After trying to watch the movie, though, I can honestly say Skateboard Hip-Hop Handphone Is Terrible.

Some may say that my assesment of this movie is unfair due to the fact I haven't watched the movie as a whole. Don't worry, I will, and if it does turn out good after a second viewing I'll take my words back, but when the first ten minutes bore the shit out of you in ways no movie has ever achieved, then you know there's something wrong.

Sure, as per all local movies these days, the dubbing is horrendous (somebody shoot the sound engineer who's probably still splicing tape with a razor), the film transfer is attrocious, the title cards are like something out of the 70's (and not ina kitsch kind of way) and the movie's slower than a senior citizen trying to masturbate herself to orgasm with a Tesco's cucumber in the spring time.

The (lack of) speed in the movie is not a pacing issue. It's more than that. It's a syndrome I keep seeing time and time again in Malay movies: A scene that should only warrant about 1 minute of screen time (or less) is instead stretched to about 5 minutes. In a wide shot.

The scene I'm talking about is when the main girl arrives at college in her parents car. The camera is permanently on a wide shot as the car pulls up, she takes out all her luggage, one by one, and says goodbye to her parents. No time lapse. No cuts. Just a shot of an expensive car and some people taking out their luggage whilst the actress playing her friend has a tough time of trying to make her 'ooh's and 'aah's sound remotely interesting throughout this entire scene. It grates me. It pisses me off. It annoys unholy fuck out of me. It makes me want to vomit green bile onto the faces of innocent choir boys.

And they do this again. And again. And again. Time to hit the forward button.


My other gripe over this film is that it's supposedly a skate movie. And every skating shot looks like the director's never seen a skate video in his entire fucking existence.

One thing I will say is that I do admire the fact that the kids' skate abilities are presented as more realistic (although I have no idea whether this was intentional). Instead of being able to pull off every single trick in the book (courtesy of either Tony Hawk or Rodney Mullen doubling them) they hired kids with some level of skating abilities (much better than mine, I'll admit), but not of the supreme pro level. During the contest (where the good guy that nobody understands faces off to the skate bully... as if we didn't see that one coming) the hottest trick in the skaters' repertoir is a crooked grind. Not much, but that's usually what these skate comps are like.

But Jesus, they could have shot it a lot cooler.

Every skate shot during the comp is a wide shot with absolutely no feeling of action in it. No cool music, no funky editing, no moving shots, just static wide shots of the Kg. Batu skatepark empty as fuck with one kid doing a 50-50 about 50 meters away. Wow. Ain't skating cool.

And don't even get me started on the 'hip-hop' scenes. Please, if you're going to shoot a dance sequence, wouldn't you want the visuals to be in sync with the music?

Then there's your usual love story bullshit, your funny side character (watch him do funny facial gestures and fall off his board! Whoopee!) and your 'kepoh' girl. It's your typical over-stretched Malay love triangle jumping on the 'extreme' bandwagon but still lacking any redeeming audio-visual features whatsoever.

And it cost RM$1.5 million. The majority of it probably went to the editor for his 'cool' camera-click-click-cut-between-two-scenes-click-click-a-lot technique. Fuck off.

Maybe I should give it a chance. Maybe I should force myself to watch the movie in its entirety. I survived a half hour long session of dentists yanking out my wisdom tooth, I could survive this, right?

Or maybe I should shove it up a leper's ass, attach grenades on him and shoot him through a cannon into the fucking studio that made this insulting piece of shit.

Jersey Girl

Why did everyone hate this movie so much?

I've finally seen Jersey Girl, and I sincerely don't see why it was shot down so hard. It was beautifully shot (thanks in no part to Academy Award winning cinematographer Vilmos Zsigmond, he of Close Encounters of the Third Kind fame), finely acted, touching, warm and a nice change from Kevin Smith's usual poopy jokes. Ben Affleck was believable, Liv Tyler was cute and George Carlyn was surprisingly restrained.

I mean, come on, seriously. Kevin Smith does write some wonderfully depraved dialogue and many know this as his trademark, but what's wrong with the guy spreading his wings a bit and trying out something different? Sure, I prefer the movies he's previously put out with the immortal lines "Snoogans!", "Bung!" and "...then, Black Beauty decided to do some of her own mounting...", but Jersey Girl was alright. It's not in the same calibre as his previous films, but it was nice.

And not in a 'nice size' kind of way, either.

But is the lack of Jason Mewes, sexual references and Walt Flanagan's dog jokes the main reason why it flopped so bad and critically mauled? I don't think so.

I reckon it's all a question of timing and expectations.

People expect a certain thing from a Kevin Smith movie. They expect to laugh out loud at his crass-ness. They expect a certain type of humor, regardless of what story Kevin tells. So far, that's been the unifying theme in Kevin's movies: the humor.

But the lack of humor doesn't hamper the movie. It would probably look out of place and besides, there's enough touches of Kevin-ism's here and there to make one chortle (the 'I'll show you mine, you show me yours' scene a particular laugh out loud favourite). No, the movie didn't sell because it came out at the wrong time.

Before Jersey Girl was released the world was watching the exploits of Ben & JLo with extreme scrutiny. Then the disaster that was Gigli came out, followed by their break-up. Worst of all, Kevin had to publicly declare his biggest secret: that it's not a Bennifer movie.

And the nice thing about the movie is it's little surprises. If the movie had come out at the height of Benniferwatch everyone and their ex-mother-in-law would be making their way to the cinema, purely for the purpose of proving

(a) a Bennifer movie is going to suck ass and

(b) Kevin Smith going 'mature' is going to suck even bigger ass.

A lot of ass-sucking was expected.

They would have gone in and in the first 15 minutes POW! Jennifer Lopez is out of the picture. An entire audience goes "what the fuck?!" and watch on. Suddenly all the other surprises pop out, one after the other:

"Hey, Jason Lee looks kinda old!"

"Matt Damon's in a cameo!"

"How the fuck did Kevin afford Big Willie Style?"

They would have then come out of the cinema with warm feelings and gone home to hug their children. Or someone elses children. Regardless, the children hugging would be completely non-Jackson and full of paternal love (ok, maybe I'm giving the movie more credit than it's due, but it's my post, fuckwhip).

Instead, Gigli comes out and everyone flat out despises the movie with enough hatred to start a terrorist organization and they break up. By the time Jersey Girl rolls around, nobody cares. And the few that do go watch it come out feeling it was a two-out-of-five star movie and below.

Yes, there are other, better Kevin Smith movies which are a whole lot funnier. Yes, I'm a big fan of Kevin Smith. But I'm not gonna lie if I think a movie of his is shit. I just haven't seen a shit Kevin Smith film. There are ones that dissapointed me in some aspects, he's no Scorsese. For example, Dogma didn't live up to my expectations and I'm one of the few that thought the long speeches in Chasing Amy were unnecessary, but these didn't stop me from enjoying the movies. And to further my argument of unbiassed-ness (that can't be right), I'm one of the Kevin Smith fans that liked Mallrats more than Chasing Amy (I've always believed that there are only two types of Kevin Smith fans in the world: those that like Mallrats more and those that like Chasing Amy more. Clerks doesn't count 'cos everybody loves that one). I prefer the funny-as-fuck-flat-out-comedy Kevin Smith movie, but that doesn't mean I couldn't enjoy Jersey Girl.

It's sappy, it's Hollywood-y, but it's sweet and pulls the right strings. I could be the only one out there who liked it, but fuck it. I was expecting shit as everyone else had been claiming it was a steaming pile and instead found a charming little movie enjoyable enough to watch. Bear in mind, everybody tore Mallrats a new asshole when it first came out, and now it's a cult fave. Sure, Jersey Girl probably won't end up being a cult fave, but it's nice. Sure, given a choice I'd rather watch Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back as a repeat viewing movie, but Jersey Girl was a nice film and it made me laugh and smile and kept me interested enough to want to finish the movie till 3am.

And there ain't nothing wrong with that.