that sasquatch sound
The best moments in film are those that can forever be called to mind. There may be no fathomable reason for such remembrances, and some films containing such moments are wholly unworthy of persistence in mind. Whatever the case, the 2002 film "Sasquatch" accomplished this feat at least once. Amiable outdoorsman Clayton Tyne produces an unearthly sound that, if one did not know better, could have reverberated from the vocal cords of the fabled Bigfoot himself.
Part laughter, part disgust, part hairball, and a touch of whooping cough...that's my best explanation for it. Be sure to listen to it again.
trapped in the room
When I watch "the worst movie ever," I expect to be entertained by how bad it is, and not just bored or frustrated. Having heard that "The Room" is "the best worst movie ever made," it seemed worth a try as something fun. Let's go over the checklist and see how it succeeded and failed:
- Comical acting...check. This was pretty consistent throughout, and not many points can be docked here.
- Memorably poor lines of dialogue...check. "You're tearing me apart, Lisa!" I have to admit, I was hanging on Johnny's every word. The accent didn't hurt, either.
- Awkward sex scenes...check. This is a failure, not a success. If I wanted to watch two naked hogs rolling about, I'd drive past the farm down the road. You know how it goes.
- Unrelated plot lines thrown in for good measure...check. There's a scene that advocates the avoidance of drugs and seemingly has no relevance to the main story whatsoever. But it's tense and emotional - or it could have been, if any of the actors had been capable of conveying emotion.
- Less than three different sets...check. The viewer would just get overwhelmed if the characters went to too many different locations anyway.
- Repetition, repetition, repetition...check. It's difficult to fill an hour and a half, so a good device to employ is the reintroduction of an ancillary character to have the same discussion over, and over, and over again. She doesn't love him, old woman - get over it.
There's other stuff I could put up there, but I'm tired of doing lists. There's no point in reviewing the traditional love triangle plot. Let me just say, the first five to ten minutes (minus the awkward sex scene) are pretty unintentionally hilarious, and worth watching. The rest of the movie...not so much. If it had turned into one of the numerous ridiculous horror movies out there, with less of a strained effort on "story" and more focus on stupid violence, it might have succeeded (see: "The Midnight Meat Train"). As it stands, "The Room" felt painfully long and did not make me feel like it was worth my time to sit through this failed experiment; it is just another suckfest, and nothing exceptional.
Better luck on the sequel, Tommy Wiseau.
cylinders and cubes, oh my
It's like something out of that twilighty show about that zone!
homer simpson
I used my Independence Day to learn about a region both simultaneously American and foreign - the Twilight Zone. And I learned that a movie I thoroughly enjoyed, "Cube," was based on an episode of the Twilight Zone. The episode is known as "Five Characters in Search of An Exit," and it first aired in 1961. That may not be the most poignant of titles, but it should already let those familiar with "Cube" know how similar the two premises are. In the show, a clown, hobo, ballerina, bagpiper, and Army Major all awaken in a giant cylinder with no knowledge of who they were or how they got there. This odd menagerie of characters is a bit more entertaining than the group assembled in "Cube," but the character development isn't nearly as deep (which should not be surprising given the 30-minute nature of the show).
The people spend some time discussing how they might have gotten there, and they try to find a way out, to no avail. Unlike the movie, there is only one cylinder and they cannot move from one room to another. Periodically, there's a giant bell ringing. Eventually, the prisoners form a giant human chain/ladder (this is used in the movie as well) to try to reach the top of the cylinder. They also create a rope from clothes, and the soldier uses it as a grappling hook.
Spoilers: the ending provides much more closure than the movie does. When the soldier reaches the top of the cylinder, he falls over the edge and into snow, going lifeless. The camera pans out and the big twist is revealed: that the people were all dolls in a bin during a toy drive for Christmas. They remain inanimate at that point. Say what you will, but that was a pretty good explanation. Still, there's something more to like about the different twists employed by the film, and the fact that its ending leaves much more to the imagination. The deadly traps in various cubes don't hurt its appeal either.
I suppose the take-home point is that all art begins with a good idea, and that it's far easier to base that idea off of something you've seen or read or heard before, rather than creating it from scratch. Both the original and the derivative may both be worthwhile, as long as they're just different enough to provoke distinct thoughts or emotions.
democratic party liaison
The Internet is abuzz with Kumar's restlessness, so I'll give my take. First off, what would be a natural job move for someone whose resume includes acting in such films as "Van Wilder," "Malibu's Most Wanted," "Epic Movie," and "Harold & Kumar"? If you guessed an appointment to Associate Director in the White House Office of Public Liaison, you'd be correct. For those who haven't heard, apparently the Obama administration sees potential in 32 year old actor Kal Penn; hopefully it's a side not evident in his big screen performances. I have no idea what the duties of such a position might be, but knowing that our taxes will be paying his salary from now on is truly comforting.
Hey, Reagen can become President, Arnold can become governor...surely Kumar can fill such a fictituous office position adequately...right? I don't think the nation really has anything to worry about, but it's still pretty ridiculous. Interestingly, someone I know had the "pleasure" of personally meeting Mr. Penn and the general impression was that he came off rather rude. Perhaps the Public Liaison position doesn't require good people skills?
On the other hand, we definitely should worry if the other Mr. Penn is given a job in politics.
Lastly, to free himself up to take the new position, Kal's character was killed off of the show "House" (which I don't watch). I don't really care, but Pete Yorn's song "Lose You" (one of his finest) was played during that portion of the episode. Kind of a nice way to go out; you can see the clip here, if it remains available.
fired, with good cause
Some people just lack common sense. Take this situation: this guy is a writer for foxnews.com for 10 years, and presumably he has no inclination to lose his job in the current economic climate. Still, he illegally downloads a movie that isn't out yet - "X-Men Origins: Wolverine," which looks pretty awesome - and then goes on his column and explicitly states what he did while preemptively giving his thoughts on the film. What's worse is that the movie is from 20th Century Fox, which is owned by the same company (News Corp.) as Fox News. He had to think there was a possibility of someone reading his column and "disapproving" of his actions. At least it'll make for an interesting conversation at his next job interview.
None of this would be an issue if downloading movies was legalized. Lobby your senator.
He did enjoy the movie though, for what it's worth.
make my day
My philosophy is basically this (and this is something that I live by, and I always have, and I always will): don't ever, for any reason, do anything to anyone, for any reason, ever, no matter what, no matter where, or who, or who you are with, or where you are going, or where you've been, ever, for any reason, whatsoever...
- Michael Scott
Some people may not realize that Clint Eastwood is a badass. I know this to be true, but I'm basing this solely on his portrayal of a retired gunslinger in "Unforgiven." He wrestles with hogs, cures their ailments, and raises his kids, all after having been reformed by his departed wife. And yet, there's more to him than that. He's laconic in a "I know I could best you but I don't need to prove it right now" kind of way, and he has a stone face that you could feel glaring at you even if the room were pitch black. He's comical, but at the same time extremely fierce, and he's not limited by false perceptions of perfection.
Still, he is not above falling back into some of his old habits. If that means he gets to kill the narcissistic, abusive sheriff or the whore-cuttin' cowboys, then he'll do it, and we'll watch, but he doesn't want us to enjoy it. He knows what his shortcomings mean to his character: they define him as a person and condemn him at the same time. Everything about him that is exceptional is hauntingly despicable, and he acknowledges that.
So here's to you, Clint Eastwood's fictional character and/or Clint Eastwood himself. Because I have little doubt that the real Clint Eastwood is a full embodiment of his on-screen personas.
tale as old as time
I don't think I ever realized the stunning endorsement of bestial impropriety invoked by the animated Disney movie, "Beauty and the Beast." When Belle falls in love with the Beast, she really doesn't know he used to be a man (even if she suspects as much). And her love for him is certainly not based on some profound connection; the longest conversations they have consist of him roaring at her and her saying she wants to see her father again. It's not until he saves her life that she starts "coming around," and from that point on all they do is dance, eat sloppily, and frolic in the snow.
So Belle loves the Beast because he is an animal capable of displaying compassion and a certain degree of nervous cuteness. That's all well and good, but she certainly got lucky that he ended up turning back into a man before she married him. Man-beast marriages might fly in France (I wouldn't be surprised one way or the other), but it's no good over on this continent (at least not without a democrat in the White House). And it's a good thing too, or Jethro would be having a field day.
One other movie to consider along these lines is the most recent "King Kong." Films like this really leave me conflicted, because I almost find myself rooting for the animal and the woman to just find their way to Vegas and live out their lives in tranquility. But then I realize it's just a damn dirty ape, and it would imprison her and beat down her society the first chance it got.
Maybe I missed the whole point of the movie.
more like crystal suck
I'm not sure how the new Indiana Jones movie has garnered any significant amount of praise, but without giving any spoilers away, let me just say that it's a fairly large waste of time. Taken on its own, I suppose it contains an adequate amount of action and excitement, but it can't be compared to its predecessors. The writing is mediocre at best, the dialogue is far from witty, and the story itself...ouch. Harrison Ford is still OK, but he can only do so much with the material he's given.
At least they toss around a lot of references to let you know it's an Indiana Jones movie. The crystal skull concept was a decent direction for them to head (no pun intended), but overall this movie could've gone straight to video. It tries to maintain a throwback feel but there's nothing about it that's particularly alluring.
Instead of watching this old series with an old actor, rent "Rambo" in a couple of days. Now there's a revival that's not disappointing.
Best line from "Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull":
It's a portal!
his mind is the ultimate weapon
This is just preliminary information, but it's certainly worth sharing: apparently there's a big screen adaptation of MacGyver in the planning stages. Anyone who grew up in the mid-80s or early 90s and didn't experience MacGyver didn't have much of a youth at all, and people who, for whatever reason, missed the episodes when they were originally run should head to CBS.com to watch them for free.
Anyway, the creator of the series, Lee David Zlotoff, has said that he owns the rights to a MacGyver movie and is putting plans in place that would revive Mac for his first true movie (not counting the made-for-TV stuff) - according to Gizmodo. It's far too soon to tell if this would mean seeing someone other than Richard Dean Anderson reprising the role, but it would have to be a surprisingly compelling movie if they didn't bring RDA back (and, for some reason, I couldn't imagine the writing being spectacular).
The only reason I'm writing this is to put one more bit of information about the movie on the web, thereby increasing the exposure to potential viewers and, hopefully, increasing the likelihood that the movie would get formally under way. But it's a coincidence that this news was recently mentioned, because I just got done watching an episode from my MacGyver DVD collection in which he helps a little girl in Bangkok recover her stolen dialysis machine, while at the same time reuniting his bounty hunter friend with his estranged son.
Those who have seen MacGyver may find these YouTube videos mildly humorous - they're called "MacGyver: The College Years." The first one's probably the best, but there are four of them. Only watch if you're very bored.
didn’t see this coming
Well that didn't take long...The Ruins, that craptacular "best seller" I wrote so lovingly about, is being made into a movie. If you haven't read both parts of my review (Part I, Part II), I thoroughly suggest doing so, because this is one movie you won't want to miss.
Actually, the only reason I'd watch that movie is to give the man my money for creating such a masterful work of art. The entire time I was reading that book, it was painfully obvious that he wanted it made into a movie, and of course Hollywood ate it up. Most books that are made into movies leave you with a new respect for the original text. If that's the case in this situation, they will have made a movie unimaginably bad, because that book was truly terrible. Horrific even, and not because it was scary. I'd say that at least the dialogue in the movie might be better than it was in the book, but apparently Scott Smith wrote the screenplay as well.
I'm...I'm just beyond words right now. Forgive me. Just watch the trailer, and I'm sure you'll find yourself much smarter for having done so.