By Ben Heckendorn

Yo yo Ben H here! A little known fact is that when I’m making building videogame crap or drinking MGD I am a soothsayer! That is, I can predict the future! Amazing, I know. So anyway, since this is a movie site I figured to use my powers to predict “The Top and Bottom Holiday Films of 2005!”

Being an uber-capitalist I don’t mean the best or worst. Nope, just which ones make the big bucks and which STEALTHFULLY flop away into the bargain bin. Why do this, you ask? Why not! When all’s said and done we can look back on this and laugh. Overall I think this holiday season will be pretty big, much better than summer. Of course pundits will attribute this to the now-lower gas prices but it’s the MOVIES themselves that make the difference. (I can see the headlines now: “People brave deadly BIRD FLU to see Harry Potter” What BS) Anyway, let’s get started, going in sort-of chronological order.

November 4th
CHICKEN LITTLE
AKA “Let’s throw away all our 2D animation stuff and do it all on computer now!” Disney Feature Animation Studios, Directed by the guy who did “Emperor’s New Groove” and starring the usual cast of TV and independent film actors.

WILL MAKE: $175 million US
Rating: SUCCESS

“Chicken Little” comes out this Friday and it’ll probably do pretty well. Not on its merits, mind you - it’s got to be the ugliest looking CGI film ever, and that’s a big feat considering I think most CGI films are already ugly. And not from the huge advertising budget either.

Nope, “Chicken Little” will be this year’s “JUMANJI”. (The funnest word to say in all history) See, I worked in a theatre when “JUMANJI” came out and it didn’t make money cause people wanted to see it. It made money because “Toy Story” was always sold out and people went to the next family-friendly poster they saw - “JUMANJI” - the “overflow film”.

Of course there’s no “Toy Story” this year, instead we have the TRUE 800-lb gorilla of the season “Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire” That movie will sell out faster than a lifeboat store on the “Titanic”. Everyone who arrives too late and gets turned away will go see “Chicken Little”. Guaranteed. Eisner probably knows this, but will say the film is a success because the studio “went 3D, and that’s what the people wanted”.

November 9th
Get Rich or Die Tryin’
AKA “Hey that 8-Mile movie made a bunch of money!”
Starring: Some rapper whose name involves money, ice or the letter T. (shrug)

WILL MAKE: $30-$50 million US
Rating: Bleh

Naturally they’re going for the “8 Mile” ripoff with this one, but I don’t think anyone will really care. I’m not a hip-hop expert but I’m pretty sure M&M (screw his real name, or how to spell the fake one) is, and was, a LOT more popular than this 50 cent piece dude. But of course they probably got this sucka in the can for 20 mill (or 20,000 G’s) so they’re pretty much assured of not going broke. Or dyin’ tryin’.

November 11th
Zathura
AKA “JUMANJI 2 – Electric Boogaloo”
Starring: Some kids, outer space, robots. Released by Sony “We’re reverting to the kind of shit we released in the early 90’s” Pictures (Columbia)

WILL MAKE: $35-$50 million US
Rating: BOMB (based off expense of film)

Who gives a fuck about this movie? It’s been 10 years since JUMANJI, and they’re trying to say this is part of the (bleh) “franchise” I hate movie franchises. Or the term at least. Movies are supposed to be about art. Franchises are about selling shitty hamburgers.

Anyway, same plot as Jumanji but the “spillovers” from Harry Potter and the Cash Cow of Doom will go to “Chicken Little” instead since its ad budget appears to be 100 times that of Zathura. Plus it’s easier for kids to say “Chick N Lit Tul” than this phonetic abortion.

Who the hell calls a movie “Zathura”? It’s hard to say, isn’t fun to say, and sounds like a character from Olivia Newton John’s “Xanadu” or “Legend”. “JUMANJI”, while a bullshit word, was at least easy to remember and of course, really fun to say. Try yelling out “JUMANJI!” at the top of your lungs some time, you’ll have a blast.

The title IS important, Hollywood. You’d be surprised how many people pick which movie they’ll see by just going to the theatre and looking at the posters. Do some research on that once, and you’ll realize people probably think the following when they see some titles:

“The Constant Gardener” – a Martha Stewart movie?
“Jarhead” – somebody who cans a lot of fruit?
“Aeon Flux” – a paste that helps you solder?

November 18th
Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire
AKA “All your money are belong to us”
Starring: The Harry Potter gang. Released by Warner Brothers.

WILL MAKE: $350-$400 million US
Rating: UBER-SMASH HIT of 2005

Harry Potter 4 is going to make so much money it’s not even funny. Utter shit-loads. Titanic-loads. Something to think about is “Goblet of Fire” was the book released in 2000, when the Potter phenomenon really took off, so it’s the one everyone remembers. (And supposedly the best, but I wouldn’t know, shucks, I don’t do much book readin’).

I don’t know what else to really say. It’ll be the biggest hit of the year, trouncing Star Wars, and probably one of the biggest hits of all time. The kids will all flock to it, and the adult readers, who would flock to it anyway, will flock even faster since it’s rated PG-13. Oh I know what to say while I’m hear. I am quite sick of would-be pedophiles who go on and on about how hot Emma Waston will someday be. Ug! I guess with the Olsen Skanks turning 18 somebody had to be the “next big thing” Just watch, 5 years from now we’ll see Emma Waston in “Aeon Flux 2” or “20 Things I Hate About You” Then her career will promptly vanish and she’ll be reduced to Sci-Fi channel original pictures or an extra on Stargate: Atlantis SVU.

November 18th
Walk The Line
AKA “That Ray movie was well-received, let’s find another dead singer to exploit”
Starring: Joaquin Phoenix, Reese Witherspoon and some other people. Released by 20th Century Fox

WILL MAKE: $40-$60 million cash US
Rating: Eh.

Actresses have it easy – when they want an Oscar all they have to die is take off their shirt. Actors on the other hand must always play dead famous people, preferably ones with mental defects. Thus Joaquin Phoenix pines for an Oscar with “Walk The Line”, a movie about the life of Johnny Cash.

I dunno – I’m not to hot on obvious Oscar-grab movies. I like Cash and all but I don’t give a rat’s ass about this movie. Now a “How Cameron Met Paxton” movie – THAT I’d see.

November 23rd
Rent
AKA “Hey we’re only 3 years behind Chicago!”
Starring: A bunch of people who sing I guess. Directed by… Chris Columbus? Released by Sony “Bombs R Us” Pictures

WILL MAKE: $20-$40 million cash US
Rating: Cheap bomb (dirty bomb?)

I actually like musicals a lot but I don’t care about this thing. My feeling is nobody else will too, or they’ll go see “The Producers” instead. There’s no star power as with “Chicago” and I have a feeling it just won’t be as good, so no word of mouth. Damn sell your Sony stock NOW!

December 2nd
Aeon Flux
AKA Zit on the ass of Cameron’s upcoming Battle Angel Alita
Starring: Charlize Theron. Directed by… oh probably some music video director. Released by (please don’t be Sony…) THANK GOD! Paramount Pictures.

WILL MAKE: $10-$20 million cash US
Rating: NUCLEAR BOMB

I’ll be upfront you with – I am going to this movie. Jones and I have already decided this will be the first official “in theatre” Shitty Movie Night. Plus he’s a Charlize fan and apparently has actually SEEN the old Aeon Flux show on MTV. But on to why they made this…

How much crack do these execs smoke? I mean really? “Let’s make an expensive sci-fi movie based off a 10 year old MTV show that ran for 1 season” Oh fucking BRILLIANT. Even the uber-popular “Beavis and Butthead” show didn’t translate into big box office bucks, and they actually released the film close enough to the show to be relevant.

Of course what do I know? Maybe it’s policy to make X number of bombs per year to wipe out the profits from successful films. I mean, as long as everyone gets paid on a film who cares if it makes money? Too bad real life isn’t like that. “I will spend 100 grand on a house and sell it for 35 grand, and that’s FINE!” Sheesh.

Final thing – Charlize Theron. OK she won her Oscar using the OTHER method for actresses (extreme weight change) but still. Why does every actress immediately make SHIT after winning an Oscar? Oh right, the money. A short list to make you cry:

Mira Sorvino – “Mighty Aphrodite”, then “Replacement Killers” and “MIMIC”
Angelina Jolie – “Girl, Interrupted”, then “TOMB RAIDER”
Halle Berry – “Monster’s Ball”, then, ug, “CATWOMAN”.
Nicole Kidman – “The Hours”, then THE STEPFORD FUCKING WIVES

And I’m sure Hillary Swank is reading the script for “Pong: The Movie” as we speak.

December 9th
The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe
(Longest title since “Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl”)
Starring: A bunch of kids, a lion, a witch and get this – a wardrobe!. Directed by Andrew Adamson. Released by Disney.

WILL MAKE: $150-$200 million US (possibly even more)
Rating: HIT

I think I actually read this book like a zillion years ago. I can’t remember what happened, but it seems like it was a fairly popular tale. Kind of for kids I think. Anyway this is Disney’s knee-jerk slap themselves in the face reaction for passing on “Lord of the Rings” and I think they’ll do OK with it. By the time it comes out everyone will have already seen “Harry Potter” 16 times so it’ll have room to breathe.

Supposedly this movie has a Christian undercurrent to it – I can’t recall. That won’t hurt the box office, if anything it’ll help. I mean, “Passion of the Christ” anyone? I think people are possibly getting a little sick of the agnostic or evolutionist approach in most films, or the fact if God is used at all it’s just in passing or from the “religious nut” character. I mean, I actually think a “Ten Commandments” remake would be a huge, huge hit. Maybe I’m wrong. But I bet “Chronicles” proves me right. To paraphrase Wesley Snipes: “Always bet on God!”

December 14th
King Kong
Starring: Naomi “I was in Tank Girl” Watts, Jack Black and a big CGI ape. Directed by Peter Jackson. Released by Universal.

WILL MAKE: $150-$200 million US (tops)
Rating: DISAPPOINTMENT

Mark my words now – this will be the sure-fire “big disappointment” of the season. Sure it’ll make money, but with a cost of over $200 million, not counting advertising, it’ll fall short of what they want. I’m sure it’ll be interesting, have good effects, blah blah blah, but I just don’t think people will care. Really all it has going for it is “from the director of Lord of the Rings”.

In 1933 King Kong was something filmgoers had never seen before. The 1976 remake was pretty cheesy but it did OK, despite the flood of “disaster” films it was released during. Now we have Kong 2005.

The problem here is we’ve all seen “Jurassic Park”, which set the standard for all the “run away from the monster” movies that have come since. And these movies are always the same: A monster is on the loose/attacks. People are not directly killed by it, or it is shown off-camera. Lots of cars are thrown around. The monster attacks or is seen near well-known landmarks. Most of the action involves people “jumping out of the way” of things. (falling cars, girders, electrical lines) Again nobody thinks to, oh I don’t know, SHOOT the bad creatures.

This same kind of conflict-less bland crap is evident in the Kong 2005 trailer. Actually, half that trailer is about them finding Naomi Watts and her walking onto a ship, so we may be in more trouble than we think (or the effects weren’t ready, a more likely scenario) The “people making a movie within a movie” thing never works, it always comes off as phony and pretentious. (Plus making movies is actually extremely boring and monotonous) It only really worked in “Ed Wood” since that’s what the movie was about rather than just a scene or two.

Maybe I’ll be wrong and this film will rock. But I’m not a Peter Jackson fanboy so I won’t believe it til I see it. I just have this feeling this movie is just going to be seen as another “monster on the loose” flick by most people. I mean, in 1998, even with the amazing duo of Bill Paxton and Charlize Theron “Mighty Joe Young” didn’t do squat. (Paxton: “Oh shit! A giant monkey! Game over man!”) We’ll see if people go ape-shit for this or not.

December 14th
Diary of a Japanese Hooker
Starring: A bunch of people. Directed by Rob Marshall. Released by Dreamworks.

WILL MAKE: $100-$150 million US
Rating: SUCCESS

I didn’t read this book of course. Seems like Spielberg was gonna do this flick for the longest time (just like Indy 4) but now Rob “Chicago” Marshall is taking a whack at it. He’ll probably whack it out of the park.

I think it’ll make money because 1) it was a book 2) it’ll have that “Dances with Wolves” meets “Bridges of Madison County” meets “The Last Samurai” thing going 3) it seems like an “important” film that people will check out. The older crowd will see it, and they’re the SECRET WEAPON of smash hits (cough cough “Titanic”).

December 16th
The Producers
Starring: Nathan Lane, Matthew Broderick, the Kill Bill chick. Directed by… beats me… Not Mel Brooks, I know that. Released by Universal.

WILL MAKE: $50-$100 million US
Rating: Eh.

I haven’t seen the original movie or the new stage play. But it’s cool Mel Brooks is still kicking out stuff. Anyway, what to say about this… It won’t be a “Chicago” sized hit, but maybe close. Will knock out Rent with the electric bill to spare. Again the “play within a play within a movie” thing is always kind of confusing. Sure it works on Broadway but that’s Broadway, we’re talking about a theatrical release here. It’ll do alright, but it’s certainly not the next “Sound of Music”.

December 23rd
Munich
Starring: Eric Bana and the New Bond. Directed by Steven “The Kids Can Never Die!” Spielberg. Released by Universal.

WILL MAKE: $100-$150 million US
Rating: SUCCESS

Here’s the controversial movie of the year! (or so they say) Apparently this is about some assassins and the 1972 Olympics. I don’t know much more than that, but it involves 1) terrorism 2) past events 3) Steven Spielberg so it’s guaranteed to be a hit. People will go just to see it as it’ll likely raise a lot of questions and debate. Let’s just hope it has more balls than “War of the Worlds” and its “resurrected from the dead” Tom Cruise’s son.

Well there you have it. My (sort of) complete list of box office hits and misses. This list is surely so accurate you can buy or sell stock of studios right now! Your profit margins will be amazing! Have fun and see you at the movies!

Share on Facebook

By Dale Nauertz

Hello friends and neighbors. It’s that time of year again. The time when I enlighten all of you as to the few films yet to arrive in the remaining months of the year that I actually care to see. Last year, you may remember (and if not, you can look last year’s installment up in the Essays section of the site) there wasn’t anything that I was really frothing at the mouth to check out (“The Life Aquatic” was the top of that list by default) but I managed to scare up ten movies all the same. This year is more of the same. Though, I must admit, I am chomping at the bit to see a couple of these. I’m not willing to lose a finger or take time off from work for any of them, but I have a heavy interest. In fact, to illustrate my level of interest, I have devised a color coded system reminiscent of the one our Department of Homeland Security uses to tell you how close to shitting your pants with fear you should be over the latest, vague terrorist threats the CIA has discovered (Go here in case you have no idea what I’m talking about). Therefore, I shall compile several lists; each list organized by the level of interest I have and each level of interest represented by a corresponding color.

Green: signifies films I have no interest in, but which still exist for some reason. I won’t be mentioning them on this list because, really, what’s the point? I don’t care about them, and you shouldn’t either. They were a waste of the filmmaker’s time (from the looks of things) and they shouldn’t bother you either.

Example: “The Man” with Eugene Levy and Samuel L. Jackson.

Blue: I probably won’t mention many of these either. These are films I would not actively flee from if I found myself trapped in a theater where they were playing, but films that I would not, ideally, put myself in a position to see. Unlike the green list, however, I would not be tempted to gnaw my arm off to escape.

Example: “Deuce Bigalow: European Gigolo”. It looks terrible, but I’ll probably end up seeing it someday because I enjoyed the first one. Still, my money could be spent on better things.

Yellow: movies I want to see, sort of. They’re not high priority, but I’m not ruling them out. I may even see them in the theater, if I have absolutely nothing better to do with my time.

Example: “V for Vendetta” with Natalie Portman and some guy in a weird mask overthrowing a fascist government…probably by using “bullet time”.

Orange: these are movies I want to see, and have a great deal of interest in, but if they come out the same weekend as anything on the “Red” list, they’ll have to wait their turn.

Example: “The Legend of Zorro”. Yeah, it’s an unnecessary sequel, but it looks like it could be fun.

Red: Movies I really, really want to see. These are films that I cannot wait for.

Example: “Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire”.

Now, let the games begin!

RED ALERT FILMS:

1. “Elizabethtown”

Cameron Crowe is one of my personal gods of filmmaking. I’ve never seen a bad film with him at the helm, and I’ve only seen one that was less than amazing (“Singles”). He wrote and directed this story about a man (Orlando Bloom, here’s hoping he can act without carrying a sword…hell, here’s hoping he can ACT) going to a Southern town he’s never been to (the city of the title) to bury his father there. Along the way, he encounters relatives he’s never met and a plucky, charming flight attendant (Kirsten Dunst) who changes his life…or something. It sounds a bit like “Garden State”, but that’s all right. I’d take a warmed-over version of “Garden State” over most things I’ve watched at the theater this year. And with Crowe in charge, I’m sure there will be some unexpected delights that will take this movie to wonderful places you never thought it would or could go. In short, it looks to be a well-written, uplifting movie, the sort that Crowe could probably make with his eyes closed.

2. “Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire”

I blame Stephen King. Seriously. I’d heard about the Harry Potter books, but I’d never really paid them much mind. I thought they were only for kids. I had known adults who had read them, but not many of them, and they were usually adults with kids anyway. But then I read a book by King called “On Writing”. In the back of that book, he mentioned recent books he thought were well done. The Harry Potter tomes were on that list. For me, you see, King is a gateway writer, the literary equivalent of pot. He’s a great writer, and he’s been my favorite forever. So whenever he recommends a book or a writer, I give them a shot. He’s the reason I had devoured the Potter books (the ones that were out, anyway) within a couple of months. (He’s also the reason I gave a book called “Fargo Rock City” a chance, thanks to a blurb by him on its cover. Now I’m a huge Chuck Klosterman fan. I have a lot of things to thank Steve for.) Needless to say, I’ve seen all the Potter films so far, and I like all of them. The third one has the most artistry, but I admire the slavish adaptations of the first two as well because they are literally (no pun intended) like the books I fell in love with in the first place. Of all the books, “Goblet of Fire” is my favorite thus far. It’s a riveting, action-packed read that develops the characters nicely, has the best set pieces of the series, and is darker than all the rest. It’s like “Harry Potter and the Temple of Doom”, at least in the last couple chapters. The prospect of this phenomenal book being turned into a film has me excited, especially since it’ll be rated PG-13, hopefully preserving the unsettling darkness of the final chapters. Trust me, if it’s even close to the book, it’ll be a great time.

3. “Serenity”

After “Sith” hit theaters, I realized that my main source of sci-fi goodness had come to an end. I therefore ventured out to find new science fiction arenas that would hopefully thrill me half as much, worlds that had leapt from the writers’ imagination with that same spark George Lucas had brought to his films. For some reason, “Star Trek” has never really done this for me. “Farscape” is good, I like it a lot, but there are still a few things about it that just don’t sit well with me (an overdose of quirkiness, perhaps). “Firefly”, however, was just right. I got it for free from Amazon.com when I opened a Visa card account with them, and I blew through the DVD set, saddened when I had watched the last of the fourteen, all too short episodes. I wanted more. Thank God those magnificent idiots at Universal decided to give Joss Whedon (creator of “Firefly” as well as “Angel” and “Buffy”…neither of which are half as compelling as “Firefly”) fifty million bucks to bring these characters and this universe to the big screen. Thank God, as well, that Whedon used the same actors as he did on the show. Thank God he didn’t replace Nate Fillion’s unique brand of bad-ass cool, for example, with that of some schmoe like Josh Hartnett or Mel Gibson. I loved this show, and I love the trailers for this movie. It hits theaters on September 30th. That gives you all plenty of time to rent “Firefly” off Netflix and find out just how great it is. I’ve already converted my brother-in-law. Trust me, it’s great stuff.

4. “Lord of War”

Nicolas Cage movies end up on this list almost every year, I think. Maybe it’s because, when he’s at the top of his game, there are few people in movies that I would rather watch. When a director knows how to make use of him, few actors are better. He essays a sense of quirkiness and fun, but never at the expense of character or of the overall film. Like Johnny Depp, he’s a great cinematic oddball…most of the time. In the wrong director’s hands, however, he can be a giant sleeping pill (“Windtalkers” and “Captain Corelli’s Mandolin” spring to mind). The trailer for this movie looks fantastic, with Cage playing a supercool international arms dealer. This movie looks to do for gun merchants what “Blow” did for coke dealers. This is to make them damned entertaining, as well as thought provoking, subjects. Hell, it looks so good that even the presence of Ethan Hawke doesn’t irk me.

5. “Munich”

Steven Spielberg is now filming this tale about a Mossad agent (Eric Bana) tracking a group of Palestinian terrorists responsible for killing a group of Israeli athletes at the 1972 Munich Olympics, but it will allegedly be ready by Christmas. This sounds like one of Spielberg’s ballsiest projects yet, and he’s been doing some ballsy stuff lately, like turning the alien invasion genre on its head with “War of the Worlds”. “War of the Worlds” was basically about terrorists from another planet, after all. If Spielberg gives us the hard-hitting, gritty drama that I think he will, this should be a shoe-in for Best Picture consideration. Considering his recent track record, however, it’ll probably be an excellent movie that fumbles somehow in the last twenty minutes. But the closest thing he’s done to perfection lately was “Catch Me If You Can”, another movie based on real events, so I’ve got some real hope for this one. If nothing else, it should be interesting to watch.

6. “Kiss Kiss Bang Bang”

Before Quentin Tarantino emerged, Shane Black was the “It” writer of the Hollywood scene. It’s hard to fathom in retrospect, but “The Long Kiss Goodnight” was actually the highest selling screenplay of its time. In fact, with his concoctions of well conceived action, colorful dialogue, rampant profanity, dirty jokes and guy talk, he may even have been the forerunner of a guy like Tarantino. After “Long Kiss”, however, Shane disappeared from Hollywood without a trace. Now he’s back, having written and directed this film which stars Val Kilmer and Robert Downey Jr. That seems like an odd combination (well, actually, it seems like an uninsurable combination) but those are sort of Black’s specialty. Look at Damon Wayans and Bruce Willis in “The Last Boy Scout” or Danny Glover and Mel “Riggs” Gibson in the first two “Lethal Weapon” flicks, all written by Black. Those are great teams. If Black knows what he’s doing (and I, for one, believe that he does) then perhaps he has crafted another winning team with this tale of a thief posing as an actor playing a detective (tutored by gay detective Val Kilmer). It’s a great concept, and it’s got a fun trailer. Plus, I’m personally happy to see one of my favorite screenwriters working again. This man is the M. Night Shyamalan of action cinema (and his worst movie is arguably better than “The Village”).

7. “The Producers”

I can’t afford to go to the Broadway show, so this will have to do: a movie version of the musical based on the ‘60’s Mel Brooks film about a Broadway producer and a neurotic accountant intentionally making a Broadway flop. Matthew Broderick and Nathan Lane are reprising the roles they made their own and Uma Thurman and Will Ferrell are on hand for support. I own the soundtrack to the Broadway show, and it is hilarious. I can’t wait to see the actions that go along with it. It should be a rollicking good time.

And those are the only ones I have a burning desire to see. Now we move on to…

ORANGE ALERT FILMS:

1. “Wallace and Gromit in the Curse of the Were-rabbit”

The big-toothed inventor with a penchant for cheese and his intelligent dog sidekick has always been a big source of amusement for me, and now they have their own movie. Hooray!

Wallace and Gromit in the Curse of the Were-rabbit Trailer

2. “Waiting…”

I love Ryan Reynolds, even when the movie he’s in is less than stellar. He always gives his best, and I appreciate it. Plus, with his sardonic air and hipster quality, he sort of reminds me of a modern Chevy Chase…back when Chevy was still regularly funny. He’s in this movie which, from the trailer, looks ready to do for waiters what “Office Space” did for office workers. Justin Long, Anna Farris, hilarious stand-up comic Dane Cook and Luis Guzman co-star.

3. “The New World”

I didn’t like “The Thin Red Line”. I thought it was, to quote Mel Gibson’s opinion of his own “Million Dollar Hotel”: “as boring as a dead dog’s ass”. That was directed by Terrence Malick, who also did “Badlands” and “Days of Heaven”, neither of which sucked. In fact, they were gorgeous. And I hated “Alexander” which starred Colin Farrell and Christopher Plummer. They are both in this film. And yet, somehow, I have a good feeling about this one. Mostly because it tells the story of the explorers who “discovered” America (well, after Columbus) and I find that to be an interesting and largely unfilmed portion of history. So I will check out this movie. But if it had less people who had made movies I disliked involved, it might have made it to the Red Alert status.

4. “Shopgirl”

I want to see this because, deep in my heart, I still hope that Steve Martin can be funny. He’s had a dry spell with everything he’s done since “Bowfinger”, but I still have my fingers crossed for this movie where he apparently falls in love with a retail clerk played by Claire Danes. It’s based on a book he wrote. Please, Steve, don’t screw this up.

5. “The Fountain”

I had almost completely forgotten about this film until an afternoon I spent leafing through magazines at Barnes and Noble (one of my favorite, cheap pastimes) and discovered via Premiere magazine that it’s actually slated to come out this year. It’s a story from director Darren Aronofsky (the possible lunatic who made “Pi” and “Requiem for a Dream”) about a man traveling through time to save the woman he loves…or something. Hugh Jackman (sans claws) is the time traveler and Rachel Weisz is the woman in question. Apparently, this film spans from the conquistador days of the 16th century to a spaceship in the year 2500. Wow. The film was originally set to have Brad Pitt as its lead, but he skipped out to have sex with Angelina Jolie or something. Oh well, I like Hugh Jackman and with Aronofsky in charge, this film is bound to have at least a couple of screws loose. It sounds lighter than his usual fare…but then again, maybe it isn’t. Only time will tell.

6. “The Legend of Zorro”

Seven years after the fact, we get a sequel to “The Mask of Zorro”. Now, “The Mask of Zorro” was a diverting bit of entertainment (and it did introduce most American males to the natural resource that is Catherine Zeta Jones) but I doubt anyone was clamoring for a sequel to it. Hell, most people have probably forgotten the original film even exists. I know I pretty much forget about it until I recognize it lurking in my DVD collection…and even then I am rarely prompted to pop it in. Whenever I DO happen to pop it in, however, I realize it’s a fun, entertaining and action-packed film filled with beautiful women, luscious cinematography and cool swordplay and horse stunts. Here’s hoping that this sequel will have more of the same…though, sadly, without Anthony Hopkins and with a less attractive incarnation of Catherine Zeta Jones. (Truthfully, I’m not sure if Catherine is really any less attractive…I think it’s just that I’ve gotten tired of seeing her over the past decade. It’s like the Grand Canyon: if you saw it on the cover of a magazine every day, you’d stop caring after while.)

7. “The Transporter 2”

I love Jason Statham. I think he’s set to become the leading action hero of his generation. And I loved “The Transporter” despite the fact that there wasn’t a brain in its head. It’s just a good time, nothing more. So I hope this will be a good time too…though I have my doubts.

8. “Ice Harvest”

John Cusack hasn’t done anything that I’ve found intriguing for a while, but hopefully this allegedly dark thriller set around Christmas-time, co-starring Billy Bob Thornton, and directed by Harold Ramis will change that trend. That’s about all I know about this movie, but it’s enough to pique my interest.

And that’s about all for the movies on my Orange Alert list.

YELLOW ALERT FILMS: 

“Proof” 

Probably an Oscar bait movie: it has Gwyneth Paltrow, Hope Davis, and Anthony Hopkins in it. It’s about a dying math genius and his daughters, I think.

“The Libertine”

A dark, period drama starring Johnny Depp.

“The Weather Man”

It’s more Nicolas Cage. This time he’s a put-upon weather man who undergoes a life crisis.

“Syriana”

George Clooney in a Steven Soderbergh film about our national dependence on oil: should be a light, breezy romantic comedy that stirs absolutely no controversy.

“Flight Plan”

Jodie Foster takes “Panic Room” on a plane. Someone is messing with her daughter. I’ve run afoul of Jodie a time or two and, trust me; you don’t want to be doing that.

“The Corpse Bride”

Johnny Depp lends his voice to a Tim Burton-produced story about a man who “accidentally” marries a corpse. It’s a stop motion animated film in the same vein as “The Nightmare Before Christmas” and should find a cult following among the same audience: hard-core animation fans and Goths.

“Jarhead”

A movie about soldiers directed by Sam Mendes. I like Sam Mendes, so I’ll probably go.

“The Ringer”

Johnny Knoxville stars in this movie from the Farrelly brothers about a con artist pretending to be disabled so he can compete in the special Olympics. Even though Cartman did the same thing in a hilarious “South Park” episode, this should be worth a peek. Besides, Brian Cox is in it!

“V for Vendetta”

Yet another great Alan Moore comic gets a Hollywood adaptation, and will probably end up being yet another disappointment. Still, hope springs eternal.

“Rent”

It’s a musical. I like musicals. Apparently, everyone in this musical dies of AIDS. So, y’know, it should be a blast! (By the way, I was being sarcastic.)

BLUE ALERT FILMS:
Movies I barely care about, but might still wind up seeing. 

“King Kong”

I know Peter Jackson has been dying to make this for years, but I still don’t see why any of the rest of us should give a damn. The effects in the trailer don’t look any better than those in “Jurassic Park” and the storyline is, let’s face it, fairly cheesy. It worked in the ‘30’s, but I’m just not sure it’ll work nowadays. And Jack Black just seems all wrong for this flick.

“Zathura”

A couple of kids play a board game that takes them into Outer Space. If it sounds a lot like “Jumanji”, well, it IS by the same author. I just want to know what company it is, in this fantasy universe, which keeps making all these board games that come to life. I picture them as a satanic version of Parker Brothers. Who ARE these people, anyway?

“Domino”

I wanted to see this movie a lot more before I saw an actual trailer for it. The premise is neat: a woman casts aside her modeling career to become a bounty hunter. The cast is pretty good: Keira Knightley, Mickey Rourke, Lucy Liu and the ever-watchable Christopher Walken. Unfortunately, Tony Scott seems to be indulging the same overdose of style that sabotaged his “Man on Fire”. But Walken is still in it.

“A Sound of Thunder”

This movie was mentioned on my list last year. A bunch of guys go back in time to hunt dinosaurs and end up screwing up the space-time continuum. Did Professor Emmett Brown teach us nothing?

“The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe”

Hey, everybody, let’s cash in on “Lord of the Rings”! I’ll end up seeing it for the lion and because, after “Constantine”, I love Tilda Swinton. She plays the witch of the title. From the trailer, it looks like they put “Lord of the Rings”, “Lemony Snicket” and “Harry Potter” in a blender and ended up with this. Plus, I find the colon in the title to be disturbing. I’ve got a feeling that means they’re going to make ALL of these books into a movie and there were…what? A hundred of them? Seven, at the very least. I may have gotten myself hooked on four seasons worth of “Alias”, but I’m not committing to thirty-eight films about some magical closet. Sorry, but no thanks.

And there you have it. Don’t bother looking anywhere else; these are the only films you should remotely care about. Take it from me, I’ve done the research. And of these, the Red list is the only one I really, truly care about. The rest are just time-fillers. Choose wisely, mark down the release dates (you’ll have to find those on your own, I couldn’t be bothered), and I’ll see you at the movies!

Share on Facebook

This week I’m complaining about:

5 Shitty Remakes Nicole Kidman Could Do Next

NOTE: This was previously going to be a rant about annoying trends started by hit movies, but I figured I if I wanted to bitch about Nicole Kidman and “Bewitched” I’d better do it before the movie bombs (well, in its second weekend) and falls off the radar.

With the newly released “Bewitched” and last year’s “The Stepford Wives” it’s pretty obvious that Nicole Kidman, AKA ex-Mrs. Tom Cruise has a single mantra for the remainder of her career:

“I shall do nothing but shitty remakes!”

And why not? Remakes are all the rage in Hollywood, and probably will be until either audiences grow sick of them or someone actually creative moves to Tinsel town (whichever comes first) In the meantime, why shouldn’t every remake star Nicole Kidman? I mean, it “worked” twice, why not again? With this in mind, here’s 5 Shitty Remakes Nicole Kidman Could Do Next. Aspiring screenwriters, pay attention and call your agents!

“Who’s Afraid of Virginia Wolf?”

The plot: An alcoholic whore (Kidman) and her pussy-whipped husband (Hm… Russel Crowe?) invite over some young teachers from the campus Crowe works at for a late night of drinking, debauchery and character development.

The Catch: This time, they really DO have a son, who shows up halfway through the movie for revenge (and burgen), turning the film from an insightful adult drama into a thrill-a-minute slasher flick. In the end Kidman has to kill her own son (not a dry eye in the house) by dousing him with her last bottle of gin (thus resolving her alcoholism) and lighting it aflame.

The Tagline: “Son’s Coming Home For Dinner”

“Pretty Woman”

The plot: A down-and-out prostitute (Kidman) gets lucky and has a one-nighter with the man of her dreams, a hunky advertising agent played by Antonio Banderas.

The Catch: Kidman really isn’t a prostitute at all but an elite assassin trained by the Guild of Shadows (or some such guild of BS) since birth to be a cold-blooded killer. It wasn’t fate that brought her and Antonio together – instead he’s her next target! What follows is a romantic comedy / slash action suspense adventure! In the end she predictably falls in love with Antonio and refuses to kill him. The Guild of Shadows doesn’t think very highly of this and thus sends their top TOP assassin (Jason Statham) to take out both her and her boyfriend.

The Tagline: “Nothing Can Stop Her Mission – Nothing But Love”

“Flashdance: The Next Generation”

The plot: Not a remake, but a “re-imagining” of the original 1983 smash hit. Nicole Kidman plays a tough street-smart woman in the down and out streets of Philly (delphia) Working as a welder by day and a legwarmer-wearing vixen by night she follows her dream of becoming a professional dancer and not a stripper like her friend.

The Catch: The whole “welder by day, dancer by night” is a clever ruse to keep people from realizing she’s actually fabricating stuff for the A-Team, specifically, building their ass-kicking weapons and machines so they can chase off (but not kill) criminal masterminds and villains. A synergy-filled merging of two of the hottest franchises from the 80’s!

The Tagline: “I piddy da foo who don’t see dis movie!”

“Cleopatra: Queen of the Fucking World”

The plot: A show-boating sex-bomb Egyptian queen (Kidman) turns Julius Caesar (Harrison Ford) into her personal love slave, thus starting a war between their two nations.

The Catch: Cleopatra, being the queen of the fucking world, is the one who actually plots Caesar’s death so she can cash in on his insurance policy before he annuls their sham marriage. (As an obvious dig at Tom Cruise and Katie Holmes) Brutus takes the fall but escapes prison to hunt down and kill Cleopatra for revenge. Only her hunky new personal love slave (Orlando Bloom) stands in the way of Brutus and the fair queen.

The Tagline: “She Ruled The World With Iron Thighs”

“The Sound of Music”

The plot: Playing off the success of “Moulin Rouge” Nicole Kidman plays Maria - the Austrian nun with a British accent and a Spanish name – who becomes a nanny for the Von Trapps during World War II and teaches them all to sing, love life and be happy.

The Catch: Kidman really isn’t a nun at all but a secret Nazi agent sent to either bring Commander Von Trapp (Russel Crowe again) into the German Navy or kill him if he refuses! Oh the drama! However she has a splendid singing voice and despite her Nazi-dom falls in love with the children and eventually Von Trapp himself. After a heart-breaking rendition of “Edelweiss” her and the family escape Austria via the Autobahn in a stolen truck containing Heavy Water for the Nazi A-bomb experiments while being chased by Tiger Tanks, Messerschmitt planes and the new experimental “Weapon X”.

The Tagline: “The Hills Are Alive – With the Sound of ACTION!”

TUNE IN NEXT WEEK FOR MY NEW RANT!

Entitled:

”10 Annoying Trends Started by Hit Movies”

(Previously to have been this week’s rant, before Nicole Kidman’s post-Oscar “I’ll do ANYTHING for $$$!” rampage both repulsed and inspired me)

Share on Facebook

This week I’m complaining about:

The aliens in ‘War of the Worlds’ better not have shields, dammit!

There’s really only been two “big ticket” Alien mass invasion movies - the original War of the Worlds (1953) and Independence Day (1996) These movies had two big things in common: special effect mass destruction and of course, aliens with shielded spaceships.

The problem with shielded spaceships is that for the first 2/3rds of the movie the aliens basically blast the hell out of whatever they want (typically national landmarks rather than items of military significance) and humans spend all their time shooting blindly at them or running away. Then in Act 3 the humans find some way to deactivate the shields (ie: with a Mac laptop at the end of Independence Day) or “mother nature” comes in and kills the alien intruders with bacteria / STD’s / mad cow disease. (I’m still waiting for one where the lead alien says “You know what? I think this is the wrong planet… Hm. Sorry about the mess”)

So now we’ve got the release of Steven Spielberg’s “War of the Worlds” coming up. I’m actually really looking forward to it as I think Spielberg is one of our better, if under appreciated, directors and really excels at “war” films. (1941 doesn’t count) He understands the human drama that is more important than the actual fighting, but on the same token delivers extremely well-done action scenes. Everything he shoots is done very clearly, you know exactly what’s going on and it’s all got a very realistic feel to it. And somehow he always gets excellent special effects into his movies, so well done they just seem real. It probably has something to do with him being buddies of the guy who owns ILM, but who knows?

Which is why if the aliens have shields I’m going to be very disappointed.

The thing is, this movie is called WAR of the worlds, not “One world comes down and has a shooting gallery out of our world” War is all about conflict and loss on both sides. If the aliens have shields, where’s the conflict? All we do is run away and watch our shit get blown up. Now this isn’t all bad but as mentioned, it’s been the course for the earlier alien invasion movies so I really hope Spielberg does something different.

Look at the Iraq war (Either one, take your pick) A superior force goes in and fights an inferior one, much like when aliens attack Earth. Now even though it’s obviously a one-sided battle the superior side still takes plenty of damage. Planes get shot down, helicopters blown up. Sure we still win but it’s not a total victory - lives and equipment are always lost in any large-scale battle.

Now look at the new War of the Worlds (WotW henceforth) Obviously, as seen in the trailer, these alien ships / tripods / whatever are huge and armed with weapons enough to kick our ass ten times over. But so why can’t a F-14 fly by and lob a few missiles at it, perhaps taking out a tentacle or maybe even knocking one down? Maybe a tank could blow a few holes in an alien vessel, and then get stepped on. (Insert Wilhelm scream) If the aliens have enough ships who cares? But if we can cause damager right away then it at least seems like we might have a chance - that we could put up a fight. Or win a battle. Or a WAR. Of the worlds!

Maybe I’m just worrying ahead of time but think of how cool it would be to see jets, tanks and maybe even battleships fighting, actually engaging in battle, with alien tripods! In most “alien invasion movies” to date the aforementioned vehicles lob rounds at the aliens, see them bounce off the god-damn SHIELDS, and then run away with their turrets between their legs. Cut to the President / geeky scientist wondering “What can stop those shields? Let’s think about it for an hour while a bevy of multi-ethic characters hug their wives and save their dogs!” That’s just lazy… I want a bullet, missile, shell and bomb filled ORGY of destruction! Think of how cool it could be, the superbly done battles of “Saving Private Ryan” but with the army fighting aliens. The mind reels at the possibilities.

I should give this film more credit, especially since I haven’t seen it. Spielberg is a HELL of a director who knows sci-fi better than people will ever give him credit for and if anyone can make this film kick ass it’s him. Remember, it was Spielberg who ended the curse of “saving the dog” in 90’s disaster movies when he had one eaten in Jurassic Park 2. No modern director has made the range and variety of war action movies that he has, from the inventive comic action of “Raiders”, to the human and refugee element of ‘Schindler’s List” and the utterly real violence of “Saving Private Ryan” I say “C’mon Steve! Make this the war to end all wars, the ultimate American refugee film, a behind-alien-lines suspense thriller with a heart of gold!” It could be one hell of a film if you think about it, and I’m crossing every finger in toe in hopes that it is.

Just don’t have shields, dammit!

TUNE IN NEXT WEEK FOR MY NEXT RANT!

Entitled:

”10 Annoying Trends Started by Hit Movies”

Share on Facebook

This week I’m complaining about:

Digital TV / Cable / Music

(WARNING: This article contains a lot of techno-babble talk and some rough language leveled at technology)

Digital TV is SHIT! Digital Cable is SHIT! Digital Music is CRAP! DVD’s are OK though!

We have reached a sad impasse in this world. People are accepting entertainment (TV, movies, music) of shitty quality simply because a magical word has been placed in front of it.

Digital!

I hate to break it to everyone, but almost every “digital” form of delivered entertainment is pure and utter shit. Why do you ask? I shall elaborate…

In the olden days media (the term I shall use to cover TV, music, etc) was recorded and delivered in analog form. This included TV shows that came over the airways, music on records and laserdiscs. “Analog” refers to the fact that different voltages of power were used to represent the picture (such as 1.5 volts, 4 volts or 2 volts) instead of digital 0’s and 1’s (which are usually +5 volts or 0 volts, cut and dried) The reason this was better was because the entire picture (or sound) was recorded and represented on the screen or in the picture. Though it was analog and thus subject to “flutter” (voltages might be a little off and cause distortion) you still “got everything” that was originally recorded.

Compact Discs (you know, CD’s) are digital but even they record everything, a large spectrum of sound, as digital data. The same goes for video laserdiscs, which record an analog video signal in digital form.

Then came compression and everything went to hell, especially for video.

“Compression” is the act of taking electronic media and removing “unused” portions to make the file size / bandwidth used smaller. In a digital MP3, for example, parts of the sound not heard by humans are removed along with some other stuff. In a digital video file (such as the very common MPEG2) most compressors only record the “difference” between the frames. So let’s say a newscaster is sitting in front of a set. Their mouth and head will move as they talk but the background will be still. Thus, the compressor only needs to record the moving parts of the picture constantly, whilst the background is only recorded/updated every second or so. This is why compressors such as MPEG as referred to as “talking head” compression schemes.

The MPEG2 scheme is widely used today in everything from DVD’s to digital cable to HDTV. It typically uses variable compression, which means the data rate can be changed on the fly (variably) to improve the quality of the picture.

Before I start ripping on digital TV and cable let’s look at DVD for an example of compression done right. A single-sided DVD that contains 2 hours of video can contain up to 4.7 gigabytes of data (Gigabytes as in how the size of your hard drive is measured) This translates to roughly 652k a second, that’s the data rate available as the video runs. (For a reference, a high-speed cable internet connection can transfer about 300k a second) However since a DVD is variable compression the player can use higher or lower data rates depending on the video.

For example, if a movie is playing a scene of Gandalf talking to Frodo there’s not much motion going on, just their mouths really. Therefore the DVD can use a lower data rate, let’s just say 300k/second, for that scene, saving space on the disc. Then, when an army of Orcs attack the DVD can use a higher data rate to better present the motion, action and detail of the scene, perhaps 1000k/second (1 megabyte). By using lower rates in places it free up overall space to allow higher data rates elsewhere.

This can also be called “mastering” the DVD, by optimizing the picture/data rate as much as possible by analyzing the detail and motion demands of the video on a frame-by-frame basis. Jones (you know, the site master) told me the DVD of Ridley Scott’s crap-fest “Legend” was delayed for several years. Upon watching it for a Shitty Movie Night I knew why – every scene contain floating dust, snow, flower petals or stripper glitter. That meant the backgrounds were always in motion and therefore probably a bitch to compress decently. On the other hand some cheap DVD’s of flop movies (such as “The Rocketeer” - starring Jennifer Connelly when she was hotter than shit on an Arizona tin roof) don’t give a shit about the picture quality and just sort of “dump” it onscreen, sometimes with a fixed compression rate. Some scenes may look OK, but others containing action and lots of movement don’t have the extra data available and look bad.

Now I’ve come to the point where I can rip on digital cable/TV because I’ve introduced the idea of a fixed compression rate. While a DVD can spin faster or slower to get more or less data as needed for a good picture streaming video services (such as digital TV and cable) have a fixed amount of bandwidth to work with. So a close-up of a flowerpot gets the same amount of bandwidth as an army of mosquitoes flying over a waterfall. The flower will look good, the mosquitoes like shit.

Remember when I mentioned how a high-speed internet connection can get 300k a second? Ok, so then imagine if that’s ALL the available bandwidth for a video – it’s less than a fixed rate DVD even! (appx 625k) It’s the same basic idea for digital TV that comes over your cable or from a dish. There’s a certain amount of bandwidth and that’s it – no more or less.

What really pisses me off is that people are made to think that it’s better. It’s not. Here’s a hint: the cable companies don’t want to give you anything better, only if it’s better for them. The reason they’re so hard over digital shit is that they can fit several compressed digital channels in the space of one old analog channel, thus streaming more stations of Texas Hold ‘Em and Fear Factor into your living room and bilking you for more money. Compression is not some magic bullet – if media is compressed you loose something. If media is compressed a lot (as with digital TV) you loose a lot.

What really sucks is even with my analog cable TV the station streams are compressed before even being sent to me as analog signals down my line! They’re probably compressed before being sent out to local markets, then decompressed and sent as analog, or passed along as digital if that’s what the person uses. So you get shitty digital quality even if you don’t ask for it! My favorite, the History Channel, comes in like this, even though I don’t have digital cable. What horseshit!

Look closely next time you watch digital cable (or as mentioned, probably a lot of your analog cable channels) Especially bad are close-up water effects, such as an electric toothbrush agitating water – everything turns to ass-looking “compression squares” like a really low-quality JPEG (internet picture) Look at the small text at the bottom of car ads and all the “lice” pixels hanging around it. BARF!

I remember in the past how football games were well photographed and look crystal clear on good old analog television. Well no more! I’m sure it’s not always this bad but last fall I saw a game (off Dish Network) and it was so fucking compressed the grass looked green – as in a solid color green like a 1980’s videogame. I thought I was watching god-damn John Madden Football on my Genesis until I realized the grass in that game actually had a texture to it. And the numbers on jerseys – forget about reading them! Why would you want to anyway, you’ve got DIGITAL TV!

How fucking stupid is it that TV had a better picture 10 years ago? How is that an advance? My car sucks – I must need a horse and buggy! Granted the American TV system (NTSC) is ancient - the color version of it hasn’t changed since 1953 – but why is it being replaced with something of lower quality? Oh yeah I forgot, so they can fit more lower quality channels in the space of 1 old good-quality channel.

Ok now it’s time for the big kicker of digital TV: Even if you get a digital cable package, with “1000 premium all-digital channels” once it goes onto your TV screen it’s no longer digital but ANALOG! Yes, that’s correct – your digital cable is analog! Ha ha ha ha ha!

This is because while the methods of delivering video have changed TV’s have not. Ok granted HDTV’s are different but those are still few and far between, despite what Hollywood and shows like “24” might make you think. The vast majority of people still have 4:3 ratio NTSC TV’s – even high-tech Sony Vega’s fall under this category. And these TV’s still use analog signals as inputs - even RGB (technically “component”) is analog, albeit a very good type. So a digital cable box must take its [shitty] digital signal and convert it to an analog form that your TV can display.

Of course in the future (or present, again if you believe commercials and Hollywood) everyone will have flat-panel LCD or OLED televisions. And then the shit will REALLY hit the fan. See, one slight saving grace of watching crappy digital video on a conventional CRT (tube-based) TV is that since the TV signal format is a bit primitive it “hides” a lot of errors in the digital picture, mostly due to the overall higher contrast of the tube. While an LCD screen, whose range is more even, will reveal more errors. For a good example of this try watching a DVD on your TV, then your laptop. (An 2D animated movie such as “Lilo & Stitch” works very well, unsuccessful 2D movies, such as the first Iron Giant DVD release, have much worse compression and look almost BAD on LCD’s) Using the laptop’s LCD, look at things like text on the screen, or the ink lines of animated characters. You’ll see “garbage squares” - similar to highly compressed JPEG pictures - around ink lines, and “bubbles” around text (when it appears over a picture) However the main color of a character is perfectly clear as it contains simple data (only 1 color) Also watch backgrounds – they’ll appear perfectly still under the camera pans, at which time they’re “jump” to life and move. Now while a DVD is usually well compressed digital TV is not - so imagine those kinds of errors, only much worse, on a LCD television from digital cable in the future. Yeech. I think we’d be almost better to go back to 1920’s-style mechanical TV (look up Mechanical TV sometime – pretty interesting stuff)

While HDTV is better than digital cable it’s still compressed and since most HDTV’s are flat-screen LCD variety the errors they do have are immediately apparent. Look at text and thin lines, such as newscast graphics. You’ll see garbage squares and bits of pixels “jump” around them. The overall resolution is much higher than TV, digital TV or even DVD’s but the same evils of compression are still there. And, as with digital cable, the streams are constant so they don’t get to use more or less data as needed.

Well I’m sure my ranting is not going to have any effect but the acceptance of lower-quality media by the public and the fact we’re made to think it’s better kinda pisses me off. Oh well. Maybe someday when digital cable becomes SO compressed (to fit in 5000 channels of Texas Hold ‘Em instead of the standard 100) and starts looking like video from a Sega CD-ROM game (and I’ve seen some digital movies off cable that, in parts, look ALMOST that bad) people will notice and say “Enough is enough!” That is if they haven’t become complete TV zombies yet.

TUNE IN NEXT WEEK FOR MY NEXT RANT!

Entitled:

”The aliens in ‘War of the Worlds’ better not have shields, dammit!”

Share on Facebook

This week I’m complaining about:

People (columnists, newswriters) who think Tom Cruise and Katie Holmes’ romance is a publicity stunt to help out “Batman Begins” and “War of the Worlds”.

If you’ve gone to the grocery store or ever seen any entertainment-related news story in the last month you’re surely aware that Tom Cruise is dating Katie Holmes, who is nearly 20 years his junior. Normally when an older movie star/record producer dates someone young enough to be their daughter (or granddaughter in Celine Dion’s case) nobody pays it a second thought. But for some reason people think the Cruise/Holmes thing is just a ploy to get more people to see “Batman Begins” and “War of the Worlds”, and you see “quotation“ marks around any word used to describe their romance. (IE, Holmes is “happy” with Tom)

That is complete and utterly stupid horseshit. First off what’s her nuts… Penelope Cruz is only about 7 years older than Holmes and Tom did her for a while. Secondly, Tom Cruise is the single most sure-fire hit making star currently in Hollywood. Practically every film he does makes at least $100 million, even if it’s something as weird as “Vanilla Sky” or off-beat like him being a Samurai and slicing off heads. Not even Tom Hanks or pre-Passion Mel Gibson had such good runs. In fact without even checking I’m pretty sure the only Tom Cruise movies to not break $100 million since, oh how about 1992, are “Far and Away”, “Magnolia” and “Eyes Wide Shut”.

But what really made me laugh, well actually, pissed me off was a recent article/story again saying the Tom/Katie thing was BS, then also saying that “War of the Worlds” needed the help because Spielberg was on a box-office slide. Ok that is just re-god-damn-diculas. Spielberg makes the movies he WANTS to make and doesn’t give a tinker’s damn if anyone likes them (The underrated and much-loathed “AI” for example) Not to mention he’s directed several of the top films of all time and, along with George Lucas, single-filmingly redefined American “summer movie smashes” with “Jaws”, “Raiders of the Lost Ark”, “ET” and “Jurassic Park”, not to mention the scores of smash hits he’s executive-produced.

But NO! “War of the Worlds” is a sinking ship and obviously needs a scandal to get people in seats come this 4th of July weekend because Spielberg doesn’t know what the hell he’s doing. I can imagine how the pitch meeting went:

PARAMOUNT EXECUTIVE
Well Mr. Spielberg, it seems here you’d like to make a “War of the Worlds” movie…

STEVEN
Yes sir, that’s correct.

EXECUTIVE
I don’t know, sounds expensive. And are you sure you’re experienced enough to handle it?

STEVEN
Um, I’ve done every movie on budget since 1981. And I have a few Oscars… my own studio…

EXECUTIVE
Yes, well I know you’ve made us BILLIONS with your, what was it, Indiana something series, but I think this “War” thing is too much of a risk. Yeah. In fact we’re probably going to greenlight “The Shadow 2” instead.

STEVEN
Well, what if it starred Tom Cruise?

EXECUTIVE
Tom Cruise? Are you fucking kidding me? “Mission Impossible 2″ only made about half a billion worldwide. And in Euros it’s even less. Sorry, I just can’t justify those numbers son.

STEVEN [nervous]
Ok, I’ve got an idea. Let’s start shooting, but shortly before release I’ll convince Tom to start a sham romance with someone half his age!

EXECUTIVE
Ah, now you’re making sense! The millions we spend on advertising will be shored up by the free Tom plugs in tabloid articles read by forty-something soccer moms who will then no doubt flock to see a killer alien invasion flick.

STEVEN
Exactly! So… I’ve got a green light then? Huh? Huh? PLEEEASSSEEE???

EXECUTIVE
Well… Ok.

STEVEN
YIPPEE!!!

And with that Steven got to make his killer alien movie. Near the wrapping of it though he was forced to confront his good buddy Tom Cruise…

STEVEN
Tom, I think we need to have a talk…

TOM
About what? You already told me where babies come from…

STEVEN
I’m afraid this is more serious Tom. [sigh] I’m sorry, but the studio wants you to start a sham romance with a young chick. It’s the only way people will go see our movie.

TOM
What? But… why? Why don’t people want to see it right now?

STEVEN
I’m just not a good enough a director. And our $200 million of effects and destruction simply won’t cut it these days. I mean, I thought I could make a good war movie like I did with “Saving Private Ryan” but… I guess I was wrong. You’re our only hope.

TOM
Fine. I guess I did just dump that Cruz woman anyway. Do you have anyone in mind?

STEVEN
Well… what about that Katie Holmes from Dawson’s Creek?

TOM
THAT COW? Are you kidding? It’d be a total “bag over the head” thing!

STEVEN
Do it for me, Tom. Please?

TOM
Ok. I guess if I was in “Legend” I can stoop to this…

STEVEN
Shh! You’re not supposed to mention that!

MEANWHILE, ON THE SET OF “BATMAN BEGINS”, ANOTHER TROUBLED, SURE-FIRE FLOP…

JENNY [BEST FRIEND OF KATIE HOLMES]
Katie! Like OH MY GOD! Tom Cruise is coming over to your trailer!

KATIE
Oh GOD not him again… He’s got a face like a horse!

JENNY
Well I think he’s cute!

KATIE
You would.

TOM enters the trailer, a bouquet of red roses in one hand.

TOM
Hiya Katie. You don’t know me - my name is Tom Cruise. I hope you like roses…

KATIE
Oh yeah, they’re great. In fact, I’ll put them right next to my “Cocktail” DVD - in the trash!

TOM
Katie, baby, gimme a chance huh?

JENNY [embarrassed]
I am like, SO out of here.

Jenny leaves. Tom checks to make sure she’s out of earshot, then swoops in for the kill.

TOM
I hear “Batman Begins” is having trouble…

KATIE
What do you mean?

TOM
I mean I hear nobody wants to see it. That it’s gonna sink Warner Brothers. That it’s so bad they’re thinking about putting the Bat-Nipples back on and spray-painting everything bright green.

KATIE
Who told you this?

TOM
That’s unimportant. But perhaps we can help each other out…

KATIE
I’m listening…

TOM
All we have to do is start a “love affair” and the tabloids and media will go nuts. That’ll translate DIRECTLY into box office dollars for our movies.

KATIE
I guess when you put it that way, yeah… Ok I’m in!

TOM
YIPPEE!!! Now give me some sugar, baby!

If those scenes sounded realistic, well it’s because that’s obviously what happened if you believe all the talk. I guess when “Batman Begins” and “War of the Worlds” both become big hits it’ll be thanks solely to Tom and Katie, and once all the dollars are in they’ll break it off (until they star in future “sure fire flops” like “Mission Impossible 3″).

All joking aside here’s a REAL sham romance publicity stunt that none of these E! exclusive types seem to notice: Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie.

Think about it: Aside from “Troy” Brad Pitt hasn’t had a success in nearly 10 years and Jolie got lucky with the god-awful “Tomb Raider” but has made exactly ZERO hit movies beyond that. (Or beyond borders) Put it all together this June and it’s sure bet that “Mr and Mrs. Smith” is going to flop harder than a 10 ton pancake dropped from a 747. Oh but I’m sure it looked good on paper:

EXECUTIVE
Boy am I glad that Spielberg punk is outta my office… Come in!

DOUG LIMAN
[director of Mr and Mrs Smith] Hey there! Have I got a deal for you!

EXECUTIVE
Hit me.

DOUG
Ok - True Lies, the movie where the husband was a spy but his wife didn’t know, made like $150 million U.S. right?

EXECUTIVE
Yeah…

DOUG
Ok so get this – if I make a movie where BOTH the husband and wife are spies and neither one knows then we’ll make DOUBLE that!

EXECUTIVE
You know… that makes sense. And wow that’s like, what, $200 million right? I can’t actually do math…

DOUG
Close enough - at any rate it’s MORE! So whadda think?

EXECUTIVE
I’ve already started righting the checks son. So who’s gonna star in this thing?

DOUG
Well the best way to shore up the success of a $100 million production is to use two stars with abysmal track records…

EXECUTIVE
Of course. So what like – Tom Cruise?

DOUG
Actually I was thinking Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt. It’ll be a PERFECT date movie, complete with guns and explosions!

EXECUTIVE
God you’re brilliant. But wait a minute – won’t girls stay away because Jolie’s a buxom big-lipped-and-boobed bimbo, and guys will steer clear cause it’s got Brad “I was a heart throb during the first Clinton term” Pitt?

DOUG
I don’t see that happening. Studies say people really connect with actors much more attractive than they are.

EXECUTIVE
I’m convinced! Ok here’s a check for $100 million, plus, aw what the hell, another $100 million – why not, I’m sure this’ll beat “Titanic”. That boat movie didn’t have Brad Pitt, you know!

Well that’s my take on it I guess. But only time (and box office return) will truly tell…

TUNE IN NEXT WEEK FOR MY NEXT RANT!

I have no clue what it’ll be about yet, probably something videogame-related. Maybe Mario and Lara Croft will start a faux romance to help sell the Nintendo DS and I complain about that… I can only hope!

Share on Facebook

By Ben Heckendorn

In Star Wars: Episode I - The Phantom Menace Anakin’s mother Shmi says that the boy “has no father.” - leading the Jedi to believe he was conceived by Midi files or some such nonsense. Obviously this is complete horse crap which then begs the question: who IS responsible for the little twerp? After exhaustive research I have been able to compile a list of the most likely suspects along with the how, why and when for each alleged deed. So without further ado, let’s see if we can decide WHO IS ANAKIN’S FATHER?

R2D2

Occupation: Ass-kicking robot trash can

Parental Likelyhood: 15%

Your first reaction to this is probably that R2D2 is a robot and thus can’t father a biological son. But try to keep a few things in mind:

• It’s a movie with spaceships, the Force and lines like “I hate sand”
• Darth Vader (who, SPOILER ALERT, used to be Anakin) IS mostly machine
•  R2D2 has that access probe thing he’s always whipping out for whatever reason.

Now that I’ve answered the question of could it be done we must next tackle the how, why, when and where. Consider if you will… 

In her early years young Shmi Skywalker attended a public university on the planet Naboo. But her wild nights and hard-partying lifestyle made Paris Hilton look like Mary Poppins and it took a toll on Shmi’s studies. Failing in her classes she turned ever increasingly to alcohol, debauchery and deathsticks.

One night, staggering home after a bender, she came across an equally drunk R2D2. He beeped a wolf’s whistle her way and she couldn’t help but be aroused. See, she’d run into him a few times on campus (he was majoring in robo-ass-kicking 101) and figured “what the hell, he’s a good-looking guy” Jumping on top of his can, she caught a ride back to his place and they shared their passions well into the next morning.

Two months later Shmi was a girl in trouble and R2 - not wanting his future wages garnished - was nowhere to be found. The only thing he’d left behind was a note written with beeps she couldn’t understand. (R2 planned it that way) Her debts astronomical, the only remaining recourse was the Tatooine mail-order-bride racket, where a certain “Watto” was willing to pay off her tab in return for absolute slave-hood. Figuring she’d go back to school “someday” she accepted his offer, flew to Tatooine, popped out Anakin and pretended the whole college thing never happened.

Postscript: Upon seeing R2D2 come to her house in Episode I her blood ran cold, then she quickly dismissed it as “There must be a THOUSAND blue robots! Millions!”

Yoda

Occupation: Wise green Muppet/CGI mentor

Parental Likelyhood: 15%

Chicks dig older men (like Sean Connery, Harrison Ford, Jack Elam) so when it comes to 800 year-old Yoda it’s usually “your place or mine” at first glance. Sure, he may have a diminutive stature and walk slower than a worm but the Force is Strong with him. Take that as you may…

Now that you’re convinced Yoda’s a complete and utter chick magnet let’s get down to the business of how HE got down to business… with Shmi!

“Who Wants To Be a Jedi?” was the top TV show back in the day and young twenty-something Shmi didn’t miss a single episode. Every week she’d watch it and com-link in her vote for the best contestant. One day, as luck would have it, a recruiter for the show happened into Watto’s shop on Tatooine…

“Gut te nola!” croaked Watto, counting money and drinking a Hamm’s “We a got what cha need!”

The recruiter, trained to act as if he likes anyone (despite how disgusting or blue they may look) promptly blurted out “What I need, and I totally think you’re perfect for this, is…. Drumroll folks… The Next Republic Jedi!”

“Next a WHAT? Jedi ehh…? Bums! I don’t a ta like ‘em Not one bit! I am an Italian Mobster caricature you know, so don’t a cross me either!” Watto grumbled, reaching for his trusty tire iron.

“Excuse me” said a shy Shmi walking into the room “but can I have a chance?”

“Like oh – my – GAWD! You’d be perfect honey!” the recruiter exclaimed, practically falling over himself to give Shmi an entry form “Just fill this out and you’ll be on your way!”

A month later on the show things weren’t going so great for the eager Shmi…

“I do not see how you expect to swing your lightsaber into an opponent when you can barely swing it through the air” Mace Windu dished out in bitter judgement. “You have the grace of a cardboard bulldozer driving over a field of greased bowling balls”

“But-“ Shmi insisted.

“Agree do I” agreed Yoda “Skill have you not. But have you do is a smokin’ booty!”

“I wanna be a Jedi not a bimbo!” Shmi said, starting to cry.

“Unlikely to happen it is.” Yoda said, then gravely continued “As of now no Jedi in you do have.”

A lengthy pause…

“Would a little Jedi in you like to have?”

Shmi’s initial reaction was disgust – this wrinkled old green guy was actually hitting on her! Sadly it was her only hope if she truly wanted to become a Jedi. Begrudgedly she followed Yoda back to his swank apartment.

“Your daddy who is!” the green horn-bag said, popping a few Levitra (ask your doctor) Suddenly, Shmi didn’t think he looked so bad after all… No, he’s actually quite cute… So cute, why, he wouldn’t have to play a Jedi mind trick to get me in the sack. Nah! Never! Yeah he’s…. wait – it’s already the next morning and he’s gone! Where are my pants?

The scandal shook the Jedi council to its very foundations. Yoda’s sexual escapades were well known yet this latest shagging of a commoner - especially one from the Jedi’s own reality show - was a bombshell. Disgraced and hounded by paparazzi Shmi crawled back to Tatooine and didn’t tell Watto a thing.

Two months later Shmi’s a girl in trouble but all Watto cares about is the new free help he’ll have in the shop. “As long as I’M a not the father, I a don’t a care!” he cackled upon seeing her emerge from the bathroom with a purple-hued stick “Heh heh heh… Hope he can clean switches and say Yippee!”

Jabba the Hut

Occupation: Eats

Parental Likelyhood: 20%

Jabba the Hut is to Tatooine as Bill Gates is to computers: He rules it all - whether you like it or not. Granted it may seem unlikely that a character as gruesome and fat as Jabba could father a child (much less find his own equipment) but think about it – baby Jabbas have to come from SOMEWHERE, as it sure as hell ain’t a stork! Let’s explore the possibilities:

“Ju-tu moolia churm!” Jabba bellowed one morning upon waking up in a pool of his own vomit “Goosh neena plurb known-yah!”

Translations by Google: “God I’m hungover!” “What the hell happened last night?”

A jittery protocol droid ambled forth. “Oh mighty carriage-endowed Jabba! Last night you accidentally ate… oh dear… your dancing metal bikini slave girl!”

“Bantha-podo!” Jabba blurted, smacking the droid with a flabby hand “Jippo dun tanna mass torga DU tuppa doie-yah!”

Translations by Google: “Horse-crap!” “I fully intended to eat that saucy wench – AND her metal bikini!”

The droid picked himself off the floor “A trillion apologies oh cellulose one. Might I suggest you find a new slave girl to drag around?”

“Jaaaaaa…. Meen toya!” Jabba pondered “Goosh yuppa je joppa!”

Translations by Google: “Ahhhhh! Good idea!” “I shall hit the bars!”

The Cantina was one of the most happening bars on the planet - everybody went there on a Friday night to have a good time (and buy power convertors) Some nights they’d have live bands, other times they’d fire up the old karaoke machine, but young Shmi Skywalker didn’t much care either way - if there was a gaggle of horny moisture farm-boys around she’d be happy.

Mulling over her third blue milk-colored drink Shmi felt the presence of someone slide up behind her. Maybe it’s the hunk I made eyes with earlier, she wondered, unconsciously sniffing her armpits. Armpits OK she turned and saw:

JABBA DU HUT!

“Muh cha dunno de banka?” he blurbed out, a stream of phlegm tricking down his chin and onto Shmi’s miniskirt.

Jabba’s droid waddled up. “Excuse me. The mighty artery-clogged one asks if he may buy you a drink.”

“Ask him what kind of car he drives” Shmi snapped. The droid relayed the question to Jabba, who immediately laughed.

“Har har har ho! Chon dunno konk je nobba bonko – chon bonko muh hassa duh chon!”

“Jabba states that he doesn’t have to drive a car – his private chauffeur drives for him!”

Shmi, always a sucker for money, was impressed. “Rich, huh?”

“Gujeppa…. Chuin buine com passa duh gubba-jeeb.” Jabba whispered into her ear, careful to only get a little drool on her blouse “Chum passa du tuppa doie-yah yuppa je onna”

The droid looked somewhat flushed, then said “Jabba asks if you would accompany him back to his palace-“

“Palace?” Shmi jolted out.

“Yes, his palace,” the droid continued “He’s got a… metal bikini he’d like you to try on.”

“Lemme get my purse” Shmi cooed softly. She was sold – sure he was disgusting, but he was RICH and disgusting.

After a couple of weeks she grew tired of being drug around by a chain (the appeal wears off) but enjoyed the otherwise lavish lifestyle enough to stick around. Then one night after a nasty domestic dispute Jabba tried to eat her and it pretty much ended right there. Enraged by her not-wanting-to-be-digested insolence Jabba sold her to Watto for a pittance, dooming her to a life of slave-dom. Little did Shmi know that because of her time with Jabba she now carried inside her the seed of a man who would become… [SPOILER ALERT] Darth Vader!

Jar Jar Binks

Occupation: Screws things up, babbles, accepts “moui macho” responsibilities

Parental Likelyhood: 20%

“My afraid mine been banished!” Jar Jar cryptically told the Jedi in Episode I. Upon further questioning he revealed it was because of his clumsiness. A likely excuse to be sure! Here’s a more logical one…

Young and comely Shmi Skywalker always enjoyed her yearly summer trips with Watto to the resorts on Naboo. But as the years passed she found the excursions to be ever increasingly boring. Maybe she was just getting older, approaching womanhood, and outgrowing such a thing. Maybe it was Watto’s smell. Or maybe it was something else…

Summer came and she found herself once again at the Nubian resort. Watto was off having a Swedish massage (“Ahhh….. A that’s a what I like-a!”) so Shmi decided to take a walk through the woods. From over a ridge she thought her heard a sound… no, not a sound, but music. Yes, a jumpin’ rhythm… a salsa-like beat! Intrigued she wandered towards it…

The valley before her was filled with Gungans, all dancing and whooping it up. One young strapping Gungan in particular caught her eye. Though he couldn’t really dance worth a shit his seizure-like flailing had a certain machismo that aroused Shmi’s inner beast. In a trance-like state she ambled up and asked his name.

“Mesa Jar-Jar Binks!” hesa said, grabbing her into his dance “Yousa pitty hot!”

Smitten, Shmi fell helplessly into his allure. Number after number, dance after dance, drink after drink she felt more and more one with the Gungan until later that night, back in his bachelor pad, she really DID become one with him! Screams of “Yousa! Mesa!” were heard throughout the land.

The summer continued on. Watto spent all his time at the massage palor/whorehouse and barely cared where Shmi went wandering off every day. Little did he know that a certain Nubian native was railing on his slave with a reckless abandon he could only dream of.

August came and it was time to go home. Watto eyed up Shmi as she packed her bags.

“Shmi? Are you a gettin’ FAT?” He quizzed, noting a difference in her girth.

Shmi felt her stomach “Um… well… no… but…”

“Wait! You’ve a been knocked a up!” her blue master growled.

“No! It can’t be! I mean… oh no!” she cried, flailing herself onto the bed.

“No problem!” Watto consoled “It means a free slave for a me! Heh heh heh… So! Just a be tellin’ me whose the father…”

“It was…” she stammered, “it was…” Her mind raced. She couldn’t betray her beloved Jar-Jar. It might mean his death – or worse! Desperate, she thought of anyone else on Naboo she could blame it on…

“Panaka! It was Panaka!” she cried out “A royal guard in the Nubian court!”

Little did Shmi know that Panaka - who she’d run across in the past but thought nothing of - was, despite being a horrible actor, quite wealthy and could afford the best lawyers Republic credits could buy. The patronage trial began with a cross-delegation of Gungans and Humans, judged by Boss Nass, leader of the Gungans himself.

“ Mesa havin’ been weighed all the evidence. And mesa also know who the REAL father is” Boss Nass said. He then turned to the nervous Panaka, who gulped along with his lawyer.

“Meesa knowa you notta the one done got Shmi in trouble!” mumbled Boss Nass “When meesa wrong meesa SAY I’m wrong. BRRRRRRWRAAAHHHH!” He then turned solemnly to Jar Jar, who gulped upon his gaze. Nass knew Jar-Jar to be a screw-up, and a horny one at that.

“Binksssssssssss! Yousa havin’ affair with this herein bonko?”

Jar Jar turned white as a sheet “Uh…. Uh huh!”

“BRRRRRRWRAAAHHHH! Yousa to being pewnunished! Meesa banisha yousa outaa bonko theesa kingdomesa!”

Translations by Google: “???”

“NOOOOOSA!” Jar Jar cried “Giva meesa another chance-a!”

“Be gone with heem!” Boss Nass exclaimed, waving a flabby hand. Jar Jar was then escorted out of the kingdom to become an exile, a Gungan without a home, a country, or a hope. He sustained himself by tripping over things in the forest and then eating them. His life of hermit-like solitude made him become celibate and regret his earlier gigolo-esque days…

Later in Episode I Jar-Jar was adamantly against wandering around Mos Espa - not because he might get “robba-ed and crunched!’ but for fear of running into Shmi and being forced to cough up child support. When he did run across her in Anakin’s home he remained silent as did she, a kind of silent pact of acceptance. Though when he started grabbing apples Shmi couldn’t help but think back to all the wonderful memories of that tongue… Alas, she decided not to tell Jar-Jar that he was really the father of her son, who would one day become [SPOILER ALERT!] Darth Vader!

Count Dooku

Occupation: Starts trouble, aligns himself with Dark Lords, commands thousands of Orcs/robots with a wave of his hand.

Parental Likelyhood: 30%

“I have a problem, Darth Sidious my Master” Count Dooku confessed one night in the Sith bordello he and other evil Jedi often visited.

“What is it, my young apprentice?” croaked Sidious, who was really [SPOILER ALERT] Senator Palpatine but with a hood over his eyes so no one (but the audience) could tell.

“It is in the sack. Using my Jedi Mind tricks (and charisma) I have no trouble getting the ladies home, but once there… Ug. It just falls apart.”

“I understand my evil Padawan learner. The Dark Side has many advantages, but also many side effects - including nausea, headache and impotence. You should have asked your doctor first.” Sidious snarled in an ambiguous manner.

“Guide me, oh master.”

“There is a young slave by the name of Shmi Skywalker who works in this very bordello. She would make an excellent host for a new evil Jedi.”

“Why don’t you sire the child yourself, oh not-so-mysterious one?”

“I have often tried. However, when I lower my hood I also become quite ugly, so even with my mind control she always just throws a drink in my face.” Sidious admitted, a look of despair over the visible part of his face. “I therefore pass the task onto you.”

“But… what about my problem?” Dooku stammered hopelessly.

“Get her into the bedroom my young apprentice; I will help you from there.” Sidious said, an evil grin smearing over his face.

Later that night Dooku led the young slave Shmi under a red light, through a doorway and into a smelly room consisting of a bed, B&W TV and an old 70’s style VCR. One thing led to another and then it was time to go for it.

Dooku however wasn’t up for the task. Literally. Shmi grew impatient and checked her watch - Dooku’s 30 minutes were almost up and she was booked solid for the rest of the night. Suddenly a voice boomed through the darkness… It was Darth Sidious!

“Lord Dooku?” he asked.

Dooku was a bit taken aback, and then realized who it was. “Yes master?”

“RIIIIIIIIISSSSSSSEEEEEE!!!!!!”

The rest of Dooku and Shmi’s time went as planned and Sidious watched on, cackling evilly. A few months later Shmi was a girl in trouble and the bordello sold her to a certain blue junkyard owner on Tatooine. Later on she bore a young, innocent son named Anakin, who would one day become [SPOILER ALERT] Darth Vader!

EPILOGUE

So there you have it. All the possible fathers for Anakin to kill. Granted some are more likely than others but come next month, upon the release of Episode III, we’ll see which one of these really turns out to be… ANAKIN’S FATHER!

Share on Facebook

By Dale Nauertz

I do this every year, but most years there are one or two movies that I am actually, truly excited about. Last year there were “Kill Bill” and the final “Lord of the Rings” movie. The year before there was “Gangs of New York” and the second “Lord of the Rings” movie. This year, well, it’s hard work trying to figure out which movie coming out this fall/winter is the one I want to see most, because none of them have me really chomping at the bit. There are a few movies that I want to see, and some that am fairly interested in, but none of them that I’m taking time off work for (a’la “Lord of the Rings”) or highly excited about (like “Kill Bill” and “Gangs of New York”). Sure, Scorsese has another film coming out, but the Scorsese mania that was in full bloom in 2001 (when “Gangs” was originally supposed to come out) has dissipated. Maybe I need to watch “Goodfellas” again. Otherwise “The Aviator” would be higher on my list (that might also have something to do with not having seen a trailer for it and knowing that Kate “Movie Poison” Beckinsale is part of the cast). And there are no movies featuring hobbits and only movie featuring elves this year (“Polar Express”, in which I have just heard that Steven Tyler is following in his daughter’s pointy shoes by doing the voice of one of Santa’s elves) so I’ve got nothing to anticipate on that front. Who knows? This might be the year that I am forced to actually go out and get a life. But I doubt it.

So, without further ado, here we go.

1. “The Life Aquatic”

I love Wes Anderson. He’s one of those rare directors that do something fresh and exhilarating every time. He’s also a filmmaker whose movies are so distinctive that you know, as the credits are still showing, that you are watching one of his movies, and that no one else would have had the desire to make it. Since there are so few truly unique talents out there, that is the reason I have such a desire to see this movie. Not only that, but it’s the story of a Jacques Cousteau-like oceanographic explorer (played by Bill Murray with facial hair) searching for a rare shark that killed one of his buddies. The cast also includes Willem Dafoe, Cate Blanchett and, because no Wes Anderson movie would be complete without involving him somewhere, Owen Wilson. The idea of Bill Murray and Owen Wilson hunting a shark is a highly entertaining concept, especially when you factor in Anderson’s own quirky brand of charm. Will Murray finally win the Oscar he was denied last year? Will Wes Anderson finally get some Academy recognition? Frankly, I don’t care. I just want to see Bill Murray play Quint by way of Cousteau. That alone will assure that I buy a ticket.

2. “Team America: World Police”

I don’t personally think that “South Park” is all that ingenious of a show. Sure, there are some episodes that are filled with wit and actually make me cackle with glee (including the recent “Passion of the Jew” episodes with Cartman leading some kind of Christianity brigade while dressed like Hitler) but overall I find the show to be rather hit and miss. But the mere notion of a movie making fun of the pursuit of terrorists and the current political climate by the makers of “South Park” and featuring a cast made entirely of marionettes (!) is just too wonderful to pass up. This could, conceivably, be the most gleefully offensive movie since “Bad Santa”, and it’s also made with puppets. Oh, I am so there.

3. “I Heart Huckabees”

I’m not even sure what this movie is about. I know that it’s a comedy by David O. Russell whose “Three Kings” was a great movie and whose “Flirting With Disaster”, while mildly overrated, still had a scene where Alan Alda is making LSD in his basement. This promises to be a distinctive, weird comedy featuring Jude Law possibly going insane and possibly break dancing in the woods. The cast also includes Jason Schwartzman (who can hopefully make another movie where he’s as good as he was in “Rushmore”), Mark Wahlberg (who I can usually do without, but the last time he was really good was in “Three Kings”, so maybe Russell knows how to make the guy earn his check), Lily Tomlin and Dustin Hoffman (the last two playing “existential detectives” or something). I don’t expect this movie to do very well at the box office, but I just want to see a comedy that isn’t afraid to have some fun and embrace some strange ideas and mine them for all they are worth. I don’t know why this movie appeals so strongly to me, I just get a good vibe from it.

4. “The Aviator”

Even though I’m not rabid to see this, it does have one of my favorite actors (Leonardo DiCaprio) in it and is directed by one of my favorite directors (Martin Scorsese). It’s the life story of Howard Hughes, which is just an interesting concept all by itself, and it has some great supporting actors in it: Cate Blanchett, Jude Law, Gwen Stefani (oh lovely, lovely Gwen, she’s never acted but I really like looking at her) and, well, let’s hope she’s better than in “Van Helsing”, Kate Beckinsale. It probably won’t be Scorsese’s best work but hell, even the worst Scorsese film is worth watching a couple of times (no, wait a sec, that would be “New York, New York” which I haven’t managed to stomach all the way through, so maybe I’m wrong on that). It probably won’t be perfect, but it’s got a better pedigree than most of the movies coming down the pike in the next few months.

5. “Ocean’s Twelve”

It’s the sequel to “Ocean’s Eleven”, for those of you who are slow on the uptake. The original cast is all back, with the addition of Catherine Zeta Jones as the ex of Brad Pitt. Apparently, Pitt and Jones have all the chemistry of a dying panda and a ravenous hyena, but if the movie is half as entertaining as the first one it will be a good time. That’s all I really want out of it. I just want to see Clooney acting suave, Pitt being cool, and everyone else doing the same thing they did the first time. I don’t want anybody to reinvent the wheel here; I just want to have fun.

6. “Alexander”

In the wake of “Braveheart” and “Gladiator” it seems that we’ve had roughly three thousand and two hundred epics in which hordes of people yell and run at each other with swords. And I’m frankly tired of it. Granted, “Troy” was far better than I expected, but it’s still a genre that has been drained of most of its life. But if any man can bring it back from the dead, that man is Oliver Stone, who never met a movie genre he played straight. Without knowing it, I’ve become something of an Oliver Stone fan. He’s made some spectacular movies and, like Kubrick, he’s a guy whose movies need more than one viewing to truly sink in. Plus, I think Colin Farrell is a hell of an actor, I still like seeing Angelina Jolie for some reason, and I think Anthony Hopkins is running around in this somewhere. I’ll check it out.

7. “Spanglish”

James L. Brooks is a great director of movies that make you laugh and make you think as well. I love “Broadcast News” more than any of his other flicks, but “As Good as It Gets” and “Terms of Endearment” aren’t bad at all. Not only that, but I have grown into something of an Adam Sandler fan over the past few years and Brooks actually thinks enough of the man to cast him in this story. What is the story? I don’t know. From what I’ve read it involves Sandler playing a chef whose life starts to go haywire or something. Who knows? But it’s got a great director and an actor who is likeable at worst and great at best (check out “Punch-drunk Love” if you somehow doubt me) and it features Tea Leoni, who has been ripe for stardom for quite some time, she just needs the right movie to push her to the forefront. If everything works, this could be that movie. It sounds fun, anyway.

8. “Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow”

Okay, let me break this down for you. Giant robots are attacking the world, the time is the 1930’s, and a heroic, crack flying ace known as Sky Captain has to save the world with his feats of derring do. If it’s half as much fun as it sounds, if it pays half the respect to old serials as it needs to, this could be a great movie. If it looks like it was shot against a green screen (and it WAS shot against a green screen) and the plot is overly busy or not busy enough or doesn’t find the right balance of innocence and zesty action theatrics, then it could be another “League of Extraordinary Gentlemen”. It’s got Jude Law, Gwyneth Paltrow, (who only seems to have disappeared, she’s actually done two movies in the past couple years) Angelina Jolie, (with a fucking eye patch! Kurt Russell would be proud) and Giovanni Ribisi (a damn fine actor) in it. I’m hoping for the best, but I fear the worst. If it’s all style and no meat, then no one will hate this movie more than me. If it’s done just right, I will probably be this movie’s biggest fan. It looks like a sequel to “The Rocketeer” and I, for one, find that exciting. If Ain’t It Cool News hadn’t promoted this thing so nauseatingly, it would probably be higher on my list.

9. “Shaun of the Dead”

A British comedy about zombies! Yes, that’s right. Zombies. If Nick Hornby wrote a Sam Raimi zombie flick, well, judging from the great trailer, it would look a lot like this. The word of mouth on this film from overseas is great, so it should be right up my alley. No one loves zombie comedies more than me. Well, okay, someone probably does. But I like em a lot.

10. “Finding Neverland”

Johnny Depp stars in this. That’s enough to get my ass in a seat. But wait, there’s more. He plays J. M. Barrie, the guy who wrote Peter Pan. Apparently, the film is about the circumstances that led him to write Peter Pan and it’s got Kate Winslet in it. So, what the hell, I’ll go. Depp is an abstract artist of the acting variety. He’s never done a performance that bored me.

There, those are the ten I most want to see. But here are a few that I’m intrigued by, all the same.

“Closer”

It’s got Julia Roberts in it. Not so good. But it’s got Clive Owen in it. A little better. The trailer shows Natalie Portman doing a striptease. Hmmm, better still…

“Blade: Trinity”

Did the world really need another “Blade” movie? Going out on a limb here…No. But some motherfuckers are always trying to ice skate uphill.

“National Treasure”

Nicolas Cage finds a treasure map on the back of the Constitution. No. Seriously. Bruckheimer produced it. So it’s probably going to suck. But that concept is just great. I must see it, even if it sucks.

“A Sound of Thunder”

Edward Burns and Ben Kingsley in a movie where some guys travel back in time to hunt dinosaurs. Sounds cool to me.

“Bridget Jones: The Edge of Reason”

Renee Zellweger as darling Bridget again. Colin Firth and Hugh Grant are back. All this has to do is be as good as the first one and I’ll be happy. I love British comedies, more than I have any right to.

“The Forgotten”

Julianne Moore wakes up one morning and her entire life has changed, but she’s the only one that seems to notice. It’s got a great, creepy trailer. Might be worth a look.

“Surviving Christmas”

A dark comedy about Christmas and gangsters that features James Gandolfini. But before you get your hopes up too high, it’s got Affleck in it. Still, last time he did this sort of thing we got “Reindeer Games”. So there’s still some hope.

“Sideways”

Alexander Payne is back in action after “Election” and “About Schmidt” in the story of an alcoholic writer and his friend going to a vineyard or something. If Payne made it, I’ll see it.

“Meet the Fockers”

The unnecessary sequel to “Meet the Parents”. It features Dustin Hoffman watching DeNiro shower and DeNiro getting a back rub from Barbra Streisand. So it might be worth a look.

And then there is the one movie that I won’t see, and if I do, I will have to be dragged to the theater, kicking and screaming and probably in restraints “A Shark’s Tale”. Have you seen a trailer for this thing? It looks positively awful. Maybe the reason “The Aviator” isn’t higher on my anticipation list is because Scorsese plays a mobster shark that, in the trailer, licks a fin and puts it to his ass and makes a hissing sound. Ugh. Will Smith, who I loved in the under appreciated “I, Robot” (it’s seriously the best action flick of the summer) returns to Shitville as a tiny fish who pretends to kill a shark and then dances on a table while singing MC Hammer’s “U Can’t Touch This”. I’m not huge on the trailers for Pixar’s “The Incredibles” either, but it’s GOT to be better than this.

And, despite the presence of Tom Hanks in multiple roles and the directing talents of Robert Zemeckis (one of my favorite directors ever) “The Polar Express” just don’t look all that hot. Maybe if I was five I’d be primed to see it. But I’m not five. I haven’t been five in a loooong time. So I think I’ll pass, thank you, despite the fact that Steven Tyler (lead singer of Aerosmith) is playing one of Santa’s elves. Having Tom Hanks and the lead singer of Aerosmith in the same movie is one of the signs of the Apocalypse, isn’t it?

So there you have it. As far as I’m concerned, this is everything that looks worthy of a shit in the upcoming months. Maybe there will be a few pleasant surprises smuggled in there somewhere. I’m hoping so. And I do want to see most of these. But none of them look worthy of smuggling in pudding over.

Share on Facebook

By Dale Nauertz

Well, friends and neighbors, it’s that time o’ the year again. It’s, um, fall? Yup, Fall. That’s what it is. And there’s a whole slate of flicks coming out in the last couple months here that are jockeying for your entertainment dollar. And some of these films don’t even look to suck. So, as I have done for the past couple of years, I’d like to shine the harsh light of day onto these flicks and let you know which movies I am most anxiously awaiting and, in short, look like they might actually be worth a damn. But, this year, there aren’t as many films that have me champing at the bit. There aren’t quite as many films this fall/winter that have me jumping up and down and clapping my hands like a little girl in anticipation. But oh well. There’s still a few of them lurking out there.

I think.

1. “Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King”

“Fellowship of the Ring” was awesome! Seriously, just plain amazing. I loved every second of it and still watch it repeatedly. It’s probably already one of my favorite films of all time and, in retrospect, is the greatest movie of 2001. (”Moulin Rouge” is good and all but…) “The Two Towers” is a solid, even excellent film, but not quite as good as “Fellowship” and they changed a couple characters from the book and stuff like that which might not seem like much, but still occasionally pisses me off. Still, it’s a great movie and one of last year’s best. So, at the very least, “Return of the King” should shape up to be a great movie and provide some very breathtaking spectacle. At the best, it could leave “Fellowship” in the dust and make me ruin a perfectly good pair of pants come December 17th. So, you know, hooray!

2. “Kill Bill: Volume One”

Quentin Tarantino, I think I speak for an entire nation of film geeks when I say: “Where the hell have you been?” I loved “Pulp Fiction” and “Jackie Brown” (oh, right, and “Reservoir Dogs” which I’m not so huge on, but it’s still damn good) so I’ve been wanting more films from the Q Man. The only down side is that this is a balls to the wall kung fu flick, the plot of which sounds like “Charlie’s Angels” if Charlie screwed over one of the Angels and earned her hellish wrath. I claim that as a down side because I’d sorta like to see another movie with criminals and smart, witty dialogue and an occasional bloodbath. But it’ll be nice to see Quentin bring his witty touch to the whole kung fu genre and, hopefully, he will be able to inject it with the sense of flair and coolness that it’s sort of been losing lately thanks to the fact that there seems to be kung fu in every third film being made nowadays and they just keep getting more outlandish. (Thanks, “Matrix”!) But it’s been six years, so it’ll be nice to see the words “A Quentin Tarantino Film” splashed all over the big screen.

3. “Love Actually”

I like British people. Particularly, I like British comedians. They’re usually sharper and more sophisticated than American comedians and there’s just this indefinable something about them. I’m not sure what it is. Maybe it’s the fact that thirty years of Bond films have conditioned me to see them as dapper and debonair and seeing them as anything less is just somehow hilarious. This movie is just stocked with such people: Hugh Grant, Rowan Atkinson, Alan Rickman, Emma Thompson, Colin Firth, Liam Neeson, the gorgeous Keira Knightley and even a couple of Americans- Laura Linney and Denise Richards. Plus, the whole concoction is a romantic comedy brewed up by a master of the form: Richard Curtis who, since writing the “Black Adder” and “Mr. Bean” television series has gone on to pen the scripts for “Four Weddings and a Funeral” and “Notting Hill” as well as co-writing “Bridget Jones’s Diary”. And this one is a sprawling romantic comedy of epic proportions about sixteen separate people all falling in love or something like that. The trailer was funny and the movie looks highly intriguing, which is more than I can say about most of the movies set to release in the coming months…

4. “Intolerable Cruelty”

The Coen Brothers are back, and they have once again made an alliance with George Clooney. The trailer looks fun, despite the fact that Catherine Zeta Jones is in this…which can go either way. Billy Bob Thornton seems to be providing laughs simply by showing up, which is admirable, and the whole thing looks like a breezy good time. The reason it’s not higher on this list is because the screenplay appears to be written by two other guys and the Coens seem content merely to direct. This causes me concern, but if the Coens have devoted themselves to filming someone else’s work, then that work must be worth something. Looks amusing.

5. “Mystic River”

There is one main reason to see this movie: CLINT! CLINT! The hand of God is on the tiller of this film. He’s not in it, but he’s controlling every aspect of it, and that makes it worth at least a look. The buzz is pretty good on this one as well, and it’s got a great cast that includes Kevin Bacon, Sean Penn and Laurence Fishburne, who looks relieved not to be in another damn “Matrix” movie for once. But, if you’re wavering about seeing it, I have something else to say: CLINT! CLINT! CLINT!

6. “Runaway Jury”

I usually have no interest in seeing courtroom movies, or movies based on John Grisham books, but the trailer for this movie is a breathless marvel and if the movie is the same way, well, then it should be an intense experience. Cusack is in it, and so is “Mummy” beauty Rachel Weisz, as well as veteran folk like Gene Hackman and Dustin Hoffman. The cast is cool, the concept (scrambling to decide which side of a trial controls the jury of a billion-dollar trial) is cool and the whole thing just oozes a breathless, top-notch thriller sort of attitude. So count me in.

7. “Big Fish”

I like Tim Burton and have never disliked anything he’s done. He directs this and it stars Ewan McGregor, who is, in my belief, one of the finest young actors in Hollywood today. Plus, Danny Devito is running around, and that’s usually a good thing. Add all that up, and you’ve got my ass firmly planted in a seat. The whole plot of a man investigating the tall tales of his dying father, also sounds promising.

8. “The Singing Detective”

Robert Downey Jr. and Mel Gibson are among the players of this strange musical based on a British miniseries about a delusional detective. Songs, dance, delusions, a recovering drug addict (Downey) and Mel. Even if it doesn’t work at all, it should be fun to watch.

9. “The Matrix Revolutions”

I guess I have some desire to see this movie. I should have more, though, and that’s what bothers me. The original “Matrix” is, in my opinion, one of the best science fiction films of all time. The second is alright, I guess, and fun to watch, but not a whole lot more than that. I hope that “Matrix Revolutions” is more like the original, but since I am a realist, I believe it will be more like the latter. And if it isn’t at least a hell of a lot better than “Reloaded” and explains what the fuck was going ON in “Reloaded”, then I am officially disappointed. I’m sure I will be going on opening day anyway, but I will be sitting in the theater with my arms folded over my chest, waiting for the film to have made the trip worth my while.

10. “Timeline”

Unfortunately, Paul Walker is in this. But the trailer I have seen makes it look like a good time. It’s based on a Micheal Crichton novel, and those are usually entertaining. Plus the plot involves both time travel and medieval times, which are two things that I enjoy. So I’m going to go and hopefully have a lot of fun. That’s really all I expect.

Other than that, there really isn’t much I care to see. I’d like to see Tom kick some ass in “The Last Samurai” and I am looking forward to seeing Jack Nicholson play himself once again in “Something’s Gotta Give” and I can’t really say no to a movie entitled “Bad Santa” but these ten are the ones that I am most hankering for and, frankly, I could probably do without seeing a couple of them. So there you have it. It doesn’t look like that great of a year, and it hasn’t been so far. Unless “Return of the King” completely floors me, “Pirates of the Caribbean” will probably emerge as my favorite film of 2003. And that would be just a little weird.

Share on Facebook

By Dale Nauertz

“The Horror, the horror….”
-Colonel Kurtz (Marlon Brando) in “Apocalypse Now”

Christmas is a time for good cheer. Thanksgiving is a time to give thanks for what you have been given and think about how fortunate you are. New Years is a time to reflect on the passing year and think about how to improve the one ahead.

But Halloween. That’s a whole different beast altogether. No such thoughtful holiday is Halloween. It’s a time to dress in costumes, eat candy, and watch a movie that will scare the bejesus out of you. Needless to say, it’s my favorite holiday. Much more fun than most other holidays. Much less commercialized (well, the whole holiday was started by commercialism anyway) and the commercialization that has set in is just about having fun. No treacly pap about brotherly love here covering an attempt to sell you everything from diapers to beer. There’s something I can get behind.

And since horror movies are what this holiday is all about, let me give you some handy hints about the good ones. Many of the films that try to pass themselves off as “scary” are just gory, or stupid, or lame. Some of them mistake blood for fear, which it isn’t, if you ask me. Fear is something more sneaky. Fear is about the half-glimpsed thing hiding in the woods. Fear is about what you can’t see more than what you can. I prefer something that achieves eerieness, something that makes my flesh crawl. Something that might even rob me of some sleep.

Which brings us to Number One on my top-five, all-time scary movie list:

1. “The Exorcist”

The only movie that has made me frightened before I even saw it. Just the idea is creepy. The devil taking control of your body. Well, the idea is pretty creepy as it is executed in THIS movie. Not in movies like “Lost Souls”. The turning of the head. The message that rises out of the little girl’s stomach. The overall tone of the movie. Those harrowing last twenty minutes. The phrases that come out of the poor girl’s mouth. I have never seen any horror movie that had such an impact on me. Easily still as horrifying and shocking today as it was twenty-seven years ago. Some have said that since this movie was made, it no longer retains its ability to shock. Some say that audiences have been too jaded since then. I say that’s all bullshit. This is still the creepiest thing ever to come down the pike.

2. “Texas Chainsaw Massacre”

The original, mind you. Not the sequels, not the crappy remake (which is, however, almost worth seeing just to see a young Matthew McConaughey as a sicko tow-truck driver, at least it does have one genuinely unsettling moment…and Rene Zellweger is in it too) I am talking about the first “Texas Chainsaw Massacre”. This movie is truly shocking and unsettling. Like all master horror films, it does nothing to prepare you for the first scare. Suddenly, out of nowhere….well, I’ll let you see it for yourself. Despite its title, this movie is a triumph of eerie atmosphere and true horror, not of sheer gore for gore’s sake. Leatherface is a genuinely terrifying foe, unlike most of his horror movie ilk (he would literally have Freddy Krueger and Jason for dinner) and a force to be reckoned with. It also is sorta like the original “Blair Witch Project”. It’s so low-budget that it actually looks like it is really happening, or like something that actually did happen. Therefore, all the dark humor in the world (incredibly dark humor) cannot dilute the fear that is reaching out of the screen and seizing you by the throat. Not only that, but it’s a one-movie argument against picking up hitchhikers.

3. “Night of the Living Dead”

Unsettling and disturbing are also two great words to describe this, the mother of all zombie movies. Black and white and bringing new definition to the word “stark”, this movie works mainly because of its unpredictability and the claustrophobic aura it creates. Racism and other tensions run high between a group of people as they fight against an army of flesh-eating zombies baying at their door. You don’t know who will live and who will die. The movie also wins bonus points for its unique casting of a black man as the hero. Very creepy stuff, with a dark human commentary at its center.

4. “Evil Dead”

The other “Evil Dead” movies are just plain fun, but this one is harrowing to its icy core. The humor that made the others palattable is not in evidence here, or rather it is of a much darker strain than that of the other films. It is also the one time that gore actually works for a film. The movie succeeds mainly due to its goosebump-causing tone and its unique and ground-breaking bag of cinematic tricks. Not to mention the solid work of an impossibly fresh-faced Bruce Campbell. Sam Raimi’s Hollywood calling card.

5. “Poltergeist”

Tobe Hooper has two movies on this list. What a man. No one does horror any better than him. “Salem’s Lot” is pretty darn good too, although not quite good enough to eek its way onto this list. Anyway, this story of a young girl and mysterious forces in the most haunted house I have ever seen has more scares on it than you can ask of a movie (with the exception of “The Exorcist”). Good performances, creepy moments coming one after another, and many other virtues. A wild, twisted, and eerie ride.

5 1/2. “Scream”

The rest of the movie is nothing but an exercise in hip self-awareness, although a much more fun and involving exercise in hip self-awareness than its two successors and the endless list of clones that it inspired, but the first scene is truly terrifying. Poor, beautiful Drew Barrymore: alone in the house and called by a man who starts out rather sexy and interesting and then turns a lot more scary. The shocking part? SPOILER ALERT: Drew is the biggest star in the movie, and she ends up gutted by the time the opening credits roll. Yikes. That is creepy.

If you don’t want something terrifying on Halloween, however, well, there are some alternatives that are just plain fun.

“Sleepy Hollow”

Beautiful cinematography, decapitations, a dense and wonderful visual style and a hilarious and droll performance by Johnny Depp.

“Evil Dead 2″

For sheer fun and inventive gore, accept no substitutes. Bruce Campbell’s physical comedy here deserves favorable comparison to Buster Keaton and the effects are remarkable. Pure bloodthirsty fun from beginning to end.

“Ghostbusters”

Ghosts, Bill Murray, best comedy in the history of time. Nuff said.

“An American Werewolf in London”

A remarkable eerie tone, the best werewolf transformation in history (all on camera and all stunningly realistic) and some very funny moments of dark comedy. Also includes the funniest rotting corpse in cinematic history.

“Dead Alive”

Dark, violent, often hilarious, very sickening. A good time all around.

That should be enough to make your Halloween a good time. Just pick up some candy and popcorn, put on a costume, and let the fun (and maybe lack of sleep) begin. Enjoy.

Share on Facebook