In this episode Merrill and Hash are joined by first time guest Andrew Robinson to help find the mechanism to the madness that is Tim Burton. You can always send ideas for new episodes to Merrill[at]MerrillBarr[dot]Com

Download this episode

Music:

Further Away by Evanescence

Subscribe:

Links:

Merrill’s Twitter

Hash’s Author Page

Andrew’s Twitter

If there is one thing that no one can knock Kevin Smith for, it’s the amount of heart and passion he puts into every single thing he does. Cop Out is just that, a movie with a tremendous amount of heart, but, missing some brain.

Cop Out is about two veteran NYPD detectives played by Bruce Willis and Tracy Morgan. When Jimmy (Willis) discovers he needs money for his daughter’s wedding he decides to sell his rare child hood base ball card. At which point the card is stolen and the plot leads Jimmy and Paul (Morgan) on a hunt for the card and encountering every single buddy cop cliché ever.

The film is meant to be a homage (which plays a key part of the opening scene) to buddy cop films, I can agree with that to a point. But unlike a film like Hot Fuzz which pulls off the clichés and homage from beginning to end, Cop Out because maybe a bit too self aware and end up dragging itself down.

One of the biggest problems I have with the film is the editing. Kevin Smith is a great writer and a competent director. But, editor he is not. The reason it hasn’t been a problem until now is because all his other films were not edit intensive. Any editor (including myself) will tell you that editing dialogue, though requiring finesse is not difficult. However, action is a whole other beast. The film, especially during the action scenes would have worked much better is an editor by trade had edited the film. I am quite surprised Warner Brothers didn’t push one to be honest.

One of the things that really push this movie is the brilliant 80’s style score by Harold Faltermeyer. Known for some of the most iconic scores of the 80’s (Top Gun, Beverly Hills Cop) Faltermeyer gives Cop Out a flair and through that, a soul. The score adds a very comical aspect to Cop Out that, on top of a very comedic performance by Tracy Morgan (who I am not normally a fan of) works very nicely.

Is Cop Out a step forward for Kevin Smith, maybe, we will have to wait and see. But it does prove he is capable, but he needs to push himself more. This film was still too much in his wheel house and that is when the film falls apart at times. I will be interested to see what happens next.

7 out of 10

In this episode Merrill is joined by returning guest Kevin Carr to break down the latest entry into the buddy cop genre, Cop Out. They also examine if Kevin Smith has in fact grown as a film maker as well as take a in depth look at the split between critics and general audience. You can always send ideas for new episodes to Merrill[at]MerrillBarr[dot]Com

Download this episode

Music:

Various Tracks From the Bad Boys Score by Mark Mancina

Subscribe:

Links:

Merrill’s Twitter

Kevin’s Twitter

In this episode Merrill and Hash take a look at the man, the myth, the legend, Martin Scorsese. You can always send ideas for new episodes to Merrill[at]TheFilmStage[dot]Com

Download this episode

Music:

(I Can’t Get No) Satisfaction by The Rolling Stones

Subscribe:

Links:

Merrill’s Twitter

Hash’s Author Page

In this episode Merrill and Hash take a look at one of today’s hottest (literally and figuratively) talents in Hollywood, Leonardo DiCaprio. You can always send ideas for new episodes to Merrill[at]TheFilmStage[dot]Com

Download this episode

Music:

I’m Shipping off To Boston by Dropkick Murphys

Subscribe:

Links:

Merrill’s Twitter

Hash’s Author Page

In this episode Merrill and Hash break down the 2010 Oscar nominations and discuss who will win, who should win, and who got backed over by a truck and left for dead. As well as learning about Merrill’s inability to speak a single Spanish language title correctly. You can always send ideas for new episodes to Merrill[at]TheFilmStage[dot]Com

Download this episode

Music:

Lose Yourself by Eminem

Show Notes:

Merrill meant to say Lost in Translation. He already realized he is an idiot.

Subscribe:

Links:

Merrill�s Twitter

Hash’s Author Page

Spotlight Twitter

Spotlight on Facebook

In this episode Hash rejoins Merrill to break the down the ever evolving genre of revenge. You can always send ideas for new episodes to Merrill[at]TheFilmStage[dot]com

Download this episode

Music:

Crawling by Linkin Park

Subscribe:

Links:

Merrill’s Twitter

Hash’s Author Page

Spotlight Twitter

Spotlight on Facebook

Fat Guys At The Movies: Episode 150 – The Edge of Fatness

In this episode Hash once again leaves Merrill to figure out the world on his own..but, being the resourceful S.O.B. that he is, Merrill grabs Jack Giroux and along with special guest Brian Taylor of Neveldine/Taylor, they break down what the action genre is all about. You can always email any suggestions you have for future episodes to Merrill[at]TheFilmStage[dot]com.

Download this episode

Music:

Sweet Dreams (Are Made of These) by Marilyn Manson (from Gamer)

Subscribe:

Links:

Neveldine/Taylor’s Official Web Site

Neveldine/Taylor’s Twitter

Merrill�s Twitter

Jack’s Twitter

Spotlight Twitter

Spotlight on Facebook

Also, before the show Brian was telling us about a great write up that was done on Crank 2 and I recommend all of you go and check it out here, it is a great read.

In this episode Merrill and Hash, coming of the rush of The Book of Eli, decide to enter their own post-apocalyptic world and look deep into the genre. Working to figure out what makes the genre something that clicks with so many different people and why people want to see the end of civilization on film. You can always email any suggestions you have for future episodes to Merrill[at]TheFilmStage[dot]com.

Download this episode

Music:

What I’ve Done by Linkin Park

Subscribe:

Links:

Merrill’s Twitter

Hash’s Author Page

In this episode Merrill and Hash are joined by the returning Kevin Carr to discuss the continuing adventures of Kevin Smith and what makes him everything from a cult director to one of the greatest success stories of all time. You can always email merrill[at]thefilmstage[dot]com with an suggestions you may have for future episodes.

Download this episode

Music:

Remember The Name by Fort Minor

References:

Kevin Smith’s Twitter

Smith’s Message To Merrill 1

Smith’s Message To Merrill 2

Cop Out Trailer

Subscribe:

Links:

Merrill’s Twitter

Hash’s Author Page

Kevin’s Twitter

In this episode Merrill was able to resurrect Hash from the dead and brings him along with Dan Mecca on to discuss the ongoing debate of film vs video. You can always email merrill(at)thefilmstage(dot)com with any comments or suggestions for future episodes.

Download this episode

Music:

Let It Rock by Bon Jovi

Subscribe:

Links:

Dan’s Twitter

Merrill’s Twitter

Hash’s Author Page

In this episode The Film Stage creators Jordan Raup and Dan Mecca once again join me to take a look back at the year that was 2009 and what made it good, what made it bad, and what didn’t get a chance to shine. Some Oscar predictions are also thrown out, as well as the most anticipated of 2010. You can always email merrill(at)thefilmstage(dot)com with any comments or suggestions for future episodes. You can stream the episode below.

Download this episode

Music:

Fade Away by Breaking Benjamin

Subscribe:

Links:

Jordan’s Twitter

Dan’s Twitter

Merrill’s Twitter

In this episode Hash leaves Merrill to fend for himself, so Kevin Carr from Fat Guys At The Movies tags along to fill the void and help discuss Holiday films and what makes them so magical. You can always email spotlight(at)merrillbarr(dot)com with any comments or suggestions for future episodes.

Download this episode (right click + save)

Music:

Weezer - We Wish You A Merry Christmas

Subscribe:

Links:

Merrill’s Twitter

Kevin’s Twitter

In this episode Merrill and Hash are joined by two special guests to help break down the validity in Hollywood’s latest fix, 3D. We also give a semi-review of Avatar (no spoilers so don’t worry). You can always email spotlight(at)merrillbarr(dot)com with any comments or suggestions for future episodes.

Download the episode or get the episode from iTunes

Music:

Avatar Score by James Horner:

Tracks Used:

Track 5 - Becoming One Of The People-Becoming One With Neytiri

Track 9 - Quaritch

References:

Roger Ebert’s AVATAR Review

3D TV

Original Jurassic Park Trailer

District 9 Trailer

AVATAR Trailer

MTV Interview With Cameron, Zoe, and Worthington

Titanic Box Office Numbers

Subscribe

Links:

Jordan’s Twitter

Dan’s Twitter

Merrill’s Twitter

Hash’s Author Page

In this episode Merrill Barr and Hash Aguirre take a look at one the greatest evils to ever hit the film world. (formally known as TFS Spotlight)

Download this episode (right click + save)

Show Notes:

1. We misspoke and meant to say The Good German not The Good Sheperd.

2. Crash was the last Academy Award Winner to be released on VHS not the last to be released on 4:3 DVD.

Music:

Wanted Dead or Alive by Bon Jovi

References:

Widescreen vs. Pan & Scan (Sydney Pollack)

Turner Classic Movies: Letterbox

[Spotlight] Let The Aspect Ratio Revolution Begin

Subscribe:

Links:

Merrill’s Twitter

Hash’s Author Page

Since the initial release of the trailer back in December people all across the blogosphere have been attacking Kevin Smith’s latest film Cop Out for a whole host of different reasons. Whether it be nit picking the fact that Smith’s name isn’t on the trailer, which as Smith himself defended (his name is never on ANY of his trailers). Or the fact that people say the movie looks like a stupid, watered down action comedy. It has become clear, at least to this writer, that people have lost sight of what this movie is: Kevin Smith’s attempt at a studio picture. There are some things that need to be addressed.

First and foremost is the trailer. This film is a hard R comedy, at least in terms of language. This means a lot of fucks, asses, and shits. When the trailer was first released, I took a moment and read the opening scene of the script and it was a good indication of the rough language contained in the film. The fact that people are attacking a GREEN BAND trailer for not being funny seems a bit unfair to me. Look at the green band trailer for the latest R-rated comedy success, The Hangover. The trailer is funny enough, but the film proved to be the most hilarious comedy of the year. That seemed to be a similar reaction I heard from people regarding the Cop Out trailer: it was just mildly funny, not side-splitting.

It should also be remembered that trailers are all about marketing. Marketing to the majority market that will see the movie. Warner Bros. is in no way selling this movie to film buffs, bloggers, or Smith fans. Why? Because they know we are already going to see this movie. We don’t need to be sold on Cop Out. However, people who have never heard of this movie before, i.e. the majority market, needs to be sold the movie because a Bruce Willis/Tracy Morgan buddy cop comedy is foreign to them. Based on the reaction I saw from people when it played in front of Sherlock Holmes, I would say Warner Bros. succeeded.

[Now this piece was originally supposed to run before the Red Band was released. But since that was released early, here are my thoughts on the reaction to it. I had no doubt that, that trailer was going to be the one to turn people around. The reason being, that trailer WAS made for the internet crowd that already knows about the film. We are the ones Warner Bros. is marketing too in this case and like the green band, they succeeded.]

My next case in defense of this movie is Bruce Willis himself. This movie is in a genre that Willis knows all too well. He has played this character 10 times over. He knows what not to do and what to do to make the movie work. When I attended Smith’s Q + A at Carnegie Hall this past summer, he told a story about Bruce Willis and how he likes to have input on the film. This coupled with the previous facts should set everyone at ease. Also, unlike Seth Rogen in Smith’s Zack and Miri Make a Porno, Bruce Willis is always bankable in this genre. Morgan also has a built in fan base from 30 Rock, so that will be a big help as well.

As I stated before, I have read some of the script for this film. It sat on the Black List for a while before it was picked up. It’s written by The Cullen Brothers. These two have mainly written and produced television work before now. Their most recent project was a television pilot for a show called Manchild. Ironically, Smith was set to be one the lead characters in the show. According to statements made by Smith in his third Q + A DVD, the show would have been picked up by Showtime had it not been for Californication swooping in with a built-in fan base. The pilot for the show has since made its way to the Internet and I highly suggest you all seek it out for yourselves because it’s all the proof needed that the Cullen Brothers know comedy.

Now comes the next, and perhaps, most crucial fact that people constantly point out about Cop Out: “Smith didn’t write this film, thus it is doomed.” It’s true, Smith has never directed a FILM that he did not write. But, he has directed projects that he did not write himself. I would like to take you all back to 2007. The CW was just starting out and they were developing many projects that would hopefully make it to air. One of these projects was a show called Reaper. Reaper centered around a 20-something kid whose parents sold his soul to the devil before he was born. He is now forced to be the devil’s bounty hunter and collect souls that have escaped from hell. Smith was made an offer to direct the pilot for the series. Watching the pilot, it’s clear that Smith is a capable filmmaker who doesn’t need to be attached to a project from its inception for it to succeed.

Which brings me to another point: because Smith wasn’t with the project during the writing phase, he has stated that he was more open to collaboration and suggestion during production. Any filmmaker will tell you that once you get an idea in your head for a scene, it is near impossible to have that idea changed by outside opinion. But since Smith didn’t write it, he felt more confident and trusting in the people around him to help him with certain aspects of the film. In that Carnegie Hall Q + A he stated that he would often turn to The Cullen Brothers and ask them what they envisioned for certain scenes since they were the ones writing it.

Cop Out is a film that will have the Smith touch. It won’t sound like a Kevin Smith film, and might have a quicker pace than his usual work. But, it will be a Kevin Smith film. No one can deny that. This is a film that was grown for success. This is a film that is meant to show what Kevin Smith is capable of outside of his norm. This is the film that will prove to the world that Kevin Smith is more than just dick and fart jokes. Come February 26^th, don’t be surprised to see Cop Out gain #1 at the box office (unless Shutter Island has two weeks in it).

Do you think that Cop Out will succeed?

The last time we got to see Mel Gibson onscreen was in 2002’s Signs. When asked why it took so long for him to return he said acting had gotten boring and he wanted to take a break to return on something that was compelling and well made. It looks like he kept to his word. Edge of Darkness hearkens back to the 70’s style espionage thriller with it’s slow pace, little action and a lot of character development. This is not the 2 hour ass kicking fest that the trailer would have you believe. This is something much better and way more intelligent.

The initial  plot of Edge of Darkness is simple enough. Detective Thomas Craven lives alone in the suburbs of Boston. His daughter comes home for a few days and she soon becomes extremely ill. As she and Craven are leaving for the hospital she is gunned down and dies immediately. This is when the movie begins to show its true colors.

In regards to Martin Campbell’s directing, this movie was perfect for him. If you like the slow portions of Casino Royale and Goldeneye, where you are taken deep into Bond’s character and emotional state then you will love Edge of Darkness. A lot of this movie is about examining the psychological state of Craven after having his daughter die in his arms. One can only imagine what he is going through and any parent will feel true pain for him. This makes his actions all the more understandable and relatable.

One of the things this movie excelled at was building tension. Similar to the kind of tension one would experience while watching Inglorious Basterds. Your heart begins to race when you think something is about to happen, and when nothing does you feel that much more moved and relieved. Then, when you least expect it… BANG! The film was great at making the audience care for the usually pointless side characters. The ones that don’t add much to the plot of the story and are just there for needed exposition. I felt truly moved when something would happen to them, similar to the way one would feel while watching an episode of 24.

As for Gibson, he’s fine. He definitely hasn’t lost his touch. His Boston accent was a bit iffy but it’s watchable. He is one of the few nitpicks I have with the film. He has turned the corner into the town of Harrison Ford and Clint Eastwood, where he just grunts a lot. But even those grunts come off as more intelligent than most young actors today. Gibson is still able to command a scene and point the audience exactly where he wants them to be.

Edge of Darkness is a well made espionage/thriller/revenge film. If you’re a fan of the genre then you will have a great time at the theater. Just don’t walk into the film expecting Taken 2.

8.5 out of 10

Normally, I am a sucker for a film like this: an R-rated action/horror film with angels, guns, violence and Tyrese Gibson. How could this possibly go wrong? I walked into Legion expecting something along the lines of Daybreakers, something fun and gory. But it soon became very clear to me why this film got dumped in January. This is probably one of the safest R-rated films to come out in a while. It’s not so much that I hate Legion for its lackluster story or characters, it’s that with an R-rating you have free reign for over-the-top action. It appears no one told the filmmakers.

The plot’s as simple as they come: Michael, the archangel (Paul Bettany), falls to earth after disobeying an order given by you know who. We learn fairly quickly that he was sent to kill an unborn child, carried by soon-to-be single mom Charlie (Adrianne Palicki). He’s chosen instead to protect the child, who’s birth determines the fate of mankind.

So much of Legion is bogged down with this kind of useless exposition, complimented by pointless character relationships. Again, this would be forgivable if the movie wasn’t trying to be seriously deep. I want to believe that the actors, along with writer/director Scott Stewart, know how ridiculous this concept is and decided to have a little fun. But based on what I saw in the action department, I just can’t.

The real reason this film is rated R is because they use the F word one time to many. The action scenes, instead of being flat out fun, come off as stale and incomplete. In the first real shootout between the humans and the angels, all we really get to see are the many muzzle flashes of automatic weapons. If you are going to give a movie like this an R rating, then show me bullets going into bodies, show me cars exploding. There is only one scene in the entire film that really deserves an R and even that could easily be cut for PG-13.

Did I hate Legion on the same level I hated something like 2012? No, but, I do regret spending $8.75 to see it. This film screams straight-to-DVD with a budget. Heck, it probably would’ve worked better as a straight-to-DVD. Legion is not worth your money at the theater, or its R rating.

2 out of 10

Last summer, I took some time out to publish a breakdown of necessary rules Hollywood has inadvertently created to successfully pull off a remake. But there is another genre that many believe is a sign of the lack of creativity, and again, I argue it is a sign of real creativity and like the remake, there is a set of rules that need to be followed in order to make them work. I am of course talking about sequels.

Many people have gotten the idea in their heads that there are maybe five sequels that surpassed the originals, but that couldn’t be further from the truth: Godfather Part II, Terminator 2: Judgment Day, Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan, The Empire Strikes Back, The Dark Knight, Back to The Future: Part II, The Bourne Supremacy, From Russia With Love, Aliens, Evil Dead II, Spider-Man 2, and the list goes on. All of these sequels follow the “rules” to become successful and this is a breakdown of what to look for from now on.

Rule 1: Re-establish

The first thing you have to keep in mind with a sequel is that there are going to be people who have never heard of or seen the original film. So it is the job if the film maker to get everyone up to speed and explain the key points established in the first film. If people walk out of the sequel saying “you need to see the first to understand anything” then you have failed. Take James Cameron’s Aliens for example. Within the first few minutes of the film we see Ripley rescued and then brought in to explain what had happened to her. She recounts all the key points from the first film – she was the only survivor, an unknown creature attacked them, there was a crashed ship containing the creatures, etc…

These are all things people need to know if they didn’t see Ridley Scott’s film. An extremely poor example of this however, is The Matrix Reloaded. In Reloaded we start off with Trinity jumping out of a building being chased by an agent… Anyone who didn’t see The Matrix (they exist) has no clue who this person is, and, why they are running. Which, would be fine, except that no explanation is given throughout the film of who the agents are and why they are so dangerous. There is also no explanation as to why Neo is able to do what he does and why the war exists. If you don’t re-establish then you won’t be able to bring your audience in.

Rule 2: Don’t be afraid to mix things up

Not so much a rule but, rather advice. Don’t be afraid the throw your audience a curve ball. If you go into the sequel and plan on doing nothing more than go through the motions and redo whatever the first one did then you will fail. You need to add some creativity and make the sequel unique. Again I go back to Cameron (this must be Scream 2), Terminator 2: Judgment Day threw a huge curve ball at the audience by making the T-800 the hero and not the villain.

Why John Conner made this choice was left open to interpretation but by doing this, people who enjoyed the first film wouldn’t be walking out saying “yeah but it was just like the other one.” Instead people went “What… The… Fuck.” This (along with the ground breaking effects) helped establish T2 as an iconic piece of cinema.

Rule 3: New Is Good

Unlike Rule 2 which is just a piece of advice, this is a must. The audience NEEDS something new to make them want to see and enjoy the film. The audience hates the same thing over and over again. Even the SAW films, though they follow the same basic plot structure, they give the audience new deaths to enjoy which makes them want to see the film, perhaps the ultimate example of this rule is The Godfather Part II.

In Part II, not only do we see what happens to Michael Corleone (the expected part) we also get to see the rise of his father Vito Corleone. We also get to see all the parallels between Michael’s and Vito’s rise to power. A horrible example of this (and this also goes for rule 2) is Escape From L.A. Why? Because it’s the EXACT SAME MOVIE! Nothing in Escape From L.A. except for the fact that the city is L.A. and not N.Y. is different. The president is kidnapped, snake has been arrested, snake goes in to rescue him, and they even put in another blood sport scene. There is nothing different about Escape From L.A. to keep the audience interested.

Rule 4: Bigger doesn’t mean better:

Just because you have the resources and money to put more on screen, doesn’t mean you should. If having more things on screen doesn’t add to your story then utilize your extra resources in some other way. Perhaps one of the freshest examples of this is Transformers: Revenge of The Fallen. While I am not one to criticize Bay for his story telling, there was simply too much in this film, too many robots, too many adventures, too many humans, too much of everything. There weren’t one or two major plot lines that the audience could latch on to.

The first film had three main stories, the government response, Sam and Mikaela’s adventure, and the story of the Autobots looking for the All Spark. Transformers 2 had individual plot lines for Sam, Mikaela, Lennox and his team, the Autobots, the Decepticons, Leo, and Simmons. There simply wasn’t enough screen time to give them all justice. In contrary, an example of a film that takes this rule to heart is Clerks 2. Kevin Smith had access to over 22x the amount of money he had on the first film. But he never lost sight of what Clerks 2 was about, 2 guys talking about their lives and working through their problems. Smith could have gone and filled Clerks 2 to the brim with nothing but stars and overloaded side characters, but instead he took that money and told the story he always wanted to tell (and in color).

Rule 5: Trilogies Are Tricky

A) There are two types of trilogies: the planned and the unplanned trilogy. The planned trilogy has the basic story mapped out, at the very least, by the start of the second film. The unplanned trilogy is when the second film is made with zero intention of doing a third. Some examples include The Blade Trilogy, The Mission Impossible Trilogy, The Transporter Trilogy, The American Pie Trilogy, these are all stories that only exist on a self contained level. In this case the standard sequel rules apply. There isn’t much to say other than be careful as usual.

B) If you have your trilogy mapped out from film 1 then you can’t make that blatantly clear. Take The Phantom Menace for example. Anyone who had already seen episodes 4-6 knew that episode 1 was the start of a new trilogy. But anyone who had never seen Star Wars before or wasn’t aware of it (again, these people exist) had no clue that Episode 1 was the start of a new trilogy. So by ending the film with a clear set up for a sequel you make the ending of the film meaningless, because everyone needs to know what happens and no one can enjoy the film on a self contained level – like they did with A New Hope.

C) If the 2^nd film is when you begin planning on a trilogy then there are a few things to know. First, the same blatancy rule applies. Don’t make your second film a giant set up for the third film. The Matrix Reloaded, Pirates of The Caribbean: Dead Man’s Chest, Attack of The Clones, they all make this mistake. If people know you are just setting up for a third film, then they get mad that they had to sit through the 2^nd film. Like the first film, it makes the 2^nd film meaningless (see the pattern?). Something else you need to keep in mind is that the third film needs to complete the story, so if you close to much out in the 2^nd film then there will be nothing left to talk about in the third film. Take The Bourne Suprmecy and The Bourne Ultimatum in this case. Supremecy ends in a way that leaves people happy with the film on a self contained level but still leaves enough open so that we can jump right back into the third film with Bourne still looking for the people who hurt him.

Final Thoughts

Contrary to popular belief, sequels are a good thing. They let us go deeper into the stories of our favorite characters and discover new things that make us go wow. But there is a fine line in the sequel world and when it is crossed everything goes to hell. Follow these rules and you will be successful.

Honorable Mentions:

Watchmen

UP

(500) Days of Summer

The Taking of Pelham 1 2 3

Top 10:

10 – Taken

Any film that can turn Liam Neeson into an ass kicking, no holds bard, killing machine gets an A in my book. A film that came out of left field and completely wowed anyone who saw it. Truly a classic in the action genre.

9 – Precious

A film that says so much, Precious deserves all the praise it gets. It has a lot to say about inner city life and pulls it off with spectacular precision.

8 – The Hangover

A laugh out loud comedy that shows off the true talent of Todd Philips. This comedy hits every note with amazing whit and intelligence. A film that is real proof that Judd Apatow and Kevin Smith aren’t the only ones who know how to do good R rated comedy.

7 – Public Enemies

Michael Mann’s newest film is filled with amazing performances and is fully aware of what it’s going for. Mann wanted to separate this film from all the other period pieces out there and with the use of digital cinematography he did just that. The video adds a true sense of depth to the film that makes it feel all the more real.

6 - Zombieland

I honestly can’t remember the last time I had so much gut busting fun at the theater. While The Hangover is a real comedy classic, Zombieland is non stop laughs from start to finish. This is also one of the few times where 100% of the audience was in sync with the jokes. It wasn’t a case of some would laugh at one part and some would laugh at another. Everyone laughed at everything at the exact same moment. Also, Woody Harrelson is at the top of his game in this film. Zombieland is a must see.

5 - Star Trek

I wasn’t a big Trekkie growing up. I liked Voyager (which to all Star Trek fans is grounds for lynching) but that was about it. When I heard that J. J. Abrams was doing a reboot to the franchise I was both intrigued and worried. I was worried because if it has flopped, it would of flopped hard and hurt him big time. But not only did he succeed in making a great summer blockbuster, he also made Star Trek accessible to your average movie goer. Congrats J.J., congrats.

4 - District 9

District 9 is an amazing film full of excitement and adventure. Proof of what can be done with limited resources. Also proof that CG is officially at a point that we ca be used effectively on a tight budget.

3 – Inglourious Basterds

I would make a case for Taratino’s latest being on this list but I would probably just end up repeating what EVERYONE else has already said. It is great, if you haven’t seen it yet, then why are you not at a Best Buy right now buying it?

2 – AVATAR

AVATAR is the true definition of an event film. AVATAR does for 3D and motion capture what Jurassic Park and Terminator 2 did for CGI. The fact that AVATAR was able to do what it did is truly something extraordinary. While I still think is doesn’t deserve and major Oscar WINS, it definitely deserves all the praise it has received.

1 – The Hurt Locker

Every generation has its war film, and before this, all there was, was Black Hawk Down. But The Hurt Locker is a truly extraordinary piece of work. Creating a very, very realistic feel for what soldiers fighting the war on terror go through today. Kathryn Bigelow knocked it out of the park on this one and it won’t soon be forgotten.

It has been an amazing year for film. Not on the big scale (except for a few exceptions) but rather on the small scale. I can’t wait to see what 2010 has in store.

Inception Trailer – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RSyQ3K0xnYg

Shutter Island Trailer – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c4bznTvfP6k

Made in 2009

Apparition | USA | 118 min

By the traditional definition The Boondock Saints II: All Saints Day is not a good movie, but as the last few years have taught us with films like Crank, Gamer, Crank 2, Bad Boys II, and most recently Ninja Assassin, sometimes that traditional definition does not apply. Writer/director Troy Duffy has delivered a film that packs a punch of stylized violence and offensive yet still comical (in their own sadistic way) one liners to make anyone who was already a fan of the brothers happy and anyone who was on the fence have an enjoyable experience with the movie. However, anyone who despises the first film will not find anything that will change their opinion of The Saints.

The plot of the film is simplistic by nature but fits perfectly into the world Duffy has created. Eight years after the events of The Boondock Saints the brothers have gone into hiding with their father in Ireland. When they get word that a priest was murdered in such a way as to make it look like they are the murders they head back to Boston to seek out the one responsible and anyone who had a hand in the planning. The film pretty much follows the formula of the first one from that point. We see Duffy use the same time jumping techniques he used in the first film and many of the character personalities have not changed (though it is clear that age has effected them in some way).

Of course one of the notable changes is that of Julie Benz filling in the role left behind by Willem Dafoe. Though she does not have nearly the same flamboyant charisma that Dafoe brought to the first film she does bring her own unique – yet flawed – charm to the new installment. There are moments where the dialogue she delivers is somewhat cringe worthy, but the way she handles herself and the character allows her to get away with it… sometimes. Much like Benz, another major cast change is Clifton Collins Jr. taking over the role left by David Della Rocco. The character he portrays in Boondock II feels very similar to the one he plays in Crank II. His character doesn’t care about how others view him and he simply wants everything to go the way he envisions it. This makes for some very comical moments with the brothers.

The brothers have not changed between the first and second film. They still have the same outlook on the world that they always had. To them, everything is about family, respect, and following the basic rules of life. They still make many references to pop culture as they did in the first film and yes they still have their rope. These two are the epitome of the living-in-the-moment lifestyle. They rarely plan ahead and just role with the punches, literally. Everything that made them cult icons is still there, the prayer, the sunglasses, the coats, the guns, and the charisma. They are just an enjoyable duo to watch and there is not much else to say beyond that.

While Duffy is not known for providing deep, philosophical character development he does make an attempt in this film. In this case it is the back story to the brothers father Il Duce played by Billy Connolly. Done through flashbacks of 1950’s New York we get to see how Il Duce came to be. It is not the most coherent back story ever given in film history but it shows that Duffy is trying to expand beyond the role of strictly a flashy filmmaker.

The film is a definite step up for Duffy in terms of style. It is clear he tries – though fails – to create a unique visual style that one would be able to recognize as his. Since this is only his second film he has a long way to go. But the fact remains that these flaws are welcomed by fans, and he ends up using it as a strength. Also to his credit, Duffy is a man that never stops thinking. The movie is jampacked with many moments that are supposed to help progress the story. Unfortunately, this also leaves little room for a breather moment. The film is constantly moving and never gives the audience a chance to completely take in what is happening. Had there been a few moments of exposition the plot of the film would have been much stronger.

If you loved The Boondock Saints then you’ll love The Boondock Saints II: All Saints Day. If you hated The Boondock Saints then you’ll hate The Boondock Saints II: All Saints Day. It is clear that this new installment is for fanboys of the first film and by those terms the film succeeds in what it attempts to do. If you walk into this film expecting nothing more than a glamorized spectacle of violence and humor then you will have an enjoyable experience.

7 out of 10

What did you think of All Saints Day?

Lionsgate| USA | 110 mins

Precious is a very powerful and very disturbing film. It makes the audience truly appreciate the main necessities of life (food, clothing, education, clean living, and money) and how hard they can be to come by. Director Lee Daniels looks beyond those, showing the audience that a strong family unit will make or break a person both mentally and physically.

The film follows the journey of Claireece “Precious” Jones (Gabourey Sidibe), an overweight illiterate teenager that is pregnant with her second child. When the pregnancy is discovered she is kicked out of her high school and sent to an “alternative” learning center where she can get her GED. Precious’s home life is broken; her mother (Mo’Nique) is abusive and her father nonexistent. The way the scenes inside the home are framed and edited makes the audience feel nothing but sorrow for Precious and her trapped situation. The only time the audience gets to see the powerful side of Precious is when she is at the alternative learning center. There we see her thrive and achieve things no one thinks she is a capable of. The film is a coming of age story while learning to take responsibility and control of your own life.

There are moments that make the audience turn their heads in fear and disgust. Not only because of what is actually on screen but also because of the subject matter that the moment revolves around. The abuse that Precious suffers evokes a similar reaction at times. It is extremely disturbing to watch the way her mother treats her and feel completely helpless to do anything about. The film succeeds very well in making you forget that you are watching a movie. The big reveal in the film, which is very subtle in its approach, is extremely heart wrenching and causes a sickly reaction in the audience to its truth.

The acting in Precious is all above par. Sidibe accomplishes what she sets out to do, make the audience feel remorse for this character. Precious’s teacher in the learning center played by Paula Patton is perhaps the weakest character but being the weakest character in Precious is not saying much. Even she is above par and evokes true emotion from the audience. But as great as those characters are, the unsung hero (or villain in this case) is Precious’s mother played by Mo’Nique. She causes a stir of hatred in the audience and a very powerful one at that. You feel no remorse for her situation and by the end of the film the audience is truly disgusted by her. Even the supporting characters are amazing. Take the characters in the alternative class with Precious for example, every one of them represent a different piece of inner city culture yet they are all united by one thing — they want to better their lives and make something of themselves. They all have dreams just like Precious and they all have a minor side story that allows them to arc on their own merit in some way.

Occasionally when something bad is happening to her, Precious retreats into her own head and we see what she is imagining. She has dreams and sometimes will wish to be a completely different person. This helps to add to her struggle and allow the audience to see how awful she really feels.

The only real problem with Precious are the music choices. A film like this doesn’t play by the rules and it shows. There is nothing “safe” about this movie except for the music. If it’s a sappy scene a sappy song is played. If it’s a dramatic scene then a dramatic song is played. It doesn’t work with the rest of the film. I would have preferred some originality in the score and not one that is so ordinary.

Precious is an amazing film and one that will stand the test of time. It’s very message driven and is the type of film that was missing in this year’s repertoire. I also would like to warn the readers that this film is a very hard watch. Not in the way Antichrist is hard to watch, but more in the Blue Velvet way. See it,  but unless the film touches you on extremely deep level you don’t need to see it again  — at least not in theaters.

9 out of 10

The other day fellow Film Stage writer Hash Aguirre told me he purchased J.J. Abrams’ summer hit Star Trek on iTunes via a digital file. I was extremely confused when he told me this because like me, Hash is a big time hard disc media supporter. This is when he hit me with a bomb shell I was never expecting. He told me that iTunes was offering DVD style features along with the films purchase. I couldn’t believe it, so I went on to iTunes myself and I saw the picture above. What I want you to notice is the upper right hand corner of the screen, the tiny box that says iTunes Extras. Then look underneath that box:

Over 40 Exclusive Images
A Making of Documentary
Poster Galleries, International Trailers
Secret Code That Unlocks Hidden Content!

This shocked me to the core. These features seem like something one would expect when purchasing a single disc DVD version of the film. If this is the new route that iTunes is taking than this look like it could put quite a dent in hard disc media. One of the big things that kept hardcore collectors (like me and many of you) from switching was the fact that we love things like commentary, making of documentaries, blooper reels, concept art galleries, and anything else you can think of, but, if they are going to start being offered with digital purchases than there is no more reason to deny the inevitable.

Could we really only be a few years away from commentary tracks and easter eggs on digital movie purchases? ITunes is not only offering these featurettes but they present them in a DVD menu style format. When you purchase a film on iTunes that includes these iTunes Extras the movie comes as part of a digital dvd menu. This includes ways to navigate chapter selection, special features, etc… (see below image)

This is all began with the latest version of iTunes (9.0). With this version came two very important items. iTunes Extras and iTunes LP. iTunes LP is basically iTunes Extras for music. You can see a video on what is included with iTunes LP here. As you can see many similar ideas are included. Unfortunately, I was unable to find a video version of the iTunes Extras navigation interface for movie but you get the idea. Apple has been the leader of the digital revolution ever since MP3’s became popular. The fact that these iTunes Extras have begun to be offered should come as no surprise.

Am I currently setting all my hard disc media a blaze and running over to iTunes? No, but if iTunes continues to add more and more features to the point that all the features on your standard DVDs and Blu Rays will be available digitally then I can say without a shadow of a doubt that Blu-ray Disc will be the final hard disc media format to exist.

Do you think hard media will go away in a decade or so? Does iTunes Extra hint at what the future holds?

This week the 10^th anniversary Blu Ray version of one of the best films I have ever seen will hit stores. Unlike so many other films like it, Fight Club is something special. I saw it for the first time in 2007 when I had only heard of it in passing and knew almost nothing about it other than the fact that Brad Pitt was in it. I watched it, I was sucked into it, and I was blown away by it. It’s rare when a film with a twist so powerful manages to keep it hidden and never makes me guess that it exists. No one told me there was a twist and that the film is the mind bender that it is. I wish I could go into every movie like that. Films like Old Boy and Memento were ruined for me because people told me there was the existence of a twist. So I would begin looking for it or at least try figure out what it is. With Fight Club no one did that. Thank god they didn’t. It made the film something amazing. When the realization of what is actually going on comes together I remember saying the following out loud to my roommate “what the fuck just happened to my brain?” It is a film that transcends time, race, gender, religion, and everything in between. Even beyond the twist and the amazing story telling, the visuals that Fincher provides managed to impress even the action movie junkie in me. It is so good. I can’t express enough the masterpiece that this film is. Now that it is finally hitting Blu Ray people will be able to enjoy the film exactly the way it was meant to be seen. While Fight Club is a statement on the 90s male, it is also a statement on control and how everyone has to take command of their own lives.

Columbia Pictures | USA | 158 mins

Roland Emmerich’s latest piece of world destruction cinema not only pushes the bounds of awful storytelling but manages to assault the viewer physically, mentally and psychologically. If there is one thing that films like Stargate, Independence Day, The Patriot, and The Day After Tomorrow all have in common (besides Emmerich’s direction) it is that they contain an element of fun. 2012, if it can be believed, surpasses the level of embarrassment that is achieved in Godzilla. While clichéd dialogue and shoddy CG are to be expected by Emmerich, it’s not an excuse for a story that is not only implausible, but, one that lacks even less character development and depth than Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen.

The film’s plot is as simple as its title. In 2009 an Indian scientist discovers that the world will end in the year 2012. The scientist then tells a colleague at the White House of the impending doom and ill-advised government action follows from there. My question is, how does that in anyway relate to the struggles of an unsuccessful science-fiction author who looks alarmingly like John Cusack? This kind macrocosm/microcosm breakdown of a disaster was made famous in old sci-fi classics like The War of the Worlds but, unfortunately, the style doesn’t fit with today’s far more introverted form of storytelling. Emmerich’s story parallels only help to accent the campy cheese that engulfs this whole project.

That said, the first 20 minutes of the film is rather enjoyable. A lot of key plot points are established, as well as the anticipation of the title’s definitive promise. It’s almost easy to blink and miss the complete 180 this film does in terms of quality. It’s funny: the truly awful moments in the movie begin right when the world starts going to hell on a silver platter. In fact, the actual act of the world being demolished is rather boring and doesn’t insight any sort of care from the viewer. It’s been done over and over and over again, and, ironically, is shown over and over again here in this one movie.

Although the entertainment value of this film was always going to overshadow fact (or even plausibility), it quickly becomes apparent that not a single shred of research was done for the writing of this film (you can blame co-writers Emmerich and Harald Kloser). There is a scene that involves the ground cracking in two, a limo, and two senior citizens that invokes immediate laughter at its oddity and randomness, nothing more. Even more amazing still are the gaps in common sense that inform the giant plot holes throughout. Apparently, the U.S. Government has the ability to track every single member of the White House staff but cannot find a conspiracy nut (Woody Harrelson) on the radio in the middle of Yellow Stone (where they have a military base set up).

Not to mention, the extremely bloated run time. There are so many random scenes intercut with the “action” that are meant to provide some form of comic relief. But they just become an eye sore that bores the audience to death.

Also, this is some of the worst acting put on screen in some time, especially when considering the talent involved. Take Danny Glover, who plays the President of the United States. Even this man, one of the more reliable actors of our time, can’t escape one of the worst performances of his career. Every time he is on screen the audience becomes bored and disconnected, even during pivotal moments like his address to the nation informing of the impending doom. One can’t help but laugh because there is not a single iota of emotion from Glover and it looks as if he himself is trying to hold back the laughter at how awful his speech is written.

Of course, one cannot (or rather can, which is the problem) forget Cusack, the film’s leading man, whose character is even more clichéd than Glover’s. He has some well-placed jokes but, if the viewer is to believe that Cusack’s writer/limo driver Jackson Curtis suddenly turns into an environmentally-defensive driving extraordinaire/stunt man, said viewer must first be invested in the character himself. Like Glover, and the rest of the cast, the audience becomes disinterested with the cheesy one-liners.

Though these two characters would be enough of an insult in any blockbuster, they’re nothing compared to the horrendous performance given by Chiwetel Ejiofor, who plays science adviser Adrian Helmsley. What is really interesting is that he is the best part about those enjoyable first 20 minutes. The audience can really sink their teeth into the emotion of his character, similar to the way Emmerich offers up Jeff Goldblum’s character and his quirks and checkered past at the beginning of Independence Day. But, like the rest of the film, Ejiofor becomes completely uninteresting and ungrounded as soon as the destruction begins. He suddenly starts spewing cliché one-liner after cliché one-liner.

The only memorable character is Harrelson as the conspiracy theory radio host of Charlie Frost. This is the only character that the audience seemed to be engaged with. His lines were excellent and his physical traits were perfectly crafted, a credit to Harrelson and not Emmerich or the screenwriters for that matter.

The next, and last, thing to be discussed is the amazingly bad special effects. While I can appreciate the time and work I am sure went in to making the entire world crumble into dust, one must also wonder where the $200 million projected budget went (surely Cusack’s quote isn’t that high!).

If we live in an age where we can make the sight of robots turning into cars, space battles and aliens living in Africa look as photo real as the people involved then how can the ball be dropped so far on something that should be so simple? Like the story, the formula for destroying the world is set in stone at this point. There is nothing new to add to the image of the end of the world, at least not here. So why the need to show things like Yellow Stone erupting in an explosion that looks like Hiroshima or two buildings falling into each other in such a way that they conjure up images of 9/11? It is both insulting and disengaging.

2012 is a movie that misses every mark it’s shooting for. It’s unoriginal and uninteresting. I know for a fact that Emmerich is capable of much better disaster cinema, featuring interesting characters and not nearly as much poorly written dialogue. Avoid this movie like the end the of the world.

2 out of 10