Pictures, Pictures and More Dark Knight Pictures

A huge deal of "Dark Knight" pictures have been revealed. Many of them are simply higher quality versions of pictures we've seen or they might as well be screen captures from the recent trailer. Although there are a few gems. We finally get to see some proof that Morgan Freeman is still in it as Lucius Fox and more shots of the Batcycle. And someone hand over the oscar to the people that made the Joker look so creepy. Those yellow teeth do it for me! Click to enlarge. (And they are large.)

Goku Powers Up

A bad scan, or snapshot, of a magazine has entered the web sporting Justin Chatwin as Goku forming an energy ball. No doubt a better quality version of the photo will be online soon. Despite all the bad buzz surrounding this movie, I'm still pretty pumped for it, bad or not. I like Chatwin's hair. Click to enlarge:


April 2009.

X-Files 2 International Poster

Pretty generic looking poster for The X-Files sequel. It gives people a better vibe for what this movie may be like, but at the seem time it also could be any horror movie. Personally I like the teaser poster more. Click to enlarge:


July 25.

The Clone Wars in All Its... Ew...

The hideous poster for "Star Wars: The Clone Wars" has been released. I'm a little late on this one, but... do you really care? The characters look awful and this whole idea is throwing me off the fritz.


August 15.

REVIEW - "Iron Man" (2008)

At this point audiences have more than caught on that superhero movies are the big fad today. It’s obvious why. The special effects of today make these characters possible to bring to life and, more importantly, they’re the perfect type of summer blockbuster—They make money.

The majority of the superhero movies are origin stories; movies that show the birth of a certain superhero and why they do what they do. Though we’ve seen so many of these types of films I sat through “Iron Man” wondering, “Why is this movie so different?” The fact is that a good movie is a good movie. This is what “Iron Man” has on “Ghost Rider,” “Daredevil,” and “X-Men: The Last Stand.” In fact “Iron Man” is such a good film that it may top every Marvel Comic movie we’ve seen thus far. (Yes, even “Spider-Man 2.”)

Billionaire weapons creator Tony Stark (Robert Downey Jr.) is anything but a character that fits the superhero mold. He’s sarcastic, a womanizer, he enjoys reaping the benefits off of others’ misfortunes and he has no sense of morality. His sharp wit and exponential ego is cut down when he is held in captivity for three months. Though his Middle Eastern captors want him to build a missile, he instead uses his genius to escape by means of an armored suit. When he returns home he dedicates his talent to modifying the suit and “protecting the people he put in harms way.”

My summary does the film very little justice. What the movie really owes its magnificence to is Robert Downey Jr.’s quick, spot-on portrayal of Tony Stark and his rapid-fire quips written by screenwriters Mark Fergus and Hawk Ostby (“Children of Men”). The writing may trump even “Batman Begins,” and Robert Downey Jr. might just be the best lead superhero to grace the screen. He never goes overboard, but instead gives the audience a character that’s enjoyable to watch whether he’s in the Iron Man suit or not. He’s believable, and without being a Peter Parker or some poor soul who accidentally gets “cursed” with great powers, he betrays a headstrong man bent on giving himself those powers to correct his mistakes and do wonders beyond that.

The glowing performance by Downey is accompanied by Gwyneth Paltrow, Jeff Bridges and Terrence Howard, all in which hold their own against Downey’s presence. Paltrow and Downey have the chemistry Maguire and Dunst wished they had in the first “Spider-Man.” They keep each other on their toes and Paltrow does an excellent job rebounding off of Downey’s wit.

What the film kind of muddles its way through are the villains. While they aren’t laughable (“Ghost Rider”) or overstocked (“Spider-Man 3”) the motives of the main villain aren’t fleshed out very well and his vague reasons hardly justify his actions. (Not to mention it was pretty obvious who the main baddy was going to be.)

I’m sure some people will write “cliché” on this movie for incorporating a hazy interpretation of the current Middle East struggles and under-the-table weapons dealing. But it sits well with the concepts brought to the table in the Iron Man mythos. Comic books have always had their own commentary on current events: Captain America has battled against the Nazi’s, if I recall, and not too long ago a comic book was released depicting Spider-Man’s reaction to 9/11. Iron Man has a right to bring fiction to current events and I don’t think the way it was done is too offensive for wide audiences, or too heavy to be preachy. It’s simply a statement that isn’t meant to be overstated. It doesn’t need to be.

Meanwhile the special effects bring to life a hero that’s cool, fun and a joy to watch in action. Granted the action isn’t as plentiful as, say… “Transformers,” but the movie as a whole offers so much more; so when you’re treated with Iron Man going in to battle it’s just that much better!

“Iron Man” may just be the best Marvel film to fly on to the screen. Even with the onslaught of pictures and previews before its release nothing was ruined and I couldn’t have been more satisfied with it. I eagerly await the return of Tony Stark and his gold titanium suit. (With a little “hotrod red.”) And judging from the box office results, so is everyone else.

***½ out of ****

REVIEW - "Horton Hears a Who!" (2008)

Sorry it’s been so long since A) an update or B) a recent review. Frankly I didn’t want to go see movies I knew would probably be awful so I passed on “Doomsday,” and a host of other movies that looked bad. “10,000 B.C.” gave me my fill for hideous films this year and I didn’t want to risk anymore. However I did see one little jewel in the rough; I say jewel rather than diamond because I don’t think it’s that valuable, but it was probably the best thing that came to theaters during the month of March.

“Horton Hears a Who!” won’t be remembered like most Pixar pictures, but it might as well be. Besides, it’s a good one for the kids and mother to go see while dad stays at home melting his brain over March Madness.

Jim Carrey voices the elephant Horton who ends up finding an entire civilization of Whos living on a spec that is set upon a clover. Though the original 1970s cartoon was sharply condensed to stay truer to the book, this new version delivers a more spastic Horton that is sure entertain smaller children of this generation. Meanwhile, Steve Carrell’s Mayor of Whoville will probably resonate more with the parents. Sure, the character has that abrupt humor that younger audiences like, but the obstacles he makes light of is something parents can appreciate too.

Seth Rogen also offers his voice to this movie, but plays a character that hardly does anything. I felt like his name was just thrown on the poster to gain a wider audience and they gave him a nothing part to keep the poster’s credibility. The voice acting from Carrey and Carrell is really what makes this movie. I can’t help but wonder if they improved some lines or made their own changes to the script.

The animation isn’t anything that we haven’t seen before, or that Pixar has done better, but it’s no less pleasing. I don’t think anyone would notice any severe flaw with it. In fact the animation is very emblematic of the entire movie. It’s above average, highly enjoyable and a fun family movie. Nothing groundbreaking—It’s no “Toy Story,” but it maintains a quality that isn’t popular during the month of March.

Now how does it stack up as a Dr. Seuss movie? The recent batch of live action Dr. Seuss films have delivered overly stretched, unfunny and tacky versions of the original stories. “The Grinch” was an enormous disappointment and “The Cat and the Hat” was simply forgettable. However, “Horton Hears a Who!” only extends ideas that were present in the children’s book rather than transforming it in to something else. It maintains that classy Dr. Seuss humor while spicing up the characters for today’s audience. It doesn’t veer off to far from the original story and the small editions are enjoyable and fitting.

Again, it’s hard to find quality films during March, but “Horton Hears a Who!” was a great breath of fresh air. It probably wasn’t strong enough to go up against this summer’s stacked lineup, but it most certainly should not be lumped with the crap that came out during the month it opened.

*** out of ****

TRAILER - The Dark Knight (Trailer 2)

This one's here to stay. As I've said before, it's a perfect trailer. It doesn't show too much or give away too much, but it makes you wish July was a little bit closer. Enjoy!

Lots of Low Quality Indy Photos

I don't know if I'd even click on these to "enlarge" them. If they're bigger, it's not by much. In any case they're pretty interesting photos and well worth putting up. The crystal skull is in plain sight and we get to see what John Hurt will look like for the first time. Enjoy!
(Also, notice what Shia's character is using to pull Indy out of quicksand. Ha!)

Abrams Talks "Trek"

It's been awhile since we've heard anything about "Star Trek." But now, J.J. Abrams, the man behind "Lost," "Alias," and "Cloverfield" and director of the new "Star Trek" feature comes out to say a few words on his vision for the legendary franchise.

From Yahoo News:

"It was an opportunity to take what I think has been a maligned world — to sound crass, a franchise — and treat it in a way that made it something that I wanted to see. To take the characters, the thoughtfulness, the personalities, the sense of adventure, the idea of humanity working together, the sense of social commentary and innovation, all that stuff. To take it and apply it in a way that felt genuinely thrilling.

The whole point was to try to make this movie for fans of movies, not fans of `Star Trek,' necessarily," Abrams continued. "If you're a fan, we've got one of the writers who's a devout Trekker, so we were able to make sure we were serving the people who are completely enamored with `Star Trek.' But we are not making the movie for that contingent alone.

You can't really make a movie for them. As soon as you start to guess what you think they are going to want to see, you're in trouble. You have to make the movie in many ways for what you want to see yourself, make a movie you believe in. Then you're not second-guessing an audience you don't really have an understanding of.

I feel like this is so unlike what you expect, so unlike the `Star Trek' you've seen. At the same time, it's being true to what's come before, honoring it. I can say the effects for `Star Trek' have never, ever been done like this. ... I can only tell you the idea of the universe of `Star Trek' has never been given this kind of treatment."


Brave words, and ones I totally agree with. I love the bit he said about making a movie you believe in. After being responsible for one of the best television series of the decade ("Lost"), reinventing the giant monster genre ("Cloverfield") and giving us a "Mission: Impossible" movie with actual thrills, I'm going to go ahead and say this is probably going to be one of the most enthralling Star Trek movies ever. He's got the track record and he speaks with a great deal of confidence. I like that. It gives me confidence. None of this George Lucas, fans-won't-like-it, bull crap. Take it all Abrams! Do whatever the hell you want with it!

"First Blood" Being Re-Released With Alternate Ending

Looks like Rambo isn't finished yet, the original "First Blood" is being re-released with an alternate ending that was shown on its DVD release. For those who don't know what it is, and would like it to be revealed on the big screen, I'll refrain from saying what goes down at the end.

To see if "First Blood" is playing near you, type in your zip code at this website.

"First Blood" returns to theaters May 15th.