TRAILER - Boondock Saints II: All Saints Day

'Bout time. While the trailer isn't exactly mind blowing it doesn't worry me enough for the film as a whole. The first movie was a love-it-or-hate-it flick with a large fan following that would rather stick their middle fingers up to naysayers than indulge them; it seems fair that the second should feel the same.

I also want to exhaust how great it is to see Sean Patrick Flanery after USA debunked "The Dead Zone." (He played Greg Stillson in the series.) The original cast looks great and the trailer ensures this will be a lot of fun.

So how soon will "Boondock Saints II: All Saints Day" arrive? Shockingly, October 30th! No, of this year, not 2010. I was expecting a release date of early next year at the soonest. Not bad.

The trailer is a red band trailer, so be cautious, this isn't so work/soccer mom friendly.


Oct. 30th.

Disney Owns Marvel: Maybe Not a Bad Thing?

When I heard today that Disney had bought Marvel Comics for a whopping $4 Billion I wasn't exactly thrilled. Once again, I was provided with evidence that Disney will end up owning everything. At the same time I was a little dismayed by all the negativity. I logged on to twitter, facebook and followed comments made on various entertainment news sites-- The reaction was bombastic. Is it really that bad?

Actually, probably as a result of being fed up with the negative reactions, I'm beginning to think this could be a good thing.

First of all, we won't be seeing the effects of Disney's Marvel for awhile. Paramount still has the rights to distribute "Iron Man 2," and the "Thor," and "Captain America" movies. "The Avengers" is still under Paramount's wing as well, but that, and the other two films, are a long way off. Disney has said they will keep their distance from the current productions, trusting the current crew. But once these movies have been distributed, Disney will be the sole owner of everything future Marvel.

Not a terrible thing considering Marvel has unofficially been under financial stress. (I detail my theory on that here.) Is it really that bad if Disney steps in to help pay the hard working cast and crew? Besides, the more dollar signs, the more likely we'll continue to see A-list filmmakers join the Marvel community.

And then, the big one: Will Pixar make a Marvel oriented movie? Disney CEO Bob Iger has remarked on the idea:

"Pixar boss John Lasseter talked to the Marvel guys about this and they all got excited about it. We think there’s ultimately some exciting product that [could] come of that."

A Pixar Marvel movie? Those are some exciting prospects! I know the world is afraid of what Disney may do to the Marvel world, but ultimately, I doubt they'll do much to get in the way creatively. I'm sure it'll be the same old Marvel, just with a Disney logo attached to it.

Pirates of the Caribbean and the Vague Plot Synopsis

Although some might think this post needed to be added to my "Bad Ideas" post, I, for the most part, enjoyed the "Pirates" movies. The second film is hard to sit through, admittedly, and although the third had flaws I enjoyed it a lot more. They're fun, well acted fantasy films. I could say my expectations were higher, but I'd be lying.

Anyway, even though I don't think we're in any need of a third sequel, we are getting just that! The plot of "Pirates 4" will center around Jack Sparrow and crew finding the fountain of youth. In a addition, they will be up against a Captain Nemo-esque villain armed with the latest technology for the time. (i.e. There's no plausible way anyone could make whatever we'll see in that time period. So begin swallowing that bit of information now.)

While the rumored "steam-punk" addition to this movie will no doubt be interesting, I'm wondering how it will look in contrast to the rather over-the-top fantasy elements these movies have thrived on. Plus I keep seeing flashes of the giant, steam powered mecha-spider from "The Wild, Wild West." That's right. I just dug up a movie that horrible from my memory banks. Are we still okay with this Captain Nemo-like character's technology?

Still no word if Bloom or Knightley will return. It looks unlikely though. "Pirates 4" is most likely to begin shooting next year.

Three Bad Ideas, Three Bad Sequels

While the title to this post may seem rather condemning I have reason to believe I'm not jumping the gun. Hollywood's shrewd hard-on for milking franchises has reached new heights in the last few years, so it's no surprise these announcements feel like the coming of a new paycheck. Lets plow through this from bad to worse:


Bad Idea #3 - Bad Boys 3

This is probably the least of my concern. I never cared for the first two and don't think there's really anything to ruin. Columbia Pictures has hired Peter Craig to write a screenplay in the hope Will Smith, Martin Lawrence and director Michael Bay will return to the franchise.

The hurdle? Money. Will Smith and Michael Bay are two very, very expensive players in the superstar world right now. Furthermore, Michael Bay is lost in Transformer-land and wants to do another movie before Transformers 3. My guess is Bay won't be returning, but my hope is that this will fall through altogether.


Bad Idea #2 - Halloween 3D

After Rob Zombie molested what's barely remaining of the Halloween franchise with his psuedo-psychological take on the killer, Dimension decided they would like to squeeze another "golden egg" out of the shriveled up prune of a goose. I've stated my displeasure behind the current 3D fad before and this movie sounds like another way to cannibalize both the franchise and film-going as a whole. Raise your hand if you really, really want to pay $10+ to see Mike Myers slash up people in 3D. Is it really worth it?

The good news is Rob Zombie will not be returning. The bad news is... Well, damn, I just announced the bad news.


Bad Idea #1 - Rambo 5

Once upon a time, I thought the Rambo franchise was pretty good. Sure the third movie was terrible, but the first two were fun and exciting. They were adventurous and I believed Rambo really was the haunted and battle worn character he was portrayed to be. But with Stallone's fourth film I've lost hope in a full return to form. Rambo wasn't so much a character as he was an excuse for violent exploitation. The fact another movie is greenlit based on the fourth film is terrifying to me. Was it not Stallone who stated the latest, and arguably worst, of the Rambo films would be the Final Blood?

Regardless, a fifth Rambo is happening. In the next flick, our favorite steroid toting actor will take on drug traffickers on the United States/Mexican border. Production starts next Spring. Can good ole' Sly return the Rambo we all loved? I doubt it. I really want to think it's possible, but I doubt it.

Dollar signs have never been as clear as they are today.

What Did You Think of "District 9?"

With a whopping four votes I'm confident both my blog and its polls will reach Entertainment Weekly popularity in no time. That said, at least three people in the world felt "District 9" was 'good' and one person thought it was 'average.' What ever should we do with that one person who is alone in this large majority?

The Oscar nominees are:

Masterpiece - 0 Votes (0%)

Good - 3 Votes (75%)

Average - 1 Vote (25%)

Meh - 0 Votes (0%)

Horrible - 0 Votes (0%)

TRAILER - The Men Who Stare At Goats

[sarcasm]Well it's about time something outlandish and absurd hit theaters this year.[/sarcasm] Based on (what I can barely believe) a true story, "The Men Who Stare At Goats" follows a reporter (Ewan McGregor) who tries to track a story about a military unit trained to utilize special powers. You know, seeing the future, walking through walls, telekinesis-- Real X-Men stuff. Anyway he stumbles upon the "best" of the unit (George Clooney) and well... Watch the trailer.

The all-star cast also includes Kevin Spacey and Jeff Bridges. Looks funny, but then it could have just given away all the best moments. November 6th will tell us soon enough.

TRAILER - Zombieland (International Version)

Finally. A zombie flick that doesn't bother trying to be good. We may have a winner!

Although I think I enjoyed the domestic trailer more, this still has the spark about it that will put my ass in the seat to see it.



Welcome to Zombieland October 9th!

REVIEW - "Inglourious Basterds" (2009)

Over the past week I’ve seen some moviegoers declare “District 9” as “The Dark Knight” of this summer. I shrugged, not exactly agreeing with such sentiment, but certainly not giving the comment much credit. And for good reason. It’s undeserved. While I doubt a summer blockbuster will ever reach the bar set by “The Dark Knight” in the next twenty years, I suppose we can still clamor about the closest cases and correlate the absurd comment to films on a yearly basis. And if the title, “This Year’s Dark Knight” is to go to any movie, it is “Inglourious Basterds.”

Lt. Aldo Raine (Brad Pitt) leads a Jewish squad in to Nazi France to… “Do one thing and one thing only.” Kill Nazis. When they learn a Nazi film’s premiere will include Hitler himself they decide to take out the entire audience during the film. While their plans face casualties, particularly under the ruthless Col. Landa, they are also unaware of a Jewish girl’s plot to burn down her theater—Aiding the Basterds in their agenda.

So why on Earth would I declare this movie as “This Year’s Dark Knight?” Well, anyone who is a fan of Tarantino should be able to figure that out. Like the “The Dark Knight,” though less subtly, “Inglourious Basterds” harkens back to great 1970s and 1980s cinema. (Arguably two of the best decades of film.) Granted, all of Tarantino’s movies have a 70s aesthetic to them, but like the latest Bat-venture it seamlessly fuses raw, hard characters with painstakingly difficult moral dilemmas that give violence a newfound substance. The big difference is, “Basterds’” elements are all satirical. What? You thought Tarantino was going to create cookie-cutter, heartfelt war flick we’ve seen countless times before? I. Think. Not.

It is without regret or remorse that I laughed my throat sore as soon as Pitt’s Aldo Raine trampled the screen. Scenes of his merciless brutality and colorful vocabulary only seemed to excite the audience and I. But why was this character so interesting? Beyond his one-track attitude toward Nazis, he seemed rather one-dimensional. It wasn’t until his conversation with a Nazi prisoner that I realized what he was. When the officer declines to give Raine information, after the threat of a brutal beating from “The Bear Jew,” (Eli Roth) Raine replies, “Actually, Werner, we're all tickled to hear you say that. Quite frankly, watching Donny [The Bear Jew] beat Nazi's to death is the closest we ever get to going to the movies.” Suddenly Tarantino’s love for film skyrockets from the screen to my body. He’s fully aware what makes the audience tick, what they enjoy and how they enjoy it. But he is also aware of the desensitization that movies, even his own films, have been criticized for. Satire has never been brighter, ballsier and funnier as this scene runs to a violent finish.

As we hop from one lengthy scene to another, there’s something marvelous to be said about the writing for each character. Though many will argue the movie needed a sharper axe in the editing room, there truly isn’t anything I would have changed. For example, undercover British soldier Lt. Archie Hicox’s rendezvous with a German informant is interrupted by a Nazi soldier’s curiosity and need for company. The awkward scene is brought to life with long-winded shots of drinking, gaming and snooty comradery. What feels like a pointless exercise in how to shoot non-mobile characters with dialogue feels more like a long joke waiting for a punch line. Though the scene ends with most of the characters’ conversation left irrelevant, there’s something gratifying about sitting through it. It’s Tarantino’s style to outwit the audience’s emotions and bring their misguidance tumbling down on their heads. Here he succeeds like never before, ending everything with jaw dropping abruptness.

Because of the massive amount of attention given to even the tiniest characters, it’s hard not to chew up the screen if you’re in front of the camera. Every performance, one after another, is absolutely top notch. As if arming themselves for a Shakespearean tragedy, the cast of “Inglourious Basterds” is wrought with the most believable amount of tension to keep audiences gripped to the screen. While Pitt’s Aldo Raine ranks among his better performances, Christoph Waltz nearly steals the show with his portrayal of Col. Hans Landa. Smart, calculating and treacherous—It’s so much more interesting to give us a Nazi we can hate more than Hitler, instead of lazily allowing historical knowledge to fuel our feelings. Waltz may be up for a supporting actor nod as he is, by far, a stand out player in “Basterds.”

A rather underrated player is the gorgeous Mélanie Laurent’s revenge filled Shosanna Dreyfus. A character I ended up loving more than I thought, Laurent transformers herself from a petty Jewish survivor, to a full-fledged nightmare to the Nazi party. Although she is never aware of the Basterds, her presence in the film is a giant factor to how everything winds up by the end of the film.

Before the credits hit the screen, the last line audiences will hear is, “I think this just might be my masterpiece.” With that, I can only reply, “I think it just might be, Mr. Tarantino.” So lets strip away “This Year’s Dark Knight” nonsense, and even a line like “Tarantino’s best since Pulp Fiction.” By the end of the film I was convinced: This is Tarantino’s best. Ouch. Now that is bold isn’t it?

**** out of ****

Terminator Salvation Director's Cut Rated R?

I suppose this isn't too surprising, but what few flies on the wall that know anything about "Salvation's" home video release are buzzing loudly: Supposedly the DVD/Bluray release of the fourth Terminator film will include slightly more violent footage and Moon Bloodgood's nudity. This is all speculation because, according to McG, very little was cut from the movie. (Other than Moon Bloodgood nude.) So why a director's cut? Well...

While I greatly enjoyed "Salvation," it's also a very flawed movie and it didn't exactly blow up at the box office. I'm not sure how much a risque shot and rise in brutality will help the film, but a "director's cut is always a 'sure fire' strategy to help sales...err...right?

In the meantime, I'm wondering if it's ever coming out on home video. No one seems to know an exact release date, other than "mid-November." This is subject to change, but I wonder if Warner Brothers' is changing up their marketing strategy for the film's video release beyond a simple "director's cut." If so it might be why we have release dates for "Star Trek" and the later released "Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen" but no "Salvation."

I look forward to it either way. Maybe more Arnold in the director's cut? Please?

TRAILER - Avatar

For years we've waited. James Cameron claimed he wanted to put this "epic" project on the back burner until technology had become advanced enough to make it work. Fans, geeks and Cameron supporters have bit their nails eagerly to see the touted revolutionary special effects-- And finally. We get a teaser trailer.

Now, I saw this trailer several days ago, but I wanted to see it on the big screen before I put it on here and blogged about it. Frankly, even after seeing it on one of my city's larger screens, I don't get it. Sure it looks, fun, colorful and enjoyable. I'm glad Cameron is back and I hope he doesn't over a decade to make his next movie. But as far as "Avatar" goes... What's the big deal? The effects don't look any more revolutionary than "District 9's" aliens and the rest looks reminiscent, if not identical to effects extravaganzas of recent: "The Matrix Revolutions," "Harry Potter" and "Transformers," all come to mind as comparable and, dare I say, influential.

Perhaps I'm jumping the gun. It is, after all, a teaser trailer and James Cameron certianly wouldn't spill all the goods in a teaser... Right? Right...?



December 18.