Sunday, May 04, 2008

I am Iron Man

The summer blockbuster movie season has started. As usual, the month of May dishes out the fun and money making movies that will get no nod at the Oscars for acting. But as a fanboy, the summer movie season is a blast. Iron Man is the first to rocket onto the big screen for this summer.

About this Movie:
This movie sticks fairly close to the comicbook series. Tony Stark, ( Robert Downey Jr.), is the rich and famous owner of Stark Industries, which is a big weapon's manufacturer. He is taken by terrorists and forced to create a weapon. Instead he built his first Iron Man suit, powered by a device to keep him alive. His armor continues to evolve and change during the movie with some very humorous moments in the process. In the end, he fights against another version of his armor which is worn by one of the bad guys.


What I liked about this Movie:

It was complete gambit of a popcorn summer movie. It had a lot of action and appropriately placed humorous moments. It was very visually appealing with great special affects. It had a great story that stuck very close to the comicbook.

This was a great comicbook adoption. In the last 10 years, the comic industry has developed a lot of good to great adoptions of comicbook characters and stories, which I have enjoyed. But they have also had as just as many misses like the Punisher, Daredevil, and Hulk. Iron Man is the first group and it is one of the best. It is up there with Spiderman 1 and X-Men 1.

The cast is wonderful. The acting was really good for a popcorn movie. Downey pulled off the drunken rich guy (not a stretch for Downey) with no issues. Gwyneth Paltrow was a great Pepper Potts. The other actors are perfect fits for their roles.


What I did not Like:
In this movie, Jarvis is not the attentive butler but rather a computer system that runs Stark's home and the Iron Man armor. I also felt that his big "reveal" at the end of the movie should have waited for a sequel. Those minor details are the only things I could really complain about in this movie.


My Review:
This is a "super" movie that I fully recommend. It is fun and full of action and great special affects. The crowd laughed and cheered often during this movie.

It is rated PG13. It did seem appropriate for some children under the age of 13. I would recommend parents viewing it before letting their children go. It is much tamer than other PG 13 movies like Cloverfield.

Look for the great Stan Lee in this movie as a Hugh Hefner like character. (Not as funny as his role in FF2 but still very funny)

By the way, stay through the credits. Comic fans will love the implications of the post credit special appearance.

My Grade: A-


Here is what other reviews have to say:

Rotten Tomatoes Fans: 94% Fresh
Rotten Tomatoes Critics: 91% Fresh
Rolling Stones: 3.5 out 4 Stars
E Online: B+

Also check out: Strange Culture: 5 Reasons you will enjoy Iron Man

Sunday, January 20, 2008

Cloverfield Review

I finally was able to watch the highly anticipated Cloverfield this afternoon. I have been salivating at the previews and online hype. I love most everything that J.J. Abrams and Bad Robot Productions touches.


About this Movie:

Cloverfield is a thrill ride extreme. As with any roller coaster, if you have high blood pressure, are pregnant, have back or neck problems, get motion sick or a queasy stomach, then you will want to pass on this movie. Ok, you may not have to pass if you are pregnant or back problems but you will feel like you spent 3 hours on roller coaster and the movie is only an hour and a half long.

It is filmed from the perspective of a group of friends in New York's Manhattan when a monster attacks the city and all Hades breaks loose. One of the friends has a video camera because he was taping the goodbye party. It is similar to the Blair Witch Project with the whole movie from a hand held camera. One of the guys that viewed this movie with me has to leave an hour in because of the camera motion.

Cloverfield is a monster movie on steroids. I can not even describe the creature because it is so bizarre. You have to see it to fully understand this terrifying monster. It also has spawn that are as bad as the main monster. Together they terrorize New York far beyond what Godzilla and children ever could.

What I liked about this Movie:

This is not your stereotypical monster movie. It develops characters and plot. You unfortunately become attached to some of characters along the way. This is a benefit of shooting the movie from the innocent bystander's point of view. My friend Bryan pointed out how shocking it is that this method of story telling for a monster movie has not been used previously.

The special effects were very special. Even as twisted and bizarre that the creature is, it looked like it belonged. There was realism to the monster and the way it acted and moved.

When the creature first attacks the city and destroys a skyscraper, there is a dust storm that hits the streets. It was just like happened on 9-11-01 when the towers went down. They attempted to keep a level of realism all the way through this movie and were fairly successful.

This movie had a similar feel to the movie Alien. The movie Alien was the first to successfully mix the Sci-Fi and Horror genre. Cloverfield mixes the Monster Movie genre with Horror with success. There are moments that reminded me of Alien but in a limited way.

There were some very funny moments in this movie. Hud, the friend that is video taping, has some great lines. Hud is very socially inept and insecure. He talks when he should just be quiet. The conversation in the subway tunnel was great. I know guys just like Hud.

This movie was very different than anything I have ever seen.

What I did not Like:
The camera motion at times was too much. I had to hold my head during some of the scenes when they are running down the street. Anyone with any motion sickness issues will have problems with the some of the scenes.

My Review:
This movie was excellent. I was a bit numb after it was over because it was so intense. The crowd was totally silent as the movie ended. No one was talking or clapping or booing. Most people just sat there through as the credits began. It appeared to have the same affect on all of us. We were mesmerized and in shock.

This movie produced everything I was hoping from this movie. It is truly the monster movie of the ages.

By the way, stay through the credits.

My Grade: A

Here is what other reviews have to say:
IMDB User Rating: 8.1/10
Rotten Tomatoes: 76% Fresh
Roger Ebert: 3 Stars
Rolling Stones: 2 1/2 stars out of 4
E Online: B+

Friday, August 03, 2007

TRANSFORMERS

Review by Fat Jack
My Rating: 3 stars out of 5

Rated PG-13


Rotten Tomatoes Critics: 57% Rotten
Rotten Tomatoes Users: 82% Fresh
Netflix: 4.3 stars out of 5
IMDb: 7.9 stars out of 10
Roger Ebert: 3 stars our of 4



I was a big fan of the Transformers as a kid. I collected the toys (and I still have many of them) and watched the cartoons. I was go for the experience and had fun, but I was not overly impressed. I was disappointed in the editing. Director Michael Bay utilized a very quick and jumpy camera. He cut away too soon in the action sequences and I thought he zoomed in too much. It made for exciting action scenes, but there were times when it was hard to see what was going on. I suspect that was to hide mistakes. It was fun while it lasted, but it was a forgettable action flick.


Mikaela: [speaking of Bumblebee] Why, if he's supposed to be like this super-advanced robot, does he transform back into this piece of crap Camaro?
Sam: Oh, see, no. That doesn't work. [Bumblebee turns around and speeds away.] Great. Now... see? Fantastic. Now you pissed him off! That car is sensitive. I mean, $4,000 just drove off!

THE SIMPSONS MOVIE

Review by Fat Jack
My Rating: 4 stars out of 5
Rated PG-13

Rotten Tomatoes Critics: 89% Fresh
Rotten Tomatoes Users: 91% Fresh
Netflix: 4.3 stars out of 5
IMDb: 8.4 stars out of 10
Roger Ebert: 3 stars our of 4



I think most people expected THE SIMPSONS to suck, or at least to be nothing more than a feature length episode. Who knew that it would be so good? This flick bares all (including Bart’s doodle) and makes for a surprisingly fun time. Woo hoo!


Todd Flanders: I wish I had a dad like Homer.
Ned Flanders: Well I wish you didn't have the devil’s curly hair.

Marge: [to Lisa] Great. But the very best thing is that he listens to you. Because nothing means more than for a man to... [looks up in surprise].
Marge: How did the pig tracks get on the ceiling?
Homer: [singing Tune to Spider-Man Theme Song] Spider-Pig, Spider-Pig. / Does whatever a Spider-Pig does. / Can he swing / from a web? / No he can't / cause he's a pig. / Look out! / He is the Spider-Pig!

Sunday, June 17, 2007

FANTASTIC FOUR: RISE OF THE SILVER SURFER


Review by Fat Jack
My Rating: 4 stars out of 5
Rated PG

Rotten Tomatoes Critics: 39% Rotten
Rotten Tomatoes Users: 60% Fresh
Netflix: 4.3 stars out of 5
IMDb: No rating yet
Chicago Sun-Times: 2.5 stars our of 5

I was hesitant to see this after the vomit session that was the first FANTASTIC FOUR, but I heard decent things, some good things, and the trailer looked like fun. On a Father’s Day weekend when I get to choose the movie, I thought our little family would give it a chance. I had been reading comics all morning and was in the mood.

Popcorn movie – a great description of this movie. Where RISE OF THE SILVER SURFER differs from say, the last SPIDER-MAN movie is this: F4 does not take itself seriously. It is a comic book movie that knows it is a comic book movie. There are bits of silly humor, plot holes, and bits of preachy dialogue at the end. Whereas SPIDER-MAN seeks to be realized as a piece of movie art, F4 seeks to entertain and simply have fun. I know that going into and am more forgiving assuming the creators take themselves serious enough as to not stomp of their own film.

Besides, the bar was set so low in the first one, the creators would have to try hard to make SILVER SURFER worse.

So I was into it. It was fun and enjoyable. We three (me, wife and daughter) had a nice, light, fun Father’s Day at the movies.

Susan Storm: Guys, we have a problem. He’s here.
Reed Richards: Sue, get out of here!
Susan Storm: Why are you trying to destroy us?
Silver Surfer: I have no choice.
Susan Storm: There’s always a choice.
Silver Surfer: Not always.

Friday, June 15, 2007

30 Days of Night


Another comic story turns to Hollywood for interpretation. The famed comic, 30 Days of Night, came out several years ago. I was lucky enough to all three comics when they hit. Great horror comic. Sam Raimi (I suspect you've heard of him) will produce the flick. It stars Josh Hartnett and Melissa George and is due out 19 October 2007. Diamond has the goods:

For those unfamiliar with 30 Days of Night, the story is set in the remote village of Barrow, Alaska, which is just about completely dark for an entire month every winter. After most of townsfolk head south for the winter, a group of vampires arrive and the Barrow's Sherriff (Hartnett) must stop them.

Click here for info from IMDb.
Click here for the trailer.

Thursday, June 14, 2007

Blooker!!! Neigh!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

My brother in law (Fat Jack) talked me into posting my thoughts about movies in this inconceivable blog. Yes, I love watching movies, but don't get to see them as often as I would like. I also have a tendency to watch shows that are not part of the mainstream. Well here goes nothing.

Just watched an oldie but goodie last night with the kids. We watched "Young Frankenstein" and I think the kids enjoyed it. If you haven't ever seen YF or it's just been a while, do yourself a favor and rent it. It stars Gene Wilder, the late Marty Feldman, Madeline Kahn, the late Peter Boyle (as the monster), Cloris Leachman (Frau Blucher) and a voluptuous Teri Garr. Since it is written by Mel Brooks, it's a parody of the original version of Frankenstein. This is definitely a movie chalk full of funny movie quotes. "What knockers!" "Sedagive!!!!!!!" "You take the blonde and I'll take the one in the turbin!" "Could be worse, could be raining!!" It is rated PG and only has a couple of bad words so the kids could see it. It does have some adult themes (bedroom talk) but probably no more than your typical prime time sitcom nowadays.

I especially like the scene where the monster visits the blind man (cameo by Gene Hackman). Too funny watching the monster roll his eyes after the blind man crushes his cup after his toast. "Hey, where ya goin', I was gonna make expresso."

Well, I promised the Fat Jack I would sign up to post on the blog and I did. I am an accountant, not a writer, but I will try to embellish a little bit in future posts. Here are some movies I have seen lately and how I rate them out of 4 stars:

The Waitress - 31/2 (Adrienne Shelly's swan song, murdered last Nov.)
The Host - 3 (Korean seamonster started by those evil american scientists)
Babel - 31/2 (Heart wrenching, 6 degrees story of people desperately needing to be heard)
Away from Her - 31/2 (Excellent acting by Julie Christie on grim subject of alzheimer's)
Notes on a Scandal - 21/2 (Probably like better than rating, deducted 1/2 point for creepiness and wife hated it, although when I was a teenager it was cool to have an older actress seduce a teenage boy)
Little Children - 31/2 (Creepiness factor outweighed by former Bad News Bears pitcher reviving acting career and playing a pedophile)
Shrek 3 - 2 (Just okay, material has about run out, must see with the kids, though)
The Last Kiss - 21/2 (Zach Braff making some stupid impulsive decisions and having to beg for forgiveness for half the movie)
Pan's Labrynth - 4 (Masterpiece adult fairy tale, must watch again soon, perfect at the theater, also helped with the grim story line that the theater's heater wasn't working properly and the temperature was about 50 degrees.)
The Fountain 11/2 (A little too out there for most people, including myself. May have been better if movie was a little shorter, just seemed to drag.....on)

Monday, May 07, 2007

Spider-Man 3- One Fan's perspective

Review by Larry Litle


I am a true blue Spider-Man fan. I have been reading Amazing Spider-Man since I was 5 years old. I love the Spidey Character and I love Peter Parker even more. Peter is a poor sap whose life has always been far worse than mine but he has always done what is the right thing, at least eventually.

I was very fearful when the first movie came out. I had seen Hollywood ruin great comic characters over and over again. I was hopeful that it would not suck but I had very low expectation. When I left the theatre after
Spidey #1, I was very pleased. Yes, as a fan, I had trouble with some of the details like no "web-shooter" and the blurring of Mary Jane and Gwen Stacey but I loved the movie anyway. They always have to change something but it did not take away from the core of Spider-Man/ Peter Parker.

I did not have the looming fear with the second movie but I rather had high expectations and anticipation. I was well please with the second one but it also had some issues.

Spider-Man 3 brought back the fear and anxiety. I became anxious when it was announced that they were going to have 3 villains because I know how that worked for the tragic Batman and Robin (at least Spidey 3 did not have the cardboard cut out actor- George Clooney). Then I started reading reviews and critics of this film. It was being torn to shreds and made to sound like it would be Daredevil bad. As Spidey 3 is starting, I crossed my fingers and spoke out loud several times "Please don't suck."

So much for brief background information. Below is the real review. It does include spoilers so if you do not want to know, do not read until after you see this film. You have been warned.

What I liked:

I enjoyed Peter Parker. I loved that he is finally comfortable with his Spidey alter-ego. I liked how he started getting a little cocky about Spidey. Then his perfect world came crashing down and he had even more problems. Unlike my fellow reviewer, I even liked the crying. This is true the nature of Pete. I loved how his anger gets the better of him when dealing with information about Uncle Ben. I enjoyed the complexities of his relationship with Mary Jane. I savored the transformation to the dark Pete and then his redemption. Toby has become the complete Peter Parker.

Topher Grace was an amazing Eddie Brock. The story stuck very close to the comic with Eddie and how he becomes disgraced. His hatred for Peter which leads to the bonding with the symbiote was a wonderful tribute to the comics. The church scene of the bell ringing and Peter ripping of the symbiote was picture perfect. I thought the CGI of Venom was wonderful and brought to life this terrifying character.

The story to rap up the Harry Osborn arc was marvelous. The best friends turned arch-enemies story played very well on screen. I truly felt for Harry even when he was the Goblin. The transformation from enemies back to friends for a while then back to enemies and then back again was fabulous and true to the nature of the comics. The redemption of Harry and the Goblin was fulfilled in his death by his own glider (similar to his father’s death) while saving Pete and Mary Jane was the perfect ending even though I wanted him to live.

The Sandman was a complex bad guy with reasons for the crimes he was committing. This is true to his comic character. Sandman has been a villain by circumstance. For a while in the comics, he even turned to be a good guy. I like how they used his sick daughter to show the humanity of this villain. There were things about the Sandman that I did not like but I enjoyed his character over all.

Many people disliked Aunt May's role in this film. I felt that it demonstrated well the relationship between May and Pete. She is still a huge part of his conscience. Her reaction to Peter's news that the Sandman, who killed her beloved husband, was killed by Spiderman was perfect. She has always been the forced that helped Peter stay grounded in life. I thought it was brilliant to have her show up at his apartment because she is worried about him.

If you are going to introduce Gwen Stacey (see below) then it is wonderful to introduce Captain Stacey. Captain Stacey is one of my favorite old peripheral characters. I continued waited for them to kill him off by a piece of falling wall but I realized that they just introduced him. In the comics, Captain Stacey sacrifices himself to save a child from a piece of falling wall that Doc Ock knocks down while fighting Spider-Man.

The action sequences were sweet. I prized the action sequences with Spidey and the Sandman. The ending battle sequence with Sandman and Venom fighting Spidey and the (Good) Goblin was sensational. True to the comics, the Spidey sense can not detect Venom and that was shown nicely in this film. Venom killing the (good) Goblin with his own glider was a nice touch. I enjoyed the trapping of Venom and using sound against him to defeat him.

Update 5/9/2007 12:05:48 PM I also loved Bruce Campbell in this movie. He always has a minor role in these movie but this was clearly the best. He is a great "French Maître d" in this film. This was clearly the funniest parts of the movie. It was hysterical watching him bring the champagne and sending it back.

What I did not like:

I really liked the overall presentation of Sandman. I did not like how they made his fly in flying sand. Fat Jack's review of this is correct and right when simply stating that “sand does not fly”. I know it worked in the Mummy but the Mummy was controlling the wind with the sand. Sandman is not Storm of the X-Men and can not make sand fly.

Why is it in every final fight scene has to have Mary Jane's life in jeopardy? All three movies used her as bait. Why not lure Spidey out by having Sandman attack civilians. I do give props for them having a cool way to threaten her life with the web trap and the taxi.

There was not enough Venom. He is one of Spidey's worst enemies. The first several times Spidey faced him, Spidey also lost his life. He almost seemed like an after thought in this movie. I loved the build up to him but he did not do much. Also Venom would not have died by a Pumpkin bomb. If you were going to show the explosion, why not show him hanging off the edge of the building recovering. Venom needs to be the exclusive villain in Spidey 4, if they make one.

Talking about Sandman and Venom, I thought there were too many villains in this movie. I love all three villains but it would have been much better by leaving out either the Sandman or Venom. I believe you still could have had the redemption of Harry and had him die at the hands of either Venom or Sandman. What I would have loved to have seen was the story of the Black Suit and to have shown Venom at the end as a precursor of things to come like at the end of the Batman Begins. A show down with the Sandman at the end would have worked for that scenario.

I understand that the Spidey sense does not work when Venom is attacking and this was even joked about. What I do not understand is how both the Goblin and the Sandman can sneak up on Peter. Did the Spidey sense go on the fritz? It was almost non-existent in this movie.

Why does every movie have Spider-Man unmasked in multiple parts of the film? Until recently, Spider-Man's identity was one of the greatest secrets in the Marvel Universe. He would not stand on the top of a building with his mask off. He would not show up at Harry's with his mask off. He certainly would make his mask out of something that can take a blow or two so it does not rip in half like it has in every movie.

I did not like how they introduced Gwen Stacey. I hated how Peter used her to make Mary Jane jealous. The first movie blended these characters together and made it difficult to bring in the true nature of Gwen. Gwen was Peter’s first love that was pure and innocent. It is hard to bring that into a character that is being used by Pete.

Why would we mess with the killer of Uncle Ben? Yes this was a convenient way to make Peter become darker but it was wrong to mess with the story. It reminded me of Batman Forever trying to rehash the death of his parents. There is no good reason for it.

Final Thoughts: I really liked this movie. I know that some people are saying that it is too long. I felt it was about perfect in length. Others have stated that this was a chick flick/ crying movie in disguise. I also disagree. Peter and company are dealing with really issues in relationships and life. There may be no crying in baseball but there is in Spidey movies. I really liked but did not love this movie

My Grade: a Solid B

Other Grades:

Fat Jack's review: 2 out of 5

Netflix: 4.7 out of 5

IMDB: 7 out of 10

Rolling Stone: 3 out of 4

Rotten Tomatoes: 61% Fresh

E! Online: B

First Weekend Gross: 151.1 Million Dollars

Saturday, May 05, 2007

Mini-Review: "Spider-Man 3"

Review by Fat Jack
My Rating: 2 stars out of 5
Rated PG-13

Rotten Tomatoes: 61% Fresh
Netflix: 4.7 stars out of 5
IMDb: 7.9 stars out of 10

Spider-man 3 was not as bad as the critics make it out to be. It was a fun action movie and it had some cool moments. Some of the criticism was warranted. Here’s what I noticed:

  1. There was entirely too much crying by everybody.
  2. Sand cannot fly.
  3. It was a bit too long.
  4. There were too many villains.
  5. What was up with the Uncle Ben reinvention?

Everyone had their crying moment in this film and some, like Peter Parker, cried through the whole thing. That really doesn’t bother me unless it is overused and this was overused. There are other ways to show pain and emotion besides crying. The water works were really flowing in this.

I do not care what kind of particle accelerating, neuralizing-what-you-call-it you put it in, sand cannot fly. Merge sand and man, and sand still cannot fly. It just can’t Why on God’s green earth Raimi thought it necessary to have Sandman turn into a cloud of particles and fly around the city is beyond me. What good could come of that except … and here it goes … you just want to have it look cool.

And now we know why Spider-Man 3 is getting poor reviews. Director Sam Raimi made the big no-no of comic book movies, the great failing of the genre. He focused on looking cool rather than being great. Whether pressure from the studio, or internal pressure to make the next one great, Raimi slipped and fell. Not all the way to the bottom mind you. This is an Oscar winner compared to other comic flicks like [shudder] Daredevil or Electra. But the pressure to one-up himself too its toll. The script was long, too long, and the characters were jumbled. Script not there. No problem. Add another villain or two and you can distract the audience with cool special effects. Oh, except that really doesn’t work.

Just in case all of that doesn’t work, then you can reinvent a character and his past. That will get them. Yeah, that gets them fighting mad. In a move of pure movie making genius, Raimi decided to change who killed Uncle Ben and work that whole thing into the Sandman plot. It sucked. Sucked big time. Hot steaming cup of sucked. Suck big donkey … okay I need to stop right there. [Breath] There was absolutely no sense in that. That is a big failing of fantasy and sci-fi writing. If you write yourself into a corner, rather than reworking the script and creating good writing, we just use magic to save the day or just make you think something happened one way when it really didn’t. Daytime soap operas employ this tactic all the time. That should tell you something.

The more I think about it, the longer I ponder these strikes, the more I dislike the movie. The madder I get. There was no sense in making these mistakes and someone of Raimi’s talent should have known better. Do these people not use editors? What the Hell?

For a flick it was fine. Plenty of action to keep things going. I liked what they did with Harry. Venom was fine, but they should have stopped there and made a movie around that. Would have been plenty for a good writer.

And by the way, does anyone really go to a church and ask God to kill someone for them? Do people really do that? I mean those people who do not have serious mental illnesses. That was about poor writing again. Seems I’m seeing a trend here. By the way, I really wanted to love this movie.

Mary Jane Watson: What's happened to you?
Peter Parker: I don't know... But I have to stop it.

[I wish someone had stopped this script a long time ago.]

Monday, April 09, 2007

Review: GRINDHOUSE


Review by Fat Jack
My Rating: 5 stars out of 5
Karla Quotient: Avoid It

Now in Theaters
Rated R (very, very R)
Directed by: Robert Rodriguez and Quentin Tarantino

Rotten Tomatoes Critics: 82% fresh
Rotten Tomatoes Users: 90% fresh
Netflix: 4.4 stars out of 5
IMDb: 7.1 stars out of 10

This is a blood-soaked train ride that barrels down the River Styx at 200 miles per hour, and I loved every single second of it. The Rodriguez-Tarantino double feature pounds the ground from minute one with no less than flesh-eating zombies, powerhouse chicks who stomp skulls and save lives, guns, knives, blood and brains, and bad ass muscle cars. Movies do not get any better than that.

This is not for everyone. Don’t take your 10-year-old, no matter how cool or how mature. He’s not ready for it and even if he was, he shouldn’t be. This is not recommended for the likes of my sister, Karla, or grossfest thrill ride of incredible proportions. Be prepared for buckets of blood and ooze and smatterings of skull and laughs too.

Laughs you say? Yes, laughs. Maybe I shouldn’t laugh. Maybe I should be shocked and disgusted and disturbed. I did squirm a bit from time to time, and I enjoy that feeling as well. But I did laugh at parts where I think I was supposed to laugh. You may not. My friend, Brian, certainly will not. But I laughed during Tarantino’s PULP FICTION and KILL BILL. This brilliant director has this uncanny ability to bring humor to scenes that should not be funny and I tip my hat to that ability.

This is a double feature that starts with Rodriguez’s PLANET TERROR, which is a zombie flick. A good zombie flick as far as that goes – one of the best really. Then there are the fake trailers between the movies. Those are a hoot and they are directed by a host of different folks. You can get the skinny at IMDb. Afterwards, comes Tarantino’s flick, DEATH PROOF. Typical of Tarantino, this movie takes its time and develops the characters through brilliant dialogue. He doesn’t just rush into the action, but takes his time. I love that about Tarantino. In this case, we have a killer, a serial killer, whose weapon of choice is a death proof street rod.

One interesting tidbit is the actress, Zoe Bell, who plays herself in DEATH PROOF. The actor is a real-life stuntwoman who worked as the stuntwoman for Uma Thurman on the set of KILL BILL and the stuntwoman for XENA: WARRIOR PRINCESS. In DEATH PROOF, she plays herself, a stuntwoman, who is a thrill seeker. She certainly gets her wish dealing with the psycho serial killer played by Kurt Russell. My wife loved this character. Tarantino and Rodriguez did a great job with creating strong, powerful female characters. That is nothing new for Tarantino who is a pro at portraying different types of great women. That is one thing I love about him. As a side note, the stunts in DEATH PROOF were done with real cars and real stunt people. I understand that Zoe Bell did her own stunts. After you see he movie, you will understand why that is so cool. CGI? I think not.

No doubt about it: Another hit for Tarantino. Rodriguez’s movie is good too, but it is nothing compared to DEATH PROOF. My only criticism is that DEATH PROOF wasn’t long enough. That is, there was so much more that could have been done to that movie. I wanted more: more of the characters, more of the story, more of the dialogue. More. But how much more could he have done with a movie that was nearly 3.5 hours long as it was?

STUNTMAN MIKE: Do I frighten you?
ARLENE: [nods]
STUNTMAN MIKE: Is it my scar?
ARLENE: It's your car

DR. DAKOTA BLOCK: If anyone comes to the door, I want you to shoot them.
DR. BLOCK’S SON: What if it’s Dad?
DR. DAKOTA BLOCK: Especially if it’s your Dad.

STUNTMAN MIKE: There are few things fetching as a bruised ego on a beautiful angel.

Tuesday, April 03, 2007

Scene Stealers

There is an interesting movie review site out there called Scene Stealers. Check them out and their unique rating system. I think you will find their reviews interesting.

Star Wars 30th Anniversary Quiz

Calling all fellow Star Wars geeks. If you have not taken the Wizard Universe Star Wars 30th Anniversary Quiz, then here is your chance. Here is what Wizard Universe has to say about the Quiz, "From the best 'Star Wars' movie ever made to the hottest woman in the galaxy, Wizard Universe wants to know your opinions on the Star Wars Universe ". Let the Force guide you in your selections and you will not go wrong.

I would like to thank my friend KittyKat Jill (AKA Token Girl) for pointing me to this quiz.

Saturday, March 31, 2007

Mini-Review: "High School Musical

Review by Fat Jack
My Rating 4 stars out of 5

Now available on DVD

Rated G


Rotten Tomatoes:
60% fresh
Netflix: 3.8 stars out of 5
IMDb: 6.4 stars out of 10




Wondering why you want to see this teeny-bop Disney flick? Well you probably won’t unless you have a kid. If you have youngsters, then this is the GREASE for their generation and it’s sure to be remembered by them for years to come. Once you rent it, you will likely want to buy it, but be prepared for multiple viewings and lots of sing-alongs.

The DVD is especially nice as it has a karaoke feature where you can watch the DVD and when the musical portions come on, then the words play at the bottom of the screen: a perfect addition for the aspiring actor or actress in your household.

SHARPAY: “We need to save our show from people who don't know the difference between a Tony Award and Tony Hawk.”

Monday, March 26, 2007

Fat Jack's Summer Preview 07

GRINDHOUSE
In Theaters: April 6, 2007

Rated R

You Must See the Trailer!


Cult fan favorites – Quentin Tarantino and Robert Rodriguez – bring what promises to be a bloody good time with GRINDHOUSE. Back from the days of yore when the old movie palaces hosted gruesome and grinding double features of sex and blood, these two directors bring us their version of the non-stop action. Each director presents a 60-minute feature back-to-back with fake trailers in between. Tarantino, a personal favorite of mine, brings us DEATH PROOF and Rodriguez directs PLANET TERROR in one explosive show.

These are meant to be exploitation, B-movies with lots of sex, violence and gore. That should be enough to warn you. Faint at heart and easily offended should steer clear. Those who are cool; however, will want to be sure to catch GRINDHOUSE in the theatre. Don’t wait for it to come out on DVD. I suspect these will be good enough, or bad enough depending on your point of view, to be a part of your personal DVD collection.

DEATH PROOF is a slasher movie with a car as the weapon of choice. PLANET TERROR takes place on an alien planet that is a nice parallel to our own. As the tagline states: “Welcome to the Grindhouse – It’ll tear you in two.”





PATHFINDER
In Theaters: April 20, 2007
Rated R

See the Trailer


From the Apple trailer site: “An action-adventure set in the time when Vikings tried to conquer North America, PATHFINDER tells the heroic story of a young Norse boy left behind after his clan shipwrecks on the Eastern shores. Despite his lineage, the boy is raised by the very Indians his kinsmen set out to destroy. Now, as the Vikings return to stage another barbaric raid on his village, the 25-year-old Norse warrior (Karl Urban) wages a personal war to stop the Vikings’ trail of death and destruction. Forging his own path, his destiny is revealed and his identity re-claimed.

This reminds me of the very cool, but a bit ridiculous Schwarzenegger movie PREDATOR. Based on the trailer, I think you are going to have to suspend your disbelief a lot to enjoy this film. Not necessarily a bad thing, but don’t get bogged down by historical inaccuracies or plausibility. This action-adventure movie is for fun.





JINDABYNE
In Theaters: April 27, 2007

Rated R

See the Trailer


From the Apple Trailers site: “On an annual fishing trip, in isolated high country, Stewart, Carl, Rocco and Billy (“the Kid”) find a girl’s body in the river. It’s too late in the day for them to hike back to the road and report their tragic find. The next morning, instead of making the long trek back, they spend the day fishing. Their decision to stay on at the river is a little mysterious - almost as if the place itself is exerting some kind of magic over them.”




SPIDER-MAN 3
In Theaters: May 2007
Not Yet Rated

See the Trailer

From IMDb: Peter Parker has finally found the balance he's longed for between his love for Mary Jane Watson and his responsibilities as Spider-Man. The city of New York and it's citizens are at last coming around and appreciating everything he has done as his crime-fighting alter ego, and Peter is in the running for a staff job at the Daily Bugle. However, everything Peter has worked for is about to unravel. Flint Marko, while fleeing prison, is caught in an accident that displaces molecules and is transformed into the Sandman, a new super villain who is able to change his body into any shape of sand he sees fit. When Peter learns of a connection between The Sandman and the murder of his uncle, Ben, he will stop at nothing as Spider-Man to capture him; but before Peter can do so he discovers a mysterious black substance has made his suit black, and has brought forth a darker side of Parker and Spidey nobody has seen before. He starts to abandon the ones he loves and forces his best friend Harry Osborn to take up his late father's mantle as The New Goblin. Peter now has to decide which life he wants to lead... the strong-willed hero he once was or the new dark-minded villain that he is becoming. Little does Peter know the black substance has its sights set on somebody else as well, a rival Bugle photographer, and a troubled young man, by the name of Eddie Brock, turning Brock into Venom, a foe Spider-man may be unable to stop.




NANCY DREW In Theaters: May 15, 2007 Rated PG See the Trailer

If you’ve grown up in the last few decades then you’ve no doubt heard of the Nancy Drew books. Young Nancy goes to California with her Daddy and finds herself smack dab in the middle of an unsolved mystery. Go figure. A girl power movie, it would be a great way to get young girls into reading.








DAY WATCH
In Theaters: June 1, 2007
Not Yet Rated

See the Trailer


This is the second film of a Russian horror/fantasy trilogy that began with NIGHT WATCH, which was a hit in the former Soviet Union. Forces of light and darkness come to blows after centuries-long truce. If you like horrors and underground films, then this second installment should be right up your alley.






HARRY POTTER AND THE ORDER OF THE PHOENIX
In Theaters: July 13, 2007

Not Yet Rated

See the Trailer


Everyone knows this film is coming out. What else is there to say? If you are a fan of the series, then you have already read it and know what’s going to happen. If you haven’t read the books but have watched the movies, you have probably picked up on the fact that Harry is growing older and his world is becoming ever-darker. That was a good move by J.K. Rowling and gives the character real life. This will be the darkest of the movies so far, so beware and have fun.





THE SIMPSONS MOVIE In Theaters: July 27, 2007 Not Yet Rated See the Trailer


The Simpsons finally made it to the big screen. Will this mark the end of the franchise or will it propel them to a new level? Only time will tell. As a Simpsons lover, I am hoping that it is great.









UNDERDOG
In Theaters: August 3, 2007
Not Yet Rated
See the Trailer

From the Apple trailer site: “After an accident in the mysterious lab of maniacal scientist Dr. Simon Barsinister (PETER DINKLAGE), an ordinary beagle unexpectedly finds himself with unimaginable powers and the ability to speak. Armed with a fetching superhero costume, UNDERDOG (voiced by comedian JASON LEE) vows to protect the beleaguered citizens of Capitol City and, in particular, one beautiful spaniel named Polly Purebread (voiced by Academy Award nominee AMY ADAMS). When a sinister plot by Barsinister and his overgrown henchman Cad (PATRICK WARBURTON) threatens to destroy Capitol City only UNDERDOG can save the day.”

This is a live action film with cgi. I don’t know what to make of it, but the kids will probably dig it. It can surely lead to a good introduction of the old cartoon to a younger crowd.

Wednesday, March 21, 2007

Entertainment site- Flixster

I had a friend send me a link to a new entertainment site. It is called Flixster. It has information about upcoming movies, photos celebrities (No John there is not nudity), news, and a great trivia game. Check them out and let me know what you think.

Monday, March 19, 2007

Mini-Review: "300"

Review by Fat Jack
My Rating: 4.5 stars out of 5

Rated R

Rotten Tomatoes: 61% Fresh
Netflix: 4.4 stars out of 5
IMDb: 8.2 stars out of 10
Richard Roeper: 4 stars out of 4





What do I say about 300 that hasn’t already been stated? You know it is highly stylized and that it’s by comic book great Frank Miller. This is a man’s movie. It is about all things male: territory, protection, honor and bravado. It is bloody – bloody good, that is.

That isn’t to say that it doesn’t have its problems. It does. If you are a history junkie, then I hear tell that this is not very accurate. There were also a lot of persons with disabilities who were portrayed, as often happens with Hollywood films, as evil, corrupt, beastly, or treacherous. There were more, but most of it has already been talked about.

Spartan King Leonidas: We Spartans have descended from Hercules himself. Taught never to retreat, never to surrender. Taught that death in the battlefield is the greatest glory he could achieve in his life. Spartans – the finest soldiers the world has ever known.

300 As Republican Propaganda?


The movie wasn’t over and two people out of the group of five, were whispering about conspiracies of the republican propaganda machine. After the movie we continued to debate the issue: Was the movie, 300, a piece of right wing extremist propaganda?

I did not think so then and I defend that position now. Just like V for Vendetta, the story was written well before September 11, 2001. In this case, creator Frank Miller had his comic book published by Dark Horse in May 1998, which garnered him three Eisner Awards.

I do acknowledge that there are very interesting political parallels that can be drawn about the current war in Iraq and the imperialistic President Bush, but to say that this is right wing propaganda is to dismiss the value in the story. It is to miss the point.

Left wing or right, anti-war or pro-war, there are ideologies that are important to understand. The phrase from the movie “Freedom is not free,” may very well have been right out of the Karl Rove playbook. That does not make it conservative propaganda and it does not make it an invalid statement. Karl Rove may indeed be one of the most corrupt men on the planet, but people have died in order to preserve freedom. That may sound like a Martine recruitment mantra geared to take advantage of the uneducated, and it may be. It is also true.

300 was not about President Bush’s war in Iraq, nor was it a movie about joining the Marines. It was about soldiers who were born and bred to fight and defend their country. Boiled down, every man worth his salt loves his family and will do what he can to defend them against the evils of the world. This movie was about universal feeling of protection that every father and husband has. Protection is a genetic instinct, which explains why it grossed $70 million in the first weekend. Men can relate to the feelings that the Spartans held dear.

There are more lessons to be learned here than warmongering or corrupt senates. To see 300 as a mere mouthpiece of political propaganda inspired by the war machine is to miss the point entirely.

Saturday, March 10, 2007

Mini-Review "Borat"

Review by Fat Jack
My Rating: 3.5 stars out of 5
Rated R


Rotten Tomatoes: 90% Fresh
Netflix: 4.4 stars out of 5
IMDb: 7.8 stars out of 10
Roger Ebert: 4 stars out of 4





Borat: Cultural Learnings of America for Make Benefit Glorious Nation of Kazakhstan
was quite the humorous fakeumentary. Sasha Baron Cohen certainly came up with an interesting character and script, raising the bar for comedies.

If you didn’t already know, it is an offensive piece, but like good comedies, it is humorously offensive to all types of protected groups. The script had a hard time keeping up during the whole of the movie, which is why I gave it a lower rating than it may have deserved. That is not to say that I didn’t laugh. I did. It’s just that toward the end, the writing gave way to the length requirement of a feature film. Still, I would recommend watching it, especially with a group of friends who all have a strong sense of humor.


OXANNA: “What? What? What did say about me, you skinny piece of shit? Why don't you go do something useful and dig your mother a grave, you tall piece of shit!”

BORAT: “We support your war of terror.”

BORAT: “Although Kazakhstan a glorious country, it have a problem, too: economic, social, and Jew.”

Tuesday, March 06, 2007

300 is Not to be Missed

You do not want to miss this film. Based on the epic graphic novel by Frank Miller, 300 is a ferocious retelling of the ancient Battle of Thermopylae in which King Leonidas (Gerard Butler) and 300 Spartans fought to the death against Xerxes and his massive Persian army. Facing insurmountable odds, their valor and sacrifice inspire all of Greece to unite. It opens on March 9. It should be a bloody good time, but don’t take the kiddies. This is not meant for them. I won’t have a chance to see it opening weekend and that next week I will be taking midterm exams. So I will plan on catching it over Spring break (march 16-25). Sounds like a great boys night out to me.