The Moviefone Blog

Extended Trailer for 'Green Lantern' is Online!

Jacob Hall — 2011-04-02T18:40:00+00:00

With a summer season looking to be stuffed to the bursting point with geeky goodness, 'Green Lantern' often feels dangerously close to being lost in the shuffle. Aside from the controversial costume reveal and a now 5-month-old trailer, things have been pretty quiet on Warner Bros.' end. After all, 'Thor' just debuted its 857th poster -- where is 'Green Lantern'?

In a move that feels like a very loud "You want some 'Green Lantern'? Here's some 'Green Lantern'!", a slightly shorter version of the 'Green Lantern' footage that recently played at WonderCon has made its way to Apple Trailers for your viewing pleasure. Whether you like what's on display here or not, it's obvious from the get-go that this movie has something that most of this summer's releases seem to lack: a truly epic sense of scope.

Click that link to check it out!

Seriously: this movie looks flippin' huge, an unapologetic space opera filled to the brim with hundreds of unique aliens and all kinds of strange visuals. Sure, some of it looks a little shaky -- as would all effects in a trailer for a summer blockbuster still a few months away -- but it's safe to say that director Martin Campbell and Warner Bros. have made the risky decision to not play this one safe. This looks like one geeky movie.

Sure, the movie nerds and the comic fans are going to be sold after seeing this (and let's face it, if you're reading this site, you were probably going to see it anyway), but how are the, ahem, normal folks going to react to something like this? Will audiences be willing to embrace a superhero movie that's not afraid to dive headfirst into a dense and detailed science fiction world (of course, we are fully prepared to help non-fans know what's going on here)? Is Ryan Reynolds -- who looks fantastic in the role of Hal Jordan -- enough of a popular counterbalance to the overabundance of geekery on display here?

Those are questions the marketing departments should be asking. The important thing is that 'Green Lantern' looks bigger and more exciting than any other mainstream movie hitting multiplexes this summer.

Will You Pay $30 to Watch 'Just Go With It' At Home Before It Hits DVD?

Jacob Hall — 2011-03-31T19:15:00+00:00

The past decade has seen the window between a film's theatrical release and home video release shrink rapidly, with most films hitting retail shelves mere months after their premieres. It would be impossible to nail down a single, direct cause for this, but there are a number of contributing factors, chief among them Netflix and Redbox, which have made skipping the theater experience easy and convenient.

Well, the times, they are a'changin,' and after so many years of fierce resistance several major studios look ready to move into this brave new world. Variety reports that Warner Bros., Sony, Universal and 20th Century Fox are teaming up to launch Home Premiere, which will act as "the industry's official brand" for on-demand movie releases.

Here's how it would work in a nutshell: Home Premiere will launch via DirecTV (and eventually other providers) and will allow customers to watch movies a scant two months after their release for $30 a pop, with the Liam Neeson action film 'Unknown' and the Adam Sandler comedy 'Just Go With It' being the first films available when the service launches next month.

That $30 price tag may seem initially unreasonable, but it showcases who the studios are expecting to take advantage of this system: families. A trip to the movies for a family of five is an increasingly expensive excursion and the option of waiting two months and paying significantly less than the cost of several tickets must sound enticing.

However, there's one fatal flaw: if someone is willing to wait two months to treat their family to Liam Neeson breaking spines in 'Unknown', what's stopping them from waiting one more month to just buy the DVD or Blu-Ray for the same price? Heck, what's stopping them from waiting that additional 28 days and just watching the movie for a buck when it hits their local Redbox? If someone has the patience to not see a film during its initial theatrical run, what's stopping them from just waiting a little longer?

The original Variety article does address this, saying that initial plans to offer movies on-demand four to six weeks after theatrical release were squashed when major theater chains balked, worried that such a small release window would hinder their chances of making more of that sweet, sweet cash money (and in all fairness, it would).

The only thing left to see now is whether or not people are ready to embrace Home Premiere. What do you think? Would you pay $30 to watch a movie after it's out of theaters but before it hits disc? If you have a family, does this sound convenient to you?

How Maurice Sendak Almost Illustrated 'The Hobbit'

Jacob Hall — 2011-03-28T14:10:00+00:00

The problem with the "What If?" game is that it always ends in frustration and sadness. For all of the temporary joy you get out of imagining an unwritten novel or an unfinished film, the realization that it's never going to happen is a nice little slap in the face. For fans of fine illustration and fantasy geeks, the L.A. Times has a piece about one particular "What If?" that belongs in the pantheon of great projects that never came to be: an illustrated adaptation of JRR Tolkien's 'The Hobbit' by 'Where the Wild Things Are' artist Maurice Sendak.

The piece, written by fantasy artist Tony DiTerlizzi, goes into great detail about how this project almost happened, but here are the broad strokes:

The year is 1967 and 'The Hobbit' and 'The Lord of the Rings' are going through a major resurgence thanks to a paperback release. Tolkien, now 75 years old, continues to oversee every aspect of his literary empire. The American publisher hires Sendak to create an illustrated children's book adaptation of 'The Hobbit,' but Tolkien has the final say on whether or not the book happens. Some knucklehead mislabels Sendak's illustrations, so the one featuring hobbits is says "elves" and vice versa. Tolkien is furious and thinks Sendak didn't actually read his work. The publisher tries to straighten everything out, but Sendak has a heart attack and goes to a hospital for an extended period to avoid, you know, death. The project never happens.

Although Sendak drew two samples, only one of them remains. His depiction of "wood-elves dancing in the moonlight" has long since vanished, but his version of Bilbo and Gandalf, as seen above, is safe and sound at Yale University, preserved for posterity. Anyone who has read Sendak's books -- and that should be anyone who has had the fortune to be a child in the past 50 or so years -- should immediately recognize his distinctive style. (In the original article, DiTerlizzi calls attention to Sendak's distinctive crosshatching.)

Perhaps it would be comforting for director Guillermo Del Toro to know that he's not alone when it comes to tales of visionary artists finding themselves soundly defeated by the early adventures of Bilbo Baggins. Someday, maybe we'll be able to see Del Toro's surely-abandoned designs and sketches for his interpretation of Middle Earth (though we're sure some of them made it into the upcoming film since he worked closely with Jackson), but in the meantime, Sendak will do nicely.

'Black Swan' Ballerina Controversy: Where Do You Stand? (Updated)

Jacob Hall — 2011-03-28T11:50:00+00:00

Update: 'Black Swan' director Darren Aronofsky has responded with comments. See what he has to say about this whole mess after the jump ...

If you happen to be one of those people who read things about movies on the Internet -- and since you're reading this, it's safe to assume that you are one of those people -- you've surely heard about the entire 'Black Swan' controversy by now. For those of you who may have missed the news, here's what you need to know to catch up.

Entertainment Weekly broke the story: Ballerina Sarah Lane has gone on something of a warpath, claiming that she did most of the dancing for Natalie Portman's role and that the Oscar-winning actress only danced in close-ups, leaving her to do all but 5 percent of the major dance sequences (which saw Portman's head digitally grafted onto her body). Naturally, Ms. Lane thinks she deserves due credit, since many people (including Portman's choreographer fiancee) have emphasized Portman's dancing contributions.

And that's where a potential debate can begin.

How much credit is due someone whose one and only job on the film was to make the lead actress look capable of something else? Everyone knows that films are team efforts. Do you see individual camera operators attacking the director of photography after he wins an Oscar? Do you see stuntmen trying to take down Will Smith or Tom Cruise for claiming that they do all of their own stunts? No, you don't. Anyone with half a brain could have told you that Natalie Portman didn't do all of her dancing in 'Black Swan'. To do what her character accomplished requires a lifetime of training and dedication. Everyone and their mother knew some trickery was afoot.

In some ways, it's easy to sympathize with Lane. She undoubtedly worked hard and danced her ass off in the movie, and when you've got people involved in the film claiming that "85 percent of the movie is Natalie," sure, that can lead to sour grapes. However, Portman's raw, terrifying performance works on its own apart from the dancing; she won her Oscar for a reason, and Lane's public outcry feels like the petty whining of someone who has never worked on a movie before. 'Black Swan' is a film filled with subtle but amazing visual effects (check out the video below) and whether she likes it or not, Lane was hired to be one of those subtle but amazing visual effects. After all, special effects are at their best when you don't notice them.

That's one point of view. Use the comment section below to share your own thoughts on the matter and to bicker and debate back and forth as you see fit.

UPDATE: In a prepared statement handed to Entertainment Weekly, Darren Aronofsky responds to the ballerina debacle, stating ...

Here is the reality. I had my editor count shots. There are 139 dance shots in the film. 111 are Natalie Portman untouched. 28 are her dance double Sarah Lane. If you do the math that's 80% Natalie Portman. What about duration? The shots that feature the double are wide shots and rarely play for longer than one second. There are two complicated longer dance sequences that we used face replacement. Even so, if we were judging by time over 90% would be Natalie Portman.

Read the rest of his statement over at EW.

New 'Narnia' Film Being Planned -- 'The Magician's Nephew'

Jacob Hall — 2011-03-23T11:35:00+00:00

This may very well be the first and last time that The Christian Post breaks the news regarding the latest entry in a series of blockbuster fantasy films, but that's not too unexpected when you're dealing with the 'Chronicles of Narnia' series, which wears its religious influence on its sleeve.

Despite inconsistent box office and mixed critical reaction, Walden Media and Fox seem dead-set on filming all seven books in C.S. Lewis's 'Narnia' series. Although 'The Silver Chair' is technically the next chronological entry in the series, Walden Media co-founder and president Michael Flaherty told The Christian Post that they'll be taking on 'The Magician's Nephew' next, a prequel story and the sixth book published. As Flaherty himself says:

"We are starting to talk to Fox and talk to the C.S. Lewis estate now about the Magician's Nephew being our next film ... If we can all agree to move forward, then what we would do is find someone to write the script. So, it could still be a couple of years."

Surely a huge part of talking with Fox about this project will be convincing them that it needs to happen. Despite strong international grosses, 'Prince Caspian' and 'Voyage of the Dawn Treader' underperformed at the domestic box office in the wake of 'The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe''s massive success ('Prince Caspian' grossed roughly half of 'The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe's box office take while 'Voyage of the Dawn Treader' made significantly less than that). Although international grosses are a nice cherry on top, it's the domestic haul that typically helps a sequel get the green light.

These inconsistent numbers also translate to the books, as Flaherty is quick to point out:

"What's interesting is that the 'Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe' over this period of time sold twice as many books as 'Prince Caspian' and it did twice as much at the box office. 'Prince Caspian' sold a third of the books as 'Dawn Treader' and did a third at the box office."

Flaherty then goes on to say that 'The Magician's Nephew' is the second most popular book in the series, so it's a guaranteed blockbuster hit, which sounds like slightly delusional wishful thinking, but if it helps him get his movie made, more power to him. With interest in the series waning though, will an audience for these films still exist when this one finally gets the go-ahead? Sound off in the comments below!

David O. Russell Ready for 'Fighter' Sequel

Jacob Hall — 2011-03-22T18:00:00+00:00

It may be redundant to heap further praise on a movie that was recently nominated for seven Academy Awards, won two and turned out to be a crowd pleasing hit at the box office, but David O. Russell's 'The Fighter' truly is a wonderful little movie, taking what should be, by all accounts, a retread of every rags-to-riches cliche ever burnt onto celluloid but instilling them with heart, humor and personality. It's a rarity: a warm, powerful movie that never wears any grand artistic intentions on its sleeve and wins the audience over by the sheer force of its characters and story.

But does it need a sequel? Star Mark Wahlberg thought so and now director David O. Russell has joined him. Here's what he told MTV:

"I think that would be awesome ... I just love those characters and I think we could do a lot of fun and interesting stuff."

Before we go any further, we need to quickly examine Russell's choice of words, mainly the part where he says "I think that would be awesome" and later in the original article, where he adds "I would do it whenever anyone says they're ready" and "I would definitely want to be involved in that." All of this is film industry talk for "Yeah, I'd do 'The Fighter 2', but I'm not really thinking that hard about it right now and I have a lot on my plate with my upcoming adaptation of 'Uncharted', but I'd consider it, thank you very much and good day."

That's not to say a sequel won't happen. "Irish" Micky Ward had all sorts of adventures after the events of 'The Fighter' (although the text epilogue does kind of spoil the outcome of any potential sequel for anyone not familiar with boxing in the real world), so there's definitely somewhere for the story to go. His epic trilogy of fights with Arturo Gatti was easily the biggest moment of his career and there is certainly cinematic potential there. Not to mention the fact that the real soul of 'The Fighter' resides in the scenes outside of the ring -- the extended dysfunctional family at the center of this story is oddly endearing, to say the least, and audiences may very well want to revisit them just as much as the actors do.

What say you? Should a sequel to 'The Fighter' happen? Will they be able to round up the entire ensemble for another go-around, particularly the ever-prickly (and now Oscar-winning) Christian Bale?

Watch the 'Harry Potter' Kids Shoot Their Final Scene (Video)

Jacob Hall — 2011-03-22T14:25:00+00:00

After ten years and eight films, principal photography on the 'Harry Potter' film series is over and done with. What was the final scene shot for Daniel Radcliffe, Rupert Grint and Emma Watson, who have literally grown up before our very eyes on film? Was it part of the final, epic showdown with Lord Voldemort and his forces? Was it a quiet, emotional and introspective scene? Maybe even that infamous epilogue that still divides fans?

Nah. It's the three of them running in front of a green screen and jumping off camera onto a mattress. Luckily, cameras were on hand to capture this pivotal moment from behind the scenes.

You don't schedule a film shoot based on what would be the most fitting or dramatic scene to end production on. You schedule a film shoot based on convenience, time and money, meaning that the long journey for this trio of actors ended on a large, crowded soundstage, with them battling obvious exhaustion and pretending that they were in some sort of exotic fantasy location. Movie magic!

Check out the video after the jump.

Roman Polanski Returns - Check Out the First Images from 'Carnage'

Jacob Hall — 2011-03-22T13:15:00+00:00

Despite his various, er, troubles, Oscar-winning filmmaker Roman Polanski is hard at work editing his latest film and has supplied Empire with a couple of images for your viewing pleasure.

The film is 'Carnage', an adaptation of the acclaimed stage play 'God of Carnage', which had its Zurich premiere in 2006 before being translated into English and brought to London's West End in 2008. That version starred Ralph Fiennes, Tamsin Greig, Janet McTeer and Ken Stott. When it made its way across the pond and premiered on Broadway, the cast became Jeff Daniels, Hope Davis, James Gandolfini and Marcia Gay Harden (it ended up winning Tony awards for direction and Harden's performance).

Keeping with the tradition of only casting incredible actors in every version of this story, Polanksi's film stars John C. Reilly, Kate Winslet, Jodie Foster and Christoph Waltz.

Originally billed as a "comedy of manners without the manners," the story "...begins after a playground fight between two boys, and follows two sets of parents as they attempt to resolve the children's altercation, but instead devolve into chaos." If anything, it should be interesting to see Polanski, a filmmaker whose recent work has been pretty dour, tackle a comedy with this cast.

Check out one image below and head on over to Empire to see the rest.

There is no scheduled release for 'Carnage', but the original article suggests it should be ready by late this year, making it a possible Oscar contender.

'Superman' Update: Viggo Mortensen Out, Filming Starts Late Summer

Jacob Hall — 2011-03-22T11:10:00+00:00

With 'Sucker Punch' opening in just a few days, director Zack Snyder has been making the press rounds, meaning that he goes into a room to tell the world about his latest directorial effort and ends up dodging a whole bunch of 'Superman' questions. When you're taking on a character as iconic and troubled (at least when it comes to film adaptations) as Superman, it comes with the territory.

Latino Review, who've been breaking 'Superman' stories all over the place, have an excerpt from an upcoming interview with the slow motion-obsessed filmmaker. The parts where Snyder talks about his movie opening in three days will have to wait, because he provides a big 'ol update on the status of the mysterious new 'Superman' movie. Priorities! (Said with love, we assure you.)

You really should go read the whole interview for all of the interesting little details and tidbits, but here are the broad strokes: They're still in the midst of heavy pre-production, and they hope to get the cameras rolling by late summer. Viggo Mortensen, who had been tapped to play the villainous General Zod, will not be combating the Man of Steel because he'll be too busy romancing Kristen Stewart in 'Snow White and the Huntsman'.

Although it's a shame they lost Viggo (to a 'Snow White' film? Really?), the show must go on. In the rest of the interview, Snyder neither confirms or denies the presence of Lex Luthor, neither confirms or denies the presence of Lois Lane and neither confirms or denies the presence of major elements of Kryptonian mythology. Oh, he's a slippery one, that Zack Snyder. Yes he is.

However, with filming only a few months away, things should start to fall into place soon by sheer necessity. We'll keep you updated.

Is Taylor Kitsch the Next Sam Worthington?

Jacob Hall — 2011-03-21T12:45:00+00:00

The facts: Deadline reports that Taylor Kitsch, he of 'Friday Night Lights' and 'X-Men Origins: Wolverine' fame, is in talks to join Oliver Stone's adaptation of Don Winslow's novel 'Savages,' where he would star alongside Aaron Johnson as a drug dealer forced to work for a nasty Mexican drug cartel after his best friend is kidnapped. Kitsch would take on the role of "... Chon, an iron-hard former operative who is a remorseless killer and seems to only have room in his heart for his growing partner." Johnson would play that partner and Salma Hayek is being looked at for the role of the head of the drug cartel. And that's the news that's fit to print.

Kitsch is the textbook definition of a rising star. After cutting his teeth on an acclaimed television series and popping up in key roles in popular (if not always particularly good) movies, his career is on the verge of exploding. Two of the biggest blockbuster films of 2012 will have his name above the title and he doesn't look ready to slow down.

Call it the Sam Worthington method of success: You've got to saturate the market with yourself. The audience can't ignore you if you're everywhere.

You can easily draw similarities between Kitsch and Worthington. Neither are from the United States (Canada and Australia, respectively), but both specialize in playing rugged, heroic Americans, occasionally with questionable accents. Both are good-looking without being too pretty, so they're nice fits for leading roles that require a man of action. And, of course, both are trying to worm their way into public consciousness through the geek market. In less than a year, Worthington appeared in 'Terminator Salvation', 'Clash of the Titans' and 'Avatar' and in 2012, Kitsch will be starring in Disney's science-fiction epic 'John Carter of Mars' and Universal's pre-maligned but still slightly intriguing 'Battleship'.

Although seemingly taking every high-profile acting gig that's offered to you will keep food on the table, cars in the garage, boats at the dock and ladies in the bedroom, it's not a guaranteed path to superstardom. Although Worthington's career is in no danger -- he has four films finished or filming -- his putting himself out there in such a big way is a double-edged sword, giving him a great deal of exposure but also opening him up to a lot of criticism from an ever-fickle movie-going populace. Call it the Jude Law Effect or the "This guy? Again?" conundrum: The more you ride the wave of your own growing star power, the more quickly audiences will tire of you.

So, as the title of this post asks, is Taylor Kitsch the next Sam Worthington? We'll have to see how audiences react to 'Battleship' and 'John Carter of Mars,' both of which feel like tough sells ('John Carter' because it's based on a book that hovers outside of the mainstream and 'Battleship' because it's frickin' 'Battleship'), but it definitely feels possible. As long as he doesn't become the next Jude Law first.

Quick Hits: 'Super 8' Poster! 'RoboCop' Writer! 'Smurfs' and 'Conan' Trailers!

Jacob Hall — 2011-03-15T19:00:00+00:00

You may not be at SXSW right now (or maybe you are), but you can still check out some of the more awesome posters for films screening there.

Phenomenal character actor, consummate "that guy!" and recent Academy Award nominee John Hawkes has joined 'Surrogate,' a film based on the life of Mark O'Brien, a writer who decided to explore his sexuality after spending most of his life with an iron lung.

A couple of years ago, we at Cinematical demanded a Sam Cooke biopic, and it looks they've finally got one in the works.

Sarah Jessica Parker and Marisa Tomei are in talks to join 'Married and Cheating' from director Raymond De Felitta. Presumably, the plot will deal with people who are married and/or cheating.

The very cool and eye-catching poster for JJ Abrams' 'Super 8' has hit the web.

Because the world is a cruel and unfair place, here's the newest trailer for 'The Smurfs':

And because the world is still a cruel and unfair place, here's the teaser trailer for Marcus Nispel's remake of 'Conan the Barbarian':

After his acclaimed script 'Infiltrator' never got made, his penned remake of 'Dune' dissolved and his fourth 'Bourne' screenplay got shelved, Hollywood scribe Josh Zetumer has been hired to write the remake of 'RoboCop.' Fourth time's the charm?

Want to see Terrence Malick's 'Tree of Life' right now? Well, you can't. You can look at these new stills from the movie, though. If you want to.

The British horror movie festival FrightFest has plans to expand into the movie distribution game, starting with 'Shadow,' an "Italian tale of terror and torment [that] details the story of a soldier returning from a tour of duty in Iran who finds himself trapped in a lost Nazi experiment camp in a remote part of the Alps." Yeah, we want to see that too.

Although the horror flick 'Dead Girl' was met with a mostly negative response, a sequel is in the works. Unlike the first film, which featured two guys discovering a zombified girl, the sequel will follow -- wait for it -- a girl discovering a zombified guy. Twists, ahoy!

Speaking of horror movie news, J.T. Petty, the director of 'The Burrowers,' is getting ready to roll on a new 3D horror movie. The cast includes Clifton Collins, Clancy Brown and Dan Fogler. Where's the casting director? Hands need to be shook.

You want more horror news? Here's more horror news: a remake of the classic 'Cat People' is in the works. Jeer or cheer appropriately.

Oh, and here's the trailer for 'Quarantine 2: Terminal,' a sequel to the remake of 'REC,' but not a remake of 'REC 2.'

Josh Hutcherson Wants Role in 'The 'Hunger Games'

Jacob Hall — 2011-03-15T10:10:00+00:00

You can file this one under "slow news day."

The long and short of it is that rising young star Josh Hutcherson (if you want to feel old today, know that he was born in 1992) has been taking meetings with filmmaker Gary Ross regarding a role in the upcoming film adaptation of the immensely popular young adult novel, 'The Hunger Games'. He's probably on a list with a dozen other names, but the fact that he's letting us all know that he's in the running (and that he very much wants the part) allows us to make this news.

The role in question is presumably that of Peeta, the teenage boy who accompanies Katniss (a role that will supposedly be filled by Academy Award nominee Jennifer Lawrence) to the Hunger Games, a gladiatorial battle to the death fought by the children of a post-apocalyptic America. From an outside perspective (um, certain writers here at Cinematical haven't read it yet), it sounds like 'The Running Man' meets '1984' but for, you know, kids.

The news comes from Entertainment Weekly, who spoke to Hutcherson at SXSW, where his latest film 'Detention' made its world premiere this week. You can watch the trailer after the jump.

Hutcherson's other credits include 'The Kids are All Right', 'Journey to the Center of the Earth', 'Bridge to Terabithia' and the sadly MIA remake of 'Red Dawn'. His upcoming slate is jam-packed, meaning that even if he doesn't get the 'Hunger Games' role, we'll be seeing a lot of Mr. Hutcherson in the next few years.

'The FP' SXSW Review: Silly, Filthy and Utterly Unique

Jacob Hall — 2011-03-14T21:00:00+00:00

Several questions immediately invade the mind after viewing 'The FP,'' one of this year's SXFantastic film selections and already the leading contender for the strangest film to find its way to a movie screen in 2011. Most of the questions, like "Who made this thing? (Jason and Brandon Trost, making their feature debut) and "Does this movie actually exist?" (yes), are easily answered. Others, like "What giddily insane spirit possessed the souls of everyone involved and actually allowed this movie to get made?" don't have such obvious answers, but they also don't require them. 'The FP' is fueled by black-souled, delightfully vulgar anarchy and like great punk rock, over-thinking it just sinks the experience. You've just got to go with it.

Set in a vaguely post-apocalyptic near future (or perhaps a terrifyingly silly alternate universe circa 1985), the 'Escape From New York'-esque opening scroll and narration set the stage: there are two rival gangs locked in a continuous battle for control of the town of Frazier Park and while their goals may be conventional, their methods are certainly not -- battles are not conducted through violent altercations on the streets, but rather through one-on-one competitions in a dancing arcade game called Beat Beat Revelations.

Yep.

Our story really takes off when the heroic gang leader BTRO (Brandon Barrera) dies mid-game, leaving mohawked rival and all around-horrible dude L Dubba E (Lee Valmassy) the victor. After a year of self-imposed exile, BTRO's eye-patched younger brother JTRO (Jason Trost) returns to reclaim the FP and restore his gang's honor.

And from there, 'The FP' becomes a perverse parody of Hollywood conventions, trotting out worn-out plot points and story devices and contorting them to fit this twisted world. Are there training montages? You bet. Is there a rekindled romance between our hero and the woman he loves, who's currently shacked up with the big baddie? Of course. The big difference is that they occur in a world populated by characters dressed like they belong in 'The Road Warrior' and speaking in an absurdly complicated slang that sounds like early '90s gangster tropes met 'A Clockwork Orange' in a head-on collision.

It's all so very silly, but the film refuses to acknowledge that fact, treating every moment and performance with a deadpan stoicism that manages to simultaneously mock and revere every convention the Trost brothers are parodying. The comedy of 'The FP' does not come from jokes or gags, but from the film's steadfast, almost level-headed commitment to an absolutely ludicrous premise. The laughs are the same kind you get from watching idiotic blockbusters like 'Armageddon', but the difference here is that they're intentional.

Everyone's in on the joke but doing their absolute best to make sure they don't show their hand. No one ever winks at the camera. Even the silliest characters, like Art Hsu's energetic emcee KCDC, never betray the reality. Hsu's film stealing work is hilarious because he commits to an insane character, not because he's asking for a laugh. Also important is the film's cinematography: slick, stylish and often atmospheric work that looks like it belongs in a science fiction or action film rather than a comedy.

The film's straight-faced, high drama tone only further highlights that this is one filthy movie, filled with all kind of awful debauchery that simply cannot be unseen. While 'The FP' playfully tweaks with convention in its structure and story, it fills every available moment with pitch-black vulgarity, scenes and characters so deliriously wrong and offensive -- but taken so seriously! -- that it's a shock to the system. The dialogue, slur and profanity-laden all of it, is strange and dense, forcing you to keep up with the wordplay.

With the economy tanking and school grades plummeting, the world of 'The FP' often feels like a pretty damning (if not realistic) depiction of an America in ruin: a bunch of white guys fighting over their rundown po-dunk town using video games, thoroughly abusing the English language and treating women like objects to be won and thrown out. For all of its silliness and raunchiness 'The FP's faux-celebration of post-apocalyptic white trash behavior can't help but feel like a condemnation of everyone and everything the Trost brothers find fascinating and horrifying about people in general.

'The FP' is the rare "ready-made cult hit" that actually works. It's an uncommon combination: a fearless, low-budget indie that's not necessarily made for mass consumption, but made with confidence and skill by guys who grew up devouring cheesy blockbuster cinema, a love letter and a middle finger to Hollywood. It's really something else.

Adventures in B-Movie Land #6: 'Night Train to Terror'

Jacob Hall — 2011-03-12T20:00:00+00:00

Welcome to Adventures in B-Movie Land, the monthly column where I take a look at some of the strangest, cheapest and worst films ever made ... and explore why you have to see them. Look for new entries during the second week of every month.

The Motion Picture:

'Night Train to Terror' (1985), directed by John Carr, Phillip Marshak, Tom McGowan, Jay Schlossberg-Cohen and Gregg C. Tallas

Also Known As:

'Death Wish Club,' 'The Nightmare Never Ends' and 'Scream Your Head Off,' the three films that footage was "borrowed" from to make this movie.

Featuring the Talented:

Ferdy Mayne as Mr. God, Tony Giorgio as Mr. Satan, Byron Yordan as the '80s-tastic singer of the rock band traveling on the titular locomotive and Richard Moll (Bull from 'Night Court') in not one, but two roles!

What Is It?

A deliriously wrongheaded, staggeringly incompetent 1980s horror anthology film that steals footage from three other films (two of them unfinished!) to pad out its running time. Full of extended claymation sequences, rapid voice-over work to fill in gaping plot holes, philosophical debates that feel like they came from a dorm room for the mentally impaired and frequent use of a massive, synth-driven '80s band rocking out on a doomed train occupied by God and Satan, 'Night Train to Terror' is easily one of the worst films ever made. It's also incredible.

The Plot:

We open with stock footage of a 19th century steam engine. We venture inside this train and meet the passengers: the world's largest rock band, all of them performing their latest opus entitled "Dance With Me." We'll see a lot of them throughout this movie. They sing the same song every time we see them. There is no audience, and they're in an empty train. In fact, here's that song right now:

They breakdance and they badly mime playing their instruments, all the while unaware that the train is scheduled to crash at dawn and that Mr. God and Mr. Satan (seriously) are sitting in a neighboring train car, discussing who gets to keep their souls when they meet their fiery end on this Night Train to Terror (they never actually say that out loud, but oh, I wish they did). God, a well-dressed older man with a white beard and even whiter suit, and Satan, an Italian guy, pass the time by examining recent events and deciding who gets to keep the souls involved. Their compartment window magically transforms through the power of bad optical effects into a portal that allows them to view footage from other movies that the producers stole without asking permission.

The first story follows a man who is drugged, hypnotized and forced to abduct women so an insane surgeon and his even more insane orderly can do all sorts of nasty business to them involving hacksaws and machetes. A lot of events that don't make any sense occur, including women being locked in padded cells, a man collecting severed heads in a neatly labeled jars and lobotomized people performing impromptu surgery on their enemies.

And then it's back to the train, back to the rock band and back to God and Satan going about their merry way. After God and Satan blather on about who's better (God brags that he can weep and laugh at the same time), we get into the next story, this one making even less sense. It has something to do with a rich man enticing a popcorn vendor into the world of pornography, growing jealous when she finds another man and forces them both to attend a "death wish club," where members place themselves into suicidal situations and see what happens. After avoiding death by a massive stop-motion bug, our heroes decide this is not for them, but armed thugs say otherwise and not even our protagonist's sudden knowledge of karate can save him. A net is thrown over him and he's dragged back into the deadly game once more. I dare not spoil the ending.

We're back on the train once more. We get to see the band play "Dance With Me Again." God and Satan still can't agree on anything. We enter the third and final story, this one involving a Nazi with Satanic powers who goes around not doing much while a bunch of other people try to kill him. This story (the longest of the three and the only one to come from a finished film) has the magical power to put everyone watching it into a deep sleep.

Finally, we go back to the train for the denouement. The train, which turns out to be model all along, crashes. God claims the souls of the rock band. Satan's not happy. The Night Train to Terror flies into heaven. The end.

Shocking Acts of Violence:

Although horror fans will not find anything particularly new going on with the gallons of red stuff in 'Night Train to Terror,' it has its moments. My personal favorite scene of violence is when the madman who decapitates his victims and preserves their heads gets beheaded. You know, because of the irony. Also of special note is the massive mutant mosquito, whose sting will cause your face to swell up and explode, and the scene where the woman attempts to surgery a demon to death, both of which are not without their charms.

Sexual Deviancy and Mindless Perversity:

At one point, God and Satan discuss the morality of the rock stars in the other train car and Satan claims that all rock stars' souls go to him because of their very nature. God doesn't agree and says that all rock stars are secretly praying to him through their music. Seriously. Because God seems to approve, 'Night Train to Terror's' stance on sex is pretty liberal overall, with one character entering a career in the adult film industry and seemingly having a blast while letting herself get bent over a bed by a fellow performer dressed like a frontiersman (complete with coonskin cap). Also: lots and lots of boobs, but that's a given. It was the '80s and this is a horror film, after all.

Is There A Robot?

A robot is the only thing 'Night Train to Terror' doesn't have and it's probably the one thing that could have possibly made it better than it is (and it's kind of amazing as it stands right now). While the film certainly lacks in robots, it does not lack in lousy claymation effects that were spliced into the already finished stolen footage. This is a good thing for two reasons. Firstly, this footage is terrible and the inclusion of an exploding head made of Play-Doh can only make things better (and it does). Secondly, it allows us to see a large demon, also made of Play-Doh, batter a helpless monk around a beach for about two minutes. Take comfort in the small things, boys and girls.

Just How Cheap Does It Look?

'Night Train to Terror' looks about as cheap as a movie that stole 95% of its footage from other movies should look. Considering that the other movies were also cheap pieces of garbage, the answer is super duper cheap. This is no more evident than in the final moments of the film, where the electric model train driving toward the camera across a wobbly tabletop meets its end through an abrupt cut to an explosion. It's impossible to imagine that more than $100 was spent on the making of this movie and surely most of that went to cocaine. And that's not a lot of cocaine.

Scholarly Thoughts:

To call 'Night Train to Terror' a bad film would be doing it a disservice. It's the worst film. In terms of production quality and such obvious behind-the-scenes greed, there is no better example of the film industry at its nadir than this nightmare. It's difficult to imagine anyone involved in this movie being proud of their work or having any motivation other than pocketing a quick buck and profiting off of other filmmaker's (admittedly, also awful) work.

But -- and this is a huge but -- 'Night Train to Terror' is also one of the most entertaining movies ever made, a one-of-a-kind example of how obvious disdain for things like story and character and tone can lead to something that's not only completely and totally watchable, but absolutely fascinating.

For example, take a look at the scenes that actually take place on the train, the wrap-around stuff that was shot to allow for the "stories" to exist. You have a modern rock band, dressed in typically '80s (i.e., garish) clothes riding on a train that is big enough to house their daily routine, which looks like a MTV music video. This band adds nothing to plot, never actually share a scene with God and Satan and feel crudely forced in because one of the producers seemed to have a crazy idea that if kids like pop music and break dancing, surely they have a place in a horror anthology film.

That lining of selfish, greedy reasoning leads to scenes that stand up against the best intentional modern art. If surrealism and absurdism are ultimately about deconstructing our normal view of the world, often by contradiction, what's stopping 'Night Train to Terror' from being an absurdist masterpiece? As bad as most of the ideas in this film are -- from God and Satan's incomprehensible debates to the train conductor breaking the fourth wall and winking at the audience -- they pile on top of each other, one after another, so fast and furious that you simply can't keep up with the incompetence on display. Most "good" bad films feature a handful of wonderful moments surrounded by an ocean of boredom. 'Night Train to Terror' plays like a Zucker-Abrahams-Zucker comedy; despite the film's completely straight face, it's nothing but one wacky gag after another, an accidental 'Airplane!' for '80s horror films.

It's one thing to make a bad movie. It's quite another to make a movie so bad that it shifts the paradigms of your brain, crawls through your grey matter and emerges from the back of your skull as a work of accidental art. You really, really need to see 'Night Train to Terror.'

Previous Adventures:

The Happening
The Films of Edward D. Wood Jr.
Santa Claus Conquers the Martians
Warriors of the Wasteland
Starcrash

The Full 'Super 8' Trailer Is Here!

Jacob Hall — 2011-03-11T09:56:00+00:00

With a summer movie slate crammed full of sequels, prequels, reboots and comic book adaptations, leave it to director JJ Abrams to deliver something original. The full trailer for his science fiction adventure 'Super 8' is here, capping off a year of mysterious teases regarding the film's plot and concept.

This full trailer thankfully leaves a lot of things unanswered (can we all agree that going into a movie not knowing every detail of the plot sounds pretty darn refreshing?), but what we do see looks unique -- a summer blockbuster that's truly going to stand out from the rest of the pack.

Here's the recently released official synopsis, itself also little more than a tease:

"In the summer of 1979, a group of friends in a small Ohio town witness a catastrophic train crash while making a super 8 movie and soon suspect that it was not an accident. Shortly after unusual disappearances and inexplicable events begin to take place in town, and the local Deputy tries to uncover the truth -- something more terrifying than any of them could have imagined."

And really, what else do you need to know? Check out the trailer after the jump.

Steven Spielberg's involvement and that Amblin logo don't look like a coincidence. 'Super 8' looks (and seemingly feels) like something he would have produced in the '80s, a time when movies about kids -- and often for kids -- were getting a bit tougher and scarier, leading to the creation of the PG-13 rating. Based on the footage seen here, 'Super 8' will have spiritual cousins in movies like 'Gremlins' and 'Poltergeist.' As far as we're concerned, there's not a more promising bloodline for a movie of this type.

'Super 8' opens on June 10th. If you plunk down money to see the fourth 'Pirates of the Caribbean' or the third 'Transformers', the least you can do is check this one out.

Sylvester Stallone Won't Direct 'Expendables' Sequel -- Who Should Take His Place?

Jacob Hall — 2011-03-09T11:20:00+00:00

Last year, 'The Expendables' grossed $274 million worldwide, proving that there was still a place in the world for aging action movie stars and their modern macho brethren. Not bad at all for an independently produced action movie starring a cast not exactly known for lighting the box office aflame.

Director/star Sylvester Stallone has been talking almost nonstop about a sequel, already saying he wants to bring back Bruce Willis and Arnold Schwarzenegger, who had cameos in the first film (with Willis most likely being the big baddie our team of mercenaries goes up against in their next adventure). There's been no official word on whether or not Jason Statham, Jet Li and the rest of the cast will return, but it's hard to imagine them turning a sequel down.

However, the L.A. Times reports that although Stallone will star in the eventual 'Expendables 2,' he will be handing directorial duties over to someone else. While Stallone trucks around Hollywood, taking meetings with interested parties, it is our duty as film fans to throw some potential names into the air and see if they stick.

The Director: Neil Marshall

His Work: 'Dog Soldiers', 'The Descent', 'Doomsday' and 'Centurion'

Why He Should Do It: Marshall's work is fueled by his love of 1980s cinema. His work tends to be bloody and vicious, but he's definitely no stranger to having fun, as seen in 2009's incredibly silly John Carpenter riff 'Doomsday.' Ultra violence combined with a humorous self-awareness? Sounds like exactly what the 'Expendables' sequel needs.

The Director: Kathryn Bigelow

Her Work: 'Near Dark', 'Blue Steel', 'Point Break', 'Strange Days' and 'The Hurt Locker'

Why She Should Do It: First of all -- yeah, there's no way that the now Oscar-winning Bigelow would ever take this on (it would feel like slumming after her trip to the Kodak theater). However, prior to helming the exceptional 'The Hurt Locker', she was known for directing extremely masculine, adrenaline-fueled action fare like 'Point Break.' Can you imagine the macho world of 'The Expendables' shot by a woman? The result would surely be fascinating.

The Director: Jack Bender

His Work: Countless episodes of 'Lost', 'Alias' 'The Sopranos' and other television work going back 30 years

Why He Should Do It: Although he's definitely the smallest name on this list, he's a choice that actually feels likely. Although he directed a few films back in the day (most of which he'd probably like to strike from his resume), he's spent the past decade directing some of the biggest television shows of all time. His ability to direct exciting action sequences on a TV budget makes him a perfect match for an 'Expendables' sequel -- he truly knows how get a bang for his buck.

The Director: Lexi Alexander

His Work: 'Green Street Hooligans' and 'Punisher: War Zone'

Why She Should Do It: Before she was a filmmaker, Lexi Alexander was a world champion kickboxer, so it's easy to imagine her developing an immediate rapport with a natural born tough guy like Stallone. However, her work speaks for itself. Her unfairly maligned 'Punisher: War Zone' is one of the craziest action movies of recent years, a celebration of extreme violence tinged with pitch-black comedy. In other words, she'd be perfect for this gig.

The Director: John McTiernan

His Work: 'Die Hard', 'Predator', 'The Hunt for Red October' and 'The Thomas Crown Affair'

Why He Should Do It: First, look at that filmography -- the man's easily one of the greatest action directors of all time. Of course, he also directed 'Last Action Hero', 'Rollerball' and 'Basic,' but his work in the '80s earns him a lifetime of good will. Thanks to epic legal troubles, McTiernan hasn't directed a film in eight years. If he intends to make a comeback anytime soon, what better way to do it than with a throwback to the kind of film he had perfected back in the day?

Check Out the Seven Movie Posters That Sold for $2 Million

Jacob Hall — 2011-03-09T09:45:00+00:00

"Up for sale are 7 posters that constitute arguably the greatest movie poster collection in the world. Certainly, one could not say that they have the greatest science fiction collection without them. Each poster is unique and the only copy known to exist. All 7 of these posters transcend the movie poster field."

Big words for a humble eBay auction page, but the final sale price of $1,950,000 should pretty much erase all doubt: eBay user "mrs. miniver" really does seem to have the best frickin' movie poster collection of all time and she's selling it piece by piece to movie fans with deep wallets. The set that sold for $2 million included posters for 'The Day the Earth Stood Still', Howard Hawks' 'The Thing From Another World,' 'When Worlds Collide,' 'The Man From Planet X,' 'The War of the Worlds,' 'Forbidden Planet' and 'Conquest of Space', all of which are apparently the only remaining copies.

Even if you aren't wealthy enough to partake in her wares (some prices are high enough that you can only imagine people un-ironically wearing top hats and monocles when buying them), browsing through her sales is enough to make any movie fan -- especially science-fiction buffs -- feel a little weak in the limbs. Check out some examples after the jump.

First, let's take a look at a few of the amazing posters that were part of that multimillion-dollar sale, starting with this banner for the classic 'The Day the Earth Stood Still':

Next, here's 'Forbidden Planet', one of the best sci-fi films of the 1950s. It may not be as highly regarded as 'The Day the Earth Stood Still', but this poster is as iconic as they come:

Here's my personal favorite of the bunch, the creepy and eye-catching poster for the 1951 adaptation of H.G. Wells' 'The War of the Worlds':

If your sci-fi tastes skew toward the populist, "mrs. miniver" offers plenty of original 'Star Wars' one-sheets for your buying pleasure, but why buy something you've seen before when you can put something like this one your wall:

Heck, if you're a real 'Star Wars' fan, surely you want this one gracing your kitchen:

If you're not a science-fiction fan, she still has you covered. How about an original 'Rocky II' poster?

You want something classier? Nothing classes up a joint quite like the Rat Pack:

What if you're a film snob trying to show off your knowledge of film history? Well, surely you'd be willing to lay down a couple thousand dollars for the poster for 'My Four Years in Germany.' Although not well known now, it was Warner Bros.' first film and this is the original poster from 1918!

Money can't buy you love, but it sure can buy you a whole lot of amazing things to put on your walls.

(Via Awesomenator)

Where Everyone Has Gone Before #32: 'Pink Flamingos'

Jacob Hall — 2011-03-05T19:00:00+00:00

Welcome to Where Everyone Has Gone Before, the weekly column where I continue my film education before your very eyes by seeking out and watching all of the movies I should have seen by now. I will first judge the movie before I've watched it, based entirely on its reputation (and my potentially misguided thoughts). Then I will give the movie a fair chance and actually watch it. You will laugh at me, you may condemn me, but you will never say I didn't try!

The Film: 'Pink Flamingos' (1972), Dir. John Waters

Starring: Divine, David Lochary, Mary Vivian Pearce, Mink Stole and Danny Mills.

Why I Haven't Seen It Until Now: The real reason? I haven't seen 'Pink Flamingos' because it sounds absolutely disgusting. Not in a high-minded moral way, mind you, but in a "this sounds like it may actually make me sick to my stomach and I'm not sure I'm up to that challenge" way. But that's the kind of answer that makes me sound like a wimp, so this paragraph is just a placeholder until I can think of a decent lie. Oops.

Pre-Viewing Assumptions: Outside of its title and presence on every known list of "top cult movies," I know very little of John Waters' 'Pink Flamingos.' This is one of those strange cases of a film's infamy overpowering the film itself -- I'm fairly certain that a lot of people in my generation are familiar with the film's reputation but don't know anything about what goes on in the film itself. And that's if they have even heard of the film. If any filmmaker inhabited a very specific niche, it's Waters.

So, without further ado, here's what I do know about 'Pink Flamingos.'

Divine, easily the most horrifying of movie drag queens, plays a particularly disgusting individual concerned only with claiming the title of "filthiest person alive." Others decide to compete against her in a display of white trash bravado and faster than you can say "This is the plot of the movie?", all sorts of horrible business is occurring right before your very eyes, a ninety minute cinematic geek show that dares you to watch as things get increasingly revolting. I want to say this sounds like an early example of raunchy comedy, but "raunchy" feels like a word invented to describe man-children played by Jim Carrey slipping in poop in mediocre mid-90s comedies. Perhaps the word I'm looking for isn't raunchy, but rather "evil." 'Pink Flamingos' sounds like an evil comedy.

Truth be told, I haven't been this frightened of a movie in this column since 'Cannibal Holocaust.'

Being more familiar with Waters as an off-screen personality than as a filmmaker, I find it easy to imagine him making this movie just because he knows he'll get a kick out of watching an audience squirm. Will 'Pink Flamingos' work for me in the comfort of my home or is this something best served by a trip to your local independent cinema for a sold-out midnight screening packed full of people seeing the film for the hundredth time? Will it's reputation hold up or have the ravages of time dulled its fangs down to round nubs? Well, I suppose it's time to find out.

Post-Viewing Reaction: Whenever I gather screenshots for this column, I search through the film at hand and look for frames that sum up the film. Sometimes it's an iconic image, sometimes it's just a striking composition, but I take the process very seriously. It's important to me to find shots that will define the film for anyone reading.

That's not going to happen with 'Pink Flamingos' because every shot that gives you an actual glimpse into this film's pitch black heart does not belong on a website that caters to movie fans of all tastes and ages. So if you're a twelve year old movie lover who's disappointed that I can't share an image of a man performing on stage with a "singing" anus, feel free to add this movie to your Netflix queue so you can see it yourself. No one's stopping you. In the meantime, you can enjoy the handful of relatively clean images I managed to cull from the film. They're the only ones.

Yes, "Pink Flamingos" manages to live up to its borderline mythological hype quite nicely and I'll admit to having to stare at my feet on more than one occasion to avoid losing my dinner. Surely that's the point. You don't make a film that climaxes with your lead character eagerly devouring freshly, uh, released dog feces without harboring some secret hope of an audience made up of squares like me barfing into their popcorn. There had to have been some point in production when John Waters pulled his eye away from the camera, giggled and shook his head, flabbergasted that he was actually getting away with this.

Actually, you can quite clearly see how Waters got away with the film just by looking at the credits. He was practically a crew of one, writing, directing, editing, producing and acting as his own cinematographer. He shot on weekends and scrounged up the budget during the week. The resulting film looks as primitive as they come -- it's badly shot, cheap looking and the entire soundtrack is muffled, masking an dialogue that is pitched lower than a piercing scream (but enough of the characters shout all of their lines to make this only a minor issue). You can say what you want about the final product, but Waters is not making a single compromise to his vision. It may be rough around the edges (and through the middle and on the top and on the bottom), but it's his movie. It's as pure an undiluted artistic vision as they come.

With that out of the way, this is the point where I'm allowed to say that I didn't care much for 'Pink Flamingos' and really can't fathom putting myself through it again. With the entire cast simply competing to be "the filthiest person alive," no one finds time to be likeable or interesting, they only find time to have bizarre chicken-infused sex or operate rape dungeons to turn a profit on the infant black market. It's actually impressive just how despicable each and every character in this movie is and how completely irredeemable their actions are; there is never a single attempt to let us like these people. This thing is like the 'Salo' of comedies -- it's just too ruthlessly unpleasant to sit through more than once but once you've seen it, you will never un-see it.

Although other films have attempted similar shock comedy over the years, most don't have what 'Pink Flamingos' has: honest-to-god freaks. I use that term endearingly. These are not actors (and by that, I mean their acting is just simply not very good) and they are not in a glossy Hollywood production that would allow them to fake what they're doing. No, these are people that Waters dug up and showcased on film, a joyful middle finger to anyone with a shred of dignity. Because these people are obviously real (the obese mother looks uncomfortably happy and content sitting in her baby carriage) and because the film's crude production doesn't allow for most of this to be faked (and things that are faked, like a series of murders, are very poorly executed), we can't take comfort in thinking it's only a movie. "Pink Flamingos" is an anarchy-fueled gut punch to decency. You just have to admire the nerve on the display.

At the same time, the movie's campy storyline and community theater acting manage to undercut much of the film's nastiness, keeping it possible to watch. The film may lack things like a decent story, but Waters and his cast bring a nice sense of self awareness to the table. They know they're being disgusting and they're having a grand 'ol time doing it. The appeal of the film lies in tapping into the weird joy of everyone involved -- the script feels like it was written around a series of escalating dares involving what everyone would and wouldn't do.

When all is said and done, is there a point to "Pink Flamingos" outside of it being shocking just for the sake of it? There are twinges of slight social commentary (Divine's trailer trash, blue collar family does take on a sociopath, apartment-dwelling upper class couple, after all), but I think the truth is that Waters discovered a basic truth: people like watching really, really disgusting things. The Internet may offer a daily smorgasbord of depravity, but 'Pink Flamingos' did it first, nearly forty years ago. Just as there is not point for people to watch certain Internet videos that I won't describe here because I don't want to lose my job, there is no point in watching 'Pink Flamingos' other than being able to say you've seen it. To say anything more about the film would be to give it too much credit. I can't help but think that John Waters would agree with that.

Next Week's Column: Well folks, we're just about ready to wrap this particular line-up of films. Next week, I'll take on a triple feature of Clint Eastwood westerns ('High Plains Drifter,' 'Pale Rider' and 'The Outlaw Josey Wales', to be specific) and that'll leave only one remaining film for the following week -- Fredrico Fellini's classic 'La Dolce Vita.' Voting will return next week with a brand new batch of movies to choose from!

Previous Entries:

'Mystery Train'
'Return to Oz'
'Altered States'
'On the Waterfront'
'Sex, Lies and Videotape'
'Ferris Bueller's Day Off'
'Death Wish'
'Cannibal Holocaust'
'The 39 Steps'
'Bicycle Thieves'
'Moulin Rouge'
'The Sound of Music'
'Rebel Without a Cause'
'A Matter of Life and Death'
'Julia'
'Bride of Frankenstein'
'The Monster Squad'
'Solaris (2002)'
'Solaris (1972)'
'Soylent Green'
'Silent Running'
'Colossus: The Forbin Project'
'Cocoon'
'Enemy Mine'
'A Boy and His Dog'
'The Thing From Another World'
'Forbidden Planet'
'Logan's Run'
'Starman'
'Strange Days'
'Tron'

Watch a Great Short Documentary About People in an Elevator

Jacob Hall — 2011-03-04T10:15:00+00:00

As much as we love to talk about rumors swirling around upcoming summer blockbusters or moan about potential prequels to our favorite science fiction movies, sometimes we've just got to make time for cinema that's not big and flashy, but rather emotionally resonant and deeply moving.

Do you have 24 minutes to spare? Okay, go ahead and close those other browser tabs and give this short documentary, titled 'Lift', a watch. You won't regret it.

Shot almost entirely from a single angle in the corner of an elevator in a London apartment building, the film chronicles what seems to be several weeks in the lives of the people who regularly come and go. As they get used to the filmmaker's continuous presence, the subjects begin to open up on camera, engage in conversation and talk about their lives. The result is sad, funny and often achingly beautiful.

Watch it after the jump.

Although all of the people in the doc make for wonderful subjects, you've just got to love the guy who keeps offering the filmmaker food every time he gets in the elevator. Each of these average people -- from the seemingly grumpy man who reveals an amazing childhood memory to the woman who's "never been in love" -- seem to have a story that's not only worth telling, but worth listening to. We're all the heroes of our own life. As one uncommonly on-point YouTube comment points out: "People are just wonderful, aren't they?"

The short is made available via Future Shorts, one of the world's leading distributors of short films and they have hundreds of films on their YouTube page and their website. Knowing that there's an outlet for short films that allows them to be potentially seen by millions of people just warms the heart; most short films vanish after their festival runs and that's if they get a run at all.

'Blade Runner' Prequels and Sequels on the Way (And How They Should Handle Them)

Jacob Hall — 2011-03-02T22:30:00+00:00

The problem with 'Blade Runner' emerging from the ashes of its initial critical and financial failure to become known as one of the greatest science fiction movies of all time (said without an iota of hyperbole, thank you very much), is that it runs the risk of becoming just another popular commodity, ready to be used and abused by the powers that be. Now that Ridley Scott's epic sci-fi film noir is officially the prettiest girl at the ball, everyone wants to get their hands on her.

So many others have tried, but it looks like Alcon Entertainment has succeeded: Variety reports that the production company is in final negotiations to secure film and TV rights to 'Blade Runner,' allowing them to do whatever they want with the franchise (man, 'Blade Runner' is a "franchise" now) short of remaking it. After all, this girl does have some measure of class.

You are forgiven if your initial reaction is one of abject horror -- How Dare They Tamper With This Masterpiece! -- it's only natural. Alcon's deal will allow them to play in the 'Blade Runner' sandbox, letting them produce prequels and sequels to the original 1982 film in any media. A brief perusal through science fiction film history will reveal many great movies having their reputations tarnished by both sequels ('Alien'!) and prequels ('Star Wars'!), so getting up in arms and raging into the internet feels like the only appropriate action.

It's tough to be optimistic in general, but nearly impossible to be optimistic when you examine the often nefarious machinations of Hollywood.Believe it or not, however, it is entirely possible to remain optimistic on the subject of further adventures in the 'Blade Runner' universe. It's tough, but let's go ahead and put on those rose-tinted glasses for just a moment, okay?

'Blade Runner' functions beautifully as a great, two-fisted noir tale, but what really separates it from its contemporaries is the universe in which it's set. The film's depiction of 2019 Los Angeles (surely they'll add a couple of decades to that date if they go ahead with future projects) manages to feel terrifyingly alien while being eerily prescient, a nightmarish exaggeration of our own world. There may be flying cars, space travel and fugitive robots on the loose, but it's the anti-Roddenberry vision of what we'll do to ourselves. The world is dirty, dark, overcrowded and polluted. New languages have emerged in every neighborhood and communication feels impossible. It's a world in which it's easy to get lost and easy to vanish in, a world teeming with so much desperate life that there must be a story worth telling on every street corner.

'Blade Runner' took this world and wove a film noir through it. What else can this world offer? What is it like to work in this world, to commute, to raise a family? What's it like to fall in love in this universe? What kind of movies do people watch? What happened to the education system? When will the robotic slaves known as Replicants finally take a stand and fight for their civil rights?

There is enough life in every shot of 'Blade Runner' to inform a hundred fascinating stories. If you're going to explore this universe through prequels and sequels, don't dwell on previously tread stories. Don't make a sequel with the same plot as the original film. Branch out. Explore life in a science world. Heck, Alcon, you have the option of taking this to television. Why not deliver the science fiction equivalent of The Wire?

Sadly, any 'Blade Runner' prequels and sequels we'll see will probably be fairly straightforward action films (it's not like noir is in style right now, anyway). However, Alcon should realize that 'Blade Runner' does not share the same audience as the common summer blockbuster. Going a little smarter, a litter darker and a little deeper can only prove beneficial.

Possible 'Dark Knight Rises' Plot Details Emerge

Jacob Hall — 2011-03-02T17:50:00+00:00

For a moment there, it looked like the 'Dark Knight Rises' rumor mill had finally run out of steam. You know you're grasping at straws when everyone gets noisy and excited when an actress (Anne Hathaway!) casually mentions the name of the character that we all knew she was playing (Catwoman!). However, Devin Faraci over at Badass Digest reports that he spoke with "a good source near the Batcamp" who was able to spill the beans on what may actually be going down plot-wise in what is sure to be the blockbuster event of 2012.

Well, if it turns out to be true...

As the article dutifully points out, director Christopher Nolan is no stranger to employing all kinds of internet derring-do and subterfuge to throw nosy movie nerds off the trail of what he's actually up to. If you want to remain completely in the dark though, go no further. Here there be potential (albeit broad) spoilers.

The villains in the film will represent the League of Shadows (also known in the comic book word as the League of Assassins), a mysterious organization of vigilante types who use their vast network of agents and assassins to secretly manipulate the world. Even if you're not a comic book geek, the name should ring a bell: Bruce Wayne almost joined them and eventually fought against them in 'Batman Begins', killing their leader, Ra's Al Ghul (AKA, Liam Neeson). In 'The Dark Knight Rises', the League will be controlled by his daughter, Talia Al Ghul (still apparently not cast) and Bane (Tom Hardy) will be her right-hand man. In comic lore, Talia and Batman developed a romance that led to her having his child, but that's a detail that feels unlikely to make it's way into the film (but who really knows at this point?).

Or none of that is true and Nolan is hiding behind a corner, giggling as we dissect his carefuly planted misinformation. We would never put that past him. Nolan is well known for hiding behind corners while people speculate about his future work.

The original post also has a few other tidbits you Bat-fans will surely be interested in (including a cool take on how Catwoman will function in the film), but what's most intriguing about this news is how Nolan seems to be rounding out his trilogy by tying everything back to the first film. The ultra-realistic, Michael Mann-inspired 'The Dark Knight' was itself a pretty drastic leap forward from the slightly more fantastical (emphasis on that "slightly") 'Batman Begins,' so it'll be interesting to see Nolan try to reconcile the loose story ends of the first film with the style and tone of the second. Seeing a more experienced Bruce Wayne deal with the repercussions of his actions from his first vigilante adventures should tie Nolan's story together into a pristine little package, allowing his three-part story to feel complete.

And then you can look forward to 'Untitled Batman Reboot' in 2015. You know that's coming.

Details Revealed for the New Spike Jonze/Charlie Kaufman Collaboration

Jacob Hall — 2011-03-02T09:45:00+00:00

We heard a few months back that director Spike Jonze and screenwriter Charlie Kaufman were were teaming up for a top secret film -- their third collaboration together after 1999's brilliant 'Being John Malkovich' and 2002's even more brilliant 'Adaptation' -- but today, Deadline not only has word that the project is in negotiations to be picked by Megan Ellison's Annapurna Pictures, they have the first details of what the film may be about.

Although the synopsis is about as bare-bones as a synopsis can be while still maintaining the title of "synopsis," it's a set-up that should prove tantalizing to fans of both Jonze and Kaufman: "...a satire about how world leaders gather to figure out all the seismic events that will take place in the world, from oil prices to wars that will be waged."

It's a premise that feels beautifully suited to Jonze's whimsical, freewheeling style and Kaufman's brainy, obtuse sense of humor. It also sounds like the kind of oddball project that would normally struggle to find support and financing, but Ellison, the heiress daughter of multi-billionaire Larry Ellison, has been using her powers for good lately, throwing her support behind a wide range of talented, unique filmmakers. She produced 'True Grit' for the Coen brothers, she's producing Andrew Dominik's next film, 'Cogan's Trade, she rescued John Hillcoat's troubled adaptation of 'The Wettest County in the World,' and, finally, she's getting into the Paul Thomas Anderson business. In other words, she's Hollywood's newest hero.

We last heard from Jonze about a year ago, when his robots-in-love short film 'I'm Here' played Sundance, and his previous feature was 2009's long-troubled-but-ultimately-beautiful 'Where the Wild Things Are.' Kaufman has kept busy too, winning an Oscar for writing the heartbreaking 'Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind' in 2004 and making his directorial debut in 2007 with the polarizing 'Synecdoche, New York.' Even though these two continue to make great work apart from each other, the sheer number of great moments from their work together automatically make this project one of our most anticipated movies of, well, ever.

Remember the unforgettable scene in 'Being John Malkovich' when John Malkovich discovers that people are using a mysterious tunnel to enter his brain and decides to try it out himself?

Or how about the sequence in 'Adaptation' where the character of Charlie Kaufman (played by Nicholas Cage) attends a screenwriting seminar held by script guru Robert McKee (a real guy, but played by Brian Cox) and gets a foul-mouthed earful about "truth" in storytelling?

If this new project has moments half as good as those, we're looking at an amazing treat.

Stars in Rewind: The 2011 Oscar Winners

Jacob Hall — 2011-02-28T19:00:00+00:00

Stars in Rewind is a feature that looks at what our favorite movie stars were doing before they were our favorite movie stars. You can find it here every other Monday.

We've all got to start somewhere.

You don't just wake up one morning, put on a tux, drive to the Kodak Theater and waltz up on stage to receive your little golden Oscar statuette without a long history of bit parts, embarrassing roles and forgotten work littering your past. Would Colin Firth, Natalie Portman, Melissa Leo and Christian Bale prefer that we forget some of the early building blocks that have led them to their current station in life? Probably. However, their status as Academy Award-winning thespians will surely cushion the blow of us taking a tour of their earliest work.

First, let's take a look at the acting debut of Melissa Leo, who took home Best Supporting Actress for her work in 'The Fighter'. The time? 1985. The show? The long-running daytime soap opera, 'All My Children.' The role? Linda Warner, who, in the scene below, exchanges nasty verbal barbs with Nina Cortlandt before the two of them trade blows in an epic (for daytime TV) catfight. This may not be the most honest, truthful work she's come to be known for, but it's soapy histrionics at their very best.

Check out that clip, as well as the debut work from Firth, Portman and Bale after the jump!

Before he was a go-to heart-throb for British romantic comedies, the ideal romantic lead for adaptations of austere 19th century novels and an Oscar-winner for 'The King's Speech', Colin Firth was the second lead in 1984's 'Another Country,' where he played Tommy Judd, a Marxist student who befriends his openly gay classmate, Guy Bennett (Rupert Everett).

An adaptation of an acclaimed play (which was itself loosely based on the early life of Soviet spy/British traitor Guy Burgess), 'Another Country' features Firth already doing what he does best: being ridiculously, awesomely British in every sense of the word. As young as Firth looks, his one-of-a-kind voice sounds the same as it always has.

Although Natalie Portman will forever be known for her Oscar winning performance as Nina Sayers in 'Black Swan', she played another Nina back in 1994. Although that was the year of her breakthrough performance in Luc Besson's action classic 'The Professional,' the thirty-minute student film 'Developing' was finished first, making it her official debut.

Rarely seen -- and unavailable on DVD or VHS -- the short features Portman battling puberty while trying to come to terms with her mother's breast cancer. Even at 13, you can already see the beginning of Portman's quiet, understated style, which would be so beautifully and horrifyingly subverted in 'Black Swan.'

Finally, we arrive at Batman himself, Christian Bale, now an Oscar winner for his work in 'The Fighter.' For a lot of movie fans, Bale seemingly appeared out of nowhere in the late '90s and early '00s with incredible work in films like 'Velvet Goldmine' and 'American Psycho,' but his career stretches back much further than that.

Before his breakthrough performance in Steven Spielberg's 'Empire of the Sun,' a 12-year-old Bale had a supporting turn in the TV miniseries 'Anastasia: The Mystery of Anna' as Alexei Nikolaevich, the only son of Emperor Nicholas II of Russia, who was killed alongside the rest of his family during the Russian Revolution of 1917. Alexei was a hemophiliac, proving that Bale's attraction to strained, sickly and incredibly thin characters has a very early origin.

Marathon Man: The Blaxploitation Essentials

Jacob Hall — 2011-02-25T22:10:00+00:00

(Welcome to Marathon Man: the monthly column where I examine a series of films and compare, contrast and analyze them until either your brain or mine explodes.)

Introduction

The term "blaxploitation" conjures up some very specific images for many movie fans. Afros. Poor production values. Awesome soundtracks. Sweet clothes. Cool-as-ice black people kicking the stuffing out of evil white people who have been been up to all kinds of no good.

A genre so easily parodied, so incredibly undervalued and so under-watched by modern audiences, it is often easy to forget why "Black Exploitation" films are not only a fascinating cinematic time capsule, but a massive cultural leap forward: black actors, often working with black filmmakers (although almost always financed by rich white guys) making films for black audiences. Although it's been argued that these violent, explicit films, with their depictions of African Americans as gangsters, pimps and drug dealers, ultimately did more harm than good, it's the first instance of the African American voice making itself heard in Hollywood, paving the way for a new generation of black filmmakers. They are, for better or worse, a cultural milestone.

February is Black History Month. While it may be more politically correct to honor that by holding a marathon of Spike Lee or Sidney Poitier films, a marathon of eight blaxploitation classics sure sounds like a lot of fun.

Marathon Prep

To design the line-up for this month's marathon, I turned to fellow Cinematical writer and blaxploitation expert Brian Salisbury. The decision was made to move away from silly, campy movies and instead concentrate (mostly) on films that are legitimately good and hold up in the face of low budgets and occasionally poor acting. Sadly, limiting this marathon to eight films meant a lot of interesting, famous films will be left out ('Dolemite and 'Foxy Brown' are probably going to be the two biggest omissions here).

My look at each film will be divided up into four sections: Our Titular Hero (an examination of the film's protagonist, whose name is usually the title of the film), Race Relations (how the film addresses the subject of race, if it does at all), Brian Says (where the ever-knowledgeable Brian will unleash a fun fact or opinion about the film your way) and ending with any of my lingering Thoughts on the film itself.

'Shaft' (1971), directed by Gordon Parks

Brian Says: "The gold standard. Shaft is often erroneously credit as the first blaxploitation film; that honor belongs to Melvin Van Peebles' nigh unwatchable 'Sweet Sweetback's Badasssss Song.' Melvin was fond of telling people that the original script for 'Shaft' was a run-of-the-mill detective story staring a white actor that was altered after the success of his film, but it was actually based on a novel about a black detective so the story doesn't hold much water."

Our Titular Hero: Let's take a look at the lyrics to Isaac Hayes' Academy Award winning theme song to 'Shaft' and see what we can learn. Is he a black private dick that's a sex machine to all the chicks? Yep -- and dick means cop. Keep your mind out of the gutter. Is he the man who would risk his neck for his brother man? Yeah, sure. Is he the cat that won't cop out when there's danger all about? Ya damn right! There's a reason Richard Roundtree's performance as rogue police officer John Shaft is so iconic -- he's just the epitome of cool, the very definition of a classic badass. He may not be as overtly flashy as other heroes in the marathon, but he's the template. He set the standard. He's Shaft, baby.

Race Relations: It's not so much that Shaft hates white people -- they're just big squares who don't know nothin' about anything. The few white people who aren't bumbling morons who shout at an apathetic Shaft from behind a police chief's desk are the Mafia goons who turn out the be the true villains of the film. The racial politics of 'Shaft' are dialed down compared to other blaxploitation films, but the concept of a potential "war" between white and black gangsters does a fine job realistically outlining the racial tensions of New York circa 1971. Oh, and there's the bit where Shaft recruits a small army of black militants to take on the Mafia in the bloody climactic shoot-out, because if you're going to kill whitey, that's how you do it.

Thoughts: 'Shaft' is all about attitude, a good thing since the film's plotting is a little muddled and it's "cop-on-the-edge" storyline is something we've seen a thousand time before and since. In its opening moments, the film shows us exactly where we are: New York city of the early 1970s, dirty and gray, but teeming with life and a dangerous vibrancy. Shaft patrols the streets, vaguely amused by his surroundings, jaywalking across a busy street and flipping the bird to whoever honks at him. Man, Shaft just doesn't give a sh*t. His ethics are loose, at best. He never listens to authority. He manages to blend his police work with private jobs, working behind the backs of criminals and the police. He should be a nasty, despicable piece of dirt, but Roundtree is so charming and the world of 'Shaft' so unpleasant, that we just can't blame the guy. Shaft just does what he has to do. This is survival. In the end, the cops win, the black crooks win, the white mobsters lose (because they're all very dead) and most of all, Shaft wins. It may not be pretty, but when something works, you've just got to keep on doing it.

'Trouble Man' (1972), directed by Ivan Dixon

Brian Says: "One of the better, lesser-touted blaxploitation films. Marvin Gaye provided the soundtrack, which is fantastic."

Our Titular Hero: It's easy to see that the hero of 'Trouble Man' only goes by "Mr. T" and immediately think of the fool pitier who fought Rocky Balboa and drove the A-Team's van. There truly couldn't be a more unfair point of reference. Mr. T may very well be the greatest blaxploitation hero of this marathon, a character who, while certainly not deep, is infinitely fascinating. Using a pool hall as a Base of operations, Mr. T specializes in "fixing" things. Sometimes that involves giving a troublesome youth a good talking to. Sometimes that involves roughing up a city official. No matter where he goes, he has the respect of the criminal underworld as well the cops. He's on the level: he's the best ally you'll ever have unless you double cross him -- then he becomes the deadliest enemy you could possibly imagine. Most blaxploitation heroes are thoroughly one-dimensional, with even the best of them just being singers or retired football players playing a variation on themselves. Robert Hooks' Mr. T is a real performance, a tough guy that may not be the biggest or the strongest, but he's always the smartest the guy in the room. And he always wins.

Race Relations: One of the driving forces in every blaxploitation movie is the idea of our African American heroes operating against or entirely outside of white society. It's an angry depiction, one that has more truth to it than many modern people may want to admit and to see a black hero stand up to oppressive white gangsters or corrupt police officers must have felt cathartic. Which is what makes the almost total lack of significant racial bias in 'Trouble Man' interesting. Sure, Mr. T's pool hall seems to exclusively cater to black players and he definitely throws a "honky" or two around, but he seems to value loyalty far higher than skin color. White or black, you're a dead man if you screw with him.

Thoughts: Although buoyed by an unforgettable lead performance, 'Trouble Man' is often painfully slow, moving at a snail's pace when it just begs to take off. A shame, since the nuts and bolts of the story are simply incredible (and unlike so many others in the marathon, not implausible) and the film itself is far better shot than many of its contemporaries. In a genre where campy excess often reigns supreme, 'Trouble Man's attempt to be a real movie is admirable and refreshing. Not to mention the action, which is stripped down and simple compared to the what was to come, but is thrilling in a real, visceral way, capable of inspiring gasps instead of guffaws. If most blaxploitation films are a "black" take on a popular genre, this is undeniably a riff on film noir. Strange, though, how this "riff" manages to capture that sense of danger that permeates classic noir, something that most modern attempts at the genre have failed to get right. Whether by accident or design, 'Trouble Man' is noir to its bones and Mr. T a perfect update on the film noir anti-hero. The flaws of 'Trouble Man' feel minute. What a great movie.

Interlude: Two movies in and I'm already thrown for a loop. Aren't all blaxploitation movies supposed to be wacky, over-the-top campfests? Where are the hanging boom mics and wooden performances? Heck, both of those movies were legitimately good! Maybe these won't be quite as hokey as I was expecting -- oh, wait. The next one is 'Blacula.'

'Blacula' (1972), directed by William Crain

Brian Says: "Not only a great blaxploitation film, 'Blacula' has flashes of legitimate horror nuance. The animated sequence at the opening of the film is phenomenal. The actor who plays Blacula, William Marshall, would later enjoy great success as The King of Cartoons on 'Pee-Wee's Playhouse.' "

Our Titular Hero: Yes, his name is Blacula, as in "Black Dracula." You don't even have to make a joke about it -- the punchline is already there. It's a silly name for what should be a silly character. Emphasis on that "should be," because William Marshall's work as Blacula is something to behold, a towering performance filled with nuance and emotion that's the perfect example of a great actor using his natural gravitas to elevate the entire movie around him. Like many classic movie monsters, Blacula wishes to be normal. He wants love and companionship. He wants to be normal and his curse is a chain around his neck and each day as a vampire only further erodes his soul, making him less human. Yeah, sure, laugh all you want at the existence of a movie called 'Blacula,' but don't you dare mock Marshall's work and the bare, naked honesty he brings to this suffering character. It's hard to find a performance this good in Academy Award winning films.

Race Relations: In the opening scene of 'Blacula,' an African prince named Mamuwalde visits Count Dracula's castle and requests his assistance in helping end the slave trade in Africa. It turns out that Dracula is not only an evil vampire, he's a complete and total racist who curses our hero to a lifetime of being an undead bloodsucker, dubbing him Blacula. His most intense racial moment actually comes in the far superior sequel 'Scream Blacula Scream.' Cornered by two black pimps armed with switchblades, Blacula chastises them for resorting to a life of crime, implying that they're still just slaves after all of these years. It's a surprisingly powerful moment, delivered with a terrifying energy by Marshall, that helps elevate the character into something more than a B-movie monster. Then he kills them, of course.

Thoughts: It goes without saying that 'Blacula' isn't in the least bit scary. Asking a blaxploitation horror movie to accomplish that would be like asking another to tell a fast-paced, competent story -- it's just not gonna' happen. Still, like the best of the genre, 'Blacula' succeeds thanks to its wonderful leading performance and several coffin-loads of charm (See what I did there? Coffin-loads?!) The film suffers when it switches focus to the typical "black cop on the edge" who's investigating the mysterious string of vampiric murders that have been popping up all over town (of course he has a white, jerk-ish captain who tries, unsuccessfully, to lay down the law), but whenever Blacula himself is on screen, the movie enters its zone. Marshall is effortlessly charming and likeable, easy to sympathize when he's battling his inner demons. When he enters kill-mode (and oh, Blacula enters kill-mode a lot, especially in the climax, where he seems to kill most of the police force), he's a physically imposing monstrosity, with Marshall making full use of his massive, muscular build. Anti-heroes as good as Blacula are a rare commodity, indeed.

'Slaughter' (1972), directed by Jack Starrett

Brian Says: "The most successful attempt by the genre to create a blaxploitation Bond. Jim Brown made a name for himself as an unstoppable NFL running back before he was ever in films. The theme song for 'Slaughter' rivals that of 'Shaft' as best in blaxploitation and was creatively "borrowed" by Quentin Tarantino as the introduction music for his Nazi-killing Hugo Stiglitz (a name he also borrowed from exploitation) in 'Inglourious Basterds.'"

Our Titular Hero: Jim Brown is probably not an actor with considerable range, but you'd be hard pressed to find a role that fits him better than that of Slaughter, a former green beret out to avenge the murder of his father. A persistent action hero is a dime a dozen, but Slaughter is a special case. If you had a role in harming his family, he will kill you. Think that plane is going to save you? It won't. Think fleeing south of the border will save you? It won't. Think retreating into your massive lair with dozens of armed guards will save you? Take a guess. Nothing will stop this guy -- look at his friggin' name! As tough as Slaughter is, Brown imbues the character with a quiet dignity. After all, the man's a soldier, not a gangster. Sure, he'll kill all of the bad guys and seduce all of the ladies, but you'll never once hear him brag about it. He's a professional. He does what he's trained to do, he does it well and he goes home. You've got to respect a guy like that. As Billy Preston's theme song says "Slaughter's going to blow your mind, Slaughter does not waste his time."

Race Relations: If you were to take a step back and take in everything you see in blaxploitation movies as pure, unadulterated fact (not recommended, by the way), you'd realize that most of the evil in the world is committed is not just committed by white people, but by Italian white people. I'm not just talking about Italian mobsters, I'm talking about the corrupt Italian FBI agents who threaten to send you to prison unless you do their dirty work. Of course, once the white Italian sidekick who accompanies you on your mission sees how effective your punch first, blow 'em up later methods are, he will be won over by you and become a valuable ally. See? Martin Luther King Jr. was right. We are all capable of change.

Thoughts: 'Slaughter' is a James Bond movie. Albeit, a low-budget, less polished James Bond movie starring a former American football player instead of a British gentleman, but a James Bond movie nonetheless. It has all of the proper elements: a globetrotting hero sent to an exotic country to take down a criminal mastermind, a lot of suave investigation, an encounter with the lead baddie in a high stakes casino (complete with Slaughter himself in a tux!) and a final raid on the villain's fortress compound. Heck, 'Slaughter' so effortlessly incorporates Bond elements that it's not surprising to note that the next Bond film, 'Live and Let Die,' was itself a blaxploitation riff. As a film, 'Slaughter' is one of the strongest films in the marathon, one of the rare films in this genre to maintain its crazy intensity throughout with very few lulls. Let's spell that out: at the fifteen minute mark, Slaughter is battling an airplane with his car. That's act one. Before he goes to South America. Before he really starts to bring the hurt to the evil mobsters that iced his father. Although not as well made as other films in this marathon (which, considering the genre, is saying a lot, really), in terms of raw content, it's a completely upper tier kind of amazing and one of the pinnacles of blaxploitation.

Interlude: By this point in the marathon, I'm usually feeling a little woozy, but 'Slaughter' managed to really wake me up. What a crazy movie. That movie is like 90 minutes of pure concentrated caffeine, filtered through testosterone, human blood and gun powder. I could watch these things all day.

Continue to Part 2 of the Blaxploitation Essentials.

Marathon Man: The Blaxploitation Essentials Part 2

Jacob Hall — 2011-02-25T21:31:00+00:00

Return to Part 1 of the Blaxploitation Essentials.

'Coffy' (1973), directed by Jack Hill

Brian Says: "Released by Roger Corman's American International Pictures, the home of some of the best blaxploitation ever made, 'Coffy' made Pam Grier a star. AIP opted to make 'Coffy' over another blaxploitation film: 'Cleopatra Jones.' 'Cleopatra Jones' ended up making less and costing more. Interesting tidbit: the mobster's house, featured at the end of the film, is actually the home of American Western icon Roy Rogers."

Our Titular Hero: Coffy (the legendary Pam Grier) is an operating room nurse by day and "the baddest one-chick hit-squad that ever hit the town" by night. After her little sister overdoses on drugs supplied by evil Mafia types (of course), she infiltrates a prostitution ring (using the worst ever fake Jamaican accent in Hollywood's long history of horrible fake Jamaican accents), gets into a massive topless food fight with a bunch of other hookers and finds herself promptly found out and captured. This is a pretty big snafu on her part, but she more than makes up for her poor planning by turning things around and effortlessly wiping out every one of those nasty mobsters. Coffy doesn't have the brash confidence of many of Grier's other characters (a trait that would go on to define her) and her lack of a decent revenge plan is irritating, but when she smashes her car through the front door of a house to take down a Mafia henchman, all is forgiven.

Race Relations: Like in 'Slaughter', the villains in 'Coffy' are nasty mobsters, but it's a bit more of an international crew. You've got your Italian ringleader, your brutish Russian (played by Sid Haig!) and the cowboy hat wearing Texan type. We also can't forget the one-eyed, silent henchman, whose sole character trait is that he has one eye, so you know that he's especially evil. Like most white villains in these movies, they're big stereotypes (but let's face it, white people deserve it), but 'Coffy' also finds time to condemn black community leaders who let themselves be taken in, bribed and corrupted by The Man. Coffy's answer to such traitors? A shotgun blast.

Thoughts: 'Coffy's not exactly what I'd call a good movie, but damn, it's a lot of fun. It's never boring and often hilarious and completely worth watching, but certainly not good in the traditional sense of the word. Like so many exploitation movies, there are a number of amazing moments, but all of them are separated by large chunks of nothing much at all. The film gets off to a roaring start, with Coffy seducing and executing two local gangsters, but there's a good twenty minutes of padding, most of it preaching about social justice, until the next great moment (the above mentioned topless food fight, which has to be seen to be believed). The fact that 'Coffy' seems to have a genuine desire to expose the drug problems facing lower class black youth is interesting, but it's essentially canceled out by the ludicrous amount of nudity and violence that follows. I'm not complaining -- you will certainly never me complain about a film containing too much violence or nudity -- it's this odd juxtaposition that makes this entire genre so darn endearing.

'Truck Turner' (1974), directed by Jonathan Kaplan

Brian Says: "Isaac Hayes actually auditioned for the title role in 'Shaft' and, though he didn't get the part, impressed the filmmakers so much that they asked him to do the score and he eventually landed the role of bounty hunter 'Truck Turner.' Yaphet Kotto, in one of his many blaxploitation appearances, is sensational."

Our Titular Hero: Truck Turner is played by Isaac Hayes, which may be all you need to know about him. He's a bounty hunter (you can tell because he carries Dirty Harry's gun) with a heart of gold (you can tell because he has a pet cat). Hayes really can't act, but he makes up for that little setback by being so full of incredible personality that you really don't notice. When he's not gunning down rogue pimps or participating in extended car chases (extended because Turner is sort of gleefully incompetent despite being a crack shot), he's using fried chicken to win back the heart of his estranged girlfriend -- while Hayes himself performs on the soundtrack. As it was pointed out to me by a friend: "Isaac Hayes provides the soundtrack to his own sexual encounter." How cool is that?!

Race Relations: Most of Truck's adversaries are black pimps out for his head so they can claim the lady stable of a fellow pimp Truck recently iced (Seriously! The pimp army is even led by Yaphet Kotto!), but there is an incredibly uncomfortable scene early on in the film when Truck and his partner attempt to enter a military base to apprehend a wanted pedophile. There's an awkward, racially charged scene with the gate guards. There's an even more awkward, even more racially charged scene between Truck and the base commander. It all culminates with Truck beating the tar out of the (white) pedophile himself. In the world of Truck Turner, white folks are either pedophiles or harboring pedophiles. No word on whether or not they're Italian.

Thoughts: In short, 'Truck Turner' is kinda' awesome. In long: 'Truck Turner' suffers from the various problems that also plague most blaxploitation movies, namely sluggish pacing, cheap camerawork and a lead actor who, despite his best efforts, isn't playing a real character. It may not have the crazy action of 'Slaughter' or the intense personal focus of 'Trouble Man,' but 'Truck Turner' has a one-eyed pimp. It has a prostitute cattle call. It has the greatest surprise shotgun death scene of all time. It has Issac Hayes bribing his girlfriend with a kitten. It has a Yaphet Kotto flinging elderly people out of wheelchairs and using children as human shields during a hospital shoot-out that would be the craziest hospital shoot-out of all time if 'Hard Boiled' didn't exist. What 'Truck Turner' lacks in the broad strokes, it more than makes up with the little details. Whatta' movie.

Interlude: Despite 'Truck Turner's efforts to jar my mind into action using the soulful power of Isaac Hayes, I'm officially starting to feel the wear and tear of this marathon. You reach a point where it all starts to blend together: whether it's cops, vampires or bounty hunters, all of these movies are about revenge and sex. Not that I'm complaining. I heart revenge and sex.

'Boss Nigger' (1975), directed by Jack Arnold

Brian Says: "Eventually re-released with its less racially tumultuous title 'Boss,' 'Boss Nigger' is basically 'Blazing Saddles' with less intentional comedy. Fred "The Hammer" Williamson had three rules that filmmakers had to follow if they wanted him in their movie: 1.) You can't kill him 2.) He always wins. 3.) He always gets the girl. Considering the screenplay was written by Williamson himself, his first, those rules are unsurprisingly adhered to."

Our Titular Hero: Yes, the title is the character's name. Yes, I will do my best to not repeat it, but we'll deal with that in a moment. What can be said about the titular hero, a black bounty hunter operating in the Old West who rides into a lawless town, takes up the mantle of sheriff and proceeds to kick ass and take names? Well, he's played by Fred "The Hammer" Williamson, so you know that he's kind of awesome, but he's also a bit of a jerk -- he changes all of the laws, locks up anyone he possibly can for minor offenses and pockets their bail money. His shuffling of the system also gets a ton of innocent (at least as innocent as stupid racist white folks can be in a movie like this) people killed. However, Williamson's inherent charm wins the day and we can't help but love this guy. After all, maybe he has a right to a little casual revenge after a lifetime of slavery.

Race Relations: The DVD for this film opens with a quote from Williamson himself, who wrote the film as well as starred in it. He admits that he used the slur in the title because he knew its sensationalism would lead to bigger box office, but he also asks us to note what happens to everyone who calls him that word in the film. And note it I did: they're shot, arrested, beaten up, stabbed, ridiculed, humiliated and generally treated like the scum they are, especially when compared next to the undiluted cool of Williamson. Although this film is ostensibly a comedy, playing as a parody of westerns and other blaxploitation films, there is an underlying anger to the whole thing, a sense that the only way to fight racism is to respond with physical force. Of course, that may be reading too much into it -- after all, snobby racists getting thrown behind bars by their new black sheriff is surefire recipe for yuks.

Thoughts: Let's get this started right. Watch the trailer and listen to the theme song. Just don't do it at work and make sure you have headphones on. I'm making you do this because it's one of the best trailers ever cut and the song will not leave your head for days (just don't sing it in public). The trailer does a fine job selling you on what you're in for - a ridiculously silly movie that never takes itself too seriously and is a helluva lot of fun if you can get past the title. Heck, it would make a fine double feature with the incredibly similar 'Blazing Saddles' (which came a year earlier). As expected, it has its fair share of rough patches and it's sloppily made, but Williamson, looking thoroughly modern with his black leather coat, carries this film with impeccable tough guy grace. It's difficult to put this one up on any kind of pedestal, but it has a nice spot in the "I Can't Believe This Movie Exists" hall of fame.

'JD's Revenge' (1976), directed by Arthur Marks

Brian Says: "Of the films on this list, this is the most legitimately well-done. The story is compelling and the performance from lead actor Glynn Turman is unbelievably good; not surprising, as he got his start in theater playing opposite Sidney Poitier. Look for a standout supporting performance from future Oscar-winner Lou Gossett Jr."

Our Titular Hero: What we've got here is a double header of a protagonist. On one hand, he's Isaac, a mild mannered law student with a loving girlfriend and a part-time job driving a taxi. On the other other hand, he's possessed by the ghost of JD Walker, a slightly evil gangster who's thirty years in the grave. On occasion, JD will take over his host's body, commencing a spree that includes rape, knife fighting, terrorizing old ladies and lots of fedora wearing, all in the name of taking down the man who killed JD back in the day. Naturally, Isaac's friends find his peculiar behavior off-putting, putting our nice guy protagonist between a rock a hard place. Glynn Turman's work straddles a fine line, managing to be over-the-top without going overboard, letting Isaac's transformation into the brutal JD play as equally horrifying and hilarious.

Race Relations: Isaac is an anomaly among blaxploitation heroes in that he's not a pimp, gangster, drug dealer or cop -- he's a normal guy, pursuing a higher education and involved in a healthy relationship. He's a hard worker, a genuinely good guy. Then the ghost of JD gets involved, transforming him into one of the darkest and meanest characters of the marathon. Is this a commentary on African American youths being pulled into a life of crime despite their best efforts to escape the ghetto? Probably not. This is the rare blaxploitation movie that concentrates solely on the mechanics of its plot without a single notable tangent on race.

Thoughts: After a rough first half hour, 'JD's Revenge' gets real good, real quick. While it lacks the rough and tumble craziness of a 'Slaughter' or a 'Truck Turner,' it more than makes up for that by being a legitimately fine film that relies on stellar performances and a twisting, exciting story to keep things interesting. Is it safe to say that this is proof that blaxploitation didn't vanish, but rather grew up, evolved and became absorbed by the mainstream? It's a bit of a double-edged sword to say that 'JD's Revenge' could've been remade entirely with white actors without dulling its impact; one one hand, that's a testament to the film's raw power, but on the other hand, it's evidence that the weird blaxploitation energy born out of pure anger in the early 1970s was on its way out. Still, if you're going to go out, you better go out in style -- wearing a fedora, twirling a switch blade and dicing some sucka' to pieces.

Conclusions and Such

Marathon Ranking:

1. 'Slaughter'
2. 'Truck Turner'
3. 'Trouble Man'
4. 'JD's Revenge'
5. 'Blacula'
6. 'Boss Nigger'
7. 'Shaft'
8. 'Coffy'

Best Blaxploitation Hero: This was an incredibly tough choice. This could easily be Blacula or Slaughter, but I've got to give it to 'Trouble Man's Mr. T, who eschews macho posturing and delivers a true thinking man's action hero, a character that I wish had gotten a series of films.

Worst Blaxploitation Hero: Sorry, Pam Grier, but Coffy ain't no Foxy Brown. She's pretty weak sauce as far as tough blaxploitation chicks go.

Most Interesting Racial Commentary: If there's one thing I learned from this marathon, it's that you shouldn't turn to blaxploitation films for thoughtful commentary on race. However, I'll give this award to 'Boss Nigger' for having the raw nerve to tackle this not only head-on, but in a silly, comedic fashion.

Most Uncomfortable Racial Commentary: The racist soldiers and the pedophile at the beginning of 'Truck Turner' provide easily the squirmiest moment of the entire marathon.

Best Theme Song: Yeah, the theme from 'Shaft' is iconic. Yeah, the theme from 'Slaughter' kicks ass. But did you listen to the theme from 'Boss Nigger'? Because it not only wins the day, it wins every day.

Just How Awesome Are Black People: Very awesome! Superfly TNT!

Just How Horrible Are White People: Very horrible! Whitey poisonin' the neighborhoods!

Marathon High Point: As tempted as I am to give this to 'Slaughter's amazing car versus plane chase, no scene gave me more pure delight than 'Truck Turner's climactic hospital shoot-out, which gives Yaphet Kotto his greatest death scene of all time (and considering how often Yaphet Kotto has been killed in the movies, that's saying a lot).

Marathon Low Point: This one is unfair, because even the weakest of these movies still manges to be a ton of fun, but I'd have to say minutes 11-35 of 'Coffy,' where the film stops dead in its tracks to deliver nothing but mind-numbing exposition.

(And while I'm here, one final thanks to Brian Salisbury, whose expertise and DVD collection made this marathon possible. Be sure to check out his own reviews of blaxploitation classics over at Film School Rejects.)

Return to Part 1 of the Blaxploitation Essentials.

Previous Marathons:

Eight Versions of 'A Christmas Carol'
The 'Harry Potter' Series
The 'Saw' Series
The 'A Nightmare on Elm Street' Series

The Mind-Blowing Art of Foley Sound (Video)

Jacob Hall — 2011-02-24T15:15:00+00:00

It's almost become a cliché to rant and rave about just how important sound is to a film, but then a video like this comes around and reminds us all that there simply isn't enough wild praise to lavish on the mad geniuses that somehow manage to breath true life into a series of photographs projected in rapid motion onto a large screen. Anyone who has seen a work-in-progress print of a movie without finished sound can tell you that -- despite film being a visual medium -- it's up to the sound guys to ease you into the world of the film.

The subject of this all-too-short behind-the-scenes portrait is Gary Hecker, a Foley artist whose filmography may very well make your brain explode. His job is simple in concept, but amazingly complex in execution: He has to look at the finished film and recreate every single sound in the film, from footsteps to horse hooves to crashing cars. As you will see in the video, it's not a simple task, and Hecker truly has to "perform" to achieve each and every sound to give it proper authenticity. Watching him slowly "build" the sounds of a horse riding past the camera for a brief sequence in Ridley Scott's 'Robin Hood' is a sight to behold. This is real movie magic.

If you care about the art of film production in any way, this is five minutes worthy of your surely valuable time. Check it out after the jump.

SoundWorks Collection: Gary Hecker -- Veteran Foley Artist, from Michael Coleman on Vimeo.

(Via Neatorama)

Science Proves That Movies Are Getting Worse

Jacob Hall — 2011-02-24T13:00:00+00:00

Between the depressing state of last year's mainstream releases and that spectacular Mark Harris piece on the death of storytelling in Hollywood, movie fans have every right to be down in the dumps. While we all complain and moan about how movies seem to be getting worse with every passing year, only The Moki Blog was crazy and/or smart enough to build a complex chart (see it after the jump) examining this phenomenon in ridiculous detail.

The chart takes the 20 most popular films of each year for the past 20 years and reflects the film's box office (how large the circle is on the chart), critical reception (the color of the circle) and how polarizing the film was to audiences at large (the circle's placement on the vertical axis). The result? Yep, movies do seem to be getting steadily worse.

Whether or not the final chart is scientifically sound is a debate we'll leave to the smartest among us, but in the meantime feel free to strap on your lab coat, break out your thinking cap and dramatically whip off your glasses to show how serious the situation is as you look over these findings.

A few stray observations after the jump...

1. In addition to reflecting the declining quality of popular cinema, the chart also depicts how film fans have developed a true "love it or hate it" mentality, leaving nothing to the middle ground. While films in the early 1990s seem tightly clustered, the films of the last couple of years sprawl all over the chart. As Hollywood becomes afraid of medium budgeted, middle-of-the-road films, sensible reactions from audiences become more and more rare.

2. The only truly deplored film that isn't in any way polarizing is 1997's 'Batman and Robin', a movie totally worthy of such a dubious honor. Meanwhile, the first truly polarizing movie prior to 2008 was 1999's 'The Blair Witch Project.' The least polarizing film of the past two decades? 'The Shawshank Redemption', because no one hates 'The Shawshank Redemption.'

3. Small-budgeted films seem to be better received and less polarizing to audiences, while massive blockbusters with built-in fanbases tend to earn both extreme support and extreme opposition. The two least polarizing blockbusters were 'The Dark Knight' and 'Toy Story 3.'

What do you see in the chart? Make use of our hand dandy comments section and let us know!

D.J. Caruso to Direct 'Preacher' (Plus 4 Things You Need to Know About the Series)

Jacob Hall — 2011-02-22T15:15:00+00:00

Remember back when Garth Ennis and Steve Dillon's classic comic book series 'Preacher' was going to be an HBO series overseen by 'Ghost Rider' director Mark Steven Johnson? Remember how that fell apart and Oscar-winning director Sam Mendes stepped up and took the reins with every intention of taking the story to the big screen? Well, that was before he was offered the next James Bond film. Now, there's a new name attached: D.J. Caruso, the man behind 'Disturbia,' 'Eagle Eye' and the recent 'I Am Number Four.'

Although not a new rumor, the director beat all of the trades to the official announcement himself, letting the world know via his Twitter feed (and Collider confirms it):

"My deal just closed on Preacher. Going back to the dark side and pretty f*cking pumped!"

Dark side, indeed. Although it was one of the most acclaimed comic books of the 1990s, 'Preacher' is not tame stuff, somehow finding the time and energy to offend anyone who is capable of being offended. To put it mildly, it's definitely a niche title. If you're new to the series, here's what you need to know.

1. The story
'Preacher' is the story of Jesse Custer, a small-town Texas preacher who finds himself possessed by a mysterious force called Genesis, the result of an affair between an angel and a demon. This gives him the ability to speak with "the word of God," meaning he can command any living thing to do what he says. Teaming up with his estranged assassin girlfriend and his hard-drinking Irish vampire buddy, he goes on an epic quest to track down God, who has abandoned heaven, and make him pay for all that he's done wrong.

2. 'Preacher' is wildly offensive in ways both childish and thoughtful
The series is filled with Ennis's ribald sense of humor, so there's certainly no shortage of sex, poop and vomit jokes. It's also excessively violent, often uncomfortably so, with Ennis often managing to mine pitch-dark comedy from characters being maimed in horrible ways. As if that wasn't enough, the series' stance on religion will undoubtedly be a major turn-off for a lot of folks, who certainly won't want to see a movie where the heroes are out to make God answer for abandoning his creation. Finally, Ennis finds time to piss off those who may be OK with an ultra-violent, black-humored comic series with an anti-religion slant by embracing a hardcore, right-wing political mindset that would make John Wayne proud. It makes sense: Our hero is routinely watched over and advised by the ghost of Wayne throughout the series. There is no way to not be uncomfortable at some point, which is kind of a stunning achievement.

3. 'Preacher' is epic
Seriously epic. As in "traveling all across the country as well as the world while occasionally venturing into heaven and hell" epic. There's no way to capture this entire story in one film, so how they'll adapt it remains a big mystery. As the story opens up, more villains are introduced (including the patron saint of murderers and an organization called The Grail that secretly runs the governments of the world and protects the bloodline of Jesus Christ) and the scope widens, raising the stakes of the story to an impossibly high level.

4. 'Preacher' is Americana, pure and simple.
Because he's Irish, Ennis is telling a truly American story through the lens of his childhood love of westerns. The "America" of 'Preacher' is not America as it actually is, but the America of John Ford, a vast, beautiful land where anything can happen and anyone can achieve anything if they work hard enough. Although the series is renowned for being dirty and distasteful, many ignore this aspect of 'Preacher,' possibly leading them to miss the entire point. Ultimately, this is the story of the friendship between our three leading characters and how their relationship (one of the strangest ever concocted, mind you) could have only been formed in America. If Caruso and his creative team understand this, they should be golden.

Hopefully, the series will make it through the adaptation process intact -- to dilute the 'Preacher' is to miss the point. If done right, it will have the rare honor of being something we truly haven't seen before on the big screen. Hopefully, Caruso and producers Neal Moritz and Jason Netter realize this and have the nerve to do justice by this property. Of course, there's always the chance that the entire project could fall apart again -- but isn't the third time the charm?

Feel free to start doom-saying and/or fancasting (which one of you is going to say Nathan Fillion first?) in the comments below.

Zack Snyder's 'Superman' Movie to Add Kevin Costner? (UPDATED)

Jacob Hall — 2011-02-21T15:55:00+00:00

UPDATE: Latino Review has chimed in with word from an inside source and it looks like Costner is up for the role of Jonathan "Pa" Kent. Of all possible choices, it's definitely the most obvious, but hey, you've got to go with what works.

With shooting set to begin sooner rather than later, rumors concerning Zack Snyder's reboot of 'Superman' continue to swirl in. First, Henry Cavill landed the coveted role of the Man of Steel himself. Then it was all but confirmed that one of the film's villains would be the Kryptonian superwoman, Ursa. Now, Deadline brings us a vague but interesting rumor regarding who may be joining the cast next: the one and only Kevin Costner.

And that's it. The role is unspecified. Whether or not Costner has been approached or not is unspecified. Whether or not Costner is interested is unspecified. All we know is that he's a candidate for a "key role."

What could this "key role" be? What character in the Superman mythos could Costner pull off?

Once upon a time, Costner himself, with his good looks and manly jawline, could have played Superman, so maybe he could be Superman's father, Jor-El, in flashbacks? However, he's also one of the quintessential all-American actors of the past few decades, so a role like Jonathan Kent, Superman's adoptive Earth father, would fit him like a glove. Maybe they're going slightly left field with the casting and he's wanted for the role of Perry White, editor at the Daily Planet and boss to mild mannered reporter Clark Kent? He's certainly the right age to play a seasoned newspaper man.

Of course, maybe the rumors are false, the evil General Zod is in the film and Costner will be brushing off his old 'Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves' accent to play him? Um, on second thought, let's pretend that thought never arose.

With shooting set to begin in a few months, this is one rumor that doesn't have time to be dragged out for too long. 'Superman: Man of Steel' is set for a December 2012 release, an eternity for us fans, but a blink of an eye for the folks scrambling to get the film made.

Man Gets Shot for Eating Popcorn Too Loudly During 'Black Swan' (UPDATED)

Jacob Hall — 2011-02-21T13:30:00+00:00

UPDATE: The original article at The Telegraph had its facts a little muddled. It turns out that it may have been the 27-year-old who was the shooter and the loud food muncher, meaning that the victim was just a poor guy standing up to a noisy moviegoer. (It's still a crazy -- and sad -- story.) The Register has the update. Thanks to the reader who pointed this out to us.

At the famed Alamo Drafthouse theater in Austin, Texas, there is a strict policy regarding disruptive moviegoers. If someone alerts a manager to your talking, cell phone using or in-any-way noisy activity, you are given one warning. There is no second warning. After that, you're kicked out of the building without a refund. It's a harsh but reliable system that ensures the quality of your film-watching experience.

But they have nothing on one disgruntled movie lover, who decided that a fellow audience member at a screening of 'Black Swan' was eating his popcorn far too loudly and shot him to death, therefore teaching him a valuable lesson about being respectful in a movie theater.

The incident occurred in Latvia -- which is surprising, since this whole thing is one bottle of Jack away from being a quintessential American experience -- where gun crime is a rarity. The exact details of this fundamental disagreement in theater etiquette are unknown at this time, but the violent exchange between the armed-and-angry 27-year- old and the 42-year-old popcorn muncher occurred when the film was over and the credits were rolling. The assailant, like 'Black Swan's Nina Sayers, had evidently been driven to the edge of his sanity.

Although movie theaters aren't typically seen as a place to go when you want to get shot to death, they're not completely free of the occasional act of violence. Most of it -- fist fights, minor riots, flashes of gang violence -- remains unreported, but ask any theater employee to regale you with tales and they'll gladly give you an earful. Sometimes, though, the story will explode onto the national scene. In 2008, a Philadelphia man quickly tired of the talkative family sitting in front of him during a screening of 'The Curious Case of Benjamin Button', so he pulled a gun and shot the father in the arm to shut them up -- a method that ensured their silence but also his incarceration.

Were these people in the right for shooting their fellow moviegoers? No, of course not -- this is a classic case of overkill (pardon the pun). However, if you're one of those jerks who likes to get chatty or whip out your cell phone during a movie, you should take immediate note: someone may very well shoot you for it. You have been warned.

'Transformers: Dark of the Moon' and 'Cars 2' TV Spots, Plus a Clip from 'Hesher'

Jacob Hall — 2011-02-21T11:00:00+00:00

Another day, another round-up of clips and trailers for your viewing pleasure! Today, let's take a look a new trailers for 'Transformers: Dark of the Moon' and 'Cars 2' (both with which, rather appropriately, premiered during the Daytona 500) as well as a clip from the indie flick 'Hesher,' starring Joseph Gordon Levitt and Natalie Portman, which will be making its way to SXSW in a couple of weeks. Let's start with the biggest and work our way down, shall we?

'Transformers: Dark of the Moon,' the third adventure of those wacky automobile robots, has at least one thing going for it: it looks huge, massive on a scale that dwarfs the last two films in this series, both of which felt absurdly huge themselves. It's difficult to imagine anything that would get us excited about this series again following the debacle that was 'Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen,' but the treatment of this latest entry as a strict "alien invasion movie" works like gangbusters (at least in the advertising).

This 30-second spot isn't too different from the ad that ran at the Superbowl, but there seems to be enough new stuff to make it worth a half-minute of your time. Check it out (as well as the footage from 'Cars 2' and 'Hesher') after the jump!

Next up, here's a new minute-long trailer for 'Cars 2,' the sequel to arguably Pixar's least interesting film (at least among animation aficionados). At the risk of being profoundly, unfairly negative, what's on display here doesn't look good: crass jokes, a lot of screaming, simple slapstick and more Larry the Cable Guy than a sane person can tolerate. Of course, we can't judge a film based on a trailer alone, but coming from the company that made such beautiful and sophisticated films like 'Toy Story 3' and 'Up,' this looks like one big step backwards. However, when toys from the first 'Cars' film alone have made over $8 billion for the company, it must be tough to say no.

Finally, at the exact opposite end of the spectrum from giant robots destroying the world and animated cars prat-falling into vats of oil, here's a clip from 'Hesher,' the story of a weirdo loner (Joseph Gordon Levitt) who meets up with a shockingly nerdy-looking Natalie Portman for what we can assume are romantic, emotional shenanigans. The film is the feature debut of Spencer Susser (check out our review from Sundance 2010) and before it lands at SXSW for its latest festival appearance, check out a new short NSFW (language!) clip from the film, which finds Levitt rescuing Portman from a predicament in a manner that can only be described as, er, unique:

Watch a Short Film Made by the "Real" Homer Simpson

Jacob Hall — 2011-02-20T13:30:00+00:00

Die-hard 'Simpsons' fans surely know that creator Matt Groening named his animated creations after members of his own family, but do they know that his father, Homer, was a humorist and filmmaker? Thanks to the blisteringly amazing power of the internet, they can learn that fact right now by watching his 1969 short film, 'Basic Brown, Basic Blue,' a funny pseudo-documentary that's more than a little bizarre:

"Ever wonder how Matt Groening of 'The Simpsons' got his quirky sense of humor? Probably from his filmmaker dad, Homer Groening, who passed away in 1996. Although known for his documentaries, Homer Groening directed and narrated this film, ostensibly about color, but filled with an ongoing series of bikini-clad bathing beauties. The film is perhaps best viewed as a graphic artifact that will interest media historians seeking additional insight into the elements that influenced the cartoonist."

'Basic Brown, Basic Blue' reeks of the '60s (and by "reeks," we mean that you can practically smell the marijuana and LSD), but it's certainly not without its wacky, endearing charms. Although certainly a different style of comedy than the 'The Simpsons' (somewhat ironically, it's off-topic silliness feels more like an ancestor to 'Family Guy'), it's certainly interesting to note that Groening's sense of humor didn't just spring out of thin air. Now someone needs to track down the rest of Homer Groening's filmography -- titles like 'A Study in Wet' (which you can actually watch on YouTube) and 'Psychedelic Wet' sound like they demand our immediate attention.

Watch 'Basic Brown, Basic Blue' below.

(Via Boing Boing but available for downloading through the consistently miraculous Internet Archive.)

MORE: 15 Great Movies, Free of Charge and Absolutely Worth Watching!

Where Everyone Has Gone Before #31: 'Mystery Train'

Jacob Hall — 2011-02-19T19:30:00+00:00

Welcome to Where Everyone Has Gone Before, the weekly column where I continue my film education before your very eyes by seeking out and watching all of the movies I should have seen by now. I will first judge the movie before I've watched it, based entirely on its reputation (and my potentially misguided thoughts). Then I will give the movie a fair chance and actually watch it. You will laugh at me, you may condemn me, but you will never say I didn't try!

The Film: 'Mystery Train' (1989), Dir. Jim Jarmusch

Starring: Youki Kudoh, Masatoshi Nagase, Screamin' Jay Hawkins, Cinque Lee, Nicoletta Braschi, Elizabeth Bracco, Joe Strummer, Rick Aviles, Steve Buscemi, Tom Noonan and the raspy tones of the great Tom Waits.

Why I Haven't Seen It Until Now: My first exposure to director Jim Jarmusch was when Teenage Me (perhaps you remember his only slightly stupider earlier incarnation 12 Year Old Me) plucked 'Dead Man' off a Blockbuster shelf expecting a traditional western and receiving a darkly comedic, surreal, acid trip of a western deconstruction. Man, Teenage Me decided that he hated Jarmusch based on that one film alone.

Pre-Viewing Assumptions: Looking back on how I learned to love movies, I see a map charting how I became the human being I am today.

It all had to start somewhere and for me, it was the James Bond series. Prior to discovering a battered copy of 'Licence to Kill' on VHS (yes, that was my first 007), movies were a fun distraction, something entertaining that you partook in here and there, but they existed on the same level as books. Or board games. Or my action figures. They held no sway over me. I didn't feel any magic in them.

But the massive history of the Bond series! The sheer number of films! So much to dive into! So much to explore! Not to mention, to an adolescent with the minimal possible understanding of sex (I only knew that it was apparently awesome) and no understanding at all of the consequences of violence (except that it was also apparently awesome), Bond was like the encapsulation of everything that my young self found important and amazing.

(Yes, we are here to talk about 'Mystery Train.' We'll get there soon enough, I promise.)

For the first time, movies spoke to me. Sure, it spoke to me in a childish, emotionally distant way (I still consider myself a minor Bond scholar and a huge fan, but let's not elevate them too high, okay?), but that was the moment where I fell in love with cinema. That was the moment where I felt a true, genuine connection to the medium. I had a reason to care. I had a reason to invest. I had a reason to pay attention to what I was watching. To absorb it. To treasure it and not forget it.

By my early teens, my film world had widened to include horror movies and for about six months, I convinced myself that I was the world's reigning expert on the genre (over a decade and hundreds of horror movies later, there are countless people who walk serious circles around me when it comes to that genre). Bond was still great, but horror movies were mean. They were bloody. They were for grown-ups. By watching them, I knew I was growing up, too.

When my teens came around, I entered my pretentious phase. Film had been important to me for so long that I had finally graduated to the Hollywood classics. The came the three-hour, black and white Swedish movies about losing your faith. I walked around saying idiotic things like "What do you mean you haven't seen (INSERT SEVENTY-YEAR OLD MOVIE HERE)? What kind of moron are you? GOD!" Teenage Me was insufferable. This was when I saw Jim Jarmusch's 'Dead Man' and was immediately turned off by its strange blend of surreal visuals, oddball comedy and strange metaphor. It didn't have a reputation for being a great film and it didn't wear any importance on its sleeve. Of course I was going to hate it.

Four years of college, surrounded by people just like me, managed to beat this pretentiousness right out of my skull. Well, most of it. Half. Forty percent.

Having seen 'Dead Man' again recently, I think it's a good film. I like to think that Current Me is a fairly well-balanced movie watcher who appreciates glorious trash just as much as he loves the standard classics. I like to think that Current Me knows that a film doesn't have to be "important" to be legitimately great. I like to think that Current Me can finally appreciate a filmmaker who makes intensely personal personal movies that are derived from a unique place, that feel completely out-of-touch with the standard plain of reality and portray a point of view that no other movie has depicted. I like to think that Current Me is finally ready to appreciate Jim Jarmusch.

Bring on 'Mystery Train.' It's about Elvis or something, right? I wrote all of that because I really don't have a clue.

Post-Viewing Reaction: Younger versions of myself would have hated 'Mystery Train' with a blinding passion. It doesn't follow a traditional structure. None of the characters have a Hollywood arc. There is a lot of dialogue and very little action. It takes its time, meandering about, never in a hurry, asking you to soak up little details, to consider the characters and their environment rather than wait for anything resembling a plot to arise.

I cannot begrudge anyone who dislikes 'Mystery Train,' much like how I cannot begrudge myself for having such an averse early reaction to Jim Jarmusch. However, I'd be curious to see the "movie histories" of the people who find his work dull or insufferable. Looking back on my personal relationship with the movies, I see a series of events preparing me to embrace this kind of filmmaking, contorting my tastes to fit in the admittedly narrow niche that Jarmusch is working within. Jarmsuch has always operated under the radar and he surely will continue in that fashion, but it's hard to imagine him having it any other way. Any other way would involve compromise.

'Mystery Train' is three overlapping stories taking place over one day and one night in Memphis Tennessee, told one right after the other. The first is about a young Japanese couple (Youki Kudoh and Masatoshi Nagase), who have traveled across on the world on a pilgrimage to see where rock 'n and roll was born. She's an Elvis fan, bubbly and excited, ecstatic at the thought of visiting Graceland. He's a man of few words, hiding behind a manufactured toughness and his rocker's hairdo. He thinks Elvis is overrated. Carl Perkins is much better. They wander the city. They tour a tiny record studio. They find a hotel. They talk.

The second story tracks an Italian woman (Nicoletta Braschi), recently widowed, who finds herself stranded in town for day after her connecting flight to Rome is delayed. She finds herself manipulated by a magazine salesman, cornered in a diner by a sleazy con man (the great character actor Tom Noonan), who tells her a story about encountering the ghost of Elvis. She shares a hotel room with the talkative Dee Dee (Elizabeth Bracco). They talk. The ghost of Elvis also appears to them, but mostly they just talk.

The final story is probably the most action-packed of the three, but that's not saying much. After losing his job, Johnny (Joe Strummer) goes on a bender and is "rescued" by a friend (Rick Aviles) and his brother-in-law (Steve Buscemi, looking impossibly young). Much alcohol is consumed. A gun is fried twice. They drive. They talk. They drive. They find a hotel room and they talk some more.

Because the film isn't about plot, it's impossible to spoil anything. The joys of 'Mystery Train' come not from wondering what's going to happen next, but rather from sympathizing and empathizing with these characters as they interact with one another, often passing other key characters, unaware that their story is not the only one of interest occurring at that very moment. The overlapping time frame is not a gimmick -- the film never acts like a mystery that needs to be solved. When characters in one story here a gunshot, we know a later story will tell us where it came from, but there's no pressing desire to find out. It's just Jarmusch telling us that while the story of your life is happening in this room, the story of someone else's life is happening right next door.

Your life may be sweet romantic drama about visiting Memphis to see the origins or Elvis and the life down the hall may be a dark comedy about what happens when a man with a loaded gun has too much alcohol, but one is not more important than the other. And that may be the meaning of 'Mystery Train' (if it actually has one -- it certainly doesn't have to have one): every life is a story worth telling. Even the boring ones.

Watching 'Mystery Train,' I'm reminded of that old adage "acting is reacting." Not in connection with the films performances (although they really are stellar across the board, masterclasses of understated naturalism), but in what Jarmusch is obviously fascinated by. This is a movie that's entirely about reactions. How do the Japanese tourists react to the city of Memphis and its inhabitants? How does the young Italian woman react to her chatty roommate and the con man with the ghost story? How do the three friends react when a night of angry debauchery takes a violent left turn? Three completely different stories about completely different people, but all of them united by the town they're in and how it has influenced their decisions and choices. 'Mystery Train' is a meditation on the beauty of the human reaction ... we can only imagine the the thousands of other noteworthy stories occurring in Memphis on this night.

Although an ensemble piece, the true lead character at the heart of 'Mystery Train' is Memphis itself. Although not always a flattering portrayal, Jarmusch finds beauty in a city that looks like it's entirely composed of seedy bars, dirty hotels and condemned theaters. I kept waiting for the moment when the Japanese couple would feel let down -- they came thousands of miles for this dump?

But that never happens. After all, Elvis recorded here. So did Carl Perkins.

Next Week's Column: It looks like I'll finally be giving the John Waters' seminal gross-out flick 'Pink Flamingos' a watch next week, but what should I watch after that? There are only two options remaining before we go into a whole new batch of films, so vote in the comments below (or by Twitter)!

'La Dolce Vita'
'High Plains Drifter'/'Pale Rider'/'The Outlaw Josey Wales' (Triple Feature)

Previous Entries:

'Return to Oz'
'Altered States'
'On the Waterfront'
'Sex, Lies and Videotape'
'Ferris Bueller's Day Off'
'Death Wish'
'Cannibal Holocaust'
'The 39 Steps'
'Bicycle Thieves'
'Moulin Rouge'
'The Sound of Music'
'Rebel Without a Cause'
'A Matter of Life and Death'
'Julia'
'Bride of Frankenstein'
'The Monster Squad'
'Solaris (2002)'
'Solaris (1972)'
'Soylent Green'
'Silent Running'
'Colossus: The Forbin Project'
'Cocoon'
'Enemy Mine'
'A Boy and His Dog'
'The Thing From Another World'
'Forbidden Planet'
'Logan's Run'
'Starman'
'Strange Days'
'Tron'

Hailee Steinfeld Sweepstakes Begin: Actress to Star in 'Forgotten'

Jacob Hall — 2011-02-18T14:30:00+00:00

You're the star of the surprise hit of the year. That surprise hit is a film by the unnaturally wonderful team of Joel and Ethan Coen. You're an Oscar-nominee, considered a front-runner in a race that includes established talent like Melissa Leo, Helena Bonham Carter and Amy Adams. You are also 14-years-old and 'True Grit' is your feature film debut. You are Hailee Steinfeld and you must feel like you're on top of the friggin' world right now.

Paramount, seeing a potentially huge star on the rise, seems eager to stay in the Hailee Steinfeld business. Deadline reports that the studio has just obtained the rights to 'Forgotten,' a novel that will be hitting shelves this summer, and plans to build a film adaptation as a star vehicle for Steinfeld.

She can't even drive yet and a multi-billion dollar company like Paramount is planning major film productions specifically for her? Some things just make you want to change your personal definition of "success."

The debut novel from Cat Patrick, the plot of 'Forgotten' sounds a little like a teen-centric 'Memento':

"Each night at precisely 4:33 am, while sixteen-year-old London Lane is asleep, her memory of that day is erased. In the morning, all she can "remember" are events from her future. London is used to relying on reminder notes and a trusted friend to get through the day, but things get complicated when a new boy at school enters the picture. Luke Henry is not someone you'd easily forget, yet try as she might, London can't find him in her memories of things to come. When London starts experiencing disturbing flashbacks, or flash-forwards, as the case may be, she realizes it's time to learn about the past she keeps forgetting-before it destroys her future."

So, a psychological-romantic-mystery thriller? That teasing synopsis is definitely hiding something (maybe aliens, or a government conspiracy, or vampires). Young Adult lit these days is all about vampires, after all. Vampires sell like hot cakes. Hot cakes laced with cocaine.

'Forgotten' will be produced by Josh Schwartz and Stephanie Savage (both of television's 'The O.C.' and 'Gossip Girl') through their new production company Fake Empire. We're too early to even begin to consider making an educated guess regarding a writer or director -- and there's a chance Steinfeld will work on something in between while this project gears up -- but when the novel arrives on June 6th, maybe we can start making a prediction or two.

Fan Casting Olivia Wilde (in Every Remaining Geek Property)

Jacob Hall — 2011-02-18T12:00:00+00:00

Olivia Wilde is probably not going to play Lara Croft in a film reboot of the 'Tomb Raider' franchise; the fact that a gossip site called The Fan Carpet is the source of this rumor is the only proof we need of that. However, Cinema Blend (where we first saw the news) put it best: the upside to posting any wild and crazy Olivia Wilde rumor is that you can start your story with a big picture of Ms. Wilde. See above.

One of the biggest rising stars on the film scene right now, Wilde was a highlight of 'TRON: Legacy' for fans, and the sole redeeming feature for those who hated the film. Next she'll be seen battling aliens in the old west alongside Daniel Craig and Harrison Ford in this summer's 'Cowboys and Aliens' (and we certainly can't disregard her long-running role on TV's 'House'). Her appeal is not just that she's easy on the eyes; she brings genuine warmth and intelligence to all of the roles she plays.

We here at Cinematical are rather fond of Olivia Wilde. We're unashamed of that. Seeing that she's becoming one of the go-to gals for casting geeky projects, we're also unashamed to fan cast her in a few geek-centric roles that she'd easily knock out of the park. Speaking of Lara Croft...

The Character: Lara Croft

Who Is She: The heroine of the 'Tomb Raider' video game series, Lara's a globetrotting millionaire adventuress with a knack for tracking down priceless artifacts and stirring up all sorts of trouble. The bodies of countless adversaries, whether they be man or beast, lie in her wake.

Why Olivia Wilde Should Play Her: 'Tomb Raider' has already been adapted into a film series (both of them starring Angelina Jolie, both of them rather terrible), but there has been talk of a reboot for quite some time. However, with the video game series itself currently undergoing a massive reboot, what better time is there? The upcoming 'Tomb Raider: Lara Croft Reborn' is a reset button on the entire series, re-imagining Lara as a younger, more vulnerable, more human and less cartoonishly busty protagonist. With Lara Croft no longer a buxom, unstoppable superhero, who better to take on the role of a tough young woman facing the unknown than Wilde? As already mentioned, the chances of this actually happening are slight, but if a new film chooses to follow this revisionist path ... who knows?

The Character: Lois Lane

Who Is She: The wife or girlfriend (depending on your continuity) of Superman in the DC comics universe, Lois is a tough-as-nails investigative reporter for The Daily Planet and frequent alien/robot/evil bald billionaire abductee.

Why Olivia Wilde Should Play Her: When portrayed at her best, Lois Lane is a spunky go-getter who gets away with all sorts of trouble by being a damn fine reporter (see: Margot Kidder in 1978's 'Superman'). When portrayed at her worst, Lois Lane is a blank slate with an unmoving face that exists only so she can be kidnapped by Lex Luthor and to give Superman a ticking clock to overcome (see: Kate Bosworth in 'Superman Returns'). It's easy to imagine that Wilde, who embodies "medical professional" quite well on 'House,' could lend the proper weight to the role of a hard-working journalist with a huge professional interest (and massive crush) in Henry Cavill's Superman.

The Character: Tulip O'Hare

Who Is She: One of the lead characters in Garth Ennis' acclaimed comic book series 'Preacher,' Tulip is an expert marksman and professional hitman (hitwoman?) who teams up with her super-powered preacher boyfriend Jesse and his vampire buddy Cassidy to track down God after he abandons heaven.

Why Olivia Wilde Should Play Her: 'Preacher' has almost been made as a TV series or a film on several occasions, with names like Mark Steven Johnson and Sam Mendes attached. Now that DJ Caruso is expressing interest, we can slide Wilde into a role that's actually quite different than any of the others on this list. It's easy to imagine Wilde playing a smart, charming professional type, but we've yet to see her play a gun-toting southerner with a foul mouth and a temper who solves her problems with jaw-dropping amounts of brutal violence. If we're going to fan cast her into every imaginable comic book property in existence, we might as well have the courtesy to offer her some variety!

The Character: Nurse Christine Chapel

Who Is She: A recurring character on the original 'Star Trek' TV series, Nurse Chapel served on the Enterprise as part of a personal quest to track down her missing scientist fiance. She 'sorta' finds him, but he's a robot. On several occasions, she served as a romantic foil for Spock, but little came of their on-again, off-again flirtations.

Why Olivia Wilde Should Play Her: Why should Olivia Wilde join JJ Abrams' rebooted 'Star Trek' universe? Why shouldn't she? That's like asking why someone would want a scoop of ice cream on top of their pie. Go ahead and Photoshop her into this cast picture. Go ahead. Do it. There is absolutely no way she would look out of place alongside Starfleet-uniformed Zachary Quinto and Chris Pine. There is no evidence that Nurse Chapel will be in the inevitable 'Star Trek 2', but she'd be a natural addition to the cast, either as the third point of a love triangle between Spock and Uhura or maybe as a love interest for Kirk (which would force him to cease his galaxy-wide sexcapades -- CURSES!).

The Character: Wonder Woman and/or Poison Ivy

Who Are They: Two highly notable DC comic book characters with nothing in common except that they've been condensed into one entry to keep this thing from running too long. Wonder Woman is an Amazonian warrior superhero with a golden lasso and a possible bondage fetish. Poison Ivy is a former scientist turned plant creature who routinely terrorizes Gotham City with all kinds of botanical plots. Neither has gotten proper big screen treatment.

Why Olivia Wilde Should Play Them: Besides the obvious answer of "Because she's Olivia Wilde and we like her and we're nerds so we can only imagine her being cast in nerdy things?" Um... Uh... Oh look! Here's another picture of Olivia Wilde!

Real Animal Deaths on Film: Is It Ever OK?

Jacob Hall — 2011-02-17T22:00:00+00:00

Sometimes it's difficult to reconcile being an animal lover and a film fan. How many movies kill off the hero's horse in the midst of battle? Quite a few. How many manage to find comedy in dogs being crushed by pianos? Not quite as many, but more than you'd think. As someone who sat through 'Dogtooth' with a cat on his lap, I'll admit to laughing maniacally at a hilarious but truly horrifying sequence involving a harmless cat and a pair of garden shears, but I can guarantee that I felt really bad for a good while afterward.

For those of us who count the furry, the feathered and the scaled among our closest companions, some movies can instantly rub us the wrong way (and Cinematical's own Scott Weinberg thinks that the MPAA should take notice). However, we can usually take solace in knowing that these scenes are staged -- that thanks to good ol' fashioned movie magic, no animal was actually killed. This has not always been the case, though.

What about movies that feature actual animal deaths? No makeup, no animatronics, no dummies -- but the actual killing of an animal for dramatic purposes. Most of the time, actual animal deaths are associated with a certain breed of trashy horror movies (oh, Italy), but sometimes more famous and respected films can feature the real on-screen death of an animal.

This begs the question(s): If the film is "art" as opposed to "junk," is the death justified? Why would it qualify as exploitation in some cases and not in others? Is this ever OK?

This debate arose here on Cinematical a few weeks back when I wrote about the horror film 'Cannibal Holocaust', which features multiple instances of live animal deaths captured on film. Berating a film so infamously controversial may have been akin to beating a dead horse (man, if there was ever a relevant metaphor), but it remains a tough watch. In addition to the elaborately staged -- and to the film's credit, incredibly effective -- human-on-human violence, the film features a pig being shot, a turtle being torn to pieces, and a monkey being beheaded -- and the camera lingers grotesquely on each shot, in order to achieve maximum shock value.

These days, movie sets are tightly monitored for any all kind of animal cruelty (you can't even swat a real fly when a a camera is rolling), so to see non-documentary footage of animals being slaughtered on camera in service of a debauched horror movie is just plain upsetting.

Few films have truly managed to capture what death truly looks and feels like. There's always that invisible wall between fiction and reality, the thing that allows an audience to remind itself that "it's only a movie." 'Cannibal Holocaust' removes that wall. This is sick stuff, the very definition of an exploitation film (a term that's taken on oddly cuddly overtones in recent years) and the choice to kill animals -- unwilling participants who are killed just to get a reaction from the audience -- feels despicable (although the crew did supposedly eat the animals afterward, so it could be argued that they weren't completely senseless killings).

It's easy to wag your finger and cry about murder and moral bankruptcy when the film in the crosshairs is trash (and even if you like it, the film is undeniably trash in its very construct), but what about when the film is a internationally recognized masterpiece from one of cinema's most respected directors?

The film is 'Andrei Rublev' and the director is the great Russian filmmaker Andrei Tarkovsky. A vividly realistic look at life in medieval Russia, the film is long, difficult, often confounding, occasionally boring but above all, somehow, still entrancing. It also features the horrifying death of a horse during an extended raid sequence: the horse stumbles down a set of stairs, lands hard and is stabbed through the neck with a spear. Although the film features other instances of staged animal deaths (a cow being set on fire was safely accomplished by coating the cow in asbestos, which, quite frankly, still sounds pretty horrible), but the horse was purchased from a slaughterhouse, killed for the film, and then returned to be processed.

The scene, shot in a single wide shot, is undeniably effective: a tragic, emotionally horrifying movie moment if one ever existed. Horses and their inherent beauty are a recurring theme throughout the story, and it's a sequence that feels vital to the texture of the film.

Therein lies the conundrum: does that make it okay? Does the fact that the horse died while creating "art" allow us to forgive Tarkovsky and his crew of the same thing that we instantly condemn the crew of 'Cannibal Holocaust' for? Both films are killing an animal to evoke a reaction, one going for sadness, the other going for shock, but at the end of the day, they've both taken a life. The ability of many film fans to look past Tarkovsky while admonishing 'Cannibal Holocaust' reveals a weird, potentially troubling double standard.

And there are many other layers to this. What can be said about 'Apocalypse Now', which features the death of an ox in a native ritual? Francis Ford Coppola didn't orchestrate the killing, but when his local jungle extras had a celebration unrelated to the filming, he turned on his camera, captured it documentary style and inserted it into the climax of the film. Is that evil? Is that-immoral?

On the other end of the spectrum, how many of you knew that the lovable talking animal film 'The Adventures of Milo and Otis' was originally a Japanese film called 'Koneko Monogetari: The Adventures of Chatran' that allegedly killed dozens of puppies and kittens during production? Devin Faraci wrote an article about this that will break your heart if you, like me, watched this film multiple times in your blissfully clueless youth. The film remains widely available on just about every $5 video rack around the country.

If we refuse to watch 'Cannibal Holocaust' on sheer principle, shouldn't we also refuse to watch 'Apocalypse Now'? If we're disgusted by the secret background of 'Milo and Otis,' should we treat 'Andrei Rublev' with equal disdain? Should it be judged on a case-by-case basis or is this a case of blanket moral wrongness?

It's a tough question that doesn't feel like it has an easy answer (unless you hate animals and/or you're the person who will post the inevitable "thousands of animals are slaughtered everyday, why do you care?!" comment). Animal lovers can only take solace in knowing that this is a debate that belongs firmly in the past ... the very fact that animals are protected on modern movie sets proves that we, as a species, have grown up a little.

Redbox Throws Down the Gauntlet to Netflix, Announces Online Streaming

Jacob Hall — 2011-02-17T11:30:00+00:00

First, there were the locally owned and operated Mom and Pop video-rental stores. Then, corporate behemoths Blockbuster and Hollywood Video came out of the sky, struck down those shops and became kings of the movie-rental industry. It was a long, unchallenged reign, but they eventually faced a competitor: a little company called Netflix that offered DVD rentals through the mail. "What foolhardiness is this?" Blockbuster and Hollywood cried, unaware that less than a decade later, one of them would be dead and the other mortally wounded.

The point of this ancient parable is that it's difficult to stay on top forever. If you do something right, someone is bound to replicate your methods, possibly even improve on them, and then attempt to viciously dethrone you. Netflix, with its powerful Instant Watch, may be the current leader of the Rental Empire, but according to the L.A. Times, that vicious little neighboring city-state, Redbox, is looking to confront them directly with an online movie-streaming service of its own.

Ladies and gentlemen, prepare for war.

Although the details of Redbox's planned streaming system are scarce, what we do know sounds very much like Netflix's lauded system: a subscription-based system that will allow customers to stream a wide selection of movies and (we can assume) television on their computers, televisions and select mobile devices. Hey, if it isn't broken...

It's a natural progression. Redbox's sales are down, and people are embracing the simplicity of instant online streaming. Watching (and buying) movies on DVD and Blu-ray has increasingly become more niche, for movie nerds and media collectors only. Most of all, Netflix has remained mostly unchallenged in the online rental field, allowing them to raise prices and remove features because no one can stand in their way. Insert bone-chilling laugh here.

However, this will be a war fought on several fronts. Amazon has announced plans for an online streaming system for its Prime users, which would actually cost less than a yearly Netflix subscription. And we mustn't forget Hulu, who, in addition to having a virtual monopoly on Television streaming, have recently partnered with the Criterion Collection, making their Hulu Plus a no-brainer for anyone interested in watching nearly one thousand of the greatest films ever made.

Of course, all of these competitors will be facing a veteran player with an already well-established name and library of available titles (Redbox and Amazon are still working on deals with the major studios to gain film rights, and there are rumors the two may even form a partnership), but a little competition never hurt anyone. Heck, maybe we'll see some prices drop as these companies struggle to grab your attention and earn your cash. Brick and mortar rental stores may be on their way out, but the war over where you'll rent your movies looks to be just heating up.

Where Everyone Has Gone Before #30: 'Return to Oz'

Jacob Hall — 2011-02-12T19:00:00+00:00

Welcome to Where Everyone Has Gone Before, the weekly column where I continue my film education before your very eyes by seeking out and watching all of the movies I should have seen by now. I will first judge the movie before I've watched it, based entirely on its reputation (and my potentially misguided thoughts). Then I will give the movie a fair chance and actually watch it. You will laugh at me, you may condemn me, but you will never say I didn't try!

The Film: 'Return to Oz' (1985), Dir. Walter Murch

Starring: Fairuza Balk, Nicol Williamson, Jean Marsh and Piper Laurie.

Why I Haven't Seen It Until Now: Oh, I tried. In my early years of perusing the VHS stacks at my local video rental establishment, I kept a vigilant eye open for it and consistently came up empty-handed. Considering how it seemingly traumatized everyone I know, maybe this was a good thing.

Pre-Viewing Assumptions: To hear it from many of friends and colleagues, 'Return to Oz' is the most terrifying movie ever made. It's always a similar anecdote:

"Oh man! My mom was looking for a movie for me to watch and she saw it and thought 'Oh! A sequel to 'The Wizard of Oz! That'll be nice.' Then she put it on, left the room and turned out the lights. I had nightmares for years."

What made it so scary? What could have possibly instilled such fear? I have no idea. They never get to that part -- they only shake their heads sadly and recall the cinematic experience that left their childhood gutted on the side of the highway. Maybe there was a mass mis-printing and a bunch of kids mistakenly found themselves watching 'Night and Fog' or something. C'mon, look at the poster at the top of this piece. It just looks so jolly!

And that takes me to the big question -- will I find 'Return to Oz' frightening? I doubt it. Kids are weird and they have weird reactions to the weirdest things. (Weirdos.) I know a guy who was traumatized by the opening fifteen minutes of 'E.T.' The ten and under set is an unreliable witness regarding scariness. What scares a kid doesn't always scare an adult (especially if you're like me and count smashing through brick walls to fight criminals and ghostbusting in haunted manors among your hobbies) and I find it highly doubtful that a 1985 children's movie will do anything to impair my sleeping habits. I made it through 'Labyrinth.' I'll be fine. What I find especially telling is how everyone talks about how this film scared them half to death, but they never bring up little things like story and character.

Because I'm viewing this as an oh-so-cynical grown-up, 'Return to Oz' will have to double its efforts to work for me. That means it will have succeed as a full-fledged film, not as a childhood memory. Is that possible? Beats me. Will I enjoy the film despite having not read a single word of L. Frank Baum's work and with my only knowledge of the 'Oz' world coming from the 1939 film and post-modern takes like 'Wicked'? Just exactly how steeped in Baum's lore is this film? Am I supposed to view it as a sequel or as a stand-alone adventure? Is it ... not a musical? Do any major characters return? Why is this the only film the great editor Walter Murch directed? Why am I thinking so hard about 'Return to Oz' before I've even seen it?

Post-Viewing Reaction: You people are crazy. I say that with all due respect, but crazy nonetheless. There is nothing about 'Return to Oz' that is remotely creepy and I find it difficult to believe that my younger self being in any way terrified by this film. To put it in 1980s family fantasy movie perspective, Young Me watched 'The Neverending Story' on a continuous loop for about a year and came out nightmare-free. That film featured the young hero's horse companion being overwhelmed by depression and slowly sinking into quicksand while our his master begged him not to die. In the immortal tone of Denzel Washington, 'Return to Oz' ain't got sh*t on 'The Neverending Story.'

You people were scared by the Wheelers? These guys? These guys? Really? Really?!

But I knew I wasn't going to be creeped out in any way by the movie (although I wasn't expecting an experience so completely un-scary -- you people are still crazy). Placing its unearned reputation as one of the scariest kids' movies ever made aside, is 'Return to Oz' any good?

Eh, it's okay.

Sometimes you just have to accept that you're not the target audience for a movie. I am not a child and I am not a fan of the 'Oz' mythos, so this film's sway over me is limited at best, since it doesn't even intend to cater to anyone outside of that crowd. Pixar has spoiled us in recent years, making us think that "family films" can entertain the kids, their sulky teenage brethren and their long-suffering parents in equal measure, but the vast majority of the time, the family film genre tag pretty much translates as "If you're under the age of ten, prepare to be underwhelmed."

And you know what? That's perfectly fine. Kids are a valid audience who need entertainment, too. As far as childrens' films with little-to-no actual adult appeal beyond nostalgia, 'Return to Oz' is a worthy endeavor, a massive step above most kids' stuff in terms of quality, design and imagination.

'Return to Oz' picks up six months after Dorothy's tornado-driven journey to the magical land of Oz. She's barely sleeping, having strange visions and creeping out her aunt and uncle by telling them that she went on a trip to a magical land filled with talking animals and scarecrows. The only apparent solution? Primitive electroshock treatment at a shady asylum (probably the only scene in the film that actually approaches being scary). The only escape? A return to Oz! The only problem? The Gnome King has ransacked the Emerald City and turned everyone to stone. The only solution? A quest to confront him and restore the land.

What's strange about the film, and what probably led to it being a massive box office dud back in the day, is that it exists in a strange no-man's land between the popular public vision of the 'Oz' universe (entirely informed by the original musical adaptation of 'The Wizard of Oz') and Baum's universe as written. The Dorothy here is significantly younger than Judy Garland's iconic portrayal, her life in Kansas tougher, and more realistic and Oz itself more threatening (but never scary -- I'm upgrading you people from crazy to insane). It's a fantasy quest more in line with something like 'The Chronicles of Narnia' than a whimsical, joyous journey like the musical. To the film's credit, its attempt to stick to Baum's work instead of sequelize the original film is bold, but when you're making a sequel in a universe that is so different than the one everyone knows -- you are essentially shooting yourself in the foot. It truly feels like we've missed the proper introductions for these versions of the characters.

It doesn't help that the film's major journey feels so small. There is never a sense that our heroes (Dorothy befriends a talking pumpkin man and a badass robot soldier, among others) go on a quest of real length, and they seems to face absurdly limited opposition on their way to facing down the Gnome King. The film is crying out for some scope, it demands to be an epic, but the world feels so small and so easily traversable. Is my modern mind just spoiled by Peter Jackson's 'Lord of the Rings' or even 'Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows,' both of which made going on an epic quest feel, well, epic?

The stagnant feeling of this journey is exacerbated by the film's pacing, which slows to a crawl once Dorothy arrives in Oz, never building toward anything that feels vital or significant. Threats never escalate. Dorothy and her companions don't have a plan. The Gnome King's motivation is shaky at best and completely non-existent at worst. What's the deal with fantasy villains so desperately wanting to become human? Aren't they more powerful in their original forms? Wouldn't becoming human make them more susceptible to getting knifed or poisoned or tackled by a particularly burly gentleman? I'd think the Gnome King would be happier as an ever-shifting stone elemental (brought to life through exceptionally impressive stop-motion before it becomes exceptionally unimpressive make-up), where his power over his domain is absolute. Then again, his desire to become human is only tossed out in one throw-away line, so who knows?

But do you know who won't notice these things? Children. Because this is a childrens' movie. As much as I believe all films should be measured up to the same level, there really is no point in picking on a film that so blatantly wants to appeal to such a specific target audience (and if you're an adult who legitimately likes this movie for reasons beyond nostalgia and/or love of Baum, please let me know why in the comments). Watching it now, I have to pick and choose the things I like, admiring parts above the whole. I love the stop-motion effects. I love the design of the world. It's a finely made film from a technical point of view (it still feels strange that Murch never went on to direct again). Most of all, I love Tick Tock the robot, a steampunk, clockwork robot with a man's man 'stache. If you asked me to name my favorite robots of all time, he'd probably find a place in the top five (right behind Elle from 'Starcrash' if you want to get specific).

Come for the solid kids' fare, stay for the ass-kicking robot.

Next Week's Column: Next week, I hope to officially bury the metaphorical hatchet with Jim Jarmusch by giving his 'Mystery Train' a watch. But what after that? There are only a few films left in this batch, so let me know your pick in the comments below (or on Twitter!)

'Pink Flamingos'
'La Dolce Vita'
'High Plains Drifter'/'Pale Rider'/'The Outlaw Josey Wales' (Triple Feature)

Previous Entries:

'Altered States'
'On the Waterfront'
'Sex, Lies and Videotape'
'Ferris Bueller's Day Off'
'Death Wish'
'Cannibal Holocaust'
'The 39 Steps'
'Bicycle Thieves'
'Moulin Rouge'
'The Sound of Music'
'Rebel Without a Cause'
'A Matter of Life and Death'
'Julia'
'Bride of Frankenstein'
'The Monster Squad'
'Solaris (2002)'
'Solaris (1972)'
'Soylent Green'
'Silent Running'
'Colossus: The Forbin Project'
'Cocoon'
'Enemy Mine'
'A Boy and His Dog'
'The Thing From Another World'
'Forbidden Planet'
'Logan's Run'
'Starman'
'Strange Days'
'Tron'

Horror Movie News Roundup: Joe Dante Returns, James Wan Blows Up, More!

Jacob Hall — 2011-02-11T17:15:00+00:00

Where've you been, Joe Dante?

The filmmaker's last effort, a 3D horror movie titled 'The Hole,' vanished into some sort of distribution hell (it remains unavailable in the United States), and his previous film was the criminally underrated 'Looney Tunes: Back in Action' from waaay back in 2003. It's a shame that the mad genius behind 'The Howling,' 'Gremlins' and the original 'Piranha' seemingly has to struggle to get projects made.

This makes the news that he's attached to direct 'Monster Love' (via Shock Til You Drop) almost feel like a sigh of relief -- at least the universe has decided to let the man keep working! The film itself, described as a horror comedy, doesn't get any help from the press release, which opens with "A werewolf and a vampire fall in love, igniting a war between their respective communities. It's ROMEO AND JULIET with fangs." Taken by itself, the premise sounds like 'Underworld' by way of 'Twilight,' which doesn't sound too enticing, but Dante's mere involvement makes this one to keep on your radar.

Moving on from people who need to make more movies, we arrive at the news of people who are about to be making many more movies. James Wan, director of 'Death Sentence,' 'Dead Silence,' the upcoming 'Insidious' and, most notably/infamously, the original 'Saw,' has signed an eight-film deal with Icon Entertainment (via Coming Soon). The fine print specifies that Wan will produce two films a year for four years, which should be easy enough considering that he helped crank out seven 'Saw' films in seven years. There's no word yet on whether or not Wan will personally get behind the camera on any of these films, but he did write the story for his first film under this contract, the not-so-subtly titled 'House of Horror,' which will be directed by F. Javier Gutierez ('Before the Fall').

Finally, we leave you with trailers for two little horror films you may not have heard of just yet (both courtesy of Twitch). First up, here's 'Elevator,' which looks like the spiritual follow-up to last year's 'Devil' -- just double the size of the elevator (and the cast) and replace the devil with a bomb. If the blood-splattered characters are any indication, things get pretty nasty:

Next up is the new film from the recently revitalized Hammer Films, fresh off the critical (if not financial) success of 'Let Me In.' The film is 'Wake Wood'; the specific horror subgenre is cult-in-a-small-British-town-terrorizes-visitors (an old standby, that one); and the star is Timothy Spall, doing what Christopher Lee used to do in productions like this: class up the joint.

Other than a dramatic "Coming Soon,' 'Elevator' is without a release date. 'Wake Wood' hits British cinemas at the end of March and will surely find its way to North America (at least on DVD) soon enough.

Adventures in B-Movie Land #5: 'The Happening'

Jacob Hall — 2011-02-09T19:00:00+00:00

Welcome to Adventures in B-Movie Land, the monthly column where I take a look at some of the strangest, cheapest and worst films ever made ... and explore why you have to see them. Look for new entries during the second week of every month.

The Motion Picture:

'The Happening' (2008), Dir. M. Night Shyamalan

Also Known As:

The first big nail in the career coffin of M. Night Shyamalan.

Featuring the Talented:

Mark Wahlberg as the overly earnest high school teacher, Zooey Deschanel as his consistently baffled wife, John Leguizamo as the mumbly, statistics-spouting best friend, and the wind. Lots and lots of wind.

What Is It?

One of the most ridiculed movies of the '00s and one of the more jaw-droppingly awful studio productions of recent years, filled with baffling directorial choices and performances by actors who look like deer trapped in the headlights. After the initial critical onslaught, Shyamalan went on a feverish interview tour, claiming "...it's a B-movie. This is the best B-movie you will ever see, that's it." But is it really a B-movie? Or is it just a bad film?

The Plot:

A strange toxin is sweeping the Northeastern United States, causing huge numbers of people to go into a trance, speak gibberish, and commit suicide. Is it a terrorist attack? The rapture? Well, we learn soon enough that Mother Nature has had enough of the human race, and so all of her plants have started unleashing this handy-dandy chemical in populated areas as a way of regaining some turf. Fine. It could work.

We follow Elliot (Mark Wahlberg) and his wife, Alma (Zooey Deschanel), as they attempt to escape from nature's wrath (although their path only takes them deeper into nature, so you have every right to question the wisdom of their plan). Elliot is a science teacher who tries to teach his students about vanishing honeybees in between bouts of insulting his apathetic pupils by informing them that their good looks will eventually fade away. (A great educator, this one.) He also loves mood rings way too much for a grown man. Alma, in sharp contrast, doesn't have the burden of a personality. Their relationship is not doing well, but don't worry: being forced to take care of their deceased friend's (John Leguizamo, using only one corner of his mouth to speak) daughter while avoiding instant death through pure luck manages to repair the seams of their relationship.

Eventually, Alma and Elliot end up at the home of a crazy old religious woman (who thinks they're planning to steal her collection of creepy dolls and/or lemon drink), do absolutely nothing, and watch as the crisis resolves itself. The end.

Wait! There's more! In an epilogue torn straight from that mid-'90s classic 'Jumanji,' 'The Happening' starts to happen again, this time in France. Because nature hates French people just as much as it hates Americans. It's an equal-opportunity bigot.

Shocking Acts of Violence!

So we're dealing with a toxin that shuts off the self-preservation switches in your brain, making you immediately commit suicide. Despite the film's patchy, pseudo-scientific (dare I say B-movie-esque?) explanation for how this works, it never really makes any degree of sense. If plants found a way to turn off our need to stay alive, wouldn't we all just turn into lethargic couch potatoes who lie on the pavement in the open elements, not doing anything while we slowly starve to death? If we lost the desire to live, how exactly would we gain the impulse to make the effort to hang ourselves with a garden hose?

But whatever ... it's just an excuse for people to die by the hundreds. Some leap off buildings. Others stab themselves in the neck area. Some share a pistol that seems to have the unlimited ammo cheat turned on. Some lie down in front of lawn mowers. Some, as in the film's second-best moment, casually stroll into the lions' cage at the zoo and offer their appendages as a tasty morning snack. Even if you're fortunate enough to outrun the wind, you may still get a shotgun blast to the face because Mark Wahlberg's attempt to sing his way into a boarded-up home filled with nutcases has hideously backfired. If that last section sounds like the best scene in the film, that's because it is.

Sexual Deviancy and Mindless Perversity!

Deschanel's Alma ate tiramisu with a co-worker and the guilt rests on her shoulders like a ton of bricks. Wahlberg's Elliot considered buying a six dollar bottle of cough syrup from a pretty pharmacist even though he didn't have a cold. Can someone please tell these people how to have proper extramarital affairs? I mean, really -- come on!

Is There A Robot?

'The Happening' takes place firmly in the here and now, so there are no sentient mechanical lifeforms to be found. But who needs a villainous robot when you have plants? Plants that unleash an invisible, deadly chemical compound that forces our heroes to literally run from the wind? Much has been said about just how silly this is: how exactly can someone outrun the wind? Hideous infractions against the laws of How The World Actually Works aside, it's stunning how "uncinematic" this threat truly is. An invisible villain with vague intentions that operates on rules that feel inconsistent at best does not a good adversary make ... but if you can get over how plainly insulting it is and take a step back, the fact that anyone thought this was a good idea is mind-boggling, fascinating and, let's face it, pretty much hilarious.

Just How Cheap Does It Look?

Well, here's the biggest strike against 'The Happening' being a B-movie: it doesn't look cheap at all. It's a glossy studio production filled with professional lighting, convincing special effects, and sets that don't look like they were built in a high school gymnasium. That's where the quality ends, though. It's the action in the frame that counts, and what's in these frame is borderline incompetent, playing like an awkward parody of Shyamalan's established style. Suicidal construction workers comedically fly into frame. Menacing reaction shots of trees abound. Everyone speaking in forcibly understated half-whispers to remind you that Things Are Serious, Damn It! There may be a $48 million price tag here, but the actual execution is endearingly amateurish.

Quotable Quotes

"It makes you kill yourself. Just when you thought there couldn't be any more evil that can be invented!"

"If we're going to die, I want you to know something. I was in the pharmacy a while ago. There was a really good-looking pharmacist behind the counter. Really good-looking. I went up and asked her where the cough syrup was. I didn't even have a cough. And I almost bought it. I'm talking about a completely superfluous bottle of cough syrup, which costs like six bucks."

"Why you eying my lemon drink?!"

"We're packing hot dogs for the road. You know hot dogs get a bad rap? They got a cool shape, they got protein. You like hot dogs right? By the way, I think I know what's causing this."

Scholarly Thoughts:

How could 'The Happening,' a film that was funded by a major studio, directed by an award-winning filmmaker and stars actors of significant note possibly qualify as a B-movie? When M. Night Shyamalan defended it to the press, was he even aware of what a B-movie really is? Although he did it first, it's a method that could best be described as the "Kevin Smith/'Cop Out'" defense: if a film is reviled enough, sometimes the director will try to attempt to defend indefensible work by claiming it was meant to be stupid / sloppily made / amateurish as a way of homage or as a stylistic choice. Smith compared 'Cop Out' to a "retarded child." Shyamalan called 'The Happening' a B-movie.

Here's the conundrum to this entire thing: if 'The Happening' is intended to be throwback to B-movies, as Shyamalan has retroactively claimed, then it's a failure, mainly because it feels nothing like the B-movies of the '50s and '60s. Because the film takes itself so seriously -- because it's obvious that Shyamalan actually believed in this film and thought he was making a gripping, thrilling, and possibly even important experience -- and because it falls so hard on its face, it ends up being a B-movie all on its own. A modern variation on the formula, for sure, but a B-movie nonetheless. The best B-movies are the films made with pure intentions by filmmakers who truly, honestly believe that they're doing good work. Surely there is some irony in enjoying bad films, but the films themselves need to be irony-free.

Essentially, 'The Happening' is a B-movie not because M. Night Shyamalan wanted it be a B-movie, but because he tried so hard for it to not be a B-movie.

As frequently reviled as it is, 'The Happening' is by no means unwatchable. It's a quick, easy watch that goes down smoothly and without too much actual pain, thanks to escalating stupidity, boneheaded dialogue, and ridiculous non-sequiters that pop up with stunning frequency. The people in 'The Happening' are stupid and they do stupid things on such a consistent basis that you can't help but wonder if Shyamalan actually intended for these characters to be morons. The actors themselves look completely lost. Obviously directed to be as "earnest" and "naturalistic" as possible, they end up wandering around the entire film looking cartoonishly baffled, confused and, on occasion, slightly impaired.

For example, Wahlberg spends most the running time looking something like this:

And Deschanel, who has even less of a character, spends the entire movie wearing this expression on her otherwise pretty mug:

In the same way that it often takes a director with real vision to make a film this bad (and whether you like him or not, Shyamalan certainly has vision), it takes otherwise competent actors to deliver performances like this. There is nothing bland or boring, the trademarks of real bad acting, from these folks. This is a perfect case of actors going out on a limb for their director, doing specifically what he's asking of them, and then being let down in a big way. You don't get work like this by accident. These performances have been meticulously crafted, just in the opposite direction of "good."

What's especially strange about watching 'The Happening,' in all of its glorious badness, is how clearly it is a Shyamalan film. The man is no work-for-hire; he's an auteur. When he makes a movie, he means it. The pacing, cinematography, and tone all bear his distinctive signature and if viewed on mute and in small chunks, this is obviously a film from the man who made 'The Sixth Sense', 'Unbreakable' and 'Signs.' It's difficult to pinpoint exactly where things went so horribly wrong, but 'The Happening' feels like a parody of his previous work. Not a broad, gag-driven 'Airplane!'-style parody, but a subtle, knowing parody that plays like one big inside joke for people who are familiar with his films.

'The Happening's desperate need to say something about love and nature and the destructive nature of the human race, and its deadly serious tone in the face of such silly performances and dialogue, make it a bad movie treasure. Someday, the actual derision will vanish, the anger at paying $10 to see it in theaters will dissipate, and people will remember it fondly as one of the great bad movies of its decade, a masterpiece of goofy awfulness that screams so loudly and falls so far that you can't help but love it. What an adorable little movie.

Previous Adventures:

The Films of Edward D. Wood Jr.
Santa Claus Conquers the Martians
Warriors of the Wasteland
Starcrash