Beyond The Dark Knight

I saw The Dark Knight, again, last night. Yes it was my third time seeing it. And I plan on watching it at least one more time (maybe two more times) as I haven't seen it yet on the IMAX. I just love it. As a Batman fan, it has just completely enthralled me.

OK...if you haven't yet seen the movie...you should probably stop reading.

But anyway...I've really been thinking about what direction a potential third movie would go in. Granted Nolan hasn't signed on yet...but come on...a third film has to be in the works. From what I've always understood, Nolan has envisioned the series as a trilogy. And I know that Bale is signed on for three and I believe that Caine and Freeman...and maybe Oldman...are signed to three picture deals.

I think it's obvious...since the Joker didn't perish...that he would have inevitable been in the third movie. But we all know that's not going to happen now--with Ledger's untimely death. I guess it's conceivable somebody else could play the part...but I'm not even going to entertain that idea. To me the Joker is just not going to be in a third movie. I think that is a pretty safe assumption. But because of that tragedy, it's harder to gauge how the series will progress from a narrative standpoint.

But the big question is...what villain or villains do they get for a third movie?

I think it's completely plausible that Two-Face/Harvey Dent is not dead. That was really left pretty ambiguous (a memorial service with no body). Batman and Commissioner Gordan could have quietly just put Two-Face in Arkham Asylum. If Two-Face were to play a role in the film, that would provide some continuity, and let's be honest...Two-Face is one of Batman's better villains and Aaron Eckhart did a tremendous job playing Harvey and Two-Face. But on the other hand it might be better to look at The Dark Knight as a more contained film and having Two-Face in the movie would remind audiences of the Joker...and the character of the Joker is not going to show up. Plus...as I mentioned in the review...The Dark Knight is really an epic struggle involving Harvey Dent's soul and it just seems to me the end of the Dark Knight is a perfect conclusion to that storyline.

Let's take a step back...what do we know going into a third movie. We know--since Batman took the rap for Two-Face's crimes--that he's wanted by the Gotham Police and that he has probably lost whatever public support he had. But on the other hand these notions would fuel Batman's image as a vilgante. So maybe now criminals will think Batman has crossed the line (in killing people). So now in theory, Batman has, for better or worse, reinforced his image as an agent of fear to the Gotham underworld.

Therefore it's completely possible that maybe Batman descends to far into the darkness and he needs something to redeem him or provide some light to his life. Now this is where some people have been arguing that introducing Robin might work.

I'm not so sure.

I trust Nolan could work in Robin but I don't think that's the best route to take even if having a Robin is simply a sub-plot or something. I just don't like that direction...although I do like character of Robin. I just find it too problematic...in the world that Nolan has created...to have a teenage sidekick buddying around with the Dark Knight.

Actually the more I think about it, I believe that maybe the next villain in the movie that might work to bring the series full circle would be Talia, Ra's al Ghul's daughter. In the past she was pretty much just a love interest for Batman but recently they have amped up her villainy traits and she would be a worthy opponent. And then I believe they could work in Catwoman as well. It seems that Nolan can effortlessly work in two villains per movie and not have it feel contrived.

So there you have it...two femme fatales in the next movie. Nolan's always kind of had that film noir feel to a lot of his films so maybe he can just play that up more in the third installment.

"Step Brothers" movie review

This week we take a look at the new Will Ferrell, John C. Riley comedy Step Brothers (R). The two star as 40-year-olds still living with their parents when they are forced to live together due to their parents (Mary Steenburgen, Richard Jenkins) marriage. Enemies at first, the two predictably become best friends. Adam McKay directs.

Ryan: Up to this point the summer has been lacking (not only in quality but in quantity) in the comedy department. That's all about to change as Step Brothers kicks off a run that involves Judd Apatow’s Pineapple Express and Ben Stiller’s Tropic Thunder. Nothing against Step Brothers but I hope those other two movies will be better overall films. Don’t get me wrong, Step Brothers has plenty of laughs and gags and overall it’s a pretty funny flick. But I can’t really argue that it’s high quality comedic gem.

Andy: I keep waiting for the day when I grow tired of Will Ferrell and his shtick, as many people no doubt have already. He continues to do essentially the same thing in all of his comedy vehicles, and I continue to laugh at it in spite of myself. He is helped significantly here by the presence of John C. Riley, who does exactly what you would expect and is every bit as funny as Ferrell. This is not a particularly well made or clever film, but it is consistently funny, and this summer that is certainly enough.

Ryan: It probably shouldn’t be too surprising—since the movie’s rated R—that Step Brothers is vulgar, raunchy and extremely juvenile. So if you don’t like those types of movies I wouldn’t recommend Step Brothers. But if foul-mouthed and crude movies don’t really offend you then you will more than likely find the humor in Step Brothers—because it’s definitely there. This isn’t Will Ferrell’s best movie but he and co-star John C. Reilly do have the comedic chemistry that manifests a fair share of laughs. There are several laugh-out-loud moments in the film.

Andy: Sometimes the movie gets a little over the top, but I don’t really mind that out of a comedy. Sometimes comedians have to push things too far. Occasionally they will hit on something brilliant by doing this, but most of the time it falls short. The real shortcoming here is not the ridiculousness or the crudeness, it is the lack of a compelling story. The narrative is basically just an excuse to have these two grown men acting really goofy. To be a truly good movie, Stepbrothers should have avoided a conventional plot entirely (which would be risky to say the least), or build a narrative and characters that can support a story the audience can connect with.

Ryan: There's no denying that Step Brothers is an absurd movie with two ridiculous main characters. The absurdity is not so much from the basic premise of two forty year olds still living at home. More to the point it's that these two adults act like eight year old boys. The movie certainly works better when that premise is not dealt with in a way that makes it seem plausible. To me the movie falters big time when the narrative tries to make sense of two senseless characters. I know the movie has to have a story but it's the story that takes away from the movie. That's definitely a problematic situation that prevents Step Brothers from being a truly memorable summer comedy.

Andy: Although I enjoyed Stepbrothers, in many ways it is unfortunate to see these two actors positioning themselves as they have. Ferrell has shown the ability to be a pretty decent actor, but audiences have made clear that they are not as interested in seeing him do anything other than his established slapstick. At the same time, many may forget that John C. Riley is an Oscar-nominated actor (Chicago, 2002) who used to be versatile and earnest. After a string of comedies in the last few years, it is now hard to imagine him in a dramatic role.

Stepbrothers is just about exactly what you would expect it to be based on the ads. It is nothing special, but it is very funny at times. Final grade: B-.

Oscar Talk

Heath Ledger's performance as the Joker seems like a safe bet for a best supporting actor nomination but what about...

Robert Downey Jr. (Iron Man) scoring a nomination for Best Actor or
Jason Segal getting some Oscar recognition for Best Original Screenplay or
Maybe even a Best Picture nomination for WALL-E or The Dark Knight.

I caught this little segment on NPR and thought it was kind of interesting.


I don't really think the Oscars need saved but it would be nice if they actually did look at movies that weren't just released in what is known as "Oscar Season"--late fall into early winter. Because sometimes...movies and performances do get overlooked. But I also think Oscar voting and nominating goes in cycles...or more specificially...there's a correcting effect (that I don't think is predetermined) that prevents the Oscar's from going to either extreme.

Worst Movie of the Year

Granted I haven't seen this movie...since it's not out in theatres yet...but sometimes you just know.

And this is one of those times.

The Bud Black Blues

In a rare occurrence I actually got the day off on Wednesday. The reason I took the day off was to attend the Padres-Reds game in the 'Nasty. (It was an afternoon game).

We were very fortunate (and many thanks to my sister) to score 4 tickets to the game from Greg Maddux's mom and sister (and no I'm not making that up). Boom's got a good relationship with Linda (Greg's mom) . I know that we were very appreciative of the good will gesture.

But anyway I was joined by Boom, Andy and Dirty. (Jenny was unable to get off of work...thus unable to go).

The game itself was typical of the kind of year Maddux and the Padres were having. Maddux exited the game in the sixth with a lead of 3-2 (and a runner at third). The reliever, Cla Meredith, enters the game and on THE VERY FIRST PITCH that he delivers...Edwin Encarnacion of the Reds smashes a two run homer. Again...for the 14th straight time...Maddux doesn't get the win. In that stretch he has exited with the lead nine times only to see it evaporate by the ineffectiveness of the Padres bullpen. In all honestly, I wasn't as frustrated as I should have been. This has been going on all year and it's becoming pretty numb.

But anyway...the result of the game stunk but not the experience. Our seats were awesome...hands down the best seat that I've ever had at a game. They were behind the visiting dugout...and when I mean behind the dugout...I mean directly behind the dugout. We were in the first row behind the dugout. It was incredible.

And to top it off I actually got a foul ball. I should clarify that it wasn't one hit into the stands...Bronson Arroyo was batting and squibbed a foul ball off the plate. The Padres batboy got the ball and was looking to throw it into the stands and I believe I just happened to be in the right place at the right time. I was wearing a Padres shirt so maybe that helped. But I'm pretty sure he was looking for a chick to throw the ball to but all he got was us (Boom missed out as she was getting something to drink). So that really cool to have a ball that Maddux pitched. That's something I'll always remember.

So even though the Padres blew it...we all had a great time. Maddux pitched well enough to win. Our seats were tremendous...it was just a really fun time. Plus I had some Skyline so one can't complain about that.

"The Dark Knight" movie review

In a summer filled with superheroes, Hollywood has saved the best for last. Christopher Nolan’s eagerly anticipated sequel to Batman Begins hit theatres over the weekend. In The Dark Knight (PG-13), Batman (Christian Bale) teams up with Lt. Jim Gordan (Gary Oldman) and newly elected district attorney, Harvey Dent (Aaron Eckhart) to finish cleaning up Gotham City from the Mob’s influence. Consequently a new and even more sinister force has emerged from Gotham’s underworld—The Joker (Heath Ledger)—to fill the void. Michael Caine, Morgan Freeman and Maggie Gyllenhaal round out the ensemble cast.



Andy: In some ways it’s misleading to think of The Dark Knight as a sequel. It certainly builds off of themes from Batman Begins, but it stands on its own so easily and supercedes the original in such a multitude of tiny ways, that you almost forget entirely that this is the second film in the reborn series. It is no coincidence that this film has never been referred to as Batman II, it is simply a Batman movie. It also happens to be the best Batman movie ever made, and I don’t think many who watch it would disagree with that assessment.



Ryan: I’m not going to mince words here. The Dark Knight is not only one of the best films of the year but is hands down the best comic book film ever. Yes, the movie is that good. Granted I’m about as big of a Batman fan as there is but I feel I can objectively say that The Dark Knight is a modern pop culture masterpiece. I give Christopher Nolan and company loads of credit. Most big budget summer sequels fail to live up to their original predecessors but not The Dark Knight. The Dark Knight delivers everything one could want from a Batman film.



Andy: The Dark Knight was justifiably one of the most anticipated movies of the year, but that expectancy increased palpably with Heath Ledger’s unexpected and early death. Immediately stories started coming out about the power of his performance in this movie and how an Oscar nomination was likely. Many cynics (to some degree myself included) thought this was just to enhance the tragedy of his death; who could resist the sentimentality of a posthumous Oscar nod for one of the best actors of his generation in one of the most successful movies in years? Well, after seeing the movie, I’m pleased and surprised to report that Ledger really is that good. He has taken the Joker and played him as the terrifying psycho he would be if the Joker really existed.



Ryan: Believe the buzz surrounding Heath Ledger’s portrayal of the Joker. Don’t get me wrong, Jack Nicholson was great as the Joker (in Tim Burton’s 1989 version, Batman). But Ledger takes the role of the Joker to heights that moviegoers will be completely in awe of. He simply delivers an iconic performance. There’s no question that Ledger’s performance will go down in film history as one of the best portrayals of a cinematic villain. An Academy Award nomination will not be a surprise and will be much deserved.



Andy: In looking for flaws in The Dark Knight, there is not much to work with. It runs around two and a half hours, and the ending is not quite as tight as it could have been. But the bottom line, however, is a movie that has two very solid and action filled story lines must conclude both of those stories. It took a little bit of time to do it, but it was worth it to see those stories play out on the screen for the first two hours. As for performances, all of the principal characters deliver impeccably, and director Christopher Nolan has firmly established himself as the new point in Hollywood where artistic integrity and commercial success intersect.



Ryan: The Dark Knight is an intriguing cinematic duality. On one hand the film feels like a crime movie that happens to have familiar comic book characters in the film. On the other hand it still has the fantastic elements that one would expect from a superhero movie. These notions appear to be in opposition but in fact they mesh together quite well. The bottom line is that there's a lot going on (and I don't just mean action) in this picture. The movie is really dealing with plenty of complex and relevant issues in terms of crime and the nature of good and evil. At the heart of this movie, is the battle for Harvey Dent's soul and that conflict provides the weight that puts The Dark Knight ahead of it's class.


Initially The Dark Knight offers no obvious flaws and boasts some of the best acting and action you’ll likely see this year, earning it a rare and solid A.


**Ryan here...just wanted to say a few more things.

1. It takes about 30 seconds of screen time to see that Maggie Gyllenhaal is an upgrade over Katie Holmes. Nothing against Katie, as she was serviceable in Batman Begins, but Gyllenhaal actually acts like somebody who works for the District Attorney's office. Plus I think she's just a better actor. Apparently the reason for Holmes pulling out of the movie was due to "scheduling conflicts."

2. I think that it should be pointed out that The Dark Knight is much more of an ensemble piece than Batman Begins. Begins was Batman centric...and that was cool...and worked very well. But here it's a much more bigger story so consequently a lot of weight is given to the Harvey Dent and Commissioner Gordon characters. It's not like the previous Batman movies where Batman would take a back seat to the cast of villains. Obviously Batman is important to story it's just that his screen time is not what it was in the first picture.

3. Props again to Christian Bale for being the best Batman/Bruce Wayne on screen. Granted the role of the Joker (and Ledger's subsequent brilliant performance) does in some ways overshadow Bale as Batman. But's it's not that big of a deal. I think you can see in this movie the character of Batman growing into the hero that he is. Bale provides the confidence and strength to pull that performance off.

No More "At The Movies..."

One of my favorite shows...and a TV institution...is on the way out.

Roger Ebert and Richard Roeper both announced that they would no longer be a part of "At The Movies..." Click here to read more.

This saddens me because I looked forward to watching it every week...whenever it would be on as channel 13 had a bad habit of not showing it consistently every week.

**UPDATE**...apparently the show is going to continue...just with new hosts.
Regardless...it's still not going to be the same. Plus they won't be allowed to use the thumbs up/thumbs down as that is trademarked by Ebert and Gene Siskel's widow.

The Dark Knight

This is all I'm going to say about The Dark Knight...

You need to go out and watch it, IMMEDIATELY!

Watchmen Trailer

With The Dark Knight opening this weekend I kind of expected this...

The trailer for The Watchmen movie is now online.

Baseball Think Tank

I was farting around on www.baseball-reference the other night (for those not aware...that's pretty easy to do as baseball-reference.com is one of the best websites on the internet. From a numbers and history standpoint, it has everything).

A few things of interest...

--I was thinking during the all-star game of the best player to never make an all-star game. These were the top three that I came up with

Tim Salmon (hit 299 homeruns and won the 1993 AL rookie of the year)
Eric Karros (slugged 294 homeruns and won the 1992 NL rookie of the year)
Kirk Gibson (won the 1988 NL MVP and was MVP of the '84 ALCS)

The three best modern players (with at least five years of experience) to never make an all-star game would be...

Pat Burrell (OPS+ of 120) He might make one in the next year or so...probably should have made it this year.
Travis Hafner (OPS+ of 144) Kind of surprising that he didn't make one a few years ago and now I'm wondering if he ever will as he seems to be in an Andruw Jones decline.
Juan Pierre (.300 batting average) The favorite whipping boy of many baseball blogs probably won't ever make one.


--Cy Young has 759 complete games. Let me repeat that...759 complete games. That is UNBELIEVABLE. It seems that when baseball people talk about records that won't ever be broken (Dimaggio's hitting streak, Ripken's consectuve game streak, Cy Young's career win total) the career complete game total never gets mentioned. I'm telling you...it's the safest record...not just in baseball...but sports period. I don't see this record ever to be broken. Take this example...Greg Maddux is the highest active leader on the career complete list...and he comes in 355th place with a 109. He has started 727 games. So that means that he pitches a complete game 15% of the time. Cy Young started 815 games. He completed 92% of the games he started. I know baseball goes in cycles but there's just no way the game will ever be that pitching dominant in terms of a starter completing 90% of his games

--Speaking of Maddux...That last paragraph had some interesting numbers. Namely Cy Young has the most starts in baseball history with the aforementioned 814. Maddux has started 727 games...and that ranks fouth all time just behind Don Sutton (756) and Nolan Ryan (773). I'm having a hard time digesting that. This might be Maddux's last year so I'm been kind of depressed about that. But in actuality I should be looking on the bright side in that my favorite player has given me so much to already have watched. That makes me feel pretty fortunate. And he's had a helluva of a career so that makes it even better.

"Hellboy II" movie review

It's only Wednesday but I've had a busy week. This is the first evening where I've had some free time...so here's the Hellboy II movie review. Hope everybody is having a good week.



This week the run of summer superheroes continues with Hellboy II: The Golden Army (PG-13). This time around the team (Ron Perlman, Selma Blair, and Doug Jones, all returning from the first movie) must stop an ancient prince who plans to awaken an unstoppable golden army to wage war on the humans. Guillermo del Toro (Pan’s Labyrinth) directs.

Ryan: Admittingly I was a little surprised that a Hellboy II was even produced. The first feature was pretty decent but it didn't tear up the box-office (a worldwide gross of only $99 million dollars). But there's no question that after Pan's Labyrinth (one of the best films of 2006), Guillermo del Toro's stock was way up. And if one couples that with the fact that comic book films continue to be hits more often than not then maybe a sequel shouldn't be too surprising. All-in-all I found Hellboy II to be just about what the first one was—a slightly above average superhero flick.

Andy: I remember going into the first Hellboy movie with impossibly low expectations and then being very pleasantly surprised at how well the film held together. For some reason I was once again down on the idea of seeing a Hellboy movie, but still del Torro was able to deliver an interesting and entertaining flick. This should come as no surprise at this point, but I would say there are very few directors that could take the Hellboy character and make a good movie out of it. Clearly Guillermo del Torro is one of those few people.

Ryan: Part of the problem with this Hellboy movie was one that plagued the first one. That's having a suitable villain to be Hellboy's foil. Every superhero has to have interesting super villains to survive—especially in a major motion picture. In the first film Hellboy battled the Nazis. Nazis are definitely bad but they are, at least from a cinematic standpoint, quite generic. The sequel builds up a new threat involving an ancient race of creatures but unfortunately it looks (and sounds) a lot cooler than it really is. If there's going to be another Hellboy movie than Hellboy definitely needs a worthy adversary because it would make (at least theoretically) for a more interesting movie.

Andy: It’s a little misleading to think of this as a superhero movie. There is no question that it starts off as one, with the standard superhero issues (how to balance a personal life with a life of being a superhero, how to interact with the public, etc). But about halfway through the movie when we enter the Troll Market, a secret underground world full of various mythical creatures, it becomes clear that this is trying to be a fantasy-adventure film rather than a straight-up superhero movie. As a fantasy film it works much better, it’s just unfortunate that it could not have the type of focus to commit to being a fantasy instead of spending so much time fighting crime in “reality.”

Ryan: One aspect of the movie that I found superior to the first flick was that the sequel is much more visually stunning. Creating monsters and creatures that actually are frightening and that look real is a lot to ask from most directors. But not del Toro. The man has a gift not only for coming up with creatures that look cool but that also don't look phony. Regrettably del Toro gets a little carried away with his imagination at times. Hellboy runs at only two hours but it's a long two hours. Final grade: C+.

Andy: Hellboy is not without its flaws, but it is visually stunning enough to overcome some awkwardness in the story. Furthermore, the performances of Ron Perlman and Doug Jones are once again pleasant surprises, allowing the movie to remain entertaining even during the times when the action fades. This is not a perfect movie, but it sure is a nice distraction until (Friday!) the Dark Knight comes out. Final grade: B.

Boy Drinks an Old Style at Wrigley Field

Would one classify this boy's father as... Father of the Year or Worst Dad Ever...

Friday Night Rants

--I saw the movie Wanted the other weekend. It wasn't much like the graphic novel, which I was somewhat of a fan of. (Although the first third of the film is pretty close in tone and story to the graphic novel in terms of Wesley--McAvoy's character--being a complete loser).

But that was all right. Like I speculated...the protagonist in the comic just isn't likable enough to build a major motion picture around. The audience has to pull for somebody. They'll pull for an anti-hero but not a nihilist punk. Furthermore--as I expected--they filmmakers changed (the) super villains (of the story) to super assassins. In the graphic novel the super villains of earth have not only eliminated super heroes but have also eliminated all memory of them. Consequently the league of super villains are in fact secretly running the world. But in the movie the assassins exist to "allegedly" in sure balance in the world. I was fine with the changes because the movie was still pretty entertaining and I can completely understand how the super villain aspect of the graphic novel might not have translated too well to a movie.

James McAvoy is on his way to becoming a big star and this movie shows his versatility in doing big Hollywood productions...(he's already got the hard hitting drama out of the way--Atonement...The Last King of Scotland). If one's a fan of stylized action summer popcorn movies than Wanted will certainly satisfy.

--This past week I also watched Batman: Gotham Knights. It's the latest straight-to-DVD DC Comics animated feature film. It's six interlocking stories (that are loosely based upon one another) that take place between Batman Begins and The Dark Knight. The animation is done in anime-style. Normally I would say that I'm not into anime but I really liked the animation in the movie. It was top notch. And it was cool how every story had a different style and flair. Some of the stories were better than others but overall it's worth watching if you are a Batman fan. I thought it was cool that Kevin Conroy did the voicing work of Batman. (He voiced the dark knight in Batman: The Animated Series, which also happens to be my all time favorite cartoon--no surprise there).

--For those interested...it's Fair Time in Decatur County.

--Jenny and I just watched The Usual Suspects. She had never seen it. I'm pretty sure she liked it...although not to the extant of my liking. I would have to say--and I've thoughts this for awhile--that The Usual Suspects is the second best movie of the '90's...behind only Pulp Fiction.

--I was reading an interview/article in Entertainment Weekly with Guillermo del Toro (he directed Pan's Labyrinth and the Hell Boy movies). But anyway he said two things that I thought were very interesting. In talking about making movies (and how Chuck Jones cartoons have inspired his work) he stated, "All movies should be designed like animation, where the style is the substance." Secondly, when talking about Boris Karloff's portrayal of Frankenstein, he said, "(Boris) Karloff embodies the most essential, existential quality of being human--a creature expelled from a womb of darkness and silence by an uncaring creator and thrust upon a world of fire, rain and hatred."

Guillermo del Toro has his shit together.

"Hancock" Movie Review

It was Fourth of July weekend a few days ago and that can only mean one thing—Will Smith. Hancock (PG-13) is the latest film from the unofficial Fourth of July holiday box-office champ. In the action flick, Smith stars as a boozed-out superhero desperately out-of-touch with the public that he is trying to protect. Coming to his aid, is a publicist (Jason Bateman) who takes it upon himself (much to the chagrin of his wife—Charlize Theron) to improve Hancock's image. Peter Berg directs.

Andy: Hancock appeared to have a lot of promise based on the commercials and Will Smith’s past 4th of July success. Unfortunately, past success does not help Hancock at all, as it starts of as an interesting and mildly enjoyable movie and then turns into a bit of a mess. The idea of a comedy about a reluctant superhero is appealing, but the execution of the story was seriously lacking, and the movie ended up not working.

Ryan: It's not much a surprise that I'm a fan of superhero flicks. Even though I wasn't overly excited for Hancock I was definitely intrigued as it's a superhero movie that is not based on a comic book or graphic novel. That unquestionably peaked my interest. Unfortunately (and this has little to do with it being based on previously published material) Hancock is not the big action spectacle that it was groomed to be. It's a movie that has its moments but it ultimately fails to capture the magic of other (good) Will Smith vehicles.

Andy: I will say that Will Smith and Jason Bateman do their part to make this movie work. Smith, who is even somehow likable as a course speaking, arrogant drunk, delivers another solid performance. Many people were not prepared for the harshness of Hancock’s language (when I saw the movie a woman with a small child walked out because of it), but it does add significantly to Hancock’s character. He has to start out pretty rough in order for the audience to see his growth. His interactions with Bateman are the best scenes in the movie, but inexplicably we don’t get very many of those scenes in the second act of the movie.

Ryan: Hancock is a film with an interesting premise. Hancock is basically a drunken reluctant Superman—sans costume. We tend to think of our superheros as being unselfish and/or driven to fight injustice. Hancock captures the bad guys on his own terms in a pretty uninspiring and alienating fashion. For the first act of the movie, this take on refining a broken superhero's image works. Regrettably the movie takes a drastic turn half way through it. And I'm still trying to figure out why the filmmakers decided to shift the entire plot of the movie to another story arc. That narrative detour is by far the biggest weakness of the movie.

Andy: To be blunt, the movie completely falls apart after that narrative switch. It wasn’t on too sure ground for the first hour or so, but the second half of the movie is poor story telling at best, and incomprehensible at worst. This is unfortunate, as director Peter Berg (Friday Night Lights) has shown a lot of promise, but this is a pretty major setback. Hancock is going to make a lot of money, but it is certainly because of Will Smith’s gravitas and not because of the quality of the movie.

Ryan: Even though Hancock isn't on par with Will Smith's last effort, the sci-fi hit, I Am Legend, his latest endeavor once again proves that he is Hollywood's most (if not only) bankable movie star. This is his eighth consecutive film to open number one and to pass the 100 million dollar threshold at the box-office. That's quite remarkable but making it even more astonishing is that Smith has accomplished this streak in a multitude of genres including romantic-comedy, drama, sci-fi and kid's cartoons. Hancock is not going to be one of his most memorable roles but it will certainly add to his continuing box-office clout.

Hancock starts off interesting but stumbles toward its conclusion. Final grade: C.

Thumbs Up...Buenos Aires museum

Being a cinephile, I found this nugget of news to be fascinating. Several scenes from the silent film classic, Metropolis (directed by Fritz Lang) were found and screened in Buenos Aires over this past weekend.

To read more click here.

I've only seen a few scenes from Metropolis--I believe from one of my film classes in college--but have just recently added it to my Netflix list. Interestingly enough I just finished watching another Fritz Lang movie, M. It was his first "talkie" and starred Peter Lorre as a serial murder of young girls. Pretty crazy stuff. Anyway...it was a solid film. It was kind of difficult to get through in parts but overall I'm glad I saw it and I can see why it's a considered a classic. It's over seventy years old but deals with a subject--that we would consider modern--in a very adult and believable manner. Plus Peter Lorre can be especially creepy and that pays off in the movie.

But anyway...I just thought it was cool that they found lost footage to such a classic movie. It makes people optimistic that some other lost gems are out there. I think in our modern world (where information-- thus access to art-- are at our very fingertips) it's crazy to think that a movie or parts to a movie are lost and may never be seen again.

Happy Independence Day!

In honor of America's birthday, I'm going to countdown my five favorite rap songs.

Maybe most people don't equate rap music with the Fourth of July but hey...it is a uniquely American creation.

Without further ado...

5. "The Message" by Grandmaster Flash and the Furious Five




4. "Got Your Money" by ODB




3. B.O.B by OutKast




2. "The Next Episode" by Dr. Dre featuring Sno0p Dogg



1. "Encore" by DJ Danger Mouse featuring Jay-Z & The Beatles



**I probably should note that the last video was just a youtube creation....but that was about all I could find.

Peace.

Michael Barrett takes a foul ball off his grill

Never seen this happen...

Barrett final
by bsap11

Joe Buck needs his "Come Uppings"

The other day Joe Buck was on the "Herd" with Colin Cowherd. Apparently Mr. Buck is not really a fan of baseball anymore. I guess that really wouldn't be a problem...if he wasn't the national voice of Fox's Saturday game of the week.

He acts like it's just such an inconvenience to even get ready for a game...this week it's the Red Sox and Yankees...hard to get excited for that...isn't it Joe. You get paid to know about baseball. How many people would kill to be in that position.

He simply comes across as just an arrogant spoiled little brat. It just really pisses me off.

Here's a snippet from the radio interview (also notice how much Cowherd slurps Buck---simply ridiculous)...

Buck_0001
by bsap11

On an even more ridiculous front...Skip Bayless (another dopey talking head from the world wide leader in sports) actually puts it too Buck during ESPN's First Take.

First take (02)
by bsap11

It's pretty darn bad when Skip Bayless is in the right about calling somebody out.

Quantum of Solace (New James Bond movie) trailer

I'm not sure about the title...but I'm not really that concerned about it...because the movie looks pretty awesome.

James Bond 007 : Quantum of Solace - Trailer
by flogoo

"WALL-E" movie review

This week we look at WALL-E (G), the final film to come from the initial brainstorming session held by the masterminds behind Pixar. WALL-E is a clean up robot left on Earth after all the humans have left. During the hundreds of years he works, he eventually develops a personality. The action picks up after he falls in love with robot sent to find vegetation on Earth.

Ryan: I know I’m going to sound like a broken record as I think I say this every time we review a Pixar movie. Quite frankly, Pixar is the surest thing in Hollywood when it comes to putting out quality films. They have completely moved beyond the constraints of a contemporary animated-driven storytelling. Last year’s Ratatouille raised the bar of modern animated flicks and WALL-E does nothing to lower it. But more to the point, WALL-E is not just a top-notch animated films but a superb motion picture.

Andy: WALL-E is a remarkable motion picture, and I feel very comfortable saying it’s the best movie to come out so far this summer. What really elevates WALL-E to a different level of filmmaking is that it does not appear to be conceived as a kid’s movie. Sure, children are going to enjoy it; it’s well animated and the robots are cute and make funny noises. But the story it is telling is as much “2001” as it is “A Toy Story.” It is an incredible balancing act to make a movie that has themes aimed at adults without sacrificing any of the childlike wonder of the situation, but WALL-E accomplishes it.

Ryan: I agree that what sets WALL-E (and other Pixar films) apart from other animated films is the fluid storytelling. Unfortunately a lot of animated films go out of their way (the Shrek sequels come to mind) in trying too hard appeal to adults. The execution of the more mature material becomes forced and what regrettably happens is that you have an uneven film in terms of its tone. With WALL-E the storytelling is so solid and so well executed that it naturally appeals to kids and adults alike. There’s nothing forced into the narrative to garner cheap laughs or thrills.

Andy: This is probably the most subtle “children’s” cartoon I’ve ever seen. There are a lot of concepts the movie presents that are not spelled out clearly. It simply shows you how things are in WALL-E’s world and allows the viewer to make their own inferences about it without spelling it out clearly. Frequently the conclusions the audience will reach are a bit disturbing (the events that must have led up to the Earth becoming how it is, the dystopian life the humans lead, etc.), and putting that successfully and seamlessly into an animated movie for the family is masterful.

Ryan: WALL-E is excellent entertainment for both kids and adults but the first thirty minutes of the movie might be a little taxing for kids five and under. There is very little action or dialog in the first act. While it certainly does not distract from the movie (in fact it initiates the sci-fi tone of the film) parents should be prepared that their kids might be a little antsy as the movie warms up. But it's definitely worth the initial burden as WALL-E is the best film (so far) of the year.

Andy: I would take that a step further and say that there is very little dialogue in the movie, period. After the first 30 minutes, talking humans do become part of the story, but they aren’t consistently in each scene. There are still long stretches with little talking. Both of the main robot characters have a vocabulary of about four or five words, and there are only humans talking in about half of the movie’s scenes. There is enough visually appealing action that I don’t think this will be an issue for most kids, but it is a different kind of cartoon than many youngsters may be accustomed to watching.

WALL-E is a fun, charming kid’s movie and a complex science fiction story rolled into one seamless enjoyable 90 minute film. Final grade: A-.