Well, it’s new, it’s a lot of fun, and totally unexpected: Tom Cruise in Tropic Thunder. Once Flo Rida’s “Low” starts playing, I dare you not to laugh. G5..playa!!!
One more for Tom Cruise, this time along side Danny DeVito and Kevin Spacey in Austin Powers: Goldmember, as the movie versions of Austin Powers, Dr. Evil and Mini Me. Funnier than the rest of movie, and totally worth it.”Yeah baby, yeah!!!”
Keith Richards in Pirates of The Carribean 3: At World’s End. What can I say it’s Jack Sparrow and the original model for him, and Richards actually manages to upstage Johnny Depp. Depp needs to snort a lot of coke if he ever decides to play Richards in some kind of Stones biopic.
Will Ferrell as Chazz Reinhold in Wedding Crashers. He’s like your worst nightmare come true: a 40 year old man living with his mother, slouching around in a bathrobe. Considering the movie builds him up as a wedding crasher legend it’s just about as sad as seeing Pacino in The Godfather then in 88 Minutes. “HEY MOM! CAN WE GET SOME MEATLOAF? ”
David Hasselhoff as the coach of the German team in Dodgeball. You have to love a man willing to poke fun at himself. The part where the Germans look extremely ashamed to have disappointed him while he’s barking German at them is priceless (then again so is “Fuckin’ Chuck Norris!” ) No Hasselhoff video, but here’s some Chuck Norris.
Probably the best cameo ever comes from Neil Patrick Harris in Harold and Kumar Go to White Castle, playing himself, or rather a coked up, totally insane version of himself, NPH. “Come on, dudes, let’s pick up some trim at a strip club. The Doogie line always works on strippers.”
Posted on October 30th, 2008 by MrWiseguy
Filed under: Music | No Comments »
So, we’re almost mid way into the third season and what has transpired so far? Sylar, err, Gabriel, is Peter and Nathan’s brother (would like to see Nathan’s reaction on that one), Nikki had not one but two twin sisters, Arthur Petrelli is still alive, and apparently the biggest villain yet, Hiro’s not the brightest in the bunch, Mohinder will ultimately be a bad guy, Claire’s a bit of a drama queen and most importantly, Tim Kring likes playing with his characters, much like a child plays with action figures, switching their roles from time to time.
Overall Heroes is still entertaining, well acted and fun. But as far as characters go, there’s just a bit too much running around from side to side. Sylar was bad, next he was good, now he is bad again(possibly misleadingly bad). What bugs me most is the fact that, for one of the most intelligent “heroes” out there (as far as season 1 and 2 go), this season he’s been a pushover. Sure, they played to his weaknesses - his need for parental figures and their approval of his persona. I could get him staying in captivity just to see how the whole new found family thing goes, but feeling sorry for himself because Peter hates him? I don’t buy that.
Peter’s never been the smart one in the family but he seems to have suffered serious brain damage over the course of the past events. He manages to unshackle himself and then what does he do, powerless as he is now? Go after his father, who was accompanied by two other guys, with a chair(or whatever metal contraption that was)?
I don’t buy the whole Daphne subplot either. She knows she’s working for bad people. She likes Parkman, and yet continues to do Arthur’s bidding? I truly wonder what they have on her, that she won’t just quit. Also, Matt is way too trusting for a guy who can read minds(he should’ve learned more from the affair involving his ex-wife).
All in all, Robert Forster is a welcome addition to anything, nice to have Elle back, good to have Maya leaving, and shame on the writers for creating some interesting situations(like Meredith throwing Tracy some looks, or dialogs between Peter and his father or Sylar) but not taking advantage of them by cutting those scenes short.
Posted on October 28th, 2008 by MrWiseguy
Filed under: TV | No Comments »
Churning more and more movies each year, and hoping to tap in that wonderful game industry aficionados, Hollywood is pretty much going overboard with video game adaptations.
After all, they are making The Sims into a movie. It’s basically like the game, except you don’t control all the characters. Wait, was that the only thing the game had going for it?
World of Warcraft too? Now that can’t work. Have you people learned nothing about fantasy films that are not Lord of The Rings? They flop. Even the mighty Tolkien trilogy barely managed to stay awesome, there were plenty of moments where it might have gone astray. Lesson learned: fantasy epics rarely work, especially when they’re pop culture adaptations (see Eragon), except if they’re marketed to the very young (case in point: Harry Potter). Those movie execs actually think the millions of players would rather spend money on a movie instead of actually playing it?
Prince of Persia? Sure, why not. I mean I was all about criticizing this one, but it’s Mike Newell, he’s done some good stuff. Say what? Jake Jake Gyllenhaal as the prince and Gemma Arterton as Tamina? Are they even remotely asian? How exactly is this supposed to work? Ben Kingsley? I used to love the man, but it seems these days he’s just sinking lower and lower.
I could go on an on about Gears of War, Bioshock and the rest, and maybe some of them might end up being above average movies( The Suffering could work as a movie, and Chiwetel Ejiofor is pretty darn good), but overall I have a hunch I’ll be more than disappointed.
Posted on October 23rd, 2008 by MrWiseguy
Filed under: Movies | No Comments »
Have you ever went to a movie just because of it’s title? Say you’re at a multiplex, and you have no idea what you want? What are you going to see? The Dark Knight? Or The Love Guru? only based on the title. Well, I don’t think there’s much of a choice there. However there have been cases of good movies with awful titles, The Shawshank Redemption is an awful title for a movie, ok for a book, awful for a movie.
And there are a lot of very, very bad movie titles, from intentional (Freddy Got Fingered) to naive (The Sisterhood Of The Travelling Pants) to really, really disturbing (Cannibal Women In The Avocado Jungle of Death-haven’t seen that one, not planning to). Sometimes you have to wonder: what were they thinking? As with Grease? Who on Earth thinks grease in a title will attract people? Well, it will, but the wrong kind of people. Fire Down Below..hmm I’m not even going to comment on a Seagal movie. Don’t Be A Menace To South Central While Drinking Your Juice In The Hood? Leave it to the Wayans to come up with something that weird. To Wong Foo, Thanks for Everything, Julie Newmar. Hmm…then again, what other title would fit a movie about transvestites?
Then there’s my favourite group. The unintentionally pornographic titles (it may very well only be me and my twisted mind though). Fun With Dick And Jane. Well..that one’s pretty self explanatory. Snatch - no comment. Rear Window. Advice for filmmakers: when titling your movies, please be sure to think about future connotations of the title. Phat Girlz. Believe it or not, it wasn’t a porn, the producers actually chose this title for a wide release movie. Dr. T And The Women. Well…if it were Mr. T And The Women it most certainly have been a porn. Feeling Minnesota. I don’t think there’s anyone able NOT to think of something dirty when reading that title. And last but not least: Ocean’s 11. So it’s about this guy Ocean right? And his eleven what? Such titles deprive the porn industry of coming up with creative titles of their own based on them.
But then again, were it not for such titles, what would we laugh at? What pop culture puns would we make with out friends just to pass the time? We can all agree that Snakes On A Plane is an awesome title as much as it is bad, can’t we?
Posted on October 9th, 2008 by MrWiseguy
Filed under: Movies | No Comments »
First you need a supernatural element. Lacking that, you’ll have to resort to slasher movies. Not that the two can’t coincide. Next, devise a way in which the killer, manifestation, or illness, can terrorize without being seen(this creates a good opportunity for jump scares, no one ever gets tired of those). For at least fifteen minutes of screen time. Failing to do that, shock the audience with grotesque imagery and/or people(inbreeding/mutation/disfigurement never fails).
Now, for the most important part. Pick the main characters, and be sure they are all pretty people in their 20s, even if you are filming a teen-slasher film(it saves time for the upcoming scenes of nudity if the actors are all of legal age). At least half of the main cast must be female, and if possible, have large breasts. Be sure to throw in some average people as well, so, when interviewed later, you can claim you made a movie with characters that ordinary people can relate to(but be sure to have them die quickly, and, when filming, one of the pretty girls must be in the shot).
Chose a remote location. Castles, swamps, jungles, ruins work best, but you can never go wrong with a high school and/or frat house(this one will come in handy as the motive behind the gratuitous nudity).
Write the dialog. Preferably on a napkin while at a drink with the other people involved in production of the movie. Do not concern yourself with its quality, if the movie fails to deliver chills, the camp factor will at least, maybe, tame the critics to a certain degree(if it turns out to be criticized, say you intended it that way).
Make sure to include at least one sex scene in the movie, and at least(preferably several) scenes in which a female character is naked, again, preferably while running. Also of importance: teach the female characters to scream as much as possible throughout the filming.
Hire a foreign director. Chose people who have shown some talent abroad, so the art-house fans will come see the movie. Make sure to tell him to include stylish shots, and at least one “close the mirror, suddenly see the killer” scene.
Next on the list, and probably the most important: the gore. You probably need blood, and lots of it, maybe even some spilled guts. Remember, whatever you do, by the end of the movie at least one of the pretty people must get soaked in blood. Things to consider: extra blood for camp, less, but more gruesome scenes.
Last, but not least: leave room for a sequel. The killer, if human, must not be killed or, must have someone that will go through everything for revenge. Next, wait for the dollars to pour in.
Posted on October 6th, 2008 by MrWiseguy
Filed under: Movies | No Comments »
These days everybody has one, from little kids to little old ladies. From the tiniest piece of mobile technology to the iPhone, or just a regular cell, people just love them. Or rather adhere to the trend of having one. It’s more than just a fad these days and it does have its benefits.
But lately, I for one, have gotten tired of seeing them everywhere. If you’ve got a thriller, there’s a chance a cell phone, or several will pop up when least expected. Got something you want to share to the audience without having someone talk? Text message. Need a way to find the villain or hero? Trace the cell phone. Have a special little gadget to hide? Shape it as a cell phone. Want to convey that someone has an active life? Have them talking at a cell phone while driving. Have a bomb? Want to blow it up from a distance? Rig it up so it goes off with a call. Surpassed movie budget? Throw in a shot with a cell phone brand and cash will pour in. Everywhere.
They even thought of making a movie out of it. Cellular’s star wasn’t Chris Evans, but the cell phone. In as many variations as possible. There’s cell phone while driving, while walking, while hiding, while shooting, while Evans is shirtless. The cell phone’s friends are right there too, including the charger, batteries and such.
And I don’t think it will stop. After all, who uses a shoe phone these days?
Posted on October 2nd, 2008 by MrWiseguy
Filed under: World | No Comments »
I remember when the musical scene in the U.S. was diverse. Back in 1999, for example, Eminem had just started out, Britney as well, there were the Offspring, Cher was having one last blast, there were the TLC (now that was RnB), Ricky Martin was reaching his peek, Shania Twain had released her most popular album to date, Mariah Carey hadn’t yet settled for whatever she’s singing now, Blink182 was making people laugh, Madonna wasn’t as hated as she is now, Fatboy Slim was at the top of his game, and oh, yeah, there were the New Radicals (whatever happened to them?).
That was diversity. Nowadays what do we get? Tokio Hotel and the Timbaland brand? I liked Timbaland, I thought he did good stuff when he first broke out (I even liked what he did with Missy), but now I’ve come to hate him. Just because nowadays everyone wants to work with him that every song ends up sounding just a bit the same.
There’s too much RnB and Hip Hop on the market. Too many crossovers, too many attempts at combining what’s hot with everyone’s personal style. It doesn’t work. Went through the Billboard top singles a couple of days back, heard almost nothing special. Had to turn to MTV UK’s charts. Not that those were extremely great either. Where’s the rock? Coldplay? Viva La Vida’s as pop as it will ever get. Sure there are some bands out there, but really, as a parallel, do they compare with The Offspring, Blink182, Foo Fighters, Red Hot Chilli Peppers, Bush, The Cranberries as far as 1999 goes? And that wasn’t exactly the best of all year for music.
I mean, Chris Brown? “I need you boo, I gotta see you boo”? How does that make it to No.1? “i bet there’s hearts all over the world tonight”? I bet that too, please hand me my winnings.
Posted on September 26th, 2008 by MrWiseguy
Filed under: Music | No Comments »
The same way the African dude who misteriously hinted at time paradoxes knew who Britney Spears was (if that’s not fame I don’t know what is) the same way the entire planet is aware of Heroes. In a way the show is the pop music of television. It’s pretty, it’s fun, and it caters to a lot of people without achieving greatness. But it is fun.
Now the first season was good. There’s no denying that. Who didn’t like the quirky Hiro or sexy Nikki? Who didn’t want a showdown between Peter and Sylar? I enjoyed every moment of it, including the anti-climactic ending. The second season was, if not as good, at least good enough, despite some missteps (the weepy Maya and a lot of loose ends to name a few). Now comes the third, serving us with two episodes right from the start. Was it worth the wait? Let’s see. The good: Hiro’s need for a quest leads the likable clockstopper to create a possible armageddon he fought so hard to save the world from, twice. I loved Ando’s possibly extended role. Maya? No longer as “important” as in the first season, now love interest (fits the part) for Mohinder. Nikki’s back (hurray for that! ), well, uhm, Tracy now I guess. Spock, errr, I mean Sylar back to his old self, same as HRG. Developing Claire’s character, always a good idea. Same “save the world” quest as before, works fine for me, all I ever want from it a decent plot and a lot of fun with characters. Cameos from dead characters? Check. Possible love interest for Hiro (”Nemesis”)? Check. Special effects? Check. Doomsday gleaming? Check. Action? Check. The bad: How dares Kring change characters? Making them act against their nature? Mohinder was the one character I liked throughout the first season, he was the one with his feet on the ground, the string that tied them all together. Now he’s back and I hate him. Where’s his good nature when he refuses to help Maya? Why this power hungry individual arisen out of nowhere? Prisoners let loose? Hope it won’t turn out to be a “villain” of the week thing. Peter stuck in bad guy’s body? Come on! You’ve done the amnesia thing to him already, why throw in another cliche? Possibility of Adam coming back? As much as I love David Anders, please let him rest in peace, well screaming away eternity in a coffin, same thing. And where’s Micah? I rarely like kids in movies or TV shows, but he was interesting.
Overall? Pretty damn fun, despite the drawbacks. I can’t wait for episode 3!
Posted on September 23rd, 2008 by MrWiseguy
Filed under: TV | No Comments »
Tarantino is one of the great contemporary directors, I’m quite sure no one would deny that. He’s brought to cinema his own unique style of movie-making, one that many others have tried to emulate.
However, that “style” was just his early attempt at cinema. Sure, Reservoir Dogs and Pulp Fiction are good movies, some would say great, but they were just exercises on the way to maturity for Quentin, who might have just peaked a bit earlier than I would’ve expected. I might be wrong and Inglorious Bastards might top all of his previous work, but from where I’m standing, Kill Bill, both volumes put together are masterful film-making, one that he has failed to equal (however fun Kurt Russell killing people with a muscle car may be) with Death Proof.
As it stands, his sword-flinging reference filled action movie is a perfect rendition of the turn of the century. And I don’t mean it in a historical way. His rare blend of western and martials film has it all.
First of all it’s an homage, be it in subject (C’era Una Volta Il West), style (Yojimbo), music (The Green Hornet) or in shots taken out exactly from the movies referenced (Marnie). And Tarantino knows all his film-making technique is just something he learned from watching movies, and he doesn’t hide that, he aknowledges all those that came before him, and, probably, made his childhood and teen years fun.
Then, the movie is also one big collection of music videos. The music itself could be considered a character in its own right. When The Bride meets Oren Ishii and the following sword fight ensues, I somehow felt I was watching two dancers in a music video. Later on ballet came to mind, but let’s not let our sensitive side get the best of us. There are long scenes where no words are uttered and the music is let loose to fill out heads and hearts. The result? A unique atmosphere.
Last but not least, Kill Bill is a comic book movie most of all. Even before comic book movies got their jolt from all our favourite spandex wearing superheroes. Only this one is not out of any books, but from Q.T.’s head, with a little help from our favourite blonde hellbent on revenge. And you cannot deny the movie this characteristic. Every shot seems right out of a comic panel, every line spoken right out of a dialog bubble. Even Tarantino himself aknowledges this while exploring Oren Ishii’s origins. Where else but in a comic book could you find such characters, at once preposterous and larger than life?
Which brings us back to where we started. Is Kill Bill an homage only to those who have come before? Or is it an homage to the era itself, an era obsessed with music videos, comic book characters and style over substance(something that Kill Bill possesses in abundance, yet manages to seem meaningful) cinema?
Posted on September 22nd, 2008 by MrWiseguy
Filed under: Movies | No Comments »
