Category: Trailer Park

  • Trailer Park: A little bit of that sticky icky…

    By Christopher Stipp

    Archives? Right Here…

    It’s odd but I don’t think I’ve ever seen a trailer that’s marked quite as tellingly that there was some “modification” of sorts going on with it.

    I speak here of the trailer for EMPLOYEE OF THE MONTH. Now, by the time the original trailer was released I was all over this fairly well-covered flick’s promotional materials. The trailer, the very first incarnation, was fairly disappointing. It’s a whole lot of disappointing. It was ass.

    My review today reflects the first trailer and, believe you me, I had to do extensive hunting on the Interwebs just to link right to the original as the studio behind the picture have done a pretty good job in replacing all remnants of it. It’s the weirdest thing because you take a look at the trailer listings on QuickTime.com and you see all the flicks all gathered together all nice and neat and then, bam, sticking out with its parenthesis is a nice little (Revised) indicator. Now, there are other trailers that have had a little revision but do I give two shits about OPEN SEASON’s trailer getting a little makeover? Nope.

    I am, however, very interested in finding out what was changed from this motion picture starring the one woman who I know a lot of dudes are waiting to see hit the wall with great impact. Call be curious, call me bi-curious if you like, but I did a little hunting and found it wasn’t Jessica Simpson that was accentuated differently, it was Dane Cook. Cook was, instead of being on the same wedding cake tier as Dax (How The Hell I Keep Getting Parts Is A Mystery To Even My Agent) Shephard, elevated to the top layer and it seems to be a movie, now, of singular proportions: it’s a Cook/Simpson production. Whereas the first trailer kind of made it an open field for the person who would ultimately win the affections of Simpson the second trailer kind of concedes that there isn’t anyone alive that would believe Dax would ever be the one who she ends up with.

    The movie evolved, in a matter of 2+ minutes, from being this wacky ensemble comedy to being a singular romantic comedy starring two of the biggest things to happen to Proactiv acne wash and MySpace. It’s a curious thing that there really isn’t any way to track the changes, to watch the evolution, of filmic advertising like this but I’m helping, nay, inviting, those who give a crap to check out both trailers and tell me what you think. I’m genuinely curious to get the opinion of those who can see how you can tell seemingly divergent stories with the same material. I guess, perhaps, it’s a function of the editorial process but it’s one that caught my eye and I felt like I wanted to share the consternation with someone else.

    And speaking of frustration who else here just wants to see SNAKES ON A PLANE and get it over with?

    It’s almost as if it’s this song that’s been stuck in there and it needs to be purged. I don’t know one way or the other if I am actually going to check out the cinematic event that some have said has defined the zeitgeist of the YouTube generation. Now, I don’t think I’d go that far but I will say, in all fairness to this flick’s production, that you just can’t put a price tag on the talents and comments some bloggers have given freely to this movie’s eventual delivery to the box office. Sure, you know all about it but who has really been doing the pimping, the studio or geeks who are doing the work for the studio?

    And good for the them.

    I would plunder nerds for all they’re worth too and it sounds like Samuel L. Jackson had himself a good idea of what he was doing when he signed on for this picture. The audio was collected just weeks ago from the San Diego Comic-Con and I do hope at least a couple of you click the link below to get an insider’s view of what in the hell Sam was thinking when he said “Fuck Yeah!” to this movie. You can think one way or the other about the film, groan as you realize how bad we need to just all collectively stop talking about this B-movie and get on with our filmic lives but this movie is a legitimate entry into the marketing hall-of-fame and I couldn’t agree more with fellow columnist Widgett Walls that I hope this movie does a financially better opening weekend than SUPERMAN RETURNS; it would be a great cap to this summer movie season.

    So, enjoy the audio here of Samuel L. Jackson and Kenan Thompson; the latter of whom you can hear in great garbled detail just going off to some distant land where syllables, their meaning or auditory volume have no place. If you’d like to hear Kenan drop what may be the twist at the end of the movie without so much as a moment’s hesitation on his part I invite you to just stick with it and listen.  

    Roundtable interview with Samuel L. Jackson (MP3 Format)

    Roundtable interview with Kenan Thompson (MP3 Format)

    EMPLOYEE OF THE MONTH (2006)

    Director: Greg Coolidge
    Cast:
    Jessica Simpson, Dane Cook, Efren Ramirez, Dax Shephard, Andy Dick, Tim Bagley, Brian George, Harland Williams
    Release: October 6, 2006
    Synopsis:
    Enter Zack Bradley (Dane Cook) and Vince Downey (Dax Shepard), two ultra competitive Super Club workers whose ten years of employment have resulted in drastically different career paths. While Vince ““ with the aid of his trusty sidekick Jorge (Efren Ramirez) — has advanced to become head cashier and winner of 17 consecutive “E of M” awards, Zack is the ultimate slacker whose scruffy appearance and laid back attitude has made him popular with his colleagues, but kept him stuck in the lowly ranks of the store’s box boys. The duo’s longtime rivalry comes to a bitter head when Amy (Jessica Simpson) ““ a beautiful new cashier with a reputation of only dating “Employee of the Month” winners ““ transfers to the store, immediately becoming the object of both Zack and Vince’s affection and often comical gamesmanship.

    View Trailer:

    * Large (Windows Media. The *FIRST* trailer that started it all)

    * Large (QuickTime. Noted “Trailer 2a”; whatever the hell that means…)

    Prognosis: Negative. What a thankless, wretched, mind-numbing, soul-sucking, pride-swallowing thing it is to have to work retail at a retail store.

    No, we’re not talking about having to navigate the perils of telling a customer that she looks fabulous in size seven chinos when it’s clear that m’lady needs to get a pair twice as large just to get sale. We’re talking here of having to work where consumables of all varieties are for sale. Where no one is above having to take the trash out or lifting cases of dog food or cleaning out the women’s crapper, including cleaning out and disposing of the used sanitary napkin holder.

    Yeah, working in an environment like this for ten years makes me entirely suspicious of a woman like Jessica Simpson being able to hack it but this is the movies, right? Right. And working on that premise I guess I also have to assume she’s a legitimate actress as well. Sigh.

    That said, I do appreciate the ease of which this trailer glides us into the misfit-run location this movie takes place in as it establishes, right from the start, that Dane is going to be the nice guy of the picture. Dax is, just as quick, established as the nemesis. There isn’t spectacular about this, there isn’t anything particularly remarkable about the laughs that are supposed to be induced by these two geeks. I know that what you’re supposed to be thinking after seeing the two of these comedic giants rip it up is that this is going to be a totally awesome fun-fun time at the movies. But, no, wait!

    Cue “Gone Daddy Gone” by the Violent Femmes and slow-mo the camera as Jessica Simpson looks like humping the nearest phallic symbol.

    Now, I’m no great storyteller, I seem capable of only critiquing the shortcomings of others, but the subsequent moments of Dane and Dax vying for the sensual attention of People Magazine’s Least-Likey-To-Engage-In-Manual-Labor are pretty bad. The premise of these two guys competing for the affections of a woman who gets all sorts of bothered at the idea of being with the man who becomes Employee of the Month is kind of, well, not very funny.

    I’m really trying to be generous with noting little things during the second 2/3rds of this thing which are actually amusing, not feeling anything for the tennis ball being fired at Cook’s crotch, not really getting into the slapstick of a guy checking out groceries so hard that he falls off his feet, not especially keen over the gag where Dax finds his car put up onto a really high shelf inside the store, but there just isn’t anything to grab a hold of in this thing.

    I am buoyed, though, at the romantic moments that we’re given between Cook and Simpson. While there isn’t anything ground-breaking I am thankful that the movie doesn’t look like a complete disaster. The two of them do seem to have something and it’s here where I think I got it: Dax is poisoning the well.

    The moments where he’s on screen I am really not smiling and, when he’s not, I am a lot less surly about the potential of the movie. I wish I could say that this is an attempt to be amusing but I am feeling pretty sure that there is homogenously nothing that great about his comedic stylings. Not a one. He’s an albatross. Sure as I am about anything. Swear to God.

    CHILDREN OF MEN (2006)

    Director: Alfonso Cuaron
    Cast: Clive Owen, Julianne Moore, Charlie Hunnam, Michael Caine, Chiwetel Ejiofor
    Release: September 29, 2006
    Synopsis: CHILDREN OF MEN envisages a world one generation from now that has fallen into anarchy on the heels of an infertility defect in the population. The world’s youngest citizen has just died at 18, and humankind is facing the likelihood of its own extinction. Set against a backdrop of London torn apart by violence and warring nationalistic sects, CHILDREN OF MEN follows disillusioned bureaucrat Theo (Owen) as he becomes an unlikely champion of Earth’s survival. When the planet’s last remaining hope is threatened, this reluctant activist is forced to face his own demons and protect her from certain peril.

    View Trailer:
    * Large (QuickTime)

    Prognosis: Positive. I missed this panel at the Comic-Con.

    I didn’t know anything about this movie’s existence before seeing the trailer here and now I wished I had stuck around to find out more.

    Sometimes using talent from a film to do a narrative voiceover isn’t really the brightest thing to do, I can tell you that this may have something to do with why Fox Animation packed up shop shortly after the dismal Barrymore/Damon/Pullman/et al. packed up their crap and left Arizona, but Clive has proven that since CROUPIER he has a unique attraction with his pipes and it’s no different here.

    “I can’t really remember when I last had any hope”¦”

    The opening scenes are dismal. The cinematography delicately presents the moment that Clive is stuck in with the kind of presentation that makes you believe that he really is a man who has lost any sense of hope for anything beyond a secretive moment in a bathroom john with the latest issue of Mammories Monthly. This is about the time when Clive lets us in on the fact that women stopped having babies and about when people start pelting the crap out of the train Clive is riding.

    Fast forward to 2027.

    While it’s not quite as bleak as BLADE RUNNER, and not quite as Crest Whitestrip bright as Tom Cruise’s MINORITY REPORT, the way we start to discover the world that Clive is living in is by news report. We’re completely consumed by the Breaking News story about the youngest living male who ends up kicking the proverbial bucket. People are glued to the TV sets, Clive doesn’t really seem to care and I am just trying to wrap my head about what’s going on here. I love the tempo, I appreciate the slow dissemination of information and I like the minimalist score behind it all.

    Then, SNAP, the ensuing explosion whips your attention away. It made me flinch, actually. I deserve a couple hits on the fleshy part of my arm for that. Good job.

    “Our civilization is in chaos”

    While Michael Caine offers the sage-like introspection about trying to help us all get a grip on how the world has gotten to the point where people are living in a police state the thieving of Clive by some super women’s lib organization seems like a great way to cut through the whole logical idea of helping a brother out by being clear as to why I should plop my money down. I’m actually impressed here with Julianne Moore, a feat that should surprise no one, but the fact that she is trying to get Owen’s help to get some little girl to some logistical point in this odd land hurts more than helps the cool factor of this film.

    As a side note, while I really do appreciate the quick tempo music that pipes in when Clive’s lame existence goes south and when you are using cards to tell people what flicks the director has done before dropping his HARRY POTTER installment just incites laughs from me. It’s his movie and the marketing people can put in there what they want but just watch it go by then try and tell me you don’t find that amusing as all hell.

    The subsequent moments of this trailer speed the thrust of the storyline right between our eyes but I’m not sure I still understand. It looks like a visually gripping movie and it’s plot seems to border on the intelligent side of wanton human destruction that’s going on. If I had to choose between this and anything else opening this weekend I would have no quandries about seeing this flick just based on the trailer.
    THE FOUNTAIN (2006)

    Director: Darren Aronofsky
    Cast: Hugh Jackman, Rachel Weisz, Ellen Burstyn, Sean Gullette
    Release: November 22, 2006
    Synopsis: The Fountain is an odyssey about one man’s thousand-year struggle to save the woman he loves. As a 16th century Conquistador, a modern-day scientist, and a 26th century astronaut, he searches for the secret to eternal life.

    View Trailer:
    * Large (QuickTime)

    Prognosis: Where’s the passion from the teaser because it’s not here. I saw the money that was being asked for when it came to purchasing original art from THE FOUNTAIN graphic novel and I passed.

    Quickly.

    Really, there wasn’t even a moment’s contemplation. Kent Williams’ artwork captures the mood of what the thrust of this story is really all about and I can see why that not even pawning a used car would’ve been good enough to purchase a set of his pages.

    After I finished with the book a couple of weeks ago, I just couldn’t stand idly by as people gushed over the finished film, I can say I was properly primed for Aronofsky’s vision.
    I just don’t see why there is such a disconnect between me and the new trailer. I am just not feeling the passion between the pages that the novel evoked.

    The teaser, for my free money, is just exquisite. At a very high level it gives you a taste of what this film could be, without telling you what it is, but it performs its job without so much as a wasted moment. But people were confused. The potential audience, people who don’t spend their waking hours on the web pages of Internet movie sites, would need more, though, I get that. What I don’t understand is the hollowness of the information that we’re given.

    As things open, as it does in the book, on an ancient temple, the lightning and foreboding vibe that is supposed to be present just isn’t there; we’re too far removed from what’s happening. We’ve got an old guy working on the ground like some crazed latter-day gardener, sifting though the mud and soil like he’s looking for some truffles, and he’s telling us about a tree that will help you live forever if you drink its sap. Awesome. The problem is that the scene doesn’t feel as dire as it should be for a man on a mission like this.

    “What if you could live forever?”

    Okay, I’m all about cribbing the font style of the LORD OF THE RINGS but the rhetorical question of me wanting to live forever seems awfully disingenuous when we don’t know the reason why we should even care about anything that’s being shown thus far. We’re nearly a third of the way through this thing before Rachel Weisz, looking positively radiant, feeds us the brick that should’ve slam dunked us from the beginning. Hugh Jackman, looking all scraggly and haggard, and the queen have an instant connection and the moment they share is positively perfect. That’s what makes the misstep of the opening so shitty. You could’ve flipped the sequences without so much as missing a beat but we press on. Hugh presses on.

    “2000 A.D.”

    You believe what’s going on. You can feel the love between these two people as Hugh seems genuinely distressed and angry by the obvious implication here that there is something physically wrong about his wife. We establish that he’s a doctor, that he has found something that may help, but there is a feeling that a lot is squeezed into 2000 A.D. that it’s hard to keep track of all the variables of what’s happening here. I know because the book told me but the average schmoe has a lot to chew on in this time period.

    “2500 A.D.”

    Here is where things get a little trippy. Ok, a whole lot of trippy. I won’t even bother to try and break down what’s happening in this era but I don’t think anyone could in the seconds we’re given to digest things. It’s very metaphysical but, again, I think this just confuses people as to what in hell is happening. I can’t blame them.

    “All flesh decays”¦”

    The final moments, the ones that rely heavily on 1500 A.D., actually feel more cohesive than the whole. You can get the idea that this about living forever but if you can’t help me understand why I would need to see this confusing movie then why even spend the money on it? Yes, 35 million isn’t like the original budget but give this movie a fighting chance to make it all back.

    BABEL (2006)

    Director: Alejandro González Iñárritu
    Cast:
    Brad Pitt, Cate Blanchett, Gael Garcia Bernal, Koji Yakusho, Elle Fanning
    Release: November 17, 2006
    Synopsis: Armed with a Winchester rifle, two Morrocan boys set out to look after their family’s herd of goats. In the silent echoes of the desert, they decide to test the rifle”¦ but the bullet goes farther than they thought it would.

    In an instant, the lives of four separate groups of strangers on three different continents collide. Caught up in the rising tide of an accident that escalates beyond anyone’s control are a vacationing American couple (Brad Pitt, Cate Blanchett), a rebellious deaf Japanese teenager and her father, and a Mexican nanny who, without permission, takes two American children across the border. None of these strangers will ever meet; in spite of the sudden, unlikely connection between them, they will all remain isolated due to their own inability to communicate meaningfully with anyone around them.

    View Trailer:
    * Large (QuickTime)

    Prognosis: (GASP!) Very Positive. I had a friend in high school who had parents that went to Morocco.

    I didn’t really understand why they went. The husband and wife had a modestly sized photo sitting on their large television which showed them dressed in traditional Moroccan garb as they sat in what looked like a multi-carpeted space and were sitting down on the floor. Didn’t look like much fun and I had visions of them having to endure the gastronomical goulash that Indiana Jones had to in TEMPLE OF DOOM; beetles, spiders and anything else that would’ve been swatted away here in America looked like it was fair game, literally, while it was washed down in tea cups the size of shot glasses. Yup, I was pretty damn cultured.

    It honestly doesn’t help this trailer that I am thinking Brad and Cate are consuming the exact same thing I thought my friend’s parents had to eat while in Morocco. Seriously. Although, since I became a pretty hardcore devotee of IN THE ARMY NOW I’ve been able to allow myself to imagine that camels are Morocco’s prime source of getting to one place to another. Public education, people.

    Now that we’ve gotten his out of the way I am a fan of this movie’s opening.

    The music immediately grabs my attention. Brad and Cate really do seem like a couple but you know as this exchange is going on he’s thinking about Angelina and how crazy that chick is and why he just listen to his boys and just stone cold kick it in Malibu but is, instead, having to check his blood for parasites every other week while his crazy woman holes herself up in a place that doesn’t have running water but has all the available malaria he wants.

    Anyway, back to the 4th wall of seeing Brad’s visage and being taken out of the moment when I see him here.

    Before getting confused about why Gael Garcia Bernal all of a sudden shows up, I get a rather perverted, but much appreciated (high five”¦), shot of a couple of Japanese girls from behind as they sashay in this short skirts. Huh? Don’t know why, don’t care and am just happy being ignorant about what’s actually going on here but when a little kid lifts a rifle and takes a pot shot at a touring bus that is holding Pitt and Cate, Cate getting one right in the chest (makes me remember my youth and the wrist rocket that has no doubt changed a few lives, accidentally of course), I get it.

    It’s one of those butterfly flapping its wings/how the world can change, kind of esoteric things, type of stories. I like Brad’s complete disorientation to try and help his lady but no one speaks his language (silly American), and how these events kind of all come together in a way that is really quite satisfying by the trailer’s end, but nothing can take away from the moment when the audience really gets at what this movie is aiming to do.

    For all the easy shots at Brad this seems like another gem where Brad, unlike his bat shit crazy friend Cruise, is able to take exciting material and let it speak for itself, not inject his own spin on how it should come across.

    As hard as I know some would like to believe I have been having a nice relationship going with this trailer. I think it’s story is very much germaine to today’s politics and even science fiction variables wherein it’s posited that should one person set in motion one simple event its effects are far-reaching to those who wouldn’t otherwise see the connection.

     

     

  • Trailer Park: Frankly, I’m Partial To Kill Bill’s Snakework.

    By Christopher Stipp

    Archives? Right Here…

    It’s been a long road from HOMEWARD BOUND II: LOST IN SAN FRANCISO (Did anyone bother to check the chop suey?) David Ellis has cultivated a career out of stunting before he turned his attention to directing films.

    While much has been written, and written, and written about SNAKES ON A PLANE I thought to add a novel, or lo-fi, approach to disseminating what was said at the press roundtable I sat at for S.O.A.P’s promotional campaign during the San Diego Comic-Con a few weeks ago.

    Sure, you could read all about the process of what this absurd flick has done to the viral marketing community but that would take a lot of work on my part. In fact, it would take more time for me to transcribe this audio than it would for you to sit down, watch the movie, and then deal with the shame for having seen it. I didn’t feel like doing that but not for the sheer laziness that you might think. Yes, a little laziness, as you’re going to get Sam Jackson’s audio next week and I don’t even want to transcribe that but I think a movie like S.O.A.P exists solely for the fleeting moment that it’s going to have at the box office. It will go just as fast as it came and the audio here just snaps right through the energy involved in making this film. It’s all about the fun and no one understands this better than Sam, David and everyone else who made the film. Kenan Thompson, on the other hand, had a different kind of energy altogether, probably fueled by herbal supplementation, and you can listen to that next week.

    It’s all about the cheap thrill, the flimsy and filthy excuse to have nudity and full-on profanity, and why try to gussy that up with exacting penmanship and accurate reporting? This isn’t the New York Times, this isn’t something that lends itself to careful introspection. This is SNAKES ON A PLANE and why mess with something that is going to make you feel dirty for having seen it? That’s why I’m not going to mess with it and offer something that no one else has offered (Finally! A not-so-exclusive but kinda is because I was so smart to do this and think of a good way of selling it to you and no one else was bright enough to do it and how sad is it that I need to end this sentence with an exclamation mark to make sure I accentuate my greatness!): the actual interview.

    Now, I would disclaim the audio quality but, eff it, I could understand David and snake wrangler Jules Sylvester just fine so if you can’t understand the questions the answers sure as hell come in loud and clear for your listening enjoyment. And while David is a pretty impassioned fellow it’s really Jules who was just a treat to listen to. The guy is a reptile fan and he’s just as happy about his profession as much as I was dreading of having to sit through 20 minutes with him. He made a fan out of me and I hope the audio gives you a glimmer about why that’s the case. Both of these guys made for some good audio and I hope you all remember who’s the lazy asshole who wanted to write a real column this week and not get hate mail for supplanting it with some transcriptions that you all would just peruse anyway.

    You’re welcome.

    Roundtable interview with David Ellis (MP3 Format)

    Roundtable interview with Jules Sylvester (MP3 Format)

    CRANK (2006)

    Director: Mark Neveldine, Brian Taylor
    Cast:
    Jason Statham, Amy Smart, Efren Ramirez, Dwight Yoakam
    Release: September 1, 2006
    Synopsis: A hit man (Statham) learns that a poison injected into his body will kill him if his heart rate drops slows a certain point. Now he must exact his revenge on the people who injected him before he takes his last breath.

    View Trailer:
    * Large (QuickTime)

    Prognosis: Can’t Wait Until It Comes To Netflix. This movie looks absurd, bestial, groan-worthy and worth my money when it comes out on DVD.

    After I churned through this trailer I honestly thought this could be mistaken for TRANSPORTER 3. It’s got Statham click-clacking around in his romper stompers, just looking to skull anyone who bothers to enter his walking path, you’ve got guns sliding around and shots going off in every which direction and, what every testosterone-fueled young man wants to see: hot ladies accompanying Jason as he ass-kicks.

    This really should be a negative review for a movie that will disappear from people’s collective consciousness but I just can’t deny that I love the way this trailer understands its audience, first of all, and is honest with itself in knowing that it’s better to just go whole hog than it is to try and put a dress on the pig and call it something else.

    “My name is Chev Chelios and today’s the day that I die”¦”

    When we all meet up with Statham we’re immediately thrust into how this movie is going to end. Pure and simple, this is great. Most storytellers would frown on such a reveal but now we as an audience can feel we have something invested in this guy knowing that he’s going to flat line by the end. Oh, and the gorilla/alpha male look he’s giving the camera, looking all surly, is a machismo move that will no doubt get the ladies from who appreciate this kind of Neanderthal behavior all tingly and bothered.

    “I’ve been poisoned with some kind of Chinese synthetic”¦”

    Um, so, we next get Jason telling his “doctor” that he’s been drugged with some kind of voodoo medicine and, without explaining what in the hell is going on, or what the context is of the situation, we are rushed into a pack of quick cuts of Jason screaming and pounding as herr doctor let’s us all know that his adrenaline levels are crapping out and that he’s, “gonna die!”

    Cue the Euro trash techno, hurry in the requisite action helicopter that means nothing to any of us, have him repeat the macho walk thing again, reveal some hotness with Amy Smart looking all beleaguered and then have Jason reappear in a dressing gown inside a hospital. Huh? Why is he in the hospital if he’s got one hour to live, as we’re told? Don’t know, couldn’t tell you, but I can say that this gives the filmmakers a great reason to have Jason get defibrillated while brandishing a nine millimeter on the resulting shockwave that sends him backward. Cute.

    There’s a whole lot more ass kicking with Jason kicking down doors, him getting angry a whole lot, pausing ever so briefly to have a tender moment with his lady, breaking shit up with his car in a BLUES BROTHERS inside the mall kind of moment while adding in just one more moment of Jason walking with that swagger that only he could pull off.

    The trailer ends rather abruptly but, really, who cares? I don’t. This is a trailer for a movie that has an endless supply of one liners and such a worldwide marketability quotient that I almost can’t wait to be able and see it when it comes to my video store.

    THE GREAT NEW WONDERFUL (2006)

    Director: Danny Leiner
    Cast: Olympia Dukakis, Jim Gaffigan, Judy Greer, Maggie Gyllenhaal
    Tom McCarthy
    Release: June 23, 2006 (New York)
    Synopsis: “The Great New Wonderful” is populated by people you know: New Yorkers you see on the elevator, in the supermarket, at the gym. Without a trace of sentimentality, director Danny Leiner, a Brooklynnative, and his extraordinary cast paints five portraits of life in this city a year after the attacks of 9/11.

    View Trailer:
    * Large (QuickTime)

    Prognosis: Positive. Get off your self-important ass and rent JUDY BERLIN.

    This was a movie I actually caught in the theater and couldn’t have been more taken at how well this movie, quiet as it was, spoke its artistic message. I’m a fan of Edie Falco and, not just because of her, but the movie was good because it showed how a solid ensemble can work together to all fit equally in a filmic puzzle.

    That’s why I am really hopeful for a movie like this. You don’t see a lot of these kinds of films where, instead of an Altman kind of narrative, you have people slowly unraveling, as it would be in your everyday life; multiple people with layers of issues. This is the kind of film that can either be boosted by those involved or dragged down, as was the case with Madonna’s performance in FOUR ROOMS, by a singular, soft effort.

    The trailer opens intriguingly enough.

    It’s stated that it is September 11″¦2002. I’m feeling the city used for this movie’s backdrop is New York and it’s a curious selection; not so much for the location but why one year, exactly, after the terrorist attacks? Hmm, I’ve got nothin’.

    You’ve got Jim Gaffigan and Tony Shalob (Really, one funny guy and the other, an enigma in the search for why this guy keeps winning awards for his show Monk) sharing a moment in a corporate break room. It’s an odd exchange but the two of them are well enough equipped that the resulting conversation, one that we really aren’t privy to, definitely produces a smile. It’s weirdly amusing.

    Next scene, some woman in a hot pink panties (Really, is there any other kind? I think not.) tells her beau that it’s been twenty-two days since the two have done it. I know the hot wife/distant husband trope is about as fresh as a bucket of egg yolks that have been allowed to ferment in a pile of old tires behind an abandoned gas shack in Winslow, Arizona on a delightful 113 degree August morning but she’s still a hot lady in a pair of pink panties so consider me interested in this story, sight unseen.

    Olympia Dukakis is some old coot who is trapped in a loveless marriage as she, no doubt, finds herself with nearly both feet in the grave. I’m sure it’s good but I’m not really engaged with the story for all the reasons above, minus the pink panties.

    Maggie Gyllenhaal’s despondency is not just pleasurable but it’s appropriate when she mentions that it all stems from her needing an undefined job. We don’t know what this job is but seeing her vacant expressions is enough to establish her position in this movie.

    Steven Colbert, an odd duck if ever there was one, pops up in an authoritative capacity trying to dole out a little school justice as it pertains to a troubled little dude. What’s really at stake here? Ah, that’s right, we’re not privy to any defining information.

    Olympia starts to get her swerve on with a guy who no doubt has a wrinkly sack so I am very appreciative of the trailer makers who quickly set the tension in motion and get the hell out of there.

    Interestingly, these stories start to congeal like a rather spirited Paint n Swirl project. The lines aren’t really clearly defined with how these people relate with one another but the extended moment when a lot of these people are caught on an elevator that loses its lights and then stops briefly gives me pause. I don’t quite understand what this elevator moment is supposed to mean but I do know that I am unable to look away from what happens next.

    “Rebuilding is a process”

    This trailer gets a positive if for no other reason than I have nothing firm to go off of with regard to the aims of this story but I am absolutely taken with how well the tease functions here. It looks like a solidly interesting premise but, like I said, it all comes down to whether each story can be as good as the others. Even if one fails it, unfairly, I know, taints the rest of the experience.

    RUNNING WITH SCISSORS (2006)

    Director: Ryan Murphy
    Cast: Annette Bening, Gwyneth Paltrow, Jill Clayburgh, Brian Cox, Joseph Fiennes, Evan Rachel Wood, Alec Baldwin, Vanessa Redgrave
    Release: October 20, 2006
    Synopsis: An adult man looks back on his childhood with his bipolar and self-centered mother.

    View Trailer:
    * Large (QuickTime)

    Prognosis: Next. Can’t there be any good non-fiction literature made today that doesn’t have an exquisitely twisted family at the center of it all?

    I mean, I know it’s cool to just come from a completely fucked up family where the father has a predilection for rubbing Crisco on his nether regions right before going out for a nightly streaking or a mother that might as well be a walking Rush Limbaugh pharmacy with the amount of uppers and downers she’s been able to extort from hapless medical professionals? No, if you want to be taken seriously as a writer. When in doubt, mine your personal pain for profit.

    Burroughs has. And, you know what? Good for him because if the opening scenes really happened in his life I am guessing we’re in store for a rather uppity exploration of middle-class twits who have a better handle on their own inner pain than they are with dealing with their family, interacting normally with their children and with really trying hard to decimate any semblance of what average humans do.

    We’re introduced to Burroughs as a very young child as he polishes his coins in front of his father, played here by Alec Baldwin. The moment, to be sure, is trying to capture both the child’s odd behavior and Alec’s aloofness as someone who questions his own contribution to a kid that really doesn’t act like one. It’s an odd way to start a trailer, though, and I am not sure of what I really think: is it artifice dressed up in pretentious clothing or is there something else afoot? I’m unable to answer that question as the freak show goes on tour and lands in the head of Annette Bening, a fruity artiste who has grand designs of superstardom that clashes with Alec’s more grounded thoughts about having to put in an honest days work every day.

    These values clash in a therapy session where our screen doctor suggests daily therapy for five hours at a time. It’s nuty, to be sure, but Annette is all over it with Alec chiming in with the reality of the situation. This part was amusing to me.

    This is, unfortunately, the last time where amusing will be used in this article as the next moment for this film has Alec walking out on Annette, a woman who seems on the verge of a complete mental breakdown. Therapy only solidifies the family as ground zero notion but where the movie should have been about the mother doing what she can to take care of her child she decides to pawn him off to the therapist in an adoptive kind of situation.

    Now, I guess since the movie actually happened this way in real life everyone deserves to do whatever they want in explaining Burrough’s own Mr. Toad’s Wild Ride but it just feels false as a story. I don’t have a lot invested in what we’re being whisked away from and to through this trailer but where some people might be shocked at this development, having to shack up with an eccentric (of course! All writers encounter eccentric characters never nut jobs who needed to have the NYPD break out some plunger justice on this cat.)

    The home is a relatively safe one, where weirdoes also live with him, where drugs are as available as mama’s Skittle dish, The addition of Paltrow and Wood as the sexy young wards of the crazy old coot is a hapless attempt to try and infuse some pop and sizzle into this thing but I can’t see what this movie’s trajectory actually is.

    Are we to believe that Burroughs had wonderful moments here or that he found love here or that he relishes in the oddity that is this family knowing that he’s going to be able and go on tour some day after he’s older and better able to handle a pen and pencil?

    I don’t know what to think but there is the feeling of pretension that coats the whole trailer in a sappy gunk that I could not wait to scrub off with a viewing of the trailer for Frank Miller’s 300.

    THE PRESTIGE (2006)

    Director: Christopher Nolan
    Cast:
    Hugh Jackman, Christian Bale, David Bowie, Scarlett Johansson, Michael Caine, Piper Perabo
    Release: October 20, 2006
    Synopsis: From the time that they first met as young magicians on the rise, Robert Angier (Jackman) and Alfred Borden (Bale) were competitors. However, their friendly competition evolves into a bitter rivalry making them fierce enemies-for-life and consequently jeopardizing the lives of everyone around them. Full of twists and turns, THE PRESTIGE is set against the backdrop of turn-of-the-century London, the exceptional cast includes two-time Oscar® winner Michael Caine, Scarlett Johansson and David Bowie.

    View Trailer:
    * Large (QuickTime)

    Prognosis: Sorta Positive. It’s ARMAGEDDON versus DEEP IMPACT all over again, I speak here of the Ed Norton/Paul Giamatti vehicle THE ILLUSIONIST that’s competing for the affections of movie going magis, but it really isn’t a battle between wits, it’s twits. I mean it’s not like this is a mano a mano between Doug Henning and Blackstone but this is something more than just a Deluxe 24 Pack of Tricks to Amaze Friends and Quadriplegics.

    This is something more than dueling movies; Christopher Nolan has given us BATMAN RETURNS part 2 without using the masks.

    As soon as you look at the opening sequence, Bale asking his proper and pale looking female companion to shoot him with a pistol, you don’t know whether Batman is trying out a new Gregorian vest for late Victorian nights on the town or if this something else entirely. I obviously know it’s the latter but there’s a BATMAN carryover here and it’s unmistakable.

    It’s odd that the next scene is Hugh Jackman’s voiceover as a woman gets lowered down into a tank of water, him saying something about showing a trick that no one has ever seen before, but when we see his face, and he’s talking, he’s holding a disappearing birdcage. I guess this audience hasn’t yet been exposed to Tweety and Sylvester; that cat can make that bird disappear into his maw more times than even I can fathom. The moment is choppy.

    And then we get Scarlett Johansson, doing her best English accent as she comforts Hugh’s magically delicious ego.

    Bale and Jackman, we take it, are pals. They’re the kind of pals, even, that can share each other’s indentured help that, here, takes the form of Michael Caine. To someone who has seen BATMAN and then this it is hard not to see the same kind of cinematography represented. It’s not a bad thing, good thing, or otherwise but it’s curiously satisfying as I can think of a few Joel Schumacher flicks that do the same thing, aesthetically speaking, but to a much worse degree. It’s just an odd sensation to look at something that feels like an extension of another.

    Things kick up to eleven when, in a rather confusing muddle of cockney and visual quick cuts, Bale performs a trick that seems to utilize the same kind of special effect-ness that TANGO AND CASH did when they had Robert Z’Dar fall in that unfortunate way into the electric cabling, thus allowing Sylvester Stallone to make a clean getaway. That’s pretty much what happens here.

    Jackman seems genuinely blown away by the illusion.

    The awe turns, obviously, into obsession and we’re all treated to the triad of a magician’s act. It’s a cheeky way to give us a basic understanding of what makes a good magic trick but there seems to be a lot more brewing beneath the surfaces of Bale and Jackman but the trailer just wants to feel like a glossy ad. I understand the need to have these two main characters trade furtive glances with one another but we’re not treated to something genuine about these men.

    No, instead we get Caine voicing over a series of unrelated scenes that realty need to do more than just be an assortment of chocolates in a heart-shaped box. Yes, it’s great to taste these things but, seriously, the last third of this trailer is just a spooge of nonsense. I’m excited to see this movie only because I know what it was about before but the trailer needs to be more focused lest Doug Henning gets the upper hand on this one.

     

  • Reflections on Comic-Con 2006 or: Why M.C. Bell Isn’t as Big of a Weasel as Some Would Think But Who Still Otherwise Looks Like Fred Gwynne from The Munsters.

    By Christopher Stipp

    Archives? Right Here…

    I liked SNEAKERS as a film. It was whimsy, light but has something to it that I just cannot rail against in any capacity. I think that the “too many secrets” idea is one that had real resonance for a number of reasons just beyond the movie itself. This kind of notion, that there is a machine that can obtain whatever it wants from wherever it goes and that information is power depending on who owns it, fits in perfectly for how my Comic-Con of 2006 experience ultimately left me feeling.

    You’ve no doubt seen all the up-the-minute, some literally up-to-the-second, coverage that happened on the floor in the convention halls. In the press section where I sat for many of the great panels on parade I could hear, in the quiet moments between really awkward questions, requests (“Can I give you a hug?” directed at the talent for 300 was, perhaps, the most painful) and pauses from geeks who just couldn’t get it together for their few seconds in the literal spotlight, I heard the click-clacks of live blogging.

    A lot of that content went to sites that shall remain nameless. I would hope and suggest, though, that many of these very same authors figure out that Strunk & White is not just a new television show on the FX network and that one of the greatest assets to people who do nothing but write real emotional screeds look into the eyes of proper sentence construction and learn how to use their newfound abilities to liveblog in a way that’s meaningful. That said, some of the other information that went to a little known site called the Risky Biz Blog from the very kind, polite and lethally literate contributors of The Hollywood Reporter. 

    While I was sitting in my very unforgiving, very uncomfortable metal ass hammock I was able to pull up a lot of sites on my little iBook and was amazed at the difference between what two different perspectives can bring to the absolute same story. One was well-written, concise and brought some context to the subject matter that presupposed, for a moment, some people needed a little background while some other suffered from the kind of erratic reporting that I would expect out of a 12 year-old girl who’s trying to push a day’s worth of emotional trauma in middle school into a 10 second blast. It then should follow, then, as to which outlet, take a wild, Hitchcockian stab, enjoyed the most exclusive “OMFG! Dood! wOOt!” access while there.

    I had went into all my roundtables with the idea that maybe, perhaps, quite possibly, I’d have enough juice to at least bring you one uninterrupted conversation that didn’t include one outlet’s constant question of the 2 different SPIDER-MAN 3 panels and one GHOST RIDER panel about whether, if you, like, could, you know, have a crossover movie with, like, another comic book universe what would it be, but I just resigned myself to Quick Stop’s place in the social order of things and just enjoyed the ride. On my own, and the many different ways I begged like a jonsin’ junkie, I ended up with nothing. Mr. Ken Plume, our esteemed EIC here, did a bang-up job of landing 1:1 time with the guys of HOT FUZZ and BALLS OF FURY while inviting me along, graciously, to enjoy the solitude of the Omni Hotel on a Sunday morning with some of the funniest men that are working in entertainment today.

    It was nice. Thinking about who got what and why my many calls went unreturned (A lowbrow commentary on the subject? Just a dick move.) does nothing in the grand scheme of it all. 

    I just look back at what 2006 yielded me for this site and while it’s easy to chalk it up to a bust, apart from the nerds I crushed and mauled getting a ticket to see BORAT, but there was some great roundtable moments that didn’t include socially retarded questioning from people who obviously had nothing else to offer a conversation but their ignorance.

    Believe it or not I enjoyed the living hell out of the SNAKES ON A PLANE panel. It was 4 separate “interviews” of about 5-6 journalists (if you could call us that) at 4 separate tables, with the talent rotating like some grown-up version of musical chairs, and I really had an enjoyable time talking with the film’s snake wrangler, a proposition I know doesn’t sound all that great but believe you me it was, Sam Jackson, who summed up his reason for making this movie perfectly and understands its complete absurdness as a vehicle with alarming clarity, the director and then Kenan Thompson who, donning a pair of sunglasses that Jackie O. would’ve thought were too damn big, seemed “somewhere else” during the conversation and was loose enough to essentially state what seems like the ending for the film without so much of an “oops.” Solid panel all the way around.

    There was Bryan Singer’s SUPERMAN RETURNS panel which was noticeably thin on people from the media but it looked like he was almost at the end of his emotional rope with regard to talking about this film. He appeared worn and in need for some long rest. It spoke well of him that he was able to be present for this after-the-fact kind of get-together and while it didn’t yield any great kernels of misgivings he might have about the final cut that’s out there my offer of $5 to anyone who would ask a question about the not so great showing at the box office by dollars and critics went unanswered. Damn.

    The GHOST RIDER panel was just swamped with geeks. Really. It was Noah’s Ark and we all wanted on that ship. Everyone vied for a chance to speak to Nic Cage/Mendes/Johnson about this long delayed production but it led right into the panel that everyone was there for: SPIDER-MAN 3. Now, while I intrinsically high-fived myself for being able to wedge in a question to Kirsten and Tobey in the cacophony of other journos yelling out requests like this was a press conference to discuss how a new cancer pill, available only in an anal suppository, has cured everyone who’s taken it, it should come as a surprise to some that it was really Thomas Hayden Church who was the real belle of the ball. The man is simply amusing, charming and seems like a guy who could give a colorful interview if he were to be plopped down in the hot seat for an hour. He was perhaps one of the only other actors there at the Con who just appeared to be pleased to be there; others looked like they were in a constant state of discomfort.

    The panel for 300, while not as intimate as the roundtables, sticks out in my mind as one of the most fascinating gems I wasn’t expecting to enjoy. Gerard Butler is simply easy to listen to as he was one of the few actors that came out and was one of the other kind of people that really just rode the rocket ship of a Comic-Con audience for all that it was worth. He’s another lost opportunity that could have been and I am torn as to whether I would have traded in a 1:1 for the chance of seeing the special trailer of footage that they did during the panel. It really does look like an intense film and I cannot get some of the imagery out of my skull, the slo-mo boobie jiggle that was flashed during one moment in the reel could have some adolescent reason why.

    Alas, after watching all the copious coverage on other, more up-to-the-moment, sites I was left thinking that there isn’t really any point to physically transcribing any of the panels that I saw up-close; you already know what was said and done and described in ways only the geek obsessed could have brought to life.

    I am, though, going to make the MP3’s of the roundtables available.

    Where else can you listen to muffled questions and louder than hell responses from rooms that have poor acoustics? Nowhere, that’s where! It’s my bit to try a) at least bring something unique to the Comic-Con coverage you’ve no doubt grown sick of b) keep from getting not-quite-but-sort-of-hate mail like I did last year from people who got bent when I ran a few panel interviews in leiu of my weekly column on trailer talk and c) do you know how long it takes to transcribe audio? It’s a bitch.

    I will, much to the delight of many, running at least one 1:1 in its full transcribed glory and that would be the time I spent with Jim Mahfood, soul funk artiste extraordinaire. He’s a guy who has been producing some of the best comic art in the past decade, in my own estimation and I know I’m right, and I didn’t leave his booth until I plopped down some serious coin to make sure I voted with my dollars to support good art. Telling these people who make funny books that their work is fresh, original and means something to you fills a very private void us comic collectors have. When the person in question seems genuinely appreciative of the comment it’s a nice feeling to know that you’re helping to further the cause of creativity.

    I went there with a pretty rank attitude because of being shut-out of so many opportunities that others got afforded but since I was able to hang with Mr. Plume who put a lot of this into perspective for me (Thank you, sir…) and Mr. Bell who shared how hated he was with the message board community on this site, but really deserves it because he is such a prick, I had a more satisfying experience than I was expecting. There’s so much more to add but as I roll out some of these MP3’s it will bring a lot more of this into context. P.s. – Bell was so extremely kind and happy to be there, it was his first Con, that you couldn’t help but feel good that this shared experience was with people you would’ve never otherwise known or met had it not been for Al Gore’s Internets.

    I’M REED FISH (2006)

    Director: Zackary Adler
    Cast:
    Jay Baruchel, Alexis Bledel, Schuyler Fisk, Victor Rasuk, DJ Qualls, A.J. Cook, Katey Sagal, Chris Parnell
    Release: June, 2006 (Newport International Film Festival)
    Synopsis: A drama focused on three residents of the same small town: a radio DJ (Baruchel), a convenience store owner (Qualls), and the local beauty (Bledel).

    View Trailer:
    * Large (Flash)

    Prognosis: Positive. I like this trailer.

    It’s sweet in a way.

    It seems like it’s from one of those movies that reminds you of how while it’s important to have your wheelhouse stocked with movie knowledge that encompasses the real vital films that are part of common discourse it’s also important to have flicks like these around to remind you that it’s not all about how many people know about the film; sometimes it’s just good to have something to say and to be able and render it on the screen.

    I feel cozy, in a way, when I watch this thing if for no other reason than I am quite appreciative of not being visually assaulted to “buy into” this film’s premise. This is a sale made on what’s present in the movie and it’s a rarity to even find a trailer that would risk potential viewers by not trying to latch on my jugular and shake me into submission to see this movie.

    To wit, this movie starts off, launches, right into things with Jay Baruchel. For those that may be unfamiliar with the man he was the one that just radiated that “Kick My Ass For No Good Reason”¦Please” vibe in Undeclared, the short-lived series on Fox, but he shines right away, right out of the gate. The trailer just eases us gingerly, like it’s a hot tub and we’re all dudes grabbing our junk as we settle in slowly so as to not scald the twig and berries, and I like it. Reed Fish is a dude in a very small town who has an even smaller radio show. He’s getting married in three weeks, has a funny ass friend who is very unhinged and there’s an element of possible danger to all of this in the beautiful vessel delivered unto us with the name of Schuyler Fisk; she’s hot and she appears to be able and deliver a lot of Van Dammage. The jaunty soundtrack is quite complimentary to all of this, unobtrusive and transparent, and as I look at the running time I see that all of this has been in done in 48 seconds.

    Most trailers can’t get this far in as much time.

    To boot, and this is neither here, there or anywhere, the trailer progresses without any nod to the players in this thing. Even though we’re only really talking about Katey Sagal, Chris Parnell, Alexis Bledel and DJ Qualls this is a lot of talent wafting in and out of scenes with nary a card proclaiming these people anywhere to be seen. Risky but it works here. It’s like being allowed to walk down Times Square without the noise or interference.

    Cue musical interlude by Schuyler Fisk. Of all the times I’m scouring IMDB or some other site to track down the tunes that are played in a trailer I cannot recall a moment when a player in the film itself has been the basis for the action that follows. Sure, there was DUETS but, please, let’s keep this discussion framed around actors and not twits who suddenly develop English accents after marrying emo rockers.

    This trailer is succinct, attractive and it pulls you into its tractor beam with its charm. I wish I could recommend this film for viewing but that’s the nature of being an indie: you just don’t know where it’s going to pop up.

    THE LAST KISS (2006)

    Director: Tony Goldwyn
    Cast: Zach Braff, Jacinda Barrett, Casey Affleck, Michael Weston, Eric Christian Olsen, Rachel Bilson, Blythe Danner, Tom Wilkinson, Lauren Lee Smith, Marley Shelton
    Release: September 15, 2006
    Synopsis: THE LAST KISS is a contemporary comedy-drama about life, love, infidelity, forgiveness, marriage, friendship”¦and coming to grips with turning 30.

    View Trailer:
    * Large (QuickTime)

    Prognosis: Negative.

    I never quite got what it meant to be a eunuch, literature abounding in the idea of castrated boys and men, until I saw the trailer for this movie.

    I feel nothing.

    Not a spark, not a tingle, not a flash of something inspiring. I’m not sure why this is as I am a pretty solid Braff fan from his stints on Scrubs and even for the wickedly powerful GARDEN STATE. The latter of which had a wonderful trailer that made my top ten list for 2004 (it ranked number 3) but I don’t know why the initial moments of this trailer is just painful to watch.

    I like the idea of a dude coming to terms with his life as he turns 30, the trailer just leading off with this notion as Zach narrates his own reflection, but it doesn’t work. The camera coming in close to Zach as his voice rolls in is just, for lack of a better adjective, hokey. It’s almost like he’s trying out to be a part of Country Time lemonade’s newest campaign as he sits, reflective, in his little suit, slightly disheveled, and is about to start talking about how many days there are left in the season for him to be able and take a slow bike ride in the hills of the country.

    I get that this is trying to set up a poignant piece about how people age, the benchmark here being a guy turning 30, but CLERKS II is almost about popping that notion open as well but it isn’t as gloomy as this to say nothing of Jacinda “MTV in the heezie” Barrett who tries again to play that role of love companion as best she can; you’ve got to love the staying power of models turned actresses.

    We’re slowly dragged, like forgotten, leashed dogs on a rear bumper, and I’m trying to identify with something about this film only to be disappointed with hearing that Zach’s character feels trapped by his age that there “are no more surprises” left for him in his life and he’s so bummed by the fact he has a hot girlfriend and pretty nice situation. Then, as if on cue by a screenwriter who needed to add some kind of turmoil into the mix to make something interesting, Rachel Bilson’s doe eyes present themselves to Zach’s.

    Let the unraveling commence!

    “From the writer of MILLION DOLLAR BABY and co-writer of CRASH”

    Okay. I know some people thought these were both earth shattering movies that deserved their Academy Awards but, please, let’s be honest here. The former was a good movie that had a plot device thrown at it from out of nowhere and had some real issues of believability to it. The latter was also pretty good but it’s concerns for larger social maladies were ill conceived and didn’t really have anything original to say. That said, yes, the card here proclaiming where this new movie has sprung is not only necessary but I am glad people will be able and know what they’re going to be getting when they go see this movie.

    The musical cue here Snow Patrol’s righteous “Chocolate” is played behind all the quick clips that somehow bring a more kinetic quality to the picture and I am utterly thankful. The morose tone and beat of the film up until this moment really is like a more flaccid GARDEN STATE trailer redux. With the uptempo emo pop song you’re finally seeing what this film could have tricked me into thinking.

    The last moments are fleeting, packed with more punch than everything that has come before and I am just floored that this movie does a commendable job with finishing what it started but, try as it does, it’s like trying to grab a piece of soap when your hands are covered in oil. It just doesn’t happen.

    AMERICA: FREEDOM TO FASCISM (2006)

    Director: Aaron Russo
    Cast: Sheldon Cohen, Ron Paul, Phil Hart, Peter DeFazio, Katherine Albrecht
    Release: July 28, 2006
    Synopsis: Determined to find the law that requires American citizens to pay income tax, producer Aaron Russo (“The Rose,” “Trading Places”) set out on a journey to find the evidence. Neither left, nor right-wing this startling examination of government exposes the systematic erosion of civil liberties in America since 1913.

    View Trailer:
    * Large (QuickTime)

    Prognosis: As Chuck said from CAN’T BUY ME LOVE, “Chilling.” Don’t know. Just don’t know.

    One thing that I realize, the more I grow older, is that I am much more keen on how I am being screwed over by “The Man,” that nebulous glob of government which takes my money and then expects me to go along with every law and public stance it takes. The other thing that’s harder to swallow, though, is knowing that no matter how loud I scream at those who make the laws is that they don’t care. No governmental official has ever been turned on their heels by any petition drive, a phone call to their office or an email into their HQ. Instead of just thinking that my voice doesn’t count, which it almost doesn’t in a state that loves its guns and portly republican representatives, I like to champion the works of people who want to raise awareness and shame those who would otherwise ignore us.

    While not a completely destructive film this trailer does look like something worth watching.

    “I went on a quest to find out whether there was a law requiring Americans to pay an income tax”¦”

    Right out of the chute we go from what seems like a quest to get information on income tax to hippies and average joes getting their collective asses kicked with a constitutional scholar telling us about government using force on its own people in order to further its own political agenda. We even get George W. Bush letting us know that civil liberties are important to him while a title card, right next to him, quotes him in November 2005 saying that, “The constitution is just a goddamn piece of paper.”

    Huh?

    We get another scholar to tell us that what The Man is selling us in Washington with regard to Americanism is closer to the kind of communism that we were fighting over there in Vietnam and Nazism of Adolf Hitler with images of Americans who have been physically brutalized by its own police forces (again, these could be the dirty hippies who cause all those problems at the G-8 meetings and Winchell’s when those raspberry glazed are all gone). The propaganda that’s being used by this filmmaker is topnotch stuff. They really make a great effort to go right for the jugular with the kind of message they’re trying to create. Although, I have no idea what any of this has to do with income tax.

    Next we get a republican, a balanced viewpoint, talking about the national ID card that all of us will have to carry with us by May 2008. I can’t vouch for the film’s claim that this is the case but, again, all good propaganda jumps on an emotional trigger and sticks with it. Kudos to these people.

    We get some talking head speaking about how it doesn’t really make a difference who you vote for in an election, someone else talking about how easily it would be to rig a voting machine and, finally, some talk about this dam income tax thing.

    No, it seems, there really isn’t a law requiring me to pay it but, like the flick says, dudes with guns will show up and strip me of my freedom if I don’t. To wit, more and more people come on the screen to talk about all these crazy things that are coming down the pike under the guise of big brother wanting to track my every move but it just seems jumbled up in what the initial aims of the trailer were in the first place.

    Everyone deserves a voice but this trailer is all sorts of crazy in that it can’t focus on a main thesis and then build everything around that. As it stands, there are a lot of sensationalist ideas and images but nothing really cohesive to tie it all together.

    THE SCIENCE OF SLEEP (2006)

    Director: Michel Gondry
    Cast:
    Gael Garcia Bernal, Charlotte Gainsbourg, Alain Chabat
    Release: September 15, 2006
    Synopsis: A man held captive by the people in his dreams tries to wake himself up and take control of his own imaginings.

    View Trailer:
    * Large (QuickTime)

    Prognosis: Delightfully Positive. Fellini was full of himself.

    John Waters makes self-indulgent projects that do nothing to inform the human condition.

    Michel Gondry’s high-falutin style marries vision, oddity and emotionality in a none-too-easy package to understand but its rewards when you finally get it are immeasurable. That said, this trailer’s all sorts of fucked up.

    “Uno, dos, tres, cuatro”¦”

    The moment opens up cleanly with a heavy influence of weird. I think that we’re in the sleeping mind of Bernal and every indication of weirdness makes me believe such is the case. The scene is crisp, well-lit and the pseudo talk show that is going on in his mind tells us what goes into making dreams. The moment is drenched in the kind of accepted bon mot-tery that is entirely indicative of Gondry’s style as a filmmaker.

    Gael wakes up.

    The scratchy recording that plays beneath the creatively thought out cards in-between the actual video is actually pretty soothing; whereas most of the time I am on edge because I know I’m being sold on a movie Gondry’s trailers for his last two films have disarmed me in a way where I am just satiated to just watch the thing and not think too much about it.

    Stephane likes a girl names Stephanie. Now, as the trailer lets us know, Stephane has a hard time distinguishing real life from his dream life. Obviously, this presents the kind of problem that not even Harry T. Anderson could solve in 30 minutes when that old bag held the courtroom hostage with a grenade because she couldn’t tell the difference between television and real life on Night Court. Of course, in that respect, all that was used was a VCR to help Harry get the point across but Michel seems to be utilizing visual cues that rival any surrealist movement in his arsenal of ideas.

    The set pieces, though, are visually lush. They kind of vacillate between absurd and beautiful while being completely understandable.

    These two Stephs seem to come together but repel one another in a tragic sort of way but you can honestly feel the chemistry between them. While even though Stephane is quite obviously a loon in need of a large quantity of psychotropic medication, as he at one point rams his pretty neighbor’s door with his head, you can sense that he has it enough together to keep himself fed, dressed and productive in society. Yeah, the trailer makes him out to be a little odd but there’s sympathy for him.

    As the trailer comes closer to its end, his love interest finding her way into his mental talk show by way of his obsession, I am transfixed by the latest employer to use a unique ditty in setting the tone for the rest of the piece. The song is “Your Heart is an Empty Room” by Death Cab for Cutie and just watching what’s happening here is agonizing to know that things might not end well. I wouldn’t expect less from Gondry.

     

  • Trailer Park: High Five…

    By Christopher Stipp

    Archives? Right Here…

    It was a testament to how bad I needed to see this movie.

    When I reviewed the trailer for BORAT last week the day the review went live I was in sweating in San Diego at the Comic-Con, sitting in the sprawling, and overly expansive, hall H. The SNAKES ON A PLANE roundtable interviews had just let out just a few minutes prior and on my way into the heart of geek darkness that held so many thousands of us to see what 20th Century Fox was going to be offering in the coming months I was handed a button. It was a large button that had a picture on it: Sacha Baren Cohen, as Borat, holding a small American flag. I was caught unaware and completely forgot that BORAT was a film that Fox was distributing but it was a nearly instantaneous knee-jerk reaction to the reception of the button as I asked whether, at 2:03 p.m., the panel that began at 12:45 and was only supposed to run until 2:15 had made any mention of the man who I’ve come to know through Da Ali G Show. It was the nicest “No” I was going to hear all weekend. Further, it was kismet, and almost felt like everyone was waiting for me to arrive, that when I took my seat the moderator of the studio’s panel started in about Sacha.

    The space erupted in cheers as he was introduced to the stage. When he ended up emerging from the ladies bathroom, and not from the hermetically sealed backstage that kept the steerage well away from the talent, in full character, donning his trademark suit, thick moustache and awkward smile, the masses ate up this bread and circus. His exaggerated attempts to take the stage, pratfalls and all, amused those entertained by such a thing but it wasn’t until Sacha gave his thumbs up and introduced two clips from the film that he really had a well-deserved stranglehold on the audience.

    The clips contained such outrageous content and triggered an inordinate amount of howls and laughs from those assembled to witness an ample amount of male nudity that when the lights came up it was already a given this was a movie that needed to be seen to be believed. The moderator satiated that need quick enough by declaring that anyone, anyone at all, who wanted to see the movie had to do nothing more than make their way out of the panel, up to the crosswalks of the convention hall’s front door, cross an already congested strip of traffic, make their way over a pair of trolley tracks, wade their way through an already thick sea of humanity moving in the opposite direction, get to Borat’s “ice cream truck” and claim their free pass to see the movie that night.

    Without straying into hyperbole it was honestly a Running of the Nerds moment that rivaled anything Pamplona has ever witnessed, or take credit for, in their streets. Geeks made a break for it in every which direction. The smell of a free movie ticket drove some of these socially addled gimps to feats of bravery as they tried to jaywalk or employ any other means to get around the automotive and human traffic that stood in their way of getting into this screening. There was yelling, scurrying, jumping, pushing, evading, sliding and diving, twisting and turning of dozens. It was scary, dangerous to be sure, hilarious to have been able to behold and completely out-of-control.

    I was right there with them.

    Thanks to whatever exercise plan I’ve been keeping to the past 13 years I was able to best most of the competition that was half my age but here I was, an adult of 31 years, participating in a free-for-all that I should have known better to even try or even cared about.

    “Well, if I’m not on a list or formally invited there is no way I’m debasing myself like some chimp,” I should’ve thought.

    But I didn’t care. I wanted and got a ticket and I was going to see this film. I am ultimately glad I did and have explained the initial way I came into seeing this movie as I have because I can categorically state that BORAT was, without question, a movie that has finally, after all these years since STRANGE BREW, defined what it takes to keep me laughing for the entire length of a filmic production.

    To state it more succinctly, BORAT is one of the best comedies to have been made in the past few years. It is completely offensive in every way possible, it uses race and ethnicity to further humor that no one has ever dared try to get away with in an amusing context and it is completely unique beast that finally can call itself art; there is no way you can look at this film and not feel completely attached to its aims or diabolically opposed to how it executes its vision. Films don’t posses this kind of edge anymore, before edgy became a catch-all for mediocrity disguised a few ribald bon mots here or there, and its charms took me completely and satisfyingly. Sure, you can sit through this movie and not find a single thing worth laughing at on the screen; that’s just the nature of comedy. But, any person who opens themselves up, and gives themselves into, Borat’s world, his donat, can see that this is a movie worth every gypsy dollar when it emerges in November.

    What was especially telling about the movie’s potential as a full-length vehicle was evident in that the movie opens just as the trailer did. The mere fact that the trailer was a solid sell to an audience as an amusing ad was an accomplishment but the opening sequences, extended even further, honestly set the tone and pace for the rest of the film. Just as the opening sequences established the crux and flow of the film evem before we were 10 minutes into the movie is a testament to BORAT’s rapid fire storytelling; you get in, establish only what you need to, cut out any extraneous exposition, get on with whatever gag you initially had in mind for the scene, and get the hell out. You could feel the expediency and you are thankful for it.

    This film is ambitious because you can sense that this is a movie where you weren’t going to linger in any one place, something that hampers a lot of comedies in modern cinema. In a television show you are not afforded the luxury of meandering or winding your way to a limp punchline. BORAT understands this notion from the word “Go” and doesn’t relent. Perhaps one of the best examples of keeping immediacy with the audience’s attention spans, or lack of one, is when Sacha explains what it is that he enjoys about his village. The visual gags of “disco dancing” represented with a circle of grown men in the daylight hours, outside, and in full dress is still as funny as it was in the trailer. The other activities represented are also just as effective at setting a comedic tone. Nothing, however, could compare anyone to being introduced to an event that’s quite popular with the people he lives with in Kazakhstan: The Running of the Jew. Apart from knowing what’s coming as soon as this event is uttered, a throng of Borat’s countrymen blazing a trail as quickly as possible, what could prepare someone for the visual representation of a grotesquely oversized head, colored green, hideously shapen in a way that looks like a stand-in for the Green Goblin’s next appearance on film, donning stereotypical accoutrements of Borat’s natural born enemies? Nothing. Absolutely nothing and as you’re wiping the tears from your face, the scene pushing things even further with the inclusion of the town’s children doing something so heinous I am almost at a loss to describe it, you’re simultaneously ashamed at yourself for going along with it but you have to congratulate Sacha for executing an idea that he found intrinsically amusing, no matter how some would initially react to it, hoping we would too.

    And the audience loved it.

    By the third or fourth time when you find yourself reacting to some of the events on the screen getting that, apart from the wafer thin conceit about Borat’s escapades across America to get to Pamela Anderson, one has to give credit to Sacha for being able to carry this one-dimensional character for the entire length of the movie without it ever seeming tedious. Borat’s initial encounters with people who believe they are trying to teach him new and exciting activities to bring back to his homeland works as well here as it did on the television show. When Borat wants to buy a car that is a real “pussy magnet,” as he’s come to hear the idiomatic expression, the salesperson that helps him, or tires to, reveals that small amount of honesty that most people wouldn’t imagine ever revealing in front of a large audience; it’s the ability to get at people’s openness, and to push hard when need be on someone’s sense of decorum, that takes BORAT a level above just being a spin-off from a television show.

    The oft discussed rodeo moment, one where Borat does his best to get a crowd on his side completely and then, just as quickly, gets them completely repulsed in a manner of moments is amusing but it’s really the conversation he has with a gentleman beforehand that’s really telling and should have garnerned more attention. When telling Borat of the things he should do in order to blend in with other Americans, commenting that he should shave his black moustache so he doesn’t look like the kind of guy who Americans are fighting in Iraq, was fairly interesting but when this older gentleman lets his unfounded concerns about the amount of explosives Borat could be mistaken for carrying on his person should be decide to keep the facial hair simply confirms what many of us in this country already should know: we’re a nation that’s kind of comfortable with our deep-seeded prejudices and don’t really care sharing them when we think no one’s listening. And just when you think you’ve seen it all you get man on man nude wrestling in a hotel room with Borat getting a tea bagging in the process.

    There has been the criticism, by one reviewer, that at times you don’t know what feels like there’s acting and where there feels like there is real interaction between the participants on the screen. I agree wholeheartedly but I also completely disagree. I think that BORAT vibrates the line between what kind of reality the cameras are catching and what is obviously set-up. Yes, of course, it causes some temporal confusion about what’s really what but who really cares when Larry Charles has an excellent eye and rhythm about how long you can allow people to gaze at an image before they start question it’s validity. Did I question whether or not that bear was going to eat the children who came running up to the ice cream truck expecting frozen treats? No (and it’ll make sense later, I promise.). Did I think to myself of what to really make of the accuracy or validity of the big payoff at the end of the film where you can’t believe if Borat is or isn’t doing what you think he is? No (and I swear even harder that it’ll make sense later).

    This is a movie driven by expectations and by surprises within the context of what the plot is trying to accomplish. You could put forth the argument that there really isn’t any hard plot here but that’s neither here nor there when you’re watching Sacha work his comedic techniques without anyone being the wiser. Razor sharp when it comes to manipulation and intuition, finding opportunities within seconds and knowing when it’s time to really lay on those he’s squeezing for comedic juice Sacha Baron Cohen, and Borat, is absolutely dangerous. Borat isn’t looking to bring lessons of cultural teachings from America to his home country. I would submit that he’s fine with who he is, is never going to change, and is more than happy to show Americans for who they ultimately are. For better or, for the people who believe that Iraq should be turned into a glass parking lot, worse.

    A NIGHT AT THE MUSEUM (2006)

    Director: Shawn Levy
    Cast: Ben Stiller, Carla Gugino, Robin Williams, Owen Wilson, Paul Rudd, Ricky Gervais, Ernest Borgnine, Mickey Rooney, Dick Van Dyke, Bill Cobbs
    Release: December 22, 2006
    Synopsis: A bumbling security guard at the Museum of Natural History accidentally lets loose an ancient curse that causes the animals and insects on display to come to life and wreak havoc.

    View Trailer:
    * Large (Windows Media)

    Prognosis: Negative. Take your pick: pre-packaged Adam Sandler or pre-packaged Ben Stiller.

    Ben, while I champion his show on Fox on being one of the most egregious firings of all time by a network, has been slipping a little. From the really so-so performance in STARSKY AND HUTCH, to his pretty bad turn in DODGEBALL, to his pretty limp voice work in MADAGASCAR I am still holding out for an acting performance to lift him out of that pit of half-assedness.

    I’m not so sure this is it.

    As we open on things I am not quite sure if I am coming into a trailer or choir practice as the shot of the Museum of National History where Ben walks into is alive with the sound of two dozen voices lilting away in my ears even before we get word one from Stiller; and, to think of it, it’s not like it’s a very good one as he drops a lead-filled joke regarding a re-creation of Teddy Roosevelt on a horse with him being our 4th president. 26th is the right answer but, man, was that supposed to be funny or is Ben playing someone who is infected with slight mental retardation?

    Anyway, we come to meet Dick Van Dyke and Mickey Rooney, Hollywood not being able to do a damn thing with regard to trying make these guys look like they don’t already have one foot in the grave with the other one thinking about making the jump. Don’t know why that was the casting decision but, alas, we are taken on the obligatory tour of the museum along with Ben as we take a look at all the things which are no doubt going to come alive at some point in the evening.

    I especially like Van Dyke’s warning not to let anything out of the museum. I would think, at that point, a nice conversation should’ve taken place between employer and employee about what kind of freaky action goes down when the sun does. Nope, of course it doesn’t, but no matter. Ben is on the case.

    And what a case it is as the first order of business is finding that the T-Rex is noticeably absent from its place in the museum. It’s off getting a drink of water from the fountain. Ben flips out, drops the flashlight he was using to investigate things with, and provokes the dino into a JURASSIC PARK rage.

    It’s then when the juice becomes loose and all sorts of wacky and zany things start happening. Not so much with regard to the exhibits coming to life, you already knew that, but the last third of this trailer is exclusively devoted to showing us all the talent that is in this movie. From Owen Wilson to Carla Gugino, Ricky Gervais and Robin Williams this is a star-studded affair that is really geared to selling the families out there who like their Christ laden holidays filled with guest stars, seeing how holiday variety shows have gone the way of the Chesterfield Cigarette Radio Hour.

    Myself? A lot of goofiness without a real compelling reason to care about anyone here. This isn’t a trailer looking to sell. This is a trailer looking to get people to buy on the basis on a little flash.

  • Trailer Park: And You Are?

    By Christopher Stipp

    Archives? Right Here…

    I’ll admit it.

    I’m an easy going sort of person. I like to go with the flow and work fairly hard to do things I’m interested in. I like to think I have passion and drive but I’m just not feeling it this week with most of the people who I have come in contact with (or have been ignored by).

    As Comic-Con rolls closer I have been all about trying to secure things for the site and for you, those 4 people who tune in on a weekly basis to read what I write. I’d like to think I could get people to spend a few moments with me 1:1 and pimp their wares but judging by the rejection letters that have been flowing into my email box you would have thought I was a 6th year high school senior trying to wedge my way into M.I.T., Stanford and/or Howard (straight representin’, yo…).

    And that’s fine.

    I’ve also come into possession of a pretty nifty item: a full season, behind-the-scenes, not supposed to have it, breakdown of Stan Lee’s new show Who Wants To Be A Superhero? I can’t say where I purloined the information as I didn’t purloin it at all; it was freely given to be, I will have you know, by someone last year as something that would make good reading becuase the network they intended on making the show did not. Lo and behold…the show not only is being made but it is starting in the next couple of weeks. 

    Now, the amusing part of this story is that I didn’t really think it fit here. I thought that some other person could use it for themselves. Someone who talks about pop television or superhero type things. I actually tried giving this stuff away to someone else but, becuase they didn’t return the email(s), I assumed they either thought no one would be interested in it, they were too caught up in their own mystique as Internets writers to acknowledge the email or the guys were too busy having arguments about who is really going to win Marvel’s Civil War saga. So, just click on the link here and read to your heart’s content. I hope someone out there gives a rats ass. I did. The show looks to be TiVo worthy.

    Regardless of all of the negativity I’ve been feeling this week leading up to what should be a real good weekend for a lot of people, I even offered to drive some mo-fos to Kevin’s CLERKS II showing/Q&A session that will be happening a few times on Saturday at a local San Diego theater as I want to try and right this mental flaming plane of mine that’s in distress, I give you a little something to read while the rest of us nerds, geeks, wastoids, dweebies, bloods, what have you, get our collective sweat-on inside the convention hall this weekend. If you’re going to be around at a panel somewhere I’d like to know and even though I know I won’t get a single email (that damn negativity again) holla at me at Christopher_Stipp@yahoo.com 

    I would’ve posted a panel by panel breakdown of where I’m going to be this weekend but apart from the Sony Pictures panel, the Warner Brothers panel, Kevin’s Q&A, Adult Swim panel and The Animation Show panel I think it’s going to be a free-for-all this year with doing whatever I’m feeling up to. I was caught up in doing so many movie roundtables that I think I forgot there was a convention going on. 

    Who knows who I might end up talking with but I think I’ve come to embrace Joel’s RISKY BUSINESS attitude of just saying “what the fuck” and just going with whatever flow comes by. I do believe that’s going to be my attitude this weekend. It sucks that it’s too late for me to be able and put that on a shirt…. 

     

     

     

    TEXAS CHAINSAW MASSACRE: THE BEGINNING (2006)

    Director: Jonathan Liebesman
    Cast:
    Jordana Brewster, Andrew Bryniarski, R. Lee Emery
    Release: October 4, 2006
    Synopsis: The origins of the legendary horror character Leatherface will finally be revealed in the TEXAS CHAINSAW MASSACRE: THE BEGINNING. The film, which is set years before the original Texas Chainsaw Massacre movie, stars Jordana Brewster and is being directed by Jonathan Liebesman.

    View Trailer:
    * Large (QuickTime) (Note: This trailer is only available for viewing between the hours of 10 pm and 4 am. What a gimmick, I tell ya…)

    Prognosis: Positive. I was a huge fan, still am, huge fan of TEXAS CHAINSAW MASSACRE PART II.

    That movie I must have watched over and over again just because it was creepy, scary and hilarious as all hell. You could not have matched the insane originality of the first movie but the sequel, the one from the 80’s, showed what you could do if you had someone who had an original vision and let loose.

    The TEXAS CHAINSAW from a couple years ago? Wonderful. This trailer is good insofar that you get that same kind of dirtiness under your eyes just from watching what’s happening on the screen that there is absolutely no need for a thick voiceover or some dope to try and stir some pot that’s not really cookin’, you know?

    We’re given one of the best introductions to a trailer that I’ve seen all year. One woman is singing “Mockingbird” to an obviously distressed woman who we can’t see. Taken for a tour of some backwoods Texas town, and having driven through that state I can say that is one state where I could think of a few places where I would not want to end up getting a flat tire, the song keeps going as the other woman is sniffling. Those in the know, those that have clicked on this trailer, know exactly what’s happening but we’re not given the goods so easily.

    The crying from the prey of this film gets to a high point where the camera, after panning back on the woman who begs to know why this old lady is planning on getting wiggidy wiggidy wacko on her ass, jumps away to a slew of quick cuts. These images include Leatherface, only briefly, as a compendium of other violent tools and quirks of these psychos’ lives are all shown.

    Then the teenagers come in.

    These kids, all looking like sweet meat, I mean it pains me to know that these children are going to be eviscerated in this flick but this trailer is rock solid as it cuts through all sorts of chase by quickly bringing us to the flashpoint of how we get from them, looking pretty in their open Jeep, to upside down and vulnerable.

    Not only is expediency the name of this game we move from their Jeep being flipped, to being shown that one is mistakenly left behind in an attempt to have an element of heroics being added to this horror pie, to the other three kids being tarried away with by the other members of the crazy family who we will no doubt take delight in as new and creative ways to kill people will be made known.

    It’s nice, in a way to see that Tobe Hooper is involved in making this movie. So many other films which pass as spooky horror, the FINAL DESTINATION’s of the world included, are just flat and pale compared to what’s possible when you can literally cut loose.

    This trailer is absolutely gorgeous to watch if for no other reason than this promo has a vision of what it wants to be, eschews the popular methods to promote what’s here, and uses only the film’s vibe to convey all of what’s needed in order to feel that this movie will not be a casual, visual experience.

    FLUSHED AWAY (2006)

    Director: Sam Fell, David Bowers
    Cast: Kate Winslet, Hugh Jackman, Ian McKellen, Andy Serkis, Bill Nighy, Simon Callow, Shane Richie, Geoffrey Palmer, Jean Reno, Douglas Weston
    Release: November 3, 2006
    Synopsis: Roddy is a decidedly upper-crust “society rat” who makes his home in a posh Kensington flat, complete with two hamster butlers named Gilbert and Sullivan. When a common sewer rat named Syd comes spewing out of the sink and decides he’s hit the jackpot, Roddy schemes to rid himself of the pest by luring him into the “whirlpool.” Syd may be an ignorant slob, but he’s no fool, so it is Roddy who winds up being flushed away into the bustling sewer world of Ratropolis. There Roddy meets Rita, an enterprising scavenger who works the sewers in her faithful boat, the Jammy Dodger. Roddy immediately wants out, or rather, up; Rita wants to be paid for her trouble; and, speaking of trouble, the villainous Toad – who royally despises all rodents – wants them iced”¦literally. The Toad dispatches his two hapless hench-rats, Spike and Whitey, to get the job done. When they fail, the Toad has no choice but to send to France for his cousin – that dreaded mercenary, Le Frog.

    View Trailer:
    * Large (QuickTime)

    Prognosis: Negative. I’m just not feeling this.

    I don’t know why I have such an aversion to this trailer but I don’t have a great affinity for rodents, not really endearing themselves to great connotations in the mind, and the trailer doesn’t grab your attention. It sort of meanders, plods and expects to just ease its way into establishing the premise but that’s not really good when it’s kids you want to hook. Sure, you’re going to get these little rugrats to come out en masse but if you can generate enough buzz what studio wouldn’t want more to come out and be repeat viewers?

    When we begin I’m at a loss to really feel excited. Sure, Dreamworks put out that crap flick MADAGASCAR, did great guns with WALLACE AND GROMIT, put out tripe in SHARKTALE, has done well for itself with OVER THE HEDGE but for all the great animated films they’ve put out they’ve been accompanied by solid trailers; they excite when they should, they get in get out and get on with it and they leave you thinking that even though you’re an adult you would like to see that.

    I don’t get that here.

    I am confounded as to why we start so damn slow. Yes, we have to establish that this rodent gets the rule of the roost but when I am rapping my fingers a third a way into this preview because I am wondering why I’m watching a rat play polo, have a bath and dress himself in a tuxedo that’s not a good thing.

    What is a good thing, though, that I can say is when Syd, the dirty mischief maker of the rat-a-tat-tat duo, appears I am pleased because this where we get the first notion that this is a movie for kids: we get some spirited belching. A lot of belching. A lot. Not only do we get sound effects but we get a green puff of belch with every booming punch into the sound field.

    The toilet humor keeps going, the very things that kids and adults can agree upon, with our uppity rat trying to flush Syd down the pipes under the rouse of the Porcelain God being a fandangled Jacuzzi of sorts and ends up in a place called, appropriately enough, Ratropolis.

    One of the things that confound me is that this is supposed to be a trailer, not a teaser. The crux of what seems to be my biggest complaint of all is that our well-to-do rat ends up coming down into this place that looks like a mash-up of Times Square and Piccadilly Circus but we don’t get any context of this new land. This rat even lands in the “vehicle” of who, ostensibly, is a girl rat who will probably be some kind of love interest but no one says anything for the rest of the trailer.

    There has got to be more here but I cannot explain why we’re not shown more than we are. Yes, this film is not coming out until the end of this year but I’ve been teased better than I’ve been trailer-ed in this advertisement.

    HUMAN RESIDUE (2007)

    Director: Chris Bouchard
    Cast: Rachael Blyth, Ben Anderson, Adrian Webster, Kate Cox
    Release: May, 2007
    Synopsis: Seven volunteers all signed up for the same temporal isolation program. They live with being sealed inside an underground bunker for a period of three and a half weeks. While they were under something went terribly wrong. When the experiment ended, nobody came to let them out. When they break out of their temporary home they find the surrounding facility deserted. The huge sprawling concrete facility is devoid of human life. What could have caused such a catastrophe? Is there something else out there? Even if they escape with their lives, what awaits them beyond the grounds of the facility?

    View Trailer:
    * Large (QuickTime)

    Prognosis: Positive. Concept trailer.

    What do you do when you’re really independent and need people to help finance your vision but you don’t feel like half-assing it by shooting what you can afford?

    You shoot a concept trailer.

    I really can only admit to seeing two concept trailers with this being the second. It’s an interesting thing when you think of it but I think the idea of making one makes absolute sense, absolutely. You want people to help pony up bread to let you make a movie but words and exciting hand motions, understandably, can only do so much. Storyboarding, as well, doesn’t really get the idea across as you could have Gary Larson at the helm or a graduate from the Rob Liefeld School for Drawing Good asleep at the switch. A concept trailer like this, though, conveys the vibe, style and tenor of what this movie could be. To be perfectly honest, if this film is as good as the tension that’s conveyed in the two and a half minutes that’s compiled here then let me pop my checkbook out and bounce a few bucks.

    “Awake and strengthen what remains and is on the point of death”

    The trailer starts spinning as soon as it starts. With good reason it should as well for if you’re looking for someone’s dough you better not waste any time making the case as to why I should part with mine. You’ve got tense strings playing, dank and dark locations evoking something quite strange. What looks like blood stained floorboards come in and out of view. A small, darkened crawlway underneath a set of concrete steps makes me think of Stephen King’s IT. Some clanging chains of a long since forgotten place evokes the kind of solitude only reserved for very bad things.

    We see feet in a forest. They walk quickly and we then are treated to a nice looking lady, also a plus for those looking to get financing, who is obviously not enchanted with the idea of crawling around a concrete building all alone.

    We meet up with three other people, of equal good looking-ness, who watch a very black building burn from all sorts of places. Plumes of smoke billow and we’re left to wonder what is happening.

    “There’s nobody else”¦”
    We’re not given any much more in the way of details but the slow meting of information does this trailer more good than bad as it’s all about the tease. The tease of why these people are, ostensibly, the last people existing after something sinister has happened to them is great.

    We see these people running away from something we can’t see, something we’re not allowed to know (they need more money, most likely, to show you that part”¦).

    The music gets all sorts of jittery, the camera banks sharply, the cuts get quicker, we gleam the baddies that are looking to put the big hurt on these people, we get more running and I find my interest is completely locked in to what’s going on.

    “When the experiment ended”¦Nobody came to let them out”¦”

    One of the primary things, that I can see, about what makes a concept trailer and a trailer for a film that has already been shot so similar is that both of them are used as leverages to garner interest and to set themselves apart from other competing works. This film may not have been shot yet but you’d never know based on what’s here.

    This movie can’t come quick enough.

    BORAT (2006)

    Director: Larry Charles
    Cast: Sacha Baron Cohen
    Release: November 3, 3006
    Synopsis: Sacha Baron Cohen – star of HBO’s hit comedy “Da Ali G Show,” takes his outrageous Kazakstani reporter character Borat to the big screen. In this hilariously offensive movie, Borat travels from his primitive home in Kazakhstan to the U.S. to make a documentary. On his cross-country road-trip, Borat meets real people in real situations.

    View Trailer:
    * Large (QuickTime)

    Prognosis: Deliciously Positive. When I saw the trailer for TALLADEGA NIGHTS it incensed me that, the first time out, there wasn’t any screen time given to Will Ferrell’s French nemesis played by Sacha Baron Cohen. It wasn’t so much that Sacha wasn’t represented well, it was that he wasn’t given any time to do anything. I know it is a “Will Ferrell” vehicle but give the guy some traction to help out the flick, you know? It’s really good that the time has come, though, to give Sacha his own “vehicle” and I can say with a high degree of accuracy that I am more interested in seeing what happens to Borat than I am to Ricky Bobby.

    So, right off the bat, when you see a trailer like this you’re struck by two and a half things:

    1. You’re not shown an inch of footage beyond the extended scene here.

    2. It’s ballsy not to show more because this is what people are going to base their initial opinions on when the movie actually arrives.

    2 ½. It perfectly encapsulates what makes Borat such a funny ass character so it really negates points 1 and 2.

    I will readily admit that I am a Da Ali G Show fan. Some people have said they “don’t get it” and I will own up that I was the same way until I randomly caught a segment with one of his other characters, Bruno, voice of Austrian youth TV and sly usurper of the insipid, false idols of fashion. The show, at times, is about more than just the fun he has at other’s ignorance and when, in the second season, Borat, Kazakhstan’s sixth most famous man, went and played a song for real rednecks entitled “In My Country There Is Problem” where the chorus regales the audience to “Throw the Jew down the well.” The delight that the real people took in this character’s dead-on measurement of what would appeal to this segment of Americana is at once amazing and frightening. That’s what I hope comes out of this movie and we get a good amount of Sacha Baron Cohen’s brand of comedy through his Borat character here.

    I appreciate how the trailer begins in much the same way as the segment does when it plays on HBO: we’re given a scratchy video which, ostensibly, marks the imprint of Kazakhstan’s state run video service along with the wretchedly composed theme music.

    We are greeted by a walking Borat, beset on both sides by children of his dank, poor, distant, impoverished village from where he greets us with that shit-eating smile that instantly disarms you. One doesn’t know to either question why he looks so happy or just delight in the fact that he seems to be blissfully ignorant of his surroundings.

    He tells us, while standing in front of either a trash heap or his home, I believe it’s both, of his favorite hobbies: ping pong and disco dancing. The former is shown to us in stark Technicolor with Borat standing for an awkwardly long time at one end of the table as he dons bright shorts that are really way too short to cover the goods and the latter is shown to us as a pack of dudes in the middle of the street, during the day, doing something that I don’t think Deney Terrio or Adrian Zmed would’ve let on Dance Fever.

    He also mentions sunbathing and, for the lack of my ability to describe what Sacha looks like in a day-glo green plum smuggler that was really meant for a woman, you’ll just have to trust in me that it should elicit some kind of sharp reaction to anyone who sees what it looks like.

    We’re let into his house and, again, trash heap or living quarters you can make the call. The delight he has in letting us see his state of the art VCR and stereo system that “plays cassettes” while passing the sneezing farm animal in his living room is amusing, to say nothing of the long kiss he indulges in with Natalia. She is number 4 prostitute in all of Kazakhstan and just happens to be his sister.

    And, lastly, when he lets his village know he is off to America, just taking sheer delight in proclaiming it, he gets in a car to ostensibly go to the airport. I should’ve known that the car that looks like it was being driven by a kid, it is, actually was being pulled along by a horse. Sometimes you just never quite know what will make you laugh when you’ve never seen something like it before and I can state for the record that I thought that was a great visual gag.
    It’s hard to know what jives and what doesn’t when it comes to comedy, so much of it is a subjective judgement even though I know I’m right when I say that Strangers With Candy is just pure crap, but when a trailer like this comes along and without showing any real footage is able to make me laugh my шарыs (that’s “balls” in Russian for the Eastern European impaired) off is deserving of my money when I am able to freely give it up.

     

     

  • Trailer Park: Why yes… I Will Be At Comic-Con Next Week

    By Christopher Stipp

    Archives? Right Here…

    A lot of times I get people inquiring about a certain song that plays in a trailer.

    It’s, perhaps, the one thing I get the most when people check out one of these things online. I am always happy to assist when I can as providing these kinds of answers is always nice to know people are reading.

    Then, of course, there are people like Mark D. who took contention with my assertion from a column I did in January 2005 that goofed on coach Mike Ditka’s choice of sunglasses in the trailer for KICKING AND SCREAMING. I tossed out the idea that Da Coach was sporting BluBlockers, an innocuous goof that I thought lived and died in one week’s time. Nope. Mark just recently went on a week’s long journey to find out exactly what kind of eyewear Ditka wore and didn’t stop until he got proof positive confirmation of it.

    Sometimes it’s the songs in trailers that get stuck in your head, be it Keane’s song “Somewhere Only We Know” in THE LAKE HOUSE, James Blunt’s ditty “Wisemen” for TRUST THE MAN but sometimes it can be a passing image and Mark D. receives a No-Prize this week for showing that obessive/compulsive behaviors know no boundaries.

    Also, to those who are going next week to the Comic-Con in San Diego next week: shoot me a note to let me know you’re going. It’s the one time out of the year when I actually get out of the house and get some sun so it’d be nice to see some of you ‘Shooters, or ‘Stoppers while I’m there trolling to see what I can buy and ostensibly make a good enough case to my wife about why I really do deserve to have a 1:1 scale replica of the Green Goblin’s head next to my pillow on my night stand.

    Now, in other, more enviornmental news, I had the chance to watch the documentary WHO KILLED THE ELECTRIC CAR? which was kindly punted my way from the nice people at Sony Pictures Classics and anyone within West Coast ear shot this week was treated to a short, yet amusingly poignant, interview with Chris Paine, director and writer of the film, on the Adam Carolla radio show.

    Now even though most listening to Adam and Chris talk about the oddity that was GM’s EV1 electric vehicle leasing program, ostensibly to see how people would respond to this new brand of automobile, was peppered with jokes it was at the same time appaling to know that GM was folding under the pressure of outside influences, namely the oil companies, and never allowed those who leased these prototypes to ever have ownership of them.

    They were all taken back, in perfect working condition, and “recycled”; crushed into pieces. Thus, this is only really the surface of what’s contained in this film by Paine.

    Now, all things being equal there is no divorcing the fact that Paine, himself, was an owner of one these cars and making this movie seems like a catharsis or a call to arms of some kind. Those seeing the former will no doubt see the overwrought funeral scene in the beginning of this movie, where the EV1 is quite literally mourned and eulogized in a cemetary as some hippie cum granola head grandstanding that not even Air America would be able and spin in their favor. Heap onto this that Martin “tree hugger” Sheen is narrating this thing and already the film’s motives can be called into question.

    However, the bulk of the movie’s weight, it’s importance is embedded with things that are not of the filmmaker’s making: GM’s awful response to why the EV1 was really taken off the road, numerous events that call into question who really is in charge of this country’s legislature and chilling reminders that conspiracies are not just for those people who like to rock a tin foil hat once in a while.

    We are all beholden to an economic system that is based on oil, oil interests and the money that can buy every single person in Washington if given the opportunity and there isn’t anything, not you, you or you will be able to change the way things are. That, I feel, is the most sobering message in this film and one that, while there are minute things we all as a populace could do if so inclined, I think is important to keep fresh in people’s minds.

    The film is so much more than the sum of its parts, from its dead-on use of interview material to its personal ancecodes of those who drove the vehicles and champion the experience of driving the cars while also skewering GM’s assertion that since there wasn’t a lot of interest in these cars it made perfect sense to kill the prototype project; there was, in fact, a waiting list of over 5,000 people waiting for these cars and, despite GM’s claim that only 50 of these 5,000 ever took GM up on a lease, every single car that was offered up by GM was taken by a willing customer.

    This is a movie that should be required viewing for anyone who wants to see how we, as a country, can come to the point of where we’re paying over $3.00 a gallon worth of gasoline for cars that are actually getting worse gas mileage than their ancestoral brethren from decades ago. It boggles the mind and this movie should be seen as a first shot across the bow of monied interests that will continure to do whatever it wants with the funds it has at its disposal. WHO KILLED THE ELECTRIC CAR? is now out in theaters.

    THE PUFFY CHAIR (2006)

    Director: Jay Duplass
    Cast: Mark Duplass, Kathryn Aselton, Rhett Wilkins, Julie Fischer, Bari Hyman
    Release: June 2, 2006
    Synopsis: Josh has failed at being a NYC indie rocker. Josh has failed at being a booking agent. Josh’s life is pretty much in the toilet. When he tries to figure out where it all went wrong he comes up with an idea that would be a small, yet life changing victory. He decides to purchase a 1985 Lazy Boy on eBay and deliver it cross-country.

    View Trailer:
    * Large (QuickTime)

    Prognosis: Positive. Please.

    If anyone has ever cared about asking me the question “What’s the best way to start a trailer?” you can simply hop in your modified Honda hooptie CRX with the glass packs, Calvin pissing on a Ford logo, muffler that looks like it shoot russet potatoes and watch the opening to this one.

    There is nothing mysterious about some of the more keener ways to get people’s attention but, at the absolute minimum, you should take the advice that dropping someone into the crux of what the whole movie is going to revolve around is a good idea.

    What could be better than bringing people into a conversation where we don’t know the person talking, what they’re all about or why he’s talking about a puffy chair? I like this because we’re not subjected to half-cocked voiceovers trying to make sense of the plot for us instead of the actors, whose job it is to make me believe in the story, doing it for us; and that’s what we’re given here: dude buys a chair that reminds him of his youth, is going on a road trip to deliver it to his father and, by the way, this movie was a Sundance Selection and a winner at the SXSW festival.

    Bing.

    Everything I need to know about what this movie is going to do is put out for me to judge, a rather bold movie when you consider the amount of deceit that goes into a lot of trailers, and since it was so refreshing to me as a viewer I am pleased to give this movie more of a chance than I give others.

    It’s funny that our protagonist, who really hasn’t been clearly defined yet, apes John Cusack’s boom box over the head shtick, something I am surprised hasn’t been done more in a co-opting culture such as ours, as he convinces his really cute lady friend to go with him on this road trip. We meet up with the dude’s other friend, a hippy Jack Johnson type, who expresses interest in inserting himself into this adventure and I think it adds a little extra element of curiosity that things shift in this direction.

    A positive review from The Daily Mirror always helps; it’s brief, to the point, and disappears swiftly.

    A jolt suddenly passes through me as we’re exposed to our main man cavorting and running around in his tighty-whiteys.

    Quick love note from Variety is nice.

    Our dude and his lady share a special moment at the dinner table and, I swear, like art imitating life it is disrupted by the guy’s insistence on taking a phone call from one of his “bros.” The accompanying violent outburst from his girlfriend is really unexpected.

    The quick clips that come after this show us that our man is capable of rage all his own with his mouth, his hands and the way his lays into the car horn for a really long time. I am not sure of how to follow the plot further after things start to disintegrate with all these people, the hippie trying to be the calming force within the eye of these hurricanes, but the plot here inexplicably fascinates me.

    “You want me to be this dude that I am not!”

    Girl loves boy, wants to marry boy, boy pushes girl away but there is something real there that deserves closer examination. By the time the trailer ends my interested is not only whetted but I am genuinely concerned to know where things will go with not only these people but what the chair really has to do with everything else.

    LITTLE MAN (2006)

    Director: Michael Cuesta
    Cast: Marlon Wayans, Shawn Wayans, Tracy Morgan
    Release: July 5, 2006
    Synopsis: A wannabe dad (Shawn Wayans) mistakes a vertically challenged criminal on the lam (Marlon Wayans) as his newly adopted son.

    View Trailer:
    * Large (QuickTime)

    Prognosis: Negative. So, on my way to see ICE AGE 2 with the fam I saw the lobby display for LITTLE MAN. I’m no expert and I don’t purport to know such things but the line on the standee proclaiming this new film is from the same dudes who brought us WHITE CHICKS is not one I would choose to use willingly, publicly.

    I had the sharp misfortune of watching a part of WHITE CHICKS and I am positive you do not want people to know you’re the masterminds behind that movie. Absolutely positive.

    Keenen Ivory Wayans, a true comedic talent who brought us I’M GONNA GIT YOU SUCKA and In Living Color when it didn’t suck so much, is the guy behind the directorial lens and I don’t see any mention of this guy’s work which is a little disappointing. That said, though, this movie disturbs me a little.

    When we start out the Voiceover Guy talks about a world of crime and for some reason I guess the phrase “world of crime” means being shown a static shot of a prison cell. I don’t know what one has to do with the other but it’s odd. Next, we get Marlon Wayans, a really solid actor when placed into a film like REQUIEM FOR A DREAM, starring in a weird amalgam of a kid and midget. I don’t think I can overstate that it looks weird, really weird.

    Tracy Morgan comes in to help play the straight man in the beginning of this trailer as Morgan helps to boost a car that already has a Denver Boot attached to it. Ha ha, very funny, I know, but Marlon tries to play up this whole ruse as best he can, him being this mutant midget of sorts. I’m not sure if we’re supposed to be freaked out by this or that we’re supposed to take it at face value but when Tracy and Marlon go into a jewelry store to boost a diamond, with Marlon being transported via a duffel bag, I’m not sure whether to be insulted that we’re supposed to believe this or think it’s hilarious that this is going on.

    I’m honestly torn because some part of me is laughing on the inside while another part of me is glued to the screen as I try to figure out why this looks so freaky.

    Long story very short, the guys have to recover the very same diamond Marlon stole just a few moments ago as Marlon ditched it in some woman’s bag. Sooooo”¦Marlon is placed in a basket and pretends to be a baby to infiltrate the household.

    I’m still reeling as I try and come to terms with my sense of humor on this one. Supposing that this is the accepted norm I am at least comforted by comedian Fred Stoller’s comments that the kid is adorable in a, “National Geographic sort of way.”

    The trailer, for the most part, hits the notes that it has to in order to sell this as a goofy comedy: you’ve got physical humor as you have Shawn and Marlon drinking warm milk only to discover it’s breast milk; you’ve got the obligatory nut shot when Marlon swings for the fences during a game of Wiffle Ball; you’ve got about as close as you’re going to get with a fart joke as there is a struggle to apply a rectal thermometer to Marlon; and there’s the whole wife/mistaken identity situation that has been done before in other flicks and has been rehashed here for our pleasure.

    I don’t think I am as willing to break bad on this flick as I am absolutely positive that I’m not going to see it. It doesn’t look like my kind of funny but, for some, this might be just the right thing for people come July. These people being, of course, those who thought that WHITE CHICKS wasn’t a complete disaster that begged the question, “What in the hell did I just allow my eyes to witness?”

    THE HOLIDAY (2006)

    Director: Nancy Meyers
    Cast: Cameron Diaz, Kate Winslet, Jude Law, Jack Black
    Release: December 8, 2006
    Synopsis: Two women troubled with guy-problems (Diaz, Winslet) swap homes in each other’s countries, where they each meet a local guy and fall in love.

    View Trailer:
    * Large (QuickTime)

    Prognosis: Negative. Seriously. Burn this film before others are infected.

    Tripe, crap, bollocks and everything other adjective one can find to describe something savagely mediocre is, perhaps, the most succinct way of stating how I feel about this trailer.

    Right off the bat I’ll start with the one kudo: “Cold Hands, Warm Heart” by Brandon Bensen is misappropriated at the mid-way point to give this trailer a jingly jangly kind of soundtrack and, since I’m a fan of the song, I am alternatively disappointed we’re given nothing but lameness to set the music to.

    Now, I’ve given stellar comments about romantic comedies but, I believe, the reason why this one falls short is that from the very beginning we’re not given much to really grab onto that’s fresh or original.

    To wit: we start with Kate Winslet speaking in rapid Olde English about being the pin pump cushion for a random man interested in just stealing some poon while, essentially, being engaged to another woman. Oh, poor Kate.

    Next moment? Cameron Diaz confronts Edward Burns about being unfaithful. Ed admits that he has. Cameron punches Ed in the face. Oh, poor Cameron.

    We’re a quarter way through the trailer and I am scratching my eyes for something interesting. I get Brandon’s musical interlude, and I get excited, but all I get for my troubles is a plot about some fake international program where you AGREE to trade your home, car, everything, to someone from another country. It’s amazingly insane that we get Cameron’s “inner dialogue” in full audio about stating the What-if premise right out in the open. For those who know a thing or two about comedy the essential What-If element is always implied but I don’t think it’s never been so forced, so out in the open as when Cameron’s fake misery sets up her eventual “trade” with Kate’s place in cold England for Christmas. This moment in the trailer really is representative of everything that’s wretched about poorly made romantic comedies.

    All is not lost, however, as Cameron, in all her ignorance, wears her finest leathers and high heels in the wackiest FUNNY FARM-kind of moment: she’s unprepared to deal with the shocking conditions of snow, ice and a driveway that’s at least a mile long all the while lugging a suitcase and valise, wackily, through it all. It’s inane and for anyone here that finds this moment amusing, you must be part of the female demographic this movie is obviously pandering to.

    “From Nancy Meyers”¦The director of SOMETHING’S GOTTA GIVE and WHAT WOMEN WANT”

    Nancy, do you realize I had to see both of these movies? Forced to see these movies. You know what I found out about what gives and what chicks really want? Softball plots, dialogue dripping with enough estrogen for me to grow a pair of hooters like Bob from FIGHT CLUB and situations so skewed towards the improbable that the flicks should be reassigned to the Science Fiction section of my local video superstore.

    Now, we progress further. Initially we get the vibe that Cameron is so done with dudes but, we come to find out, as soon as Jude Law comes into the picture, literally, he’s essentially panty peeler for the Englishman.

    The trailer boggles the mind as, when Jack Black comes into Kate Winslet’s world, we shift violently to her, sorta, getting her groove on with the other chubby member of Tenacious D. I don’t know whether I don’t believe Jack’s ability to help carry the notion of being an attractive enough dude for ladies to woo Kate or if his pseudo-intellectualism that’s throwing me off. I also know that his place in this film couldn’t have been more glossed over in a hurry. Is he or isn’t he a love interest? I’m not given enough to go on.

    It’s no matter, though, because I couldn’t be more eager for this movie to come and go out of the movie theaters. Pure saccharine awfulness.

    SPIDER-MAN 3 (2007)

    Director: Sam Raimi
    Cast: Tobey Maguire, Kirsten Dunst, James Franco, Thomas Haden Church, Topher Grace, Bryce Dallas Howard, Dylan Baker, Elizabeth Banks
    Release: May 4, 2007
    Synopsis: A specimen from the moon gives Spider-man new powers and a black suit, while Spider-man must battle the second Green Goblin, Sandman, Venom, and other dangers.

    View Trailer:
    * Large (QuickTime)

    Prognosis: Positive.

    By the time the first installment of SPIDER-MAN was released I was deeply enmeshed in that film’s marketing campaign.

    From the initial teaser, that was all but removed from the collective conscience because of the events of 9/11 from the use of the twin towers, to the full trailer that drove home every notion that Rami got it right that campaign synergized everything about that movie succinctly and perfectly.

    Now I’m given this. I’ve been given this and I don’t know what to make of it.

    Initially, though, this piece acts just as it should for a teaser: you’ve got barely a whiff of the concoction that is the final film, it’s more about words than it is images or clips and you’ve got a heavy handed score to back it all up.

    The first ¼ of this trailer is just fine. You’ve got that wicked font that has been this franchise’s hallmark, personally I would’ve gone with Wingding 10pt, we’re led on an electronic rendering of Spidey’s costume which brings up a curious point: wouldn’t it have been that much more exciting to even have this very same sequence done with the real costume? Jeez, you could’ve put Verne Troyer in it and had the same number of close-ups with the end result being a bang, pow, eye-grabber.

    Oh well, we plod on”¦

    And then you give it to me, nearly halfway through the trailer you give me the goods and it is splendiferous. The black costume, the score behind it, the gloomy/rainy environment? Perfect in every way. This is the kind of cock tease that gets fanboys and nerds scurrying home to their basement lairs inside their parents’ homes just to start chatting away about what comic arc this story is going to be told from. Personally, I liked Bendis’ recent foray into how Parker could’ve been used as a test experiment which ultimately leads to the black suit and I am also partially fond of McFarlane’s take waaay back in the 90’s as I think, from a aesthetic standpoint, lord knows it wasn’t because of his dedication to accuracy from a physiological stance, seems like he was taking lessons at times from the Liefeld School of How to Draw Good. But see what happens? This kind of nerd postulation starts to happen and that’s a great thing to be able and do simply by the introduction of a black painted suit.

    Well done.

    I mean even as Spider-Man drops from a wicked height, his body positioning, his arms, his hands, all speak to the character that really hasn’t been given its due honors as a formidable element to the Parker universe. And, this too, makes my pants fit a little snugger.

    James Franco, Topher Grace (who deserves more props than his mildly retarded cast member, Ashton Kutcher, as the real reason That 70’s Show was a solid show), Kirsten Dunst all make their obligatory face cameos which help to move this teaser along quicker than really it should; this is a good thing as, usually, you don’t even a fraction of what’s given so I feel blessed.

    The eye candy explodes from every which direction: you get the Sandman doing his thing, you see how the symbiote attaches itself to Spider-Man’s costume, Thomas Hayen Church’s visage pops up, along with the Green Goblin version 2.0 and then a screeching “Huh?” with Parker’s alter-ego looking like he got his hair cut at Adolf Hitler’s Salon and Nail Barn. I mean I get it but it just looks like an obvious move to show how the evil alter-ego is making its way into Tobey’s life.

     

  • Trailer Park: Your Friendly Neighborhood ‘Geek’… ‘Fanboy’

     

     

    By Christopher Stipp

    Archives? Right Here…

    What a difference two weeks can make here at the Trailer Park.

    A couple of weeks ago I was name-dropped and put in The Hollywood Reporter’s coverage of The 35th annual Key Art Awards. It was such a delightful and satisfying thing to be recognized in one’s chosen field of media expertise that I was asked to judge the trailer competition alongside notables as, “the Reporter’s Kirk Honeycutt and Anne Thompson, the Los Angeles Times’ Kenneth Turan, Entertainment Weekly’s Owen Gleiberman and Lisa Schwarzbaum, the Washington Post’s Desson Thomson, AdWeek’s Gregory Solman,” and, “the Associated Press’ Gary Gentile.” It’s one of those little things in life where if you do something because you love and have passion for it there is something intrinsically validating about an external nod of affirmation to keep on doing what you believe you can do well. I’m here because I can’t imagine not writing something new every week of my life and because I want to see this site to become more than just a footnote in the vast history of the Internets. There is talent here brimming from all sides and it feels good to know that the site gets recognized along with me. I’m not a huge believer in all that corporate claptrap about no one being more important than the whole but I believe it here. So suck it, haters.

    Along with that mention from the Reporter I was interviewed for a good 15-20 minutes last week with a reporter from The Washington Post on an article they were creating about movie trailers in general. (Yes, you have to register to read it but try this “authentic” NAME and PASSWORD: bill7000@msn.com, Password: bill) It was an excellent talk about movie trailers in general and, really, marked the first time I’ve ever discussed what I’ve done with someone at any great length. Most times at cocktail parties I just drop my day job and leave it at that because I’ve learned that watching movie trailers doesn’t really translate well to long, enriching conversation when you have to explain the ins and outs of deconstructing these little things. It’s only really interesting to me, I assume, so I try to bring it up only when pressed by other people to bring it up. I am disappointed, though, that I was reduced to a fraction of what I told the reporter if for the only reason that I had an epiphany while talking to her and came to the conclusion that watching trailers is still a very solitary experience. You can see the amount of traffic QuickTime gets from people looking at the new trailers that come out but where’s the dialogue? Where’s the break-down of what’s to come? The trailer for SPIDER-MAN 3 looks insanely good, even though it starts out a bit rocky, but where, besides message boards, are there people whittling these things down to their essence?

    Nowhere is the correct answer.

    Nowhere but here and it isn’t so much that I am happily boasting, I’m not, but I would visit *other* sites if someone else were to do it if they were examining these things critically. I’d like more peers in this segment of entertainment. I was a huge fan of literary criticism when I was going for my master’s if for the only reason than, as a consumer, you’re free to make any assertion you want about anything as long as you can back up what you’re saying. You think “Othello” is really a parable of homosocial relations between men? Fine, but prove your point (and big ups to Eve Kosofsky who made me see Shakespeare in a completely different context). And I’ve since learned that since not everyone wants this, and that everyone here merely wants to be entertained before going on to Fark.com or Digg.com, I like to couch everything I say with a mellow bent on things.

    It makes me proud that I am a “31-year-old self-declared “˜fanboy’ and “˜geek’ from Arizona” because there’s an honest representation of why trailers matter. These things matter and, as readers, you matter. So many people say this is the best part of going to the movies and they are. I’m just glad to be one of the only people out here talking about them every week for your personal amusement. So a compliment for me is a compliment for you. Huzzah.

    That said, let me now rip a new a-hole through prose to the buttfaces who were giving me jive for ordering some Child sized popcorn at the local theather. If any of you have had the same resistance I am sure you can relate to what I would like to put on fancy paper, put in a parchment envelope and sealed with a waxy clasp to the person in charge of these young’uns who are no doubt just doing what they’ve been told.

    “To whom it may concern,

    While I understand the need to up sell me when I visit your lobby to get myself some treats, as the talking popcorn admonished me to do in ONE CRAZY SUMMER, right before George Calamari does that funny thing where he scares Hoops McCann, do you have a clue that as a grown man I know what I’m getting myself into when I ask for something?

    To wit, I visited your Harkins Scottsdale 101 location on two different occasions in the past week. Once was to see MISSION: IMPOSSIBLE 3 (Yeah, I know. Cruise is batshit crazy but the din was impossible to deny from those who saw it and gave it a favorable mention) and the other was to see THE BREAK-UP (Yeah, I know. But, seriously, the wife really wanted to see this movie and I made it a point to make sure we saw this on the first opportunity we had as I am a huge John Michael Higgins fan and he was just spectacular. Now I look like a champ, I got what I wanted and now it’s my pick when we’re allowed to leave the sanitarium which is my household.). I went to your amply stocked snack Valhalla and ordered a Child sized popcorn. While taking in your other menu choices (A dill pickle on a stick? Who the hell is ordering this that warranted a vendor to help you stock a vat of dill pickles on sticks?) I was asked by your just-older-than-Malaysian-child-labor employee working my order the following question:

    “˜Are you sure that’s going to be enough?’

    I was taken aback. I don’t think I was shocked more than I was a little reflective on the suggestion that maybe I hadn’t properly thought out what I might be able to pound down my gullet. I’ve never had someone question my ability to consume and, having an athletic build, maybe I looked a little emaciated and this hourly liege was just offering their professional opinion; Lord knows these kids nowadays can consume pure food poundage faster than the money being spent in Iraq on a daily basis.

    And then it struck me as they started to tell me that I could make a much larger selection of popcorn for just”¦.

    “˜No. I want the Child size, thank you.’

    I don’t know why I added the thank you. I shouldn’t have if for the only reason than when I visited the same location, seven days later, and ordered it again because I found the portion size to be just perfect, I was given the same response by a girl who could barely get the sales pitch out due to the impedance of her rubber banded braces. I really, and honestly, should’ve called “shenanigans” on this bull-shiat tactic that you’re teaching these kids but I didn’t. I know it’s just something you’re doing because the snack bar is the one place where, like our modern rock stars and their $45 dollar t-shirts being sold across at mega arenas, you see profits. These kids are just unwitting pawns of your crap training scheme. Do you have sales material that explains that these kids should question the tolerance of people who order popcorn or fountain drinks? Do the people who order the biggest size in both these categories get serviced with a smile and “Will do!” chop-chop-iness? Have you thought about whether you’re partly to blame about why Americans are seeing their waistlines burgeon to alarming sizes?

    As a sales guy myself, I can respect the fact you want to make more. You want to stay in business and up selling is all a part of the game we all know about when we go into the theater. However, don’t question my tolerance for the amount of popcorn I want and whether it’s going to be satisfactory to satiate my appetite. It’s just one more excuse why people might not be so hot to come to the theaters. If you’re not giving them sticker shock at the ticket booth then being harassed at the treat counter isn’t doing you any favors when thinking about the diminishing window between theatrical and home video release dates.

    Now, I’m not about to make some threatening claim about not patronizing your establishment as you’re, really, the only drug dealer in town who can give me what I want the most but I am letting you know that I know that we all know what’s going on behind that counter of yours. I might start using my college ID from ten years ago to get a discount as recompense for my trouble but my beef isn’t with the studios. If you don’t want people buying the Child size then stop selling it next to your pickles on sticks.

    I mean, good God, man, who are buying pickles on sticks as a snack to eat while watching a movie? I can’t think of one viewing for ABOVE THE LAW where the Vlasic stork and Steven Segal seemed like a pairing made in heaven.

    Sincerely,

    Christopher Stipp”
    Yeah, it’s been a roller coaster of a couple weeks…

    MY SUPER EX-GIRLFRIEND (2006)

    Director: Ivan Reitman
    Cast: Uma Thurman, Luke Wilson, Anna Faris, Rainn Wilson
    Release: July 21, 2006
    Synopsis: When a regular guy (Luke Wilson) dumps a superhero (Uma Thurman) because of her neediness, she uses her powers to make his life a living hell.

    View Trailer:
    * Large (QuickTime)

    Prognosis: Why God…Why hast thou forsaken me? I’m not a huge fan of the American-ized The Office series on NBC.

    It has nothing to do with my fondness for the UK version but, I feel, the series tries too hard to be amusing and it only feels like a forced display of how this little company of chimpanzees can fling their poo amusingly at the camera. That said, I am a fan of Rainn Wilson.

    “Ooo”¦Check that out”¦Uptight librarian on the outside, ready to rumble on the inside.”

    The trailer opens great, I’ll give it that much. Rainn does his dependable duties as the second banana by peeping Uma Thurman on a subway, makes his above comment and, oddly, we’re allowed to proceed to the next portion of this movie’s introduction without so much as a practiced voiceover from some kind of “wacky” perspective.

    Luke, who really is an actor that seems to believe there are no small parts and is grossly underrated, does his best to impress Uma and, color me amused that she has the ability to be funny, shoots our man down ingloriously when he tries to nonchalantly pick her up for a date.

    One of the problems I stumbled over, though, is I don’t know how we get from Uma being this cold, standoffish woman when he tries to ask her out to there being an extended scene here where the two of them are going at like crazed mules on Spanish Fly. She, of course, has super powers and rips off Luke’s clothes with savage aplomb.

    There is some awkwardness in trying to get from her blowing him off, to the two of them doing it, to Luke navigating himself through a series of odd moments where Uma plays the part of the needy, psychotic girlfriend.

    I just don’t get it. There’s no flow through any of these scenes. I’m all sorts of turned around and I don’t understand if it’s Luke that’s the rube, Uma the one who deserves to be dumped or if the two of them are somehow to blame for there being such an ill fit with regard to the relationship. I’m pretty sure it’s Uma who is to blame but, the trailer being so muddled, I can’t say for sure and that’s a problem when you’re trying to create some real regard for your characters that you hope people want to know more about and get to know. This trailer is having a personality disorder.

    This when we get a useless tirade, a real time waster, from Rainn about how to break up with his lady friend which only drags my attention down with it. After the eventual “break up” happens it is now time for Uma to unleash her superpowers for us to witness.

    I’m not sure if it’s the awkwardness of the trailer up to this point or if it’s an indication of something more serious to do with the movie but the displays of her abilities are kind of old and busted. We see her zipping around really fast, we see her using her super strength to do really bad things to Luke’s car, using her crazy vision to flash fry the fish in Luke’s tank (I think) and we get it all set to the modern sounds of Fine Young Cannibal’s “She Drives Me Crazy” (Awesome choice there, Trailer Maker! What was the runner-up “Girl You Know It’s True” by Milli Vanilli?).

    Wanda Sykes is here to add to the racial tension of the movie as is her want in most everything she does, we get some really really bad effects of Uma tossing a shark into Luke’s bedroom as he’s trying to woo some young woman and, to end it, we have the two of them sharing a meal with Uma saying that she knew they’d be back to together and that’s why she didn’t kill him. Huh? I thought everyone determined she was some crazy broad who deserved to get punted yet Luke still goes back to her by the end?

    This trailer is confusing, lame and does so many other things wrong that it should be sent back to the plant for some Quality Control testing. Where’s a thick slab of Kryptonite that could smother this thing when you need it”¦

    WORLD TRADE CENTER (2006)

    Director: Oliver Stone
    Cast: Nicolas Cage, Michael Peña, Maria Bello, Maggie Gyllenhaal
    Release: August 11, 2006
    Synopsis: Director Oliver Stone tells the true story of the heroic survival and rescue of two Port Authority policemen ““ John McLoughlin and Will Jimeno ““ who were trapped in the rubble of the World Trade Center on September 11, 2001, after they went in to help people escape. The film also follows their families as they try to find out what happened to them, as well as the rescuers who found them in the debris field and pulled them out. Their story shows how the best in people rose above the tragic events of that day.

    View Trailer:
    * Large (QuickTime)

    Prognosis: Negative. I was sitting in grade school, math class, when one of the octogenarians who passed for a comprehensive disseminator of information to our nation’s youth busted into our discussion of fractions to say the Challenger had blown up.

    Without the Internets in 1986 I had no way of really contextualizing what that moment meant until I went home and had it replayed for me later that day. Fast forward to 2001 and I was just getting into my lat routine in the very tiny country club workout room when the singular television in this 20′ x 20′ space filled with the announcement that some “˜tard had flown his tiny prop plane into the WTC. The news chopper CNN was using showed the image and, honestly, on television, it didn’t look bad. Economies of scale, I guess. It wasn’t until a few more minutes before the scope of what happened was realized: I watched the fast moving second plane slam into the side of the other WTC.

    Is it too soon? Do we really need this movie? Can you really make an honest movie that doesn’t feel fabricated or false?

    All these questions are valid but I think this is really a matter of whether this movie can be made well. If you can be respectful of the material, more power to Oliver and Co. The trailer gets some of the things right while, I think, in some areas plays too heavy on the schmaltz.

    The opening is damn near requisite: you’ve got to have everyone waking up to a Folgers morning, everything crisp and in place. You’ve got the WTC delicately shown in the way way back in a shot of the New York skyline, you’ve got Nic Cage kissing his wife (Schmaltzy Moment # 1) while it’s still dark out, in their bed. I don’t about the rest of you married dudes but I usually don’t get a smiling wife first thing in the morning when I leave for work; I usually have to slide out of my bed like a ninja so I don’t wake her and am usually pushed away for a kiss in the morning because of my dragon breath.

    I like that the voiceover for roll call at the NYPD is Nic doing his best to affect an accent that seems trapped between Brooklyn and The Jerky Boys. Kudos to the use of a fast moving shadow and the sound of a jet plane to establish the effect of how many would’ve come by the experience of what happened this day; the ZOOLANDER billboard in the background of one of the shots is oddly memorable.

    We’ve already got the drama cranked up to a Lifetime Television level when Nic really pushes the moment as he and another popo are on their way to the WTC, Nic saying, “We’re prepared for everything (dramatic pause) Not this (another dramatic pause) not for something this size”¦There’s no plan”¦”

    The violins are threatening to turn this trailer into something else besides a promotion for a movie and as Nic, at ground zero, asks for volunteers to go evacuate people the moment seems stuck as no one wants to volunteer and you’ve got a real cheesy thing happening when one guy does it and declares that he’ll do so and then another. Seems fabricated, not really in the realm of verisimilitude.

    Cue Nic and a slo-mo moment as he yells “Run!” in that sort of John Rambo lip thing where it tries to be full of impact but looks like someone’s trying hard to evoke emotion out of me.

    You’ve got Maria Bello sniffing the sheets of where her husband once slept (SM #2), you’ve got slo-mo of a mother hugging her daughter (SM #3) , you’ve got one of the trapped popo’s involved in a flashback with Maggie Gyllenhall as he’s spooning her and then as he’s writing I [heart] U on a piece of scrap paper (SM #4) and, again, what is being sold? Is it the idea of a dramatic piece or is it a truthful rendering of the events that transpired? I’m not quite sure but the marketing is all over the place on this and the tag line that “The world saw evil that day”¦Two men saw something else” is enough to make me scratch my head like an ape, wondering what in the hell they’re talking about.

    If I was the teacher I would give it back and ask Oliver to work on it some more and give it back to me by next Monday because, as it stands, this is just not a very compelling trailer.

    YOU, ME AND DUPREE(2006)

    Director: Anthony Russo, Joe Russo
    Cast: Owen Wilson, Matt Dillon, Kate Hudson, Michael Douglas
    Release: July 14, 2006
    Synopsis: The story of a newlywed couple (Hudson, Dillon) whose relationship problems boil over when the groom’s unemployed best man, Dupree (Wilson), moves in with them for a brief period and seems to have no intention of leaving.

    View Trailer:
    * Large (QuickTime)

    Prognosis: Positive. So, I can relate to this.

    Having a tenuous grasp on a job is just commonplace here where I live in the Southwest. Not only do I have to contend that since I live in a state that says either myself or my employer can terminate employment at any time for any reason (“Did I wear too much Aqua Velva today?” “Is the color of my Swatch watch going to be the beginning of the end for me?) I had a boss who once called me at home after the birth of my second child not only asking where I was but, after calling in to reiterate what was common knowledge, was given a lecture that even though my newborn was fragile his business interests were fragile and if I wanted a job I would recognize that. I didn’t stay there much longer. It is this reason that I can see why Owen “The Buttercup Stallion” Wilson would find himself in such a dire situation after being canned to attend Matt Dillion’s wedding. I don’t think I’d fall that fast, that quick, but this looks like a fun slip n’ slide ride at the theater.

    The trailer, initially, goes through the motions of setting up the premise of the flick. Voiceover Guy does his due diligence in really hamming it up when we see the lush Hawaiian setting that is Matt Dillion and Kate “Overreact To Act” Hudson’s nuptials. You’ve got the word “perfect” tossed around here, there and everywhere before you almost feel you want to shout “I got it already!” before it moves on to establishing how Owen fits into this “perfect” situation.

    Now, I wasn’t that plussed with STARSKY AND HUTCH and was marginally satisfied with his performance in THE WEDDING CRASHERS (It was really Vince’s movie to steal) so I am hopeful when Owen recounts what has happened to him since being canned for going to his buddy’s wedding. His protest to Dillion when asked if he’s living in his car is comedically rendered when he says he has a 10 speed and then gets hit by a car.

    I think it’s important to state, however, that after we’re rushed to the moment when Hudson is told that Wilson is going to move into their house for a few nights, knowing full well that this wouldn’t be a movie if it were just for a few nights, it is Wilson’s holding of a mounted moose head as he thanks her which I think is a nice, humorous touch.

    It is Wilson’s movie, though, as Dillion seems to just be the straight man in this vehicle and the gags keep coming when Owen barges into the room where a love is about to be made, sending Kate barreling onto the floor in surprise as Owen chants that the toilet downstairs is “on the fritz” and then follows that up with opening the bathroom door whilst on the bowl saying, “We’re going to need some matches.”

    And, the capper, involves Wilson placing a tie on the doorknob of Dillion’s house as Kate, incredulous, ignores it and lets herself in the front door only to scream, leave, and then announce, “That butter dish was a wedding gift, Carl.”

    It’s not as wild as Dillion’s THERE’S SOMETHING ABOUT MARY and it feels little more tame than MEET THE PARENTS but I think this movie will do well with the middle-of-the-road audience and, I would assert, means some nice profits to come.

    FAST FOOD NATION (2006)

    Director: Richard Linklater
    Cast: Patricia Arquette, Bobby Cannavale, Luis Guzman, Ethan Hawke, Ashley Johnson, Greg Kinnear, Avril Lavigne, Esai Morales, Lou Taylor Pucci, Ana Claudia Talancon, Wilmer Valderrama
    Release: Fall 2006
    Synopsis: A dramatic feature based on material from the incendiary novel “Fast Food Nation,” a no-holds-barred exploration of the fast food industry that ultimately revealed the dark side of the “All American Meal.”

    View Trailer:

    * Large (Flash)

    Prognosis: Positive. Fecal coloforms?

    I read this book and have to tell those who have not that not only does this look into fast food consumer culture provoke an especially appropriate debate but it is a whole lot of funny to know that vegans who would only eat the fries were really eating slices of potato fried in beef tallow.

    One of the other things about this book is that is tries to be as nonfiction as possible. Whereas SUPER SIZE ME really mixed in fact with slanted science this book tries to be even handed. However, why would Linklater turn this decent examination into fast food into a drama? It confounds as it confuses when you try and reason the thought process on this one. Even the trailer sheds the serious tone of the book somewhat and it nearly feels like a sanitized version of what Schlosser tried to bring home.

    “Millions of families”¦Millions of immigrants.”

    The initial shots of this trailer play out in a nearly disconnected, rushed showing of the book’s main points. We, as Americans, love to consume our burgers and fries while we are blissfully ignorant of our local yokel immigrant population quietly braving the sinister conditions of meat processing plants so you can have it your way.

    Does the trailer get this message across? No, you’ve got some Soccer Mom serving slop to their kiddies while some immigrant is flashed some money to, no doubt, be yet another casualty of the underpaid underclass who take jobs in processing plants because no American in their right red, white and blue hearts would have anything to do with these places. Yet, here we are, the trailer just glossing over these things in lieu for some teenagers dropping a frozen patty on the ground only to put it back on the grill. Thanks for visual. If this was 1984 and you were the first person to make light of this it would be amusing but like all sub-par comedies before this flick we’ve all been desensitized, I posit, to the notion that when crap hits the floor there is a full-on 10 Second Rule in full effect. Nice try, though.

    And then, of course, we have to get the greedy bastards in corporate, played deftly by a pack of aging white men that is always a spot-on stereotype, dumbasses, commenting on how they’re really sticking it to their consumers by knowing how much allowable fecal coliform is in their product; I had a biology teacher, come to think of it, who discussed this very issue, a one Randy Shietzelt, a genuinely smart cat who I still admire, discuss how much you can have in a given body of water before it becomes dangerous to even wade through. It’s nice to know this trailer tosses out common knowledge like a discussion of coliform, I’m sure there are heads nodding all over this great land when they hear this portion of the trailer.

    If it sounds like I’m being tough on this piece of advertising, I’m glad. This book is a serious indictment of an entire industry, which goes beyond the bush league histrionics of Morgan Spurlock and his documentary, but I am genuinely pleased by how this thing ends. We’ve got Greg Kinnear, playing one of the evil corporate suits who will no doubt be playing the part of the rube who will be the filter through which some of the book material be flowing, standing in a lab and tasting a small stick. The stick has a liquid on it which mimics the taste of real food. One of the biggest of these flavor savor companies, International Flavours and Fragrances, right off the New Jersey Turnpike, adjusts the taste on a hellacious number of things you stick in your mouth and consume. I really like how Kinnear is amazed, as you should be, that this mere liquid disguises itself into anything you desire.

    I’m not convinced that this movie has done a service to the book by making it into a pseudo drama but I am hoping, at the very least, this once again raises awareness of how your corporate overlords are taking care of you as a consumer of their products. This trailer needs more focus on the reality and less on the dramatics.

     

  • Trailer Park: Hi. My Name Is.

    By: Christopher Stipp ; E-Mail: Christopher_Stipp@yahoo.com ; Archives? Right here…

    Note Bene: If you have the time, check out my June 30th column with Tim Nett of Trailer Park as we discuss modern trailers and what the Hollywood Reporter has doing for decades to praise those that make them.

    My new editor requested I do something I haven’t done since starting my career with the “˜Shoot and, now, Quick Stop: introduce myself. Hi, my name is Christopher and this is my column entitled Trailer Park. I’ve been around these parts for a good two and a half years, every week, with new material and now I am brining it to you out there in the Quick Stop ephemera.

    Turn-Ons: Action movies, Foreign films that aren’t predicated on pretentiousness, Romantic comedies that don’t completely suck (read here: SINGLES, SO I MARRIED AN AXE MURDERER,) Anything starring Bob and Doug McKenzie and fresh hummus from The Pita Jungle.

    This re-introduction of sorts is a great idea because now there is a healthy mix of some of my older brother and sisters who now have to mesh in with the step-kids. It’s hard whenever you have transition but I am happy to say that I am going to violate every single one of you newbies just as if you were my own.

    Turn-Offs: Anything with Diane Keaton, Brett Ratner, Badly dubbed kung-fu films, Movie houses that sit on good foriegn films for an inexorably long time and flip-flops.

    The short of it is that this column was created to comment on movie trailers. Just comment on them, say whether you like them and then be done with it. I thought it was a wonderful concept, the trailer review. For all the posturing that people comment on when they’re asked what the best thing about going to the movies is I was amazed, and still am, that there aren’t more writers really commenting and deconstructing these little two and a half minute advertisements; people say that seeing the trailers are sometimes the best part of the filmic experience but where’s the friggin’ love for these things?

    Favorite movie in the past 6 years: IN THE MOOD FOR LOVE. Favorite movie in the past 10 years: BOTTLE ROCKET. Favorite movie in the past 25 years: STRANGE BREW.

    When I took over this column two and a half years ago I just felt like commenting on them wasn’t enough. I wanted to have fun with it. I wanted to be the one stop shop for someone wondering if a movie Coming Soon to Theaters was worth spending your money on. This column really has become more than just giving a one or two sentence blurb about how “cool” or “teh awesome” a trailer is, this column is about the potential for what can happen when you marry creativity and economics in a tight package.

    Favorite Trailer of 2005: DAWN OF THE DEAD. Favorite trailer of 2006: BATMAN BEGINS.

    I’ll admit it outright: I am the only person doing what I do on this scale on The Internets and it’s the exact Coming Soon experience that I am looking to catch right here from week to week and that means I’m not always about the trailers.

    Best Interview: Robert Patrick, WALK THE LINE

    Some weeks I run interviews with people who have movies that are about to come out, sometimes I feel it’s right to delve into television every now and again, I’ll take a peek at a particularly neglected feature that many people don’t know a lot about and which deserves a little limelight and sometimes, when it’s good enough, I’ll run video clips right in this space of filmmakers who think they’ve got what it takes to be noticed.

    Worst Atrocity Committed On Screen (tie): Han not shooting first and the FBI dudes in E.T. who had guns in their hands only to be digitially replaced with walkie-talkies. I mean, for reals, what was the hell is it about revisionist history?

    I just reserve the right to do whatever fits the vibe of the space here, plain and simple.

    Best 80’s Movie: REAL GENIUS. This is not open for debate.

    I love hearing from people out there, you in the audience, and running comments about what you think about the potential for whatever is coming down the proverbial pike when I run a particularly spirited review of a trailer. This column shouldn’t be all about me but it should be about the free flow of things that are interesting with regard to entertainment for any given week.

    Movie That Sunk My Chances For A 2nd Date With That One Girl From English 102: THREESOME; I still like that movie.

    Just look what’s on the horizon for the next few weeks:

    -A review of WHO KILLED THE ELECTRIC CAR, a documentary exploring what happened to the automobile industry’s answer to hippies everywhere who wanted an electric vehicle on the market that didn’t pollute the earth as bad as their petroleum sucking brethren.

    -An interview with Tim Nett, President and founder of Trailer Park, one of the most successful trailer houses in Hollywood. His insight will help some of you understand this mostly mysterious business a little better as to why certain things are done in this medium.

    -Comic-Con. San Diego. July. Who else is gonna come get some? I know I am and, if you’ve been a reader for longer than a year, you know this where some really great material starts to trickle out. Last year I hustled some time with Josh Holloway from Lost, Natalie Portman and Joel Silver for V FOR VENDETTA, Darren Aronofsky and Rachel Weisz for THE FOUNTAIN, Jack Black and Kyle Gass for PICK OF DESTINY, the Tenacious D movie, Stan Lee and lots more. I am hoping for more exclusive material and I am aiming to deliver on that.

    -New Director Showcase. Sometimes I find things good enough to share with the rest of the class. This video is the reason why I appreciate the dedication some have to the craft of telling great stories in as little time as possible. Like this man, Steve Delahoyde. He makes funny look easy and the man easily has handfulls of videos that I’ve enjoyed too much to just let sit around without giving the man some attention. Just peer into the notion of what would happen if you took a 4+ hour road trip and all you allowed yourself to listen to was Abba’s “Dancing Queen.” Click on the picture. Solid. Gold.

    The image

    So, you see, there is now a great reason to stay with Quick Stop Entertainment all week. I cherish my Friday spot here if for the only reason that it’s like the reliever position in the 7th inning. It’s my job to get the win and to close out all any other site who thinks they can just cruise into the weekend by giving you some crap review and leaving you for the weekend. Not here.

    Influences Growing Up: Bobcat Goldthwait’s “Meat Bob,” Bill Hicks’ “Relentless,” G.I. Joe, Comic books, Comic Strip Live on Fox every Saturday night, Wild Chicago on WTTW every Sunday night, Freddy, Jason and Sigourney Weaver showing me what a hardcore lady can do.

    Trailer Park. New material every Friday.

    Influences Now: Weekly TWiT Podcast, King of Cars on A&E, Frontline (bar none the best show your ass isn’t watching right at this very moment), The Cardigans, John Holmberg, Bill Hicks and Adam Witt over there at Schadenfreude. Adam currently be found in the unemployment line when not already working mightily on his skills as 1/5th of Chi-Town’s own Voltron of comedy. The guy and his band of merry men, and lady, rock the stage and iPods weekly (keyword: Schadenfreude) so give them some non-genital loving.

    So, let’s get into it with some reviews and, in the legendary words of Bony-T from BOOMERANG, “Set this mutha fucking thing off!”

    …And, if you have the time, stop on over to MySpace. Lot more of where this came from over there. Plus, I haven’t been found out yet by Dateline NBC.


    GRIDIRON GANG (2006)

    Director: Phil Joanou
    Cast: Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson, Xzibit, Danny Martinez, Mo, Trever O’Brien, Six Reasons, Brandon Smith, Jade Yorker, Robert Zepeda, Michael Jace, Bill Smitrovich
    Release: September 15, 2006
    Synopsis: The Rock and Xzibit star in a story based on actual events about the creation of a football team within the confines of a juvenile detention camp.
    View Trailer:
    *
    Large (QuickTime)

    Prognosis: Negative. I like The Rock.

    Every time I see this dude on the screen, big or small, he’s got that kind of vibe that makes you want to see good things for his future. He’s charismatic, proven he can be funny, really is heir apparent for many action films to come but he’s got heart in everything he does; with the exception of THE MUMMY 2, which was crap. This trailer is no different, I am glad to see, as Rock’s vibe comes through from the first moment he narrates his first word on the voiceover in this trailer.

    I don’t appreciate, however, the hokey as hell “introduction” to this piece of advertisement. We’ve seen this before with UNDERWORLD and who knows how many other times and I am at a loss as to why there was a compelling need to produce a less than 10 second blurb telling me that I am about to watch a trailer that I just chose to watch before I was told I was doing so. It’s weird but whatever.

    Now, when we get to the gritty of the trailer, and it is gritty which is very aesthetic we get the Rock’s voice telling us that when some people act out they get their car keys taken away or grounded; the images that go along with this, however, of the hot WHITE chick cheerleader and the frolicking WHITE boys stand in comparison to The Rock’s next comment that some make bad choices, here, accompanying images of a violent BLACK kid with a pistol. I’m not sure if there’s a racial element that’s being implied but I am aware of the visual cues that show the every same kid being shipped off to prison because of his actions. I don’t know if I’m being too sensitive to this but I’d like to think that there’s some purposeful reason why this is.

    We end up in the self same prison and The Rock now is shown to be one of the more important elements in this prison/probationary center as a guard/counselor as he says to his boss that these angry young men have problems with a host of different things but that football may help. Huh?

    FRIDAY NIGHT LIGHTS this is not.

    Now, the musical element that starts to play underneath Rock’s insistence that a football team be formed to help facilitate a meaningful rehabilitation is kind of like Eminem’s “Lose It” but it really works here to establish a good flow for the events that follow. Now, I don’t particularly like Xzibit as an entertainment figure, as for all his hardcore rapping and attitude seems available for readjustment as long as MTV is paying for the castration, and thankfully this is all about The Rock and his insistence that these guys find something they can conform to under the guise of playing a little football. Not sure I buy the premise but it looks and feels better than most films that want to cater to the young male demographic with nothing more than flash and no substance.

    And I pained, really pained, by the progression of the plot that unfolds before us. I mean it’s great that this trailer really knows to move through the high points of the plot quickly with a little pizzazz but when this troubled boy squad (gasp!) has to go up against the 38-0 football team, filled with pretty white people from before natch, this seems more Disney than WWE. The two kinds of films, the Disney Sports genre which should be copyrighted by now, and this one both share another kind of element: they’re all based, somehow, on a true story.

    I don’t know if I keep up with current events but are there really that many “true” stories out there where underdogs have come from behind to triumph over adversity? Isn’t that what being in competition is all about? Maybe I’m just disenfranchised with the ideas of being based on reality but if you’ve got nothing else to say other than adversity + pain = enlightenment I’ve got little interest.

    WHO KILLED THE ELECTRIC CAR? (2006)

    Director: Chris Paine
    Cast: Colette Divine, David Freeman, Alexandra Paul, Chelsea Sexton, J. Karen Thomas
    Release: June 28, 2006 (Limited)
    Synopsis: WHO KILLED THE ELECTRIC CAR? chronicles the life and mysterious death of the GM EV1, examining its cultural and economic ripple effects and how they reverberated through the halls of government and big business.
    View Trailer:
    *
    Large (QuickTime)

    Prognosis: Dirty Hippie Propaganda. Yeah, I’ll Watch It…

    It’s amazing to me that when certain conflagrations of media and popular culture come together you sometimes get films that come at the right time. For example, when corporate culture was being dissected and ripped apart for what it was in the late 80’s we saw the documentary, ROGER & ME; fast food culture took a hell of a beating, and even effected positive change, when SUPER SIZE ME showed that our country’s more more more attitude when it came to desiring more on our collective plates wasn’t really a healthy thing; and now, with the rise of concerns over equally rising gas prices you have this film about a little car that could’ve but has ended up dying an inglorious death right here in the Southwest. You’re welcome for that.

    I weary that we start this thing like so many stories I get assaulted with by my local Fox affiliate every night: fear mongering. Yes, I get that the really haunting score behind the shot of some lucky dude who now has to pay over $75.00 to fill up his tank is supposed to make me clench my pearl necklace in abject disgust but the accompanying card that simply pops up the words “Global Warming,” “Pollution,” “Unrest in the Middle East” and “Rising Gas Prices” makes the point. This is the attention grabber and it does what it needs to do; I’m not a big of going this route, however, as I think you could’ve went with the quality of the work you’re about to showcase but that’s just me.

    Now, when we get into the real crux of this story, the narrative of this little car, the EV1, that only ran on electricity I find myself engaged to the quick history of the vehicle if, for no other reason, than this is a topic that has been reaching a din every day in every paper across America thanks to the three plus dollar a gallon I’m paying at the local Chevron.

    If I could, here, make a point to the person who made this trailer I would have two things to say:

    1) The spooky music you hooked people when you employed your fear mongering at the beginning of the trailer drops too precipitously when you launch into the mellow narration about this car.

    2) When you tell me that this buggy was fast, put out no emissions and was so “teh awesome” when you tell me that it almost went the way of the dodo and you put up a picture of a landfill are you really telling me that GM put these cars in a wood chipper or are you exaggerating again?

    It’s little things like this that take a perfectly solid story and turn it into a movie where I question if it’s a piece of hippy propaganda even before I see the first frame because of the way I am being sold.

    And then it changes.

    Unbelievable as it is we actually are launched into the real meat of this story by being told that the cost to operate this car is the same as if you were driving a regular one with the exception that the cost of gas for the EV1 is sixty cents a gallon. Now that’s a factoid we could’ve led with but, again, like I said, it seems that the initial volley to get people to watch was done out of provocation, not the merits of the movie itself. But, no matter, as I’m hooked on finding out more.

    We get a testimonial from Tom Hanks on the speed of this car which I imagine is a big concern for dudes, some comments about how no one knew that this car even existed and then we descend into the reasons why you’ve probably never read word one on this vehicle: Dick Cheney, Condoleeza Rice and your local neighborhood Bush administration.

    The trailer is good about quickly pivoting from one talking head to another about the reasons why we, as a country, haven’t been exposed to this alternative, about establishing the relationship between oil and the moneyed interests with power to keep this under wraps and this trailer is also good about providing quick blurbs from those who have seen the flick to give us all an idea of why this movie is so poignant at this stage in our nation’s development.

    I’ll see this documentary because of the latter half of this trailer but if you expect to get people’s attention sometimes it’s all about selling the facts, not fear. I am really receptive, as are a lot of people, to having a point of view leveled as honestly as it can be put out there, as Tom Russert from Meet the Press stated in an interview with Bob Edwards on XM this week, but when you try to spin something you’re going to get into trouble; people see through it, as cliched as it sounds, like a sheet of paper held to the sun. However, this trailer has a tricky line to walk with balancing attention grabbing and fact presenting. It’s hard to do but I think it does its job well in this trailer. A must see for anyone who wants a better understanding of oil politics and doesn’t want to sit down with a global economics textbook.

    I’m lazy like that, too.

    GHOST RIDER (2007)

    Director: Mark Steven Johnson
    Cast: Nicolas Cage, Eva Mendes, Wes Bentley, Sam Elliott, Peter Fonda
    Release: February 16, 2007
    Synopsis: In order to save his dying father, young stunt cyclist Johnny Blaze sells his soul to Mephistopheles and sadly parts from the pure-hearted Roxanne Simpson, the love of his life. Years later, Johnny’s path crosses again with Roxanne, now a gogetting reporter, and also with Mephistopheles, who offers to release Johnny’s soul if Johnny becomes the fabled, fiery Ghost Rider, a supernatural agent of vengeance and justice. Mephistopheles charges Johnny with defeating the despicable Blackheart, Mephistopheles’s nemesis and son, who plans to displace his father and create a new hell even more terrible than the old one.

    View Trailer:
    *
    Large (QuickTime)

    Prognosis: Positive. You just want good things to happen to good people. Pure and simple.

    When I was at the Comic-Con in San Diego last year I sat with director Mark Steven Johnson and Eva Mendes and it was just a really pleasant experience. To hear that GHOST RIDER was getting pushed back, way back, from its initial early 2006 release date was both disconcerting because release shifts aren’t necessarily done to great movies and disappointing because when you meet the people who have helped to make the film what it is, and they seem genuine, you feel bad in a way. Good thing, though, that they’ve decided to focus on enhancing the film, though, because this is a great trailer.

    I don’t think that Nic Cage was the most believable choice for the role of Johnny Blaze as when this trailer opens up and you see his wizened eyes popping out at you in full screen glory one has to wonder if this is really a story about a dude who makes a deal with the devil or if it’s the story of a middle aged man who makes a deal with the devil because he knows he already has one foot in the grave.

    It’s ok, though, as once we see his digital stunt double take off a jump that sees him launching over 5 working, military style, helicopters (By the way, it’s in a domed arena, soooo how did they get them in there? Movie magic, kids.) and we see him eat it the crash is wonderfully rendered; the colors pop off the screen and the momentum that begins and carries us through the rest of the trailer is undeniable.

    I don’t know so much about the actual idea of Cage being heir to this evil indenture of sorts but the trailer, sans musical interlude or voiceover, bold choice, carries us through the moment when we are all let in on his deal “To save someone he loved.” Of course it was to save someone he loved but I am especially impressed with this ad for not belaboring the point that he was a reckless dude with a heart of steel and a will of iron who shook hands with the devil or any such dramatics. No pictures of Eva Mendes pop up; no slow mo shots of his happier days as a frolicking dude with hair and a smile; and I’m happy that Sam Elliott still thinks that looking like an aging porn star with that trucker “˜stache of his is still pimp.

    Then, bam! (Deep apologies for the Emeril reference. It was unintended.)

    We get aquatic zombies, church dwelling vampires and a sweet Transformers-type metamorphosis of Cage into Ghost Rider that I think even Franz Kafka would give two thumbs on. I was once afraid of the cheesy ass effects that were employed in the “leaked” trailer months ago but when I watch his hog go from yuppie weekend warrior chopper in all its waxy glory to bad ass cycle of Satan my interest is genuinely piqued in this project.

    I am launched even further into this world of leather and chains when Cage starts riding his bike with his tires aflame like some out of control Bridgestone Firestone blow-out circa 2000. Cage rides it with a vengeance and even with the inclusion of a static shot of Eva Mendes looking all sorts of concerned with the popos behind her, guns drawn, no doubt to shred Cage doesn’t deter me from getting fanboy crazy over seeing Ghost Rider tear vertically up the side of a skyscraper, windows shattering in its wake. Not only is this a nice inclusion but the trailer just slips it in there and keeps going.

    We see him tearing down the street, riding alongside some Old Man River who’s galloping on a flaming horse, we get a more than ample look at the Ghost Rider’s head and, my favorite shot of them all, we see Ghost whipping his chains over his head and whipping them downward on that skyscraper as he heads downward.

    I’m impressed by this trailer for a number of reasons but the decision to show so much, and have it be of good quality, deserve a positive review of this advertising’s efforts.

    FEARLESS aka HUO YUAN JIA (2006)

    Director: Ronny Yu
    Cast: Jet Li
    Release: August 4, 2006
    Synopsis: Fok Yuanjia (Li) dreams of continuing the legacy his father established as a world-class fighter in China. After reaching his goal, however, a personal tragedy causes him to disappear for several years. He’s not heard from until the honor of defending his country in an international tournament surfaces.

    View Trailer:
    *
    Medium (QuickTime)

    Prognosis: Positive. Of course Li is the “only one” mentioned in this trailer who could’ve thrashed the piss out of his corporate overlords; sometimes it’s just pure drivel that begins these sorts of things.

    I know the whole singular person trope, that one that states that there really can be only one individual, usually a dude, to make change in an action movie, is a whole lot of busted, tired and lame but I still have a fondness for it; especially if that person is Jet Le, you understand, and you know that there’s going to be a whole lot of ass kicking going around. And there will.”Mastering others is strength, Mastering yourself makes you fearless.” Consider me entranced by the wide shot that opens this trailer as we’re treated to a little quote beforehand about something or another regarding strength.

    All’s I know’s is that when you start a movie talking about mastering and strength in the same sentence there’s going to be a while lot of ass kicking going around. I’m not let down in this regard as the wide shot goes from abstract to focused as we listen to the premise of the flick: China is overtaken in a war, whiteys move in and said white men want to flex their physicality over the Chinaman by having public fights to demonstrate this. This is where you feel the surge building.

    So, you’ve got dudes fighting with fists, swords, muscles, what have you, but when the narrator of this trailer, who does a better job than just going with throaty Voiceover Guy, and who I think sounds a lot like David Lo-Pan from BIG TROUBLE IN LITTLE CHINA, says that only one man rose to challenge them you know exactly who they’re talking about.

    Jet slowly thumps his fists as we’re informed, delicately, this is coming to us via the producer of HERO and CROUCHING TIGER, that the fight choreographer is Yeun Wo Ping all the while Jet gets a little faster with his moves. I am especially delighted by Jet’s moves as he’s holding an umbrella in the rain and uses his legs to do the fighting for him.

    The music gets faster, the drums beat a little louder and Li starts to take the imperialists to task one by one; he tarries mid-court inside the fighting ring as this little David takes on all the Goliaths sent his way. No matter how much older Jet is getting he is still blazing fast and amazing to watch just within the parameters of this trailer.

    The story continues on as Jet is deceived from within his population as he gets it on with some sword fighting against one of his own, we see the softer side of Sears as we get glimpses of little kids coming up to him, perhaps his own, as then we’re whisked away to another moment as Li is beset in a circle, on all sides, by an encroaching mob. We’re told that this is his final martial arts epic and I cannot see anything here that would tell me this is going to be anything else but. We’ve got a multitude of sweeping fight sequences that seem to pull at Li’s every ability but, more than that, this trailer plays like it was the next installment of a Michael Bay cluster bomb.

    You’ve got Jet’s kinetic fluidity that has always been his calling card and this trailer captures it wonderfully. You’ve got a reason to see this film for a number of reasons, be it the story of Western colonization or the chance to see Jet doing what he does well or even to see a flick where dudes are going to get served many times over.

    Simply put, after wretched examples of Hollywood directors misusing Jet it is nice to see, just in this trailer, Jet once again being able to let himself be free to express the reasons why he’s been a talent within this genre for decades.

  • Trailer Park: Revenge of The Ratner

    E-MAIL THE AUTHOR | By Christopher Stipp

    June 2, 2006

    Revenge of The Ratner

    Um, yeah, MySpace. Just go there. Go.

    So…(clasps hands together once as the sound echoes through the Internet)…120 million.

    I won’t begrudge Ratner.

    The ‘tard put up a hell of a take at the box office and I think everyone here, including myself, owe the guy a huzzah with a Coke and a smile. I wasn’t one of the people who added to the final number from this weekend; like I mentioned many times before I just wasn’t “hyped” over making sure I saw it opening weekend like I was for the other two installments. It was an odd feeling, to be sure, that the years I spent agonizing over when the actual X-Men movie was going to be made in 1988, following the film’s progression in monthly issues of the local comic book ‘zine at the time before the age of online communities or Wizard, that I really didn’t care about this movie.

    Something was missing from this third flick and it might have had something to do, first off, with the wretched looking cast members who weren’t already established (Where in the hell did that porcupine boy come from, was it during Kirby’s tenure at the House of Ideas? Or that chick with the tribal marks on her face, some Mike Tyson femme facsimile?) , the notion that Ratner felt it was a’ight to put his own spin on things by writing his way through his own envisioning of the X-world or it could have even been Fox’s own undoing by demanding whoever was going to make this movie that they hit a release date from the word “Go.” Can you rush a great movie? Not in the eyes of Fox’s accounting department.

    By the sheer fact that this movie made lots of money it has legitimized any and all factors that many fanboys screamed about, this one included. Like a president who doesn’t care about your civil liberties the population has spoken with their wallets and have said yes to the machinations of every deadline and decision that was made in this film’s name.

    Good for Ratner. I’m here to say that the guy did everything he was supposed to do, created a world all his own by adding new mutants to further his ideas of how this narrative should’ve gone and has made his corporate overlords very happy, regardless of how much he was covering his bases when he mentioned that he knew he was coming late to the game but he was going to do the best he could with what he was given.

    I’m glad the movie did well. I may try and actually pay, with my own money, to see this movie but with the beating the movie has taken from peers who I trust I am not sure what to make of a flick that’s been co-opted for the benefit of box office boffo.

    Every business has a right to make as much money as it can, where it can so I am happy that Fox can keep on keeping on with its successful business model of financially growing a successful franchise. This is show business after all, kids. Win at any price or any cost, regardless of what a few of us think.

    Kudos and huzzah.

    In other news, I just could not leave this week without mentioning the passing of Paul Gleason.

    Those of you like myself who really came into movies by way of John Hughes came upon Gleason as one of those dudes who really, really, fit the role they were cast in. For all intents and purposes Paul was just a bad ass dude that you loved to hate in the BREAKFAST CLUB. Paul WAS the embodiment, the symbolism, if you will, for those teachers in high school who just lost the idea of what it meant to be a teenager somewhere between their graduation into the real world and the end of their first marriage.

    Myself?

    I am, and will always be, a stone cold champion of Paul’s work in DIE HARD. Say what you will about Alan Rickman or that ballerina guy who eventually ate it at the end, but it was Paul’s role as Dwayne T. Robinson of the LAPD that really glued all these individual performances together like a canister of Elmer’s paste.

    I’m not much to dwell on how crushing this loss is to film’s greatest A-holes but I dare any of you to try and put someone else in these parts and tell me that they would’ve been just as memorable.

    Godspeed, Dwayne T. Robinson.

    Richard Vernon: Well, well. Here we are. You have exactly eight hours and fifty-four minutes to think about why you’re here. You may not talk, you will not move from these seats. Any questions?
    John Bender: Yeah. Does Barry Manilow know that you raid his wardrobe?
    Dwayne T. Robinson: We don’t know shit, Powell. If there’s hostages in there, how come no one’s come to us with ransom demands? If there’s terrorists in there, where’s their list of demands? All we know is that whoever shot your car up is probably the same silly sonofabitch you’ve been talking to on that radio.
    Sergeant Al Powell: Excuse me sir. But what about the body that fell out the window?
    Dwayne T. Robinson: Well who knows? Maybe some stockbroker, got depressed.

    Sergeant Al Powell: In fact, I think he’s a cop. Maybe not LAPD, but he’s definitely a badge.
    Dwayne T. Robinson: How do you know that?
    Sergeant Al Powell: A hunch, things he said. Like being able to spot a phony ID.
    Dwayne T. Robinson: Jesus Christ, Powell, he could be a fucking bartender for all we know.


    LITTLE MAN (2006) Director: Michael Cuesta
    Cast: Marlon Wayans, Shawn Wayans, Tracy Morgan
    Release: July 5, 2006
    Synopsis: A wannabe dad (Shawn Wayans) mistakes a vertically challenged criminal on the lam (Marlon Wayans) as his newly adopted son.
    View Trailer:
    * Large (QuickTime)

    Prognosis: Negative. So, on my way to see ICE AGE 2 with the fam I saw the lobby display for LITTLE MAN. I’m no expert and I don’t purport to know such things but the line on the standee proclaiming this new film is from the same dudes who brought us WHITE CHICKS is not one I would choose to use willingly, publicly.

    I had the sharp misfortune of watching a part of WHITE CHICKS and I am positive you do not want people to know you’re the masterminds behind that movie. Absolutely positive.

    Keenen Ivory Wayans, a true comedic talent who brought us I’M GONNA GIT YOU SUCKA and In Living Color when it didn’t suck so much, is the guy behind the directorial lens and I don’t see any mention of this guy’s work which is a little disappointing. That said, though, this movie disturbs me a little.

    When we start out the Voiceover Guy talks about a world of crime and for some reason I guess the phrase “world of crime” means being shown a static shot of a prison cell. I don’t know what one has to do with the other but it’s odd. Next, we get Marlon Wayans, a really solid actor when placed into a film like REQUIEM FOR A DREAM, starring in a weird amalgam of a kid and midget. I don’t think I can overstate that it looks weird, really weird.

    Tracy Morgan comes in to help play the straight man in the beginning of this trailer as Morgan helps to boost a car that already has a Denver Boot attached to it. Ha ha, very funny, I know, but Marlon tries to play up this whole ruse as best he can, him being this mutant midget of sorts. I’m not sure if we’re supposed to be freaked out by this or that we’re supposed to take it at face value but when Tracy and Marlon go into a jewelry store to boost a diamond, with Marlon being transported via a duffel bag, I’m not sure whether to be insulted that we’re supposed to believe this or think it’s hilarious that this is going on.

    I’m honestly torn because some part of me is laughing on the inside while another part of me is glued to the screen as I try to figure out why this looks so freaky.

    Long story very short, the guys have to recover the very same diamond Marlon stole just a few moments ago as Marlon ditched it in some woman’s bag. Sooooo”¦Marlon is placed in a basket and pretends to be a baby to infiltrate the household.

    I’m still reeling as I try and come to terms with my sense of humor on this one. Supposing that this is the accepted norm I am at least comforted by comedian Fred Stoller’s comments that the kid is adorable in a, “National Geographic sort of way.”

    The trailer, for the most part, hits the notes that it has to in order to sell this as a goofy comedy: you’ve got physical humor as you have Shawn and Marlon drinking warm milk only to discover it’s breast milk; you’ve got the obligatory nut shot when Marlon swings for the fences during a game of Wiffle Ball; you’ve got about as close as you’re going to get with a fart joke as there is a struggle to apply a rectal thermometer to Marlon; and there’s the whole wife/mistaken identity situation that has been done before in other flicks and has been rehashed here for our pleasure.

    I don’t think I am as willing to break bad on this flick as I am sure that I’m not going to see it. It doesn’t look like my kind of funny but, for some, this might be just the right thing for people come July.


    WORLD TRADE CENTER (2006) Director: Oliver Stone
    Cast: Nicolas Cage, Michael Peña, Maria Bello, Maggie Gyllenhaal
    Release: August 11, 2006
    Synopsis: Director Oliver Stone tells the true story of the heroic survival and rescue of two Port Authority policemen ““ John McLoughlin and Will Jimeno ““ who were trapped in the rubble of the World Trade Center on September 11, 2001, after they went in to help people escape. The film also follows their families as they try to find out what happened to them, as well as the rescuers who found them in the debris field and pulled them out. Their story shows how the best in people rose above the tragic events of that day.
    View Trailer:
    * Large (QuickTime)

    Prognosis: Negative. I was sitting in grade school, math class, when one of the octogenarians who passed for a comprehensive disseminator of information to our nation’s youth busted into our discussion of fractions to say the Challenger had blown up. Without the Internets in 1986 I had no way of really contextualizing what that moment meant until I went home and had it replayed for me later that day. Fast forward to 2001 and I was just getting into my lat routine in the very tiny country club workout room when the singular television in this 20′ x 20′ space filled with the announcement that some “˜tard had flown his tiny prop plane into the WTC. The news chopper CNN was using showed the image and, honestly, on television, it didn’t look bad. Economies of scale, I guess. It wasn’t until a few more minutes before the scope of what happened was realized: I watched the fast moving second plane slam into the side of the other WTC.

    Is it too soon? Do we really need this movie? Can you really make an honest movie that doesn’t feel fabricated or false?

    All these questions are valid but I think this is really a matter of whether this movie can be made well. If you can be respectful of the material, more power to Oliver and Co. The trailer gets some of the things right while, I think, in some areas plays too heavy on the schmaltz.

    The opening is damn near requisite: you’ve got to have everyone waking up to a Folgers morning, everything crisp and in place. You’ve got the WTC delicately shown in the way way back in a shot of the New York skyline, you’ve got Nic Cage kissing his wife (Schmaltzy Moment # 1) while it’s still dark out, in their bed. I don’t about the rest of you married dudes but I usually don’t get a smiling wife first thing in the morning when I leave for work; I usually have to slide out of my bed like a ninja so I don’t wake her and am usually pushed away for a kiss in the morning because of my dragon breath.

    I like that the voiceover for roll call at the NYPD is Nic doing his best to affect an accent that seems trapped between Brooklyn and The Jerky Boys. Kudos to the use of a fast moving shadow and the sound of a jet plane to establish the effect of how many would’ve come by the experience of what happened this day; the ZOOLANDER billboard in the background of one of the shots is oddly memorable.

    We’ve already got the drama cranked up to a Lifetime Television level when Nic really pushes the moment as he and another popo are on their way to the WTC, Nic saying, “We’re prepared for everything (dramatic pause) Not this (another dramatic pause) not for something this size”¦There’s no plan”¦”

    The violins are threatening to turn this trailer into something else besides a promotion for a movie and as Nic, at ground zero, asks for volunteers to go evacuate people the moment seems stuck as no one wants to volunteer and you’ve got a real cheesy thing happening when one guy does it and declares that he’ll do so and then another. Seems fabricated, not really in the realm of verisimilitude.

    Cue Nic and a slo-mo moment as he yells “Run!” in that sort of John Rambo lip thing where it tries to be full of impact but looks like someone’s trying hard to evoke emotion out of me.

    You’ve got Maria Bello sniffing the sheets of where her husband once slept (SM #2), you’ve got slo-mo of a mother hugging her daughter (SM #3) , you’ve got one of the trapped popo’s involved in a flashback with Maggie Gyllenhall as he’s spooning her and then as he’s writing I [heart] U on a piece of scrap paper (SM #4) and, again, what is being sold? Is it the idea of a dramatic piece or is it a truthful rendering of the events that transpired? I’m not quite sure but the marketing is all over the place on this and the tag line that “The world saw evil that day”¦Two men saw something else” is enough to make me scratch my head like an ape, wondering what in the hell they’re talking about.

    If I was the teacher I would give it back and ask Oliver to work on it some more and give it back to me by next Monday because, as it stands, this is just not a very compelling trailer.


    FLUSHED AWAY(2006) Director: Sam Fell, David Bowers
    Cast: Kate Winslet, Hugh Jackman, Ian McKellen, Andy Serkis, Bill Nighy, Simon Callow, Shane Richie, Geoffrey Palmer, Jean Reno, Douglas Weston
    Release: November 3, 2006
    Synopsis: Roddy is a decidedly upper-crust “society rat” who makes his home in a posh Kensington flat, complete with two hamster butlers named Gilbert and Sullivan. When a common sewer rat named Syd comes spewing out of the sink and decides he’s hit the jackpot, Roddy schemes to rid himself of the pest by luring him into the “whirlpool.” Syd may be an ignorant slob, but he’s no fool, so it is Roddy who winds up being flushed away into the bustling sewer world of Ratropolis. There Roddy meets Rita, an enterprising scavenger who works the sewers in her faithful boat, the Jammy Dodger. Roddy immediately wants out, or rather, up; Rita wants to be paid for her trouble; and, speaking of trouble, the villainous Toad – who royally despises all rodents – wants them iced”¦literally. The Toad dispatches his two hapless hench-rats, Spike and Whitey, to get the job done. When they fail, the Toad has no choice but to send to France for his cousin – that dreaded mercenary, Le Frog.
    View Trailer:
    * Large (QuickTime)

    Prognosis: Negative. I’m just not feeling this.

    I don’t know why I have such an aversion to this trailer but I don’t have a great affinity for rodents, not really endearing themselves to great connotations in the mind, and the trailer doesn’t grab your attention. It sort of meanders, plods and expects to just ease its way into establishing the premise but that’s not really good when it’s kids you want to hook. Sure, you’re going to get these little rugrats to come out en masse but if you can generate enough buzz what studio wouldn’t want more to come out and be repeat viewers?

    When we begin I’m at a loss to really feel excited. Sure, Dreamworks put out that crap flick MADAGASCAR, did great guns with WALLACE AND GROMIT, put out tripe in SHARKTALE, has done well for itself with OVER THE HEDGE but for all the great animated films they’ve put out they’ve been accompanied by solid trailers; they excite when they should, they get in get out and get on with it and they leave you thinking that even though you’re an adult you would like to see that.

    I don’t get that here.

    I am confounded as to why we start so damn slow. Yes, we have to establish that this rodent gets the rule of the roost but when I am rapping my fingers a third a way into this preview because I am wondering why I’m watching a rat play polo, have a bath and dress himself in a tuxedo that’s not a good thing.

    What is a good thing, though, that I can say is when Syd, the dirty mischief maker of the rat-a-tat-tat duo, appears I am pleased because this where we get the first notion that this is a movie for kids: we get some spirited belching. A lot of belching. A lot. Not only do we get sound effects but we get a green puff of belch with every booming punch into the sound field.

    The toilet humor keeps going, the very things that kids and adults can agree upon, with our uppity rat trying to flush Syd down the pipes under the rouse of the Porcelain God being a fandangled Jacuzzi of sorts and ends up in a place called, appropriately enough, Ratropolis.

    One of the things that confound me is that this is supposed to be a trailer, not a teaser. The crux of what seems to be my biggest complaint of all is that our well-to-do rat ends up coming down into this place that looks like a mash-up of Times Square and Piccadilly Circus but we don’t get any context of this new land. This rat even lands in the “vehicle” of who, ostensibly, is a girl rat who will probably be some kind of love interest but no one says anything for the rest of the trailer.

    There has got to be more here but I cannot explain why we’re not shown more than we are. Yes, this film is not coming out until the end of this year but I’ve been teased better than I’ve been trailer-ed in this advertisement.


    YOU, ME AND DUPREE(2006) Director: Anthony Russo, Joe Russo
    Cast: Owen Wilson, Matt Dillon, Kate Hudson, Michael Douglas
    Release: July 14, 2006
    Synopsis: The story of a newlywed couple (Hudson, Dillon) whose relationship problems boil over when the groom’s unemployed best man, Dupree (Wilson), moves in with them for a brief period and seems to have no intention of leaving.
    View Trailer:
    * Large (QuickTime)

    Prognosis: Positive. So, I can relate to this.

    Having a tenuous grasp on a job is just commonplace here where I live in the Southwest. Not only do I have to contend that since I live in a state that says either myself or my employer can terminate employment at any time for any reason (“Did I wear too much Aqua Velva today?” “Is the color of my Swatch watch going to be the beginning of the end for me?) I had a boss who once called me at home after the birth of my second child not only asking where I was but, after calling in to reiterate what was common knowledge, was given a lecture that even though my newborn was fragile his business interests were fragile and if I wanted a job I would recognize that. I didn’t stay there much longer. It is this reason that I can see why Owen “The Buttercup Stallion” Wilson would find himself in such a dire situation after being canned to attend Matt Dillion’s wedding. I don’t think I’d fall that fast, that quick, but this looks like a fun slip n’ slide ride at the theater.

    The trailer, initially, goes through the motions of setting up the premise of the flick. Voiceover Guy does his due diligence in really hamming it up when we see the lush Hawaiian setting that is Matt Dillion and Kate “Overreact To Act” Hudson’s nuptials. You’ve got the word “perfect” tossed around here, there and everywhere before you almost feel you want to shout “I got it already!” before it moves on to establishing how Owen fits into this “perfect” situation.

    Now, I wasn’t that plussed with STARSKY AND HUTCH and was marginally satisfied with his performance in THE WEDDING CRASHERS (It was really Vince’s movie to steal) so I am hopeful when Owen recounts what has happened to him since being canned for going to his buddy’s wedding. His protest to Dillion when asked if he’s living in his car is comedically rendered when he says he has a 10 speed and then gets hit by a car.

    I think it’s important to state, however, that after we’re rushed to the moment when Hudson is told that Wilson is going to move into their house for a few nights, knowing full well that this wouldn’t be a movie if it were just for a few nights, it is Wilson’s holding of a mounted moose head as he thanks her which I think is a nice, humorous touch.

    It is Wilson’s movie, though, as Dillion seems to just be the straight man in this vehicle and the gags keep coming when Owen barges into the room where a love is about to be made, sending Kate barreling onto the floor in surprise as Owen chants that the toilet downstairs is “on the fritz” and then follows that up with opening the bathroom door whilst on the bowl saying, “We’re going to need some matches.”

    And, the capper, involves Wilson placing a tie on the doorknob of Dillion’s house as Kate, incredulous, ignores it and lets herself in the front door only to scream, leave, and then announce, “That butter dish was a wedding gift, Carl.”

    It’s not as wild as Dillion’s THERE’S SOMETHING ABOUT MARY and it feels little more tame than MEET THE PARENTS but I think this movie will do well with the middle-of-the-road audience and, I would assert, means some nice profits to come.

  • Trailer Park: The Game Is Afoot

    E-MAIL THE AUTHOR | By Christopher Stipp

    May 26, 2006

    The Game Is Afoot

    Um, yeah, MySpace. It’s teh awesome and I’m not even using it to pick up 12 year-olds. Boys. I’m not. For reals.

    The summer movie season has begun but the notion of whether it has started real well depends on whether you like to play with your numbers in an optimistic or pessimisttic way. Let’s break down the top 5 films this week at the box office:

    The Da Vinci Code: $77,000,000 Budget: $125 Million

    Over the Hedge: $37,228,000 Budget: ?

    Mission: Impossible III: $11,015,000 Budget: $150 Million

    Poseidon: $9,200,000 Budget: $160 Million

    RV: $5,100,000 Budget: $50 Million

    Now, for those who don’t want to go look for cummulative totals I can tell you that Mission: Impossible still has a good way to go before it hits the 0 mark, the prospect of DVD sales being Paramount’s one salve on the wound that their batshit crazy mouthpiece for the film may have wounded sales just a little bit. I am sure that foriegn audiences will more than help out making the film a profitable venture for the studio but, when compared to POSEIDON’s digits you can certainly see how this is a tougher pill to swallow.

    The interesting thing when you compare a movie like THE DA VINCI CODE and POSEIDON is that both of them both received pretty awful reviews. Nay, I say, pretty disasterous reviews. When you see that that both of these flicks came within 4% of one another for an aggregate number of all reviews that either said it was good (which they’re not) or it was bad (which they are and some got very creative with how they put it). So, why the disconnect between DA VINCI’s obvious bulletproofness and POSEIDON’s eventual sinking to the bottom of people’s Must Avoid list? I can’t say for sure as most every single summer movie is constructed with the idea of maximizing company’s coffers and being appealing to the widest audience possible which means diluting the creativity of a project until it reaches a milquetoast consistency from its script to its eventual casting and direction. It’s not a bad thing, mind you, as every company deserves to make as much dinero as it can get its evil little fingers on but I am confounded why one obviously resonated with audiences and the other did not.

    I wouldn’t dare go to a film where most every person whose opinions I valued said was a waste of my money but I’m feeling that it was Hanks’ appearance alone that made so many people scoff at critics and willingly open their collective wallets. POSEIDON had no real bankable stars besides Golden Oldies Kurt Russell and Richard Dreyfuss and maybe that’s it, maybe that’s how you can literally make any movie you want, no matter how terrible, and as long as you have someone who can simply show up and make millions of dollars appear right before your corporation’s eyes it could all boil down to not how well your movie’s made but who you’ve got in it.

    Could Occam’s Razor theory really that applicable to films? If I was looking just weeks into the Summer movie season I would answer “Yes” simply based on what the trends look like. I am sure that if I really looked hard I could find out if this is a viable notion but next week is already upon us and X-MEN 3 is knocking at the Box Office door wanting to know what a marginal director and a cast of marginally well-received actors can expect from people’s bank accounts.

    I’ve already got my slide rule at the ready.

    And in this installment of Photo of the Week we get a little sporty with what is, ostensibly, my new wallpaper on the trusty iBook G4; Michael Barrett, catcher of the Chicago Cubs, takes issue with Chicago White Sox’s AJ Pierz-Zzz-something-ski or another. Be it right or not this is what makes being a Superfan of the downtrodden Cubs a nice thing. I may love my movies but I do loves me a good bar fight every once in a while on the field especially one that we start, and win. Remember kids, violence is never the answer but when you’re having your jaw pushed back into your face it’s kinda hard to be asking the question in the first place, isn’t it?


    12 AND HOLDING (2005) Director: Michael Cuesta
    Cast: Linus Roache, Annabella Sciorra, Jeremy Renner, Jayne Atkinson, Marcia Debonis
    Release: May 19, 2006
    Synopsis: Explores the complexities of children losing their innocence and adults struggling to guide them. In the suburbs of America, three close knit 12-year-olds ñ introverted Jacob (Conor Donovan), precocious Malee (Zoe Weizenbaum) and vulnerable Leonard (Jesse Camacho) – start down the path of self-discovery.
    View Trailer:
    * Medium (QuickTime)

    Prognosis: Positive. This one is a head scratcher.

    You don’t really want to desperately see this movie like you would a SUPERMAN when you see Routh milling around in his tight red Speedo briefs but you feel a certain uneasiness when you try and grasp exactly what it is that’s happening, I’m not sure I do know, though, what it is that I am supposed to be identifying with, a key component in any good grab for one’s attention or cash, but I like it; I appreciate the sentiment that I’m not entirely comfortable by trailer’s end.

    While I know that this is not going to be a gleeful romp through this coming-of-age tale you’re instantly drawn into what seems like a rather poignant set-up: identical twins who don’t share much in common and who have a troubled time relating to one another.

    We have our collective attention switched to two friends of the twins, one who happens to be fat; and I can’t understand why there needs to always be the fat friend in movies with kids. You need to look no further than most every kid movie and see where there is an obvious chunky collective at work here. I’m not saying it’s as organized as, let’s say, the mafia but there is something afoot. Of course the fat kid is eating in the first scene we’re shown and I am floored by the other friend’s declaration, who happens to be female, that she is now able to be with, and care for, a child.

    (Insert surprise here)

    This is not going to be Disney’s THE SANDLOT.

    So, the quad squad gets themselves a tree house, get into a little tiff with what seems like an ornery kid of East Coast dialect (I mean, really, aren’t all kids with New Yawk accents just thieves-in-training?) threatens to kill one, or all as these East Coasters are just murderous little shiats, and then ends up accidentally killing one of the twins.

    The bleakness and quiet that the next moment inspires of seeing the blanketed coffin is disquieting.

    After we move on from the death we get an odd theme of sexual awakening by the girl in the trio and then rage by the single twin who confronts the alleged killer while in prison; sex and violence, I guess, like a two birds and a feather. The violence takes the next step as the girl produces something off screen while in a room with the dejected brother but I think we all can safely say it’s a heater of some caliber.

    The subsequent montage of clips that don’t really have any adhesion outside of just giving us more opportunities to see these kids’ environment is actually useful here. It’s good for three reasons: 1) The soundtrack is inspired. A modern “Don’t Fear The Reaper” fits in a macabre way. 2) The quotes that this movie has garnered are solid, the film festival locations this has played at are pimped quickly. 3) We actually get an abstract way of relating to these kids’ world. The clips are effective at relaying movement and emotion.

    I’m not comfortable when we finally finish things here but that’s commendable. I shouldn’t be after seeing how complex things will get in this flick as Cuesta’s L.I.E. wasn’t a smooth pill to swallow so I shouldn’t be expecting anything less than a story that’s uniquely his own to tell.


    CASINO ROYALE (2006) Director: Martin Campbell
    Cast: Daniel Craig, Judi Dench
    Release: November 17, 2006
    Synopsis: James Bond must thwart a dangerous Russian spy from winning a game of cards worth millions.
    View Trailer:
    * Large (QuickTime)

    Prognosis: Positive. Yes.

    This is what this franchise needed.

    I don’t purport to know Bond lore any more than I have a handle on the Harry Potter series; it’s not much, I don’t have any interest knowing more than I do and, most importantly, I’m just here for the ride.

    However, knowing what I do about 007 and the enduring iconoclast symbol he represents for British folk, as he shatters the notion of all Brits having teeth that could pop open deadbolts and bodies that are pastier than white paint, this is exactly what I’ve come to expect from this kind of film: guns, explosions, chicks who have no other purpose than to be objectified by a Cro-Magnon throwback and fast cars.

    And, to wit, give it up for the sly entrance into this trailer. Instead of going the route of blazing through the aforementioned delicious bits that make every Bond film a variation on a theme we get Judi Dench doing the voiceover. Now, even though I had to look up whether her perennial character was named M or Q, again, I don’t have a firm grasp on these things, it’s quite moot because of how wonderfully this thing opens up.

    “This may be too much for a blunt instrument to understand”¦”

    I like the mystique that’s being created with the initial black and white scenes that we’re given. Sure, we could have been given that distinctive 007 instrumental suite with Craig walking before shooting the screen with that lame ass blood effect, a calling card that really should be revamped. No, we get something different. The voiceover that Dench does is actually pretty good as, unbeknownst to the dudes who are drawn to these films, it subverts in its own way the established masculine overtones these films are unquestionably all about.

    Craig, in slow-mo, beats down dudes in hand-to-hand combat whilst being a patient listener to Dench’s assessment of the kind of operative a 00 should be.

    “I understand that 00’s have a very short life expectancy.”

    Yes, Craig has it. He’s got that ability to be glib and smarmy while being flirtatious. He’s also has that look of dangerousness. It’s there and as the trailer transitions from black and white to color you see that he’s everything that a disposable Bond should be.

    I do have to suffer through the animation of Craig “shooting” the camera but as it’s a device used to accentuate the transition, much like SIN CITY used red in it its initial trailer, and this is where we move from just meeting Craig to seeing him move within the character.

    Now, we don’t see a lot of stability for the duration of this teaser but that’s just the nature of these things; especially because people want to get whetted for what’s to come this piece of promotion has to just hint. With the elaborate action sequences shown, the car that will be Craig’s little coupe and the lingering gaze we’re allowed to spend on some faceless woman getting out of the water in a bathing suit I would say this is more than just a satisfactory teaser.


    DISTRICT B13 (2006) Director: Pierre Morel
    Cast: Cyril Raffaelli, David Belle, Tony D’amario, Bibi Naceri, Dany Verissimo
    Release: June 2, 2006
    Synopsis: Paris, 2010. An isolation wall surrounds the ghetto cities. Damien is a member of the police elite task force. This time, the government has assigned him the most extreme expedition of his entire career: a weapon of mass destruction has been stolen by the most powerful gang of District B13.
    View Trailer:
    * Medium (QuickTime)

    Prognosis: Postive. Excellent concept but wretched execution.

    I would like to think trailers like this serve a purpose beyond just pimping their own films, These are little examples by which to observe and take away little bits of ideas, ways of doing things. Much like in the case for this trailer there is also the opportunity to state what isn’t such a good idea when trying to get people interested to make an effort to see your film.

    The idea with the trailer, especially one that is making a voyage beyond its own little borders, is that you want to start people thinking that they have to see it, need to see it. When you use that faux computer screen with the green letters as icons you not only are saying that you still believe people are communicating in Dos and don’t have a basic understanding on how modern GUI interfaces have vastly improved since the Apple IIe but you’re also stating that this story takes place in 2010, thus, rendering your visualization of said computer screen a sad attempt at trying to seem technologically with it.

    See, I don’t want to sound harsh as this trailer opens up solidly. You have the sound of a helicopter humming in the audio foreground as you peep the barbwired walls of desolate cement ghettos. Quickly you see that these aren’t desolate areas at all and are filled with many people. You do, though, get acquainted with the kind of police state, a heavily armed police state, that these people are living in.

    Black screen, green computer letters: “Paris”¦2010″

    The “ugh” begins as this “harsh” new reality reveals that the streets are run by the rejects from THE FAST AND THE FURIOUS. Driving souped up Yugo’s and the like it appears to be that the gangs who control what happens are about to come into possession of a nuclear weapon.

    Now, the cinematography harkens back to the salad days of the first TRANSPORTER and I’m not disappointed to know that the story is explained even further by our green screen companion that “the lone cop”¦that is sent to stop them”¦” establishes our protagonist.

    I’m confused.

    At first I thought we were dealing with just these little gangs in post-apocalyptic France but now we’ve got a French Jason Statham getting buck wild with these perps. I get ready to go absolutely monkey shines on this concept but something quite important changes my mind: we get another protagonist thrown into the mix.

    Instead of just one Jason Statham we get two. Not only that but these guys are acrobatic on the level of a Tony Jaa mixed in with those dudes who did those leaping commercials for Nike a couple of years ago; they were French I believe, as well.

    The end result has me eating all sorts of crow about how goofy this was getting. The stunts here are just a joy to watch as you try and figure out the logistics of a man running across the vertical façade of a building. We get hipped to the fact that the producers of BOTH TRANSPORTER 2 and ONG-BAK have diddled with this story and like a connoisseur who can tell vintage from swill I feel vindicated by the knowledge that this movie has their kind of fingerprints on the screen.

    I do, however, have advice for these people promoting the movie: getting it established early, the people behind this film, would be a good thing in stoking giddiness. If I didn’t know better I would’ve just rolled on to another trailer but I had to wait literally until this trailer was all done to find out what pedigree this film had.

    Selling a foreign film is tough enough without having to make dumb mistakes like this but I would lose nearly the entire first half and just launch into the ass kicking and explosions. Sorry, but it’s the truth.

    The last half of this trailer brims with excitement, passion, violence, martial arts and the hint that one could enjoy 90 minutes of this; I sure as shit would after seeing what these two dudes can do. It’s far too small of a world to be sitting on this kind of flick for just regional audiences to enjoy. I want to watch other countries’ ass kickers, too.

    Count me in on this one but just clean up this trailer.


    SUPERMAN RETURNS (2006) Director: Bryan Singer
    Cast: Brandon Routh, Kevin Spacey, Kate Bosworth, James Marsden, Frank Langella, Parker Posey, Kal Penn, Eva Saint Marie, Sam Huntington
    Release: June 30, 2006
    Synopsis: Following a mysterious absence of several years, the Man of Steel comes back to Earth in the epic action-adventure Superman Returns, a soaring new chapter in the saga of one of the world’s most beloved superheroes. While an old enemy plots to render him powerless once and for all, Superman (Brandon Routh) faces the heartbreaking realization that the woman he loves, Lois Lane (Kate Bosworth), has moved on with her life. Or has she? Superman’s bittersweet return challenges him to bridge the distance between them while finding a place in a society that has learned to survive without him. In an attempt to protect the world he loves from cataclysmic destruction, Superman embarks on an epic journey of redemption that takes him from the depths of the ocean to the far reaches of outer space.
    View Trailer:
    * Large (QuickTime)

    Prognosis: Very Positive. I think it’s my laissez faire attitude about X-MEN 3 that has something to do with my eagerness to see what else Singer has in store with SUPERMAN.

    You cannot see this trailer and not feel like you’ve been given a mainline injection of adrenaline straight to your fanboy cortex.

    What I liked about the teaser many months ago was that not only did it give you a really nice nugget or two about what Routh is going to do with the character but I would assert, more importantly, it gave Singer a chance to show off what he has done directorially with the property. How could you not feel a twinge of something when you see young Clark Kent leaping and bounding through the cornfields? How you could deny Singer’s passion when you see the wonderfully composed shot of awe struck citizens when you know exactly what it is that they’re all looking at?

    With this trailer, then, it’s time to let the people see more. The days of GODZILLA-like secrecy about denying people the chance to see the goods before the movie comes out are thankfully long since gone and it is the opening shots, the turn of the century feeling you get, like when you see Fritz Lang’s METROPOLIS, that a deliberate decision was made to how SUPERMAN was going to come to life. It’s easy to just gloss over this issue but when you can tell that a director had some kind of passion driving them it’s comforting as it is exciting.

    As Luthor breaches the Fortress of Solitude and demands to know everything about our man in the tight maroon Speedo with Routh hovering above earth, his cape is effortlessly flapping gently, the gauntlet is tossed down quickly about who and what this movie will be dealing with.

    I am annoyed slightly, though, by the rehashing of the teaser trailer with Ma Kent taking over the voiceover duties, us having to endure the same damn leaping in the cornfields with it being topped off with the same moment I spoke of earlier with the populace standing at shocked attention.

    I quickly forget this as we finally get some motion out of Superman. Singer’s biggest issue to contend with, one of many I guess, is making Routh’s flying appear to have weight. One of the issues with SPIDER MAN’s initial installment was that a good effort was made to make it appear that Peter Parker was bound to rules of physics and that if he’s going to defy gravity with his aerial acrobatics he better look like gravity wants his ass back on the ground.

    From the initial impression here, sure, it looks like Superman navigates his flying within our world. Later, when Routh turns his body mid-flight his hair appropriately flaps and it’s little details like this that will make believers out of haters.

    I don’t have much appreciation, though, for Jimmy Olsen as he looks cut out of a bad Superman comic book. He appears smarmy, too much of a doofus and kind of flat. As he tells Clark that Lois has moved on and had a kid I feel like that would’ve been a perfect time for Bizzaro to pop up and squeeze Jimmy’s little melon head like a grapefruit.

    Sure, there’s a little sense of back lot fakery when Superman and Lois have their first real moment, the top of the roof looks like it’s a manufactured façade which it most certainly is, but when the two of them fly off with one another it actually looks more realistic.

    Luthor shows his bald head once more to do his thing and it just smells of greatness. There’s nothing like Spacey’s quiet craziness as he plays his role the way it should be played. Luthor, while apt at tossing out humorous lines, should be maniacal and given to rage, not like Gene Hackman’s buffoonery.

    Oh, and Jimmy pops up again donning a bow tie and sweater. Seriously, where is Bizzaro and his head popping fetish? I know Superman is about having a nebbish secret identity but where does it state that he has to endure this geek’s nerdish vibe?

    Anyway, Spacey comes back to get wild with Bosworth as his hostage and his screaming moment is pitch perfect as is Routh’s powerful landing on both feet which I think is actually one of the best shots in this trailer; you can sense the physicality, the weight and emotion of this character perfectly.

    The other “best shot” in this trailer is the tearing apart of the airplane that is literally disintegrating as it hurdles towards the ground in flames. I am hopeful that this sequence really does challenge the notion that even though you use special effects you can show a man can fly and make it look more real than any of its predecessors.

  • Trailer Park: Yeah, like that catchy GO-GO’s song goes…

    E-MAIL THE AUTHOR | By Christopher Stipp

    May 19, 2006

    Yeah, like that catchy GO-GO’s song goes…

    I’m shilling again for my spot on MySpace and I am getting closer and closer in talking about a writing project that doesn’t have anything to do with movies, trailers or flying nuns.

    I’m on vacation this week…Yet here I am with more reviews for the lot of you still sticking around to read this. Which, judging by the sheer numbers of traffic, I would be better off reading this thing while people get on the 28 bus on their way into downtown Scottsdale.

    However, with the very public announcement that Poop Shoot was being dipped in an acid bath and getting a much needed sprucing-up I am happy to see that there will be a new crop of readers who will be parking their eyes for a bit in this here space. I don’t know if they’ll stick around, mind you, new readers also means new opportunites for my writing to be rejected by an even bigger audience, or I’ll be an even bigger reason why people don’t seem to visit the site on a Friday, but for those who really have been consistent readers of this space it really is validation that there is still great things happening at this site and all we needed is a new coat of paint.

    I cannot tell you how right Kevin was when he said that while it’s amusing to be standing on the red carpet or at interviews and for people to give a healthy chortle or guffaw as I say I work for a site called “Poop Shoot” I am pleased that the name change will help give an idea of who we are as a whole; it’s not that I was embarassed of reiterating my namesake whenever someone asked but, again, like Kevin said, Quick Stop Entertainment denotes imagery quite different as you play What’s-The-First-Thing-You-Think-Of game with publicists as you try and squeek out some time with some person who you all out there would enjoy reading about.

    As more information comes out I hope to be here to be able and say how it affects what I do here but in the meantime I have my sights set on the Comi-Con in a couple of months and am busy making sure all of you get new content from me, like you’ve come to expect for nearly 2 1/2 years, every week. I am proud of what’s been built here and there’s only more good things to come.


    STRANGERS WITH CANDY (2006) Director: Paul Dinello
    Cast: Amy Sedaris, Stephen Colbert, Paul Dinello
    Release: June 28, 2006
    Synopsis: A prequel to the critically acclaimed series featuring Jerri Blank, a 46 year-old ex-junkie, ex-con who returns to high school in a bid to start her life over.
    View Trailer:
    * Medium (Flash)

    Prognosis: Hell No. I am officially out of touch with what people think is funny.

    Sure, I loved Arrested Development, Da Ali G Show and other cancelled programming but I never understood about the funny factor when it came to Strangers With Candy. When Comedy Central ran this I was deep in their clutches with Upright Citizens Brigade, The Daily Show and South Park so I just tried to find the angle with what this show’s ethos was all about; I guess the answer was there all along: retardation and bad Tracy Ullman humor. These two elements, when mixed, made for a delightful mélange of idiocy and good ratings.

    Now, I tried to give this trailer the benefit of time. I hadn’t heard anything from Amy Sedaris for a while and hearing that this movie was being made I figured there would be a chance for me to get introduced properly to this world.

    I don’t want to be introduced anymore.

    This trailer begins with what is intended to be a really funny premise: Jerri Blank needs to make the honor roll.

    “Be prom queen!” our titular hero yells in hopeful auditory miscommunication.

    “Make the honor roll,” our straight man quietly retorts.

    Really. This is how it’s going to be? It sure is as the next lame mule joke about what Jerri’s IQ is does not go over well. “Pieces,” is her reply and it is not the right answer for a lot of reasons.

    Following this little moment we go on with a montage of Jerri being herself in all her resplendent ickiness. We see her corn chip sized toenails, get a gander as she tries disgustingly to sex us up and then rides a broom in a cackle-induced hysteria that I don’t know to be afraid or laugh out of embarrassment.

    From what I can take away from Steven Colbert, an overrated comedic talent judging by his reliance on his static, deadpan delivery style, his role is to be co-performing along with Amy as his one-liners and additions to Amy’s set-ups seem to be dependant on her reactions. It shouldn’t be this hard to be funny or to figure out why it is that other people find these things giggle-worthy but I can’t see it and the trailer does a miserable job in even letting the lay person in on the comedy.

    Oh, and the last bit of Jerri’s mother telling her, while eating dinner with the family, that, “we don’t talk with food in our mouth,” and Amy’s “physical humor” as she empties the contents on her plate saying, “I don’t have food in my mouth”? If she was 12 I am sure the kids would love it. Seeing a grown woman do it in attempt to show how funny she can be is just sad.


    DOWN IN THE VALLEY (2005) Director: David Jacobson
    Cast: Edward Norton, Evan Rachel Wood, David Morse, Bruce Dern, Rory Culkin
    Release: April, 2006 (Limited)
    Synopsis: Set in the present-day San Fernando Valley, the project revolves around a delusional man who believes he’s a cowboy and the relationship that he starts with a rebellious young woman.
    View Trailer:
    * Medium (QuickTime)

    Prognosis: Make That Another No. Couldn’t Ed be making movies where he’s beating the hell out of himself or curbing some Neo-Nazis?

    No? This is what I’m left with? Well, I can’t say that I’m all that pumped about a cowboy who hasn’t ever known anything more than the range of the South but I also can’t even muster enough joy on my femme side after seeing this trailer to even make this a recommended flick for chicks.

    It starts out well enough, though. There is a light musical arrangement and a slow opening as Ed narrates the way he’d like to be under a sky full of stars, hear nothing but the wind and, possibly, out humping some sheep.

    Evan Rachel comes off as a bitchy teen that needs to have her MySpace account taken away and defaced, along with everything else she no doubt takes for granted as she whines about how it sucks to be a disenfranchised young person. I’m not sure if this is trying to win me over to her character but she seems a little disillusioned with how life works. I hope when the tramp finally gets to the beach where she so defiantly tells her dad that’s where she’s going that the Zodiac is there, waiting.

    It looks like I won’t be getting my wish as when Evan is fueling up at the local Unocal 76 Ed looks like he’s semi-working there, I don’t really know for sure as we go from him peeping a view at her possibly underage, glistening bodice to him throwing down his oil rag in mock disgust as he’s invited to the beach with this girl; I’m not sure of whether I’m supposed to be giving him a mental high-five or calling NBC’s Dateline and reporting this perv.

    So, they’re at the beach and it’s like a scene from Real World: California when Jon, that lump of Branson backwater molded into a doughy form with a blonde-ish mullet, went to the beach in his Hulkamania t-shirt and cowboy boots. I don’t know if this a put-on or if I should feel endeared toward Ed.

    Lo and behold, children, not only does Ed manage to start making out with Evan in the ocean but the chick puts out on the very same night. Obviously a whore and needing a good ass whooping of atomic proportions Ed decides to play the gentle pedo with his clap-trap about finding one’s self, believing in whatever, blah blah blah.

    When the girl finally goes home (!) after her night of sexing and cavorting like a tramp her dad is there waiting, pissed, and understandably so. Even has this look of “What did I do?” as she runs into her room, her dad just being comfortable with pounding on the door once. Now, I have to call bullshiat on this one. If that were me I would have one of those Cops sized battering rams with accompanying riot helmets that have those hard plastic Samurai flaps on the back of it and put that bitch down with a few taser blasts to the temple. Does that happen here? Noooo”¦the chick ends up seeing Ed AGAIN and whines about her crap life.

    Sure, there may be problems but when you’re trying to spin this movie as a romance and you’ve got Ed trying to “defend” her honor by being all cowboy with the dad it does a very poor job doing so.

    The montage of the scenes of this film are a train wreck of discombobulation and mixed messages of underage copulation, family togetherness and the search for being true to one’s self.

    I think I’ll just watch FIGHT CLUB and AMERICAN HISTORY X on cable.


    THE DESCENT (2005) Director: Neil Marshall
    Cast: Shauna Macdonald, Natalie Jackson Mendoza, Alex Reid, Saskia Mulder, MyAnna Buring, Nora-Jane Noone, Oliver Milburn, Molly Kayll
    Release: August, 2006
    Synopsis: After a tragic accident, six friends reunite for a caving expedition. Their adventure soon goes horribly wrong when a collapse traps them deep underground and they find themselves pursued by bloodthirsty creatures. As their friendships deteriorate, they find themselves in a desperate struggle to survive the creatures and each other.
    View Trailer:
    * Large (AOL Player)

    Prognosis: Okay…Now, This Makes Up For It. True story that begins with a question: Have any of you out there even been in complete darkness? Not the kind of stub-your-toe in the night kind of dark when you’ve really got to whiz because turning on a light would render your corneas into flaming orbs of pain but the kind of dark where there is no ambient light available. The wife and I went to Aillwee Cave in Ireland when we were there almost five years ago and the guides do this thing where they shut down all the lights while you’re already feeling claustrophobic and ask you to put your hand to your face. It is, perhaps, one of the most exhilarating, thrilling and disconcerting things you will ever experience.

    Being in a cave is already kind of crazy, being in a cave with the likes of the ladies shown here, the beautiful kind that would NEVER do this if it weren’t for a movie, who you know are going to get picked off like Republican senators this fall, is just right for the kind of horror that’s being planned.

    I like the opening of this thing. I really do. It’s so 80’s exploitative, again with the hot chicks cavorting and having a delicious time with being ladies on the loose in the woods, that I can’t help but laugh when their movable feast means spelunking in a dingy hole in the middle of nowhere.

    Not only do we all know nothing good is going to come of this but when the one of them, we’ll say Hot Chick Who Is Only There Because It’s a Film, HCWIOTBIW for short, says that the only way out is through the annals of the naturally carved out tunnels you know fun is afoot.

    I’m especially glad when, oh my stars and garters, one of them gets stuck in a rather tight hole. Internet pervs rejoice that you too will be able to imagine what this means in the grand scheme of things, and starts moaning and grunting.

    The screen dissolves and the word “Claustrophobia” comes on the screen.

    Excellent!

    Somehow, after the ladies break free of the tight hole one of them finds herself in, they all congregate in a relatively cramped cave with one of the smart biatches asking, “This is not good, guys?” Damn right, chicas, now shouldn’t have someone figured out and exit strategy before they all threw their bodies down a hole?

    “Disorientation”

    Don’t let this get in the way of the thrilling nature of this movie, though, because fun awaits when we get more words about “Fear” and “Hallucination” coming into the mix. These ladies are like caged heat as they start flipping out on one another and the sounds of a buried cave Kraken starts to shake their grip on reality.

    The Kraken isn’t a Kraken after all, unfortunately, but it does seem like some mutant hillbilly cadre of crazies are about to show us how to get-er-done down in the bowels of stalagmites and stalactites. There is a lot of spinning camera angles and it’s hard to make sense of how this situation will devolve but I do know that there is, at the very least, a dozen of these fleshy headed mutants who hope to kill all of these misguided adventurers.

    I can say with great delight that I may have laughed all the way through this trailer and found “gimmies” with regard to easy jokes but this looks like a solid Friday/Saturday night rental when this thing finally makes it way to video stores. The trailer does a swell job of building up the story and making it quite ambiguous as to what actually attacks these women. Solid.

  • Trailer Park: Air Sickness

    E-MAIL THE AUTHOR | By Christopher Stipp

    May 12, 2006

    Air Sickness

    Can you believe I am still hooked on this little corner of The InterWeb? Head on over to MySpace and say hey. Judging by the number of views I get every Friday when this notice appears I couldn’t be more pleased that some of you are stopping by to view what NBC no doubt has made people believe is a den for pedophelia and underage solicitations. I just wish Dateline would do more of those undercover operations to catch more of those pervs who are all boner-ed up and are willing to drive two hours just to be busted by that Tele-Prom-Ter pretty boy Chris Hansen.

    Speaking of sex with minors, did anyone get sick while watching UNITED 93?

    I ask this as a question because, physically, I not only had to throw my eyes off the screen about half way through the picture but, when I arrived back home, I had to toss back a couple of Pepto-Bismols just to calm my stomach. A few years ago I went to see Greengrass’ BLOODY SUNDAY. I thought the story was solid, the perspective on the event really brought home the issues which triggered the events that transpired and I got just as sick watching it as I did for UNITED 93.

    Now, I know I can’t be the only one. Hell, a few people exiting the theaters mentioned that they felt queasy as well but I never once was given a warning that people who might have a predilection towards this sort of thing could possibly have a crap night at the multiplex.

    I don’t bring this up as a fault of Paul’s. Like I mentioned, I braved BLOODY SUNDAY and I went through this one all the way to the end. I almost didn’t make it through 93 but I did because his filmmaking represents something important and I wanted to support that. For ever loving God, though, I cannot say that I’m going to go out again to the movies just to have my stomach rattled. I will admit, though, I was getting a little testy by the film’s end because I just envisioned Paul’s directorial technique being that of requiring he do all his shooting on a half dozen paint shakers.

    “Oooh, fer craps sake, lad, do’ya got that ting set on ‘1 gallon.’ No, pappy, no, no, no. Crank that fooker up to the ‘Industrial Behemoth’ setting. Now git from the set before you think about stealin’ me Lucky Chaaarms.”

    I’d like to think he’s not trying to get anyone sick but as the movie played out I was reminded of my own swervey hand as I filmed my first full-length movie, THE TRIAL OF G.I. JOE (which I still have securely placed in a secret location where no one will ever see it), that I shot with my friend Brandon Murphy in Barrington, Illinois, in the summer of 1988. If ever there was a lesson I learned as I replayed our solidly wretched short film (I even had special effects as I lit a helpless GI Joe up in flames using rubbing alcohol) was that you’ve got to really be mindful of picture stability.

    At the end of the day you do not want your audience physically reacting to your movie in a way you don’t intend but just glancing at all the reviews I am sure people like me are just a minority. There are some of us out there, though, who are not meant to sail gently on the open oceans, join the Navy or go any Disney attraction that uses the “illusion” of motion. We’ve failed the evolutionary process somehow, I know. We’re part of the weaker variety of homo sapiens but some of us just can’t take the abuse that jittery camera movements incite in our stomachs.

    I’m not advocating that Greengrass’ movie somehow suffers from this style he obviously loves employing but I am disappointed that I could not fully take in his ultimate vision because of my prediliction for stablity.

    Now, before you’re let to chew on this week’s trailers I have to make sure that if you’re any sort of fan of this column you must check out the trailer for THE LAKE HOUSE. After watching and rewatching and rewatching some more of this trailer I can state with a great amount of certainty that this is a chick flick I can get behind. The song “Somewhere Only We Know” is perfectly matched up with the vibe of the video shown and I have to be honest that this trailer really does deserve a spot in the Top 10 so far in 2006 for being able to delicately balance despair, hope, love, affection and that sense that you really need to see this movie in a delicious little package. Keanu and Sandra are back again and let me be the first one to state that I hope the flick is as good as the trailer.

    I don’t know why this preview has such a hold on me (I’ve been sitting on the review now for almost 3 weeks) but I invariably cue up the Keane song on my iPod while working out and wish that this is really a solid romance flick. I don’t need Julia Roberts’ horsey smile, I don’t need Jennifer Aniston’s faux preening about a love lost but I am pulling for Sandra Bullock to come correct one more time like she did in CRASH and 28 DAYS to give me something to believe in.

    Check out the trailer on the movie’s homepage and tell me what you think. It’s not often that I let the soft underbelly show for the world to see but I have to give credit where it’s due and it’s due right here.


    MEET THE ROBINSONS (2007) Director: Stephen J. Anderson
    Cast: Angela Bassett, Paul Butcher, Jessie Flower, Spencer Fox, Jordan Fry, Daniel Hansen, Tom Kenny, Wesley Singerman, Harland Williams
    Release: March 30, 2007
    Synopsis: Boy genius invents a machine that recovers forgotten memories, and inadvertently travels forward in time, where he encounters a family whose survival depends on his ingenuity.
    View Trailer:
    * Large (QuickTime)

    Prognosis: Leery. It couldn’t be worse than CHICKEN LITTLE.

    I couldn’t be more sure than any animated film that utilized Pixar-like animation could have been more messed up than that turd nugget. I mean, really, when you have three discordant storylines converging in an inglorious explosion of confusion and lameness you’ve got the ingredients for a bad movie. Even if it is a kids movie the children, and the adults taking them, deserve better.

    This movie, though, looks a little more focused than its previous studios’ offering. One of the very first things you notice about this flick is the full-on animated rendering of the evil villain. The guy is everything you would want in a maniacal antagonist. He’s rocking a dashingly devilish cape, dons a twisty moustache that will, hopefully, be twirled from time to time and has got a mouthful of jacked teeth that any Briton would be envious of.

    Now, the hero of this tale is a Jimmy Neutron nerd of sorts. I could see the wagon wheels rolling off this gravy train should the kid develop an annoying parlance that includes copious amounts of the words “awesome” or “cool” but from what is revealed here there isn’t any indication of that.

    The kid in this movie looks like he’ll be “playing” off the eccentric family members that comprise the people who he has never known existed”¦until now. Yes, the heavy handed goofiness that seems to make this flick look more cartoonish than it does reflective of the smart writing which has come out of Pixar is a little disconcerting. You’ve got impossibly weird and odd moments that threaten to make this movie solely enjoyable to just the little ones but you’ve also got this one moment at the end of the trailer that made me hope there is something more to this movie.

    A woman extols the wonderful effects of the caffeine patch and while it’s superficially funny the general sense of goofiness and slapstick that’s employed is promising to me.

    Animated movies have raised the general bar insofar that the greats have challenged the accepted notion that kids movies are animated; adults are being included in the making of the films, their presence being recognized in well-written moments for them, while respecting the kids who ultimately will want to see these films.

    CHICKEN LITTLE failed as a film, at least in execution, because of its exclusion of material that would entertain the adults who had accompany their kids to the theater. TOY STORY knew how to play to this part of the audience and so did a handful of other memorable animated movies. These things aren’t just for kids. Disney would do well to remember that.


    THE OMEN(2006) Director: John Moore
    Cast: Liev Schreiber, Julia Stiles, Mia Farrow, David Thewlis, Pete Postlethwaite, Michael Gambon, Seamus Fitzpatrick
    Release: June 6, 2006
    Synopsis: A remake of the 1976 horror classic The Omen (1976), an American official realizes that his young son may literally be the devil incarnate.
    View Trailer:
    * Large (QuickTime)

    Prognosis: Ahh..No. I really didn’t see the original.

    I figured, Satan incarnate in a little boy, starts some smack, some people die, there’s some wicked climax and somehow, some way, the kid somehow survives; saved myself the hour and a half, I figure.

    The power of Christ, I guess, compelled some people to make this picture again except I don’t know who is supposed to be the evil one: Damian or Julia Stiles. One is evil on the screen and the other is just an unsuspecting little boy.

    Never minding my own bias against the whimsy blonde I am a fan of the opening sequence. You’ve got a full-on carnival going on in the backyard of this rich kid’s place. I don’t see any carnies or cotton candy machine so I have to call shenanigans on the realism but I am a big big fan of the nasty look our little blue eyed devil child gives one of the help as this leads to a great way to start things off: a public hanging.

    The woman who kills herself does it with great flair, getting people’s attention before she tosses herself of a very tall home. It’s shocking, jolting.

    “He’s cold as ice”¦”

    I also appreciate the following snippet of Damian riding in the car with his parents. He stares at a church steeple while Julia takes his boy’s temperature as he keeps his eyes fixated on the visage of Christ and Co.

    The two steps back from the one step forward occurs when Damian is let loose in the monkey house at the zoo. The path of children that cut a line away from this demon dog is wonderfully captured but when Julia asks her beanie boy what the matter is he just explains that, “They’re afraid.” I don’t paraphrase Eddie Murphy’s comedy too much but just like in Amityville Horror when the house says to get out you can be damn sure the sounds of rubber wheeling away from the house is a lot more understandable than staying with it. When you’ve got a child who tosses deadly glances, is obviously not high on life and seems to cut a path of quiet destruction wherever he goes it might be time to take the kid back from whence it came.

    Then, after Mia Farrow shows up (Huh?) and says that she’s there to protect Damian we get the man, the myth, the legend: Pete Postlethwaite. I wish he were in every movie to come out in 2006 but it looks like I have to settle with him being in this. His role here seems to be that of the concerned priest who knows what that little snot is capable of and wants to do what he can to subvert the kid’s lifespan.

    The imagery is rich with confusing and interesting moments that have NO connection to one another, nor do they add any context to the film. I’m not sure why we’re not given more about what these weird moments mean. And it’s not just a few things here or there but when we get a 80’s era synth soundtrack that is embedded underneath video clips of weird looking people, evil dudes who wear silk robes, police who figure walking into a church with their laser sights ready to shred whatever pops up in front of them or this little boy looking even more evil than he is I am not sure what the point is supposed to be.

    Am I supposed to be afraid or confused? I’m afraid it’s the latter.


    THE LAKE HOUSE (2006) Director: Alejandro Agresti
    Cast: Sandra Bullock, Keanu Reeves, Dylan Walsh, Shohreh Aghdashloo, Christopher Plummer
    Release: June 16, 2006
    Synopsis: An independent-minded doctor (Bullock) who once occupied an unusual lakeside home begins exchanging letters with its newest resident, a frustrated architect (Reeves) and discovers that, incredibly, they are living two years apart. As they begin to reveal more of themselves to one another through their continuing correspondence, they find themselves falling in love. Determined to bridge the distance between them and unravel the mystery behind their extraordinary romance, they tempt fate by arranging to meet. But by trying to join their two separate worlds, they could risk losing each other forever.
    View Trailer:
    * Large (QuickTime)

    Prognosis: My list of the top trailers for 2006 is getting a little crowded. For those who can stomach it, this is a glowing review of what could be a very well made drama. For those who dare not tread down this written river Styx please turn away now or feel the power of what a great pop song and some compelling visuals does to me.

    I don’t like people who eschew television and feel the need to point it out.

    I’m of the mindset that those people are just the kind of Luddites who need to be tossed in a raging river with a gunnysack tied taught around their feet. There’s crap, sure, on television but have any of you checked out that show, Dwell, on Fine Living? (Check your local satellite provider for times and dates”¦) There isn’t a lot I enjoy but when that show pops up on my television I can’t not watch. For example, a few weeks ago, I see some dudes who bought a house together in Texas because it damn near is completely see-through on an open prairie. They don’t care about showering in the open because there’s no one really around to spy on them. I don’t know about that and I sure don’t know about this movie.

    Sure, Sandra Bullock proved she could do drama well last year in CRASH. I was impressed and I’m glad that she’s back again in a role that has her a little more sullen than her usual bubbly self.

    “I sometimes feel as if I’m invisible”¦”

    Okay, Sandra’s narrating and we see people playing on a skating rink when she’s uttering some lines about how she feels so isolated and alone. I don’t know what one has to do with the other but, essentially, I get it. Then she starts going off about how “The Lake House,” this wicked awesome looking place where you could get your groove on in 360 degree delight, made her feel alive or something. In some way, shape or form she feels that the place gives her these super powers to not feel like killing herself. That’s what I take away from the conversation at least.

    Then, whoa, Keanu steps in. HE owns the place too. Things get real sci-fi when we grok that Keanu and Sandra live in the same house but exist two years apart YET can communicate with one another via snail mail.

    The lilting music and non-threatening storyline, one that will not garner Oscar, Golden Globe or Entertainment Tonight’s rapturous gaze, is cheesy, yes, but the trailer is doing a great job of sucking me into its world. Just assuming that this is possible in the writer’s world I like the fun the two of them are having with this relationship. It comes through really well in the preview of how both of these players see this movie as an excuse to have a little fun with one another.

    And, I’ll tell you what, I’ll be goddamed if I didn’t love the way these two react to one another without ever being on screen, side-by-side. When you get these people alone, I take it, they are free to respond to the material in their own way without having to “feed off” of anyone else around them and I’d like to think that this Sandra, this Keanu, was what could have been years ago had big budget and big blockbuster expectations not been a consideration.

    I just about shiat myself when we get a perfect musical selection “Somewhere Only We Know” by Keane comes on and then we get the montage that usually always plagues flicks like this. I don’t know why and I can’t really describe it but as these two kids are corresponding two years from one another yet able to get notes back and forth to one another it just starts to pull gently at you.

    If you give yourself over to the notion that this could be more than just a watch it once, throw it away kind of flick, the music that begs you to listen can be something actually worth sitting through. And it’s about this time when I see this movie is coming to me from a Pulitzer Prize winning author. Not that this means a whole helluva lot but the fact that this is also where I peep this flick is happening around Chicago means two thumbs up to me; you’ve always got to appreciate when the circus comes to your town.

    Besides all that this is one of the better looking dramas that will, hopefully, not require too much out of me as a viewer and for that I would be eternally grateful in this era of hysterics and SFX.

  • Trailer Park: Revenge of This Nerd

    E-MAIL THE AUTHOR |By Christopher Stipp

    May 5, 2006

    Revenge of This Nerd

    Five weeks and it’s still raging on with my presence over ‘dere at MySpace and I couldn’t be more pleased with the people checking in just to say hello or to peep what it is that’s on the brain from week to week and so I hope that if you’re around you do the same as it’s nice to hear from you all out there.

    I am troubled this week by the announcement of Fox’s decision to go through with a REVENGE OF THE NERDS remake.

    Now, I am fully aware that the crap sequels that followed NERDS IN PARADISE (Hell yeah I like that movie. Where else could you see a burgeoning Bradley “West Wing” Whitford, fresh off his role as Mike Todwell from ADVENTURES IN BABYSITTING? Answer: Right here) were a disgrace to all that was an exploitative, crass and altogether boss kind of benchmark for 80’s comedies.

    I think there was some n00b in an executive suite all those greenlights ago and somehow managed to figure out what kind of blood could be freshly squeezed from the rock that franchise. By taking the actors’ salaries and making it inversely proportional to the quality of the script there was some kind of odd wizardry going on that kept this series alive. I don’t bother to assume I know how these things keep going or why they’re not euthanized when it’s painfully obvious that not even Booger’s marriage to that one wierd looking chick from POLICE ACADAMY 4 (You know, the one who had eyes that could see approaching predators and core an apple with a single spin against her overbite?) could save this property.

    Relaunches are all the rage lately, from the SUPERMAN franchise getting a nice reboot to the BOND franchise, well, getting a much needed downsizing, but something like the NERDS deserves more than just a retelling of the same story with the possibility of getting some of the original cast to cameo in it. For a movie like this what you need is someone who “gets” why the original really captured the zeitgeist of the era. In an age far beyond just normal do-goodism and the very public cracking down on all things even hinting at salaciousness in the media what you want is someone who is going to buck every notion of decorum and give the movie going public what it wants: offensive humor. That’s all, that’s it, it’s not so much to ask. I realize I am perhaps the only person so touched by the news of this REVENGE OF THE NERDS remake but I feel protective of matters of such importance.

    Also along the lines of matters of importance I would like to issue a comment about the impending MISSION: IMPOSSIBLE 3 explosion that’s threatening to take over my television, radio and print media. I think while it’s been fun, hell, great fun, to watch that little Tom monkey fling his poo wherever there’s an available reporter to comment on his placenta eating desires it is important as moviegoers to see whether JJ an Co. have crafted a good summer movie. We’ve been assaulted as of late with tired fare at the box office and it is movies like this which will hopefully ballast our frazzled decisions of whether it’s going to be SCARY MOVIE or AMERICAN DREAMZ that we’re going to capitulate on. I think the summer movie season is an admirable one and no one more than me is eager to see whether MISSION deserves a break for Tom’s batshi$ crazy antics.

    Let the popcorn flow like wine because it’s studio tentpole time…


    LIVE FREE OR DIE (2006) Director: Gregg Kavet, Andy Robin
    Cast: Aaron Stanford, Paul Schneider, Michael Rapaport, Kevin Dunn, Zooey Deschanel, Ebon Moss-Bachrach, Judah Friedlander
    Release: Who knows…
    Synopsis: Lackluster criminals look to pull a job in the Granite State.
    View Trailer:
    * Medium (Flash)

    Prognosis: Crap. This movie won an award for Best Feature at the SXSW festival?

    Seriously?

    I can say with some certainty, and a little authority, that this is a really poor trailer. If you want the short version of the review it would be that this trailer depends on its players using the word “fuck” or “shit” in ways that would be amusing to a boy of thirteen but to someone who’s thirty it just feels like it’s not so much selling a movie as it is trying to put on a “funny” front.

    The whole point of making a trailer is to package your film in a way that’s digestible for the most amount of people in the hopes it attracts viewers of all levels. True, whoever made this trailer made the conscious point of including a lot of swearing as a point of interest. They wanted to showcase this facet of the movie. However, and I would argue, that, out of context, swearing does nothing more than showcase the fact that your actors are juveniles who need nothing more than our complete disregard for their actions if this is the kind of sell they’re going after.

    However, in the light of equal time I will try and give this thing the respect it so deservedly is begging to receive.

    We start with our protagonist claim he is a “stone, fucking killer” and that he’s killed people with his bare, “fucking hands.” I’m not sure if I am to laugh or this is the point where this movie becomes about one man’s quest to kill as many people as he can.

    Said protagonist seems to be scouring the landscape for more people to completely work over although that’s just speculation on my part. The trailer is taking a lot of time to put the spotlight on the “crazy” antics of our man Friday here as a way, ostensibly, to show how much fun we’re going to have just by following this dude around as he rips up the land around him. He gets a tall, Lloyd from DUMB AND DUMBER looking dude to tag along with him, providing an extra level of comedy.

    Plot points? I don’t have any to explain because, frankly, I haven’t got any myself out of this thing.

    I do, though, get an idea when these band of misfits pick up a third and decide to go thieving. I honestly would’ve liked to have some clue as to why these guys are out ripping people off and decimating stores, I might actually have some genuine interest in allying myself to one of them but no, none of that’s forthcoming. I do get Judah Friedlander playing every single mumble-mouthed, big glasses wearing, monotone gimmick actor he’s played in every other movie as he’s given way too much time to just do his thing.

    The ending of this trailer is just filled with enough explicative dropping I wonder if there’s any original kind of dialogue in this movie that isn’t peppered with the f-word.

    I think it’s funny to have an obscene movie, 40 YEAR-OLD VIRGIN proved that last year, but what set that movie and this movie apart was that its advertising (GASP) managed to exclude anything hinting that it was going to be as blue as it was. There’s nothing held back here and, to me, that’s a bad thing.


    THREE TIMES (2006) Director: Hsiao-hsien Hou
    Cast: Chen Chang, Mei Di, Su-jen Liao, Fang Mei, Qi Shu
    Release: April 26, 2006 (Limited)
    Synopsis: Three stories set in three times, 1911, 1966 and 2005. Two actors play the two main characters in each story.
    View Trailer:
    * Large (QuickTime)

    Prognosis: Positive. It’s often, I would say it isn’t but it is, when I see a foreign language film and wonder how long it will be until the story is appropriated by a domestic studio and regurgitated in a form that either dilutes the original spark or until the movie is picked up and sat on like it’ll ripen with every month that goes by without a release (i.e. NIGHTWATCH, SHAOLIN SOCCER); this movie, though, seems safe from either of those impulses as IFC Films has been an excellent distributor of films that would normally just get a weak release from any of the majors.

    What appealed to me most initially, then, is not so much the content but the premise. Jonsing for a peek at Aronofsky’s THE FOUNTAIN has resulted in being open to stories of just this kind. Taking place in three different time periods is a move that could either yield genuine drama or could seem like a convenient ploy, gimmick. When you see, right out of the gate, Jim Jarmusch laying out the superlatives and hyperbole for this director, Hou Hsiao-Hsien, you feel a connection to someone who many might not be familiar with. I certainly was not.

    Also, I very much liked the display of film festivals this movie has played at as it doesn’t linger too long and it efficiently, deservedly, establishes credibility. Also, we’re not talking about meager festivals. This one has bowed at Cannes, Telluride and Toronto.

    Our first shot is of a young woman playing some snooker. Regardless of how well she plays, it is the man standing behind her that catches our eye. The music is smoky, appropriate. What’s more, regarding the tune, it somehow fits the next scenes of our three eras being represented in tri split screen. Even though these two protagonists are going to be together somehow, someway, the chemistry is instant.

    Even when we’re given the obvious, the three dates being stamped on the screen the melding of the three time periods is seamless. Somehow you just feel the authenticity of this man and woman.

    The first real dialogue that’s spoken, subtitled for our pleasure, feels a little indulgent in the vein of high falutian mushiness that really only exists in cinema but that’s ok; sometimes you want to believe in the power of real strong agape between two people and if you earn it this is the arena where it can be allowed.

    Seeing A.O. Scott’s blurb is de regur for a movie like this. Even though you want to believe your flick is strong enough on its own you still want to revert, at least in marketing, to those things which will get people to come out of their hovels to see a film like this.

    The ending is a little quiet, a little reserved but the action on the screen is yearning for someone to pay attention to this woman who seems to be suffering from some kind of heartache. The fact that you can infer this from a foreign language trailer speaks volumes about the strength of the material. Highly anticipated.


    AN INCONVENIENT TRUTH (2006) Director: Davis Guggenheim
    Cast: Al Gore
    Release: May 24, 2006
    Synopsis: Eloquently weaves the science of global warming with Al Gore’s personal history and lifelong commitment to reversing the effects of global climate change. A longtime advocate for the environment, Gore presents a wide array of facts and information in a thoughtful and compelling way. The film is not a story of despair but rather a rallying cry.
    View Trailer:
    * Large (QuickTime)

    Prognosis: Always consider the source. I tell you what living in Arizona makes it hard for me to tell you what I think of global warming.

    When the average temperature hits over 100 degrees every damn summer day I would sooner believe that the world is going to melt at any moment than try to gauge what is going on with the rest of the world, scientifically, as it pertains to global warming. The fundies would have you believe it’s due to homosexuals getting their swerve on and, thus, God’s getting his wrath on. The democrats would attribute it to big corporate greed getting in the way of sound environmental policy. And the republicans would just as soon say there isn’t a problem at all and that how dare we bring this up when there is a war that is threatening our family’s lives?

    I don’t know what to believe but I do like the interesting approach to getting this trailer started.

    “At Sundance it received three standing ovations”¦”

    Like any good piece of propaganda, and remember that every movie with a viewpoint is propaganda no matter how “teh awesome,” the flashes of extreme weather moments is very effective. The clips go by awfully quick but the snippets of palm trees bending, video of hurricane movements and the stark pictures of nuclear power plants are begging us to do the math about what these threes have in common. Since I’m pretty stupid I don’t have a clue.

    More extreme shots of limp waterfalls, deforestation, tornadoes ring the point that’s about to be made.

    “If you love your planet”¦
    If you love your children”¦
    You have to see this film.”

    Yeah, I have a problem with that. What I loathe about exploitative news reporting and mainstream journalism as of late is that I am assaulted by teasers that constantly threaten either my or my family’s life with information that they have to tell me but can’t share until I tune in at 10:00 pm. This film’s marketing is essentially doing the same thing and I don’t appreciate it as a tactic.

    “By far the most terrifying film you will ever see.”

    Huh? I would hope that this film is being ironic because no person would have the brass satchels to make that kind of comment unless we were getting archival footage of Vlad the Impaler impaling. No, we’re getting some egg heads talking about hot weather using the same kind of scare tactics used by Newsroom Channel 5.

    “The consensus is that WE are causing global warming.”

    Sigh.

    Ok, Al Gore states that humans are the cause for global warming and even though I was horrid at life sciences I at least know that nugget of gold information. What else could’ve caused it? The wanton expulsion of methane gas from dairy cows?

    Anyway, Gore goes on to show us the dry beds of land in Patagonia many decades ago and what it looks like now, appearing to become the next Great Lake. We see before and after shots of Mt. Kilimanjaro. The night and freaking day difference between these two landmasses and the environmental effects they’ve endured is actually interesting, kids.

    The latter half of this trailer’s presentation of how bad global policy has resulted in things like Hurricane Katrina is at once compelling while also causing my BS Detector 2000 to activate. Does causal relationships mean relation? I don’t know but this trailer would have me believe it to be true.

    While this trailer suffers from bad slanting of information nothing is more amusing than the last few moments where the music gets real dramatic and the music ramps up to action movie speed.


    SYMPATHY FOR LADY VENGEANCE (2006) Director: Chan-wook Park
    Cast: Bu-seon Kim, Byeong-ok Kim, Shi-hoo Kim, Dae-yeon Lee, Seung-Shin Lee, Yeong-ae Lee
    Release: April 28th, 2006 (Limited)
    Synopsis: Lee Geum-Ja, at the age of 19, goes to prison for the murder and abduction of a child on behalf of her accomplice Mr. Baek, only to find out that she is betrayed. While in prison, she carefully prepares for her revenge by winning the hearts of her fellow inmates with her kindness, thus earning herself the nickname ‘kind Ms. Geum-Ja’. Upon her release from prison after 13 years, she finally sets out to seek revenge on Baek, with the help of her former prison mates.
    View Trailer:
    * Large (QuickTime)

    Prognosis: Revenge is a dish best served like this. Interesting.

    Real interesting.

    While I have yet to indulge completely in the Internet favorite. OLDBOY, this trailer really grabs me in a way that is reminiscent of AMELIE, where things don’t really jive with an actual reality, per se, but of a stylized reality where perception is the lens through which we see the movie’s world.

    The opening is wonderfully composed.

    The lighting of a single candle with the sound of a bell going off is not how one would expect to open a movie where violence will be on the proverbial menu.

    The font of the movie’s establishment of the director of this movie, along with the places where this movie has played, is regal, stately. The animation that runs beneath the credits kind of sows the idea that there is a sinister underpinning to everything that we’re going to see.

    The trailer also gets kudos for not messing around and getting right down to it with establishing the movie’s premise. Where some would go for the quick video clips from the film to show how things get going we’re rushed along even swifter with the story being written out for us.

    We know, no more than a third of a way into the trailer, that we have a woman who wants a good life, has a nice daughter, daughter gets taken away by a wrinkly old man and that she’s illegitimately stuck in county lockup with a bunch of crazy, hula-hoop playing women.

    Things take an odd turn when we’re told she wants revenge. Imagine that. Now, usually in Asian cinema this is when we get a bunch of swordplay or gunfighting or a lot of flashes using fire and a hail of bullets. Instead of this, however, I get a bunch of ladies wearing Santa beards and hats. Huh?

    Just like AMELIE the very same outrageousness that constitute normal reality is taken at face value here. We’re to believe this happens in this woman’s world and the events that follow just reinforce the notion. She gets herself a gun and unleashes the kind of stuff I was looking for before Santa’s helpers made an appearance.

    I don’t know exactly where things are going besides the obvious implications of what the old dude from the beginning is going to get in return for his kidnapping of this woman’s daughter. There looks like there’s going to be a lot of bad things going down and the directing looks fabulous as it renders this story of recompense.

  • Trailer Park: N-N-N-N-NICK NICK NICK NICKELO…DE..ON!

    E-MAIL THE AUTHOR | By Christopher Stipp

    April 28, 2006

    N-N-N-N-NICK NICK NICK NICKELO…DE..ON!

    In its fourth week of electronic epherema called MySpace I am happy those of you who have stopped by have let me know. I apologize I don’t yet have a picture of myself in the best emo pose I can muster but the one that’s there, Terry Tate, who is standing in my stead, is doing an inglorious job letting the world know it’s all about the Pain Train, or something.

    Now, in keeping things tight this week (I swear I am going to keep this intro short) I wanted to just toss out a couple of things I noticed over the weekend and they couldn’t be more divergent.

    Uno, I was just hanging out with my little girl over the weekend and we were taking in a healthy amount of Sponge Bob. I don’t know why I can show her pictures of other people, not eliciting anything more than a name of the person in question, without so much as a blink but put that little fruit-loop in front of the opening on Bob and she can tell the world what that mo-fo’s name is.

    Now, as is my want, I like to TiVo the episodes because I find being able to by-pass that insane amount of advertising that’s flooded to kids (Although, I shouldn’t talk as I became a hapless shill for any and all G.I. Joe products when those simulated battlefield situations in the commercials made me believe that I too could scream out, “You jive ass honkey this Cobra Commander is all about to decimate, you dig?!”) and I like being able to have that control. Now, as I am blazing through the adverts I see something pop up for the new Jack Black flick, NACHO LIBRE. I press play. I slow down. I was confused. I ignorantly thought that this was going to be, at the very least, an adult targeted flick.

    My bad, it isn’t.

    The spot that Nickelodeon ran last weekend had the little chubby kid adressing the camera as he went “on set” to tell us how “awesome” this movie was going to be. At one point the little marshmellow get into the wrestling ring with Jack and the two of them, awkwardly, grapple. I don’t know if it was because the vibe that Jack was putting out made it seem like having to take cues from a kid in this promo spot was lame or if realizing that being on Nickelodeon to pimp his new movie wasn’t the most “cred worthy” thing in the world. Honestly, it could be that he really didn’t mind giving some time to the little kids that are watching him but, as a big kid, I was a bit confused by the promotional spots I’ve seen on the Internets and what I was seeing there.

    If this movie is the kid-friendly outing that it is being made out to be I wonder when we’re going to see this direction reflected in the advertising. Will we only be able to see the promo spots on Noggin? I’m just confused by this being the first discovery that even though the advertising says “This Film Has Not Yet Been Rated” there really is only a PG in this film’s future. Not that I was expecting there to be a great deal that would make this an R but this certainly changes how this movie is sold. Keep an eye out for this one. More of this flick’s kiddie campaign can be found here. I would ask someone out there to compare the trailers that are hosted on this site and the one’s hosted on the movie’s main site but there couldn’t be a better example of night and day when it comes to learning real quick of doing compare/contrast anaysis; it’s not just for English Lit majors anymore, children. The one for the kids really focuses on the slapsticky moments that this film is certainly filled with but just like a modern day, digitial equivalent, of “Rashomon” you’ve got what looks like two movies that are completely independent of one another. Such is the nature of trailers, I suppose, but this is really the first flick I can really remember where two wholly different advertising campaigns co-exist with one another. Food for thought.

    Dos, my hat is curiously tipped to those behind the trailers-that-really-aren’t for FLIGHT 93. While tuning into West Wing on Sunday I noticed director Paul Greengrass’ narration and faux interview camera set-up as he personally guided viewers though the motions about his intention with the film. Now, while it was wholly unnecessary for him to try and explain why he helped to make FLIGHT 93 this was a curious spot to me for one reason: It was an advertisement for the movie that didn’t seem like one. Kind of the Pimp Backhand of Justice this little spot catches you unaware. Never has a trailer spoken directly to an audience like this one has and I think it is commendable that this step was taken to not only establish awareness but it gets people warmed up to the idea of an 9/11 movie in a way that’s at once dramatic yet personable. I tip my cap to you, Universal, for such a coy little piece of advertising goodness. Hell, even I felt even better about going to see the movie after hearing Paul talk about the importance of the film.

    See? Quick and to the point this week. I hope you all are doing well, much love goes out to all those sending in notes and shout-outs as I appreciate every single one and, if you have any questions or comments, do me a favor and drop a line. If it’s good enough it’ll run right here. It’ll help me with having to keep observing minuate every week just to have something to write as an introduction.


    DARKON (2006) Director: Luke Meyer, Andrew Neel
    Cast: Nerds, Geeks, Dweebs, Dorks, Nimrods, Dopes, Schmoes and lots more socially inept wierdos. (Sorry, but when you don’t have anyone listed in the IMDB that might as well be an open invitation for me…)
    Release: HOTDOCS Film Festival, April 28-May 7 (2006) Toronto, Canada.
    Synopsis: DARKON is a feature documentary that follows the real-life adventures of an unusual group of weekend “warrior knights,” fantasy role-playing gamers whose live action “battleground” is modern-day Baltimore, Maryland, re-imagined as a make-believe medieval world named Darkon. These live action gamers combine the physical drama of historical re-enactments with character-driven storylines inspired in part by such perennial favorite fantasy epics like the legends of King Arthur, Lord of the Rings, and the saga of Conan the Barbarian. As role players, they create alter-egos with rich emotional, psychological, and social lives. They costume themselves and physically act out their characters exploits both in intimate court intrigue and campouts and in panoramic battle scenarios involving competitive strategies, convincingly real props, and full contact “combat.” Because real life so often gets in the way, its easy to understand these players motivations. Everybody wants to be a hero.
    View Trailer:
    * Large (QuickTime)

    Prognosis: Positive. I have ADHD.

    It’s wicked bad.

    Although it’s not really diagnosed by my doctor I know that my shorter than average attention span, which can be timed to a road flare, is an indication that I get really amped about some things and then, poof, it’s off to something, or someone, else. That’s why, right now, my spastic self is really rocking on the hour long ATTACK OF THE SHOW on the G4 channel every Monday through Thursday evening. I get all my geek news and reviews in one quick 25 minute block; it’s on the TiVo and, like I said, ADHD. One of the things that came up, then, a few weeks ago was this movie and after being able to sit through the entire segment without fast forwarding once I knew I had to peep the trailer.

    This looks like a movie that will speak to any nerd who knows what it means to grok something; what it means to live in a geek culture surrounded by reality where others don’t get you; or, better yet, what it means to be slammed into metal lockers in high school and need to further that sense of outsidership in adulthood by dressing up in silly outfits having fake battles with one another. Really, someone should’ve shot Tolken before he had a chance to write those Goddammed books.

    I kid because I kare, children.

    I really like the way this movie looks simply by how the background of this movie takes shape. I liked TREKKIES for the same reason that this trailer’s opening sequence seems to really take a real look at the people who find dressing up in LOTR-style garb, and having fake battles, to be a pleasurable experience. You’ve got a guy in the very beginning buying cereal for his kid, you see him vacuuming the carpet all the while explaining that being a hero in everyday life isn’t something that’s always attainable. He looks like he’s a dad and you feel for him, sorta, but then we’re blasted with a real live geek, a real live wire, as he’s bombastically railing against his geek brother on the field of battle. The dudes are all sorts of dressed up in Old English uniforms, dragons and lions and headbands being de regur for pseudo-combat. You get the vibe quickly that these “men” were beat up a lot in high school. A lot.

    Again, though, it’s fun. I find myself giddy at the prospect of being able to watch what a collective of egg heads looks like when they decide to pick up a battle ax or mace on a wooden stick.

    And it’s sweet. Did I mention that? It’s so nice to see that people like this are so passionate about something whereas other folk are simply happy to live their lives in abject ignorance of their own desires. The sappy music playing underneath the sweeping visions of the landscape of the town that harnesses the collective geek sweat of dozens of these people really gets to you as understanding why these people dress up gives you that layer of understanding, that context.

    One of the things I especially like, even after you get a feel for the major players involved in this escapade, is that the music takes everything over and all you’re left with are shots of how intricate this game has become. You visit the east coast of America, Pennsylvania for the Gettysburg reenactment that’s going to happen this year on July 1st, 2nd and 3rd let’s say, and you decide to watch what happens. You have two sides fighting on one battlefield. Here, though, you’ve got nerds swinging their battle axes and geeks firing their padded arrows from all sorts of directions at all hours of the night and day. There are multiple factions, multiple storylines happening, but when we cut to these same people doing their day jobs it’s odd. In a good way.

    It’s hard to imagine many of us being able to participate in something so obviously steeped in fiction but it’s just as hard to look away from this trailer and not be entertained.


    THE ZODIAC (2006) Director: Scott Marshall
    Cast: Justin Chambers, Robin Tunney, Rory Culkin, Philip Baker Hall
    Release: March 17th, 2006 (And where the hell was it? It didn’t come out near my house…)
    Synopsis: Based on true events, THE ZODIAC is a psychological thriller detailing a string of gruesome murders in the Bay Area in the late 1960s and the impact on the victims, their families and the wider community. A small town cop (Justin Chambers) and his son (Rory Culkin) become obsessed with the Zodiac killer, endangering their family.
    View Trailer:
    * Medium (QuickTime)

    Prognosis: Negatively Confused. I was all sorts of amped when I glossed the offerings of trailers this week to see this one sitting there.

    Shouldn’t there have been more of a fanfare? Was I catching some exclusive peek at a quietly released trailer for David Fincher’s latest foray into film? Wasn’t this going to be great?

    No, it wasn’t any of these things.

    Just like when juggernauts DEEP IMPACT and ARMAGEDDON were released around the same time, myself wondering what in hell could’ve cosmically been the case years prior when competing end-of-the-world pics went into production around the same time, this year will be the battleground for competing Zodiac dollars. It’s a curious thing when these moments pop up in moviedom but I can tell you that this picture, while I felt let down it wasn’t Fincher’s latest, doesn’t look like the smudge on the taint that IMPACT did when compared with the God-awfulness that was ARMAGEDDON.

    You’ve got kids doing what they know how to do best, fogging up the windows in mom’s old Ford Festiva. The kids here, though, are looking to get themselves into some trouble of their own but leave it to the creepy darkened car that slowly pulls up alongside the kids’ car to be the one to make it a night none of them will remember.

    Now, since I’m not completely familiar with how the Zodiac killer operated I can only assume his interest wasn’t in getting ladies but indiscriminately killing whoever and whatever he wanted judging by the opening sequence here. It’s a solid way to introduce me and the fact that we get the doctor from Grey’s Anatomy on the case, I don’t care what you say as I watched this trailer a half dozen times, it’s the doctor from Grey’s Anatomy. It’s not an actor playing the part. It’s the doctor, and this is how I am selling myself on it, and he’s looking to make a career change.

    His old lady, Robin Tunney, comes right out and tells her man that she is scared. She should be as the lighting in this movie coats everything with a piss yellow hue. Her husband drags it with him to the office as the good doctor from Grey’s, who honestly doesn’t make the case he could be a po-po, gets an errie and spooky call from a dude who says he’s going to be kill some folks just for the fun of it.

    Now, this part of the trailer is actually pretty interesting because we get some of the actual events that transpired with the way law enforcement was played every step of the way with this serial killer. Philip Baker Hall, best known to the world as Dean Patterson in HOW I GOT INTO COLLEGE, plays the TV doctor’s boss and admonishes him to catch this guy. I think that’s all well and good but as we’ve seen in previous incarnations of this story, this doesn’t happen. I mean I’ve watched the History channel. I know how this story is going to play out and I think that’s why I just don’t feel the panic that must have ran rampant though these lifers who were dedicated to catching dudes like The Zodiac. They’re playing up the drama but it doesn’t feel like it should be a drama.

    And then, if you’re watching closely, his old lady and kid call him while he’s at work to start spilling diarrhea of the mouth as they both pour over astrological books to help dad out; we obviously know how that turns out. As if that isn’t enough, the good doctor’s son starts talking about the case with some girl in the neighborhood as if this Nancy Drew/Hardy Boy combo is what this case needs. It would’ve been sweet if the true definition of irony comes home to roost with the Zodiac taking out the meddling kids.

    The ending of this trailer should be commended, though, in doing what it should have been doing from the beginning: creating an atmosphere of paranoia and frenetic activity. No one ever knew who this guy was, or is, and with every stranger being a potential suspect or target the trailer should have focused on this feeling from the very beginning.

    I know you need to make it seem that this story has a human element but, I posit, the trailer plays it backward. You don’t feel that this is a movie about a serial killer but that this is a movie about how one guy deals with his family as it pertains to this case. While that’s fine it’s perhaps not the best route to take when you want and sell a movie with this much “reality” built into it.


    AKEELAH AND THE BEE (2006) Director: Doug Atchison
    Cast: Angela Bassett, Keke Palmer, Laurence Fishburne, Curtis Armstrong
    Release: April 28, 2006
    Synopsis: A young girl from South Los Angeles tries to make it to the National Spelling Bee.
    View Trailer:
    * Large (QuickTime)

    Prognosis: W-A-S-T-E O-F M-Y T-I-M-E. One of the things that must really be a drag when you’re a filmmaker is you think you have this great story and that no one else has done it and you’ve got this hawesome ass vision for a story and then, bam, BEE SEASON comes out just mere months before your movie.

    Not only do you reel from the fact that you’ve got this spelling movie with Richard Gere coming out before yours but when the movie ends up tanking like the Exxon Valdez on theaters’ doorsteps you could understandably get a little fidgety. Unfortunately, I can’t see how this movie will fare any better.

    What you’ve got opening this thing tells me everything I need to know about this film. You’ve got this one little girl winning her school’s first annual spelling bee and while this is all well and cheery something very Hollywoody happens. Lawrence Fishburne, along with his sidekick, Booger, nee Curtis Armstrong, jumps right into the festivities and demands this girl spell “prestidigitation.” Of course, besides the obvious weirdness of having some stranger start yelling crap at you, the camera quite visibly pulls in closer on the girl who, ta-da, does it. Her friend shiats herself, the place starts clapping but the speller girl in question bolts out of the room. It immediately feels false and hokey.

    The question here is not what makes this movie so different than BEE SEASON but should be why we should care about the people in these films. The simple answer is that I don’t care about her. Unfortunately, what you get in the montage of moments of this movie which will ultimately lead to the great spelling bee is that this girl follows the time tested clichés of a wise old sage mentor educating his ward.

    Yes, it must suck to live in a crap part of California. Yes, it must be rough as a black girl to have your brother harass you by comparing you to a white girl. Yes, it is hard to imagine that you have this old guy demanding you learn all these tough new words. Fact of the matter is that we’ve heard this story a lot of times before. Hard living, hard mentor, finding something to believe in are themes explored in the great BOYZ N THE HOOD, where Fishburne played his sage old guy part well, and the not-so-great FINDING FORRESTER where Sean Connery gave me nothing to believe in once he uttered. “You’re the man now, Dog.” Ugh.

    This movie looks like a heated mash of both kind of dudes with the exception that there’s nothing new here. It’s well-worn and as our protagonist struggles with trying to believe in herself, never minding that she’s in grade school and not believing in anything just comes with the age, the manipulation of the music and the dramatic lighting is nothing more than just a lazy attempt to create interest where there isn’t any.

    I’m sure this movie will appeal to young girls and prepubescents everywhere but, for the rest of us, this seems like an overwrought and saccharine packed sack of kiddie dramatics.


    I AM A SEX ADDICT (2006) Director: Caveh Zahedi
    Cast: Caveh Zahedi, Rebecca Lord, Emily Morse, Amanda Henderson
    Release: April 5th, 2006 (Limited)
    Synopsis: Autobiographical filmmaker Caveh Zahedi has made a cult career of his unabashed willingness to be vulnerable on camera. I Am a Sex Addict, a comic reconstruction of his ten-year struggle with sex addiction, is one of his most ambitious, hilarious confessions yet.
    View Trailer:
    * Large (QuickTime)

    Prognosis: Very Interesting. As Men on Film once said, quite boldy, “Three words: Fab You Lus.”

    You go into a trailer called I AM A SEX ADDICT with a few preconceptions about what you should be seeing: a dirty old Dell and a huge, dingy and crusty CRT screen that you know has been wanked off to more times than the collective one-offings of Brighton Middle School in Any Town, U.S.A.; I expected to see the cast off from SEVEN, the one who was force fed until he popped like a detonated whale that’s been beached; and I even supposed that I would peep the living quarters of a lonely, pathetic person who wallows in their own squalor. Instead, I get Bud Cort in a tux.

    It’s not a bad way to start things as it really does clash with what you’re expecting to come at you when you click on the link to view it. He seems quite nebbish, diminutive and has the ocular cavities of an animal who can see behind himself in case of any looming, predatory strike. He’s comes off quite honest and warm as he goes through the motions of addressing the camera directly by describing what brings us to the current moment at hand.

    He’s very loose when he says his last two marriages ended because he had this whole sex addiction problem thing; so casual is his tone, I feel, I get the impression he uses the same tone to order the Rooty Tooty Fresh and Fruity at IHOP. It’s cute in a way that we’re treated to his explanation of the genesis for his sex addiction by way of animation and poorly constructed dramatization. The GLH Formula-9 hair in a can, sprayed on himself to make the re-enactment of his sex addiction that much more believable and humorous is excellent. It puts me at ease regarding a topic that, one imagines, has to be walked around quite gingerly in these times.

    So, the re-enactment takes on a whole new level as he breaks down the timeline of how he went from just being satisfied from talking to whores to finding that he needed to hump some whores in order to satiate his lust. As a sidebar, I don’t think this qualifies so much as sex addiction as it does with finding out that, as a dude, you like the company of whores. Whoring happens. That should be a bumper sticker, actually.

    “Perversely interesting.”

    Roger Ebert nails it when we get the montage of snippets from major press that are singing the praises of a movie that deals with one man’s journey to keep a girlfriend while whoring it up. There are a lot of non-linear moments, like his lady friend who backs away from a kiss while insisting he scrub himself before thinking of defiling her, or when we see him crucified like Jesus.

    What the latter has to do with anything is beyond me but it shows us that this movie is gong to be a little different.

  • Trailer Park: MISSION IMPOSSIBLE 3: CONVINCING THE WORLD YOU’RE NOT COMPLETELY LOSING YOUR GRIP ON REALITY

    E-MAIL THE AUTHOR | ARCHIVES By Christopher Stipp

    April 21, 2006

    MISSION IMPOSSIBLE 3: CONVINCING THE WORLD YOU’RE NOT COMPLETELY LOSING YOUR GRIP ON REALITY

    In its third week of existence the voluntary experiment called MySpace has been going quite well. I’m really enjoying the ability to fill in the gaps when I can about the goings on during the week and I hope that if you’re out there you stop on by.

    Also, and I wouldn’t normally interject so early, but check out the trailer down below for TRUST THE MAN. In my own, educated opinion this is one of the best marketing tools for a rom/com, buddy picture melds this year. It’s an odd combination, to be sure, but this trailer has been lingering with me all week. I may be full of shi$ but these things happen from time to time.

    Now, welcome to this week’s column!

    Really, though, don’t be too fooled by the exclamation mark.

    Besides being trapped by the hype that was the newest thetan addition to the world, one has to wonder if Brooke Shields’ child, born the same day, is setting the stage for a real head-to-head throw down in the coming years. My money is on Brooks’ kid as, just judging by genetics alone, the kid will have about a two foot height advantage. Seriously, this courtship, fabricated or not, has only put into perspective how tiny Tom Cruise is. When your girlfriend, who isn’t that tall to begin with, towers over you and it looks like you’re kissing your mom’s cheek when you’re trying to play to the camera to show how awesome your relationship is it might be a good idea to invest in platforms. Seriously.

    The media’s fervent frenzy surrounding this “couple’s” birth and, soon, public display of this runt is reflective of the fact that no matter how many years pass in this society of ours we are still enamored and fascinated by famous people.

    I can’t say that I’m above all the clap-trap revolving around this cult of personality many belong to but I think it’s quite freeing when you consider that, many times, these relationships and public moments that are reported for our pleasure are just part of something bigger, yet smaller, than what they appear to be. When you consider timing, one of the biggest factors, of when things happen in the media to celebs there is ample evidence that coincidence has got nothing on manufactured hype. Aniston and Vaughn back in the papers? Yeah, stories were churning out at a quick clip back in the beginning of the year, around when THE BREAK UP was supposed to drop, only to die down when the release was punted back to this summer. Warmer weather, release date now coming soon, has resulted in an odd conflaguration of stories relating to this pesudo-couple.

    Things like this only reinforce the plasticine notion that there isn’t anything real in Hollywood except a well timed publicity campaign. With M:I 3 coming soon in the next few weeks I cannot begin to tell you how odd, how gullible and head-shakingly funny this whole TomKat scenario has played out in the papers and Internets; you’d almost think the marionette masters behind the “exclusive” interviews and selected appearances could have, at one time, held court inside the Bush administration. The level of precision that it takes to convince a populace of whatever agenda you’re pushing is absolutely astounding. While it’s easy to dismiss the behind-the-scenes goings on of our celeb overlords as nothing more than silly and trivial it’s best to give credit to those who make us all aware of them. It is just unfortunate that for every story about K-Fed or whatever member of the Housewives cast has just let it be known they were violated with a tube of Extra Whitening Crest as a child there was more written suspicion with regard to timing or ulterior motives.

    It’s no skin of my male sack as to whether reporting gets a little more suspicious with our millionare minions as I already feel enlightened by knowing all about this form of cause and effect. It is just hard to take when news of what these motards do makes the Top Stories on CNN. Edward R. Murrow would’ve shat himself; although, to be fair, I think he did when he finally passed.

    Now, before I leave you to your own devices this week, and to lighten the heady mood here, I wanted to literally interject a little HTML blast from the past. I found this trailer and could not resist to give it some play for everyone to see. It’s great when something like YouTube comes along and can let you embed video inside a web page without having you, the fine readers you are, the option of leaving this column to taste the goodness which is the trailer for THE MONSTER SQUAD. This thing has been sold as a bootleg DVD at comic conventions for years (Anyone going to Comi-Con out there? Let me know…) alongside such gems as the rubbery live action CAPTIAN AMERICA and the really really bad version of THE FANTASTIC 4. And with good reason, too. This was a movie if you were young and stupid enough not to know better, I sure as hell didn’t, having the combined strength of that guy, the spikey haired one, from Kids Incorporated and a handful of movie monsters was a winning combo. Ah, nostaliga…it smells like…old tube socks that could walk down the stairs on their own.


    THE FAST AND THE FURIOUS: TOKYO DRIFT (2006) Director:Justin Lin
    Cast: Lucas Black, Bow Wow, Nikki Griffin, Sung Kang, Nathalie Kelly, Brian Tee, Jason J. Tobin
    Release: June 16, 2006
    Synopsis: To avoid jail time, street racer Shaun Boswell is sent to live with his uncle in Tokyo. There he discovers drift racing. After losing a race to Yakuza-connected D.K., the Drift King, Shaun has to enter the Tokyo underworld to find a way to pay his debt.
    View Trailer:
    * Large (QuickTime)

    Prognosis: Negative. Let me just on record just in case any of the following herein is construed as obsequious or muddled: there is a better chance I would be the next guy to appear on a viral video having my rear pumped by a thoroughbred than I would be to see this movie in the theater.

    Now, that said, let’s have a little fun.

    First, the opening. I won’t be harsh at all here and I’ll even give a major nod to the trailer makers here for crafting a real sense of what this movie will be about and who it’s directed toward. I realize I shouldn’t end my sentences with a preposition but a major misstep for many marketing companies for all kinds of movies out there miss not only their core demographic but other segments of the audience as well by trying to be all things to all people. There’s none of that B.S. here, friends. This movie opens with roaring engines; hot ladies in mini-skirts galloping in their high heels because we all know that only the hottest of the hot from the XX population like to frequent drag races; highly neoned Honda civics, or Peugeots I can’t really tell; and, lookie here, a view of a woman’s butt, leaving over an engine. You then have the MC of the drag race, a Western-looking John Cho, asking some more good-looking ladies (why wasn’t I told that I should’ve been seeking out illegal drag races when I was a blossoming young man) if they’re ready. Oh yeah, they’re ready all right.

    And we’re off.

    The cars peel out and instead of the common drag race on asphalt we’ve got dudes drag racing in a parking structure. As a 30 year-old dude I didn’t know until right now that you could do that or that it’s pervasive enough to make a movie out of it. And it’s here that Lil’ Bow Wow, or is it Big Dawg now that he’s a little older, says that if you, “ain’t out of cont’ro you ain’t in cont’ro.”

    Interesting. Besides the Jedi grammar-speak I see some Mercedes take out one of these hoopties with Bow-Wow asking us if we still need a dictionary. Nope, Bow. That dude wasn’t in cont’ro. Got it.

    We then figure out we’re in Tokyo. Although, the voice over only says “on the other side of the world.” I don’t know about you but considering American students’ ability to not even be able to pick out their own state on the map I am thinking an INDIANA JONES style graphic, with a green neon line (that’d be pimp, right?) shooting from Vin Diesel’s manse straight over to Tokyo; it’d be nice and would do much good in helping our public school hopefuls.

    Here we get our Paul Walker stand-in, looking fresh off the boat of Ford Modeling Company, who we’re told is on the other side of the law. Ooo”¦he’s dangerous, ladies, plus he’s”¦dangerously good-looking. Looking like he’s doing his best Blue Steel pose is ready to rock Asia like no man has done before.

    The montage of cars, women, street fights (in which our protagonist will get his ass kicked but not hard enough that it would leave any mark on his face), clubs and more women is enough to make any male youth anxious. And I am a real fan of this “hero” for keeping it real by racing an old P.O.S. while everyone else has state of the art vehicles.


    A PRAIRIE HOME COMPANION (2006) Director: Robert Altman
    Cast: Woody Harrelson, Tommy Lee Jones, Garrison Keillor, Kevin Kline, Lindsay Lohan, Virginia Madsen, Jonathan Mankuta, Matthew Modine, John C. Reilly, Maya Rudolph, Tim Russell, Geoff Schilz, Sue Scott, Meryl Streep, Lily Tomlin, Jim Westcott, Linda Williams, Robin Williams
    Release: June 9, 2006
    Synopsis: A look at what goes on backstage during the last broadcast of America’s most celebrated radio show, where singing cowboys Dusty and Lefty, a country music siren (Streep), and a host of others hold court.
    View Trailer:
    * Large (QuickTime)

    Prognosis: Very Positive…It suprised even this Garrison hater. To any person looking to boost my car you now have this clue: I’m the guy with the NPR sticker on his back window.

    True, being an NPR addict means getting a lot of quizzical looks from people when you ask them if they heard a story or two on Morning Edition. I’m not a snob, mind you, but I just figured people would know, for better or worse, about the PBS that’s made for the short wave. Part of my love for all things public radio means that I have to live with the fact that I would like to see Garrison Keillor kneecapped at the earliest possible opportunity.

    I’ve got no love for the land of Woe-Be-Gone and it’s all attributable to Keilllor’s intonations and vocal style; it borders on abusive, really, with the way he sort of lip smacks and draws slowly from his throat. I know he thinks he’s making great radio for the masses but unless you’re collecting social security or are eligible to get a cup of coffee at IHOP at a discounted rate on Tuesdays then you’re only really reaching a segment of potential audience share. Thus, here comes Robert Altman.

    SHORT CUTS. I watched that, I believe, the week after watching BOTTLE ROCKET when it first came out on VHS. I’ve been a fan of Altman and I think, honestly, the two of them together here could make a movie that even I would want to go see.

    The trailer, I am happy to report, does stoke the kind of feelings I thought I would never have for Keillor’s work. Thanks to Meryl Streep and Lily Tomlin’s antics at the Oscars I am even more bolstered by what could-be for this movie.

    I wasn’t too giddy by the sight of Garrison’s visage at the outset of this movie’s trailer. His droopy features and get-off-of-my-lawn vibe in full screen frames the opening sequence as my blood pressure constricts in fear that this is how it’s going to be. Thankfully, we move quickly away from the stage, and Garrison.

    The stock in this movie only rises a touch when the first celeb we peep is Lindsay Lohan; she’s not terribly distracting as Lily Tomlin steps in and shoots the first volley across the comedic bow.

    “I’ll Give You My Moonshine If You Show Me Your Juggs”

    Meryl shows us that she can be forgiven for SHE-DEVIL and in this multiple character piece, which I can’t figure out of whether it’s period or contemporary, it amazes me how Woody Harrelson can be funny even if he’s just delivering a couple of lines; he can be a comedic talent if given the right opportunity and I know I can’t be the only fan of Billy in WHITE MEN CAN’T JUMP.

    It’s not so much a definitive feeling that this is going to be a funny movie as it is just a lot of good signs pointing towards it but I am dismayed by Lohan’s wasted looking sway as she’s getting down on stage with her other musical cohorts in a song; I don’t know from what bottom bin sale she was found but her real-life persona is threatening to break the 4th wall of separation and for a movie like this it could be life imitating art imitating life imitating an anemic looking basket case who likes to flash her nipples at car shows.

    And since I’m not going to let Lohan’s appearance besmirch the production on the whole I am pleased at what’s presented here. You’ve got the master of multiple storylines here to support a movie that would’ve been dead in the water for me had it been anyone else behind the lens. I might actually make my way to see this movie based on this trailer.


    KEEPING UP WITH THE STEINS (2006) Director: Scott Marshall
    Cast: Jami Gertz, Daryl Hannah, Garry Marshall, Jeremy Piven, Doris Roberts
    Release: May 12, 2006
    Synopsis: After attending a neighbor’s over the top Bar Mitzvah celebration, high-powered Hollywood agent Adam Fiedler, played by Jeremy Piven (“Old School”, HBO’s “Entourage”) is determined to pull out all the stops, and have the most extravagant celebration ever seen, for his shy, insecure son Benjamin.
    View Trailer:
    * Medium (QuickTime)

    Prognosis: Not even if they were serving gefilte fish. Where do they get these jaunty, smiley musical intros?

    I half expect to see businessmen, dressed in their brown suits, lined up the delicately manicured streets of Nowhere, USA, donning fedoras as they all simultaneously cut the lawn. I do expect, though, to be tossed a movie that is not really steeped in any heady context, an unplug-your-mind kind of comedy.

    What’s nice, though, right to begin with, is that Piven is in a fatherly role and although he’s not given much here, initially, we’re at least tossed the crux of what this story is all about. The Bar Mitzvah is one of those cultural events, on par with a quinceanera or a man’s first duct tape waxing of his a-noose by his drunken buddies, and the film comes out quickly to establish that this is all about besting the Joneses, or, I guess, the Finkleman’s.

    It’s odd to see Piven in a role of playing a proud father but I guess I buy it. There’s something about trying to say that his all about a Bar Mitzvah, at one point we see a banner giving props to the Steins’ kid saying “mazel tov” but it’s not uttered that this is a Mitzvah of any sort. Is this because the trailer makers want this to be a generic, culturally neutral, “party” theme or because we don’t want to segregate audience share? I’m not sure but getting through the first quarter of this trailer with only a reference to the torah gets me wondering.

    And where once my interest level in a flick that has a lot of cultural currency as of late with the big stories about 50 Cent playing a Bat Mitzvah and the book that was recently published about this subject which is a hoot to run through if any of you find yourselves wandering through a Borders, peters out kind of pathetically as Piven’s rival father, played here by the perennial antagonist to the protagonist, Larry Miller, starts to try and pry about the planning of Piven’s own party.

    Again, the word party planner is used in lieu of calling this for what it is, there’s a really poor attempt to wordplay 50 Cent. “How much for 50 Cent? How about 17 Cent?” Whoa there, Leno, keep these jokes down to the minimum.

    And just like that the Jewish-isms fall out of the sky like a full on blitzkrieg: we get Shamu donning a yarmulke, the Star of David comes out to say hey, Yiddish pops up its head and we are even treated to the party’s goings-on. It’s intimately amusing and poignant.

    I think while the ending suffers from a really saccharine closing, with Piven giving the fatherly speech about becoming a man which completely confirms the idea that this “family” movie will have everything turning all right out in the end. Cue studio audience “Aww”¦”

    And while I don’t find too much fault in things like this, I do have to make mention about Daryl Hannah’s facial credit in this flick. She doesn’t have one speaking role in what I saw here yet it’s shamelessly hinted that she’s an integral part of the movie by the ranking she’s given as we’re introduced to everyone in the movie.


    TRUST THE MAN (2006) Director: Bart Freundlich
    Cast: Billy Crudup, David Duchovny, Maggie Gyllenhaal, Julianne Moore, Eva Mendes
    Release: August 18, 2006
    Synopsis: A smart, sophisticated comedy about the challenges of love and marriage among modern day New Yorkers, TRUST THE MAN features the romantic escapades of two couples: a successful actress (Julianne Moore) and her stay at home husband (David Duchovny); and her slacker younger brother (Billy Crudup) and his aspiring novelist girlfriend Maggie.
    View Trailer:
    * Large (QuickTime)

    Prognosis: One of the best this year. Eva Mendes told me that I shouldn’t feel defensive about saying the words Movie Poop Shoot when I am out soliciting interviews. I should own it, she said. Almost a year later since she told me that I still think that was great advice. Odd, considering I had a physical reaction, not unlike a bad TB test, to STUCK ON YOU.

    What’s nice about this trailer, though, is that I enjoy everyone’s presence here.

    From Crudup, who was heralded as the next “it” man only to subsist on the fringe, Duchovny and Moore, well, not so much Moore, the opening sequence of this thing sets up everything that is about to be set off much later on.

    Billy and David feel like they’re brothers, when in fact that they’re brothers-in-law, and have a good relationship. I don’t know why it’s the case but establishing a bond early between these two guys makes me feel that there’s something about them we as an audience can trust.

    When we discover that Julianne publicly states that the impending marriage of Crudup and his ol’ lady is not so much sweet as it is “overrated,” the institution of it anyway, we see where there is going to be a little tension. That’s fabulous for a few reasons but the best one is that not only do we have a feel for these characters but we’re also getting an insight into the relationships these people have with one another. It’s just rare to get that quick of a glimpse so early on.

    Next, we’re introduced to Gary Shandling’s presence as David and Julianne’s therapist where it’s made known that David has a more than healthy sex drive. This talk spills over to David talking to Billy and while seeing people get hit in the nuts with a whiffle ball bat is amusing, seeing a kid make a direct strike against the ball sack of David’s penne pasta incites great laughs from me.

    The comedy comes delicately to a close as we descend like a Russian sub off the coast of the motherland before Alec Baldwin gets involved. The mood changes. Billy and David have some real words with one another about the nature of life and its natural ebb.

    It’s announced that Billy ditches Jake Gyllenhaal’s sister, we’re not sure why and not told, but then Julianne sticks her albino nose in the whole thing and quickly sets her up on a date with a guy who has a shaky grasp of the English language. Again, I don’t know what you define as funny but foreign people trying to grasp English phraseology in movies is always a winner with me. What’s odd is that Billy is present for this “date” of sorts and I don’t understand it.

    It’s odd in ways that need defining but we’re taken away from that moment to Billy asking David what’s a good flower to get a lady besides a rose. The answer is at once telling, it’s honest. Again, you feel close to these two guys as it seems that they have a genuine affinity for one another’s happiness.

    The music changes and it’s “Wisemen” by James Blunt. I bring it up because sometimes you get just the right music to play against what’s happening on the screen and this is no different. It’s wonderfully used to what seems like images that are supposed to endear us to these characters even more than we are. It’s needless because the trailer earned that a while ago but it’s delightful nonetheless. The way we’re let down from what’s been built up is just as powerful.

    To say that you’ve got to be crazy to be committed is smart in the sense that marriage between two people can feel that way, naturally, but it’s worded sharply, amusingly.

  • Trailer Park: STRAY BULLETINS

    E-MAIL THE AUTHOR | By Christopher Stipp

    April 14, 2006

    STRAY BULLETINS

    And raging into its second week into existence I have to pay homage to my “friends” who are making me feel quite welcome over at MySpace this week. I can honestly say that I’ve escaped the clap-trap about this electronic bulletin board for over a year and a half but I am finding it to be a nice place to make a comment or two during the week. Big ups to my man Buddy L who’s been a long time reader and deserves some unwarranted attention. Stop by and tell me how much I am so “teh suck.” Christ, don’t even get me started on how I wish there were a grammatical standard. I tell you, ladies, watch out for a man who can wield a semi-colon. That there’s a keeper.

    This week actually is one devoted to you, the enduring readers of this column as I finally have a comment to share with the rest of the class.

    Two weeks ago I ran a little review for the BASIC INSTINCT 2 trailer and, thankfully, the movie went down faster than a junior at the senior prom who’s had her wheels greased with some Olde English 800.

    One of the pithy remarks I included in said review had to do with English being particularly fond of consuming a certain leaven product. I stand by my remarks, with a tounge pushed delicately on my cheek, but I had a great letter follow shortly thereafter:

    “You’ve got a nice wide shot of London proper, with po-pos, or Bobby’s as you crumpet eating limeys would say, all descending on a crime scene.”

    Being a “˜crumpet eating limey’ I feel the need to educate you Anglophobe’s.

    The police are simply best known as “the filth”.

    You can say “the fuzz” but its dated, and the added bonus that you sound like a queer if you admit to being “nabbed by the fuzz.”

    Nobody really eats “˜tea and crumpets’ anymore”¦ although the slang for a hot babe still remains understood as “˜crumpet’.

    So “˜crumpet eating’ is not too bad a pastime.

    Here’s to further understanding of the language, that is after all, called “English””¦ we need to save it before the Gangsta’s fuck it up good and proper!

    Keep up the good work

    Paul
    Brit in Bangkok

    I honestly dig it when I’m exposed to things about linguistical nuances across the world. I do love movies like SNATCH where they’re using certain idiomatic expressions which I may have never used but are a delight to bring up in casual conversation. Por ejemplo, when Jason Statham tells his freind about said friend’s capacity of having an appropriate amount of “minerals” I knew I would be dropping that in my verbal rolodex.

    Some people get confused by the patina of how conversation casually sounds in a movie where they “should be” talking their own language (read here: TRAINSPOTTING and the like) but this is what makes foriegn film a delight. I know I am in the minority on this as no one really, outside the purview of this audience, natch, does think about these things but it’s the foriegn uniqueness that should draw people’s attention.

    In the coming weeks I am hoping to take advantage of my little corner in the MySpace realm and reaching out to different countries to get a clue about why its people decide to make a crap film like BASIC INSTINCT 2 a top rated film while it gets trounced here, stateside. Like Cliff Poncier stated in SINGLES (man, that’s a movie you can catch the middle of and just ride out like a choice wave), “I don’t like to reduce us just to being part of Seattle. I think of us expanding more…We’re huge in Europe right now. We’ve got records…A big record just broke in Belgium.”

    I hope that dropping in on the citizens of the world won’t mind me knocking on their digital doorstep. I mean, come on, since most of them live in the EU the good money is on the fact that they’re either unemployed, drunk or plotting their escape from the homeland to America; it could be all three.

    Ooo…and before I forget this week, two things. One, I know I promised a virtual slide show of sorts regarding my time at the Phoenix Film Festival. Even though I had some really good ideas of how it was going to be presented the limitations of me not being able to layer text over a picture have put a stranglehold on this process. Maybe if I was a design major I could’ve figured out how to do it but, as it stands, I barely am able to log into this website much less presupposing my own digital greatness. Two, I have to, have to, give some man-on-man love to Adam Witt (1/5 and 2/3rds, as we know there’s always a some slacker asshole that makes us all have to work harder, of troupe Schadenfreude, a comedic outfit which operates out of Chicago.). It’s been hard for me to find genuinely amusing writing out there that isn’t sanctioned by big monied corporations or that appeals to my erratic sense of funny; it changes, invariably, from week to week but Adam has managed to keep up with my ADHD.

    Enjoy your weekends, kids. Henry Rollins is on IFC and you should make it a point to watch his brand of movie critique. The man cuts through modern film crit with a staccato that I wish would’ve been around years ago.

    P.s. – Check out this short by a reader. I wouldn’t normally pimp something like this but since I liked the way this thing went with a wicked left-turn I wanted to give my man Rob a shout-out, Poop Shoot style.


    FRIENDS WITH MONEY (2006) Director:Nicole Holofcener
    Cast:Jennifer Aniston, Joan Cusack, Catherine Keener, Frances McDormand, Jason Isaacs, Scott Caan
    Release: April 7, 2006 (Limited)
    Synopsis: A drama about three married women, their husbands, and their lone single friend.
    View Trailer:
    * Large (QuickTime)

    Prognosis: Negative. Yeah, let’s start off with the obvious.

    Why would I want to see a movie where a bunch of preening, socialites who are more well off than I am have a spirited talk about where someone’s going to dump a couple million dollars?

    Even if this was an inheritance, and these people are hippies who really only have jobs that pay them in hemp and Skittles, I’m not really identifying well with these well-to-doers.

    Yes, by having this conversation we are able to contrast these people’s wealth with Jennifer Aniston’s obvious predicament as someone who has to work as a maid, which I don’t believe and have no ability to stretch my finite suspension power of disbelief, but who’s identifying with whom? I don’t like the rich people and I don’t believe Aniston. It’s especially bold to state that this was an Opening Night selection at Sundance when popular opinion has it on good faith that it was due to its star wattage and not necessarily due to it’s “independence.”

    No matter, though, as Frances McDormand makes lemonade out of pompous pie. She really comes off as an especially likable character no matter what role she’s playing and her comment to a new mother about the size of her child is at once amusing as it is telling.

    I’m not sure where you want to place Catherine Keener’s obviously vapid, stupid and/or drug addled insanity when the man who I think is her husband retorts to the question about what looks different about him by saying, “I shaved my beard”¦.Three weeks ago.” Oh, the laughter this stokes in me! Is this supposed to be funny or sad? I really don’t know.

    McDormand brings me back to genuine amusement when she takes some line cutters to task in an Old Navy. She’s just spitting lines, I know, but she makes it believable enough for me to be right there with her but the moment cuts off too fast as I’m yanked back to the airless lives of Aniston’s friends who would be better off being stalked by a mass murderer than having to watch them complain and whine about their lives.

    We’re treated to a philosophical Q/A with F.O.A. (Friends of Aniston) about the nature of sex and money and how one would help facilitate the other; real Einsteins, these people.

    And, as if my attitude wasn’t bad enough by the end of this trailer, we get Scott Caan. I like Scott. I thought he was one of the best players in OCEAN’S ELEVEN. Not only is his presence refreshing but his quip back to Aniston when he finds out she’s a maid is, “Can I watch?” Yes, a thousand times yes. There are promo shots of Jennifer in her “outfit” and they are nowhere to be seen here. Bad move. Stupid move.

    If you’re an exec and you haven’t figured out that even by showing the picture of Jennifer in her French maid’s getup might mean a few more bucks at the box office you need to have your head and nads examined.


    AMERICAN GUN (2006) Director: Aric Avelino
    Cast: Marcia Gay Harden, Forest Whitaker, Donald Sutherland, Linda Cardellini, Tony Goldwyn
    Release: March 22, 2006 (Limited)
    Synopsis: IFC Films presents AMERICAN GUN, a powerful series of interwoven storylines that bring to light how the proliferation of guns in America dramatically influence and shape every day lives. A gun shop owner, an ace student, a single mother, and a school principal are among those profoundly affected. AMERICAN GUN is the debut film of director/co-writer Aric Avelino, and is co-written by Steven Bagatourian and produced by Ted Kroeber.
    View Trailer:
    * Large (QuickTime)

    Prognosis: Positive. This is a gun safety video.

    At first I think that I’m watching one of those safety videos people from work. When I worked for a grocery store I was compelled to watch a video where some guy and his boy walk up to an employee as the kid is literally draining blood from his nose. The guy wants the employee to put his hands on the kid’s face to help stop the bleeding. The video asked me what I would do in a situation like this. There is no such asking of an opinion here although we get some very helpful information.

    “When handling a gun”¦Always keep the gun unloaded until ready to use.”

    Good advice. Especially when you’ve got a table littered with semi-automatic weaponry. I kid but the juxtaposition of these words with the display of guns makes the point quite salient. There’s a nice tension of the black and white footage with the haunting music that is embedded underneath it all. The echoing gunshot before setting up the real plot of the movie sets a good tone.

    Now, here comes the tricky nature of having a movie that has three, separate storylines. Good work on letting us know that there are three stories, first of all, as this helps those among us who are going to try and understand what’s happening. You’ve got Forest Whitaker, Donald Sutherland and Marcia Gay Harden leading these small vignettes and the hard part here is to give equal time to all the stories without confusing everyone.

    You run the risk anyway of confusing people with a blazing fast trailer that hits the high points and money shots without giving much context but a movie like this has to be presented logically otherwise you run the risk of presenting a movie that isn’t quite accurate; not that hasn’t stopped Michael Bay from making trailers for his films but I digress.

    All three of the stories here look compelling enough. You get the meat of the storyline quickly and without a lot of obfuscation. It gets dicey when you start having the players present start their bombastic acting moments, obviously reacting to heady contexts of their own, as I want to know what’s happening but there just isn’t enough time here. It’s done as well, though, as it can be. For that, it rises above the schizophrenia that plagues lesser films that just have to keep track of a few people.

    Sidebar kudos go to Tony Goldwyn and his crying-like-a-little-woman display of emotions as a cop who just wants to have a good cry. I don’t know what has brought him to that level but I do know that I haven’t seen emotion like that since he was pissed that Christian Slater blew up the chief of police’s corvette in KUFFS.

    The tempos change, oddly enough, and we’re left to ride out the rest of this trailer in the form of a musical montage. People are hugging, people are moving, things are happening, things are acting and reacting with our players. It’s a bold way to end a trailer. It’s almost like a party that’s really good in the beginning and is left to just run its course without any help from the host or hostess. It really does coast to the end on its own power.

    I’m not sure I would want to seek this one out but the trailer does as well as it can for what it is.

    By the way, I stated I would never assist any father/son combo where the young liege’s nose is a faucet of platelets. I was required to watch the video again.


    RV (2006) Director: Barry Sonnenfeld
    Cast: Robin Williams, Cheryl Hines, Jeff Daniels, Kristin Chenoweth
    Release: April 28, 2006
    Synopsis: Bob McNeive (Williams) and his dysfunctional family rent an RV for a roadtrip to the Colorado Rockies, where they ultimately have to contend with a bizarre community of campers.
    View Trailer:
    * Medium (QuickTime)

    Prognosis: Not a chance in hell, not a chance on Earth and not a chance whilst playing Monopoly. There is a need for there to be more family friendly fare at the movie theater, that much I concede.

    I’m not someone who actually cares about these things but there is a contingent of the mass movie audience that will come out with fistfuls of dollars should there be something even middle of the road for them to enjoy. And, if I were a betting man I would put this movie up there with what THE GREAT OUTDOORS looked like many years ago; a movie that isn’t threatening to anyone, whose humor is based on simple slapstick and thinly veiled emotions of family togetherness and is destined for late night cable greatness.

    I think it took me a full minute of this trailer’s running time before I had something noteworthy to say and, thus, proves my previous point.

    I don’t imagine that the genesis for this kind of film was anything more than a germ of an idea that sought to have a vehicle, literally, where Robin Williams could just decompress after all of his “serious” roles that he’s been playing as of late. He’s a dude who lives in the suburbs and has a contentious relationship with his daughter and his son.

    There is really nothing special about anything until the plot moves into its second act and we’re introduced to the 2000’s equivalent of the Grizwald Family Truckster. Now, I don’t see Williams mapping out his cross-country travels on a Radio Shack Tandy brand computer, with accompanying 2-bit sound effects natch, but I do think that we’re going to be relying on the chemistry between Williams and Cheryl Hines. Hines has shown herself to be a sharper comedic talent than Williams as of late and so it shall be interesting to see if one overpowers the other.

    “Whenever a white man picks up a banjo”¦my cheeks tighten.”

    As it stands, though, the wacky misadventures that these people are going on, with Jeff Daniels providing a nice comedic sidebar in this trailer, are fairly basic in terms of the level of edginess that seems to be present here.

    If I could compare my feelings to a past trailer it would be precisely the way I felt about the RAT RACE trailer. You’ve got a road trip experience, some comedy tossed in to give it a fuzzy feel and don’t allow any kind of reality in at any cost. Case in point is at one point in this trailer Robin somehow, someway, finds himself hanging onto the front of his RV. He is rolling down a hill, out of control, holding on to dear life and screaming. He wheels past his family who has their back to him, of course, with Cheryl doing the whole “Did you hear that?” thing but it’s slapsticky. Parents will love it, kids will think it’s funny but, to me, that’s why I’m not going to spend money on it.

    It’s all about demographical advertising and I am not on that list for this movie. Knowing where you level out, just like when Mr. Wizard taught us all about the density of different clear liquids, is just all a part of understanding what kind of movies are and are not made for you.


    LITTLE MISS SUNSHINE (2006) Director: Jonathan Dayton, Valerie Faris
    Cast: Greg Kinnear, Steve Carell, Toni Collette, Paul Dano
    Release: July 28, 2006
    Synopsis: This movie tells the story of the Hoovers, one of the most endearingly fractured families ever seen on motion picture screens. Together, the motley six-member family treks from Albuquerque to the Little Miss Sunshine pageant in Redondo Beach, California, to fulfill the deepest wish of 7-year-old Olive, an ordinary little girl with big dreams.
    View Trailer:
    * Large (QuickTime)

    Prognosis: So close to making the list. Hmm, art for art’s sake or a really good movie?

    I don’t know why but the eternal question for all motion pictures that skirt the line of being independent and those that are made solely because some studio head wants to see the wacky misadventures of some actor making waves that month on Access Hollywood will always remain.

    I’m not sure how this one falls but with Steve Carell, the gotta-have-him guy for the moment, leading the way here I am at a loss to really try and see if this is really a flick that deserves the imprint of the ever malleable definition of “independent.” It’s a moot point, really, because this trailer really starts off well.

    The family at the heart of this movie all gets their due in the first quarter of this trailer’s run time. You’ve got the questionably well-adjusted mother and father playing host and hostess to a son who chooses not to talk because of a long dead philosopher; Steve, who I can’t for sure make out of whether he chooses to be a live-in guest at his brother’s house or if there’s something else afoot; and the wily father character played by my man Alan Arkin, who plays crazy better than anyone else available.

    You’ve got the obligatory pre-press for the film that flashes briefly on the screen. This is not only well-done in terms of the transitions from one to the next but the font and screen time devoted to these quotes are well timed. It’s easy to plaster big words and big name publications but they are done here with consideration for the viewer and that’s well noted here.

    And, what else is really surprising, there is an extended scene that we’re left to watch play out. It’s daring to not just whip through multiple sound bite worthy moments but the decision to let everyone in the house know why uncle Steve is living with his brother, that he was in love with a grad student who didn’t love him back and thus made him want to kill himself, was a good choice. It’s not as funny as I would’ve thought it could have been with someone other than Kinnear being the straight man but it still provides the desired effect.

    What’s more is that when we eventually learn that this movie is kind of not about Steve, although even after I watched this trailer I am not quite sure that’s the case, but is, in fact, about Kinnear’s kid I try and switch gears. This is about a beauty pageant in California and the road trip that ensues when the whole family decides to get in the ol’ VW van and head west into Cali. I’m kind of disappointed here as the interesting moments about this film trail off.

    You get a whole lot of mugging to camera, ostensibly to show how silly this movie is going to be, but you don’t get any real substance. This is about one family’s journey to connect with something, I assume, but after learning about the pageant and Steve’s attempted suicide I’m not so sure there was anything left to get me in the mood to Steve bring the funny once more.

  • Trailer Park: SLEVIN’S SAM JAEGER

    E-MAIL THE AUTHOR | By Christopher Stipp

    April 7, 2006

    SLEVIN’S SAM JAEGER.

    Thanks to all of you who peeped my new MySpace page this past week. It was great to see those of you unlurk for a moment and indulge my inner need to feel accepted by my peers. Most of you, well, who am I kidding, all of you are dudes who decided to say “hey.” Do I spurn the ladies with my writing or is my maniless just frightening? I’d like to think it’s the latter but I do know it’s the former. For every Amber MacArthur there are 2,800 dudes just out to rewrite the rules of accepted grammatical techniques. Stop by and check me out if you got the time as I am finding this beast to be overwhelming addictive and for the life of me I can’t explain why. Although, I can state with some bit of confidence that I am a little bit older than the demographic for this service skews toward.

    In the first part of the conversation with Sam Jaeger, who shares time with screen chewers Bruce Willis, Ben Kingsley, Lucy Liu and Josh Hartnett in LUCKY NUMBER SLEVIN, we talked about his role in the movie and the road that led to Kevin Smith and, in this second installment, I talk with Sam about his life as an actor with regard to LUCKY NUMBER SLEVIN and CATCH AND RELEASE; CLERKS II comes up too, I believe. One of the things that come up with talking to a guy who has to make a living, to put food on the table, is the kind of conviction it has taken to be where he is. When you have a talk with someone you want to not only be looking for good pieces of copy to be able and stuff into a satisfying interview but you hope that there’s some bit of humanity that slips through that resonates with your own life. With Sam this interview was different insofar that he’s more blue collar than he is well-off millionare.

    Sam, apart from being able to look ahead to a hopefully positive reception for CATCH AND RELEASE when it comes out in early 2007, has an exciting summer planned when he goes off and films his indie TAKE ME HOME. What really caused a Scooby-Doo “Hrr?” head twist for me was that Sam states that he is filming the movie in late summer if all goes well but he has a gorgeous trailer that nearly gives the impression that he’s all but finished with the entire film.

    It’s the power of good editing, children.

    Sam is just one of those kind of guys who, after you’re done talking with, you hope have miles of success in front of him. From his extensive work on television, movies and, now, his own movie, he’s keeping himself busy and I think that’s mightily appropriate for a man with a steely work ethic in a town notorious for its people striving to have things given to them.

    One of the things that I’ve learned, and forgotten to some extent prior to having a conversation with Sam, is you can’t rest when it comes to success. You’ve got to want it more than the other guy, to be sure, but one thing that no one tells you when they espouse these little trinkets of wisdom is that the reason why you’ve got to want it more is that you’ve got to be ready for the long road of rejection, dejection and that gnawing voice that says maybe everyone saying no to your abilities actually means something; you’ve got to believe in your product and what you’re selling. Those that don’t are the ones left to ponder what could’ve been while you’re off hustling to get yours.

    It’s all a game and Sam talks about why he keeps on keepin’ on.

    SLEVIN opens today, April 7th, everywhere.


    How do you keep yourself from over-thinking a role? That seems to be the funny stereotype about actors: drama queens, overt acting, over analyzing”¦ I think”¦and this is going to sound really ridiculous, I try not to think about it. It’s the elephant in the room but, in the end, it’s only my psyche that it’s affecting. I do all my research early on and then I try to let it go. Like, in CATCH AND RELEASE, my character is a really competent fly fisherman. He owns an adventure shop in Boulder, Colorado so he has to be a good fisherman and I had done no fly fishing prior to this movie. So, two months before the movie began I was going out and I got a fly fishing reel, rod and I went out to this little pond and just cast for hours. I got really good at it but once the movie came around I was able to mellow out and not worry so much. I had to make an effort to not make it too big because then your acting becomes too much about you as opposed to what you’re experiencing in the scene. And Kevin was great. He is really really charming in this movie. He is really charismatic and I really think he does a wonderful job in it and I was just fortunate enough that I didn’t ruin the film acting alongside him.

    (Laughs)

    You know, what’s funny I actually felt this pressure early on because he and I are best friends in this movie and I thought, “I am going to get some serious hate mail from Mewes’ fans.” Because I do not want to be the guy who steps into Jason Mewes’ thing and ruins this buddy feel.

    But, thankfully, my character couldn’t be further from Mewes. I play a guy that’s anal retentive, a little high strung”¦so I don’t think people will be drawing too many comparisons between me and Jason anytime soon.

    So, when is this movie eventually going to come out? I saw the trailer and it said this spring.

    You know, I heard from Susannah and I talked with Kevin, I think the movie, for one reason or another, Sony is resituating the film so that Jennifer [Garner] can promote it when she’s still not working on Alias which will be around January of 2007. It’s just one of those things. Everyone I talk to”¦Kevin said, “You know who this sucks for? This sucks for Sam because we all have careers.”

    (Laughs)

    All I can say is one of the first jobs I got when I came out to LA was that I was cast in TRAFFIC.

    Really? I didn’t see you attributed in the credits”¦

    And the reason is because I was cut out of the movie.

    Here was this movie where I thought, “This is a great stepping stone for me!” I was feeling pretty big in my britches and I went to the premiere to with my girlfriend and I’m sitting in the theater and”¦my scene passes. And I lean over to my girlfriend and I said, “That was the scene I was in.” She went, “That one?!” And it kind of dawned on her that I wasn’t in the scene she had just seen and she just kind of held my hand as my ego was horribly deflated.

    Tell me, honestly, what was it like to just see that happen before your eyes? You could play it cool and tell me “It just happens” but really”¦

    Yeah, I was torn. I think a lot of times in life, at least for me, when I start to feel really confident, there’s some higher being, some presence, call it what you will, that comes down and smites me and I…had been smoten. It’s just a way that keeps me from taking any role, or opportunity, for granted. There’s so many variables that go into making a movie and being a part of it that it’s just about being thankful for what you have.

    Is that what keeps you going?

    Yeah.

    This is just an unusual job. On the one hand, I’ve never waited around for the phone to ring, I do work hard for these slim opportunities, these auditions”¦and my job essentially is auditioning, it’s not acting. It’s going into a room and trying to sell people on the fact that I am the guy they need to be in their product. That can be a very dangerous position to be in because you’re constantly trying to build yourself up and pat yourself on the back”¦I compare it, like I do to my brother back in Ohio, I’ve come up with an analogy: It’s like going in for a job interview with the perfect company, and you really feel this company is going to go some places and that you can climb the ladder and all these wonderful things”¦and you go in and you feel great about it and you leave and you start talking to your family about how this could be the best job in the world and you find out you don’t get it. Then, if you can, imagine that 50 times a year. It can be”¦no wonder actors can be so precious, so silly, because they’ve had to go through some really ridiculous things.

    I am sure actors, all up the ladder, can tell you stories of being”¦insulted or cut down in certain ways.

    But, it’s what I do, I’m not complaining about it, I’m really fortunate to be where I am, it’s just a process. I went on an audition yesterday and I got so attached to it because your mind starts racing about where it could lead you, what this could do for you or how you could better the film or role and then it’s gone. You don’t hear back from those people and then you start to think, “Am I good?” Yeah, we actors have such a strange sense, need for approval. I think it runs through all of us. It’s such a balancing act with telling yourself that it’s ok and being ok with realizing that the most important thing is our family, our friends and that what we do is not who we are.

    Is your girlfriend an actress?

    She is. She’s actually starring in a film that I am directing this summer.

    What’s it about?

    It’s called TAKE ME HOME. A woman gets into a taxi cab in New York and convinces the driver to take her across the United States. In the process, the two form a relationship and the relationship unfurls across the landscape of America.

    One of the things that I sort of realized, especially with CATCH AND RELEASE coming out later, was that no one was going to give me these opportunities. People sit around in this city and wait for these opportunities to come to them. Even producers wait for a magic number, like people are all shooting for a budget. “If we can just get this money, we can make this film.” “If we can just get this star we can make this film.”

    One of the things I found so interesting about working with Kevin is that I think he has a certain distaste for stars because they can come in and the movie comes about them as opposed to the script which should always be the most important thing about the film. You always have to serve the script and anybody who comes into the process should serve the script. And so, this movie, instead of shooting for a budget we are going to shoot for a date. So, when August 1st rolls around whether we have $5,000 or $500,000 we are going to shoot this movie. There’s no excuses now. It was a really important decision for me to make. I’m just sort of bulldozing and I am going to try and make the best movie I can by the time we start rolling film or shooting digital and it’s a really exciting process.

    Did you ask Kevin for any advice?

    Yeah, I’m going to sit down soon and talk to him about it but like the example he set, after CATCH AND RELEASE he said, “You know, I told Susannah, “˜Five million.’ That’s the budget.’ You make a five million dollar movie, it’s the perfect amount of money. You tell people, “˜Listen, it’s a good script, just be a part of it”¦” And that’s something he should be proud of because people are coming to that movie because they believe in Kevin and they are obviously huge fans of CLERKS.

    And I will say this, this is another thing I love about that guy, is that when CLERKS II started he invited me to a pre-shooting party at his house and everyone had nametags and everyone was getting to know one another and that’s the way he has kind of built up his community. The people that love Kevin Smith love the fact he allows them a glimpse inside. His fans feel immersed in what he does and that is true. Everyone down the line feels like they are a part of making a movie and I respect that wholeheartedly. So, I am putting together my team for TAKE ME HOME and I am just utilizing that lesson I learned from Kevin.

    We’re in the process of shooting it back in Ohio, pulling resources from the college I went to, trying to put people up in dorms, doing whatever we can to save money and still make it look like a 5 million dollar picture. Part of the process is also getting people who love the script, who believe in my abilities and are willing to go along for the ride.

    Are you rearranging your schedule to make room for this project?

    Yeah, yeah. I get too immersed in the process of making a movie that I have to remember that, “Oh, I get PAID to be an actor. Oh, that’s where the money comes from.” But, pilot season is underway and I am trying to give a lot of time to that as well but my heart has always been in film. I feel it’s like Harrison Ford who used to go into auditions where, he was a carpenter at the time, and people were mystified why he was preoccupied. He was like, “I gotta go build a deck in a half an hour. I’ve got to get this deck done today. Let’s hurry this up.” And, I think, as an actor when you give all of your vitality and all of your feelings of worth to another person or another company to a studio you end up kind of soulless and that’s just one thing I am trying to avoid. I am just trying to not let my ego get sacked by a bunch of people who judge me by whether my collar is ironed or not when I walk into the room.

    How do you keep that in check? Do you say, “Well, I’ve got to do this,” regardless of the circumstances or is there some wiggle room for you to say, “I don’t have to go along with this”?

    I think in talking with you I realize that I’ve never been cast for something where I was trying to force myself to be someone that I’m not.

    The roles I’ve gotten are ones where I happen to be confident with who I was when I walked into the room and confident with the job I did when I walked out. That says something. Sometimes I want a part so badly that I want to immerse myself in it and hold it too tightly, as with everything else we want in life, but it shouldn’t be forced.

    Thank you very much for your time.


    V FOR VENDETTA AND C FOR CHUBBY As a double-dip for you fanboys out there who enjoyed the filmic representation of V FOR VENDETTA I am running the interview I initally ran way back in August of last year. Like a good book you understand a little bit better after the second reading the interview takes on a deeper meaning after the finished product has been rolled out. The very first thing you notice about Natalie Portman, if you’re really paying attention, is her eyes.

    Those soft, rounded globes pierce right through you and, I dare say, they were able to see my soul when I asked her a total of two questions during the press roundtable, which was more like one dude who felt compelled to ask every twit-laden question rocking around in his noggin and not letting anyone else ask anything, and when she looked back and answered my queries with a friendly countenance. Now, most fan boys seem the need to fawn over the notion that Natalie is the embodiment of all their geek wishes and dreams wrapped in this perfectly shaped feminine vessel. Well, she’s obviously more than that but I do admit that I felt a tinge of something very boyish as I managed to work in a question about THE PROFESSIONAL, a quintessential must-see for any person wishing to start on their education when it comes to Ms. Portman.

    Even more than that, though, and I have to be honest, I think I was more in awe with the wattage that Joel Silver brought to the table more than anything else. I know the common “cool” thing to do is say his real name is Joel “Fucking” Silver, an moniker born out of homage to the man who made wearing black leather trench coats by every burn-out and overweight, goth wannabe disciple of Neo and Co. so badass, but please. How old is your average writer on most of the movie sites? Grow the hell up. That said, the guy commands a lot of fucking respect. When he talks, he does it so smoothly that you wouldn’t never guess that this man who is speaking no more than 3 feet away from me has been a part of a lot of big movies.

    I do, though, have to give a sorry shout-out to the other two dudes there, the director and co-creator of V, who were all but ignored by the billowing amounts of backed-up sperm producers who almost saw their presence as an intrusion as they tried to get Natalie to speak even more.

    It was a weird panel, one that would be repeated by the same kind of pole smoking at the Jack Black panel, which kind of freaked me out and I’ll discuss more of that later, but I liked the way things were going with the kinds of things people were asking about the nature of the movie. V FOR VENDETTA has a weird hybrid as the Wachowski brothers were tightly involved in the production, writing and day-to-day operations of the movie. That’s fine with me, though, as the brothers Wacho are a talented duo who needed to get the hell away from THE MATRIX for a while, yeah I liked Monica Bellucci in tight latex rubber but that only goes so far, and get back to making films.

    Anyway, enjoy the panel transcription. At the conference was Natalie Portman, Joel Silver, director James McTeigue and producer by Grant Hill.

    Natalie, I noticed in the clip that they played you had a British accent. Can you talk a little about that?

    Natalie: I worked with a dialect coach, Barbara Berkery, for about a month and a half before we started shooting and she was with me the whole time and we would do exercises every morning before we started. So, I was pretty comfortable with it by the time we shot but it definitely is an extra thing to think about.

    If you could, give us an idea of why you brought V FOR VENDETTA to the Comi-Con”¦

    Joel: Well, V FOR VENDETTA comes from a graphic novel, comes from a comic book. So, it’s uniquely suited for this.

    Yes, the kinds of things that are associated with this kind of genre, young male, young female, fan base seems to be drawn to Comi-Con. It seems uniquely suited because it is a comic book but it’s a great place to launch something because the viral Internet connection between the convention and the world is enormous. It’s an epidemic. And if something is really cool, and effective, and it works here, people seem to know about that pretty quickly. And I think it is run very well. This is a group that understands what we’ve done. It’s a pleasure to come here, bring everyone here and talk about the product.

    The interaction here [at the Con]. You don’t get that at a lot of places. Talk about the kinds of fans you’ve met here”¦

    Natalie: They just seem very passionate about this project, they really seem passionate about the comic book, the film coming out, and they seem united in their passion and I’ve seen it in other places.

    Do you find any part of your life that you’re passionate about outside of your career?

    Well, I definitely never attended a gathering like this. I mean I love music and I would travel far to see a band I liked if I had the time and cash to do it. Like, if I found myself in the position to do something like that, I would do that.

    When you first got the script and you found out that your character is going to be shaved did you think if you would have to put on a skull cap? When did that conversation take place?

    The first time I met Larry [Wachowski] and James James McTeigue. They asked me, “Would you shave your head?” And I was like, “Yeah!” Everyone else made such a bigger deal of it than I did.

    It seemed the brothers [Wachowski] have done a little more on a movie that they weren’t the directors of. Can you explain the relationship between where the one relationship of producer ended and director began?

    Joel: It’s the boys’ vision. No, it’s David Lloyd’s vision. And they [the director and producers of the film] took their vision and crafted a script, which they wrote even before we made THE MATRIX. The first draft they made of V was many many years ago and they came back to it after MATRIX REVOLUTIONS and they wanted to give James the chance to direct the picture. But, they were there. I mean, they were there everyday. They were on the set and they were very involved with the look and the feel of the movie. I mean the movie was directed by James, produced by myself and Grant”¦

    Natalie: I also think that they are the second unit directors, they are also the producers and the writers which is more than most second unit directors so I think, just in that nature, they were a lot more involved than usual. In that respect they gave James the chance to create his own vision and do his own work. It was just they, you know, helped with ideas as writers and producers and second unit directors.

    Joel: Grant, why don’t you comment on how they worked together?

    Grant: Obviously, there’s a key family group which has developed through THE MATRIX films and into this. Larry and Andy developed a strong relationship with James as well as several other key people involved with the production. It’s very much a symbiotic thing. It’s very hard to sort out where the demarcation lines are, they are very much in it for James to make his movie. As Natalie has said they wrote it, they wrote the screenplay and they were very active in producing it and, fundamentally, want to make a good movie. And they wanted to give James the opportunity to do that.

    Boo-yah, here’s question one of two that I was able to ask on my own. Not that anyone cares but I just thought to point that out for my own erudite and shameless reasons

    Natalie, Luc Besson to George Lucas. Do you find that when you’re working with a European director versus an American director there are any fundamental differences that inform your performance or technique?

    Natalie: I think it’s more an individual difference than a European/American difference. I mean, I worked with a few non-Americans. It’s hard to make generalizations but individual differences”¦all over the place. It’s very different of how people will direct you, like Luc Besson, like Larry Wachowski, like Anthony Minghella will shout things out to you in the middle of a scene, and there are other directors who will never say a thing. Woody Allen I don’t think ever said anything to me the entire time I worked with him.

    (Laughs)

    I don’t think he knows I worked with him. But, I think, it’s very individual difference but I think it has to do personality.

    In the comic V is a terrorist but he’s also a good guy. How do you handle that in this movie?

    James: You say he’s a good guy but he is a good guy, in the one sense, but he is a homicidal maniac. He’s not heroic in the sense that he only kills people that deserve to be killed. He has complete, absolute dedication to wreaking vengeance on people who maybe have changed their ways, who have reformed. He’s not really a good guy and I think that’s kept in the film. He’s very complicated, he’s a great character. I was quite disturbed when the idea of making a Hollywood movie about this guy because it would be so easy to make him a good guy. In fact, he’s not. He’s a very complicated character and he actually has a lot of the traits of the terrorists who wreaked havoc on London. It’s that complication, those nuances that are still in the screenplay and I think that’s very good.

    Me again

    Joel, you have a penchant for taking ideas and making them big. When I think of big picture, I think of you. When you got the comic book what did you see where you could say, “Oh, I could punch this up right here”¦”?

    I acquired this thing many years ago in the late 80s when I acquired The Watchmen; I had them both and I was not able to hold onto Watchmen but I did hold onto this. I was intrigued by it. When I read it, it was black and white galleys. It hadn’t even come to America. It was just beginning to be seen by people.

    I was just intrigued by this incredibly weird society and this story about this guy and this girl. And I thought, “I could make this movie.” And that’s how you do it. It’s almost 20 years later when we’re finally making it but it exited me and I thought we could find a way to make it great. And, when the boys wrote it and, again, it was before they made THE MATRIX, their script was effective but nowhere near as it was when they went back and did it again because it really came to life. It’s a remarkable film. It’s quite thrilling to watch it all come together.

    Ditto, Holmes.

    Is Watchmen out of your hands now?

    It was one of the only DC comics left over at Warner Brothers. I was head of Fox at the time and I acquired it there. So, when I went back to Warners it was gone. And then it moved about town. But, I don’t know. There are now so many pieces of material that tread on Watchmen territory that I don’t know. When it came it out it was a blinding beacon that now it will just seem derivative because so many things have come since it that are based on ideas that are in that book.

    Natalie, Now, what do you think of the message in the book?

    Natalie: I don’t think necessarily there is a message. That’s part of what David is saying. It’s not a manipulative story that says “This person is the good guy, you should fall in love with him. This is the bad guy”¦” I mean, you definitely have one who you can probably identify with more but who’s heavily flawed and you can also criticize him more. I think it’s more of a provocative piece than a “This is what is what you should think” piece and trying to make you think, make you criticize, make you object, find faults in someone’s ideology or agree with parts. It’s not black and white and that’s why I liked it. It made me have questions I couldn’t answer or I had different answers to every five minutes and it has continued to be that way for me.

    Did you see the script first or did you read the comic book, then the script?

    Natalie: I saw the script first. The script had to condense a lot of the sub-plots to make it a film but it is very faithful to the graphic noel. I think that story”¦things that explore how we define violence is very interesting because we have many categories to how we define violence. Was it intended? Was it state sanctioned or is it individually sanctioned? All these things, we make sort of moral judgments and categorizations. That’s why some of these categorizations are in the eye of the beholder and that’s why some people who watch this will identify with the government and that’s why some people will identify with the revolutionaries. And that sort of openness, that sort of ambiguity, is interesting.

    Last one, I swear

    Women and the parts for them. It’s fairly common to see women in movies in the subversive roles and this part really has you in the dominant position. Do you find a good mix of interesting roles coming to you?

    Natalie: Well, I see a lot of movies that aren’t very interesting for women or for men. And, in terms of things that I do, I have been able to find things that I am interested in and, when I don’t, I like not working.

    (Laughs)

    But I wouldn’t, like, cry over it if I couldn’t find something interesting. And, if you can’t find something interesting, make something interesting that isn’t movies. There is plenty out there that is interesting that doesn’t involve movies.

  • Trailer Park: Well, funk you very much, too…

    E-MAIL THE AUTHOR | By Christopher Stipp

    March 31, 2006

    Well, funk you very much, too…

    For those who care, I’ve set up a MySpace account as it seems there’s been a spike of people rushing over there to peep things out for a reason or two; Kevin’s updates on CLERKS II with the “real” pages of Randal and Dante give this movie a whole other meta feel to it and have found myself not being able to stop visiting the site. Stop by and say hello won’t you, neighbor? I’ve got to find a way to trick this thing out and make it all look pimp but I spent a while filling in the holes with a lot of writing about myself and my hawesome taste in all things pop cultura. Now, back to the column at hand.

    I do solid work.

    I show up every week and bring it to you, unadulterated. For better or worse I’m here and I try to mix it up for your benefit as people who have grasped the ability to read.

    I think this is why I had such a crap week with trying to get some things done, professionally, around these parts. My attitude is just bad and it all boils down to what I see is a perceived inequity between who I work for, Poop Shoot, and the resulting latitude I get when it comes to bringing new things to this page.

    I guess it started when I thought it would be really nice to try and get Darren Aronofsky to chat it up a few months ago. He was doing “press” for all sorts of movie sites for the hell of it, ostensibly to start the buzz, and it was about this time when the trailer for THE FOUNTAIN broke; I dug the hell out of the snippets that were embedded in that thing and wanted to be a part of “the circle” of other uber nerds who were deserving of his time. Now, the circle I refer to isn’t as nebulous as you think and I found out how real this was when I went through a few hoops to track down the person who could’ve hooked up a one-on-one or, at the very least, a phoner.

    Well, for sake of dragging out a long narrative, I introduced myself and stated what I wanted; it was what everyone else seemed to get: some time with the dude who has seemingly spoken to everyone else of much importance. I stated who I wrote for for, Movie Poop Shoot, and the person I talked to broke out in a bit of laughter and, as I’m used to, I waited until it subsided to quickly lay out facts about the site, who ultimately pays the bandwith bill and that I’m more than qualified to handle a phone conversation thanks to the many other people who saw that this website is more than just a clever novelty.

    It’s always like this. This process was gone through, just as it was executed for Darren, with Hugh Jackman’s peeps.

    Two different gatekeepers, two identical reactions. “We’ll let you know,” is the way things ended.

    I hear that and I know it’s over before it begins. After a few days go by without a response I’m like the gimpy nerd who gets the point from the girl who I know won’t call back. It’s no sweat off my sack but it’s still a bitch move in my book. Kevin wanted this site to be able and be something more than just an amusing punchline and we’ve got the talent here to prove that it is an ever ascending beast. This is what brings us to the Phoenix Film Festival, which I was wonderfully press passed to, that was held this past week right down the street, quite literally, from my house.

    It was great to be able and catch a dozen or so films that really were the epitome of independent and I was, for lack of a more mature adjective, jazzed about Lawrence Fishburne, Jason Mewes, Danny Trejo and others making their way to my backyard. It’s only the 6th year for this festival in the desert and I must admit that I was impressed with the fare that was offered.

    Now, Phoenix wasn’t going to get the kind of movies which get their due at Sundance but with Mewes’ NICE GUYS, Fishburne’s AKEELAH AND THE BEE, LUCKY NUMBER SLEVIN, HARD CANDY (This movie was a mind scrambler), LA MUJER DE MI HERMANO and others getting some play it was going to be a good time. The best thing about this 7-day festival was that if you missed the showing of SLEVIN, let’s say, on Friday you had a good four or five more chances to see it in replays during the week. Now, I haven’t been to many festivals but I have never known festival flicks to get the TiVo treatment. I’m not complaining, just observing. Thanks to the work I put in last year at the Comi-Con I was able to get myself all the credentials I needed in order to cover this thing properly. Now, here’s where the dark underbelly of the story comes in.

    For fear of calling some people out on the carpet for what happened on the very first day of the festival, setting the tone for the rest of the week, I will only vaguely remark that I tried, with a few people, to try and get you people out there some great exclusives. I made a lot of calls, and wrote a few emails, to people in the know and who were in the position to make things happen. Now, the fact that all these attempts failed to yield anything doesn’t bother me as much as the relationship that I built up with certain people prior to the festival coming here and thought a lot of things were in the bag.

    Turns out nothing was in the bag.

    One person I talked to prior to this event happened to walk by me while I was credentialing on opening night. I introduced myself as being, well, me. I was given an, “Oh yeah! I’ll be right back.” But the guy, like a puss, never came back and instead tarried off with his little buddies behind the VIP line. After mingling and saying “hey” to a few people who actually did know who I was I see puss-boy later on and, like the two dollar whore from CAN’T BUY ME LOVE who feigns knowing Ronald when Pat Dempsey is exposed for the geek he really is, turns around when he sees me. “What the hell is this,” I thought. High school? The big girl happens to be someone prominent here in the Valley of the Sun and I can only surmise that being important in a market bubbling over with filmic goings-on is a big thing and couldn’t possibly be bothered to act like a person.

    The really, really odd thing is that he wasn’t the only one. A few people happened to feel that being important was, well, important, and ultimately this meant a lot of promises were broken. Things I thought I was going to bring to you out there just could not be done and the nice power that I so enjoy in this space, turns out, does not translate to people who have it in the real world. I wish I could tell you all the names of people who I’ve sent real nice e-mails to in the hopes of scoring something, anything, only to be promised, confirmed and ignorned like my name was Stanley the Movie Noob, but I won’t do it. That would be juvenile. Immature. I work for Movie Poop Shoot and, as such, decorum precludes me from such antics.

    I think I just bring this all up because you may think getting people like Robert Patrick to talk with me about WALK THE LINE is easy because I work for a site like this but I’ve hustled and sold myself to far better people than the assholes who feel that their own superiority somehow means that stiffing people like me is fine. I don’t talk to hear myself speak and I don’t write to see my own words reflected back to me so I hope you all understand that my coverage of the 2006 Phoenix Film Festival next week will be limited to two flicks I really really REALLY liked (HARD CANDY and LA MUJER DE MI HERMANO) and, hopefully, a slideshow which I think you peeps will dig.

    Oh, and I will have to find a way to post what should have been audio from Jason Mewes’ “Conversation with Jason Mewes” that was supposed to have taken place last Saturday at 11:30. The nearly 2 1/2 dozen of us present were told Jason had a rough Friday night with some of the ladies from Scottsdale and was still in his room recovering from a long evening; in his defense, and as the slide show will prove, the ladies in this town are indeed that potent. Danny Trejo stood in for our favorite sidekick and it was an hour well-spent. Instead of transcribing the entire conversation I’ll simply post the audio feed. I think it’s utterly fascinating to hear the man who has been in over a 100+ movies, worked with Tarintino, Rodriguez and others give his own opinion about the state of movies today. Give it a listen in all it’s chaotic glory when I get around to figuring out the best way to get this out there to you.

    And speaking of getting it out to you I wanted to try experimenting with the delivery method which I think will best allow me to share my multi-media from the festival so if this treat of being able to watch Wes Anderson’s short film called BOTTLE ROCKET which led to the full-on, full-length version of, well, BOTTLE ROCKET works out then we are a go for future launch.


    LA MUJER DE MI HERMANO (2006) Director:Ricardo de Montreuil
    Cast: Bárbara Mori, Christian Meier, Manolo Cardona, Gaby Espino, Beto Cuevas
    Release: April, 2006 (Limited)
    Synopsis: After almost 10 years of marriage, attractive Zoe discovers that her marriage lacks passion and surprise, and is seduced by the possibility of finding those sensations already forgotten in her husband’s brother. From this premise a series of events lead these three characters to a dangerous game of revenges, secrets and passions. Two brothers and one woman: the triangle is outlined in a disquieting way. It is a bomb that triggers family secrets, the contained rage of desire and the unmanageable power of love. An exciting story that subjugates the viewer from beginning to end.
    View Trailer:
    * Large (QuickTime)

    Prognosis: Very Positive. I think that the natural evolution from being exposed to hardcore Latin cinema, courtesy of AMORES PERROS and Y TU MAMA TAMBIEN, has warmed me a bit to wanting to see a flick that doesn’t include dusty and dirty youths trying to get their groove on or wanting to throw down with the nearest available ruffian.

    A drama about a woman who steps out on her husband with the husband’s brother? Throw in a little sizzle, a pimp pad where all this goes down, plus set it in a warm climate where you’re gonna get a pool scene where you things aren’t going to go well for our cuckolded husband? Nice.

    I feel obliged to start out by commenting on the music that begins this trailer. The musical bed directs emotion, no question, and the music coordinator here deserves some love by popping in a track that not only is pleasing but sets the mood like candles on the dining room table.

    When we meet the couple that will no doubt implode like a supernova by film’s end, I’m unsure if these are actors or Banana Republic models. It’s okay, though, as that’s what actors are for; you rarely see the ugly ones holding anyone’s attention and the fact that the dude looks like Jeremy Sisto’s long lost Latin brother and Eva Mendes’ hotter sister only ballasts my superficial interest in what exactly is happening. And I’m glad I am not blasted by plot points. We take time here and I appreciate just being able to soak in the atmosphere.

    Also, and this is a mind blower, this trailer allows its players to talk. As is my theory about what film studios want their foreign language films to do in order to get people to see them, not allowing the native language to be uttered is usually the norm. Not here, though, and I genuinely love it. You get a feel for this couple’s relationship with one another and, after seeing her splayed out on the bed in her underwear, I can honestly say my interest level increases with regard to what seems to be the issue.

    As this husband, this wife, talk you are much better served in defining who is hurting whom by listening to their voices, their intonations.

    We meet the brother who treats his hair like it’s a refuge for birds but dresses nice and seems to have a vibe about him that lures the young wife away from her distant husband. What I like here is the slow motion close-up of our bride placing her wedding ring and band on the nightstand, ostensibly to start hittin’ it. We don’t see the act happen, we never see the brother and the wife kiss, it’s all implied and the husband’s questioning of whether his wife loves him is emotionally effective. I believe it.

    The modern style house that all this infidelity happens in is great eye candy. The mood of the house also reflects the relationship between these two people: cold, clean, gorgeous but, ultimately, heartless. Our people talk, the subtitles come up and none of it is a distraction to me; it helps to establish these characters.

    The highest honors go to this trailer and I promise to do all I can to see how all of this translates, ultimately, to the whole film.


    AWESOME; I FUCKIN’ SHOT THAT! (2006) Director: Nathaniel Hornblower (AKA Adam Yauch) (dir.)
    Cast: Beastie Boys (MCA, Mike D, Adrock)
    Release: March 31, 2006
    Synopsis: A formally innovative feature film experience, the Beastie Boys handed out 50 cameras to audience members at their sold-out performance in New York’s famed Madison Square Garden in October 2004. These 50 different passionate perspectives shot from the point-of-view of the audience take the viewer deep inside the world of a live Beastie Boys show.
    View Trailer:
    * Large (QuickTime)

    Prognosis: Positive. Now this is a concert film worth getting excited about.

    Thanks to Chappelle’s BLOCK PARTY the party line about what can draw in an audience has changed a bit. You can have an entire feature filled with music and not run the risk of completely alienating the audience and my only hope is that hype meets with performance for this one.

    “In a world”¦”

    The Beastie’s have always been known for their ability to rock a mic but they’re also adept at being fun without looking silly. They’ve got senses of humor and everything from their video for SABATOGE (always a fun video to watch all the way through) to their first real single unleashed on the world, FIGHT FOR YOUR RIGHT TO PARTY, has always reinforced their ability to lay it down about injustices in the world while also telling you how great it is to be married, “rockin’ the sure shot.” That’s why opening this trailer with the voiceover that starts in with the words “In a world”¦,” one of the most tried and true tropes of trailer creation, rings that superciliousness bell once more.

    The next shot that shows us the back heads of the Beasties, dashing past the pretzel concession stand while in slow motion, the building of anticipation for what’s about to come is executed really well. Most everyone knows that this is all being done tongue-in-cheek but it’s great fun.

    “When pure evil reigns over the realm of humans”¦ “

    The shot of the guy who is no doubt sporting Kentucky Mud Flap under his mesh hat and handlebar moustache, his hands flailing around in slow motion comedy, does nothing less than induce laughter in me; he’s a fan, to be sure, but I guess he gets credit for rocking out.

    “Only the strongest can rise to the challenge”¦”

    The shot of the swirling mosh pit of enthusiastic fans and churning energy that’s being released with every shove and push captures the rawness of how this show is going to go. I never thought that a Beastie’s show was so physical but the buildup of the three guys about to get on stage helps to foreshadow the fact that they are about to break it down in a big way.

    What’s also important to note is that the switching perspectives that’s shown here helps to establish the fact that there are multiple people responsible for shooting this movie but it’s never said. The montage at the very end of what dozens of cameras recorded, I am positive, only whets the appetite for any casual fan in showing that this movie’s experiment to show what happens when you entrust the shooting to your average person is going to have a huge payoff.

    I can’t say for sure of whether this will be an ok film or that they should’ve entrusted someone like Spike Jonze with directorial duties but the world needs more concert films and I am glad that this is the band that’s comin’ correct to the big screen.


    ALPHA DOG (2006) Director: Nick Cassavetes
    Cast: Emile Hirsch, Justin Timberlake, Anton Yelchin, Shawn Hatosy, Ben Foster, Sharon Stone, Dominique Swain, Lukas Haas, Bruce Willis
    Release: May 12, 2006
    Synopsis: ALPHA DOG is inspired by the true story of Jesse James Hollywood, a mid-level drug dealer from the San Gabriel Valley whose thirst for power led him to become the youngest man ever to appear on the FBI’s Most Wanted list. Emile Hirsch stars as teenage suburban drug dealer Johnny Truelove, an ambitious young man whose lifestyle is a mecca for guns, sex and drugs. When a “client” cheats Johnny and a deal goes bad, he devises a plan to get his money back by kidnapping the client’s younger brother. But things take an unexpected twist as Johnny and his crew get caught up in the dangerous and violent world they once idealized.
    View Trailer:
    * Large (QuickTime)

    Prognosis: Negative. I really don’t want to believe that Justin Timberlake is a good actor.

    I try to spend all my waking hours avoiding reading about this pop pud and his string bean girlfriend but along comes this movie that everyone’s talking about and I find myself having to give that gimp a fair shake instead of recusing myself from the flick altogether. My natural instinct to dismiss the movie because of him but that’s just not fair and I’m glad I didn’t.

    The initial moments of this movie play out like a David Hockney painting; the American idealized, suburban lifestyle is one that has been derided as being soulless and that’s what comes across as you feel the numbing effects of suburbia.

    You’re given images of turnpikes, po-pop’s responding to a disturbance at the local Krispy Kreme, kids playing little league. This is when a woman, someone off camera, says that the kids who are ostensibly going to meet, are good kids. The latter statement usually is in response to something completely awful that a pack of juveniles who have been given everything have done and are in need of defending.

    The woman goes on to explain that the kids were living the rap version of “the life.” Again, these are kids who spend their afternoon playing X-Box, possibly schmoking a lil’ weed in between while the parents are off making the money to afford the lifestyle they’re all accustomed to.

    “Inspired by true events.”

    Now this is my favorite tagline and I give props to the filmmakers for busting out this little wee factoid so early in the trailer; it always makes me pay attention a little more closely.

    Now, I’m a little thrown by what comes next. Our pro/ant/agonist is Emile Hirsch who, we’re told, is the ringleader for this little tribe of teens who are getting involved in something illicit. Now, the assorted images of Emile and his “crew” don’t tell me anything. Yeah, we’ve got Justin Timberlake doing pull-ups, his skinny frame belays any attempt to make him seem tough, and we even have Angel himself, Ben Foster, talking in a riddle-ish type speak to someone who’s looking to hang with him for the evening.

    It’s all very scattered. Emile tells some guy who owes him some money that he go and make himself useful by working off the debt but I am getting a little aggravated that we’re not really being told what in the hell is going on. Is it drugs? Is it a gambling ring? Is it a high school prostitution ring and, if so, why couldn’t this have been going on in 1993? (West side Barrington representin’, yo.)

    We’ve got a lot of innuendo but nothing to show for it.

    When I see that we’re halfway through the trailer I begin to think that, for sure, we’re gonna get some context. It’s all about context and even though I had a little faith that we would get somewhere I get Ben Foster, donning that creepy ass tenor he used when he was on Six Feet Under, as he squaring off Emile. Ben, too, owes Emile money and decides to kidnap Ben’s brother until it gets resolved.

    The hostage is oddly calm and optimistic throughout this whole ordeal, which is a little weird, and, of course, Ben’s parents flip out when they figure out Ben is using that creepy voice from Six Feet Under again; nothing good ever happens when he does it.

    And, then, out of nowhere, we get a card that says 3 days, 38 witnesses. Now, three days I get. I understand that. 38 witnesses? That’s a few dozen people and I haven’t seen a few dozen people in this trailer but then I get our hostage getting his flirt on inside a pool with some lady. At first I’m thinking I’m watching the video to the Smashing Pumpkins’ “1979” but I remember that this all about Emile.

    I’m flat out confused. Is this drug related or what? Why was this boy kidnapped? I don’t have the answers to any of these things and you can lay the blame squarely on the shoulders of improper contextualization. If I don’t know why Emile stole a boy for ransom why should I care about any of these events? I don’t feel trusted as a viewer, like it’s a reveal that needs hiding, and I don’t like it.

    I appreciate that the trailer ends with a wicked cool card that tells us that Emile’s character fled the country in 1999 and then was arrested in Paraguay in 2005. Now that’s the kind of “ooh” “ahh” I like in my trailers. I find it amusing that the final, final card tells us that the names, events and details of this “true” event have been changed for whatever reason but a quick search on New Line’s own website yields us all the information we need right here. It befuddles even me, people.


    BASIC INSTINCT 2 (2006) Director: Michael Caton-Jones
    Cast: Sharon Stone, David Morrissey
    Release: March 31, 2006
    Synopsis: Novelist Catherine Tramell (Stone) is once again in trouble with the law, and Scotland Yard appoints psychiatrist Dr. Andrew Glass (Morrissey) to evaluate her. Though, like Detective Nick Curran before him, Glass is entranced by Tramell and lured into a seductive game.
    View Trailer:
    * Large (QuickTime)

    Prognosis: Funniest thing I’ve seen all year. Two thumbs up.

    “But you know I saw this movie this year called last year called ‘Basic Instinct.’ Okay now…Bill’s quick capsule review: Piece-of-shit. Okay now. Yeah, yeah, end of story by the way. Don’t get caught up in that fevered hype phoney fucking debate about that Piece-of-shit movie. “˜Is it too sexist, and what about the movies, are they becoming too dddddddd.’ You’re, you’re just confused, you don’t get, you’ve forgotten how to judge correctly. Take a deep breath huuh, look at it again. “Oh, it’s a Piece-of-shit!” Exactly! That’s all it is. Satan squatted, let out a loaf, they put a fucking title on it, put it on a marquee, Satan’s shit, piece of shit, walk away. “˜But is it too, what about the lesbian connot.. ddddd.’ You’re, you’re getting really baffled here. Piece-of-shit! Now walk away. That’s all it is, it’s nothing more! Free yourself folks, if you see it, Piece-of-shit, say it and walk away.”
    -Bill Hicks, 1992

    “People just are sitting there going, like, ‘I don’t care what she’s saying, I don’t care what she’s saying, I just want to know, does she get naked in the movie? Is she naked? Nude nude nude naked Do I see her boobies? I don’t care what she’s saying, I don’t care, I don’t care, is she naked?’ So let’s just get through to that…YES!” […]

    And I called my publicist, who’s this great, Jewish woman…”
    -The Sharon Stone Experience, 2006, while sitting down next to Simon Peres in Israel discussing her latest role in BASIC INSTINCT 2 by way of Defamer.com

    My vote is getting cast early, children, for my favorite comedy of 2006: BASIC INSTINCT 2. I would put the Billy Ocean World Tour ’06 on my list of needless things right above this movie’s existence and I am doing everything in my power to not shred this thing before we’ve all had a chance to indulge in this trailer’s goodness.

    Because we are an equal opportunity column here I will reserve judgment until we make our way through this one which begins, oddly enough, solidly.

    You’ve got a nice wide shot of London proper, with po-pos, or Bobby’s as you crumpet eating limeys would say, all descending on a crime scene. Our detective in charge of this investigation, a rough looking man with his tie sexily loosened up just a wee bit, is ranting that some chick’s fingerprints are all over the crime scene and that a psychologist is needed in order to declare our “suspect” insane.

    Now, while I am all about having a woman kept behind bars, the world needs more movies about caged heat, I found my nads recoiling as we see Sharon Stone, looking quite mannish, trying to affect the sexiness of a woman who knows she is on the other side of a wall that is littered with the faces of ladies who should just let nature take its course.

    “So, is this where we’re gonna do it?”

    Oh, sweet Lord, did she really drop that double entendre? I think I just threw up in my mouth a little bit.

    So, she starts in with this psychologist by telling him that she’s a writer that toils in sexual perversions and power relationships that are about as healthy as anything you see on Desperate Housewives on a good day. She’s trying, really hard, to make us feel that her deviancy and lustiness are combos that will get dudes all schweaty in their drawers. Unfortunately, she just comes across as holding on too long like the old Asian madam in BIG TROUBLE IN LITTLE CHINA who is harboring the hotter meat in the annals of her cherry ranch; it’s sad, really. I half expect Kurt Russell to charge onto the screen but, alas, it doesn’t happen.

    Not more than a few seconds later, the most unintentional, comedic moment happens. When her interview with the police’s psychologist rages on, Ms. Stone straddles a chair from the front. Instead of her beav being flashed to us the chair’s thick back support fully covers Stone’s privates like a big censor’s obstruction. I’d like to thank the Academy for that. It made me laugh.

    I am at a loss to try and make sense of our psychologist’s attraction, and eventual giving in to, Sharon’s wiles. I guess the movie wouldn’t be as interesting if he called her out on her obvious insanity and delusions of grandeur but that moment when the two of them kiss I don’t immediately think this is a romance between two hot people; it’s an obvious cougar attack and our young boy has been vanquished by this woman who would probably fit in better at the Howard Johnson hotel bar on Karaoke Jam night than she would at a hipster night club.

    “I feel like a cigarette”

    Yes, Sharon has the last word in this trailer and I couldn’t agree more. For what better of an image of a smoldering, old butt that’s about to be flicked to the ground and twisted into the concrete to describe how this film’s going to be received?

    I think if you’re going to see it, be open to it, don’t let what I’ve seen here be any indication of its goodness or badness. I just believe you’ve got to be in the mood to laugh.

  • Trailer Park: MARCH MADNESS

    E-MAIL THE AUTHOR | By Christopher Stipp

    March 24, 2006

    March Madness

    I will remember to spell Sam Jaeger’s name correct next time.
    I will remember to spell Sam Jaeger’s name correct next time.
    I will remember to spell Sam Jaeger’s name correct next time.
    I will remember to spell Sam Jaeger’s name correct next time.

    One of the things about spending too long with a written piece is that you start to lose the ability to do the simple things. Now, when last week’s column ran about Sam I was all over making sure everything was attributed correctly, all the formatting was completely done right and made sure I wrote a solid, accurate assessment of how I thought the conversation went between us; be on the look-out next month when I try to squirrel some time with the director who wrote one of my biggest guilty pleasures this side of BETTER OFF DEAD, BRING IT ON, as I know there will be some mention in my opening about my initial feelings regarding it. I don’t want to tip my hand but every person who gets pitched to me initially sparks something in my mind about how unique I want to make the conversation and Sam was no different. Hell, in a couple of weeks when LUCKY NUMBER SLEVIN comes out you’ll be treated to part two of our talk where the talk between us gets even better as he just opens up to the behind-the-scenes goings-on of a working actor.

    The problem comes in, then, when you think you’ve done everything you can, editorially, done the work that needs to be done, put in the time to write the damn thing, put all the HTML goodness on it that it needs, only to find out you’ve misspelled your subject’s name a couple of times. It’s like a writer’s blindness to their own piece. It’s an odd odd thing but it’s something that you won’t see in a couple of weeks when we revisit Sam J-A-E-G-E-R so I hope you dig it.

    Speaking of which, I wanted to just let you all get right into the trailers this week so I want to keep this brief: you must read, after you read me of course, and after you tell me what I did wrong or how bad it must suck to be me, this pithy little piece by a dude who is in perhaps one of the most savory comedic troupes to ever habitate and, ostensibly, depending on how well a show goes, fornicate, in Chicago. After seeing the guy was a fan of Kevin’s work I sent a shout-out to the man and, like a pair of 12 year-old girls trading notes, sent me this. In the vein of David Sedaris’ blisteringly (I never knew why this was associated with greatness; I usually attribute it to white pus-filled bubbles of skin on one’s person) funny take on what would happen if a serious critic took that critical gaze and deconstructed a Christmas pagent. And, verily, hilarity ensues as it does with Adam Witt’s work as he fictionalizes the life of a hard-core cinephile/critic who obviously can’t be bothered with mainstream motion pictures; the guy comes from a respectible pedigree, one part of the whole Schadenfreude pie, passed this selection on to me. I had a guffaw and a sugar sprinkled Chuckle as I read it and I asked if I could share with the rest of the class. If you have the time I would suggest taking a peep and letting me know what you think of the suggested reading for the week. I know the trope of the myopic critic is well-worn with other parodies out there but since I’m the driver of this short bus with the rubber stamp I decree that I like this brand of satire.

    Do enjoy this week’s column and I hope to hear from some of you out there from the Peanut Gallery.


    STREET FIGHT (2006) Director:Marshall Curry
    Cast: Cory Booker, Sharpe James
    Release: February 22, 2006 (Limited)
    Synopsis: Follows the bare-knuckles race for mayor of Newark NJ, between Cory Booker, a 32-year old Rhodes Scholar/Yale Law School grad, and Sharpe James, the four-term incumbent twice his age. An urban David and Goliath story, the film chronicles Booker’s struggle against the city’s political machine.
    View Trailer:
    * Medium (QuickTime)

    Prognosis: Positive. I’m disillusioned with our political system as it is today.

    Be it covert, secret initiatives that our president declares are in our best interest or the tub thumping our other elected officials do on a daily basis to show that their rhetoric is strong while being unable to do anything meaningful with their positions I just don’t believe in paying attention to words as I am to actions. One person last year, though, representing the city of Chicago in the Senate, Barack Obama, gave me hope that there are still reasons to believe in this convoluted system of ours. I like that his fiery spirit and words have been cashed in full with his follow-throughs to the people he represents. I’d like to believe there are more out there like him and I see this film as a chance to see whether there are.

    This trailer is wonderful, right out of the gate. There isn’t any bullcrap narration setting things up for us all gingerly and such, no sir. We open with the meat of this story, mere split seconds, before we even have a chance to breathe. You’ve got a geezer who wants to keep his tenured political position to himself and you’ve got a young upstart who sees that fresh blood might be what’s needed to stir the passions of those in the community he wants to serve.

    I’m floored by how much information you gain just by watching things unfold. The narrator lets us know that the position these men are vying for is won or lost in the streets in which they’re both trying to blanket with their faces and their speeches.

    I didn’t really get a sense of who seems to be favored or who I wanted to win, the shots used are equally kind, until you get the old guy who likes his cushy gig turning to one of the cameras and gets a little ornery. I would go so far as to say his peeps try and start some shit with the documentary filmmakers.

    You think you’re watching the paparazzi trying to get a shot of another nip slip by Lindsey Lohan as these big meaty fingers glom on to the dude’s camera and a verbal battle of a “let go you bastard” and “why don’t you make me, chump” ensues. I’m floored at the prospect of a fairly pleasant tale of these two dudes turning into a true Royal Rumble on the streets of Newark.

    I thought politicians were all effete with their Dan Quayle-style hairdos that make them look better suited for playing tennis at “The Club” than they are with getting physical but I guess I’m wrong. We’ve got ourselves a Saturday Night ticket here, folks.

    I think if I have any contention with this swiftly paced trailer it would be that we’ve got almost a quarter of the run time for this thing burned at the end with a slowly progressing series of awards this movie has been up for. I think it’s great that it’s been nominated for so many things but, man, give me some more footage or something because all that space is being burned away when you could be impressing me more with what this thing has to offer.


    A SCANNER DARKLY (2006) Director: Richard Linklater
    Cast: Robert Downey Jr., Woody Harrelson, Keanu Reeves, Winona Ryder, Heather Kafka, Dameon Clarke, Rory Cochrane, Jack Cruz
    Release: July 7th, 2006
    Synopsis: “A Scanner Darkly” is set in suburban Orange County, California in a future where America has lost the war on drugs. When one reluctant undercover cop is ordered to start spying on his friends, he is launched on a paranoid journey into the absurd, where identities and loyalties are impossible to decode.
    View Trailer:
    * Large (QuickTime)

    Prognosis: Positive. Even better than the old thing.

    One of the things that intrigued me about the first trailer for A SCANNER DARKLY is that its presentation was captivating. It was so many months ago when I first had a chance to feel what was going on in this movie and, unlike teasers that need to find their “voice” before giving us a true trailer, this film gets more and more momentum with defining its threat to slam people’s minds.

    I like that even though WAKING LIFE didn’t make quite the dent I hoped it would on cinema Linklater sees the potential in fostering this brand of moviemaking. It is at the same time strange and malleable even though we can’t get a grip as to what dimension this movie exists in.

    This trailer grabs your consciousness and it is due to two moments within the first 15 seconds of film: the first noteworthy happening is Keanu’s introduction; it seems wildly animated, not real, and it seems like we’re watching a so-so cartoon. The next moment is the appearance of a completely anonymous person who seems to be in various states of shifting as he walks across a room; the effect is jarring if for only a moment. Something is afoot here and you can see how the passage of a few years and a script that lends itself better to the format of animated/photo realism than dudes just chatting about the meaning of love and life has done Richard well.

    The next moment of Keanu’s friends just bull-shiating on a late evening at home is a comfortable one as it doesn’t try and show all the fantastic ways this movie is going to change before your eye. It’s weirdly humanizing for the players involved in this picture. The same sentiment can be said for Keanu’s ride in a car with some floozie that wants to do a little tequila shooters with our man Bill while his buddy’s very real or very hallucinogenic mind trip mixes in some very wild images.

    Robert Downey seems perfect for a role that seems to command that he be a little on the wire, paranoid and completely sharp. I haven’t felt excited to see him really do anything as of late but his embodiment here as a revolutionary of sorts is really entertaining. Speaking of which, the music could not be better scored while taking all of this in; using M83 is not only hip but the tempo of the techno fits the source from where both of these visions have come from.

    I think, if anything, Woody Harrelson’s and Winona Ryder embodiment isn’t as compelling as everyone else’s. I like that Robert and Keanu take this movie on their shoulders but the two tag-alongs here just feel like voices who are animating a cartoon; I either don’t believe them or their caricatures just come off as false.


    THE HEART IS DECITFUL ABOVE ALL THINGS (2006) Director: Asia Argento
    Cast: Asia Argento, Jimmy Bennett, Dylan Sprouse, Cole Sprouse, Peter Fonda, Marilyn Manson
    Release: March 10, 2006 (Limited)
    Synopsis: “The Heart is Deceitful Above All Things” is based on JT Leroy’s critically acclaimed novel of the same name. The story is about Jeremiah, a child who is pulled from his foster home and thrown into a troubled life on the road with his teenage mother, Sarah. With Sarah, Jeremiah travels through the country roads of the U.S. and learns first hand about the troubles of the world. With an impressive cast including Oscar winner Peter Fonda (Easy Rider, Ulees Gold), Jeremy Renner (S.W.A.T), and Asia Argento (starred opposite Vin Diesel in XXX), The Heart is Deceitful Above All Things will be one of the most anticipated independent film projects of 2004.
    View Trailer:
    * Large (QuickTime)

    Prognosis: Positive. The woman comes from a well-seasoned lineage, no question. If my scope of movies only included the one appearance of Asia Argento in XXX I might be alarmed by this movie being not only acted but written and directed by her. For someone who is only thirty years old she definitely commands respect for the work she has done outside the purview of bad Hollywood blockbusters that were just plain busted. Her pedigree is rich, indeed, and the quality of her parts, even though they can be debated here and there, has been well-ignored by the populace here in the states.

    What I like, and appreciate, even before we begin to get into things is the disclaimer that’s run right before we see an inch of footage. That J.T. LeRoy was just a sham of an author, in this era of James Frey-ian level of subterfuge, the moviemakers are well served here in running the disclaimer about how the IT who wrote the initial story was, in fact, a lying cad who deserves all the literary ignominy usually reserved for people like Monica Lewinsky and their one trick antics. Far better writers are languishing in obscurity while this asshat makes a solid coin by making shit up. Why can’t Norton or Doubleday realize I can make shit up all day long?

    Oh well, but it is a solidly well-executed PR move by sliding this whole explanation in about this low-level author’s conceit and deceit before the trailer begins. I was a little off-put by it at first but when the trailer eventually does begin I feel good in how I view the events that transpire.

    You’ve got Asia to start off with. She’s off-the-wall insane, a drug addict perhaps, as she tears a room apart with Guns N’ Rose-ian aplomb and she’s about to inherit her son. Now, the kid is the narrator here. I’m willing to overlook the kid’s well reasoned and insightful commentary about the events that lead to his eventual custodial turn-over to this crazy woman, as the only thing on my mind at 5 was when the Bozo Show was coming on, but you’ve got a true sense of directorial style going on. It’s nice. Even though Asia is as punk and white trash as you could possibly make a woman there is a feeling of reality that I really enjoy being expressed though this picture.

    Sure, things get a little awkward when our narrator takes a beating from an adult, abuse is never easy to watch, but it’s nice to see that it’s offered up here for us to partake in. Other, less worthy directors, go for the silhouette shot of something bad happening to a kid or a completely sanitized, after the fact, kind of moment but not here.

    We see that our young child’s life is filled with dealing with the fact his mother’s a sleazy ho and that when he does look happy it is at a moment when his mom has dressed him up in girl’s clothing, curled his hair and has applied makeup to his face. Recipe for psychiatric care later on if you ask me but since we’ve ultimately discovered this is all fiction it’s all good in the context of this moment.

    The descent this film takes after this moment is riveting if nothing else.

    The kid discovers, clandestinely, his mother is a stripper and a whore, he has Peter Fonda smacking the crap out of him as well, he’s got real oddballs for friends (who didn’t sniff this out for the fiction it was in the first place?) and he has a lot of issues that will need a lot of resolving my film’s end.

    I think what clinched it for me was the moment when mother and son are huddled together, head to head, Asia affecting a really good cry, and the son says that he’ll protect her. If this was a sitcom I would be puking but, again, seeing the execution of the material here I am floored by the energy that is packed into this little movie. I honestly will forgive Asia for XXX if the end result is a movie that makes me believe in this mother/son combo.


    X-MEN: THE LAST STAND (2006) Director: Brett Ratner
    Cast: Hugh Jackman, Patrick Stewart, Shawn Ashmore, Daniel Cudmore, Alan Cumming, Famke Janssen, James Marsden, Ian McKellen, Anna Paquin, Rebecca Romijn-Stamos, Kelsey Grammer
    Release: May 26, 2006
    Synopsis: In X-Men: The Last Stand, the final chapter in the X-Men motion picture trilogy, a “cure” for mutancy threatens to alter the course of history. For the first time, mutants have a choice: retain their uniqueness, though it isolates and alienates them, or give up their powers and become human. The opposing viewpoints of mutant leaders Charles Xavier (Stewart), who preaches tolerance, and Magneto (McKellen), who believes in the survival of the fittest, are put to the ultimate test — triggering the war to end all wars.
    View Trailer:
    * Large (QuickTime)

    Prognosis: I’m going, to be sure, but do I have faith? It’s waning. To paraphrase Mark Harmon from SUMMER SCHOOL, I’m a good sport, I’ll play along.

    I that if you’re going to talk smack and break bad on a movie that hasn’t come out yet it’s in poor form to do so without any substantiating facts or reference points. Yes, Bryan Singer inherited a lot of Internet crosstalk about whether or not he would succeed at bringing a project that was languishing in Development Hell for a long time but he directed THE USUAL SUSPECTS, a flick that garnered two Oscar wins. He more than gained my confidence because of that movie’s staying power and prowess as a solid made movie. Brett Ratner, in contrast, has given us Chris Tucker and Jackie Chan. There are differences between these two directors, to be sure, but I want to objectively break down what we have here in the newest X-MEN trailer creation. An argument cannot hold weight unless there is a foundation beneath it and I hope to prove why I am still dismayed at the prospect of this movie’s release.

    To open, we’ve got our man Bill Duke, the best reason why PREDATOR is great is simply for his annunciation of the words “turn around” before taking out a scorpion on Apollo Creed, talking about what needs to be done, ostensibly, about the whole mutant thing. The tension that’s created is good and you’ve got a satisfactory establishment of the conflict that’s brewing between these two races. And, if you listen real close, the president’s voice sounds awfully close to the dude who delivers the lines about the “Lexus sales event” on television every now and then.

    We’re then treated to an exterior shot of a convoy packed with SUV’s and one tractor/trailer holding Mystique; the black sheen on that big bad boy reminds me of that wicked show Highwayman. The lilting operatic music playing in the background has me confused, though. Is this an action movie or a drama? The slow, wandering pace of the trailer starts to get to me and even when we get Magneto delivering a speech that should stoke fear falls a little flat. The camera is far enough back that his words seem to be diminutive and without much fire.

    Bobby getting his swerve-on with a young co-ed at Xavier’s only twists my confusion to another level. If this an action movie, not a drama or romance, then why are we spending time here? It’s just a personal feeling of mine that if this wants to be a tent pole for Fox then they’re not exactly firing on all pistons; hell, the peeps over at Paramount for MISSION IMPOSSIBLE 3 at least gets this one right.

    Before things fade to black we get Magneto on a close-up and I scream at the screen because this is what’s needed for Magneto to seem like he means business in this one: he needs to fill up our field of vision. He commands attention but it’s not afforded to him. Shame.

    Sure, we got Wolverine flexing his skillz but, crap, he’s doing it in slow”¦motion. How am I supposed to be amped about a berserker attack with all claws extended when he seems to be performing a pirouette? Answer: I’m not and I don’t. Dr. Crane shows up in all his blueness and I feel torn between thinking this is much better than last time and feeling that this still isn’t the best result for what could’ve been a better looking creation.

    From here we just get a little of the same old, same old from the initial teaser: Magneto flipping cars, Warren Worthington unleashing his mighty man wings, the Dark Phoenix walking around in her skivvies, etc”¦

    We get to see the evil mutants doing their evilness on the Golden Gate Bridge as you’ve got Vinnie Jones still looking like he has way more abs than he needs and one chick who’s channeling the power of one member from The Misfits of Science which ran on NBC in the 80’s, she looks like she favors the hairstyling of that era as well, and then you get whisked away to the Danger Room where we know no one is any immediate danger.

    I want a goddamn action movie trailer and all I’m getting here is a Very Special Episode of The West Wing.

    I finally get a morsel, a taste of the goods when we have our X-MEN, Colossus in organic steel mode, ready to throw down. Now while Kelsey appears to be flying in a wire, which he is, and the whole thing looks like it’s set on a robust soundstage, which it most likely is, this actually excites me as a fan.

    I don’t know if it’s too little too late but I know that I’m still not ready to believe that the best decisions were made for this project. But, as it stands, this is all my opinion. I could be wrong; I hope I am.

  • Trailer Park: Sam Jaeger

    E-MAIL THE AUTHOR | By Christopher Stipp

    March 17, 2006

    JAEGER MEISTER

    In this special, super-sized version of the Trailer Park, now with Riboflavin, I’ve got a lot of reading material for you peeps out there.

    First up is an interview I did a few weeks ago with Sam Jaeger, an actor who will soon be on everyone’s lips as the dude who is going to make VA history by being the first “best friend” outside of Jason Mewes to appear on screen with Kevin Smith. Sam first came to me as a guy who is in the upcoming starfest, LUCKY NUMBER SLEVIN, but in looking at his credentials I saw that there was a lot more to talk about than just shooting the crap about working with Ghandi and John McClaine. He was, genuinely, one of the warmest people I’ve been able to talk to in my tenure here at the ‘Shoot and I hope some of you aspiring actors/acresses read a little about what it’s like to survive inside the system of Hollywood while still retaining your sense of self.

    Also, I’ve included a some trailer review action below the interview just in case an interview isn’t something you want to be doing with your Internets today.

    And just in case you aren’t satiated by all of this writen goodness I wanted to let you know that I now can also be found writing periodically during the week over at Newsvine.com; my corner of that universe can be found right here. Not only is the site a solid destination to get all your news in one place without editorial oversight but it’s also very unique in that anyone can add to the news being reported on the site and I found that it was lacking a distinct voice in its movie coverage. Hence, I am spreading my stylistic talents like a mold virus through a piece of wet drywall. I’m testing out my skills at commenting on things that pop up during the week with regard to the movie business and I implore you to check it out and leave me some public feedback on the ‘Vine regarding what you think. My first real column was looking back at last week’s box office, commenting on Paul Haggis’ latest project and having a great time doing color commentary on Brett Ratner’s diary entry for UK Telegraph’s article on a day-in-the-life of a Hollywood director; it’s well worth your time and I am offering a free copy of the 25th Anniversiary DVD of HALLOWEEN to one random poster for any feedback left in the article’s comments section to get things started. I’ve also commented on some purported “test footage” of the new TRANSFORMERS movie that was “leaked” and offered up an opinion of this week’s announcement from theather owners’ planned push to have cell phone jammers installed in their multiplexes, or is it multiplexi?

    Anyway, check it out if you can. I am confident that you won’t be sorry or let down by some additional content from yours truly; plus, and this is key, if you think it sucks harder than Paul Haggis’ CRASH you can publicly flog me for all to see. That alone should be worth the price of free admission.

    Now, on with the column!

    Usually interviews take on a rather superficial element not usually found in natural conversations; the actor/actress needs me in order to pimp their product and I, in turn, am looking for something intriguing enough to keep me involved and exciting enough to make you, the reader, curious enough to keep reading.

    I have been fortunate that most every conversation I’ve had with someone involved in the making of a film or project has had a unique perspective on their respective roles within it. I’ve loved film all my life and I know that the predicate in the words “show business” wasn’t just a clever wording. It’s a cold fact that for every wicked awesome REQUIEM FOR A DREAM there is a HOW TO LOSE A GUY IN 10 DAYS just waiting to be unleashed into our lives; it’s a matter of knowing what audience can be brought in, how much they’re going to spend and what percentage the movie will make in profit that determines, in some odd mathematical way, people’s career trajectories. Need proof? Ask Steve Guttenberg why he isn’t in X-3.

    In a sense, this is what brings us today to Sam Jaeger. An actor who has performed on a lot of television shows in roles that you really didn’t pay attention to, it’s okay, I never noticed either, Sam has made a living in the past seven years doing what actors do: auditioning and praying. He’s made a life for himself, and a pretty good one, acting in shows like LAW AND ORDER, SCRUBS and THE WEST WING. Now, in a few weeks, you’ll see him on the big screen in LUCKY NUMBER SLEVIN, starring alongside Bruce Willis, Ben Kingsley, Stanley Tucci, Lucy Liu, Morgan Freeman and scads of others. And, for those in the know, Sam will make cinematic history of sorts in his role as Kevin Smith’s newest cinematic best friend, Mewes be dammed, in CATCH AND RELEASE, a movie that was tentatively slated to drop this spring but has been pushed back, way back, to 2007.

    What Sam lacks in the numbers of people who know who he is he makes up for in a rich understanding of the machine that is his career: Hollywood actor. One of the poignant things that you learn about Sam is that he has the kind of perspective that you wish other actors have. He knows the fragility of one’s career and is a realist when it comes to looking beyond the work in front of him while enjoying the ride. It’s hard to not envy a guy who not only is getting bigger and more substantial roles but is also going to be responsible for being the first man to act alongside Kevin Smith in 2007’s CATCH AND RELEASE in a starring role as Smith’s best friend with Jason Mewes nowhere to be seen.

    Part one of this two part series deals with Sam’s upcoming LUCKY NUMBER SLEVIN, his thoughts on making a living by acting and shares what he thinks regarding having opportunities fall into his lap.


    Well, I am glad that I am finally able to talk to you about a couple of movies you’re going to be in. Yeah, Yeah”¦ Now, I know LUCKY NUMBER SLEVIN just came out overseas in the UK and Ireland”¦

    Oh, did it?

    Yeah, I spent the morning reading the reviews. I was wondering if you knew why those limeys get it first and we have to wait?

    You know what, as an actor, you get to know so little about these things”¦unless you’re Kevin Smith…

    (Laughs)

    No, I think”¦I just have no idea. I think maybe the film feels a little bit like something that Europeans would get into. It’s got sort of a PULP FICTION”¦I hope you don’t mind I’m doing dishes”¦

    (The sound of rushing water fills my ear as the clink of assorted dishes also makes its way into the conversation)

    No, absolutely not.

    I just think it has a little more of a PULP FICTION audience that it lends itself to, a London audience to be specific. I imagine they’re testing to see how it goes over there and see what kind of momentum it can get. At least that’s my guess”¦but I’m no Weinstein.

    (Laughs)

    So, I take it, then, you were there when the film screened at Sundance.

    I was.

    How did that go?

    It’s such an”¦honestly, it’s a really stupid event. No, it’s really a great event but there’s something about it. I was there for 4 days and I saw 1 movie. The movies are impossible to get into. More people are going, there are more celebrities promoting their movies and it’s difficult.

    I will say one of the strange parts was that I was involved with the whole schwag part of it. You know, you walk around places and people judge how big or insignificant you are and then give you gifts accordingly. It’s one of the stupidest things I have ever been a part of (laughs) and now that I am in the process of raising funds for a movie I’m directing this summer I am like, “You know what? We can sell all of this stuff online! I’m gonna call my uncle who has an E-bay account and give it all to him!” And, that’s kind of been the game plan.

    I will say that the excitement at Sundance is really unique but, at the same time, there is a part of me that has tried to avoid Hollywood as much as I can. Living in Hollywood, and I live right in the middle of Hollywood, it is in the least celebrity heavy part of all of Los Angeles. I am surrounded by mostly Latino families just living their lives, working 9 to 5 jobs, and I really almost break out into hives whenever I cross La Cienega and get into Beverly Hills. It’s just not for me. It just makes me feel real uncomfortable.

    I read that you grew up in the Midwest”¦Perrysburg, Ohio.

    Yes, I grew up there and spent the rest of my life in LA. No, I’m kidding, I actually lived there all my life.

    I can relate a little bit to you as the first time I visited Hollywood I was fresh off living in Illinois for nearly all my life and when I stepped into it I just couldn’t help but feel that it was a little weird. It didn’t feel real, it’s like reality but with a heavy coat of varnish on top of it.

    Yeah. It’s a disappointing place to visit. You can see people come off the buses and it’s like, “What the hell? THIS is the magic machine?” And it’s not like I am disenchanted as I lived in New York for three years before coming out here and I like that Hollywood, at the least the middle of Hollywood, isn’t full of Rodeo folk. The people here are just trying to go about their work, their thing.

    And the funny thing about going to Sundance was that my girlfriend and I were like, “You know, we flew a 1,000 miles to get away from people like this”¦And they all came.”

    Is that what’s it come to? You hear people say of an annual event, no matter how great it is, that it’s never as good as it used to be.

    Absolutely.

    That seems to be the whole theme of this year’s event was to talk about how it’s declining and the coverage is all about who’s hanging with Eva Longoria. Is the hype real or are there quality independent films still making their splash at this event?

    Well, I think there was a need by some people to try and keep it an independent festival and, I can’t remember the selections, but the ones that were crowned king and queen of the festival were movies that could really be helped with a prize for distribution.

    I think, when you come down to it, a great movie is a great movie. It just feels like the festival is engulfed by Hollywood. I guess that’s Sundance and will be Sundance for a long time to come. I don’t see fewer people going to Sundance next year. I think it’s significantly different from when Kevin won for CLERKS but, hopefully, people will keep the focus on films that are engaging, engrossing stories.

    On that note, then, how did the screening for LUCKY NUMBER SLEVIN go?

    It actually went really well. I think people were really enthused. It’s a movie that kind of keeps you on your heels the whole time and it’s kind of like a puzzle that you piece together as the film goes along. It was a huge, the biggest theater, that was showing the movie and it was a packed packed house. In fact, one of the producers had to buy his ticket online for 200 bucks.

    Really?

    Yeah, yeah, it was near impossible to get tickets. I was fortunate enough to get them. It was a good event. I think Paul McGuigan is a really strong director with really good instincts. Certainly, great style. I think, visually, better than WICKER PARK.

    I wasn’t going to break bad on WICKER PARK but”¦

    You know, it was just under acted in some of the roles. But, like in that movie, I feel, Josh Hartnett gives his best. He’s a very dedicated, charismatic actor but I think he does a wonderful job in this one.

    I feel like Josh is on this bubble. He’s got these boyish features but he’s making a great run at trying to carry a complete movie on his shoulders. Did he ever mention anything about what direction he wants to see himself going in?

    In the few conversations I had with him he seems to actually be someone who is focused on avoiding the traps of superstardom.

    Really?

    Yeah, I think he had a lot of opportunity to do those kinds of films, he did PEARL HARBOR, and I think somewhere along that line he has learned his lesson from working with these major major stars and seeing how, sometimes, unhappy and maladjusted they are. And, again, I don’t know him that well, but I think that’s one of the things he’s wary of.

    One of the frustrating things about my job is that depending on who you’re talking to, as you want to have a good conversation with the person you’re engaging, there can be a plethora of information or none at all. For you, then, your resume is packed with work done on LAW & ORDER, CSI, NYPD: BLUE, SCRUBS, ER, etc”¦ but are you having to work to get these parts or are casting directors saying, “We need to have this guy”?

    Well, every one of those shows I auditioned for. Nothing was handed down to me. You probably already know this but the mystique that opportunities just fall into people’s lap, and that some people can’t help but to be movie stars, or can’t help but be working actors, the same being true for writing, “He just sat at a typewriter and just had to come out of him,” it’s like”¦what a load of horseshit.

    It just doesn’t happen and if it does happen then they are wrecked for the rest of their lives. I’ve been working now for almost seven years now and I would say that I have auditioned over a 1,000 times and things, eventually, fall into my lap because I do as much research and study my roles as much as I can before I go into an audition room.

    I’ve just been fortunate to be a working actor for so long because I know how rare it is to be fully employed solely by acting. I just think it’s a matter of me being able to give the right performance at the right time. I will say that when I went and auditioned for CATCH AND RELEASE there was a pretty famous celebrity that walked out before I went in for the same role and I thought, “You know what? You don’t have a chance in hell so you might as well do the best you can.”

    So, I walked in, I met Susannah, she was kind of reserved and I did the first scene and she had me go back and do it again and she said, “Great, Moving on”¦” And I thought, “Ok. She thinks I am a good actor but I didn’t get the role. That’s fine.” There were three scenes and then we moved on to the second scene and she was, “Good. Third scene”¦” By this time I am convinced there is no way in hell I am getting this, “She just wants to get me out of here. This woman is done with me, maybe I insulted her kids or something”¦”

    I get done, I shake hands, I leave, I get into my car, my girlfriend is waiting in the car and I say, “I did the best I could but I just don’t think I have a shot at this.” And then, a month later, I get the role.

    It’s always a mystery. I think it has to do with just doing the best you can and it eventually pays off.

    When you go into an audition like that are you aware of that one person who really has the final say of whether you’re hired or not? Like a producer, the director or someone else involved with the project and are you ever aware of the person you have to impress?

    Yeah, it usually depends on the director. There are some directors who are taken under the wing by some producers and remain there, I think. But, Susannah, just like Kevin, is very strong. She has such a confidence and is very intelligent and very present. You can’t help but to listen to her and heed her suggestions. I think that I was pretty much an unknown compared to the rest of the cast I think it was her confidence that sold the studio on me.

    I once had to audition five times for a guest-starring role on Dark Angel.

    Really?

    Yeah. That was a dark period in my life.

    The nadir of your career…

    (Laughs)

    Right. My blue year. And, I didn’t even get it. This just goes back into why you just keep doing the work because I went into CATCH AND RELEASE and, 10 minutes later, I come out and a month later I get the role.

    There is no specific scientific ways of getting these jobs. I just keep doing the work and then patting myself on the back because it’s all you can really do.

    If I could compare the two, LUCKY NUMBER SLEVIN and CATCH AND RELEASE, big difference between production values and days spent shooting these movies? Was any one “more indie” than the other?

    I think one of the things about SLEVIN was the sheer number of unbelievable actors. There was an energy there was at a little more serious than CATCH AND RELEASE. There was, and I don’t want to say a stress, but there was a tighter schedule on SLEVIN. You had to work in all these colossally vital actors into the movie and it was a balancing act plus you had 6 or 7 or 8 producers working on that film. That’s a lot of finagling.

    For my role, I shot it in one week. Yet, two weeks after I am done shooting my role, they fly me back to Montreal from LA, put me in a hotel for three days, they bring me to the set, they do their thing, and, five hours later, I am back on a plane. What’s more is that they did it the following week as well. And they did it because they had all these stars that they had to accommodate.

    For CATCH AND RELEASE it seemed much smoother despite rain trying to hold us back. It felt a little more like a studio film, I will say, because it felt like a 9 to 5 job, I was working at least 4 or 5 days a week but it had a little more a relaxed vibe to it.

    I know Kevin kept an online diary of the production and it was nice to read about the process of making the film while getting the feel that it was causal on the set. There was work to be done but I didn’t read anywhere about some PA pounding on his door at 4 a.m. to shoot a scene.

    No, it’s a night and a day difference from the independents I’ve done. I think the process has taught me a great deal about making movies, especially being around Kevin and having such a good relationship with him.

    Was he schooling you while you were together? How did that relationship go?

    I don’t think it could’ve gone any smoother. The funny thing is that the first time I met him it was for a table read, before the movie began, and he was talking to Timothy Olyphant, who plays the lead in the movie, and says, “I am a big fan of Deadwood, you did good work on THE GIRL NEXT DOOR”¦” and he turns to me and says, “And I have no idea what you’ve done.”

    (I laugh)

    And I said, “I did a killer episode of “˜That’s Life.’ I can’t believe you didn’t see it”¦” It’s a relationship you’re just lucky to have.

    I have nothing but respect for the guy and I think that’s what it is. We have a mutual respect for one another. He’s a great family man, he does everything he can for his friends and family; that’s kind of how I live my life. I live for my friends and my family, the people I love and he will go to bat for anyone who he loves.

    That’s really nice to say”¦

    Yeah, and I also like the fact that he speaks his mind. That’s what has got him so many fans. And his fans should rest assured that he is everything that he appears to be. He’s just a guy who says it like it is.

    Did you find when you were with him in a scene that he just came in, did what he was expected of him and then leave or did he ever interject with suggestions of his own about a scene?

    No, but that was one of the most fascinating aspects of the movie. Here’s a director who has directed six films, has written six films and is now being directed by a first time director. It would have been a lot more uncomfortable had Susannah not been such an accomplished writer, I mean she’s written ERIN BROCKOVICH, IN HER SHOES, and she is a confident woman. Kevin trusted her and they had a great working relationship once it got rolling. If there was a button on the scene that Kevin wanted to try she would let him try it so it was like having two writers on the set.

    What would you say, going into a movie like SLEVIN or CATCH AND RELEASE, are you hoping to get out of your time on a movie? Some have said, “It’s a job, it’s just work,” but is there anything intrinsic to be gained from a movie set?

    I think, in the past, my goal was to not get fired. And, I speak to that. On CATCH AND RELEASE I realized about two weeks in that, “You know what? Jennifer’s preggers. There is no way they can re-shoot this shit. I am in this movie for good.” You know? “They can edit me out, fine, but they’ve gotta keep what I’ve done here somehow.”

    (I laugh)

    I love it.

    I am only thankful to get a role. When you get a job, you want to do the best job possible. I would sometimes kill myself trying to get to this character and, coming from a background in theater, it’s an ongoing process where you try and develop a character and try to build it into something that’s comfortable but with film I’ve learned that when you get cast generally for these movies you’re already the person they were looking for because they’ve already seen 600 to 1,000 people. They don’t need you to make huge adjustments. The audition you give is often the mold they want your character in. I purposely try to lay off memorizing scenes and so forth till the day before because I know I have a tendency to overanalyze things and it can become overly stiff. And I didn’t want that to happen here because Kevin and I are supposed to be laidback guys with a really strong friendship. It wouldn’t make sense to be so strict about the lines, so meticulous.


    FIND ME GUILTY (2006) Director: Sidney Lumet
    Cast: Vin Diesel, Annabella Sciorra, Alex Rocco, Peter Dinklage, Ron Silver
    Release: March 17, 2006 (Limited)
    Synopsis: A drama based on the longest Mafia trial in U.S. history, mobster Jack DiNorscio (Diesel), faced with a series of charges, decides to stand trial instead of ratting out his family and associates. A wrench is thrown into the system when DiNorscio opts to defend himself.
    View Trailer:
    * Large (QuickTime)

    Prognosis: Negative. Another movie set against the backdrop of a trial?

    From A FEW GOOD MEN to nearly every John Grisham I am at a loss to understand the nature of what makes these movies such an appealing genre. I do know, though, that movies that fall under this kind of filmic purview, sporting events being one that comes to mind quickly, need to do something special in order to set themselves apart. It’s almost as if these movies have to work uphill even before they get started; where any other movie just needs to be original to be noticed these kind of genre movies need to additionally set themselves apart from those they share space with on the video shelf.

    This is where I am coming from when this movie opens and you get the obligatory shot of flashbulbs, hubbub, boisterous news hounds and the frumpy, velvety track suits donned by the stereotypical Italian goombahs who find themselves in a courtroom.

    It’s unimpressive. It’s flat.

    I am intrigued by the card that tells me that I am about to see a story that revolves around one of the biggest criminal trials in our nation’s history but without context I am just left drifting in this trailer. What’s more, and this important to note, everything builds up for what should be something worthy of serious drama but we don’t get that. We’re offered, instead, Vin Diesel, mugging to the audience of his peers and I am almost sure this is being billed as a comedy.

    You’ve got a jaunty soundtrack underneath Diesel’s claim that in this “trial of the century” he’s going to defend himself by being his own lawyer; when he’s asked whether he has any legal experience he states he’s been in the can most of his life and that he thinks sometimes he has, “too much legal experience.” Oh, the uproar this causes. Everyone laughs and thinks this the funniest crap they’ve heard. Is this a trial or a Saturday night at The Sands with Dean, Frank and Sammy?

    I’m not too far off here as the subsequent clips that are chosen drip with a depression inducing grey palate with Vin talking about the man who shoots him four times, expressing the misguided sentiment that it was because his “family” loves him, and the trying-too-hard-to-be-poignant moment when he tells his old lady, his girlfriend, his daughter, who knows, that even though he’s being asked to rat on his friends the best two words in the English language are “things change.”

    I’m just not sure what to make of a movie billed as a drama when Vin is playing the part of MY COUSIN VINNY. There is a lot of posturing for the camera, a lot of wacky and zany outbursts all the while one of the biggest legal battles between organized crime and the government goes on.

    Even if, perchance, the movie is indeed the comedic equivalent of an episode of LA LAW there seems to be real drama with Vin getting his ass beat and him having to be restrained for his outbursts.

    There is a movie in here, I feel it, but if this the marketing for what appears to be a marketing campaign that doesn’t know which way to sell the product then this movie is having its feet ensconced and being dumped in the Hudson.

  • Trailer Park: SON…OF A BI%&$!

    E-MAIL THE AUTHOR | By Christopher Stipp

    March 10, 2006

    SON…OF A BI%&$!

    It is 9:22 of the p.m. on Sunday and, so far, I am getting my ass handed to me for Oscar pics by a wife who only knows of Heath and Jake from US Weekly and picked MEMOIRS OF A GEISHA to win for Costume Design because they “look cool” and a father-in-law who got harangued into picking nominees while setting the TiVo to tape his only two staples for entertainment: old timey westerns and everything on The Nature Channel; he would later tell the fam collected to watch this reach-around fest that anything with animals or weaponry in the title got his vote, hence explaining his votes for KING KONG and SIX SHOOTER.

    I think the wheels really came off for me when I started letting my idea of what I thought passed as beautifully rendered storytelling, the hallmark for every great film, get in the way for what amounted to overhyped pap. I am talking here about CRASH and even though I saw it and thought it was alright I didn’t feel very moved by its message and nor did I feel that the film’s message had any resonance.

    Since I paid my $7.50 with my school ID I think I am entitled here to a moment of what I feel was the real issue with CRASH’s sudden swell of support. I think that while Paul Haggis is a swell screenwriter and able-bodied director I think he relies too heavily on convenience and falsities when rendering his character’s world. Who lives with these overtly racist caricatures? If it would please the court I would like to present Exhibit A and B in their entirety. These two passages of dialogue come from Brenden Frazier and Matt Dillion, respectively.

    Rick: Why do these guys have to be black? No matter how we spin this thing, I’m either gonna lose the black vote or I’m gonna lose the law and order vote!
    Karen: You know, I think you’re worrying too much. You have a lot of support in the black community.
    Rick: ll right. if we can’t duck this thing, we’re gonna have to neutralize it. What we need is a picture of me pinning a medal on a black man. The firefighter – the one that saved the camp or something – Northridge… what’s his name?
    Bruce: He’s Iraqi.

    Officer Ryan: [talking on the phone] I wanna speak to your supervisor…
    Shaniqua: I am my supervisor!
    Officer Ryan: All right well, what’s your name?
    Shaniqua: Shaniqua Johnson.
    Officer Ryan: Shaniqua. Big fucking surprise that is!
    Shaniqua: Oh!
    [Shaniqua hangs up]

    Anthony: Look around! You couldn’t find a whiter, safer or better lit part of this city. But this white woman sees two black guys, who look like UCLA students, strolling down the sidewalk and her reaction is blind fear. I mean, look at us! Are we dressed like gangbangers? Do we look threatening? No. Fact, if anybody should be scared, it’s us: the only two black faces surrounded by a sea of over-caffeinated white people, patrolled by the triggerhappy LAPD. So, why aren’t we scared?
    Peter: Because we have guns?
    Anthony: You could be right.

    Who the hell talks like this? I have a grandmother who thinks it’s swell to plualize the African American community by calling them “the blacks,” and don’t think I haven’t been doing my part in taking every opportunity to let her know that just because she’s from a “different time,” a popular excuse we like to let our older generation off the hook for when we should all be concerned about evolving as a race, but people talking like this? I am amazed that a movie like this gets the atttention it did as I can’t see what we’re supposed to learn about the nature of racism by trying to understand these rather one dimensional caractures. I’m not trying to put this movie down but what I am trying to do is elevate the nature of film criticism beyond just hype and hyperbole and dust this movie off to see what kind of story, at its core, that’s being told.

    To be honest, I don’t believe any of it.

    Matt Dillion may be a racist at heart but what man would dare to verbally go on the offensive, pun intended, and make his venemous prejudices known to the world as casually as one would order a Carls Jr. with mayo? Heavy handed doesn’t begin to describe the way this movie comes across; a firm pimp hand across the maw of an all too willing audience comes close though.

    One poster on the Fark.com message board summed up my feelings about CRASH succinctly when he said: “Talk about painting with a broad brush…Crash was painted with a crop duster. All that movie was missing was an Eskimo holding a harpoon. And apparently, Los Angeles is smaller than Mayberry.”

    The damage is done and those with voting power have had their say. I shant rail any more about this but I did want to give a quick rundown of other observations I had about Oscar night:

    -No matter what the popular press has to say Jon Stewart did a wonderful, solid job. F’ those who thought his joke about the Baldwins and Wilsons was mean. It was not only funny but it rang truer than any bell that rang that Sunday across our great nation.

    -Will Ferrell. F-e-r-r-e-l-l. Hmm, I can’t seem to get a magazine to exploit my ability to twist the English language like a pretzel yet some obviously retarded yutz gets to keep his job after MISSPELLING Will’s name on the marquee when he and Steve Carrell presented. Shameful. I would’ve laughed had it happened with any other person.

    -George Clooney. Brother man, send me a note, call me, do something to let me know you’re out there because he seems like a guy who you would just want to party with. Too many superlatives wouldn’t do justice to a guy who took A LOT of jokes on the chin with a smile (He, the smart one for realizing that they were jokes after all…) and made a nice, poigant message with his acceptance speech. It’s hard not to be jealous of a man who has it all together on the surface like that.

    -The house band playing AT THE BEGINNING of an Oscar winner’s speech. This is just deplorable. A person works as hard as they do to bring a piece of art into our lives, some more than others but still, and they’re rewarded by having this pseudo wedding band playing ever so softly, ready to strike like a ninja hit squad as soon as their master gives the “kill” code, when their alloted time is up?

    -I never thought I would ever write this in my lifetime but I had a ball laughing at the schoolgirl charm of Meryl Streep and Lily Tomlin. The two of them together proved to be well worth me not blazing through their banter with my TiVo remote at the ready. Next to Stewart, these two could’ve went all night as far as I was concerned.

    -Three 6 Mafia. They proved why the whole room needed to loosen up. It was just great seeing someone up there being real, honest and, frankly, ready to burst open a bottle of Crystal right on stage. Good for them.

    -Tom Hanks. Thank you, thank you, thank you for providing me with the “Huh?” moment that not a lot of people have mentioned. If there are some really good lip readers out there I would love a word by word analysis of what is coming out of Tom’s mouth. Some really good dish about the moment in question comes to us via Defamer.com who reported that Tom had some issue with regard to the music he was introduced with as he took the stage. First Mike Myers has an issue with having people poking fun at him, Heath didn’t seem amused by Kevin’s genial ribbing for BROKEBACK and now this. I don’t care what it was one was all about but I just can’t stop rewinding the footage while I try to figure out, from a scientific standpoint, whether he’s saying “fucking douchebag” or just “douchebag.”

    -Pre-show interviews. I don’t know in what JC Penny Sunday circular advertisements the network dug up these plasticine models but I have never before felt as bad for a celebrity than I have as these Brite Smile representatives with mics asked, perhaps, the most innane questions ever devised. Was there no game plan? Was the idea to trap any celebrity caught in their tractor beam of sucktitude and make the experience just as awkward for me as they no doubt made it for them?

    Oh, and before I let you kids loose today, I did want to give the winner of Stipp’s 2006 Oscar and Super Cage Match Challenge their prize: the shout-out for the week. Sherry managed to squeeze out three more picks than I did, doing it by mere Jedi random selection, and shamed me completely. I bow to her greatness. Congratulations. You’re teh awesome. Even though I can’t prove she cheated nor can I make fun of how I completely think she chose far inferior fare than I did I am considering adding a short answer/essay portion to the field of potential hopefulls for next year’s competition.


    P.S.-An interesting thing happened when I went over to the Apple iTunes music store to purchase the single for “It’s Hard Out Here For A Pimp” (with Three 6 Mafia being the best advertising campaign since that Chuck Wagon dog food commercial I thought it was a no-brainer to get the tune). It seems that Apple has taken some of the best singles from the album off their a la carte menu for this digital selection. Not only did my comments (which are explicity solicited) removed, I guess their comments section is only reserved for those fellating the wonderment that is iTunes, regarding this matter I still feel like I should state this for the record: far be it from me to tell Apple what they can do with their digital sandbox I just think other people should be made aware of other places where people can get ALL OF their MP3 files at one .COM location without being jerked around like this.


    LONESOME JIM (2005) Director:Steve Buscemi
    Cast: Casey Affleck, Liv Tyler, Mary Kay Place, Seymour Cassel, Kevin Corrigan
    Release: March 24, 2006
    Synopsis: Casey Affleck plays Jim, a young man who, after deciding he can’t make it on his own, moves back to his hometown in Indiana — under his parents’ roof. He’s saved from his family’s dysfunction by a local woman and her son, who sees him as a father figure.
    View Trailer:
    * Large (QuickTime)

    Prognosis: Positive. I went to England once.

    Saw a play there.

    The play was called “This Is Our Youth” and it was written by Kenneth Lonergan, of YOU CAN COUNT ON ME fame. Matt Damon was supposed to be in it but he was “on holiday” or some such thing and was being replaced by some name I have yet to ever hear again. I thought about not seeing it but I was a fan of the flick and gave it a go. Casey Affleck was in it and it was, perhaps, the best part of the production. He was, without pole smoking his ego, marvelous. I liked him and have enjoyed his presence in other things since then. He has his own style and presentation and it’s nice to see he wants to have his own identity. When I saw the trailer for this, then, I felt that same rush of intrigue I had when I saw him ply his theatrical trade in London.

    “He shot himself in the head”

    The opening card that announces this is a new comedy from Steve Buscemi has the above line being uttered right before we know this. Casey’s dry, straight-forward speak is well-placed for what looks like, not a black comedy, but a quiet comedy. Liv Tyler plays, in what looks like, your average small town bumpkin who is outside the ken of Casey’s well-read universe. He’s not condescending but as he explains how Hemmingway did away with himself you feel that there is an imbalance in the parity between the two of them. As we walk deeper into the trailer you also get hipped to the knowledge that Casey looks like he is just drifting through his life.

    The cinematography precisely reflects the grayness that seems to hover over his head; the danger in this, though, is you could end up with a protagonist who is so blue that the audience might start to wish he really does pull the trigger on his life, ending it all.

    After admitting that he’s on the verge of a nervous breakdown to Liv, who really warms the climate in this trailer, Casey just absorbs the odd goings-on of his family. From his mother who seems to be cut from the cloth of every adoring mother character there is, to his strange uncle who seems equally cut from the crazy person bin of stock players there seems to be an honesty that just can’t be denied in here.

    I am equally floored by how much I see hope in Casey’s frumpy, monotone persona. After telling a squad of diminutive, and equally downtrodden looking, girls that even though they are destined to lose their game but, “the past does not always predict the future.” Whoa, there, Neo, that’s a fistful of foreshadowing if I ever heard it. But, whatever, because the lilting guitars in the background, the modesty with which we’re pimped the number of film festivals the movie has played at and the ease with which this trailer makes its transitions is just commendable.

    The ending is a little too cheeky for my taste, the young boy who helps to end things seems to be channeling the dark spirit of Jonathan Lipnicki circa JERRY MAGUIRE, and I really don’t care for Casey’s forced cancer-causing saccharine smile, but the pros far outweigh the cons and makes me really want to go out my way to see this movie.


    ART SCHOOL CONFIDENTIAL (2006) Director: Terry Zwigoff
    Cast: Max Minghella, Sophia Myles, Matt Keeslar, John Malkovich, Jim Broadbent, Anjelica Huston
    Release: April 28, 2006
    Synopsis: Based on a comic story in Dan Clowes’ Eightball, Art School Confidential follows Jerome (Minghella), an art student who dreams of becoming the greatest artist in the world. Arriving as a freshman at a prestigious East Coast art school filled with every artsy “type” there is, Jerome quickly discovers his affected style and arrogance won’t get him very far. When he sees that a clueless jock is attracting the glory rightfully due him, he hatches an all-or-nothing plan to hit it big in the art world and win the heart of the most beautiful girl in the school.
    View Trailer:
    * Large (QuickTime)

    Prognosis: Negative. Hmm, is this a comedy?

    I wouldn’t know it by first trying to take in the initial moments of this trailer. When John Malkovich embodies the spirit of an artist who is trying to teach his class the ways of being one I think, initially, he’s being serious. When he tells his audience that he wants to see something he hasn’t already seen many times over I feel he’s getting at something pretty right on the mark: when you’re an artist and trying to create for the first time, be it through words, pictures or sculpture, you sometimes call upon the muse of unoriginality. Sure, to you it’s the first time you’ve drawn a woman’s fun bags, milk wagons, her hoo-ha, what have you, but unless you find the right angle to tackle the singular subject in front of you you’re just going to be white noise compared to everyone else who has been here and done that miserably.

    I got all of this just by his opening remarks, true dat, but I got uneasy when the jaunty voiceover starts telling me all about this artiste university, how artisans can explore their creativity (as you see some dude putting the finishing touches, literally, on some ice cream sculpture) and you have one guy in an audience Q&A asking what advice one can give to someone just starting out to which is said, “That is such…a stupid question.”

    The Tex Avery wolf jaw plunking down to the ground, that metallic sound clanging off-screen, is what happened at this point. So, I ask again, is this a comedy? I guess it is as the following images, one after another, keep getting more and more obnoxious.

    What’s more about this abrupt change is that, in another scene, one guy has his wrists tied with rope with alligator clamps attached to his nipples, leading to a car battery. It’s funny, to be sure, but as soon as he asks someone to hit the juice, he starts screaming and we are jerked, violently, to a woman who is about to disrobe in order to be painted as an artists’ model. I think there could have been a better way to snap from one image to another but this was not the way to do it. The flow is awful.

    To add even more mediocrity into the mix we have our protagonist trying to score with some of the art school chicks. This should have been one the best parts of this trailer as we explore all the “wacky and zany” oddballs we can all collectively imagine that inhabit art schools but it’s just executed with the kind of grace that’s usually just reserved for showboating, women’s Olympic snowboarding. To prove my point you have no less than two needle scratch sound effects being employed to get the point across that these ladies are well-beyond the normal purview of women who would, in real life, attend these kinds of schools.

    I mean, I get it, wild and crazy chicks are funny to mock and to get a guffaw or two out of them but this is just lazy trailer creation. One of the girls, oddly enough, exemplifies the stereotypical Bettie Page Syndrome I made mention of a few weeks ago; these girls with the retro black hair and sharply cut bangs are always a good go-to for a quick laugh.

    I expected more from the dude who brought me BAD SANTA and I feel a little let down. I am just hoping this was a matter of giving this movie to the wrong agency in making the trailer.


    DUCK SEASON (2006) Director: Fernando Eimbcke
    Cast: Enrique Arreola, Daniel Miranda, Diego Catano, Danny Pereat
    Release: March 10th, 2006
    Synopsis: Takes you into one particular Sunday morning in the lives of two fourteen-year old boys, Flama and Moko. With their neighbor Rita and pizza delivery boy Ulises, they create their own adventures to overcome their boredom. “Duck Season” explores the loneliness of childhood, the effects of divorce and the curious power of love and friendship.
    View Trailer:
    * Medium (QuickTime)

    Prognosis: Mucho Posi-TiVo. I am a fan of memes.

    Whether it’s finding out who might be in contention for viral video of the week, the bottle rocket kid shooting one out of his arse was a good one, or that the odd digital short I turned off prematurely one night while Saturday Night Live, Lazy Sunday (And thanks to SNL finding that people actually liked something they’ve done they’ve decided to try and beat the living piss out of these digital shorts by including them in damn near every episode since then. Great idea, peeps.), would have me so hooked after I played it a few half dozen times. The Chuck Norris meme of the moment is good but none of these are possible unless you have 13 year-old boys like these dudes here to pass it along to their cronies.

    What I enjoy about this trailer, primarily, is the strength of its opening. I am always amazed that for as many times as I’ve done this there are dozens of new approaches to get things started. Here it’s the black and white static shot of a mother walking out of an apartment door and pushing the elevator door as two boys look on. The musical cue comes in, a funky 70’s ba-wanka beat, and the screen goes black. The boys cheer in delight as their adult overlord has unmanned their post for a while, they crack open the Coke, sit their asses down in front of the television and go to town playing Halo. The music is crackin’ and the frags are poppin.

    The power cuts out.

    The mood sours as things get silent. Like true boys, they languish in their unfortunate situation by just sitting there.

    Things turn strange when a girl from next door stops by for reasons we’re not sure of nor are we sure why an odd pizza delivery guy makes himself at home; if I had money on it, though, I would say it would to be to kill the three of them but that’s just my experience talking.

    The lives of these four people start to fuse together as they delight in doing the kinds of things that kids are known for doing: inciting indirect mayhem by just having too much time, and imagination, on their hands. The music that lilts behind the cut scenes of these people getting goofy fits perfectly; it’s fun, it’s jaunty and makes no sense. You get a cadre, a lot, of different award props. There seems to be a couple of dozen that fill up the screen but you get the point, and they are cheeky about doing it, that while this is a seemingly wistful movie you’re going to get something more.

    I cannot explain why watching this trailer is so soothing and enjoyable but in an arena where loud and brash are the tools of the trade I give this trailer positive vibrations solely for setting a nice mood.

    You’ve got a foreign langauage film, strike number 1, plus you’ve got a movie about kids, strike 2, and your sole goal with this trailer is to garner some interest without using too much of your native dialogue, strike 3. I don’t envy this marketing department at all because foreign flicks ARE a hard sell to us Americans. We like to think of ourselves as melting pots of humanity but we likes our entertainments en ingles thank you very much.

    This trailer manages to overcome all of these things by not being afraid to make it all money shots, and it hurts to see the flicks that have to resort to that in their adverts, and present the movie as it is supposed to be seen. It’s one of those things where, as good or bad as the movie may be, you’ve got to admire their one shot to reach the American audience takes this form.

    Carl Taylor: “Golf clap?”

    James St. James: “Golf clap.”


    CLICK (2006) Director: Frank Coraci
    Cast: Adam Sandler, Kate Beckinsale, Christopher Walken
    Release: June 23, 2006
    Synopsis: CLICK focuses on a workaholic architect who finds a universal remote that allows him to fast-forward and rewind to different parts of his life. Complications arise when the remote starts to overrule his choices.
    View Trailer:
    * Large (QuickTime)

    Prognosis: Depends on how mainstream I’m feeling that week. Let’s have an open discussion, okay, a one-sided discussion with your delayed thoughts to follow later, about the place where Adam Sandler movies fit in the filmic landscape.

    The knee-jerk response that he has a built-in audience won’t cut it for this argument and neither will that he has his own brand of humor that people seem to come out to watch in droves. I just can’t figure out what it is about his kinds of films just seem to exude. I am sure that the director of WEDDING CRASHERS, David Dobkin, who just got bounced from Sandler’s latest creation I NOW PRONOUNCE YOU CHUCK AND LARRY, could give us a clue but since all I have is the trailer for his upcoming movie I will just break it down thusly. Now, since every movie deserves to be judged fairly, I’ll be impartial and just stick to what’s on the screen.

    “Do you ever feel there is not enough time”¦”

    I wish I could say this movie spells doom from the start but the choice of running with Tears for Fears’ “Everybody Wants to Rule the World” as the sound bed to open this trailer is nice. I like the song and it somehow gets me in the mood for something safe, basic.

    I’m not disappointed here as the sight of Kate Beckinsale walking her husband out of the house in the morning is a lot more un-common than it is real but it sets up the following scene of Adam being portrayed as a father who works too hard. The concept is as beaten and worn as anything else there is, David Hasselhoff not helping matters by being the prototypical boss who demands nothing less than obedience and hard work without regard to anything else. By David giving Adam this near-impossible assignment of coming up with something “great” over the 4th of July weekend you not only establish your characters’ motivation and problem but you have the added bonus of knowing, quickly, what the issue is at hand: he works too damn hard.

    The effect is at once brilliant and yawn-inspiring. On the former, it’s brilliant because you manage to set things in motion quickly, not dwelling on stupid details that eat time and waste attention spans. On the latter, it’s lame because the premise is so cookie-cutter that it defies any kind of real sense of originality. In the subsequent scenes we are also led to believe he is so out of touch with his kids and their world by not being able to differentiate between any of the, da-da-da-dum, remote controls in the house. He’s turning on a ceiling fan, race cars, everything else but the television. He’s so wackily frustrated that he goes out to Bed, Bath & Beyond to get a universal remote; the store’s name is so prominently displayed that I am not sure there has ever been a product placement so boldly advertised in a trailer before. Kudos, trailer people.

    Of course, this is when the crazy crap starts to happen. He hooks up with leader of the cow bells, Christopher Walken, and this is where I am sure hours and hours of time spent in a little writer’s room eventually led: Adam gets a remote that works on life. (Gasp!) I know, all you dopes who spent copious amounts of time in college to learn how to write are all wasting your time; no one can compete with these big league thinkers.

    The application of this “remote” is prominently run though as we get Adam fast forwarding through fights with his old lady, which will no doubt get laughs from the ladies as well as the dudes who they subjugate; his boss, who he puts on pause so he can physically abuse and will earn the laughter from dudes who “so wish they could do that”; and the pause effect he applies to some woman wearing a tank top as she jogs, giving us all slo-mo boob floppin’ delight. The man is a genius. I want to dislike this trailer in so many ways but when, lo-and-behold, the remote breaks and he finds himself fast forwarding unwillingly through his life, his daughter quickly going through the stages in her life, I find myself being curious to know where things are leading.

    I can’t figure out Sandler’s angle on most of his movies but I can see where he knows how to play the game of being able to reach multiple types of people with this movie. Good, bad or indifferent you can’t fault the guy for being a shrewd moviemaker.

  • Trailer Park: Innuendo

    E-MAIL THE AUTHOR | By Christopher Stipp

    March 3, 2006

    Innuendo

    One of the things that always keep me intersted in doing what I do here, and why I like movies in general, is that every single flick is an opportunity to see something new.

    Never mind that what may be coming at you when you have date night is going to be a hellacious 90 minutes but what I want to focus on is how the real hard core geeks among us rely on information as a movie’s production rolls along. Case in point is the picture of SPIDER-MAN 3’s first real tease. What I dig, besides the obvious, is that something like this can stoke the flames of anticipation for your average movie-phile. You look at this picture and any fan of Rami’s first 2 installments starts to speculate about things. You begin to wonder if our man from SIDEWAYS will be a good enough Sandman or whether Topher Grace will be a good enough foil against Parker’s every-day personality.

    It’s nice to deal in speculation and what-could-be’s if for no other reason than it gives fans the chance to build to the moment when that teaser trailer comes out. Kids start analyzing, people start prognosticating and, for people like me, it makes the whole conceit of “movie magic” a little more real as you find yourself counting down until you have the chance yourself to see if, in fact, those whole Venom/Mystery Villian rumors are true. As evidenced in great documentaries like RINGERS, STARWOIDS and even in TREKKIES you can see how getting caught in something like this can be a very enjoyable process.

    Neverminding the small percentage of 12 year-olds with a propensity for filth, smack talk and a bad case of Grammatical Inconsistency in their sentence structure it is just nice to be able and feel like that what’s coming soon can really be something worth doting on for a while.

    I think it is just the nature of watching as many trailers that I do that just reaffirms my belief that those who are down on the theater experience never really held it in much regard to begin with. Those who are purportedly putting a dent in theather attendence due to their feeling that waiting for the DVD of whatever movie in question is being discussed aren’t really the kind of customer who would watch a trailer or pour over news items and, as a result, be excited. The sites that exist for movie fans, like this one, speak to those who wouldn’t think twice about weighing the DVD window vs. going to the cineplex.

    The reality, though, is that even though attendence is off across the board lately the marketplace needs to adapt to this changing enviornment. Moviemakers like Steven Soderbergh have given great ideas to alter the experience of watching films in the 2000’s but, at it’s core, those out there that deal in information, hard facts or innuendo will always ensure a healthy discourse of film will continue for decades to come.

    By the way, for those wondering, that picture of Spidey is flippin’ sweet.


    DAVE CHAPPELLE’S BLOCK PARTY (2006) Director: Michel Gondry
    Cast: Dave Chappelle and Friends
    Release: March 3, 2006
    Synopsis: Dave Chappelle’s Block Party spotlights comedy superstar Dave Chappelle as he presents a Brooklyn neighborhood with its very own once-in-a-lifetime free block party. The unprecedented combination of comedy and music was shot on location. In addition to Mr. Chappelle performing all-new material, the stellar roster of artists includes Kanye West, Mos Def, Talib Kweli, Common, Dead Prez, Erykah Badu, Jill Scott, the Roots, Cody ChesnuTT, Big Daddy Kane, and – reunited for their first performance in over seven years – the Fugees. Academy Award-winning filmmaker Michel Gondry and his Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind cinematographer Ellen Kuras capture all of the exclusive performances and crowd excitement on an unforgettable Saturday afternoon and night, as well as (earlier in the week) private rehearsals footage and Mr. Chappelle in the small Ohio town he calls home. In Ohio, Mr. Chappelle wandered through town handing out golden tickets to invite several dozen citizens to join the party, providing transportation and lodging for their first-time-ever visit to Brooklyn. Ohio’s Central State University marching band made the trip and helped kick off the festivities at the intersection of Quincy and Downing Streets. As a diverse crowd comes together, Mr. Chappelle’s freestyle wit guides them (and us) through a day-long, life-affirming celebration of music and comedy, history and community. The lineup of performers is distinguished not only by the caliber of their music but also by the strength and power that their art draws from keeping their creativity pure.
    View Trailer:
    * Medium (QuickTime)

    Prognosis: Positive With 10 lbs. Worth Of Crazy. Obfuscation.

    Some of the things I took away from Dave Chappelle’s interview with Oprah a couple of weeks ago had nothing to do with me feeling enlightened by Dave’s actions in the past year but, rather, I took away the feeling that he either doesn’t know how to answer a direct question, wasn’t prepared to give answers to direct questions and that he is ill prepared to talk in an interview. Period.

    “Why did you walk out on a $50 million dollar television show?”

    Crickets might have well been playing an orchestral movement because Dave seemed lost.

    One thing, though, which piqued my curiosity, was his concert film that he planned on releasing. Now, this is good. There is an energy that’s apparent as soon as this trailer opens up and I am delighted that Dave’s inability to communicate to other humans hasn’t interfered with his capacity to bring the funny. Also, with Michel Gondry helming the directorial duties you can be assured that it will be captured with the right amount of personality.

    When the screen opens and you see two dudes who are residents of Dayton, Ohio, where Dave has made his home for quite some time, and explain that they don’t do a whole lot and one fine day Dave Chappelle, who is slightly off camera but gives these guys a couple of tickets to his concert, offers to take them away for the weekend. The manner in which Dave surrenders a couple of the tickets is a bit unsettling, it’s almost as if he’s trying to entreat them to get into his van to help move a couch, wink wink, but I get it.

    Fast forward to Dave working the crowd, moments before the concert begins, and he’s on. He just knows how to flip that switch and get a group of people going. He lets fly a few Lil’ John “Whaaat?!”s and so, I take it, that it’s alright for him to appropriate his comedy when it suits him but when other people do it to him it sends him into a frenzy that can only be quieted with a trip to South Africa. Got it. Check.

    The next few moments are just Dave armed with a bullhorn and traipsing through Brooklyn spouting off whatever comes to his mind. It’s honestly good stuff; his riffing here is on par with some of the best rehearsed material that’s being plied to audiences.

    Then, we get the talent. Erykah Badu is all up in there, you’ve got the Roots ready to bring it and you even have the man who may or may not need Common to bitch slap him a few times on Lower Wacker in Chicago, Kanye West. The energy is bursting off the screen and you can feel that this is really something special.

    2 things. One, when Mos Def, who has been exceptional in parlaying his music career into a filmic one, pops up, keep your ears open as the music is simply bumpin’ when you see the Fugees start working the crowd for themselves. Two, when Dave, shortly after this is talking to a pack of kids while holing a pool cue taunts these children to bring it for reals in a game of 8-ball and simultaneously slapping down a large bill. The kids’ expression alone is enough to say that while Dave may have some things to work out he can work a wide spectrum of age brackets.


    FILM GEEK (2005) Director: James Westby
    Cast: Melik Malkasian, Matt Morris, Tyler Gannon
    Release: Coming soon to a festival near you…Peep the release date information as supplied by Herr Westby below…
    Synopsis: FILM GEEK is a hilarious new comedy about Scotty Pelk, a socially inept video store clerk with an encyclopedic knowledge of film. He runs a website, scottysfilmpage.com, which receives zero traffic. He annoys his customers. He annoys his co-workers. And when he is inevitably fired from his video store job, Scotty finds refuge in Niko, a downtown hipster who teaches him a thing or two about love and life. But Niko’s smarmy ex-boyfriend Brandon won’t go away quietly. As Scotty’s first love turns to obsession, his life begins to change in profound ways.
    View Trailer:
    * Large (QuickTime)

    Prognosis: Solid. There’s this one guy, down the street, where I rent my videos. Yeah, I know about Netflix but I am slow when it comes to these kinds of things.

    The guy always always asks me about the films I bring back when I check out more. It could be that I was renting SISTERHOOD OF THE TRAVELLING PANTS but he interjects with his own narrative about how he came to like or dislike the movie. It utterly fascinates me that I could be renting YOUNG EINSTEIN and this dude would lay it out as to how he felt about the movie. He amazes me. That’s why I think I responded so well to this trailer about a know-it-all video jockey.

    Yes, the story of video clerks has been well-documented on celluloid in recent years and that’s why it puts a movie like this in the precarious position of having to prove that there is still something fresh to say about this genre, this segment of the population who do these jobs.

    When we open up things a solid music track neither distracts nor overpowers what is happening on the screen. You’ve got some customer providing the comedic bait to our protagonist, she’s looking for a movie with the word “heaven” in it, and we’re launched into this rundown of movies by our man who rattles off all kinds of flicks that might fit the ladies’ query. It’s soft comedy but it is, nonetheless, viable.

    The cards lay it all out for us. He annoys people, he’s going nowhere, etc”¦but the nice thing about the trailer is that expediency seems to be the thing on this trailer maker’s mind and that’s a great thing to see. The most common thing for someone who is doing this sort of thing on a shoestring is to really showcase the artists’ talent; trailers run in the opposite vein of that. You want your story to go in, go out and leave an impression. What you notice after we get a 1/3 of the way into this movie is that it’s doing just that.

    Things do, however, take a strange turn when our clerk gets canned from the one job he, no doubt, can only do real well. His punting coincides with him meeting some girl who wants to bring him out of his nebbish shell. This is where I have an issue with the trailer. It seems awkward that we go from complete geek to all of a sudden having this strange new woman exposing him to a life which has completely passed him by. He looks strange in the role of a guy going to parties, drinking beer, schmoking a lil’ weed and I don’t know if I buy the rapid romance here. It’s forced or at least it feels like we’re rushing through something we shouldn’t be.

    I warm up to it a little bit, though, when we see this guy surviving life beyond the video store as he makes his way through things other than always preparing for Tuesdays. The geek’s admission that he loves movies and that they let you be other people is poignant and that’s where the real emotional buy-in comes in for a movie like this.

    I felt confused, at first, with trying to peg where we are going with this guy. Was he a hapless geek who deserved what he got, was this a movie about how he was never going to get what he wanted or was this about trying to establish something new when the one thing you’re good at is taken away? It is the latter and even though there are a few visual miscues that try and throw you off the mark in getting the right idea about this movie it is nonetheless a solid trailer for a movie that has a story worth following through to the end.

    And those interested in knowing when, and if, this is coming close to you soon, Mr. Westby sent me this note:

    Syracuse, NY
    Palace Theatre
    March 3, 2006

    Orlando, FL
    Downtown Media Arts Center
    March 30 ““ April 9, 2006

    Austin, TX
    Alamo South Lamar
    Opens May 1, 2006


    NACHO LIBRE (2006) Director:Jared Hess
    Cast: Jack Black, Ana de la Reguera, Héctor Jimenez, Richard Montoya, Peter Stormare
    Release: June 2, 2006
    Synopsis: Jack Black stars as Ignacio (friends call him Nacho), a Mexican priest who moonlights as a lucha libre wrestler to raise money for his orphanage in this comedy from the creators of NAPOLEON DYNAMITE and the writer and star of THE SCHOOL OF ROCK.
    View Trailer:
    * Large (QuickTime)

    Prognosis: You’re on your own with this one. I don’t know what the hell is going on but I feel fine.

    One of the strangest predicaments to be in, I would imagine, is to create something so good that not only have you managed to spark an entire legion of fanatics that like to mimic moments from your film whilst toiling away at their cubicle jobs but you’ve also had the secondary effect of helping to make Q3’s financials for Suburban-Mom-Mall-Approved Hot Topic some of the best they’ve ever been by pimping everything from shirts that still admonish me to Vote For Pedro to a bobble head that can sit quietly on my desk.

    How do you possibly follow that up? With all the adulation that was heaped on NAPOLEON DYNAMITE you’ve thought that the bigger budget second movie Jared and Jerusha Hess would’ve blown their load, as it were, on something safe yet solid. They chose, obviously, to go with the latter and ditch the former because this is all sorts of out there.

    I can’t, for the life of me, understand where the nexus of this movie came from or why Jack Black was the obvious choice when choosing who would make the best luchador in a movie that has all the flavor of NAPOLEON’s former self. Jack opens this bad boy in all his girthy glory. His un-Godliness is spoiled, however, when he does and ankle grab that treats us to a full moon that’s Neptunian in diameter. The pace is perfect, though, as the music, the same kind of windy pipes usually reserved for those South American scenes from CLEAR AND PRESENT DANGER, makes me feel there is a fire fight about to occur. Jack is getting his vinyl jack boots laced up and is compressing his head into his mask when he explains the method to his madness.

    Before I feel comfortable in the explanation given as to why this is all happening, I am yanked precipitously to the back story involving Jack hustling business using his ped-taxi, probably whisking people to and from the Dream Palace, Skin Cabaret or Wide World of Hymens, and coming upon the greatest luchador he’s ever seen.

    His story is involved as his awe turns to work. He wants that attention, that adulation, and will do anything to achieve it. His Spanish accent is amusing, sure, and his nun friend who explains that unless his cause is for something righteous God will not bless him.

    The angles here are all sorts of odd but, again, there seems to be a reason and direction so instead of being frustrated I am left feeling that, fine, be weird for weird’s sake but keep the information flowing, you know?

    The next scene, though, throws me for a loop-da-loop when Jack is slo-mo running, pushing his anemic looking partner out of the way while taking in a dusty jog on a dirt path and then tossing a freshly snapped off bee hive at the same man. Wha huh?

    Some scenes later, the golden luchador that inspired Jack into this business of wrangling and tangling steps out into a packed house and is greeted with fireworks and hot chicks at his side. The image, while strange, is common enough when you’ve grown up on the WWF. Jack’s theatrics to counter balance the golden child are birdlike and I can’t get a handle over whether he means business or is trying to also play up to a crowd that’s looking forward to seeing Jack get all sorts of schooled.

    I am then treated to Jack ripping off his shirt, with an accompanying explanation about how he could do such a thing, displays his skills for a couple of dudes who look high on glue, and then I get not one but two butt shots of Jack; in one he gives me a full clench and, the other, a butt that’s tightly secured in red tights.

    The rest of this trailer is filled with multiple shots of wrestling, of Jack’s partner looking to get his groove on with a rather unsavory chica, and there’s a sweet shot of Jack taking flight out of the ring, getting some wicked air, as he tries to land on his golden hero.

    The ending, though, leaves me scratching my brain. He invites the woman who is, ostensibly, the female love interest in this movie to his room at the monastery, I guess he’s a monk too, to have a piece of toast. I guess it’s supposed to be funny and I think there’ll be some people who will say this is all sorts of humorous but I don’t understand. Is toast eating the new hotness or did I just miss that memo?

    I’ll probably see this movie simply to see how the sophomore outing ultimately goes but, damn, don’t make me feel that I may regret my loyalty.


    TALLADEGA NIGHTS: THE BALLAD OF RICKY BOBBY (2006) Director: Adam McKay
    Cast: Amy Adams, Sacha Baron Cohen, Leslie Bibb, William Boyer, Gary Cole, Elvis Costello, Michael Clarke Duncan, Will Ferrell
    Release: August 4, 2006
    Synopsis: NASCAR stock car racing sensation Ricky Bobby (Will Ferrell) is a national hero because of his “win at all costs” approach. He and his loyal racing partner, childhood friend Cal Naughton Jr. (John C. Reilly), are a fearless duo — “Thunder” and “Lightning” by their fans for their ability to finish so many races in the #1 and #2 positions, with Cal always in second place. When flamboyant French Formula One driver Jean Girard (Sacha Baron Cohen) challenges “Thunder” and “Lightning” for the supremacy of NASCAR, Ricky Bobby must face his own demons and fight Girard for the right to be known as racing’s top driver.
    View Trailer:
    * Medium (Flash. I would’ve punted you to another site that has it but since I don’t like their player I’m not going to give them the shout-out. So there.)

    Prognosis: Negative. No.

    I thought this was going to be, in the parlance that my English teachers would no doubt flunk me for, a slam-dunk.

    This trailer has challenged me to really sit down and meditate on the reasons why this movie appears, on the surface, to suffer from the wrong kind of angle sell. An angle sell, as I have coined, stamped and now dispersed in the annals of conversational currency, is a phrase I’ve come to realize means how a piece of advertising like this trailer, as a whole, is packaged. If you’ve got the wrong angle to begin with, usually resulting in a marketing department being confused with how to pimp a product to the masses, you’re going to start, proceed and end being way off the mark. Classic examples of movies being marketed all sorts of wrong litter the conversations of many directors who get upset when the promotions people have the end-all be-all decision power to tell the public what a movie ultimately is. Is it a drama, a comedy, a dramedy? What this all means, ultimately, is that figuring out the angle of a movie is like having a loaded gun with only one bullet in it: you’ve got to know where to shoot it and when.

    The trailer for TALLADEGA NIGHTS suffers from a poor execution. This should be the movie that brings the crazy ass Will Ferrell back from the schlock (i.e. KICKING AND SCREAMING and his part in giving us the color infused pastiche pap of CURIOUS GEORGE) that helped finance his summer home in Monaco and back into the fold of comedic icons. This is the movie that should be what ANCHORMAN really wasn’t: funny. It should pop off the screen with Ferrell’s brand of giddiness but what we’re served is an opening sequence packed with promise with ZZ Top’s “La Grange” only to be let down with a crazy child to crazy adult transition that’s as amusing as the first CARS trailer.

    The arena for NASCAR should be a hotbed of funny but, as we progress even further to setting up what this movie is about, getting a funny moment when we hear that Will’s kids in this movie are named Walker and Texas Ranger, respectively, the jokes are taking a long time to get out there.

    That’s the problem, I think. The next sequence when Will and John C. Reilly go back and forth about couplings that go together, Chinese Food and pudding being rebuked for peanut butter and jelly when involving a lady, isn’t as good as it should be because you’re making me work too damn hard to get the joke. Oh, and look at the time, half of the trailer is gone, wasted. These jokes necessitate a set-up and the momentum for this movie pays the price.

    And, when we finally come upon Sacha Baron Cohen’s character we’re given just enough time to see him, hear him utter a few words and he’s quickly forgotten. What the fu$%? Yeah, not many people really like the whole Ali G thing but I am a fan and, dammit, this is Will’s nemesis in this movie and I want something witty. No, I get Will driving with a cougar and Will signing a baby’s forehead. Yeah, the explosion of comedy just doesn’t relent.

    I will say that the angle for how you market this thing is found when Will puts on a blindfold, ostensibly to do a little Jedi driving, whilst behind the wheel. The subsequent sequence of him careening into parked cars, straight out BEVERLY HILLS COP, and then veering off the road into a house is what every moment of this trailer should have been. It’s obnoxious, irreverent, wacky and the kind of thing that dudes want to see.

    PLUS, and this is important, the moment of Will running around after a crash on the track and he’s in his underwear, spouting all sorts of nonsensical bullshit, even managing to drag Tom Cruise’s good name into it? THAT’S it. THAT’S the ethos of this movie and every other moment of this film’s trailer should have been just as irreverent.

    As it is, I’m not really looking forward to this movie as I am just hopeful that someone will get it together and give me a better trailer. Booyakasha.

  • Trailer Park: AN ARM AND A LEG

    E-MAIL THE AUTHOR | By Christopher Stipp

    February 24, 2006

    AN ARM AND A LEG

    Before we jump into this week’s article I had to preface my comments by throwing out a little trailer love for a strange, yet alluring, trailer for an animated movie. I was going to include it last week but my love for all things Roy Stalin/BETTER OFF DEAD got in the way.

    It’s nice to see the kind of animation made famous by A-Ha for “Take On Me” make a surge back into the mainstream. Now, this movie most likely won’t be classified as mainstream but it got my attention and I am feeling in the sharing mood. The movie is called HIGH MOON and you can find the animated trailer right here. If you’re a fan of a hip soundtrack and a voiceover-less viewing experience I highly recommend just peeping out the trailer. Props go out to Pat V. for shooting me the link on this one.

    I wish I had my planned column all ready for you, there have been some sweet trailers making their debut, but when I had the last minute opportunity to talk to Todd McFarlane about his involvement with David Fincher directing one of Brian Michael Bendis’ best works I had to drop what I was doing and find out what’s what. Sure, there have been other people to talk to Todd regarding this flick but since I wanted to talk movies and not action figures or trying to “scoop” when he planned on making a comeback into comics I think you’ll find this 1/2 hour I spent with him on the phone a little refreshing. So, I apologize there isn’t a slab of trailer goodness here but I wanted to give some of you closet comic nerds (present company included) a little pick-me-up. I hope you enjoy.

    Now, on to the interview!

    One of the most poignant transitions for any comic book fan that was hooked on Batman, X-Men or, in my case, G.I. Joe was that moment when superheroes just didn’t carry any emotional currency anymore. The moment when comics were just 15 minutes worth of reading that ended with some kind of Saturday Morning Serial cliffhanger and made the fan feel like they just pounded a fistful of colored panel Pixie Stix was the moment when that reader either waned in their interest for their fictional heroes or they felt empowered to seek out alternate reading.

    Watchmen and The Preacher replaced the mustachioed evil villain tropes we all knew by heart; Alan Moore and Neil Gaiman replaced whatever half-penny fill in writer was continuing the further misadventures of whatever Spider-Man or X-Men spin-off was planned for that month; and, it was here that comic book readers became more aware that the medium they indulged in so delightfully, without much regard to resonant moments in their storytelling, was about to grow up. I grew up.

    Many of those who still read comic books after long tenures of service, I am about to go on 20 years this May, know exactly what I am talking about here. There is room, no doubt about it, for all varieties of comic books.

    One of the most poignant transitions for any comic book fan that was hooked on Batman, X-Men or, in my case, G.I. Joe was that moment when superheroes just didn’t carry any emotional currency anymore. The moment when comics were just 15 minutes worth of reading that ended with some kind of Saturday Morning Serial cliffhanger and made the fan feel like they just pounded a fistful of colored panel Pixie Stix was the moment when that reader either waned in their interest for their fictional heroes or they felt empowered to seek out alternate reading.

    Watchmen and The Preacher replaced the mustachioed evil villain tropes we all knew by heart; Alan Moore and Neil Gaiman replaced whatever half-penny fill in writer was continuing the further misadventures of whatever Spider-Man or X-Men spin-off was planned for that month; and, it was here that comic book readers became more aware that the medium they indulged in so delightfully, without much regard to resonant moments in their storytelling, was about to grow up. I grew up.

    Many of those who still read comic books after long tenures of service, I am about to go on 20 years this May, know exactly what I am talking about here. There is room, no doubt about it, for all varieties of books. Those who want their mind to traipse elsewhere can find what their minds are nagging at them to read by lingering long enough at their local comic shop. One of the things that made Brain Michael Bendis’ “Torso” stand in stark contrast to the books making Wizard’s Top Seller lists was its blend of true crime storytelling that infused Marc Andreyko’s art in such a way that commanded true attention. The story would prove it couldn’t be ignored and its eventual trip towards the big screen took a leap when Miramax decided to pick up the property. The problem was, though, the house that made its name on shaping original ideas a visual reality decided to sit atop the book and not do anything with it.

    Enter, stage left, Todd McFarlane.

    The man who originally helped Bendis get the book out to the masses, the man who thought moving it to Miramax was all but a done deal to breathe life into the graphic novel, found himself snatching back the property when Miramax eventually didn’t move on getting “Torso” jumpstarted. He has been all hips and elbows since then, pitching and selling the story, has landed the help of Bill Mechanic to come aboard to defibrillate talent to attach themselves to it and it’s paid off. With screenwriter Ehren Kruger (THE RING, JOHN CARTER OF MARS) ready to pen the adaptation and heavy hitter David Fincher (FIGHT CLUB, ZODIAC) anxious to add the stylistic element the book deserves to have preserved the movie has never seemed more poised for greatness. The reality of it, though, isn’t filled with as many superlatives as one would hope. Todd talks about the mountain ahead and how he plans on getting to the top of it with a movie that not only fans will like but will draw in an audience who never has to realize they’re watching a comic book unfolding before them.


    The first real news I heard of this was that “Torso” was going to be made, Fincher is going to direct, Ehren Kruger is going to write it and I am wondering if there has been anything new to add since the announcement itself? One of the things”¦sometimes they put out those PR things slightly”¦prematurely. And what’s going on now is that we’re just making sure all the contracts are finalized. I was just talking to Bill Mechanic, one of the producers, and he was saying that his just got finalized and one of the other guys just got finalized. I think the PR people sometimes jump the gun”¦they do it for two reasons: one, they want to get it out and, two, sometimes it puts the studio into a pressure cooker; if they balk now, it’s already been announced, they don’t look good. So, sometimes it’s done as a negotiating tool. But, minus all of that, which is all inconsequential, arguably because most of the work had already been done when this announcement came out. Because, a lot of people announce things like this and then have another 8 months or year of negotiating contracts. We sort of did the leg work far in advance and most of the credit for that goes to Bill Mechanic. He used to run Fox.

    He was blamed pretty heavily for FIGHT CLUB’s initial theatrical run.

    Yeah, yeah. He was able to nurture a lot of relationships with some people and you start going on the producing side and you hope you can call some of those friends up, call a couple of markers up”¦He’s been talking about David for a long time. We’d gone and met with him before, trying to work through it, and I sort of thought that once he got behind ZODIAC that would end that conversation, but obviously Bill has been pushing that boulder up the hill and knew that the studio was only going to get excited if he got a couple of A-listers.

    What grabbed Bill’s attention, initially? What was it that made Bill say, “I’ve got to get this made”?

    For Bill, when we pitched it to him, the very first time, he sort of sees the same things I do. It’s sort of a no-brainer it seems like.

    You’ve got a brand name in Elliot Ness as everyone knows who this guy is. You’ve got a quasi sequel, but not quite, and then you’ve got, arguably, historical data, which you can argue is America’s first serial killer, this is the case where the word serial killer comes from, so all the details that come with it, when you sort of do the pitch everybody just says, “Wow.” I mean it’s got a lot of Hollywood moments in it; they’re all factual. You can look them up in the microfiche. And, again, World War II breaks out and because all of a sudden there are, arguably, some political ties that get pushed underneath of all it, you just go, “Wow.”

    To me, this is cooler than putting Capone away. At least I think it’s on the same par and, more importantly, sort of the first half of that story, the young kid turning into the knight in shining armor, is more consistent with what happens in the media today. We like to build our heroes up and then we like to deconstruct them. So this is the story of a man coming into town, literally the hero, and by the end of it all gets kicked out of the town. And, arguably, it’s still an open case. We deal in facts. If you go to Cleveland it’s still an open case. Elliot Ness’ version of events is that he solved it, if you believe him. He did his job yet he still got railroaded. They wanted him to change his job description and he goes, “That’s not what you hired me to do. I’m not a detective, that’s not what my job description is. But, okay, you want me to be a detective, fine. And, you want me to stop this guy, fine.” And, in his mind, he did both. Because the end result was hidden from the public they didn’t think he did either. He tried running for mayor and can’t even win that candidacy. Somebody runs into him at a bar in New Jersey at the end of his life and he’s almost penniless and destitute. And then he recounts his Al Capone days which results in this book called the “The Untouchables.”

    So, we’ve only really seen half the Elliot Ness story. And the second half is just as cool, if not cooler. For us, Bill got it.

    The trailer is”¦(BOOM) “Based on a true story” (BOOM) “America’s first serial killer” (BOOM) “From Elliot Ness” (BOOM) “Comes Tom Cruise” Or whatever. Whatever actor is in it. And you’ve got to ask how that trailer does not get people into seats? You go check, check, check. And then you add a director who has a reputation and it’s “You’re in!”

    And I am sure there are thousand stories out there of people saying, “I don’t understand why don’t they want to make my movie?” Then it began to try and convince everybody to belly up and get it done.

    And you’ve talked about who you thought you’d like to see, Leonardo DiCaprio, Matt Damon, who you’d like to see play this character”¦

    Well, you know, historically, Elliot Ness is a lot younger than people think. He was in his early 20’s when he came to Chicago. By the time he put Capone away he was like 26, 27, he was a kid. You could say Kevin Costner was more of a Hollywood kind of thing, not quite exact casting. So, you could put someone in the role that’s in their mid 30’s and it’s historically correct which opens the door for a lot of actors.

    One of the guys who Bill is quite fond of is Matt Damon. He’s the one he keeps saying, “That would be cool.” He’s at the right age, got those boyish looks, likable, all the traits that Elliot Ness had.

    Once we get a viable script that the studio feels they can spend money on then we can go back into that equation and there might be more candidates at that point.

    And so you’re still waiting for Ehren to finish his first draft?

    Yeah, he’s going to have to sit there, go through his first draft and, hopefully, that’ll happen around the same time David has gone through his press junket, if you will, for ZODIAC and can catch his breath for a minute.

    He’s got another movie in development”¦

    Yeah, I have it right here”¦BENJAMIN BUTTON”¦

    Yup. It might make sense for him to go from one kind of thriller, suspense movie, take a bit of a breather, and then come back in.

    I am sure, depending on whatever the studio’s wants and needs are, and how fast Ehren can”¦at some point the studio could put the bum rush on but I hear that BUTTON is developing quite nicely so it’s not like it’s in development hell.

    On the same token I know that Miramax, you were waiting a long time for them to do something with this and the rights came back up, how long have you been waiting to do something with this story?

    You know, someone said the date and it was longer than I thought.

    It’s one of those (laughts) things where you don’t see the sands of time going through”¦and all of a sudden you go, “How long has it been?” I think”¦I want to say”¦I bought the rights from Bendis and Andreyko almost seven years ago. It’s been that long. I would have to see when we sold it to Miramax as they sat on it for a while”¦and then we sold it to Bill”¦I mean it only feels like a few years.

    Have you talked to Bendis at all about this? About having Mechanic on board, having Fincher on board”¦?

    I haven’t talked to Brian recently. I do talk to Andreyko and Mark is, obviously, quite pickled. Because, at the very beginning, in earlier conversations, when I was talking to Brian about it he was saying, “We should just do a low budget one and we should write it ourselves and, Todd, you should direct it.” It’s true, you can do all that stuff, but, to me, there are way more qualified people that can come in there and do it, especially from a directorial point of view. It was like, “Thanks for the encouragement but you can sell this someplace, bigger than we’re talking about here.” And I know when we were taking our first couple of meetings Mark was saying that Brian is a fan of Fincher too.

    I don’t think you’re going to get too many people that are going to sit there and bellyache if you get an A-list guy, in any capacity, to make a movie because that means you actually have a chance to put it in front of people, connecting, after all these years. I don’t think Mark or Brian are any different than anyone else and want to see their material on the big screen.

    Exactly. And just thinking here about Alan Moore, who hasn’t really bellyached but has had issues with those involved with LEAGUE OF EXTRAORDINARY GENTLEMEN to bring it back to Mechanic and even V FOR VENDETTA which he wants his name completely removed from, is it important to have the guy who initially wrote it get excited over the making of their material?

    I think so. When all is said and done Mark and Brian will be able to give their own personal view of it. Mark works in Hollywood, I know that Brian has sold a few things there but I think they are both savvy enough to understand that Hollywood is an inexact science and that once you let something go it may come out better or worse, very few times does it ever come out the way you want it. And that’s the kind of commentary you get from people who sell the source material. They go, “Oh my gosh, it turned out better than I hoped.” Or, “They killed it.” You rarely hear, “Ehh, it had some good spots.”

    I think we understand that this has to be a character driven movie. It can’t be a slasher movie. We’ve seen those, it’s too easy. Hopefully when Ehren does his homework and, I’m guessing, will have long conversations with both Brian and Mark and sort of pick their brain and will go, “Oh. Got it, got it, got it.” He’ll be able to say to Bill, “Now I know how I can sort of get into this.” I always thought it could be in the deconstruction of that hero. Hopefully Ehren can get in there and write something that you go, “Oh, okay.”

    As producers are you able to control any of that or can you only hope Ehren comes through?

    I’m sort of in an awkward position and only insofar in that I sold it to Miramax and Paramount”¦I’m sort of looking over Ehren’s shoulder, offering words of advice. I’m not supposed to be doing that, for legal reasons, but not sound legal reasons. Big studios want something, they get conservative, they get conservative. So, my capacity is going to be more just making sure the production gets going, we’ve got the right people”¦

    Has Fincher just signed on in name or has he talked about his own vision of what he’d like to do with the material?

    I know that his initial contact with the material, he’s seen it, have you seen”¦

    Yes. Loved it.

    Yes, so did I. As co-owner of Image comics when I read it I was blown away by it. So, you can see the movie just playing out in your head as you’re reading it, right?

    Right.

    So, I think David had read it and the one thing he did say was that he sees this as being very stylistic. Now, maybe when he gets there, when we start the movie, maybe it doesn’t have the same commentary as it does in the beginning. When you look at that book and you see it in that sort of film noir look I think it’s some of that that’s intrigued him besides that it’s a hell of a story. You can see that it’s a great story and you can get a little stylistic with it. So, I know he was intrigued by the black and white part of it, I don’t know if he’ll continue to be intrigued by black and white but, all of a sudden, you see movies like SIN CITY and you go, “Okay.” You can do some quirky stuff to what extent? But, there have been other movies, like HISTORY OF VIOLENCE and ROAD TO PERDITION that, to me, fall into what this story is about.

    Both of those stories were graphic novels but I don’t think your average moviegoer knew that. They were basically watching a glorified comic book. But what they did was take a medium, a genre, and they mixed it and they made it very seriously and it wasn’t about guys in tights running around doing flips.

    And, even though there is violence in both of those movies, you can still get your wife or mom to see them because, “Oh, it’s Tom Hanks, Paul Newman is in it”¦” And they present it as a real movie. Same thing with HISTORY OF VIOLENCE. Viggo, you just saw him in his trilogy, this is him in a quiet role, and, again, it’s sort of intriguing given that, intellectually, there’s a lot of violence in it but you go, “Oh, what would I do in his position?” So, to me, my guess is this thing will fall close to that category except we have, hopefully, the added bonus of this also being based on facts. But, you get a star, and put him in there and have people say, “Oh, I like that guy.” And it just happens to be against a backdrop of some criminal case.

    And I know you’ve been quoted as saying that you’ve become less enamored with the superhero genre. Is this just an evolution of your own sensibilities”¦

    I know I find myself as I get older wanting to stray away from some of the conventional superhero stuff. It doesn’t mean you can’t look at any of the stories from the comic book world because here’s one example that you pulled out of the comic book market. The other two I just mentioned, again, there are plenty that don’t have guys in tights. As a matter of fact, maybe the marketing see that as a kind of a drawback.

    I think that’s one of the problems with big movies that come from comic books. When you look at movies like ROAD TO PERDITION and HISTORY OF VIOLENCE, like you mentioned, the marketing seemed frozen, confused. I wondered for both of them if I was being sold an action movie, a thriller, a drama. Do you see that as a potential road block and, if you, what would you do to prevent that from happening?

    In this case, I don’t think so.

    What you’ve got here is a pre-built brand name. Once you say Elliot Ness, boom, a lot of people will go, “Oh, okay.” And then you go, “Well, what is he doing?” And you say that he’s got to catch America’s first serial killer. And, like I said, this is too easy of a trailer. This is an easy trailer to get people in but now the question is, “Can you keep them there for 2 hours?” That becomes an exercise for Ehren at that point.

    I think that once you get a grip of what you’re going to do with the character, there’s too much there. And a skilled writer like Ehren he’ll find a spot, he’ll find a groove and it’s just a matter of finding what the studio wants out of it. They want more action, they want more character development, is this something they want to put out to get some Oscar attention”¦

    Right.

    Like those other two movie I mentioned, we can go down that path in terms of putting it out there, and if we get some nice visuals from David and get his whole crowd, it’s very wide, plus he has a large cult following, you could potentially have your cake and eat it too if all the pistons are firing on all cylinders.

    Do you see this as the next evolution of comic book movies or do you think that people are getting tired of seeing guys in tights?

    Naw, I don’t think so.

    It just becomes a gentle reminder that if you’re looking for comic books you can come in with an open mind. There is some nice comedy out there, some nice drama and, obviously, there is action which is a mile high.

    Do I think there will be any shift? No, not as long as the BATMAN’s, the SPIDER-MAN’s and X-MEN’s make as much money as they do and they are going to continue to mine all that. I’m just saying that once you get past the A guys, and you can count the A guys on two hands, then it becomes a matter of whether it’s better to look for stuff like Torso compared to the 25th most popular guy in DC comic books?

    I laugh

    So what’s the biggest step from here?

    I mean, the big contract, on some level, is Ehren’s. Once his is done then he gets to write. I haven’t checked in yet so they may have finished him off already. The big credit goes to Bill Mechanic for sticking with it for as long as he did because he could have walked away from it. He had a couple of opportunities but he was like, “No, let’s keep going with it.”

    I am really interested to see how this looks if it’s done right.

    Yeah, done right I think it will blow a lot of people’s minds away going, “I had no idea that happened.” It’s what every executive said after we pitched it. There are big Hollywood, wild moments and you can go, “They’re making it up,” but no, this is how it went down.

    It just got caught in a political wheel and it’s why it didn’t get exposed and, once we went to war, we got distracted. To show you how big it is, how big the story was at that time”¦that we somehow neglected in our history, Hitler mentioned it.

    Really?

    Yup.

    In one of his speeches he used this case, one of his big propaganda speeches, he used it as the proof of the degradation of America’s society, The Mad Butcher, the Torso Killings. And then, a few days later, they find another torso in Cleveland and it has the word “Nazi” carved into it. I mean, it’s crazy stuff like that. If Hitler was aware of it you can imagine how big it was. And, somehow, we’ve lost it in the annals of our crime stories for some reason and hopefully this movie will put it back on the map.

    And, really, for me, from a comic book point of view, it says to me that comic books are still a viable medium. If people are like, “I don’t want to see a movie of guys in tights,” then, you know, you don’t have to. As a matter of fact, if you don’t want to read about guys in tights, you don’t have to. All you have to do is spend 10 minutes in a comic book shop and you’d be amazed how wide a range of material is there.

    You go into Blockbuster and you see the movies are all round and flat but it’s the subject matter that differentiates itself from kid material to our material, right?

    Right.

    And comic books are no different but, in this country, have such a stereotype of the word “comic book.”

    It’s a stigma, really.

    It is. Superman and Archie, that’s it. Really, go up to someone who has seen ROAD TO PERDITION and tell them that was from a graphic novel and they’ll stare at you blankly. They don’t know what to do with that. “I like comic book movies??” No, you like good material, that’s what you like, and that’s all I am saying. The comic book marketplace has a lot of good material and I hope it continues to have good material.

    I agree. My first comic book was G.I. Joe number 47, that was almost 20 years ago this May, and even still I see the same variety of traditional comic readers; somehow that stigma is just not going away.

    I did a book called Sam and Twitch that Bendis wrote and we got the new one, The Case Files of Sam and Twitch, and that’s all crime fiction stuff in comic book form. So, it’s like you don’t want to read Superman anymore, fine, there’s other stuff. You don’t have to stop reading comics, you just have to go out and find something that’s your taste now. There is plenty of that. The Vertigo lines are part of it, just make a little bit of an effort.

    Hopefully this movie will help to chip away at that stereotype.

    Yeah, I ran into a guy and I told him I make toys and he said, “Oh, for kids.” And I told him I do animation and he’s, “Oh, for kids.” Then it was that I did comic books and it was like, “Oh, you do kids stuff.” And I have to say, “Uhh”¦not really.” Animation can be anything you want it to be, toys are clay that you can put into any form you want. “What you’re doing is remembering YOUR childhood. You’re remembering your Leave it Beaver mindset. And you haven’t updated that mindset yet.” And I guess that’s our job, pushing that boulder up the hill.

  • Trailer Park: COMEDY GOLD

    E-MAIL THE AUTHOR | By Christopher Stipp

    February 17, 2006

    COMEDY GOLD

    With the advent of CLERKS 2 coming out this summer I am reminded that even though I am keeping aged pace with the titular characters of the film I don’t feel like I am evolving out of the same flicks I liked so many years ago when movies like KRULL and STRANGE BREW were my RAGING BULL, my ANNIE HALL. I like that while I am able to be sharply critical of the movie advertisments you’ve all come here to enjoy I can feel all sorts of geeky when a car or person blows up real nice like in a trailer.

    One of the things that have caused me to reasses where my barometer is set was my foray into the cinema last week to see CURIOUS GEORGE. Now, for those who are feeling any kind of nostalga towards this little monkey which seems so cute on ringer T’s that are sold at Hot Topic in your city’s mall I tell you that this is not an adult friendly animation experience and, I posit, the only experience to be had is one of hot, bordem pokers skewering your eyeballs as you try and figure out what Timothy Leary LSD disciple/executive authorized the obscene pastiches of color that are used throughout this movie.

    Look, my girl liked the film. She’s 2 1/2 yet she kept her yammer shut and her butt in the chair. I was amazed by the supernatural power this movie had over her. She was laughing at the spots most of the other kids were laughing and even when the mayor for Cheeba Town, Jack Johnson, busted in with one of his lazy musical interludes my kid was jamming in her chair. Whatever subliminal message this movie was flickering I can’t help but give the thumbs up on any illicit activity that had this effect on my brood. What I have an issue with, then, is the Saturday Morning style in which this pathetically simple story was drawn and animated. Superfriends were better rendered than this movie and I can’t even give this movie a B grade when it was painfully obvious there was going to be zero opportunity for me to get involved with whatever the writers came up for the adults. I mean, just a couple of weeks ago I read one adventure to my little lady where George goes batshit inside a movie theather. I mean, that little simian gets into a world of troouble and not even the Man With The Yellow Hat can put the beat down on that meddling monkey; that’s the story I wanted to see: the one of the miscreant monkey who is always fucking things up for everyone else around him. This is a movie for kids and that’s fine. I am not going to take contention with that. I just realize that I have been spoiled by the efforts of other animators of over movies who had the foresight to know that there are going to be older people in the audience who like a good animated movie as well and that simply assuming kids are the only ones who would want to see a monkey get into trouble obviously have never seen me drool with delight any time that GOING APE or those gnarly Career Builder ads are on the television; primates will always be funny. I don’t care who tells you otherwise.

    I think, in closing, I am glad that I still want to be involved in the movie going experience as an adult in seeing a kid’s movie. That I am angry I wasn’t let along for the ride in what could’ve been a great movie if the original vibe of the books stayed in tact is only just proof that not only to I demand for these movies to be better but the face that my dollars helped make this monkey movie take third place at the box office is just woeful and I do apologize to each and every one of you.


    Also, and I think this is a good place for it, I wanted to state, for the record, that after watching COOL RUNNINGS over the weekend and being enthralled by the possibilities that is international competition and mutual admiration I would like to declare a fatwa against all that is Bode Miller Hype. After believing himself better than his teammates in the opening ceremony by not rocking that odd hybrid of beret, Kangol and touque on top of his melon spoke volumes about how he feels about the sanctity of sport in general. He can be all the asshole he wants but it delights me to no end that his poor showing in the one place where you have to bring your A game is some kind of cosmic karma that would not let someone so full of innane, self-righteous screed, saying that “I’ve straddled probably more times than most people have finished a slalom,” get away with being a “rebel” to those who could’ve been his supporters. I will say that he is an unbelievable ringer, a true personification, of Roy Stalin from the righteous and classic BETTER OFF DEAD. I hope you kids learned a good lesson about how much fun the media has in finding new ways to build up its heroes and to rip them down in true schadenfreude fashion. If I could admonish everyone, delicately, to send a picture to ol’ Bode (By the way, Nike, how is that marketing campaign going? Buy enough ad time? I’m sure a lot of you must be delighted with the way things turned out.) of Chad Hendrick who, even though he wasn’t a blowhard, was man enough to bawl like a little girl for all sorts of reasons, publicly, and still secure his Olympic gold in the face of those big, bad, burly commercials that show Bode in his slow-mo greatness; I am sure he could use the pick me up. Take a lesson from Chad, kids, and show a little class. It may not get you on 60 Minutes but I think you’ll see how much more rewarding and satisfying hard work, discipline and not seemimg like you having a boot planted sideways in one’s own balloon knot can be. Whoever thinks that brooding James Dean types are still a viable economic model for today’s youth need to have their collective…well, it is a viable model for many athletes and corporations who sponser children like this but it doesn’t mean that I can’t take solace in waiting till they get faced by dudes like Lane Meyer.


    Aaaaaand, speaking of controversial media figures, if I could hype up next week’s column I would like to let you all know that this space will be filled next week with an interview I just conducted with Todd McFarlane wherein the groundwork for a filmic adaptation for Brian Michael Bendis’ “Torso” is laid out. With David Fincher being announced as the man who will filter the story of America’s first serial killer the possibilities of how one renders this tale are endless. Do be sure to come back next week as the information is plentiful. Oh, and some of you who visit other movie sites will notice that one of them ran a news tidbit about a crazy trailer that just popped up online. That movie is called SPECIAL and my critique of the oddity that is that trailer can be found right here. It’s nice to know that sometimes I’m finding these out-of-the way nuggets long before anyone else decides to let other people know about them. That trailer, though, IS odd but completely worth watching again and again.


    Let’s see Bode get 6th place after getting his ass kicked by a mountain…


    THE DEVIL AND DANIEL JOHNSTON (2005) Director:Jeff Feuerzeig
    Cast: Louis Black, Bill Johnston, Daniel Johnston, Mabel Johnston, Jeff Tartakov
    Release: March 31, 2006 (Limited)
    Synopsis: Daniel Johnston, manic-depressive genius singer/songwriter/artist is revealed in this portrait of madness, creativity and love.
    View Trailer:
    * Large (QuickTime)

    Prognosis: Positive but with corrections. I think that one of the worst things you can do when pimping your product to a populace is shower too much praise on it; this only results in heightened expectations that fall short. Every time.

    When I see a synopsis claim that uses the word “genius” to describe the subject that we’re about to watch I get instantly cynical and skeptical. I don’t care if this batshit crazy music man really IS a genius but I want to come up to my own conclusions about such things. Thankfully, the trailer never drops the G word and I am amazed that I am so drawn in by this movie’s substance.

    On first glance this trailer immediately grabs me when we see our musical, filmic namesake standing on a stage, looking at a handheld camera as a throng of fans cheering in the background. The musical interlude that twinkles in the background as the screen flickers to a NAPOLEON DYNAMITE-esque hand-scribbled Sundance award proclamation along with words of praise from AIN’T IT COOL is endearing.

    The archival video footage of Daniel Johnston from years ago, in his own voice, explaining who he is and allowing us to get a feel for this un-rock star is appropriate in a way that the modern footage that’s interlaced with it offers the audience a nice balance of offering something old with something new.

    On top of getting information, quickly, about who this quirky songster is you also get a voiceover from someone who sounds well versed in musical comings and goings; it could be one of those twats that love to pour endlessly over old issues of Rolling Stone or NME and are proud as punch to think they are a part of a critical literati but it’s evenhanded. When you hear someone else, a woman, say that underneath all this talent there was something really really wrong with the guy you can sense that this is why the film got made in the first place.

    This point is expounded upon as, ostensibly, those who knew him clue is in on the fact that not only was this dude tossed like a rainbow into a mental ward but that the doted on the devil much too much for his own good. Again, the sounds of those talking are laid out over a bed of fresh looking images. An abandoned, dilapidated nuthouse is used as background for Johnston’s audio diary of his time spent inside the kook clink. Shots of deliciously piled drugs from our nation’s pharmaceutical overlords give the idea that Daniel was somehow eventually treated for his psychoses.

    The last moments of this trailer are spent showing the once rail thin Johnston about three times the man he used to be, perhaps a side effect of the medications, as his own music plays along images of his life as it is now. There are still people cheering for him, he still has that wily sense about him and his music seems just as poignant as it was over twenty years ago.

    I don’t know a thing about him but yet, simply based on what I see here, I think I’d like to.


    THE NOTORIOUS BETTIE PAGE(2005) Director:Mary Harron
    Cast: Gretchen Mol, Lili Taylor, Jonathan M. Woodward, David Strathairn, Cara Seymour
    Release: April 14, 2006 (Limited)
    Synopsis: The story of Bettie Page, uber-successful 1950’s pin-up model, one of the first sex icons in America, and the target of a Senate investigation (based on her bondage photos).
    View Trailer:
    * Large (Quick Time)

    Prognosis: Negative. Don’t you love seeing those faux hipster chicks who wear their hair like Bettie Page? They wear those same kind of era sunglasses, usually carry themselves with the kind of bitchiness that’s usually reserved for captains of the cheerleading team in high school and like to surround themselves with like-minded dweebs who feel that they’re all worse off living in the now instead of being really cool by emulating long dead iconoclasts? No? Maybe I’m the only one who loves seeing these kinds of ladies and making fun of them.

    Off the bat, I love that this movie is rated R for “Nudity, sexual content and some language.” There needs to be more of these kinds of movies in circulation as the dearth of them only make it harder for young boys to come of age with the right kind of material laying around the Blockbuster. They’re sure not going to get it with all these actresses who want to go the tease route and I am even more pleased when the first barrage of images for this film is Bettie in all kinds of poses. They’re tame, to be sure, but you can’t just expect to have things get wild from the word go.

    But, oddly enough, the trailer just explodes right into things with showcasing our talent young femme in color and black and white. I am not sure what’s more exotic or erotic but Bettie really isn’t shown to be so much of an innocent girl drawn into a world that was not her choosing but that being a pin-up was just her destiny.

    The trailer starts off with her just getting her picture taken in gun boat bras and granny panties but things take a turn for the kink when a nebbish little man brings out these mammoth looking leather boots. I haven’t a clue if this is where her S&M phase starts or what but when a man off the street walks up to her and asks whether it makes her feel like punishing, crushing, humiliating, among other things to dudes when they gravel in front of her. The moment is perfectly rendered and I start to realize that Bettie wasn’t just some Playboy fantasy girl but that she was a full-on dominatrix who reached her subjects from beyond the page.

    One of the things I fault this trailer for, though, is its simple omission of any substance here. Yeah, it’s great that we get this woman romping around in her skivvies for a full two minutes and that we get some real titillating video to watch but what about this woman’s private life? I have to assume she wasn’t all about her underwear and was so much more than the sum of her parts. I wouldn’t know any of that, though, because all I get is a little hesitation from Bettie about her fame being so constraining but I want to teased and pleased. This trailer, though, just leaves me blue in more ways than one.


    BRICK (2006) Director: Rian Johnson
    Cast: Joseph Gordon-Levitt, Lukas Haas, Nora Zehetner, Noah Segan, Noah Fleiss, Emilie de Ravin, Meagan Good
    Release: March 24, 2006 (Limited)
    Synopsis: Brendan Fry is a loner at his high school, someone who knows all the angles but has chosen to stay on the outside. When the girl he loves turns up dead, he plunges into the school’s social strata like a fist through a honeycomb to find the “who” and “why,” with the same single-minded devotion to his self-appointed task as the hard-boiled heroes of old.
    View Trailer:
    * Medium (QuickTime)

    Prognosis: Pass. Originality of Vision.

    This film was awarded a prize at the 2005 Sundance Film Festival for it’s originality of vision but does that mean it had a nice way of telling a story or that it just looked good on screen? I’m not sure what kind of an award an OOV really is but I can’t say that anything about this trailer really makes me want to find out for sure.

    It opens up really wonderfully, though, when we get the R rated red banner that comes before everything. I am jazzed that, at the very least, there will be some wildly objectionable content to follow. I am quickly slowed down in my enthusiasm when we see our first player standing in a phone booth.

    Now, why there happens to be a phone booth out in the middle of nowhere I don’t know but the little scroll of jive/slang that appears when our other player, the one on the other side of the phone, is hysterically rambling on about a “brick” and a “pin.” Ooo”¦I feel so in with the hip kids.

    When I see that the crying girl on the phone was our Australian outback steakhouse fraulein from Lost: Emilie de Ravin. She seems to have gone missing following the exchange between our guy from the beginning but that’s quickly run over as we go back to our dude who brings in his buddies into this situation.

    Our man starts to rattle off those code words again: brick, tug, pin. All the while these words are rattled off we get real smoky visuals of these words appearing and dissolving off the screen. I’m not really impressed as I am perturbed by these Sesame Street phonics lessons. I know they’re trying to be all sort of indie with the vibe and look but I’m not feeling very engaged with the material.

    What starts to change my direction on this movie is the motion we gain by starting to show what all of this means within the context of the flick. The characters start interacting with other people, the mystery starts to grow deeper as discordant images piece themselves together.

    Our hero gets his ass kicked by a Buddy Revell look-a-like in his high school’s parking lot. He, of course, gets to make a smoky cool joke about how he never saw that kid who beat him up before in his life and that he was glad he was looking for lunch money because he was”¦brown baggin’ it. Oh, SNAP! Did you fuc%&ing see that come back?? “Brown baggin’ it.”

    Yeah, it’s edgy in that wink-wink sort of way. And the trailer doesn’t especially award you for paying attention to what’s happening as it does make you feel special just for watching what it has to offer in the sense of how cool it is trying to be; and it’s trying hard.

    What’s odd is that I still want to see this movie however complex this story might be. There seems to be something between all of this and I can’t help but feel this flick rises ever so greater above the rest of the usual sludge.


    ULTRAVIOLET (2006) Director: Kurt Wimmer
    Cast: Milla Jovovich, Cameron Bright, William Fichtner
    Release: March 3, 2006
    Synopsis: Set in the late 21st century, a subculture of humans called Hemophages has emerged who have been genetically modified, giving them enhanced speed, incredible stamina and acute intelligence. To the government’s dismay, more and more of the population are being transformed, and they have set out to rid the world of this new subculture that they deem menaces to society. One rogue warrior is bent on protecting her race ““ and seeking revenge on those who changed her life forever. With fierce fighting skills and chameleon-like abilities, Violet (Jovovich) sets out to destroy a government-designed time bomb that will eliminate all Hemophages. To Violet’s surprise, the deadline device is a nine-year-old-boy, who was raised in a laboratory and goes by the name of Six (Bright).
    View Trailer:
    * Large (QuickTime)

    Prognosis: Can’t believe the hype…yet Do you know that there are only two movies I ever really came close to walking out on? I usually reserve the opportunity to see a movie as a chance to allow a filmmaker their chance to tell me a story all the way through. That’s why THE JERKY BOYS and THE FIFTH ELEMENT will always hold special places in my filmic heart as two of the worst films I had to ever endure. Milla Jovovich was only part of the problem in that movie but she’s kind of a one-note actress.

    Case in point is the trailer for this movie.

    Okay, so Milla is narrating this trailer. We open up with her kicking the crap out of some baddies who are wearing plastic scuba gear apparati, using the same kind of billy clubs made famous in DEMOLITION MAN. What’s amusing to me is that she’s trying to be this hardcore lady but when she finally stops kicking all these dudes asses for a moment and her gut is flopping up and down, she wants to break down the story from the beginning.

    I don’t know what futuristic society set out to make super warriors who bear an un-original likeness to Nazi soldiers with samurai swords but it’s like a 13 year-old was given the chance to bring their comic book to life and they’ve included every old and busted archetype they’ve ever seen. AEON FLUX seems to have fused with the leftovers from THE 6TH DAY and those obnoxious shiny black bad guy uniforms from SPACEBALLS.

    I’m not sure whose idea it was that this new futuristic world was so unkind to our lungs that people have to wear plugs in their noses which look about as serious as seeing them in the nostrils of Bob and Doug McKenzie from STRANGE BREW but it’s all downhill from this point forth.

    We get more of our super soldier Nazi ninjas doing all they can to look as cool and dangerous as they can and Milla brings up the rear, or specifically, her rear in some retro Hypercolor pants and matching half-shirt. And let’s get this out of the way: she’s always wearing a half shirt. I so forgot to consult my military training from the future manual where it states that standard issue uniforms for the good guys are no longer are to be used for maximum protection but should, instead, incite chubbies from all men who dare gaze on her fleshy tummy. It’s mindless, stupid and completely doesn’t serve any logical purpose.

    What’s more is the dreadful dialogue. When it is employed, Milla saying crap like “copy that” or “killing is what I do, it;’s what I’m good at” makes being an apologist for all the bad movies I still defend by the likes of Jean-Claude Van Damme so shaming; how can I stick up for those when I want to run screaming from this trailer? I don’t know but I am sure I’ll rationalize it somehow.

    And, to be fair and balanced, I can’t dismiss this trailer completely out of hand. Even though the music is downright pedestrian I like some of the visuals employed. The effects work in some places is interesting and the handling of some of the battle sequences brings a fresh perspective on how a B movie can be properly executed if enough cheese is tossed at the screen.

    I can’t wait until I ignore this movie completely when it’s released theatrically and then rent it when it explodes, or implodes, depending, on DVD. If it does bad enough at the box office I hope to see it being released on DVD within the month.

  • Trailer Park: 30 YEAR OLD VIRGIN


    By Christopher Stipp

    February 10, 2006

    30 YEAR OLD VIRGIN

    What a week it has been.

    First of all, let’s give it up one more time for Chris Ryall and his tenure here at Movie Poop Shoot. I am quite fond of kicking the hell out of dead horses so let me be the 23rd person to say that I have nothing but respect and admiration for the man who gave me this part of the Internet to unleash the unholy terror that is the accumulation of 6 1/2 years of college level English to you, the teeming millions.

    One of the very best things I can say about the man is that he was always available as an editor. I could always ask him a question, offer an idea that I had and he was unbelievably quick with the response. I have never known anyone to respond so swiftly with an email. He was already swamped, to be sure, with his higher paying job running this small little comic company in San Diego but for him to return an email that asked him his thoughts of whether the STAR WARS III trailer sorta sucked some ass and, regardless, would we be duped anyway to give up our collective cash to see the final installment Ryall was there to suffer this fool gladly every single day of the week. And I think that’s one thing I’ll miss about not having him around in his virtual form. It was the email that gave me the green light to stretch my boundaries a little bit and indulge in some interviewing that really changed things for me here.

    Interviewing, for me, has been a wonderful addition to my abilities as a writer. One of the best things that I’ve learned about doing it is that the Entertainment Tonight style of star fu%&ing the subjects they’re talking to is not only sickening but it does the audience a disservice. I deeply enjoy finding the angle which will make my time with a person of a certain status unique; it’s a grueling process to get my notes aligned and in order to find that one question which will really get someone to open up but it’s satisfying as a writer to achieve that. Even though a few weeks ago my ambition to get the kind of subjects other movie sites enjoy as a standard sucked Chris into a situation he really didn’t enjoy being in he gave me the benefit of the doubt and did what he had to do. I think it’s important to let people know he did that for me and had to step up again after a director had some issues with some things I said about his movie. I was mortified he had to do these things but I think that’s how Chris rolls; he goes to bat for his crew, for better or worse. I would never do anything to betray what’s been given to me and Chris hopefully knows that.

    He was the Eric ‘Otter’ Stratton to this ANIMAL HOUSE. I think he would be the one to take on any attack with the idea that only he could do that to his pledges. I don’t know when I’ll get my pin here at the ‘Shoot but I just hope to Christ I’m not the Kent ‘Flounder’ Dorfman character, the one that gets the beer tossed at the screen at the mere sight of my visage.

    I want and need to thank Chris Ryall for all that he did for me in the past two years whilst here. The house will just feel a little more empty without his brand of humor.

    Secondly. I’d like to publicly welcome the newest member of my own Southwest Syyyyiede Crew: Ella Grace Stipp. Coming in a full two weeks early and two pounds lighter than her sister I am happy to say that the only thing I have to do differently as a father is try and figure out A) how I am going to live in a house with nothing but women and B) how I am going to get the majority vote to be able and play BLACK HAWK DOWN in full surround sound whenever I damn well please. So, Ella, welcome to my world and know that I have this picture at my digital disposal. Vote right.

    Aaaand, lastly, here’s a trailer that doesn’t really adhere to the filmic forum but is nonetheless quite entertaining to me as it prompted the question to the submitter: Which came first, Robotech or Transformers? I got a very interesting answer, one that really amazed me, and it makes me wonder how the live action TRANSFORMERS movie will turn out come next year. I do loves me some good space explosions though… ROBOTECH: THE SHADOW CHRONICLES


    ON THE OUTS (2006) Director:Lori Silverbush, Michael Skolnik
    Cast: Anny Mariano, Paola Mendoza, Judy Marte, Dominc Colón
    Release: January 27, 2006
    Synopsis: A dramatic narrative feature based upon the real stories of girls from the streets and juvenile jail, who lent their voices and unique stories to the filmmakers. These are girls who struggle with all the highs and lows of teenage life in an inner-city world that makes its own rules.
    View Trailer:
    * Large (QuickTime)

    Prognosis: Positive. My real, elapsed city time of what I spent in downtown Chicago proper? It comes out to 4 months. I spent one semester at a school that was successful for me, academically, but completely wrong when it came to defining my professional and artistic goals. The city is alive with pleasure but I can’t imagine what it must be like for some kids to be mainlining that electricity, that vibrancy, of a big metropolitan town.

    “I ain’t come here to change your life”¦That’s a fact.”

    I thought it was Don Cheadle who starts this thing out. It looks like a tinier Mean Joe Brown from LEAN ON ME but it’s a nice man in a collared shirt and a black, armless sweater.

    One of the other things that you learn quickly, and this is where the props begin, is that this movie has been around. The NOMINATIONs, the OFFICIAL SELECTIONs this movie has been accorded is impressive for a movie that doesn’t sport a real noticeable “name.”

    Our Cheadle-esque character is barking at a pack of girls who don’t look like debutantes and are obviously being yelled at because of whatever happened before this trailer began. The mix of a real nice slice of music and the delicate way this trailer delivers us to the first moment of this film’s core through its cutting is very well appreciated.

    Also, what’s nice is that while there are a lot of quotes flying around, The Post, Newsday, Entertainment Weekly, the trailer doesn’t let it stop telling the story of why we’re here, trying to figure out if the flick is worth our time; the narratives of these women, these hardcore chicas, rolls right through the words.

    I start to worry that this is going to stray into derivative territory as we discover these are women come from a pedigree of drug dealing, addiction and runaways. I have to believe that this territory has been treaded on before and that this has something new to say. The three ladies who are focused on are all shown in the middle of their lives of destruction.

    When each one of them are tarried away to the clink I am pleased that things get more interesting with the advent of finding out, through our Cheadle stand-in, whether there can be a change in the ways people either change their life or become a statistic of recidivism.

    As this trailer comes to a close, the real meat of this story obviously not being able to come in the form of a money shot, I think that this is the kind of movie that GET RICH OR DIE TRYIN’ should’ve been. You want to show the dangers of people, kids, getting involved with the kind of trades which put them behind bars and destroy lives but by putting some real looking faces on the issue without sweetening the story with bulletproof vests and ho’s you are doing the narrative a great service.


    SILENT HILL (2006) Director:Christophe Gans
    Cast: Radha Mitchell, Sean Bean, Laurie Holden, Deborah Kara Unger, Kim Coates, Tanya Allen, Jodelle Ferland
    Release: April 21, 2006
    Synopsis: SILENT HILL is based on the Konami game in which Rose (Mitchell) desperately searches for her lost daughter in the mysterious, terrifying town of Silent Hill, where they are trapped.
    View Trailer:
    * Medium (Windows Media)

    Prognosis: Negative. Quick, name the most successful movie to have been adapted from a video game.

    That sound of crickets chirping? Yeah, there haven’t been that many to speak of. Sure, you’ve got Milla Jovo-whatever who was serviceable in RESIDENT EVIL and even The Rock who was a part of an experiment gone awry, both cinematically and literally, have proven that movies which are first video games only have so much steam when you try and make an hour and a half of entertainment.

    That said, then, this trailer looks like it’ll rise above, if only by a little bit, the common expectations which a flick like this engenders by its very nature of what it is: a not quite horror movie.

    I will say, though, I was a bit bored by the initial offering of this trailer. It starts out all soft with a mother and daughter talking about the nature of sleep and dreams while walking down some pussy willow populated country hilltop. I know we’re going to get to the spooky real quick as these trailers only last so long but, come on, I see that we’re already a quarter of a way through this when the conceit that there’s something in the road in the middle of the night that causes mom and daughter to spin out of control. If there are any video geeks among us here today I ask of whether this is the way things begin in the game because I can’t see this being a real “explosive” beginning to things.

    I get some jolly enjoyment, though, after we move through this little portion of the movie as when ma wakes up and discovers a) it’s now daylight b) her daughter is gone and c) the snow flakes that are falling aren’t snow flakes at all, and thus bringing back one of the most terrifying moments in SCHINDLER’S LIST, it is all about the errie. I don’t know how you would start out with this being the beginning of the trailer but now I’m engaged with things and this is what I should’ve been feeling about 30 seconds ago.

    Now that we’ve established that this woman has a missing kid and is all alone in this desolate town called Silent Hill the interesting stuff is supposed to start, right? No, it doesn’t and I can’t imagine why a lot of people on the Internets are gushing over a trailer that takes me from mildly boring, to heightened delight and then plunges me into confusing cock-tease territory with a montage of clips that renders my man, Sean Bean, into one of those movie guys who are all sorts of bombastic in his quest to find this lost wife, neverminding the fact that if Silent Hill is supposed to be this podunk town which is essentially wiped out for some reason why do they still have functioning cell towers, and makes Radha Mitchell into one of those movie heroines who seem hysterical, not empowered.

    Adding to this frustration is the false sense of horror this movie is trying to build to. I get that there is a girl who is slithering around this condemned town who looks exactly like the protagonist’s little lady but the effusiveness with which we keep this doppelganger’s visage out of view, almost like a GODZILLA-like shell game, doesn’t entice me as a viewer.

    “To find your daughter you must face the darkness of Hell.”

    The above quote just makes my eyes roll in the back of my zombiefied head. EVERYTHING in a horror movie is people talking about Hell this, Hell that and, to me, it’s just lazy storytelling. Yes, if you’ve got to work hard at something it feels like Hell but unless you’re making a movie adaptation of Dante’s “Inferno” you’ve got to come back to me later with something better than that as I would sooner give you a C- on your ability to create tension rather than relying on poor metaphors like this.


    HORRORS OF WAR (2006) Director: Peter John Ross, John Whitney
    Cast: Jon Osbeck, Joe Lorenzo, Daniel Alan Kiely, David Carroll, Chip Kocel, Kim Carey
    Release: May 5, 2006
    Synopsis: Feeling the pressure from Allied advance, Hitler unleashes his secret weapons. Throughout the European theatre of WWII, Lieutenant John Schmidt comes face to face with these “weapons” which terrorize U.S. soldiers fighting the Third Reich. The Office of Strategic Services (The O.S.S., precursor to the C.I.A.) initiates missions behind enemy lines to find the source of these weapons, a mysterious scientist by the name of Dr. Schaltur. Schmidt is joined by Captain Joe Russo and his group of war-hardened GIs who have experienced for themselves the all-too-real horrors of war in battle. Together, they must find the Dr. Schaltur and stop him before Hitler’s horrific vision can be fully realized.
    View Trailer:
    * Medium (QuickTime)

    Prognosis: Positive. Now, one of the best things about finally being able to enjoy Kevin Smith’s Spiderman and Black Cat mini-series is that Dr. Josef Mengele is dropped in seamlessly in order to move the plot along to where it needs to go which brings me to this trailer: nothing says “wicked awesome” better than paring a WWII movie and Nazi zombies together in one film. Usually it’s one of the three which get my motor runnin’ but all three together is like a mutated pairing in heaven.

    Also, what’s important to note, is that there’s no messing around here. We get right into things tout de suite without any background bull crap that usually hampers indie trailers.

    Yeah, the exchange between two Allied soldiers who want to talk about “what they’ve seen” seems a little stiff but the quick cut to the all red screen with the visage of a zombified Nazi doesn’t even begin to explain the delight I felt when I see the white eyes of the undead cutting in and out of the screen as some other soldiers walk a night patrol. I don’t have any context to where we are or when this verbal exchange is happening but it’s just enough that we’re somewhere in the battle of WWII.

    I also appreciate the effects work that is on display here. The shot of a plane with its wing on fire, the battle scenes of guns going off with bombs of smoke trying to create the realism of war, the cutaways of the mad scientist’s lab where these zombies are being created should impress even the most ardent stickler of details.

    Sometimes the most tragic thing that a movie can do is to have its characters loaded with one-liners and dialogue so stiff it feels like a corpse but intermingled with the scenes of action, which should also be testament to the amount of work which was put into trying to mimic some kind of battlefield realism, but this is the exact kind of lot which should be delivering these kinds of lines. This is WWII, the era of pulp fiction, of Mickey Spillane and these army guys’ grandiose delivery is easily glossed over in order to try and understand why there is this Master Zombie which doesn’t look like he is so easily put down by ordinary machine gun fire.

    As we come close to the end we should be pleasantly surprised that the trailer doesn’t follow the current trend in trailer construction which states that you blow your wad in explaining, and showing, everything that’s going to happen. The cards aren’t all on the table, as our narrative stops just as our men in green are going to after the last zombie in the line, “daddy” they call him, and it’s much appreciated as it leaves the audience with just enough questions about what is going on in this movie.

    Kudos.


    SPECIAL (2006) Director: Hal Haberman, Jeremy Passmore
    Cast: Alexandra Holden, Jack Kehler, Andrew Leeds, Ian McConnel, Josh Peck, Michael Rapaport
    Release: January 30, 2006 (Sundance)
    Synopsis: LES FRANKEN (Michael Rapaport) leads a painfully unremarkable life as a metermaid until he enrolls in a drug study for an experimental anti-depressant. An unexpected side effect of the drug convinces Les he is developing special powers and must quit his job to answer his new calling in life… Superhero. A very select group of people in life are truly gifted. Special is a movie about everyone else.
    View Trailer:
    * Large (QuickTime)

    Prognosis: I Have No Idea. Like to spark up a little? Having a hard time trying to use your “high time” effectively? I’d like to suggest you watch this trailer to truly put psychotropic drugs to good use.

    I don’t know how to really put into words what we’ve got cooking here but it’s something I’ve never really tasted before and I like the way it hits the tongue, so to speak.

    When we open up the trailer we see Michael Rapaport, really a likeable loser or annoying Brooklyn-ite who ought to learn how speak good, I choose the former, sitting in a stark doctor’s office as he holds a bottle of pills. He asks if they work, the doctor say they do and the next thing you know, and we see, he’s hovering in his family room as his bong load buddy looks on.

    Now, the pills he took could possibly be inducing a state of insanity on our protagonist but the early 80’s synth music, popping and crunching in the background, and the static camera shot of Michael just floating as he tries to explain his condition to his roommates glazes everything with a funky craziness.

    Not to be undone in his own apartment, Michael returns to his doctor’s office only to leap off his desk and hover above the ground on his chest. The doctor is confused, I’m confused but when he announces that being a superhero takes some adjustment time I am all on board.

    Michael then appears at the local police station to tell the officer on duty that he stops crime and then takes off, like Batman fleeing the scene, only to run himself into the nearest brick wall. At first I don’t know what to even say about this but as Michael gets hit by a car, has his buddies shuttling him around town to ostensibly fight wrong do-ers and espouses a credo about not doing good being tantamount to doing evil I can’t help but feel either very impressed at the level of insanity or completely freaked out by where this story is going.

    It doesn’t help matters any more that as this trailer progresses, Michael’s condition worsens and looks more and more beat-up.

    There is a definite slide Michael’s character takes, as we get the idea that it DOES have something and everything to do with the medication he begins to take, and there is a certain amount of sadness to seeing him slowly burn out in a tailspin of psychosis and paranoia.

    I can’t help but sit in awe and amazement as I try and get a handle with where exactly this movie’s story really is going but it’s too much fun to see Michael’s delusion of his own abilities get the best of him as he’s repeatedly thrashed and ass-kicked.

    I promise you, though, once you watch this trailer you will have the musical bed that these visuals rest on popping for a very long time afterward.