Apologies that updates have slowed to a crawl at the mothersite. Regular operations should resume next week or before.
If you're looking for something of substance to read, check out Rosey's latest column on the many paradoxes of "the director's cut."
21 comments:
Alex,
I don't know another film critic on earth who could churn out 10 paragraphs on something as impersonally-substandard as "The Whoopee Boys", a film I've never been able to get through. Pray tell, why do you think Michael O'Keefe turned into such an unappealing killjoy after wonderful work in "Caddyshack" and "The Great Santini"? It's almost like he was Johnny Favorite who sold his soul for brief success and Beezlebub soon came collecting. As for Paul Rodriguez, I tried watching him recently in "Born in the U.S.A." and found him about as alluring as a rusted radiator. Even Clint Eastwood couldn't get anything viable out of him in the tepid "Blood Work". For my money, if you want the real thing, Ruben Blades is the definitive one to go to.
Looks like you might have answered your own question regarding O'Keefe. Simple case of killing the goose that laid the golden eggs. Jury is out on Rodriguez. At the very least, he made me laugh a couple times during The Whoopee Boys:
"I'm Humping, the butler."
"So who's fucking the maid?"
Is anyone else going to see the Clone Wars this weekend? And for those of you who are, do you feel like Charlie Brown just moments before Lucy pulls away the football again?
I really don't see why ANYONE would go and see Clone Wars. It's three episodes of a TV series stuck together and shamelessly being shown in theatres to make George Lucas more cash. Those dodo eggs for breakfast are expensive.
All the reviews I've read say it's mildly better than Phantom Menace, but far worse than AOTC, ROTS and the 2D animated series. Wait for the DVD or the inevitably TV premiere, surely?
All the reviews I've read say it's mildly better than Phantom Menace, but far worse than AOTC, ROTS and the 2D animated series.
Attack of the Clones is better than The Phantom Menace?
In some respects, yes. If it wasn't for the romance bogging down the middle, the story worked better I thought.
Menace had Darth Maul. what did Clones have?
the avatars in Clone Wars look embarrassingly shoddy...
I'm going to see Clone Wars tonight...because my 5-year-old is geeked up for it.
I fully expect the kiddies to enjoy it and for me to suffer.
I just think there was more drive to AOTC and a bit of mystery with the "detective"-story for Obi Wan. TPM was all politics, podracing and Jar Jar Binks. Admittedly, Maul was excellent -- but AOTC had a decent arena battle near the end and that Yoda vs. Dooku scene. Which I thought was funny and exciting in equal measure.
The only thing TPM has over the other sequels (beyond Maul) is how the "prequel version" of the SW universe was still fresh and the hype very enjoyable pre-release. Of *all* the prequels, TPM was the one that (visually and technically) blew you away and gave you that "summer blockbuster" feeling. By the time ROTS arrived, every other summer movie was on a similar scale.
The Phantom Menace is superior because it led to great anti-Phantom Menace jokes in Season 2 of Spaced
Clone Wars was as worthless as expected. I snuck into The Dark Knight after it was over to get the foul taste out of my mouth. The hacks who made this crudely animated piece of garbage finished what George Lucas started--turning Star Wars into a lifeless video game.
As for the prequel vs prequel debate, they were all terrible in their own ways. TPM was idiotic and pointless (as Bill said, even the Darth Maul scenes are kind of embarrassing). AOTC is a hostile, mean-spirited movie made for dopey fanboys who don't realize that Saint George would love to feed them all to the Rancor. And ROTS is somewhat better only because of Ewan McGregor's marked improvement and Ian McDiarmid's gleeful mustache twirling archvillain. I would just as soon forget that the three prequels (and Return of the Jedi depending on the day) even exist.
I thought Clone Wars was better than any of the prequels. I credit Lucas's limited involvement.
What does everyone think about the upcoming De Niro/Pacino reunion, Righteous Kill?
And how about Bill Maher's anti-faith doc, Religulous?
I can't see anyone getting too excited about De Niro's umpteenth attempt to be taken seriously again, though I have to be honest: I thought Jon Avnet's last Pacino picture, 88 Minutes, was tremendously underrated. Any detective thriller that can suggest, with complete, convincing earnest, that maybe everybody did it deserves a little praise.
Religulous is probably going to be less of an anti-faith doc than a pro-Bill Maher doc. Imagine Sicko times ten: a lot of good points about the inherent, dangerous ridiculousness about a widely-accepted institution lost in a mire of self-satisfied bullshit that misses the point entirely.
Religulous is probably going to be less of an anti-faith doc than a pro-Bill Maher doc. Imagine Sicko times ten: a lot of good points about the inherent, dangerous ridiculousness about a widely-accepted institution lost in a mire of self-satisfied bullshit that misses the point entirely.
Good call. A must-see for me nonetheless; I'm a glutton (and a masochist) for anything on this subject.
It's piffle, light as air, utterly without substance, and every bit the garbage that it predicts we'll be watching in four years, thus making it already four years behind the times.
Love that.
I get the sense, though, that ripping apart pieces of shit like this really is wearing on you, Walter. Maybe it's me projecting, but I get a real sense of sadness from this review.
"Think Ladyhawke with cars"
I would...but I can't remember a damn thing about "Ladyhawke" other than it was the type of film that the Piers Anthony crowd fell over.In other words, I hated it.
I just knew they'd wuss out on the major conceit of Corman's Deathrace 2000 wherein the idea was to kill plenty of innocent pedestrians. Now THAT'S good comicky-nihilism.
Ian, I think you hit the nail on the head about the late lamented (it was 7 years ago already?) TV Funhouse. When I first saw the show, I was sort of perplexed, as I was expecting a naughty parody of a children's show, in itself not such a bold idea. On repeat viewings, I realized my expectations were unfairly low, and that Smigel and company knew how hacky the conceit of a children's show parody was and, after a quick intro with the human character, effectively jettisoned it. (The inclusion of Triumph, who I seem to like more than you but that's neither here nor there, in one episode was, I agree, unnecessary. The characters in TV Funhouse should've existed in a seperate universe. I don't doubt that Comedy Central begged (or demanded) a Triumph guest shot for the obvious reasons.)
His cartoons, which you touched briefly on, are better when he veers into the surreal. The cheerful dirtiness of Wonderman is nice, but my fave will always be The Baby, The Immigrant, and The Guy on Mushrooms.
What's especially disappointing about "Death Race" is that its predecessors ("Death Race 2000" and "The Running Man") delighted in their own tackiness. They were at least partly intended as comedies, so one would think it could use Paul W.S. Anderson's talent for unintentional hilarity ("Alien vs. Predator," "Resident Evil"). Naturally, "Death Race" is his first movie that's too good to be funny, and is instead a grim, gray-faced trudge blasting heavy metal. A true shame.
seattle jeff:
Yes, Clone Wars was better than any of the prequels, but that's not a compliment. It was still utterly pointless.
But thanks for reminding me of Spaced, especially the Phantom Menace jokes. Not to mention the line at the start of season 2:
BRIAN: I had no choice. They arrived before you did.
TIM: You Lando...
(You knew Simon Pegg was going to say something along those lines, didn't you?)
Is anyone else as deeply confused as I am? One week Walter praises a Joel Schumacher movie, the next Bill pans a Scorsese movie. This is cats & dogs living together, mass hysteria.
Post a Comment