Blockbuster's good news and bad news...

The good news is, Blockbuster has a plan to get them outta their financial crisis; the bad news is, there plan blows.

I'm sure you have all heard that, with the current economic issues, Blockbuster seems to be tumbling, there was a report not too long ago, that there is no way Blockbuster can pay all its bills and is expected to go into bankruptcy by the end of the year.

So, Cinematical reported an interview done by Blockbuster execs going into a bit of detail on what they came up with to save the big blue box and the empire they created....are you ready? Movie apparel; let me say it again, movie apparel. That's right, the geniuses behind Blockbuster have said they are going to start selling T-shirts, MIB Sunglasses, Field of Dreams Cracker Jacks and other movie posters. The expected revenue generated is enough to turn a mild profit, they claim.

This news is a bit bitter sweet. As most of you know, I have many fond memories of the Block, but I simply don't approve of the company, their poor management and lack of regard for customers and employees alike. That being said, I do think it would be a huge blow to the movie community if Blockbuster goes under. Now, my retail side is wondering how they will get the room for all this new garbage in an already stuffed store. The answer has to be, they will cut back on the movies; the same movies that bring them the revenue they are currently enjoying.

I believe this to be the final blow for the Block, so if you can stand to go in there, give it a shot, it maybe the last time. Just don't be surprised if they don't have that copy of Surf Ninjas you were looking for.

a Movie that is remake-proof?

Alien, Predator, The Three Stooges, Total Recall, The Wolfman, Halloween; there are many more, but these are just a few of the remakes that are making news this week. Obviously, Hollywood has gotten in its collective mind that they can do everything better than it was previously done, and as a result, have started remaking everything in hopes of a good payday.

The topic for today is, do you think there is one movie that can't be touched; one movie that even the dumbest, or bravest of directors wouldn't touch?

Over the past few years, I have heard of many roles that can't be touched. The most recent ones that disprove an untouchable role include Jack Nicholson's The Joker and William Shatner's James Kirk. These roles were not only touched, but surpassed the original. Other questionable attempts include the aforementioned three stooges and the Wolfman. I will go on a limb and say that these will also surpass the originals.

So, with all the roles that have broken the rules and lived to tell the tale, is there a movie that is untouchable? I've mentioned I don't think Casablanca should ever be remade. I would say the same goes for Citizen Kane. I also think Schindler's List should not be touched other, but what I think should not be touched and what I think are untouchable are two different stories. There are plenty of movies I don't think will ever achieve the kind of cinema magic previously achieved, but I don't think that should ever prevent someone from trying.

In my opinion, there is not a film out there that is so perfect, it can never be topped, therefore, there will always be directors, producers and actors trying to top the classics, only history will tell if they get it right...oh, and me; I'll tell you if they get it right.

Here are a couple that I think will not get touched any time soon. The list includes Blazing Saddles, Star Wars, Ep. 4. (as long as you don't count the 55 special editions) Citizen Kane, Schindlers List, The Matrix, Bambi, Indiana Jones.

So, got a movie that should be remade? How about a movie that is untouchable? Did I forget a big movie that won't see the light of day in the next 10 years?

Does Stewie, Peter and the rest deserve an Emmy?

Yes, you read that right, the topic of the day is whether Family Guy deserves to be considered with other shows like 30 Rock, The Office, How I met Your Mother, and other comedies for an Emmy for Best Comedy Show, Seth McFarlane seems to think so.

On one hand, McFarlane has a point when he told Variety he doesn't produce his show like SpongeBob or Looney Tunes, it is written like a comedy show. He also goes on to say he has writers that are comedy writers, not cartoon writers and often hears people compare his show to shows like the Office. Other animated TV shows have tried to break the mold for the Emmy's, like The Simpsons, but have failed.

I personally feel comedy is comedy, and that the show should be put in the same category, just as I feel the same way about "Best Animated Movie" at the Academy Awards presentation; its all a creative work that delivers a similar experience with a different working model. However, I don't think the quality and intelligence of Family Guy deserves an Emmy nod, especially this year. I mean, sure, nominate it, and it should be considered in that category, but no way should it be in the top 5, let alone winner.

What do you think, should they have a "best animated" section for the Emmy's or should Family Guy get the nod in comedy, and does it have a shot to win?

Danny McBrides new project

So, a friend made me watch the first 10 minutes of a show I had never heard of called Eastbound and Down. What can I say, I'm poor and can't afford things like HBO and Showtime. Anywho, after seeing this clip about a fowl-mouthed baseball pitcher who quickly gets to the top of the MLB, only to have his ignorance drop him out of baseball completely, and I guess the show is him traveling across country, living with his fall from fame. Danny McBride is absolutely hilarious in the part I have seen and I immediately put the season in my Netflix queue.

So, his new project sounds kinda similar, except with a hilarious twist. The movie Hench, based on a comic book is about a football player who has a career-ending injury, forcing him to work as a henchman for a supervillain. This sounds like comedic gold to me. If McBride brings the same kind of ignorance to this character, this could be a hilarious movie.

So, go check out the first few minutes of Eastbound and Down on Youtube now. The language makes it NSFW, but it is worth your time.

Is Superman dead? Are we responsible?

Superman is dead, and we killed him.

I read that title the other day, and I don’t have a link, so if anyone has it, I will post it here. The title got me thinking, and the article was even more interesting. The idea goes like this; Superman, the big, blue Boy Scout that stands for truth, justice and the American way can never be appreciated anymore. The world needs imperfection, it needs its dark place, and Batman, with all his flaws, his mortality and scarred psyche is a better fit with today’s America, leaving Superman out in the cold.

There is some interesting support to this hypothesis, and that is the same support for any argument in the movie business, the Benjamins. Superman comics have seen a considerable downturn from the days of yore, along with Marvels alternative, Captain America seeing the death of that character sometime ago. Also, the article credits the poor box office showing of Superman Returns to this hypothesis. Meanwhile, characters like Wolverine and Batman have both seen their renaissance and have shown massive popularity with their movies and comic sales soaring. Reports on the third Batman run rampant, and the second Wolverine movie, despite poor critical reviews is in pre-production already, so there maybe something to this.

Let me address the movie, Superman Returns, a movie that had many flaws. I agree the Superman in that movie has clearly lost his edge, I mean he was nearly killed by a mortal Lex Luthor and his thugs. The movie was panned for showing a lack of creativity and looking like a Richard Donnor remake. The other main critique in the movie was the lack of action, replaced by an increase in stalker-ness (not a word?). Execs seem to think the new Superman needs to be darker, like the Dark Knight, which set all kinds of records at the box office.

The problem here, in my opinion was three-fold. First off, the script was absolutely terrible, with the story being poorly thought out and kinda silly. The second was the direction; a lack of action and a very whiney Superman makes for a boring film. Thirdly, Superman had a very un-original villain in Lex Luthor. While Kevin Spacey played a great Luthor, we have seen him as a lead villain in nearly all Superman movies, and in this movie, his scheme was less than brilliant, I mean, he wanted real estate! I think, without a worthy challenge, Superman can never show his true worth. Dark Knight on the other hand, had two amazing villains in the infamous Joker, and an incredible two-face; while the movie excelled at not making a whiney Batman and focusing more on a bad-ass Batman, and showed it with the amazing amount of action.

Now, with the reason why the movie tanked being more about execution, and less about American values, the core idea is still valid, in my opinion. I do believe the days of the blue Boy Scout become increasingly numbered. Smallville is still going after 8 seasons, but mainly because of the flaws of Clark Kent and the ability to bring forth some great bad guys. I do believe society enjoys the flaws of the hero more than the strengths. As Willem Defoe’s Green Goblin said “the one thing they love more than a hero is to see a hero fail, fall, die trying” and while that isn’t always true, I do agree we like to see our hero’s fight through adversity and overcome their inner demons. What kind of inner demons and obstacles can a superman really have? If there are any, we haven’t seen them yet in movie form.

So, either Superman gets a raspy voice, a scarred psyche and a really great villain, or we can say goodbye to a hero that was an icon, and has now fallen to something left for tales from the days of yore.

Fantasy Casting Showdown...Casablanca

Once again Kevin’s Movie Blog was challenged to come up with all the answers regarding one of the greatest movies ever made. So, the weapons are fantasy casting at 10 paces, and at the end, we find out who is right and who is dead.

“This is the start of a beautiful friendship,” “Round up the usual suspects,” and “we’ll always have Paris,” are among many of the famous quotes of one of the best movies of all time, Casablanca. This 1943 movie starring Humphrey Boghart and Ingrid Bergram went down in history for it’s fantastic script, great chemistry and an interesting ending that truly deserved it’s best picture Oscar. With Hollywood’s tendency to remake good and bad movies alike, should this movie be next, and if so, who could fill those shoes?

There is such a thing as “lightning in a bottle,” and while the ‘rules for a remake’ show that it has been enough time to bring back the story, and while special effects weren’t what they are now, the movie was never about special effects, it was about chemistry, some of the best chemistry and screenwriting in history, and to think you can just go out and top that is ludacris.

Since it’s fun to fantasy cast, we’ll forgo the fact the movie should never happen, so please tell Madonna to stop wasting her time, she will never be Ilsa. So, who would you cast? I’ve got the answer.

Rick, the tough American who actually has a heart of gold has to go to George Clooney. I think Danny Ocean, himself can easily have the look and the chemistry, as he has shown in several instances. The other good part about this choice is, thanks to his recent attempts, he could also easily direct the movie, as he has shown great promise.

His love interest should probably be an unknown, but since that is no fun for the game, I choose the incredible Mrs. Ryan Reynolds herself, Scarlette Johansen as the girl trapped by the Nazis.

Captain Renault is a clever, very wise police officer caught between his duty and what is right; my call is Josh Hartnett. I like Hartnett, he has shown some great promise in some otherwise terrible movies, and I think this would be his time to shine.

Finally, the one character that really is the anarchy in an otherwise perfect love story, and that is Victor Laszlo. I think this choice could be the most questioned, but his recent film resume should leave no questions that he can do anything. This role also needs to be a guy that can have more charisma that Rick, and with Clooney in those shoes, it has to be someone amazing. My choice for the underground leader is Robert Downey Jr. The guy is currently working on Sherlock Holmes, which looks amazing and will clearly blow everyone out of the water with this role.

The final question is, should this movie be in the here and now, or should it be a period piece to remind the world what it was like back in World War II? In my opinion, you can’t have a World War II movie; Americans as a whole have been force-fed the stories of World War II since it happened, and I believe a certain sense of boredom and distance has come; as a result, American will have trouble truly identifying with an event that happened 66 years ago. The only option is to work something into the here and now. The option you would have would be some Americans and other Europeans stuck in a country in the middle of a war that is really tough to get out of; which won’t be easy in the era of cell phones.

So, who would you choose for the greatest love story ever told? Would you like to see a movie with the cast I chose, or would you rather just pop in the classic and enjoy. For me, I am curious to see what they can come up with, but I still know there is no possible way they will be able to have the chemistry and the history behind the original.

Flight of the Navigator is next!

In the long list of remakes in an attempt by Hollywood to get some more money, Flight of the Navigator gets the call to be remade, and I'm stoked!

The 1986 Disney movie about a boy and his flying saucer is said to be next on Disney's remake list. Now, normally I would be right there with people crying that Disney is ruining their childhood, however, I think this is a great idea. The movie is over 20 years old, so the target audience has either forgotten about it or can't remember it, and the kids won't wanna see it, I mean they make references to Twisted Sister and Starsky and Hutch.

I think the improvement in special effects over the past 23 years will really make MAX, the spaceship something special, but, just because I am feeling nostalgic today, I hope the original ship makes a cameo appearance. I just hope they don't turn to Lucas and make everything green-screened, I think you can do this movie without too much special effects as the original will show.

What do you think, good idea or bad idea...please tell me you remember this jewel, you'll make me feel really old if you don't!

FUN TRIVIA: The voice of MAX, the interstellar space ship is voiced by Pee-Wee, himself, Paul Reubens. If you go to MGM Studios in bright, sunny Florida, you can still see the spaceship in the studio tour. It just looks a little sad, now.

Harry Potter gets adopted by Luke Skywalker

On the next..Oprah.

Alright, so I watched Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix the other night and despite my less than stellar opinion of the last Potter movie, I enjoyed this movie, but I noticed a couple of things I wanted to share and just get out in the open. Before I begin, I want to say, I have never read the books, but I have actually enjoyed the first couple Harry Potters, but I did notice a bit of a downturn in the quality of the movies up until recently.

First off, Harry Potter has a new daddy, and his name is Luke Frickin' Skywalker (seriously, "frickin'" is his middle name). If you have seen Star Wars you know what I'm talking about. I am talking about going into Tashi station to pickup some powwerrr converterrrssss. That's right, I'm talking about the hero acting all whiney and Emo-like. There have been multiple similarities between Harry Potter and Star Wars including a society with mystical powers, a young protege being thrown into the mix and having to duel a fallen member of the same society who now wears a dark cape and has the letter "V" in his name. Now Harry is starting to imitate Luke and his lame-hero act. I can see it now..."Harry, I am your father...nooooooo."

Another interesting thing I picked up is the tendency to focus on the female characters more heavily than the male characters. Now, I'm not talking about Harry, per-se, but I am talking about Harry's entourage, and the tendency to focus on how the female characters are always much stronger and more powerful than their male counterparts. You don't believe me? Here's an example: Look at the Weasleys, clearly momma Weasley runs the show. When Dumbeldore's army is training, most of the screen time is used up by showing the girls (including Jenny Weasley, that Cho chick, Hermoine and Luna) all nailing their spells; the small amount of time left is showing Ron and Neville bumbeling around. Another example is that of Sirius Black and his mysterious relative (played by the wacky Helena Bohnam Carter) who, without giving anything away, clearly gets the best of Sirius, and most of the decisions Harry makes come from Hermoine pushing him to greatness. While there is no issue with this, I would just point it out as a matter of discussion.

Lastly, and I will expand and make another post just on this topic, but it goes well here too, and it involves CGI moments in movies that take you out of the moment, and simply put a small mark of crap on an otherwise interesting movie. In this case, I'm talking about the giant guy, I mean, it looked like the Scorpion King from the second Mummy had a kid with those monsters from I am Legend, and we got this...just silliness, considering the rest of the special effects were spot on, especially when Dumbledore was fighting Valdemort.

So, I know there was a bit of complaining, but without addressing the flaws, you can appreciate the successes, and there were some here, especially the girl that played Looney Luna, along with a great performance by Gary Oldman and I also thought Emma Watson will be an acting force to be reckoned with some day.

So, there are some thoughts, got any response, or ideas? Are you insanely excited for the new Harry movie? I know you are!

Museum tops Terminator

That's right, you read that correctly, Ben Stiller and the gang of Night at the Museum 2 come out #1 in the box office with an average $53 million, beating Terminators lousy $43 million to give it second place, with Star Trek hanging on steady in third place with a respectable $21 million.

I am not sure if you read my box office prediction or not, but I wasn't real off on the dollar, but I was way off on the placement, I mean, who woulda thunk Terminator comes in second to Ben Stiller, Amy Adams, and Owen Wilson. I guess the below average reviews of the movie really did get heard by moviegoers.

Trailer of the week!

So, its Saturday and the sun is shining in most places for a change, and you know what that means, don't you? Hey, you got it first try, it's the trailer of the week!

This weeks entry is the befuzzeling Sherlock Holmes trailer, starring Robert Downey Jr. as Sherlock Holmes, Jude Law as Watson and the incredibly hot Rachel McAdams as...well, as some chick in a dress. This movie certainly does not look like a Sherlock Holmes movie, it has action, boxing, humor and a couple of pee-pee jokes. I don't think they have only shown the funniest parts of the movie in the trailer, it seems there is a lot of goodness yet to come. The questionable part is whether it really is an action movie, as the trailer suggests, or simply a drama with a hint of action, as the title suggests. I guess we'll have to find out. In the mean time, enjoy an entertaining, albeit bizarre Sherlock Holmes. This is just proof that the new Robert Downey Jr. can do anything!

Top time travel movies of all time:

Time travel has been a staple to Sci-fi for a long time now; everyone seems to love the idea of going through time, putting right what once went wrong, and hoping each time that his next leap....sorry, I digress. Anyway, some call time travel a cheap way out of writing a good script, but I think it is hard to do it correctly, and if done correctly, is all that much harder, and shows a much better writer.

So, without any further delay, I present the top 10:
Honorable Mention: The Final Countdown (1980) - This piece of Sci-fi gold star a young Martin Sheen and involves a modern U.S. Aircraft carrier that somehow gets dropped into the middle of a battle between U.S. and Japanese forces in World War II. A truly great movie, with an exciting premise.

10) Deja Vu - Starring Denzel Washington and Val Kilmer, an exciting, action packed time travel movie about a government agency investigating a horrible riverboat tragedy. A pretty decent modern day time travel story.
9) Time Cop - Jean Claude Van Damn at his finest. This movie gets bonus points for special effects, trying to establish rules of time travel, and the fact Mia Sara, Ferris Bueller's girlfriend is nakey.
8) Butterfly Effect - The fact there is an Ashton Kutcher movie on here speaks wonders for the writing, and Amy Smart. The movie established an interesting premise, and established the classic rule of time travel movies: anything you do will have serious repercussions on future events. This movie lost points for the theatrical release, but gained some back for the directors version of the ending.
7) Army of Darkness - Bruce Campbell and Sam Raimi...'nough said. This movie was all kinds of awesome and funny. The trilogy was great, but the third incarnation had some great special effects, some fantastic writing and Bruce being Bruce. This movie got some serious bonus points for the ending.
6) Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home - Yeah, yeah, the whale one; shut up, I liked it! Anyway, the movie was fun and campy, and a great ride, which was something different for Trek at the time. This movie established the idea that anyone with a starship just needs to get close enough to the son, and voila! Extra points for Leonard Nemoy's spock saying "one damn minute, admiral."
5) Star Trek: First Contact - Are you noticing a pattern yet? There seems to be a theme of time travel and Star Trek. This one pits the next generation crew against one of the best bad guys the series has ever known; the Borg. The crew goes back in time to stop the borg from ending a flight that brings the vulcans to earth for the first time.
4) Bill & Ted's Excellent Adventure - The break through role for Keanu Reeves. This movie gets bonus points for having the late, great George Carlin as the guy who helps Bill & Ted save the world, and ace their history test. Believe it or not, quantum theorists have said this, despite all others seems to follow the rules of time travel the closest, phone booth or not.
3) Terminator - This series is kinda the reason for the poll. The series had lots of time traveling heros coming back to save the famed John Connor, including the best, Robert Patrick as the T-1000. Arguably the Governators best role, the second, especially, is one of the best movies of all time. This movie gets some special points for innovation, but it loses points because the governator starts out naked.
2) Star Trek (2009) - The movie just came out, so I won't ruin anything for you. I was hesitant to put this movie so high up, for fear people will say it is just because it's new, but this movie does a great job of using time travel as a way of rebooting a franchise without telling you to forget about the last 40 years. Besides the best movie of the summer, this movie handles time travel with ease, and hardly feels the the puzzling McGuffin of other movies.
1) Back to the Future - The name gives it away. This is a trilogy that is among my favorites, whenever it is on, I will watch it. Besides being a great memory from my childhood, this movie has some real staying power with excellent performances from Christopher Lloyd and Michael J. Fox. This movie, through a digital console on the dash of the famed Delorean (which I want so bad due to this movie) keeps the audience well aware of the time of when and where they are, and also deals with alternate time threads (when the timeline skewed into a tangent) and did so with comedy, charm, and a lot of heart.

So, agree, disagree, or did you think of something I missed? Let me know!
Until then, stay cool, movie geeks!

Will Terminator Salvation live up to its name?

The fourth film in the Terminator series is out as of today, but will the McG directed movie truly be the salvation for the series everyone is hoping for, or will it be a big, machine driven flop?
The studios are predicting a luke warm first week at around $50 million. The movie, which has received less than stellar reviews, in my expert opinion will rake in a $52 million dollar weekend, given Night at the Museum 2: Secret of the Ooze is also coming out.

I also think Star Trek will take the third spot this week, to Terminator and Night at the Museum, respectively, leaving Angels and Demons to drop to a depressing fourth place, with Wolverine rounding out the top 5.

So, will I be right? Do you think you are right-er? Let me know what you think!

"V" tv show trailer

Way back in 1980, there was a little known miniseries called "V" about aliens who come to earth to befriend humans in exchange for technology, but their true purpose is much different, and possibly evil. Finally, ABC is bringing the show back, and the best part is, it has a great cast, including two Firefly veterans in Alan Tudyk and Morena Baccarin. I am stoked for this one. ABC ordered a 13 episode season, and if it does well, they will extend that order (knowing my TV show luck, I will love it and it will be canceled).

A Movie geek-ism to impress your friends:

NUKE THE FRIDGE: a colloquialism used to delineate the precise moment at which a cinematic franchise has crossed over from remote plausibility to self parodying absurdity, usually indicating a low point in the series from which it is unlikely to recover. A reference to one of the opening scenes of Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull, in which the titular hero manages to avoid death by nuclear explosion by hiding inside a kitchen refrigerator.

Thanks to Nukethefridge.com for a great piece of movie geek-ism. This term is kinda like a modern, movie version of "jumping the shark."

Twilight fans Vs. Trekkies: The Showdown!

VS.

Trekkies are known throughout the world as the most over the top of the movie fans. There doesn’t seem to be anyone who can top the ravenous nature of the Klingon loving fans, with their conventions, toys, even there own language. Lately, however, there seems to be a franchise with a fan base crazy enough to go after the thrown; Twilight fans.

It is no secret Twilight fans have a killer instinct that drives the stars of the movie into hiding and makes them afraid for their own life. Also, there seems to be countless Twilight clubs online, along with little conventions of their own, which are pretty impressive, considering there is only one movie out.

So, which group is the more…passionate? (I say that, because I don’t wanna call them crazy and have them coming after me.)

Trekkies have been around a lot longer, with the TV show starting in 1966, and 11 movies, spanning 30 years, and spawning 4 more TV shows, Trekkies seem to have the advantage when it comes to material. Where they lack, however, seems to be the amount of money made. Up until this years reboot/sequel/whatever of the franchise, the franchise seemed to have a warp nacelle in the grave, the highest grossing movie for the original series was Star Trek IV: The Voyage home with a $67 million gross, and the highest ever, was Star Trek: First Contact with $97 million. The final numbers aren’t in with the newest movie blowing away expectations, but until now, the franchise definitely had a week spot.

Twilight has a total of 4 movies planned, with one in the books…get it…books? Never mind. Anyway, there is one movie out on DVD, with one being filmed, and two more in some stage of pre-production. The books that the movies are based on seem to be everywhere, a clear advantage to Star Trek. The first movie alone grossed a total of $191 million, with a staggering $69 million in its first week (more than the Voyage Home ever got). The final advantage, it seems, for Twilight, is the youth, who will be obsessing about the adventures of emo-vampires for decades to come.

So, pretty evenly matched, don’t you think? Who is the more rabid, vicious, obsessed group? My money is still on the Trekkies, who, with the newest movie, seemed to have grown their numbers, but with Twilight coming out next summer, expect that to possibly change, with what I predict to be a possible box office record breaking weekend.
So, we made it through another showdown, if you disagree, leave me a comment, but don’t hunt me down. Also, for your entertainment, check out this funnyordie.com video about the craziness of the Twilight fans. Until then, stay cool, movie geeks!

Cam Gigandet vs. Twilight Fans from Cam Gigandet

MLK movie may not get made

The possibility of a movie based on the life of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. has been in the news a lot this week, mainly because there are rumors the movie was on the fast track to production. The big announcement this week, is the project has a director attached to it now, and it's big. Steven Spielberg has been announced to direct, and immediately, people are jumping right to the casting, but that may be a bit useless; the film may never reach pre-production.

Before you start naming off who is gonna play the late great civil rights leader, Dreamworks, the company in charge has hit a snag before they have even hired a writer for the script. It seems the family, handling the estate has gotten into a big legal battle over money, and who has rights to the estate. Until then, Dreamworks is planning on backing off and not do anything until the family works out the deal, and exactly who will be handling things from now on. Cinematical has a great quote from the studio "The purpose of making a movie about the life of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. is to tell a great story which could bridge distances and bring people together. We remain committed to pursuing a film chronicling Martin Luther King's life provided that there is unity in the family so we can make a film about unity in our nation. We believe this is what Dr. King would have wanted."

So, now that we have the fact the film may never get off the ground, lets move on to the fantasy casting, shall we? There are a lot of quality actors out there who could easily give the part the respect it deserves, but who to cast.

A lot will depend on when in his life they choose to tell the story, but, lets assume it will be toward the end of his life, when most knew him, during the height of the civil rights movement. Would you go with the big box office draw of Will Smith (he was amazing in Ali) or the rock-solid reputation of the over-hyped Denzel Washington? To make the decision even harder, lets add a few more people to the mix, Mekhi Pfeifer, Don Cheadle and Terrance Howard. All of these choices are solid choices that would bring their own element to an already interesting character. My personal favorite at the moment happens to be Chiwetel Ejifor (IMDB page http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0252230/) I think he has done some solid work in movies like American Gangster, Inside Man, and my persona favorite, Serenity. I also think he could hit the look head on.

So, despite the fact that, in my opinion, the MLK movie won't see the light of day for quite a long time, ironically, due to fighting in the King family, the casting is a tough one, but an interesting one. So, who's your pick?

Star Wars still king according to poll

According to a survey done by a website called Moviefone.com of 330,000 votes, Star Wars Ep. 4 is considered the top Sci-Fi movie of all time. This pole seems really Star Wars friendly with some of their questions, but the focus on the Sci-Fi, so lets go through what they come up with, and we'll see if we agree, or call some Florida-style shenanigans.

Top Sci-fi movies-
1) Star Wars Ep. 4
2) Star Wars Ep. 5
3) Aliens
4) The Matrix
5) Blade Runner

Now, I have to question Blade Runner. I mean, have they actually seen the movie, or did they just read about the hype? While I like any list that has the Matrix, I do question the placement of these, and wonder where some of the other greats would rank on the list.

The worst Sci-Fi film of all time, according to the list is none other than John Travoltas epic failure, Battelfield Earth. Clearly whoever voted on this list doesn't watch the Sci-Fi channel all that often.

Now, here is where the pole is kinda goofy, they rate the Star Wars movies as follows:
1) Empire Strikes Back
2) A New Hope
3) Return of the Jedi
4) Revenge of the Sith
5) the Phantom Menace
6) Attack of the Clones

Now, I have a problem with the list, when the number one movie of all time is number two on this list. Other than that, I don't have too much of a problem with the list, other than I would have put The Phantom Menace at the bottom, and given Attack of the Clones one better spot.

A few other notables include Vader being the best Villain in cinema history; Empire being the best sequel of all time; Han Solo being the best character of all time; Ripley being the best Heroin; Back to the Future taking best Sci-Fi comedy and Serenity is the most underrated. Not all bad there. If you would like to check out where your favorite movie ended up, here is the link http://www.moviefone.com/insidemovies/2009/05/05/the-ultimate-sci-fi-poll/.

So, do you agree with the list, or, possibly has Star Trek earned a spot at the top, or the Matrix, or even, dare I say Mega shark vs. Giant Octopus...I mean, it deserves its spot too, right?

Who ya gonna call...Eliza?

Alright, so my headlines need a little bit of work, shut up! Anyway, There is an interview from Dan Akroyd today, talking about the third Ghostbusters, and it seems to be a bit further along than we were lead to believe.

According to Akroyd, the script is done, and they have the original cast signed, including Akroyd, Bill Murray, Harold Ramis, Ernie Hudson, and Sigourney Weaver. The movie is supposed to be a passing of the torch type movie to a new crew of Ghostbusters. There is no word on the cast, but Akroyd had suggested Alyssa Milano and Eliza Dushku, saying he thinks they are great!

So, there you have it, Dan Akroyd himsel, saying he wants a sexier, sleeker Ghostbusters. I like the idea of Alyssa Milano and Eliza Dushku; I mean, they have talent, they are great to look at, and they are already in the realm of supernatural slaying, but I don't know how much humor they are going to convey, especially Dushku; from what I've seen, she's always played the rebellious teenager/young woman, never the comic relief. A couple of picks for some sexy, comedic actresses off the top of my head include Jordana Spiro of My Boys fame (IMDB Page http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0819079/), another would be Allison Mack, from Smallville (IMDB page http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0532928/), and a third would be Maggie Lawson, from Psych (IMDB Page http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0493279/), finally, Elizabeth Banks would finish it (IMDB Page http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0006969/). Now, after I look at my list, I notice two things; first, I apparently have blonds on the brain today; and secondly, I have TV on the brain, because I can't see any funny women in movies lately...I'm blaming it on the rain.

So, now I have the leading ladies, I need some guys. My first choice, which is my first choice for nearly everything is Captain Hammer, himself, Nathan Fillion (http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0277213/), Steve Carrell, Justin Long, and the token black guy would be played by Orlando Jones. Although, now that I look at it, you really wouldn't need the ladies to be too funny with this crew, I mean, just put some eye candy next to these guys, and you still have comedic gold.

Now, what do you think, do you think this new team of ectoplasmic crime fighters could take on the StayPuft Marshmellow Man? I just can't see it, I mean, Ghostbusters without the original crew handling the packs would be weird...could be fun, though.

IMAX, movie myth or savior?

IMAX has become synonymous with quality and a movie-going experience that is second to none. So, why, as of late have people been complaining that the additional $5 paid for IMAX is being wasted, and the experience is watered down? Whether or not the experience is good is always based on more than picture and sound, it’s about the lighting, the stupid baby in the third row, the guy with the cell phone and the butter of the popcorn, and is often varied from person to person, but the actual quality of the IMAX presentation is based on facts, so lets take a look.

Currently, the resolution is filmed with a standard camera by most directors, with few exceptions, The Dark Knight being the most successful, the projector setup in theaters is two 2k projectors showing what is essentially the same resolution you get in regular theaters. The sound quality is generally of a higher quality, and should be noticeable.

The theater size is the next noticeable feature of IMAX, and anyone who argues that size doesn’t matter has never been to a true IMAX theater. Slashfilm has a great article about this with the following graphic showing what a true IMAX theater shows, versus the standard theaters that pretend to be IMAX, and the graphic is pretty evident, your not getting what you pay for at most IMAX locations.

So, it sounds to me that you’re getting average quality picture, on an average theater size, with above average sound, provided the theater is setup for the sound upgrade. I personally won’t waste my money on that, not when the regular theater is good enough for me. The good news, though is Regal and AMC are in the process (as of this week) of installing new 4k projectors that should offer a much better picture; now if they can upgrade the screen size, the IMAX theaters should start resembling IMAX theaters.

So, what do you think, is the $5 worth the experience, or are you sticking to the standard theaters for now?

Goldmine or bust?

Late Star Trek creator Gene Roddenberry's son, Eugene "Rod" Roddenberry is reported by Variety news as getting ready to release over 500 hours of behind the scenes footage and cast interviews from Star Trek the Next Generation and the additional spinoff series. Roddenberry said it's a gold mine with the huge success the new Trek film had, he wants to share some of the magic with new and old Trekkies.

Now, here is where I have a problem. First off, I love behind the scenes, I think how the movies and shows are done are often more entertaining than the shows themselves, but a goldmine? The way I see it, the new film brought many fans, not necessarily because it was Star Trek, but because it was a great Sci-Fi movie. Now, do you really think all of the fans of the latest blockbuster are going to rush out and get their hands on the behind the scenes of a show that had very little relation to the movie, and was probably one that was seen by very few of the people who just saw the movie? My answer: Not so much. I think the die hard trekkies (and if you ask me to call you a "trekker" I will smack you in the Klingon dome piece of yours) will buy the DVD, and why not, if you enjoyed the show, you would probably enjoy this, but saying fans of the movie will rush right out and get this is comparing apples to oranges and oranges always win (I don't know what that means, but whatever).

Board Games storm Hollywood!

Do you remember back in the day when we didn't have Nintendo's, Playstations and Sega's (this is really making me sound old) when we had those board games with little pieces we actually had to move around on our own? I know, how antiquated, huh? Well, apparently Hollywood remembers those days too, but instead of looking back on "the days of yore," and being amused on how entertained we were with bits of plastic, Hollywood instead thought "lets make a movie!"

Now, this isn't the first time a board game has shifted into a movie. Do you remember 1985's Clue, starring Tim Curry? Yeah, darn right you do, because that movie rocked with all kinds of awesomeness. Do you think they can carry that kind of magic into some of these other movies that now have directors? (Thank you to screenrant.com)

The newest addition to the list was this week, and the game is Battleship! Screenrant is reporting the director attached to the film is Peter Berg (Collateral, Smokin' Aces). Other board games in pre-production, and in my opinion, in that state permanently are Monopoly, with Ridley Scott set to direct; Candyland; Magic: The Gathering; and Ouija (amazingly pronounced wee-gee) with the awesome Michael Bay at the helm.

Despite the amazing ness of this news, I just don't know how any of these movies could have a workable script, let alone one for a major blockbuster, but I said the same about a little known amusement ride with pirates, and look how that turned out. So, we'll see how it goes, in the meantime, do you have any ideas for the adaptation of your favorite childhood pastime?

Star Wars: The Phantom Menace turns 10!

You read that correctly, Episode 1, the most highly anticipated film in cinema history turns 10 tomorrow, May 19th, and you know what that means... well, it probably means a special directors mega cut of the film can't be too far behind. Should we celebrate it or should we all be wearing black and mourning the day our innocence and wonder died?

Just recently, I did a column answering the question "what movie would I erase from time," and I chose this one, not a Godzilla movie, not a bad horror movie, a member of the sacred trilogy, itself. So, will Star Wars fans rejoice, or will they burn copies of Lucas's horror, my guess is a bit of both.

In all actuality, the film isn't the worst thing to appear on the big screen (watch Manos: Hands of fate, and we'll talk) but compared to the incredibly high bar that was set for the original trilogy, fans everywhere expected, with technology the way it was, the bar would be set higher. Instead, we got a little kid, humanizing the greatest villain of all time, we had Old Ben Kinobi with a small poni tail and we had Liam Neeson; we also had a lot of green screen. It seems, the beloved father of one of the greatest trilogies of all time fell into the green-screen trap; apparently, adding more special effects can take the place of script and character development, or so Lucas thought. As a result, it was the first misstep amongst many, and it also was messing with the original trilogy, something that is generally not looked upon well.

So, tomorrow, have a beer, a margarita or your beverage of choice and drink to the film that once was, shake your head and plug in Episode 4 and try to forget Episode 4 existed...remember, denial is not a river in Egypt.

Chuck has been renewed!

That's right, it's official, one of my favorite shows on TV, and a show that had the best season finale I have ever seen sold enough Subway sandwiches to warrant a 13 episode season.
About two months before the show ended, there was talk about how Chuck was on the verge of cancellation, the ratings were low, but the internet community was active, and drummed a huge amount of support towards their cause, and in a truly inventive move, tried to get as many people as possible to go get a Subway sandwich on the season finale, as a sign of support for the shows lead sponsor.
Apparently, all the letters and sandwiches worked, network execs have announced Chuck will be back for 13 episodes, but they have not announced when the show is returning, or under what time slot. Apparently, due to budgetary constraints, the show is forced to cut some costs, which may include a cast member, and some writers.

Celebrity Jeopardy

This is the video from Saturday's Saturday Night Live's Celebrity Jeopardy skit, by far, my favorite skit they do, and it didn't disappoint. This is proof that Tom Hanks needs to drop the crappy Angels & Demons B.S. and go back to comedy, he has talent for it, it is where he started, and I would love to see a really crazy comedy with him in it.
So, here is the video, check it out:

Angels & Demons squeak out box office victory

Angels & Demons, the movie starring Tom Hanks, and was a sequel to the Davinci Code raked in $48 million this weekend, enough to squeek out a win over Star Treks $43 million. Hardly a good weekend for the summer blockbuster, which came up short of the $77 million the first movie, the Davinci Code received, and less than Star Trek's $79 million pulled in last week. Unfortunately, it also came up short of the $63 million I predicted, but hey, the studios were off more than I was, they predicted $70 million. Apparently Tom Hanks' mullet wasn't enough to bring the crowds in this week.

Trailer of the week!

It's that time again, ladies and gentlemen, the week is coming to a close, your getting your best clubbing outfits on, ready to go out on the town, meet some new people, get drunk and get lucky...ok, if your reading this, that is probably not going to happen to you, your probably staying home and playing video games, maybe re watching that classic episode of Firefly where Mal gets married....good times, hey, I'm not judging.

Anyway, this weeks trailer cracked me up, and made me laugh out loud (that's LOL to most people) because of Mike Friggin Tyson, and that is something I never thought I would say. The movie is called The Hangover, and it basically looks like a cross between Harold & Kumar go to White Castle, and Dude Where's My Car, which is never a bad thing, because I liked both those movies. The trailer probably has all the funniest scenes in it, but the trailer is hilarious, so party on.

So, without further delay, the trailer:
Have a great weekend, and stay cool Movie Geeks!

Don Quixote lives...maybe

Director Terry Gilliam is known for his successes such as Monty Python and Twelve Monkeys as much as he is known for is monumental failures; the most famous being The Man Who Killed Don Quixote. This movie was the source for an interesting, and very sad documentary called Lost in LaMancha, basically covering the utter failure of Gilliam trying to make a movie. If you haven't seen this documentary, you really should; there is nothing more that can possibly go wrong for Gilliam than what happened here, from Mexican militia, to the death of the star actor, to budget and health concerns.

I say all this, because Gilliam bought the rights of the movie back from the insurance company, after he lost it because he couldn't pay back his loans. After getting the rights to the movie back, he has announced he is going to give it another try, talking to Johnny Depp to come back and finish the movie that cost several their lives, and even more, their careers.

Do you think Gilliam will once again succumb to the curse of Don Quixote (look it up, there is a curse) or will this film finally see the light of day? Personally, I would think it would be better, but I don't think this movie will ever see the light of day, the curse is just too strong.

J.J. vs. that of which we do not speek

With all the magic that is Star Trek, there is already small talk, somewhere in a dark alley, where hardcore movie buffs live, the kind of talk that is only whispered, and there is generally a bit of fear in their voice. The talk is of Star Wars, the beloved franchise, and whether anything more should ever be done, and if so, should George Lucas be a part of it.

J.J. Abrams has a lot of people talking about remakes, I mean, if you can make Star Trek into a watchable movie without screaming the word “Kahn,” then it opens a whole new world of possibilities. In this world, anything is possible, including touching the other side of the geek Tri-Force, Star Wars. So, would you let someone mess with Luke, Leiah, Han and the rest, or would you prefer to leave the greatness that was the original trilogy lie?

My favorite movie blog is themovieblog.com, there is much wisdom to be found on that site, including some rather interesting rules on remakes, including having a majority of your audience not familiar with your story, the reason being is it will never be a fresh, new story, rather a comparison to a previous one (the reason the Incredible Hulk failed). In my opinion, the most important rule he has, is the story needs to benefit from a retelling. This means technology needs to have advanced to give the film a new look, or a truly amazing script can be written, dwarfing the previous one, or maybe many of the shots can be done in a way that enriches the story. While Star Wars is now a bit older (if you say old, it’s on) I don’t think special effects have evolved to the point where there would be a huge difference in the space battles, which is a testament to the original series. While the script could have been a bit better in the original trilogy, I think everyone will agree, it ads a certain charm to the film.

So, since a remake of the original series is out, what about the talked about third trilogy, which takes place after Jedi? Here is the thing, after the prequels, which, from this point forward, I will refer to as “those we do not talk about,” most have a bad taste in their mouth, and the world has seemed to discover Lucas’s grand scheme: to make money. At this point, I would say anything Lucas does will simply look like an attempt to make more money, not to tell a story that needs to be told. So, if a third party came up with an absolutely fascinating script, not involving anyone from the original trilogy, then it may be worth the debate, but at this point, there is no such thing, therefore no debate. I also don’t know how you can get the epic scale of the original trilogy, without forcing the issue. I mean, how many deathstars and Jedi’s evil fathers are really out there?

So, it looks like we are out of options, even J.J. cannot bring this around, not for another 10 years, at least, maybe then, we’ll have something to talk about, until then, we’ll just have to live with the super directors mega awesome edition of Star Wars where Guido still doesn’t shoot first, but it’s ok, because stuff looks really pretty; and there’s an Ewok in the background of one of the shots, and Jar Jar is actually one of the Rogue Squadron pilots. Until then, live long and prosper.

Will Star Trek beat Angels & Demons

Star Trek busted up the box office last week with a sweet $79 million. This week, Star Treks adversary is not a Romulan, it's a mulleted Tom Hanks and the church o' doom! Ok, that makes it sound so much more exciting than it probably will be.

So, will Angels & Demons take the box office? Or will Star Trek reign supreme two weeks in a row? The previous installment, which received mediocre reviews made a ton of money ($77 million its first weekend), but reviews have been less than stellar for the sequel, along with not a lot of talk, or controversy, as the church seems to not really care about the release.

The studios are predicting about $70 million for Angels & Demons, which, if true would more than likely push Star Trek to second place.

For my prediction, I'm saying $62 million for Angels & Demons, but it will take first place. Am I right here?

Star Trek review

The year was 1979, and people everywhere were going crazy at the thought of James T. Kirk and company finally coming to the big screen and bringing Star Trek to the masses. It took 10 years for the intrepid crew of the Enterprise to make the transition from the small screen, so people were foaming at the mouth for the chance to see their beloved ship back in action.

Unfortunately for them, Star Trek: The Motion Picture was born, and everyone acted like that ugly baby no one talks about and put it back where it came from. Unfortunately that didn't work, but it made enough money for them to continue to try. 10 movies later, Star Trek had lost most of it's fan base, had a series cancelled because no one watched it, and made fun of the last outing of the Enterprise crew in Star Trek: Nemesis. Star Trek was dead, so it seemed.

The year is now 2009, and J.J. Abrams, Hollywood's golden boy comes off some very successful shows, a resurrection of Mission Impossible III, and cinema gold in Cloverfield. He comes out and says he is going back to the beginning, but not as a reboot, he then declared he didn't really care for the original movies; the 4 Star Trek fans left got mad. Over the past 6 months, trailers, reports and photos leaked out, and as a result, a few movie bloggers got excited. Finally, the weekend was here, and finally, Star Trek fans got what they wanted from the beginning, a great Star Trek movie that would please the "Trekkies" and the masses alike, they got Star Trek (11).

The movie revolves around the early days of Kirk and Spock. Due to an interesting time travel plot point, Leonard Nemoy's Spock comes back in time, changing everything we thought we knew about this universe, setting up a new timeline in which Kirk is not captain, and is most definitely not friends with Spock. As Romulan bad guy Nero plans to destroy the planets Vulcan and Earth, Kirk, Spock, and the rest of the Enterprise crew need to find themselves and each other in order to save the world. (I now know how Doc Brown felt in Back to the Future II, I just wish I had a chalkboard.)

First off, I have to say, I have always been a fan of Star Trek, but never really loved any of the movies, until now. I loved this movie, and let me tell you why. First off, the casting was flawless. Chris Pine did a great James T. Kirk, without doing a William Shatner impression, he played a tough, bad ass, similar to what Indiana Jones would be. The character of Kirk was also flawless, he showed a tough guy, but was able to have some humor as well (the Kobiashi Maru test was priceless). Zachary Quinto not only looked the part of Mr. Spock, but nailed the essence of the role, and did a great job of showing an erupting emotion, that the character was trying to keep in check. Zoe Saldana was cast as Uhura and filled the screen with the same sexiness and grace Nichelle Nichols did all those years ago. Simon Pegg was cast as engineer Montgomery "Scotty" Scott, and was one of the best parts of the movie, although he did not have a lot of screen time, the parts he was in was pure gold. Sulu and Checkov were perfectly cast as well, showing a good reason for their characters to be there. Finally, there is Carl Urban, who plays Dr. Leonard "Bones" McCoy, easily the best part of this movie, and a great example of how everyone involved got not only the concept, but the characters. Bones was faithful to the original, and also part of the comedic relief that broke up the action scenes. Eric Bana played the bad guy, Nero, in traditional, over the top style that made Star Trek great.

The cast was great, the story was solid, in not just having a traditional reboot, and trying to convince the audience what they have seen over the past 30 years didn't exist, they accepted that, and changed it to give the audience a truly new and fresh experience. You don't have to have seen a Star Trek before to like this movie, but there is enough throwback to the original that fans will be truly rewarded, finally, for all their loyalty.

The special effects in the movie were truly incredible. The Enterprise has never looked better, the space battles were truly epic, and blew away anything you have previously seen in Star Trek and the locales looked fresh, clean, and beautiful. There are a few things that I think added to the movie experience, the shaking and lens flair of the camera. You may or may not see it, but it is an interesting technique that is used in action scenes, and I think is something that will be used in a ton of movies to come.

So, it took me awhile to write the review because I really wanted to make sure I wasn't just geeking out over my favorite characters finally coming to glory, I wanted to make sure I wasn't just biased, that the movie was really as good as I thought it was. I have come to the conclusion, as apparently so many others have (it's at a 95% at Rotten Tomatoes) that this movie truly is that good. If you are a Sci-Fi fan, you will love it, if you do or do not like Star Trek, you will love it.

I give this movie a 9.5 out of 10!

Fun Fact: Christopher Doohan, son of James Doohan, who played Scotty in the original series played the assistant of Simon Pegg, who played Scotty in this movie.

Back to the Future, would you remake it?

I have been thinking about this all morning, and, finally, I read a great article from Cinematical.com (one of my new favorite websites) and they were talking about J.J. Abrams remaking movies, and how he did an absolutely perfect job at Star Trek, given that, they talk about some other movies they would only trust a reboot to Abrams, because he is good at balancing characters, and their importance, while showing some great action, including a bigger dynamic.
One of the movies on this list is the classic by Robert Zemeckis, the famed '80s director, and one of my favorite trilogies of all time. That got me to thinking, even with J.J. Abrams directing, or even Robert Zemeckis rebooting his own franchise, would you like to see a remake, or is it too untouchable? I originally would have said, maybe a few years ago, some things are untouchable, and not able to be remade, but with Batman, Watchmen, and now Star Trek being remade, and near flawlessly in my opinion, I wouldn't hate someone helming the franchise who had as much respect and fun as I have had.

Now, on to the important stuff; if you would remake Back to the Future, who would you cast, and more importantly, what car would you use to replace the famed Delorean (I've wanted one of those since I first saw that movie). There are a couple of the cars I thought could possibly handle being iconic enough for the part, most are concept cars, but here we go.
The Cadillac Converj would be my ultimate choice.








The original Chevy Volt Conept would be my other.








Now, that the vehicles are done, who would you get as the famed Marty McFly?
I would choose Zac Efron. Ha, I had you for a moment, didn't I? Seriously, it's gotta be Thomas Dekker, the guy that played John Connor on the short lived Sarah Connor Chronicles. I think he could play my rebellious teenager pretty well.











For Doc Brown, I seriously doubt anyone can replace the great performance of Christopher Lloyd, but I would choose Liam Neeson. The guy is brilliant, and I think he could break out of his normal cool shell and truly shock people by playing an unorthodox scientist.












So, there you have it, my main cast, along with the car. I'm not super enthusiastic about a reboot, but, if it were to happen, and the way Hollywood is going, it probably will eventually, I hope it's made like this, and with as much respect as shown to other reboots, such as Star Trek.

Best trailer I have EVER seen!

I've heard reports of this movie, but I didn't believe it until now. The trailer for Mega Shark Vs. Giant Octopus is here, in all it's Shark-biting-a-bridge-glory. This looks so terrible, I want to go out and buy this, along with a six-pack of beer and some pizza and have a great evening. After this movie, comes Frogs, and maybe, if there's time, and pizza, Mosquitos.

Movie Trailers - Movies Blog

What origin story would you like to see next?

There is an interesting poll on Rottentomatoes.com today, talking about what origin story you would like to see next for the X-men. Wolverine's story was first, with a followup; apparently there is a Magneto movie, still in the pipeline somewhere, but after that, is there an X-man you would love to see an entire movie dedicated to?
Now, most people who voted for the pole predictably picked Gambit as the next origin story. It's only fair, as he was the most popular X-man, next to Wolverine, but I would not really be excited about this. Do we really need another "loner who was scorned and a guy who lost a love, but it's ok because he's a mutant with really cool special abilities, so he's also a bad ass," type character? After a certain time, doesn't that whole thing just become a bit too cliched?
Perhaps its the result of the last movie, or more likely the last three movies, but I am just not convinced the X-men franchise can be translated into a movie, or at least a really good movie. As far as I'm concerned, it hasn't been done yet, and it's not due to lack of technology, it seems to me its due to a lack of creative writing, or maybe a grasp of the source material in general. Furthermore, I don't see any of the characters as truly deep enough to have a full length feature movie with any depth. I mean, sure you can blow stuff up, and move bridges and stuff, but actually introducing us to these interesting characters has been something that was mismanaged, to say the least.
I'm going to go slightly off topic here, but, it's Kevin's movie blog, so, I'm entitled. The X-men franchise as a comic book had many story lines, but in my opinion, the root of the franchise was based on racism, and people, despite being different, and often facing violence fight to save the same people that would turn around and hang them. The movie franchise not only did not understand that, they couldn't seem to focus on a good storyline, or build the several unique characters. It is often hard to juggle the character development of multiple lead characters, but it is essential if you want the audience to feel for them during their toughest hour in the climax of the movie; with X-men, I couldn't have cared less. The only reason I was worried at the end of the first X-men was Anna Paquin was hot; the second movie, I was just too bored to care, and finally, the third, I was just praying for a stabbing so the movie would end. If you need tips on how to juggle multiple lead characters, ask Joss Whedon, especially with the Firefly series.

Now that I'm back on topic, which character would you like to see for a two hour feature film?

American Gladiators: The movie

In the 'Hollywood is really desperate' section, there is an announcement that studios are trying to make an American Gladiators movie, allegedly from the same cast that starred in the ill-fated show that only last one season.
I'm a huge fan of American Gladiators, I mean, who doesn't want to see another healthy dose of Crush, Siren and rest in a very un family friendly R-rated movie; along with that crazy obstacle course, and that one even with the nerf guns and the tennis ball gun (I'm still trying to get my hands on one of them). However, I will not see a movie based on American Gladiators, there are simply too many good movies, based on good ideas for me to see. This idea just seems too ridiculous to be true, but since we passed April fools day, maybe Hollywood really is that desperate. We shall see.
What do you think, would you go see an American Gladiators movie?
And, more importantly, who is your favorite gladiator? Nitro, Tower, or the incredibly hot Crush, for instance?

Wow! Trek then and now a look at the trailers

I know there has been a ton of info and posts on Star Trek lately. I will move on, but the movie was just so darn good (a review to come). I was looking back at the trailers of the previous Star Trek movies, along with a great post on Rotten Tomatoes and I watched the Star Trek the Motion Picture trailer. After watching this trailer, I was kinda creaped out, and I kinda laughed at the obscurity of it all. After I composed myself, I realized what a long way not only the movies, but the trailers themselves have come. A strategy of an eerie voiceover monologue guy and bizarre, acid-trip inducing effects have gone by the way side and have been replaced by action, and lots of it. So, here is the original trailer, and for reference, I will include the new trailer as well. Enjoy!
Bonus Points to anyone who knows who the voice over monologue guy is (without looking).



And now, the new Star Trek movie, currently in theaters!

Star Trek rakes in some dough!

Not quite what I predicted, but this movie still brought in the cash with a weekend gross of $79.5 million, short of the $90 million I projected in a previous post, but still pretty good, and nearly double the highest opening weekend of any other Star Trek movie (Star Trek Nemesis $46 mill).
I knew this one would be tough to predict, being a Star Trek movie would tend to have a low opening, but, as anyone will tell you, it's not your classic Star Trek, and it's done by Hollywood's golden boy, and yours truly's favorite J.J. Abrams, which would lead to higher numbers, so, studios and apparently, Kevin's Movie Blog really didn't know what to expect. I'll take $79 million as a good opening, and I'm wondering if it will show a huge dropoff this coming week, or word of mouth over the greatness of the movie will keep it only slightly less spectacular.
In other dinero news, Wolverine dropped a pretty staggering amount from last weeks $87 mill to $28 million; so for all you non-math people out there, that's a 68% drop, which is pretty harsh, even for a fan-boy driven movie like X-men.
So, that's the news for today, now go out there and enjoy the day, and don't forget to stay cool, movie geeks!

Trailer of the week!

I am late, once again, but this time, movie geeks, I have a good reason, I had to go see Star Trek. More on that later, but let me just say, it was awesome!
Now, down to the important part, the trailer. This week's pick is District 9. Throughout the last few big movie premieres, conventions and film festivals, we have seen some "viral marketing" in the signage of a district 9 with a slash through it, and a picture of an alien with no other explanation, begging you to find out more. This trailer does something similar, it starts off slow, kinda boring, and then it hits you with a bombshell, we aren't talking about violence in another country, we are talking about what the world decided to do with an alien landing! It's kind of a shocker, then you see some humans interrogating an alien that makes you feel sorry for the poor alien. By the end of the trailer, you have no idea whats going on, who is who, and what kind of movie it will be, you just really want to know more, which is the sign of a very effective and kinda eerie trailer.
Let me know what you think! It did peek my curiosity, despite its kind of slow and uneventful start. The one thing about this trailer I don't like is, I have no idea what kind of movie it is, is it Sci-Fi, or action, drama, or is it show all documentary like? I don't know, but I'm sure we'll hear more from this soon!

This is getting me excited for the Summer!

I love Burn Notice, I can't wait for it to come back, if we can just get Psych, Burn Notice and Chuck on at the same time, I may never leave my couch!

Check out the teaser!

What will Star Trek make opening weekend?

The new Star Trek movie looks amazing, capturing the mind of trekkies and non trekkies alike. The question is, will people flock to the movies to see Kirk, Spock and the intrepid crew of the Enterprise take off at warp speed on the first weekend, or will it take more word of mouth to get them in the seats?
Lets look at some numbers (try not to freak out, numbers are not the enemy):
The last Star Trek movie, Nemesis pulled in a measly $43 million the entire time.
Star Trek the Motion Picture raked in $11 million the first weekend, and $39 million total.
J.J. Abrams last blockbuster, one of my favs, Cloverfield got $46 million opening weekend.
The studios are predicting $70 million.
Wolverine got $83 million last weekend, so will the Enterprise make more than Hugh's Jackman?
My answer is yes, the marketing machine Star Trek has, along with stellar (hehe, I meant that pun) reviews will propel it to $90 million for the first weekend.
What do you think, will Star Trek topple Wolverine's mulah, or will it pull in less than stellar amounts?

The ultimate showdown! Top 10 Villains of all time!

Since the beginning of time, mankind has had certain things they just can’t seem to agree on; religion, politics, sports; this struggle has continued, and now, the fiercest battle of them all finally begins here and now, the battle over the most important part of cinema, the villains. Amongst movie geeks, there is no more fierce a struggle, Star Wars versus Star Trek, Kirk versus Picard, whether Guido should shoot first, all of it fails in comparison to the likes of Vader, man in Bambi and Aliens.
In every good movie, the hero, or protagonist must have an antagonist to really prove his position in the movie, as that of the hero, and often times, those antagonists can truly be the best part of the movie. Generally the struggle between the ying and yang, good and evil is the dynamic of the film, and that struggle determines the quality of the movie. Since the beginning, when the antagonist wore a black hat and fought the guys in the white hats, antagonists have captured the imagination of movie goers everywhere, partially because they have fun, but sometimes, it’s because they are so truly evil, no one knows how they can be that way, and often has a deep seeded dread for the villain. This sometimes subconscious dread of people is often the magic that makes the hero shine, not because he is just so good, often because the villain is so bad.
A villain is defined by the American Film Institute as a character(s) whose wickedness of mind, selfishness of character and will to power are sometimes masked by beauty and nobility, while others may rage unmasked. They can be horribly evil or grandiosely funny, but are ultimately tragic. I define a villain a little differently, I say, a villain is the perfect antagonist to the hero, he or she exhibits the traits of pure evil, being driven to evil, and shows no traits society shows as endearing.
Most villains pick one trait that humanity has, that most are often not proud of and brings that out, showing it for all of humanity to see, hence the hatred. The good villains bring out all the traits and shove them in your face. I submit, for you approval my list of the best 10, subject to discussion.

10) Cyrus the Virus – Con Air – John Malkovich plays an intelligent, ruthless, and cold bad guy who hates law, has no regard for life and has really good grammar. Despite Nicholas Cage’s character not living up to the hype of the villain, Cyrus the Virus was a perfect bad guy, and even creepier, Malkovich based that character off a real inmate.
9) Lex Luther – Superman Returns – All great heroes have great villains, villains that challenge the hero and either make or break the hero. In the case of Superman Returns, Kevin Spacey’s Lex Luthor does both, he shows the good in humanity by showing the true ruthlessness in him, I mean, he kills humanities savior, and tries to destroy the earth, all in with a twisted evil that everyone realizes from the beginning of the mediocre flick.
8) Mrs. Carmony – The Mist – Never has there been a character that showed the ugly side of humanity better than Marcia Gay Hardens Mrs. Carmony. When a little town of people who all know and love each other is trapped inside a small grocery store, you see the terrible side of humanity, showing greed, brutality and a savage everyone for themselves mentality that is not nearly as bad as the creatures outside the store in the Mist (except for those creepy spiders).
7) Bruce the Shark – Jaws – “Just when you thought it was safe to go into the water,” is this movies tagline. This movie kept thousands of beachgoers from the water and gave little kids nightmares, all over a vicious shark. Normally, I don’t see animals, especially sharks as evil; they are simply doing what nature intended. Bruce (the name was affectionately given by the production crew to the animatronic shark) however, was a different story, the shark showed unnatural tenacity, a cunning that puzzled the fisherman until they realized they are not the hunters, they are simply the food. This is a primary fear in many swimmers, and to this day is in the back of the head of anyone swimming off a beach, don’t believe me? Try going in the water and yell ‘shark!’
6) Hans Gruber – Die Hard – Die Hard has one of the most iconic heroes in modern cinema, and it’s only fitting Bruce Willis’s John McClain has an equally iconic adversary in Alan Rickman’s Hans. This guy was cold, calculating and was willing to kill anyone in his way to get what he wanted, without as much as a blink of an eye. Hans toyed with the police and FBI, as he showed he was the superior mind, and even showed a lack of caring for his own men. Truly a great character who exhibits all the traits that make a great villain.


5) Commodus – Gladiator – As I stated above, the best villains are usually a perfect yang to the ying of the hero (or vice versa), and the best villain for Russell Crow’s Maximus is Joaquin Phoenix’s (yeah, the rapper) Commodus, he is the exact opposite of Maximus in every way, he is not a good guy, he is a coward, wimpy, but he is also cunning, and willing to go the dishonorable way and kill his father to get the power he craves, oh, and he has some incestual issues. This guy is another great example of evil, and the worst parts of people being shoved in your face!
4) Hannibal Lecter – Silence of the Lambs - #21 on AFI’s best movie quotes of all time, this character is renowned as being incredibly smart, cunning, and a cannibal. Not only was he vicious, but he generally outsmarted you, and was downright chilling to the bone. One of Anthony Hopkins finest moment, he portrayed a guy that everyone knows as truly evil, able to outsmart nearly everyone and eat their face off at the same times with some fava beans and a nice Chianti; it took a cunning hero and pre-lesbian Jodi Foster to stop this monster.
3) Joker – The Dark Knight – The Joker is one of the best villains, and unlike some, no matter how the Joker is portrayed, be it Caesar Romero, Jack Nicholson, Mark Hamill, or the best portrayal, in my opinion, Heath Ledger, the Joker is always a cunning villain, generally mistaken as insane, he is lethal, smart, and is able to make up for his lack of physical prowess with a vicious, lack of regards for life, and some great magic tricks (he can make a pencil disappear). The Joker, even in the face of his adversary, Batman, laughs and shows a true evil…just don’t ask him about his scars.
2) Agent Smith – The Matrix – At first sight, you can tell Agent Smith is evil, as you progress through the story, you start to realize he is just part of a system, then you realize he is more than just system of control, he is evil. For every ying, there must be a yang. Keanu Reeves’ Neo was the hero of mankind, so it is fitting Smith would be the destroyer of mankind. This guy was too evil for his programming, the Matrix and the real world. Hugo Weaving gave an excellent performance as a cold, calculating agent who wanted more than just the destruction of mankind, he wanted the destruction of everything.
1) Darth Vader – Star Wars: A New Hope – At first sight, you see the ultimate depiction of evil, the dark black, the iconic music, the breathing, and finally a voice known throughout the world as evil. Kevin’s Movie Blog’s winner of the ultimate villain is known to be evil, he starts off casually throwing people around, choking fellow empire members from across the room, killing his own men for the slightest mistake and striking down his former mentor, all with a dark and dreading presence. Vader doesn’t only look the part, he is the part, going from bad to worse throughout the movie, you realize, when he is ready to kill his own child, the cold, evil nature of a man that is more machine than man, twisted and evil.



There you have it, the top 10 movie baddies of all time. While no list is perfect for everyone, I would like to hear what you think, did I leave anything out; get them out of order, perhaps?
- No, I got it right, your wrong, but thanks for playing!

Here is a link to the most excellent list my friend posted. Check it out, it is quite insightful, well written, and, well wrong, but really worth the click!
http://impoetry.livejournal.com/133117.html?view=524797#t524797

A battle to the death: coming soon!

I have been challenged to come up with a top 10 villain list, one for the ages, one to finally settle an argument that has been nearly half a decade in the making. Of course, Kevin's Movie Blog will not be outdone in a battle as grave as this, so, look tomorrow for a top 10 list, and the rebuttal, and prepare to judge the superior list.
I don't wanna try to sway you one way or the other, but please let me know your name, address and phone number, and I will send any appropriate bribe money your way! ;)
In the mean time, be thinking of who, in all of cinema is the best bad guy for your money. Let me know what you come up with, not that I need any help, but if you want to contribute, I won't turn you down!

Wolverine spawns 2 movies...within a week!

Wolverine had a great week, bringing in $87 million, a fair amount for the summer blockbuster game, apparently it was enough to convince studio execs to make not one, but two more movies. I know what you are thinking, but no, it's not two more Wolverine movies.
Wolverine has at least one more sequel coming, apparently Hugh Jackman is signed on for the sequel, ateast, and the new Wolverine movie would deal with Logan's Japanese adventures, which, if my memory serves me, deals with mutant samurais, amongst other bizarre characters.
The second spinoff is for Ryan Reynolds character Deadpool. Known as the "Merch with a Mouth," the new movie would show Deadpools rise to fame, including something the character is famous for, wise cracking and breaking the fourth wall.
So, what do you think, are you ready for more Wolverine goodness, or did Origins give you enough Hugh Jackman?