Wednesday, April 28, 2010
3 Guys & Glee are on ITunes!
I'm very excited, the 3 Guys & Glee podcast is now on ITunes. So, you can easily subscribe and listen to your favorite Glee podcast involving 3 Guys from Tampa...who are named Rabid Nick, Jimbo and Kevin....who are straight.....ok, nevermind. Anyway, it's here, so click HERE and subscribe Today!!! (And, if you could write a review, I would appreciate it!)
Tuesday, April 27, 2010
3 Guys & The Quest for the Holy Fail - Slimed
Finally, the Holy Fail column is back. And this week, the movie was done by a couple of local filmmakers which makes it all that more fun. The movie was so good, we were able to contact them, and the interview will be up tomorrow. But, when you look at the column, be sure to check out the amazing trailer at the bottom, and try our custom drink recipe. Click HERE to read the 3 Guys & the Quest for the Holy FAIL
A return to the Cove- My interview with Ric O'Barry
Back in October, I spoke with Ric O’Barry, the Flipper trainer turned dolphin defender featured prominently in The Cove, the documentary about the capture and slaughter of dolphins in Taiji, Japan. At the time, O’Barry was excited that the movie was coming out, finally exposing the travesty he had spent so much of his life trying to stop. Well, a lot has happened since then — including The Cove’s win of an Academy Award for best feature documentary. Notoriously, his acceptance segment was cut off when he hoisted a sign urging viewers to “TEXT DOLPHIN to 44144.”
On May 5, Tampa Bay gets a rare chance to hear from O’Barry in person at a special screening of The Cove at Muvico Baywalk (see box). The screening is a fundraiser for the Oceanic Preservation Society, helping O’Barry to continue his work saving dolphins. In advance of that event, I called O’Barry to talk about what has happened in Tajii since the film and its Oscar win.
In the interview, I ask him if the dolphin hunting has stopped, what he thought about an U.S. Military Base refusing to show the film, and a ton more. Check it out!
An Interview with Ric O'Barry
On May 5, Tampa Bay gets a rare chance to hear from O’Barry in person at a special screening of The Cove at Muvico Baywalk (see box). The screening is a fundraiser for the Oceanic Preservation Society, helping O’Barry to continue his work saving dolphins. In advance of that event, I called O’Barry to talk about what has happened in Tajii since the film and its Oscar win.
In the interview, I ask him if the dolphin hunting has stopped, what he thought about an U.S. Military Base refusing to show the film, and a ton more. Check it out!
An Interview with Ric O'Barry
/Film interviews Tommy Wiseau
Since seeing The Room, I have seen and heard all kinds of interviews with director/writer/producer/star Tommy Wiseau. I have to admit, I love it because they always make me laugh. This interview, done by David at /Film was no different. His wording was great, and of course, Wiseau is... one of a kind. Check out the interview!!
Interview with Tommy Wiseau, Director of "The Room" from /Film on Vimeo.
Friday, April 23, 2010
NPH is on Glee, bitches!
NPH is scheduled for this season on Glee. I know, you're excited, right? Well, the question has been, what will his role be. Finally, we get the anwser straight from Doogie's mouth, and it sounds awesome! Check it out!
Chuck trailer
This is why I love Chuck more than any other show on TV, and that is because they are happy to make fun of themselves. Check out the trailer, and whether you are a fan of good ol' Charles Bartowski or not, I'm sure you'll still get a heardy chuckle!
Twilight Trailer
So, I have to admit, I am not a fan of Twilight...at all. It's the crazy fans, the team Edward vs. team Jacob, the lip biting Bella, all of it, it's all just plain annoying to me. That being said, this trailer looks pretty interesting. Check it out!
Wednesday, April 21, 2010
Joss Whedon comic
As you probably know, being the delicously geeky movie fans you are, that Joss Whedon, the geek prince, is set to write and direct Avengers. It's cause for celebration, but I prefer to be cautiously optomistic as the world loves to take my fellow geek away from me just as things are getting good (see 'Firefly'). So, check out this comic that made me crackup. And remember, you can't stop the signal!!!
Monday, April 19, 2010
Harry Potter movie gets me all kinds of excited!
I am a huge fan of movie posters. The designs are intriguing, and their attempt to tell a story is often really great, but sometimes, they are just too busy. I am a huge fan of a simple concept in movie posters, and this poster has it right. Check it out, and join me in excitement for the last two movies!
Are Red Band trailers reaching those that shouldn't see them?
EDITORS NOTE: This story appeared on Creative Loafing. Check it out by clicking HERE
As the recent success of the Kick-Ass preview shows, Red Band Trailers (R/NC-17/unrated) are extremely popular online. Some people are complaining that images of little children cursing and killing people are too much for their own kids to see, but should studios stop distributing the extreme content, and are they doing enough to make it out of kids reach?
Red Band trailers are previews that are not rated by the MPAA and generally contain content not appropriate for all audiences. These trailers that are passed around websites with ease are all the rage online. Currently, you have to enter your birth date to be able to view the trailer. Is that enough to ensure that the audience under 18 is not able to see the material considered not suitable for them?
In my opinion, it requires anyone to either put in their correct date, and see it, or lie about their birth date. If the children are lying about their date, then the parents need to be aware their child is lying, and redband trailers are the least of their worries. However, I don’t know what parents are wanting studios to do, if the trailer goes online, which is a great way to get the attention of the internet community, there doesn’t seem to be much more they can do to ensure the trailer is not viewed by the improper audience, without ensuring the trailer is not embedded on other sites, which would hurt traffic, and defeat the purpose.
I am not a parent, so I admit I am not able to see the whole picture, but like so many other issues, it seems to me parents need to take responsibility for their children, and pass that same responsibility on to their children. If the parents deem content of a violent or sexual content not appropriate, then the child needs to be responsible enough not to see it. If, as a parent, they don’t think the child is able to do that, then that is something a parent needs to be taking care of. Either make sure the Internet is supervised, or locked to ensure they are not able to see such content.
When parents blame the studio for putting out content, they need to realize 10 and 12 year-olds are not their targeted demographic — it is usually the 18-25 year old males that they are aiming to reach — and as a result should not be held responsible for people outside the demographic that get hold of the video.
It is the Internet, and the United States loves the idea of having free reign of the information, ideas and people on the Internet. As such, you can’t have it both ways: either censor the information, and stop claiming we give free reign to the world wide web, or tell the parents to do their job and take charge of their own children.
As the recent success of the Kick-Ass preview shows, Red Band Trailers (R/NC-17/unrated) are extremely popular online. Some people are complaining that images of little children cursing and killing people are too much for their own kids to see, but should studios stop distributing the extreme content, and are they doing enough to make it out of kids reach?
Red Band trailers are previews that are not rated by the MPAA and generally contain content not appropriate for all audiences. These trailers that are passed around websites with ease are all the rage online. Currently, you have to enter your birth date to be able to view the trailer. Is that enough to ensure that the audience under 18 is not able to see the material considered not suitable for them?
In my opinion, it requires anyone to either put in their correct date, and see it, or lie about their birth date. If the children are lying about their date, then the parents need to be aware their child is lying, and redband trailers are the least of their worries. However, I don’t know what parents are wanting studios to do, if the trailer goes online, which is a great way to get the attention of the internet community, there doesn’t seem to be much more they can do to ensure the trailer is not viewed by the improper audience, without ensuring the trailer is not embedded on other sites, which would hurt traffic, and defeat the purpose.
I am not a parent, so I admit I am not able to see the whole picture, but like so many other issues, it seems to me parents need to take responsibility for their children, and pass that same responsibility on to their children. If the parents deem content of a violent or sexual content not appropriate, then the child needs to be responsible enough not to see it. If, as a parent, they don’t think the child is able to do that, then that is something a parent needs to be taking care of. Either make sure the Internet is supervised, or locked to ensure they are not able to see such content.
When parents blame the studio for putting out content, they need to realize 10 and 12 year-olds are not their targeted demographic — it is usually the 18-25 year old males that they are aiming to reach — and as a result should not be held responsible for people outside the demographic that get hold of the video.
It is the Internet, and the United States loves the idea of having free reign of the information, ideas and people on the Internet. As such, you can’t have it both ways: either censor the information, and stop claiming we give free reign to the world wide web, or tell the parents to do their job and take charge of their own children.
Sunday, April 18, 2010
Death at a Funeral Review
Death at a Funeral is a remake of the 2007 Frank Oz directed British movie by the same name. With that being said, as a movie critic, it is required by our law to say the original is better; to not do so would result in lashings and beatings from Roger Ebert. However, I’m going to be the rebel here and avoid the sentence completely, and simply say the two had very different styles of humor. Are you going to find this movie funny? I guess you’re just going to have to keep reading to find out.Death at a Funeral stars Chris Rock, Martin Lawrence, Zoe Saldana, Luke Wilson, Tracy Morgan, James Marsden, and Danny Glover to name a few of the many stars. Now, as a Sci-Fi fan, I was simply thinking they got Ney’Tiri, Cyclops, and Shepherd Book all in one movie, so imagine my surprise when I sat down to watch a ridiculous comedy that actually had a bit of heart.
The movie is about Aaron (Rock) dealing with his fathers funeral, and all of his crazy relatives that show up. You would think they are there to pay their respects to their fallen friend, but almost everyone has an ulterior motive, which leads to wacky shenanigans, a crazy midget, drug use, and plenty of poop jokes. Aaron, however, is a conservative guy, who seems to only want the sense of family, and shelters the entire burden in the film, which, on paper is easily identifiable.
For me, I thought James Marsden’s character was the best part. He was the boyfriend of Zoe Saldana, who was slipped a hallucinogen and spends the entire funeral completely high, which ends up with him naked on the roof, in front of everyone and is proof that Marsden needs to do more comedy work. The other star was Danny Glover, as the crotchety uncle. He was great as the guy who was “way too old for this shit.” There were other adequate performances from Saldana and Luke Wilson, but everyone else seemed to not have much interest in the lines. Rock just seemed to have no sense of comedic timing, and his lines just felt like they had zingers thrown in at the last minute with no sense of timing, and a very dry delivery. Martin Lawrence was his typical self, not deviating at all, so if you think that is a good thing, you’ll enjoy it; for me, however, it seemed tired.
The original movie didn’t do well because the overall census was that it was too dry and straight laced to be funny, and too crazy of a concept to be a drama. The remake makes it very clear that it is trying to be a comedy, and felt like it was over compensating a bit. There were plenty of parts I laughed at, and the audience seemed to eat it up, but sadly, stoned midgets and poop jokes don’t have the same effect they used to on me, and as a result, I only found this movie slightly enjoyable, but overall forgettable. If you love the simpler things in comedy, however, you will definitely enjoy this movie.
EDITORS NOTE: This appeared on Creative Loafing's website. Check it out HERE!
Saturday, April 17, 2010
Sunscreen Film Fest film - Charlie Valentine
Charlie Valentine is one of many movies that appeared at the Sunscreen Film Festival. The movie is an attempt to have a really good character drama with famous actors, and mob themes. While the movie doesn’t really hit on either note, it still makes for an interesting enough film.
The film stars Raymond Barry in the titular role as an aging gangster who is continuing his life as a thief. When a job goes bad, he is forced to do something he does all too well; cut and run. When the same situation arises when he meets up with his estranged son (NCIS star Michael Weatherly) the idea of cutting and running is a tough one.
The film is an attempt to be quite dramatic, with a scoundrel and womanizer who only cares about himself in Charlie Valentine, but the problem is the script just leaves the great acting feeling like a sore thumb. Barry does a great job as an elderly mobster, but we never see him as anything more than a screw up, which makes his near legendary status seem unfamiliar. Weatherly’s estranged son meets his father after an extended stretch, and despite being abandoned and his mother dyeing, he is happy to greet his father with open arms, for the promise of his father’s life. However, again, since Valentine is nothing more of a screw up in the audiences eyes, it just seems forced and silly.
There was plenty of violence, and the gore, despite being extremely in your face, was pretty good. There were plenty of dead bodies, and blood fountains in this movie. Coupled with the naked women seeded throughout the movie, this film feels like they tried extremely hard for the R rating the film received.
The film showed that good acting can almost overcome some weak writing, almost, and if you like some of the classic mob stories of the ‘70s, then you will find something familiar here, just not as well done. Overall, I thought it was a good addition to the film festival, showing the more dramatic side of the festival.
The film stars Raymond Barry in the titular role as an aging gangster who is continuing his life as a thief. When a job goes bad, he is forced to do something he does all too well; cut and run. When the same situation arises when he meets up with his estranged son (NCIS star Michael Weatherly) the idea of cutting and running is a tough one.
The film is an attempt to be quite dramatic, with a scoundrel and womanizer who only cares about himself in Charlie Valentine, but the problem is the script just leaves the great acting feeling like a sore thumb. Barry does a great job as an elderly mobster, but we never see him as anything more than a screw up, which makes his near legendary status seem unfamiliar. Weatherly’s estranged son meets his father after an extended stretch, and despite being abandoned and his mother dyeing, he is happy to greet his father with open arms, for the promise of his father’s life. However, again, since Valentine is nothing more of a screw up in the audiences eyes, it just seems forced and silly.
There was plenty of violence, and the gore, despite being extremely in your face, was pretty good. There were plenty of dead bodies, and blood fountains in this movie. Coupled with the naked women seeded throughout the movie, this film feels like they tried extremely hard for the R rating the film received.
The film showed that good acting can almost overcome some weak writing, almost, and if you like some of the classic mob stories of the ‘70s, then you will find something familiar here, just not as well done. Overall, I thought it was a good addition to the film festival, showing the more dramatic side of the festival.
Friday, April 16, 2010
Should Cell Phone Jammers become common place?
EDITORS NOTE: This appeared in Creative Loafing. Click HERE to check it out and read the really interesting comments that followed!!
As the hero comes busting through the door, he confronts the villain, and sees the damsel in distress, he debates how to make his grand move, only to be stopped by the latest hip hop song as the person behind you in the theater picks up their phone. The person pretends to be considerate, whispering, talking about what restaurant they want to go to later, or what they are up to the next day as the rest of the audience in the theater all contemplates exactly how long of a sentence they would get for murdering a theater patron. We all have been there, and we have all contemplated the murder of an inconsiderate theater member with a cell phone, but what would happen if theaters picked up a handy little cell phone jammer? Would you support that decision?
Cell phone jammers are down to around $200, but it’s the morality and legality of the situation, more than the cost. So, first off, would you support a jammer morally? Would you mind the idea of having no touch to the outside world while you are watching a movie? Some would say they wouldn’t mind not having the annoying talking person that is always behind them, but they would think twice about not getting email, texts or phone calls. For me, I would have no problem shutting the outside world off for a movie, especially one I am really excited for, and would probably consider cold blooded murder on the person that interrupts it. If I am worried my house is on fire, my relatives are dead, or my dog just kidnapped a school bus full of penguins, then I would choose a later showing for the movie, end of story.
So, if people like me wouldn’t mind the jammer, than it must be illegal, right? Jammers themselves aren’t illegal, but the idea of blocking an emergency phone call is a legal problem the theaters probably don’t want to get themselves mixed up with, and is probably the reason we still get texts during movies. I am sure there are hundreds of lawyers out there, ready to pounce on any theater wanting to stop what some people consider an emergency, citing some breach in constitutional rights. Considering I am not a lawyer, I won’t cite the actual laws, but if anyone would like to look up the clause blocking me from my cinema bliss, feel free to post it in the comments.
When I am lucky enough to see a pre-screening for a movie, they ask you to turn off your cellphones, and they actually remind you several more times before the movie starts. During the movie, the theater is scanning with a video camera and some actually use infrared cameras to look for heat signatures, to stop movie pirates. However, since they can’t distinguish between a camcorder and a person with an active social life, they simply ask you to leave immediately. I think this should become a regular practice, and anyone caught with an active cell phone should be asked to leave. A few months of this practice will result in people turning off their cell phones or paying a lot of money for a partially viewed movie.
The only other idea is a theater bouncer. Take one of the big, gym loving bouncers from Ybor and offer them free popcorn (they love that stuff) and ask them to simply walk up and down the isle looking menacing. If he sees a cell phone out, he is allowed to tackle that person, dragging them out by their hair. After a few beaten theatergoers are dragged out in front of your eyes, you will be much less likely to forget to turn off your cell phone.
So, what do you think? Should cell phone jammers become common place? How about my theater bouncer idea? What is your idea for a more pleasant theater experience (barring the fact that we aren’t above fully automatic weapons)?
As the hero comes busting through the door, he confronts the villain, and sees the damsel in distress, he debates how to make his grand move, only to be stopped by the latest hip hop song as the person behind you in the theater picks up their phone. The person pretends to be considerate, whispering, talking about what restaurant they want to go to later, or what they are up to the next day as the rest of the audience in the theater all contemplates exactly how long of a sentence they would get for murdering a theater patron. We all have been there, and we have all contemplated the murder of an inconsiderate theater member with a cell phone, but what would happen if theaters picked up a handy little cell phone jammer? Would you support that decision?
Cell phone jammers are down to around $200, but it’s the morality and legality of the situation, more than the cost. So, first off, would you support a jammer morally? Would you mind the idea of having no touch to the outside world while you are watching a movie? Some would say they wouldn’t mind not having the annoying talking person that is always behind them, but they would think twice about not getting email, texts or phone calls. For me, I would have no problem shutting the outside world off for a movie, especially one I am really excited for, and would probably consider cold blooded murder on the person that interrupts it. If I am worried my house is on fire, my relatives are dead, or my dog just kidnapped a school bus full of penguins, then I would choose a later showing for the movie, end of story.
So, if people like me wouldn’t mind the jammer, than it must be illegal, right? Jammers themselves aren’t illegal, but the idea of blocking an emergency phone call is a legal problem the theaters probably don’t want to get themselves mixed up with, and is probably the reason we still get texts during movies. I am sure there are hundreds of lawyers out there, ready to pounce on any theater wanting to stop what some people consider an emergency, citing some breach in constitutional rights. Considering I am not a lawyer, I won’t cite the actual laws, but if anyone would like to look up the clause blocking me from my cinema bliss, feel free to post it in the comments.
When I am lucky enough to see a pre-screening for a movie, they ask you to turn off your cellphones, and they actually remind you several more times before the movie starts. During the movie, the theater is scanning with a video camera and some actually use infrared cameras to look for heat signatures, to stop movie pirates. However, since they can’t distinguish between a camcorder and a person with an active social life, they simply ask you to leave immediately. I think this should become a regular practice, and anyone caught with an active cell phone should be asked to leave. A few months of this practice will result in people turning off their cell phones or paying a lot of money for a partially viewed movie.
The only other idea is a theater bouncer. Take one of the big, gym loving bouncers from Ybor and offer them free popcorn (they love that stuff) and ask them to simply walk up and down the isle looking menacing. If he sees a cell phone out, he is allowed to tackle that person, dragging them out by their hair. After a few beaten theatergoers are dragged out in front of your eyes, you will be much less likely to forget to turn off your cell phone.
So, what do you think? Should cell phone jammers become common place? How about my theater bouncer idea? What is your idea for a more pleasant theater experience (barring the fact that we aren’t above fully automatic weapons)?
Burn Notice gets renewed through season 6
My favorite show on TV, USA's Burn Notice got some great news this week in the form of a pickup. It was leaked that the show was renewed through season 6. It's great news as we gear up for a June 3rd start of Season 4, two more seasons is a welcome sign that USA has plenty of confidence in their show. And why shouldn't they? Burn Notice has the top demos for it's time slot and is the highest ranking scripted show on television. So, while it's no surprise, the news will definetly help me sleep better tonight. So, have you gotten on the Burn Notice train yet?
Thursday, April 15, 2010
Star Wars Uncut Trailer
Star Wars Uncut is an amazing project that chops up Star Wars into little 15-second clips and asks fans on the Internet to submit different 15 second clips that get put together to for a remade Star Wars film. The idea is brilliant, and as you can see from the trailer, so are some of the clips. Some are just cheesy attempts, while some look they have real potential, but either way, it's cool those people got out there and made some film. Check it out, and let me know your thoughts on the idea!
Star Wars Uncut "The Escape" from Casey Pugh on Vimeo.
Friday, April 9, 2010
Zombie Combat Manual
So, we all know the Zombie apocalypse is coming. It's a fact, and only all the ones that aren't prepared will be a happy meal. Believe it or not, there is actually several books out there to help you get ready and hopefully survive the apocalypse. Here is a video, showing a simple combat move that will work on a zombie. Remember: You never have to reload a blade!
The Other Guys trailer makes me laugh out loud (lol)
The Other Guys, starring Will Farrell, Mark Wahlberg, Dwayne Johnson, Samuel L. Jackson and Michael Keaton finally released a trailer, and it looks hilarious! I have a feeling this will be a hard R rating, but it still looks amazing.
Check out the trailer!
Check out the trailer!
Chuck Season 2 Bloopers
I'm sure you haven't realized I am a huge Chuck fan. As far as I'm concerned, the characters, and even the actors themselves are all amazing and can do no wrong (not even if they shave a cat) so, when I saw this blooper real, I had to share. Enjoy!
Wednesday, April 7, 2010
Trailer Trap!
It's a good time to be a movie geek. Like the flowers opening up for summer, so is the movie marketing machine. There are tons of trailers to wet our appetite out there, and fortunetly, there is one spot to see them! Check it out over at Creative Loafing by clicking HERE
MTV Movie Awards
The Awards season has come and gone, and all the front runners have forgotten where they put their trophies, and geeks like me are just happy Star Trek won something. Enter the MTV Movie awards. Lets be honest, here, nobody cares about this award, but it's still fun to rehash the debate. Click HERE to vote for your favorites in the categories including breakout star, WTF moment, and more.
Something I was thinking about, though, is that for several of the categories, there are 10 entries, which makes it really tough for me (Zombieland vs. Star Trek for Best Picture), but it occured to me that maybe it's not a good thing...I mean, maybe the winners and losers get watered down.
Atleast, I have seen every single movie on all of the lists. That makes me feel better...I think!
What do you think of the voting process, and what is your pick in the list for Movie of the Year?
Something I was thinking about, though, is that for several of the categories, there are 10 entries, which makes it really tough for me (Zombieland vs. Star Trek for Best Picture), but it occured to me that maybe it's not a good thing...I mean, maybe the winners and losers get watered down.
Atleast, I have seen every single movie on all of the lists. That makes me feel better...I think!
What do you think of the voting process, and what is your pick in the list for Movie of the Year?
Tuesday, April 6, 2010
Some upcoming USA projects
I'm a huge fan of USA's original broadcasting. Shows like Psych, Burn Notice, White Collar and Royal Pains have been hugely succesful, and really, really enjoyable. So, with the "characters welcome" theme, here are some of the latest projects that are in some stage of development. They may not see the light of day, but they are being explored, and who knows, you may see one or two of them in the next year....
A LEGAL MIND One of Manhattan's top corporate lawyers goes on a recruiting trip and hires the only guy that impresses him, a brilliant but unmotivated college dropout. This early twenty something has barely coasted through life on his natural intelligence and copious amounts of marijuana. Now, as he impersonates a bright young professional, he might even become a real adult. From writer Aaron Korsh ("The Deep End") and executive producers David Bartis and Gene Klein of Dutch Oven. From Universal Cable Productions.
ROBYN After her financier father's fraudulent dealings are exposed, a young woman realizes she's done nothing substantial with her own life. Initially attempting to be a do-gooder, she finds it much more satisfying (and effective) to rip off the decadent upper class. Rather than keep the proceeds for herself, though, she redistributes the wealth by giving it to the exploited underclass. Becky Hartman Edwards ("Parenthood," "Life On Mars") is the executive producer/writer. From Universal Cable Productions.
GAY WALCH PROJECT Karyn Burke, a suburban supermom to three kids, wakes up one morning and finds her husband has left town because he was in too deep to mob boss Tommy. Now, Karen's left to clean up his mess by paying off her husband's gambling debt and becoming Tommy's new "fixer." It's just one more priority on her weekly to do list. Executive producer is Burrad Marsh (Shed Media) and Gay Walch ("Summerland") is writer. From Universal Cable Productions.
STICK Chris "Stick" Blake is a player in the NHL prominently featured in the majority of the top 10 hockey fights on YouTube. He just got suspended from his team, and now has to attend court ordered anger management classes. He's not a bad guy... he just loses it when people are bullied. After an old friend shows up with a life-threatening problem, Stick focuses his considerable energies on solving it and discovers a new line of work - helping people that the law can't. From writers Mark Altman & Steve Kriozere ("Castle") and Executive Producers Steve Stark ("Medium," "Girlfriends") and Russ Buchholz (FACING KATE). From Universal Cable Productions.
UNTITLED JOHN MICHAEL HIGGINS / INSURANCE ADJUSTER PROJECT From Steve Carell ("The Office") and John Michael Higgins ("Best in Show"), this project is about Bob Welsh, a crusading middle class insurance investigator who proves that sometimes the dullest jobs are the most exciting as he ferrets out high stakes dramas. Higgins writes with Margaret Higgins. Joining Carell (Carousel Television) as executive producer is Thom Hinkle ("Rockford Files"). From Universal Cable Productions. From Universal Cable Productions.
UNTITLED CULLEN BROTHERS PROJECT Two estranged brothers end up on the same FBI task force. One brother is a by-the-book profiler who lived in his brother's shadow. The other is a shoot-first-ask-questions later type who must now report to his brother. Executive Producers are Dave Broome ("Biggest Loser") and Steven Burnett from 25/7 Productions. Aaron Kaplan ("Made of Honor," "You Me and Dupree"), Jim Clemente ("Criminal Minds") and Tim Clemente ("Copout," "Heist") also executive produce. Writers are Mark Cullen and Rob Cullen ("Las Vegas"). From Universal Cable Productions.
THE VELVET HAMMER Houston-native Candy Carter returns home but she's not the same Texas debutante who left - she has two kids, she's divorced and she's an FBI agent. Back home, she uses her brains and beauty to help out her fellow proud Texans while getting back in touch with her Southern roots. From writers Gail Gilchriest and Kevin Murphy, executive producers Anthony Edwards ("ER") and Cheryl Dolins of Grand Central Entertainment with CBS Television Studios.
A LEGAL MIND One of Manhattan's top corporate lawyers goes on a recruiting trip and hires the only guy that impresses him, a brilliant but unmotivated college dropout. This early twenty something has barely coasted through life on his natural intelligence and copious amounts of marijuana. Now, as he impersonates a bright young professional, he might even become a real adult. From writer Aaron Korsh ("The Deep End") and executive producers David Bartis and Gene Klein of Dutch Oven. From Universal Cable Productions.
ROBYN After her financier father's fraudulent dealings are exposed, a young woman realizes she's done nothing substantial with her own life. Initially attempting to be a do-gooder, she finds it much more satisfying (and effective) to rip off the decadent upper class. Rather than keep the proceeds for herself, though, she redistributes the wealth by giving it to the exploited underclass. Becky Hartman Edwards ("Parenthood," "Life On Mars") is the executive producer/writer. From Universal Cable Productions.
GAY WALCH PROJECT Karyn Burke, a suburban supermom to three kids, wakes up one morning and finds her husband has left town because he was in too deep to mob boss Tommy. Now, Karen's left to clean up his mess by paying off her husband's gambling debt and becoming Tommy's new "fixer." It's just one more priority on her weekly to do list. Executive producer is Burrad Marsh (Shed Media) and Gay Walch ("Summerland") is writer. From Universal Cable Productions.
STICK Chris "Stick" Blake is a player in the NHL prominently featured in the majority of the top 10 hockey fights on YouTube. He just got suspended from his team, and now has to attend court ordered anger management classes. He's not a bad guy... he just loses it when people are bullied. After an old friend shows up with a life-threatening problem, Stick focuses his considerable energies on solving it and discovers a new line of work - helping people that the law can't. From writers Mark Altman & Steve Kriozere ("Castle") and Executive Producers Steve Stark ("Medium," "Girlfriends") and Russ Buchholz (FACING KATE). From Universal Cable Productions.
UNTITLED JOHN MICHAEL HIGGINS / INSURANCE ADJUSTER PROJECT From Steve Carell ("The Office") and John Michael Higgins ("Best in Show"), this project is about Bob Welsh, a crusading middle class insurance investigator who proves that sometimes the dullest jobs are the most exciting as he ferrets out high stakes dramas. Higgins writes with Margaret Higgins. Joining Carell (Carousel Television) as executive producer is Thom Hinkle ("Rockford Files"). From Universal Cable Productions. From Universal Cable Productions.
UNTITLED CULLEN BROTHERS PROJECT Two estranged brothers end up on the same FBI task force. One brother is a by-the-book profiler who lived in his brother's shadow. The other is a shoot-first-ask-questions later type who must now report to his brother. Executive Producers are Dave Broome ("Biggest Loser") and Steven Burnett from 25/7 Productions. Aaron Kaplan ("Made of Honor," "You Me and Dupree"), Jim Clemente ("Criminal Minds") and Tim Clemente ("Copout," "Heist") also executive produce. Writers are Mark Cullen and Rob Cullen ("Las Vegas"). From Universal Cable Productions.
THE VELVET HAMMER Houston-native Candy Carter returns home but she's not the same Texas debutante who left - she has two kids, she's divorced and she's an FBI agent. Back home, she uses her brains and beauty to help out her fellow proud Texans while getting back in touch with her Southern roots. From writers Gail Gilchriest and Kevin Murphy, executive producers Anthony Edwards ("ER") and Cheryl Dolins of Grand Central Entertainment with CBS Television Studios.
This film is not yet rated - A review, sorta
The other day, I sat down and watched a documentary. Can you believe it? This documentary came highly reccomended and is about the MPAA, or Motion Picture Association of America, which is the group that decides whether a movie is G, PG, PG-13, R, or NC-17. The process had always been a bit of a mystery to me, and their shennanigans were always laughable (ex. anatomically incorrect puppet nudity), but apparently, I wasn't the only one.
The movie starts off by interviewing several famous directors, getting their take on the whole process of trying to get a movie out of the depths of NC-17 status, which is like a death sentence for a film. The experiences sounded terrible, and rediculous and just plain silly. Finally, the director asks who these people are, so they can be interviewed, only to find out no one knows their name. After hiring a weird P.I., the film slowly finds out who these raters are by following them, digging through the trash and all kinds of other, bizarre ways. Meanwhile, the film is trying to get a handle on exactly what their system of rating is, only to find out there is none, and there is not much consistency from one film to the next.
After the documentary completely fleshes out the names of the rating board, things get murkier as the film actually submits the film to be rated, only to get the dreaded NC-17 rating, with no description. Apparently, the appeal process is shrouded in even more mystery, as everyone refuses to give names, and acts like a secret society, with church figures and all. After continued dirt diggin, the director finds the name of the appeals board as well, and shows the complete one sided-ness of the board and the stupidity behind their alleged fair-ratings.
I personally don't have a problem with the idea of rating movies, but the cloak and dagger B.S. is just silly. I say, the company polls 100 of the top critics of a movie from a prescreening, and takes 25 randomly from the pile and uses the average for a rating. That rating should be challengable, and would allow for a filmmaker to better understand what is taboo, and what is ok.
So, overall, I learned a lot about the crookedness of the MPAA, but I don't hate them, I just think they need to get their stuff together a bit better. Maybe after the names are made public, an overhall can be made.
The movie starts off by interviewing several famous directors, getting their take on the whole process of trying to get a movie out of the depths of NC-17 status, which is like a death sentence for a film. The experiences sounded terrible, and rediculous and just plain silly. Finally, the director asks who these people are, so they can be interviewed, only to find out no one knows their name. After hiring a weird P.I., the film slowly finds out who these raters are by following them, digging through the trash and all kinds of other, bizarre ways. Meanwhile, the film is trying to get a handle on exactly what their system of rating is, only to find out there is none, and there is not much consistency from one film to the next.
After the documentary completely fleshes out the names of the rating board, things get murkier as the film actually submits the film to be rated, only to get the dreaded NC-17 rating, with no description. Apparently, the appeal process is shrouded in even more mystery, as everyone refuses to give names, and acts like a secret society, with church figures and all. After continued dirt diggin, the director finds the name of the appeals board as well, and shows the complete one sided-ness of the board and the stupidity behind their alleged fair-ratings.
I personally don't have a problem with the idea of rating movies, but the cloak and dagger B.S. is just silly. I say, the company polls 100 of the top critics of a movie from a prescreening, and takes 25 randomly from the pile and uses the average for a rating. That rating should be challengable, and would allow for a filmmaker to better understand what is taboo, and what is ok.
So, overall, I learned a lot about the crookedness of the MPAA, but I don't hate them, I just think they need to get their stuff together a bit better. Maybe after the names are made public, an overhall can be made.
Monday, April 5, 2010
Kevin Smith takes on Film Critics in Twrant
EDITORS NOTE: This article appeared on Creative Loafing's website. Check out the article, and all the comments by clicking HERE. Thanks for the Support
Twrant (n.) - to go on an annoying rant in Twitter.
Kevin Smith, the director of such acclaimed movies as Clerks, Dogma, and the latest Cop Out is once again in the spotlight for a rant on his Twitter account recently regarding the harsh criticism his latest movie Cop Out received. Just recently, he turned to Twitter to vent his frustrations over an ugly spat with SouthWest Airlines and their two-seat policy. Now, Smith is targeting film critics, and hitting back, telling film critics to get a life.
I have to say I am a huge fan of Smith’s, and I have to agree with part of the rant of his, stating that some critics focus on such tiny details that they often miss the joys of watching film. I also agree that this is not rocket science, and writing film reviews is not saving the world. Some people get so focused on the film and their job, they often forget that we are studying an art, and some critics written words are really just opinions.
I do, however, feel very disappointed with Smith and his rant, and not just because he shows his dislike for film critics, but because he defends his latest movie, Cop Out, by admitting it’s stupid, childish, and “like a retarded child.” This leads me to believe that any passion for film the once great director of Clerks had is now gone, and seems to be simply a form of income, which is hard to take, given we’ve seen such passion out of him with previous films. If you are going to defend something you’ve done, it should be because you did the best you possibly could with what you are given, and that if people don’t like your work, than that is their problem, not because it’s stupid and pathetic. I would think that if that attitude was applied to Clerks back in the day, we wouldn’t know who Smith is.
When Dogma came out, Smith had his loyal supporters, and people who hated his movie. He, meanwhile, stood by the film, which resulted in more than a few comedic stories, but he stood by it, saying this is a great movie, and at the time, the critics agreed. Now, critics hated this movie (it’s at 19% on Rotten Tomatoes), so Smith, in turn, hates critics, which just seems childish to me. I think the best reviews I’ve read (including our own Joe Bardi’s, who actually liked the movie) complained about poor execution, and the un-funny jokes, not the subject matter being serious enough for them. The movie does not have to be Citizen Kane to be a great movie.
Finally, I have to comment on the idea that he wants to take his Twitter followers and get them to see the movie for free and force film critics to pay the money for his movies. While I can respect giving people who want to see film the chance to see it over those who have to for their job, why would I read a fanboy’s reaction to one of his movies? Isn’t that the problem we have been talking about this whole time, poor reviewing? Aren’t they just people with a blogger account?
If you follow movie blogs, you’ve probably heard of CHUD.com, and their editor, Devin Faraci. Faraci wrote an editorial in response to Smith’s rant, lambasting Smith, and more importantly, his fans, which I see no correlation with. Faraci says “Fifteen years ago I thought Kevin Smith was the voice of a generation. It turns out he is - the generation just happens to be lazy, stupid people who are perfectly content going through life without an original, interesting thought in their heads.” Faraci does make a good point, however, when talking about defending a film with the “hey, it’s a stupid piece of crap, back off” mentality saying “If Smith doesn't want to be judged on a filmmaking level let's judge him on a sheer consumer level - does he really believe that Cop Out, a retarded child of a film, is worth a full price admission at a movie theater?” But, he goes right back to supporting some of Smith’s claims saying that he will no longer review Smith’s movies, and he now has two hours of his life for more important things; once again, a film critic who looks at film as a job, not as a source of entertainment.
Here is the full rant, for your reading pleasure:
Twrant (n.) - to go on an annoying rant in Twitter.
Kevin Smith, the director of such acclaimed movies as Clerks, Dogma, and the latest Cop Out is once again in the spotlight for a rant on his Twitter account recently regarding the harsh criticism his latest movie Cop Out received. Just recently, he turned to Twitter to vent his frustrations over an ugly spat with SouthWest Airlines and their two-seat policy. Now, Smith is targeting film critics, and hitting back, telling film critics to get a life.
I have to say I am a huge fan of Smith’s, and I have to agree with part of the rant of his, stating that some critics focus on such tiny details that they often miss the joys of watching film. I also agree that this is not rocket science, and writing film reviews is not saving the world. Some people get so focused on the film and their job, they often forget that we are studying an art, and some critics written words are really just opinions.
I do, however, feel very disappointed with Smith and his rant, and not just because he shows his dislike for film critics, but because he defends his latest movie, Cop Out, by admitting it’s stupid, childish, and “like a retarded child.” This leads me to believe that any passion for film the once great director of Clerks had is now gone, and seems to be simply a form of income, which is hard to take, given we’ve seen such passion out of him with previous films. If you are going to defend something you’ve done, it should be because you did the best you possibly could with what you are given, and that if people don’t like your work, than that is their problem, not because it’s stupid and pathetic. I would think that if that attitude was applied to Clerks back in the day, we wouldn’t know who Smith is.
When Dogma came out, Smith had his loyal supporters, and people who hated his movie. He, meanwhile, stood by the film, which resulted in more than a few comedic stories, but he stood by it, saying this is a great movie, and at the time, the critics agreed. Now, critics hated this movie (it’s at 19% on Rotten Tomatoes), so Smith, in turn, hates critics, which just seems childish to me. I think the best reviews I’ve read (including our own Joe Bardi’s, who actually liked the movie) complained about poor execution, and the un-funny jokes, not the subject matter being serious enough for them. The movie does not have to be Citizen Kane to be a great movie.
Finally, I have to comment on the idea that he wants to take his Twitter followers and get them to see the movie for free and force film critics to pay the money for his movies. While I can respect giving people who want to see film the chance to see it over those who have to for their job, why would I read a fanboy’s reaction to one of his movies? Isn’t that the problem we have been talking about this whole time, poor reviewing? Aren’t they just people with a blogger account?
If you follow movie blogs, you’ve probably heard of CHUD.com, and their editor, Devin Faraci. Faraci wrote an editorial in response to Smith’s rant, lambasting Smith, and more importantly, his fans, which I see no correlation with. Faraci says “Fifteen years ago I thought Kevin Smith was the voice of a generation. It turns out he is - the generation just happens to be lazy, stupid people who are perfectly content going through life without an original, interesting thought in their heads.” Faraci does make a good point, however, when talking about defending a film with the “hey, it’s a stupid piece of crap, back off” mentality saying “If Smith doesn't want to be judged on a filmmaking level let's judge him on a sheer consumer level - does he really believe that Cop Out, a retarded child of a film, is worth a full price admission at a movie theater?” But, he goes right back to supporting some of Smith’s claims saying that he will no longer review Smith’s movies, and he now has two hours of his life for more important things; once again, a film critic who looks at film as a job, not as a source of entertainment.
Here is the full rant, for your reading pleasure:
So, what do you think? Was Kevin Smith’s Cop Out judged too harshly? Is movie criticism going too overboard on all of this? Tell me all about it in the comments section!(1/5) @coked_up_jesus "I gotta say that every day I hate film
theory & film students & critics more & more. Where is the fun in
movies?" Sir(2/5) sometimes, it's important to turn off the chatter. Film
fandom's become a nasty bloodsport where cartoonishly rooting for failure
getsabout 14 hours ago via web(3/5)the hit count up on the ol' brand-new blog.
And if a schmuck like me pays you some attention, score! MORE EYES, MEANS MORE
ADVERT $.about 14 hours ago via web(4/5) But when you pull your eye away from
the microscope, you can see that shit you're studying so closely is, in reality,
tiny as fuck.about 14 hours ago via web(5/5) You wanna enjoy movies again? Stop
reading about them & just go to the movies. It's improved film/movie
appreciation immensely for me.about 14 hours ago via webSeriously: so many critics lined-up to pull a sad & embarrassing train on #CopOut like it was
JenniferJasonLeigh in LAST EXIT TO BROOKLYN.about 14 hours ago via webWatching them beat the shit out of it was sad. Like, it's called #CopOut ; that sound
like a very ambitious title to you? You REALLY wannaabout 14 hours ago via
webshit in the mouth of a flick that so OBVIOUSLY strived for nothing more than
laughs. Was it called "Schindler's Cop Out"? Writing a nastyabout 14 hours ago
via webreview for #CopOut is akin to bullying a retarded kid who was getting a
couple chuckles from the normies by singing AFTERNOON DELIGHT.about 14 hours ago
via webSuddenly, bully-dudes are doing the bad impression of him, using the
"retart" voice. The crowd shifts uncomfortably. #IfOnlyDaltonWasHereabout 14
hours ago via webAnd you may impress a couple of low IQ-ers who're like "Yeah,
man! Way to destroy that singing retart!" But, really? All you've done is
makeabout 14 hours ago via webfun of something that wasn't doing you any harm
and wanted only to give some cats a some fun laughs. Yes I compared My Flick To A Retarded Kid about 14 hours ago via webIt was just ridiculous to watch. That was it for me. Realized whole system's upside down: so
we let a bunch of people see it for free & theyabout 13 hours ago via
webshit all over it? Meanwhile, people who'd REALLY like to see the flick for free are made to pay? Bullshit: from now on, any flick I'm everabout 13 hours ago via web
involved with, I conduct critics screenings thusly: you wanna see it
early to review it? Fine: pay like you would if you saw it next week.about 13
hours ago via webLike, why am I giving an arbitrary 500 people power over what I
do at all, let alone for free? Next flick, I'd rather pick 500 randoms fromabout
13 hours ago via webTwitter feed & let THEM see it for free in advance, then post THEIR opinions, good AND bad. Same difference. Why's their opinion more valid?about 13 hours ago via web
It's a backwards system. People are free to talk shit about ANY of my flicks, so long as they paid to see it. Fuck this AnimalFarm bullshit.about 13 hours ago via webReply Retweet
Saturday, April 3, 2010
Clash of the Titans Review
Thanks to Creative Loafing, I was able to see Clash of the Titans in 3-D early. So, check out my review and find out if you should spend your hard earned money on the movie or not. (Hint: yes, yes you should). Let me know what you think of the review in the comments section!!
Check out the Loafing review HERE
The summer movie season has officially kicked off with the remake of the 1981
classic, Clash of the Titans. I was a big fan of the original movie — a tale involving Greek Gods, a sacrificial virgin, a flying horse and a mechanical owl — so I had high hopes for this remake. Plus, after seeing the trailer, I knew I really wanted to see them “release the Kraken.” The question is: Can the long, effects-heavy journey to the Kraken really worth it? The answer is a big Oh Hell Yeah!
Check out the Loafing review HERE
Friday, April 2, 2010
Reel Projections Podcast
So, this week, I did a total of THREE (3) podcasts. Can you believe it? I know, I can't either. Anywho, one of the podcasts was a bunch of movie geeks sitting around talking about the latest news, including Clash of the Titans, 3-D, our Holy Fail post and a lot more. I really enjoyed listening to this afterwards, and I think you will too.
So, click HERE for Reel Projections, hosted by Joe Bardi.
The other podcast that is now up is 3 Guys and Chuck, the Podcast. This weeks episode was entitled Chuck vs. the American Hero, and was one of the best episodes of Chuck ever. When we have a good episode, we always have a good podcast, and this was one of our best, so give it a listen by clicking here: 3 GUYS & CHUCK - CHUCK VS. THE AMERICAN HERO.
So, click HERE for Reel Projections, hosted by Joe Bardi.
The other podcast that is now up is 3 Guys and Chuck, the Podcast. This weeks episode was entitled Chuck vs. the American Hero, and was one of the best episodes of Chuck ever. When we have a good episode, we always have a good podcast, and this was one of our best, so give it a listen by clicking here: 3 GUYS & CHUCK - CHUCK VS. THE AMERICAN HERO.
Zack Levi on the Tonight Show
Zachary Levi seems like the kind of guy that I could invite over to drink beer and play video games with, which makes him that much more likeable on Chuck. Here he is talking to Jay Leno. Check it out!
Chuck's Yvonne Strahovski on Attack of the Show
The rediculously hot Yvonne Strahovski stopped by Attack of the Show last night. After I saw this video, I thought of three things, first off, that accent makes her the sexiest woman in the world; the second is me wanting Kevin Perrera back for interview time, and the third is I need a cold shower after that Mass Effect scene. I thought it was great to see Chris Hardwick lose it like that. I would like to have seen more Chuck insight, but that's because I'm a Chuck fan, but take a look!
Thursday, April 1, 2010
Muppets sing Stand By Me
This is just so rediculously disturbing, I had to share this Muppet video. The muppets have some serious internet waves lately, and this video is a great example of why. Check it out!!
The Room's Tommy Wiseau on Space Ghost!
This video is awesome. Space Ghost does a great interview here, and sure, they make fun of Wiseau, but after seeing the room, the question is, how can you not?
Check it out, courtesy of Rabid Nick.
Check it out, courtesy of Rabid Nick.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)