So with Liam Neeson as Col. Hannibal, Bradley Cooper as Faceman, Sharlto Copley as Murdock and Quintin ‘Rampage’ Jackson as B.A., I felt the cast was decent, especially with Liam Neeson in the mix. But after seeing the trailer… I think they made a BIG mistake in casting Neeson and Cooper. Liam, a great actor by all accounts, and Bradly, still flying high on the success of ‘The Hangover’, don’t embody the essence I saw in Peppard and Benedict.

From what I saw in the trailer it looks like Liam is phoning in his performance and Bradly, who has a shirtless scene to show off is newly chiseled physique, looks more like a male model who than a solider.  I can see how Joe  Carnahan (Narc, Smoking Aces) thought those two would be a good fit, and on paper they seem great. It didn’t quite fit, at least for me, when I saw them together in the trailer. Maybe its just me trying to transition from the guys I grew up watching in those roles to the guys who are playing them on the big screen…

I guess I have to see the film before I can fully commit to either liking the casting choices or not.

Now I remember seeing it at the Ritz 16 (now called Showcase at the Ritz) in Voorhees, New Jersey when it came out in 1998. I was just a junior in high school then. Not really aware of the awesome power that this film embodied. And over the next few years that followed I saw it 2 or 3 more times. It wasn’t until I studied it in film school that I finally saw the film for what it really was – the best film from a Hollywood studio in the past 11 years… I know that’s a bold statement to make but if you’ve seen the film you’ll better understand where I’m coming from…

The storyline is simple: Two 1990′s teenagers find themselves in a 1950′s sitcom where their influence begins to profoundly change that complacent world. The concept to put people into alternate realities, where their actions have consequences, is far from a new idea. But in this film, the cause and effect work to better the “human condition” by showing that people are more than the sum of their parts. That the only thing standing in the way from living your life to the fullest, is you…

The cinematography was/is a sight to see. Nowadays b/w photography isn’t used all that much, except for independent and foreign cinema. But the DP, John Lindley, ASC, captured the beauty and truth that exists only in b/w photography. And once color was introduced here and there to the compositions, it created a more, more powerful, canvas to express the story. In modern cinematography you hardly ever see colors as vibrant and rich and full as you did when Technicolor came out. This film uses some of those same conventions to the extent that you’d think the colors were painted on with a brush!

The film’s soundtrack, though mostly 1950s classics, was blended together with an instant tearjerker suite by Randy Newman. I’m not ashamed to admit that the scene with Tobey Maguire and Jeff Daniels, where they’re looking at an art book in the diner, is interwoven with a composition that’s so moving and inspirational that it literally brought tears to my eyes.  When those high notes hit, I could felt electricity course through my body. Now any soundscore that can envoke that kind of reaction out of its listener while adding depth and substance to the visuals is flat out amazing.

The acting, though tongue-in-cheek and overly dramatic, was executed with such precision that seeing it from a 90s perspective washed away any notion of it being one of those 1950s movies, where its all “fiddle sticks”, “oh gosh” and “holy cow”. The title characters played by Tobey Maguire and Reese Witherspoon injected a deavy dose of the post-MTV generation antics into the traditional “Norman Rockwell” ideaology, and the outcome was a wonderful mix of then-and-now.

I know others will disagree with me on this film. That’s fine.  A film by its very nature is subjective and each person will see things differently when they look at ‘Pleasantville’. Some will think it takes itself too seriously or not serious enough. Others may chaulk it up to a film propelled by its visual effects and disregard the storyline altogether. And even still, some will say its arrogant or self-righteous. I’m sure they’ll even be those who think its down right aweful.

For me…I saw a film that shocked me to my core; it took my breathe away!

As a Fellini fan (studied him extensively in film school) I was upset to see that once again Hollywood has decided to remake a classic, modernist film and put their own misguided and deluded spin on what they think will improve the original version beyond what even Fellini himself envisioned.

There are several classic films, both foreign and domestic, that should never, ever be remade. Why? Because the elements that affected the creation of the originals (societal times, studio involvement, etc…) allowed for far more creativity then we have now – in Hollywood we simply through money at a film (e.g. Michael SFX Bay and Jerry Boom Boom Bruckheimer).

So that being said I’m reluctant to even consider seeing ‘Nine’. And while the cast is impressive (Danie lDay-Lewis,Nicole Kidman, Penelope Cruz, Dame Judi Dench, Kate Hudson, Sophia Loren, and Fergie) I just can’t imagine this film as a musical. Granted there is definitely a music-esque theme to certain portions of the original and it would be fitting to the “circus theme” that is notorious in all Fellini films, I still can’t picture seeing Marcello Mastroianni, Claudia Cardinale or even Anouk Aimee singing and dancing to a story about a respected filmmaker who slowly descends into absurdity on the set of his lastest film.

I wondery how this film would fair in Italy? Would Fellini lovers from “the boot” appreciate an Americanized version of an Italian classic? Would they even care at this point? I would hope so and if they didn’t I’m sure they would if Hollywood decided to remake ‘La Dolce Vita’ into a musical – that would definitely cause an uproar (or at the very least  it should!)

Still… I saw the trailer and while it looks like a carbon copy, line-for-line remake of the original, I can’t help but be impressed with the interpretation that Rob Marshall has given this 1963 classic. Maybe I’ll let this one grow on me, see what the critics say and take the plunge this November to see it. Who knows…

What does it mean for American culture/ethics when the masses go out to see a slasher flick rather than a film with culture (slumdog millionaire) or history (frost/nixon, milk)  or equailty (gran torino)or even the human condition (the wrestler)? Maybe it means that the collective voice of “entertainment” enbodies both the good and the bad (and somtimes the ugly) of the moviegoing experience. Maybe the masses are tired of the Oscar race and just wanted to see something that didn’t conform to calendar of “safe films” that come out during the 1st few months of each new year.  Or maybe a film such as Friday the 13th does as well as it did on Valentine’s Day Weekend because it provides a polar opposite to the commercialholiday weekend – death instead of love.

But what if Jason is in fact the best film to see where young people will learn about the consequences of their actions? What if Jason is the ultimate conservative parent?

Think about it, Jason kills those who: Have pre-martial sex, do drugs, have a disregard for anything except themselves and who sometimes wander aimlessly through the woods and trepass onto the private property.

Maybe the “life lessons” that Jason teaches are excellent ways for the younger generations.  Ha-ha, wouldn’t that be something? What if Jason Voorhees came into the school environment to teach kids about the dangers of pre-martial sex- not only could you get an STD or become pregnant, you may in fact die. That’s one of hell of a preventive sex ed video!!!

Maybe …, just maybe the box office success of Friday the 13thhas nothing to do with culture, ethics or morality, but rather it was driven by the resurgence of the target audience for the slasher genre of the 70s and 80s, coming alive again in the early OOs.

The original, which starred a pre-Footloose Kevin Bacon, was a decent slasher film with a villian that wasn’t revealed until the last 5-10 minutes of the 3rd act: Mrs. Voorhees. When I ask most people who’s the villian in Friday the 13th, the original, they say: “Jason”. It never ceases to amaze me how people don’t associate Jasons’ mother as the villian and default to a hockey mask wearing, zombie-esque killer with a penchant for sharp objects and a fear of water.

If the Friday the 13th series brought nothing “new to the table” in the terms of genre conventions, it solidifed the fact that if you’re: having sex, doing drugs, or walking alone in the woods, you’re a gonner cause Jason’s gonna get you. This was a fresh concept in 1980 with the original but once the “assembly line” sequels  hit the theatres, the producers threw anything at the audience to keep the concept fresh: busty blondes, stoners, inept sherriffs, motorcycle gangs, NYC (remember that one?),  telepathic teens, Space (remember that one too?), Corey Feldman, Freddy (possibly the best one since the original)  and the best of them all, Friday the 13th Part 3  in 3D!

So with tomorrow being Friday the 13th and the release date for the remake, what will be in store for the generation-x Jason viewers? From what I can see in the trailers, a more expediate Jason slaughtering his way through the iPod and MTV generation of young coeds at good ‘ol Camp Crystal Lake.  Happy Screaming!

So, come this May I’ll finally be able to see if Hollywood can take a boy’s imagination of the “Real American Hero” and do justice to him (and her) when they release G.I. Joe Rise of the Cobra.

When I saw the SuperBowl teaser on Sunday I wasn’t too sure what to think. I knew that the Michael bay approach to filmmaking (explosions, car chases, fast cuts, overlapping sound effects, etc…) would need to play a part in this Action Adventure film, I just didn’t know to what extent. I’m delighted that Stephen Sommers (The Mummy, Mummy Returns, Van Helsing) ist at the helm. He’ll undoubtably make it over the top but still, on some small scale, keep it believable and enticing enough to promote a sequel should it’s box office demand one. I’m just glad that Michael SFX Bay, or Jerry Boom Boom Bruckheimer, aren’t attached to this project. They don’t know the 1st thing about telling a story without the SFX carrying it and knowing is half the battle!

1. The Curious Case of Benjamin Button

2. Frost/Nixon

3. Milk

4. The Reader

5. Slumdog Millionaire

Now I’ve only seen 3 of the 5 (Button, Frost and Slumdog), but I feel its going to be a close race between Benjamin Button and Slumdog, with the oscar eventually going to Slumdog.

Why? Because its a film that explores a culture not as widely known or understood as others in the United States – provides in-depth perspective of social, cultural and economics of India. It’s also a story of hope, love, luck and good old fashion filmmaking. Don’t get me wrong, I think Fincher and, to a larger extent, Pitt, did a wonderful job transforming Benjamin for the silver screen – I see it snagging Director and several technical awards. I just see Slumdog Millionaire, an indie film, taking home the ultimate gold – Best Picture.

David Zucker (Kentucky Fried Movie, Airplane and Naked Gun films) has switched political teams (now a conservative) and takes aim at Michael Moore (and others) in his new satirical film entitle, ‘An American Carol’, which is a twist on Charles Dickens’ A Christmas Carol.

I don’t want this post to get “too political”, so I’ll simply post the trailer and let everyone make their own decisions on the content and its relevancy in today’s society.

Sound stupid?

Sure does, but that doesn’t stop Hollywood from making it.

Quarantine, a remake of the Spanish film REC (which is only a year old) follows its predecessor but with American panache I love Romero films! For that matter I love early Jackson and Raimi films of the same genre, but there’s something missing with the Zombie films of today. Sure the cinematography and editing enhance the action sequences and the sfx and gore turn your stomach a little more then the films of the 70s and 80s, but today’s films lack what those classics embodied…HEART.

Here’s the trailer for Quarantine. It looks interesting but that doesn’t mean much in today’s Hollywood.

How does he denounce Scientology you say? The only way people in Hollywood do these days: they upload a YouTube post where they’re ranting about it. In all fairness though, he does support his claims with what he considers to be evidence that is contradicting the essence of the religion. I can only imagine how steaming Tom Cruise is now, ha-ha!

I’M NOT A SCIENTOLOGIST NOR DO I BELIEVE IN THAT RELIGION, SO I TAKE WHAT HE SAYS IN THIS POST AT FACE VALUE.