Important Lessons Learned from Movies: Hudson Hawk
Last night at movie night (where we watched Johnny Dangerously, a movie that constantly hovered around good and funny but never went in like a very timid hummingbird with a flower phobia) the discussion turned to other bad/good movies from history. The subject of Hudson Hawk, Bruce Willis’s attempt to reinvent his Moonlighting character as the worlds greatest cat burglar came up. While this movie did indeed suck on many levels, on other levels it was hilarious. As I thought about it an important life lesson returned to my cerebral cortex.
The lesson is this: just because the plunger bomb gun plunger bomb stuck to you forehead turns out to be a dud does not mean the plunger bomb gun plunger bomb stuck to the wall behind you is (in case you missed it, the plunger bomb gun was my favorite part of the movie and I like saying plunger bomb gun). If you are faced with two forms of certain death it’s OK to run away from one of them in the hopes that the second one is less certain than it appears on paper. Sure, either one of them will probably kill you but if both of them are 99% than it’s better to have a 1% chance of survival than a 0.01% chance.
Bomb technician graphic courtesy of the Funny T Shirt category, by the way.
Dave
Hansel & Gretel Review
This film puts the “Gret” in “I regret watching it”.
I think this movie is a good opportunity to talk about a commodity in films knows as “suspension of disbelief”. Suspension of disbelief is needed to a lesser or greater extent in all films, if only because you know the people are all acting and not really getting killed, or falling in love, or shooting webs out of their wrists. This is why actual real footage of accidents or romance is so much more impactful than the greatest scenes ever created.
(movie image courtesy of the Movie T Shirt category)
The problem is there is only so much suspension of disbelief available in the universe. Actively disbelieving something you know to be true (like aliens don’t really burst from the chest of humans) is a conscious decision you as the viewer opt to make, and like all conscious efforts it requires work. The more you have to suspend your disbelief the harder your brain is working, thus making the viewing experience more tiring.
There are ways of extending the amount of disbelief an audience will stomach. A great story, interesting characters, excellent special effects, or even something we really want to believe is true (like super heroes actually have super powers that work) will allow you to disbelieve more than you normally would. However, when you hear people talking about a story or character being really “real” what they are really saying is these things are easier to watch and enjoy because their brains don’t have to work so hard.
Unfortunately, Hansel & Gretel have none of the disbelief extending elements. The story is ass, the characters actually add to the disbelief by dressing like they were from 17th century Bavaria but sounding like they just got back from the Galleria, the special effects were nothing of note, and the Brothers Grimm story of Hansel and Gretel is not so beloved by anyone in Western Culture that we would want to believe that they could grow up to be witch killing super ninjas. Then, in what can only be some kind of evil science experiment to see how much disbelief it takes to break all the brains in a movie theater the need for disbelief gets ramped up to 11(000) by showing us some of the dopiest old school super technology ever. Ever wonder why the didn’t have monofiliment wire, miniguns, machinegun crossbows that don’t need ammo, beehive rounds, pump action shotguns, and insulin in the 17th century? That’s because it was all being used by Hansel and Gretel to kill witches, of course.
This weird super technology was remarkably similar to the idiotic contraptions from the epically bad the Three Musketeers. In fact, they were so similar that I decided it couldn’t be a coincidence and sure enough after a little digging I found that Stefen Kolbe was the prop maker for both films. He must have some kind of hypnotic super power over film directors because somehow he gets them to give him a green light to cook up anything he feels like making and put them in the films. The whole film looks like a prop makers ego trip and self gratification project.
The sad part is like I said in my review for the Three Musketeers all this dumb non-existent technology actually adds nothing to the movie and instead drags it down like an anchor. This film could have been decent if they had gotten rid of all this and the ninja super powers and just had Hansel and Gretel hunting witches using the technology of the period. Perhaps they had a team of henchmen who died like red shirts and a priest to back them up (if you have ever read the book Vampire$ by John Steakley you can imagine what this would look like. Don’t see the movie) and can only kill a witch with the blood of a half dozen guys killed in the effort.
How much more engaging would the characters be if we could believe that they were seriously taking their lives into their hands every time they went against a witch? In this film Hansel and Gretel almost always act like fighting witches is kind of easy. Even when they were in a hard fight they never had a moment of fear or real emotion. Remember the movie Aliens when all the super confident Colonial Marines got killed early on and from that moment on the entire cast was terrified because even a single alien could kill them? Think about how much more you identified with Ripley. Nothing bleeds tension from a film like having the protagonists act like killing their enemies is more an inconvenience than anything else.
Sigh. The story. Hansel and Gretel are abandoned by their parents in the woods for no apparent reason as children. They come to a witches house made of candy and she tries to eat them. They push her into an oven and grow up to be the worlds greatest witch hunters (Jeremy Renner-the Avengers, Hurt Locker, the Bourne Legacy and Gemma Arterton-Clash of the Titans, Quantum of Solace, Prince of Persia). Fast forward an ill defined number of years and they are hired by the mayor of a local village to find a bunch of missing children. They stop the sheriff from burning to death a super hot red head (who later shows us some bare ass. I hope my best friend is reading this. He loves red heads. Pihla Viitala-Tears of Helsinki, Must Have Been Love, Red Sky) as a witch. They go witch hunting but the head witch (Famke Janssen-Phoenix from the X-Men series, Taken 2, Down the Shore) has some secret plan to make witches immune to fire, thus making them immortal (can someone who saw this explain how this was a good plan? She seemed to think that burning was the only thing that witches were vulnerable too, but most of the witches in this film were either shot, dismembered, or decapitated). Some other guys get sent out into the forest by the sheriff and meet a gruesome end.
Ugh. Recounting this feels like trying to run a length of iron rebar through a hand crank meat grinder. The two find their old house and start to piece together the mystery of why their parents abandoned them in the woods Scooby Doo-style, but just when the story might have had some kind of interesting plot elements the head witch shows up and tells them in exacting details what happened to their parents like she was reading the script Cliff notes. They get their asses beat on and Gretel gets captured. Hansel finds an arsenal of weapons that have no business existing on the other side of 1992 and with the help of the super hot red head (turns out she actually was a witch, but a good one) and some local kid turn the witch ceremony into a comical gun fight.
The stars. A little nudity (very little, but what there was was of extremely high quality). One star. Gretel, the head witch, and the red head were all very easy on the eyes. One star. Total: two stars.
The black holes. The propmaker obviously wanted to be working on Star Trek, not this garbage. Also I’m pretty sure I spotted a zipper on Hansel’s off the rack leather Harley jacket. Two black holes. The story was about as dumb as possible. One black hole. Both Hansel and Gretel looked like they were bored through most of this film, pretty much killing the slightest amount of tension and giving us no reason to really give a damn. Two black holes. The action was laughable, but not in a it’s-fun-to-laugh-at-dumb-action sort of way. One black hole. It’s weird for me to ask for this given how I bitched about it in the Last Stand but this film really could have used a fish-out-of-water comic relief to help off set all the stupidity. All the jokes were delivered by Hansel and Gretel in the same bored affect that they delivered everything else. One black hole. I’m running out of funny predicable things to compare predictable movies to so I will just say this film was very predicable. One black hole. This movie pretty clearly ripped of the speeder bike scene from the Return of the Jedi. One black hole. Finally, two black holes for missing some decent opportunities and spending 88 minutes insulting my intelligence. Total: eleven black holes.
A grand total of nine black holes. How bad is it really? Well, it didn’t feel like this movie was causing me actual pain, and I did like most of the actresses in it. If this film had been done as a cartoon (manga) it might have been decent. I’d say if you were home sick with something that caused you to frequently run to bathroom and expel things from one end or the other this film would keep you from being totally bored. You could miss segments without losing out on the quality of the story. Overall I think this movie just got lazy. Maybe it started as a decent idea and had something of a budget but after a while the producers just figured “F it”. Date movie? Sure, if you are trying to get her to dump you to spare yourself the pain of dumping her. Bathroom break? Feel free at pretty much anytime you like (including the climactic final battle) but if you want a specific time I’d say the scene right after Gretel is rescued by Edward the Troll is an opportune moment.
Thanks for reading. Lots of new stuff out recently, so I will try to see something cool in the next day or two. Follow me on Twitter @Nerdkungfu. Post comments on this movie or my review at the bottom of this article (or click here if you don’t see a comment section). Off topic questions and suggestions can be sent to [email protected]. Have a great day.
Dave
Warm Bodies Review
Definitely has a pulse.
Thousands of years from now when alien archeologists are sifting through the decayed ruins of our once mighty civilization some clever PhD student will write a thesis claiming that that the decline and fall of Western Civilization (if you know where that came from we should hang out and listen to music some time) started when the entertainment priests decreed that all forms of film need to appeal to to teenage girls. When you think about it, the film Interview with a Vampire turned vampires from horrible blood sucking monsters into teeny bopper dreamboats that goth girls swoon over, setting the stage for the inevitable worst case scenario, the entire Twilight series. We have recently seen the noble film role of brutal melee combat switched over with the Hunger Games, and now we see them make a stab at turning zombies into adolescent romance fulfillment.
First of all let me do a huge public service to any dumb teenage girls who think having a zombie boyfriend sounds like a good idea. The idea of zombies being so charmed by you and falling in love is ludicrous. No matter how much like a hipster dreamboat he may look like, when he gets close he will smell like death and try to eat your brains (new Caution sign courtesy of the Zombie T Shirt category). Of course, the same thing could be very well said about vampires (that they are evil blood suckers who only want your life essence and burst into flame in daylight, not pretty boy sparkle fairies) so I doubt any of you will listen.
On the drive home from this film I was worried that this, like Interview, would be patient zero for the deluge of zombie romance films but upon reflection I decided this is a seed not likely to take root. When you think about it Hollywood is fighting an uphill battle trying to convince us that zombies are sexy. They got away with in this film (more on that later) but the fact is they are animate rotting corpses and if there is anything remotely romantic about that for you do the world a favor and move to a pod at the bottom of the ocean please.
So this film was cute and I did indeed enjoy it. However, it could have been amazing and instead opted for trite and cute. This is the only real issue I have with this film. You see, the idea of societal integration of zombies has been well explored in great movies like Fido and Shaun of the Dead. In those films zombies are still rotting corpses but uses are found for them. In this film the zombies are coming back to life, but we only see ones who do are fortunate enough to not be missing their lower jaw, or have half their face rotted away.
Think how shocking and cool the story could have been if the main zombie had not been a hipster pretty boy (by the way, in retrospect it is pretty amazing how well hipster guys play zombies. When you think about it there is something zombie-ish about all hipsters: bad hair, pale skin, poor posture, and clothing that looks like they crawled out of a shallow grave wearing it. Put a picture of a zombie next to a picture of a guy stumbling home from Zeitgeist in San Francisco and I defy you to accurately tell the difference) but instead been a gross, rotting zombie missing half of one cheek (classic image) and most of one arm who starts to recover his faculties and falls in love with a living human. She then falls for him not because he looks like Elliot Smith but because he saves her life over and over again and shows that he cares for her. That would be a great story. Then imagine of all the zombies regained their facilities, even the Boneys, forcing humans to reintegrate with walking skeletons. But no, all the recovered zombies have to be more or less perfectly human and all the bad guys have to be horribly disfigured. Lazy.
By they way, for those of you who know me and believe me to be a zombie purist and are wondering why I am not incensed about the idea of zombies recovering their brains let me tell you that as a concept that one has been long established in books like The Omega Man and most of the Romero films. The idea is that as time goes by they learn more using what brains they have left. I don’t have an issue with it.
The story. It is eight years past the Zombie Apocalypse and power is still running in some airport. A zombie later named R (Nocholas Hoult-X-Men First Class, About a Boy, A Single Man) stumbles around with his friend M (Rob Corddry-Hot Tub Time Machine, Harold and Kumar Escape from Guantanamo Bay, What Happens in Vegas) running an inner monolog narrative that details the undead life. He collect things like vinyl records and knows how to play them (using batteries that have lasted eight years as well). Meanwhile in the last remaining human stronghold eight cool kids with no training or experience are sent out in the wild to recover drugs or something. Among them is Julie (Teresa Palmer-I am Number Four, Bedtime Stories, the Sorcerers Apprentice), the daughter of the local dictator (the great John Malkovich-Being John Malkovich, Burn After Reading, Con Air). They are in a hospital when R and a bunch of his cronies attack. The kids show how incompetent they are (one guy yells “Shoot the head!”. Thanks Captain Obvious) and get pretty much all chomped. R eats the brains of Julie’s boyfriend Perry (Dave Franco-21 Jump Street, Superbad, Fright Night) and gains some of his memories. He has some kind of emotional reawakening and falls in love with Julie. He rescues her from the group and hides her in his plane. At that point the film devolves into a goofy romantic survival movie, with R trying to keep Julie both alive and interested in him.
Meanwhile the “Boneys” (zombies who have degenerated to the point where they have no capacity for emotion at all and are walking skeletons) have a problem with all this newfound emotion. R’s reawakening spreads to M and then to all the others. The humans, zombies, and Boneys all scrum up in an epic battle. I don’t want to spoil the ending, but if you have any kind of deductive reasoning (and by any kind I mean if you can deduce that jumping into a swimming pool will get you wet) then literally no part of this film will surprise you.
The stars. Cute and fun. Two stars. Interesting twist on zombies. One star. Zombie movie. One star. John Malkovich. One star. The new creepy-old-man love of my life Analeigh Tipton (Crazy, Stupid Love, the Green Hornet, Damsel in Distress) was looking super cute in this, and Teresa Palmer is pretty easy on the eyes too. One star. Overall an enjoyable movies. Two stars. Total: eight stars.
The black holes. Trite, with missed opportunities to be awesome. One black hole. A four year old could have predicted how this film was going to end (and, for that matter, pretty much every scene in it). I guess plot twists are passé. One black hole. Every kid in this film, human or zombie, reminded me of every super cool kid in high school that I wanted to murder. Also the main kid might have been a zombie, but if hipster were a disease I know what he died of. One black hole. Total: three black holes.
So five stars total. A good movie, and worth seeing. Definitely on the light side, so don’t expect too much. I think even a hard core zombie fan could enjoy this as long as he or she doesn’t take it too seriously. Date movie? If she is into zombies, vampires, or anything even remotely nerdy than absolutely. If this doesn’t get you laid I don’t know what will. If she is not into any of these things she will probably still like it as it is cute and romantic, but she might be grossed out by some of the undead stuff. Bathroom break? There is a scene where R and Julie shack up in a house for the night that is not really critical for the story. Most of this film is worth seeing and it’s only 97 minutes so I’d say try to hold it.
Thanks for reading. I have been really kind in my reviews lately. I think I need to buckle down and see something awful so I can remember what is like to deliver righteous vengeance on to a deserving bad flick. Looks like Hansel & Gretal wins that honor. Follow me on Twitter @Nerdkungfu. Feel free to post any comments on this film or my review at the bottom of the page (if you don’t see a review section click here). Off topic questions or suggestions can be emailed to [email protected]. Talk to you soon.
Dave
Lincoln Review
SPOILER ALERT: he dies at the end.
I honestly was going to let this one slide by. I had heard all the speeches were boring people to tears, and I have an issue with “historical” movies that actually treat history like a paper towel used to mop up the baby upchuck that passes for stories in most movies these days. I had heard that Daniel Day Lewis delivered a powerful performance, but my contrarian nature tends to disincline me to see what everyone else thinks is great. Just look at how long it took me to finally see the Artist.
Fortunately I have a friend who really wanted to see it and the fact that it is still in theaters says a lot about it’s staying power. Going in I was afraid the film would have me wishing fondly for a return of Abe Lincoln, Vampire Hunter but I was very pleasantly surprised. Like my experience with The Artist I found myself eating crow with my popcorn and wondering what the hell the deal is with my deep-seated psychosis that keeps me from doing stuff I should enjoy. (Lincoln image courtesy of the Funny T Shirt category, incidentally)
The speeches and stories are indeed long. I can easily see how someone who has no patience or appreciation of a powerful performance or craves action films would find this dull, and for you sir I recommend Parker (the film I reviewed yesterday). I consider it a sign of my maturing cinema eye that I enjoyed it so much. In the years prior to starting this blog I probably would have been bored stupid(er). However, when you see every bad action movie done you find yourself craving a film based on more than explosions and cheesy CGI effects (I’m looking at you, Michael Bey).
The story is of Lincoln trying to ramrod the 13th Amendment through congress in the last few months before the Civil War ends. Not only does he have very specific reasons for needing to do so, but he explains them and they all make total sense. He does seem more motivated by the abolition of slavery than I happen to know he really was (Lincoln’s real motivation was always the preservation of the Union. The Emancipation Proclamation was a political move designed to keep France and Great Britain from siding with the Confederacy, and even the 13th Amendment was more to make his Proclamation legal. Here is an excerpt from a famous letter to Mr. Horace Greeley in 1862: “My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that. What I do about slavery, and the colored race, I do because I believe it helps to save the Union; and what I forbear, I forbear because I do not believe it would help to save the Union.” This is why you don’t want to see historical movies with me). I guess some rosy painting is a good thing, although a lot of the really fervent Abolitionism was put in the mouth of assorted Congressmen.
At that point this movie becomes a political thriller as he wheedles assorted Democratic Congressmen to vote yes. He hires a team of guys to do a lot of the dirty work and is both aided and confounded by his main Congressional supporter Thadeus Stevens (Tommy Lee Jones-the Fugitive, Men In Black, No Country for Old Men). His wife Mary (Sally Field-Forest Gump, Mrs. Doubtfire, Brothers and Sisters) seems bent on making his life hell, which she for the most part does. His son Robert (Joseph Gordon-Levitt-Looper, Inception, Premium Rush) drops out of school and joins the army. Honestly that’s about it. This movie isn’t great for the story. It’s about the performances.
The stars. Daniel Day Lewis nailed this roll. Three stars for a stellar performance. All the supporting actors were amazing. Not a bad egg in the bunch. Two stars. Good story and well paced. Even scenes that should have felt like they were dragging were actually timely. One star. Historically accurate enough to not drive me bonkers. One star. It was really refreshing to see a Congress that can actually get something done and compromise, as opposed to the clown troupe we are stuck with these days. One star. There was almost no action whatsoever, and honestly the movie was better for it. One star. Total: nine stars.
The black holes. Not much, really. I was definitely feeling the 150 minutes on my bladder, but didn’t want to cut out for a break. That wasn’t a pacing problem. I think this is going to be one of those extremely rare gem among gems wherein I find no nits to pick. Well done, Mr. Spielberg.
So nine stars and not a single black hole. Definitely see this film. If you missed it in the theater NetFlix is as soon as you can. Well worth your time, and very true to the PG-13 rating so if you want to bring your kids to something both cool and educational go for it. Date movie? No reason not to. Nothing to really get her turned on except a weird liberal satisfaction at seeing justice done in our history. Bathroom break? I actually really needed one and held it. There isn’t a scene in this film you will not regret missing. If you really have to go to avoid embarrassment I’d say the scene where General Grant is negotiating with the Confederate peace commissioners. Less important than other scenes and you get the gist of it in a couple later scenes, but still try to hold it.
Thanks for reading. I’m seeing Warm Bodies and am really looking forward to it, so either I will be effluent in my praise tomorrow or so bitterly disappointed that the bile will ooze from your computer monitor and run all over your keyboard. I hope it’s the former. Follow me on Twitter (please, for God’s sake. My low numbers are starting to hit my self esteem pretty hard) @Nerdkungfu. Feel free to post comments on this review at the bottom of this page (if you don’t see a comment section click here). Any off topic questions or suggestions can be emailed to [email protected]. Talk to you all soon.
Dave
Parker Review
Same movie, different poster
I think we need two different movie rating scales in our society. The first would be for all the normal movies, with things like Argo at the top and and Jack and Jill at the bottom. The second would be exclusively for Jason Statham movies. You see, his movies kind of defy qualification when compared to other movies. They are usually awful, but weirdly fun and entertaining. Kind of like picking at a big scab. It hurts, and you know you are just going to bleed again and you will probably end up with a worse scar, but you just can’t help yourself.
On the Jason Statham scale of movie judging, Parker is not particularly good. Statham films are usually pretty thin on story, plot, character development, believable action, and acting challenges for Jason but this one is diaphanous to the point of invisibility. I can’t help but feel like this film was either written or directed by a bubble baby; someone who as never actually seen a movie but has had them described to them. I’d also say that the person doing the describing must come from France or some other country that has contempt for American culture as every bad American stereotype possible is trotted out and held up for ridicule.
That’s probably not fair. The screenplay writer also wrote Black Swan and worked on Carnivale (great series if you don’t mind stories getting shut down incomplete). The director did Ray and the Devil’s Advocate. Both of them seem qualified. Perhaps they watched a Stratham marathon as prep and realized that actually putting effort into this project would be an exercise in futility. Or maybe the studios have been studying Stratham films for a while and realize that a certain amount of suck equals box office success (if so, fail deluxe. Parker netted $7MM first weekend and cost $30MM to make).
The story. I’m going to do a quick one sentence summary to see if this sounds like any other Jason Statham movies: Jason Statham plays a criminal with a code of ethics who is betrayed by less moral criminals and spends the rest of the film seeking revenge with the aid of a super hot girl. Sounds like about 326% of them if you count all the movies he is likely to to do in the next ten years. The longer version is Jason plays Parker, an expert armed robber (or safe cracker, or martial artist, or something. There’s nothing in this film he’s not good at except Texan accents). He hires on with a crew of American stereotypes (bald sociopathic head villain (Michael Chiklis-Spirited Away, the Commish, the Shield), fat black sidekick (Wendell Pierce-Ray, Horrible Bosses, the Wire), the hillbilly white trash gadget expert (Clifton Collins, Jr.-Star Trek 2009, Tigerland, the Mindhunters), and the greasy mafia goomba (Michah Hauptman-Iron Man, A Bag of Hammers, S.W.A.T. Firefight). Geez, did they turn past the forth page of the Stereotype Spotters Handbook?). He was introduced to them by his girlfriends father Hurley (Nick Nolte-Cape Fear, the Thin Red Line, Warrior). His girlfriend (Emma Booth-Blood Creek, the Boys are Back, Introducing the Dwights) is some kind of trauma nurse or something. Anyway, the crew robs the Ohio State Fair (white trash stereotypse a go go) and uses a fire vehicle to escape. During the robbery Parker tells a bunch of witnesses his rules for robbing people, which if you have seen the trailer you know already.
Anyway, during the ride out the head villain offers Parker a chance at a bigger job. Parker bows out, so they shoot him to keep his part of the loot. Parker survives and walks out of the hospital with two bullet wounds, uses some trivial detective techniques (anyone watching this film notice how the entire plot would shrivel up and die if the bar owner Parker interrogates for 30 seconds said “Orlando” instead of “West Palm”, thus saving the life of his brother) to figure out where the next job is going to be. Once he arrives in West Palm Beach Florida he gets struggling real estate broker Leslie (Jennifer Lopez-Out of Sight, Maid in Manhattan, Monster-in-Law) to help him find the crew. By the way, at this point in the movie my ears started to bleed listening to Jason Statham try to do a Texas accent. Bring ear plugs.
Leslie figures out that Jason isn’t from Texas (a three year old could have figured that out) and inserts herself into the plan for a cut. The bad guys are going to rob some jewelry using a fire truck (hey, if it was exciting the first time it has to be exciting the second time, right? Coming up with new plot devices is a pain). Jason, in spite of two bullet wounds, two stab wounds, and who knows what else manages to shoot, stab, and bludgeon his way to righteous revenge. 
(sorry if that was a bit of a spoiler, but if by this point in the movie you hadn’t figured out how the plot was going to go I’m surprised you can even read. Wicked Smart image courtesy of the Funny T-Shirts category).
The stars. In spite of being the movie equivalent of chewing on packing foam, I can’t deny there is something fun about Statham movies. One star. JLo is super easy on the eyes and managed to deliver the only credible performance in the film (although that might be greatly enhanced by the mediocrity of the rest of the cast). One star. The comic relief character (Leslie’s mom. Patti LuPone-the Heist, Driving Miss Daisy, Witness) was everything one could hope for in an action movie comic relief character: funny, appropriate, and brief. One star. If you are a fan of Jason Stathams monotone English character this film will fill your cup. One star. Total: four stars.
The black holes. All the problems associated with most Statham movies: weak story, one dimensional characters, and Jasons Terminator-like ability to take a lickin’ and keep on tickin’. Two black holes. Excitement through repetition. One black hole. Milking the stereotype cow dry. I understand that a lot of these films make their money in foreign markets and those markets like to laugh at Americans but if you are going to debut and hope to make money here consider your primary audience. As an American watching the filmakers make fun of Americans to make Chinese audiences laughs makes me want to find them and give them a wedgie that stretches up over the back of their head and covers their eyes (in high school that was called a “covered wagon”. Very painful). One black hole. A house of cards style plot that only seemed to advance through the most tenuous of random coincidences. One black hole. Total: five black holes.
A grand total of one black hole. Should you see this? I’m going to say yes for the same reason I say to a good friend “Smell this” after opening a bottle of rancid pickled eggs. There is definitely stuff to entertain you, and if your movie standards are low enough you should really enjoy it. However, if you are the type to punch your “smell this” friend then perhaps you should give it a pass. In spite of being an action film there isn’t anything I would say needs to be seen on a big screen so NetFlix the hell out of it. Date movie? Probably not. Nothing in here is likely to put your date off unless she is truly a delicate flower but her respect for you might suffer a bit when she sees your taste in film. Bathroom break? There isn’t much in here that is critical to your understanding of the plot, so take your pick. I’d say the scene where Leslie is running around showing Parker houses feels like a clip of Cribs inserted randomly into the film and could readily be missed.
Thanks for reading. I finally saw Lincoln and am working up a review for it. More to see soon. I’m also seeing a midnight showing of Warm Bodies and am excited about it. Looks cool. Feel free to post comments on this film or my review at the bottom of this page (if you don’t see a comment section click here). Off topic questions and questions can be emailed to [email protected]. Follow me on Twitter @Nerdkungfu. Talk to you soon.
Dave
.
Dating 101: The First Date…and Getting the Second…
Okay, as promised a couple weeks ago, here’s Cousin Nora’s attempt at some advice for eligible gents (and ladies) who are subjecting themselves to the joys and pitfalls of modern dating. Ugh. First, allow me to present my “credentials:” I’ve dated a lot. I was married once. I’ve had many GREAT relationships with fantastic men who just weren’t right for me. And I’ve gone on more dates than I care to remember. I’ve dated some daddy mac ladies men and can tell you what makes them so annoyingly endearing. I also have a brother who always gets the babes and another brother who never does and has given up trying. This is fortunate for the women of the world, since he’s the hairiest man alive. I also have four sisters by blood and many sisters by choice (hey, girls!) I have lots of guy friends as well. What do we talk about? Dating and relationships, of course. And here’s a place where I’m hoping to share some information, information derived from countless hours spent discussing men and women and every combination thereof.
I’d been thinking about writing a dating blog – and have even toyed with the idea of writing a book about my unique dating stories and relationship tales. I was further inspired to action when one of my closest friends and I inadvertently observed a date while she and I worked at a café in Silicon Valley (a mecca for the ladies since eligible nerds abound). Anyhow, Alexis and I were at this café and ended up sitting next to a man and woman who appeared to be in their mid-30’s. It was quickly clear to us that we had stumbled upon an internet date. Alexis and I have been on many of these dates (not with each other, tragically, as she and I share an addiction to men and their accouterment – more on why I’m bitter later lol). 
So allow me to present our daters: Dude: Attractive (but not hot), fit, white guy wearing jeans, good shirt, great boots (guys, don’t underestimate the importance of selecting the right shoes) (Chick Magnet image courtesy of the Funny T Shirt category). Chick: Attractive, fit, Asian (turned out to be Japanese) woman nicely dressed and coiffed. Let’s name the dude, hm, Brent and the chick Kathy.
It’s clear that Brent and Kathy have had at least some communication online because Kathy has brought a Tupperware container with stewed bananas in sauce and, at some point, the two share this dish. So they must’ve discussed it before they met, unless Kathy just travels with prepared snacks. When Alexis and I first sat down, Brent and Kathy’s conversation seemed to be going pretty well. We could hear Brent very clearly since a. The table was pretty close to ours and b. his voice was on the loud side. In fact, we couldn’t have ignored him if we’d tried. According to what we heard, Brent worked in technical sales and had a couple kids and an ex-wife who now lived in Japan. He liked to ride bicycles. In fact, he said that, at one point, he compulsively rode bicycles and had to discipline himself from overdoing it. Red flag number one: In talking about his exercise this way, Brent was bragging and pretending that he considered his compulsive exercise a flaw. It was like he just wanted to show Kathy how hardcore he was about cycling. At this point, Brent disappointed me and I thought he made himself sound like a total wanker. But Kathy seemed okay…her body language for at least the first 30 minutes of the date showed that she was into Brent and he had a chance at a second date.
But then Alexis and I noticed that he was talking about his ex an awful late. HUGE red flag! Not only did he talk about her too much, but when he talked about doing different activities, he referred to “we” instead of “I.” This was weird. Was he talking about him and his kids? Him and his ex and their kids? Was he thinking he was King Brent and utilizing the “royal we?” WTF, Brent?! He never clarified who “we” meant and, at this point, we noticed that Kathy seemed less enthusiastic. Why, you wonder? In addition to the “we” thing, at this point in the date, we know all this stuff about Brent, but nothing about Kathy because HE DOESN’T ASK OR SEEM TO CARE. We know Kathy’s from Japan. We know she cooks bananas in sauce (which looked pretty good), and we know she lives in or near Oakland because Brent thanked her for driving down to the peninsula and talked about Oakland restaurants near her.
Towards the end of the date, Brent kept bringing up different restaurants in Kathy’s area, clearly hinting that he wanted to have dinner with her. Kathy ignored these attempts at establishing date number two. Neither Alexis nor I heard Brent asking her for that second date, but what I did notice was that he asked her something, she responded, and then he said, “Well, nice meeting you,” turned quickly and walked out of the café as quickly as he could without breaking into a sprint. Crash and burn. Poor Brent. Alexis and I felt really bad for the guy because he seemed nice, interesting, and intelligent – and he was cute, as well. So what went wrong?
Fatal error: Brent talked waaaaay too much about himself. If we (ha) were to divide the time he spent talking and the time Kathy spent talking, I’d estimate the proportion to be 75% (Brent) vs. 25% (Kathy). That’s way too much talking time from Brent. And, not only was he talking too much, but he talked about himself the whole time. And about Japan and his fondness for all things Japanese. This creeped me out, since I was wondering if Brent had an Asian fetish and was just looking for Kathy to fulfill his Asian fantasy (or substitute for his Japanese ex). Anyhow, Kathy wasn’t as loud as Brent – maybe she didn’t want to share her business with that particular corner of the café or maybe she was shy or, by that point, wanted to end the date as quickly as possible – so Alexis and I couldn’t hear her as well. But it was obvious that he talked most of the time. By the second 30 minutes of the date, Kathy had shifted into leaning back against the chair with her arms crossed.
So here’s my advice:
This morning, I went for a walk with one of my closest and oldest (as in long-term, not seniorly) friends, Denise, and we discussed relationships. Since I am on a self-imposed “guyatus,” I’ve taken the last few months to reflect on dating, relationships, and my romantic life. As such, I’ve been talking with my closest friends about this, of course, and what I told Denise was that I’ve decided that I only want to date men who could be secret agents. How did I come to this decision? I was at dinner with my ICB (“Inner-Circle Bitches”), four women who seriously kick ass. As I looked around the table, I thought about how smart, funny, and pretty these women were…and how we all complement one another’s areas of expertise, skills, and talents. This train of thought evolved into a fantasy of us forming a secret agent den, combatting evil and saving the world. Then I thought about the men I admire, the ones who really get to me. Hm. They seemed like secret agents, too. The ones I wasn’t that into? Not secret agent material. James Bond knows how to date (duh). How does James Bond get so many chicks? Well, Denise and I think it’s because he knows how to engage in ACTIVE LISTENING with women. What’s that, you ask (because you ARE “listening.”) It’s when a guy (or chick) really engages and cares about what you’re saying – and AUTHENTICALLY questions and follows up on the information you’re giving them. Don’t just pretend to listen while you’re slyly gazing down her blouse (secret agents are VERY discreet about this, too, btw). Don’t give the standard answers or ask the standard questions. Really listen, like your future depends on it. Because it could. Listen, follow up, and remember what she said on that first date. And if she talks too much about herself, maybe she’s not the right one for you, no matter what she’s packing. And can nerds be secret agents? Hell yes! In fact, nerds are better choices for partners because they aren’t routinely shot at, they don’t have access to all sorts of hot women at work every day, and they come in very handy when it comes to stuff like integrating comments into your cousin’s blog (more on that in a second).
And those are my initial thoughts about dating and first dates…Cousin Dave (Head Nerd) is looking into making comments more visible, but, in the meantime, to comment on this (or any) blog, click on the blog title.
In the next post, I think I’ll revisit first dates and share some of the better ones I’ve enjoyed over the years…sigh…anyhow, I hope this helps in your search for THE ONE (ah, yes, Highlander…now HE would definitely NOT talk too much about himself on date one…or two… or three….J )
Cousin Nora over and out!
Important lessons learned from movies: Lethal Weapon 2
I am always looking for stuff I can do short blog posts on and have struck upon something cool. Movies and TV have for the most part given up any pretense of trying to educate the populous (and in may ways can be considered responsible for making humanity stupider in the aggregate). 
However, while the days of expecting anything resembling scientific fact or knowledge has gone the way of the dodo (an extinct species of bird. I never said reading blogs couldn’t be educational) there are still things to be discerned in the common sense department, especially if you plan a career in crime and/or world conquest (Curses Foiled Again image courtesy of the Funny T Shirt category). Most of these lessons come in the form of watching other guys fail, like “Don’t tell James Bond your diabolical plan and put him in a death trap when you can just shoot him.”
The first run at it comes from the movie Lethal Weapon 2 (1989). The lesson is this: if you screw up on a job that costs your crime boss millions of dollars in gold Krugerrands and he calls you into a late night meeting with only him and his enforcer and you find yourself standing an a plastic tarp, you might question him when he says “Don’t mind the tarp. We are having some work done.” In fact, it is safe to assume you are about to be killed and you might as well pull out your gun and go out in a blaze of glory.
Evil Dead remake?
To suck or not to suck, that is the question.
I have a love of the Evil Dead that stems way back. My favorite is probably Evil Dead 2, but the first one was great as well. Army of Darkness is more comedy than horror (they all are, really), but all of them are great (Ash image courtesy of the Horror Movie T Shirt category).
I have long campaigned against the great Remake-ageddon, seeing it as Hollywood throwing off it’s pretense of creating quality entertainment and revealing itself as the money sucking vampire it always secretly was. If this were a studio remake I would have no trouble telling you how I expect it to both suck and blow. However, not only is it being done by Sam Raime but it is owned by both him and Bruce Campbell. They have retained creative control so I have to look at it from the possibility that Sam is creating another campy bad horror masterpiece. One can only hope.
I have also learned that there is no Ash in this remake. At first this seemed like a tragic mistake, but then I remembered that he was much less a critical role in the first movie. Evil Dead 2 and Army of Darkness were pretty much character studies of Ash (with Kandarian demons), one of the greatest horror action heroes ever, but in the first movie he wasn’t really the lynchpin. Honestly, since there is no real way to recreate him without cloning Bruce Campbell in his 20’s, this could be a great move.
Also, since Evil Dead 2 was pretty much a remake of Evil Dead the precedent for remakes has been long established. For the first time in a long time I am kind of looking forward to a remake, at least to see how it is treated. Don’t get me wrong. It could still be the movie equivalent of dying of explosive diarrhea (let’s not forget that Sam Raime did do Spider-Man 3) and if it is I will relate the experience in excruciating detail. However, the potential to not suck is present.
Dave
Mama Review
Good and scary, but I think a couple great opportunities were missed.
Before I get into this film, let me say that if you saw Don’t Be Afraid of the Dark you can probably drive right past this one. It’s extremely similar in that it’s about supernatural creatures wanting to take away little girls and do something horrible to them. And like Don’t Be Afraid I liked this film and was really engaged, but once again feel the need to beat my fists against the Hollywood wall of unoriginality. However, I do appreciate this story in that it helps illustrate a point I made in my list of the worst Star Trek episodes of all time: while talking about And the Children Shall Lead I said any time a group of children survive in a situation where all the adults died and you are at a loss to explain how, maybe you should keep an eye on them just in case they were aided by an evil supernatural force (or are just evil themselves).
By the way, can someone tell me when Jessica Chastain became the Hollywood “it” girl? She is in freaking everything. On the one hand I am glad for her, as I think she is a talented actor and very easy on the eyes. I especially liked her in Lawless (topless) and Zero Dark Thirty (just darned cool). However, I still harbor some ill will towards her for her part in creating psuedo-artsy crime-against-entertainment film Tree of Life. Some mistakes you pay for forever.
Like I said when I reviewed Don’t Be Afraid of the two types or horror films (terrifying, psychological or supernatural stories verses slasher) I prefer the movies that don’t rely on body count to impress the audience. When 10-15 college students end up on the wrong side of a chainsaw you just never have a chance to connect with any of them. Even the protagonist gets lost in the shuffle. When a story is wrapped around a couple of characters who have an ongoing series of bad things happen you truly identify with them and feel a true empathy. You care and hope all goes well for them. It just makes a horror movie more engaging and less comedic.
This film definitely fits into the good camp and I absolutely connected with the main characters. Overall I enjoyed it. Why, then, do I think there was something that could have been done better here? SPOILER ALERT-skip ahead a few paragraphs if you want to see this film and will lose something by having me run my mouth. You see, Mama is the ghost of a crazy woman who adopts the two girls after their father kills his wife and attempts to kill the girls. We are more or less shown her and what she is in the first five minutes. Later the psychologist thinks that Mama is a manifestation of the older girl’s psyche she has developed a motherly alter ego. What would have been really cool, IMO, is if instead of showing us Mama right away they had played this as a psychological drama where bad things keep happening and everyone keeps blaming the girls until the ghost manifests itself in all her horrible glory. It’s OK to at least try to surprise the audience. This film carries itself on the horror aspect but could have been a great story as well (kind of like the Shining). As it was there weren’t a lot of surprises in this movie.
I had some fun with this movie by mentally playing with the perspective a bit. Like I did when I saw Playing for Keep once I had used my big brain to figure out pretty much how the story was going to end (by about the first 45 minutes) I decided to pretend that instead of seeing a story about the vicious ghost of a crazy woman who murdered her own baby while killing herself and wanting to keep these two girls in seclusion while killing anyone who got between them I was seeing the story of a friendly ghost (Casper image courtesy of the Comic Book T-Shirt category) who tragically lost both her life and the life of her child while trying to escape from a mental institution who rescues two little girls from the murderous rampage of their mental father (who had just earlier killed his estranged wife) and wanted to protect them from their marginally employed uncle (brother of the father. He obviously wanted to inject them into the same dysfunctional family upbringing that created his brother), his punk rock musician girlfriend who had no interest in being a mother and was ill prepared to do anything motherly, and the self serving psychologist who wanted to treat them as a lab experiment for a book he was writing. It’s honestly the truth, depending on which side of the room you are sitting on.
Anyway, the story. Dad goes nuts and kills his ex wife and some other people at work. He takes his super cute girls on a drive into the woods. He finds an abandoned cabin where he plans to murder/suicide the whole lot. Instead he is stopped by Mama. Skip ahead five years and two white trash woodsman his brother Lucas (Nikolaj Coster-Waldau-Nightwatch, Blackhawk Down, Headhunters. Note-in an apparent attempt to keep the cast budget down he also plays his twin brother) hired managed to find the cabin where the girls now live literally like animals. Mama doesn’t seem to stop them from taking the girls to a hospital, where they come into the care of Dr. Dreyfuss (Daniel Kash-Aliens, the Tuxede, Lucky Number Seven), a psychologist. Lucas wants to adopt them with his girlfriend Annabel (Jessica Chastain, looking really hot as a short haired tattooed brunette) in spite of the fact that his former sister-in-law (Jane Moffat-the Recruit, Driven, Moon Point) wants them and actually has a job and a house. Dreyfuss recommends them with the understanding that they stay in the area so he can continue to observe.
Honestly, at that point the story progresses in a very predicable manner. Mama shows up and over time the entire cast becomes aware of her. Dreyfuss has his own agenda with the girls. There is a lot of history on the ghost pulled up. Lucas ends up in the hospital, leaving the girls with Annabel for a while. The ending wasn’t quite what I expected (kudos to the writers) but also wasn’t mindblowingly amazing.
The stars. Very creepy and atmospheric. Two stars. All the characters were engaging, and the actors did a good job overall. One star. The two little girl actors (Isabelle Nelisse and Megan Charpentier) were shockingly good, not to mention cute as a button. One star. The lighting, camera, and CGI (Mama was super creepy) all worked well to put you in the film and scare the heck out of you. One star. Overall very entertaining. One star. A non-typical ending. One star. Total: seven stars.
The black holes. Derivative, and once you got past the creepy jump out at you stuff not really surprising. One black hole. My sympathy and connection with Annabel (really the main character, as Lucas spent a lot of time in the hospital) dropped significantly every time she did something I thought was stupid (i.e. just not bug the hell out once it became painfully obvious something was really wrong). I don’t connect well with characters I think of as dumb. One black hole. The motivation for Lucas and Annabel to make any of the life choices they did in this film were considerably less than clear. One black hole. The punk rocker sub plot added nothing and was actually kind of distracting. One black hole. Total: four black holes.
A grand total of three stars. Good movie IMO. It’s not a slasher or Saw clone. It won’t rock your preconceptions of what cinema is all about, but it will kill a couple hours. Worth seeing in a theater, as the oppressive lighting might lose a lot on a TV. On the other hand, watching a film about a ghost doing horrible things in a nice modern home might hit you a little harder if you happen to actually be in a nice modern home. Depends on what you are looking for, I guess. Date movie? Yes. Scary enough to have her in your lap but not slasher or horrible enough to make her not want to touch another human being for a couple weeks. Bathroom break? I didn’t black hole the movie for this but it does drag a little. There’s a long scene where Annabel is reading the notes of Dr. Dreyfuss and watching hypnotic interviews he conducted with the girls that doesn’t add anything at all. Most of what is revealed you should have figured out already.
Thanks for reading. More coming out this weekend, so hopefully I will find the time. Follow me on Twitter @Nerdkungfu. Comments about this movie or my review can be made down at the bottom of this article (if you don’t see the comment section click here). Off topic questions or suggestions can be emailed to me at [email protected]. Talk to you soon.
Dave
Broken City Review
Broken movie.
Not irrevocably broken. There are elements to this film that are quite good, almost bordering on excellent. The performances by both Mark Wahlburg and Russell Crowe were spot on and intriguing. Some of the scenes were very engaging. The problem is the good pieces of this film only occupied about 30% of the film and the rest was filled with carpet remnants and all glued together with spit and rancid bacon grease (AKA the story).
This is an Icarus film, in that it really tried to fly too high and the whole film fell when the wax holding the feathers in place melted. On paper it tries to be a gritty modern NY crime drama, and in it’s aspirations attempts to be a great film noir epic, but the story trips up on gargantuan plot holes, most of the characters seem to lack motivation (or what is presented as motivation seems tertiary at best), and there are some oddball subplots that are as out of place as finding a dead mouse in your bowl of ice cream that later vanishes into the void like a hot girl after my first date with her. There were clearly some attempts at adding subtle subtext that more or less failed. The net result of all the extraneous elements is the story is ponderous and grind-tastic. 
However, they did make the effort. If I were in 3rd grade and this were my homework I could count on a big jolly “Good Try!” with a smiley face next to my C-. (Zoolander School image courtesy of the Movie T Shirt category)
The story is of ex New York Detective Billy Taggart (Mark Wahlburg-Contraband, Boardwalk Empire, Entourage), who loses his job after killing the rapist of his girlfriend’s sister (the girlfriend is super hot Natalie Martinez-Death Race, End of Watch, Saints and Sinners) under suspect circumstances. Seven years later he is a private eye. The Mayor of New York (Russell Crowe-Gladiator, Les Miserables, L.A. Confidential) hires him to find out who his wife (Catherine Zeta-Jones-Rock of Ages, Entrapment, the Terminal) is sleeping with. He goes on the trail and in short order finds her seeing the campaign manager (Kyle Chandler-Friday Night Lights, Super 8, Early Edition) of the Mayors rival in the upcoming election (Barry Pepper-Saving Private Ryan, True Grit, the Green Mile). He gives the Mayor the photos in spite of a plea from the Mayors wife. The next day the campaign manager is killed.
At that point the story kind of falls apart. There is a lot of confusion as to who the leak is, and who is killing who for what reason. I consider every time I mentally said “huh?” another nail in the coffin that is the script. Some stuff was painfully convoluted and confusing, and some stuff so handed off with no effort I kept expecting to see Santa Claus on the screen (sorry, but I just find movies that put the entire evil dastardly plan on the first sheet in the first box in the dumpster the main guy digs in just dumb, especially when everything else is shredded except for the one damning part. Why not just have the protagonist find a copy of the script next time?). The girlfriend acting career sub plot vanishes and is replaced by an alcoholism sub plot, both of which add nothing to the story. There is a political debate that might have added something if we had been given more of a reason to be invested in the election, but in spite of their best efforts I couldn’t find a reason to care. The movie grinds out and ends in a way I approve of, but the energy level was akin to a bouncy castle settling after getting a big leak.
The stars. Good performances from pretty much everyone including the supporting characters. Two stars. Cool in concept. One star. A bonus star for at least attempting to make something more than the usual retread crap that is spewing forth from Hollywood. Total: four stars.
The black holes. Big plot holes. One black hole. Poor character motivation all around. Sometimes characters would completely change their attitude for no reason whatsoever. One black hole. Overly complex for no reason most of the time, except for when the writer was feeling lazy and made it stupidly simple. One black hole. The movie feels a lot longer than the 109 minutes. I normally applaud a movie that avoids car chases or gun fights, but this film could have used a car chase or a gun fight. One black hole. Subplots that act like cockroaches on the kitchen floor when you turn on the light, scurrying out of sight never to be seen again. They also never really contributed much, and really just seemed to bog the movie down. One black hole. Total: five black holes.
One black hole. You know, secretly I hate the movies that hover around the middle more than the films that suck so bad I’m handing out black holes like condoms at Plato’s Retreat. At least when I have a movie that earns 12 black holes I have something funny to write about, and if it is the right kind of suck some entertainment can be had while watching it. Oh well. Worth seeing? If you are a Marky Mark or Russell Crowe fan sure. You will appreciated both of their performances. Just don’t expect too much from the story. This film is totally doable on your home screen so feel free to NetFlix it. Date movie? Meh. Not a lot of romance going on, and honestly the wrong brain might fight it really boring. Try to see something else. Bathroom break? Pretty much anywhere, but a specific scene could be when Mark and his assistant is trailing the Mayors wife. The scenes you do not want to miss are any of the meetings between Wahlburg and Crowe. Those are the closest thing to interesting this film has.
Thanks for reading. I’m going to see Mama tonight, which looks like it will do some damage to my brain so look for a review tomorrow. Those sorts of films always freak me out. Follow me on Twitter @Nerdkungfu. If you have comments on this movie or my review feel free to post them at the bottom of this review (or click here if you don’t see a section for it). Off topic suggestions or questions can be emailed to me at [email protected]. Talk to you soon.
Dave
