 While I got really nervous just before election day — you never really know what those crazy voters are thinking, even if we have polls coming out of every orifice — but I have no compunction whatever in predicting, along with the people who (think they) know, that the #1 movie this week will not be a new release, but last week’s expectations beating megachamp, “Iron Man.” But while Marvel stockholders are counting their money and the rest of us are wondering when Hillary’s going to drop out, there is a race for second place this week, though it’s also pretty easy to call….
*How long has it been since I was puzzling over the identity of “Racer X”? Well, let’s just say it was slightly longer ago than 135 minute runtime for the Wachowski Brothers version of “Speed Racer,” a movie that’s been gestating since I had a full head of hair. 135 minutes is a long sit for most members of the pre-13 set (and many in the post-13 set), and with the Wachowski’s erratic storytelling skills apparently confirmed by a lackluster 34% Tomatometer score, this one might drive some to distraction and have weaker than usual legs for a family friendly film with considerable adult nostalgia/geek appeal.
In the “ouch” department, the follow-up to Henry Bean’s outstanding 2002 indie, “The Believer,” “Noise,” a comedy of sorts, is opening in two theaters and no one seems to care much, despite starring a couple of our best, Tim Robbins and William Hurt. Shame. And considering we are aligned with an online men’s mag, I should make mention of the opening of “The Babysitters” in very limited release. The premise of this black comedy is pretty much the premise of the similarly titled film you’re likely to find in the blocked off section in the back of the vid store. The reviews are about what you’d expect, and then some. Take the semi-literate, quasi-grammatical critique by Prairie Miller:
By God, Prairie is right. One needs no excuses, pathetic or otherwise, to show graphic simulated sex acts — they are there own justification. As for “hot, soapy showers” following a viewing, well it’s kind of a waste of water compared to baby oil, but sure. Filed under: Actors and Actresses and Reviews and Movie Comedies and Movie Dramas and Action Movies Comments: None Digg this! Add to Del.icio.us |
Also, the would be blockbuster’s trailers look less like anime and more like a particularly gaudy video game, and that might not help with the grown-up side of the equation, though 
*Since we’ve been basing movies on video games and theme park rides, why not movies drawn from tourism board ad campaigns? That’s the question asked by the makers of “
And, in other news…. After opening in just a couple of theaters last week, writer-director David Mamet’s |
Show: “Gomer Pyle, U.S.M.C.”
Role: Opie Taylor. (As if the title of the episode didn’t completely give it away.) You might be surprised to discover that, despite being a spin-off from “The Andy Griffith Show,” there were precious few occasions when Gomer Pyle received visits from his friends and family from Mayberry, NC. In fact, of the 150 episodes of the series that were produced, only three - count ‘em - three episodes featured folks from back home stopping by. We saw Goober pop up once (”A Visit from Cousin Goober”), and Aunt Bee found time in her busy schedule to bless Gomer with her presence (”A Visit from Aunt Bee”), but this time we’re giving props to Opie’s unexpected appearance, which came about through one of the all-time classic sitcom plot lines: a kid running away from home. Why the props for such a predictable premise? Because Opie lives in North Carolina, and “Gomer Pyle, U.S.M.C.” took place in California. We have to give Opie credit: when he decides to run away, the kid doesn’t take the half-assed way out. In fact, the idea that a 12-year-old boy could’ve managed to make it across country by himself is something that Gomer can’t even wrap his head around. Now, granted, the man’s not Einstein, but, still, we were kind of wondering about how he managed it ourselves. Opie: I hitched a ride on a plane. You didn’t realize Jim Nabors had that kind of range, did you? Well, he moves back into his dumbfounded expression when Opie explains that he’s traveled cross-country to join the Marines. Why? Because he wasn’t doing so well in school, and to keep from having to deal with a pissed-off Andy Taylor, he figured maybe he’d better go away for awhile…’til, say, adulthood. Filed under: TV and TV DVDs and Actors and Reviews and TV Comedies and External Entertainment and External TV and And Our Very Special Guest Star... Comments: None Digg this! Add to Del.icio.us |
|
It’s old news to you blokes in the UK, but here in the States, we “Doctor Who” fans are positively chomping at the bit to check out Season Four of the series. The fact that the first episode of the season, “Voyage of the Damned,” is premiering tomorrow on the SciFi Channel is therefore like getting a Christmas present in April…though, mind you, it also doesn’t hurt that the episode in question actually has a Christmas-oriented plot. (It’s become an annual tradition for the series to produce a 90-minute holiday special to precede the actual season premiere.) The real “Who” geeks in America have probably managed to view the episode via the ‘net, since I know that it’s been broken up into chunks and posted in its entirety on YouTube by some industrious fans, but even those who’ve seen in such a fashion will still no doubt enjoy being able to watch it on a decent-sized screen in top-notch quality.
When we last left The Doctor, he’d crashed the TARDIS into…the Titanic? Well, yes and no. Seems it’s actually a starship bearing that famous name that he’s collided with, and he’s arrived just in time for a lovely shindig. The best bit about the function: one of the waitresses looks suspiciously like Kylie Minogue. As “Who” casting goes, this one’s clearly strictly for the novelty, but Ms. Minogue holds her own admirably as she and The Doctor pop down to Earth for the holiday (the ship’s in orbit around our big blue marble), only to find that London’s all but evacuated due to fears of yet another alien invasion…and, y’know, it’s a fair cop, what with how many times it’s happened in the past. The two find themselves abruptly returned to Titanic, however, just in time for - you guessed it - a collision. I won’t be spoiling the fun for those of you who haven’t seen the episode yet, but I will say that my favorite character was a short and spiky red alien called Bannakaffalatta, and I, like the Queen herself, must give The Doctor props for his steering ability. All in all, it’s not one of the best “Who” episodes, but it’s always good to see David Tennant step back into his familiar shoes, and the finales on both the Titanic and on Earth were each sweet enough to get me at least mildly choked up. (I’m an old softie, though, so your own mileage may vary.) Not only is The Doctor back on SciFi, but also on the Channel is a new show featuring one of his former compatriots, Miss Sarah Jane Smith. “The Sarah Jane Adventures” came about when the BBC asked “Who” executive producer Russell T. Davies to consider working up a spin-off for the kids’ market; rather than take their initial suggestion of a teenage version of The Doctor, he pulled together a series which focused on Sarah Jane, since the actress who played her - Elisabeth Sladen - had recently revisited the “Who” universe, anyway, in “School Reunion.” The resulting series, which teams Sarah Jane with her 13-year-old neighbor, Maria (Yasmin Paige), still feels very “Who”-like, but, as anticipated, is a bit less intense, so as to keep from scaring the younger viewers.
The hour-long premiere episode - it’s regularly a 30-minute show - premiered on SciFi last week and set the stage for the series by showing Maria and her dad moving into their new neighborhood. (Maria’s mom’s still in the picture, but after sleeping around, she and Dad aren’t exactly a couple any more.) The two quickly begin to meet their neighbors, including a rather obnoxious little girl named Kelsey (Porsha Lawrence Mavour) and, more importantly, Sarah Jane. On the first night in the new house, Maria spots Sarah Jane communing with an alien; as you’d expect, she’s pretty freaked out, but she’s also fascinated. It’s a fascinating area all around, this new neighborhood, as the soft drink called Bubble Shock! is manufactured nearby…by aliens! Long story short, Sarah Jane gets involved, teams up with Maria and her pal, takes down the aliens, and ends up with an adopted, alien-bred wonder child in the process. “Invasion of the Bane” was initially aired as a one-off special rather than the first episode, which turned up 9 months later, but I’ve seen the first proper episode as well - the two-part “Revenge of the Slitheen” - and it’s just as much fun. Even better, Kelsey’s abruptly vanished from the proceedings, replaced by Maria’s new and far less annoying school friend, Clyde Langer (Daniel Anthony). As you’d expect from a Slitheen-themed episode that’s been adapted for a younger audience, the fart jokes are legion, but, really, who doesn’t enjoy a good laugh at a bit of gas, eh? If you’ve got a kid who’s into sci-fi, you’d do well to steer them toward “The Sarah Jane Adventures,” and if you’re already a “Who” fan, you won’t want to miss it, either. It’s quite like something you’d expect to have originated from ABC Family these days; it’s well-written, it’s both funny and dramatic, the special effects are on par with “Doctor Who,” and despite technically being for teens, it’s in no way dumbed down for a younger audience. Catch “The Sarah Jane Adventures” tomorrow at 8 PM EST, with “Doctor Who: Voyage of the Damned” premiering immediately thereafter, at 8:30 PM EST. Filed under: TV and Actors and Actresses and Reviews and TV Dramas and External Entertainment and External TV and TV Sci-Fi Comments: None Digg this! Add to Del.icio.us |
|
A sorry weekend seems to be in store at America’s mainstream mansions of mass entertainment this week. So sorry, in fact, that a movie nobody seems to particularly care for, the youth-oriented gambling drama, “21,” has a chance of staying at the #1 spot for a third week, but more likely not. Also, an unusually strong supporting cast would seem to help, including a couple of personal favorites — Oscar winner (and fellow Daniel Webster Junior High alum) Forrest Whitaker, Hugh Laurie (”House” to most, charming twit Bertie Wooster and ultra-twit Prince Regent from “Blackadder” to BBC America fans and me), plus Jay Mohr and Cedric the Entertainer, who just seem to make sense in this context…I’d love to hear those guys enunciating some of Ellroy’s poetic, blood-spattered profanity. But, with his original screenplay rewritten by two other credited writers, the reviews are not discussing dialogue that snaps, crackles and pops like it comes from Satan’s own furnace, just another average-to-below-average violence-packed thriller that, at least, doesn’t sound like it’s extremely boring. The bar is set awfully low right now, and this one might just jump over it. * But the smart money at both Variety and the Hollywood Reporter says I’m wrong about “Street Kings.” (Okay, I’m not all that smart and if I was into money, do you think I’d be doing this?) It’s entirely likely this weekend will be won by another in a recent string of review-protected horror flicks, this one a remake of a a movie that wasn’t all that much liked the first time around, “Prom Night.” (The original was a “Halloween” follow-up with Jamie Lee Curtis and Leslie Nielson back when people thought he took this stuff seriously.) The trick here is that this a slasher film that’s rated PG-13, which strikes me as a bit wrong, like showing the pre-sex intros from a gonzo porn film to twelve year boys. Still, while “wrong” often works in show bidness, there has been a glut of horror, both PG-13 and R, lately. Without some real buzz behind it, “Prom Night” may pleasantly disappoint. In fact, the reviews, can get pretty negative, but one did remind me of a grammatical fine point I’d become hazy on. Here’s what Rick Groen of Canada’s Globe and Mail said:
I’m embarrassed to admit this took me a second. Yes, it’s not “I’ll loan you the money.” It’s “I’ll lend you the money.” After all, the soon to be Hamlet-stabbed Polonius didn’t advise Laertes, “Neither a borrower nor a loaner be.” A good reminder.
Meanwhile in Indiewood….I’m happy to say, things are looking much more interesting on the arthouse side of things this week. The big indie this week may be “The Visitor,” the new film from writer-director Tom McCarthy — creator of the 2003 Sundance hit, “The Station Agent,” which made Peter Dinklage a household name…well, assuming your household is in Santa Monica or Tribeca. Anyhow, when I went to Sundance with a bunch of critics for another website, one of my cohorts reported writing the phrase “unlikely friendship” in four separate reviews. And so, like its predecessor, “The Visitor” is a star-free tale of an unlikely friendship, this time between an depressed professor and a young immigrant couple. On the strength of McCarthy’s prior film, I’m wiling to say this one is worth a look and may do some decent business with older filmgoers seeking gentle but smart fair. Other than that, most of the action is on the documentary front. By far the most high profile doc with solid critical buzz is “Young@Heart,” about a senior citizen’s chorus dealing with a repertoire that includes the words of Sonic Youth, the Clash, James Brown, and Coldplay. Speaking of buzz, but showing up in only four theaters, is “Super High Me,” a film which takes pothead comedian Doug Benson and gives him the Morgan Spurlock treatment. Aside from appearances by such comic luminaries as Sarah Silverman, Bob Odenkirk, and Patton Oswalt, I’m mentioning this one because it’s directed by a guy who played the straight man in this great comedy short a few years back. I maybe shouldn’t, because it’s only playing at New York’s Film Forum, but I can’t resist bringing up the mega-Freudian documentary “Stalags,” about pornographic Israeli novels, which started popping up during the 1961 trial of German Holocaust planner Adolph Eichmann. The subject of this porn: Nazi she-wolves administering what we’d now call “enhanced interrogation techniques” (nudge nudge wink wink) to brave British and American soldiers. Let me repeat, these books were written and consumed by Israelis. I’m also plugging the well-reviewed documentary “Bra Boys,” about Australian surfing hooligans. If I don’t, narrator Russell Crowe might beat the crap out of me. Filed under: Actors and Actresses and News and Reviews and Movie Comedies and Movie Dramas and Horror Movies and Action Movies and Documentaries and External Movies Comments: None Digg this! Add to Del.icio.us |
|
Shockingly, terrifyingly, it turns out that most of my predictions in the Friday post turned out to be correct.
*”21” earned a respectable $23.7 million for the film’s budget ($35 million), winning the weekend though not doing much to reverse the modest box-office trend right now. As for theories about why it won, here’s a quote from Variety
Yes, “cool, fresh and different.” It’s not just a movie, it’s a salad dressing. (I also gotta say, I know some folks hate the Variety lingo, but I get a kick out of the word “prexy” for “president.” It sounds so non-threatening and sort of like a Keebler elf. On the other hand, I don’t think I’d want to entrust thermonuclear launch codes to a “prexy.”)
*I doubt the Mighty Fanboy boycott can truly take credit for it (though I can’t blame them for claiming it), but as predicted/wished, “Superhero Movie” came up with a fairly lousy third place showing for this kind of movie of $9,510,000 on 2,960 screens (more than 300 more screens than “21″ opened on), despite the demonstration-disbanding efforts of the non-galactic storm troopers of mall security. “Just like Beggar’s Canyon back home”? Well, we take our triumphs where we find them, even if, to be fair, there’s some indication “Superhero Movie” might be at least a tiny bit better than other recent spoof films, as Cinematical’s Eugene Novikov schools us on the gradations.
Nevertheless, while its earnings of $4,525,000 were dismal, the per-screen average of “Stop-Loss” was $3,505 — actually nearly $300 bucks higher than “Superhero Movie,” so there’s that. Even, so, audiences bear the ignominy of being slightly more kind to both “Shutter” and “10,000 B.C.“, proud owners of 7 and 9 percent ratings on the RT meter. (Of the former, a PG-13 remake of a Thai horror film — points for originality since it wasn’t Japanese or Korean — Bullz-Eye’s own Jeff Giles wrote: “This will not be a theatrical hit. It will not find a new audience on DVD. You can officially pretend it was never made.”) *Meanwhile, good ol’ Simon Pegg has had his cult status confirmed in the harshest way possible with the drubbing of his David Schwimmer-directed “Run, Fatboy, Run” which netted only $2,390,000 and had the lowest per-screen average of any new film this week. On the plus side, it also had the lowest budget, a mere $10 million, so there’s something to be said for thrift. Meanwhile in Indiewood…. And, here too, yours truly seems to have called it. The immigration weepie, “Under the Same Moon” came in just below “Run, Fatboy, Run” with $2,251,000 — but did so while being in only 390 theaters (”Fatboy” was on over 1,100 screens, far too many for a modest comedy.) Its growth seems strong and this one could be headed for something like “My Big Fat Greek Wedding” territory, driven, no doubt, by the eternally under-served Latino audience. The only film I was sort of wrong about was that the highest per screen average of any film this week was “My Brother is an Only Child,” an interesting sounding, politically driven Italian film with great reviews, about which I made a crack implying I’d be the only person reading this column who would consider seeing the movie, nevertheless managed a whopping $10,500 per screen average. Of course, it’s only on one screen in NYC, but still…. And, finally, I was appalled to realize only too late that I had not mentioned the opening in limited release of the boxing-themed Adam Carolla vehicle, “The Hammer” because it wasn’t mentioned, well, anywhere, but last week’s “Ebert and Roeper” and perhaps some L.A. area local media, and so it had completely slipped my mind. Now, some of you will be hooting in derision because you think of Adam as the slightly less unfunny guy on the early seasons of “The Man Show” and others will be perking up because he’s the even funnier guy on the early seasons of “The Man Show,” but radio fans, especially out here in SoCal, know Adam as the host of the only-ever listenable iteration of “Love Line,” and something of an actual comedy genius in terms of mastering the art of the impromptu rant about idiots who try to argue that they cheated on their signifant other’s “on accident,” or garbage collectors who refuse to pick up certain types of garbage. After he left “Loveline,” I feared that he’d never find a format as amenable to his particular skills. Certainly a well-reviewed movie was about the last place I expected to find him. However, in perhaps the most shocking development in filmed entertainment history, critics seem to like this movie, more or less, netting a very healthy 72% Fresh rating on the Tomato Meter. But here’s the really strange part — even though it entirely failed to even register at Box Office Mojo, according to RT, “The Hammer,” which also got “two thumbs up” from Richard Roeper and Michael Phillips, did a very respectable per screen average of $4,857 for a total of approximately $97,000+ at twenty theaters. Not bad for a movie even confirmed movie-geeks aren’t hearing about just yet. Could “The Hammer” wind up doing better than “Run, Fatboy, Run,” with a similar sports/rom-com set-up, but with possibly far better, old fashioned slow-roll-out release pattern? Weirder things have happened. Filed under: Actors and Actresses and News and Reviews and Movie Comedies and Movie Dramas and External Movies Comments: None Digg this! Add to Del.icio.us |
*Not one bit to my surprise, “
*Of the other new movies this weekend, I’m not all that happy to report that Kimberley Peirce’s “|
Okay, so this is the start of a new, ongoing feature we’re going to be trying here at Premium Hollywood in which I’ll be taking a look at the slate of new movies releases for the coming weekend each Friday, making highly opinionated remarks about them, and perhaps engaging in some box-office prognostication — though I’ll mostly avoid specific numbers as I am certain to be wrong. Then, on Sunday night/Monday morning, I’ll be reporting back with information on just how very wrong I was, with further apt comments on same. Let the madness begin….
(Bret Michel of The Phoenix has a semi-spoilerific rundown on the changes from book/mostly-true story to film, which includes de-Asian Americanizing the real-life main character of the book, Jeff Ma. Ma, presumably well paid, doesn’t seem to have a problem with this, and there is a token Asian in the filmic group of unusually attractive overachieving nerds turned card counters, but I count this is as a cop-out and a missed opportunity. Hollywood really seems to have an issue with Asian-American men not practiced in the martial arts, and, in world where John Cho exists, there really isn’t that much an excuse other than rank cowardice. Besides, there’s more to life than playing Harold and Sulu.)*
“Stop-Loss” predictably fared better on the Tomatometer than “21″ — but not all that much better. That’s bad news, because “serious issue” films generally need at least borderline ecstatic reviews to succeed, not half-hearted appreciations of good intentions. Though it has a moderately big name in the stolid Ryan Phillippe and the always outstanding Joseph Gordon-Levitt in a supporting role, I would be flabbergasted if this one did anything but mediocre-to-abysmal business. In any case, if ever a war seemed to be box-office poison, it’s this one. W didn’t only screw several nations with his war, he had to include filmmakers as well * Not screened for critics, I think it’s safe to say that “Superhero Movie” isn’t going for quality. Especially lately, Hollywood has rarely lost money underestimating the intelligence of America’s teenagers, but I can’t help but wish a massive box-office defeat on the latest entry in a string of inexplicably successful films that seem to think that merely recreating one scene after another from recent popular films on a lower budget amounts to hilarity. In this case, there’s an odd wrinkle, because the Weinstein Company is the target of a boycott by outraged Star Wars fans, angry over the treatment of the upcoming film, “Fanboys.” If I may engage in an act of outrageous self-linkage, I can’t help but sympathize with fanboys and fangirls in the fight for justice. Still, I wouldn’t be surprised to see this come down in the second or third slot on Sunday.
Also David Gordon Green’s “Snow Angels” is expanding some this week. I personally failed to fully grok the arty wunderkind’s ultra-lauded debut miniature, “George Washington,” and have lost track of him since, but at least this drama “of love and loss converging” is a chance to see Kate Beckinsale play a human. *H/t to Greencine for the Bret Michel and Chris Orr pieces on “21″ Filed under: Movies and Trailers and Actors and Actresses and News and Reviews and Movie Comedies and Movie Dramas and External Movies Comments: 3 Comments Digg this! Add to Del.icio.us |
* “
* If “21″ is the main commercial hope of this weekend, then the Iraq war drama, “
* “
 When we last left John Adams, the Declaration of Independence had been signed, but now that we’re back, it’s time for him to head over to Paris - with his son, John Quincy Adams, in tow - in order to assist Benjamin Franklin in establishing a treaty with France so that they will assist America in its efforts to battle against Great Britain. John’s initial announcement of his impending departure goes over poorly with Abigail, given that he’s only just returned from an expedition, but as those of us who’ve ever found ourselves as part of a couple can appreciate, her reaction is one which begins with utter infuriation but concludes with concern that he’s packed properly for his trip. The two Johns soon get aboard the ship to head to Paris, and there’s a humorous moment where young John Quincy lies in his hammock and continues to do his lessons while his father pukes his guts out. (Some people just can’t handle the motion of the ocean.) Things quickly get dramatic, however, as the ship encounters a vessel on its way from Great Britain, resulting in a oceanic battle with guns and cannons blazing. Certainly the most profound moment from a character standpoint occurs when Adams ignores the demands of the ship’s captain and joins the battle, but it leads to a disconcerting sequence where one of the hands is struck by a cannonball and requires immediate surgery. Note to self: if I’m ever time-traveling back to the 1700s, avoid any injury that might result in amputation.
Upon their arrival, the Adams boys meet up with Benjamin Franklin, and while John Quincy begins the matter of his further education, his father quickly learns that his erratic temperament has no place in France. Franklin first announces that a tentative treaty between France and America has been signed, thereby making Adams’ sea voyage predominantly unnecessary, but when Franklin discusses the specifics of the treaty, Adams immediately gets out of sorts, demanding more. It’s not an attitude which sits well with the French, and it’s made worse by the fact Adams hasn’t bothered to learn a lick of the language. The audience clearly sympathizes with Franklin in the scenes where he chastises Adams for his poor ambassadorial methods, and it’s even harder to treat Adams as a good guy when he continues to fly off the handle on these matters. Again, Tom Wilkinson’s performance as Franklin is wonderful, interspersing Franklin’s well-documented wit with his knowledge of politics and infuriation at Adams’ refusal to pay him any heed. Filed under: TV and Actors and Actresses and Reviews and TV Dramas and External Entertainment and External TV Comments: None Digg this! Add to Del.icio.us |
|
Historical dramas are a dodgy proposition to pitch to the mainstream. True, Showtime has been doing all right with “The Tudors,” but let’s face it: the success of that series has ultimately been as much to do with audiences eating up the soap-opera aspects of the storyline as it is to do with the actual historical events contained within. Since HBO’s new 7-part miniseries, “John Adams,” can’t possibly compete on the same level (nor would its producers have any interest in attempting to do so), it’s evident why the network has felt obliged to promote the work everywhere possible, up to and including every single Netflix envelope that’s gone out in the past few weeks. The good news, however, is that if people actually take a chance and tune in, what they’ll find is an enthralling program which will, fingers crossed, inspire Americans to sit up and take proper notice of their history.
Paul Giamatti and David McCullough Based on David McCullough’s 2002 biography, “John Adams” provides a detailed examination of the life of America’s second President, with the title character played by…Paul Giamatti? Giamatti might seem on the surface to be an odd choice for the role of John Adams, since he’s known more for the comedic rather than the dramatic and hasn’t done all that many period pieces; the only ones that leap immediately to mind are “The Illusionist” and “Cinderella Man,” and both of those take place in the 20th century, so they’re not really stepping that far back in time. You’d never know of his lack of his experience from his performance here, however. The phrase “acting tour de force” doesn’t begin to describe how substantially Giamatti owns the role of John Adams; it’s a measured performance, showing a man who loves his wife and family but struggles to find a way to keep them close while building a new nation. Filed under: TV and Actors and Actresses and Reviews and TV Dramas and External Entertainment and External TV Comments: 3 Comments Digg this! Add to Del.icio.us |
 First off, if you didn’t see last week’s write-up, there’s a perfectly good reason for that, but to find out what it is, you’ll have to click here. Are you back? Excellent. Let’s move on, then, shall we? Hey, everybody, Dale’s back! I always thought the guy was a little squirrelly because, well, he is squirrelly. But, wow, the guy’s really grown up over the course of the past few months. One trip to Missouri, and he’s become a man. And by “man,” I mean he’s actually about one evil look away from being a full-fledged bad-ass. I think I’ve said it before, but, seriously, you don’t want to be around that guy when he’s finally fed up. Y’know, I’ve heard some people say that D.B. Sweeney is too damned likable to accept as the devious Goetz, but, personally, I think the combination of this against-type performance and a disconcertingly dark second season of “Jericho” makes him exceptionally off-putting in the role…which I mean as a compliment, if that wasn’t evident. Jake’s hatred of Ravenwood is understandable, given his history with the organization in Iraq, but it doesn’t take long for the majority of the town to turn against them when they start screwing with Dale’s shipments of the Hudson River Virus vaccine. (More on that in a moment.) Hey, everybody, Jimmy’s back! Or, to put it another way, “Narc, narc, who’s there? Jimmy!” Not that we should’ve expected him to anything other than tell Beck what he knew about Sarah Mason, but what wasn’t expected was the way Hawkins decided to handle the situation: by bursting into Beck’s office and saying, “You’re killing my investigation!” It’s actually a good ploy, given how readily Hawkins has had lies spill forth from his lips during the course of the series, but in this case, it’s for the greater good, as he attempts to pick and choose bits and pieces of the facts at his disposal in order to sway Beck into realizing that the government isn’t telling the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. It’s a slippery slope he’s treading, but Major Beck’s conversation with Thomas Valenti was clearly sufficient to sway Beck into believing Hawkins’ story. And as long as we’re speaking of Beck, I like him a little more each episode, especially after the scene with him and Heather in the waning minutets of the episode Hey, everybody, Dr. Dhuwalia’s back! The guy’s not a very good liar, though, and he’ll clearly break under pressure at the drop of a hat. Still, I love the character, so I’m glad to see him return. Plus, even though he’s got the kind of loose lips that sink ships, the whole issue with the virus made for great drama, from the transmission Heather received that clarified just how bad things had gotten to the tension-racked scenes in the warehouse. So Bonnie’s going the Kerouac route and hitting the road with Jennings & Rall, eh? Well, we did get our first full-fledged CBS’ing of Season 2 with the way the music swelled during the front porch conversation between Stanley and Bonnie, but we also got a bit of heretofore-unrevealed information about how Stanley and Bonnie lost their parents, and I’m sure fans - like, say, myself - enjoyed getting those details. It’s nice to see that the cute girl from J&R seems to have some scruples; at least it looks like Bonnie will be in good hands. So who’s this mysterious person on the other end of the line from Hawkins…? Time, as they say, will tell… Filed under: TV and Actors and Actresses and Reviews and TV Dramas and TV Action and External Entertainment and External TV and Jericho Comments: None Digg this! Add to Del.icio.us |
|
You know, you’d think it would be awesome to get advance screeners of TV shows…and, okay, yeah, for the most part, it IS pretty awesome. But there’s one problem with it: you forget when shows are actually on. That, in case you were wondering, is why this entry is mysteriously appearing in the archives almost a week after the episode originally aired. Not that you’d know this without my telling you, since it’s actually been backdated to seem as though it was posted more or less on time, but I feel guilty enough about the ruse that I felt I needed to acknowledge it upfront. There, now that’s out of the way. Now, let’s talk about how happy I am about the way “Jericho” is continuing to maintain this seriously dark tone. It didn’t start dark, of course. The lighthearted breakfast scene with Stanley and Mimi was funny, thanks to Stanley’s well-intentioned but poorly-phrased observation, “That’s probably the most boring story I’ve heard in months.” It seemed a bit odd that the President’s team needed to land their helicopter in Stanley’s front yard to ask if “Condor” could make his speech on the front porch of the farmhouse. What, couldn’t they go through channels with the military instead of using the Whirlybird Express? But let’s stay on our original topic and keep talking about the Stanley / Mimi relationship. Once again, Stanley has proven to be a lunk-headed sweetheart, accidentally putting his foot in his mouth about who Mimi might invite to the wedding, then trying to backpedal by seeing if he might be able to use Jennings & Rall to find some of Mimi’s family. Last season, they might’ve CBS’ed things by miraculously discovering her mom or even a long-lost cousin, but not so this year: even with the resources of J&R, it’s a big ol’ goose-egg on the family front. It’s depressing, but I applaud the producers for not shoehorning in a happy ending. Okay, back to the Presidential visit. Y’know, I realize that they were trying to show that the President’s men weren’t screwing around with their security measures, but it seemed a little over the top when one of them snapped at the local sheriff, “Sir, nobody told you to move.” Really? Not any respect for local law enforcement…? Hawkins’s buddy, Chavez, got busted in his guise as Lieutenant Parker, which I think we all figured would happen sooner than later. I definitely like this new relationship between Hawkins and his wife, but I still find it weird that we haven’t heard so much as a whisper about their kids so far. By episode’s end, of course, Chavez was out of custody and on his way to Texas, but not before stepping up the mystery about this Project Boxcar. As a Democrat, it probably won’t surprise you that I snickered at the suggestion that the new government would immediately attempt to rewrite the textbooks in order to make it look like America screwed up by not attacking the Russians during the Cuban-Missile Crisis and by pulling out of Vietnam too early. Do I really think the Republicans would do something like that? Maybe I’m naive, but I don’t think so. But, then again, Bush got elected to a second term by riding on his post-9/11 high, so what do I know? Okay, enough personal politics. How about the situation with the journalist? From “okay, I’m in” to “okay, I’m dead” just a few short hours. Now that’s what I call an effective cover-up. Again, though, I was shocked that he met his end as quickly as he did; I’d really anticipated that that plot thread would go on for several episodes. I guess this is another case of a short season paying off in terms of rapid-fire plot progression; there’s definitely no moss growing under anyone’s feet this time around. At least Writer Boy managed to leak the info to Jake about the progression of the Hudson River virus. As things wrap up, Gray leaves for the constitutional convention in Cheyenne and grants Eric the status of interim mayor, and we get the return of the dastardly Goetz. Yep, he’s made good on his ominous assurance from Season 1 that Ravenwood would be called in to help the U.S. Government put the nation back together again. Boo, hiss, etcetera. Can’t wait for next week. Filed under: TV and Actors and Actresses and Reviews and TV Dramas and TV Action and External TV and Jericho Comments: None Digg this! Add to Del.icio.us |
|
Yeah, I know, I already declared “Jericho” to be back in my preview of Season 2. But now the show’s made the declaration itself during the opening credits of last night’s season premiere…in Morse code. The resulting ratings must’ve made a lot of people really, really happy: it scored first with adults 25-54 as well as tying for first (with NBC) with adults 18-49. Not too shabby. The bigger question, of course, is whether or not the show can maintain that ratings momentum. If it doesn’t, however, it won’t be the fault of the onscreen goings-on…or, at least, that’s my perception after watching Episode 2.1. When we last left the population of Jericho, they were engaged in battle with the people of New Bern. Instead of leaping back to the concluding moments of Season 1, however, we jump into a tête - à – tête between the leaders of the two sides – Jake Green and Phil Constantino – and get our first look at a scruffier, scarier looking Skeet Ulrich. I realize the fear of cancellation was rough on all of us, but, really, he’s looking a bit bug-eyed, don’t you think? Anyway, the talks between the two sides are moderated by Esai Morales, who plays this season’s major new character…and that pun was totally not intended, even if the name of Morales’s character is Major Edward Beck. As Beck stands by, we’re treated to a quick wrap-up of how the battle between Jericho and New Bern came to its conclusion…namely, via military intervention. There have been complaints that Morales doesn’t come across tough enough for the role he’s playing, but he seemed plenty gruff to me when the situation called for it. Filed under: TV and Actors and Actresses and Reviews and TV Dramas and TV Action and External Entertainment and External TV and Jericho Comments: 2 Comments Digg this! Add to Del.icio.us |
 You probably know Rory Cochrane, even if you don’t think you do. His longest and most high-profile gig was serving as a member of the “CSI: Miami” team as Tim Speedle, but prior to that, he’d already earned the status of cult icon by playing the stoned-as-shit Slater in “Dazed and Confused,” as well as the monetarily-challenged Lucas in “Empire Records.” Since departing “CSI: Miami” of his own free will, Cochrane has kept busy with the occasional film; we spoke to him on the occasion of the DVD release of the disconcertingly-real thriller, “Right At Your Door,” and we took the opportunity to ask him about how much of a toll the filming of the movie took on him, why he left a sweet gig on a weekly TV series, and…well, frankly, we spent most of the time just trying to get him to give us answers of more than a word or two. (Nice guy, that Rory, but not one to give you essay-length responses.)
Rory Cochrane: Hello? Bullz-Eye: Hi, may I speak to Rory? RC: Yes. BE: Hey, this is Will. RC: How are you doing, Will? BE: Pretty good. How are you? RC: All right. BE: Actually, I tried you a few minutes ago, but I figured you were still on the last interview maybe, RC: Oh, yeah? I didn’t hear it beep. BE: Not a problem. So…”Right at Your Door.” Very intense flick. I hadn’t actually seen it until they sent me the DVD – it never played in my area – but it’s great. RC: Oh, well, I’m glad you liked it. BE: Definitely. It’s part disaster movie, part horror movie, with a thread of romance running through it. How was it to shoot? RC: Very grueling…and intense, you know? I’m sort of glad that it was only…that we shot it in twenty days. Which is a good thing, because I would probably have had to check myself into some sort of institution afterwards if it had went any longer. BE: Yeah, it’s a little dark. RC: Yeah. BE: How did you get involved in it in the first place? Filed under: Movies and Movie DVDs and Actors and Interviews and Reviews and Movie Dramas and Horror Movies and Action Movies and External Entertainment and External Movies and External Movie DVDs Comments: 1 Comment Digg this! Add to Del.icio.us |
Yes, I know, it’s cutting it pretty darned close to wait until the last couple of days of January 2008 to run a Best of 2007 list, but that’s the problem with these TV DVD sets: there’s a whole lot of viewing involved to get through them, and you don’t want to give anyone the short end of the stick just because your schedule didn’t allow you to give their set a look. With the confidence that I’ve had a chance to check out the majority of the cool stuff that came out in ’07, however, I hereby present my personal picks for the Top 20 TV DVDs of last year. And when you’ve read through my list, check out Bullz-Eye’s Best of the Best staff picks for 2007! (Oh, and don’t forget to pop back by to tell us if we missed anything!)
Filed under: TV and TV DVDs and Reviews and TV Comedies and TV Dramas and TV Action and Rome and South Park and The Office and External Entertainment and External TV and Heroes and Battlestar Galactica and TV Sci-Fi Comments: None Digg this! Add to Del.icio.us |
 It’s not like we were planning to force anyone to endure “Meet the Spartans,” anyway - I mean, even the people on staff who we don’t like shouldn’t have to be subjected any film that features the tagline “From the makers of ‘Date Movie’ and ‘Epic Movie’” - but if you really feared that you might be missing out on something good, let Brian Orndorf at DVD Review set you straight. Filed under: Movies and Reviews and Movie Comedies and External Movies Comments: None Digg this! Add to Del.icio.us |
|
So The CW provided critics with the first part of the 2-hour 5th season premiere of “One Tree Hill,” which picks up four years, six months, and two days after the 4th season finale…and although I have never before seen an episode of the show, I know this to be true because, well, the episode is entitled “4 Years, 6 Months, 2 Days.” It’s a leap of faith I’m taking, I realize, but, dammit, I’m confident that I’m right about this. In addition to the screener of the episode, however, critics were also given a pleasantly threatening note, which begins with the line, “Please Do Not Reveal the following information in your reviews, features, etc,” then goes on to offer up five bullet points that, obviously, I won’t be offering up for your reading enjoyment. Well, okay, I will list them…but so as not to upset anyone at The CW, I’ll have to put in blanks where the crucial information is. If you’re a real fan of the show, though, I’m sure you’ll be able to solve the mysteries. * Do not reveal (PERSON) is in a (THING). See what I mean? Easy peasy. The truth of the matter, however, is that my never having seen a single episode of “One Tree Hill” in no way affects my ability to offer this heartfelt opinion of the proceedings: if you’d told me that the script had been written by Chester Cheetah, I would’ve said, “Wow, that sure is eerily appropriate, as I was just thinking how that’s the only possible excuse I would’ve accepted for why it’s so cheesy.” Yeah, yeah, that’s right, the guy who doesn’t know anything about the show takes a cheap shot, thereby proving that he’s a complete asshole, which is what you already suspected, anyway. Look, I absolutely applaud a show for taking a risk in an attempt to shake up the status quo (as I just did that yesterday with”Medium,” in fact), but this thing plays less like a new season of a show than one of those TV reunion movies, like “An Eight Is Enough Wedding,” or even worse, like that updated hour-long version of “The Brady Bunch” that ran in the ’80s: “The Bradys.” In fact, can I get a clip for that, please, just to refresh your memories…? Awesome, thanks. Man, that sure was awful, wasn’t it, folks? And, sadly, that’s how this new season of “One Tree Hill” is looking. It’s, like, “Hey, look, the kids are all grown up and living awesome new adult lives!” So what can I tell you that hasn’t been put on the do-not-reveal-under-penalty-of-getting-your-ass-kicked list?
* Brooke (Sophia Bush) is a veritable fashion mogul, now that her design company - Clothes Over Bro’s - has skyrocketed her to fame and fortune. The only real good news is that Daphne Zuniga, late of “Melrose Place,” has been added to the cast as a hard-ass businesswoman who works for Clothes Over Bro’s, providing a reminder of how much fun melodrama can be when the right person is reading the lines. There are also a few entertaining sequences with the less grown-up members of the ensemble as they play basketball, video games, and basically act like real people in their early 20s. Otherwise, we’re given a non-stop run of plot threads and cliches that feel rehashed from Lifetime movies or ABC Family Channel flicks. In particular, the sequences with Peyton at the record label would be hard-pressed to play more unrealistically. Boss: How long have you been in Los Angeles, Peyton, from… Aaaaaaarrrrrrrggggggghhhhhhh… Okay, fair enough, I’m not a fan of the show, so you can discount my opinion completely. But I’ll close with this: my wife was a huge “Dawson’s Creek” fan, and she still watches the reruns on occasion, but she watched “One Tree Hill” with me last night, and not only did she declare it awful, but she also actually regretted that she’d never get back those 42 minutes of her life. She said it, not me. Filed under: TV and Actors and Actresses and Reviews and TV Dramas and External Entertainment and External TV Comments: 2 Comments Digg this! Add to Del.icio.us |
|
Y’know, it’s a good thing I checked out those two episodes of “Gossip Girl” before I checked out the next two episodes of “Friday Night Lights.” If I’d seen the latter first, I’d've probably used the former as a point of comparison for how impossible it is for the average kid to relate to most characters on TV; the latter, however, is about as real as any show this side of…well, actually, I don’t even have a ready point of comparison. That’s how realistic they feel to me…though I’m willing to concede that maybe it’s just the handheld camerawork that makes it feel more real. (At the very least, it gives the show a look that’s unique to most anything else on the air at the moment.) My opinion on “FNL” can’t be trusted as much as our dedicated blogger, Mr. John Paulsen, who’s been in the show’s camp from the beginning, but I’ll just say that these two episodes - tonight’s and next week’s - made for great viewing, with both the teen and adult storylines unfolding in a manner that was consistently enthralling, both in the dramatic and the comedic sides of things. The teen characters have the kind of problems that adults will remember from their own youth, such as a girl trying to accept that the best person for her isn’t necessarily the school matinee idol, and the adult issues - like, for instance, Coach Taylor (Kyle Chandler) and his wife, Tami (Connie Britton), dealing with her sister’s refusal to realize that she’s being a nuisance of a houseguest - are pretty damned familiar, too. And damned if it isn’t true what people have been telling me all along: there’s precious little football in “Friday Night Lights.” And when there finally is a big game, which happens in next week’s episode, it brings with it one of those great “oh, shit!” moments that you don’t need to be a sports fan to appreciate. Hmmm…looks like Season 1 of the show is only $18.99 over at Amazon. Maybe it’s time to finally take the plunge and get the full experience of what everyone’s been telling me is one of the best shows on TV…?
Filed under: TV and Actors and Actresses and Reviews and TV Dramas and External Entertainment and External TV and Friday Night Lights Comments: None Digg this! |
