The National Film Preservation Board has made their annual announcement of which films are being added to The National Film Registry.

For those unfamiliar with the project, each year up to 25 films are selected for preservation in the Library of Congress.  Each film must be at least 10-years-old, they do not have to be feature length, and they do not have to have received a theatrical release.

This year’s list includes:

1) The Asphalt Jungle (1950)
2) Deliverance (1972)
3) Disneyland Dream (1956)
4) A Face in the Crowd (1957)
5) Flower Drum Song (1961)
6) Foolish Wives (1922)
7) Free Radicals (1979)
8) Hallelujah (1929)
9) In Cold Blood (1967)
10) The Invisible Man (1933)
11) Johnny Guitar (1954)
12) The Killers (1946)
13) The March (1964)
14) No Lies (1973)
15) On the Bowery (1957)
16) One Week (1920)
17) The Pawnbroker (1965)
18) The Perils of Pauline (1914)
19) Sergeant York (1941)
20) The 7th Voyage of Sinbad (1958)
21) So’s Your Old Man (1926)
22) George Stevens WW2 Footage (1943-46)
23) The Terminator (1984)
24) Water and Power (1989)
25) White Fawn’s Devotion (1910)

As usual there are several in here I have never heard of, and only one that immediately leaps out at me as a “What the…” and that is The Terminator.

While a film like Deliverence has had a left a lasting impression on our collective sub-conscience, what did The Terminator do beyond giving us the saying, “I’ll be back”?  While some of these are clearly added for reasons such as age, advancements in story telling and film making, I can’t for the life of me think of what this movie contributed to the world.  I could even see Terminator 2: Judgement Day for the T-1000 liquid effects before I could see the original being worthy.  The charter for the National Film Preservation Board defines eligible films as “culturally, historically, or aesthetically significant films”… again, huh?

You can also check out the additions for 2006 and 2007.

Majel Barrett-Roddenberry, the widow of Star Trek creator Gene Roddenberry, has passed away.  Mrs. Barrett-Roddenberry was 76-years-old and had been suffering from leukemia for some time now.

Besides being the wife of Mr. Roddenberry, she was well known to fans as Nurse Chapel in the original series, Lwaxana Troi in Star Trek: The Next Generation and Star Trek: Deep Space Nine, and the voice of all Federation computers since The Next Generation.  As if all that wasn’t enough, she also did voices for the Star Trek cartoon series, appeared in other shows such as Leave It To Beaver and Babylon 5 and on, and on, and on.  She was never a woman to sit around quietly.

After Gene passed in 1991, every one looked to her for her blessing on all subsequent Star Trek projects, though she lacked any ability to stop one from happening.  She was considered “the First Lady of Star Trek”, though I generally heard her referred to as “Mom” by many fans.

I had the pleasure of meeting Mrs. Barrett-Roddenberry on numerous occasions at San Diego Comic Con, the Star Trek 30th Anniversary convention in Huntsville, AL and so on, and I can honestly say she was never anything but pleasant and cordial.  If you took the time to talk to her, she gave you her undivided attention and expressed as much interest as she could in what you had to say to her.  I have met many celeberties over the years through my various jobs and connections, and I have to say she ranked easily as one of my favorites for just how nice she was.

She was scheduled to be the voice in the upcoming 2009 Star Trek film, but it is unclear if she had recorded her lines by the time of her passing.  My feeling is she has recorded so many other clips, there is a good chance they could splice together what they need.

Rest in peace, Majel.  You will be missed.

Netflix added the ability to stream movies some time ago, and after taking the plunge to try it out, I have to say I’m sold on the concept.

At first I was hesitant to give it a try because you could only do it on your computer, and I didn’t feel like going through the trials and tribulations of watching Internet videos on my TV.  Eventually a company named Roku brought a Netflix set top box to market, but, I also didn’t feel like plopping down $99 for a dedicated device.

Then, in November, Microsoft updated the Xbox 360 dashboard and added the option to stream Netflix to your TV without any more equipment then I already owned.  With the temptation being too great, I finally gave in and reactivated my Netflix account and decided to give it a shot.

For as little as $8.99 a month (we’ll ignore the $4.99 option as that only gives you 2 hours of video streaming a month), you get one DVD rented at a time, but you get unlimited video streaming to your Xbox.  Quite a bargain if you ask me since they have over 12,000 selections for you to choose from.  True, the movie selection is mainly older films, but for a film buff like myself, I’m thrilled.  They also offer help a very healthy selection of older TV shows, all which are available on DVD, but for three months of streaming, you can save your self buying a DVD set you may not even like, and you will save room in your house.  I finally can try out an older British comedy I have been dying to try for years called Yes, Minister without rolling the dice on an expensive boxed set and risking not even liking the show.

The only drawback to the system is you have to go to the Netflix site to add more videos to your queue.  You can only have 6 active selections show up in your Xbox dashboard at any time, but that is plenty for a night of video watching.

My biggest fear was that you were going to end up with heavily pixalated veiwing since it was streaming over the Internet and being blown up to the size of a TV screen, but I am pleased to say I was totally wrong about that.  Last night my father wanted to watch a movie since he is laid out on the couch recovering from knee surgery, and he chose The Illusionist from 2006.  What little I watched of the movie since I had work to do was just stunning in its quality.  It might not be true high def, but coming over an HDMI cable to our 42″ Toshiba Regza LCD, I noticed little to no “image noise”, no buffering except before the film started, and an overall better experience than a standard definition DVD played on a standard DVD player.

I would still like to see a broader slection of films to watch, and also the ability to add new things to your queue on the fly, but overall, if you have an Xbox 360 already, or feel up to getting a Roku device, this is well worth $8.99 a month.  Also, keep an eye out, but some Blu-ray DVD players are starting to add the ability to stream the videos also.

Can any one, or anything, stop the money making machine that is The Dark Knight?

As the film stands as of today (December 11th, 2008) it has had a box office haul of $530,594,370 domestically and $465,956,888 internationally for a total of $996,551,258 gross. This isn’t to short change the fact it cost $185 million to produce, but it is still a highly successful film no matter how you slice it. There has also been the surprising news that the film will be re-released to theaters on January 23rd, 2009 for another go, and this all but guarantees that the film will break through the $1 billion dollar level.

I bring all of this up because earlier this week the film was released on DVD.  While I certainly expected it be successful, I knew something was up when I was at Walmart at midnight Monday night and there was a line in the electronics department of people waiting for them to wheel out their supply.  I can’t say I remember ever seeing that before any other DVD, so the writing was on the wall this was going to be big.  (For the record, mine was on its way via UPS, I was there for other reasons)

Well, the numbers are in, and the sales for the first 24 hours was 600,000 Blu-ray copies and 2.4 million standard DVDs.  The previous Blu-ray champ was Iron Man with 400,000 copies in its first week… sorry, Iroan Man.

Warner Brothers is trying to woo Christopher Nolan & Jonathan Nolan, the brothers who wrote the movie and Christopher directed, back for another installment, but they are currently not jumping at the chance.  Christopher has been quoted in numerous interviews of fearing the curse of third film in a series (See Spider-Man 3), and he has also said he hasn’t been struck by an idea yet for another outing of the caped crusader.

I have to say, “Stick to your guns, Chris”.  If we only get two movies from him of Batman, then so be it.  Sure I would like to see a third film in the series, but I want it to be ‘right’, and not just made to be made.  Sure there are more Batman villains he can tackle, but would they be worthy of carrying a film?  Catwoman is possible… The Riddler is a bit weak… Mr. Nolan has publicly declared he doesn’t like The Penguin… Harley Quinn couldn’t carry a film on her own, and without The Joker, she would be hard to do… Posion Ivy couldn’t do it on her own… Mr. Freeze is too silly and so on and so forth.

With these new sales numbers Warner Brothers is sure to be courting Mr. Nolan harder for a third film, but what say you, should he go for it?

In what is becoming an annual list, I’m going to share the holiday programming I enjoy every year.  However, I am changing the format a bit this year with ones I think everyone should own on DVD, and then following it up with a list of what is airing in the month of December, and on what channels and times you can find them (if you are in the USA that is).

A Charlie Brown Christmas - It’s amazing this show has aired every year since 1965, and it never seems to get old.  This was the first of the Charlie Brown specials, and was probably the best of them.  Interesting how something that aired in 1965 still seems so relevant in how Christmas has become all about consumerism.

A Christmas Carol - Patrick Stewart is a classically trained actor and he brings a powerful tone to the role of Scrooge. A fantastic version of this classic tale of Christmas spirit.  This has become one of my first watch items each Christmas season.

A Christmas Story - Being set in the 1940’s does nothing to diminish the fun, or relevance, of this movie. Every kid has had that “dream” gift on their Christmas list that it seemed no one wanted you to have. Fun, cute and so many quotable lines. “You’ll shoot your eye out” if you miss this one!

Elf - I am shocked how fast I took a liking to this film, and I watched it multiple times last year around Christmas.  I then spend the entire year screaming, “YOU SIT ON A THRONE OF LIES!  You smell of meat and cheese!”

Emmet Otter’s Jug-Band Christmas - Sadly it seems the only version floating around of this Jim Henson special is somewhat cut up from the original version with Kermit the Frog cut out of the beginning and end.  Still, Henson’s work was always magical, and this special from 1977 is just another example of how good he really was.

How The Grinch Stole Christmas - This is a special I really never got wild about, but it’s a mainstay of the season, so it makes it.

It’s a Wonderful Life - Come on…do I even really need to discuss this one? Is there anyone alive who hasn’t seen this? Actually I did find someone a few years ago…and I promptly pointed her out for the heretic she is… and then I bought her a copy and mailed it to her, forcing her to watch it.  This is one of my all time favorite movies. Jimmy Stewart is amazing.

Love Actually - Really, the only connection to Christmas is the time of year, and a couple of holiday jokes, but it’s cute and sweet. Never mind it has a stellar cast of English actors and actresses.

Miracle on 34th Street - While some can believe it’s like a film length ad for Macy’s department store, it’s still a cute film with a central message that Christmas can be magical for any number of reasons.

National Lampoon’s Christmas Vacation - The Vacation movies have been a mixed bag (as has most of Chevy Chase’s career), but this film is so easy to relate to. We all have those dreams of the perfect family Christmas, just to have them dashed and never have them live up to our hopes. Plus, the Cousin Eddie scene in white sweater, with green dickie, is worth the entire price of the movie!

The Nightmare Before Christmas - Not only is it a sweet story, and amazing to watch, how can you not love a movie that can make both the Halloween AND Christmas movie lists?  And without it, would Hot Topic have anything to sell.

The Original Television Christmas Classics (Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer / Santa Claus Is Comin’ to Town / Frosty the Snowman / Frosty Returns / The Little Drummer Boy) - I recommend this primarily for Rudolph, but now you can only get it with all this other stuff. Oh well. What is Christmas without Rudolph? Nothing I tell you!  Although Santa Claus Is Comin’ to Town is pretty darn amusing also.

Santa Claus - The Movie - This movie got ravaged by critics, but it is cute, funny and warm. Deal with it.

Star Wars Holiday Special - This thing has never been released to video, and aired only once on television on November 17th, 1978.  It is two hours of solid pin set in the Star Wars universe.  What is even sadder is the original cast of Mark Hamill, Harrison Ford, Carrie Fisher, Anthony Daniels and so on all appear in the special… along with the likes of Harvey Korman, Art Carney and Bea Arthur.  Yes… you read all of that correctly.  You can find the Star Wars Holiday Special online, but be prepared to cringe.  The only cool thing is that it does feature the first appearance of Boba Fett, albeit in an animated form.

And yes, I know a lot of these movies show up on TV, but if it’s something like It’s A Wonderful Life, PLEASE don’t watch it on commercial television. It is deserving of your hard earned money being spent on a DVD of it. Same with Christmas Vacation. Christmas Story I don’t mind because it’s a 24-hour marathon, I usually watch it 3 - 4 times through out the time period. Yes… 3 - 4 times, I love it that much.

2008 Holiday Specials On TV Schedule

I will be putting this list up by network and in order of airing.

ABC:

Dec. 1, 8-9pm: Shrek the Halls and Dr. Seuss’ How the Grinch Stole Christmas (animated version)
Dec. 2, 8-9pm: Santa Claus is Comin’ to Town
Dec. 5, 8-10pm: Dr. Seuss’ How the Grinch Stole Christmas (live-action version)
Dec. 8, 8-9pm: A Charlie Brown Christmas
Dec. 9, 8-9pm: America’s Funniest Home Videos Christmas Special
Dec. 13, 8-9pm: America’s Funniest Home Videos Christmas Special
Dec. 13, 9-11pm: Surviving Christmas
Dec. 14, 8-10pm: The Santa Clause 2
Dec. 15, 8-9pm: I Want a Dog for Christmas, Charlie Brown
Dec. 16, 8-9pm: A Charlie Brown Christmas
Dec. 20, 8-9pm: I Want a Dog for Christmas, Charlie Brown
Dec. 20, 9-11pm: Dr. Seuss’ The Cat in the Hat
Dec. 22, 8-8:30pm: Shrek the Halls
Dec. 23, 8-9pm: Dr. Seuss’ How the Grinch Stole Christmas (animated version)
Dec. 30, 8-9:30pm: Happy New Year, Charlie Brown and Rudolph’s Shiny New Year

CBS:

Dec. 3, 8-9pm: Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer
Dec. 12, 8-9pm: Frosty the Snowman and Frosty Returns
Dec. 20, 8-10pm: Elf
Dec. 23, 8-9pm: 10th Annual Home for the Holidays with Faith Hill

Fox:

None… apparently they have no holiday spirit!

NBC:

Dec. 3, 8-9pm: Christmas in Rockefeller Center
Friday, Dec. 5, 8-9pm: Greatest Holiday Moments: TV & Film Countdown
Dec. 10, 8-9pm: Little Spirit: A New York Christmas
Dec. 12, 8-9pm: Greatest Holiday Moments: Songs of the Season Countdown
Dec. 13, 8-11pm: It’s a Wonderful Life
Dec. 17, 8-9pm: A Muppets Christmas: Letters to Santa (BRAND NEW, MUST WATCH!)
Dec. 19, 8-10pm: Greatest Holiday Moments: TV & Film Countdown and Greatest Holiday Moments: Songs of the Season Countdown
Dec. 22, 8-9pm: Greatest Holiday Moments: Hilarious Home Video Countdown
Dec. 24, 8-11pm: It’s a Wonderful Life
Dec. 25, 10-11pm: Greatest Holiday Moments: Hilarious Home Video Countdown

MyNetwork TV:

Dec. 6, 8-10pm: Miracle on 34th Street
Dec. 8, 8-10pm: Blizzard
Dec. 9, 8-10pm: Olive the Other Reindeer and Santa’s Funniest Moments
Dec. 10, 8-10pm: Home Alone
Dec. 16, 8-10pm: Soul of Christmas
Dec. 17, 8-10pm: Christmas is Here Again and Santa’s Funniest Moments
Dec. 18, 8-9pm: Wrestlemania Holiday Special
Dec. 22, 8-10pm: The Spirit of Christmas
Dec. 23, 8-10pm: Babes in Toyland

The CW:

Dec. 5, 8-9pm: Grandma Got Run Over by a Reindeer
Dec. 5, 9-10pm: The Story of Santa Claus

2008 Holiday Special on TV By Date

(All times listed are EST)
Dec. 1, 8-9pm: Shrek the Halls and Dr. Seuss’ How the Grinch Stole Christmas (animated version), ABC
Dec. 2, 8-9pm: Santa Claus is Comin’ to Town, ABC
Dec. 3, 8-9pm: Christmas in Rockefeller Center, NBC
Dec. 3, 8-9pm: Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer, CBS
Dec. 5, 8-9pm: Greatest Holiday Moments: TV & Film Countdown, NBC
Dec. 5, 8-9pm: Grandma Got Run Over by a Reindeer, The CW
Dec. 5, 8-10pm: Dr. Seuss’ How the Grinch Stole Christmas (live-action version), ABC
Dec. 5, 9-10pm: The Story of Santa Claus, The CW
Dec. 6, 8-10pm: Miracle on 34th Street, MyNetwork TV
Dec. 8, 8-9pm: A Charlie Brown Christmas, ABC
Dec. 8, 8-10pm: Blizzard, MyNetwork TV
Dec. 9, 8-9pm: America’s Funniest Home Videos Christmas Special, ABC
Dec. 9, 8-10pm: Olive the Other Reindeer and Santa’s Funniest Moments, MyNetwork TV
Dec. 10, 8-10pm: Home Alone, MyNetwork TV
Dec. 10, 8-9pm: Little Spirit: A New York Christmas, NBC
Dec. 12, 8-9pm: Greatest Holiday Moments: Songs of the Season Countdown, NBC
Dec. 12, 8-9pm: Frosty the Snowman and Frosty Returns, CBS
Dec. 13, 8-9pm: America’s Funniest Home Videos Christmas Special, ABC
Dec. 13, 8-11pm: It’s a Wonderful Life, NBC
Dec. 13, 9-11pm: Surviving Christmas, ABC
Dec. 14, 8-10pm: The Santa Clause 2, ABC
Dec. 15, 8-9pm: I Want a Dog for Christmas, Charlie Brown, ABC
Dec. 16, 8-9pm: A Charlie Brown Christmas, ABC
Dec. 16, 8-10pm: Soul of Christmas, MyNetwork TV
Dec. 17, 8-10pm: Christmas is Here Again and Santa’s Funniest Moments, MyNetwork TV
Dec. 17, 8-9pm: A Muppets Christmas: Letters to Santa (BRAND NEW, MUST WATCH!), NBC
Dec. 18, 8-9pm: Wrestlemania Holiday Special, MyNetwork TV
Dec. 19, 8-10pm: Greatest Holiday Moments: TV & Film Countdown and Greatest Holiday Moments: Songs of the Season Countdown, NBC
Dec. 20, 8-9pm: I Want a Dog for Christmas, Charlie Brown, ABC
Dec. 20, 8-10pm: Elf, CBS
Dec. 20, 9-11pm: Dr. Seuss’ The Cat in the Hat, ABC
Dec. 22, 8-8:30pm: Shrek the Halls, ABC
Dec. 22, 8-9pm: Greatest Holiday Moments: Hilarious Home Video Countdown, NBC
Dec. 22, 8-10pm: The Spirit of Christmas, MyNetwork TV
Dec. 23, 8-9pm: 10th Annual Home for the Holidays with Faith Hill, CBS
Dec. 23, 8-9pm: Dr. Seuss’ How the Grinch Stole Christmas (animated version), ABC
Dec. 23, 8-10pm: Babes in Toyland, MyNetwork TV
Dec. 24, 8-11pm: It’s a Wonderful Life, NBC
Dec. 25, 10-11pm: Greatest Holiday Moments: Hilarious Home Video Countdown, NBC
Dec. 30, 8-9:30pm: Happy New Year, Charlie Brown and Rudolph’s Shiny New Year, ABC

You have a fave? Talk about it!

Those of you have read this blog for any amount of time, you know I think Arrested Development was one of the finest shows to ever grace television airwaves, and now it may be gracing the silver screen also.

The series ran for three seasons on Fox, and was possibly one of the most well crafted sitcoms ever.  While you could sit down and watch one episode, there were numerous things in each episode that would make the loyal viewers smile.  Each episode progressed each and every storyline at least a bit, and when you got to final episodes, things you totally missed came blindingly clear.  It was possibly one of the most well planned out shows ever.

The nice thing is that the cast was as passionate about the show as the fans were, and ever since the show went off the air in 2005, they have been doing everything they can to get a movie follow-up in to theaters.  As of Friday that dream got a little closer to reality as the producers, Mitch Hurwitz and Ron Howard, signed dealswith the proper companies to bring a film to reality.

As it stands, it appears all of the main cast is ready to come back with the exception of one.  (rumor is that it is Michael Cera who played George Michael, if true, you ain’t that big of a movie star yet, kid)  There is no script in place yet, but Mr. Hurwitz has said many times he has the movie all plotted out in his head, and Ron Howard is all set to return to his role as “The Narrator”.

For those of you haven’t tried the series yet, what are you waiting for?  You don’t even have to rent DVDs as both Hulu and Internet Movie Database have all three seasons online for you to watch for free! I’ll even get you started by embedding the first episode of season 1 right here in the post for you!  Try it, it is well worth your time, and you can be all prepared for the movie.  Now… excuse me, I need to watch the entire series for the umpteenth time.

A while back, I ran an image that was rumored to be the new Enterprise from the next Star Trek film.  That image has now been proven false by the above image that is the first official photo of the new ship.

Can we go back to the fake one?

The new image comes from Entertainment Weekly, so there is no denying it is the real thing.  While it does hold the basic shape of the original Enterprise, it is just too slick.  Take the pylon the saucer section rests on as an example.  It is set too far back on the secondary hull and appears too “sweepish” for my tastes.  It has an almost “organic” feel to it like the neck and secondary hull are fused together.  The design of prcious ships has always been a bit more “bolted on” in feeling.

I don’t even know where to start with the warp nacelles.  They look like they have air intakes like jet engines for crying out loud!  However, it fits with the image we’ve seen of the Enterprise bridge.

This image was released on MTV a few months back (you can click it for a larger view), and my first reaction was, “Huh… apparently Apple runs Starfleet.”  It looks like if the camera continued to pan to the right, we would see all of the crew is raptly listening to Steve Jobs give a keynote address.  This appears to be the same design mantra that was applied to the outside of the ship.

As you can see from the picture, the same basic structure of the uniforms was kept (Kirk is all in black due to something in the plot), but their surroundings have been completely changed.  Something that a lot of people don’t get about science fiction is that fans tend to form an emotional bond with the ships of the series, and they reach a level of being a character onto themselves.  Think about the Millenium Falcon in Star Wars, didn’t you feel like it was as much of the core group of characters as any of the living actors?  When Serenity crashed in Serenity, spinning down the runway, her engines being torn off, didn’t you go “aw”?  And in Star Trek IV - The Voyage Home, when that shuttle lifts over the Excelsior, and your see the Enterprise-A sitting there, didn’t it feel like an old friend had come back to life?

I don’t get why the uniforms were kept so true to the original, but the Enterprise gets a complete refit.  It makes me feel like JJ Abrams doesn’t get the die hard fans, and that says to me that he doesn’t get the heart of the property in general.  I honestly hope the movie is decent, but he is messing with icons here, sure, leave your mark on them, but at least make them feel somewhat similar to what we all grew up loving.

It’s episode 16… Scattercast is going through its rebellious teen years!

Little bit of everything in this one folks!

- I beg, again, for feedback on the podcast.

- A brief history of my relationship with Halloween and the costume industry.

- A very long winded rant about the state of horror films.

Only three subjects this week, but my rant is lengthy!

Here’s a link to the MP3 for those who wish to download it.

I have gone on and on about how hard it is for a movie to be considered profitable, but yet the top two films this weekend did it in their opening weekends.  What lesson is there here?

High School Musical 3, the first of the popular franchise to be in theaters, has a reported production budget of a mere $11 million dollars and it grossed $42 million dollars domestically this weekend.  Saw V, reportedly the last film in the series, had a budget of $10.8 million and grossed $30.5 million dollars this weekend.  As I have told you all before, a movie must double its budget to be considered profitable, so on paper, both of these films made well over double their budgets and are completely in the black already.

Hello.  Hollywood?  Are you paying attention?

If this weekend proves anything, it is that films don’t have to have huge budgets with insane special effects to make money.  True, both of these films had built in audiences from the preceeding installments in their respective series, but this also shows if you keep budgets under control, then you can make a quick buck.  Both films star smaller name actors, a major chunk of a film’s budget these days, and concentrate more on the story and plot than catering to some huge actors fan base.  I love Johnny Depp, but he is reportedly getting $54 million to star in a rumored fourth installment of Pirates of the Caribbean, kudos to him, but a huge slap up side the head to the Disney executives for agreeing to it.

Think these are flukes?  The first Saw film was made for $1.2 million dollars and went on to gross $55.1 million domestic.  News has just come out that the Saw series is now the highest grossing horror series ever with a cumulative domestic gross of $145.8 million on an estimated cumulative budget of around $30 million.  (the budget for Saw IV is unknown, so I took an average)  This particular series is not my cup of tea (I like actual horror, and not “horror porn” as some call this), but there is denying that this series is insanely successful.

As for High School Musical 3, well, I don’t get the success of the first two on television, so this one doing so well is also beyond me.  Teenagers seem to love them, so more power to them, and what teens love will always do well.

This does just tell me that Hollywood, for the most part, is broken.  Why should any movie cost $150 million or more?  A large portion of the problem is that they have given in to the insane salaries of stars.  I’m sorry, but no actor is truly worth a $20 million dollar plus paycheck for what amounts to three or four months work.  Stop paying these outrageous paychecks, focus on actually telling a story, and you can turn a profit.  Sure they may not be gigantic profits, but perhaps you could pay your executives less and then you wouldn’t need to turn such huge profits.

Oh, I know, there I go talking all crazy again with sensible talk.  I’m wacky that way.

While I am known for being harsh in movie reviews, one movie I have heaped endless hate on over the years is Dirty Dancing.

Most bad movies are quickly forgotten.  You see them, you say, “Wow, what a trainwreck” and move along.  However, Dirty Dancing is one that has stuck in my mind for years because I can remember when it came out on video, and I couldn’t go to any female friend’s house without that movie being in their VCR on an endless loop.  Honestly, the movie is mostly forgettable except for what is possibly one of the most excruciating lines of dialog ever written… yeah, you know which one I mean…

Nobody puts Baby in the corner!

-shivers-

I hated this line from the moment I heard it (actually, I burst out laughing, much to the anger of the girl sitting on the couch with me at the time), and this was long before Conan O’Brien picked on it relentlessly on his talk show.  I truly consider it six of the most insipid words ever strung together in a sentence.  Perhaps it was Patrick Swayze’s delivery of the line, but I really think it is just a horribly written line.

I remember hearing a few years back about some sort of live stage version of this abomination on celluloid, but quickly pushed it out of my head.  Now comes word via Variety that the stage production may be making its way to Broadway in the near future.  “Dirty Dancing — The Classic Story Onstage” (’classic’?  seriously?) may be taking up the theater with its tripe where Hairspray hasbeen playing for six years.  Nothing is firm yet, but that’s what has been reported.

This bring up a conversation I had with M (for newcomers, my best friend who shall only be known by an initial) not long ago about the “Disneyfication” of Broadway.  With things like “Little Mermaid” going on at the moment, and “Spider-Man” inching closer to being a reality, we wonder what has happened to classic storytelling on Broadway.  Where are the shows like “A Chorus Line”, “Evita”, “Damn Yankees” and so on?  Instead we get things like “Dirty Dancing” which, by the way, doesn’t even feature a singing cast, they just dance to the music from the movie.  Essentially it is the movie just done on a stage.

Why?

You know, here’s part of my problem with this whole “Oh it’s a classic!” and “It’s so romantic!” schtick with this property: Does no one realize that Johnny, the dance instructor, is significantly older than Baby?  Were there no statutory rape laws in 1963, the year the story takes place?  No no, everyone is just horrified that the hired help of the resort slept with a guest, not that she is an underage girl having sex with a man in his mid to late 20’s.  True, their ages are never stated, but it is fairly obvious.  I guess it’s okay though because it’s “romantic” and “sweet”.

Never mind the whole sub-plot about the female employee of the resort who has an illegal, back alley abortion and nearly bleeds to death.  Really, this movie was sweet and perfect for teen girls in 1987!

So come on folks, pack up your kids, specifically your young daughters, and take them to see the “sweet” and “romantic” story of illegal love between an adult male and a teenage girl on Broadway!

It would seem Paramount is none too happy with the fall premiere of South Park that aired earlier this week.

-looks outside- Yep, the sky is blue.

Nikki Finke at Deadline Hollywood Daily is saying that executives at Paramount or more than just a bit displeased about the content of the episode entitled “The China Probrem”.  It wasn’t the “A” story that had to deal with Cartman trying to stave off an impending Chinese invasion of the USA, but the “B” story that dealt with the other boys trying to cope with imagery of George Lucas and Steven Spielberg raping Indiana Jones.

Yeah… you read that right.

The kids saw Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull over the summer, and having been dealing with the guilt of having watched their favorite adventurer getting “raped”, and not doing anything about it.  Of course the rape was metaphorical for the disaster the script was, but at three separate points in the episode, we were shown Lucas and Spielberg actually raping Indiana in scenes that were homages to rape scenes from A Clockwork Orange, The Accused and Deliverance, as well as sending up all the scenes in rape movies where people will finally agree to helping the victims.  At the very end of the episode we were also treated to Spielberg and Lucas raping a Stormtrooper from Star Wars… it was a very uplifting episode.

There are others who are saying the rape metaphor shouldn’t have been used at all.  While I certainly do not find the traditional definition of rape amusing at all, how many times have people and writers said, “They raped my childhood…”, “They raped that character…”, “The government is raping us…” etc?  The word has taken on so many meanings in our lexicon, but did anyone stop to think that was what the show was trying to portray?  I heard many people say Indiana got raped by the fourth movie, so the show just took it literally, and people get worked up over it.  You have to selective sensitivity.

According to Ms. Finke, Paramount execs are not happy with parent company Viacom as they also own Comedy Central, and allowed this episode to go forward.  I would image a lot of their anger is because the DVD for the movie is coming out on October 14th, so having the movie picked on so publicly this close to release probably doesn’t thrill them.  Also according to Ms. Finke, Paramount is planning to keep quiet on the subject in public venues as they want the issue to go away, but since when have bloggers allowed an issue to die?

This isn’t the first time Paramount has been angry at Matt Stone and Trey Parker, the creators of the series.  Back in 2006 they were also displeased with them over the Tom Cruise/Scientology episode, “Trapped In A Closet”, as Cruise was one of their biggest box office draws at the time.  At that time they did complain, and the episode was pulled from the usual rotation after only one repeat airing.  I think it is rather obvious that the suits at Paramount need to get a much thicker skin about things.

South Park works because all subjects are equal fodder for them, and it is just about guaranteed that there will eventually be an episode that offends you/insults something you believe in. If the show was to consider Paramount properties off limits, how would that be fair? It wouldn’t.

It concerns me that comedy writing seems to be taking so many hits from various sides as of late. Earlier this week we had the Saturday Night Live video pulled from the web over two jokes at the expense of a couple involved in the sub-prime loan disaster.  Now we have South Park under fire again for making fun of another company in the Viacom family.  Are we suddenly seeing the rise again of the political correctness boom from the 1980’s and comedy writers are going to have what they can write about being dictated to them by committee and lawyers?

Comedy, and all of its derivatives such as satire, should enjoy the utmost freedom under the 1st amendment, but yet it seems there are many out there who feel it should have more and more restraints put on it.  Is it outright censorship?  No, but suggesting things shouldn’t be written about sure is a close second.

According to IO9, there is talk of someone doing a sequel to Blade Runner.

Okay, first off, the original film came out in 1982, based on a novel by Philip K. Dick named Do Androids Dream Of Electric Sheep, and while it has cult status, I doubt many people younger than myself even know of this film.  Considering this project isn’t locked, and lead times for effects heavy films are 2 - 3 years, you’re looking at 2010 or 2011 for this to come out.  That would put this project close to the 30 year mark since the original, making progressively less sense.

Secondly… IT ISN’T NEEDED!  Blade Runner is one of those works that, no matter which cut of it you watch, it is a complete and perfect work.  Fantastic story, great acting and with so many years gone by, the visuals still pack a heck of a wallop.  I watched it on HD-DVD when the deluxe boxed set came out, and there were even more astonishing details lurking in the shadows, and with a bit of effects cleaning, it was just… wow.  Capturing the vibe of this film a second time would be next to impossible and, quite simply, should just not be done.

This is where Hollywood is just depressing me more and more.  We just hear about bad idea after bad idea, and there seems to be no stopping them.  Remember MTV is remaking The Rocky Horror Picture Show?  There are talks that the remake of Ed Wood’s schlock classic, Plan 9 From Outer Space, is moving ahead.  Possibly a Men In Black 3, which is so not needed (and the cartoon series actually was better than the second film).

It just seems like bad idea afte rbad idea is coming out of Hollywood lately, and no one is saying “wait a minute…”.  I think the time has come for exectutives to come out of their ivory towers and hear what people actually have to say about these projects.  They need to be stopped before they even get started, and save all of us the inevitable pain.

Just say no to Blade Runner 2… please.

What could any person say about Paul Newman that hasn’t been said a thousand times by millions of others?

While Mr. Newman could have traded on his famous good looks for his entire career, he didn’t.  Instead he became a master of his craft and provided us with more memorable roles than some armies of actors could ever hope to do.  While you can certainly point to his well-known roles in films such as The Hustler,  Hud, Cool Hand Luke,  Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid, The Color of Money and on and on and on, one of my personal favorites is one that never got much coverage, and that was Nobody’s Fool.

I’m not sure why Nobody’s Fool never got much mention, it may have been because it was a story that centered heavily on people facing their own mortality, but it is one of my most recommended films to friends and family.  A great performance by Newman (of course), Jessica Tandy in her last role and Bruce Willis (who took scale pay so he could have the opportunity to work with Newman), make for a wonderful little gem of a film.  Seriously, rent it, buy it (you can usually find it pretty cheap), but do yourself the favor of checking it out.

Beyond his acting, though, it was his immense generosity that always amazed me.  Most people have seen the Newmans Own brand of food items in the grocery store, but it always amazes me how many people don’t know the story behind it.  Every penny of profit made from the line of salad dressings, lemonade, popcorn and more goes to charity.  In the 25 years the brand has been around, it has donated over $250 million dollars to various charities around the world.  This also included the Hole in the Wall Camps (named for the Hole in the Wall Gang from the story of Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid) which were summer camps set up for kids with serious health problems that allowed them to attend totally free of charge.

I will certainly miss Mr. Newman not only for his contributions to the cinema, but also for all of the charity work he did over the years.  Rest in peace, Mr. Newman.

Ian Fleming, a former British Naval officer during World War II,created James Bond 007 in 1953.  After fourteen books about the British spy, Mr. Fleming passed away in 1964 of a heart attack.  Somehow his character endures over four decades after his death, and shows no signs of slowing down.

I bring all of this up because I finally watched Casino Royale, the 21st James Bond film, on Monday night.  I admit I took my time getting to this film because the past few movies had been less than classics to be sure.  With a reboot to the franchise (it was named for the first novel and had Bond just picking up the mantle of being a double-0), they seemed to have really retooled the whole thought process behind the films, and I couldn’t be more thrilled.

The early films had over-the-top villains bent on world domination, but I always enjoyed the aspect of the nefarious organization known as SPECTRE (SPecial Executive for Counter-intelligence, Terrorism, Revenge and Extortion).  While no name was ever mentioned in Casino Royale, there were some hints to some evil organization running things in the background, and the commercials for Quantum of Solace, the 22nd film, certainly point to more information on this portion of the plot.  I mean, come on, Tomorrow Never Dies had a guy who wanted to start a war so he could sell more news.  That’s a villain?

So, why the picture of how Mr. Fleming envisiong the spy?  It is time to delve into one of the most hotly contested debates to face mankind of all time… which actor was the best James Bond?  (I avoid politics on this blog, but I’m willing to take on THIS taboo subject?!?  Am I insane?!?)

Sean Connery

The first man to portray James Bond, and the one most people point to at the true James Bond.  He played the role for six films (Dr. No, From Russia with Love, Goldfinger, Thunderball, You Only Live Twice, Diamonds Are Forever… I think everyone tries to forget Never Say Never Again), and is the first impression most people have of the character.

I would have to say I always enjoyed his wry delivery, and he certainly had the debonair aspect down, but he also knew how to become the deadly assassin when needed.

Easily the best up until a certain point… more on that later.

George Lazenby

Poor George Lazenby.  He is like the forgotten Bond as he only appeared in one film, On Her Majesty’s Secret Service.  He was originally supposed to appear in seven, but apparently his agent felt Bond wouldn’t last that long and convinced him to drop out after only one film, leading to Connery returning for one more go at the title role.

I’ve seen the movie once or twice, and he didn’t seem to really fit to me, though that may have partially been because his voice was dubbed over in some sections of the film, but who knows.  I think you would be hard pressed to find anyone who says he is their favorite Bond.

Roger Moore

I remember as a kid thinking Moore was fantastic, and he never failed to make me laugh… in a James Bond film.  As I’ve gone back and looked at his seven apperances as the spy (Live and Let Die, The Man with the Golden Gun, The Spy Who Loved Me, Moonraker, For Your Eyes Only, Octopussy and A View to a Kill), I think he may have partially been a victim of the time period where he played the role.

The 1970’s had an odd sense of humor, focusing more on a slapstick style, and when they wanted to interject humor into the films, it always came off as ham fisted.  I think it also didn’t help he played the role into his 50s, and his age was showing towards the end.

He was passable, but I would say if I was forced to make a list of the actors in order, he would be in the bottom three for sure.

Timothy Dalton

Mr. Dalton only appeared in two films (The Living Daylights & Licence to Kill), and I had high hopes for him, but both films were pretty much disasters story wise.  He was more inline with what Bond should be like, but his comedic deliver was just abysmal, and the movies just seemed to drag on endlessly.

I’m not sure if it was his fault, or the scripts, but I also wonder if the fact Pierce Brosnan was perused heavily for the role, but couldn’t take it because NBC didn’t want to mess up Remington Steele, had anything to do with it.  There was a six year gap between his last film and the next one, so something went awry with the whole process.

Pierce Brosnan

I just about did backflips when he finally got named to the role of Bond, but he entered a horribly weak period for the villains.  Over his four films (GoldenEye, Tomorrow Never Dies, The World Is Not Enough and Die Another Day) he was certainly passable as Bond, but with the lack of good villains, it just felt like an exercise in pointlessness.

His tenure in the role also suffered from more and more emphasis being put on product placement.  Everytime you turned around in these films, you were being shown some company logo on a gadget he was using.  While some is to be expected, the amount during these four verged on the absurd.    It also seemed that special effects got better, they were trying to see just how many they could cram into the film, leaving Bond as almost more of an instigator than the centerpiece of the films.

It was unfortunate because I thought Mr. Brosnan could have been the best Bond since Connery, but he suffered from a film series that had certainly lost its way.

Daniel Craig

The minute Daniel Craig was announced as Bond… I was horrified.  He was too rough looking, he wasn’t debonair… HE WAS BLONDE!  You can’t have a blonde guy being James Bond!  The horrors!  I will say now that I have seen a drawing of what Fleming always envisioned that he actually is the closest, and that surprises me.

Having finally seen Casino Royale, I have to say that Mr. Craig actually has a shot at being the best Bond since Connery, and (this part may get me killed) potentially surpassing him.

I know, I know, BLASPHEMY!  Hear me out, though.  He played this role in such a human way, an almost brutal and animalistic way.  This Bond is human, but just an amazing one.  The scene that sold me was the foot chase early on in the film.  Where the guy he was chasing was doing all these fancy acrobatics, Bond was running through dry wall like a bull.  He was more of a force of will than some super spy.  He still has his moments of brilliant cunning, but he is just a man at the end of the day.

Partially script, partially a fantastic performance by Craig, it has me more jazzed about the James Bond series than I have been in ages, and I actually want to see his second film, Quantum of Solace, in the theater, and that’s something I haven’t done since Licence to Kill.

And the winner is…

I think in the end it all boils down to personal tastes, but I will force myself to do something that will possibly get me hung in some parts of the world.

1. Sean Connery
2. Daniel Craig
3. Pierce Brosnan
4. Timothy Dalton
5. Roger Moore
6. George Lazenby

It’s difficult to say because there were script problems for some, production problems for others, but you really just have to look at the actual performance to make the final judgment. Brosnan would have ranked higher for me if he had been given more to work with, but he is where he is on the list.  Moore would have beat Dalton if he hadn’t played the part for so long, and hadn’t had bad comedy all the time.  Lazenby gets last place for a whole slew of reasons, but I really don’t blame him as an actor.

Have at me, but that’s my list.  So, who is your favorite, and why?

When Spider-Man 3 was being filmed, and I started to hear about the number of villians in the film, I already pretty much knew it was going to be painful to watch.

Well, I was wrong… it was worse.

Anytime you introduce too many new characters into an existing franchise, and you are trying to balance their introduction with showing off the old characters, it’s not going to work.  In this film you had the following all brought into the fold:

• Eddir Brock Jr.
• Flint Marko/Sandman
• Gwen Stacey
• Venom/Symbiote costume

Yes, I list Eddie Brock and Venom seperately because that’s how they were introduced and it was almost like a villain team-up when they came together.  So by the time you were done with the new character arcs (which really was only two as Gwen did next to nothing and Venom is more a force) you also had Harry going Green Goblin II, Mary Jane dealing with her career and Peter… I’m still not sure how many story arcs he had going, but it was more than one.  So you had five characters all attemtpting to have story arcs in an action film where you will lose major chunks of development time to fights.

So, as opposed to only picking on the film, I thought I would do something different this time in actually offering sugegstions of how it could have been done better.

Eliminate the “Flint Marko Killed Uncle Ben” story angle - It felt exceptionally shoehorned in to the overall movie storyline.  Leave him as just a misunderstood thug who wants to help his daughter.  Maybe have him hurt Mary Jane or Aunt May in a robbery and you can still have the same conversation at the construction site at the end.

Chuck the Harry gets amnesia sub-plot - It would have been far more interesting to have Harry fake being changed from the near-death experience to build empathy from Peter and Mary Jane.  You could have still accomplished all of the same things (MJ calling Harry for comfort… Peter and Harry bonding again… Peter/Harry fight where Harry gets hurt) and saved some time for other developments.

Possibly we could have gotten rid of the incredibly random deus ex machina moment with the butler showing up in the Goblin room and telling Harry that Spider-Man didn’t kill his father.

Have the black costume span two movies - This was the biggest problem to me.  Sam Raimi, director of all three films, said in numerous interviews before the third film that he was totally disinterested in using Venom as he didn’t find the character compelling.  Since this was planned to be the last film, Sony, the studio backing the series, insisted that Venom be included for marketing purposes and a potential spin-off film.  Raimi’s total lack of interest in the character is apparent in the film, but it sadly needed to be a two film arc if it was even going to be bothered with.

You could have had the meteor impact in one film (drastically different than the comics, but I liked it), have Peter get the black costume, feel the strength, etc.  In the second film you would have Peter’s further descent into the evil side of the suit.  You would also have Brock in the first film and carry over to the second, and everything would have felt a lot less rushed and more fleshed out.

Could we go one movie without the villain(s) learning his secret identity? - So, one villain finally got away knowing who Spider-Man is.  Great.  Could we go one movie withot his mask getting trashed and the bad guys always learning who he is?

The dancing scene - Have Peter make out with Gwen while MJ sings her song on stage, show MJ going on with the show while in pain, but having her completely shut down for one of the most ridiculous moments ever in a movie was just painful.

So, was there anything good about the movie?  Well… hmm… I like the fact we’re still getting the Dr. Conners cameos, but maybe we can finally get him to play his bigger part in the next one?  (Won’t spoil what’s up with him for the non-comic book readers in the audience)  Beyond that, that was really about it.

I think this whole debacle was caused by little to no self-editing.  It almost felt like every first idea they had they ran with it without thinking anything through.  There was just no passion for this project it seemed from anyone involved.  It even visually looked lackluster compared to the first two, this one seemed very cartoonish, over-the-top from costuming up through lighting.

Now comes the bigger question why I would bother ranting about a year old movie.  Well, I just finally saw it this weekend, and Sam Raimi and Tobey Maguire have just recently signed for Spider-Man 4 & 5.  There is no word yet on Kirsten Dunst, but considering hwo much Sony wants to keep the team together, I imagine they will be offering her enough to lure her back.  There are also rumors the two movies will be shot back-to-back to cut costs, so if #4 goes wrong, that pretty much assures #5 not being that great either.

I probably wouldn’t care so much if I hadn’t actually enjoyed the first two films, but the third one just went so horribly wrong on every level, it makes me worried they won’t be able to stitch it back together for two more.

Hollywood has tried turning numerous video games into movies, and most of them… well… lets be honest, most of them have sucked. Now the savior may be on its way, and its name is…

Guitar Hero: The Movie!

-commences to slamming his head against a wall-

Mind you this is in no way official yet, but according to an interview with MTV, Brett Ratner is keen to do it.  Luckily for the masses of the world, Activision, the makers of the game, don’t seem so keen on the idea.

For those of you unfamiliar with the popular gaming franchise, you play a plastic guitar and hit the corresponding colored buttons on the instrument to what you see on the screen.  The game is enermously popular, but it doesn’t exactly scream “movie plot” to me.  Ratner has an idea in mind, though:

“It could be about a kid from a small town who dreams of being a rock star and he wins the ‘Guitar Hero’ competition. One of these dreams-[come-true] kind of concepts.”

Didn’t I already see this movie?  Ah, yes, the 1989 “classic”, The Wizard, starring Fred Savage.  Not EXACTLY the same, but close enough.

Anyway, no, this is not a good idea, and thankfully Activision doesn’t want the franchise messed with.  Apparently they think a lackluster movie could possibly damage the name of the game.  Brett Ratner is a big time director though, so I’m not sure how they think the man behind the Rush Hour series and X-Men: The Last Stand could possibly make a bad movie…

Aw crap.  RUN, ACTIVISION!  RUN!