Twilight: The Trashening

It is no secret that I find the popularity of the Twilight series completely ridiculous. The biggest reason being that I'm a fan of the darker vampires, such as those of Ann Rice, Blade, or Underworld (I've no idea why Kate Beckinsale is not considered one of the hottest woman on earth). I wish that just the silliness of these books was the travesty that I am bringing to you today, but alas, it is not.

I was quite content with the option of never having to see the recently released movie. My wife went with friends without me. I was glad to hear it. Last night I endured torture of the likes that would make Daniel Craig's Bond scream out in pain. I saw...Twilight.

What follows is my attempt at describing the pathetic dung heap that is this movie called Twilight. Oh that I were just talking about the story, the sappiness, or the differences in my view of vampires verses those on display. But no, the production quality of this film may be the worst I've seen in a very very long time. Twilight, is in essence, a home movie (and not of the high quality kind such as The Blair Witch Project) billed as a blockbuster . Robert Redford wouldn't have allowed this kind of crap at the Sundance Film Festival. I spent half the movie in a fit of giggles at just how bad this movie is.

Let's begin with the most positive thing I can say about this. The premise of the story is good. Boy meets girl, girl likes boy, boy likes girl, boy wants to eat girl, girl wants to be eaten by boy, others want to kill boy and eat girl. Pretty standard fare for Hollywood.

The absolute worst acting I've seen at least all year, and I'm sure going farther back than that. Edward was OK, and James was OK, and I'm not decided on Dr. Cullen. Other than those 3, it was pathetic. Lines were delivered as if they were memorized seconds earlier, with no knowledge of how they fit into the story. Nearly every action taken felt completely inorganic. I could understand the vampires being a little wooden, but the mortals should appear like they have a pulse and not like 80's era animatronics. I swear that one of the vampires, when told he was playing a monster, thought Frankenstein and not Dracula. Bella seems to have not been up on her tetanus shots, because she seemed to have lock-jaw through most of the movie. And could someone mention in the comments if Bella stutters? If that is true to the book, I won't make fun, but if it's just because she can't remember her lines, that's just sad.

To go hand in hand with the acting is casting. I'm told the blonde vampire is supposed to be attractive. L.A. has a myriad of wanna-be actresses, it's not like that part had any acting to do. Find someone to just stand there and look pretty OK, is that so hard? Other than Edward was there a single person in this movie with any experience at all? What did they spend their money on?

And what about that dialog eh? The movie was almost entirely made up of exposition. It's ok to spell out everything in words in a book, but in a movie there are more tools at your disposal...use them. Every other scene had dialog that explained what happened in the scene before. Not to mention the Bella narrative that could have been easily replaced with actual acting. I would also rail on the sappiness of some of the lines, but that would be like beating a crippled leper, for lying in your path. I can only be so mean...yes, even me.

Not all of the blame can be laid at the feet of the piss poor selection of actors. The director should never have let half those takes end up in the can. Ever heard of take 2, take 3, etc.? If your actors are getting it this wrong, you need to provide them some direction, maybe a couple run-throughs, and multiple takes if necessary.

There is a common problem that crops up in half of the movies made from books. The author gets involved and can't bare to part with any - I mean ANY - of the scenes. So instead of actually developing any of the scenes on screen, they provide a taste of what the scene should be then move on to the next, like a hyper active nat. They then make up for the discordance with narrative and overly wordy dialog to explain what happened in the previous or current scene. "This is what you should have taken from the previous 15 seconds. OK on to the next 15 seconds!" Develop the freaking story with visuals, don't read it to me!

The camera work. I lack the words. If everything else in your movie is done by amateurs, the last thing in the world you need is a handheld camera to muck things up even worse. There isn't a single thing going for this movie, the least they could do is frame shots half way decent. This film didn't have the chops for a handheld, use a tri-pod. Dolly's would help with the sporadic panning as well. If you don't know what zoom is for, don't use it.

What you get at the end of production is largely the result of editing. You have to provide the editor with quality building blocks (which this movie didn't), then it's up to them, with the director, to put together the final vision. If the vision was disconnected ramblings of a 60's B movie with ADHD, they were spot on.

Juno

The wife and I took the baby to the grandparents for babysitting, while we went to a movie with friends.

We saw Juno, which is a comedy. Basic plot is that a 16 yr (The actress is actually 20, so it's not as creepy as other films that have happened lately) gets knocked up, decided to give the kid up for adoption.

This thing was absolutely hilarious. The wit contained in the dialog must have gone through countless iterations to come up with stuff that good. Most comedies have really funny trailers. Then, when you watch the movie, you learn that you've already seen all the funny in the trailers and there is no more funny to see. That is exactly not this movie. There is a time at the end of the movie, where things are decidedly not funny. My eyes almost started leaking, but I think that might be in part due to the whole new dad thing, that I hear is going around.

My one little critique on the dialog, is that Juno was given way more sophisticated speech than any 16 yr old really has. They just aren't smart enough (even the geniuses) to come up with the kinds of things Juno said. Sadly, if you fixed this, the movie wouldn't be half as funny.

Also, some of the content of the dialog might not sit real well with some of the people that I know read this brain fart of a blog.

There is only one other film soundtrack that I can think of that I even noticed, and that was O'Brother Where Art Though. In Juno, I caught myself really trying to hear all of the lyrics for the songs. They were actually pertinent to what was going on in the film.

There were a number of things in the film that were...well...squicky (For those familiar with the origination of that term: same feeling, but not the specific screwed up demographic. And what have you been into, to know the origination? hmm? My excuse, is that I'm a geek and have been on these internets longer than you.). If that last bit confused you, I'm not ever going to clarify it for you, but I'll rewrite that first sentence so you aren't left out. There were a number of scenes and situations that left you a little uncomfortable about what was going on. A 16 yr old being pregnant (I'll rant on this, liberals in general, and athiests, some other day). Watching a 16 yr old pee on a prego detector. Watching a 16 yr old's panties fall to the floor (Again, the actress is 20, so back off!). Stuff like that.

You may have noticed that I don't exactly rate movies in my "reviews" (ha, my film class teacher would totally fail these reviews of mine). I like to think that instead of all that crap (like certain hacks we have in Utah), I tell you useful things about the movie and let you decide for yourself.

Beowulf: Literary classic...

...or animated porn?

The movies rating board ought to be slapped around for this one. As much gruesome violence as any rated R movie, plus an "animated" Angelina Jolie in the buff (animated, as in a drawing of porn instead of real porn...WTF?). When Beowulf is fighting Grendel in the buff, there is clever prop positioning to hide his naughty bits. When Angelina gets a full body scan, I swear they pixelated some nipple. How's that different than wearing just body paint? The animation isn't as good as they think it is either. They're still wedged firmly down in the uncanny valley (stiff animations, waxy skin, etc.).

After seeing the movie (which really was an OK flick), I looked up the story on the intertubes to get a better idea of what was going on, and what that ending was supposed to have meant. After reading a few paragraphs here and there, and reading a summary, I've decided the movie doesn't really follow the original story. The irony of it is that this hollywood version is a total condemnation on the behavior of most of the people in hollywood.

What we get in the movie is a theme demonstrating that those who yield to temptation, whether it be lusting after flesh, glory, treasure, or power, bring pain and misery to themselves, those around them, and others. A truth that has rarely, if ever, been told by those who are the most instantly gratified, self-indulgent, wicked people since the earth was flooded some thousands of years ago (maybe that southern california fire is a sign).

Here's a surprise (not), the main actress/hottie has been fornicating (still not married is she?) all over the place, while building an international baby collection. Just how screwed up are those kids going to be (Oh, hi Maddox. You're that accessory that your mom picked up in Cambodia aren't you, welcome to college.)? I'm sure she's a nice person and does lots of humanitarian things, but come on, this kid still is going to have cultural and "who's my dad" issues. But none of that factors in when she decided she wanted a child. "hmm. I'll take...that one." If she could figure out how to get married, stay married, and build a family, not a touring international circus, it would be a different story. As it is, Brad is the flavor of the month/year. Then the "father" will be ousted for a new replacement, while the mother raises her Grendel...ahem children.

How about every other liberal nutjob who wants right now whatever will bring them pleasure right now. Friends, family, or civilization/culture be damned.

No left coast hypocrite (ask one to talk about intolerance some time. hehe) is going to get what that movie is saying, and they came up with it. Ha!

Rehashed Hour 3

Me and the misses saw Rush Hour 3 the other night. The first 2 in the series were really funny. Lots of jokes one after another. This one though, was just kind of OK funny.

The story is the same as the first 2. Didn't we already fight the Triad?

A number of jokes were just references to jokes from the previous 2 installations. Some were even references to the outtakes of the previous 2.

The fights weren't nearly as long, involved, or creative as the others.

So, I'm glad I didn't see it 'till it was in the cheap theaters.

On the positive side, the chick in the flick (I should trademark that as representing a leading lady in a movie), Noémie Lenoir, was pretty good looking...after she took the wig off. My wife agrees with me on this. Bald, she is hot, with the hair...meh.

3:10 to Yuma

That's the movie I ended up watching while the wife was out of town. I really liked it. The actors did pretty well on their characters (which is weird for Russel Crowe). I even was feeling for poor Evans (Christian Bale) as I learned more about him. The side characters were even good. It's nice when a film doesn't blow it's wad on one or two actors and then find some bums off the street to fill in the rest (Dragon Heart). I love westerns though, so maybe I'm a little biased, who knows.

Speaking of actors, if you want to add a little comedic sidekick to a movie, I can think of no better than Alan Tudyk (the doctor/veterinarian in this movie) or Steve Zahn.

There was a lot of blood. Blood everywhere all the time. Whether that's good or bad is really up to you though. Why critics take something subjective like this and determine whether it's a good thing or a bad thing is beyond me, but I don't like many film critics.

The story was good. It shows how most of the best stories are short events expanded in detail. It's a remake though, so the original writers should take the credit, not whoever is likely going strike here soon.

Hollywood Strike

There has been a little talk lately about the contract junk going on in Hollywood. The writers guild (the union of people who write scripts for TV and movies) is in negotiatons with the producers right now on contracts. There are details and crap, but I don't care what they are.

The writers are threatening to go on strike, and the actors may very well do the same when their contract comes up next summer.

So what!

Hollywood recently has also tried to pin the blame for low box office numbers on video games, most notably Halo 3. I myself am a gamer snob (the elitist class of video game players), a PC man if you will. Halo is beneath me.

My wife and I like movies. We go to the movies or rent movies multiple times a week...at least we use to. I'm not sure I can name more that half a dozen good movies this year, and some of those are only good in comparison to the rest of the crap.

In no particular order:
Live free die hard
Transformers (action scenes in general are too frenetic any more, this is more of the same)
Stardust (really good movie)

Oh boy. Did I already run out of good movies? I don't keep track and compile a top 10 for the year, so I may have forgotten some. I would hope there were at least a few more.



Let's look at what's in theaters right now.



Let's go back and add in Ratatouille as one of the good movies this year.

That first list is mostly rated R movies. Not rated R because there was an artistic reason to include more violence or language or nudity. No. There is extra violence language and nudity just for the sake of it, or in the hopes of getting an R rating. How pathetic. These aren't artists. Not at all. Further, my wife is going out of town this weekend. What normally happens on such an occasion is I go watch or rent movies she normally wouldn't go for. I think last time this happened I watched "Aliens vs. Predator" (meh). So, what are my options this time? Maybe "3:10 to Yuma". That's it. That sucks! Hopefully I can get "Shooter" from redbox.

The second list is the cheap theater. I've already seen the 3 good ones on that list. Heck I expeced "Bean's Holiday" to have been better than it was, but we saw that a few days ago...meh.

Strike? How can you "go" on strike when you've been on strike for the last 12 months already?

Are video games stealing some cash from the movie industry? You bet they are, because some of there stuff doesn't suck!

Summer Movies (spoilers)

Harry Potter:
Last night I watched the new HP movie in 3D on an IMAX. Only the last 20 minutes were in 3D, and was more like a special 2D (and not very good).

First off, I was a HUGE HP fan for a while. I had a counter-strike clan named HP (Harry Potter). My handle was HP_Sirius. I greatly enjoyed books 1-4. I totally loved #4. Book 5... Book 5 demonstrated how much of an amateur hack Rowling is. Apparantly not talented in the least and essentially got lucky for 4 books with a cute story. 500 pages of useless drivel. Pages better suited for wiping my back side. The last few hundred pages eventually got on with the story and were good, but the whole first half (and then some) could have been done like this. "We join Harry now as an angsty teenager." That's it! That's all you need. 500 pages of "Harry feels alone in the world", "Harry feels like no one else understands him." gets really old in 500 pages! I haven't read book 6 and have no intention of reading 7 either.

What Rowling really needed 7 years ago was a screenwriter, or director, to act as her editor. That person's role should be to cut out the boring crap. That is what we got with this movie. The exact same story, hitting all of the important (guess what fanbois, leaving out a screaming portrait, or something equally mundane is NOT important) bits, and leaving out the 500 pages of agony. The movie still gets the point across that Harry feels picked on. The movie is good. I really liked it.

It's not something that has to be seen at the expensive theater, but must be seen on a big screen.

Transformers:
Wow! You've already heard reviews and box office totals that tell you enough. You have to see this. If you haven't, just leave now and go watch it somewhere, I'll wait.

Welcome back.

I do have some problems with what they've done to my childhood. GM bought out Michael Bay, and Bay won't admit to it. They killed Jazz, instead of one of the new unknown autobots. They killed off most of the bad guys. Too much for one movie. Defeat a couple of the decepticons, but not Megatron already, what are they thinking? That's like killing Lex Luthor in the first Superman, what are you going to do after that? And they didn't do Starscream justice at all.

Live Free or Die Hard:
Bruce Willis.
What, I already said Bruce Willis. Maybe you need an extra little bit of Kevin Smith. There, that should do it. Go. Go now and watch this one too!

Mayo Movie

My father-in-law knows how to make some very good eclairs. They take a long time, but that flakey chocholatey goodness is worth it.

Back when my wife and I were dating we arrived at her parents house late one night at the end of a date. Her dad had made eclairs that day, so we were more than happy to indulge in a couple. One had been left on the counter for her (I'm sure not expecting me to be coming in), so she gave it to me and went to the fridge to get herself another. Boy did it look good. I had eaten these eclairs before and knew the wonder I was about to experience.

Normal people would have taken a huge bite, allowing the creamy pudding to run out over their hands and face, leaving a little spot of chocholate on the tip of their nose. I am not normal, and am incapable of eating anything with such disregard for getting anything on my hands or face. so I took a little bite. Mmm the chocholate, how wonderful. Then another and another. Something was wrong with the pudding. It wasn't sweet. It wasn't runny. It was mayonaise! AAAAHH!!!! Disgusting! (It happened to have been April 1st) I didn't eat another eclair for a couple of years after that.

Spiderman 3 is like a mayonaise filled eclair. You've had one before (both the first and the sequel). To all outward appearances (trailers, actors, director, etc.) it contains the same ingredients. You are expecting something wonderfully entertaining. When you get to the middle of it though, you realize you've been tricked into watching some B level independent arthouse flick. yuck!

A better alternative for a movie to watch this week would be to go rent George and the Dragon.

No such thing as magic?

Took me longer than I had planned, but I finally watched The Prestige. Wow was that ever a great movie! So rarely does a movie put in so much detail about a twist, but disguise it and throw out misdirection. I'm stunned at how well that movie was put together. I even new that there was a twist or two and was kept guesssing as to their nature until they are finally revealed.

You have to see this movie at a theater I think, but don't take kids, cause it's a little on the dark side.