Have Posts Sent To Your Inbox!
Enter your email address:

Wednesday, October 31, 2007

In The Future, We'll All Be Movie Stars

I once read somewhere that there's a director out there willing to make a movie starring anybody who pays him $100,000. Think about it, a movie in which you're the star! Wouldn't that be great? But my guess is a director who is open to projects like that probably isn't the greatest director in the world. So while you'd be the star, your movie might not itself be one.

But then I realized that everything Spielberg and other greats do can at some level be distilled. Pretty soon, computers are going to be smart enough to spontaneously generate movies of fantastic quality day-in and day-out.

Spielberg can take any normal person and make a movie in which the scenes starring that person are brilliant. This I believe. So an artificial Spielberg program could also do that.

Someday, they just might come out with a program you can download that takes a home movie you created of no less than 5 minutes in length, and generates a 4-star film around it. The program would artificially render the same backgrounds you used in your clip, and more, and use CGI actors to fill in the rest of the story. But the movie is made in such a way that your 5 minutes of screen time is breathtakingly amazing. And if you wanted more than just a sensational cameo, you'd upload a couple of hours' worth of footage of yourself, and you'd be edited in such a way as to again be brilliant.

Coming to internets everywhere in 2009!

If you enjoyed this post, please think about becoming a subscriber to my RSS feed.

Tuesday, October 30, 2007

Sonic The Hedgehog: The Movie

I think a movie based on Sonic would be cool. They already came out with one for the Mario Brothers, and Street Fighter, so why not?

With today's special effects, and a good director, I think a movie mixed with CGI and live action would be great. It could tell the basic story of Sonic. How he came to move so quickly, the origin of the rings, and Dr. Robotnik's evil plan to take over!

If it did well, a sequel could reveal all the other characters.

But if it was done in a certain lower-quality style, it would probably glance over all the material in the Sonic universe at once, giving each character and item enough screen time to be recognized, but not enough to really be developed.

Maybe someday the world will be ready for a Sonic movie. Maybe...tomorrow!

If you enjoyed this post, please think about becoming a subscriber to my RSS feed.

Monday, October 29, 2007

Buffy The Vampire Slayer

I recently watched the "Buffy The Vampire Slayer" movie, and noticed something I'd never seen before. It was written by Joss Whedon, the creator of the TV series! That blew my mind, because before I had just assumed that the series was a more serious (and totally separate) take on the romantic comedy. Now I know they are connected through Whedon. Cool.

I actually like the movie better than the show. I like the actors better, the style, the lighter tone, and the music. I also thought the movie was pretty funny at some parts. Plus there are a lot of actors that I recognize from other projects. I especially think it's neat that Ben Affleck made a brief appearance as a basketball player.

Ok, let me just rattle off the names of the higher profile actors in the film: Kristy Swanson, Donald Sutherland, Paul Reubens, Rutger Hauer, Luke Perry, Hilary Swank, Stephen Root, and Ben Affleck. All these guys are great. Just fantastic. Stephen Root especially. When I first watch this film, I didn't quite "get" him, but now that I've seen him in other stuff, it's great to come back to an earlier role and reanalyze it.

I wonder what a sequel with all the original actors would have been like?

If you enjoyed this post, please think about becoming a subscriber to my RSS feed.

Sunday, October 28, 2007


One of my favorite movies is Steven Spielberg's "Hook," starring Robin Williams as Peter Pan, Dustin Hoffman as Captain Hook, and Julia Roberts as Tinkerbell. It's just so well made, and thrilling. The wonder of it all is the best part. Spielberg knows how to present things in a way that maximizes your sense of amazement. And the music is great!

One of the things I wonder about concerning the film is how Hook originally showed up to kidnap Peter Pan's kids. People can fly only when they've been dusted with magic by Tinkerbell, who herself can fly. So whoever came to get Peter's kids, whether it was Hook or a henchman, may have been flying. And if that was the case, Hook must have had a hidden supply of magic dust. So why didn't he use it in his battle for revenge? He could have flown and faced Peter Pan in the air. My guess is that flying wasn't how the children were snatched. Maybe Hook has secret spy henchman dispersed throughout the "normal" world, who do his bidding from time to time.

But my main theory for how Hook left and then returned to Neverland entails the use of a magic portal. I'll bet in some cave somewhere, Hook's got access to a doorway to the "other side." He imagines Peter Pan's house, says a few words, and BAM! Instantly he is connected to the window of the kids' room. They never flew to get to Neverland. They were carried over a spacial gateway, which didn't feel odd at all. And that's why at the end when they fly, they are so amazed, because they're doing so for the first time.

I wonder if there'll ever be a live-action sequel?

If you enjoyed this post, please think about becoming a subscriber to my RSS feed.

Saturday, October 27, 2007

Acting In A Spielberg Movie Will Mess You Up

Unless you're prepared for it.

Many are aware of "The Spielberg Effect." A young, inexperienced actor works with a director so brilliant that the film created is a masterpiece, earning the actor and director rave reviews, and skewing the actor's expectations for future projects and directors. Then Spielberg moves on, putting more brilliance up on screens everywhere, while the actor fends for himself working with normal, mortal directors. Nothing quite fits. It's like being a basketball hero, and then getting married to an alcoholic, becoming a salesman, and living the rest of your life in mediocrity. You find yourself wishing you had never "peaked," if only to rewrite your definition of "Hell" from "life as it is now" to "life as it might otherwise be."

The Spielberg Effect helps young actors peak before they're experienced enough to understand it. Without a proper context and framework to interpret the event as being extremely rare, they think, "That was easy!", and adjust their behavior accordingly. That shift can and often does prevent a repeat of such brilliant success, and eventually the actors end up with shattered hopes of similar glory (with the exception of Harrison Ford).

If you're a young actor who just signed to do a Spielberg film, and you'd like to be adequately prepared for the coming changes that could otherwise destroy you're mind, just call 555-1234 and order my brand new system, for only $99, 99, 99, 95!

If you enjoyed this post, please think about becoming a subscriber to my RSS feed.

Friday, October 26, 2007

First Owen Wilson Interview After His "Suicide Attempt": Midnight Tonight

This article reveals that Owen Wilson has finally agreed to be interviewed. The interviewer will be Wes Anderson, a fellow filmmaker, and friend. The interview will be available tonight at midnight as part of MySpace.com’s Artist on Artist series.

Wilson, who has starred in such movies as "You, Me and Dupree," "Cars," "Wedding Crashers," "Meet the Fockers," "Starsky & Hutch," "Shanghai Knights," "Behind Enemy Lines," "The Royal Tenenbaums," and "Zoolander," reportedly tried to kill himself last month. With such success and fame, a lot of people wondered why. Could it be that the success came so easily as to feel hollow and pointless? Who knows. Maybe the interview will shed a clue.

If you enjoyed this post, please think about becoming a subscriber to my RSS feed.

Thursday, October 25, 2007

E.T.: The Extra-Terrestrial

What a brilliant movie. Steven Spielberg is a genius. He crafts each moment so well, and the music figures in at just the right moments. Absolutely superb.

This movie introduced me to Reese's Pieces. I love them! Did you know, originally, they called up M&M's, and asked if they wanted to pay to be in the movie? M&M's said to take a hike! They thought the movie was beneath them. Wrong! Reese's hit it big with E.T. To this day, I still enjoy Reese's Pieces more than I do M&M's. There's brainwashing for you!

Steven Spielberg's movies are so well-crafted, they make you sit and wonder if there's an equally well-crafted design to life, the universe, and everything. I sometimes wish life could be as magnificent (24/7) as it is depicted by masters like him. I know it can be...somehow...

If you enjoyed this post, please think about becoming a subscriber to my RSS feed.

Wednesday, October 24, 2007

Will CGI Actors Take Over Some Day?

With cartoons, you can do anything, but it's not realistic. With live-action, you can be realistic, with limitations on what you can do. Someday, CGI will be so advanced that you'll be able to do anything realistically. Even replace live actors with CGI replicas that look exactly the same.

So far, you can still tell when CGI is used. On a recent "Heroes" episode, Claire jumped off the "Hollywood" sign in California. You could tell the version of her falling was CGI, since it didn't look quite right and seemed a little too smooth. But technology keeps advancing, and pretty soon, we won't be able to tell the difference between a real person on TV and a CGI stand-in.

When we reach that point, what if reporters are replaced with AI CGI representatives? That's a very big change. I wonder when it will happen...?

If you enjoyed this post, please think about becoming a subscriber to my RSS feed.

Tuesday, October 23, 2007

Night Of The Comet

One of my favorite movies is "Night of the Comet." It's pure 80's, fun, with cool characters, a great soundtrack, and zombies!

A comet that apparently killed the dinosaurs with radiation or some other effect returns to earth and wipes out most of its population. Two valley girls are left to fend for themselves. They meet up with Hector Gomez, a truck driver, and find out that a think tank full of geniuses also survived. Problem is, the think tank is slowly turning into zombies, and they want to take the blood of "pure" survivors for a so-called "serum" that they think will cure them. The valley girls and Hector have to fight to survive in a post-Apocalyptic freak show.

The best part of the movie is the humor. It pokes fun at itself from a variety of angles, but is so good you never ever have the moment of, "Another zombie move? Why bother." It's an entirely unique take on a genre that's been done to death, and it's packed with fun. It almost makes you wish you could live in a zombie world! The best part? It's finally out on DVD!!

If you enjoyed this post, please think about becoming a subscriber to my RSS feed.

Monday, October 22, 2007

People Who Talk During The Movie

One of my pet peeves is people who deem it necessary to say something in the middle of a movie that we're all watching for the first time. If we've seen it a few times, and there's nothing new on the screen, then sure, talking is fine. But the first time you watch a movie should be sacred.

The directors, produces, writers, and actors didn't intend for you to hear your friend's comments during the course of the film. If they did, the remarks would be included in the movie and audible to all. Instead, they planned the film as deeply as they could, putting great attention on the details of each moment, to produce to desired effect.

A movie is a piece of art. It is designed to be taken in and enjoyed as is, without any extraneous contributions. A lot of careful planning went into each moment that goes on film, and talking puts all of that effort to waste. It ruins the moment.

Talking during a movie that someone hasn't seen before is disrespectful. It's like taking them to the museum to see a painting, and then shooting the art with a paintball gun. "Neat art, huh?"

Someone with respect for someone else's observational skills and right to enjoy a film would not talk during a movie. Someone with respect for the work that was put in to create just the right effect to make the viewer feel a certain way should not speak during the climax of the film. Alas, many do, and many don't seem to understand any of this. "It's just a stupid movie." "Yeah, if you talk it is!"

If you enjoyed this post, please think about becoming a subscriber to my RSS feed.

Sunday, October 21, 2007

The Bourne Redundancy

I remember seeing Matt Damon on "The Daily" show back when "The Bourne Ultimatum" was first coming out. I believe he referred to a possible title for a proposed fourth installment in the Bourne franchise as, "The Bourne Redundancy." I remember back when only "The Bourne Identity" and "The Bourne Supremacy" existed. I had heard him remark that he would only do a third, and his colleagues agreed, if the script were good enough. Apparently that happened, as "Ultimatum" grossed over $400 million worldwide at the box office, a little less than half of the total $900 million from the entire trilogy. I never thought there would be a fourth, and neither, apparently, did Damon.

However, this article revives the possibility of a fourth installment actually getting made. It may have more to do with money and less with personal desire to do the film this time around, however. Damon said, "Personally, the character means a lot to me because the character has done so much for my career. You know, it put me in the position where I have a lot more choices of kind of movies I want to make. If Paul Greengrass, maybe years down the road, was interested in doing another one, then I would do it, too. I don’t think either of us completely put the character to bed yet."

That makes sense to me, given that the series so far has ended on a high note, and also when you take into consideration movies like Die Hard 4.0, which breathe new life into an old successful franchise. I just hope Damon continues to demand a quality script!

If you enjoyed this post, please think about becoming a subscriber to my RSS feed.

Saturday, October 20, 2007

Pee-wee's Big Adventure

Sure, Paul Reubens got into the news for public misconduct and indecent behavior. Sure, some people think he's gross. But some of the movies he's been in, like, "Buffy The Vampire Slayer," have been great. "Pee-wee's Big Adventure" is also one of those movies.

I'd have to say the number one reason the movie is so great is the music. Danny Elfman composed it, and the National Philharmonic Orchestra performed it. Elfman is brilliant. His musical genius is just fantastic.

The number two reason why the movie rocks is the exciting plot under Tim Burton's direction. There's never a dull moment. And all the cool toys and places you get to see add loads of weight to the film's "fun factor." The characters are great, too, and everybody loves a happy ending.

For a child, the movie is amazing. For an adult, it's not too shabby, either. It makes you remember how fun it can be to see the world with the wonder of a child. After all these years, it's no wonder "Pee-wee's Playhouse: The Movie" is currently in production.

If you enjoyed this post, please think about becoming a subscriber to my RSS feed.

Friday, October 19, 2007

Die Hard (Number One)

This could be one of the greatest films ever made, in my opinion. Ok, sure, the use of "terrorist" robbers and violence abound isn't necessarily cerebral in its appeal, but you must admit that for an actioner, "Die Hard" is superb.

The nonchalant humor of John McClane in the face of violent opposition is brilliant. Hans Gruber is a villain you can identify with even as you identify with John McClane. The blonde henchman who comes back at the end, the elevator explosion, the opening of the vault -- all priceless!

And the best part: Sgt. Al Powell at the end conquering his reluctancy to draw his pistol, in order to save his new best friend, John McClane. The music at that scene is breathtaking.

But hey, I guess when you come right down to it, "Die Hard" is simply an action film. That's right. But it's also simply one of the best.

If you enjoyed this post, please think about becoming a subscriber to my RSS feed.

Thursday, October 18, 2007

Beetle Juice

Way at the bottom of the "Beetle Juice" page at IMDB, in the user comments, someone intelligently and eloquently wrote that Beetle Juice is the kind of movie that we don't get to see anymore -- "pure art packaged to simultaneously look and play like accessible mainstream motion pictures."

What genius! I agree wholeheartedly with the comment's author, as the more I watch "Beetle Juice," the more I see.

My childhood viewings of the film were able to just scratch the surface of the layers of information poured into this movie. And at every layer, even the most superficial, it's supremely enjoyable. Whoever commented on it at IMDB made me realize this when he/she wrote that the movie "is superficially a haunted-house comedy, superficially a movie that would appeal to children, superficially a supernatural fantasy. But what it really is, like David Byrne's 'True Stories,' is a modern art piece set to film."

I love that! Some movies are exactly what they seem to be, and you can absorb everything in one viewing. Others are so complex that you have to go back and rewind, and can't fully enjoy them until you've sat through at least 3 or 4 viewings. But "Beetle Juice" is one of those rare films where every time you watch it, you enjoy it for unique and different reasons. It's like ten movies in one. Packed with entertainment. Highly recommended.

If you enjoyed this post, please think about becoming a subscriber to my RSS feed.

Wednesday, October 17, 2007

Reaper (TV) vs. Ghost Rider (Movie)

The new CW show, "Reaper" has a few interesting places where it agrees and disagrees with the "my soul is in the Devil's pocket" storyline. I've enjoyed both, so an exploration will be fun.

In "Ghost Rider," the guy sells his soul to save his ailing father, who is soon killed anyway.

In "Reaper," the guy's parents had already sold his soul before he was even born.

In "Ghost Rider," the guy has powers that are effectively static and cumulative, meaning that they don't change or go away, and he can learn how to use them better and better every time he does the Devil's work.

In "Reaper," the guy's powers vary week to week, depending on what villain he's fighting. Every episode there's a new ability that he (so far) seems to have very little control over. It seems like he loses his old powers while gaining new ones, but that is unclear.

My hope is that "Reaper" will end up revealing the guy can have every power imaginable, like Peter Petrelli, and only pulls out whichever one is necessary at the time.

In "Ghost Rider," the guy uses his powers to send Demons back to Hell.

In "Reaper," the guy uses Devil Technology to send Demons back to Hell, and his powers seem to be an afterthought or random nuisance (so far).

In "Ghost Rider," the guy decides to keep his "curse" and use it to fight the Devil. But then again, the guy is basically the Devil's personal assistant, not just some Schmoe who lost his soul.

In "Reaper," the guy can't use his powers against Satan (just yet), or risk getting killed by his "employer."

In "Ghost Rider," the Devil endows the guy with the ability to survive pretty much any normal injury, and leaves the guy to his own devices for the most part.

In "Reaper," the guy is flesh and blood, physically vulnerable, and while the Devil doesn't torture him like he would a soul in Hell, he does take a few simple steps toward ruining the guy's life.

All in all, "Reaper" is definitely a unique take on the "I work for Lucifer now" idea, and has enough play in the storyline to keep it going for a long, long time. An eternity, even. In Hell!

If you enjoyed this post, please think about becoming a subscriber to my RSS feed.

Tuesday, October 16, 2007

The Last Castle

A few years ago, when "The Last Castle" first came out, I thought it would be boring. But the other night I watched it, and I enjoyed it.

Robert Redford plays a 3-Star General who is sent to a U.S. military prison. His pride had gotten 8 soldiers killed, and all he wants to do is serve out his sentence. But the corrupt warden's methodology grates on the General, until he finds he can no longer tolerate the crap.

Redford rallies the rest of the inmates, all soldiers in their own right, and gives them something worth fighting for. In the end, the inmates take control of the prison.

I had thought the film would be more like, "An old man with old values goes to regular prison, and chaos ensues." Instead it was like, "A patriotic man of honor inspires his peers and rights the wrongs he finds inside a military prison."

It was great. It makes it clear how power can be abused, and why human rights are an absolute necessity. I'd recommend it.

If you enjoyed this post, please think about becoming a subscriber to my RSS feed.

Monday, October 15, 2007

New Movie Headsets

Would you rather watch a film with friends and family, on a single screen, where you can talk and look at one another? Or would you rather sit back, relax, and watch it on a giant screen a few inches in front of your face, using a pair of glasses that provide you with a completely privatized viewing presentation?

Glasses like those are expensive, but I'd love to try a pair. I've heard that even though the "real" screens are tiny, they seem huge when so close up. And a built-in headset would be awesome. You could watch TV in bed without sitting up!

Don't fall asleep with them on, though, or else you'll "dream" you're in the movie! Hmm...that might not be a bad idea after all...

If you enjoyed this post, please think about becoming a subscriber to my RSS feed.

Sunday, October 14, 2007

Future Movies Gone Interactive

On Star Trek, there's a room called a HoloDeck in which people can interact with a virtual world as if it were completely real. I'm thinking films of the future will gradually approach such a state.

Pretty soon, we're probably going to be able to zoom in on HD TV as far as we want. Some day, I bet we'll even get to pan around and examine the action from any angle.

Of course, direction nowadays plans things out so the most interesting angle is the one you are forced to watch things from. But maybe when pan-around technology comes to fruition, directors will build a lot of interesting stuff into the "hidden" parts their movies.

I know some directors already do that, but you can pick up on their secret tidbits even from the basic viewing angle. I'm talking about stuff that you'd never even see unless you moved the camera angle a few degrees. Then "watching" a film will be like playing a video game, where your main goal is to observe and immerse yourself in another world.

Won't that be cool...

If you enjoyed this post, please think about becoming a subscriber to my RSS feed.

Saturday, October 13, 2007

Don't Watch Movies And Drive

I've seen some vehicles now equipped with video units for the driver and front-seat passenger. That's insane! There's only one scenario in which watching a movie while driving would be OK. That's when you're in a stop 'n go crawl, stuck in a traffic jam, and bored to tears. At that point, with little else to focus on besides when to inch forward and when to break, a movie seems like it might be OK. But there are no other times when driving that diverting your attention from the road to anything, let alone cinematic entertainment, is a good idea.

You can use movies to keep the kids in the rear seats entertained, but that screen is above and behind the driver's area. What were auto engineers thinking when they came up with the idea of a movie/TV screen that drivers too can enjoy? Maybe they had a special brainstorming session: "Ok boys, today let's forget about safety and logic, and come up with something fun!" That's definitely what that option seems like -- fun, but incredibly unsafe.

If you enjoyed this post, please think about becoming a subscriber to my RSS feed.

Friday, October 12, 2007

Terminator's John Connor Never Existed -- In One Universe

I read a theory a long time ago on Wikipedia that described how things really went down the first time a Terminator was sent back through time to kill Sarah Connor. Things were a little different from the movie.

In the original timeline, SkyNet went active, and decimated humanity. Kyle Reese led the resistance, and was able to smash SkyNet's defense grid using a virus. Part of the virus included some decoy intelligence used to help keep SkyNet busy thinking about things that never were. The lies that SkyNet learned included info on a legendary figure named John Connor, who was the true leader of the resistance. SkyNet then sent back the first Terminator to 1984, to kill Sarah Connor, the "mother" of the fictional John Connor. Kyle Reese didn't go back through time to save her. In that future, SkyNet won.

Meanwhile, back in 1984B, a Terminator chases Sarah Connor, who manages to barely survive. She finds the cyborg's CPU, and with the help of a scientist, she decodes the data and learns about John Connor, her supposed son. She and the scientist fall in love, and have a child, which they name John. John grows up, SkyNet comes online, and John teams up with Kyle Reese and others to save humanity. SkyNet can see that John Connor is a real threat, and sends a Terminator back in time to 1984 to kill his mother. John Connor then sends Kyle Reese back to save Sarah Connor.

Meanwhile, back in 1984C, a Terminator chases down Sarah Connor, who is protected and ultimately saved by Kyle Reese. During the ordeal, Reese fathers Sarah's son, who she goes on to name John Connor. John grows up, SkyNet comes online, and John and the Resistance save Humanity.

So learning this, it becomes apparent that SkyNet effectively defeated itself when it sent the first Terminator back to kill an unborn child that would never exist. In doing that, it alerted the past to the threats of the future, and prepared its enemy against itself.

Maybe somewhere out there, there's a guy named John Connor who at this moment is preparing for Judgment Day...

If you enjoyed this post, please think about becoming a subscriber to my RSS feed.

Thursday, October 11, 2007

Buy A Movie Through Your TV

Who would have thought 20 years ago that just a few months after a new movie is released, you can pay to see it from the comfort of your own home? No more trips to the video rental store. No more waiting in line to see a new movie in a crowded theatre where the young people next to you repeat every other line in the film. If you can just hold out long enough, you'll be able to watch the relatively new cinematic masterpieces right in your living room. But at what cost?

Between $4 and $6 per film, on top of your cable plan. So that's about the price of a single ticket. If you've got a family or some friends with you, that's a good way to save some coinage. And no more price-gouging at the Lobby. You can make your own popcorn, break out the candy bin, and have at it.

Sounds great, right? Some say yes. Others argue that you need a home theatre system to get the real benefit and enjoyment. And if you've got a 12-inch television, might as well give in and comply with all the movie ads shouting for you to see a movie while it's still in a theatre. And why not? Twenty-foot screens are better anyway. But not better than IMAX. So wait until the movie comes to IMAX. That's what I do, and I save a TON. Even more than what I saved on my car insurance.

If you enjoyed this post, please think about becoming a subscriber to my RSS feed.

Wednesday, October 10, 2007

Tango of the Spy: TV's Chuck and "True Lies"

On a recent episode of TV's "Chuck," the reluctant spy for which the show is named was instructed that he would be fine at the latest operation, which took place in a high-society ballroom, if he knew how to tango. That reminded me of "True Lies," in which Arnold Schwarzenegger took to tangoing with the various ladies in his life.

Chuck, like Arnold, ended up doing the tango with an attractive woman at an event. And Chuck, like Arnold, was quick to learn that she was really the enemy.

What really impressed me about the parallel was that in "True Lies," Arnold bends to look at a piece of art in an effort to hide his face from security guards that are on the lookout for a party-crasher. It is at that moment when he meets the woman he ends up tangoing with, the woman who is playing a major role in the work of the bad guys. In "Chuck," our hero was also looking at a piece of art when he met the woman he would soon tango with, and quickly get captured by.

I wonder if the writers were watching "True Lies" when they wrote that part of the episode? I'll give them more credit than that. A lot of spy films and shows probably involve looking at a piece of art, meeting a woman, doing the tango, and then learning she's the enemy!

If you enjoyed this post, please think about becoming a subscriber to my RSS feed.

Tuesday, October 9, 2007

Ghostbusters 3

The last time I heard about this highly-anticipated sequel, the Angry Nintendo Nerd said it would be CGI, with Bill Murray voicing his character in an adventure that saw the Ghostbusters descend into Hell.


I remember watching one of the animated series, which would later be cancelled for being too violent, and seeing a woman, maybe a teacher, part her hair in the back of her head and reveal a big yellow eyeball the size of her skull. Freaked me out! And there was some cauldron and potion involved. I was younger then, about 37 (jk), and I remember feeling the weight of what I was seeing. It was so bizarre, and the Ghostbusters were so familiar and endearing, that that episode and others like it made an impact on me.

I liked the old cartoons where Dr. Venkman was voiced by the guy who voiced Garfield in the cartoon. He always did sound like Bill Murray, so it was no surprise when Bill voiced Garfield in the Garfield movie after the voice actor, Lorenzo Music, died of cancer in 2001.

I think a third Ghostbusters movie could be amazing. And if they get back most or all of the actors from the first two, it probably will be! It would have to be fantastic to attract everybody back. Like Indiana Jones 4, wait for a good script...

If you enjoyed this post, please think about becoming a subscriber to my RSS feed.

Monday, October 8, 2007

South Park: Bigger, Longer & Uncut

I enjoy "South Park," the show, and so when the movie was on Comedy Central's "Secret Stash" the other night, I tuned in. I realized I had never seen the "South Park" movie before. I'd caught clips here and there, and I remember hearing people quote parts of it and sing some of the songs. I couldn't believe I never saw it before. I've already seen "Team America," so it was neat to see an earlier cinematic work by Trey Parker and Matt Stone.

I enjoyed the way they intertwined the potential impact of their film into the movie itself. The main four kids, along with every other kid in the neighborhood, went to see a new movie by their Canadian TV heroes, “Terrence and Philip.” The movie is filled with profanities, causing the kids to swear and get in so much trouble that war is declared on Terrence and Philip’s home country of Canada.

The Terrence and Philip movie represented “South Park: Bigger, Longer, and Uncut.” Both movies were full of profanity. The kids in South Park represented kids in real life, learning from a movie (Terrence and Philip and South Park, respectively) to swear. Trey and Matt foresaw parents complaining about the newly-acquired curse words in the vocabularies of their children, and worked it into the film. It was hilarious. But since it’s been around for 8 years now, you probably already knew that!

I also really enjoyed the songs, and the graphics. They went a lot further with aspects like that than they usually do (or did) in the show, and it was neat to see those other avenues explored. I thought the song, "Little Boy You're Going To Hell," was very funny, because children are considered by most people (unless they're a "bad seed") to be innocent until adulthood. So condemning a child is ridiculous, and therefore hilarious. Plus, Kenny made it to Heaven in the end, so everything turned out OK.

If you enjoyed this post, please think about becoming a subscriber to my RSS feed.

Saturday, October 6, 2007

Indiana Jones 4

There's been a lot of speculation over the years as to what the plot might encompass for the fourth Indiana Jones film. Here's my theory:

IJ4 is set in 1955. At some point during the movie, we'll see a Delorean in the background. Then old man Biff gets out and goes off to take care of some business. Meanwhile, Dr. Jones would investigate the strange vehicle, and end up getting into the Time Machine.

Indiana Jones then travels to 2015 (where old man Biff came from), and gets the rejuvenation treatment that Doc had. Young again, Dr. Jones would be ready for another adventure.

In 2015, Dr. Jones meets the Doc, and Doc convinces him to go back to wherever it is he came from, never realizing Biff had originally taken the Delorean (until later, that is). Dr. Jones gets back into the time machine and goes back to 1955, but a glitch sends him to a different time altogether.

Then he'd wind up travelling to A Long Time Ago, and meet a previous human civilization that has since either destroyed itself or left the planet. He'll talk to some of the people there, and they in their vast wisdom will recognize him as bearing a strong resemblance to Han Solo. He will then be directed against his will to a wormhole or Stargate, which will transport him to A Galaxy Far, Far Away. At that point, he will be overwhelmed by the technology and craziness of it all.

Then the REAL Han Solo will show up, and they'll fight to the death, leaving it open as to who won and assumed (or resumed?) the identity of Luke's pal. There can be only one -- Han Solo. Since this is an Indiana Jones movie, Indy will probably end up winning, but then decide not to kill his lookalike, and instead spare him and ask for help to get back to his planet and time. Han will oblige, and direct Dr. Jones to a transit station, where he will return to earth.

Then Indiana Jones will sneak past the pre-humans, and find the Time Machine in some sort of workplace, being experimented upon. He quietly gets in and programs the computer for the 1930s. He arrives on the exact day during which the final scenes of "The Last Crusade" took place.

Hiding the Delorean, he sneaks to the temple containing the Holy Grail, and waits in a secret passage that he remembers seeing the last time he was there. Then, when the temple is collapsing and the grail is resting precariously on part of the shifting rock floor, he uses his whip to retrieve it.

Quickly returning to the Time Machine, Indy goes back to 1955, brings the machine back to where old man Biff left it, and uses the Holy Grail to keep himself and his friends (and hopefully father, unless it is too late) all young and immortal. If his father had died previously, he would have made another stop in between the 30's and 1955, and saved him with the cup of Christ.

Then at the end, old man Biff gets in and returns to 2015, and then Marty and Doc show up to steal back the Almanac.

I'd like to see that!

If you enjoyed this post, please think about becoming a subscriber to my RSS feed.