Category: Movies
Walt Disney: Can you hire a decent director???

I love dramatic reenactment — skits, plays and, of course, movies. My love most likely stems from the creative side of me. You see, when I watch a movie, I always want to see, hear, feel and smell what the writer and director are trying to convey. And, I want to be “in” the story. There is nothing more impressive than a well constructed and sonorously conveyed tale.

However, I have an affinity for sports. And, when someone writes a book or makes a movie about sports, I really want to have a “true-to-life” experience. Have you seen “Hoosiers”? If you haven’t, it’s awesome. It is a very closely accurate depiction of the basketball craze here in Indiana. “Hoosiers” is a great example of “making a movie, that depicts the reality of the subject.”

What am I saying? Well, I hate watching movies that completely abandon the "true" story at hand. For example, I just finished watching “Glory Road” (a movie about the all-black Texas Western college basketball championship team in 1966). It is absolutely a monumental story, but “Disney” (like in other movies), almost makes me believe that the story they tell, is well, fiction. “Glory Road” is a good movie, based on an excellent story. The story absolutely carries the movie, and the ridiculous amount of B.S. — like the fake “can’t we all just get along” crap they feed you in the movie — only detracts from the real subject, which is tolerance and acceptance. Why can’t they just tell it like it was? This “reshaping” of history only clouds the true theme, which was racial integration within college basketball.

This movie reminded me of “Miracle” (the Disney movie based on the 1980 USA hockey team victory over the USSR). Almost exactly, the theme was, “the great underdog.” I love the underdog. But, how many movies can be made with the same “cookie-cutter” script? The worst part was that, in both movies, the “game-play announcement” sounded SOOO fake, that it made it hard for me to attach myself to the story. It sounded like a home video, with a bad actor, doing a book-read overdub…well, it sucked. And, the commentary (in both instances) seemed more like modern day vernacular than what would be expected for the times of the movies. One last thing…how in the world does hip-hop music fit into a movie based in 1965-66?

I absotively, posilutely LOVE a good movie, but give me a break. There is nothing worse than taking an incredible story and “transforming” it into a mediocre movie. Disney, you suck!!

 
Year end reviews: The Incredible Hulk

Well, it's that time of year again, when I dust off my keyboard and hand out the middle aged, caveman year end movie reviews for alleged blockbusters. This year's manly movies should've been named Rear End Reviews due to just how disappointing the offerings were.

In case you're new to the caveman, manly movie year end reviews, allow me to elucidate the context for these reviews in all their…shall we say…cavemanliness. The fact is these reviews don't come late for hardworking caveman types who happen to have families. Most of us haven't as yet seen these movies or are just now getting around to it. That's just due to how married with children life derives for those of us who still like an occasional beer and whose knuckles are scraped up from, you know…dragging the ground. Also, unless we're clubbing our next meal to death (to provide for our families), we, frankly, don't get out much and therefore have to wait until these movies are released on DVD. So anyway, here's the first review installment.

Topping my list of biggest adrenaline rush disappointments for 2008 is The Incredible Hulk. What can I say? Despite the slow take off for it's predecessor, Director Ang Lee stole my heart and boosted my epinephrine with his rendition of the Hulk. The cast was stellar for Lee's picture as was the look of the film. I also liked Ang and writer James Schamus' vision for Banner and for the Hulk. Lee's Banner was a complex character with depth and Eric Bana's performance of Banner was nothing less than brilliant. The man was born to play Bruce Banner. Lee's Hulk was something of a paradox: seemingly limitless power coupled with nobility and an almost childlike sensibility. But it was a combination that worked for me. In contrast, 2008 brought us a lukewarm Banner in Edward Norton. He comes off as one dimensional with a performance, which like the movie, strains credulity. His green alter ego doesn't fair much better, resembling a steroid induced, ripped, monster.

Okay, so I'll cut to the chase here: Hollywood's latest depiction of the Hulk (how can I put this lightly) SUCKED!!! Yes, and sucked with all caps. This may come as a surprise to many of my friends who actually had the gall to tell me this movie ruled. But I'm bound by my impeccable taste, culture, and good sense to disagree with you. With the exception of the special effects this movie blew from entre to exit. Sorry guys.  It's true, Edward Norton is a terrible Bruce Banner, exhibiting all the depth of nearly evaporated rain puddle. Liv Tyler, who plays opposite Norton as Banner's love interest, had me guessing the entire movie if I was looking at Liv Tyler or if I was looking at an "actress" whom the director wanted me to think was Liv Tyler. As for William Hurt, well all I can say is he certainly did….hurt that its, pretty much every time he opened his mouth. Too bad for you William. When it comes to playing an obsessed four (or is it five) star general, you can't carry Sam Elliot's water. If that weren't bad enough, there was the absolutely weak assed story line, punctuated by unbelievable scenes, like the one where General Hurt takes an entire platoon along with his Panzers and Humvees and razes the local university to try and capture the Hulk. When they do attempt a Hulky extraction, you can guess what happens next; the Hulk gets angry and proceeds to destroy everything General Hurt hasn't. In the midst of the chaos, General Hurt's daughter (who is a prof at the university) storms one of the tanks and demands that the General come out of there and give her an explanation for why he's pissing off her big green love interest….and on it goes like that for about two hours.

You have to wonder who's to blame for all this. My guess is that both the director, Louis Leterrier along with Norton, who basically rewrote the script are the culprits.  My opinion (and it's the only one that counts around here) they should've left Ang Lee's vision of the Hulk intact and stayed with the original cast. In fact, Marvel really mucked this up when they decided to dump Ang Lee, James Schamus, and that remarkable cast in favor of this abomination. But that's what happens when you put style ahead of substance.

 
Iron Man Trailer Part II

This one is wicked cool.

ENJOY!