Needs To Be Glassed

"ANY RESEMBLANCE TO ANY PERSONS, PLACES OR EVENTS
IN THIS MOVIE ARE PURELY COINCIDENTAL AND FRANKLY
QUITE SAD. IF YOU ATTEMPT ANYTHING YOU SEE IN THIS
FILM, YOU WILL DIE. NO GERMANS WERE HARMED DURING
THE MAKING OF THIS FILM. DRINK RESPONSIBLY AND TREAT
ALL WOMEN WITH RESPECT."

-- Actual disclaimer at the end of Beerfest trailer.

Mmm. Frightening what passes off as comedy these days, isn't it? "No Germans were harmed in the making of this movahahaHAHAhhhhHahahaHAAAAhhHAAAAHAAAAHAAAAAA!"
I can't even get through it without my sides splitting in wrenching pain as I keel over and internally bleed to death and suffocate in my own sour vomit. I'd rather be a pedophile than to think this movie was funny. I'd rather contract HIV in the worst possible way. I'd rather give a rectal birth to the anti-Christ, quite honestly. I reckon somewhere in this world, there are people trembling with starvation and hopelessness as their third world dictator has left their village to rot and die, and in their last moments of complete agony and sorrow, they'd think "Hey, it could be worse, I could be someone who thinks Beerfest is funny."

Beerfest is so unfunny that it's affecting me emotionally. It comes from the team that made Super Troopers and Club Dread, and while I thought Super Troopers had one or two zingers, I thought Club Dread was as close to the bottom of the comedy barrel as you could get. But oh, I was so wrong. It goes so much deeper, far far far down into the black recesses of Hell.
I was so very wrong and naive.

Dare I even explain the premise? It follows an underground drinking game event called Beerfest, and it somehow involves a whole heap of terrible national stereotypes with exaggerated accents and Willie Nelson. Willie Nelson KILLS any movie, but you can't kill something that is and was dead on arrival. (On a sidenote, Willie Nelson actually looks dead in the trailer... and I'm not talking 'he passed peacefully in his sleep' kind of dead, either.)I want to puke all over myself after watching this, for two reasons: 1. Because everything is so barf-worthy and 2. To punish myself so as I never watch it again. That's what this industry has resulted in, me wanting to voluntarily puke all over myself. Son of a bitch.

Beerfest marks another huge bomb for Legendary Pictures; a studio division joined to Warner Bros. Pictures. Beerfest, Lady in the Water and Superman: Returns all earnt WAY less than what was expected, and to be honest, this monstrosity was the only one that really deserved to fail unsympathetically. Die in suffering, die die die die die die!!!! Die from the injuries inflicted by a thousand repeated stabbings of pitchforks to the extremeties! DIIIIIE!!!

DIIIIIIIE!!!!!

Beerfest - Warner Bros. Pictures
Anticipation Level: Stay unreleased (even though it's already been released...)
Look out for: I bet you don't believe me about that disclaimer ACTUALLY being in the trailer. It's read ALOUD and scrolled up the screen. And oh my god, you have to hear some of the one-liners that are said. "Sweet creamery butter" is one, and my favourite, after learning of 'the greatest beer in all the world' one of the complete fucking idiots says: "I wish it were winter and we could make it into ice blocks and skate on it and then melt it in springtime and drink it." *hangs self*.
US Release date: Last month, 25th August, 2006. As if you'd bother, anyway.
Trailer Source

My Prayer, Answered.

In my last post, I raised that age old question; Will things ever improve? Am I destined to view drab trailer after drab trailer, day after day, week after miserable week? Surely not. But the month of September would provide insurmountable support for those who would wish to argue.

Today however, a glimmer of hope. Light at the end of the residual 'get me the hell outta here' tunnel. Marie Antoinette, and her subtle, beautiful and intriguingly funky teaser trailer that has simply won me over with simplicity, is giving me a newfound belief in the Almighty motion-picture marketing deity.

And that's saying something, because I'm not a Kirsten Dunst fan, even at the best of times. So to really have such strong feelings towards a teaser with central focus on her is an admirable achievement. Apart from a few enjoyable darker toned kid's films, like Small Soldiers and Jumanji, the only movie I've really liked her in is The Virgin Suicides, because it was so strongly directed by Sofia Coppola and was so easily atmospheric.
Perhaps not so coincidentally, Marie Antoinette is also directed by Sofia Coppola, who seems to be able to perform that one immaculate miracle to a professional degree, make Kirsten Dunst appeal to me. Not in a superficial way, not even Francis Ford could work that magic, but as an actress and intellectual. It's accomplished here.

What is it that this teaser does right where all the others go wrong? It's simple, it's subtle, it is a joy to view, it combines great images with a sensational melancholy New Order song, which brings it to near perfection. Trailers and teasers do not need to overwhelm, they simply have to send out a signal of awareness. The 80's music track coupled with the huge frilly dresses and the men in those high white wigs and pale faces with those disgusting big moles on their cheek, it's such an erethreal experience, but it works so so so well.

I haven't heard the greatest things about the movie, but I am loving the style and the intentions attached. I can relate to the approach that Coppola is trying to head here, and in the end, I'll guess I'll decide for myself if she pulls it off to my likings, but if this teaser is indicative of the final product, I'm really in for a smashing time linking the polar natures of synth-beats from the 80s and string appagios from the Renaissance.
And that's what cinema is all about. (not specifically, obv.)

Marie Antoinette - Columbia Pictures
Anticipation Level: Medium.
Look out for: Age of Consent by New Order is a perfect fit. You have to see and hear it to appreciate it. Another thing to look out for, Kirsten Dunst's unusual jogging style down a corridor... What the hell is she doing? She looks like The Tin Man doing aerobics.
US Release date: 20th October, 2006.
Trailer Source

This Was The Role Alec Baldwin Was Born To Play... Over and Over, Again and Again

There's just something overbearingly sleazy about Old Man Baldwin that has always given me a dirty feeling. Although, never as much as his array of nobody brothers. (What about that one that went on that American celebrity fatty TV show. Jesus, he was fucking insane.)
But the dirty feeling I get from him is perfectly understandable. Look at his previous roles:
Along Came Polly - Prick boss.
Elizabethtown - Prick boss.
Fun With Dick and Jane - Prick boss.
Running With Scissors - The less said about that movie the better.
And of course, Mini's First Time - He plays a guy who loves getting his freak on with his 18 year old step-daughter named Mini.
He just gives me the creeps. Evidently.

This film is so hard to judge because I just don't know what the hell it is about. A girl hates her mother but loves her old, fat stepfather so she plans to drive her mother crazy by trying to convince her that she's being stalked? That's the most asanine thing I've heard all week. The title makes absolutely no sense to me. Mini's First Time? Her first time doing what? Terrorism?
Actually, it's prostitution, unless Mini was only kidding when she said she was turning tricks to her drunk and fluffy, pink bed-robe wearing mother, played by Trinity from The Matrix.

It's a difficult movie to understand because the premise, if that is indeed what the premise is, is so incredibly unbelievable. Who would go to these lengths to make your own mother think she's mentally unsound? It appears as though Mini is the one with a few cerebral malfunctions.
I don't know how it happens, but somehow a detective played by Luke Wilson is thrown into the mix, just to round out the unusual casting decisions to a whole. Everything seems misplaced, frenetic and travelling in opposite directions.
Maybe it's the trailer's fault, I dont know. But from it, I have no desire to see it and quite frankly, I don't think many people did when it was released a few months ago, so I'm not alone in this.

Maybe if they showed a little more Jeff Goldblum, who is, in my opinion, an extraordinarily gifted comedic actor, some degree of enjoyability might have been salavaged. But alas, Mini's First Time ends up as just another lacklustre, lacklustre, LACKLUSTRE trailer to go with my growing collection of lacklustre as fuck trailers. And it also adds one more notch to Alec Baldwin's bedpost of typecast roles, proving that he is the most consecutive prick/sleaze in modern cinema. No wonder my outlook on life is so bleak, with so much deterioration going on around me, even as I type. Will things ever improve!?

Mini's First Time - First Independent Pictures
Anticipation Level: Low.
Look out for: Carrie-Ann Moss. She plays a pretty good eccentric bitch of a mother. Maybe a little to well?
US Release date: Long ago, 14th July, 2006.
Trailer Source

Anything That Claims To Be Hardcore =/= Hardcore.

It's a well known fact. Acknowledgement of hardcore definately leads to a defiancy of hardcore, until so many people are claiming not to be hardcore to achieve hardcore status that not being hardcore becomes the new hardcore. And so continues The Circle of No Life.
When a mass population of teen rebels that were teen rebels before it was cool to be teen rebels named a genre of a new invented breed of punk-style music Hardcore, it shifted into motion a new order of what it meant to be hardcore. Suddenly, everyone knew what hardcore was. Parents and churches shuddered at the sights and sounds, but American youth absorbed every bead of sweat dripping from every emaciated creep dressed in cargo parachute pants, thigh high socks, baseball sneakers and nothing else.
In other words, Hardcore concerts were very hardcore. Or not hardcore, as the case may be. One's things for certain, they would have been the smelliest concerts since Woodstock.

American Hardcore is a punchy, upbeat, stylish documentary about the phenomenon of Hardcore music. For those of you are are too square to know what type of music that is, it's basically the same music you hear on the radio every day, only it carries less of a tune and it's sung by people you've never heard of.
And I wonder why. Only in Hardcore music can you get away with the band name: FARTZ. Is that not the stoopidest thing you ever heard? FARTZ. Not soon forgotten.
But those American teens seemed to find no problems with it, and with youth's power, and their power alone, not only FARTZ, not only the 25 other crappily named bands, but the whole genre in general catapulted to great fame. Which in the Hardcore universe means, it sold out. Thus, it died. And all the Western world got out of it was the Red Hot Chilli Peppers. What a waste of precious adolescence.

Meanwhile, the movie looks boring. It's old men talking about how the 80s was the greatest decade since 0-10BC and how they are still hardcore. No, not with all that excess skin dropping from your arms whenever you lift them to do some 'rad' trademark pose.
The fucking least these scraggly old fartz can do is sit back in their chairs, look directly at the camera and say "Yeah, we sucked. We sucked big time. Not for a second did we think we were any good."
Middle-aged rockers. If you don't have honesty... then what DO you have!?

Before I go - the next time you see a 40 year old paraplegic begging for euthanasia and you think about fighting for his right to end his life of misery and torture, save your efforts and think of this picture:

Long live the Hardcore!

American Hardcore - Sony Pictures Classics
Anticipation Level: Low.
Look out for: All the crazy and humorous names of bands and people. 'Fat Howard' Saunders. Gang Green. And Flea! That's honestly one of the best names ever. Why are there not so many people named Flea? I'm serious, I think that could really catch on. No really, I'm serious, I'm not fucking kidding.
US Release date: Last week, 22nd September, 2006.
Trailer Source

The Ass in This Movie is Ass

Kidding kidding.

I've been having such a huge streak of movies that I've really really despised the look of over the past week, I can't help but thinking up really negative, not-exactly-clever but not-exactly-the-stupidest-thing-you-ever-heard-either review titles. Even though this one's was a COMPLETE throw away, I just couldn't bear to throw it away. Each and every one are like my children. Even though the only similarity they bear is that they are named long before they even exist. And even that bears no truth. Still... 'The Ass in This Movie is Ass'. Ooooh yeah, that one's going into the annals of blog history.

And that's the sort of self-deprecating humour that makes this blog worth its weight in gold. Zero grams. As there is no gravity in the virtual world, there is no weight as a subsequent result. And even so, virtual gold is worthless unless it's part of some fantastical online videogame and you actually know someone that's even more worthless than said virtual gold to buy it. Try Korea. Their price on a live person is approximately the sum of half a dead person. Communism = Escapism.

Ah, now for the impossible task of linking communist Asia with a movie about a woman who has never orgasmed. You're on you're own on that one.

The Oh in Ohio sounds like ass. Hence, my adorable and multi-layered headline. But in actuality, it doesn't look as bad as it sounds. The cast is solid, it doesn't look cheaply made or boring or overly lame or too 'we're adults, so we can make a movie about adult jokes' pretentious. But there's still the fact that this movie's central focus is a woman, played by Parker Posey, who has never orgasmed. Or even knows what a vagina looks like.
Hello!? The great apes would know what a vagina looks like. Mother Teresa would know what her own vagina looked like. Hey, dumbass woman, maybe the reason why you are having so much trouble with your orgasms is that you've had a dehabilitating yeast infection for 13 years that has destroyed every nerve ending in your pelvic area because you were too fucking conservative to check up on one of the most important areas in the female anatomy!?!?!

But, I suppose she's not alone. I've never looked at my inner thigh. I've never seen my knees. To be honest, I'm not even sure if I have knees. Which is why I'm too scared to check.

ANYWAYS, all this frustrates her husband enormously, he has an affair with Mischa Barton, Liza Minelli is some vagina-motivational-white-witch person. Think stereotypical lesbian. And then there's Danny DeVito, who has pummelled his career so fluently that now he is reduced to being the minute funny-looking therapist that appears in maybe 5% of the film's running time. And half of that is with his shirt off, which is shudderworthy to say the very least.
Ok, and what's with the trailer being so specific about DeVito. "and Danny DeVito as Wayne". Like we are supposed to know who Wayne is? Who the fuck is Wayne and how is that supposed to give us any more or less information about his character!? He's a minor character. Who cares? The fuck is with the Wayne?

Jesus, I can talk some shit...

The Oh in Ohio - Cyan Pictures
Anticipation Level: Low.
Look out for: Liza Minelli. From the look of her, you take pity. But she's actually a really comedic entertainer. She has a cool way of speaking and pronouncing. And wacky dancing. Check it.
US Release date: Way back in July, 2006. Yeah, I'm late to the party, so what, get used to it.
Trailer Source

I've Been Looking Forward To This

No, not the movie, per se.
I've more been looking forward to giving this movie a complete public scathing. Yes, that's right, a scathing. Not usual, for me, I know. But this time it's different. This time, I'm actually offended. This time, it's damaging so much more than impressionable youth and the big business in general. This time it's damaging us writers. Our ideas. Our creative rights. Justice. And all that is good in this world.
Eragon burns all this to the ground. Eragon pisses on the ashes and then Eragon flames the piss to ensure any hope of regrowth is evaporated. Such is Christopher Paolini's ambition. Such is his sleazy way, riding high on the coattails of establishment, recieving mass praise and sums of money to plaguarise and construe a few thousand words and relinquish in its wake.

For those of you who don't know what Eragon is, you are my type of people. But for those of you who are curious as to what it is solely for the purpose of understanding what the hell I'm talking about, Eragon is some shitty fantasy novel about dragons and lame kingdoms and a boy that must triumph and all that same old same old bullshit. It's written by this gumpy 11-year-old that thinks he's some child prodigy. And the book reached #1 on the New York Times Bestseller List.

And then everyone that bought it began to discover some striking familarity to the story of Eragon. Like they've heard the exact same thing before. Like they knew every plot development. Almost reminiscent of a modestly known series like.... STAR WARS!?!?!
No kidding.
Princess sends a message of great importance using an important item to a faraway land. A young boy who lives with his uncle and yearns to leave to be a pilot find this item with the message. The message tells him to find an old hermit that lives nearby. The boy finds the old hermit, and the old hermit wants to help the princess. The old hermit also reveals he is part of an ancient order that has long been thought extinct, and that the boy's father was also part of this order. He then aquires his father's weapon. The boy returns home to find it burnt and destroyed by the empire's soldiers, his uncle killed also. So the boy goes with the old man, with the help of an eccentric character who helps them escape the town. Then they go and save the princess, the old man gives up his life for the young boy by being killed by the evil lord and then it's on to book number two.

Honestly, that plot summary can seriously be used to describe both Eragon and A New Hope. It gets even worse in the sequel. Yes, the boy sees a vision of the old man telling him to seek out an ancient trainer. Yes, the boy abandons his training because he senses his friends are in danger. Yes, the evil lord meets with the Emperor. AND YES, the evil lord turns out to be the boy's father. Hah, what a shock!

For those eagerly anticipating what happens in the third book!!!!! Watch Return of the Jedi!!!! Jabba. Ewoks. Good triumphs over evil, only with sacrifice.
Chris Paolini or whatever you're shit name is, YOU ARE HUMAN GARBAGE. You complete prick.


Now that I've blown off some steam, let me now tell you about the actual movie. The dragons look like the sketches that you see Year 7 dweebs doodling in the library, only worse. Like a big swan with the face of a middle aged woman. The kid looks so fucking out of place, especially in armour. There's a stupid black chick that drags the movie down even further. The crusty old supporting actors, John Malkovich and Jeremy Irons don't even redeem this trash. It has the same old puke-worthy shots of incompetent extras in HORRIBLE HORRIBLE HORRIBLE make-up and costume doing that stupid waddle/run thing. What is that, why do they run like that!? Whenever you see a bunch or orc people running through a village, they always run like their ass is collapsing.
Ahhh my fucking god, I hate this movie beyond words. Do me a favour, be an Eragon hater. It's an excellent EXCELLENT cause.
The landscape is bland as. The creatures consist of the previously mentioned drab and terrible running grunts, Jeremy Irons has a really laboured sword tussle with quite possibly the stupidest looking enemy ever... The special effects are ok, but they'll look like ass in about 6 months. The kid looks like he's been stung by bees. Did I mention the dragons talk? Guh.

Christ Almighty.

Eragon - 20th Century Fox
Anticipation Level: Stay unreleased.
Look out for: A possible lawsuit issued by Lucasfilm. Exhibit P: Eragon stares off longingly into a sunset in a trademark Skywalker fashion.
US Release date: December 15th, 2006.
Trailer Source

This All But Proves My Theory That Sam Jackson Is In 75% Of All Movies Ever Made

Samuel L. Jackson has just about appeared in every movie I've watched in the past 6 months.
Ok, maybe I'm massively over-exaggerating, but seriously, he's massively over-working. He's in too many movies. Too many!!!!

He just never stops. When was the last time he had a fucking vacation? I can't remember one time where I've stopped and thought, "Hmm, I haven't seen anything new from Samuel Jackson in a while?" Do you know why? Because there is always a new Samuel fucking L. fucking Jackson movie on the immediate horizon.

Home of the Brave, the next in a looooong string of upcoming Jackson movies, is a pretty generic offering at best. It's a statement on the war, not just the war in Iraq where the movie has its basis, but on war in general and how it affects people's lives. The reason that this is generic is that what it explores is everything you'd expect it to explore.
The war made my son hate me, the war made me have scary dreams, the war made me hold up a fast-food store and get held up in a siege situation. It's all such a characature of what you'd expect of a group of shell-shocked, hardened warriors returning home.

If anything, war beats the crap out of the metaphorical cookie cutter, and creates an unpredictability of which noone can define. This is not the movie to convey that idea.


Everyone seems miscast in this movie. Sam Jackson as a regular Joe Bloggs family man??? Please!!! I bet he doesn't even say 'motherfuckin' in the entire running time. MISCAST!
Jessica Biel. In Iraq. Avoiding RPG blast debris. MISCAST. Curtis 'Fifty Cent' Jackson. In a movie. MISCAST.
Such an estranged, ungelled cast being thrown into roles that demand to be typecasted. This is the equivalent of the challenged child trying to bash the triangular block into the square hole. Not only does the block get damaged, but the hole too. And possibly the kid's hand trying to force it in there.

If anything can be learnt from this, it's that voilence is damaging to everyone. Whether it be your alienated wife, or 50 Cent's career, everything and everyone suffers.
It doesn't look like an especially great movie, and it has a so-so trailer that quite uncomfortably switches from a tragic, moving tone to an upbeat happy one while they are showing all the key characters' lives falling apart around them. It just looks so incredibly bland and uninvolving.

Also, either Jessica Biel's hands are really small, or her boyfriend is The Incredible Hulk. Discuss.


Home of the Brave - MGM
Anticipation Level: Low.
Look out for: The aforementioned Hulk-Fist. That, honest to god, was the biggest highlight of the trailer for me.
US Release date: 15th December, 2006.
Trailer Source

Lennon vs Predator!!!

Anyone that has a public assassination is, in my mind, a respectable figure of history.
We just don't have any great assassinations these days. And I have my theories as to why. It's because noone cares about anything anymore. Everyone complains about the President or Prime Minister of their respective countries, but noone has the extremist attitude to do anything about it. We just watch The Tonight Show ridicule them, and think our laughter and personal satisfaction is enough to change the war in the Middle East or permit stem-cell research. We just don't care about things that much anymore.

But here to show us what we would and should be caring about if we weren't so caught up in trying not to care is a whole ton of archived John Lennon interviews!!!!

Ok, so I set it up to be a negative review. Which it isn't. I even said I respected him for being shot four times by a mentally-corrupt fan. But it seems that nowadays, political documentaries are getting to the point that, even though they might be focusing on different wars and different leaders, they still only aim at doing one thing. Defacating on US patriotism and informing us how shitty humans are.
The U.S. vs John Lennon is sort of the same. It's based on Lennon's position in United States politics and the turbulance he created... and the threats he posed to Nixon's cabinet. In the end, this is a more specific, less flabby (so to speak) version of a quasi-purpose Michael Moore doco. And in my eyes, a broad documentary is a boring one, so narrow targets and specific subjects are what's appealling about this.


I don't agree with Lennon's 'no hygiene, no grooming, no shoes' and overall homeless man ambition. And I just don't agree with Yoko Ono's face. But there's something to The U.S. Versus John Lennon, I think. If you didn't already realise that Nixon = Bad and John Lennon = Good, then maybe you should Google 'Vietnam War'. Or check the trailer out now. It contains some snazzy Lennon music, washed-out 70's era film and some fashions that have to be seen to be believed that what your wearing is going to look any better in 30 years.
In all, I guess it's good to know that some of the important things Lennon said and strived for will be compiled into one big package. Who knows, it might even prompt someone to kill again, so I can get a little excitement in my life and watch cable news cover the breaking news story of a crazed stay-at-home father's assassination of Jenna Elfman by a crossbow bolt through the throat.

The U.S. Versus John Lennon - Lionsgate
Anticipation Level: Low.
Look out for: There's some nice music. I mean, you don't expect dazzle from a trailer for a documentary. The music is the only real standout. Unless you want to check out how old Yoko Ono has become.
US Release date: 29th September, 2006. It's out in selected cities now.
Trailer Source

Obviously, I'm No Stranger To Negativity

I hate Will Ferrell.
I hate Anchorman: Legend of Shallow Newcaster That Talks Like A Retard, I hate Whatthefuckeva Nights: Ballad of Shallow Car-Driver That Talks Like A Retard, I hate that movie with the retarded Elf.
And I'm soon to hate Stranger Than Fiction, the movie with the retarded guy whose life is being dictated by some novelist who doesn't wear shoes.

Goddamn, why why why why why.

I suppose I should be thankful that Will Ferrell hasnt actually toplined a good movie. Like, not once. I mean, let's just say he was cast as the lead in Minority Report. Or Goldeneye. Or The Truman Show. That would seriously cause me to have a breakdown. Luckily, he gets nothing but shitty leading roles, and ok-ish brief cameos in ok-ish movies. Hollywood, let's keep it that way.

Stranger Than Fiction looks to be absolutely no exception to the franchise that is Will Ferrell's ability to put himself in a potentially hilarious situation, and say something completely disposable and stupid that his mere presence disappoints you. Stranger Than Fiction ups the anti, however. This time, there are no potentially hilarious moments. Just really really really potentially pathetic moments. And all the moments showcased in the trailer live up to their potential, and then some.

Oh my god, Will Ferrell can hear a woman narrating his life. Strange? Yes. Stranger Than Fiction? No. What would be stranger than fiction would be if Will Ferrell realised that acting retarded and simply using words that are not traditionally used is not the definition of comedy. If you walked up to someone like Jerry Seinfeld and asked him to be funny, he'd tell you a clever observation or joke. If you walked up to Will Ferrell and asked him to be funny, he'd probably scream, run up and down the road like an orangutan and then dry hump a streetpost. Which would warrant someone to throw loose change into his face to stun him and then bolt far away from that dazed dickhead.

And because I had trouble finding a moment of the trailer that didn't have Will Ferrell's 'young Ron Perlman' mug smacked in it, I'll leave you with a close-up of one of the supporting actresses. Yes that's right, its the 'human-equivalent-of-a-Shetland-pony' principal from Kindergarten Cop!!!

Stranger Than Fiction - Columbia Pictures
Anticipation Level: Low
Look out for: Nup. Nothing but barren, high-concept, low-intellect shit here.
US Release date: 10th November, 2006.
Trailer Source

...Mulva???

I am so fucking confused. I've heard so much about Volver, about how good the cast is, about how it has a lot of Oscar potential and about how it's the most successful Spanish movie ever made.
And there's been a sort of trailer-drought lately (by the way, I realise that new trailers for Casino Royale, Flags of Our Fathers, Blood Diamond and The Prestige were released this week, but for reasons I won't go into, I haven't seen them), so I thought "What the hey.", I'll see what this mysterious Volver is all about.

Well, I've watched the trailer four times now. And I went into a lot of synopsis research. And now I have even less knowledge of what this film is about than before I knew anything about it!

From the trailer, here is what I thought the movie was about:
A family of women get together for a suprise reunion, only to find the mother cutting all her hair off to con a talk-show into thinking she had cancer. To make matters worse, Penelope Cruz somehow kills the mother, drags her over to a freezer, dumps her in it, throws it into a pit and buries it.
Then Penelope and Co. go about their daily lives trying to forget about killing their own mother.

And yeah, I know, it sounds terrible.

But then, I went to IMDb to find out how close I was. Well, you decide, this is IMDb's synopsis:
After her death, a mother returns to her home town in order to fix the situations she couldn't resolve during her life. Of her family left in the town, her ghost slowly becomes a comfort to her daughters, as well as her grandchild.

So, basically, the trailer shows us Penelope Cruz killing someone, disposing of their corpse and someone pretending to have cancer to reap the benefits of sympathy, but the overall movie is about a ghost returning to put some unfinished business to rest and make her daughters feel super? I don't understand. I just don't get it. Where does bloodshed fit into that? Maybe its the mother that was killed by Penelope Cruz. But then, why would her ghost return to make her feel good? What is going on here?

The movie got standing ovations at Cannes, so it can't be a lost dog of a film, even though that's what it appears to be. It's apparently really great, but it's impossible to tell from the trailer. Whatever the marketing, I'm sure once I get to see it, all the jagged pieces of the Volver jigsaw will come together.

Even though, admit it: My version of Volver > IMDb's version of Volver.

Volver - Sony Pictures Classic
Anticipation Level: Low.
Look out for: Penelope Cruz. She's a great looking gal with some real prescence. She's really developed I think...... as an actress, I mean.
US Release date: 3rd November, 2006.
Trailer Source

Someone Stab Me In The Eyes!

I wanted to really scold a writer-director named Ryan Murphy for this PIECE OF SHIT for today's blog entry. And I had full intention of doing so. God knows, after I finished watching the trailer to Running With Scissors, I wanted to literally scold him with molten iron. But then I looked him up on IMDb, and discovered he is the creator and head writer of one of my favourite TV series, Nip/Tuck.
Unthankfully, Running With Scissors is absolutely in no way like Nip/Tuck. Nip/Tuck requires a great deal of talent, focus on character, focus on story progression, on drama, on interaction and conversation. Running With Scissors is some PIECE OF SHIT that follows some fuck that was adopted by his mother's psychiatrist who happens to be insane and have a Texas Chainsaw Massacre style family that likes to be all zany and dress like they just stepped out of a capsule from an alternate dimension in time. I HATE movies like this. I HATE them.

For whatever reason, like many outcast, underattended kids, this movie has to dress weird and be unpredictable and semi-snappy to feel special. But in reality, at it's core, the reasons they were outcast to begin with never fail to shine through the forced obscurity.
Under the 'we live in a crazy universe Tim Burton would be proud of' farce there exists a sickening hollow that angers me extremely. I just really hate this PIECE OF SHIT.
Tim Burton can go to hell too. He's the grandfather of dressing up bland and laboured films with silliness and quasi-realism. It's not imaginative, it's not charming, it's not fun. It's lame and its gimmicky and it's a major distraction to what is essentially nothing more than a PIECE OF SHIT movie.

Running With Scissors is not just filled with angering moments, it is riddled with disappointments too. Brian Cox, who has had an impeccable track record, crashes, burns, and when the firefighters go in to recover the black box, he explodes again. He bumbles around as the lunatic father/psychiatrist with lunatic daughters, Gwenyth Paltrow and Evan Rachel Wood (who might I add are looking uglier here than they ever have in their life). Together, they enjoy giving each other electro-shock treatment, making holes in the ceiling with broomhandles, and prescribing one another drugs that they don't even know the names of.
Couple that with the woman that eats dog biscuits for no reason, and you've got yourself the reason I hate this movie.

However, that's not to say I hate all movies with the same motivations. The Royal Tenenbaums surprised, stunned and won me over. Might I also add, Running With Scissors borrows so much from The Royal Tenenbaums that I shook with rage when re-watching the trailer. Even down to casting Gwenyth Paltrow in the SAME fricken type of role. Using the same 'father alienating his daughter in front of everyone, almost on purpose' joke, lifted right from Tenenbaums. It's criminal, that's what that is.

So, screw the fact that Nip/Tuck is oh so awesome, Ryan Murphy, you're a PIECE OF SHIT.

Running With Scissors - Tristar Pictures
Anticipation Level: Stay unreleased. Please!
Look out for: Absolutely no reason to watch this. I tell you, Running With Scissors should consider itself lucky that I previewed it in the same month as Sleeping Dogs Lie, because if it wasn't for that, it'd be getting Worst of September hands down.
US Release date: 20th October, 2006.
Trailer Source

Movies About Wild Horses Overcoming Odds And Becoming The Perfect Companion SUCK

A girl finds a wild black stallion in the forest, covered in flies and insects and stuff. Well not really, but there's a bunch of shit blowing in the wind when she finds it, looks weird. Anyway, she tries to catch it, but it's such a stubborn fucker it would rather jump off a cliff then be anywhere near her. But the father of the girl lassoos the son of a bitch before it can dive into the sprawling canyon, and puts it into captitivity back at his ranch. This makes the horse chuck a fit and kick it's hind legs into the air!!!
The girl names the horse Flicka, and she tries to domesticate it. But it has made it quite clear (since it tried to kill her, then commit suicide) that it doesn't want to be her fucking friend, so it hurts her. So the father gets all pissed off, and wants some people to take it away, but she's like "NO, I WANT TO TORTURE THE CREATURE MORE. I WANT TO FORCE IT INTO A LIFE OF BEING MY SLAVE." so with the help of Ryan Kwanten, she overrules her father and keeps the horse in constant misery. And everyone's happy, except the aforemention title character Flicka. And the audience, whom have seen this story so many fucking times that the mere sight of another horse, nay, another mammal will result in a shower of vomit.

Ahh, Flicka. We know it's not your fault. You're a fawn in the headlights of Hollywood... or at least a foal. Semantics aside, the same can be said for the talented Alison Lohman, who is just horrifically plain and predictable in this generic trot around familiar grazing territory.
And just as this review is plagued with shitty horse themed puns, this trailer is just PLAGUED with trailer cliches. Oh my good fucking god, the music is that same weepy string-based scum used to promote sweeping epics that don't look very quality, but using it with this is just a new low. This is as formulaic as you can get, folks. Absolutely no originality, absolutely no purpose, fuck all reason for existing, fuck all reason for actually seeing it. (Even though I probably will at some point, if only because I'm moronic.)

This has GOT to be rewarded September's Most Generic. I don't see it being topped.
Although it's in no way even close to kicking Sleeping Dogs Lie off the throne of Worst Trailer. I think it's going to take a movie about a wild horse overcoming odds and becoming the perfect oral sex partner for that 'accolade' to ever be beaten.

Flicka - 20th Century Fox
Anticipation Level: Stay unreleased.
Look out for: I don't know, the really really terrible scene where Alison Lohman is coaxing the horse with an apple. The dialogue and delivery is classically awful.
US Release date: 20th October, 2006.
Trailer Source

"I'm Completely Ashamed Of Myself"

So, ok, let me ask you this. If I LIKE the trailer to Jackass: Number Two, does that make me as fucking retarded as the people that make up the Jackass team? Or just as retarded as the target audience of the Jackass movies?
Frankly, I don't want to be as retarded as either of those undesirable groups of decaying humanity... but the trailer does so many things right, it's hard to resist the temptation of leaving your mental high ground and descending into a numbed consciousness where nothing exists in the universe except tongue piercing lobsters and midgets doing death defying stunts. Christ help me.

To be fair to myself, it's only a very short, very sparse trailer. It introduces itself rather intellegently (not sarcastic) by quoting some of the worst reviews that the first Jackass installment recieved, including the respectable (Richard Roeper) and the not-so-respectable (Christian Spotlight on the Movies). Using academic pummellings as a way to promote a movie is actually quite inspired, but it really could only work with this type of movie, going by the fact that the intended audience just don't care what old people have to say about young people's movies, and that it also taps into the very effective rebellious scene.

I have to say, the stunts that are sampled in the trailer are often times impressive. Some would take a while to organise... while others would take all of two seconds to think up and do. I'm thinking of one scene with that ape Steve-O jumping on the end of the rake and then writhing in pain when he gets smashed in the face with the handle.
It's so idiotic, I know it. But there is some real energy to it all.

I don't think I have to explain why I won't be in line to see this when it hits cinemas. But under all the insane stupidity and thoughtlessness, there's real creativity and inventiveness, I feel. And I guess it makes me just a little curious to see what other completely outlandish fucked up ordeals these dickheads have thought up to torture themselves with.
And in that regard, yes, I am ashamed of myself.

Jackass: Number Two - Paramount Pictures
Anticipation Level: Low.
Look out for: "Let's remove this tooth!" Completely masochistic and tasteless, so why is it so re-watchable? Any movie with a yak in it gets props too.
US Release date: 22nd September, 2006.
Trailer Source

Even As A Yeti, I Like Her!

One of the things I really like about Nicole Kidman is the projects she chooses. She seems smart. She seems like she's into intellectual roles and roles that can constantly challenge her not only as an actress, but as an audience member as well. But that's not to say she doesn't dabble in mainstream cinema, because she obviously does; in roles like The Interpreter, The Others and Cold Mountain, plus more upcoming (I'm in great anticipation for the trailer to The Visiting). But even her mainstream efforts are way above the schlocky norm of our current mediocre BS releases.
One of the things I really don't like about Nicole Kidman is that she married Keith Urban. But, that's besides the point.

With risky and ambitious films like Dogville and Birth under her belt, it's apparent that Kidman is not afraid of audience reception, and that she is interested in pushing boundaries and obtrusive ideas. And it seems she continues this interest, in her latest film Fur: An Imaginary Portrait of Diane Arbus.

To be honest, I have no idea who Diane Arbus is or was, but from the trailer, I gather she's a revolutionary photographer that photographs handicapped people that live in her attic? Or was a tragic love victim of a werewolf? Or... something.
It's obvious that this isn't a retelling of Diane Arbus' life. Even the title makes a point of telling us it's more of a re-imagining. Changing specific details to better accustom the movie's themes and feelings to suit the person that was Diane Arbus, whoever the hell that was. One things for sure, she must have taken some pretty whacked out pictures.


Nicole Kidman is a real trooper throughout. At the beginning of the trailer, she's abnormally normal, and by the end, she's the Sasquatch. It's kind of a mind trip, there's definite allusions to Alice in Wonderland, which I know has been done billions of times before, but it doesn't seem overly hokey. And from what I could gather, Robert Downey Jr completes what is quite possibly the hairiest love triangle ever propositioned.
In all, I realise how freaking insane this movie looks and sounds, but it's relatively tame in comparison to movies like Drawing Restraint 9. If you really want to be freaked out by randomness and the question "What the fuck is going on right this second?", rent that. If you just feel like a unique and visionary story of love's struggle, then you might want to look out for this one.

Fur: An Imaginative Portrait of Diane Arbus - Picturehouse
Antipation Level: Low-Medium.
Look out for: I'm certain Yeti'd Nicole Kidman will be the signature image of this film.
US Release date: 10th November, 2006.
Trailer Source

So, Is Africa Just Portrayed Badly In Film Or Is It Really This Much Of A Shithole?

" Welcome to Africa, I hope you enjoy our corrupt republic of prejudice and poverty, because you probably wont be leaving here alive. Thank you and again, enjoy your short stay here."

That's the vibe I get from Africa, thanks to the world of cinema. Every film about Africa is about how shitty it is to live there. I swear, if it wasn't for The Gods Must Be Crazy, I would have no evidence that Africans knew what comedy even was. Or joy. Or laughing of any kind.
Which isn't very sturdy evidence because I didn't find The Gods Must Be Crazy the least bit funny whatsoever, in fact combined with it's sequel/s, I regard it as being possibly the worst franchise ever created. Still, the fact the Africans at least attempted comedy speaks volumes.

Surprise surprise, Catch a Fire is hot on the heels of Hotel Rwanda, The Constant Gardener, The Last King of Scotland and countless others to inform the Earth that African regions are extremely turmoiled and unpleasant, and unless you are an armed mercenary, to stay away. There's an explosion at a plant one evening, and some guy and his family are victimised as a result. I watched this trailer really late last night with way too little focus. But I think that's the basic plot. I hope that's that's the basic plot, otherwise that extended insult to an entire continent was all for nothing.
Anyway, Tim Robbins is on a hate-crime spree, and the innocent victim decides to stage an uprising... I think. Once again, I could be remembering what I WANTED to happen. But I am pretty sure I clearly remember Derek Luke planting a makeshift remote mine to blow the shit out of something. It might have been a pressure cylinder, it might have been a fuel tank, it might have been the back of Tim Robbins head. Catch a Fire is a blurred combination of every deprecating movie centred on African politics swirling around in my brain.

But whatever the monotony, makeshift bombs are cool, and this film does look pretty good. Tim Robbins has made many interesting career choices as of late. He's into darker villains I notice (and doing pathetic Will Ferrell movie cameos, like he's some sort of comedian? The only thing that's ever been hilarious is his delivery of the 'vampires and werewolves' speech in Mystic River). It's directed by Philip Noyce, who I must say, chooses the most dissimilar projects ever. But he lends even more competency to the whole project. It looks expectedly strong, it has a decent trailer and it should be an interesting, or to a lesser extent, an important film.
But how about giving Africa a break and expose the untold atrocities and depravities of Greenland next? Huh?

Catch a Fire - Focus Features
Anticipation Level: Medium.
Look out for: Just basically look out for all the collateral damage that ensues. Oh, and Tim Robbins going all CIA Operative on a local village.
US Release date: 27th October, 2006.
Trailer Source

It's The Mighty Ducks Meets The Red Baron

This must be the most 'under the radar' movie of this past year. Where the hell did it come from? I've recognised the name many times, but I always took it for some stupid low budget movie about World War 1 pilots.
Instead, after I checked out the trailer, I was surprised to learn that it's a stupid high budget movie about World War 1 pilots.

First of all, I want to comment on the name. Flyboys ...is the worst title I've ever seen, especially so seeings as it's has it's context in WWI, an era in which they held a lot of class in anything they did. They called deadly brigades of bombers 'Flying Circuses' and wore completely unsparing swimmers, which they called 'trunks' or 'costumes'. In a time of such eloquance, where did the fucking stupid name of Flyboys come from? It sounds like something that a group of lamoids would name their team at a trivia night.

The title aside, the trailer shows that the film is constantly fighting an aerial battle with itself, as to whether it's good or bad. For example, on the good team, the special effects look mind-blowing. Loved the colourful and fully-lit dogfights, the bombings and the on foot explosions. Loved it all. It really, really surprised me how awesome the action of this film looks. But of course, as an good physicist will tell you, for every action movie, there is an equal and opposite spurt of shitty dialogue.
I mean, even from the trailer, I can tell the script is just appalling. It's a typical asanine Hollywood deal, which is a shame, because the film is made by MGM, which I think deserves way more success and quality than it's been recieving. (Casino Royale will change all that though. Won't it!) There's talent in the direction, and obviously in storyboarding and putting together a vision for those brilliant looking air-battles, but everything else smells of the decomposing corpses of James Franco's post-Spiderman 2/pre-Spiderman 3 movies.

When will anyone learn that James Franco is too weak to hold an entire movie up over his head. Annapolis, remember that? Exactly. Tristan and Isolde. I bet more people went to see the ballet on the day that film was released. Just because he's in Spiderman doesn't mean everything he lends himself to will be in the top 10 most successful movies of all time list. Enough with James Franco already.
Oh, and enough with trying to get me to believe that there were really nice guys in the airforce that weren't racist towards blacks in the 1930s. And that a guy can run away from an exploding blimp.... whilst on top of the blimp.... whilst it's still in midflight.... What!? You really have to see it to understand how stoopid it is.

Somehow the differing ideals and integrity get confused when bridging between the 1930s and the 2000s. I wish I lived back then. I'd check out all the women in their swimsuits: aka aquatic dresses complete with stockings and corset.

Flyboys - MGM
Anticipation Level: Low-Medium.
Look out for: Great aerial action and special effects. You can't miss the little doomed man fleeing from a plane that has just plowed into the blimp he is on. I just can't get over that. He's on top of an exploding blimp at about 14,000 feet. Where's he running to, and how the eff is what he's doing even possible? Ahh, I feel like screaming, it's so fun and infuriating at the same time to think about how amazingly terrible that whole concept is!
US Release date: 22nd September, 2006.
Trailer Source

de Niro, Brando, Pacino... Ribisi?

Yeah. Hell yeah. This is what I've been waiting for my whole life. Giovanni Ribisi playing a pumped mafiosa psycho-bitch! That's all I ever dreamt of, that's all I ever asked for. The man can master anything. He can make movies like the Flight of the Phoenix remake watchable. He can turn a cameo into the highlight of a film. He can be a raving Scientologist and still seem credible and awesome. He can do ANYTHING.
Now he's a riled up member of the family, and he's so so so pissed off that it makes me shiver with anticipation!

Ok ok, so I realise 10th and Wolf was released like a month ago, but I'm in Australia, and most people don't realise how LONG a majority of movies take to reach our screens. The longest ever was the wait for Bad Santa. 13 month difference between the US and Australian release. Yeah. And when we do get a release that is earlier than the US, it's Dead or Alive! Dead or motherfucking Alive! So, if I seem like I'm behind, I'm not. I simply live in two different worlds. One where I watch the good movies get released months in advance, and one where I witness them trickle in ever so slowly in this land of constant movie release drought.

As probably gathered from the intro, I'm a massive Ribisi fan. So I just couldn't pass up the opportunity to blather on about him (instead of the actual movie, the trailer, or the large, prolific cast). As far as I can gather, Ribisi isn't even the main character, which is so strange because any movie with him in it is instantly overshadowed. Hands down. James Marsden has nothing on Ribisi. In fact, let's give Giovanni his own title card:


Ah, now Gio's face is a permanent part of my blog, I suppose I can expect hundreds of thousands of hits daily, all logging in to worship at the shrine I constructed. For the people.

Meanwhile, the 10th and Wolf trailer proves the movie has a strong mafia theme and an equally strong cast to convey that theme, and even if Ribisi were to be somehow subtracted from the film, it'd still appear to be decidedly decent. It's not like we haven't been in this territory before, it's tried and true. But with an interesting writer and a few nice details here and there, I think we could be looking at a winner.
But then again, I am biased towards the fact I'm a fan of the genre and have some awkward same-sex crush on Giovanni Ribisi. I have a thing for short, shrimpy, fugly, little guys. Guilty.

Note: You know how you enter some family's homes, and they have a distinct smell. But they can't smell it because it's too familial to them. Believe me, I know all to well. I had a friend whose family smelt so badly of catfood that I had to renounce my friendship with him.
So what distinct family smell do you think 'THE family' would have? My vote would be for cigar smoke and salami breath. But maybe that's just the stereotypist in me talking.

10th and Wolf - ThinkFilm
Anticipation Level: Medium.
Look out for: RIBISIIIIII!!!!
US Release date: It was in theatres a month ago. Might have to wait for the DVD.
Trailer Source

Rupert Grint Is A Pale Douche

Rupert Grint: Has no charisma. Has no stamina. Has no attractive quailites whatsoever. Has no conviction. Is British.
He's a sod!
Julie Walters: Bint. Probably wildly alcoholic. Too much charisma for a senior citizen. Is British.
She is also a sod.

Put the two together and, like Jack Lemmon and Walter Matthau before them, you get THE SOD COUPLE!

Awww, look at them, such a comedic dynamo. Julie Walters sitting there, descending further and further into her own inevitable dementia. And Rupert, good ol' Rupe (yes, that's right, of Thunderpants fame), sitting so coscientiously, looking like an AIDS sufferer on his way to the hospital for another blood check-up. Yeah, they're a real hysterical bunch. And chemistry!!! Oh, they get on like a house.
That's not on fire.
And it's not on fire because it's walls are packed with asbestos.

Driving Lessons is like asbestos, if only for the fact that you should stay far away from it. Only brave, brave Harry Potter fans should don a mask of ignorance and face the hazardous fibres of this movie's shitty and unlikely premise. Come on, a 17-year-old starts hanging out with the lamest granny ever and before he knows it, he's enjoying all sorts of activities like picnicing on a hill and driving his car on the pavement and looking like an anaemic.
And Julie Walters is such a tragedy. Caked make-up, a bajillion ugly hats with ribbons in tow and some horrid one liners that make Ron Weasly (or in fact any character with dialogue in Harry Potter) sound like a fucking crack-up.

Rupert and Julie, take this personal driving lesson, from me, driving extraordinaire:

• Stop driving on the pavement, because seriously, if you don't know the fucking pavement from the fucking road, then you're a fucking retard.
• Choose better movies, or just don't do any more movies. Anything, just as long as I don't have to try to care about you anymore.
• Leave Laura Linney out of it! She's a good egg, and you have no right to drag her down these avenues.
• Ease the brake and let the car gently coast off a ravine, check your mirrors one last time aaaaaaaaand we're finished. Or at least, you are.

Driving Lessons - Sony Pictures Classics
Anticipation Level: Low
Look out for: Laura Linney. She's the only thing that looks genuine and classy about this whole dreary affair. And her line "Mobiles give you cancer." is the ONLY laugh, probably in the entire film.
US Release date: 13th October, 2006.
Trailer Source

Thank Havens!

Going into the fray of the US box office this upcoming weekend is the long delayed indie release, Haven. Not that the box office is very much of a fray at present. The Covenant: #1 postition with $9 million. Pathetic. And a big reminder that summer is over and that if a movie like Dead Man's Chest was a choice surloin cut of prime beef, then the September period would be the equivalent of the washing and sweeping of the abbatoir floor. Collecting all the unwanted, perhaps even partially putrid and rotten scraps of meat to be used in making dog food and sausage rolls. The Covenant looks like dog food. Cheap, gluggy and has about the same charm and lure appeal as the can it's served in. Hollywoodland looks like a sausage roll, the same grisly meat scraps that have fallen from a greater quality carcass, only seasoned with Oscar winners and wrapped in a deceptive sheet of pastry, making it not so shudder-worthy to the palette.
Believe it or not, I'm no precise connoisseur. Hell, I needed to spell check just to know how to spell it. But whether you like sausage rolls or not, there is no denying that September is a dumping ground for films that shouldn't have been made.

Which is why I'm so wary of this conundrum, Haven. Probably like you, I knew pretty much nothing about it until today, only that it starred Orlando Bloom and Bill Paxton and that it is scheduled for release in a matter of days. Now, it's no shock that an indie film has gone unnoticed for this long, I mean, there are just about a billion of them released every week. But I was in a 'I want to seem like a smart guy' mood, which basically means that I investigate independent movies.
And here's the thing. Even though Haven has been shelved for something like 2-3 years, even though it has two male leads I'm not particularly fond of, even though it has an interconnected storyline set against a background of racial tension in a foreign nation, even though it's being released in September!!!! I still think it looks kinda good.

Because the trailer is excellent. Great buildup, great presentation. Love the tagline ("Can love survive the fall of paradise?"). Orlando Bloom shows a different side to his whole 2-dimensions by putting himself in an unflattering role of a hideously scarred robber of some sort, although he is his usual self in most of the trailer. Bill Paxton doesn't show up too much, which is always a plus. Any trailer in which Bill Paxton doesn't show up in gets a point in my books. And as is expected from any independent movie worth the $10 ticket price, there is some significant style to the substance.
But perhaps what I loved most about the trailer was the use of sound. Cracking guns and booming percussion provide a real audial treat, I must say. Whether it be Orlando firing his 'piece' in the air, or some crime scum tossing a chair into to a floor-to-ceiling window, the bangs and thuds add to the ambience, and really excites you. Truly, I know it sounds like BS, but it excited me.
I don't like to pass so much judgement on iffy movies like this, but rest assured, it's got a dynamite trailer.

Haven - Haven Distribution
Antipation Level: Medium
Look out for: The great sound. And Orlando all mutant'd in his bandit/lepur hooded veil.
US Release date: 15th September, 2006.
Trailer Source

When Good Looking Movies Get Bad Trailers...

...It pisses me right off. It's a basic principle, if you've got a strong movie, market it to its advantages. Yet somewhere along the way, studio marketing departments conclude that doing this makes the movie unappealing, so they decide to mash together every crucial scene in the movie and throw some fast-paced, constantly changing music over it, and call it a promotion.

Promote it does not.

If you want to know what I'm talking about, check out the trailer for The Last King of Scotland, which has revieved huge kudos from festivals, most notably for the bold and striking performance of Forest Whitaker. Now, while Mr. Whitaker's performance is showcased rather well in the trailer, there's so much going on, with the out-of-place soundtrack and the MTV-style quick-cutting, it makes Forest the selling point, whereas the film overall should be the subject.
The movie has a similar look and general direction of last year's The Constant Gardener, but to say Last King of Scotland has been rewarded the same subtlety would be a lie. The worst part about watching the trailer is the fact that the rapid-beat music changes every 5 seconds to another song with a slightly faster or slower beat. It puts the pace and flow right off, and makes everything seem sluggish. From the look of the subject matter, there should have been a slower, more dramatic pace, leading to a buildup. In a way, that's what the existing trailer does, but it does it very sloppily, and the build-up crashes and burns like big hunk of Scottish peat. Ahhh, the peat.
Another of the trailer's gaping down-points is that it focuses way too much on informing its audience on the premise of the film. Now, that's acceptable to a certain degree. But when you spend the first half of the trailer detailing the first half of the plot, and then the second half of the trailer showing crucial scenes and plot elements, I take that as ruining the full intended experience. But hey, I think I'll be able to forget what I know by the time I get to watch the movie anyhow.

Overall, The Last King of Scotland looks very promising. If it can emulate the success of The Constant Gardener, I'll be ecstatic. But the trailer was a total and forgettable disappointment. Note to Fox Searchlight marketing department: treat your films with a degree of dignity. And don't be afraid to take risks with risky films. That's what they're designed for.
Making independent films seem mainstream isn't fooling anyone, and in most cases, everyone and everything suffers from it.

The Last King of Scotland - Fox Searchlight Pictures.
Anticipation Level: Medium-High
Look out for: Forest Whitaker mastering the Ugandan accent perfectly.
US Release date: 27th September, 2006.
Trailer Source

My Most Anticipated Movie of 2006: Fulfilled.

Well, after over a year of full anticipation, I finally got to see Lady in the Water. Even though I was a little disappointed in some areas, I loved it. A lot. And it will easily be a definate purchase.
But now that I've seen it, I can spoil myself and actually watch the trailers I sheltered myself from in an effort to protect the surprise and experience of watching the movie with no material expectations. And, now that I've seen them, I'm very glad I did this, and will be doing it more often.

For starters, I had only seen the teaser trailer, which in essence, revealed very very little about the movie. It basically gave you a look at the environment the entire movie would take place in, the protagonist (played by Paul Giamatti) and his role as a cleaner of an apartment building. Then it set up a bit of mystery, he sees something splashing in the pool. End of teaser. It was done very majestically and it rocketed the movie into instant 'must-see' status.
However, the full theatrical trailer turned majesty into all-out misrepresentation. It's very horror based, quick flashes of supernatural beasts running and attacking, dark images, rainy action. Its all very far from the actual movie's themes. Which I suppose could also be said of the pre-hype of Shyamalan's The Village, which was basically a romantic period piece with many dark, twisted elements thrown in to emphasise the narrative.


Lady in the Water is Shyamalan's weakest film to date, in just that parts of the story were too contrived and convenient. But for all the excitement and patience I put into it, I still think it was all worth it.
The film has absolutely no horror element to it. And marketers really need to step away from promoting films with unsteady genres. An unconventional movie should be treated as such, or else why make them?

Lady in the Water - Warner Bros. Pictures
Rating: Extremely enjoyable.
Look out for: Ok, don't even bother taking a look at the latest trailer, it's not worth it. See the teaser if you want something to get excited over. Or just see the movie, it's a refreshing foray into your own imagination!
US Release date: In theatres (well probably not since it bombed real hard)
Trailer Source

Time To Lift The Curse

So, I'm thinking to myself, this could be a long and arduous task for me, and the people who hear my stories, to constantly be subjected to long posts about trailers of underwhelming movies. That's why I think it's a wise idea to offer up at least one positive view on a teaser trailer to break the monotony of my own assholishness. I feel it's at least my duty to do that much. Besides, it's not just you who thinks my cynacism gets a little grating. This is as much for me as it is for you. Nevertheless, don't get too used to me being in a leniant and praising mood.

Ok, so whatever. I've dug into the archives and selected one of my true recent favourites, the teaser trailer to Curse of the Golden Flower. To many suboridinates, just another foreign movie with Mandarin dialect with tiny men flying about Ancient China like teetering sparrows. To them, all these melt into one undesirable and subtitled bore. But for me, this is like, the highlight of any blessed movie year. The release of a new Zhang Yimou film.

And to say his films are visually stunning would be the understatement of the decade, while even the description of the scope of said understatement would be an understatement in itself. Zhang Yimou is a poet, his cinematographer is his pen, the world is his flow of words and sounds. It really is a breathtaking experience, and I'm not just saying that because English teachers dictated me to think as such. There really is balletic and artistic beauty to pretty much every element of Yimou's film choices. And the brief showcase of concise footage shown in the Curse of the Golden Flower teaser will show you exactly what I mean if you havent had the pleasure of seeing Yimou's latest films, Hero, House of Flying Daggers and Riding Alone for Thousands of Miles (which has yet to be released here).

Filled with all the fluidity, symmetry, colour and spectacle that has come to be expected, this is sure to be a one fucking awesome film. Chow Yun Fat and Gong Li are safe, yet extremely established and smart casting choices. There is an epic feel that is strong in a lot of Zhang Yimou's works, but traditionally, storylines are rather simple, and that often juxtaposes what is seen with what is taken in. However, Yimou's films, Curse included it seems, succeeds in being a rich cinematic experience, something that is hard to come by these days. And with this being the most expensive movie in Chinese history, how can one not expect great things!?

AND if anyone can deny being at least a little excited when seeing that huge army wielding unsheathed swords, running towards the camera, then I pity what little of your soul is left.

Curse of the Golden Flower - Sony Pictures Classics
Anticipation Level: Very high.
Look out for: All the gorgeous visuals. There are so so many. I mentioned the army charge. There's the ninjas flying through the canyon, Yun Fat as the badass looking king. There's also an unusual amount of rapid cleavage shots, if that's your thing.
US Release date: 22nd December, 2006.
Trailer Source

It's So Hard To Escape The Claws of Disney!

You wanna know the worst thing about being committed to this blog now? The fact I have to watch trailers to movies I know I'm going to hate, the fact I have to watch something I'd rather not see. Like Tim Allen once again whoring himself out to the family-degenerate scene. Like Martin Short wasting any comedic talent on developing the character of a gimmicky villain in a threequel. Like not being able to deny this movie, nay, franchise even exists. I hope my hard laboured journalism is one day appreciated.

As if you haven't put together already (I mean, the logo of the film's title is right there! Unless there's a bad link or something, in which case, don't blame me) I'm bitching about The Santa Clause 3: The Escape Clause. Yeah, I know what you're thinking. How many clauses can there be? Well, three apparently. And trust me, this is the stoopidest clause yet. For some reason there's this guy covered in shitty blue make-up with spiky hair that wants to be Santa Claus. How convenient for his intentions to coincide exactly with the third and final chapter of the gripping Santa Clause trilogy. I simply can't wait for this series to come full circle! And to see the fates of Santa, Jack Frost, that son-of-a-bitch little kid and those HORRIBLE animatronic reindeer come to a dramatic climax.

Ok, I saw the first film. Not sure how, not sure where. I actually think I might have seen it in cinemas... I really can't be sure. I have a dark dark cinematic history I would like to forget, and on the most part, I think I've succeeded. The second film must have slipped past my radar, because for some reason, I never saw it! I know, weird right? Can't believe I never gave a damn about Santa Clause 2!
I don't think I need to stress the complete lack of interest I have in this type of genre. I mean, obviously I'm not part of the targeted audience for this, but if I had a kid, and he said:

Ryan Jr.: "Daddy, Daddy, I wanna see the movie with Tim Allen as Santa Claus and Martin Short as that gay looking freak with no dignity!"

I'd say:

Ryan Sr.: "There's no way I'm sitting through that piece of crap buried in fake snow, let's see Casino Royale instead."

Ryan Jr.: "Is Santa in that?"

Ryan Sr.: "No. Santa is just a fictional character used to sell a whole heap of commercial product and merchandise. Like James Bond. Only James Bond could kick Santa's ass. And that's why we are seeing Casino Royale. Get your coat."

There is something semi-ok about this film. Not a redeeming quality, more like a notable effort. They incorporate time travel to events that take place in previous movies, ala Back to the Future. But from the look of it, it lacks the heart and invention of the latter series. I don't know, kids might find it clever, but it's basically an intergrated imitation.

The Santa Clause 3: The Escape Clause - Buena Vista Pictures
Anticipation Level: None.
Look out for: The part where the voice-over guy confirms this as the "final chapter of the greatest Santa story ever told." Thank Christ.
US Release date: 3rd November, 2006.
Trailer Source