# 370 - THE QUICK AND THE DEAD (1995)

THE QUICK AND DEAD (1995 - ACTION / WESTERN / GIRL POWER FLICK) *** out of *****

(Sharon Stone as a gunslinger. Right. And I’m Calamity Jane)



CAST: Sharon Stone, Gene Hackman, Russell Crowe, Leonardo DiCaprio, Tobin Bell, Roberts Blossom, Keith David, Olivia Burnette.

DIRECTOR: Sam Raimi

WARNING: Some SPOILERS and rather unbelievable gunslinging heroines straight ahead…




Ellen, the heroine of our next review THE QUICK AND THE DEAD played by Sharon Stone, is one grumpy bitch. Seriously - I would not want to be stuck in a car with this chick for hours on a road trip. Or, given that THE QUICK AND THE DEAD is a western, I wouldn’t want to be saddled with her on the same horseback. She just might kill me. Or I might kill her first. I don’t care how much she looks like Sharon Stone.

Of course, to be fair, Ellen does have good reason to be grumpy. To wit, the following has happened to her: (1) an evil dude named Herod (Gene Hackman) killed her marshal father (Gary Sinise) when she was just a little girl; (2) this has scarred her for the rest of her life and now she wants revenge; and (3) Pantente Pro-V Hair Conditioner has not been invented yet and so Ellen must walk around with her hair looking like a dusty mophead. Trust me - you’d be pissed off, too.

Anyhow, our story kicks off when Ellen rides into town, scowling like a champ of course. The town is called Redemption, and apparently it has a yearly event called “The Quick Draw” contest. This is basically similar to the gun duels you’ve seen on the Looney Tunes Cartoon where Elmer, Bugs, Daffy, Sylvester, Tweety, or any two cartoon characters basically try to see who is the fastest at, uh, blowing their wad. And I don’t mean in that “That’s alright, dude, we can try again in fifteen minutes” way.

Whatever. The point is, this is an interesting time to be in Redemption, and before you know it, Ellen has entered the contest. Basically all the players will shoot each other off - until only one person is left standing to claim the prize: a whopping….$123,000. Hmmmmm. Thank god this is the Wild Wild West, because $123,000 is barely enough money to have a killer block party these days.

Again, whatever. So the other contestants in the, uh, contest are: (1) The Kid (Leonardo DiCaprio), Herod’s ultra-cocky son who is convinced of his greatness, obviously being prescient enough to know he will one day star in a movie called INCEPTION; (2) Cantrell (Keith David), spiffy dude with a hidden agenda; (3) Cort (Russell Crowe), smokin’ hot dude who is apparently both a preacher and a killer, making him the perfect guy - good boy and bad boy rolled into one; and or course: (4) Herod himself, who basically sponsors this contest. Kind of like the way Microsoft sponsors the Sounders. You know ho Kasey K. and the rest of his gang where jerseys that read “X-BOX 360”? Well, The Kid, Ellen, Cort, Cantrell, and the rest of the gunslingers should wear ponchos that read “HEROD INC.”

Anyway, there are a bunch of other contestants but none of them are as hot as the five mentioned above. Pretty soon, people are challenging each other to duels that wind up leaving the street of Redemption littered with corpse. Not for long, though, because apparently the people of Redemption just love to strip down corpses of all their valuables. Nice place to live, Redemption…

Before you know it, only four players are left: (1) Ellen, (2) Cort, (3) The Kid, and (5) Big Daddy Herod. Who will survive the semi-finals? Will Ellen bust a hole in Cort’s chest? Or will Cort beat her to it? Will they even try to kill each other considering they clearly look like they want to fuck each other’s brains out? What about The Kid and Herod? Will The Kid kill his own father? And will Herod cap his own son? Are they even really related?

And the most important question of all: will Ellen get her revenge on Herod? Wait… the real question is this: will Ellen finally get some fucking conditioner for that hair. Seriously, it’s starting to bug me.


BUT, SERIOUSLY: In the wake of BASIC INSTINCT, SLIVER, INTERSECTION, and THE SPECIALIST in the early 90’s, Sharon Stone was in danger of being permanently typecast as either: (1) the cool, calculating femme fatale with hidden depths who may or may not be evil; or (2) the strong but emotionally vulnerable career gal who may or may not be in serious danger from the man she loves. Stone was quite good playing # 1 in both BASIC INSTINCT and THE SPECIALIST, and was just as compelling as # 2 in both SLIVER and INTERSECTION.

Still, she must have felt that she needed to broaden her range and play other kinds of women. Which is probably why she chose to do THE QUICK AND THE DEAD. The decision is not entirely without merit. After all, there’s no better way to leave behind the sleek, polished, glamorous bombshells Stone played in the past, than to don some leather chaps, cowboy boots. duster and hat, and cover it all in grime. In theory, anyway. The result, unfortunately, is underwhelming despite the initial novelty of having the soigne Stone play a Wild West Woman.

I adore Sharon Stone, and think that is a very underrated talent, but the fact remains she is simply not believable as gunslinger. She does her best, and tries to invest Ellen with the emotional intensity needed for us to keep our eyes on her, even when she spends most of the movie silent and keeping to herself. Sadly, Stone doesn’t quite manage it.

It’s not entirely her fault. Blame for this weak central performance must also go to writer Simon Moore and director Sam Raimi. The way the script is written, Ellen spends far too much time on the sidelines watching the action. Moore concentrates on the trio of Herod, Cort, and The Kid - supporting male characters who end up driving the action and plot more than Ellen does. Of course, it doesn’t help that these guys are played by three of the most charismatic actors out there. They basically steal the show from the star.

Gene Hackman is a delight as Herod, and he actually makes his villainy seem playful and sexy. His performance here is one of his best, chiefly because he knows how to act with our without words. Matching him in the charisma department is Russell Crowe, who made his American film debut in this movie. The guy is simply a wonder of the acting world, and has more potent masculine screen presence in one little finger, than the majority of Hollywood’s male acting contingent combined.

Then there’s Leonardo DiCaprio, whom I have slowly grown to appreciate over the years. I could never understand the TITANIC hoopla (which came after this movie), but after BLOOD DIAMOND and INCEPTION, my eyes have seen the light. This guy may be no Russell Crowe (who is but Rusty himself?), but he is up there in the intensity department. And watching him in his youth in THE QUICK AND THE DEAD you can see the simmering talent just waiting to bloom. He hold every scene he’s in - and matches his much more experienced co-stars.

In the end, THE QUICK AND THE DEAD might have been more than just an above-average western if Ellen’s role had been rewritten to be more dynamic and present. As it is, she seems to be a supporting player in her own showcase. Stone does what she can with the role, but she facing an uphill slog. Even Meryl Streep might have had a hard time making Ellen register, considering how much she’s absent from the action.

Still, it’s a decent western, and considering I abhor westerns, that’s saying something. Of course, it’s a western with Russell Crowe in it…

BREAKING NEWS: Fabio Cannavaro Retires Early Due To Bad Knee...

Well, the weekend was going great until I found out that my favorite soccer player, the Italian defender Fabio Cannavaro, is retiring from the Beautiful Game at the age of 38.

I can't tell you folks how much this saddens me. I've followed Cannavaro's career since 1998 when I first moved to Europe and started my immersion into European football. The guy is not just a handsome face - he's an actual dynamo of a defender. He has a stellar track record with Inter-Milan, Parma, Real Madrid, Juventus, and now Al Alhi in Dubai. And, of course, he led the Italian National team to World Cup Victory in 2006 as the team captain. And he's from Naples, where I lived for 3 years. Part of the reason I was happy when I got my assignment to Naples was because I knew I'd be going to Fabio's home town.

Well... This is pretty much a huge bummer for anyone who loves the game. But we have to have faith that this move will be better for him in the long run. His knee must be pretty bad if he has to retire early. Of course, he's had a great run, and that's what we need to focus on.

Anyhow... please find below a collage/slide show of Fabio's career. Sigh...

Fabio, ci mancherà. Il mondo del calcio non sarà la stessa.

# 369 - THE PROPOSAL (2009)

THE PROPOSAL (2009 - COMEDY) ***½ out of *****

(Well, that‘s one way to get the office talkin‘)



CAST: Sandra Bullock, Ryan Reynolds, Craig T. Nelson, Mary Steenburgen, Betty White, Malin Akerman, Denis O‘Hare.

DIRECTOR: Anne Fletcher

WARNING: Some SPOILERS and one rather extreme version of an arranged marriage - straight ahead…




Ah, the life of an aspiring screenwriter… Is there a more awful form of torture? I’m thinking, no. Let’s count all the levels on which that particular existence sucks donkey balls. Ready? Here we go: (1) you spend most of your available time writing, with just enough hours left over to watch a soccer game, go diving, or slam back a few with friends during happy hour; (2) you have to deal with over-competitive, paranoid peers who are convinced you are out to steal their ideas when you have enough of your own; (3) even if you are somehow lucky enough to catch lightning-in-a-bottle and make a sale, your “vision” will likely get ass-fucked relentlessly until it no longer resembles anything you would ever deign to write; and, last but not certainly the least: (4) no matter how brilliant or original you think your idea is, you can bet your ass that someone else already has a similar concept already in production, basically ensuring you wasted countless hours on your project.

So, it was a great load off my shoulders when I made the decision to walk away from screenwriting in January 2010. Life’s just too damn short, and boy what a difference that made. I felt like I was reborn, and finally given the freedom to more actively pursue my other passions. I know a lot of other friends who are still in the screenwriting game, and I wish them well. I have no doubt they’ll eventually make it. And they deserve to, given the crap they have to put up with. Out of all the bullshit enumerated above, the most grating (to me, anyway) is # 4: putting a lot of work into something, only to discover that someone else already has the very same idea, ready to roll.

In our review for BASIC INSTINCT (review #83), we talked about how I wrote a script called STILETTO when I was just a teenager. It was about an New York City homicide detective who finds himself attracted to the beautiful prime suspect in a serial murder case. The chick is a music video director/photographer whose three ex-boyfriends whom she kicked to the curb have all been murdered in the same fashion: tied to a bed and stabbed with a stiletto dagger. What’s worse is her photographs and videos echo certain elements of the murders - and they were taken waaaay before the crimes. The woman’s defense: “Would I kill all my exes in the same way as the models are posed in my photographs and videos? That would make no sense. I’d be incriminating myself since I’m the common link between them…”

Is she right? Is someone setting her up and using her work as a template? Is she actually the killer’s main target? Or is she the killer herself? And has come up with an ingenious way to make herself look innocent? Those are the questions the cop must try to answer, as he finds himself falling in love with her against his will. Will he wind up the next victim? Or will he solve the mystery before then? Or will he fall under the photographer’s spell and somehow become her accomplice? Let’s just say that someone crosses over to the dark side at the very end…

Anyhow, I was living in Asia at the time, and discovered that a script called BASIC INSTINCT has sold for a cool $3 million bucks. Penned by a veteran screenwriter Joe Eszterhas, the plot revolves around a San Francisco homicide detective who finds himself attracted to the beautiful prime suspect in a brutal murder of a retired rock-and-roll star with an ice-pick. The chick is a novelist with a background in psychology who was dating the murder victim. What’s worse is the murder follows the same description of a murder in one of her novels - which was published waaay before the crime. Her defense: “Would I write a book about killing and then kill someone exactly as I described in my book? I’d be announcing myself as the killer. That would be stupid.”

Hmmmmmmm…. As you can see BASIC INSTINCT and STILETTO bore many resemblances. But, sadly, this kind of thing happens all the time in Hollywood. I have no doubt that Joe Eszterhas was working from his own original idea, just as I was working from my own. There is simply no way we could’ve known about each other’s scripts. Me, being a nobody, and he, being a top screenwriter. When I found out what BASIC INSTINCT was all about, I was understandably pissed off because I thought I had an original idea. Turns out someone else on the other side of the world had beaten me to it. More power to him.

And when I finally saw BASIC INSTINCT, it was almost exactly the way I envisioned STILETTO (with the exception of the prime suspect being raven-haired, not blonde like Sharon Stone), all the way to the dark, ambiguous ending. I liked the movie a lot. And then I promptly buried STILETTO and tried to forget about it. In other words: whatever.

But I’m not the only in my circle this whammy has happened to. There’s also the comedy script a writer/director friend of mine wrote called SWITCHING TEAMS, in which two executives in a company have to fake a marriage so that one of them won’t get deported back to England. The problem? They’re both men. The Brit is a homophobic straight guy and the American is gay. The straight guy is so desperate not to be deported, he bribes the gay dude to marry him in a civil union to keep him from being booted out of the country. The problem is they hate each other, as you can imagine. On top of that, they have to deal with an INS investigator who is suspicious of their “union”. Then the craziest thing happens: amidst all that bickering and fighting and punching and trying to act like a married gay couple to satisfy the investigator and other people, they unexpectedly fall in love. Most unexpectedly for the straight guy. Hence, that title.

Sound familiar? SWITCHING TEAMS might as well be a gay version of the Sandra Bullock-Ryan Reynolds smash hit THE PROPOSAL. Take out the straight guy-gay dude angle and this is basically the same movie. Especially the trailer for THE PROPOSAL, which could be a preview for SWITCHING TEAMS, but with Bullock and Reynolds instead of, say, Daniel Craig and, well, me (my friend said he’d hired me as an actor if he could get independent financing for the project to keep costs low - that should‘ve been me and Daniel Craig pretend-kissing-then-for-real-kissing in front of the party in the trailer).

Anyhow, when my friend found out about THE PROPOSAL going into production in 2008, he basically did to SWITCHING TEAMS what I did to STILETTO when I found out about BASIC INSTINCT: used the script as a beer coaster, because that’s about all it was good for at that point - besides mulch, that is. Just another example of the conundrum that screenwriters face every day: what do you do when your “brilliant and original” idea is already green-lit by a studio with someone else’s name on it?

Answer: you cut your losses and slam back as many shots of Cuervo Gold as you can. Then you move on. That’s what I did with STILETTO. And that’s what my friend did with SWITCHING TEAMS. I guess I’ll have to wait longer for my movie debut.

In THE PROPOSAL, instead of a bickering British homophobe and American fruit, we have a bickering Canadian publishing executive (Sandra Bullock) and American executive assistant (Ryan Reynolds). Bullock is Margaret Tate, and she obviously graduated from the Miranda Priestly School of Ice Princess Leadership. Reynolds is Andrew Paxton, and he obviously graduated from the Andrea Sachs School of Mousy Wuss Assistanceship. In other words, Margaret makes his life a living hell - and he has no choice but to take it.

We know Margaret is kind of well, difficult, by the way Andrew messages everyone in the office when she arrives by saying: “The Witch Is On Her Broom.” Cue the entrance of our Ice Princess, and cue the ducking of the staff like she’s a tactical fission device heading for its target. Yes, folks. The only differences between Margaret and Miranda Priestley are: (1) Miranda is silver-haired, Margaret is brunette; and (2) well, that’s about it, really…

Just like Miranda and Andrea from THE DEVIL WEARS PRADA, Andrew and Margaret pretty much have that kind of love/hate relationship that you know would led to some seriously hot sex if they let it. And that chance comes when the INS denies Margaret a visa, leading to the threat of deportation. Yes, folks… unless our Dragon Lady in Pumps can come up with a plan, her ass is headed back to the Land of French Fries Served With Cheese Curds And Gravy and Guys With Funny Hats On Horseback.

It doesn’t come as much of a surprise that Margaret does have a plan. Too bad it’s a colossally fucked-up one. To wit, she contrives to do the following: (1) browbeat Andrew into marrying her to keep her from being deported; (2) bribe him with the chance to advance along the corporate ladder and get his novel published, and (3) force him to join her in trying to thwart a suspicious INS investigator (Denis O’Hare) who correctly surmises that there’s a greater chance of a homophobic straight British dude and an American gay guy falling in love than Margaret and Andrew ever hooking up.

And so off to Alaska our crafty “lovebirds” go to try to snowball Andrew’s family into thinking they’re actually a couple. But what happens when Mom and Dad (Craig T. Nelson, Mary Steenburgen) tell Margaret and Andrew that they should get married that weekend so that Grandma (Betty White) can witness it before she croaks? Will they go through with it? Or will they blow the whole act with their constant arguing? Or will all that sexual tension finally erupt and consume them and turn them into a real couple? What happens when that pesky INS investigator shows up in Alaska to check on our “lovebirds”? Will he ruin their plans? Or help them along somehow?

See for yourselves. But I still wish my friend’s script for SWITCHING TEAMS had beaten THE PROPOSAL to the multiplex. Just imagine: Daniel Craig and I bickering the hell out of each other for two hours before finally falling into the sack together. Let’s see that shit in 3-D!


BUT, SERIOUSLY: Okay, folks, it’s like this: THE PROPOSAL is a somewhat formulaic flick that would’ve been stale had it not been for two things: (1) the great chemistry between Sandra Bullock and Ryan Reynolds, and (2) wonderful support from Betty White and the rest of the supporting cast.

We’ve seen this type of film before, even before SWITCHING TEAMS and THE PROPOSAL: two mismatched people meet, hate each other upon first sight, fight relentlessly, then gradually warm to each other, before finally being forced to admit the unthinkable: they’ve fallen in love. This concept has been going since IT HAPPENED ONE NIGHT way back in the 1930s. They say that arguing and bickering is sometimes a sign of sexual tension and attraction, and that trope is certainly put to good use in THE PROPOSAL.

But there’s a fine line between timeless and tired, and THE PROPOSAL sidesteps the pitfall of being stale by highlighting the electric connection between its leads. Ryan Reynolds is approximately 13 years younger than Sandra Bullock, and it’s nice to see this kind of age difference between a leading man and a leading woman for a change. It’s just the right kind of age gap. The fact that Bullock is 13 years older than Reynolds actually works well for the story, as well as their interactions.

Margaret and Andrew’s relationship arc from hostile and combative, to reconciling and appreciative happens by degrees, and it’s a testament to Bullock and Reynold’s skills that it all seems reasonably fresh. Even though you know these two, as dictated by formula, will eventually fall for each other and see one another in a different light, you still enjoy the ride getting there.

In the end, THE PROPOSAL doesn’t go anywhere new. But the sheer star power and chemistry between Sandra Bullock and Ryan Reynolds makes you feel as if it does…

In closing, please groove to the tunes of Katy Perry's song "Hot N' Cold" from THE PROPOSAL. To my writer/director friend out there reading this: if it makes any difference, I think SWITCHING TEAMS would've been an even better flick. Thanks for thinking of me for the role of the American fruit. You know I can channel my inner Sandra Bullock like no one's business..."

# 368 - THE HANGOVER PART II (2011)

THE HANGOVER PART II (2011 - COMEDY) ***½ out of *****

(Boys, boys, boys, are you ever going to fucking learn?)



CAST: Bradley Cooper, Ed Helms, Zach Galifanakis, Justin Bartha, Jaime Chung, Sasha Barrese, Ken Jeong.

DIRECTOR: Todd Phillips

WARNING: Some rather unfortunate cases of history repeating itself - straight ahead…




Recently, one of my friends whom we have referred to in the past as “Liam Neeson” because of his resemblance to said actor, called me and asked if I wanted to do the “dinner-and-a-movie” thing. The flick he had in mind was THE HANGOVER PART II. The first thing I asked “Liam” was “Have you seen THE HANGOVER PART I?” His response: “No.” My response: silence.

What I was quietly mulling over is whether his not seeing the first film would impair his understanding of the second one. Then I realized THE HANGOVER PART II is essentially THE HANGOVER PART I - but set in Bangkok. And Thailand just happens to be “Liam’s” most favorite country in the whole world. I knew that was his prime reason for wanting to see the movie. Can’t say I blame him, though, because I do the same with movies set in Italy: no matter how bad they may be, at least I know I’ll be looking at some serious eye candy, both in terms of people and geography.

In other words, all “Liam” needed was cursory (very cursory) description of the first film to set the stage for the second one. And that description goes a little something like this: “Four lovable dipshits head on down to Vegas for a Bachelor’s party - only to wake up the next morning with no memory of the night before, and the discovery that the groom is missing. Now they must race against time to reconstruct what happened and save the wedding.”

Essentially, this is the same plot breakdown for THE HANGOVER PART II, except the setting is Bangkok, Thailand. Our quartet of lovable dipshits from the THE HANGOVER are back and even more lovable (and dipshitty) than before. They are: (1) Phil (Bradley Cooper), hunky ringleader of the group; (2) Doug (Justin Bartha), mild-mannered peacekeeper of the group who was the missing groom the last time around; (3) Alan (Zach Galifanakis), bizarro extraordinaire of the group; and (4) Stu, primo whiner of the group who is also the groom this time around. His bride-to-be is the lovely, exotic Lauren (Jaime Chung), a Thai-American chick who is about to make an honest man out of Stu. Or try to, anyway.

Anyhow, the wedding is going to be on one of Thailand’s offshore islands. A couple days before the nuptials, though, our boys decide to have a drink on the beach which includes Teddy (Mason Lee), Lauren’s nerdy little brother who could use a little adventure in his life. Needless to say, you don’t have to have seen the first movie to surmise that this “harmless” drink on the beach is going to lead to some rather fucked-up stuff.

Sure enough, the next morning Phil, Alan, and Stu wake up in a dingy (really dingy) flat in Bangkok. Needless to say, this is quite the step down from the luxury suite that they came to in during the first movie. The good news is, unlike last time, there is no Bengal tiger lurking in the bathroom. Nor does Stu have a tooth missing. The bad news? There’s a monkey jumping around the room like he mainlined a cocktail of crack, blow, heroine, and a triple-Venti espresso. And let me just say that when you’re nursing a hangover that NASA could detect from space, the last thing you need is a monkey ricocheting around the room.

Oh, and further bad news? While Stu may not be missing any teeth, he does have a rather… interesting… tatoo around his left eye. And doesn’t remember how it got there. Personally, I thought the tatoo made Stu look sexy as fuck, and made me consider whether I would tell Phil to take a hike and choose him for a fuck buddy instead. Unfortunately, Stu doesn’t think the tattoo is all that hot, and freaks the hell out. I guess it doesn’t go with the tux he’ll be wearing at the altar.

Oh, and even further bad new? Teddy, Stu’s future brother-in-law, is missing. If you thought Stu was having a mega-conniption fit over the tattoo, imagine his reaction to the discovery that he’s lost his bride-to-be’s baby brother. If that’s not a sure way to not get any nookie on your honeymoon, I don’t know what is…

So… once again into the breach our boys go, trying to piece together what the hell happened the night before? What kind of clues do they have this time around? The monkey on crack? The sexy-as-fuck tattoo on Stu’s face? What role does a monastery outside Bangkok have to do with their crazy allnighter? What about a mysterious American wheeler-dealer named Kingsley? What happens when that mega-dork Chou (Ken Jeong) from the first movie turns up in Bangkok? Will he help our boys? Or throw them under the bus? And the most important question of all: why does Stu’s ass keep hurting? What happened to him the night before? Ahem?

Find out for yourselves, bitches. Don’t say I didn’t warn you…


BUT, SERIOUSLY: There are some contingents that think very lowly of THE HANGOVER PART II. They state that this film doesn’t do anything to try to differ from the first movie. Instead, they say, it recycles all the elements of the previous adventure and tweaks them a little without offering anything truly new.

They are right. However, that’s as far as I agree with them. While THE HANGOVER PART II truly does copy the template of THE HANGOVER with some alterations here and there, it is essentially the same film as the first one. Why, then, does it rate fairly high (***½, good) in my book? For two reasons: (1) the characters are as likable as the first time around, and (2) the movie is hilarious as all get out.

THE HANGOVER is a modern comedy classic that caught lightning in a bottle. It took a concept that is universally relatable, and mined it for endless comic gold. Just when you thought it couldn’t possibly tap into the mother lode of yuks any more, THE HANGOVER constantly surprised you by pulling more tricks out of its hat. That is the sign of a well-written script.

THE HANGOVER PART II suffers a little from two things: (1) a less elegant set-up than the first one, and (2) a sense of familiarity because it’s following in the steps of its trailblazing predecessor. Fortunately, as I mentioned before, the movie is so funny and its characters are so engaging that we’re too busy laughing to mind too much. At least I was.

Bradley Cooper once again turns Phil into a nice mix of level-headed charm and no-nonsense directness, easily showing why the character is the leader of the group. He keeps it together for everyone by knowing when to be calm and mellow, and when to be a stone-cold asshole. Justin Bartha is once again the voice-of-reason of the group as Doug, who doesn’t get to go on the adventure this time around, but acts as sort of a “mission control” for the boys back at the island. Zach Galifanakis as Alan is once again a loony delight. This time around, though, he’s not the funniest character walking around. That would be Chou, whom Ken Jeong brings to life with unapologetic political-incorrectness. The guy is a genius comedian. He nails the movie’s biggest laughs, and is easily THE HANGOVER PART II’s MVP.

Finally, Ed Helms gets some good screen time as Stu, the shy dentist who finds his inner backbone and surprises everyone with it. Just as in the first movie, Helms manages to be both attractive and dorky at the same time, and it suits the character of Stu very well. And that tattoo looks damn hot on him. There’s no way I’d ask for him to remove it. In supporting roles, Mason Lee, Jaime Chung, and Sasha Barrese are all solid and memorable. Barrese, in particular, is great mix of exasperation and strength. Watch the scene at the very beginning where Phil calls her and says “Tracy, it happened again…” Her reaction is priceless…

So… bottom line: THE HANGOVER PART II may not be quite as fresh or great as the first movie, but it is definitely a good flick worthy of your attention. See it now. But watch out for those Thai go-go girls. You’ll see….

# 367 - TRANSFORMERS 3: DARK OF THE MOON (2011)

TRANSFORMERS 3 (2011 - ACTION FLICK) *** out of *****

(Megan Fox, we miss you, but Rosie H-W has got better DSLs - Dick Sucking Lips…)



CAST: Shia LeBouef, Rosie Huntington-Whiteley, Josh Duhamel, John Turturro, Frances McDormand, Patrick Dempsey.

DIRECTOR: Michael Bay

WARNING: Some seriously guilty pleasures straight ahead - enough to make you feel so… dirty.



Folks, I’m a terminally honest person, and I’m going to come out and be straight-up with y’all: I have not seen TRANSFORMERS 1 and 2. Yes, I think Shia LeBoeuf is cool as fuck. Yes, I was the first kid on my block to own a Transformer Toy. Yes, I think Megan Fox is an ultra-hottie and if I swung more her way than Chris Evans‘, she would be in soooooooo much trouble. No, I don’t mind Michael Bay as much as you would think. Despite being an unapologetically commercial director, the man does have an undeniable visual style and acid humor that never fails to engage me.

So, no. I don’t have an excuse. Except that maybe I need to take my ass down to the local Blockbuster (yes, I am an old fart who needs to get with the Netflix generation) and rent them. Anyhow, this is the reason I was a bit reluctant to see TRANSFORMERS 3 when my pal “Nia Vardalos” (because she looks like said actress) chose the flick as our latest spectacle. “Nia”, however, assured me that I would not be lost, and she could fill in any blanks, if needed. So, being an easy person (in more ways than one), I relented and accepted.

And she was right. I didn’t have a problem following the plot, which goes a little something like this, apparently: two races of shockingly-flexible space robots called Autobots and Decepticons have escaped their dying planet called Metatron, and have decided to duke it out on Earth, with her inhabitants being caught in the crossfire. Chief among the inhabitants who are about to either becomes heroes or Transformer-fodder were (1) Sam Witwicky (Shia LeBoeuf), a dude who seems remarkably well-adjusted considering his name sounds too much like “Wet Wicky”; (2) Mikaela Barnes (Megan Fox), the smoking’-hot chick who knows more about cars than Sam, and gets pulled into the fray because of it; and (3) a shitload of other folks including a couple of hot military dudes (Josh Duhamel, Tyrese Gibson).

However, as anyone who has an even passing awareness of movie news knows, Megan Fox left the production of TRANSFORMERS 3 because she called director Michael Bay, ahem, something rather unflattering. Not my business, so I’m not even going to go there. You want to find out what she called him, go find back-issues of Entertainment Weekly. Anyhow, realizing that Shia LeBoeuf is going to need another love interest, otherwise people might think he and Josh Duhamel secretly have the hots for each other, the producers of this flicks scoured every catalog of Victoria’s Secret they could find - and settled on British model Rosie Huntington-Whitely.

Not hard to see why: (1) she’s tall, (2) gorgeous, and (3) has lips the size of a sectional sofa. Megan Fox’s puckers ain’t got nothing on those babies. Oh, and Ms. Huntington-Whitely has an awesome British accent that just makes you want her to say anything to you, even if it’s only “You could stand to lose some weight, you tosser.” Nothing makes an insult sound sexier than a British accent.

Anyhow, our story opens with Sam having survived the events of the previous two movies, including graduating from college. He’s moved to Washington DC, where the following have occurred: (1) he received a medal from President Obama, (2) he has pretty much been given the runaround as far as job searches are concerned, and (3) has landed a nuclear-hot girlfriend in Carly (Rosie Huntington-Whitely), a British-embassy-attached-turned-car-museum-hostess (or something). Carly works for a smarmy prick named Dylan (Patrick Dempsey) who you just know is going to turn out to be a baddie.

Sure enough, the Autobots and Decepticons rear their metallic heads again and decide to throw down once more. This time, it involves reviving the lost planet of Megatron (or something) and using the Earth’s resources to accomplish that. Before you know it, Chicago becomes the focal point of internecine warfare between the walking metal heaps in a ferocious battle to the death - with Sam, Carly, and our military hotties once again caught in the crossfire.

Will the Decepticons triumph over the Autobots this time? Or will the good guys win yet again? Will Sam pitch in and do his share in saving the Earth yet again? Or will he just say “Fuck this” and go on vacation with Carly and lay out (and lay each other) on a Philippine beach?

You know what I would do. Break out the sunblock and edible body oil…


BUT, SERIOUSLY: Like I mentioned above, I haven’t seen either the first or second installment of the TRANSFORMER series. Fortunately, that didn’t really stop me from enjoying the action spectacle that is TRANSFORMERS: DARK OF THE MOON. What I like about Michael Bay’s movies (even ARMAGEDDON and THE ROCK) is how loose and fun they are. They may be too loud and action-oriented, but their common denominator is always the warm rapport between the characters. One of my mottos in life is “Laughter is the Best Medicine” and “Always Smile”, and I think the best way to get an audience to warm to film characters is through humor and kindness. The strengths of Bay’s films are their hidden humanity and sly comic sensibility, and this film’s best moments emphasize that just as much as it does the impressive (and eventually numbing) action.

Shia LeBoeuf is rapidly shaping up to be a formidable lead actor. He’s only 25 - practically a baby - but he has the gravity and confidence of a much older actor. In fact, I’ve started to think of him as a younger, American version of Russell Crowe. Or “Baby Crowe.” LeBoeuf just owns the screen with a potent combo of raw masculinity, goofy humor, and brash charisma. If he plays his cards right, and I hope he does, he could very well mirror Russell Crowe’s career.

The biggest question is whether model-turned-actress Rosie Huntington-Whitely makes us forget Megan Fox. Well, not having seen the first two TRANSFORMERS or Fox’s performances in them, I can’t really say or compare Huntington-Whitely’s work to hers. I can only judge it in terms of this film, and considering H-W has never acted before, she does reasonably well. Of course, the role of Carly doesn’t really call for more than H-W to be beautiful, sweet, and feisty, but she does it in a natural way that doesn’t draw any negative attention. She doesn’t embarrass herself, and manages to hold her own against LeBoeuf and the rest of the more experienced cast.

John Turturro, Frances McDormand, Josh Duhamel, Patrick Dempsey, and Tyrese Gibson all provide vivid support to LeBoeuf and Huntington-Whitely. Most engaging is Frances McDormand, whose driven, impatient character appears to be modeled off Miranda Priestley (Meryl Streep) in THE DEVIL WEARS PRADA. McDormand is a hoot, especially in her scenes with Turturro as a returning scientist from the first two flicks. I’d like to see more of these two in future sequels…

In the end, I enjoyed TRANSFORMERS 3. If it has a flaw that keeps it from rating higher than above-average, it’s that the climactic battle in Chicago between the warring Transformers and the humans caught between them, goes on a little too long. Other than that, though, it’s guilty pleasure of a good time…

Now, I must remind myself to get TRANSFORMERS 1 and 2 to get caught up…

# 366 - THE TREE OF LIFE (2011)

THE TREE OF LIFE (2011 - DRAMA) **** out of *****

(Also known by its alternate title: WTF: THE MOVIE…)



CAST: Brad Pitt, Jessica Chastain, Sean Penn, Laramie Eppler, Hunter McCracken, Tye Sheridan, Joanna Going.

DIRECTOR: Terence Malick

WARNING: Some cerebral aneurysms lying in wait for the unwary - straight ahead…




This past two weeks were an interesting one for me as an armchair movie critic. A week from last Monday night, a friend and I ventured out to see THE TREE OF LIFE. Then, this past week, another pal and I went to see TRANSFORMERS 3. I don’t have to tell you folks that these two flicks are pretty much on diametric opposites of the cinematic spectrum. In other words, seeing THE TREE OF LIFE and TRANSFORMERS 3 nearly back-to-back is like going on a speed-dating night with Mother Teresa and Jenna Jameson.

The trailers for THE TREE OF LIFE are the first sign that we shouldn’t be expecting any transforming robots or Victoria’s Secret models trying to make us forget Megan Fox. Or, to put it more succinctly, knowing is going to mistake this flick for a Michael Bay production anytime soon. In fact, this is the kind of film that would face off against ARMAGEDDON, BAD BOYS, THE ROCK, THE ISLAND, TRANSFORMERS 1-3, and any other Michael Bay-inspired action kablam-fest, if films were sentient beings capable of re-enacting the gang-war scene in WEST SIDE STORY.

But I digress. It’s going to be hard to try to parse the plot of the THE TREE OF LIFE, since it’s about as oblique a face-down book. But here goes: Mr. and Mrs. O’Brien (Brad Pitt, Jessica Chastain) and their three boys (Hunter McCracken, Laramie Eppler, Tye Sheridan), are your average middle-class family in Texas in the 1950’s. Average, that is, if every other family in town has an abusive father for a breadwinner. Yes, folks… Mr. O’Brien is kind of a prick. And no one knows this more than his oldest son, who gets the brunt of Pop’s anger.

Think you know where this flick is heading? You have no idea. Suffice it to say, the “troubled family” angle is just a framework for additional themes and plot threads that include: (1) planets being born, (2) the sun firing sunspots, (3) alien planets, (4) velociraptors facing off against stegosaurs, and (5) more stuff that just might make you turn to the person next to you and say: “Did we smoke a bowl before leaving the house and not realize it?”

Yes, folks. Your mind will be blown. And not in the pleasurable way that makes you walk funny for days afterwards….


BUT, SERIOUSLY: Director Terrence Malick has only made five films in his 38-year career. He is also famously private and doesn’t speak about them to the press as much as other directors and filmmakers do. As a result, he’s a bit of a mysterious figure, and so are his films, which tend to be far removed from your average cookie-cutter Hollywood product. As a result, audiences are left to their own devices to piece together the puzzle of his cinematic stories. None of his films are more enigmatic than THE TREE OF LIFE, though…

I was frustrated while watching THE TREE OF LIFE. Moments of sheer brilliance and emotional clarity were juxtaposed with entire passages that left me puzzled and confused. Add to this a leaden pace (not always a bad thing) and repeated use of “fade to black” transitions, and I found myself wishing the movie would end early. I even did something I haven’t done in a very long time: I looked at my phone to see what time it was. I didn’t even do that for PREDATORS.

Why, then, did I give THE TREE OF LIFE a rating of **** (very good)? Well, let’s just say that the friend whom I saw the film with engaged me in a conversation about it afterwards. I told him that parts I liked, and the parts I didn’t like. Then something wonderful occurred: as I was discussing the puzzling parts with him, it all fell into place. I suddenly got the film. And I realized what Terrence Malick was going for. Or, considering he never comments on his intentions, what I think he was going for.

I don’t want to say any more, except that parsed down to its core, this film is about how we as humans can be more than what nature intends us to be. And more than the hurdles that life has thrown our way. You can be small, bitter, cynical, mistrustful, brittle, paranoid. Or you can turn your back on people like that and be the change you want to see in the world. Being a realist doesn’t mean becoming bitter and cynical. That is a lamentable misconception. Being a realist is seeing the flaws in life and people - but not letting that be your overall guiding principle. It’s about seeing the negative, taking note of it, then releasing it, and not letting it turn you into a brittle shell - and choosing to believe that something better is a possibility. Not a certainty (that would be idealism), but a possibility.

That’s what I got out of the THE TREE OF LIFE. Of course, I believed all those things before. It’s nice to know that Terrence Malick, one of our most gifted cinematic artists, is of the same mind. And let me add that the cast is excellent. Brad Pitt actually made me forget that he is Brad Pitt, while Jessica Chastain and Sean Penn are equally good. Chastain, in particular, more than holds her own against her more established co-stars. Praise must also be heaped on the trio of child actors who play the three young sons of the film's central couple. Tye Sheridan, Hunter McCracken, and Laramie Eppler are all terrific, and hopefully will forge solid careers in the future...

See this movie now, if you don’t mind puzzles that take some time to solve. Do not see it if your favorite movie was ARMAGEDDON or THE ROCK. You just may not survive…

SNEAK PEEK: This Weekend's Reviews...

Hello, folks...

Please find below a sneak peek at our four movie reviews for this weekend. Please expect them to post by Monday night. Also, please expect a game report for the Sounders/Galaxy match down in L.A.

Have a great fourth! Live it up. We sure as hell are...

And to ring in the Fourth, as part of our music appreciation schpiel, please revel in Katy Perry's "Hot N'Cold" from the THE PROPOSAL, one of our reviews this weekend. It perfectly captures the love/hate attraction between Ryan Reynolds and Sandra Bullock's characters. Doesn't hurt that they've got awesome chemistry.