In television, a "hiatus" refers to a short pause in a show's broadcast schedule when a network temporarily takes an under-performing show off the air for a few weeks. In reality, "hiatus" is code for "cancellation," a kind way of quietly removing a show from the schedule without the humiliation of announcing its been cancelled. It's only after audiences have forgotten about it does the bad news come out.
The good news is that the Cheese Fry has not been cancelled. It really was on an August hiatus.
But now we're back, leaner and meaner than ever. For those handful of people who expressed sadness at our lack of postings... thanks! We didn't know anyone was actually out there.
9.09.2008
7.26.2008
Knee-jerk review: "The X-Files: I Want to Believe"
1. Strange subtitle, isn't it?
2. But a way cool poster.
3. It's a fairly low-key movie, more a character drama than a creepy supernatural thriller. No special effects really.
4. Then again, that's a good thing compared to the over-the-top, convoluted conspiracy mess that was the first feature film back in 1998.
5. There's not much humor, something at which the TV show excelled. The quirky episodes were always the best.
6. Nice surprise appearance of a fan favorite character at the end. Didn't see that coming.
7. Plenty of frustrating plot holes and logic lapses here. Coincidental moments where two characters cross paths at just the right time to advance the plot. But upon further review, those kinds of story contrivances were a big part of the TV show. Then more you think about it, the more this movie feels like an extended episode of the show. Whether that's a good thing or a bad thing depends on your expectations.
8. Gillian Anderson has aged very nicely. Wow. She looks better now than she did in 1994.
9. Some really great little moments here (especially when Mulder and Scully get into one of their great back-and-forths about the evidence and what it could mean), but also some very forced, rushed moments. Feels like sometimes the filmmakers are hurrying things along to keep things as brief as possible.
10. The big bad-guy secret isn't as shocking as it probably could have been. Also some disappointing parallels to things like Hostel and Silence of the Lambs.
11. For fans of the show, it'll certainly be enjoyable. But did it really need to be made? What could have been an enduring feature franchise may have paid the price for waiting too long to ramp up again (thanks in part to a nasty legal fight between Fox and creator Chris Carter).
12. There's also a considerable "ick" factor that involves pedophiles and deviant homosexuals.
2. But a way cool poster.
3. It's a fairly low-key movie, more a character drama than a creepy supernatural thriller. No special effects really.
4. Then again, that's a good thing compared to the over-the-top, convoluted conspiracy mess that was the first feature film back in 1998.
5. There's not much humor, something at which the TV show excelled. The quirky episodes were always the best.
6. Nice surprise appearance of a fan favorite character at the end. Didn't see that coming.
7. Plenty of frustrating plot holes and logic lapses here. Coincidental moments where two characters cross paths at just the right time to advance the plot. But upon further review, those kinds of story contrivances were a big part of the TV show. Then more you think about it, the more this movie feels like an extended episode of the show. Whether that's a good thing or a bad thing depends on your expectations.
8. Gillian Anderson has aged very nicely. Wow. She looks better now than she did in 1994.
9. Some really great little moments here (especially when Mulder and Scully get into one of their great back-and-forths about the evidence and what it could mean), but also some very forced, rushed moments. Feels like sometimes the filmmakers are hurrying things along to keep things as brief as possible.
10. The big bad-guy secret isn't as shocking as it probably could have been. Also some disappointing parallels to things like Hostel and Silence of the Lambs.
11. For fans of the show, it'll certainly be enjoyable. But did it really need to be made? What could have been an enduring feature franchise may have paid the price for waiting too long to ramp up again (thanks in part to a nasty legal fight between Fox and creator Chris Carter).
12. There's also a considerable "ick" factor that involves pedophiles and deviant homosexuals.
7.20.2008
Knee-jerk review: "The Dark Knight"
1. Sometimes too much of a good thing is a bad thing. This movie's about 30 minutes too long. Sorry.
2. Everything you've heard about Heath Ledger's Joker is true. That performance is a force of nature. Funny, feral, unpredictable.
3. Maggie Gyllenhaal is about a 300% upgrade over Katie Holmes, who was so hopelessly in over her heard in Batman Begins playing the same character. Gyllenhaal's a woman, whereas Holmes is a little girl.
4. The raspy voice Christian Bale uses when he's Batman works great when he's saying something bad-ass like "Drop the gun." But when he has to deliver long impassioned speeches that affected voice is just silly.
5. They flipped an 18-wheeler truck end over end. Wow. It's hard these days to see a stunt you haven't seen before.
6. Why would anyone want to work as a Gotham City cop? It looks like you never have a day off.
7. We didn't get the Harvey Two-Face character when Tommy Lee Jones played him in Batman Forever. But with Aaron Eckhart, we get it.
8. The problem with the movie is that there's too much of it. If you're looking at your watch and wondering if the movie will ever end, then someone somewhere has made a miscalculaton. Here, there's at least one action set piece too many and the final climax is so convoluted and over-the-top that it's hard to sometimes follow the action, much less care what happens. Part of the problem is a strange bit where Joker suddenly concocts an elaborate hostage situation (this is a movie full of hostage situations) straight out of a Saw movie.
9. You can only watch (and hear in Dolby Digital) so many explosions before it all starts to lose impact and you get numb.
10. Even so, this is probably the best superhero movie to so explicitly explore the fine line between vigilante and criminal, justice and vengeance, law and lawlessness. Thematically, the film is very sophisticated. How far can you push a just man before he snaps and becomes unjust? How much (or how little) would it take Batman to become the Joker?
11. It's fun to see Gary Oldman playing a bookish, mild-mannered hero.
12. "You complete me."
13. It must be nice to be a billionaire.
2. Everything you've heard about Heath Ledger's Joker is true. That performance is a force of nature. Funny, feral, unpredictable.
3. Maggie Gyllenhaal is about a 300% upgrade over Katie Holmes, who was so hopelessly in over her heard in Batman Begins playing the same character. Gyllenhaal's a woman, whereas Holmes is a little girl.
4. The raspy voice Christian Bale uses when he's Batman works great when he's saying something bad-ass like "Drop the gun." But when he has to deliver long impassioned speeches that affected voice is just silly.
5. They flipped an 18-wheeler truck end over end. Wow. It's hard these days to see a stunt you haven't seen before.
6. Why would anyone want to work as a Gotham City cop? It looks like you never have a day off.
7. We didn't get the Harvey Two-Face character when Tommy Lee Jones played him in Batman Forever. But with Aaron Eckhart, we get it.
8. The problem with the movie is that there's too much of it. If you're looking at your watch and wondering if the movie will ever end, then someone somewhere has made a miscalculaton. Here, there's at least one action set piece too many and the final climax is so convoluted and over-the-top that it's hard to sometimes follow the action, much less care what happens. Part of the problem is a strange bit where Joker suddenly concocts an elaborate hostage situation (this is a movie full of hostage situations) straight out of a Saw movie.
9. You can only watch (and hear in Dolby Digital) so many explosions before it all starts to lose impact and you get numb.
10. Even so, this is probably the best superhero movie to so explicitly explore the fine line between vigilante and criminal, justice and vengeance, law and lawlessness. Thematically, the film is very sophisticated. How far can you push a just man before he snaps and becomes unjust? How much (or how little) would it take Batman to become the Joker?
11. It's fun to see Gary Oldman playing a bookish, mild-mannered hero.
12. "You complete me."
13. It must be nice to be a billionaire.
Let's 86 number 4.
If you look at it honestly and objectively, the enduring appeal of Brett Favre really boils down to three rather cliched observations about him.
1. He's loves playing football. This is invariably uttered by sportscasters over video of Brett grinning after a play or horsing around with his teammates. Of course, there are also many infamous moments - too may to count, actually - when Favre would make stupid decisions on the field, heaving a ball into the air or forcing it into double coverage, that would result in an interception. And there would be Favre jogging to the sidelines, shrugging with a little smirk. We'll get them next time, coach. There's confidence and there's recklessness. Yeah, he's not always the most level-headed, consistent player... but he loves to play, by golly. It might have worked out better for the Packers overall if they'd had a guy who maybe hates to play a little, but does so with a smarter attitude.
2. He's a good guy. This stems mostly from his aw-shucks, Southern-fried personality, all laid-back charm and stubbled machismo. He's the kind of guy you'd want to buy a beer for, a perfect complement to the blue-collar town of Green Bay, Wisconsin. Of course, none of us really know Favre, so we'll have to just take at face value the many ESPN interview packages that help reinforce this notion that Favre's a guy's guy who chops wood and drinks Pabst. Albeit a guy's guy who makes millions and millions of dollars. Maybe he should buy the beer.
3. He's one of the most durable players in the NFL. Favre certainly earns this one, having made 253 consecutive starts at quarterback. In a league where every game is the equivalent of a multi-car accident, that is an amazing feat. Then again, consecutive starts don't necessarily equal wins. Why is this such a big deal again?
It's not fun, we know. It's practically an American requirement to love Favre. But look yourself in the mirror. Favre is a great story, but he's always been a very streaky player.
In fact, the time may be drawing nigh when we all have to re-evaluate Number 7. Because the escalating retirement/unretirement soap opera between Favre and the Packers front office is not only exhausting, it's threatening to completely undermine the Favre Myth. He's now seeming so petulant and whiny that you'd think he was an NBA player.
Submitted for your consideration:
* A recent network sports show interviewed a number of NFL quarterbacks, all of whom said something along the lines of "He's Brett Favre - he should do what he wants." So if you're a celebrated athlete, there's no reason to be bound by a contract, much less any sort of common courtesy? Okay, just checking.
* Favre recently claimed that the Packers "forced" him out. You can maybe force out the second-string safety you drafted out of Eastern Nevada State. No way do you force out one of the best-known QB brands in the NFL. The fact that Favre expects anyone to believe that line of crap is beyond belief. In fact, it's insulting.
* The Packers contend that they had arrangements with Favre to un-retire back in March, but he changed his mind. Read that sentence again. They were ready to take him back when he said never mind. And so now he's changing his mind back. Again. This unending vacillation is selfish in the extreme, as if Favre has some sort of twisted psychological need to be the center of attention. You'll surely recall that this kind of farce has played out the last two off-seasons as Favre cruelly left the Packers and its fans wondering for months if the Great Favre would come down form the mountaintop and deign to grace them with his 17 touchdowns and 32 interceptions. It's arrogant behavior that does not match the fuzzy PR image of Favre as the good guy who loves to play football. In fact, if this guy is so unsure what he wants to do, if you're in the huddle with him you have to be wondering if he'll suddenly retire again in the middle of the season.
* Favre recently also had the audacity to suggest he's upset with the Packers because they haven't been very welcoming or warm to him. Unbelievable. Why should they be? Can you imagine what might happen if any of us quit our job and then wandered back in three months later demanding it back... and then complaining about a lack of warmth when the red carpet wasn't rolled out? This isn't the real world, people. It's the Coddled-Star-Athlete-World. It's just sad that we're learning Favre is among its inhabitants, no different than crybabies like Terrell Owens or Chad Johnson or Randy Moss.
* Now comes word that the real reason Favre suddenly wants to un-retire might be the Minnesota Vikings, a Packer division rival, want to sign him. Favre surely figured he'd snap his fingers and get the Packers to release him to play wherever he wanted. I mean, come on. He's a good guy who loves to play football.
This sordid mess will have no happy ending, not for Favre, not for the Packers.
One thing is certain: if Favre plays again in the 2008 season, the Cheese Fry will now vigorously root against Brett Favre. You should, too.
UPDATE: An unofficial ombudsman of the Cheese Fry, Taco Salad, correctly pointed out that the original title of this post "Let's 86 number 7" made no sense as Favre's number is, in fact, number 4. The Cheese Fry regrets the error.
1. He's loves playing football. This is invariably uttered by sportscasters over video of Brett grinning after a play or horsing around with his teammates. Of course, there are also many infamous moments - too may to count, actually - when Favre would make stupid decisions on the field, heaving a ball into the air or forcing it into double coverage, that would result in an interception. And there would be Favre jogging to the sidelines, shrugging with a little smirk. We'll get them next time, coach. There's confidence and there's recklessness. Yeah, he's not always the most level-headed, consistent player... but he loves to play, by golly. It might have worked out better for the Packers overall if they'd had a guy who maybe hates to play a little, but does so with a smarter attitude.
2. He's a good guy. This stems mostly from his aw-shucks, Southern-fried personality, all laid-back charm and stubbled machismo. He's the kind of guy you'd want to buy a beer for, a perfect complement to the blue-collar town of Green Bay, Wisconsin. Of course, none of us really know Favre, so we'll have to just take at face value the many ESPN interview packages that help reinforce this notion that Favre's a guy's guy who chops wood and drinks Pabst. Albeit a guy's guy who makes millions and millions of dollars. Maybe he should buy the beer.
3. He's one of the most durable players in the NFL. Favre certainly earns this one, having made 253 consecutive starts at quarterback. In a league where every game is the equivalent of a multi-car accident, that is an amazing feat. Then again, consecutive starts don't necessarily equal wins. Why is this such a big deal again?
It's not fun, we know. It's practically an American requirement to love Favre. But look yourself in the mirror. Favre is a great story, but he's always been a very streaky player.
In fact, the time may be drawing nigh when we all have to re-evaluate Number 7. Because the escalating retirement/unretirement soap opera between Favre and the Packers front office is not only exhausting, it's threatening to completely undermine the Favre Myth. He's now seeming so petulant and whiny that you'd think he was an NBA player.
Submitted for your consideration:
* A recent network sports show interviewed a number of NFL quarterbacks, all of whom said something along the lines of "He's Brett Favre - he should do what he wants." So if you're a celebrated athlete, there's no reason to be bound by a contract, much less any sort of common courtesy? Okay, just checking.
* Favre recently claimed that the Packers "forced" him out. You can maybe force out the second-string safety you drafted out of Eastern Nevada State. No way do you force out one of the best-known QB brands in the NFL. The fact that Favre expects anyone to believe that line of crap is beyond belief. In fact, it's insulting.
* The Packers contend that they had arrangements with Favre to un-retire back in March, but he changed his mind. Read that sentence again. They were ready to take him back when he said never mind. And so now he's changing his mind back. Again. This unending vacillation is selfish in the extreme, as if Favre has some sort of twisted psychological need to be the center of attention. You'll surely recall that this kind of farce has played out the last two off-seasons as Favre cruelly left the Packers and its fans wondering for months if the Great Favre would come down form the mountaintop and deign to grace them with his 17 touchdowns and 32 interceptions. It's arrogant behavior that does not match the fuzzy PR image of Favre as the good guy who loves to play football. In fact, if this guy is so unsure what he wants to do, if you're in the huddle with him you have to be wondering if he'll suddenly retire again in the middle of the season.
* Favre recently also had the audacity to suggest he's upset with the Packers because they haven't been very welcoming or warm to him. Unbelievable. Why should they be? Can you imagine what might happen if any of us quit our job and then wandered back in three months later demanding it back... and then complaining about a lack of warmth when the red carpet wasn't rolled out? This isn't the real world, people. It's the Coddled-Star-Athlete-World. It's just sad that we're learning Favre is among its inhabitants, no different than crybabies like Terrell Owens or Chad Johnson or Randy Moss.
* Now comes word that the real reason Favre suddenly wants to un-retire might be the Minnesota Vikings, a Packer division rival, want to sign him. Favre surely figured he'd snap his fingers and get the Packers to release him to play wherever he wanted. I mean, come on. He's a good guy who loves to play football.
This sordid mess will have no happy ending, not for Favre, not for the Packers.
One thing is certain: if Favre plays again in the 2008 season, the Cheese Fry will now vigorously root against Brett Favre. You should, too.
UPDATE: An unofficial ombudsman of the Cheese Fry, Taco Salad, correctly pointed out that the original title of this post "Let's 86 number 7" made no sense as Favre's number is, in fact, number 4. The Cheese Fry regrets the error.
"Fists with your toes..."
Last week was the 20th anniversary of the theatrical release of Die Hard. The Cheese Fry remembers well his first encounter with that action classic: an employees-only, after-hours screening at the now-defunct United Artists Walnut Hill 6 movie theater. Suffice it to say, none of us had ever seen anything like it. So many movies over the years have ripped off, er, paid homage to Die Hard, it's easy to forget how revolutionary the film was back in 1988.
To celebrate the anniversary, Martians Attacking Indianapolis offers an exhaustive and insightful analysis of Die Hard.
To celebrate the anniversary, Martians Attacking Indianapolis offers an exhaustive and insightful analysis of Die Hard.
7.16.2008
Pixar Animation vs. Dreamworks Animation
Let's agree for the purposes of this discussion that the undisputed bronze medalist these days when it comes to feature film animation is 20th Century Fox. We'll stipulate that Robots was something of a charming mess and Ice Age was fun.
But the heavyweights - the George Foreman and the Muhammad Ali of CGI animation - are Pixar and Dreamworks.
So which one's Ali (the flashy, charismatic pretty boy) and which one's Foreman (the dependable, low-key workhorse)?
Let's look at the tale of the tape.
1. BOX OFFICE
Pixar Animation
Wall-E (2008, $171 million in grosses worldwide to date)
Ratatouille (2007, $621m)
Cars (2006, $461m)
The Incredibles (2005, $631m)
Finding Nemo (2003, $864m)
Monsters, Inc. (2001, $525m)
Toy Story 2 (1999, $485m)
A Bug's Life (1998, $363m)
Toy Story (1995, $361m)
* Nine releases, $4.48b - an average of $498m per release
Dreamworks Animation
Kung Fu Panda (2008, $357m to date)
Shrek the Third (2007, $798)
Flushed Away (2006, $177)
Over the Hedge (2006, $336m)
Wallace and Gromit in the Curse of the Were-Rabbit (2005, $192m)
Madagascar (2005, $532m)
Shark Tale (2004, $367m)
Shrek 2 (2004, $919m)
Shrek (2001, $484m)
* Nine releases, $4.33b - an average of $482m per release
At first glance, it seems close though Kung Fu Panda has about a three-week head start on Wall-E. Who knows how that head-to-head race will end up? Even so, one cannot overlook the muscle that is the Shrek franchise. A fourth one's on the way, of course. But what ultimately tips the balance in Dreamworks' favor is the mulligan that was its ill-fated venture with Aardman Animations. If you rightfully discount the Flushed Away and Curse of the Were-Rabbit flops (which forced Dreamworks to embrace Aardman's cutesy claymation look and dry British humor), then Dreamworks' seven releases average out to $567m per release. That's almost $100 million more per release than Pixar.
Advantage: Dreamworks.
2. ACADEMY AWARDS
Pixar Animation
Wall-E (2008) - nomination practically a foregone conclusion
Ratatouille (2007) - nomination
Cars (2006) - nomination
The Incredibles (2005) - winner
Finding Nemo (2003) - winner
Monsters, Inc. (2001) - nomination
* two wins, three nominations
Dreamworks Animation
Wallace and Gromit in the Curse of the Were-Rabbit (2005) - winner
Shark Tale (2004) - nomination
Shrek 2 (2004) - nomination
Shrek (2001) - winner
* two wins, two nominations
Dreamworks can lay claim to the first ever Oscar for animated feature with Shrek, but every one of Pixar's releases since the category was created in 2001 has been nominated or won. That's an impressive streak.
Advantage: Pixar.
3. ARTISTIC MERIT
Here's where things start to get subjective. It's tempting to look down your nose at Dreamworks Animation, especially in light of the painterly beauty of Pixar films like Ratatouille or Wall-E. But don't forget the detailed whimsy of Shrek or the kinetic energy of Kung Fu Panda. Every release, including those from the show horse 20th Century Fox, pushes the envelope and finds new ways to play with the CG toolbox. But, you say, what about how Pixar practically invented the whole medium with Toy Story? Good point, but don't forget the way Dreamworks' Shrek single-handedly created a subgenre - right or wrong - of animation with nudge-nudge self-awareness, droll irony, and winking pop-culture jokes.
Advantage: Draw.
4. PRODUCTION SYSTEM
Dreamworks Animation, it seems, works like old Hollywood. CEO Jeffrey Katzenberg is the boss and everyone else jumps through hoops to keep him satisfied and curry his favor. The scripts and storyboards are written and rewritten again and again, endlessly tweaked by a parade of interchangeable directors and writers. The important element in this system is the gag, the sequence, the payoff.
Pixar, on the other hand, seems to work more like a Wall Street firm. There are no freelancers at Pixar coming and going like Dreamworks' hired guns. There's a continuity there, a family atmosphere. The same artists and technicians and writers and directors work together for years at a time on several projects. The important element for Pixar seems more holistic as a result: it's all about the big picture, the story.
Advantage: Draw. It's hard to argue with the results of either system.
5. COMMERCIALISM
This is the big one. Dreamworks makes no effort to hide the fact that its animated films are conceived with an eye towards sequels. The name of the game is launching franchises - a long chain of DVDs, toys, TV shows, theme park rides, and breafast cereals. The studio found a goldmine with Shrek and will milk it for as long as it can. Dreamworks' only other big hit is Madagascar - and guess what? A sequel is coming to a theater near you very soon. Though all companies exist to make a profit, there is something dispiriting about the way Dreamworks seems so solely interested in big tentpole franchises. It seems like they make Shrek movies and little else. And even the movies that aren't Shrek feel like Shrek: overblown characters, snarky gags and one-liners, broad humor and slapstick. It's a formula.
Pixar has its Toy Story franchise, true, but it mostly seems curiously determined to not go back to the same well twice. Every movie is different. They may, like any story geared at least in part to kids, explore the same morals of Be Yourself, but they all have their own feel. Paris of Ratatouille feels wholly unlike the flat desert of Cars or the future world of Wall-E. This interest in exploring different looks and genres and characters give Pixar films an artistry. With few exceptions, Pixar films are masterpieces. Dreamworks films are, well, they're entertaining movies.
Advantage: Pixar.
It's close one, but for now, it's Pixar taking Dreamworks the distance, winning by a TKO in the final round, using finesse and footwork (a love of the game) to counter Dreamworks' powerful-but-limited combinations. But that's okay - Dreamworks didn't really want to win. It just wanted the big purse.
But the heavyweights - the George Foreman and the Muhammad Ali of CGI animation - are Pixar and Dreamworks.
So which one's Ali (the flashy, charismatic pretty boy) and which one's Foreman (the dependable, low-key workhorse)?
Let's look at the tale of the tape.
1. BOX OFFICE
Pixar Animation
Wall-E (2008, $171 million in grosses worldwide to date)
Ratatouille (2007, $621m)
Cars (2006, $461m)
The Incredibles (2005, $631m)
Finding Nemo (2003, $864m)
Monsters, Inc. (2001, $525m)
Toy Story 2 (1999, $485m)
A Bug's Life (1998, $363m)
Toy Story (1995, $361m)
* Nine releases, $4.48b - an average of $498m per release
Dreamworks Animation
Kung Fu Panda (2008, $357m to date)
Shrek the Third (2007, $798)
Flushed Away (2006, $177)
Over the Hedge (2006, $336m)
Wallace and Gromit in the Curse of the Were-Rabbit (2005, $192m)
Madagascar (2005, $532m)
Shark Tale (2004, $367m)
Shrek 2 (2004, $919m)
Shrek (2001, $484m)
* Nine releases, $4.33b - an average of $482m per release
At first glance, it seems close though Kung Fu Panda has about a three-week head start on Wall-E. Who knows how that head-to-head race will end up? Even so, one cannot overlook the muscle that is the Shrek franchise. A fourth one's on the way, of course. But what ultimately tips the balance in Dreamworks' favor is the mulligan that was its ill-fated venture with Aardman Animations. If you rightfully discount the Flushed Away and Curse of the Were-Rabbit flops (which forced Dreamworks to embrace Aardman's cutesy claymation look and dry British humor), then Dreamworks' seven releases average out to $567m per release. That's almost $100 million more per release than Pixar.
Advantage: Dreamworks.
2. ACADEMY AWARDS
Pixar Animation
Wall-E (2008) - nomination practically a foregone conclusion
Ratatouille (2007) - nomination
Cars (2006) - nomination
The Incredibles (2005) - winner
Finding Nemo (2003) - winner
Monsters, Inc. (2001) - nomination
* two wins, three nominations
Dreamworks Animation
Wallace and Gromit in the Curse of the Were-Rabbit (2005) - winner
Shark Tale (2004) - nomination
Shrek 2 (2004) - nomination
Shrek (2001) - winner
* two wins, two nominations
Dreamworks can lay claim to the first ever Oscar for animated feature with Shrek, but every one of Pixar's releases since the category was created in 2001 has been nominated or won. That's an impressive streak.
Advantage: Pixar.
3. ARTISTIC MERIT
Here's where things start to get subjective. It's tempting to look down your nose at Dreamworks Animation, especially in light of the painterly beauty of Pixar films like Ratatouille or Wall-E. But don't forget the detailed whimsy of Shrek or the kinetic energy of Kung Fu Panda. Every release, including those from the show horse 20th Century Fox, pushes the envelope and finds new ways to play with the CG toolbox. But, you say, what about how Pixar practically invented the whole medium with Toy Story? Good point, but don't forget the way Dreamworks' Shrek single-handedly created a subgenre - right or wrong - of animation with nudge-nudge self-awareness, droll irony, and winking pop-culture jokes.
Advantage: Draw.
4. PRODUCTION SYSTEM
Dreamworks Animation, it seems, works like old Hollywood. CEO Jeffrey Katzenberg is the boss and everyone else jumps through hoops to keep him satisfied and curry his favor. The scripts and storyboards are written and rewritten again and again, endlessly tweaked by a parade of interchangeable directors and writers. The important element in this system is the gag, the sequence, the payoff.
Pixar, on the other hand, seems to work more like a Wall Street firm. There are no freelancers at Pixar coming and going like Dreamworks' hired guns. There's a continuity there, a family atmosphere. The same artists and technicians and writers and directors work together for years at a time on several projects. The important element for Pixar seems more holistic as a result: it's all about the big picture, the story.
Advantage: Draw. It's hard to argue with the results of either system.
5. COMMERCIALISM
This is the big one. Dreamworks makes no effort to hide the fact that its animated films are conceived with an eye towards sequels. The name of the game is launching franchises - a long chain of DVDs, toys, TV shows, theme park rides, and breafast cereals. The studio found a goldmine with Shrek and will milk it for as long as it can. Dreamworks' only other big hit is Madagascar - and guess what? A sequel is coming to a theater near you very soon. Though all companies exist to make a profit, there is something dispiriting about the way Dreamworks seems so solely interested in big tentpole franchises. It seems like they make Shrek movies and little else. And even the movies that aren't Shrek feel like Shrek: overblown characters, snarky gags and one-liners, broad humor and slapstick. It's a formula.
Pixar has its Toy Story franchise, true, but it mostly seems curiously determined to not go back to the same well twice. Every movie is different. They may, like any story geared at least in part to kids, explore the same morals of Be Yourself, but they all have their own feel. Paris of Ratatouille feels wholly unlike the flat desert of Cars or the future world of Wall-E. This interest in exploring different looks and genres and characters give Pixar films an artistry. With few exceptions, Pixar films are masterpieces. Dreamworks films are, well, they're entertaining movies.
Advantage: Pixar.
It's close one, but for now, it's Pixar taking Dreamworks the distance, winning by a TKO in the final round, using finesse and footwork (a love of the game) to counter Dreamworks' powerful-but-limited combinations. But that's okay - Dreamworks didn't really want to win. It just wanted the big purse.
7.06.2008
Knee-jerk review: "Hancock"
1. Outstanding.
2. "I been drinking, bitch."
3. Ironman might be the better traditional popcorn kind of big summer action movie, but Hancock is far richer. It feels more important, more substantive. There are a lot of unexpected narrative and thematic layers here, the sorts of things that stay with you long after the lights come up.
4. Inexplicably, many critics are giving the movie bad reviews. Some think it's a sort of backlash against Will Smith, the suggestion being that it's time for him to have a flop. Luckily, moviegoers don't seem to be buying into that nonsense. The film made over $100 million in its first five days and will surely benefit from strong word of mouth.
5. A lot of critics are focusing on a whopper of a second act twist. If you're expecting Ironman or Batman or any of those other superhero "mans" then, yes, the twist can be hard to swallow. It changes everything. But it also kicks the movie into a higher gear that raises complicated questions about heroism, love, fate, and self-sacrifice. It's that twist that makes it so special. Without it, it's just a clever little superhero riff.
6. When it comes to movie stars, nowadays there's Tom Hanks and Will Smith and then there's everybody else.
7. It is a little hard to believe how Los Angeles' crooks think they have can actually tangle with Smith's Hancock (who can fly, has superhuman strength, and can't be hurt with bullets) and win. That inexplicable attitude may be the movie's weakest element...
8. ...As is the head-up-the-ass thing, which is funny but utterly impossible.
9. As a sidenote, Charlize Theron has never been sexier.
10. A lot of superhero movies seem studiously interested in portraying "how superheroes would really work in our society." But the way Hancock handles that puts those others movies to shame. It's very easy to imagine a superhero being threatened with lawsuits and arrests or relentlessly second-guessed and attacked in our selfish, coddled society. You saved my life, but you wrecked my car! It's also easy to see how that sort of reaction might make for one very miserable, misanthropic superhero.
11. Director Peter Berg is becoming the next Steven Soderbergh, willing and able to take on any and all genres. Berg's films are always interesting and far better than you might expect: the black comedy Very Bad Things, the action comedy The Rundown, the gritty drama Friday Night Lights, and now Hancock.
12. Nice career resurgence for Jason Bateman. He's solid as always.
13. Go see it.
2. "I been drinking, bitch."
3. Ironman might be the better traditional popcorn kind of big summer action movie, but Hancock is far richer. It feels more important, more substantive. There are a lot of unexpected narrative and thematic layers here, the sorts of things that stay with you long after the lights come up.
4. Inexplicably, many critics are giving the movie bad reviews. Some think it's a sort of backlash against Will Smith, the suggestion being that it's time for him to have a flop. Luckily, moviegoers don't seem to be buying into that nonsense. The film made over $100 million in its first five days and will surely benefit from strong word of mouth.
5. A lot of critics are focusing on a whopper of a second act twist. If you're expecting Ironman or Batman or any of those other superhero "mans" then, yes, the twist can be hard to swallow. It changes everything. But it also kicks the movie into a higher gear that raises complicated questions about heroism, love, fate, and self-sacrifice. It's that twist that makes it so special. Without it, it's just a clever little superhero riff.
6. When it comes to movie stars, nowadays there's Tom Hanks and Will Smith and then there's everybody else.
7. It is a little hard to believe how Los Angeles' crooks think they have can actually tangle with Smith's Hancock (who can fly, has superhuman strength, and can't be hurt with bullets) and win. That inexplicable attitude may be the movie's weakest element...
8. ...As is the head-up-the-ass thing, which is funny but utterly impossible.
9. As a sidenote, Charlize Theron has never been sexier.
10. A lot of superhero movies seem studiously interested in portraying "how superheroes would really work in our society." But the way Hancock handles that puts those others movies to shame. It's very easy to imagine a superhero being threatened with lawsuits and arrests or relentlessly second-guessed and attacked in our selfish, coddled society. You saved my life, but you wrecked my car! It's also easy to see how that sort of reaction might make for one very miserable, misanthropic superhero.
11. Director Peter Berg is becoming the next Steven Soderbergh, willing and able to take on any and all genres. Berg's films are always interesting and far better than you might expect: the black comedy Very Bad Things, the action comedy The Rundown, the gritty drama Friday Night Lights, and now Hancock.
12. Nice career resurgence for Jason Bateman. He's solid as always.
13. Go see it.
7.05.2008
Knee-jerk review: "Wanted"
1. You have to see it, if only to hear Morgan Freeman say a certain 12-letter curse word in that amazing sonorous voice of his.
2. The middle gets mushy with all the ridiculous training and expositional mumbo-jumbo, but the beginning and the ending are... like, wow.
3. Note to self: don't ever stand on an X someone else has put there.
4. The Cheese Fry didn't see the great act two twist coming. We should have, but we didn't. Nicely done.
5. Angelina Jolie is attractive, no doubt. But there's a coldness there, too. She's not warm at all.
6. The Loom of Destiny. That's pretty kick-ass. You have to admit, you've never heard of (or even thought of) anything quite like it.
7. The train scene is pretty frakking amazing.
8. We get that a high metabolism/heartrate could create faster-than-normal, superhuman reflexes. But how would a high metabolism/heartrate help you curve a bullet? Or fly through the air? Here's the answer: it wouldn't.
9. We had high hopes for the movie and wound up slightly disappointed. If only it were 20 minutes shorter.
2. The middle gets mushy with all the ridiculous training and expositional mumbo-jumbo, but the beginning and the ending are... like, wow.
3. Note to self: don't ever stand on an X someone else has put there.
4. The Cheese Fry didn't see the great act two twist coming. We should have, but we didn't. Nicely done.
5. Angelina Jolie is attractive, no doubt. But there's a coldness there, too. She's not warm at all.
6. The Loom of Destiny. That's pretty kick-ass. You have to admit, you've never heard of (or even thought of) anything quite like it.
7. The train scene is pretty frakking amazing.
8. We get that a high metabolism/heartrate could create faster-than-normal, superhuman reflexes. But how would a high metabolism/heartrate help you curve a bullet? Or fly through the air? Here's the answer: it wouldn't.
9. We had high hopes for the movie and wound up slightly disappointed. If only it were 20 minutes shorter.
A brief political interruption
The Cheese Fry isn't a political blog, but William Broyles just wrote a great essay on the Iraq mess for Texas Monthly that's worth a look. Broyles argues for an immediate withdrawal and he's no arugula-loving, draft-dodging liberal. He's a Marine and a Vietnam veteran (Broyles co-created the underrated 1980s Vietname drama series "China Beach"). Plus his son recently did several tours in Iraq. He's the kind of guy whose opinion on war we should all value.
Non-knee-jerk review: "Swingtown"
1. The summer series currently running on CBS isn't an amazing show. But it's a perfectly good show. And one that stands out amid the usual derivative programming that fills the airwaves. It's not a disturbing, bloody police procedural. It's not a loud reality show with preening contestants. It's not even a situation comedy in which everyone's witty and knows just what to say and how to say it. Which of course means "Swingtown" likely won't last long. It's too different. The ratings have declined each and every week for the show, so it's probably only a matter of time before CBS pulls the plug.
2. Yes, ostensibly it's about some couples in suburban 1976 Chicago who swap wives. But it's not nearly as racy as you might imagine.
3. Although it certainly often seems too racy for CBS. One just just imagine the sweaty palms of certain CBS executives watching the rough cuts. Drug use, implied nudity, pornography, promiscuity. In short, this is a show that probably would have thrived on HBO, TNT, or even AMC, places where smaller niche shows can thrive without the demand of big network ratings and audiences.
4. You really don't often seen shows that take so close a look at that awkward situation we've all found ourselves in when we change locations or social positions and have to balance the cool new friends with the slightly uncool old friends. It all feels very fresh.
5. Then again, the show also gives us the very unfresh subplot of a brainy high school girl and her blooming inappropriate romance with a young teacher. Been there, done that. And frankly, it was pretty boring then, too.
6. The three female leads - Molly Parker (our heroine), Lana Parrilla (the cool new friend), and Miriam Show (the uncool old friend) - are outstanding.
7. Clever idea for CBS to make available for downloading the show's 70s-infused soundtrack each week.
8. But all those disco-era songs are also an annoyance. The writing is often so strong that the show's frequent reliance on period songs seems somehow lazy. Does the episode about Molly Parker feeling the stirrings of the women's lib movement really have to end with Helen Reddy's "I Am Woman"? That's the kind of obvious, heavy-handed thing a junior film student would do. The show's better than that.
9. If you want to check it out, tune in before it's too late.
2. Yes, ostensibly it's about some couples in suburban 1976 Chicago who swap wives. But it's not nearly as racy as you might imagine.
3. Although it certainly often seems too racy for CBS. One just just imagine the sweaty palms of certain CBS executives watching the rough cuts. Drug use, implied nudity, pornography, promiscuity. In short, this is a show that probably would have thrived on HBO, TNT, or even AMC, places where smaller niche shows can thrive without the demand of big network ratings and audiences.
4. You really don't often seen shows that take so close a look at that awkward situation we've all found ourselves in when we change locations or social positions and have to balance the cool new friends with the slightly uncool old friends. It all feels very fresh.
5. Then again, the show also gives us the very unfresh subplot of a brainy high school girl and her blooming inappropriate romance with a young teacher. Been there, done that. And frankly, it was pretty boring then, too.
6. The three female leads - Molly Parker (our heroine), Lana Parrilla (the cool new friend), and Miriam Show (the uncool old friend) - are outstanding.
7. Clever idea for CBS to make available for downloading the show's 70s-infused soundtrack each week.
8. But all those disco-era songs are also an annoyance. The writing is often so strong that the show's frequent reliance on period songs seems somehow lazy. Does the episode about Molly Parker feeling the stirrings of the women's lib movement really have to end with Helen Reddy's "I Am Woman"? That's the kind of obvious, heavy-handed thing a junior film student would do. The show's better than that.
9. If you want to check it out, tune in before it's too late.
Knee-jerk review: "Get Smart"
1. Missed it by that much. It's enjoyable and often quite funny, but it's not as good as it should be. Not even close. Then again, the trouble the producers had with the adaptation shows how genius the TV show was. It was a satire, but also a action show, but also a situation comedy. It was like genre alchemy, turning lead into gold. The movie tries without luck to blend those elements, balancing big-budget action with broad, goofy comedy. It's painful to watch sometimes.
2. Steve Carrell is the perfect Maxwell Smart, of course.
3. And Alan Arkin is the man. The Cheese Fry would see him do anything anywhere. Here he gets some very funny lines, especially one involving a swordfish. Anyone else it's maybe amusing. With Arkin's wry stone face, it's hilarious.
4. But the whole thing is kind of a mess, especially a random act three twist involving Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson.
5. The filmmakers also make the bizarre decision to force some clumsy backstories onto Smart and Agent 99 to make their bonding all the more "plausible." He was fat, she just had her face changed. Weird. And even so, we're sad to report that there's just not a lot of chemistry between Carell and Anne Hathaway. Cutesy bickering doesn't equal romance, people.
6. The bathroom lavatory steel-dart scene is pretty good, though.
7. Nice use of the shoe phone.
8. The L.A. Dime called it: Anne Hathaway transcends the "hot" label. She, in fact, deserves the label "beautiful." It's ridiculous how good she looks.
2. Steve Carrell is the perfect Maxwell Smart, of course.
3. And Alan Arkin is the man. The Cheese Fry would see him do anything anywhere. Here he gets some very funny lines, especially one involving a swordfish. Anyone else it's maybe amusing. With Arkin's wry stone face, it's hilarious.
4. But the whole thing is kind of a mess, especially a random act three twist involving Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson.
5. The filmmakers also make the bizarre decision to force some clumsy backstories onto Smart and Agent 99 to make their bonding all the more "plausible." He was fat, she just had her face changed. Weird. And even so, we're sad to report that there's just not a lot of chemistry between Carell and Anne Hathaway. Cutesy bickering doesn't equal romance, people.
6. The bathroom lavatory steel-dart scene is pretty good, though.
7. Nice use of the shoe phone.
8. The L.A. Dime called it: Anne Hathaway transcends the "hot" label. She, in fact, deserves the label "beautiful." It's ridiculous how good she looks.
"We're back and we're bad, you're black and I'm mad!"
Top six lines from "Lethal Weapon 2"
6. "My dear officer, you could not even give me a parking ticket." - Crooked South African diplomat Arjen Rudd making it clear to Detectives Riggs and Murtaugh the ironclad extent of his diplomatic immunity. Made all the more scary in that exotic South African accent.
5. "After I shoot you through the door you can examine the bullet, now open up." - Riggs talking through the door to accountant-turned-government-witness Leo Getz (who just asked "Who do I know it's the police?"), which is the best role of Joe Pesci's strange career.
4. "Nailed 'em both." - Murtaugh's obligatory one-liner after he dispatches an assassin with an industrial nail-gun. You see, kids, back in the 1980s all movie heroes had to say pithy one-liners after killing their attackers.
3. "Have your brains ever seen the light of day?" - A chilling question from killer Pieter Vorstedt as he's screwing a silencer into the barrel of his gun.
2. "I'm not a cop tonight, Rog. This is personal." - It's a cliche now, of course, but it wasn't perhaps quite so stale a sentiment back in 1989. And few people can do steely, martryed determination like Mel "William Wallace" Gibson, so when he says this line in act three, we know he's about to get medieval.
1. "It's just been revoked." - The money line, the one that made audiences cheer. It's delivered by raspy-voiced Danny Glover moments after he puts a bullet through the forehead of Arjen Rudd. Rudd, you'll recall, just had the gall to shoot up A-list star Mel Gibson and then cry out "Diplomatic immunity!" to Murtaugh in the hopes of getting away with it.
6. "My dear officer, you could not even give me a parking ticket." - Crooked South African diplomat Arjen Rudd making it clear to Detectives Riggs and Murtaugh the ironclad extent of his diplomatic immunity. Made all the more scary in that exotic South African accent.
5. "After I shoot you through the door you can examine the bullet, now open up." - Riggs talking through the door to accountant-turned-government-witness Leo Getz (who just asked "Who do I know it's the police?"), which is the best role of Joe Pesci's strange career.
4. "Nailed 'em both." - Murtaugh's obligatory one-liner after he dispatches an assassin with an industrial nail-gun. You see, kids, back in the 1980s all movie heroes had to say pithy one-liners after killing their attackers.
3. "Have your brains ever seen the light of day?" - A chilling question from killer Pieter Vorstedt as he's screwing a silencer into the barrel of his gun.
2. "I'm not a cop tonight, Rog. This is personal." - It's a cliche now, of course, but it wasn't perhaps quite so stale a sentiment back in 1989. And few people can do steely, martryed determination like Mel "William Wallace" Gibson, so when he says this line in act three, we know he's about to get medieval.
1. "It's just been revoked." - The money line, the one that made audiences cheer. It's delivered by raspy-voiced Danny Glover moments after he puts a bullet through the forehead of Arjen Rudd. Rudd, you'll recall, just had the gall to shoot up A-list star Mel Gibson and then cry out "Diplomatic immunity!" to Murtaugh in the hopes of getting away with it.
6.16.2008
"I see dead Hollywood careers..."
The New Republic's Christopher Orr picks The Happening apart in excruciating, spoiler-heavy detail, plot point by plot point. If you don't want to spend $10 to find out why it's such a deeply flawed movie, just read his article.
6.15.2008
Why "American Idol" is an abomination
The days when "American Idol" was an enjoyable guilty pleasure appear over. This past season (the seventh) was aggravating in a way that no previous season has been. The show's many sins are becoming impossible to ignore, outweighing the fun of watching the performances and wondering who'll get voted off next.
1. The parade of washed-up mentors. What's more pathetic, the contestants pretending to be excited about meeting a music fossil like Neil Young, or someone like Andrew Lloyd Weber desperately trying to stay relevant and expand his audience by mentoring these mostly talentless kids? It's hard to say. One thing is certain: watching seven singers perform songs solely from the Dolly Parton catalog makes for a fairly tedious viewing experience.
2. The increasingly uselessness of Paula and Randy. With Randy Jackson, you do get usually a sense that the lights are still on. But with Paula, the windows are boarded up, wild cats live in the basement, and the front lawn's turned to dirt. Her incoherent ramblings have long since stopped being charming in their incoherence. Now it's almost impossible to stomach her vapid free-association ditherings, her refusal to say anything negative, and her rather sexist need to tell the girls how pretty they are. The show would be better without her. As for Randy, he may know music, but he's hopelessly inarticulate. Only Simon Cowell can be counted on to zero in on the performance's problem and offer a solution. He's almost always right.
3. The prostitution of product placement. The judges' omnipresent Coke glasses are one thing. And we'll admit that we actually like those hopelessly cheesy Ford TV spots that feature the Idols hamming it up in strange little vignettes (the Idols are office workers, the Idols are in the Wild West). But if you saw the season finale, you bore witness to a protracted infomercial for Mike Myers' new movie The Love Guru. It was an absolute embarrassment for everyone involved. The movie looks unfunny enough as is without having to create some stupid interaction between the two Idol finalists and Myers in character. It often seems like Fox will let anyone be on the show so long as the price is right. Do they ever say no?
4. The lack of taste among voters. First of all, it's hard to be completely sure if it's the audience voting these people off or if Fox is somehow calling the shots. Ryan Seacrest says only that the voting will be open "for at least two hours." Some believe Fox shuts down the voting when the Idol is wants to boot is in the bottom position. Be that as it may, time and again the more talented Idol gets the boot while some half-witted, tone-deaf knucklehead lives to sing another day. These twists aren't "dramatic" or "shocking" - they're proof of the shallow, ratings-driven nature of the entire format. The producers wanted a David versus David showdown fairly early in the season and guess what? They got it. David Archuletta is a wispy-voiced, one-trick-pony simpleton, but he's also a cute, sexless-and-safe Mormon kid that a certain demographic loved. He's in!
"American Idol" ratings were down this season for the first time, which suggests the new is at last wearing off and audiences are coming to the same conclusion as The Cheese Fry. The producers are planning some changes for season 8. But it may be too late.
You can fool some of the people some of the time, but even fools will eventually get sick of listening to Paula Abdul.
1. The parade of washed-up mentors. What's more pathetic, the contestants pretending to be excited about meeting a music fossil like Neil Young, or someone like Andrew Lloyd Weber desperately trying to stay relevant and expand his audience by mentoring these mostly talentless kids? It's hard to say. One thing is certain: watching seven singers perform songs solely from the Dolly Parton catalog makes for a fairly tedious viewing experience.
2. The increasingly uselessness of Paula and Randy. With Randy Jackson, you do get usually a sense that the lights are still on. But with Paula, the windows are boarded up, wild cats live in the basement, and the front lawn's turned to dirt. Her incoherent ramblings have long since stopped being charming in their incoherence. Now it's almost impossible to stomach her vapid free-association ditherings, her refusal to say anything negative, and her rather sexist need to tell the girls how pretty they are. The show would be better without her. As for Randy, he may know music, but he's hopelessly inarticulate. Only Simon Cowell can be counted on to zero in on the performance's problem and offer a solution. He's almost always right.
3. The prostitution of product placement. The judges' omnipresent Coke glasses are one thing. And we'll admit that we actually like those hopelessly cheesy Ford TV spots that feature the Idols hamming it up in strange little vignettes (the Idols are office workers, the Idols are in the Wild West). But if you saw the season finale, you bore witness to a protracted infomercial for Mike Myers' new movie The Love Guru. It was an absolute embarrassment for everyone involved. The movie looks unfunny enough as is without having to create some stupid interaction between the two Idol finalists and Myers in character. It often seems like Fox will let anyone be on the show so long as the price is right. Do they ever say no?
4. The lack of taste among voters. First of all, it's hard to be completely sure if it's the audience voting these people off or if Fox is somehow calling the shots. Ryan Seacrest says only that the voting will be open "for at least two hours." Some believe Fox shuts down the voting when the Idol is wants to boot is in the bottom position. Be that as it may, time and again the more talented Idol gets the boot while some half-witted, tone-deaf knucklehead lives to sing another day. These twists aren't "dramatic" or "shocking" - they're proof of the shallow, ratings-driven nature of the entire format. The producers wanted a David versus David showdown fairly early in the season and guess what? They got it. David Archuletta is a wispy-voiced, one-trick-pony simpleton, but he's also a cute, sexless-and-safe Mormon kid that a certain demographic loved. He's in!
"American Idol" ratings were down this season for the first time, which suggests the new is at last wearing off and audiences are coming to the same conclusion as The Cheese Fry. The producers are planning some changes for season 8. But it may be too late.
You can fool some of the people some of the time, but even fools will eventually get sick of listening to Paula Abdul.
Knee-jerk review: "The Happening"
1. We cannot endorse this movie.
2. The concept is undeniably intriguing and deserves a big, epic movie to explore it. But this movie clocks in at about 90 minutes. That's not much time. The whole thing feels rushed and truncated. Where's the rest of it?
3. It takes a special kind of ineptitude to make Mark Wahlberg this bland and stilted. Putting him in a sweater vest doesn't help.
4. How is it that the toxin efficiently and swiftly affects a large group of pedestrians in Central Park... except for the one movie character who has to witness the whole thing with bug eyes?
5. In general, much of the movie rings phony. The characters don't seem genuine, what they say feels forced, and what they do strains credibility. That makes for a fairly painful experience as an audience member.
6. But Zooey Deschanel sure is smoking hot.
7. It's the kind of movie that suggests a character is a nerdy math teacher by giving him a tic in which he has to always push up his glasses on his nose. That's the sort of lame character shorthand you'd expect in a "Saturday Night Live" skit.
8. Can someone explain to us the purpose of the Betty Buckley character? Seriously, she had no point.
9. If you want to see a vivid, scary look at what might happen during the panicky few hours after a catastrophic disaster, go watch Cloverfield.
10. Like everything else, the R-rating feels forced. It's like the filmmakers crammed in a lot of gore and violence just to goose everything up to an R. You might think we're referring to the lawnmower scene, but no, the more upsetting bit involves the falling construction workers.
11. This probably isn't the career-ending flop for M. Night Shyamalan that some critics predict, but it does him no favors. And on the heels of the train wreck that was Lady in the Water, it futher sullies Shyamalan's reputation as a Hitchcock/Spielberg heir apparent. The best thing he probably could have done was stop making movies after Signs and gone into grumpy J.D. Salinger seclusion where he could be worshipped as an artistic genius based on a tiny sample.
12. To recap, Shyamalan's best film is without question The Sixth Sense. From there, things get subjective. The runner-up is probably Unbreakable, if only because the story sticks to its own strange logic and sells it. The Cheese Fry actually liked The Village, even with the insane twist ending. Signs gets a bad rap because of "swing away" and the glasses of water, but it's a scary, thoughtful movie until the final 10 minutes. Lady in the Water certainly goes at the bottom of the list, below even The Happening. So here's the ranking: 1. The Sixth Sense, 2. Unbreakable, 3. The Village, 4. Signs, 5. The Happening, 6. Lady in the Water.
2. The concept is undeniably intriguing and deserves a big, epic movie to explore it. But this movie clocks in at about 90 minutes. That's not much time. The whole thing feels rushed and truncated. Where's the rest of it?
3. It takes a special kind of ineptitude to make Mark Wahlberg this bland and stilted. Putting him in a sweater vest doesn't help.
4. How is it that the toxin efficiently and swiftly affects a large group of pedestrians in Central Park... except for the one movie character who has to witness the whole thing with bug eyes?
5. In general, much of the movie rings phony. The characters don't seem genuine, what they say feels forced, and what they do strains credibility. That makes for a fairly painful experience as an audience member.
6. But Zooey Deschanel sure is smoking hot.
7. It's the kind of movie that suggests a character is a nerdy math teacher by giving him a tic in which he has to always push up his glasses on his nose. That's the sort of lame character shorthand you'd expect in a "Saturday Night Live" skit.
8. Can someone explain to us the purpose of the Betty Buckley character? Seriously, she had no point.
9. If you want to see a vivid, scary look at what might happen during the panicky few hours after a catastrophic disaster, go watch Cloverfield.
10. Like everything else, the R-rating feels forced. It's like the filmmakers crammed in a lot of gore and violence just to goose everything up to an R. You might think we're referring to the lawnmower scene, but no, the more upsetting bit involves the falling construction workers.
11. This probably isn't the career-ending flop for M. Night Shyamalan that some critics predict, but it does him no favors. And on the heels of the train wreck that was Lady in the Water, it futher sullies Shyamalan's reputation as a Hitchcock/Spielberg heir apparent. The best thing he probably could have done was stop making movies after Signs and gone into grumpy J.D. Salinger seclusion where he could be worshipped as an artistic genius based on a tiny sample.
12. To recap, Shyamalan's best film is without question The Sixth Sense. From there, things get subjective. The runner-up is probably Unbreakable, if only because the story sticks to its own strange logic and sells it. The Cheese Fry actually liked The Village, even with the insane twist ending. Signs gets a bad rap because of "swing away" and the glasses of water, but it's a scary, thoughtful movie until the final 10 minutes. Lady in the Water certainly goes at the bottom of the list, below even The Happening. So here's the ranking: 1. The Sixth Sense, 2. Unbreakable, 3. The Village, 4. Signs, 5. The Happening, 6. Lady in the Water.
6.08.2008
Knee-jerk review: "What Happens in Vegas"
1. The romantic comedy is not dead. This movie and Forgetting Sarah Marshall prove that with a clever concept, the old boy-meets-girl genre still has a lot of gas left in the tank.
2. It's far funnier than you probably think it is. Hilarious, in fact.
3. The Cheese Fry loves Rob Corddry. "I'm the law, bitches!"
4. You know it's a great comedy when the throwaway subplots are packed with memorable gags and funny characters (see also: the Judd Apatow oeuvre). Here we get Cameron Diaz's rival, an ambitious-yet-awkward woman named Chong, and Ashton Kutcher's weird friend, a guy called in the credits "Dave the Bear."
5. Yes, the premise is hard to boil down to a Hollywood logline, but once you're on board, it works: couple get drunk-married in Vegas, win a $3 million slot pull, but the judge won't let them divorce and split the money unless they try to live as man and wife for six months. Hilarity ensues.
6. With only a few exceptions, there's no story fat to be found. The plot moves quickly and cleanly.
7. Ashton Kutcher may just get himself an real acting career yet.
8. Some good chemistry between the leads. You will be rooting for them to get together.
2. It's far funnier than you probably think it is. Hilarious, in fact.
3. The Cheese Fry loves Rob Corddry. "I'm the law, bitches!"
4. You know it's a great comedy when the throwaway subplots are packed with memorable gags and funny characters (see also: the Judd Apatow oeuvre). Here we get Cameron Diaz's rival, an ambitious-yet-awkward woman named Chong, and Ashton Kutcher's weird friend, a guy called in the credits "Dave the Bear."
5. Yes, the premise is hard to boil down to a Hollywood logline, but once you're on board, it works: couple get drunk-married in Vegas, win a $3 million slot pull, but the judge won't let them divorce and split the money unless they try to live as man and wife for six months. Hilarity ensues.
6. With only a few exceptions, there's no story fat to be found. The plot moves quickly and cleanly.
7. Ashton Kutcher may just get himself an real acting career yet.
8. Some good chemistry between the leads. You will be rooting for them to get together.
Knee-jerk review: "Prince Caspian"
1. Call this Lord of the Rings lite. Working hard to be epic and dark and important, but still very much a Disney movie for families.
2. It's enjoyable, but also a little forgettable in a way that other summer blockbusters, like Iron Man, are not.
3. Peter Dinklage steals the movie. Runner-up is Georgie Henley.
4. Some very cool battle sequences that are more imaginative than you might expect. Best example comes when two armies poised to do battle instead allow their differences to be perhaps settled by a one-on-one sword fight (that allows for "time outs"!) between the two kings. That's fresh.
5. 2005's The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe was better.
6. There's something a little creepy about the lion Azlan.
7. It's got to be tough to rule a magical kingdom for many years and then get zapped back to your boring life in 1940s England.
8. Funniest line out of context: "I don't think that bear could talk at all."
9. Extra credit to the costume designers and their scary armor for the Telmarines.
10. Is it us, or does Prince Caspian seem to be too much of a pretty boy to be a great leader?
2. It's enjoyable, but also a little forgettable in a way that other summer blockbusters, like Iron Man, are not.
3. Peter Dinklage steals the movie. Runner-up is Georgie Henley.
4. Some very cool battle sequences that are more imaginative than you might expect. Best example comes when two armies poised to do battle instead allow their differences to be perhaps settled by a one-on-one sword fight (that allows for "time outs"!) between the two kings. That's fresh.
5. 2005's The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe was better.
6. There's something a little creepy about the lion Azlan.
7. It's got to be tough to rule a magical kingdom for many years and then get zapped back to your boring life in 1940s England.
8. Funniest line out of context: "I don't think that bear could talk at all."
9. Extra credit to the costume designers and their scary armor for the Telmarines.
10. Is it us, or does Prince Caspian seem to be too much of a pretty boy to be a great leader?
6.03.2008
Indiana Jones and the Lame Sequel
Mystery Man on Film looks at Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull from a story structure/screenwriting perspective and... well, he eviscerates it. Fifty reasons why the movie is deeply flawed, poorly executed, and sloppily written. A very comprehensive look at how the movie could have been so much better. The Cheese Fry blames George Lucas.
5.24.2008
Knee-jerk review: "Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull"
1. If it were a term paper, it'd get a solid B. Good, but we think it could have done better if only it had applied itself.
2. A lead-lined refrigerator? Seriously?
3. Harrison Ford is in his mid-60s and it shows. It may take you 15 minutes or so to settle into the fact that Indiana Jones should be a member of AARP.
4. Cate Blanchett can do no wrong. Amazing.
5. The movie doesn't really take off until Shia LaBeouf shows up. His interactions with Ford are a lot of fun.
6. The quicksand scene has the film's best moment.
7. Karen Allen looks terrible. Sorry, but we call them like we see them. And the filmmakers completely fumble the reunion of Indiana and Marion, inexplicably making it a forced and rushed moment.
8. The big jungle truck chase is fun, but also somewhat tedious. The fencing is cool, though.
9. The movie's much more of a mystery/quest, following clues and piecing everything together, rather than a rip-roaring action adventure.
10. The Cheese Fry found the ending somewhat ridiculous.
11. Nice Marcus Brody reference at Indiana's college campus, but the photos Indiana has on his desk of his father and Brody look like Paramount publicity stills, not the sort of real photos a real person would, like, really have on a real desk. Why is that?
12. The charm of the first three movies, especially the first, was that so much of the action had to rely on practical effects. Which made sense because they were supposedly an homage to the cheesy 1930s two-reel adventure serials. There's a bit of a CGI overload here, especially in the last 10 minutes that undermine the film's simplicity.
13. The rumors you've heard about the crystal skull are, sadly, very true. It's all very odd. But you just have to remind yourself that this is all a throwback to the B-movie serials of George Lucas' youth, in which (especially in the 1950s) there were some with some rather overt sci-fi elements.
14. Love hearing that Indiana was an OSS spy working in Europe during World War II. If only we could have seen a movie about those exploits.
2. A lead-lined refrigerator? Seriously?
3. Harrison Ford is in his mid-60s and it shows. It may take you 15 minutes or so to settle into the fact that Indiana Jones should be a member of AARP.
4. Cate Blanchett can do no wrong. Amazing.
5. The movie doesn't really take off until Shia LaBeouf shows up. His interactions with Ford are a lot of fun.
6. The quicksand scene has the film's best moment.
7. Karen Allen looks terrible. Sorry, but we call them like we see them. And the filmmakers completely fumble the reunion of Indiana and Marion, inexplicably making it a forced and rushed moment.
8. The big jungle truck chase is fun, but also somewhat tedious. The fencing is cool, though.
9. The movie's much more of a mystery/quest, following clues and piecing everything together, rather than a rip-roaring action adventure.
10. The Cheese Fry found the ending somewhat ridiculous.
11. Nice Marcus Brody reference at Indiana's college campus, but the photos Indiana has on his desk of his father and Brody look like Paramount publicity stills, not the sort of real photos a real person would, like, really have on a real desk. Why is that?
12. The charm of the first three movies, especially the first, was that so much of the action had to rely on practical effects. Which made sense because they were supposedly an homage to the cheesy 1930s two-reel adventure serials. There's a bit of a CGI overload here, especially in the last 10 minutes that undermine the film's simplicity.
13. The rumors you've heard about the crystal skull are, sadly, very true. It's all very odd. But you just have to remind yourself that this is all a throwback to the B-movie serials of George Lucas' youth, in which (especially in the 1950s) there were some with some rather overt sci-fi elements.
14. Love hearing that Indiana was an OSS spy working in Europe during World War II. If only we could have seen a movie about those exploits.
The six best parts of "Raiders of the Lost Ark"
1. Commandeering the truck - The obvious choice. This is why the Hollywood term "set piece" was invented. Consider this: out the windshield, down the front grill (bending off the Mercedes hood ornament along the way), under the chassis, then back up into the back (thanks to a handy bullwhip). A Nazi tries the same move a few minutes later and gets run over with a delightful shriek of pain. If you're not a globe-trotting archaeologist, don't try this at home. "Truck? What truck?"
2. The bar fight - No phony CGI trickery here, only practical on-set effects (spreading fire, sparking bullets, breakaway tables and chairs) and clever fight choreography in very closed quarters. Also a great reminder of the dangers of picking up a Staff of Ra medallion without first checking its temperature.
3. The flying wing fight - Suspenseful in that Everything Goes Wrong. Marion gets trapped in the flying wing, a fire's slowly spreading to a giant fuel tank, and Indiana's getting his ass kicked by a guy who belongs in the WWE. Few actors can take a beating as convincingly as Harrison Ford. Watch out for those propellers.
4. The Peruvian temple opening - There are character introductions and then there are sequences like this. Movie heroes don't often get iconic set-ups like the one Indiana Jones gets here. You don't pull a gun on him, you do exactly as he says in a hidden temple ("Stay out of the light."), you throw him the whip when he asks or run the risk of death by impalement, and you most definitely don't stash a snake in his plane seat.
5. Escaping the Wells of Souls - In a movie full of movie-serial cliffhanger moments, this is the movie's best. Indiana and Marion sealed in an ancient chamber all alone, surrounded by snakes, with their torches going out. There's no plausible way out whatsoever. They'll die here. Right?
6. Opening the Ark - The payoff. Only here do the filmmakers let their visual effects flag fly as Belloq, Toht, and Deitrich find out first-hand what the Power of God can do and millions of pre-teen boys can't believe their frickin' eyes. "Close your eyes, Marion!"
2. The bar fight - No phony CGI trickery here, only practical on-set effects (spreading fire, sparking bullets, breakaway tables and chairs) and clever fight choreography in very closed quarters. Also a great reminder of the dangers of picking up a Staff of Ra medallion without first checking its temperature.
3. The flying wing fight - Suspenseful in that Everything Goes Wrong. Marion gets trapped in the flying wing, a fire's slowly spreading to a giant fuel tank, and Indiana's getting his ass kicked by a guy who belongs in the WWE. Few actors can take a beating as convincingly as Harrison Ford. Watch out for those propellers.
4. The Peruvian temple opening - There are character introductions and then there are sequences like this. Movie heroes don't often get iconic set-ups like the one Indiana Jones gets here. You don't pull a gun on him, you do exactly as he says in a hidden temple ("Stay out of the light."), you throw him the whip when he asks or run the risk of death by impalement, and you most definitely don't stash a snake in his plane seat.
5. Escaping the Wells of Souls - In a movie full of movie-serial cliffhanger moments, this is the movie's best. Indiana and Marion sealed in an ancient chamber all alone, surrounded by snakes, with their torches going out. There's no plausible way out whatsoever. They'll die here. Right?
6. Opening the Ark - The payoff. Only here do the filmmakers let their visual effects flag fly as Belloq, Toht, and Deitrich find out first-hand what the Power of God can do and millions of pre-teen boys can't believe their frickin' eyes. "Close your eyes, Marion!"
5.10.2008
The Best and Worst Films of 2007 (in 25 words or less)
1. The Bourne Ultimatum – Among the most visceral and suspenseful action movies Hollywood’s ever made, it deserved a Best Picture nomination. Kick ass twist ending.
2. 3:10 to Yuma – The best western since Unforgiven, driven by powerhouse perfs by alpha-actors Russell Crowe and Christian Bale. Action plus morality tale plus crackling dialogue.
3. 300 – No matter the adjectives used to describe this movie’s envelope-pushing visuals, it sounds like empty hyperbole. But this one truly reinvents the medium.
4. Gone Baby Gone – Sadly flying under everyone’s radar last fall, this gritty mystery
thriller delivers big twists. And poses tough questions about right and wrong.
5. No Country for Old Men – Best Picture Oscar was well deserved. A stark, tragic tale about our inability to comprehend (or stop) evil. Every shot is a work of art.
6. Superbad – The police-character subplot doesn’t belong, but the Michael Cera-Jonah Hill scenes are sublime in their blend of horny vulgarity and adolescent awkwardness.
7. Enchanted – A genius idea (Disney princess enters our most un-fairy-tale world) elevated by a surprisingly snarky sense of humor and the effervescent Amy Adams.
8. Atonement – The obligatory lushly tragic English period piece, this is about as good as it gets for this kind of thing. Strangely underrated.
9. Michael Clayton – A complex story of complex characters, this film insists you pay attention to piece if all together. The most satisfying climax of the year.
10. Sunshine – The ending goes off the rails, but the first hour offers the kind of smart, gripping science fiction action thriller we all crave.
Honorable Mention: 28 Weeks Later; Dan in Real Life; Disturbia; Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix; I Am Legend; Into the Wild; Juno; The Kingdom; Knocked Up; Ratatouille; Right at Your Door; Waitress; and Zodiac.
The Invasion – Maybe 10 minutes here feels fresh. The rest is a dervative hodgepodge amalgam of zombie movies and pod-people movies.
Spider-man 3 – So lame it’s almost insulting. A visually confusing, narratively tedious, overall pointless exercise in filmmaking excess and ego.
Grindhouse – It’s time for Robert Rodriguez and Quentin Tarantino to grow up. Their arrested-development charm has worn off.
See also: "The Best and Worst Films of 2006" and "The Best and Worst Films of 2005"
2. 3:10 to Yuma – The best western since Unforgiven, driven by powerhouse perfs by alpha-actors Russell Crowe and Christian Bale. Action plus morality tale plus crackling dialogue.
3. 300 – No matter the adjectives used to describe this movie’s envelope-pushing visuals, it sounds like empty hyperbole. But this one truly reinvents the medium.
4. Gone Baby Gone – Sadly flying under everyone’s radar last fall, this gritty mystery
thriller delivers big twists. And poses tough questions about right and wrong.
5. No Country for Old Men – Best Picture Oscar was well deserved. A stark, tragic tale about our inability to comprehend (or stop) evil. Every shot is a work of art.
6. Superbad – The police-character subplot doesn’t belong, but the Michael Cera-Jonah Hill scenes are sublime in their blend of horny vulgarity and adolescent awkwardness.
7. Enchanted – A genius idea (Disney princess enters our most un-fairy-tale world) elevated by a surprisingly snarky sense of humor and the effervescent Amy Adams.
8. Atonement – The obligatory lushly tragic English period piece, this is about as good as it gets for this kind of thing. Strangely underrated.
9. Michael Clayton – A complex story of complex characters, this film insists you pay attention to piece if all together. The most satisfying climax of the year.
10. Sunshine – The ending goes off the rails, but the first hour offers the kind of smart, gripping science fiction action thriller we all crave.
Honorable Mention: 28 Weeks Later; Dan in Real Life; Disturbia; Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix; I Am Legend; Into the Wild; Juno; The Kingdom; Knocked Up; Ratatouille; Right at Your Door; Waitress; and Zodiac.
The Invasion – Maybe 10 minutes here feels fresh. The rest is a dervative hodgepodge amalgam of zombie movies and pod-people movies.
Spider-man 3 – So lame it’s almost insulting. A visually confusing, narratively tedious, overall pointless exercise in filmmaking excess and ego.
Grindhouse – It’s time for Robert Rodriguez and Quentin Tarantino to grow up. Their arrested-development charm has worn off.
See also: "The Best and Worst Films of 2006" and "The Best and Worst Films of 2005"
5.05.2008
Knee-jerk review: "Iron Man"
1. Excellent.
2. Lest anyone think otherwise, please take note that this movie cements the fact that Robert Downey Jr. is the man. A commanding, magnetic presence on screen.
3. There's a whole lot of humor here, which will keep a silly grin on your face for most of the running time. It's got little in common with the operatic, sanctimonious Superman Returns or the brooding, dour Batman Begins.
4. Which is why the Tony Stark character is so much fun. He's a billionaire who's living the Maxim magazine lifestyle, surrounded by gizmos and girls and alcohol. It's every nerd comic book geek's fantasy come true. He's Bruce Wayne if Bruce Wayne knew how to enjoy himself.
5. Stark also seems like a more complete character. Bruce Wayne's fascinating, but he's got the oppressive darkness about him. He's haunted and has been haunted since his parents died years ago. The same goes for Wolverine, who's been seething for years, trying to understand who and what he is. They're bad asses, but they've got the world on their shoulders. They're grim. Stark is the selfish, irresponsible playboy who suddenly comes of age and realizes the error of his ways. And he's determined to do something about it. That seems a little more active, a little more interesting.
6. Gwyneth Paltrow's never seemed this engaging and fun. And where has she been?
7. Is this the best comic book movie ever? It's a photo finish. Consider it a three-way tie between 2004's Spider-man 2, 2000's X-Men, and now Iron Man. A very close fourth place is 2005's Batman Begins.
8. Comic book origin movies can be very tedious as all of the pieces get set up and explained. Sometimes you feel like you'll have to wait until part 2 to get to the good stuff. But this movie is so fizzy and fast-moving, and Downey such a perfect match with the Stark character, that even the exposition is enjoyable.
9. Lots of great set pieces (kicking ass in Afghanistan not once, but twice), lots of great lines ("What do you say to your other nickname, Merchant of Death?" "That's not bad."), lots of memorable moments (Stark's ongoing problems with one of his lab robots).
10. A must see, as the $100 million weekend suggests. Word of mouth will be very good to this movie.
2. Lest anyone think otherwise, please take note that this movie cements the fact that Robert Downey Jr. is the man. A commanding, magnetic presence on screen.
3. There's a whole lot of humor here, which will keep a silly grin on your face for most of the running time. It's got little in common with the operatic, sanctimonious Superman Returns or the brooding, dour Batman Begins.
4. Which is why the Tony Stark character is so much fun. He's a billionaire who's living the Maxim magazine lifestyle, surrounded by gizmos and girls and alcohol. It's every nerd comic book geek's fantasy come true. He's Bruce Wayne if Bruce Wayne knew how to enjoy himself.
5. Stark also seems like a more complete character. Bruce Wayne's fascinating, but he's got the oppressive darkness about him. He's haunted and has been haunted since his parents died years ago. The same goes for Wolverine, who's been seething for years, trying to understand who and what he is. They're bad asses, but they've got the world on their shoulders. They're grim. Stark is the selfish, irresponsible playboy who suddenly comes of age and realizes the error of his ways. And he's determined to do something about it. That seems a little more active, a little more interesting.
6. Gwyneth Paltrow's never seemed this engaging and fun. And where has she been?
7. Is this the best comic book movie ever? It's a photo finish. Consider it a three-way tie between 2004's Spider-man 2, 2000's X-Men, and now Iron Man. A very close fourth place is 2005's Batman Begins.
8. Comic book origin movies can be very tedious as all of the pieces get set up and explained. Sometimes you feel like you'll have to wait until part 2 to get to the good stuff. But this movie is so fizzy and fast-moving, and Downey such a perfect match with the Stark character, that even the exposition is enjoyable.
9. Lots of great set pieces (kicking ass in Afghanistan not once, but twice), lots of great lines ("What do you say to your other nickname, Merchant of Death?" "That's not bad."), lots of memorable moments (Stark's ongoing problems with one of his lab robots).
10. A must see, as the $100 million weekend suggests. Word of mouth will be very good to this movie.
Beverages that make life worth living
* Vanilla Coke straight from a cold bottle
* Hot apple cider on Thanksgiving morning
* Cherry Slurpee from 7-Eleven
* Unsweetened ice tea with a wedge of lemon
* The milk left in the bowl after you eat all the Cocoa Krispies
* Newcastle Pale Ale (in a frosted mug, please)
* Coconut Margarita from El Cholo
* A giant jug of Gatorade - any flavor but original - after a sweaty workout
* Cold water straight from a water fountain
* Green apple martini from Karl Strauss circa 2001
* Capri-Sun circa 1982
* Ocean Water from Sonic
* Tahitian Treat from the Thomas Jefferson H.S. vending machine circa 1989
* Jack and Coke on the rocks
* Dublin Dr Pepper
* Hot apple cider on Thanksgiving morning
* Cherry Slurpee from 7-Eleven
* Unsweetened ice tea with a wedge of lemon
* The milk left in the bowl after you eat all the Cocoa Krispies
* Newcastle Pale Ale (in a frosted mug, please)
* Coconut Margarita from El Cholo
* A giant jug of Gatorade - any flavor but original - after a sweaty workout
* Cold water straight from a water fountain
* Green apple martini from Karl Strauss circa 2001
* Capri-Sun circa 1982
* Ocean Water from Sonic
* Tahitian Treat from the Thomas Jefferson H.S. vending machine circa 1989
* Jack and Coke on the rocks
* Dublin Dr Pepper
5.03.2008
TV Guide back issue: 5th Grade
What were you watching when you were 10 years old and muddling through the fifth grade?
Sundays
6:00pm Central "Ripley's Believe It or Not" (ABC) - This is how Jack Palance and his raspy, emphysemic voice became a household name to Generation X.
7:00pm "CHiPs" (NBC) - Randi Oakes was a big deal in 1982, but if you look at these episodes today, she's pretty weird looking.
8:00pm "The Jeffersons" and "One Day at a Time" (CBS) - "Look, Mrs. Romano--" "Mizz Romano..."
Mondays
7:00pm "That's Incredible!" (ABC) - If you're ten years old, this is the coolest show ever. Remember when that one dude folded himself inside that little bitty plastic cube? Why'd he do that? What was the point of that exactly? Other than to be on the show?
8:00pm "M*A*S*H" (CBS) - Not always kid-friendly, but everyone in America was watching it so you watched it. Honestly, the Cheese Fry thinks this may be one of the most overrated shows in TV history. The episodes are all well-made, but is it really all that? The early "comedy" episodes aren't really funny and the later "drama" episodes are very self-important and pretentious.
8:30pm "Newhart" (CBS) - Still not as good as "The Bob Newhart Show." Mary Frann is no Suzanne Pleshette.
9:00pm "Cagney and Lacey" (CBS) - You watched it because your grandmother watched it. And because you thought Sharon Gless was kind of hot. In an early 1980s, feathered-hair sort of way.
Tuesdays
8:00pm "Happy Days" (ABC) - You ever see this show nowadays? It's kind of lame.
8:30pm "Laverne & Shirley" (ABC) - Didn't all fifth graders harbor a secret crush on Cindy Williams? We didn't say we were proud of it.
Wednesdays
8:00pm "Tales of the Gold Monkey" (ABC) - For those of us who obsessed over Raiders of the Lost Ark, a TV show ripoff like this was extremely bad-ass. The dog had an eyepatch!
Thursdays
7:00pm "Magnum P.I." (CBS) - The talky drama could be pretty boring for a fifth grader, but the action and the humor was fun. Other points of 10-year-old interest: the cool red Ferrari and TC's helicopter.
Fridays
7:00pm "Dukes of Hazzard" (CBS) - An instant classic, of course. Shepherd calling Lost Sheep, where can we get some of those exploding-tip arrows?
8:00pm "Dallas" (CBS) - If you lived in Dallas, this was required viewing for all citizens.
9:00pm "Falcon Crest" (CBS) - That was one cool theme song.
Saturdays
7:00pm "T.J. Hooker" (CBS) - Dumb action appeals to fifth graders. So does Captain Kirk with a gun.
8:00pm "Love Boat" (ABC) - You watched it because your grandmother watched it.
9:00pm "Fantasy Island" (ABC) - Ditto. "Who's dat, boss?"
Sundays
6:00pm Central "Ripley's Believe It or Not" (ABC) - This is how Jack Palance and his raspy, emphysemic voice became a household name to Generation X.
7:00pm "CHiPs" (NBC) - Randi Oakes was a big deal in 1982, but if you look at these episodes today, she's pretty weird looking.
8:00pm "The Jeffersons" and "One Day at a Time" (CBS) - "Look, Mrs. Romano--" "Mizz Romano..."
Mondays
7:00pm "That's Incredible!" (ABC) - If you're ten years old, this is the coolest show ever. Remember when that one dude folded himself inside that little bitty plastic cube? Why'd he do that? What was the point of that exactly? Other than to be on the show?
8:00pm "M*A*S*H" (CBS) - Not always kid-friendly, but everyone in America was watching it so you watched it. Honestly, the Cheese Fry thinks this may be one of the most overrated shows in TV history. The episodes are all well-made, but is it really all that? The early "comedy" episodes aren't really funny and the later "drama" episodes are very self-important and pretentious.
8:30pm "Newhart" (CBS) - Still not as good as "The Bob Newhart Show." Mary Frann is no Suzanne Pleshette.
9:00pm "Cagney and Lacey" (CBS) - You watched it because your grandmother watched it. And because you thought Sharon Gless was kind of hot. In an early 1980s, feathered-hair sort of way.
Tuesdays
8:00pm "Happy Days" (ABC) - You ever see this show nowadays? It's kind of lame.
8:30pm "Laverne & Shirley" (ABC) - Didn't all fifth graders harbor a secret crush on Cindy Williams? We didn't say we were proud of it.
Wednesdays
8:00pm "Tales of the Gold Monkey" (ABC) - For those of us who obsessed over Raiders of the Lost Ark, a TV show ripoff like this was extremely bad-ass. The dog had an eyepatch!
Thursdays
7:00pm "Magnum P.I." (CBS) - The talky drama could be pretty boring for a fifth grader, but the action and the humor was fun. Other points of 10-year-old interest: the cool red Ferrari and TC's helicopter.
Fridays
7:00pm "Dukes of Hazzard" (CBS) - An instant classic, of course. Shepherd calling Lost Sheep, where can we get some of those exploding-tip arrows?
8:00pm "Dallas" (CBS) - If you lived in Dallas, this was required viewing for all citizens.
9:00pm "Falcon Crest" (CBS) - That was one cool theme song.
Saturdays
7:00pm "T.J. Hooker" (CBS) - Dumb action appeals to fifth graders. So does Captain Kirk with a gun.
8:00pm "Love Boat" (ABC) - You watched it because your grandmother watched it.
9:00pm "Fantasy Island" (ABC) - Ditto. "Who's dat, boss?"
Mavs, please be sure to turn off the lights as you leave the playoffs
If it's springtime, it must be time for another Dallas Mavericks playoff collapse. It's become a staple of the season. You put away your winter clothes, you start to smell that heady mix of fresh cut grass and lawnmower gasoline, and you see Dirk Nowitski on TV trying gamely to explain how it all went wrong. For the Mavs, it's no longer a question of will they get bounced from the playoffs, but a question of when. And by who? And by how embarrassing a score?
Clearly, the mid-season blockbuster trade for aging point guard Jason Kidd wasn't the answer this season. He may still be quick of mind, but he's undeniably slow of foot these days. It also doesn't help when the only player who takes the court with any intensity against the New Orleans Hornets in the first round is a backup named Brandon Bass. Please also file under the "Not Helping" category the curious case of forward Josh Howard, who chose the first round to announce to everyone that he likes to smoke weed in the off-season. The angry, vociferous outcry in Dallas seems to have surprised stoner Howard, who subsequently disappeared in the playoffs like, well, a warm wisp of exhaled pot smoke. Forward Dirk Nowitski has also been taking his lumps for a while now, seemingly unable to escape the "soft" label even though he once finished a game after losing a tooth. It's now apparent, however, that Nowitski is not a leader. He'll score you points, but please don't ask him to set the tone. This is a guy who said in a recent interview he was glad the Mavs didn't have to face the Lakers in the first round. Way to inspire confidence, Dirk. Are you happy that you won't be facing the Lakers in the second round now, either?
In short, the Dallas Mavericks are a team that no longer believes it can win. The regular season sure seems manageable, but once the bright "win or go home" lights of the playoffs come on, this team wilts like a pile of $5/pound arugula. This irritating lack of mental fortitude can surely be traced back to the 2006 NBA Finals. In those playoffs, the Mavs scratched and bit and clawed their way through impressive series with the powerhouse Phoenix Suns and the San Antonio Spurs. They were a team possessed. In the Finals (the first ever for Dallas), they flew to a 2-0 lead against the insufferable Miami Heat... and then let the Heat come back and win the Series. Thus insuring we'd never be rid of Dwyane Wade's smug grin - the Cheese Fry sincerely hopes Wade never again makes it deep into the playoffs. If you had the misfortune of watching those NBA Finals, you'll remember seeing a thoroughly confused Mavs team who began to slowly but surely, game by game, loss by loss, meltdown once they realized they might not win the trophy. It was a disaster.
The Mavericks have tried twice since those 2006 Finals to reset, to dig deep and use the bitter bile of that humiliating loss to fuel their resurgence. They played the 2007 season with a proper chip on its shoulder: Nowitski won the MVP, the team earned a league-best 67-15 record and #1 seed. But then they ran smack dab into the Golden State Warriors threshing machine who won the series in 6 games. Oops. You know what happened this year.
As of now, the only fallout from this continued slide into mediocrity (many would argue that only owner Mark Cuban still thinks the Mavs are an elite NBA team) is the dismissal of head coach Avery Johnson. The Cheese Fry is a huge Johnson fan, but in the NBA the coaches are interchangeable parts, hired and fired and rehired like migrant farm workers. Johnson perhaps does share some blame, especially in the way he seemed to panic in the 2006 Finals against coaching and hair product icon Pat Riley. Johnson will go elsewhere and likely take another team to the Finals mountaintop.
The team he leaves behind in Dallas doesn't share so hopeful a future. The only player who might draw trade offers is its best player: Nowitski. But trading him may be very hard for Cuban, if only because it would signal once and for all that the championship window for this version of the Dallas Mavericks is closed. The NBA, with its petulant players and multi-million-dollar contract guarantees, is an unforgiving league. Make one false move and you're stuck with loser players no one wants but who must be paid anyway for the next 5-7 years. It can take a long, long time to rebuild and refocus.
Hopefully, if and when the Mavericks ever make it back to the Finals, they won't choke it all away.
Clearly, the mid-season blockbuster trade for aging point guard Jason Kidd wasn't the answer this season. He may still be quick of mind, but he's undeniably slow of foot these days. It also doesn't help when the only player who takes the court with any intensity against the New Orleans Hornets in the first round is a backup named Brandon Bass. Please also file under the "Not Helping" category the curious case of forward Josh Howard, who chose the first round to announce to everyone that he likes to smoke weed in the off-season. The angry, vociferous outcry in Dallas seems to have surprised stoner Howard, who subsequently disappeared in the playoffs like, well, a warm wisp of exhaled pot smoke. Forward Dirk Nowitski has also been taking his lumps for a while now, seemingly unable to escape the "soft" label even though he once finished a game after losing a tooth. It's now apparent, however, that Nowitski is not a leader. He'll score you points, but please don't ask him to set the tone. This is a guy who said in a recent interview he was glad the Mavs didn't have to face the Lakers in the first round. Way to inspire confidence, Dirk. Are you happy that you won't be facing the Lakers in the second round now, either?
In short, the Dallas Mavericks are a team that no longer believes it can win. The regular season sure seems manageable, but once the bright "win or go home" lights of the playoffs come on, this team wilts like a pile of $5/pound arugula. This irritating lack of mental fortitude can surely be traced back to the 2006 NBA Finals. In those playoffs, the Mavs scratched and bit and clawed their way through impressive series with the powerhouse Phoenix Suns and the San Antonio Spurs. They were a team possessed. In the Finals (the first ever for Dallas), they flew to a 2-0 lead against the insufferable Miami Heat... and then let the Heat come back and win the Series. Thus insuring we'd never be rid of Dwyane Wade's smug grin - the Cheese Fry sincerely hopes Wade never again makes it deep into the playoffs. If you had the misfortune of watching those NBA Finals, you'll remember seeing a thoroughly confused Mavs team who began to slowly but surely, game by game, loss by loss, meltdown once they realized they might not win the trophy. It was a disaster.
The Mavericks have tried twice since those 2006 Finals to reset, to dig deep and use the bitter bile of that humiliating loss to fuel their resurgence. They played the 2007 season with a proper chip on its shoulder: Nowitski won the MVP, the team earned a league-best 67-15 record and #1 seed. But then they ran smack dab into the Golden State Warriors threshing machine who won the series in 6 games. Oops. You know what happened this year.
As of now, the only fallout from this continued slide into mediocrity (many would argue that only owner Mark Cuban still thinks the Mavs are an elite NBA team) is the dismissal of head coach Avery Johnson. The Cheese Fry is a huge Johnson fan, but in the NBA the coaches are interchangeable parts, hired and fired and rehired like migrant farm workers. Johnson perhaps does share some blame, especially in the way he seemed to panic in the 2006 Finals against coaching and hair product icon Pat Riley. Johnson will go elsewhere and likely take another team to the Finals mountaintop.
The team he leaves behind in Dallas doesn't share so hopeful a future. The only player who might draw trade offers is its best player: Nowitski. But trading him may be very hard for Cuban, if only because it would signal once and for all that the championship window for this version of the Dallas Mavericks is closed. The NBA, with its petulant players and multi-million-dollar contract guarantees, is an unforgiving league. Make one false move and you're stuck with loser players no one wants but who must be paid anyway for the next 5-7 years. It can take a long, long time to rebuild and refocus.
Hopefully, if and when the Mavericks ever make it back to the Finals, they won't choke it all away.
4.19.2008
Knee-jerk review: "Forgetting Sarah Marshall"
1. Hilarious.
2. The Cheese Fry's been a fan of Jason Segel since his days on the late, great NBC dramedy "Freaks and Geeks." He excels at playing the gawky, slightly nerdy nice guy who's too sensitive for his own good - that includes his role on CBS' underrated sitcom "How I Met Your Mother." Which means we're feeling an odd sense of pride in seeing him shine here as newly minted movie star and screenwriter.
3. It probably would have been easier to make the ex-girlfriend Kristen Bell and her obnoxious new boyfriend Russell Brand one-dimensional objects of scorn and villainy. But they're really just as fully realized (and even likable) as leads Segel and Mila Kunis.
4. Funniest bit: killing the pig.
5. Paul Rudd continues to steal any movie he's in.
6. This feels like the most naturalistic and plausible comedy of writer/producer/director Judd Apatow's ouevre. His films are often funny, but there's often something a little broad and high-concept about his movies (e.g. The 40-Year-Old Virgin, Superbad, Knocked Up).
7. The movie probably could have done without Jonah Hill's pointless restaurant server. Probably the only misstep.
8. It'll make you want to book a vacation in Hawaii.
9. A puppet rock opera about a lovesick Dracula is either the worst idea ever or the best. Discuss.
10. Charming and surprisingly sweet given all of the R-rated language and sex.
11. However, Segel's two full monty moments don't seem as outrageous and ribald as the filmmakers seem to have intended.
12. Kristen Bell is ridiculously hot.
2. The Cheese Fry's been a fan of Jason Segel since his days on the late, great NBC dramedy "Freaks and Geeks." He excels at playing the gawky, slightly nerdy nice guy who's too sensitive for his own good - that includes his role on CBS' underrated sitcom "How I Met Your Mother." Which means we're feeling an odd sense of pride in seeing him shine here as newly minted movie star and screenwriter.
3. It probably would have been easier to make the ex-girlfriend Kristen Bell and her obnoxious new boyfriend Russell Brand one-dimensional objects of scorn and villainy. But they're really just as fully realized (and even likable) as leads Segel and Mila Kunis.
4. Funniest bit: killing the pig.
5. Paul Rudd continues to steal any movie he's in.
6. This feels like the most naturalistic and plausible comedy of writer/producer/director Judd Apatow's ouevre. His films are often funny, but there's often something a little broad and high-concept about his movies (e.g. The 40-Year-Old Virgin, Superbad, Knocked Up).
7. The movie probably could have done without Jonah Hill's pointless restaurant server. Probably the only misstep.
8. It'll make you want to book a vacation in Hawaii.
9. A puppet rock opera about a lovesick Dracula is either the worst idea ever or the best. Discuss.
10. Charming and surprisingly sweet given all of the R-rated language and sex.
11. However, Segel's two full monty moments don't seem as outrageous and ribald as the filmmakers seem to have intended.
12. Kristen Bell is ridiculously hot.
4.08.2008
“You must go to the Dagobah system.”
Top ten lines from “The Empire Strikes Back”
10. “Having trouble with your droid?” – Lando Calrissian’s sarcastic understatement when he notices the heap of C3-PO parts.
9. “Sir, the possibility of successfully navigating an asteroid field is approximately three thousand, seven hundred and twenty to one.” – C3-PO’s panicked assessment of Han’s improvised plan to elude the Star Destroyers chasing them. Han’s reply: “Never tell me the odds.” By the way, how did Han and Chewbacca pilot the Falcon? There was no stick, no yoke, no steering wheel. Discuss.
8. “Oh, you will be. You will be.” – Yoda, using his scary/serious low-register growl (and appearing very un-Muppet-like) when replying to Luke’s cocky “I’m not afraid” claim about the dangers that awaited him.
7. “Impressive. Most impressive.” – Darth Vader, upon realizing that Luke’s made an unexpected last-minute escape from carbon freeze and perhaps taken a few meager steps on the road to becoming a Jedi. A wise-ass Generation X staple, this quote can be used in a variety of settings and situations in which one has surprised another.
6. “Would it help if I got out and pushed?” – Princess Leia’s generous offer to help get the Millennium Falcon up and running when they’re making their fast getaway from Hoth. Han, who must always have the last word and get the bigger laugh, replies, “It might.”
5. “Do or do not. There is no try.” – Yoda, struggling again with Luke’s whiny immaturity as he tries to learn the ways of the Jedi. The runner up is surely this exchange: Luke breathlessly mutters “I don’t believe it” and Yoda replies, with a touch of weary regret, “That is why you fail.” In Luke’s defense, do you have any idea how heavy a frickin’ X-wing must be?
4. “That’s not true! That’s impossible!” – Luke’s instant-classic cry of disbelief when told Darth Vader is his father. Also a textbook example of adding insult to injury since Luke gets this awful “impossible!” news right after losing his right hand to a lightsaber. Mark Hamill’s bleary-eyed, slobbery shriek is devastating on first viewing, but the more you see this moment, the more ridiculous it gets. It couldn’t be any more over the top. Poor Mark Hamill. He could just barely keep his acting head above the water in these movies.
3. “And I thought they smelled bad... on the outside.” – Han’s observation about the relative odors of a Tauntaun as he tries to save Luke’s life by, you know, shoving him inside the steaming guts of a dead animal. Yucky.
2. “What is thy bidding, my master?” – Darth Vader, kneeling before the Emperor’s hologram. When you’re 8 years old in 1980 and you suddenly learn that the personification of evil has an even more evil boss, well, your whole world is rocked.
1. “I know.” – Han Solo’s answer to Princess Leia’s proclamation “I love you” just moments before he’s put into deep carbonite freeze (he’ll be perfectly safe assuming he survives the freezing process). It’s a brilliant line: tragic, romantic, with just the right touch of wry humor to leaven what is surely the original trilogy’s most disturbing and dark moment. Rumor has it Harrison Ford made it up on the spot after a number of other alternatives weren’t satisfying.
The blog Writer Joshua James takes a close look at the plot of The Empire Strikes Back and suggests that one reason it's so memorably dark and tragic is that every character fails to get what they want.
See also: "The top ten lines from Star Trek 2: The Wrath of Khan."
10. “Having trouble with your droid?” – Lando Calrissian’s sarcastic understatement when he notices the heap of C3-PO parts.
9. “Sir, the possibility of successfully navigating an asteroid field is approximately three thousand, seven hundred and twenty to one.” – C3-PO’s panicked assessment of Han’s improvised plan to elude the Star Destroyers chasing them. Han’s reply: “Never tell me the odds.” By the way, how did Han and Chewbacca pilot the Falcon? There was no stick, no yoke, no steering wheel. Discuss.
8. “Oh, you will be. You will be.” – Yoda, using his scary/serious low-register growl (and appearing very un-Muppet-like) when replying to Luke’s cocky “I’m not afraid” claim about the dangers that awaited him.
7. “Impressive. Most impressive.” – Darth Vader, upon realizing that Luke’s made an unexpected last-minute escape from carbon freeze and perhaps taken a few meager steps on the road to becoming a Jedi. A wise-ass Generation X staple, this quote can be used in a variety of settings and situations in which one has surprised another.
6. “Would it help if I got out and pushed?” – Princess Leia’s generous offer to help get the Millennium Falcon up and running when they’re making their fast getaway from Hoth. Han, who must always have the last word and get the bigger laugh, replies, “It might.”
5. “Do or do not. There is no try.” – Yoda, struggling again with Luke’s whiny immaturity as he tries to learn the ways of the Jedi. The runner up is surely this exchange: Luke breathlessly mutters “I don’t believe it” and Yoda replies, with a touch of weary regret, “That is why you fail.” In Luke’s defense, do you have any idea how heavy a frickin’ X-wing must be?
4. “That’s not true! That’s impossible!” – Luke’s instant-classic cry of disbelief when told Darth Vader is his father. Also a textbook example of adding insult to injury since Luke gets this awful “impossible!” news right after losing his right hand to a lightsaber. Mark Hamill’s bleary-eyed, slobbery shriek is devastating on first viewing, but the more you see this moment, the more ridiculous it gets. It couldn’t be any more over the top. Poor Mark Hamill. He could just barely keep his acting head above the water in these movies.
3. “And I thought they smelled bad... on the outside.” – Han’s observation about the relative odors of a Tauntaun as he tries to save Luke’s life by, you know, shoving him inside the steaming guts of a dead animal. Yucky.
2. “What is thy bidding, my master?” – Darth Vader, kneeling before the Emperor’s hologram. When you’re 8 years old in 1980 and you suddenly learn that the personification of evil has an even more evil boss, well, your whole world is rocked.
1. “I know.” – Han Solo’s answer to Princess Leia’s proclamation “I love you” just moments before he’s put into deep carbonite freeze (he’ll be perfectly safe assuming he survives the freezing process). It’s a brilliant line: tragic, romantic, with just the right touch of wry humor to leaven what is surely the original trilogy’s most disturbing and dark moment. Rumor has it Harrison Ford made it up on the spot after a number of other alternatives weren’t satisfying.
The blog Writer Joshua James takes a close look at the plot of The Empire Strikes Back and suggests that one reason it's so memorably dark and tragic is that every character fails to get what they want.
See also: "The top ten lines from Star Trek 2: The Wrath of Khan."
4.05.2008
The Cheese Fry Hot 12 (Survivor contestant edition)
1. Amanda (China; Micronesia)
2. Michelle (Fiji)
3. Candice (Cook Islands)
4. Jenna and Heidi (Amazon)
5. Leeann (Vanuatu)
6. Amber (Australia; All-Stars)
7. Courtney (Panama)
8. Eliza (Vanuatu; Micronesia)
9. Tammy (Marquesas)
10. Ashley (Palau)
11. Morgan (Guatemala)
12. Kimmi (Australia)
See also: "Cheese Fry's Hot 19 (TV Character Edition)"
2. Michelle (Fiji)
3. Candice (Cook Islands)
4. Jenna and Heidi (Amazon)
5. Leeann (Vanuatu)
6. Amber (Australia; All-Stars)
7. Courtney (Panama)
8. Eliza (Vanuatu; Micronesia)
9. Tammy (Marquesas)
10. Ashley (Palau)
11. Morgan (Guatemala)
12. Kimmi (Australia)
See also: "Cheese Fry's Hot 19 (TV Character Edition)"
Knee-jerk review: "The Ruins"
1. You ever see a horror movie that was so horrific that it stopped being 100% entertaining? This is one like that. These characters suffer in awful, bloody ways.
2. Note to self: if a Mayan is ever waving a gun at you and shouting in Mayan, look around to see if there's an evil vine anywhere nearby from which he might be trying to warn you away.
3. Not to get all film history on you, but with the way the vines attack and invade its victims, there are interesting echoes here to Cold War "Other" horror films of the 1950s and 1960s like Invasion of the Body Snatchers.
4. In the book, it was the Greek who fell down the shaft, not the German.
5. If you're going hiking in the Mexican jungle, don't wear flip flops.
6. Actress Laura Ramsey, heretofore unknown by the Cheese Fry, is mighty fine. That is no joke.
7. Do you know what septicemia is? It's apparently something that is to be avoided at all costs. All costs.
8. A great example of how to condense a 300 page novel into a 90 minute movie. Some characters are combined, some plot points omitted or tweaked. Nicely done.
2. Note to self: if a Mayan is ever waving a gun at you and shouting in Mayan, look around to see if there's an evil vine anywhere nearby from which he might be trying to warn you away.
3. Not to get all film history on you, but with the way the vines attack and invade its victims, there are interesting echoes here to Cold War "Other" horror films of the 1950s and 1960s like Invasion of the Body Snatchers.
4. In the book, it was the Greek who fell down the shaft, not the German.
5. If you're going hiking in the Mexican jungle, don't wear flip flops.
6. Actress Laura Ramsey, heretofore unknown by the Cheese Fry, is mighty fine. That is no joke.
7. Do you know what septicemia is? It's apparently something that is to be avoided at all costs. All costs.
8. A great example of how to condense a 300 page novel into a 90 minute movie. Some characters are combined, some plot points omitted or tweaked. Nicely done.
3.22.2008
The primary problem
Andrew Gumbel in this week's L.A. City Beat takes a look at the mess that is the Democratic primary system and how it's affecting Obama, Clinton, and the ultimate showdown with John McCain.
It’s an odd moment to be turning to Eliot Spitzer for any sort of wisdom – on politics, or anything else. But the man said something inescapably interesting in the first of his brief, excruciating responses to the prostitution ring scandal – the one where he had his devastated wife clutch hold of him from behind while he offered an apology about as heartfelt as a public-address announcement at the DMV.
Here’s what he said: “I do not believe that politics in the long run is about individuals. It is about ideas, the public good, and doing what is best.”
In context, of course, this sounded like so much self-serving horseshit, some tiny glimmer of an attempt to convince New Yorkers that having a flaming hypocrite for a governor might still somehow be okay. That lasted about two minutes. But Spitzer – precisely because he was being so self-serving – also hit on one of the deeper conundrums of American politics. It is always, theoretically, about the greater good – the realization of ideas, not just personal ambitions. But, as we know, those personal ambitions (and character flaws) keep getting in the way. In fact, the system just about ensures that personality, and the clash of personalities, trump ideas and progress every time. Just look at Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, and the sorry state of their battle for the Democratic presidential nomination.
It wasn’t just Governor Spitzer’s career that melted down last week. The entire Democratic Party primary process melted down right along with him. How do we know this? We know it because when Barack Obama won the Wyoming caucus and the Mississippi primary, it barely mattered anymore. We know it because, for all the wrangling about Michigan and Florida, neither of them necessarily matter all that much anymore either.
The results don’t matter because the whole process has become a lie, a sort of small-d democratic con job. Anyone honestly looking at the state of the race knows that Obama will – barring some freak occurrence – end up in June with more pledged delegates than Clinton, and a bigger share of the popular vote. If the voice of the people were paramount here, then the contest would be over already. The party could embrace Obama as its nominee, put an end to all the damaging negativity, and start building up the guy rather than, à la Hillary, finding every possible means to pull him down.
The fact that Hillary is still fighting gives us a big clue that this is not about the voice of the people at all. It’s about raw power and the manipulation of a system that is already loaded, unfair, and byzantine to try to reach a desired outcome, will of the people be damned. The Clinton’s campaign spin – that Obama can only win in “boutique” states, that caucuses don’t really count, that he only appeals to “latte liberals,” not “real” Democrats and “real” American voters – ignores the hard reality of the numbers, which is that she is behind in this contest by any objective measure and is more than likely to remain so to the end.
Her suggestion that some votes are more “real” than others follows an inglorious tradition in this country of trying to exclude certain groups from participating in the political process at all – blacks, newly naturalized immigrants, Catholics, factory workers, reformist intellectuals, and so on. The Clinton campaign even appears to have embraced the overtly racist aspect of this tradition, distancing itself only hesitantly from Geraldine Ferraro’s outrageous remarks about Obama’s candidacy and apparently calculating that, in Pennsylvania at least, awakening the racist sensibilities of all those blue collar former Reagan Democrats might have political mileage.
Granted, the crisis in the Democratic Party is not just about Hillary’s overweening ambition and distasteful campaign tactics. The party has been trying for decades to rig the primary process in such a way as to insulate itself from unpleasant surprises, and now it is receiving the biggest conceivable karmic kick up the rear end.
Everything about the process is designed to favor the establishment candidate – the kickoff in white, relatively conservative states like Iowa and New Hampshire, the quick pile-on of races on Super Tuesday (itself originally conceived as a regional primary in the South to keep upstarts like Jesse Jackson at bay) and, of course, the votes accorded to unelected superdelegates, who make up the backbone of the party and have the option, if they feel the need to exercise it, to buck the will of the people at the national convention.
Most years, the primary battle is quick and painless, precisely because it is so unfair. Sometimes, for sure, it takes a little extra effort to silence upstarts like Gary Hart, or Jesse Jackson, or Howard Dean. This year, though, the extraordinary success of the Obama campaign has torn the party rulebook to shreds, making it unclear which side the establishment should be on and exposing the entire jerry-built system to ridicule. Some of the greatest absurdities have been at the Clinton campaign’s expense. She won the Nevada caucuses by a six-point margin, yet ended up with one fewer delegate.
And she won the Texas primary – albeit narrowly – only to lose the delegate fight there because of the Lone Star state’s weird allocation system, and because of its even weirder hybrid system that had voters returning to their precincts for caucuses as soon as the vote was over. I’m old-fashioned enough to believe that the winner of an election should be the candidate with the most votes, but those aren’t the rules by which this fight is being conducted, on either side. If the Clinton campaign is behaving worse, it is because they are ones running behind. For sure, Hillary had a choice – whether she would bow out for the sake of party unity and the bigger prize of victory in November, or whether she would embark on the high-risk strategy of trying to destroy her opponent and thus leave the party no option but to offer the nomination to her. The choice she made is her responsibility, and the damage it does will surely be laid at her door – especially if John McCain becomes the next president.
Once made, though, the choice taps right into the ugly electoral logic of fighting and winning at any cost, the sort of mano a mano combat we last saw play out in the Bush-Gore fiasco in Florida in 2000. It’s the absolute nightmare scenario for Democrats – two talented, potentially winning presidential candidates battering and bloodying each other so badly that the Republicans don’t have to do much more than sit back and watch. For Clinton to say John McCain is better prepared to be president than Obama is not just unforgivable – you can bet it will be played and replayed in television ads all summer and fall if Obama ends up being the nominee anyway.
Obama appears more conscious of the risks of going too negative, but he doesn’t have a whole lot of choice in the matter. Already he’s started asking tough questions about how much real-world governing experience Clinton gained as First Lady – questions that, once again, the Republicans can just lift to bolster their own campaign later in the year.
Mitt Romney said last week that the Clinton 3 a.m. red phone advert was “the greatest gift she could have given the McCain campaign,” because if she wants to make this election about national security experience then there is only one possible winner, and he’s not a Democrat. McCain can probably count on a few more similar gifts before this is all over. Who can stop the madness? Not the Democratic Party grandees, who are as divided amongst themselves as the candidates. And not the voters, who have already been put on notice that they don’t entirely count. Their job, at this point, is to provide political cover for whatever manipulative tricks the party chooses to pull to justify its ultimate decision.
Don’t expect the enthusiasm and high participation they – we – have shown in this primary season to sustain itself in the general election.
It’s an odd moment to be turning to Eliot Spitzer for any sort of wisdom – on politics, or anything else. But the man said something inescapably interesting in the first of his brief, excruciating responses to the prostitution ring scandal – the one where he had his devastated wife clutch hold of him from behind while he offered an apology about as heartfelt as a public-address announcement at the DMV.
Here’s what he said: “I do not believe that politics in the long run is about individuals. It is about ideas, the public good, and doing what is best.”
In context, of course, this sounded like so much self-serving horseshit, some tiny glimmer of an attempt to convince New Yorkers that having a flaming hypocrite for a governor might still somehow be okay. That lasted about two minutes. But Spitzer – precisely because he was being so self-serving – also hit on one of the deeper conundrums of American politics. It is always, theoretically, about the greater good – the realization of ideas, not just personal ambitions. But, as we know, those personal ambitions (and character flaws) keep getting in the way. In fact, the system just about ensures that personality, and the clash of personalities, trump ideas and progress every time. Just look at Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, and the sorry state of their battle for the Democratic presidential nomination.
It wasn’t just Governor Spitzer’s career that melted down last week. The entire Democratic Party primary process melted down right along with him. How do we know this? We know it because when Barack Obama won the Wyoming caucus and the Mississippi primary, it barely mattered anymore. We know it because, for all the wrangling about Michigan and Florida, neither of them necessarily matter all that much anymore either.
The results don’t matter because the whole process has become a lie, a sort of small-d democratic con job. Anyone honestly looking at the state of the race knows that Obama will – barring some freak occurrence – end up in June with more pledged delegates than Clinton, and a bigger share of the popular vote. If the voice of the people were paramount here, then the contest would be over already. The party could embrace Obama as its nominee, put an end to all the damaging negativity, and start building up the guy rather than, à la Hillary, finding every possible means to pull him down.
The fact that Hillary is still fighting gives us a big clue that this is not about the voice of the people at all. It’s about raw power and the manipulation of a system that is already loaded, unfair, and byzantine to try to reach a desired outcome, will of the people be damned. The Clinton’s campaign spin – that Obama can only win in “boutique” states, that caucuses don’t really count, that he only appeals to “latte liberals,” not “real” Democrats and “real” American voters – ignores the hard reality of the numbers, which is that she is behind in this contest by any objective measure and is more than likely to remain so to the end.
Her suggestion that some votes are more “real” than others follows an inglorious tradition in this country of trying to exclude certain groups from participating in the political process at all – blacks, newly naturalized immigrants, Catholics, factory workers, reformist intellectuals, and so on. The Clinton campaign even appears to have embraced the overtly racist aspect of this tradition, distancing itself only hesitantly from Geraldine Ferraro’s outrageous remarks about Obama’s candidacy and apparently calculating that, in Pennsylvania at least, awakening the racist sensibilities of all those blue collar former Reagan Democrats might have political mileage.
Granted, the crisis in the Democratic Party is not just about Hillary’s overweening ambition and distasteful campaign tactics. The party has been trying for decades to rig the primary process in such a way as to insulate itself from unpleasant surprises, and now it is receiving the biggest conceivable karmic kick up the rear end.
Everything about the process is designed to favor the establishment candidate – the kickoff in white, relatively conservative states like Iowa and New Hampshire, the quick pile-on of races on Super Tuesday (itself originally conceived as a regional primary in the South to keep upstarts like Jesse Jackson at bay) and, of course, the votes accorded to unelected superdelegates, who make up the backbone of the party and have the option, if they feel the need to exercise it, to buck the will of the people at the national convention.
Most years, the primary battle is quick and painless, precisely because it is so unfair. Sometimes, for sure, it takes a little extra effort to silence upstarts like Gary Hart, or Jesse Jackson, or Howard Dean. This year, though, the extraordinary success of the Obama campaign has torn the party rulebook to shreds, making it unclear which side the establishment should be on and exposing the entire jerry-built system to ridicule. Some of the greatest absurdities have been at the Clinton campaign’s expense. She won the Nevada caucuses by a six-point margin, yet ended up with one fewer delegate.
And she won the Texas primary – albeit narrowly – only to lose the delegate fight there because of the Lone Star state’s weird allocation system, and because of its even weirder hybrid system that had voters returning to their precincts for caucuses as soon as the vote was over. I’m old-fashioned enough to believe that the winner of an election should be the candidate with the most votes, but those aren’t the rules by which this fight is being conducted, on either side. If the Clinton campaign is behaving worse, it is because they are ones running behind. For sure, Hillary had a choice – whether she would bow out for the sake of party unity and the bigger prize of victory in November, or whether she would embark on the high-risk strategy of trying to destroy her opponent and thus leave the party no option but to offer the nomination to her. The choice she made is her responsibility, and the damage it does will surely be laid at her door – especially if John McCain becomes the next president.
Once made, though, the choice taps right into the ugly electoral logic of fighting and winning at any cost, the sort of mano a mano combat we last saw play out in the Bush-Gore fiasco in Florida in 2000. It’s the absolute nightmare scenario for Democrats – two talented, potentially winning presidential candidates battering and bloodying each other so badly that the Republicans don’t have to do much more than sit back and watch. For Clinton to say John McCain is better prepared to be president than Obama is not just unforgivable – you can bet it will be played and replayed in television ads all summer and fall if Obama ends up being the nominee anyway.
Obama appears more conscious of the risks of going too negative, but he doesn’t have a whole lot of choice in the matter. Already he’s started asking tough questions about how much real-world governing experience Clinton gained as First Lady – questions that, once again, the Republicans can just lift to bolster their own campaign later in the year.
Mitt Romney said last week that the Clinton 3 a.m. red phone advert was “the greatest gift she could have given the McCain campaign,” because if she wants to make this election about national security experience then there is only one possible winner, and he’s not a Democrat. McCain can probably count on a few more similar gifts before this is all over. Who can stop the madness? Not the Democratic Party grandees, who are as divided amongst themselves as the candidates. And not the voters, who have already been put on notice that they don’t entirely count. Their job, at this point, is to provide political cover for whatever manipulative tricks the party chooses to pull to justify its ultimate decision.
Don’t expect the enthusiasm and high participation they – we – have shown in this primary season to sustain itself in the general election.
3.08.2008
Top 10 "X-Files" Episodes
1. The one where Mulder and Scully get help on a murder investigation from Clyde Bruckman, the hangdog psychic who can predict how and when people die. The series’ best line: Scully’s “There are hits and there are misses. And then there are misses.” (“Clyde Bruckman’s Final Repose”)
2. The one where Mulder and Scully uncover a government test to send murderous subliminal messages through TV signals. (“Wetwired”)
3. The one where Mulder and Scully pose as married couple Rob and Laura Petrie to investigate at a gated suburban community that uses a Tibetan monster to enforce the Homeowners Association rules. (“Arcadia”)
4. The one where Mulder and Scully pursue a man who uses telepathy to bend others to his will, a 1996 version of the Jedi mind trick. (“Pusher”)
5. The exceedingly oddball “meta” one where Jose Chung writes a salacious book about Mulder and Scully’s investigation of an alien abduction. (“Jose Chung’s From Outer Space”)
6. The one where Mulder and Scully battle two bitchy teenage girls whose violent telekinetic powers are linked to sharing a birthday with an unusual planetary aligment. (“Syzygy”)
7. The really, really creepy one where Mulder and Scully uncover a satanic cult among the teachers and PTA in a small town. (“Die Hand Die Verletzt”)
8. The one that’s a ripoff of The Thing where Mulder and Scully discover weird parasites in an Arctic research station that create murderous paranoia in its hosts. (“Ice”)
9. The one where Mulder and Scully fight deadly green insect swarms freed by old-growth logging in the Pacific Northwest. (“Darkness Falls”)
10. The one where Mulder and Scully investigate a murder among the freaks and carnies in a traveling circus. Also, Scully eats a bug. (“Humbug”)
2. The one where Mulder and Scully uncover a government test to send murderous subliminal messages through TV signals. (“Wetwired”)
3. The one where Mulder and Scully pose as married couple Rob and Laura Petrie to investigate at a gated suburban community that uses a Tibetan monster to enforce the Homeowners Association rules. (“Arcadia”)
4. The one where Mulder and Scully pursue a man who uses telepathy to bend others to his will, a 1996 version of the Jedi mind trick. (“Pusher”)
5. The exceedingly oddball “meta” one where Jose Chung writes a salacious book about Mulder and Scully’s investigation of an alien abduction. (“Jose Chung’s From Outer Space”)
6. The one where Mulder and Scully battle two bitchy teenage girls whose violent telekinetic powers are linked to sharing a birthday with an unusual planetary aligment. (“Syzygy”)
7. The really, really creepy one where Mulder and Scully uncover a satanic cult among the teachers and PTA in a small town. (“Die Hand Die Verletzt”)
8. The one that’s a ripoff of The Thing where Mulder and Scully discover weird parasites in an Arctic research station that create murderous paranoia in its hosts. (“Ice”)
9. The one where Mulder and Scully fight deadly green insect swarms freed by old-growth logging in the Pacific Northwest. (“Darkness Falls”)
10. The one where Mulder and Scully investigate a murder among the freaks and carnies in a traveling circus. Also, Scully eats a bug. (“Humbug”)
Knee-jerk review: "The Other Boleyn Girl"
1. The Cheese Fry still can't decide whether or not Scarlett Johansson is a good actress. She's sublime in Lost in Translation, charming in The Nanny Diaries, but a disaster in The Black Dahlia and In Good Company.
2. It's not the polite period drama you might expect. This one's got a darker, more tragic vibe, centering as it does on the sad moral collapse of Anne Boleyn.
3. Eric Bana is a man's man. (See also: Clooney, George; Craig, Daniel; Ford, Harrison; Quaid, Dennis; Wahlberg, Mark)
4. PG-13 apparently means no royal decapitation on screen. And no nudity. This in a movie that's all about affairs and executions.
5. The dialogue really crackles. And it's so beautifully economical, conveying so much in so few words. Thank you, Peter Morgan. He's also the reason why The Queen was so good.
6. What's with all of the stillbirths and miscarriages back in those days?
7. The Duke of Norfolk (played by David Morrissey) is one cold-blooded mofo. That is no joke, people.
8. Kristin Scott Thomas is looking old.
9. Jim Sturgess is starting to grow on us. We'll forgive his involvement in the abomination that was Across the Universe. That'll be his one mulligan.
10. The moral of the story: nothing good comes from a greedy, ambitious grab for power and money, especially in the court of Henry VIII. Also: men will do incredibly self-destructive things to get a girl into bed.
2. It's not the polite period drama you might expect. This one's got a darker, more tragic vibe, centering as it does on the sad moral collapse of Anne Boleyn.
3. Eric Bana is a man's man. (See also: Clooney, George; Craig, Daniel; Ford, Harrison; Quaid, Dennis; Wahlberg, Mark)
4. PG-13 apparently means no royal decapitation on screen. And no nudity. This in a movie that's all about affairs and executions.
5. The dialogue really crackles. And it's so beautifully economical, conveying so much in so few words. Thank you, Peter Morgan. He's also the reason why The Queen was so good.
6. What's with all of the stillbirths and miscarriages back in those days?
7. The Duke of Norfolk (played by David Morrissey) is one cold-blooded mofo. That is no joke, people.
8. Kristin Scott Thomas is looking old.
9. Jim Sturgess is starting to grow on us. We'll forgive his involvement in the abomination that was Across the Universe. That'll be his one mulligan.
10. The moral of the story: nothing good comes from a greedy, ambitious grab for power and money, especially in the court of Henry VIII. Also: men will do incredibly self-destructive things to get a girl into bed.
3.03.2008
Knee-jerk review: "Vantage Point"
1. That was sure one cool trailer. But the movie? Not so much. In fact, it's quite terrible.
2. Dennis Quaid is the man, as always. He does what he can in a stale archetype: the Haunted Law Enforcement Agent Who's Trying to Cope with a Recent Traumatic Shooting.
3. The gimmick here is that the movie keeps rewinding... and rewinding... and rewinding to show the same two-hour period from the perspective of a different character. The hope seems to be that you'll piece the truth together like a jigsaw puzzle. A clever idea, but as more than one critic noted, had the filmmakers just told the story linearly without any flashback razzle-dazzle, you'd be left with a fairly ordinary movie.
4. Too many plot turns - including the film's biggest twist involving a shocking double-cross - hinge on one character or another being in the right (or wrong) place at the right (or wrong) time. And audiences can only swallow so many coincidences before they tune out.
5. If you're trying for a gritty political conspiracy-theory thriller, you probably don't want the audience groaning in frustration or stifling laughter. Which is exactly what happened at the Friday night 8:00pm show at the Arclight Hollywood.
6. The dialogue is often quite awful.
7. For such a huge explosion in the Spanish square, it's odd how many people seem to survive. Must be that PG-13 rating that protected them.
8. You know you're in trouble when the very first performance of the film - Zoe Saldana stumbling through a role as a CNN-type reporter - is this awful and utterly unbelievable.
9. Watching the complex plan to kidnap the President unfold is engaging. It's probably the best part of the movie. But there's just no way one guy could get through that many Secret Service agents. The Cheese Fry refuses to believe it.
10. Do not see this movie. Instead, go rent Three Days of the Condor or The Parallax View.
2. Dennis Quaid is the man, as always. He does what he can in a stale archetype: the Haunted Law Enforcement Agent Who's Trying to Cope with a Recent Traumatic Shooting.
3. The gimmick here is that the movie keeps rewinding... and rewinding... and rewinding to show the same two-hour period from the perspective of a different character. The hope seems to be that you'll piece the truth together like a jigsaw puzzle. A clever idea, but as more than one critic noted, had the filmmakers just told the story linearly without any flashback razzle-dazzle, you'd be left with a fairly ordinary movie.
4. Too many plot turns - including the film's biggest twist involving a shocking double-cross - hinge on one character or another being in the right (or wrong) place at the right (or wrong) time. And audiences can only swallow so many coincidences before they tune out.
5. If you're trying for a gritty political conspiracy-theory thriller, you probably don't want the audience groaning in frustration or stifling laughter. Which is exactly what happened at the Friday night 8:00pm show at the Arclight Hollywood.
6. The dialogue is often quite awful.
7. For such a huge explosion in the Spanish square, it's odd how many people seem to survive. Must be that PG-13 rating that protected them.
8. You know you're in trouble when the very first performance of the film - Zoe Saldana stumbling through a role as a CNN-type reporter - is this awful and utterly unbelievable.
9. Watching the complex plan to kidnap the President unfold is engaging. It's probably the best part of the movie. But there's just no way one guy could get through that many Secret Service agents. The Cheese Fry refuses to believe it.
10. Do not see this movie. Instead, go rent Three Days of the Condor or The Parallax View.
2.28.2008
Drivers who deserve the finger
If you have just a half-hour commute to work, then you're in your car fighting traffic about 20 hours a month. That's almost an entire day dealing with other drivers' stupidity, incompetence, and lack of appropriate attention to the world around them.
Below are the worst offenders, those degenerates who deserve the middle finger salute from all of us. You may find yourself on this list. We did.
* Drivers who suddenly merge into your lane without signaling
* Drivers who do signal a lane change and then refuse for some reason to come over even though you're very clearly slowing down to give them a nice big space to merge into
* Drivers whom you allow to merge in front of you and then lack the common courtesy to give you the hand wave of thanks
* Drivers at the front of a line of left turners who become Cathy Cautious and refuse to turn until there isn't another car coming for at least two nautical miles
* Drivers who run extremely stale yellow lights when they really shouldn't, blocking the intersection and thereby preventing you from making a left turn before the light turns red
* Drivers whom you expect to run an extremely stale yellow light, but then at the last minute suddenly don't, thereby preventing you from making a left turn before the light turns red
* Drivers who insist on blocking an entire line of cars in a parking garage because they shortsightedly want to take the spot of the first person they see (who take 15 minutes to put two bags in their trunk - they get the finger too) when you know damn good and well that a few levels up or down is a sea of empty spaces
* Drivers of SUVs who insist on cramming their ridiculous, penis-substitute vehicles into spaces clearly marked "compact"
* Drivers who take up two parking spaces because they so overvalue their stupid little souped-up 1992 Toyota Camry
* Drivers who skip their turn at four-way stops
* Drivers who won't let you merge in one of those situations where doing so is extremely reasonable, like when you're just trying to get out of a garage after a concert or baseball game
* Drivers behind you who honk a fraction of a second after your light turns green
* Drivers who, when they do decide to honk, don't give you a short little friendly toot, but a long, obnoxious blast that goes on for so long the sound bends with the Doppler effect as they zoom around you
* Drivers who are clearly lost, but refuse to pull to the curb and get out of the way, preferring instead to creep along at the pace of pedestrians as they swivel their heads looking for an address or stare at the map in their lap
* Drivers who take an inordinate amount of time paying to get out of a parking garage
* Drivers who block traffic because they're having some utterly pointless conversation with another driver, who's likewise blocking traffic, the both of them apparently unaware of a new device called the telephone
* Drivers who block you because they're not following a clearly posted traffic sign, like "no left turn" which surely doesn't include them, right?
And no list like this would be complete without special finger given to those jackass motorcycle riders who roar down La Brea Avenue with their throttles wide open and revved as loud as possible for that short little 300 yard stretch until they hit another traffic light. Sure did go fast for a second there, huh, Captain America?
Below are the worst offenders, those degenerates who deserve the middle finger salute from all of us. You may find yourself on this list. We did.
* Drivers who suddenly merge into your lane without signaling
* Drivers who do signal a lane change and then refuse for some reason to come over even though you're very clearly slowing down to give them a nice big space to merge into
* Drivers whom you allow to merge in front of you and then lack the common courtesy to give you the hand wave of thanks
* Drivers at the front of a line of left turners who become Cathy Cautious and refuse to turn until there isn't another car coming for at least two nautical miles
* Drivers who run extremely stale yellow lights when they really shouldn't, blocking the intersection and thereby preventing you from making a left turn before the light turns red
* Drivers whom you expect to run an extremely stale yellow light, but then at the last minute suddenly don't, thereby preventing you from making a left turn before the light turns red
* Drivers who insist on blocking an entire line of cars in a parking garage because they shortsightedly want to take the spot of the first person they see (who take 15 minutes to put two bags in their trunk - they get the finger too) when you know damn good and well that a few levels up or down is a sea of empty spaces
* Drivers of SUVs who insist on cramming their ridiculous, penis-substitute vehicles into spaces clearly marked "compact"
* Drivers who take up two parking spaces because they so overvalue their stupid little souped-up 1992 Toyota Camry
* Drivers who skip their turn at four-way stops
* Drivers who won't let you merge in one of those situations where doing so is extremely reasonable, like when you're just trying to get out of a garage after a concert or baseball game
* Drivers behind you who honk a fraction of a second after your light turns green
* Drivers who, when they do decide to honk, don't give you a short little friendly toot, but a long, obnoxious blast that goes on for so long the sound bends with the Doppler effect as they zoom around you
* Drivers who are clearly lost, but refuse to pull to the curb and get out of the way, preferring instead to creep along at the pace of pedestrians as they swivel their heads looking for an address or stare at the map in their lap
* Drivers who take an inordinate amount of time paying to get out of a parking garage
* Drivers who block traffic because they're having some utterly pointless conversation with another driver, who's likewise blocking traffic, the both of them apparently unaware of a new device called the telephone
* Drivers who block you because they're not following a clearly posted traffic sign, like "no left turn" which surely doesn't include them, right?
And no list like this would be complete without special finger given to those jackass motorcycle riders who roar down La Brea Avenue with their throttles wide open and revved as loud as possible for that short little 300 yard stretch until they hit another traffic light. Sure did go fast for a second there, huh, Captain America?
2.23.2008
"My fellow Americans..."
Artist R. Luke Dubois has used the familiar optometrist's eye-chart to provide an interesting dissection of Presidential State of the Union addresses in a piece he calls "Hindsight is Always 20/20." The more often a word is used in the speech, the bigger the word appears on Dubois' chart. It's genius, the way one can easily see the big topics and themes with which the nation was grappling (or what topics and themes these presidents wanted to grapple).
George Washington's top 3 words: gentleman, provision, fellow
Thomas Jefferson: limits, sum, soon
Andrew Jackson: bank, money, payment
Abraham Lincoln: emancipation, rebellion, proclamation
Teddy Roosevelt: corporations, railroad, wage
Woodrow Wilson: processes, energy, tasks
Herbert Hoover: unemployment, recovery, major
Franklin D. Roosevelt: democratic, unity, allies
Dwight Eisenhower: nuclear, scientific, planning
Richard Nixon: truly, environment, vision
Jimmy Carter: us, 1980s, sector
Ronald Reagan: deficit, let's, bless
Bill Clinton: 21st, got, lot
George W. Bush: terror, iraq, iraqi
George Washington's top 3 words: gentleman, provision, fellow
Thomas Jefferson: limits, sum, soon
Andrew Jackson: bank, money, payment
Abraham Lincoln: emancipation, rebellion, proclamation
Teddy Roosevelt: corporations, railroad, wage
Woodrow Wilson: processes, energy, tasks
Herbert Hoover: unemployment, recovery, major
Franklin D. Roosevelt: democratic, unity, allies
Dwight Eisenhower: nuclear, scientific, planning
Richard Nixon: truly, environment, vision
Jimmy Carter: us, 1980s, sector
Ronald Reagan: deficit, let's, bless
Bill Clinton: 21st, got, lot
George W. Bush: terror, iraq, iraqi
2.21.2008
And the Oscar goes to...
Here's an interesting one-sheet almanac on Oscar trivia and factoids.
Looking at the past 25 years of Best Pictures (going back to 1983's Gandhi), which ones stand the test of time? Which are truly enduring cinematic classics?
The most deserving Best Picture winners
1. The Silence of the Lambs (1991), obviously
2. Unforgiven (1992), genius
3. Titanic (1997), popcorn filmmaking at its best
4. Platoon (1986), operatic in a good way
5. American Beauty (1999), the whole is far greater than the sum of its familiar parts
6. Chicago (2002), razzle-dazzle fun
The most undeserving and ridiculous Best Picture winners (and who should have won)
1. the insipid Shakespeare in Love (1998) (Saving Private Ryan packed a far stronger and more important punch)
2. the tedious Gandhi (1982) (Tootsie is about as perfect a comedy as you can make, but the Oscars don't reward that kind of thing)
3. how many people have actually seen The Last Emperor (1987)? (Fatal Attraction captured the 1980s zeitgeist, but the best film is probably a toss-up between Moonstruck and Broadcast News, although neither has aged well - guess 1987 wasn't so good a year)
4. The Lord of the Rings: Return of the King (2003) (sorry, The Cheese Fry is one of those people who think Lost in Translation is sublime on every level)
5. the bombastic, empty-headed Gladiator (2000) (the most exciting film of the year was Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon)
6. the solid but familiar biopic A Beautiful Mind (2001) (the true cinematic masterpiece was Moulin Rouge)
Who will win this Sunday? Look for a strong showing by No Country for Old Men.
Looking at the past 25 years of Best Pictures (going back to 1983's Gandhi), which ones stand the test of time? Which are truly enduring cinematic classics?
The most deserving Best Picture winners
1. The Silence of the Lambs (1991), obviously
2. Unforgiven (1992), genius
3. Titanic (1997), popcorn filmmaking at its best
4. Platoon (1986), operatic in a good way
5. American Beauty (1999), the whole is far greater than the sum of its familiar parts
6. Chicago (2002), razzle-dazzle fun
The most undeserving and ridiculous Best Picture winners (and who should have won)
1. the insipid Shakespeare in Love (1998) (Saving Private Ryan packed a far stronger and more important punch)
2. the tedious Gandhi (1982) (Tootsie is about as perfect a comedy as you can make, but the Oscars don't reward that kind of thing)
3. how many people have actually seen The Last Emperor (1987)? (Fatal Attraction captured the 1980s zeitgeist, but the best film is probably a toss-up between Moonstruck and Broadcast News, although neither has aged well - guess 1987 wasn't so good a year)
4. The Lord of the Rings: Return of the King (2003) (sorry, The Cheese Fry is one of those people who think Lost in Translation is sublime on every level)
5. the bombastic, empty-headed Gladiator (2000) (the most exciting film of the year was Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon)
6. the solid but familiar biopic A Beautiful Mind (2001) (the true cinematic masterpiece was Moulin Rouge)
Who will win this Sunday? Look for a strong showing by No Country for Old Men.
2.03.2008
Ding dong, the witch is dead
Yes, Virginia, there is a Santa Claus.
17-14. Scoreboard.
There are no words to accurately describe the immense feeling of elation and satisfaction that comes from watching the wheels come completely off the New England Patriots in the waning minutes of Superbowl XLII. If ever there was an insufferably arrogant team in dire need of some humble-pie humiliation and come-uppance, it was this one. So smug with their false humility, soberly claiming to respect their opponents but so clearly resenting anyone who believed their unbeaten season was anything other than a God-given right. So lucky with miraculous play after miraculous play in the regular season that give them a "W" in the nick of time and preserved that annoying unbeaten streak that so consumed the media. So self-righteous at justifiable suggestions of a blotch on their legacy courtesy some shading dealings from the coaching staff (that the off-season could further taint them with accusations of cheating in Superbowl XXXVI is all the sweeter). And so phony in their self-created image as hard-working Boy Scouts above it all, even though their roster is filled with just as many thugs and dirty players and jackass hotheads and free agent mercenaries as anyone else.
Yes, it's always fun to see the villain defeated. Especially on national television.
So much for 19-0. How's it feel to finally lose a game? Sucks about the timing.
17-14. Scoreboard.
There are no words to accurately describe the immense feeling of elation and satisfaction that comes from watching the wheels come completely off the New England Patriots in the waning minutes of Superbowl XLII. If ever there was an insufferably arrogant team in dire need of some humble-pie humiliation and come-uppance, it was this one. So smug with their false humility, soberly claiming to respect their opponents but so clearly resenting anyone who believed their unbeaten season was anything other than a God-given right. So lucky with miraculous play after miraculous play in the regular season that give them a "W" in the nick of time and preserved that annoying unbeaten streak that so consumed the media. So self-righteous at justifiable suggestions of a blotch on their legacy courtesy some shading dealings from the coaching staff (that the off-season could further taint them with accusations of cheating in Superbowl XXXVI is all the sweeter). And so phony in their self-created image as hard-working Boy Scouts above it all, even though their roster is filled with just as many thugs and dirty players and jackass hotheads and free agent mercenaries as anyone else.
Yes, it's always fun to see the villain defeated. Especially on national television.
So much for 19-0. How's it feel to finally lose a game? Sucks about the timing.
2.01.2008
Knee-jerk rewind: "Juno," "Atonement," and "Charlie Wilson's War"
Juno
1. Very funny, very satisfying.
2. But its Best Picture nomination is a bit of a reach. This thing gets released in April, no way it gets the Oscar nod (see also: the ignored Zodiac). More proof that Academy voters have inexplicably short attention spans: they nominate films with fall releases. And Hollywood happily obliges them, stacking fall slates with Oscar bait. Hey, that rhymes. Let's make T-shirts.
3. Ellen Page is great, the anti-Lohan, all rough edges and slouchy confidence. Worth a look: the dark thriller Hard Candy in which Page's character takes hostage a possible hostage.
4. An exceptionally strong cast. Jennifer Garner's never been better.
5. The media's fallen in love with screenwriter Diablo Cody, fawning all over her in a way that suggests Cody's completely re-invented the very fabric of cinematic storytelling. It's frankly a little annoying and probably part of the reason for the growing Juno backlash. But the real fascination with Cody is surely the fact that she's an oddball character herself: an ex-exotic dancer and blogger. In any event, Cody gives the film a distinctive point of view and snappy dialogue that's really pops, which is what any good screenwriter should do. Don't be surprised if it takes the Best Original Screenplay Oscar.
6. Bonus points to everyone involved for not letting the Ellen Page/Jason Bateman dynamic get too icky.
7. The last scene's duet of "Anyone Else But You" is infectious in its charm. Just try to resist.
Atonement
1. The textbook Oscar nominee. Big sweeping story. Period setting. Lush costumes. World War II. Drawing room sex. English accents. Stylish chain smoking. Tragic ending. Doomed romance. The thing practically writes itself.
2. Keira Knightley is surely the hottest anorexic-looking actress working today. Seriously, like, whoa.
3. Some call the ending a cheat, but it's no more a cheat that any other twist movie ending that Changes Everything. If you go with it and try to understand the "why" behind it (hint: look at the movie's title), you'll be fine.
4. Lesson to be learned: if you're going to send a bratty teenaged girl to deliver a letter to her sister, please be sure you give her the right letter.
5. It's most certainly better than the vastly overrated The English Patient.
Charlie Wilson's War
1. Philip Seymour Hoffman steals the movie.
2. It's a lot of fun, thanks mostly to the sharp dialogue and political scheming by "West Wing" auteur Aaron Sorkin. But then you start to realize... there's no conflict. Once Tom Hanks and his cronies decide to fund the mujahadeen in Afghanistan, that's exactly what they do. No hiccups, no detours, no obstacles.
3. Critics have complained that the film takes liberties with the truth. On one hand, hey, it's a movie, not a textbook. Then again, the media culture is slowly but surely blurring the lines between reality and fiction and many in the audience may think this is how it all happened because Tom Hanks says so. But what's the solution? Stay tuned for this argument to get kicked up another notch come fall when Oliver Stone's biopic of George W. Bush may hit theaters.
4. The appeal of Julia Roberts is frankly lost on The Cheese Fry. If you're honest with yourself, digging deep, you'll agree that she's really been interesting in just one film: Erin Brockovich. Her work is typically of the softball popcorn variety that calls for her to just flash that twangy smile. Even Tom Cruise sometimes mixes his Mission Impossibles with his Magnolias. She's kind of dull here as well.
5. Consider it a push. Some concerns, yes, but the running time's only 90 minutes. Get in, make some laughs, score some satirical points, turn Hoffman loose, let Hanks shine, get out.
1. Very funny, very satisfying.
2. But its Best Picture nomination is a bit of a reach. This thing gets released in April, no way it gets the Oscar nod (see also: the ignored Zodiac). More proof that Academy voters have inexplicably short attention spans: they nominate films with fall releases. And Hollywood happily obliges them, stacking fall slates with Oscar bait. Hey, that rhymes. Let's make T-shirts.
3. Ellen Page is great, the anti-Lohan, all rough edges and slouchy confidence. Worth a look: the dark thriller Hard Candy in which Page's character takes hostage a possible hostage.
4. An exceptionally strong cast. Jennifer Garner's never been better.
5. The media's fallen in love with screenwriter Diablo Cody, fawning all over her in a way that suggests Cody's completely re-invented the very fabric of cinematic storytelling. It's frankly a little annoying and probably part of the reason for the growing Juno backlash. But the real fascination with Cody is surely the fact that she's an oddball character herself: an ex-exotic dancer and blogger. In any event, Cody gives the film a distinctive point of view and snappy dialogue that's really pops, which is what any good screenwriter should do. Don't be surprised if it takes the Best Original Screenplay Oscar.
6. Bonus points to everyone involved for not letting the Ellen Page/Jason Bateman dynamic get too icky.
7. The last scene's duet of "Anyone Else But You" is infectious in its charm. Just try to resist.
Atonement
1. The textbook Oscar nominee. Big sweeping story. Period setting. Lush costumes. World War II. Drawing room sex. English accents. Stylish chain smoking. Tragic ending. Doomed romance. The thing practically writes itself.
2. Keira Knightley is surely the hottest anorexic-looking actress working today. Seriously, like, whoa.
3. Some call the ending a cheat, but it's no more a cheat that any other twist movie ending that Changes Everything. If you go with it and try to understand the "why" behind it (hint: look at the movie's title), you'll be fine.
4. Lesson to be learned: if you're going to send a bratty teenaged girl to deliver a letter to her sister, please be sure you give her the right letter.
5. It's most certainly better than the vastly overrated The English Patient.
Charlie Wilson's War
1. Philip Seymour Hoffman steals the movie.
2. It's a lot of fun, thanks mostly to the sharp dialogue and political scheming by "West Wing" auteur Aaron Sorkin. But then you start to realize... there's no conflict. Once Tom Hanks and his cronies decide to fund the mujahadeen in Afghanistan, that's exactly what they do. No hiccups, no detours, no obstacles.
3. Critics have complained that the film takes liberties with the truth. On one hand, hey, it's a movie, not a textbook. Then again, the media culture is slowly but surely blurring the lines between reality and fiction and many in the audience may think this is how it all happened because Tom Hanks says so. But what's the solution? Stay tuned for this argument to get kicked up another notch come fall when Oliver Stone's biopic of George W. Bush may hit theaters.
4. The appeal of Julia Roberts is frankly lost on The Cheese Fry. If you're honest with yourself, digging deep, you'll agree that she's really been interesting in just one film: Erin Brockovich. Her work is typically of the softball popcorn variety that calls for her to just flash that twangy smile. Even Tom Cruise sometimes mixes his Mission Impossibles with his Magnolias. She's kind of dull here as well.
5. Consider it a push. Some concerns, yes, but the running time's only 90 minutes. Get in, make some laughs, score some satirical points, turn Hoffman loose, let Hanks shine, get out.
Were the Democrats serious with that whole John Kerry thing in 2004?
L.A. Weekly's Joe Donnelly offers a fascinating and rather scathing look at the apparent inability of the Democratic Party to nominate a presidential candidate who can win in November. It's only been four years since the John Kerry disaster. The Cheese Fry recently had the misfortune of seeing Kerry on TV. He may be bright and utterly capable, but what an uncharismatic bore. Blech. Donnelly makes the interesting point that Bill Clinton's upset win in 1992 was something of an accident - if the Democratic Party had its way back then, the nominee would have been another smart-but-dull Yankee: Mario Cuomo. No way he beats George H.W. Bush, which would have put us in year 27 of a GOP Reaganite-Bushian monarchy. The mind reels.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)