list http://www.spout.com/ Recent community activity around National Treasure on Spout Copyright 2005-9 Spout, LLC Spout RSS http://www.spout.com/images/SpoutLogoRSS.jpg http://www.spout.com/ 136 30 http://www.spout.com/films/National_Treasure/229290/default.aspx Title: National Treasure
Year: 2004
Director: Jon Turteltaub
Plot: A man sets out to steal a lost fortune in order to save it in this adventure drama from producer Jerry Bruckheimer. Benjamin Franklin Gates (Nicolas Cage) is an archeologist who is from the eighth generation of a family who has shared an unusual quest. As Gates-family legend has it, George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, and Benjamin Franklin hid a massive cache of gold during the waning days of the Revolutionary War and left clues as to its whereabouts in the original drafts of the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence. With no firm proof that it actually exists, Gates sets out to crack the code that will lead him to the fortune, which, as a member of the Gates clan, he is sworn to protect from wrongdoers. National Treasure also features Sean Bean, Harvey Keitel, Justin Bartha, and Jon Voight. ~ Mark Deming, All Movie Guide
Times Tagged: 38
Number of Lists: 50
Number of blog posts: 9
Number of discussion threads: 3
SpoutRating: 3
]]>Thu, 09 Jul 2009 02:21:58 GMTNational Treasure2004Jon TurteltaubA man sets out to steal a lost fortune in order to save it in this adventure drama from producer <a href="/players/P____83309/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Jerry Bruckheimer</a>. Benjamin Franklin Gates (<a href="/players/P____10155/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Nicolas Cage</a>) is an archeologist who is from the eighth generation of a family who has shared an unusual quest. As Gates-family legend has it, George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, and Benjamin Franklin hid a massive cache of gold during the waning days of the Revolutionary War and left clues as to its whereabouts in the original drafts of the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence. With no firm proof that it actually exists, Gates sets out to crack the code that will lead him to the fortune, which, as a member of the Gates clan, he is sworn to protect from wrongdoers. National Treasure also features <a href="/players/P_____4761/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Sean Bean</a>, <a href="/players/P____37381/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Harvey Keitel</a>, <a href="/players/P___355681/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Justin Bartha</a>, and <a href="/players/P___115561/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Jon Voight</a>. ~ Mark Deming, All Movie Guide38Tag Target (>10)50933http://www.spout.com/ProductImages/u47899xs1wf.jpghttp://www.spout.com/films/National_Treasure/229290/default.aspxFilm http://www.spout.com/groups/Movie_Games/Re_Pick_a_Pair/598/37563/1/ShowPost.aspx Post By: Ravie13
Post To: Movie Games
Post Date: 11/23/2008 5:07:42 AM
Body: The Craft and Practical Magic (irresponsible teen witches versus irresponsible adult witches) (triple feature with The Witches of Eastwick) or The Craft vs. The Covenant (girl witches vs. boy witches) OR The Craft vs. Ginger Snaps (witches vs. werewolves) On another night it'd be a National Treasure vs. The DaVinci Code double feature (secret societies and the Illuminati)
]]>Sun, 23 Nov 2008 10:07:42 GMTRavie13Movie Games11/23/2008 5:07:42 AMThe Craft and Practical Magic (irresponsible teen witches versus irresponsible adult witches) (triple feature with The Witches of Eastwick) or The Craft vs. The Covenant (girl witches vs. boy witches) OR The Craft vs. Ginger Snaps (witches vs. werewolves) On another night it'd be a National Treasure vs. The DaVinci Code double feature (secret societies and the Illuminati) http://www.spout.com/groups/Top_5/Frankenstein_movie_marathon_banned_movie_posters/190/36812/1/ShowPost.aspx Post By: SkyPilot
Post To: Top 5
Post Date: 10/30/2008 4:11:53 PM
Body: 1. HALLOWEEN MOVIE MARATHON Karina posted her Ultimate Frankenstein Film Festival. I think all six of these films look great. 2. CONTROVERSIAL MOVIE POSTERS Kevin Kelly presents controversial movie posters. Some seem harmless--and others make my skin crawl. 3. JUDY BLUME DREAM CASTS Remember the Judy Blume books like Tales of a Fourth Grade Nothing? Kevin posts the top 5 dream casts for movies based on her books. 4. Kevin also posted the top movies that happen in Philadelphia. I didn't know Dawn of the Dead happened there! Wow, I can't believe Mannequin and National Treasure made it, but not A History of Violence.
]]>Thu, 30 Oct 2008 20:11:53 GMTSkyPilotTop 510/30/2008 4:11:53 PM1. HALLOWEEN MOVIE MARATHON Karina posted her Ultimate Frankenstein Film Festival. I think all six of these films look great. 2. CONTROVERSIAL MOVIE POSTERS Kevin Kelly presents controversial movie posters. Some seem harmless--and others make my skin crawl. 3. JUDY BLUME DREAM CASTS Remember the Judy Blume books like Tales of a Fourth Grade Nothing? Kevin posts the top 5 dream casts for movies based on her books. 4. Kevin also posted the top movies that happen in Philadelphia. I didn't know Dawn of the Dead happened there! Wow, I can't believe Mannequin and National Treasure made it, but not A History of Violence. http://www.spout.com/blogs/spoutblog/archive/2008/10/27/36709.aspx Post By: SpoutBlog
Post To: SpoutBlog on spout.com
Post Date: 10/27/2008 7:00:43 PM
Body: It’s been more than 100 years since the Philadelphia Quakers changed their name to the Philadelphia Philadelphians, which was thankfully shortened to “Phillies” very quickly, probably by printers who were afraid of using up all of their ‘P’s in the printing press. Since being founded in 1883, they’ve been one of the most tenacious teams in baseball, winning six pennants, and the World Series in 1980. In fact, in all of American sports (not just baseball), the Phillies are the team that’s been in one city with one name for the longest time. They’re one game away from another World Series win tonight, despite being the Major League team with the most losses in history. We celebrate their scrappiness with a list of quintessential Philadelphia movies. Check them out after the break. Rocky When most people think about Philadelphia and movies, the first thing that springs to mind is the iconic shot of Rocky Balboa running up the stairs to the Philadelphia Museum of Art and triumphantly pumping his fists to the sky from Rocky. City Commerce Director Dick Doran said Sylvester Stallone and the movie did more for Philadelphia’s image than Ben Franklin,  and that scene has probably been recreated by thousands of people that visit the city. In fact, the closing credits of Rocky Balboa is a long montage of images of people imitating his famous run, and there are countless fan recreations on YouTube. The Philadelphia Story Even though it’s set entirely on a Hollywood soundstage, this 1940 film skewers Philadelphia high society  in a comedy of errors. It also features Katherine Hepburn, Jimmy Stewart, and Cary Grant at the top of their game, with Stewart winning an Oscar for Best Actor for his role. Katherine Hepburn had previously starred in the Broadway play the film is based on, and eccentric billionaire Howard Hughes bought the film rights for the play and gave them to her as a gift. Which was somewhat ironic, since Philip Barry had written the play for her in an effort to bring her back to Broadway. It’s still one of the best-written romantic comedies of all time, and the city of brotherly love is probably proud of the fact that its name is in the title. Mannequin Set in the famous Wanamaker’s department store in downtown Philadelphia, this is one of those quintessential 1980s movies that critics hated, but audiences adored. Although this story about window display mannequin come to life might not hold up well today, it has grossed over $42 million dollars and was considered such a success that they made a sequel in 1991 called Mannequin Too: On The Move. That one didn’t do quite so well. The original featured both Andrew McCarthy during his rise in the Brat Pack, and Kim Cattrall in her pre-pre-pre Sex and the City days. Besides giving us Starship’s “Nothing’s Gonna Stop Us Now,” the film has become iconically linked with Philadelphia through Wanamaker’s, now a Macy’s, which was the first department store in Philly and one of the first in the United States in 1876. Philadelphia This movie provided the one-two punch of a powerful performance from Tom Hanks along with Bruce Springsteen’s “Streets of Philadelphia” song, both of which netted Oscars. This film not only addressed AIDS and gay issues in a straightforward manner that was extremely new for Hollywood, it helped open the door for future films and even television series in the sexually conservative (at least in gay and lesbian terms) entertainment industry. It also was shot in key locations around the city, including the courtroom scenes which were filmed in an actual court in Philadelphia. Ironically, Denzel Washington’s character says he prays that the Phillies will win the pennant, and when this film came out in 1993 they did just that. The Sixth Sense M. Night Shyamalan famously shoots all of his movies in or around Philadelphia, and this is easily his most famous. Shymalan goes out of his way to show that the film is set in his hometown, including in the opening scene where Bruce Willis and Olivia Williams are looking at a citation Willis has just received from the mayor. The camera pans all the way down to show the words “of Philadelphia.” The film also features several key locations in South Philadelphia. The filmmaker has continued to show love for the city, although audiences haven’t been loving his movies. The Sixth Sense grossed over $600 million at the worldwide box office, but his latest, The Happening, has only pulled in $163 million. Dawn of the Dead Although most of this film takes place in a shopping mall in Monroeville, PA, the action starts in Philadelphia with the main characters fleeing from pandemonium in the city via helicopter. The entire city has become overrun with zombies, which is probably high time to leave any city. The Philadelphia S.W.A.T. team responds to an apartment building full of zombies, which doesn’t turn out so well for them since zombie attack from your reanimated dead loved one probably isn’t in the training manual. Romero shot the film in and around Philadelphia for around $650,000 dollars in 1978, and it still stands as one of the best horror movies of all time and the strongest in his zombie trilogy which includes Night of the Living Dead and Day of the Dead. National Treasure Right on the heels of the success of The Da Vinci Code came this Nicolas Cage starrer with historic clues to lost treasure hidden in Philadelphia. The central clue in the film is the Declaration of Independence, which leads the main characters to Independence Hall (where the Declaration was signed) in Philadelphia where they find a pair of special glasses hidden by Philadelphia’s most famous historical resident, Benjamin Franklin. Although the treasure ends up being underneath an old church in Boston, the scenes in Philadelphia with the secret brick and Franklin’s glasses are one of the most interesting homages to Indiana Jones’ headpiece to the Staff of Ra in Raiders of the Lost Ark. Nicolas Cage’s character is also named Benjamin Franklin Gates, so they had to show some Philly love. Trading Places This comedic version of the prince and the pauper tale is set in an affluent neighborhood in Philadelphia, and in the offices of a commodity brokerage downtown. It’s a double rags to riches tale, with Winthorpe and Billy Ray (Dan Ackroyd and Eddie Murphy) swapping places before they turn the tables on the Duke brothers and bankrupt them as well. Winthorpe’s mansion is actually a real location in a ritzy part of town, and many of the downtown scenes key Philadelphia locations and even local television reporters as extras. Although Randolph and Mortimer return briefly in Murphy’s Coming to America, they’re seen as bums in New York, and not Philadelphia. Witness Ironically, most of this key Philadelphia movie doesn’t take place in the city at all, but rather in the Amish communities of nearby rural Lancaster County. The film opens with a very young Lukas Haas witnessing a murder, which leads to a conspiracy within the city’s police department. Police Captain John Book, played by Harrison Ford, is shot while discovering this, and takes Haas back home to protect him. However, he collapses from his bullet wound, and is nursed back to health by a bonnet-wearing Kelly McGillis. He stays on to protect the boy, and is eventually accepted by the community before offing the bad guys and returning to the big city. 12 Monkeys While this Terry Gilliam post-apocalyptic film is set mostly in modern-day Baltimore and Philadelphia, it’s the shots of the virus ravaged Philly that are the most haunting. Bruce Willis roams the future devastated landscape in his steampunk environmental suit while encountering wild animals and looking for clues that can help the human race repopulate and return to the surface. The iconic ending sequence in the airport was actually shot inside the Philadelphia Convention Center, and the asylum where Willis is a patient is the Eastern State Penitentiary, which is the one of two things Charles Dickens wanted to see when he visited the U.S. The other was Niagara Falls. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog
]]>Mon, 27 Oct 2008 23:00:43 GMTSpoutBlogSpoutBlog on spout.com10/27/2008 7:00:43 PMIt’s been more than 100 years since the Philadelphia Quakers changed their name to the Philadelphia Philadelphians, which was thankfully shortened to “Phillies” very quickly, probably by printers who were afraid of using up all of their ‘P’s in the printing press. Since being founded in 1883, they’ve been one of the most tenacious teams in baseball, winning six pennants, and the World Series in 1980. In fact, in all of American sports (not just baseball), the Phillies are the team that’s been in one city with one name for the longest time. They’re one game away from another World Series win tonight, despite being the Major League team with the most losses in history. We celebrate their scrappiness with a list of quintessential Philadelphia movies. Check them out after the break. Rocky When most people think about Philadelphia and movies, the first thing that springs to mind is the iconic shot of Rocky Balboa running up the stairs to the Philadelphia Museum of Art and triumphantly pumping his fists to the sky from Rocky. City Commerce Director Dick Doran said Sylvester Stallone and the movie did more for Philadelphia’s image than Ben Franklin,  and that scene has probably been recreated by thousands of people that visit the city. In fact, the closing credits of Rocky Balboa is a long montage of images of people imitating his famous run, and there are countless fan recreations on YouTube. The Philadelphia Story Even though it’s set entirely on a Hollywood soundstage, this 1940 film skewers Philadelphia high society  in a comedy of errors. It also features Katherine Hepburn, Jimmy Stewart, and Cary Grant at the top of their game, with Stewart winning an Oscar for Best Actor for his role. Katherine Hepburn had previously starred in the Broadway play the film is based on, and eccentric billionaire Howard Hughes bought the film rights for the play and gave them to her as a gift. Which was somewhat ironic, since Philip Barry had written the play for her in an effort to bring her back to Broadway. It’s still one of the best-written romantic comedies of all time, and the city of brotherly love is probably proud of the fact that its name is in the title. Mannequin Set in the famous Wanamaker’s department store in downtown Philadelphia, this is one of those quintessential 1980s movies that critics hated, but audiences adored. Although this story about window display mannequin come to life might not hold up well today, it has grossed over $42 million dollars and was considered such a success that they made a sequel in 1991 called Mannequin Too: On The Move. That one didn’t do quite so well. The original featured both Andrew McCarthy during his rise in the Brat Pack, and Kim Cattrall in her pre-pre-pre Sex and the City days. Besides giving us Starship’s “Nothing’s Gonna Stop Us Now,” the film has become iconically linked with Philadelphia through Wanamaker’s, now a Macy’s, which was the first department store in Philly and one of the first in the United States in 1876. Philadelphia This movie provided the one-two punch of a powerful performance from Tom Hanks along with Bruce Springsteen’s “Streets of Philadelphia” song, both of which netted Oscars. This film not only addressed AIDS and gay issues in a straightforward manner that was extremely new for Hollywood, it helped open the door for future films and even television series in the sexually conservative (at least in gay and lesbian terms) entertainment industry. It also was shot in key locations around the city, including the courtroom scenes which were filmed in an actual court in Philadelphia. Ironically, Denzel Washington’s character says he prays that the Phillies will win the pennant, and when this film came out in 1993 they did just that. The Sixth Sense M. Night Shyamalan famously shoots all of his movies in or around Philadelphia, and this is easily his most famous. Shymalan goes out of his way to show that the film is set in his hometown, including in the opening scene where Bruce Willis and Olivia Williams are looking at a citation Willis has just received from the mayor. The camera pans all the way down to show the words “of Philadelphia.” The film also features several key locations in South Philadelphia. The filmmaker has continued to show love for the city, although audiences haven’t been loving his movies. The Sixth Sense grossed over $600 million at the worldwide box office, but his latest, The Happening, has only pulled in $163 million. Dawn of the Dead Although most of this film takes place in a shopping mall in Monroeville, PA, the action starts in Philadelphia with the main characters fleeing from pandemonium in the city via helicopter. The entire city has become overrun with zombies, which is probably high time to leave any city. The Philadelphia S.W.A.T. team responds to an apartment building full of zombies, which doesn’t turn out so well for them since zombie attack from your reanimated dead loved one probably isn’t in the training manual. Romero shot the film in and around Philadelphia for around $650,000 dollars in 1978, and it still stands as one of the best horror movies of all time and the strongest in his zombie trilogy which includes Night of the Living Dead and Day of the Dead. National Treasure Right on the heels of the success of The Da Vinci Code came this Nicolas Cage starrer with historic clues to lost treasure hidden in Philadelphia. The central clue in the film is the Declaration of Independence, which leads the main characters to Independence Hall (where the Declaration was signed) in Philadelphia where they find a pair of special glasses hidden by Philadelphia’s most famous historical resident, Benjamin Franklin. Although the treasure ends up being underneath an old church in Boston, the scenes in Philadelphia with the secret brick and Franklin’s glasses are one of the most interesting homages to Indiana Jones’ headpiece to the Staff of Ra in Raiders of the Lost Ark. Nicolas Cage’s character is also named Benjamin Franklin Gates, so they had to show some Philly love. Trading Places This comedic version of the prince and the pauper tale is set in an affluent neighborhood in Philadelphia, and in the offices of a commodity brokerage downtown. It’s a double rags to riches tale, with Winthorpe and Billy Ray (Dan Ackroyd and Eddie Murphy) swapping places before they turn the tables on the Duke brothers and bankrupt them as well. Winthorpe’s mansion is actually a real location in a ritzy part of town, and many of the downtown scenes key Philadelphia locations and even local television reporters as extras. Although Randolph and Mortimer return briefly in Murphy’s Coming to America, they’re seen as bums in New York, and not Philadelphia. Witness Ironically, most of this key Philadelphia movie doesn’t take place in the city at all, but rather in the Amish communities of nearby rural Lancaster County. The film opens with a very young Lukas Haas witnessing a murder, which leads to a conspiracy within the city’s police department. Police Captain John Book, played by Harrison Ford, is shot while discovering this, and takes Haas back home to protect him. However, he collapses from his bullet wound, and is nursed back to health by a bonnet-wearing Kelly McGillis. He stays on to protect the boy, and is eventually accepted by the community before offing the bad guys and returning to the big city. 12 Monkeys While this Terry Gilliam post-apocalyptic film is set mostly in modern-day Baltimore and Philadelphia, it’s the shots of the virus ravaged Philly that are the most haunting. Bruce Willis roams the future devastated landscape in his steampunk environmental suit while encountering wild animals and looking for clues that can help the human race repopulate and return to the surface. The iconic ending sequence in the airport was actually shot inside the Philadelphia Convention Center, and the asylum where Willis is a patient is the Eastern State Penitentiary, which is the one of two things Charles Dickens wanted to see when he visited the U.S. The other was Niagara Falls. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog http://www.spout.com/blogs/spoutblog/archive/2008/9/19/35323.aspx Post By: SpoutBlog
Post To: SpoutBlog on spout.com
Post Date: 9/19/2008 5:01:43 PM
Body: Sometimes I really wish David Bordwell’s blog permitted comments. Mostly it’s better that it doesn’t, but the man’s last post has made me want to discuss the art of movie titles for a whole week now. And it didn’t help that coinciding in time with Bordwell’s post was another one of those sidebars in Entertainment Weekly pointing out some new movies with misleading titles. Yes, Lakeview Terrace does sound like a period romance, as do many other badly titled films (Elizabethtown and Wicker Park come to mind). This weekend also sees two new movies employing the method of borrowing song titles, which are typically not appropriate (Ghost Town seems more like a horror western hybrid, while My Best Friend’s Girl actually fits its plot). Well, fortunately for me (and hopefully you), I can bring the discussion over to SpoutBlog, though not quite as in depth as Bordwell. I’ll be more than happy to have a conversation in the comments section regarding the more general topic of movie titling, but for now I’ll kick things off with a list of what I find to be the most interesting movie titles of the past decade. It’s been a time when studios and filmmakers have been very loose with ill-fitting and overlong titles, as well as some that are too plainly literal (Snakes on a Plane), but the following selections have the benefit of featuring clever, well-chosen and more meaningful monikers. All About My Mother (Todo sobre mi madre) (1999) This Pedro Almodóvar film has a very telling title, one that goes along with Bordwell’s acknowledgment of titles that speak for the character. Yet the character spoken for here is Esteban, the kid who dies in the beginning. Or does he? The title actually refers to a story Esteban has written for school and is inspired by the film All About Eve, which he has just watched. Esteban doesn’t so much die in the film as he does in his own story, which is depicted within the film. Also, the word “Mother” in the title doesn’t so much refer to his actual mother, Manuela, as it does his (made-up) transvestite “father”, Lola, who we learn all about. Amores Perros (2000) Although improperly translated as “Love’s a Bitch,” that phrase does at least apply on some level to Alejandro González Iñárritu’s film. As does the more acceptable translation of “Love is Dogs,” which references the film’s canine companions, each of which parallels its owner. But there is also another translation that’s more like “Goodness Wretchedness,” referring to a phrase on the film’s website that basically translates as “If your story turned out well, put it down to ‘amores.’ If bad, put it to ‘perros.’” The fact that you can interpret the meaning of the title multiple ways, and therefore you can interpret its meaning to the film multiple ways, is the reason that it was so important to release the film in the U.S. with its original Mexican title. The Perfect Storm (2000) Although the title comes from Sebastian Junger’s book, the name took on a whole new meaning for the film, which is, in my opinion, completely about the attempt to perfectly create a storm on a computer. Sure, there’s a plot within the film, too, but nothing more attended to than the perfectly rendered storm. In fact, the film’s storm may have been too perfect-looking, as the film lost the Visual Effects Oscar to Gladiator. While the title was clearly not intended for such purpose, and I had planned to ignore titles that inadvertently become more ironically meaningful upon release (Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed; Disaster Movie), I think the filmmakers at least meant to produce a spectacular storm more than a good story, so I believe it more qualifiable for the list at hand. Shanghai Noon (2000) This title doesn’t necessarily add anything to the meaning of the film nor does it really have multiple layers of meaning by itself. But it features the most cleverly punned title of the last ten years, in my opinion. The sequel’s title, Shanghai Knights, isn’t too bad, either. But just as the movie isn’t nearly as good as the original, neither is the title. Adaptation (2002) This title may actually be my favorite of all time due to its consisting of only a single word, which can be lent to the film in a multitude of ways. The title refers to the adaptation of a book to a film, the adaptation of a plant to its environment, the adaptation of a screenwriter character to his assignment, the adaptation of the same character to the events of his environment and, finally, the adaptation of the film itself to fit the mold of a certain kind of film that fares well in the present environment of the movie biz (ironically it’s this adaptation in the end from a smart film to a silly action movie that fails in execution, even though the joke more fittingly works perfectly on paper). Bad Company (2002) Even awful movies can have titles with multiple meanings, and this lame Joel Schumacher effort is a good example of such. Because “Company” means the CIA in addition to companionship, the title may refer to any of the following: an incapable member of the CIA (Chris Rock’s character); an incapable CIA in general (this was a time when the organization was called into question); a defective spy or untrustworthy spy; or simply the bad buddy team-up of Anthony Hopkins and Chris Rock (diegetically and extradiegetically). The same title had been used previously for a bad 1995 movie dealing with the CIA, so its multilayered usage here was not that inspired, but it is nevertheless a good title, in my opinion, and perhaps it will one day be put to better use. National Treasure (2004) The same goes for this movie, which should have and could have been a lot better. The title, which is a well-played mix of figurative and literal meaning and seems more thoughtful than most blockbuster Hollywood titles, would have you believe there was once some smarter writing to be found within the film itself. Shaun of the Dead (2004) For a short while, I thought the title of this comedy didn’t really appropriately fit the film’s story. Shaun isn’t of the dead, I reasoned, because he never “dies.” I accepted the title, though, because it was a nice play on the title Dawn of the Dead. Eventually I decided that it does indeed fit, because the general theme of the movie is that Shaun has been living his life as if he were a zombie. Before the real zombies show up, the “dead” of the title refers to all the people living in this spiritless way, Shaun included. Yet while the rest of these “dead” become undead creatures, Shaun proves that he is capable of living more fully and is able to survive the (allegorical) outbreak. 2046 (2004) Wong Kar-Wai loves to play with the idea of Hong Kong’s transition from British territory to Chinese (which occurred in 1997), and the title partly refers to the final year in which Hong Kong is allowed self-regulation before becoming fully integrated into mainland China in 2047. In the film, the numerical title literally references both a hotel room and the future year, which is employed in a science fiction story being written by the main character. Some people also like to interpret the title as reading “two-oh-four-six” meaning “to owe for sex.” Though there are prostitute characters in the film, this meaning is less likely the intention of Wong. But the additional interpretation makes for a richer title anyway. There Will Be Blood (2007) Why not retain the title of Upton Sinclair’s source novel, “Oil!”? Well, besides all the changes made to the story, it could be because Paul Thomas Anderson’s new title has more possible meanings. The word “Blood” in the title may refer to the actual oil, or the blood shed for the oil (as in drilling accidents then and wars now), or family, especially actual blood relatives (of which there aren’t actually many in the film). Mostly, though, the title allows for and acknowledges a connection between the film’s setting and the current events it appears to be commenting on. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog
]]>Fri, 19 Sep 2008 21:01:43 GMTSpoutBlogSpoutBlog on spout.com9/19/2008 5:01:43 PMSometimes I really wish David Bordwell’s blog permitted comments. Mostly it’s better that it doesn’t, but the man’s last post has made me want to discuss the art of movie titles for a whole week now. And it didn’t help that coinciding in time with Bordwell’s post was another one of those sidebars in Entertainment Weekly pointing out some new movies with misleading titles. Yes, Lakeview Terrace does sound like a period romance, as do many other badly titled films (Elizabethtown and Wicker Park come to mind). This weekend also sees two new movies employing the method of borrowing song titles, which are typically not appropriate (Ghost Town seems more like a horror western hybrid, while My Best Friend’s Girl actually fits its plot). Well, fortunately for me (and hopefully you), I can bring the discussion over to SpoutBlog, though not quite as in depth as Bordwell. I’ll be more than happy to have a conversation in the comments section regarding the more general topic of movie titling, but for now I’ll kick things off with a list of what I find to be the most interesting movie titles of the past decade. It’s been a time when studios and filmmakers have been very loose with ill-fitting and overlong titles, as well as some that are too plainly literal (Snakes on a Plane), but the following selections have the benefit of featuring clever, well-chosen and more meaningful monikers. All About My Mother (Todo sobre mi madre) (1999) This Pedro Almodóvar film has a very telling title, one that goes along with Bordwell’s acknowledgment of titles that speak for the character. Yet the character spoken for here is Esteban, the kid who dies in the beginning. Or does he? The title actually refers to a story Esteban has written for school and is inspired by the film All About Eve, which he has just watched. Esteban doesn’t so much die in the film as he does in his own story, which is depicted within the film. Also, the word “Mother” in the title doesn’t so much refer to his actual mother, Manuela, as it does his (made-up) transvestite “father”, Lola, who we learn all about. Amores Perros (2000) Although improperly translated as “Love’s a Bitch,” that phrase does at least apply on some level to Alejandro González Iñárritu’s film. As does the more acceptable translation of “Love is Dogs,” which references the film’s canine companions, each of which parallels its owner. But there is also another translation that’s more like “Goodness Wretchedness,” referring to a phrase on the film’s website that basically translates as “If your story turned out well, put it down to ‘amores.’ If bad, put it to ‘perros.’” The fact that you can interpret the meaning of the title multiple ways, and therefore you can interpret its meaning to the film multiple ways, is the reason that it was so important to release the film in the U.S. with its original Mexican title. The Perfect Storm (2000) Although the title comes from Sebastian Junger’s book, the name took on a whole new meaning for the film, which is, in my opinion, completely about the attempt to perfectly create a storm on a computer. Sure, there’s a plot within the film, too, but nothing more attended to than the perfectly rendered storm. In fact, the film’s storm may have been too perfect-looking, as the film lost the Visual Effects Oscar to Gladiator. While the title was clearly not intended for such purpose, and I had planned to ignore titles that inadvertently become more ironically meaningful upon release (Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed; Disaster Movie), I think the filmmakers at least meant to produce a spectacular storm more than a good story, so I believe it more qualifiable for the list at hand. Shanghai Noon (2000) This title doesn’t necessarily add anything to the meaning of the film nor does it really have multiple layers of meaning by itself. But it features the most cleverly punned title of the last ten years, in my opinion. The sequel’s title, Shanghai Knights, isn’t too bad, either. But just as the movie isn’t nearly as good as the original, neither is the title. Adaptation (2002) This title may actually be my favorite of all time due to its consisting of only a single word, which can be lent to the film in a multitude of ways. The title refers to the adaptation of a book to a film, the adaptation of a plant to its environment, the adaptation of a screenwriter character to his assignment, the adaptation of the same character to the events of his environment and, finally, the adaptation of the film itself to fit the mold of a certain kind of film that fares well in the present environment of the movie biz (ironically it’s this adaptation in the end from a smart film to a silly action movie that fails in execution, even though the joke more fittingly works perfectly on paper). Bad Company (2002) Even awful movies can have titles with multiple meanings, and this lame Joel Schumacher effort is a good example of such. Because “Company” means the CIA in addition to companionship, the title may refer to any of the following: an incapable member of the CIA (Chris Rock’s character); an incapable CIA in general (this was a time when the organization was called into question); a defective spy or untrustworthy spy; or simply the bad buddy team-up of Anthony Hopkins and Chris Rock (diegetically and extradiegetically). The same title had been used previously for a bad 1995 movie dealing with the CIA, so its multilayered usage here was not that inspired, but it is nevertheless a good title, in my opinion, and perhaps it will one day be put to better use. National Treasure (2004) The same goes for this movie, which should have and could have been a lot better. The title, which is a well-played mix of figurative and literal meaning and seems more thoughtful than most blockbuster Hollywood titles, would have you believe there was once some smarter writing to be found within the film itself. Shaun of the Dead (2004) For a short while, I thought the title of this comedy didn’t really appropriately fit the film’s story. Shaun isn’t of the dead, I reasoned, because he never “dies.” I accepted the title, though, because it was a nice play on the title Dawn of the Dead. Eventually I decided that it does indeed fit, because the general theme of the movie is that Shaun has been living his life as if he were a zombie. Before the real zombies show up, the “dead” of the title refers to all the people living in this spiritless way, Shaun included. Yet while the rest of these “dead” become undead creatures, Shaun proves that he is capable of living more fully and is able to survive the (allegorical) outbreak. 2046 (2004) Wong Kar-Wai loves to play with the idea of Hong Kong’s transition from British territory to Chinese (which occurred in 1997), and the title partly refers to the final year in which Hong Kong is allowed self-regulation before becoming fully integrated into mainland China in 2047. In the film, the numerical title literally references both a hotel room and the future year, which is employed in a science fiction story being written by the main character. Some people also like to interpret the title as reading “two-oh-four-six” meaning “to owe for sex.” Though there are prostitute characters in the film, this meaning is less likely the intention of Wong. But the additional interpretation makes for a richer title anyway. There Will Be Blood (2007) Why not retain the title of Upton Sinclair’s source novel, “Oil!”? Well, besides all the changes made to the story, it could be because Paul Thomas Anderson’s new title has more possible meanings. The word “Blood” in the title may refer to the actual oil, or the blood shed for the oil (as in drilling accidents then and wars now), or family, especially actual blood relatives (of which there aren’t actually many in the film). Mostly, though, the title allows for and acknowledges a connection between the film’s setting and the current events it appears to be commenting on. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog http://www.spout.com/blogs/christhilk/archive/2008/8/26/34425.aspx Post By: ChrisThilk
Post To: ChrisThilk Blog
Post Date: 8/26/2008 10:01:07 PM
Body: It was interesting to follow-up the real Indiana Jones with these movies, which features one of the most prominent Indy-Lite characters to be developed in recent years. Nicholas Cage and his cast of cronies run, jump and ponder amiably through Book of Secrets, which I actually watched first, as they try to stay one step ahead of the bad guys, who are after the same City of Gold that the good guys are. There’s nothing that they’re asked to do by the plot that’s all that engaging and the strength of the film is dependent largely by the action just never slowing down enough for the audience to actually think about what’s going on. If they were given that opportunity some bad things would begin to happen, including them starting to likely laugh at the action unfolding on-screen. While enjoyable enough as some fluffy entertainment there’s nothing beyond the surface layer. It’s like reading an early Grisham novel in that all the characters are dependent on everyone else being as illogical as they are but hey, look at the car chase! I had not, upon seeing this one, seen the first movie but that’s certainly alright in that the character development is so superficial you can still get to know everyone and who they are and why they’re in the situations they’re in pretty quickly and easily. Decent enough if you find yourself needing something on in the background while you’re catching up on some emails but certainly not meaty entertainment by any stretch. It was after watching #2 that I finally caught up with the first National Treasure and found it to be almost the exact same movie as the second installment. There are the same familial issues that Cage’s character is working out, the same Mission: Impossible tech sequences that are pulled off by the nerdy sidekick and the same romantic arc that goes on between Cage and the female lead, although in the first one it’s them falling in love in the second it’s them coming back together after a falling out. In thinking back on the movies it’s almost impossible to differentiate between the two. If I think about a scene it takes me a minute to remember whether it comes from the first or the second. I basically have to try and visualize either Ed Harris or Sean Bean in the bad guy role (though their motivations aren’t so much “bad” as “counter to those of Cage and his altruistic gang”) in order to decide which is which. Originally posted on:Chris Thilk
]]>Wed, 27 Aug 2008 02:01:07 GMTChrisThilkChrisThilk Blog8/26/2008 10:01:07 PMIt was interesting to follow-up the real Indiana Jones with these movies, which features one of the most prominent Indy-Lite characters to be developed in recent years. Nicholas Cage and his cast of cronies run, jump and ponder amiably through Book of Secrets, which I actually watched first, as they try to stay one step ahead of the bad guys, who are after the same City of Gold that the good guys are. There’s nothing that they’re asked to do by the plot that’s all that engaging and the strength of the film is dependent largely by the action just never slowing down enough for the audience to actually think about what’s going on. If they were given that opportunity some bad things would begin to happen, including them starting to likely laugh at the action unfolding on-screen. While enjoyable enough as some fluffy entertainment there’s nothing beyond the surface layer. It’s like reading an early Grisham novel in that all the characters are dependent on everyone else being as illogical as they are but hey, look at the car chase! I had not, upon seeing this one, seen the first movie but that’s certainly alright in that the character development is so superficial you can still get to know everyone and who they are and why they’re in the situations they’re in pretty quickly and easily. Decent enough if you find yourself needing something on in the background while you’re catching up on some emails but certainly not meaty entertainment by any stretch. It was after watching #2 that I finally caught up with the first National Treasure and found it to be almost the exact same movie as the second installment. There are the same familial issues that Cage’s character is working out, the same Mission: Impossible tech sequences that are pulled off by the nerdy sidekick and the same romantic arc that goes on between Cage and the female lead, although in the first one it’s them falling in love in the second it’s them coming back together after a falling out. In thinking back on the movies it’s almost impossible to differentiate between the two. If I think about a scene it takes me a minute to remember whether it comes from the first or the second. I basically have to try and visualize either Ed Harris or Sean Bean in the bad guy role (though their motivations aren’t so much “bad” as “counter to those of Cage and his altruistic gang”) in order to decide which is which. Originally posted on:Chris Thilk http://www.spout.com/groups/Weekly_Theme/Re_Weekly_Theme_for_August_11_The_Secret_Society/625/33857/1/ShowPost.aspx Post By: The_American_Dream
Post To: Weekly Theme
Post Date: 8/11/2008 11:42:02 AM
Body: [quote user="SkyPilot"] Which is a far cry from how interested I was in the Masons when I was about 18, when I saw From Hell. [/quote] "From Hell" is a great and creepy movie. When I first saw it I was like 'No way any of that can be true beyond the happening of the murders themselves." As it turns out allot of the facts of the movie are not far from some events that really happened (even the letter with the kidney). However, going off from the masons, I am going to have to add "National Treasure" to the list there which also really has a remarkable blend of the true and the absurd (despite the fact that it is not a particularly remarkable movie). "From Hell" also reminds me of another movie neatly in this category; "The Ninth Gate". Johnny Depp again, and also the classic people in robes look to the secret society there.
]]>Mon, 11 Aug 2008 15:42:02 GMTThe_American_DreamWeekly Theme8/11/2008 11:42:02 AM[quote user="SkyPilot"] Which is a far cry from how interested I was in the Masons when I was about 18, when I saw From Hell. [/quote] "From Hell" is a great and creepy movie. When I first saw it I was like 'No way any of that can be true beyond the happening of the murders themselves." As it turns out allot of the facts of the movie are not far from some events that really happened (even the letter with the kidney). However, going off from the masons, I am going to have to add "National Treasure" to the list there which also really has a remarkable blend of the true and the absurd (despite the fact that it is not a particularly remarkable movie). "From Hell" also reminds me of another movie neatly in this category; "The Ninth Gate". Johnny Depp again, and also the classic people in robes look to the secret society there. http://www.spout.com/blogs/usesoap/archive/2008/5/23/29825.aspx Post By: usesoap
Post To: usesoap Blog
Post Date: 5/23/2008 1:17:59 PM
Body: This is not going to be one of those columns that goes into a lengthy diatribe about the influence on Dr. Indiana Jones had on this reviewer’s life as a child. I refuse to prattle on about owning a fedora and a bullwhip used to scare the bejeezus out of the family dog, or the backyard films created as homage to “Raiders of the Lost Ark” and the countless scars and bruises that serve as a testament to my inexperience and/or stupidity in attempts to replicate the adventures of the intrepid archeologist. It seems that the prerequisite in reviewing this latest installment in the Indiana Jones canon, “Kingdom of the Crystal Skull” has almost every critic launching into some wistful rant on its impact of his/her life. And while I am certainly one to appreciate the personal power of cinematic experiences, I think this self-indulgent therapy session approach is a tad tiresome now. Let’s take “Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull” for what it is, without the nostalgic mist clouding my eyes. I will begin with stating that, as slavish as my devotion was, I do not consider the entire trilogy of Indiana Jones films as the be-all, end-all of adventure films. “Raiders” was, and remains, a masterwork of cinema – thrilling, thoughtful and thorough. Its sequels – “Temple of Doom” and “The Last Crusade” – had their strengths, but rose to levels nowhere near their source. So the thought of another entry two decades later held only slight promise. And there is much wish fulfillment to be found, but there are several critical elements that drag the tale into the catacombs of many Indy Come Lateleys, such as “The Mummy” and “National Treasure.” The film picks up 20 years after “The Last Crusade” in 1957, where Dr. Jones (played by Harrison Ford, duh!) finds himself in New Mexico searching for the eponymous object located in a government storage warehouse (keep your eyes peeled for flashes of his previous conquests located within). From here, he tangles with old-fashioned cinematic Russkies (headed by a Cate Blanchett, acting as though she stepped out of a “Rocky and Bullwinkle” cartoon), survives a point-blank impact of an atomic bomb, floats down not one, but three, waterfalls, eludes countless natives and soldiers who have apparently all been trained at the Keystone Kops Weaponry Training Academy, killer mutant ants, various auto and motorcycle chases and takes more punches than a speed bag. Honestly, were Wile E. Coyote and Road Runner out of budget range to make a cameo? I know Indy has survived many things – rolling boulders, a pit full of snakes, airplane crashes, Kate Capshaw – but by layering on so many narrow escapes, there was never a moment that felt as though he was honestly in any danger. The problem lies predominately in the script. In these last two decades, there have been countless attempts to jumpstart the series again from names like Chris Columbus (“Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone”), Jeb Stuart (“Die Hard” and “The Fugitive”), Frank Darabont (“The Shawshank Redemption”), George Lucas. Even M. Night Shyamalan is to have reported to take a stab at the legend. David Koepp (“Spider Man,” Jurassic Park”) was eventually hired to cobble together what feels like the “greatest hits” of all the previous drafts (and trust me, they are all available on the internet for those who snoop hard enough). There are elements, plot devices and characters that pop up for several scenes only to disappear for gaping sections of the film or are never heard from again (what’s up with those groundhogs?). Most notable of these slights is the character of Marion Ravenwood (played by Karen Allen). Looking game for adventure, Allen makes a grand entrance, only to serve as a getaway driver for the majority of her screen time. When Indy professes a still-burning flame for her, we want it to give us chills, but director Steven Spielberg has far too many hoops for his hero to jump through to get bogged down with emotional development of any sort. Shia LaBeouf, here playing a Indy’s young greaser sidekick by the name of Mutt, has been the source of much debate from fans who have not cozied up to the actor’s snarky style (but they were completely content with the whiny musings of Short Round in “Temple of Doom”?). Frankly, it was all for naught, as he is easily one of the few new elements in a film that has many other problems with which to deal. With all that said, there is still a level of comfort that can be found in “Skull,” but it is not in the Rube Goldberg archeological sites set up for the characters. It is more in the iconic shots of Indiana once again picking up his weathered fedora and placing it on his head; or when he and his college’s dean (played by a criminally underused Jim Broadbendt) briefly ruminate over their accelerated age; or the old-school motorcycle chase scene through campus involving more stunt work than pixels. Too often, the film succumbs to its bombastic tendencies, though, that severely diminish Indiana’s humanity and vulnerability that made him so accessible in the first place. He is now no more defenseless than any other CGI-enhanced superhero at the box office. Ironically, it’s all these attempts to stay “new” is what ages “Crystal Skull” the most. For in its seemingly relentless pursuit to appease the current box office action appetites, what true Indiana Jones fans want is less breakneck pace, more of the same old “hat.”
]]>Fri, 23 May 2008 17:17:59 GMTusesoapusesoap Blog5/23/2008 1:17:59 PMThis is not going to be one of those columns that goes into a lengthy diatribe about the influence on Dr. Indiana Jones had on this reviewer&rsquo;s life as a child. I refuse to prattle on about owning a fedora and a bullwhip used to scare the bejeezus out of the family dog, or the backyard films created as homage to &ldquo;Raiders of the Lost Ark&rdquo; and the countless scars and bruises that serve as a testament to my inexperience and/or stupidity in attempts to replicate the adventures of the intrepid archeologist. It seems that the prerequisite in reviewing this latest installment in the Indiana Jones canon, &ldquo;Kingdom of the Crystal Skull&rdquo; has almost every critic launching into some wistful rant on its impact of his/her life. And while I am certainly one to appreciate the personal power of cinematic experiences, I think this self-indulgent therapy session approach is a tad tiresome now. Let&rsquo;s take &ldquo;Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull&rdquo; for what it is, without the nostalgic mist clouding my eyes. I will begin with stating that, as slavish as my devotion was, I do not consider the entire trilogy of Indiana Jones films as the be-all, end-all of adventure films. &ldquo;Raiders&rdquo; was, and remains, a masterwork of cinema &ndash; thrilling, thoughtful and thorough. Its sequels &ndash; &ldquo;Temple of Doom&rdquo; and &ldquo;The Last Crusade&rdquo; &ndash; had their strengths, but rose to levels nowhere near their source. So the thought of another entry two decades later held only slight promise. And there is much wish fulfillment to be found, but there are several critical elements that drag the tale into the catacombs of many Indy Come Lateleys, such as &ldquo;The Mummy&rdquo; and &ldquo;National Treasure.&rdquo; The film picks up 20 years after &ldquo;The Last Crusade&rdquo; in 1957, where Dr. Jones (played by Harrison Ford, duh!) finds himself in New Mexico searching for the eponymous object located in a government storage warehouse (keep your eyes peeled for flashes of his previous conquests located within). From here, he tangles with old-fashioned cinematic Russkies (headed by a Cate Blanchett, acting as though she stepped out of a &ldquo;Rocky and Bullwinkle&rdquo; cartoon), survives a point-blank impact of an atomic bomb, floats down not one, but three, waterfalls, eludes countless natives and soldiers who have apparently all been trained at the Keystone Kops Weaponry Training Academy, killer mutant ants, various auto and motorcycle chases and takes more punches than a speed bag. Honestly, were Wile E. Coyote and Road Runner out of budget range to make a cameo? I know Indy has survived many things &ndash; rolling boulders, a pit full of snakes, airplane crashes, Kate Capshaw &ndash; but by layering on so many narrow escapes, there was never a moment that felt as though he was honestly in any danger. The problem lies predominately in the script. In these last two decades, there have been countless attempts to jumpstart the series again from names like Chris Columbus (&ldquo;Harry Potter and the Sorcerer&rsquo;s Stone&rdquo;), Jeb Stuart (&ldquo;Die Hard&rdquo; and &ldquo;The Fugitive&rdquo;), Frank Darabont (&ldquo;The Shawshank Redemption&rdquo;), George Lucas. Even M. Night Shyamalan is to have reported to take a stab at the legend. David Koepp (&ldquo;Spider Man,&rdquo; Jurassic Park&rdquo;) was eventually hired to cobble together what feels like the &ldquo;greatest hits&rdquo; of all the previous drafts (and trust me, they are all available on the internet for those who snoop hard enough). There are elements, plot devices and characters that pop up for several scenes only to disappear for gaping sections of the film or are never heard from again (what&rsquo;s up with those groundhogs?). Most notable of these slights is the character of Marion Ravenwood (played by Karen Allen). Looking game for adventure, Allen makes a grand entrance, only to serve as a getaway driver for the majority of her screen time. When Indy professes a still-burning flame for her, we want it to give us chills, but director Steven Spielberg has far too many hoops for his hero to jump through to get bogged down with emotional development of any sort. Shia LaBeouf, here playing a Indy&rsquo;s young greaser sidekick by the name of Mutt, has been the source of much debate from fans who have not cozied up to the actor&rsquo;s snarky style (but they were completely content with the whiny musings of Short Round in &ldquo;Temple of Doom&rdquo;?). Frankly, it was all for naught, as he is easily one of the few new elements in a film that has many other problems with which to deal. With all that said, there is still a level of comfort that can be found in &ldquo;Skull,&rdquo; but it is not in the Rube Goldberg archeological sites set up for the characters. It is more in the iconic shots of Indiana once again picking up his weathered fedora and placing it on his head; or when he and his college&rsquo;s dean (played by a criminally underused Jim Broadbendt) briefly ruminate over their accelerated age; or the old-school motorcycle chase scene through campus involving more stunt work than pixels. Too often, the film succumbs to its bombastic tendencies, though, that severely diminish Indiana&rsquo;s humanity and vulnerability that made him so accessible in the first place. He is now no more defenseless than any other CGI-enhanced superhero at the box office. Ironically, it&rsquo;s all these attempts to stay &ldquo;new&rdquo; is what ages &ldquo;Crystal Skull&rdquo; the most. For in its seemingly relentless pursuit to appease the current box office action appetites, what true Indiana Jones fans want is less breakneck pace, more of the same old &ldquo;hat.&rdquo; http://www.spout.com/blogs/spoutblog/archive/2008/2/6/24777.aspx Post By: SpoutBlog
Post To: SpoutBlog on spout.com
Post Date: 2/6/2008 1:01:11 PM
Body: I was one of the many who enjoyed Morgan Spurlock’s debut feature documentary, Super Size Me, but mostly only because it came at the tail end of an anti-fast-food kick for me that began with Eric Schlosser’s 2001 book Fast Food Nation. By the time Spurlock showed up on the big screen with his silly McDonalds-only diet/experiment, I had already given up fast food two years prior, had lost 65 lbs. over the course of a summer (only partially as a result of not eating fast food, of course) and wasn’t exactly in need of convincing. But I was in the mood for some comedy, and Spurlock entertained as needed. Did he deserve the Oscar nomination? Not at all. This time around he’s even less of a pioneer. In fact, I think the Where is Osama Bin Laden? jokes were already dated when Super Size Me hit theaters. This isn’t to say that I think the search for the terrorist should be over, nor that I think we should shrug off the topic of Bin Laden and Al Qaeda just because it’s been more than 6 years since 9/11. I just don’t see how a feature-length documentary, which from watching the trailer appears to consist of nothing more than Spurlock annoying people with his query, can keep the issue funny enough throughout its whole running time. Actually, thanks to the trailer I now have doubts that Where in the World is Osama Bin Laden? is even funny for a minute of the film’s length. Of course, it received mixed reactions from Sundance last month, where Karina reviewed it somewhat favorably, so perhaps my doubts aren’t completely justifiable. Maybe this is just a failed trailer. Or maybe, judging by the little (also dated) joke on The Da Vinci Code (or is it on National Treasure?), this trailer is simply aimed at a broader audience with a broader (and simpler) sense of humor. As of yet, The Weinstein Co. has not set a U.S. release date for the film. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog
]]>Wed, 06 Feb 2008 18:01:11 GMTSpoutBlogSpoutBlog on spout.com2/6/2008 1:01:11 PM I was one of the many who enjoyed Morgan Spurlock’s debut feature documentary, Super Size Me, but mostly only because it came at the tail end of an anti-fast-food kick for me that began with Eric Schlosser’s 2001 book Fast Food Nation. By the time Spurlock showed up on the big screen with his silly McDonalds-only diet/experiment, I had already given up fast food two years prior, had lost 65 lbs. over the course of a summer (only partially as a result of not eating fast food, of course) and wasn’t exactly in need of convincing. But I was in the mood for some comedy, and Spurlock entertained as needed. Did he deserve the Oscar nomination? Not at all. This time around he’s even less of a pioneer. In fact, I think the Where is Osama Bin Laden? jokes were already dated when Super Size Me hit theaters. This isn’t to say that I think the search for the terrorist should be over, nor that I think we should shrug off the topic of Bin Laden and Al Qaeda just because it’s been more than 6 years since 9/11. I just don’t see how a feature-length documentary, which from watching the trailer appears to consist of nothing more than Spurlock annoying people with his query, can keep the issue funny enough throughout its whole running time. Actually, thanks to the trailer I now have doubts that Where in the World is Osama Bin Laden? is even funny for a minute of the film’s length. Of course, it received mixed reactions from Sundance last month, where Karina reviewed it somewhat favorably, so perhaps my doubts aren’t completely justifiable. Maybe this is just a failed trailer. Or maybe, judging by the little (also dated) joke on The Da Vinci Code (or is it on National Treasure?), this trailer is simply aimed at a broader audience with a broader (and simpler) sense of humor. As of yet, The Weinstein Co. has not set a U.S. release date for the film. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog http://www.spout.com/blogs/jbecher/archive/2007/11/21/21894.aspx Post By: Jbecher
Post To: Jbecher Blog
Post Date: 11/21/2007 7:01:08 AM
Body: I just watched national treasure again and realized how much I liked that movie - read about it on spout (National Treasure). While watching the film they were promoting the new National Treasure 2 (National treasure - Book of Secrets) I am actually excited to see this movie. Originally posted on:Jimiz.net - Jim Becher on the web
]]>Wed, 21 Nov 2007 12:01:08 GMTJbecherJbecher Blog11/21/2007 7:01:08 AMI just watched national treasure again and realized how much I liked that movie - read about it on spout (National Treasure). While watching the film they were promoting the new National Treasure 2 (National treasure - Book of Secrets) I am actually excited to see this movie. Originally posted on:Jimiz.net - Jim Becher on the web http://www.spout.com/blogs/go-ape/archive/2007/10/7/20476.aspx Post By: Go-Ape
Post To: Go-Ape Blog
Post Date: 10/7/2007 6:52:49 PM
Body: I think that for every bad film Nicolas Cage makes, somebody should burn one of his fingertips on a stove. Perhaps he will learn eventually. This film was crap. Don't watch it. Read a book. It's better for you.
]]>Sun, 07 Oct 2007 22:52:49 GMTGo-ApeGo-Ape Blog10/7/2007 6:52:49 PMI think that for every bad film Nicolas Cage makes, somebody should burn one of his fingertips on a stove. Perhaps he will learn eventually. This film was crap. Don&#39;t watch it. Read a book. It&#39;s better for you. http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/funny/MemberTagFilms.aspxfunny
Number of films tagged: 608

Number of people who tagged: 315

Number of times used: 941

]]>Fri, 11 Dec 2009 01:28:29 GMT608315941Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/Loved-It/MemberTagFilms.aspxLoved-It
Number of films tagged: 509

Number of people who tagged: 179

Number of times used: 921

]]>Tue, 03 Nov 2009 17:56:35 GMT509179921Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/fun/MemberTagFilms.aspxfun
Number of films tagged: 459

Number of people who tagged: 142

Number of times used: 296

]]>Tue, 15 Sep 2009 14:23:09 GMT459142296Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/adventure/MemberTagFilms.aspxadventure
Number of films tagged: 227

Number of people who tagged: 95

Number of times used: 367

]]>Wed, 18 Nov 2009 17:34:17 GMT22795367Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/conspiracy/MemberTagFilms.aspxconspiracy
Number of films tagged: 524

Number of people who tagged: 48

Number of times used: 94

]]>Mon, 12 Oct 2009 04:07:45 GMT5244894Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/history/MemberTagFilms.aspxhistory
Number of films tagged: 999

Number of people who tagged: 48

Number of times used: 156

]]>Wed, 09 Dec 2009 05:15:22 GMT99948156Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/treasure/MemberTagFilms.aspxtreasure
Number of films tagged: 747

Number of people who tagged: 35

Number of times used: 51

]]>Wed, 01 Jul 2009 06:40:33 GMT7473551Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/archaeology/MemberTagFilms.aspxarchaeology
Number of films tagged: 373

Number of people who tagged: 16

Number of times used: 22

]]>Sat, 15 Aug 2009 02:22:58 GMT3731622Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/cage/MemberTagFilms.aspxcage
Number of films tagged: 38

Number of people who tagged: 9

Number of times used: 9

]]>Mon, 02 Nov 2009 19:06:31 GMT3899Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/coverup/MemberTagFilms.aspxcoverup
Number of films tagged: 350

Number of people who tagged: 9

Number of times used: 15

]]>Tue, 05 May 2009 13:12:46 GMT350915Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/mediocre/MemberTagFilms.aspxmediocre
Number of films tagged: 39

Number of people who tagged: 9

Number of times used: 41

]]>Fri, 20 Mar 2009 11:43:18 GMT39941Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/adventurer/MemberTagFilms.aspxadventurer
Number of films tagged: 681

Number of people who tagged: 8

Number of times used: 14

]]>Mon, 08 Jun 2009 13:02:54 GMT681814Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/jon/MemberTagFilms.aspxjon
Number of films tagged: 12

Number of people who tagged: 4

Number of times used: 12

]]>Thu, 29 May 2008 00:09:24 GMT12412Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/bean/MemberTagFilms.aspxbean
Number of films tagged: 3

Number of people who tagged: 3

Number of times used: 3

]]>Tue, 10 Feb 2009 14:02:36 GMT333Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/diane/MemberTagFilms.aspxdiane
Number of films tagged: 5

Number of people who tagged: 3

Number of times used: 5

]]>Tue, 17 Jun 2008 00:59:16 GMT535Tag