list http://www.spout.com/ Recent community activity around Ghost Rider 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/Ghost_Rider/230858/default.aspx Title: Ghost Rider
Year: 2007
Director: Mark Steven Johnson
Plot: When a motorcycle-riding stuntman offers his soul to Mephistopheles in order to save the life of the one he loves most, he is forced to play host to a powerful supernatural entity whose flaming skull visage strikes fear into the heart of his enemies in this feature-film version of the long-running comic series. By day, Johnny Blaze (actor and comic-book devotee Nicolas Cage) is one of the world's best-known stuntmen, but when the sun goes down and he is in the presence of evil, the death-defying daredevil bursts into flames to become the indestructible, motorcycle-riding antihero known to the world as the Ghost Rider. ~ Jason Buchanan, All Movie Guide
Times Tagged: 34
Number of Lists: 46
Number of blog posts: 19
Number of discussion threads: 2
SpoutRating: 2
]]>Fri, 17 Jul 2009 16:04:02 GMTGhost Rider2007Mark Steven JohnsonWhen a motorcycle-riding stuntman offers his soul to Mephistopheles in order to save the life of the one he loves most, he is forced to play host to a powerful supernatural entity whose flaming skull visage strikes fear into the heart of his enemies in this feature-film version of the long-running comic series. By day, Johnny Blaze (actor and comic-book devotee <a href="/players/P____10155/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Nicolas Cage</a>) is one of the world's best-known stuntmen, but when the sun goes down and he is in the presence of evil, the death-defying daredevil bursts into flames to become the indestructible, motorcycle-riding antihero known to the world as the Ghost Rider. ~ Jason Buchanan, All Movie Guide34Tag Target (>10)461922http://www.spout.com/ProductImages/s230858.jpghttp://www.spout.com/films/Ghost_Rider/230858/default.aspxFilm http://www.spout.com/blogs/the_mow/archive/2009/7/17/43109.aspx Post By: The_MOW
Post To: The_MOW Blog
Post Date: 7/17/2009 12:04:02 PM
Body: When I was a kid, I never read the "Ghost Rider" comic books published by Marvel Comics Group. I am only familiar with the character when he made a guest appearance in one of the titles I did read. So, since I had heard of the character, I was pretty interested when I saw that a live-action adaptation was coming to theaters even if they cast one of my least favorite actors in the lead role. The teenage "Johnny Blaze" (Matt Long) is following his father (Brett Cullen) into a life of being a motorcycle stunt rider at a circus. To complicate things, his girlfriend, "Roxanne Simpson" (Raquel Alessi) is moving away under orders of her father. To complicate things either further, his father is dying of cancer. Just as he is preparing to leave his father and the circus behind to go after "Roxanne", a man with a cane (Peter Fonda) comes up to him and offers to cure his father's deal for the young man's soul. "Blaze" signs the contract, and the next morning, his father is completely healthy. However, the young man soon finds out that when you make a deal with the devil, you will pay in spades. Now, years later, "Johnny" (Nicolas Cage) is a famous motorcycle stuntman who puts his life on the line in bigger venues than his father ever did. However, he is not happy with the fame and fortune he has now and is looking for a sign for a second chance at the life he believes he was destined for. And the sign apparently shows itself when "Roxanne" (Eva Mendes) walks back into his life as a television news reporter assigned to cover his jump that he has scheduled for the anniversary of his father's death shortly after she moved away. However, a demon known as "Blackheart" (Wes Bently) wants to bring the End of Days to the world so he might inherit it. So, because of this, the man with the cane re-enters "Johnny's" life to cash in on his debt. He transforms "Johnny" into his bounty hunter known as the "Ghost Rider" who is bent on returning and sending evil souls to Hell. Now, "Blaze", with the help of a mysterious cemetery "Caretaker" (Sam Elliott), must stop "Blackheart" and his evil minions while trying to save his own soul. Like I said earlier, I never read the "Ghost Rider" comics. So I will say right off that those who do will probably like this a lot more than the average audience member who probably never read it. And, unlike those who never picked up a copy of either version of "Ghost Rider" (one of which has since been renamed the "Phantom Rider"), they will be able to pick up on the major differences in the original comic book version and this movie. And, after some web surfing, I have learned that there are some major differences between the comic book storyline and the movie's storyline that only the fans of the comic book will know. First off, the movie tends to drag in many places. It's not really the fast-pace that it should be. The action is also pretty slow. You would think that with all the special effects used for the supernatural powers of the villains and "Ghost Rider" you would think that they could have made the characters move at a superhuman-like speed at times. For the most part, the supernatural-powered characters move as if they are just average humans. The acting pretty much suffers due to a weak script. Many times, it seemed as if the actors were repeating the lines being relayed to them by somebody off-camera. There was little chemistry between the entire cast. I felt no chemistry between Cage and Mendes. I also felt that Cage was miscast as "Johnny Blaze"/"Ghost Rider". If my memory serves, the comic book character I remember was younger than Cage. I also felt that he was holding back in his performance. Mendes was also underused, as were other major supporting characters. If you ask me, the absolutely gorgeous Mendes was there more for eye candy than her acting. When "Roxanne" re-enters "Johnny's" life, we see her standing in profile in a tight fighting dress that would not be seen worn by real news reporters. And, in a later scene, she is showing off just a little too much cleavage for the working environment. I think that the only perfectly cast actor was Elliott as "The Caretaker". With his deep voice, he made the character very mysterious as he tried to give "Johnny" tips on his battle. You also never really realize his true nature until it appears in the story, but with "Caretaker's" knowledge of "Ghost Rider's" mission will make you wonder. One bad thing about "Caretaker" is that when his true nature is revealed, it's the wrong look. Over the years in the comic book history, there have been three characters known as "Ghost Rider". I only know of the first one and the "Johnny Blaze" one, and knew instantly that when the "Caretaker's" true nature was finally revealed that it was in reference to the first character with the name. I also knew instantly that it was nothing like the first comic book character. The music is pretty good in this movie. There is a mix between songs by well-known artists and instrumentals. There is no real current stars on the soundtrack, but there are well-known artists performing big hits from their careers. Of course, there is a lot of special effects in this movie. There is a lot of morphing effects that are nicely edited together. I also liked the look of "Ghost Rider," but it was pretty obvious that the "bone" that we see of his skeletal body was made with CGI. The "flames" that come from his body is much better looking than the "bones" if you ask me. The "flames" are multi-colored much like real flames and have a natural movement. One thing that I wasn't too fond of was the digitally-enhanced voice used for "Ghost Rider" because, at times, it was hard to understand what he was saying. If you are a fan of the comic book, I would say rent this. However, if you are not a reader of the comic book, then I would say watch this on television when nothing else is on.
]]>Fri, 17 Jul 2009 16:04:02 GMTThe_MOWThe_MOW Blog7/17/2009 12:04:02 PMWhen I was a kid, I never read the "Ghost Rider" comic books published by Marvel Comics Group. I am only familiar with the character when he made a guest appearance in one of the titles I did read. So, since I had heard of the character, I was pretty interested when I saw that a live-action adaptation was coming to theaters even if they cast one of my least favorite actors in the lead role. The teenage "Johnny Blaze" (Matt Long) is following his father (Brett Cullen) into a life of being a motorcycle stunt rider at a circus. To complicate things, his girlfriend, "Roxanne Simpson" (Raquel Alessi) is moving away under orders of her father. To complicate things either further, his father is dying of cancer. Just as he is preparing to leave his father and the circus behind to go after "Roxanne", a man with a cane (Peter Fonda) comes up to him and offers to cure his father's deal for the young man's soul. "Blaze" signs the contract, and the next morning, his father is completely healthy. However, the young man soon finds out that when you make a deal with the devil, you will pay in spades. Now, years later, "Johnny" (Nicolas Cage) is a famous motorcycle stuntman who puts his life on the line in bigger venues than his father ever did. However, he is not happy with the fame and fortune he has now and is looking for a sign for a second chance at the life he believes he was destined for. And the sign apparently shows itself when "Roxanne" (Eva Mendes) walks back into his life as a television news reporter assigned to cover his jump that he has scheduled for the anniversary of his father's death shortly after she moved away. However, a demon known as "Blackheart" (Wes Bently) wants to bring the End of Days to the world so he might inherit it. So, because of this, the man with the cane re-enters "Johnny's" life to cash in on his debt. He transforms "Johnny" into his bounty hunter known as the "Ghost Rider" who is bent on returning and sending evil souls to Hell. Now, "Blaze", with the help of a mysterious cemetery "Caretaker" (Sam Elliott), must stop "Blackheart" and his evil minions while trying to save his own soul. Like I said earlier, I never read the "Ghost Rider" comics. So I will say right off that those who do will probably like this a lot more than the average audience member who probably never read it. And, unlike those who never picked up a copy of either version of "Ghost Rider" (one of which has since been renamed the "Phantom Rider"), they will be able to pick up on the major differences in the original comic book version and this movie. And, after some web surfing, I have learned that there are some major differences between the comic book storyline and the movie's storyline that only the fans of the comic book will know. First off, the movie tends to drag in many places. It's not really the fast-pace that it should be. The action is also pretty slow. You would think that with all the special effects used for the supernatural powers of the villains and "Ghost Rider" you would think that they could have made the characters move at a superhuman-like speed at times. For the most part, the supernatural-powered characters move as if they are just average humans. The acting pretty much suffers due to a weak script. Many times, it seemed as if the actors were repeating the lines being relayed to them by somebody off-camera. There was little chemistry between the entire cast. I felt no chemistry between Cage and Mendes. I also felt that Cage was miscast as "Johnny Blaze"/"Ghost Rider". If my memory serves, the comic book character I remember was younger than Cage. I also felt that he was holding back in his performance. Mendes was also underused, as were other major supporting characters. If you ask me, the absolutely gorgeous Mendes was there more for eye candy than her acting. When "Roxanne" re-enters "Johnny's" life, we see her standing in profile in a tight fighting dress that would not be seen worn by real news reporters. And, in a later scene, she is showing off just a little too much cleavage for the working environment. I think that the only perfectly cast actor was Elliott as "The Caretaker". With his deep voice, he made the character very mysterious as he tried to give "Johnny" tips on his battle. You also never really realize his true nature until it appears in the story, but with "Caretaker's" knowledge of "Ghost Rider's" mission will make you wonder. One bad thing about "Caretaker" is that when his true nature is revealed, it's the wrong look. Over the years in the comic book history, there have been three characters known as "Ghost Rider". I only know of the first one and the "Johnny Blaze" one, and knew instantly that when the "Caretaker's" true nature was finally revealed that it was in reference to the first character with the name. I also knew instantly that it was nothing like the first comic book character. The music is pretty good in this movie. There is a mix between songs by well-known artists and instrumentals. There is no real current stars on the soundtrack, but there are well-known artists performing big hits from their careers. Of course, there is a lot of special effects in this movie. There is a lot of morphing effects that are nicely edited together. I also liked the look of "Ghost Rider," but it was pretty obvious that the "bone" that we see of his skeletal body was made with CGI. The "flames" that come from his body is much better looking than the "bones" if you ask me. The "flames" are multi-colored much like real flames and have a natural movement. One thing that I wasn't too fond of was the digitally-enhanced voice used for "Ghost Rider" because, at times, it was hard to understand what he was saying. If you are a fan of the comic book, I would say rent this. However, if you are not a reader of the comic book, then I would say watch this on television when nothing else is on. http://www.spout.com/groups/Coming_Soon/Re_Upcoming_Movies_Week_of/216/34685/1/ShowPost.aspx Post By: SkyPilot
Post To: Coming Soon
Post Date: 9/3/2008 10:37:40 AM
Body: [quote user="TheWorkingDead"] I can't speak for anyone else, but I've become quite the fan of Nicolas Cage these days. ... can you believe that Steve Buscemi, John Cusack, Nicolas Cage and John Malkovich got together and the movie they made was frigging Con Air?!. But, after Wicker Man, I'm a fan again. He's so inappropriately crazy in everything he does that I get a kick out of watching him all the time. I may actually see this one in the theatre. [/quote] Please let me know if you see Bangkok Dangerous. Are you a fan of Ghost Rider and Next? I haven't seen either of those, but they look like good vehicles for Cage to be 'inappropriately crazy.' And I like your note about Con Air. I tried to think of a similar movie but couldn't. Marlon Brando, Robert Deniro and Edward Norton made The Score, but that's just disappointing, not the same crazy league as Con Air.
]]>Wed, 03 Sep 2008 14:37:40 GMTSkyPilotComing Soon9/3/2008 10:37:40 AM[quote user="TheWorkingDead"] I can't speak for anyone else, but I've become quite the fan of Nicolas Cage these days. ... can you believe that Steve Buscemi, John Cusack, Nicolas Cage and John Malkovich got together and the movie they made was frigging Con Air?!. But, after Wicker Man, I'm a fan again. He's so inappropriately crazy in everything he does that I get a kick out of watching him all the time. I may actually see this one in the theatre. [/quote] Please let me know if you see Bangkok Dangerous. Are you a fan of Ghost Rider and Next? I haven't seen either of those, but they look like good vehicles for Cage to be 'inappropriately crazy.' And I like your note about Con Air. I tried to think of a similar movie but couldn't. Marlon Brando, Robert Deniro and Edward Norton made The Score, but that's just disappointing, not the same crazy league as Con Air. http://www.spout.com/blogs/mike_moody/archive/2008/6/25/31712.aspx Post By: mike_moody
Post To: Moody's Movie Blog
Post Date: 6/25/2008 11:02:54 PM
Body: Have you ever watched a movie and thought, "Wow, that was a mess, but I loved it"? I have, and I have a name for movies that make me feel that way. I call 'em "beautiful failures."Beautiful failures are usually too long, too weird, too sloppy or just plain stupid, but they're always strangely compelling and, well, beautiful. They're the movies you think you hate but you can't stop thinking about. You come back to them over and over and you can't figure out why. They can be very complex, pretentious or even too simple or mass appealing. Other film buffs might tell you different, but there's really no formula to creating a beautiful failure.Some of my favorite beautiful failures are Steven Soderbergh's Solaris, Stanley Kubrick's Eyes Wide Shut and David Cronenberg's awkward 1996 thriller Crash. I love these films for different reasons, but I recognize that they're all a little ... dreadful.Here are a few titles I've recently added to my list of beautiful failures. The Science of Sleep The problems start with the packaging and advertising for director Michel Gondry's follow-up to Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind. The trailer and DVD box try to sell the film as a quirky romantic comedy full of whimsical dream sequences and cute one-liners. What you really get is a seemingly chaotic but densely structured character study of an unlikable, mentally ill manchild (Gael Garcia Bernal). There's a lot of good here, though. Bernal's character has trouble disassociating fantasy from reality, and Gondry illustrates this with some charming and singular visual tricks. Also, the ending is somewhat of a stunner that brilliantly unites all the disparate ideas and elements that came before. Unfortunately, most viewers will be confused and sick of all the seeming randomness before the third act. Bernal and the rest of the cast are great, but most of the characters are unappealing or hard to relate to. Still, I'll go back to this movie again for its brave storytelling, strange comedic bits and great visuals. The Fountain Where to start? The Fountain is the perfect beautiful failure. It's at times fiercely incoherent, silly and pretentious, but it's also visually impressive and features a very strong lead performance by Hugh Jackman. All of the "big ideas" director Daron Aronofsky (Pi, Requim for a Dream) attempts to convey here can be gleaned from the preface of one of those Don't Sweat the Small Stuff books, but he delivers his dime store philosophy in an extravagant package that constantly switches from compelling to laughable (picture a bald Jackman reaching nirvana while sitting in a lotus position). Add to that a bunch of muddled biblical references, plot strands that go nowhere and performances that range from sleepy (Rachel Weisz) to irrelevant (Ellen Burstyn) and you have a "bf" that somehow demands repeat viewing. Ghost Rider This campy comic book adaptation is about a guy with a flaming skull for a head, but that's the least ridiculous thing about it. After delivering two joyless duds based on Marvel books (Daredevil and Elektra) writer-director Mark Steven Johnson ampsGhost Rider's absurdity factor up to 11. Unfortunately, that's way too high -- even for a comic book movie.The film is a poorly written, painfully simplistic and predictable popcorn flick, but its worst attributes are what will keep me coming back to it. You have to admire a film that so economically delivers the cheap thrills and seems willing to suck ass to do so. The cast members do their best to make sure that Ghost Rider makes you smirk for 90 minutes and slips out of your system faster than a Diet Coke. It's a sick and fascinating thing to watch Nicholas Cage violently hammer tons of trite quirks and ticks into his character (He eats M&Ms from a champagne flute! He listens to The Carpenters! He speaks with an undefinable accent!). Peter Fonda and Sam Elliot ham it up, but the real kick here is Wes Bentley as the film's impossibly witless and fruity villain, Blackheart. Originally posted at Gold Teeth.
]]>Thu, 26 Jun 2008 03:02:54 GMTmike_moodyMoody's Movie Blog6/25/2008 11:02:54 PM Have you ever watched a movie and thought, "Wow, that was a mess, but I loved it"? I have, and I have a name for movies that make me feel that way. I call 'em "beautiful failures."Beautiful failures are usually too long, too weird, too sloppy or just plain stupid, but they're always strangely compelling and, well, beautiful. They're the movies you think you hate but you can't stop thinking about. You come back to them over and over and you can't figure out why. They can be very complex, pretentious or even too simple or mass appealing. Other film buffs might tell you different, but there's really no formula to creating a beautiful failure.Some of my favorite beautiful failures are Steven Soderbergh's Solaris, Stanley Kubrick's Eyes Wide Shut and David Cronenberg's awkward 1996 thriller Crash. I love these films for different reasons, but I recognize that they're all a little ... dreadful.Here are a few titles I've recently added to my list of beautiful failures. The Science of Sleep The problems start with the packaging and advertising for director Michel Gondry's follow-up to Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind. The trailer and DVD box try to sell the film as a quirky romantic comedy full of whimsical dream sequences and cute one-liners. What you really get is a seemingly chaotic but densely structured character study of an unlikable, mentally ill manchild (Gael Garcia Bernal). There's a lot of good here, though. Bernal's character has trouble disassociating fantasy from reality, and Gondry illustrates this with some charming and singular visual tricks. Also, the ending is somewhat of a stunner that brilliantly unites all the disparate ideas and elements that came before. Unfortunately, most viewers will be confused and sick of all the seeming randomness before the third act. Bernal and the rest of the cast are great, but most of the characters are unappealing or hard to relate to. Still, I'll go back to this movie again for its brave storytelling, strange comedic bits and great visuals. The Fountain Where to start? The Fountain is the perfect beautiful failure. It's at times fiercely incoherent, silly and pretentious, but it's also visually impressive and features a very strong lead performance by Hugh Jackman. All of the "big ideas" director Daron Aronofsky (Pi, Requim for a Dream) attempts to convey here can be gleaned from the preface of one of those Don't Sweat the Small Stuff books, but he delivers his dime store philosophy in an extravagant package that constantly switches from compelling to laughable (picture a bald Jackman reaching nirvana while sitting in a lotus position). Add to that a bunch of muddled biblical references, plot strands that go nowhere and performances that range from sleepy (Rachel Weisz) to irrelevant (Ellen Burstyn) and you have a "bf" that somehow demands repeat viewing. Ghost Rider This campy comic book adaptation is about a guy with a flaming skull for a head, but that's the least ridiculous thing about it. After delivering two joyless duds based on Marvel books (Daredevil and Elektra) writer-director Mark Steven Johnson ampsGhost Rider's absurdity factor up to 11. Unfortunately, that's way too high -- even for a comic book movie.The film is a poorly written, painfully simplistic and predictable popcorn flick, but its worst attributes are what will keep me coming back to it. You have to admire a film that so economically delivers the cheap thrills and seems willing to suck ass to do so. The cast members do their best to make sure that Ghost Rider makes you smirk for 90 minutes and slips out of your system faster than a Diet Coke. It's a sick and fascinating thing to watch Nicholas Cage violently hammer tons of trite quirks and ticks into his character (He eats M&amp;Ms from a champagne flute! He listens to The Carpenters! He speaks with an undefinable accent!). Peter Fonda and Sam Elliot ham it up, but the real kick here is Wes Bentley as the film's impossibly witless and fruity villain, Blackheart. Originally posted at Gold Teeth. http://www.spout.com/blogs/laylor/archive/2008/6/22/31511.aspx Post By: laylor
Post To: laylor Blog
Post Date: 6/22/2008 12:09:39 AM
Body: I had an assignment to do for my Western Cinema class which was to pick a film that immediately did not seem like a Western but has elements of it at it's core. Rather than do the obvious and pick Serenity I picked another obvious film: Ghost Rider. The first time I watched it, I thought it was ridiculous. I thought that Wes Bentley was extremely miscast and not at all threatening, I thought Donal Logue's character was random and not given enough to do and I didn't like Eva Mendez very much either. After multiple viewings (for the essay) I softened a bit and while I still think those things, there are positive parts of the movie as well. Peter Fonda doing a pretty okay impression of his father, the action is pretty good (although it does take quite awhile to get to any real hint of a threat), Sam Elliot is awesome as always and I actually liked Cage's performance. I had my doubts about him at first because he's usually so hammy and distracting he sinks the picture right along with him but he actually pulled it off. I don't see myself watching this ever again, as I watched it around 4 times in the span of two weeks, but it's not the worst movie out there by any means and its an alright ride while you're watching it.
]]>Sun, 22 Jun 2008 04:09:39 GMTlaylorlaylor Blog6/22/2008 12:09:39 AMI had an assignment to do for my Western Cinema class which was to pick a film that immediately did not seem like a Western but has elements of it at it's core. Rather than do the obvious and pick Serenity I picked another obvious film: Ghost Rider. The first time I watched it, I thought it was ridiculous. I thought that Wes Bentley was extremely miscast and not at all threatening, I thought Donal Logue's character was random and not given enough to do and I didn't like Eva Mendez very much either. After multiple viewings (for the essay) I softened a bit and while I still think those things, there are positive parts of the movie as well. Peter Fonda doing a pretty okay impression of his father, the action is pretty good (although it does take quite awhile to get to any real hint of a threat), Sam Elliot is awesome as always and I actually liked Cage's performance. I had my doubts about him at first because he's usually so hammy and distracting he sinks the picture right along with him but he actually pulled it off. I don't see myself watching this ever again, as I watched it around 4 times in the span of two weeks, but it's not the worst movie out there by any means and its an alright ride while you're watching it. http://www.spout.com/blogs/spoutblog/archive/2008/6/12/31175.aspx Post By: SpoutBlog
Post To: SpoutBlog on spout.com
Post Date: 6/12/2008 3:01:33 PM
Body: Two big movies arrive in theaters this week, The Incredible Hulk and The Happening, and each has had its share of bad buzz. From what I can tell, though, the former is recuperating quite nicely with mostly favorable early reviews. And it’s sure to gross in the hundreds of millions, just like its big brother, Ang Lee’s Hulk, did a few years back. The latter, however, is still struggling through the muck, with writer-director M. Night Shyamalan doing everything he can to assure us that his film is merely a B-movie and shouldn’t be the victim of high expectations. If The Happening bombs, though, 20th Century Fox won’t be able to blame its bad buzz. Especially if The Incredible Hulk comes out a big winner this weekend. When a movie is good, or at least has some goods that audiences actually crave, it can overcome bad buzz. The list of films after the jump is evidence of this, although it’s possible that some of the older titles might have been less successful in the globally conscious age of blogs. Titanic - James Cameron’s romantic disaster film arrived in the early days of mass internet usage, but it didn’t need high-speed gossip to spread word of its troubled production. Any reader of entertainment news learned of the drug-induced food poisoning, the crew illnesses and injuries that came with filming in cold waters and the other problems that put the shoot way over schedule and way over budget. Then there was the matter of its release date being pushed back from July, 1997, to December. Yet Titanic had the goods, and it went on to become the highest-grossing film of all-time and win 11 Oscars, including Best Picture. Star Wars - If the first Star Wars film were made today, it would likely receive a lot of bad press on the web. The production was marred by a number of problems that have since been made public over the last 30 years, and apparently some initial screenings were met with disappointing reactions. But just because the bad buzz didn’t make its way to the masses doesn’t mean it wasn’t there. Much of the film’s cast and crew talked about how the movie was silly and would be a failure. My father, who was one of many illustrators commissioned to design the poster, also thought it looked stupid. And theater owners and studio execs weren’t that excited about it, either — considering this was already the beginning of the age of wide-releasing blockbusters, Star Wars‘ 32-screen opening was pretty slim. Right from that opening week, though, the movie was a smash hit, and of course its success and popularity only grew and grew. Batman - Considering how much disdain there is these days from internerds towards Michael Keaton’s Bruce Wayne/Batman, I can only imagine what kind of bad buzz Tim Burton’s movie would have gotten had the forums and blogs been around in 1989. However, at the time, there was indeed hatred for Keaton’s casting and the film in general. The Los Angeles Times printed a letter from a fan that read: “By casting a clown in the lead role, Warner Bros. and Tim Burton have defecated on the history of Batman.” Also, according to Peter Bart’s book “Boffo”, comic book geeks at Comic-Con booed representatives from the film, and the Wall Street Journal featured a front-page article criticizing the film’s extensive marketing. Ghost Rider - Like the casting of Keaton as Batman, Nicolas Cage as Johnny Blaze/Ghost Rider seemed a ridiculous choice to many fans. And the movie got dragged through the mud seemingly every time it was mentioned on the web over the many years it took for the comic adaptation to be made and then released. The nail on the coffin seemed to be Sony’s decision to bump it from August 2006 to the dead-man’s month of February, in the following year. Yet despite all that, plus negative reviews, it became a surprise hit. Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl - Remember how we all reacted when it was announced Disney would make a movie based on a theme park ride? Remember how we all loved it when it was finally released? Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs - Another old film made before the scourge of the internet; another old film with bad buzz that seems to have remained hidden from the public at its time. Still, in “Boffo”, Bart claims that due to escalating costs and an overlong production (this was the first feature-length animated film from Disney and nobody knew how much or how long it would take) and the fact that studio execs didn’t believe audiences would go for such a long cartoon, “Hollywood tagged the production ‘Disney’s Folly.’” Waterworld - This one was plagued by so much bad buzz that most people still think it bombed at the box office. And if you only look at the domestic numbers, it did. But this was around the time when Hollywood started realizing how much more money could be made from international b.o. and sell-through home video distribution (VHS was still big and the DVD breakthrough was around the corner), both of which overcompensated for lack of sufficient domestic gross. Cleopatra - Another film that has a sort of unfair reputation for being a box office failure. Sure, it nearly bankrupted Twentieth Century Fox, which indeed lost millions on the production. And sure, the scandalous affair between Elizabeth Taylor and Richard Burton brought the film a lot of negative publicity around the world. But it was the top-grossing film of 1963 and was nominated for 9 Oscars, including Best Picture. So, despite the bad buzz, tons of people went to see it, but there was no possible way for the thing to make any money. Bee Movie - Everyone seemed to want this to fail, mostly because Jerry Seinfeld’s longtime marketing of the film was more obnoxious than anything experienced prior. And perhaps also because it was fun to refer to a bee having bad buzzzzzz. Yet children don’t follow buzz and so the movie did great business in the long term, even despite its inability to top the box office chart its opening weekend. The Da Vinci Code - It wasn’t the first movie to garner negative publicity from religious groups, but it may have been the biggest production to be threatened by protest and criticism from as high up as the Vatican. Likewise, it probably wasn’t the first movie to be laughed at and booed during its Cannes premiere. But news of that reaction circled the globe/net very quickly. However, despite whatever protests there were and despite the near-universal panning of the film by critics, it was a huge success. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog
]]>Thu, 12 Jun 2008 19:01:33 GMTSpoutBlogSpoutBlog on spout.com6/12/2008 3:01:33 PMTwo big movies arrive in theaters this week, The Incredible Hulk and The Happening, and each has had its share of bad buzz. From what I can tell, though, the former is recuperating quite nicely with mostly favorable early reviews. And it’s sure to gross in the hundreds of millions, just like its big brother, Ang Lee’s Hulk, did a few years back. The latter, however, is still struggling through the muck, with writer-director M. Night Shyamalan doing everything he can to assure us that his film is merely a B-movie and shouldn’t be the victim of high expectations. If The Happening bombs, though, 20th Century Fox won’t be able to blame its bad buzz. Especially if The Incredible Hulk comes out a big winner this weekend. When a movie is good, or at least has some goods that audiences actually crave, it can overcome bad buzz. The list of films after the jump is evidence of this, although it’s possible that some of the older titles might have been less successful in the globally conscious age of blogs. Titanic - James Cameron’s romantic disaster film arrived in the early days of mass internet usage, but it didn’t need high-speed gossip to spread word of its troubled production. Any reader of entertainment news learned of the drug-induced food poisoning, the crew illnesses and injuries that came with filming in cold waters and the other problems that put the shoot way over schedule and way over budget. Then there was the matter of its release date being pushed back from July, 1997, to December. Yet Titanic had the goods, and it went on to become the highest-grossing film of all-time and win 11 Oscars, including Best Picture. Star Wars - If the first Star Wars film were made today, it would likely receive a lot of bad press on the web. The production was marred by a number of problems that have since been made public over the last 30 years, and apparently some initial screenings were met with disappointing reactions. But just because the bad buzz didn’t make its way to the masses doesn’t mean it wasn’t there. Much of the film’s cast and crew talked about how the movie was silly and would be a failure. My father, who was one of many illustrators commissioned to design the poster, also thought it looked stupid. And theater owners and studio execs weren’t that excited about it, either — considering this was already the beginning of the age of wide-releasing blockbusters, Star Wars‘ 32-screen opening was pretty slim. Right from that opening week, though, the movie was a smash hit, and of course its success and popularity only grew and grew. Batman - Considering how much disdain there is these days from internerds towards Michael Keaton’s Bruce Wayne/Batman, I can only imagine what kind of bad buzz Tim Burton’s movie would have gotten had the forums and blogs been around in 1989. However, at the time, there was indeed hatred for Keaton’s casting and the film in general. The Los Angeles Times printed a letter from a fan that read: “By casting a clown in the lead role, Warner Bros. and Tim Burton have defecated on the history of Batman.” Also, according to Peter Bart’s book “Boffo”, comic book geeks at Comic-Con booed representatives from the film, and the Wall Street Journal featured a front-page article criticizing the film’s extensive marketing. Ghost Rider - Like the casting of Keaton as Batman, Nicolas Cage as Johnny Blaze/Ghost Rider seemed a ridiculous choice to many fans. And the movie got dragged through the mud seemingly every time it was mentioned on the web over the many years it took for the comic adaptation to be made and then released. The nail on the coffin seemed to be Sony’s decision to bump it from August 2006 to the dead-man’s month of February, in the following year. Yet despite all that, plus negative reviews, it became a surprise hit. Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl - Remember how we all reacted when it was announced Disney would make a movie based on a theme park ride? Remember how we all loved it when it was finally released? Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs - Another old film made before the scourge of the internet; another old film with bad buzz that seems to have remained hidden from the public at its time. Still, in “Boffo”, Bart claims that due to escalating costs and an overlong production (this was the first feature-length animated film from Disney and nobody knew how much or how long it would take) and the fact that studio execs didn’t believe audiences would go for such a long cartoon, “Hollywood tagged the production ‘Disney’s Folly.’” Waterworld - This one was plagued by so much bad buzz that most people still think it bombed at the box office. And if you only look at the domestic numbers, it did. But this was around the time when Hollywood started realizing how much more money could be made from international b.o. and sell-through home video distribution (VHS was still big and the DVD breakthrough was around the corner), both of which overcompensated for lack of sufficient domestic gross. Cleopatra - Another film that has a sort of unfair reputation for being a box office failure. Sure, it nearly bankrupted Twentieth Century Fox, which indeed lost millions on the production. And sure, the scandalous affair between Elizabeth Taylor and Richard Burton brought the film a lot of negative publicity around the world. But it was the top-grossing film of 1963 and was nominated for 9 Oscars, including Best Picture. So, despite the bad buzz, tons of people went to see it, but there was no possible way for the thing to make any money. Bee Movie - Everyone seemed to want this to fail, mostly because Jerry Seinfeld’s longtime marketing of the film was more obnoxious than anything experienced prior. And perhaps also because it was fun to refer to a bee having bad buzzzzzz. Yet children don’t follow buzz and so the movie did great business in the long term, even despite its inability to top the box office chart its opening weekend. The Da Vinci Code - It wasn’t the first movie to garner negative publicity from religious groups, but it may have been the biggest production to be threatened by protest and criticism from as high up as the Vatican. Likewise, it probably wasn’t the first movie to be laughed at and booed during its Cannes premiere. But news of that reaction circled the globe/net very quickly. However, despite whatever protests there were and despite the near-universal panning of the film by critics, it was a huge success. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog http://www.spout.com/blogs/jj79/archive/2008/6/9/30945.aspx Post By: JJ79
Post To: JJ79 Blog
Post Date: 6/9/2008 12:57:59 PM
Body: Disregard the negative hype. The latest Marvel comic-turned-movie "Ghost Rider" isn't as horrible as it's being made out to be. Granted, it never reaches the sensational heights of "Spider-Man" or "X-Men," but those are both top tier comic characters. To expect "Ghost Rider"-a decidedly C-tier character-to top them is out of the question. Directed and written by "Daredevil" helmer Mark Steven Johnson, "Ghost Rider" stars Nicholas Cage as Johnny Blaze, a motorcycle stunt driver. As a teenager, he makes a deal with the Devil to save his father from cancer in exchange for his soul. Unfortunately, his father dies shortly thereafter in a stunt accident, leaving Johnny an angst ridden kid. As a grown man, Blaze continues the family profession...and is visited by the Devil. The Devil's son, Blackheart (Wes Bentley), is trying to take over his family's business and it's up to the newly transformed Ghost Rider-complete with fiery skull head-to stop him. Okay, let's get something absolutely clear. This is a comic book thrown onto the screen. "Ghost Rider" isn't designed to be the next "The Godfather" or "American Beauty." We're supposed to have fun, be lost in the action and leave the theater feeling satisfied. And, by and large, the audience does. Perhaps a bit overstuffed and bloated, but satisfied. Why overstuffed? Although the story is thin, there is a general feeling of too much happening. We have Johnny's backstory, his grown up years, trying to reconnect with an old flame, his transformation, multiple action sequences and then the grand finale. If there is one part of "Ghost Rider" which is better left not talked about, it's the love story between Cage's Blaze and Roxanne Simpson, played by Eva Mendes. Above and beyond the absurdity of the relationship (he left her alone after his father died, she coincidentally is assigned to interview him), there is no chemistry between the two actors. Cage, wearing a laughable toupee, and Mendes, who can barely stand up straight in heels (check out their scenes in the stadium early on), aren't even compatible by comic book standards. I won't harp too much on this aspect of the film because there is source material and if it's not adhered to, the fanboys start to scream. Would it have been out of the realm of possibility to cast an actress the audience would buy as Blaze's interest? Not just someone he would want to have, but someone who would have an interest in him? I am one of only a handful of people in the world who enjoyed "Daredevil" for what it was: a comic book movie. And, frankly, I also enjoyed "Ghost Rider" on the same principle. Not every film out there has to shake the world or be the best thing to ever hit the screen. Sometimes, all a movie has to do is be fun. "Ghost Rider" is fun. Cheesy and a bit over the top at times, but fun. Every shot seems composed by Johnson to be part of an actual comic book. Notice, for instance, the shot near the end as Nicholas Cage's head fills the screen with a purple sky behind him in the desert. Or the sequence teased in the trailers of Ghost Rider on his motorcycle coming down the side of a glass building, flaming chain high above his head. This, above every other entry into this genre, is the definition of a comic book movie. It's comic book-y right down to the most minute detail. The plot, thin as it is, doesn't make much sense in the context of the real world. The devil is not going to be looking for a list of damned souls (or whatever he's looking for). This isn't a revenge movie like "The Punisher;" a social commentary like "X-Men;" a meditation on growing up like "Spider-Man." It's pulp. Good pulp, but still pulp. This is beginning to sound as though "Ghost Rider" is a bad movie. As I said before, it's not. It's actually very fun, all the way down to its questionable choice in music. The final action sequence takes place in the desert, so I wouldn't expect a score akin to "Hulk" to come blaring at me. But there is a very odd marriage of techno and western music covering the end of the film and credits. I half expected Serenity (from "Firefly") to drop out of the sky and lend a hand at any moment. Again, it's not bad; just an odd choice for a movie of this nature. One last thing I wanted to nitpick. The visual effects for Ghost Rider himself. They're bad. Cartoon and video game-level bad. Creating a person in a computer is perhaps one of the hardest things to do because we know what people actually look like. Maybe that's the problem behind a flaming skull head. Everytime the effect is on the screen, it looks wrong. Wrong as in not refined enough, not believable enough. It may have been a good idea to keep this movie on the backburner for a while until the effects could suitably give us the title character. Aside from all that, I find it hard to pick out what it is about "Ghost Rider" that makes me like it when nearly every other critic on the planet panned it. I was most entranced with the shot selection and framing, I think. Whether deliberate or not, what is on the screen feels like frame out of a comic book. Not just an isolated shot here or there, but the whole thing. Maybe that's where my good feelings for "Ghost Rider" come from. It doesn't pretend to be something it's not and never could be. It has fun with the premise and is two hours of eye candy. I do question the wisdom in bringing lower level characters to the screen. This movie grossed enough in its first two weeks in release to nearly assure itself a sequel. Where does it go from here? There is no well-known villain for Ghost Rider to combat (Batman has a whole laundry list of bad guys to use) and this isn't even a character known to most people. The general populace knows who Superman, Batman, Wonder Woman, the X-Men, the Fantastic Four and Spider-Man are. Ghost Rider? Probably not so much. However, based on the grosses, it seems as though "Ghost Rider 2" is an all but certain proposition. Let's just hope the creative forces behind it remember what made this film a fun experience. "Ghost Rider," on the scale of 1 to 10, rates a 6.
]]>Mon, 09 Jun 2008 16:57:59 GMTJJ79JJ79 Blog6/9/2008 12:57:59 PMDisregard the negative hype. The latest Marvel comic-turned-movie "Ghost Rider" isn't as horrible as it's being made out to be. Granted, it never reaches the sensational heights of "Spider-Man" or "X-Men," but those are both top tier comic characters. To expect "Ghost Rider"-a decidedly C-tier character-to top them is out of the question. Directed and written by "Daredevil" helmer Mark Steven Johnson, "Ghost Rider" stars Nicholas Cage as Johnny Blaze, a motorcycle stunt driver. As a teenager, he makes a deal with the Devil to save his father from cancer in exchange for his soul. Unfortunately, his father dies shortly thereafter in a stunt accident, leaving Johnny an angst ridden kid. As a grown man, Blaze continues the family profession...and is visited by the Devil. The Devil's son, Blackheart (Wes Bentley), is trying to take over his family's business and it's up to the newly transformed Ghost Rider-complete with fiery skull head-to stop him. Okay, let's get something absolutely clear. This is a comic book thrown onto the screen. "Ghost Rider" isn't designed to be the next "The Godfather" or "American Beauty." We're supposed to have fun, be lost in the action and leave the theater feeling satisfied. And, by and large, the audience does. Perhaps a bit overstuffed and bloated, but satisfied. Why overstuffed? Although the story is thin, there is a general feeling of too much happening. We have Johnny's backstory, his grown up years, trying to reconnect with an old flame, his transformation, multiple action sequences and then the grand finale. If there is one part of "Ghost Rider" which is better left not talked about, it's the love story between Cage's Blaze and Roxanne Simpson, played by Eva Mendes. Above and beyond the absurdity of the relationship (he left her alone after his father died, she coincidentally is assigned to interview him), there is no chemistry between the two actors. Cage, wearing a laughable toupee, and Mendes, who can barely stand up straight in heels (check out their scenes in the stadium early on), aren't even compatible by comic book standards. I won't harp too much on this aspect of the film because there is source material and if it's not adhered to, the fanboys start to scream. Would it have been out of the realm of possibility to cast an actress the audience would buy as Blaze's interest? Not just someone he would want to have, but someone who would have an interest in him? I am one of only a handful of people in the world who enjoyed "Daredevil" for what it was: a comic book movie. And, frankly, I also enjoyed "Ghost Rider" on the same principle. Not every film out there has to shake the world or be the best thing to ever hit the screen. Sometimes, all a movie has to do is be fun. "Ghost Rider" is fun. Cheesy and a bit over the top at times, but fun. Every shot seems composed by Johnson to be part of an actual comic book. Notice, for instance, the shot near the end as Nicholas Cage's head fills the screen with a purple sky behind him in the desert. Or the sequence teased in the trailers of Ghost Rider on his motorcycle coming down the side of a glass building, flaming chain high above his head. This, above every other entry into this genre, is the definition of a comic book movie. It's comic book-y right down to the most minute detail. The plot, thin as it is, doesn't make much sense in the context of the real world. The devil is not going to be looking for a list of damned souls (or whatever he's looking for). This isn't a revenge movie like "The Punisher;" a social commentary like "X-Men;" a meditation on growing up like "Spider-Man." It's pulp. Good pulp, but still pulp. This is beginning to sound as though "Ghost Rider" is a bad movie. As I said before, it's not. It's actually very fun, all the way down to its questionable choice in music. The final action sequence takes place in the desert, so I wouldn't expect a score akin to "Hulk" to come blaring at me. But there is a very odd marriage of techno and western music covering the end of the film and credits. I half expected Serenity (from "Firefly") to drop out of the sky and lend a hand at any moment. Again, it's not bad; just an odd choice for a movie of this nature. One last thing I wanted to nitpick. The visual effects for Ghost Rider himself. They're bad. Cartoon and video game-level bad. Creating a person in a computer is perhaps one of the hardest things to do because we know what people actually look like. Maybe that's the problem behind a flaming skull head. Everytime the effect is on the screen, it looks wrong. Wrong as in not refined enough, not believable enough. It may have been a good idea to keep this movie on the backburner for a while until the effects could suitably give us the title character. Aside from all that, I find it hard to pick out what it is about "Ghost Rider" that makes me like it when nearly every other critic on the planet panned it. I was most entranced with the shot selection and framing, I think. Whether deliberate or not, what is on the screen feels like frame out of a comic book. Not just an isolated shot here or there, but the whole thing. Maybe that's where my good feelings for "Ghost Rider" come from. It doesn't pretend to be something it's not and never could be. It has fun with the premise and is two hours of eye candy. I do question the wisdom in bringing lower level characters to the screen. This movie grossed enough in its first two weeks in release to nearly assure itself a sequel. Where does it go from here? There is no well-known villain for Ghost Rider to combat (Batman has a whole laundry list of bad guys to use) and this isn't even a character known to most people. The general populace knows who Superman, Batman, Wonder Woman, the X-Men, the Fantastic Four and Spider-Man are. Ghost Rider? Probably not so much. However, based on the grosses, it seems as though "Ghost Rider 2" is an all but certain proposition. Let's just hope the creative forces behind it remember what made this film a fun experience. "Ghost Rider," on the scale of 1 to 10, rates a 6. http://www.spout.com/blogs/usesoap/archive/2008/3/10/26069.aspx Post By: usesoap
Post To: usesoap Blog
Post Date: 3/10/2008 8:58:51 PM
Body: This has not been a good week to be at New Line Cinema.After getting enslaved by the Time-Warner media monolith last week, the company could not even trumpet its swansong. “Semi-Pro,” the Will Ferrell sports comedy, was the last film to be released while still remaining a “free agent,” tanked at the box office, squeezing out $3 million less than “Meet the Spartans” just a few weeks ago.Let that sink in.Will Ferrell, who has a string of successes and is a worldwide box office “star,” made less in a comedy than a film that’s biggest asset was a Britney Spears clone shaving her head and breakdancing gladiators.Prognosticators are scratching their heads as to how this could happen, offering theories of a tired formula (Will Ferrell + a sport + wacky non-sequiturs = funny), an unstable movie-going weekend (though “Ghost Rider” did better in its second week last year at the same time and “Madea’s Family Reunion” earned $25 million at the same time in 2006), or the fact that the normally PG-13 Ferrell excluded some fans by having an R-rating slapped on this one.After watching the film, I have another theory to throw into the mix: it sucked.See, I’m convinced I put more effort into that little two-word synopsis than the producers of “Semi-Pro” put into the entire film.Cluttered, lazy, wildly unfunny and lit like an underground 70s porno, “Semi-Pro” will most likely not be a nail in Ferrell’s film coffin, but it certainly demonstrates that, without the proper material in place, he’s dangerously close to arm-wrestling Jon Lovitz for special appearances on sitcoms.And this is coming from a Feral Ferrell fan.Ferrell plays Jackie Moon, a one-hit disco wonder who scooped up his earnings and is now sole owner, promoter and player of the Flint, Michigan Tropics, a struggling ABA team circa 1976.When the NBA comes knocking and says it will merge the top four teams of the league, Moon and his team rally to make the cut. There’s no sense getting into too much plot description, for “Semi-Pro” is not about the drama. The trouble is, it’s not about anything else, either.It’s almost disconcerting how jokes build in the picture than just linger in the air like some fetid gastric expulsion that just clears the room for the next scene. Ferrell’s former co-stars, David Koechner (“Anchorman”), Will Arnett (“Blades of Glory), Tim Meadows (“The Ladies’ Man”), Rob Corddry (“Blades”), Kristen Wiig (“Saturday Night Live”) – a who’s who of comedians— are all trotted out for cameos that range from boring (Koechner) to brief (Wiig) to disturbingly bizarre (Corddry).Director Kent Alterman makes his debut with sledgehammer subtlety. And while I am sure the city of Flint has some wonderful areas and lovely residents, he somehow manages to cake the entire film in a gauze of filth, even staging two pivotal scenes in or near trash bins for no reason whatsoever. For all the idiots he prefers to play, Ferrell is a smart comedian. He has amassed a nice little mini-comedic entourage (including directors Adam McKay, Judd Apatow, actors John C. Reilly, and Will Arnett). He has helped launch a much-watched video website (FunnyorDie.com) and has even carved out critical acclaim in few semi-serious roles (“Stranger than Fiction,” Winter Passing”).But his level of quality has been steadily sliding since “Anchorman” and Jim Carrey can’t wait to start getting first dibs on the “goofy white guy” scripts Ferrell has been coveting for the past decade.On the bright side for Ferrell, I hear there are some openings at New Line Cinema.
]]>Tue, 11 Mar 2008 00:58:51 GMTusesoapusesoap Blog3/10/2008 8:58:51 PMThis has not been a good week to be at New Line Cinema.After getting enslaved by the Time-Warner media monolith last week, the company could not even trumpet its swansong. &ldquo;Semi-Pro,&rdquo; the Will Ferrell sports comedy, was the last film to be released while still remaining a &ldquo;free agent,&rdquo; tanked at the box office, squeezing out $3 million less than &ldquo;Meet the Spartans&rdquo; just a few weeks ago.Let that sink in.Will Ferrell, who has a string of successes and is a worldwide box office &ldquo;star,&rdquo; made less in a comedy than a film that&rsquo;s biggest asset was a Britney Spears clone shaving her head and breakdancing gladiators.Prognosticators are scratching their heads as to how this could happen, offering theories of a tired formula (Will Ferrell + a sport + wacky non-sequiturs = funny), an unstable movie-going weekend (though &ldquo;Ghost Rider&rdquo; did better in its second week last year at the same time and &ldquo;Madea&rsquo;s Family Reunion&rdquo; earned $25 million at the same time in 2006), or the fact that the normally PG-13 Ferrell excluded some fans by having an R-rating slapped on this one.After watching the film, I have another theory to throw into the mix: it sucked.See, I&rsquo;m convinced I put more effort into that little two-word synopsis than the producers of &ldquo;Semi-Pro&rdquo; put into the entire film.Cluttered, lazy, wildly unfunny and lit like an underground 70s porno, &ldquo;Semi-Pro&rdquo; will most likely not be a nail in Ferrell&rsquo;s film coffin, but it certainly demonstrates that, without the proper material in place, he&rsquo;s dangerously close to arm-wrestling Jon Lovitz for special appearances on sitcoms.And this is coming from a Feral Ferrell fan.Ferrell plays Jackie Moon, a one-hit disco wonder who scooped up his earnings and is now sole owner, promoter and player of the Flint, Michigan Tropics, a struggling ABA team circa 1976.When the NBA comes knocking and says it will merge the top four teams of the league, Moon and his team rally to make the cut. There&rsquo;s no sense getting into too much plot description, for &ldquo;Semi-Pro&rdquo; is not about the drama. The trouble is, it&rsquo;s not about anything else, either.It&rsquo;s almost disconcerting how jokes build in the picture than just linger in the air like some fetid gastric expulsion that just clears the room for the next scene. Ferrell&rsquo;s former co-stars, David Koechner (&ldquo;Anchorman&rdquo;), Will Arnett (&ldquo;Blades of Glory), Tim Meadows (&ldquo;The Ladies&rsquo; Man&rdquo;), Rob Corddry (&ldquo;Blades&rdquo;), Kristen Wiig (&ldquo;Saturday Night Live&rdquo;) &ndash; a who&rsquo;s who of comedians&mdash; are all trotted out for cameos that range from boring (Koechner) to brief (Wiig) to disturbingly bizarre (Corddry).Director Kent Alterman makes his debut with sledgehammer subtlety. And while I am sure the city of Flint has some wonderful areas and lovely residents, he somehow manages to cake the entire film in a gauze of filth, even staging two pivotal scenes in or near trash bins for no reason whatsoever. For all the idiots he prefers to play, Ferrell is a smart comedian. He has amassed a nice little mini-comedic entourage (including directors Adam McKay, Judd Apatow, actors John C. Reilly, and Will Arnett). He has helped launch a much-watched video website (FunnyorDie.com) and has even carved out critical acclaim in few semi-serious roles (&ldquo;Stranger than Fiction,&rdquo; Winter Passing&rdquo;).But his level of quality has been steadily sliding since &ldquo;Anchorman&rdquo; and Jim Carrey can&rsquo;t wait to start getting first dibs on the &ldquo;goofy white guy&rdquo; scripts Ferrell has been coveting for the past decade.On the bright side for Ferrell, I hear there are some openings at New Line Cinema. http://www.spout.com/blogs/pratchettfan/archive/2008/1/29/24491.aspx Post By: pratchettfan
Post To: pratchettfan Blog
Post Date: 1/29/2008 7:41:20 AM
Body: Something special had to happen to celebrate my 25th birthday. And going to the movies all day long is something unique, something I haven't done before :). To my pleasant surprise lots of people decided to join me, even if just for one or two movies. Nevertheless, there were four of us going the whole nine yards.The day started at 2pm with 'An Inconvenient Truth', Al Gore's documentary about global warming. To be honest, there were now new facts revealed, but it was nevertheless very interesting to see those facts condensed and supported by powerful pictures.After a short break we continued with 'Pan's Labyrinth', which turned out to be my favorite movie of the day. A compelling fantasy-tale about a small girl trying to flee the cruelties of war into a fantasy world, it isn't a movie for children though.Third in line was 'Smokin' Aces'. The trailer looked quite promising, but the movie failed miserably. We weren't sure if it wanted to be more comic or more dramatic, but neither approach worked. The term 'mindless violence' quite closely fits the feeling that we left the movie with.To round things up we visited the midnight screening of 'Ghost Rider'. After 'Smokin' Aces' this was a real joy. The movie was funny and successfully so and still had very cool characters and scenes.On the whole it was a memorable birthday party :)
]]>Tue, 29 Jan 2008 12:41:20 GMTpratchettfanpratchettfan Blog1/29/2008 7:41:20 AMSomething special had to happen to celebrate my 25th birthday. And going to the movies all day long is something unique, something I haven&#39;t done before :). To my pleasant surprise lots of people decided to join me, even if just for one or two movies. Nevertheless, there were four of us going the whole nine yards.The day started at 2pm with &#39;An Inconvenient Truth&#39;, Al Gore&#39;s documentary about global warming. To be honest, there were now new facts revealed, but it was nevertheless very interesting to see those facts condensed and supported by powerful pictures.After a short break we continued with &#39;Pan&#39;s Labyrinth&#39;, which turned out to be my favorite movie of the day. A compelling fantasy-tale about a small girl trying to flee the cruelties of war into a fantasy world, it isn&#39;t a movie for children though.Third in line was &#39;Smokin&#39; Aces&#39;. The trailer looked quite promising, but the movie failed miserably. We weren&#39;t sure if it wanted to be more comic or more dramatic, but neither approach worked. The term &#39;mindless violence&#39; quite closely fits the feeling that we left the movie with.To round things up we visited the midnight screening of &#39;Ghost Rider&#39;. After &#39;Smokin&#39; Aces&#39; this was a real joy. The movie was funny and successfully so and still had very cool characters and scenes.On the whole it was a memorable birthday party :) http://www.spout.com/blogs/kickstandsup/archive/2007/12/13/22790.aspx Post By: kickstandsup
Post To: kickstandsup Blog
Post Date: 12/13/2007 5:17:55 PM
Body: Ghost Rider is not a bad movie at all. It is kind of strange to suddenly see a guys head catch on fire and not be one of the Jackson 5. If you love bikes, then the movie is ok. If you are not a motorcycle fan, then this movie will not be one you will like. Story line is kind of weak, but pretty good special effects. Whether you like the movie or not, you have to admit that when that bike changes shapes it does turn into one sweet ride. Friday night, nothing else to do, would be a decent rental.
]]>Thu, 13 Dec 2007 22:17:55 GMTkickstandsupkickstandsup Blog12/13/2007 5:17:55 PMGhost Rider is not a bad movie at all. It is kind of strange to suddenly see a guys head catch on fire and not be one of the Jackson 5. If you love bikes, then the movie is ok. If you are not a motorcycle fan, then this movie will not be one you will like. Story line is kind of weak, but pretty good special effects. Whether you like the movie or not, you have to admit that when that bike changes shapes it does turn into one sweet ride. Friday night, nothing else to do, would be a decent rental. http://www.spout.com/blogs/jouni/archive/2007/9/17/19850.aspx Post By: jouni
Post To: jouni Blog
Post Date: 9/17/2007 2:24:52 AM
Body: Now this is the way to turn comics to movies! Take it seriously enough, but don't forget the comical elements, and you have a great comedy which is thrilling to see! You can't but laugh to the bad guys and still have to sit at the edge of your chair. I need to see this again :)
]]>Mon, 17 Sep 2007 06:24:52 GMTjounijouni Blog9/17/2007 2:24:52 AMNow this is the way to turn comics to movies! Take it seriously enough, but don&#39;t forget the comical elements, and you have a great comedy which is thrilling to see! You can&#39;t but laugh to the bad guys and still have to sit at the edge of your chair. I need to see this again :) http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/revenge/MemberTagFilms.aspxrevenge
Number of films tagged: 5189

Number of people who tagged: 145

Number of times used: 489

]]>Wed, 02 Dec 2009 23:13:41 GMT5189145489Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/action/MemberTagFilms.aspxaction
Number of films tagged: 319

Number of people who tagged: 111

Number of times used: 460

]]>Tue, 15 Dec 2009 15:49:02 GMT319111460Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/Boring/MemberTagFilms.aspxBoring
Number of films tagged: 177

Number of people who tagged: 105

Number of times used: 207

]]>Tue, 29 Sep 2009 23:44:27 GMT177105207Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/a/MemberTagFilms.aspxa
Number of films tagged: 69

Number of people who tagged: 69

Number of times used: 78

]]>Fri, 13 Feb 2009 20:47:14 GMT696978Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/gay/MemberTagFilms.aspxgay
Number of films tagged: 166

Number of people who tagged: 62

Number of times used: 191

]]>Thu, 12 Nov 2009 01:49:41 GMT16662191Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/ghost/MemberTagFilms.aspxghost
Number of films tagged: 1219

Number of people who tagged: 58

Number of times used: 137

]]>Thu, 19 Nov 2009 00:30:06 GMT121958137Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/predictable/MemberTagFilms.aspxpredictable
Number of films tagged: 40

Number of people who tagged: 37

Number of times used: 52

]]>Fri, 10 Apr 2009 01:32:00 GMT403752Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/comic/MemberTagFilms.aspxcomic
Number of films tagged: 44

Number of people who tagged: 35

Number of times used: 67

]]>Sun, 03 May 2009 07:06:48 GMT443567Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/destiny/MemberTagFilms.aspxdestiny
Number of films tagged: 114

Number of people who tagged: 18

Number of times used: 20

]]>Wed, 12 Aug 2009 13:02:59 GMT1141820Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/devil/MemberTagFilms.aspxdevil
Number of films tagged: 71

Number of people who tagged: 18

Number of times used: 28

]]>Wed, 22 Apr 2009 13:01:59 GMT711828Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/satan/MemberTagFilms.aspxsatan
Number of films tagged: 180

Number of people who tagged: 15

Number of times used: 23

]]>Mon, 19 Oct 2009 09:53:24 GMT1801523Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/what/MemberTagFilms.aspxwhat
Number of films tagged: 13

Number of people who tagged: 13

Number of times used: 13

]]>Mon, 20 Oct 2008 16:44:28 GMT131313Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/biker/MemberTagFilms.aspxbiker
Number of films tagged: 364

Number of people who tagged: 9

Number of times used: 11

]]>Tue, 03 Mar 2009 14:04:40 GMT364911Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/ride/MemberTagFilms.aspxride
Number of films tagged: 8

Number of people who tagged: 8

Number of times used: 8

]]>Sat, 31 Jan 2009 06:45:01 GMT888Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/adaption/MemberTagFilms.aspxadaption
Number of films tagged: 8

Number of people who tagged: 4

Number of times used: 9

]]>Fri, 01 Feb 2008 13:22:43 GMT849Tag