Movie news on your iPhone today!
Advertisement
Sign in
Username   Password         Forgot password?
Wanna join? Sign up
Find movies you'll love

SpoutBlog on spout.com

  • Hellboy vs. Batman, Iron Man and Hulk. Clip of the Day

    Was this review helpful? [Be the first to tell us!]
    Under discussion:

    Watchmen  (2009)

    I apologize if you thought this was going to be an action-packed fan-made movie, a la Batman: Dead End. But I’ve loved these Mac/PC parodies for some time now, and I couldn’t help myself. This one not only bridges the past weekend with the upcoming weekend by including Hellboy and returning DC toy Batman, but it also seems to unite all the summer 2008 superheroes, save for Hancock, who apparently does not have an action figure tie-in.

    Of course, this one doesn’t beat the best of the series, which came earlier this year with the Iron Man/Batman showdown (eventually we’ll similarly need each a Quicksilver/Flash movie showdown, an Aquaman/Namor showdown and a Plastic Man/Mr. Fantastic showdown), but it’s fine until this winter, when we’ll probably get another “I’m a Marvel; and I’m a DC” clip featuring The Punisher and one of the many characters from Watchmen (toys for which hit stores in January — unfortunately no comparative Comedian action figure, it seems).


    Originally posted on:SpoutBlog

  • Andy Dick Exposes Teen’s Breasts (Shocker!)

    Was this review helpful? [Be the first to tell us!]
    Under discussion:

    Old School  (2003)

    Is it just me, or does Andy Dick’s mug shot from the Riverside County Sheriff’s Department look like a head shot from a Joker audition? Suddenly his part in Old School as Barry the Oral Sex Instructor is a lot less funny.

    For anyone who doesn’t know Andy Dick was arrested this morning at 1:13 am for exposing a 17-year-old girl’s breasts outside of a Buffalo Wild Wings (yes, Buffalo Wild Wings) in Murrieta, CA. Police were investigating a call about “an intoxicated male” urinating outside the restaurant. It was then, a police statement says, that Dick approached the girl and pulled down her tank top and bra.

    But really? Is anybody shocked? It’s like the fake gasps that Pee Wee Herman masturbated at a theater. I’d be more surprised if a year went by without some Andy Dick genital story (no pun intended). The actor has reportedly exposed himself to audiences twice, was arrested for cocaine and marijuana possession in 1999, and in Feb., 2007 was forced from the set of the “Jimmy Kimmel Live” for continuing to rub Ivanka Trump after she asked him to stop.

    Dick has already been released from the detention center upon posting the $5,000 bail. Ah, to work in the LAPD.


    Originally posted on:SpoutBlog

  • 10 Posthumous Oscar Nominations That Should Have Been

    Was this review helpful? [Be the first to tell us!]

    Though I first buzzed about an Academy Award nomination for Heath Ledger in The Dark Knight more than a month before his death, I now want to take it all back. I feel all the talk of Ledger’s posthumous Oscar chances will cloud my mind when I finally do see it, and it will probably also cloud the Academy’s judgment, too. Six months from now, when the nominations are announced on January 22 (coincidentally the one-year anniversary of Ledger’s death), if Ledger is not recognized for his role as The Joker, there will surely be an uproar — actually, Hollywood might just up and self-implode.

    I’m not the only one annoyed by all the Oscar buzz. Terry Gilliam, who directed Ledger in The Brothers Grimm and the upcoming The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus, is calling “bullshit” on the whole thing, particularly against Warner Bros., which Gilliam accuses of exploiting Ledger’s death and chance of a posthumous Oscar for publicity purposes. Considering most Oscar campaigns for live actors are really just part of movie marketing, he has a good point.

    Sure, I would love to see Ledger honored. I’ve believed in his Oscar worth since 10 Things I Hate About You . But in February, if he receives a posthumous award, it will surely feel, at least in good percentage, that it’s because he died young. In that case, why not also give supporting noms sight unseen to Rob Knox for Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince and Brad Renfro for The Informers? Despite the more than 10 posthumous nominations in Oscar history, however, it’s not obligatory for the Academy to hand out such accolades every time someone dies before his final movie is released. Just check out the following list of talent who probably deserved posthumous Oscar recognition as much as Ledger does:

    1. Jean Vigo for L’Atalante - One of the greatest, most influential films of all time, L’Atalante premiered in France in 1934, a few months before Vigo died of tuberculosis at the age of 29. It eventually made its way to the U.S. 14 years later, just in time for the debut of the Oscar for Best Foreign Language Film. And considering the first recipient, Vittorio De Sica (for Shoeshine), would win again two years later (for Bicycle Thieves), the Academy should have recognized Vigo’s film, even if it was more than a decade old. Unfortunately, it would be many decades before L’Atalante received the kind of esteem it deserves.
    2. James Dean for Rebel Without a Cause - Dean starred in only three feature films, one of which, East of Eden, was released prior to his death. He received posthumous Oscar nominations for that film and his final appearance in Giant, which came out a year later. But wouldn’t it have been wonderful if he’d also been nominated for his most iconic role in Rebel Without a Cause? Sure, he’d have posthumously gone up against himself in 1956, but that’s what movie gods like him were made to do.
    3. Richard Harris for Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets - Not only should Harris have received a nomination, he should have won, too. It doesn’t matter that it wasn’t the greatest performance by the actor, who’d previously been nominated for 1963’s This Sporting Life and 1990’s The Field. It’s that Harry Potter fans would have tuned in and saved that year’s telecast from being the least-watched in years. Just imagine how many people will be tuning in to next year’s show just because of the (inevitable) Ledger nom.
    4. Heather O’Rourke for Poltergeist III - I know that I’m only one of maybe three people who like the third Poltergeist movie, but even if you think the movie itself is bad, you have to give little Heather O’Rourke credit for being giving creepily terrific performances throughout the series. Compare her talent to some other young actresses who’ve been nominated. Especially Abigail Breslin of Little Miss Sunshine. And had she lived, she’d probably be a better actress today than Oscar-winner Anna Paquin.
    5. F.W. Murnau for Tabu - His Sunrise was pretty successful a few year earlier, at the 1st Academy Awards, but he wasn’t even nominated. In fact, the man who also gave us Nosferatu, Faust and The Last Laugh was never nominated for an Oscar, a fact that might have been different had the Oscars been founded a decade earlier or had he not died tragically in a car accident at age 43. I’m sure, at least, that Floyd Crosby, when winning for his cinematography work on Tabu, raised the statue to the sky and said, “this is for Murnau.”
    6. Peter Sellers for The Fiendish Plot of Dr. Fu Manchu - Whether or not you believe the Academy hates on comedic actors, you should agree that Sellers should have won an Oscar before he died. Or after he died. If he’d been nominated for this critical and commercial failure, though, it would of course have been one of those “he deserved it for ______, but this will do” kind of situtations.
    7. Stanley Kubrick for Eyes Wide Shut - If Scorsese can finally win with The Departed, Kubrick should have finally won posthumously with what is often thought of as his worst film. If anything, he at least deserved to be nominated instead of M. Night Shyamalan.
    8. Adrienne Shelly for Waitress - Didn’t it seem like a sure thing the writer-director-actress, Shelley, would get the nomination this year? Considering Diablo Cody had already (unofficially) won the actual Oscar before the nominations were even announced, could it have hurt to include the tragically murdered screenwriter? Or were there already too many ladies on the screenwriting ballot this year?
    9. Thelma Ritter for What’s So Bad About Feeling Good? - If ever there was a supporting actress who should have won an Oscar, Ritter was she. After six nominations (four of them consecutive), a posthumous seventh should have come with this movie (even if I’ve never personally seen it, I bet she’s great as usual). Unfortunately, the ballots were likely already in when she had her heart attack in February 1969. Also, she probably would have lost to Ruth Gordon anyway.
    10. Brandon Lee for The Crow - Laugh all you want, but in a crazy year that saw John Travolta recognized with a nomination and Tom Hanks recognized with a win for one of his silliest performances ever, would it have been so strange if the Academy had given Lee the slot filled by Morgan Freeman (obviously Oscar had little love for The Shawshank Redemption as it was)?

    Originally posted on:SpoutBlog

  • Meet Dave: What’s interesting is why it bombed

    Was this review helpful? [Be the first to tell us!]
    Under discussion:

    Innerspace  (1987)

    Men in Black  (1997)

    Dr. Dolittle  (1998)

    I Spy  (2002)

    Daddy Day Care  (2003)

    Dreamgirls  (2006)

    Norbit  (2007)

    Meet Dave  (2008)

    The latest Eddie Murphy comedy, Meet Dave, debuted at a dismal 7th place this past weekend with only $5.3 million (on Monday it had already dropped down to #8), marking the worst wide-release opening for the actor since The Adventures of Pluto Nash. Can you spot the connection between these two movies? If you noted that they’re both sci-fi comedies, you’re smarter than the average movie exec, apparently. After comedy subgenre failures like Pluto Nash and Vampire in Brooklyn, you’d think producers would have known better than to cast the broad comedy star in something like Meet Dave. Actually, its distributor, Fox, may have started growing wise to the issue when it threw away the original title, Starship Dave.

    A few writers have now addressed some of the reasons why Meet Dave failed, and it should be clear how to avoid such a bomb in the future. At the L.A. Times, Patrick Goldstein argues the sci-fi comedy case, though figured out the subgenre can sometimes go blockbuster, as the Men in Black movies show us. He also notes all the horrible crap that Fox has been putting out lately, displaying how shocking it is that this particular film did so much more poorly than garbage like Alvin and the Chipmunks and even What Happens in Vegas. Still, there seems to be some debate over whether or not Meet Dave suffered from actually being a sci-fi comedy or from Fox’s failure to own up to the fact and market it as such.

    Meanwhile, at Defamer, Stu Van Airsdale offers the simple idea that kids today just don’t give a rats ass about Eddie Murphy. And neither does anyone else. But enough people cared to allow Norbit to come really close to grossing a million bucks, and the people tend to enjoy him, as Anne Thompson claims, when he’s in disguise (of course, he also makes big bucks when his face is visible and he’s surrounded by talking animals or rambunctious kids). Considering his recent Oscar nomination (for Dreamgirls), he probably just needs to go serious for a bit. Or merely stay away from the spacemen roles.

    It’s definitely not too late for Murphy, despite Vulture blog’s call for his retirement. Personally, I stayed away from Meet Dave because it seemed a lot like a cross between What Planet Are You From? and Innerspace, neither of which I particularly enjoyed (well, I have a soft spot for the latter as a huge Joe Dante fan). That, and I guess I’m in the Stu-designated camp since I haven’t bothered with any of Murphy’s films since I Spy (and honestly I stopped caring after The Distinguished Gentleman — I didn’t even see Beverly Hills Cop III). As for the people who have cared in the past, neither the little kids nor the older fans likely saw any appeal in Meet Dave. Maybe Murphy needs to decide to go directly for the family films or directly for the raunchy stuff (it still works well enough for Martin Lawrence and others). Trying for the middle clearly isn’t working.

    What was your reason for avoiding the flop? The star? The subgenre? The fact that a ton of other bigger blockbusters are out right now?


    Originally posted on:SpoutBlog

  • Surreal Sex: L’Age d’Or

    Was this review helpful? [Be the first to tell us!]
    Under discussion:

    L'Âge d'Or  (1930)

    Un Chien Andalou  (1928)

    Thanks to the Museum of Modern Art’s recent exhibit “Dali: Painting and Film” (through 9/15/08), which features over 130 of the artist’s paintings and drawings, scenes and films brilliantly juxtaposed side by side, I feel I now understand Salvador Dali for the very first time. Though erotic Freudian imagery, sexed up amoebas and disembodied cocks, may be what draws one into the Surrealist’s paintings, it’s his use of lighting and perspective that keeps you coming back for more. For Dali never was a painter at heart, but a man possessed by a cinematographer’s eye. Within the limits of the flattened canvas Dali’s mind was able to create – see into the future – that which modern day CGI allows for the screen. In fact, both showman and visionary, this master of the bizarre does not even make sense outside of filmmaking! A piece of the puzzle is missing when his paintings are seen alone and static, not in conversation with Bunuel or Hitchcock (or even Cocteau). Viewing Dali’s artwork without a cinematic context is like trying to talk about (his friend and sometime collaborator) Warhol without mentioning The Factory.

    So with this in mind let’s revisit Dali and Bunuel’s classic study in sexual frustration, the erotically surreal L’Age d’Or (offered in its entirety at the end of this post).

    Like their earlier collaboration Un Chien andalou (featuring the infamous razor-to-the-eye sequence), L’Age d’Or is really a series of seemingly extemporaneous images, this time revolving around two lovers forever being frustrated in their carnal desire (an early example of Bunuel’s lifetime running gag of upright citizens unable to consummate their attempts at escaping the land of the bourgeoisie – be it dinner parties or sexual etiquette). Tellingly, we’re introduced to the well-heeled pair without the requisite back-story of romance and impending marriage, which at least would mitigate the sin of lust in the eyes of the Church and righteous society. Nope, the first glimpse we get is of the nattily attired male and prim female passionately pawing at one another, slithering and writhing like snakes in the dirt. That is, until the woman’s cries of ecstasy distract the nearby religious pilgrims trying to hold a solemn funeral (sex and death naturally intertwined) for deceased Majorcans, who rush to rip the heathens from each others’ arms. The look on the man’s face as he licks his lips, wild eyes still burning in close up as his lover is escorted away, resembles that of the seediest pervert, sharp suit in lieu of a trench coat though all is identical underneath.

    But it’s Bunuel’s next cut to a medium shot of the brunette cutie waiting alone in a brightly lit room, unquenched desire radiating from her face, followed by the insertion of an image of hot lava undulating suggestively which is borderline blue. Title cards soon put things in proper historical perspective, letting us in on the joke that pious Rome was once decidedly pagan. But like in modern day Times Square, purification has its limits, and we see the still dirty, literally sand covered man (escorted by plainclothes officers no less!) as he stumbles along the street, unable to keep his horny gaze from the various billboards that come alive to tempt him with female fingers and luscious legs. His object of desire lying languidly on a couch sighs, her face a mask of arousal, before Bunuel’s camera jumps back to the man’s fantasizing eyes peering through the window like a peeping Tom. Bunuel and Dali emphatically understand that it’s the sexual push and pull of the shots, heightening the tension, the longing facial expressions and heaving body language, those physical signs of thwarted orgasm, that express the beating animal heart of mankind.

    When the couple finally meet again it’s at a (typical Bunuel) ritzy party, polite bourgeoisie niceties, ritual socializing coming between them as they bite their lips, undress one another with their eyes from across a crowded room. When the man fed up with small talk slaps an elderly socialite in overreaction to a spilled cocktail his caveman brutality only makes the hot and bothered dame desire him all the more. (Proper behavior be damned when there’s steamy sex to be had!) Hiding behind a curtain he motions her to sneak off with him outside, the element of a secret liaison only escalating arousal. Though the back and forth of the pair frenetically devouring each other’s fingers, locking lips by a frigid statue while a concert plays nearby is more ludicrous than sexy, the scene that follows once the man has been called away is shockingly pornographic even today (nearly eight decades after the film’s scandalous release). The act being simulated is never in doubt as the woman teasingly licks, then voraciously sucks on that statue’s big toe with all the coyness of Paris Hilton on the red carpet. Though Bunuel had the balls to end L’Age d’Or by juxtaposing the Marquis de Sade with Jesus Christ (emerging from a “120 Days of Sodom” orgy) in the last scene, it’s this toe fellatio that stays with you, the erotic equivalent of a razor in the eye.


    Originally posted on:SpoutBlog

  • The Dark Knight: Love Letter to the City

    Was this review helpful? [Be the first to tell us!]
    Under discussion:

    Iron Man  (2008)

    The Dark Knight  (2008)

    As many reviews have already made clear, The Dark Knight sets the new gold standard for comic book movies. I think a big reason for that lies in the casting of a new heroine for Batman, Gotham City. Dark Knight evokes adjectives like epic and edgy. It feels like something is really at stake, but what? Writer/director Christopher Nolan crafts a handful of brilliant characters, but the one we’re really gunning for is Gotham City herself.

    While it’s easy to say Gotham City is an allegory for society as a whole, in The Dark Knight Nolan intentionally paints a unique urban environment. The film opens with stunning aerial shots of Gotham City (played beautifully by Chicago). A lot has been said about Nolan’s choice to shoot certain scenes of the film in IMAX, and it’s no coincidence that nearly all of them fill the frame with an urban landscape. There is something truly breathtaking about seeing Batman leap from the roof a building and spread his wing-like cape in IMAX, but what’s equally important is what’s below him: an endless grid of streets, buildings, and people.

    Nolan really works his magic when he combines sustained suspense, a series of sub-climaxes and surprisingly deft character development in a huge film that doesn’t feel too crowded or choppy. Of course, the movie’s climax is an epic clash between strong characters and the nuanced ideals they’ve come to represent. In many ways it looks as though Rachel Dawes is set to be the damsel-in-distress, motivating two heroes in a tense love triangle. But ultimately, I believe, this isn’t the case. As much as Dawes, Batman, Commissioner Gordon, and Harvey Dent risk their lives to save one another, in the end they’re really laying it all on the line for Gotham City.

    Let me make something clear. I don’t mean to say that the character of Gotham City was the best rendered of them all. That honor clearly goes to Heath Ledger’s Joker. No IMAX panoramas can match what that man did with his lip-smacking alone. Rather, I mean to say that Gotham City is the ultimate prize, it’s what every character fights for, either to save or to destroy. The survival of The City trumps even the battle between good and evil as the central conflict of the film.

    Why so much love for The City? I think it’s more than just the tradition around Batman. Despite the fact that the Joker is repeatedly referred to as a terrorist, there’s a warrantless wiretapping subplot that boarders on heavy-handed, and the film explores difficult questions about what’s moral when fighting unthinkable threats, The Dark Knight does not feel like a War on Terror parable. I could be wrong, but I don’t think the United States is mentioned in any way in the entire film. Batman is not America’s hero, Batman is Gotham’s hero.

    While Iron Man found his origins in the seemingly Osama-infected hills of Afghanistan, Batman only strays from Gotham briefly to apprehend a criminal so that he can be brought to justice by Gotham’s superstar D.A., Harvey Dent. While it could be argued that keeping the justice vs. terror conflict confined to Gotham (as opposed to Baghdad) is simply a way to keep the film from feeling stale, I think it’s much more. If Gotham has suburbs, Batman won’t acknowledge them. Bruce Wayne and his colleagues choose to stay and fight. What The Dark Knight shows is that while there are battles between good and evil all over the world, the ones we should care about most happen in our own city.


    Originally posted on:SpoutBlog