stuntman_James Blog

Dan is real life!!!! My Two cents

stuntman_James — Tue, 27 Nov 2007 17:03:32 GMT

I am a huge Steve Carell fan. Have been since the Daily Show and will most likely be that way for years to come. Mind you that not everything he touches is gold. While he was amazing in 40 year Old Virgin as the lead, his best roles are those of a supporting type like in Little Miss Sunshine and Anchorman. Then comes Dan in Real Life.

Carell plays Dan, a soon to be syndicated writer of an advice column entitled, you guessed it....Dan in Real Life. He lives a real life with real problems and real phobias. However, his real problems are his three daughters that sometimes treat him like dirt and his never ending mourning of his long gone wife.

Dan takes his daughters to Rhode Island to have a family reunion and assist in closing the beach house of his parents for the winter. While there, he walks into a book store and into the life of a major love intrest Marie. They have an intense although short affair and arrives home to only find out that the new woman in his life is actually the new love intrest of his brother, played by Dane Cook. Soon the weekend becomes less about moving on and becoming closer to his children and more about avoiding conflict with his brother and avoiding falling in love with Marie.

What makes this film tick and flow is the constant conflict with both his past and his future. Dan has trouble relating to his kids and has trouble relating to anyone that may love him like he and his former wife loved each other. At the core, Dan is a true sad sack. He denies himself pleasure at the sake of living in his own misery. When he is presented to cut his brother out of the picture and pursue a woman that has the same emotions and affections for him, he denies that, rather living in mourning and such.

This film was good. Carell puts up a fantastic acting job equal to that of his role in Little Miss Sunshine. While I felt that his character was too 2 dimensional and lacked reality at times, it was still a pleasure to see him wallow a little. His distant relationship with his daughters was too fake and cliché.

Superbad......my 2 cents!!

stuntman_James — Sat, 01 Sep 2007 18:01:57 GMT

For centuries, young males have come to a right of passage when it comes to the brink of becoming a man. That right of passage.....drop the loser title, score some alcohol and score some chicks.....here is my 2 cents on the coming of age movie Superbad!

I so wanted to see this film, and was actually one of my top 5 most anticipated films of 2007. To say I love Judd Apatow and friends is a gross misinterpretation. I have followed his career since Freaks and Geeks. So when I heard that Apatow and Rogen were behind this movie, it was a must see.

Superbad is about two friends, who are not the most popular nor the best looking in school, but as seniors, they know that they must really make the best of the last few weeks of high school before they embark on their move to college.

Evan, played by Arrested Developments Michael Cera and Seth, played by Apatow staple Jonah Hill, are just geeks. They dress geeky and talk geeky. Along with their friend Mclovin, they have one goal in life......get drinks, get drunk and get some!

Along the way of this adventure, they meet 2 cops, played by Seth Rogen, who yearn for the years of their youth, a crazy guy who hits them with their car and a maniac at a party, all in the process to meet the women of their dreams. In the end, they learn more about themselves and how strong their friendship is and will stay, and it takes more than booze to make a woman of your dreams fall in love with you.

Lets get one thing out so there is no confusion. This is not an original movie. Nothing about it is original. Porky's, Meatballs and such are all the same......geeky guys devising ways to get laid.

What makes this film refreshing and an ode if you will to those teenage sex romps of the past is dialog. The way they rag on each other, the character Fogell and other characters is amazing. The one thing is that Apatow is like many of my favorite directors. Kevin Smith and Quentin Tarantino know that dialog sells movies, makes them more palpable and more realistic. They talk like my friends talked in high school. Most of my friendships made in high school was built on ragging the other guy.

This is a movie you need too see twice. not for the small things that you may have missed, but when the jokes are told and you are laughing your ass off, you miss the responses.

While i loved this film, there were things I just couldn't get. I loved Michael Cera in Arrested Development. His character George Michael was uncomfortable in his skin, but found ways to fit in. All his character was in this film a mere extension of that character. He was quite and would spend more time talking to himself to others in a soft voice, and while his lines were funny, I would love to have seen him expand his acting chops. Hopefully his role in Juno, premiering at Toronto Film Festival will show us more.

Overall, this was an amazing movie. I look for to the DVD to see all the outtakes and such.

Halloween 2007......my two cents

stuntman_James — Fri, 31 Aug 2007 16:58:23 GMT

I was going to write this review last week when I got to see it. However, life supersedes everything...so better late than never....Here is my 2 cents for Halloween 2007

Let me start by saying that I have a love affair for the original Halloween. This movie was really the first horror film I saw all the way through, without stopping it or leaving halfway through the movie. John Carpenter was brilliant, giving us an emotional movie that allowed our minds create the horror and violence more than what was ever shown on the screen. He gave us a character that has a one track mind, and that was killing. We created the motivation and the drive for his killing. I remember when that little kid said you couldn't kill the boogey man.

Carpenter made Michael Myers indestructible, above death. He was a cold, silent and deadly killer. He had the curorisity of a small child. The most chilling scene is when the poor guy who gets a beer is raised and stabbed into a cabinet. He tilted his head like a small kid looking at a masterpiece in an art museum. Along with the create camera work and the soundtrack, this was a true complete movie.

So here comes Rob Zombie. He, along with best wishes from Carpenter, decided to give us a remake of this horror classic. It has that same low budget feel, but did it do the original justice? In some ways yes, and in a lot of ways, no!

We meet a 10 year old Michael Myers. He is a victim of his environment. He lives in the rundown house in the neighborhood. He has a mom that struggles to save money by stripping, a moms boyfriend that is unemployed and drinks. He has an older sister that is smart-mouthed and sexually exploring. He has a baby sister that we think he adores. However, we see the angst and the morbidity starting to form right form the opening scene. He wears these masks to hide himself. The torture and killing of a small pet is only the start to the road to an end.

He fights kids at school, which leads to killing the bully. He tortures and photographs dead animals. Soon, he commits heinous murders and is brought into the care of Dr. Loomis, played by Malcolm McDowell. We see a sweet boy that loves his mother and little sister start dwindling to a silent murderer, consumed with masks to hide the ugliness of his inner demons. Soon, he is an overwhelming man, cold and silent. He is consumed with masks, and after escaping, returns to the place of his evil birth. Haddonfield becomes his destiny, and the search for his baby sister.

He finally finds her and submits to her for acceptance, only she rejects him. Soon, he stalks her again to kill her. It is only the pleads from Dr. Loomis that Michael ends his killing spree, and in part loses his own life.

After viewing this movie, I have so many mixed emotions. Overall, zombie pays tribute to a horror genre masterpiece, giving it his own spin on this tale. It is so hard to really make stark comparisons to these two films, because while the characters are the same, the stories are different. I see what Zombie is trying to achieve here with this story, I think it takes away from the original in so many ways.

While the original does little in the origin of Michael Myers, that is what really motivates the movie. He is a mystery, a riddle. He is the boogeyman. We don't know why he kills or even what the end result is. It is only near the end that we even know that Laurie is his sister. The original focuses on Laurie. Why did she survive the first attack on Michaels older sister?

Zombie gives us the whys and hows in terms of the origin of Michael Meyers. He is a victim of his environment and in someways it works, but for the most part it is a cop-out. It is too easy to sit there and say, well he is a psycho killer because he was picked on at school, his moms deadbeat boyfriend and older sister treat him like crap, and the only people that really love him and accept him and his flaws are his baby sister and a mother that is really never there.

Even Loomis is not the same. I really loved Donald Pleasence as Loomis. He was like chicken little running around yelling that the sky was falling. McDowell's characterization of Loomis was remorseful and yet just bland at times.

Overall, it was a good movie. While the original had very little if no blood and gore at all, while Zombie's film was gory, it was really never over the top. The violence was a plot pusher, allowing us to look in disgust on how a little 10 year old boy could do this. Just telling us he did it is really never as disturbing as seeing it for ourselves. I will give Zombie credit in the fact that he did want to give us a different experience while not taking away too much from the original. He keeps some of the soundtrack from the original, and adds a little himself. With all the news from the beginning of this movies filming, the change of scripts and production problems, he did really want to put out a quality film. While he does give us a quality remake, it does stand up as an original. Three Stars out of 5

Bourne Ultimatum......my 2 cents

stuntman_James — Sat, 18 Aug 2007 16:55:49 GMT

In the summer of trilogies, like Spider-Man 3, Shrek 3 and Pirates 3, we finally get a trilogy movie worth its weight in gold. Here is my 2 cents on.....The Bourne Ultimatum

We finally get closure for the 3 movie series based on Robert Ludlum's books. Jason Bourne is now remembering things from his past, linking memory strings together to remember his life before the program. Who he was and what happened. He starts making attonement for his sins, for killing people that could of been innocent of being killed by his hand.

As always, the program that created this killing machine is trying to stop him. They send assassin after assassin, but the end result is always the same. Assassins zero, Bourne one!

In this final installment, Bourne is tracking a reporter and his informant that have information about his past. Who he really is and the secret program. Project Black Birch, that has made him Jason Bourne. When Bourne surfaces again, searching for answers and tracking this reporter, the program that is run by the CIA is after him. They kill the informant and the reporter. Finally, with help from Nicki and Pamela Landy give him clues to finding his past. In the end, Bourne confronts the man who made him. Soon,. the secret program is revealed by Landy and the world knows the governments dirty little secret.

Paul Greengrass returns to helm the second of his Bourne movies. After giving us a completely underated United 93 last year, not one director I can think of could balance the non-stop action of this spy thriller. The movie lays an intense foundation with his escape from Russia, amazing car chases and hand to hand combat. The small amount of dialogue from principal characters and the jerky movement of the camera just add to the film itself.

While I do think that the previous film, Bourne Supremecy stands above this film, this was no sad threquel. It is a smart and intense film, and while it does lack the human condition and human emotion that could make me connect to this character, I did feel his pain. A man searching for answers is a powerful force.

Harry Potter.....my 2 cents

stuntman_James — Tue, 07 Aug 2007 16:06:48 GMT

I am not a potter-phile geek. I want to get this out of the way. I have read the books and although they are a seminal good read, I was not one of the cosplay folks waiting with bated breath for the final release.

As for the films. I saw the first one and as with all Chris Columbus films, it was more cheesey and child-like than serious. I did not watch the second film to spare myself of the diabetic induced sugary goodness. I watched the third film on HBO and was happy with the darker feel of the film and the direction of Alfonso Cuaron, and did attend the fourth installment because of the series was becoming more adult as the main characters became more adult.

I waited several weeks to view the new installment of Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix. In terms of the film itself, it is now becoming more adult and in return more appealing to all who pluck down hard earned cash at the box office.

We meet Harry after confronting Voldemort in the previous movie. Harry has grown both mentally and physically. Harry is more brooding and looks like he has hit the weights in the process. After Harry saves his portly of a fat cousin Dudley, he has to appear in front of the Ministry of Magic to answer to his use of magic in front of muggles, or non-magic users. After being exonerated all charges, he goes back to Hogwarts, but with a cloud over his head. It seems that the Ministry has started a slander campaign against Harry because he insists he has seen Voldemort. Soon friends and others turn on Harry.

We also meet the Order of the Phoenix, an underground movement that is trying to prevent Voldmort from retaining an army, doing this against the ministry of magic. Harry takes it upon himself to build a new army among those who believe Harry and realize that evil is about. Soon, he teaches these young magicians complicated spells to arm and protect themselves.

While they train, Hogwarts is under assault as well. Not from Voldemort but from the Ministry itself. While they present a fascist regime in the running of the school, they are preventing the students and the Order from building an army for the inevitable fight between good and evil. Soon, Voldemort is attacking those close to Harry. Then comes the first fight between Harry, his followers and Voldemort and his minions.

The film works on many levels. David Yates, a nominal television director, does a fantastic job creating multiple and complex story lines. He still retains the magical world of Hogwarts and the people of the magical world. Harry is torn and more complex. He is no longer the bumbling child that relies on others to help him pass his classes and figure out the solution to the problems that J.K. Rowling presents in each book. This time Harry is coming into his own as a wizard and a leader. Snape, Sirus Black and Dumbledore allow Harry to grow. They provide more depth to the film and characters.

What doesn't work well is the other surrounding characters. The stumbling sidekick Ron grows tired and boring. The whining and bossy Hermione is just the same in this film than in all the others. While the main character and other characters have evolved, these two have not.

I look forward to the last two. I want to see this major lord of the rings style battle between the forces of good vs evil. Like all great movies where good and evil clash, the two main characters have a unique connection. Voldemort and Harry have that connection. They can see each others thoughts and this will lead to a fantastic battle. The final scene with wizards fighting each other was fantastic, but too short and really did not show what the true power of a wizard is. Harry struggling with fear, awkwardness and anger reminds me of my own school days, battling with puberty and such.

DOH?

stuntman_James — Sun, 05 Aug 2007 17:44:42 GMT

Ok, so on a lazy summer afternoon, I decided to catch the Simpsons Movie. The movies opening sequence was more prophetic than funny. Homer stands in a movie theater and complains that he has paid a fortune to watch a show he could watch at home for free. He then says to everyone in the theater that they are all suckers, then points to us, the real people in the theater and says even you!

So, am I a sucker? Lets face it.......the show has wained in the past. The best writers, including Conan, have left that show, and in recent years is the same sorry story lines involving homer becoming more and more idiotic. So instead of bearing 20 minutes of a badly written show on Sundays, we endure 90 minutes of it in a theater. Is the animation better? No. Is the story better? Kind of.

Don't get me wrong. I am not really giving this a poor review. Some of the film is funny. The Austin Powers inspired sequence was funny, Bart skateboarding through town naked, objects blocking our view of his simpsons genatilia. Homer living in Utah was funny, but there were just things that did not work. It is hard pinpointing exactly what does not work, but the flow was choppy and disorganized.

Should we go see this movie? Simpsons fans should. It is good at points and has its moments, but overall, not something I would see a second time nor own on video. Wait for a few years to see it on free tv when fox wants to milk more money and ratings from everyone.

Where does he get those wonderful toys

stuntman_James — Thu, 26 Jul 2007 20:58:34 GMT

Alright Batman fans, and dont act like you are not one of them. If you see the movie The Simpsons, you may be very lucky to see the teaser trailer for the new Nolan written and directed Batman Sequel.....The Dark Knight.

I have been following this since it was made official and I have some doubts as to whether it can be pulled off. I loved Batman Begins. He treated the movie with the mythos that it deserved and gave life and breath to this floundering property( Thanks alot Joel Shumacher). This movie was Batman. He protects innocents by instilling fear in those bad guys. He was more than a rich guy that can buy those wonderful toys. He has purpose and drive.

So, lets fast forward ahead a year. Nolan tells the world that the new villain is the Joker! No duh! Then he says that all looks and no acting talent Heath Ledger will play him. WHAT!!!! Then the first pics come out on the net, and needless to say, he looks less Nicholson/Romero joker and more Alan Moore " The Killing Joke" joker. His smile looks surgical, much like Black Dahlia and he is sinister. Then he adds a bat-cycle and the possibilitiy of another villian...Aaron Eckhart as Two-Face. So here we go....two villians does not make a better.

Lets hope for two things....keep the joker less Jerry Seinfeld and more serial killer and do not kill him!!!! no matter what!!!!!

We will see what happens!!!!

IT'S COMING......IT'S COMING

stuntman_James — Thu, 26 Jul 2007 20:00:00 GMT

Well, comic com is here and as most geeks know, it is more than comic books and guys with bad complections that have neither seen the outside their parents basement nor a woman naked.....present company included. Now a days, the movie studios come here to sell their ware. So, for those of you i am addressing, please be aware that no big news from the snazzy trailer attached on too transformers other than a real one piece poster has been revealed. If you have been following the hype machine from J.J. Abrams, then you know he has a top secret monster film coming out, with no title and a great viral campaign behind it. It seems that in fact a copy of the poster was leaked, believed to be fake. It had the title monsterous on it. Well, today at Comic Con, the poster is in fact real, but the title has disappeared. Why? maybe a title for a movie that has awesome potential sohuld be named something else other than MONSTEROUS! So, we will see if in fact a title of this film will be revealed before the end of Comic Con.....im hoping so...sick of calling it cloverfield!!!

My 2 cents.......Live Free or Die Hard

stuntman_James — Thu, 12 Jul 2007 19:07:55 GMT

It's hard when our favorite action stars strap on the loud gun and massive explosions once again, sometimes even at their rather senior citizen old age. Rambo is coming back, and in return, beating him to the punch is our favorite swearing cowboy saying John McClane.

It has been over a decade since we last saw McClane fight off terrorist or just guys with a purpose and a vendetta. Like all red-blooded and testostorone filled alpha male, I loved Die Hard. Nothing says merry x-mas than explosions and snuffing out eurotrash german terrorists. The other two were, lets just say, not up to snuff.

So here we are. John is divorced, single, bored and extremely hated by his daughter. However, unknowingly, he is sent to retrieve a computer nerd/hacker for the FBI. It seems that someone is hacking into the FBI servers and they want anyone who either knows who or actually did this,

It doesn't take long for John McClane to be thrown in to absolute havoc when his prisoner, played awkwardly by Justin Long, are running for his life. It seems that this super nerd, played by Tim Olyphant and his super hot ninja like assassin played by Maggie Q, are hiring other hacker-nerds to write code and start killing them off. Thank god that Justin Longs' character is brought in by John McClane, as these two villains send big men with even bigger hardware to seek and destroy these teo.

As usual, McClane frustrates the terrorists by just not dying. Then we find out that Olyphants character was in the FBI, warned them that a computer terrorists could shut down the country and then does it himself to prove a point. He starts a " Fire Sale" and takes over everything connected to a computer. Soon, traffic, utilities and computer networks are taken over by him. In the end, John and his computer geek rescue McClane's daughter, foil the villains and everything is well when the sun comes up on a new day.

In essence, the movie works well. The statement that technology has consumed our lives is very relevant. We cannot go anywhere without the internet or cellphones or computers to help live our lives. Willis is still the wise-cracking cop he has been in all three other Die Hards. He is stoic and no matter what his station is in life, McClane is thrown in these situations. The special effects are amazing and the story at times works well.

What doesn't work is the villains. Timothy Olyphnat is just not a bad guy. Between the preening and the smoldering looks to the cameras and his non-convincing smugness, he is just a joke. Even his martial arts, ninja ass kicking sidekick is more " Wow she is friggin hot!" than " man she is pure evil.". Even Justin Longs character is more annoying than anything else. His conspiracy theory laced diatribes are long in the tooth and short in plot substance. Kevin Smith was great as this uber-nerd king of his own nerd kingdom. The Warlock is just funny.....calling his basement in his moms house his Command Center, reminds me of every computer nerd I have ever met in my life. The movie dragged in certain areas and could of been cut almost 30 minutes.

Is this a good movie? Yes. Is it a good popcorn movie? Yes. Could it of been better......YES! It was good to see them make a better movie than the 2nd and 3rd one, and this was good like the first one....but if I want a real good Die Hard, I'll just pop in my DVD and watch it again.

Transformers........More Crap than meets the eye!!!!!!

stuntman_James — Fri, 06 Jul 2007 23:00:46 GMT

I love nostalgia. I sometimes break out my parachute pants, my atari 2600 or NES. I will dance and sing to Blondie while I wear Drakkar and such. Somethings are good a second time around. I have re-discovered some great synth bands. Somethings are left to just remembering.

I actually ended up seeing Transformers by accident when the ticket monkey mistakenly heard me say TRANSFORMERS instead of DIE HARD! So begins my travels down the road less travelled.

I would give a review of the script and the story if there was one......but in reality I will just give my impressions of a film.

Ok. It is a popcorn movie. Michael Bay is a popcorn director. It stars a kid that was in a Disney Channel show. However, the title of this film is called Transformers.....so one would expect that this movie would center around the robots in disguise. Well you unfortunate fool that forked over 8+ dollars to see this movie......these friggin robots are here for almost comedic value. Instead of seeing what I expected to see......2 hours of kick ass transforming robots shooting and blowing each other to kingdom come, taking every piece of home and office building with him, we are treated to Shia Lebouf and his love intrest, who by the way is never more clothed more than 20 percent of herself.

I know this. The special effects were kick ass. One expects that. However, Michael Bay just assumed I wanted to see the former star of a kids channel rather than these kick ass robots......who are named after the title of this film. I felt more emotion in the cartoon series and the cartoon movie than ever in this movie.

I will say this.....i spent more than an hour discussing J.J. Abrams mysterious trailer than the 2 hour film i was forced to watch.