Awesome With A Side Of Sweet

"Groundhog Day" Remixed

noreply@blogger.com (Rob Hynes) — Mon, 08 Nov 2010 22:28:00 +0000

This Groundhog Day "remix" covers pretty much the whole film rather then just an iconic scene or the trailer. It's very well done, very clever and very thorough. This is clearly a labor of love, or perhaps obsession, because about a minute into watching this I thought to myself this must have taken months, then learned in fact it took nine. It was created by HomeStarRunnerTron, who crafted the video in the style of Pogo who's got a few classics of this style of video to his credit. Visually there's a lot of interesting stuff going on in this flick, but clearly, the stand out here is the music he creates using the samples and cues from the movie and nothing else. The first time I watched it, I didn't realize until a couple of minutes in that the audio was created exclusively by using the dialog, music and sound effects from the original film. It needs to really be watched twice to realize the incredible things that HomeStarRunnerTron (that really flows off the tongue, doesn't it?) had done with this. The level of detail in the work he's done on the music that accompanies the piece is staggering and the editing and story telling is compelling, creative and encapsulates Groundhog Day perfectly. The piece is called 'Bing;' named after a line delivered by "Ned Ryerson" in the film, one of the many people Bill Murray's character crosses paths with day after day after day in the movie.

Check out the video below where HomeStarRunnerTron talks about the work that went into creating 'Bing.'

Titans of Terror: Posting Numbers

noreply@blogger.com (Rob Hynes) — Mon, 01 Nov 2010 14:36:00 +0000

U2's The Edge Soundchecking

noreply@blogger.com (Rob Hynes) — Mon, 18 Oct 2010 04:35:00 +0000

I was a big fan of Davis Guggenheim's It Might Get Loud, (which I originally posted about in August of '09) in part because it's a great documentary in it's own right, but more personally, because I'm a big fan of each of the films three guitar slinging subjects, Robert Plant, Jack White and The Edge. The Edge, in particular, is a guitarist who's career, style, influences and sound I'm very intimately aware of. In the summer of 1983, while sitting in the backseat of a friend's dad's car, driving back from another friends cottage, I found a cassette copy of U2's War album. I was instantly drawn to the sound. Raw, urgent, dramatic. There was something that just drew me in right away, but the most distinctive thing about it was the unique, slightly haunted sound of The Edge's guitar. I hadn't heard anything that sounded quite like how he played. Laced with echo and delay it was a sound that was familiar and unique almost simultaneously. The echoey clanging sound filled in the blanks and bled into other parts of the song. I was hooked.

The above clip, from It Might Get Loud, shows The Edge sound-checking a guitar, and playing snippets of 'Until The End of the World,' 'Pride (In the Name of Love)' and 'Bad.' What can I say, stuff like this really presses my nerd button, and if you dig this, you will really enjoy It Might Get Loud, if you haven't seen it. The Blu-Ray version of the flick has a ton of extra performance footage (like the clip above) that shows these excellent guitarists dropping their iconic riffs both by themselves, and, in the film's nerdtastic climax, together.

Zach vs. Bruce

noreply@blogger.com (Rob Hynes) — Wed, 13 Oct 2010 15:05:00 +0000

Zach Galifinakis' "Between Two Ferns" series always gives us solid comedic gold, but this incarnation, with a mostly humorless Bruce Willis, might well be my very favorite. Best line? "When you were making The Whole Ten Yards, were you ever worried it would be too good?"

Bourne Free

noreply@blogger.com (Rob Hynes) — Mon, 11 Oct 2010 21:31:00 +0000

MATT DAMON AS JASON BOURNE, BACK WHEN THE NAMES OF THE FILMS MADE SENSE

GILROY ON THE SET OF THE DUBIOUS 'DUPLICITY'

So Tony Gilroy, the talented screenwriter who scripted the three Bourne films and wrote and directed the excellent Michael Clayton and the not-so-excellent Duplicity will serve double duty on the upcoming fourth Bourne film, The Bourne Legacy. This was heralded as good news last week when the news broke because the previous incarnation of the fourth installment fell apart back in 2008 over scripting issues and ultimately director Paul Greengrass left the project to focus on other things which was closely followed by Matt Damon announcing he wouldn't make another Bourne without Greengrass, putting the franchise at a standstill. When Damon issued his "Not Without My Greengrass" plea, he was careful to not rule out eventually returning to the franchise, so It was assumed with Tony Gilroy taking the reigns - with his history with the series and with Damon - might lure Damon back. Well, it turns out this will be a Bourne-free Bourne Legacy.

SOON THE STUDIO WILL GIVE DAMON $25 MILLION REASONS TO RETURN

Fear not, they are not re-casting the part. Jason Bourne will not appear in the film despite his name appearing in the title for the movie. This should go right up there in the Movie False Advertising Hall of Fame with and Van Wilder 2: The Rise of Taj - a film that didn't have Van Wilder in it at all, yet used his name in the title. Gilroy who I'm sure was acutely aware of the internet rumors that Damon might return with him signing on to helm was quick to respond. "No one is replacing Matt Damon. There will be a new hero, a whole new chapter.... this is a stand-alone project." Really? The fourth entry to a successful film series is a "stand alone project." I beg to differ... this is clearly a film being made to keep the franchise alive in the event that Damon and likely Greengrass opt to return to the series. Gilroy goes on to say "This is not a reboot or a recast or a prequel. The easiest way to think of it is as an expansion. Jason Bourne will not be in this film, but he's very much alive." This just seems... cheap. It also seems beneath Gilroy who I was very excited about after I saw Michael Clayton at the Toronto International Film Festival a couple of years back but have since tempered my enthusiasm after seeing the lousy Duplicity - a movie that thinks it's much more clever than it really is - and then learning that he's opted for this cheesy effort as his next project. It's also worth northing that despite using the title of the fourth 'Bourne' book, The Bourne Legacy, (which wasn't written by series creator Robert Ludlum) this scirpt will have nothing to do with that novel. It's been obvious for the better part of a decade now that the Hollywood studios are being run by marketers, and frankly, nothing really surprises me anymore, but the Bourne series was always a critical and audience favorite, and I naively thought they were above a blatant cash in like this. "Jason Bourne's activities in the first three films are the immediate trigger. The world we're making enhances and invites Jason Bourne's return." Gee, really Tony? So this whole effort is just a stepping stone for the real cash in, when Matt Damon returns? Sounds like The Bourne Placeholder and brings back band memories of U.S. Marshalls the limp sequel to The Fugitive that was just missing one thing: Harrison Ford. (Though if anyone could make you forget about Harrison Ford, it would be the always delightful Wesley Snipes, who, amazingly, wasn't able to elevate that ill-fated follow-up.) This whole situation kinda makes me wish I had amnesia. Unless, of course, they cast Wesley Snipes as the "new" Bourne. Then I'm totally in.

"Inception" 50's Style Trailer

noreply@blogger.com (Rob Hynes) — Tue, 05 Oct 2010 18:36:00 +0000

I saw this over at /Film and thought it was pretty cool... Inception, as a 1950's news serial.

Puck Flick Reborn...

noreply@blogger.com (Rob Hynes) — Sun, 03 Oct 2010 22:24:00 +0000

FROM TOP LEFT: SEAN WILLIAM SCOTT, KEVIN SMITH, SOURCE MATERIAL FOR 'GOON', JAY BARUCHEL

Back in January, I wrote about a hockey flick scripted by Jay Baruchel and Evan Goldberg called Goon that was slated to go before cameras with Fubar director Michael Dowse helming only to see the production fall apart. I was disappointed to see that project falter, chiefly because it was being written and directed by Canadians and in the canon of hockey cinema the biggest issue is the stories being created and told by people with precious little knowledge of the game. Whatever issues plagued it then are no longer a problem and the movie is back in production with Dowse once again at the helm and co-scripter Jay Baruchel (who's co-writer Evan Goldberg is Seth Rogen's writing partner who co-wrote Superbad, Pineapple Express and the upcoming Green Hornet) appearing in a support role.

KEVIN SMITH SHOWING HIS DEVIL PRIDE

This is good news because Kevin Smith's long discussed project Hit Somebody, which is based on singer songwriter Warren Zevon's song of the same name is going into production directly following Smith's current project, Red State. I've had the chance to talk with Smith about this project, and his love for hockey (he's a big New Jersey Devil and Edmonton Oilers fan, the former because of his home-state allegiances and the latter because of loyal devotion to Wayne Gretzky) and I'm genuinely intrigued by his project. Smith twice as a guest on my Sirius Satellite radio show Relentless, and both times he spoke about the development of the film, his reverence for Slap Shot, and his genuine passion for the game. We discussed the pitfalls that hockey movies often fall in, the largest issue being that the filmmakers don't understand the sport and ultimately make choices that insult the intelligence of the average hockey fan viewer. (The Mighty Ducks making Iceland, of all places, the ultimate global hockey power springs to mind, as does the ridiculous scene in Youngblood where Rob Lowe - who's walked off the team and left returns to the rink, gets dressed and steps on the ice just in time to score the game winner, somehow finding himself on the roster, with his gear in the building and his team magically playing a man short to accommodate his sudden return.) After decades of lousy hockey movies, or no hockey films at all, it's nice to have two projects in the pipeline scripted and directed by genuine fans of the sport.

STIFFLER ROCKS THE HOCKEY HAIR

But all is not well, I'm afraid, because Goon, the Baruchel project, has also announced it's casting and the lead role will be occupied by Seann William Scott. (Also in the cast is actress Alison Pill, seen recently in the under appreciated Scott Pilgrim vs. the World) I have no issue with Stiffler on skates, but both times I spoke with Smith about his project, he mentioned that he was writing the lead role with a specific actor in mind: Seann William Scott. I understand that some actors can play similar roles, for example, Kevin Costner has played a broken down old baseball player twenty six times in his career, but I don't see Scott playing the lead in both of these movies. Considering both films are hcokey comedies about a pugilistic hockey player in the lower ranks of minor pro hockey, I would say it's a little too similar to have him in both, and when you consider he'd literally be shooting the movies back-to-back it becomes absurd. Kevin... it's casting time. Smith, as he's apt to do, responded to the situation via his twitter, aknowledging that Scott was "circling" Goon, and that because of his work on Red State, the screenplay, which he told me last month was coming along very well, is now at a standstill. "It's been a busy month, so still on page 101." Despite losing his leading man, Smith's passion for puck supercedes his desire to cast Scott. His final tweet looked at the big picture: "The more hockey flicks, the better. #SellTheGame" Well said.

80's Cinema

noreply@blogger.com (Rob Hynes) — Sat, 02 Oct 2010 19:51:00 +0000

22 EIGHTIES MOVIES... CAN YOU NAME THEM ALL?

I've got a great fondness for the cinema - and the music for that matter - of the 80's. I think pretty much everyone has a soft-spot for the pop culture of the time when they first started becoming aware of such things. This design - which is for a T-shirt from the good folks at chopshopstore.com - tickles my nerd bone by featuring all 80's movies and using clever little icons to signify each movie. The best part is this: they provide no answers. I've got almost all of them, but there's one that I suspect is intentionally vague and another I'm not sure about at all. Guesses are welcome - even encouraged - in the comments section.

Badfellas

noreply@blogger.com (Rob Hynes) — Fri, 01 Oct 2010 23:19:00 +0000

In the current GQ Magazine, in celebration of the 20th Anniversary of Martin Scorsese's classic 1990 mobster flick Goodfellas, they published an extensive oral history of the making of the movie which revealed many things I didn't know about the movie, and almost all of them are bad. This movie came along at a time in Scorsese's career when he was in desperately in need of a hit. The eighties, by and large, weren't very good to Scorsese. His 1980 film Raging Bull is now considered by many to be the top film of the decade, but it earned much of its praise in retrospect and the movie didn't perform particularly well at the box office. He followed that up with a dark examination of celebrity and celebrity worship called The King of Comedy which also didn't set the box office on fire then made the little-seen After Hours in 1985. In '86, he made the strange choice of directing a sequel to The Hustler with The Color of Money. In '88 he made The Last Temptation of Christ, a movie that touched off protests and controversy from the religious right and not only under-performed at the box office, but actually drew picketers. As the decade was coming to a close, Scorsese, more then any other time in his career, needed a hit.

ROBERT DeNIRO, JOE PESCI and RAY LIOTTA

He got it. Goodfellas was a return to form for Scorsese and was a massive critical and box-office success. Any discussion about the greatest films of Scorsese's esteemed career would have to include Goodfellas, but it easily could have gone the other way. It's hard to imagine, but at that time, Scorsese, coming off a string of middling films, didn't have the clout he has today, and as such, the casting of the movie wasn't entirely in his control and he dealt with studio interference in this regard. A large part of the success of the film, beyond his brilliant direction, was due to the excellent cast: Ray Liotta, Robert DeNiro and Joe Pesci, but none of them were originally in place. The original discussions about who would play the lead character, Henry Hill, didn't include Liotta who had a supporting turn in the Jonathan Demme flick Something Wild (which Scorsese loved) but precious little else on his resume. The part instead was ticketed for Tom Cruise, who Marty had worked with a few years earlier on The Color of Money. Cruise is a great actor, but he would be horribly miscast in the role of career mobster Henry Hill. Scorsese stuck with his guns and eventually studio relented and offered the part to Liotta. Robert De Niro, who had collaborated with Scorsese several times in the seventies and eighties was originally not offered the part of Jimmy Conway. Initially the studio approached John Malkovich who turned the part down. "It sort of came at a bad time in my life, when I wasn't feeling well and didn't want to think about working. It's hard to explain why end up in Eragon (his 2006 bomb in which he played an evil King and former dragon rider) and not Goodfellas. But De Niro is fantastic." Malkovich is a skilled actor who's delivered some great performances and infuses his characters with a lot of interesting layers, but I can't imagine him playing an Irish gangster in a Martin Scorsese flick. One of the things Scorsese stresses over and over again in the article is his unwavering quest to make the movie "authentic" and while Malkovich isn't Irish; he might have disqualified De Niro from contention for the part because he couldn't envision De Niro playing the non-Italian in the story.

JOE PESCI AS WISE GUY TOMMY DeVITO

The other lead, Joe Pesci, wasn't interested in doing the movie at all. He told Scorsese he was gonna pass, but after talking with Marty about some of the stories of things he had seen while working in a restaurant frequented by local wise guys; and Scorsese's subsequent enthusiasm regarding incroporating those stories into the screenplay (included among these, the infamous "How am I funny?" ball breaking sequence which unfolded, in Pesci's real life, when he told a wise guy he thought he was funny and the guy took mock offense at the remark) Pesci agreed to sign on. I simply can't imagine this movie without the outstanding contributions of Joe Pesci. As brilliant as Martin Scorsese is as a filmmaker and as incredibly fascinating as the source material is; I don't believe this movie would have been nearly as good had any other actor taken that role. Pesci would ultimately win the Academy Award for Best Supporting actor for his work, and he's provided us with some of the most quotable, fantastic scenes in movie history. The "Go Get Your Shinebox" scene with Billy Batts, for example, is an absolute classic, and Pesci's unhinged, raging performance is the lifeblood of this scene and this movie. He embodies the insanity of the lifestyle and it's intoxicating allure all wrapped up in one tiny, lethal package. He is danger. This movie, without him, isn't the same beast at all. But, amazingly, there was one other casting tidbit in the GQ piece that, had it happened, could have sunk this movie even if Scorsese had his real male leads in place. The Lorraine Bracco role of Henry Hill's wife Karen almost went to a different Italian actress, and this would have been much more catastrophic then Sophia Coppolla in The Godfather Part III... In consideration for the role was the antithesis of acting: Madonna.

MADONNA: THE THESPIAN

Goodfellas Executive Producer Barbara De Fina, who worked with Scorsese on The Color of Money, Michael Jackson's 'Bad' video and The Last Temptation of Christ reveals that the Madonna talk progressed beyond just idle speculation. "I remember that we went to see her in the play 'Speed-the-Plow.' Marty said hello to her afterward. Can you imagine? Tom Cruise and Madonna? But Marty can get a performance out of almost anyone." Yes, Barbara. Almost anyone. I would wager a fair amount that Madonna, who has built a resume of shockingly mediocre performances in lousy movies and somehow has managed to capture the opposite of charisma and ooze that out in every scene she's ever done would prove to be the exception to that rule. By all accounts, what they would have seen that night was a very underwhelming performance (The New York Daily News headlined their review "No, She Can't Act") I suspect Scorsese watching her perform live was something he told the studio he would do before he officially shit-canned any chance of her being in the movie. She instead made Dick Tracy - a film she was awful in - and shacked up with Warren Beatty instead of appearing in a modern American classic. Madonna in the cast of Goodfellas would have been an absolute game-changer. It's not just an issue of how bad she would have been - and by now, we've seen more than enough evidence that she would be truly lousy in this film regardless of what magic pixie dust Martin Scorsese sprinkled on her - but there's also the issue of the film losing the outstanding performance of Lorraine Bracco, who ultimately landed the role of Karen. This would be a terrible, terrible trade. The GQ article really illustrates that this modern classic might very well have been the film that all but ended the career of America's greatest film director.

The article is in the current October issue of GQ, which is on newstands now.

Wit Vs. Twit

noreply@blogger.com (Rob Hynes) — Fri, 01 Oct 2010 04:21:00 +0000

The always delightful Paul Lemieux has an excellent recurring bit on MTV Live called One on One. It's the Canadian red-headed step child of Zach Galifinakis' Between Two Ferns. In this edition, my favorite of the bunch so far, Paul interviews 'Jersey Shore's' Ronnie.

Find more of Paul's excellent One on One work here.

Danny De Vito in "Ghandi II"

noreply@blogger.com (Rob Hynes) — Sun, 19 Sep 2010 22:10:00 +0000

It's comforting to know that I'm not the only person waiting with baited breath for the inevitable sequel to the Ben Kingsley classic Ghandi. It is, however, quite surprising that I'm joined in this by none other then David Mamet. The Pulitzer prize winning playwright, who also penned one of my favorite film scripts ever - Glengarry Glen Ross was from his own Tony nominated play - seems like literally the last person in the world I would expect to team up with FunnyorDie.com but amazingly, that's exactly what this is. Mamet wrote and directed this "on set" interview with Danny De Vito, where he discusses taking the title role in Ghandi II.

Phoenix Hoax Fallout

noreply@blogger.com (Rob Hynes) — Sun, 19 Sep 2010 20:29:00 +0000

PHOENIX IN ONE OF HIS MORE LUCID MOMENTS ON 'THE LATE SHOW WITH DAVID LETTERMAN"

DIRECTOR CASEY AFFLECK WITH PHOENIX

Casey Affleck, the brother-in-law of Joaquin Phoenix, and the director behind the recent "warts and all" documentary about Phoenix's attempt to transform himself into a rap artist; has revealed the movie - and Phoenix's career change - were all a hoax. This reveal has surprised many in that it came so shortly after the film began showing at film festivals (including the just completed Toronto International Film Festival) which totally demystifies the movie and takes away much of the allure to see it. Why spend a year building this elaborate fake story line then throw it all way shortly after the movie is made available to the public? Seems odd. It's even stranger when you factor in that Affleck stuck by the film and insisted to the press at both the Venice and Toronto film festivals that it was a real document of his friend and brother-in-law scrapping his acting career and earnestly pursing a new career in hip hop, only to then tell the New York Times the entire thing was a hoax less then a week later. Affleck (strangely) claims that "I never intended to trick anybody. The idea of a hoax never entered my mind." This is a bizarre remark considering he just released a documentary about Joaquin Phoenix where Phoenix is acting from start to finish and is telling a purely fictionalized tale. His documentary, by definition, isn't a documentary at all, and rather a pure work of fiction - or as Affleck calls it a look at "the disintegration of celebrity;" whatever that means. How is it possible that a the notion of this being a hoax never entered Affleck's mind?

BEST TALK SHOW APPEARANCE EVER

One of the hilites of Phoenix's (fictionalized) descent into madness was mostly incoherent, strange appearance on David Letterman. (For the record, Phoenix, likely clean shave and using full sentences and talking about this faux-film, will return to the Letterman show on Wednesday.) On Letterman - in character as the "retired actor turned rapper" - Phoenix appeared incoherent, confused, and mildly sedated. This too, of course, was a hoax with the Letterman people in on it. This isn't the first time Dave has courted weird controversy via a strange actor behaving, well, strangely. On July 28th, 1987, actor Crispin Glover - best known as George McFly from Back to the Future - appeared on Letterman's old show, 'Late Night' and while wearing a wig and platform shoes gave a strange, rambling interview where he rails against the press in a peculiar panicked manner before announcing to Letterman that he was "strong" then he announced he "could kick" before sending a platform shoe within inches of Letterman's head which led to Dave announcing "I'm gonna go check on the Top Ten" before fleeing his desk and sending the show to commercial. After the break, Letterman returned with Glover and commented on how close he came to getting a dent in his head. It was, of course, spectacular television... but was it real? First of all, this wasn't the result of Glover stoned out of his mind, though it did look that way. He was on the show to promote the little known real crime drama The River's Edge (a great, dark movie by the way) but he elected to use this time, instead, to promote a movie that wouldn't be released for another four years. He opted to do the entire interview with Letterman in character as "Rubin" from the little-seen and not yet made film Rubin & Ed, which would ultimately be made in 1991. Letterman, apparently didn't know he was doing this, but I suspect he was acutely aware that Glover had some Andy Kauffmanesque plan in store for the appearance. Strangely, Glover appeared on Letterman again, just two weeks later to "apologize" for the incident - which he never did, by the way, instead he denied ever being on the show before and despite many attempts by Letterman to get to the bottom of the his strange schtick on the previous appearance, Glover offered very little. Back then, I used to pour through the TV Guide each week when it came in the paper to see who the guests were on the late night talk shows so I could tape any episodes featuring guests that intrigued me, and I remember finding it quite odd that Glover's name was listed as a Letterman guest ... again. This was strange because these things were printed so far in advance that playoff games in any sporting event never had teams listed, and yet, with just a two-week lead, somehow they knew that Crispin Glover was going to return to the David Letterman show? How could they have known that if, in fact, he hadn't been booked to return well before his first show ever aired?

Check out Glover's original, spectacularly odd appearance on Letterman below:

Excellent Casting

noreply@blogger.com (Rob Hynes) — Sun, 19 Sep 2010 01:39:00 +0000

MERCURY ON STAGE AT LIVE AID, 1985

The rock n' roll biopic is a sub-genre littered with a lot of predictable fare, so much so that it's been lampooned with Walk Hard: The Dewy Cox Story starring the criminally under-rated John C. Reilly. It's usually the same formula: young rising star needs to get his music out there; fame changes them; drugs enter the picture; they fall from grace and/or die; the end. That being said, when they are done well, they provide excellent dramatic fodder, and, as an added bonus, they have kick ass soundtracks. Hopefully this upcoming project will fall into the latter category. An interesting piece of casting news surfaced this week when word came out that Sasha Baron Cohen - yes, Borat himself - is set to play Freddie Mercury in an upcoming Queen biopic. The film will chronicle Queen's rise in the 1970's to the top of the rock heap and will climax with their 1985 Live Aid performance which essentially was the bands last hurrah and a gig considered by many fans to be the best the band ever did. A few years later, Mercury's physical condition began to worsen and rumors began to surface when he appeared gaunt and frail in his increasingly rare public appearances. Mercury, who while a very flamboyant and engaging performer was notoriously quiet and publicity-shy off stage, shot down speculation he was suffering from HIV and dismissed all the rumors, but by 1991, Mercury, on his deathbed, confirmed that he was in fact dying from AIDS complications. The following day, on November 24th, 1991, Mercury passed away at the age of 45. This film, however, will focus on Mercury's tremendous career and successes and not his sad demise, which is really a sad footnote and not what defined him.

'BORAT' LOOKING SLIGHTLY MERCURY-ESQUE

Baron Cohen, of course, is a total question mark, outside of comedic work. That being said, the very immersive nature of his comedy performances - essentially becoming a character and reacting as that character rather then the more traditional set up/joke nature of most comedic actors in Hollywood - lead me to believe he will follow in the long line of comedians and comedic actors capable of delivering stellar dramatic performances. It's worth pointing out that Baron Cohen is currently shooting a Martin Scorsese flick, so clearly there's a school of thought - and a highly respected one - that thinks he can act. In this case in particular, I think he's an inspired choice to play Freddie Mercury, and I suspect he will absolutely kill in the role. Mercury's surviving band mates - who had casting control as the movie will be made, in part by the newly-formed Queen Films (in partnership with Robert De Niro's Tribeca Productions and GK Films, who are currently making Hugo Cabaret, the aforementioned Martin Scorsese film) - have endorsed the casting choice as well. Other than the large height difference - Baron Cohen is nearly six inches taller than Mercury was - there is a strong physical resemblance between the two right down to the shape of their mouths and the ability rock a thick mustache. There is no director attached yet, but the script is being written by Peter Morgan - the scribe behind the excellent Frost/Nixon and, fittingly, The Queen - which gives me a lot of hope that will be more then a paint-by-numbers retelling of the rise of a rock band. The fact that the band members are involved in the production should add to its authenticity, and, perhaps more importantly, the rights to the full catalog of Queen music.

I'm Back

noreply@blogger.com (Rob Hynes) — Sun, 19 Sep 2010 00:45:00 +0000

The Toronto International Film Festival, at least the coverage of it for MTV, has finally come to an end and a crazy couple of weeks for me personally is also over. With TIFF and the MTV Video Music Awards down in Los Angeles last weekend (which meant I was covering the Film Fest in Toronto while being on the opposite coast) I've been a very busy camper and sadly, 'Awesome with a Side of Sweet' paid the price, which is ironic, really, because I've had so much stuff to write about between the films I've seen and some crazy pop culture encounters while down in L.A., but alas, I'm back and the regular postings on the blog will return as well. Sorry for the unannounced hiatus... but I'm back.

Full Metal Quacket

noreply@blogger.com (Rob Hynes) — Tue, 31 Aug 2010 17:52:00 +0000

Stanley Kubrick's Full Metal Jacket is an uneven movie, largely because the first half of the film, which takes place entirely on American soil following a group of soldiers in boot camp being prepared for Vietnam, is so much stronger and more dramatic then the second half, which takes place in Vietnam. A large part of the success of the first half of the film is the riveting performance of R. Lee Emery, a real-life drill sergeant turned actor who deliver an intense, hilarious performance while constantly berating his charges. This clip brilliantly subs in Donald Duck's for for Emery's and the results are amazing.

Self-Effacing Sly

noreply@blogger.com (Rob Hynes) — Wed, 25 Aug 2010 04:59:00 +0000

I just caught Sylvester Stallone tonight on a re-run 'Jimmy Kimmel Live' from a couple of weeks back where he's promoting his latest, The Expendables, which I found really disappointing chiefly because it wasn't the campy, self-referential film I thought it was going to be and - its biggest sin - it just wasn't much fun. This is particularly disappointing because it seems Stallone - who wrote and directed The Expendables - actually does seem to be funny and willing to make fun of himself. Stallone impressed me recently with his self-effacing remarks in reference to the recently revealed early 80's plan by Paramount plan for a Stallone/Travolta pairing in Godfather Part III - was at it again while discussing on of his worst films ever: Stop or My Mom Will Shoot. In response to an earlier joke about the film made by Kimmel, Stallone said this: "As bad as that movie is... As horrible as it is for you..." Stallone gestured to the audience for effect then added, wearily; "I'm in it." After the audience and Kimmel laughed, he continued: "I'm stuck in it. This is like, whoa, "What a schmuck. I am the schmuck." This little throw-away comment on a talk show eighteen years after the films release is actually funnier then the anything in the movie itself. Better late than never.

Mixed Feelings: Indy to Return?

noreply@blogger.com (Rob Hynes) — Mon, 23 Aug 2010 04:43:00 +0000

Most movie nerds in my age group are often very reverential towards the Stars Wars films. Not me. I really enjoy those movies and they're definitely a part of my childhood, but for me, the Indiana Jones movies and the Back to the Future films are closer to my childhood cinematic Holy Grail. I followed the decade long effort to get a fourth Indiana Jones movie to the screen then watched in horror when it was finally released and fell way, way short of expectations. And now, it seems, a fifth movie is on the way despite my incredible affection for the series the damage done by the last movie leaves me with mixed feelings about another outing. Shia LaBeouf - a large part of the problem in the last installment - revealed this past week that the fifth movie is being scripted right now. "I got called into Steven's office and he pitched a little bit to me and it sounds crazy, it sounds really cool." As much as I dislike LaBeouf - and I dislike him plenty - I might just take his word for it that the new script is "really cool" because he was quite candid in the past about how lousy Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull saying "I feel like we dropped the ball on the legacy that people loved and cherished." He was right about that, I hope he's right about the fifth film having a good concept cause they owe it to us big time after the debacle that was the Crystal Skull.

Hopes Dim for "Scream 4"

noreply@blogger.com (Rob Hynes) — Mon, 23 Aug 2010 01:20:00 +0000

It's difficult to have high hopes for any Part 4 of a film series, because, after three sequels, its safe to say the best is in the past, but I did have faint hope for the fourth Scream film. The newest installment, which will arrive eleven years after the last effort, which was rather underwhelming and didn't feature the writing of series creator Kevin Willimason, had the original creative team re-assembled and the remaining (meaning living) cast members also on board. Williamson was hired to not only write Scream 4, but also spoke up a whole new trilogy and veteran genre director Wes Craven, who helmed the first three movies was back in the director's chair. Williamson was active on his twitter account while the developing the new film and when Neve Campbell, the star of the original trilogy officially signed on for the fourth installment it seemed they might have a chance to make a cool new Scream movie. As the film neared production, casting details began to surface and the movie landed Hayden Panettiere, Rory Culkin, Adam Brody and Alison Brie joining the returning Courtney Cox, David Arquette and, of course, Neve Campbell. This was all good. Then the film went into production.

Shortly after they started rolling cameras, actresses Lauren Graham and Lake Bell left the project for undisclosed reasons and rumors quickly began to circulate that Williamson, who created the series and wrote the script for Part 4 after sitting out the last (lousy) sequel was bounced from the project and replaced by - wait for it - the screenwriter from the last (lousy) sequel. The fact that screenwriters are even being hired and fired while a project is shooting is not a good sign. Generally, it's a pretty good idea to have the script completed well before you begin shooting, but to not only require a scribe on set, let alone having to fire one and bring in a totally different person to tweak and re-write while the film is before cameras is a recipe for disaster. Kruger's changes led to Graham's departure and whispers other cast members weren't pleased with how things had been "dumbed down" in the new draft. Things got so dicey last month Craven even took to his twitter account on July 2nd to address rumors of unrest on the set and the hiring of writer Ehren Kruger (the scripter of Scream 3) said "I have not been given control of the script." So Craven is directing a film with a screenplay in a state of flux; the original scribe is gone, a new writer is on board, and the director doesn't have control of the story he is supposed to be telling. This really doesn't sound good. So with Kruger now hired to polish or possibly revamp the Scream 4 script, what kind of changes will he make? Rumors last week suggested that some of his tweaks might be more dramatic then merely a dialouge polish. When Campbell joined the cast, Williamson was asked if any other cast members from the previous entries would return and his response was this: "No. We're not that movie. "We're not that universe where you can bring people back from the dead. That would be just a cheat. It's such a disservice. It's a false move. So I just won't do it. I can't do that. I just won't do it." It was suggested at Bloody Disgusting.com (my pick for the best source for anything horror) that Matthew Lillard (who played one of Campbell's two tormenters in the first film before being murdered by her in the climax was set to return in Part 4 (despite, you know, being dead) because he was spotted dining with Campbell in Ann Arbor Michigan... where Scream 4 is lensing. Turns out, Lillard is shooting another movie in nearby Milford, Michigan (who knew Michigan was such a production hotbed) and was just visiting his old cast mate (confirmed on his twitter.) So we know what they're not doing, what's unclear is what they are doing, but all signs point to this being a bit of a mess.

Lame Lucas

noreply@blogger.com (Rob Hynes) — Thu, 19 Aug 2010 05:25:00 +0000

A nerdy Star Wars convention called Celebration V was held this past weekend and the big news to come out of it came directly from the grand poobah himself, George Lucas who made the long-awaited announcement that his beloved original Star Wars trilogy (A.K.A. "the good ones") were coming to Blu-Ray in the Fall of 2011. That's the good news. The bad news is they will be available in a box set with the other trilogy, you know, the one that was essentially just six hours of Lucas pissing on his legacy. It's not clear yet if they will be available individually or if Lucasfilm will make you buy the shitty ones as part of the package. I suspect they will. Shortly after that set is available, don't be surprised if you see The Phantom Menace used as a coaster during cocktail parties or Revenge of the Sith available second hand in large quantities where ever you buy used DVD's and Blu-Rays. But that's not the only bad news; the versions of Star Wars, The Empire Strikes Back and Return of the Jedi contained on the discs, amazingly, will not be the movies we saw and loved back in the movie theatre. Instead, they will be the 2004 box set versions which were filled with digital alterations that Lucas made to the films back in 1997 and additional post production tweaks and changes in 2004 in order to tie the original trilogy into the new set of films.

Why on earth would Lucas not give the fans - who have supported him so incredibly well for so incredibly long - the Hi-Def versions of the films as they were originally released? Amazingly, Lucas, who has relentlessly marketed his movies and milked the fans with multiple new versions, revisions and special editions and a slew of lunch boxes, toys, bed sheets, video games and collectables, revealed that it was a financial decision. "Releasing the originals is kind of an oxymoron because the quality of the original is not very good. You have to go through and do a whole restoration on it, and you have to do that digitally," Lucas said. Gee, really? Do you mean like every other Blu-Ray on the market? He then had the balls to add: "It's a very, very expensive process to do it. So when we did the transfer to to digital, we only transferred really the upgraded version." Are you kidding me? After all the money he's made on these films - and the gajillion more he made with the more recent trilogy based almost entirely on the nostalgia for the original movies - he has the blend of arrogance and ignorance to tell the fans he has to give them the bastardized version of the series because to actually release the classic movies in their classic form is "very, very expensive." What a douche bag.

The Oscar Race Has Begun

noreply@blogger.com (Rob Hynes) — Tue, 17 Aug 2010 19:43:00 +0000

Funny or Die, which, frankly, is often a little light on the funny, has put together the first "For Your Consideration" Academy Award campaign... for Piranha 3D. As much as I love shitting on lousy movies, I must admit, I'm eagerly anticipating this flick. I think it's gonna be a big, dumb, fun, 80's style cheesy horror flick and - as a bonus - it's gonna be in 3D. This, to me, is exactly the kind of movie that should be in 3D. Martin Scorsese making his next flick in 3D doesn't excite me. I'd much rather see his shot composition and Thelma Shoonmaker's editing without it being muddied by 3D, but perhaps that's just me. But Piranha 3D seems like exactly what a 3D flick should be - cheesy, fun, stupid and over-the-top and fully aware that it's 3D and milking that fact every frame of the movie. (Piranha 3D, to give you an idea of what kind of movie this is, has a 3D (severed) penis and a girl vomiting into the camera, of course, in 3D.) This past week I've interviewed several of the cast, Ving Rhames, Jerry O'Connell, Kelly Brook and Elisabeth Shue and the one thing that they've all mentioned is that the movie doesn't take itself too seriously and it's all about having fun. O'Connell marveled at the sheer volume of blood in the movie while Brook pointed out the film features breasts - or as she put it, Double D's - in 3D. 3D tits and lots of blood? This sounds like the movie I would have come up with when I was 12. Count me in.

Close Encounters... of the Daft Punk Kind.

noreply@blogger.com (Rob Hynes) — Tue, 17 Aug 2010 14:58:00 +0000

Found this over at /Film. It's a "remix" if you will, of the original finale for Close Encounters of the Third Kind, where the scientists use music as a tool of communication with an alien life form. In this version, the music is provided by Daft Punk. It amused me, though I must admit, this would be much less climactic finale for the film.

Drew Struzan Doc On The Way

noreply@blogger.com (Rob Hynes) — Mon, 16 Aug 2010 02:43:00 +0000

It's strange that I stumbled upon this trailer for an upcoming documentary about movie poster illustrator Drew Struzan because I was just talking a few weeks ago about how modern-day movie posters are so lame compared to the stuff from the 1980's that I grew up with. In the 80's, in the era before Photoshop (gasp!) movie posters were often works of art rather then a series or promotional photography airbrushed together with a name slapped on it. In that era, many posters were hand rendered, and the vast majority of the really good ones were courtesy Drew Struzan (who always signed his work with just his first name.) His work went from respected in the industry to iconic among movie fans in large part because of his association with George Lucas and Steven Spielberg. Struzan created the posters for the Star Wars films, the Indiana Jones movies, E.T. - The Extra Terrestrial and the Back to the Future trilogy. He also created the artwork for the Police Academy movies, the Cannonball Run films, The Muppet Movie, Blade Runner, The Goonies, First Blood, Big Trouble in Little China, Coming to America the list goes on and on... Essentially he illustrated the movie posters of my youth. The upcoming documentary Drew: The Man Behind The Poster will give this anonymous illustrator of my pop culture youth his due. I look forward to checking this out, and in the meantime, check out some of Drew's iconic work here.

Why Couldn't That Bottle Be Made of Glass?

noreply@blogger.com (Rob Hynes) — Mon, 09 Aug 2010 17:11:00 +0000

Here's a nice video of Justin Bieber getting smoked in the head by a water bottle - from multiple angles! - during a recent concert performance. After this mini-douche tells the audience how much he loves them he is immediately struck in the head by a water bottle that I assume was being tossed to him by a fan who forgot to factor in that he's barely over four feet tall, so he gets nailed in the noodle instead. Instant charma. As good as this is - and it's pretty fucking good - it would be much better if the bottle were made of glass and filled with urine.

$15,000 Budget for A Monster Movie?

noreply@blogger.com (Rob Hynes) — Fri, 06 Aug 2010 16:49:00 +0000

Monsters is an upcoming British film about the aftermath of a large scale alien outbreak on earth after a Nasa vessel, containing an alien life form, crashes in the Gulf of Mexico upon re-entry causing an outbreak that spawns massive octopus like alien creatures that soon wrecks havoc on earth. The result is a the US and Mexican military staging a massive assault in an effort to contain the situation. The events of the movie takes place six years after the initial crash with a large chunk of the US and parts of Mexico considered infected areas with monsters running amok and stability not fully restored. The film shows two people traveling through the infected area trying to get to safety and despite the large scale scope of the story, the critically acclaimed project (which has already screened at South By South West and the Cannes Film Festival) was shot for the paltry budget of just $15,000 by a crew of two; the director who doubled as the camera person and his sound guy. Check out the video above to see how they managed to pull this off. Monsters arrives in theaters October 29th.

This Is Sexually Suggestive, No?

noreply@blogger.com (Rob Hynes) — Thu, 05 Aug 2010 19:19:00 +0000

Is it just me, or this ad sexually suggestive, especially for a film that is clearly aimed at children? You've got one bear, with a massive grin that suggests that he's extremely happy - or perhaps very much enjoying whatever it is that he's doing - standing directly behind another bear, who also seems to be in a state of enjoyment, and the tag line reads "Great things come in bears." Hmmmmm.