Box Seat

The (Pod) Casting Couch - Movie Draft Results

2012-05-02T23:25:00.002-07:00

TEAM SHANNON SIMON LAURA ANDREW

DIRECTOR David Fincher PT Anderson Steven Soderbergh Christopher Nolan

WRITER The Coen Brothers Charlie Kaufman Shane Black Aaron Sorkin

LEAD Brad Pitt Tom Hardy Michael Fassbender Robert Downey Jnr

LEAD Angelina Jolie Rooney Mara Jennifer Lawrence Amy Adams

SUPPORT Anna Kendrick PS Hoffman Gary Oldman Paul Giamatti

SUPPORT Mark Ruffalo Michael Shannon Joseph-Gordon Levitt Kristen Wiig

SUPPORT Chloe Moretz Greta Gerwig James McAvoy Stanley Tucci

PRODUCER Clint Eastwood Judd Apatow Nicholas Winding Refn Joss Whedon

MUSICIAN Reznor & Ross Jon Brion Cliff Martinez Bruce Springsteen

WILDCARD Q. Tarantino (Script) Nic Cage (Cameo) Bruce Willis (Cameo) Matt Damon (Cameo)

The (Pod) Casting Couch - The Descendants

2012-01-31T05:05:00.001-08:00

Podcast Powered By Podbean

THE 2012 ACADEMY AWARDS NOMINATIONS PREDICTION GAME

2012-01-23T16:25:00.000-08:00

Much like the American presidential elections or the Miss Universe pageant, I follow the Academy Awards race not because I care who wins, but because the getting there is so much fun to watch. 2012 holds some vestige of promise – unlike last year, there isn’t yet one definite winner. (In retrospect, it was always going to be The King’s Speech last year, as much as one might have wished for a The Social Network upset.) Annually, I submit myself to the fool’s errand of trying to pick the nominees – so here we go again.

This year, I humbly submit a play-along-at-home game. It works like this. Write down your 10 possible nominees for the main categories in order of likelihood. Your top choice receives 10 points, second 9, third 8, etc. For every nomination you get correct, you get that many points. Total ‘em up at the end and see if you can beat my score! (Spoiler alert: You probably can.)

BEST PICTURE

THE ARTIST (10)
HUGO (9)
THE DESCENDANTS (8)
THE HELP (7)
WAR HORSE (6)
MONEYBALL (5)
MIDNIGHT IN PARIS (4)

THE GIRL WITH THE DRAGON TATTOO (3)
THE TREE OF LIFE (2)
BRIDESMAIDS (1)

BEST DIRECTOR

MICHEL HAZANAVICUS, THE ARTIST (10)
MARTIN SCORSESE, HUGO (9)
ALEXANDER PAYNE, THE DESCENDANTS (8)
WOODY ALLEN, MIDNIGHT IN PARIS (7)
STEVEN SPIELBERG, WAR HORSE (6)

DAVID FINCHER, THE GIRL WITH THE DRAGON TATTOO (5)
TATE TAYLOR, THE HELP (4)
TERRENCE MALICK, THE TREE OF LIFE (3)
BENNETT MILLER, MONEYBALL (2)
GEORGE CLOONEY, THE IDES OF MARCH (1)

BEST ACTOR

JEAN DUJARDIN, THE ARTIST (10)
GEORGE CLOONEY, THE DESCENDANTS (9)
BRAD PITT, MONEYBALL (8)
GARY OLDMAN, TINKER TAILOR SOLDIER SPY (7)
MICHAEL SHANNON, TAKE SHELTER (6)

MICHAEL FASSBENDER, SHAME (5)
LEONARDO DICAPRIO, J. EDGAR (4)
WOODY HARRELSON, RAMPART (3)
DEMIAN BICHIR, A BETTER LIFE (2)
RYAN GOSLING, THE IDES OF MARCH (1)

BEST ACTRESS

MERYL STREEP, THE IRON LADY (10
VIOLA DAVIS, THE HELP (9)
GLENN CLOSE, ALBERT NOBBS (8)
TILDA SWINTON, WE NEED TO TALK ABOUT KEVIN (7)
MICHELLE WILLIAMS, MY WEEK WITH MARILYN (6)

ROONEY MARA, THE GIRL WITH THE DRAGON TATTOO (5)
CHARLIZE THERON, YOUNG ADULT (4)
ELIZABETH OLSON, MARTHA MARCY MAY MARLENE (3)
KRISTEN WIIG, BRIDESMAIDS (2)
KIRSTEN DUNST, MELANCHOLIA (1)

BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR

CHRISTOPHER PLUMMER, BEGINNERS (10)
ALBERT BROOKS, DRIVE (9)
KENNETH BRANAGH, MY WEEK WITH MARILYN (8)
JONAH HILL, MONEYBALL (7)
NICK NOLTE, WARRIOR (6)

BEN KINGSLEY, HUGO (5)
ARMIE HAMMER, J. EDGAR (4)
MAX VON SYDOW, EXTREMELY LOUD AND INCREDIBLY CLOSE (3)
GEORGE CLOONEY, THE IDES OF MARCH (2)
PATTON OSWALT, YOUNG ADULT (1)

BEST SUPPORTING ACTRESS

OCTAVIA SPENCER, THE HELP (10)
MELISSA MCCARTHY, BRIDESMAIDS (9)
BERENICE BEJO, THE ARTIST (8)
JESSICA CHASTAIN, THE HELP (7)
SHAILENE WOODLEY, THE DESCENDANTS (6)

JANET MCTEER, ALBERT NOBBS (5)
VANESSA REDGRAVE, CORIOLANUS (4)
CAREY MULLIGAN, SHAME (3)
JUDI DENCH, MY WEEK WITH MARILYN (2)
SANDRA BULLOCK, EXTREMELY LOUD AND INCREDIBLY CLOSE (1)

BEST ORIGINAL SCREENPLAY

MIDNIGHT IN PARIS, WOODY ALLEN (10)
MICHEL HAZANIVICUS, THE ARTIST (9)
TOM MCCARTHY, WIN WIN (8)
ANNIE MUMOLO & KRISTEN WIIG, BRIDESMAIDS (7)
WILL REISER, 50/50 (6)

ASGHAR FARHADI, A SEPARATION (5)
MIKE MILLS, BEGINNERS (4)
DIABLO CODY, YOUNG ADULT (3)
TERRENCE MALICK, THE TREE OF LIFE (2)
ABI MORGAN, THE IRON LADY (1)

BEST ADAPTED SCREENPLAY

AARON SORKIN & STEVEN ZALLIAN, MONEYBALL (10)
ALEXANDER PAYNE, NAT FAXON & JIM RASH, THE DESCENDANTS (9)
JOHN LOGAN, HUGO (8)
TATE TAYLOR, THE HELP (7)
STEVEN ZALLIAN, THE GIRL WITH THE DRAGON TATTOO (6)

PETER STRAUGHAN & BRIDGET O'CONNOR, TINKER TAILOR SOLDIER SPY (5)
RICHARD CURTIS AND LEE HALL, WAR HORSE (4)
GEORGE CLOONEY, GRANT HESLOV & BEAU WILLIMON, THE IDES OF MARCH (3)
ERIC ROTH, EXTREMELY LOUD & INCREDIBLY CLOSE (2)
LYNNE RAMSEY & RORY KINNEAR, WE NEED TO TALK ABOUT KEVIN (1)

The (Pod) Casting Couch - Moneyball

2011-11-15T06:51:00.000-08:00

The (Pod) Casting Couch tackles the new baseball drama Moneyball and reach the epic conclusion of their three-podcast project - The Top Ten Movies of the 2000s! The Couch is West Australian film critic Shannon Harvey, (@Choc_Bomb), Quickflix critic Simon Miraudo (@Quickflix), Laura Hewison (girlonfilmblog.blogspot.com) & Andrew Williams (@DrewWilliams9). Check it out and give us a great rating on iTunes if you're a fan! We'd also love to hear your top tens - e-mail as at thepodcastingcouch@gmail.com or Tweet at @podcastingcouch.

Podcast Powered By Podbean

The (Pod) Casting Couch - Abduction/Feature Four Action Movies of the 2000s

2011-09-22T17:18:00.000-07:00

A packed Couch this week as we talk the new Taylor Lautner actioner Abduction, pick our Feature Four Action movies of the 2000s and answer some questions without notice. The Couch is Western Australian film critic Shannon Harvey (@Choc_Bomb), Quickflix critic Simon Miraudo (@Quickflix), Andrew Williams (@IntheBoxSeat). Check it out and give us a great rating on iTunes if you're a fan!

Podcast Powered By Podbean

QUICK TV REVIEW: The Joy of Sets

2011-09-20T06:53:00.000-07:00

Full disclosure: I was a huge fan of Get This, the Triple M program and podcast that originally brought Tony Martin and Ed Kavalee together, along with the much-missed, much-loved Richard Marsland. So I’m a little biased.

Having said that, I got more laughs out of the opening segment of The Joy of Sets than I did out of a whole episode of Good News World. These guys have a natural, easy chemistry that just works, whether it’s on radio or television. That chemistry comes across here, and they mine some fine material out of the weird and wonderful that is the history of television.

First of all, though, someone needs to get them some better chairs. The whole show was a little bit awkward and a little bit clunky, and I think it will benefit as time goes on, once the guys become more comfortable in their roles and the editing becomes less jarring. It should be less scripted as well, but that might prove too high a degree of difficulty, especially for a first episode.

(I really enjoyed the closing title sequence. That was close to the best thing on the show.)

On top of that, I actually don’t have all that much to say about ‘The Joy of Sets’. It was funny, pretty interesting, a little awkward and charming. Much like the guys themselves, I suppose. I think it would probably benefit from being on a little bit later and have less pressure on it. It strikes me as being more suited to a later timeslot a la the panel or Merrick and Rosso Unplanned. I hope people, and Channel Nine, give it a chance because I thoroughly enjoyed it. Check it out next week!

TV REVIEW - TWO AND A HALF MEN

2011-09-20T04:10:00.000-07:00

There are so many jokes about Ashton Kutcher’s enormous penis in the return episode of Two and a Half Men, that I half expected the title card to become ‘Two and a Half Legs’ - or ‘Three Men’. It’s a sign that the writers of this show haven’t left their own particular brand of vaguely nauseating humour behind in making the transition from Charlie Harper (Charlie Sheen) to Walden Schmidt (Ashton Kutcher).

The fact that those jokes are possibly among the most family friendly of the episode is quite a spectacular achievement, one only bettered by the breathtaking laziness of a mid-episode fart joke involving Angus T. Jones – a moment that is almost his only ‘line’.

Some more (spoiler-y) thoughts on the return of ‘Two and Half Men’ coming up after the jump:

If you divide this episode into two halves, you get two very different shows. The second half involving Ashton Kutcher’s introduction is the same old stud/impotent nerd dynamic the show has been peddling for seven seasons, no funnier or cleverer than before. That show seems to be a fitting replacement for Sheen’s Two and a Half Men. I actually don’t think that half of the episode, which is representative of what the series will be going forward, will affect the show’s ratings and response to any considerable degree.

However, I suspect that there are many 2.5 Men fans that watched the show first and foremost for Charlie Sheen. You may understand that, you may find it completely baffling, but it remains probable. He was the undeniable public face of the show, even if Jon Cryer was its secret weapon.

So how are those fans going to react to the show leaving the Charlie Harper character (and let’s face it, by extension, Sheen) with not a shred of dignity whatsoever? The funeral sequence and the minutes following absolutely eviscerated the character, with a quick fire series of jokes about how only one person at his funeral cared he was dead and everybody else was just saying what venereal disease he gave them. Not content, the show’s writers followed that with Melanie Lynskey’s Rose basically confessing she murdered him for his infidelities by pushing him in front of a train. It was so callous, crass, undignified and unrepentant that I can’t imagine any fan of Charlie Harper even giving the replacement a chance.

As a side note, the two potential buyers for Charlie’s house were both very meta and both very bizarre. I’m still not one hundred per cent sure whether John Stamos was confessing that his character and Charlie raped an unconscious woman or that they had sex with each other. I’m assuming the phrase ‘we continued without her’ means the latter, but should there really be even a tiny grey area there? The Dharma and Greg appearance was initially a little dispiriting, but became much funnier once you remembered how awful that show was and how likely it would be that Dharma and Greg would grow to hate each other.*

(*I see Thomas Gibson has understandably gained absolutely no comic timing during his stint on Criminal Minds.)

Will you like Two and a Half Men in its new guise? The answer, like the show itself, is pretty simple. If you like jokes about Ashton Kutcher's penis, fart jokes, or Jon Cryer, you'll like this.

THE 2011 EMMY AWARDS PREDICTIONS EXTRAVAGANZA

2011-09-16T00:54:00.000-07:00

Feel free to play along at home with the Emmy Nomination prediction game. 2 points for a will win, 1 point for a should win.

Supporting Actor, Comedy 

Jon Cryer, Two and a Half Men 

Chris Colfer, Glee 

Ty Burrell, Modern Family 

Jesse Tyler Ferguson, Modern Family  

Ed O'Neill, Modern Family

Eric Stonestreet, Modern Family

WILL WIN

As always, the Supporting Actor in a comedy category presents us with the Colfer Conundrum – do you pick the best performance in a comedy or funniest performance in a comedy? If we’re going with best, I suspect Chris Colfer takes this category easily based on his heartbreaking performance in ‘Grilled Cheesus’. If we’re going with funniest, it’s probably (narrowly) Ty Burrell in Modern Family. Given that Emmy voters have to actually watch the episodes, though, I think its going to be difficult to go past Colfer, on his performance of ‘I Wanna Hold Your Hand’ alone.

SHOULD WIN

Chris Colfer. He’s the best part of a show that’s crumbling around him. While Ty Burrell was the most consistently funny part of Modern Family over the year, he didn’t really have a standout episode.

Supporting Actress, Comedy 

Jane Lynch, Glee

Betty White, Hot in Cleveland

Julie Bowen, Modern Family 

Kristen Wiig, Saturday Night Live 

Jane Krakowski, 30 Rock 

Sofia Vergara, Modern Family

WILL WIN

Jane Lynch is hosting the ceremony. She’s won every award in this category since Glee began, and while she’s an increasingly awful part of that show, I don’t think your average Emmy voter has twigged to that. Helping her even further is the fact that her submission episode is a dramatic showcase for a comedic character.

SHOULD WIN

In every episode of Modern Family, Sofia Vergara makes me glad I watched. Her pronunciation of ‘Shia Labeouf’ alone has kept me amused for months. She’s consistently the funniest part of a consistently funny show and as such easily deserves the win here. She won’t get it, though. More’s the pity.

Outstanding Mini-series or Movie 

Mildred Pierce 

Downton Abbey 

The Kennedys 

Cinema Verite 

Too Big to Fail 

The Pillars of the Earth

WILL WIN

Given that the Kennedys was critically panned and none of Cinema Verite, Too Big to Fail or The Pillars of the Earth made much of a splash, this is a race between a critically adored British historical drama and a critically adored American drama. It’s gonna be Mildred Pierce, folks. Pack up and go home.

SHOULD WIN

I’m not a huge fan of any of these series, finding Mildred Pierce slavish and overlong and Downton Abbey wildly inconsistent, depending on whether we were upstairs or downstairs. For being entertaining and thought provoking for the longest stretch, I’m going with the lords and ladies. Downton Abbey deserves this one.

Outstanding Variety, Music or Comedy Series 

The Colbert Report 

Late Night with Jimmy Fallon 

Saturday Night Live 

Conan 

Real Time with Bill Maher 

The Daily Show

WILL WIN

The Daily Show is on a deserved hot streak in this category and that shows no signs of abating.

SHOULD WIN

The Daily Show continues its run of being the most relevant, sharpest comedy on television. Only The Colbert Report comes close but The Daily Show still has the edge.

Supporting Actor, Drama 

John Slattery, Mad Men 

Andre Braugher, Men of a Certain Age 

Walton Goggins, Justified 

Peter Dinklage, Game of Thrones 

Josh Charles, The Good Wife 

Alan Cumming, The Good Wife

WILL WIN

Unlike some other critics, I’m perfectly happy with Josh Charles being nominated in this category. I think he’s fantastic. But EVERYONE is fantastic in this category. Slattery is solid as always, Alan Cumming is consistently the best part of ‘The Good Wife’, Walton Goggins is one of the best character actors in the business, Andre Braugher plays against type beautifully and Peter Dinklage is a charisma machine on ‘Game of Thrones’. I’m going to go with Alan Cumming here for no other reason than he’s had the best combination of flashy part and popular show. Everyone would deserve a win here.

SHOULD WIN

Man. This is a tough one – but I’m going to go with Peter Dinklage. Because I loved Game of Thrones, and this is probably its only chance for a ‘major award’. Plus, he’s awesome. If you haven’t watched Game of Thrones yet, you should have.

Supporting Actress, Drama 

Kelly McDonald, Boardwalk Empire 

Christina Hendricks, Mad Men 

Michelle Forbes, The Killing 

Archie Panjabi, The Good Wife 

Margo Martindale, Justified 

Christine Baranski, The Good Wife

WILL WIN

I’m pretty deeply concerned that Boardwalk Empire is going to sweep these Emmys, and I expect Kelly McDonald to be one of the early harbingers of doom.

SHOULD WIN

Having said that, it’s really difficult to deny McDonald her accolades, as she’s regularly pretty excellent on Boardwalk Empire. Anyone who watched Justified this year though knows that despite the fine work of Panjabi, Forbes, Baranski and Hendricks, Margo Martindale deserves the win as her unbelievable work on that show’s second season. Just brilliant, and she deserves the win.

Lead Actor, Comedy 

Alec Baldwin, 30 Rock 

Louis CK, Louie 

Steve Carell, The Office 

Johnny Galecki, The Big Bang Theory 

Matt LeBlanc, Episodes 

Jim Parsons, The Big Bang Theory

WILL WIN

I think you can rule out LeBlanc and Galecki pretty quickly. The fact Galecki was nominated was pretty amazing in itself considering he’s on a show where he’s increasingly irrelevant. LeBlanc is the best thing about Episodes, but I don’t think that show gained enough cultural traction. Louis CK is a pleasant surprise for a nomination but I don’t think he’s quite got the tickets in the bank yet. So we have a three-way raise – the most recent winner in Parsons, the multi-winner in Baldwin and the emotional favourite who is yet to win an Emmy in Carell. I think Parsons gets the vote split with Galecki and Steve Carell’s episode is just good enough to get the nod over Baldwin.

SHOULD WIN

And so he should. Steve Carell has created a fantastic character with a brilliant performance and is the most deserving person in the ENTIRE SHOW.

Lead Actress, Comedy 

Edie Falco, Nurse Jackie 

Tina Fey, 30 Rock 

Laura Linney, The Big C 

Melissa McCarthy, Mike & Molly 

Martha Plimpton, Raising Hope 

Amy Poehler, Parks & Recreation

WILL WIN

Sometimes you look at a category and it’s so even that you just look at the biggest movie star and give them the award. On that basis its probably Laura Linney, with a late charge from Melissa McCarthy.

SHOULD WIN

As the anchor of the best comedy on television and simply the funniest and best actress on this list, it’s an easy and much-deserved win for Amy Poehler. DON’T BET ON THIS.

Lead Actor, Drama 

Steve Buscemi, Boardwalk Empire 

Kyle Chandler, Friday Night Lights 

Michael C. Hall, Dexter 

Jon Hamm, Mad Men 

Hugh Laurie, House 

Timothy Olyphant, Justified

WILL WIN

I think Steve Buscemi is an easy pick here but this is the only category when I’m going to break rank and put my faith in them to pick Jon Hamm for his wonderful performance in Mad Men, specifically in The Suitcase.

SHOULD WIN

I’ve made my peace with the fact that Hugh Laurie and Kyle Chandler won’t with Emmys with two of the best (and best-performed) characters on television. Jon Hamm deserves this for the iconic Don Draper’s three previous seasons alone – but perhaps never more than this one.

Lead Actress, Drama 

Kathy Bates, Harry's Law 

Connie Britton, Friday Night Lights 

Mireille Enos, The Killing 

Mariska Hargitay, Law & Order: SVU 

Julianna Marguiles, The Good Wife 

Elisabeth Moss, Mad Men

WILL WIN

I think we can rule out Enos and Hargitay for having good but not outstanding seasons. I think Kathy Bates’ Kathy Bates-ness could very easily get her over the line. Julianna Marguiles and Connie Britton would both be easily deserving but I think Elisabeth Moss has chosen the right year to move up to Lead Actress and should get the win now.

SHOULD WIN

See all the stuff I wrote about Jon Hamm up there? Uh, ditto. Elisabeth Moss for the win.

Outstanding Comedy Series 

The Big Bang Theory 

Glee 

Modern Family 

The Office 

Parks & Recreation 

30 Rock

WILL WIN

The critically acclaimed and popular Modern Family will surely take this category out.

SHOULD WIN

Glee had a wildly inconsistent second season and I’m not sure The Big Bang theory was actually especially funny this year. The Office had its highs as well as shocking lows (and really should have finished by now). 30 Rock and Modern Family had good, even great seasons, but nothing came even remotely close to the sustained brilliance of Parks and Recreation, especially Flu Season.

Andy: “I entered your symptoms into the computer and it says you may have ‘network connectivity problems’.”

That surely deserves an award.

Outstanding Drama Series 

Boardwalk Empire 

Dexter 

Friday Night Lights 

Game of Thrones

The Good Wife 

Mad Men

WILL WIN

Martin Scorsese, Steve Buscemi, Kelly Macdonald and HBO are all involved with Boardwalk Empire. I just can’t see it not winning this category over Mad Men – but Mad Men has the runs on the board and also had a great season.

SHOULD WIN

As much as I admire the depth and drama of Mad Men and Boardwalk Empire, as much as I like the twisted moral complexity of The Good Wife, as much as I love the searing emotion of Friday Night Lights, nothing captivated me as much this year as the action-packed, intrigue heavy genius of Game of Thrones. This is so much more than just a fantasy series, folks. Check it out.

The (Pod) Casting Couch - Win Win/The Guard

2011-09-14T23:12:00.000-07:00

The (Pod) Casting Couch reviews 'Win Win' & 'The Guard' and answers some questions without notice.The Couch is Western Australian film critic Shannon Harvey (@Choc_Bomb), Quickflix critic Simon Miraudo (@Quickflix), Andrew Williams (@IntheBoxSeat). Check it out and give us a great rating on iTunes if you're a fan!

Podcast Powered By Podbean

The Interchange Bench - Finals Week One

2011-09-14T23:09:00.000-07:00

In the absence of Steve Allen, Andrew Williams and Adam Papalia chat all things football in the lead up to the semi finals.

Podcast Powered By Podbean

The (Pod) Casting Couch - The Help

2011-09-02T01:14:00.000-07:00

The (Pod) Casting Couch reviews 'The Help, answers some questions without noticeand rates their feature four Books that should be movies. The Couch is Western Australian film critic Shannon Harvey (@Choc_Bomb), Quickflix critic Simon Miraudo (@Quickflix), Andrew Williams (@IntheBoxSeat). Check it out and give us a great rating on iTunes if you're a fan!

Podcast Powered By Podbean

The Interchange Bench - Round 23

2011-09-02T01:13:00.000-07:00

The Interchange Bench (Andrew Williams @Intheboxseat & Steve Allen (@ScubaStv) review Round 23 and deliver the long-awaited Feature Interview. E-mail us anytime at theinterchangebench@gmail.com.

Podcast Powered By Podbean

The (Pod) Casting Couch - Horrible Bosses

2011-08-24T03:12:00.000-07:00

The (Pod) Casting Couch reviews 'Horrible Bosses', answers some questions without notice and rates their feature four Scene Stealing performances. The Couch is Western Australian film critic Shannon Harvey (@Choc_Bomb), Quickflix critic Simon Miraudo (@Quickflix), Andrew Williams (@IntheBoxSeat) and Laura Hewison (girlonfilmblog.blogspot.com). Check it out and give us a great rating on iTunes if you're a fan!

Podcast Powered By Podbean

The Interchange Bench - Round 22

2011-08-24T03:10:00.000-07:00

The Interchange Bench put the call out last week for a female listener to send us an e-mail. Did we get one? Listen and find out! E-mail us your Brownlow tip at theinterchangebench@gmail.com.

Podcast Powered By Podbean

TV REVIEW - SUITS

2011-08-15T03:28:00.000-07:00

When I sat down to watch Suits, I wasn’t particularly enthralled at the idea. Watching two snappily dressed, rich, white guys banter and do legal things isn’t really my idea of a good time unless its very nicely executed. While I wouldn’t go as far as to say that Suits is ‘very nicely’ executed, there’s a degree of competency at work here that just makes this show fly by.

Reading American critics’ reviews had made me think that ‘Suits’ was going to be a slog, and while you should never think too deeply about what’s going on, a slog it is not. Leads Patrick J. Adams and Gabriel Macht have an easy chemistry and natural charm, although it still baffles me how often in the pilot they aren’t in scenes together, as the show really clicks when they are.

Macht (The Spirit) stars as Harvey Specter, a flashy attorney who is ‘the best closer in town’. This seems to be based more on reputation than actual evidence, as he spends most of his time in the pilot screwing up. Through some contrived plotting he meets Mike Ross, (Adams) a pot-smoking screw-up who also happens to be a genius. He hires Ross to join his legal firm despite the fact he’s never been to law school and they begin to close cases together.

And that’s it, really. There are other people who populate the law firm like Gina Torres (Firefly) as their boss and Rick Hoffman as a lawyer so incredibly prissy and annoying he makes Macht’s character look like a self-deprecating, humble street urchin – and that’s probably the idea – but really this show is about whether you like the two leads and want to see them do the legal equivalent of solve crimes together. The writing is unspectacular, the women are smart, attractive and underwritten, and the cases are nothing to write home about. It’s all down to whether you like the characters.

Personally, I started out not liking either of them but begrudgingly accepted they were a watchable duo in the end – and maybe liking them a little bit. Sure, Gabriel Macht may be playing a played-straight version of Barney Stinson and Adams is like a straighter-laced Aaron Paul from Breaking Bad, but they make decent, inoffensive, frothy viewing.

Just don't think too hard about it.

The (Pod) Casting Couch - Green Lantern/Superhero Movies

2011-08-11T17:59:00.000-07:00

The (Pod) Casting Couch reviews Green Lantern and does a superhero themed feature four. Featuring The West Australian's Shannon Harvey (@Choc_Bomb), Quickflix critic Simon Miraudo (@quickflix) and Laura Hewison. E-mail us at thepodcastingcouch@gmail.com or @podcastingcouch on Twitter!

Podcast Powered By Podbean

The Interchange Bench - Round 20

2011-08-11T01:45:00.000-07:00

It's a full bench this week as Steve and Andrew are joined by Michael Genovese and Claire Thomas (@ClaireT78) to discuss the round just gone. Our e-mail topic this week is to let us know your biggest disappointment of season 2011 - e-mail us at theinterchangebench@gmail.com and you too could be commemmorated in song.

If you've enjoyed the podcasts, please do us a favour and give us a great rating on iTunes! Cheers

Podcast Powered By Podbean

The Interchange Bench - Round 19

2011-08-02T06:35:00.000-07:00

Michael Genovese (@GenoveseMichael) makes his triumphant return to the Interchange Bench, joining Andrew and Steve in a wrap that unsurprisingly concentrates primarily on the Melbourne fallout. It's not all Woe of the Demons, though, as Beau Mitchem (@Mitchem89) joins us from Newcastle to review a Western Bulldogs season that fell just short of his prediction of a runaway premiership. E-mail us at theinterchangebench@gmail.com with your thoughts to win our very special prize.

Podcast Powered By Podbean

FILM: RISE OF THE PLANET OF THE APES REVIEW

2011-08-01T22:49:00.000-07:00

Rush Hour: Always a bitch.

I’ve never really understood the whole ‘Planet of the Apes’ phenomenon. I get that they’re entertaining films with a few good ideas and a nice twist, but the series’ longevity and level of cultural impact was always somewhat beyond my grasp. I was therefore not only surprised that there was a prequel on the way but even more surprised that it was premiering in this, the most blockbuster-heavy summer in recent memory.

Most of the hype for ‘Rise of the Planet of the Apes’ has happened by stealth and put the special effects front and centre as the primary selling point. Stars James Franco, Freida Pinto and Draco Malfoy (I mean, Tom Felton) have been sidelined in favour of short, effects-heavy clips of the stunningly real-looking apes. Not only is this also how the film itself works, but it’s also why the film works – and no one is more surprised than me that it does.

James Franco stars as Will Rodman, a scientist motivated by the illness of his father (John Lithgow) to find a cure for Alzheimer’s. After a disastrous presentation for his new drug, he is left with nothing but a small baby chimp named Caesar (Andy Serkis) who displays remarkable intelligence. Will cares for Caesar while continuing to work on his research, but as Caesar grows older and finds the world outside, the situation spirals out of Will’s control.

Perhaps the most pleasant surprise about Rise is the fact it’s willing to engage in the slow burn. So many action or sci-fi movies feel compelled to punctuate their plot with action set-pieces for their own sake, but surprisingly little of Rise feels forced. The creative team understands that scenes of people (or in this case, monkeys) interacting can be just as thrilling as things exploding or colliding and that means the pacing of the film feels just right. Those expecting an all-out monkey assault on Earth might be blindsided by the numerous early scenes of Caesar being adorable and learning about his environment, but they’re worth it because they provide the base for what comes later. The relationship between Will, Will’s sick father and Caesar is given the time and investment it deserves – and that gives Rise every chance to be an above-average, even a great sci-fi movie.

Improving the odds is the outstanding special effects work. Special effects company Weta Digital should lock the FX Oscar away here – not only is the film thankfully in 2-D, but these computer-generated apes give unbelievable performances. Specifically, if there is one performance that warrants that much-mooted Best Motion-Capture Oscar category, it’s Andy Serkis and his computer wizard team as Caesar. The work here is simply outstanding, a real step forward. You understand every single emotion and thought that passes through Caesar’s head, you feel for him and anyone who can make me feel emotionally invested in a computer-generated chimp from start to finish deserves some sort of recognition. Not only that, but the other ape characters are also well rounded and deserving of your emotional attention. That’s a fair effort.

Faring less well in the acting department are those pesky humans. Even a day later, I can’t quite work out if this is a good or bland performance by James Franco – he’s completely without his trademark smirk, so that’s good, but also completely devoid of any other identifiable character traits. He’s not laughably bad or anything – but he’s so buttoned-down that I can’t help but feel he’s dialled it back on purpose to give Caesar/Serkis the limelight. That hurts the film slightly, as we end up caring more about Caesar’s general plight than we do his relationship with his ‘father’. John Lithgow has the showier role as a sufferer of Alzheimer’s and is admirable without being anything special, while Freida Pinto gets VERY short shrift as something barely approaching a character. Having the most fun by far is Tom Felton as Dodge Landon (Ha!) who gets to be involved in the film’s most thrilling (and potentially cheesy) moments.

On the way out of the cinema the discussion turned to what this film was actually trying to say, if anything. The storylines throw out all kinds of moral questions about science, ambition, motivation and revenge without exploring them with any real depth. It’s a film driven by plot, performance and technical wizardry rather than theme – one that gives you just enough to chew on to avoid being shallow, but stops well short of being deep.

My primary complaint involves elements of the film that enter spoiler territory, so I’ll speak in general terms. The elements of Rise that look to set up sequels and join the dots between this and earlier films, primarily concerning the humans, feel forced and out of step with the rest of the action. It’s a token gesture that pays off to some degree as the credits roll (the credits themselves are surprisingly chilling) but it’s hard to really invest in a plotline that is kicked off by a side character being phenomenally, soul-crushingly stupid. It should also be said that the ending doesn’t quite live up to all the fantastically laid groundwork but features several thrilling moments.

I think if it was watched in the wrong mood, the wrong light or on the wrong screen, even, Rise could seem a ridiculous, cheesy film. On the big screen, though, with next to no expectations, I bought into it and was handed a more than pleasant surprise. All the scenes featuring Caesar are just brilliant, and that makes up for the film’s other shortcomings. Rather than having a monkey on its back, the monkey actually does the carrying here. Refreshingly, Rise of the Planet of the Apes doesn’t try to do too much, it doesn’t have too many characters and it doesn’t have too many plot threads. I don’t love it, but I respect it as professional, thoughtful and highly skilled entertainment.

18.5/25

(SHAMELESS PLUG - if you liked this review, please click on an ad or two to keep this site ticking along! Cheers!)

The (Pod) Casting Couch - Captain America/Top 4 Sidekicks

2011-08-01T17:29:00.000-07:00

The team (Shannon Harvey @Choc_Bomb), Andrew Williams and Laura Hewison tackle the new Marvel Flick Captain America: the First Avenger and talk about their top 4 movie sidekicks of all time. E-mail us at thepodcastingcouch@gmail.com !

Podcast Powered By Podbean

FILM: CAPTAIN AMERICA REVIEW

2011-07-28T03:22:00.000-07:00

CAPTAIN AMERICA: THE FIRST AVENGER

Captain America: The First Avenger is a fun, thrilling boy’s own adventure that capably delivers exactly what you’d expect from a Captain America origin story. Not a bit more, not a bit less. It’s the 80% student of comic book films – the kid that just coasts on his natural intelligence and charisma without going the extra mile.

This ‘origin’ film tells a story that most Cap fans will be familiar with and the uninitiated will pick up pretty easily. Steve Rogers (Chris Evans) is the skinny kid from Brooklyn who can’t get into the army. He volunteers for the Army’s Super Soldier program and soon has to match wits and muscles with the villainous Red Skull (Hugo Weaving). Bookended by codas that set things up for films to come, Captain America is pretty fun, pretty thrilling and pretty satisfying.

The First Avenger’s biggest asset is undoubtedly its cast. Chris Evans is fantastic as both skinny Steve and super Steve, never any less than likeable, charming and passionate – though it feels like the script and suit might just be holding his full range of charisma back. Hugo Weaving gives Loki a run for his money as my favourite Marvel movie villain to date and Hayley Atwell sells the toughness of Agent Peggy Carter beautifully. Having the most fun, though, are Stanley Tucci and Tommy Lee Jones as two of Rogers mentors. Everyone in this film is great, kicking ass and all with just enough of a twinkle in their collective eye.

My main concern going in was director Joe Johnston, who forced out ‘The Wolfman” last year and watched it die both critically and at the box office like the half-formed mutt it was. Would the man behind Jurassic Park 3 turn his recent cold streak around and do justice to the Cap? For the most part, he absolutely does. The film looks great with a nostalgic sheen, great action and beautiful make up and costumes. He doesn’t waste time with two many extraneous characters like the later X-Men films or Spider-man 3 and most of all, focuses clearly on one hero and one villain. This is all good, solid directing that ensures Cap a strong critical and commercial ride.

Here’s my one complaint, though, and it’s not so much a complaint as it is wishful thinking. I feel like Captain America had the opportunity to be truly great but Johnston plays it a little too safe. Considering Captain America’s straight-laced nature, there’s an opportunity to play his adherence to rules and dedication to what’s right a little more for real comedy. There’s an opportunity to really have his romance with Peggy Carter make us feel something, but again Johnston holds back, instead choosing to create false tension with random side characters. Hugo Weaving always feels like he could really go into memorable evil psychopath mode but again, the movie holds back, not wanting to err on the side of being too cartoonish. I would venture that nothing in this film is truly bad, a rare feat, but nothing in this film is truly great, either – and that’s fine. Better the movie pass the commercial and critical tests and set up a sequel rather than go the way of Green Lantern. Maybe those opportunities for greatness will be seized in the sequels now the character has been established, and fans of the comic books will certainly recognize where the groundwork is being laid.

There are some concerns that the film won’t do well overseas because the American patriotism won’t play, and that’s certainly an unavoidable consequence of having a superhero called Captain America. The word of mouth should spread, though, that this is just an old-fashioned good vs. evil movie, and the fact the Americans are the good and the Nazis are the bad doesn’t really come into play. We’re more looking at two divisions of those armies going to head-to-head and Evans is a charming enough lead to make you forget about the more patriotic aspects of the story. It certainly didn’t bother me – I only had one real problem with Captain America and that was the baffling-for-the-uninitiated cosmic cube stuff. Marvel need to release a pamphlet or something on what’s going on there.

Captain America also features a great musical sequence from the deservedly prolific Alan Menken, some nice character work, lots of shout-outs to fan boys and in my screening, a post-credits sequence and trailer for a certain Marvel team-up. While the Avengers trailer only disappointed mildly due to its brevity and short cuts, I would say that the post-credits sequence is not worth hanging around for at all. If your bladder is bursting, just go. It’s not worth the damage.

Captain America: The First Avenger is on par with Thor as far as Marvel’s harder-to-sell heroes go and Johnston and his actors have done a more than credible job. For me, the whole movie was even with Thor on pretty much every level. It’s a really good comic book movie that sets up the mythology with style and has an above-average cast.

I wouldn’t dream of asking more than that.

TELEVISION: Crownies Review

2011-07-28T01:54:00.000-07:00

(This review covers Episode 1-3)

The ABC took a pretty age-old approach to selling Crownies. Sex sells. ‘Sex, lies and magistrates’ was the tagline.

Sure enough, there’s lots of cleavage. There’s a set of lingerie. There are a lot of pretty people.

Unfortunately, it’s like when an Australian Idol contestant tries to be sexy. The ‘sexiness’ is all so forced – dropped into the plot purely because it should be there, not because it rises organically from proceedings. That’s to begin with, at least. Episode three manages to create some chemistry between two of the five leads – and that’s far sexier than randomly putting girls in their bra.

A couple of those girls are among our leads for this show – the five young Crownies whose trials (Ha!) and tribulations will form the basis of this show going forward. They’re all pretty good and immediately distinguishable from each other. The standouts at this stage are the continually flustered Hamish Michael who brings a real humanity to his role and Indiana Evans for her breezy charm and casual intelligence. This is not to denigrate any of the other five leads – they’re all very good.

Oh man, though. Midway through the first episode the primary prosecutor of the DPP absolutely smashes apart a defense team during a negotiation, and you can’t help but cheer for her as she does it. Despite the young cast being front and centre, it’s Marta Dusseldorp as Janet King that absolutely sprints away with the show. Disappointingly, she’s barely in the second part of the season pilot.

The rest of the adult cast is professional and competent though they don’t stand out like Dusseldorp does. Essentially, though, Crownies has an attractive, competent, charismatic cast. All that’s left is to do something worthwhile with it. On that basis, I think the show succeeds. While the first two episodes try to tackle way too much the third episode contains the focus somewhat and that results in a much, much better show. The cases are contemporary without feeling ripped-from-the-headlines and the issues involved generally have enough shades of grey to keep them interesting.

It takes slightly longer for the personal storylines to have as much impact as the legal ones. The young cast mostly make horrifyingly idiotic mistakes and sleep with people that shouldn’t be anywhere near their social circles if they had a shred of decency. Those forced plot developments that populate the first episode do make way for more complex storylines as the episodes progress and the characters begin to intertwine in ways that are more fun to watch.

Overall, do I want to watch a fourth episode? You bet I do. Once the third episode was over I was actively looking forward to the fourth and seeing how the series would progress. In fact, Crownies might be one of the best Australian-produced TV shows I’ve seen this year. No hysteria, not too much attention seeking, just classy, decent Aussie drama.

The Interchange Bench - Round 18

2011-07-26T05:46:00.000-07:00

The tangents fly as @ScubaStv Allen and Andrew @Intheboxseat Williams discuss all of the round 18 AFL action! E-mail your badly thought out jobs for AFL players to theinterchangebench@gmail.com.

Podcast Powered By Podbean

TV: Dinner Date Australia Review

2011-07-25T04:21:00.000-07:00

Dinner Date Australia features one single girl going on three blind dates with three men – with one twist – they’ll all be cooking for her and she’s picked them out on the basis of their menus.

Let’s get one thing out of the way.

If you’re tuning into Dinner Date Australia because you want to see Manu Feildel, forget it. Feildel spends about one minute onscreen during this and I don’t reckon he would remember any of the names of the people involved. He doesn’t get involved in the segments or offer any cooking advice, he is just the guy top-and-tail-ing the segments. This is a role where his French accent is a bigger asset than any sort of cooking expertise he may or may not have.*

*Hey, and he just won Dancing with the Stars! Isn't that lucky considering he has this new show coming up?

Now that’s out the way, what is Dinner Date Australia? The answer is pretty simple - it’s ‘Perfect Match’ meets ‘My Kitchen Rules’. The production values are MKR 101. The premise is pretty hard to screw up - just capture all the awkward tension and charm of a first date and include lots of delicious looking food. It’s not easy to go wrong - and sure enough Dinner Date Australia is a solid, vaguely amusing, slightly depressing hour of utterly disposable television.

The main problem facing all the 'suitors' is that the dinner is being cooked while the date is happening, so that’s a high degree of difficulty for anyone to overcome. They fare better when they include their date in the cooking proceedings - as does the show - because then it becomes a cooking and dating show, not just a dating show with meals shot in close-up. The casting appears to be pretty good - in the first episode, the dater (Simone) is a very winning, watchable personality* – and that helps immeasurably.**

*She's also completely stunning.

**It’s also really fun to guess why everyone’s single. In the case of our second Romeo, it’s probably the ‘Italian stallion’ shirt. We get it, you’re Italian.

It’s all very pleasant and watchable but the whole experience is a bit soured by the annoying narrator, who takes that ‘Who Dares Wins’ approach to talking directly to contestants. “Oh, Jeff, what are you doing mate?!!!”. That’s annoying. I wanted the My Kitchen Rules narrator to come back and do his trick of creating drama where there was none, rather than admonishing contestants who can't hear him.

Other cheesy moments – the slick second prospect being smooth and the producers making the genius decision to play “Smooth Operator” over it. Really thought out of the box there, everyone. Also once the actual dates are over the show descends into cheesy dates shot with soft lighting that all gets a bit 'dating service ad from 1998'.

Overall, it’s mildly diverting television that doesn’t bring anything new to the dating show table. Would I be compelled to watch another episode? Not remotely. It’s about the gentlest television you could possibly find.

Which probably means it will rate its socks off.

Dinner Date Australia airs on Channel Seven 9:30pm Tuesday.

PS: Not to spoil anything, but the ending of the first episode is kind of depressingly predictable.

TELEVISION: UNDERBELLY RAZOR REVIEW

2011-07-25T02:37:00.000-07:00

Set in Sydney in the 1920s, Underbelly: Razor follows the razor gangs of the 1920s and the battle for the underworld between vice queens Tilly Devine and Kate Leigh.

I have an ongoing problem with the Underbelly series – how can I enjoy a program where I hate all the characters?

Every Underbelly series has been almost exclusively populated with the most annoyingly stupid and selfish people known to man. We’ve been asked to sympathise with criminals, prostitutes, crooked cops and so much more. Maybe I’m too straight-laced, but you would need some of the most charming actors on the planet to make me care about what happens to anyone in these shows.

This wasn’t such a problem in the first series, which was genuinely explosive drama and had enough charming actors to see it through – while also being fantastically of the time. It was undeniably Australian television at very close to its finest.

Underbelly: A Tale of Two Cities however, was incredibly skeevy – to the point of unwatchability – and descended into completely mad plotting hell in its later episodes.

Underbelly: The Golden Mile was just solid and unspectacular – not as bad as series two but nowhere near as good as series one.

So that brings us to the fourth series of a show with stagnating, if not diminishing returns – Underbelly: Razor. Here we have what is basically the Australian sibling of Boardwalk Empire – a crime series set in the twenties and invoking all the social mores and visual signifiers of that age – flappers, pinstripe suits, hats. So many hats. More importantly, though, this was a chance for a Brand New Underbelly. A chance for the reinvention of the series. A chance to really achieve something.

So what did we get?

We got the same old Underbelly. Just with more hats.

It is certainly beautifully produced. I saw Underbelly: Razor on a cinema screen and there at least it looked stunning. The twenties setting is pretty impressively rendered and the cast is uniformly gorgeously shot and made up.

That’s the height of Razor’s competence though as the script and plot just meander through the usual points. Judging by the first two episodes, Razor is once again saying absolutely nothing new. People are flawed, crime is glamorous and violent, prostitution is common…. etc. The only new point Razor seems to make is that it has been this way for a very long time.

This refusal to change or grow is never more aggravating than in the return of Caroline Craig as narrator. When she was narrating the first series, it was as one of the characters in the story – but from Season 2 onwards she’s just become an omniscient narrator. Not only does this not really make any sense (is the narrator still Craig’s original character? If so, has she retired from real police work and is now just reading old case files to children?), but the device has become lazy and stagnant. Rather than adding a personal layer over the story as it did in Season One, it’s now just a way for the writers to continually abuse the golden rule of television – show, don’t tell. Exposition pretty much exclusively falls to Craig and graphics because the writers don’t trust their actors, the audience or themselves to adequately tell this story without holding the viewer’s hand.

The script is also way too into its colloquialisms. I understand that the Australian lexicon is part of our national charm but that doesn’t mean we have to fit an idiom into every single sentence. After two episodes of this, can’t be far away from a ‘flat out like a lizard drinking’. Once I get hold of a DVD, I’m doing a tally. I’m sure Australians in the 1920s used plenty of this sort of slang - I just don’t think they used it exclusively.

That’s language covered, how about violence and sex? Well, this is Underbelly: Razor so there’s going to be plenty of blood and there’s going to be plenty of slicing and dicing. There’s one scene in particular that, while not shown in full, is still pretty sickeningly gory – but at least the characters all react to it as thus. The first two episodes weren’t all that violent, but I suspect it might get worse once the razors become more prevalent.

As for sex, well, Tilly Devine owns a fair few brothels so there’s going to be plenty of sex. Anna McGahan as notorious prostitute Nellie Cameron does most of the heavy lifting in this area and she brings a coquettish curiosity and sense of fun to her many, many sex scenes. Plenty of people do weird things, but none of it really leads anywhere apart from Nellie realising she likes being a prostitute.

The performances are all pretty solid. Danielle Cormack is a battleaxe as Kate Leigh – there ain’t no feminine grace here whatsoever and fair enough. Chelsie Preston Campbell plays Tilly Devine, all British accent and shrill shrieking. I suspect Anna McGahan will be the breakout star, all bitten lips and sexy eyes. – but for me Felix Williamson as Phil ‘the Jew’ Jeffs is the real charismatic presence onscreen – the show lifts many degrees when he shows up.

This is Underbelly, so Razor isn’t terrible. It’s a more than competent retelling of a crime story from the 1920s. But that’s all it is – just a very well produced re-enactment.

This is Underbelly – not with anything else inside, just a new coat of paint. The litmus test is whether I want to watch a third episode. At this stage it’s pretty fifty-fifty – but the show will have to improve its plotting and characterisation to hold my interest for more than a few episodes more – because sadly, I’ve seen this show before.

Channel Nine is yet to announce an air date for Underbelly: Razor.