Zachary Quinto and Chris Pine in ‘Star Trek: Into Darkness’.
(Courtesy of Paramount Pictures)

Star Trek: Into Darkness ranges from good to very good throughout, and it captures the fun and wonder that the first installment in the reboot offered. The roster of familiar crew and their relationships have also crossed over into the sequel intact and a little more developed. And, of course, the action sequences are awe-inspiring. Into Darkness struggles, however, in capturing the same level of emotions as the previous film, opting instead for more thrilling elements.

Captain Kirk (Chris Pine) is up to his old reckless ways as he and his crew disobey orders and interfere with the development of a primitive alien planet where the indigenous people are about to be wiped out by a volcanic eruption. As a result, Kirk is severely punished, but the consequences don’t last long, because Starfleet is directly attacked by the mysterious John Harrison (Benedict Cumberbatch), who seems to be an army unto himself. Suffering a personal loss in Harrison’s latest attack, Kirk volunteers to hunt Harrison down and bring him to justice.

Star Trek: Into Darkness is very well made, and there’s really no strong argument against seeing it. It’s fun, the characters are endearing and the set pieces are spectacular. The best part of the film, however, is the relationship between Spock (Zachary Quinto) and Kirk. Pine and Quinto are effortless in their portrayals, and their interaction with each other feels natural and unforced. A close second best are the fantastic action sequences. There’s something indescribably thrilling about space combat and watching a lone warrior take on an entire squad of Klingons, including their ships. If nothing else, at no time will audiences be disinterested in what’s happening on-screen.

The film does suffer, however, under the burden of giving all of the major characters something interesting to do. At times, it can feel forced. Consider Bones (Karl Urban) having to dismantle a torpedo or Uhura (Zoe Saldana) trying to broker safe passage past a group of Klingons. “You brought me here to speak Klingon,” she reminds Kirk, “so let me speak Klingon.” It seems like such a limp way to resolve the situation, but unfortunately communication is her forte and the filmmakers wanted to provide Uhura her moment. It also didn’t help that a new character was added to the crew, Carol (Alice Eve), another science officer and potential love-interest for Kirk.

It’s important to remember that this is the first Star Trek crew that has appeared on film without first appearing on television. Audiences haven’t had years upon years to live with the characters and go on the same adventures. Other films in the franchise could get away with giving less involved characters less to do, because viewers had already seen those characters get entire episodes revolving around them. Not so here. There’s no real harm in showcasing each character, but it does give the film a utilitarian feel at times.

Fortunately, audiences who aren’t familiar with the Star Trek pedigree and who couldn’t care less about the characters will still find plenty to keep their eyes glued to the screen. Maybe too much. There are moments that are set up nicely for an emotional catharsis, but are resolved too quickly, and usually by comic relief. So when Kirk looks helplessly at the long faces of his crew who know that they are all about to die, it’s a heart-wrenching moment. But then danger is quickly averted with nary a gasp of relief from anyone. It’s these dramatic lurches that deflate tension in the film, giving an inappropriate sense of safety in every tight spot. Couple that with the fact that essential crew, like the captain, science officer, medical officer and communications officer, keep personally handling tasks that are best left to trained security teams, viewers get a sense of just going through the motions.

Nevertheless, Star Trek: Into Darkness is rock-solid entertainment, and it’s unlikely that anyone will leave the theater disappointed. Sure, some of the writing is awkward, like all of the exchanges between Spock and Uhura, but the performances make up for any shortcomings in the script. Benedict Cumberbatch’s Harrison is an especially charismatic portrayal and he’s a very worthy villain that audiences are going to enjoy. So while it doesn’t quite reach the bar that the previous film set, Star Trek: Into Darkness is still worth every cent spent to catch it in the theaters.

Dennis Delsing, Jon Amirkham and Gregg Christie.
(Courtesy of Ross Kramer)

The nature of the theatrical event is found in ritual or routine, drama enters the equation when that event suffers a rupturing. Most often when the rupture is unmendable we have a tragedy (“Oedipus Rex”, “Hamlet”, “Death of a Salesman”). When the rupture is mended we generally have a comedy (Felix moves out of Oscar’s apartment, Prospero adjures his magic, Ruthie and Lloyd make love regardless of being coated in her mother’s ashes). What contributes to raising a play to the level of good or even great drama is when the playwright understands that ritual and routine are echoing off a shared source.

In Lee Wochner’s “The Size of Pike”, the routine is represented by the gathering of friends the night before the annual fishing trip. The ritual finds expression in the journeys the characters find themselves facing, which transcend returning to the favorite fishing hole.

The piece opens with Rod (Dennis Delsing) ribbing his fishing partner John (Jon Amirkhan) none too gently over the abundance of gear he’s packing for the trip. Rod prides himself on only taking five items, the knife his recently deceased father crafted together from a broken axle and a tree struck by lightning, a six pack of beer, a bottle of cheap scotch, cheaper cigars.

“Take whatever you want – you gotta carry it,” Rod chimes him.

The rupture is introduced with the arrival of Fletcher (Gregg Christie). Childhood friends with Rod, all but brothers, the two men now find themselves estranged by Rod’s sense of betrayal at Fletcher’s not having attended the funeral of Rod’s father.

Wochner has crafted a play that enfolds volumes within its brevity. It is crass and lyrical, familiar and unanticipated, evident and tantalizingly intangible which offers audiences layers of reflections and musings to delve beneath and uncover.

Wochner’s work is enriched by a fine cast, customary of productions at Moving Arts. Amirkhan as the affable peacemaker of the trio has woven a splendid performance both sincere and nuanced. Delsing communicates coarseness of his character with an under current of pathos that does not allow the audience to dismiss the characters’ humanity. Christie fills the stage with his physical presence and the sense of history his character shares with that of Rod.

Audiences should be prepared for the confined arena of the Moving Arts’ stage, which places you closer to the actors than some may at first be comfortable with. But Director Sara Wagner has successfully addressed the venue limitations and in the process veiled the production with a sense of intimacy rather than constraint.

The intimacy is welcome, because these men, portrayed on stage, are familiar to some of us. They were our fathers, our uncles, and their pals either from the plant or from down at the Elks Club. And if you were a child who preferred reading to hunting, and who was upset at the thought of how the hook must hurt the worm, you knew one day you would reject the world these men offered, but that you would never lose your awe of how they stood astride it.

Perhaps the more attentive reader will have noticed that in describing the five items Rod carries with him, only four were named. In the context of the play, Rod is called on this same error of deficiency by the astute John, and glibly resorts to a joke to cover his mistake.

But the truth is that the last item is the one we carry on our journeys, and the only one we take on our “last”. Our memories.

As Rod cautions us, “Take whatever you want – you gotta carry it.”

There is a short poem by the late, great James Thurber that kept running through my head while I wrote this review, and it does capture an element of the play far better than I ever could:

“All men should strive to learn before they die, what they are running from, and to, and why.”

“The Size of Pike” originally produced by Moving Arts in 1994 is being revived as part of their 20/20 Vision series, in acknowledgment of their twentieth anniversary season.

Both the play and the occasion are worthy of celebrating.

Oh, and I must acknowledge Peanut McCoy the house manager for doing a fine job and having a great name to boot.

The Size of Pike

By Lee Wochner
Directed by Sara Wagner
Produced by Dana Schwartz

Moving Arts Hyperion Station
1822 Hyperion Ave.
Los Angeles, CA 90027
(323) 666-3259
www.movingarts.org

May 3 – June 1, 2013
Thur-Sat at 8 p.m.

Admission: $20.

(photo: Dennis Delsing, Jon Amirkham and Gregg Christie. Photo by Ross Kramer)

Tina (Alice Lowe) and Chris (Steve Oram).
(Courtesy of Ben Wheatley)

Sightseers is a film with almost no story. The characters also have very little development or any kind of arc. The draw of the film is its ability to entertain through the absurdity of its concept, which is how two seemingly ordinary people can become serial killers and even learn to take pride in their work while still seemingly remaining ordinary. To that end, the film is a success, but its audience will be very narrow.

Tina (Alice Lowe) is 34 and still lives at home with her overbearing mother (Eileen Davies), who blames and resents Tina for killing the family dog. Tina has finally met a man she gets along with, Chris (Steve Oram), and the two of them plan to take Chris’ caravan and get away for a few days to take in the sights and indulge in a little intimacy. Unfortunately, other people keep spoiling their plans, and after one accident gives the couple a taste of blood, they quickly discover that murder is the quickest solution to any problem, even personal ones.

Those familiar with director Ben Wheatley’s work, like Down Terrace, will find similar details here. Wheatley has a knack for submerging audiences in the small details of the characters’ lives, even if they don’t necessarily develop the characters or push the story forward. The minutia, however, does offer bits of subtle humor, like Tina’s crotch-less lingerie that appears hand knitted. So while this information is disposable, it’s at least funny.

The characters are interesting in their mundaneness, but they are also all horrible people who grow difficult to like as the movie goes on. They behave monstrously to each other, but in a very nonchalant manner that straddles the line between comedy and repulsiveness. When Tina defends her killing of the family pet with, “It was an accident”, her mother replies, “So were you!” The characters also behave like adult children, indulging impulses without regard to anything else. Most times this is humorous; other times the characters are extremely off-putting, making it difficult to care about them.

Sightseers finds its stride late in the film when the couple has fully acclimated to the slaughter. They’ll kill people for simply being in the way of their vehicle while trying to park. Here, the absurdity is fully realized, and the two sightseers not only take pride in how they kill people, but also criticize each other’s methods.

The actors perform well, and there is a natural cohesion within the cast, even if it’s mostly couched in mean-spiritedness. The cast’s prowess, however, is exemplified by their ability to stay within the caricatures they’re playing, not in the exploration of actual character. But their incredible roles work well in the film, and it’s during the exchanges that feel completely adlibbed that the laughs will be strongest. It is a testament to the cast’s ironclad commitment that they don’t start laughing at their own material.

Sightseers won’t satisfy most audiences who are looking for story resolution and/or character growth. There’s nothing to suggest that Chris and Tina have murderous instincts, even after their first accidental kill. Surely, the fact that these ordinary people can be turned into serial killers is part of the film’s charm, but without more grounding in reality, Sightseers devolves into simplification, like parable or fairy tale. That observation notwithstanding, Sightseers still offers strong comedy of the darkest type. It’s so dark that many viewers may find it difficult to see what’s so funny, but for those who can, this film is a rare gem.

Venus and Serena.
(Courtesy of Magnolia Pictures)

While it won’t be considered a Grand Slam, Venus and Serena is a well-intentioned look at how two sisters from Compton transcended the sport of tennis, and brought new meaning to the term match point.

It’s no surprise that when asked to name two female American tennis players, most people will immediately say Venus and Serena Williams. And unless you’re an avid fan of the sport, you’ll probably have difficulty listing too many others. That’s because for the better part of the last decade, these two sisters have been dominating the tennis world.

Through this documentary audiences are offered a rare glimpse into the lives of these two superstar athletes, and how their presence in this international sport has brought a whole new awareness to the game. Once the curtain is pulled back viewers are granted access to everything, ranging from family tragedy and a strange love of karaoke to lessons on how handling fame in the spotlight can sometimes give you multiple personalities (some of which may come out at inopportune international moments).

Serena makes the comment early in the film that “Two black girls from Compton probably weren’t supposed to ever play tennis, let alone be really good at it.” This sets the stage for a trip down memory lane. Through humble beginnings and fierce determination by their father Richard Williams (who wrote a 78 page plan before they were born on how they both would become number one in the world), we take a look back at how their careers began to unfold and what continues to drive them. From becoming fashion icons to international athletes and multiple championship winners, the film never fails to give its two stars the credit they deserve.

However, while rich in detail, the film’s pacing starts losing steam halfway through its over two-hour runtime. After the personal triumphs and greatest hits reel, the clips dwindle into celebrity praise and talking heads. No matter the subject matter, that’s a difficult way to hold an audience’s attention. Even clips of John McEnroe’s famous outburst in contention with Serena’s somehow lose their desired effect.

Where the film does succeed, is in reminding us that age is the ultimate opponent to an athlete’s career. For those who grew up watching the Williams sisters’ careers explode, it’s hard to believe that they are already in their early 30’s. After two comebacks each, we see the clocks wind back to 2011, which proved a difficult year for both women. It’s tough to watch Venus pull out of the 2011 US Open due to a diagnosis of Sjögren’s Syndrome (an auto-immune disease known for, among other things, completely zapping energy), and Serena suffer from a hematoma and pulmonary embolism. Though, after some intense therapy and a healthy recovery, both women say that if they have their way, then they’ll be at the top for the foreseeable future. Let’s hope that’s true, because it’s unlikely we will ever see a pair of sister athletes, who, while both are extremely talented, share such respect and love for one another.

Iron Man is wounded.
(Courtesy of Zade Rosenthal/Marvel Studios)

The pressing question for fans of the Iron Man film series is probably, “Is it better than Iron Man 2?” The answer is an unequivocal “Yes”, but that isn’t saying much, considering how disappointed the second film left audiences. It still entertained of course, but it felt hollow and artificially stuffed with too many characters and plots. Now, free from the burden of having to tie in to a group film property like The Avengers, Iron Man 3 gets to tell its own story that ends up being much more satisfying than the previous film. But even so, it doesn’t capture the magic of the original despite having breathtakingly stunning visuals.

Iron Man 3 begins as a flashback. In 1999, Tony Stark (Robert Downey, Jr.) was still a playboy. He was having one-night stands with gorgeous women – on this particular night with botanist Maya Hansen (Rebecca Hall), who may have discovered a way to regenerate limbs. Stark also didn’t suffer fools, like awkward inventor Aldrich Killian (Guy Pearce), choosing to instead send them away in humiliation. In present day, Tony Stark stays true to his sweetheart Pepper Potts (Gwyneth Paltrow), and he spends his days and nights tinkering with new Iron Man suits. Unfortunately, the events of The Avengers have rattled him, and he can’t get over the anxiety of battling aliens, falling through worm holes and nearly dying. To complicate matters, Aldrich Killian has returned as a devastatingly handsome and powerful businessman, who makes it clear that he wants both Tony’s empire and his girl. Finally, a mysterious terrorist called The Mandarin (Ben Kingsley) is wreaking havoc across the globe, targeting the President of the United States specifically with his “lessons”.

The character of Tony Stark and his life is largely consistent with the previous films. He still has cool gadgets, a smart mouth and a graphic user interface in his workshop that defies belief. His bodyguard Happy Hogan (Jon Favreau) makes a return as does Colonel James Rhodes (Don Cheadle), who now wears a rebranded Iron Man suit that looks much more patriotic. Thankfully, Tony also has some new tricks up his sleeve that are sure to impress audiences in both their creativity as well as their potential for awesome action sequences.

Moreover, the visual effects in the film – namely the CGI – are phenomenal. Even challenging sequences, like one where people are falling out of the sky, look completely believable. A hallmark of great visuals is when audiences stop looking for the imperfections, and just focus on the movie. To that end, the visual effects team deserves special praise for their work in Iron Man 3. Their attention to detail and their technical wizardry unleashed the creativity of the filmmakers, allowing for a truly spectacular climax to the film. The 3-D work, however, is largely a non-issue, and audiences will be better served watching the movie in 2-D.

Despite the film’s rich world and fantastic looks, questionable choices by the filmmakers hold Iron Man 3 back from realizing its full potential. The most glaring issue is that Stark spends too much screen time outside of his suit. Everyone loves Robert Downey, Jr., granted, but it’s the suit that audiences want to see kicking ass. Unfortunately, Stark does way too much sans suit, which fosters some interesting cinematic and thematic moments, but becomes belabored after a point. There is also too much comedy peppered throughout, especially during dramatic moments that need to be taken seriously. If the hero has time to crack jokes, how dire is the situation? Finally, the film doesn’t quite shake off the ghost of too-many-characters from the previous film. The filmmakers even threw in a kid (Harley Keener) who usually sap films of any mature themes, but thankfully isn’t too bad here.

The cast is enjoyable to watch all around, but Gwyneth Paltrow’s talents seem wasted once again with too little to do, while Downey, Jr. gets to play himself one more time. That seems to be his main attraction, so audiences probably won’t be disappointed. Guy Pearce, however, does an outstanding job, and plays the only character that has any real arc. His charisma fills the screen in every scene he’s in.

Iron Man 3 does what it needed to do: It got the franchise back on course in a thoroughly entertaining way. It’s misshapen in parts, but not fatally so. As Shane Black’s sophomore directorial effort, he doesn’t disappoint. There are even echoes of Kiss Kiss, Bang Bang, in which he directed Downey, Jr. If nothing else, Iron Man 3 offers the spectacle audiences crave from comic book films, making this weekend’s entertainment choice an easy one.

Pierce Brosnan and Trine Dyrholm.
(Courtesy of Sony Pictures Classics)

As if audiences haven’t had a few ensemble films so far this year—what with Disconnect still in theaters—and The Big Wedding opening to underwhelming reception last weekend, Sony Pictures Classics is giving moviegoers another ensemble with a wedding setting. But instead of an American family and Colombian family gathering in Connecticut, this time we have English and Danish families together for a wedding in Italy. Susanne Bier’s Love is All You Need captures everything one might expect to see and feel at a wedding: romance, family drama, drinking, partying and awkward speeches.

While considering a spot in an airport parking structure, Ida (Trine Dyrholm) crashes into Philip’s (Pierce Brosnan) car and discovers he is the father of the young man about to marry her daughter. Not only that, but they are taking the same flight and taxi to the house where the families are set up. Soon they discover they’re both rather unsatisfied with their lives. Ida’s just discovered her husband’s left her for a younger woman and Philip has been a widow for a decade. All the while, his son has distanced himself from Philip. The soon-to-be wed couple, Patrick (Sebastian Jessen) and Astrid (Molly Blixt Egelind), is experiencing butterflies and cold feet. Meanwhile, once everyone’s set up in Philip’s old house for the event, Ida’s husband, Leif (Kim Bodnia) arrives with his new, bubbly girlfriend Tilde (Christiane Schaumburg-Müller), and Philip’s clingy sister-in-law Benedikte (Paprika Steen) brings her bratty daughter Alexandra (Frederikke Thomassen). On the sidelines, Ida and Philip begin to spark a companionship.

In the grand tradition of wedding themes, one might expect the romance to be from the perspective of the bride and groom, but here Bier and screenwriter Anders Thomas Jensen take a cue from Robert Altman’s A Wedding and Mike Newell’s Four Weddings and a Funeral, and make the main couple guests at the ceremony. And to top it off, they are middle-aged protagonists, which can usually be harder to market to audiences. But despite their ages, Ida and Philip’s characteristics and chemistry aren’t boring and even become a bit youthful in some scenes (such as when Philip notices Ida skinny dipping). Bier has already focused on family dysfunction on screen with Open Hearts and Things We Lost in the Fire, and has featured a wedding in After the Wedding. In Love is All You Need audiences get both elements, but in a slightly lighter mood, though not very comedic either. Jensen, Bier’s usual script writer, sets up the characters in amusing situations. Such as Benedikte giving a tipsy dinner speech where she embarrasses Philip and insults Alexandra, or Philip later giving Benedikte a reality check. But he still keeps the tone serious and romantic.

While a lot of viewers still picture him as 007, Brosnan manages to convince us he’s a workaholic who’s grouchy, anti-social and unaware of how to connect with his family. Though charming in his scenes with Dyrholm, he shows range across Steen and Jessen. The film opens with Dyrholm, and from the moment she’s on film she carries the movie admirably. Just by using her facial expressions does the audience see her confusion and frustration with her husband’s selfishness, and her adjusting to life after a cancer scare. Jessen is fine as the son who doesn’t know if he should get married for love or his father’s respect, but Egelind and Schaumburg-Müller are the stand-outs of the younger cast members. Particularly memorable is a sequence where the latter flirts with Ida’s son (played by Mickey Skeel Hansen) while drinking at a pre-wedding party.

Love is All You Need is set in foreign countries (Denmark and Italy) with mostly foreign characters speaking Danish half of the time with English subtitles. Since subtitles can be a turn-off for ordinary film viewers, there have been exceptions for past foreign hits (Life is Beautiful, Volver, A Separation, even the retro silent flick The Artist to name a few). All You Need might not be a huge, award-worthy smash, but it’s sweet and charismatic enough to find a modest size film audience. Though there are a few plot holes left involving the young couple and Benedikte’s daughter, the variety of characters and the courtship between Ida and Philip make the film enjoyable nonetheless. Bier’s film isn’t exactly a romantic comedy, but hits all the right notes for people looking for a cute weekend flick.

The funniest nerd you’ll ever meet.
(Courtesy of Kevin Giffin)

Working hard never guarantees success, but it certainly puts one in a better position to achieve it. Veteran stand-up comic Erikka Innes has a work ethic that makes her success as a comedian almost a foregone conclusion. She forces herself to write every day, and usually not on topics that are comfortable for her. Granted, this material typically doesn’t make it into her act, but it’s evidence of her rigid determination to keep honing her craft, and it automatically puts her a cut above most stand-up comics. Innes also tries to put out a new comedy album every year, emulating the practice of successful comics. Her latest is Smells Like Nerd Spirit, but she confessed to Working Author that she’s already hatching plans for a third.

Erikka Innes began her career as a stand-up comic seven years ago, but the seed was planted long before. “I think it was just because as a kid, my mom loved stand-up comedy and comedy so much,” she explains. “It was on all the time, and she was so into it. And then I’d be like, ‘I want to do that!’ You know, as a little kid you don’t realize all the effort that went into being the person on TV and how hard it is.”

Most people who want to do stand-up typically test themselves very early on by doing short sets at open mikes. The experience can be brutal. Innes went a less conventional – but infinitely more sensible – route: She took a class. “It’s like multiple weeks, but it’s not like a whole course,” she says. “Although I’m sure you can sign up at a university and come up with constant things to do that would make it a major.” In the beginning, Innes was terrified of being on stage, and books were an attractive way for her to learn the skills of stand-up comedy. “So I was just like, ‘Hey, I’ll take a class and learn how you do it, and then I’ll go to the mikes.’”

In the beginning, she wanted to be like Steven Wright. Now, seven years in, she can’t be sure what influences are obvious in her style. She rattles off several big names that affected her early on, like George Carlin and Robin Williams, but highlights Margaret Cho. “I would say that Margaret Cho was like a big hero of mine, because I felt like she was so honest about her life when she was talking. And it would be hilarious; people would be dying laughing.” Refreshingly, even after having experienced a national tour and the rigors of traveling as a stand-up comic, Innes still enjoys the profession. “It’s been more fun lately because I’ve reached a point where when you tell jokes you’re not struggling to come up with a way to say something funny; you can say something from your life and then make it funny. You don’t have to work the other way around.”

‘Smells Like Nerd Spirit’

For the uninitiated, Innes describes her comedy as “nerdy, quirky, smart, and a little bit dark, a lot of biting, dark undertones.” So while she’s happy to work in a bit about the early video game Pong and her childhood pet rock, she’ll just as easily make observations about how similar therapists are to prostitutes, or how pirates would make for poor rapists. “I’ve always been pretty nerdy,” she says, and she works her life into her act, always striving to just be herself on stage. She’s even gone so far as to take out funny bits from her sets because they didn’t reflect her as a person.

“Whenever I do anything I try to take it from personal experience. When I started I would be like, ‘Oh, what are people going to connect to that’s part of my life? Let me really think about what they relate to, and I’ll write a joke about that!’ And then I was like, ‘It’s too hard.’ Because you never really know what people think.” So she decided on just doing what she cared about. But while she is the self-proclaimed Commander of the Nerd Legion, non-nerds discovering Erikka Innes shouldn’t worry that her comedy will be too esoteric. “Whenever I do nerd stuff, if I’m making a reference, I try to be careful and pick a reference that everybody is gonna get, because I think it’s lame if you go to a show and you paid to see somebody and didn’t know who they were, and half their act is references to stuff you don’t get.”

As a professional stand-up comic, Innes understands that she’s paid to make people laugh, and sometimes that means tailoring her sets for different audiences. But that doesn’t mean that there are topics that should never be joked about. “I feel like if you’re a comic, you want the space to be able to do stuff…and I do think the Internet and how accessible it is…people can go home now and blog about what you did and it’s big news now.” She finds it silly that a simple stand-up comic doing his or her set is news at all. “We’re talking (about) comedians; they’re supposed to entertain you. And if they didn’t, part of me is like, ‘Then don’t go to their show again.’ Are some of them over the line? Maybe there are on and off. I’ve definitely heard stuff from comics where I’m like, ‘I really don’t like what you’re saying.’ But, it’s also part of the art. The whole thing with comedy is if you can make it funny and sell it on stage, it’s a go.” She admits, however, that the topic is tricky to unravel, because sometimes a joke can be funny to everyone in the room except one person who is deeply offended. Does the problem lie in the joke, or the person’s sense of humor? “I think if you’re a comic though, you’re hoping for freedom of speech and not ‘I’m going to come to a show and blog about what a shit you are.’”

Are men funnier than women? Innes doesn’t flinch at the question and simply replies, “Some of them are.” Then she qualifies her answer by explaining how the reverse is true as well, but if purely going by who makes it, then men are more successful. On the other hand, more men attempt to get into the business. “I think we’re more comfortable with certain types of people doing comedy.” But she also thinks the industry is changing, and that women are creating comedy that men can enjoy, like the film Bridesmaids. The logical conclusion for Innes is “You don’t have to be a man before you can be funny.”

Smells Like Nerd Spirit is available on iTunes and Amazon.

See Erikka Innes live at Flappers in Burbank on Thursdays and Saturdays.

Flappers
102 East Magnolia
Burbank, CA  91502
818 845-9721

Follow Erikka on her site www.erikkainnes.com.

Michael Shannon and Ray Liotta in ‘The Iceman’.
(Courtesy of Millennium Entertainment)

The Iceman is a striking look into the camaraderie and code of ethics of this specific branch of documented killers. In a place where toughness and machismo are acknowledged solely by reputation and known affiliates, one man attempts to quiet his inner turmoil in as healthy of an outlet as his neighborhood allows.

Michael Shannon is The Iceman, Richard Kuklinski. He is the strong, silent type among the loud and convincing. Like so many others in his neighborhood, on the surface his life is quite good. Richard is happily married and a devoted father to his children. His work allows him to live a comfortable life in a beautiful home. His family enjoys the perks of the best school in the most respectable area of town.

Underneath the surface is the truth of his temperament and the source of his income. Richard Kuklinski is a notorious hitman for Roy Demeo as played by Ray Liotta. After several years of an amicable working partnership, friction within the syndicate drives a wedge between associates. Richard’s secret, once kept as privileged information amongst wise guys, is exposed, and every decision leading up to it is revisited in this account of his life.

The Iceman is grim, though it manages to tell a dark story without ever succumbing to the gore of its subject matter. Michael Shannon possesses a conviction that allows him depth and mystery even when taking a breath or exhaling. The slicked-back hair and eastern dialect of New York’s Mafioso secure him as an imposing character and person of interest.

It was in 1992 that filmmaker Ariel Vromen first learned of Richard Kuklinski through James Thebaut’s documentary, The Iceman: Confessions of a Cold-Blooded Killer. Vromen teamed with writing partner Morgan Land and penned the screenplay The Iceman. Years later, a test scene for YouTube received 200,000 views and reignited Vromen’s desire to bring the inside story of Richard Kuklinski to the silver screen.

Then, still practically unknown, Shannon was deemed as the only man who could do justice to The Iceman. Vromen had long been a fan of the actor’s work, and once the interest in the screenplay had become an Internet success he was able to secure producers to start filming which began in December 2011. The film wrapped in April of 2012 after an exhilarating shoot which took place primarily in Shreveport, Louisiana. Audiences can rest assured, cast and crew held true to the Jersey core of the central story and enjoyed an intoxicating last day of filming in New York.

The film is set in America and begins in the middle of the 1960s with a media frenzied conclusion in 1986, the year of Kuklinski’s arrest. Much consideration is given to the events that lead what seems to be a confident and mild-mannered young man down the road of infamy as a contract killer for the mob. Richard Kuklinski is a mystery and a contradiction. This is countered by the delicate nature of his unsuspecting wife, Deborah. Each member of the cast is equally matched to the specific character portrayed. The sum total of dynamism and accuracy is humbled before impact and will not be missed by audiences. Ray Liotta is spot-on as Roy Demeo. While David Schwimmer is perfect as Demeo’s beta, Josh Rosenthal. Chris Evans is fantastic as the notorious Mr. Freezy. Finally, Winona Ryder allows Deborah Pellicotti a sweetness that is almost painful.

The Iceman reveals how a mass murderer by day negotiated his home life by night. This film is based on actual events and designed for mature audiences. It is a nail biting, breath-holding sigh of relief that never really arrives on time. Do not enjoy this film alone; it’s an experience meant to be shared.