Movie Show Podcasts - 1/29/10

Boy, was our show awesome this past week. If you didn't have a chance to catch it, consider yourself lucky that I'm nice enough to post them here weekly. We did our usual reviews (this week, it was Edge of Darkness and When in Rome) as well as our weekly breakdown of the hottest movie news stories with Brendon Connelly of slashfilm.com, but the excitement this week came in the form of celebrity interviews with Clark Duke and Craig Robinson from the upcoming Hot Tub Time Machine. They called in live and it was a blast.

Of course, we also spoke with our friends and respected critics, Nell Minow and Tim Gordon, though we were on such a role this week we couldn't squeeze in Brandon Fibbs. However, since we love the guy so much, we stayed late and did a separate off-the-air podcast about the Oscars and what our predictions will be. We even made a bet, so listen to find out what it is. Enjoy!

1/29/10
Segment 1: Kevin and Josh breakdown "Edge of Darkness" and "When In Rome" with Nell Minow and Tim Gordon (Fellow DC critics)
http://www.bdkreviews.com/podcasts/2010-01-29%20-%20Kevin%20and%20Josh%20movie%20Show%20-%20Reviews%20with%20Nell%20and%20Tim.mp3

Segment 2: Kevin and Josh interview "Paranormal Activity" star Micah Sloat about the film and it's upcoming sequel
http://www.bdkreviews.com/podcasts/2010-01-27%20-%20BDK%20Movie%20Show%20-%20MICAH%20SLOAT.mp3

Segment 3: Kevin and Josh talk about "Avatar" and inflation of Box office prices - Also Chad Dukes chimes in!
http://www.bdkreviews.com/podcasts/2010-01-29%20-%20Kevin%20and%20Josh%20movie%20show%20-%20Discussing%20Box%20office%20inflation%20and%20Avatar.mp3

Segment 4: Brendon Connelly from Slashfilm.com joins the show to give us the latest movie news
http://www.bdkreviews.com/podcasts/2010-01-29%20-%20Kevin%20and%20Josh%20movie%20show%20-%20Slashfilm.com%20news%20with%20Brendon%20connelly.mp3

Segment 5: Josh and Kevin interview "Hot Tub Time Machine" star Craig Robinson (Also from "The Office")
http://www.bdkreviews.com/podcasts/2010-01-29%20-%20Kevin%20and%20Josh%20movie%20show%20-%20Craig%20Robinson.mp3

Segment 6: Kevin and Josh interview "Kick-Ass" and "Hot Tub Time Machine" star Clark Duke (Also from "Sex Drive")
http://www.bdkreviews.com/podcasts/2010-01-29%20-%20Kevin%20and%20Josh%20Movie%20Show%20-%20Clark%20Duke%20interview.mp3

Segment 7: Kevin and Josh talk to Brandon Fibbs from BrandonFibbs.com about Oscar predictions
http://www.bdkreviews.com/podcasts/2010-01-29%20-%20Kevin%20and%20Josh%20Movie%20Show%20-%20Brandon%20Fibbs%20talks%20Oscars.mp3

When in Rome Another Painful Rom-Com

When in Rome. It's one of those phrases that you hear fairly often. It's said by people who are going along with a group, conforming to their behaviors to fit in. Now, I hate to join the critics who are giving Kristen Bell's latest film scathing reviews, but hey, when in Rome.

When in Rome is yet another in a long line of predictable romantic comedies. The thing is, this one is more predictable than the rest. Not in a long time have I sat down and picked apart a film scene by scene, line by line, guessing ahead of time exactly what was going to happen and what was going to be said. I was right about 85 percent of the time.

The film stars the adorable Kristen Bell as Beth, a woman who obsesses over her job and can't find love. When her sister, played by Alexis Dziena, announces she is getting married in Rome, Beth packs up and flies out. There she meets a handsome man named Nick, played by Josh Duhamel and she is instantly smitten by him. However, after she sees a drunk woman kiss him, she wrongfully analyzes the situation and claims there is nobody in the world out there for her, so she makes her way over to a famed fountain of love where people go to throw in coins with the hopes of finding someone. Well, she decides to pick some of them out of the water for some reason. Perhaps it was on impulse or perhaps it was a larger metaphor for how difficult it can be to pick the right person in a sea of people. Or perhaps it's just a contrivance. We'll go with the latter.

Little does Beth know that when you take wished upon coins out of the fountain of love, the ones who threw them in fall in love with you. Now back in New York, she is being stalked by Antonio, an Italian painter played by Will Arnett, Lance, a street magician played by Jon Heder, Gale, a model played by Dax Shepard, and a character played by Danny DeVito whose name eludes me because it isn't on IMDb.

Of course, the main bulk of the story is the love connection between Beth and Nick, the latter falling in love with the former while the former thinks the latter is only doing so because she picked his coin, or in this case a poker chip, out of the fountain. I'll give the film this. The premise is mildly clever. It's not just your typical rom-com where a good looking man and woman meet one day and fall in love over the course of two hours. Ok, it is, but it had room to grow.

The sad part is that it didn't. The possibilites of five men fighting for the heart of one woman, all under a spell they have no control over, are endless. So many wonderful jokes could have been made here, but each character embodies only one, coming off as cookie cutter and one-dimensional. For instance, all of Gale's lines revolve around how well sculpted and good looking he is. Antonio's jokes obsess over Beth's feet because as a painter, he needs to see them to put them on paper. DeVito's character is a meat man and his jokes all revolve around sausage. None of them fall into something other than a running one note joke.

The only person that squeezes a laugh or two out of their banality is Jon Heder. His quirkiness comes across well and he delivers his lines with an exaggerated seriousness that fits his character. There was also a Napoleon Dynamite reference, although out of place and forced into the movie, that was funny enough to break up the monotony.

But that monotony is only furthered along by the weak story that putters along like a broken down car. The only main force trying to pull this through is the chemistry between Kristen Bell and Josh Duhamel which rings true even in an outlandish film such as this. Bell is beautiful and sweet and forces you to like her. The same goes for the jealousy inducing good looks of Duhamel.

Too bad they're trapped in a horrific screenplay. This is a movie that thinks its funny when Nick stops before he runs into a pole, only to walk past it and fall into a hole. It's a movie that uses the record scratching sound bite that signifies a drastic change in tone multiple times in only a few minutes. It's a movie where jokes consist of "Gale takes shirt off." That's how out of ideas When in Rome is.

When in Rome receives 1.5/5

Mel Gibson Shines in Mediocre Edge of Darkness

Edge of Darkness has an impressive resume. It's directed by Martin Campbell, the man who helmed the excellent James Bond reboot Casino Royale, written by William Monahan, writer of the Oscar winning picture The Departed and stars Mel Gibson, an excellent actor in his first role in seven years, since 2003's The Singing Detective. It has all the parts needed to come together and create an amazing, visceral action picture. So where did things go wrong? Or more precisely, how in the world did these talents come together to create such a mediocre product?

The film follows Craven (Mel Gibson), a Boston detective who has just picked up his daughter (Bojana Novakovic) from the airport. Once she arrives, however, she starts to puke and her nose bleeds uncontrollably. In a panic, she tells her father she needs to go to the hospital, but before they do she insists on telling him something. Before she can get it out, a man in a ski mask appears at the front door and kills her with a shotgun blast to the chest. Craven, now a man with nothing to live for, goes on the hunt to find her killer and unravel the conspiracy that led to her demise.

So basically what I'm saying is that it's your typical revenge flick. Although this does differentiate itself a bit from the others, namely because his kid dies for a reason rather than just plain bad luck (like in 2007's Death Sentence), which gives the protagonist something to track other than the murderer, it's still a routine revenge movie where a vigilante father goes berserk on the baddies with a wide assortment of firearms.

Which is fine. I'm all for a good revenge movie, but Edge of Darkness fails to keep consistent with the whole novelty of the sub-genre. More often than not, nobody really cares about the fallen family member so much as the bullets that fly afterwards. This is no different. Craven's daughter is onscreen for such a small amount of time that it's impossible to truly care about her, even after she's filled with holes, but the movie nevertheless tries to wrangle some teardrops out of nothing. After she is killed, Craven takes her ashes to the beach and dumps them in the ocean, reflecting back on the film's opening 30 seconds that shows an old family video where she is playing in the water as a kid, which is hardly a set-up for an emotional payoff. My complaint isn't the fact that the film lacked emotion. Rather, it's that it tried too hard to force that emotion through when none was really needed.

Now, there are only a couple of things I hated in Edge of Darkness and for every bad thing, there's a great one to balance it out. For instance, the acting is terrific. It's a return to form for Mel Gibson. His gritty determination as the hellbent father vowing justice for his fallen daughter is played pitch perfectly, even if he is forced to act out a few ridiculous scenes where he sees the ghost of her or hears her voice speaking to him. Couple him with another great actor, Ray Winstone, who plays a government operative sent to clean up their messes, and you have a sublime pair whose scenes play out like a fluid dance. Their dialogue together is wonderful and neither outshine the other. They simply do their part in telling the story. Their scenes together are easily the best part of this movie.

Unfortunately, the skillful panache of those scenes does little more than draw attention to how haphazard the rest of the production is. Some scenes don't fit into the flow of the story, working as an unnecessary way to break up the talking with some action, the material doesn't stay completely afloat during its two hour run time and the final shot of the movie is, I'm pretty sure, the dumbest possible way this thing could have ended.

That's not to say this is a bad movie. It's not. It's just a painfully mediocre one. I'm tempted to recommend Edge of Darkness anyway given the poor quality of movies this month, but it is in its failure to realize its own potential that prevents me from doing so.

Edge of Darkness receives 2.5/5

Movie Show Podcasts #3

Yes, it's early Wednesday morning and yes, I'm just getting around to posting the latest podcasts from the best radio show ever produced, the Kevin McCarthy Movie Show featuring Josh Hylton. What's the reason? I'm busy. Because of that, I'm just going to cut to the chase this week.

As usual, Kevin interviewed a host of people beforehand, which kept me from participating in the interviews, but listen to them anyway because there are some pretty big stars in there (including a pair of recent Golden Globe winners). We also reviewed the weeks new movies and had an excellent discussion on religion in cinema with Brandon Fibbs, among other things. So listen, enjoy and come back next week for more goodness.

1) Kevin interviews Book of Eli directors THE HUGHES BROTHERS
http://bdkreviews.com/podcasts/2010-01-22%20BDK%20Movie%20Show%20-%20The%20Hughes%20Brothers.mp3

2) Kevin interviews Crazy Heart songwriters and producer T BONE BURNETT/RYAN BINGHAM
http://bdkreviews.com/podcasts/2010-01-22%20BDK%20Movie%20Show%20-%20T%20Bone%20Burnette.mp3

3) Kevin interviews Creation director Jon Amiel
http://www.bdkreviews.com/podcasts/2010-01-22%20BDK%20movie%20Show%20-%20Jon%20Amiel.mp3

4) Kevin interviews Pandorum/MMA star Cung Le
http://www.bdkreviews.com/podcasts/2010-01-22%20BDK%20movie%20Show%20-%20Cung%20Le.mp3

5) Kevin and Josh review Tooth Fairy, Legion and Extraordinary Measures
http://bdkreviews.com/podcasts/2010-01-22%20BDK%20movie%20show%20-%20Opening%20reviews.mp3

6) Kevin and Josh talk to Brandon Fibbs about religion in cinema
http://www.bdkreviews.com/podcasts/2010-01-22%20BDK%20Movie%20Show%20-%20Creation.mp3

7) Josh and Kevin end the show on a funny note
http://www.bdkreviews.com/podcasts/2010-01-22%20BDK%20movie%20show%20-%20End%20of%20show.mp3

8) Kevin and Josh talk to Brendon Connelly from SLASHFILM.COM about the latest movie news
http://www.bdkreviews.com/podcasts/2010-01-22%20BDK%20movie%20Show%20-%20Brendon%20Conelly.mp3

Legion Angelic Stupidity

Ok, now it's getting a bit ridiculous. Being an avid film lover, I watch a lot of movies and let's face it, very little separates each one from the next. Leap Year is no different than the countless other romantic comedies I've seen just as The Boondock Saints II: All Saints Day mimics innumerable other action flicks. Still, the apocalypse sub-genre is fairly new, or at least has seen an explosion in recent years. Each film tries to differentiate itself from the last, with modest success. We've seen a hard hitting drama in The Road, a tongue-in-cheek B-movie in 2012, the zombie apocalypse in Zombieland and the vampire apocalypse in Daybreakers. But we're pushing it a bit far now with Legion, a ridiculous movie where God sends his angels to demonically possess humans and kill everyone alive.

Huh?

That's the sentiment I had rolling around in my head as this film wrapped up. The story, as foolish as it may be, revolves around an angel who has fallen down to Earth, cut off his wings and made himself human. His name is Michael (Paul Bettany) and he has rebelled against God's wishes to wipe out the human race. You see, God is pissed off. Just as we have lost faith in Him, He has lost faith in humanity. We kill each other over race and greed and we start wars unjustly and He's sick of it. As the movie points out, the first time he lost faith in us, he sent a flood, now he is sending angels. Yep.

Well, for some reason, there's a baby that is the last hope for humanity. It's in the stomach of Charlie (Adrianne Palicki), who works at a small diner in the middle of no man's land where the next service station doesn't come around for 50 miles. She works there with a group of disposable fodder played by Lucas Black, Charles Dutton, Jon Tenney, Willa Holland, Kate Walsh, Tyrese Gibson, and Dennis Quaid. Michael's job is to protect Charlie and the baby, the main target of the angels.

This is getting out of control. While not all of the recent apocalypse movies have been particularly good (2012, The Book of Eli), at least they made sense. Legion makes as much sense as using a sterilized needle at a lethal injection. There's so much in this movie that needed to be answered, yet so little is. For example, why the baby is so important is never explained. Who is it? Is it the second coming of Christ? If it is, why would God send his angels to kill it? What the hell was going on in this thing?

The weird thing is that there's plenty of downtime for explanation. For a movie about an angel takeover and the human extermination, this thing moves slow and the copious amount of dialogue does little more than waste time in between action scenes. There were a handful of moments where two characters would have a dialogue, but it was usually about trivial matters, like why Gibson's character carried around a handgun. Well, because he grew up in the streets yo. Great, but who cares? It's irrelevant to the story, existing as nothing more than a sad sack attempt at putting a personality to the character.

Complaining about scenes that flesh out the personalities of the characters feels weird because if we want to care about them, we need to know about them, but Legion takes itself far too seriously and would have worked better as a humorous, balls to the wall action film. Surely the filmmakers knew their movie was absurd. Why not play it for laughs?

Taking the serious route did little to help them anyway. The action scenes, which are meant to be epic battles between heaven and earth, are shot so darkly that not much can be seen. The little bit that can is unimpressive and, more often than not, anti-climactic. In the trailer, a man rides up in an ice cream truck. His mouth opens wide, his arms stretch out and he runs toward the camera. In the movie, he is shot immediately after he starts to run. What could have been a tense battle ended up being a major disappointment.

I've seen lots of apocalypse movies recently, but this could be among the worst. Paul Bettany does a good job and a few moments of what looked to be a good movie were hidden in it, but everything else is a misfire. Even the wanton stupidity of 2012 was more entertaining than Legion.

Legion receives 1.5/5

The Tooth Hurts Indeed

Dwayne Johnson is a bucket full of unrealized potential. The man made a name for himself with his WWE persona, "The Rock," marking himself as a bad ass and paving the way for a huge action movie career. So what, pray tell, is he doing in these fluffy family friendly kids movies? Did he learn nothing from The Game Plan, Race to Witch Mountain or his recent voice work in the atrocious computer animated picture Planet 51? Evidently not, because he seemed more than willing to make a fool of himself in his latest monstrosity, Tooth Fairy. Outside of the inherent comedic value of seeing The Rock flutter around in a pink tutu, this movie has little to offer.

Johnson plays Derek, a minor league hockey player who was sent there from the NHL after hurting his shoulder. He's known on the ice as "The Tooth Fairy" because he has a knack for knocking out his opponent's teeth. He's nothing more than a sideshow on his team, having not taken a shot on goal for nearly ten years. He is dating a pretty woman named Carly, played by Ashley Judd, who has two children, Tess, played by Destiny Whitlock, and Randy, played by Chase Ellison. One night, Tess loses a tooth and places it under her pillow hoping the Tooth Fairy will come and give her money. Derek is babysitting and agrees to humor her, but instead uses the money he has to gamble with his buddies. When she wakes up, freaking out from the lack of cash, Derek decides to tell her the Tooth Fairy isn't real, though he is quickly interrupted by Carly who gets angry with him. That night back at home, he wakes up to find a summon under his pillow. He has been accused of killing dreams and is forced to live as a real live Tooth Fairy for two weeks.

I like Dwayne Johnson. He's charming. He's good looking. He's even pretty funny when he is provided quality material, as evidenced by his role in the hilarious Get Smart. And I must stress, there is nothing funnier than seeing him wear a tutu and looking like an idiot. Laughter is the desired intention in Tooth Fairy, but the problem here is that we're not laughing with it. We're laughing at it. This is merely another in a recent string of awful kids movies with no imagination, intelligence, or bite. Much like the notion of an actual Tooth Fairy, this movie is complete nonsense and as soon as it's out of your head, the better.

However, I can see a good children's movie in here somewhere, but it's saddled down too much by writing that meanders all over the place until it has nowhere to go. Like the posters that promote it, the film is loaded with plays on words like "You can't handle the tooth" and "The tooth, the whole tooth and nothing but the tooth," all of which are as grating as you'd expect them to be.

The film also lacks a decent sense of direction, probably due to the fact that director Michael Lembeck's most prized titles on his resume are the last two Santa Clause movies, which God knows is nothing to write home about. The only shining light in this otherwise abysmal experience are a handful of decent jokes, mostly coming from the talented Billy Crystal, who plays a role similar to his fantasy turn in The Princess Bride. He is delightful and manages to drag a few guffaws out of the inanity.

Everybody knows that January is dump month, but this year seems to be extra dumpy. Limited releases aside, the only film I would recommend from it is Daybreakers. Since that film, I've sat through dreck like Leap Year, The Lovely Bones, The Spy Next Door, and now this one (with the inevitable stinker When in Rome rounding it out next week).

Still, kids may enjoy this, specifically the ones that still believe in the Tooth Fairy, and it was nice to hear the word "fairy" get thrown around without some derogatory connotation attached to it, but for those above the age of belief, Tooth Fairy is not worth your time.

Tooth Fairy receives 1/5

Extraordinary Measures TV on the Big Screen

Before the first shot of a bouquet of balloons proclaiming "It's a girl!" shows up in the new Brendan Fraser/Harrison Ford drama Extraordinary Measures, a logo pops up, one I had never seen before: CBS Films. I questioned, when did CBS start their own film production company? Pretty recently one assumes because this is their first big screen attempt and, appropriately, looks and feels like a TV movie. From scene to scene, each passing shot, every line of dialogue, all of it screamed television. Had it appeared on the small screen, it would have been a damn fine adaptation, but theatrical films are held to a higher standard and this amateurish production does little to convince that it belongs where it is.

The story of Extraordinary Measures follows John Crowley (Brendan Fraser), a father of three kids. The youngest two, at ages six and eight, suffer from Pompe, a disease similar to muscular dystrophy where the muscles weaken due to excessive build-up of glycogen. Their life expectancies range around age 9, a number fast approaching his two children. After a scare where his daughter almost dies, he decides he must do all he can to try to find a cure. He had been studying up on the disease and reading theories proposed by Dr. Robert Stonehill (Harrison Ford), a Nebraska scientist who had been working on a solution to saving the lives of Pompe sufferers. Crowley convinces Stonehill to join him, partly through his determination and partly through the huge check he bestows to him. So will they find a cure before it's too late? Well, it's based on a book by Geeta Anand called "The Cure," which flashes onscreen right at the beginning of the movie, so I'd say it's a safe bet.

When I first saw the trailer for this movie, I honestly thought it was a commercial for a TV movie, and as I mentioned earlier, it follows the exact formula a film appearing on, say, Lifetime would, all the way down to the low angle "person-slides-their-back-down-against-a-wall-in-sadness" shot. The look of the film is simplistic, the dialogue is perfectly suitable for the medium (sans a few FCC deemed dirty words), and it tugs at the heartstrings, as most of these things do.

Besides, who doesn't feel sadness when children are deathly ill and happiness when that one in a million shot to save their lives pulls through? But that's the problem. I've seen this movie played out on television countless times, each one more manipulative than the last. Sick kids are an easy target because even the most hardened of souls wouldn't wish harm on a helpless child. Yes, I cared about the children and I hoped they would pull through, but that was more due to the fact that I'm not a soulless bastard more than it was because the film was of good quality.

Granted, it's not as bad as I expected it to be. The first hour is painful to watch, with transitions from scene to scene where commercials could have easily been placed, but it picks up and the performances are good enough. Harrison Ford, though not quite as youthful and spirited as he used to be, does a fine job in his role as the contemptuous doctor who sometimes lets his anger get the best of him, and Brendan Fraser finally gets to flex his dramatic muscles after three nonsense loony films (Journey to the Center of the Earth, The Mummy: Tomb of the Dragon Emperor, and Inkheart). I like him that side of him and it's the most sincere I've seen him since 2004's excellent Crash.

But that pesky television look and heavy-handed narrative just keep getting in the way. It's funny really because it's a great made for TV movie, but it's not even a good theatrical one. I felt the attempt and I appreciated the uplifting story, but you've got to do better than this to justify your big screen existence. Extraordinary Measures is admirable and has nothing to object to, but nevertheless, you can wait for it to reach cable, where it should have been all along.

Extraordinary Measures receives 2/5

Jackie Chan Embarrasses Himself in The Spy Next Door

Remember when Jackie Chan was still cool? I do. I remember watching him as I grew up. I loved how agile he seemed to be, effortlessly flying through the air performing some of the most amazing acrobatic martial arts I had ever seen. I loved his charm and his sense of humor about things. He was a guy I wanted to hang out with. Sure, his most recent American films have suffered from poor scripts and unfunny one-liners, most notably Shanghai Knights, The Tuxedo and the third Rush Hour, but I still find myself rooting for the guy. His 2008 outing, The Forbidden Kingdom, proved that he was still more than capable of delivering the trademark action and humor he is known for. But then he follows it up with this year's wretched The Spy Next Door, a kid's comedy with one genuine laugh and about 50 irritated groans.

The Spy Next Door follows a fairly routine plot used in a number of other movies about a secret spy who is forced to babysit a handful of little brats that hate him. You'll forgive me if I haven't seen any of them. When I sit down for a Vin Diesel movie, my first inkling isn't to reach for The Pacifier. Anyway, this film plays off that formula, this time starring Jackie Chan as Bob Ho, a Chinese operative on loan to the CIA. He is dating his next door neighbor, Gillian, played by Amber Valletta, but her kids loathe him. He's too "uncool." They think he is a pen importer, but they aren't aware of his secret. After capturing his arch-nemesis early in the movie, he retires so he can spend more time with Gillian and warm up to her kids. Well, Gillian's father is in the hospital and she has to leave town for a few days. Bob thinks this is the perfect opportunity and volunteers to watch over the children, to which she reluctantly agrees. Unfortunately, his nemesis has escaped and is on his way to find Bob.

As you can imagine, the following scenes consist of tired slapstick, constant back talk from the snotty children, and Jackie Chan trying to act hip, doing things that would be embarrassing for even the lowliest of actors, much less a martial artist of his stature. If the mostly silent child audience I watched this with is any indication, this film is a complete failure.

This is due to many reasons, but one is the utter lack of laughs thanks to a piss poor script and Chan's inability to break the language barrier, stumbling over his English like a first time speaker teaching phonetics. You could readily tell a few of his lines were re-recorded in post-production, probably due to this problem.

In romance movies, one tends to talk about chemistry between the two lead actors, but it seems a bit frivolous here as that really isn't the main draw of the movie. Still, each scene between Chan and Valletta was awkward to the point where I felt bad for the actors onscreen. Watching them try to act together and seeing Chan plant his mid-fifty year old lips on a pretty woman 20 years younger than him gave me an unsettling chill down my spine that cannot easily be explained.

The one thing I took a mild liking to was the cheeky James Bond-ish vibe, complete with an enemy with a scar under his eye and his seductive Russian sidekick. The only problem is that they merely exist. There isn't much of a parody here other than that, so the only minor enjoyment this film has going for it becomes moot by the 30 minute mark.

I haven't spent too much time focusing on putting my thoughts together in an articulate way because I don't feel it's necessary to grant this film more effort than it took to put the thing together. No care was put into any of this, aiming only to cheaply exploit the emotions of easily amused children. It's only fair that I care as little. This isn't as bad as the horrific Alvin and the Chipmunks: The Squeakquel, but "bad" takes on many levels. The Spy Next Door is still unwatchable.

The Spy Next Door receives 1/5

More Movie Show Podcasts

Time for more podcasts! This time only one show's worth. I'm trying not to be lazy. This last Friday was an interesting experience. Kevin and I were hustling back and forth during the show contacting engineers, trying to get ourselves on the air because, whoops! They forgot to switch the signal to HD. Good thing engineers get paid so much money or else they might have to work for a living. For the first 45 minutes or so, we were talking to ourselves, after which we finally got our voices out. Thankfully, that's what podcasts are for! All that interesting stuff you may have wanted to hear but didn't is finally at your disposal.

This week, we reviewed The Lovely Bones and The Book of Eli, as well as talked to Brendon Connelly of slashfilm.com and Washington DC film critic Brandon Fibbs of brandonfibbs.com. There are also a handful of interviews, none of which I personally participated in. Unfortunately, most interviews are not scheduled during show time which makes it very difficult for me to partake in them. Oh well, they are interesting nonetheless and I implore you to listen to each and every one.

I'll be back next week for the next installment of the Kevin McCarthy Movie Show featuring Josh Hylton podcasts from WJFK HD2. But for now, enjoy the terrible one-liners and awkward on-air chemistry.

January 15, 2010
1) Josh and Kevin review The Lovely Bones/The Book of Eli - Globe Predictions with Fibbs
http://www.megaupload.com/?d=NHD4F2LX
2) Kevin talks to Oscar winning film score composer Hans Zimmer about The Dark Knight and Sherlock Holmes (Unedited version)
http://tinyurl.com/yl5pr6h
3) Brendon Connelly from slashfilm.com calls in with the latest movie news and scoop
http://www.megaupload.com/?d=ELUKTKNC
4) Comedian Brian Posehn calls in (Unedited Version)
http://tinyurl.com/yjupho2
5) The Lovely Bones star Saoirse Ronan calls in
http://www.megaupload.com/?d=QJTEGMFL
6) Daybreakers directors call in (Unedited 30 Minute interview)
http://tinyurl.com/yama33l
7) Josh and Kevin discuss worst remakes and reboots (Spider-Man 4 cancelled)
http://www.megaupload.com/?d=7LF4NKS7

The Book of Eli Full of Missed Opportunities

The end of the world seems to be all the rage these days. Everywhere you turn, some nonsense theory pops up. If it's not the Mayan calendar proclaiming Armageddon, it's cries of the Antichrist finally coming in the form of Barack Obama. Both have zero validity, but that doesn't stop Hollywood from capitalizing on them (though we're still yet to see that Obama movie). In recent years, post-apocalyptic movies have flooded our screens. Just in the last few months we've seen director Roland Emmerich blow stuff up real good in 2012, the Oscar worthy picture The Road, and the vampire and zombie apocalypses in Daybreakers and Zombieland. Chalk another one onto the ever growing list with The Book of Eli, a moderately entertaining film that will appeal to the following interests. If you want to see three decapitations in about that same amount of time, you'll like The Book of Eli. If you want to see a guy get an arrow through his crotch, you'll like The Book of Eli. However, if you want to see a post-apocalyptic tale with heart and meaning, you may want to look elsewhere. It's basically The Road meets Mad Max, but it's only about half as good as either of those films.

The movie opens with Eli (Denzel Washington) as he embarks on a trip to the west (as opposed to the trip down south the characters take in The Road—totally different). The world has been destroyed by a war and something they call "the flash," assumably referring to a nuclear war, which blinded many of the remaining survivors. It's been thirty years and a new generation has now grown up not knowing about the times before where, as Eli puts it, "people threw away what they kill each other for now." On his trip, Eli stumbles into a broken down town where he is violently confronted. He asks for no trouble, but is forced to kill a whole bar full of people. Carnegie (Gary Oldman) takes notice. He's the leader of the town and has a slew of henchmen he uses to track down an old book, one he claims will be able to control the lives of those he reads it to, thus giving him power. Little does he know Eli has that book.

What transpires is nothing more than a battle between the two factions for possession of the book. But what is the book? Well, if you have half a brain, you should be able to figure it out fairly quickly, though some still deem a reveal a spoiler, so I suppose I should offer up a warning. I will discuss what the book is and how this affects the overall picture, so if you want to go into the movie in the dark, stop reading.

Now, with that out of the way, the book is the Bible. Again, that shouldn't be too hard to figure out. A quick glance at the poster should be enough to give it away. "Deliver us" isn't exactly the most subtle of taglines (nor is the more succinct Gary Oldman one-sheet, "Religion is Power"). Then again, there's also a giant freaking cross on the cover of the book, which you see very early on in the movie. But why did I feel the need to bring this up? Because it is necessary to discuss the message, one that is admittedly fresh in a business that seems to continuously be at odds with it.

The recent comedy, The Invention of Lying, made it a point to deem religion a falsity. In fact, that was the whole basis of the film. The documentary, Religulous, does exactly the same (given the snarky title). But The Book of Eli is decidedly different. Its message here, without giving away the ending, is that there most certainly is a God and he (excuse me, He) uses people for a greater purpose. There's no doubt about it. He exists and works in all of our lives in ways we cannot possibly imagine. It's refreshing regardless of your religious beliefs.

Unfortunately, I've always been one to lean on the side of thought and interpretation rather than the straight forwardness of The Book of Eli. The Invention of Lying may have been anti-religion, but it posed questions. Would the world be better without it? Would there be war? Would it even exist in a world where nobody could lie? The argument it makes is that religion is merely a temporary solution to life's problems and that speculation about the afterlife is time wasted when we could be doing so many other positive things right now. Religulous, in it's own sarcastic way, does the same. These films make us question our beliefs and the beliefs of those around us, which is fascinating. The Book of Eli doesn't.

Sadder still is that it sets itself up to do just that, but never does. As noted before, Carnegie is searching for the book, knowing full well that it is the only Bible left in existence. He wants to use it to control people, insinuating its power and how it can be, and most certainly is, used for evil. At one point, Eli mentions that some people even think that it was the cause of the war that destroyed their planet. Well, religion is used to justify wars. Why not explore those themes?

Regardless of its missed opportunities, it was nice to see a pro-religion film. It just would have been nicer for it to pose questions rather than state facts, something too many religious people do already. But there's more to this thing than just its religious message and, unfortunately, not much of it is particularly impressive. It may be supporting Christianity, but boy does it get bloody. This is an action movie after all. Though the action is stylish and fun, it usually comes about arbitrarily. One scene that ends with multiple bodies strewn across the floor is initiated by Eli shoo-ing a cat away from his things. The cat's owner is none too happy and attacks Eli. Too many action scenes felt randomly placed in the movie rather than working out of necessity of the story.

The Book of Eli is a moderately successful, sporadically entertaining post-apocalyptic film that borrows from other, better movies ranging from a shot taken directly from The Road to a scene that mimicked The Devil's Rejects. Outside of the admittedly clever twist, which nevertheless is never completely satisfactory, The Book of Eli doesn't offer much other than an unexplored message stated matter-of-factly. This might work for some, but for those who like to think about religion and discuss it rather than have it shoved down their throats, The Book of Eli is a bust.

The Book of Eli receives 2.5/5

One Last Ledger Performance, One Mediocre Movie

If you're a film lover, you were immediately saddened about the untimely passing of Heath Ledger. If you didn't care at first, you almost certainly did after watching The Dark Knight, if for no other reason than for the future of that franchise. He created one of the most terrifying villains to ever grace the screen with the Joker and it really is a shame to know that the next Batman movie will lack his presence. Worse still is that he would have undoubtedly dazzled us with many more movies for years to come. Hollywood is hurting without him. Although most will always think of him as the Joker, he was in the process of filming one more movie when he died, The Imaginarium of Dr. Parnassus, a quirky little fantasy tale about love and immortality that, unfortunately, never fully comes together.

Christopher Plummer plays Dr. Parnassus, an old man who travels the country performing a stage show with his vertically challenged friend Percy, played by Verne Troyer, his daughter Valentina, played by Lily Cole, and a boy in love with her named Anton, played by Andrew Garfield. The 16th birthday of Valentina is fast approaching and Dr. Parnassus finds himself troubled because in a deal he made a thousand years ago with the Devil, he agreed to give up any newborn once they turned 16. In exchange, he earned immortality and the ability to guide the imaginations of others as they walk through the centerpiece of his show, a mystical mirror. Eventually, the Devil makes another offer to Dr. Parnassus. If he can capture five souls in two days, before Valentina's birthday, he can keep her. To do this, he must attract people into the mirror and he finds help in Tony, played mostly by Heath Ledger, a mysterious man with amnesia, who uses his allure to whisk people into the imagination world.

You may be wondering what I meant when I wrote that Tony was played mostly by Heath Ledger. You see, when Ledger passed away, he had already filmed all of the scenes that took place outside of the mirror in the real world. Filming in the fantasy world was yet to begin, so according to many interviews, including this one from Comic-Con, Terry Gilliam, the writer and director, rewrote an early scene to explain that when somebody ventures into the mirror, that person's face can change figure. Stepping in to complete the movie are notable actors Johnny Depp, Jude Law and Colin Farrell, who nobly donated all the money they made on the film to Ledger's daughter. Although it is saddening to see the switch in persons, knowing full well Ledger is not with us anymore, one can't help but admire the imagination it must have taken to overcome this difficulty, being able to finish the movie while still allowing it to make sense narratively.

However, as much as I hate to say it, that's about as imaginative as the film gets. I was more impressed by the way they solved this problem than with the actual product itself. For a movie about a fantasy world where imaginations come to life, Dr. Parnassus is strangely unimaginative. I found myself bored by the visuals which did little to represent the imaginations of the people in the mirror.

Being a fantasy film, that's a big deal. It's not so much about what happens outside of the mirror, but rather what happens inside of it. Even if it were flipped around, however, you could still color me unimpressed. The story was simply uninteresting. I never sensed a genuine threat from the Devil, I felt that the third act personality twist of a certain character was pulled out of thin air, and the whole thing seems muddled, rarely explaining certain aspects of the film that needed explanation.

Now, the performances are good and the actors do what they can to sustain the movie, but when your run time is over two hours long, you need a better script and better visuals. As it stands, Dr. Parnassus has neither. I can feel my stomach turning as I write this because Ledger's life should be honored and his final performance demands to be seen. It's a close call, one that sickens me to no end, but I'm going to have to recommend you skip The Imaginarium of Dr. Parnassus.

The Imaginarium of Dr. Parnassus receives 2.5/5

The Lovely Bones Disappointingly Bad

Before 2001, few people knew of the now famous Peter Jackson. Before landing the gig of a lifetime with The Lord of the Rings movies, he had dabbled mainly in comedy/horror films with Bad Taste, the Michael J. Fox starring The Frighteners, and one of my personal favorites Dead Alive (known as Braindead in other areas of the world). Since then, what with The Lord of the Rings trilogy and the highly lauded 2005 King Kong remake, Jackson has proven himself to be a real talent in Hollywood. So imagine my disappointment after watching The Lovely Bones, a mediocre, pretentious effort from one of cinema's most prized directors. It's been quite a while since I've seen a movie with such an impressive resume that has failed to create any type of emotional resonance or meaning.

The film begins in 1973 and is about Susie Salmon (Saoirse Ronan), a 14 year old girl who gets murdered by George Harvey (Stanley Tucci) one day on her walk back home from school. Susie ends up in a purgatory type of world, which her brother dubs "the in between" after seeing her in his room one night. You see, her family, particularly her father, can still sometimes see her or at least get a message that she is still around, like through a flickering candle for instance. In the in between world, she meets up with another girl named Holly (Nikki SooHoo) who explains that she can pass over whenever she likes, but she must leave her old world behind her. She decides she isn't yet ready and watches her parents, as well as her killer, as they try to unravel the mystery back in the world of the living.

There's a lot going on in The Lovely Bones. There are themes of love, death, tragedy, murder, the afterlife, divine intervention, the break-up of a family, and more, but none of them ever seem to fully come together into a cohesive whole. They are explored, but only by themselves, never together. None of the themes ever run their courses into one giant metaphor on life or death. They're just there.

This is a movie that assumes there is an afterlife. It never truly questions what happens after you die, which comes as a disappointment. Quite simply, one minute you're here, the next you're not and you're on your final journey on your way to the afterlife. Susie talks of "my heaven," but as far as I could tell, this heaven had no god or supreme being to rule over it. The film never questions the implications of what would happen if you died and there was an afterlife, but nobody was there to rule it. I felt like it had plenty of opportunities to really get into why death is such a mystery, but it spends the majority of its time on Earth going through the motions of a routine murder mystery.

The Lovely Bones is an unstructured movie where years go by with little to no indication, which comes off as confusing because Susie does not age in the afterlife, but everything goes on as it would normally on Earth. Its plot turns come off as insignificant, as evidenced by a scene midway through where the Salmon mother, played by Rachel Weisz, leaves the family out of grief and doesn't return until late in the movie. There's even a montage that occurs after Susie's death that is played for laughs that feels like it should be placed in the next Austin Powers movie, not in the serious nature of this film.

Then you have the acting, which is uniformly unimpressive. Mark Wahlberg is poor, Rachel Weisz, a usually reliable actress, seems to be phoning it in and little Susie Salmon as played by Saoirse Ronan is adequate, but hardly compelling. The poor acting correlates with the sometimes laughable story because none of it feels authentic. There's a ridiculous love connection that sparks up between Susie and Ray, played by Reece Ritchie, that plays like a deleted scene from Twilight due to the long awkward stares and a piano tune that sounds ripped from NBC's "The More You Know" PSA's.

After my screening of The Lovely Bones, I inadvertently heard another critic comment that the film had the "style over substance" school of thought. That person couldn't be more right. This is all style and no substance. Jackson is a great director, but his approach to this film seems extravagant simply for the sake of it. It worked in King Kong and Lord of the Rings, but the difference is that this material doesn't always necessarily call for it, yet it's bumped up to 11. It becomes a major distraction.

Though not devoid of all positive qualities (Stanley Tucci is terrific and there's a truly heart pounding chase scene in the back half of the movie), The Lovely Bones nevertheless feels manufactured not out of love, but labor and its ending is anti-climactic and unfulfilling. Don't expect this one to win best picture kiddos.

The Lovely Bones receives 1.5/5

Movie Show Podcasts

I'm like the Jeffersons. I'm moving on up. Only a year ago I was beginning my internship on BDK's Movie Show, answering phones and doing the usual intern work, only sporadically getting my voice out there on the radio airwaves, and now I've been promoted to co-host. While I am grateful for the opportunity, it really just goes to show how awesome I am. Despite the station flip from talk radio to sports talk radio (real dramatic, I know), we still find ourselves broadcasting every week on the newly launched WJFK HD2 channel. We hope lots of people listen, but we're realistic. Not many folks have purchased an HD radio and therefore are unable to listen to our show, so we put them up online. I've neglected the show recently due to being busy and plain old forgetfulness, so the last few shows are lumped into this single post, though I hope to do one weekly for each show from here on out.

Anyway, I'm rambling. Without further ado, I present to you the newly titled "Kevin McCarthy Movie Show featuring Josh Hylton," or something like that. Kevin changes it around every week.

Just to clarify: I'm not featured in every segment because Kevin records a few interviews ahead of time (I like him to take the lead on interviews anyway). Enjoy!

(Word of caution: When you click the link, you actually have to enter the four letters on the top right of the screen and download the file. It's cumbersome, but hey, be grateful you're getting anything.)

12/11/2009
1) Kevin interviews "The Green Mile"/"Sin City" star Michael Clarke Duncan
http://www.megaupload.com/?d=2KJ5K682
2) Kevin interviews "Beerfest"/"Super Troopers" star Jay Chandrasekhar
http://www.megaupload.com/?d=2FQTYIJJ
3) Kevin/Josh review INVICTUS/PRINCESS AND THE FROG
http://www.megaupload.com/?d=SD6M1NI2
4) Kevin and Josh talk to Brandon Fibbs about the WAFCA awards
http://www.megaupload.com/?d=EOHU2T5W
5) Kevin and Josh talk to Brendon Connelly
http://www.megaupload.com/?d=10OYGFCN
6) Michael Clarke Duncan live in show
http://www.megaupload.com/?d=I3O0YWP0
7) Kevin and Josh TOP 10 of 2009
http://www.megaupload.com/?d=Q2HBO4PG
8) Kevin and Josh end the show
http://www.megaupload.com/?d=Z8N1WCCJ

12/18/2009
1) Josh and Kevin Review AVATAR
http://www.megaupload.com/?d=2S5GP6ZF
2) Nell Minow talks about AVATAR and Golden Globe Nominations
http://www.megaupload.com/?d=ORCN97TP
3) Brendon Connelly from Slashfilm.com discusses AVATAR
http://www.megaupload.com/?d=JCX6BY0J
4) Brandon Fibbs on talk about AVATAR
http://www.megaupload.com/?d=YT4NC279
5) Josh, Kevin, Brandon and Brendon talk about the latest movie news
http://www.megaupload.com/?d=Z0AVZ1CQ
6) Golden Globe predictions
http://www.megaupload.com/?d=S1T21NJJ

1/8/2010
1) Josh and Kevin review DAYBREAKERS and LEAP YEAR
http://www.megaupload.com/?d=L5C134JG
2) Josh and Kevin talk to UP IN THE AIR/500 DAYS OF SUMMER Cinematographer ERIC STEELBERG
http://www.megaupload.com/?d=7510WD5H
3) Josh and Kevin talk to Moviemom about week's releases
http://www.megaupload.com/?d=TQAS8ARK
4) Kevin talks to "The Lovely Bones" star Rose McIvey
http://www.megaupload.com/?d=H6CYFO06
5) Kevin and Josh talk to Brandon Fibbs with 10 Oscar Predictions
http://www.megaupload.com/?d=JGJEWE5S
6) Kevin talks to SOUTHLAND/BAND OF BROTHERS star Michael Studlitz
http://www.megaupload.com/?d=JR28VTJ3
7) Josh awkwardly ends the show with our theme music
http://www.megaupload.com/?d=RSK5QTHM

On an unrelated note, this is my 200th post. Wow.

Skip This Leap Year

It's been two days since I staggered my way into the horrendous new romantic comedy, Leap Year, kindly allowing it to sit and ferment in my brain with the hopes of coming up with something to say. I've had two days of reflection, wishing for the right words to say. Unfortunately, two days is all it took for me to forget it. It's an early contender for a "worst of the year" list, but it probably won't make the cut because come December, I'll have rightfully secreted every last thought of this thing from my mind. It's mere existence will be unbeknownst to me.

Amy Adams plays Anna, a prissy, irritating material girl who is too blinded by the thought of getting engaged to realize she's with a scummy boyfriend whom she doesn't really love. After an evening dinner where the big "surprise" her boyfriend promised was a pair of earrings, she gets antsy for an engagement and hears from her father, played by John Lithgow, that there's an old Irish tradition where a woman can go to the country and propose to her boyfriend on February 29th, a leap year. Well, whaddya know, her boyfriend is in Dublin on a business trip. How convenient! Being the young, hopeful woman she is, she makes her way out to see him and pop the question, but alas! The weather is bad and her plane is forced to land in Wales. Oh, whatever shall she do? Why, hitch a ride with a strapping young Irish lad of course! His name is Declan, played by Matthew Goode, and...well, you know what happens from here.

I adore Amy Adams. I've been in love with her ever since I saw the wonderful Enchanted. From that moment on, I've been ready to fall to my knees and confess my undying devotion to her, even when I've sat through films that I didn't particularly like. For example, Night at the Museum: Battle of the Smithsonian was a brain killing movie, yet I found myself attracted to Ms. Adams, which pulled me through the grueling experience. She's proven herself to be quite the actress as well, pulling off Oscar nominated roles in Junebug and Doubt. But she is beyond annoying in Leap Year. Perhaps her character was simply written that way and her performance was actually spot on, but I, for the first time since discovering the beautiful young woman, found myself disgusted at her presence. It just goes to show that even the most gorgeous, charismatic girl in Hollywood can't rectify a miserable script and shoddy production.

Unfortunately, I was unable to attend the pre-screening for this film and was forced to pay for it, where I sat and watched with a packed crowd of women (and three other men who begrudgingly wandered in with their lady friends). They laughed the entire time and when walking out, I heard nothing but praise, so I can only imagine that if you are a woman aged 18-65, you may enjoy this. You are its demographic. I am not, so take my words with a grain of salt, but I can't help but feel like Leap Year lazily catered solely to that audience instead of creating a product that could be enjoyed by anybody. For instance, the jokes in the movie usually centered around Anna's clothes, handbags and shoes. At one point, she finds herself washed up on the beach in heels. Cue the female laughter. Walking in heels on the beach? How ruthlessly absurd!

Perhaps I'm being too hard on it. Just like I don't understand the humor in jokes about clothes, most women I know don't understand my love of Rambo, so I'm willing to call it even. What I cannot forgive, however, is the predictable script, eye rolling dialogue and inauthentic love story. What transpires is nothing more than a fairy tale happy ending that would never, ever in a million years, happen in real life. If it did, we would all be living with the one true love of our lives cuddling up in front of a fire that emanates a warmth unneeded due to the own warmth we'd be creating, if you know what I mean.

But movies are an escape and I suppose if things ended realistically, everybody would be miserable and movie going patrons would cry foul. That doesn't make up for its ineptitude, but I'm sure it will be a hit with its target audience. More power to them, I say. Of course, that doesn't mean I have to like it. And I don't. In fact, I've already booked an appointment with Lacuna, Inc. to come and wipe it from my memory tonight when I go to sleep. Will I fight the process, realizing my love for it and discovering that my hatred was only pain disguised as anger? I doubt it. That story has already been told.

Leap Year receives 0.5/5

Daybreakers a Gory Good Time

There was a time when vampires used to be the epitome of cool. There was a time when Blade ruled the box office with its hard R rating, providing plenty of action and blood for fans. There was a time when vampires weren't reduced to frilly angst ridden teenagers entwined in a romantic love triangle with a self-pitying high school girl and shirtless werewolf. I remember those times. Oh, how I miss them. Vampires used to be scary, stalkers of the night out for the blood of unsuspecting humans. Now they sparkle when they walk in the sun. Thankfully, nay, blessedly, Daybreakers is here to set things straight. While it may be coming at an unfortunate time, in the wake of those silly Twilight movies, it's nevertheless a riotous good time.

The year is 2019. Due to a single bat with a strange virus, a plague of vampirism has spread across the world like a wildfire. Now, less than five percent of the population is human. Everybody else has turned into a demon of the night, but things still run as usual. They still go to work, drink coffee (with blood instead of cream) and drive and the television politics still rage on. The only difference is that they do it all at night and the political arguments are about the extermination of the human race. During the day, the world is one giant ghost town, which proves to be a perfect opportunity for the last remaining humans to venture outside in search of other humans. Edward (not to be confused with that pale skinned, love sick ninny), played by Ethan Hawke, a vampire himself, runs into a group of them one day on his way home from work. Although they threaten to kill him, he has no desire to feed on them and helps them instead. He's one of those human-hugging types. Hippie.

He does this despite a global shortage of blood. In fact, in another few weeks, the last remaining human harvests will dry up and the vampires will all go mad feeding on each other, which will increase the rate of their deterioration until they all finally die. However, those humans have found a cure for vampirism thanks to a former vampire called Elvis, played by Willem Dafoe, and they enlist Edward in their attempt to save not only themselves, but the whole world.

Not since 2000's Shadow of the Vampire, which also starred Willem Dafoe, have I seen such a unique vampire movie. Finally a film comes along that dares to switch up the tried and true formula. It takes the basic concept of vampires feeding on humans and flips it around. What if there were no humans left to feed on? The premise is intriguing and an interesting commentary on our dwindling resources with our growing population. Who knew a bloody horror flick could be so smart?

But then again, it's not like I had my brain tuned to "think" when I sat down to watch Daybreakers. All I really wanted was a slickly done vampire movie with humor and gore and that's what I got. After watching Twilight and New Moon, where the only pain inflicted on anyone was purely on an emotional level, it was nice to see some pain transcend to the physical realm. This thing gets red with some excellent moments I didn't see coming, including a hilarious vampire combustion that had me cackling with glee.

What I came out of Daybreakers surprised about, however, was that the film was actually made well. A horror movie not screened for critics being released in the theatrical dump month of January? There's no way it could be good, right? Wrong. The Spierig brothers, the directors, whose only other feature length film was the 2003 straight-to-DVD horror/comedy Undead (which was pretty damn awesome if you ask me), showcase some skill here. Whereas Undead was fun, but amateur, Daybreakers promises better things to come in the duo's future. It's slyly directed and the little attention to details makes for a pleasurable experience.

Even more impressive is that they wrote the picture as well, toning down their jocular tone from Undead to make a more mature horror/drama. With the sole exception of Willem Dafoe's character, who spouts some really dumb one-liners that feel out of place in an otherwise rock solid picture, the writing is spectacular. It doesn't explain everything, but it doesn't need to. It's not about how it happens. It's merely about what happens and why. Though I fear putting these two films side by side may confuse the levels of their quality, this film is like The Road in that it's more of a warning than anything else. It intends not to show the causes of certain situations, but rather create an allegory revolving around them that can be related to real life.

Now, Daybreakers is no Oscar contender like The Road, but not every movie has to be some amazing display of filmmaking to be entertaining. Despite combining quality acting with a clever script and skillful direction, this is really nothing more than a fun romp at the movies. Given the quality of films usually released in this month, what more could you ask for?

Daybreakers receives 4/5

Crazy Heart a Moving Drama

There are few actors working today who can captivate an audience like Jeff Briges can. No matter whether he's playing a quirky Army soldier (The Men Who Stare at Goats), an evil weapons manufacturer (Iron Man), a carefree bowling enthusiast (The Big Lebowski), or voicing a long thought dead surfer penguin (Surf's Up), he can come across in a big way, hitting a multitude of emotions and endearing himself to the viewers. He is a top notch talent and always hits a home run in his roles, even in movies that are fairly terrible (How to Lose Friends & Alienate People). This time, he tackles a film that is already worthy of consideration for an end of the year "best of" list and finds himself in a role guaranteed to include a few "Best Actor" nominations, including the already announced Golden Globes nod. Yes my friends, Crazy Heart is a special movie.

Though I love all genres of film, I'm a person who finds himself stubbornly staving off any type of music other than good old rock n' roll. Put some country music on around me and my ears start to bleed, so imagine my skepticism when it came to this film about a washed up country music performer. What Crazy Heart proves, even to this jaded head banger, is that music can be beautiful regardless of what genre it's in. I was tapping my toes to the music and reveling in the discovery of how each song came to be, all of which came from the singer's own life experiences. Jeff Bridges plays the singer in question who for years has gone by the moniker of Bad Blake and as he tells a seductive journalist named Jean, played by Maggie Gyllenhaal, nobody will know his true name until the day he dies, where it will be written on his tombstone. She remarks, "That's a long time to wait," and he replies with what can essentially be paraphrased as, "Maybe not."

His response comes with a few caveats. Despite the humorous nature of it, we later find out that Bad is in trouble. He is in danger of having a stroke due to an unhealthy lifestyle, which includes excessive smoking and drinking. He used to be the biggest star around, but now he is a nobody and his former band mate, Tommy, played by Colin Farrell, has gone off on his own and wrangled his own fans. Naturally, Bad is depressed and bitter, finding himself playing small shows in worn down bars and bowling alleys just to make a buck.

After the aforementioned interview, Bad begins to fall in love with Jean and this is where the story really starts to take off. Bad has been miserable since his falling out an unspecified number of years ago and we assume it's all for legitimate reasons. Who wouldn't be miserable playing in small bars after your former band mate left you? Well, later we find out that Tommy didn't leave in hate and still respects Bad tremendously. He remarks to him how he'll never forget that it was him who gave him his start. Throughout the movie, Bad is heard spewing verbal hatred at Tommy and we simply take it as his way to deal with Tommy's crippling betrayal, but it simply isn't the case. He has no real reason to be mad at Tommy. He is merely confusing his jealousy for anger. After he reluctantly opens for him at a big gig, we finally discover this and realize there's something more brewing underneath Bad's seemingly hardened veneer.

The reason he takes the gig in the first place is because of Jean, not because she urges him to, but because he starts to find happiness in her and starts to dismiss those feelings of hate. However, when everything finally seems to be turning around for the better and he finds himself getting his love for Jean returned to him, he ruins it with bad decision making. His alcoholism controls him and although he is asked by Jean to not drink in front of her young son, he stops inside of a bar one day while out with the little tyke and loses him due to his drunkenness.

To continue on discussing this terrific story would be taking the pleasure of seeing it unfolding yourself away. However, it's the underlying message that really hits home and makes this movie something more than the sum of its parts. It shows a man emotionally and physically crippled from a number of problems, some external and some self inflicted, but finds hope in his cloud of depression. It says that it's never too late to turn your life around. No matter your age, your nasty habits or the turmoil you're going through, you can change yourself and become someone better, somebody who looks at life through a fresh perspective.

Much more is revealed about Bad in this nearly two hour movie, but my adulation for Crazy Heart has already kept me rambling for far too long. Bad is a multi-layered person, simple on the surface, but hiding secrets within him and he summarizes his entire character arc with one lyrical line from one of his country songs where he sings, "I used to be somebody, but now I'm somebody else."

Although there isn't much going on behind the camera, largely due to first-time director Scott Cooper, and the story is overly familiar—it's basically The Wrestler with more heart (as my friend Kevin "BDK" McCarthy put it)—it's done with such splendor and dedication that one can't help but be impressed with the finished product. It's a shame Crazy Heart wasn't released in DC a couple of weeks back so I could rightfully place it on my 2009 best of the year list. Oh well. I guess 2010 will have to do.

Crazy Heart receives 5/5

Youth in Revolt the First Stinker of 2010

I should have known better. Everybody knows that January is dump month, the month of the year where movie studios release the films they have no faith in. After the holidays, where they release the films they think could be big money grabbers or Oscar contenders, theatrical attendance generally goes down a bit. So instead of releasing something of quality, they take whatever they have lying around and plop it here just so they will have something on screens nationwide while they await their next big blockbuster. Despite this, Youth in Revolt looked promising. The trailers were amusing and seemed like only a glimpse at an overall better, raunchier, funnier movie, but naturally, that isn't the case. Youth in Revolt is quite bad and Michael Cera's relatively impressive filmography is now on a running streak of two bad movies in a row with the inclusion of the wretched Year One released earlier this year. Perhaps his usual brand of awkward humor is beginning to wear thin.

The film follows Nick Twisp (Cera), the typical nerdy, virgin teen that usually crops up in these types of pictures. He lives with his mother (Jean Smart) and her boy toy whom he hates named Jerry (Zach Galifianakis). After three Navy men come around to lay the beat down on Jerry, they pack up and take a road trip to a camper site where Nick meets the love of his life, Sheeni (Portia Doubleday). His overwhelming emotions get the best of him and in his desire to win her over, he creates a supplementary persona whom he dubs Francois (also played by Michael Cera), the suave, uncaring, foul mouthed side of him who says what's on his mind and does what he wants. Unfortunately, Nick has to leave the camper site and Sheeni behind, so he comes up with a master plan. He will do terrible things and make his mother's life miserable. This way, she will kick him out and he will have to live with his father (Steve Buscemi) who lives near Sheeni. After blowing up a store with the help of his alternate personality, he gets his wish, but the cops are now looking for him as well.

Youth in Revolt is one mess of an unfunny movie, in large part due to the creepy nature of Francois and the questionable mental state of Nick. The crutch of the film is his split personality, but Francois comes off more as a child predator than he does the cool bad ass side of Nick. Essentially, Nick is talking to himself in the scenes with Francois and forces himself to do things he doesn't want to do. He's mentally unstable, sick of his repressed, secluded self and growing weary of his mother's sluttiness that his kind, gentle demeanor is overtaken by the power of Francois. His brain is so diluted with the foolish thought that he simply can't go on being a virgin (because no 16 year old anywhere is still a virgin) that he basically snaps. This is a guy we're supposed to root for, but I found myself more inclined to root for the police so he could get the proper psychiatric treatments he so desperately needed.

Though it does offer up a few laughs here and there, roughly half are in the trailer (equaling out to about seven or eight total) and they're better edited in it than the actual picture. Similar to the overrated Fantastic Mr. Fox, Youth in Revolt takes a funny joke that was edited with terrific comedic timing in the trailer and adds in an extra shot or two that throws the whole punchline off track. It just goes to show how important editing is. You can have the funniest joke ever on paper, but if it doesn't come across pitch perfect in the movie, it loses its impact.

Michael Cera, though undeniably likable and charming, has more or less played the same character in every movie, including this one. His awkward, nerdy physique and sarcastic humor are intact in Youth in Revolt, but it's old at this point. While Francois is a departure from his usual performance, he is underutilized, only showing up in a handful of scenes, only one of which is funny in the slightest.

I'm not quick to point the finger at anybody in particular when it comes to the failings of Youth in Revolt. The actors do a capable job, the direction is fine and the writing was decent enough, but "capable," "fine," and "decent" aren't exactly impassioned adjectives. The whole affair just seems lazy, with nobody doing anything too awful, but nobody on the opposite end picking up the slack either. The new year is off to a poor start indeed.

Youth in Revolt receives 1.5/5