Wednesday, April 28, 2010

Yes, YES!

The first yes is a smaller one, but an enthusiastic one nonetheless: 24 IS GOOD AGAIN! Oh, I've been waiting so long to actually like it; I can't believe that it's finally decent once more. The only thing that could make me happier would be Nina Meyers strolling in on the arm of Tony Almeida (which, let's face it, COULD happen given how out-of-whack things have gone in the plot lately).

I fully think the turnaround began the moment Charles Logan stepped onto the scene. You have to have a slippery enemy in 24; things just don't work if you don't. The first few seasons it was First Lady Sherry Palmer.

Then we had THIS GUY! Bravo, Charles, BRAVO. I never really felt one way or another toward Alison Taylor, only maybe that she was a crashing bore. I am thrilled to no end that Logan is completely out there dragging her name through the mud and being all sinister.

BUT WHERE IS AARON PIERCE? off making the goat movie, I suppose. Too bad.

Jack Bauer in battle mode, STEALING A HELICOPTER and contradicting the President? YES! FINALLY, YES! This is why people watch the show. We don't want to see Jack playing it safe, we don't want to see Jack worrying about some chick (although the surprise sex scene with Renee just before she got whacked was kind of good), we want to see Jack Bauer kick some ass! And all this tomfoolery just so he'll be able to get Platypus in a lockdown somewhere TO TORTURE HER!

On that note, Matt told me before the show that Dana Walsh was about to meet a fitting (and comical) end during the episode; fitting because she gets WATER-boarded (platypus) and comical because she sucks, and good riddance. I was a little surprised by that, actually. No Johnson behind the 2-way mirror with his injection bag? No ripping off fingernails, no Ritchie-from-season-4-psychadellic torture helmet, but right to water boarding? I suppose we're almost to the end by now and they need to get where they're going pretty quickly, so fine, I still give it a thumbs-up.

And second, BREAKING BAD.

This is fast becoming my second favorite show, ever. I cannot believe I've come to the table so late on this, but it is amazing.
"Could you do me a favor? Could you just. CLIMB DOWN. OUT OF MY ASS. JUST A LITTLE BIT?" The sarcasm on this show is killer.

And KEN WINS's BMW blowing up at the gas station? My new, favorite moment in media, ever. Do you know how many of those douche bags I've had to make coffee for during the last four years? PLENTY. The strut and the looks and the goddamned blue tooths. . . .

WONDERFUL. Do yourself a favor and watch it NOW.

Sunday, April 25, 2010

Quite Possibly the Worst Film Ever Made.

I know this is an easy target, but honestly, if any of you out there want to take a stab at making it through this entire film, I submit that you'll be undertaking a brutal task. . . I turned it off about halfway, seriously unable to go on. It would be tempting to say that Bruce Willis is a kiss of death for any non-action 80s film (MORTAL THOUGHTS, much?) but to say that would be to miss the forest for the trees, if you get me.

There was one good thing in this train wreck, a very small one thing: KIM CATTRALL. She was actually spot-on as Sherman's wife.

My list of issues?

1. Tom Hanks being cast in this, at all. Gray status of teeth not appealing. He is not sexual at all.
2. Melanie Griffith, anytime, anywhere.
3. Bruce Willis, as Peter Fallow. This guy was written as a Brit, took pride in his Brit-ness, and most of his POVs from the book dealt completely with this Brit disdainfully parading around American unpleasantness.
4. During the first half, nothing was really said about Kramer's financial situation, which seemed to be a big deal driving his actions throughout the story.
5. Whole movie told from Willis's disgusting Fallow's POV was awful. Definitely the wrong move. Who thought that up? Gross.
6. Sherman's constant "hemorrhaging money" wasn't brought up at all. Again, a big deal driving the narrative that was ignored.
7. The fact that a decent director (Brian DePalma) did this just makes me sad. Screenplay was shit. Either write it yourself or don't do it.
8. Also, did someone just allow Melanie Griffith to AD LIB her entire role? She was like tin foil on fillings, more than usual, even.

Wow. In thinking of past films that have earned this "status," I can really only think of two others, neither of which I've seen all the way through.

Pearl Harbor and, surprise, Mortal Thoughts.
I mean, there's a way to do something cheesy and have it be good, like Clerks, or Dallas. It's like the minute you lose your sense of humor about what you're doing, you just completely tank it.


Tuesday, April 20, 2010

The Stand as it pertains to LOST.

I just finished it today.

And there is something a little unsettling about the evil element in The Stand (Randal Flagg, aka The Walkin' Dude, aka Richard Something-or-Other, aka RUSSELL FARADAY) having the same name as our beloved DANIEL FARADAY?!?!?! What is with RF? And now, in this season, we have DANIEL WIDMORE, not FARADAY. Why? On Lostpedia it says that his birth certificate did not list a father's name, in the main narrative, I suppose it's unknown in the flash-sideways what this situation is.

If they're being clever with names, I want to know just WHAT Smokey's real name was back in the day (I'm not a WHAT, Ben, I'm a WHO!) and I want to know if it was Faraday. If it was, was Eloise KNOCKING BOOTS WITH THE SMOKE MONSTER? Is Eloise evil? She seems to be a Martha Stewart-caliber BITCH, for sure, if nothing else.

Nukes play a large role in both narratives.
Pregnant women play a substantial role in both narratives, Frannie in The Stand, and Claire in LOST. Nadine Cross is impregnated by Randal Flagg, Lucy Swann by Larry Underwood. Sun and Jin conceived a daughter, would that leave perhaps ONE MORE POSSIBILITY?!>?!?!
maybe Kate is supposed to carry Smokey's love child but can't because Jack has already knocked her up? Oh what fun!

There were four men who were told they had to defeat Randal Flagg, friends, as it turned out: Glen, Ralph, Stu, and Larry. Mother Abagail told them, "God didn't bring you folks together to make a community or a committee, he brought you here only to send you further, on a quest. He means for you to try and destroy this Dark Prince, this man of far leagues."

Are Jack, Hugo, Jin, and Sawyer going to be the ones to destroy Smokey, FOREVER? I sure hope so. OR, with all that "he walks among them but he is not one of them" tattoo business on Jack's arm, (Jack the fixer), will the three others sacrifice themselves so that Jack can go on to do the one ETERNAL fix of keeping the devil inside the wine bottle? That seems to be a pretty significant task. . .

Wednesday, April 14, 2010


Wow. I don't know WHAT fricking end is up after that episode, which I thought was amazing, btw. We're getting close to the end now, and I'll say that I still think Jack and John are going to have to duke it out (DID YOU LOVE SMOKEY LOCKE'S "HELLO JACK!" AS MUCH AS I DID?), and while Jack might get the most press out of being the show's savior, I'm not entirely discounting Hugo. He's good, pure, and honest, and he's remained that way all along. He would see the good in people, were he required to somehow prove it, right?

Jack is the fixer. He can't NOT be the fixer! He wants to fix things. Matt thinks Sawyer and Kate are going to die. I think Kate's knocked up. Poor Illana, gone the way of Ernst. Just for the record though (and NOT in the flash-sideways), Sawyer has Clementine waiting for him "back home," Jin and Sun have their daughter. Kate has no one anymore, unless you count her old bitch-face rabbit mother who sold out her own daughter. Aaron = with the Grandmama. Jack has nothing but his mother. Hurley has nothing but his religious mother and Cheech. Ben and Lapidus probably don't even care.

Ding, dong, bell, Desmond's in the well. . . that was unpleasant. I hope he's okay.

My brain hurts. Here are some images.

Sunday, April 11, 2010

Normally I don't really like periods. . .

But for some reason I watched three inside the last month or so: Wuthering Heights, Marie Antoinette, and Shakespeare in Love. I had seen Shakespeare in Love (in the theater) back in the day, but the others were new. I finished reading Wuthering Heights after about an entire year of effort and was displeased by it but thought I'd still try the film. Since there are at least three film adaptations of Wuthering Heights, I did what any film scholar would do (ha ha) and picked the one with the hottest male lead, which happened to be Ralph Fiennes in one of his first major roles.

I wish I could say it was a good film but it was quite boring. I can't even imagine what it was like for Matt who had absolutely no idea what was going on having not read the book; I had to explain things as if I were a Bronte authority or something. . . not even close. I didn't even finish it. What I will say is that having a hot male lead (Fiennes) did WONDERS for keeping me interested; in the novel I hated Heathcliffe from the word go, in the film I found myself at least mildly interested in Fiennes as Heathcliffe, only because I find him wonderfully attractive, even if he plays a jerk (which he'd do much worse a few films down the line in Schindler's List. . . AMON GOETH?) yikes. Still hot though, even as Lord Voldemort. Perhaps especially as Lord Voldemort. I've said it before, and I'll say it again: That scene, at the end of Order of the Phoenix where he flails his arms back and makes everything explode and shatter? If they gave him a nose instead of those snake nostrils, I would totally hit that. Yes, I'm twisted.

Next we have Marie Antoinette. I'll say this: it was a beautiful piece of cinematography. It was a typical period piece, too long, boring dialogue, uninteresting women who other women think are super-interesting, etc., etc. It seemed a bit like The Virgin Suicides in France to me. Then, when she got pissed that her husband wouldn't screw her and the cake, shoes, and hair business started we had (cinematic) Sex and the City in France. The one part I liked a lot was when the Dauphin finally got busy and nailed her; he climbed on top of her and then there was a fade to black (and a excited *gasp* by Marie), nice. The whole affair with the Swedish soldier turned me off completely, I don't care if it was historically accurate or not, it was annoying. Overall, it was probably the most skillfully done period piece I've seen, and quite a bit shorter than Barry Lyndon, so good work, I guess.

And last but not least, Shakespeare in Love. I know there is a lot of flack out there about this one, Weinstein Bros commercializing Shakespeare with Ben Affleck of all people, upsetting the Oscars over Saving Private Ryan, etc. But I really, REALLY like this. Mostly I like it because I like Joseph Fiennes, but I like it also because it's about a writer. I just figured that out this time around! It's a well done film, well written, and honest, I think, if you consider that most writers write best about what they know, and who do they know better than themselves? Wonderful. If I had to watch one period film for the rest of my life, it would definitely be this one.

"Gentlemen upstage, Ladies downstage, ARE YOU A LADY MR. KENT?"