411 Fact or Fiction Movies/TV 06.19.09: Week 182
Posted by Ben Piper on 06.19.2009
Will the teaming of Michael Cera and Jack Black elevate Year One to being an underrated comedic gem? Are people already looking forward to seeing Scorsese's Shutter Island? Was the Letterman/Palin flap blown completely out of proportion? 411's Arnold Furious and DC Perry debate these and other topics in week 182 of 411 Fact or Fiction: Movies/TV!
What's happening? Welcome back yet again to the 411 column sure to cause general unrest and disillusionment, Fact or Fiction. This week we've got DC Perry, whom recently brought to a close his My Life At The Movies column. Standing opposed is the always outstanding English lad, Arnold Furious. Let's check out what they have to say, shall we?
1. Your better half couldn't drag you kicking and screaming to see Ryan Reynold's and Sandra Bullock's new rom-com The Proposal.
Arnold Furious: Fact. As much as I love my wife…Sandra Bullock has been off limits for some considerable time. The last time I remember actually enjoying a Sandra Bullock vehicle was 28 Days where she did a reasonable job of playing a flamboyant alcoholic. That was 9 years ago. I should probably note that I don't consider 2005's Crash to be a Bullock vehicle as she was part of an ensemble cast and frankly didn't add much to the picture. To actually get back to full on enjoyable Bullock films you'd have to go back to 1993-94 where she made Demolition Man and Speed the two action movies that made her career. Of course she didn't shut off the action option and made two terrible action films as the lead character; Speed 2 and The Net. Over the past decade I've completely lost interest in her career and her revelation in interviews ahead of this one that she gets naked but doesn't show anything isn't fooling anyone. It stinks of desperation. Ryan Reynolds is an actor I have less of a problem with but his record in rom-com's is a little shaky. Although I'd take Definitely Maybe over anything of Sandra's in the past ten years. Combined, I'm not interested. I'm sure the missus will want to see it because it's well into that ‘chick-flick' genre. Hey, she finds Richard Gere movies amusing as opposed to irritating! But I'm hoping this is one of those films she manages to catch on TV when I'm at work.
DC Perry: Fact. Because she'd never even try. No one in my house is going to crash Fandango for a romantic comedy, with the possible exception of anything involving James L. Brooks. Ryan Reynolds is fine, though I wouldn't have pegged him as the breakout star from Two Guys, A Girl, and a Pizza Place (shows what I know – why the hell isn't Nathan Fillion in more movies?). Sandra Bullock has never done much for me. Even in the movies she's in that I enjoy (Demolition Man, Speed, A Time to Kill), she's wooden and distracting. I can't take her seriously in a romantic lead. But I'll probably end up catching it some night on HBO in a few months, mostly because Betty White rules.
Score: 1 for 1
2. The trailer for Martin Scorsese's new movie Shutter Island already has you chomping at the bit to see it.
Arnold Furious Fact. Martin Scorsese may not be the greatest director of all time but he's certainly in the top ten of anyone's list. I figure I've got him at #3 or maybe #4 depending on where I stick Spielberg. I'm quite happy to watch anything Marty makes even if I don't think it quite hits the marks. For example I was thrilled by the very thought of the The Aviator but the actual film was a little on the disappointing side. Ever since Shutter Island was announced (and I'm glad they went with that title as opposed to Ashecliffe) I've been waiting for something off the production that would whet my appetite for Mr Scorsese's latest. The trailer certainly does that. It looks to be a top notch thriller with a solid cast. DiCaprio has been improving as a performer since he started hooking up with Scorsese on Gangs of New York in 2002. Everything he's been in since has shown his acting abilities to be on the rise. As if that punk teenager from Titanic has finally grown up (yes, I know he was 23 but the character felt like a teen). He's in a rich vein of form and this is perhaps his most mainstream film in a while too. The run-time of 148 minutes might put some folk off but increasingly we're being conditioned to sit through longer films if the pay-off is there. Scorsese rarely ever fails to deliver and this could easily be his best collaboration with DiCaprio. I can't wait.
DC Perry: Fact. Creepy locale? Check. Conspiracy? Check. Encroaching madness? Check. What more could you want in a movie? Oh, yeah. Martin Scorsese. I'd be stoked for this movie even without him at the helm. With him, it gets that added injection of style and substance. The cast is the usual Scorsese brand of stellar (Max von Sydow? Really? Awesome), and even in the trailer, Scorsese's direction sets the mood perfectly, even making the exterior shots feel claustrophobic and chaotic As for DiCaprio – I can't think of another actor who's done as great a job of career reinvention than he has (OK, maybe Tom Hanks, but that's some solid company), though I'd go a bit further back and pin its start to 2000's The Beach. The financial success of Titanic presented him with a chance to take a very safe, very easy career path, and he didn't take the bait. He's one of the heavyweights in this cast right along Ben Kingsley, and he earned it by working on his craft despite plenty of temptation not to. Color me impressed.
Score: 2 for 2
3. The teaming of Jack Black and Michael Cera will make Year One an underrated comedic gem in the long run.
Arnold Furious: Fiction (-ish). I've got nothing against either Black or Cera. I think they've made some very funny comedies between them. However I'm partly agreeing with the statement because I think it will be a comedic gem and develop a cult following and that's because the director is none other than Harold Ramis. Yanno, that guy who directed Groundhog Day. Writer of Animal House, Ghostbusters and Caddyshack. He's due a hit or at least a movie that develops a following. Year One should do that or at least create enough buzz for the upcoming production of Ghostbusters 3 that everyone's talking about. I might be being hard on Jack Black but as a lead actor, voice work aside, he's not made an enjoyable film since School of Rock and that was way back in 2003! Not quite the dry streak some actors, like Sandra Bullock, are on but that's a long time for one of the supposed heavyweights of mainstream comedy. Whatever happened to Jack Black? Several wayward career choices and some subpar comedies (like the underachieving Be Kind Rewind and Nacho Libre) have seen his stock slip somewhat. Which is why Year One arrives with little hype attached to it. If it is a hit it'll be one that Jack needs to give his career a boost. If it falls short I worry about his future. Probably touring with Tenacious D. Which would be awesome because I love those guys. Cera on the other hand has had a hot run of movies lately including Juno and Superbad. He doesn't really need a hit like Jack Black does but he needs a challenge as he keeps playing the exact same character. Good luck to them but I can't see Year One being a big hit and whether it becomes a cult hit is down to how many stoners dig it. Time will tell.
DC Perry: Fact. Though I can't swear in court it will be because of Black and Cera, Harold Ramis knows how to make comedies that stand up (see everything listed above), and while it might not (read: absolutely will not) burn up the box office, that's never been the standard for successful comedies. I don't remember anyone getting trampled in the lines for Austin Powers or Shaun of the Dead. DVDs get rented, word of mouth spreads, and if it's any good, everyone owns a copy and everyone pretends they saw it opening night and knew all about it before their friends. Because people are hypocrites and liars. This movie will be like that.
Score: 2 for 3
Switch!!!
4. You're relived to learn that the planned live-action remake of Akira has been shelved.
DC Perry: Fact.Akira is a brilliant, trippy, confusing piece of 80s anime, and I prefer that it stay that way. It doesn't need reinterpretation; it definitely doesn't need live-action reinterpretation. I'm looking at you, Kanye West. If you've never seen Akira – well, you're screwed, because it's not available from Netflix for some reason. But if you can find a copy, buy it. It will mess up your brain, in all the best ways. It's post-apocalyptic (because Japan is post-apocalyptic – see August 6, 1945) and barely linear, but the overall effect is magnificent. And no matter how impressive the special effects might be in a live-action remake, it just couldn't be as magnificent. Plus, it would set a dangerous precedent. I don't want anyone getting the idea to do a live-action remake of Grave of the Fireflies.
Arnold Furious: Fact. I have to go along with DC on this one. I love the original Akira. It remains exciting and colourful and in a world where animation has become computerised Akira stands apart as being beautifully hand drawn. There's nothing quite like seeing the headlights of the motorbikes racing through Neo-Tokyo at the film's beginning. Really only Satoshi Kon has come close to making films with the same kind of beauty in them (check out Millennium Actress). The biggest issue with a re-make isn't getting the effects right, as surely by now almost anything is possible using CGI, but rather the cost of doing so. Akira is one of those films that is so epic that it'd cost something in the region of $300 million. Add in that Akira has only a limited audience (similar to Watchmen, I'd wager) and there's no way anyone is going to cough up that kind of green. Even if it did break every box office record in Japan! DC also makes a valid point that if the re-make came off we'd run the risk of seeing other manga cross over into live action and frankly, I think that's asking for trouble. Due to the cost I think Hollywood has no chance of going this route although I'm sure it'll come up again in the future. The live-action Akira project has been on the drawing board since the early 1990's with Sony involved. As soon as it's financially viable talk will surely come around to the possibility of it happening again.
Score: 3 for 4
5. The flap between David Letterman and Alaskan Governor Sarah Palin was greatly blown out of proportion by the latter.
DC Perry: Fact. Ugh. Can this end already? Letterman told a joke that was just flawed enough to allow people desperate to misinterpret things plenty of room to do so. I think it's clear he was talking about Bristol, who is both an adult and a public person in her own right; that doesn't mean Letterman didn't cross a line, but it makes it a very different line. Palin's camp decided he must have meant Willow, for the very logical reason that she was the only daughter who accompanied Palin on her trip to New York, but then went off on an unjustifiable tangent about rape. Bad concept, bad wording, bad research, bad reaction. Bad all around. So Letterman apologized. Twice. Thoroughly. Everyone's had their run around the news cycle with this thing. It's over. Good riddance.
Arnold Furious: Fact. The original gag wasn't out of line with Letterman's usual humour. It was just badly researched. If Sarah Palin feels the need to take a gag and turn it into an issue then she's more of an attention seeker than I thought. How's about you try and do something useful…like taking care of the Alaskan people who elected you governor! I don't know if she's noticed but her approval rating is heading into the toilet with the more time she spends away from the issues that relate directly to her job. In May 2007, way before John McCain gave her ideas about political power above her station, Palin's approval rating was 89%. People in Alaska were perfectly happy with her. Her approval rating, as of May this year, sits at 54%. Someone's been upsetting the people who put her in her position of power. I think she should go back to Alaska and work on her own job before she becomes the modern version of Dan Quayle. Without the power. And who names their daughters Willow and Bristol anyway?
Score: 4 for 5
6. Marcus Nispel is a poor choice to direct the new version of Conan.
DC Perry: Fact. Nispel has made some absolute stinkers, and there's no reason to assume he'll stop any time soon. For some reason, this guy has become the go-to guy for franchise reboots, and he's been all thumbs each time out. I know he says this is his childhood dream project, but that only translates into quality if your name is Peter Jackson. J.J. Abrams didn't know a Romulan from a Tribble before he rebooted Star Trek. Passion only goes as far as your talent will let you. Hopefully, they'll shoot the moon and cast HHH in this thing and let it be as awful as possible.
Arnold Furious: Fiction. I don't think there's a good way to re-boot Conan. I mean, come on, we're not talking about Shakespeare here, or even the successful re-boots with bigger built-in audiences like Star Trek or Casino Royale. It was only a success to begin with because they struck gold with Arnie. Unless they fluke it again with an unknown with a bizarre accent I think the project is doomed to failure as it is. As is pretty much any Schwarzenegger property that he's no longer involved with. If anything was going to survive without him it was Terminator and we all saw what happened at the box office with Salvation. It might be a minor hit after overseas money is taken into account but it's performed well below expectations and probably won't see profit until the DVD is selling well. And let's not forget the Arnie-less Predator 2. Made on a $35M budget the film only returned $30M at the box office. And that's with a cool concept and the awesome bad guy! So if they think Conan is going to do anything at the box office they're in for a big surprise. As for Nispel; sure he's made some lame films and he's basically a commercial director but that never stopped Michael Bay. Anyone who finds a single Bay film entertaining will eventually find something enjoyable come from Marcus Nispel. Bottom line, however, is that I'm really not bothered about the director because a) I don't really pay much attention to re-makes and b) I have no intention of watching this. Sorry, Marcus.
Final Score: 4 for 6
Bonus Non Fact or Fiction Question: What is your favorite "guilty pleasure" movie?
DC Perry:Rocky IV. 1976's Rocky was a scrappy, street-wise, underdog. 1985's Rocky was a super hero. This movie has everything you need in a guilty pleasure. Cold War nostalgia. Obvious, cartoonish stereotypes. Lines you can quote in your sleep. (Who hasn't stared someone down and said "I must break you"?) Rocky IV is so unapologetically jingoistic and so wonderfully unsubtle, I have to watch it any time it's on TV.
Arnold Furious: This is a tough one. I don't feel guilty about watching films that aren't deemed ‘good'. My gut reaction was Meet the Feebles. I love that film. But I checked on RottenTomatoes and it's 76% fresh. Wonderfully grotesque film btw. I highly recommend it. Peter Jackson does the Muppets! So I'm going with The Majestic; Frank Darabont and Jim Carrey's bizarre collaboration from 2001. Called "ponderous and overlong" on RT it's also been accused of being overly sentimental and is a mere 42% fresh. I love the film personally. I thought Carrey's turn was delicate and meaningful and ranks among his best serious films. It has a noir-ish feel and a small town vibe to it. Martin Landau is incredible in it and I find it very touching. Also, Rocky IV. "He's like a piece of iron".
Amen, Furious, The Majestic deserves much more credit than it receives.
Posted By: Talon (Guest) on June 19, 2009 at 01:11 AM
"I don't want anyone getting the idea to do a live-action remake of Grave of the Fireflies."
SHHHHH!
Evil has eyes everywhere.
Posted By: Ack! (Guest) on June 19, 2009 at 04:31 AM
Furious, you are even aware that Conan was a literary phenomenon for 50 YEARS before Arnold came along? Conan had managed just fine without Arnold, and it will continue to be fine without him. You bring up Terminator and Predator, but Arnold was there for the very beginning of those franchises. He was an integral part of them in a way he simply isn't for Conan - hell, he was not even BORN when Conan started, and was unknown as an actor when the comics and paperbacks became a sensation.
I'm sure you'd argue that when it comes to the films Arnold is integral, and I'd agree... if this was a continuation of the De Laurentiis films. It isn't, it's going to be a complete reboot going back to the original stories. There is no reason for Arnold to be tied to this film any more than Adam West should've been in Batman Begins, or Sean Connery in Casino Royale. And they did pretty damn well. And of course, I could point to Conan the Destroyer: surely it would've been a success because Golden Boy Arnie was in it? It wasn't. Same with Terminator 3. Thus we have proof that Arnold's presence does not mean success in and of itself.
Finally, of course there's a good way to reboot Conan, get a guy who loves the original source material who's an accomplished enough director. I don't think Peter Jackson is that man (nor Nispel for that matter), but guys like Ridley Scott and John McTiernan have shown interest in the past. I certainly think those two would make better films than Nispel could even dream of.
Posted By: The Tortoise King (Registered) on June 19, 2009 at 01:25 PM
I might be being hard on Jack Black but as a lead actor, voice work aside, he's not made an enjoyable film since School of Rock and that was way back in 2003
Tenacious D and the Pick of Destiny was a great movie. It was just lost in the post-Borat hype.
This was just about 3 years ago.
Posted By: wtf? (Guest) on June 19, 2009 at 11:14 PM
bullock was good in "Miss congeniality"
Posted By: dogpound7382 (Guest) on June 19, 2009 at 11:24 PM
Demolition Man kicks ass. Everyone should hail this, as the best action movie of all time.
Posted By: CB2009 (Guest) on June 20, 2009 at 02:04 AM
Of course you Damn liberals on this site will defend Letterman. His joke was tastless. What if he said that about your daughter? Would you think the same way?
Posted By: Guest#3845 (Guest) on June 20, 2009 at 02:18 AM
The funniest thing I saw about the Letterman/palin thing was a picture of a protester. Some young teen girl was holding asign that said we are all Palins daughters. Which mademe think ,oh so you want to be an unwed mother by the time youre 18 too?
And really how could someome seriously support Palin who was trying to pass a bill to make it legal to hunt animals from a helicopter?
Posted By: Guest#1934 (Guest) on June 20, 2009 at 04:18 AM
The Majestic is an awesome movie. Way underrated. I'd easily put in Jim Carrey's top 5.
Posted By: Volourn (Guest) on June 20, 2009 at 04:19 AM
The Letterman joke isn't receiving the negative publicity because of its "tasteless" content. It's received negative publicity because of its political connections. Which makes the whole matter a bit ridiculous.
Posted By: Joe (Guest) on June 20, 2009 at 06:36 AM
If he dies, he dies.
Posted By: Ivan Drago (Guest) on June 20, 2009 at 09:47 AM
hey arnold , who names their kids malia and sasha? People can name their kids whatever the fuck they want. what does it have to do with the question and why the fuck should you care?
Posted By: furey (Guest) on June 20, 2009 at 11:06 AM
Michaels Cera is as bad as Shia LaBeouf and needs to quit. He plays the same type character in all his movies. The shy, loser that some how gets the girl he wants by doing retarted things along the way and constantly acting like a loser. I'm just wondering how long it will take hollywood to get rid of him. Hopefully, Michael Cera will take Shia LaBeouf with him because he is equally annoying.
Posted By: The Truth (Guest) on June 20, 2009 at 11:21 AM
Of course you Damn liberals on this site will defend Letterman. His joke was tastless. What if he said that about your daughter? Would you think the same way?
Posted By: Guest#3845 (Guest) on June 20, 2009 at 02:18 AM
So if you make jokes....you're a liberal?? What's wrong with this world?? I know it's totally cliched but...can't ya take a joke?? Damn
Posted By: Erik (Guest) on June 20, 2009 at 11:46 AM
"DiCaprio has been improving as a performer since he started hooking up with Scorsese on Gangs of New York in 2002. Everything he's been in since has shown his acting abilities to be on the rise."
Furious you are retarded. You do realize he is like a top 3 actor in hollywood right now. I like the way you act like you know all about it. LOL at your ego
Posted By: Captain Patterson (Guest) on June 20, 2009 at 11:58 AM
This column gets so much negative feedback it is freaking hilarious. For one the moron who called Furious retarded about his DiCaprio comments. Hey Ace you do realize that is true right? Before Gangs of New York Leo was hated by everyone except teenage girls. After Gangs everyone saw he was improving and picking good movies. So I don't see how Furious is retarded when he is telling the truth.
Posted By: JM (Guest) on June 20, 2009 at 12:33 PM
Anybody who question Leo's ability after seeing "The Basketball Diaries" is out of their mind... Seriously... He's never not been a superb actor, except maybe his "growing pains" stint when he was overshadowed by Kirk Cameron
Posted By: Guest#0508 (Guest) on June 20, 2009 at 03:14 PM
imagine if someone said something about Letterman's kids, think he would laugh it off? He wouldn't because parents SHOULD defend their children end of story. Just because you don't like Palin doesn't defend Letterman
Posted By: Guest#0598 (Guest) on June 20, 2009 at 03:49 PM
This column gets so much negative feedback it is freaking hilarious. For one the moron who called Furious retarded about his DiCaprio comments. Hey Ace you do realize that is true right? Before Gangs of New York Leo was hated by everyone except teenage girls. After Gangs everyone saw he was improving and picking good movies. So I don't see how Furious is retarded when he is telling the truth.
Posted By: JM (Guest) on June 20, 2009 at 12:33 PM
The guy who commented after you said it best JM. I will now call you a Douchenozzle. Douchenozzle.
Posted By: Captain Patterson (Guest) on June 20, 2009 at 03:53 PM
"imagine if someone said something about Letterman's kids, think he would laugh it off?"
That depends, is Letterman's kid a sniveling hypocrite who preaches abstinence while getting knocked up?
Posted By: Guest#4850 (Guest) on June 20, 2009 at 08:06 PM
A live-action Akira would be like a live-action Dragonball Z (only less annoying), and lord knows nobody's crazy enough to try- wait, nevermind.
Posted By: KanyonKreist (Guest) on June 20, 2009 at 09:29 PM
"imagine if someone said something about Letterman's kids, think he would laugh it off?"
That depends, is Letterman's kid a sniveling hypocrite who preaches abstinence while getting knocked up?
Posted By: Guest#4850 (Guest) on June 20, 2009 at 08:06 PM
..and I think that one went out of the ball park. Kudos.
Posted By: Guest#4290 (Guest) on June 20, 2009 at 11:21 PM
There already is a live action remake of grave of fireflies. It was released in 2005 in japan.
Posted By: PolePop (Guest) on June 21, 2009 at 07:15 AM
this is my impression of Guest#3845: "Blah blah blah liberals. Blah blah blah rape. Blah blah blah I'll defend any conservative issue no matter how ridiculous."
Posted By: nick* (Guest) on June 21, 2009 at 10:34 AM
FACT:
1. Palin has a right to be offended by the joke whether it was against Bristal or Willow. If she was not offended, I would really question her judgment as a parent.
2. While I think the names she chose for her children are funny, they are her children and she gets to name them.
3. Letterman said it to get ratings and to get people talking.
4. Palin keeps it going because it keeps her name in the spot light.
5. Arnold is an idiot.
Posted By: Tugman (Guest) on June 21, 2009 at 09:10 PM
Not only did Gov. Palin rip Letterman for his ignorant comments and attitude, she did a pretty good job on Matt Lauer to boot. When was the last time we saw Letterman do anything even close to entertaining, let alone prove his competence in the political arena? So what if he has more money than the Gov.; his sophomoric attempts at humor only prove why he was a distant second to Leno for years. You couldn't get me to cross the street to see Letterman, even if somebody else paid for the tickets.
Posted By: guest (Guest) on June 21, 2009 at 09:37 PM
