411 Fact or Fiction Movies: Week 55

Posted by Matthew Craggs on 11.25.2006

Trevor Snyder and Will Helm talk Happy Feet, Bond, Bobby, The Hobbit and more in Week 55 of Fact or Ficton.

Greetings,

A little late this week, but it's more than worth it as we have Trevor Snyder, your Top 5 guy, and Will Helm, your Misunderstood Masterpiece.

1. Happy Feet beat Casino Royale at the box office. Didn't see that one coming.

Trevor Snyder: FACT. Yeah, this one caught me by surprise, although it would have been a hell of a lot more shocking if Happy Feet had absolutely demolished Casino Royale. As it is, it was a narrow win, which makes it somewhat less surprising, since I had a feeling both movies would do well. I guess this just goes to show that you can never underestimate animated animal movies. Still, Bond did quite well itself, so both movies get to keep their heads up high, and Hollywood can be happy that two movies, for two different audiences, had a great weekend.

Will Helm: FICTION. No surprise at all. When in doubt, it's always fair to assume that a children's/family movie will win out over anything but the most popular movies. Yes, the James Bond franchise is extremely popular, but this is a reboot and I believe a lot of the fanbase is wary of the changes. On the other hand, Happy Feet, of which I have no idea what the plot is, has been advertised ad nauseam and is winning family fare for this time of year. Even though James Bond has its fans, family films sell more tickets . . . because kids don't get in for free.


Score: 0 for 1

2. Daniel Craig is the best Bond since Sean Connery.

Trevor Snyder: FICTION. Don't get me wrong, I loved Casino Royale. It's certainly one of the best films in the series so far, and Craig's excellent performance is a big factor in that. And when all is said and done, and his time with the character is over, perhaps Craig will be considered the best Bond ever. I don't know. And, at this point, neither does anyone else. What I do know is that it's a little too eary to start instantly proclaiming him the best Bond since Connery, or Moore, or whatever. Especially since it all really comes down to a matter of taste, depending on how you like your Bond portrayed. Yes, Craig is a better actor than Pierce Brosnan, but is he a better Bond? Well, that depends. He's playing a totally different kind of Bond than Brosnan did. I don't think Craig could have pulled off the kind of Bond Brosnan played, or vice versa. Personally, I enjoy both interpretations, and am fairly confidant that we will eventually see the return of the cocky, almost-superhuman James Bond - probably whenever the next actor takes over. Right now, I just think it's too early to decide this issue. Brosnan's first movie was great too, but he never did another one that matched Goldeneye's quality. Let's see if Craig's next movie lives up to the lofty expectations set by Casino Royale before any permanent judgments about him and his place in the Bond standings are made.

Will Helm: FACT. I have yet to see Casino Royale, but I'll go on faith that Craig is the best bond since Connery only because everyone says that he is. In addition, on blind faith, it's fair to assume that Craig is an excellent Bond, especially in the Connery mold, simply because the films since Connery have gotten away from the mystique of the original films. What were hard-boiled espionage films in the mid- and late ‘60s became overblown action films even into the Pierce Brosnan era. This, as I mentioned before, is a reboot back to the old Connery era and, therefore, Craig is guaranteed to be the best James Bond since then mainly because he's the first playing that style of James Bond since then . . . if that makes any sense.

Score: 0 for 2

3. Bobby has solidified Emilio Estevez as a star again.

Trevor Snyder: FICTION. So far, I've seen mixed reviews for Bobby, and while I'm not sure if it's box office perfomance is living up to expectations, I think it's safe to say that the majority of people going to see it aren't doing so because it's directed by Emilio Estevez. I bet a lot of them might not even know that until they see his name in the opening credits. If the movie ends up doing really well, and Estevez earns some nominations and awards for it, then maybe we can say he's once again a star. Until then, I think he's still flying safely under the radar of most movie-goers.

Will Helm: FICTION. Whether or not Bobby is a good film remains to be seen, but the real meat of the issue is whether or not Emilio Estevez was a star to begin with. Yes, Emilio Estevez was in some popular films but, other than perhaps the Mighty Ducks franchise, it could never be said that he was the main player in most of his films. In The Breakfast Club he was overshadowed by Judd Nelson, in St. Elmo's Fire he was upstaged by Rob Lowe, and even in Men at Work he had to share the screen with his more successful – at the time and even today – brother, Charlie Sheen. It could be said that Emilio Estevez was famous – and Bobby may have returned some of the luster of that fame – but it'd be a little bit of a stretch to say he was ever a star.

Score: 1 for 3

Switch!

4. The now cancelled OJ Simpson TV special was in poor taste, but you would have watched it anyway.

Will Helm: FICTION. I know for certain I wouldn't have watched it – especially because I work a night. But, even still, I wouldn't be watching it because I haven't thought about OJ Simpson in about ten years. This was a hot story back when it was the third or fourth "Trial of the Century" in the '90s, but now it's old hat. Passé, even. To be quite honest, the fact that this special was even conceived annoys me to no end – not because I have any ill will toward OJ Simpson . . . I don't care enough to have any ill will – but because I'm sick of seeing all the hangers on in the deal as well. Fred Goldman, Kato Kaelin, all of them. Of course, the only way I would've watched it is if OJ Simpson were to say "If I did do it, it would've been something like this" and he cuts the interviewers head off. Now that'd be quality television . . . but, as of now, I have to chalk this one up as a big FICTION.

Trevor Snyder: FICTION. Like Will, I also would have probably skipped the special not only because of it's general tastelessness, but also because I'm bored of the whole thing. I guess OJ couldnt stand the fact that no one has paid attention to him for the last few years, and this was his last desperate attempt to get people to care about him again. Man, you'd think he would just be happy enough about the fact that he got away with murder (alledgedly...ahem). This had bad idea written all over, and I had no intention of checking it out. Afterall, it's not like if OJ had actually said anything amazingly newsworthy, it wouldn't have ended up all over the news networks and internet the next day, anyway. So why waste my precious time actually watching the special?

Score: 2 for 4

5. Peter Jackson not being involved in The Hobbit is a bad move.

Will Helm: FACT. . After watching years and years of bad movies, Hollywood executives still confound me. The logic behind this decision is mind-numbing, honestly. Peter Jackson was the man who rescued J.R.R. Tolkien from the legacy of those disappointing Rankin-Bass cartoons and created one of the best – if not the best – movie trilogies in history. He's one of the few directors that can successfully navigate human drama and big box-office special effects with equal aptitude. Of
course, it makes sense, in Hollywood logic, that he NOT be involved in the long-awaited Lord of the Rings prequel – so to speak. This is a decision that has "bad" written all over it, but that's just par for the course in Hollywood.

Trevor Snyder: FACT. How could New Line possibly think it's a good idea to take this to a different writer/director. I dont care what kind of lawsuit is going on, this is just a terrible decision, in both a creative and business sense. Peter Jackson created one of film's most popular and beloved franchises with the Lord of the Rings, and in the minds of the fans is now synonymous with Tolkien. It doesnt really matter who New Line gets now; a large section of the fanbase is going to revolt for feeling they are being denied getting to see Jackson finish up the complete series. I don't know, I could be wrong, but it just seems like this could really blow up in New Line's face.

Score: 3 for 5

6. Ed Norton is speaking out against award show gift baskets just to get his name in the press.

Will Helm: FICTION. In the case of Ed Norton speaking out against award-show gift baskets, I think the timing is everything. If this were February or closer to "awards season," then I'd be more inclined to believe that Ed Norton was just trying to get his name in the papers with his diatribe. However, this is the dead period for awards so it's not like the gift baskets are a hot-button issue. Yes, Ed Norton taking a stand against them does put his name in the paper but – and maybe I'm being a bit naïve here – there is an element of sincerity to what he's saying. I'll take it on faith that he's doing the right thing and not angling for good publicity . . . as of now.

Trevor Snyder: FICTION. I admit I don't really know too much about this story. But I'm gonna go with fiction, if only because I have enough respect for Norton to think that if he really wanted to get his name in the press that bad, he could think of a better way to do it than ripping on award show gift baskets. In a era when celebrities deliver racist rants and talk about how they "might have" murdered someone, am I really supposed to care that some actor doesnt like getting some free schwag now and then? I mean, it's not exactly a great publicity stunt. Norton just seems like the type of guy who doesnt buy into the typical Hollywood BS as much as some do, so I'm not surprised he finds the unnecessary excess of the baskets to be pretty ridiculous. Now, if he had called a press conference to say so, then I would have agreed that he was doing it just to get his name in the press. Come to think of it, though, he should call a press conference just for that reason. Wouldn't it be great to see all of the important entertainment media show up to hear a celebrity make such a boring announcement?

Final Score: 4 for 6

These two end strong with 4 out of 6. Thanks, guys, and make sure to join us next week for more Fact or Fiction.