make movies all the time

In that Robert Rodriguez spirit, I didn't hesitate to pick up the video camera and start shooting the story Emme told me this weekend. I was so moved to just be in the room when her mind started rolling. To literally see her eyes as she created from nothing, and not even from me asking her to tell me a story....

I must admit, I'm not that big of a fan of Robert Rodriguez films. But I've learned a LOT from him. I haven't read his book and I've never seen "El Mariachi" or "Shorts". I wasn't that thrilled by his section of "Sin City" and I think he was outdueled in Grindhouse. I'm not even interested in "Shark Boy and Lava Girl".

But I am so inspired by him.

Why?
It used to be because of his legend. There are rumors that circulate the film community that may or may not be true. There are people who would fight you for having issues with the plot holes in "Desperado", there is an entire race of people that will show up to see his movies no matter what he comes up with (I'm talking about Texans).

I hear he was a drug tester in Austin to make money to buy the film stock for El Mariachi? When it wasn't enough, he sold his future dead body to science. When that wasn't enough he sold his grandmother's to science.

And he made the movie. He shot an action movie by editing in camera. And he kept on making movies.

Creative Screenwriting Magazine's Podcast (download here or check it out on iTunes - it's awesome) featured him on a panel at Comic Con 2009 after a special screening of "Shorts". He had so much energy. So much passion. And most of that was directed towards his family.

He spent most of the time talking about how the people around him were family. How they fed off of eachother and worked and lived together. Then he talked about making movies with his kids. He encouraged everyone to take their kids out in the back yard and start making movies. He joked that it was all he did now, it was just that his back yard was a massive film set.

But he said that his kids have grown up there and that they were used to it. And they could let their creations and imaginations run free. He said how it was the most sophisticated form of expression to create a story and realize it on film. And I believe that fully (And I would know - I'm in Education *I say in my most proper and academia of voices*).

And then he dropped the real bomb on me. He stated that "Shorts" was not from his mind, but from the mind of his children. He wrote down what they said, and kept the order of events and the storylines just as they expressed them. That "Shorts" was an exercise in realizing what it is like to live in a neighborhood where the kids all on the street all have their own stories and they are all happening at the same time and from time to time will intersect. He said that his kids not only created the stories but mentioned how they auditioned for the parts to play themselves. Two of them got parts, one of them got to play him self. But they all got to hang out on set and be apart of the creation and realization. They got to order crew members around.

Then he stated again - get out there and just keep making movies.

It inspires me because it is so easy to NOT make movies. You see, I've studied this stuff exhaustively. You need a cinematographer and a sound guy and then you have to edit. You need crew, you have to feed the crew. You got to coordinate and spend money and settle for less than what was in your head. So then you think you need big money and if that doesn't stop you, that means you need to focus on business, which is just like any other business venture - cut throat.

And suddenly you are further and further away from your passion. From the reason you started making movies in the first place. I can't tell you how long it's been since I filmed a "fight scene". It was the first thing I ever filmed in fact. I did it all in camera, too. No Final Cut Pro. No sound engineer. I couldn't figure out how to expose for Ephraim's skin without whiting out Brandon's. I didn't worry about production value and how long it would take to build the dolly tracks. Ephraim kept dropping his Jamaican accent, and Brandon kept "whining" about being really punched in the nose, and almost breaking his finger... and twisting his ankle off. The fight started at 11am and 2 minutes later the Jamaican villain, Boombostic, was "Finshed: Fatality!" against the setting sun. And it was awesome. And it was thrilling - the making of, I mean. Well, I'm sure the fight scene was thrilling, too.

But I just went and made it. And from that I learned and moved to the next fight scene. There was this momentum. The production value went up. The amount of people chipping in went up. I had people pitching me characters to play and fight against. And because I just got out there and just started making movies - I just kept on making movies.

Even in the middle of making my "epic", I did every homework assignment with video. Anytime a friend came over, we made a movie. Other people around me started making movies. It was crazy.

But somewhere along the lines, someone told me I had to make it perfect. Someone told me I had to have substance and drama. And so I sought after the most meaningful shots and the perfect exchange from actors. I slowed down. I let things slow me down. And the movie making ground to a halt while I kept putting it off until I could make the movie perfectly.

The realization has hit me hard the past couple of years. And yet, Rodriguez has instantly inspired me to move forward. That is, once I put his already inspiring message together with a spent day helping Emme realize her story on screen. Once I just started making a movie.

Emme's story was a good one - just hillarious as she told. I didn't do it justice on screen, but Emme and Cooper saw themselves in a story they created. And that was epic.

And though it's nearly impossible to edit in camera with a 4 and 2 year old, the 6 hours of editing was far from exhausting. It was inspiring. And I've now charged myself with the responsibility of making sure my kids never know the limits of their imaginations, and so, in turn, maybe I will forget the limits of mine. I look back and see my dad was doing that for me when we'd go out "on a mission" into the woods to "shoot some Russians" and get the POW's back (what? it was the 80's). We didn't have the video camera but I'm sure dad would have loved to have the simple luxery of capturing (what was actually his - now looking back) imagination running wild on screen.

Always make movies, people. Expressing you, is how we process. And processing what goes in us and through us, makes us better people. And like me and my friend Robert said, making movies is the highest form of expression. Even if you don't have a four year degree in film, keep on making movies. You don't need no stinking school learnin'. Robert Rodriquez is still taking college classes to earn his film degree. And Hollywood begs him to create for them (note his charge to reboot the Predator series).

INTERESTING NOTE on SERENDIPITOUS CYCLES: I was obsessed with Mortal Kombat (the video game) and the idea that two characters could square off against each other and it could be so riveting without a story - the special powers and outfits said everything. I realized I could film a movie without a story. So the idea was circulating of shooting a bunch of fight scenes. My father took me out one weekend to get away. We saw "Mortal Kombat" in the theater and I was kind of satisfied by seeing the fights I'd imagined realized on film. I think it had honestly quenched my thirst to do it myself. And then we wanted to kill more time, so we walked into "Desperado" (Rodriguez's sequel to "El Mariachi". And I realized a movie didn't have to be perfect, that the story didn't have to be perfect, it just had to be fun. I remember talking to my dad about the movies. I may have really analyzed a film for the first time.

The next weekend I shot the first scenes of Moron Kombat. And some of you know the rest from there.
For anyone else... It's waaaaaaaaaayyyyyyy too long of a story.

Maybe it's time I read that book of his. Rebel Without a Crew.

The Book of Eli

The first of the religious apocolypse movies this year sets the bar pretty high.

Contrary to critics quoted on recent TV spots it’s not the first must-see movie of the year, unless you see movies every weekend, and then, yeah, see this one first. It’s also not epic. I don’t know where these critics come up with these quotes but this is a relatively small film. It is a great January/February fit between awards and summer. And I'd take it against most of the coming summer popcorn fair, too.

This is The Road Warrior with a studio budget. A lone wanderer, just trying to reach his destination, is pulled into helping an entire community because only he will stand up to the badguys. It takes place some 30 years after a war that ended in nuclear destruction of civilization. Most people died, some survived. Many blamed religion for the wars and they systematically burned all religious books. Eli holds the only surviving copy of the Holy Bible, and he’s been “told by God” to take it west and that he will be protected. The film then expertly takes on a mantra from a bible verse, “walk by faith and not by sight”.

This film is unique because it doesn’t pander to any “broad” audience in a way I don’t ever remember seeing before.  This film manages to stay purely biblical (meaning none of the broad-stroke mysticism you get from most of Hollywood trying not to offend people) without preaching or having any agenda at all. And all without pulling punches. It's just a story about a guy who just happens to be a bad-ass and a Christian (yep, I just said that). It doesn’t appologize for ITS CHARACTER being a little evengelical and it doesn’t appologize for its characters that are purely evil and holding a mirror up to some of our religious leaders of all kinds.

The characters here, and their motivations, are believable, deep, unique, and fleshed out. And it is what makes Denzel's Eli so great to watch on film - even when he seems to be reaching into his Denzel Washington bag of tricks (the moments happen - but it you'll get over them quickly). He, and his bag of tricks, are a lot of fun. And when he whips out his knife, we believe what he’s capable of and can’t wait to see it happen.

Gary Oldman as Carnegie is fully realized and sympathetic as well. He does suddenly develop a southern bible-belt evangelist accent whenever the topic of the book comes up. It's a little hokey, and yet he's so committed, and gets out of the hamming it up quickly enough to save himself, especially as the story moves forward. I felt it was an easy and pretty lame choice as far as the accent goes - but that really only because it's been overdone that way. Oldman still brings his A-game when it comes to playing the intentions so we can forgive the fake southern charmer thing.

Unique here also, is that the antagonist and protagonist both want the same thing with this book, they want to spread the word of God. Eli has been told to go west with it so it can spread and our villian, knowing the power of religion, wants to use it to spread the Word of God as filtered and controlled by him.

For me, this makes him extremely evil. Not only is he seeking control, but he’s doing it through means we know and have seen work time and time again. From cults that divide members from their families through out of context scriptures, to terrorist cells, we see religion used by people that believe they are in the right and doing right all the time. Carnegie's motivations here are truly to bring order. And what's chilling is: you believe him. You know it will work and that he would be successful. He doesn't want to slaughter and enslave mankind, he just wants order. And for a second you'll ask yourself, "if he gets that book, won't the "good word" spread anyway? Maybe Eli should just let him have it." Brrrrrrrrrr. Chills. That's how well it's played.

What's also interesting is something is being said about God and humanity, people and religion, but you honestly have no idea what its conclusion is. I like that, it's a topic study without a presentation from each side. You don't have to think about it, or even care, because the action and story and screenplay are so good.

At the end you think you know what the film has concluded in the underlying thesis. It seems obvious. And then, in the closing seconds, notice the publishing company name on all the books placed on the shelf. You can’t help but know this was intentional and seems to be completely contrary to everything we’ve just explored. It’s interesting to say the least, and deserves a discussion.

But before all that heavy talk, you can gasp at the blood and carnage and explosions. All in all, it is a solid action film. Competent acting and directing provides for suspense in the right spots, tension where it needs to be, emotional nuances, and a plot that is slick enough on top of archetypal characters you can’t help but write solid dialogue for.

Filmmakers Lesson Learned: Good actors can sometimes overcome self-indulgent filmmaking. So cast well. Stay true to your characters, not your plot, not your action scenes, not even your thesis. Your audience will follow. As I've said before, listen to your characters and let them guide you - You are not even God in your own story.

Legion

Waste of time.

If you think you have to see it, wait for DVD. Or see if you can stream it from somebody’s digital camera they snuck into the theater.

No, wait, I take that back. Make sure to pay for it. I like Paul Bettany. And you can just feel it in the air how much he is trying to be viewed as an action star. I think he deserves it too. He’s got the acting chops, and he looks danged good on film holding M-60's and whipping a bazooka around.  Obviously he got tired of being cast in the “actor’s” role and wants to do something superhero-ish. So I think you should support him. Maybe just pay for a ticket and then go see something else you wanted to see but were ashamed to admit – like To Save a Life or that Squekuel Alvin movie.

So Paul Bettany plays the archangel Michael who descends from heaven on December 23^rd, and because he too, decides to sell me out on coming to Ashley’s surprise party, he goes to his weapons cashe hidden in some regular building on the side of a busy LA street.

That’s right, the archangel Michael needs a lot of guns. Okay, well maybe it’s because he cut his wings off, not sure why, it did help him lose his halo I guess. Which was an electronic collar – what? That’s right, electronic collar, because God needs to keep electronic collar’s on his angels. Now, I’m okay with trying the imagery of the halo being a collar, but it actually drops off his neck and makes a mechanical whine sound before the light fades out. I guess it’s powered by the Holy Ghost battery power. 4 Double A’s.

He stands off with another angel who possesses a police officer and tries to stop Michael from going forward with his plan. This after Mike blows a hole in the side of the building he held all of his weapons in. And here’s how hokey it is, the blown hole is actually in the shape of a cross. I mean, that’s trying really hard to infuse it with religious imagery. What does that even mean? What was the thought process there? "Oh, this Michael character is from the Bible, so let's have him blow a cross shaped hole in the wall! YEAH!" Because crosses are in the Bible too. That's clever.

I can’t figure out why the angels possessed the humans and the would rush in and bite their targets. Usually demons posses people in order to operate in the fleshly world. I guess most of the angels didn't get the memo that Michael and Gabriel got - angels can fly around AND get shot by guns. It was clearly more effective when Gabriel flew in using his bullet proof wings (they actually make metal ricochet sounds when the bullets hit). Or why didn’t they just come in as themselves – Michael did it pretty well too. But why did Michael fight Gabriel with guns anyway? And why did he take off his wings, he lost like 5 hours driving a stolen cop car from LA when he could have flown.

Then Gabriel fights with this really awesome mace. It’s looks like the very weapon you’d expect an S&M suited archangel to carry. He puts it against Michael's face… and then pushes a button on the side and the handle. The mace starts to rotate!… Yes Tim “The Tool Man” Taylor, apparently they do have power tools in Heaven.

See, it all gets so stupid you can’t just go with it. The real problem is that it takes itself SO incredible seriously. I mean, some of my favorite films of all time are 3000 Miles to Graceland, Mortal Kombat, Highlander, etc. I know what a B movie is - I know how to suspend my disbelief. This fails to help me in anyway. It is concerned with getting from one image to the next, and with letting Paul Bettany carry around large guns. And that is it.

Proof of this idea is after the grandma demon (popular from the previews) is shot and killed. The teenager is freaking out in her corner booth when blood starts dripping on her face. She looks up into a ceiling vent and more blood is coming out of the vent and dripping on her face. And that's the last we ever visit that image. No one mentions there’s blood dripping from inside the ceiling, no one goes to check if someone is caught in the air ducts. The teenager even fails to alert the manager of the store that his air ducts might need cleaning … DUE TO BLOOD COMING OUT OF THE CEILING TILES!!!

What you would think would be covered in blood and action, actually leaves the gunfire quite sparse. There are moments of hightened action sequences and then suddenly it all stops. It’s strange. All the characters keep breaking up in twos and asking eachother about their home life. This has to account for at least two thirds of the film. It’s actually kind of interesting and it is well acted, but it left me squirming and bored because I was there to see action. I thought the action was going to get better. It didn’t. And at the end of the film I looked back thinking I should have tried more to enjoy the two person acting scenes.

Sadly, you've seen every action sequence from the previews. What you thought were tiny snippets were actually the entire reveal. It ruins any chance of surprise and you quickly realize it was just there to get you to pay for the ticket and to take up a couple more minutes in the script. The grandma demon, the icecream man demon, and the lots of demons including the little kid that talks like a woman on steriods (which his voice was probably the scariest thing in the whole the movie) are all just about as long as you see them in the trailer.

What was really good about this movie? The casting. It is the only thing it has going for it. I decided not to look up anything about this movie in an attempt to guess where the director came from based on what I saw. It had to have been a music video director. This is at best a B-movie. But then it takes itself so seriously you can’t help but hate it. But that’s like a music video where the singer is over acting her singing movements. All the visuals you can think of are slapped across the screen, and you do your best to fill every face in the frame with a star or someone beautiful. But you can stand it because it's three minutes and a good song. Luckily for this group of actors, they were all really well cast together and with parts that fit so well.

It's evident that the image is the only thing being paid attention to in the film.

I also think we inadvertantly created a new action star. As much as I like Paul, he will need to try again (and unfortunately he is scheduled to try again with the same director - I looked him up - he came from the special effects department - I knew it was all about what it looked like) The actor who plays Gabriel is magnificent - Kevin Durand. It may very well be only his onscreen presence, but it is phenomenal. He's powerful even when soft spoken, his voice has the hypnotic resonance to it, he holds a power tool mace really well when framed in the doorway against a bright light, and I absolutely bought his dilemma, his pain, and even his hurt in the moment he finds that he was wrong. He should be playing the next Conan the Barbarian.

The sound design was also superb. The mix is haunting and creepy in all its use of sound and I swear something was done to Gabriel’s voice that made me want to be on his side like I was in a trance.

But let me tell you, this film is a SHAMEFUL repackaging of Terminator. Trade a timetravelor and machine for two angels, and make Sarah Conner have the new hope for mankind during the final chase sequence. We even get an extremely similar monologue voice over that caps the beginning and end of the movie.

"Oh, and instead of being a chase through the city, let’s just stick it in one location. And since we can’t figure out how to keep the archangels at bay for two days, we’ll have angels possess humans. That way all our main characters get to shoot somebody." Suddenly it’s a zombie movie. Seriously, think Terminator but Sarah holds up in a restaurant, the Terminator just walks around outside, and then zombies show up to give her and her gang something to shoot.

It was ridiculous. And I don’t mean in the Rambo III / Missing in Action III kind of way. I mean because it was trying so hard it completely ruined any chance it had at being a laugh-with-me-and-watch-some-cool-action type of flick.

Lesson Learned: Make time for your screenplay. Even great actors can't overcome being in a music video. Oh, and make things make sense, unless you know they don't and you're winking at the audience. Don't be too clever for your own movie.

Downey Rocks Sherlock

I didn't plan on seeing Sherlock Holmes. But I wasn't about to see Avatar in 2D. And 3D was surprisingly sold completely out. I was okay with seeing Sherlock Holmes, just never thought I would be sitting in that theater.

The truth is, I've only been slightly interested in the film in the past couple of weeks, when to my self loathing, I warmed up to it by seeing quotes in the TV spots saying how good it was (I hate being sold). Before that time I was slightly upset by Sherlock. Why, Master Guy Ritchie (the director), pray tell, must you bring your modern pop-noir (I think I just invented that awesome term - use it) and over-copied, inventive-look-when-it-was-called-"Snatch", to a treatment of a proper Englishman sleuth? I'm no fanboy crying for faithful adaptations, but "how in the world does it make sense for Sherlock Holmes to be pit fighting?!" And am I the only one who has this oddly shaped character mold for Watson as an overweight Labrador? It was a mind hurdle for me upon first view to see Jude Law as Watson, skinnier and more beautiful than Holmes. Weird.

I've got to say, it was an extreme example, for me, in how advertising companies ruin movies and their chances at their correct markets. Looking back, my hopeful thoughts and excitement for the film were quickly dashed by the previews that showed basically this: "Robert Downey, Jr. as the rowdy boy you've always loved - but this time with an accent - is in an action movie with a recognizable name, no two, no three big names, and it's shot cleverly, and we know you'll come and see it, we don't even have to tell you what it is about because RDJ hits a dude in slow motion."

Seriously, I had no idea what it was about. Did you? Which was actually a great thing going in, and maybe a plus for the marketing department on that note. Usually they give away the whole movie and a couple of twists too. So I won't spoil it for you except to say that the plot is quality and with Holmes' and Watson's characters constantly going against type, it makes the screenplay feel fresh and surprising.

Downey, Jr. brings a confidence and swagger to the role that makes you realize no one else could have possibly played this incarnation. Law takes on Watson with a masterful underplaying and gives the show over to RDJ in every scene. I found myself waiting for Watson to enter the scenes, and truly sad to see him leave (a running gag that Watson is trying to leave the gumshoe life but can't help himself but to be pulled back in). And although Rachel McAdams seems horribly outmatched in her first scenes with RDJ, I soon warmed up to her and made apologies to myself for the feeling, citing her character was frightened and actually feeling overmatched by her circumstances, which you soon learn later as the story develops.

The three principles are absolutely magnetizing and RDJ certainly deserves the Golden Globe. Of course the supporting cast is great as well, a testament to Guy Ritchie's masterful direction. Mark Strong brings some real evil into Lord Blackwood, and squares off nicely with Robert Downey Jr. The two are matched up evenly in their confidence and this is partly what makes it so much fun. The turns, the murders, the actual happenings in the story take a back seat to these two men barreling forward without hesitation towards accomplishing their mission, neither of them seeming to have any notion or regard for the fact that the other could possibly outsmart him. Holmes seems to always be a step behind Blackwood, and yet, he seems comfortable with this because he knows he will have his chance to bring Blackwood in. He is also the only one not convinced by the blackmagic being wielded by the Lord Blackwood, even when the audience can't see around just how the tricks are being done.

So that leaves the visuals. Were they as out of place as I assumed they would be from previews? The fact is, I completely forgot that these moments were apart of a previous assumption of mine. I was so engrossed in the film that when Holmes was in the pit fight, I was just smiling and going along with it. I'll spoil this in case you were like me and this image really turned you off and you want to know what it is all about: Sherlock is engaged in a "round of fist-a-cuffs" or 19th century boxing and betting. It seems he does it to stay sharp and for a bit of a high. He bets money on himself then boxes larger men for the fun of it.

What is particularly inventive and something I really loved, was that Holmes has his own style of fighting. He analyzes opponents then breaks down their every move. We see this in slow motion as Sherlock systematically calls what shot he'll make, "left cross to the jaw - duck under haymaker - right counter - jaw dislocated." It makes sense because Sherlock is incredibly smart and well studied. So of course he would be able to break down an opponents' behavior instantly, then plan an attack to particular pressure points and vulnerable spots on the body. He even goes so far as to break down the opponents recovery time physically and mentally before completely demolishing him. After we hear the breakdown, we recover to the beginning of the fight and watch it replay in real time. It is an amazingly fresh take on a smart fighter and a real revelation for me.

Sherlock Holmes is a whole lot of fun and it's at least extremely fresh. It's opened for a sequel and I honestly can't wait. There's a surprise reveal at the end that's an added touch of suspense for the next movie. It alone promises an even better matching of wits and confidence that I'm already excited for.

So see the movie. There's no shame in waiting for it on DVD if you had something else in mind. It's a PERFECT keep-your-brain-switched-on popcorn movie, which is pretty rare, and that's what I found so engaging. I say it's worth the $10 theater ticket.

Avatar: Pocahontas Times Awesome

So, I've finally seen the great "Avatar." After following it from its very beginning, and spending at least six months telling everyone to mark their calendars for the date that changed cinema. After poking my wife too hard to look up at the moment the first television frame debuted. And, three minutes later, feeling like a moron for telling everyone and their dog to mark their calendar for "The Day Cinema Changed". Then processing my reputation. Then trying to bring it up around everyone while they were with their dog so I could recount my previous confidence. After finally deciding I should experience it. After watching it make half a billion dollars. After trying to get someone to go with me - but most people had already seen it. After deciding to go by myself but having the thing STILL sold out. I saw the great "Avatar". 

It was fun. It was truly a first of it's kind experience. This has probably opened the door to the conversation about utilizing 3D as a viable art form and expression in drama and not just gimmicks. And so, though it's not an OMG moment for studios and audiences, it may have very well started a change in cinema. With its success, director James Cameron will again be the "smartest guy in the room" when he speaks to studio execs. And he is pushing more 3D, and higher frame rates in Stereo-Scope, and the studios will listen. He contends that in order for film to stay alive they must continue to outdo television. And now, televisions are beginning to develop native stereo-scope. This will push the cinema.

What I can't figure out is this: Why was it released in November/December/January - A.K.A. - Awards Season? Did he (or whomever made the decision) really think they had a shot for an Oscar? Even if Segourney Weaver or Giovanni Ribisi (both miscast here I think. No, I take that back, underused and misused, respectively) did have more to work with - how seriously were they going to be taken? The field for best picture has been open to 10 nominations this year (a little trick I REALLY like *but that's another blog*) and more than likely it will be nominated (with 10 to choose from how do you not choose the one that risked the most?) but to win it? It's not even like a nomination will make people buy it on DVD any more than they would have anyway. I digress. 

My point - this movie is far from original in its story and in some cases its execution. I find it hard to believe that Cameron himself didn't recognize this. It is Disney's Pocahontas with elements of the Abyss. He knew that! Everyone knew that! This film was made for what could be put on screen - not for it's originality in story. 

So, I'm mildly upset at the timing of the release because it's almost like they are trying to pull a fast one on me. I'm instantly skeptical. This could - however - just been released as soon as humanly possible after it was locked and shipped. Since I'm sure Cameron almost bankrupted himself again on developing the technology to do what he wanted. I don't know, but like I said, it's far from a best picture winning caliber movie. 

What I do enjoy is the execution in that it is cut and dry - nothing too fancy (besides obviously it's in 3D - so I guess I mean in framing and camera movement) and the scenery - the attention to detail is absolutely mindblowing. It is all wonderfully pieced together. Though it goes too long and too indepth in certain scenes - there are boring spots where, 3D-less, I would've screamed "Yes I get that the Navie are tied to the land! Get on with it!" - I'm instantly calmed by the fact that the visuals are something I've truly NEVER seen before. 
This is an experience made for an alternate purpose than movies trying to tell a story. It's akin to seeing the IMAX-specific movies about rock climbing - they are not supposed to be a classic "movie", you are there to see a massive picture of the landscape. Avatar is packaged as a movie as an afterthought and specifically built to utilize IMAX 3D on some other planet, to push the boundaries of cinema. They knew they didn't need to spend any more money and time on the screenplay. The had to have said, "Let's get a boiler plate and start making a camera!" That's why I forgive the horribly unoriginal story and the extra length in scenes.

However, just like any good action movie - when the big final fight comes - all the waiting pays off. And that's what happens here. The length of the film draws you deeply in, you have come to feel for the Navie, and you've come to accept the mix of CG and live people. And you've also gotten used to a moderately paced drama. The final fight bursts on and is gripping and edge of your seat (if you'll allow me to use two over-used cliches that happen to be true here). I believed the battle was hopeless, I believed anyone could die at any moment. And I understood the geography and who was in the fight and where and why.

I had one issue with the visuals - may I rant? - Why is it suddenly in vogue to do quick-zooms with the camera EVERY time their are flying things in a sci-fi movie? I don't get it! It showed up in Serenity, then Star Wars, Battle Star Galactica, and now Avatar. It's like you can't have flying saucers without the camera tripping out and zooming in suddenly. It just took me out of the movie and made me think I was looking through a lens. And this is one of those moments where Cameron did disappoint me - he's not one to do something because everyone else is (hence this movie coming to fruition).

Despite some disappointments, it's an example of how to make a movie for what it is - Cameron absolutely knows what he's making. It's amazing how he uses the added depth of field in dramatic ways. He even mostly stays away from in-your-face 3D gimmicks. It shows how to make an action movie that lacks a great screenplay. I can, in no way, imagine this in the hands of a Michael Bay. His Transformer movies are far less than what Avatar is and I think he might have had a better story to work with. Bay might have ruined cinema all together... geez. 

Anyway - go see the movie, and see it in 3D. I recommend not seeing it alone. There's not enough meat to satisfy you to walk out alone without anyone to talk to. You'll want to experience it with someone. Because this is something truly new. And it is a GREAT experience. Judging from what the previews looked like on my 19inch TV, I'm not sure you'll care about it once it's on DVD.

A-Team on My Screen

I just got ahold of a link that took me back to the future. The trailer for the movie version of the hit 80's show got leaked and I can't tell you how excited I was. I heard a lot people complaining that it should never be made and that it would ruin what the show was. I have to say I started out after first hearing of the green light, in a state of worry. How could a two hour movie possibly tackle four lead characters (plus you knew they would have to bring in a love story cuz that's how it's done in H-Town - which means a fifth lead [confirmed when Jessica Beil signed on you know there's no way she's taking a minor role] and that means Face has to be established as a playboy and then fall in love) tackle being pursued by the military and then also tackle the soldiers for hire part? As the rest of the team was filled in and confirmed I sighed relief when the new "Face" told us on Leno that they were making the version of A-Team everyone wanted to see. Let's face it, after going back to watch a few of the episodes, the series actually begs to be treated the way Charley's Angels was by McG if you wanted to stay "true" to the source. I mean, Mr. T throws someone in a dumpster EVERY episode. It could even go "Starsky and Hutch" if it needed to.

So the trailer starts up... and at once I'm in love with the new Hanibal. Liem Neesen? how could you not be? I always said George Clooney (circa Three Kings) but after "Taken" - you know this cigar wielder can brawl. Face shows up, and his sly smile fits all too well on some lake at sundown.

The action roles and I can see how great this might be. B.A. Baracas comes on and plays it as a toned down angry man, not Mr. T - check. Murdock lets us know the wings of a plain are on fire and he's not scared at all - crazy man not over acted - check. Hannibal drops THE line like it just came out and he sincerely loves it when a plan comes together, not like it's the signature of the show with a wink - check.

It goes black and my reflection is all I see - a wide smile on my face. Looks like an action flick. A quality one. It's gritty. What you'd expect from a crack team of commandos. It's got all the right nostalgia points (did you see the GMC van?). I'm happy...

It pops back on for a final look (the action movie trailer cliche I should've known was coming) back with a plain exploding and a tank dropping into the sky - obviously the A-Team inside. Face pops out the top and takes out a fighter plane as the tank floats in through the air by way of parachutes tied all around the corners of the tank...

Was that a scene straight out of "Charley's Angels 2"?

Dang it.

Pushing that last moment away and rolling with the tag line "there is no plan B", this thing is happening and I'm going to be excited to hear everything that comes out about it. I'm anxious. I'm ready. I've found the team. I'll gladly shell out the cash to let them do their thing.

"Never Back Down" A Review

Just finished watching “Never Back Down”… gwwwaaaaaad… It’s High School Musical meets Bloodsport. I was however, captivated quite enough to stick around and watch it. It really is jaw dropping to me to see how played out some of these movies are. What I can’t figure out is if they know they are played out cliches and they are just assuming you know and will go with it – so they don’t need to develop any relationships – or if it is truly the pop machine we thinking people are so weary of stripping quality movies (at least original or classics – like Blood Sport) of their scenes and characters and watering them down and mashing them together. My fear is the latter as I my self have fallen victim to lazy writing when I’ve been stuck and turned to what is essentially parody of other scenes.


There are stolen plot points from Bloodsport, stolen “trainer” and montage sequences from Rocky, plenty of underdeveloped love story, and WAY bad cliché parent problems for the 30yr old playing 18. By the way, this is highschool, and the badguy has won the big fighting tournament 2 years in a row… uh… really? A 16 year old tapped out a whole field of competitors in the world of underground fighting? The acting is pretty good all around, they seem to work with what they have. There is some directing problems with the film that make me think this guy must have come from TV. Like lifetime. Ex: in the final scene Jake walks with his friend (who was put in the hospital and nearly died – which was the final straw in Jake facing this guy and getting into the tournament) by the badguy in the parkinglot outside of school. Jake nods with a slight smile – not like “I own you” – no, like, “we are cool now. It’s almost like we are brothers because we both cage fight.” The badguy gives him the same smile and nod – all is well.

Even though he tried to kill your friend and manipulated you into getting into a brawl tournament. Even though he talk all that trash about your dead father. Even though he fought dirty. He knocked you out once. When he found out your ribs were cracked he went after your ribs (which could kill you by the way). Despite all that, it’s cool. Because you aren’t the King of the Brawl (or whatever they called it) anymore. Also, the music scored to this had absolutely zero business in it. Most of the music actually didn’t fit the scene, forget the lyrics even matching the tone of the film.

But mostly my issues come back to the writing. Forced. Forced. Forced. Cliché after cliché.

Despite all this, there are quality fight scenes in this film. And so I kept watching, and I even gripped the arm of the chair tightly during one scene. What can I say, I’m a sucker for the fight scene. Other bright spots were the actors. I found them all to be cast really well. And I found myself wanting more screen time for  Djimon Hounsou (Gladiator, Blood Diamond, Push) because he was genuinely magnificent. I think this might be due in fact, to a quality editor. In his scenes they cut to him as he listened to the other actors. And he is amazing at listening to the other characters in the scenes. It brought the attention to the affect of the character in the story, rather than the character him/herself. So when he speaks it has real impact. Not to mention the superpowers of a simple accent and how it hides any tonal inflection that would otherwise cause us to call any other actor bad, and for quality actors such as Hounsou, it elevates his abilities to us because it’s “exotic”.

Another piece I didn't mind was a little trick first popularized in "Romeo Must Die". In that film it came out of nowhere but here it makes total sense. The special effect takes us inside the body during a particularly hard hit. It took away the need for exposition of how dangerous it would be to continue getting hit in the ribs. So when the hit happens, we suddenly see the ex-ray view of the impact of the hit. I think this did a great job of building the tension, keeping the fight edgy, and it was suttle enough, and used enough to fit into the style and context of the film.

I've got to note that this little piece of film grammer most definitely owes so much of its impact to David O. Russel's "Three Kings" which took us inside the body during a gunshot. The smallest setup in this film introduced us to the danger of a single bullet. It raised the stakes of what a gun signifies when pulled (something we've desensitised ourselves to from all the acion films).

So like the special effect, taking from a better source and using it effectively the film, I would say, is also an effect exercise in pop action movies. Though I wouldn't pull it off the shelf to watch it again, and I certainly wouldn't stay up until 2am to watch it again, I would pay attention if I were surfing channels and ran across it during a fight scene.

WHHHHHAAAAAAATTTTTTT????  I just read that the final fight won a "Best Fight" MTV award in 2008. You may find it perplexing that I'm surprised - nay - upset - by this news after what you just read from me. But I looked at the list of nominees and though they didn't sound all that great at first (Jumper, Spiderman 3, Rush Hour 3), the final nominee was the one of the best fight scenes ever captured on film, "Bourne Ultimatum". And now I turn my nose up at you... MTV voters... imbeciles.