My Top 10 for 2009

This is my top 10 for 2009. Keep in mind, I did not see all the movies that were released in 2009. So if I left The Final Destination: 3D off the list, don’t get mad; I can only rank movies that I have actually seen. So, without further ado . . .

10. Star Trek
Was it a Star Trek movie? No, not really. But it was an awful lot of fun, and it breathed new life into a dead franchise. Chris Pine (after a lot of complaining by staunch and irrelevant Trekkies) turned out to do a pretty decent job as Kirk, and Zachary Quinto seemed like he was born to play Spock. For me, Star Trek was the only palatable summer blockbuster last year. Compared to stinkers like Wolverine, Transformers, and GI Joe, that may not be saying much, but it is a sign that the studios haven’t completely lost touch with what makes good cinema.


9. Sunshine Cleaning
Just so you know, this is not a sequel to Little Miss Sunshine. This was a quiet little inde film featuring Amy Adam’s first lead performance, and she does very well as the former high-school cheerleader who never did anything with her life. When she finally decides to get some self-respect and start a new business, cleaning up crime scenes seems doesn’t seem like the most likely of professions. But with the help of her sister, played brilliantly by Emily Blunt, she comes to feel the real value of family, and she finds that she is a much stronger person that she ever thought she could be. This is fantastic inde fimmaking that would be hard to sell to a major studio, but it works all the better because of it. This movie is wonderfully heartfelt and emotionally engaging. Amid all the blood and body fluids, there is a beautiful message about believing in yourself and truly coming to understand who you really are.


8. Inglorious Basterds
Quentin Tarantino’s WWII movie took me by surprise. Although Tarantino’s films are all pretty solid, I’ve found it hard to get really worked up about any of his films since Pulp Fiction (Although Kill Bill vol.2 was pretty good). However, Tarantino’s foray into the war movie genre kept me riveted. I never knew what to expect around each bend in the script and felt myself engrossed in Tranatino’s signature intimate dialogues that seem to wander far from the action of the story but then wind back on themselves in a way that makes them seem like they were relevant the whole time. Sure, it wasn’t historically accurate, and Eli Roth’s performance was not believable at all, but two fantastic performances by Brad Pitt and Christoph Waltz elevate some of the movie’s pitfalls to high art.


7. Where the Wild Things Are
I know there was a lot of head-scratching on the part of long-time fans of the book when this movie was released, and there are rumors that the studio wanted to can the entire movie altogether, but I feel that this was one of the most important films of the year. For me, this movie was an impressionistic voyage into the conflicting and oft-times uncontrollable emotions of a child. For some, it was a story of a little boy who actually got a on a boat, sailed to an island, and hung out with a pack of monsters who seemed to be at each other’s throats a lot. For others, it was a rough and raw voyage into Max’s psyche where we were able to see Max’s conflicting emotions interact in physical ways. I found beauty in Max’s conflicted self and the chaos of the wild things (not to mention the fantastic world created by Spike Jonze and the special effects team). And in the end, Max’s smile says it all—things may not be perfect, but he’s come to better understand himself. And I think he’ll be OK.


6. The Hurt Locker
I have to admit, the shaky cam got me a little sick at times, but The Hurt Locker was as good a war movie as any I’ve ever seen. But unlike many of the recent Iraq War movies, director Katheryn Bigelow doesn’t sink to politicizing the war. Instead, she gives us a raw character study of the soldiers who are fighting, the danger they face, and the effect that the stress of their adrenaline-filled lives has on them, their relationships, and their life back at home. But more than the excellent script and the superb directing, Jeremy Renner’s performance as Sgt. William James, the tortured explosives expert, is a real stand out. You may not agree with him, but by the end of the film, you come to understand that he is making the only decision he can make.


5. Up In the Air
I don’t really know what to say about this movie except, great writing, great directing, and great performances from George Clooney, Vera Farmiga, and (especially) Anna Kendrick. This movie was smart, artistic, funny, and emotionally engaging throughout—a rare combination in today’s studio madness over remakes and flashy blockbusters. It’s not very often that a big studio film like this can make me excited to go to the movies, but it did just that. Amid all the explosions and action figures, maybe Hollywood still has a heart.


4. District 9
Some estimates put the cost of James Cameron’s Avatar at close to $500 million. District 9 cost only $30 million to make, and proves that you don’t have to put your entire studio up as collateral to make a visually and emotionally engaging and exciting sci-fi film. As much as I was blown away by the world of Pandora, Neill Blomkamp’s insect-like aliens seemed more “real” to me. And the story of the hapless Wirkus Van De Merwe, who—at first—seems kind of annoying, becomes a supremely empathetic character who you root for, even though you know he is still mostly self-interested. It’s a beautiful and exciting piece of filmmaking by people who know the power of sci-fi to question current social, historical, and political practices and use it well.


3. Zombieland
OK, so I’m a sucker for a good zombie flick. But this is more than just another zombie movie; it’s fun, funny, and completely, deadpaningly self-aware. It’s the kind of movie that you walk out of with a smile on your face, simply because you just had a really good time. I found myself sad to leave Columbus, Tallahassee, Wichita, and Little Rock behind as I walked out the theater, and I desperately wanted more. And—really—isn’t that what we all want from a movie? Throw in some zombie and it just makes it all that much better.


2. Moon
Three reasons why Moon was one of my favorite movies of the year: Sam Rockwell, Sam Rockwell, and Sam Rockwell (oh yeah, and the script, cinematography, set design, and directing didn’t hurt either). The afore-mentioned actor carries the entire film quite literally. He is, in fact, the only live actor in the entire movie. But more than Sam Rockwell’s awesome performance, Moon is a great throwback to the classic sci-fi films of the 70s, like 2001: A Space Odyssey and Solaris. It uses the sci-fi genre to explore what it means to be human. It’s not flashy. There are no big explosions of action set-pieces, just solid moviemaking at its best. And unlike a vapid summer blockbuster, Moon stays with you, makes you think, and is not easily forgotten. See it.


1. (500) Days of Summer
Again, this movie represents everything I love about the movies. Call it a postmodern romantic comedy. Sure it’s a story of boy meets girl, but that’s where all the usual romantic comedy clichés stop. What I loved about this movie is the fact I had no idea what to expect from one moment to the next and loved every minute of it. Although we’re told at the very beginning that “this is not a love story,” we still root for Tom and think, “Maybe, just maybe, he’s going to walk off into the sunset with Summer anyway.” Well, there is a happy ending. It’s not the ending you might expect, but it still leaves you rooting for Tom and believing in the magic of love. At this point it is probably needless to say that the writing and directing were great and that Joseph-Gordon Leavitt’s performance as Tom is fantastic. And Zooey Deschanel may just be playing Zooey Deshanel, but that doesn’t bother me a bit. All that, plus french new wave, animation, YouTube-style testimonials, a kicking soundtrack, and the best musical dance sequence this year make this movie my number one for 2009.

My Oscar Post

So, I guess I'm obligated to do this. So here is my Oscar post.

Slumdog Millionaire was awesome and deserves everything it got (except maybe bast song, "Jai Ho"!?). Five words: Danny Boyle is the man.

The Curious Case of Benjamin Button deserved to win best special effects and it did.

Sean Penn blindsided me. I totally thought Mickey Rourke would win, even if he is kind of slimy.

Heath Ledger: nuff said.

Seth Rogan and James Franco: nuff said.

Still miffed that Bruce Springsteen's song from The Wrestler wasn't nominated.

Still mad The Dark Knight wasn't nominated for Best Picture (It wouldn't have won, but still, one the most highly reviewed movies of 2008 and grossing $1 billion at the box office deserves some recognition).

Hugh Jackman was alright. The opening musical number was amusing (Anne Hathaway stole the show), but next year, I think they should get a comedian again.

And next year, I hope they nominate some films that people actually cared about.

The Curious Case of the Special Effects

If you've seen The Curious Case of Benjamin Button, you probably sat there going, "I know that's Brad Pitt's face on that little old man, but that is not Brad Pitt's body." I was amazed and curious as to how they achieved the whole effect. Now there is a website set up by the Benjamin Button people that shows you exactly how they did it. And not only that, but you'll be amazed at the number of things that you didn't even realize were special effects. I was astounded. I thought the FX were good, but I didn't realize how far they had gone. The Curious Case of Benjamin Button is truly a huge leap in the area of movie special effects, as big a leap as Jurassic Park or Forrest Gump were in the 90s.

Visit Benjamin Button FX here, and be amazed.

Video of the Week: Joaquin Pheonix on Letterman

So this is about the weirdest thing I've seen in awhile. I realize that Joaquin Phoenix has said that he is retiring from acting so that he can pursue a career in hip-hop, but it looks like he's checked out a little early. Here he is on Letterman, pretty much despondent and maybe a bit angry about something (even before Letterman mocks him). I expect this kind of thing from people who aren't used to being interviewed, but it's not like he hasn't done this before. Watch the video below and be completely dumbfounded by Phoenix's complete lack of . . . well, anything.



What did you think?

A Racist Exploitation Film up for Best Picture?

If you haven’t seen Slumdog Millionaire yet, I urge you to see it, either now at your local art house movie theater or eventually on DVD. It is a great movie by one of my favorite directors, Danny Boyle (28 Days Later, Sunshine, Millions). It is one of my favorite movies of 2008 and is the favorite for winning the Academy Award for Best Picture.

That being said, since Slumdog has been nominated for Best Picture and it has received almost universal acclaim from critics nationwide, a few dissenting voices have arisen, calling the movie exploitative of India’s poor and blaming it for the perpetuation of negative Indian stereotypes in the west.

Jamal, the main character, rises from the poverty-stricken slums of Mumbai and there are depictions of police torture, child mutilation and exploitation, and Indian gangsters. Some Indian critics have accused Boyle of taking these negative images of India and using them to his advantage to play on the heart strings of a western audience, to excite their emotions improperly.

Although it is true that some of the power of the movie derives from the depiction of Jamal and his brother’s surroundings as they face a hard life of child labor, crime, and fear of Hindu violence against Muslims, it is also true that the movie focuses on Jamal’s struggle to overcome these circumstances.


Personally, I don’t see a lot of Bollywood movies. In fact, I have never seen a Bollywood movie—unless you count Bend it Like Beckham, which I don’t. As a result, I don’t know what kind of image Indian filmmakers are trying to portray to western audiences. As well, I’ve never been to India, so I can’t testify as to the truth of Boyle’s depiction of India. But I do know that Boyle has said that this movie is a “love letter to India.” And in interviews, I’ve seen he has been nothing but respectful of Indian culture. (Let me note that Boyle is British.) In fact, because India does not have the strict child labor laws that are enforced in the UK and US, Boyle decided to use western-style child labor laws while shooting the child actors in the movie, in order to avoid even the suggestion of impropriety.

When was the last time you saw an American movie that depicted a person rising above their station? A victim of child abuse or poverty who grows up to make something of him or herself? This is a very common theme in western cinema, especially American cinema (In fact it is a key American mythological archetype). Maybe part of the problem lies in the idea that Indian critics do not appreciate the archetype that resonates so well with western audiences. To back this up, I have heard that at screenings in India the movie has been perceived as boring and confusing by the general population.

I don’t know. I would like to say that the film transcends time and place because it is really about the triumph of the human spirit and the will to rise about your circumstances. It is a celebration of life (both the good and the bad) that just happens to be set in India, but could have been set anywhere. But am I being culturally insensitive when I say I don’t think the movie was exploitative of Indian society?

Come Oscar night, sitting among the bowls of dip and chips on my couch, I’ll be rooting for Slumdog Millionaire to win Best Picture, for Danny Boyle to win Best Director, and for Simon Beafoy to win Best Adapted Screenplay, because—in the end—I think Boyle’s film is a superb example of what movies should be: uplifting, unflinching, visually beautiful, well written and well acted. But a small part of me will also be wondering if I’m a perpetuating cultural ignorance. I hope this is not the case.

Trailer posted below.


Have you seen Slumdog Millionaire? What did you think?

Screenplays Galore!

We've already established that I'm a geek, right? Well here's some more geekiness to add to the case against me. I happened to hear about this website that archives movie scripts: simplyscripts.com.

Mind you, these are not synopses or plot outlines or novelizations, but the actual shooting scripts of big movies free for download in pdf. For example, the site has the complete scripts for all the Golden Globe nominated movies, and has an archive of past Oscar winners for best screenplay.

Usually these types of scripts are not available to the general public; it's not as if you can walk into your local Barnes & Noble and walk into the screenplay section. But now they are all available for free download.

Granted, I really wanted to see the script for The Fountain, one of favorite films of all time, but it was not available. So not all film scripts are in the archive, but a good portion of them are. If you get a chance, click the link above and visit the site and have fun comparing the script in your hand to the movie you see on screen (but, of course, only real film geeks do that sort of thing).

Video of the Week: The Business of Being Born

I thought I would post a movie trailer this week for a documentary that my wife and I saw recently. It's called The Business of Being Born. The documentary examines the business of birthing babies in the united states and questions our current system of OB/GYNs and hospital deliveries. It's eye opening to see that the US has the 2nd highest infant mortality rate in the developed world, it has the highest rate of C-sections, and lowest number of natural child births in the world—by a wide margin. The documentary is very obviously on the side of midwives and home births, but it presents its message in a very loving and informative way. It doesn't finger wag, or call for the eradication of OB/GYNs. And although, you may roll your eyes and think that this kind of thing is only for hippies, this movie shows you that it's not and backs up its argument with great research and interviews. It is very informative and well made, and I highly suggest watching it. (It is currently available on Netflix.) Check it out below.

Oldie but Goodie: Invasion of the Body Snatchers (1978)

Director:
Philip Kaufman
Starring:
Donald Sutherland
Jeff Goldblum
Veronica Cartwright
Leonard Nimoy
Brooke Adams

I just saw this film for the first time a few weeks ago and I was really surprised at how well it holds up today, and how relevant it is in today’s society. This is the first Invasion movie I have seen out of the three that have been made, including the original 1556 and the 2007 remake with Nicole Kidman and Daniel Craig. Whereas the first Invasion takes place in a small town, the 1978 version takes place in San Francisco and follows Matthew Bennell (Donald Sutherland), a department of public health worker, and his coworker Elizabeth Driscoll (Brooke Adams), as unexplainably strange things begin to happen around them, namely, that ordinary people are being replaced by alien clones.

What I found most terrifying about this movie was the characters’ inability to explain anything about the odd occurrences around them. Not only are their friends and family turning into emotionless zombies, but they are at a complete loss as to how they can communicate what is going on. Building terror in the movie, in large part, stems from the fact that those who know what is going on cannot explain it to anyone, and no one believes them. And as a viewer, you can see that something is wrong, so you feel their frustration as they try and explain to others what is going on and no one believes them. In particular, a good portion of the movie is devoted to convincing Dr. Kibner (Nimoy), a friend of Bennell’s, that something is going on that cannot be explained by psychology, but to no avail. Eventually, the small group of survivors find themselves fighting for their lives and trying to stay awake so that they are not turned into invaders themselves.

Taking place during the cold war, there are obvious themes of a silent take over and assimilation into an alien collective with no individuality. However, at the same time, there also seems to be a general distrust for authority figures, academics, and scientists. In this movie, those who are supposed to be the guardians of rationality and scientific advancement are the very same people who are trying to convince you that nothing is wrong and that there must be something wrong with you if you believe differently. It’s very scary to think that those who are supposed to make you better, both physically and mentally, are the very ones trying to turn you into a zombie “for your own good.”

Invasion of the Body Snatchers is still relevant today for some of the same reasons in struck a chord in 1978. In a post-9/11 world, we are told to fear the terrorist among us, the sleeper cells that are just waiting for the order to strike. They don’t look different than you or I, but could strike at any moment. At the same time, especially under the Bush administration, there is a fear that the government is taking over our lives, intruding into our space, eves dropping on our phone calls, all in the name of preventing an attack—in other words, “for our own good.”

But perhaps more important than any of the political of social reasons that make this movie relevant, is the fact that Invasion of the Body Snatchers is just a well made movie. It has a solid script and has some great performances from Sutherland, Cartwright, Goldblum and Nimoy—who deftly leaves Spock behind in a great nuanced performance. Overall, Invasion of the Body Snatchers is a great thriller that keeps you guessing and delivers a smart story with good action and great suspense.

Oldie but Goodie: Alien

Alien is turning 30. That's right, Alien was originally released in 1979. It was directed by Ridley Scott who went on to direct Blade Runner, Gladiator, Black Hawk Down, and is currently making a new Robin Hood movie titled Nottingham. But Alien was the movie that first got him noticed as a director.

The story follows the crew of the interstellar mining ship Nostromo as they are awakened from their cryogenic sleep early by the ship's computer. The computer, named Mother, has detected a signal from a nearby uninhabited planet. The crew is ordered to investigate and finds the remnants of a crashed alien spacecraft in which they find alien eggs. Shortly thereafter the crew is forced to bring an alien on board after which they find themselves the unwitting prey of a dangerous beast.

Of course, the movie stars Tom Skerrit, Sigourney Weaver (who made a name for herself as Ripley), Ian Holm, John Hurt, Yaphet Kotto, Henry Dean Stanton, and Veronica Cartwright.

As a thriller, this movie is pretty good. It has some really good plotting and some jumpy moments. Scott does a good job of using the cramped, dark mood of the ship to really create a sense of creepiness. And, like Hitchcock, Scott holds back on showing you too much in order to give the viewer a sense of uneasiness, which build on the tension that is already present. Also, the movie is not content with simply deteriorating into a predator and prey movie, but instead throws in some curve balls related to the "real" mission of the spacecraft and the duplicitous nature of one of the crew members. It's smart in the sense that it keeps you guessing and thinking about what's going on, making the viewer take some jumps of logic rather than spelling everything out.

My only real criticism of Alien is that it seems to borrow too much from Star Wars, released only two years earlier. Some of the sets seems to follow the style of Star Wars (and 2001: A Space Odyssey). And the full classical score (something very distinctive to the Star Wars movies) seems, at times, to conflict with the tone of the film. That is to say, soaring classical music complemented the soaring themes and storyline in Star Wars. In Alien, a similar musical style seemed to distract from the action because it seemed out of place in a smaller, simpler story line and physical space.

Overall, I would say that Alien is a great sci-fi horror movie. And if you're in the mood for a smart, creepy movie, it might be time to revisit it.

Oldie but Goodie

I've decided that it would be silly of me to post movie reviews on my blog. This is because I don't normally see brand new movies when they come out, and I certainly don't get invited to advanced screenings like "real" critics. For these two reasons, I don't think writing movie reviews here would be helpful to anyone reading. For example, I saw Eagle Eye last week at the dollar theater, but it's been out for at least a month now. If I reviewed it now, I'm not sure it would really help anyone decide what to go see this weekend.

On the other hand, I just like watching and writing about movies, so I've decided to create a new feature for one guy's movie blog: Oldie but Goodie. In these postings, I'll just review movies that are not at the movie theater currently, movies that you may have heard of but have not seen, or movies that you may have seen but may have forgotten about. In Oldie but Goodie postings, I just want to revisit these movies, discuss them, and maybe look at them with a fresh perspective.

I find that, often, new movies are judged according to what other movies were released that weekend, that month, or that summer, in conjunction with the immediate social or political climate, to say nothing of general movie trends or movies that seem to be "in style" at the moment. For example, Citizen Kane opened to mixed reviews and was booed at the Academy Awards. But now it is cherished as one the greatest movies of all time.

Therefore, I think there is value in reexamining movies outside of their original context, to judge how they stand up now, or to see if they take on new meanings as they age.

I am constantly rediscovering older movies thanks to Netflix, but I would certainly welcome suggestions from anyone out there who would like to know more about an older movie that they've never seen but always wanted to, or a movie they have seen but would like to see a different perspective on.

Pixar's UP: Up in the air.

You might have recently heard about Pixar's next movie, to be released this summer: UP. Not too many of the details of the story are known just yet, but it revolves around a grumpy old man who ties a bunch of balloons to his house so that he can get away from everyone and be left alone. But his plan hits a snag when he finds that a optimistic boy scout from the neighborhood has stowed away.

As you can see from the picture above, Pixar again looks to be bringing us some beautiful animation. No doubt the visuals will be creative, interesting, fresh, and beautifully rendered, as they always are at Pixar. But recently, I got into a bit of a squabble with a fellow commenter on one of the movie blogs that I follow. I expressed concern that a story revolving around a grumpy old man might not hold my children's attention. For example, some of Pixar's stories tend to skew more adult in theme, like Cars and Ratatouille. Cars follows the existential crisis of a talking car sandwiched between two exciting race scenes at the beginning and the end of the movie. My kids loved the race scenes but were completely bored by everything in between—as was I. As well, Ratatouille deals with the same sort of internal crisis. And, to boot, the antagonist that my kids are supposed to be afraid of is a mean food critic. Needless to say, the threat of a negative restaurant review didn't exactly have my children sitting on the edge of their seats. Keeping this in mind, I expressed concern that UP may turn out to be the same sort of thing, a story that has no real villains or moral choices, but rather focusing on the internal struggle of a jaded, all be it beautifully animated, old man.

I was attacked mainly for implying that Pixar movies are kid's movies, and that the strength of a Pixar movie lies in my children's enjoyment of it. However, notwithstanding the fact that Pixar often makes good films that both children and parents can enjoy, I would argue that Pixar makes children's movies, or at least they aim for a family-friendly audience. For example, Pixar's best movies (Toy Story 1 and 2, The Incredibles, Finding Nemo, and Wall-E) all deal with issues that are central to the lives of small children like loss of family, learning between good and evil, fitting in, loneliness, and believing in yourself. And the characters in these stories have clear objectives and a clear line between right and wrong, good and bad. (We're not talking Ghost in the Shell, here, people.) And whether we like it or not Pixar movies are marketed to children with toys, sponsorship of Happy Meals, and commercials during Saturday morning cartoons.

Adults can deal with moral ambiguity, and we can identify with existential crises because we realize how complicated the world is. But children need to see clear lines drawn in order to better learn those lessons and understand the world around them. They need to know that the challenges they face are large, but they need to know they can overcome them. They feel reassured and safe when the good guy wins and the bad guy is punished.

This is what I hope Pixar can achieve with UP, but I'm slightly skeptical. As I said before, not much about the story's actual plot has been released, but I hope that the old man in question can face a series of insurmountable tasks and overcome them instead of simply ruminating over his own existence. I have faith in Pixar, and they've come through before. I hope they can do it again this summer.

Watch the teaser trailer below.


What do you think? Does Pixar make kid's movies? Does UP look commercially viable?

Video of the Week: A Couple of Great 2008 Movie Retrospectives

Here are a couple of great videos that I came across this week that both do a good job or reflecting on the past year in movies. They are different, but both good in their own ways. Check them out below.




What did you think? Leave a comment.

Video of the Week: Thundercats Live Action Movie

I know I haven't spent a lot of time on here lately, but I thought this was so neat that I had to blog about it. Now, before you get too excited, this is not a real trailer for a real movie. It is a fan made trailer that was cut together from movies starring Brad Pitt, Vin Diesel, Hugh Jackman, and others, and has some added CGI. Anyone who remembers Thundercats will think this is a pretty cool, not just for its nostalgia, but for its fidelity to the original cartoon. Here it is:



What did you think? Leave a comment.

It has Arrived!

A little while back I announced that Netflix had finally come to its senses and would be offering the Watch Instantly feature to its Mac-using members. That day has finally come. I streamed my first movie the other night: THX 1138. The quality was pretty good. It wasn't 100% DVD quality, but it was darn close. Even in full screen mode the picture was suprisingly good—much like the Fox or ABC's online episode player. (It is sad that most of the shows I watch online are on NBC, whose video player is lower quality. In full-screen mode the picture is severely blurry.) To watch the movies on my computer, I had to download a bit of software first (Microsoft's Siverlight), but it didn't take much time and it was easy to install.

I did have a bit of a problem though because unlike some other online players, the full-screen mode did not disable my screen saver. As a result, I had to remember to touch the mouse pad every once-in-awhile. If the screen saver kicked on, I would be returned to the smaller web viewer. Also, if I exited full screen mode, when I tried to go back the picture would freeze. But going back and forth a couple of times, usually fixed the problem.

All-in-all it seems like there may be a few bugs that need to be worked out, but overall it was great. I really feel like I'm getting the most out of my Netflix membership now. In fact, I now have more movies in my Watch Instantly queue than in my DVD rental queue. "Invasion of the Body Snatchers," here I come.

Are you a Mac user and a Netflix member? Tell me how your experience has been.

Video of the Week: New Star Trek Trailer

So, I know it seems like all I do now is post videos. But, honestly, there hasn't been a whole lot of exciting movie news lately. Except this: Apparently a trailer for the new J.J. Abrams Star Trek movie was attached to Quantum of Solace this past weekend.

Before I actually saw the trailer, I read some discussion boards from those who had seen the trailer in the theater, over the weekend, and WOW. Of course I knew that a franchise this popular and beloved would not be receive well by the die hard Trekkies because they have set the original series right up next to the bible and they take themselves waaaaaay too seriously. But I was surprised by the amount of HATE generated by a two-minute trailer.

On the other hand, many of the self-confessed moderate-Trekkies and most of the non-Trekkies thought the trailer looked awesome. After all, both Kevin Smith and Edgar Wright have already seen the movie and give it high praise.

As for me, I am cautiously optimistic, and I think the trailer shows some promise of an entertaining movie, whether or not you know anything about Trek. But I am surprised that people could get so worked-up and analyze a clip that basically gives no hint of a storyline and almost no dialogue. One post I saw actually analyzed the "realistic" beaming effect, and one guy condemned the whole trailer based on Simon Pegg's single line. When you see the trailer (follow the link, sorry I can't actually embed it here), whether you think it is awesome or rotten, you'll probably be scratching your head and saying to all the fanboys out there: "Get a life!"

Watch the trailer here.

What do you think about the new Star Trek? Let me know, I'm interested to hear your feedback.

Video of the Week: The Haunting in Connceticut

Sorry about the lack of post lately, I've been in Arizona and haven't had much time to comment on the latest movie news, let alone blog about it. Anyway, maybe this will get your spirits up.

Most scary movie trailers are fairly cheesy, or maybe intriguing, but usually I just look at them and say, "we'll see" because usually the trailers are filled with images that are supposed to be scary, but are not simply because of the nature of a trailer--a short commercial for a movie. The fact is, it's really hard to scare somebody in a 30sec ad. Real terror takes time to build up. But the trailer I have posted below actually kind of creeped me out, so I thought I would share it with the rest of you and see what you think.

I'm also interested in this movie because I know about the events that it is based on. It looks like they changed a few details and exaggerated it, but that is the nature of movies. Anyway, watch it and tell me what you think.

Howard Not Cheadle: The Petition

The blogs and entertainment websites have been a-buzz with the recent news that Don Cheadle will replace Terrance Howard as Jim "Rhodey" Rhodes in Iron Man 2. Initially, the reason given was a dispute over Howard's paycheck for the next Iron Man, but in a recent interview with Scott Simon of NPR, Howard said that there was no dispute. In fact, he says he learned about the switch just like the rest of us, through the media. In the interview, he seemed offended and remarked that Hollywood contracts aren't worth the paper they are printed on, insinuating that Marvel has broken a contract with Howard. So, why is Cheadle going to be Rhodes in Iron Man 2, and not Howard (who did a wonderful job)? We may never know, but there are some very devoted fans out there who want to do something about it.

The website howardnotcheadle.com is devoted to a petition to let Marvel studios know that fans want Howard to be in Iron Man 2, not Cheadle.

Now, personally, I have nothing against Don Cheadle. In fact, he's probably one of my favorite actors, and I think he could do just as good a job as Howard did in Iron Man, but that is not the point. There is no need to replace Howard and doing so only disrupts the continuity of the story and characters. But in the end, a petition like this will have virtually no effect on the studio. Remember, studios don't listen to movie-goers, they only listen to movie-goer's money.

So, you can go the website and sign the petition, or you can speak with your money by boycotting Iron Man 2 and all other Marvel Studio releases in theaters and on DVD. But, who are we kidding? We'll see it anyway. And that is precisely why studios don't listen.

What do you think of the Howard/Cheadle switch? Sound off in the comments section.

Netflix Has Finally Come to Its Senses

I just recently joined Netflix. And I know what you're thinking: "The 'one guy' at One Guy's Movie Blog did have a Netflix account?" Yes, I am ashamed to admit that I have been missing out of the beauty of mail-dvd-rental goodness. But I have repented and turned my heart toward unlimited rentals and streaming movies. And that last part (the streaming movies) is the part I want to talk about. As some of you may know, I am a Mac user, and Netflix's streaming movies feature will not work on my Mac, which has been a major issue with Mac users as you can imagine. But Netflix just announced that it has finally found a platform that will allow Mac users to benefit from the "watch now" feature they are currently paying for but have not been able to use until now. Apparently, the video format runs on Silverlight, which can be downloaded for Mac or PC for free. Currently, the service has only been opened up to a handful of testers, but should roll out for everyone by the end of the year. Yipee! Hooray! Mozoltov!

Video of the Week: If Hollywood Directors Made Campaign Ads

Since the election is just a little over a week away, and McCain is down in the polls, I thought I'd post something relevant. What if John McCain hired Hollywood directors to make some new election ads for him? They might look something like this.

V ideo of the Week: Sleepless in Seattle, the Horror Movie

I've post videos in the past, and I've received lots of feedback on them, so I thought it might be fun to do it on a regular basis. Starting today, I'm going to try and post a Video of the Week every Monday.

This week's offering is a recut trailer for the movie Sleepless in Seattle. Much like the Shining recut trailer I posted a little while ago, this trailer gives a different spin on the classic romantic comedy.



Tell me what you think. Leave a comment below.