John's DVD pick of the week (October 25th 2011)

Sorry for the delay. This week I chose a superhero flick its...

Captain America: The First Avenger

That's right the superhero flick (which ironically is the last of the Avengers to get his movie) is my pick this week. The other two picks out this week are Winnie The Pooh and A Serbian Film, I have not seen either film but will see them both at some time.

My vintage pick is... in honor of today's release of In Time, I'm recommending a movie that had four of the stars of this film appeared in before, it's called Alpha Dog. It's a very underrated gem and I highly recommend it.

The Movie Blog: John's DVD pick of the week (October 25th 2011)

The Movie Blog: John's DVD pick of the week (October 25th 2011): Sorry for the delay. This week I chose a superhero flick its... Captain America: The First Avenger That's right the superhero flick (which...

Amazing Race recap (10/23/11)

Sunday the 19th season of The Emmy winning series The Amazing Race continued airing
Road Block # 1 find a fish near a man and break it
The Speed Bump Liz and Marie had to do was having to wash an elephant
after that teams had to disassemble a spirit house
Road Block # 2 Reassemble the spirit house that was disassembled (the person who sat out the first road block had to do this one)
after that teams were given bread to feed to fish
Pit Stop was at the M.R. Kukrit Heritage House
Final Placings in this leg were
1st - Amani and Marcus (Won Trip to Bali)
2nd - Bill and Cathi
3rd - Ernie and Cindy
4th - Justin and Jennifer
5th - Andy and Tommy
6th - Laurence and  Zac
7th - Jeremy and Sandy
LAST - Liz and Marie (ELIMINATED)
thoughts?

Boo.

Guess who I was for a Halloween party over the weekend.  :)

Cute Specs!

I ran across this Land of Nod insert in a Crate & Barrel catalog the other day.  Isn't she just about as cute as can be, the way she's concentrating on those blocks?

Look! Up In The Sky! It's a Bird! It's a Plane! It's...

...It's BirdPlaneMan! Fuck me, he's hideous!


I believe I predicted earlier that once Superhero movies started consistently tanking at the box office, studios would stop making superhero movies. I was incorrect in this regard, simply because if you market these things well enough, they're going to at least make the millions of dollars back that it took to produce these things. Also, it's not like the public has another medium to explore the superhero genre in these days, does it? Ah, right. Video games and T.V. shows. Of course, of course. Excuse me whilst I digress:

Back in the day, about 1988, back when modems were dial-up, and the cool kid was the one who had a 300 baud modem that only took fifteen minutes to download a 16-bit Playmate centerfold from a bulletin board, there was a serious controversy a-brewin'. Was it the election of wimp George Bush the Elder? Nope. Was it the collapse of the Warsaw Pact, and the effect on our glorious capitalist economy? No, again. It was the casting of a specific actor as the lead in the upcoming 'Batman' movie. Yes, Warner Brothers had greenlit a big-budget screen adaptation of The Batman, and comic fans hearts everywhere were all-aflutter over the obviously egregious casting of Michael Keaton, that 'Swing-shift' comic actor guy as the lead. The horror! Now, this was pre-internet, so if you were a comic fan, you had to register your disdain by writing an actual letter to the Comic Buyer's Guide, and many did, thus showing their commitment to the promotion of the superhero comic book as a Serious and Legitimate Art Form. What was Warner Brothers thinking? Was this movie going to be a campy joke fest? Was Keaton going to start doing the 'Batusi' half-way through the film? Why not cast a real serious actor like Rutger Hauer or Bruce Willis? The fools! Didn't Warner Brothers read all those magazine articles that said, "Bang! Pow! Zoom! Comics aren't just for kids!" The release of this 'Last Temptation of Batman' was going to set the cause of the comic book industry back to the dark ages! (Well, casting Jack Nicholson as the Joker was a nice touch.) The end result? Batman went on to make over four hundred million dollars worldwide.

And the last 'Batman' film made over one billion dollars. If I was a majority shareholder at Time/Warner, I'd be doing some serious accounting. "So...how much does the DC comics licensing division make per year? Um, hm. And that figure with all those zeros behind it, that's on the up and up. Okay. Now. How much is the-what are they called again, silly book division? Oh, comic-book division making this year? Yeah, with that whole '52 reboot' thing. Hm. That's a lot less zeros over there. Why don't we take all the people who are making the few zeros at the end of the integer from that division... and move them over to this division with the more zeros at the end of the integer? We'll make a lot more zeros with the more successful division! Sorry, what? Oh, the superhero comic book fans will be angry if we reduce the amount of comics in our stable. Oh. Gosh, I bet they'll be so angry, they'll protest by not seeing the movies based on their favorite comic book character? For the first weekend, at least! And I'm sure they won't buy any video games or DVDs either! Oh, I'm so concerned. Look, here's my concerned face! Look!"

I guess my ultimate point is in all this rambling is that while the superhero comic is a dying medium, the superhero genre is as strong as ever. It's just that Time/Warner, (DC's parent company) and Disney, (Marvel's parent company) have seen the writing on the wall and in this case, the wall is a movie screen, and the writing is projected images of A and B list actors in tight suits emoting in front of green screens. So superhero comics, as a medium, get left further and further behind. The publishers will continue to try marketing gimmicks like DC's recent 'New 52' lineup, sales will continue to slowly drop, more talent will leave for other commercial mediums, sales will keep dropping, and finally, an odd equilibrium will be achieved where superhero comics, manga, "Art" comics, and non-superhero comics will all occupy the same rough region in the publishing arena.

Case in point: X-Men: First Class (C+) Not bad, not great. Weird thing is, they had a good movie in this somewhere, but it kinda got lost along the way. I think. Here's some notes:

-The retro 60's look of the film works to its advantage; they don't hit you over the head with archaic references. It's a nod to the classic Bond films, I suspect. The thing is, since the Bond films were the property of the Broccoli family, the directors in question were somewhat limited in the directions that they could take their films. This led to the whole series having the feel of being done by competent, if uninspired journeymen directors. Which is what's happening here.

-James McAvoy and Micheal Fassbinder work just fine as younger versions of the mutant leaders. However, it's kind of embarassing watching Fassbinder, whom I'm developing a hetro man-crush on as an actor, bathetic-ally monologuing at the movie's end. Did Stan Lee write this bit? (Seriously, go watch Fassbinder in Steve McQueen's brilliant 'Hunger', after you see this. An actor's life, indeed.)

-"Sure, bad guy who ruthlessly killed all our Government guards to get to us, and destroyed our base, I'll go with you! What could go wrong?" and "Sure, other villain who almost killed my step-brother, paralyzed him from the waist down and went off on an insane tangent with that goofy, over-dramatic speech of yours back there, I'll join your side! What could go wrong?" Which leads me to:

-While Magneto is the bad guy, in the movie's context, his argument against the humans makes the most sense. In that I mean Professor X doesn't seem to have any type of long term plans for the mutant community except for "Let's get a bunch of people with superpowers under the same roof." You don't do your movie any favors by making the bad guy the one with the most logical long term survival plan.

-The movie seems to be positioning Magneto as the superhero Malcolm X to Professor X's Martin Luther King, I suppose. The thing is, if you try to tie in real-world issues like civil rights to a silly popcorn movie, it tends to put a bit of a damper on the whole 'fun' concept, doesn't it? I like to imagine Martin Luther King, in this movie's history, trying to come up with a slogan for his 'Freedom March' of 1964 and going, "Say! Why don't we co-opt the mutants' ideology to succinctly promote our goals of treating all human beings with dignity and compassion?" Then twenty years later, gay rights activists can borrow the mutants' slogans for their cause. Doesn't it seem kind of ridiculous tieing in actual human rights issues to people in costumes blowing up stuff with their mind? (This is why I don't bother with superhero comics. When real-world concerns bang into superhero comic story lines, they just wind up pointing out the inherent absurdities in the superhero genre. Why didn't Spiderman or Superman stop the World Trade Center from collapsing? Why don't they do something about famine in Africa? Or wars in Eastern Europe? Or..? You get my point.)

-When one of your leads has the acting ability of an athlete guest-hosting on SNL, I guess it's a good idea to put her in her underwear for most of the movie. Honestly, January Jones' idea of 'acting' is blinking rapidly while delivering lines meant to be menacing but come off like she's ordering a pizza.

-The shout-outs to Rebecca Romain and Hugh Jackman were a nice touch.

-I believe, at the day's end, the superhero-in-a-movie is going to triumph over the superhero comic if only for the simple reason in a movie you can get your fix in ninety minutes. Whereas in a comic series, a first time reader has to wade through a backlog of plots and story lines decades old in order to keep on top of the current story. The unexpected added bonus of this is that it, -well, getting back issues of comics off the internet, also- has basically killed off the speculator market for comic collecting that sprang up in the Nineties.

As long as I'm ranting about comics, here's some actual comics I picked up...


Century 1969: League of Extraordinary Gentlemen (B-) The conceit of Alan Moore's and Kevin O'Neil's comic series is that Mina from Dracula and Allan Quartermain from King Solomon's Mines have teamed up with other fictional characters to fight Evil. The broad concept works well enough, except for a couple of minor issues: Firstly, since Mina and Allan change their appearances in issue to issue, as well as their personalities, it's like having to get re-acquainted with new leads every issue. Wouldn't it be simpler to just take other fictional characters and tweak them enough to avoid a lawsuit? Like, maybe Holden Caufield and Anne Frank team up? (That's an idea in really poor taste, but you get my drift.) Secondly, Moore's adding in fictional in-jokes is a little like XKCD's trope of making obscure science and computer references. Unlike XKCD, Moore's crafted a good enough story so if you miss the in-jokes, you're not lost on the story.



Hate Annual #7 (C+) Peter Bagge's original 'Hate' series worked as it was the result of a suburban man in his thirties looking in on a subculture he had just left- the 'grunge' movement in Seattle. Bagge had enough sympathy for his characters to make his stories relate-able, but enough distance from them to put his comics in perspective. Bagge wisely ended 'Hate' just as his main character, Buddy Bradley, had reached a level of stability in his life, and thus, ended a chapter of his life. When the annuals look in on Buddy's married life, they come across as sitcom material that I suspect Bagge feels more obliged to produce then wants to. Bagge's strips of the history of scientists and libertarians, on the other hand, are what he really seems interested in these days. (Go check out his archive at Reason magazine, here.)

I now realize that the next big project Bagge needs to tackle would be a biography of Ayn Rand. Seriously.


Cartooning: Philosophy and Practice by Ivan Brunetti (A) Brunetti does in 77 pages what Scott McCloud tried to do in two volumes of 'Inventing Comics' and 'Reinventing Comics'. It's a overview of Brunetti's cartooning classes, and as succinct and as in-depth an overview of the medium of comics and cartoons as you're ever going to get. Even if you don't do his hands-on guide to cartooning, I guarantee you'll come away from this with a deeper and richer understanding of the ideas and craft behind it. A must-have. See? I'm not such a grouchy fuck, after all!

Amazing Race recap (10/16/11)

Last week I did not have time for a recap but Kaylani & Lisa went home.

Teams traveled to Phuket, Thailand.
The detour choice is
Coral construction - Teams had to build a nursery out of coral pipes, when they were done teams took a kayak and set it on the ocean floor
Beach Preparation - Teams had to set up 20 beach chairs and 10 umbrellas with a symbol
The road block was to climb a sheer rock wall to a bird's nest to get the next clue
The pit stop was at Koh Panyi floating soccer field
Team rankings were
1st - Andy and Tommy (won $5,000 cash each.)
2nd - Justin and Jennifer
3rd - Jeremy and Sandy
4th - Laurence and Zac
5th - Ernie and Cindy
6th - Amani and Marcus
7th - Bill and Cathi
8th - Liz and Marie (SAVED, Must do speed bump next leg)

John's DVD pick of the week (October 18th 2011)

Hey guys it's Tuesday therefore it's my DVD pick of the week. This week I chose a movie that was awesome IT'S

Red State

Thats right the Kevin Smith Horror flick is my pick of the week. Other films out are the blockbuster sequel Pirates Of The Caribbean: On Stranger Tides, The Comedy Bad Teacher and the chick flick Monte Carlo.

My vintage pick is, in honor of this weeks release of Martha Marcy May Marlene, I'm recommending a film that came out last year with a similar tone, it's Winter's Bone, it's a decent film worth seeing.

Nums.

I just tried this snack, and it's insanely delicious.  It's kettle corn plus dark chocolate plus chocolate chips.  How bad could that be?

Review: What's Your Number (**)

I saw the promos for this pic when I saw "Crazy Stupid Love" and "Our Idiot Brother". It seemed kind of funny, so I took a chance on it tonight.

I'm not a big fan of the bubbly blonde genre, nor do I frown upon it, but the film seemed to have lots of sexual references, almost too many for a character like Anna Faris's "Ally Darling". In this regard the film is a bit of a disappointment as it dove immediately to uninhibited descriptors of sex, as opposed to building up to those moments where Anna's character has to blurt out the obvious. But hey, it's a chick flick rom-com, so you can't really fault it too much, because it does mean well.

I can't say I laughed too much at this film, but laugh I did, and I truly wanted to laugh more, but the humor bounced from raunch to intellectual, with some shades of gray in-between. So it was that I found myself hard pressed to absorb and laugh at all of the sexually oriented humor, but nor was I a prude in that department, as I could very much appreciate some of the finer points of sex-gags.

Some of the alleged romantic moments seemed way over the top. So much that one wonders why they were put in there to begin with. And casting Colin Shea as the hunky yet uninteresting neighbor who might be a sleaze, seemed a bit of a stretch. Particularly when Ally's past suitors physiques pail in comparison to her sleuth-neighbor.

The other stretch is the notion that perky cute blonde living on her own in Boston would have a hard time finding mister right. But, it's a movie, so we take the premise for what it is, and either go with it, or shrug and begrudgingly accept what is put forth.

Technical marks all hit their cues. There're some interesting shots here and there, and one wonders how they got some of those. Otherwise this film isn't about great cinematography nor sound, just about a quirky little girl in a highly explicit verbal-sex film. Now, having said that, I think the delivery and editing of some of the lines (not to mention some of the lines themselves) could have been better executed, for the film does feel a bit flat in act I, and doesn't really pick up until a third of the way into act II.

Still, it is what it is. Not a film I'd go see again, something I might rent in the future just to see what went into making this film.

Yes! New Job!

I am so excited.  I just got a new job.  Like an hour ago.  It's at my same company, which is nice, but it's in the Education Department instead of Support. 

Even before this wretched economy, I've always been fairly blessed with good jobs.  (Cue the theme from The Wonder Years.)  I started out working in a video store in high school (like Dawson and Pacey!  What?!) and moved to a bank for most of college and grad school.  I had a one-year stint as a high school English teacher, but to say that it was not ideal would be a massive understatement.

That is such a long story, but the gist is this: I loved the teaching part, and I hated the babysitting/politics part.  My new job is going to be all teaching, all the time.  I'll work with new employees at our company as well as clients (mostly hospital employees) who pay us for training.  And I'm stoked.

I've worked in Support (almost exactly two years now) for our software, so I'm on the phone for seven hours a day with hospital staff who are having trouble with our program.  I've learned a ton, but it's probably the hardest and most stressful job I'll ever have.  The system is so complex, and I did not receive much training before going on the phones.  And we're constantly being rushed by management. 

Hopefully, as an educator in the company, I can help make a change for the better.  That's not to say that I am flat-out running away from Support; on the contrary, I am grateful for the experience I've gained there.  It's put me in touch with lots of our clients, and it's helped me to identify with their needs and expectations.  It will only make me better at anything else I do in the company going forward. 

I should start in the new position in the next few weeks.  Those of you who know me personally probably know how stressed I've become at work, but this move just feels right.  And I know that every job has its ups and downs, and almost no job is perfect.  But I'm super optimistic.  I just wanted to share my news and capture this excitement, blog-style.

This Means War Trailer 2011 HD

John's two cents: looks interesting thoughts?

John's DVD pick of the week (October 11th 2011)

Hey guys it's that time of the week again. This week I chose this year's winner of the Palme D'or at Cannes It's

The Tree Of Life

That's right the Terrance Malick directed Brad Pitt/Sean Penn starrer is my pick this week. Other big releases include the comedy Horrible Bosses, The family comedies Judy Moody And The Not Bummer Summer and Zookeeper, and the mediocre Superhero flick Green Lantern.

My vintage pick is: in honor of this weeks releases of Footloose and The Thing, I'm recommending a handful of 80's remakes and reboots, they are The A-Team, Clash Of The Titans, The Karate Kid, and My Bloody Valentine, They may not be masterpieces but they are worth watching.

Long Weekend

In three words.  Relaxing.  Flowers.  Stamping.

I picked these up at Whole Foods today.  Just because.

Then I stamped up some birthday lovin' for my niece. 

Don't worry about this spoiling the surprise.  She's not a blogger, although I did have her text me her current favorite colors.  Aren't kids funny that way?

What did you do over the last few days?

Review: The Ides Of March (***)

Stephen (Ryan Gosling) is a razor-sharp, rising star political media consultant. Presently, he is working on Pennsylvania Governor Mike Morris' (George Clooney) campaign for the Democratic presidential nomination. Steve-o has only one man above him, overall campaign manager Paul (Philip Seymour Hoffman). The two consult each other daily. The governor has a single chief competitor, an Arkansas senator with his own astute adviser, Tom (Paul Giamatti). At the moment, the Ohio primary is looming and the staff is working out of Cincinnati. One of the governor's lower-level workers is beautiful Molly (Evan Rachel Wood), the daughter of the present head of the National Democratic Party. Only 20, she is just learning the ropes. One day, she makes a pass at Stephen and he responds positively. But, he makes it clear to her that politics is his passion and, especially, Mike Morris, his idol. Indeed, Morris is handsome, smart, and appears to speak sincerely and clearly to potential voters. Yet, very soon after their first encounter, Molly drops a bombshell on Stephen. It is a stunning piece of news, one that could knock the earth off its axis. Also, amazingly, Tom has been courting Stephen to "switch sides" while a respected, determined journalist, Ida (Marisa Tomei) is eager for any and all campaign stories. A cauldron of conflicting genuine and perceived realities is brewing. What will be the result? This is a fine film, based on a stage play, and directed by Mr. Clooney. While the story is more predictable in nature, the script has some great lines and Clooney's direction is quite, quite admirable. This is particularly true of the performances he draws from the cast, with Gosling, Hoffman, Giamatti, Tomei, Clooney himself, and especially Wood giving great turns. All the film's amenities, from sets, costumes, and camera work, are also nice. If you are a discriminating film buff, who loves quality flicks with ample discussion points, then I'd suggest you see Ides at your earliest convenience.

Review: 50/50 (***1/2)

Adam (Gordon-Levitt) is a rule-following, mild-mannered twentysomething who lives in Seattle with his girlfriend, Rachael (Bryce Dallas-Howard), and works at Seattle Public Radio. His life takes a sudden and dramatic turn when he is diagnosed with a rare form of cancer that has taken over his spine. A laidback kind of guy, Adam handles each hurdle with surprising ease and levity while engaging in somewhat helpful counseling from Katie (Anna Kendrick), a young psychologist the hospital assigns him. Before long, though, his complex relationships with Rachael, his best friend Kyle (Seth Rogen), and his needy mother (Angelica Huston) become even more convoluted with the introduction of chemotherapy and medicinal marijuana into his life. As the severity of his condition increases, Adam begins to reassess his life, his relationships, and the nonplussed façade he uses to get himself through.

The inevitable comparisons between "50/50" and 2009's "Funny People" are unfortunate. While I stuck up for "Funny People" more than most of my colleagues, even I will admit it is an incredibly flawed film that misses the mark on many levels. "50/50", then, plays out a bit like what "Funny People" should have been, right down to the performance of Seth Rogen. It is, first and foremost, a very funny movie and that is where "Funny People" first went awry. You can't make a comedy about cancer, or any other serious illness for that matter, and fail to produce a genuinely funny script. Laughs come often and organically. I also quite liked that writer Will Reiser (who based his script on the events of his own battle with cancer) makes it clear early on that he intends to laugh at cancer and if you're not up for that, you're in the wrong theater. That is not to say that the disease itself or the havoc it wreaks on Adam's life is disrespected or ignored; in fact, "50/50" gives a fairly realistic view of the hell that is aggressive cancer and the sometimes even more aggressive treatment. "50/50" is bold but soft, a combination that works well.

The dialogue between the characters in "50/50" flows with tremendous ease, especially in the scenes involving Adam and Kyle. This dynamic between JGL and Rogen is the meat of the film and the two play it out brilliantly. They have a chemistry that Anne Hathaway only wishes she could develop with…well, anyone. (That was an unnecessary shot at Miss Hathaway. My apologies.) They reminded me of the type of friendship I might have with any one of my closer pals if we cursed more and occasionally smoked pot. Adam's other relationships are a bit awkward but whether this was done on purpose or not, it serves the narrative well. In my mind he would have a tense partnership with Rachael because they're clearly not suited for each other and any furtherance of his friendship with Katie beyond doctor-patient would be a bit odd.

All of the supporting actors hold their own. As spot-on as I might have been with JGL all those years ago, I would have never guessed, after reluctantly watching "Twilight", that Kendrick would be an actress whose performances I truly look forward to. This isn't quite to the level of her work in "Up in the Air" but it is good and believable nonetheless. Huston's character seems a bit over-the-top in the early going but the depth of her character comes to light in the late stages and Huston pulls it together splendidly. And Rogen gives what might be his best performance to date. To be fair, I'm not much of a Rogen fan so I'm far from an expert on his value as an actor. But whereas he was completely outclassed in "Funny People" and pretty much plays the same character in almost every film, he shows a little more strength in "50/50" than he ever has before (with the possible exception of "Knocked Up"). I actually liked him and I haven't felt that way toward him very often.

But of course, the weight of "50/50" rests almost entirely on the shoulders of JGL and he holds up to the challenge. One of the best compliments I can give an actor is to say that he and his character become one and the same. That's what JGL does here and that's why "50/50" succeeds. He envelopes himself into the Adam character and makes his portrayal incredibly believable. It is almost like watching a documentary on a young cancer patient. Adam handles his disease with class and dignity but not without emotion. His outbursts are few but powerful and through them JGL sells the story beautifully. Simply put, this guy is a star and "50/50" serves as the announcement of such to those of you who didn't already know this to be fact.

"50/50" is honest and at times tough to watch but never purposefully harsh or depressing. In fact, it is generally positive but in a way that isn't all sunshine and unicorns. It is smart, hilarious, and even touching while all the time remaining respectful of the audience's ability to relate to difficult circumstances without artificial emotional fishing. It is an excellent film marked by one outstanding performance that deserves the attention received come Award Season.

Review: Drive (***1/2)

It seems to be the case nowadays that film audiences, particularly at this time of year as the summer winds down, are left with a choice of seeing the latest broad appeal movies filling the multiplexes, or venturing to the local independent cinema in search of more intellectual fare. Very rarely will a film transcend these boundaries and offer a mix of Hollywood-style action and art-house flair, which is what makes Nicolas Winding Refn's Drive so unique and something to be celebrated.

Drive tells the story of an unnamed stunt driver (Ryan Gosling) moonlighting as a getaway driver for a crime syndicate run by Bernie Rose (Albert Brooks). Seemingly a loner, the driver becomes involved in the life of his neighbour Irene (Carey Mulligan) and her young son Benicio (Kaden Leos). After agreeing to drive for Irene's newly paroled husband Standard (Oscar Isaac), and finding himself on the wrong side of assassination contract, the driver embarks on a mission to protect Irene from the vicious gangsters who would seek to harm her to get at him. It's a well-worn plot line which in the hands of someone less adept than Refn would likely be nothing more than a forgettable thriller, yet the massively talented director, who picked up the Best Director prize at Cannes this year for Drive, crafts an engaging and thrilling throwback film elevated by masterful performances across the board.

Refn, previously known for the fantastic Bronson, and the lesser known but equally excellent Pusher trilogy, is a man who has very clearly studied his Kubrick. Certainly most modern directors could do worse than imitate the style of one of history's greats like Stanley Kubrick, but rarely does one pull it off with the skill of Refn. In Bronson, the influence was a little more obvious, with the resulting film seeming like something of a spiritual successor to A Clockwork Orange. With Drive however, the traces are a little more subtle, visible in the impeccable technical touches, and the use of dissolves, pensive long takes, and slow zooms, a hallmark of Kubrick's catalogue. Drive is a flawlessly crafted film, filled with beautiful imagery of the Los Angeles underworld seen more often in the work of Michael Mann.

The technical achievements of Drive are more than matched by the acting of the entire cast, and Refn shrewdly selects a wide variety of performers to populate the story. Top notch support comes from Bryan Cranston, Christina Hendricks, the ever dependable Ron Perlman, and particularly Brooks, who jettisons his familiar comedic persona in a truly frightening and villainous performance, which will surely be on the radar of voters come awards season. Mulligan shows characteristic heart in a largely overlooked role, yet the film unquestionably belongs to Gosling. Often heralded as one of the finest actors of his generation, in Drive Gosling delivers his best work yet as the driver; a quiet role that is all the more effective due to the subtlety of the performance. He displays an ability to ratchet up the tension using just the slightest widening of his eyes and tensing of his jawline, and when the character is pushed to act more forcefully, Gosling transitions from almost silent observer to brutal aggressor so swiftly that it leaves one breathless. It's work that he makes look easy, yet it's the most focused performance seen in an action film in quite some time.

There's something undeniably retro about Drive, with its neon opening titles and 80s infused soundtrack, but the film seems remarkably fresh. Smart action filmmaking is so hard to come by these days, so Drive delivers refreshing variety, beginning the time of year when the so-called prestige pictures are released with a bang.

Review: Moneyball (***)

I recently saw Moneyball and thought the movie was quite great. The storyline is intriguing to say the least and though a lot of people already know the plot the movie made it come to life. The cast was great and specifically Jonah Hill, who usually does a great job in comedies, should get nominated for best supporting actor in it. It is nice to see him make a switch to a non-comedic role and I am sure this will greatly help his acting career.

This is one of those rare movies that everyone should like, whether they are sports fans or not. The story is so interesting that it could not have been made up and the original author of the book was well represented in the screenplay. I read some commentary that this might not be as big as The Blind Side overseas because a lot of people aren't in love with baseball, but I think this appeals to all people even if they are not a fan.

Overall, I think Sorkin did a wonderful job with the movie and picked a perfect cast-he has definitely been on a roll lately. Although I saw a matinée, I would have even liked it had I paid full price for my tickets. So, enjoy... :-)

Review: Crazy, Stupid, Love (***)

I wasn't sure if I wanted to see this movie at the theater,but I am really glad I did. The characters are well played out, not very likable at first, but after you get to know the cast, you really feel for everyone. I thought Julianne Moore & Steve Carrell had great chemistry with their relationship. Super script, nice directing, great casting with Robbie, the son. This movie will surprise you at how good it is. I loved how you saw the characters at work, at home, at the bar & with their friends. This was very well played out & comes together in the end extremely well. Ryan Gosling is very hot even when he is sleazy. Great date night movie!!

Review: Contagion (***1/2)

So what comes to mind when you think of a disaster movie? Is it gigantic alien invaders? Is it volcanoes exploding and flooding the land with lava? Or is it the world ending in some fiery, cosmic, or overpowering natural force way? Regardless we've seen various movies that have tried to destroy the human population in flashy, explosion filled ways. However, one movie that released this weekend called Contagion has decided to approach the threat of human extinction in a different way. Was it worth it? Well read on to find out.

Okay let's face it, when I first saw the trailer I couldn't help but think that this movie was going to be nothing more than a boring and over-dramatic remake of the movie Outbreak. About thirty minutes into the film however, I was proved wrong as the tale unfolded into something much deeper. As the trailer pointed out, the plot of Contagion centers on a mysterious virus that suddenly appears in a few random cases, making the doctors think that it's nothing more than a common virus. The opinion soon changes however, when cases across the world come pouring in and many people begin experiencing the symptoms. Soon the experts begin working out a solution to the virus causing the disease, but the fear and paranoia filling the general public begin causing major problems, which could be even deadlier than the virus.

However this tale is really split into two different scenarios one involving Matt Damon and his family and the other on Lawrence Fishburne and his team dealing with the silent killer. Both of these tales were, too my surprise, actually pretty interesting with their pace and drama balanced to a healthy level. Perhaps what made this movie come to life was the great acting by Fishburne and Jude Law. The two actors played the head of the health team and the weasel journalistic respectively, fighting each other to the vary core. While one is trying to pool all his resources into combating chaos, the other continues to increase it with his articles. As the two combat one another, the rest of the supporting cast, most of who are on Fishburne's team, attempt to do their part in surviving in the panic filled world. I'll mention here that Kate Winslet and Jennifer Ehle fans will be happy with the roles played by these starlets, while fans of Damon and Paltrow will be disappointed as their roles are much more diluted and calmer than what we've seen in the past.

Now although the acting was good, the biggest factor that gave this movie character was how the crew made your imagination fill you with fear. The combination of the camera-work, layout of the scenes, and dialog all combined to create a believable scenario about a world caught up in an epidemic. Instead of the flashy explosions, scream filled close-up death scenes, and high speed outrun natural disaster scenes, the virus instead silently travels across the world and you don't know who it's going to strike next. As a result, I was caught up in suspense at hoping my favorite characters would not succumb to the virus or be taken out by someone plagued with fear. Regardless despite not being able to see the killer, the virus may in fact be one of the scariest killers I've seen in a long time.

The other factor that I thoroughly enjoyed were the realistic steps and actions portrayed in this film that were used to combat the epidemic. The science, governmental laws and regulations, propaganda, and many other factors I felt were pretty accurate, and I was able to follow and understand what they were doing. I'm not going to lie that my favorite parts to this movie were the scientific explanations about the virus, which I was able to understand, but lets face it I'm a geek. Regardless I'll warn you that people who don't like science or bureaucratic processes will not like these scenes.

Now lets get to the weaknesses of this movie that I wish to share with you. The first thing is that this movie is very sad at parts and people who don't like depression will want to avoid this movie. The movie is not afraid to show the dying victims up close and personal, which can either tug at your heartstrings or make you sick. Germophobes as well will want to stay away from this film, as their fears will only be amplified by some of the focused shots of the victims leaving the virus on various surfaces. I guess the only other weakness I can say is that for an action-thriller, which this movie is classified as, there is not a whole lot of action. Again there are no high-speed chases, suspense filled acrobatics and climbing expeditions, or giant CGI natural disaster attacks. Those looking for said characteristics should choose another movie.

Contagion is one of the better disaster movies I have seen in a long time. The good acting, well angled shots, and ability to use the audience's imagination to paint the fear kept me deep into the movie and kept me surprised through most of the movie. However I do have to say that the focused portrayal of death and the emotions that came with it were not my cup of tea. So until then I welcome constructive criticism and hope you have a fun time at the movies!

Shirley MacLaine to recieve AFI lifetime Achievement Award

Following in the footsteps of this year's honoree Morgan Freeman, Shirley MacLaine has been tapped by the American Film Institute as the 40th recipient of its Life Achievement award.
And it's an achievement that is well deserved.
Not only has MacLaine sustained a viable career in Hollywood for decades, but the 77-year-old thesp is also an Oscar winner (among many other things).


After making her film debut in Alfred Hitchcock's The Trouble With Harry in 1955, the Valentine's Day actress later went on to win an Academy Award in 1984 as Best Actress for her performance in Terms of Endearment.
To date, MacLaine has nabbed six Academy Award nominations, six Emmys nominations
But that's just one entry on MacLaine's long list of awards.y noms and seven Golden Globe Awards, and she's even managed to squeeze in the time to become an established author, most recently penning the book I'm All Over That–And Other Confessions, which was published in April.
"Shirley MacLaine is a powerhouse of personality that has illuminated screens large and small across six decades," Howard Stringer, chair of the AFI's board of trustees, said in an announcement for her selection. "From ingénue to screen legend, Shirley has entertained a global audience through song, dance, laughter and tears, and her career as writer, director and producer is even further evidence of her passion for the art form and her seemingly boundless talents."


And MacLaine's success appears to run in the family. Warren Beatty, MacLaine's brother, also received the AFI Lifetime Achievement Award in 2008, making them the second family in the history of the award to have multiple honorees (Kirk Douglas and his son Michael were the first, honored in 1991 and 2009, respectively)
Congrats! 

Review: Red State (***)

OK. So after reading the other reviews and deciding to watch this based on the positive reports, I feel compelled to offer a more realistic review.

First of all, this is not the masterpiece it's made out to be. A lot of Kevin Smith fanboys seem reluctant to give him a bad review.

So here we go, it's a bit of a mess really. It seems to be getting a lot of praise for switching genres but honestly, it just comes across as confused. Yes, the performances are pretty good and some of the camera work is exceptional (the escape/chase scene is noteworthy) but overall it's almost like three films in one. This might sound like a good thing but not the way it's presented here.

And as for everybody trying to get clever over the title, the meaning is pretty clear to me. It refers to both the political and the government angle that the authorities can lock any suspected terrorist up for an indefinite time. A la communist/red states.

Overall, some good performances, memorable dialogue and decent cinematography fail to save this confused mess.

'Young Adult' Trailer

John's DVD pick of the week (October 4th 2011)

Well it's Tuesday, sorry for the delay but I picked a fun flick it's

Fast Five.

That's right the action packed flick is my pick this week. Other picks include The horror sequel Scream 4, the nature doctumentary African Cats, and the blu ray release of The Lion King.

My vintage pick is - in honor of this weeks release of The Ides Of March I'm recommending George Clooney's best directorial outing it's Good Night and Good Luck, check it out if you get a chance

Geeze. Give Me Some Credit

Some things in this world just make little to no sense.  Wheel taxes.  The Kardashians.  And credit.

The thing with credit is that it takes credit to get credit, much like new graduates feel the pressure to have job experience to get a job.  It's a total catch-22.

Here are a couple of things that I've learned so far.  Hopefully they will help you, too.  Please bear with me.  We're dealing with complicated subject matter here.  (Unlike said Kardashians.)

In my quest for fiscal knowledge, I have found that one of the best ways to raise one's credit score is to use a credit card.  (Remember to check Credit Karma to see your score for free.)  Oh, and pay it off in full each month.  Just pay a regular expense, such as a cell phone bill or a trip to the grocery, with your credit card.  Come home, unpack, and virtually swipe that debit card to pay off your credit card purchase.

This way you use a small part of your credit limit, which improves your debt-to-credit ratio.  And make consistent payments without carrying a balance.  This looks good to Mr. FICO.

You may be saying: But TomTom, how do I get a credit card?  Excellent question, you.

Recently I applied for a card from a major company and was instantly denied.  Limited credit history.  What a bummer.  I have a steady job, stable income, pay my bills on time, etc.  It didn't matter.  My score was considered fair, but the 'hard inquiry' from that company lowered my score by 20 points.  This is what's known as a double whammy.  You try to scrape together a decent score, but your efforts are only rewarded with a swat at your points.  Le sigh.

I was able to get a no-frills card from a local bank, and after using my card one time (and paying it off, as mentioned above), my score went back up by about 20 points.  I look for it to increase as I continue to make a credit card purchase at least once a month, indefinitely.

Why does this matter?  Your credit score is a numerical way of expressing your reliability.  At least in "The Man's" eyes.  If you plan to buy a house, then the higher your score, the lower your interest rate.  If you apply for a job, the potential employer may check your credit score.  Collections from Verizon?  Goodbye, corner office.  Or tiny cubicle. 

These are not circumstances to be taken lightly.  If you are in college, please don't be like me and treat pre-approved credit offers like they're covered in warts.  Compare your offers and take a card.  It doesn't mean you have to max it out or even carry it around all the time.  Again--small, regular purchases that you pay off.

If you have teenage children, call your credit card company and have your child(ren) added as authorized users.  Then don't even tell them until they're older.  That way, your score becomes their score, and they don't have to do anything to earn it.  (It's one of the few times in life that I will endorse that mentality.)  When you go to remove them as authorized users, it will not affect the score of either party.

If you've made it this far, thanks!  I hope that this has been useful information.  On Specs Appeal I try to share only what I feel is crucial for your daily life.  Please remember that I am not a financial expert and am only sharing things that I have learned in my own experience.  There are tons of great books, blogs, websites, and so on, but if I can be of assistance, please let me know!  Mazel!

RIP Steve Jobs

Apple issued the following statement today that Steve Jobs has passed away at the age of 56 due to complications from pancreatic cancer:

We are deeply saddened to announce that Steve Jobs passed away today.

Steve's brilliance, passion and energy were the source of countless innovations that enrich and improve all of our lives. The world is immeasurably better because of Steve.

His greatest love was for his wife, Laurene, and his family. Our hearts go out to them and to all who were touched by his extraordinary gifts.

Amazing Race Recap (10/2/11)

Sunday was the second leg of the 19th cycle of The Amazing Race. This week the teams traveled to Indonesia, they had to fly and take an overnight train. When they got there they had to do a roadblock, the roadblock one person had to go in a cave and find a mask and a sword. The detour was a choice between money maker or ticket taker. In Money make teams had to put on a costume and dance and collect 30,000 rupees. In Ticket Taker teams had to valet park scooter bikes and collect 15,000 rupees. In both detours they had to donate the money made and all money they had in possession to an orphanage, teams were not allowed to check in usless they did that. The order before teams turned back, bold means team didn't have to turn back.

1st - Ernie and Cindy
2nd - Liz and Marie
3rd - Bill and Cathi
4th - Andy and Tommy
5th - Jeremy and Sandy
6th - Justin and Jennifer
7th - Amani and Marcus
8th - Laurence and Zac
9th - Ethan and Jenna
10th - Kaylani and Lisa
11th - Ron and Bill

After teams turned Back
1st - Andy and Tommy (won trip to Ireland)
2nd - Laurence and Zac
3rd - Kaylani and Lisa
4th - Ernie and Cindy
5th - Liz and Marie
6th - Jeremy and Sandy
7th - Bill and Cathi
8th - Justin and Jennifer
9th - Amani and Marcus
10th - Ethan and Jenna (ELIMINATED)
11th - Ron and Bill (ELIMINATED)

Kurt Russell Replacing Kevin Costner in Django Un Chained

Quentin Tarantino is reuniting with two actors he's worked with before. Kurt Russell who starred in Tarantino's Death Proof, is in talks to replace Kevin Costner in the filmmaker's Django Unchained while Kill Bill Vol. 2 co-star Laura Cayouette is on board as well, says Heat Vision.

They will be joining Leonardo DiCaprio, Jamie Foxx, Christoph Waltz,Samuel L Jackson Gerald McRaney and Dennis Christopher in the film that's scheduled to start shooting in November for a December 25, 2012 release.

In the film, Django (Foxx) is a freed slave, who under the tutelage of a German bounty hunter (Waltz) becomes a badass bounty hunter himself. After assisting Waltz on taking down some bad guys for profit, he is in turn assisted by Waltz in tracking down his slave wife and liberating her from an evil plantation owner (DiCaprio).

Russell will be playing a character called Ace, a man who oversees the plantation in a ruthless manner and who relishes punishing slaves. Costner had to drop the role two weeks ago due to schedule conflicts.

Cayouette will play DiCaprio's widowed sister, a southern belle who co-owns the plantation.