As with many film dynasties, commercial and critical success often leads to sequels and spin-offs. Great films like Earnest Goes to Hell and Police Academy 19 were only made possible because of the success of the original. And so it is the case with this year's highly acclaimed Brokeback Mountain.
It's the Johnny Drama syndrome: Chris Penn, like so many other less-famous Hollywood siblings (Frank Stallone...Don Swayze...am I missing any others?), was an actor who appeared in scores of films as bit characters yet never achieved fame or fortune on the level of their kin. But since he was in Reservoir Dogs, he deserves proper respect. R.I.P.
Got $100,000 or more burning a hole in your pocket? Like porn? I bet you do, Spanky. Become the CEO of your own state-of-the-art porn film production company by bidding on eBay in hopes of winning a profitable adult franchise. Just make sure you're at least 22 years old, live in a blue state, and that mommy and daddy approve of your new filthy, debaucherous lifestyle. Oh, and don't think you're actually going to get lucky with any of the porn stars, fatty.
Jennifer Garner, still recuperating from the news that her show Alias has been canceled, looks so pregnant that you'd expect little green aliens or CIA probes to come busting out of her belly. Perhaps the only thing more scary is the thought of her giving birth to a litter of little Ben Afflecks, who will then all grow up to star in sequels to movies like Armageddon, Daredevil, and Pearl Harbor.
Attention Netflix Customers! Everybody pay attention to your email from over the next month or two. You're about to be granted a special deal for one month! Due to a semi-class action suit regarding misleading advertising, Netflix is paying YOU the consumer reparations to the tune of one free month of 4-Disc NetFlix service!
Sounds great, right?
(courtesy of Sports Guy's World)
Continue reading "Beware: Another Potential NetFlix Subscription Hike!" »
Starring Mike Myers, Cameron Diaz, Eddie Murphy, Antonio Banderas; directed by Andrew Adamson and Kelly Ashbury
Dr. Scott rates it 
out of
five bananas
Wow, it’s been awhile, huh? With all the other shit that I’ve been publishing lately, I haven’t sat down to write an actual film review since...well, about two weeks ago. And that was for a film that’s now out on DVD. Not only have I been busy writing (as those of you who’ve been receiving chapters of my forthcoming book, FASHIONABLY LOST will surely understand), but I’ve hardly had a chance to get to a theater.
Alot of that has to do with what’s in theaters. I’ve seen so much bullshit in movie theaters over the last year or two, I’ve gotten to the point where it’s gotta be something pretty special to get me to make the journey to my local Googleplex. And take into consideration that I rarely pay for films anymore. Today, I was inspired to go see SHREK 2. I loved the first film, liked what I saw of the trailers for this sequel, and it was a bad weather sorta day here in Dallas, so why not?
The question, of course, is: Did the sequel live up to the original?
Yes, yes, and more yes. I’ve only seen SHREK 2 once, but I’m already convinced that it’s even better than the original. There are more characters, more pop culture references (I saw allusions to THE LORD OF THE RINGS, FROM HERE TO ETERNITY, ALIEN, SPIDERMAN, and about a dozen others I can’t recall on the spot), more locations, more everything. I guess the best place to start reviewing this one is the "more characters" part.
 Who would have thought Cameron Diaz could look this hot? |
There’s Shrek, of course, as well as Donkey and Princess Fionna. They’re all voiced by the actors and actresses that did the voices in the first flick, and they’re still just as entertaining as they were the first time around. But, ah, didn’t I say "more characters"? That I did. The big star of this one, whom I predict will become the real "star" of this series if he shows up in the just-announced SHREK 3 and 4, was Puss in Boots, voiced by Antonio Banderas.
Puss is hired by a Fairy Godmother with revenge on her mind. See, her son– Prince Charming– didn’t get to make Fionna his wife, even though that had been promised to him by Fionna’s father. When the Godmother finds out that Shrek is the one she ended up with, she’s furious. She sets in motion a series of obstacles that will tear Shrek and Fionna apart, chief among them the hiring of Puss in Boots to assassinate Shrek. Puss shows up in a floppy, Three Musketeers-style hat with a similar sword. His real secret weapon is the "cute face" he makes whenever he’s threatened– a gag that gets used throughout the flick. Banderas brings an enormous amount of personality and charm to the character, making every scene that he’s a part of that much better.
The Fairy Godmother is played by Jennifer Saunders, who some of you may recognize from the British TV series ABSOLUTELY FABULOUS (which I usually refer to as ABSOLUTELY UNFUNNY AND UNDESERVING OF THE PRAISE BESTOWED UPON IT). I loved how dark they made this character, and I particularly enjoyed the running jokes about her diet and the visit we make to her enchanted potion factory.
 I can now officially say that Antonio Banderas is a pussy. |
Which brings me to another point– the locations in SHREK 2 are lightyears beyond the locations from the first film. They burst with the sort of detail and background jokes that are atypical of the animated features from Pixar. Pay close attention during the visit to the enchanted potion factory, in particular the workers therein. There’s a great sight gag when Shrek appropriates the uniform of one of these workers.
Another scene that was bursting with detail involved the arrival of a slew of fairy tale celebrities to the King’s castle. There are huge crowds, a Joan Rivers-look alike (and I wonder if that wasn’t actually her doing the voice of the character; if not, it was a spot-on imitation), and all kinds of carriages showing up to drop off the celebs. I particularly liked the carriage carrying Sleeping Beauty, and how she evacuated the carriage face-first into the floor, dead asleep. Great touch.
In addition to these new, hilarious characters and all this exquisite detail, a bunch of the minor characters from the original SHREK show up to help their buddy get what needs to be done, done. The Gingerbread Man, who so many people loved in the first film, is back (with little icing stitches where his torn off legs have been reattached) with a meatier role, as well as a surprise transformation late in the film that needs to be seen to be appreciated in full (think: GHOSTBUSTERS). Pinocchio shows up again, too, with some embarrassing secrets of his own. The Three Blind Mice also return, as do the Three Little Pigs. All are used to serve a purpose within the story; in other words, they aren’t brought back just to take up time and give us some easy laughs.
In fact, nothing about SHREK 2 seems like "easy laughs". What I mean is, all the jokes (and they come at the rate of about 3 per minute) in SHREK 2 are genuine, non-filler humor. The writing is always clever, never dumbing itself down even with the idea that this should be a kid’s flick. There are many, many sequences here that will please children, but they’ll please adults even more. Look for a COPS parody in the third act, and keep your eyes peeled for the contraband that the cops (here playing their role on a show called KNIGHTS) take off of Puss in Boots ("That’s not mine!").
 The obligatory "Shrek and his Pussy" comment goes here. |
I laughed through the vast majority of SHREK 2. The jokes come faster and funnier. The characters are more developed, and the ones that have already been established are given more to do. The story– Shrek and Fionna travel to the kingdom of Far, Far Away to meet Fionna’s parents– is, on the surface, pretty threadbare. But the writers have really put alot of effort into mining this plot for all its worth. The film is short, maybe 90 minutes, but not a moment is wasted as far as humor and cool visuals are concerned.
If you liked the first SHREK, you will absolutely adore SHREK 2. I applaud the DREAMWORKS animation division. They’ve now stepped their game up well enough to run alongside the Pixar guys as equals, leaving Disney in the dust. I, for one, am grateful for this new renaissance of animation, since everything that Disney’s made since THE LION KING has been a big pile of ass.
Bottom Line: SHREK 2 is an outstanding film, perfect for a date or by yourself on a rainy day. You will laugh at the film from start to finish, and you’ll have your socks rocked directly from your feet by all the intricate detail, sharp writing, and brilliant song usage going on in the film. This is one of those rare, rare, very rare occasions where the sequel has surpassed its original in terms of...well, everything. See SHREK 2– Doctor’s Orders.
Word,
Dr. Scott
Starring Uma Thurman, Lucy Liu, Vivica A. Fox, Daryl Hannah, Michael Madsen, David Carradine; directed by Quentin Tarantino
Dr. Scott rates it
out of
five bananas
Well, it’s over, folks. KILL BILL, the glorious epic that has consumed Quentin’s life for the last several years, has been released upon the public. Maybe “unleashed” is the better word. The most exciting thing about this volume is that it’s even better than the first. Plus, the film is far different from the script that I’ve had for the last year or two, so I was pleasantly surprised by the film on many occasions.
Let’s do a little recap, just for the slow people out there. Uma Thurman reprises her role as “The Bride”, an assassin that used to work for the evil death-pimp Bill. She tried to get out of his employ, disappearing and getting engaged to a guy who ran a used records store, and Bill didn’t take it very well. On the day of her wedding rehearsal, The Bride is beaten, shot, and believed dead by Bill and the other members of The Bride’s assassin squad (The DiVAS). She wakes up after four years in a coma to find her baby missing (she was pregnant at the time of her “death”), her legs atrophied, and with a mind set on revenge. The bulk of KILL BILL– in both films– revolves around The Bride tracking down these 5 bastards and killing them off in spectacularly bloody ways.
In the first film, The Bride (Hereafter referred to as “TB” because I’m too lazy to keep writing out “The Bride”) eliminated two of her former team members– played by Vivica Fox and Lucy Liu– before sending a message to Bill that she was coming after him, too. We found out in the final moments of VOLUME ONE that TB’s daughter had not, in fact, died when TB was attacked. When VOL. TWO begins, TB is going after Daryl Hannah (as Elle Driver), Michael Madsen (as Budd, titty-bar bouncer for hire), and, of course, Bill.
 Uma likes her swords like she likes her men. |
One of the big problems I had with the first film– I liked it, but there were some pretty substantial flaws I couldn’t love unconditionally– was the shallowness of it all. The film was like one, long fight scene, and I found myself yearning for the trademark “Tarantino Dialogue” and complex plot structure. It was a revenge tale– nothing more, nothing less. So, I was enormously happy to find that VOL. TWO was a return to the things we fell in love with in Tarantino’s earlier films: The pop-culture infused dialogue, the complex plot structure and screwed up chronology, the off-beat and frequently verbose characters. It was because of these things that I loved VOL. TWO while I simply enjoyed VOL. ONE.
As I’ve already mentioned, the plot for VOLUME TWO is simple– more revenge, more fights– but the film is saved from being a retread of VOLUME ONE by its dialogue and characters. TB has two underlings to off before she gets to Bill...and there’s that issue of TB’s daughter floating around that needs to be resolved. The film follows TB as she tracks these people down, undergoes some serious injuries herself, and disposes of those who have wronged her. The ending is satisfying, something I had concerns about ever since I heard about the film’s plot.
In the acting department, Uma Thurman goes all out to impress us and win us over as The Bride. She obviously went through some hellish training for this role, but it’s paid off: There’s not a single moment where you don’t believe she’s actually doing the things that she appears to be doing. She brings a lot of heart to the role, and the scenes where she finds out about her daughter are enormously touching. These were some of my favorite scenes in the film.
Michael Madsen is...well, not as good as I expected. He was very...adequate, I guess. I loved, loved, loved Madsen in RESERVOIR DOGS, but he seemed very sluggish and low-key here, something I wasn’t expecting. He’s as heartless here as he was as Mr. Blonde, but I dug that character more.
 Pretty hot for, you know, only having one eye. |
Daryl Hannah, on the other hand, was better than I expected. The scene wherein she describes the effects of a snake bite from the deadly Black Mamba is hilarious, and she was just as believable in her fight scenes as Uma was in hers. These two have a knock-down, drag-out, no-holds-barred, dirty-ass fight near the midway point in the film, and it was just as entertaining as the first film’s “House of Blue Leaves” segment. The way the fight ends, in particular, was absolutely perfect, and there’s a money shot in this sequence that had the audience I saw the film with shrieking with laughter, revulsion, and applause. You’ll know it when you, er, “see it”.
The real star of the film, though, is David Carradine as the titular bad guy. What charisma! What a face! Originally, Warren Beatty was slated to play Bill. But he pussied out when he learned he’d have to undergo some serious training with swords and martial arts for the role. Great career move, there, chief. You could have familiarized yourself with a whole new generation, made fans of them all, but you didn’t want to wear yourself out swinging a sword around. No matter: David Carradine is phenomenal. So phenomenal, in fact, I’m going to dedicate an entire follow-up paragraph to him.
See? Here it is. Carradine gets some of the best lines in either of KILL BILL’s volumes, and he gets a handful of monologues that I predict will become just as quotable as PULP FICTION’s “Royale With Cheese” discussion. I particularly enjoyed the “Superman” monologue, as well as the story he tells about Pai Mei (more on him in a moment). He delivers every one of his lines as though it were the last chance he’d ever get to talk in front of a camera. Who knows? Maybe it will be. Tarantino has achieved yet another “career resurrection”, but it could go one of two ways for Carradine from here: The Travolta Route, which leads to overexposure and a slew of fat-ass paychecks; Or, the Robert Forster Way, which leads to...not much. I hope it’s the former.
Now, let’s talk about Pai Mei. The sequences with this kick-ass martial arts master were show stoppingly great. The audience I saw the film– rowdy to begin with– was in stitches every time Pai Mei stroked his evil beard in an evil manner while laughing evilly. Just great stuff. You’ve all seen that shot of the dude jumping onto the end of TB’s sword, but that’s just the tip of the iceberg for this sequence. I think that this chapter– called “The Cruel Tutelage of Pai Mei”– was my favorite portion of the film.
 You wouldn't to see this assassination squad waiting outside YOUR house. |
Another sequence that deserves some mentioning is the “Lonely Grave of Paula Schultz” chapter. In this portion of the film, Tarantino gives us what might be the most effective and squirm-inducing “Buried Alive” sequence ever committed to film. Look for the stretch where the screen goes totally black and the sounds of dirt falling on a pine-covered coffin lid come crashing out of the theater’s speakers. This, too, was one of my favorite parts of the film.
In all, each sequence seems to top the next, all building up to an ultimately satisfying and tense confrontation between TB and Bill, during which a lot of questions will be answered and a few mysteries solved. I should mention yet another sequence I really enjoyed, before I forget to talk about it: The sequence where Bill and TB talk at the chapel before TB’s wedding rehearsal is just brilliant, establishing menace through some tense dialogue exchanges between these two (TB: “Are you gonna be nice?” Bill: “All my life, I’ve never been ‘nice’. But I’ll try my hardest to be sweet.”) This is just a great, solid piece of filmmaking that I think many of you will enjoy more than the first. I give this film my highest recommendation– Doctor’s Orders.
Bottom Line: KILL BILL VOLUME TWO is better, much better, than VOLUME ONE. You will have one helluva time watching this flick. You’ll gag, you’ll laugh, you’ll applaud, you’ll stare in amazement at the fucking morons who brought their 3 year old kids to the film who decided to stand next to my aisle throughout the film. Well, okay, maybe they won’t be there...but you’ll feel my pain, right? Check out VOLUME TWO, and with someone who loves Tarantino movies. And make sure the person you bring stays awake (unlike my date for the evening, who wasn’t sleeping because the film was boring but because they’d had a long-ass day and blah, blah, blah), because they’ll be missing one of the most exciting films of the last several years. See VOLUME TWO, folks– Doctor’s Orders.
Word,
Dr. Scott
Starring Uma Thurman, Lucy Liu, Vivica A. Fox, Daryl Hannah, Michael Madsen, David Carradine; directed by Quentin Tarantino
Dr. Scott rates it
and a half out of
five bananas
Any of you who’ve been reading my reviews from the beginning know that I’ve already reviewed KILL BILL. In fact, it was the first “formal” review that I ever did for The Doctor’s Mailing List. So, you’re probably wondering: Are you really this desperate for new material, Doctor? Well, yes and no. It’s KILL BILL DAY here at
ApeChild.com, and we thought a look back at The Bride and her mission would be appropriate– especially with VOLUME TWO coming out this Friday.
Some of you, as I mentioned, will recall that I’ve already reviewed KILL BILL. But I took a look at that review and, well, it sucked. Back when I wrote that first one, I was writing all my reviews with this silly “format”, breaking the review up into sections like “Best Actor or Actress in The Film” or “Worst Scene” or, in KILL BILL’s case, “Ugliest Feet Belonging to an Actress With The First Name Uma Who Also Just Broke Up With Ethan Hawke” (oddly enough, this category also appeared in one of the gay porn reviews I sent out, but that’s another story). The “format” was gimmicky and only there as a crutch, something to fall back on because I didn’t feel like I’d be able to organize my thoughts well enough to present the information in paragraph form. Well, now I feel like I can.
Whether or not you feel the same way is your problem.
 Uma, the Goddess of kicking major ass. |
So, here I am, back with another angle on KILL BILL. Most of you are just as die-hard geeks about films as I am, so you’ve probably already seen the film and have read all manner of articles and reviews about it already. You know that the film found its way onto many of the country’s critics’ “Top Ten” lists for 2003. You know that Uma was nominated for a Golden Globe for her work here. You know the plot, you know who survives the first film, and you know about the cliffhanger ending. Thus, we don’t need to discuss any of that.
Rather, I’d like to concentrate the bulk of this re-review on something that hasn’t been discussed so much in all those other reviews: The sheer joy for film watching and making that’s evident in every frame of KILL BILL. I got the same impression watching KILL BILL that I did while regarding Johnny Depp’s performance in PIRATES OF THE CARIBBEAN: These people had a blast making this film. This isn’t anything new for a film directed by geek favorite Tarantino. His first film, RESERVOIR DOGS, was a rich, pop-culture infused stew of all the things Quentin admired about his favorite movies– the shocking, stylized violence of John Woo; The “honor amongst thieves” theme of Kurosawa; The rat-a-tat dialogue of Scorcese’s mafia films; The gritty glamor that can only be found in exploitation films of the 70's. It was a perfect marriage of all of these things, and the beginning of a soon-to-be-legendary career.
Tarantino went on to direct PULP FICTION, arguably the most important and influential film of the 90's. Again, his love for all kinds of films permeated every aspect of his film: The dialogue, the characters, the fractured timeline, the pitch-black humor and violence. While RESERVOIR DOGS announced Tarantino as a new force within the industry, PULP FICTION cemented the status.
After PULP FICTION, Tarantino became one of the strongest, quotable “flavors of the month”: Starring in and writing FROM DUSK TILL DAWN, directing episodes of ER and the short-lived, Margaret Cho/Asian-American sitcom ALL AMERICAN GIRL, starring in a broadway revival of WAIT UNTIL DARK (more on that in the epilogue)(that’s at the end, chief), starting his own division of Miramax, called Rolling Thunder, just so he could release films like MIGHTY PEKING MAN and SWITCHBLADE SISTERS into theaters across the country. PULP’s success gave him the opportunity to do all the things he ever wanted to do, whether we wanted to see him do them or not. Somewhere in all that, he shot JACKIE BROWN, released it to widely positive reviews, and then...the flavor’s month ended. Tarantino fell silent.
 The next time you ask for a happy ending at your local massage parlor, make sure she isn't hiding a samurai sword. |
Years passed. Film geeks awaited his next project with baited breath, trading gossip about what the next film from Tarantino might be (at various times, his follow-up to JACKIE BROWN was one of two Elmore Leonard adaptions he’d secured the rights to– KILLSHOT and 40 LASHES LESS ONE, a sequel/prequel to PULP and DOGS called THE VEGA BROTHERS, or possibly a World War II film called INGLORIOUS BASTARDS). The truth was, no one knew what he was up to for a solid four year period, which was a long enough stretch of time to cause film geeks to question their allegiance to Lord Tarantino.
During these Tarantino-less years, much happened in the world of film: The popular home viewing format evolved from VHS to DVD. Comic book films came back, and came back with a vengeance. Acts of unspeakably horrific terrorism occurred on our own, American soil. Angelina Jolie stood strong in her flat-out refusal to sleep with me. These were tumultuous years. And then, an announcement was made: “ Quentin Tarantino–you guys remember him, right?–well, he’s finished a script, and he’s gonna make another one of those movie things. It’s called KILL BILL”. There was much rejoicing.
I went out and rented the first film last night from my local Nazi Germany– oops, I mean “Blockbuster Video” (Ever worked there? Hell on Earth, my friends). In the time since I’d seen KILL BILL, I’d forgotten a lot of the little flourishes within the film that made it great. I will be the first to admit that, several months after I’d seen KILL BILL in a theater, I wasn’t the biggest fan of the film. It seemed shallow, like Quentin could have done any number of things I would have liked better, stuff with more dialogue, character, plot, story. But watching it again last night, on a much smaller screen, I fell in love with it all over again. If you haven’t seen KILL BILL, then you need to go rent it right now so that you’re not lost when I come to your house, break down your fucking door, and drag you, screaming, all the way to the theater by your hair this Friday to see VOLUME TWO. KILL BILL has that sort of effect, where you want to show people the film and let them see how cool it is. Even if it means breaking down a few doors.
What I loved most about KILL BILL was the almost total lack of computer generated stuntwork or effects. After seeing MATRIX: RELOADED, it only took a few days for me to realize how hollow and...well, unsatisfying the film was. Sure, it looked cool, but most of what we saw there was just some really high-priced computer animation. The fights in KILL BILL were the real deal, and that makes all the difference in the world. I was picking my jaw up off the floor after every confrontation scene in KILL BILL, particularly that whole “House of Blue Leaves” sequence wherein Uma, as The Bride, hacks her way through an army of masked Yakuza thugs. One fight in the film, that one that took place between Uma and Vivica Fox, didn’t get the attention it deserved: That was balls-out, knock-down, hair-pulling, exploitation-era street fighting, and God bless Quentin for giving us a dose of it.
 Naughty Nurse: Sexy yet lethal. |
But KILL BILL isn’t all about the fight scenes, which is what some critics would have you believe. Moreover, this is a film about style. Consider the fact that the film changes its appearance and tone with every new adversary the Bride confronts. For Fox’s character, we find ourselves in a 70's era blaxploitation movie. For the backstory of O-ren-ishii, we’re treated to an extended, hyper-violent, beautifully crafted anime sequence that virtually stole the movie. That “House of Blue Leaves” segment was pure Kung-Fu-Sonny-Chiba-Enter-The-Dragon intensity, featuring a brilliant sight gag involving a Japanese man-servant who resembles Charlie Brown. I loved these abrupt, jarring changes in tone throughout the film; It felt like I was getting three films’ worth of entertainment in one shot.
The acting was adequate, with the exception of Lucy Lui. I’m not a Lucy Lui fan, first of all. I’ve never understood the “sex appeal” that everyone’s telling me she possesses. I’ve never been bowled over by her physical presence or fight work. But here...well, she was all of the things the hype surrounding her for the last several years had promised. Intimidating, charming (especially in the “Board Room Decapitation” scene), and gracefully sexy with a sword, she was the standout for me in this one. Special attention should also go to Sonny Chiba, who was far more charismatic and funny than I ever would have thought he’d be. The argument he has with his assistant over who’s going to bring Uma the bottle of warm sake is priceless.
This isn’t a film you can spend hours dissecting. It’s a straight-forward revenge tale, soaked in blood and reveling in its own shallowness. It is pure entertainment, impossible to view without feeling like you’ve mainlined it. KILL BILL provided me with one of the best times I had in a theater this past year, and I’m pumped for the sequel.
Bottom Line: KILL BILL is nothing but style, with much to spare, and deserves to be seen by anyone who counts themselves as a film geek. Uma Thurman pulls off what could have been a silly, wink-wink role in the hands of a lesser actress (imagine if, say, Cameron Diaz had played The Bride...yikes), and Tarantino makes up for all that lost time by packing in dozens of films’ worth of entertainment into the 90-some odd minute running time. See KILL BILL, and come back for seconds this April.
Word,
Dr. Scott
Epilogue: I told you I’d say a bit more about WAIT UNTIL DARK, and I will. Back in 1997, Tarantino was cast as Harry
Roat, a hoodlum attempting to break into the apartment of a blind woman to steal a cache of drugs that mistakenly ended up in her possession. The critics were savage about his performance, but when I was lucky enough to see him–from ten feet away– when I went to New York that summer, I was smitten. After the show, The Man Himself came out and signed autographs for everyone, taking the time to talk to me for several minutes (Quentin, to me: “So, how’d you like the show tonight?” Me, to Quentin: “Man, you were a fuckin’ pimp”. Quentin: “[wild, Woody Woodpecker-style laughter] Thanks, my friend.”). It was one of the best nights of my life, and I was thrilled that the guy was so cool to his fans. Fuck the critics, Quentin, you’ll always be one of my heroes.
Starring James Caviezel, Monica Bellucci, Claudia Gerini, Maia Morgenstern; directed by the Lord Mel Gibson
Dr. Scott rates it
out of
five bananas
It's
time for a pop quiz for those of you who have seen THE
PASSION OF THE CHRIST. Please put away all your
anti-defamation league pamphlets and religious texts. Please
stow all vitriol and Anti-Semitism paranoia under your
desks. Don't worry, folks- it's multiple choice. Ready?
Mel Gibson's THE PASSION OF THE CHRIST is A) A horrifically violent, nearly impossible to watch film; B) A powerful Biblical epic with truckloads of talent behind the camera; C) A good film, to be sure, but not necessarily a "great" film; Or, D) All of the above.
If you answered D), you'd be damn right.
I finally got around to seeing THE PASSION this evening, and it was just about exactly what I expected it would be. Nothing I have ever witnessed on a movie screen or on a television set could have prepared me for the brutally graphic violence of the film. And, for the record, keep in mind that I've seen every TEXAS CHAINSAW film that's ever been made (even that woefully deranged "remake/reimagining" with Renee Zellwegger and Matthew "Naked Bongos" McConnaughey). It's impossible to discuss THE PASSION without getting into the violence, so we may as well get that out of the way right now.
|
|
| Don't be fooled. Those crosses can be really fucking heavy. |
Roger Ebert's review of THE PASSION stated that it was the
"most violent film (he'd) ever seen". I agree. I
wasn't surprised by the violence- how could I have been?-
but I was shocked that the film managed to land an R-rating
with the notoriously prude MPAA. The only reason this film
is playing on thousands of screens across the country with
that rating is its subject: Jesus Christ. How can this be?
Think back to the last film that was released with the
dreaded NC-17 rating- SHOWGIRLS. The MPAA deemed that
inappropriate for anyone under the age of 17...but not this?
There's something very wrong with that. In the showing of
THE PASSION that I attended this evening, I saw more than a
few parents with children- toddlers!- in their laps. I
cannot be more clear about this: THE PASSION is not anywhere
near appropriate for anyone under the age of 14 or so.
I'm a member of the tail end of Generation X. When I was
growing up, violence was seeping into television and films a
little more with every day, and this resulted in an entire
generation of children growing up to be desensitized to
violence. I'm not in any position to say whether or not this
is a good or bad thing, but I do know that violence in films
doesn't bother me. I don't particularly enjoy seeing
violence, but I certainly don't shy away from it. That said,
the amount of violence and the graphicness thereof in THE
PASSION nauseated me. Gibson's camera does not flinch, does
not pull any punches, does not grant us a reprieve from
witnessing the most famous execution of all time.
|
|
| Mel Gibson, the Lord Almighty who died for your sins. |
And, what of that? Some have questioned the
need for this gruesome display, but the answer seems plainly
obvious to this critic: This is the story that he wanted to
tell. As a writer-slash-director- and, you know, as the guy
who put up all the money to make this film- Gibson has every
right to give us whatever film he feels like. His intentions
here were to give us a brutal, unflinching re-enactment of
the death of Jesus Christ. Every film that has featured a
dramatization of the crucifixion has sugar-coated the truth:
This was a horrific, messy way to die. I can only assume
that Gibson wanted us to see this death in as realistic a
manner as possible. Thus, was it necessary? Yes, if this is
the film that Gibson wanted to make. Is it difficult to
watch? Enormously so. Will it be too much for many
filmgoers? Absolutely. You may not like the violence, but
you can't argue with its authenticity.
Now, let's move onto the next problem the film has faced:
The charges of anti-semitism. First of all, let me say this:
If you have not seen a film, you are in no position to make
claims about its content. Far too many people cried
"Anti-Semitism!" before THE PASSION was even
released, and the truth of the matter must be highly
embarrassing for all these alarmists: There isn't a trace of
Anti-Semitism anywhere in THE PASSION. There are Jews who
cry out for Christ to be tortured and executed; There are
Jews that plead for him to be spared.
The Pharisees demand that Christ be killed, and when they
can't get Pilate to carry out the execution, they seek a
sort-of "second opinion" from Harod. I don't know
much of this Harod character, but here he's portrayed as a
bombastic, slightly drama queen-ish guy (and, with that
eyeliner, maybe a touch of drag queen-ishness, as well ).
When he finds Christ "crazy, but not guilty" of
any crime, they find themselves back in front of Pilate. By
this time, the Pharisees have riled the congregation into a
frenzy with their accusations against this man who's been
quite the rabble-rouser of late, and Pilate does everything
in his power to avoid having Christ crucified. In the end,
it's not enough, and the Pharisees get their wish. As far as
I know, this is historically accurate. Yes, the Pharisees
were Jewish, but is it not correct that it was these men who
were the primary antagonists in the crucifixion? It's
totally irresponsible to raise a cry of Anti-Semitism over
this film, Period.
|
|
| The Last Supper: Atkins approved? |
And, while we're talking about this, I am
aware that Mel Gibson has a loony-ass father who's made a
fool of himself by publicly proclaiming that he doesn't
believe the Holocaust occurred. For the people claiming that
this indicates the presence of Anti-Semitism in THE PASSION,
let me say: Pleeease. Take your conspiracy theories to David
Ike, folks. There's nothing Anti-Semitic about this film. I
think anyone claiming that the film features anything
approaching Anti-Semitism should A) see the film before they
keep making foolish statements, and B) apologize for such
irresponsible accusations.
Well, now that we've got the majority of the controversy out
of the way...how's the flick? As entertainment, the film
fails. Who could possibly be entertained by this horror?
This film was made to make it clear (to all who are
interested enough to check it out) what it was exactly that
Christ went through in the hours leading up to his death. To
be honest, I had no idea that the man's death was this
horrific. I know that I keep using that word, but it's
simply the most appropriate. And, as we all know, horrific
things are not usually entertaining (unless, of course,
we're talking about SHOWGIRLS again). As a tool for teaching
those who aren't informed, the film is an enormous success.
It has people talking, it has people thinking, and therein
lies The Doctor's Golden Rule, which many of my readers know
by heart at this point: Whenever a film inspires
conversation, debate, or deep thought in its audience, it
has succeeded. Thus, while I wasn't entertained by THE
PASSION, I was held in rapt attention the entire time, and I
learned a thing or two in the process. And, sure enough,
there I was after the screening, standing out front of the
theater, smoking a cigarette, and debating what I'd just
seen with my fellow moviegoers. Success!
Jim Caviezel does a fine job in the role of Christ. To be
frank, he really doesn't have much in the way of dialogue or
acting after about half an hour of screen-time; His job
mostly entails that he appear to be in a tremendous amount
of pain. There are scenes, though, where Caviezel is given
the opportunity to humanize Christ, and I thought this was
the most important thing the movie had to offer. In any film
I've ever seen that featured Christ as a character, he's
always seen proclaiming things in a very stern manner. THE
PASSION shows us, in flashback, a Jesus who had a sense of
humor, a Jesus who...smiled. Think about it: Have you ever
seen a film where Christ is allowed to have a good time? As
I said, this humanizes Christ, and I thought that was just
great.
I'd like to mention one or two other scenes that I thought
were particularly effective. The first occurs in the Garden
of Gethsemane, when Christ is speaking to God through
prayer. Satan shows up, embodied by an androgynous figure in
a black, hooded robe (What else was he gonna wear? Well,
besides acid-wash jeans), and Satan attempts to "psyche
out" Christ. As Satan watches Christ praying, we see a
maggot or some small, white worm wiggle its way out of the
Evil One's nostril. It's just a split-second thing, but it
was so unsettling and unexpected. Very interesting choice
here, and it leads me to another sequence that I really
enjoyed.
As we're all aware, Judas Iscariot performed history's
greatest betrayal when he turned Christ over to the
Pharisees for a bag of silver. Judas is there when Christ is
taken into custody, and we see that he's remorseful about
what he's done. A few scenes later, Judas shows up again to
plead to the Pharisees that Jesus be freed. He tries to
return the silver, too, but the Pharisees aren't having it.
Totally wracked with guilt, Judas stumbles out onto a
street, where he gets accosted by some children playing in
the dirt nearby. As they poke and prod him, we see the kids
from Judas' point of view: They have twisted, wrinkled faces
and wildly spinning eyes. Again, highly disturbing and
effective.
It's a little off topic, but on the basis of these scenes
(as well as one other one, which I won't spoil for those who
haven't seen THE PASSION yet; For those that have, I got
three words for you: Evil. Grinning. Baby.) , I'd love to
see what Gibson could do with a good horror script. He
doesn't overplay these scares, and you might even miss them
if you happened to look away for a moment. I wasn't
expecting these sort of subtle flourishes within the film,
which made them all the more effective and scary. It's an
interesting choice, especially when we consider that the
rest of the film seems to be presented in as
straight-forward (or, rather, as non-supernaturally) as
possible. That is, of course, until the final ten minutes or
so. There's a stunning shot of a tear falling from Heaven
that stopped my breath cold, and I loved the way that Gibson
shows us the resurrection without quite...showing it. You'll
see what I mean.
Gibson is a brilliant filmmaker, and the cojones it must
have taken to make this film would be so large they could
only be measured in theory, like space. Gibson also gave us
BRAVEHEART, and on the basis of these two films, I have no
doubt that he is an enormously gifted director of film. The
frame composition, in particular, was extraordinary: Any
frame from the film could be an oil painting by one of the
masters. I thought that presenting the story in the original
languages- Aramaic and Latin- was a stroke of genius,
lending yet another realistic layer to the film. Whether you
like THE PASSION or not, or agree or disagree with Gibson's
reasons for making it, it's inarguable that he is wildly
talented and a true visionary.
Bottom Line: THE PASSION OF THE CHRIST is a terrifically
difficult film to endure, but it's an important film. As a
lazy Agnostic, I learned a thing or two over the course of
the film, and found myself with a deeper respect for this
carpenter who may or may not have been the Son of God. This
film is not for everyone, obviously, but it's an ambitious,
superbly crafted film that should stand the test of time
against many other Biblical epics. I applaud the courage
with which Gibson made this film, but the hideous violence
prevents me from being able to wholeheartedly recommend it.
For those with a strong stomach and a desire to learn, THE
PASSION proves to be a powerful, moving, rewarding
experience.
Word,
Dr. Scott
Starring Tobey Maguire, Jeff Bridges, Chris Cooper, and William H. Macy; directed by Gary Ross
ApeMaster rates it
out of
five bananas
With
the cold weather we've been experiencing lately in Vermont,
I've been stuck inside watching more DVDs than usual
lately. The other day I decided to rent Seabiscuit,
which has been praised as an Oscar candidate for it's
feel-good, come from behind tale of a horse given a second
chance and by a jockey whose heart and passion for his horse were greater than his skills on the
racetrack. It's a tale of adversity over tragedy
during a time in our country when people had little else to
feel optimistic about. Doesn't that make you feel all
warm and fuzzy inside?
I have to admit, I thought Seabiscuit was a good, entertaining movie. The acting and film production were superb, as were the depression and post-depression era cinematography and set design. Some of the camera angles and racing sequences have to be seen to be believed, and make you feel as though you're right in the middle of the pack. While Tobey Maguire and Jeff Bridges' respective performances as jockey and millionaire-horse-owner were excellent, I felt that their relationship was slightly under explored. Oscar winning actor Chris Cooper, who plays Seabiscuit's trainer, also puts on a great performance, but his role was strictly resigned to that of a supporting actor and doesn't get enough screen time. In one of the of the wackier roles in the film, William H. Macy -- brilliant in any role he plays -- provides much needed comic relief as an eccentric radio DJ who follows every move of the Seabiscuit team during their triumphs and tribulations.
That being said, I thought Seabiscuit had several weaknesses. In addition to being shamelessly subjected to nearly every corny underdog, spirit-lifting cliché in the book during the film's 141 minutes (which was a little too long in my opinion), the film was grossly predictable (wait, you mean Seabiscuit wins?!?). Some of the ending scenes were waaaay too overly dramatic and over the top for my taste. Near the film's end, when Tobey Maguire recites the line, "It's better to break a man's leg than a man's heart," I thought I was going to vomit. "He didn't just help me. He helped all of us!" Could it get any cheesier?
Seabiscuit is a good flick. It is an uplifting, feel-good movie worthy of praise and deserving of a watch, but I wouldn't necessarily call it an achievement of filmmaking worthy of Academy Awards, as has been suggested by some critics. While the film has its share of overly-dramatic and predictable moments, it is worth seeing for the slick production value, great acting, and amazing horse racing scenes. My official recommendation is that while it is worthy of a rental from your local video store or Netflix, I couldn't necessarily see myself wanting to own this one on DVD for multiple viewings. I give it three out of five bananas.
Starring Robin Williams, Connie Nielson (Gladiator), Michael Vartan (TV's Alias), Gary Cole (i.e. Bill Lumbergh, Mike Brady, etc); directed by Mark Romanek
ApeMaster rates it
out of
five bananas
One
Hour Photo is a mind-fuck, a psychological thriller that takes us on a
journey through the desperate, obsessive, and twisted mind of a one hour photo
clerk who becomes fixated with a family by living vicariously through the photos
they drop off each week. The film succeeds on so many different levels by
employing the "less is more" mentality, creating a eerie, suspenseful
feeling of unease and unpredictability. It is this subtlety that delivers
so much more than others in the genre based on not what we see, but what we don't
see. Through brilliant acting, crisp & vivid cinematography, and a
compelling sense of sympathy for the psychopathic lead character,
One Hour Photo
is excellent even with a refreshing lack of violence, gore, or other flashy
effects.
Robin Williams stars as Sy Parrish, a depressing and lonely photo technician who takes extraordinary pride in the quality of his photos despite being treated like shit from all of his coworkers and customers. Without friends or a family of his own, Sy becomes fascinated with a local family who comes in regularly to develop their photos. He knows their names, where they live, and has seen nearly all of the important events in their lives caught on film. He almost considers himself part of their family. As we learn more about Sy, it is difficult to feel anything but pity and sympathy for him. His existence is so lonely and the film so depressing that I actually felt like blowing my brains out a few times while watching this. (NOTE: Don't see this movie on drugs). In one of the most compelling moments of the film, Sy leafs through some old photographs at a flea market while the following words are going through his mind:
"I'm sure my customers never think about it, but these snapshots are their little stands against the flow of time. The shutter is clicked, the flash goes off, and they've stopped time, if just for the blink of an eye. And if these pictures have anything important to say to future generations, it's this: 'I was here; I existed; I was young; I was happy; and someone cared enough about me in this world to take my picture'."
Whoa. That's some pretty heavy stuff. You can't help but feel the sadness, loneliness, and desperation within his life.
But while you cannot help but feel pity for Sy, you know there is something darker lurking beneath the surface. You can sense that something will blow at any moment, and the film builds slowly and brilliantly as the true nature of Sy's obsession becomes apparent.
Vividly set and photographed in the sterile and pure environment of a mega-discount store (a la Wal-Mart), One Hour Photo has a precise look and feel due to the excellent cinematography and artful direction from Mark Romanek. Connie Nielson (Gladiator's uber-hot Lucilla) is a treat for the eyes, and Gary Cole (Bill Lumbergh from Office Space) is hysterical in any role he plays--even when he's not trying to be funny--and this one is no exception. Robin Williams easily gives the performance of his career playing a psychopathic freak. It's ironic; Robin Williams spends his career making the shittiest movies. But after his recent roles in One Hour Photo and last year's fantastic Insomnia, he has proven that he's capable of convincingly playing a darker, creepier character.
Rent or buy this DVD without hesitation. While some may complain of the lack of intense action and violence, as well as the somewhat anticlimactic nature of the ending, most will truly enjoy the depth of this film. I know I sure did.
ApeMaster rates it
out of five boners
The ApeChild community reviews the flick everyone's talking about and the one everyone wants to believe is real.
Admit it. You've seen the web site and heard the rumors. You want to believe it's real but you know it's not. You want to see it for yourself but don't want to waste your cash. Being like most people, we at ApeChild.com, in a service to our local and greater online community, decided to acquire the tape, see it for ourselves, and share our thoughts with the world.
As the story goes, Britney Spears sought help with her backhand from tennis star Anna Kournikova. Anna agrees to meet Britney at a hotel in L.A. on a day when both of their schedules permit and gives her some lessons on the court. A guy with a camera hides in the bushes and films the two, and subsequently sneaks into their penthouse suite where the two go to change. One thing leads to another, and you can probably imagine where it goes from here.
Britney Does Anna arrived approximately four weeks after it was ordered by an
anonymous volunteer. In addition to the featured footage, it also contains
some 'bonus' materials, which I will discuss shortly. The film opens with
a surprisingly flashy trailer and excellent sound, most of which can be seen on
the Britney Does Anna web
site. After a quick, low-budget introduction
from the marginally-looking stars of the subsequent bonus footage, the film
starts off with Britney and Anna warming up on the court. Since the
premise is that the footage was captured on a home DVR by a
voyeur hiding in the
bushes, the camera work is intentionally wobbly and unpolished. The
actresses do actually resemble their intended celebrities, although you
have to work hard not to examine their faces too carefully in order to play
along with the plot. While the actress playing Anna looks quite similar
from a distance, it is Britney who does an excellent job of playing the part:
her hair, makeup, and ditzy body language are convincing. The key is never
to focus directly on either girl long enough to spoil the fantasy, and luckily
the constantly shifting camera work and rarely focused angles help make this
possible.
While the amount of time on the court seemed a little
longwinded at
times, particularly in anticipation of the events to come, it did provide
the predictable plot introduction and segue to the second act. After Anna
spots the cameraman in the bushes, a security guard chases him off into the
hotel where the two are staying. His friend working at the hotel takes him
to the Penthouse suite and lets him in to hide. Britney and Anna soon
arrive to relax after their workout on the court, and the pace of the
film finally begins to pick up. Anna decides to show Britney what they
"do in Russia after practice," and predictably, the two end up
in the bedroom taking each other's clothes off. Anna's faux Russian accent
is a riot, and Britney quickly proves that she's interesting in learning Russian
culture.
The cameraman, hiding behind some seemingly enormous houseplants in the
suite, captures the bedroom events unnoticed for the ensuing thirty
minutes as the two take turns on each other. Britney clearly appears to be
the porn veteran of the two, while Anna is slightly less animated. Maybe
it was the repressive Soviet upbringing in her. Again, the camera work is intentionally
jerky and unfocused, although it is much improved from the court scenes.
But at this point in the movie, less emphasis should have been placed on trying
to convince the audience of the unlikely plot, but rather on producing a great
porn scene. Inadequate lighting, shaky camera angles, and a lack of
necessary close-ups just proved how low-budget the production was. But
since everyone was already expecting the film to be low-tech, you just need to
accept the film for what it is and enjoy the nature of the plot, no matter how
unlikely or how unbelievable it is.
Aside from an untimely close-up of a butt zit on Anna's ass and the lack of
proper lighting, the film proved to be an enjoyable and entertaining spin on an
unlikely rendezvous between two of the world's sexiest celebrities. I was
pleasantly surprised with the likeness and acting abilities of the two
actresses, both of whom are quite attractive for the world of porn. I
recommend the video to anyone sharing a similar fondness of Britney and Anna and
interested in an entertaining fantasy. We just hope that the guys behind
this incredibly simple yet brilliant idea make enough cash to create future,
higher quality productions. What's next? Britney Does
Christina? Christina does Britney AND Anna? The Olsen Tw...ahh, never
mind. I'm not going there.
Bonus Footage
The bonus footage, which appears to be completely amateur (i.e. not good),
consists of two female "fans" of the Britney Does Anna film who get
right down to business. While I won't go into much detail, I will reveal
that the two continue with the tennis theme, featuring a modified tennis racquet
in one of the silliest props I've ever seen. The actual camera footage is
much better than the feature film preceding it, but unfortunately the girls
aren't quite as hot as the Britney and Anna imposters. One additional
piece of bonus footage was also included, but I won't go into too much
detail. A conspicuously out-of-place and forgettable scene, the second
bonus features soft-core lesbian Goth chicks incapable of keeping anyone's
interest.
-ApeMaster
Dick rates it
out of five nuts
The film begins with some shaky footage of two blonde women on a tennis court, one apparently teaching the other some basic forehand techniques. The perspective suggests a peeping tom is secretly recording the activities from behind a chain-link fence. One notices a pony-tailed teacher and her enthusiastic pupil, who does indeed resemble Britney Spears. Unfortunately, the camera work is a bit unsteady, and while some viewers may enjoy the voyeur theme, I wanted to focus on Britney's forehand and remain undistracted as I stared at her tight little ass. Had I the opportunity, I would have given the cameraman a backhand and taken over.
Unfortunately, the peeping tom point of view is maintained throughout the vignette, first as the two women check themselves into a hotel suite, and throughout, as the fun begins and later ends in the bedroom. As one watches the action, one finds oneself continually lamenting the lack of proper lighting, the sometimes shaky footage, the muffled audio, and the lack of close-ups. That is, until one sees a bright pink zit on the ass of one of the actresses.
Butt-zits notwithstanding, I found the premise unconvincing at best (how would these women not have noticed some guy sitting behind a houseplant with a video camera?), and found myself wishing the director had foregone the voyeur motif in favor of something that would have allowed for higher quality picture quality.
The cameraman does finally get caught, and the story ends without much fanfare. The movie, however, does not. Indeed, one more scene awaits the viewer, in which two other women go at it with each other, even bringing out a tennis racket with a floppy rubber dildo attached to the grip, the base of which is wrapped in grip tape. This scene, while entertaining, no longer has the mystique of a 'Britney does Anna' storyline, and therefore disappoints a bit. Despite its fun diversions, the last scene is ultimately anticlimactic as the viewer realizes the Britney/Anna lovefest is over.
Bottom line? The women are attractive, the idea of Britney doing Anna is fun, and there's some decent girl/girl sex. Absent the novelty factor, however, the film is sadly just another low budget porn. The fantasy will make it worthwhile for the hardcore Britney and Anna fans out there, but for the connoisseur of high quality American porn, this one just doesn't cut it.
I rate it two nuts out of a total of five.
-Dick
Rodney rates it
out of five loads
My first reaction to Britney Does Anna was "Wow! I can't believe they actually got those two to make this video!" That being said, Britney Does Anna is a decent erotica film. The deep plot of the movie and unique filming styles remind me of Pulp Fiction or
The Usual Suspects.
The video is split up into three sub-movies, each having a distinct taste (pun intended).
The first part of the video is the headliner, Britney Does Anna. The camera work in this part of the video is sub-par,
although you can't expect much considering as Britney and Anna do not even realize they are being
filmed (until later). This voyeur perspective is different and the cameraman does achieve some decent shots. The video must have been filmed a while ago, back when Britney had no implants. This is made clear when Britney removes her foam padding from her sports bra.
My biggest complaint about this part of the movie was the close up shot of the ass-zit (asscne) on
Anna; that could have definitely been left out.
The acting in Britney Does Anna is natural and believable, I think mainly due to the fact they did not know they were being recorded. I never knew Britney and Anna were such good friends.
Moving on to the second feature of this video, we get to see two Britney Does Anna fans; this part of the video isn't that bad. It explores the close relationship between two friends, and what feelings emerge after viewing their Britney Does Anna
video. The camera work here definitely improves, and things start to get a bit
freaky (unless you consider a tennis racket with a dildo taped on to the end of it normal).
Finally, the video comes to a close with one more freaky sub-film. This wannabe gothic piece throws a totally unexpected ending to the suspenseful plot. I personally did not like the ending,
as I felt the acting and camera work were not up to par with the first two features. If you are into
Goth shit, you may want to check it out though.
Overall, I'm glad I finally got to see this highly anticipated video. The internet buzz around this video is amazing, and I'm sure
www.britneydoesanna.com
is making a killing of this. I'm glad I skipped this movie when it was in theatres, but it's definitely worth a rental.
-Rodney
ApeMaster rates it
out of five boners, err, bananas
Anna
Kournikova's Basic Elements workout video is probably one of the
most anticipated and hottest workout videos ever produced.
I discovered very quickly that this is indeed one hell of a
workout video: my blood was pumping and my heart was racing
within a few minutes, and I wasn't even exercising! I was
on the couch!
After fast-forwarding through the boring introduction and the whiny narration from an annoying British chick, I was extremely excited to watch Anna 'loosen up'. She starts off with some jump-roping. I soon discovered that this video is the entire reason why DVD players have slow motion capabilities. Awesome!
Following the warm-ups, Anna shows us how to stretch. This was personally my favorite part of the entire movie. I liked it so much, I watched it over and over and over. With Anna down on all fours, she stretches her hamstrings, quads, and--my favorite--the buttocks. It was during this part of the workout that I found the pause button to be extremely useful.
As the video progresses, Anna's workout gets more intense and more upbeat. One thing that I found annoying is the crappy hard-core music playing in the background. I recommend using the mute button on your remote. She is later joined during the workout by one of her male athletic trainers. What the FUCK were they thinking?!?! What a buzz-kill!!! I skipped a few chapters until the man was gone and I returned to solo Anna bliss once again. Ahh, Anna.
I recommend this video to anyone who is serious about watching Anna Kournikova work out. Her spandex-clad athleticism was simply a joy to watch. Clocking in at 52 minutes, this video is much shorter than most porn videos, but the quality and production are simply fantastic.
