Blogcritics Author: General Disdain

Announcement: Short-content feeds

Phillip Winn — Sun, 26 Aug 2007 12:00:00 EDT

Sunday, August 26, 2007, marks the switch of all Blogcritics.org article feeds from full-content to short-content. This is the result of several converging factors, and is unfortunately a permanent decision (as permanent as any decision can be on the web, that is). We are aware of all of the reasons that this is a Bad Idea, and we are aware that some of you will be quite upset about having to click on something to read the free content, and we're sorry. Unfortunately, despite great effort, full-content feeds are not currently economically viable. Two other factors are involved: full-content feeds have resulted in an unprecedented level of content theft, with BC content appearing on many websites, usually spam sites, without attribution or permission. This duplicate content causes a cascading set of problems, not the least of which is that search engines generally aren't favorable to duplicate content, and don't always guess correctly. Finally, our RSS advertising partner is strongly in favor of short-content feeds. We hope that you'll continue to subscribe to BC via RSS, and when an article grabs your eye, it's only a click away, still free on the BC website. Thank you for your understanding.

Movie Review: License to Wed

General Disdain — Fri, 20 Jul 2007 12:52:23 EDT

For all intents and purposes, License to Wed should have been just one of many romantic comedies released to little fanfare this summer. Nothing spectacular about it. But someone (the director, Ken Kwapis) got the bright idea to cast Robin Williams in a lead role. "Why?", I plead, "What have I done to deserve this?" Hell, what has anyone (excluding everyone who loves America) done to deserve this? The answer is simple: we're all sinners and this is our brutal punishment. Me? I'd rather be flogged with a cat o' nine tails.It's probably safe to assume that from my beginning rant, you've figured out I'm not the biggest fan of Robin Williams. I'd say you're mostly right. I simply cannot fathom how anyone can be entertained by his scatter-brained, super-hyper antics. However, when he acts in serious films like Good Will Hunting or One Hour Photo the guy is great. You've also probably figured out, it's not the serious Robin Williams acting in License to Wed.Anyways, our other co-stars of the movie, Sadie Jones (Mandy Moore) and Ben Murphy (John Krasinski), want to get married. Sadie wants to get married at St. Augustine's, her family church where Reverend Frank (Williams) leads the congregation. He tells them that before he'll oversee their vows, they'll first have to take and pass his Marriage Preparation Course. Sadie jumps at the opportunity while Ben voices his reservations to a brick wall (if only women would listen to us). This course, we soon find out, is really just an exercise to strain an otherwise great relationship and to provide a stage for Reverend Frank to get zany.Let’s see what some of the good Reverend’s course work is, shall we? There is a word association game with Ben and his in-laws. It doesn’t take an advanced degree in mathematics to figure out how well that goes. He gives the couple two remote-controlled, robotic babies to care for as if they were their own. Of course, the Reverend and his Hitler youth sidekick (Josh Flitter) make sure the babies have tantrums at all the best times. He wants the two of them to work on their communication skills, so he blindfolds Sadie and tells Ben to give her driving instructions. Please, tell me again how this is supposed to strengthen a marriage because I don’t get it.The rest of License to Wed is simple enough to figure out. There aren’t any shocking twists at the end and I don’t have the strength to talk about it anymore.Speaking of strength, John Krasinski carried himself like a wet towel. Yeah, I get his character is bit disinterested in the whole charade – but holy shit – he looked like he was sleeping through his lines. I got the feeling he didn’t give a rat's ass about the final outcome of this movie. Cheers to Mandy Moore, though. Sure, she’s not much of an actress (or a singer for that matter) but she tries like hell and that’s gotta count for something. She’s also kinda cute – in a ‘I wouldn’t kick her out of bed but wouldn’t try real hard to get her there’ sort of way. Do I need to give you a final verdict on License to Wed? I don’t think so. I’ll finish with a quick thought. My Christmas wish this year is to insist that Williams only be cast in serious roles from now 'til eternity. If Hollywood won't stop the madness, maybe, just maybe, Jesus can. Can I get a hallelujah?

This writer enjoys candlelit dinners and the fast paced excitement of NASCAR. Additional reviews can be found at The Critical Critics.

Movie Review: Evan Almighty

General Disdain — Thu, 28 Jun 2007 07:27:22 EDT

Hot off the heels (if you call four years later a quick turnaround) of the successful Bruce Almighty, Hollywood brings to us Evan Almighty. This time, however, instead of Jim Carrey carrying the load, the baton has been handed off to the new funny man of cinema – Steve Carell. Unfortunately, the baton was dropped during handoff.Evan Almighty is the story of Evan Baxter (Carell). You may remember him from the first movie as a news anchor for Eyewitness News. Now he’s a newly appointed congressman, who’s been elected on the campaign motto of “Change The World.” In addition to that promise, he’s made a promise to his wife (Lauren Graham) to get closer to his family. Guess who notices? God (Morgan Freeman), of course! And in his infinite wisdom he combines the two. Can there be a better way to change the world and bring the family together than to build an ark? Hell, no! So after initially fighting the Genesis 6:14 notices all around him, Baxter gives in and begins to build his ark. As you can guess, no one, including his wife, understands his endeavor and think he is crazy. But is he? Of course not, but I can tell you who is:Anyone who thinks Evan Almighty is a funny movie.Steve Carell is an extremely funny guy but apparently someone lost the memo on that when they put this movie together. The boyish charm and naivete he uses for his laughs (see The 40 Year Old Virgin) is nowhere to be seen here. Instead they’ve got him doing pratfalls galore and acting like a bonehead. It’s almost as if the writers had no motivation to come up with anything worthwhile. Here is a brainstorming session I envisioned:Writer 1: “I got an idea, let’s make fun of facial hair and clothing.”Writer 2: “Great idea. We can make his hair grow really long!”Writer 1: “Yeah, and when he shaves it, it grows back instantly.”Writer 2: “Too funny. Each day we can make it grow longer too.”Writer 1: “And make it turn white!”Writer 1: “That’s an easy ten minutes of screen time filled – now lets fill another ten making him wear a shepherd robes...You can see where I’m going with this. It wouldn’t have been so bad if they did it once and moved on. But they keep revisiting these lame visuals numerous times throughout the movie. I’m not the smartest guy on earth but even I know to stop doing something if it’s not working. The only, and I mean the absolute single funny aspect of Evan Almighty is provided by the comedy of his secretary Rita (Wanda Sykes). Her nasally complaining and sarcastic comments made me laugh repeatedly. They should have gotten her into more scenes.Really, the only good feature of this movie is the message it tries to deliver. Changing the world via one act of random kindness is something we should all partake in. Say “please” and “thank you,” help an old person across the street, or donate some of your time to a worthy cause. I’m a firm believer that you reap what you sow, so I strongly encourage people to start planting some worthwhile seeds and stop being such assholes. Oh yeah, Morgan Freeman plays a great God. I actually prefer his renditions over those of George Burns in Oh, God!. I find myself listening intently to what Mr. Freeman says, he has a very fatherly aura about him.The final word: Evan Almighty is a complete letdown. It turns out to be a good family film (no swearing that I can recall, good uplifting message), but as far as I am concerned its priority should have been comedy. The writers should be drawn and quartered for doing the unthinkable – making Steve Carell unfunny.

This writer enjoys candlelit dinners and the fast paced excitement of NASCAR. Additional reviews can be found at The Critical Critics.

Movie Review: Surf's Up

General Disdain — Fri, 22 Jun 2007 07:21:31 EDT

Another penguin movie. First there was March of the Penguins and Madagascar. Then came Happy Feet. I swear to Christ, I'm going to have a nervous breakdown. Who in hell told advertisers and Hollywood that penguins are cute, adorable birds? News flash -- they're not. They're ugly and mean. Anyways, obviously someone is laughing at me because Surf's Up has just recently washed ashore.If you couldn't deduce from my rant, Surf's Up is an animated feature starring -- c'mon, you can guess it -- penguins. This time around our star is Cody Maverick (Shia LaBeouf), a misunderstood, cocky surfing penguin from Shiverpool, Antarctica. After being introduced to surfing so many years before by the world’s ranking surf champion Big Z (Jeff Bridges), Cody has decided to compete to win the 10th Annual Big Z Memorial Surf Off (Big Z disappeared 10 years ago). Along the way he befriends a fellow surfer, Chicken Joe (John Heder) and sexy penguin lifeguard Lani Aliikai (Zooey Deschanel). Our hero comes of age under the tutelage of surf bum, Geek (Jeff Bridges), while avoiding those that would do him harm like reigning surf champ Tank Evans (Diedrich Bader) and Don King-like promoter Reggie Belafonte (James Woods).Thankfully, I must say, Surf's Up managed to make me forget I was watching flightless birds on the screen. I was actually more intrigued with the story (imagine that!). It’s the typical loner mentality kid with a chip on his shoulder growing up to embrace and love people around him. Good heartwarming stuff. What’s especially good about it is it’s told in a funny, offbeat kind of way in which you don’t even realize a lesson is being taught. That’s very important because the moment I feel someone or something is becoming too preachy I immediately stop listening.As an adult, I also found there was just the right amount of low-brow humor to keep me laughing. My boys weren’t sure what I was laughing at, and that is a good thing since I don’t want them to suddenly start peeing on each other (it’s in the movie). My only quip was I wasn’t quite sure if Chicken Joe was perpetually stoned or eating acid-laced squids on a stick. Luckily, the kids didn’t catch onto that little tidbit either but I’m sure if they were a year or two older they would have made the connection. Drugs and kids movies don’t mix.Of course I have to mention the computer generated imagery (CGI); it’s a must for any animated feature nowadays. In short, it was good, very good. Apparently someone made the smart decision to hire a real physicist to model fluid dynamics. It shows throughout Surf's Up (the scenery is 85% water) and it is applauded. The animators caught the crashing of the waves and the motion of the water in an extremely realistic fashion. The camera angles are also a very nice touch. I’ll never experience being inside the curl of a monster wave but the many shots of contestants surfing in them capture what I suspect it is like – tranquility surrounded by chaos, like the eye of a hurricane.So, in parting, it gives me great pleasure to say Surf's Up is a fun movie for the entire family. The story is tried and true and the animation is very impressive. It’s not, however, quite enough for me to get over my hangup about those freakish birds. Please stop, Hollywood. On the other hand, it was enough to entertain me for an hour and a half, something many movies of late haven’t been able to do.

This writer enjoys candlelit dinners and the fast paced excitement of NASCAR. Additional reviews can be found at The Critical Critics.

Movie Review: Knocked Up

General Disdain — Mon, 11 Jun 2007 23:38:59 EDT

Yeah, I know. I'm late to the game -- everyone one calling themselves a critic has seen and reported on Knocked Up already. Each and everyone one of them has seemingly given it rave reviews too. They also all gave shiny, glowing reviews to Hostel: Part II and we all know how wrong they got that one . . . don't we? Therefore, I felt it was my obligation to tell you, even if it is belated, whether these people are actually telling the truth or just buying into the brouhaha.And here it is. Knocked Up isn't nearly as funny as all these folks are telling you. That by no means is saying that it isn't a funny movie, it's saying it should have been 100-times funnier. "But how can this be," you ask, "isn't this written and directed by Judd Apatow, the guy who brought us the classic The 40 Year-Old Virgin?" It most certainly is. He has undoubtedly come up with another concept that for all intents and purposes can be funny as fuck.It’s a story about how two people on completely separate courses in life intersect with each other and ultimately try and meld those paths together. Ben Stone (Seth Rogen) is a perpetual loser (putting it mildly) without a goddamn thing going for him. Alison Scott (Katherine Heigl) is a hot, up-and-coming Hollywood reporter for the E! Television network. Their paths cross at a local dance club when Alison and her sister Debbie (Leslie Mann) and Ben and his four uninspired friends (Jason Segel, Jay Baruchel, Jonah Hill, and Martin Starr) run into each other. Add two parts alcohol, one part atmosphere, and Ben becomes the lucky recipient of a good ‘ole banging. Strip away the luck when, eight weeks later, Alison calls to say she is pregnant. The “hilarity” ensues as these two incompatible people try and form a relationship.“Hilarity” is in quotes because as I said before, Knocked Up doesn’t come close to reaching it’s full potential. I had fully expected the bulk of the humor to come from the differences between both characters as they found themselves mired in situations they had no control over. Or more importantly, in situations they absolutely had no desire to be in. And while there are a few moments of that (gynecologist visits, shopping for baby gear) there didn’t seem to be a lot of focus on the outstanding issue at hand – the pregnancy!Most of the jokes were centered around the interactions of side characters; most notably Debbie and her husband Pete (Paul Rudd). These two, stuck in a rocky marriage, provide the tit-for-tat, “you’re a worthless asshole” routine I expected from the stars of the movie. They’re so good at it, I was getting flashbacks of my wife barking incessantly at me. The only difference is I was able to laugh heartedly at their situation. The other jokes landed squarely on the tried-and-true college humor. Guys acting like four-year olds who like to smoke pot, drink heavily, and lay around the house, all the while saying stupid shit at the most inopportune moments. I’ll admit that it is funny for a few scenes, but I found it wears thin rather quickly, just like the tires of an Indy car (good for a lap or two, then there needs to be a change).All in all, even though Knocked Up doesn’t live up to the hype, it is still a decent comedy. And with all the horror, poorly directed dramas, and glut of trilogies in theaters now, it’s just what the doctor ordered. I’ve warned you though, the laughs won’t come in droves but they will come. And all things considered, that’s all that really matters, isn’t it?

This writer enjoys candlelit dinners and the fast paced excitement of NASCAR. Additional reviews can be found at The Critical Critics.

Movie Review: Mr. Brooks

General Disdain — Sat, 9 Jun 2007 20:34:13 EDT

It's been a long time -- 16 years to be precise -- since the water mark was set so high by The Silence of the Lambs for serial killer thrillers. And in those 16 years, there has yet to be a movie that even comes close to surpassing it. So it is fair to say I didn't have my hopes set so high when I finally got off of my ass to see Mr. Brooks. Good thing too. Kevin Costner plays Earl Brooks a highly successful businessman with a very dark secret. That secret, predictably, is that he enjoys killing people. And after a two year hiatus, he gives in to his more sinister side and once again the "Thumbprint Killer" strikes again. Only this time, he's gotten sloppy and left a witness. That person, Mr. Smith (Dane Cook), reaches out to him -- not for money -- but to join him on his next assault. All the while, diligently pursuing Brooks is the very sexy detective Tracy Atwood (Demi Moore). Sprinkled throughout the movie are subplots involving Atwood's nasty divorce, a released inmate, Thorton Meeks (Matt Schulze) hell-bent on revenge, and Brooks' daughter Jane's (Danielle Panabaker) own demons.As I had expected, I couldn't find any major flaws (or any superlatives) in the way Kevin Costner portrayed the outwardly meek, quiet Mr. Brooks. A great deal of Brook's communication is done through his eyes and through his body language. Costner didn't have far to stretch -- he has the eyes and mannerisms of someone you need to keep an eye out for. What was unexpected -- and the only reason Mr. Brooks is remotely entertaining -- is watching the inner dialogue Earl has with his other personality Marshall (William Hurt). Marshall is the dark, cruel side that yearns for the kill thrill. He is extremely calculating and exacting; always thinking things through and focusing on the effects of any actions. Hurt's unemotional, flat delivery is the perfect contrast to Costner's nervous, pathetic half.Other than Hurt's performance, there is little that makes Mr. Brooks remarkable. Much of story is dragged in forty different directions which I found rather irritating. Of what worth was it to focus so much energy on the divorce proceedings of Demi Moore's character? It certainly didn't add anything of vital importance. I again asked myself the same question when presented with Jane’s dilemma. Was it spliced into the film to show that a serial killer can be compassionate about his family? Was any of it really necessary?Anyway, for me Mr. Brooks left a lot to be desired. I would have preferred it if the movie focused more on the inner turmoil that Brooks continually battles with, rather than seeing so much frivolous shit jammed into the movie as filler. The movie would have certainly flowed better and would have provided to me a much better viewing experience. It’s a shame to see something with so much promise fail miserably. As it stands now, Mr. Brooks is a misguided psychological thriller with little thrill. Ho hum.

This writer enjoys candlelit dinners and the fast paced excitement of NASCAR. Additional reviews can be found at The Critical Critics.

Movie Review: Hostel: Part II

General Disdain — Sat, 2 Jun 2007 02:59:27 EDT

Let me first start by saying, I never watched Hostel. There was something about glorifying the abject horror of torture made my stomach tense up and do a flip. Fast forwarding a few years and my stomach has gotten stronger on the inside (flabbier on the out). It's probably a side effect of being married for so long. Whatever the reasoning, it is just in time for Hostel: Part II. Lucky me.Hostel: Part II starts off with the lone survivor from the first movie, Paxton (Jay Hernandez) hiding out at the house of his girlfriend's grandmother fearing for his life. Of course he doesn't last much longer, and just as soon as he's extinguished we're whisked away and are introduced to three girls, a wild child Whitney (Bijou Phillips), a rich prude Beth (Lauren German), and their butter-faced nerd friend Lorna (Heather Matarazzo). They’ve decided to go on a trip to Prague and upon departure are soon persuaded to alter their plans to include a five-star spa in Slovakia. Upon checking into the hotel, the wheels begin turning -- the super-bored and-super rich folks begin bidding on who gets to "play" with them.From there, I expected to be transported into Hell and to wish to God I never saw the movie. Yet that didn't happen. The horror and terror is practically nonexistent. I'm not about to go through the glorified gore or torture scenes, but I will say there are scythes, saws, clippers, knives, and blunt instruments all used in various ways. Unfortunately, those ways did little to revolt me. A blood bath -- whoopity doo. Electroshock "therapy" -- seen it in First Blood (or was it Rambo: First Blood Part II?) years ago. Aside from the ending, which made me wince, very little originality went into the heart of this film.And that's where another problem arises. It takes far to long to even get to the heart of the movie. For the first hour we're basically hanging around with these girls as they yip and yap at art school, on the train, in the hotel ,and at an outdoor festival. It probably wouldn't have been so bad if I actually gave a shit about them but I didn't. I realize these are expendable characters, but the director (Eli Roth) should have at least made an attempt to give me a way to relate to these girls. Maybe one takes care of old people in her spare time and has a heart of gold. Perhaps another takes in stray animals and she's being kicked out her apartment because of it. Something -- anything! I figured, if he couldn't be bothered with helping me to identify with them, then I sure as hell couldn't be bothered about them or their fate either. Fuck 'em -- let 'em die a horrible death.The final nail in the coffin, and it pains me greatly to say it, is even the gratuitous nudity, which is staple in these exploitation type films, is junk. The first Hostel, from what I understand, was filled to the brim with tits, ass, and sex. Hostel: Part II has very few scenes of nudity. I was expecting wave after luscious wave of European hotties baring it all for my enjoyment. Yet, instead of being dished a healthy dose of the female anatomy, I was instead given several shots of men in all their glory. This may be good for the sadistic women out there, but not, I repeat, not what I wanted to see. What a huge letdown.Mostly, Hostel: Part II is major disappointment. I've seen far worse things surfing the web and ending up on sites like Ogrish.com (which surprisingly has cleaned itself up). As a matter of fact, the boredom from the first half of the movie was even more painful to watch than the "horrifying" torture scenes. And now that I've grown a full pair of manly balls, I'm going to rent the first movie just to see what all the fuss was about. I suspect it was over a whole lot of nothing, but it's gotta be better than this.

This writer enjoys candlelit dinners and the fast paced excitement of NASCAR. Additional reviews can be found at The Critical Critics.

Movie Review: Pirates of the Caribbean - At World's End

General Disdain — Tue, 29 May 2007 09:44:21 EDT

Chalk up number three of the summer. Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End has arrived in theaters and knocked out the oh-so endearing Shrek the Third from its elevated position as the weekend top grosser. But isn't that what we expected to happen? After all, our lovable ogre lost a great deal of his mojo in his third time around the track. Same goes for Spider-Man. Thankfully, as I’d been hoping, a worthy third has hit the cinemas. Finally.In this chapter, we find our hygieneless (?) pirate Captain Jack Sparrow (Johnny Depp) banished to Davey Jones's Locker where he has apparently taken to talking to multiples of himself to occupy the time. Will Turner (Orlando Bloom), Elizabeth Swann (Keira Knightley), and Captain Barbossa (Geoffrey Rush) set off to find and release Sparrow -- each for their own nefarious reasons. Turner wants to turn Sparrow in to the East India Trading Company (EIT) in exchange for the Black Pearl so he can set his father free from the Flying Dutchman. Barbossa needs the pieces of eight Sparrow holds so he reconvene the brethren court of nine pirate lords. His ultimate goal is to release Calypso, the goddess of the seas. Swann has guilt issues dating back to Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest and sees Sparrow as the ultimate solution to defeating EIT and Davey Jones. Of course everything goes every which way but loose and allegiances and plans change as often as I change my boxer shorts on a hot summer day. It’s this fluidity caused by fractured promises and outcomes that works both for and against Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End.On the one hand, it’s great because it keeps the movie fresh and invigorating. There are a myriad of side plots all twisting and flailing about, yet marching toward, the main objective. The subplots allow for the introduction of a few new characters, most notably Captain Sao Feng (Chow Yun-Fat) and additional face time to others from the previous movies. The director (Gore Verbinski) does a handsome job of intermixing all the characters and developments as the story progresses. It could have been extremely easy for him to lose his bearing while navigating these storylines. This is a job very well done.On the other hand, with all these subplots, cut-tos and cut-outs it is rather easy to get confused and forget who is doing what to whom and why. An average movie goer isn’t necessarily going to follow along with all the twists and turns and may find themselves scratching their heads later in the movie. Even I’ll admit there were a few moments, albeit extremely brief moments, that I needed to try and piece back the chronology of events – something I don’t like to have to do (it detracted from my enjoyment of The Matrix Revolutions too). Although they’re done well, they just may be one too many.And of course I shouldn’t have to say it, but I will; visually Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End is brilliantly crafted. The land, and especially the seascapes, are a sight to see. It reminded me why I won’t be taking any cruises anytime soon. The attention to detail is evident on each of the warships. Nothing is skipped – whether it was a barnacle encrusted to a cannon, the splintering of the planks making up the decks or the weathering and tearing of the mainsails. And the final battle is truly something to behold.Lastly, the acting. Each of the actors does an adequate job; none of them blew me out of the water. Perhaps it’s because this is the third installment and I’ve seen them all before. Depp’s portrayal of Sparrow is even more zany than before. I believe it is just a bit too metrosexual for my tastes this time around. And I’m not quite sure what I think about Keira Knightley. Very pretty, yet something about her screams man, which I find uncomfortable. The two standouts are Lee Arenberg as Pintel and Mackenzie Crook as Ragetti. These two guys are the prefect comic segues to the incredible action occurring around them. Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End would simply not be as good as it is without them.Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End is definitely the best of the summer blockbusters of 2007 (at least until Transformers in July). Hell, it’s damn close to being the best of the Pirates trilogy. Go for the laughs. Go for the action. Whatever the reason, just go. You'll be hard pressed to find another way to burn nearly three hours without knowing it.

This writer enjoys candlelit dinners and the fast paced excitement of NASCAR. Additional reviews can be found at The Critical Critics.

Movie Review: The Last Legion

General Disdain — Sun, 27 May 2007 12:17:22 EDT

I hadn't heard much about The Last Legion. But what I had heard was that it wasn't particularly good -- it doesn't follow any true historical events and the action was rather inactive. Now, I certainly wouldn't call myself a history major (I'll leave that to my brother), so the possibility of that ruining my experience is nil. The battle sequences and sword fighting, on the other hand, is most definitely a deal breaker. I simply had to find out if the movie is that bad and here is what I discovered...They were right. The two previously mentioned facets are glaring but there are several others that could have been called out as well. Let's walk through them, shall we? Weak, unoriginal plot. You'll see what I mean at the end of the plot description. The Last Legion takes place during the decline of the Roman empire. For Rome to rise to power again, the latest Caesar, Romulus Augustus (Thomas Sangster) must hope to find the sword that gives great power to the rightful wielder of it. To aid him he has Aurelius (Colin Firth), the captain of the guards, his spiritual aide Ambrosinus (Ben Kingsley), and Mira (Aishwarya Rai), an Indian woman warrior. Together they journey to gather the forces of the Ninth Legion stationed in an outward post in Britannia to reclaim Rome and reunite her peoples. If you said this sounds a bit like the Arthurian legend with a Roman theme, you'd be right! And unless you watch the entire movie, you won't know how right you are! Atrocious battle scenes. I've seen some poorly choreographed fight scenes in my day, but The Last Legion gives some of them a tight race. There’s nothing like watching one fighter duck well before the other combatant swings his weapon. And if I see any more of those moments where fighters have the time to hug or lovingly gaze in one another's eyes across a chaotic battlefield, I'm going to scream. There's a lot of them in here.Yet, even though there isn't much going for The Last Legion, it was still rather pleasing to watch. It's campy. It's cheesy. It's all rather endearing if you don't take the movie very seriously. So for those of you who want to see a lighthearted movie that's not full of gore, intense violence or much of anything else, The Last Legion is for you. For those of you who want something more, I strongly suggest Excalibur.

This writer enjoys candlelit dinners and the fast paced excitement of NASCAR. Additional reviews can be found at The Critical Critics.

Movie Review: Fired!

General Disdain — Wed, 23 May 2007 18:44:05 EDT

I've been fired from a few jobs in my 36 years of life. There was this time I got canned from Tile City for 'purposely' breaking ceramic tiles. There was another time I was escorted off of a construction site for cursing off the foreman. It was so bad I was removed from the IBEW! Seeing as I had my experiences with losing my job, I figured it would be fun to watch Fired! and see how other people reacted when they got kicked to the curb.The movie starts off simply enough: Annabelle Gurwitch is being told by Woody Allen that her voice is too high pitched and that she looks like a retard when saying her lines. Ultimately, he wouldn't be needing her for his new play. So after wallowing in her despair for a few days, Gurwitch decides to seek solace by talking to her friends, then ordinary people and policy makers. Through it all, she realizes that, as with all traumatic experiences, making fun of it and ultimately finding humor in it helps one cope. Hell, you can even make a living off of it . . .But let's cut to the chase. The problems with Fired! are tri-fold. First and foremost, Annabelle Gurwitch is one annoying lady. Woody Allen is correct when he said her voice was painful to the ears. I found it very distracting and it actually made the movie seem so much longer than the 71 minutes it is (this is very bad for a documentary). Secondly, Gurwitch tries like hell to be funny in the same vein as the mock interviews done so brilliantly in shows like The Daily Show and The Colbert Report. She fails miserably. Lastly, I felt only an egotistical whiner would make a spectacle about themselves getting fired. I felt zero compassion for her -- hell, she's an actor for Christ's sake! If you decide to pursue that as a career, you should expect to be unemployed or at the very least be prepared for some major setbacks.There is but one saving grace to Fired! and that is the segments in which she is able to parade her showbiz friends in to recant some of their bizarre firings. Hearing Tim Allen recall his short few days as a union pin fabricator is funny. Not so much as to why he got fired but more as to his convoluted work theories. Andy Dick is always great for a few laughs, even if his segments were a bit too long. The David Cross scene is insightful in a wacky sort of way. He recommends a few activities to pass the time, that may be of use to us all (even in times of peace):find and practice a new religioneat a tomato like an applehave a sex change operationeat an erotic cake in a public placebecome an MTV video jockeyIlleana Douglas takes the cake though. She reminisces about her time as an Armani model and -- believe it or not -- a coat checker. I literally laughed out loud as she walked through what she did to get canned from these jobs that required zero skill.Aside from a few intermixed moments of insight or laughter, Fired! is rather boring and bland. Annabelle Gurwitch is not an accomplished interviewer. This greatly detracts from the serious parts of the movie when she is interviewing the General Motors workers in Lansing, Michigan. She is also not much of a comedian. Lucky for her, she has got quite the cast of famous friends who were willing to put their faces in her movie (not so lucky for them). If this movie were a job, I'd recommend doing a preemptive strike and not even show up for the first day of work (skip this movie). Find yourself another place of employment (watch another movie).

This writer enjoys candlelit dinners and the fast paced excitement of NASCAR. Additional reviews can be found at The Critical Critics.

Movie Review: Shrek the Third

General Disdain — Mon, 21 May 2007 18:16:24 EDT

Here it is. The second of the most anticipated movies of the summer is here. No, I'm not talking about Gracie. I'm talking about Shrek the Third. If the title didn't give it away, it's the third installment of the animated juggernaught -- the first being aptly titled Shrek and the second even more aptly titled Shrek 2. Can number three keep pace with its predecessors? Well, they say the third time around is a charm, right? Right?Well, not always. This time around our lovable ogre Shrek (Mike Myers) sets course with his trusty sidekicks Donkey (Eddie Murphy) and Puss In Boots (Antonio Banderas) to find the heir to the throne of Far Far Away, Arthur (Justin Timberlake). Along the way, they find themselves in a host of situations, some funny, some not so. However, while they're out, Prince Charming (Rupert Everett), who's still simmering over his losses in the previous movies, devises an ingenious plan to take over the castle and set himself as king. It's up to Fiona (Cameron Diaz) and her girlfriends to save the kingdom while her husband is away.As expected, visually Shrek the Third delivers fantastic CGI (computer generated imagery). Stunning landscapes, fluid motions, and a keen attention to detail are all accounted for. Yet, I couldn't help but want more. The graphics, while extremely well done, are basically the same as the previous movies. I'm from the school of going above and beyond and I felt the animators should have added a new 'WOW' factor. You can't sit on your past triumphs in this town if you want to stay ahead of the game.Also, as expected, we're given a very healthy dose of adult humor, wrapped around innuendos and read-between-the-lines dialogue (we've got to trick the children, of course). As with all movies, some jokes hit and some miss. Mostly, the antics in Shrek the Third are singles intermixed with a few doubles; the only home run I can think of was during the Pinnochio interrogation -- even I was getting confused with all the double-speak. Yet as stated previously, while there are funny moments, I've basically seen the same material in the first two movies.What I was pleasantly surprised by was the influx of new characters. I suppose it has to be done to keep things fresh; nonetheless, some interesting characters make their debut. Fiona surrounds herself with Sleeping Beauty, Cinderella, Rapunzel, and Snow White (reminded me of the Fox Force Five from Pulp Fiction). Prince Charming amasses a group of ne'er do wells of which Captain Hook, Rumplestiltkin, the Wicked Witch, and even Geppetto (among many others) are a part.In closing, it seems almost ridiculous that I’ve reviewed Shrek the Third. This movie is a beast and it doesn’t matter if it receives so-so or poor reviews; everyone and their mother will flock to the theaters to see it. And so long as my Apple Jacks box has a big Shrek head on it, this film will make money – gobs and gobs of it. Its only question mark is, will it be able to sustain the momentum when Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End comes out later this week?

This writer enjoys candlelit dinners and the fast paced excitement of NASCAR. Additional reviews can be found at The Critical Critics.