Blogcritics Author: Scott C. Smith

Movie Review: Snuff - A Documentary About Killing On Camera

Scott C. Smith — Tue, 22 Jul 2008 07:12:51 EDT

Do "snuff" films exist? Director Paul von Stoetzel examines the myths - and reality - of snuff films.
What is a snuff film, exactly? The phrase has been a part of the American vernacular since 1971, when Ed Sanders used it in his book on the Manson Family murders, The Family: The Story of Charles Manson’s Dune Buggy Attack Battalion. It was alleged that Manson and his “family” had filmed the murders of their victims using stolen...

PC Gaming Review: The Incredible Hulk

Scott C. Smith — Sat, 12 Jul 2008 15:40:43 EDT

Game developers made me angry. Hulk smash ugly textures!
Marvel Entertainment seemingly can't go wrong. They've published hugely successful comic book franchises (The X-Men, The Fantastic Four, Spider-Man, countless others) and have had tremendous success with movie adaptations of those comic books (Iron Man has grossed over $311 million so far, according to Rotten Tomatoes). Sadly, things go...

TV Review: FOX's The Moment of Truth Proves People Will Do Anything For Money

Scott C. Smith — Wed, 9 Jul 2008 06:55:43 EDT

FOX's latest reality game show puts a cash value on humiliation.
Would you reveal your deepest, darkest secrets for $500,000? That's the premise behind FOX's latest reality game show, and summer filler program, The Moment of Truth.NBC pretty much broke the mold for what people would do for a cash prize in Fear Factor, the show most famous for what contestants had to eat (like rancid cow testicles) and...

DVD Review: Blue Man Group Shows You How To Be A Megastar

Scott C. Smith — Tue, 8 Jul 2008 07:23:10 EDT

The Blue Men return for version 2.0 of their rock concert experience.
The Blue Man Group return to their rock concert experience in their latest DVD, captured during their "How To Be A Megastar 2.0" tour. If you already own The Complex, Blue Man Group's previous DVD release from 2004, much of this material will be familiar as it's nearly the same concert from that tour. That's not necessarily a...

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: X-Men: The Last Stand

Scott C. Smith — Sat, 27 May 2006 15:44:27 EDT

Director Brett Ratner takes over the X-Men helm from Bryan Singer, and the result is less than satisfying. Oh sure, it's a loud, frenzied summer action film with lots of explosions and special effects, but something was lost in the translation from Singer's vision of the franchise to Ratner's. I will say Ratner and his writers made some bold choices with the film, some of which may put off those fans who enjoyed Singer's two X-Men films. The plot: a pharmaceutical company has developed a cure for the "Mutant X" gene that causes mutation; the cure will transform any mutant into an ordinary human being. Naturally, this revelation is met with skepticism by some, especially Magneto (Sir Ian McKellen) and his "brotherhood of mutants," Magneto's mutant army. Magneto believes the cure will actually be used to involuntarily transform mutants into normal humans, and raises his army to do battle. Professor Charles Xavier (Patrick Stewart) opposes violence and wants to resolve the matter peacefully.We meet many new mutants this time around, including Dr. Hank McCoy (Kelsey Grammer), also known as Beast, a furry blue mutant who is the newly appointed Secretary for Mutant Affairs. Other mutants come and go; we see them briefly in one or two scenes, and there are just too many to keep track of. On Magneto's side, among others, is a huge mutant named Juggernaut (Vinnie Jones), who is on hand to, apparently, run through walls. There are other mutants on Magneto's side, but they just don't register in our memories. I think Ratner is juggling too many characters.The series regulars are back, including Wolverine (Hugh Jackman); Storm (Halle Berry); Cyclops (James Marsden, in a very brief appearance); and, apparently back from the dead, Dr. Jean Grey (Famke Janssen), who has developed a new personality, the all-powerful Phoenix. Also returning is Iceman (Shawn Ashmore) and Pyro (Aaron Stanford). Anna Paquin is back as Rogue, but like so many others in this film, she doesn't occupy a lot of screen time. Rogue is interested in the mutant cure, due to the fact that her mutation can cause death if she comes into physical contact with someone. Very briefly we are introduced to Angel (Ben Foster), a mutant with giant wings, who doesn't really seem to serve any purpose, other than to fly around in a few scenes.The final act is a special effects extravaganza, as Magneto and his army wreck havoc on San Francisco, with cars flying and a pretty spectacular sequence involving the Golden Gate Bridge and a huge battle between Magneto's army and the X-Men.My biggest complaint with the film is the lack of character development. In Singer's films, the characters evolved and were allowed to develop into real people, despite their super-powers. In The Last Stand, their growth is stunted. The characters just don't seem as real as they have in the past. Also, the movie focuses more on Storm than Wolverine, and Halle Berry just doesn't have Hugh Jackman's charisma. Sure, the films aren't just about Wolverine, but he is a powerful presence (although, not as much this time around).There are some surprises in this film, which I will not give away here, but needless to say, not all X-Men are on hand at the film's conclusion. Don't get me wrong, the film isn't terrible; it's great summer entertainment, and it will get my recommendation. There are many spectacular special effects sequences. But special effects cannot make a movie; the human element needs to be present. I'm sure there will be lots of debate among the die-hard X-Men fans over the direction Brett Ratner has taken the franchise. Recommended.

Scott C. Smith is a freelance writer from Hillsboro, Oregon, returning from a two-year-long break to resume writing for Blogcritics. He is best known for his rabble-rousing web site, What's In Scott's Head, and his political columns at Counterbias.

Movie Review: American Dreamz

Scott C. Smith — Sun, 23 Apr 2006 12:29:19 EDT

You'd think a satire that pokes fun at American Idol and the Bush administration would make for a good movie. In the hands of writer/director Paul Weitz (American Pie), you'd be wrong. The film offers few laughs and thinks terrorism and the war in Iraq are better targets than George W. Bush and American Idol's smug host, Simon Cowell. Ostensibly the film is about an American Idol-like show called American Dreamz, hosted by smarmy Brit Martin Tweed (a sleepwalking Hugh Grant). The show is about to start its new season, and Tweed is looking for a star. He discovers his star in Ohio, a contestant named Sally Kendoo (Mandy Moore), played up a bit like Britney Spears by Moore.There is a subplot involving the President of the United States, President Staton (Dennis Quaid, doing a passable George W. Bush impression), and Staton's chief of staff, played by Willem Dafoe, looking quite a bit like a bald Dick Cheney. President Staton has been re-elected but is in a funk and hasn't left his bedroom in weeks, instead spending his time reading... newspapers. To help boost his sagging approval ratings, Staton agrees to appear on American Dreamz as a guest judge.The other subplot is about a terrorist in training named Omer (Sam Golzari), who we first meet in Afghanistan, stumbling his way through a Taliban training video shoot. Omer isn't a very good terrorist and he enjoys performing show-tunes in his tent. It's decided to send him to his family in Orange County, California, where he will await orders. Through a series of increasingly implausible events, Omer ends up a contestant on American Dreamz. He's not very good, but makes it to the final episode. And since President Staton is going to be a guest judge on the final episode, Omer's handlers decide to activate him so he can blow himself up and take out Staton. Jihads are funny! Not really.This is a film of missed opportunities. Sure, we've seen many a George W. Bush impression on Saturday Night Live, and Dennis Quaid does a convincing Bush impression, but Weitz only goes so far in lampooning Bush before pulling back the reins. Dafoe is credited as "Chief of Staff" at the Internet Movie Database, but other reviewers credit him as the Vice-President, so it's not clear if Dafoe is doing an impression of Dick Cheney, or a character sort of like a mix of Cheney and Karl Rove. I don't know. Dafoe does deliver a good performance.Are you looking for a film with offensive stereotypes? American Dreamz has enough for everyone, from stereotypical Arabs to Jews and even a gay Arab character, Omer's cousin Iqbal (Tony Yalda). Hugh Grant could have skewered Simon Cowell but instead portrays Martin Tweed as a self-loathing man with a mean streak. As a character he's completely boring.The film spends a lot of time building to its climax, but the problem is it builds this time slowly, with a few scattered laughs. It's not difficult to figure out how the movie will end.If you're in the mood for a scathing satire, go see Thank You for Smoking. American Dreamz can only dream of being as good as Thank You for Smoking. Not recommended.

Movie Review: Thank You for Smoking

Scott C. Smith — Mon, 10 Apr 2006 01:30:14 EDT

Thank You for Smoking is a surprisingly hilarous, biting satire of lobbying - in the form of Nick Naylor (Aaron Eckhart), spokesman for the Academy of Tobacco Studies. Played with perfection by Eckhart, Naylor becomes a character we, the audience, want to see more of - he turns someone who should be unlikeable into a sympathetic character.Our first introduction to Naylor is on a talk show about smoking and cancer. Naylor shares the stage with a 15-year-old boy who is dying from cancer (and had recently stopped smoking), and Naylor turns the audience's hostility towards him around by saying Big Tobacco wants the boy to live -- so he can continue to be a smoker -- and it's the anti-smoking bunch that wants him to die. It's a hilarious opening to a great film, directed with unexpected maturity by 29-year-old Jason Reitman (son of director Ivan Reitman). Reitman, who also wrote the screenplay (based on the book by Christopher Buckley), deftly conducts the actions on-screen, maintaining a certain tone and not veering the film off the path of satire. Naylor meets frequently with his friends, fellow lobbyists, known as the "MOD" squad (Merchants of Death): alcohol lobbyist Polly Bailey (Maria Bello) and firearms lobbyist Bobby Jay Bliss (David Koechner). In their funny scenes, the trio argues over which of their products causes the most deaths.After his talk show appearance, Naylor becomes something of a celebrity, and a Washington, D.C. journalist, Heather Holloway (Katie Holmes) wants an interview. Naylor not only grants the interview, but the two begin an affair, with Naylor, well, making a lot of what he thinks are off-the-record comments to Holloway. The comments not only turn out to be on-the-record, but they end up in the article Holloway writes about Naylor. Needless to say, his world is turned upside down. With everything going on in his world, Nick Naylor is trying to be a good father to his son Joey. There's a great scene when Nick comes to Joey's school for one of those "what do your parents do for a living" talks. "Please don't ruin my childhood," Joey pleads as his father talks to the kids, eventually cross-examining a little girl who says her mother said smoking is bad for you. "Oh, is your mother a doctor?" Naylor asks the bewildered little girl. "She's hardly a credible expert."There is a sub-plot involving Naylor's firm trying to get smoking put back into the movies. Naylor meets with movie producer Jeff Megall and the two figure out how to get smoking back into movies: set the film in the future, after cigarettes have been declared safe.Meanwhile, a powerful senator, Ortolan K. Finistirre (William H. Macy), is holding hearings on having a poison label placed on packs of cigarettes. The plot winds its way down to Naylor testifying before the Senator's committee, pointing out that Finistirre's home state, Vermont, produces cheese that clogs arteries... should cheese have warning labels, too? "The great state of Vermont will not apologize for its cheese!" Finistirre fumes.There are many great moments in Thank You for Smoking, and the film as a whole is just terrific. The satire is biting and skewers all targets equally. Jason Reitman will be a name to look for in the future. He has a great future ahead of him, if Thank You for Smoking is any indication. Highly recommended.

Movie Review: Slither

Scott C. Smith — Sat, 8 Apr 2006 09:53:43 EDT

What happens when you take a movie, add in generous servings of gore, humor, aliens, zombies, and the music of...Air Supply?? Why, you get Slither, the film by Troma alum James Gunn (who wrote the screenplays to the great Troma films Tromeo and Juliet and Terror Firmer, as well as 2004's Dawn of The Dead remake).Slither is a goofy, gory homage to the horror films of the 1980s. It seems as of late Hollywood has been churning out PG-13 rated thrillers and the occasional humorless R-rated gore-fests (Hostel, The Hills Have Eyes), but goofy horror flicks are not the norm (thank goodness for Shaun of The Dead).In Slither, the small town of Wheels unknowingly becomes the host to a strange alien...well, blob, delivered in a meteorite that crashes in the woods. Not much happens in Wheels. Police officers trying to catch speeding motorists instead spend their time tracking the speed of passing birds, since there are no speeding motorists. If you watch the film, you'll know how fast a whipporwill flies. Entertainment and education. Of course, while the police officers are tracking the speeding birds, they fail to notice the meteorite crashing behind them.Meanwhile, town businessman Grant Grant (Michael Rooker) is having marital troubles with his young wife, Starla (Elizabeth Banks). Not even the music of Air Supply can get her into the mood for love, so Grant storms off to get drunk. He eventually ends up in the woods and discovers the alien blob, which opens up and ejects a slug-like creature that enters the body through the mouth. Before long, Grant begins to transform into a hideous creature with an appetite for meat. Lots of meat. It isn't long before people in the town become hosts to the alien organisim. Cats and dogs go missing, a fact Starla discovers after going into a room her now-alien husband had padlocked shut. The police finally get involved in the search for Starla's husband, headed by police chief Bill Pardy (Nathan Fillion).There are plenty of laughs in Slither, many courtesy of the town's foul-mouthed mayor, Jack MacReady (hilariously played by Gregg Henry), as well as the exchanges between characters.There are also some boring stretches in the film, as you wait for the next gory scene. The film delivers plenty, especially the scene where we get to see what happens when a human host gives, er, birth to hundreds (maybe thousands) of slimy slugs that quickly spread out through town, leaping down the throats of the hosts to turn them into lurching zombies. Yes, zombies.During all of this, Grant Grant has transformed into a creature that looks quite a bit like Jabba the Hutt from the Star Wars movies. The alien creatures all share the same consciousness, so it quickly becomes apparent that the only way to stop the zombies is to destroy Jabba the Grant.Slither is an entertaining, if occasionally slow film, but a great flick for a rowdy group to watch on a Friday night. The gore scenes deliver the goods and the whole film has a wacky sensibility. Recommended.

Movie Review: Inside Man

Scott C. Smith — Mon, 27 Mar 2006 05:17:08 EST

Spike Lee is one of America's great filmmakers, yet his work is often underrated, which is a shame. Lee has worked in many genres, from his acclaimed 1989 film Do The Right Thing to 2002's 25th Hour, Lee has a large body of unique work.His latest, Inside Man, is, at first glance, a traditional crime thriller. A group of bank robbers, led by Dalton Russell (Clive Owen), and three accomplices, rob -- or seem to rob -- a Manhattan bank. They do so in the usual way, barking orders, ordering everyone in the bank on the ground, threatening to kill anyone who moves. But this group of robbers seems to have an entirely different agenda in mind, and they seem to have plotted the perfect robbery. With electronic equipment they knock out the bank's surveillance camera, and have all the hostages change into the same outfit the robbers are wearing. Spike Lee frames the action with a non-linear narrative, so in one scene we'll watch Det. Frazier speak with Dalton Russell, and in another we flash ahead to the hostages being interrogated, as the detectives try to find out who pulled off what ends up being a non-robbery, or move to the present to receive important (or so it seems) information from one of the main characters.The police bring in Det. Keith Frazier (the always excellent Denzel Washington), the hostage negotiator, to deal with the situation. He and Dalton Russell begin a cat-and-mouse game of trying to figure out what each other is up to. As time goes by, Frazier is convinced that there's something else going on, and it's not a bank robbery. Frazier is taken off the case, of course, and is left to figure out what the hell is going on. I'll not spoil the ending, but there is a Usual Suspects-like moment when Frazier realizes a key clue to the crime, although at that point it's too late to do anything about it.The bank's founder and president, Arthur Case (Christopher Plummer) has a secret to protect at the bank, items in a safe deposit box that he doesn't want made public (items Dalton Russell seems to know all about), so he brings in the mysterious Madeline White (Jodie Foster), one of those movie characters who have secret agendas and seemingly unlimited power and influence -- think Robert De Niro's character in Wag The Dog -- to protect his interests in the bank.The screenplay by Russell Gewirtz -- his first -- provides for plenty of tension and some great interaction between the main characters. At the same time, the script feels like it could have used a re-write. There are a few situations that are not fully explained in a satisfactory way (how does Dalton Russell know what's in Arthur Case's safe deposit box?) and Jodie Foster's character, and her motives, are not fully fleshed out. She's an enigma who, truth be told, could have been written out of the film without affecting the outcome.The acting by all the leads is solid. Jodie Foster is cool and collected (and in charge) as Madeline White, and as I mentioned earlier, Denzel Washington delivers his usual outstanding performance. Clive Owen as Dalton Russell is also good, as is the supporting cast. Spike Lee provides solid direction, keeping the action moving while creating tension. It's a shame the script ultimately leaves more questions unanswered than answered. A good, but not great, thriller. Recommended.

TV Review: Nanny 911 (3-24-2006)

Scott C. Smith — Sun, 26 Mar 2006 16:36:00 EST

I've previously written about Nanny 911 in a general way, focusing on the series as a whole. Today I'm writing about a specific episode (aired on March 24, 2006), which was completely fascinating and a little different than other episodes in the series. This episode provides enough material to continually raise the question, "Why does this family want America to know how horrible the parents are?" Or, when you get right down to it, why would the parents want to know how horrible they are? Is a brief moment of fame worth the public humiliation? I don't understand it at all.We meet the Longairc family: husband and stepfather Adam; wife and mother Michelle; and her three children: son Sean, eight; five-year-old son Adam, a charming child who bites, screams, and likes to drop the F-bomb. It's so cute when children swear, isn't it? And six-year-old daughter Erica, the only child of the three we don't see acting like they had been raised in the wild by a pack of wolves. Adam is in the unfortunate position of being a stepfather. Now, before I get complaints that I'm calling stepparents "unfortunate," I'm only referring to this situation. I know there are plenty of families with stepparents that do not have the issues the Longairc family have, and are thriving. I can relate to Adam as I'm a stepparent. I came into my stepchild's life when he was nine, and immediately wanted to jump in with my own style of discipline. Big mistake, since his mother had her own style, and our styles were not the same. For several years it created strife until I finally decided that I would not continue in a disciplining role, but rather try to be a positive influence and a mentor. And things got better fast. I know, all experiences vary, but I know there are some of you out there who know what I'm talking about. But I digress.Back to the Longairc family. We watch stepfather Adam attempt (unsuccessfully) to bring some discipline into the family. The kids are defiant and mom Michelle is not what you'd call a disciplinarian. So Adam has his hands full as he fruitlessly attempts to bring some order out of chaos. Time to bring in Nanny Stella!If you've never seen the show, the format is pretty simple. On the first day, the nanny will observe the family and take notes. At the end of the day, she'll discuss her observations with the parents. The next day, the nanny brings in a set of family rules, and the rest of the episode (normally) shows us how, by the end of the week, life is ice cream and puppies for the family as the children magically transform into little angels. Not this time! Nope. That's what made this particular episode so unusual. Sure, Nanny Stella came up with family rules, but throughout the episode, mother Michelle refuses to follow the rules or enforce them. In fact, she even refuses to acknowledge that her children are...difficult, despite saying so at the beginning of the episode.Poor Stella gives it her best shot, but nothing. Michelle basically wants Stella to leave due to the fact that Stella has questioned Michelle's parenting skills (or, in her case, lack of parenting skills). And so it goes in this train wreck of an episode, culminating with five-year-old Adam punching, kicking and spitting in Stella's face, all while his mother sits back and enjoys the show. You know she wants the tyke to assault the woman who dared to question her skills as a mother. It's all very sad, really.By the end of the week, Nanny Stella hasn't really accomplished anything, which is unusual for this show, and off she goes, with no emotional departure that is the norm of Nanny 911. We get a sort-of follow up to find out that stepfather Adam is attempting to follow the rules set up by Nanny Stella, and even Michelle acknowledges she's going to try and follow them. Which seems unlikely. I wonder if we'll see this couple on Divorce Court?All said, the Longairc family episode made for interesting television. Recommended