Netflix Stream This, Bitch!

When We Left Earth

     Throughout my entire life, I've always been drawn to space and stories about NASA and their missions, as I'm sure many others have. Anyone in their right mind would want to find out more about the incredible universe we live in, instead of chalking it up to some "being" that created us all (though many theists would claim that God created everything we find in the great unknown). The Discovery miniseries When We Left Earth satisfies plenty of these small curiosities. Recently, President Obama has come under significant scrutiny from scientists and astronomers due to his position (to cut the budget) on space exploration. Yet even more recently, he has countered those arguments with a few solid goals: to make asteroids and Mars a realistic destination for the future. JFK challenged Americans to reach the moon by 1961. According to the New York Times, Obama's vision is a bit different--it was a "call for private industry to innovate its way to Mars, rather than a call for a national effort to demonstrate American predominance." I can't say that I disagree: eventually, not in our lifetime or our children's lifetime or our grandchildren's lifetime, Earth will no longer be a safe and reliable home for human beings. 
     When We Left Earth is a 6-part miniseries consisting of hour long episodes about the general history of NASA and its missions. Part 1, entitled "Ordinary Superman", deals with the Space Race and the failures and successes of the Mercury program; Part 2, entitled "Friends and Rivals", deals with Project Gemini and the first American spacewalk; Part 3, entitled "Landing the Eagle", details the Apollo program with great interviews and views of the first Lunar landing; Part 4, entitled "The Explorers", deals with five other successful moon landings, including the Apollos; Part 5, entitled "The Shuttle", shows the Space Shuttle and the ill-fated Challenger mission (the video of which still gives me goosebumps no matter how many times I witness it); Part 6, entitled "A Home in Space", deals with the Hubble and the International Space Station and the failed Columbia Mission. All of the episodes are intriguing, entertaining and well worth watching. My only hope is this: in thirty years time, we will have another incredible and inspiring mini-series to view, probably titled When We Arrived, pertaining to more successful missions to the Moon, Mars, and beyond. 

Splice Review, Or How to Watch Adrien Brody Bang a Freak Humanoid

     What is it about freaks that draws the attention of most any curious, self-absorbed man? Flip through the channels on any given week night and one is bound to find a show on TLC or Discovery that deals with conjoined twins connected at the cock or some 1,400 pound man suffering from retardation and a tendency to hoard. There's even a Curb Your Enthusiasm episode (well, there are many actually) that deals with freaks, including a picture book with freaky photos, John McEnroe, and the one-legged Heather Mills. It's not that most people want to make fun of them--it's about the fact of witnessing something that you don't see in the tediousness of everyday life, something that's abnormal and unknown. That's why films such as Freaks ( a 1932 film about sideshow performers [starring real people with real deformities]) become such a cultural phenomenon. It's also why Splice, the new film starring Adrien Brody and Sarah Polley, showed up on my very wide movie radar. Splice, though, has a different type of freak: one that has advanced characteristics of many differing species. The scientifically-advanced creature in the film, named Dren, has all of the great things that make a perfect creature: lungs that can breathe underwater, wings that shoot out from the skin like a bird, a stinger as a self-defense mechanism like a scorpion, and, namely, a woman's breasts and vagina.
     The story of Splice is complex yet very simple at the same time. Two scientists (the aforementioned actors) become mildly famous by splicing together the DNA of various animals. They want to take their experiments to the next level: by using human DNA in the mix, they could create incredible breakthroughs in science and medicine. The company they work for is opposed to this idea, due to the moral and ethical boundaries that will be pushed to the limit. So they decide to conduct the experiments on their own, in secret. What they create changes their lives forever, and it deals with issues of parenthood, love, discipline and the morality of creating a brand new species that threatens to leave their controlled environment. To give away more of the plot would rob the viewer of some entertaining twists and surprises.
     This film was a big hit at the festivals lately, yet it barely made an impact to this past weekend's box office. Part of the problem is the marketing of the film. If you watch the trailer, it seems to be a Species-like horror movie about a genetically-altered creature wreaking havoc across the land. Although there are disturbing scenes of violence and medical procedures, the film should be taken as more of a Frankenstein-esque tale of a creator's love and personal moral questioning of the ethics of creating a fully-functioning human-like creature in a science lab, and then watching it discover the outside world. Should they treat their creation like a child? Like an animal? In Adrien Brody's character's case, he treats it like a lover at one point in the film. This is where Splice will polarize many of it's potential viewers. It raises the question of loving something that isn't quite human and isn't quite animal. The film's insightful about it's characters psychological motivations and the possibility that the creators are the ones that are the freaks, not the creature itself. It's creepy, it's intelligent, and it raises questions in the viewer's minds about the societal implications of working with DNA and the motivations and choices of parenthood.     (B)
  

What You'll Want to be Watching:

                                
                                 Hard Knocks: New York Jets

     In years past, I never really cared that much about NFL football, just as I still don't give two shits about the NBA or the MLB. Only one thing sparked my interest for the 2009 season: fantasy football. Never could I have imagined the entertainment and strategy of "owning" players and managing a roster, all culminating to the precious day of the week where I would go to Church and come home to beer and NFL Sunday coverage (minus the going to Church part). Fantasy football has become an extremely popular phenomenon, and more than 27 million players set their rosters every week. According to Wikipedia, the average "owner" spends about 9 hours a week on their rosters and strategy. Last season--my first season--was the wonderful time in my life when I was unemployed and collecting money from our great government (Thanks, Obama, for the extra $25 a week); I probably spent 20 hours a week on reading articles and making minor and significant changes, not including every Sunday (and Monday nights) where I would watch football from 12 noon to 11 at night. What does this all have to do with the HBO annual series Hard Knocks, about the training camp of yearly-revolving NFL teams, you may ask? Well, my friends: come late summer, when this season's focus on the New York Jets hits our airwaves, it will mark the very beginning of my defense of the fantasy football championship.
     Hard Knocks has been airing on HBO since 2001, though I never cast my eye upon it until last season's look at the Cincinnati Bengals. It's a very entertaining show (even if you're only mildly interested in Football), as it focuses more on behind-the-scenes looks at the team during training camp. It covers preparations for the upcoming season along with an inside look at the jokes, pranks, fights and injuries that occur in such a trying time for the players. Rookies and undrafted players also play a major role: how they respond to getting cut or making the roster and the toll it takes on their family and friends. These names minght sound familiar when they have a successful game early in the season and I easily beat you to the waiver wire to fill an empty slot on my team.

     The main reason why this season will be worth watching more than any previous is because of the man in the picture to the left: morbidly obese fat blob of a man Rex Ryan--also known as the New York Jets head coach. As you can see, he is polite, shy and quite a looker. Without such sarcasm he is an asshole, very outspoken and repulsively disgusting. Grade A Entertainment, in other words. He will say what he wants and do what he wants, all for our viewing pleasure. The other cast of characters is intriguing too: Hot Dog-eating Quarterback Mark Sanchez, Wide Receiver-destroying Darrelle Revis, and Electric Slide-grooving LaDainian Tomlinson. What it do, indeed. We couldn't have asked for a more pertinent set of personalities for some must-see T.V. Coming this late summer, I'll be watching and taking mental notes. You'll want to be watching too, so you wont have to succumb to the rape and pillaging of your fantasy team, courtesy of me, on a weekly basis.

EW, Stealing this blog's thunder???

What You'll Want to be Watching:

                                       
                                     Boardwalk Empire

     At this point in time, if you're an avid movie channel watcher or subscriber, you have to wonder what shows can top the awesomeness of the current and past series that have blown our minds and creamed our jeans. The Sopranos, Breaking Bad, Six Feet Under, Dexter, The Wire--all of these shows (and many more) have taken television to new and exciting directions that network television can't match (I'm looking at you, piece of shit Lost finale). Coming this fall, we all may have another win on our hands. Boardwalk Empire, the new show from HBO, has all of the pieces that a show needs to have to become must-see viewing for years to come: Emmy-award winning screenwriter and producer Terence Winter of The Sopranos, Check. Oscar-winning director Martin Scorsese, Check. An amazing character actor and all-around badass Steve Buscemi, Check. And above all, a network that generally gives shows the time and money to thrive in an era where other networks trash all-time great shows (FOX and Arrested Development), and all we see are bitch-cunts gracing the screens every night (Kate Gosselin, Oprah). I would have to call this one the epitome of a Check Mate.
     But a great show can't be a great show without a great story; this show has one. It's loosely based on a book titled "Boardwalk Empire: The Birth, High Times, and Corruption of Atlantic City". The story revolves around the dawn of Prohibition in the 1920's and the leader of the up and rising Atlantic City, Enoch "Nucky" Thompson (Buscemi). He's equal parts politician and gangster. He makes a name for himself by being the go-to guy for alcohol. The show will be filled with intrigue, violence, vulgarity and political back-room dealings. In other words, it has potential to be amazing entertainment.

When this fall rolls around, when the leaves are slowly changing and Sookie Stackhouse will still be annoying the shit out of me (when she's not topless), this show will hit the airwaves with plenty of press and excitement. I can't express how sick it will be to see Steve Buscemi headline an HBO show. Whether he plays a creepy little dude with violent tendencies (Fargo) or Tony Soprano's cousin Tony in the greatest show in the history of television, Steve just keeps it real, man. I hear he still rides the F-train and never thought about relocating to L.A. He still lives in the Brownstone home off Seventh Ave. that he has for many years. In October, I'll be keeping it real, too, watching with wide eyes and a (small) boner as I change the channel to HBO and get transported to a new time, a new place, and an exciting story that will satisfy my viewing pleasure.

Why I'll Be Glad When Lost Is Over

     (This post spoils the show up to Sunday's series finale)

     I had never seen an episode of the acclaimed ABC series Lost until about 8 months ago when Seasons 1-4 popped up onto the instant watch of my Netflix queue. Obviously, I had heard many many things about the show, none of which made any sense to me when casually reading an article or hearing it being talked about on various media outlets. There are polar bears on a tropical deserted island? There is a crazy dude that lives in a hatch and has to push a set of seemingly arbitrary numbers to keep the world from being destroyed? These things, when hearing a conversation here and reading a snippet there, sounded like utter major network television bullshit. I'm not going to say I was completely wrong; however, as a whole, Lost has restored a little bit of interest in my heart to give certain shows a chance--namely, series on network television that typically don't even compare to the amazing shows on HBO, Showtime and AMC. It's been an entertaining ride to say the least. What more can one ask for in a television show? Lost ends this Sunday night. For various reasons, I'll be glad when the credits roll for the final time.
     Long ago, back in the late summer of 2009, the glory days of my receiving money for free from the government and when Avatar hadn't even been released yet (!), I watched the first couple of seasons of Lost. Things were so simple back then: a plane crashes, there were a number of survivors we got to know like long-lost friends, and there were only two major threats that were unexplainable: the "monster" and the others. Boy, have things changed. The show clearly would have benefited from explaining at least some of its existing mysteries instead of creating new, more complex ones. Throughout the show's 6 seasons, we have the hatch, the numbers, the Dharma Initiative, numerous new groups trying to save or destroy the island (such as the freighter filled with mercenaries, led by the built-like-a-brick-shithouse Martin Keamy), time travel, flash forwards, flash backs and flash sideways, not to mention Jacob and the Man In Black (Now better known as MIB, The Smoke Monster, Smokey, Fake Locke, Flock, and The Locke Monster). I'm not trying to say new, potentially exciting and show-changing plots and characters are a bad thing. I am saying that most of things could have either been explained better or not been brought into the show at all. The only answers the writers ever give us are questioning confused looks and statements from the major characters. I'm not an incompetent half-tard viewer: I don't need everything laid out on a silver platter and explained to me. However, I would like a few questions answered better than Jacob saying, "That's just the way it is," and Hurley saying, "Whoa, dude," like a morbidly obese fat fuck version of Keanu Reeves.

     Speaking of Hurley, never have I watched a whole entire series run of a show while hating the main characters with such an unrelenting passion. Hurley is so fat and repulsive that if you asked him to haul ass he'd have to make 3 trips. Sun and Jin, well let's just say that I cried from tears of joy when they drowned together in the exploded sub. Jack and Kate I'm more indifferent about. I could take them or leave them. Jack, being the adorable doctor that he is, always needs to fix things: well how about he fixes the erection I just "lost" from witnessing his horrible chemistry with Kate and his nervous tics when he gets upset. The only part of season 6 worth watching other than Ilana's luscious titties is Terry O'Quinn's amazing portrait of Locke and Un-Locke, and Desmond being the normal cool cat as he always is.

     But I digress, after re-reading everything that I just wrote, it sure sounds like I'm bitching a lot more than I'm enjoying myself. And maybe that is the case. But: even after all of these crazy things have happened in the life of the show, it's still enjoyable for me to watch. I've invested too much time to just give up now. I can say with a certain degree of assuredness that Season 6 will go down as the worst in the history of Lost. And that's  okay. The writers have taken a risk, and some would say taking the risk at this stage in the game is more important than if the risk was ultimately successful. I may miss the absolute ruthlessness of Ben Linus, just as I'll miss Sawyer's womanizin' and general bad taste. However, come Sunday at 11:30 pm, I'll be glad when Lost is over.

Surprise, Bitch

Robin Hood Review, Or How I Wish I Was Watching Braveheart for the 17th Time

     Spoiler Alert: this film ends with the statement "And so the Legend begins..." It's fairly easy to ascertain from that sentence that the 140- minute film before it contains nothing about the true legend of Robin Hood. There is no stealing from the rich and giving to the poor. His band of outlaws are not given much screen time, and one could hardly call them "Merry" (except when they are tying one on from Friar Tuck's Bee Mead). I just watched the film last night, and I doubt that I could pick the Sheriff of Nottingham out of a police lineup, due to how little we see him. No, this film is like a Mad Lib of plot points, stylistic medieval flashes of battle, and pick-and-choose ideas from the recent plethora of origin stories in films recently. For example: how many motherfucking times do we have to see thousands of arrows casting shadows over the ground and whizzing through the air as they are launched towards their prospective targets? Apparently, at least according to director Ridley Scott, these scenes are not tired and cliche anymore. I beg to differ: like the arrows that barely miss the throats of Robin's enemies, Robin Hood the film significantly misses the mark.
     Numerous versions of Robin Hood's lore have graced our television and theater screens since the invention of television and theater screens: the 1938 Adventures of Robin Hood starring Errol Flynn, the 1973 animated Robin Hood created by Disney, 1991's Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves and 1993's Robin Hood: Men in Tights (both of which hold a place in my heart for introducing me to the story of Robin From the Hood).  Now we have this, 2010's Robin Hood, starring the always-game-for-medieval-warfare Russell Crowe and directed by the always-game-for-killing-horses-and-beating-their-dead-bodies-relentlessly Ridley Scott. Articles and advance reviews state that you wouldn't even know that this film was based on Robin Hood if it wasn't for the names and very loosely based on the legend plot. I cannot disagree: it's a PG-13 version of Gladiator with archery and more talking and less action; it's a PG-13 version of Braveheart with less heart and less blood. Above all, it's just not that fun, something that should have been the first box that was checked off when discussions of a 2010 version of Robin Hood began.
In the past decade, something has changed in film studio's and film maker's minds: they have gotten a large boner when thinking about taking a cherished, established character and telling the story of their origin, or how they became the legend that we know and love today. It's the modern day full-runtime film version of a flashback scene. Batman Begins and Casino Royale did this experiment with much success, rejuvenating old franchises with new talent on the sets and in the director chairs. Hannibal Rising and X-Men Origins: Wolverine appeared with less success, and a question was asked (at least in my mind): Is. This. Necessary? In the case of this version of Robin Hood, that answer is a definitive "No". I don't care what Robin Hood did to become Robin Hood if the actions of what he did to become the legend are not as entertaining as the legend itself. This is the paradox when examining origin stories: if we enjoy the man (or woman) as we know and love today, shouldn't we care about what that man (or woman) did to become the character that we know and love? Particularly since the actions of this character in the past directly shape the actions that the character performs in the present day. It's really just one big crapshoot when it comes to this type of film making. I cared when it came to Christian Bale's portrayal of Batman, just as I cared when it came to Daniel Craig's portrayal of 007. I didn't care when it came to Russell Crowe's portrayal of Robin Hood. There's nothing new here. Nothing exciting. Robin Hood 2010 is a gritty, tough slog through the bullet points of Robin's time before becoming the legend. The real film for this story begins just as the credits end.     (C-)

Netflix Stream This, Bitch!

Pandorum

     Back in the year of 1997, when my mind was the tender sponge of any pubescent 13-year-old boy, blue dresses were getting stained with semen in the oval office, and scientists in Scotland were cloning sheep and naming them "Dolly", I watched a film that shaped my brain in relation to horror and sci-fi movies. That film was titled Event Horizon. Its plot dealt with an abandoned spacecraft that had--come to find out during the horrific scenes of the film--literally gone to Hell and back. It was and still is scary, tense and disgustingly violent. It was and still is the benchmark for which I interpret films that fall into this entertaining genre. Pandorum, which I saw in theaters late last summer, is a worthy successor in this niche of filmmaking. Although it's not a film that one would see due to it's originality, Pandorum is a melting pot of great aspects of movies such as the aforementioned Event Horizon, The Descent, and Aliens.
     Pandorum is a sickness, at least in the world in which this film takes place. The effects of it develop after long periods of hyper-sleep (which obviously all of the crew members just awoke from). The symptoms: paranoia, hallucinations and homicidal tendencies (sounds like some good weed if it wasn't for the paranoia). Two crew members awake from the deep sleep with no memory of who they are, what they are doing, and what the fate is of the 60,000 people on board of their spacecraft. What follows next is claustrophobia, fights with hellacious humanoid creatures, and the story of the ship slowly spinning into their grasp. Carrying most of the workload of finding out the tale of the ship through truth and lies is the actor Ben Foster, who is becoming one of my new favorites after witnessing his amazing diversity in the show Six Feet Under and the films 3:10 to Yuma and 30 Days of Night. Although I'm not sure how much I dig the ending, and although the general critical consensus for the film may be a bit off-putting for the general public, if you're a fan of sci-fi (and sci-fi horror in particular), then Pandorum is a scary, satisfying slope to navigate through from the comfort of your pitch-black living room.


30% on Rotten Tomatoes
    

The Stark Show: An Iron Man 2 Review

      I entered the theater to see the first Iron Man film with no expectations whatsoever; I was tired of the same old shit, particularly the putridly vomit-inducing 139 minutes that calls itself Spiderman 3. (The moment that you see Tobey Maguire becoming "emo" and dancing like a douche is the moment that your franchise just jumped the shark.) After watching Robert Downey Jr. play the part so perfectly and witnessing Jeff Bridges having fun with a villainous comic book character role, I was very pleasantly surprised. My thoughts echoed the same sentiments after watching Iron Man 2. Like the first film in many ways, the film succeeds on two levels: Firstly, Robert Downey Jr. is the embodiment of Tony Stark (more so than any other actor). His cockiness, humor and redemption shine through and echo a lot of the stories from his personal life over the past year.  Secondly, the film's villain(s) are played by very interesting, very great actors that portray badasses in new and exciting ways.
     Iron Man 2 really works when Robert Downey Jr. is portraying Tony Stark. It works significantly less when Tony Stark slips into his suit to become Iron Man. You would think that in a movie like this, the action set pieces involving Iron Man would be exciting and wonderful; however, Downey Jr. plays Tony Stark with such a pleasurable wink to the "Phoenix Metaphor" of his own life that his scenes without the suit play much better. Like Tony Stark, at one time in his life he loved alcohol with an insatiable thirst, he was addicted to banging hot ho's, and he loved being the center of attention. Unlike Tony Stark, he drank and drugged himself into a stupor and fell asleep in a neighbors bed, thinking it was his own. That fact has absolutely nothing to do with the Iron Man films, but it just goes to show how he is the fucking man. Anyway: Tony Stark is at the top of media attention and the world--just as Downey Jr. is riding high on the 133 Million Dollar opening weekend of Iron Man 2. (On a side note, that briefcase that turns into the Iron Man suit did induce a changing of my underwear.) 

     Mickey Rourke, with his wonderful turn in The Wrestler, is another "risen from the ashes" actor who was a perfect choice to play one of the two villains in Iron Man 2. We all know that the villain in a comic book film is nearly (if not more) as important as the hero. Rourke plays the bad guy with a gruff nonchalance and natural Russian accent that makes him a pleasure to watch. He has a penchant for birds and ruining Stark Industries. His first major scene with Tony Stark, the scene that has played out in the trailers involving his electric whips during an Indy Car race, is exciting even though the outcome is inevitable. He truly is a badass, and you just don't fuck with a badass's bird. Sam Rockwell's turn, on the other hand, is a villain with his rhetoric instead of his strength. He plays Justin Hammer, a man in direct competition of Tony Stark. He's like Tony only meaner and more insecure, a dangerous combination. 













    
     To give more away would rob the viewer of the pleasure of watching these actors play off of each other throughout the film. Numerous people are complaining that this film has too many characters, too many plot lines, and not enough romance. Not enough romance? Between who? Tony Stark and Pepper Potts (played by Gwyneth Paltrow)? If I see Gwyneth Paltrow in another film in 20 years that will be too soon.  She's mean enough to kick a pitbull off of a meat wagon.  Fuck her. ScarJo, as those who know her more personally call her (and by personally I mean masturbating to a grainy picture of her sideboob from Mr. Skin) would be the only female where more romance would make sense. Who doesn't want to look at her? Overall, the film is an entertaining summer blockbuster (not without its faults) that flies by quickly and doesn't overstay it's welcome in its 2 hour runtime. What more can we ask for from the tired comic book genre?     (B+)

Walt Throwing Pizza.

Kick-Ass: Earning Its Name Through Humor, Vulgarity and Violence

     Upon first hearing of Kick-Ass (probably) 6 months ago, I wasn't that keen on the premise: a high school nerd decides that he wants to become a superhero and ends up Peter Parkering his way into super stardom with the help of some other on-the-outskirts-of-society wannabe losers. Then I watched the Red Band Trailer and read that the makers were going for a balls-to-the-walls "Hard R" with copious amounts of profanity-laced throat slitting and knives to the testicles. As one can imagine, the film instantly traversed above most of the junk that comes out in wide release nowadays to become one of my most anticipated in 2010. After leaving the opening night showing this past Friday, I was not disappointed.
    Since the best parts of the film come from an 11 year-old's mouth and actions (already a statement that sounds scarily close to pedophilia), I'll refrain from using my typical orgasmic language as not to have my I.P Address flagged by Chris Hanson's crack team of investigators. Let's just say this: Hit-Girl's a girl spawned from the womb of Ellen Ripley's uterus, fertilized by a generous squirt of Tarantino's semen. I guess when your (in the fictionalized movie world of Kick-Ass) dad is a reinvigorated Nic Cage, it's easy to be cool and crazy with a ca-ca mouth.

  
  

     Speaking of Nicolas Cage, his character Big Daddy (not of Bioshock fame) is another good aspect of the film. From the moment we first see him shooting his bulletproof vest-wearing daughter in the chest to teach her what it feels like to get shot at point blank range, the audience realizes what a caring, loving father he is. Here's the deal with Big Daddy: he's out to get the major crime boss villain in the film, D'Amico. Why, you may ask? Well, Big Daddy was once a cop and D'Amico framed him and sent him to prison; while in prison, Daddy's wife died giving birth to their daughter, Mindy (eventually becoming the aforementioned Hit-Girl). When the Big D was released from jail, he taught his daughter how to kill the bad guys, presenting her with birthday gifts of butterfly knives instead of dolls or Miley Cyrus DVDs. Cage has rejuvenated his career as of late: between the 30 second scene of him slashing and dashing his way around the room murdering people in Kick-Ass to his bursts of uncontrollable hysterical laughter in Bad Lieutenant: Port of Call New Orleans, he's stealing scenes in every film he touches.
     Which brings us to one of the few small problems that Kick-Ass has: The side characters are more entertaining than the film's main star, Kick-Ass himself. If you were to shave off fifteen minutes of the film's runtime involving Kick-Ass doing tired and cliche acts (I'm talking to you, talk in mirror Taxi Driver style scene...), the film could reach an even higher level of greatness. Not that everything Kick-Ass does is stupid and boring; on the contrary, he does spank his meat to his English teacher's breasts and pretends he's gay to get close enough to a girl to rub lotion on her naked body. Everything's not lost, as Chris Martin would say.
     A significant portion of viewers and critics are trashing the film due to its graphic depiction of child violence in a Columbine Age. Clearly that's stupid, just like the parallel argument that video game violence causes children to act out in violent ways. It's a film based on a Comic Book. It's not real life, although most fanboys probably wish it was. Just buy a ticket, sit down and take the film for what it is: an entertaining story that breaks the mold and kicks the ass of almost all the comic book films before it, all while maintaining a carefree and risky nature that most filmmakers wouldn't dare try in an age where Tea Baggers roam the streets like brainless zombies and Sarah Palin gets a show on the Discovery Channel.     (A-)

Netflix Stream This, Bitch!

  Following

     Before Batman Begins and The Dark Knight, before Memento and Insomnia,  Brit Christopher Nolan directed this small little film about stalking and voyeurism on the streets of London. The film can be seen as a good precursor to Memento in the sense that it follows a non-linear story structure and has abnormal characters with interesting motivations. 
     To presumably find inspiration for a new novel, a young man begins following and studying certain people throughout the main roads and back allies of a dreary and dank London environment. At first, the man has a certain set of rules that he follows when following strangers to not get too obsessed or sucked into something dangerous. He immediately finds an interesting man in a suit and begins following him. However, things are not what they seem: the man in the suit confronts and introduces himself to the young man, letting the young man know that he is a serial burglar; he also wants to know if the young man wants to take the following a step further into people's homes and apartments. What "follows" is a story with a wonderful existentialist look at what the things people own really mean, along with blackmail, betrayal and murder. 
     Like all of Christopher Nolan's films, there is a never a dull moment. Everyone should see the early work of one of today's most talented and entertaining directors. It was written, directed, filmed and co-produced by him. One would think that a low budget black and white film shot on a 16mm camera on the streets of London with a minimal cast would be an easy job; however, that wasn't the case. Nolan referred to the shoot as "extreme" and it took nearly a year to finish...long for any movie. Part of why this is true deals with the complicated nature of the film. The scenes fit together like a tangled web of peeping tom visions and various back stabbing. Although it doesn't reach the brilliant greatness of Memento, the movie, like an entertaining jigsaw puzzle, is a great way to spend 70 minutes.


80% on Rotten Tomatoes.

Netflix Stream This, Bitch!

The King of Kong: A Fistful of Quarters

     I'm a sucker for documentaries like this. The King of Kong is a 2007 film (in the same niche as Spellbound and Word Wars) that follows one man, Steve Wiebe, as he tries to become the all time high scorer in the history of the arcade game Donkey Kong. Steve Wiebe's arch nemesis, Billy Mitchell, is still world-renowned in the year of the film for having the all time high score in both Donkey Kong and Centepede. The story is about their clash at the top of the Donkey Kong world rankings. 

     You couldn't think of a better, more dramatic story than this: In Iowa, a man named Walter Day founds an unheard of organization named Twin Galaxies, a group that keeps track of high scores of most United States-based arcade games. Billy Mitchell is like the Jesus of video games, with long dark hair and an attitude than can only be described as douchebaggery. He says in the film that his videogame accomplishments are his greatest in life (other than his family), and he is the founder of some local, successful homemade hot sauces (I couldn't make this shit up). Hundreds and hundred and hundreds of miles away in Washington State lives our underdog, the fore-mentioned Steve Wiebe. Recently laid off as a Boeing engineer, he spends all of his free time on a Donkey Kong machine that he bought for his garage, neglecting his other interests in life including his love of sports, music, and family. 

     To give away more would rob the viewer of many hilarious and cringe-inducing pleasures involving tainted and tampered-with Donkey Kong machines, private investigators, and friendships and families strained to extremely high and sad levels. Even if you have never played a video game in your life, it doesn't matter: the story can be used as a metaphor for anyone's passion about a hobby that contains a competitive edge. The King of Kong is as watchable as Donkey Kong is frustrating. 

97% on Rotten Tomatoes, 83 out of 100 on Metacritic. 

Top 20 Television Characters of the Past 10 Years

#1) Tony Soprano (Portrayed by James Gandolfini):

Makes sense that the best character on this list comes from the best television series ever, The Sopranos. If this pick came as a surprise to you, you're dumb. Tony Soprano is the only character to appear in every single episode of The Sopranos. Juggling all of the members of his crew, all of the enemies that pop up every season, and the wire tappers in the FBI, Tony Soprano has a tough life. It's no wonder that he suffers panic attacks every so often. Here's the difficulty with this final post on this list: if you've never seen The Sopranos, how do I convince you that he is the best character of the past 10 years (and probably ever)? 1] He curb stomps someones face. 2] He murders a former mobster turned rat in Waterville, Me. 3] He bangs strippers and Russian whores and one legged women, among many others. 4] He murders one of his best friends while having the shits from bad Indian food. 5] He shoots a certain someone in the face with a shotgun. These are just 5 instances out of 100s that I could mention, but it's not worth spoiling things for people who haven't seen this incredible series. You could write 20 page papers on how great his therapy sessions are with Dr. Jennifer Melfi (my PSN handle). You could write 50 page papers about the epicness of his arguments with his cunt wife Carmela. I'm on my 4th time through watching the entire series right now, and every time I click play I still become excited enough to have to change my underwear. Let's just say I've gone through a lot of pairs since Tony first graced the credits of The Sopranos, driving home into New Jersey, puffing on that huge cigar for the first time.

Top 20 Television Characters of the Past 10 Years

#2) Nate Fisher (Portrayed by Peter Krause):

Arguably the main character of the second greatest drama in the history of television, Six Feet Under, Nate Fisher is the oldest Fisher son who originally didn't want anything to do with Fisher and Son's Funeral Home, but eventually came around and realized how beneficial emotionally being a funeral director can be. Part of why Nate is such a great character is that he is living each moment like it could be his last, due to the fact that he has arteriovenous malformation (AVM), a potentially fatal brain condition that causes seizures and strokes. If any show and character can teach you valuable lessons about accepting death, it's this show and this character. Another reason why he is entertaining is his numerous relationships with women throughout the run of the series. He always thinks things though logically, and he also has some epic fights with his on again-off again slut girlfriend Brenda. To bring it back to my main point, though, this show is about Death. Dealing with it, accepting it, and realizing that no matter what path you take in life, we all end up in the same place: Heaven, if you accept Jesus as your savior. Just kidding: I mean we all end up six feet under ground (well, unless you get cremated. Or your body is dismembered or never found. Or you drown and sink to the murky depths. Or...).

Top 20 Television Characters of the Past 10 Years

#3) Walter White (Portrayed by Bryan Cranston):

Star of the best series on Television right now, Breaking Bad, Walter is a high school chemistry teacher who turns to cooking Meth when he gets diagnosed with terminal lung cancer (to provide money for his family when he dies). Safe to say, things don't go quite as planned. 2-time Emmy Award Winner Bryan Cranston is far from playing Malcolm's dad in this show: he kills, lies, and steals his way onto the radar of various drug dealers and DEA agents (including his Brother-in-law, played by the hilariously great Dean Norris). The show is unflinching and unforgiving, as is Cranston's performance as Walter. Breaking bad refers to Walter turning a 180 from honorable teacher, husband and father to hard-assed (literally and figuratively, as you can see from the picture above) Iron Chef of America's Meth. The show is ultimately about Walter and Jesse's moral choices: is making Meth to provide for your family any less "wrong" than making Meth under other circumstances? Even if it means people dying? Even if it means your family finding out? With Season 3 just beginning, I can't wait to see what Walter has in store for us viewers in the next few weeks. Above all, everyone has a little Walter in them; given the right opportunity, we all might break bad.

Top 20 Television Characters of the Past 10 Years

#4) Larry David (Portrayed by Larry David):

I'll be the first to admit that I enjoy Curb Your Enthusiasm more than Seinfeld. Although only winning once, the series has been nominated for dozens of awards, including 30 Emmys. Obviously, the series stars Larry David as a fictional version of Larry David (although I'm not so sure that the real life Larry David doesn't actually act pretty much the same [except a bit tamer]) getting into amazingly hilarious, neurotic, candid, awkward conversations and situations. Most of the show is improv--Larry just writes out the Plot and intersecting events. Each episode has an arc that ends with an incident (a sometimes predictable incident, although that doesn't make it any less funny) that pertains to an event that has happened earlier in the episode. There's really no point to talk about any specific episodes, only because there are over 30 or 40 that are so funny they make me giggle like a 10 year old school girl. Part of the reason of of why Larry is so funny is the interaction with the other characters, particularly Jeff, Susie, Cheryl, Richard Lewis and Marty Funkhouser. Whether Larry is listening to Porno Gil talk about sticking Tobasco Sauce up his ass to keep a boner, listening to Susie call him a sick fuck, or adopting a black family post-Katrina, his reactions are always priceless. Jeff Garlin recently said in an interview that Larry is working on Season 8, and I think that is prettttyyyyy pretttttyyyyy prettttty pretty good.

Top 20 Television Characters of the Past 10 Years

#5) Titus Pullo (Portrayed by Ray Stevenson):

Although Rome only lasted on HBO for two seasons, the first season in particular (and especially the character of Titus Pullo) left a great impression on me. This is how T.V. should fucking be. The basis for this character is the actual Roman soldier of the same name, although the similarities don't overlap very much. Pullo is one of the most badass characters to grace this list: if you want proof, then just watch the awe-inspiring gladiator scene near the end of Season 1 where Pullo proceeds to decapitate some douche with his own shield and then fend off some big, bad, motherfuckers. He is also cool because he says the word "Cunny" when giving sexual advise, for example: "When you couple with her, there's a spot just above her cunny, it's like a little button. Now...attend to that button, and she will open up...like a flower." Also: "That Gyppo Princess, now that's good cunny". See what I mean? He decapitates people, and says "Cunny" Wow. Rumor is that Rome is finally getting the attention it deserves and is being made into a feature film sometime in the near future. Let's all hope that Titus plays a main part, because HBO lost a lot of its orgasmic nature when it cancelled Rome (although the mojo will be back when A Game of Thrones premieres in Spring 2011), and it will be wonderful to see Pullo back on our television screens once again. My cunny's getting wet just thinking about it.

Top 20 Television Characters of the Past 10 Years

#6) Eric Cartman (Voiced by Trey Parker):

Not only the best character on South Park, but also one of the most recognizable characters in all of television, Cartman is the son of a Hermaphroditic mother/father (as in his mom has both sexual organs and fucked herself to become pregnant). One of the most iconic animated characters of all time, Cartman is obviously foul-mouthed and says the most (awesome) politically incorrect things at all the most sensitive moments ever since the first South Park episode, "Cartman Gets An Anal Probe". Matt Stone and Trey Parker, the creators of South Park, actually named Cartman after a real friend that they had in high school, Matt Karpman, and he is also inspired by Archie Bunker. When speaking about the greatness of Cartman, it's impossible not to mention one of the most amazing half hours in all of television history, "Scott Tenorman Must Die" (Season 5, Episode 4): in this episode, Cartman brags to all of his friends that he has reached puberty, when if fact he just has bought pubes from a local 9th grader named Scott Tenorman. Feeling cheated out of $16.12, Cartman hatches a plan to get back at Scott Tenorman involving the band Radiohead, "Cancer...of the ass," and chili with bits and pieces of Scott's family inside. The episode is actually loosely based on Shakespeare's Titus Andronicus, which involves a character tricking the mother of his daughter's rapists to eat her own two sons. I recently watched this episode and still came 12 times in 30 minutes, years after it was released. Screw you guys, I'm going home.