A VIRTUE-ous Prequel To SEVEN???

Greetings and salutations to you all. Today's lead off story is an odd one that may well be proven false in the near future... That said, it's interesting and I thought it worth my time and yours (Especially yours! HA!). I'm sure 99% of you have seen the creepy 1995 classic Seven. Well, you may be seeing more of it one day...

What am I talking about? Well, as I was perusing my assorted info sites today looking for interesting tidbits to blow out of proportion, I ran into an odd article over at the popular horror/splatter film site bloodydisgusting.com (Here's the story link: http://http://www.bloody-disgusting.com/news/7543.)

Apparently a treatment is circulating around Hollywood for a project called Virtue that is actually a prequel to Seven. The article states that the treatment is currently being shopped around to writers to fully script. From there it will be offered to directors. The film is being set up as its own entity (Hence the vague title) and will only expose itself as a prequel near the film's closing.

Immediately after reading the article I thought it was a false rumor. However, the sheer amount of press this info has gotten from reputable websites is leading me to believe there may be a kernel of truth here... So what do I think about this Virtue project?

Well, I really enjoyed Seven. It was my favorite of the serial killer films (Yep, even over Silence Of The Lambs! Sacrilege!). I thought David Fincher's direction was brilliant and the pairing of Brad Pitt and Morgan Freeman was genius. On top of that, Kevin Spacey was so memorably disturbed and intense that his performance is still ingrained in my memory. His John Doe (pictured) took the already great film to a whole other level. It's unfortunate he didn't get an Oscar nomination out of it... Plus, the film's ending was so uncompromising and clever that it became a deserved pop-culture reference. We never quite looked at Gwyneth Paltrow the same way again... It was the perfect closing and it defined the thriller as a masterpiece of the genre.

Now, those are pretty big shoes for Virtue to fill. Now, I like that they've set it up to act as an isolated film that would only reveal itself in the ending (Though, you can bet the studio would blatantly market the film as being the next Seven film, which would make it an easy sell. Never underestimate Hollywood's greed trumping artistry, kids.). Hopefully this would mean that it wouldn't feature Morgan Freeman's earlier cases or something. Freeman exhausted his philosophical-cop-hunting-serial-killer shtick in the post-Seven Alex Cross films Kiss The Girls and Along Came A Spider (Both of which were lame wannabes). It's likely, however, that it would feature Spacey's character in his earlier stages. If this is the case, I'm not sure it's that good of an idea. The brilliance of the character was that there was no back-story to him, nothing to base our opinions on. He was a cipher who was more terrifying due to his anonymity.

I'm also extremely leery of Virtue due to the fact that it will likely be made without any of the creative forces behind Seven. Andrew Kevin Walker's script for Seven was so ingenious that it seems unlikely another screen-writer could match it's Rubik's cube structure. The other key component in the film's success was director David Fincher (pictured). Fincher, after Seven, has gone on to create the brilliant Fight Club, the wonderfully suspenseful Panic Room, and the eagerly anticipated Zodiac (Also about serial killings, albeit non-fictional ones). I have grave doubts that an artist of his magnitude would be particularly interested in re-visiting his past success. Without Fincher's unique visual style and storytelling approach my concern is that Virtue would play out more as a lesser copycat than a worthy follow-up.

But then, that hasn't stopped Hollywood in the past, now has it? Basic Instinct 2 anyone? Son Of The Mask? Like I said, never underestimate Hollywood's love of easy money.

I'll keep watch over this story and let you know if it comes to fruition. In the meantime, go rent Seven if you haven't seen it. Caution though, it's not for the squeamish (My mom still shudders at the mere mention of it!).
___________________________________________________________________
I've got a quick update on Spider-Man 3 that's really groovy! Evil Dead god Bruce Campbell's cameo in the upcoming Sam Raimi production has been announced. As we all know, Campbell showed up in Spidey 1 as the ring announcer at the wrestling match, and provided comedy relief as the "snooty usher" in Spider-Man 2 (For anyone who's not familiar with Mr. Campbell, go rent Army Of Darkness. It'll redefine everything you thought you knew!). Well, get ready for Campbell to play one of Spidey's greatest (and goofiest) nemeses in the summer 2007 blockbuster!

The fan community has long rallied for Campbell to play Spidey's special-effects master antagonist Mysterio. Well, Raimi and the producers listened to their inane rantings and have given them their wish. Sort of. In a scene in the film Peter Parker and Mary Jane Watson will wander onto the set of a Spider-Man movie being filmed. Director Raimi and producer Avi Arad will play themselves and Campbell will play Quentin Beck (Mysterio's alter ego), the special effects guy.

This way seem like nothing news to most of you, but to us Campbell fans this is spectacular news. If you don't believe there are Bruce Campbell fans, do a Google search, or better yet, go to www.brucecampbell.com, where you can get better acquainted with the man, the myth, the legend!__________________________________________________________________
Just a quick note that it seems my earlier writing of the Halo film getting into production soon has proven false. The plug has been pulled due to lack of financing, an over-blown budget, and an unproven director who has never made a feature film. Looks like producer Peter Jackson isn't infallible... So, sorry Gabe, no great video-game films in the near future... Though, there is that Street Fighter sequel....

H'okay folks, that's all! Hope you enjoyed what you read! Keep it real!

HALLOWEEN To Be Resurrected By A Zombie???

Okay, well, today's post isn't exactly "breaking" news... Rather it's pretty darn old. I'm really only doing it to appease those of you who feel that there should be a Halloween theme today. Well, here ya go!!! I hope you all choke on it! No, wait! Come back! I'm just kidding! Actually, it's a cool story that I'm actually looking forward to! What is it? Well, how many of you saw Halloween: Resurrection....?

I'm guessing a decent amount of you. You all know how bad it was! How ungodly a creation, spat out from the bowels of the darkest region of schlock cinema! A public defiling of a beloved horror icon! A quick pay-cheque for Jamie Lee Curtis! An acting showcase for Bustah Rhymes...

You could say I didn't think it was great. BUT, as was announced a while back, Halloween ain't dead (God knows they tried to kill it...)! Nope, next October will bring us a revamped, re-imagined version of the Halloween mythos, directed by none other than Rob Zombie, creator of the brilliantly off-kilter Devil's Rejects!

Now, there is reason for concern of course. Horror prequels are almost always bad. The public hasn't exactly taken to the streets singing the praises of Texas Chainsaw Massacre: The Beginning. There's also some dread about the impending Friday the 13th and rumored Nightmare on Elm Street prequels. I don't particularly await those last two with open arms... But, I believe strongly in the abilities of Rob Zombie.

Now, most who know me know that Zombie's '98 album Hellbilly Deluxe was responsible for introducing me to heavy metal (You don't want to know what I was listening to prior to that...), so I've always felt a certain respect for anything Zombie produces. That said, I thought his House Of 1000 Corpses was pretty lousy. It was a hokey rip-off of the Texas Chainsaw Massacre school of horror, that was really only notable for its bizarre atmosphere and killer performance by Sid Haig as Captain Spaulding. The Devil's Rejects, however, was nothing short of genius! It was quirky, disgusting, and unforgettable. It was everything it should have been and so very much more. It established Zombie's distinctive voice and gave me confidence about his future as a filmmaker.

So, when it was announced Zombie was gonna re-interpret Halloween, I was giddy. I've watched all 8 previous Halloween films and seen the highs (Personally, I'm partial to 1,2 & 4), and the grim lows (What the hell was going on in part 3???). Michael Myers is my favorite of the serial slashers and I think it's time people were properly reminded why he's such a classic figure in terror. Plus, it should be known that the original Halloween (Go rent it!) is severed head and shoulders above the rest of those that followed (Nightmare, Friday, etc.). So, if this one's half as good as that one, it'll still be better than pretty much every horror movie of the last 10 years or so (With a few exceptions, of course.)

Now, the film is scheduled to start shooting in January, with no confirmed cast at this point (Though Zombie said he could see Jeff Bridges or Ben Kinsley as Dr. Loomis, Myer's adversary). Apparently Zombie is going to focus on the reason Michael Myers donned that William Shatner mask in the first place. There will be a deeper study on his childhood with greater detail given to Myer's psychology. Basically, he ain't just gonna give us a lunatic with a knife chasing a scantily clad teenie-bopper for 90 mins. He's going to give us a real horror film with fully drawn characters.

Zombie has stated that the mask will remain unchanged (We don't need a Jason X-style upgrade, thank you very much!), so there won't be any radical alterations done to Myer's image. Hopefully he chooses to keep the same music as well, as John Carpenter's 1978 Halloween score is the best of the horror film themes. Zombie's recent use of that theme as his opening music on his band's summer tour has put that concern to rest for me.

So, you can assume that next Halloween, I'll be waiting in line for tickets to this one over the just-announced Saw IV. I'm sorry, Jigsaw's cool and all, but, to paraphrase the old saying, he doesn't hold a butcher knife to Michael Myers!
___________________________________________________________________
Moving on, I read an interesting article on www.cinescape.com today. Seems Variety is reporting that a deal has been reached that will result in a new Street Fighter film(!). Since the 1994 film was such a massive success (LOL), they've decided to go for round 2. This film will apparently focus away from Van Damme's Guile character ("Now, who wants to go home... and who wants to go with me?") and instead follow Chun Li (Played my Ming Na in the original).

I don't really know what to say about this one... The first is sort of a cheese-classic for me (My friend Tony often laughingly recalls the "stealth" boats from the climactic boat chase), so I'm not sure there's much point in this film. There's a reason no one remembers Plan 10 From Outer Space! You can only fly so close to the sun so many times before your wings melt off... I wonder if Chun Li will be a reporter again, with her wacky news crew featuring a sumo wrestler and a heavyweight boxer...

Either way, curiosity may lead me back to the theatre again. They better give my man Blanka his due though! He got screwed in the last one. Oh, and they better bring some Van Damme-age to the project! And fingers crossed for more stealth boats!


Okay, that's all from my end today! I'll be back later with more inane ramblings.

Oh, and if you're looking for a good Halloween rental here's some recommendations: the aforementioned '78 Halloween, the original Dawn Of The Dead or Night Of The Living Dead, Evil Dead 2, The Exorcist, Psycho (Don't think for a second I'm referring to the 1998 remake) or Poltergeist... Stay away from that I Know What You Did Last Summer/When A Stranger Calls/The Grudge/House Of Wax crap! And don't rent my Halloween 2000 choice: Ghost Town. It'll just put you to sleep...

Happy Trick or Treating!

Are We To Expect A SUPER Summer 2009???

'Ola! Well, looks like my Friday new release format has crashed after one consecutive week. Don't blame it on me! Blame it on a lackluster group of film debuts. Babel? Interesting, but not sold. Catch A Fire? Za? Saw III? What can I really say other than I thought the 2nd one was a disappointment and I have little anticipation for this one... Oh, and that it wasn't even screened for critics (Never a good sign...). So, I'm choosing to spend my time writing about something else... Something... SUPER!!!

Okay, before I plunge into the brightly colored abyss, let me make a few things clear. I loved Superman Returns! Not liked, LOVED! I thought it was a brilliant reinterpretation of the character and a great way to re-vamp the franchise. I also think director Bryan Singer is a genius! This guy made the X-Men franchise what it was (Before Brett Ratner lowered the bar a bit with X-Men: The Last Stand) and I think he's been unfairly criticized for Superman's darker tone.

Now, I'm sure you're wondering what the hell I'm talking about! Believe me, that is not an uncommon thought. My Iron Man entries draw the same sort of reaction. Or so I'm told. Anyways, it was announced today throughout the web (Though my main source was Ain't It Cool News: http://www.aintitcool.com/node/30528) that Superman Returns (Henceforth referred to as SR) has finally crossed the $200 million mark. Now, this is pretty blah news to base an essay on, so it gets better! That box-office accomplishment was the necessary incentive for Warner Bros. to green light a sequel. So, Bryan Singer has signed to return, bringing with him Brandon Routh (Superman), Kate Bosworth (Lois Lane), and the whole supporting cast. Now this is exciting news! The budget is a bit smaller ($140-$175 mill) to accommodate SR's gross (SR's budget? $204-$208 mill! Yowza!), but that's still more than enough to make another spectacular movie!

There were a lot of complaints that SR was too solemn (Depressing, even!), and not "FUN" enough (Wasn't that X-Men 3's problem? Too much action, not enough drama? Make up your minds, people!). Singer has responded to these comments, promising that he's gonna go all "Wrath Of Khan" on this one! What does that mean? Ummm... Ricardo Montalban bearing his chest a lot, and caterpillars crawling in people's ears? No, apparently he means action-packed and exciting. He's promised a new cosmic villain (Rumors are swirling around that it's Brainiac [pictured]) in an attempt to get some new blood after many felt Lex Luthor wore out his welcome in SR. Personally, I loved Kevin Spacey as Lex and hope he comes back, even if it's in a role like Magneto in X2 - working with Superman to overcome a greater evil.

I'll give Singer one piece of advice though (Like I'm in the position to!), and that is to knock some sense in Kate Bosworth (Left)! Her Lois Lane just doesn't work. She's not peppy, quirky or interesting. Look back at the original Superman: The Movie and Superman 2. Margot Kidder was no beauty queen, but she had such great comic timing and an eccentric approach to the character that we could see why Clark/Supes would fall for her. She was spunky & adorable, as well as a goofy best friend. Bosworth, on the other hand, is mopey and bland. She'd be overlooked in a Staples department store. Bosworth should be forced to spend a month shadowing Kidder (Even if it means living in the bushes in stranger's yards, as Kidder did in her mid 90's breakdown... Hmmm... That's really mean of me! I still love ya Margot!), and get this character fixed. She's the only thing holding the series back.

I hope Singer (Right) keeps the darker edge though. I liked his positioning of Superman as a Christ-figure. It was interesting and made the character seem more real in this day and age. I loved the first two Chris Reeves Superman's, but they wouldn't work very well today. The 2nd two Reeves films wouldn't work either, but then they didn't work back then... God, Nuclear Man *shudders*). I like where Singer has taken it and I hope he doesn't wuss out due to a few vocal complaints from fanboys. We've seen the original films/Lois & Clark/Smallville takes, let's see where Singer can take this! Nobody's complaining about the differences between Burton's Batman films and Chris Nolan's new Bat-films (Though, they did complain about Schumacher's Batman flicks, and I joined in their fury and still remain bitter!). Let the man tell his story and if you don't like it, wait for the next storyteller to give his interpretation!

...But then I loved Superman Returns, so I'm biased! Ha! By the way, if you haven't seen Superman Returns yet, make sure to rent it when it comes out on Nov. 28th. Oh, and if you know Kate Bosworth tell her to rent Superman 1 or 2!
___________________________________________________________________________________
As always (or se it seems), the B story of the day is here to draw your attention to a trailer to a neat little movie that shows real promise. I don't know how many of you recall the gritty 2002 cop thriller Narc... It was the one with Ray Liotta as a really dirty cop and Jason Patric as his morally upright partner. It was faaaaaaaaaaaaaaar better than the similar Training Day (Although Liotta didn't get to yell "King Kong Ain't Got Sh*t On Me!"... That probably woulda gotten him an Oscar like Denzel...).

Either way, Narc director Joe Carnahan has finally put together his follow-up film (after leaving Mission: Impossible III during stalled development) and it's called Smokin' Aces! It's a frenetic, cool looking crime thriller starring a really great assortment of quirky actors. It stars Ben Affleck (Daredevil, Chasing Amy), Jason Bateman (Arrested Development - The Greatest Show Of All Time!!!), Alicia Keys, Andy Garcia (Ocean's Eleven, Untouchables), Jeremy Piven (TV's Entourage, Very Bad Things), rapper Common, Ray Liotta (Narc, Goodfellas) and Ryan Reynolds (Blade: Trinity, Waiting...). So, yeah, an eclectic cast, in what very may well be one of the sleeper hits of the spring. Do yourself a favor and check out the Smokin' Aces trailer: http://movies.yahoo.com/feature/smokinacesqt1.html.

Because, let's face it: The world hasn't been the same without Affleck in the limelight! Remember: He's ain't Benny From Tha Block no mo'! Let's welcome him back with open arms.

Okay, that's my bit for tonight. I wasn't even going to do one, but daylight savings got me that extra hour of writing time!

Hope you all are having a great weekend! I'll post again on Monday!

*EDIT*: This post was supposed to be up Saturday night but blogger.com was all sketchy. I know many of you wept, possibly finding solace in the good book... Hopefully this doesn't become a regular occurence (The Blogger.com malfunctioning, not the finding solace in the good book...).

SPIDER-MAN 3: An Eye-full Of Venom!

Okay, people! Today's entry is a really polarizing one. This is a serious "I don't give a crap!"/"This is the most exciting news of the week!" type-thing. I actually wasn't going to give it mention but a friend convinced me that this was worth devoting attention to (So blame him if this stuff bores you!). Either way, it surrounds a movie that I imagine 98% of the population of North America will end of seeing anyways. So, let's get to the point of today!

Spider-Man 3 has been surrounded by a tornado of gossip, hearsay and misdirection since its early inception. The media has reported false rumor after false rumor. We were told that co-star Topher Grace would be playing Electro, that Grace and Thomas Haden Church would be playing the same character: the shape-shifting villain Chameleon, they even reported that the movie would follow the storyline of the universally hated Clone Saga storyline (A storyline so awful that Marvel's Spider-Man sales plummeted and they ended up rewriting everything so that it didn't really happen), with Grace as Tobey Maguire's clone, Ben Reilly (aka The Scarlet Spider!).

All these news leaks were nonsense (And brilliantly leaked by Sony, and prank-loving Spider-Man director, Sam Raimi), however one leak proved true. Bewildered co-star Kirsten Dunst accidentally let it slip that Topher Grace would be playing fan-favorite villain Eddie Brock, better known as Venom.

Now, for those who don't know a Venom from a Toxin (*snort* snort*), here's his rough history. In the 80's there was this really cheesy event called Secret Wars, in which superheroes had to travel to another galaxy to battle an intergalactic being called the Beyonder. While over there Spider-Man found an alien symbiote that he could wear as a living suit. The suit could take any form and could shoot webs and the whole nine yards. All was dandy, till the suit tried to take over Spidey's body, hence casuing to his discard it. The suit then found a willing host in Eddie Brock, a disgraced photographer with a serious grudge against Spider-Man alter ego Peter Parker (for exposing his news story as false). Brock merged with the symbiote and became Venom, a villain who not only despised Spider-Man, but also Peter Parker. Whew...

Now, the sheer ridiculousness of the early parts of Venom's origin will no doubt be rewritten so the film will better suit the more realistic tone set by the first two pictures. Eddie Brock has been downsized from a massive weight-lifter type dude to, well, that skinny kid from That 70's Show (That's him in that photo at the top of this entry). They will, also, I imagine attempt to make him a more sympathetic character, like Raimi did with Dr. Octopus in Spider-Man 2.

Now, since the knowledge of Venom's participation became public, fan fervor has been uproarious, eagerly awaiting a glimpse of how the character will translate to the screen. All the excitement over Venom has almost completely over-shadowed any interest in Haden Church's Sandman character. However, Sony, in a brilliant effort at building anticipation, have kept the venomous one tightly under wraps (even excluding him from the film's first trailer), with not a single image of the character leaking into the public eye... Until now!

Now, before I get to the actual pics, I'll warn you that they are far from A-quality photos. In fact, they aren't even shots from the film (Or even of Topher Grace). Rather, they are in the form of a leaked character sketch and the prototype for a sculpture that will be sold in connection with the film. So, I'll dispense with the excitement-building and show them to ya!

Now, I'll be the first to admit, the production sketch is pretty vague. It is apparently authentic, but it's impossible to know how far into the development process this picture dates. Anyone that has seen production sketches knows that they typically evolve from one thing into something completely different over the course of development. Heck, C-3P0 started out in a feminine form similar in concept to Fritz Lang's Metropolis and Han Solo looked like a light-saber wielding Bee Gee's member. So, there's really no saying if this sketch is anything like what will show up on screen.

The sculpt, however, is undoubtedly very much what we will be seeing on screen. They are obviously toning down the monstrous Venom image of the comics to better act as the dark mirror image of the movie Spider-Man. Unfortunately we don't get a glimpse at the mouth, as that's obviously Brock's mouth being revealed by the suit. I'm curious whether the filmmakers will go with the gaping-jawed, slobbery look of the production sketch, or the slightly subtler toothy grin of the image above-right. Either way, I like the direction they're going in.

So there you have it. This is nitpicky movie-geek stuff to be sure, but it's also cool to see that a beloved character is looking to be well-translated. It's shaping up that Venom will more likely fall into the Dr. Octopus category of excellence, and not into the Power Ranger-tastic group that Green Goblin fell in. Either way, I'll be in the theatre next May no matter what, and the majority of you likely all will too.

And just to show some love Thomas Haden Church's way, here's a cool Sandman pic. Don't worry Tommy, we still think you're cool... And you were really good in Sideways! Anyways... moving on... ____________________________________________________________________________________

Now to talk about a movie I really don't care about! I don't know how many of you recall the mediocre 2004 remake of Dawn Of The Dead (If you haven't seen it, go rent the 1978 George Romero classic instead!), but it was successful enough to warrant a follow-up. So, now we're getting a remake to the 1985 Romero film, Day Of The Dead. The trailer has just been released and you can check it below:

http://www.movieweb.com/news/12/15312.php

Now that you've wasted 2 minutes of your life watching it, I'll comment on it! What the hell is that? First off, this isn't a remake! The original took place in an underground bunker, where an army platoon found solace after zombies had overrun the world above... This looks like a Resident Evil rip-off! And come on, I do not buy Mena Suvari as an army ranger! If you're gonna throw an American Pie alum into a bad horror movie, get Chris Klein. He can actually pull off a soldier role (As witnessed in the infinitely better We Were Soldiers). This whole project has straight-to-video written all over it. Why can't Ving Rhames get better work? This man is one of the most intense actors out there! Wasn't it enough he had to be in Dawn Of The Dead? Call up Tarantino and get a Marcellus Wallace film going or something. Geez... Oh, and if you want to see a decent remake of Day Of The Dead (Which itself was no prize!), rent 28 Days Later. It's too similar to be mere coincidence. Better yet, go rent the original Night Of The Living Dead! It's far scarier than this crap-fest will be.

Yuck, I am growing very tired of bad zombie movies. To think we also have Resident Evil: Extinction on the horizon too... I'm going to go cry into a pillow...

At any rate, this entry is done! You had geeky excitement followed by whiny bitterness. Let's hope the next post isn't such as emotional roller-coaster.

I'm going to go watch Survivor: Cook Islands. It always cheers me up. Jeff Probst, the tribe has spoken, and you sir are the new king of cool!

Later y'all!

*EDIT*: Bah, stupid Survivor recap episodes! Now, I'm really angry! Damn you Probst, Damn YOU!!!!!!!!

Jump-starting Geriatrics! ...And Other ROCKY Developments!

Hiya folks! Happy Monday-Monday Day! I was reading a bit piece on rotten
tomatoes.com today regarding Indiana Jones IV and Harrison Ford's eagerness to reprise the role. It's basically a fluff-piece of nothing concrete (Hence the lack of a link), but it got me thinking. What is it of late that has inspired this trend of dusting off long-dead franchises?

Now, to be fair, Indiana Jones IV has been "in development" since 1994 or so. It ain't a recent development. I have my doubts, however, about it coming together in the next little while, judging from George Lucas's non-committal attitude. I think the time has come to either make the damn thing or shut up already!

Is there really a high demand for another film in this series? The last chapter, Indiana Jones & The Last Crusade ended on such a poetic note, with the characters riding off into the sunset. Also, it was called THE LAST CRUSADE! On top of all that, those films were released over a relatively short period of time ranging from 1981-1989, a perfect period of time to keep the tone of the films consistent. To me, it's time to call it a day. The book has been closed for 17+ years, for the love of Mola Ram!

The Indiana Jones films, for me, are very much films of their time. They embraced a more old-fashioned attitude towards action and adventure, an attitude long annihilated by filmmakers like Michael Bay. There was a sort of playfulness and panache to the violence, that may seem sort of odd to today's audiences. It's not easy to go back to that style either: Look at the Star Wars prequels and compare them to the original films. There is a definite modern sensibility of upping-the-ante of the violence in the newer films; more decapitations, impalings, etc. I find it unlikely they wouldn't try something similar with the Jones series (Heck, George Lucas is producing!).

Most importantly, I have a certain image of the character of Indiana Jones. Seeing 64-year old Harrison Ford cracking the whip wouldn't quite fit that. Yeah, I have faith that Spielberg can deliver a good movie, but is this film really necessary? Why not create something new that could feature Ford as a new character, more fitting of his current place in life.

Speaking of 60+ year old actors returning to classic roles, this Christmas will mark the return of Rocky Balboa in the film of the same name (I guess they figured Rocky VI sounded too redundant...). Now, this one makes a little more sense to me. Anyone who saw Rocky V felt a bit of a sense of disappointment of how the series supposedly ended. Watching Rocky beat up Tommy Gunn on a dirty Philadelphia street was kind of pathetic. After the glitz and decadence of Rocky IV, it didn't quite fit. It was an odd, sad little film that didn't do the character justice. I'm hoping that Rocky Balboa can correct this, it's just unfortunate they couldn't have wrapped it up sooner, preferably with a better fifth instalment. Seeing 60 year old Sylvester Stallone bobbing and weaving around the ring is stretching it a tad (Despite the fact the man doesn't appear to have aged past 40.).

While I'm casually optimistic and accepting towards the return of Rocky Balboa, I'm less excited about seeing the return of John Rambo in Rambo IV: In The Serpent's Eye. First off, who thought of that title? It sounds like a bad direct-to-video cheese-fest starring Jan Michael Vincent or Michael Dudikoff! Bah!

Now, I should confess, I love the Rambo series! Rambo: First Blood Part 2 is one of the best action films to come out of the 80's! I even enjoyed the much maligned Rambo 3! That said, like the Indiana Jones series, this is a character whose time has come and gone. I can't see audiences rushing out to see Stallone wearing a headband and blasting away at attack choppers with an oversized machine gun in Burma. Do kids even know who Rambo is anymore? He was a very much a product of his time (And come on, it won't be the same without the mullet!) and it doesn't seem quite right to place him in a current context. Since 9/11 and the Iraq War fallout, the idea of the All-American Soldier doesn't have the same unquestionable appeal (This also applies to the Captain America film currently in development). I also don't like the idea of having Rambo leading a team of younger commandoes (as he does in the rumored storyline on imdb.com). Rambo is a loner, not Lee Marvin in The Dirty Dozen. Plus, not having Colonel Trautman (Richard Crenna, deceased as of 2003) in it is just plain wrong. I'm all for a Stallone-revival! I've always had a soft spot for the mumbling lug, but I'm not sure resurrecting Rambo is the way to go about it. Now Cobra on the other hand...

Yes, folks, the 80's is coming back in a big way. On top of the above, we have the often mentioned (By me!) Live Free Or Die Hard & Terminator 4 to look forward to in the near future. There's even been rumblings of a fifth(!) Lethal Weapon film. I'm just curious as to when RoboCop is going to get rebooted. God knows, they made him fly in RoboCop 3, and the mind marvels at where they can take him next! So, I'll see you at the theatres in 2009 when RoboCop 4: Mechanized Mars Attack Avenger hits theatres. ____________________________________________________________________ Okay, now to talk about something I know little about! ...And that would be the video-game based property Halo. Now, I'm not a video game enthusiast, or "gamer" as they prefer to be called (According to my friend Gabe), but I have a small morsel of interest in the upcoming Peter Jackson produced film adaptation. Seems, the mighty franchise has hit a snag over financing!

According to a story at Rotten Tomatoes
(HERE: http://www.rottentomatoes.com/news/comments/?entryid=374299), it seems Universal and Fox have dropped out of the project, seeing the hugely expensive venture as being a little too risky. Can't say I blame them. The typical video-game movie doesn't make much, with the highest grosser, 1995's Mortal Kombat, doing 90 mill or so. Halo, from the looks of it is going to cost well into the 100 million bracket, more than double what recent video game films such as Silent Hill, Doom, and the Resident Evil franchise have pulled in. I have no doubt Halo will go into production in the near future (Peter Jackson being attached helps significantly), and I for one hope that it's good. Why? Well because I've had all I can take of awful video-game adaptations! Doom and Resident Evil: Apocalypse weren't simply bad, they were boring, embarrassing, pathetic efforts with not a single ounce of cleverness or originality. Because of them, I haven't been able to bring myself to rent Silent Hill. So, here's hoping Halo breaks the cycle, because I'd like to see the stigma of the "video-game based" film disappear.

Well, that's all folks. I better get back to the script I'm writing. You want a picture that has it all? Drama? Suspense? Hilarity? Well this is it! It's a faithful adaptation of the classic NES game Duck Hunt, and it's gonna be BIG!!!

Till next time!

Friday Wrap-up: A PRESTIGE-ous Release And A Previous Rumor DIES HARD!

Well true-believers, it's kind of a hodge-podge entry today. I'm not doing one of my patented exhaustive essays (*A sigh of relief emanates from the peanut gallery*). No, rather I'm holding true to my promise last Friday of covering the new releases. I'll do that and then throw in a little bit of info about that troubling Live Free And Die Hard project. Seems, my earlier optimism over Jeffrey Wright is short-lived. I'll get to that in a bit, but first let's get to the new releases!!!

Now, the most exciting release this week (In my humble opinion) is Christopher Nolan's The Prestige. Nolan is a director I can trust. A real mensch as they say. This is a guy who knocked one out of the park on his first try and considered that a warm-up! Now, enough gushing like a school-girl, I'll stop spouting inane analogies and tell you why this guy deserves the benefit of the doubt about where your $8.50 belongs this weekend.

Let's hop in a time-machine and take a little trip back to 2000. A great year, it twas! A year in which X-Men re-energized the long dormant comic-book movie! A year in which Cameron Crowe stole our hearts and made us reach for the Kleenex with Almost Famous! It was also the year that gave us Dude, Where's Me Car?, a film that still inspires homicidal anger within me... It was also the year that young Mr. Nolan gave us the indie-masterpiece Memento. Now... If you haven't seen Memento stop reading this and run down to your local video store and rent it. It'll blow yer socks off! Okay... I SAID GO! Anyways, Nolan showed in his first film that this was a guy who was gonna be big! And he was... later! First, he put out Insomnia, with Al Pacino, Robin Williams and Hilary Swank. It was a medium-sized hit, and a good movie, however it's sort of vanished into time. Nolan was back in 2005, though, silencing all doubts that there could be a Batman movie as good as Tim Burton's '89 film (Though, c'mon, will anyone EVER top the '66 Adam West one? I seriously doubt it. "Salt and corrosion! The two oldest enemies of the crime-fighter!" *Chuckles to self*). Yep, Batman Begins proved Nolan was here to stay! Now, he gives us The Prestige!

I can't tell you much about it, other than that it's about dueling magicians. That's really all I can get from the ads, which is great! I'm so tired of trailers giving everything away. They completely ruined the subtle element of surprise Scary Movie 3 was going for! Anyhoo, all the ladies will love this one! Hugh Jackman! Christian Bale! Michael Caine! David Bowie ("ZIGGY!")! All in period costume! The guys will have to settle for Scarlett Johansson (I know, I know, it's rough...). Plus, Nolan's promising tricks, turns and twists and the whole nine-yards! It looks great, sounds cool, and it'll be next ticket purchase.

Now, moving on to the next release, we have Flags Of Our Fathers, the story behind the Iwo Jima flag-raising. I think this one'll be damn nifty! First off, Clint Eastwood is on a real hot streak following Mystic River and Million Dollar Baby. Second, it's written my Paul Haggis, writer of Million Dollar Baby, and writer/director of last years Best Picture winner Crash. Now, that's a dynamic duo! Early word of mouth has been strong, if a little underwhelming. Unfortunately, ol' Spielberg had to make Saving Private Ryan in '98 and every war movie since has had to compete with it. I hear it's well acted (Apparently Ryan Phillippe and Adam Beach give career-best performances), and the war scenes are incredible. Guaranteed to be a very good movie, though a great one? You'll have to see for yourself. I definitely will be checking it out. The cool part is that if this one rocks, we get the companion film Letters From Iwo Jima (It tells the Japanese side of the story) in February.

By the way, sorry about the crappy pixilation on the poster for Flags. I couldn't find a half-decent usable one in all of cyberspace! Damn you Clint! Probably laughin' it up with that wacky orangutan of yours! Any Which Way You Can indeed...

Now... Where was I... Oh, right! New releases! Okay, this brings us to the final exciting release of the week. That's right folks; I'm talking about Marie Antoinette. You may have heard about it earlier in the year when it was booed at the Cannes film festival. I have a feeling that had more with the French's feelings about a revisionist portrait of their beloved monarch than over the quality of the film. Drector Sophia Coppola has a 50/50 score with me thus far. I really enjoyed Lost In Translation, but found The Virgin Suicides to be pretentious and dull. So, I'm eager to see where this one lands. I'm also interested in seeing how the two main leads handle themselves. Kirsten Dunst, when she's on top of her game, is among the best young actresses out there. The bigger curiosity, though, is Jason Schwartzman. Schwartzman excels in playing loopy characters (Watch Rushmore or I Heart Huckabees to see what I mean!). This all makes Antoinette more interesting to me than I would have initially guessed. So, for all of you complaining about a lack of variety in movies nowadays, it's undoubtedly different from anything else currently playing...

Okay, there's your releases. I've made my calls; the rest is up to you to figure out how your hard-earned cash is spent! Just promise to rent Memento if you haven't seen it. You'll thank me later.
____________________________________________________________________________________
Okay, now to kill a rumor that I really had my hopes riding on... As you may recall in a past entry, Jeffrey Wright was scheduled to face off against John McClane in Live Free Or Die Hard (That's not the real poster. I just wanted to show some support to the fan who mocked up that nifty fake promo poster. Yep, someone with as much spare time as me! Represent!). Well, my initial shock proved correct. Jeffrey Wright will have nothing to do with this sagging franchise. Oh, Lenny Wiseman, what are you gonna do? Well, I'll tell you what he did! He cast his villain! So, now it looks like Timothy Olyphant (Scream 2, HBO's Deadwood, Go - Pictured below) will be matching wits with the famously dogged cop. Now, I think Olyphant is a fine choice. He ain't Wright (Pardon the pun), but he has a crazed energy that may pay off. He's also an actor who, I've long felt, is one break away from being BIG. So, Here! Here!, Mr. Beckinsale you've potentially done good. Oh, before I forget, on the less cool side (Bad Lenny!), he's hired Mary Elizabeth Winstead (Sky High - Pictured below) to play McClane's daughter. I'm guessing that's the role that Britney was vying for so many moons ago... I'm iffy on teenage sidekicks and this one sorta concerns me... Consider this project up one point for the Olyphant casting and down a point for the teeny-bopper casting. So, we're pretty much back where we started.

Frankly though, I wish this franchise had just ended with Die Hard With A Vengeance. It proved to be a disappointment and I'm concerned this one will be too.

Yippee-Kay...Yay?
_____________________________________________________________________________________ Hey, just a quick shout out to a new trailer that looks promising. It's an atmospheric looking film noir called The Good German. If great cinematography isn't your bag, well look at the pedigree: directed by Steve Soderbergh (Traffic, Erin Brockovich, Ocean's 11 & 12) with George Clooney (Batman & Robin, Return Of The Killer Tomatoes), Tobey Maguire (Spider-Man films, Cider House Rules) and Cate Blanchett (The Aviator, Lord Of The Rings). It looks groovy, so check out the trailer:
http://www.apple.com/trailers/wb/thegoodgerman/

Okay folks, sorry for the insanely long entry. Patience testing, I know. Blame it on a Friday release schedule far more eventful than the norm!

Anyways, I'm off on a road trip with two buddies of mine. The mission: mischief! So hold on to your seatbelts cuz Clint, Clyde and I are going EVERY WHICH WAY BUT LOOSE!
Sing it if ya know it!

"Dragon" The Deceased Back To The Silver Screen!

Hmmm... We got ourselves another slow news day. With that said, I did come across a small piece of info that I think is worth commenting on. It seems, according to Production Weekly, that director Rob Cohen has signed on to direct a new film called Rage & Fury. Now, that bit of news would generally be ignored (I'll get to my Cohen-bashing in a bit), were it not for the announced star of the film. Who would that be? Well, it's the fellow you see pictured above. Yes, Mr. Bruce Lee is apparently coming back to the big screen, directed by the mastermind behind XXX, Fast & The Furious and Stealth! Yeesh.

Now, I'm not just annoyed that Bruce Lee's being guided from the grave to the cinema by the man who has, at every turn, produced mediocre-to-crappy films. No, what I find extremely tiring is this popular trend of resurrecting long dead actors and putting them in films or commercials which, had they been alive, they would have seriously distanced themselves from. It used to be that when actors died, their filmographys were closed. Not the case anymore! God bless CGI!

The whole darn thing started a few years back. I don't know how many of you recall the infamous Diet Coke ad featuring Gene Kelly? It may have raised some ire, but nowhere near as much as the 1996 Fred Astaire Super Bowl commercial... The one where they altered footage from Royal Wedding to make it appear that Mr. Astaire was cutting the rug with a Dirt Devil vacuum? It was quite controversial at the time, raising great fury from a large number of film fans. Interestingly, sales on Dirt Devil's fell following the airing of the advertisement. You would think that would cause advertisers to realize the trend was a bad idea; however we would then be overestimating the intelligence of corporate advertising teams. No, the future brought us Lucille Ball shilling for Service Merchandise and Marilyn Monroe hawking cosmetics, just to name a few. Recently, Audrey Hepburn started dancing in Gap ads. It didn't stop in the ads though; soon they were popping up in films too!

A few years ago there was a pretty forgettable movie called Sky Captain And The World Of Tomorrow. Visually, it was amazing. Story-wise, it was a big ol' bore. It starred Jude Law, Gwyneth Paltrow, Angelina Jolie and er... Sir Laurence Olivier. Yes, Mr. Olivier (left) decided (Well actually the guardians of his image decided) that the role of the maniacal Totenkopf would fit nicely into his already amazing filmography. It's too impressive to note two or three examples, so check it out at: http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000059/. What was supposed to be the big surprise of the movie was instead more of a "what the hell is this?" moment. The whole thing was done rather poorly, using CG-manipulated archival footage, showing Olivier on a blurry computer screen speaking lines that sounded strangely disconnected to each other. His forced participation in the film had no impact and made little sense.

Now, there is a grey area to this whole ridiculous trend. Nobody (including myself) was enraged by Marlon Brando reprising his role as Kal-el in Superman Returns, or a whole slew of people popping up in Forrest Gump. In my own opinion, what made these scenes acceptable was the fact that it didn't pervert the celebrity's images or force them into new roles in which they have little say. Brando's scenes were simply outtakes from his initial appearance in 1978's Superman: The Movie. They were respectful to the the original work and didn't alter the performance to fit something new. The same goes for the scenes with Forrest Gump. The celebrities were shown great respect and didn't have their images tarnished.

Now this brings us to Mr. Lee's role in Rob Cohen's future opus. Bruce Lee has never played the role that he will be portraying. They will be using technology to force a performance out of an actor no longer able to display proper emotions. It's creepy and strange. It also shows little respect from Lee's family. In an attempt for a cash grab they're dishonoring Lee's right to be left to rest. Now, I realize that Cohen (right) has an in with the family. He directed the acceptable biopic Dragon: The Bruce Lee Story back in '93. It was decent, though took pretty serious liberties with the man's life (I doubt Lee fought as many ancient demons in real life...). So, I understand the family's willingness to trust him. That said, Cohen has proven himself to be a technically proficient hack. A director who can make films that look good, but are hollow exercises in shallow action. His biggest contribution to the industry has been making Paul Walker and Vin Diesel famous. Now, I've enjoyed some of Diesel and Walker's films, but they ain't exactly De Niro and Pacino... Closer to Lundgren and Guttenberg actually... (Come to think of it, what happened to Steve Guttenberg? I've always considered Short Circuit to be an underrated gem... "Johnny 5 is alive!") Anyways, back to Cohen. Now, certain director's may have the tact and talent to use some form of a Bruce Lee recreation (I'm not saying they should, mind you!), but this clown ain't one of them. Has the Lee family watched Stealth? Or what about The Skulls (Which co-starred Walker)? Yeegads!

I'm still going to consider Bruce Lee's final film to be Game Of Death. I don't care what perversion Cohen and his monkey-boys cook up in the lab; it won't be Lee in Rage & Fury. No, it'll merely be a special-effects creation on the same level as Dobby, Gollem, or Jar Jar Binks. It may look and sound the same, but the soul of the man is long gone and no empty effects exercise can fill in.

____________________________________________________________________

Oh, hey! Speaking of stupid ideas... News is swirling around the net that Naomi Watts (Mulholland Drive, King Kong) is circling the proposed Michael Bay-produced The Birds remake. Now, I'm not going to rant about how lousy a project this is (Michael Bay has yet to produce a decent movie), rather I'm going to plead with Ms. Watt's to reconsider. It's never really a good idea to remake a classic. Sure, King Kong worked out allright, but that was Peter Jackson. This is Michael Bay... And trust me; they won't be getting a brilliant director attached to this. Plus, you don't want to attempt to recreate Hitchcock. Remember Gus Van Sant's Psycho remake? So, come on Naomi, crawl out of this potential cinematic sludge-pool and find another 21 Grams or Mulholland Drive. And if you really are that desperate to be in a mainstream thriller, stay away from Michael Bay! Stay away from Rob Cohen too! Get someone like Chris Nolan (Memento, Batman Begins) or Sam Raimi (A Simple Plan, Spider-Man series) on the phone.

Mother of Pearl! You don't see many days with news as moronic as the above stories. I hope something big happens with Spiderman 3 or Iron Man in the near future cuz I'm tired of complaining...

Go out and rent a Guttenberg film and bring about some sort of Guttenberg resurgence. Maybe then I'll get my Short Circuit 3... Oh, Johnny 5, you card, you!

Later y'all!

Public "Mel"content...

Okay, people! We're really switching gears today! There ain't any Iron Man talk today. Instead, I'm focussing on a common occurrence that really gets on my nerves. I'm talking about the public's need to judge an artist's work on the basis of their personal life and beliefs. The photo above is, by now, known to everyone and the reason for it much buzzed about. There is great concern about how this photo will affect Mel Gibson's next directorial project, Apocalypto, and the spin doctors are working themselves into a frenzy...

Today's kind of a slow news day. I wandered around my assorted entertainment news sites looking for something that would inspire another momentous blog entry. I had pretty much given up, but then I stumbled across a story over at www.ew.com. The article was in regard to the panic and apprehension surrounding Apocalypto, and Gibson's recent attempts to make amends for his late summer drunk-driving arrest and the anti-Semitic comments it inspired.

The story is another example of how a celebrity's dysfunction can be used as advertising. I have heard more about Mel's arrest and recent chat with Diane Sawyer than anything regarding Apocalpto. I 've read about all I can take of these arranged quick fixes that are supposed to convince me that "It's okay! He's cured now! You can see his movies again!" I'm sorry; Mel Gibson has had a long history of substance abuse. He also had an upbringing that pretty much guaranteed some racist leanings (Gibson's father is a known Holocaust-denier). He's going to be facing these problems for likely the rest of his life. Long-rooted dysfunctions take long periods of therapy and rehabilitation to overcome, even for movie stars. This is why I find it insulting to my intelligence that we're being bombarded with his quick-cures in an attempt to market something. I would have been interested in Apocalypto no matter what.

Now, I should make it clear that I don't condone Gibson's actions and can understand why people would be hurt by his words. But why is it only a concern when it's thrown in our face? Gibson's radical right leanings haven't been a secret to anyone for decades! Yet, as soon as it makes the national news it causes people to rise up in shock and boycott the star's films. People don't realize that stars are susceptible to the same flaws that everyone else is. They are just as likely to be screwed up, politically incorrect or troubled as the rest of us. Probably even more so, since they operate in cocoons, out of touch with the majority of society. Why do we judge the artist before the art?

Take a look at Vincent van Gogh. Most agree that he was pretty much a loon. He also created some of the most beloved (and valuable) art in the world. Now, in that case we can say that he wasn't appreciated until long after he expired. Okay, how about Michael Jackson? Now, he's always been crazy. His childhood pretty much ensured that. But does that mean we shouldn't buy copies of Thriller? Does that mean that anything he creates should be disregarded as the works of a disturbed individual? Hate to break it to ya; the majority of art is created by people who aren't quite all there. There is a strong correlation between artistic ability and irregular brain activity. We should remember that actors are included in this lot, no matter how perfect they seem on screen.

This summer I watched Mission: Impossible III fail to live up to expectations, despite the fact that it was one of the best popcorn flicks of the summer. Apparently the public JUST realized that Tom Cruise was "crazy"! Well, my sister and I had that realization around 1996. That didn't stop me from watching his films with an open mind, however. The man makes a lot of good movies. I don't really care if he has an unusual view of the world or a seemingly bizzare relationship if he makes movies that entertain me. Mel Gibson has created good movies for almost three decades. Are his future films suddenly not worth our time due to his political beliefs and behavior? Why is it that that Gibson is vilified, while Brad Pitt receives cheers of support for allegedly cheating on his wife? Why do Jack Nicholson or Colin Farrell get free passes for their famously promiscuous lifestyles? Yes, I realize the seriousness behind Gibson's statements, but why is it preferable from a moral standpoint to cheat on one's wife than drunkenly utter racist statements?

The biggest problem in all this is the media. Yeah, it's become a cliche to blame them, but let's face it: they love to create drama by poisoning the image of a particularly loved individual. Sadly, we love to listen. It makes me wonder if many of our greatest stars, notoriously flawed or troubled people like Marlon Brando, Steve McQueen, Rock Hudson, Anthony Perkins or Anthony Quinn, would make the same impact today under the ever-present media eye and the public's eager willingness to judge others. I have my doubts. It's not enough to have talent; you also have to be willing to bury your flaws.

It has to be said that I greatly look forward to Apocalypto. I really admired Gibson's Passion Of The Christ and am eagerly awaiting his detailed account of Mayan life. I will also continue to see Gibson's future films. I hope those of you who read this are willing to watch Apocalypto, or Tom Cruise's next project, with an open mind. Do your best to ignore the stars' talk-show confessionals and concentrate on the reason they are famous in the first place. Just because you don't agree with them personally does not make their art dismissible. Remember that 50 years from now, it's the films that will be re-visited and remembered, not the personal drama.
____________________________________________________________________
Well, I wasn't going to put a B-story on today's entry, but there is a bit of info circulating about a project that is guaranteed to be a huge hit... Hugh Jackman, currently doing press for the nifty looking Prestige, has let it leak that the X-Men spin-off Wolverine is gonna be underway pretty darn soon. Jackman indicated that the Daniel Benioff (25th Hour, Troy) written script is "fantastic". No director announcement yet, but the film will be a prequel to the X-films and cover Wolverine's role in the Weapon-X program, as well as his relationship with the evil mutant Sabretooth. Rumors are circulating that Juggernaut, Lady Deathstrike and Silver Samurai may appear. I was a little disappointed with The Last Stand (Though it played much better on second viewing on DVD), but am excited by the prospect of this film. It's cool that Jackman wants to continue making films about the character and I hope we get some serious berserker moments.

Well, that's it on this end.... Oh, I forgot!...

...By the way, after realizing how lousy the title of my blog is, I've refined it! That's right! Gone are the days of the 20+ word title of which I can barely remember (I think "crazy" and "world" were in there...)! Now, it's plain 'ol Cam's Pop-Culture Episodes. Simple. To the point. Easy to relate to your friends *hint hint*. So yeah, not very exciting, but there ya go.

Exelsior! ...And whatnot...

Sentinel Of The Skyways To Make FANTASTIC First Cinematic Appearance!

Hey guys! Hope you're having a good beginning to your weekend. My initial plan with this blog was to do pieces on Fridays highlighting the new films entering theatres that day. Last week, I kinda did that with my Texas Chainsaw/ Departed thing. This week my choices were between The Grudge 2 (Which I said all I could about yesterday in my angry rant about insipid horror movies) and Man Of The Year, which features Robin Williams... Anyone who knows me well knows there are few things more irritating to me than a manic Robin Williams comedy. Drama, he's fine. But the majority of his comedy showcases (Mrs. Doubtfire notwithstanding) are icepick-through-the-eardrum awful. So, since I had nothing much to work with (Though I could bitch about Williams for 1000 words....), I'm instead gonna do a piece on a movie few of you are excited about and a character fewer still are familiar with.

I wanted to talk a little today about an icon of my childhood who will be coming to theatres next year in the sequel to the widely disliked Fantastic Four movie. The Silver Surfer (Pictured above) was a defining figure for me at the impressionable young age of 12, and I will be eagerly anticipating his arrival next summer.

But first, some background. Let's take a time machine back to the glorious year of 1992. Hurricane Andrew left 250,000 Florida residents homeless, young Amy Fisher pled guilty to attempted murder, allowing Joey Buttafuoco to run free, the Rodney King beating occured, which led to the controversial trial results that began the L.A. riots, and Woody Allen and Mia Farrow were engaged in a bitter court battle over Soon-Yi... Hmmm... Maybe it wasn't so great... Well, on the brighter side Wayne's World (my comedy bible) was released, The Cold War was declared over, rascally Bill Clinton won the presidency from reptilian Ross Perot, Johnny Carson gracefully retired from the late night game, and a young upstart named Paulie Shore stole our hearts in Encino Man ("The Weasel!!!"). At any rate, it was also the year that I discovered comic books (a discovery I'm sure my sister wishes hadn't occured...).

My good friend Dave and I became consumed with superhero comics that year, specifically those published by mighty imprint Marvel Comics. The two of us used to spend our weekends biking to the local corner store or drug store snatching up a couple comics for about $1.25 each (Oh, how old I sound, and how inflation has risen...). Dave had a quick affinity for Spider-Man (How could you not!), and set his sights on collecting as many adventures of the Webbed Avenger as possible. I found myself drawn to the hypnotic image of the Silver Surfer. Something about that shining figure against the blackness of space captured my imagination, and I was sold. From then on, Silver Surfer was my number one. As our collecting got more fanatical we'd get rides over to the local comic stores Airship Comics and The Comic Scene in search of cheap back issues. It's a memory I look back on fondly and the reason I feel personally invested in the upcoming film.

Silver Surfer's origin is a tad bizarre to those unfamiliar with comic-book lore. Silver Surfer began as Norrin Radd, native of the planet Zenn-La. He was in love with the lovely Shalla-Bal and living a peaceful existence... UNTIL (There's always an "until") a powerful being called Galactus came around. See, Galactus survives by "eating" planets, and ol' Zenn-La was lookin' mighty tasty. To save his planet Norrin agreed to become Galactus' herald, thus being transformed into the Surfer (And never to be with his beloved again!). The Surfer's job was to find less inhabited planets for Galactus to consume. Anyways, to make a long story short, Surfer came around Earth and was going to tell Galactus to chow down before the Fantastic Four changed his mind and he turned against his master. Despite fighting off the hungry dude and saving Earth, Surfer was stripped of his status and left to soar the skyways alone, in search of answers.

The above story is what we'll be seeing next July when Fantastic Four: Rise Of The Silver Surfer is released. Now, many, many people disliked the original Fantastic Four. I was not one of them, but I understand their reasons. Many felt that, after the X-Men films, Spider-Man films and Batman films, Fantastic Four was too lightweight and fluffy. I hear y'all. Thing is, this is what I liked about the movie. It was bouncy, goofy, and just an all-around fun 100 mins. I thought the actors did a good job recreating the characters (Especially Michael Chiklis & Chris Evans). It was an enjoyable film, but by no means a classic. I'm afraid, however, that while the light-hearted approach worked out okay the first time around, it just won't cut the mustard when it comes to my buddy, the Surfer.

The Surfer is a tragic character, forced to give up everything he loves and holds dear. He isn't a snappy one-liner kinda guy. He's prone to long philosophical soliloquies pondering our and his existence. He's far more likely to have an intelligent conversation than kick ass. Sure, when he does go loco it's awesome, but it's also rare. Looking at the first FF film, I'm not 100% convinced these films are the perfect launching pad for his inevitable self-starring franchise. Director Tim Story better brush up on his filmmaking techniques and examine what makes a script work. His past efforts show a severe lack of judgment (Taxi, anyone?). The Surfer deserves to make it onto the screen with his dignity intact and not altered to fit the short attention-spans of rowdy 16-year old boys.

While I'm concerned about Mr. Story's input, I'm really excited about the special effects department's efforts. It was announced early on that Surfer will be created through CG. Okay... That could be neat... Then it was announced that WETA (The geniuses behind the Lord Of The Rings films & King Kong) would be bringing him to life. Well damn, if he looks half as good as Gollum or Kong, I'll be giddy as a schoolgirl. They also hired Mr. Doug Jones to do the movements for the Surfer. No newbie to the process, he also did the body work for Abe Sapien in the under-rated Hellboy. As you can see in the pic, Mr. Jones (clad in the green pajamas) will be acting out the majority of what ends up on-screen, with the pajamas covered in the Surfer's reflective silver skin. I'm very curious who they'll find to do the voice. It has to be someone with a certain Zen-ness goin' on. Like a smarter Keanu Reeves-type voice.

Well Mr. Story, I'm intrigued. You've taken a project that had little anticipation and made it something to get excited over. You may not prove to be much of a filmmaker, but you have a potentially great future in spin-control. That is, if you end up dropping the ball on this one.

I think I'm especially involved in this project because if Fantastic Four: Rise Of The Silver Surfer is incredible there will be a certain amount of personal fulfillment for me. Dave got to see the icon of his youth, Spider-Man, brilliantly brought to life. I want to have that feeling of wonder and nostalgia myself in seeing my favorite childhood comic-book hero made real. Here's hopin' the Surfer gets his due.
_______________________________________________________________________________________
Well, I don't really have a B-story for today. It ain't a particularly scintillating news day in pop-culture. I would, however, like to wish Roger Ebert, another huge childhood idol of mine, continued success on a tough battle back from illness. You can read his latest update on his condition at his home page at www.rogerebert.com. It hasn't been a fun summer for Mr. Ebert and I just wanted to give him a quick shout out. I've missed his brilliantly written reviews every Friday, and he's much missed on the balcony with Roeper. So, my respects go out to Ebert and his family and it's my regret (And his benefit) that I won't be able to hear him rip The Grudge 2 to shreds. Ah well, there's still his review of Hostel 2 to look forward to in the future. Give 'em hell Ebert!


See, these posts can have real heart attached! You got a fond recollection of my childhood, and a solemn well-wishing to an early idol. There's a whole plethora of emotions swirling around The Latest Episodes In Our Crazy Pop-Culture World (Really need to do something about that title...)! Well, hopefully next week I'll get back on track with my Friday new release format. Heck, next week brings Clint Eastwood Flags Of Our Fathers! Now, that's something to get excited about! Until next time, in the words of Ebert's fellow Chicago-ite, take care of yourselves... and each other.

-Cam