Film Review: PIRATES OF THE CARIBBEAN: AT WORLD'S END: Captain Jack Returns To Find His Franchise Seriously Keelhauled!

Wow, what the heck happened here? I was among the many that hoorawed and rejoiced over the first chapter in this series, The Curse Of The Black Pearl. And while I was never truly begging for a sequel, I found myself tossed and fairly delighted by the imaginative Dead Man's Chest. Through it all I never truly fell into Pirates-mania like the rest of the collective world, but I still felt a glimmer of anticipation for this final disappointing entry, which we will examine and puzzle over today. This film, as you all know, is called At World's End.

Picking up where the last film left us, Pirates 3 follows Elizabeth Swann (Keira Knightley), Will Turner (Orlando Bloom) and their back-from-the-dead associate Barbossa (Geoffrey Rush), as they find directions and help in entering Davy Jones' Locker to free Captain Jack Sparrow (Johnny Depp). From there, the characters commit a truly mind-numbing number of double crosses and deceptive tricks on their way to reunite the Pirate Lords. This act will provide them with the strength to overcome the East India Trading Company, who is aiming to take over the seas with the aid of their new weapon: Davy Jones' The Flying Dutchman. When it's all over, relationships are settled, old feuds are ended, and a movie-goers hope for a truly great film, are long gone.

Now, obviously I skipped over a large amount of detail regarding the story of the film (Unlike my epic sweeping recounting of Spider-Man 3's plot which managed to sound long-winded even to me...). The reason for this is that the film is so stuffed to the gills with "story" that I likely wouldn't finish the task before the film's DVD release.

It's important to mention first and foremost that I don't think Pirates 3 is a bad movie in any way shape or form. It's merely an average film that is a victim of its own hype. So, if you want to skip out on this whole review right now before we head down the dark river of negative criticism Apocalypse Now style, I'm recommending the film in the mildest way possible. It's on the borderline, but manages to tip over into the favourable. But therein lays the rub...

This is a near three hour film with some of the most talented artists in the world involved. Mediocrity should not result from this. The film should either be a great time at the movies, or a spectacular (and likely fascinating) failure. The fact that At World's End manages to be neither is the most frustrating aspect.

What I found truly amazing about this film was how it failed to build upon any of my favorite aspects of its lead-in Dead Man's Chest. Captain Jack is sidelined for the first hour of the film and never really becomes anything more than a supporting character in the film. Sure, he has his funny moments (Though definitely less than the previous films), but they don't really add up because he has so little bearing on what is going on. The first film gave us a mad genius who managed to stay alive only by his sheer insane logic and baffling inventiveness. Here he's like a weird uncle that always manages to stumble into the middle of important events. He's entertaining, but rarely necessary.

I also was eager to see more of the spectacular Davy Jones (Bill Nighy) and his kraken beast. HA! Director Gore Verbinski and writers Ted Elliott and Terry Rossio shove Jones into the background and write the kraken right out of the picture. Instead they choose to place all the emphasis on the evil (and boring) Lord Cuttler Beckett (Tom Hollander). Beckett is a sneering nemesis in the vein of the most forgettable Bond villains (Like the guy in The Living Daylights), who's most sinister trait is that he wants to rid the seas of pirates. Is this really a bad thing? Erase the wackiness of the whole Black Pearl gang and let's remember that pirates were generally pretty awful individuals. He could be seen as a heroic figure in a different film... Except for the fact that he (SPOILER ALERT) kills Elizabeth's pops (Jonathan Pryce - in a cameo here). Why? I'm not really sure. This plot point is handled so incompetently (and off-screen) that there is no impact to the development. It's a reason for the guy to be booed and hissed at. Now, I'll admit the circumstances in how the Elizabeth finds out are eerily beautiful and dream-like and a testament to the actors and the effects and set design crew, but this development needed a little more underscoring. All of this blundering really only ends up reminding us why the Beckett character should be a bit player. Preferably located 100 ft behind the left shoulder of Davy Jones.

Davy Jones had all the potential to be one of cinema's great villains as well as one of the coolest looking. It's small consolation that he merely winds up with the latter prize (Good job ILM!). The filmmakers make the curious choice to just push him into generic back-up heavy territory. The poignancy of the character, regarding his love-sick heart, is bungled all over the place and his exit from the film is underwhelming to put it lightly. Also annoying is the mere walk-on status given to Norrington (Jack Davenport) who actually became interesting in the previous film.

So, Davy Jones, Jack Sparrow and Norrington are a wash, so who's really running the film? Well, the answer is Keira Knightley and Geoffrey Rush. I know the fans were just clamouring for these two to get more screen time and they get it here. Rush's Barbossa is the more successful choice as Rush plays him with such gusto that he is never dull. Knightley on the other hand lacks the spunk that was present in the other films. Her character really ain't much fun and the plot development that occurs later in the film regarding her is flat-out moronic. It's the type of story turn that makes me cringe every time...

Orlando Bloom is fine, I suppose. He's pleasant without having too much impact on the story. Even his part in the unsatisfying Elizabeth/Will relationship finale is pretty weak. I gotta ask: Did anyone really invest themselves that much in this relationship? It was pleasant enough in the first film but the convoluted turns it's taken over the last two has pretty much killed any goodwill I had towards it.

Completely wasted is Chow Yun-Fat as Siamese pirate Sao Feng. The character's role in the film is pretty pointless and could have easily been excised completely. It appeared to me that his only function was to make the stupid decision that leads to Elizabeth's ridiculous final arc. I must also say that I flabbergasted at how much is given to Naomi Harris' Tia Dalma character. Often incomprehensible, this character never works in large doses and gets bad laughs when her "important" role in the finale is revealed.

Okay, let's push all this negativity aside. Why am I going to recommend (albeit slightly) this troubling film? Well, because familiarity goes a long way. The world created within the film is so immersive that it's hard not to give credit where it's due. This is a universe unto itself that has become a memorable part of the pop culture landscape. It's fun to see all these characters and the wild effects that ILM has cooked up. It must be said that the final forty minute battle scene is pretty amazing to behold and earns the film higher marks for the immense scale and scope involved. This ain't no minor scuffle. I must also admit that while the film doesn't close how I feel it should, it is for the most part a satisfying conclusion to the series. The way it harkens back to the first film is somewhat poetic. It's difficult for a 168 minute movie to not deflate, and the filmmakers come close to succeeding. The film can be a tad frustrating, but it is never dull.

If this series does go on, I can't recommend enough to cut the running times down. These films aren't meant to be so long-winded. They should try to emulate the Indiana Jones films which were stylistically similar but embraced speed and a two hour length. They never felt rushed, and the Pirates films would fit this model beautifully. There is no reason that the third chapter of the series should be the same length as The Godfather. The mythology simply isn't complex or interesting enough to sustain it.

That said, for an uneventful summer night there's worse out there... Though there's also better.

Final Grade: 3 out of 5

Film Review: SPIDER-MAN 3: Spidey Scores Despite Getting Tangled In His Own Web

Hello, I'm back in black... Say just like ol' Spider-Man in the wildly anticipated new chapter that his theatres last night at midnight. I attended the 12:01 at the groovy Imax theatre in the Langley Colossus complex. It was quite a sight! A few hundred of us all a twitter (I've always wanted to type that) over what new adventures that poor sap Peter Parker would find himself in this time...

Okay, truth be told, I pretty much knew all the details due to my obsessive investigation into the film's production over the past two years. What was interesting however, is both how right the gossip was, and how wrong. I'm pleased/concerned to report that Spider-Man 3 is quite a different animal than the brilliant earlier chapters. I'll get to specific instances in a bit, but first I have to throw on my cape and assume my other identity as EXPOSITION MAN! Recanter of vague plot details!

The film starts off quickly after segment numero deuce, with the whole city of New York going Spider-Man crazy. Everyone loves the guy, and Peter Parker (Tobey Maguire) is feeling pretty damn pleased with himself. As always though, the dude is destined to get slapped down a few pegs. First, his beloved M.J. (Kirsten Dunst), who he is planning to propose to, gets a lousy review for her big Broadway debut. Then the troubled Harry Osborn (James Franco) attacks him, in his new X-treme sports villain attire, receiving amnesia in the ensuing throwdown. Meanwhile, escaped convict Flint Marko (Thomas Haden Church) is accidentally transformed in the villainous Sandman following an escape from the police. Also, as pretty much the whole world knows, Spidey finds himself a new black suit this time around. The suit, which is an alien symbiote, has hitched a ride on an asteroid/comet (I can't tell the difference) and landed on earth... Right next to Peter Parker's moped.

Fwew. Anyways, soon Peter learns that it was actually Flint Marko who killed his beloved Uncle Ben. It's at this point that the symbiote takes hold of him and Peter starts to slip into a severely angry funk. This has severe consequences on his relationship with M.J. (Who starts to wander over to Harry's side of the field), as well as causes him to seek revenge against the clearly downtrodden Sandman. Amongst all the chaos, we also meet young upstart Eddie Brock (Topher Grace), a competitor for a job at the Daily Bugle. Pete and Eddie's relationship is further tried by Gwen Stacy (Bryce Dallas Howard), Eddie's sorta girlfriend, and Pete's lab partner, who has a crush on ol' Webhead. Eddie is smug and cocky, and eventually becomes the fan favorite Venom, a seething black monster version of Spider-Man (Like you all didn't know that already!). Toss in comic bits from Bruce Campbell, Stan Lee and J.K. Simmons (Returning as the great J. Jonah Jameson.), and a few musical numbers, and a four character battle royale at a construction site, and Spidey 3 is packed to the gills for it's entire 140 minute running time.

So, I know the first question you all have! Is it as good as the other two? Putting it bluntly, no. Before I explain why, I just want to mention that it's always hard reviewing a movie like this because I see it through the geeky comic-fan lens, while the majority of the world won't. I want to also mention that while I raise a number of negative points, I actually think Spidey 3 is a great film-going experience. The running length flew by. However, as with the Star Wars prequels, my intense love for them causes me to be more critical when they falter. So, I'm going to try as hard as possible to keep my reasoning objective, but bear in mind that I'm probably taking the negatives more harshly than you will. Let's get to the breakdown!

Tobey Maguire (Right, with Dunst) is once again spot-on and he never appears foolish, despite a couple of poorly thought out scenes involving Peter's dark side taking over. Maguire is the key to why these films work, and he does good work here. He understands the series Parker character so deeply that we simply accept him without question. His dramatic scenes in this film are strong, and his Spidey moments are snappy and clever. It's only in the film's funky middle where the somewhat moody nature of the character drags Maguire down. I'd like to point out however, a painful scene between him and Dunst on a bridge that is very uncomfortable (In a good way) to watch. Maguire's face translates so much pain that it I found it almost hard to watch. It's going to be extremely difficult to see the role recast in future sequels.

Kirsten Dunst is again reliable as Mary Jane, although the film's writing occasionally fails her. Dunsts has received a lot of criticism for these films, but I still think she really brings something to the franchise. She has a spunk and adorbale quality that works really well. When M.J. is emotionally beaten down she really plays it effectively. That said, I think it was a poor decision to create such false circumstances for Peter and M.J. to breakup. The ensuing bitterness and anger damages our faith in their relationship as a whole, and unfortunately has a slightly negative consequence on the film. Despite dedicated work from the duo, it's becomes hard to see them in any sort of cheery light come film's end.

James Franco (Right) gives probably the strongest performance in the film. His Harry Osborn character is finally given a true dramatic arc that is sometimes tough to watch. Lacking the playfulness of Green Goblin or Doc Ock's storylines, Harry is a study of a good man who is undone by a lifetime of emotional abuse and low self-confidence and esteem. Even as he is suiting up as the New Goblin and battling Peter over the city, we never lump him into the villain category. It's a testament to Franco that Harry becomes the film's strongest point. He's funny, sympathetic, frustrating, and heart-breaking. Of all the resolutions in the film (And there are many!), Harry's has the most impact and stays with us the longest after we leave the theatre.

What made the first two films (Specifically 2) great was how fleshed out the villains were and how they tied into the overall themes. Sandman and Venom are both quite underwritten and don't have the impact they should. Haden Church (Left) has an effective melancholy dignity that, used properly, could have put Sandman right alongside the other greats of the series. His transformation scene alone is the most beautiful and haunting comic-book villain origin scene, I think, in film history. Watch for that moment, it's a joy to watch and arguably the film's highlight. Sandman's backstory is also effective, although emphasized so shallowly that it prevents him from becoming him a great villain. Despite a couple great battle scenes, he seems lost by the end, and his reasoning behind doing what he does is questionable. I also think it was a mistake to spend so much time with Sandman as a bellowing 6 story tall CG monster. It strips him of his tragedy and humanity.

Venom on the other hand, is a completely different story. This is a character that shouldn't probably be here at all. Like Sandman, he's underdeveloped, and yet I have to admit that he too had the potential to be a wonderful villain. Topher Grace (Right) steals every scene he's in, and when Venom finally does show up, he doesn't disappoint. While closer in tone to Carnage (Geek alert!), he still has enough Venom-like characteristics to make him an acceptable translation. I do feel strongly, however, that he should have been saved for a future film, as Grace is so good that the mind boggles at what he could have done with a full film. Let me just say that his mano et mano with Spider-Man is extremely cool.

Falling in the "Glorified Cameo" category is Dallas Howard's Gwen Stacy (Left), who is such an energetic breath of fresh air that the film really loses something when she disappears in the third act. It would have been nice to include her in the story's resolution. Rosemary Harris, as Aunt May, has only a couple scenes where she provides earnest advice, and I felt that each one was effective and properly highlighted the heart of the series. James Cromwell, as Captain Stacy, Gwen's dad, is a throwaway, with little reason to exist. It's unfortunate, as his character was such a warm presence in the comic book series.

Sam Raimi (Right) does a good job again of holding it all together and keeping the whole project from derailing. I love his vision for the series and truly love the quirkiness he brings to the films. Here, he does what he does best, amazing us, moving us, and drawing a few good laughs. His judgment falters, however, in some of the more heavy-handed comic moments. Bruce Campbell's idiot maitre'd is a keeper, as is a fair amount of Pete's 70's era swagger in a key scene. He goes a bit far, however, when Peter channels Jim Carrey's Mask in a jazz club and starts pounding on the piano and dancing up a storm. It's a bizarre moment that while undeniably well-timed and executed, belongs in a completely different movie. I also wish he'd refrain from so many shots of kids yelling "Go Spidey!", "Awesome!" and "Wicked cool!" into the camera. It was something I could look past before, but here it's just tiresome. Also annoying is the ridiculous British reporter in the final battle. She belongs on the cutting room floor.

Spider-Man 3 is a triumph of effects artistry and staging. Every action scene is a joy to behold and reminds us why these films are held in such high regard. If only the film could have found better ways to tie the threads together near the end. Minor characters pop-up and announce details that they likely wouldn't know (Or really should have mentioned earlier... YES, I'm talking to you Butler man!), and characters occasionally ignore their own psychology. If only the writers (Sam & Ivan Raimi, and Alvin Sargent) had better tied the whole thing together. Let me also add that while I applaud their courage in ending the film on such a bittersweet ambiguous note, it robs the audience of the joy they experienced with the exhilarating closings of the previous two films. It is also an odd way to end it in such a fashion as this is likely the last Spidey film to feature any of this creative team. The downbeat tone is going to make it very interesting to see how this film performs in the long run...

In closing, I recommend the film for the strength and imagination behind it. There are great sights to be seen and you are unlikely to be ever bored. Raimi has crafted a truly unusual summer blockbuster that dares to take chances, even if they don't all pan out. This courage elevates the film above most movies of this magnitude and I have a feeling that Spider-Man 3 is going to create some really interesting debates between film-goers. Obviously you can see that my thoughts on the film are somewhat conflicted. I will need to see the film again to establish a more concrete position and view the film without my over-hyped expectations. I do feel it's important to mention that Spider-Man 3 is far better than Ghost Rider, and more satisfying than X-Men: The Last Stand! Now, its up to you all to weigh in with your own opinions.

Despite this film's shortcomings, I'm still praying Raimi and Co. return for Spider-Man 4. Then they can really give us a film that will be a rousing final home-run.

Grade: 4 out of 5

TRANSFORMERS: Weaving A Tapestry Of Anticipation

Hey y'all. Well, it's gonna be a bit quiet here for the next week and a half. I'm nearing the end of my semester and the papers are piling up. So, today's entry is a short one.

The Transformers movie is something of a mild curiosity for me. I wasn't a huge fan of them in the 80's. But take me out of the equation and people are going mental for this movie. This, for them, is the defining film that will complete any unfinished business left from childhood. Me, I just hope it doesn't suck. I'm a bit weary of director Michael Bay still too. I actually liked The Island, and The Rock is one of my faves, but I'm concerned this one will fall into the Armageddon/Bad Boys II category or noisy, flashy garbage.

I must say I was intrigued the other day when it was announced that Hugo Weaving (Agent Smith in The Matrix trilogy, V in V For Vendetta) would be voicing arch nemesis Megatron. I had assumed that they would just get the guy who voiced the cartoon show. This decision has upset some of the purists obviously, but I'm pretty indifferent. Weaving has a great voice that really has an amazing unsettling quality. I still think his voicing of the line "Mr. Anderson..." is one of the greats.

So, feel free to throw hate mail my way over my approval of this choice. Frankly, with a cast as bland as Transformers (Shia Labeouf, Jon Voight, Tyrese), I'll take any unconventional choices they make. Oh, how I hope this isn't a 2 and a half hour migraine... ___________________________________________________________________

The other big casting news of the week in the new Indiana Jones IV addition. I mentioned Cate Blanchett's addition a while back, and now we have another ace character actor joining up. It was announced on Tuesday that Ray Winstone would be playing a new ally to Harrison Ford's Indiana Jones.

Now, Ray Winstone (Pictured) may not set off alarms of excitement for you. In fact, I'm guessing a fair amount of you have no idea who the bloke is. Well, his most famous recent role was as Mr. French in The Departed. He was Jack Nicholson's number one guy. He also popped up in Cold Mountain and King Arthur. I've also just been informed that he voiced Mr. Beaver in The Chronicles Of Narnia: The Lion, The Witch & The Wardrobe. Well, whaddya know. Personally, my favorite performance of his was as the retired mobster terrorized by Ben Kinsley in Sexy Beast. Check it out if you haven't seen it.

I really like this choice. I'm pleased that Spielberg and Lucas are filling out the roles with character actors as opposed to superstars. Though, I suppose that's always been the way with these films. Regardless, I'm brightening up to this one. Just stay away from the CG, Lucas!

Okay, gotta get back to the term papers!

Later!

SPIDEY Watch: The Final Frontier

Well guys, this is the last of it. Today Sony released the final trailer for Spider-Man 3 and it's the big enchalada. Venom is now officially released to the world and the movie is just a little over a month away. It's sort of bittersweet in a way. The speculation and little details make a film like this all the more exciting. Now the film will live or die on its quality as opposed to its hype.

So, I'll just say that I've had a lot of fun following the progress of this one. Hopefully, you have to. So, until my review gets posted (Hopefully on May 5th), this is about the last of Spider-Man 3 you'll be seeing in detail here at Pop-Culture Episodes.

I'm swamped with school work right now and don't want to bog this whole thing down in another thousand word extravaganza. So, sit back and enjoy the trailer: http://www.spiderman3oncomcast.com/.


See ya in "BAT Watch".

-Cam



P.S.: That Heath Ledger poster is a fan-made thing. I just thought it looked nifty.

Jet Li All Wrapped Up In THE MUMMY 3?

Gracias! Well, unfortunately my review of Shooter is non-existent. We arrived at the theatre the other night, free passes in tow, to be told that the theatre was full. Seems they handed out buttloads of free passes and we were screwed... Even though my friend Tom won them on a radio station giveaway. So, don't blame me! Blame the nitwits at Tinseltown Cinemas! Instead, out of boredom, we went to the Joel Schumacher directed (Never a good sign) Jim Carrey "thriller" The Number 23... I'm not going to do a review but suffice to say it is the biggest load of crap to be deposited in theatres so far this year. Avoid at all costs! Yuck. So, that tragedy aside, lets focus on some news brewing down in ol' Hollywood town about a franchise that we'd almost forgotten about.

In case you hadn't heard, the big news of today was posted on a few sites (but specifically Rotten Tomatoes) (http://www.rottentomatoes.com/news/comments/?entryid=40903939) and it's... Meh. Universal, in all their collective wisdom, have decided to film another entry in the exceedingly vanilla Mummy franchise. You probably remember them vaguely: Lots of sand, a bunch of hokey CG, the dude from Encino Man, and wasn't The Rock playing a lobster or something in one of them? Well, the answer is yes to all of that and so... little more.

The first one, directed by hack extraordinaire Stephen Sommers) starred Brendan Fraser (The Encino Man in question), Rachel Weisz (Now an Oscar winner for The Constant Gardener), Arnold Vosloo (Darkman II &III), Oded Fehr (Resident Evil: Apocalypse, TV's Sleeper Cell), and John Hannah (JOHN HANNAH, ladies and gentlemen...). It featured a bunch of goofy mumbo jumbo about the evil Mummy Imhotep doing evil mischief and, consequently, kidnapping Brendan Fraser's son. The second one (Also "directed" by Sommers) was pretty much the same except The Rock (very briefly) showed up as the Scorpion King and did cheesy battle with our heroes. Finally, the Scorpion King showed up in his own self-titled spin-off (Produced by Sommers, directed by Chuck Russell) where the cheesiness continued in hopelessly clunky dialogue and battle scenes ripped from Conan The Barbarian.

Now, I saw all three of these films in theatres. Why? Because I'm a sucker, that's why. The first one was a weak, disposable Indiana Jones knock-off that I'd forgotten by the time the credits rolled. Perhaps it was this amnesia that led me stumbling into The Mummy Returns. I actually thought it was kinda fun. It was dumb as a pile of rocks but it had a certain charm that made me smile at its inanity. It was good for a laugh. That mild (very mild) affection is probably what drew me to The Scorpion King. Like Returns, it was hokey and stupid and kinda fun. Instantly forgettable, but enjoyable.

Well, the franchise went dormant after Scorpion King failed to match the success of its predecessors. Audiences didn't really notice, and the cast, for the most part, went on to better things (John Hannah is presumed missing and if anyone finds him please notify his agent.). Stephen Sommers moved on to the soulless abomination Van Helsing, continuing to bore audiences with his unique brand of talentless monkey-direction. For the most part it was as if the whole thing had only been a really vague dream...

But the news today was a wakeup call. The franchise is now in the hands of uber-clown Rob Cohen (XXX, Stealth, that upcoming Bruce Lee movie I wrote about a while back! - Pictured), and they have announced their villain. Well, since I killed all suspense with the title of today's entry, let's just state the obvious. Jet Li is now contractually obligated to be seen in this film. So, whether he's the Mummy remains to be seen. Perhaps a kung-fu Mummy would be the next obvious step for this franchise to go in...

From what I have bothered to read, the new film is set a fair number of years after the events so wondrously chronicled in The Mummy Returns. This time, Brendan Fraser and Rachel Weisz's son is now all grown up and ready to kick some Mummy tail. So young... uh... Billy (I made that up), with mumsy and dadsy along for the ride, will do epic battle with the undead Ninja Mummy. I don't know about you, but I'm thrilled... beyond... belief... zzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.

I swear Hollywood doesn't learn their lessons well! ("Really?", you say.) This one has all the makings of a big 'ol flop. It reminds me of when they made that sequel to Tomb Raider even though no one liked the first one and it (Surprise!) fizzled. And attaching Rob Cohen to it doesn't help matters. This guy is a magnet for box-office duds lately... Possibly because he lacks the subtlety of even Michael Bay. The only way I can see this franchise thriving is under a director with a serious creative vision for it. I'm talking total reinvention. Start from square one and bring in a whole new cast of characters (And no villains with dumb names like Imhotep).

I'm not slagging Jet Li (Pictured) or nothing either. I thought he was really good in Unleashed, and I still consider Kiss Of The Dragon to be an underrated gem. I want nothing more than for this guy to get some good material (Like I feel about Chow Yun-Fat) and really break through to the mainstream (With something better than The One or Cradle 2 The Grave that is...). That Kato role in the now-in-development Green Hornet sounds promising... As it stands though, I have a feeling Jet will be the only real reason to see The Mummy 3. That and to see if they throw some work John Hannah's way. John Hannah gotta eat!

___________________________________________________________________

This next bit sounds like a really, really cool project (In fact, probably more deserving of the A-story slot Mummy 3 got...). Director Bryan Singer (Usual Suspects, X-Men, X2, Superman Returns - Pictured) is teaming up with everyone's favorite punching bag Tom Cruise to film a yet-to-be titled epic WWII adventure about a mission to assassinate Hitler! The film's been scripted by Nathan Alexander, Singer and his Usual Suspects co-writer Christopher McQuarrie. The project is off and running already, scheduled to film this summer (So as to not interrupt Singer's Superman sequel).

Me, I'm a sucker for anything WWII. Whether its Saving Private Ryan, Flags Of Our Fathers, Dirty Dozen, U-571, Great Escape, Bridge Too Far, or even Pearl Harbor (I know, I know...), I can't get enough. And with a pedigree like this it almost makes me forget about Tarantino's frequently stalled WWII adventure Inglorious Bastards. Either way, I'll be there when this one hits theatres. Singer has yet to falter in my eyes, and Tom Cruise, love him or hate him, always give these types of movies his all. Last Samurai was a testament to that.


So, sorry folks about the lack of Mark Wahlberg in today's post. But c'mon, The Mummy 3! Eh? Eh? Bah, see ya next time you ingrates!

Just kidding. Please come back!

Yargh! A Trailer Full Of PIRATES Off The Port Bow!

Greetings my disciples. Trust your weekend was most excellent. Well, I'm back with another blithering blog entry. Today we're going to take a little journey to... The World's End. And by that I'm referring to the third and final (?) entry in the stunningly successful Pirates Of The Caribbean franchise, At World's End. The marketing blitz hit a high point today with the release of the newest trailer, and it is a doozy. You all can see it pretty much anywhere on the internet right now (www.ew.com, www.aintitcool.com, www.mania.com, www.alongcamequilting.com...), and I recommend you do before plowing onwards into the mountain of minutiae that is today's entry.

Now, when last we left the series, with last summer's Dead Man's Chest, things were looking pretty grim. Jack Sparrow (Johnny Depp) had been devoured by the giant squid monster ruled by Davy Jones (Bill Nighy - Pictured), Will Turner (Orlando Bloom) and Elizabeth Swann (Keira Knightley) were going through a rough patch, Norrington (Jack Davenport) had taken off with Jones' heart, and poor Bootstrap Bill (Stellan Skarsgard) seemed doomed to eternal damnation. Then, they announced that Barbossa (Geoffrey Rush) was back and would be taking command of The Black Pearl. Why, it was all too much drama for a person to take!

Finally, on May 25th we will have all our questions answered and hopefully all the threads will be tied into a neat little package. Or it could end like The Matrix: Revolutions. Annoyed confusion leading to pouting and emotional hysteria. I have faith, however, that this one will work due to the quality of Dead Man's Chest.

"Hold up!" you're thinking! "That movie was a big ol' let-down!" Yes, many people felt that the second entry was a less than successful follow-up... But I'm not one of them! HA! After an admittedly bumpy first act I thought the story really took flight. I thought that Davy Jones was a truly wonderful (and potentially classic) villain who was far more interesting than Barbossa from the first film. I also liked that the filmmakers trusted the audience to jump into the story without unnecessary exposition reminding us what happened in the first film. I thought every one of the comic set-pieces worked nicely, and the action moments were equal to, if not superior to those which came before. The actors really fell back into the characters nicely and really worked to develop them as opposed to just running in place. I also felt that returning director Gore Verbinski perfectly matched the tone of the first film, while setting the bar even higher. Hell, I even thought that the cliffhanger ending worked out really well, and I hate abrupt endings (Yes, Matrix Reloaded, I'm talking to you!)Plus, the kraken was just plain cool.

Even if you think I'm completely wrong and that everything I just typed is moronic you
do have to admit this: That trailer looks pretty cool. Everything from the clever comedic bits to the epic scenes of pirate ships nearing waterfalls, spinning around whirlpools, etc. have been handled with real flair. I'm particularly pleased with the shots of Depp battling Davy Jones on the ship's... er... mast? No, I don't think it's a mast... Damn I really am bad with nautical terms... Well, whatever, it looked awesome. I'm also really wild about the whole idea of having pirates from all over the world converging into a battle of momentous proportions. With a series like this the ending has to be huge. Throw in everything and the kitchen sink. Yargh...

I'm also pleased to see Chow Yun-Fat in an American film role that may actually be memorable. After truly horrific films like Bulletproof Monk and The Corruptor I had lost faith that Yun-Fat would ever get any really good material in fickle western cinema. I mean, come on, this guy was amazing in Hard Boiled! He deserves A-quality material for that film alone! Well, regardless, it looks like he's got a good part here, as the pirate Captain Sao Feng (Pictured).

I do have to mention, though, that I hope this is the last film of the series. The Disney honchos have hinted at multiple more installments (And after the 400 million plus gross of Dead Man's Chest who can blame them), while Verbinski and assorted cast have said "NAY!". I'd like this one to end up as a trilogy. For once let a film series end before it slowly dies from overexposure and familiarity. Only time, and The World's End's profits, will tell.

Anyways, consider me psyched. This is the film I'm most looking forward to this summer... After Spider-Man 3 and Fantastic Four: Rise Of The Silver Surfer that is. I'm still a little confused about how Barbossa came back to life but I'm sure a perceptive 8 year old could answer that question. So, see you on May 25th when the goons from Disney order us from our homes to see this film. Disney don't play around when it comes to aggressive marketing... Yargh.
___________________________________________________________________
Well, I suppose I shouldn't be surprised. It was announced the other day that, due to its staggering success, a sequel to 300 was in the planning stages. Perhaps I'm being overly cynical. If there's one thing Hollywood cares about it's quality over anything else. And if you believe that then I've got some magic beans for sale.

My hopes are lifted, however, by the news that Frank Miller (Pictured... On the right), the artist/writer who created the graphic novel 300, as well as Sin City, Dark Knight Returns, etc., is going to be a key figure in putting the follow-up together. While the details are vague at best (I'm unclear whether Miller will make a graphic novel that will then be adapted, or simply work on a script and visual ideas), it appears that the next film will be based on another classic Greek story. Perhaps the eternal fire or something. Regardless, while I mock creating a sequel to films such as this simply for the sake of profit, I'll remain cautiously optimistic about this one. When they announce director Zack Snyder's involvement I'll be less cautious.


Well, there you all go.
I'll be back soon with another fun-filled, time-wasting, zip-trippin' entry!

See ya then. Yargh.

2008... Another Great ESCAPE???

Hey neighbors! Well, first off I have to say that I'm totally amazed at how much of a spike I get on my site counter whenever I post something about Venom or Spider-Man 3. I suppose it's a hint at just how much people are looking forward to that flick. Well, today there isn't any Spider-Man stuff. Nope, rather I'm gonna invite you to jump in my trusty DeLorean time machine and take a little journey back to the age of excess, the 80's. It was a glorious time. Arnold ruled the world with his preposterous brand of action movies, the nerds showed those punks at Alpha Beta frat what real "coolness" is, and a strange man named John Carpenter introduced us to an even stranger man named... Snake Plissken.

Now, I'm sure a few of you (the younger ones) are scratching your heads right now. See, Snake was a man who could never quite get a break. A man who spoke through actions rather than words. He was also... Kurt Russell! In an eye patch! Warning everyone not to @!#% with him! The film was Escape From New York and it was a brilliant concept. See, the future of 1997 is a post-apocalyptic war-zone (God I love that term!) and a bunch of no-good punks kidnap the president (Donald Pleasance) after his plane crashes on the penal colony of Manhattan. Yep, that's right! Manhattan is now a veritable stew of the criminal and the psychopathic. The government implant former soldier turned bank robber Snake with an explosive device timed to go off in 22 hours and drop him in Manhattan. He then has 22 hours to find the president, ESCAPE FROM NEW YORK, and return to safety, where the device will be deactivated.

Now, I suppose most of you are telling yourselves: "Yes, I'm aware of this! Why are you wasting my time telling me about a movie I saw 26 years ago?" Well, because next year you'll be seeing it again! Only this time it won't be a grungy low-budget film. Nope, this time they're starting from scratch with a big budget and a rising new action star named... Gerard Butler (He of 300 - Pictured)!

WHAT? Gerard Butler ain't Snake Plissken! Only Kurt Russell can play his royal Badness! Yes, I know. But hear me out and keep an open mind. We may just have a potential diamond in the rough here.

Now, I don't know how many of you have watched Escape From New York lately, but it has not held up well. While they may have terrified the world in their hey-day, the punk rocker villains of the film don't exactly inspire fear in the hearts of modern viewers. Rather, they inspire laughter. Unfortunately the age of irony has taken this once pure, visceral film and relegated it to the land of 80's cheese. I know Isaac Hayes as the Duke of New York (Pictured) was hardcore, but many don't agree anymore. And I feel Plissken deserves another chance to shine (Outside of the less than spectacular 1995 follow-up Escape From L.A.).

When it was announced today that New Line had snatched up the Butler remake rights I was optimistic. I usually despise remakes, but this one has real promise. Why? Well, the character of Snake Plissken is classic, on par with Clint Eastwood's "Man With No Name" from the Dollars trilogy. And while Russell will always be Plissken, I feel Gerard Butler will do the character serious justice. Having seen 300, I think that this guy has the stuff to really bring back the type of gruff, no-nonsense, menacing qualities that have long been forgotten in this age of dull action heroes.

I also think that this film's look could seriously be improved with some modern set design ideas and cinematography. John Carpenter, God bless his crazy soul, was never a particularly gifted director when it came to visual novelty. My hope is that they get a bright new director who completely grabs hold of this project and runs with it as far as they can. I want someone with new ideas to completely redefine what this world is and how we can view it. Basically, I'm hoping for a complete reimagining of the world as opposed to a lifeless retread.

So join me in my optimism and let's hope that they get this one right! This is a great concept that deserves the attention of a new generation of film-goers. Plus, if nothing else, it may just inspire them to revisit the original film. And frankly, I can't think of anything wrong with that. ___________________________________________________________________

Now, my B-story today is the A-story of every entertainment news pundit out there right now. Casting has finally begun in the long gestating yet-untitled Indiana Jones IV. While we were bombarded with news that young Shia LaBeouf (Constantine, the upcoming Transformers) would play Indy's son (which is still unconfirmed and looking like more of false rumor), there was a neat little casting decision being finalized. That of the film's female lead...

Well, it was announced last night that the very talented Cate Blanchett (Babel, Notes From A Scandal, The Aviator - Pictured) would be tackling the role. Now, details on the project are so heavily guarded that there is nothing to really say regarding her role in the film. At this point in time it is unknown whether she'll be playing a friend or foe...

Regardless, Blanchett is a great choice to have aboard. She's a proven A-level talent that will bring a lot to this troubling project. While I have yet to wave the flag of enthusiasm for this one, I'm intrigued none-the-less. I just hope that the final product matches the tone of the previous three. Only time will tell. Stay tuned, more Indy IV casting decisions will likely be coming down the pipeline in the very near future.


Okay folks, that's all for me today. Have a great weekend, and if you have some time go out and rent the original Escape From New York if you haven't seen it. It's worth a visit.

I'll be back sometime next week, hopefully with my best of list. It's a work in progress.

-Cam