Quick clips for Wednesday March 18
Things that make me sad
No, this is not a post to discuss true moments of sorrow (like when my iPod died a few weeks back, setting into motion a disastrous chain of events that have left me in a rut, DAMN YOU TECHNOLOGY). This is a post about something I rarely have to deal with (and a review as a bonus!).
About a week ago, an enthusiastic marketing person hired by or working for Roadside Attractions (a distribution company who distributed brilliance in Super Size Me, The Fall, Right at Your Door, and Fido...and less than brilliance with Beer for my Horses...if Toby Keith asks you to do anything but wail on his junk, you say no) contacted me in an effort to rush a screener of Super Capers to my door in time to beat the opening weekend (arriving on Friday). The movie is a low-budget, slapstick love letter to genre influences ranging from 007 to Star Wars to The Matrix and so on made by what appears to be a very nice man getting started in the industry (with two whole credits on IMDB.com). Now, nobody usually cares what the lowly Ryan Syrek thinks about a movie enough to want to get a film Fed Ex-ed to him on a Saturday (mmm...third person), so believe me when I say how badly I wanted to like this movie...or at least enjoy it...or be able to recommend it in some capacity.
Sadly, Super Capers is the worst movie I have seen in almost as long as I can remember.
Review time.
Super Capped
Super Capers makes me long to be shot in the face
It shouldn't be surprising in the age of remakes that a film can be produced without one shred of originality, called a comedy despite not having one inspired or even marginal moment of hilarity, produced without any redeemable factors (save for keeping Tom Sizemore off of drugs for the 3 minutes it took to shoot his role). Somehow, Super Capers still manages to shock with its awfulness.
The "plot" follows a non-powered superhero wannabe named Ed Gruberman (Justin Whalin) as he accidentally gets sentenced to a half-way home for superheroes despite not having any actual powers. He's sent there by Michael Rooker (okay, a character played by Michael Rooker but there's really not a difference any more). Once he arrives at the superhero equivalent of "Sober House," he meets Will Powers (Ryan McPartlin)...feel free to groan at the name. Powers has Superman-esque powers but terribly overplayed self-confidence issues, which is what passes for comedy in the film (Supervillain - "You're fat." Powers - "Sob sob sob." Cue "Looney Toons" sound effects...no that's not a joke). Gruberman also meets Herman Brainard (Sam Lloyd) who has (wait for it) brain powers, Puffer Boy (Ray Griggs...the writer/director of this mess), and Felicia Freeze (Danielle Harris), whom he wants to warm with his super schlong.
There's some kind of story about missing money or escaped villains or something but trust me when I say you won't remember. Under a full-on assault of wacky noises (down to the "ahooogas" and "zoinks" from Saturday cartoons), dialogue that wouldn't be funny if you built a time machine and went back to the 1990s when the riffed-on materials were first released, and acting that can only be described as "Oh, no," Super Capers is without merit. We haven't touched on the effects, which appear to have been done on a home computer, because that just seems mean.
Sigh. Here's the thing, Griggs meant well, there's no question. His tender script over the credits thanking everyone for letting him do the film and helping him with it makes you feel bad. Writing this review feels like making fun of the guy singing his ass off at the Karaoke bar who really wants to be good and entertaining, not because he's shallow, but because he wants to share with you. Oh, oh how I wish this had been a B-movie or bad movie with some measure of entertainment. It wasn't. At all. That saddens me like you can't believe.
In an age when a movie like Primer can be slowly made and put together on home computers and for a relatively small budget, you can't help but be reminded that it is very possible to make low, low, low dollar entertainment with good ideas and the right spirit. Griggs has the spirit, but lordy the ideas aren't there. I'll stop kicking the puppy now, but it has to be said to sum up the point: 2009 officially has it's first entry for "Worst of." Sadface.
Grade - F
There goes anybody ever sending me anything ever again. The hand that feeds me is tasty.
Lost predictions for "Namaste"
Did anybody else panic a little at how much the absence of "Lost" hurt them last week, realizing the show doesn't go on forever and will finish the season soon and then crying, uncontrollably, embarrassingly crying until you thought your annual allotment of tears was used up? Just me? Cool.
I did a little poking around on the Interwebs and found somebody I apparently know third or fourth-hand had reposted (and bless them for doing it) in a forum somewhere (The Fuselage, I think). This is insanely cool. Sadly, as it turns out, most people found my theories as cogent as Swiss cheese and as reliable as a Yugo. Fair enough. I'm not incredibly good at this stuff, I like to do it more than I'm skilled at doing it. Still, discussion is discussion and I think that's what the show wants us to do...so I am actually pumped that this has happened and want more of it! I still argue that I'm right on some of these (like the dude who said "why don't they just stay quiet" to my theory that the whispers are time travelers...to which I can only respond "I don't know, they haven't thus far!" I mean, when Sawyer and the gang saw themselves, they were all whispery. Plus, the other explanations don't make sense. They aren't "ghosts," unless we come to find out that term means something different on the island, and every answer is GOING to filter through the time travel lens, you'd best believe that one). Wow. Long aside there.
Anyway, point is I'm happy to get into these discussions and freely admit how wrong, wrong, wrong I can be and how right, right, right I can be (okay, there should probably only be one right there). What I'm saying is: This is where the fun is with this show, so take off your pants and get in the pool. Wow. Creepy metaphor.
Okay, predictions for "Namaste:"
1.) Doc Jensen at EW.com (weekly plug) tells me we're seeing Radinsky, the guy who drew the map on the blast door. That's not a prediction, that's cool. He also said he's working on something that makes the map make more sense. Also not a prediction, because I didn't come up with that. My prediction: The thing Radinsky is working on is a way to use the island's energy to peer into the future, to spy on it without going there. He realizes the importance of having a map when he sees that others will need it. Total bullpuckey guess, but we're having fun aren't we?
2.) Sun and Sayid are NOT in 1977. I predict they and John Locke and the two new (please don't go Nikki and Paolo) characters are in "present day," providing an interesting obstacle to a happy Sun/Jin reunion. This will also make cool time travel stuff possible, like leaving notes to be read in the future and whatnot. Time travel writers love dat shiznit. Also, I really like the phrase "time travel writers," it sounds like the people who once pontificated on vacationing in Aruba now write about the perils of 17th century Europe for the modern man.
3.) We will again not see Smokey.
4.) Sayid will again not kill anyone.
5.) We'll begin to see how Jack and the gang integrate with Dharma. I'm guessing that Jack will reveal his doctorness (because he can't help himself) and that will allow him to become a valued member. The lie that Sawyer is going to tell is going to have to be a whopper...I think he won't try to assert these are his former boat mates but some kind of rescue mission sent to find him. Just a guess.
6.) We're going to get puppy dog eyes from Juliet to Jack, Sawyer to Kate, Kate to Sawyer and my friend Ben (not the homicidal island dweller) is going to hate it.
7.) Ben is going to have another interesting conversation with Locke where he tries to convince him that his murdering him was a helpful thing. I think we're also going to get an allusion to (but not evidence of) where Ben was when he got beat up. He's going to mention Desmond.
8.) Speaking of Desmond...I don't know that Amy will reveal that her baby is him, but I think we're going to find out who her baby is tonight. I'm sticking with Desmond, but smart money says if it's revealed this early, it will be a minor character (like Ethan or whatnot). If it is Ethan, it's going to bring up an interesting question of how it is Amy would have survived to have him if the gang hadn't gone back in time and saved her...another time travel brain freeze is upcoming.
Beyond all of that, we should see Marvin Candle (aka Pierre Chang) tonight, "Namaste" is kind of his thing yo. Maybe a Miles Straum origin story? Too much to hope for methinks.
No, this is not a post to discuss true moments of sorrow (like when my iPod died a few weeks back, setting into motion a disastrous chain of events that have left me in a rut, DAMN YOU TECHNOLOGY). This is a post about something I rarely have to deal with (and a review as a bonus!).
About a week ago, an enthusiastic marketing person hired by or working for Roadside Attractions (a distribution company who distributed brilliance in Super Size Me, The Fall, Right at Your Door, and Fido...and less than brilliance with Beer for my Horses...if Toby Keith asks you to do anything but wail on his junk, you say no) contacted me in an effort to rush a screener of Super Capers to my door in time to beat the opening weekend (arriving on Friday). The movie is a low-budget, slapstick love letter to genre influences ranging from 007 to Star Wars to The Matrix and so on made by what appears to be a very nice man getting started in the industry (with two whole credits on IMDB.com). Now, nobody usually cares what the lowly Ryan Syrek thinks about a movie enough to want to get a film Fed Ex-ed to him on a Saturday (mmm...third person), so believe me when I say how badly I wanted to like this movie...or at least enjoy it...or be able to recommend it in some capacity.
Sadly, Super Capers is the worst movie I have seen in almost as long as I can remember.
Review time.
Super Capped
Super Capers makes me long to be shot in the face
It shouldn't be surprising in the age of remakes that a film can be produced without one shred of originality, called a comedy despite not having one inspired or even marginal moment of hilarity, produced without any redeemable factors (save for keeping Tom Sizemore off of drugs for the 3 minutes it took to shoot his role). Somehow, Super Capers still manages to shock with its awfulness.
The "plot" follows a non-powered superhero wannabe named Ed Gruberman (Justin Whalin) as he accidentally gets sentenced to a half-way home for superheroes despite not having any actual powers. He's sent there by Michael Rooker (okay, a character played by Michael Rooker but there's really not a difference any more). Once he arrives at the superhero equivalent of "Sober House," he meets Will Powers (Ryan McPartlin)...feel free to groan at the name. Powers has Superman-esque powers but terribly overplayed self-confidence issues, which is what passes for comedy in the film (Supervillain - "You're fat." Powers - "Sob sob sob." Cue "Looney Toons" sound effects...no that's not a joke). Gruberman also meets Herman Brainard (Sam Lloyd) who has (wait for it) brain powers, Puffer Boy (Ray Griggs...the writer/director of this mess), and Felicia Freeze (Danielle Harris), whom he wants to warm with his super schlong.
There's some kind of story about missing money or escaped villains or something but trust me when I say you won't remember. Under a full-on assault of wacky noises (down to the "ahooogas" and "zoinks" from Saturday cartoons), dialogue that wouldn't be funny if you built a time machine and went back to the 1990s when the riffed-on materials were first released, and acting that can only be described as "Oh, no," Super Capers is without merit. We haven't touched on the effects, which appear to have been done on a home computer, because that just seems mean.
Sigh. Here's the thing, Griggs meant well, there's no question. His tender script over the credits thanking everyone for letting him do the film and helping him with it makes you feel bad. Writing this review feels like making fun of the guy singing his ass off at the Karaoke bar who really wants to be good and entertaining, not because he's shallow, but because he wants to share with you. Oh, oh how I wish this had been a B-movie or bad movie with some measure of entertainment. It wasn't. At all. That saddens me like you can't believe.
In an age when a movie like Primer can be slowly made and put together on home computers and for a relatively small budget, you can't help but be reminded that it is very possible to make low, low, low dollar entertainment with good ideas and the right spirit. Griggs has the spirit, but lordy the ideas aren't there. I'll stop kicking the puppy now, but it has to be said to sum up the point: 2009 officially has it's first entry for "Worst of." Sadface.
Grade - F
There goes anybody ever sending me anything ever again. The hand that feeds me is tasty.
Lost predictions for "Namaste"
Did anybody else panic a little at how much the absence of "Lost" hurt them last week, realizing the show doesn't go on forever and will finish the season soon and then crying, uncontrollably, embarrassingly crying until you thought your annual allotment of tears was used up? Just me? Cool.
I did a little poking around on the Interwebs and found somebody I apparently know third or fourth-hand had reposted (and bless them for doing it) in a forum somewhere (The Fuselage, I think). This is insanely cool. Sadly, as it turns out, most people found my theories as cogent as Swiss cheese and as reliable as a Yugo. Fair enough. I'm not incredibly good at this stuff, I like to do it more than I'm skilled at doing it. Still, discussion is discussion and I think that's what the show wants us to do...so I am actually pumped that this has happened and want more of it! I still argue that I'm right on some of these (like the dude who said "why don't they just stay quiet" to my theory that the whispers are time travelers...to which I can only respond "I don't know, they haven't thus far!" I mean, when Sawyer and the gang saw themselves, they were all whispery. Plus, the other explanations don't make sense. They aren't "ghosts," unless we come to find out that term means something different on the island, and every answer is GOING to filter through the time travel lens, you'd best believe that one). Wow. Long aside there.
Anyway, point is I'm happy to get into these discussions and freely admit how wrong, wrong, wrong I can be and how right, right, right I can be (okay, there should probably only be one right there). What I'm saying is: This is where the fun is with this show, so take off your pants and get in the pool. Wow. Creepy metaphor.
Okay, predictions for "Namaste:"
1.) Doc Jensen at EW.com (weekly plug) tells me we're seeing Radinsky, the guy who drew the map on the blast door. That's not a prediction, that's cool. He also said he's working on something that makes the map make more sense. Also not a prediction, because I didn't come up with that. My prediction: The thing Radinsky is working on is a way to use the island's energy to peer into the future, to spy on it without going there. He realizes the importance of having a map when he sees that others will need it. Total bullpuckey guess, but we're having fun aren't we?
2.) Sun and Sayid are NOT in 1977. I predict they and John Locke and the two new (please don't go Nikki and Paolo) characters are in "present day," providing an interesting obstacle to a happy Sun/Jin reunion. This will also make cool time travel stuff possible, like leaving notes to be read in the future and whatnot. Time travel writers love dat shiznit. Also, I really like the phrase "time travel writers," it sounds like the people who once pontificated on vacationing in Aruba now write about the perils of 17th century Europe for the modern man.
3.) We will again not see Smokey.
4.) Sayid will again not kill anyone.
5.) We'll begin to see how Jack and the gang integrate with Dharma. I'm guessing that Jack will reveal his doctorness (because he can't help himself) and that will allow him to become a valued member. The lie that Sawyer is going to tell is going to have to be a whopper...I think he won't try to assert these are his former boat mates but some kind of rescue mission sent to find him. Just a guess.
6.) We're going to get puppy dog eyes from Juliet to Jack, Sawyer to Kate, Kate to Sawyer and my friend Ben (not the homicidal island dweller) is going to hate it.
7.) Ben is going to have another interesting conversation with Locke where he tries to convince him that his murdering him was a helpful thing. I think we're also going to get an allusion to (but not evidence of) where Ben was when he got beat up. He's going to mention Desmond.
8.) Speaking of Desmond...I don't know that Amy will reveal that her baby is him, but I think we're going to find out who her baby is tonight. I'm sticking with Desmond, but smart money says if it's revealed this early, it will be a minor character (like Ethan or whatnot). If it is Ethan, it's going to bring up an interesting question of how it is Amy would have survived to have him if the gang hadn't gone back in time and saved her...another time travel brain freeze is upcoming.
Beyond all of that, we should see Marvin Candle (aka Pierre Chang) tonight, "Namaste" is kind of his thing yo. Maybe a Miles Straum origin story? Too much to hope for methinks.
posted by Ryan at
8:59 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home