Quick clips for Tuesday June 30

Amy Adams is hereby warned to avoid walking through the background of sets

Why? Because she's undeniably quirky/hot/talented/soft-looking and Christian Bale is undeniably angry/angry/angry/dangerous. Variety reports that the lovely redhead is in negotiations to star with Bale and Mark Wahlberg in The Fighter, the latest movie from director David O. Russell (the "O" stands for "Oh-my-god-this-set-is-uncomfortable"). The movie is a retelling of the life of "Irish" Mickey Ward, and the shooting locale is now the best place to find unchecked acts of testosteronicity in the United States (The Expendables is filming overseas). Seriously, you have Russell (whose last project imploded before recollecting its molecules and then exploded), Bale (has he done anything to indicate an anger problem, I can't remember), and Wahlberg (if you call him Marky Mark, he will face-rape you). And somehow, the sweet and charming Amy Adams wants to walk into that. Were there no bear cages you could wear a salmon suit into? Seriously, you're only in negotiations Amy and I think you've already been harassed. Here's a list of 5 things you're going to want to negotiate for:

1. A bodyguard who isn't afraid to kill celebrities
2. Specialty ear-wear to protect your hearing from Bale's growl
3. A spit guard to protect you from Russell's phlegm-laced tirades
4. The funky bunch
5. A salary equal to the gross domestic product of Guam that is guaranteed, so when the project goes supernova, you still get yours
   

I'll see this movie (should it get made), I'm interested in the subject matter (provided Russell doesn't change it to a movie about a talking guppy during shooting), and it could bring some awards talk (if the cast survives).

Please, recession, take anything but our mediocre-sounding Tony Scott/Denzel Washington movies

Variety has had the unpleasant job of reminding us frequently these days that the industry they count on to give them money does have some issues (I say some because Transformers 2 is officially the biggest wad of fecal matter to ever gross $400 million in the blink of a Bay's eye). First came the untimely demise of Moneyball, the Steven Soderbergh/Brad Pitt baseball movie (which may not be entirely dead, just mostly dead...Columbia is trying to resurrect it but it's looking bleak). Now comes word that Fox, the little studio who shouldn't, is freakin' out over the budget for Unstoppable, a generically titled, generic sounding, generically cast "suspense thriller." Tony Scott is set to direct, which means Denzel Washington MUST be involved (someone should really look into the relationship between those two...I'm pretty sure they're common-law married by now). The other star is Chris "I'm Kirk now, Dammit" Pine, who is making this his first post-Star Trek flick...provided it happens. It looks like the film is still going to happen, but it will be delayed as they try to squeeze some dollar signs out of the "runaway train filled with chemicals" movie. I think what's interesting here is that this sudden concern about budgets isn't really being handled right. See, if it were me, and I'm just spitballing here, I would worry about shaving $25 million from the $200 million movie (because it's probably easier) than I would shaving $10 million from the $60 million movie (where it would be noticed more). Just a thought. This does give some evidence as to why studios like F#@ks studio will only greenlight shitty, shitty remakes: They can project the exact return on the flaming piles, as all remakes have a ceiling. What I'm trying to say is, this is an omen, not of reconsidering inflated crazy budgets, but trimming middle-of-the-road movies in favor of remakes and sequels. Happy Tuesday!

Let's take a peek at some Dicks

I was so let down by Zach and Miri Make a Porno and the recent comic book writing of my former hero Kevin Smith (seriously, my man crush was formerly epic)...that I really stopped following him. That is, I stopped following him until I read his Twitter feed (speaking of which, read mine). He made me laugh, showed the same self-awareness that endeared himself to me, and continued to post info about his next movie, A Couple of Dicks, which sounds stupid but also stars Bruce Willis and Tracy Morgan, two guys I like. Now the cast is swelling to include Michelle Trachtenberg (who is beloved by the Buffyfiles I know) and Jason Lee (of course). Those small pieces of casting are my excuse to talk about Smith, but this is really a post wherein I admit how badly I'm pulling for Smith. He didn't write the script on this, so my hopes are high, as I think he needs to rest his pen a bit. His recent "Batman: Cacophany" was as boring and uninspired as Zach and Miri was redundant and stupid...but God help me I like him and want him to succeed. I want him to find his voice again, and sometimes directing or dealing with someone else's words are the best way back to that. This screwball comedy about cops may not be the best film ever, but if it's a step in the right direction, it will be welcomed with open arms. I don't need to see Smith do a superhero movie, but I would love to see him tackle something with a bit more of himself in it, not the persona he's cultivated over the last decade. Okay, time to end with something funny and not this boring personal cry of support: The funniest story Smith told the last time I saw him speak was about Ben Affleck describing to Kev the horrid things he had done to the glorious Jennifer Garner, starting with "Hey, Kev, you know that chick who plays Elektra." Gotta love it.

Quick clips for Monday June 29

The subtlety of junk jokes

I am going to review HBO's new show "Hung," which hinges (as most things do) on a huge phallus, for two reasons: (A) It's the Monday of 4th of July Week, meaning it was this or a write-up on how Smurfs is going to be in 3D (to better appreciate Smurfette's kickin' curves), and (B) it was directed by Academy Award winner and Omahan (he's more proud of one of those than the other) Alexander Payne, so I get movie AND Omaha points (mmmm, the double dip). Feeling very much like a male-oriented "Weeds," the show demonstrates a surprising amount of restraint for a program centering around a reproductive organ. Thomas Jane is Ray, a down-on-his-luck everyman whose life trajectory is best summed up by his exchange with his shallow, shrew of an ex-wife (Anne Heche), who ditched him for a needle-nosed, sure-to-be-erection-challenged dermatologist with money: "God, you were beautiful and athletic and talented and smart and popular—and hung.” “What am I now?” “Now you’re just hung!” Divorced and broke, Ray and his two awkward, real-looking children (Charlie Saxton and Sianoa Smit-McPhee) live in his parents old home...until that burns down. Desperate, Ray attends a self-help money-making seminar where he reunites with and reboffs Tanya (the delightfully quirky Jane Adams). In a fit of post-coital rage, Tanya taunts Ray with the idea that he should find a way to capitalize on the one gift he has, the Ed "Too Tall" Jones he has in his pants. Within minutes, the plot is hatched, and Ray is on his way to Gigolo town, population: skeevy. In the hands of a lesser writing/directing team, "Hung" would have been an unbearable bevy of junk jokes, burdened by the very premise that probably got it greenlit by HBO execs. Instead, Payne's subtle hand guides the action into his wheelhouse: the schlub adventure. Jane's sullen, tragic performance never veers into tomfoolery, as though he studied Mary-Louise Parker's descent into the drug trade on "Weeds" like his life depended on it. Adams is equally up to the challenge, as she fights off the pull of her role as it was written: a campy stock character with little glitz. It's important to note that this is only one episode, and the pilot does fall pray to the one weakness that threatens to consume "Weeds" at times: tonal shifting of a tectonic nature. Never outright funny enough to be a comedy (and to daggum sad at times, like with Payne's haunting fire sequence), never realistic or poignant enough to be a drama, the show's burden will be to swim between those shores as interesting as possible, lest it drown while treading water. Overall, an incredibly nice debut with the promise for some sexual hijinks and subtle conflict to come. Grade - B+

Oscar is serious about this shiznit

You ain't watchin' da Oscars and da Oscars knows it. In another move that is sure to raise eyebrows (as soon as everybody collectively recovers from the McMahon-Fawcett-Jackson-Mays celebrity death march...seriously, God, why take Billy Mays...did you have a stain in heaven that just wouldn't come out?), the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences (a title as long as their award shows) have announced two more changes in addition to the doubling of the Best Picture nominees. However, unlike that maneuver (designed to make room for big budget tripe you actually liked), these two are designed to bring respectability back and shrink the show. The first announcement was that they ain't gon' give a Best Song Oscar if they's don't wanna. Basically, the music branch of the Academy will listen to eligible songs (as usual) and will score them (as usual) on a scale of 6-10 (so that nobody gets their feelings hurt with an "ouchie" score of a 1-2, or what I call the "Miley Cyrus range"). New rules say that if no song gets at least an 8.2, the category won't exist that year. If at least one does, that song and the next highest scorer would be nominated (with a cap at 5 if 5 or more were to score 8.2 or higher). It's actually a move to show some integrity, but they will assuredly find some way to screw it up, so don't worry. Now, the second piece of news is short and easy to understand: They're moving those annoying take-your-pee-break-now "tribute" awards to another night. HALLELUJAH! I mean, don't get me wrong, I want said old industry fart to get the recognition, but maybe not at the expense of padding a half-hour onto the broadcast. It was pretty much the point at which all older folks went "well, I'm going to bed," which is ironic considering it was their peer up there, likely wishing he or she (who am I kidding, it's the Academy, so HE) was in bed too. We'll have to see if this has a real impact or just a tiny little one on the running time of the show and the integrity of the categories. My guess? Just like an ambidextrous dwarf tosser, it'll have a little on both.

Weekend Box Office Roundup: Thanks for the reminder that my opinion is irrelevant

Nothing like a $387 million worldwide reminder that your opinion is totally, 100% worthless. It's nice to know that, globally, the citizens of the world care not for writing, character, or integrity so long as plenty of shit blows up and Megan Fox's goodies jiggle. Michael Bay is now rich enough to buy back his dignity and have me killed for dissing him. Thanks again, moviegoers! I'm now going to whisper my opinions to a chicken, upon whom it will have a similar impact.

Here's how it went (haiku style):

1.) Transformers 2: Revenge of the Racists - $112 million (Accuracy of prediction - 91%)

America votes:
Unanimous rejection...
of me, not the film.

2.) The Proposal - $18.5 million (Accuracy of prediction - 98%)

Sandra is in line
for one of her biggest hits.
Somewhere, Steve feels joy.

3.) The Hangover - $17 million (Accuracy of prediction - 94%)

I have nothing left.
It's funny but not that much.
Still, suck it Paul Blart.

4.) Up - $13 million (Accuracy of prediction - 92.5%)

Now Pixar's third best
Sure to get the second spot.
Not bad, Ed Asner!

5.) My Sister's Keeper - $12 million (Accuracy of prediction - 90%)

Not bad for cancer!
Wait, I mean cancer movie.
That was poorly done.

Overall accuracy of prediction - 93.1%

Solid week, this week.
I'm getting used to success.
It will fade quite soon.

Happy Monday gang!

Friday free for all

Eating Chud's cud

I'm a sucker for lists almost as much as I'm a sucker for report cards (as opposed to a report card sucker or someone who got suckers for report cards...I'm going to stop there). Yesterday, Devin at Chud.com doled out his mid-summer grades, which you should check out here (seriously, check him out, that mothertrucker is funny...he blasted the tweet that defined my experience of finding out that Michael Jackson died via twitter yesterday, "It's been touching sharing the death of America's greatest weirdo pedophile with you in real time"). It's a Friday, the entertainment world is falling into seizures trying to memorialize MJ while delicately handling the last 20 years of molestation, psychotic behavior, and baby dangling; so, nobody is releasing any interesting information so much as they are cutting together montages to "Smooth Criminal," which is a total bad-ass song, no matter what Ben Coffman says. I contemplated doing a "separating the artist from the art" piece, wherein I discussed how a lot of the greatest masters of art are totally bugf**k crazy and that it's okay to really love their work without supporting their propensity to do terrible and weird things...but then I realized that I'm nowhere near that sophisticated and I didn't want to devolve into tasteless humor (because, let me tell you, tasteless humor is flying through the air like food in the Swedish Chef's kitchen today). So, instead, I'll ape Devin and score the summer movies so far. I'm going to be revisiting them more than just reposting my original grades for them...and I haven't seen a few, so forgive me and just appreciate that this has nothing to do with Michael Jackson.

May

X-Men Origins: Wolverine
Original grade - C-
New grade - C

Now, I'm going to get more flack than fighter pilots who may be forced to drop bombs on North Korea (that's not a joke, that's a reminder to occasionally seek news other than "Michael Jackson is still dead" in the next few days) for slightly improving this score, on account of the movie being written by semi-trained monkeys. They ruined Deadpool, had some truly stupid dialogue, and smooshed the most interesting backstory in comics into a truly average film...but as the summer wears on, average becomes a badge of honor. You'll want to thank the last few weeks for lowering the bar, Hugh Jackman.

Star Trek
Original grade - A
New grade - A

The most enjoyable film so far this year (the italics are so people don't say "how could you think it's the best film of the year?" that is, they would say that if they actually communicated with me). So much fun that I think I'm going to try to go see it again before it leaves theaters. Loves it.

Angels and Demons

I didn't see it, so I'm deferring to Ben Coffman, who is pretty reliable despite his denial of "Smooth Criminal" as a totally wicked awesome tune.

Original grade - B-
New grade - C

This is straight from the Coffman's mouth: "It resonated less than even the first film, The DaVinci Code, which wasn't exactly a thinkpiece." Hey at least Ben coined the term "blockblustery" in the review for it, a term I plan on using relentlessly in years to come.

Terminator Salvation
Original grade - D+
New grade - D

By the time it's all said and done, it may rank as an F for me. Seriously, the robots find the guy they're looking for and CAPTURE him? Plus, I heard the original ending idea. Now, that would have been something. It may have been a spectacular failure, but it would have been something to see, as opposed to this nutless, stupid bag of bolts. McG is McDead to me.

Night at the Museum 2: Battle of the Smithsonian

I would never make anyone see this. It gets an incomplete, which it likely is.

Up
Original grade - A
New grade - A

It's teetering on an A+. It's that GD good, folks. This IS the best film of the year so far, not just in terms of entertainment but in its power to move you. Enjoy your first Best Picture nomination this year, Pixar. Try to pretend you would have gotten one if there were only 5 nominees.

Drag Me to Hell

This isn't one I saw either. Our own Justin Senkbile did and had some nice things to say about it, as did most of the internets. I'll just repost his original grade and move on.

Original grade - B

Same goes for his Land of the Lost review

June

Land of the Lost
Original grade - D-

Ouch.

The Hangover
Original grade - B
New grade - B

Still not as funny as everyone wants it to be, but in no way bad. It's got sporadically hilarious moments, but is mostly just enjoyable. Plus, I'm getting sick of this no-funny-women stuff. Sarah Silverman is funnier on her twitter feed (and raunchier) than many moments in this movie.

The Taking of Pelham 1 2 3

Another Justin one.

Original grade - C+

Year One
Original grade - D
New grade - F

The more I thought about it, the more it cheesed me off. If I have an F rating, I may as well use it on this one, as I can't fathom something less enjoyable happening to me that didn't involve physical harm.

Transformers 2: Revenge of the Fallen
Original grade - D+
New grade - D

It's gotten worse in my memory over 2 days. By the end of the summer, this will be an example of something worse than Year One that can happen to me. The best is how the screenwriters are now pointing to Michael Bay explicitly as being responsible for the racist robots. They may be telling the truth, but it would have been nice for them to say something when they saw it screened for them prior to widespread release. Enjoy your box office records, you morally reprehensible brainless behemoth of a movie!

This post has gone on so long that there's little chance you're still reading, so I'm going to get right to the point (after like 1,000 words):

OVERALL SUMMER MID-TERM GRADE (drumroll please): B-

Slightly above average thanks to Star Trek and Up. We'll do another tally at the end of the summer (which, given the insane length of this one, I can only assume you'll skip right by).

Weekend Battle Plan: DON'T SEE TRANSFORMERS 2...what do you mean you already did...twice...

I know that movie critics are as valuable to your weekend plans as cacti are to fish, but if you've ever listened to me before, heed my words now: DO NOT SEE TRANSFORMERS 2. Michael Bay is becoming a dark overlord, that's my only explanation for the sheer evil I see before me. He must somehow be using the incomprehensible, racist movie to instruct his minions to commit various acts of terror and hatred. That's the only reasonable meaning behind how a movie this big can be this bad. It's like people at the studio didn't even watch it. Maybe they were all "who cares what's on the actual film, it's already made $200 million and it isn't released until next month." They KNOW you're going to see this, so do the opposite just to mess with them. Hell, see the movie with the dying sister kid or whatever. I don't care, just don't go see this. If Bay gets more powerful, it will mean the end of all humanity as we know it. We'll all be forced to wear mullets, sculpt our bodies into unrecognizably chiseled forms, and develop the intellect of Megan Fox (meaning basic functions like walking will become a nuanced and difficult process). Only you can prevent this from happening.

That's my recommendation: Do anything you want to do in the whole wide world that is legal besides seeing Transformers 2. Do you hear me?

On DVD: As I told Steve King on the radio show today, I'm recommending Confessions of a Shopaholic out of spite against Michael Bay. Now, you're probably saying, but Ryan, Jerry Bruckheimer (Bay's long-time associate and [presumed] heterosexual lifepartner) produced that movie, why would that be a spiteful thing to do to Bay? Well, it's full of as much estrogen as Bay's films are testosterone, and Isla Fisher will remind you of your humanity, whereas Transformers 2 will make you question the point of living. Fisher is a beautiful, talented actress languishing in a moderately boring little film, but still...if we support her in this maybe she'll get better roles. Also, it's not Transformers 2.

Fearless, Flawless Box Office Predictions

I don't know what happened to this blog today. I'm just grossly over my self-allotted word count (people often tell me they don't read the blog because it's too damn long...so, they're long gone by now). This is going to be an easy week to pick number one, but who's going to go number two (ha, get it?) and who will round out the top 5 is a bit less clear. I'm counting on Bullock's naughty bits to get me through. Also, I'm only predicting the WEEKEND totals for TF2, not the whole 5-day opening because they were the only film to do so (next week we'll do a full 5-day for everybody, because it's a holiday and I love America).

Here's how I see it (haiku style):

1.) Transformers 2: I Heart Racism - $91 million

Nothing more to say.
Racist robots and bad script
have made me quite sad.

2.) The Proposal - $19 million

Sandra is back boys!
Perhaps this time she will stay?
This makes Steve quite happy.

3.) The Hangover - $15.5 million

This film just won't stop.
Look for another one soon.
No clue how that works.

4.) Up - $15 million

What more can you say?
A best picture nod maybe?
Why the Sam Hell not?

5.) My Sister's Keeper - $9.5 million

I don't know this one.
Haven't seen a single ad.
Enjoy this one, gals!

WILDCARD: Year One - $9 million

I hope this is wrong.
I want to forget it all.
Like it never was.

Okay, that's your epic, unnecessary blog for the day. Enjoy your weekend and don't get too sucked in to constant MJ coverage, you're better than that.

Quick clips for Thursday June 25

Because the problem with the Academy Awards ceremony is that it wasn't long enough

Yesterday in a press release that Movieline.com described as a "bombshell" (Hyperbole? On an Internet site? Surely you jest!), the Best Picture race at the Oscars just went all Val Kilmer on us, doubling in size overnight. Whereas before, only 5 movies had the honor of nomination (on average, about two of those being deserving), now a mind-boggling 10 pictures will make it to the party. This isn't overkill, this is digging up a corpse, stabbing it a few more times, setting it on fire, reburying it, then digging it up again and shooting it a few times. Apparently the Academy can only think in groups of 5, as a reasonable number of expansion like 7 (usually only about 1-2 films are "left out") would have seemed a bit more reasonable for a ceremony whose length has become as infamous as its irrelevance to mainstream Americans. Now, if they couple this with the announcements that, as a people, Hollywooders are officially done with "the montage" (I'm talking in films and in ceremonies about films), we may just be able to get the show finished in the time it takes an arthritic grandfather to shovel his driveway with an ice cream scoop. Obviously, I have a few reservations. That said, this is a somewhat shrewd movie on the Academy's part for two reasons and does hold one singular benefit (which we will see as immediately as this year). The Academy's two-fold reasoning for the Kilmerian expansion is (1) it's a ploy to get more viewers, as chances are now good that a movie you loved will make it to the final 10 (seriously, this plan makes "Dancing with the Stars" seem like a well-conceived endeavor), and (2) it's good for the movie business, as a bunch of movies will pay for ads in the trades to promote their now Oscar-nominated movie, it will allow repeat business for a bunch of films, and it generally creates a decent amount of buzz. The reason I'm in favor is because we're FINALLY going to see some deserving films that were just left out of the race make their way in. The Dark Knight would definitely have been in the field of 10, and this year, you just know that Up is going to make it (YESSSSSS). And, once the film GETS the nomination, there's no reason to think that a public outcry wouldn't possibly lead to it actually winning. So, when you think about it, this means we're getting one small piece of enjoyment for some serious long-term bloating. So, basically, it's like eating a deep-fat fried Oreo with baconnaise. Happy 4th of July, America!

Ryan's Junk Drawer

Ahh, Thursday, my least-favorite day of the week and the day on which we sort through all of the news that even I can't stretch into something long enough to resemble a whole blurb (and I can talk shit about A-N-Y-T-H-I-N-G). This week has been pretty slow, I'm guessing the heat wave which spread across the U.S. made even the act of bloggery feel wretched and sweaty (as opposed to how it usually feels: sweaty and wretched). Here's the little tidbits that bit their tids this week:

• Antichrist, the new movie from batshit insane director Lars Von Trier (who seriously believes himself to be the best director in the world), is going to be opening in October in the U.S. This is good news for anyone who wanted to see a movie in which some seriously awful things reportedly happen to Willem DeFoe's genitalia. The film is supposedly just whacked, but also beloved by some critics, so it will be interesting to see if America can handle real horror: what lies in Willem DeFoe's pants.
• Of news perhaps only to those who still care about the lines of journalism and what is or is not ethical Internet behavior, Slashfilm.com (one of my personal favorites), pulled a boner and ran a Sam Mendes retrospective that carried a tag at the top saying the article was sponsored by Focus Films (one of my favorite studios), which just-so-happens to be releasing a Sam Mendes movie this week. A twitter-tiff instantly developed between some prominent blogging honchos and the guys at Slashfilm did the right thing right away and said "we hear you, we apologize, it won't happen again." The mea culpa also came from the advertising firm and the studio. This is a big deal because it could have changed how movie bloggers who get advertising (NOT ME, LORD KNOWS I DON'T SEE ONE DAMN PENNY) may have been in the crosshairs of pay-for-play writing. Nice to see one of the leaders (Slashfilm.com) step up and prevent the problem. If they hadn't backed down, this would have been a full blurb, but as it stands, it's junk drawer material because they did it all right after the fact. Not that they care about my little opinion, but my little opinion is happy.
• Moneyball, which I told you on Monday was on life support, has been pretty much euthanized. Sorry, Brad Pitt. Supposedly, Steven Soderbergh couldn't get any takers to come in and save the day after Columbia balked (get it, because it's a baseball movie). It's not officially dead, they could try some serious resurrection through budget cuts and script revisions, but I don't think this is going Lazarus on us so much as it's going kersplat (people just don't use kersplat enough these days). So, long story short, Soderbergh got his balls cut off.
• Nimrod Antal (yeah, that's a guy's real name) is supposedly directing Predators, which leaves me feeling exactly the same as I did about the project before I heard this news: totally indifferent. Other than having the worst name after Slappy McWeinerhead, Antal directed Kontroll, which I heard was atmospheric and good, but was spelled stupid, so I didn't see it. We'll know more about this one when casting and script news start leaking like a bag of nasty trash.
• Finally, Chud.com is reporting that Zack Snyder's follow-up to the unfairly blasted Watchmen is possibly going to be PG-13. This is interesting because the initial description of the hot chicks in an asylum sounded like the very best of Skinemax. This isn't for sure yet, but Snyder seems to think that the fantasy elements will negate the violence (we were hoping that the "fantasy" elements were what would get the R rating)!

Transformers 2: Revenge of the Fallen Review

I wanted to like this, I really did. Thankfully, this is exactly one tiny baby step better than Year One, or I'd have to take my own life. I enjoyed the first one, but apparently, if left unchecked, Michael Bay is a total asshole. Enjoy!

Oh, Bay!
Director ruins Transformers 2, but you’ll see it anyway
Ryan Syrek

A critique of Transformers 2: Revenge of the Fallen is as relevant to audiences as philosophy is to lemurs; still, even the staunchest giant-effing-robot proponents will find the latest overproduction from director Michael Bay to be a bitter horse-sized pill to swallow. Beyond the wholly incomprehensible script by Ehren Kruger, Roberto Orci and Alex Kurtzman, which features such choice dialogue as “I’m directly below the enemy’s scrotum,” the film also presents an all-you-can-eat buffet of racial stereotypes and manages an unforgivable sin for a movie that’s only as successful as its eye-gasm-inducing sci-fi-ghting: it’s kind of boring.

At the onset, things are fun, as the surviving good transformers from the last movie—that’s the Autobots, for those who don’t speak nerd—are hunting down the surviving bad transformers—the Decepticons. Meanwhile, Sam (Shia LaBeouf) is still LaBeouf-ing his girlfriend Mikaela (Megan Fox) while transitioning to college, where he meets his roommate and poorly conceived comic relief Leo (Ramon Rodriguez). Because Michael Bay movies are what testosterone would dream of if it could, every single female at Sam’s college dresses like a Maxim photo shoot.

Things go fine until a somehow-even-bigger-evil robot, The Fallen (Tony Todd), decides to return from outer space and jumpstart an ancient device that will blow up the sun. Once more, Sam must join forces with the robots to prevent them from gaining the “Matrix of Leadership,” which sounds like a self-help business seminar but is actually the key to start the sun-killing machine.

There are a myriad of aborted half-subplots throughout, including Mikaela’s leg-humping robot side-kick and a ne’er-do-well government agent, but all they serve to do is pad the running time from “inadvisable” to “sheer punishment.” But if Bay’s film will have a legacy, it won’t be the film’s length or even the sure-to-be-huge box office; it will be his ability to score a blackout in his game of bigotry bingo.

The worst offenders, Skids and Mudflaps (both voiced by “Spongebob Squarepants” himself Tom Kenny), are two shucking-and-jiving, ebonics-talking robots designed to look like monkeys and revealed to be illiterate. If that’s not your favorite stereotype, don’t worry, as there’s also a little robot who spouts Italian-mobster-speak and John Turturro, who is reintroduced in a Jewish deli and lives with his nagging mother. Wowza. Basically, box office records will fall, along with our cultural progress.

Tossing acting out the window, although it should be noted that Fox is less believable than a cover story from the governor of South Carolina, the film also sports plot devices that don’t even make sense in the context of a Transformers movie, including a Decepticon that appears as a Victoria Secret model, which begs the question as to why robots that could look human choose to hide as modes of transportation.

Yes, the effects are top-notch. Yes, there are moments of summer-movie joy. Yes, Transformers 2 was never intended to be intellectual. Yes, one of the transformers is shown to have testicles. You decide which of these things outweighs the others.

Grade - D

Quick clips for Wednesday June 24

Avatar still on pace to change all of our lives

There's hype ("Oh my God, The Hangover is so funny that it made me laugh hard enough to give me permanent epilepsy. It also cured my suicidal friend's clinical depression.") and then there's HYPE ("Avatar will cure your cancer, give babies to infertile women, and reverse hard-line policies in the Middle East."). I've been on record saying that the effusive praise for Avatar is only serving to raise the bar high enough for James Cameron to rack himself on. Apparently, nobody else got the message, as JC screened 24-minutes of footage to some distributors and it caused them to have fits of pleasure stronger than a revivalist preacher casting demons from them. Slashfilm.com has the best wrap-up I've seen of the event, and did a pretty kick-ass job compiling the relevant collective nut-bursting over the footage. Here's some of my favorites (all of this is taken from Peter Sciretta's excellent compilation):

“The Insider” files his report on ComingSoon: “jaw-dropping experience.” … “3-D until now has been used as a gimmick.” On the human characters inhabiting their Avatars: “It took my breath away. I thought–just like you guys–that I’ve seen it all with Gollum, or The Hulk, but Cameron has done it again. These creatures seem so real, that within minutes you forget you’re watching an enormous and very blue CGI character. Even the eyes are totally convincing. The characters have real personalities and a soul.”

If you're keeping track at home, this one appears to suggest that James Cameron has created new life, complete with "a soul." Good thing we're not exaggerating things and making him sound like the divine creator himself and not a guy making a movie with a computer.

Unique Cinema Systems Nord on Twitter: “stunning, literally jawdropping. Amazing visuals unlike any before seen, with incredible detail.” … “CGI was photorealistic, characters look really real. Believe the hype, this movie will be massive!” … “Cameron told audience each frame of finished film takes 30-50 hrs to render, then double that up for 3D.”

I really love any use of "literally" during a freakout review like this. I hope the jaw-reattachment surgery went well. Also, using the math, this film took 17 years to make. Incredible.

GJKooijman on Twitter: “is mindblown” … “Still in awe of meeting James Cameron… Avatar will change movie industry forever.. thank you Jim” … “It’s nothing you can imagine, it’s real. Cameron made a new planet and took a cam there.” … “THIS WILL CHANGE MOVIES FOREVER. Trust me, it will.”

This guy is ready to full-on make out with Jimmy. Plus, he's the first to take things to ALLCAPSVILLE, where your passion is demonstrated by HUGE LETTERS! I don't know that I can trust you Kooijman, will it change movies into something else? Like turtles? Will movies be turtles now?

Sperling on Twitter: “It’s official! The footage from “Avatar” shown at Cine Expo was amazing. Absolutely stunning in 3D. Should be a huge hit.”

Then you get the one guy who gets it. This is how you describe things that are good without making messypants. I think he's probably right on. The movie will be pretty, it will likely be a big hit because it's a spectacle (especially in 3D) and then we'll go right on living our lives, as though nothing had happened. Also, one more acknowledgment of the rad work Peter did at Slashfilm on this compilation, as those quote-gasms were spread across a number of sites.

Facebook schmacebook, if Fincher directs an Aaron Sorkin script, I'm pushing the "like" button

The prospect of a movie called The Social Network, which sounds like a slutty follow-up to Sandra Bullock's epic The Net, is bleak. That is...until you find out who is circling the project. The film is about the creation of Facebook, a platform that has consumed far too much of my time with things I can't believe I did ("Which Twlight character AM I?"), which again sounds about as interesting as a documentary on the crinkling of leaves. But Aaron Sorkin is writing it. People say stupid shit like "I love (insert actor here) so much that I would watch him read the phonebook." In the case of Aaron Sorkin, I love him so much I would watch anything he wrote, include Phonebook: The Movie. Thus, I'm already in for this flick. Then Variety reported today that David Fincher is in "advanced talks" (having graduated from "kindergarten talks") to direct. I wasn't a big fan of Fincher's last film, Benjamin Button, but he has a great eye and can make things visually interesting without having to go batshit insane with the camera. A lot would depend on casting (has anybody seen Ryan Gosling around?), but this could develop into a slyly interesting little project. By the way, they rerun episodes of "The West Wing" on Bravo now at 7 in the morning, as if they knew I'd be working out at the time and could catch them. If there was a better-written show in history, James Cameron must have created the superbeing that wrote it. Even knowing how everything turns out, I'm still riveted.

Looks like I can remain interested in Robocop...for now

The Internet giveth and the Internet taketh away. Take one ambiguously answered question by director Darren Aronofsky (see Chud.com), add in news that he's making a project with Natalie Portman (God, what I wouldn't give to "make a project" with Natalie Portman), combine that with some puzzled tweeting back and forth speculating about time frames and interest, and you have a festering rumor that Aronofsky had moved on from the now long-gestating Robocop reboot. That news sucked and pissed me off, as my interest in Robocop is directly tied to Aronofsky's involvement. This isn't to say that I'm not a fan of Mr. Cop. I once went with my friend Andrew to see a guy dressed in a wickedly awesome Robocop costume (no, this was not last year and no it was not a guy in spray-painted boxes yelling "I am ROBOCOP"). I just want so badly to see Aronofsky work on something "mainstream" and see a superhero-esque project by an artist that is skilled, as most of the time skilled artists aren't associated with such projects. It won't work in every case, just imagine Paul Thomas Anderson's Captain America...okay, actually that just gave me the piss jitters with excitement, but you get the point (um, let's go with Sofia Coppola on Wonder Woman...DAMMIT, that works too). So, imagine my relief when Harry from Aintitcool.com, informed us that Darren Aronofsky was staying put on the project. How does he know? Well, that's what Darren Aronofsky said. He said "no, still on it" and told Harry that no new details had come up but he was still the guy. I wish I had Aronofsky on speed dial, but I'll have to settle for that good Chinese Place sitting on Speed Dial Number 3.

Quick clips for Tuesday June 23

Christina Aguilera and Cher to star in a movie somehow not called Before and After

The reanimated, never-attractive corpse of Cher will join the plastic-molded, once-attractive Christina Aguilera in Burlesque, a movie that sounds more evil than Satan's to-do list, according to Variety. Wizards, magicians, and science will come together once more to manipulate the former flesh of Cher so that she can star as a former dancer who runs a club that small-town-girl-with-big-town-plastic-boobies Aguilera stumbles into and dances in. Although to this point only a handful of truly dedicated gay computer-savvy individuals have been able to hear what a Cher/Aguilera duet would sound like, many of us have heard the squeal of tires that fail to stop in time to save a beloved family pet. This will be Cher's first movie role since 1999, when she was returned to her cemetery plot. Aguilera has spent the last decade squandering her actual singing talent by alternating between dressing like a whore, becoming a mommy, and then dressing like a mommy/whore. The Variety article has a choice quote from Screen Gems president Clint Culpepper, who actually said "The only person who was more excited than I am is Christina." This leads me to a series of three jokes I couldn't decide between, here they are for you in no particular order: (1) This may be the first time someone has unintentionally come out of the closet in a Variety press release. (2) Wake me when they have a ranking of who's least excited about this news. (3) Christina was only excited because for the first three weeks, she thought she was headlining a movie with "a chair." Remember these attempts at humor when Conan, Dave, and Jimmy take their stabs at this later on...I'm guessing I come out on top.

If you're looking to kill yourself, I have a deadline for you

That deadline will be the release date of The Zookeeper, which I wouldn't be wiling to see if the alternative was Burlesque. Variety is reporting that the animals who try to help Kevin James copulate with Rosario Dawson will be voiced by Adam Sandler, Cher, Jon Favreau, Sylvester Stallone and Judd Apatow. I'm sorry, did I not draw enough attention to the fact that the plot is basically Dr. Doolittle meets Hitch, featuring the voices of Adam Sandler and Cher? I know, I always thought that sentence should be accompanied by pictures of children crying tears of blood and grown men throwing themselves in front of trains. Oh, yeah, and the script for "Kevin James tries to bone Rosario Dawson with the aid of effing talking animals" sold IN A BIDDING WAR for $3 million. I would go into the physics behind how James making any physical contact with Dawson may spell the end for every molecule and atom in the universe, but let's focus on the fact that somebody wrote "a giraffe tells Kevin James how to use his dingus" on a napkin and got paid $3 million...and Cher will now voice that giraffe. This is another Happy Madison production, which is growing as synonymous with quality as the companies who make Chinese toys and baby formula. I don't hate Adam Sandler as a person, on account of things like Punch Drunk Love and, from the looks of it, Funny People. But Kevin James may be the worst human on the planet. Seriously, I saw on Entertainment Tonight that he lives on a diet consisting solely of baby koalas and the tears of pretty ladies.

You know what a slow news day means....LIST! LIST! LIST!

Unreality Magazine has published a fairly cool little totally irrelevant list of the most polarizing films of the last decade. For no good reason, I'm gonna take a peek at what they came up with (complete with a few thoughts of my own on each) and see what ones they missed.

Here's what they had:

• The Fountain - To me, one of the most brilliant films of the decade. To a lot of other people "hippie, sci-fi garbage." Those people mostly still need their food to be chewed for them, however.
  
• Vanilla Sky - Loved it. It wasn't revolutionary or game-changing, but very, very solid. Perhaps Cameron Diaz's best performance, and capitalizing on Tom Cruise's own personality before that went all apeshit. Lots of people did hate it for the ending and general weirdness, but those same people loved Hitch.
  
• Watchmen - This one didn't age well in my mind. I loved the first 20 minutes and certain elements (including Rorschach) were phenomenal...but looking back it was uneven. I think I'm coming down more in the middle, which negates it's inclusion on this list for me.
  
• AI - I'm noticing that I'm liking almost all of these but know tons of people who didn't. Yes, it was basically Pinocchio. So what? It was touching and beautiful. Really underrated in Spielberg's bibliography if you ask me...which you didn't.
  
• Eyes Wide Shut - Totally agree with this being included. When I first saw it, I was mixed. Upon repeated viewing it became a much richer film that still haunts me thematically. For many other people, it was just people in weird masks doin' it, and the only thing they remember was nekkid Nicole Kidman before she looked like a wax figure of Nicole Kidman.
  
• The Village - Absolute drivel. The first sign that the emporer M Night Shyamalan had a distinct "no clothes" problem. Wickedly stupid...and yet I know many people (including my wife) who found the visuals beautiful and liked the dang thing. And yet I love her anyway...strange.
  
• The Blair Witch Project - Separate the hype from the movie. The movie was good and terrifying (and easily mockable), the hype was waaaaay over-the-top. Polarizing for reaction, not for the film itself, which brings me to:
  
• Fahrenheit 9/11 - A Michael Moore film, polarizing? Nooooo. It's not the best "movie" but it was captivating at the time. One of the few guys pissed off at the onset, before it was okay. Medicore filmmaking, excellent moment capturing.
  
• Moulin Rouge - My favorite movie musical ever. I loved it. How do you not like this movie? I've never met anyone who outright hated it who didn't hate all musicals. I'm not sure about this one.
  
• Crash - Here you go, a polarizing film because people thought it was profound when it was obvious. Actually, a pretty bad movie. Horribly overacted and full of cliches.
  

Overall, a damn accurate and good list. I am hard-pressed to think of any glaring omissions from the list, aside from one. Here's a few of my own, just to further the discussion:

• Punch Drunk Love - This was one that so many people just didn't "get." To me, it was beautiful and prevented me from wanting to do to Adam Sandler what I want to do to Kevin James.
  
• Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind - I've heard people say this was "weird," when it was simply one of the most heartfelt and beautiful films of the last 10 years.
  
• Lost in Translation - The movie that launched my Scarjo obsession. Perhaps the finest work by a female director I've seen. Lots of people tell me "it wasn't funny." Again, I loathe those people.
  
• Magnolia - The second Paul Thomas Anderson movie on this list of mine, for good reason. Frogs, man. Yep, it's weird...yep, it's phenomenal. Tom Cruise's best performance ever, hands down (I just realized he has 3 works between these two lists...hmmmm).
  
• Twilight - I suppose it's only polarizing to the tweens who love it, but never has a movie made so much money and was so reviled by so many...well, maybe one more was more polarizing (see below)
  
• Star Wars Episode I: The Phantom Menace - This should have been on the main list. The general consensus now may be "crap," but you had near fist-fights breaking out between friends looking to defend it and condemn it. Hands down the most polarizing of the last decade.
  
• The Reader - Oscar nominated? For what? K-Win's no-no parts? Seriously, this was terrible and somehow critically acclaimed. Eff that.
  
• Hostel/Saw - Either of these would work, depending on which one you think started the whole "torture porn" movement. Abominations in my eyes, dammit.

What do you think, any more you'd add or omit?

Quick clips for Monday June 22

Steven Soderbergh is down a ball

In addition to the many balls that steroids have shrunk, I think I'm going to blame steroids for this one too. All of the trades this weekend announced that Columbia Pictures stuck the baseball-flick Moneyball in the shitter two days before it was supposed to start shooting. Ouch. The story is that Amy Pascal, described in the Variety piece as "Columbia Pictures topper" (which makes her sound like she spends her time standing on cakes) got around to reading the rewrite director Steven Soderbergh did to Steven Zaillian's script and shit canned it immediately thereafter. Don't take it personally Steve, she had no qualms about the Spiderman 3 script, so clearly she likes a little more feces in the screenplay. The film was put into "limited turnaround," which means Steve spent the weekend calling in and offering favors (bow-chicka-bow-wow) to try to get another studio to pony up and get in on the film...which happens to star Brad Pitt. So, for those counting at home, that's Brad Pitt as the main star, Oscar-Winner Steven Soderbergh as the director, and Oscar-Winner Steven Zaillian writing the script...and Pascal euthanized it 96 hours before start time, a full 3 months after Soderbergh started interviewing ballplayers for footage to use in the film. Wow, did Soderbergh revise the draft until it's now a 3-hour documentary on the perfect meatball, with Pitt starring as a noodle? Nobody is saying that $50 million for a movie based on the economics of baseball is a sure thing...but you've got more than enough to sell this sucker with Brad Pitt. Plus, you have to consider how easy marketing to your target audience would be, what with countless radio sports talk show hosts salivating about the prospect of talking to Brad Pitt instead of the monosyllabic cliche-spewers they normally interview. Maybe this is just because I'm currently wearing a Cubs shirt while typing this, but I can't believe that Columbia Pictures read the Year One script and was like "HELL effing YES, we're gonna get RICH BITCHES!" and then read a script passed by two Oscar winners and loved by Brad Pitt and said "ummmm can we get Sandra Bullock to show up 'Maxim' nude in it?" Maybe they should offer to throw Jack Black in there to act like he ate paint chips and show his man teets, Columbia apparently thinks that's a license to print money. There hasn't been a good baseball movie in forever now, here's hoping Soderbergh can somehow find the stones to get his balls back.

The weekend news was slow enough that I am, in fact, going to talk about the Teen Wolf remake

I wanted to show some restraint. I honestly did. I was seriously going to ignore the information that Teen Wolf is going to be remade by some assholes with money that they're too lazy to light on fire or flush. I also couldn't think of the appropriate angle to take when discussing the Teen Wolf remake. Should I go with a blurb that skewers the modern high-school/tweenage movement and add to the growing body of Miley Cyrus verbal feces-flinging (perhaps with a hint of joking about Vanessa Hudgen's use of a personal camera to document her ability to grow into the role naturally)? Should I speak reverently about my affection for the first film and risk the slings and arrows of everyone else who has seen it and realized that it is, in fact, among the worst non-war crime atrocities ever perpetrated on a people? Should I propose the ridiculous story elements they could really play up (50 bucks says "Shades" is turned either into a token minority or "a gay!")? I mean, I could take the noble way out and talk about how much Michael J Fox ruled and how terrible it is that he was taken out of the game by a stupid and awful illness, but I'm not noble and I'm still kinda pissed at Fox for that kid's movie he made. So, I guess that just leaves me taking no interesting approach at all, simply mentioning that this is happening and that it leaves the possible movies to remake from the 80s at three (all of them starring Steven Segal). Oh, and it was this or show you the character designs that everybody is showing off from the Tim Burton Alice in Wonderland movie, and that shit is just nightmare-inducing. Plus, it's kind of unoriginal (other than somehow giving Helena Bonham Carter a head as big as Tim Burton's), although Anne Hathaway still looks hot. You can find that elsewhere, I'm not putting it here where it will scare me every time I log in. Seriously, when I find Teen Wolf remake news LESS terrifying, you've done something against God.

Weekend Box Office Results: Sandra Bullock should thank Matt Lauer for his perviness

I don't care that Sandra Bullock just proved you STILL don't have to have a good idea for a romantic comedy so long as it's released at the right time because all guys still kind of love her (she's like the hot chick you think would actually talk to you at the party...she wouldn't but you think she would). I don't care that Ryan Reynolds just, once again, kept himself relevant despite not making just one movie I've ever actually liked all the way through (The Nines). I don't care that Matt Lauer's dirty giggling about seeing Sandra Bullock "nude" (meaning technically naked but covered by more materials than many young girls wear to the mall) actually seemed to boost interest in the picture. Nope, I care that the film's writer pretended to be a woman at first before revealing he had junk. Supposedly it's a cute story, but I'm feeling like it went something like this "What do you mean this script is by a woman, we can't film that!" "Just kidding, it was a guy who wrote it!" "Oh, thank Jesus, I thought for a minute 'they' had figured out how to use a computer." Nice to see we keep the women in front of the camera almost showing their nurples to get attention, just like it should be (note the sarcasm hand is raised high here).

Here's how it went, haiku style:

1.) The Proposal - $34 million (Accuracy of prediction - 90%)

Bullock's best open,
aided by rumors of boob.
Her dad must be proud.

2.) The Hangover - $26.5 million (Accuracy of prediction - 92%)

Still going quite strong.
With no real competition,
more asskicking soon.

3.) Up - $21 million (Accuracy of prediction - 98%)

It just passed WALL-E,
should be in third by next week.
Bye Incredibles!

4.) Year One - $20 million (Accuracy of prediction - 85%)

Enjoy this week boys,
word of mouth is on the way.
And that word is "crap."

5.) The Taking of Pelham 1 2 3 (Accuracy of prediction - 89%)

Soon we will all say
What was that one movie called?
It will fade away.

Overall accuracy of prediction - 91%

No Wildcard needed.
One of my best weeks without.
The little things help!

Happy Monday gang!

Friday free for all

Year One Review

Let the following serve as a warning. Who would have thought The Proposal would be the funniest movie of the weekend?

Humor Starts in Year Two?
Year One ain’t no fun
Ryan Syrek

Watching Year One is like listening to an unfunny coworker tell a long set-up joke full of unnecessary detours. Only, instead of a punchline, the priest, the rabbi and the flatulent nun just make idle conversation and misremember parts of the bible. Audiences watching comedies in a theater are more forgiving than Kobe Bryant’s wife, and yet Year One yielded but one big laugh from the gang at my screening, coming when Michael Cera’s character peed on his own face. Enjoy, America!

The screenplay, penned by director Harold Ramis alongside Gene Stupnitsky and Lee Eisenberg, appears to have been written during a commercial break while watching a television show or while soaping up in the shower. Zed (Jack Black) and Oh (Cera) are morons living in cave people times who behave just like Jack Black and Michael Cera. Zed accidentally burns the village down after eating forbidden fruit from the Tree of Knowledge, which begins the confusion about just when the film is set and initiates the biblical tomfoolery.

The dipshit duo journey over a mountain range, and run into Cain (David Cross) and Abel (Paul Rudd), who don’t do anything funny. They then meet Abraham (Hank Azaria), who makes a bunch of jokes about circumcision because frequent use of the word penis is hilarious, and travel to Sodom to rescue a few smoking hotties (Juno Temple and June Diane Raphael) from their village who have been sold into slavery because slavery is also hysterical. The rescue attempt somehow involves Oh rubbing hot oil on a fat, hairy high priest (Oliver Platt) and Zed making ridiculous screaming noises.

Beyond the criminal misuse of cameos from the likes of Rudd and Bill Hader, Year One just never even tries to be funny. What passes for humor includes a joke about Jews not being good at sports, repeated mentions of the joys of sodomy and Black doing the same schtick he’s run into the ground for more than a decade now. Cera is passably funny but is hereby put on notice that his “awkward nerd” bit is starting to sour. We’ll drink it now, but he’s just a few days from curdling.

More concerning is that Stupnitsky and Eisenberg have been given the first crack at penning the upcoming Ghostbusters sequel, potentially with Ramis directing. There are probably worse creative teams to reunite—M. Night Shyamalan and Mark Wahlberg perhaps—but the list is relatively small.

That the film was slated for a choice summer release date is as much an indication that hopes were high as the sizable budget that the film was given; sadly, this squandered investment of time and money by the studio will be repeated on a smaller level by consumers upon every ticket purchase. What could have been a goofy return to historical shenanigans a la History of the World: Part I plays like an unfunny stoner’s religious history cliff notes. To use a biblical descriptor, Year One is downright unholy.

Grade - D

Weekend Battle Plan: See Sandra Bullock's goodies

I'm guessing there's not full-on nudity in The Proposal. I wouldn't know because I haven't seen it. I know that I will see it because my wife has a compulsive need to rent all romantic comedies ever made. Have you seen Win a Date With Tad Hamilton? Because I OWN a copy of Win a Date With Tad Hamilton. This week was busy enough where I only got to see one incredibly unfunny summer movie, but I did hear some good things about The Proposal from folks (one of them was an interview my friend Steve King did on his morning show with Jesse James...who just happens to be married to Sandra Bullock). Ryan Reynolds is likable (although I think I've only truly liked one movie he's ever been in, The Nines) and if you even get to see a little of what Sandra's got workin', it's still a hot piece of somethin' somethin'. So, consider this a lukewarm recommendation to see The Proposal if you want to see something new. It's more of an anti-recommendation against the hellaciously stupid and relentlessly unfunny Year One than it is a recommendation for the cookie-cutter rom-com. Oh, and someone needs to tell me how much of Sandra's Bullock you're actually getting to see. Matt Lauer seemed to indicate by his childish and giddy horny behavior that you see a lot, but he's sexually repressed (come on, we all know it).

That's my recommendation: See The Proposal if you want to. I honestly don't care. If you live in a town with Moon playing, see that instead and tell me how it was.

On DVD: I don't have a DVD recommendation this week. I'm sure as hell not recommending the Friday the 13th remake and that's about all that got pooped out onto video shelves this week. On the morning show this morning, I recommended renting a TV series like "Weeds." That's a good recommendation, but so is enjoying the out-of-doors. For example, if you happen to be within the vicinity of Decatur, Nebraska and are so inclined, they are having their "Riverfront Days" celebration this weekend. The town has various events, including a fish fry and "Decatur Idol," which is tonight at 7 pm. I just so happen to play Simon Cowell in that little production. My accent quickly moves from "droll and accurate" to My Fair Lady embarrassing, so it's worth seeing. Saturday, my wife and her family ride horses in the big parade. So, support a small town like Decatur (or actually support Decatur) this weekend instead of going into a dark room and watching a video.

This doesn't fit into anything but someone on twitter sent it and I had to include it.

Best.

Tattoo.

Ever.

That dude's my hero.

Fearless, Flawless Box Office Predictions

Another lackluster week means more of the same faces showing up in this list, whether I want 'em to or not. How stupid do all those execs who engaged in the pissing contest to get their films released in May look right now? If Terminator had dropped it's turd self in during the last two weeks, it would have made $200 million domestically. It would have still sucked, but it would have made a lot more money.

Here's how I see this week (haiku time):

1.) The Proposal - $27 million

Romance be damned
the promise of Sandra nude
will win this weekend.

2.) The Hangover - $22 million

This may win again
but even if it doesn't
it already won.

3.) Up - $20 million

Continued success!
May beat The Incredibles.
Now that is shocking.

4.) Year One - $14 million

Word of mouth will kill.
Sunday should be nearly empty.
Avoid at all costs.

5.) The Taking of Pelham 1 2 3 - $13.5 million

Mediocre film
Mediocre box office.
No surprises here.

WILDCARD: None

Don't need one this week.
I should be spot on with these.
Will regret this Mon.

Have a good weekend gang!

Quick clips for Thursday June 18

Ryan's Junk Drawer

Time to see what's in the old Junk Drawer for this week. Oddly enough, in my real junk drawer at home, nothing but buttons, Hershey kisses, and dead Smurfs.

• Like it or not (and, for the record, me likey), that whole JJ Abrams/Tom Cruise produced next entry in the Mission Impossible series is going to happen in 2011 (most likely May). We still don't know what the nature of the entry is (sequel? prequel? reboot? reimaginging? sequeprebootagining?), who will be involved (beyond Tommy boy), and what the central Macguffin will be (I'm a big fan of nuclear stuff...not in real life, but you know, mushroom clouds look wicked cool on my TV).
• David Lynch, who used to just blow your minds, is continuing to show interest in blowing your ears (kinky). His first album (with Danger Mouse and Sparklehorse...which I still haven't heard on account of me wanting to not trip balls during the work week) just hit and he has a second one, called Fox Bat Strategy (see, you're practically hallucinating already just reading the title) is on the way June 30 and is a set of 50s-style tunes. So...there's that.
• Everyone on the Internet all at once heard a largely unsubstantiated rumor about Michael Sheen being in the running for Blofeld in the next Bond movie. This titillated and aroused people (and not just because of the name Blofeld), including myself. Not only is this (A) highly plausible in my book because Sheen is a great British actor who has worked with the new screenwriter (Peter Morgan) on a bunch of stuff (including the Broadway and screen versions of Frost Nixon) but (B) would give the new rebooted series the one thing it has missed: A big baddie. Lots of people are poo-pooing this rumor, but I say we make it happen. Hell, the power of positive nerding is why The Expendables is happening, why can't we make Blofeld rise? That sounded way dirty.
• Josh Peck (from some kids show and The Wackness) is joining Chris Hemsworth (he gon' be Thor!) and some hottie from "Friday Night Lights" named Adrienne Palicki (her name sounds made up) in the remake of Red Dawn. It's my second favorite guilty-pleasure 80s movie (right after Roadhouse..."pain don't hurt" bitches), so these cast of no-names better get it right or I'm going Red Army on their asses.
• According to Shia LaBeouf, who made the offhanded comment to some reporter while whoring out Transfomers 2: Rise of the Robot Nuts (for reals, there's a robot who has full-on cyber testes), Steven Spielberg "cracked the story" for Indiana Jones 5. (A) I thought Lucas was the one on crack (hi-oh!) and (B) wake me when this comes to fruition (or doesn't), we heard about the "cracking of Indy 4" for almost a decade before it happened. For the record, still don't hate Crystal Skulls. It's got problems, but so does each and every person I love.
• Finally, Australian Stuart Beattie is making a movie out of the "Tomorrow" series, which is like Red Dawn in Australia (but in Australia, they'd have eaten Jennifer Gray). Maybe it will act as a do-over when the American version inevitably sucks dingo dong.
  

An open plea to someone I once loved...whose name rhymes with N Height Bamalan

This probably should have ended up in the Junk Drawer, but I love it too much to let it go. M. Night Shyamalan has mentioned that he is still considering making another Unbreakable movie. YES, PLEASE. That movie remains one of my favorites, and for good reason. To me, it is the gold standard for origin stories; plus, it set up a wholly NEW superhero in an age when people are buying the rights to comics before they're even published yet. Basically, you have a franchise sitting on the shelf, and I know you can get Sam Jackson (he'd do my yardwork if I asked right) and Bruce Willis (come on, M. resurrected his career with The Sixth Sense). I don't know that I mourned anything as much as the demise of the once promising Mr. Shyamalan (okay, maybe a few deceased relatives), who absolutely dropped a deuce on a promising career with the three-fold plop of The Village, The Lady in the Water, and The Happening. Wowza, that list reads like punishment we should inflict on terrorists. That he's even considering another Unbreakable should be encouraged to a degree usually reserved for cult television shows that weren't that great to begin with ("Jericho" I'm looking at you). Don't tell me that Internet buzz can't be used to get a project off the ground; we need a groundswell of support for this project in order to ensure that M doesn't go on to make a movie about telekinetic sea cucumbers or something...THE DUDE WAS GOING TO BE GREAT and now he's the guy who made the worst Mark Wahlberg movie ever. The worst MARK WAHLBERG movie EVER. You want to make the worst Tom Hanks movie, that's pretty easy, but Mark Wahlberg has been trying to make bad movies for years now, so that took some doing. Anyway, discuss this total bullshit rumor and minor side-note as if it were your religion. Promote the idea of Breakable or whatever you'd want to call it like it was your job (it kind of is mine). I want this to happen like a fat kid wants his hand to come out of the bottom of the vending machine.

How do you solve a problem like Bruno

It's being widely reported (for example, at The Wrap) that Bruno is being slightly reshot to "appease the Hollywood gay community." Yeah, because that ought to fix any problems that someone who may have problems with Bruno is going to have. One of the most anticipated releases of the year for me is also perhaps the most complex. Will the film serve as brilliant anti-homophobia exposition or will it be nothing more than a stereotype paraded around for abuse, a homo-pinata if you will? Personally, I think the answer is both and that, more surprisingly, that's a good thing. Okay, first and foremost we know that the film is going to be a collage of "gotcha" moments that expose the deep-rooted homophobia that many out there carry. The only way to produce that deep-rooted homophobia is to invent a character that is guaranteed to provoke it. Second, it's about gol-darn time we blow up the stereotypes involving homosexuals. Hell, for about 8 years there was a character only slightly less ridiculous on "Will and Grace" and he got Emmys and was counted as one of the "homosexual representations on television." Eff that! You want to blow up a stereotype, you dress someone in a glittery, diamond-encrusted banana hammock and have them say every ridiculous thing that you can think of. Why? To laugh at how INSANELY RIDICULOUS people who think that's how actual homosexuals act are! The joke is that this caricature gets taken seriously by people who think that's how homosexuals actually act! Hell, the funniest part about Borat to me was that everybody seemed to believe that all foreigners are really that backwards. That's the point of these movies, to expose people who are hateful and quick to believe that an obvious caricature is real and to blow up the stereotype for the obvious over-exaggeration it is. Yes, there are going to be those who find this to somehow be a set-back for the community, but I disagree wholeheartedly in concept (perhaps I'll feel different after seeing the movie). Personally, I think this is the sort of thing we need to really combat deep bigotry, and I hope the reshoots don't water down what could be an important satirical message. Satire has always been used to make real, lasting social change; here's hoping it is again.