Cool Shit 4/1

Enjoy these pictures of outer space. Deep, deep outer space.

When solo acts break up the band.

Yes it premiered last night, but here's a quick guide to what's happening with all the characters in Game of Thrones.

Sure the series finale script from Breaking Bad was stolen, but that's not the first time it's happened.

A look at Quentin Tarantino's favorite movies, and how they possibly may have influenced him.

I mean, there comes a point when we, as a society, simply have to say "that's too hot." Right?

Cool Shit 2/1

If you're a fantasy novel fan, you'll easily lose yourself (pun fully intended) in this collection of maps.

Art Bell and former host of the Coast to Coast radio show, is quite possibly getting a new show! (Honestly, it might be worth checking out his wikipedia page for some entertaining Friday reading.)

If you can slog through the atrocious layout and design of the site, you'll be able to enjoy a comprehensive look at the influences and homages in Quentin Tarantino films.

4 volcanos erupting at once! Check out the photos, and don't miss the navigable video (use your arrow keys and you'll be able to take in a 360 degree view of the eruption sites).

House of Cards, a new series on Netflix, comes out today. Here's a look at the first two episodes (Netflix is releasing the whole thing at once so you could make it a weekend watch if you'd like).

And here's a trailer for it to give you an idea of what it will be about:



This is incredible. A look at one of the original drafts (I think the 5th) of Raiders of the Lost Ark - complete with Harrison Ford's notes. A cool look into what really goes into finishing a script - long before the cameras start rolling.

Cool Shit 1/22

Are these the best songs from Quentin Tarantino films?

Last night FOX premiered The Following, a Kevin Bacon starred show about a serial killer and other stuff. I should have my thoughts on it soon - but first read the A.V. Club's take on it.

That movie that was all shot at Disneyland sans permission? Here's a trailer for it. Probably the most footage we'll ever see of it before Disney lawyers get their claws into it.



The pain that is on display in the NFL. It is my theory that we're currently at the peak of the NFL's popularity and is slowly on the decline. Articles like this one are chinks in the armor.

A documentary (maybe) on what an ACE Hardware employee would do when suddenly faced with the zombie apocalypse.

Links of Interest 2/17

A pop culture map of time travel references. It's dizzying, if you can believe it.

It's hard to be a movie fan without counting Roger Ebert as an influence. This is a sad, yet inspiring article about the life he now leads after cancer ravaged his mouth, leaving him literally speechless. And yet he communicates now perhaps better than ever.

A visual of just how deep the Mariana Trench is.

Person in a deer costume, wooden acting, horrendous dialog...there isn't much more you need to make an awesome commercial.

Full disclosure: I hated Inglourious Basterds. I thought the plot was tepid, many of the characters had no reason for their behavior (seriously - the main guy simply pulls a 180 after the first 2/3 of the movie has been spent building him up as a total badass) and the theater - don't get me started: both plans to blow it up had nothing to do with one another. I guess that was a coincidence?

I really hate the fact that it's up for best picture.

Anyway, here's an article with Tarantino listing the movies that inspired him to make it.

Taking a look at where the honey bees went. Here's hoping the trees had nothing to do with it.

That Steve Jobs is one sneaky bastard.

Hair items!

I'm fascinated by all things El Bulli.

Links of Interest 1/21

Interview with Tony Clifton.

I’m really not sure how these superheroes could really help you.

The idea of buyouts stink – unless someone offers me one.

An essay about the late night television landscape and how the internet affects how people react to it.

Ski jump mishaps.

I like the 15 second Macgruber sketches on Saturday Night Live because each one executes a one note punch line well. Fleshing out the character (who is already based on a fictional character) for a feature length movie, is a little concerning.

The plight of the repo man.

Sure James Cameron is a dick. But we still have to give him credit for continuing to push the boundaries of filmmaking.

A roundtable discussion with the directors from 2009 that are the odds-on favorites to be Oscar nominated. (via pop candy)

Myths about the American Revolution. (via kottke)

What is the defining movie of the 2000s? PART 8: 2007

Want to catch up?

If you haven't been following, but would like to catch up now, here are the earlier parts...

Part 1
Part 2
Part 3
Part 4
Part 5
Part 6
Part 7

As always, the disclosure/definition: this is not a list of good/great/your personal favorite movies. This is a list to see if we can find what the definitive movie is of the decade. The criteria, as with most internet lists is subjective and vague in its definition. It has to be recognized by a majority of people (that means no art house films), and has to have a positive buzz. It has to be considered by the mainstream and have cultural significance.

Maybe it's me maturing, or maybe because not enough time has passed, but I feel that 2007 doesn't have too many contenders to be a defining movie. And that's ok, because I feel treating this like the Baseball Hall of Fame accepts members is a good thing.

Regardless, let's take a look at what 2007 brings to the table...




Remember, this is not a list of good/great/your personal favorite movies. This is a list to see if we can find what the definitive movie is of the decade. The criteria, as with most internet lists is subjective and vague in its definition. It has to be recognized by a majority of people (that means no art house films), and has to have a positive buzz. It has to be considered by the mainstream and have cultural significance.


First up - the Oscar nominated films:

No Country For Old Men
Atonement
Juno
Michael Clayton
There Will Be Blood

Of this list, I immediately see 2 contenders. So let's break it down. Atonement? I have no idea what that was about and it was only 2 years ago. I bet in another year it will be the Trivial Pursuit question that stumps everyone when they try to name the 2007 Oscar contending films.

I loved Michael Clayton, but do understand why others might not. Long, meandering, and purposefully ambiguous, I think Clooney and David Bowie both did bang up jobs. I loved that it had a 70s cinematic feel and wish more movies took risks like this one did.

There Will Be Blood? Daniel Day Lewis fantastic. "I drink your milkshake!" Pop culture significance. Seriously, you can't order a milkshake with friends without getting a bunch of terrible impressions of that line. And I'm never going bowling with Daniel Day again.

But is the movie defining?

I don't think so. I think everyone got caught up in the performance and kinda forgot about the movie. Is it still a great film? Absolutely. Is it defining? Nah. It's historical and cool and a great accomplishment, but not special at the end of the day.

That leaves No Country For Old Men and Juno...



(spoiler if you haven't seen the movie. This is the ending! Not that it would mess you up too much)

No Country For Old Men has a lot going for it. Based on a novel from arguably one of the best living writers. Directed by arguably the best directors working in Hollywood. Won the best picture. Things against it? A rather vague and open ended conclusion to the whole thing that left some scratching their heads. While I think the ending is a little jarring, I can also appreciate that it is something different, in that it forces the viewer to interpret it. That's rare and also a little refreshing. I definitely believe it's a good contender for defining movie of the decade.

As for Juno, if you remember it receive ridiculous hype before and during the first two weeks it came out. And that inevitable hype inevitably damaged it. It also put hipsters at war with one another and questioning their values. On one side you had the hipsters who saw it first and created the hype; on the other side you had hipsters who refused to see it because of the hype. Yay hipsters!

Regardless, this film is a smart, edgy teen comedy with a female protagonist - something were not used to. Is the dialog a little over the characters' heads? Possibly...but didn't we all know slightly pretentious teens in school that at least tried to speak like this?

It also doesn't hurt that the writer was a former stripper and broke into Hollywood the way all struggling writers would like to. That the film now is a measuring stick for other indie comedies (_______ is this year's Juno!) doesn't hurt it either. I feel confident choosing it as a contender.

With the Oscar's out of the way, let's turn our attention to the mainstream releases...

300
A small little movie about a bunch of Greeks that hold off the Persian hordes...oh yeah and it was pretty much done all in front of a green screen. Stylish and gory, this movie turned people's both in Hollywood and across the country when it opened so big. Birthing (eww) a number of lines that have become cliche, glorifying hyper violence and yelling, this movie is the rallying cry of a contender for defining movie of the decade. It even has the honor of being the focus of a spoof movie, "Meet the Spartans," something that can't be overlooked.

And really I think that's it for 2007. I thought about Superbad and Knocked Up, and I think they are comedies that people will remember from the decade, but I don't think they have enough staying power to be considered a defining movie. Maybe I'm wrong, but I just don't see it. I think both Old School, Anchorman and Wedding Crashers are all funnier and more iconic, and will stick with that.

Of course we can't ignore the the now time honored tradition of looking at some of the other movies Hollywood trotted out for us to consume...

Transformers
"_________raped my childhood" has become a cliche on the Internet, probably going back to when Lucas released Phantom Menace. People became so outraged because the movie didn't closely adhere to their childhood memories of the original trilogy, so they took this mantra as their battle cry. Ok, so maybe it wasn't the biggest thing in the world, but I've heard it enough that in my head it's a cliche. It's used ad nauseum to describe something that doesn't fit perfectly with the memory of something.

That said, I'm pretty sure Michael Bay is raping all of our childhoods with his Transformer movies.

I understand that it's not so much a movie as it is a really long and loud commercial, and that we sorta as a society are ok with that, but that doesn't mean the movie doesn't have to make sense.

Of course, the joke's on me, because Michael Bay is rich enough to live on a bed made of explosions, while I sit here and write this in a poorly lit cubicle. So he wins. (Apologies if the Fox image I used is from the sequel. I really didn't care enough to figure it out, and really, it's a Megan Fox picture so you shouldn't be too upset.)

Ghost Rider
Nicholas Cage is apparently going broke. I like to think it's because he made choices to star in movies like Ghost Rider. Based on the comic about a motorcycle rider that turns into a flaming skeleton. What? You don't like my plot synopsis? Fine, wiki it, it's a ton more confusing, non sensical, and silly. And yes, I understand anyone could have written that, but I doubt even Tom Wolfe has the writing chops to make it any more coherent. I will give Ghost Rider one little bit of credit - it had the foresight to cast Eva Mendes. While that won't get me to watch the movie, it will get me to linger on it a bit if I sstumble across it on cable.

Grindhouse
This splits people a lot of ways, and with good reason. Comprised of 2 movies that pay homage to the experience of watching a 70s drive-in movie (complete with bad audio and missing reels, which, ok do we all realize these were bad things that people hated?) directors' Robert Rodriguez and Tarantino take slightly different routes to get to the same place.

Rodriguez tackles a zombie movie, and pretty much follows a standard 70's horror movie script note for note. There's the occasionaly wink to the audience, but for the most part he plays it all honest. So what we're leeft with is...a purposelly made mediocre zombie movie - which, yeah I really can't get too enthused about.

Tarantino went a slightly different way, and the results are...mixed. First of all, while the template of a 70s movie is all right there on screen, Tarantino just couldn't contain himself. And that's a good thing. So what we got is a patchwork quilt of all the 70s genres he loved so much, blended with a 2007 Tarantino sensibility. It's interesting to watch it unfold, and that's with absolutely nothing happening for the first 40 minutes. By the time we get to the car chase, we're exhausted from having to deal with the main characters chat about nothing. This would have made a fantastic 30 minute short; I think 90 minutes was just too much.

The other thing Grindhouse had going for it are the "trailers" of made up movies. Speak to a Grindhouse fan and he/she will most likely suggest this is the best part of the movie. While some of them are kinda clever, (Machete looks awesome!) the others definitely are only a gimmick and start to drag.

But don't take my word for it, take a look yourself! (be careful of the violence and nudity - there's a lot of both)



So that leaves us with just 3 contenders for 2007:

No Country For Old Men
Juno
300

Stay tuned for part 8...

Links of Interest 8/20

A list of bad ass motorcycle gangs.

Thomas Pynchon’s latest, Inherent Vice, is reviewed.

Interview with the guy who made Police Academy 2 what it is today, Bobcat Goldthwait.

An appreciation of Miles Davis’ Kind of Blue.

This guy is a hardwired Constitutionalist. If you share similar views, you will enjoy this article on how to fly without ID.

Jeremy Piven answers 10 questions for Time.

MTV talks to Brad Pitt and Quentin Tarantino about time travel. Or rather, Inglourious Basterds.

I’m including this link simply for the excuse to now include a clip of the awesome television show that is Small Wonder.

The rapid extinction of the land line.

Not enough people appreciate Pinball. Well I’m here to change that, by linking to this!

Links of Interest 8/18

A look at upcoming movies.

Interview with Eli Roth.

Guy watches Big Trouble in Little China for the first time.

A serious look (by The Atlantic!) of Tarantino’s Inglourious Basterds.

What would you do if you weren’t allowed to eat?

Appropriate material with the recent Vick signing, a look into dog fighting.

Track hate groups in the United States.

A look at what Tarantino suggests are his favorite movies of the last 25 years or so.

A look at Hollywood’s worst blockbusters.

I’m not going to lie, I’m fascinated by secret menus. Did you know Taco Bell has one?

Links of Interest 8/14

Least impressive supergroups.

Sexy sci-fi scenes.

Harvard has a Natural History Museum?

Interview with Quentin Tarantino about Inglourious Basterds.

The mathematics of gambling.

Everything you know about fruit is wrong.

What would you change when creating a new look for the suburbs?

Living on a submarine.

A look at expensive war planes. Really expensive war planes.

The era of celebrity chefs and television kitchens.

What is the defining movie of the 2000s? PART 4: 2003

This is part 4 in an ongoing series.

Part 1
Part 2
Part 3

I briefly wanted to answer some of the people that have left comments about these posts...

1. I'm an idiot about Chocolat. I was getting it confused with Like Water for Chocolate. Neither are going to be considered for defining movie of the 2000s.
2. I've seen at least 2 minutes of Mullholland Drive
3. Thanks for all the suggestions about movies I've missed. You realize I asked for your suggestions, right?
4. Yes, I've never seen Almost Famous. But I still included it on the short list of movies to be considered for the defining movie of the 2000s. So I'm not sure where the vitriol is coming from. The "twist" I'm talking about that so many people have assured me is autobiographical, is the part where the kid's mom allows him to travel the country with a rock and roll band. I get that it's possible it happened; what I'm saying is it's still a little farfetched. Especially in the 2000s. Which would be an argument against it being a defining movie for the 200s.
5. The Nicholas Cage trilogy debate is exactly that - a debate. A subjective debate.
6. Every movie I bring up, I'm not considering as a candidate for the defining movie of the 2000s. Case in point, Gone in 60 Seconds. I'm not considering that. Ok.

That's it. Thanks for the comments!


Let's dive right into this, because to linger with the list of releases from this year is depressing. From Justin to Kelly was made in this year. That should be more than enough information to tell you what I've slogged through.

2003 Academy Award nominated films:

Lord of the Rings: Return of the King
Lost in Translation
Master and Commander: The Far Side of the World
Mystic River
Seabiscuit

Return of the King, not only being the third installment in a trilogy is also a test to your bladder. I've seen less endings in a Choose Your Own Adventure book. While it wrapped the story up rather nicely, I'm not including it on the list.

Master and Commander: The Far Side of the World? I bet I could I could spot 100 people on the street the "Master and Commander: The Far Side of the --" and people still wouldn't come up with the title. Well made movie, but certainly not memorable, which definitely excludes it from a list of candidates for most defining movie of the 2000s.

Mystic River was a well crafted movie that dealt with very heavy subjects, but at the end of the day it was nothing more than a 2 hour Law and Order special written by M Night Shyamalan.

Seabiscuit? Rocky for horses. Which leaves...

Lost in Translation
A great movie about existentialism and our place in life, disguised as a romance. Lost in Translation uses very little plot to explore issues about the universal feelings people can have, and how we act and don't act on them. Both Johanssen and Murray are brilliant in this, in a way that you'd never expect when first hearing about the pairing. This definitely is a contender for the movie that defines the 2000s.

Ok, so now done with the Academy Award movies, let's dive into the rest of the year's releases. 2003 gave me personally 2 of the most disturbing, depressing movies I've ever watched: 21 Grams and Monster.

Monster tells the story of Aileen Wuornos, the serial killer convicted of murdering seven men, and her relationship with Tyria Moore (different name in the movie). Bleak, depressing and at the very core one very fucked up love story, the movie is important, but not one I'm going to revisit anytime soon. If you've never seen it, it's worth the rent for Charlize Theron's performance alone.



21 Grams is one of those movies that I knew I should see, but when it came via Netflix, I kept finding excuses not to sit down and watch. For over a year. I can't begin to calculate how much that stupid movie cost me in subscription fees, but finally one night, in a pensive if slightly despondent mood, I forced myself to watch.

And it pretty much was exactly what I thought it would be. Open ended, depressing, deep, reflective and nothing I want to revisit. All the performances were top notch, but the subject matter was incredibly deep, dark and devoid of anything I saw or had to deal with in my cushy, pretentious suburban upbringing, which is why I really couldn't relate.

I also don't think it was the defining movie of the 2000s.

So what are some candidates from 2003?

Kill Bill Vol. 1
The Tarantino mashup of styles, genres, and plots was certainly ambitious. Originally supposed to be one long film, (running about 4 hours) it was split into two "volumes," which I believe hurt it significantly - especially this first part. Yes, the big fight at the House of Blue Leaves is impressive, but knowing that there is a second part after this one diminishes it slightly.



Regardless, while on a personal level I don't find this to be one of Tarantino's better efforts, it still deserves to be considered for the defining movie of the 2000s.

Pirates of the Caribbean: Curse of the Black Pearl
It's hard to go back to this movie and see it fondly after the two sequels destroyed it. I really have no idea what happened. This original was a fun adventure yarn that didn't take itself too seriously, but still delivered the thrills and gave us characters to care about. Depp's Jack Sparrow represented the in-it-for-myself-only pirate and gave us a iconic character that was only later exploited in the sequels for money. Look, I don't begrudge companies creating sequels to make more money - but why not spend a little more time on the plot and create worthy sequels to the original? We know it's possible, the first movie is evidence.

Still, we can't hold the sequels against this movie, so I'm including it on the list.

By my count, that's pretty much it for 2003. Of course, we haven't looked at some of the clunkers of the year...

From Justin to Kelly
Awesome. A movie that took two reality stars that have good voices, and turned them into Hollywood stars. Well, Ok, tried to turn them into Hollywood stars. Luckily, this endeavor failed, or we probably would have gotten Kris Allen in Point Break 2. Actually, we'll still probably get that, but at least we can all laugh about it.

League of Extraordinary Gentlemen
Long ago, probably about 6 years ago, I wrote how this, along with the movie Driven, were teh worst movies ever. Obviously, that's just my personal opinion and there are plenty of other candidates, but seriously, those two movies are the worst ever. Based on a comic book, it takes the admittedly cool premise of ganging up some famous literary characters together (Allan Quartermain, Captain Nemo, Dorian Gray among others) into a spy ring. Had the movie been more about that, it could have been cool. Unfortunately we needed implausible (and often impossible) action sets, evil overlords, backstabbing characters and every other action adventure movie cliche.

Oldboy
Ok, I don't consider this movie to be one of the bad ones. Far from it. Oldboy takes an interesting concept (man imprisoned for 15 years not having any idea why, before suddenly being let go) and dials it up to eleven. And once it gets there, multiplies it by 60. Oldboy is an installment in the Vengeance Trilogy by director Park Chan-wook, which dealt with themes of revenge.

Having never watched the other two installments, I hesitate to say that Oldboy was the most severe, but if you want a shocking movie that plumbs the depths of the human psyche, this is the movie for you. It certainly is not a movie where you'll see the ending coming.

So, let's see what we got for 2003...

Lost in Translation
Kill Bill Vol. 1
Pirates of the Caribbean: Curse of the Black Pearl

Ok, what did I miss? Please leave your suggestions in the comments section!

Up next, 2004.

Links of Interest 5/21

Apologies for the lack of updates these past few days. I have been on the road tending to less important yet more lucrative business, and Cline, well, you know.

Look what companies could do with advertising on semi-trucks.

The possible future of television.

The more I see of Inglourious Basterds, the less I’m excited.

Ghostbusters 3 is apparently closer to reality. Good thing or bad thing?

Interview with the current guy-who-can-do-no-wrong, JJ Abrams.

Looking for a planet like Earth.

I link to lists like this not so much to definitively give you a list of the best whatevers, but more to show that these lists simply cannot be considered definitive. And if you followed that, you’re a better person than I, because I jumped out after making up the word “whatevers.”

Now this list – this list is definitive. And awesome in a 80s hair metal way.

Perhaps a sign that we’ve taken the bacon craze a little too far.

So what has George Bush been up to these days?

Finally, an answer after all these years – what’s it like inside Neil Patrick Harris' house?

Apparently American Idol doesn’t like the greatest song ever written – and free, awesome publicity.

Here’s a look at television show marathons for the upcoming Memorial Day weekend.

Movie Trailer Preview - Inglourious Basterds

First, I'll let you simply take a look before diving right in.

My first thoughts?

Read more on the flip side...



It makes me nervous.

My feelings for Tarantino films run hot and cold. I love his early stuff, as pretty much everyone does, but feel he has lost his way a little bit of late.

Reservoir Dogs, Pulp Fiction and Jackie Brown is a series of three that is hard to beat by any director. There's nary a misstep there anywhere. And that level of superiority seems to hurt Tarantino. My theory is after completing the complex and mature Jackie Brown, and not getting the kudos it deserved (at least in my opinion) Tarantino figured people simply wanted him to go and make violent movies with a lot of pop culture refrerences, cool music, and nods to his influences.

And that's a shame. Because Jackie Brown really showed off his skill and growing experience as a director. Not only did it prove he could craft something from someone else's source material, it showed he wasn't a one trick pony.

Unfortunately, it also wasn't what his core fanbase was looking for after the too hip for the room movies that preceded it. And I think that affected Tarantino and he drifted back to his wheelhouse.

Don't get me wrong, that isn't a bad thing. People working in the genres and things they love can produce magic. And Tarantino's films will never be considered safe, boring, or "generic." They will always have something cool to look at.

But when you don't stretch your wings, you don't take risks, and you don't fail, and you don't learn. And then a funny thing happens...you get complacent. And once you get complacent, you start to become irrelevant.

I'm not a huge fan of Kill Bill. Not because it doesn't have a lot of great ideas or great shots in it - it does. I don't like it because to me it feels as though it's just a series of cool looking scenes loosely tied together. I mean I enjoy the Crazy 88s fight:



It's beautifully choreographed and is full of cool looking action. The problem I have with the movie isn't the ideas and large action scenes - it's the transitions between these scenes. There really aren't any. The narrative doesn't flow. Yes, there is an overarching story about revenge, and it follows a typical story structure, but the transitions between each of the bigger scenes are scarce and poorly executed at best.

And don't get me started on Death Proof. The car chase is exciting, and QT deserves props for doing it without CGI - a rare feat these days that gives the entire chase an added sense of danger, but the first hour drags considerably and serves little purpose. It's one thing to show off dialog and cool things in movies when you can, but the scene feels flat and meandering, and you wind up waiting for it to end instead of really watching it.

I understand the theory of trying to recreate an exploitation film, I just think QT got caught up in himself and forgot about it. He knew he had a cool car chase and didn't really know how he was going to get there.

Enough background though. Let's go back to his new movie: Inglourious Basterds.

What makes me nervous?

• Eli Roth has a large role. He wasn't good in Death Proof, and I can't imagine he's gotten better.
• Brad Pitt seems to be playing a caricature. Therefore, I can't imagine the other characters are all that fleshed out. And when I say fleshed out, I don't mean we're not told their back stories. But I don't want to be told. I want to be shown. QT does a lot of telling in his movies of late.
• Violence for violence sake. From the trailer, it seems this should have been his exploitation movie.
• The hack Dirty Dozen vibe that's coming off it. Brad Pitt seems to be channeling a version of Lee Marvin. Brad Pitt is not Lee Marvin.

Look, I know it's only a trailer, and that trailers are created to get people excited by movies. So they don't necessarily show what the film is about. I get that.

But "100 Nazi scalps?"

Really?

I'll leave it at that.