Movie Review: Surrogates

Surrogates is the latest film to feature Bruce Willis. It's an action sci-fi combination that plays on familiar themes, and slips in a bit ot philosophy/politics when you aren't looking.

Starting with the plot, it does have one. It's not hard to follow and it is set-up well. The progrssion of AI and robotics eventually leads to the creation of human looking Waldo's. Initally meant to be an aid to the disabled, it is adapted by the millitary and then consumer versions. The device becomes wildly popular and soon the entire world is using this. The ultimate couch potatoe luxury item for everyone.

Well almost everyone. There are humans that are against the idea. And they set-up conclaves within the U.S. and presumably the world, where no machinery exists. Essentially they are ludites.

All of this you probably got from the trailers for the movie. But the plot quickly moves around. We start with a murder, actually 2 of them, via the surrogate machines. Then we shift to a conspiracy to another one, and then to a love story, and finally to a moral dilema.

All of the themes work on a level, to an extent. But they all fail as well. The biggest problem is that you don't feel like any side in this film is really all that compelling.

Ving Rhames character is a support role, but not very essential to the movie, though he is a key to the plot. In fact everyone except Willis is basically a weak minor support. Which would be fine, but the acting of Willis seems as weary and devoid of emotion as the surrogate robots the fill this movie world.

The special effects of the film are decent but not spectacular. The same can be said of the CGI scenes. Overall you geta bland feeling in looking at the various city scenes. Which is likely what was intended, as this is the effect of the surrogates.

Are there plot holes in the film? Many, and the pace of the film allows you time to wonder about them. Is there lots of gunplay and explosions? Not as much as you would thing. Though there are more than a few scenes of large groups of people being destroyed, except these are all robots so everyone is safe.

The big question of the film is, what makes us human? Is technology a tool for our benefit or a means of destroying us while we still live?

The end of the film is like the rest of it, a bit contrived and far too neat to be believable.

There is a bit of humor though in seeing what most of the characters really look like without their robotic counterparts.Not enough to make the film worthwhile but interesting for a few seconds. Similar to what we learn of the guy controlling the wife in the boring Gamer film.

There's not much to say about Surrogates as there isn't that much to speak about. The film is not compelling, you don't really feel engaged at any point. Overall it was a decent film but not worth a movie ticket. I'd propbaly buy the DVD to keep up with my Bruce Willis collection of films, but that would be the only reason.

Movie Preview: Surrogates

What if you were to take the themes of WestWorld and The Matrix, add in a waldo (not the character) and some I Robot (the book not the substandard movie), what might you get? Well these are likely sources that helped to create Surrogates.

The concept is hardly new. We have a world of luxury, or so it seems. A future where people are even more removed from interacting with each other than we do know with the internet. Almost a world like Logan’s Run, separated from everything around us – effectively in a trap of our own creation.

Suddenly this “ideal” world has a serious problem. Our hero, Bruce Willis, is an unwilling piece in a series of events that move towards a revelation that will affect everyone. And the punch-line will be either anti-climactic or dead-on.



Considering the normally successful choices of films Bruce Willis has been in over his career (once he got past his first film) this film starts on a good foot. The addition of Ving Rhames is another plus to the film. Robots and a decent amount of action can’t hurt either.

But this film will be more plot heavy than most sci-fi these days. I expect that the first 15 minutes will be critical for the film, much like in Blade Runner. So keeping the plot holes small will be very critical to it being a good movie.

The look of the film is pretty consistent with most futuristic films these days. Nothing special there. And the special effects look to be lighter than most on the CGI front, which I find to be a bonus.

I can’t say that I want to run out and see this film. But I’m not dreading the fact that I will review this either. Thus this is a middle of the field movie. Likely to be worth the time of fans of sci-fi and Bruce Willis and Ving Rhames (unless Rhames has a mostly cameo role – which seems likely). But it’s all down to the writing on this one.

A near miss counts in horeshoes and with asteroids

Believe it or not, Monday was your lucky day. I bet you didn't even know it. I didn't.

Monday, unreported to the masses, an asteroid passed by the Earth just past the satellites in orbit of the planet. No one was warned, and nothing was sad until today. The asteroid was between 70 and 150 feet in diameter.

Now you may be wondering what happened, or why you should care.

Well first off is why you should care. The asteroid is the same size as one that struck the Earth in 1908. That one hit with the force of a nuclear blast, in Siberia, completely destroying 800 square miles of forest and possibly causing a minor 'ice age' in Europe that lasted some 5 years. Effectively, had that asteroid hit, any major city in the world would have been wiped out in seconds.

As for why nothing was said, it was because scientists were sure it would miss. Mind you that the asteroid was only found late in February this year. The asteroid was moving so fast that it covered 1 million miles in roughly less than 2 weeks. Aren't we glad they got the math right? Be more glad that they found it.

The fact is that there is an unknown number of asteroids that might hit the Earth any and every day. Less than 5% of the visible sky has been charted for possible threats. But it is a guaranteed fact that eventually, something will hit our planet. How bad that could be depends on what actually hits us.

The asteroid that possibly wiped out the dinosaurs was in the E.L.E. level. That's Extinction Level Event, for those that have not seen the multitude of movies (like Armageddon) and television programs (Discovery Channel) about the subject. But it does not have to be that big to do damage. Plus events happen more often than you think.

In 2004 an asteroid was within 4,000 miles of the surface and in our atmosphere. In 2008 an asteroid luckily burned up before it could hit in Africa. That one was found a mere 19 hours before it began to plunge into our planet.

So give your mom a call, or hug a loved one. Because Bruce Willis can only save the day in a movie, and we were lucky on Monday.

Forbes best paid actors - my version

On a less important and trivial note, news came out today on the top paid actors in America. Now this list has nothing to do with talent per say. Several people on the list are horrible if you ask me. So even though they may have made money I want to present the list in the order of quality each actor on the list has, and I’ll throw in a movie I think that justifies my though.

Let me know if you agree.

• 1. Will Smith. Forbes had him at #1 and he deserves it. He made $80 million in the past 12 months and has a record-setting 8 consecutive films breaking $100 million to show for the salary. Sci-fi, drama, action, you name it and he can act his ass off. So much for those that argue that White audiences cannot connect with a leading actor that is of a different race. – See Ali, Hancock, Independence Day and so on to see what I mean.
  
• 2. Johnny Depp. Another great actor, capable of a range that equals anyone else on this list. He may prefer esoteric roles like What’s Eating Gilbert Grape, but when he wants to go mainstream it’s like a day in Tortuga. Forbes had him in 2nd and I would say it’s as close as his $72 million makes it look. – See any Pirates of the Caribbean.
  
• 3. Bruce Willis. Here Forbes goes by the numbers and I go by quality. Of the remaining actors and actresses he tops the list. He is the everyman that gets the job done with style. He may be the oldest and only made $41 million for Die Hard 4 (which made $380 million) but he most importantly delivers entertainment. – See Hudson Hawk, 5th Element, or any Die Hard film
  
• 4. Nicolas Cage. While you wouldn’t imagine that he was paid $38 million from movies like Next and Ghost Rider, he still can get it right more often than not. He is another of the versatile entertainers on this list. – See National Treasure
  
• 5. Mike Meyers. He is still coasting of the success of Shrek and Austin Powers. And he needs to considering his turn as the Cat in the Hat (thankfully Dr. Seuss was dead before the movie was made). Still Shrek is funny, though not worth the $55 million that he made. – See Austin Powers, or the first Shrek
  
• 6. Eddie Murphy. I would put him higher as he has more lasting power than most on the list, and he has enough talent to do nearly every role in a movie. But his last couple of films were not that good – Norbit and now Meet Dave. Yet as an entertainer he can wow the audience with roles like Dreamgirls (he was robbed of the Oscar plain and simple). His $55 million is like paying a couple of actors each, and it would have got him over his Shrek co-star but his overly family friendly films don’t work above the age of 11. – See Dreamgirls and be amazed.
  
• 7. Keira Knightley. The first lady on the list. She only makes it one step above her Forbes ranking in terms of cash, but she is miles ahead of the next closest female entertainer. She’s sexy, smart, and can do a bit of action – yet none of it over the top. For $32 million I think she is getting underpaid. –See Star Wars episodes 1,2,3
  
• 8. Adam Sandler. While his low-brow comedies are a hit or miss proposition he is more than where he started from. He has grown to do quality serious roles like in Reign Over Me (with a good dose of help from Don Cheadle – massively underpaid) which helps us all forget films like Little Nicky. My guess, his career will grow, and his pay of $30 million, if he stays away from dumb comedy like The Gong Show (yes I know it’s a television program). - See Spanglish.
  
• 9. Leonardo Di Caprio. Basically I put him here because I dislike the rest of the actors even less. I don’t find him all that good and I wouldn’t pay the price of admission to see any film he starred in as sole lead. But he made $45 million so some Hollywood exec must think he is worth it, though some exec greenlighted Soul Plane too. – see something he is in. I wouldn’t know.
  
• 10. Will Ferrell. I liked Elf. Moments in Ricky Bobby (or whatever it was called) were funny, though most of it was exactly what most of America tends to think of when they think of NASCAR. Sadly though he has been paid $31 million to keep playing the same sort of character found in both those movies, over and over again. Semi-Pro didn’t do well because of this, Stepbrothers probably will fare the same. He needs to change or the entertainment career will be like his work on Saturday Night Live, a flat bomb. – See Elf.
  
• 11. Cameron Diaz. She only precedes the next guy because she is a lady and I thought I’d be nice. I don’t find her funny, attractive or talented. Seriously she is ugly and needs to gain weight. I believe the only funny film she was in was Something About Mary (and luckily it was an almost good film for Ben Stiller too) and any other work she has done is too vapid to remember. The $50 million she was paid needs to seriously be spent on other actresses. – See the revisioned remake of Charlie’s Angels, you’ll go to sleep but it’s better than the next guy’s films.
  
• 12. Ben Stiller. He came from a comedy family. He’s been in films with huge talents. He was paid $40 million. Yet this guy cannot stop playing the same insipid character in every movie. I will say this for him; he has mastered the art of doing the same thing badly and getting paid well for it. – See The Royal Tenenbaums, not because he is in it but because everyone else in the film is great.
  
• 13. Last and least of all the entertainers on Forbes list of the best paid (and some of the most overpaid in my opinion) is the #3 woman on their list, Jennifer Aniston. Simply put she needs to eat some food and stick with unrealistic television sitcoms. – See Friends because you won’t have to focus on her and it’s slightly better than the Charlie’s Angels remake.
  

Since no list should go to 13 I will add one more I think deserves to be on the list – Denzel Washington. If he is not the highest paid actor per film he should be. He is quality and can act against anyone on this list and make them all look good via osmosis (yes even Aniston and Stiller).

So that is my take on Forbes. How would you rank them? Who would be your 14th entertainer on the list?

The movies of 2007 in retrospect - 12.12.2007.1

As 2007 is coming to a close I looked back on the films of the year, and the actors that made them what they were. It’s quite the mixed bag, with far too many massively overpaid for underperformance. Quite a few are, in my opinion, without the ability to justify the pay they receive, while others are a bit surprising in the modest pay they receive, relative to Hollywood payouts. Thankfully there are many that are worth the money that are a bit long in the tooth, making ‘older’ folks like myself feel a bit better I suppose.

In terms of the films that were hits, that lived up to the hype we all seemed to have. Included in that list The Bourne Ultimatum, Live Free or Die Hard, Pirates of the Caribbean: At World’s End, Saw IV, Harry Potter, 300, Spiderman 3, I Am Legend [I include this because the storyline has been good enough to make this the 4th version of the film, and I have that much confidence in the ability and choices made by Will Smith] and to a lesser amount Hitman.

There were several films that failed, and most were no surprise to me. That would include Underdog, Fred Claus, The Mist, The Comebacks, Halloween, Code Name: The Cleaner, Alpha Dog, Hannibal Rising, The Hoax, Rush Hour 3, The Brothers Solomon, Lars And The Real Girl, 30 Days Of Night, The Invaders and a few others.

And then there are the special mentions like Aqua Teen Movie, Red Line, Georgia Rule, Ocean’s 13, Talk To Me, Bratz Movie, Rendition, Darfur Now, Lions For Lambs, Redacted, This Christmas, and American Ganster.

The leading films all boasted great casts with some of the best in the industry. It’s no surprise that Johnny Depp made a reputed $92 million this year. The same can be said of the $32 million for Matt Damon, the $23 million paid to the top 3 in Harry Potter and the unknown amounts for Bruce Willis and Will Smith (I would guess in the range of $20 million a piece). As for 300 or Spiderman, every dollar spent on the effects was worth it as that was the real stars. And Saw is just what you expect so it did its gore fest above par.

The worst films, which the list is hardly complete for, were all bloated poorly written refuse that amazed me someone greenlighted. Underdog proved that not every show or cartoon from the past needs to be remade or done live action. Stephen King continued his long streak of failing to convert his quality and success from books to film. Rush Hour, and Hannibal show that making sequels just for the money doesn’t always make money, and Cedric may be an entertainer, but he’s not an actor. Didn’t anyone get the clue from the horrendous Honeymooners movie? They just need to stop making him the lead in movies. The rest were just really bad ideas that turned into really bad movies.

The list of movies that qualify under that last sentence is too long to write. I’m sure we all could think of a couple of those movies, if we wanted the torture of thinking about that. The good news is that 2007 is over and they can only be reseen on DVD, if you get bored burning $20 bills. (The bad news is that 2008 will probably have at least as many gruesome failures – at $20 million a film Nicole Kidman is burning buildings full of them)

As for the last category of films, well they are special. Aqua Teen Hunger Force is a special interest – mostly targeting college kids up late watching cartoons that are distracting and meaningless (which is why we like them). Georgia Rule deserved to fail because of 2 things Lindsey Lohan and Hanoi Jane. I cannot fathom any film that contains the America hating Hanoi Jane that deserves to make a single dime. I dislike her and revel in her failures, personal and professional. [And I don’t care if anyone likes her for any reason, I despise her.] Equally fathomless is the concept that a film based on anorexic dolls could work. Seriously, anorexic dolls with attitudes?

I equally reveled in the failure of equally America hating films Rendition, Lions For Lambs, and Redacted. The abject failure of these films to garner any interest is a testament to the good taste of everyone except the people who greenlighted them. I can only hope that the actors in these films were doing them for the paychecks and not their political views. I would also say that if the producers and writers of these films feel that strongly (especially Mark Cuban) give up your citizenship and move to Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan or any other nation that will take you. I will not mourn your loss or the money you have.

But there are also films that should have gotten real attention and distribution. Talk To Me and Darfur Now were thrown to the wayside, the corporate execs sleeping well at night because they got them into theaters. In fact both were solid films deserving of recognition for what they had to say and the performances. Luckily both have Don Cheadle in them, though he is only acting in one. I have to wonder, considering the wide release of Cedric’s movie, that execs fear promoting a film with a Black actor that makes any serious political and social statement. You can’t pay a major media company to acknowledge Darfur has been going on, least of all for 4 years, and America has yet to do ANYTHING about it. We can run around the world and help fix everyone’s problems, but forbid we even distribute a movie about a genocide we can do something about.

Lastly there is American Gangster and Ocean’s 13. Denzel Washington is a solid, brilliant actor. The film is quite good (even with 3 rappers in it). But I have a problem with the promotion of a negative style of life for African Americans. Far too many will see this as a vindication or motivation. The mindless find inspiration in odd places, thus the film upset me. And Ocean’s 13 just proved that sometimes you can make a sequel just for the money and it’s ok.

So there are my thoughts on the films of 2007. Get the DVD’s of those you like, target shoot the ones you hate and get as a gift. And gird yourself for 2008, because Carrotman (it’s an old obscure comic book character) the movie hasn’t been greenlighted, yet.

[Again I say, Iron Man will be the massive big winner of the year.]

Worth the ticket, Live Free or Die Hard - 6.28.2007.1

You need to see Live Free or Die Hard. I saw the film last night and it is well worth the money.

In an interview with Mr. Bill O’Rielly, Mr. Bruce Willis mentions that this is a visual rollercoaster rider, and he was correct. Almost from the very first scene this move starts running Like a cable modem connection, making most of the other films this year look like they were on a dial-up connection. Especially when you watch “Spider-boy” in action.


Mr. Willis’s John McCane has gotten a bit older, and life has slowed down a bit, but he definitely isn’t some old foggy. He still has trouble with the women in his life, and like many technology is well beyond him. He can still kick ass with the best of them, definitely someone you want on your side.

Let’s not forget that McClane is a New York Police Detective. That should be warning enough for the PC police out there. One of the funniest and most memorable lines is so outrageous it has me in stitches, while many in the movie theater gasped, not sure what to do. The line is just funny, and sadly it will ruin it if I tell you here.

There is enough action to satisfy any fan of the Die Hard series. Like the previous films almost every scene is realistic. There are one or 2 things that just can’t happen, but while you are watching them unfold you don’t care. Only one thing makes you go “how did he do that” a split second before you just go”ow” out loud. In fact there are manybe a dozen scenes where everyone will cringe out loud. Not because it’s graphic, but because you can feel the pain. Some of the action just had to hurt.

I love the fact that unlike most movie action heroes, McClane takes a beating as good as he gives. The man is a Timex watch. To bad for the bad guys that there is no digital analog.

While all this is going on, a pretty strong statement is made about national security, the differences between the generations in terms of technology, and the general apathy that many of the youth have today. It’s not a sermon, the points are made and the movie keeps moving. It works, you get the message and aren’t taken out of the film.

Some may recall that Mr. Willis’s character John McClane is a father of a son and daughter. You might imagine that his kids wouldn’t be the average kid considering their father and his propensity to have less than traditional hoilidays. If you think that, you won’t be disappointed.

I really can’t say too much more, or you may call 1-800-henchman on me. Suffice to say that I plan on seeing this again. This will probably be the #1 summer movie of the year, and it should be.

This is what I think, what do you think?

Fear Master Shake, and who is most desirable - 1.31.2007.1

Well there were a few things that caught my eye today. One item, was the sad reminder that large amounts of wealth and a strong dash of fame rarely mixes well with friends and family. In this case it’s the signal of perhaps the end of a long friendship for Mr. Bruce Willis. While the lawsuit was settled, the fact that it had been made may be the breaking point between Mr. Willis and his friend. I’m always sorry to hear of stories like this. There are never any winners in this kind of situation.

Speaking of a no-win situation, imagine that you are just coming home after a particularly stressful day. Your only thought is to get home and relax watching television in that massage chair you got over Christmas. You sit down, turn it on, and after a few minutes you pop up wondering what you left on the stove that was burning. Sadly you realize that it’s actually your chair on fire. Not a good day at all. Luckily for most of my readers it’s not an issue, the massage chairs made by Matsushita Electric Industrial Co. Ltd, are sold in Japan and Asia (and are being recalled). So perhaps your day here is not as bad as you might have first thought.

In terms of relaxing, it seems that there are quite a few men that daydream about a few stars. A list was made by AskMen.com on the 99 most desirable women of 2007 [why 99? And isn’t it a bit early to be doing this kind of list in January?] had Ms. Beyonce Knowles at number 1. A good choice I think.

Who didn’t make the list? Well I think Ms. Alicia Keys should have made it. Talented and good looking, but the low profile she had in 2006 kept her out. That’s a shame. On the other end of the spectrum Mrs. Britney Spears (is she still married?) didn’t make it either. Thank goodness. I’m so tired of seeing her face. Limited talent, not really that pretty, no class – why do people still talk about her? And where was Mrs. Jada Pinkett-Smith? She is classy and sexy and deserves to be on the list, married or not. I have to add a long time favorite of Ms. Claudia Black. [Ayrn Sun rules! I don’t give a frell if you don’t agree. My fellow ‘Scapers know what I mean.]

Now as for the other women on the most desirable list, Ms. Gabrielle Union is far too low at 94. Ms. Rosario Dawson made it to 77, Ms. Jennifer Esposito got 69 (higher than Ms. Dawson?), Fergie is 60, Mrs. Gwen Stefani hit 56, Ms. Mandy Moore ranked 53, Ms. Tyra Banks was what to high at 26. Ms. Charlize Theron could have been higher at 24, Ms. Angalina Jolie caught 9, and Ms. Jessica Alba was far too high at 3. There are a huge number of women I have never seen before (but I’m not big on basic television or low quality programming so that could be a factor). And why are most of the women so thin that they have little or no curves? Face it, they may say that Ms. Knowles is number 1 because of abilities, but her sex appeal didn’t hurt either. That sex appeal is in no small part the fact that she has curves. Why most forms of entertainment are afraid of women with curves I have no idea. If models were shaped more like Ms. Knowles or Ms. Mayra Veronica I’m sure Top Model or runway shows would be far more interesting, for men and women. But that’s my take on the list you can check it out and make your on decision. [Ms. Hilary Duff, Ms. Jennifer Aniston, Ms. Lindsay Lohan, Ms. Penelope Cruz, Ms. Jessica Simpson, Ms. Eva Longoria all made the list and I have no idea why.]

Lastly, I hope that the actions or guerilla marketers in Boston will not adversely affect the programming at Cartoon Network’s Adult Swim. You may have heard how the various images of Err, and Master Shake shoke-up the city with fears of a terrorist scare or bombing hoax. It actually was just advertising that went wrong. It seems similar marketing ploys are in 9 other cities, and have been for weeks. I have to wonder though, that since these items were around for a couple of weeks (as was reported), did someone from the parent network decide to get some extra attention and called in the first couple of bomb reportings? Maybe an exec with a desire to get more traction since some poll showed the marketing wasn’t getting enough attention? I have to admit that I thought something was up when Err was pictured on screen and reporters fumbled to figure out who he was and the name of the show. They couldn’t even get the Moonites name right at first. Watching them describe the Aqua Teen Hunger Force show broke up the tension a lot! The apology at 7:59pm on Fox News, for screwing up the details, was classic!

This is what I think, what do you think?