Movie Preview: Repo Men

If flattery is the highest form of compliment, then Hollywood gives more compliments than a politician trying toget funds to get re-elected. But Hollywood is usually a bit less blatant in its compliments than the upcoming film Repo Men is.

Repo Men is the rip off of 2 film predominantly. Logan's Run and Repo! the Genetic Opera. You might have heard of Logan's Run but I doubt you heard of Repo!

The plot is basic. Our hero is running from the bad guys. In this case he is a former repo man - in a world where augmenting the body is a life-saving and profitable business, those that don't pay lose whatever was replaced. Repo men are the guys that collect on the bad debt. Remy (Jude Law) and his partner Jake (Forest Whitaker) are the best at collections. Remy winds up getting an augment, and failing to pay becomes next on the list for collection.

You've seen this movie in Logan's Run, as the former pair of friends now are at odds with each other. You saw a take on the idea in Running Man, as the oppressive authority forces a hero to rise up and the people to join him.

What you didn't see is how it works in a world like this. That's where Repo! comes in.



Given that Repo! had Paris Hilton in it, and it's a musical. 2 great reasons you never saw the film. But ti doesn't make Repo Men any more original. Still the question is if it is a good movie.



Well the film looks better than Repo! which says a lot. Plus it does NOT have Paris Hilton in it, which is a HUGE statement for it's quality.

Forest Whitaker is a great actor. He has been in more than a few great films. So to see him in this adds credibility to the film, and an assurance that it's not a complete waste of time.

Jude Law is also a solid actor and more than capable of a film of this nature. So again this is a plus for the film.

The fact that it copies some of the more time honored ideas in Hollywood, friends as rivals, futuristic drama, decent helpings of actions and new gadgets, helps.

This is yet another non-Oscar worthy film. Which means that someone besides the Oscar community will see it. It will likely give action and sci-fi fans what they are looking for. Some ladies (possibly men too I suppose) will get their fix of Law, and the afrocentric crowd gets Whitaker in a lead support role. It's got almost something for everyone.

I would see this in a theater. It's likely better than most of the films coming out for the 2010 summer blockbuster season. And considering the repercussions of the recession, this will be one of the few films of any note for most of the year. Though it won't be the last rip-off film, it is far from the worst.

Blame It - Jamie Foxx's new music video

No matter what you may think of the skills of Jamie Foxx as a singer, you have to give him credit. The man is big enough from his acting career that he is able to pull out the stops. His latest album features the song Blame It - the video of which puts many entertainers to shame.

The music video is a collection of some of the top entertainers of the past several decades. Ron Howard, Morris Chestnut, Jake Gyllenhaal, Samuel Jackson, Quincy Jones, Forest Whitaker, among several other stars all appear prominently in the video. Oh, there is also T-Pain, who sings on the track. There are enough stars in this one music video to start an awards show.

But having the power to attract big names for a music video does not mean that the song itself is good. Luckily Foxx can sing. Which elevates the song. It has a message which unlike contemporary songs is not overly graphic or over the top with sexual lyrics (though it's not a choir boy song either). That is up until T-Pain starts his part. Then it gets far more graphically explicit.

The title gives you a pretty good idea where the song is going anyway so there are no real surprises. Still the video avoids the mostly naked, butt gyrating theme most videos of this lyrical nature would inspire. A bit of class never hurts, and can be among the reasons so many stars agreed to be available.

The beat is smooth and reminiscent of older R&B, nothing hits you to glaringly - except for the dramatic shift during T-Pain's section. Then again, that's what T-Pain is on the song for. While this may not be the top selling song of the year, I can see how this can do well in a club on Saturday night. I have no doubt it will get people on the dance floor, and massive airtime on the radio. There is just one riff - the stuttering of the word alcohol - that just irks me. But that is a personal irritation, which many may not even notice.

The 2 things that I left the video with are: Who is the Panda? Yes there is a person with a panda head dancing in the video - how often do you get to see that? And if I read it right, the little sister of Jamie Foxx was just introduced to the world in this video as one of the featured dancers of the video. Which I though was a sweet thing to do.

The Expendables: Cast growing with action movie icons

In a bit of a quick update there is the news that the 2010 film, The Expendables, has increased the large and famous cast. The latest addition to the film will include yet another major icon of the 1980’s action movies.

Yes the Guvernator himself will be taking a role in Sylvester Stallone’s latest film. But this will not be a major part, just a cameo. And he will be playing a role that will involve little acting – he will play the Governor of California. How embarrassing might it be if his role is done poorly?

Still the Expendables movie is continuing to look like a must see film. The cast of Jason Statham, Jet Li, Dolph Lundgren (an old nemesis of Stallone and Schwarzenegger) , Mickey Rourke, and Forest Whitaker is compelling. The addition of the Governator just adds a bit of flair.

By the way, here are some of the match-ups from the past with this cast.

Stallone has been in films with:
Mickey Rourke – Get Carter (remake)
Dolph Lundgren – Rocky 4

Jason Statham has been in films with:
Jet Li – War and The One
Mickey Rourke – 13 (filming now - remake)

Mickey Rourke has been in films with:
Eric Roberts – Pope of Greenwich Village

Forest Whitaker has been in films with:
Ben Kingsley – Species

And oddly enough, Christopher Walken (who is not in the film) has been in movies with:
Mickey Rourke – Dominoe, Man on Fire
Arnold Schwarzenegger - The Rundown (the Governator had an uncredited role, did you notice?)
Sylvester Stallone – Antz
Eric Roberts – Prophesy 2
Dolph Lundgren – A View To A Kill

Just thought I’d add that.

The Expendables - 2010 movie

Now here is a concept that I am looking forward to seeing trailers for. A movie with action as its complete drive. Plot be damned, this will be fast-paced and sure to provide a pounding.

The Expendables is a film featuring Sylvester Stallone, Mickey Rourke, and Dolph Lungdren. With just that part of the cast you might think this is a return to the action movies of the 1980's. Which is not an entirely bad thing. But hold on.

Add to this group of oldies but goodies Jet Li and Jason Statham. And for a bit of dramatic flair there is also Ben Kingsley and Forest Whitaker. Now that is a cast of standing. You can stage a film about almost anything with this group of actors.

This film will focus on mercenaries that are hired to take down a South American dictator (might he have a last name sounding like Chavez?). It doesn't need to get much deeper than that.

Likely good guys are Statham, Li, and Stallone. Probable bad guys are Rourke, Lungdren, and Kingsley.

While I don't expect this to be an Oscar winner, I do expect massive amounts of explosions and kicking ass. There will be big guns a plenty. So if you enjoy art house films this will not be for you most likely.

One thing I would really enjoy in the film would be a fight scene between Li and Statham. I am sure the film has to have that, if only for a few minutes. That would be a great action sequence. That will make the film for sure.

There is no video yet, but be confident that once there is I will be getting it out to you all. Expect this in 2010.

America likes quality not color in movies

I just want to back track for a moment. At the end of 2008 there was a top of 2008 list that I think most have never heard of nor are they aware of who made the list. While this list is mostly for acting entertainers, movie studios and movie theaters it bears worth mentioning.

The Quigley Poll has been around for 76 years. It surveys movie theater owners and asks them whom they feel was responsible for the most revenue generation in the year. This is important to Hollywood as it confirms or changes how much an actor/actress is worth, and who they want to star in additional films. And it also influences what films will be made, indirectly. If an actor/actress who is know for dramas brings in enough to top the list for drama films, Hollywood with their tunnel-vision will make more of those types of films especially with that entertainer.

In 2008 Will Smith topped the list. Now that is very significant. He is only the second Black actor to top the list in 76 years. The last time an African American topped the list was 40 years ago, and he was Sidney Poitier. Just imagine that.

That means that all the success of Denzel Washington was not enough. Samuel Jackson didn't count. Even Jamie Foxx was not seen as successful enough. Not to mention Don Cheadle and many others over the decades.

This also means that Will Smith (the first and only actor to have 8 films consecutively gross over $100 million) has attained a level of acceptance in America not seen in 2 generations. In the late 60's America was forced to open it's eyes to all the people in the nation. Leading that charge on screen was Poitier. He opened doors that had been closed for the better part of a century. Then America looked away again.

This is important because Hollywood uses the excuse

"White people won't go to see a film or television show starring Black people. They can't connect with them."

That feeble attempt at justification enables television to mirror the 1950's mentality, and denies opportunity in front of and behind the cameras to thousands of qualified and non-White Americans every year.

But Will Smith has given just cause for that excuse to die. He again proved that America wants to be given quality, not just repetition, in their entertainment. It is the American spirit of competition that says the best demand equal time regardless of race or any other superficial factor.

I love quality Black cinema. I hate Soul Plane and other such trash. And I enjoy equally as much quality work of any capable actor/actress in multiple genres. But I cannot say that I will begrudge Hollywood if they finally join the rest of most of America in the 21st century. Will Smith is just one example, as is Spike Lee, Bill Duke, Denzel Washington, Don Cheadle, Forest Whitaker and on and on.

Americans go to see the top actors/actresses in the top films. It's time that Hollywood look around and see who really is in the A-list, regardless of color.

Australian movie exec calls Forest Whitaker 'ugly, black, unbankable'

Australia is an interesting nation. The people I have met from that nation have been pleasant and good natured. They have provided America with several excellent entertainers, most notably Mel Gibson (who is American but grew up in Australia).

Yet that nation had, and continues to have many problems. The interaction with the native Aboriginal population is in many ways similar to the slavery issues that were found in America. Even to this day there are extreme racial conflicts between the 2 groups, though the distance to the rest of the world helps to ensure that most of this news is unseen.

It is perhaps because of this racially derisive past and present that an Austrailian film executive felt the need to claim this about Forest Whitaker

“Even if he wins the Oscar he's ugly, he's black and he's unbankable.”

Bollocks! Who the hell is this executive?

I realize that Australia, along with neighbor New Zealand, have gotten quite a bit of attention from Hollywood in recent years. I understand how they might see their importance growing with this greater influence. But that does not justify such comments.

Forest Whitaker is an acclaimed actor, director and producer. His credits include:

• Last King of Scotland – where he received an Oscar, Golden Globe, Screen Actors Guild, and BAFTA Awards
  
• Color of Money
  
• Bird – Cannes Film Festival Award and Golden Globe nomination
  
• Ghost Dog: The Way of the Samurai - an exceptional film that I recommend people see
  
• The Shield
  
• Fast Times at Ridgemont High
  
• Good Morning Viet Nam
  
• Platoon
  
• The Crying Game
  
• Prêt-à-Porter - National Board of Review Award for Best Acting by an Ensemble
  
• Panic Room
  
• The Great Debaters
  
• A Rage in Harlem
  
• Waiting to Exhale
  

I could go on as his career spans 26 years. In fact he will be working steadily into 2010, where he will be directing and acting in It's A Wonderful World about Louis Armstrong. There aren’t many actors that can be assured of leading roles 2 years in the future, and those that can are the best in the entertainment industry.

Somehow I think the fact that Whitaker is this successful, in all aspects of film, does not only make him bankable – it makes him one of a few actors that are bankable over decades.

To say that Whitaker is ugly is just a base, moronic, and unrealistic comment. It’s similar to the inane argument made by racists that people (usually implying Whites) will not go to see a film starring an actor/actress of a different color. The financial success of films by Will Smith, Denzel Washington, Samuel Jackson, Jamie Foxx, and Forest Whitaker to name but a few prove that to be absurd drivel.

Now the issue at hand was the upcoming movie Winged Creatures, directed by Australian director Rowan Woods. To the credit of Woods he fought to have Whitaker as the lead. He believed that the ability, look, quality, and bankability of Whitaker would be an asset to his film. And he would not budge on his choice of lead.



The Australian entertainment industry responded to this with a racially based slap-in-the-face. The initial budget of the film was $11 million, it was cut to $4.5 million. Who did the racists want? Al Pacino or Michael Douglas. Now I personally don’t think that Al Pacino was ever the most handsome leading man. And Michael Douglas is a good looking guy, but his age shows through these days. So the reality was that they just wanted a White face as lead.

To the credit of the director, Woods, he was able to fill out his cast – on a budget that was a pittance of the initial target – with actors of high quality. I have to believe that each of these actors had no problem with a Black man, and more importantly a quality actor who happens to be Black, as the lead. The other actors are:

Guy Pearce, Kate Beckinsale, Dakota Fanning, Jeanne Tripplehorn and Jennifer Hudson

Racism is a despicable thing in any nation or part of the world. It is usually based in unfounded, illogical, small-minded, envious, mindsets. It is the reason that so many are persecuted by so few. It is the worst image of any group of people.

Again I note that the Australians I have met have been great people. The director of Winged Creatures helps to show that not every Australian is the closed-minded, repugnant, imbecilic racists that seem to populate their entertainment industry (and more than just a few in Hollywood too).

But I think that future directors should think twice before going to Australia for a film. Because if the film has anyone that is Black it seems they will shun the film. And in an industry that is supposed to represent the boundless depth of the human imagination, this repressed limited and potentially psychologically damaged view is a cancer that sours the best of work.

**I want to thank the owner of 1800blogger for bringing this to my attention, and D.C. Moviegirl for speaking on this**

2008 films of note - 1.31.2008.1

So Rambo has come out along with Cloverfield. 2 of the more anticipated movies of 2008 are now out and everyone is looking forward to see what will be coming up next. The choices seem slim to me, and I’d expect the box office numbers to be lower than in 2007.

As I have mentioned in the past, Star Trek fans can look forward to the latest installment of the series that delves into the earliest days of James T. Kirk, Spock, Bones McCoy and the rest of the original crew. The cast is mostly unknown or little known, which can be good or bad. But the teaser trailer that is out, is just a waste of time.



Notice the snub to William Shatner, the original Kirk, in that his friend and original Spock, Leonard Nimoy, speaks the ever so famous intro lines. Hopefully this will be a good movie, and has none of the writers from Star Trek: Enterprise.

I’ve discussed Iron Man, Batman: The Dark Knight, Speed Racer (a while ago – I don’t like the trailers I’ve seen so far), and WANTED previously.

In the world of sequels expect to revisit HellBoy 2 to do well.



It’s a bit over the top, but at least it’s honest about that. The first was entertaining, and the Dark Elf looking villain in this film could be of interest.

For more original fare we have what will undoubtably become a hit film Kung Fu Panda. I mean how can it go wrong. It’s animated, has Jack Black’s voice, a comedy, and has martial arts fighting. This will clear $200 million easy.



Of course that looks like it has far more laughs and interest that the latest film by Adam Sandler. He’s been very hit and miss of late, more miss than hit. Don’t Mess with Zohan seems to be on that miss list, even though it’s sure to make $100 million. Perhaps it’s just me but this film just doesn’t hit the mark. At best it’s just a DVD film, but I won’t spend $20 to see it in a movie theater.



The real winner in comedy is probably the anti-super hero film Hancock. Will Smith takes the concept of a superhero and Superman in particular and twists the concept. It’s a superhero with issues and problems, some especially entertainers and celebrities tend to have. It looks good, and may be a sleeper hit (or at least a sleeper for a Will Smith lead film).



In the line of over the top, silly, action filled comedy there is Postal. This film doesn’t look to have a single serious moment. Of course that does not count what is the opening scenes of the film. Guaranteed to piss off Muslims, and highly likely to anger many New Yorkers (and anyone who lost someone in 9/11) just because of the start of the film. I’ve seen several trailers that look good. The opening isn’t one of them. You can see the other clips at many places, but this is the start, which is not funny to me.



Perhaps it will be worth the time, after this opening, but the question will be can anyone get past that. Sure to gain a lot of protests, who knows how it will go.

What I will go see is some of the following.

Jackie Chan and Jet Li in the same film. Do I need to say more? Forbidden Kingdom



Wanted, Iron Man, Vantage Point



I’ll give you more as the year progresses.

Allegations against Will Smith - 12.26.2007.1

So I’ve read the response of Will Smith on the allegation that he claimed “Hitler was a good guy”. It is complete idiocy. How someone can come to that conclusion is beyond comprehension to me.

Let’s take the actual quote made by Will Smith.

“Even Hitler didn't wake up going, 'let me do the most evil thing I can do today.' I think he woke up in the morning and using a twisted, backwards logic, he set out to do what he thought was 'good.’”

Now when you think about that, I find it hard to see that as an endorsement. You really have to reach to come to any conclusion that is positive about Hitler. Add to that fact that Mr. Smith is an actor, and a very good one.

I do not know how many times I’ve heard actors discuss the motivations of their characters. From Forest Whitaker discussing playing Idi Amin, to Denzel Washington discussing his crooked cop in Training Day, to Gary Oldman in the Fifth Element or The Professional. You can go on and on, but the consistent thought has always been that an actor needs to find what motivates their character. And for the bad guys it’s often that the character does not see their actions as bad or evil. Often that character views their actions as a positive, either for themselves or the world at large.

This applies to the Will Smith lead character Neville in I am Legend. For those that are not familiar with the original book, or the prior 3 movies, Neville is the bad guy. He is the monster in the night that kills people in their sleep. He is the Dracula, or Frankenstein’s monster. He is the thing under the bed. Net result, he is the bad guy that the people of the world fear, and speak of in legends and ghost stories late at night.

But Neville does not realize this, and the audience is not given that perspective until the end of the movie and book. It’s a perspective few films take on, and it changes the view of the world and our traditional views of it.

Thus in looking at the motivation of the character, and preparation of the role the actor must look at it in a manner where you would say “he set out to do what is good.” And there are far too many real life figures that did the same. Vlad the Impaler (who is a positive figure in his native land), Genghis Khan, the first emperor of China, Idi Amin, Alexander the Great, and yes Hitler all thought they were improving the world. That fact that they were repulsive, to at least parts of the world if not all the world, does not change their motivations. To say this is not to endorse their actions but to state a truth of their mind set, and a motivation for actors portraying them.

So when a writer states, immediately before Mr. Smith’s quote,

“Remarkably, Will believes everyone is basically good.”

That is out of context and an insult to Mr. Smith. It’s an attempt to sensationalize a common acting tool and a historical truth. It’s a twisting of words for the monetary gain, and an attempt at international fame for the gratification of the Daily Record writer. And it offends me.

There is no reason to slap the image and personal character of Will Smith. It’s an affront I have never seen made of any other actor. I have heard dozens of actors of note that have made similar statements when portraying questionable or reviled characters. None have ever been accused of promoting the base nature of the character they portray.

You have never heard say Kevin Kline advocating animal cruelty or violence (Fish Called Wanda), or Al Pacino advocating devil worship (The Devil’s Advocate). How about Al Pacino being a role model for cocaine use (Scarface), Sir Anthony Hopkins being Hannibal Lecter (Silence of the Lambs), or Henry Fonda as an assassin for hire (Once Upon a Time in the West). Of course not. To claim such a thing is ridiculous. But if you look at each character you can see where they have a motivation that is positive (from the bad guys perspective) and that makes the character engaging and deeper.

Some might say this is a racial thing. I feel it’s more an American thing, and a rich thing. Will Smith is a successful American, and Black. Overseas there are many that would love to poke at Americans, and the wealthy. The additional fact that Mr. Smith is African American is just another bonus. It’s a trifecta for a mean-spirited and self-aggrandizing writer. And it has no place in fact or criticism of Mr. Smith and his acting ability.

If anyone believes that Will Smith advocates or excuses the actions of Hitler, they are far too small minded to understand actors portraying roles or the difference of a personal motivation and the actual effect of those actions. It would appear that the Daily Record employs such a writer. I feel bad for the readers of that publication as they are being given a disservice.

I can only hope that the American major media stand by Will Smith, and recognize the insulting and defamatory nature of this writing in the Daily Record. And I ask the Daily Record print an apology to Mr. Smith for the actions their writer and editor allowed to appear in their publication. It’s the least they can do.

The Notorious B.I.G gets a movie - 8.9.2007.1

I’m sure there must be some hip-hop and rap fans that are dancing today. The good news for them is that the life story of Mr. Christopher Wallace is moving closer to the silver screen. If the name is not familiar, you may recognize his stage name, Notorious B.I.G. That’s right, a biopic film is about to be under way, once the titular lead character is found.

“In the typical Hollywood world, no one came to mind outside of Forest Whitaker who could capture that essence genuinely,” stated Mr. Wayne Barrow (a former manager of Mr. Wallace).

No, Mr. Whitaker is not going to be in the film, and he will definitely not be the title character. The ‘honor’ of portraying Mr. Wallace is going to be open to the public. Anyone can audition for the role, with or without acting experience. If this is of interest you can submit audition videos beginning 3 a.m. EDT Sunday to http://www.foxsearchlight.com/notorious or http://www.biggiecasting.com.

Those are the facts, and as I said, fans should be thrilled. Now for my opinion.

Why in the world is this being made? I’m not saying it can’t be, or that it shouldn’t. I just don’t think that Mr. Wallace was big enough to deserve a film of his life. The tragic end he came to was not deserved, as no murder is, but that does not warrant the adoration and almost cult status I have seen so many provide him since his death.

Perhaps it’s just me, but Mr. Wallace was a convicted crack dealer, had been arrested for drug and weapon charges after attaining fame (though I’m hard pressed to think of a gangsta rapper who hasn’t had the same sadly), and was convicted of at least beating (it was alleged he threatened to kill) 2 people looking for autographs. There is a hero.

He was deeply involved in tuning the gangster image that is now rampant in hip-hop and rap music. He was debatably deeply involved in the feud between east coast and west coast rappers, which I always found to be possibly one of the least intelligent squabbles among successful entertainers in music history. I may not have known the man, but his lifestyle and public persona indicate I would never want to, nor that he should be so revered.

What is it about dealing crack that is so much more interesting than New Jack City, or worthy of glamorizing? And a film about his exploits does glamorize what he did, in my eyes. I will give up the point that some found his lyric to be near gospel like in their quality. I don’t agree but that is one opinion. But so have dozens of other rappers, several far better than Mr. Wallace.

There may be something redemptive about his life, but I have not read a single word about that. The movie Ray was redemptive. Mr. Ray Charles had a life that was filled with real challenges that he had to overcome. Mr. Charles was not perfect, and he had flaws we all share, but he did strive to overcome them. His drug use was not a means of income, nor a tool to create his decades of musical entertainment. He did not glorify nor promote violence. His talent was universally understood and has lasted the test of time. What part of these things can honestly be said of Mr. Wallace.

I just don’t see the value or worthiness of a film for someone of the limited stature that is the actual Notorious B.I.G.

This is what I think, what do you think?

Summer movies, bulldogs and Forest Whitaker - 4.24.2007.1

Well just a little hodgepodge of things I noticed lately. First I want to send out congratulations to Mr. Forest Whitaker on his Star on the Walk of Fame. While this honor has lost some of it’s status, there is no question that it is still a status symbol that is desired by all entertainers. Mr. Whitaker has come into his own and this just continues to cement his place in Hollywood. I’m glad to hear of this further step into the history books.

Looking into the future, I know I’ve mentioned it but this is going to be quite the summer movie season. 14 sequels are planned to come out. There are several I’m looking forward to. I’ve talked about Pirates 3, Spiderman 3, Die Hard 4 and others. I recently saw the trailer for the Bourne Ultimatum and I think this may be the best movie of the season. Of course there are the less inspired sequels that will be out as well. Shrek 3 is only a money grab, though it might be good, while Fantastic Four 2 is just to give teen boys another chance to stare and dream about the invisible parts of Ms. Jessica Alba. But the bigger question is where are the original ideas? What happens when the final Harry Potter installment is done, and all the good comic books have been translated to film? I’ll take the good with the bad, but if there are these many sequels coming out shortly I have to wonder if there is anything original and compelling anywhere in the Hollywood pipeline.

Oh a reminder, boycott Georgia Rules. Hanoi Jane should not profit from anything again, and hopefully if yet another film she stars in flops directors and exec will stop putting her in movies.

And for the dog lovers out there, the most beautiful Bulldog has now been crowned. The winner is Riggs. I realize not everyone can appreciate the beauty of a bulldog, but I am sure their character shines brightly. I think they are the most charismatic dogs ever. Riggs of course leads the pack on this point.

Well I just wanted to get up a little bit before I go and discuss the Mr. Alec Baldwin situation, and Mr. Russell Simmons comments.

This is what I think, what do you think?

From here to there in a few words - 3.30.2007.1

So what else has happened in the world as Paris Hilton get more air-time than could ever be justified. Well in India there was a woman that gave one of the strongest expressions of love that I think I’ve ever heard. It seems that the woman was engaged a short while before her fiancé fell down a well and died. That is a sad thing, but what was sweet was her commitment Prior to her betroved being buried the woman, with the blessing of his family, married the love of her life. That’s a statement. At first look I thought it was creepy, but in thinking about it I find it sweet. Now where is an example of something like that here at home?

Now for something completely different. UFO conspirators rejoice. Yes there has been confirmation from France that something is out there, and it visited here. Since 1954 France has held onto documented cases, some seen by thousands, which cannot be explained by an earthbound means. This is similar to the Project Bluebook files that were (and possibly continue to be) held by the United States Air Force. While many of the files released to the internet were explained, roughly 400 have not been. It just goes to prove the simple math I have long believed. There are just too many solar systems, galaxies and so on in the universe to believe we are the only things alive and with intelligence in it. It just smacks of the same logic that held the earth as flat or that our planet was the center of the universe. One day, if we don’t kill ourselves off [high probability], I’m sure that thinking will seem as absurd as the current consensus.

Following the pattern of jumps, The Shield will start its new season on Monday. I can’t wait. Vic Mackey, Mr. Michael Chiklis, is a unique character, both endearing for his loyalty and angering in his blatant corruption. With Mr. Forest Whitaker still in the cast, and causing no lack of problems for Mackey and his crew, sparks may be the least of things to fly.

And Shane, Mr. Walton Goggins, better watch his back. His murder of a teammate was brutal and wrong. I cannot see any of the dwindling Strike Team members forgiving this. I can see a vicious retaliation. Especially when you consider the fact that there are a few ‘innocents’ that are going to have a ton of bricks come down on their heads before the truth is known. [On a side note, imagine having to kill your best friend in real life. In a manner of speaking Mr. Goggins did exactly that. In real life he is very good long time friends with Mr. Kenneth Johnson who portrayed the conflicted Lem. The day they filmed the murder both men had just returned from the 2006 Super Bowl that Mr. Johnson invited Mr. Goggins to. That’s rough.]

Continuing to the next thing, the world of books. I know some must still read actual books, I do. For those who have read the actual Lord of the Rings Trilogy, perhaps good news. The son of JRR Tolkein has finished his father’s last book. From what I understand it’s not a continuation of the story, nor even in Middle Earth. Yet the themes of the 4 parts of the One Ring stories are maintained. [Yes 4 parts. The Hobbit starts it all. And no there isn’t a movie of it yet. And the movie will not be made by Mr. Peter Jackson. You have been warned.] This is something to pick up. I’ll read it shortly after it comes out and let you know what I think.

Oh, expect a review of 300. Late as it may be. Good movie, in parts, but a bit disappointing as well.

This is what I think, what do you think?

And the winners are - 2.25.2007.1

So the Oscars Awards have been handed out. As always there were a few surprises a few let downs and a couple of sure things. I was glad to hear of Ms. Jennifer Hudson’s win. I’m very glad to know that Mr. Forest Whitaker received recognition for his performance in The Last King of Scotland. As my choices go those were right on the mark.

Of course there was the win by Mr. Martin Scorsese for his movie The Departed. Considering how many times he has been nominated there is no shock in his win. The Academy definitely lives up to it’s history of rewarding today for actions in the past. While there are stand-out moments, and big wins for deserving newcomers, like Ms. Hudson, generally winners in the top categories are those with long histories.

Of course the recent wins by Mr. Jamie Foxx and Mr. Whitaker do seem to fly in the face of that. Not to mention the Oscar Academy’s penchant for ignoring any non-white performers. Yet there is still the fact that Dreamgirls was historically not nominated for best picture. Historical in that it was the first time that the film with the most nominations was not also nominated for best picture. Perhaps the fact that only 1.9% of the Academy is African American (out of 5830 members) has had something to do with that.

And yet the Oscar Academy was very consistent in nominating films that the general public never saw, and most likely never will. The difference in what the public feels was a great performance and what the Academy deems award-winning is a vast ocean apart. I’m referring to the loss of Mr. Eddie Murphy. Widely held as the best performance in his acting career, winning several awards leading to this ceremony and then snubbed. Perhaps it had something to do with the fact that his next film, Norbit, was a comedy and low-brow. Of course it was made well in advance of the release of Dreamgirls or the Oscar nominations. Comedy is what he has built his career upon. Not that that is a positive in the eyes of the Academy. Some have noted that his joking manner at the Screen Actors Guild Award cost him. Let me say it again, comedian.

Well given the snub of Dreamgirls, and Mr. Murphy I am left with a single thought. I hope that directors will not ignore Mr. Murphy and his abilities.

This is what I think, what do you think?

Screen Actor's Guild Award winners - 1.29.2007.2

Excuse me for a moment as I take a second to give myself a bow. Yes I got 5 out of 7 right – 71% - which I call pretty respectable. If you are wondering why I’m so pleased with myself, of the guesses I made on January 9th for the Screen Actor’s Guild Awards [Bad films and Screen Actors Guild Awards hopefuls - 1.9.2007.1] I came pretty close to a clean sweep.

Not too bad for a regular guy. Perhaps the Oscar Award voters are paying attention. They should be. Considering how they have completely disconnected with the public, again, in not nominating Dreamgirls for Best Picture. I would love to hear the reasoning on why it was not nominated. I will give the SAG Awards the benefit of doubt on Little Miss Sunshine, at least they recognized the talent in Dreamgirls by giving them a nomination for best ensemble (basically best picture).

The snub really irritates me. 8 Oscar nominations, but not best picture. Never in 79 years has the leading nominated film not been a best picture. If it is so highly regarded how can it not also be best picture? This reminds me of the fear in 1993, when Malcolm X was not nominated for best picture, nor Mr. Spike Lee for best director. Yet there was large critical acclaim for the film, it won several awards (lesser ones but still won all the same), and Mr. Denzel Washington was easily recognized for his portrayal. In that case though I think the political commentary of Mr. Malcolm X was too much for the predominantly liberal white Oscar committee. [By the way I think this was the reason Mr. Washington won the Oscar. Often the Oscars will give a deserving actor/actress an award in a later good movie for a phenomenal role they were passed over on previously.]

The excuse for Dreamgirls escapes me. It’s popular, making money, still in movie theaters, well done and critically acclaimed – even before the Oscar nod. The only reason I can see for it to get snubbed as it has is a horrible and deplorable reason. I can only hope that isn’t the reason.

But to get back to the point of this post, I am sure that my winning choices will win the Oscar Awards as well. The choices that apply anyway. My congratulations to the winners, Mr. Hugh Laurie (you really should see him play the title character House. Biting wit and sarcasm matched with intense ability. Well written and balanced by an excellent cast), Mr. Forest Whitaker (a long time favorite of mine. His work in Ghost Dog is especially good, though his role as Idi Amin is even better), Mr. Eddie Murphy (I spoke about him in What does Eddie Murphy make you think of? - 12.22.2006.1), Ms. Jennifer Hudson and all the other winners.

Now let’s see how I do for the Oscars.

This is what I think, what do you think?

Historically bad Oscar omission, great Razzie choices - 1.23.2007.1

Ok, I’m shocked. This took me completely by surprise. Whoever is on the nominating committee for the Oscar’s should be checked for drug use, in my opinion they are acting like they are on crack. Perhaps that’s too harsh but I still think the dramatic move away from tradition is severely unwarranted. Of the few historic moments in Oscar history, this is not the one most might have hoped for.

I’m speaking about the omission of Dreamgirls from the Best Picture category. I’d love to hear the justification for this. In 79 years, the total time Oscar Awards have been around, there has never been a leading nominee not also being in Best Picture. It’s more than an a snub its an insult. Perhaps those that chose felt a Golden Globe win was enough, or that Mr. Martin Scorsese has earned a win. I would hate to think it was a remnant of the ‘old boys club’ mentality.

With 8 nominations I think Dreamgirls deserves the nomination. I am not shocked with the nominations of Mr. Eddie Murphy and Ms. Jennifer Hudson. I had picked them earlier in the month to win the Screen Actors Awards and the Globes. I feel Mr. Murphy will get the win, as he has had many films over the years and most have been well liked. In addition it’s time that recognition be given to his ability, as I mentioned in December he has played more characters in a single film more times than any other actor to my knowledge. Mr. Murphy’s current portrayal is just the feather in a cap of a career filled with memorable roles.

Sadly, I don’t think Ms. Hudson will win for the same reason that Mr. Scorsese, Mr. Murphy and Mr. Forest Whitaker will win. They all have a body of work with many powerful performances behind them. Mr. Jamie Foxx has already won, deservedly for Ray, and Mr. Will Smith has been nominated before.

I will say that it is interesting to note how many deserving African American actors are getting noticed for the roles they should be noticed for, since the win by Mr. Denzel Washington. After decades of being ignored, en masse, it’s refreshing to see the change. Still I think Dreamgirls is being affected by the same thing that hit Mr. Spike Lee’s Malcolm X, it’s a subject the Academy doesn’t want to look at.

On the other side of the movie industry, there are the Razzie Awards. How they were able to whittle down the numerous losers from last year it’s hard to say. One pick I had thankfully forgotten was Little Man. Mr. Keenen Ivory Wayans is a great director, and his comedic instinct is usually on the mark. Still there is only so much that can be done with material like the stuff of that movie. Then again it was a far better film than the forgettable Basic Instinct 2.

But it was a bad year for big names overall. Many of the normally steady actors made choices I have to imagine were just for the money being offered. Mr. Robin Williams, Mr. Tim Allen, Mr. Nicolas Cage all had films that just didn’t match up to the films they usually work in. Well anyone can make a mistake from time to time. Of course the people greenlighting films like Larry the Cable Guy: Health Inspector, The Shaggy Dog (remake), and the multitude of needless sub-par remakes [mentioned in my recap of the worst films of 2006] get it wrong far too often. There should be Razzie’s for worst greenlight, most remakes okayed without any idea what the original was, and most likely to buy an ice cube in Alaska during a snowstorm in winter (executives and movie companies only).

This is what I think, what do you think?

Bad films and Screen Actors Guild Awards hopefuls - 1.9.2007.1

Well it’s January and the worst of the films of the year are starting to be released. I’m sure many may have noticed that the early weeks of the year seem to have a bunch of films that blink away with a speed that is rarely seen. This of course is a good thing, as many of these films don’t deserve to be released in a theater and I doubt many will be worth a DVD either. One such film, I’m guessing, is Code Name: The Cleaner.

Cedric the Entertainer (his real name is Mr. Cedric Kyles) can be a funny man. I’ve seen some of his stand-up on film and it wasn’t bad. Star quality it was not, nor has anything in his body indicated that he has leading man capabilities. That’s not to say he doesn’t have talent. I just think his talent isn’t being conveyed in the films he has done.

Beyond his support work in The Steve Harvey Show, which had it’s moments though they were few to me, his movie Johnson Family Vacation is probably his best film work. I’m not counting the 5 animated roles where he supplied his voice (including the upcoming Madagascar 2). I am including his leading role in the Honeymooners remake [horrendous] and the sequel supporting role in Be Cool [just bad]. The Cleaner looks to be on par with these lesser films and will no doubt clean the few pockets that view it. Of course there is a following for Mr. Kyles, as well as those that will watch anything that has an African American lead because they are showing support – even if that support goes to cheap and tasteless theatrical films like Soul Plane. I admit I haven’t seen it, nor will I, but if others do and disagree please let me know. If you convince me of the worth perhaps I will watch it, via a bootleg DVD.

Speaking of movies, here are some of my choices to win the Screen Actors Guild Awards. I hope these will lead to nominations and wins at the Oscar’s as well. For best actor I chose Mr. Forest Whitaker for The Last King of Scotland. I think it will be Ms. Helen Mirren in The Queen. For best support I pick Mr. Eddie Murphy in his stand out performance in Dreamgirls and from the same movie I pick Ms. Jennifer Hudson as best supporting actress. In the cast category of course I chose Dreamgirls.

In television I have fewer choices as I don’t watch many shows. I may well be off on these but here are my choices. For best actor in a drama I think Mr. Hugh Laurie wins for House. For a comedy I would chose Mr. Tony Shalhoub for Monk, though I do like the comedic acting of Mr. Jeremy Piven. Sadly I have not seen Entourage so I can’t say if his work is better than Mr. Shalhoub.

As for the other television shows, I have no comment. I watch little regular broadcast television programs. In general I think the effort executives have put into finding the lowest common denominator in programming is so bad as to not warrant viewing. And yes I do prefer a more high-brow television show so that doesn’t help either. Still a preference towards House, 24, and the West Wing does not prevent me from enjoying Farscape, Gilligan’s Island, or Cheers.

Well let’s see how good my choices are.

This is what I think, what do you think?