Friday, July 27, 2007

Top at the Box Office This Week

1. "I Now Pronounce You Chuck and Larry." Most of Adam Sandler's comedies have been about as funny as the Bataan Death March, and this is no exception. It doesn't help that there is something about Kevin James's face that makes me want to shove it into a vat of hot frying grease until he stops wiggling.

2. "Harry Potter and the Order of the Holy Living Fuck Do I Not Give a Shit."

3. "Hairspray," which apparently is good despite all evidence to the contrary.

4. "Transformers." I've heard this is decent enough for a big dumb action film, but I'm having nasty visions of a "G.I. Joes" film adaptation running through my head.

5. "Ratatouille," Is this some sort of opposite land where solid, entertaining films are popular? What's going on here?

6. "Live Free or Die Hard." Ah. There we go.

7. "License to Wed." At what point in the creation of this film did this seem like a good idea? And why are people seeing it? WHAT THE FUCK IS HAPPENING TO THIS COUNTRY? ARE YOU ALL SNIFFING PAINT? WHAT THE FUCK?!

8. "1408," in which John Cusack plays a man who meets Samuel L. Jackson while drudging the bottom of the Stephen King adaptation barrel.

9. "Even Almighty." This still exists? I thought everyone involved had had their genitals torn off by rabid badgers. Or did I just dream that?

10. "Knocked Up." Opposite world again.

Friday, July 20, 2007

Wizards and Rich Cocksuckers

In Other "Harry Potter" News:
Go fuck yourself.

In Celebrity News:
Will Smith and Tom Cruise are hosting a party to welcome some hunky dipshit soccer player and his no-talent wife to America. Expected attendees include Jim Carrey, Oprah Winfrey and some other assholes. Expect much uber-rich, self-important Hollywood cocksuckery to occur.

Opening This Week:
"Hairspray," the film adaptation of the musical adaptation of a John Waters film from the 1980s. 1980s film comedy combined with musical theater? Could the level of Idontgiveashittery be any higher?

Also opening is "I Now Pronounce You Chuck and Larry," which is one of the worst titles imaginable for what is looking to be one of the most wretch-inducing gay panic comedies of the last couple of years or so (at least as far back as "Boat Trip"). Adam Sandler must have some sort of grudge again laughter, because he's been trying to kill it his entire career. This one is interesting because it co-stars Kevin James, who has apparently been typecast as someone who marries people who are thinner and slightly more attractive than himself. By the way, did you know that the man who directed this also directed "Problem Child"? Think about that for a moment. Try to conjure up in your mind images from that film. Now look me in the face and tell me whether or not you still believe in an all-merciful god.

Friday, July 6, 2007

A Look at Comic Book Adaptations

A massive slew of comic book adaptations is planned for the next couple of years. Having exhausted most of the major super heroes, the studios are now digging up the mass pile of second-rate comics from both DC and Marvel. Aside from the obvious sequels (the "Batman Begins" sequel, "The Dark Knight," "The Punisher 2") there is a hot steaming load of heroism coming to the screen. Here's a look at a few selections from the pile:

The most promising of the bunch is "Iron Man," which involves an armor-plated billionaire saving the world. The special effects are looking to be semi-decent and it stars the tolerable Robert Downey Jr. The director hasn't done much other than some bland, kid-friendly comedy, but at least he isn't Tim Story. Two of the screenwriters were involved with the excellent "Children of Men," but there are two others listed as well, who collectively haven't produced shit before this. We'll let this one slide for now.

In the inevitable-but-somewhat-pointless sequel department, we have "The Incredible Hulk," which ditches Ang Lee's Greek tragedy-inspired original vision for what instead is looking to be a film about a large green man who smashes things. The original cast has been replaced (really, everyone) and the director is the guy who brought us both of the "Transporter" films, which might indicate the studio wanted to take things in a different direction, i.e. dumb it down so it won't bomb this time.

There is an ass-load of lesser-known comics coming to the screen as well, with "The Sub-Mariner," "Thor," "The Flash," "Nick Fury" and "Iron Fist" all set for release between now and 2009. But what about black people? Oh yeah, "Luke Cage," which is about a really strong guy. Being really strong is kind of a boring super-power when you think of it, like being able to fly or shooting lasers out of your eyes (Superman = Most boring superhero of all time). Yeah, it gets stuff done, but it also shows a real lack of creativity.

You can almost see the thought process going on at the major studios in regards to these films: "You know, when we put interesting directors with original visions, such as Sam Raimi and Christopher Nolan in charge of these film, we got intelligent, exciting movies that ended up becoming popular franchises. Let's try to recreate that success by putting total hacks in charge of the films and giving them sub-par material! Quick, give me another line of coke before this idea train I'm riding totally derails!"

Speaking of franchise opportunities, after Brett Ratner fucked the holy living hell out of the third "X-Men" film (really, was there a character in that film they didn't totally screw up? The stoic one becomes a rash, emotional wreck; the intelligent villain comes up with the world's most retarded attack plan, the brilliant leader/mentor causes untold damage by not sparing five seconds for some exposition. And so on and so forth), I guess they decided the best way to salvage the characters was to start farming them out for prequels. Hence, "Wolverine" and "Magneto" are both planned for release in the next couple of years. "Wolverine" I can see, if you do it right (which they won't), but "Magneto"? WTF?

Here are a couple of really absurd ones: "Shazam!" (Points for being esoteric, but does anyone really think this will be good? I'm having "Thunderbirds" visions of this one), "Wonder Woman" (this belongs in the 1970s and there it should stay), "The Avengers" ("What hero should we do next?" "Ah fuck it, let's do them all"), and finally "Captain America," which in case you have forgotten was actually done once before and will look incredibly silly no matter what they do to it.

And finally, it wouldn't be a list of upcoming comic book adaptations if someone weren't planning on ruining an Alan Moore comic, in this case the seminal "Watchmen." How do I know they will screw it up, you say? Fan boys are going ape shit about it and the director is a really big fan of the comic, so why shouldn't it be good? Because fan boys go ape shit about everything and they're almost always wrong because they want to see everything adapted into a movie regardless of how it would turn out. And every director who directs a comic book adaptation says they are a big fan of the comics. That's part of the problem. They try to make a comic book instead of a movie and the thing ends up sucking more than a Dyson vacuum in a wind tunnel. In this case the director in question is Zack Snyder. Sure his last two films were big hits, but they were also stupider than a bag of hammers. His general tactic is to take something he likes and dumb it way the fuck down, whether it be "Dawn of the Dead" or "300." Sure, he can make it entertaining, but this is only provided you don't feel like thinking it through. Do you really think this is the right approach to take with one of the most critically celebrated, literate, multi-textual graphic novels of all time? Do you think having leeches attached to your testicles is a cure for headaches? Then boy do I have a movie for you.

Sunday, July 1, 2007

Horror Movie Update

A remake of "Day of the Dead" is in production. Planned as a direct sequel to the 2004 remake of "Dawn of the Dead," with many of the same characters returning, the film is hoping to recreate the success of "Dawn" by slyly replacing the director and writer with much lamer substitutes, in this case the director "Halloween H20" and "Lake Placid" and the screenwriter for the entire "Final Destination" series. Would it be possible to make this any more mind-numbingly boring?

A remake of "The Creature from the Black Lagoon" is in the works for 2008. Originally, Guillermo del Toro was attached to this as director, but I guess someone decided that would just be too impossibly awesome for words and came up with the bright idea of having the guy who directed a multimillion dollar "Indiana Jones" wannabe piece of shit flop staring Matthew McConaughey take the helm. The writer at least has a better track record, if you count a popular Tom Hanks comedy from the 1980s a track record.

The classic 1980s slasher film "Prom Night" is also being remade (it was inevitable at this point, wasn't it?), despite the fact that the original was such a dull non-entity that it would hardly make any difference if you called it a remake or not. They did decide to try something new with this remake though. You see, they took a forgotten horror film they owned the rights to, had a random hack shit out an update screenplay, hired a dull as dishwater television director to helm it and populated the cast with oversexed WB rejects willing to whore themselves to whatever artistically dubious project might bring them the chance for even the most fleeting bit of fame. Certainly, nobody has tried doing this before?