1G or L:  Tropic Thunder Movie Review

2G or L Bonus Edition: Hancock and Hellboy - 2 Reviews

Written by Humphrey McGonigle

What's good? I have been away for a hot minute, but for a good reason; I am gainfully employed again!

See when I started this blog I was unemployed, got stoned every day and reviewed my home DVD collection. But now I got a job, still get stoned everyday and review $12 movies at the flicks instead of shaky DVD bootlegs.

But because I have been gone for awhile, we going to start off with 2 new reviews, the first 2 movies I paid to see after getting a new job. (My faith is $5 shaky bootlegs has been restored with a vengeance.)

Hancock (2008)                                                                                                       

I used to be a big fan of Jet Li, when he was younger anyway. The extent of his skill and ass-stomping abilities was always obvious when he performed and audiences appreciated that.

But in the last 2 decades or so, Li started following a rigid template when making his films: they are very long, always include some boring subplot involving unrequited love, the plot dragged bare ass to the ground, breaking from fights to tell and overdevelop a subplot story that stole shine from the main story (yeah, I love kung fu movies for the intricate plots, sharp dialogue and substantive character development) and most egregiously include CGI-effects overkill. (Erase a kung fu master behind million dollar CGI effects? Genius!) Remember Romeo Must Die? Remember the digital skeletal animations that showed what kind of damage Li's hits were inflicting? Why do I want to see state of the art animation instead of Jet Li breaking someone's head? How did that help the non-existent story?  How about Kiss of the Dragon? It had a few great action sequences, but Bridget Fonda's character really took over as the main plot theme, though her character was just a subplot device.

My point is that somewhere in his career, Li lost an innate awareness for comprehensive filmmaking and appears in unfocused, meandering films, where plot and character development is sacrificed for…whatever.

I have to post a review of I Am Legend to bolster my point, but I think I noticed a similar dispiriting cinematic plot trend developing with Will Smith, still one of the planet's most popular actors. In that film, which started out compelling enough, a major plot twist is introduced midway into the film, drastically changing the direction and tone of film and undercutting character plotlines developed in the first half of the film.

When audiences invest time into film characters, they want to see the paths those characters will follow; if a filmmaker introduces new plots, situations and characters midway in a movie which negates what we learned in the first half, well, then what is the point of watching the first half? Why do I want to learn about new characters midway in a film when the introductory characters of the first half should be following their plot paths to the film's finale?

While I thought this technique was just a production hiccup, I fear that this filmmaking technique may be Smith's new cinematic M.O.

I really wanted to like Hancock. But its principal problem as a film is that it does not know what story it wants to tell, does not know what type of movie it wants to be and sacrifices plotlines and character development for the sake of a "plot twist" in the middle of the film that negates and deflates everything that was learned in the first half of the film. (Kind of like what happened in I Am Legend)

Smith plays John Hancock, a superhero who can fly and has super strength but who also has amnesia and a bad attitude. He sleeps drunk on park benches instead of foiling crime. When he does fight crime it is in a very half-assed way and with no regard to public safety or property. The CGI in this movie are middling but serviceable: you will get a kick out of seeing Smith, drunk off his ass and flying in the air, almost like a manifest version of rapper Redman's song character Sooperman Lover.

Anyway, the public hates Hancock but tolerates him for his semi-heroics, but when he stops a car of criminals by dropping their car onto a spire on top of a tall building, public sentiment goes against him.

Hancock then saves the life of a P.R. man (Jason Bateman) who invites Hancock into his home. Bateman wants to remake Hancock's image and make him more palpable to the public.

Up until this point, Smith tries to portray himself as an anti-hero who barely cares about anything, but it is a hard sell from Smith. Can you image Will Smith as a bad guy, killing innocents and trying to take down the hero? He doesn't do that here, but that is the point: you can't see Smith as the villain and it is hard to accept him here as the flawed and uncaring Hancock. Smith's off camera persona and charisma make it near impossible to appreciate what he is trying to do, but it isn't because of lack of effort.

OK, at this point, the movie is basically action comedy until the twist mid-way, which I won't reveal. Hancock's origin is discussed…kind of. We get a partial origin for Hancock, which makes it hard to understand who he is as a character and impossible to tell what path he will follow. A new character is introduced who takes all the attention away from Hancock, which is deflating because we still know nothing about Hancock. Hancock's and the new character's purpose and origin is never really defined and the last third of the movie takes a very serious tone that clashes with the action/comedy tone introduced when the movie started.

Hancock is a mess in terms of execution: it doesn't know what kind of film it wants to be and if it did, it wouldn't know how to do it. It is almost as if director Peter Berg got bored with the original story and resolved to introduce a new, conflicting story mid way.

More head scratching than entertaining.

Hellboy 2: The Golden Army

I am a big comic book fan and collector, but I didn't get into independent comics and creator-owned comics (versus corporate owned properties like Spider-Man or Batman) until I was already an adult.

Hellboy is a comic book character created by artist and writer Mike Mignola. Hellboy is a demon, spirited to Earth from another dimension but who now fights evils with other heroes and misfits for the Bureau for Paranormal Research and Defense, and organization charged with protecting the earth from monsters and other threats.

Grouchy, sarcastic and combative, Hellboy gets the job done.

Fresh off of his work on the surreal masterpiece Pan's Labyrinth, director Guillermo del Toro helms Hellboy 2: The Golden Army, which is visually stunning but leaves a lot of desire for a more coherent plot, character chemistry and pacing.

The first 10 minutes of the film, an animated segment that sets up the plot, is the best part of the film. John Hurt, reprising the role of Professor Trevor Bruttenholm, is shown in flashback, telling a bedtime story of a long-ago event to a very young Hellboy, about 10 years old or a little older it looks. The story concerns a race of elf-like creatures and humans, who have been warring for a long time for control of the world. An indestructible golden army of 4900 soldiers, unstoppable, with magic-based, inexhaustible strength levels and the ability to regenerate themselves is created to destroy mankind. When the Elf King witnesses the destructive power of the army and regrets their creation, the king forges a truce with humans that allowed humans to exist while elfs and other creatures would inhabit nature.

The Golden army is controlled by the wearer of a crown that was broken into 3 pieces: 1 piece was given to the elf king, 1 piece was given to one of his twin children, Princess Nuala and the last piece was given to humankind. Prince Nuada, the king's other child, twin brother of Nuala, exiles himself in protest of the truce.

We transition to the present, where Price Nuala (Luke Goss) is preparing to retake the 3 crown pieces, revive the Golden army and destroy humanity for the sake of his kind. Hellboy, orphaned after the death of his father in the first film, is the star of the B.P.R.D., which is a bad thing since he works for a covert agency. The attention B.P.R.D. attracts because of Hellboy's antics spurs the heads of the agency to employ a new supervisor, a being made up of smoke (voiced by Family Guy creator Seth McFarlane) who tries to employ a strict work environment for Hellboy to learn some discipline.

One of the crown pieces, the one that was entrusted to mankind, ends up on the auction block. Nuada reclaims that piece violently, kills his father for the second piece and stalks his twin sister Nuala for the last piece. Nuala takes refuge with B.P.R.D. and events are set up for a showdown between Hellboy and Nuada.

Hellboy 2 is entertaining, but the story falls flat and the plotlines never really become exciting, which is a shame because there is so much material here for the right ideas.

Ron Perlman never disappoints as Hellboy. Perlman understands the voice of this character, heroic, cranky, stubborn and always ready with a wise-ass remark. But it is hard for the viewer to connect with Hellboy: never ever really feels at stake and it just feels like we are running through some motions to see eye popping visuals.

Luke Goss is extraordinary as Prince Nuada: it is obvious this actor endured serious training and prep work for this film. Nuada is a martial arts master who employs a wooden pole as a weapon. Completely enveloped in make-up like Perlman, Goss is chalk-white, with Spock ears and black eyes. Goss' action scenes are incredible and bring the film to life. I guarantee you that you will not be able to take your eyes off of Goss, for he completely immerses himself in this character. His diction and cadences, the way he intones and enunciates his lines, betray how conflicted he is about his actions and what he must do to achieves his goals, though he allows nothing to stop him.

The problem with the hero/villain dynamic here is that you never get amped up about the two meeting, and if you do, you will be left underwhelmed by the mediocre finale.

Selma Blair is OK as Liz, who controls fire, but her relationship problems storyline with Hellboy is not very compelling. Doug Jones is fine reprising his role as Abe Sapien, but the film creators misstep by allowing him to voice his own lines. In the first Hellboy, David Hyde Pierce voiced the character while Doug Jones portrayed him physically, but this time it is all Jones. Pierce did such a great job that it is a very jarring transition to try to get used to Jones' natural voice portraying Abe. The filmmakers should have brought Pierce back or employed Jones' voice the first time around. 

An unknown "creature market" under the Brooklyn Bridge, a film segment with myriad, surreal creatures as a background for the main characters turns out to be very boring; astonishing for someone of del Toro's talents. Watch for the "tooth fairies," very, very literally named, terrifying creatures and a winged oracle of sorts, a being who sees the future and gives Liz an ultimatum/choice rife with predetermined consequences of disaster and heartbreak. (While also hinting at another sequel.)

Not better that the first and treating another sequel prospect like a threat, Hellboy 2 is just "aight," I guess.

1G or L: Commentary, reviews and opinionated opinions on a variety of topics.

Movie Review: The Incredible Hulk

Written by Humphrey McGonigle 

OK, first off, let's have a little history review:  Yes, Ang Lee's 2003 cinematic version of the Hulk was very bad.  Lee is a cinematic master and he has more talent that I will probably ever hope to possess in a 1000 lifetimes, but Hulk was unforgivably craptacular.

It just seemed like Lee didn't really understand the character enough or was hellbent on a radical, hyper-psychology theme heavy, reinterpretation of the Hulk character in spite of the source material. The overemphasis on psycho-drama involving Bruce's unresolved Daddy issues and the death of his mother dragged on for far too long. The overemphasis on psycho-drama involving Betty Ross and her Daddy issues took a lot of the focus away from Bruce in the movie. I thought Eric Bana made a compelling and believable Banner, but he had zero chemistry with Jennifer Connelly's Betty Ross. Also, Bana was a bit too buff for the movie, should shed some pounds and looked a little more banner-scrawny. I dug Nick Nolte's turn as Banner's father, but he had way too much onscreen time and less of Nolte would have been a hell of a lot more.

And, most importantly, there was no villain! He fought some" Hulk Dogs" and basically his father.  There was no official villain in that film if you think about it. Imagine Keaton's and Nicholson's Batman with no Joker.

If your movie has a hero, it must have a villain. Watching Bruce Banner wrestle with his psyche for 2 hours?  Pizz-ass.

And why the hell was it pitch black every time the Hulk was on screen? WHY? It was at night in a shadowed office when he first changed, it was night when he fought the Hulk Dogs and it was pitch-black dark in the middle of the night in the desert during the climatic fight scene. You don't know how much that bugged the shit out of me.  Why not film Spider-Man swinging around at night during a black-out? It made no sense, the reasoning in having so many fight scenes in the dark.

The cons massively outweigh any pros one can think of. Lee must be credited and commended with taking an artistic risk, (no reward without it) but Hulk just didn't work.  The potential for balancing mindless HULK SMASH! action with a smart, well plotted origin story was just never realized.

OK: Flash forward 5 years for the reboot.  Forget that Lee's version ever existed because Hollywood now believes that it is profitable to remake the same movie every few years.

Directed by Louis Leterrier of the Transporter movies, written by Zak Pen (with an infamous un-credited rewrite by star Edward Norton), The Incredible Hulk is a reboot and acts like Lee's version never existed.

After injuring Liv Tyler's Betty Ross and William Hurt's General Thunderbolt Ross during his first transformation, Norton's Banner escape's to Brazil, learning meditation and breathing techniques that help him keep the raging green beast at bay. An accident at Banner's job site tips off General Ross to Banner's whereabouts and the chase begins.

I like Norton's turn as Banner, meek and determined, but he didn't really give off any vibes that he is a scientist. It is just so hard trying to erase Bana's turn as Banner to fully appreciate and digest Norton's turn. (If you are going to make a movie, do it right the first time. Will comic books movie reboots become a norm like comic book series reboots? Hope not, why not just do it right the first time?)

Tim Roth, playing the proper villain here, is Emil Blonsky, a Russian born and British raised soldier under General Ross's command who hunts Banner and becomes psychotically obsessed with stopping the Hulk. Roth's performance in the film is the most enjoyable: Blonsky becomes an uncompromising zealot in pursuing Banner, undergoing experimental surgery to become the Abomination, a monster with strength comparable to the Hulk. Nothing is more important to Blonsky, and watching his narcissistic quest for power is the best thing about this movie. Roth is on like a light switch in this movie.

Spectacular fight scenes, but it is kind of like eating a lot of popcorn, fills you up but it ain't really filling. You never feel like anything is at stake and there is never a question who will win. (Of course the hero wins, but the fights, while good to look at, were formulaic and safe. I think some of the fight scenes were inspired by recent Hulk video games.)

Hurt and Tyler are effective, not much more can be said than that.

You will get your action and some decent fight scenes, but this Hulk movie has no heart, no real center. Lee's version had the brains and this version is all fanboy brawn.

This is not a bad movie, but it not great either. Also, it comes off as far less entertaining than the recently released Iron Man. The filmmakers probably wanted to attract the crowds who loved Iron Man, but I don't know how it helps the Hulk brand if you have to yell, "Iron Man is in it!" Robert Downey Jr. appears in the film for a small cameo at the very end, and it only makes you appreciate how much better Iron Man was than this film. (Maybe they should have waited an extra month or two before release rather than releasing so soon after Iron Man.)  In the theater I was in the crowd got absolutely hype when Tony Stark appeared on the screen, they got really excited and showed it by yelling and clapping. I didn't notice such wild enthusiasm for the other characters of the film.

Norton would have been an inspired choice five years ago, or they could have just made it right the first time with Bana. False starts and reboots just muddy the message and inspires audience indifference.

1G or L: 1000 words or less of reviews, commentary and opinion pieces on a vast array of subjects.

DVD Review: Rambo

Written by Humphrey McGonigle

            I need to get out more. Here I am watching late night movies on Spike TV, and the people running that company must have a mandate that airing cheesy, direct-to-video movies featuring sudsy, washed up action stars of yestercentury will tap into a large, hidden market of viewers who love plot-less, badly acted action films that feature very little action.

          Watching Jean Claude Van-Damme in 2007's Until Death (mostly cuz nothing else was on and I wanted a good laugh watching Jean attempt his trademark and only move, his kick, especially now that he is up in age) I waited and waited for some mediocre action sequences to begin. He plays a cop coming out of a coma who has to rescue his wife kidnapped by the same bad guys Van Damme was tracking before the coma. And the lead bad guy is portrayed by Stephen Rea, who obviously owes Van Damme a hell of a favor or Van Damme has some dark, incriminating evidence on Rea. 

            As the closing credits started I was shocked that Van Damme didn't perform any kind of martial arts moves or any serious stunts. He just acted. He shot people, got shot in the head and got beat up, but never once did he try to high-kick the hell outta somebody. I was expecting the renegade cop who kicks…really, really high, but instead Van Damme plays this flick like a murder mystery movie of the week. Maybe Van Damme is getting up there in age, maybe the producers could not afford to hire an experienced stunt crew to take some Van-Damme-ish punishment, maybe Van Damme really had to pay his electric bill this month, but whatever the reason this flick exists and it proves a few things: people who like bad, cheesy movies will not stand for kick-less Van Damme films and maybe Van Damme needs to hang it up. We don't like to see our action stars get old or do anything not related to action, which is cruel maybe, but true.

            Which brings us to Sylvester Stallone's Rambo, also released the same year. (Don't get it twisted tho, Until Death ain't on the same planet with Rambo in quality, which you can take as you will.) The film's message works, though it has nothing to do with John Rambo. The only reason I compare the 2 films is that after viewing Rambo, you too may ponder if Stallone needs to hang it up, action-wise anyway.

            Rambo begins with a view of a horrifying killing field in modern day Burma, actions that reflect war-time atrocities occurring today. Civilians are herded into a rice field by their tormentors, who have thrown live land mines into the water for a sadistic game: forcing the terrified villagers to run through the field with mines buried in knee length water, in an updated, macabre version of Russian roulette. From here, we transition to John Rambo who is alive and well in his 60's, living near the border of war-torn Burma, where he ekes out a living as a poisonous snake handler. Rambo is approached by missionaries, naïve tree-hugging, liberal character stereotypes who only look seconds after they leap, who want to enter the war zones of Burma to admit aid to the persecuted Karen peoples of Burma, who the government is trying to wipe out. They want Rambo to lead them in, who reluctantly agrees to help.

            Rambo is steadfast in his belief that some things can never be changed, while the missionaries counter that that belief is true only if one never tries to enact change. Rambo takes them in and then soon after must go back into enemy territory to save the same missionaries when they become captured by Burmese soldiers.

            Rambo is very effective as a polemic on the horrors of war. Stallone tries to offer a stark, realist's view of modern war and he succeeds, but is only successful in putting light to the horrors of Burmese civil war, not in making the John Rambo character very relevant.

            Be warned, this is not a date movie or a film for the squeamish: Stallone documents in morbid detail and realism the depravity, violence and moral vacuity of war. The attack by the Burmese soldiers on the Karen village that the missionaries visit is a scene you won't shake from memory anytime soon. But some of these scenes have a documentary gravitas that pleads with viewers to be aware of what is happening in the real world. War is hell, and only those who have seen war up close really understand that saying. Stallone should be commended for bringing light to matters like these.

            The problem is that the depravity and violence gets overdone by the end, and it is hard to tie John Rambo to these events: I was more riveted at how the film's violence parallels the atrocities committed against people in the real world, and how the western world reads about it in the newspapers and then turns the page, much more than was I interested in watching a geriatric Rambo try to save these missionaries. Stallone even has to assemble a motley crew of mercenaries to assist him in saving the missionaries.

            Your attention and focus will be set on the problems of war in Burma and the rest of the world: Rambo ties your attention to these events, but your interest in John Rambo, the character, will wane after the story is set. Rambo is just looks too old to be chopping off heads and shooting the shit out of people.

            Rambo's fitting ending at least promises that will be the last installment of the John Rambo saga. Hopefully Stallone will have the sense to continue his work as a producer, director and writer, or it may be a short matter of time before his own tragic, nostalgic and nauseous direct-to-video releases make it to late night TV.

1G or L: 1000 words or less of reviews, commentary and opinion pieces on a vast array of subjects.

Movie review: Mongol

Written by Humphrey McGonigle

            It is the late 12^thcentury and young Genghis Khan, known as Temudgin, perhaps 10 or 11 years old, is traveling with his father and associates through the arid and unforgiving terrain of Mongolian landscape. They travel to arrange a marriage for Temudgin, for political purposes. As they approach a rest area, this group encounters another group of men, men whom they recognize to be their enemies.

            At this point Khan's father commits a tragic and plain stoopid mistake, a mistake that scars his son emotionally but also toughens him and opens up power vacuum opportunities for his enemies. The incident is one of many life altering experiences that helped to form the mind that would later become Genghis Khan.

            I won't give away any more, just wanted to persuade you to see Mongol, an incredible history lesson epic about the rise of Genghis Khan, from slave to ruler, in a cinematic fashion more charismatic and grander than the film's obvious structure template, 300.

            Director Sergei Bodrov's choice of landscapes and backgrounds provides Mongol with stunning visual scenery that balances nicely with the outstanding performances of the movie's cast. The performances are inspired: you will be hooked and emotionally invested in these characters 10 minutes in, if not sooner. You will want to root, cheer and jeer, where appropriate, in snooty art-house movie theaters, because as well proving its skill at weaving an exciting and dramatic story, this film absolutely rawks! Tadanobu Asano portrays Khan with commendable determination and art master flair and is contrasted well with his superb supporting cast. The fight scenes are well choreographed and have an added weight of realism and gravitas because again, the audience cannot help but become invested in these characters and their actions.

1G or L: 1000 words or less of reviews, commentary and opinion pieces on a vast array of subjects.

Commentary: From a Black Man, To Hillary: Girl Why You Buggin? Part 2

Written by Humphrey McGonigle

OK, I am too disgusted by Hillary Clinton right now to even write something coherent. The first black Democratic nominee for President, ever, and we are only allowed to talk about what Hillary wants! After the Super Bowl you don't pour Gatorade on the team that loses. And she lost.

Did she think we were going to wait for the convention to allow her to decide what she wants? Roll out a large red carpet for her to march into Denver and declare that she was fighting on?

Why didn't we give Mike Huckabee more time to consider his options after he lost? Isn't it kind of disrespectful we didn't do that? Wasn't Romney the first real serious presidential candidacy attempt by a person of Mormon faith? Shouldn't we respect him and his supporters? Why is Romney out of this race? Why aren't the pundits asking what he wants?

And in the end, she didn't have the grace to concede and acknowledge Obama as the winner: she had to be forced out by her own senatorial and congressional supporters – her supporters! –who were left livid by her ungraceful, rude behavior, especially in not showing the winner of the democratic nomination race any respect.

All of the historic importance and excitement and fervor of that moment is gone and can not be re-captured. Years from now when historians reflect on this indelible moment in American history, they will remark on this country's focusing its attention on the machinations of the loser, the candidate who had no chance of winning. Which is more fitting, I guess.

Can you imagine Barack Obama demanding extra attention, extra respect and more time to decide whether or not he would accept being the loser? Now imagine the American media capitulating to Obama's demand to not accept him as the loser, even though reality bluntly contradicts wanton delusion.  Can you imagine?

I am not against showing Hillary Clinton respect: I just wish that those who demand such would admit they don't want to afford any such respect for Obama. Obama never really got a chance to enjoy what he accomplished and the spotlight was completely robbed by Hillary. Obama and his supporters never got a chance to take in the moment, because we were talking about "What Hillary Wants?" and if Hillary wants to be Vice President, as if Obama didn't have an ounce of say-so in the decision.

I watched her cringe-inducing non-concession speech when Obama clinched the nomination- when it seemed as though she had no intention of dropping out- and her non-concession consession speech when she "suspended" her campaign and tepidly endorsed Obama. It was obvious how painful the experience was-she still wants that job and in no uncertain terms does not believe Obama is fit for the job, but she endorsed him. You could see her mood change, tangibly feel her pain, especially when she mentioned Obama's name.

Obama accepts her as V.P. to his peril: she would definitely follow the Cheney model for V.P. in amassing power and influence.

1G or L: 1000 words or less (usually less) of commentary on current events, news, politics, reviews or any subject that crosses my headbone.

This week's commentary topic:

From a Black Man: Dear Hillary, Why You Buggin?

By Humphrey McGonigle

Is this about Bill, Hillary? Misdirected hostility? Listen, in 200 years, someone will speak about Bill Clinton and then in a few breaths later or minutes later, will then make some kind of direct or indirect reference to Bill's genitalia and/or intimacy issues. Mr. Clinton made it that way and he's got to live with it.

Monica? Until she changes the subject in a dramatic way, her name will forever be connoted to well, you knew what! MIC CHECK! MIC CHECK!!!!

You see Hillary, it can't be—oh right, him.

Yeah. I can see how a peanut-head shaped black man, with a confidence and swagger last seen exuded by Bill Clinton circa 1992, who is steadily breaking away to the nomination, might stiffen your pantsuit.

You only have yourself to blame. You all ASSumed that the nomination would be in the bag on February 5. Not taking Obama seriously at all, especially at the beginning of this race, has cost you dearly. Not having a campaign strategy post Feb. 5 has spoken volumes about your preparedness to lead. Your over-pervading, smug sense of entitlement to the presidency probably didn't help much either.

Also moving the campaign goalposts every week and trying to enforce self-beneficial rationales and standards about what it means to be president…girl, we tired of the silliness.

Then you bring up, in a cowardly fashion and speaking out the side of your face, how Obama can't win white votes.

* I don't know how you got away without being criticized or why the media let this go, (maybe because the delegate math is against you and they figure it ain't worth the hassle) but, you remember how you lost like 12 states in a row after Feb. 5? A LOT of those states are Lily-White states and they backed Obama. But, we can pretend like that didn't happen, I'm sure you want to.*

Has it come to this? McCain and his handlers know McDamn well better than say such a thing.

Has it come to this? The so-called, Nixon inspired "Southern Strategy?

Why you buggin girl?

After Jeremiah Wright Barack is still standing, what do you hope to gain?

Yes, this might be a blockbuster year for Democrats. You want to usher the Democrats into the White House after 8 years of Dubya. Also, if you don't win now, you will have to wait 4 years to try again, hell, maybe 8 years, and by then you will be knocking on 70. In your mind I guess you think this is now or never.

Also, Hillary Clinton, with the backing of the Clinton machine and your influence with the party, still couldn't stop a relatively new political newcomer, a black man named Barack Obama.

Gotta hurt.

But baby, it is, what it is.

The longer this draws out, the worse for the party, Obama and your legacy.

You want to run out the clock, it looks like you can have your way. But don't damage the party, don't damage Barack. You are a tough and self aware politician. If Barack loses, by any fault besides his own, you will be blamed. (Ralph Nader anyone?) The Clinton legacy will be tarnished further.

It just seems like you are on a narcissistic, self destructive, self immolating path to heal your celestial-body-sized ego. Your demeanor and divisive campaign tones and pandering suggest that if you can't have it, no one can.

The world is much more dangerous now.  The US has to re-represent itself and repair its image on the world stage. If you really think we are in better hands with only yourself or McCain in the White House, well, just don't call yourself a Democrat, that term is already laughable now, and your actions only make the joke richer.

Obama has to talk substance now, I get we need change, but he hasn't explained how we are going to get it. But I am going to listen to him. He has shown and proven that he deserves at least that much. Perfect? No. But at the moment, he will have to do.

I thought we were cool Hillary. I been down with Bill since he blew into that sax on Arsenio. You don't inhale Billy? Me neither. Wink, wink. Economic surplus! Those were the good old days. Even when Billy was wildin out with the interns, we had your back Hillary.

And now you got Billy running around saying the stoopidest shit, insulting and emotionally shitting on the African-American base you steadfastly built in the 1990's.

(I'm trying to plug my ears Billy, I'm trying.  I thought we were boys.)

Those days are gone.

When you can no longer warp reality and fuel delusion to service your imperial wants and desires, we will still be here, and you will have some explaining to do. We had your back Hillary and you jettisoned us. The presidency is not a vanity prize.  It is a responsibility, a service, a pledge to all of us.

1G or L: 1000 words or less (usually less) of commentary on current events, news, politics, reviews or any subject that crosses my headbone.

This week: Review of Iron Man

Written by: Humphrey McGonigle

            Stop reading this review and go see Iron Man. Perfect? No. But it is that good. Not since Spiderman 1 and Superman 1 has a comic book character been made into such a compelling and heartfelt movie character that you want to root for.

            Robert Downey Jr., perfectly cast as the brilliant but flawed superhero, makes this film impossible not to watch from beginning. RDJ practically loses himself in the role of Tony Stark, futurist, inventor, electronics genius and weapons manufacturer. Having become bored with his talents and genius, Stark has become a womanizer and indifferent playboy, and sells his weapons indiscriminately throughout the world.

            Stark travels to Afghanistan embedded with the US military, to offer demos and sell his weaponry and when his convoy is attacked by terrorists, he is injured and kidnapped. Stark learns to his horror that he was attacked by his own weapons, weapons purchased by the terrorists holding him captive. Wounded in the attack, his heart is badly damaged and he is kept alive by a device that keeps shrapnel out of his heart. The terrorists hold Stark captive in a cave, give him raw materials and demand he creates new weapons for them.          

            Stark uses the materials to create a crude armor and escapes his tormentors. Upon returning home, he dedicates his life to perfecting the armor and destroying all of his weapons being used for evil in the world.

            The origin story comprises the first third of the movie, but it is worth the ride. RDJ is very compelling and his skills as an actor are a marvel to behold as we witness Stark's personal enlightenment as a human being and as a responsible inventor. The best scenes in the movies are Stark's trials and triumphs perfecting the final version of his armor.

            Rounding out the outstanding cast is Jeff Bridges as Stark nemesis Obadiah Stane, Terrence Howard as Stark's best friend Rhodey and Gwyneth Paltrow as secretary Pepper Potts. The pacing, chemistry and timing exhibited by the cast makes the film criminally enjoyable.

            When I first heard Jon Favreau, director of Elf and Zathura, also cast as "Foggy Nelson" in the craptacular Daredevil, was directing, I figured Iron Man would go for a kid or family friendly atmosphere, but Favreau has proven he gets the character and the film comes off like a love letter to comic book fans. Incredible move, period. And again, RDJ makes this film work.

            Can't say anything more positive, go see this film. And stay until after the final credits roll, there is a great surprise at the end. (NERDGASM ALERT!!!)

1G or L: 1000 words or less (usually less) of commentary on current events, news, politics, reviews or any subject that crosses my headbone

This week: DVD review of  Cloverfield

Written by Humphrey McBoingBoing

            I read a review of this movie on Salon.com before it came out and the reviewer remarked that at the end of the film, just as the credits rolled, some audience member exclaimed an incredulous "What!?", unable to process or monetarily justify what they just paid to see.

            You know what? As I sat in the theater watching the credits for this film, an unknown audience member also disapprovingly let out a "What!?"

           I really should have heeded the warning of that first review. Or got a lot more stoned than I was when I saw the flick.

            Directed by Matt Reeves and written by Drew Goddard, Cloverfield tries to assert itself as the definitive monster movie that stomps out N.Y.C. in terms of "monster movies" the way Godzilla does his two-step on Tokyo. The problem is that they rip off the Blair Witch Project playbook too faithfully instead of trying to break new ground in the monster genre.  Also, the main characters of the film, who tether you to the film and their P.O.V. as a monster attacks N.Y.C., are so boring and undeveloped, the thrills you get from the monster's rampage is blunted.

            Main character Rob is about to leave N.Y.C. to take a job in Tokyo. In the weeks before he leaves he hooks up with his childhood friend, a girl he has known his whole life, then ignores her before he leaves. Rob's friends and his brother throw Rob a big going away party the night before he leaves for Tokyo, Rob's girl shows up at the party with another guy, and just as you are bored enough to start nodding off and drooling, the monster appears in NY harbor. (The monster appears about 17 minutes in. Believe me, you will count the minutes.)

            The monster rips the head off the Statue of Liberty, throwing its head into the streets of lower Manhattan and destroys an oil tanker in the harbor. The monster seems to be a lizard/amphibian hybrid, sloughs off little monsters from its skin and is impervious to weapons and ordnance of all kinds. (You will really dig the monster attack, but some scenes will remind you of the 9/11 terror attacks, and the film seems to co-opt those attacks and morphs the debris clouds and panicked masses of that day into a cinematic theme ride. You need to see it to know what I mean.)

            Rob and his friends get separated from his girl, who gets trapped in her building during the attack. Rob's friend Hud, the most ass-noying movie character ever created since Jar Jar Binks or Emo-Tap Dancing Spiderman, records the nights events as Rob & Co. stoopidly risks their lives trying to save the girl Rob slept with and then ignored for weeks because he loves her so much.

            The atmosphere of dread and suspense and inevitability is definitely ramped up. If you ignore the main characters, you feel like you are on a personal P.O.V. of a monster attack in N.Y.C. And that is the problem with the film right there: you can only mildly enjoy this film in spite of the cast, not because of experiencing the film through their P.O.V. We see the film mostly through the eyes of Rob's friend Hud, who is strangely dedicated to documenting every second of this attack instead of dropping the camera and running away like Benny Hill as fast as he can.

            The filmmakers budgeted multi-millions for CGI and green screen special effects YET only budgeted $0 for a script. If you can't tell by the stilted, uncharismatic dialog, all the lines were improvised, every letter. (Once you hear Hud yell "Hey ROB!!" for the billionth time, you'll know what I mean.) Goddard wrote every aspect of the monster attack: you can tell by the actions of the monster and the dread you will feel, watching this monster stomp through lower Manhattan like it has become a surreal monster playground. To go that far for effects, and then to cheap out on a script, to try to replicate a Blair Witchact or get into the moment of a nuanced plot, theme and storyline: you-are-there-as-it-is-happening feel, is such a cop out from the filmmakers. You get the impression that all the actors were asked by the director to improvise, react and then improvise some more, not actually

            Rob, you have to get to the girl, nothing else matters! Hud, don't let Rob get too far a away, why don't you yell his name every 2 seconds? Everyone else, just look confused and scared. This is gonna rawk!! OK, monster to your left, ACTION!!!!!

            I am more than sure production went exactly that way. Besides not being able to actually act, you can't blame the actors too much as they weren't given anything to work with. Reeves and Goddard are too intent on recreating the marketing successes of The Blair Witch than creating a damn good monster movie.

            I won't spoil why the movie is called Cloverfield, but when find out why and then think for half a second about the title's plot device similarities  to Blair Witch, you are just going to go, "What!?"

1G or L: 1000 words or less of commentary on current events and pop cultures, reviews, and whatever else I might be thinking about. This is a political cartoon script, commenting on the current presidential race...:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />

This script, about 2 and half pages, was written with a Cow & Chicken/Ren & Stimpy mindset, dry, surrealist parody. Could make for a 3 minute cartoon or anime.

Screenplays, music and scoring possibilities from MAKKROSS! More samples, animes and feature scripts to come!

Counting It Down: With Keith Ohcomeonman!

By Humphrey McGonigle

Int. Cable newsroom studio - Evening

Keith OhComeonMan!, the cable news magazine, is about to begin. We view cable news opening credits and graphics. Then we cut to a news studio set, with Keith at a desk.

KEITH:

Good evening. It's time for "special commentary," a few minutes of blunt analysis on serious topics. Although on most nights we just overanalyze outtakes from Uzbekistani Idol, we now present a commentary on the future of the ..:namespace prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" />United States of America, now presently known as the Bush Administration's toilet paper.

We now see CNN/MSNBC-style transition graphics and the segment title.

CAPTION: Our Next President: The Crap Shoot of a Generation.

KEITH (VO):

Your final 3 choices…and yes, we checked: First up, Hillary Rodham Clinton, testosterone's queen.

As Keith speaks we see 3 short segments of the candidates. Hillary is in a barroom brawl. She is manhandling terrified patrons. Bill Clinton is holding her jacket and standing attentively and submissively. As she picks up and throws a random patron off frame, she snarls, "You'll vote for me and like it! I'm the chosen one!" and then charges off frame amid horrified screams.

KEITH (VO):

A self proclaimed "bullet magnet", polarizing conviction and sheer Clintonian will has taken Hillary Rodham Clinton very far.

We cut to Hillary seated at a bar table, gun and bottle of beer on table.

HILLARY (Addressing camera): Listen, it's not my fault that presidential standards just happen to match whatever wacky idea I happen to yank out of my rear end. Now if Obama can't trap a Mongolian unicorn, transmute gold into fine pewter and yodel while juggling chainsaws and riding a unicycle, well, how can he then become president? How? (Inquisitively and earnestly) The people want to know. The people deserve to know. So vote for me - (Derisively) or Old Man Arizona.

We then cut to a quick scene of a confident Obama, in sunglasses and walking with a rap-like swagger down a red carpet. He is surrounded by famous reporters who are screaming in adoration, like a rock star has arrived.  

KEITH (VO):

Barack Obama, a man so smoooooth, an orator of such immense inspirational and persuasive fortitude, so nice with "his," that he makes pimps blush in bromantic admiration.  

In an inspirational, calm and smooth voice Obama addresses the camera and signs autographs for fawning reporters.

OBAMA:

It's hard being so hanDAMNsome! But you know…we got so much more to go…so much more to know…it's beautiful! We are who we were waiting for. Waiting for what? Waiting to get enough! Waiting…for the next generation…to make their indentation… culturally and historically. We is who that be! Vote for me! America, oh baby, let Daddy Bear make it all better.

Suddenly, Rev. Jeremiah Wright barges through crowd, intent on stealing attention. He is in the background, dressed in a Rev.'s attire, like in those Youtube videos, gesturing as if caught up by the Holy Spirit. He speaks in exaggerated, televangelist cadences and tones.

JEREMIAH:

Did yah know!! HONEYbees, tech-nic-ally…can't fly! Don't know why!!  But they do!!! You know why? Plot    a-gainst me and you-uh!

OBAMA (To JEREMIAH):

Man, you just messin it all up!

We now cut to John McCain, guarded by a phalanx of soldiers, strolling in a dangerous Iraqi marketplace. McCain is willfully oblivious to the cacophonous background noise of war and carnage, pretending he is in the safest place on Earth.

KEITH (VO):

And finally John McCain, so old, he fractures his hand whenever he covers a sneeze.

As if on cue, McCain is about to face and address the camera. But then the sound of a tin can hitting the ground, from off in the distance, is heard. The tension thickens.  McCain and Co. all pause.  They all look in different directions, looking out for trouble. All clear signal is given and then McCain resumes.

MCCAIN:

Safest place in the world to be!

Joe Lieberman appears and whispers in McCain's ear. He then disappears again off frame.

MCCAIN:

OK, safest place in a 1 block radius, but that has nothing to do with my well armed security detail, heh, heh. Sorry about that G.I. Bill! Anyway, nobody young wants something that sounds like a debt.

Now, Cindy McCain struts in, in an elegant pantsuit and holding a silver tray with a frosty beer on it. McCain takes the beer and Cindy struts away.

MCCAIN:

Thanks babe. Listen, after 100 years of war, then WW3, and then protracted wars via proxy-nations and then nuking the planet 'til nothing but burnt mud remains…heh, what was the point again?

The sound of a twig breaking is heard. Everyone raises their weapons, posed as if ready to use. The group is tenser, more aware of their surroundings.

MCCAIN:

Yep. Safer than home plate!

We now cut to Keith at his anchor desk, staring into the camera with a blank, stunned reaction.

KEITH:

If you want hope, just remember, one of these 3 will replace the current white house resident, who depreciated the standards of the office to lobotomized chimp levels.  However karma, history or The Hague judges the actions of Dubya, we will be judged harsher if we don't clean up the mess his administration spewed upon the world. So vote in November. The best of what's left is preferable to the current mess. Good night.

(c) 2008 MAKKROSS. All Rights Reserved.