Valentine's Day

This was going to be a column entitled "Pet Peeves: Part II (the return)" because I had left out a few from the original column in October. But then I realized that most of the things I had planned on including involve love and affection, so I thought I'd wait until near Valentines Day, and then post a diatribe against it. Take that, Hallmark! So here's what movies and TV portray incorrectly about love (and yes, I apologize in advance for a lot of TV references here. In case you hadn't noticed by now, I watch a lot of mindless TV as well as a lot of mindless movies. Sorry).

1) The Misunderstanding. It's common in romantic comedies, teen movies – anything where two people are supposed to wind up together. You have a traditional boy-meets-girl, boy-dates-girl, boy-loses-girl, boy-wins-girl, happily-ever-after story line. This is about the third one: boy-loses-girl. Often it happens as part of a misunderstanding, but it can also be a part of the boy's past that the girl isn't comfortable with. You can see each of them played out classically in Hitch (misunderstanding) and She's All That (Girl learns something about the boy and they split). I think writers put them in because without it, you’d have pretty much a normal dating to married storyline that exists in real life (and you can’t put that in a movie. It’d be too boring). It makes me think I should have something shady in my past so that when I date a girl, she can learn it and dump me, and then I'll have to prove my love (possibly involving a song-and-dance routine in a public place with many witnesses to the outpouring of emotion) upon which she'll throw herself in my arms and we'll live happily every after. She may need to think about it beforehand though, and I'll have to endure a montage of loneliness before she comes to her senses and marries me. I'll call that plan B. But before that can happen, we'll have ...

2) UST. Also called URST, it stands for Unresolved Sexual Tension (many thanks, TVTropes). It's the "will they or won't they" question that a lot of TV shows use. Movies have about 90 to 120 minutes to resolve any relationship woes, which is why they only have the simple arc described above. TV shows have between 20 and 40 minutes each week, but need to carry it on anywhere from 10 to 26 episodes a year, for as many years as the show lasts. So they have to invent ways to keep characters from getting together, even though most of the audience is pulling for it. Why? Mainly, it's from Moonlighting. Moonlighting was a show in the 80's starring Cybill Shepherd and Bruce Willis (yes, before Willis was a butt-kicking action star, he was a sleuthing comedy star). For many seasons, the two leads had UST. They finally resolved it for the last season ... and the ratings tanked. Ever since then, writers have been scared that if they pair off their leads happily ever after, their shows will tank and get cancelled. And so they invent increasingly implausible ways of keeping them apart. Friends makes an excellent example, with Ross and Rachel getting together partway through season two, splitting up in season three, and spending the remaining seasons (there were ten in all) going back and forth, back and forth, until the audience felt seasick and wished both would die. Or just the writers. Each season started or ended with the possibility of them getting back together, frustrating viewers but keeping them glued to the screen for those crucial ratings. And yes, they got together in the finale, because that's what finales do.

Some shows handle UST better than others. Scrubs never had JD and Elliot together for more than an episode, even scrapping the UST after season three until the end of season seven, before putting them into a stable relationship in season eight (it was implied they get married afterwards). Chuck had an interesting case in that Chuck and Sarah had to fake a relationship for their spy covers, only Chuck's an amateur and Sarah's smoking hot, so he fell for her. She fell for him (eventually) and they wrung some UST out of a spy-or-relationship question that most of us felt was pretty stupid before they finally got together. Now they argue about small stuff. So there is a danger in resolving UST. Conflict in TV has to come from somewhere, but Chuck's gone about as far as it can go relationship-wise. Castle has the UST by having Castle and Beckett like each other at different times and introducing temporary love interests (like Friends, only Castle does it better), as does Eureka. Apparently, the UST between Booth and Brennan in Bones is epic, but I've never seen they show so I don't know. Better Off Ted didn't have much of it at all, as Ted and Linda were pretty sure about when they could and couldn't have a relationship. Warehouse 13 ignored the whole thing and had the leads treat each other like siblings.

So before I go dating this fictional girl I’ll end up marrying, I'll have to have to go through many of these moments, possibly involving another guy. A handsome guy who turns out to be a jerk. The only problem is ...

3) The other guy isn't a jerk. I have luckily never been involved in a love triangle involving deep-seated jealousies and seething hatred, but a lot of TV characters have. All of the TV shows I mentioned above will bring in someone temporary for one of the main characters to have a short relationship with. Of course, they'll need to end it to wind up with their one true love, and so one of the ways of doing this is to have the temp turn out to be a jerk. See Paolo in Friends. Handsome, foreign, Rachel immediately falls for him, and Ross becomes jealous. A few episodes later, Paolo blatantly hits on Phoebe (because he’s a jerk), and so he and Rachel break up, making Ross happy, and bringing back the UST. Whee.

But in real life, not all the other guys are jerks. They're nice, and while it's easy to envy them, it's hard to hate them, and when they wind up with the girl, nice guys step out of the way and let them have the girl. And they wind up happily ever after. We can only hope they break up because they move out of the country (possibly for a job), or it just doesn't work out. Allowing me to step in and have a relationship. And if things get far enough ...

4) Pregnancy. The chances of getting an STI from unprotected sex are much higher than getting pregnant. And yet, somehow it's only the pregnancy scares that are aired (usually for laughs). I guess a syphilitic main character wouldn't get as much action, and is probably not as sympathetic as network executives would prefer. Plus, a man's fear about fatherhood can be a lot funnier than his fear of Chlamydia.

The other problem I have with pregnancy is the general fear that it's held in. I can get that for the nine months itself - the changes and stresses it puts on a woman’s body are enormous. But children are an incredible gift. Ask any new parents you know. Ask any old parents you know. A tremendous amount of work - but a tremendous amount of joy as well.

So realistically, after unprotected sex, I'd be more likely to get sick than procreate. To be fair, a lot of TV shows imply safe sex, so kudos to them. Now, how do I know that this woman I'm sharing my bed with is my one true love? Because of ...

5) Love at first sight. I'm a little tired of the "I loved you the moment I first met you." It's popped up on a fairly large amount of the television airwaves, and I think it's leading a lot of people astray. I'm sorry to sound like a cynic, but I doubt it exists. Affection at first sight almost certainly does, and lust at first sight most certainly does. But not love. Love takes more work than a few moments of eye contact and a conversation. Otherwise I would have married that cute cash register lady the other day.

The problem with the notion of easy love is it trivializes the amount of work that real relationships take. Certainly there will be some that are easier than others. And there will be relationships where no amount of work will keep you from loving your significant other. But TV shows trick people into thinking what they feel at first is love. And then they get married when they don’t actually love each other, and then it leads to ...

6) Divorce. This one is sort of meta, because it's the societal acceptance of divorce that annoys me the most. Certainly, there are marriages that need to end. The Bible says any marriage betrayed by adultery can end in divorce. I'm pretty sure any marriage involving abuse (physical, sexual, verbal, emotional, mental) should end – quickly. Get out, get out, get out.

But marriages shouldn't end just because two people didn't try. That's easy, lazy thinking. Did you try therapy? Counselling? There's a ton of help for couples who're struggling, and simply giving up shouldn't be the first (and likely, only) thought. But TV shows and movies portray them as acceptable ends of marriage, and the stars live the same lifestyle (quite a contrast to the happily-ever-after we're used to), and so society has deemed them perfectly fine. Love shouldn't be like that.

But of course, I won’t divorce this fictional woman I’ve married, because she’s my one true love. And we’ll live happily ever after … until next season.

The Mechanic

It seems every movie I see lately is called "The (noun)." The Mechanic, The Green Hornet ... Maybe in the future, I'll wind up going all meta and see "The Movie."

Anyway, Evan and I went to see The Mechanic. I have three letters for it, and they are M, E and H, in that specific order. The movie didn't do anything for me, nor was it a complete waste of time.

It started off badly, because we were a bit late. I don't know how many previews we missed, but we walked in on the tail end of Battlefield LA, and saw Drive Angry, The Eagle (there it is again) and another one that I forget, but we both decided would not be on our list. (Turns out it was Limitless, a movie with far too much acting for our taste.)

Then the movie started, and Jason Statham (playing a guy called Arthur) killed a guy by waiting at the bottom of his pool and drowning him. Nifty concept, but not much action. Just some thrashing around by the drowning guy. Then Arthur snuck/walked out while the guards administered CPR. It didn't work. Arthur returned home and put on a classical record, of which we only hear the first minute of. Yes, our hitman ("mechanic") is cultured, because he listens to classical music. Or, one song of it, which gets played a few times. Seriously, don't you have anything else? Some Brahms, Mozart, Beethoven maybe? No, just that one song. Blah. And the rest of the soundtrack was nothing special either. So that was a bit of a disappointment for me.

Anyway, his mentor gets killed, so he takes the mentor's son Steve (played excellently by Ben Foster) under his wing and teaches him how to kill people. Steve learns quickly, and takes to killing. Which is a shame, because I don't think movies and TV shows to a very good job of portraying the psychological burden of having taken a life. Really, only Human Target's touched on it. The hero is an ex-hitman, so he's used to it, but he doesn't want other people to kill. To paraphrase, it's like a line that you can't uncross, and it's a heavy weight to carry for the rest of your life. Every other TV show and movie treats first-time killers like their fine afterwards, and it's business as usual. Yeah, right.

Anyway, Steve disregards Arthur's advice and gets into a brawl with the big gay guy he's supposed to have drugged. It gets uncomfortable and then bloody. Not that I have a problem with that, but I’d rather see stylized violence than a clumsy stabbing match.

Next, they hit a TV preacher who's a stereotypical TV preacher. Love, God, the Spirit's work, and behind the scenes it's drugs and abortions. Whee. I’m surprised they made the girl he hit on 18. I guess having him be a pedophile as well may have been a bit too expected. The hit goes wrong, they kill the preacher, and have a shootout with his escort. Wait, why does the preacher have goons, and why do they have guns? I have no idea, except to provide excitement for the audience. The pair flee by jumping off the roof of a high-rise hotel, something I always approve of.

They split up to take the heat off, and Arthur has a fight with a man who's supposed to be dead. That this guy is alive means that his employer betrayed him. So he kills the man by knocking him out of a bus, where he's promptly smoked by a passing car. Evan winced. I pumped my fist in awesomeness.

Each gets ambushed separately, but that's resolved very quickly. They fake a torture scene (one of these days, I want to see a movie subvert that and actually have the good guys torture someone, instead of faking it. It would make me question whether I wanted the good guy to win. No director has the balls to actually do that, or it may be that the studios keep putting the kibosh on it) and get information about where their employers actually are. And then there’s a very quick climax (insert your own dirty joke here) and a disappointing denouement, despite two exploding vehicles. There's a tremendous amount of preparation that could have been outsmarted by a bullet to the brain, but neither of the main characters thinks of it.

So this movie isn't a great movie. Not even a good one, really. It's okay. There are about four action scenes, only one of which lasts five minutes. Also, they had to have a carjacker in the movie. He's black. He's the only overtly black guy in the movie. Just something to think about, if you've been thinking about racism lately.

It's a low-budget rental. DVD old-release, or whatever. Yes, Ben Foster is good in it. There's some good action, but I've seen most of it before (although I haven't seen anyone stabbed in the cheek with a fire-extinguisher pin before. Usually they're just beaten with the extinguisher itself. Arthur has sense to be unique at times, at least). So don't waste your money until it's really, really cheap.

The Death Race Distribution

The title is an homage to The Big Bang Theory, which I (and several of my friends) enjoy. Anyhow, the Doctor and I had intended to watch Death Race 2 this week, so last weekend I watched Death Race. “What?” you’re thinking to yourself. “You, of all people, have not seen Death Race?” No, I had not, until that point. It was on my list of movies to watch, but I just never got around to it. However, if I was going to be watching the sequel (it’s actually a prequel), I figured I had better watch it.

For whatever reason, Evan and I did not actually watch Death Race 2. So I watched it last night. I thought I’d review it first, seeing as how it comes first chronologically.

It stars Luke Goss as a getaway driver. He’s a cross between Paul Walker and Jason Statham, only a bit more talkative than the latter. It also has a bunch of other people you’ve never heard of. In fact, there are no celeb – holy crap, is that Sean Bean? Yes, yes it is. Oh my gosh, Ving Rhames, what are you doing here? And hey, it’s Danny Trejo … wow, you’ve gotten fat. It also has Robin Shou, whom you may recognize from the Mortal Kombat movies, and hopefully not from Street Fighter: The Legend of Chun-li. Because I sincerely hope none of you have seen it. I viewed it as a public service to all my friends, so I can warn them away. See? I’m not just a mindless lout seeing movies. I’m a mindless lout seeing movies and making valuable contributions to a movie-going society.

Anyway, Luke Goss (who conveniently goes by the name Luke in the movie) gets caught after a bank robbery goes wrong. He doesn’t rat out his employer, who in return feels no loyalty towards his minions, and orders a hit on Luke in jail.

At the same time, a live news report during a riot in prison sparks huge ratings, and so the TV producer decides to air fights between prisoners. Weapons are sometimes available, including a mace and shield, an axe, and a flamethrower (in case the fights didn’t get fatal enough, I guess). After initial interest, the ratings start falling, so the producer (a former Miss America and mega-bitch extraordinaire) takes the idea and turns in into a race. Weapons are available, and each car tries to take out as many others as possible, while coming in first. The setup is that there are three laps per day, and three days total. Whoever comes in first on the last day wins. The first two days are just about survival.

Unfortunately, Luke doesn’t do that too well. The first day, he wins the race, but the second day he ends up getting incinerated after one of the inmates took up Sean Bean’s offer of one million dollars to kill Luke. He survives with many second degree burns, but is officially listed as dead so he can take on the persona of Frankenstein, as well as getting that annoying hit off his head. Sean Bean is taken care of by the Triads, who owe Luke a favor after he saves one of them on the race course.

The movie ends with Frankenstein getting into his car and running over the producer. Which made me flinch, because any graphic male violence against females makes me very uncomfortable. You have to make the woman incredibly evil to make her end seem karmically fine. Otherwise it’s just a guy running down a girl. Squick.

The second movie starts an uncertain amount of time after that, but I want to take a break to talk about ratings. Any movie about entertainment will most likely involve ratings, be it TV shows, box office take for movies about movies, or records sold for music (these are important in real life too, not just in movies). Unfortunately, writers aren’t able to extrapolate without wild exaggeration. In Death Race 2, the prison riot had a television share of 48. Which means that 48% of every television on at that point was watching the riot. At one point during the race, it jumped over 70. Which means that part of the race was about as popular as the M.A.S.H. finale, made in 1983, while cable was in its nascent stage before it could dilute the ratings.

In the first Death Race, each day was streamed over the internet for $99, or $250 for all three days. They had 50 million subscribers, which I doubt would ever happen. The most watched video on Youtube right now is (I hate to say it) a Justin Bieber music video. It has over 450 million views. But it’s only 3 minutes long, and it’s FREE. There’s no way on earth that many people would pay $99 for three laps, unless there was mass inflation that was never mentioned (given how little the main character was paid while he was legitimate - $300 for two weeks work - I doubt that’s the case).

The problem is writers want to emphasize how incredibly popular their fictional products are, but it just doesn’t translate to real life. In 1998, the Truman Show was released, about a man who unwittingly lived in a reality show. Every fictional viewer was depicted as enthralled by the show. It was supposedly a worldwide phenomenon (despite the fact everyone cheered when he left and the show could no longer continue). The Real World was an actual TV show (it still is, as a matter of fact) made on TV, and followed a few people who lived (and mostly partied) together. It did not get the ratings of the fictional Truman Show. Reality TV really took off in the 2000’s, but still didn’t generate the ratings predicted by the Truman Show. It just points out that fictional concepts are never as popular in real life as they are in movies. So movie writers, stop being so damned proud of your fictional show! *ends rant*

Death Race starts with Jason Statham finishing up his last shift at a steel plant before it shuts down. He’s paid a pittance, leaves after the inevitable riot, and comes home only to be framed for his wife’s murder. He’s tossed in jail, where he meets the warden, played by … Joan Allen?!? What’s she doing here? Anyway, she pressures him to take on the guise of Frank(enstein), because he died but was incredibly popular. Since Frank always wore a mask, the ruse can work. Just win one more race, and he’ll have his freedom. Of course, Allen doesn’t want to lose such a popular racer, so she goes through many subterfuges to keep him there.

He also meets up with Frank’s chief rival, played by Tyrese Gibson, and his own pit crew, headed by Ian McShane. He also has a navigator, a woman brought in from their own prison (presumably to boost ratings. It worked). She’s not played by Megan Fox, so that’s a swing and a miss by the casting department.

Statham and Gibson eventually come to an understanding and escape during the final day of the race. Allen gets her just desserts when a bomb she planted on Frank’s car is returned to her via gift box. And Statham lives happily ever after in Mexico with his daughter, whom he presumably kidnapped from her adopted parents. So there’s that.

These movies aren’t quite up to a Blu-ray rental. Maybe DVD rental quality if they’re cheap. I just found too many problems with the concept. There are too few laps, and too few racers. What happens if they all kill each other on the first day? No more subsequent subscriptions. Why bring out guard-driven vehicles to kill the prisoners even more? They’re doing a good enough job as it is. Why not have more cars and more laps, unless you’re afraid you’re diluting the products. Why not limit the amount of weapons available on pickup, to keep drivers trying to drive over them. Limit the time, or the amount of rounds.

On the other hand, the movies are action packed. Quick shots amplify the action, although they are pretty standard techniques. Half-second shot of a car drifting around a corner, quarter-second shot of a grimacing driver, quarter-second shot of a gearshift being rammed into a higher gear, maybe a shot of feet working pedals, back to the car racing through tunnels, close-up on the front, long-shot of a pursuer. I feel like I’ve seen them all from The Fast and the Furious, but the action keeps on coming, and they added guns. Lots of guns. And missiles. So that’s nice.

The Green Hornet

We got the 2011 Mindless Movie Marathon started on Tuesday by going to see The Green Hornet. It was appropriately mindless. It stars Seth Rogan and Jay Chou, who's new over here but a big star in Asia. Which is good. We need more martial artists over here, so I don't have to scour the internet to find their movies.

The movie starts off with a flashback to 20 years ago. It makes it kind of weird, though, because everyone's dressed like it's 1970. The movie can't be set in 1990, because there's a flash drive integral to the latter parts of the plot. Maybe The Green Hornet's dad just makes everyone at work wear stuff from the 70's. Maybe it was flashback week (A flashback as part of a flashback? Trippy).

Anyway, it goes forward 20 years, to the present day (I presume) and Britt Reid (Rogan) is partying it up. And dancing clumsily, which gives me hope that one day, I too will be able to dance clumsily with hot girls. Except I will probably be neither spoiled nor rich. Anyway, Britt's dad dies, and he gets to be friends with his Dad's mechanic, Kato (Chou). They foil a robbery after desecrating a statue of his father (who's a bit of a dick, but everyone thinks he's great). Soon, the Green Hornet is born, with a nameless sidekick who actually does all the butt-kicking (for Goodness!) while the green hornet gets to say the lines.

There's a jealousy angle worked in that I didn't see coming, but Evan did, so chalk it up to him being smarter, and me being more naive. Whatever. Gang wars erupt over LA, because the Green Hornet is posing as an independent crime contractor, and all the gangs start using him as an example to get out from under the thumb of the bad guy, who’s in charge of all the crime in LA. Really. Can’t rob a bank without his permission. Can't sell drugs. Can’t even jay-walk. The police should just bribe him to keep all the other criminals in line, but movie police are never that smart, unless they’re the protagonists. It all comes to a head in the newspaper building that Reid now owns and runs, with lots of violence and cool gadgets.

There's a car (later, more of them) that has pretty much everything. Missiles, chain guns, flame-throwers, Bullet-proof glass, self-inflating tires, ejector seats, High-caliber machine guns (I think it was a howitzer, but I could be wrong), and a record player. Because Kato likes classical music. And butt-kicking.

This movie was the first one in 3-D I've seen that uses a lot of martial arts. I was a little worried that the eye-focusing would be a problem, but it's not. And I like it. While the choreography is good (if standard), there's a lot of new tricks the camera can do in 3-D now that makes each fight new and interesting. Having blood spatter out towards the camera, or a guy kicked over the hood of the car, away from the screen, is good use of new technology. Thumbs up.

The movie brings the humour too. A lot of it is the awkward humour that's in vogue right now, but I still enjoyed it a lot. Yeah, sometimes the punch lines can be seen from a mile away, but Rogan goes after them so earnestly that it's impossible not to laugh at him. Then he realizes how wrong whatever he said sounded, and it gets even funnier. And they didn't put the funniest parts in the trailer, which I approve.

So it's a theatre movie. Not the best one we've seen, but probably not the worst. It had about the amount of action I expected, but a bit more humour, and I appreciated the humour far more than I expected, so that was good.

I don't really know how to end this, but Cameron Diaz is also in it, and she has aged well. Very well. So that’s good.

Nothing Happens!

The title is my cry of distress for most movies that I don’t like. For reasons unknown to me, I’ve actually seen a number of these movies. If someone else had told me beforehand that nothing happened, I would have avoided them. But no one gives me a heads-up about these things, so I’m forced to watch a movie where NOTHING HAPPENS. For example, a group of friends and I watch “My Dinner with Andre” on one of our friend’s suggestion. The opening credits followed Wallace (“Inconceivable!”) Shawn as he walked to a restaurant, where he met his friend. The rest of the movie used about three shots, and showed both men talking. Just talking. Sometimes listening. NOTHING HAPPENED! I imagine it would be a nice experience to live in, but it was terrible to watch. Similar but opposite to how Die Hard would be terrible to live through, but an awesome movie. I can’t believe I got suckered into watching it (My Dinner with Andre, not Die Hard. I'm glad I watched Die Hard. Several times).

On the other hand, there are some good movies where nothing much happens. By that, I mean there are no high speed chases, no rocket propelled grenades, no bone-crunching martial arts. Just a good story (beyond “two people talking”) and good acting, and some humour. I’m also a sucker for a happy ending, so that affects my judgement at time.

Possibly my favourite movie where nothing happens is Field of Dreams. If you haven’t seen it, it’s about a farmer who hears voices in his head, telling him to build a baseball field. He does, and the ghosts of dead baseball players come play on it, eventually helping him to reunite with his father, with James Earl Jones coming along for about half the movie. Not a whole lot happens (there’s a road trip, but it’s by adults, not college kids). The tensest moment is when a child starts choking on a hotdog. Still, I like it. The music is great, Kevin Costner is actually good, and there’s enough humour in it to keep me entertained. Plus, it has a sappy ending, so there’s that.

Of course, there’s a lot of sports movies that might fall into the “Nothing Happens” category, but the argument can also be made that because sports are a metaphor for war, there’s technically a battle going on. Also, most sports movie have a lot of action, it just might not be guns, cars, or fists (except for boxing/mma movies). They also employ the quick camera cuts to imply intense action, combined with blood-pumping music. They’re basically using techniques from action films, only about sports. Sometimes action movies use these as well when they don’t have much action but want to pretend they do. For instance, Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen had about an hour of space to fill before the climactic battle. So they used quick cuts, close-ups, and fast music to imply tension when the characters were pretty much just talking or travelling.

Anyway, another movie I like is The World’s Fastest Indian. It stars Anthony Hopkins as a New Zealander who travels to the Utah speedway in the 1960’s to break the motorcycle speed record. It follows him on his trip and all the bureaucracy he has to deal with, as well as the many people who help him on his way. I didn’t get to watch the whole thing, so I’ll have to make the effort to catch it again.

I like 10 Things I Hate About You and not just because it has the geeky guy getting the girl and putting Julia Stiles on my radar. It’s really funny. Yes, it’s a teen movie, and has music that’s now ten years out of date. It’s still funny.

I saw Mickey Blue Eyes on a plane. Normally, the experience of watching anything on a plane ruins it. The small screen, tinny headphones, and crowded seats tend to affect my opinion of the movie (even though they shouldn’t). Still, I remember liking it. Maybe Hugh Grant charmed me, I don’t know. Maybe I’m a bigger fan of James Caan than I thought. Who knows?

The last movie I want to bring to your attention is October Sky. It’s about a high school student in the 50’s who wants to break free of the mining town he’ll be trapped in. Inspired by Sputnik flying overhead, he sets about building rockets. This eventually takes him to the state-wide science fair (a movie event often limited to Disney movies for preteens). It’s not very funny. There are some explosions, but they all involve toy rockets. Someone dies quickly, someone dies slowly. It does have a good ending, though. And terrific music. And some good, solid algebra (I’m not-so-secretly a math geek as well as a movie geek).

So yeah. A movie doesn’t have to have violence, or comedy, or car chases, or any number of other things to appeal to me. But they should.

Mindless Movies 2011

When we first decided to see all the movies we usually miss, I circled one on my mental calendar: The Expendables. That was last year. This year is similar, although it happens earlier in the year. July 1^st, actually. It’s when Transformers: Dark of the Moon comes out (yes, it seems to have a silly name, but so did Star Wars: The Empire Strikes Back. So take that for what it’s worth). I’m a big fan of Transformers, so I can’t wait (but I must … sigh). Other movies come out too, and we’ve got some on our list of must see, and some are just on our radar. And some are on our list of “well, if there’s really nothing else that comes out.”

In January, we’ve got:

Season of the Witch – It’s already out, but I’m not sure we’ll see it. Hammy actors chewing scenery? Terrible reviews, but since when have they mattered?

The Green Hornet – Comic book movie? Funny, with action? Martial Arts? Yes please!

Ong Bak 3 – Evan hasn’t seen one or two yet, so I doubt we’ll see it. Well, I will, but I’m not sure it’ll be in the theatres.

The Mechanic – Jason Statham as a hitman. ‘Nuff said.

Ip Man 2 – Another martial arts sequel where Evan hasn’t seen the first one. I’ve actually seen this already, so I’m not sure we’ll see it. I want to spread it around, because it does shed light on the pervasiveness of racism against foreigners by colonial powers. How white people treated the Chinese was despicable, both as nations and person-to-person.

February has:

Sanctum – James Cameron trying to capture the Avatar magic by having it set on Earth and underwater. I will do my best to avoid it.

The Eagle – Seems like it could be a sequel-type-thing to Centurion. It’s listed as a drama in some place and action in others, so we’ll see.

Drive Angry 3D – It could be Faster 2.0, but I doubt it. Nicholas Cage must return from Hell to save his daughter from being sacrificed to demons. Iffy at best.

Justin Beiber Never Say Never – Hah! Just kidding.

Unknown – Liam Neeson has been replaced in his life, and must figure out what’s going on. If it’s anything like Taken, I’m on board.

I Am Number 4 – Science fiction (possibly action) about a teen with superpowers on the run from the government. Seems like a good idea to me.

Angle Mort – French thriller, so we’ll see if it comes to a threatre we go to normally.

Every March, there’s one big blockbuster that make a chunk of change, but isn’t really good. We’ve had 300, Clash of the Titans, and Watchmen. I’m not sure what this year’s film is, but here’s what we get to choose from:

The Adjustment Bureau – Yeah, right!

Battle: Los Angeles – More human/alien violence. I’m in!

Limitless – A guy gets his brain boosted. I’ll try and find out if there’s action in there, or if it’s only thriller.

Sucker Punch – Fantasy set in the imagination of a teen. The poster had a Lord of the Rings type setting … with Lasers!

April has:

Your Highness: A comedy set in the middle ages, I’ve heard it has action in it too. Seems like a spoof of medieval films.

Source Code: It might be good, it might not. Depending on how awesome the eight minutes that keep repeated are.

Haywire: The female Jason Bourne. Anytime you have to describe a film as “It’s like Movie, only with Difference” it’s probably not working out. Still, I’ll keep an eye on it.

May is the traditional start of the blockbuster season, and many people rejoice. Well, I do, and studio heads do. Not sure about critics, though. It consists of:

Thor – Wait, is that a Rene Russo sighting? I think she gets better with age.

Priest – It’s listed as horror, but the trailer we saw was pretty full of action. Maybe anything with vampires is listed as horror (after all, I’d run away from Twilight as fast as I could).

Pirates of the Carribean: On Stranger Tides – This time, it’s in 3D!

The Hangover 2 – I dunno. I might wait to see it on DVD.

Kung Fu Panda 2 – The first one had innovative martial arts, so I’m looking forward to this one. I don’t know if we’ll see it in theatres, though.

June brings us:

X-Men: First Class – We’ll see if this sullies the good name of the X-men as much as Last Stand and Origins: Wolverine did (although I liked both of them).

The Fast and the Furious Five – It’s definitely mindless enough. It also has Dwayne Johnson in it this time. Aw yeah!

The Green Lantern – I’m a fan of Ryan Renolds. He’s just funny.

Rise of the Apes – A prequel to Planet of the Apes. Only if we’re really, really bored.

July has:

Transformers: Dark of the Moon – Unicron? Hell. Yes.

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 2 – We didn’t see the first one. We probably won’t see this one.

Captain America – With Thor released earlier this year, they’re working on getting an Avengers movie after all the Avengers have their own. Plus, we’ll get Scarlett Johansson (Ironman 2) and Natalie Portman (Thor) in the same fictional universe. I’m not quite sure how the guys will get anything done.

Cowboys and Aliens – This movie could not be more Guy if they had named it after parts of the female anatomy.

August has … nothing. I’m not looking forward to it. I’m really hoping something pops up.

September has:

Colombiana – Few details, but I have a while to find out more.

Abduction – I’m not sure how many people will see this for the action, and how many will see it hoping to see Taylor Lautner’s abs (he’s the werewolf in the Twilight films).

October brings:

Real Steel: Robots that box. I’m wonder if a desperate writer saw “Rock’em Sock’em Robots” and wrote a movie about it.

The Three Musketeers – I’m always up for a good swordfight.

November has:

Immortals – More sword fighting in ancient Greece. Sure, why not.

December doesn’t have anything yet.

The months later in the year don’t have a lot of movies yet, but there’s a lot of time for the following movies to be placed somewhere in there. They don’t have a released date yet.

Red Dawn – A remake of the 80’s classic. Wolverines!

Super 8 – It’s from JJ Abrams. That’s all we know. We had a discussion about whether it’ll involve the hotel or the film type.

Red Sonja – It’s listed as horror, but I’m wondering if it’s a remake, prequel, or sequel to the 80’s atrocity that was headline by Schwarzenegger, only he only put in an extended cameo. His star-power had just exploded from Terminator, so producers put him all over the posters. Liars.

Anyway, I’m sure that more movies I haven’t heard about will be slotted into our list. If you have any suggestions, feel free to leave them in the comments. I think the only problem is that there are some terrific video games coming out as well, so I'll have to figure out a way to split my time and money between movies and games. Frankly, it's a problem I like to have.

The Year in Movies - 2010

Near the end of the year, a lot of magazines, newspapers, websites, and what-have-you do best of lists. I thought I’d wait until the beginning of the next year, in case there was a late movie I needed to add. So which movie was the best of the year? Evan would say Inception. I would say … I have no idea. I figured I’d just list the Theatre movies, Blu-ray movies (Rent them right away), DVD movies (rent them when they’re cheap), TV movies (only watch them for free … if you’re bored), and avoid (At all costs … seriously).

Theatre movies:

Ironman 2: Not as much action as I wanted, but funny throughout

Prince of Persia: I liked it more than other people. Funny, action throughout, characters acted believably.

The A-team: Ridiculous. Funny. Awesome.

Knight and Day: I liked it better than most people. If it copied from other movies, at least it copied from other good movies.

Inception: I never bought the hype that it was so awesome and confusing. Great, but not a lot of fun.

Salt: This could probably be downgraded, but there is some good action, and it could go anywhere after half the movie is over.

Clash of the Titans: We missed it in theatres, but saw it on Blu-ray. Maybe it was better for the lack of 3D. I enjoyed it, even if it was pure pulp.

The Expendables: Took a while to get going, but once the action started, it never stopped.

Avatar: We caught the re-release (with 8 extra minutes!) and it was fantastic, even if the story was mediocre. The technical wizardry made up for it.

RED: The action was as good as I expected. The humour was unexpected and awesome. John Malkovitch is worth the admission price alone.

TRON Legacy: Like Avatar, only better. The story is standard, some lines are clunky, but the experience is awesome! If there’s one movie that will be severly hurt by not seeing it in 3D, it’s this one.

Blu-ray movies:

Predators: Action, a bit of humour. But the trailers lied, and it seems like the Predators are getting a little less awesome with each movie.

The Other Guys: Not as much action as I wanted, and some of the humour missed my personal preference. Good for people who like 30 Rock or The Office.

From Paris with Love: The action trailed off as the movie progressed, until the climax was purely emotional. Still, lots of good action, and some humour.

Resident Evil Afterlife: Gory, with a lot of action. Still, the slow-motion was way overused, and there wasn’t a lot of humour. In 3D.

DVD movie:

Jonah Hex: Has enough interesting things you could probably spend one or two bucks on it without feeling like you’re wasting movie. Plus, Megan Fox! But it’s very short, and there’s not a lot of action.

On TV:

Faster: There’s almost no action, but if you’re interested in a revenge drama, with some forgiveness thrown in, you can watch it on TV … if nothing else is on.

Avoid:

Robin Hood: Totally and completely generic. Watch Prince of Thieves instead. Or better yet, Men in Tights. You’ve seen this movie a thousand times in different movie.

Avoid at all costs:

The Last Airbender: M. Night Shyamalan, what have you done? WHAT HAVE YOU DONE?!? How he could screw up such a great TV show into such a travesty of a movie, I’ll never know. But it starts with him, and it ends with him. DO NOT SEE THIS MOVIE!

Evan also reviewed some of the movies we saw, although his schedule was busy enough that he could really write about them all.

Jonah Hex

Knight and Day

The Last Airbender

Predators

Inception

Salt

Clash of the Titans

The Other Guys

The Expendables

Faster

Also, sometimes I would sit down and write about particular things in movies that interested me, and occasionally touched on parts of other media (TV, internet, music, books) as well.

Summer of Mindless Movies: Our idea to see a lot of movies

The Preview Game: What to do right before the movie starts

Site News: An update about the blog

Ratings: How I decided to rate movies

3D: It’s the future of movies, like sound and colour before it

Music: What I like, and who I like writing it

The Losers: A missed mindless movie

Sequels: Why are there so many

Casshern: Under-the-radar movie from Japan

International Initials: How bureaucracy translates from one country to another

Heist Movies: when thieves set their sights too low

Martial Arts: I like them. A lot

Multiple Mediums: adapting movies into other things, and vice versa

End of Summer: Why blockbusters stop

Movies and Video Games: adapting movies and video games into each other

Sports Movies: movies about sports

Movies and TV: adapting movies and TV shows into each other

Pet Peeves: what I hate in movies, and sometimes why

Movies and Books: adapting movies and books into each other

Centurion: a missed (under-the-radar) mindless movie

Movember: a celebration of facial hair in movies

Movies and Comic Books: adapting movies and comic books into each other

Christmas Movies: there aren’t that many good ones

Spies vs Military: who would win in a fight

So that’s pretty much all of everything on this blog. Next week will probably be a look ahead to what movies we’ll be seeing next year.