Categories
Back Seat Box Office Shows

Back Seat Box Office #80

Picks:

Tony, Jonathan, Lena, Father Beast:

  1. Hunger Games
  2. Wrath of the Titans
  3. Mirror, Mirror
  4. 21 Jump Street
  5. The Lorax

Andrew, Uriah

  1. Hunger Games
  2. Wrath of the Titans
  3. 21 Jump Street
  4. Mirror, Mirror
  5. The Lorax

William, Mrs. Beast

  1. Hunger Games
  2. Mirror, Mirror
  3. Wrath of the Titans
  4. 21 Jump Street
  5. The Lorax

Menolly

  1. Hunger Games
  2. Wrath of the Titans
  3. 21 Jump Street
  4. The Lorax
  5. Mirror, Mirror

There are no other new wide releases.

Categories
Back Seat Box Office BSBO Results Shows

Back Seat Box Office #79 Results and Voice Mail

Congrats to all the 25s!

#DittoWilliam!

Categories
Back Seat Quickies Shows

Back Seat Quickies #39: The Ocean Waves

In the seat:

  • Sam
Recorded: 03/26/12
Categories
Back Seat Producers Season 07 Shows

BSP Episode 222: Kick-Ass

Release date:                           4/16/2010
Lionsgate

Directed by

Matthew Vaughn

Screenplay by

Matthew Vaughn

Jane Goldman

Based on “Kick-Ass” by

Mark Millar

John Romita, Jr.

Produced by

Matthew Vaughn

Brad Pitt

 Kris Thykier

 Adam Bohling

 Tarquin Pack

David Reid

 

Cast

Aaron Johnson                        Dave Lizewski/Kick-Ass

Nicolas Cage                           Damon Macready/Big Daddy

Chloë Grace Moretz                Mindy Macready/Hit-Girl

Christopher Mintz-Plasse        Chris D’Amico/Red Mist

 

Happy Birthday, Sam!!

Initial comments by the hosts:

Melina thought it was a great overall movie with awesome acting, writing and music.  Jill enjoyed it and thought there were some neat parallels to other movies and she loved the characters.  Sam thought this movie was surprisingly violent, appropriately voiced-over and he enjoyed the hell out of it!  Darrell thought… simply put… it kicked ass!  David really liked it.  Tony thought it was hyper-violent and hyper-awesome.  One thing the hosts brought up is that they pretty much all thought that the movie was going to be a light comedy with superhero elements… not so much.

As much as Aaron Johnson gave a good, solid performance as Kick-Ass, Chloe Grace Moretz stole the show as Hit-Girl.  Nicolas Cage was fantastic in this movie!  They thought his voice and mannerisms were very Adam West-Batman/Captain Kirk.  The hosts didn’t think that any other actor could have pulled off the father/daughter relationship any better than Cage.

David liked that the arc of this story didn’t follow the typical arc of a comic-book story.  Typically there is one single large-scale event that motivates the character to become a superhero, or an event that physically changes the character. In Kick-Ass, Dave Lizewski (Johnson) is bullied and sees too many people turning the other way when they witness bullying.  This is his motivation.

Favorite “kills” from the movie:

Tony – when Hit-Girl is wearing the school girl outfit and she shoots the other guys in the building lobby through the man’s mouth… and after everyone else is dead, she casually turns back and shoots the first man one more time to kill him.

Melina – her favorite sequence is Hit-Girl’s first scene (where the funky version of the Banana Splits theme was playing) and in between killing people, she looks up at Kick-Ass and gives him a big, creepy smile.

David – his favorite sequence is Kick-Ass’s jet pack scene, completely with a portion of “An American Trilogy” by Elvis Presley.

Darrell – he liked the scene where Hit-Girl had all pretty much lined up and then she’s waiting with guns in both hands and she explodes out and kills them out.  His favorite scene in that part was where she reloaded her guns, by tossing the magazines in the air, while still marching down the hallway.

Sam – as much as he loved the microwave scene, his favorite was when she was in the library and, after she shoots one of the men, he falls and his sawed-off shotgun then shoots him through his chin.

Tony liked how the crime wall and the back story for Damon Macready/Big Daddy were all hand drawn in comic book style.

Nicolas Cage modeled his speech mannerisms as Big Daddy on original Batman – Adam West. According to Matthew Vaughn, Cage started acting out his lines this way at the first costume fitting. The director was happy for Cage to continue with this performance in the film, citing his irritation with the gravelly voice Christian Bale used in “The Dark Knight.”

According to Mark Millar, the “C-word” moment in issue three of the comic ultimately convinced Vaughn that it was a worthy project.

Cage came up with his character’s “disguise”: that Damon Macready would have a mustache, while “Big Daddy” would have an even larger mustache via adhesive extensions.

The comic montage of Damon Macready/Big Daddy’s past life was illustrated by artist/co-creator John Romita, Jr.

In response to criticism towards Hit-Girl’s character, Chloë Grace Moretz stated in an interview, “If I ever uttered one word that I said in Kick-Ass, I would be grounded for years! I’d be stuck in my room until I was 20! I would never in a million years say that. I’m an average, everyday girl.” Moretz has said that while filming, she could not bring herself to say the film’s title out loud in interviews, instead calling it “the film” in public and “Kick-Butt” at home.

There was a cameo of Stan Lee as a man watching news footage.

Your Producers for this episode were:

  • Tony
  • Darrell
  • Jill
  • Melina
  • David
  • Sam

This episode was recorded: 3/14/2012

Categories
Announcement

Theatrical Review: The Hunger Games

In retrospect, I probably shouldn’t have gone to see this movie.  I really had no familiarity with the source material at all other than knowing the basic premise, which seemed to me to borrow liberally from a great Japanese movie (and book and manga) called Battle Royale.  Honestly, that was all that I knew about this other than the fact that it was big with a younger audience… that should’ve also been a tip off.

It’s a non-distinct time in the future.  A dystopian society has surfaced after an apparent uprising between the Haves and the Have-Nots (obviously written during the Bush administration, heaven forbid this could’ve ever been written during the Obama administration) across 12 different districts.  Now the Haves keep the Have-Nots at bay with their force of peacekeepers, but they also give them a little bit of hope in the form of entertainment known as The Hunger Games.  In The Hunger Games, a boy and a girl from each district (aged between 12 and 18) is chosen to engage in mortal combat against the other districts.  24 combatants enter the 2-week long game, but only one will survive, but to that one, fame and riches.

We’re now in District 12 and introduced to the sisters Katniss and Primrose Everdeen.  Primrose is set to be entered into the Hunger Games drawing for the very first time, and of course, her name is drawn to represent District 12.  Katniss, doesn’t stand for it at all, and says she’ll be the first actual volunteer for the games if they’ll let Primrose go free.  And of course, that’s what happens.  On the boy’s side, a young man named Peeta, who has an attraction to Katniss (much to the chagrin of another young man named Gale) is chosen and the two embark on the journey to participate in the Hunger Games.  Happy Hunger Games everybody!

I think the biggest problem that I have with The Hunger Games is just that it’s way too long, boring and just takes itself way too seriously.  Director Gary Ross has previously made films like Seabiscuit and Pleasantville (I actually enjoy Seabiscuit a great deal).  They’re directed in a somewhat safe style and it looks to me like he’s trying to be a bit “edgy” here by using lots of hand-held camera work and quick cuts, with the occasional break to let you bask in the production design.  This needed a real visual punch that, in my opinion, Ross doesn’t have (as much crap as he gets, a Paul W.S. Anderson could’ve really directed the hell out of this).

From what I understand, this is a very faithful adaptation of Suzanne Collins’ original book, and for fans of that, they’ll probably be in total heaven with this (and if our audience was any indication, it was just me and the friends I saw this with that had problems with this, but then we’re all white males near 50 or in our 50s as well).  The film’s vision of the future just doesn’t make a lot of sense to me.  It’s societal breakdown is told in just the simplest of strokes and it’s technology aspects and rules of the game are amorphous, with changes being made simply to advance it’s plot more than anything else.  For example, the games themselves take place in an ill-defined “arena” which is all controlled from a central source that can literally create life when it needs to (talking about the terrible CGI “dogs” seen at the very end).  The rules of the game are abruptly changed twice just to advance the “relationship” between Peeta and Katniss (these names are just soooo precious).  With the second climactic change of the rules, I just literally laughed out loud when it happened… it was just so safe.

I mentioned Battle Royale above and one of the great things that has going for it is it’s variety of characters that aren’t at all what they might appear on their surface.  Now sure, in the end, they might still be considered two-dimensional but that’s still one dimension more than most of the characters of The Hunger Games have.  Katniss Everdeen is the idealized nurturing female protagonist with no real faults at all and no real depth.  She’s told from the start the she has to win The Hunger Games and of course she does, but does it in such a way in which there’s no real blood on her hands.  The only real change for her is in the relationship that develops with Peeta, that just sort of comes to us as a matter of plot convenience.  I mean heaven forbid that she should remember that Peeta at the start of the games hooked up with a bunch of rivals in order to take Katniss specifically down.  Now to be fair, if you see a Die Hard movie with Bruce Willis, you’re sure to see Willis’ John McClane triumph in the end, that will happen, but at least the ride is fun and interesting with lots of great action and some snappy dialogue and one-liners that make it even more entertaining.  That type of movie still manages to build some suspense and there’s really no suspense at all in The Hunger Games.

The production design is… interesting.  It’s sort of like taking the great Ken Adam (who designed so many Bond films) and had him working with Lady GaGa and the Bravo Network at the same time.  There’s aspects to it that I think are quite cool (the control room for instance) and others that’s just perplexing.  I mean really, conservative “Haves” who will dress up in sparkly colors and have the hair colored blue and all bunned up in the future?  Yeah, I sorta find that one hard to buy.

And then there’s it’s whole social commentary, which is simplistic as is it’s cultural commentary.  I’ve read that this is supposed to be a big statement against reality TV shows and it just plays likes it’s written by a writer that just resents the concept of these shows more than one who’s done some actual digging into them.  Reality TV competitions are here to stay just as much as Young Adult genre fiction who’s fans thinks it’s far superior to anything else that’s ever been written before.

Performances… well I really can’t fault Jennifer Lawrence for what she does as Katniss.  She’s doing everything that’s asked of her, I just don’t think it’s asking much. The same can be said with the rest of the young cast as well.  The bright spot for me is in the character of Haymitch played by Woody Harrelson, a former winner of the Hunger Games, and Cinna played by Lenny Kravitz, the stylist for Katniss.  Both of these guys at least give the impression of more depth and have a bit more “lived in” quality to what they do.  I also have to give a little call out to Wes Bentley as Seneca, who I guess is the “producer” of the games.  Not so much for his performance, but more for being willing to let the filmmakers mold him into the cartoon character villain (and appearance wise, really all he needs are real horns coming out of his forehead).  That actually takes some stones to give yourself over to that, so good for Wes.

So in the end, well, The Hunger Games just wasn’t for me.  I’m clearly not it’s intended audience though I was most certainly willing to give it a chance.  It’s intended audience will no doubt absolutely love this to death and if this weekend’s box office is any indication, I think it’s a safe bet that you’ll all get your sequels in the future.  I believe I will pass on those and if I want to see something that uses this similar premise again, I’ll just satisfy myself by picking up the just-released DVD or Blu-Ray of the far superior Battle Royale or else watch something like The Running Man again (which at least knows how to not take itself so damn seriously).  Happy Hunger Games everybody!

Categories
Back Seat Box Office Shows

Back Seat Box Office #79

Picks:

Andrew, Tony, Jonathan, William, Lena:

  1. Hunger Games
  2. 21 Jump Street
  3. The Lorax
  4. John Carter [of Mars]
  5. Act of Valor

Scott, Mrs. Beast

  1. Hunger Games
  2. 21 Jump Street
  3. The Lorax
  4. John Carter [of Mars]
  5. Project X

There are no other new wide releases.

Categories
Back Seat Box Office BSBO Results Shows

Back Seat Box Office #78 Results and Voice Mail

Notes soon

Categories
Back Seat Quickies Shows

Back Seat Quickies #38: Only Yesterday

Back in the seat:

  • Sam
  • Scott
Recorded 03/19/12 at a bus station.
Categories
Back Seat Producers Season 07 Shows

BSP Episode 221: She’s Gotta Have It

Release date:                           8/8/86
Island Pictures

Directed by                             Spike Lee
Written by                               Spike Lee
Produced by                            Pamm R. Jackson
                  Spike Lee
                  (Credited as Shelton J. Lee)

Cast
Tracy Camilla Johns                Nola Darling
Tommy Redmond Hicks         Jamie Overstreet
John Canada Terrell                Greer Childs
Spike Lee                                Mars Blackmon

Welcome back, David!

Initial comments by the hosts (short and sweet):

David liked the movie, although he expected not to.  Jill liked it, and she’s also a fan of Spike Lee movies.  Sam didn’t like the movie.  Tony thought it was good for an indie movie, it had flaws but it was an interesting character study… he thought he would end up liking the discussion more than the movie itself.

Tony was disappointed in the fact that the three men, who all knew they were in a relationship of sorts with Nola, were “babies” about it.  Each thought they had something more important than the other, some kind of power/control over her, but none of them did.  None of the hosts agreed with Tony, though.  They didn’t see any of the male characters as thinking or feeling as if they “owned” Nola in any way.

While Greer seemed to treat Nola more as an accessory or a trophy than a partner and Jamie seemed to be more the female counterpart of his relationship with Nola, he is also the only one who took a stand and told Nola that she had to make a choice or he was leaving.  Mars appeared to be the only one who had the most realistic view of the relationship, although he also wasn’t too happy about it.

The hosts also discussed the “rape” scene… was it truly a rape scene at all?  Nola never said no to Jamie, never moved to stop Jamie.  She took on the submissive role, for the first and only time in the movie.  Did she force Jamie to play that more violent hand by calling him over in the middle of the night for sex (while he is already in his bed with another woman)?

The hosts discuss what IT might be, but there isn’t a clear answer.  Is it sexual satisfaction, is it a general satisfaction with her life, is it a singular relationship, is it power or control, is it independence?

David brought up the fact that the movie is not presented in a way to portray Nola’s sexuality as negative and was hard pressed to think of other characters treated in the same way.  The only other comparison that was brought up was Samantha Jones in “Sex and the City.”

Tony found it interesting that Nola went to a sex therapist, considering she didn’t have any personal issue with her relationships.  Then Sam brought up the fact that Nola also entered a phase, albeit short-lived, of celibacy.  For someone who seemed so steady in her beliefs and in how she lived her life, she still took in the judgments made by the people in her life and took time for self-examination before returning, again, to knowing that she is who she is.

Tony compared Nola Darling’s character to a precursor to “500 Days of Summer” in that she was always honest and upfront about who she is and how she leads her life.  Sam saw a little bit of a “Chasing Amy” comparison.

Darrell (from the chat room on this night) liked the fact that the actors constantly broke the 4th wall.  David didn’t like that, reminding him too much of current reality TV.  Tony said it was done in “mockumentary” style.

Tony asked if, at the end of the movie, was Nola truly happy with her life?  David and Jill thought so, even though they show Nola being alone at the end, she is ultimately living the life she wants to live.  She has always known, and after looking deeper into herself, reinforces the fact that she does not want just one man in her life, she is not a sex-addict, she is perfectly fine as she is, and any problems that arise from her multiple relationship are caused by these men, not her.

Jill brought up that, because the film’s budget was so tight, there were no second takes of any scenes.  Also, whenever the cast broke for a meal, Spike Lee instructed them to save their soda cans so they could be turned in for recycling money.  The film was shot in twelve days on a budget of $175,000.

Spike Lee wrote a book detailing the making and distribution of this film, entitled, “Spike Lee’s Gotta Have it: Inside Guerilla Filmmaking.”  His father, Bill (who was also cast as Nola Darling’s father) wrote the jazz score for the movie.

This movie won the “Award of the Youth” Foreign Film award at the 1986 Cannes Film Festival, the “New Generation Award” at the 1986 Los Angeles Film Critics Awards and the “Best First Feature” award at the 1987 Independent Spirit Awards.

Your Producers for this episode were:

  • Tony
  • Jill
  • David
  • Sam

This episode was recorded: 3/7/2012

Categories
Announcement

Theatrical Review: Silent House

A young woman named Sarah is working on an old summer house with her father and uncle with the purpose of selling the house.  As things progress, Sarah finds herself trapped in the house under unknown circumstances and now must survive the nightmare that she’s about to endure.

That’s the cryptic premise to Silent House the new horror film (actually more psychological thriller) from director’s Chris Kentis and Laura Lau who previously directed the thriller Open Water.  It’s an adaptation of a Uruguay film called La Casa Muda that I haven’t seen.  Like Open Water, Silent House uses a gimmick to tell it’s story.  The gimmick here is telling the entire series of events with the illusion of one seamless 80+ minute take.  It’s certainly an ambitious move, though it also gets in the way of making this truly effective.

Now, the reason for that, at least from my point of view, comes from the twist revealed at the end of why all of this is happening to Sarah.  This twist doesn’t come out of the blue and there are certainly clues leading up to it, but I think you almost need more time with Sarah to become truly invested in her experience by it’s end.  With that said, I do think that this could be a more fulfilling film on a second viewing considering that you’d now know to look for certain things, but I don’t know if it would make it any more effective.

I’m trying not to spoil anything about this movie, but it’s somewhat hard to do so and still go on about my criticism about it.  While this isn’t a direct spoiler, I’m going to make a comparison here that could certainly act as one, so you’ve been warned and you might want to avoid the rest of this paragraph. If there’s any movie that Silent House resembles most to me, it’s Alexandre Aja’s movie from 2003, High Tension.  If you’ve seen High Tension, then you’re already familiar with it’s twist and the twist there isn’t that far off from the same twist in Silent House.  The threat of this film is from Sarah’s own internalized past history.  The difference though is that High Tension takes a little more time to get you invested in it’s main character and thus makes it extremely effective when the twist is revealed.  Because of the nature of this film (being presented as one long take), you just don’t have the same opportunity to do the same with Sarah.  I give Kentis and Lau a lot of credit though, they try to do what they can within their box, so to speak, but it’s not quite enough.  I’d almost rather that they’d made this more of an external tangible threat and did away with the psychological elements entirely, but doing so would’ve changed this film entirely and would’ve made this a much different piece.

Now with that said, I do think they pull off their illusion pretty effectively even though there are certainly moments that can be picked out where there would be breaks in the filming.  The film’s sound design is extremely well done and for a film like this, it should be.  Elizabeth Olsen (the younger sister of Mary Kate and Ashley) plays Sarah and she’s terrific considering what she has to work with, but what she has to work with is more of a character sketch more than anything else.

I don’t think Silent House is a horrible movie by any means, but it’s just not as effective and horrifying as it could be and most of that is due to the nature of it’s gimmick.  I love a good gimmick movie, but this movie’s gimmick stands in the way of really getting behind it’s main character considering where they take their main character.  There’s certainly stuff here to chew on that I think would certainly be worth a second viewing down the road, but until I do that myself, I can’t say for a certainty that it would make it any more effective.