"Guardians of the Galaxy" VS. "Star Wars: Episode VII"

Two different movie franchises. One monolithic conglomerate.

Marvel and LucasFilm are now owned by Disney. While the MCU (Marvel Cinematic Universe) has been rolling along the last several years, churning out story after story and learning from creative mistakes, the Star Wars series has laid dormant with the aftertaste of the prequel trilogy and the failed 3D release. That being stated, much has been learned from the success of Marvel, and is being applied to the next installment of the Skywalker saga.

But, with so much content being pushed so close together by Disney, will one project over shadow the other?

Two subsidiaries in competition for the same audience - Marvel and LucasFilm. Two movies similar in genre - Guardians of the Galaxy and Star Wars: Episode VII.  In my opinion, it's Lucas Film at the disadvantage. It's Star Wars with everything to prove. It's Guardians of the Galaxy that will capture the torch.

Well, in my mind anyways...

audioBoo Reviews: "The Raid 2", "The Final Member" and "Oldboy"

At the moment, #cineNOLA Weekly is on hiatus. In the interim, here is a new series, using audioBoo, that will focus on movies I missed in theaters, didn't get to write about previously, or classics I'd like to talk about. Enjoy!

Visit my patreon page for more information on how you can support this blog.

#cineNOLA Weekly - Episode 1

Just a few weeks ago, I attended a meeting of local New Orleans cinema presenters and aficionados. It was fun, getting to meet those I've interviewed in the past in person. Many ideas were suggested, but the one that has carried over onto an email chain has been the creation of a twitter hashtag - #cineNOLA.

We've been pushing it pretty aggressively, mostly on posts that promote film events in town. In an effort to continue the conversation beyond the 140 character twitter limit, I took it upon myself to produce a new podcast, debuting here on the blog.

This first episode features reviews of Pro Wrestlers vs. Zombie, Curio Shop: A Post Apocalyptic Acid Western, an editorial and a rundown of some events for the week. This is a work in progress - please leave a comment if you have any suggestions for future episodes. Thanks, and enjoy!

Review: "Tennessee Queer"

The more things change, the more they stay the same. I’ve heard and used this phrase more times than I care to count, but, much like its meaning, it never gets tired despite the more it’s used. And yet, the lessons that can be learned from it often go in one ear and out the other. Repeating a phrase over and over to people who are constantly repeating the same actions over generations makes me ask; Is an uphill battle worth fighting?

With a sense of humanity and an optimistic radiance, Tennessee Queer says yes.

Review: "Life Itself"

In his review of the 3D re-release of Titanic, film critic Roger Ebert wrote:

"James Cameron's film is not perfect. It has some flaws, but I hate the way film critics employ that word "flaw," as if they are jewelers with loupes screwed into their eye sockets, performing a valuation."

This is a line that I not only agree with wholeheartedly, but something I have taken as advice when criticizing
a movie. In college, a good friend of mine would often ask me to define what art is, and if it can be confined to just a few mediums. The answer lies in the mind of the beholder - anything can be considered art, from brick laying to murder (my college friend suggested that last one). To expand further, an art form should not and cannot be confined to a strict standard. Sure, there are basics in storytelling and expression through film, but they can be creatively manipulated and re-imagined in all sorts of ways. Basically, movies are not to be examined as one would a diamond. A movie can be more than one thing.

Roger Ebert spent his career as a film critic observing and picking apart cinema, explaining why and how, from his point of view, what kind of thing or things a particular movie was. His body of work was elegant, evocative and accessible, enlightening many a reader. This I knew. What I didn't know was that Roger was initially assigned to be a film critic. Fate?

Hit & Miss Review: "Pacific Rim" and "R.I.P.D."

This past month has seen some high profile movies do very poorly at the box office. Lack of interest from the audience, poor marketing and horrible word of mouth aside, I feel the urge to discuss two of them - one that deserved to be shunned and one that didn't. If either or both are still playing at a theater near you, hopefully my quick words will sway you in the right direction:

Review: "World War Z"

In This is the End (which I quite liked), Emma Watson remarks to her celebrity friends that she believes the disaster that has hit Hollywood is a zombie apocalypse. Now, it turns out to be the rapture in that movie, and not a single zombie is actually seen. But This is the End does share some common ground with that horror genre. The setting is a tight space (a house), and the characters pose an equal threat to each other when compared to what is happening outside.

Traditionally, the zombies are merely a catalyst for getting the characters together, and presenting the real threat - humans. We bicker, fight, make selfish choices and even kill one another. The looming danger outside only heightens the true danger inside. Commentary through horror. If only we had just gotten along.

Bad Dude Status: "Jack Reacher"

Beyond that internet meme from Duke Nukem, the title of Bad Dude is something reserved for the most awesome of heroes. Not boy scouts and not anyone with any respect for our “code of law”. These guys are willing to make a boy scout cry if necessary. They have their own law. And if you fall within their jurisdiction...

I plan on, through a series of blog entries, explaining why some characters are bad dudes, why some are not. Maybe doing this will reveal something wonderful and/or sickening about us as an audience. To help me out will be fellow critic and purveyor of the exploitative, The Cine-Masochist! Enjoy:

Review: "Man of Steel"

For me, one of the most striking images after 9/11 was on a local news report. The reporters did a regular feature on paintings and drawings made by Elementary School kids, based on current events. One child, after witnessing the terrorist attacks on New York, drew a crayon colored picture of Superman, stopping one of the planes from crashing into one of the towers, having arrived just in the nick of time. Sad that there is no real superhero in our world, but hopeful because potential for good exist within all of us. This meant more to me than President Bush standing on top of rubble, calling for payback.

You see, Superman is about doing the right thing, even in the face of unimaginable horror. He doesn't give in to senseless rage, nor does he use his powers for selfish reasons. Well... except for when he turned back time to save Lois Lane. And does breaking a man's neck count as rage if done to save a group of people?

It's hard making such decisions, especially when you can do almost anything. But, that's part of what makes the character so compelling. In his latest film adaptation Man of Steel, we get an origin story laden with this.

Review: "The Purge"

One night of unrestrained, perfectly legal violence. For this future version of America, this Purge is a Holiday in the vein of the 4th of July. We faced the collapse of our country, and our leaders "solved" it all - by allowing us to bludgeon each other during a 12 hour period once a year. Low unemployment, low crime, no government debt. Clearly, this works.

The Purge is not about how this night came to be, who implemented it or how it should be taken down, but instead what could potentially happen during it. A well off white family attempts to go through the night, guarded with what has been billed as a tight security system, in peace. Unfortunately, the young son lets a poor black man, who is being chased by psychopathic hunters, in. The hunters threaten the family, causing them to confront the morality of the nights events directly.

Review: "After Earth"

Green Lantern left such a sour taste in my mouth. Ever since reading the comic issue where Hal Jordan goes nuts and destroys the Corps, I've wanted to see a live action version of the superhero. Based on the trailers, I was expecting something along the lines of The Last Starfighter. Instead, I got a studio controlled product of mediocrity. So sad.

Many things were wrong, but the one that stands out is the reason for Hal's fear. It vaguely has to do with his father's death, but after a very quick flashback, this is never brought up again. All he says is "I'm afraid." Then suddenly, he's no longer afraid. Why? Because the script said so.

Why couldn't Hollywood deliver a heroes journey where fear is confronted and lessons are learned? It's so simple, even M. Night Shyamalan could do it. And he did. Rather well, I think.

Review: "Fast & Furious 6"

Over on the official MovieBoozer Facebook page, a question was posed to readers: When does a film cross the line from stupid-fun to just plain stupid? This being the season for big and loud Hollywood blockbusters, it's a perfect time to provide an answer. So many sequels, so much potential money to be made, so much money to burn - and so many fine examples.

What is a "plain stupid" movie? There are many components that are considered; plot, logic, character behavior, etc. But, for me, none of those necessarily equal "plain stupid" by themselves or even together. Movies like The Room and Birdemic may be incompetent technically, and laughter usually ensues from this, but they remain fun to watch. Why? Aside from laughing at the incorrect skills and unusual moments of the film, there is sometimes a genuine effort going on that shines through the screen. Sure, the cast and crew were over their heads, but they at least tried. That's admirable.

"Plain stupid", for me, is when there is no joy or redeemable quality to be had from a film. No effort to attempt to elevate the material from stupid to fun, just a paycheck and a job to do.

The Fast and the Furious franchise didn't start on the right side of the line, but it eventually crossed over.

Review: "The Hangover Part III"

Have you ever just given up on a movie? I know you have. One time, I popped a DVD of Anchorman into my player for family night, and turned it off about 20 minutes in. It was a chore to watch what we watched. Now, that particular movie aged well, as I gave it a second shot some years later and loved it. Typically, however, once I've made the decision to turn off or walk out, that's it. The movie has lost me forever.

I can stick through just about anything. Heck, Orson Welles' The Trial - unwatchable for some of my friends - is a personal favorite of mine. But it was only a few months ago that I first walked out of a theater midway through a screening, completely bored. It was Taken 2. What could've been a fun Liam Neeson-sploitation flick was just a joyless affair, churned out with the sole purpose of making money based on the success of the previous film. I went to the bathroom after the first half hour, and never returned.

It's sad, because even money hungry sequels are capable of delivering something entertaining. Take Ghostbusters 2: not needed whatsoever, but did a fine job of continuing the story and gave audiences something to come back for. The cast/crew weren't phoning it in and the filmmaker wasn't filled with contempt for his fans. It was a fun movie that I would pay to see, even now.

I wouldn't even scoff at a discounted DVD of The Hangover Part III. It really isn't worth any attention whatsoever.

Review: "Star Trek Into Darkness"

I like to think that, when compared to other critics, I'm pretty easy to please. Silly plot holes, odd dialogue, unfinished effects, etc. can be forgiven, as long as I leave the theater thinking and excited. I'm not asking for much; treat me like a mature human being, and I'll treat your movie with respect. A simple request that can be easily met, I believe.

Sometimes one moment - just one - can nearly ruin an experience for me. The movie as a whole might be superb, but this one sequence can stick in my mind and tarnish the good feeling I was having. It's like having a pounding headache with no pain reliever in sight. It. Just. Hurts.

Can such a headache be excused in time?

Review: "The Great Gatsby"

There are many great scenes in Django Unchained, but one in particular stands out for me. After ordering his dogs to tear apart a runaway slave, Calvin Candie stares up at Django, who is on his horse. The two men look into each others eyes, all the while a man is being viciously killed out of frame. They discuss Django’s friend Schultz for a moment, then head on their way to the plantation.

That moment was a cinematic equivalent of a two man poker game. For not even a minute, we learn more about the danger our protagonists face, just how dastardly our antagonist is and more importantly the presence of a power struggle, all without saying much. I love it when what’s unsaid speaks louder than what’s being said.

Imagine that sequence with voice over narration, perhaps from an older Django; does it make you angry?

Review: "Iron Man 3"

The idea of an extraterrestrial life visiting Earth and making contact with humans has been expressed many times over. I remember spending a lot of energy on the subject, to the point where it caused me anxiety. It got so bad, my parents decided NOT to take me to see Independence Day, until I calmed down. Of course, I’m a bit more collected now, but I still wonder; how would we respond to the knowledge of intelligent life beyond our planet?

In Independence Day, we fought against an attack. In District 9, we impoverished an entire species. And in Marvel’s The Avengers, we assembled our best to protect us and send a warning. The options appear to be either A) Fight them or B) Control them, at least in the examples provided. In the case of Avengers, we get a series (the Marvel Cinematic Universe) that shows our world prior to, during and now after alien life has been exposed to all. How does the world move on in the follow up film Iron Man 3?

Better than you’d expect, actually.

Review: "Pain & Gain"

A movie might be based on real events, but the director doesn’t have to treat it what happened as gospel. A good example would be Tony Scott’s Domino, based on the real life Domino Harvey. The story is completely fictional (if you can follow it) but the filmmakers weren’t interested in telling a straight bio pic, opting instead to express her balls out personality through a fantastical tale. They didn’t get the truth of what happened, but rather the truth of her. And, for me, this is of most importance.

Now, a filmmaker doesn’t have to treat a person’s story as the final word, but a level of respect for the subjects involved doesn’t hurt. Unfortunately for the real life people behind Pain & Gain, Michael Bay is their storyteller.

Review: "GreasePaint"

I have great respect for pro wrestlers. Ever since 2000, when my older brother took me and others to a Monday Night RAW TV event, I’ve read books, watched old tapes and absorbed as much information as I could on the subject. We’re watching guys and gals perform daring feats of strength and courage, tell a story with their body language and be charismatic enough to connect with people; silent film acting is alive and well, people! I could basically sum it up with “The Wrestler got it right. All of it.” Seriously. Mad props to these performers.

Clowns, on the other hand...

No, I don’t dislike clowns - I’m just indifferent towards them. Once, my parents took me to a circus. During the show, a clown came through the crowd, to pick a kid to join him. When he came to me, I just shrugged, shook my head and let out a half hearted “eh”. It wasn’t anything personal; clowns just never connected with me. Sure, watching Bozo on TV was fun, but mostly to see if one of those kids would eventually win the ball toss game.

Review: "Birdemic 2: The Resurrection"

There’s something charming about certain kinds of “bad” movies. For me, I can say that they remind me of my middle school days, when I’d run around the neighborhood, making short films on my palmcorder and S-VHS camera. I cringe whenever I view this old footage - it is just horrible. However, there is an earnestness that comes through clearly; a wanting to make a movie because you love movies, skills be damned.

Birdemic: Shock and Terror was made and put out into the world with the kind of passion that some mainstream directors lack. Through word of mouth, midnight screenings and an excellent Rifftrax commentary, the movie became a cult success. And, like with most successful films, plans for a sequel came out.

Would the same charm that people loved carry over?

Review: "To the Wonder"

Within my circle of facebook friends, Trash Humpers is one of the most disliked films. Two local theater programmers, while appreciative of Harmony Korine’s body of work, absolutely despise his found footage flick. Every once in a while, the movie will come up in a comment thread, and I’ll try my best to defend it. Well, I’ll defend my view of it, anyways.

Anti-Cinema is what I like to call it. Something that feels more like a statement against what we currently accept as the moviegoing experience. Basically, a movie that is executed and presented in a manner that challenges the audience to a staring contest; some people are up for it, but many will blink and walk away.