SDCC '07 - Riding The Comic/Graphic Novel Gravy Train

Is there anyone in Hollywood NOT involved with a comic book these days? At this year's SDCC everyone from Rosario Dawson to Neil Young (yes, THAT Neil Young) unveiled new comic book & graphic novels.
Look, I'm all for artistic types stretching their craft and trying new things .. but its getting kind of ridiculous.
My big beef is that a lot of these people aren't actually creating these new projects they're involved with. They're doing the publication equivalent of 'executive producing.' And that's not how graphic novels or comic books or manga WORK.

You can't produce a graphic novel or comic book. You can't present one either, unless your name's Stan Lee. Otherwise, you haven't earned that distinction. You can write, pencil, ink, letter and/or edit one. Because then you're involved in the true creative process that creates a comic or GN.

Maybe I'm just splitting hairs here but I'm not that impressed when I hear about Rosario Dawson's GN "O.C.T. - Occult Crimes Taskforce" - because she didn't write or illustrate it. She may be involved in the storytelling process in some way but if she's not handling any of the two primary tasks, how much input into the story can she have? [BTW, O.C.T.'s first TPB is due out soon, and Dawson announced at Comic Con that more stories are due.]

Same thing with Neil Young. DC announced at their Vertigo panel plans to have Josh Dysart write the GN adaptation of Young's 2003 album "Greendale." At the panel, Dysart said the book "...is about a woman who finds her place as an activist. It's a blend of surrealistic Vertigo, my aesthetic and Neil Young." It was also said Young would have significant input -- whatever that means.

Look, I'm a big Neil Young fan but last time I checked he had no comic book experience so chances are he's not doing much more than giving the occasional piece of advice to the writer about what certain songs in the album meant. I could be completely wrong about that ... but I bet I'm not.

Not all of this new wave of 'Hollywood graphic novelists' take such a hands-off approach. Actor Thomas Jane ("The Punisher," "Stander," the upcoming "The Mist") has launched his own comic publishing firm, RAW Studios, to put out traditional comics as well as digital comics online. Jane is partnering with "30 Days of Night" creator Steve Niles on the project and Jane is co-writing the books. That's a big difference. [I'll have more on Jane's multitude of multimedia offerings in my next post. He's a busy guy!]

My concern with this new trend is that it cheapens the hard work, the dedication comic pros put in to making their books. There are no shortcuts for true artistic endeavors. Brian K. Vaugh, Brian Azzarello, Neil Gaiman, Dave Gibbons,et all .. none of them have 'ghostwriters' helping them with their stories. Its their work, their vision.

The blurring of the creative lines is giving someone whose main contribution is likely restricted to the promotional front, just as much credit as the person or persons responsible for the story. And that's not right.

I'd love to hear thoughts on this issue, no matter which way you stand.

INNNDYYYYYY!!!! (Guess Who's Back?) -SDCC News

One of the several big things to come out of Thursday's Paramount panel was the 'live via satellite' appearance by director Steven Spielberg and the cast of Indy 4 sitting on directors chairs. Harrison Ford looked great in his worn adventurer's outfit, Ray Winstone (who's also starring in Bob Zemeckis' Beowulf) and Shia LaBeouf were also there from the film's current shooting location.
Spielberg and Ford shared few details other than the fact that after 18 years, 25 days of shooting have been completed. Ford seemed genuinely excited to be doing another Indy movie and I can't wait to see him working with Winstone onscreen. No confirmation about LaBeouf's role, other than Ford calling him his 'other sidekick.' Spielberg told the audience this movie is for the fans and they're going to get it right - frankly, how can you doubt this crew?
Oh yeah .. almost forgot. Before signing off, spielberg went and grabbed another directors chair -- with the name 'Marion Ravenwood' on it! The crowd in Hall H inside San Diego's Convention Center went nuts when Karen Allen, the first and to many fans the best of Indy's girls, walked into view and sat in the chair.
And she looked amazing!! I mean, really, really good. I'm all of a sudden extremely excited about this movie. Everything seems to be falling into place for a great return for Indy. And while I'm a huge Cate Blanchett fan, I'm hoping Karen Allen gets more than just a cameo walk-on role, because the character of Marion Ravenwood deserves better. Thankfully, it appears Spielberg is well aware of what the fans want with this movie and he wants to get it right.
More SDCC updates later.

San Diego Comic Con '07 - Trek Casting Call

Big Star Trek news broken @ SDCC today. At the Paramount Pictures panel, director J.J. Abrams revealed Zachary Quinto from "Heroes" will play young Spock in Abrams' still-untitled Star Trek project due out next year. Its assumed Abrams is taking the crew from TOS back to the beginning, maybe as far back as to the Academy. But before the crowd could even settle down from the well-received news of Quinto's casting, Abrams & Co. announced ANOTHER casting note for the movie - LEONARD NIMOY!!
Yep, original Spock will play himself in the new film. When Nimoy walked out on stage, it set off perhaps the most pure form of Fanboy enthusiasm I have ever witnessed, and that's saying alot. It was a great moment.
Meanwhile, Abrams said he hasn't cast Kirk yet and he wants Shatner in the film too but he wants to do it right and not screw with Shatner's legacy or that of Capt. James Tiberius Kirk.
I'll post pix when I return home to NYC and give you updates on Iron Man & Indy 4!!!

Billy Crudup is Dr. Manhattan!!

So a VERY, VERY well-placed source told me over the weekend that Billy Crudup is definitely, 100% inked to play Dr. Manhattan in the long-awaited and even longer-in-development "Watchmen" movie. Its expected that '300' director and the current King of all things graphically-oriented Zach Snyder will announce this and perhaps other casting notes this Friday @ the San Diego Comic Con during the "Watchmen" portion of the Warners panel.

Interesting decision on both sides. Snyder proved with 300 he 'gets' the source material and understands the responsibility a filmmaker has to bring a well-respected and beloved story to the screen. With "Watchmen" its doubly so because its nearly universally viewed as the apex of comic book literature. He knows if he screws this up, he's toast with the rabidly loyal fans who are bowing at his feet now because of his adaptation of Miller's bloody masterpiece.

What I like about Snyder is that unlike most folks in Hollywood, he realizes that to be a true commercially successful entity, a comic book/graphic novel adaptation should first and foremost appeal to the core fans. Of course, you want casual fans to get into your movie, but if you hook the diehards who are familiar with the source material, chances are you've got a hit. So I'm cautiously optimistic about "Watchmen," despite the fact that I have doubts about how they're going to pull off some of the bigger scenes from the comics.

As for Crudup, this could put him back in the public eye after years of ducking mainstream movie attention. Not even his too-brief turn in MI:III last year was enough to get him off the Hwood Milk Carton he's been on the past few years. If it wasn't for his voice on those 'priceless' Mastercard commercials, you'd think the man who portrayed 'The Golden God' Russell Hammond in the practically-perfect "Almost Famous" had fallen off the face of the earth. He hasn't. He's been on Broadway, but for most movie fans, that's the same thing.

Whatever the reason he's jumping onboard (hopefully he likes the original comics), Crudup's good in ANYTHING. This is a good step forward for "Watchmen." Can't wait to hear who else signs on.

Make This Guy A Star, Already!

The opening weekend success of "Hairspray" (not to mention the sterling reviews) may finally, FINALLY, solve a nagging mystery in Hollywood - why James Marsden isn't a bigger star?

Just look at the guy. He's annoyingly good-looking, perfectly coiffed and just about always well-dressed. On top of that, the guy can flat out ACT. His work on Ally McBeal, the X-Men trilogy, The Notebook and especially Superman Returns proves that. In Hairspray, he also shows he can sing & dance like a Broadway star. So I ask again, why isn't he a bigger star?

It has nothing to do with off-set headlines. He's never in Page Six or any other gossip columns because he lives the nice, comfortable life of a married man. It may have EVERYTHING to do with the fact he has perfected the role of the third wheel, the guy who NEVER gets the girl. As Cyclops, he may have technically gotten the girl (Jean Grey/Phoenix) but she obliterated him in the third film and always seemed to pine for Wolverine -- so that doesn't really count. In The Notebook, he loses Rachel McAdams to Ryan Gosling. Now, I enjoyed this movie, I did. Thought it was a great love story. My wife, though, LOVES this movie. Its one of her all-time Top 5 films. But she says the one flaw she has with it is that no woman in her right mind would leave a guy like Marsden for a sourpuss like Gosling's character. But it happens anyway!

Then in Superman Returns, Marsden has to compete with the Man of Steel. Impossible, yet, he somehow manages to make you sympathize with his character, knowing he's being held up to an impossible standard, and hoping he comes out of this incredibly awkward situation OK. THAT'S GOOD ACTING.

In Hairspray, the Stillwater, Oklahoma native turns a nothing part in the Broadway show into a scene-stealing effort that's bursting with charisma and conscience. He could have played it in a self-absorbed, Vince Fontaine-styled performance, but Marsden's natural likeability comes through onscreen and infuses Corny Collins with a personality he really didn't have in the Broadway show. If you caught the cast's appearance on TODAY last Friday, you saw it there as well. (Of course, you didn't hear a word from James during the interview portion because they only wanted to talk to the other stars. Talk about a slight!)

So again - why isn't he a big star? Beats me. Maybe casting directors feel he's the prototypical 'too good to be true' guy, someone the audience can't relate to. Could be, the right parts/scripts haven't come his way, or perhaps they have and he hasn't jumped on them. And sometimes, its just bad timing and bad luck. Who knew Hugh Jackman would be the breakout star of the X movies? Or that Preacher (based on the graphic novels), a project Marsden had been actively trying to get off the ground so he could star in it, would keep getting stalled in the Hwood pipeline? To illustrate my point about luck and timing, Marsden told me Preacher is finally getting made -- as a cable TV series. He won't be a part of it. Too bad. He would have been great in a really interesting role. But once again, things didn't break his way.

Regardless, he's way overdue to break out.

We had him on REEL TALK last week and he was one of the most down-to-earth guys we've had on. Laid back, self-deprecating, and very aware of the industry and his place. He seemed genuinely excited about Hairspray's chances of raising his profile. I hope it does that for him. Enchanted seems like another can't-miss hit later in November, which should also show off his sense of humor (he's playing a buffoon-like Prince Charming, as he put it - check out the trailer here. HE's also got a romantic comedy with Katherine Heigl and Ed Burns called 27 Dresses coming out later this year. If this isn't the year James Marsden becomes a big star, then there's no hope.

Keep this in mind. Outside of Hugh Jackman and maybe Matt Damon, name another under 40 star who can do comedy/action/drama/musicals. Think about it and get back to me when someone comes to mind. And I'm only including Damon because of his 'Will & Grace' episode.

So hopefully Hollywood finally smarts up and realizes their next genre-juggling star has been right under their noses, waiting to show what he can do. Someone give this guy a LEAD ROLE!

The Potter Bandwagon

So yesterday I was talking about how Harry Potter has become the dominant force in pop culture. Admittedly, not such an 'out-there' statement to make. But I have to admit it was funny to wake up and read the front page of USA TODAY's LIFE section today and see their cover story.

Seems I'm far from the only person to notice the bespectacled one's pervasive influence and cash-hoarding prowess.

Also, is there any greater indication of someone (or something)'s "IT" factor than becoming a victim of piracy or getting prematurely leaked onto the Internet? If so, then further proof that it's Harry's world and we all just live in it can be found
here.
If those really are the pages from the last Potter book, I hope they catch the person who put 'em up there. Its one thing to give an early heads up for a preview screening of an upcoming movie, but to go ahead and steal shots of the pages to post them .. its not just wrong but its cheapening how the audience can enjoy the book. Reading photographs of the pages of perhaps the most anticipated book of the last quarter century is not the way people should experience it. So if anyone is thinking of going on an online search for those pages, DON'T! Wait 'til Saturday and buy the book, sit down and read it on the couch, and enjoy Harry's last adventure the way it was meant to be enjoyed.

My PSA is done. Now I'm off to eat some Cuban food at Havana Central (which is pretty good, despite being right in the middle of tourist hell in Times Square).

The King of Pop (Culture)?

After scoring a mind-boggling $44 million its first day in theaters, $77.4M for the weekend, $140M for its first 5 days .. however you add it up, the totals compute to a ridiculous figure. Mind you, "HP:ATOOTP" is easily the worst-reviewed of the Potter films, so these totals prove the franchise is officially critic-proof. No matter what people say (my guys on REEL TALK didn't like it at all, BTW) the fans intend to go see it. That, along with the stellar box office, must have the executive folks at Warner Bros. exhaling and resuming their Hamptons house-hunting. They're also an indicator of just how strong a hold Mr. Potter has on mass audiences.

In TV a long-running series starts to lose steam, creatively and popularly, after its 3rd or 4th season. In the movies, the decline begins even earlier (Remember how fast the Matrix lost its coolness once Reloaded & Revolutions stumbled into theaters?). And the few franchises that have lasted past 3 chapters (off the top of my head ... Star Wars, Star Trek, Alien, Land Before Time, Halloween, Friday the 13th ..) have all either hit significant stumbling blocks that they could never fully recover from (Phantom Menace, ST: The Final Frontier .. any Land Before Time after the first, Winona Ryder) or degenerated into self-parodying schlock that was churned out just to cash in a quick buck. Harry Potter is different, however.

The unique situation of having the book series that inspired the movies continuing to be insanely popular has helped sustain interest in the franchise beyond the usual lifespan. Also, since the books were a few chapters ahead of when the first film was made, its built anticipation amongst the audience waiting for the chapters they've read to show up onscreen.

I also think the fact that the 3 stars were so well-cast is going to pay off in these last 3 films. Daniel Radcliffe, Emma Watson and Rupert Grint have really made their characters their own, to the point that the fans couldn't see anyone else in those roles. And now that they've reached their late teens - in real life and in the films - it will make for better movies. Think about it. They're all veteran actors now who have learned their craft in these roles. The next 2 films should only see more improvement as they mature. And maturing along with them, are the fans who have grown up reading the books/watching films. Because Harry and the others have continued to age and grow up and not be stuck in an 'Archie in Riverdale' time warp, the Potter franchise has avoided the potential problem of being left behind by kids who have 'outgrown' the material.

Alot of people, myself included, have criticized the films for being too close to the original source material. Its as if the directors were somewhat lazy and didn't try to take too many liberties with the subject matter. Considering how popular the movies have been, its painfully apparent most people disagree with that assessment. Potter fans don't want a different spin on the stories they read. They want to see them AS IS on the screen, and the filmmakers have obliged.

Now obviously the key ingredient in all this is JK Rowling's incredible characters and storylines. Its a one-in-a-million Perfect Storm that appeals to practically anyone who's ever read them. I have NEVER met someone who has said, "yeah, I picked up the first Potter book, but I just couldn't get into it." NEVER.

My 62-year-old mother pores over each book like one of those 10-year-olds you see on the news whenever a new Potter book goes on sale at midnight. Then she gives them to my 2 nieces, who are 14 and 11. Its incredible. And that's how it is ACROSS THE WORLD. Its important to remember, that no matter how popular he is here in the States, he's that much more popular everywhere else on the planet. Harry Potter may be the last literary phenomenon of our lifetime. With so many other options competing for kids' free time, that's not a far-fetched statement to make. And that's all due to Ms. Rowling's imaginative writing.

The very nature of the books - the story of a boy wizard who learns about spells and real life while dealing with all the complications that go along with both - lends itself to a certain kind of devoted following that a regular, dyed-in-the wool, grounded-in-reality TV show/Movie/Broadway show just can't earn.
Grey's Anatomy may be TV's top show, but you don't see people dressing up as Mcdreamy at conventions do you?
Jersey Boys may be Broadway's hardest ticket to score, but they don't have a crowd of teenage, free-spending fans waiting outside the stage door like Spring Awakening does.

My point is, if you want success, any quality production can earn it. But if you want a Cultural touchstone, you should set the cop drama in space or in Fantasyland or someplace other than Brooklyn. Because the really devoted fans, the ones that make it a 'happening,' that buy all the related merchandise .. want their real-life metaphors wrapped in escapist fare, and they want their heroes to attend a school called Hogwarts.

So in this fragmented, Demo-specific, 500 channel, Internet-always-on universe we live in, a British boy wizard has become perhaps the last across-the-charts singular pop culture sensation. And folks, there isn't anyone - or anything - that's even close.

Whats In Your Playlist?

I mainly use my iPod for running, and I hear it as I walk to work, which thankfully is only a 10 block walk from my apartment to 30 Rock (yes, I work in the same building, just 2 floors below, for the same company ((NBC)) that Tina Fey ridicules on her hilarious sitcom).

Latest additions to my playlist: couple new Bon Jovi songs, "Any Other Day" and "Lost Highway" which is a sickeningly addictive song. Those guys know how to rock a catchy tune.

Also have Fergie's "Big Girls Don't Cry", a new Martina McBride song .. and as for classics, how about The Clash's "Police on my Back"? Perfect song near the tail end of a run when you're starting to fade. The moment that comes on your adrenaline spikes. God Bless The Clash.

I'm up to about 400 songs on my Nano and I usually don't blow anything out 'til I'm completely sick of it.

LMK what you've got playing ...

'Prime' Example of A Blockbuster Weekend

The Fourth of July has been a heavy-hitting weekend for the movie industry for quite some time. It has all the elements that make it one of the Top 2 or 3 weekends of the year for Hollywood, alongside Memorial Day and Thanksgiving.

This year its no different, except for the sheer variety of the movies being offered up. First you have the comedy "License to Wed" which -- despite the fact it looks incredibly lame -- features a proven favorite (Robin Williams) in a role perfectly suited for his bombastic, ad-libbing comedy skills.

Then you have the 800 lb. gorilla of the holiday, and maybe the entire summer, in "Transformers." I've seen it and it was a true cinematic experience. With so many CGI-heavy 'event' pictures being made these days, you don't really get to experience something so ... BIG very often anymore. But Transformers felt different to me. And no, I'm not one of those super-Transformers fans from the 80s. When the toys came out I was 13 and was just starting to stiff-arm myself away from my geeky pre-teen passions. That said, the moment in the film where all the Autobots are revealed was one of the best 'Geek-Out' moments EVER. Trust me when I say this is not a movie you want to see in an empty theater. This movie is meant to be shared with an audience full of Ringer Tee-wearing, toy-collecting fanboys. Oh, and don't sit close to the screen. You'll thank me for it later.

But while I think Transformers is definitely THE MOVIE to see this weekend, running a close second would be "Rescue Dawn" starring Christian Bale. Based on a true story, it has you on edge 5 minutes into the picture. Bale is always good but here's he's surreal. He plays Dieter Dengler just different enough so that you know this is not some cookie-cutter escape drama. Bale's POW is a picture of madness, but also one of dogged determination. The best thing about is that Bale plays him with wild eyes and Texas-sized intestinal fortitude, and makes the audience believe that nothing will keep him from escaping.

Because its such a dominating performance, Bale's work will overshadow everyone else, which is too bad because Steve Zahn really impresses with his work as a fellow prisoner. This could be the role that breaks him out of the goofy sidekick prison he's been trapped in his whole career.

Director Werner Herzog was born to make this movie. And his fingerprints are all over the film because it just ... FEELS DIFFERENT. In the hands of most of the filmmakers in the studio system, this would have been a by-the-books Prisoner of War drama. But Herzog does just enough to give it a wholly unique rhythm, keeping you from getting too comfortable with the pacing of the movie -- which then puts you in perfect position for the several SHOCKING scenes in the picture.
Excellent movie, one that I hope doesn't get buried in the avalanche of blockbusters this summer.

And you heard it here first - Christian Bale will get an Oscar nod for this role.
And you can hear a really good interview with Mr. Bale on Reel Talk this weekend - or check it out online at www.wnbc.com/reeltalk.

I'm out.

Box Office Predictions

OK .. so this weekend's new movies is quite varied. Like those plastic-wrapped sets of 8 small single-serving cereal boxes, this weekend holds something of interest for most movie fans.
For the action shoot-em-up fans, there's Mark Wahlberg's "Shooter"...

for fans of more serious subject matter, there's Adam Sandler's 'I'm not just a movie star, I'm an actor!' turn in "Reign Over Me" ...

There's also "Pride," the inspiring, based-on-true-events flick starring Terrence Howard, who is so good, he even made to a pimp seem noble in "Hustle & Flow." Haven't seen it yet but I'm curious to see if swimming can pump up an audience like Boxing or Baseball.

For the kids, you have "TMNT," the rebirth of the Turtles franchise ... and "The Last Mimzy."
Now, while New Line Cinema's marketing department will do their darndest to make sure 'Mimzy' is the big winner this weekend (because their boss, studio chief Bob Shaye -- the guy who FIRED PETER JACKSON FROM THE HOBBIT -- directed it, so money is no object when it comes to preventing this film to bomb), I think the Turtles will be the big winner. Just a hunch but it looks like something kids will really get excited for.

Here's how I think the new movies will do this weekend:

1. TMNT - $35M

2. Shooter - $30M

3. Reign Over Me - $18M

4. The Last Mimzy - $10M

5. Pride - $7.5M

BTW, most of you reading this (anyone? ANYONE? Bueller??) don't know this but I produce LYONS & BAILES REEL TALK, NBC's national movie show which airs weekends on NBC stations around the country (Check your local listings). Its good stuff. Our critics, Jeffrey Lyons and Alison Bailes, review the new films, do interviews with the stars, check out new dvds, industry features and also share a weekly commentary called Final Takes. Click here to for more Reel Talk

OK, shameless plug is over. Enjoy the movies this weekend. What are you planning to see?

A Shell Game

This weekend, what could be the best test yet of how strong a pull nostalgia has on the 80s Generation will take place. If successful, it could open the floodgates for a pop culture blast of retro-activity that will shake you down to your Pac-Man socks. On the other hand, if it fails ... we may wave bye-bye to rebirths from that gloriously geeky decade for good.

I'm talking about the cinematic return of the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles. This time out, its called "TMNT" and CGI animation replaces the rubbery costumes of the original trilogy of Turtle flicks that unspooled in theaters starting in 1990. Most people may think this movie's coming out of nowhere. I mean, the Turtles haven't been spotted on the pop cult radar for years. But their return has been a few years in the making, with a new animated tv series, new comic books .. plus, the slow release of the classic 80s cartoon on DVD, which is the easiest way to stir those warm, fuzzy feelings of 'the good old days' that tend to lead to projects like this happening.

I'm actually surprised it took this long to for a new Turtles project to drop. You have to keep in mind, for most kids who grew up in the 80s, the names Michaelangelo, Donatello, Leonardo and Ralphael don't recall the great masters of Art. They're Turtles, dude!

I mean, these guys were huge -- SpongeBob huge, a billion-dollar franchise when that number still meant a BILLION DOLLARS!! And they were multi-platform. They began as an indie comic book, then came the cartoon series (which is what really launched Turtle-Mania), then the merchandise, THEN the films. After awhile, like every other pop phenom, after it was milked dry by the string-pullers behind the scenes, it faded away, stored away like old blankets in the attics of the minds of its maturing fan base.

But with comic book movies so big in Hollywood lately, this makes perfect sense. I haven't seen the film yet, but I must admit I'm curious. I was a casual Turtles fan -- I was in Junior High when they first broke so the cartoons were what I enjoyed when I took the occasional break from my juvenile delinquency -- but I'm always interested in seeing how comic book characters are translated to the screen. As long as they stay true to the wise-cracking, brothers-in-arms personalities the Turtles are known for, I think this could do OK.

What will be very interesting will be who turns out for the film. Will it just be aging fanboys looking to see their 80s favorites again? There's still a very strong collectors market for Turtles stuff - check out what this eBay auction for the original art from the first Turtles comic is going for.

But will the original Turtle fans come alone or with their kids? If I were the studio execs behind this project, I would hope younger kids turn out for it. If the crowds are full of overweight, toy-collecting moviegoers, that won't bode well for the rebuilding of a once-lucrative franchise. Because once they've had their nostalgic fill, those fans will lose interest and wait for the next blast from the past (which is coming in July with the Transformers movie, BTW).

And that's why TMNT's opening is crucial. Whether it does well at the box office is one thing. WHO turns out to see it could help determine if 80s nostalgia is a rich mine with much more left to be tapped, or if its running dry. So if you still have dreams of seeing the 21st Century reboot of the Smurfs like I do, keep your fingers crossed and hope lots of kids go Cowabunga at the theater this weekend.

Critic-al Juncture??

So perusing the box office totals for the weekend, it seems "300" used its superior fanboy-powered momentum to score a 2nd straight win. This is great news for fans of adrenaline-rush movies with some teeth and comic/graphic novel adaptations in general (I fall into both groups) because Hollywood being Hollywood, there will no doubt be many more movies of this nature hitting theaters in the next year or so as studios try to squeeze this particular lemon dry.
That's probably more good than bad. I'm sure there's already a script on some studio exec's desk about the legendary battle of Roman farmers who stood up and rebelled against the tyrannical produce price-fixers of ancient Rome. I can see the tag-line on the poster already - "Farmers, prepare to plant!"

Anyway, I also came across an interesting article from Variety's Peter Bart about an interesting effect 300's success could have. [check out the full article here]

Bart looks at the growing disparity between critical reviews and a film's box-office performance -- in the case of 300, mostly negative reviews had ABSOLUTELY NO impact on the movie's record-breaking opening. Same thing for 2007's other big box-office winners, Ghost Rider, Wild Hogs and Norbit. All 3 were raked over the critical coals but that didn't stop audiences from flocking to see them. GR's already over $100M and Wild Hogs will clear that hurdle by next week.

Using two print critics as examples, A.O. Scott of the NY Times & Kenneth Turan of the LA Times .. Bart illustrates how many critics today share no common ground with the average moviegoer. Scott trashed 300 and said its was on its way to camp movie infamy. That sounded silly to me when I read it on 300's opening day, and it sounds downright moronic now that it appears the film could usher in a new wave of filmmaking.

Studios no longer kowtow to critics like the old days. The fact of the matter is, they don't need to. Good reviews simply don't impact box office numbers outside of the more prestigious releases during the awards season.

Take horror movies. That genre rarely screens before opening day for critics because studios know that the teenage crowd they're going after with slasher films doesn't care what critics think of the film. As long as the blood runs deep and there's a high body count, they're happy.

I think the problem is that too many critics still view every movie from the same perspective. You can't critique a movie like 300 or Ghost Rider the same way you would Pans Labyrinth or Letters From Iwo Jima. The goal of the films is different, and so should the way they're analyzed.

Ghost Rider for example, wasn't out to win Oscar consideration. It was a popcorn flick aimed squarely at fans of the comic book (and starring a self-avowed fan, Nic Cage, who really got into his role as Johnny Blaze) and judging by the numbers, they were happy with it.

Judging by many of the reviews I scanned when the film first opened, few (if any) critics bothered to research the comic book before seeing the film. So how could they determine if it was faithful to the source material?

One of the first complaints about any movie adaptation of a book is its not true to the original story. The same should be held for pictures based on graphic novels or comic books. And since this genre is so important to Hollywood these days, critics need to pay closer attention.

The same for a movie like the Transformers or TMNT, both based on popular 80s cartoons. Movie critics would do well to do some research and try to understand why studios are so anxious to tap into the deep nostalgia properties like this spark in (mostly) 30-something men who grew up watching them. How can that NOT help them gain a better understanding of the film they're reviewing?

Knowing the intended audience of a movie is more important than ever. Its one thing for a critic to generate anger and frustration among its readers/viewers. But more and more, we're seeing something far more troubling -- indifference.

If you don't believe me, look at the box office numbers so far in 2007. They speak for themselves.

In a nutshell, sometimes a bad movie is a bad movie that deserves a drubbing. Norbit's a great example (or bad .. or .. er, forget it).

Other times, a movie's strengths need to be inspected from a more 'generous' vantage point. I'm not saying don't criticize a movie for fear of alienating its audience (and in return, your audience). But having a deeper appreciation for the movie and its source material could pay unexpected dividends.

Its like the difference between your parents (who listen to the lite rock radio station) and your friend's parents -- the ones who still listen to rock music and know who Fall Out Boy and the Tragically Hip. Whose opinion would you seek out to talk music?

If movie critics of any medium -- TV, print or Internet -- want to maintain their relevance, I think its time to draw up a new game plan. And quickly. The summer blockbuster season's just around the corner!

Time After Time

That's the name of one of my all-time favorite songs and one of the best songs of the 80s IMHO .. I never get tired of hearing it (check out Cyndi Lauper's reinterpreted version of her song on her new album; pretty cool). For all the grief that the 80s get for greed, bad fashion sense, ugly car designs -- all of that well-deserved criticism, BTW -- the music from that decade doesn't get enough credit. There was some great music being made then .. New Wave bands like the Cars, the Boomtown Rats, Depeche Mode and New Order all churned out incredible songs. So did the metal bands like Judas Priest, Ozzy Osbourne (before he permanently hopped onboard the Crazy Train and drank away what was left of his musical ability), Motley Crue and the lighter fare like Ratt and Bon Jovi. Hey, say what you will about their unwise fashion choices and shameless flaunting of their feminine tendencies (c'mon guys; did you really need that much hairspray?); but you can't deny alot of those bands could write good songs. Bon Jovi in particular were masters of the Pop hook. Go ahead, raise your hand if you can sing along with You Give Love A Bad Name. Don't lie, you know you know the words. I just saw them in concert recently at the Nokia Theatre in Times Square as they were out promoting their new disc. I couldn't believe how well some of their songs have aged .. I hadn't heard Raise Your Hands since like 1987, but when they played it at the concert it sounded like a brand new song.
Bottom line is, a good tune is a good tune. Doesn't matter what the person singing it is wearing or if they're wearing spandex. So if you grew up in the 80s, don't be ashamed to listen to the songs of your youth. There's a reason 80s nights are popular in clubs; its the music, stupid! So hit iTunes and start downloading those closet classics. Whether you liked dance music like Lime (Say You Love Me) or Lisa Lisa (Can You Feel The Beat .. ) -- or metal like the Crue (forget Theatre of Pain; go for Shout At The Devil. Every song on that disc will tear you up, especially Looks That Kill) and Judas Priest (You Got Another Thing Comin' is just a bad-ass song. The utter coolness of this song is probably what made Priest fans overlook all the incredibly obvious signs of lead singer Rob Halford's homosexuality. Yeah, that had to be why they couldn't believe the guy who had a Caesar cut while wearing skin-tight black leather w/chains was gay. Uh-huh. Yeah. Right.).

I do recommend though digging past just the usual Top 40 songs from the era that always get airplay. I've had my fill of "Electric Avenue" and "C'mon, Eileen," thank you very much. Listen to T'pau's "Heart & Soul" .. or "Funky Little Beat" .. or how about "Do You Want It Right Now?" Great stuff!

Ok, I'm out. On my iPod right now: "Only Lonely" by Bon Jovi.

Oh. Yeah.

Weather Woes

As I stare outside my window here in NYC, another miserably wet (and cold!) day coming to an end, I'm thinking about my mom down in Miami. Hurricane Wilma ripped South Florida apart, left nearly 2 million people without power -- some won't get it back for 4 WEEKS! Can you imagine being without electricity for that long? Think about what that means -- no TV, no refrigerated food, no microwave, no TV, no radio, no computer, no ATM [which means no food, gas or water since without electricity most stores can't use their credit card machines so its cash only], no AC, no lights ...!! This has been an unbelievable year, one that really spotlights how woefully unprepared the world's most powerful and advanced country is for a temper tantrum by Mother Nature. If Hurricane Katrina didn't prove it, Wilma certainly has.
Or .. at least it would to those few people who actually know how bad it is in South Florida. If you're watching the major cable networks, its been buried the past 2 days beneath coverage of the Nor'easter dumping a couple inches of rain and gusting winds across the Northeast. Hey, I live in Manhattan, I'm seeing it firsthand, I know we're having miserable weather. But a major American region is thisclose to an emergency crisis, while not as bad as New Orleans after Katrina, but still much worse than many think, and a lot worse than the rain we're experiencing. We all learned during Katrina how important it is for the media not to get distracted by the story of the day, when a bigger picture item is still unfolding. Unfortunately, news stations and networks are run by the ADD generation, so its become a greater challenge to keep the media's eye on the ball, so to speak. Hopefully, for my family, friends and everyone else down in South Florida, that challenge will be met.

Go Oprah!

The government's woeful response to Hurricane Katrina has most of the country outraged. It only gets worse with every new story coming out about how trucks carrying supplies were turned away in the first few days after the storm hit, or how it took days for the National Guard to arrive in town to help the overmatched local police. And then there is the just-discovered FEMA memo that shows Mike Brown asked to send 1,000 emergency workers to the region -- 5 HOURS after Katrina hit. The memo also indicated little urgency was being felt on the governmental side.

And then there are the numerous reports of private citizens and companies who were trying to bring supplies in to the region, only to be turned back! My goodness .. but, the good news is Canada's offer to help has finally been accepted -- a full week after our northern neighbors first offered. I wonder how many meetings it took before someone in DC said, "Well, you know, it is the worst natural disaster in our history. Maybe we should accept Canada's help." Unbelievable.

Jay Leno's writing staff couldn't make this stuff up. If this wasn't such a tragedy, it would be laughable how incompetent the agency is appearing. Thankfully, some people do know how to respond to a crisis like this .. who know how to get help -- and get it fast -- to those who need it.

Thank God for Oprah Winfrey!

Her recent shows from the Gulf Coast have been so powerful in their depiction of the sheer devastation down there .. I don't know how anyone can watch it without being moved. Her group of all-star reporters (Julia, Travolta, Rock, Lisa Marie, McConaughey) have really brought the personal stories home. Her regular correspondents (Her Friend Gayle, Nate, Dr. Oz) have also been great.

Where Oprah's show has separated itself from the work done by the networks and cable channels is by showing us the real images of New Orleans -- the dead bodies on the street, lying there like trash. These are our fellow Americans, and they died on the street! The images are graphic, often unwatchable. But we need to see them. We all need to see them, to really understand what happened down there. I applaud her for doing it.

I also give her props for showing the plight of the animals down there. I'll come right out and say it; I'm a dog person. My two dogs, Bernice & Serena, are my kids (check out the photos - bernice is the little one w/the red harness). It took days before the major networks even mentioned the fact that thousands of pets were fighting for their lives. It was as if they felt they were being disrespectful to the human suffering by mentioning the animals' situation. I frankly don't understand that. All those pets belonged to families. I think Campbell Brown on Weekend Today was the first to really discuss how thousands of pets were lost in the Gulf Coast area.

But Oprah's a dog person, as her fans know. So she made sure to turn the spotlight on the four-legged victims of this disaster, using personal stories to drive the point home. Like the guy who didn't want to evacuate without his 14-year old dog .. a dog he's had since he was 10 years old. The authorities wouldn't budge, but thankfully Nate took the dog in and later reunited the two. That poor guy was refusing to evacuate .. refusing to put his own life before his faithful companion. How could anyone who saw that story not see that these loyal animals deserve help, too?

Besides that, Oprah also showed the frustration, the outrage so many of us feel over the response to Katrina.

I've never been her biggest fan; in fact, up until very recently, I would refuse to sit down with my wife and watch Oprah because, like many men, I suspect, I thought she was a man-hating, manipulative, insanely self-absorbed talk show host. But then, something happened. I actually watched one of her shows, the gifts one. And I noticed that she wasn't just giving out extravagant gifts to rich Chicago housewives. She filled the audience with teachers .. people whose lives could really be enriched by the huge windfall. And that's when I became a believer.

So you stay on the Gulf Coast as long as you have to, Oprah. Make a difference. You already have.

So Long, Little Buddy

Saw the news today that Bob Denver, best known as the title character in "Gilligan's Island," had died. I'm not someone who gets that emotional when a popular figure passes on; My wife and mother-in-law, for example, have sometimes bawled over the death of a celebrity (my wife still gets choked up whenever an old Three's Company rerun pops up - she was a HUGE John Ritter fan). But that's not me.
Usually I think, 'what a shame' .. he/she was great in (fill in the blank) movie/tv show. But I rarely feel as if I've lost someone close to me. Why should I? I didn't know them personally.

With Bob Denver, it was different. He was the star of my favorite sitcom ever. I remember being 6 years old, watching reruns of 'Gilligan' back in Miami (during the days of 4 channels) after school. And watching them -- again and again and again. I bet I've seen every episode of that series a couple dozen times each over the years. And that's why the show is a perfect sitcom. Because people like me, who weren't even born when the show was first on, call it their favorite sitcom. And you can watch it over and over again.

The radioactive vegetables episode? Sure, I know what happens, but I still watch it every time my channel-surfing brings me to TBS. Why? Because watching Gilligan lift those phony props thanks to the radioactive-boosted spinach IS FUNNY! That's just me; I find silly 60's sitcom humor entertaining .. and nobody best exemplified this type of comedy than Bob Denver.

Although he was around 30 years old when the show started, Denver still played the role like a teenager, and I liked that. I identified with him because he was the kid who felt the grownups didn't take him seriously. Of course, he did wreck about 56 chances for them to get off the island .. but that's not the point. I could identify with him. I liked all the other castaways, for various reasons (Mary Ann guys. It's all about Mary Ann) ..but I could identify with Gilligan. Sure he pissed off the Skipper alot .. but without him .. the girls wouldn't have been able to make coconut cream pies. You don't think all those coconuts just fell off the tree, do you?

Here's how much I loved that silly show. When I was in college, I walked into a Gap store and bought .. a Gilligan hat. No kidding. As soon as I saw it .. that's what I called it and bought it on the spot .. purely for the fact that it was a chance to sport the same hat Gilligan did. Now if only they would have had the red rugby shirt.

My wife met Bob Denver during a promotional interview a few years ago .. on a boat! I've had the pleasure of meeting several celebrities .. but that was one celeb sighting I wished I could have made. Because to this day, a big smile comes across my face whenever I watch an old Gilligan's episode.

So here's to you, Bob Denver. You made a lot of kids, in age and in attitude, happy. And this 34-year-old kid wants to say thanks.

Rest in Peace, Little Buddy

(:

Hurricane Katrina

Folks,

This Blog was started as a way for me to discuss my favorite (and least favorite) aspects of Movies, TV, Music & Comic Books. By the pathetic number of posts I've made since I started this little project (two?! Are you kidding me?) its obvious I haven't taken it that seriously or not set aside enough time. But the events of the past few days in the Gulf Coast lit a fire, so to speak, and I feel compelled to share my thoughts on the devastation down there.

I work in TV news, so a good part of my job is watching all the tape coming in and seeing what the other networks are doing. And words simply don't do the situation justice.

Shock, depression, disgust, heartbreak, frustration -- and anger. Mind-bending, fist-pounding, shout-at-the-top-of-your-lungs anger.

Anger at the delay in responding to help the people of New Orleans, Gulfport & Biloxi, Miss. Their governments, on a local, state and national level, have let them down. Many feel, and rightfully so, like they've been abandoned.

I don't know, maybe the Louisiana Governor's office was too busy congratulating themselves for dodging another Hurricane bullet on Monday to listen to what New Orleans mayor Ray Nagin was saying -- that even though Katrina did not deliver the direct hit experts had predicted, the damage was still extensive.

WHY WASN'T THE NATIONAL GUARD SENT IN IMMEDIATELY? I'm from Miami; after Andrew hit the area in 1992 .. looting never became a widespread problem because the Guard was mobilized immediately .. for that exact reason.

In the months and years to come, as the aftermath of this storm is debated and discussed, one of the decisions I'm sure will be dissected over and over, is the one made on Monday to ingore the looting and focus on rescuing people. Admirable in intent, disastrous in result.

Not that there is a guidebook for this sort of tragedy .. but if there was one, you can bet one of the main rules would be to always, ALWAYS, maintain order. Without it, you have no chance to maintain any semblance of a civilized society. And New Orleans officials tossed out the opportunity to maintain order without a second thought. Now, order has slipped out of their grasp and chaos has taken over.


Some people will say, like the President, that the lawlessness must be dealt with. The looters should be dealt with harshly and ruthlessly. Initially, I was one of those. The scenes of people looting stores and stealing anything they could angered me. Then I paused for a moment and put myself in their shoes.

If I was trapped inside my own city, seeing no signs of help coming our way, what would I do? How far would I go to help my friends and family? As far as I had to, I realized. I know if that was me, I'd be carrying all the water and food I could carry out of whatever store I found.

That said, those people stealing laptops and TVs are annoying me .. more for the fact that they are wasting precious looting time grabbing items they have absolutely no use for. What are you going to do, pull a Macgyver and jerry-rig a power source for the laptop with Duracell batteries?


I heard something tonight on Nightly News that I never thought I would hear in connection with the United States. A reporter was discussing the deteriorating situation when he mentioned helicopters were having trouble making food drops in the area.

FOOD DROPS! In the land of plenty .. of super-sized fries, double-whoppers, sugar-laden cereals, $4.99 all-you-can-eat buffets and half-chicken platters with four sides of your choosing .. we are having trouble making food drops.

For Goodness sake, this is America, not Ethiopa. What I was watching and hearing was something I thought I would only ever experience in a report on the NBC Nightly or CNN at about 45 minutes past the hour. But it was happening here in one of the most unique cities in the U.S. A city that has seen its identity, its past, its civility and hope -- and perhaps its future -- washed away.

Four days into this disaster .. those poor people feel like they have been tossed aside and forgotten. Who can blame them? Where is the help? Where is the help?

Ticketmaster Stinks

It really does. If an idealistic professor at an American university ever needs the perfect example to illustrate why monopolies are a bad idea, all he/she has to do is hold up a ticket stub to the fill-in-the-blank concert. One look at the obscene service fees they charge per ticket, not to mention the horribly below-standard website that I bet is the cause of more smashed computers and multiple F-bomb &#%$ rants than anything short of a local news cut-in during the last five minutes of General Hospital -- on a Friday.

I tried getting tickets to one of 5 U2 concerts happening in October in NYC. I couldn't get 1 ticket -- not 1 ticket! -- to any of the shows. I have a cable modem so bandwidth isn't the problem -- the problem is a system that can't handle a high volume of traffic. That's the funny thing, though. How can the amount of traffic be suprising? Do they not expect fans of the world's most popular band to flood the Internet trying to get tickets? Maybe the higher ups at Ticketmaster feel their hefty profits are better spent earning interest than reinvested back into their infrastructure. After all, what are upset customers like myself going to do, stop using Ticketmaster and use another service?

Unless you like getting raped and pillaged by ticket brokers, that is not an option. Unbelievable. And I haven't mentioned Ticketmaster's phone service. This may sound like sour grapes, but the next time I score a pair of tickets over the phone on the day they go on sale, it will be the first. And I've been a concertgoer for 17 years.

What a great business. You operate in a field with steady demand, no competition, you can scrimp on customer service because your customers are held hostage by the lack of options, the government does nothing about it and the only people with the guts to take a stand were a grunge band (Pearl Jam) on the downslope of their popularity.

I don't know .. maybe instead of bashing them I should congratulate them on being brilliant businessmen.

24

Has there ever been a show as addictive as '24?' Seriously, it's like the China White of television. Once you invest two hours, three at most, into it, the show gets its dramatic hooks into you and never lets go. Last night was no exception. Before the first commercial break we saw someone (Paul, Audrey's soon-to-be ex-husband) getting tortured for information (which is a well-known rite of passage for '24' characters), Jack kill 3 bad guys, and a bad guy commando unit arrive looking to kill both of them. All of this while L.A. is in the midst of a blackout caused by an EMP blast (don't ask; just go with it).

L.A. being L.A., a blackout means one thing -- looters! Which of course is used as a plot device to put Jack in a position to pad his body count, which after episode 13(?), is nearing the 2 dozen mark. Mr. Bauer resumed his body-bagging ways in a big way last night, after being noticeably merciful the past few weeks [Last week, he took down those 3 security guards using just his hands and head -- what, he couldn't have snapped at least one of their necks?].

Last night also was proof of another '24ism' -- bad things happen to people who hang around Jack. Poor Paul had a better chance of surviving the day if he would have been working with the terrorists.

I'm really enjoying Season 4 -- I know some people complain that the series doesn't have as many twists but they've really ramped up the action, so I think that's a good trade-off. Besides, I have no idea where the writers are taking us regarding the big storyline, so I'm happy.

But the best part of this season has been the focus on Jack & Tony's friendship. That has been the most well-developed aspect of the show during its history (aside from Jack's tortured existence) and Kiefer & Carlos have really shined in their scenes together. I just hope the bloodthirsty writers don't make Tony's redemption his swan song. Aside from Jack Bauer, Tony Almeida is the show's most well-developed character. But I wouldn't bet this month's mortgage payment on Tony living another day.

Now if only they would bring back Chloe ...