Get in the Zone: GREEN ZONE - Reviewed!

GREEN ZONE Review:

- I think Green Zone is one of those movies that is doomed to be underrated, for any number of reasons. It's Paul Greengrass and Matt Damon, but it's not a new Bourne movie. It's both an action/war movie and a political thriller. It doesn't shy away from recent politics - namely, the Iraq War and the controversy over the existence or lack thereof of WMD's. Personally, I thought Green Zone was great, for all of the above reasons and more. It's an exciting, visceral movie with some absolutely stunning action set pieces. It's intense, and it doesn't shy away from the issues. It makes its points effectively and dramatically. And it features a great cast of uber-talented actors that really gel, making for a great ensemble. Bottom line: Green Zone is a damn good film - one of the better movies of 2010 to date.

Green Zone is a slice of recent history. It follows the US effort to gain control of a very unstable Iraq in the days and weeks following the removal of Saddam Hussein from power. Things have stabilized enough that journalists, businessmen, etc. are living rather comfortably in the US-controlled "green zone." But, on the ground, there is an increasingly dangerous and chaotic war effort still very much in effect. The Pentagon is pressuring the army to capture or kill top insurgency leaders, and, most importantly, to find evidence of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction. But with each new search mission, the military is coming up empty. Some are beginning to question the legitimacy of the intel. Chief among the skeptics is Roy Miller, played by Matt Damon. Miller begins to look for answers, and he finds a small group willing to help him as a means to expose the truth about falsified intelligence. And that's when things really heat up - because in addition to all the other dangers of being a soldier in a chaotic, war-torn Iraq, Miller must now deal with people from the military and from the US government who don't want him getting close to the truth.

It's an intriguing story, to be sure. And the script by Brian Helgeland is strong - with enough deep characterization and intense action that the politics don't feel overwhelming. That said, I can see where some might find the script to be heavy-handed. And yeah, maybe the term "WMD" is thrown around a bit too much. But - this is one of the most controversial and important American issues of the last decade. I found it fascinating to see a film that really raised questions, that made you think. And again, the political drama is there in the context of a badass action movie. This is certainly not just a bunch of talking heads.

Speaking of which, one of the first things you'll notice about Green Zone is that it features director Paul Greengrass' trademark shaky-cam and "you-are-there" aesthetic. I know this style has some detractors, and I'll admit, it can be annoying and distracting when lesser talents utilize it. But Greengrass is no ordinary talent - he's a master at immersing the viewer in chaos. The editing is just right, and the overall effect is that you feel like you're right there with Matt Damon's character as he navigates through some absolutely riveting chase sequences. There is definitely a feeling of viewer involvement that is on par with playing a great action videogame. Greengrass knows how to ensure that his action scenes have maximum impact.

Green Zone also benefits from a pretty great cast. Personally, I think this is Matt Damon's best role in a while. No, this isn't as deep or iconic a character as Jeremy Renner's in The Hurt Locker - but this isn't the same type of movie, at all. That was an action film / character study, this is an action movie / political thriller. But Damon really helps carry the movie here. He isn't Jason Bourne - he's much more a regular guy. A good soldier but also curious and questioning. His life and his men's lives are seemingly being risked for the sake of political theater, and he wants to know why. The supporting cast is stellar. Brendon Gleeson (In Bruges) is always great, and here is no exception. Okay, his American accent is a bit dicey, but the guy is such a kickass actor that it's hard to care. He's a scene stealer as an intelligence official who's been a longtime presence in Iraq, and who has strong reservations about the Bush administration's wartime policy. Meanwhile, Greg Kinnear is suitably smarmy as a neocon Pentagon official intent on carrying out administration policy, even if the intelligence is questionable. Amy Ryan is also a solid presence as a journalist investigating these same anomalies in the WMD intel. All three have some memorable scenes with Damon. Also in the mix is a great performance from Khalid Abdalla as Freddie, an Iraqi local who helps out Miller but who is himself a complex and emotionally-conflicted individual. Freddie is an interesting look at the turmoil that many Iraqis have surely faced during the war. Again, a really great turn from Abdalla.

I don't think Green Zone is political in the sense that its lecturing. It's a movie that does ask legitimate questions though. Even if we went to war under false pretenses, was it ultimately for the betterment of the Iraqi people? Do we always need a reason to justify international actions that ultimately help serve American interests? Or does the truth always matter? And if our actions were based on lies, then at what point do you stop worrying about the truth, about the past, and just focus on the here and now? Do you ever? I think these are important things to think about, and even if you are 100% convinced that we went to war for vaild reasons, it's still an interesting hypothetical - if, *if* we didn't, then what does that mean, what precedent does that set?

Most of all, Green Zone is an exciting, action-packed thriller that mixes intrigue and explosive intensity with some real, meaty food for thought. Another great film from Greengrass. I'd definitely recommend it.

My Grade: A-

TV's Big Guns: LOST! CHUCK! And 24!

Lots to talk about today, so I'll get right to it. Keep reading for reviews of this week's episodes of: CHUCK, 24, LOST, and MODERN FAMILY!


- I'm going to kick things off by talking about Monday's episode of CHUCK, aka one of the series' all-time best, and one of my single favorite episodes of any TV show in a long time. To me, Chuck has been pretty good this season, but at times has gotten a bit too bogged down in the neverending angst stemming from Chuck's leftover feelings for Sarah. It's felt like some of the real fun, excitement, and heart of Chuck at its best was missing. But, last night was an absolutely *awesome* episode. For nearly the entire duration, I was just watching with a goody grin on my face, and yeah, I'll admit, it even choked me up a bit as well. To sum up - Morgan's long-awaited discovery of Chuck's double-life as a spy was hilarious, heartfelt, and just plain fun. It really was the perfect payoff to a storyline that's now been years in the making.

The fact is, Morgan finally finding out about Chuck's secret could have been terrible. It was a moment I was anticipating but also dreading. But going into this episode, I didn't even know that such a huge game-changer would go down. It was a nice surprise, but it also didn't feel contrived - it felt like the time for this had come. But really, the episode brought back the old Chuck, the geeky Chuck, and reminded us how fun he and Morgan can be together. Morgan is one of those characters who can be annoying if overused, but the fact that he's been less prominent on the show this season made his part in this episode all the more satisfying. But hey - every hero needs a trusty sidekick, and yes, a best friend - and this episode finally featured the unlikely dynamic duo in action together.

I loved Morgan "firing" Chuck as his best friend. I loved Morgan's giddy reaction upon hearing that his best friend was a spy. I loved his triumphant entrance as he proudly told Walker and Casey to "bag 'em and tag 'em," after he and Chuck took down the villainous members of The Ring on their own. In fact, there were so many great little moments in this episode that it's hard to keep track. Everything came together in a perfect storm of awesome-sauce. Chuck "flashing" on Duck Hunt. JEFFSTER singing "Fortunate Son" to the bewilderment of The Ring agents. Big Mike's reaction to the Buy More being "saved." Jeff taking out the Ring agent with chloroform. Morgan taking out a Ring agent, and saving the day, with a Kendo Stick to the head! "Dancing with Myself" and Chuck's villain flashcards. Sarah coming through for Chuck and convincing Shaw that Morgan was the one man who'd never turn his back on Chuck and the team. Awesome getting his awesomeness back. Casey getting assaulted with Nerf guns. And did I mention JEFFSTER?

Seriously, this was one of those rare, classic TV episodes that makes even a hardened TV cynic want to stand up up and cheer. Awesome episode of Chuck, and seriously, thank you to all involved. I sat down to watch this one after a long and soul-crushing sort of day. I was tired, not feeling well, and not in the greatest of moods. This was some great TV entertainment - just what the doctor ordered.

My Grade: A


TWENTY by-gum FOUR!

- So Monday's 24 had some decidedly kickass moments. Moments of intensity. Moments of coolness. Moments of ... gravitas. Everything with Jack and the would-be suicide bomber in the hospital pretty much ruled it. Yes, we've been down this road before on 24, in which Jack tries to coerce information out of a target, but ultimately resorts to threatening to harm their friends or family in order to get the info he desperately needs. But, watching the kid squirm as Jack threatened to kill his poor mother slowly and painfully ... well, it was intense and yes, vintage Jack Bauer.


There were also a lot of other nice little touches that seemed to indicate that business had picked up. Chloe back in charge of ops at CTU and seeming to assume a larger role. Hastings continuing to become more likable and more take-charge. People actually listening to Jack, giving him free reign to save the world like only he can.


Even the reveal of the Head of Security guy as a terrorist conspirator, while not exactly shocking, at least gives some added intrigue to the otherwise boring Hassan subplots. In fact, I could have cared less about his daughter running off with her forbidden boy toy before, but now, there is definitely some potential there, especially given that Jack and CTU are on their way to their hotel for a big confrontation next episode. I do still think that this season is sorely in need of a great villain to serve as the ultimate badguy behind the terror plot, but hopefully such a worthy adversary will emerge in the coming weeks.


But, this episode was once again brought down a notch by the increasingly insufferable Dana Walsh storyline. I actually thought the seeming-resolution to this last week was fairly well-done, and it seemed to pave the way for a clean break away from what has easily been the lowpoint of the season so far. I was optimistic, too, that bringing in Stephen Root as a new foil for Katee Sackhoff could give her character a fun new direction. Afterall, Stephen Root is great, and he's shown in series like True Blood that his quirkiness can translate well to over-the-top drama. But, this week's new chapter in the ongoing Dana Walsh melodrama was handled in the same craptacular fashion as in previous episodes. It just feels so ... forced? As in, the entire conversation between Root and Sackhoff was terrible - like, it's 2 in the morning, Dana's in the middle of a national security crisis, and has just gotten reprimanded by her boss - she's on thin ice. There is NO WAY she agrees to meet her old stalker's parole office that night. No way. Now, if Root perhaps tracked her down and paid her a surprise visit, okay, MAYBE I'd buy it. But the scenario that the show presented to us was just totally unbelievable and lame. They need to do a slightly better job of making Dana, and in turn us, believably invested in this subplot. Or better yet, get rid of it altogether, or somehow fold it into the main terror threat (ie maybe it's all a calculated distraction by the powers that be to take Dana out of the game). Something. Anything. But please, no more annoying scenes of Dana clandestinely roaming the halls of CTU on her cell and making half-baked excuses to leave (because in CTU, it may be 2 am, but that's primetime for those guys).


I'm complaining about the Dana Walsh stuff, but overall this was a darn good episode of 24. Everything with Jack pretty much ruled it, from Jack's first over-the-intercom convo with the kid to the kid's harrowing (and quite messy) demise. And overall I do feel like the season is gaining momentum, enough that I'm genuinely excited to see next week's promised huge surprises and twists.

My Grade: B+


LOST Thoughts:

- On paper, I don't know if this week's Ben Linus-focused episode of Lost was all that much better than the last couple of week's worth of eps. Again, we got a kind of greatest-hits style look at one of the series' key characters, flashing sideways to an alternate, island-free version in which many of the key character-defining traits and issues are reiterated and reemphasized in an off-island setting.

But, in practice, this episode was a step up. And the reason is simple: Michael Emerson is and always has been amazing as Ben Linus.

There was a great LA Times article the other day that sort of summed it up - Ben could easily have been one of TV's all-time most annoying characters. He lies so much that even Emerson likely has no idea how much of what his character says is truthful. He's a character who is manipulated by the writers to divulge or withhold information on a whim. At times he seems to hold all the answers, at other times he seems to be in the dark. But Emerson has made him fascinating - endlessly captivating and entertaining. He's made Ben into this creepy, pathetic bastard who somehow, you can't help but root for ever so slightly, if only because he takes so much abuse from everyone else. And yet - we know he's a mass-murderer, a liar, selfish, and pretty much irredeemably evil. But again, Emerson has made the character work - almost too well - to the point where he's often overshadowed some of Lost's other central characters.

In this ep, seeing Ben's flash-sideways, in which he evolves from merely creepy into downright treacherous (in a somewhat compressed version of his previously-established origin story), was interesting and disturbing to watch. Interesting to see Ben as a teacher, plotting (as usual) to bring down the school principal via blackmail, so that he can usurp him and gain power. Interesting, sure, but again, it's basically just a "what-if" version of character arcs we've already seen. Although, I guess the twist here was that, perhaps surprisingly, Ben does NOT go through with his plan. When the principal counters Ben's blackmail scheme by threatening Ben's prize student (his on-island adoptive daughter, Alex Rousseau), Ben decides not to harm her and gives up. This contrasts, of course, to Ben having done the reverse back on the island, getting his daughter killed after refusing to turn himself in to Keamy and the rest of Widmore's invading army. At the end of the episode, Ben does something similar. After plotting to escape Ilana and the rest of the castaways and go off to join The Smoke Monster and his makeshift legion of doom, Ben has a change of heart. When he gains the upper hand on Ilana, he decides not to kill her. He drops his weapon and decides to go back with her to the beach, to turn a corner and try to fit in not with Not-Locke, but with the likes of Sun and Jack and Miles.

To be honest, not sure how I feel about this. I think Ben is too far gone for redemption, and too evil and creepy to be some sort of convert to the side of good. From a narrative perspective, I think it makes much more sense for Ben's story to end not with heroism or benevolance, but with hellfire and brimstone, so to speak. Whether or not Ben has one last bout of treachery in him remains to be seen. But I wouldn't be surprised.

And I will say this - I was very excited with this episode's ending. After weeks of mystical mumbo-jumbo and plot progression that's amounted to "character A walks to the temple, character B leaves the temple", etc., it was awesome, that - finally! - business is about to pick up. Since, what - two seasons if not more of Lost have basically been building to Widmore's attempts to regain control of the island - it was a big, huge, "ABOUT TIME!" moment when we ended on a sinister-looking sub approaching, as, inside, Widmore and his crew braced for battle. Now that's what I'm talking about. Enough Jacob and Smoke Monster (and by the way - can the character have a NAME already?! I mean come on!). Enough with wheels and candidates and temples and such. We have 9 episode left. I want WAR, baby.

This ep also had more with Jack, Hurley, and Mr. Guyliner himself, Richard Alpert. The Richard stuff to me is a bi frustrating. We know there's a Richard-centric ep on the way, so it felt like something of a time-waster to have even more teases from him as relates to his true identity, origin, etc. Similarly, there was a lot of Jack doing that passive-aggressive nodding-and-smiling thing, convinced that he could not die because Jacob wouldn't let him. I don't know, I liked the tension of the dynamite scene and such, but at the same time it feels a little cheap when they do these sort of "I believe this is true! How do you know? I just do!" moments. I feel like if you want to dramatically convey the fact that Jack can't die due to Jacob's protection, there are cooler and less contrived ways to do it aside from him risking suicide, all of a sudden and at the drop of a hat.

Overall though, this episode of Locke was a notch above other episodes this season thanks to one more stellar performance from Mr. Michael Emerson. In addition, there was a killer cliffhanger that gave me a lot of hope for next week and beyond.

My Grade: B+

- Okay, I'll include a quick MODERN FAMILY review as well. Last night's ep was very funny. I'm a huge fan of Judy Greer - loved her on Arrested Development, loved her on the underrated Miss/Guided - so it was great to see her guest star here as an old girlfriend of Phil's looking to rekindle the old flame. Phil's naive attitude towards the whole thing was hilarious - and even funnier was his frenzied reaction when Greer comes to visit, and he realizes that she is, in fact, into him - bigtime. Just great physical comedy from Phil as he tries to escape his old flame's lusty intentions. And more Greer on TV, please! Meanwhile, the other subplots were decent, but not quite on the same level. I enjoyed Mitch quitting his job - it was an interesting wrinkle to the show dynamic and made for some nice, funny moments of freaking out between Mitchell and Cameron. Manny was also good for a few laughs, and some "aww, shucks" style moments - when Jay accidentally kills his pet turtle and tries to cover it up. Standard sitcom-y stuff, but still done well thanks to Modern Family's unique take on these kinds of things. Phil and Greer made this episode though.

My Grade: B+

- Okay, that's all for now - stay tuned tomorrow for an early review of GREEN ZONE.

Danny's OSCAR Recap 2010

Well, all in all, I was happy with how things went at last night's OSCAR AWARDS.

- Not only were a good chunk of my predictions (see my picks from last week's post) correct, but more importantly, the right movie won for Best Picture - that being THE HURT LOCKER. Given that there seemed to be some backlash around the film in recent weeks, I was a little worried. But ultimately, I felt good that Kathryn Bigelow's masterpiece would take home the prize. And it did. Speaking of Bigelow, her win for Best Director is just plain cool. I love that the first female director to win the Best Director trophy has had a career that defies gender or easy stereotypes. This to me is inspirational - a woman who, with her diverse filmography, represents the idea that you have to go out there and tell stories about what resonates with you. This is the woman who brought us Point Break, Near Dark, and Strange Days. And she just won an Oscar for one of the most intense and badass war movies ever made. That's awesome, and the Oscar was well-deserved. Drew McWeeney wrote a nice essay about Bigelow over on Hitfix, and I really agree with his premise - that so many times, it seems like pop culture underestimates women. Give the girls and women the chick flicks and the rom-coms, and leave the serious stuff to the men. And slowly, girls start to just accept the fact that the cheesy chick-flicks are all that they are "supposed" to like, let alone create. Meanwhile, here's a woman in Bigelow who directed one of the most brutal vampire movies ever made, who brought us an adrenaline-fueled crime movie with Keanu Reeves and Patrick Swayze, and who now delivered this past summer's best and most explosive (literally) action movie. I'm not saying that all women filmmakers should be out there creating action flicks and genre films. But, I think it's great that there is a woman out there who's doing just that, and showing up her male counterparts in the process. And as relates to the Oscars, I think this is a case where, if I honestly didn't know who directed each of the nominated films, I'd still say "yep, Hurt Locker is the one." So again, congrats.

- Otherwise, I thought the show was pretty well-done as far as Academy Awards shows go. Steve Martin and Alec Baldwin were fine as the hosts - some funny bits scattered throughout the show, with a somewhat old-timey, vaudevillian vibe to the comedy. It seems like no matter who the host is in a given year, you can always count on the Oscars for a dose of vintage Vegas night club-style antics. The jokes were sometimes funny but usually pretty stale. Dolly Parton jokes? Jokes about all the Jews in the room? Even Robin Williams' obligatory joke about all the balls being held in Hollywood felt like one of those old standbys that was probably told at the Oscars thirty years ago by Charles Nelson Reilly or something.

- But, I really enjoyed the various tribute segments at this year's show. The John Hughes piece in particular was great, and actually kind of gave me chills. Hughes is the classic example of a guy whose movies were never really Oscar movies but who nonetheless made comedies that defined a generation, comedies that made people like me love movies and want to make them. Seeing former Hughes stars come out to pay tribute to him was one of the better Oscar moments in a while. And, even though the occasion was a sad one, it was great seeing a segment on the show that so clearly focused on great movies. Not necessarilly movies made to win awards, but movies that affected and inspired people, which of course is what making movies is, or should be, all about anyways.

- Meanwhile, the Horror montage was decent - loved all the old Universal horror monsters, Evil Dead, etc., but it felt slightly half-hearted, lacking some of the more iconic moments you might have expected.

- One thing I didn't like - and that's this new tradition of having stars come out to speak on behalf of each of the Best Actor and Actress nominees. Do I really need to hear Stanley Tucci joke (I think?) about how he's always been in love with Meryl Streep? Look, these are awards for acting, not humanitarianism. I think it's unfair and semi-obnoxious to feature these speeches which tend to veer away from acting and into personal anecdotes about the character of the nominees. I feel like there are other and better ways to fill up the broadcast.

Back to the awards though ... again, no *huge* surprises ...

- Probably the biggest surprises for me were in the two screenplay categories. I didn't think The Hurt Locker would win there, but once it did you knew it was probably going to be The Hurt Locker's night. But, I was cool with the screenplay win. It was, I think, an amazing script. It's not a script that's transparent in the same fashion as A Serious Man or Inglourious Basterds. But it's dramatic, brilliantly-structured, perfectly paced for maximum intensity and payoff. It was a well-deserved win. For adapted screenplay, I was also a bit surprised that Precious won. But, it was a powerful movie with a powerful script, and it's a script filled with memorable and dramatic moments. It's another one that I think is a well-deserved win, even if it wasn't my top choice or predicted winner.

-I was excited to see Jeff Bridges win even though I thought this should have been Jeremy Renner's year. But Bridges is the man, and he was superb in Crazy Heart. I only wish he had ended his speech by saying: "And oh yeah, one more thing ... The Dude abides, man!"

- I don't really have anything against Sandra Bullock. And I haven't seen The Blind Side. I want to see it eventually, but I don't know, it's just hard for me to buy that this was the female peformance of the year. I thought Gabourey should have won. But, I liked Sandra's acceptance speech, and I do think that she is one of many actresses who in their careers have gotten typecast and ultimately shafted by Hollywood, which rarely comes up with great female leading roles.

- No big surprise that Up won for animated film. Despite the fact that I actively rooted for Coraline and/or The Princess and the Frog, I still love Pixar and am glad that they are out there continually making innovative movies. And I loved the one guy from Pixar's speech about how dedicating our life to creativity is not a waste of time. As someone who's been told over and over that my creative pursuits are, in fact, a waste of time, I say ... THANK YOU, SIR.

- Mo'nique deservedly won for her amazing turn in Precious. And you know, I actually admire the fact that she sort of stayed away from the Hollywood political machine to some extent in terms of promoting the movie. It's a good test case to show that the PR machine may not really matter as much as some might want it to at the end of the day. Still, yikes ... I wish I could un-see Mo'niques interview with Barbara Walters after the show. A bit disturbing, to say the least.

- I know that Christoph Waltz was a shoe-in, but man, even just from watching the highlight reel of his role in Basterds, I couldn't help but think "good lord, he freaking ruled in that movie." Waltz was incredible, an award well-deserved.

- Speaking of Inglourious Basterds, it's interesting. I think Tarantino's movies are really hard to quantify, so to speak. I love his films, and Basterds is one of his best. But I think he'll always have trouble winning an Oscar because his movies are less about being conventionally "good" and more about appealling to a certain geeky "this is awesome" sensibility. His movies can be a bit messy, a bit all over the place, but that's why we love them. At the same time, it'd be almost weird if he actually won an Oscar, as Tarantino's movies celebrate the very movies that the Oscars typically ignore - pulp fiction, crime, grindhouse movies, genre movies. Still, it's fun seeing Tarantino at the show, and in the mix. Him being there is a constant reminder that, sure, we have our grand period pieces and melodramas and epics. But let's not forget about the movies that get dirty, that get raw, that get pulpy. Suffice it to say, when the show cut to QT applauding after the horror-film highlight reel, it felt all-too appropriate.

- I feel almost similarly about District 9. This was a gritty movie. A dark movie. It was 100% geeky in the best way possible. I don't think Oscar is quite ready for a movie like District 9 just yet, but I'm glad it was there in the running, as a reminder of "this is what's coming, this is what's cool."

- All that said, I guess it is kind of amazing that The Hurt Locker - a gritty, violent war movie -actually won Best Picture.

- By the way, I cracked up at Barbara Streisand opening the envelope and announcing Bigelow for Best Director. She got all verklempt.

- And yeah, I guess this wasn't The Coen Bros.' year to win. Part of that is how under-the-radar A Serious Man was. I don't get why the movie received such an uneventful and limited release. To me though, it was one of the absolute best movies of 2009, and it's another one where, even if it didn't win, I'm happy that it was right there in the race for Best Picture.

- It's funny, I joked about Logorama winning, but it actually looks sort of amazing. I'll have to check it out.

- Was Ben Stiller speaking Hebrew while dressed as an alien from Avatar?

- Would have liked to have seen the Roger Corman tribute on the main telecast. A highlight reel of some of his best and/or crazies films would have been a lot of fun.

Finally, here's a list of some of my favorite movies from 2009 that received NO nominations, yet are still very much great films worth checking out:

- Moon
- Observe & Report
- Anvil: The Story of Anvil
- Bad Lieutenant: Port of Call New Orleans
- Drag Me to Hell
- Paranormal Activity
- The Road
- Taken
- Adventureland
- The Invention of Lying
- Pirate Radio
- Watchmen
- Bruno
- House of the Devil
- Thirst

And on that note, that's all for now. Stay tuned for more, very soon!

“Ooh, spooky. But why?” THE OFFICE's Big Baby Episode - Reviewed! And More!

Almsot the weekend. It's been a long week, and I've been feeling a little under-the-weather the last few days ... so I'm really looking forward to a few days off. I hope I feel 100% soon though - there's lots to do.

In terms of movies, personally, I'm excited for ALICE IN WONDERLAND, despite some of the recent negativity with regards to the film. Like many, I'm a longtime fan of Tim Burton, and I'm always eager to see what he comes up with next. I don't quite see why there's such a Burton backlash. Obviously, he's had a few misfires in his career. I think we can all agree that Planet of the Apes, for example, was just plain bad. I really liked Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, I know others didn't ... but ... how are people now making blanket statements that Tim Burton has lost his touch, has sold out, etc? Sweeney Todd, anyone? That was one of Burton's best-ever films, a total masterpiece. And the thing is, even if Alice proves to be a highly flawed film, it's still likely to be more interesting - certainly more visually interesting - than most other fantasy films that you'll find. And for now, Burton has made enough great films - both early in his career and more recently - that I'm happy to give him the benefit of the doubt.

And ... I am super-psyched to see the TRON trailer prior to Alice. I can't wait for that movie. As a kid, Tron was one of those movies that I'd always watch whenever it came on TV. As with many children of the 80's, growing up I was completely fascinated with the idea of computers gone awry - the fact that these then-mysterious machines could unlock the door to whole universes of danger and intrigue. The idea of "the ghost in the machine." Tron was kind of the end-all be-all of the subgenre. Now that computer technologys is such a pervasive part of our everyday lives, you could argue that that old mystique no longer exists. Certainly not in pop-culture. So that's why Tron is going to be kind of awesome (well, one reason at least). I think it will be a supernova blast of 80's nostalgia.

Speaking of which ... I can't wait for SCOTT PILGRIM. Everything I've seen and read points to a movie that is positively dripping with awesomeness.


TV STUFF:


- I really loved last night's big baby episode of THE OFFICE. Seriously, the first half of this hour-long was completely classic. I was dying of laughter for much of it. Everything just came together to perfection. The very real-yet-funny nervousness of Jim and Pam contrasted nicely with the absolutely absurd craziness of Michael and Dwight. Dwight in particular, realizing that he too wanted a baby, and thus making a baby-making pact with Angela ... hilarious. And this was also one of those rare times where Michael felt just right. He was annoying and over-the-top, but at the same time, you really felt like he was trying to help, and that he had a genuine affection for Jim and Pam and the fact that their romance and family blossomed within the halls of Dunder-Mifflin. There were a lot of those genuine, happy moments, but they really felt earned. They were the kind of moments that could really only work after spending so much time with these characters that we know them inside and out. The result was a half hour of near-euphoric hilarity where everything clicked. I loved Michael and Dwight driving Jim and pam to the hospital - in fact, the whole sequence of them rushing out of the office was just brilliant. From Stanley stopping the elevator (and Toby getting shut out of it) to Dwight getting pulled over due to impersonating a police officer (and having to quickly empty his car of various weaponry). There was just a lot of frenetic comedic energy throughout that whole first half hour. Everyone got their little moment. The birth of Pam and Jim's baby was funny, touching, and a nice payoff to years' worth of storylines. Just a great episode of The Office - one of the best ever, I think.

The second half-hour was a little bit of a come-down. Michael, who really felt spot-on in Part 1, became a bit more cartoonish in Part 2 - spending all of his time trying to recreate the Pam and Jim romance by hooking up other single people in the office. This led to an awkward lunch-date between Erin and Kevin, and more shenanigans preventing Erin and Andy from finally hooking up. But, at episode's end, the two finally made it happen via the always amusing tactic of a self-faxed date request. Oh, Andy, you smooth operator, you. But yeah - there is a lot of comedic potential now that the two are finally going to be dating. You've got to love Andy and Erin - both are hilarious characters, and I can't wait to see scenes from their first date. Similarly, Pam and Jim had some really funny moments in the hospital, post-preganancy. But, some of the cameos from Pam's mom and sister were jarring reminders of some somewhat misguided storylines (Michael hooking up with Pam's mom) from the show's past. And Jim's annoyance with a male nurse / breast-feeding coach seemed a little out-of-character and forced. Overall, the second half of the hourlong Office event was really good, but never quite matched the comedic heights of the first.

Still, an awesome overall night for one of TV's best comedies of the last decade. It was great to see THE OFFICE in top form. And, looking at the ratings now, great to see the show doing so well. Kudos to The Office for showing everyone else how these types of TV events should be done.

My Grade:

Part 1: A
Part 2: B+

- MODERN FAMILY had a really funny episode on Wednesday night. While this wasn't a huge belly-laugh type of episode, it was really enjoyable nonetheless. I got a huge kick out of Phil and Luke's expadition to find some hinted-at hidden treasure buried under the house. I could easily watch a whole episode of just these two interacting, and Ty Burell continues to just kill in every scene he's in. The Mitchell and Cameron storyline was also funny, with baby Lilly saying "mommy" as her first words, prompting her two dads to freak out. Meanwhile, Haley's quest to get her driver's license (for the third time) was amusing and definitely (at least for me) relatable. Finally, the Jay/Manny/Gloria plotline involving Manny's fear of rollercoasters also worked. Pretty amazing - all four parallel plotlines were really strong this week, leading to an episode that overall really hit it out of the park. Again, nothing mind-blowing, but just really great characters that are endlessly watchable and funny. Another excellent ep from Modern Family.

My Grade: B+

- Still have to catch up on PARKS and COMMUNITY. Loving both shows lately, though!


- Okay, I am kind of losing steam here and need to shut my brain off for a bit. So I bid you adieu. Stay tuned, of course, for new movie reviews, Oscar thoughts and reaction, and lots of other assorted craziness.

Danny's Oscar Predictions 2010

Stephen King said it best in his latest Entertainment Weekly column: To paraphrase: "The Oscars are most important for people who like movies, not for those who love them."

And that's why the Oscars can be so frustrating for those of us who are true film fans - so much of the awards and the awards build-up is about politics, politics, politics. Whenever you hear so-called experts making their predictions, you hear every reason in the book why a particular movie or talent will win, but only rarely do you hear "because they were the best."

This year, there are ten Best Picture nominees, presumably with the idea that expanding the number of nominated films helps to make the Oscars more populist. That's great, but should that automatically mean that the highest-grossing movie of the year wins? I hope not. Personally, I like having ten nominees. Even if certain films seem like odd choices, there are others that 100% deserve to be there, like A Serious Man or District 9, that probably would not have gotten a shot if there were still only five slots. That said, some people seem to get so bent out of shape because they think that the Oscars typically favor smaller, more obscure films. If the best film of the year is small and obscure, then I say it should be awarded regardless of box-office gross. This year, the best film of 2009 was The Hurt Locker. There are other movies that came close, very close. Personally I could make a case for A Serious Man, Inglorious Basterds, or even District 9, at least in terms of other nominated films. But was Avatar in the same league as those films? At first, upon its release, many wanted to say yes. But I think that as time has passed, reaction has cooled. The visuals of Avatar were indeed spectacular and award-worthy, but the movie, as a whole ... well, it was great, but not in that very top, absolute elite category.

That's why I hate having to speculate on box office gross or populist appeal or which director is more likable or anything else that's tangential to the movie itself. I say may the best movie win. And in 2009, that movie was, I think, The Hurt Locker.

But hey, predicting things can be fun, and even if to me an Oscar isn't necessary for creative validation, it's still cool when your favorite movie, or director, or actor wins. So here are my picks - who should win, and who I think will win. And yeah, I tend to be optimistic and predict that some of my should-wins will win. But ... the Oscars have actually had a pretty good track record these last few years, in my opinion. In fact, Best Picture winners like The Departed, Slumdog Millionaire, and No Country For Old Men all correllated with my own picks for the #1 movie of their respective years of release. So I've been somewhat in tune with Oscar over the last few years, I guess. We'll see if the same holds true this time around ...

DANNY'S 2010 OSCAR PREDICTIONS:

BEST PICTURE:

Should Win: The Hurt Locker

- As I said above, this to me was the best film of 2009. No other movie from this past year could claim to be as complete of a package. Hurt Locker boasts an incredible cast, stunning, ultra-intense direction, a deep and memorable script, and themes that really hit home during this tumultuous era of international conflict. To me, Inglourious Basterds and A Serious Man are right up there. So is District 9. Precious is another one that it's hard not to root for. But ultimately, it's Hurt Locker FTW.

Will Win: The Hurt Locker

- Hey, I've got to go with my streak of best movie pics ending up winning Best Picture. I think that enough people have seen this movie on DVD and blu ray at this point that it has widespread awareness. And I think that people who have seen it are largely blown away. I think that having ten nominees dividing votes will ultimately help the one film that has few real detractors.

BEST DIRECTOR:

Should Win: Kathryn Bigelow

- This one is tough. Of the nominees, I think both James Cameron and Quentin Tarantino are very deserving. Avatar was a visual tour de force, and Inglorious Basterds combined action, suspense, and comedy like few other movies before it. But ultimately, I think Kathryn Bigelow deserves the win. Hurt Locker was one of THE most intense movie-going experiences I've ever had. It's amazing, because I remember seeing the movie in close proximity with Transformers 2, supposedly the summer's big action blockbuster. In one fell swoop, The Hurt Locker and Bigelow showed Michael Bay how to do action the right way, and she did it in the context of a movie that was also cerebral, layered, and nuanced. Bigelow delivered her masterwork with The Hurt Locker.

Will Win: Kathryn Bigelow

- James Cameron may be the biggest name in this pool, but I think Bigelow is the favorite. She has momentum on her side and I think she's easy to root for. She's a woman making action movies bolder and ballsier than her male counterparts. She knocked it out of the park with The Hurt Locker. I think this is her moment.

BEST ACTOR:

Should Win: Jeremy Renner

- As great as Jeff Bridges was in Crazy Heart, The Hurt Locker was the better movie, and it was Jeremy Renner who delivered what was, to me, the year's most memorable performance. Bridges was great, but he was Jeff Bridges. Renner in this one broke through to the other side. He's now at the top of my list to play every badass action movie role there is. He played a character both iconic and nuanced. He deserves to win. And for the record, this category is missing numerous deserving nominees. Sam Rockwell in Moon, Sharlto Copley in District 9, Michael Stuhlbarg in A Serious Man, and Viggo Mortenson for The Road ... for starters.

Will Win: Jeff Bridges

- Everyone loves Jeff Bridges. The guy is awesome. He's The Dude, fer crying out loud. And in Crazy Heart, he was vintage Jeff Bridges. It was an awesome performance, but more so it was a sort of reminder of how great this guy has always been. For that, I think he's the favorite to win.

BEST ACTRESS

Should Win: Gabourey Sidibe

- To me this is absolutely no contest. Gabourey was phenomenal in Precious. It was a transformation. It was an iconic role. It was a powerful performance. A breakthrough performance. This is a category where I'm pretty surprised by who was and wasn't nominated, but at the end of the day, Sidibe's Precious performance was the year's best.

Will Win: Gabourey Sidibe

- I don't think many are predicting Gabourey to win, for some reason, but I am. I mean, like I said above, this was an AMAZING performance. I can't honestly see how anyone can put Streep in Julie & Julia or Sandra Bullock in The Blind Side in the same league. Those are the big names, but I predict something of an upset, because Gabourey was too good to ignore.

BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR:

Should Win: Christoph Waltz

- No contest. For one thing, the nominee pool is incredibly weak other than Waltz. Matt Damon's five minutes of blandness in Invictus? Are you serious? Where are the supporting actors from The Hurt Locker?! But yeah, Waltz was awesome in Inglourious Basterds - a villain for the ages, and one of Tarantino's most memorable characters to date.

Will Win: Christoph Waltz

- Again, no contest. It's a weak pool of nominees. And Basterds needs a couple of bones thrown its way since it likely won't win for Best Picture or Director. An wasy win for Waltz.

BEST SUPPORTING ACTRESS:

Should Win: Mo'nique

- Similar to the Best Actress category, I think Mo'niqe's performance in Precious was just crazy-intense and ultra-memorable, and it's hands-down the best in this category. Anna Kendrick, Vera Farmiga, and Maggie Gyllenhaal were excellent in Up In the Air and Crazy Heart, but Mo'nique delivers a gut-wrenching performance that stands heads and shoulders above the pack.

Will Win: Mo'nique

- Unlike in the Best Actress category, Mo'nique has no huge, big-name competition to distract from her breakthrough performance in Precious. Farmiga and Gyllenhaal might be more glamorous choices, but still, I think this will be a fairly easy win for Mo'nique.

BEST ANIMATED FILM:

Should Win: Coraline or The Princess and the Frog

- Sorry, I just don't think this was Pixar's year. Up was great, but much moreso in its first fifteen minutes. After that, it became standard kids-movie fare. On the other hand, I thought that Coraline was an amazingly-realized, wholly unique animated fantasy film that seemed to really capture the spirit of Neil Gaiman's dreamlike writing. It was a dark, creepy movie full of wonder and spectacular imagery. By the same token, The Princess and the Frog was a spectacular return for traditional Disney animation. To me, it skillfully blended classic Disney themes with a more modern sensibility, and it worked wonderfully. Both of these films were great animated movies. Pixar had its shining moment with Wall-E, and to me Up was not in that same league of greatness. Meanwhile, I thought Fantastic Mr. Fox was a bit overrated - Wes Anderson in animated form didn't quite work for me.

Will Win: Up

- I think there's this weird consensus that Pixar must be honored this year. There's still leftover resentment that Wall-E wasn't nominated for Best Picture, and now you see Up in the Best Picture race. To that end, it basically has to win *at least* Best Animated Feature, right?

BEST FOREIGN FILM:

Should Win: ???

- Unfortunately, I haven't yet see any of the nominated films. I am really intrigued by the Israeli film Ajami though, and I'm hearing amazing things about A Prophet, which is currently in theaters in limited release.

Will Win: A Prophet

- From the sheer buzz that A Prophet is getting, with people comparing it favorably to the likes of The Godfather, I feel like it has to be the favorite. Then again, this category tends to be pretty unpredictable, so you never know.

BEST ORIGINAL SCREENPLAY:

Should Win: A Serious Man

- This is a tough one, but I think the Coens are geniuses, and their screenplays are consistently works of art in and of themselves. The dialogue in A Serious Man is so rich, the characters so funny, the situations so darkly hilarious, that to me this one is right up there with the Coen's best. And it's a tough call, because The Hurt Locker had an amazingly-structured screenplay that hit all the right beats. And man, Inglourious Basterds was just crackling. Those three movies had three of the best scripts of the decade, so it's tough to pick one. But to me, the Coens are the best screenwriters working today. Most movies make you think "yeah, I could do better." Not A Serious Man. Instead you think "man, *how* do they do it?"

Will Win: Inglorious Basterds

- I think this one boils down to the fact that a lot of people saw this movie, and a lot of people surely came away highly impressed by the great script. The Hurt Locker also has a strong shot. And it'd be a cool surprise if A Serious Man wins. But I think this might be Tarantino's to win - I mean, I can't remember the last time so many people were writing reviews OF A SCREENPLAY when a draft of the script got leaked way back when.

BEST ADAPTED SCREENPLAY:

Should Win: District 9

- There's something to be said for a sci-fi movie that's a burst of originality and imagination. District 9 works so well, I think, in part because the script continually defies all expectations. It dared to make its main character a complete asshole. It dared to morph from faux-documentary into balls-to-the-wall action movie. It dared to mix sci-fi and horror and socio-political commentary. If only more sci-fi movies were made out of scripts as unique and daring as this one.

Will Win: Up in the Air

- I think it's ultimately going to be a tough night for Up In the Air, but this one will be its token prize. And look, it is a great, great screenplay, with many memorable moments, and some really great interactions between its main characters. It's also a story that feels relevant and timely. I think it's probably the favorite to win here.

BEST DOCUMENTARY:

Should Win: ???

- Another category where, unfortunately, I haven't seen any of the nominated features. Honestly, none have really jumped out at me as must-sees, but I'm sure I'm missing out on one or two great films. I have to say though, one of my absolute favorite movies of 2009 was Anvil: The Story of Anvil - one of the best rock-docs I've ever seen - funny, sad, and endlessly entertaining. How or why it wasn't nominated, I have no idea.

Will Win: The Cove

- Most of the buzz seems to be around eco-doc The Cove, so that's my pick to win it. I haven't really heard much about any of the other nominees, to be honest.

BEST ORIGINAL SCORE:

Should Win: ???

- I honestly don't remember the scores for any of the nominees being all that memorable, but I may need an additional viewing to really get a better handle on it. I do distinctly remember wishing that Avatar had had a better, more epic score given how cool the rest of the movie's aesthetics were.

Will Win: Up

- Just a feeling that Up could take this one by default. We shall see.

BEST ORIGINAL SONG:

Should Win: The Weary Kind (from Crazy Heart)

- I really enjoyed the music from The Princess and the Frog, but I think Crazy Heart nailed it with this key anthem from the movie. For Crazy Heart to work, you really had to buy Bad Blake as a legit country music legend, and a song like The Weary Kind accomplished that, while also being a nice thematic tie-in to the movie's central themes.

Will Win: The Weary Kind (from Crazy Heart)

- I think it's probably a shoe-in. When you get a memorable song like this one that's so deeply tied to the fabric of a movie, it tends to win.

BEST FILM EDITING:

Should Win: The Hurt Locker

- Like I said earlier, The Hurt Locker showed up summer action movies with more hype and bigger budgets by showcasing some of the most intense, visceral action of this past year, or this past decade. Some of the credit for that, I think, has to go to the movie's great editing.

Will Win: The Hurt Locker

- For all the reasons mentioned above ...

BEST CINEMATOGRAPHY:

Should Win: Avatar

- I'm not an Avatar hater. In fact, I'm a huge fan. I just don't think it was on the same level, storytelling-wise, as movies like The Hurt Locker or District 9. That said, Avatar's visuals were absolutely jaw-dropping, and a lot of that was the sweeping cinematography that took us on a journey through a breathtaking alien landscape. Avatar deserves the win.

Will Win: Avatar

- Again, for all the reasons mentioned above.

BEST COSTUME DESIGN:

Should Win: The Imaginarium of Dr. Parnassus

- Terry Gilliam and his team winning an Oscar ... yep, that would be awesome.

Will Win: Nine

- It has to win something, right?

BEST VISUAL EFFECTS:

Should Win: Avatar

Will Win: Avatar

- No contest - this was the year's f/x game-changer. Avatar deserves to win for its revolutionary visuals.

BEST MAKEUP:

Should Win: Star Trek

Will Win: Star Trek

Hmm ... pretty weak entries in this category. Star Trek I guess is the winner by default, even if your basic Vulcan makeup job has been around since, what, the 60's? I guess it wins for Zoe Saldana's green roommate?

BEST SOUND EDITING:

Should Win: The Hurt Locker

Will Win: The Hurt Locker

- The single movie "sound" from 2009 that sticks with me? The sniper-fire from that one amazing scene in The Hurt Locker. I'll go out on a limb and predict that others had a similar experience.

BEST SOUND MIXING:

Should Win: Star Trek

Will Win: Avatar

- If you've seen Star Trek on Blu Ray, you've gotta appreciate just how slick this movie is from an A/V perspective. But look, I think Avatar will sweep just about all of these more technical categories.

BEST ART DIRECTION:

Should Win: Avatar

Will Win: Avatar

- Part of me wants to root for Dr. Parnassus, but I think the game-changing nature of Avatar ultimately wins out.

BEST SHORT FILM - ANIMATED:

Should Win: ???

Will Win: Logorama

- Why not? I say let's start a movement - LOGORAMA FTW!

BEST SHORT FILM - LIVE ACTION:

Should win: ???

Will Win: Instead of Abracadabra

- Hmm ... intriguing title, right?

BEST SHORT FILM - DOCUMENTARY:

Should Win: ???

Will Win: The Last Truck: Closing of a GM Plant

- Hmm ... sounds timely and important.

- Okay, those are my picks. Again, most of the time I'd rather the best movies win even if it invalidates my predictions. I'll be rooting for The Hurt Locker, for Inglorious Basterds, for A Serious Man, and District 9. Of the nominated movies this year, those were my favorites. I think the women of Precious should win big. I think Avatar is a lock for visual f/x. I think there are a number of amazing films that were barely nominated, if at all, so at the end of the day, these awards are by no means definitive. But here you go. May the best movies win.

LOST - Taking a Stand

LOST Review:

- First of all ... thank you, Sayid. Thank you for swiftly and brutally killing off two of the most annoying and useless characters ever on LOST ... Dogen and Lennon, aka the two men with the nifty superpower of being COMPLETELY UNABLE TO DIRECTLY ANSWER ANY QUESTION THAT IS POSED TO THEM. I mean, seriously, holy $%&# were those dudes obnoxious.

And it kind of pisses me off, because here we are in the final season of Lost, hopefully moving towards some sort of climactic endgame, only to have these two crappy characters introduce us to about 500 new concepts that seem designed to elicit one cry of "WTF?" after another. In this episode alone, let's see:

- A machine that can tell if you're good or evil - WTF.
- Sayid is evil so he must leave the Temple - WTF
- No, wait! Sayid should go kill Smokey - WTF
- No, wait! It was just a trap - Sayid was sent to kill the unkillable Smokey so that he'd fail and Smokey would kill HIM - WTF
- Dogen was a businessman in Osaka who got in a drunk-driving accident that killed his son. Jacob agreed to revive his son if Dogen promised to go to the island and never leave - WTF
- Sayid says "I want answers!" ... Dogen doesn't answer a single thing ... Sayid seems to accept the non-answers because the writers of Lost have never heard of the concept of a FOLLOW-UP QUESTION. - WTF

Okay, here's the thing. Some people will say "but Danny, why don't you just chill out and go with the flow - it's more about the journey than about getting your precious answers." And you know what? That's a valid point. The problem is that Lost has a nasty habit of specifically POSING QUESTIONS, setting up a scenario in which the only satisfying narrative response is ... AN ANSWER. If you don't believe me, then I point you to all the times in the history of Lost where a character, like Sayid in this very episode, has angrily grabbed Ben, or Juliette, or Dogen by the collar and demanded ... answers! In those moments, we are MEANT to identify with the characters. We're meant to think "Hells yeah! It's about time! Spill it!" At that moment, we don't need everything spelled out for us, but we at least need the clues so that we feel like we're getting somewhere.

And that's why I sometimes doubt the strength of Lost as a TV show. Because, it's one thing - and I've talked about this before - if you set up a narrative where everything exists in a dreamlike, ambiguous, murky state of reality. Old episodes of The Twilight Zone, the movies of David Lynch, the writing of Ray Bradbury - all of those works were captivating because half the fun was just getting "lost" in these sort of waking nightmare scenarios. But, LOST is different. The whole show is set up as a MYSTERY, in which answers are presumably forthcoming. I mean, so much of the show's own self-promotion is about how "the answers will be revealed!", etc. Hell, each week ABC runs pop-up versions of the show that explicitly exist to help clarify the show's mysteries. And in fact, big parts of Lost's uber-mythology HAVE been explained - the Dharma Initiative, the island's unique electromagnetic properties, the history of Ben and Widmore and The Others, etc. So, we have gotten SOME answers. There is the expectation OF answers still to come. And yet ... so many times, over and over, Lost cheats at its own game. Having a character ask a specific question, only to be met with an only tangentially-related answer ... that's not good mystery writing - that's just lazy. It would be good writing if the character being questioned has a defined motive for being ambiguous. Then we think "aha, they're withholding information because they have their own agenda - interesting." BUT ... how did Dogen and Lennon benefit, AT ALL, from never telling anyone jack squat? We never knew their motivations. We never knew their backstories. The characters were just time-wasters, and that's just lazy.

I'm not a Lost hater, in general. I supported the show in Season 3 when many dismissed it. And I LOVED all of Season 4, really enjoyed Season 5 as well. But when I think back, so much of what I've enjoyed about Lost has consisted of moments that were essentially self-contained. Moments that took a particular element of Lost's complex makeup and ran with it. Time-travel. Pulpy adventure. Great characters with powerful central conflicts at their core. By that same token, every time Lost actively attempts to address the BIG questions at the heart of the show, it falters. It collapses under its own weight. From the beginning, Lost's central mythology has been something of a patchwork quilt of wildly varying ideas and concepts - some scientific, some supernatural. The thread that held it all together was the characters. But the characters have now been milked for all they're worth. We've seen them deconstructed inside and out - we've seen their pasts, futures, and "what-if" alternate realities. In turn, Lost is now forced to finally and quickly make sense of all that *other* stuff that's going on on the show - to tie together a storyline that's involved everything from Smoke Monsters to ghosts to electromagnetic irregularities. It's messy. It's been a mess all along, but we went along for the ride, enjoyed each new concept as it was presented. But parallel to that, there's been this idea that there's a master plan to it all, that in one fell swoop we'll get a Twilight Zone-esque exclamation-point ending. But given all of that messiness, bringing together all those threads, answering those questions in a satisfactory manner - it's likely impossible and likely not gonna happen. And we're seeing that play out now in the final season.

Part of the problem is that there's never exactly been one central idea at the heart of Lost. With something like The X-Files, even when the mythology sort of collapsed, it was okay because the core idea of the entire show - "the Truth is out there" - remained intact. Here in Season 6 of Lost, we're suddenly being told that the whole show has been about the good and evil inside all of us. No, that's not what the show's been about. Sayid has always been about that conflict. So has Sawyer. Maybe Ben. But Claire was never at all evil. Jack was an asshole, but not evil. If this is what the show is now about, it doesn't ring true. Tonight's episode heavily riffed on Stephen King's THE STAND - characters divided up - Team Smokey or Team Jacob - or something. But if that's how things go, again, it doesn't feel earned. There could have been a big, dramatic moment where someone like Sawyer has to choose - good or evil. And we may still get that moment. But the big deaths in this ep came about because Sayid was infected by the Smoke Monster. It wasn't because of any natural character progression. Again - an easy way out.

I liked a lot of this episode. I liked the bigtime feel of the climactic finale, with the Smoke Monster wreaking havoc on the Temple. It was exciting, exhilirating. It felt cinematic. There were some great little moments - Ben backing away from crazy-Sayid was priceless. Keamy showing up in Sayid's flash-sideways was pretty cool. Miles' dry humor is always appreciated. And the scene where Sayid stabs Not Locke was exciting and intense. The ensuing conversation not so much, but still.

As for the flash-sideways, it was alright, but fell into the same pattern as others where we just end up covering the same ground we've covered in several previous flashbacks and flashforwards. Sayid is a man who struggles with his violent past, who tends to be forced into conflict even though he oftentimes wants to live a simpler, more peaceful life - even though he wants to be a good person. We get it. We've covered this. At least with Jack's flash last week, we got some thematic closure on Jack's long-running father issues. This week, Sayid's flash ended rather abruptly - he kills Keamy and his lackey, finds Jin, for some reason, and that's all she wrote.

Despite the exciting finish, so much of this episode had a feeling of pointlessness to it. Lost has practically been playing musical chairs with its characters, sending them back and forth between the Temple and the Jungle, with no real reason except logistics, ie "we need Kate in this scene with Claire, so ... she's back at the Temple!" Meanwhile, the quick deaths of Dogen and Lennon, while perversely satisfying, just exemplified how pointless they were to the larger story. All that time teasing us with who they are, what their relationship was with Jacob, how they got to the island, etc. - all a waste, or so it appears. Oh wait, we got a completely random martial-arts showdown between Sayid and Dogen at the start of the episode. So at least there was that. Uhhh ... why was a former businessman from Osaka an insane kung-fu master again? And why did Lennon dress like a muppet? I guess we'll never know.

So many times though, LOST is saved by its awesome cast and its amazing production values. I give total credit to people like Naveen Andrews, who's made Sayid into such a likable, intriguing character. I can once again only offer praise for Terry O'Quinn, who has the unenviable task of playing a completely new character who, so far at least, is a complete question mark. O'Quinn makes it work - few others could. And the show always looks awesome. Few if any other series on TV have such a cinematic look and feel.

But ... I feel like Lost right now is becoming very, very messy as it races towards its final episode. Last year at this time, Lost was on a roll, making us ponder the nature of time travel, putting the puzzle pieces together, solidfying its mythology, making us wonder where it stood in the cannon of TV's all-time greatest series.

(And, by the way, is it merely coincidence that Lost's best overall seasons coincided with the great Brian K. Vaughan's involvement on the show as a writer and producer? I think not - his influence was obvious over the last few seasons, and this season is sorely missing his knack for great character moments, witty dialogue, cool pop-culture references, and mind-bending sci-fi storytelling.)

Anyways, a year ago I really did think Lost was one season away from claiming an undisputed claim to all-time TV greatness. Now, to be honest, I'm not so sure. Lost is falling back on old habits. The cracks are becoming deeper. We're getting lots of shortcuts. It feels like the endgame was hastily-assembled. as opposed to deeply rooted in the show's natural path of progression. I'm enjoying the show - that much I'm not questioning. But I'm enjoying it with serious reservations.

My Grade: B

Has everyone gone CRAZY?! THE CRAZIES - Reviewed! 24 Thoughts! Chuck! Smallville! And More!

- So, I had a pretty nice weekend, a mix of fun and relaxation, although as always, I could use a couple more days off. Still, I was really counting down to Friday night this past week - all week, I was recovering from the previous weekend's family visit to LA and the nonstop car-shopping that went with it, and I was dying for a quiet night to just do nothing, relax, and catch up on sleep. On Saturday, however, I was pretty productive during the day, and then that night I hit up PURIMPALOOZA, a huge Jew party at a swanky Beverly Hills establishment, in honor of the holiday of Purim. Purim is one of the few Jewish holidays that's purely celebratory - the only real "rules" are to eat and drink, dress in costumes, and to listen to the story of Purim and boo and make noise whenever the name of Haman - the villain of the story- is mentioned. Anyways, Purimpalooza was fun, although, the venue was crowded as heck, so much so that you could barely move. I guess it was cool to see such sizable attendance, but, at the same time, after about two hours of pushing and shoving just to walk around, I got kind of sick of it and decided it was time to head out. Still, always nice to see an event like that so well-attended, and hey, it filled my quota of Purim-related activities for the weekend.

On Sunday, I took in an afternoon showing of THE CRAZIES, which I'll be reviewing in this very column. Scroll down to check out my thoughts.

In the meantime, I've been working dilligently on a new movie script idea that my brother and I came up with a while back. I'm getting close to the halfway point of the screenplay, and I'm pretty psyched about how it's coming out. It's a dark, over-the-top comedy in the mold of something like Observe & Report, but I don't think there's ever been a comedy quite like this one. I'll hold off on saying anything more for now, except that it's been fun getting so immersed in a new creative endeavor.


Some TV Reviews:


TWENTY BY-GOD FOUR:

- Okay, now that's more like it. I'm not saying that this was a mind-blowing episode of 24 or anything, but for the first time this season, this felt like a real by-gum episode of the show I know and love. The focus was, finally, squarely on Jack again - and this was a Jack who was large and in charge, kicking ass and taking names with the full support of the US government. It's about time. This episode also had the kind of cleverly intense action scenario that has long been 24's trademark. When Farhad Hassan was killed before CTU could get to him, Jack has CTU leak false info to the media that Farhad is still alive and is about to talk. Far-fetched? Sure. But it was fun. Even more fun was the terrorist group's attempt to kill Farhad in his hospital room, not realizing that the whole thing was a CTU setup. The badguys send some nervous kid with a suicide bomb into the hospital, where he inevitably runs into CTU's own fresh-out-of-college rookie. Suffice it to say, the confrontation between the two kids was intense, sort of funny, and definitely entertaining. It was also cool to see some vintage Chloe techie-action, as she remotely disarmed the bomb's detonator in a sweet sequence of tech-ops intensity. It was fun and totally refreshing to finally see the now-legendary Jack and Chloe team back in action.

Now, the episode broke down a bit when Jack finally cornered the would-be suicide bomber in Farhad's hospital room. I mean, come on - the kid jumps out the window and CTU is totally unprepared? It just felt frustrating to have all of this build-up lead to a cliffhanger that felt somewhat cheaply earned - of the kid locking himself in a hospital vault, looking to manually detonate his bomb-vest as Jack looks on helplessly.

That said, I don't like to grade an episode based on the previews for next week ... but ... my feeling of being underwhelmed was severely lessened by the previews, in which we see Jack go old-school, and apparently find the kid's mom to use as leverage to get him to drop the bomb and cooperate. Damn - that's going to be intense.

Oh yeah, Jack's line to Renee about having a CTU team bring her to his apartment ... man, that was hilariously cheesy. I guess Jack works fast both in the field and with regards to the ladies. But, Jack and Renee haven't so much as enjoyed an intimate moment yet - their whole relationship this season has been Jack listening in while Renee stabs people. A little bit more subtlety in their seeimingly-inevitable romance would be appreciated. But, you've got to give that scene props for sheer entertainment value as well. Damn Jack, you may be a grandpa, but you're still a playa'.

Otherwise, this ep felt like a breath of fresh air in more ways than one. Jack was back in action with CTU, working with Chloe etc - which was great. At the same time, the terrible Dana Walsh storyline seemed to end its long and painful opening chapter. The next chapter apparently involves Stephen Root, so I'm assuming it can only get better from here.

I think 24 viewers eveywhere also applauded when Hastings finally grew a pair and stood up to the White House, following last week's assurance from Jack that he's got "more juice than he thinks." Hastings is still no Bill Buchanan, but he's slowly become a bit more likable on a season of 24 that's been in desperate need of likable characters.

Meanwhile, the stuff with President Hassan is still kind of draggy. Other than the novelty of his daughter going from unassuming blandness to sultry sexbomb very quickly, I still don't really care about the Hassan family intrigue.

Still, this episode of 24 had me on the edge of my seat like old times. There were a lot of positive signs that the season is in the process of turning a corner, and the action was the most intense and involving of the season to date. The stakes were upped with the threat of a nuclear bomb in the middle of New York. And Jack felt like "the man" again. Good stuff.

My Grade: B+


- CHUCK was back on Monday night, and it was good to see everyone's favorite Nerd-Herder return to action. Although, as excited as I was about Chuck's post-Olympics return, this episode was way too emo for my tastes. Look, I know that Josh Schwartz shows inevitably have their share of lovelorn characters staring off into the distance as contemplative indie-rock plays in the background ... but with Chuck, I'm always hoping that Schwartz can keep his tendency towards relationshippy angst in check. Not so last night - practically the whole focus of the episode was on the fact that Chuck still, apparently, has feelings for Sarah (or Sam - her real name as revealed this ep). Yeah, no duh. Considering the fact that the two broke up for no real reason - and that as soon as Sarah leaves Chuck to avoid mixing her work and personal lives, she immediately shacks up with the first new co-worker she meets - well, it's understandable why Chuck might feel a lack of closure there. Still, the sudden monkey wrench in the Chuck and Hannah relationship felt a bit out-of-nowhere. And Chuck breaking up with her right before he's about to have dinner with her parents felt like an unnecessary moment inserted for cheap dramatic effect. And as I type this, I'm wondering, why is there SO much emphasis on the emotastic relationships in what is supposed to be a comedic spy show? Obviously, this stuff has always been a huge part of Chuck, but I definitely missed the action, fun, and comedy of Chuck-at-its-best in this particular ep. Instead, I had flashbacks to Smallville at its worst - endless will-they-or-won't-they melodrama between Clark and Lana (hello, Kristen Kreuk), and endless trust issues getting in the way of their relationship (hello again, KK). There were some really fun moments in this one, particularly when Chuck was pared with a couple of clueless goombas (one of whom was EDGAR from 24 - poor Edgar!). I liked Chuck trying to act the part of a badass assassin while undercover, yet having his usual geeky personality slip through the cracks at inopportune moments ("cupcakes - everyone loves cupcakes.") And as always, Adam Baldwin as Casey got in some choice lines. But, way too much sappiness - and not well-earned sappiness, at that - for my tastes.

My Grade: B-

- I was pretty underwhelmed by Friday's new episode of SMALLVILLE. The show has seemed to be in steady decline since the great "Absolute Justice" episode several weeks back, and this latest episode felt like a whole other series as compared to that landmark installment. I mean, it's amazing to me how none of the intriguing threads from that episode have yet been followed up on - Amanda Waller, Checkmate, the Suicide Squad, the JSA, etc. I understand that the JSA episode was likely shoehorned into the schedule, but still. But there's more to it than that. That Geoff Johns-penned episode was so effective in part because it didn't follow the typical Smallville formula. It broke from the mold and felt more like a great serialized TV show as opposed to a series of constant retreads. This week's Smallville was something we've seen countless times before - a random, meteor-rock powered villain surfaces and draws Clark towards a confrontation in his lair. Clark saves the day, minimally using his powers even as everyone else remains blissfully oblivious to what actually happened. Now, this ep was tied into the ongoing Zod storyline, and yet, after last week's promising cliffhanger - in which Clark burns down Zod's tower - this week abandoned the high drama of that scene for a relatively low-key, run-of-the-mill freak-of-the-week plotline. We met a scientist who had been experimented on by the Kandorians, and was now out for revenge, capturing some of Zod's army and performing his own freakish experiments on them, trying to prove to the world that aliens walk among us. Um, yeah, it was a totally weaksauce plotline. Why is it always so hard for Smallville to build momentum week to week? The big twist came when Clark used some of his blood to "heal" a dying Zod. Why this healed him, or why it suddenly gave Zod Clark's powers, I don't know. But the big reveal at the end was a suped-up Zod now powered-up and able to fly. It was definitely a roundabout way to get to that endgame, but at least now we have some set up in place for a big Zod-Clark smackdown. Then again, Smallville has rarely delivered on those big fight scenes, so who knows if this one will satisfy? In any case, as per usual, this storyline has been dragging for a while now. Let's wrap up this Zod story and move on, shall we? And you know, I don't get why Smallville is so afraid of just doing a sequence of episodes that directly deals with a single plotline. Think of how much momentum the Zod stuff might have had going into April, if only we didn't need to spend time on all the lame freak-of-the-week filler.

My Grade: C


- And now, a movie review of Breck Eisner's new psuedo-zombie horror flick ...


THE CRAZIES Review:

- The Crazies is one of those movies that very easily could have, you know, gone either way. There was the potential in the premise - a remake of the old George Romero movie - for it to be a cool, interesting film that improved upon the original - widely regarded as a decent flick but not necessarilly among Romero's classics. At the same time, this one could have been a disaster. Helmed by Breck Eisner, mainly known to date for the adventure movie dud Sahara, there were certainly signs that The Crazies could be nothing more than B-grade horror junk. But, encouraged by some very positive reviews, and eager for a fun movie to cap off my weekend, I went to check out The Crazies, and am happy to report that I was thoroughly entertained. While The Crazies isn't going to change the horror movie landscape or anything, it's a solid movie that's elevated by a great cast and a couple of fairly awesome action scenes. I wish more attention had been given to the somewhat inconsistent script, but I can recommend the movie to anyone looking for a fun, action-packed horror flick.

The Crazies is essentially a Zombie movie, but in this particular scenario, we're not dealing with the living dead, but with ordinary people who have been infected by a mysterious contagion. The infected become violent, homicidal, and yes, crazy - and a couple of isolated cases in a small Iowa town quickly escalate, to the point where an entire town has been overrun by murderous, braindead maniacs. Good times.

I liked that The Crazies took some time in the beginning to set up the location and the main characters. Breck Eisner nicely establishes the quiet, small-town locale - a sleepy farming 'berg in rural Iowa. Similarly, our main characters tend to fall into the usual zombie-movie-cliches, but the solid cast helps make us care about them in a way that many horror movies don't. But here, Eisner takes his time setting the mood - and in doing so, he creates the perfect setup for a great opening scene. As the town gathers for a local minor-league baseball game, it's a picture-perfect scene of middle-American tranquility. That is, until the local drunk staggers towards the field, wielding a loaded shotgun. The sheriff, who's there watching the game, of course, confronts him. It seems like no big deal - except that the drunk isn't drunk - there's something else wrong with him, a blank, vacant look in his eyes. The truth is, he's infected. And the violent outcome of this establishing scene sets the small-town-goes-crazy vibe for the rest of the film.

Again, the cast is overall pretty solid. But the man who anchors the film is Timothy Olyphant as the local sheriff, the hero of the movie. Olyphant is a refreshing change of pace for a movie like this, because he has acting chops, and he easily pulls off the small-town sheriff thing while actually seeming heroic and likable as opposed to just in-over-his-head. He's old enough to be believable as a world-weary yet competent leader. And he's got a gravitas to him that helps sell even the movie's cheesier moments. Radha Mitchell is also good as Olyphant's wife, a local doctor. Another case where it's nice to see someone a little older and more world-weary as opposed to the usual dumb-teenagers in peril situation. One other standout is Joe Anderson as the younger Deputy. Anderson is good as a sidekick / foil, and was fun to watch throughout the movie. Also, there's a cameo from the guy who plays Aaron Pierce on 24, which was sort of awesome.

Where The Crazies falters is in plot and pacing. For one thing, the movie started annoying me with how frequently it went for ultra-cheap scares. There are a couple of really effective "thing jumps out at you accompanied by a loud noise" moments, especially in a really kickass, climactic action scene set inside of a carwash. But many other times, Eisner resorts to cheap, "jump" scares for no real reason - loud music cues and "jumps", oftentimes gotcha-style fakeouts, that just give watching the movie the feeling of being in a cheap haunted house at times. It's weird, because the movie has enough genuinely exciting action and thrills that it didn't need so many lame moments that go for the easy scare. Similarly, there are a number of groaner-type moments where characters split up and such for no apparent reason. I mean, come on, if you're one of a handful of healthy people in a town infected by homicidal freaks, at the very least, stick together!

In addition, I wish The Crazies had a bit more meat to its plotline. Even in terms of the little details that help create suspension of disbelief, the movie oftentimes gets lazy. For example, we never quite know the "rules" of the infection. Some people seem to instantly succumb to it, whereas for others it's a long, slow burn (i.e. for main characters for whom it's convenient, plotwise). Similarly, at one point in the film, a bunch of characters are rescued from a military containment camp, where people who are suspected of infection are being held. The idea is that the characters deserve to be rescued because they were so viciously captured and contained by the army. And yet, no one really stops to wonder who is or isn't infected, or if rescuing them puts the rest of the group at risk. In short, there are a lot of weird plot holes, and a seeming reluctance to really set the stakes by clearly explaining the nature of the infection.

Finally, the movie definitely lacks much in the way of subtext. There isn't really much going on below the surface, and the movie rarely pauses to really comment on any sort of bigger themes or ideas that you might expect it to touch on. In most films, this wouldn't be such an issue. But, given the tradition of zombie films - and Romero's movies in particular - as vehicles for astute social commentary, the lack of real depth to the film is a tad disappointing.

Still, the movie is entertaining enough that you don't think too hard about some of the logic gaps. As I said, the acting is above-average, and the direction - from the mood-setting scenes early in the film, to the wild carnage later on - is well done, definitely an impressive visual effort from Eisner. This was a fun roller-coaster ride of a film - cliche at times, but packed with fun action and a nifty premise. I mean, sometimes, you're just in the mood for a good ol' fashioned zombie flick, and despite some flaws, The Crazies nicely fits the bill.

My Grade: B


- Alright, I'll be back with thoughts on LOST and, eventually, my official Oscar predictions. Stay tuned.