SUPERMAN Ramblings: 5 Ideas for Zack Snyder's Sure-to-be-Epic Reboot of the Man of Steel!

As a lot of you guys know, I am a diehard Superman fan. I love the character, the mythology, the history, the social and political origins of the world's greatest superhero. And being too young to have seen the original Richard Donner films in a theater, it's always been a dream of mine to see a great, iconic Superman film on the big screen (it's also been a dream of mine to help create a Superman film, but that's a whole other story ...).

When Superman Returns was originally announced, I was ecstatic - especially in the wake of the superb Batman Begins. But very quickly, my excitement turned to caution. The casting seemed off. Rumors about the plotline made me worry that Bryan Singer and co. didn't have a great handle on how to make a definitive Superman movie for a new era. Superman Returns was just a mess, and I don't know if I've ever been more disappointed with a blockbuster film before. If someone had been watching my face as the movie began, they would have seen a pretty extreme transition from giddy happiness as the opening credits played over the remixed John Williams score, to sheer horror as we were introduced to a version of Lex Luthor who was a sleazy, bumbling joke. Within minutes, it was clear that Superman Returns would NOT be the Superman film that we had all been waiting for. There was Lex Luthor as used-car-salesman. Superman as a mopey, effeminate deadbeat dad. Lois Lane was bland. Jimmy Olsen and Perry White were non-factors. The look of the film was gray and boring. The costume was weak and goofy-looking, and the "S-shield" was way too small. The action was mostly nonexistent. Superman didn't throw a punch the entire movie, and he was made to look weak and ineffectual - both physically and emotionally. He was saddled with a super-son that nobody wanted to see. So much was wrong about Superman Returns, and as the months passed following it's release, it became increasingly clear that WB was eventually going to have to go back to the drawing board and re-reboot it's biggest superhero franchise.

Now, after years of speculation, there is movement. DC Entertainment is ramping up at Warners. There is a significant push to get DC Comics characters set up as movies, TV shows, and games. And amidst all that, you have to figure that priority #1 was always to, finally, kickstart a new Superman franchise and to get it right.

First, it was announced that the man behind Batman Begins and The Dark Knight (not to mention a little movie called Inception), Chrisotpher Nolan, would be overseeing production on a new Superman movie. Then, the big news ... Zack Snyder would direct.

Let's repeat that ... Zack Snyder is directing Superman. We knew he was on the short list of candidates, but I honestly wasn't sure if he'd get the nod. I'm glad he did. In fact, I'm pretty freaking excited about this news - Zack Snyder does big, he does epic, he does colorful. He does action as good as or better than anyone working today. He isn't afraid to make his movies crazy, over-the-top, and stylized. He makes movies that get your blood pumping, that kick some ass, that embrace far-out ideas and larger-than-life characters. He is, I think, exactly the man for the job of making the most insane, action-packed, epic Superman movie possible.

Zack will make the most out of whatever he has to work with - I'm confident of that. But now, the main priority has got to be getting a great script. Supposedly David Goyer worked with Christopher and Jonathan Nolan on a draft. It's still too early to know what to think or expect though. I think the script was perhaps the weakest aspect of the recent Batman films - not saying the scripts *were* weak, simply that if there was any one flaw with Batman Begins or The Dark Knight, it was probably to be found in some of the structural issues inherent in each of their screenplays. These superhero movies tend to be overstuffed and filled with plot points and characters that are unnecessary to the story. With Superman, the writing team should find a way to build a strong supporting cast and establish an awesome villain, but first and foremost, they need to make Superman into THE MAN. Between Superman Returns and Smallville, I think we are all sick and tired of an emo, self-doubting Man of Steel. It's time to finally see a Superman who is inspiring, confident, and a natural leader - a symbol of hope.

The next important thing will be the casting. I know everything in Hollywood trends towards young. But I hope that Snyder and co. truly think outside of the box when it comes to casting Clark Kent / Superman. A typical young-Hollywood pretty-boy won't do. We need someone with a commanding presence, who looks like an adult. We also need a Lois Lane who is brimming with wit and personality. She has to be spunky and able to kick some ass when called upon. We have to understand why Superman is in love with her. Lex Luthor should be in the picture, but not the primary villain, at least not yet. He should be a badass. A genius mind who is a titan of science and industry. A man who is, in public, a figure who commands respect, but in private a sinister force for evil. No land-grab schemes. No cartoonish plots. This Luthor is out for power and control and ultimate knowledge. Jimmy Olsen should be in the picture. He should be the unlikely hero - the regular guy who is somehow always surrounded by weirdness and adventure. He always believes in Superman no matter what, and he is, at the end of the day, Superman's pal. Perry White is the gruff boss of the Daily Planet, but also a father figure to Clark. When the chips are down, Perry is an old-school reminder that you stick to your guns and fight the good fight. And you also need Jonathan and Martha Kent. They are the reason that, despite being an alien, Clark Kent is more human and grounded than most ordinary people. They taught him right from wrong, and are still there to remind him of what's right.

Zack Snyder and co. have 75 years' worth of stories to mine. They have the ability to craft an epic adventure - to make a franchise worthy of the Big Red S. They need a dynamite script and an equally stellar cast. Some other suggestions:

1.) Make it BIG: Superman is a character that can work well with smaller, more personal stories - but only because those stories serve as a contrast to the usually-epic scope of his adventures. A new Superman story needs to start out with a BANG. Skip the origin, skip the will-they-or-won't-they Lois and Clark romance. Just get right to the good stuff - huge villains, a big, far-reaching story, and a plot filled with intrigue, spectacle, twists, turns, and lots of action. We've yet to see a Superman movie on a truly super-scale. So yeah, no more cheesy Lex land-grab schemes. I want intergalactic warfare, epic battles, giant villains, and mind-blowing sci-fi concepts that would make Jack Kirby smile. On another note, I don't want this movie to rehash what we've seen before. The idea of Zod as the villain, for example, doesn't 100% intrigue me. Just because he was cool in Superman II doesn't mean we need to see him again.

2.) Make it COLORFUL: Superman returns never *felt* like Superman. Superman has always been the comic book character who has the craziest adventures, the most insane, out-there stories, and the biggest, most over-the-top villains. So Zack - go wild. Dazzle us with awesome visuals and comic book color. Make that super-suit the brightest blue, red, and yellow you can find. Introduce all the insane concepts from the comics that WB will allow - Bizarro, Boom Tubes, fifth-dimensional imps (okay maybe we can skip them ...), DNAliens, signal watches, and alien invaders from the fiery planet Apokolips. Leave the dark and gritty and brooding stuff for Batman. Make a Superman that pops off of the screen.

3.) Make it INSPIRING: In spite of what I just said, I still want a Superman that takes time to save a little kid from a random street thug, or who stops to give advice to a woman who seems depressed, or who answers letters from people who write to him with their problems. I want a Superman who is a hero to the world, who fights the neverending battle. Most of all, I want a moment, or moments, in the movie where I want to stand up and cheer and say "hell yeah, kick his ass Superman!" Superman Returns never gave us that moment, and that's a shame.

4.) Set it in the DC UNIVERSE: As much as Christopher Nolan seems resistant to the idea of an interconnected DC movie universe (in the vein of what Marvel is doing), I think the time has come for DC and Warners to plant the seeds for a bigger vision of the world of DC Comics in the movies. Not only does this open up a floodgate of possibilities for tie-in comics, games, TV shows, and other films, it just makes the next Superman movie that much richer and more epic. Have other heroes appear. Make sure to include DC Comics staples like STAR Labs, Cadmus, and Lexcorp. Maybe throw in Wayne Enterprises and Kord Industries. But give the fanboys something to latch onto, and have some fun with this - show us that this is not just another retread of the old Donner movies, but a brand new vision of the DC Universe on the big screen.

5.) Make sure it KICKS ASS: This is where Snyder is going to bring something to the table that other directors might not have been able to pull off. I mean, this is a SUPERMAN movie - give us at least one fight scene that makes us sit up and say "HOLY CRAP I've never seen THAT before." Show us a Superman who's battered, bruised, half-dead, but who keeps on fighting. Show us Lois in mortal danger, show us Jimmy coming to the rescue, show us Lex making a last-minute swerve to the dark side that leaves our jaws on the floor. But for the love of all that is holy, give us some kick-ass action.

And now, we wait. We'll see if this new Superman can finally deliver. I hope it does.

Tapping Into THE SOCIAL NETWORK - Movie of the Year So Far ...?

THE SOCIAL NETWORK Review:

- I was a student at Boston University's College of Communication from 2000 to 2004, and in many ways, it was an exciting time to be in college and to be studying communication. From a technological point of view, the times were definitely a-changin'. Cell phones were becoming ubiquitious. High speed internet was becoming more widely available, and at BU, circa 2000, the vast population of students was already very much connected to each other via intra-university networks, and the beginnings of the modern social media web were already beginning to evolve. We'd log on to those networks and download movies and music. People were sharing, creating, linking. My freshman year, Napster blew up, and suddenly there was this whole new world of online music. The floodgates had opened. People were blogging and instant-messaging. At a campus as huge as BU's, IM was the preferred way to keep in touch, and it was already replacing phone calls as a primary means of chatting. Your online alias was quickly becoming an important part of your identity. For a freshman communications class, I wrote a paper on the use of AIM among teens and college students and how it was changing the way young adults interacted. By my junior year, digital cameras were exploding in popularity, and people were starting to post more and more of their photos, and eventually videos, online. By the time I studied in London in 2003, it felt natural and easy to search for episodes of my favorite TV show, 24, via various online networks. I started a blog for a computer science class I was taking my senior year (which eventually morphed into this very blog), but prior to that I was semi-addicted to reading a couple of LiveJournal blogs written by friends or friends of friends, and I had my regular list of websites that I checked every day - many of which were becoming increasingly dependent on user-generated or user-submitted content. By my junior year, I think, there was something in the air in Boston. Everyone was trying to figure out how to create the Next Big Thing. All of us in COM were wondering what the digital future meant for us. My friends in the School of Management were all trying to dream up the next huge website, the next big idea. There was a lot of energy in Boston dorm rooms at this time, a lot of big dreams. But there was also a dark side to the infiltration of social connectivity and easily-shareable media. Students began getting taken to court by the record labels. At BU, a girl was filmed doing some pretty disgusting and embarassing stuff at a party, and the video was infamously passed around within the BU network, and on the internet at large, for anyone to see. A reminder that privacy was becoming less of a guarantee, that there were a lot of dark corners in the social network. It was clear, though, that this was indeed a new digital era, with all sorts of potential for both good and bad.

And then came Facebook. I know there are still some people who dismiss the site as a fad or a gimmick, but those people are not seeing clearly. Facebook has "won," and it's here to stay. There were other sites that predated it, and others that have challenge it, but right now, in 2010, Facebook is the site that is at the forefront of the revolution in social media. It's at the forefront of the web in general. At BU, the site spread like wildfire in 2004 - my senior year. Within months, seemingly everyone on BU had a profile on the site ... at a huge college like Boston U, the chance to connect so easily and with so many people - from good friends to random classmates - was hard to pass up. While it took the mainstream a while to catch on, Facebook was already well on it's way to world domination even then. Facebook was all the rage in Boston in 2004, but soon enough, it expanded to the rest of the country. Soon after that, it expanded to other countries - I now have Facebook friends in England, Israel, Australia, and elsewhere. Before long, my co-workers, young and old, were on the site. Later, my parents. Political campaigns, marketing campaigns, campaigns to get Betty White to host Saturday Night Live - all conducted on Facebook. Messaging, photo-sharing, games of Scrabble - all on Facebook. You meet someone at a party, and you ask them to "Facebook-friend" you. Honestly, when I meet someone in my age range today who's NOT on Facebook, it's like meeting one of those people who used to refuse to buy a TV or something. I know there are those who like to boast that they're not on Facebook, and I get it. In some ways, the site has become an all-encompassing monster. It's addictive. It raises privacy concerns. It makes it so our lives are digitally catalogued and recorded - our likes and dislikes, our nights out, our relationships. It's fun and useful but also anxiety-inducing. And hey, I'll admit it, my life was and is changed by Facebook, as I suspect many of yours were and are. And it's for that reason that there is that fascination to understand it, to get the story behind it, to try to make sense of how we got to this point so fast and so suddenly.

But, regardless of what you think of (or how much you use) Facebook, there's no doubt that the story behind its inception is a fascinating one. So please, don't judge THE SOCIAL NETWORK based on your opinion of the site. The movie isn't a referendum on Facebook, nor is it about the specific ins and outs of using Facebook. Yes, the movie was extra compelling to me - I was there from the beginning, I was in Boston as Mark Zuckerberg was creating Facebook, and I've been on the site longer than most. I was hanging out around Harvard, exploring Cambridge, hoping fruitlessly for a chance Natalie Portman encounter. Getting pizza and hitting up Newbury Comics at The Garage in Harvard Square. I was there, and I went on to work in digital media and at a job where Facebook is very much a part of what I do. In some small way, I feel connected to the events of this movie.

But all that being said, it doesn't matter. Apart from all of that larger context, the fact is that THE SOCIAL NETWORK is an absolutely phenomenal, mind-blowing film. It captures a time, captures a place. It is riveting. The script is crackling. The acting is exceptional. The direction is the great David Fincher 100% at the top of his game. It delivers a knock-out punch. It might just be the best movie of the year so far.

I mean, think about this for a second. The hype over this being "The Facebook Movie" is so huge, that people are actually overlooking the fact that this is the new film from DAVID FINCHER, and that it's written by AARON SORKIN. That's a dream team, a once-in-a-lifetime combo of visionary writer and director. Now, these are two of the greatest creative minds of the last couple of decades, but ... both have had high profile misfires of late. For Fincher, Benjamin Button was a visually outstanding but narratively lacking film - not in the same league as the director's greatest films, like Fight Club. For Sorkin, the television show Studio 60 was a high profile flop. After a great pilot, the show became so preachy and heavy-handed that I began to question my high regard for Sorkin in general. But here's the great news about The Social Network - it might just be the best thing that Fincher has ever directed, and it might just be the best script that Sorkin has written to date.

Fincher directs the story of Mark Zuckerberg's invention of Facebook with a driving energy that makes it as intense and riveting a film as anything else he's helmed. There's a dark, almost apocalyptic vibe to the movie. Seeing such recent history play out on screen, knowing how much things are about to explode, knowing that the small actions and reactions of the characters will very quickly change the world - it gives The Social Network an ominous and pulse-pounding mood that makes it hard to take your eyes off of the screen. This is NOT a bland, slice-of-life tale of college life or corporate maneuvering. This is huge, epic, operatic, end-of-the-world-as-we-know-it stuff. This is a movie that's about so much more than just the basics of the story it tells. It's bursting with subtext, with theme, with character, with depth. Fincher's camera captures that certain something, that pulsating, driving force that propels you through college, that energy and freedom and sense of possibility that makes each class, each idea, each night out, each conflict feel bigger and grander than it might have in another setting. That energy that I spoke of earlier - that feeling that was in the air in Boston circa 2003? Fincher nails it. It's something that's slightly intangible, hard to describe, but he nails it. I think about a rowing scene towards the middle of the film. It involves the Winklevoss twins - two purebred Harvard students who approached Mark Zuckerberg with an idea for a social networking site, and then felt betrayed when he ditched the project and struck off on his own, going on to create the site that would be Facebook. The Winklevoss twins are business students as well as star athletes, and their ultra-competitiveness as Olympian-level rowers - and it's transference to their rivalry with Zuckerberg - is a recurring theme throughout the movie. And in this scene, as we see them intensely rowing in a big competition, I don't know why, exactly, but it absolutely gave me chills. Fincher directs it with that driving intensity I've been talking about. It's just two guys rowing, but it feels like so much more is at stake. In that one scene, it's the old vs. new, the establishment vs. the geeks, the old world vs. the oncoming revolution. Again, Fincher never makes The Social Network feel like a "small" movie. The stakes are always epic. The themes are grand. The moody score by Trent Reznor adds immeasurably to that feeling as well. But man, this is Fincher at his absolute best.

Meanwhile, the script by Aaron Sorkin is equally impressive. For one, the dialogue is absolutely top-notch. Some of the best I've ever heard on-screen. I was worried that Sorkin would infuse the film with some sort of overt political message - the same sort of heavyhandedness that has been his achilles heel in the past. But that is not the case. Sorkin is laser-focused on character and theme, and it shows. Every character pops off the screen - from the awkward boy genius Zuckerberg, to the snobby Winklevoss twins, to the charismatic Napster founder Sean Parker, to Zuckerberg's friend and rival Eduardo Saverin. We don't know everything about these characters, and the script wisely leaves a lot open to our own interpretation. Nothing is black and white - no true heroes or villains. And yet, the characters are so brilliantly drawn so as to invite endless discussion and debate and analysis. Was Zuckerberg really a bad guy? Was Saverin screwed or was there more to his situation than meets the eye? Did the brothers Winklevoss have just cause to take Zuckerberg to court? Given the recent and reality-based nature of the events of the film, it's probably wise to leave these conclusions to the viewer. But it's not just good business - Sorkin's script is so well put together that you can only admire him for not cutting corners, for not hitting us over the head with his own opinions or biases, for creating these fully realized characters that are, like most people, capable of both good and bad. And I also have to take a moment to praise the structure of the script - it is near-perfect. So many movies have a great setup but no payoff. So many films feel rushed or too long or seem to skip over important details. The Social Network is perfectly paced. It starts off with one of the movie's best scenes - a brilliantly-written and acted bit in which we see Zuckerberg at a bar, on a date, with a girl who is quickly losing patience with him and his hyperlogical sparring. The scene will inform and drive the rest of the film, and the way in which it all comes full circle by movie's end is nothing short of genius. It's all the result of what is surely lot of creative license on the part of Sorkin, but it doesn't matter - it makes for an incredible narrative that plays out, with a gut-punch of an ending that is haunting, ironic, and darkly funny. Throughout the film, there are moments that are quietly hilarious, moments that are wrenching, and moments that are exhilerating. All the credit in the world goes to Sorkin for crafting a screenplay that works as well on the micro level (dialogue, character, humor) as it does on the macro level (overarching themes, sense of scale). A year ago the very idea might have sounded laughable, but Sorkin and Fincher have done the seemingly impossible - they've made the story of Facebook - no kidding - into one of the great epic dramas of our time.

Of course, I've also got to talk about the cast. Each and every cast member brings it, delivering the best work of their careers so far. Jesse Eisenberg is ridiculously great as Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg. His speech, his mannerisms - they're at once unique and stylized and yet 100% believable and real. His version of Zuckerberg is eccentric and awkward, sure. But he also feels like someone you might know. He doesn't feel like a cartoon character or a mere impression. He feels like a damn good character brought to life. This is an award-worthy performance from Jesse Eisenberg. And Andrew Garfield is just as good if not even better. His character, Eduardo Saverin, is more emotional than Zuckerberg, and so Garfield gets a lot of the movie's big, dramatic, emotional scenes. And yep, he nails 'em. Garfield again shows that he is one of the best young actors out there. This is also, easily, Justin Timberlake's best movie role ever. Timberlake's Sean Parker is a rockstar of the digital world - a smiling charmer with more than a hint of sinister temptation in his eyes. He brings the star-struck Zuckerberg into his pseudo-glamorous life and leaves an unmistakable stamp on the evolution of Facebook. Armie Hammer is also superb, playing both Winklevoss twins thanks to some impressive and seamless digital f/x. Serving as great foils for Zuckerberg, the Winklevoss brothers help establish the unique world of Harvard and the elitist Ivy League establishment that still dominates the culture of the school. Rooney Mara also has a small but crucial role as Erica Albright - that girl in the first scene who breaks up with Zuckerberg in a Cambridge bar. A made-up character, but an important one, Erica's presence haunts the entirety of the film, and Mara makes her a worthy one-that-got-away - a BU girl (go BU!) who makes for a formidable sparring partner with the sharp-as-a-tack founder of Facebook.

From the opening scene of The Social Network, I knew I was watching something special. The movie grabs you from the get-go and never lets up. By the time the credits began to roll, I was shellshocked. Stunned. The ending was every bit as powerful as the opening, and the story in between was consistently captivating. I saw this movie as part of my birthday celebration, and going in I worried that I might be too distracted by all the party-planning to fully focus in on the film at hand. But that wasn't the case. I was 100% immersed in the film for its duration, and when it was over I eagerly discussed it with my friends, all of us in agreement that we had just seen a landmark movie. This is a fantastic film in and of itself. But when looked at in the context of recent history, in terms of how it sheds light on the world in which we live in today - a place where we're simultaneously connected to everyone and no one - it becomes, I think, a singular achievement. This is a film that lives up to the hype. A film that feels important and yet never fails to entertain. It's David Fincher and Aaron Sorkin and a cast of some of Hollywood's best young actors each bringing their absolute A-games. The Social Network is a must-see, and the first truly great movie of the Fall.

My Grade: A

Let Rocktober Commence: ALICE COOPER and ROB ZOMBIE Bring The Poison and Bring The Pain!

- I can't believe it's already October. Partly, that's because it's been close to if not higher than 100 degrees here in LA for the last week. Partly, it's because it feels like only yesterday that we were poised for the start of Summer. And, maybe, part of it is that I'm trying to come to terms with the fact that this past Tuesday I turned (gasp!) 28 (on Sept. 28th!). And yet, I can't complain - because every year since moving to LA, this has always been right up there as the most fun month of the year. Halloween is huge in Hollywood, and hey, when in Rome ... Now, sure, I've partaken in my fair share of Halloween fun over the last few years, but one thing I always wanted to do ... see ALICE COOPER in concert, the closer in proximity to Halloween, the better. So, when I had the chance to see a double-bill of Alice Cooper and ROB ZOMBIE, live and in person - a super-show dubbed Halloween Hootenanny, featuring "The Gruesome Twosome," well, suffice it to say I was psyched.

I think I've been semi-fascinated with Alice Cooper since I was a kid. And ever since I saw Wayne's World and saw Wayne and Garth partying and rocking out at a kickass-looking Cooper show, I've wanted to see the mad man of rock n' roll live. I remember watching the Behind the Music special on Cooper back in the day and again, just being fascinated at the juxtaposition of this guy who, on one hand, was by all accounts a nice, genuine, humble good samaritan, and on the other was one of rock's great goth icons - a crazyman who seemed to walk on the edge of dark psychosis. But hey, he is a bonafide legend, no doubt about it. He influenced all sorts of artists, has a catalog packed with awesome tunes, and hey, he's about to become a certified (and much-deserved) Rock n' Roll Hall of Famer.

So yeah, seeing Alice Cooper play live, at Universal Studios, on the eve of October 1st, was just something that to me was inherently awesome. And man, the guy can still perform. A master of his craft, Alice Cooper burned through dozens of hit songs, barely pausing to take a breath in between tunes. But Alice doesn't just sing. Every song is a live stage show - darkly funny performance art in which the psychotic Alice Cooper character is killed repeatedly in all manner of amusingly gruesome ways - he's beaheaded by a guillotine, hung by a noose, and injected with a glowing syringe filled with toxic poison. He's tied up in a straightjacket, seduced by a femme fatale, and carried off by demonic monsters and sacrificed to their hellish gods. Sounds grisly, but it's all in good fun. All of Cooper's bits have an over-the-top sense of humor about them. He's a natural performer, too - donning a sparkling tophat and waistcoat for "Elected' and fencing on stage with a rapier during "Billion Dollar Babies."

Cooper blazed through 22 songs, kicking things off with iconic rockers like "School's Out," "No More Mr. Nice Guy," and "I'm Eighteen." I was hoping for a little bit more love for Cooper's more over-the-top 80's and 90's-era songs (I love stuff like Man Behind the Mask and House of Fire), but at least we did eventually get one of my all-time favorites, "Poison," which kicked ass and then some. Other highlights included "Be My Lover," as well as the aforementioned "Billion Dollar Babies" and "Elected."

But yeah, it was sort of surreal and unquestionably awesome to be welcomed into Mr. Alice Cooper's nightmare. To see the icon onstage, the classic black makeup streaks intact, the trademark bullwhip in hand - it was definitely an experience. May he keep on rocking for many years to come.

"Told her that I came

From Detroit City

And I played guitar

In a long-haired rock and roll band ...

She asked me why

The singer's name was Alice

I said listen, baby

You really wouldn't understand!"

Meanwhile, the show was opened by a band called the Murderdolls, a bunch of rockers in Kiss-style facepaint who were probably closer to Rob Zombie in terms of edge and bite. They had a couple of pretty decent tunes that, at the least, got the crowd primed and ready for Cooper and Zombie.

Speaking of the crowd, they were an eclectic bunch to say the least. You had your old-school classic rock dudes who saw Alice Cooper back in '78 and swore he hadn't lost a step. You had your goth kids in white makeup and fishnet arm-stockings. You had families, old guys, young guys, goth girls, rocker girls, and everything in between.

Eventually, after Alice Cooper finished up his set and got a well-deserved ovation, it was time for ROB ZOMBIE. I'm a longtime fan, although definitely only a casual one. I like Zombie's hits, and songs like "Dragula" and "Feel So Numb" are great pump-up songs to blast at full volume on the ride home from work. But I definitely do not consider myself in the cult of Zombie or anything like that. I've never even seen any of the guy's movies - I'm sort of intrigued by them, but I rarely go in for horror movies who's biggest selling point is extreme gore and brutality.

But I'll say this - I came away from Halloween Hootenanny a bigger Zombie fan than before. The guy put on a truly awesome show, and had some of the best sets, props, and theatrics I've seen in a concert. As Zombie blasted through sci-fi inspired songs like "Jesus Frankenstein" and "Mars Need Women," the stage was assaulted by giant monsters, aliens, and robots. There were huge pyrotechnics, clips of old horror and sci-fi movies playing on the big video screen, and crazy lighting and secondary video displays. Plus, a lot of the songs that I may not be playing on repeat in my car nevertheless made for great arena-rockers, with easy-to-chant choruses that had the crowd on their feet, banging their heads, and pumping their fists.

I didn't know a lot of the Zombie songs beforehand, but we got some of the big hits that any rock n' roll fan is familiar with. "More Human Than Human" and "Living Dead Girl" were two of the big crowd-pleasers, and Rob closed out the show with an absolutely thrashing rendition of Dragula that had the fans at Universal going wild. We even got the hilarious "Werewolf Women of the SS" trailer from GRINDHOUSE, followed by the song of the same name. In between songs, Zombie had some pretty amusing banter, waxing philosophical about the appeal of the Jonas Brothers, and giving some huge props to Alice Cooper. Rob and his band even played a quick cover of "School's Out" in tribute to the icon who preceeded them onstage. I was really surprised by how great of a showman Zombie is though - he was dancing and leaping around the stage like a man possessed, and just brought huge overall energy to what was on the whole a crazy show. By the time the epic Dragula concluded, we had all been thoroughly rocked.

Overall, it was a blast to see these two horror-rock icons together and each on top of their game. I can't think of a better way to kick off October.

Epic Owl Adventure - LEGEND OF THE GUARDIANS - Reviewed!

LEGEND OF THE GUARDIANS: THE OWLS OF GA'HOOLE Review:

- Legend of the Guardians is, first and foremost, an amazing movie to look at. Featuring incredibly-rendered animal characters, and directed with stylized flair by Zack Snyder (300, Watchmen), this is easily one of the most visually-captivating movies I've ever seen. But, the film is such a visual showcase that the narrative, while sweeping and epic, sometimes seems to take a backseat. It's Lord of the Rings, Star Wars, and The Chronicles of Narnia mashed together - with owls - and the result is a story that touches a lot of familiar high-fantasy tropes, but also feels a bit rushed and a bit *too* familiar. Still, the sheer visual punch of the film, combined with some genuinely cool character and story beats, are enough to make this one deserving of a hearty recommendation. On the big screen, the movie makes an impact, and is, oftentimes, simply breathtaking to behold.

The story of the movie is complex and busy, but it's also a mashup of a lot of very familiar character archetypes and mythic conventions. Basically, in the movie's mythical, magical world of talking animals, there is an amassing army of an evil owl empire who seem like a cross between the Nazi's, the Empire from Star Wars, and Sauron's forces from LOTR. The army, known as the Pure Ones, are led by a scary warmonger who wears an iron mask to hide his deformed face (like an owl Dr. Doom). Rumors of their rise are spreading throughout the owl kingdom, and the rank-and-file owls have no one to turn to except for old legends about a bunch of really awesome owl heroes known as The Guardians (basically the Owl version of Jedi, except they don't seem to have any particular powers except for being really badass). Our main character, Soren, is kidnapped and taken prisoner by the Pure Ones, along with his hothead brother and younger sister. While his brother is slowly being turned to the dark side by the frosty queen of the Pure Ones (shades of Narnia), Soren escapes and goes on a quest to find the Guardians, so that they can help put a stop to the Pure One's sinister plans to conquer and enslave all of the other owls.Along the way there's goofy sidekicks, the old warrior who has to don his armor for one last battle, and even some owl-on-owl romance. Again, a lot of it is pretty familiar to anyone who's seen Star Wars or LOTR or what have you, but when matched with the incredible visuals, the story is made to feel relatively fresh given how unique the accompanying visual element is. It's the kind of thing where, if you happen to be a ten year old boy with as-of-yet limited exposure to fantasy fiction, you just might walk away from this one thinking you've just seen the greatest movie ever made.

The voice cast is also pretty good, with a couple of key contributions from noted British thespians. Helen Mirren, for one, is great as the Pure One's evil queen Nyra. In a performance that brought to mind that of Tilda Swindon in The Chronicles of Narnia, Mirren makes for a great villain. On the other end of the spectrum, Geoffrey Rush is likely the movie's biggest scene-stealer as a legendary Guardian warrior who mentors Soren and gets to kick some serious ass despite being over the hill. Is the character sort of cliched? Maybe. But hearing Rush bellow his lines with ridiculous amounts of gravitas made for some pretty badass moments of undeniable awesomeness.

One sort-of-frustrating thing about the movie, though? The ultra-detailed CG makes it pretty hard at times to actually distinguish between the characters. The animators clearly put in some key "tells" to better recognize which character is which, but still, it can get a litle confusing.

Speaking of those visuals ... again, they are incredible. The sheer detail in the characters is astonishing, and every feather, every texture, every gesture, is rendered with eye-popping artistry. Some of the backgrounds are similarly amazing. When we travel to some of the animal cities in the movie's world - vast structures filled with grand architecture and teeming with soaring owls and other creatures - well, it's easy to just get lost in this universe. It's one case where IMAX and 3D only help to add to the full-immersion factor.

What takes the visuals to an even higher level is the direction of Snyder. Say what you want about the guy, but he has an eye for creating crazy scenes of sensory overload like few others working today. And man, this may have been marketed as more of a kids' movies, but Snyder loads up Legend of the Guardians with some truly epic and surprisingly brutal action scenes. There are lots of intense scenes of claw and talon-induced violence, and all of the action is choreographed with a true flair for the dramatic. There's a lot of Snyder's trademark stylization (his trademark slow-down / speed-up camera move, for example), and it's interesting to see a director with such a signature visual style bring that same technique to the world of animation. I don't know if I've ever seen an animated film that fits so neatly into the cannon of its director's live-action catalog.

I really did enjoy the film, but despite all of the visual splendor and cool action, the plot was just too messy and rushed for this one to be something truly special as a whole. In some ways, it felt like three movie's worth of plot was crammed into this film's 90 minutes. You never truly feel like you're watching an epic quest unfold, because everything happens so fast, and all of the big story beats come fast and furious with minimal build-up. It really ends up undermining the stakes of the film, making the bad guys seem weak and the Guardians not-so-legendary. You miss out on all the slowly-building gathering-of-the-troops scenes from LOTR, or the long-simmering character arcs of Star Wars. Everything in the movie happens super quick, so you don't get as invested in the characters or the plot as much as you should in a movie like this. Plus, events unfold so rapidly that it creates the feeling that the characters are just sort of moving from Point A to Point B.

I'd definitely recommend checking this one out though, even if only to see a new bar set in CG animation. The story is familiar but fun, and the action is badass. Legend of the Guardians is further confirmation that Zack Snyder is one of the most dynamic directors working today.

My Grade: B+

Catching a CATFISH

CATFISH Review:

- Catfish is an interesting little movie that's benefitted from some very slick marketing and hype. Launched under a shroud of secrecy, Catfish is a documentary in which, supposedly, the less you know going in, the better. And I'll admit, not knowing much about the film made the beginning and middle sections that much more intriguing and tense. The mystery surrounding the film's much-rumored "twist' caused my imagination to run wild, and I came up with all sorts of far-flung scenarios of what the movie might ultimately be "about." Without spoiling anything, I think that Catfish, in the end, proves a little underwhelming because the story that unfolds, while interesting and disturbing, is nothing so over-the-top as to be truly shocking. And, at some point, the reality of what we're seeing documented stops being a great story and becomes somewhat hard to watch - more sad than gripping, more exploitative than narratively compelling.

So, what is Catfish? Well, I know that the movie is supposed to be a total secret, but I don't think it's spoiling much to give some of the basic setup of the plot ... (skip if you wish).

Catfish is a documentary about a young guy named Nev Schulman, a freelance photographer and artist who lives in New York. Nev's brother Ariel, a filmmaker, decides to make a short documentary about online romance, using his brother as a subject. As it turns out, Nev has struck up a relationship, via Facebook, with a girl named Megan from Michigan. The story of how Nev and Megan met is somewhat convoluted. Nev had some photos published in a magazine, and ended up getting some pretty crazy fan mail from a young admirer named Abby. Abby, only 8 years old, was a child-prodigy artist, who was inspired by Nev's photos and used them as the basis for her paintings. Abby sent Nev prints of her paintings, and Nev, impressed, and flattered, wrote back to her, expressing admiration of her work. Abby kept sending Nev more and more of her paintings, and Nev kept encouraging her to do more. Eventually, Abby's mother calls Nev and thanks him for supporting her daughter. Soon enough, Nev is Facebook friends with Abby's mother, Abby's brother, and her older sister - Megan. Megan is also, apparently, an artist - a musician - and she begins sending Nev some of her songs to listen to. She and Nev begin exchanging emails, texts, and phone calls, and eventually, Nev is truly smitten with her, to the point where he is motivated to go to Michigan to meet Megan in person.

For the first third of the film, Catfish is an interesting slice-of-life style documentary about a developing online romance. There's a lot of humor as Nev is semi-reluctantly filmed by his brother and co-director / friend Henry Joost. We sense that something is a bit off about Nev's overeager relationship with Megan and her family though, so there's a slight sense of tension in the air as we wait for the other shoe to drop.

The second act of the film is where Catfish really comes alive. Once we know that something doesn't add up about Megan, even as Nev and his friends begin to proactively investigate her ... that's when the movie really takes on the trappings of a classic thriller. The movie gains a really spooky, ominous vibe, and it really does begin to feel like a classic Hitchcock-style thriller, as advertised. It's a lot of fun to speculate on all of the far-out what-if's that come to mind as Nev makes his way towards Michigan.

Finally, the third act of the film is something of a letdown. Again, don't want to give anything away, but I think there's an invitable feeling of being letdown by how things wrap up. The second half of the movie is constructed and edited in a manner to evoke a classical thriller, but all of that build-up seems wasted once we realize that the truth behind Megan is not so much shocking or thrilling as it is slightly creepy, very sad, and just plain pathetic. And it's also at this point in the film that Nev and co's actions and reactions seem less based in reality and more driven by the fact that they're all collectively trying to get a lot of footage for their film. By the film's end, Nev seems more self-satisfied that he got an interesting subject for the film than he is shocked or scared or creeped out or repulsed (ie what any regular person would feel) after discovering the true nature of "Megan." I just think that over the course of the movie, Catfish loses a lot of its original sense of legitimacy and spontaneity. Worse, the filmmakers sacrifice all that for a story that's ultimately, well, just not that great of a story.

Still, Catfish is interesting simply as a reminder of how crazy the online world can be. It's a movie that is sure to provoke a lot of discussions about Facebook and other social networking avenues, and their ability to function as a means of creating a new persona or personas, to mess with ideas of identity, to manipulate the truth and others' perception of the truth. Catfish is also a movie that's about half of a damn good reality-based thriller. When it's in that tension-filled, creepy storytelling mode, it's a really effective movie that you can't take your eyes off of. Later, it just gets weird, but no so weird as to be more than your typical Dateline fodder. To that end, there's ultimately something sort of off-putting about the whole thing - as in, what was the point of the film - what story is it telling and to what end? It's an intriguing film, one you'll want to talk about and debate. But to me, it is less than satisfying as a narrative. Tellingly, it's much more effective as a film when you have no idea what's actually going on.

My Grade: B-

Danny's SUPER-sized Fall TV Premiere Week Round-Up: Fringe, Smallville, Glee, Wilde, Hope, Lone Star, The Simpsons, and MORE!

Well, it's been quite a week. Of course, right as I am basically overflowing with pop-culture stuff to blog about, I get stuck on jury duty. As of Friday though, the trial concluded and therefore ... I'm back, baby. I will say this though: jury duty had its not-so-fun moments (mostly the insane morning commute between Burbank and downtown LA, which is basically stop-and-go traffic on the 101 for an hour), but, overall, it was a pretty fascinating and even entertaining experience. Being here in LA, you can rest assured that there are going to be some pretty colorful characters in the jury box, and some pretty colorful lawyers to boot. We definitely had that in spades on this case, and it made for some entertaining and memorable moments. So, civic duty is done.

Other than that, I had a fun weekend. On Friday, I kicked off Halloween early with a trip to Halloween Horror Nights at Universal Studios Hollywood. Despite living minutes from Universal and being an NBC UNI employee for five years now, I've never actually been to the parks' annual Halloween horrorfest before. So, I figured it was about time to check it out, and so I went with some friends on opening night to take in the scene. It was a lot of fun, even if i was dead (bwahaha!) tired from my week at jury duty. Still, I did my best to get a second wind and enjoy attractions like the haunted tram tour, the Saw maze, the House of 1000 Corpses maze, and Bill & Ted's Halloween Adventure show. Interestingly, the Kardashian clan was at the park, taping an episode of their reality show, and their presence often meant that the crowds of people in line had to wait for Kim and Khloe to pass through a maze before they could enter. Only in LA, people. Speaking of which ...

... on to TV.

I'm late in reviewing stuff, so I'm going to run through a number of shows fairly quickly. The fact is, this has been an INSANE week for TV fans. More so than usual, everything premiered during the same weeklong period, and there were a TON of new shows to boot. I usually like to check out several of the new pilots that most interest me, even if I'm ultimately planning to drop at least a couple of them. That means that my DVR was filled to the breaking point this week, and there's a still a lot I need to catch up on as well. So let's get to it, I've got a lot to talk about ...

CHUCK:

- I'll be honest - there was a point where I was DVR'ing Chuck and watching Gossip Girl on Mondays. Chuck was okay, but it just had trouble climbing that final rung, going from good and fun and likable to *great*. But last year, Chuck went from being a pretty good show with the occasional great episode to a show that week in and week out was bringing the goods. Chuck became true must-see TV, and last year, I think, really began to hit its stride. But, even when Chuck isn't 100% clicking for me, I still love so much about the show. I love the characters, the humor, the geekiness, the cast. Chuck is a unique thing on television. Not a remake, not a ripoff. It's cool. It's funny. It pays homage to things like Y: The Last Man, Tron, Rocky, and the music of Rush. Do you get what I'm saying here? Even when Chuck isn't great, it's still pretty damn awesome. And that's how I felt about the premiere of Season 4. Not the best episode in the show's history, but, man was it great to see Chuck back, in September, on the air. The episode had all sorts of cool moments, guest stars, etc. Harry Dean Stanton as a repo-man. Olivia Munn as a too-cool-for-school Buy More manager-slash-CIA spook. Dolph freaking Lungdren as a Russian badguy. And Linda "Sarah Connor" Hamilton kicking ass and taking names as Chuck's long-lost mom. That alone is enough to make any Chuck fan smile and cheer. That said, I did think the show moved a little quickly to re-establish the old status quo (what happened to Chuck and Morgan on their own, away from the CIA?). I also thought that some of the humor was a tad overcooked (Morgan's insistence on sexting with Sarah on behalf of Chuck was at times more creepy than funny). And, I missed the Buy More crew of Jeff, Lester, and Big Mike, who have become an integral part of the show and a chief source of comic relief. But hey, this was a very solid ep, and I hope that it's just the build-up to a great season. Watch CHUCK. Seriously.

My Grade: B+

THE EVENT:

- Look, the fact is, there's a lot that remains to be seen about The Event. We've all heard the cautious warnings comparing the show to the likes of Flashforward, and we've all wondered whether the show has a real narrative plan and vision behind it. I don't know, at least not yet. But, I do think the show had a damn good pilot. It was exciting, riveting, and left me eager to find out more. It was an effective Chapter 1. Very, very curious to see Chapter 2. In the meantime, I would like to see a couple of characters a little better fleshed-out. Lost worked so well out of the gate because, if nothing else, we had the likes of Locke, Sawyer, Jack, Kate, etc. If The Event can give us at least a couple of characters to really get behind, it may just live up to the hype.

My Grade: B+

LONE STAR:

Man, it's disappointing to me, just as a fan, that this show scored such a low rating after its Monday night debut. To me, Lone Star had an amazing pilot episode. It set up some really compelling storylines, and featured a charismatic cast. The acting was stellar all around. And the premise is something unique for network television - a con man leading two lives, playing each one against the other, working the long con yet wanting to get out of the game altogether. I found the whole thing pretty fascinating, and I was really appreciative of the fact that the main character isn't forced to have a certain set of moral standards. He's unapologetic about some of the more controversial aspects of his lifestyle, and that's refreshing. I hope this show survives. It's got a ton of potential, and it's already operating on a higher level of quality than most shows on television. It's a character-driven drama, something rare on TV, especially nowadays. It's got Jon Voight as a badass oil czar. I think FOX really blew the marketing on this one. Especially given the history of FOX Monday nights - with gritty action dramas like 24 and Prison Break, they really should have pushed Lone Star as a cool, gritty, morally-grey drama with some badass actors in it. But I don't think people were aware of the show, and clearly not many tuned it. Nonetheless, I give this one a big recommendation.

My Grade: A-

RAISING HOPE:

- Was not a fan of this one. I liked My Name Is Earl, for a while, but I think a lot of that had to do with great actors like Jason Lee and Ethan Suplee elevating the material. Raising Hope has the same sort of style as Earl - just barely trying to be quirky and wryly humorous in the style of Wes Anderson or the Coen Bros, but never taking it too far in that direction, instead settling for easy jokes and base humor. Worse, the mostly bland cast couldn't bring life to the characters like Lee did for Earl. This one was, to be honest, hard to get through.

My Grade: D+

RUNNING WILDE:

- Okay, you've got Mitchell Hurvitz, creator of Arrested Development. Will Arnett. David Cross. How could this go wrong? The bad news is that this was an unspectacular pilot, especially given the talent involved and the expecations that go with that. The good news is that there were some rays of hope. A couple of jokes felt spot-on, the basic premise is sound, and there were, overall, enough moments of entertaining comedy that, hey, this might just get better and get good. Still, a number of the supporting characters fell flat, and I wasn't yet sold on Kerri Russell as a legit comedic lead. I also worry that Arnett's character is just a more cartoonish version of Gob. We shall see.

My Grade: B-

GLEE:

- I really enjoyed the Glee S2 premiere, for the most part. The show seemed to pick up right where it left off at the end of S1, and included some great bits of humor. There was some very funny self-referential stuff, as well as the usual hilarity from the great Jane Lynch as Sue Sylvester. I always find the music on Glee to be hit or miss, so it's hard for me to really judge the musical numbers in a given episode. That said, the final song just felt very long, boring, and not particularly relevant to the plot. It was just a shame to end the episode with such a thud, after it had been mostly excellent to that point. I really loved everything with the new female football coach though, and her interactions with Will and Sue were really the highlight of the ep.

My Grade: A-

MODERN FAMILY:

- As usual, Modern Family is pure comfort food. I have to admit, the show's pilot last year made me think that MF might turn into the next Malcolm in the Middle - a sublimely ridiculous comedy of the absurd that still somehow hits on essential truth. But the show eventually became something else - a show that mixed the documentary style of The Office with the homespun sentimentality of an old TGIF comedy. And that's cool - I still get a kick out of it and watch eagerly each week. It's a show that anyone can laugh with an enjoy. I just now know to expect a big aww-shucks group-hug moment at the end of each episode, the kind of thing that would make Danny Tanner proud. But, what I still love about MF is that it's consistently funny, and that the characters are awesome. Those two factors alone were enough to keep me tuned into the show, and also helped make the Season 2 premiere a light but enjoyable slice of TV apple pie. Mitchell and Cameron build a castle for Lilly. Phil is reluctant to get rid of his old beat up station wagon. Manny has a new ladyfriend who makes smothering mom Gloria jealous. All pretty standard stuff, but again, the characters and the phenomenal cast who portray them make it all work.

My Grade: B+

TERRIERS:

- We're now up to Episode 3 of Terriers, and the show is quickly becoming one of my favorites. In Ep #3, the intensity was really ratcheted up, and some of the overarching character stuff really began to come to a head. I'm really digging this show - and definitely getting that Veronica Mars-like vibe from its mix of weekly mysteries paired with ongoing subplots that slowly peel back the corruption and criminal activities at the heart of a small beach town. Good stuff, highly recommended.

My Grade: A-

MY GENERATION:

- This show has an intriguing premise, and it seems aimed squarely at someone like me. Like the characters in the show, I graduated high school in 2000, and it's interesting to think about what's changed in the ten years since. I was really hoping that this could be a show that accurately captured the Gen Y zeitgeist and that really resonated with people my age. But, instead of feeling real and relatable, My Generation instead came off as cheap and cliched. The characters just felt like broadly-drawn stereotypes straight out of a John Hughes movie, only, you know, without Hughes' wit, humor, or ability to deconstruct those established archetypes and make them into something more. There was a show I really liked a few years back on FOX called Reunion, and that show had a sort of self-aware campiness to it as it flashed through time to different years in the lives of its principle characters. For that show, the device really worked, and the cheesiness of flashing to a given year in the 90's only to hear some Third Eye Blind song playing was part of the fun. But My Generation seems to be just going through the motions, making it feel like an eye-rolling chore each time we flashback to 2000 and hear songs like The Real Slim Shady and The Thong Song, for no good reason except that they were popular in that year. And the moment in the flashbacks in which a character (in high school) talks about mP3's, and the documentarian says "what are those?" and he smiles and says "you'll see" ...? Ugh. Just ugh. Also, the show just felt lazy in how within one episode it already made its universe so insular. These characters have been mostly apart for ten years, but within an hour it felt like they lived in a world with no one else but each other. There was just a lot of clunkiness to this show that made it hard to get through. I wanted to like this one. I like the concept, and I like the idea of a show that is specifically about people my age and the issues we deal with that are unique to our generation. But the show didn't seem to really cover that. It was just a laundry list of cliched characters and news events that most of us are already sick of hearing about in this age of 24 hour news cycles. It's funny, I think that CHUCK, even with all its self-aware humor humor and goofiness, is a better and more definitive show about "my generation," in its own way, than My Generation. As it stands,

My Grade: C-

COMMUNITY:

- Awesome premiere, and Community is really firing on all cylinders right now. If the show keeps this up, I don't think I'd hesitate to call it the best sitcom on TV. The ensemble cast kicks ass, and all of the little in jokes and references to past episodes, near-fourth-wall-breaks, and random pop culture references give this show a depth and texture that can only be compared to something like The Simpsons at the height of its powers. Community is absolutely must-watch TV comedy right now.

My Grade: A-

30 ROCK:

- I know there's been a lot of debate about the relative quality of 30 Rock over the last year or two. There's a whole camp who thinks the show took a considerable dip in its last few seasons, and others who think the show's as sharp and funny as ever. Personally, I do feel like 30 Rock hasn't been quite as amazing and superlative as it was at its height in, say, Season 2. I feel the show got a little too soap-opera-ish and, instead of playing up the fast-paced randomness that made it so great, it started becoming a little less wacky and a little more standard sitcom. But, praised be Liz Lemon, the Season 5 premiere was hilarious, and one of the best episodes of the show in quite a while. Even the relationshippy stuff - between Tina Fey and guest star Matt Damon - was really funny and had some of the episode's best dialogue. And, just about everything Alec Baldwin said, as he faced off with Avery in a Machiavellian battle of wits - was comedic gold. Plus: Kenneth in a CBC Page uniform! So wrong and yet so right. Great start for 30 Rock.

My Grade: A-

THE OFFICE:

- On the other hand, I thought The Office's return was alright, but a little blah considering that this was a much-hyped season premiere. The episode was a pretty inconsequential standalone about Michaels' incompetent nephew getting an assistant gig at Dunder-Mifflin. There was some amusing comedy derived from the premise (I loved the nephew's line about being a film buff - his favorite movies are "Citizen Kane and The Boondock Saints"), but overall this felt like a pretty standard-issue episode that could have aired at any point during the show's run. And, it seemed to give the short shrift to standout supporting cast members like Andy, Erin, and Daryl. Extra points though for the infectiously fun cold open dance number, which was pretty sublimely entertaining. Despite the only-okay premiere, I'm still very much looking forward to seeing where things go from here.

My Grade: B

FRINGE:

- Fringe was quite possibly the best TV show on the air last season. By the end of Season 2, FRINGE was kicking ass and taking names, delivering episode after episode that brought the straight-up ownage. John Noble was doing the best acting on TV. The mythology was expanding and becoming increasingly epic, intense, and mind-blowing. The cast, overall, was really beginning to gel - with Anna Torv and Joshua Jackson stepping up and improving leaps and bounds since Season 1. Fringe was THE must-see serialized drama on TV, eclipsing the likes of Lost and 24 as a true TV event. And now, with those shows off the air, and no new heir apparent to take the torch, as of yet, all hail Fringe - the current king of sci-fi television. Now, Fringe is going for something really ambitious in Season 3 - alternating episodes between its two parallel universes. The S3 premiere was almost entirely set in Earth 2, where our Olivia is trapped and trying to find a way home, all the while encountering alt versions of her friends, family, and colleagues.

I really liked the slow build here. Whereas the season finale felt like a blockbuster movie, this opener methodically took its time to establish the stakes of this new season, all the while keeping some key mysteries hidden, at least for now. But this was great stuff, with Anna Torv really carrying the episode and doing a nice job of it, as TV's premiere kick-butt leading lady. The episode played out like an extended chase scene, so there was a lot of action and tension. But, there was also a lot of character and mystery. Most intriguing is what, exactly, was Walternate's intention in implanting the memories of Earth 2 Olivia into the Earth 1 version? And how does he plan to use her dimension-hopping abilities to his advantage in the impending war between worlds? God, John Noble is so freaking badass. His take on the Earth 2 Walter Bishop is brilliant - similar yet highly different from the crazy, shaky Earth 1 version. Walternate is stone-cold, calculating, and rimming with ridiculous amounts of gravitas. Just awesome. And so far, we've only gotten a very brief tease of how things are going over on Earth 1, where "Faux-livia" is currently posing as the real deal, unbeknownst to Walter and Peter. Next week we're back on Earth 1, and it's going to be fascinating to see that new dynamic play out.

Fringe is really swinging for the fences right now, and it's great to see. The S3 premiere didn't have the kind of jaw-dropping moments we got in the S2 finale, but man, it was an ultra-compelling first chapter of this new volume. And you can feel the groundwork being laid for something big and epic, which is what makes this all so absorbing. Unlike certain other shows of this type, you feel with this season of Fringe that there is a plan, an endgame around the bend. So of course, I'm in for the long haul, and psyched to see where this all goes.

My Grade: A-

SMALLVILLE:

- Unbelievably, here we are at Season 10 (!) of Smallville. Pretty incredible. I still remember watching the early seasons with my friends in college, wondering when Clark and Lana would finally hook up, or when Lex would finally fully given in to his dark side. For it's first three seasons, Smallville was really a great show - a fresh new take on the Superman mythos that delivered a great mix of adventure, intrigue, and romance. From that point on, things have been up and down, to say the least. There's been a lot of crap in the last several years of Smallville, but there's also been enough good stuff to keep me coming back. I love the legend of Superman, and Smallville always has just enough of those iconic "super" moments to prevent me from pulling the plug on the show, which I've been tempted to do several times. In fact, Smallville has so much potential, so many great stories to draw on, that when the right writer comes along with the right vision, you can easily make something great out of the show's fundamental building blocks. Witness last season's "Absolute Justice" - written by comics scribe Geoff Johns, the extra-length episode was a classic comic book story come to life, and a flat-out great episode of television. It's moments and episodes like that that have ensured that I'm sticking with Smallville to the end.

Now, there was a lot last season that I wasn't enamored with. The overarching Zod storyline was way too dragged out and overcomplicated to have any real dramatic impact. Worse, the show kept bringing Clark to the brink of flull-fledged superherodom, only to keep him in this frustrating purgatory between being an anonymous do-gooder and coming out to the world as Superman. Nobody wants to see Clark Kent as proto-Superman mystery man "The Blur." After ten years, it was time for Clark to stop brooding and start kicking ass in red, blue, and yellow. So here we are, the final season, Season 10, and it's time for Smallville to go all-out and be super. Did it?

Overall, I liked the premiere. There were a number of intriguing plot points - from evil clones of Lex Luthor running around, to the Suicide Squad's interrogation of Oliver Queen, to the many ominious warnings that a "greater evil" (revealed, as has been speculated, as uber-villain Darkseid) was on the way - there was a lot of big, crazy stuff happening here. Perhaps best of all, we got the return of Jon Shneider as Jonathan Kent. Losing Schneider has always been a huge loss for Smallville. Along with the great Jonathan Glover, Shneider helped to class up the show, and was always great as Clark's strong-willed adoptive father. Seeing him appear again - even if it was in the context of a semi-random vision from beyond the grave - was really cool, and he and Tom Welling shared a great scene of father-son bonding. Meanwhile, there were strong hints that Erica Durance's Lois Lane is finally wise to the fact that Clark and The Blur are one and the same. Even if this is veering pretty far from the established Superman continuity, I support Lois finding out everything, because really, how far can you drag out a secret like that on a show like this? Do we really need yet another season of Lois stressing over whether Clark is keeping secrets from her?

And then there are the two big fanboy-friendly moments in this ep ... the first being the reveal of the Superman suit from Superman Returns. I don't love that particular version of the suit (the S-shield is too small and the rubbery texture looks weird), but still, it's the iconic outfit, and I hope that we see Tom Welling in it sooner rather than later (if it's dragged out for the whole season, then seriously, kill me now). But, after all the early talk on this show of how Smallville would have "no tights, no flights" it's nice to see the producers realize that, hey, after ten years, it's time to rethink that. Secondly, we had the reveal of Darkseid as the season's big bad. Now, I am a total geek for the character and for all of Jack Kirby's Fourth World creations, and if Darkseid is NOT the villain in the next Superman movie, it will be a huge shame. Because Darkseid is to me the ultimate Superman villain other than Lex, and certainly the one who makes for the most epic storylines - a near-invincible intergalactic warlord who rules the planet Apokolips with an iron fist, and who seeks to eliminate free will via the mysterious Anti-Life Equation. Hell yeah. If Smallville can pull it off, more power to them. Will they? Can they? In the glimpse of Darkseid we got in the premiere, he at least looked like the comic version as created by the legendary Kirby. But, he also looked very CGI-ish, which was a bit worrisome. Hopefully there will eventually be a happy medium between having Darkseid be a badass alien stone-monster and yet still looking like a guy who could have one hell of a smackdown with Clark.

Now, although there were indeed a lot of intriguing developments in this episode, there was still a lot of stuff that was a little underwhelming. I was turned off, for example, by the fact that so much of the episode was AGAIN about Clark doubting himself and worrying that he could be a danger to humanity. Like I said, enough brooding already. I'm also sort of sick of Tess Mercer. Her character makes no sense at this point, and the most intriguing revelation about her - that she was secretly a spy working for Checkmate - now seems to be all but ignored.

But, we'll see. It's kind of exciting knowing that this is the final season, and, at least in theory, all bets are off. I'm intrigued to see Deadshot pop up next week, and can't wait for the Blue & Gold episode that Geoff Johns is writing for later this season. And hey, there seems to be some big, epic stuff on the horizon. Will Smallville deliver? I hope so.

My Grade: B

THE SIMPSONS:

- Speaking of long-running series, how about Season 22 of The Simpsons? You know, when people ask me why I'm still watching the show, long after its glory years have faded, I usually say that it's because a.) out of habit / loyalty, and b.) because every so often, the show surprises me and airs a genuinely funny, well-done episode that's close in quality to the old days. The S22 premiere was genuinely very funny and clever, and had a surprising number of laugh out loud moments. It also had one of the more memorable guest appearances in a while, as Brett and Jermaine of Flight of the Conchords showed up as two bohemian artists who show Lisa the good and bad sides of being a penniless musician just trying to express yourself. I enjoyed the fusion of Simpsons-style humor with the Conchord's unique sensibilities. And, honestly, it was just great to see those guys again (even if in animated form) after the end of their awesome HBO series last year. Some Glee cast members also made an appearance, but it was just for a quick musical number, whereas Brett and Jermaine really stole the show. There was also a pretty funny subplot in which Bart and Homer try to prove Krusty's merit in from of the World Court. Honestly, it's hard to remember the last time The Simpsons had such a solid B-plot matched with a funny A-plot. So, I know some people are inclined to just dismiss the show at this point - but I say be open-minded. If you missed last night's premiere, then you missed a pretty darn good episode of The Simpsons.

My Grade: A-

Okay, deep breath! And ... I'm done (for now). So, what'd you think of premiere week? Any hits or misses that I left out? Thoughts on Fringe, Smallville, The Event, etc? I think I am going to have to ease up on writing about a lot of these shows, but I'll definitely check in to cover some of my favorites in the weeks ahead. I've also got some movie reviews coming up, so stay tuned. Until then, happy TV watching.

NEVER LET ME GO - aka: Bleakest. Movie. Ever.

NEVER LET ME GO Review:

Never Let Me Go is a hard film to assess. It features a fascinating premise and fantastic, memorable performances from its three lead actors. It combines the pacing and attention to character of a classic British coming-of-age drama with the unsettling, ominous feel and grand themes of the great works of dystopian sci-fi. It has the feel of a unique, underdog sort of film that deserves support and praise. And yet, if I'm being honest, the fact is that Never Let Me Go is so unrelentingly bleak and depressing that at times it's just plain hard to watch. I don't have a problem with movies being dark or even bleak, but I do ask that such movies have an ultimate message or purpose to them - something to take away from the story that puts it all in perspective. Walking out of the Arclight theater in Hollywood, I wasn't sure what to make of the film. There were moments of greatness, award-worthy performances ... but what did it all mean? It sounds like a lame question in some ways, but it can be a real problem for certain films (I had a similar complaint recently with The American - what, exactly, was the point?). Especially after the rollercoaster ride that this movie takes us on, I needed some sort of resolution to the movie's depressing plot - some bigger-picture context, some lesson learned. But I left the theater feeling mostly empty.

I know that the film has been marketed under a veil of secrecy, but the structure of the movie (based on the book by acclaimed author Kazuo Ishiguro) doesn't do much to conceal any big twists or mysteries. In fact, the opening text crawl quickly establishes some basics about the world of the film: in the 1950's, scientists found a way to clone humans in order to harvest their organs to eradicate sickness and disease. Cancer, diabetes - all gone, with the price being that there is now a sub-population of clones who will be turned into spare parts by the time they're 30. Never Let Me Go opens in one of the isolated British boarding schools in which the clone children are raised - mostly oblivious as to their true nature and the grisly fate that awaits them. The movie focuses in on a trio of kids who are going through all of the usual pre-adolescent struggles and crushes and uncertainties - Kathy, Ruth, and Tommy. Kathy is the shy, reserved girl who harbors a crush on Tommy - the awkward but endearing outcast. Ruth is Kathy's catty friend, who pursues Tommy more as a means of one-upping Kathy than anything else. The movie is divided neatly into three acts - the first follows the trio as boarding school students in the 70's. We then pick up several years later, when the kids, now in their late teens, are shipped off to a camp that gives them, for the first time, limited access to the outside world. Finally, we skip ahead another ten years, and rejoin the characters as they prepare for their seemingly inevitable fates.

To attack the movie from a different perspective, I'll say this: Never Let Me Go is a hard movie to watch for anyone with even a little bit of sci-fi nerd in them. The reason is that us geeks love to know everything. When we are taken to a new version of reality, we want to know all the rules, all the ins and outs, all the ways in which this place is both like and unlike the world that we know. In Never Let Me Go, we're teased with very, very scant bits of information about this alternate version of reality. And I get the reason for it - the movie is trying to place us in the shoes of the main characters, who similarly know very little about the nature of their own existence. But the movie rarely, if ever, shows us the characters actively questioning things. It makes you wonder what, exactly, these kids were taught in their schools. How much did they know about the world around them, and how much did the world know about them? I think some level of ambiguity is good, and adds to the atmosphere of uncertainty, but I also think the movie "cheats" by never concerning itself very much with the how's and why's of the somewhat far-fetched scenario it presents. Not only that, but as it becomes increasingly apparent that the characters are in a very perilous situation, one in which they are in imminent mortal danger, it becomes increasingly frustrating that they don't at least *ponder* options for escape. Everyone in the film seems resigned to accept their bleak fates with barely a rebellious moment between them. And so it makes you wonder - what is the story here? Why tell us about these characters if they are wholly unexceptional within the world that they live? It makes you think - is a story worth telling if it's only real arc is "characters accept their bleak fate and sadness ensues?" Maybe some people can accept that, but for me, it's a frustrating story to see unfold. There has to be some spark of hope, something. Look at a movie like THE ROAD - to me, that was a great example of a dark, bleak film that nonetheless worked because all the darkness led up to something poignant and meaningful. That was a story of survival and perseverance. Never Let Me Go is a story of resignation and inaction.

As mentioned, we're only given the briefest hints as to the larger context that this story takes place in. But again, the lack of curiosity that the main characters have about their own situation is more frustrating than tantalizing. I mean, I love stories where characters find out that everything they thought they knew was a lie. It's why I was so intrigued by this film once I heard sippets about its plot. But Never Let Me Go never has that big Truman Show-style moment of realization and epiphany. It just marches a slow death-march towards oblivion.

Still, there are moments of real power in the movie. I don't want to gloss over the fact that there are some hugely emotional, memorable scenes in the film. And when the movie starts to ramp up the stakes, when it gives its characters a purpose - that's when it really becomes absorbing. In fact, there's a great scene towards the end of the film that's a real eye-opener for the characters, and it's really well done and well-acted and effective. But it felt like a scene that should have happened earlier. It felt like, finally, the characters had some motivation, some hope - but when even that ray of hope is shot down, it's back to the extreme melancholy that colors the rest of the story.

The whole of the movie though is really brought to life by the cast. First of all, the child actors from the movie's first act are all really, really good. Izzy Meikle-Small who plays young Kathy is particularly exceptional. Those young actors really help add to the movie's air of mystery, and make the first act, surprisingly, perhaps the movie's strongest and most satisfying.

Later on, the main trio is portrayed by Carrie Mulligan as Kathy, Kiera Knightly as Ruth, and Andrew Garfield as Tommy. All three do some amazing work. Mulligan is so poised, so steady as Kathy - and yet there's that undercurrent of sadness and longing. Knightly is wild and bitchy as Ruth, and that makes her eventual fate all the more disturbing. Meanwhile, Andrew Garfield is the real deal. He's fantastic in this film (and fanboys can rest assured he'll do well as Spiderman - it should be no problem for him to do justice in that role). Garfield has some of the movie's most heart-wrenching moments of raw emotion, and man, he kills it. All three actors are great, and they give the movie that feeling of award-worthy prestige that makes it stand out and feel like something special. And even as the movie becomes almost unbearably wrenching, it's hard to avert your eyes thanks to the top-notch quality of the performances.

Maybe the unrelenting bleakness of Never Let Me Go will work for some. There's enough to like about the film that I'm sure there are those who will love this one without reservation. But to me, the type of story being told here doesn't mesh with what actually happens. We're shown this disturbing, dystopian society, and introduced to these interesting characters who want, on some level, to escape their grim fates. And then ... nothing. I'm not saying I want the movie to be like every other movie of this type. I don't want paint-by-numbers. I don't want it to be The Island. I like and appreciate that Never Let Me Go is something genuinely different in terms of theme and storytelling style. At the same time, I am a fan of great stories, and this movie only feels like half of one. It's a lot to endure without a lot of payoff.

My Grade: B