Franchises; Ghostbusters

There are two film franchises that mean the world to me: Star Wars and Ghostbusters. After the harsh and unfair treatment of Ghostbusters 2, the third installment has been in limbo since the early nineties. First off I would like to say that Ghostbusters was an incredible achievement and the second was even better. It was darker, bigger, and packed with more ghosts. It was a riveting story that almost seemed like a straight forward horror film rather than a comedy. In my opinion, the critical response was totally unfair as the majority of its audience completely missed the point. It was a sign that the film had matured and was ready to start expanding into other, more interesting areas of supernatural mythology. But critics claimed to know what was going on with the film and spit out pointless reviews, comparing it to other paranormal films. Not to mention that fact that they crucified the brilliant performances of the people who were committed enough to return to the franchise and deliver a near perfect sequel. Ghostbusters is in a league all its own, like Star Wars or The Thing. Dan Aykroyd and Harold Ramis obviously weren't phased at all as they immediately went to work on a third film. The plot revolved around an alternate world known as ManHellton where the Ghostbusters find themselves battling evil versions of themselves. It was also the plot of an episode of the animated series. Only in that episode, the uniforms worn by the team during their battle with Gozer were contaminated with ectoplasmic residue which manifests as evil versions of the team. This seems like a dream come true for a diehard fan of the franchise. But budget problems and mixed reactions from the studio has plagued the production and has continuously halted it from filming. Now we are closer than ever to actually seeing the new installment twenty three years later and I couldn't be more excited. One thing in particular that bothers me is Bill Murray's stubborn will to not be involved. And his reason? "I don't do sequels." Okay you know what, stop punishing the world because you did two Garfield movies. I love Murray to death. Always have. But to be honest, if fans had a choice between soiling his career with two awful CGI cat movies or one more Ghostbusters film, it'd be the quickest fuckin' decision since the vote to end prohibition. (I know I shouldn't curse in a blog because it makes me sound like an idiot, but I am and this subject pisses me off as I'm sure it does other fans too) He needs to buck up and end his involvement with the franchise on a high note. Weaver, Aykroyd, Hudson, Ramis and Potts are all willing to do so, what makes him so special? It's not like he'd be doing anyone a favor. Venkman had the best lines. It's cool that he 's killin' it in the film industry. I love his collaborations with Wes Anderson. But he has a commitment. Not just to one of the greatest franchises of all time, but to the fans who have supported and praised him for years. Aykroyd and Ramis have said that the Venkman character might be killed of due to Murray's absence. Which I guess would be fine as long as we get a new film. I'm confidant Reitman and the rest of the crew will deliver a fantastic third adventure, but the joy will be short lived if morons who have no dedication in the franchise decide to pan it and criticize the team for either being old or creating a dull film. What was wrong with the second film? What did Siskel and Ebert imagine would be a better film? I made the same argument with the Star Wars prequels. They were made for the faithful fans, not biased moviegoers filled with negativity. Dan Aykroyd has said he hopes to continue the franchise with an all new team of younger Ghostbusters, which sounds awesome. But these films with never be made if people who have no business judging them continuously pan the filmmaker's gifts to their fans. I hope someone involved in the production of GB 3 reads this because as someone who is completely dedicated to the franchise, I have created a new team that I think will be the perfect continuation of the ghost fighting firm:
Pat Healy
Michael Eklund
Chris Messina
Anthony Mackie
also
Freddy Rodriguez
This might be my most scattered thought blog ever, but I'm a passionate fan who wants a great story to survive. If you have personal interest in this franchise, please join me and help it blossom for a new generation. (And you know I'm serious because I used the word "blossom") Lets go back to the right formula and away from this bullshit Paranormal Activity crap that is always shoved in our faces. No, I actually don't care about cheap gimmicks and retarded characters that don't even seem scared in the first place. Or interesting for that matter.

Evil Dead Reborn

Now that I have given the world ample time to see it, I would like to discuss the quality of the new Evil Dead. Unlike most of the horror audience, I was not anticipating the remake of Evil Dead. I grew up watching the Evil Dead Trilogy and loved the franchise dearly. But on its opening weekend, I paid to see the Raimi/Campbell produced, Alvarez directed update of The Evil Dead. After a pretty strong opening, I will say, the direction was impressive. But not the new twist. The beginning seemed to be just your average glee-generation horror movie opening scene. Quiet reveals, foreshadowing some awful event about to take place, sudden foul language  and so on. Before I go on, I will say this flat out, the characters in Alvarez's Evil Dead are really boring and stupid. After twenty minutes, I leaned over and said to my girlfriend "This is fucking stupid, if it doesn't pick up soon, we're going to see G.I. Joe 2." In my defense, after the new Total Recall, I'll walk out of a movie if it gives me thirty minutes of shit. But I stayed. To be honest, the terror and gore is genuine. Maybe the gore is a little over hyped, but it delivers. The film just traps itself by the end as it lazily tries to keep its focus on both the characters personal problems and the thinly derived plot at the same time. The ending is pretty weak too. I'm not one for spoilers, so I'll just say this, dismemberment is separating each limb and the head from a body. Sawing a head in half isn't dismemberment. But don't get me wrong, I thought it was pretty scary. The sets are really cool and the tone is very dark and filled with tension. And maybe that's the problem. It disguises itself as a superior version than the original. Overall, Evil Dead 2013, to me, only achieves the status of being a remake that didn't quite live up to the shock value of the original, but I must say it was still a pretty fun ride.

Tired Melodies

I haven't posted anything in a while. That's on me and my workload. But one thing happened that was supposed to be a huge deal. I'm referring to the Oscars. Don't get me wrong, Seth MacFarlane was a fantastic host. He was funny and he didn't try too hard to be likable. For the most part I agreed with all the winners (the Hobbit doesn't get Best Make-up...seriously?). And I don't mind that Jen Lawrence got Best Actress, although, Emmanuelle Riva was the obvious choice. However, the cut to a musical number every five minutes became so exhausting. And I don't think I'm alone on this because, like the Golden Globes, multiple people seemed uncomfortable and even annoyed to be there. Joaquin Phoenix was clearly one of them. With some of the most well crafted and original films in years nominated, one has to ask: Why did they spend all of their time praising Chicago and other musicals the whole damn time instead of showing some appreciation for the remarkable line-up that they had? I get the anniversary of Chicago is kinda a big deal (:-/) but it doesn't seem viable to celebrate with an entire Academy Awards ceremony. The Master isn't nominated for Best Original Screenplay?! Godd**mit! And hey, since they didn't adequately show some proper appreciation for the great films and filmmakers, how about they make up for it by cutting everyone off right in the middle of their f**kin' speech, basically saying "Hey it's cool that all of your hard work got you an Oscar, but move the hell outta the way so we can get on with the musical stuff." Because everyone knows that the biggest crowd-pleaser this year was musicals. I actually started to get pissed when humble artists trying to thank all who have helped them over the years turned into stuttering wrecks trying to speak fast so they can give some credit where credits due. Lord knows the Academy won't do it. Argo winning Best Picture was a huge positive for the program. Ben Affleck has earned so much praise that he has yet to be given. He has more than proved himself as a filmmaker. His last three films have been better than Katherine Bigelow's last whole filmography (with the exception of enjoyable ventures Strange Days, Point Break, and Near Dark). All Ben Affleck got for making excellent back-to-back films was an entire season of "no Best Director" jokes. Hilarious. Ang Lee winning Best Director was also very warranted. He is an amazing talent an deserves all the awards he gets. Especially since he credits 2003's Hulk as an experience that made his work on Life of Pi possible. I for one loved Lee and Schamus's version of the big green rage monster. Even though there were details that were greatly altered. That is a fan. You like what you get because you love it. Star Wars fans bitch more about the franchise than discuss it. I've said that I loved the Green Lantern film. Plain and simple. I've watched the Oscars every year as far back as I can remember. Maybe next year, invite MacFarlane back and cancel the Glee theme. Swear to God the music made that show seem so much longer. And from a fan, Beasts of the Southern Wild, Amour, and Django Unchained should have anniversary shows about them in the years to come.

Ancient Mumblecore

Believe it or not, I've always been obsessed with film. I was avidly scanning movie sites and release dates by the age of 7. In 2002, I started to come across reviews for a film titled Funny Ha Ha. I sought the film out and viewed it. I must say, I was quite taken with it. A very unique sort of drama. Funny, yet not funny in some ways. Andrew Bujalski, director of Funny Ha Ha, is credited with making the first Mumblecore film. Mumblecore is a genre of film that consists of low budget filmmaking and usually features semiprofessional to unprofessional actors in scenes that are either improvised or scripted. The films focus more on naturalistic dialogue instead of routine sentences and monologues that are crafted like a cheap bird house. What attracted me so much the Mumblecore style was that even when I was little and thought that I knew everything about everything, this was the way I envisioned making a film. Tell the actors where we want to go with the scene, point the camera and shoot. Trust I gather is a major component in making a film like this. Trust in the actors you have chosen. Trust in their ability to make everything they say sound real and convincing. For some reason I've always found Mumblecore films very funny. They seemed like the weird and playful films that Kubrick and Warhol made. Maybe the culture has always been around. Like a super subculture. I've always loved films that play with your head and force you to them, as well as yourself. Baghead was a huge influence on me after I saw it. A comedy-horror that's so funny and unusual it completely disarms you and leaves you vulnerable until the very last second. At first, I was wondering if this was our answer to dry British humor. But it goes deeper than that. Each film has a unique soul and a voice that needs to be heard. Natural dialogue is something I take seriously as a filmmaker. The Duplass Bros film The Puffy Chair came to me like a revelation. Its a film I can't help think about whenever I begin to write anything. Mumblecore movement films like In Search of a Midnight Kiss and Mutual Appreciation are perfect examples of his as well. Joe Swanberg, who has now become some what of a prominent figure in horror, began his career making Mumblecore classics like Nights and Weekends with fellow movement cornerstone Greta Gerwig and Uncle Kent. While the years continue to pass Mumblecore has begun to evolve, as with every genre. Alternative/anti-comedy pioneer Tim Heidecker is has moved into the Mumblecore scene with Rick Alverson's The Comedy. A sarcastic critique of today's culture. Major film stars John Krasinski, Olivia Thirlby and Rosemarie DeWitt are headlining Ry Russo-Young's Nobody Walks. A Mumblecore drama co-written by Golden Globe winner Lena Dunham. Look up Mumblecore films and check a few out. You'll be surprised by the curiosity you feel watching them and the creativity they inspire in you.

A Century of Undead

Zombie media is now stronger than ever. Zombies are everywhere. When I was little, I had an unusually intense fascination with zombies. This is common in most boys that age. But now little girls wear zombies on their shirts and zombies are featured on television and film as comedic and romantic. Zombie posters, car decals, keychains, even books and documentary TV shows centered around how to survive a zombie invasion. This genre got bitch slapped by the commercial machine. To me, the idea of a zombie apocalypse sounds awesome, but moronic when people keep talking about it like it's a real thing. When I was little, there was one place I went for zombie films, Hollywood Video. With the selection they had, I spent a lot of time watching zombie films. To me, the only zombie films like existed were Return of the Living Dead, Return of the Living Dead Pts. 2 & 3, Redneck Zombies, The Dead Pit, Both Night of the Living Dead and its Remake, Dawn of the Dead, Night of the Creeps, and Dead Alive. My favorites have always been the Pet Sematary and Evil Dead films. But over the years I have discovered that the genre was way more vast than I could've ever hoped. So many films form the 70's right on into the 80's and the era of their incubation period the 90's. Of course since the zombie mythology has been around for hundreds of years, there are zombie films for the silent era. But as the years have gone by the genre has been souped up into what it is today, a loud explosion filled mess that makes a lot of money. George A. Romero really defined the genre with his films. Giving it a unique perspective with every entry. Although I loved every film in his Living Dead Saga (excluding Diary of the Dead), none reached the height of what is arguably considered his greatest masterpiece, Dawn of the Dead. Actually his masterpiece would've been Day of the Dead. The script was unbelievably epic (and readable on virtually any script website) and the crew was assembled. But studio nervousness caused them to shell out a measly 3.5 mil. This would make Romero edit his script down considerably. The result wasn't bad, just misjudged. And Romero ended up taking the heat. When in the right hands, zombies can be the perfect ingredient for cult status. Peter Jackson has won numerous Academy Awards including Best Director and he made his name making low budget splatter-horror films. His first being the awesome alien-horror film Bad Taste (middle finger up) and a grizzly gory zombie film known as Braindead (or Dead Alive). Braindead featured some of the goriest effects and sickening zombie madness since Romero's Day of the Dead, including one where our hero picks up a push mower and chops up a zombified horde of partygoers. James Gunn's Slither is a worthy zom-com as well. The right amount of sickout gore and crude humor made me fall in love with Slither from the beginning. As I have stated in a previous blog Paul Anderson's Resident Evil franchise IS zombie horror, however it is in a very strict world. And that world shrinks with every film. I am a fan of the franchise, but I prefer zombie films I can relate to more like Romero's new installment Survival of the Dead, as well as Re-Animator or The Crazies. The 28 Days Later films were a huge achievement orchestrated by talented filmmakers like Danny Boyle and Juan Carlos Fresnadillo and writers Alex Garland and Rowan Joffe. Fresnadillo contributed to the writing as well with the help of E. L. Lavigne and Jesus Olmo. Brilliant films are born from comedy as well. Edgar Wright's Shaun of the Dead is probably the best zombie film in the pest ten years. A Cuban film titled Juan of the Dead featured a similar premise and it was a fantastically thrilling ride. Soon, a film called Warm Bodies open in theaters. This will be the first film to feature a zombie as the romantic lead since 1993's My Boyfriend's Back. I'm not against the idea, but I am wary. A remake of Evil Dead is also on the horizon, this one featuring a new story with Ash being allegedly being replaced by a woman. But I can be optimistic about that as well. Or at least save judgement until viewing it (Diablo Cody? Really?). 2009 would see the highest grossing zombie film of all time with Zombieland. This film proved that zombies are a highly lucrative item on film. Especially with the young adult crowd. It's success has led to the highest budgeted zombie film to date going into production. World War Z, an upcoming film from Brad Pitt, Marc Forster and Matthew Michael Carnahan adapted from Max Brooks' bestselling novel looks like The Godfather of all zombie films. But from experience dealing with huge letdowns from the past, I will wait before I sing about it. I think we are taking too many liberties with the material. Exploring too far and turning our love for zombies into just tolerating them.

Franchises; Resident Evil

I for most of my life I have not been a gamer. I played quite a bit of NES, Sega and N64 when I was younger. But I stopped at some point before puberty and never went back. In the past two years I've considered myself a gamer having locked into Call of Duty and many others. But no matter what, whenever a new Resident Evil game came out, I would buy it, play it and beat it. I started on Playstation, then N64, then GameCube and so on. I developed a deep love for the game and its characters. George A Romero was actually attached to make a Resident Evil film. I read the script when it was released to a screenwriting forum and it mirrored the game perfectly for a film adaptation. The mansion, STARS and the Tyrant were all included. Fast forward to 2002, the first Resident Evil film opens in theaters. Romero had exited the project some time back and his film concept was scrapped. This new version was written and directed by Mortal Kombat and Event Horizon helmer Paul WS Anderson. Never the less, I was extremely excited to see what a full budgeted big screen version would be like. After the initial viewing, I must say, it was very enjoyable. The story however was entirely different from the games. The plot surrounded a underground scientific facility that becomes infected when a virus is set loose. The only things incorporated into the film where the T-virus, the Umbrella Corporation, Cerberus', Raccoon City and the main monster being a Licker. There was also a hint at the end of the "Nemesis" program, this being a reference to the main antagonist in RE3:Nemesis. The main character was an original character and not featured in the games. Alice, played by Milla Jovovich, would serve as the main protagonist in all future films. I would have rather preferred the game story to the films story, but one thing was true, I wanted to see more. When photos of the second film installment of Resident Evil entitled RE: Apocalypse surfaced on the web, I couldn't help but be excited. Nemesis, Carlos Oliveira, the STARS and UBC troops, and the biggest character in the film Jill Valentine (Sienna Guillory). Though she was just one of a dozen in the first game. Written by Anderson but directed by first timer Alexander Witt, Apocalypse wasn't that bad to sit through. Combining many elements of both RE2 and RE3, it seemed more like an RE film than the first one. The plot was inspired mostly by RE3 and centered around survivors trying to escape an infected Raccoon City before Umbrella nukes it. But two things were clear, Paul Anderson revealed himself to be a terrible writer and once they introduced the weird psychokinesis stuff at the end, we knew the third film would stray even farther way from the games. Of course, I was right. When the synopsis was released a few years later for the third film entitled RE: Extinction, I was more than confused. Completely skipping over RE4 and Code:Veronica, Anderson decided to destroy the world all together. This was never done in the games. The film made a major jump from RE: Apocalypse and was more of a tracing of Max Max. The world is reduced to a desert and lone survivors must battle the Umbrella Corporation and an army of undead. It is also revealed the the Umbrella Corporation has been cloning Alice in order to experiment with her DNA. Once again, Anderson created the script while this time he whored the directorial burden to legend and expert Russell Mulcahy. The only thing to look forward to was seeing one the games major characters, Clair Redfield, on screen. The film also featured the infected birds from the games, as well as the Crimson zombies and featured two main villains from the first game, The Tyrant and recurring game villain Albert Wesker (Jason O'Mara). To be clear, RE: Extinction was not a good film. Though an okay zombie film kill time with, its terribly written and features some of the worst performances ever. Clair Redfield was terribly represented by Ali Larter and came with super cheesy dialogue. After I viewed this film in theaters, I thought the film franchise was over with. Terrible reviews and terrible reactions drove some fans back to the games wishing they could un-see a film that crushed any hopes for more video game similarities. But the films gross so mush money that another sequel couldn't be ignored. Before that, Anderson would make his long envisioned update to the classic Sci-Fi film Death Race 2000 simply entitled Death Race. After that he would begin work on his next film which would be a return to the Resident Evil film franchise as both writer and director. The film was long rumored and finally confirmed to be titled RE: Afterlife. The film followed Alice once again fighting Umbrella with the help of her clones, while also trying to locate her lost friends from the previous film and bring them to refuge. The main character from the first game, Chris Redfield (Wentworth Miller), is also introduced as a protagonist. Though the script was yet again underwhelming, the film in its entirety was a lot better than RE: Extinction. Accompanied by a great score from tomandandy, Anderson molded the story so that he could begin to close it. With the storyline pretty much reduced to fighting Umbrella and killing video game monster cameos in the process, Anderson had no choice but to signal the beginning of the end. Had he stuck a little closer to the games series, he could make all the films he wanted. Although the story in Afterlife was more than unimaginative, the next installment entitled RE: Retribution would be more simple and weak as a film. While speeding to the end of the story, the film centers around Alice fighting her way through an underground testing facility for the T-virus, specializing in simulating environments to be destroyed by the virus so the results to be studied. One big red flag that the crew were pulling out every cheap trick was the introduction of many characters from the games. Going into character overload when it isn't a necessity is never a good sign. Bringing Leon S Kennedy (Johann Urb), Barry Burton (Kevin Durand), and Ada Wong (Li Bingbing) into the fold was not the safety net that the filmmakers intended. The action was formulaic and flat as well as the story. The dialogue slowed down an already slow film and the twists were very unimaginative. I fact, the entire film seemed a weak build up to a massive, special effects driven ending sequence at the White House were the last of humanity is in savage combat with the army of T-virus zombies and monsters charging toward them. I stopped following Anderson's projects after the terrible abomination that was the remake of The Three Musketeers and there hasn't been any news on a new film, but I have noticed something peculiar. That feeling I had when I watched the first film had changed. Instead of being excited to see more, I was excited to see the series end. Then the producers can start working on a reboot more accurately rooted in the game mythology.

Review: Savages and Oliver Stone's Last 12 Years

Oliver Stone is a unique filmmaker. His work has always paralleled expectations. He has a real eye for authenticity. Now, let's enter the millennium after the Release of Any Given Sunday. Oliver Stone is trying to put together what he describes as his most ambitious work to date, a biopic on Alexander the Great. Baz Luhrmann's own conflicting Alexander project goes up in flames as Stone's film enters production. Colin Farrell is chosen for the lead and an ensemble of Oliver Stone regulars and new faces follow. The film was a bomb. One simple reason why, it was too long and too vague. On top of the fact that Alexander's death in the film was total speculation. But I can forgive that minor detail. It was caught up (more like trapped) in one period of Alexander's life. It wasn't a biopic, it was an action/drama. At some points, it was way too serious and at others, it wasn't serious enough. This was to beginning of an eight year disaster of a filmography. Doing a film cannibalizing the World Trade Center attacks wasn't the right answer to get back on track. Although W. was quite enjoyable. Wall Street- Money Never Sleeps was awful. I understand the need to make the film, but I didn't agree with the path that the film ended up taking. But I won't kick something when it's down. So here we are, on a new foot trying a new look. Behold we have Savages, a modern crime masterpiece. Pulling out all the stops really worked this time. Stone seemed to have lost that fearlessness. His old films were like epic sacrifices to the art form. Hopefully this is the beginning of many more films that have the teeth and the impact of Savages. The performances were as fine tuned as the script. The look of the film was so different than his previous films, so lively and vibrant. It really accentuated the brutality. Benicio Del Toro and Salma Hayek were perfect villains. Del Toro being psychotic and Hayek being sociopathic. Everyone in the film is emotionally broken and in some way needy. Travolta delivers an honest performances and turns it into one of his careers best. The surprises performance has to go to Blake Lively. She might have finally broken out of her usual typecastings. Although I was a fan of Green Lantern. In Savages, Lively truly seems compassionate and fragile. Her story is a strange one for sure. Taylor Kitsch was also great. A nice change of pace from his usual lesser roles. I was bored through Battleship and John Carter just didn't fit him. But this role seemed tailored for him specifically. But with the complex characters and explosive plot, Savages definitely packs a punch. Oliver Stone might have gotten over his bumpy patch.