January 2018 Movie A Day Blog

The continuing saga of a man and his collection of unopened DVD's and his bursting-at-the-seams DVR...I've been watching movies all my life, yet there are still so many movies I have never seen...this is an excuse to watch those films...

Here are links to my December 2017 Movie-A-Day blog, August 2017 blog and July 2017 blog!  Enjoy!  Or not, whatever... :)

I don't re-watch movies...all the movies should be ones I have never seen before...I try to avoid too many spoilers of movies still in theatres but with older movies?  I spoil the crap out of them!

*Psssttt!  In case you missed it above...SPOILERS!!!!

The List:

• 1- Wanted

• 2- The Big Store

• 3- Bill and Ted's Excellent Adventure

• 4- Devil In a Blue Dress

• 5- $

• 6- Molly's Game

• 7- Norma Rae

• 8- The Thrill of It All

• 9- Thelma and Louise

• 10- Bundle of Joy

• 11- Giant

• 12- Extract

• 13- The Stooge

• 14- Goon: Last of the Enforcers

• 15- Table 19

• 16- Blade Runner 2049

• 17- Megan Leavey

• 18- The Trip to Spain

• 19- The Lost City of Z

• 20- The Post

• 21- Comedians in Cars Getting Coffee

• 22- Thank You For Your Service

• 23- Stronger

• 24- TCM's Noir Alley

• 25- I Am Not Your Negro

• 26- The Sisterhood of the Traveling Pants 2

• 27- Murphy's Romance

• 28- Once Were Warriors

• 29- I, Tonya

• 30- The Devil Wears Prada

• 31- Martha Marcy May Marlene

January 31st - MARTHA MARCY MAY MARLENE (2011)

Now this is a rare film; one that I have wanted to see for a long time but until tonight, I've just never seen it listed on cable, or seen it for sale in a Wal-Mart bargain bin (I didn't say I wanted to see it THAT bad).  But I'd heard some really great things about this film and Elizabeth Olsen is one of those actresses whom I want to see more of.  At first when I heard of her, the first reaction was "How good of an actress could she be, if she's a member of the Olsen family...?" which of course if unfair.  But really, after the Olsen Twins became a corporate juggernaught, what were the odds there was a third sister and she was "the talented one" when it came to acting.  What's in that water at the Olsen house?  Although now that I look at her filmography, it turns out I haven't seen that many of her projects other than her appearances as Scarlett Witch in the Marvel Cinematic Universe, and Godzilla, plus just a little while ago I saw her in Wind River, which is a fantastic film.  BUT WHAT ABOUT THIS FILM?  I've been watching alot of movies about PTSD lately.  Between "Thank You For Your Service", "Stronger", "Megan Leavey" just this month alone, I might be going through movie-PTSD - which of course is a joke, I would never undermine the psychological trauma people go through on a daily basis.  But someone has to ease the tension.  This movie is different from most living-with-a-cult movies, in that it deals with life afterwards, dealing with the paranoia and nightmares that come with it.  It's told with chronological shifts so we can see flashbacks to her life in the cult.  Some things could have been better, like having her brother in law not be such a dick about everything.  Sarah Paulson plays Olsen's sister who tries her best to help but is torn.  But really, weren't there other ways to show her struggle than to make it so cut and dry as "Get your sister committed to an insane asylum means you love your husband vs. Keep your sister untreated means you love her".  There has to be more to the situation than just those two extremes.  And the ending is one of the all-time worst.  It's so "indy" to "leave things to your imagination" and "not spoon feed the viewer by spelling out what happens next."  I used to think that, back in my pretentious film-school days.  But people deserve an ending.  They've spent two hours getting to know these characters and being in their world, and just to end the movie ten minutes early, just cause the director didn't want to/couldn't make a choice.  It's a good movie, sure, but again, not something I'll probably ever watch again.  *Smokers Report: There is some smoking, but only so the cult leader, John Hawkes, can point out how bad that is.

January 30th - THE DEVIL WEARS PRADA (2006)

This is a big check off my bucket list.  There have been many times in my life the last few years when this movie would come up and I'd say "Haven't seen it" and the looks I would get...So apparently, "The Devil Wears Prada" is one of those essential films (not like a TCM Essential…but who knows twenty years from now they may be interviewing Anne Hathaway on TCM about this…), but like other films on my Movie-A-Day blogs, I just hadn't watched it, and didn't feel the need to.  And tonight it was on cable, so why not?  Anne Hathway gets a job at "Vogue" magazine, er, "Runway" magazine, working for the meanest people in the world, or at the very least, the meanest people in the fashion industry.  And she knows nothing about fashion.  But she's super sweet and "fat" aka size 6, so why not?  Her boss is the iconic Meryl Streep, and also Emily Blunt and Stanley Tucci work there, with only Tucci being a smidge more towards the "nice" side of the personality meter.  It's a good movie, but why it's iconic is a mystery to me.  No one really has much of an arc.  They fake an arc for Blunt (her "transformation" at the end of the film includes still being rude to Hathaway, but in a "nicer way", I guess).  Streep's character seems more 3-Dimensional than a typical villain, but not at first, as she rips apart Hathaway for the fact Hathaway couldn't stop a hurricane from existing (and never apologizes btw).  I could understand if Hathaway blabbed some important info or did something dumb, but not being able to stop a hurricane?  Frankly, I almost turned it off there, but then I figured there has to be some comeuppance for Streep acting THAT badly.  But really (SPOILERS) there isn't.  She ends the film more powerful than when it began.  Simon Baker and Adrien Grenier are also here and kinda important.  I was annoyed by Hathaway's character, as half way through the film she's still cheery and oblivious (sample dialogue between her and Blunt, who have now known each other for six months: Hathaway: "Wish me luck!"  Blunt: "Go kill yourself." or something like that).  And later the justification by Streep for all her backstabbing by saying to Hathaway "You did it too" was crap, honestly.  I'm probably missing something, or just don't "get it".  Although, other than one cringe-worthy scene described earlier, it was a good movie, although probably one I will never watch again.  Always great to see Tucci, though.  Ever seen "Big Night"?  THAT'S a great movie… *Smokers Report: None that I can remember, although really?  The only people who smoke more than writers and poker players are models (and, well, actors).

January 29th - I, TONYA (2017)

First of all, lame title.  It fails the movie title test.  If you say the movie title fast, in passing in conversation, and you have to repeat yourself, then (like "Out of Sight" for example), it fails.  Just call it "Tonya", or geez, "The Incident" even.  But enough about how much smarter I am than everyone in Hollywood (JK, BTW).  Anyway, this film, unlike historical dramas "Molly's Game" or "Norma Rae" that I knew little about, this was a movie that covered events that I was well aware of and could remember from my youth.  I totally remember the day Nancy Kerrigan was attacked, the "WHY?  WHY?" crying, the fallout at the Olympics and during all that "showdown" talk between Kerrigan and Harding, the world fell in love with a little Soviet girl named Oksana Baiul.  And then Kerrigan was caught on film making fun of Baiul and her image as an American icon became more of an American sore loser.  Once she cried to the judges about her broken laces (when at that point NO ONE has sympathy for the girl who took out America's at-one-time sweetheart), and actually got a second chance and still finished 8th, she was done.  I remember her becoming a national joke, I even remember that particular David Letterman Top 10 he did making fun of her that they use in the movie (not that there was just one time that happened).  I remember her, later on, getting big money offers to go train in Japan as a female wrestler, which in Japan was actually kind of a big honour, but she apparently scoffed at this and became a female boxer instead.  She she wanted to get beat up for real instead of in a controlled environment, I guess.  I remember all of this.  But this movie isn't just about recreating those events, it's about telling Tonya's side of the story and, I think, trying to point out her innocence.  Or is it?  It portrays Tonya as not very likeable, and proud of it, but late in the film there is a part where she looks right at the camera and says the media made her a joke and "we all" were complicit.  To which I say, well, yeah.  Guilty as charged.  It's true what she says about America building up heroes and then taking great pleasure in stripping them down.  And once Tonya hits rock bottom after the 1992 Olympics, she seemingly turns a corner, and apparently she really had no idea that anyone was going to attack Kerrigan.  So should we "forgive her".  She still was in on the original plan to scare Kerrigan with death threats.  She was cool with that.  So she's not "innocent".  She talks about nothing being her fault, repeatedly.  Over and over again she says this.  And seeing what her devil mother was like (played amazingly by Alison Janney) and how her asshole husband abused her (Sebastian Stan) sure, we should probably sympathize with her.  But what I liked about the film is that this isn't a black and white issue…it's very complicated. VERY COMPLICATED!  And unlike "Foxcatcher", which took a real incident and actually made it more boring that it really was, and more of a black and white issue, this movie gets points for going all in with the wackiness of it all.  I read a click-bait headline recently that said something like "Tonya Harding is ready for her apology now".  I liked this film, but, at least from me, she'll have to wait a lot longer for that apology.  *Smokers Report: Oh, yeah!  Harding smokes a lot, and Janney's character is literally never on screen without a smoke in her hand.  So that's a big yes!

January 28th - ONCE WERE WARRIORS (1994)

This was a hard movie to watch.  For those keeping track, this was on cable.  I had vaguely heard of this, and saw it in the listings, looked it up and thought, "Oh, I have to watch this…"  This is considered "The Best New Zealand film of all time".  "Better than "Whale Rider?" I say to myself.  And it stars Temura Morrison, who played Jango Fett in the Star Wars prequels, and I've heard is pretty cool otherwise.  But the Temura Morrison I saw in this film I didn't know existed.  This film is a brutal one about alcohol abuse, domestic violence and living in a toxic environment, with no hope in sight that it will end.  Morrison is frightening in his role and the other "actors" in the movie don't come across as actors, just people who just happen to be standing in front of a camera as it happened to roll.  It does have that "mid-90's indy feel" to it, shot on film but in a low budget way, where you can tell every penny spent is on screen.  We still see indy movies, but they are all shot on digital and all look kinda too perfect, whereas these films are a little dirty, probably from using older cameras and cheaper film stock.  I'm just assuming all this, of course; I could totally be wrong.  At first Morrison's character seems like a good bloke just trying to make things right for his family, fun loving kind of dude, but later once he has a few drinks in him, he can explode, with that phrase "explode" not at all hyperbole.  The beating he lays on a tattooed jerk in the bar early on is cheered…the identical beating he lays on his wife (Rena Owen) just a few minutes later isn't so cool (he says in the understatement of the year so far).  And then he basically rapes her.  And then falls asleep on top of her.  Then the next morning, the kids get up and start cleaning up, as the house is turned upside down, plus their mother's blood is all over the walls, but they do this as if they have done it a million times before.  This is a regular occurrence that they have gotten used to.  Meanwhile, their family is seemingly falling apart, as the kids see their father for what he is, but usually ending up blaming their mother.  Their father won't change, and they know that, but why does she stay with him?  Plus, she is there, and if they talk back to her, they won't get punched in the face.  However, the fact the family is splitting up into different factions actually kind of saves it, but not before tragedy strikes unfortunately.  This is a gut wrenching film, so if you do watch it, be prepared.  I honestly try not to watch movies like this.  And honestly if I had known more about this film, other than it was the "best New Zealand film ever", I might not have watched it.  I, at this stage in my life, try to avoid "tough" movies, for better or worse.  I haven't seen "12 Years a Slave", for instance, as I just… I just don't want to watch it.  Not that I am better than that, or anything else.  I remember watching "Monster" in the theatre, and admiring the film, but at the same time, I knew I would never watch it again.  I think I can safely say I'd be fine if I never watched another movie with a slave being whipped, or a woman (or man) being raped ever again. The urge to watch all the Oscar films every year is long gone, for instance.  Maybe that's me "hiding" from such things, but I think I'm old enough now to decide what I will or won't watch.  Or maybe I'm naive.  Anyway, I was stunned to learn that the film's director went on to do many Hollywood films, including Mulholland Falls (really?), The Edge, even Die Another Day, the Madonna infused Bond film.  He even did the Triple-X film that had Ice Cube.  And I was kind of surprised no one from this film, besides Morrison and Cliff Curtis have gone on to big careers in acting.  There is one of the actors in particular, Mamaengaroa Kerr-Bell who plays Grace in the film, had never acted before this (she was "a natural"), and is now in real estate.  After seeing what she had to go through for the role, I can see why.  BUT WHAT ABOUT THIS FILM?  It was very well done, the acting is about as natural as it gets, and the subject matter is a kick in the gut.  I would recommend it for sure, but just be prepared… *Smokers Report: Oh yeah.  Every adult character in the film seemingly smokes (other than Morrison, from what I remember) and the teens smoke some pot in one scene.

January 27th - MURPHY'S ROMANCE (1985)

There wasn't anything on cable tonight that I hadn't already seen, so I had to turn to alternative methods to find something to watch.  I tried YouTube but then something told me to try iTunes out.  For some reason iTunes is just not something I consider when it comes to movies.  When I think of iTunes I think of thousands of podcasts and the crappiest way possible to download music.  But then I booted up iTunes (is that still a saying?) and with given the options of, well, thousands of movies, I did what I normally do, punch "James Garner" into the Search engine and see what comes up.  I've been wanting to watch this movie for awhile, mostly because of Garner, but also after doing research for "Norma Rae", I learned that the team that made that movie (Field, director Martin Ritt and the screenwriters) then made this one too.  Also, after "Absense of Malice", another movie I reviewed earlier on one of these blogs, Field and Ritt first approached Paul Newman to co-star, but he declined, so Garner was next.  Although apparently, they had to fight for Garner, as the studio wanted someone like Marlon Brando, who they felt was more marketable since Garner was now a "TV star" (in one of the best shows ever, The Rockford Files, btw) but Filed and Ritt were insistent.  Garner was later nominated for an Oscar for Best Actor.  BUT WHAT ABOUT THIS FILM?  I really enjoyed it.  It's very slow paced and there is no sex or violence, which probably sounds boring, but it really isn't.  So much is said with just looks and body language between Field and Garner.  I was surprised that the titular "Murphy" is Garner, with movie posters from the time just featuring Field, I assumed that was her character's name.  And the movie really is about her, she is in every scene whereas Garner is in 3/4 of the movie, so it is an odd choice for a movie title, but whatever.  I'm probably over thinking it.  And the fact that there is no sex or violence is a plus.  At one point, Field's ex husband shows up (he's also the father to her son, a young Corey Haim) and she wants to kick him out but he is a good dad, so he stays around, which makes an aloof Garner take notice.  But again, it's not that simple.  You'd think at some point, Field and Garner have a yelling match, Garner punches out the ex, she has to make a hard choice, maybe the ex smacks her around in front of the son, making it easy for Field to kick him out, oh and I forgot to mention, of course the ex is an asshole, but the son still loves him and he and Field yell at each other.  But this movie doesn't go in that direction.  The ex can drink a little too much, but he's not a bad guy really.  He leaves on his own, after Field has made the decision to kick him out, but then she doesn't have to.  There is no yelling or punching out.  Everything just kind of...works out.  And again, not in a boring way.  You can see it coming but everyone is so freaking charming that you really want to see how it plays out.  And normally I hate movies where the man is nearly twice the love interest's age, but again here it works.  Highly recommended!  *Smokers Report: Surprisingly, none, considering the stars...

January 26th- THE SISTERHOOD OF THE TRAVELING PANTS 2 (2008)

As this list is winding down, it's getting harder to get these reviews done in a timely manner.  With having gone back to work full time after a few weeks off, then also working on The Supers #2, trying to have a smidge of a life, trying to keep up with the few TV shows I do, AND HAVING TO watch a movie every night, it does get tiring, especially with what little sleep I get.   And now being back on the road, I will have to depend on whatever is on that particular hotel's cable that night to get this "assignment-I've-given'myself" done.  I was tempted to go to a local theatre here and see one of the much-ballyhooed Oscar bait movies, like "The Shape of Water" or "Call Me By Your Name", but I saw in the listings this movie and...well, you can see here who won.  I reviewed the first movie in one of my first Movie-A-Day Blogs and really enjoyed it.  And so now I'm back to see what more mischief those pants can get up to.  And also it's a movie about four very talented young actresses too, btw.  But it's hard to figure out who got the better deal between the four.  Blake Lively's Bridget got to share scenes with both Blythe Danner and Shohreh Aghdashloo (recently from "The Expanse", Oscar nominated for "The House of Sand and Fog"); America Ferrera's Carmen got scenes where she got to do Shakespeare; Amber Tamblyn's Tibby got to be in a scene where a person gives birth (no spoilers though); and Alexis Bledel's Rory, er, Lena got to make out with two hot guys.  This is a surprisingly long movie, with Bledel's story arc being about bonding with her grandmother, but first goes on a massive detour on an archaelogical dig, which somehow brings up feelings form her past about her mother's suicide.  It's a bit of a stretch.  Then I read ahead on the movie's Wikipedia page and it said "Lena starts to date Jesse, but then Kostas shows up and wants her back" and I looked up and said "She's not even dating Jesse yet!".  There is some un-even-ness to the script, as America Ferrera is the over bearing heavy in most scenes, and Bledel is mad at her love from the first film, and is hesitant to get back together with him because he broke her heart...yet SHE BROKE UP WITH HIM!!!  To this film's credit, they fixed one problem from the first movie; there are more scenes with the girls together, which was something I wanted more of in the original.  They all have chemistry together and it comes across on screen, as they are actually best friends in real life.  I like how they dealt with the normal thing where kids grow up to be young adults and sometimes they have to leave their childhoods behind and that means leaving behind not just teddy bears but people too.  I remember learning that the first film was directed by a man and thinking "Really?" but they fixed it this time as a woman directed the film (Sanaa Hamri, for the record).  So is it a perfect film?  Nope!  Is it nice to visit these four friends and see what they are up to?  Absolutely!  And let's hope that one day movie #3 becomes a reality, despite the fact that (like I mentioned with Goon 2), this movie does wrap things up pretty well in a nice little bow.  *Smokers Report: None that I can remember

January 25th- I AM NOT YOUR NEGRO (2017)

What an impactful documentary!  James Baldwin's life is something I'd like to learn even more about.  Knowing all three of the African American icons of the time (Medger Evers, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and Malcolm X) alone makes for an interesting life.  But then becoming an activist out for equal rights also makes his life out to be something special.  Just watching some of the archival footage in this movie is tremendous.  I had seen the footage of the school that had the army escort black children to school on the their first day, but I hadn't heard about the young girl in Charlotte who was basically on her own; I can only imagine the fear she had in her heart, but also the determination to stay and sit in that chair no matter what.  Of course it goes without saying that I will never experience that kind of prejudice, and hopefully most people, no matter their race never have to feel that again.  But in today's world, the future seems uncertain.  Which is why this movie is so important.  To remind us that as great as Dr. King and Malcolm X were, they were murdered.  To this day, I'm shocked and also thankful that President Obama wasn't assassinated.  I would be interested to hear what Mr. Baldwin would think about President Obama during either of his terms.  I have heard some black leaders saying they were happy the day he was elected but he "didn't do enough".  And while totally unfair, his legacy might just be re-written by "the winners", the people currently in power wanting to do everything to undermine what President Obama did accomplish during his time in office.  BUT WHAT ABOUT THIS FILM?  I watched this twice, as the first time I found the film kind of all over the place, at first a bio about Baldwin and then his relationship with the three men and then back to him…but after watching it a second time, I was able to follow it a lot better and I really enjoyed it the second time.  I acknowledge that I am of a certain generation that has to be reminded once in awhile of the horrors of the past, of slavery, and how long it took to get equal rights, and how many great people had to die, and how people will most likely continue to die in the struggle going forward.  Dick Cavett in the film interviews Baldwin and asks, basically, things are better now, "why aren't negroes happy with the progress so far?"  And the answer is that, yes, things are better now, but there's always more progress to come.  *Smokers Report: Baldwin smokes in practically every scene he's in, so yes.

January 24th - TCM's NOIR ALLEY

I'm a big fan of film noir and every Sunday morning, Turner Classic Movies has it's "Noir Alley" at 7am (Pacific) where they show a classic example of "film noir", which is basically a movie about bad guys, essentially.  I usually tape them and watch them later.  On this day, I watched a few in a row, "711 Ocean Drive", "Pushover" and "In A Lonely Place".  "711 Ocean Drive" (1950) is a movie about how new technology, the invention of long distance telephone wires and conference lines, helped the bookies of the world take bets and hear the results of events from the other side of the country.  This development brings one smart guy into the fold, who goes from a blue collar dude to the head of the local mafia, and all the problems that ensue.  It's an interesting movie, with a twenty minute chase ending that just goes on forever.  Apparently at the time this movie was a big deal, with the writers given tons of access to police records and inside info, and this was a big "look inside" to their world.  Unfortunately today this movie is interesting (with the look back at how phones were so primitive) but not necessarily groundbreaking.  And the chase sequence at the end is repetitive.  "In a Lonely Place" (1950) is Noir Alley's host, Eddie Muller's, favourite movie and he calls it a masterpiece.  It stars Humphrey Bogart and Gloria Graham, directed by Nicholas Ray, all film noir all-stars.  It is a great film, with Bogart playing an aging screenwriter in need of a hit, who meets Graham, who is his alibi at first, then they fall in love, but she's not sure he didn't commit the original murder, etc.  This is a great movie, but frankly, the behind the scenes stuff is more interesting to me.  Apparently, Graham and director Ray were married, having problems, then Graham hooked up with Ray's 13 year old son (her step-son) and they fell in love and ended up together.  That must have been an interesting Thanksgiving!  But my favourite of the three was "Pushover" (1954) starring Fred McMurray and a 20-year old Kim Novak.  McMurray is known as a Disney guy, but can "play dirty" with his iconic role in "Double Indemnity" and this movie is almost a remake of that, only with McMurray as a cop instead of an insurance seller.  Novak is a younger version of Barbara Stanwyk from "Indemnity" and isn't quite there as an actress, but you can understand why McMurray is willing to throw it all a way for her.  Maybe it's because I love "Indemnity" so much that I loved this film…but who cares?  I was interested the whole way through, especially once I realized Dorothy Malone was in it too, who just died recently and who I'd always been a fan of since her one scene with Bogart in "The Big Sleep" where they try to "get wet" while inside a book store.  I loved the opening scene as well, where two hoods rob a bank without saying a word, while the credits roll.  I also found it interesting that this movie was adapted from not one but two books, "The Night Watch" by Thomas Walsh and "Rafferty" by William S. Ballinger.  And who adapted them?  None other than a young Roy Huggins, the mastermind behind such TV classics as my favourites "The Rockford Files" and "Maverick", plus "The Fugitive", "77 Sunset Strip", "Hunter" and others.  So of the three, I'd recommend "Pushover", which admittedly is "Double Indemnity"-lite, whereas most people would probably prefer "In A Lonely Place."  *Smokers Report: Three film noir black and white films.  What do you think???

January 23rd - STRONGER (2017)

This was a great movie.  I wasn't sure going in, but as I mentioned in my review for "Thank You For Your Service", it doesn't take much to sway me (and presumably others, I'm not that different after all) into the "let's watch this movie" column.  For this, it was the possibility of seeing Canadian Tatiana Maslany on screen.  She's pretty awesome.  But then I saw that Miranda Richardson and Clancy Brown were in it too.  Richardson I've liked since watching Black Adder back in the day.  Brown is always great with his distinctive voice, but for me he's the voice of Lex Luthor from Superman the Animated Series and Justice League Unlimited.  This is a very down to earth film, takes it's time with what's going on, after a quick opening.  15 minutes in and the Boston bombing has happened and Jake Gyllenhaal's character, Jeff, is recovering in the hospital.  But in that first fifteen minutes, we meet Jeff, a goofy outgoing chatty guy who everyone loves, who is in love with Erin (Maslany), who he's dated for years but they always break up, but end up back together.  At the beginning of the film, they have been split for awhile, but Erin wants to run in the Boston Marathon, and in trying to impress Erin, Jeff wants to show up and support her.  And by being there, at the finish line, Jeff's a victim of the bombing.  The performances are all well done, and you can definitely see the arc of Jeff's character.  It's great also in how America treats it's celebrities, how someone like Jeff is seen as a beacon of hope, a living symbol of "not letting the terrorists win", but later when his mom brings him out to the car, coming out of his rehabilitation to go home, no one is there to help her get his wheelchair in the trunk.  One of the best scenes is with Jeff in a bar and someone recognizes him, he assumes it's cause they want a picture, like everyone else, but the guy wants to know the truth, in that Jeff was paid a lot of money to fake his injuries so "Obama could go to war with Iraq".  The guy says this to Jeff's face, as he's there in a wheelchair.  If this took place in any other city other than Boston, I'd scoff.  PS It used to be every movie took place in New York…but now, since Good Will Hunting, every frickin' movie takes place in Boston…anyway, ironically, this movie is a lot like "Thank You For Your Service" in that it deals with PTSD and the trauma of dramatic events, brain injuries that we still don't know much of anything about.  Something that happens more than once is Jeff being used by sports teams to make appearances…to "throw out the first pitch".  I've never felt comfortable with this, not in a bad way I guess, I guess it's good to recognize people who do great things (most NHL teams have a visiting "hero" from the Army as a guest) but if you saw (again) "Thank You For Your Service", if those special people aren't getting treatments, yet are trotted out for "feel good moments", that seems exploitive.  Or I'm over thinking.  Another good sign for this film is that when writing this, I just noticed I'm using character names to describe what's going on.  Normally I rely on the actor's real names.  But in this movie, it really was about Jeff, Erin, Carlos and the rest of the people; they seemed real, not actors.  Or I just didn't want to type out Gyllenhaal a bunch of freakin' times.  Great movie, very inspirational but not in a "USA, USA, USA" way.  *Smokers Report: Miranda Richardson's character smokes like a chimney.  Everyone of her scenes (other than the ones in the hospital) has her with a cigarette in her hand or her mouth.

January 22nd - THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE (2017)

These days there are so many movies to choose from…it's interesting (to me anyway) to try to figure out why we choose to watch some films and not others.  This movie I heard was a good movie, but it's another "war" movie (or so I assumed), so why pick it?  I'd heard Amy Schumer was in it, and it was a more dramatic role, rather than a comedy.  That's pretty much it.  I picked this movie rather than "Stronger" or "Detroit" or the Deep Throat Liam Neeson movie, and that's it really.  "Stronger" will probably be next simply be because Canadian girl Tatiana Maslany is in it.  Weird.  BUT WHAT ABOUT THIS FILM?  Well, it's not really about war, it's about life after war.  It's about life after coming home from war and the expectation of having a "normal life".  Early on, the main character says "We need some help" which surprised me.  Usually in the movies, at the start of the third act, the main character says "we need help" and then there is a fun montage and, tada, happy ending, all life's problems go away and people "get over" whatever their problems are.  This movie is the opposite of that.  It's all about servicemen coming home after being blown up and shot at, killing people and being the worst versions of themselves, then having to come back and just forget all that, get jobs and be husbands.  Just turn it all off.  And most come home with some form of PTSD.  Even the ones who aren't messed up need some kind of help.  So you assume that the US government takes care of them, right?  These people sacrificed their lives and afterwards, anything they need is given to them.  Nope.  Apparently even people who acknowledge they need help can't get any.  And they try to help themselves, over medicate themselves, get into trouble…it's heavy stuff.  But this is an important film.  Although PS…Amy Schumer only in a few scenes, and some she doesn't even have dialogue.  So don't watch the film just for her.  It's always good to see Keisha Castle-Hughes, though.  *Smokers Report: Miles Teller's character becomes a smoker 3/4 of the way through the movie, after never having smoked before.  He just pulls out a cigarette, lights it up and smokes.  Weird.

January 21st- COMEDIANS IN CARS GETTING COFFEE (2012-2018)

Yes, this counts.  Okay, so I've been watching some heavy movies lately, and I found out that this Jerry Seinfeld talk-show-while-driving-getting-coffee series had been added to Netflix, and figured I'd only watch a few.  They average about 15 minutes each, I can bang a few out and then watch a "real movie".  But then it's on Netflix, so you just let it run and the next thing I know I'm 20 episodes deep and it's 10pm…so I'm calling an audible and reviewing this.  They all go back to back and with Netflix, so there are no credits, so it's like watching a documentary…or just a string of vignettes back to back.  At one point I looked to see how many episodes were left in "season one", and I was at #16, so I figured I'd keep going.  But then "season two" started with President Barack Obama and I had to watch that.  Then it was Kevin Hart…then Will Ferrell…then I just had to keep watching until they got to the episode with Carl Reiner and Mel Brooks.  And then I kept watching until the end of "season two".  I remember watching these (or the early episodes, more on that later), when they came out and loving them, but then with most things I lost touch with when the new episodes came out.  Apparently the next "season" is going to be season TEN for pete's sake.  And the weird thing is that these episodes on Netflix are all shown out of order than how they were originally uploaded.  Just for example, the first episode shown is with Jim Carrey, which is from Season 6 in 2015.  The next two episodes is the two-parter with Jimmy Fallon in Season 5.  Early episodes people talked about how popular the show was, which was weird.  I am confused why they did this.  Some things are better, as when I originally watched them I got annoyed with the ads for Crackle and things like the Michael Richards as the Crackle President in Season 5, which they have taken out here.  Some are illuminating, like the Jim Carrey episode where he kind of comes off as a little nuts, but frankly I wouldn't be surprised to hear one day that he killed himself.  Is that mean?  I learned about apartheid from Trevor Noah.  They pretty much are all enjoyable, there isn't a bad one…which, I mean, they're only 15 minutes…how can you spend hours with these funny people and NOT have at least 15 minutes of good stuff?  The most disappointing was Kristen Wiig, which isn't to say it's bad but it's just not as good as the others.  Christoph Waltz is probably the worst cause…well, it's just an odd choice.  And it's as if Waltz knew that.  John Oliver, Kevin Hart, Will Ferrell, Ricky Gervais are all hilarious.  Sarah Jessica Parker is a delight, as is Tina Fey, like they are people you'd want to be friends with.  It's fun watching Seinfeld try to drive a tour bus and then a semi-truck in the Aziz episode, then him and Chris Rock getting pulled over for speeding.  Watching the Michael Richards episode is moving, with him reflecting on the night he went nuts at a comedy club and how it's haunted him since.  That episode and the Julia Louis-Dreyfus episode are awesome cause it's just old friends reminiscing.  The biggest surprise was the Ali Wentworth episode, as it's similar to the Seinfeld reunion shows in that they are old friends and you seem like a fly on the wall to a very cool dinner party with the funniest people on the planet.  The shortest episode is Joel Hodgson episode at 11 minutes, and while it's very funny, you wonder at times "Is Joel okay?"  The funniest episode (and longest at 22 minutes) is probably the Norm Macdonald episode where it's just a laugh a second.  Seeing Seinfeld interview Barack Obama was tremendous.  But the one I loved the most, though, was the one with Carl Reiner and Mel Brooks.  These two comedy legends are a treasure, as it starts with Reiner but Seinfeld ends up invited to their nightly dinner at Reiner's house.  Brooks then takes over and never stops talking while Reiner serves the food.  You can tell Reiner has heard these stories a million times but loves Brooks, plus you can tell Seinfeld is having the time of his life as if comes across on screen.  Same goes for the Don Rickles episode, but to a little lesser extent.  And of course you get to know Seinfeld alot too.  He's a prickly pear at times, they kind of guy who will stop and take a picture with fans and then as soon as the fans are gone he'll make fun of them.    The most telling quote from him was as he's walking down the street, someone screams out of joy, he waves at them, says hello, then says "I hate that sound.  The high pitched squeal is the sound of dumbness".  But yet somehow he's still really likeable, probably because he's basically found a dream job and gets to do fun stuff that doesn't really involved too much work.  And of course, he's really funny too.  So I look forward to watching all the other episodes at some point.  *Smokers report: None.

January 20th - THE POST (2017)

So, here's the prequel to "All the President's Men".  No really, watch the film and then you'll want to run home and put in a copy of that movie right away.  As far as I can tell (having only done about thirty minutes of research since coming home from watching this film in the local theatre), only one character carries over between the two and that's Ben Bradlee, who is played by Tom Hanks here and Jason Robards in "ATPM".  How's this for an interesting sidebar.  I was about to write "In the year in between the court case and the Watergate break in (aka the year in between the end of "The Post" and the beginning of "ATPM"), Bradlee seems to have aged about ten years!"  But then I looked it up…Robards, when he played Bradlee in ATPM, he was 54 and when Hanks played Bradlee, he was 60…so that's weird, eh?  In other words, Tom Hanks is a wizard!!!  BUT WHAT ABOUT THIS FILM?  So it's about THE POST aka The Washington Post (which is headquartered in New York, btw, not Washington), and it's team of reporters, headed by Bradlee, and also the rich owner of the paper, Katherine Graham, played by Meryl Streep and the conflict of whether or not to print leaked classified documents.  And also President Nixon's attempts to stifle the "freedom of the press".   And protests…lots of protests.  See any modern day parallels?  The only things that are different then to now are that the US isn't in a full-on war like with Vietnam (at least not yet) and that a white woman comes out the hero (whereas today white women are THE REASON this is all happening, according to some).  And this is a very pro-women film, painting Streep's character as someone to admire and look up to, putting literally everything on the line to "do the right thing".  Plus all this big moments, where John Williams score really kicks in and the camera slowly (but not at all subtly)  moves in for a close up, all those moments are big speeches by women.  Sarah Paulson, Carrie Coon (from the 3rd season of Fargo) and even the wonderful Alison Brie gets a moment to shine (Paulson is even third billed, which I thought was weird, but good for her agent).  Which is very cool and probably a tradeoff, since otherwise the movie is all (white) dudes and Streep.  Deirdre Lovejoy from The Wire, as Hanks' secretary, didn't get much to do, so maybe there was something cut from the film.  I haven't seen much about this online, which is funny how a movie with Hanks and Streep, directed by Steven Spielberg, isn't getting much buzz.  And there is an all-star cast here.  From Bradley Whitford (in another one of his cringe-inducing roles), Bruce Greenwood, Matthew Rhys (and his haircut) from The Americans, Michael Stuhlbrg and Jesse Plemons (apparently Spielberg is a fan of the Fargo TV show and Breaking Bad), but the coolest thing to me was the Mr. Show reunion of Bob Odenkirk and David Cross, minus any comedy whatsoever.  Odenkirk is given the third biggest role and does well, although his character looks like he's dying of cancer most of the time (PS he's not, he just looks like that).  This movie does want me to re-watch All The President's Men, but also the Robert McNamara documentary "The Fog of War", and also another 2017 movie "Mark Felt: The Man Who Brought Down the White House" starring Liam Neeson which prior to this I didn't know about.  It's very cool how they used Nixon's actual voice in the actual recordings from the White House.  I did see one criticism of the film in that it glosses over The NY Times's efforts to also report this story, which I respond to by saying "The movie is called "The Post"…not "The Times".  So after saying all that, was this a great film?  Well, I guess so…it has all the ingredients for a great movie.  Maybe I'm just an old cynic now, but I remember getting goosebumps watching ATPM for the first time, or even The Fog of War doc.  The only real eye opener to me was that the movie slammed JFK, and actually said that Nixon was just going along with what JFK and JBJ started, and that the "embarrassment of losing a war" was the reason the Vietnam War was still going on and all those American soldiers were dying.  Usually in a liberal Hollywood movie, JFK is portrayed as a paragon of virtue who practically walked on water, along with Martin Luther King Jr., and not portrayed as a human with flaws.  Also, one minor detail, is that as the movie's storyline is happening, the Vietnam War was still going on (and wouldn't end until 1975, approximately four years after this movie takes place) it took me about 3/4 of the movie to realize that.  I think that would have given it more "oomph" if that was hit harder.  I mean, is the movie about freedom of the press or stopping the Vietnam War?  Looking back, the first scene of the movie in Vietnam War seems tacked on in post production cause they focus grouped the movie and after they were like "Oh, was that about Vietnam?"  The biggest thing early on in the film, before the "papers" are even mentioned, is Nixon's daughter's wedding.  I don't consider myself a history buff, but I know stuff, but I can only imagine today's generation watching this and not knowing what's going on, really.  But maybe the that's the point.  I might watch this again when it's on free cable, and it's something for sure to include if you are doing a "Nixon years" movie marathon, but even then it would be down on the list of importance with other movies like ATPM, Apokalypse Now, Nixon, etc. (although now that I think of if I'm not sure I've ever sat through all of "Dick", so that review is coming soon!).  This probably sounds like a negative review, but I did enjoy it, but I just can't say it moved me like other movies with similar subjects.  And the Spielberg-haters will probably have a field day with this, saying he puts a semi-gloss sheen over the whole situation.  I think viewers will like Streep's character transformation, who goes from a mousey quiet yet powerful woman who no one thinks is qualified for her job (Whitford's character early on rips her apart to others knowing full well she's three feet away…I wanted him fired!) to someone who finds her voice and stands up for herself and for what's right.  I just have to wonder if it's Much Ado About Nothing.  But I say go see it…or not.  Whatever.  *Smokers Report: Yes, lots of smoking.  Who smoke more in movies, writers or poker players?  Tom Hanks even smokes here, which I think is the first time he's smoked onscreen (I saw him on Broadway in "Lucky Guy" where he smoked like a chimney) so it wasn't a surprise for me but other might think it's weird seeing Mr Nice Guy Hanks with a cigarette.  Or I'm just weird.  That's totally possible.

January 19th- THE LOST CITY OF Z (2017)

The parade of 2017 movies continues.  Although really, this could be called "The Lost Movie of 2017".  I remember this coming out and disappearing fast.  Few people saw it, but some of them who did called this one of the best movies of the year.  I was intrigued by it, with an interesting cast of Charlie Hunnam, Robert Pattinson, Sienna Miller and Tom Holland and also a fun concept.  But it left theatres so fast, and then kind of disappeared after that.  But now that the "Best of" Lists have come out, it has emerged again…a little.  I had forgotten about it again and then saw it on my PPV channel, so I figured what the heck?  The movie is about obsession, with Hunnam going on several trips to discover "Amazonia" in South America.  One thing I liked that was different from these typical "trip into the jungle" movies was that usually the heroes go on one trip and it last the whole movie and they learn stuff about themselves and each other and stuff.  The first mission is underway, some bad stuff happens, then suddenly Hunnam and others are back home.  What?  So then other stuff happens, and Hunnam returns to the Amazon.  Then he returns home.  Then stuff happens.  Then war breaks out.  Then…etc.  I like it when movies "speed things up" storyline wise, but this was almost Game of Thrones-like silliness in that someone seemed to journey across the world in three seconds flat.  Eventually Tom Holland, the new Spiderman, shows up and he is either sad or angry or…always seemingly this close to crying.  I might need more time to evaluate how I feel about Sienna Miller's character.  She is either the best wife/mom ever, or the worst.  She supports her husband and his adventures.  Apparently each trip lasts minimum two-to-five years.  And later, more of her family leaves and she doesn't seem all that upset.  The only argument she has with her husband is when he forbids her to come with him.  How unreasonable of her to want to see her husband more often than once every half-decade or so.  I'd actually be interested in a movie about her, being basically a single mom and having a husband who shows up eventually and a son who…well I won't spoil things.  They could have had subplots about her having lots of suitors and being conflicted, like Odysseus' wife Penelope.  Anyway, despite my quibbles, this was a very well done film.  It was slow and took it's time, which in 2017 seems old fashioned.  There is a big subplot with Angus Macfadyen but really it goes nowhere after setting up Macfayden as a villain and he meets his fate offscreen in a moment you may have missed if you blinked.  There is a great film here, but unfortunately it is a bit anticlimactic I have to say.  It's nice to look at and all the performances are done well, but I'm not sure I'll ever watch this again.  *Smokers Report: Some cigars, Pattinson's character smokes, I think.

January 18th- THE TRIP TO SPAIN (2017)

Steve Coogan and Rob Brydon now have done three movies together in this series ("The Trip", "The Trip to Italy", and now "The Trip to Spain") and I want more, frankly.  According to Wikipedia, these movies are edited down versions of a TV series.  I want the TV series!! (although the only copies I can find on Amazon are Region 2.  That's lame).  Anyway, back when I first saw The Trip, I was late to the party, but it was one of the freshest, funniest thing I had seen in years.  The sequel, The Trip to Italy had it's great bits but it was a notch below the first one, although at this point that has to be expected with just sequels in general.  This third instalment is a return to form and is laugh out loud funny!  The charm of these films is Coogan and Brydon's chemistry and how they launch into impressions and impromptu sketches and how they play off each other.  They try to have an overall story arc, getting more elaborate with each film and frankly it's just distracting at this point.  For example, Coogan and Brydon are playing versions of themselves, and since I don't know much about their personal lives, I don't know how much is fiction and how much is real.  Like is Emma really Coogan's assistant?  The parts where, in this film, Coogan is dating a married woman…that has to be fake because, well, I doubt the woman's husband would appreciate it.  There has been a subplot of each movie dealing with Coogan's womanizing and it's, again, a distraction.  One subplot that does work is each one's careers as they have made these movies.  At the time the first one came out, Coogan was an emerging star and Brydon was an unknown.  In this film, Brydon is still an unknown (although David Bowie was a fan) but seems to have prospects whereas Coogan is having problems getting a movie green lit.  Again, I don't know how much of that is true, but I don't really care.  And frankly, it doesn't really go anywhere.  Maybe the fourth film will deal with it.  This film has a major cliffhanger, which I thought was weird and out of place.  But the lovely moments in these films are all when Coogan and Brydon sit down and someone brings them food and they start to riff.  Again, there are some genuinely laugh out loud moments.  Then they get in the car or go back to the hotel and some "Storyline" stuff happens when they call home or whatever, then the next day they sit down and eat and it's funny again.  Maybe if I was watching the TV series of six episodes of all this the story lines would help but in this movie version, I just want to see the food and hear them pretend to be Sean Connery or Roger Moore.  That is my comfort food.  They only possible thing wrong with the riffing is that, Coogan especially with his Mick Jagger impression, borders on obnoxious while in a public setting.  In fact, one of their last sit downs inside a restaurant (with them and Emma) they got so loud I was waiting for a waiter to come along and tell them to leave.  But other than that, and the out of place ending, this is tremendous and I want to go back and watch all three again.  And "A Cock and Bull Story" too.  Highly recommended.  *Smokers Report: None that I can remember.

January 17th - MEGAN LEAVEY (2017)

Wow I loved this movie!  Why don't more people know about this?  Okay, I admit I knew about this film and should have seen it sooner.  I had the chance to see this in theatres and, as I mentioned before, sometimes I'm just too lazy or able to come up with some lame excuse not to leave the house/hotel.  And I now regret that.  This was such an uplifting feel-good film that made me cry, made me gasp, actually made me put my hand over my mouth at one point.  I can't remember the last time that happened.  I remember smiling like a fool watching Wonder Woman this year, tears rolling down my cheeks as I watched Star Wars: The Last Jedi.  But a hand-to-mouth gasp?  Nope.  Megan and her partner, Rex are such an inspirational story.  I didn't want the movie to end.  I wanted an immediate sequel where they show Megan and Rex living together after retiring.  Admitidely it might not be that interesting, but I still want it.  I loved that they got right into it.  The introduction of Megan, her enlisting in the army, her crazy home life, her bootcamp training was all established within the first ten minutes.  Then she screws up and ends up being punished by having to take care of the K-9 unit of the Marines, but then meets Rex.  I also liked how they didn't even show us Rex training as a bomb sniffer; he had already been trained, he just needed to learn to trust Megan.  Then they get shipped out and they quickly earn the respect of their fellow Marines on missions.  I was shocked to learn how they don't like dogs where they were (I think it was Iraq), and sometimes will kill dogs, then stuff them with bombs to kill Marines.   That's a special kind of evil.  The rest of the film is both Megan and Rex recovering from injuries, Megan decides to leave the Army but even though he is still injured, they send Rex back to the Middle East, with Megan failing to convince the Army to let her adopt Rex.  I'm sure you can guess what happens here, so if I keep talking is it really a spoiler?  The ending (should) just get you in the feels.  Kate Mara stars as Megan Leavey, and she goes a great job.  It's a great cast, with Edie Falco, Bradley Whitford (who was very understated here, unlike in the West Wing back in the day), Tom Felton (Draco Malfoy, of all people playing a US Marine, although he dos a good job), Common (who seems to be a regular contributor here), and Ramon Rodriguez as well.  It was directed by Gabriela Cowperthwaite, who doesn't even have a Wikipedia page, but apparently has only done a documentary before this.  But she does a great job. The one big fight scene is quite intense and well done.  Not sure what else I can say about this.  This is a great film and people should check it out.  Sidenote: I found an interesting History vs. Hollywood article comparing the movie to reality.  Plus, apparently, the person who took over Rex's care after Leavey wrote a book about Rex, which is talked about in the article. *Smokers Report: In one scene Edie Falco smokes while eating lunch at a diner, so it made we wonder when that scene was supposed to take place?  Maybe when there were still smoking sections in restaurants?  In this case (unlike Goon and Tusk, for some reason), I trust these filmmakers that that particular detail was researched.

January 16th- BLADE RUNNER 2049 (2017)

Okay, so I'm going to say something new that will probably get my film-buff registration card revoked…I'm not a big fan of the original Blade Runner!  In fact, until recently, I never really "got it".  I tried watching it a few times and just never got into it.  Plus, it was always in the back of my mind whether or not I was watching the "right" version.  There have been a lot of different cuts over the years, between the Theatrical Cut, Director's Cut…seven total cuts apparently, according to Wikipedia, including "The Final Cut".  The one I watched off of cable the other day (to prepare for this movie) had Harrison Ford's monotone monologue, which apparently he hated (in his words, he went "kicking and screaming" into the studio to record it), and the "$" (which is what I'm now going to call the "Studio-Mandated-Awkward-Happy-Ending").  In fact, one thing I read about the new movie was that it would go along with the idea that Ford's character is a replicant.  Well, in the version I saw, that was never discussed, at least as far as I can remember.  I also imagine it must have been hard for the writers of the sequel, trying to decide which version they were making a sequel too…but anyway, this movie was one I kind of wanted to see in theatres, I would have called myself at least "curious" to see it, but it's 2 hour and 44 minute runtime (over three hours actual time if you add in commercials, trailers, finding parking, standing in line for popcorn, etc.) was intimidating.  Plus I would have wanted to re-watch the original first, since like I said, it wasn't burned into my memory like it was for some people.  But then lately this movie was on a lot of year-end-lists, and it ended up on my PPV, so here we are.  But what about this film?  It is…epic, that's for sure, like "Giant" I reviewed earlier.  Scenes are allowed to breathe, sure, but there is one scene where Ryan Gosling's character (SPOILERS) finishes up a chat with Morgan from Walking Dead, he plays with what looks like an ashtray on the desk, and then he proceeds to go look around the furnaces for something that we know he's going to find, as he had shared a memory earlier.  We know where this is going, but it takes over four minutes of screen time for us to come to the conclusion.  They show us looking down, then looking up, then turning around, then coming out the door, then walking down the stairs, looking left, looking right…you must see what I'm getting at here.  All the while Hans Zimmer's "BLAAAAAHHHH" score ringing in my ears.  Maybe I'm just not a connoisseur of movie scores, but Zimmer…am I the only one who thinks all his scores sound the same?  Like an air horn but with just way more bass?  Anyway, that being said, there is a bit of a mystery here and it's well done.  I liked newcomers Ana de Armas, Sylvia Hoeks and Carla Juri, with Armas making the biggest impression, but the movie has been tagged with claims of sexism, as every female character is a automaton, a villain or a space prostitute.  I thought Robin Wright and Canadian Mackenzie Davis' characters were above that, but whatever, I'm not getting into the Blade Runner sexual politics here (I did that for other movies back in 2016 here...).  Bigger stars Harrison Ford and (ugh) Jared Leto are in very few scenes, although Ford was in more than I thought he would be, and Leto not in as many as I thought he would be, which was a nice trade off.  Did they dub Leto's voice?  It just didn't seem to fit, especially in his last scene.  Also another reason not to watch this film when it was in the theatres was the vignette I saw where director Canadian boy Denis Villeneuve, when talking about Jared Leto, referred to his performance as something like "if Jesus was an actor" or something like that which just made me go "Eww".  Leto is becoming the new Ben Affleck with negative charisma, as in I want to avoid his films and not see them.  On a positive note, it was nice seeing Edward James Olmos as well.  One minor side note, in the trailers I kept seeing Ana de Armas's character, although I thought it was another Canadian, Mia Kirschner…they look really alike, although Armas is 13 years younger, which I'm sure is a coincidence.  BUT WHAT ABOUT THIS FILM?  I did like it, I admit.  I wasn't blown away by it, however the cinematography, the sets, the costumes are all beautiful to look at.  I even enjoyed the original Blade Runner when I re-watched it.  I'm glad I watched them, but is 2049 going on my top ten list (if I had one)?  No.  It's like Denis Villeneuve's other recent film "Arrival".  I respect it, admire it, and realize I should probably watch it again to fully appreciate the artistry involved.  But something tells me I won't ever be doing that.  Maybe I need my lead actors to have more going on?  When watching Ryan Gosling just staring at people instead of engaging them in dialogue, I found myself saying "sure, that's an interesting choice, but can ya…do something?"  Between this and ScarJo in "Ghost in the Shell", can we not have emotionless robots as lead characters anymore (not a spoiler, btw, it's in the trailer).  Sure characters like Data on Star Trek: TNG were cool but would I want a whole Data movie?  Although, if you need someone pretty to just stare straight ahead and look confused, Canadian boy Gosling is your man.  So, final verdict?  It's not the "instant classic" that some have called it, and it's not "horrible and pretentious" that others have called it.  I say watch it, but find a comfy seat and give your self an intermission (aka pee break) cause this movie isn't going to do it for you.  *Smokers Report: Yes, in one scene Gosling smokes, but I don't remember him ever doing it again.  It was weird.  Was this their way of tipping their hat to Ridley Scott?  At least in "The Fifth Element" when they have Bruce Willis smoke early on but never again, it established why later on in the film he would have matches on him.  But here…it didn't fit.  Between that and the few nipples on display, it just seemed like they were saying "This is a big boy movie!".  Or maybe I'm over thinking it…that happens. :)

January 15th - TABLE 19

I watched this film out of pure curiosity.  Plus it is a 2017 film, and I'm trying to watch as many as possible as I can (short of limited release movies like Shape of Water or I,Tonya) and somehow watching this movie makes up for not watching others.  So more quantity than quality.  Plus I'm a big Anna Kendrick fan, so that helped.  Actually, I liked this entire cast.  Craig Robinson and Lisa Kudrow play a married couple, Stephen Merchant (who I like in pretty much everything he does, starting with the British "Office" series, all the way up to this year's "Logan"), Tony Revolori (the kid from Grand Budapest Hotel) and June Squibb rounding out the table, with Squibb being the only one I hadn't heard of before.  Apparently she was nominated for Best Actress for "Nebraska"?  Is that true, internet?  The more you think you know…anyway, this is a comedy about six strangers who go to a wedding and have to sit together at the last table, where all the "randoms" are placed.  And the wackiness that ensues.  Also in the cast is Wyatt Russell, ironically, who I just saw in Goon 2 yesterday.  Weird how that turned out, totally a coincidence!  Also here is Amanda Crew, a Canadian girl who you might know as Monica on "Silicon Valley".  And why am I wasting time going over the cast?  Hmmm…I liked this movie, I did.  But here I am, a few hours later, trying to write this and there's nothing going on here.  There was a bit of a twist when it came to who Kendrick would end up with, which was good.  I liked the cast, the premise, the set-up, the results…it was just FINE I guess.  I can't give it a bad review, as it was a fine movie and there was nothing offensive about it.  It was just…FINE!  If you want a fine comedy to watch on a rainy Sunday afternoon…this works!  A short review…I guess this makes up for the really long Goon 2 review…*Smokers Report: A few of the Table-ers smoke a pipe at one point and get high…I think that's it…

January 14th- GOON: LAST OF THE ENFORCERS (2017)

Okay, so I am a huge hockey fan.  And when I heard that the first in this series was going to be called "Goon" and was going to focus on the fighting side of the game, I was disappointed.  But still, there was a movie…about hockey!  I, in principle, disagree with this movie's point of view (that hockey is a sport about blood and fighting and nothing else), and hate that fighting, as opposed to the real art of a sport that requires it's players to do everything basketball players do but WITH STICKS AND ON ICE, would be the focus.  I do acknowledge that fighting as a place in the game, and disagreed with pundits in the 90's that yelled for fighting to be abolished.  The fact fighting exists helps keep down the amount of high sticks,  ankle-hacks and cheap shots, in my humble opinion (except if you are Phil Kessel...ha! hockey fan joke!).  I remember watching "Slap Shot" for the first time and wondering "Is that really how they played hockey back then?" with using their sticks like swords in a Robin Hood movie?  Then the first Goon came out and they introduced something that I had never seen before…when two players want to fight, everything just stops and they go to centre ice like two boxers.  That even started happening in a few NHL games afterwards, but I haven't seen it since.  But what about this film?  This is the sequel to that first "Goon" hockey fighting movie, which I did enjoy.  Is it possible to put away my feelings about the glorification of fighting in hockey and actually be able to enjoy a movie?  Sure.  In the original, I liked the cast and it was funny through most of the film.  I liked the fact young Canadian actors like Eugene Levy, Jay Baruchel and Alison Pill are appearing in a Canadian film and not just all Hollywood Blockbusters along with good ol' Canucks Nicholas Campbell and Kim Coates.  One side note about the first Goon movie (that does relate to this film) is that I was always distracted by Sean William Scott's face…it looked like he had gotten a facelift and his face was all stretched out.  Everytime they cut to him, I was weirded out.  But that wasn't the case in this movie and Scott was back to looking like an older Stifler.  But, again, WHAT ABOUT THIS MOVIE?  It was good.  Not as funny as the first one, but it is a more complete story, with a few characters actually having story arcs, Scott's Doug being one of them.  This is actually more of a hockey movie, as Doug's teammate LaFlemme matures as a player, starting to block shots and hit opponents, leading to him becoming not just a hot dog puck hog like he was in the first film and he ends up being named the Team Captain.  He gives a speech late in the film that all young hockey players should listen to about "evolving".  There are ALOT of fights here, but they become parody, as in the world of this movie, there is a touring road show that involves hockey goons, fighting on skates, but no hockey.  Like pro wrestling on ice.  The movie adds Elisha Cuthbert, Jason Jones and Wyatt Russell (son of Kurt Russell and Goldie Hawn and as a guess, I imagine this kid grew up playing alot hockey, as Russell and Hawn are huge LA Kings fans) and Baruchel is a minor character here (probably because he was the director?).  Liev Shreiber is good here and I was happy for his character, one of the ones I mentioned getting an actual arc.  Callum Keith Rennie is always fun to see on screen (have you seen "Hard Core Logo"?), an amazing Canadian talent (technically he was born in England, but has lived in Canada since he was four) and he is tremendous here.  Alison Pill's character becomes a pill (pun intended) but they even acknowledge this by having her character admit it, and she gets mad at Scott for making her that way (although shouldn't she have been mad at Baruchel, who co-wrote the script?).  And btw, was it awkward that Baruchel and Pill had to work together, years after they broke up?  There are some things that take me out of the movie, like TJ Miller (what?) as the TSN Sportsdesk anchor who keeps saying the F word…that just doesn't happen.  Even in Canada, still can't say the F word on TV, people.  And also James Duthie as a Sportsdesk anchor…as if!  And the blood…my God the blood!  There is so much tinted-red-ice here, it looks like that scene in The Last Jedi where they skid the speeders over the salt field.  There is so much blood that it's a turn off.  Apparently there was a sale on fake movie blood that day.  But in the end, I am happy for Doug and his family and teammates and really, Baruchel has talked about making Goon 3, but I wouldn't.  I really think everything was wrapped up tight in a neat bow here.  And what would Goon 3 be about?  He gets a call to the NHL and, again, hockey causes family problems, and Pill gets on his case for not being part of the family and worried about him getting hurt?  We've seen that movie.  Sidenote #2: the word "Concussion" is never uttered in this film.  Doug has a lingering injury, but it's a shoulder injury from throwing too many wicked-hard punches.  I wonder if they just figured the word "concussion" was too depressing and too many people would end up agreeing with Pill's character...Anyway...so I did like the film, actually probably more that I did the first movie.  And I want it to do well, cause that means the Canadian movie industry does well too.  So see this one!  *Smokers Report: Not as much as the first one, where Liev Schreiber smoked everywhere, even in restaurants (which also Johnny Depp did in Kevin Smith's "Tusk" as well…same as the F word on TV…DOESN'T HAPPEN PEOPLE!).  Schreiber's character still smoked in just about every scene but at least he's outside when he does, like every other human being for, like, years!

January 13th - THE STOOGE (1951)

I remember back in the summer of 1991 discovering cable for the first time.  And by that I mean the kind of cable you had to pay for and rent one of those cable boxes from the cable company.  In the summer of 1991, this was new to us, so we got one and we got (if memory serves) four new channels - TBS from Atlanta, WGN from Chicago, the Disney Channel and Super Channel (which was just a movie channel, basically).  TBS gave me a lot of WCW pro wrestling, WGN gave us pretty much nothing new other than we could watch the Chicago 6pm news (and why would we?) but also the promise of watching local Chicago sports teams play, Super Channel was awesome, and the Disney channel was, well, kinda lame.  That was the crown jewel, as everyone who wanted the cable box said "Well, at least we'll get the Disney channel".  But from what I remember, there wasn't much to it.  What I do remember (besides that crappy cable box…seriously whenever they did a "free preview weekend", they just flipped a switch and boom the channels were no longer fuzzy…yet to get the channels permanently, you 'needed' to rent the box…my first ever "cable provider scam"! part of every young boy's growing up phase), is that they would occasionally show Dean Martin and Jerry Lewis specials (I'm pretty sure they were repeats of the Colgate Comedy Hour, or at the very least highlight reels - I'm going off memory here people).  I believe they were their TV specials, not their movies, but I could be remembering that wrong.  Point is, I LOVED watching Martin & Lewis together.  I thought they were the funniest people I'd ever seen.  I'm not saying anything new, but Martin being so damn cool and the straight man to Lewis' craziness was just perfection.  I've always wanted to see some of their movies, all these years later.  Jerry Lewis passed away and on Labour Day, TCM did a tribute to him (fitting since he did the Labour Day telethon for so many years).  Among the movies they showed were "King of Comedy", "The Bellboy" and this movie "The Stooge", the only Martin & Lewis one that I recorded, and according to Illeana Douglas (who was friends with Lewis) this was their best one.  This was their fifth movie made together but was the seventh released; apparently the studio didn't think it was funny enough and would hurt the duo's box office magic.  This is a great film and actually brings up some interesting comedy "psychology".  In the movie, Martin's character is an entertainer in decline until he meets up with Lewis, who becomes his "stooge", a character planted in the audience who Martin can make fun of in a hilarious fashion and make the audience laugh.  The act becomes a big success, but everyone around Martin, including his wife, get mad because Martin wants to keep Lewis' talents a secret, and not acknowledge him in the posters, programs, etc.  His argument is that if people knew about Lewis and that he was part of the show, the audience members wouldn't laugh as hard or be as entertained.  If they knew it was all "fake" or "choreographed" as opposed to "real" and "spontaneous", then word would get out and the show wouldn't be as popular.  The people around Martin just think he's being selfish and wants all the credit for himself.  But I actually thought Martin had a very genuine argument.  When the audience comes in knowing they are part of the act, then that changes the emotion they are feeling.  Instead of watching the show, Martin on stage with his accordion, they are sitting there wondering when Lewis is going to show up.  That being said, of course Lewis' character deserved recognition.  And Martin's argument falls apart when you consider at some point, if they tour for years successfully, at some point SOMEONE is going to see the show twice, or even more often, and what happens then?  What happens when they've toured all over and come back to a city for the second time?  Are the people who come to the show going to be all new people who have never seen the show before or mostly people coming to see it again?  Am I over thinking this silly comedy?  Probably.  When it gets right down to it, it's great seeing these two talents together, and I look forward to watching other Martin and Lewis movies.  It's too bad they split up and didn't talk for twenty years.  This movie is apparently thought of as "too real", as if their characters in the film shared the same kind of relationship in real life.  I'm sure that a movie about that would be interesting.  But would it be as interesting as "Where the Truth Lies?"  *Smokers Report: Dean Martin is in this film.  Nuff said.

January 12th - EXTRACT (2009)

This movie has been a curiosity to me over the years.  Mike Judge is an interesting artist, after all.  I loved Beavis and Butthead, and King of the Hill, then "Office Space" is a still a movie I will watch whenever it's on TV (and like "Ocean's Eleven", it's on ALOT!) and I'm currently a fan of "Silicon Valley".  Like many other confessions I've made on here, this might get my film-buff credentials taken away, but I don't quite 'get' "Idiocracy".  I watched it years ago but I'd have to watch it again, cause I'm a bit baffled by it's current legendary status.  I knew very little about this film and didn't even know it was a Mike Judge film until later.  I had heard bad things about this film, eventhough it had Jason Bateman in it (who I'm a fan of from Arrested Development) but Bateman was in every other film at the time and just his presence in a movie didn't necessarily mean it was good.  I also was curious about the whole Ben Affleck thing.  I saw the trailer with Affleck (who was in "movie jail" at the time after Daredevil and Gigli) and thought it was hilarious he wore that weird wig, almost to "hide" that AFFLECK was in this movie.  And if someone told me that, I would believe it, as Affleck at that point was the only person who would cast Affleck as the lead in a film, he was that toxic.  Then he started getting out of movie jail as a director with Gone Baby Gone, The Town and Argo, but then he had to go and want to play Batman and the internet turned on him again...but what about THIS film?  Well, it has an all-star cast, eventhough at the time it came out it wasn't an all-star cast.  In the years since, Mila Kunis, JK Simmons, Kirsten Wiig, TJ Miller, Clifton Colins, Jr, David Koechner have all become stars and even superstars.  There's a even a good Canadian boy, Dustin Milligan in the movie...every movie needs at least one!  It's billed as a comedy, but I only remember laughing once.  I think.  And it came from Simmons...Gene Simmons actually, not JK.  Gene plays a ambulance chaser-lawyer, and says to Bateman at one point that they will drop the charges if Bateman agreed to have his balls slammed in a doorway.  He says this three or four times.  Finally, Bateman gets mad and says he'll slam Gene's balls in the doorway instead.  Gene gets serious, looks at him and says "Are you threatening me?".  Maybe you had to be there.  Despite the hilarious, talented and beautiful cast, there isn't much here.  The script is all over the place.  It's called "Extract" but that's about the only thing in the script that doesn't become a factor.  I assumed part of the plot would center around a secret formula being sold to a competitor or something.  Kunis steals all her scenes, with her fireworks display of a smile, although later she has to fake cry in a scene and it's the fakest fake crying ever.  Maybe if she'd had to really cry, it would have been better?  And Wiig is bland at first but gets more and more interesting as the movie progresses and is wonderful, as usual.  Affleck is almost unrecognizable here, not only cause of the wig but he's really slim and kinda goofy, totally different from the usual Affleck character.  But not in a good way.  I also almost didn't recognize TJ Miller, or even Judge himself in a cameo.  This is a movie I'd almost have to watch and study to figure out why it just doesn't work.  But chances are I'll never watch this again.  *Smokers Report: None that I can remember...I'd double check but why?

January 11th- GIANT (1956)
I had no idea this was 3.5 hours when I sat down to watch it.  Apparently director George Stevens took over a year to edit it down, and still ended up with an "epic" movie.  What did he take out?  Every scene here seems like it goes on for at least ten minutes or more.  EVERY SCENE!  There are lots of pauses and pensive reflections and back and forth arguments, some of them even repeated twice (like when Elizabeth Taylor and Rock Hudson argue before going to bed about her wanting to be able to talk politics, and then in the morning they argue about it again!).  And I don't necessarily mean that as a criticism.  But as someone who might have ADHD (never been diagnosed anyway) it was hard for me to stay focused during this film.  During James Dean's scenes especially.  Whenever he's on camera, he stammers and shuffles his feet and takes a stroll between sentences of dialogue, towards the end of the film his mumbling is inaudible (on the Wikipedia page it says Stevens had to get someone to come in and dub over Dean's voice…I know exactly which scenes, and also, couldn't they have gotten someone to at least sounded like Dean?).  Rock Hudson would have long pauses but at least you could tell what he was thinking by his facial expressions.  Elizabeth Taylor is the opposite of Dean in many ways…she yells, stomps her feet and is immovable, leaving no doubt what she is thinking, cause she'll tell you!  To your face!  This is a story about Texas and multiple generations of a family and after 3.5 hours, the last scene is about (SPOILERS) Rock Hudson saying after all that time that he's a failure, and Elizabeth Taylor basically agreeing with him, but yet, finally, he's become her hero.  Cool.  I was waiting for one more scene, where Rock Hudson goes back to the restaurant and buys it, or SOMETHING happens (or kicks that racist dude's ass, like in Superman 2!).  There's a ten minute fight scene that kinda goes nowhere.  The major subplot is about racism, and I was surprised that in fact Hudson becomes the "good guy" (so to speak) by becoming a little less racist than he was in the beginning.  Just a little though (in that last scene he still looks at his Latino grandson with disdain) although I guess we are supposed to be satisfied but the fact he lets that grandson into the house at all?  Or maybe I missed the point and he was just sad about the fact the old ways, his ways, are gone, and he's the only one who seems to care?  Maybe.  It is of course a tragedy that James Dean died weeks after this movie finished filming.  But to me Elizabeth Taylor totally steals the movie.  She fights back at the overwhelming sexism and racism in that region, including improving the quality of life for everyone no matter their race, she tries to raise her children properly…and yet in the end her sole reason to exist is to make her husband feel good about getting his butt kicked in a fight.  Mixed messages maybe?  Or maybe I'm over thinking it?  Or under thinking it?  Anyway, I did enjoy the film, although I actually agree with the studio heads from then…it could have been shorter, even just a little bit.  *Smokers Report: Yes there is smoking throughout the film, mostly by Dean and some by Hudson, but it's nothing, really.

January 10th - BUNDLE OF JOY (1956)

So legend has it, during this film Debbie Reynolds was pregnant with Carrie Fisher.  And it's about a woman becoming a mother.  Pretty cool!  Only thing that would be cooler was if they made the movie a year later and baby was played by Carrie herself.  Although by then had Debbie Reynolds and Eddie Fisher been split up by Elizabeth Taylor?  Anyway, this is a musical remake of "Bachelor Mother", which starred Ginger Rogers and David Niven.  I really enjoyed that film, but do musical remakes work?  I love "The Philadelphia Story" but can never get into "High Society" for some reason.  So we'll see...the setup of the film, other than the added musical numbers, are nearly shot for shot the same as "Bachelor Mother".  Even the weird part where Niven confronts Ginger, yells at her and fires her, walks toward the door, turns around and seconds later nicely asks if she has decided to beg for her job back.  Eddie Fisher does the same exact routine here, and it's just as weird.  Why would she beg for her job back, you just fired her?  David Niven couldn't pull that off, so Fisher didn't really have a chance.  As an actor, let's just say he's a great singer...he tries some slapstick Jerry Lewis type stuff but just looks silly.  But as I said before, this is a great story, so if they did follow the formula, they should be okay.  Anyway, by the end of the film, I felt emotional, happy for Debbie and Eddie, Adolphe Menjou who melts at the sight of a child who MIGHT be his grandson, but mostly for little Johnny, who is abandoned outside an orphanage, but finds not only a mother and a father, but a protector in Ms. Dugan, and a grandfather...an entire family.  And that's pretty cool for someone who "nobody wanted".  Apparently this was the first and last time Debbie and Eddie were in a movie together and, as I said earlier, they split soon after thanks to Eddie falling for Elizabeth Taylor...which leads to tomorrow's movie... *Smokers Report: None other than Menjou smoking a cigar.

January 9th - THELMA AND LOUISE (1991)

It's funny how a movie like this can take on a legend of it's own.  I have never sat down to watch this film, and yet I know everything about it.  I knew how it began, I know how it continued and I for sure knew how it ended.  So up to this point, I had wondered "Why should I bother?"  But then I also thought "Why not?"  And then seeing Geena Davis and Susan Sarandon at the Golden Globes together made it more of a pressing need.  But did what I "knew" match up to reality?  I was curious how a "feminist" movie like this was directed by Ridley Scott, for instance.  And because of that fact, I knew the movie would look really slick.  More Beverly Hills Cop 2 than Beverly Hills Cop.  Stylish as hell.  There is some of the fakest looking rain in scenes with Harvey Keitel and Christopher McDonald.  And while I'm at it, let's do the Smokers Report now...there is so much smoke in this film that it gets distracting.  Sarandon, at least in the beginning of the film, always has a smoke in her hand and exhales to the best of her ability each time.  Pretty much every important character smokes in this film.  There's even one scene where a dude is cleaning the pool at a hotel and he's smoking.  Even the extras smoke!  Not sure the point of the scene with the Jamaican guy, smoking a joint who comes across the cop in the trunk, though.  All the dust flying around makes for a good effect, especially during the car chase sequences through the desert.  And of course there's a big damn explosion.  Of course.  This is a long film and it's slow to start, but that's important to establish both Thelma and Louise and their characters.  Plus the men in their lives, and the circumstances that lead them to their situation.  Davis' transformation in particular is really well done, from snivelling scaredy-cat housewife to total bad ass, as opposed to Sarandon who starts out with a chip on her shoulder and she gets "softer" as the movie progresses.  I liked the Keitel character and the fact that he was the only good man in the film, and that if I didn't know the ending of the movie already, I would think him and Sarandon got together eventually.  Brad Pitt here is almost unrecognizable (to me anyway) as a skinny punk hayseed, but I guess I can see how this turned him into a star.  I don't remember him eating food in any of the scenes, so maybe that's why I didn't recognize him?  The only real negative criticism I can give the film (the stuff with the smoke and fake rain was just annoying) is the ending.  Not that ending, the one we've all seen a million times, hand clenched together.  I mean the part when they fade to white and IMMEDIATELY cut to a happy montage with happy music, as if the studio wanted to, after all the time, just get the hell out of there and were in their cars driving home before anyone watching realised what just happened to their two favourite characters.  It, like the ending to "$", just seemed like a studio note.  But this was a great film and I'm very happy I finally watched it. 

January 8th - THE THRILL OF IT ALL (1963)

I am a huge James Garner fan, but not so much Doris Day, which is border line blasphemous in classic movie fan circles, and it's not like I don't like her, I just haven't seen alot of her movies.  Kinda like Audrey Hepburn.  Please send hate tweets to @abuckley23...But what about this film?  It is super old fashioned!  The movie ends with the housewife, after getting a taste of a life outside the home, agreeing to give it all up and have a third baby with her husband, just to make him feel better.  It's a sweet film, but I can see some people today watching this film and being so enraged they throw their TV's out the window (although with today's flatscreens, it wouldn't be difficult as it was "back in the day".)  The funniest part to me was finding out that this was directed by NORMAN JEWISON of all people (of IN THE HEAT OF THE NIGHT and ROLLERBALL) and written by Carl Reiner and Larry Gelbart, two legendary comedic talents.  Looking up their timeline of their careers, this was before Reiner created the Dick Van Dyke Show and before Gelbart created MASH (and that movie Neighbours I mentioned before...gotta watch that...and Rhinestone, although that's not related to this...)...so I guess this was a bunch of young up and comers trying to pad their resumes and hopefully later get to the point they can do...better?  This isn't remembered as a classic, but there are some funny bits, starting around the part Garner does the classic "if looks could kill" look as he drives his car into the backyard pool, and up to the guys coming and getting rid of all the soap suds from the backyard.  And the kids were cute, as the little girl in this movie was the littlest girl from "The Sound of Music".  I got a little confused at the end, with Garner stopping his male chauvinist tirades and trying to make Day jealous instead, but that's all dropped when a background character has to deliver a baby.  And perhaps the problem is that Garner is too charming...by the end of the movie you are almost convinced that "Yeah, she really should get back to being barefoot, pregnant, taking care of the kids and making sure he has dinner on the table when he gets home..."  Not sure I'll ever watch this again...if anything this movie maybe should go in a time capsule for future generations to look at how it used to be but never for it to be like that again... *Smokers Report: About every third character smokes...in fact at one point it looked like the only people not smoking were Day and the two kids.

January 7th - NORMA RAE (1979)

The theme of movies about strong women continues with this film starring Sally Field in her most iconic role as the fictional Norma Rae, a single mom who wants a better life for her family and wants to have the textile plant she works for to unionize.  First, I was surprised to hear that Norma Rae is a fictional character, based on a real person, Crystal Lee Sutton, her actions and her book that came out in 1975.  In reading up on this movie, it's funny that they changed the name of the main character but yet filmed scenes that were based on real events, like when Norma transcribes the letter posted on the bulletin board and when she stands on the table and writes "UNION", followed by her co-workers shutting down their machines in a sign of solidarity.  Plus it seems like alot of Sutton's personal life is just like Norma's...being a widow, remarrying later on, etc.  So why did they not just call the character Crystal Sutton?  And why am I hung up on this?  Having just watched "Molly's Game", based on a real person, using her real name (and not using others, which is a theme in the movie), where alot of events/timelines (seem to be) changed (based on the minimal research I've done aka read the Wikipedia page).  It's funny-slash-puzzling to me how things are done in Hollywood, and most likely always will be.  But what about this film?  They do a great job with the backstory of the main characters and there is more texture than I would have thought (for instance, why not just start the movie with her married to Beau Bridges?).  I guess they wanted to show her struggling as a single mom, show her relationship with her mother and father?  That she did, in fact, "sleep around" with married men, and it wasn't a character flaw.  Her courtship and marriage to Bridges happens so fast if I had blinked, or gone to the bathroom, I might have missed it.  But the most important relationship in the movie is between Norma and the union organizer, Ron Liebman.  And his scenes in the movie are all great, with this self identifying Jew trying to fit in in this little town.  A town so small that Norma asks him if he has horns, as that's what she's always heard.  His intensity is tremendous on screen, and it's funny that I don't recall seeing him much at all over the years.  I remember watching "Night Falls on Manhattan", a very underrated film IMHO, where he is one of the leads and I thought "Who is this guy?"  And now I want to know what he did between those two movies.  He's great.  Although as I look him up, he was Rachel's dad on "Friends" and apparently appeared in "Rhinestone" which is on my DVR and I plan to review soon.  And he's married to Jessica Walter, who is best known as Lucile Bluth on "Arrested Development", so that's cool.  I admit I did expect more violence in the film, like Norma getting beaten up, Liebman getting beat up, late night phone calls, even possibly the "R" word (not that I wanted to see that, I just assumed the writers would include one)...but the people in charge of the factory seem like people who don't want the union but aren't THAT bad people, probably just uneducated.  And there aren't any real HORRIBLE things that go on to make the union a reality.  There is one part where six white dudes beat up a black guy who is part of the union, but that's the only kind of non-union violence I can remember, and even that is broken up quickly.  At times the movie does seem more focused on Norma's social life and TELLING us the factory is awful than showing us.  Norma's mother and father being the exception, of course.  And it is kinda weird that Liebman is in that backwater town for so long and doesn't at least get a black eye or something.  Just for being a Jew and existing, really...would those hillbillies need more of a reason?  Anyway, now I'm just rambling.  The last scene is great and I'm glad they didn't go for the obvious ending (like they did for "$" apparently.)  Overall this is a great film and I recommend it.  Sidenote: Funny seeing those textile machines in two movies this month...this movie and "Wanted".  *Smokers Report: Yes, but not alot...

January 6th - MOLLY'S GAME (2017)

Wow, this was a great film.  I told a friend I was going to see this film today, they asked what it was about, and I honestly couldn't say.  After seeing it, I can say things like "It's about Molly Bloom, who was an Olympic skier, then ran poker tournaments, got into trouble, wrote a book, got into more trouble..."  Apparently Molly Bloom was named the "Poker Princess" by the tabloids and this was a big story at one point, but I had never heard of it.  They must not have covered it on the Daily Show.  But back to that description...that doesn't sound too interesting, does it?  It's hard, especially without revealing spoilers, talking about this movie too much.  It's written and directed by Aaron Sorkin (the first movie he's directed, surprisingly) and the dialogue is exceptional.  It snaps and pops, especially with scenes involving star Jessica Chastian and Idris Elba.  This back and forth verbal duels are just as sexy as if they were having a love scene.  Sorkin I have had a love-hate relationship with.  I loved Sports Night when it came out, but have since re-watched it and...not so much.  I respect it, sure, but other than Robert Guillaume (RIP), everyone came off as entitled liberal whiners...and that's coming from me!  The West Wing I LOVED when I watched it (except for Bradley Whitford...I wanted to punch him), probably cause that's how I hoped the West Wing was actually ran (especially at the time, with Bush in charge; and if I watched it now, it would probably be soul-crushing).  The Newsroom I hate-watched the f out of that show.  I wanted to punch Will McAvoy in the face (not Jeff Daniels...him I like).  How West Wing and Newsroom are different in my brain...I guess it is really quantified by "A Few Good Men", which when I watched it as a teenager (not knowing who the f Aaron Sorkin was), I was happy when Jack Nicholson went to jail.  When I watched it later on as an adult, still liberal but older and jaded, I cringed.  But what about this film? Like I said, it's hard to talk about without spoilers...Chastian will get nominated for an Oscar, Elba and Kevin Costner should be, and Aaron Sorkin will be lavished with as many accolades as possible.  And as I said in my "Wind River" review last month, it's always a pleasure to see Graham Greene on screen.  I liked how it was told "out of order" (but not in a Pulp Fiction way...it still was easy to figure out what was present day and what was a flashback).  And the message, basically about a woman almost literally wanting to "stick it to the man" is very timely.  There are certain parts of this movie that are heart breaking and some that (should) want you to stand up and cheer.  Only weird thing is that I read the Wikipedia page of this entire real-life situation and it was alot different than the movie.  Not "A Walk to Remember" different (only example I could come up with quickly), but maybe that's why there was a joke in the movie about Molly not wanting to sell her story to Hollywood because of "Creative Differences"?  Anyway, this is a GREAT film, probably will be in my Top 10 (if I did such things) so GO SEE IT!  *Smokers Report: Yes, lots of smoking.  It's about dudes sitting around playing poker, so yeah, lots of smoking in this movie.

January 5th - $ (1971)

Okay, first off, I'm all for being creative with names for films.  You kinda have to be, especially today.  There are some great films with bad titles (like "Out of Sight") that I think legit would have done better with a more creative title.  But just having a dollar sign?  I'm sure the people who had to plug this movie, like radio DJ's and movie theatre ushers and the like, were always like "Is that how I say it?  Is it "Dollar", or "Dollars"?  Or maybe "Dollar Sign?" Screw this…"  I always remember in "That Thing You Do" (great movie, great title) when the band is starting out and they want to be called the "One-Ders" but everyone calls them the "O-KNEE-ders" and Tom Hanks comes along and just simplifies it to "The Wonders" and off they go.  This movie is weird, right off the bat, even in the credit sequence.  Quincy Jones did the music, then they list the songs Little Richard will sing in the movie, weird as that's usually done at the end but maybe when this movie came out they were still figuring out things like the credits, as in movies during this time sometimes had all the credits in the beginning, some at the end…and then the next credit comes up as "DON ELLIOT The Human Instrument".  WHAT DOES THAT MEAN?  Is Don Elliot an actor and he's in the movie playing The Human Instrument?"  Does he contribute to the soundtrack?  I DON'T UNDERSTAND!  So anyway, this movie has started with a bang!  I'd never heard of this film before I saw it listed on TCM.  And the fact Goldie Hawn is in it…well, say no more!  The fact I'd never heard of a particular film doesn't necessarily make me assume the movie is crap (usual theory is "If a movie is any good, you would have heard people talking about it").  Like I just discovered a movie called "Neighbours" which when I saw it listed, I assumed it was the Seth Rogan/Zack Efron movie, but no, apparently it's a John Belushi/Dan Akroyd film.  So I'm curious…but I have heard the legend of Belushi told and I've heard tons about Blues Brothers, Animal House, 1941 even…but Neighbours not so much, so it must suck right?  Wow, I'm off on a tangent.  But what about this film?  It's a heist film, and right off the bat, like Devil In a Blue Dress, it introduces alot of characters all at once, but it does it with confidence.  Warren Beatty comes on screen with no backstory, already a developed character, with the job of a bank security manager.  Goldie Hawn is, of course, a prostitute.  MOVIES!  But she's a prostitute with weird clients, like a guy who gets off thinking he's on fire and sprayed with seltzer water.  This takes place in Germany, and because of tax laws and such, it's legal to have undeclared income in safe deposit boxes...and Beatty gets an idea to rip off alot of people, but only bad people, with Hawn's help.  This is a fun heist movie with a fun plan for the heist.  Heist movies, like film noir, are the kind of movies I'm a sucker for.  I love the planning, the maps and blueprints, the making of gadgets...also in this movie is Goldfinger!  Freakin Goldfinger!  I'm dancing around plot points, as eventhough it's a 47 year old movie, as I stated before, I don't think anyone has seen this movie so I don't want to spoil it.  People should see this movie.  It's fun to watch, funny that apparently Goldie Hawn did this movie after winning an Oscar, which I didn't even know happened.  The only thing about the movie I didn't enjoy was the end of the film where there was literally (I checked) a twenty minute chase scene.  I guess it was creative, with the chase incorporating cars, trains, old fashioned on-foot, even ICE!  But it went on way too long.  Also, there is a SUPER TACKED ON Studio-Approved-Happy-Ending here, and back in the day apparently they didn't have it written into their contracts that they had to do re-shoots.  Not sure when this will air again on TCM but people should find this film. Hopefully they show it again soon, as I always delete films when I'm done watching them out of habit, which I did here, but I would like to watch it again, the first hour anyways (before the chase) and see if it really did all add up.  *Smokers Report: Goldfinger smokes at least once in the movie, as I recall, but that's it...

January 4th - DEVIL IN A BLUE DRESS (1995)

Another Denzel Washington feature...I'm a sucker for film noir and also neo-noir (movies that want to be a film noir but aren't filmed in black and white...right?).  Detective stories are always interesting to me, especially ones set in Los Angeles, like LA Confidential, Chinatown, Marlowe, etc.  Something about the sunshine and palm trees during the day and seediness that comes out at night.  Of course this is a twist, as Denzel's character, "Easy", is someone who is dragged into an investigation and is assumed to be a private investigator by more than a few characters in the movie.  And he ends the movie talking about opening his own PI firm, so presumably if there was a sequel, it would show him as a PI.  This movie reminds me of "The Big Sleep" in the sense that this movie doesn't make...er, sense - at least to me.  There are alot of characters here, some literally only on screen for one scene and a brief one at that, but are important parts of the plot.  There are people shown once who we are told is a main character's brother, or another character's lover, and only about four or five characters are in alot of scenes, so this movie is kind of a memory exercise.  After the movie was over, I went back and read the Wikipedia page for the movie to really figure out what happened.  I kinda figured it out but I had lingering doubts.  And there is one big twist (one that involved Jennifer Beals' character) that I guess back in 1995 was a big twist, but with the advancement of time, it really wasn't a twist.  It's not something on the level of "The Crying Game"'s twist, but still a twist that wasn't a twist to me, at least.  And Don Cheadle...was this his breakout movie?  He kills it (pun intended) in every scene he's in.  This is, like I said, a bit confusing at times, but what film noir isn't, at least a little bit?  I enjoyed the film...but it's not going to be on any of my favourites list.  And usually I save this for the Smokers Report, but there was ALOT of smoking here.  And I might as well talk about this here, but in movies like "The Big Sleep" where it's in black and white somehow the smoking blends in, whereas in a modern movie like this it's distracting (to me).  I understand this was most likely a very specific choice, with the scriptwriters and/or actors thinking they needed to have lots of smoking in order for it to "qualify" as a film noir (or neo noir), ESPECIALLY with the femme fatale character.  I mean, she HAD to smoke, right?  They would be laughed off the screen if she didn't, right?  Anyway, good, but not great film.

*Smokers Report: OH YEAH!

January 3rd - BILL AND TED'S EXCELLENT ADVENTURE (1989)

Been watching alot of Keanu Reeves lately, so why not finally watch this "classic"?  Don't really have a reason that I've never seen this film, just never had the chance.  It's not like it's shown on cable all the time, like "The Italian Job" or "Ocean's Eleven" or "Speed"...it's one I'd have to search out and find.  And also, recently someone pointed out that in this movie, the way that the boys are able to time travel is by using a phone booth.  Apparently, they original script had the time machine as a car, but they wanted to change it as it would be too similar to "Back to the Future".  But then they changed it to the very TARDIS like phone booth.  I had never put together the Dr. Who connection for some reason.  I figured this was a dumb comedy, which I enjoy from time to time (I freaking loved "Encino Man" back in the day, although it's probably been twenty years or more since I've seen it), but again this has just never been an easy film to watch.  I was surprised that the beginning was very slow to get going, with the opening title sequence reminding me of a James Bond cold open (at least the song "I Can't Break Away" did).  And at first I was kind of confused with the plot, as Bill and Ted go through time cherry picking historical figures like Billy the Kid and Joan of Arc and bring them to modern California to be a part of their oral history report, but how will this get them an A?  From the teacher's point of view, if Bill and Ted brought a bunch of actors to a class, and those actors in costume talked about their accomplishments, how does that prove Bill and Ted knew enough history to pass?  Well apparently at some point, Bill and Ted sat down and chatted with all these historical figures, or all the information about them magically was implanted in their brains the closer they got to them, cause Bill and Ted suddenly DID know alot about these people and their accomplishments, so then I can accept them passing their class, even though it makes no sense really.  But then again, this is Bill and Ted's Excellent Adventure, right?  They go through time, getting in wacky adventures, and I started losing interest, honestly, but then they accidentally end up in the future and the scene that happens, for some reason, really felt poignant to me.  The song here "In Time" helps too.

So I found the Soundtrack most excellent.  There are other fun time travel jokes too, as right off the bat, the Bill and Ted from 24 hours earlier show up to tell the current Bill and Ted to go ahead and believe what Rufus is telling them, a nice way to speed things up.  And later, the stuff with Ted's dad and his keys is all fun sci-fi stuff too.  And of course Napoleon being a dick, and his Waterloo waterpark adventures, are pretty funny.  And George Carlin is sorely missed, especially his wit in this modern political climate.  But was he wearing a fake nose?  That distracted me.  And I liked the last scene where they go to "jam" together but of course it's the first time, so they all suck, when I figured they'd magically all be awesome, cause it's a movie.  So I did like this movie and will be definately downloading the soundtrack.  And I will watch the sequel, if I can get my hands on it.  I'll even be rooting for that third movie that's been rumored for awhile now.  And remember, Be Excellent to Each Other!  *Smokers Report: Uh, well I think Bill and Ted are meant to be stoners, and I was looking for evidence, but I couldn't really find any.  I don't remember any smoking at all, really.

January 2nd - THE BIG STORE (1941)
I recorded this on my DVR as part of TCM's annual New Year's Eve Marx Brothers marathon, along with "A Day at the Races", "A Night at the Opera", "Go West", etc.  I just automatically record Marx Bros movies on TCM, like "Casablanca", the Rat Pack's "Ocean's Eleven", "His Girl Friday", "The Philadelphia Story" and others, just cause.  I usually watch a few minutes of these movies and then delete them, but as I watched "The Big Store", I realized I hadn't seen it before.  So then I started paying more attention, and looking it up on Wikipedia.  Turns out this was the last of their five movies with MGM, and advertised as their last EVER movie.  It wasn't, as they did two more movies together ("A Night in Casablanca" and "Love Happy") but this was towards the end of their run together as movie stars.  I've always admired the Marx Bros for not only their gags but their intelligence as well.  Kind of like how I loved and also admired Monty Python, who were not only hilarious comedians, but college graduates whose comedy challenged social and political norms of the time.  The Marx Bros didn't necessarily do that, other than in their best film "Duck Soup", but their comedy was a notch above the Three Stooges, for example, as they had great sketches full of hilarity, but also music numbers as well.  Groucho talked fast and had a machine gun wit, but then Chico could play the piano and Harpo could play, well, the harp!  And on top of that they would have musical numbers and dance sequences that were a notch below Busby Berkeley but still great.  One tiny twist right off the bat made this a different movie, as to start Groucho and Harpo are teamed up and Chico is off on his own, which kind of brought a different dynamic.  Although later Chico introduces Harpo as his brother, so anyways…there are lots of moving parts here, as usual there is the Bros storyline, plus another romantic subplot involving non-Bros actors.  Plus there is another storyline where the owners of the Mall where the Bros end up working is for sale and a bunch of people are all trying to buy it, some of which are gangsters.  And the male lead character, Tommy Rogers, played by Tony Martin (who can really sing, btw), wants to sell his part of the mall, but yet for some reason it takes the entire movie to make this happen.  And even then, the gangsters want to drag it out to specifically 1pm for reasons I didn't quite get, I admit.  I probably missed a plot point of two while researching the movie, ironically.  But all that, and the reason the movie takes place in a mall is just so the Bros can run wild, including some awesome sequences, one musical number called "Sing While You Sell", and later a big chase through the mall (or I guess "department store") as the Bros are trying to escape the gangsters, both of which are very fun to watch.  It's as if they saw Charlie Chaplin's skating in-the-store scene in "Modern Times" and thought it was great but there could have been more, that there was enough material there for a full movie…plus the great Margaret Dumont is in here, Groucho's favourite foil.  This isn't the best Marx Bros movie but I am glad I watched it.  One disclaimer before watching is that there are scenes (like the bed scene) where there are major ethnic stereotypes displayed, but I don't think anyone is treated too terribly…I guess…  *Smokers Report: Groucho as always has his cigar present, but this is a black and white film and smoking in these old films just kind of blends in so I guess this is a N/A

January 1st - WANTED (2008)

After seeing John Wick Chapter 2 (which also starred Common, as a coincidence...but is it really?), I figured I should catch up on other gun gun bang bang movies.  Or, really, this was on cable and I figured, what the hell, Angelina Jolie is in this right?  She was badass in Mr. and Mrs. Smith...and yes she is here too!  And I had no idea Chris Pratt was in this.  I always thought Pratt, prior to Guardians of the Galaxy, was only on Parks and Recreation and that was it.  Apparently he was in alot of movies, just ones I didn't watch.  Or, like in Moneyball, I just never noticed that he was that Andy guy from TV.  I've never been much of a fan of Mark Millar's work, although that's for no real actual reason, I admit.  As I look over his Wikipedia page, I realise maybe I should be.  I think I just wasn't impressed with Kick-Ass and that was it.  Anyway, back in the day, (brace yourself for this generalization) Hollywood movies were either stylish, or well written...never both.  This is both.  Always great to see Terrence Stamp, and of course God himself Morgan Freeman.  Although I might have liked this movie more before I saw John Wick Chapter 2, with all it's explanation of not only Wick's world of assassins, but the rules, conduct and expectations of that world.  In comparison, this movie is a shallow exercise of "cool shit" like making bullets bend in the air after they've been fired.  As I think back on it, it really is a basic story, like the Matrix (ironically starring Keanu Reeves...or is it?), where a loser finds out he is "special", a hot girl takes him under her wing and a wise black man shows him the way...hmmm!  But what about the film?  I could have done without the Trainspotting/Fight Club style monologue at the end.  It's funny how a movie like this tries to hard to be "cool" and at the end it's like they are saying "F*ck you, loser" to it's viewer, which of course is all part of being cool...I guess.  It's a fun watch, but I'm not sure I'll ever watch it again, honestly.  Other than maybe to figure out why the Russian dude blew up that rat...  *Smokers Report: None, which weird since the villains are European...they always smoke in the movies...

December 2017 Movie a Day Blog!

With work being a bit more low-key leading into the holidays (meaning more time at home as opposed to being on the road 24/7), it occured to me that I could do another Movie-A-Day Blog.  I did two previously, in July 2017 and August 2017 so here we are again!

What's the purpose of doing this?  Well, after being on the road for a few months, my DVR is packed full and I need reasons to go in and check them off.  Also, why not just enjoy watching movies while I can?

A few rules, which usually get broken...must be a movie I've never seen before...although in extreme cases, I can substitute movies I have already seen, as will happen immediately with the 1st movie of the month...just cause...

*SPOILERS OBVIOUSLY

The List:

1- Thor: Ragnarok
2- Robin Hood
3- The Children's Hour
4- Hanna
5- A Challenge for Robin Hood
6- And Justice for All
7- Truth
8- Battle of the Sexes
9- Across the Pacific
10- Bengazi
11- White Nights
12- Keeping Up With the Jonses
13- Absence of Malice
14- Star Wars: The Last Jedi
15- Throw Momma From the Train
16- Around the World in 80 Days
17- Coco
18- The Bishop's Wife
19- Winter's Bone
20- Postcards From the Edge
21- The Sound of Music
22- Jumanji; Welcome to the Jungle
23- Killshot
24- A Nightmare Before Christmas
25- Gremlins
26- Jumanji
27- Chips
28- John Wick Chapter 2
29- Wind River
30- The Preacher's Wife
31- A Christmas Story

December 31st - A CHRISTMAS STORY (1983)
So I finally watched it.  This movie that I'd never heard of until I was an adult, when I was TOLD it was a all-time classic, and I heard things like "You'll put your eye out!" and how people wanted a Red Rider BB Gun...in fact as I watched this film I realised I knew most of it already without ever actually seeing it.  The part at the breakfast table where Ralphie tries to casually drop hints about what he wants for Christmas, I have seen taht scene so many times already.  When the kid gets his tongue stuck...seen it before.  The "Fragile" scene...seen it...and laughed again, cause that's just funny.  It's funny seeing Melinda Dillon as the mom, as she was in "Absense of Malice", which I reviewed earlier, and won an Oscar for that, and was also the mom in "Close Encounters of the Third Kind", and I think the scene where Ralphie's brother plays with his food is an homage to that, or whatever.  The Santa's lap scene, the leg-lamp, the bunny suit...I've admired some of Bob Clark's work…and by that I mean I saw Black Christmas in Film School and thought it was great, which is something coming from a person who hates slasher/horror movies.  Although I had no idea he directed "Loose Cannons", a movie I loved as a kid but have no idea if it holds up, as well as Rhinestone and Baby Geniuses.  But what about this movie?  Geez that Ralphie kid cries alot.  Melinda Dillon seems like a cool mom and that she's having a legit good time in a few scenes, in particular the Chinese food scene, which is a huge departure from her Absense of Malice role where I don't think she smiled once.  This movie is as straight forward as a movie can be.  It's about Ralphie getting a specific toy for Christmas and then Christmas comes and the movie is over.  And I don't mean that in a bad way.  This is a charming funny movie and I'm glad to have finally watched it.  In a side note, I remember getting my tongue stuck in the winter...TWICE!  The first time I was going for a taste of snow and missed and my tongue got stuck on a steel bar.  I was a little kid, and I don't know where my parents were (I think we were going to church that morning), but suddenly I'm stuck and freaking out.  Along comes two very old ladies with grey hairs and they basically try to "help me" by yanking on me until me and my tongue are ripped off the bar, and my tongue is bleeding everywhere.  I eventually heal and then I remember wanting to do it again.  Why?  Well, I wasn't sure if that first time was a fluke, so I had to try it again.  Duh.  Although this time, a smart person came along, calmed me down and told me to get some saliva from my mouth onto my tongue and onto the steel bar.  As soon as the saliva hit the bar, I was free!  My tongue was still sore, but it wasn't bleeding.  Where was I going with this?  I can't remember.  Anyway, HAPPY NEW YEAR!  *Smokers report: None

December 30th - THE PREACHER'S WIFE (1996)

Earlier I reviewed "The Bishop's Wife" with Cary Grant and David Niven, knowing that this was a remake and wondered if Denzel Washington could walk in the shoes of Grant.  Well, there are many things Denzel, as an actor, can do very well, better than most other actors alive today, in fact.  But, unfortunately, he's not as charismatic nor as charming as Cary Grant.  But then again, who is/was?  And with his bright toothy smile, Denzel, as Dudley the Angel, gets pretty darn close.  Of course it's unfair to, while reviewing movies, to compare one to another.  That being said, let's do just that.  The original had a simpler plot.  The Bishop felt that his purpose was to build a huge church as a monument to God, but was having troubles getting a misery old lady in town to give him the money without conditions and compromises.  While running around, trying to make this woman happy, The Bishop loses sight of his duties as a father and a husband.  In this movie, I guess they try to modernise it and bring in topical subjects, like a legal system that is unfair to black people, and how poor neighborhoods rely on the church not just for a place to go on Sunday morning, but for food and clothing as well.  But by doing that, it complicates things and Whitney Houston's character, the wife, comes off badly for it.  Literally in one scene, as Denzel and Whitney go to a nightclub for fun and dancing, The Preacher (the great Courtney B. Vance) is helping give out food to the homeless.  This happens in a bunch of scenes, and then after, Whitney gives Vance grief for doing these charitable things instead of going shopping, or skating, or whatever.  It makes her look really bad.  In one scene, she gives Vance grief cause he couldn't get a young black boy out of jail.  What exactly was she expecting?  She's mad at him for DOING HIS JOB!  And the subplot with the angel, Denzel, falling for Whitney is underwhelming.  In fact, it all kind of fizzles out at the end, as Vance has a big revelation, but from what I saw, it wasn't from anything Denzel did or said to him.  He just got in the way.  Gregory Hines, Lionel Ritchie, Jenifer Lewis and the rest of the cast are great, and sure the little kid was cute.  There were alot of things that didn't add up to me, like why was the final sermon televised, with cameras, boom mics and teleprompters?  And why did the judge let the boy out or prison, when really she should have put The Preacher in jail for contempt of court?  Was Denzel's big influence really on Whitney, giving her the confidence to go onstage as part of the pageant?  It seemed like her character was supposed to be shy, hiding her amazing singing voice, but I'm only guessing that's why she made such a fuss about not wanting to sing in the club.  If that's the case, it wasn't hit hard enough by the director, Penny Marshall.  This movie was apparently horrible to film, taking three extra months to film, with Houston acting like a diva and there were many accidents, some leading to deaths.  But what about the film?  There was enough charm to go around, but this movie was a bit of a let down unfortunately.  In the original, Cary Grant was supposed to play the Bishop, but the angel was the better part.  Here, Denzel should have played The Preacher, cause it was definately the better role.  And it goes to show how talented Whitney Houston was as a singer, and how it was all wasted by her drug use, which was apparently in full effect around the time she worked on this film.  Her acting isn't great, but when she sings, she seems to be the angel, not Denzel.  *Smokers Report: Jenifer Lewis, who plays the mother in law, smokes in many scenes, but there is a definite anti-smoking message.

December 29th - WIND RIVER (2017)

As you scroll through this list, you'll notice I've been watching 2017 movies lately to get caught up on my list of movies I "should have seen" in 2017.  Alot are showing up on cable and On Demand, so it's time to watch.  This movie is one in particular that I've meant to watch in the theatre, and with all the travel involved in my job, I get to go to alot of cities with second run "cheap" theatres, so I admit I have had more than a few chances to see this, but for whatever reason it just never worked out.  I'd heard good things about this, specifically on Rotten Tomatoes, which has it's share of controversy lately.  For the record, I only use RT when it comes to deciding between six or more movies in theatres, and I don't know much about any of them.  But even after hearing good things about this movie, I still never quite felt that overwhelming pull to leave the warm hotel room and go out in public.  But I should have.  This was a great film.  I actually ahd no idea it was made by Taylor Sheridan, who made "Sicario" and "Hell or High Water".  If I had, it may have swayed the film into the "worthy of leaving the warm hotel" column.  One thing I had heard was that this film was another one of those "white savior" movies, like "A Time to Kill" or "Amistad", where a white dude comes along to save poor minorities from other evil white people.  Actually "Amistad" has two white people as saviours, and so does this movie.  But that's politics and as stated in an earlier review, we've got our brain turned off and just want to enjoy a movie, right?  Well, sure, but I couldn't help notice Harvey Weinstein's name in the credits, when I had heard his name would be taken out.  Maybe that's just for the Blu-Ray/DVD?  But what about this film?  It's a 2017 film so no spoilers, but both Renner and Elizabeth Olsen are great, as is Graham Green and the other Native American actors involved.  Also good to see Hugh Dillon, a good Canadian boy, in the film too.  That made me assume it was shot in Canada but it wasn't.  It's a mystery movie, so it's hard to talk to much about the film without spoiling anything, so I'm stalling.  But I will say that anything that calls attention to the horrible treatment that Native American women receive is definately welcomed.  Although by saying that...SPOILERS!  A great movie, watch it!  *Smokers Report: None that I saw.

December 28th - JOHN WICK: CHAPTER 2 (2017)

I reviewed Part one of this series on one of my previous blogs.  I liked it for what it was.  A shoot em up with style.  This movie picks up where the last one left off, with lots of shoot shoot bang bang and choreographed fight scenes which were fine.  But as the movie progresses, you get more and more into the world of John Wick that was only hinted at in the first film.  You see the professionalism, the rules, the "gentlemanly conduct" so to speak that this world strictly adheres to.  So when Wick does what he does in THAT scene, you know what he's done and how he's screwed himself big time, but you also understand that's how his character reacts to being pushed.  And how that all leads to the third film where the stakes will be huge, making the first film and it's motivations (a dead dog and a stolen car) look quaint by comparison.  As with 2017 films, I try to adhere to rules myself and don't want to reveal too many spoilers.  So I'll say how I liked seeing Ruby Rose here and I'd like to see a movie that challenges her more.   Ian McShane is always a pleasure to watch onscreen and with how the movie ends, sends shivers down the spine.  Even "splainy" scenes are interesting, like when Wick goes to the assassin tailor who explains they have kevlar fabric now, so his coat will stop bullets but the process will be incredibly painful.  So later when Wick is hit by the occasional bullet and he flinches, we understand why.  And there has to be a website where they list all the kills Wick performs in this film.  Normally I don't like these movies, as I do subscribe to the theory that all that "killing" leads to desensitization, but these movies are so stylish and over the top that I have to appreciate the craftmanship involved.  And of course part of the appeal of the movie was seeing Keanu Reeves and Laurence Fishburne reunite onscreen.  I have to assume this will lead to Carrie Ann Moss appearing in the 3rd film of the trilogy?  I hope so.  This movie reminded me of another Reeves film, Speed, where there were three big action sequences and each got bigger, with higher stakes, as the movie progressed.  The big scenes towards the end of the movie, one in a subway and one in a museum, are tremendous.  Anyway, this movie exceeded my expectations, is better in my opinion than the first movie and I look forward to the next one.  Highly recommended.  *Smokers Report: Some henchmen smoke but that's all I remember.

December 27th - CHIPS (2017)

***I realise now that, despite the random nature of how I pick movies for this blog, I should have planned ahead and watched "Postcards From the Edge" today, to honor Carrie Fisher.  RIP General Organa

After so much holiday cheer, I felt like a "dumb" movie to relax with.  And this is as I thought it was...dumb.  I like Dax Shepard, how he started as a guy on Punk'd and has worked his way up the system...jealous of him cause he's married to Kristen Bell sure, and the fact he was allowed by Warner Bros. to write and direct a remake of a potentially successful franchise (like 21 Jump Street, for example) is, at first, gives me a "good for him" kinda feeling.  But then I saw the movie.  There's nothing really terrible, per se, about it.  There are alot of beautiful women in it (like Bell, and two actresses I'd never heard of before, Rosa Salazar and Jessica McNamee, who reminds me of a young Kylie Minogue - she's even from Australia) but there is alot of talk about the "hotness" of women, ranking women on a scale of ten, even with one scene with a group of women agreeing they aren't attractive...I felt uncomfortable watching those scenes.  If the women are putting themselves down, does that make it okay?  I was shocked to see a bare breast in the first scene of the film, not that it was ever something that happened in every movie, but having that and two other scenes with breasts in them and being surprised by it probably says more about the kinds of movies I watch.  It was fun seeing Adam Brody, Jane Kaczmarek and Veronica Mars alum Ryan Hansen on screen (although there was a scene missing at the end showing "Ponch" and Kaczmarek's character Lindel hooking up).  Michael Pena is one of the great actors of this generation, and he is tremendous in everything, recently killing it in "Ant-Man", "The Martian" and other films.  If I was another person, I would point out that it's funny a guy like Shepard, who has written and directed on other movie, "Hit and Run" which wasn't exactly a hit, was given this franchise to play with, whereas someone like Patty Jenkins had to wait 14 years in between directing movies, even after the first one won an Oscar.  But who wants to deal with all that?  It's the holidays, brains turned off dammit!  But what about the film?  On the action movie scale, where Die Hard, Lethal Weapon, Speed, Point Break are the best...this is no where near that.  If my brain was turned on, I might have been offended by some of the scenes mentioned above, but since my brain was off, the movie was just a silly way to spend a few hours.  Watch it, don't watch it...whatever.  *Smokers Report:  Boobs, but no smoking.  Today's R rated film...

December 26th - JUMANJI (1995)

So, this came on cable and I figured this was as good a time as any to finally sit down and watch the original Jumani, having just seen the "sequel" in the theatre a few days ago.  It's funny how, I guess cynically, I think I know all the beats to movies these days.  The opening few scenes explain who the main character is, Alan Parrish, how he gets stuck in the Jumanji board game, then the next fifteen minutes of the movie set up the "modern" storyline, with Kirsten Dunst and her brother moving into the abandoned Parrish house, and then eventually they find Jumanji...etc.  Then Robin Williams shows up and the movie can actually start.  Weird things happen, and so then Williams, Dunst and the boy settle into this rhythm where a board game has deadly consequences and it's all kinda not that big of a deal.  Until Bonnie Hunt shows up and she's freaked out and it's like "Finally someone gets it!".  I thought it would be fun to see Williams in action again, but Williams is deadly serious here, like "Insomnia" serious, almost as if he's trying to ditch his "funny guy act" here.  I guess it worked, as he got alot more dramatic roles after this, like Good Will Hunting and his Oscar win.  There is a dated "crazy postal worker" joke.  The CGI is pretty terrible, and not just in a "compared to 2017" way.  And the biggest question I have, after seeing the sequel, is the physics of what happens to players who go into the game and then come back out.  So Alan goes in as a kid and comes out 26 years later in modern times.  But in the sequel *SPOILERS* Nick Jonas goes in, is in for twenty years, and when he comes out, he goes back to being a kid and history is changed.  What's up with that?  That's what I'm thinking as I watch it, but by then end, I guess it all makes sense with what happens to Williams and Hunt's characters after they win the game...I guess.  The middle part, or basically anything with the hunter guy, drags the movie to a halt.  Bonnie Hunt is a treasure who is grossly underused these days (in fact, I had to Google her just now to make sure she's still alive).  Dunst's acting consists of making her eyes bigger and smaller alternately (not a criticism, she's just a kid here, just an observation) and Bebe Neuwirth is always a treat to see on screen, although she doesn't have much to do here.  The film, once it focuses on the game itself, is very charming and fun.  But it does seem like a 75 minute movie stuffed into a 104 minute bag.  I liked it, but like other movies I've been watching lately, I'm not sure I'll ever watch it again.  But I will remember it fondly.  Sidenote: doing research for this makes me realise that apparently Robin Williams died in 2014...it seems like a decade at least, not three years...it has always seemed like a little piece of the world went with him too... *Smokers Report: The dad in the movie smokes a pipe.

December 25th - GREMLINS (1984)

First of all MERRY CHRISTMAS TO ONE AND ALL!  I hope everyone had a great day and got spoiled with lots of presents!  I was going to finally, after all these years, watch "A Christmas Story", but shockingly, it was no where to be found!  I could have watched it on demand for $5.99 or on YouTube for $3.99, but then I saw Gremlins was on cable for free, so maybe next year!  Funny after there being years where TBS would show ACS for 24 hours straight and I never watched it then, and now I want to watch it and...oh well.  Just something about that movie never appealed to me.  But what about this film?  This recently came up in a Twitter debate about Christmas movies...one person was giving the usual "Die Hard is the best Christmas movie" schpeel, and other people responded with their picks, with this movie being one of the most identified as a "real" Christmas movie.  I have no one in this fight, but this made me realise this was another movie I hadn't seen.  So here we are.  It is charming, for sure.  First, of the three rules you have to follow if you own a "mogwai"; the first rule, no bright lights, is fine I guess.  The second rule, don't get it wet...how do you avoid getting anything wet?  And how does it survive if it can't even drink water?  Does it self-hydrate somehow?  And the third rule...no food after midnight...which midnight?  Is that midnight Pacific time?  Eastern time?  Gizmo starts out in China so is it midnight there?  Or was it just a generic Chinatown in a big city and is it in the same timezone?  Fun to see a young Judge Reinhold, young Jonathan Banks (who I just put together was the "bruiser" guy in Beverly Hills Cop...small world!) and a kid sized Corey Feldman...and Phoebe Cates!  Wow!  And fun to see at the "inventor's convention" they have the original "time machine" and Robbie the Robot walking around, reciting his lines from "Forbidden Planet".  This is supposidely a fun family holiday movie but there are some really gross things in it, like when one of the Gremlins blends itself.  It's trying to be an homage to both holiday movies and horror movies at the same time, as evident by the fact Billy is fan of old horror movies and they show clips of "Invasion of the Body Snatchers" and other films throughout.  It's fun how they make it out like these Gremlins are the same Gremlins that people talk about causing fighters to go down in WWII (presumably the same gremlin that William Shatner saw on the wing of the airplane in that Twilight Zone episode).  Oddly, while the Gremlins are kinda scary at first, they become entertaining, like killing the mean old lady while dressed up as evil carollers, flying around while holding onto a ceiling fan or playing with hand puppets...are we supposed to root for them or the boring Billy?  The movie seems over produced at points, with every car frosted over to the most extreme by the fakest snow I think I've ever seen (it's weird some of the things you notice watching movies sometimes).  The montage in the bar is fun at first but goes on way too long, with Phoebe Cates(!) taking out more of the Gremlins all by herself than Billy and the cops together.  I mean, he needs help from Cates, Gizmo, Barney the Dog...just to take out one Gremlin...But then Cates has her big monologue of how her Dad died...are we supposed to laugh or cry?  In the end, I guess the cause for the Gremlin's demise is apathy.  Did they want to take over the town?  Or the world?  No they just wanted to watch a movie and that's what killed them.  Is there a message there?  I hope not...but this was fun to watch...plus there is a fun "War of the Worlds" reference!  *Smokers Report: Yes...not a ton but they are there.

December 24th - THE NIGHTMARE BEFORE CHRISTMAS (1993)

Yup.  Another "all-time classic" that I've never seen.  I've never really been a big fan of Tim Burton's work.  Other than Edward Scissorhands and Ed Wood (which I loved), I've always thought Burton's work was a little too dark and weird for me.  Even his "Batman" was off to me (and don't even mention Batman Returns).  So what do I think now that I have watched this film?  Other than it being a little slow in the middle, both the beginning and the end were tremendous.  In fact, the beginning was so good that even if the rest of the film had fallen off a cliff, I still would have enjoyed it.  With the songs "This is Halloween" and "What is This?" I loved the beginning.  I was surprised to hear that Danny Elfman himself was Jack Skellington's singing voice.  I really enjoyed this and it might become a new Christmas tradition, like Dr. Who and a Harry Potter marathon!  *Smokers Report: N/A

December 23rd - KILLSHOT (2009)

I bought this DVD years ago, based on the fact it was, well, based on an Elmore Leonard novel.  And I'd heard it was better than it's straight-to-DVD fate.  And the cast...Mickey Rourke, Diane Lane, Joseph Gordon-Levitt, Thomas Jane, Rosario Dawson, Hal Holbrook...directed by John Madden.  Is this really so bad?  And, at least the first part of the movie, is set in Canada!  How could it go wrong?  Well, Rourke plays a Native American.  A Native American who's had alot of face lifts, apparently.  Gordon-Levitt is one of my favourite actors, but here he's unhinged and with a weird accent.  Even Diane Lane seems off.  Dawson is good but not enough of a factor to make it good or bad.  Thomas Jane is the only one who seems to be actually in a real movie, but even his performance is...weird.  In a movie full of weird.  And the dialogue is weak.  Lane's character is seemingly nuts even before the movie starts, and Jane is too relaxed for someone being chased by the mob.  Their marriage is the central relationship in the movie, and it's weird too.  They have separated, and Jane wants to fight to stay together, but we don't know anything about why they split or why they'd want to get back together...why are they fighting?  Why are they not getting back together?  Did they just fall out of love?  If so, sure that happens in real life, but this is a movie, dammit!  It all builds up to a big dramatic face off, guns going off, blood everywhere...and it tries to be different with lots of talking and double-crossing and should-be-tense moments, but it doesn't really add up to much.  Apparently a whole subplot with Johnnie Knoxville was edited out to make things make more sense and flow better, but it still has it's problems.  Skippable film in my opinion.  *Smokers Report: Rourke smokes in the film but that's all I can remember, so it' s minimal.

December 22nd - JUMANJI: WELCOME TO THE JUNGLE (2017)

As I sat in the theatre to watch this movie (a half empty theatre, which wasn't a good sign for the movie's box office this week vs. Star Wars), I realised "Crap, I should have watched the original Jumanji first."  That's right, I have never seen the original Jumanji.  But then I realised, wait...it's Jumanji.  I saw the trailer, I think I got the gist.  I tried to have low expectations (I do this for most movies, it just helps) and I was very happy with this movie.  It's too long, but as I've discussed before, I think most movies are too long.  And after seeing Star Wars: The Last Jedi, this movie seemed like it was shot like a TV movie by comparison, with TV level CGI too.  Usually in a movie like this, everyone has a "role" and only one person gets to be "the funny one", but all four get to be funny here and all four have major moments of hilarity.  The Rock and Kevin Hart should become the next big movie duo as their chemistry is amazing here, much better than their last movie "Central Intelligence".  Jack Black is so funny, and most times would have stolen the show playing a shallow selfie-obsessed teenage girl trapped in a "middle-aged fat guy's body".  And it was nice to see Rhys Darby.  Nick Jonas is just kind of there, although I was actually surprised where they went with his character's storyline.  But for most people the discovery will be Karen Gillan.  I've been a fan of hers for awhile since she debuted as Amy Pond on Dr. Who and became smitten with her, but I never fully loved her character like Rose Tyler, for various reasons (I never liked how she treated Rory, for example).  I felt bad for her, as it must not have been too fun having to look like that for all those months, wearing that outfit and being that skinny.  But she steals the movie for me, both with her comedic timing and also by looking frigging amazing.  I know that shouldn't be a factor in reviewing a film, but I can't help it.  Karen Gillan is gorgeous and right now is right at the top of my celebrity crush list along with Daisy Ridley.  This is a fun movie for sure, alot better than I thought it would be.  Highly recommended.  *Smokers Report: Nope

December 21st - THE SOUND OF MUSIC (1965)

I think, technically I've seen this movie...it's one of those movies I probably saw as a kid but never revisited, unlike "It's a Wonderful Life", which I've watched many times as an adult.  This movie just never came up, I guess.  Despite it being shown all the times during the holidays.  Anyway, I had no idea the movie started with THAT song, and leads into lots of other songs.  THIS is a musical.  Holy crap Christopher Plummer is young here.  And even WITH grey streaks in his hair.  And another movie I can describe as "epic".  Alot happens here.  The movie goes on so long a war breaks out.  That's a long movie!  I foolishly watched it WITH commercials, and it took over four hours to watch!  Despite that, it did move quickly from plot point to plot point.  Julie Andrews is a nun, goes to live with the Van Trapps, the kids are jerks, but they all fall in love with her two scenes later, there is a montage of them learning to sing, Plummer very quickly goes from jerk to softie (which I liked, don't get me wrong), Andrews leaves but then returns, they get married, the Nazis take over, the family wins a singing competition, they escape through the hills...this movie is a movie and a half, like a movie plus it's own sequel.  The only thing missing is a bit where Uncle Max organizes a tour for them across America and they become hugely popular.  Although that apparently was a thing.  You learn alot on the movie's Wikipedia page.  Like that this movie was shot on a Todd-AO 70 mm camera, just like Around the World in 80 Days that I reviewed earlier.  Another thing I learned was that this family's real life was totally different than the movie version, although I guess that can be expected from Hollywood.  It just made me think...What if someone made a movie about my family one day and it changed facts, consolidated characters, turned a jerk into a saint...how would that make me feel?  Would I spend my life with people coming up to me, saying they saw the movie but I'd have to tell them "Well, that stuff didn't really happen that way..." I wasn't really surprised to learn that this movie won Best Picture, but I was surprised that this was the biggest box office movie of all time for awhile.  But what about the film?  I loved it!  The kids were cute, Julie Andrews was a delight, Plummer was scary cold but then also has a great smile.  I would love to watch it again sometime...when I had lots of time to spare, of course.  Great film, highly recommended!  *Smokers Report: None.

December 20th - POSTCARDS FROM THE EDGE (1990)

I've been thinking alot about Carrie Fisher lately, both because of The Last Jedi and because it's coming up on the one year anniversary of her and her mother's tragic deaths.  Supposidely this movie is about them, written by Fisher and assumed by most to be about her and Debbie Reynolds.  I bought this Blu-Ray a while back and I've been wanting to watch this but now I'm glad I didn't and I could watch it for this.  Carrie Fisher, of course, isn't really a space princess/warrior general.  But she is Hollywood royalty who was a good actress, a better comedienne and a great writer.  And that writing leads us to this movie.  I remember the trailer from this film from back in the day, with the line about MacClaine's skirt twirling up, and Streep hanging off the side of the building and shrugging.  I still remember seeing that, this was back before DVD special features and everyone knew about how movies worked.  At one point a house "drives off" behind Dennis Quaid as they are on a movie set, and back in 1990 that must have been...well mind blowing is probably an overstatement, but it was interesting.  This is an amazing cast, beyond the two stars and Quaid, there is Gene Hackman, Richard Dreyfuss, Rob Reiner, Annette Benning and young versions of CCH Pounder and Oliver Platt, directed by legend Mike Nichols.  And of course all the gossip around this movie was regarding speculation that Streep and MacLaine were just playing movie versions of Carrie Fisher and Debbie Reynolds, which both have denied over the years, with Fisher saying that would assume she had no creativity and just a tape recorder.  Although of course in the biggest irony, Debbie Reynolds auditioned for the MacLaine role but Nichols turned her down, saying she "wasn't right for the part".  This doesn't necessarily age well, as it's supposidely about addiction but not really, and after watching movies like Leaving Las Vegas, the treatment of addiction and it's struggles are a bit underwhelming.  But other than that, there is nothing wrong with the film and the cast is tremendous.  And if you want to actually know more about Fisher and Reynolds relationship, watch the documentary "Bright Lights".  Fisher will be remembered for many reasons, as she should be.  Both her and her mother were legends and the world is lesser without them around, as even Reynolds has recently had a career resurgence, so to speak, thanks to TCM.  It's been a year since they left us, Carrie first and Debbie the next day, her family saying it was due to a broken heart and not wanting to live in a world without Carrie.  Despite never actually meeting Carrie Fisher, I can kinda understand that.  RIP.  *Smokers Report: Most of the cast smokes, which since it was filmed in the eighties and it's about Hollywood, it fits.

December 19th - WINTER'S BONE (2010)

Has it only been seven years (well, almost eight) since JLAW became a thing?  Will our grandkids ask us one day "Daddy, where were you the day you discovered JLaw?"  That probably won't happen, but I do remember (kinda) when I discovered who this Jennifer Lawrence person was.  I had heard her name announced as an Oscar nominee, for some movie called "Winter's Bone", along with John Hawkes (who I did know), but never really had a desire to see the film, or desire to figure out who this new blonde girl that was Hollywood's "It girl" of the year/month/moment was.  I remember looking at pictures from the red carpet of that year's Oscars and seeing all the glammed up "stars", desperate for attention and wearing gowns and smiling away.  But then I saw a picture of Jennifer Lawrence, dressed in a basic red dress, smiling sure but it was a forced smile, and I remember thinking, "Who is this?"  As has been analysed to death in the years since, she had a kind of down-home, girl next door quality that immediately made me like her.  I remember the phrase "Breath of fresh air" being said alot.  And of course in the seven years, she has gone from being super popular to receiving the inevitable backlash after a few bad films and just the good ol' "We are so over her" social media pendulum swing from the public at large, the same public at large who embraced and put her on the pedestal in the first place.  But what about this movie?  It seemed like a depressing, albeit well made film, but depressing is something I have to work up to.  So here we are seven years later.  I owned the DVD, so I wanted to see it at some point, as why did I buy it in the first place?  But I obviously wasn't in a hurry.  JLaw, or more appropriately in this role, she is just plain Jennifer Lawrence, does a spectacular job being the main actor in every scene, carrying this role on her back, much like her character carries her family on her back.  It's about a world I don't know much about (the drug producing Ozarks with it's backwater mafia) so that in itself was fascinating.  And the movie contains a bit of a mystery too which is always fun.  In fact I don't want to go into too many details cause it will ruin the suspense.  The best parts of the film are really Lawrence spending time with her younger siblings, teaching them how to shoot a gun, hunt and skin a rabbit, and later take care of some baby chicks, including some stuff I'm sure was just them improvising (or in the kid's case, just being themselves).  Lawrence deserved all the praise she got for this role, and I'm not sure she's done as well since.  Sure she won the Oscar for Silver Linings Playbook, and I did like that movie (getting past the obvious problems, like no one as pretty as her and Bradley Cooper have that many problems, right?) but actors don't usually win Oscars for the roles they got nominated for, they win for roles they SHOULD HAVE won for.  Blah Blah aside, this is a great film.  I should have watched it sooner.  And Jennifer Lawrence is legit...although I admit I'm late to the party here...now I guess I have to get the DVD's for all the seasons of "The Bill Engvall Show", to see if she was robbed of an Emmy for her role as "teenage daughter"...  *Smokers report: Hawkes always seems to have a smoke in his mouth or hand, but that's about it.

December 18th - THE BISHOP'S WIFE (1947)

Another David Niven movie, although I picked this cause I'm a big Cary Grant fan, actually.  This is the first of more than a few holiday movies I'll be watching and reviewing here...tis the season after all.  I am kinda surprised to find out this was nominated for Best Picture and a bunch of other Oscars.  And originally, Cary Grant was cast as the bishop but wanted to switch roles and since he was the bigger star, he got to play the angel.  So he didn't have to flip a coin to switch roles like he did with Douglas Fairbanks on "Gunga Din".  Also in this movie is Citizen Kane's mom and little Zuzu from "It's a Wonderful Life", one year older.  So the story of the movie is David Niven prays for help, a guys shows up, says he's an angel there to help him, just like he asked, and the next day, Niven leaves this guy in the house with his wife and daughter.  That would never happen!  Plus this "angel" keeps spending alot of time with his wife.  Does this movie make sense?  No, but damn is Cary Grant alone makes this enjoyable.  His smile (or is it a smirk?) and how his eyes light up when Niven is going nuts...now I know what the phrase "he smiled with his eyes" means.  Or is that a phrase?  Anyway, this movie is a charm-fest and lots of fun.  The scene where Grant is on the floor telling Zuzu a story is fun.  I actually felt jealous of little Zuzu, as I would have loved to have Grant look at me like that.  I don't mean that in a pervy way...I just think it would be awesome to have Cary Grant tell me a story, that's all.  And watching this kinda makes me want to watch "The Preacher's Wife" and see if Denzel Washington can possibly match up to Grant.  *Smokers Report: Strange considering it's a Cary Grant movie, but it lacks any kind of smoking whatsoever...

December 17th - COCO (2017)

Another beautiful, amazing, gorgeous film from Pixar!  Pixar had an incredible streak of movies that could claim to not only being the Best Animated Film of that year, but the best movie, period.  My personal favourites have been Wall-E, Up and The Incredibles, with the Toy Story films, Ratatouille and Brave also being exceptional...Pixar got replaced with Marvel Studios as having one great film after another consistently.  I am not a fan of the Monsters Inc., or the Cars movies, but even those aren't bad movies.  Anyway, what about this movie?  Something I love about Pixar is that they are willing to make movies about other cultures (cultures other than the typical white America, anyway) and have the confidence that they aren't making it for a niche audience; that if they make a great movie, people will come, even if the movie is about rats who live in Paris, of all places.  This movie takes us into the Mexican culture, which probably isn't THAT much of a risk, as people have been saying Latino culture is the "next big thing" ever since 1999, and people are dumb if they don't acknowledge this.  I loved the nods to Frida and of course, El Santo, the Luchador wrestler who was so famous, after his death they made up a holiday celebrating him.  He's not Hulk Hogan big, he's like...is there an equivalent?  Who gets holidays named after them?  Martin Luther King Jr.?  This is a strong movie about family, a great backdrop of Dia de Muertos aka the Day of the Dead and has great songs too!  "Remember Me" should win lots of awards!  Now I have a reason to watch that similarly themed animated film "The Book of Life".  Highly recommended!  Go see it!  *Smokers Report: N/A

December 16th - AROUND THE WORLD IN 80 DAYS (1956)

I described Star Wars: The Last Jedi to a friend as "epic" and then I pick this movie randomly and it is also "epic".  Starring David Niven, Shirley MacLaine and Cantinflas (who I had never heard of until this), this is as if a movie and one of those IMAX nature documentaries had a baby.  Part scripted adventure, part travelogue, this features some beautiful cinematography and funny moments too, usually thanks to Cantinflas.  At three hours long, including an intermission and a seven minute ends-credits sequence, this is the kind of movie people today might fidget through, but once I got into it, I admit it flowed over me and I enjoyed it alot.  The "team" travels, off the top of my head, from London to France to Spain to India to Hong Kong to Japan to San Francisco to the Wild West then back home across the Atlantic.  So didn't Australia, or Hawaii, or South America or Africa exist in 1956?  I guess the point was to go around the globe, not hit every continent, although the bet was kind of vague.  This movie was a mess of guest stars, with Frank Sinatra, Marlene Dietrich, Buster Keaton, Peter Lorre, Cesar Romero, Red Skelton all showing up to wave at the camera.  A full list is on the Wikipedia page.  Also on the Wikipedia page is a description of the cameras they used, using 70mm film shot in Technicolour, that looked amazing but apparently forced them to shoot everything twice...I don't get it but take a read, maybe you will.  It would be cool to watch this movie in IMAX or Cinerama, that's for sure.  Cantinflas is a discovery here, apparently a huge Latin American star, who Charlie Chaplin admired, but I had never heard of him, like I said earlier.  I was confused as I started watching it, as it included a prologue where Edward R. Murrow talks about the 1902 film A Trip to the Moon by George Melies, then shows a rocket being launched in "real life", then the film begins.  It's weird, as I still have no idea why this is there, other than the fact Jules Verne is connected.  But it was cool seeing Murrow nonetheless ("Good Night and Good Luck" is one of my all-time favourite films).  If you have a lazy Sunday afternoon with nothing to do, take this in.  *Smokers Report: Yes, but not much. 

December 15th - THROW MOMMA FROM THE TRAIN (1987)

This was really bad.  So bad I barely got through it.  In fact, I'm not totally sure that I did.  I may have fallen asleep.  Not sure how this happened.  Danny DeVito, in his directorial debut, made a real stinker in my opinion.  Between him and Billy Crystal, two legends, I'm not sure how this happened.  But this was a commercial success, so what do I know?  I have a hard time watching Anne Ramsey, and I was shocked to learn she was nominated for a Golden Globe for this.  I mean, good for her, she was probably a nice lady in real life.  She was good in The Goonies but had a far smaller role there.  I've always had the image of DeVito nailing Crystal in the head with a frying pan in my head since I first saw the trailer back when I was a kid, but yet I've never actually watched the film until now.  About the only fun I had was catching certain cameos in the film.  Like how Crystal's writing class includes Philip Perlman, who plays "Phil", and also played "Phil" on Cheers and is also Rhea Perlman's dad in real life.  Also in the class was J. Alan Thomas, who played Jeff on Taxi, DeVito's all time classic TV series.  Rob Reiner shows up but I felt bad for Kim Greist, both her and her character.  After being in Brazil and Manhunter, she deserved better.  Not to mention the great Kate Mulgrew...but that's just my opinion.  *Side note: is this where Crystal perfected the move where he rests his face/head on his hand on the movie poster?  I can think of at least one other example, "Father's Day" with Robin Williams, where he did that, but there has to be others.  When I think of Billy Crystal, I think of him like that.  *Side note #2: I'm still looking for a way to watch "Running Scared", the buddy cop film starring Crystal and Gregory Hines... *Smoker's Report: I don't remember but it was in the 80's so there had to be, right?

December 14th - STAR WARS: THE LAST JEDI (2017)

Yup...I just saw THAT movie!  And what can I say without spoiling it?  Not much...if you believe the "evil" (or Dark Side) of the internet (aka Twitter), even me saying whether or not I liked this movie is considered a spoiler...so...I say...Go see this film!  You probably will anyway, I doubt I will sway anyone this way or that...let's see...Rey aka Daisy Ridley is my new celebrity crush...I thought she was cool and badass before but now I'm just plain ol' smitten...Mark Hamill is a God among men, as after all these years of hearing him do other voices in cartoons (like being MY Joker), I had no idea hearing him talking in "Luke's voice" would mean so much to me...the movie was a great tribute to the late great Carrie Fisher...lots of cool fight sequences but you probably could have guessed that...okay, I'll say it, I loved this film!  I have to go back and see it again (and again...and again...) but highly recommended!  Only a franchise like Star Wars can make me feel like a kid again, and what they failed to do with the prequels they are doing in spades with Force Awakens, Rogue One and this film!  Can't wait for Part Nine (and presumably Part Ten, cause...c'mon!  How can they not?)  Go see it!  *Smokers Report: N/A

December 13th - ABSENCE OF MALICE (1981)

Starring Sally Field and Paul Newman and directed by Sydney Pollack.  This movie was apparently about the responsibility of the press, but it seemed to get bogged down by the romance of Field and Newman.  And it didn't really make sense either.  In his review when it came out, Roger Ebert wrote about this film that the reporter Field is terrible and "no respectable journalist would ever do the things that Sally Field does to Paul Newman in this movie.  She is a disgrace to her profession."  But also said he liked the romance of the film and that the fact that Field is bad at her job probably won't matter to most viewers.  Well it mattered to me.  The whole plot is kicked off by her bad reporting and I guess it's necessary to kick the plot into gear, but I couldn't get past it.  Plus how quickly Newman forgives Field for an even bigger mistake, although I guess later it turns out the ending plot twist negated that...but then I'm not sure that's what happened.  And if if DID happen, then Field forgives Newman way too fast.  Either way...It was nice to see Wilfred Brimley come in, kick ass and literally take names.  But most of the rest of the film is kind of a mess.  To me...*Fun Fact: By total coincidence, this movie is sold on DVD in a two-pack with And Justice For All, which I reviewed not that long ago...scroll down to see...  *Smokers Report: Oh Yeah.  It's about reporters and gangsters.  Everyone smokes.  I wonder if that was really the case or it's just a cliche that was just passed down generation to generation?

December 12th - KEEPING UP WITH THE JONESES (2016)

This has GAL GADOT in it!!!  WONDER WOMAN!!!  Along with Jon Hamm, Zach Galifianakis, Isla Fisher, Patton Oswalt, Matt Walsh...a great concept, so why did it bomb?  Well cause it's not very good...well, ten minutes in, Fisher suspects Hamm and Gadot of being spies and they reveal that, yes...they are spies.  But no one believes her...cut to thirty minutes later...Zach and Isla break into Hamm and Gadot's house...he shoots her with a dart...wackiness ensues...blah blah.  She follows Gadot to a change room in a mall and Gadot comes out wearing lingerie and that's a fun scene...although now that's like looking at Wonder Woman in lingerie and is that wrong???  Is that like looking at Mother Theresa in lingerie?  So the movie is 2 hours long and it takes an hour before the scene from the trailer, with Hamm and Gadot yell at Zach and Isla to get in the car and Zach takes off without Isla, to happen.  There are some funny lines here and in the ensuing car chase, but then it's back to blandsville.  It's too bad as, like I said before, this is a fun concept with a great cast.  Interesting tidbit: Rumours are that Ben Affleck is seeking a "graceful exist" from the DCU movies and Batfleck, and one of the rumoured choices to take over is Jon Hamm, which after seeing this film, with Hamm and Gadot's chemistry, that Hamm's Batman and Gadot's Wonder Woman would work well on screen together.  Thinking about THAT movie got me through this one.  *Smokers Report: Nope.

December 11th - WHITE NIGHTS (1985)

As with most of these films, this is one I've always heard about but just never watched.  I always have had the image of stars Gregory Hines and Mikhail Baryshnikov dancing together in a studio, in tandem, both being amazing dancers.  But I didn't know the context or anything about the film.  For all I knew, they were American and Russian cops working a case who just happened to like dancing together when not fighting crime.  From the poster, it looks like a martial arts film in the same vein as Rocky IV.  Turns out this is about a ballet and tap dancer who become friends in Russia behind the Iron Curtain during the Cold War.  The scenes where they dance together are tremendous, but the stuff in the middle drags, and it's a two and a half hour film!  There is a lot of homoerotic undertones which is funny, along with their dancing that involves seemingly too many karate moves that I assumed would be used later on in a big fight scene but alas...Not to mention the unintentional comedy of the dramatic "yelling" scenes, usually with Hines over emoting.  Fun to see young John Glover, Helen Mirren and Isabella Rossellini (with the "introducing" tag in front of her name), with Jerzy Skolimowski, who later played the Russian agent "interrogating" Black Widow in the 1st Avengers movie.  And the movie is directed by Taylor Hackford, who met Mirren here and they ended up married.  Mikhail was coming off being nominated for Best Supporting Actor for "The Turning Point", a movie that was nominated for ELEVEN Oscars, and despite that is a movie I've never heard of.  Speaking of Oscars, "Say You, Say Me" by Lionel Ritchie is from this movie, and apparently it won the Oscar for Best Song that year, beating out another song from this film "Separate Lives" and "The Power of Love" by Huey Lewis from Back to the Future (which FYI was also nominated for Best Original Screenplay and was ROBBED!  ROBBED I SAY!).  Also at the Oscars that year both Jon Voight and Eric Roberts were nominated for "Runaway Train", a movie I previously reviewed, so that's a neat connection.  I'd say fast forward to the dance numbers, but that's crappy to say.  Watch the movie, or don't. I have to track down that one movie "Running Scared" where Hines teams up with Billy Crystal of all people and they apparently are bad-ass Lethal Weapon style cops.  Can't wait to see that one!  *Smokers Report: Mikhail almost literally smokes every time he is on screen, as do alot of the "Russian" back ground actors.

December 10th - BENGAZI (1955)

I kept hearing this name "Bengazi" over and over again in this political climate, then as I was searching through the TCM schedule, I saw this movie listed, so that's really all I needed for a reason to watch it.  The cast is fun, made up of stars of some of my favourite films.  Richard Conte stars, who was in Ocean's 11 (the Sinatra version).  Mala Powers was Roxanne in Jose Ferrer's version of Cyrano de Bergerac.  Victor McLaglen was in Gunga Din.  Early black and white Hollywood seemed obsessed with any movie concept that involved a desert...or treasure.  And a treasure buried in a desert...BINGO!  I remember lots of old Bugs Bunny cartoons (among others) where the main character would be lost in the desert, see water, run towards it, but the water is a mirage.  I was waiting for the heroes in this movie to run into a mirage of their own.  I was hoping this movie was a hidden gem that people say they find on TCM from time to time (and I have as well, I admit).  The idea that I've heard of and seen all the classic movies on TCM is a depressing one for sure.  I tend to record the same movies over and over that I know are great and I love (I currently have Casablanca on my DVR three times, eventhough I just saw it in theatres, not to mention having it on DVD,  and will most likely delete them when push comes to shove) but the search for the elusive hidden gem in black and white continues.  The synopsis of this film says "Three Shady characters hunt for Nazi Gold in the African Desert" but I read that after the movie, and that makes more sense, but still not alot.  This movie is named "Bengazi" (spelled wrong, as it's "Benghazi") but I never once heard the word "Libya" or "Africa".  They say "Tripoli" once.  It's nothing like the aforementioned Casablanca, where you know why the characters ended up in a distant, foreign land, and why they have stayed there, and the circumstances where they would want to/have to leave.  Here the characters are just there, want gold for no better reason than to get rich, and we don't get any motivations anywhere.  Once they get the gold, then what?  Why is there a CID officer stationed in Libya?  Why is there Nazi Gold in Libya, or is there?  It's never called that in the movie, just the synopsis.  Why are the local "tribesmen" trying to kill our heroes?  At one point a character sacrifices himself...but his reasons for doing so make no sense.  In typical Hollywood style, a woman falls for a rogue after knowing him only for a day, and only after he forces her to kiss him.  Conte talks tough, like John Garfield, but usually with these movie tough guys there really is something likeable about them, like Frank Sinatra.  Not here.  Overall a miss in my opinion.  *Smokers Report: Lots but it's in black and white so somehow it works.

December 9th - ACROSS THE PACIFIC (1942)

I recently got the chance to re-watch Casablanca on the big screen as part of it's re-release to celebrate it's 75th Anniversary, so seeing Bogie come up on TCM made watching this a no-brainer.  Although it would make more sense watching this after watching "The Maltese Falcon", as this cast and crew worked together on that film a year earlier.  Is this as good as TMF?  Nope.  There is a reason why this film isn't listed among Bogie's best.  It's not bad...it's just not great.  It's funny seeing Bogart and Mary Astor goofing around a bit on screen, after their tense relationship in TMF that was based on lies and deception.  And as a Canadian, my brain flares whenever I hear "Canada" or "Canadian" mentioned.  In this movie, Astor's character is supposidely Canadian (from Medicine Hat, to be exact, although whether she really is or isn't ain't exactly clear), some action takes place in Halifax, Bogart tries to join the Canadian Army, etc.  Little details like that make me pay attention, eventhough it really has nothing to do with the overall story.  Even the name "Across the Pacific" is misleading as they never make it across the Pacific as the action takes place in Panama.  And in one specific instance, they show that the date of this all happening is December 6, 1941.  As far as I can remember, after this there is no mention of Pearl Harbour and the attack, and from what I read online, this movie was supposed to be about a fictional attack on Pearl Harbour, but they re-wrote it after the Japanese bombing in real-life.  One quick note: I don't mean to sound like a jerk, but am I the only one not captivated by Mary Astor?  It would be fine, she is a great actress, but it just seems weird, especially after in TMF when she's referred to as a "knockout".  Them using that word for some reason just seems wrong...but it's a minor detail...  *Smokers Report: Yup, but it's black and white... 

December 8th - BATTLE OF THE SEXES (2017)

This movie is still in theatres, so I'll lay off the spoilers...but this is an exceptional film!  I loved most things about it.  Emma Stone and Steve Carell are both tremendous as Billie Jean King and Bobby Riggs.  I loved that they didn't make it a good vs. evil thing.  Sure Riggs played up the "Male Chauvanist Pig" routine, but he really is a loveable, funny guy.  When they have the press conferences, they show Stone-as-King smiling and laughing and seems to kinda be having fun, despite the fact she does really want to beat Carell-as-Riggs in their tennis match.  It shows that King did seem to like Riggs, warts and all.  They could have undercut these scenes with one of those deals where Stone is smiling for the public but then turns her head and is clearly mad, or a flash forward to her crying in her hotel room later after being embarrassed.  There was a tremendous balance there...it is possible for people to be competitive with each other and not want to murder each other.  I loved little details when Stone is coming out to start the match and she gladly gets on the big sedan to be carried to the arena by muscular men.  In a lesser movie, they would portray it as King being against such a thing, not wanting to turn her passion, tennis, into a spectacle like pro wrestling.  She knew the game she was playing and even gets to one-up the showman Riggs at times, like handing him a baby pig just before the game gets underway.  I also loved that both had amazing spouses who loved them, despite their issues.  Riggs is a hustler, King is laser-focused on tennis and her career.  I had no idea that this whole time period was when the WTA was formed, and learned other little bits of info about these tennis players, most I won't reveal as - again - spoilers!  Let's just say I ended up liking Austin Stowell more than Andrea Riseborough, and after the film you'll understand what I meant.  And ultimately, those relationships are important to the overall story, but the film does a good job reminding everyone that this is about a tennis game between and man and a woman, and not a soap opera game of who will end up with whom!  And isn't Elisabeth Shue awesome?  Why aren't more people talking about her?  Not to mention Sarah Silverman and the AMAZING Alan Cumming both knocking it out of the park (couldn't think of a tennis joke there, had to settle for baseball...)!!!  I hope alot of the talent involved here gets recognized come awards season, especially Stone and Carell.  Stone is already an Oscar winner and Carell was nominated for "Foxcatcher" (imagine reacting ten years ago to the idea that "Superbad" star Stone and "40-Year Old Virgin" star Carell would one day be Oscar winners/nominees...), but I see both these roles as more "worthy" of Oscars than their previous work (I really hated Foxcatcher...), but whatever...anyway...GO SEE THIS FILM WHILE IT'S STILL IN THEATRES!  *Smokers Report: SIlverman's character is always smoking, plus Virginia Slims gets alot of face time, as they sponsor the initial WTA tournaments.

December 7th - TRUTH (2015)

Another chance to catch up with Cate Blanchett.  I am a Canadian who, in today's world, actually knows more about US politics than Canadian politics.  But I have no memory of this whole "Killian papers" scandal.  They must not have talked about it much on "The Daily Show."  Anyway, the movie hits the ground running and, in my opinion, assumes the viewer knows alot about the subject.  Since I didn't, it took me awhile to figure out that this was about a story about President GW Bush and his service record, or lack thereof, and the implications of that.  In fact, it isn't until 42 minutes into the film, where Robert Redford recreates the 60 Minutes opening where I had a distinct feeling of "Oh, okay...got it."  There were a few problems as the movie progresses...I have to admit I couldn't buy Robert Redford as Dan Rather...the use of "uplifting" music in certain scenes like when the piece first airs, and rock music when Blanchett is putting her badass news team together, like they are The Avengers or something...the scary horror movie music used when Blanchett sees the mean things people are saying about her on the internet...  The movie is kind of manipulative, reminding me of Aaron Sorkin's The West Wing or The Newsroom (oddly, I loved West Wing but hated The Newsroom for reasons I can't quantify).  The all star back up cast of Elizabeth Moss, Bruce Greenwood, Dennis Quaid and Topher Grace are fine, but the movie is about Blanchett and Redford.  Both are great, especially Blanchett.  *Smokers Report: None.

December 6th - AND JUSTICE FOR ALL (1979)

Okay, so now after watching this film for the 1st time, I know where the "You're out of order, you're out of order, this whole court is out of order" famous line comes from.  I can check that off my list of "To-Do's" that I didn't know existed.  Although the line is misquoted, as it's actually "You're out of order...this whole TRIAL is out of order..."  I record some movies randomly just based on stars, or the director or if the image shown associated with the movie looks interesting.  The write up for this movie says "A lawyer in contempt of court agrees to defend a judge he hates, accused of rape."  Starring Al Pacino, Jack Warden, John Forsythe, Lee Strasberg.  Based on that, I don't know why I recorded it, really.  Sure Warden is awesome and I know Forsythe from Dynasty, and Strasberg I know from Inside the Actor's Studio sure...no mention of the fact Norman Jewison directed this, Barry Levinson co-wrote it and it has an all-star cast of "wow they were young then" Craig T. Nelson, Christine Lahti, Joe Morton, Larry Bryggman (John McClaine's Captain in Die Hard 3) and the awesome Jeffrey Tambor, who has a full head of hair and also delivers the best line of the movie, better than the famous Pacino rant, to end the film.  In today's instance of weird random connections between films, this is alot like "The Children's Hour" in that things really haven't changed after all these years.  The events depicted in the life of a lawyer in the big city from 1979 seems like it could be the pilot of one of the many lawyer shows on TV today.  The scenes are almost like skits or vignettes about a lawyer's life that don't seem to be connected, other than Pacino connects them as the actor in each scene, but it all comes together in the end as Pacino's character, who at this point hadn't become the "shouty Pacino" he's become, gets louder and louder and starts screaming...but of course it works, as the character earned the exasperation he feels in the final courtroom scene, after one judicial disappointment after another.  Some scenes, like the helicopter scene, are seemingly out of place, but add to the overall bizarreness of the movie and the eccentricity of the characters involved.  For a movie I chose at random, I really enjoyed it.   *Smokers Report: Nada.

December 5th - A CHALLENGE FOR ROBIN HOOD (1967)

I found out that, while doing my other lists, patterns just kind of emerge.  Thor: Ragnarok lead to Cate Blanchett, who lead to watching the 2010 Robin Hood, which now leads to this film that was on my DVR but I had forgotten about until I was scrolling through looking for something to watch tonight.  This was on TCM months back but as I watch the credits roll, I realise I recognize absolutely zero names listed.  The only name I recognise is "Hammer", which means the people who made this film also gave us the classic "Hammer Horror Films".  I recognize the man playing Robin Hood but have to look it up as Barrie Ingham, who ironically I just watched in an episode of the classic British TV show "The Avengers" "You Have Just Been Murdered", which inspired me in my writing a certain storyline for The Supers #1 and beyond...weird how all this is connected.  This movie and it's interpretation is a little different than any other interpretation, but still kinda the same.  There is, of course, Robin and his Merry Men, Maid Marian, the Sheriff of Nottingham...hiding in Sherwood Forest...a contest that leads to a big action sequence...rescuing Maid Marian from the bad guys...the big differences are how Robin becomes an outlaw, and how Maid Marian is "hiding in plain sight" to begin with, which isn't referred to at all going forward, but was pretty creative.  The movie is pretty inoffensive, has lots of humour and no blood or gore.  It's a better Robin Hood story than the 2010 version, but not nearly as heart warming as the Errol Flynn version or as...er..."blockbustery" as the Kevin Costner version.  There are certain stories that just keep getting told over and over again, like this one, and each time, I imagine, the filmmakers have to ask "Why do this...how can we make this different?"  In 2001, they put out "The Princess of Thieves" starring Keira Knightley in one of her first roles, about older Robin is trying to raise his and Marian's daughter, Gwyn, as a single parent (Marian has died) and is still hanging out in Sherwood Forest.  While you have to still wonder why the Merry  Men are still hiding out twenty years later, the movie was about the daughter trying to impress her father, and while not amazing, it was a different take on the legend.  While some things are switched around, this does seem like the same old-same old.  While I didn't like the Russell Crowe version, it is at least a totally unique look at the legend.  Despite it being made by masters of horror, this is an incredibly family friendly version of this legend and I liked it, but if I have to watch a Robin Hood movie it will be the Errol Flynn version...or the Costner version...or the Disney cartoon...  *Smokers Report: None

December 4th - HANNA (2011)

Here we continue our Cate Blanchett Appreciation...ness...?  I guess there's probably no point saying "I've been meaning to see this movie for a long time..." cause that's the case with all these movies.  I'd heard lots of good things and I can see why.  This was a very stylistic film, great to look at.  I liked alot about the movie but there was just something missing.  It was interesting to watch but I didn't really find myself getting emotionally involved.  Cate Blanchett didn't have much to do here.  It's pretty much all about Hanna herself, Saoirse Ronan.  She does a great job, and I like her journey but, again, there was just something missing.  The action scenes are well done and I like the settings, like the container ship-yard and a freaky amusement park.  A good but not great film.  *Smoker's Report: Nope

December 3rd - THE CHILDREN'S HOUR (1961)

Been meaning to see this for a LONG time.  Almost saw it at the TCM Film Festival, have had it on the DVR before, but just never sat down to watch it.  I've heard great things, and I'm a huge James Garner fan and Shirley MacLaine fan, so I was looking forward to this.  As I've stated in other Movie-A-Day Blogs, I have major gaps in my movie watching when it comes to Audrey Hepburn.  And I have yet to find a Hepburn role that I've loved, some that I've liked (Wait Until Dark) and some I've just hated.  And as for this movie, I loved all of it...except Hepburn!  In fact I think I might have hated Hepburn's character.  HATED!  Without spoiling the movie, as I do recommend it, it's about how rumours and heresay can ruin lives.  And how children are evil and I'll never have any...cause EVIL!  I loved how, once Hepburn and MacLaine get into trouble, Garner stood by them and never doubted them.  Until the big emotional scene where Garner wants all three of them run off together and start fresh, even insisting MacLaine come with them at least until she can get on her feet, then along comes Hepburn to ruin everything as she badgers him over and over and basically forces him to admit that he did believe "the rumors" in a moment of weakness, and she then sends him away.  That whole scene I was just...wow!  At that point I wanted MacLaine and Garner to run off together and leave Hepburn alone to mope by herself.  The little girl in this movie is very convincing at being evil, as is Miriam Hopkins at being a self-centered actress.  Alot of the tension at the end of the film revolves around everyone loving Hepburn and that I didn't get.  And the finale is heartbreaking.  Funny that this is a remake by the same director, William Wyler, who did the original, which is rare outside of Howard Hawks, who made TWO remakes of Rio Bravo.  Wyler wanted a second crack at the material, as when he made the first (sharing the name "These Three" with the play it was based on) in 1936, there wasn't even a hint of lesbianism allowed.  And even then, MacLaine has said she was disappointed about how Wyler didn't go far enough....Also, as a side note, it's really sad how little we've evolved since 1961 (or 1936, when the initial movie was made, or 1934 when the play first was performed).  Sure, people these days can at least say the word "lesbian" and be so publicly, which is great, but somehow I doubt that if a couple of lesbians were to run a day care center that their lives would be care-free and they would never receive a sideways glance, even in 2017.  *Smokers Report: As stated in other Blogs, for some reason, in black and white movies smoking doesn't seem to be as big a deal as in colour movies.  Garner, as always, smokes in this film, but I didn't really notice it until it was pointed out in a scene by Hepburn (Grrr).  Again, she just ruins everything!!!!  :)

December 2nd - ROBIN HOOD (2010)

Because Cate Blanchett was so awesome in Thor: Ragnarok, and also because on cable Saturday morning they showed Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves (a favourite movie from my childhood, Kevin Costner's accent be damned), it made me think of this film...and how I'd never seen it.  Going back to childhood, my fascinations were Superheroes, pro wrestling and Robin Hood...so apparently early on I admired men in tights (but oddly not Mel Brooks' Robin Hood: Men in Tights...).  I loved the old Errol Flynn version, the Costner version, and the Disney cartoon version.  I remember hearing alot about this film in it's build up, how it was going to be the definitive "historically accurate" Robin Hood...and I thought "Who needs that?"  As I get older, I've started to realise you "Never let the truth get in the way of a good story"...add to that I've never really been a big Russell Crowe fan.  I wasn't a fan of Gladiator, which these days is almost like admitting you don't like The Godfather...but that's another story...This movie had the usual Crowe dinner theatre players (Scott Grimes as Will Scarlett, Canadian boy Kevin Durand as Little John for example), Crowe's buddy Alan Doyle of the Canadian band Great Big Sea (who all randomly guest starred with Crowe on the Canadian CBC drama Republic of Doyle, in a little trivia for you), and his favourite director Ridley Scott.  There was also an all-star cast of Mark Strong, Oscar Issac, William Hurt, Danny Huston, Max Von Sydow, Mark Addy,  Lea Seydoux, Jessica Raine...etc.  How was the film though?  It's...fine.  It's definately more complicated than any other version.  Robin LONGSTRIDE and his Merry Men fought with King Richard the Lionheart and Robin of Locksley in the Crusades.  Locksley was married to Marian, but Locksley dies, Robin returns to Nottingham to fulfull a vow he made as Locksley died, Robin pretends to be Locksley, meets Marian, all the while Richard's death mixes things up politically in London, with Isaac's King John taking over, coming up with "taxation", etc etc etc...this looked like, from the trailers, a dour humourless adaptation but there is some humour, especially once Crowe and Blanchett meet up.  There's even a scene where they share a bedroom but not a bed so there is a sheet that divides the room...just like famous scenes in such classics as "It Happened One Night" with Clark Gable and Claudette Colbert and "No Holds Barred" with Hulk Hogan and Joan Severence.  People always make lots of fun of American Costner's British accent in "Prince of Thieves" but no one seems to make fun of New Zealander Crowe's British accent.  Probably cause he'd kick their ass if they did.  It's an hour into the film before Crowe and Blanchett meet, and an hour and a half before Crowe meets the army of Sherwood Forest...there is somekind of political stuff going on with Hurt/Issac/Strong in London but it's confusing and over complicated, some stuff about Longstride's secret origin, Hurt tries to get a war started by simply yelling "They're FRENCH!!!!"...Going in I expected great action sequences, with Scott involved but while a spectacle (it was apparently the Middle Ages version of Saving Private Ryan's invasion of Omaha Beach) it is messy, as at certain points Crowe is attacking from the left, then he's attacking from the right...and it takes you out of the movie.  And when it gets right down to it, this isn't a Robin Hood movie!  The only part of this that is "Robin Hood" is the last five minutes, I guess setting up a sequel that will apparently never happen.  Blanchett is always awesome, and I like Crowe when he's smiley and with softer edges and their scenes are great.  But the rest is...well, again...over complicated.  There are lots of other, better versions of Robin Hood, so go check them out first.  Man, I hope my other reviews aren't so long... *Smoker's Report: Nope

December 1st - THOR: RAGNAROK (2017)

Okay, so full transparency...I saw this movie on opening night, a month ago...and loved it!  And it's been in the back of my mind ever since.  Over the past month, while I was on the road travelling all over Western Canada, I had the chance to see it again, but never did.  Upon returning home, I got together with my podcast partner Andrew Buckley to record for the first time in awhile, and the topic of our first podcast was Thor: Ragnarok vs. Justice League.  To get ready for this ahead of time, I listened to a few other podcasts (Comedy Film Nerds and Filmspotting to be precise) to refresh my Thor memory.  And then I started flashing back, remembering all the great scenes, and then talking about it with Buckley on our podcast TRILOGY SPOILERS made me want to see the film again BAD!  So I did!  I went again and I had previously claimed that it might be in my top 3 Marvel films period!  After seeing again, it was amazing and I still loved it, but towards the end in the big fight I did get a little drowsy.  The movie has so many memorable scenes it's hard to list them all.  The banter between Thor and the bad guy in the "swinging-while-chained-up" opening scene, the amazing cameos in Loki's "play-within-the-movie" (which I won't spoil), Dr. Strange's cameo, Hela showing up and being awesome!...then the movie shifts to the planet of SAKAAR and the movie turns into an early episode of The Simpsons with a joke-per-second ratio that is simply amazing!  As soon as Tessa Thompson's Valkyrie stumbles off her space ship, then Jeff Goldblum shows up...then THE HULK shows up...the BRUCE BANNER shows up (there is a difference)...someone on a podcast (I think Filmspotting) mentioned that it was almost too bad that Cate Blanchett's Hela was in this movie, as she was so good and such a great character that she could've had her own spinoff...I agree...the big final fight is well done (despite my drowsiness) and this does a great job setting up the next Marvel Avengers movie "Infinity War".  Special mention to Taika Waititi, the director, who after odd ball movies "Eagle vs. Shark", and the great "What We Do in the Shadows" was picked to tackle this 3rd Thor movie and apparently make it as weird and different as the other 2 Thor movies, which most people think of as a cross between Lord of the Rings and Shakespeare. As we are inching towards the 20th edition of the Marvel Movie Universe, these movies are trying new things, and whomever came up with the idea of a Thor movie being a space opera/buddy-cop/action-comedy movie deserves a raise!  Not only did he do that as a director, he contributes on screen as "Korg" a wonderful character who I hope we see more of in the future.  Other than the first Iron Man, first Avengers movie, first Guardians of the Galaxy movie...this movie is up there on the list!  Can't recommend this enough!  *Smokers Report: N/A

Blog Archive

• March 2018
  • Mar 23, 2018 IMHO: Fave Five Ginger Rogers Movies Mar 23, 2018
• January 2018
  • Jan 1, 2018 January 2018 Movie A Day Blog Jan 1, 2018
• December 2017
  • Dec 2, 2017 December 2017 Movie a Day Blog! Dec 2, 2017
• August 2017
  • Aug 13, 2017 Blog Archive Aug 13, 2017
  • Aug 9, 2017 My Influences #4 - British TV Comedies! (a continuing list) Aug 9, 2017
  • Aug 1, 2017 August 2017 A Movie A Day Blog! Aug 1, 2017
• July 2017
  • Jul 5, 2017 July 2017 31 Movies in 31 Days Jul 5, 2017
• January 2017
  • Jan 5, 2017 My Influences #3 - Sitcoms (a continuing list) Jan 5, 2017
• October 2016
  • Oct 31, 2016 My Influences #2 - Gail Simone (a continuing list) Oct 31, 2016
• September 2016
  • Sep 30, 2016 My Influences #1 - Dwayne McDuffie (a continuing list...) Sep 30, 2016
• August 2016
  • Aug 22, 2016 Comic Con San Diego 2016 Reflections Aug 22, 2016
• June 2016
  • Jun 29, 2016 BLOG #1 - Why Not? Jun 29, 2016

My Influences #4 - British TV Comedies! (a continuing list)

British comedies!

Growing up in Canada, we got quite a mixture of pop culture thrown at us.  Where I lived our cable TV channels consisted of the big four US networks, NBC, ABC, CBS and Fox, filtered through the local Seattle affiliates, plus PBS and two main Canadian channels, CTV and the government funded CBC.  Our Canadian cable stations, such as TSN (The Sports Network), gave us Canadian (and American) sports, Much Music gave us Canadian (and American) music videos while YTV (Youth TV, I think the "Y" stood for) gave us cartoons from all over the world.  In Canada we got CNN before we had our own 24 hour Canadian news channel.  Canadian "culture" consists of a lot of American influence, but also a TON of British influences as well.  Thanks to PBS, A&E and also late night YTV, which was a kids channel during the day and at night showed, well, seemingly whatever the hell they wanted, we got a lot of British shows too.  I remember watching great British TV shows such as The Avengers (Steed and Peel!), Fawlty Towers, Cracker, Lovejoy, The Good Life, As Time Goes By, French and Saunders, Chef, Yes, Prime Minister and others, some I'll be kicking myself later for forgetting (my dad's favourite was "Are You Being Served?" and lately I've been meaning to binge those shows).  But this list is the best of the best, ones I go back to often and re-visit (with one exception, as you'll see).  And they also influenced me and shaped my brain to what it is today.

1- Red Dwarf
*PBS, or for me it's Seattle affiliate KCTS 9, wouldn't show Red Dwarf often.  They would, once a year or so, do Red Dwarf marathons all weekend and when they did, it was a reason to celebrate.  Discovering Red Dwarf and it's brand of sci-fi humour was an awakening for me.  I was very young when I was introduced to Lister, Rimmer, Cat and Kryten and didn't know sci-fi was something that was, or even could be, funny.  I hadn't yet found Douglas Adams and the like.  In fact, Red Dwarf goes so far back in my memory it may be the first British TV show I ever watched, even before Monty Python even though chronologically of course it came much later.  Some very British references went over my head, such as a kipper or smeghead, but since I discovered this show as a kid, I was used to things going over my head and just rolled with it.  I remember being fascinated by concepts such as "future echoes", "polymorphs" and "parallel universes". 

And then Series 3 changed without so much of an explanation, other than a Star Wars style crawl at the beginning of the 1st episode that you had to slow down to properly read.  Kryten was added to the cast full-time, they changed Holly to a woman and ignoring the fact Lister ended the last series as having just delivered twin babies.  They could have taken one episode to explain everything properly, but they just didn't feel like it, so why bother?  Once that five-some were united, the show really found it's stride, using Kryten in particular as a middle-man caught between Lister and Rimmer's battles for the upper hand.  I remember Series 4's "Justice" and "Meltdown" as well as Series 5's "The Inquisitor" being particular favourites.  But I also remember my mind being blown by Series 5's finale "Back to Reality", where the crew seems to die and then are awoken all at the same time, as they had apparently been playing a virtual reality game the whole time and weren't actually the crew of the Red Dwarf.  So many great memories from this show and even watching the show, in particular when KCTS 9 would do the marathons in later years they would fly over the stars to take part and chat in between episodes, something that is kinda common now on cable and the internet but at the time to me was pretty amazing.  I think the last time they did this (or one of the last that I saw anyway) Joel McHale, an unknown Seattle comedian at the time, was one of the KCTS 9 hosts and was geeking-out talking to Lister and The Cat, a far cry from his character on "Community" who would have made fun of that guy.  I remember having to search through my old VHS tapes, looking for tapes with enough space on them to record a few episodes at a time (in SLP we could record, like 6 hours on one tape, right?).  I drifted away from Red Dwarf when new episodes were few and far between, but apparently they are still making them to this day, so I need to go back and get caught up on what those "Smedheads" are up to.

2- Black Adder
I recently re-watched all these shows in a binge session (all are available on Youtube, btw) and yes, that first series still isn't good.  But series 2-4 are still amazing and get better and better, which is rare for any series.  I talked about this show's influence on me during my August 31 movies in 31 days Blog after watching a 90 minute retrospective documentary on the show.  I just love this show and seeing how it changed so much after Ben Elton came along after the first series.  Going to a studio audience format and swapping the personalities and intellects of the characters (Baldrick was actually the smart on in the 1st series…that just seems wrong doesn't it?) really shook up the series and both the cast and crew are legendary. 

Stephen Fry, Hugh Laurie, Miranda Richardson, Tim McInnerny, Robbie Coltrane, Jim Broadbent, Rik Mayall, Brian Blesses…the first episode even featured Peter Cook…plus Richard Curtis and Elton behind the scenes.  Also interesting was that McInnerny was supposed to play the Prince Regent in Series 3 but left the show and Laurie took over and was spectacular. 

Then it all came together for the final series, Series 4, set during World War I in the trenches of No Man's Land (hear that Wonder Woman movie fans?), with the final few minutes of the last episode being part of tv history.  I loved that the show changed every series, able to re-invent itself every time, almost kind of like Dr. Who in a sense, in that they weren't bogged down creatively.  That's something I've wanted to incorporate into my writing and hopefully someday I can in way that doesn't suck too much.  Rowan Atkinson is known the world over as Mr. Bean, and while I do like Mr. Bean (well, early Mr. Bean…), but Edmond Blackadder should be his comedic legacy.

3- Spaced
This show launched some shining stars into the entertainment world.  Simon Pegg, Nick Frost and Edgar Wright, for starters.  The show starred Pegg and Jessica Stevenson as two roommates and their friends and lives and other things.  It was filled with pop culture references, some of which stand up and some that don't.  I re-watched these recently and (surprisingly) almost didn't get the Sixth Sense reference.  But of course the homages to The Matrix and Phantom Menace all hold up.  I have to admit that this show was hyped big time to me, with me buying the big box set when it came out, having never watched a second of the show, but saw that there were commentaries by Kevin Smith and Quentin Tarantino and knowing Pegg/Frost/Wright for their movies (I prefer Hot Fuzz to Shaun of the Dead, just like I prefer buddy cop movies to zombie movies, but I still love Shaun too, so calm down...) and figured it was a can't miss. 

But then I admit that the first time I watched the show, I didn't get it.  But something made me try again and that second time the lightbulb went off and I loved it.  Also a treat, on the DVD, is a documentary about the show, not just with talking heads and retrospectives (they do have that though) but also Pegg, Stevenson and Wright actually go back to where the series was filmed and even to the house where the filming took place and have a fun encounter with some Spaced fans who just happen to show up that day.  They all come across as cool people who you would like to hang out with and be happy for their successes.

4- Monty Python
For obvious reasons…I remember knowing who John Cleese was at an early age, and I probably saw Fawlty Towers first…and I remember one Sunday afternoon flipping the channels and this movie came on called "Monty Python and The Holy Grail" and loving it.  After that I tried to know everything I could about Monty Python.  At my local video rental store, they had "Best of Python" VHS tapes I could rent, plus I found out about other Python films like "Life of Brian" and "The Meaning of Life", plus any books or documentaries I could find (and luckily, there isn't a shortage of those).  Then one day Bravo in Canada started showing Monty Python's Flying Circus from the beginning and I was blown away.  While I still think of "Holy Grail" as the best Python's ever done (they say "Life of Brian" is their masterpiece, I respectfully disagree), watching the show, episode by episode, series by series, I think this is quite simply masterful.  I know -  news flash: Monty Python is good! 

If I had to pick a favourite episode, I'd almost have to say the first one…nearly all the sketches are burned into my brain.  The first two sketched in particular, with Graham Chapman and Terry Jones discussing the possible benefits to sheep aviation and then them transitioning to John Cleese and Michael Palin, in French no less, talking about a new design for an Airplane made out of Sheep.  And that was kind of their brilliance, every episode had a loose theme and sketches carried over, not necessarily needing a big finish.  SNL sketches needed a way out, a big punch line to wrap it up before they headed to commercial.  The Flying Circus had no such limitations.  My all-time favourite sketch (today) is probably the sketch where Eric Idle comes home to his parents and is treated like a traitor by his father and you assume the father is a labourer and the son is an artist, but it's flipped and the skit ends with the father crying out in pain cause of his writer's cramp.  As a writer with family that didn't quite get what I did, I always found that skit hilarious. 

I still break out the huge DVD box-set of Circus every once in a while to re-watch those great episodes.  Even after Cleese left the show, while the quality did go down a bit, there are some still amazing bit there.  I know, again - news flash: Monty Python is funny!  Recently watching their Reunion Special, seeing Spamalot live and then even more Monty Python docs (the doc "Monty Python: Almost the Truth (Lawyer's Cut)" in particular I've watched several times) and having listened to as many audio books as possible about the subject, it truly never gets old.  And it's got me looking back further to check out their influences like The Goon Show, Peter Cook and Dudley Moore too.  Just an unending thread of comedy greatness.  NEWS FLASH!

5- Young Ones/Bottom
I have to admit, this selection is questionable…I could have put Fawlty Towers or a sketch show like French and Saunders, which I watched over and over when the Women's Network started showing it in Canada…but these two picks are sentimental, as Rik Mayall died too young and also to me they are still full of potential, as I've seen some episodes but not all of them.  Both shows have something in common, hence the grouping.  Both shows featured Mayall and Adrian Edmondson, first as youngsters and then the two of them again ten years later.

I love the Young Ones episode where they did the quiz show, and Bottom (which I have seen more of) did that great birthday episode that was a Young Ones reunion (if I am remembering correctly).  My favourite episode was the one where the two characters just sit in their apartment and talk, having had their TV stolen (I believe it's Series Two's "Culture", after reading the show's Wikipedia).  I loved it so much I considered adapting it into a stage show, but it never happened. 

But why are these shows on this list, considering I admit that I am not necessarily an expert on the shows and haven't even seen all the episodes.  First, sod off, it's my list.  Second, I like that I have more to discover with these shows and new experiences to come.  And it is #5, after all…

That's it for now…I plan on doing similar lists for Best Animated TV series, Best British sic-fi show, etc.  One day...

August 2017 A Movie A Day Blog!

The List:

1- Seven Year Itch
2- John Wick
3- Charade
4- Justice League: Throne of Atlantis (animated)
5- The Duff
6- The Hangover Part 2
7- The Night of the Hunter
8- Black Adder: The While Rotten Saga
9- Okja
10- The Hangover Part 3
11- Star of Midnight
12- Shane
13- McLintock!
14- Street Smart
15- Freebie and the Bean
16- A Place in the Sun
17- Cat on a Hot Tin Roof
18- The Founder
19- To The Bone
20- Bridge of Spies
21- Moana
22- People Will Talk
23- Mr. Right
24- Anomalisa
25- Synecdoche, New York
26- Noises Off!
27- Runaway Train
28- Lilo & Stitch
29- The Rescuers
30- I Ought to be in Pictures
31- An Officer and a Gentleman

August 31st - AN OFFICER AND A GENTLEMAN (1982) Last movie of this blog!  Not sure if I'll do an September blog, as I am going on the road again for work and it's hard driving 9 hours, getting to the hotel and then HAVING to watch a movie.  Anyway, I've never had much of a desire to see this film, eventhough I've heard about it seemingly forever.  I've never really been a Richard Gere fan.  Other than Primal Fear and Unfaithful, and I guess Pretty Woman, I haven't really seen much of his filmography.  He's a very stoic actor and doesn't really...do...much on screen.  Especially in this film, his face doesn't move much, he has to get really angry or emotional before his expression changes.  He relies on shifting his gaze, mouth movement and body language to convey his emotions.  And I was surprised that this movie is known as a love story but the story is actually mostly about Gere's character, Mayo, and his training to join the Navy's Aviation Program.  There's way more onscreen time between Gere and drill instructor Lou Gossett Jr., and Gere and buddy Keith David (not David Keith from They Live) than there is between Gere and Debra Winger.  But the thing is, Winger steals every scene she is in.  She is gorgeous and doesn't get the credit she deserves.  Although maybe she would have if she hadn't taken a hiatus for so many years.  Anyway, any time she is on screen, my focus was on her.  Especially in those sexy-even-by-todays-standards love scenes.  So while this film has that iconic ending of Gere picking Winger up in his arms and them walking out of her factory, it's a feel good moment that I'm sure had the crowds cheering in 1982's theaters, it actually was a bigger deal that Gere graduated a few scenes earlier.  Interesting that the cast included a young David Caruso and Lisa Eilbacher, who played Jenny Summers in Beverly Hills Cop.  I can totally see why this was considered one of the best movies of the '80's.  *Smokers Report: A few characters smoke but not alot, which, like the previous film on this blog, I found unusual for an 80's movie.

August 30th - NEIL SIMON'S I OUGHT TO BE IN PICTURES (1982) I thought I had posted this last night but apparently not, so here we go.  Okay, so I'm searching through Netflix, looking for a movie to watch, which can be a long time-consuming adventure.  I just type in "movie" and see what happens.  "Movies from 1980's" comes up, and I've seen most of them.  Then there is this film, which I'd never heard of.  I get more info and it says "Starring Walter Matthau" and I'm in.  I've never heard of this film, but I hit play anyway.  Dinah Manoff comes on screen, talking and talking and talking and immediately I'm like "okay, this was based on a play" and yes it turns out it was written by Neil Simon, based on one of his Broadway plays.  Manoff is the only one from Broadway who ended up in the film.  The banter is okay early on but it gets a bit annoying later.  I looked up this film and both Siskel and Ebert named it one of the worst films of 1982.  Wow!  Manoff and Matthau meet, get all lovey-dovey (they are estranged father/daughter), and then start yelling at each other within ten minutes.  Ann Margaret shows up and literally says "What do you expect?  It won't happen in ten minutes!".  I was thinking "AMEN, sister!"  Matthau is awesome as a guy slowly falling in love with this young woman who he didn't know existed (his daughter, and I don't mean it that way pervs) and as he slowly takes down his defenses and wants to have this girl in his life.  Manoff I remember from sitcoms in the late 80's but not much else.  Ann Margaret is one of those actresses I'll always have a crush on.  Neil Simon is one of those guys that has done all-time amazing work (The Odd Couple, The Goodbye Girl) and some...not so much.  I did like one line where Manoff says "I talk to (her dead) Grandma cause I'm so worried no one else is listening".  I guess I'm a sap cause I kind of enjoyed this.  I was genuinely emotional at the end of the film.  Am I just programmed to automatically love all things Matthau?  Is it a great film?  I don't know.  Watch it yourself and you tell me.  A trivia note: This is the only Walter Matthau movie on Netflix (at least my Canadian Netflix).  While Netflix is alot of things, it's not great presenting anything earlier than 2000 unless it's a big movie like Back to the Future.  Sure there's TCM Online and other streaming services, but most aren't available in Canada.  So if it's not on Youtube... *Smoker's Report: Walter Matthau's character smokes but that's it, which is actually kind of weird for an '80's movie.

August 29th - THE RESCUERS (1977) So the more I go down the Disney Animation Rabbit Hole on Netflix, there are alot of films I haven't seen.  Or at least some, like this film, that I admit I may have seen as a kid, but have zero clue as to what it's about.  I didn't even know Bob Newhart was in this.  And I'm a fan of Bob Newhart.  I think I got this film confused with "Rescuers Down Under"...I remember that being a thing, so it is possible i haven't seen this at all after all!  Anyway, really old school Disney hand drawn 2D animation in the opening sequence, although early on it seems like more like a Filmmation He-Man style of animation, but what do I know?  Is it possible to love every character in a film?  Bernard, Miss Bianca, Penny, Rufus, Orville, Brutus and Nero, Evinrude, Ellie Mae and Luke and their group...all adorable!  Even Madame Madusa is fascinating.  The logical side of my brain occasionally butts in and wants details explained (like when twenty minutes in, Rufus asks "But you two are just two little mice, what can you do?" I was like...right?", and how they end up at Madame Madusa's makes no sense, how did Bernard go from being the janitor to being a full agent?...) but like with Lilo and Stitch, the details don't matter.  Apparently this was considered a Disney "B" movie back in the day but it's a really sweet film.  *Smokers Report: N/A

August 28th - LILO AND STITCH (2002) Another Disney film from an era where I missed alot of Disney films.  I'm thinking that at the time I was more into Pixar movies maybe?  I don't really have a reason...maybe I thought 2D animation was lame after seeing what 3D was all about?  Anyway, I know this film as a huge following and people think Stitch is their spirit animal or something.  I really, really enjoyed this.  I wasn't sure what to expect, from what little I've seen of clips and trailers, Stitch seemed like a jerk.  But apparently he's a fun, entertaining, charismatic Elvis-loving jerk.  Funny that I just watched Moana and this also takes place in Hawaii, although that really doesn't seem to be a main plot point, other than keeping Stitch away from a big city.  I fell in love with both Lilo and Stitch, even though by "normal movie standards" their relationship doesn't make much sense (why does she like him, how does she discover he can play records, how does he pick up the guitar so quickly...) but that doesn't matter.  That stuff was probably explained in an earlier draft but who cares that it was taken out?  I like that this is only 85 minutes.  I liked Kevin McDonald, of Kids in the Hall, as the "Earth expert".  I loved that everyone was just like...okay aliens...cool!  By the end I was genuinely moved by Stitch getting to stay with his new family.  I'm sorry this movie didn't become part of my life sooner.  *Smokers Report: N/A

August 27th Part 2 - RUNAWAY TRAIN (1985) Another selection from my un-opened DVD collection, although this one I didn't know I owned.  It was part of a DVD two-pack and I bought the DVD for the TV movie version of "Taking of Pelham 123" that starred Edward James Olmos and Vincent D'Onofrio...so this movie was a bonus.  I'd never heard of it, and that could be because of Jon Voight.  That's because until that Seinfeld episode with him on it (or I guess technically, his car), I had never heard of Jon Voight.  Ever.  I was even a pretty big movie fan at this point, but had never heard of Jon Voight.  I must have heard of Midnight Cowboy but not seen it.  Hadn't seen Deliverence until later.  When they said Jon Voight on Seinfeld, I thought it was a made up name. Not until Anaconda, of all things, I didn't get who he was.  Then his career rebounded, and as a bonus, he was Angelina Jolie's dad.  So, again, I had never heard of this, and then I found out I was really missing something.  Apparently this film was nominated was alot of awards, including a Golden Globe for Best Picuture- Drama, and both Voight and Eric Roberts were nominated for Oscars!  That shocked me, since this was basically an action film.  Again, not sure how I had never heard of this before, but I'm glad I've found it now.  It's a great film.  I was surprised Rebecca De Mornay was in this, as they "dirtied her up" alot but her looks still shone through the oil and dirt.  Some notable trivia: This was supposed to be a movie by Akira Kurasawa, but his involvement fell through.  Also, this film is the debut for both Tiny Lister (Zeus in No Holds Barred, the President in The Fifth Element) and Danny Trejo (any tough guy movie ever).  And also, this movie was made by The Cannon Group, a kind-of infamous movie studio that made "How Did This Get Made" podcast subjects such as "The Apple", "Lifeforce" and Lou Ferrigno's "Hercules" movie series. Also Highlander, Bo Derek's Bolero and Breakin 2: Electric Boogaloo, not to mention cheap horror movies and action flicks, like Bloodsport, Cobra, Superman 4, Masters of the Universe and various Chuck Norris movies.  They seemed to occasionally stumble across a good movie like this or the aforementioned Street Smart, 52 Pick-Up and Mannequin.  A good documentary about this studio is "Electric Boogaloo: The Wild, Untold Story of Cannon Films".  Oh, and PS, this is a great film!  *Smokers Report: None that I can remember.

August 27th - NOISES OFF (1992) Here's a film that I bought awhile back but have never cracked open.  I think I bought it at the same time as Street Smart as I was on a Christopher Reeve kick.  This got horrible reviews but the cast is made up of people that I love, plus it's directed by Peter Bogdanovich.  Bogdanovich is entertaining to listen to on TCM when he has vignettes, plus I do love some of his films, such as Last Picture Show and The Cat's Meow (I haven't seen Paper Moon...yet), although looking back over his filmography he's seemingly had a lot of stinkers too.  But in some strange way, his stinkers intrigue me, like "At Long Last Love", a musical with Burt Reynolds and Cybil Shepherd?  I need to see that!  And as I said, this cast is as if I picked it out myself.  Chris Reeve, Michael Caine (reuniting after Death Trap), Carol Burnett, John Ritter, Marilu Henner (who I am falling in love with all over again watching Taxi reruns on MeTV lately), plus a gorgeous Nicolette Sheridan, a zany Mark Linn-Baker and a boozy Denholm Elliott (Brody from the Indiana Jones movies), apparently in his last movie role ever.  And as advertised this movie didn't really work.  The idea of us watching a play (within a play) and having closeups of the actors is just weird, period.  It's one thing if you are watching an opera being filmed at a movie theater, you know what you are watching.  The slapstick zaniness is Bringing Up Baby-level, which Ritter excels at but it's over the top.  So over the top that...I can't even come up with a comparison.  I did love the 2nd act, where they are being all zany but silently, with barely any dialogue and just alot of choreographed shenanigans.  But altogether it is just to wacky, especially the ending where it just ends with a happy ending out of no where.  I might be biased, but Reeve is the shining light, playing it as straight as it gets in this film and when everything stops for him to ask the director Caine a question, it actually seems like a good question.  And when his question gets answered he seems genuinely happy and thankful.  I'm not disappointed I watched this, it was kind of fun with a big laugh spread out here and there, but overall it wasn't good.  *Smokers Report: None that I can think of.

August 26th Part 2: SYNECDOCHE, NEW YORK (2008) And speaking of Charlie Kaufman...why not watch this film too?  So some people have called this film brilliant and some have called it horrible and pretentious.  Roger Ebert, who I respected and admired alot but didn't always agree with as far as movie tastes, called this "the best movie of the decade".  I admire Kaufman, as noted in my review of Anomalisa below, but I couldn't figure this movie out.  It was almost like Kaufman trying to be a combination of David Lynch and David Zucker.  It was just a weird movie, happening seemingly at hyper-speed as it speeds ahead 17 years in about ten minutes (I think), but it starts coming together around the time Tom Noonan shows up to play Philip Seymour Hoffman in the play within the play-slash-movie.  It was a casting masterstroke to have Emily Watson show up to play Samantha Morton, although I'm not sure if I can quantify why I was tickled so much by that.  The movie starts out realistically and the weirdness could have slowly developed, except then they introduce the house-on-fire and any illusion of this being based on reality disappears.  There are some Zucker like jokes in here, like when Michelle Williams' character says "Everyone has tattoos", pulls up her shirt revealing a massive tattoo that covers her whole back, and Hoffman says "I've never seen that before" and walks off.  Or the scene where Hoffman is wanting to see his daughter, sees a present he bought her in the garbage, Hoffman stops, puts eyedrops in his eyes, then the next scene is him "crying" holding the present, as if that was Kaufman and Hoffman winking at the Academy or something.  But the meta-ness started to get suffocating.  Between the fire house, the magic diary and the 20 year pre-production of a play, it became too much.  Hard to believe I can't love a movie with Catherine Keener, Jennifer Jason Leigh, Samantha Morton, Emily Watson, Hope Davis and Diane Weist.  Unlike some people, just because I don't understand a movie, I won't dismiss it as garbage.  I am willing to concede that this movie is above my intelligence level. Maybe if I watched this movie a few more times I'll grow to appreciate it's brilliance.  Maybe.  *Smokers Report: A few characters smoke.  Maybe just one, now that I think of it.  Not a big deal.

August 26th - ANOMALISA (2015) What a strange wonderful film, but it's from the mind of Charlie Kaufman, so I guess I should have expected that! Kaufman has given us Being John Malkovich, Adaptation and one of my all-time favourites, Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind.  I own Synecdoche, New York, but have yet to watch it, for some reason.   It didn't take very long to fall in love with this film.  I think it was when I figured out every character was voiced by Tom Noonan, you know, on purpose (and it just wasn't me being nuts and thinking everyone sounded alike).  Probably when they recreated the "Godfrey loves me!" scene from My Man Godfrey.  I recently saw Moana and was amazed by the animation...but this film takes animation and is actually somehow better.  One the one hand, they take animation and instead of coming up with alien worlds or superheroes, they recreate the inside of an airplane, then an airport, then a taxi, then a hotel lobby, then a hotel room...and it all looks amazingly accurate in that it's just average looking.  And you might think "Why bother?  We can see that stuff in real life..." but the fact it's so realistic is part of the charm.  I can only imagine the hours and hours it took to make this stop-motion animated film, second-by-second (Wikipedia is a surprising lack of help, only saying it took 2 years to make the film).  In particular, the scene of the main character pacing his room practicing a speech, it's so, well, normal and could have been filmed in an hour in a real hotel with a real actor, but it my head it took months to film.  And I haven't even talked about the performances or the story...I was interested in particular as I'm a big Jennifer Jason Leigh fan and she doesn't work on enough projects these days.  This has one hilarious moment where the main character drives a trolley into an empty swimming pool.  The animation is so realistic, so I guess we've got past the "uncanny valley", "dead eyes" thing.  And even towards the end I did kind of wonder myself "Why not shoot this live action?" but it becomes clear, as the ending and how it conveys loneliness couldn't have come across as clear using live action actors or CGI.  *Smokers Report: The main character smokes, which I think was just the filmmakers showing off as opposed to it being an important story element.

August 25th - CRAP!  Happened again!  Now I'll have to watch 3 movies on Saturday!!!!  On the bright side "THE SUPERS" is close to publication!  :)

August 24th - It was bound to happen...worked an 8 hour day, then went over to my friend's as he's a graphic designer and we worked on my comic book, drove home (an hour commute), got home at 11pm and crashed...so no movie today!  Now I'll have to watch two on Saturday!  :)

August 23rd - MR. RIGHT (2015) This film was recommended to me by my podcasting parter, Andrew Buckley ( http://www.andrewbuckleyauthor.com/trilogy-spoilers-podcast) and despite the fact we rarely agree on movie tastes, I saw this on Netflix and figured what the hell?  I love Anna Kendrick and Sam Rockwell, the cast also includes Tim Roth and RZA, and also the dude who was the bad guy in Season 1 of Wynona Earp, a good Canadian boy, Michael Eklund.  This was a good little film, not a masterpiece but still enjoyable.  Tim Roth is interesting character in general (on and off screen), seemingly destined for superstardom during the Tarantino-ing of Hollywood but that never happened.  The most memorable thing I can think of that I'd seen him in prior to this was the Monty Python documentary "Almost the Truth: Lawyer's Cut" where he was asked about Python and his favourite sketch and he seemed stoned out of his mind.  Anyway, as I watched the film I thought I was losing it, as in one scene he'd have an Irish accent, then the next an American one, but it all makes sense eventually.  As mentioned earlier, Kendrick and Rockwell are two favs of mine and they have great chemistry.  These "hitman-with-a-heart-of-gold" movie was a dime a dozen in the late 90's after Pulp Fiction but time has passed.  It was a little weird with all the guns and death and laughs going along with it, but if it's a little movie that you don't necessarily think too much about, this could be it.  It was written by Max Landis, son of John Landis, who also wrote the great film "Chronicle" but also "American Ultra" (which I haen't seen to be fair, but I didn't hear much good about it) who has become a controversial online figure for his opinions.  That has nothing to do with this film, but just an aside.  PS Landis best works are his Youtube short films "Wrestling Isn't Wrestling" and the all-star cast-led "Death of Superman".  *Smokers Report: RZA smokes at one point but I think that's it.

August 22nd - PEOPLE WILL TALK (1951) Saturday was Cary Grant day on TCM's Summer Under the Stars, but it was hard for me to watch a Cary Grant movie that I hadn't seen already.  I'm a big Grant fan, and all the shows they were watching were some of my favourites, like The Philadelphia Story and The Bachelor and The Bobby Soxer (which they play all the time on TCM, yet I seem to be the only one who loves it; could be wrong...), Holiday...plus His Girl Friday was on the other day, which was Rosalind Russell day.  I've loved watching Grant as a true movie star and all that word means.  I don't assume anyone will argue Grant was a great "actor", and be mentioned in the same sentence as Marlon Brando, Al Pacino, Robert DeNiro, etc.  I hear Grant mentioned more along the lines of a George Clooney...again as great "movie stars" who are just as comfortable in comedies as they are dramas or thrillers.  Grant's filmography includes slapstick like Bringing Up Baby or a Hitchcock like North by Northwest.  But like all stars, not every movie is a homerun.  Now what about this movie?  I only had a few movies to choose from, seeing as the ones they showed I'd seen already, so I picked this one kinda at random.  The first hour of the movie drags, and it takes that long to really get the story moving.  It starts with Hume Cronyn interrogating the wicked witch about Grant's character, which I thought meant we were going to into a long flashback sequence, but the movie just proceeds from there.  Seems everyone loves Grant except Cronyn, who is on somekind of witch hunt.  Grant is a bit of Walter Burns and a bit George Kaplan...er...Roger Thornhill, in that he is laid back in his manner but yet talks and talks and talks.  Around the one hour mark, Grant proposes to "the girl" (played this time by Jeanne Crain) and ten minutes later they are married and Cronyn has THE EVIDENCE he's been looking for in said witch hunt.  There's not much humour here, some scenes that made me smirk, or smile, but not much laughing, but then again it's not that kind of film.  The best scene is when Grant and two "distinguised gentlemen" friends are arguing like children, dressed in suits and ties, about their toy train set crash, most of their conversation consisting of 'Beeps'.  But then that scene ends in tears too.  That also leads into a scene with a misunderstanding, an argument and shockingly, a quick resolution, where people don't rush out of a room angrily, actually rationally discuss something and everything is...fine after.  The movie comes down to a big courtroom scene (kinda) and the testimony of Grant's companion throughout the film, where we hear that Grant's friendship with him, a person who others have received "many complaints" about, could end his career.  When were these complaints?  What were they about?  The movie seems to be about the love story, but then its about the friendship.  It seems like the filmmakers were trying to do too much.  And this movie has quite a pedigree, produced by Darryl F. Zanuck and written and directed by Joseph L. Mankiewicz.  But it really doesn't add up to much, eventhough that last scene with Grant joyfully conducting an orchestra, is pretty cool.  And that is one freaking awesome train set!  *Smokers Report: Cary Grant is one of those movie stars who seemed to always have a cigarette in his hand or his mouth, but this movie was a rare exception.

August 21st - MOANA (2016) What a gorgeous film!  Unlike live-action VFX, 3D animation is killing it!  To the point where I wonder why people even bother making big budget live-action films like Transformers and the DC movies pre-Wonder Woman.  The water effects alone in this film are spectacular and worth watching.  But I found myself looking very closely at everything on screen, in particular the human characters and the rich texture of what was going on.  I also loved what the movie didn't give us.  I read on Wikipedia that an initial draft of the script had Moana with multiple brothers and her finding her place as the only girl and whether or not she should be the chief of the tribe...I saw that story done really well in "Whale Rider" years ago and didn't need to see it again here.  I was shocked when the movie started talking about Moana as the next chief of the tribe in a very non-chalent way, no one even questioned it.  I was even waiting for someone to say "Wait...SHE'S going to be our chief?  But she's a girl!? and it never happened!  That may have been the most revolutionary thing about the movie!  The movie also features awesome songs, great performances and, again, amazing animation!  Only thing wrong about this film is that it's too long (but I say that about everymovie these days) and I didn't see it in an actual movie theatre.  Oh, and it reminded me how Pixar used to be killing it when it came to 3D animation and how Pixar was on a streak, from Toy Story to The Incredibles to Wall-E to Up, of guaranteed home-run movies.  Is it really a coincidence this all changed after John Lasseter left Pixar for Disney Animation?  I'm freestyling here cause I say that after doing no research at all on the subject.  Just throwing that out there.  Highly recommended!  *Smokers Report: N/A

August 20th - BRIDGE OF SPIES (2015) A little late on this, after not having wifi for a little while, here we are, talking about a movie I had meant to watch but just never got around to it...kinda like most of the movies on this list really.  But I actually searched for this film in theatres, as at the time I was trying to get caught up on Oscar nominated movies that year (2016) and my job involves alot of travel, so I would drive to Calgary, for instance, look at the movie listings, see that it had just left Calgary, but was in Saskatoon.  So I would go to Saskatoon a week later, and it had just left and was in Regina.  Long story short, it's been a journey to see this film.  Although after the Oscars, for some reason, the need dwindled, which is weird cause the movie won for Mark Rylance as Best Supporting Actor.  As the credits rolled, I was surprised the Cohen brothers had written the script (or re-wrote it, as I found out later).  So this movie starred Tom Hanks, directed by Steven Spielberg, co-written by the Cohen Brothers, features an Academy Award winning performance...so why didn't I love it?  It has a stop and start feel to it, just getting interesting then slows down...I'll always love Tom Hanks and I root for him to find the success he had in the 90's, and I'm happy this film made money and was critically accepted.  I admire it, as it seems to be an attempt at an old-school classic thriller released in 2015 where most of it's viewers will have ADHD.  I am always annoyed at scenes like the one where (after defending a Russian spy) Hanks' house is shot at, his family freaked out, a mob is outside his house, and he has a look on his face of "What is going on?", as if everyone else in the film hadn't warned him this was going to happen from the start.  Unfortunately the real greatness are scenes between Hanks and Rylance, but Rylance kinds disappears half way through the film and only pops up again for the finale.  During the credits, it's said Hanks' character went on to consult for JFK and negotiate the release of hostages captured during the Bay of Pigs.  So when is the sequel coming out?  *Smokers Report: Rylance smokes through the movie.

August 19th - TO THE BONE (2017) So this was a tough film to watch.  There is a disclaimer before the film that warns you that it might be tough to watch.  I assumed that meant, since the movie was about people struggling with eating disorders, lots of puking, since it also dealt with depression, maybe some slit wrists and lots of blood, but none of that is shown on screen.  In fact, in that sense the film is downright shy.  Puke is there but only seen by the actor on screen.  Blood shows up briefly but only shown for a split second when the filmmaker could have smeared it all over like it's a horror film.  So what could have been so "offensive" that they felt they needed a disclaimer?  Apparently the sight of really skinny people might offend people.  Although I guess that makes sense; in today's world if you are super skinny or overweight, you are "gross".  But what about this film?  I really enjoyed it!  I have to admit I was rooting for it a bit, as it was written and directed by Marti Noxon, who I've been a fan of since her time on Buffy the Vampire Slayer (one of my all-time favourite shows).  I liked the cast, the story, the acting.  I liked the group inside the treatment house that's run by Parks and Recreation's Retta and Keanu Reeves.  Leslie Bibb does a good job too.  Lilly Collins as the lead role does a tremendous job as Eli.  She was also in Okja too!  I, in particular, loves the relationship between Collins and Liana Liberato, who are half-sisters in the film but that's only a label, and they truly are sisters and love and care about each other.  The movie, unfortunately, does fall apart towards the end, once Eli leaves the treatment house.  Her epiphany is kinda weird (I was assuming a movie this smart would avoid the "she's cured!" ending), her problems with her absentee father are never addressed, and the movie just kind of ends.  It is an unsatisfactory ending, but the movie as a whole is well done.  Does that make sense?  *Smokers Report: Lilly Collins characters smokes quite a bit.

August 18th - THE FOUNDER (2016) I've been looking forward to watching this for awhile.  It's probably been two years (I think) since I first saw the trailer, waited for it's release, then realised it had pretty much come and gone from theaters.  It apparently wasn't that successful at the box office, which surprises me, considering Michael Keaton is in the midst of one of those big Hollywood comebacks you hear about, but maybe people weren't interested in hearing the "downer" history of how a slick-rick type stole away McDonalds from it's creators?  It wasn't for lack of marketing, as I saw trailers for this movie everywhere for a long time.  I thought for sure this was Oscar bait, especially if distributed by The Weinstein Company.  The Oscar noms came and went and...nothing.  Anyway, how was the film itself?  It starts out pretty basically, with Keaton having a hard time, hears about this McDonalds place, shows up, orders food, is shocked the the burgers only take 30 seconds to make, asks where and how he's supposed to eat it, etc.  Keaton immediately falls in love, seeing dollar signs, whereas the brothers to started the business are skeptical about franchising their restaurant.  One interesting bit was that it turns out they had already tried to franchise four more locations but all four had failed, and that's why they were skeptical.  One other interesting bit was that Keaton initially wanted rich partners to start franchises, but when it became clear that they didn't care as much as "little people" who would start up with their own money, his recruitment went into high gear towards that demographic.  Meanwhile the brothers resented his success, although it's not really clear why.  Keaton starts taking credit, telling stories here and there about how he started the company and he eventually convinces himself that he did.  The movie is kind of uneven, as Keaton seems to have good intentions, and it's not like he spends money on coke and hookers, whereas the Brothers seem like they are saying no to him just cause their feelings are hurt. In the end, Keaton's character Ray Kroc, is a crook who stole two brothers' business from them and cheated them out of $100's of millions of dollars.  And the movie is about him and how he got away with it.  Without sounding too corny, it's similar to The Wolf of Wall Street, in that it celebrates "bad behavior".  And to me, that's not cool.  *Smoker's Report: None.  In fact it seems one of the McDonalds brothers was a smoker and they 'deleted' that from the film, so if this was a math equation, they'd be -1 smoker.

August 17th - CAT ON A HOT TIN ROOF (1958) Elizabeth Taylor is another actress I haven't kept up with (so to speak) so after A Place in the Sun, I decided to watch Cat on a Hot Tin Roof (and maybe Giant soon too?).  Taylor is a Hollywood legend, of course, as much for her personal life as her on-screen work.  After watching TCM and listening to the per-show talks by the hosts, I see a pattern developing where it's talked about how Taylor had alot of chemistry with her male co-stars, and if it's Richard Burton, they inevitably talk about their off screen relationship.  With this film, though, the hosts talked about how natural Taylor's performance was, possibly one of her best performances, as well as Newman's.  Written by Tennessee Williams as a play initially, and I could tell!  The long monologue by Taylor at the beginning of the film as she strolled around the room as Newman drank lying on a couch streamed "play!"  To start, sure Taylor looked gorgeous, but Newman was seemingly mute, his family was annoying (including Canadian boy Jack Carson) and everyone seemed likea real jerk.  But as the movie progresses, the walls come down and Newman's guard drops and the movie becomes something to see.  Between Taylor, Newman and Burl Ives as Big Daddy, there are three great performances in this film and you like the characters more and more, something I frankly wouldn't have thought possible early on.  It's amazing that Taylor acted in this film after finding out that her husband died in a plane crash.  The shot of her leaning on the bed is iconic, and so is the film itself.  Although I was disappointed a bit that Taylor didn't give Jack Carson's wife a good smack across the face.  *Smokers Report: If there was (other than Big Daddy's cigar) I didn't notice it

August 16th - A PLACE IN THE SUN (1951) George Stevens may be close to being one of my favourite Movie Directors.  My all-time favourite is Billy Wilder.  I loved that Wilder could make movies as different as Double Indemnity, Sunset Blvd, Ace in the Hole, Stalag 17, Some Like it Hot, The Apartment and IMHO the underrated The Fortune Cookie.  Or Howard Hawks who could make movies like Scarface, Bringing Up Baby, His Girl Friday, The Big Sleep and Rio Bravo, among others.  As I have noticed while I am watching these films, George Stevens has many classic films under his belt - Swing Time, Gunga Din, The Talk of the Town, Giant...and movies on this list and the July list...Woman of the Year, Shane and now A Place in the Sun.  This movie is famous for the on-screen chemistry with Montgomery Clift and Elizabeth Taylor.  People gush about seeing them together on screen, but I don't know of that many times I've heard people gush about the quality of the movie itself.  I'm sure people do, of course.  This is a very straightforward film.  We meet Montgomery Clift, then Shelley Winters, who he starts dating, but then in comes Elizabeth Taylor and turns his world upside down.  The movie is about hubris and ambition, with Clift (although this is implied and not said) getting Winters pregnant and offering to marry her, but then he starts dating Taylor and enters a world of luxury and wants to stay in that world, and won't let Winters ruin that.  I pretty much could tell where this was going at every turn, there were no surprises at all.  The only real surprise is that Clift doesn't really kill Winters...he clearly wants to but it's an accident that kills her, but he can't prove that in court, so Perry Mason himself (Canadian boy Raymond Burr) gets him sentenced to the death penalty.  I try to think of the movies as how they existed at the time they were made, such as was, in this movie, seeing someone walked to his execution, revolutionary at the time?  In 2017, I've seen this story many, many, MANY times before.  I did enjoy the twist, and that towards the end, Winters started getting tired of Clift's crap and standing up for herself, and the chemistry between Clift and Taylor is palpable, for sure.  This story is an old one, and the performances are good but I'm not sure I'll sit down and watch this again. *Smokers Report: There is some, but I think I've said before in my July blog that somehow, in black and white films, smoking just seems natural somehow, so it just kind of blends into the scenery. 

August 15th - FREEBIE AND THE BEAN (1974) Apparently this is one of the original buddy cop films.  I'd heard the name of this film on and off (it stood out cause it was so different) but I really knew nothing about it, even who starred in it or what it was about.  It stars James Caan and Alan Arkin as two cops who destroy pretty much everything in San Francisco as they try to protect a witness.  Where has this movie been all my life?  It's amazing!  How has this not been remade?  How is this not more well known?  It's smart, funny, great action sequences...the leads have great chemistry together, and Valerie Harper is a Latino version of Rhoda and is absolutely majestic during the "interrogation scene" with her and Arkin.  Loretta Swit only has two scenes but shines in the last one.  It was a bit weird that Arkin and Harper were supposed to be Latino but I guess back then in Hollywood you just said you were "Mexican" and that was that.  How was there not a sequel?  Coming after Bullit and Dirty Harry, was this the first time a cop movie like this combined action and comedy?  Probably not but they did it really well.  Apparently it made money...did they not make sequels circa 1974?  Or have movie franchises until later after Star Wars and Jaws came out?  It really is amazing how much stuff gets destroyed in this film. Almost over the top.  In the scenes where they chase bad guys on foot, it's almost like the director said "Okay, pretend it's like you are playing tag!" and they really were chasing each other as if life depended on it.  Some of Caan's dialogue would be considered racist in 2017 but it seemed okay somehow cause, well, he was talking to Arkin, who's white as a sheet, so I guess that made it funny...?  Anyway, this is a tremendous film and I recommend it!  Coincidentally, I noticed Jack Kruschen in this film, who has starred in this film, McLintock! and Cape Fear (and I didn't recognize him, but he was Jack Lemmon's doctor neighbour in The Apartment, a role where he apparently was nominated for an Oscar).  Weird how some patterns emerge here, eventhough how I pick these films is totally random.  *Smokers Report: I think Caan smoked in one scene but that's it.

August 14th - STREET SMART (1987) This is the film that launched Morgan Freeman into the stratosphere.  Freeman up until this movie hadn't done much other than TV's The Electric Company, and after being nominated for an Oscar and Golden Globe for this, went on to Glory and later Shawshank Redemption and God...etc.  This was a project Christopher Reeve had tried for years to film, and only agreed to Superman 4 after the producers agreed to also finance this.  Superman 4 is pretty bad (although if I had to choose, I'd say it's actually better overall than Superman 3, but that's not saying much), but thankfully we got this film too.  I'm a big Reeve fan, of course for being the quintessential Superman, but seeing a movie like this shows me how talented he was in the right role and had alot more to show us had he not been paralysed in 1995.  After watching movies like this, Remains of the Day, Somewhere in Time and Deathtrap, I'm sure he would have become an in-demand character actor, kind of like how Alec Baldwin re-started his career a few years back.  Anyway, how's this film?  I really enjoyed it.  It wasn't at all what I expected, nor did it play out the way I expected.  Most movies like this play out in a very formulaic way, with the viewers able to anticipate every twist and turn.  In this film I thought I knew for sure how it was going to go and was constantly surprised.  It seemed a bit violent for 1987...maybe if this had come out during the mid-90's, during the new age of indy films, post Quentin Tarantino, it might have done better.  But I think this is a hidden gem.  Highly recommended.  *Smokers Report: Kathy Baker's great performance is one that includes a cigarette constantly in her hand.

August 13th - MCLINTOCK! (1963) I've never been a big John Wayne fan, honestly.  Not sure why, just haven't been drawn to his films.  Other than Rio Bravo...that's one of my top ten all-time favourites.  I have seen El Dorado, the remake and I think I've seen Rio Lobo, the other remake, and I have seen parts of The Searchers...anyway when TCM's Summer Under The Stars featured Wayne, I thought I would get caught up.  I figured I'd start with one of the movies where he teamed with Maureen O'Hara.  Then I found out this was an adaptation of Shakespeare's Taming of the Shrew.  I've never been a fan of Taming of the Shrew.  When I say that people say "But it's Shakesepare!"  I love most of his work but even the best can have a dud here or there.  I saw the Elizabeth Taylor/Richard Burton adaptation in school and didn't like it, thinking it was misogynistic, just about putting women in their place.  And that's basically what this movie is too.  O'Hara is a shrew, and rejects Wayne the whole film, until he literally spanks her, then she is 'tamed' and wants him bad, then they live happily ever after.  I'm guessing this kind of thinking appealed to Wayne, the old school man's man, the kind of guy who thought...well I won't speculate, I don't know the man but knowing things about these actors and their personal lives and how things can bleed over...I can guess that's why I've never been interested in Wayne's films...but what about this film?  Well I did kind of like it, it had a nice cast and good performances, and it was kind of a coincidence that both this film and yesterday's, Shane, were about the cattleman-homesteaders, or at least it was at first.  There's actually two shrews in this film that need to be tamed, which is funny, and also I liked how Wayne's character treated his old Chinese cook and stuck up for the Native Americans.  But then the actors portraying these roles did them in a very stereotypical way, so does that just even out?  It's weird watching some of these "classic" films in 2017, especially considering the political climate these days, and the constant battle online regarding misogyny in comics, games, etc.  Can I just shut my brain off for 2 hours and enjoy a film for what it is?  Not today, unfortunately.  I am interested in watching The Quiet Man, though... *Smokers Report: None that I can think of...

August 12th - SHANE (1953) No, I've never seen Shane, but I knew how it ended.  This movie is one of those what I've just never sat down to watch, and because I (seemingly) knew so much about it, I kind of passed it by.  But I decided to watch it, and was kind of surprised by how much I didn't know.  Sure the ending is iconic, as is the face of the little boy (Brandon deWilde), who spends most of the film being a pretty cute little skamp.  I knew Alan Ladd was the star, but didn't know Van Heflin and Jack Palance or Jean Arthur were in this film.  I was shocked as I watched and realised it was Jean Arthur as "the wife".  I wondered why Jean Arthur would take a "wife" role, after starring in so many films, but then I looked it up on Wikipedia and turns out she hadn't worked in years until George Stevens, who had worked with her before, asked her to take the role.  It's a pretty standard, heart-on-its-sleeve movie, no irony or sarcasm...everyone says what they mean and does what they say.  With one exception, it's pretty much good vs. evil, with the ultimate good guy making the sacrifice for the other good guy who has a family, even beating him nearly to death to stop him from stepping into a trap.  It was fun seeing some familiar faces, like Elisha Cook Jr., the little guy from Bogie and gangster movies; Nancy Kulp in a small role, who was Mrs. Hathaway on Beverly Hillbillies; and a young Ben Johnson, who is the one black hat who has a slight shade of grey in him.  This film's impact on pop culture is huge, even just this past year in Logan, in just one example.  George Stevens isn't reinventing the western genre here, just telling a good story the best he can.  I can see why this movie is so iconic and it is a great film.  Not sure if I'll ever watch it again, but it is a classic for a reason.  *Smokers Report: Not really.

August 11th - STAR OF MIDNIGHT (1935) It's Ginger Rogers Day on TCM's Summer Under the Stars and I'm making sure to watch all the non-Fred Astaire team-ups.  I'm a big Ginger Rogers fan but have to admit I favour the musicals as they are a special kind of magic that neither Astaire nor Rogers could match with other co-stars.  I have seen her big solo movies, such as Kitty Foyle, Stage Door, Bachelor Mother, Rafter Romance...two in particular that I love are The Major and the Minor and also Vivacious Lady, a comedy with her and James Stewart that I think was the first movie I ever saw on TCM.  But I had never heard of this movie, that co-stars William Powell, another favourite of mine, from My Man Godfrey and the many movies with Myrna Loy, who was Powell's Fred Astaire...so to speak.  So Powell without Loy and Rogers without Astaire...I wonder if Loy and Astaire ever did a movie together, to even things out?  This is a movie similar to The Thin Man series that starred, again, Powell and Loy.  A mystery to be solved by Powell and he doesn't seem to want any part of it.  This actually came a year after the first Thin Man movie, and after Rogers had starred in three musicals with Astaire (Flying Down to Rio, The Gay Divorcee and Roberta), but later this year saw the release of Top Hat, which some think is the best of the nine Fred-Ginger movies.  So how does this movie play out?  Is it just Thin Man-Lite?  Well, kinda.  There really is nothing like the chemistry between Powell and Loy, plus Loy's Nora is even more into the cases they are on as Powell, possibly more and eventually her enthusiasm to solve the whole thing herself carries over.  Rogers is wonderful and can carry a film on her own but does seem to pale in comparison at times.  Like here, I can't watch her without comparing her to Loy.  Rogers and Powell aren't married, and Rogers is pursuing Powell, trying to convince him to marry her and Powell doesn't seem interested.  Which makes Powell's character kind of dumb, ironic since Powell keeps making fun of Rogers' intelligence (whereas he would play along with Loy's silly questions).  The movie is good, as funny moments and a plot that makes no sense, and when the killer is revealed I thought "Who's that?", but Powell's and Rogers' charm carries it through.  But what chance did this movie have, being a Thin Man knockoff, but no Asta!  *Smokers Report: Oh Yes!  Powell is an old school movie star like Cary Grant or Humphrey Bogart, never without a lit cigarette in his hand, and even Rogers smokes too, which I hadn't seen her do in many films, although it does seem at times she's just doing it to keep up with Powell.

August 10th - THE HANGOVER PART THREE (2013)  Well, it's over!  I can say that this movie is better than Part Two, but not nearly as good as Part One.  What else?  Poor Doug.  I guess for him Part Two was "the good one", eh?  They return to Las Vegas, which was good, but took awhile, which was bad.  The movie takes a turn away from the typical "Hangover" formula, which is good, but then it's nothing like the others, which is bad (I think).  I'm not a professional critic, I'm not getting paid by the word or whatever...so final thoughts...watch the first one...skip the others...although that kid who plays Carlos (who I'm 99% sure is the same kid who was the baby in the original) has haunting eyes and that scene with him in it was probably the best in the whole film.  *Smokers Report: Don't remember...don't care...

August 9th - OKJA (2017) Okay, right away, Tilda Swinton is in this, has a funny voice...this is gonna be weird.  I've heard alot of good things about this film, and was waiting to see it in theatres, but it turns out it was on Netflix the whole time.  At one point I loved watching foreign films and watched as many as I could.  But as I got older and my mind wanders more easily, I find myself multi-tasking, watching movies but also tweeting, going on Facebook, writing these blog posts...so watching foreign films are harder, as I can't just listen to the dialogue and look up occasionally, I have to concentrate.  Anywho, this movie is cooperating with my ADHD as it's half English and half Korean.  And as I mentioned before...it's weird!  But it's awesome!  The little girl and Okja are both adorable and their relationship carries the movie.  The ALF group, with Lilly Collins, Paul Dano and GLEN FROM WALKING DEAD, are trying to save Okja but in the most awesome and hilarious way!  The movie grinds to a halt when Dano and the group have Okja and Mija in the back of a truck and Dano is trying to explain who they are to Mija (and us) and talks and talks with Glen doing very little translation to Mija (who doesn't speak English) and it's kind of weird and not really addressed, but then gets back on track.  Shirley Henderson and Giancarlo Esposito are always a pleasure to see.  Jake Gyllenhaal is so over the top that his performance will be studied for centuries to come as either genius or drug-induced...or more likely both.  The film is quirky and funny and has moments of action-adventure but towards the end can be heartbreaking on a Schindler's List-level.  Is this movie going to make me stop eating meat?  No.  But will I smile everytime I think of this film?  Absolutely!  This will be on my Top Ten Best Films of the Year list (if I make one) for sure!  Director Bong Joon-ho, who before this gave us "The Host" and "Snowpiercer", is incredibly talented and I look forward to whatever he has up his sleeve next.  *Smoker's Report: One or two smokers but that's it.

August 8th - BLACKADDER: THE WHOLE ROTTEN SAGA (2008) This counts right?  I have just finished re-watching the entire four series of Blackadder, the classic British TV show (every episode available on Youtube, btw) and noticed that there was this full 90 minute documentary about making the series, so one thing lead to the other and here we are.  For those of you who haven't watched it, Blackadder is a generational sitcom, with each series taking place decades (centuries?) apart, and following the characters from one series to the next as their own descendants.  What is it about British TV shows being about history...this and Dr. Who and...I guess that's it.  Anyway, apparently that was just something that evolved in going from the first series to the next and not the grand scheme surprised me.  This show stars Rowan Atkinson (more famous for Mr. Bean, which to me is a shame, although I am not at all one of those Mr. Bean haters) and also British legends such as Hugh Laurie, Stephen Fry, Miranda Richardson, Rik Mayall, Tim McInnerny, Brian Blessed, Peter Cook, Jim Broadbent, Robbie Coltrane, Miriam Margoyles and written (mostly) by Richard Curtis and Ben Elton, who after Blackadder went on to huge things (Google them).  The show's first series, which everyone in the doc seemed to admit wasn't very good, was created by Curtis and Atkinson, and almost didn't come back for a second series, but Atkinson just wanted to act, so Curtis brought in Elton to co-write and then the show itself evolved into something great.  The most interesting bit was learning that Tim McInnerny decided to leave the show due to not wanting to be typecast as a moron, as he was going to play Prince Regent, but by walking away, Hugh Laurie was cast instead after a memorable cameo in the prior series.  This seemed to energize the series and shook things up a bit.  The final series is thought of as the best (how often does that happen?) with the final few minutes being part of British TV history.  But it was also interesting to learn that the ending was kind of improvised in the editing room, when the actors refused a second take and the producers and editor had to come up with something other than what they had originally envisioned.  For me personally, Blackadder might be my all-time favourite British TV show, up there with Monty Python, Fawlty Towers and Red Dwarf.  I remember being shown the aforementioned final episode in Social Studies (History) class in Grade 10 and it having a huge impact on me, so much so that I had to go back and watch the other series.  And until it was pointed out, I had never noticed such massive changes from the first series to the second (less on location filming, taping it in front of a live audience, flipping the script on characters, specifically making Atkinson the smart one of the group and Baldrick the moron) other than the quality went up several notches.  And watching this doc, with interviews with most of the people involved (Rowan Atkinson wasn't a talking head, but they did have archival footage of him discussing the show, but unfortunately no Rik Mayall) and some funny and insightful stories about the making of the show (and even some behind the scenes footage too), I highly recommend the show and this doc too.  *Smokers Report: N/A

August 7th - THE NIGHT OF THE HUNTER (1955) Another pick from TCM's Summer Under the Stars, with Robert Mitchum as the star in question.  This, like most of the movies on this and July's list, are movies I've intended to watch but just never have for some reason.  I consider myself a Mitchum fan, but looking at his filmography, I really haven't watched many Mitchum films other than Out of the Past, Crossfire, Holiday Affair and a few others.  I knew alot about this film already...the LOVE and HATE tattoos on Mitchum's knuckles, the monologue about how Love beat Hate...So finally sitting down to watch this film, I knew I was in for a classic...one list of the best movies of all time placed this #2, just behind Citizen Kane in ALL TIME MOVIES (just wanted to stress that again) but I think I wanted too much.  The first thirty minutes or so speed through alot of plot, which normally I like when a movie gets to the good stuff, but here it just seemed rushed.  There are parts of this film that come across almost as a comedy...especially the scene in the cellar, with Mitchum stumbling and chasing the kids up the stairs, getting his fingers caught in the door, and then a hard close up of the young boy.  The look of the film is spectacular, with the shadow work being haunting, and scenes like when Mitchum is staring down Lillian Gish, a girl with a candle comes along, causing a flare, then Mitchum is gone...it's a genuinely great scene.  But I didn't get what was happening in some parts of the film, especially towards the end.  The people in the town are freaking out, yelling at the kids and such...did they think Mitchum was innocent?  I was really confused then the movie just kind of ends with Gish giving a speech to the camera.  And Shelley Winters is given second billing but has a very limited role.  Mitchum was haunting in his performance but I can't say this was a great film, let alone the 2nd best movie of all time.  *Smokers Report: None that I can remember.

August 6th - THE HANGOVER PART TWO (2011) Wow, this might be the shortest blurb/review yet.  There's nothing here.  It's shocking.  Especially since I LOVED the first Hangover movie.  I might have seen it three times in the theatres.  I loved it that much.  Looking back I'm not even sure why...do I just love movies that take place in Las Vegas?  Was it the fresh faces of Bradley Cooper, Zack Galifianakis, Ken Jeong...the over the top comedy that also was kind of a mystery...did I really want Ed Helms to succeed after leaving The Daily Show...I honestly don't know.  Seeing as they stuck to the same formula, what went wrong...maybe the fact they were lost in Vegas, sure it's a huge city but it's really self-contained and they knew the language...getting lost in Bangkok but bringing it all together in the end maybe is just too unbelievable?  Should I bother with the 3rd one?  Is it like the Ocean's Eleven movies...another Vegas film that lost it's way a bit in the sequel that wasn't in Vegas but rebounded in the 3rd film, which coincidentally goes back to Vegas?  I guess what I'm asking is does Hangover 3 take place in Vegas?  If so I might check it out...What else is there to say?  Wow, Jamie Chung is gorgeous and, between this and Sucker Punch, deserves way better!  Other than that...I got nothin'... *Smokers Report: Uh...sure...I think so...one or two smokers...I don't care really...

August 5th - THE DUFF (2015) "Designated Ugly Fat Friend" is what "The Duff" stands for.  Just to get that out of the way.  I admire Mae Whitman as a person and as an actor.  She took on the role of Michael Cera's bland girlfriend on Arrested Development where it was constantly hit home how....well, bland she was.  And she survived that.  Then after becoming a bit of a star, she WASN'T recast as the President's daughter in the sequel to Independance Day, which, if she didn't turn down the role, had so suck to see the role given to a younger, blonde girl.  At 29 she was already "too old" by Hollywood standards.  But what does that have to do with this film?  Just some context, calm down.  I heard this was a good film, so I'm watching it.  After the John Hughes movies of the 80's, there was a resurgence of teen movies in the 2000's (did American Pie start this trend?) and within all the noise, there were some great ones in there too, such as Juno, Mean Girls and Easy A.  And after he guest starred on The Flash, I became a fan of Robbie Amell.  And it turns out ALLISON JANNEY is in this too!  So how was the movie?  I liked the cast, especially Amell, who was saying some awful things but yet somehow came off very likable.  And there were some funny bits, like Whitman's old Halloween picture with her two other friends being Angels, and Whitman dressing up as Bosley instead of the 3rd Angel.  This is kind of a remake of Can't Buy Me Love, with the genders switched, eventhough this was made from a novel, so I guess the novel was a remake of Can't Buy Me Love, which btw has already been remade...Whitman and Amell are great, so good in fact that all the rest of the movie between them becoming friends and actually getting together is kind of a waste of time.  How about a teen movie where it's clear where things are going, but then they change gears, the two meet cuters actually become a couple (which I kind of thought they were doing in the "rock" scene) and the movie is about them being a couple, rather than the will-they-won't-they stuff?  I guess I have an idea for a movie..."irregardless", it was a good movie with some funny stuff.  Not an all time classic but it has a good message for modern teens about cyberbullying.  And most importantly, the girl gets the boy by being herself and not having to change, which is nice (I'm looking at you Breakfast Club!)  *Smokers Report: Zippo!

August 4th - JUSTICE LEAGUE: THRONE OF ATLANTIS (2015) This is a DC Animated Universe movie, the second in a series after the "New 52" reboot of not only the animated universes and also the DC comic books.  "The New 52" was something done by DC Comics in 2011 that, long story short, restarted the entire 75-year history of the books and gave every character new origins (some more different than others; they tried making Superman more hardcore whereas Batman and Green Lantern, their best selling titles at the time, pretty much stayed the same).  And the Animated universe got the same treatment.  This movie is the 2nd in a series, after "Justice League: War", which was where the Justice League was formed with Superman, Batman, Wonder Woman, Green Lantern, Flash and newcomers Cyborg and Shazam replacing Aquaman and Martian Manhunter Jonn J'onzz.  The series, like the comics, tried to be more adult, with the occasional "shit", lots of blood splatters and even a beheading or two (which really started with the animated "Flashpoint Paradox"; be warned about watching that with the kiddies around).  One weird thing is that eventhough this is a series, probably half of the characters' voices were recast, the most notable being Nathan Fillion as Green Lantern, replacing Justin Kirk, although really it's a re-cast, as Fillion played GL in three previous (unrelated) JL movies...confused yet?  This film is the backdrop for the origin and rebooting of Aquaman, one of the more famous JLers, but probably not for the best reasons.  Aquaman has always been the butt of jokes when it comes to super heroes, most notably on the TV series "The Big Bang Theory", and, as seen by trailers for the big upcoming Justice League live-action feature film, DC and Warner Bros are trying their best to change that image by casting badass Jason Mamoa as the King of the Seven Seas.  But what about this movie, the reason we're here in the first place?  The movie starts with Aquaman mourning his dead father, cause no good superhero can exist without a dead parent and/or daddy issues.  Plus the movie goes into Superman and Wonder Woman's relationship, as one of the biggest things about the New 52 was making the two most powerful heroes a power couple.  One weird thing right off the bat is that they cast George Newburn as Steve Trevor, and Newburn was the voice of Superman in the all-time great Justice League Unlimited tv series, so that was hard to get used to, although it passes as Trevor isn't exactly a major character.  Another overused trope for the past few years is the reluctant hero, best example being the Henry Cavill Superman from "Man of Steel" and that other 'v' movie-that-shall-not-be-named, where sure he's the most powerful being on the planet, but mopes about asking "I dunno, do I really wanna be Super?".  That's what's so great about Gal Godot's Wonder Woman...she knows she is special and knows she is the one to save people...but that's another digression...what about this film?  Random notes...whomever played Aquaman, his line delivery was annoying...also the writers use terms like "terrorism" and "living under a cloud of fear" is trying to make this timely...Mera is awesome...But this darker, more adult version of the DC Universe, much like the new 52 comics, turned me off, which is kind of why it's taken me two years to watch this movie.  There are little details that just bug me, like adding Cyborg and Shazam to the League (Cyborg is a Teen Titan, people!) replacing Jonzz and Aquaman, and while I like the idea of making Aquaman a better character, making him brooding and a killer isn't how I'd do it.  Anyone see the cartoon series "Batman: Brave and the Bold"?  THAT is the best version of Aquaman!  It's so good it's OUTRAGEOUS!  Geoff Johns grew up reading about Barry Allen as the Flash and Hal Jordan as Green Lantern, and so did I, reading George Perez' Justice League of America.  But as I grew up, and saw different versions, like the BWAHAHAH JLI, Grant Morrison's JLA, and later Bruce Timm and Dwayne McDuffie's JLU tv series (even the prior series, "Justice League" and it's Aquaman story "The Enemy Below", while not as good as JLU stuff but it's still better than this), I have my own favourite version of the League.  And that includes John Stewart as Green Lantern!  And when you get right down to it, MERA is such a better character than Aquaman...make her Aquawoman and be done with it...what was I saying?  Oh right, this film...the big fight at the end is Orm aka Ocean Master and his army invading the streets of Metropolis and the Justice League having to fight them off...which was the EXACT same finale to the last "JL:War" movie, with it being Darkseid's army there.  That's just lazy storytelling.  And these versions of the characters just aren't as interesting, which is kind of why, six years later, the New 52 is all but forgotten and the DCU is being rebooted yet again (or is it re-started?).  But what about this film?  There are a few cool bits, like John Henry Irons' cameo, and Lois Lane interrupting Clark and Diana's date, Black Manta's fate and what Aquaman says right after that, Fillion's few good one-liners...but the outright carnage of this film, with Wonder Woman and Mera both more interested in beheading Atleantean soldiers than anything...at least in the last film they were beheading aliens and usually in missions they beat up robots...the violence against PEOPLE somehow seems worse.  And maybe it's just semantics but that did bother me.  And they seemed to be setting up a "Justice League vs. Injustice Society or Legion of Doom" movie, with Lex Luthor approaching Ocean Master at the end, but that never happened.  They used much of the same cast in the next Justice League movie, JL vs. Teen Titans, but whether or not that was a sequel to this...I'll have to watch it and find out...  *Smokers Report: Heck no!  These animated films can say "shit", behead people and have blood splatters everywhere, but no smoking!  (and that's good, imho, just to be clear...)

August 3rd - CHARADE (1963) Last month I admitted I hadn't seen alot of Audrey Hepburn films, and tried to correct that.  I continue that cinematic journey here.  I'm surprised I hadn't see this yet, as while I wasn't a big Hepburn fan, I'm a huge Cary Grant fan, and also a huge Walter Matthau fan, plus the movie has James Coburn, George Kennedy and is written and directed by legendary Stanley Donen.  Given all that talent was involved, I wasn't really that impressed unfortunately.  Grant is great, but the others don't do much.  Especially Matthau who only has a few scenes in the whole movie.  There are some nice twists, especially that Grant's character isn't all that interested in Hepburn and she is constantly flirting with him and pushing for something to happen.  But even after she finds out his secret she still is persistent, and Grant is still hesitant, eventhough getting together with Hepburn would help him out...it was kind of weird but apparently Grant requested this, being sensitive about looking like a dirty old man.  Do all of Hepburn's movies take place in Europe?  This was a disappointment.  *Smokers Report: A few smokes here and there, which I expected considering who the leads were but not much, especially compared to Funny Face or Breakfast at Tiffanys.

August 2nd - JOHN WICK (2014) Okay, so I am not usually a fan of shoot em ups. And knowing I'm a movie guy, people often recommend movies to me.  And no offense to everyone ever, but my cinematic tastes are usually a little different that everyone elses'.  But last year(ish) it seemed like literally everyone I talked to said "Have you seen John Wick?  You'll love it!"  So much so that it backfired and it made me NOT want to see the film.  But then John Wick 2 came out and everyone loved THAT ONE too.  So here we are, starting with the first one, then maybe later this month, the second one.  If this one is as good as everyone ever says.  So does it live up to the hype?  One other thing...spoilers don't really affect whether or not I decide to watch a film...I'm either going to watch it or not...I may get mad when someone spoils important specific plotpoints of a movie for me, like with Colossal (see July 2017 blog), but again, I'll watch what I want to watch.  I knew early on that in this movie, the dog dies.  Apparently a really cute dog too.  And that just pissed me off.  Killing a puppy?  F*ck that!  But again, I heard over and over it was great...so I'll give it a chance.  And yup, the cute puppy dies like ten minutes into the film.  And the worst thing is the killer is that Theon Greyjoy loser from Game of Thrones, who is THE WORST!!!  I have to watch a movie with THAT GUY?  I guess I can look forward to him getting his ass kicked at some point...unlike Theon who is basically the cockroach of GoT...Anyway...I like movies that are a little different, and I liked how this movie seemed like it was just another shoot em up, with a innocent man out for revenge against an army of mafia men who scoff at him. The twist is that the army of men are all scared of John Wick, and I liked that detail.  Other than that, really, it is a typical shoot em up, but with some great fight scenes.  Keanu Reeves is good here, with minimal dialogue and lots of punching.  I liked the supporting cast.  I liked the look of the film.  And I think I am looking forward to the sequel.  But I do worry it will be like the Taken franchise, with that one you start to think Liam Neeson is just a bad father.  With Wick, I wonder how many cute dogs will have to die before the SPCA people lock the doors when they see him coming... *Smokers Report: Some bad guys smoke, like bad guys do...

August 1st - THE SEVEN YEAR ITCH (1955) Every year August is the month for TCM's Summer Under the Stars, with every day of the month dedicated to a particular classic movie star.  So this month might feature alot of older classic films, much like how July featured alot of blockbuster movies currently (at the time) in the theatre.  August 1st was Marilyn Monroe day, so that gave me an excuse to finally watch this film.  It's one of those I'm told I have to watch but as to why...is it because it's one of Monroe's few major roles?  Just the fact that it's a Billy Wilder film, one of my favourite directors, is reason enough to watch.  Chronologically, this film came a few years after Monroe's "Gentlemen Prefer Blondes", "How To Marry A Millionaire" but four years before Monroe teamed again with Wilder in "Some Like it Hot".  For the first 30 minutes or so, other than one Monroe scene, it's all Tom Ewell, someone whose name I recognized but face I didn't.  Throughout the first 1/3 of the film, Ewell is alone on screen but talks and talks and talks, making me think "Is he crazy?" and once he starts hallucinating, it's kind of confirmed.  Monroe emerges and the comedy is with Ewell, a married man, trying to seduce her.  Which is completely understandable, in that it's HER, but kinda crappy for the leading man.  It's especially weird that we are apparently cheering for adultery in 1955.  And as I drift towards Wikipedia, turns out Wilder thought this was a "nothing film" and that he was "straightjacketed" by censors, as in the play version, the two leads have a full on affair while in the movie it had to be made out as all in his head.  So if Wilder doesn't think much of this film...apparently Ewell played the role over 900 times on Broadway and won a Tony and a Golden Globe for it.  I did laugh a few times, like when Monroe dips a potato chip into her champagne, or when Ewell is apologising for basically attacking her while going in for a kiss, her response is "It's okay, it happens to me all the time."  This movie is of course famous for the image of Monroe standing over a subway grate and her dress blowing up, but it's really quick but Wilder is so smart that he does it twice, just in case you missed it the first time.  Apparently Walter Matthau auditioned for the Ewell role and normally I celebrate any chance to see more Matthau, but I see him as a more cynical character as opposed to the bumbling one Ewell portrays, and I'm not sure it would have worked as well.  Ewell does grow on you after awhile, and Monroe, is of course, MONROE!  She is gorgeous and charming and...she disappears for a good twenty minutes until the big dress scene.  And it only lasts a few minutes...so really we have to ask "what makes a great film"?  Does one iconic scene make this film a classic?  Roger Ebert used to say any movie with three great scenes in it was automatically good.  And after awhile I felt a bit mislead, as this really is Ewell's film...Monroe gets top billing on the poster, but there are long stretches where it's just Ewell on screen, so if you don't love Ewell then you aren't going to love this film.  *Smokers Report: Ewell's character smokes, as does Monroe, but not much else...

July 2017 31 Movies in 31 Days

I've been meaning to do this for awhile, seeing others do this online...some do it for a year, but that's weird, so let's try a month first!  I have some glaring holes in my movie watching experience and this is a great way to plug those holes.  I'll give myself some rules, such as the movie needs to be something I haven't seen before, which shouldn't be a problem.  Between some new films in theatres coming out that I'm excited to see, my DVD/Blu-Ray collection that includes a few un-opened movies and my DVR, I shouldn't run out of movies to watch in only 31 days.  And there are some "classic" films that I have never seen, so no judging!

*Shall we assume that saying SPOILERS! goes without saying?

*Amendment to SPOILERS rule: I will, however, try to avoid Spoilers for new movies (released this year or last year)...but be warned!

The List:

1- The Great Outdoors
2- King Arthur: Legend of the Sword
3- Breakfast at Tiffany's
4- The Man Who Would be King
5- Hands on a Hard Body
6- Act of Violence
7- Spider-Man: Homecoming
8- Gunfight at the OK Corral
9- A Year of Living Dangerously
10- Labyrinth
11- Baby Driver
12- 2 Weeks in Another Town
13- Concussion
14- A Little Chaos
15- The Big Sick
16- Night of the Living Dead
17- Mulan
18- Cape Fear
19- Colossal
20- Harold and Maude
21- Valerian
22- The Sisterhood of the Traveling Pants
23- Quick Change
24- Woman of the Year
25- Dunkirk
26- Funny Face
27- Roman Holiday
28- Like Crazy
29- War for the Planet of the Apes
30- Atomic Blonde
31- Bon Cop, Bad Cop

July 1st - Happy Canada Day!  I figured I should celebrate our Nation's 150th birthday by watching a movie with two famous Canadians, Dan Aykroyd and the late, great John Candy!  That movie is THE GREAT OUTDOORS (1988).  This movie has lots of fans, some people feel this is a classic, and I'm not one of them.  It was surprising seeing Annette Benning here, plus that it was written (but not directed) by John Hughes.  It had some sweet moments, especially with Candy trying to be a good dad to his kids.  It's interesting to think of what Candy could have accomplished as an actor if he were still alive.  I'm not a huge fan of Aykroyd as a bad guy, I like him more as a shlub(?) like Ray in the Ghostbusters.  It got sentimental towards the end, which was actually good I felt as Aykroyd and Candy got to behave like real people as opposed to the cartoon characters that the script initially made them out to be.

July 2nd - KING ARTHUR: LEGEND OF THE SWORD (2017) in the theatre, released May 17th as a big summer blockbuster.  On Rotten Tomatoes it has a critics score of 28% but an audience score of 74%, so there isn't really a consensus here.  I am a sucker for this kind of stuff, with the legend of King Arthur and the Knights of the Round Table, the Trojan War, Greek Mythology, even Robin Hood and those kinds of stories.  Making a movie like this must be a challenge, as there is no one unified King Arthur story, but then again, with a director like Guy Ritchie, he probably thinks that's a good reason to "pump things up".  I like it when a movie "expidites" it's storytelling, when they speed things up or fast forwards through scenes that aren't necessary, and Ritchie certainly has a talent for that.  He brings modern writing, that makes me think of Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels and Snatch, to these classic stories, and doesn't seem to care about accents, which probably annoys some people (critics) whereas I am not a historian and I appreciate the creative freedom.  For example, I love the Kevin Costner version of Robin Hood...anyway this film was fun, but way too long.  Way too long.  And it had a weird way of "taking the piss out of itself" yet also took itself way too seriously.  I didn't hate it but I'm not sure I'd recommend it either.

July 3rd - BREAKFAST AT TIFFANY'S (1961) Never seen this before, never really had the desire to and well, it didn't really do anything for me.  Audrey Hepburn is wonderful and it's fun seeing George Peppard pre-A-Team.  I admit I have a problem with smoking on film and nearly every scene had one character, or both, smoking away and that just makes me cringe.  Somehow, if it's a black and white film it's okay but otherwise...my brain is weird.

July 4th - I tried picking a big all-american film cause of the 4th of July but I ended up watching "THE MAN WHO WOULD BE KING" (1975) a movie I bought after not being able to see a screening at the TCM Film Festival but hadn't watched it until today.  Sean Connery, Michael Caine and Christopher Plummer are all great, but Plummer isn't in it much after the first half hour, so it's mostly just Connery and Caine.  They seemed to be trying to make a less fun, more dramatic version of Gunga Din, but with just two guys instead of three.  Directed and written by John Huston seemingly trying to make another Lawrence of Arabia-type of film.  I have to admit, again, that this classic didn't really do much for me, unfortunately.

July 5th - HANDS ON A HARDBODY (1997) a tremendous documentary that should have been my 4th of July film!  This is America!  Or, 'Murica!  People standing around, one hand on a truck, last one standing wins the truck.  It seems silly at first but then you choose your favourites, root for them, get upset when you seemingly catch someone cheating, etc.  I won't spoil it for anyone who hasn't seen the film, I wouldn't take that from you.  The best thing to come out of this film's success is that this has been adapted into a Broadway musical (that I have to see) but the worst is that we will never see the Robert Altman film version of this.  A film adaptation of this was to be Altman's next film project right before his death, and I would have loved to have seen that with it's reported cast of The Rock, Billy Bob Thornton and Hillary Swank.  Great movie!

July 6th - "ACT OF VIOLENCE" (1949) I love film noir and I'm a big fan of Robert Ryan in film noir.  I studied film noir in film school but had never heard of this film, intriqued by a Ryan and a young Janet Leigh, plus Mary Astor's name in the credits.  It starred Van Heflin and was directed by Fred Zinnemann.  It started out as a typical bad-guy-looking-for-revenge-on-good-guy film, but then both Ryan and Heflin's characters was revealed to have layers.  Not sure how far I should go for spoilers, as I recommend this film highly.  It is rare, in that, after World War II (the supposed "good war"), they have a film where...again, spoilers...anyway, there are layers!  Lots of layers!

July 7th - "SPIDER-MAN: HOMECOMING" (2017) A highly anticipated summer blockbuster, the 3rd reboot of Peter Parker and Chapter 16 of the MCU ongoing series (yes, there have been 16 Marvel Studios movies since Iron Man in 2008).  As a dislaimer, I do like Marvel, but have always been a huge DC fan myself and while of course I know Spider-man, his foes, his allies, his biggest storylines...even while only ever reading maybe a handful of Spidey comics in my entire lifetime.   So while some comics fans might have problems with the use of certain characters (I read online that alot of the characters in this film are from the Miles Morales Spiderman character, but I don't know details), I loved this "new" interpretation.  I already liked Tom Holland's Spidey, from his first appearance in "Civil War", plus Marisa Tomei's younger, hotter Aunt May.  So really the question was, did we really need a third reboot?  An even younger Spidey?  Turns out...yes we did!  I never loved the other interpretations of Spidey, other than the 2nd Tobey Macquire film with Doc Oc (haven't seen that in years and don't know if it holds up, but I thought that was close to a masterpiece).  A young, immature, impetuous Spidey dealing with villains that are using weapons salvaged from the attack on New York from the 1st Avengers film (with the film name dropping Damage Control, a huge Dwayne McDuffie shout-out!) was all great stuff!  The Captain America cameos were hilarious, the young cast was great and RDJ as Tony Stark as usual was tremendous.  And it was good to see Jon Favreau back as Happy Hogan after the events of Iron Man 3.  And yes, stay after the movie is over.  There is a mid-credits scene AND an after credits scene, one you will love...or hate...whatever...I loved it!   

July 8th - "GUNFIGHT AT THE OK CORRAL" (1957) starring Burt Lancaster, Kirk Douglas, Rhonda Fleming and a young DeForest Kelley (Bones from Star Trek), directed by John Sturges.  There have been many interpretations of the saga of Wyatt Earp, Doc Holliday and Tombstone.  Movies like "Hour of the Gun", "Tombstone" and "Wyatt Earp" and tv shows like Maverick and Star Trek (ironically starring Kelley of course) have all touched on the legend.  This one almost seems to gloss over the actual dual, focusing on the friendship of Wyatt and Doc (Lancaster and Douglas, respectively).  The first half of the film is Wyatt and Doc in other cities, building up to the Earp Family and the Clanton Family having a shootout, with Doc along based on his friendship with Wyatt.  One negative with the film is that we only briefly meet the other Earps so when they get fired at in the big gunfight, we don't feel nearly as much impact.  Another is the portrayal of the women in these men's lives...they are all cowards, whiny and turn their backs on their men when in danger.  But the chemistry of Lancaster and Douglas, in just one of their many film team-ups, is worth it, and for all "OK Corral" completists, this is a must watch.

July 9th - "THE YEAR OF LIVING DANGEROUSLY" (1982) This is a film I've wanted to watch for a long time.  Mel Gibson, Sigourney Weaver, directed by Peter Weir...and the great Linda Hunt, with her Oscar winning perfomance.  Now this is one of those weird things, about watching a movie with a big reputation 35 years later, knowing things that the people who watched in when it came out in theatres didn't. For instance, I know Linda Hunt is a woman.  But she is playing a character that is a man.  I doubt this was well known at the time.  But there were times early on where characters were talking about "Billy" and I had to remind myself they were talking about Linda Hunt.  Anyway, half way through the movie shifts from Gibson and Hunt's friendship to Gibson and Weaver's romance and while I am a fan of Weaver, I was more interested in what was going on in Indonesia at the time then whether or not they would run off together.  At one point they flee a party to be together and break through a check point in their car, getting fired at by machine guns and laughing about it, which was kinda weird, frankly.  Although I guess with a movie with that title, it fits...the movie seems to think Gibson is the star when it's really Hunt.  And (spoilers; I'm revealing things here where I wouldn't elsewhere, I don't always make sense) once Billy Kwan dies, I lost interest.  Gibson makes a beeline to the airport to flee to be with Weaver at the end, and the movie ends with them embracing, but what about all the asian characters who got him there?  They don't get to fly off into the sunset...so they probably all died right? 

July 10th - Labyrinth (1986) Just never watched this film, not sure why.  Could be cause as a kid I was freaked out by The Dark Crystal and figured this was similar...meant to watch this after David Bowie died, bought it but haven't watched it until now.  I have heard mixed things about this film, it was kind of a bomb when it came out but became a cult classic...people seem to LOVE this film.  Starring Bowie, a teenage Jennifer Connelly and a bunch of muppets, directed by Jim Henson, exec-produced by George Lucas...so what's the verdict?  What a great film!  It helps that the two flesh and bone actors, Bowie and Connelly, are awesome!  But without Henson Studios' magic in creating creatures that are clearly puppets but still come to life as characters, this would be a failure.  But with characters like Hoggle, Ludo, Sir Didymus, the Door Knockers...this is an incredibly fun adventure!  Looking on Wikipedia, it's interesting that this originally was going to be directed by Monty Python's Terry Jones.  Bowie was so talented, and Connelly was and is amazing, I'm shocked she hasn't done more...sure she has starred in many films and has an Oscar, but hasn't done much since "A Beautiful Mind".  I assume that's because she's picky with her roles?  It was a fun piece of trivia learning that Connelly was the AI voice "Karen" in the new Spider-Man: Homecoming film (which is ironic, as her husband Paul Bettany, plays "Vision" in the MCU).  And I will always love the "you remind me of the babe..." part, as it reminds me of the Cary Grant/Shirley Temple/Myrna Loy film "The Bachelor and The Bobby-Soxer", which is one of my favourite films, possibly the first movie I ever saw on TCM.  Highly recommended!

July 11th - BABY DRIVER (2017) I am a huge Edgar Wright fan, and I LOVE Scott Pilgrim vs. The World.  Some may take offense to that, but whatever, films are subjective.  I loved it!  I just finished re-watching his tv show with Simon Pegg and Nick Frost "Spaced", which is a classic, and I love Hot Fuzz over Shaun of the Dead, just cause I'm not a huge zombie guy and love buddy cop movies.  I even can appreciate World's End!  So going into this film, I was excited but then I had heard some horrid reviews.  Not that they were universal, but people who didn't like the film LOATHED the film.  Kinda how I feel about Batman vs. Superman...anyway I still wanted to see it and judge it for myself.  And I enjoyed the film for the most part, but I can see why others hated it so much.  It really all depends on the lead, Ansel Elgort and whether or not you find him charming or want to punch him in the face.  I can't think of a recent film that depended on the likability of it's lead so much.  The script is funny (the Mike Myers big is hilarious), the use of music is great, the supporting cast of Jon Hamm, Kevin Spacey, Jamie Foxx and others are all solid...Wright is really ambitious here, doing long takes that spoof (honour) hollywood classic like Singing in the Rain and the music chosen in each scene is never random.  But Elgort in many scenes is dancing around, mouthing words to songs, prancing even...and again you may love that or want to barf and that really will affect how you view this film.  Stylistically it's Wright's biggest film so far, with impressive car chase sequences and big "Heat"-style shootouts.  So I liked it...or did I?  In my head there are alot more yes' than no's...but like I said, what about Baby?  I'll give it a thumbs up...with reservations and an option to change that at a later time... :)  *Quick note: I'm going to start putting a "Smoking Meter" on these reviews, not to judge smokers or whatever, just for my own amusement.  In one scene, to make him look ominous and just plain ol' mean, Kevin Spacey smokes.  So...1 out of 10 smokes...I guess...this is a work in progress...

July 12th - TWO WEEKS IN ANOTHER TOWN (1962) I've been on a Kirk Douglas kick lately (see Gunfight at the OK Corral above) and one of my all-time favourite films is "The Bad and the Beautiful".  This movie was said to be an almost sequel, if you squint a bit.  The film reunites Douglas, director Vincente Minnelli, producer John Houseman, screenwriter Charles Schnee, composer David Raskin and studio MGM from TBATB.  This film even shows scenes from TBATB in it!  This film has the great Edward G. Robinson, Clare Trevor and (to me) an unrecognizable Cyd Charisse as well as a young George Hamilton, supposed to be playing a James Dean-type which even Hamilton himself has said was less than appropriate.  I admit I had a hard time getting into this film and had to re-start it a few times.  Douglas is a shouty-actor, either shouting as a heel (like in BATB) or as a good guy losing his s*it (like in Gunfight), and there is some of that here, but he mostly reigns it in and his best scenes are with young Daliah Lavi walking around Rome.  The theme of washed up actor Douglas talking about the pitfalls and hardships of fame, particularly the loneliness, is something people are still talking about today.  But the screetching and backstabbing from the female actresses in this film (with the exception of Lavi) got annoying (although kind of similar to Gunfight...another Douglas film...hmmmm...).  On that point, there were a few instances where actor-turned-director Douglas has to deal with his tempermental actress, who isn't happy with her part, scene, lines...whatever.  In one scene he flatters her, another he kicks her in the ass...both tactics work and she's instantly obedient.  Do most Hollywood directors watch a film like this and go "Yeah...that's how it's done!  Damn actresses and their opinions, thoughts, ideas, whatever...!"  And it all leads up to a confusing finale...Douglas leaves the girl and a big opportunity in Rome behind to race to the airport, get on a plane and...what?  I admit I was confused by the ending.  Was he going back to Hollywood?  Back to the asylum?  Why didn't he take the girl with him?  I'd say this was a good but not great film.  *Smoke Meter: 10 out of 10!!! Every scene, every character in every scene practically smokes.  Just things I notice...

July 13- CONCUSSION (2015) This is a tough movie to watch.  I am a big sports fan, and the cold shower of reality when it comes to concussions and their affects is frankly a real bummer.  I love NHL hockey, but also watch football, baseball, basketball, etc.  This movie focuses on the reality of concussions in football, but it relates to all sports, including boxing, car racing and even pro wrestling.  The statistics in this film are staggering, and I can sort of understand why the NFL hated the fact people like Dr. Bennet Omalu (Will Smith) were "ruining their fun".  But yet more and more athletes suffer and die from complications from CTE.  Are people's lives, the athlete's lives, all just collatoral damage?  Like the gladiators of the past?  Unfortunately, if you want head injuries outlawed, what's left?  Basketball, Golf, Bowling...Baseball with wild pitches and base-stealing banned?  But what about the film?  Will Smith provides a great performance, I almost forgot it was him by the end of the movie.  The scenes with him, Alec Baldwin and Albert Brooks were amazing, I would have loved to have been in the room for those scenes.  Although I have to say I didn't really care about the love story...while I understand it kind of needed to be included in order to see Omalu's journey, it was distracting as I wanted to hear more about the concussions and the fight with the NFL.  And really, at BTW over two hours long, was this a biography about Omalu or the concussion problem in sports?  Whenever there is a romantic subplot it in a movie like this it always seems like a studio note..."Sure the brain stuff is interesting but can't we have a scene with the doctor guy dancing in a night club?"  This, and another movie I saw recently and was infuriated by it's politics, "Sully" (which also starred Mike O'Malley as a real jerk, he should worry about being typecast), has to keep putting obsticles in the main characters way but almost to the extreme.  Most people would scoff, saying "It's based on a true story, so all that must be true", whereas I know enough about movies to know that "based on a true story..." means very little.  Take "Foxcatcher", watch it, then watch a documentary about what REALLY happened...anyway, what was I saying?  Good movie, not great.  Again, good performances but a bummer.  I can kind of see why this movie bombed, frankly.  No one wants a cold shower of reality...especially in movie-fantasty-land.  *Smoke-meter: Can't think of any, which actually is kind of weird...all those people suffering from concussions and no one was smoking pot?

July 14 - A LITTLE CHAOS (2014) This was directed by the wonderful Alan Rickman (his second apparently, now I have to watch "The Winter Guest") and I've been wanting to watch this since his tragic death.  And of course, seeing this as a tribute to Professor Snape himself, frankly there is no way I was going to hate this film.  Especially with him IN IT, plus the always amazing Kate Winslet, plus Stanley Tucci and some kinda recognizable very-English actors...how could I not love this film?  Rickman and Winslet have three scenes together and those three (especially the first!) are worth the price of admission.  That first scene, where their characters meet and there is a misunderstanding but in a marvelous way, crackles with their chemistry together and is very sweet.  It's a cool story about Winslet's character helping to design the Gardens of Versailles.  Winslet's characters are always best "punching up" against people telling her she can't do whatever it is she wants to do.  It's not a must-see film but I recommend it.

July 15th - THE BIG SICK (2017) I've been looking forward to this film for awhile.  It's odd, as my anticipation for this film is a byproduct of modern day let's call it "new media"....?  I have "gotten to know" Kumail Nanjiani and his real-life wife Emily Gordon through alot of podcasts and comedy shows.  As podcasts were becoming more popular, Kumail started appearing on a lot of them, such as "Doug Loves Movies", "The Nerdist" and "Harmontown", appearing as himself and coming off very funny and likable.  Gordon herself has also appeared on various podcasts (Emily and Kumail hosted a podcast called "The Indoor Kids"), with ones such as Pete Holmes' "You Made it Weird", where Holmes and his interview subject can sometimes sit and talk for up to three hours and talk about literally their whole lives (although this was years ago, I haven't committed their lives to memory, and I should make a note to go back and re-listen to those old episodes).  And Kumail, Jonah Ray and Gordon also hosted "The Meltdown" comedy show and it involved telling alot of real-life stories, not to mention Kumails' own comedy stand-up routine.  Then I heard that their story was being made into a film by Judd Apatow, someone I admire, if only for the greatness of "Freaks and Geeks".  And on top of all that, the movie was getting rave reviews.  What does all this mean?  I had high hopes, let's just say.  And yes, I really liked the film.  There are somethings that were weird, such as Emily being played by a different girl while Kumail plays Kumail.  "Knowing" Kumail and Emily as real people made this a smidge awkward.  And, as it says in the trailer (so this shouldn't count as SPOILERS) most of the film isn't really about Kumail and Emily, it's about Kumail and his family AND Kumail and Emily's family, played by the great Holly Hunter and the surprisingly good Ray Romano, while Emily is comatose.  I honestly (and I don't know what this means, other than my brain is weird, as established earlier) could not stop thinking about the Sandra Bullock movie "While You Were Sleeping" (which ironically starred Peter Boyle, Romano's on-screen dad for years).  I was waiting for them to make a reference to it.  The chemistry between Kumail and Zoe Kazan (faux Emily) was great and I did like them as a couple.  The biggest problem with the film is that is just ends without most of the problems resolved (although it does make us assume it WILL BE resolved, and everyone will live happily ever after), which I guess means there really has to be a sequel!  BUT as the credits start to roll, they show real pictures of the real Emily and Kumail and also a picture from their wedding, with Kumail's family there, so that major plot thread solved itself off screen, BUT the biggest thing to me was, as they were a huge part of the movie, where was the picture of Emily's family at the wedding?  Again, this all screams SEQUEL!  I may have to watch this again to just soak it in as a movie onto itself.  But just as it is, I highly recommend it!  *Smoke meter: None that I can remember...I totally expected Kumail and the Holly Hunter character to bond while smoking a joint. 

July 16th - THE NIGHT OF THE LIVING DEAD (1968) I had planned on watching another film noir today but I woke up to two huge pieces of news 1- There is now a female Dr. Who (awesome!) and 2- George A. Romero had died (and later that day, I heard Martin Landau had died as well.  RIP sir).  I know Romero's work well merely by reputation, as I have never seen any of his zombie films...or any other of his films either.  I am not a horror guy, I was shielded by that kind of stuff alot as a kid.  I may have been an adult before I watched the non-TV uncensored version of Ghostbusters, to give just one example.  And once I was an adult, I never have developed a taste for gory films.  I watch The Walking Dead, but only because we review it on our podcast Trilogy Spoilers (cheap plug - link is http://www.andrewbuckleyauthor.com/trilogy-spoilers-podcast)...so I decided, if possible, to watch the very first Romero "zombie film", the one that started it all.  I looked On Demand, and on Netflix and there is a shortage of Romero there.  On Youtube though I found a few versions of the film, and even the 1990 remake, for free to watch.  Researching the film I found out that it was made for only $114,000, but made millions and started an entire genre (or sub-genre?) of movies and Romero himself has been named as an influence on an entire generation of filmmakers.  I could list a bunch of stats but that's what Wikipedia is for.  But did I like the film?  Yes, I did.  Some of it doesn't age well, like the fight scenes (compared to today's films, it seemed like the characters were fighting underwater), sound effects (the rifle's shots sounded like a capgun), and at times over-the-topness was comical, with this usually provided by the actors in their performances.  But no matter the budget, the filmmaking is top notch, as there are several genuine moments of dread and great amount of tension.  As the characters are listening to the newscasters describe what the "ghouls" are capable of (the word "zombie" is never actually used) the looks on their faces, matched with the words being said, is moving.  As characters start to die, and in some cases, turn on each other, you pick favourites and want them to survive.  And this is also one of those movies that is interesting to watch now, in hindsight.  While I am not a horror fan, I have seen The Walking Dead, the Dawn of the Dead remake, Shaun of the Dead, etc. so I do know the typical tropes and jokes that those shows are based on.  And now watching the "OG" but in the "wrong order" so to speak is interesting.  I can only imagine being in an audience in 1968 watching this film, it's unprecedented amount of gore for the time, the kid in the basement, and when the main character's fate is determined...at the time this must all have been ground breaking.  The fact that the main character is black, and what happens to him, is actually ground breaking when considering TODAY's films, really.  But then it's sad to think how far we haven't progressed in that sense.  Final analysis...I liked it, almost enough to want to go back and watch the others (the original Dawn of the Dead for sure, as for comparison).  Whether or not I do go back is another question entirely, but I do have more appreciation for Romero, a true legend.  RIP George A. Romero.  *Smoker Report: N/A as it was in black and white, and in my weird brain, smoking is okay in black and white movies.  I don't make the rules, people...

July 17th - MULAN (1998) I've always been a huge fan of Disney animated films, I know big shocker!  But for whatever reason there seems to be a gap around the late 90's, as I realised I had never seen Mulan or Pocahontas, despite hearing raves about both films.  Which is weird as I have a soft spot for movies with strong female characters.  Regardless, here we are.  Although watching this film turned out to be a bit of a chore, although the film itself did nothing wrong, really.  Up until this point, this list has been a joy but for a variety of reasons (mostly personal so I won't go into them), on Monday July 17th I was really tired and I would have gone to bed but I HAD TO watch a film for my blog.  I should have resisted, as that's not fair to the film, but I went ahead and fell asleep twice while trying to watch this movie.  Finally I woke up, saw that the film was winding up and I had missed most of it and gave up and went to bed.  The next day I tried to re-start 15 minutes in but had to stop for more life-stuff that was getting in the way.  Finally I finished the movie and how was it?  I really liked it!  First impressions, and piecing things together abit, I feel the film really had a great pace, getting to the point quickly, as it seemed that Mulan was in the army, posing as a boy, fairly quickly after the movie began.  And I like that, when movies just get to the point!  And it wasn't long after that where Mulan is revealed to be a girl...but she still manages to save the day!  I really liked the voice work of Pat Morita, George Takei, Harvey Firestein, Miguel Ferrer, James Hong and of course one of my all-time favourite comedian Eddie Murphy.  The snow avalanche scene was where things really started to pick up steam and by the end of the film, I really was enjoying these characters.  This is a movie pointed out as a great movie for young girls, starring a kick ass female, although for most of the film Mulan doesn't really kick ass, so I was wondering if this would end up like old school Disney films like Cinderella, Snow White, etc. where, sure, the main character (the TITLE character, in fact) is female, but is Prince Charming going to come along and do the heavy lifting while the main character is alseep?  Luckily, Mulan does kick ass in the last act, which made me very happy.  Ultimately, this is a great film and I'll have to watch Pocahontas at some point soon!  *Smokers Report: N/A as this is a Disney animated film

July 18th - CAPE FEAR (1962) I'm a big Robert Mitchum fan, and one of the first movies I ever saw that really made me think was "To Kill A Mockingbird", so the fact I've never watched this is strange (haven't seen the remake either).  But now I get to watch it now, so it all works out in the end!  First thing...Telly Savalas with hair!  I had no idea he was in this and frankly I had assumed he was born bald!  But right off the bat, what an amazing villain Mitchum plays!  His eyes, when he first sees Peck in the courtroom are just...haunting!  And this movie is alot smarter than I had given it credit for, and is anything but formulaic.  I had assumed that Mitchum would taunt Peck, sure, but usually in these kinds of films, no one believes the hero when he says the villain is a crazy murderer, and its not until the end of the film when the hero is redeemed.  In this film, everyone believes Peck and he uses his friendship with the police chief to try to run off Mitchum, only Mitchum keeps coming.  I found that to be tremendous, almost to the point it makes Mitchum likable.  Almost.  In fact if Mitchum wasn't so devious and so in-your-face to Peck, laughing and taunting him and his family at every turn, he would almost be the hero.  To a more modern audience, I can definatley see Mitchum being the hero.  He never stops, almost like a Terminator.  That is until the end of the film, when he goes full-evil and tries to rape both Peck's wife and 14 year old daughter.  At that point you are rooting for Peck.  His character is quite interesting too, using his political power and outright illegal dealings to do whatever he can run Mitchum off without getting his hands dirty.  Until the finale, that is.  I was kind of shocked at the scene in the police chief's office where Peck and Savalas are planning, with the chief, trapping and the murder of Mitchum.  And again, until the end, Peck's character never really loses his cool, much like Atticus Finch.  Perhaps this film would have come off totally different if someone like Charlton Heston played Peck's character.  And I imagine at the time this was a huge film, with the graphic violence at the end but having a villain as smart as Cady too.  Excellent film!  *Smokers Report: Mitchum smokes a cigar and of course Telly Savalas smokes a cigarette constantly, possibly the same one through the whole film.  In my mind, up until now, Savalas was born bald with a cigarette in his mouth.  At least one of those things have been proven wrong now...

July 19th - COLOSSAL (2017) First reactions...what a weird movie!  And yet, totally straightforward and never confusing...really.  It starts off slow, building the world that Anne Hathaway's character lives in, then boom!  Huge things happen (literally!).  And it's totally worth the ride.  I've been waiting to watch this film for a while.  I wanted to watch it in theaters but where I live it wasn't really an option so I pre-ordered it on iTunes!  Finally it's here!  It's hard not to talk too much about the film as to avoid spoilers...eventhough the overall idea was spoiled in the trailers, and the overall plot and plotpoints where spoiled by one specific jerk (Dan) on "The Flop House" podcast's "Mother's Day" episode.  Having known what that feels like, I don't want that to happen to anyone else.  So just go watch the film!  I guess.  Right?  *Smokers Report: None!

July 20th - HAROLD AND MAUDE (1971) This is just one of those films that I always intended to watch, would record whenever it came on TCM, but just never made time to sit down and take it in.  First thing...for some reason I always through that the film took place in Europe.  Not sure why, maybe because of the film stock they used?  Maybe, in my mind they would only make a movie like this in Europe?  This dark a comedy, about a young boy, obsessed with death, falling in love with an old woman, isn't that really European?  Once again with a film I'm watching specifically for this blog, I had a hard time getting into it and actually fell asleep at one point, but after going back to it and re-starting it, I really got into the film and the characters.  Especially once Maude shows up and starts stealing cars, shovels and the rest of the film, really.  If Harold hadn't done those elaborate death hoaxes to freak out his dates, he wouldn't have really had much of a presence at all.  I loved the sequences with a young Tom Skerritt as the highway cop baffled by Maude and her logic.  And, knowing what the movie was about, I was curious to see how they actually handled Harold and Maude's relationship, if they would hint at it, if they would actually show them being affectionate with each other, especially since this was made in 1971.  I was also shocked how much I started to root for them as characters and was happy when Harold surprised Maude for her birthday and they started sweetly slow dancing.  This movie is surprisingly funny, with a lot of laugh out loud moments.  And that soundtrack by the former Cat Stevens is iconic!  I'm really glad I finally got to take in this classic!

July 21 - VALERIAN AND THE CITY OF A THOUSAND PLANETS (2017) I first heard of this at last year's San Diego Comic Con, where I believe they showed the first trailer, and I've been very excited about it ever since!  Why?  Luc Besson returning to his "Fifth Element" roots!  Amazing visuals!  Plus Cara Delevigne!  And Rihanna!  Besson's imagination is seemingly limitless, has wanted to adapt this from the comic book that first came out in 1967, but has had to wait for the VFX to catch up!  Apparently Besson found funding for the film outside the Hollywood studio system and it's the most expensive "indy film" ever at over $209 million budget!  So why am I Wikipedia'ing you?  Cause I don't really want to talk about the film itself.  Because, other than a few scenes here and there, there just wasn't much going on here.  Remember when I talked about Baby Driver and the importance of whether or not you liked the lead actor?  It's not as important here, but important nonetheless.  And having Valerian, who seemingly charming space-rogues from Han Solo forward have been modelled after, played by Dane DeHaan, didn't work for me.  I might have been more forgiving to Delevigne, but she worked for me.  I thought she was terrible in Suicide Squad, if that evens things out (but then who wasn't, other than maybe Margot Robbie?).  There was no chemistry between the two leads, and as the only two humans on screen for most of the film, that's kind of important.  The writing is terrible, with more than one long monologue about love or justice or duty or something blah blah blah.  But bad writing and dialogue can be saved by actors with charisma and chemistry.  Check out the big emotional scene in "The Fifth Element", where Bruce Willis is explaining love to MIlla Jovovich's "Leelu"...it's corny but at that point we love both characters and...it works!  There is a similar scene here and I almost strained my eyeballs as I was rolling them so much.  Actually, there are two scenes like this, one in the beginning and one at the end.  The one at the beginning is bad, almost made we want to check out for the rest of the movie, but I think the one at the end is worse, cause by that point the characters should have won me over, and they didn't.  The monologue at the beginning is designed to make Valerian out to be stud but, not to be that guy who lives in a glass house, DeHaan is a dweeb and is no Han Solo!  He's not even Ace Rimmer, or for that matter even Arnold J. Rimmer, from Red Dwarf!  And not to sound all "You kids and your rock n roll!", but these "advanced" VFX suck!  It just looks like I'm watching someone else play a video game, especially when DeHaan is going all flippity-ninja-man and killing some actually likeable plumpy aliens.  Again, back with Fifth Element, they used costumes and puppetry, and the aliens seemed way more "alive", whereas now I know it's all done on green screen with the actors talking to tennis balls on sticks for their eye-line.  There are two great scenes in the film, when Rihanna shows up for her "performance", she is...wow!  The second great scene is a quick one, with Delevigne captured and trying to communicate with an alien, who just wants her to try on dressed for some reason.  That kind of is all one sequence, so maybe there is just one great scene in the movie!  Maybe if they had flipped the roles, had Delevigne as Valerian, it might have worked, despite the horrible dialogue, but then Besson would have had even more haters than he did already by "not being true to the source material".  Anyway, if you like crazy visuals and no real plot or emotion (for example, do you like the Transformers franchise?), then go ahead and see Valerian.  But for me it was a HUGE disappointment.  *Smokers Report: ZERO!

July 22nd - THE SISTERHOOD OF THE TRAVELING PANTS (2005) BECAUSE I WANTED TO OKAY!?!?!  I was flipping through the channels and this was just starting, and technically I've never seen it before, so...actually that's not true, I saw it was on, checked if it was on later, set the DVR to record, then sat down to watch it...CAUSE I FELT LIKE IT!  I'm a fan of all four girls in the movie...at the time the movie came out I knew Alexis Bledel the most from Gilmore Girls, America Ferrera from the indy film "Real Women Have Curves" (a great film BTW), Amber Tamblyn from "Joan of Arcadia", an underrated show and at the time, Blake Lively was the unknown of the four.  In the years since this, and it's sequel, Lively has become the biggest star, Ferrera is in a hilarious sitcom "Superstore", Bledel hasn't done much other than some appearances on Mad Men and the Gilmore Girls revival, and Tamblyn has kind of disappared off my radar, other than the fact I'm fascinated with her real-life marriage to David Cross (Tobias from Arrested Development).  So how was the film?  I liked the chemistry of the four with each other (which apparently spilled over to real life and the four became best friends for real), but the movie isn't about that.  The movie is touted as being about friendship but we really only see that in a few scenes, letters done in voiceover, and how they talk about each other to other people.  I would have liked a movie just about them hanging out, not split up in four directions.  Tamblyn and Ferrera do get some good scenes together but it's not enough.  Tamblyn's storyline is about death, Ferrera's is about family, Bledel's storyline is about young love and Lively's storyline is about young sexuality.  Although that maybe too simple...but are there really soccer camps in Mexico?  Was that really an El Santo movie being watched on a TV in the background in one scene?  And are all soccer camps in Mexico filmed in B.C.?  Are all of Blake Lively's scenes in this movie supposed to make me feel dirty?  An admittidely under-age Lively's whole storyline is about seducing a guy, one of her coaches, who is ten years older than her.  I guess it's good that she is in control of her sexuality, choosing what to do, rather than be preyed upon?  And was the Bledel "Romeo and Juliet" storyline about her supposidely pure young love to balance that out?  It's too bad Tamblyn isn't in more stuff as she has a great presence on camera, and can really say alot with doing very little.  And Ferrera's emotional phone call with her dad (Bradley Whitford) and reconciliation scene later on in the film is really powerful.  Bledel kind of just plays Rory Gilmore with a different name, as she seems to do alot (not that it's bad, I like Rory...).  Of the four, Lively showed the least range but she is tall, blonde and gorgeous, so I guess it's not a surprise she's become the biggest star really.  Not that she is bad in the film, though, it's just that her scenes involved alot of running and looking hot, which isn't her fault.  And on a side note, I think she looked better pre-nosejob.  But it is Ferrera who steals the movie, and I'm glad she has found success as a producer and star of a funny sitcom (as rare as that is) and something other than a show called "Ugly Betty".  Movie gets extra points for including a Chantal Kreviachuk song.  I'm actually looking forward to watching the sequel. And let it be said that I am no movie snob!  *Smokers Report: A few of Tamblyn's co-workers smoke but that's it.

July 23rd - QUICK CHANGE (1990) I had heard of this film but had never been able to sit down and enjoy it.  I was surprised to find out that this film was co-directed by Bill Murray and featured a lot of young actors by the names Stanley Tucci, Tony Shalhoub, Phil Hartman and also Kurtwood Smith.  The beginning of the film was a standard bank hostage caper, with Murray's acting style being his standard "too cool for school" smartass who's too smart for this script (which is weird, since he's co-director) but once Murray and his cohorts leave the bank and things start going wrong, it becomes a funny movie with lots of twists and turns.  I liked how Murray's character knew how smart the police chief (Jason Robards) was, and Robards knew how smart Murray was and that part of the cat-and-mouse game was fun to watch (although, of course, Murray was always much smarter).  Murray, though, never quite loses it and always does seem to be in control, and with a few exceptions, never stops being Mr. Cool, which kind of lacks dramatic tension.  Randy Quaid's character is supposed to be endearing but is just annoying.  Geena Davis was (and is) super talented and I hope she gets that one great role once more in her career.  On the list of great movies in her career, this probably isn't one of them.  Tucci and especially Shalhoub stand out here, especially Shalhoub who I figured was just going to be a one-note stereotype but as the camera lingers, he shows more and more the talent on screen that we would see in years to come.  I wonder if there is a backstory about this movie and Tucci and Shalhoub becoming friends, leading to their friendship and the classic indy film "Big Night".  It's probably not a coincidence.  Also in the film in a small role is Jamey Sheridan, who played Oliver Queen/Green Arrow's father on "Arrow".  It is funny, watching this in 2017, with every character's seemingly endless desire to get out of the "hellhole" of 1980/1990's New York City and seeing personally what NYC and Manhattan in particular have become since (I think "Disney-fied" is the term people use).  It might not sound like it but I love Bill Murray and it was worth it just for those few moments here and there where he would show a spark of his charisma and acting chops that he would later show off in "Lost in Translation" and other more dramatic movies.  Not great but good.  *Smoker's Report: None that I can remember.

July 24th - WOMAN OF THE YEAR (1942) This was kind a a surprise to the list.  I recorded it out of habit, as I always record TCM's Essentials on Saturday Night, even if just for the intros of the film (it's not the same without the beloved Robert Osbourne, with Alec Baldwin taking over but still...).  I thought I had watched this film already and once I had watched Baldwin and guest Tina Fey discuss their thoughts of film, I was going to just erase the film from the DVR.  But as they showed clips, I realised I hadn't actually watched this particular Tracey-Hepburn movie, apparently the first one they worked on together and what sparked their romance of Hollywood legend.  As Tracey's character is a sports reporter, I learned a few things, like the Oakland A's used to be in Philadelphia and football teams used to all wear black or dark uniforms which made it difficult to see who was whom.  The role for Katherine Hepburn was figuratively and literally written for her, and I'm not sure anyone else could pull off the role and not seem "bitchy" and still be likeable.  Tracey kind of glides through the film, with a smirk on his face, looking at Hepburn like "Isn't she amazing?", which makes sense based on what was happening behind the scenes.  In an example of "The more things change, the more they stay the same", back then Hepburn's character would have had to have her commuppence in the end, as a woman that smart and dedicated to her career has to be shown "the right way", although I was happy to see that she tries to "be put in her place" but Tracey wouldn't have it.  These days Hepburn would be called an "elitist", as keeping up with current world events and knowing five different languages is considered a bad thing by some people on the right.  As I said, I had feared the movie would really be about good old boy Tracey "taming" the smartypants Hepburn, but it ended up with Tracey basically accepting her for who she is and her vowing to try harder to spend more time focusing on them, which isn't too horrible a message even today, but I have to think that this couple, at least the movie version, is doomed once the cameras stop rolling.  Still a very charming film.  *Smoker's Report: Lots of smoking, as both Tracey and Hepburn are smokers.

July 25th - DUNKIRK (2017) Remember a few days ago when I talked about how todays VFX looked fake and that inhibited my ability to enjoy Valerian?  Well, Christopher Nolan's latest epic, Dunkirk, uses lots of practical effects, using thousand of extras and actually destroying planes and boats, all in the name of filming a big ol' war movie.  And the result was movie I only liked a little more than Valerian.  And that's not saying much, as I didn't like alot about Valerian, whereas Dunkirk didn't really have anything I hated, there just wasn't much there that I got attached to.  By that I mean I didn't really get attached to any of the characters on screen other than knowing I should root for them cause they are "good guys".  It's said you should watching this on an IMAX screen, given how Nolan used 60mm film and IMAX cameras to capture the action.  I believe that.  There was some shots where I was legit wowed, such as a shot from a plane where a boat blows up and as the plane circles the boat we see it sink to it's left.  Alot of the shots towards the end of the film of Tom Hardy's plane, flying without the engine going and basically gliding along the beach, I would have loved more of that.  Was there another reason I couldn't quite get into this film?  Am I just rejecting Nolan himself, who after "The Dark Knight" has kinda just become pretentious and seemingly takes himself too seriously?  Am I just rejecting Hans Zimmer's score, that all sounds the same to me?  Have I become a shallow moviegoer, and I should revisit "Pearl Harbour" cause it didn't really mess with all that war stuff and made it all about a love triangle?  I don't really know.  Maybe my brain today just rejects war films that are, above all, about how war is awesome, when they are trying to say war is terrible, but it sure makes it look cool.  Not to spoil things, but in the end, one kid is mourned but the others returning home are treated as heroes.  How can war be that bad, assuming you survive?  I'm not writing a term paper and these aren't supposed to be "epic" reviews (unlike Nolan's films) that take forever to get through, so this might seem flippant, but I really am struggling with this film and my feelings for it.  I don't want to just say it was boring, cause it wasn't.  I just felt, well, cold towards it.  I watched it, then came home, and nothing really happened.  I didn't receive any new insight on war that I haven't seen in dozens (hundreds?) of other war movies, other than what "Dunkirk" was.  There are a few young soldiers we follow and through their adventures we kind of get to know them a bit, and I liked how they were kind of con artists, scheming as much as they could just to get ahead of everyone else, but all their scheming just gets them back to the beach, to start all over.  But even that storyline ends up about valour and right and wrong and people saying lines like "It's not fair!", just to trigger in our brains the response "War isn't fair, son!"  In no way are my feelings on this film meant to diminish what those soldiers actually went through in the real-life Dunkirk, or in any war movie.  Those were brave men most of whom made ultimate sacrifices.  But so many filmmakers claim to make war movies in order to show how horrible war is.  And to that I say "BS", as the purpose of a war movie today is basically the same in the 30's and 40's; as propaganda...what more can I say? *Smokers Report: Zero.

July 26th - FUNNY FACE (1957) So apparently I have a severe mental block when it comes to Audrey Hepburn...looking at her filmography, I've only ever watched Sabrina, Robin and Marian, Wait Until Dark...so no Roman Holiday, no My Fair Lady, no Charade, no The Children's Hour, no Breakfast at Tiffany's until very recently...not sure why, it's not like I dislike her or anything.  If anything, making this list will correct at least some of those holes in my film watching where she is concerned.  I am a big Fred Astaire fan, although to be clear, I am more of a Fred & Ginger fan, and between the two individually, more of a Ginger Rogers fan.  I haven't seen many Fred without Ginger movies, cause frankly it's kind of weird.  Plus the best Fred & Ginger movies are black and white (Top Hat, Shall We Dance, Swing Time...) so seeing Astaire in colour is weird too.  Not to mention he's THIRTY years older that Hepburn and looks it.  Looking back at my Breakfast at Tiffany's review (and wow they used to be short!) I didn't really like Hepburn as the "heavy" so to speak, a not very likeable character, whereas here she is the lovable girl next door, and I find it much more suitable.  I mentioned Kate Winslet in an earlier review and how I prefer her "punching up", and being the hero fighting the odds and proving she can do more than people expect of her and Hepburn seems to be the same kind of actress.  The musical numbers aren't that memorable in my opinion, other than the solo Astaire has "Kiss and Make up", although it goes too long.  The cinematography during the three-way song "Bonjour Paris" really made me want to visit Paris, which is weird cause lots of film have been filmed in Paris and I've never had that urge before.  I liked the film but I'll most likely never watch it again.  *Smokers Report: Lots of it, especially in the Bohemian Cafe!

July 27th - ROMAN HOLIDAY (1953) Now THIS is a great film.  Both Gregory Peck and Audrey Hepburn are great in this film.  And I'm now starting to see what "all the fuss" was about with Hepburn.  She is wonderful and a ray of sunshine in this black and white feature.  I now wonder if I had watched this first and fallen in love with her, would that have changed by opinions on Funny Face and Breakfast at Tiffany's?  For 2017, it's pretty standard stuff that we've seen a million times and I have to remember to remember that this is the OG of "princess wanting to be a pauper for a day" movies.  But there are some scenes that surprised me, the first being the coffee shop scene where Eddie Albert shows up and Peck doesn't want him to reveal his true identity.  There is no chill here and the gags go from subtle to over the top, with Albert landing on his head at one point.  Later, when Hepburn's Princess returns to the castle, I expected her to cower and feel terrible about what she had done, but she kicks serious ass and basically tells her handlers to back off and as of now, that things are going to change.  And the ending absolutely shocked me, but if you are like me before today and haven't seen it, I won't spoil it.  Sometimes older films have weird scenes that you watch and are like "Well, I guess that was acceptable back then!"  There is one scene where Peck tries to wrestle a camera away from a little girl and as it starts I'm like "Wow, that's creepy" but as the scene progresses, it turns out that was weird behavior back then too.  Alot of funny and just plain sweet moments throughout.  A big recommendation!  *Smokers Report: Off the top of my head, I remember there is one scene with Hepburn trying to smoke...sidenote I've always found it weird in moves and tv shows where characters will take a few puffs then throw the smoke away...I guess in old movies that's more acceptable cause cigarettes didn't cost as much as they do today?  When I see that in modern films/tv shows, it takes me out of the film and I'm like "yeah, that guy didn't pay for that, otherwise..."  I've lived around smokers my whole life and you don't take two puffs and throw it away...you just don't.  Sidenote #2: Wow the blacklist sucked.  A major oversimplification, I know...but screw the House Unamerican Activities Committee and God Bless Dalton Trumbo.

July 28th - LIKE CRAZY (2011) I had heard about this film, saw it in my DVR and was like..."Sure!"  I had heard Jennifer Lawrence was in it, and that's how it came on my radar, and I didn't know much about Felicity Jones other than she was in Star Wars: Rogue One.  And she was in a Dr. Who episode, but one I don't really remember (other than there was a really big wasp in it I think).  Anton Yelchin I've seen more of, due to the Star Trek films and heard more about following his tragic death.  Felicity Jones is really young looking here, as is Lawrence, once she actually shows up.  As I was watching the film, I usually multi-task (do some writing, tweet, research the movie I'm watching, etc.) and looking this film up I saw that it was a very low budget indy film, most of it was improvisational, and that people loved Jones and Yelchin's performances but thought the overall movie was flawed by it being completely unrealistic.  I didn't really see how Jones and Lawrence fell for this guy so hard, Yelchin's performance consisted of being mopey and dead-eyed most of the time and generally unhappy when, from a dude-bro's point of view, two of the hottest, smartest and coolest women in the world are both professing their love for each other.  I'm sure it would be a real bummer having to choose between them.  Poor guy.  :) Jones, even when she is unhappy and crying still has a spark to her that makes her insanely loveable.  And Lawrence, even in her very limited amount of screentime, is amazing.  Jones and Yelchin's love story isn't one I was really rooting for; they fall in love, argue, make up as if they were teenagers, when they are supposed to be adults.  When it built up to the big finale I wasn't all that enraptured, unfortunately.  But did I mention Alex Kingston is in this film too? *Smokers Report: None.  Lots of alcohol consumption, but whatevs.

July 29th - WAR FOR THE PLANET OF THE APES (2017) WOW, THIS MOVIE WAS AMAZING!  Sorry for the capslock, but it's true.  This third "Apes" movie was tremendous!  I highly recommend it.  A few months back on my podcast "Trilogy Spoilers!" (link here) we were talking about the Best Movies of 2017 so far, and I made a remark that unless the new Star Wars movie is amazing, then I can't see another film dethroning Wonder Woman as the Best Movie of the Year!  I loved WW that much!  But now there's this...I have liked other Apes films (of the original movies, I've really only seen the first Chuck Heston version, hated the Tim Burton/Marky Mark version, liked the Franco version (Rise...), and liked the sequel even more (Dawn...)) and heard good things about this version (93% on Rotten Tomatoes) so I went in with high hopes.  And they were met!  The VFX are so good you think that there are actual apes/monkeys talking to each other on screen.  The movie doesn't mess around, as two minutes in there is a major battle sequence, then a few minutes later another one, then the movie kicks into gear with the addition of a new ape (should I spoil it and reveal who does the voice?  No, I'll let you discover that yourselves, but I loved it) and the young girl in the poster above was tremendous too!  Woody Harrelson nails it...Matt Reeves as co-writer and director nails it...I really loved this film!  Have I made that clear?  I'm just mad at myself now because it took me so long to go see it (it came out 15 days ago!).  All the apes, especially Andy Serkis' Caesar, are fully developed characters that we care about and, considering what I said about VFX in my Valerian review earlier, I would say this movie is an exception to the rule.  Plus bonus points cause it was filmed in Canada, eh!  Plus classic film fans will probably recognise some homages to movies like "The Great Escape", "Bridge on the River Kwai", "Apocalypse Now" and others.  I expected blow ups and cool set pieces but I was not expecting such an intelligent script!  Go see this!  *Smokers Report: None!

July 30th - ATOMIC BLONDE (2017) As I wrap up this list and month, I am planning on doing another list like this for August but I realise there might not be as many new releases on that list.  July was a good month, August doesn't seem to be, but that's for another time!  Now, for this movie...what a fun ride!  The plot makes no sense, but neither did the plot of "The Big Sleep", and that movie didn't have the amazing fight sequences that this one does!  As scenes happened, and there was double cross after double cross, and things were said in dialogue that related to things on screen that hadn't happened yet, and the narrative switched voices...but really none of that matters cause Charlize Theron kicks serious ass!  Plus the soundtrack is amazing and I downloaded it as soon as I got home.  Plus having all this go on as the Berlin Wall was coming down was a great set piece.  It really did remind me of the Bourne movies but that could be because of the European setting.  And the Bourne movies made sense.  Really, leave your brain at the door and just go to enjoy lots of people getting punched in the face really hard!  *Smokers Report: LOTS!  Literally every character in this movie smokes all the time!  But I didn't mind it so much, maybe because it was set in the 80's???

July 31st - BON COP BAD COP (2006) This probably should have been my Canada Day movie.  It's Canada's first attempt at a big budget buddy cop movie.  It was good but way too long.  Way too long.  It couldn't really decide if it was a dark serious cop movie or a buddy cop-comedy.  I liked the "meet cute" between the two cops, bickering over whether a dead body, lying half way over the border between Ontario and Quebec and the two leads have chemistry.  I liked the plot where the killer is targeting people responsible for taking hockey away from Canada and to the States, and it's kind of interesting how they were clearly referencing the NHL, Wayne Gretzky, Peter Poklington, Gary Bettman but having to just say "The Great One", and giving characters similar names like "Pickleton" and "Buttman".  But was it interesting enough for a whole film?  Things started to unravel for me towards the end and lost interest, I have to admit, although there was a recent sequel that I would watch if it came on cable.  It looked good and clearly had a good budget, and these sorts of projects should be encouraged.  Just a little more editing maybe?  *Smokers Report: one of the main characters is always smoking (which do you think, the Frenchman or the English?) and a few other characters here and there do as well...

*This has been fun...I do plan on doing an August list like this, so keep an eye out for that...

My Influences #3 - Sitcoms (a continuing list)

Sitcoms! (no really!)

As I sit here starting to write this blog, at 10:08pm on New Year's Eve 2016, I'm thinking of what to watch.  I'm not really a "Let's watch the ball drop!" kinda guy (is there a joke there...moving on...).  And since thinking back on 2016 is kinda depressing, I think I need to watch something to make me laugh.  Not ponder, not consider, not reflect...LAUGH!  So I'm writing a short list of the Top 5 Sitcoms (or, let's say, 30 minutes or less TV shows - how many dramas are 30 minutes or less?) that I go to for laughs.  I'm sure there is more, but here are the Top 5.  I may add more later, but I do kinda want to get this done quick...cause it's New Year's Eve.  Not sure that's really a good reason, not like I'm going anywhere...sorry got lost there...

*Note - this Top Five doesn't include the Holy Grail of TV comedy...the first ten (or so) seasons of The Simpsons.  That deserves it's own list.  Or any animated TV shows.  One day...

*Note #2 - I won't be putting on any British TV shows, as, again, that deserves it's own list one day...

*Note #3 - no new shows, currently in production, will be listed, such as FX's "Atlanta" or Netflix's "Master of None" for instance (which if you haven't watched yet, you should!) - just shows that have been around for awhile.

1- Newsradio
This is one of the most underrated shows ever, in my opinion.  If someone tells me they like Newsradio, I think that makes us instant BFF's.  For life.  Watch it just for Phil Hartman.  Watch it for Dave Foley and Maura Tierney's comedic sexual chemistry.  Hell watch it to see a young Joe Rogan before he found the UFC.  It's wall-to-wall jokes, set in an office environment.  If you've ever worked in an office, you'll get these jokes, they are timeless.  Stephen Root, Vicky Lewis, Andy Dick and the rest of the cast and guest stars, not to mention the writers!, are all on top of their game.  Too many cliches in this description!  Just go watch it!

2- Arrested Development
History will remember this one weirdly.  Won Emmys, had terrible ratings, critically acclaimed, always on the verge of cancellation, loved by fans, kept around begrudgingly by FOX executives...but is it funny?  This was almost a live action version of The Simpsons with so many jokes per second it had to have broken some kind of record. 

Jason Bateman lead this motley crew of hilarious actors through many hilarious adventures.  Some may think of this show as the reason Michael Cera was thrust upon us, but the show gave us so much more.  The most unlikable cast of characters ever on a TV sitcom (Seinfeld...pffffttt!).  Just like Newsradio, it's a network sitcom but instead of being about the workplace, it's about family.  The Netflix version I'm torn on, some parts being hilarious and some just head scratching.  Part of the greatness of AD was the chemistry between the cast members, and the Netflix version was filmed with each cast member separately in separate adventures, with the original cast members only getting a few scenes together here and there.  There is talk of another series and if they do it, hopefully it be focused on the original cast and not how many wacky cameos by wacky guest stars they can fit in.

Favourite Character of the group?  Hard to pick but Will Arnett's Gob Bluth might get the pick, just for the name alone, really.  His self-centered yet low self-esteemed Gob is a joy to watch...especially that chicken dance!

3- Community
Another great network sitcom that was loved by many except for it's network executives.  This show started out as a show about seven strangers enrolling in a local Community College for various reasons and forming a study group for their Spanish class.  It was about strangers becoming friends and then eventually family.  Then in later seasons things started to get whacky.  They were the same seven characters but starting with their zombie movie parody episode, their later paintball episodes and episodes done completely in stop-motion, the show started taking on a more sci-fi bent.  Later episodes talked about "dark timelines" and Troy and Abed's "dreamatorium" (Community's version of Star Trek The Next Generation's Holodeck), Community's creator Dan Harmon started speaking to a very niche audience, with the result usually being hilarious.  If you knew what the heck they were talking about.  But really the core of the show, like so many other great shows, was it's cast and their chemistry.  Troy and Abed (Danny Glover and Danny Pudi) will go down as two of the great buddy duos of all time.  Alison Brie's Annie Edison was the perfect blend of naive sweet and super hot at the same time, with some amazing comedic timing as well.  Joel McHale, Gillian Jacobs, Yvette Nicole Brown and Chevy Chase rounded out the seven, plus having Jim Rash as the Dean, Spanish teacher Ken Jeong and John Oliver as Professor Duncan gave them a deep bench to pull from.  Plus this show gave us the Russo Brothers, who are now, after Joss Whedon, the gate keepers of the Marvel Universe.

4- Parks and Recreation
Another work place comedy, but with a twist - a sitcom about politics!  Before Veep, "Parks and Rec" came along as a show about local politics of a small town.  But like Newsradio, it was also a show about people who work together and eventually become not just friends but family.  The all-star cast started with Amy Poehler and gave a spotlight to unknowns such as Nick Offerman, Chris Pratt, Aziz Ansari, Adam Scott, Rashida Jones and Aubrey Plaza who are now big names in the industry.  After a shaky first season and a two-for-one switch-out from removing Paul Schneider's Mark Brendanawicz and bringing in Adam Scott's Ben Wyatt and Rob Lowe's Chris Traegar in season two, the show's writing and the cast's chemistry really came together.  Great guest appearances by Paul Rudd, Louis CK, Megan Mullally, Patricia Clarkson, Andy Samberg and the best arguably being by Ben Schwartz as "Jean-Ralphio". 

NBC comedies post-Friends/Seinfeld/Frasier seemed to have it tough - even winning Emmys an loyal fan bases didn't seem to necessarily guarantee a spot on the fall schedule.  But through the glory of re-runs and syndication, I've managed to catch up with this great show and it's wonderful characters.  And I cried when Little Sebastian…well you'll see...I giggled along with Ron Swanson when he revealed his love for scavenger hunts...was baffled by Tom's get-rich-quick schemese...and marvelled whenever Chris Pratt's Andy Dwyer came on screen...

5- The Flight of the Conchords
It's kind of surprising that I've picked a lot of network shows, especially with the abundance of great cable TV the last ten years.  But for the most part, if you think about it, there haven't been a lot of comedies that have emerged, let alone great ones.  FX has always had It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia, and this past year Atlanta.  HBO has been known for dramas like The Sopranos and The Wire, but now has Veep and Silicon Valley.  In the past, when HBO has tried comedies, it always seemed lacklustre.  But then along came Flight of the Conchords.  This short-lived show on HBO was a delight to watch while it was around. 

The Flight of the Conchords, the "4th Best Folk Band in New Zealand" (which is probably where I got the idea for The Supers being the 3rd Best Super-Team in the world) came to the US to make it big, but finding difficulties along the way.  Bret and Jermaine, playing fictionalized versions of themselves, created this show, part sitcom part musical, living in a small apartment in New York City and having a hard time paying the rent.  The ultimate show about two fish out of water, not having a clue how to be successful but still trying really hard.  Each show featured two, sometimes three or more songs and Season One consisted of 12 episodes.  That first season is an all-time classic and unfortunately by the time Season Two came along, they had used up all their songs so Season Two wasn't as successful but still good.  And that's how the show ended.  Both members have gone on to bigger things, Bret winning an Oscar for writing the "Muppet Movie" song, and Jermaine going on to many other projects, the biggest one being "The Things We Do in the Shadows" a hilarious mock-u-mentary about vampires. 

There is talk of a Flight of the Conchords movie, and they have teamed up for several tours, including in the summer of 2016 where I got to see them perform at the Greek Theatre in LA, which was a major life hilight for me.

Bret and Jermaine, The Flight of the Conchords live at the Greek Theater in Los Angeles in July 2016

That's it (FOR NOW!).  I reserve the right to add more...cause it's my blog!  :)

My Influences #2 - Gail Simone (a continuing list)

I have had many influences over the years, usually in comic books, but this also extends to movies (both animated and live action), TV Shows (again both animated and live action), plays, music, books and on and on.  I'm going to start this list and see where it takes me...

Gail Simone

Gail Simone!

In an earlier post, I professed my love for "Birds of Prey", starting from the beginning with Chuck Dixon's initial run.  I loved the relationship between Oracle (Barbara Gordon) and Black Canary (Dinah Lance).  Then along came Gail Simone and she took BoP up a notch...

The Birds of Prey!

Backing things up a bit, Gail Simone, a longtime comics fan, but concerned about the treatment of women in the medium, started a website called "Women in Refrigerators", pointing out all the examples of women being treated as objects, a story point discarded or killed in order to make the male star (98% WHITE male star) something to get mad about.  Simone's passion came through the screen, and people in the comics industry took notice.

"Fridging" became a comic book term thanks to Gail Simone

It took me awhile longer to notice, though.  As stated above, I've already talked about my love of The Birds of Prey, first written by Chuck Dixon but eventually taken over by Gail Simone.  I love that book and look around on this blog, you'll find out why!  So I'll skip BoP and go right to the OTHER main reason I love Gail Simone...SECRET SIX!

Villains United!

Around 2004, DC Comics was getting ready to do a sequel to it's huge 1985 series CRISIS ON INFINITE EARTHS, which re-did all of DC's continuity.  But there wasn't just going to be a INFINITE CRISIS series, they also launched four six-issue mini-series as well; The OMAC Project, Rann-Thanagar War, Day of Vengeance and Villains United!  The first three were good, but to me, Villains United was amazing!  In the series, Lex Luthor and a team of united villains (hence the title) were getting ready to wreak havoc on the DCU.  But there were six villains who didn't want to play along and they formed the Secret Six.  Catman, Deadshot, Cheshire, Ragdoll, Scandal and Parademon, with their mysterious leader Mockingbird, who no one on the team knew the identity of.

The Secret Six!

Right away, the unlikely group fought together, lived together, bickered like crazy and had amazing adventures.  Sounds like a great idea for an ongoing series (PS I totally stole this idea for myself, but not as well!).  After Villains United wrapped up in December 2005, a Secret Six mini-series was published to test the waters.  Later the Six guest starred memorably in Simone's BoP, including a big fight between the two teams and some great interplay.

Finally in 2008, an official Secret Six series was launched.  While a wonderful, critically acclaimed series (voted 4th best comic run of the entire decade by IGN; the whole "Get out of Hell Free" card run alone is worth your money), it wasn't commercially successful and unfortunately only lasted 36 issues.  But it's legacy lingers on - there is now a new version of the team, a New 52 version, alot different than the other, but still worth a read.  It is written by Gail Simone after all!

Justice League Unlimited's "Double Date" starring Green Arrow, Black Canary at odds with Huntress and The Question written by Gail Simone!

Gail Simone has become a comic book powerhouse, working with DC, Marvel and other companies, writing books such as Deadpool, Red Sonja, Action Comics, Wonder Woman, Batgirl, The All-New Atom, Welcome to Tranquility, The Movement, Leaving Megapolis and others!  She has also written on my as-stated-before beloved Justice League Unlimited, writing the episode "Double Date", starring Green Arrown, Black Canary, The Question and Huntress, as well as for the great "Batman Brave and Bold" cartoon, "The Mask of Matches Malone!".

Simone's popularity and influence in the industry is legend these days, as can be shown with two recent examples, both involving Batgirl.  With the New 52 company re-launch in 2011, DC Comics decided to take Barbara Gordon out of her wheelchair and put her back under the cowl as Batgirl, removing one of the most loved characters in comics, Oracle. 

Oracle!

Oracle meant alot to many people, including myself, as not only was a fantastic character, but she was one of the few disabled characters in comics.  Alot of people hated this, but the backlash could have been worse, as DC selected Simone to write the new ongoing Batgirl comic.  People, including myself, thought "Well, if Gail is writing the book...I'll give it a chance..." That’s powerful!

The New 52 Batgirl!

The second example of Simone's popularity is when she was apparently being fired from Batgirl.  Word spread on the internet that this was happening, and, seemingly at the time, the entire internet rallied around Simone and it lead to her being re-hired as Batgirl's writer.  There is alot of unrest on the angry internet, everyday in fact.  But not alot comes of it, usually.  This was one example where the internet did some good.

I have had the pleasure of meeting and speaking to Gail Simone a few times recently, and she has always been incredibly gracious and polite, even with me stammering and trying hard to say the right thing, but really probably talking nonsense and gibberish.  Her husband Scott is also a wonderful person and great to talk to.  I got to talk to him alot at the 2016 San Diego Comic Con, as Gail was doing press and he would be standing by, waiting, and he at one point saw me and pointed and said "Hey you!".  We talked for a half hour, and then again a few more times during the con.  And thanks to him, I finally got a picture with my writing idol after the Birds of Prey 20th Anniversary Panel.  I usually am too shy to ask for pictures but Scott could see this and helped me get a picture with Gail.  At least that's my interpretation of what happened.  And then I went a little nuts and wanted pictures with everyone who was on the panel!  And then I wanted a picture with Scott himself.  He seemed shocked but went along with it.  :) And I'll always be thankful to him.  Well both of them, of course!

Follow Gail Simone on Twitter @GailSimone

Follow Gail's husband Scott on Twitter @RocketSpouse

My Influences #1 - Dwayne McDuffie (a continuing list...)

I have had many influences over the years, usually in comic books, but this also extends to movies (both animated and live action), TV Shows (again both animated and live action), plays, music, books and on and on.  I'm going to start this list and see where it takes me...

DWAYNE MCDUFFIE

My favourite TV series of all-time is Justice League Unlimited.  I LOVE that show.  I'll watch it over and over, whether happy or sad, doesn't matter...it just works.  According to his Wikipedia page, Dwayne McDuffie wrote, produced or story-edited 69 out of the 91 episodes. 

View fullsize

The final run of the "Cadmus" storyline, in particular, saw McDuffie write or co-write the last seven episodes of the season, from "Clash" (where a jaded Superman encounters a naive Shazam) to "Hunter's Moon" (an underrated team-up of Hawkgirl, Vixen and the awesome VIGILANTE) to "Question Authority" (The Question becomes a legendary character) to "Flashpoint" (Superman is a badass and so is Amanda Waller) to "Panic in the Sky" (every character in the JLU is given a moment to shine) to "Divided We Fall" (wrap up to the whole storyline) and then finally "Epilogue" (a crossover with Batman Beyond starring an elderly Amanda Waller that is one of the best Batman stories ever!). 

I can't sufficiently explain how much these stories mean to me.  I watch them for entertainment, for the wow factor, to see how these characters can be brought to life on my TV screen if done properly.  I also dissect them, specifically the writing, how the characters' personalities are shown through actions and dialogue...I could go on but I'm not as good a writer as Dwayne McDuffie so it would be futile.  In the last season of JLU, McDuffie brought us "I Am Legion", "To Another Shore", "The Great Brain Robbery", "Far From Home" and the season finale "Destroyer".  Sadly, a show that should have gone on forever stopped there.

McDuffie wasn't done though, continuing on writing the Justice League movies "Crisis on Two-Earths", "All-Star Superman" and "Justice League Doom".  Even the first two seasons of Justice League, where the creative team was trying to find their footing before JLU, there are great episodes, usually with McDuffie involved.  My favourite is "Hereafter", a touching Superman story that I highly recommend to anyone.

After learning who McDuffie was thanks to the Special Features on the JLU DVD's, I wanted to learn more about him. 

I learned that he was one of the people behind "Milestone Comics", a 90's minority-owned comic studio that sought to bring african-american super heroes to the world.

He brought us Static Shock the animated series.  And worked on the Teen Titans and Ben 10 animated universes as well.

He brought us Marvel's Damage Control. 

He had a run on the Justice League comic book and was fired after being honest with fans online about the creative process. 

He wrote a PRINCE comic book!

*Fun facts: McDuffie was Prince’s cousin and half-brother to Keegan Michael Key of “Key and Peele”. 

Unfortunately he passed away on February 21st, 2011.  I can only imagine what his talents would have brought us in those intervening years.  What would he have thought of the New 52, for instance?

If you've never heard of Dwayne McDuffie, look him up.  Start with the JLU episodes I mentioned above.  Then check out the documentary "A Legion of One: The Dwayne McDuffie Story" included on the Justice League Doom DVD and Blu-Rays.  He's definitely worthy of the name "legend".  And his influence will continue, both in the written word, but also with "The Dwayne McDuffie Fund".

From the GoFundMe page:

"Today, a Dwayne McDuffie gofundme campaign exists to continue his legacy. The funds raised here by his estate and handled by his widow, Charlotte (Fullerton) McDuffie, are to help establish The Dwayne McDuffie Foundation, which will be a non-profit organization to award academic scholarships for diverse students. The fund will also continue to keep Dwayne’s vision alive by managing and maintaining an archival website for research purposes, and applying on behalf of Dwayne’s fans for his star on the Hollywood Walk of Fame.

Diversity in entertainment is an on-going effort, more important now than ever. In his all-too-brief lifetime, Dwayne McDuffie had only just begun his meaningful work that is left for us to continue.

Thank you all in advance for your contributions and for sharing Dwayne’s vision."

I've donated to the cause, and you should too!  Here is the link to the GoFundMe campaign: https://www.gofundme.com/DwayneMcDuffieFund

And while you are in a reading mood, here are some great articles about Mr. McDuffie...enjoy!

- Help Launch "The Dwayne McDuffie Fund"

- The Wife of Legendary Comic Writer Dwayne McDuffie Wants to Make Sure People Never Forget His Legacy

Comic Con San Diego 2016 Reflections

This year was my fourth year attending San Diego Comic Con.  I first attended in 2010, then again in 2014, 2015 and then 2016.  My first time in 2010 was a part of a road trip and a huge whirlwind experience; my first time in California, first time in Los Angeles, first time in San Diego, first time DRIVING to Las Vegas and so on.  All this in a rental car because my actual car broke down in Medford, Oregon (I'll always remember the name of the city Medford thanks to "Double Indemnity"; unfortunately no one IN Medford ever said to me "I'm a Medford man...").  Maybe one day I'll write a long article about it but for now...2016!

2016 Comic Con in San Diego was the best one yet for me personally!  I got over some of my fears and insecurities, got to hang out with some amazing people and spread the word about "The Supers" project!  Also it was an emotional, soul-searching kind of trip, as I was at one point actually re-considering this whole comic book thing but then not long after, more determined than ever to get this sucker done!  It was quite the emotional ride!

I love attending panels at Comic Con.  I'm not a Hall H guy...I figure whatever exclusive footage they show there will be online soon after.  It's usually my routine at night after getting back to my hotel...check out that day's new trailers online, then go to bed.  I'm not a line-up-for-autographs kind of guy.  Even at smaller cons when it's not that busy, I generally leave "celebrities" alone (although I did get to meet some AWESOME celebrities at this con...more about that later...). 

But again, I love panels!  I love learning things at comic cons.  I tend to gravitate towards panels such as "Comic Book Law School" and writer's panels...I always take notes and get inspired.  At so many panels this year, I would get a sudden inspiration after a simple comment by someone on the panel, then I would type it all into my "Notes" on my iPhone.  Lots and lots of notes for future issues of "The Supers."  It's a wonderful, creative, energetic atmosphere to be around.  So why, at one point, was i ready to give this all up?

I attended the panel for Diamond Distribution.  They were very encouraging to people, asking who in the crowd wanted to self-publish their own books and wanted to have it distributed through Diamond and a bunch of us put our hand up.  These two guys seemed really cool, genuinely loved comic books and wanted to help others accomplish their goals.  Then they changes slides on their power point presentation and the subject was "What NOT to do if you want to be distributed by Diamond...NO SUPER HEROES!"  I was, of course, flattened, like I'd been struck by a speeding train.  Or a powerful bullet, one of the two.  They explained that since DC and Marvel and others were focusing on Super Hero comics, then you shouldn't bother, cause they have the market cornered.  They were nice about it and said "This isn't a set-in-stone rule, but for the most part..." so the door was left open for a really good, eye-catching super hero project.  But it was a slim chance.

This wasn't the first time I'd heard this...in fact many people had told me not to do a Super Hero comic book.  But for some reason THESE GUYS made it ring through my ears.  Why bother?  This project isn't THAT great to be the exception to the rule...nothing I do will ever be THAT great.  And I didn't necessarily want to cry or get really upset...I took the news quite well, I think.  I smiled and exhaled and thought to myself..."Oh well, it was fun while it lasted."  Also "Should I even bother finishing the book?....should I just call it quits now?"

But then a couple of things happened...I had printed off about 200 postcards featuring "The Supers" and dropped about 50 off the first day at the "Free Table" inside the Sails Pavilion.  I walked by later on, around noon as I was heading to a panel on the otherside of the Convention Center and I notices all my postcards were gone.  I asked the man in charge if he had put them out and he said yes and they were the most popular postcards at the table and asked if I had more with me.  I said no but I had more back at the hotel and would bring more the next morning.  I did that and all four days, the same thing happened...they would quickly be snatched up by people and the whole stack would be gone by noon.  So that felt good.

Then I went to a panel called ".Insights for Independant Creators" that was moderated by Charlotte McDuffie Fullerton (wife of one of my writing heroes, Dwayne McDuffie and quite a great writer herself!) and on the panel was a friend of mine, Hannibal Tabu, so it was a no-brainer for me.  Also on the panel was a writer/artist named Russell Nohelty (@russellnohelty on Twitter)...he took over the panel, and was quite adament about EVERYTHING he said.  I kinda was worried he was coming off a bit rude at first, but then I slowly realised he was just intense and incredibly passionate about what he was talking about.  Later, he became even more intense and said (going off memory, this is what I remember he said) "I made a graphic novel, ten years ago, it put me $10,000 in debt.  But then I made a second graphic novel, and it put me another $10,000 in debt.  But then the books got around, I went to comic cons with them, I got to meet people and opportunities came from that.  Sure I was $20,000 in debt, but who cares about that?  And right now, today in 2016, I am at San Diego Comic Con, on a PANEL, with published books and more work coming my way.  So my point is, MAKE YOUR BOOK!  MAKE YOUR GRAPHIC NOVEL!  MAKE YOUR COMIC BOOK!  It might take ten years but you'll get to be on a panel at comic con and be working in the industry!  Trust me, it's worth it!"

Now, I was rejuvenated!  I wanted to run up and hug him but I didn't cause he was still intense and kinda scary but he had said exactly what I needed to hear!  Really, in this life we live today, when aren't we going to be in debt?  If I don't finish this book, I might not have as much debt in ten years but I will have regret and wonder about "what if?"

So hopefully The Supers will be finished soon, books will be printed and after you are done reading this you will be able to purchase The Supers #1.  Cause this book is going to be completed.  Not just because I want to...Cause I HAVE TO!

BLOG #1 - Why Not?

So why at this point in my life am I self-publishing a comic book?  Why not? 

I have been fascinated by comic books my whole life.  I remember going into a general store in a small town in Northern BC in Canada, seeing a "spinner rack" full of comic books and wanting all of them.  I settled on an issue of World's Finest, the Superman/Batman monthly team up book.  They were fighting Dr. Double-X.  A Google search tells me it was #276.  Also in that book, Green Arrow was involved in a prison riot, another story starred Zatanna, another starred Hawkman and yet another starred the Captain Marvel (Shazam) family.  All this for $1; for "Non-stop action Cover to Cover!"  That's the first comic I remember owning.  And soon after, I had many more comics, boxes of them!  I remember getting ready for a sleepover at a friends' house, he had told me to bring some comics, and I couldn't decide which one to bring, so I brought them all!  Somehow they managed to all fit into my backpack!  Can't do that today!

World's Finest Comics #276 - $1 of Non-Stop Action Cover to Cover!

My favourite was always Justice League of America, the George Perez era!  To this day, when I think of the Justice League (or The New Teen Titans for that matter) I think of Perez's designs.  They filled my dreams with adventures starring the greatest superheroes in the world!  I vividly remember reading #212 over and over again, as it was basically one long fight scene, very little dialogue (ironic for me, as you'll get to know my work) and no context...from page #1 the entire JLA must team up, in groups of two or three, of course, all over the world to fight off an alien invasion.  I'm sure there was a reason the aliens were invading (it had to do with THAT MAN in the middle of the cover!) but I didn't care!

Justice League of America #212 by George Perez

After school I remember getting on my bike and as a "latch-key kid" (a kid with two parents who worked, no one waiting for me at home) I could go to my favorite used book store/comic store and look at the comics.  I would stand there going through all the comics, the covers at first, make a stack and look at them all.  The store manager, Roz, says now that she never minded, as I would always take care of the books and when I was done, I would put them back neatly where I found them. 

One book I also loved was DC Comics Presents, a monthly book where Superman took turns teaming with every DC superhero/heroine and sometimes even villain in the universe!  Superman was always my favorite (I never really got why people liked Batman, still to this day really...) and I would always love his adventures teaming up with He-Man and the Masters of the Universe, The Phantom Stranger AND The Joker (all in one issue!), THE GLOBAL GUARDIANS (more on them later) and O.M.A.C.  Even the Legion of Substitute Heroes got a chance to team up with the Man of Steel!  The covers, of course always got my attention.  Whether it was Superman and Wonder Woman making out in front of the Washington Monument or Supes and Shazam punching each other at just the right moment, the covers were what initially got my attention.

DC Comics Presents #61

The more I look back at the covers that caught my attention the most, they had something in common...usually they featured Superman throwing a punch, or about to throw a punch.  Something that simple fascinated me. 

Another comic book I loved was the New Teen Titans, also by George Perez but by Marv Wolfman and, unlike the action heavy JLA, who left the character development to their characters to their name sake's titles, TT was about action but also emotion!  We got to know them as people, and part of that reason was they lived together, dated each other, were like family...they were still discovering their powers!  The Judas Contract storyline hit me like a ton of bricks!  Robin became Nightwing, finally his own man!  Now comics weren't just about action but also I cared about the characters!  Their villains were badass!  Deathstroke, Slade Wilson, HIVE and The Fearsome Five were all badass!

The New Teen Titans #8

But when it came to INFLUENCE, nothing comes close to the BWAHAHAHA era of the Justice League International.  After the 1st DCU reboot, Crisis on Infinite Earths (long story, you probably know it) all the titles were relaunched and alot of the DC big names were off limits, so the creative team of Keith Giffin, J.M. DeMatteis and Kevin Macguire had to take a rag-tag group of superheroes and do something DIFFERENT with them.  Batman was allowed, along with Jonn Jonzz and Black Canary from the old JLA, add Blue Beetle, Mr. Miracle and Oberon, Green Lantern Guy Gardner, Booster Gold, Rocket Red, Captain Atom and newcomer Maxwell Lord and have them not only have some great adventures (largely forgotten now) but the biggest ingredient was HUMOUR!  It was genuinely LAUGH OUT LOUD funny! 

Justice League #1 (remember this cover!) :)

I remember in particular reading issue #8, an issue where the JLI don't fight villains but MOVE INTO THEIR NEW HQ!  That's the entire issue!  It was only about them moving and all the humor and misadventures that came along with that!  SUPERHEROES ON MOVING DAY!  It was amazing!  I laugh just thinking about it now...when Mr. Miracle crashes the new JLI jet into the roof...great stuff!

Justice League International #8

Later the League expanded to two teams, another one called Justice League Europe, who would tangle with another former super hero team, The Global Guardians!  The Guardians included superheroes from countries all over the world!  Godiva from England!  The Wild Huntsman from Germany!  Green Flame from Brazil!  Jack O'Lantern from Ireland!  Rising Sun from Japan!  Icemaiden from Iceland!  The Olympian from Greece!  These heroes didn't get their own series, so they appeared here and there, and when they did, I would grab that comic immediately!  I remember as a kid collecting The Super Friends comic and in particular loving the two-part story where the Super Friends have to team up with the Global Guardians to SAVE VILLAINS!  Craziness, of course, ensued!

View fullsize

Super Friends #45 & #46 featuring The Global Guardians! How could you see this cover and NOT buy it!

The Global Guardians caught my attention and I've been fascinated with the idea of other superheroes ever since.  I mean, why were all the superheroes American?  And white, for that matter?  What's up with that?  And then later, I fell in love with another book, The Birds of Prey and one character in particular, ORACLE!

Birds of Prey, at first by Chuck Dixon but made famous by Gail Simone!

Oracle, the paralysed former-Batgirl Barbara Gordon, still wanting to fight crime but unable to physically, becomes a computer hacker and field leader for The Birds of Prey, a team that at first consisted of Black Canary but later included Huntress and several other great female characters.  I loved the early adventures, with Oracle sending Canary on covert missions all over the world, their banter together, the trust that forms between them despite Canary not knowing who Oracle really is, and that moment they finally meet in issue #21 is historical!

Birds of Prey #21 "Call me Barbara"

I loved Oracle as a character, but later I would find out that she was more than just a comic book character.  Oracle was one of the few characters in wheelchairs (without powers, I might add) and she meant something to ALOT of people.  Especially after DC Comics did their 2nd (3rd?) reboot with The New 52 and took Oracle away from us and put Barbara back in the Batgirl suit.  Alot of issues came to the front in those days...it was the first time I really felt the power of the Internet and Social media.  Why couldn't there be an Oracle?  Why aren't there more Black Superheroes?  Latino superheroes?  Gay or LGBT superheroes?  Canadian superheroes? Coincidentally around that same time I started a podcast, Trilogy Comes in 3, later Trilogy Spoilers!, and got to vent my frustrations.  But somewhere along the way, I decided to not just complain about it, but to do something about it.

I had wanted to write a comic book for years.  I always loved ensemble casts, even when I wrote screenplays or plays, I just got bored writing one character.  I loved having three, four, five characters in scenes for them to play off of.  I know that came from my love of the Justice League but also The Teen Titans, The Outsiders and many other team books.  So a team book was what I wanted to do.  Being Canadian meant that there HAD to be a Canadian on the team!  And I loved the idea of this team not being THAT TEAM, being a few notches below the top guys, the type of superheroes who might be watching an alien invasion on TV rather than stopping it themselves...there was humor there, I thought.  And there had to be HUMOR!  Everything in 2011 in comics was DEAD SERIOUS!  Even when they rebooted the Justice League International, it was serious.  No jokes, no lighter tone...nothing.  Comics should never take itself too seriously.  If anyone was going to be doing a "Brokeback" pose, it was the guys!  If anyone was going to be "fridged", it was going to be a dude! 

Fridging in The Supers...

And if a character wore a skimpy costume, it was for a good reason!   Characters will die and come back!  The team will have more women than men, have black people, LGBT heroes, a hero in a wheelchair, a hero with alopecia, a hero who is balding and has a beer gut, a hero who texts during fights, a hero who has a normal body compared to "normal people" but in a typical super-outfit, feels self-conscious...like normal people!  Cause everyone deserves to have a hero of their own!

So The New 52 happened in summer of 2011.  Here I am, on Canada Day of 2016, launching the website for The Supers: 3rd Best Superhero Team in the World!  It's been a long five years, working with the amazing Ricky Gunawan, the artist who draws what my brain writes.  And I am very proud of what The Supers have become!  I hope you enjoy it!

The Supers #1 cover...