The Source Code

I'm sure it will come as no surprise to you that I am not the target market for Jake Gyllenhaal.  It took my teenage daughter to get me to sit down and watch him. I get that she is in the target market group-- and I will watch any movie with someone I care about, whether I would pick up the movie on my own or not. Elisa is as high on that list as anyone in the world. So, I found myself sitting to watch Jake-- target market or not.

The movie we sat down to watch together was "Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time."  The most wondrous thing about watching these kinds of movies is that I am with someone I love.  That, in itself, changes the entire experience. But the second most wondrous thing is that when you watch a movie with extremely low expectations, they are usually surpassed. Jake did a much better job than I expected, and the movie was really nicely done.

He did not impress me enough to go get "October Sky," "Lovely and Amazing" or "Bubble Boy," but maybe someday I will catch one or all of them with someone I love-- and I might even enjoy one or all of them. I can't get myself to watch "Brokeback Mountain," no matter how sweet the love story may be. I'm on the fence about "Donnie Darko." I think I may have seen some or all of it in separate sessions along the way (in my HBO years). 

Since we were called away before the end of  "Love and Other Drugs," I doubt I'll get to see all of it.   The story may turn out to be ok, but... another one I love refuses to sit down to the rest of it.  It was too graphic for my wife, Sallie's, taste.

Having been in the Marines, I may also get around to the likes of  "Jarhead" and "Brothers." But not yet.

Which brings me to a movie I love for a myriad of reasons- Jake Gyllenhaal actually being one of them. Jake does a good job in "The Source Code."  The story appealed to me so much that even if Mr. Bean played Jake's role, I would still enjoy it.  OK, maybe not, but point made.

I do not remember anything objectionable in it.  Maybe some language. I believe it was/ is PG13. But then, so was "Cellular," and I am still reeling from that call.  WHAT do these ratings people look for?  I think John Travolta called it best in his "Get Shorty" sequel "Be Cool."  He plays a movie producer who is tired of the same ol' same ol' and he gives a great dig to the ratings guys. Actually, there is a ton of wit in both movies.  I may sit Sallie down to watch both flicks back to back.  They are NOT Disney, but they aren't raunchy or gory either (I think they are both PG13).  I'll get back to you on how that goes.

But back to "The Source Code."  Good story.  Well told. Solid action from opening to closing credits.  It's science fiction, but not overly so.  It's action, but not graphically or gratuitously so.  The characters are engaging and played well.

This, of course, is my kind of movie to begin with. I recommend that you watch this movie the way that I do-- as a theme park ride.  It is about a theory, so you might be able to poke holes anywhere. You could catch yourself saying, "no way."  But that would be like saying, "If we could fly, there is no way we could do a summersault in mid air, or you would lose your balance and free fall."  Your theories are your theories, and mine are mine.  The time to discuss them is AFTER the movie- not during.

Try the "suspension of disbelief" concept. I may have mentioned this before, but it's worth repeating. I got it from, "Basic Instinct." Yes there was more to that movie than the police room interrogation of Sharon Stone's character. And, ftr (for the record) if I subscribed to PLAYBOY, I would read the articles. Sharon played an author. She wrote-- or maybe Michael Douglas' cop partner was just reading one of her interviews, I do not recall-- that it is not the job of an author to make the reader believe something- rather, the job is to create a "suspension of disbelief." I think that is cool, no matter who said it.

So forget about Newton, and Einstein, et al, and have a great time watching "The Source Code."

If the world doesn't end tonight, or "The Day After Tomorrow,"  I'll see you again soon.

Ciao!

Fred

Changes in my Movie Watching

Hey There!

It's been too long since I posted, but a few events have transpired since my last post-- very few of them having anything to do with movies-- and without going into great detail, I will simply say that it feels good to be in front of my pc again.

The most significant events to report are the finding, courting and marrying the girl of my dreams, Sally Marie.  I recognize that I owe some of my good fortune to the fact that she had misunderstandings about me, but she said, "yes," and I'll take it. So many things she knew about me- but so many things were yet to be learned.  I hope what she knows to be true about my core values will outweigh what she misunderstood about my idiosyncrasies.

Her first surprise was that my favorite movies were not made by Disney.  I had the good sense to sit her down to watch, "Kiss Kiss Bang Bang," before she said yes to marrying me. If you missed my, "Kiss Kiss Bang Bang" post (Called, "What is Your Favorite Movie?" posted 12/12/10), you can find it listed in my earlier posts. Read it, Watch it, Learn it, Love it. Enough said. Except to say that she watched it (and she was embarrassed to be laughing loud and often, btw) and married me anyway- so I am not solely to blame for her every misunderstanding pertaining to my twisted nature.

I did reciprocate by watching, "Ariel's Beginning," the prequel to, "The Little Mermaid."  Of course, my eldest is named, Ariel, so I know all those movies well. And, for the record, Ariel was born WAY before, "The Little Mermaid" came out, so she was NOT named after the movie (It was a '70's song by Dean Friedman, if you must know...).

I don't think Sallie and I will keep score on which type of movie we watch -- maybe we will, I don't know-- but I will sprinkle some "Sallie selections" in my future posts, regardless.

In any event, it is good to be back.  I look forward to getting more and more posts out here, and hearing more and more from you.

Take care, and come back often...

Regards,
Fred

Wild Target

Hi There,

I have to say I miss the madcap comedies where all I have to do is sit back, watch and laugh.  The kind of movies where I don't have to put on my thinking cap- nothing to try and figure out. Those movies that just unfold.  I might care about which way the plot will twist, but it is not important at all.

Laurel and Hardy movies fit that bill for me.  Abbott and Costello movies do as well. Jerry Lewis and Dean Martin also made movies like that. I could be certain that these duos would be entertaining.

The sixties produced a ton of comedies. Comedies with no serious plots, just pure fun and riotous situations. Peter Sellers, as I've mentioned before, is in this group. Jack Lemmon, Tony Curtis and a host of others enteretained me like, it seems, no one else can these days.

These days (as I so often lament) it just seems all about the graphics and "reality" of it all. Story seems secondary. It is just so important that the film is "believable." If someone is shot, it must be bloody and graphic... and on and on.

In the old, old westerns the actor would just point a fake gun at his rival and pull the "trigger." An unrealitic sound would be heard and the opponent would drop (maybe after grabbing his wound) and we would know he was hit. Imagination could still kick in. Now, the phrase, "nothing left to the imagination" is not just applicable to the way a woman dresses.

There is a place for graphics, but I long for the good old Keystone Kops type movies.  The ones I may even see the pratfalls coming, but I laugh anyway. Okay, I guess I have ranted enough-- the old days are gone, and I am going to have to deal with it.

However, I have heard it said that the Brits are a bit behind Hollywood. I think they say it in a negative way, but it has a positive spin for me. It means they might still make some comedies the way I like them. Some of the ones you may have heard of might be, Hot Fuzz, Snatch, Death at a Funeral (not the remake with Chris Rock), and In the Loop.

My latest pearl is "Wild Target" with Emily Blunt and Bill Nighy. I think it is out in DVD stores as a new release. I popped it in and just loved the characters and the story. It doesn't look big budget to me (Let's see- the Pound versus the Dollar... no, I don't think that matters at all in this case). Still, I delighted in the timing and the texture of the movie.

The story isn't overly original, but the characters are fresh. And I found it easy to sit back and let the story unfold as it may. There's a hitman (Nighy), some bad guys and a possible love interest/ target (Blunt). There are several nice locations and several outrageous situations.  The banter is quite amusing. The facial expressions are classic and and the sight gags are most welcome.  All in all, a most delicious jaunt.

Of course, it's british, so some of the humor you may not care for (or even get), but I don't think it will detract from your enjoyment. If you haven't seen a british comedy (outside of Monty Python), it may open a whole new genre for you to explore.

Give "Wild Target" a look-see and let me know what you think, okay??  Ta ta!!

Warm regards,
Fred T Wyrick

The Replacements

Happy Super Bowl Sunday!

There are several football movies that come to mind on this long-awaited day.  Among them, On Any Sunday, North Dallas Forty, Leatherheads, The Blindside, Jerry Maguire, Varsity Blues, The Best of Times, The Longest Yard (and the remake), and The Little Giants. I could say The Last Boy Scout was a football movie- but that might be a stretch. Wayans was a QB, and he did throw a killer pass, but we'll stop here.

My favorite football movie to watch around this time is, "The Replacements." It has all the elements of the super bowl show- it just goes beyond the borders of network TV. Even the TV commentators in this film- veteran team, Pat Summerall and John Madden- get to call scab games beyond their TV contractual limits.

As you know by now, I love a good story. To me, the best addition to a good story is colorful characters- not CGI enhancements. "The Replacements" has more than its share of colorful characters. Each one is steeped in richness. They all come together to make a great comedy. I never tire of watching it. I reach for it every year around super bowl time, and laugh again and again.

The basic story line is the NFL players go on strike, so NFL management brings in replacement players.  How about that? For once, the title is actually descriptive and accurate. Wow, what a concept. Keanu Reeves plays the replacement Quarterback. Gene Hackman plays the coach who recruited him. Jack Warden (the "old man" character for every movie since about 1962) plays the team owner.

Every replacement player has a story. The idea that they could even become a team in time for the playoffs seems ludicrous, but I always enjoy seeing how they attempt it.

They even bring in replacement cheer leaders (what is football without them?). The cheer captain becomes the love interest for Keanu (shock).  The others are just as colorful as the players- and certainly more attractive. Not an accident, I am thinking. Besides the obvious, they actually add to the comedic strategies of scab football.

I am not mocking Susan when I say this movie really is about relationships.  In fact, there are too many relationships to count. I focus on different ones each time I watch it. "The Replacements" is not a deep movie- it never claimed to be one- but there really are some truths to ruminate.

The truths are for you to accumulate and walk away with, but you may miss most of them the first time though. Still, I would say this movie is a success even if you miss the truths-- you'll miss them because you are laughing. Laughing is always a good thing, in and of itself.  Anything more is cake in my book.

If you don't like Keanu Reeves, you may want to miss this movie. The cast is awesome, but the whole story revolves around him. If you can, however, I suggest that there is enough to enjoy that you will like this movie, whatever your take on Keanu.

I hope your team wins the super bowl, and I hope you like "The Replacements."

Warm regards,
Fred T Wyrick

What Did You Do In The War, Daddy?

Hey, Hey!

I know I'm starting to show my age (OK, maybe not just starting, but I'm noticing it more... fair enough?) but I sure long for some good, old fashioned comedies. Today, comedies lack comedy. There are some comedic themes out there- some of them very repetitive- but most modern comedies are sadly lacking.  In fact, more than once this week, as I started to unfold a scene from a movie to a listener, and he would break into laughter, I would say something like, "Yeah, the concept is actually funnier than the scene was." How sad is that?

When Blake Edwards died last year, we lost another great. And I seem to be the only one looking for someone to replace him. Most of us know him from the "Pink Panther" series, and some other Peter Sellers movies. My favorite movie of his was, "What Did You Do In The War, Daddy?" It's been too long since I have seen it, and I think tonight, in his honor, I will revisit this comedy classic.

Made in '65 or '66, "What Did You Do In The War, Daddy?" sits amidst the Peter Sellers classics. It stars James Coburn, and has great character actors like Dick Shawn (Hitler in the original "The Producers"), Carroll O'Connor (yes, Archie Bunker), and Henry Morgan (M.A.S.H. Col Potter).

I do not recall any CGI in the movie. In some of the fight scenes, they visibly swing "air punches" that could never have connected. As I think back on it, it actually reminds me more of a play on stage than a movie. The choreography is so fake that modern day audiences might be offended.  No arms detach from bodies during explosions (This is kinda-sorta a war movie, after all). I don't even remember if it was shot on location or a back lot set. Why, there might even be some contradictions to authentic uniforms, equipment and such.

What I do remember is laughing so hard that none of that mattered. I enjoyed it all- from setting up the story to the ending credits. I threw out all worries of authenticity, and even believability, and went with the story. I got sucked deeper and deeper into the madness.


The basic story is an army captain is ordered to take a town in Italy. The Italians surrender immediately- without a fight at all- if they are allowed to have a festival first. Of course, regulations prohibit anything of the kind, but his Leutenant (Played by Coburn) finally convinces him that the logic of it overrides the illegality of it. Ends justifying the means. From there, it just gets crazy.

The subject matter is for adults, but it is subtly displayed and referred to. Well, that may not be entirely true, but at least there is nothing objectionable on screen.  Less is more, in this case. I can remember laughing at lines, at physical gags and at situational absurdities.  The whole movie just seems to work for me, and I cannot wait to pop some corn, park in front of the screen and laugh the night away.

They say laughter is the best medicine.  I tend to agree- it certainly has been true in my case. My wish for you is a life full of love and laughter.  Of course, I would want for much of that laughter to be generated by you and yours personally.  But you could do worse than to augment your life's laughter with a little hollywood magical laughter.  And, "What Did You Do In The War, Daddy?" would certainly fit the bill.

Enjoy your day and your life.

Warm regards,
Fred T Wyrick

The Notebook

Hello movie fan!

A few years ago, I was fortunate enough to be dragged to the theater to see a "chick flick." As a rule, I don't mind chick flicks, but I prefer to see them on DVD. Why waste the big screen? Big screens were made for explosions, jet packs and afterburners, car crashes and the like-- not tears rolling down mascara-streaked cheeks.  I get the concept of anguish, and DVD is about the right dose of visual for me.

Still, I know I am not the only type of movie goer (some even want 3D horror flicks), so I chose to go along. I did say I was fortunate to be dragged to a "chick flick," because this one was called, "The Notebook." I agreed to go because James Garner was in it. I love Garner. And no disrespect to the guy, but I loved James Garner playing James Garner-- I didn't even know he could act until I saw "The Notebook."

James Garner is always entertaining to me.  His sarcasm and wit was probably instrumental shaping my lifestyle and decisions as a youngster- including many for which I spent in the equivalent of modern day "time outs." But we'll stay away from those, for the time being. As "Maverick," his smile and one liners made me laugh.  As "Rockford," he traded a horse and cowboy hat for a Trans Am. Yet, his smile and wit still made me laugh- even when he was getting punched for them. In "Space Cowboys," his smile and wit culminated in "later years" humor. Then came the "Ya Yas" and he tried something new- playing mediator.

I figured James was going to do something similar in this second chick flick. He shocked me completely by doing something I had never seen him do in all my years as a fan- he was acting! Again, no disrespect, but James Garner can act- who knew? He took me on an emotional roller coaster that I was not prepared for- and I thoroughly enjoyed it.

The movie is out on DVD, and I own it. I am sure you have seen it (either willingly or otherwise) but if you haven't- see it.  It is amazingly good. It is based on a book- which is probably better, but so what?- but this movie stands alone. It is well directed and well acted. It is told in flashback fashion-- actually the same couple is presented in the present and in the story of their past during the WWII era.

I enjoyed both sets of actors and actresses. I was as engrossed in their past story as I was their present story. It is real and easy to believe. More importantly, it is compelling.

This was truly a "journey-is-more-important-than-the-destination" kind of movie. I just found myself being led deeper and deeper into the story.

I am enjoying Rachel McAdams more and more as well. She is an actress.  She may well become a movie star, but I hope not. It may be good for her in the short term, but I find very few stars who act.  It may be the fault of Hollywood and the biz- for for whatever reason, very few stars act anymore. Rachel, up to this point, has played a variety of roles- and she nails each one.

I even went back to "The Hot Chick" with what's his face because I was so impressed with her portrayal in "The Notebook," I wanted to see more of her work. I'm not suggesting you do this, but when I did, the little bit that she was on screen, was really good work. Rachel McAdams is here for real, my friend.

Pick up "The Notebook" and enjoy it with someone you love. Oh, this movie is rated PG-13 (The Notebook, not Hot Chick), and I do not remember anything objectionable (but remember the source here, OK?), but having said that- there is much in the theme of the movie, and topics that arise, that I would not expose young children to. They would probably be bored anyway- after all, it is still a chick flick.

Warm regards,
Fred T Wyrick

The Last Shot

Buon giorno!!

Today, I had Italian at a nice little Italian ristorante with all the art on the wall and such.  Sophia Loren in black and white.  Lovely old photos of famillies dining, laughing and singing.  Very nice.  The food was good as well. But as I looked around, my mind kept going back to the news release the other day regarding the FBI and the Italian polizia working together to arrest the largest number of mafia members in history. Over a hundred, I think they said. The release listed all these colorful names of the arrested members.  It was a very big deal.

While eating Italian, looking at so many cinematic 60's photos and thinking of the mafia, my mind drifted to a nice little movie I enjoyed so much when it came out 6 or 8 years ago. I'm sure more dining guests thought about "Goodfellas" or "Married to the Mob" or some much more popular movie- or, at least, more mainstream- but my mind just doesn't work that way.

No, my mind settled on, "The Last Shot," with Alec Baldwin and Mathew Broderick. It is (looesely?) based on a true story of an FBI agent bent on catching a major mafioso. This agent (Baldwin) hatches a scheme to make a movie-- well, pretend to make a movie- to get the transportation industry involved. Transportation in the east was apparently mafia run. So, his pitch was, pretend to make a movie, trap the mafioso in a transportation fix attempt. This was the plan he got the FBI to sign off on. It kinda sorta makes sense, right??

I can still remember my first viewing. My nephew, Shawn, and I saw it on the rental shelf and, though neither of us had ever heard of it, we knew (and liked) many members of the cast. I don't remember if the movie box told me, or if I found out later, the director, Jeff Nathanson, had never directed before, but had written many successful screenplays ("Catch Me if You Can," "The Terminal," "Rush Hour 2") and he had written this screenplay as well. Nothing ventured, nothing gained, so we took it home.

In terms of shock factor for us, the list goes: 1. "Pulp Fiction;" 2. (Tie) "Usual Suspects" and "From Dusk Till Dawn;"  and 3. "The Last Shot."  I far prefer "The Last Shot," because I can recommend it to people. It is far less graphic than "Pulp Fiction," has much less profanity than, "Usual Suspects" (which isn't saying much-- almost EVERYTHING has less profanity than, "Usual Suspects.") and isn't as disgusting as, "From Dusk Till Dawn."  So, "The Last Shot," it is...

If you are not insanely hooked on this movie in the first seven minutes, turn it off and watch a basketball game or a soap opera-- this movie will have nothing for you. I do not remember how many times Shawn and I had to grab the remote to ask ourselves what we were watching. Or how many times we were laughing so hard (probably inappropriately, but that's how we are- deal with it) that we missed the ensuing lines and had to back up.

I am going to deviate from the norm (wait, do I have a "norm"?) and set up the beginning of the movie, for you, because I doubt you have ever heard of it.  If you have heard of it, or even more unlikely, seen it, please post something for us to see. I am more than curious about how many of even heard of this flick.

Ok, we pan in on Alec (an FBI agent) duck taped to a swivvel chair. At least three mobsters are trying to beat some info out of him.  I don't remember what they wanted to know, but I assure you they were very intent on obtaining it. One guy picks up a pair of those garden clippers- you know, the kind with one narrowly curved blade and one half-moon blades they use to prune rose bushes?- and convincinces Alec that if he doesn't tell them what they want to know, he will start removing fingers.

Now, we pan outside, and we see a video of Alec in the chair displayed on a pc monitor. It is inside a white panel van that every FBI squad uses in surveillance. Alec's team members are watching this, and are overwhelminly distraught, but only one seems anxious to, "get in there," and help their boss out. There is some discussion and differences of opinion, but one agent says something to the effect of, "He hasn't given us the signal.  The last time we went in without a signal, he (Alec) gave me grief for a month.  No way, I'm waiting till I get his signal."

Right then I knew I was hooked. But when the next scene shows Alec coming home after a long day's work, opening his door (which was hard to do with the large bandage from where they reattached his finger) and calling for his dog.  I knew I would not be moving for the next hour and a half. The maid came down the stairs with the bad news:

"Oh, senor, I tried to reach you. Your dog is dead. She committed suicide." This might be considered a spoiler alert, but it isn't.  And from there the movie just gets weird.

It's a very funny movie. I don't think strange would really cover it. And the characters that pop up all the way through just add more color and personality to the madness. I loved Tony Shaloub.  And the Oscar goes to Joan Cusak-- although I don't know what the category should be.  Any suggestions, Shawn??

In any event, I hope you like Italian food, I hope the coinvictions on all the members of the mafia stick (and no, Fred is NOT my real name!..  ok, yes it is... but I don't live here!!), and I hope you can find "The Last Shot." Enjoy it.  Alas, it is not for kids, and I am sure it is rated R.  But it's still a ton of fun.

Until next time, my movie friend.

Warm regards,

Fred T Smith (ok, Wyrick)

 

Out of Sight

Hi there, movie friend!!

I have a few movies on VHS that are so worn out, they don't play evenly any more. And I'm not talking about being faded in just one spot- like when Kevin Kline's wife, Phoebe Cates, steps out of Judge Reinhold's swimming pool in "Fast Times at Ridgemont High."   No, I mean where my whole movie is warped. I keep thinking at any time these VHS movies will get eaten like my old 8 tracks, or even some of my cassette audio tapes. But that usually only happened in my car...

One of these movies is, "Out of Sight," with George Clooney and Jennifer Lopez. Again, I'm guessing this movie came out about 2000 or so.  It is chock full of great characters.Ving Rhames plays Clooney's side kick with a huge idiosyncrasy. Steve Zahn plays Steve Zahn-- but he does it so well. Catherine Keener plays an unlikely airhead (I'm so used to her wit and sarcasm in most of her performances- a ditz is quite the departure). 

Luiz Guzman cracks me up as a 2 (maybe 3, 4 or 5) time loser. Albert Brooks whines like no one else I know- save Charles Grodin-- but in this small dose, I can appreciate his talent. Dennis Farina plays Jennifer's dad and Michael Keaton plays her boyfriend. They play off eachother so well-- I would love to see their deleted scenes and outtakes.  Of course, I don't have them on VHS, and I have yet to see the DVD. But something tells me the transfer of the movie will not include those kind of pearls.

Another gem in this movie is the character played by Don Cheadle.  If you haven't gained an appreciation for this guy, you need to see some more movies until you do. I love Dennis Farina, but he plays the same character in everything-- you have to really pay attention to know if he's playing a good guy or a bad guy. I love him, regardless, but I can't say Dennis shows range. 

Range is Don Cheadle playing a thug in "Out of Sight." Range is Cheadle playing an enlightened crime boss living in The Bahamas in, "After the Sunset,"  then playing a complicated devout Muslim in "Traitor." From "Iron Man" to "Hotel Rwanda;" from, "Crash" to "Hotel for Dogs," Don Cheadle works his craft. And then he has some fun in the "Ocean 11" series.

"Out of Sight" is really just a love story-- albeit with a twist.  George is a bank robber and Jennifer is the federal cop.  They were made for eachother, right? There is a ton of things going on around them, but all he really wants is a chance- and to not to go back to prison, of course. But you can't blame him for that, can you?

My hat is off to the entire cast for making such a simple story so enjoyable to watch. The movie bounces around from place to place and person to person, but I don't find it distracting. The banter even helped me believe each and every scene was plausible.

It's not a new release, and it probably doesn't have extras or bonus features, but the movie is a gem.  Check it out.  If you are one of the few who saw it, let me know what you thought.

Warm regards,
Fred T Wyrick

Star Trek, Galaxy Quest

Hello again!!!

I watched the new DVD "Star Trek," and I really enjoyed it.  I always liked the original TV series with William Shatner and the crew, but I wouldn't say I am a Trekkie. To my way of thinking, a Trekkie is someone who knows a lot of trivia as well and stats-- facts and figures about the ship (USS Enterprise) the planets, the populations of said planets, and on and on.

I enjoyed the story- telling of the TV show.  It was low-budget, but that didn't matter to me.  I loved the banter among the cast members.  It was never a concern whether a cast member would die in their peril of the week, or even how they would escape. It was the relationships they forged-- the laughter and tears they shared-- that I enjoyed so much, and they probably shaped my view of the world.  And I daresay we have cellular  flip-phones because we saw them in action on TV every week (Kirk out).

You probably know by now, that I am not a fan of remakes.  I never watched any of the new versions of TV Star Trek-- Voyager, NG, DS9,  or SVU (Oh wait, that was a different show altogether).  But that fact aside, I enjoyed the new story of "Star Trek."  I think it holds its own for those who grew up with the TV original or those who have never heard of the TV original-- and all those in between.

Sitting down to watch this movie was akin to going to a concert by "The Who," or "The Rolling Stones," in that, their task is to fit so much into so little.  Have you ever walked out of a, "(pick your group here)," concert and said,-- to yourself or to someone out loud-- "but they didn't play, '(insert one of your favorite songs by that band here)!'"

I have so many favorite lines from the show.  I couldn't help but wonder how they would include all of them and keep the story fresh.  I will have to go back to see just how many were referenced or used.  But the point is, the story gives due homage to the past and yet stays fresh. Kudos to them all.

BTW (a tangent here), a great spoof of the Star Trek shows/ movies is a movie from a while back, called "Galaxy Quest." I saw it on VHS, so I'm guessing it's from 2000 or so. This comedy/ parody starred Tim Allen as William Shatner-- I mean a fictional actor who starred in a cult sci-fi series-- who goes on tour with the rest of the cast of the long-discontinued show.  At one such cult gathering, Tim is approached by real aliens who recruit him to save the real universe from disaster.

Of course, with all the miscommunications (which I love as a plot device), the story continues to be a wonderful joyride. "Galaxy Quest" has an awesome cast, and, just as with the TV show, it isn't as much about the story as it is the banter. The guy who plays Monk on TV (Tony Shaloub, I think) plays the fictional Scotty.  His portrayal alone is worth my price of admission.

The common thread in all these works is that story and banter override the technical stuff of science fiction.  I do not delve into quantum physics or believability of the stories.  I just let the stories unfold and enjoy them immensely.


Unless you are a Trekkie puritan (and even then I don't think you'd be disappointed with this version) or just can't stand the Science-Fiction genre (hmmm, even then I don't think you'd be disappointed), I think you'll enjoy, "Star Trek."

Check out "Star Trek" and "Galaxy Quest" and let me know what you think.

Live long and prosper, my friend.

Warm regards,
Fred T Wyrick
 

RED

Hi movie friend!!

I don't often take the time to see movies at the theater. Besides being expensive (who can go without the #1 Popcorn/Drink Combo?), there are not too many high-quality or must-see (for me) movies being released these days. Please remember, I mentioned my movie-watching categories (see my page, "Welcome to my Blog!!" if you missed it earlier) as "theater," "$1.00 theater" and "DVD."

A movie I consider to be a "theater" movie, is "Red" with Bruce Willis (and an all-star cast). It is PG-13.  Rare for Bruce, but he pulls this one off magnificently. Keep in mind that Bruce and I go way back (Moonlighting), and I would probably pay money to see him read the Yellow Pages onstage. Still, I enjoyed the ride from start to finish.

I am extremely pleased that he plays a retiree, and not a college kid or something.  Bruce is comfortable in his skin. As I think about it, that fact is probably his best trait. Neither of us wants to go back to high school-- we look forward, not back.

Having said that, I probably like his refusal to grow up just about as much.  Neither of us wants to be stereo-typed into being old guys with garden hoses, yelling, "Get off my lawn." (Wait, Clint made that comment in "Gran Torino." He pulled it off ok-- it's just not Bruce or me)

I like to think that Bruce and I both know the difference between childlike (good) and childish (not-so-good). We choose to keep our wonderment of life-- as through a child's eyes-- as we move from one phase into the next of our lives.  We take life seriously, but we don't have to be serious all the time-- or even most of the time.

In point of fact, the entire cast seems to have a ball in this movie. Helen Mirren, Morgan Freeman, John Malkovich and even Mary Louise Parker (who I can only take in very small doses) all make the movie fun. I don't need much of an excuse to break out into laughter, so for me, this movie is a mood-altering drug (in a good way-- salt and hot butter are not controlled substances, are they??).

I do not have any lines or spoiler alerts to insert here.  I'll just say that RED stands for Retired, Extremely Dangerous.  Bruce puts his own twist on putting together an all-star squad to preserve life as they know it.

I do not know if you still have time to see "Red" at the theater or not.  I do not know if you categorize movies the way I do or not.  But I do know that I will rent the DVD when it comes out.  I do know I will share it with as many people who will watch it with me. And I do know that if you have started to identify with me, or if you have found yourself liking some of my movie selections from previous posts... then you will like, "Red."

Hit the theater if you have time (and some discretionary income) or rent the DVD when it comes out (No, I don't know when-- I'm not a critic,  nor am I privy to such info).  When you do-- or if you have already seen it-- post a comment here and let me/ us know what you thought, ok??

All my best to you!!

Warm regards,
Fred T Wyrick

Up In The Air

Greetings from California!

I am home for ten days. I am very excited to be here. My wish for this new year is that all of you will be where you want to be, do want you want to do and be doing it with the people you want to be doing it with. Enjoy your life.

Those of you who know me well, know that I always finish a movie I start.  And you also know I am always able to find a pearl or a takeaway.  Most people I know would not be willing to sit through an entire movie for one such pearl, but I enjoy the experience.

One of my latest such movies is, "Up In The Air," with George Clooney.  I'm sure it is no coincidence that it comes to mind right after a flight from Houston to LAX.  It also isn't hard to believe that I would find it appropriate, since I am a limo driver when I am not typing on my keyboard.

Add these two facts together, and you discover I am either flying myself, or driving someone to or from a flight. No wonder I found so many pearls in this movie about a super-elite, frequent flier.

In this movie, George Clooney spends about 322 days in the air.  His only complaint is that it means he is on the ground for 43 days a year.  He is truly in his element as a traveling businessman.  He thrives at airports, hotels and rental car kiosks.

He is totally inept, however, in places like home, family gatherings and social interaction out of the business arena.  He's like a great military hero who cannot adjust to peacetime (out of his element) or the hero cop who fails at home, and so on.

The movie is not uplifting, but it is a good character study.  I consider, "Up in the Air," to be more of a project than a joyride.  There is bound to be something in this movie with which you can identify- character or event- and probably others that will be completely out in left field.

Without analysis, someone will say this movie has no point, or that this movie is slow, or that this movie is pointless-- and for them, I would say they would be correct.

I am not recommending this movie, but I loved it-- and not just because I am a huge Clooney fan.  I'm not sure how I became such a Clooney fan, but I found myself enjoying his movies time and again.

Most of my favorite Clooney movies are more of the roller-coaster-ride type movies that I enjoy so much-- Out of Sight (my all-time fave with Jennifer Lopez), Dusk til Dawn (don't watch if anything at all offends you; this movie is as offensive as Quentin Tarantino could make it), Leatherheads (comedic history of football movie) and Oh Brother, Where Art Thou (updated version of Homer's "The Odyssey"- you'll love it or hate it... and I don't know you well enough to know which it'll be), or the Ocean 11/12/13 series.

Granted, he did some Redford-wanna-be movies-- Three Kings, Syriana and Michael Clayton-- and they weren't so bad.

The bad ones were "Men who Stare at Goats" and "Burn After Reading."

"The American" fell somewhere between the bad and Redford.

And yet, I still think that anyone should be allowed to make any movie they want.  I am not the only target market, so I do not think that all movie scripts should be passed by me first.  I don't think  the First Amendment was ratified specifically to protect movie makers... but it doesn't exclude them either, right??  I may have to look into that, but for now, I'll assume they are covered by it.

I actually used one of the pearls I extracted from, "Up in the Air" while at IAH airport in Houston this afternoon. In one scene, George gave his new protege a lesson in streamlining the boarding process at airports.  It included buying new luggage, tossing extraneous items, and how to get through security in the shortest amount of time.  I always pack light, but I did use his technique for scanning the security lines, and I saved time in this new light of his.  As vulgar as he made his dissertation sound, profiling to save time getting through security screening actually works.

I won't give details-- it would sound just as vulgar in print, I would guess-- but it's all there for you to see in the movie.

OK, to recap this post:

I like George Clooney, but his movies tend to be offensive and controversial. "Out of Sight" is my favorite Clooney film-- it's a tender romance between a cop (Jennifer Lopez) and a bank robber (Clooney)... ok, maybe not tender, but it's nice. And "Up in the Air" is more of a project than a roller coaster. And lastly, I think you could find "Up in the Air" to be a good character study, and it may even get you through an airport faster on your next flight.

Have a great week end, my movie friend!!

Warm regards,
Fred T Wyrick

Runaway Jury

Hi There!!

Hope your New Year's was fantastic!!

I just picked up two of my good friends from the airport-- Wayne and Holly-- and (surprise, surprise) we started talking about movies. As I dropped them off, I had to chuckle. Looking back on our conversation, we were all over the board.  We definitely followed a progression, but as we talked about one movie with, "that actor from 'another movie,'" we would talk about a co-star and some of their best work-- which would remind us of another movie or actor-- and so on, until we got home. Of all the movies, actors and lines we discussed, my biggest "takeaway" from it all was:

If you think the way I TYPE is convoluted... you should spend an hour with me, "in person." I promise you the way I talk is even more so.  I have been getting some really good feedback regarding my blog, and I appreciate each and every one of you and your comments. They vary, of course, but my two most common comments are:

1. My writing is convoluted, full of tangents and, perhaps, a bit too hard to follow, and

2. Requests for recommended movies-- even though I've made it clear that I'm no critic.

I'm not sure I can do much about the first group of comments.  As Robin Williams' "Popeye" said, " I yam what I yam." But I will try to do more labeling of my tangents. I have also made an effort to use movie titles or names-- instead of pronouns-- so you can follow what and where I am.  I also try to sum it all up at the end of each post, and I will strive to do even better.  But believe me when I tell you that I am always "all over the board."  Forgive me.

As for the second group, I have been trying to give "recommendations" with certain stipulations.  I will continue in that regard. Holly said something that hit me hard-- she doesn't know it yet-- and I consider it a compliment. So, I will take it under advisement. I'm not quoting her, but her gist was that they know me and so they want to know my opinion. Thank you, Holly, and I'll run with that.

As I said in the car, I feel you just can't go wrong picking a movie with John Cusak- with the exception of 2012, I hear. BTW (by the way, which means I am going on a short tangent), I have decided I will wait until Jan 2013 to rent it. So please, while you are free to post your opinions if you disagree, don't put any spoiler alerts in there. I don't want to know how it ends until I rent it.  Thank you.

I became a huge fan of Cusak in the 80's.  He plays the neurotic perfectly-- I'm not sure what that says about me that I enjoy his performances so much. One of my favorite Cusak lines is from "America's Sweethearts."  I use it almost unconsciously as a comeback when someone asks me if I'm OK. He said, "Yeah, sure, of course, I am-- why??  What have you heard?!!?" It works every time.  Thank you, John.

Among his best works--Say Anything, Grosse Point Blank, Con Air, Midnight in the Garden of Good and Evil, and Serendipity-- "Runaway Jury" may arguably be the best movie of them all. It doesn't hurt that it has a cast including Gene Hackman, Dustin Hoffman and Rachel Weisz.

Based on a John Grisham novel by the same name, the story is compelling (there I go with that "story" thing again... I just love stories). The acting is superb. The pace is both fast and slow--painstakingly fast and slow, actually. I think Alfred Hitchcock would have enjoyed this movie-- just a theory; I don't really know.

It's interesting to me that this was the first time that Gene and Dustin shared the screen. There was nothing in the original script to give them interaction.  In fact, their original set schedules precluded them from it-- at no time were the two actors scheduled to be filming simultaneously. Someone just happened to mention that they were roommates in acting school, yet had never acted together. The director, in his wisdom, said something needed to be done-- it would be a crime to have these two greats in the same movie (a first) and NOT have a scene together.

Something was done.  A scene was written especially for the two legends. Gene Hackman said it best when he said that it was a scary thing that all this hype would hinge on a scene with two old guys in the men's room. Still, it was a great scene, to my way of thinking-- and the fact that it was the only scene with them both made it historical to me.

So, pick up a John Cusak movie and have a good time.  Don't try to stereotype him, though-- mistake; big mistake; huge. Make sure you pick up a comedy if your wanting one.  Or a drama, or a suspense, or a horror-- he does them all. My disclaimer here is that I never said John only does comedies, OK?? He nails the neurotic, but not all his characters are comedic.  Still, I think you can't go wrong picking any one of his works.

In summation, I'm all over the board, I'll try to be better, I'll offer suggestions if you don't hold me to them, John Cusak is one of my favorite actors, and lastly, I think "Runaway Jury" is one of his best movies. Any questions?

Have a great 2011, and come back often, my movie friend.

Warm regards,
Fred T Wyrick