So, yea, you guys! The Hobbit opens this weekend! And I’ve heard it’s really, really long. Like super-long! Like why-did-they-split-it-into-three-movies long!
And that’s great because it means three times as much Watson, it does! (Or, you know, Martin Freeman, whatever.)
Now, being a person who only read The Hobbit once in high school and didn’t particularly like it at the time, I don’t know much about Hobbits except that this song is still awesome. So I was expecting to learn great things from the trailer. And I totally did.
Like Ian McKellan is still the bestest ever, and I want him to be in all the movies all the time.
Other than that, though, I’m not sure.
(I think the trailer was counting on me to be smarter than I am?)
What I could glean, though, is that Bilbo Baggins, who will grow up to be Ian Holm, is visited by Gandalf the Wizard and a whole bucketload of dwarves and maybe a guy who’s supposed to be a human or something? (He seemed taller than the rest, but I didn’t see any pointy ears, but I have to say that he had a lot of hair all over the place, so there might have been pointy ears hiding somewhere.)
And somehow, they talk Bilbo Baggins into going on an adventure of some kind, to claim mumble mumble, part where I couldn’t understand what anyone was saying. And I have to say: More power to them! Go adventuring, you dwarves, wizards, Hobbits and possibly humans! And on the way, I hope you learn the power of proper enunciation!
Also, there’s giants who want to eat Bilbo Baggins, like, don’t they know he’s famous now?, and a scary cliff crossing and that horrid, horrid Gollum is back.
Anyway, long story short: Making a long story short is something Peter Jackson can’t do. Making a short story long?
I seriously thought we were done with Twilight movies. I truly thought that the series ended when Whatsername married Whatsisname and they had a magical vampire baby.
(Also, it kills me that I know some of the plot points of this series, because I’m sure I could be using that part of my brain for something useful instead, like remembering how to calculate the radius of a circle or something.)
So imagine my surprise to learn that another Twilight movie opens this weekend.
And, I guess, the heroine is a vampire now? And everybody’s fighting bad CGI wolves, because werewolves and vampires are totally enemies, which I always forget, mostly because I don’t care.
(Unfortunately, I’m not using the part of my brain that doesn’t remember that to solve for the area of a triangle or anything.)
The moral of this post is DON’T GO SEE THE LAST TWILIGHT MOVIE. You are only encouraging them. If you go see the last Twilight movie, they will DEFINITELY MAKE 50 SHADES OF GREY INTO A MOVIE and you have no one but yourself and your soccer mom to blame.
A thing I don’t get about the new Bond films starring Daniel Craig (aka the guy I still don’t think looks like a James Bond, no matter how many of these things he stars in) is why do they all have such terrible names? Except for the first one, I guess, because it has the same name as the Peter Sellers one. That name’s OK. But Skyfall? If it hadn’t been for the recognizable theme music and everybody calling Daniel Craig 007, I’d've thought they were advertising a video game or something.
But if you felt like ignoring that first paragraph, the point is: the new James Bond flick opens on Friday here in America (though apparently it’s been playing in France for a couple of weeks, like why does France rate, you know?) and everybody’s going to go see it.
And you probably should go see it. Because, as far as I can tell, M has an Astrid-from-Fringe look-alike murder the hell out of James Bond…
…then he comes back as a zombie, then Q gets a cute hipster makeover…
…then James Bond gets the best gun ever…
…and then a train explodes but Bond’s suit is OK.
Also: more explosions, lots of Dame Judi Dench…
…something with a motorcycle doing flips and a lot of people asking Daniel Craig why he’s not dead yet and he’s like “Because this is only my third Bond film, duh.”
So what else does a movie need?
Oh, right, the love interest with too much lipstick.
Oooh, ooh, and one of the Fiennes!
Yup. That should do it, then.
I don’t wanna see Flight this weekend, but I haven’t got a funny reason why.
Mostly it’s because of two things. The first is, of course, that I haven’t seen a movie with Denzel Washington, ever, where I remembered the character’s name at the end. The character was Denzel Washington, right? I’m not saying he’s a bad actor, because I don’t think he is. He’s just so Denzel Washington-y!
So if I go to a Denzel Washington movie (which I tend not to do), I left feeling like I just watched a movie about Denzel Washington. Which I did, because Hollywood wants me to watch movies about Denzel Washington.
The second reason is omigod it’s about a plane that crashes and I know in the movie most everybody survives but some of them don’t and flying is already scary enough and gaaaahhhhh.
So there you have it. Logic in action.
Cloud Atlas is a new movie by the Matrix Brothers, and it’s about how everyone’s lives are intertwined, past, present and future, and I don’t know about you, but it seems awfully pretentious. Like, if I were to show up in the theater to watch this film, it would judge me and find me lacking.
“Don’t you care about the intertwinedness?” the imaginary Cloud Atlas in my head says.
“No,” I say.
“Don’t you want to see Tom Hanks play a variety of characters?” continues the imaginary Cloud Atlas.
“Oh, God, no!”
“What are you? Some kind of poser?”
And then I’d have to admit that I didn’t actually even like the FIRST Matrix movie, and then Cloud Atlas would never let me hang out with the cool kids while they talk philosophy ever again.
So a thing I’ve noticed in all the reviews for The Perks of Being a Wallflower is that the reviewer is, inevitably, amazed and delighted that the movie is set in the ’90s. I can only assume that this surprise is due to the fact that they’re not familiar with the source material at all. That is: a book that was written, and thus set, in the ’90s.
Yeah. It’s an old book that the writer has apparently kept close to his heart, seeing as how he’s the director.
Which is nice, I suppose, but what’s the point now? I remember, in the ’90s, reading the book and enjoying it, but not so much that I still have the book or ever wanted to read it again. It’s your, you know, standard coming of age story, with lots of The Smiths and unrequited love and Catcher in the Rye references. And really, I stopped caring about the book (indeed, I even forgot it existed until all of a sudden it’s a movie!) a long time ago.
In fact, the effect it’s having on me is like when you hear a song on the radio, or in a commercial, and it’s a song you didn’t remember but you used to like a long time ago and then you think, huh, why did I ever like that song? and then you start wondering if someday you’re going to hear one of the songs you like now and think the same thing and then you think am I getting old? and then you have some whiskey.
Anyway, I’m not going to see The Perks of Being a Wallflower.
Q. Why a Taken 2?
A. To prove to doubters that even Liam Neeson can’t punch every movie into awesomeness.
A. Right, because, really, people do still watch those.