Thursday, February 19, 2009

MONSTER JAM: NBA, LOST, and reviews of FANBOYS and CORALINE!

So Wednesday night I was fortunate enough to enjoy some great courtside seats at the Clippers-Suns game at the Staples Center. Man, what a massacre that was. Entertaining, to be sure though - I mean, who doesn't enjoy seeing Shaq and Amare run rampant over the hapless D-leaguers on the Clips? But, wow ... the fact that the Clippers played Phoenix twice in two nights, and both nights got reamed, and *both* nights allowed the Suns to score 140+ points on 'em ... that's just sad. I mean, it's one thing to lose in a single blowout - you can always chalk it up to a bad night or whatever. But to lose twice in two consecutive blowouts to the same team? Yikes. All that does is confirm that the first blowout was no mere fluke - you do, in fact, suck that badly.

Anyways, I am slowly but surely starting to get back into all things NBA after being kind of out of the loop for the first half of this season. I got caught up in all of the All-Star Weekend festivities and once again got a huge kick out of the dunk contest in particular. Last year, Dwight Howard's theatrics really reinvigorated the annual throwdown-showdown, and this year saw "Superman" once again thrill and dazzle the crowd with an array of gravity-defying jams. However, the competition and one-upsmanship that Nate "Lex Luthor" Robinson brought to the table could not be denied. Nate won the contest and upset the reigning champ, and now I'm curious to see the eventual tiebreak in 2010 - with the added twist that Lebron James himself has tentatively thrown his hat in the ring as a future entrant. Get Lebron, D-Wade, even Kobe in there and business will have really picked up.

But without a doubt, it was great Wednesday night sitting only several rows up from the floor, seeing Nash, Shaq, Amare and co wreaking havoc on the court.


- Alright, I'm sure you're all dying to hear what I thought of LOST, so here we go ...




LOST:

- Okay, I have been a huge advocate for Lost over the last two seasons, and so far this season I've been enjoying each episode and getting fairly absorbed in the quickly-unraveling plot. I've defended the increased focus on the show's sci-fi mythology, and argued that said focus has still left plenty of room for great character moments in spite of the increasingly plot-heavy episodes.

Well, this week's ep was intense, exciting, and featured some really great character moments and revelations. There were exciting new mysteries introduced, and a long-awaited return to the Island for the Oceanic 6. I loved the way in which the episode was structured - you had a riveting opening with Jack, Kate, and Hurley back on the island, and then an extended flashback that filled in the gaps of how they got there while creating some new gaps in the process.

That being said, the opening 20 minutes or so of this episode frustrated me in a way that reminded me of how I sometimes felt watching the show in the early Season 1 and Season 2 days. What I mean is, and I've talked about this before, is that it's always bothered me how Lost will try to have its cake and eat it too when it comes to its own mythology. On one hand, this season of Lost in particular is unraveling a farily intricate and detailed science fiction mythology, with big concepts at its core like time travel and quantum physics. And yet, on the other hand, last night's ep had large sections in which characters spoke and acted as if they were in a Samuel Beckett play. I mean, these characters' lives are at stake, they are about to commit themselves to returning to a time-lost island for no tangible reason, and yet they never stop to grab Eloise Hawkings by the collar and ask "who are you, and how do you know all this?" At one point, Jack does ask something similar of Ben, and I cringed as Ben responded to an obvious question with a random, unrelated anecdote, and then walked away, with zero followup from Jack. Stuff like that just bugs me to no end and strikes me as lazy writing. If you want to avoid giving answers, then at least put your characters in some kind of urgent situation where there is legitimately no time for exposition. But in last night's ep, people were standing around, chilling in Eloise's mysterious hideout, and not even speaking to one another.

Now I know, people will say to me, "yeah, but this is how the show's been since the beginning." And I'd say that, yeah, this tendency to take shortcuts at the expense of realistic characterization is one of the show's biggest recurring flaws. Lost has always been at it's best when the situations are so dire and fast-moving that there's really no time for questions or explanations. Or when an episode (like "Walkabout" or "The Constant") is essentially self-contained. But the show has rarely done well when it's had to slow down and actually address all of the corners its backed itself into with regards to its labrynthine mythology. Nobody does cliffhangers and big reveals better than Lost. Few shows have a better cast of characters or a more clever approach to storytelling structure. No other show on TV comes close to Lost's ability to capture the imagination or present a story that truly feels like it's being told on an epic scope and a grand stage. But man, Lost just struggles when it comes to the details sometimes. Which is odd for a show that has its fans analyzing every aspect of the show with a microscope. That's what gets me - the show often seems to ask its fans to be detail-oriented, active viewers / participants. And yet, sometimes Lost seems to drop the ball when it comes to delivering the payoff to all of this.

So that's why I was a bit turned off by parts of "316", but again, these are my main complaints regarding a show that, mostly, I think extremely highly of. So highly that I called it, without reservation, the best TV series of 2008. And like I said, this episode had a lot of great moments, and as usual, I can't wait for next week to see how this all plays out. But to those who blindly praise 316 and call some kind of landmark episode, I say sorry, but no.

My Grade: B


Alright, time for some VERY long-time-in-coming movie reviews ...



FANBOYS Review:


- What up, ma' nerds? So, I am very happy to report to you all that Fanboys is actually a pretty great movie. I was starting to get really worried for a while there -- after endless delays and speculation about which version of the movie would ultimately hit theaters, I was really anticipating the release of the film, only to find that reviewer after reviewer seemed to be bagging on the movie. What? Could a movie this anticipated by geeks everywhere actually be that bad?

Suffice it to say, I went into Fanboys with slightly lowered expectations, but came out of it very pleasantly surprised by just how fun of a movie it was. This movie won me over. It wasn't particularly deep or sophisticated, but it had a completely endearing quality to it. It felt like the kind of movie that some friends and I might dream up. It felt like a film that had a real, genuine affection for its characters and premise - it felt 100% authentic - the kind of movie that a couple of guys get together and shoot out of a real passion to just make something that embodies their sensibilities and sense of humor. Fanboys doesn't always get the biggest laughs or have the best acting or production values, but you can't help but get caught up in its sheer fun and enthusiasm. Sitting in a theater with a bunch of, well, fanboys, we all had a great time, laughed our asses off, and walked away feeling like we had just seen a real gem of a movie.

Basically, the plot of Fanboys revolves around a couple of lifelong friends circa the late 1990's, recent college grads just starting to plant a foot in the real world. Some have moved on to real jobs, others are still crashing with their parents and playing videogames all day. But at the end of the day, what unites all of these characters is that they are all, at their cores, Star Wars geeks. Sure, some wear it on their sleeves while others try to hide it, but get these guys together and they'll talk all day about whether Empire was in fact the best of the trilogy or whether Luke was still attracted to Leia even after he knew she was his sister.

What reunites the somewhat estranged group of childhood friends is that one of their number has cancer. The illness inspires the guys to go on one giant geeky adventure, the idea being to drive cross-country to George Lucas' Skywalker Ranch, sneak in, and steal an early copy of the yet-to-be-released new Star Wars flick. Afterall, what geek worth his salt would want to kick the bucket without seeing the new Star Wars movie that at that point had been twenty-plus long years in the making? Thus kicks off a wild and crazy roadtrip that has detours at a Star Trek convention, in geek-haven Austin Texas, in Vegas, and everywhere in between.

A lot has been said about the version of the film that screened a while back which cut out the whole cancer angle. Personally, I'm glad they kept it in. To me, the film had enough heart and handled the cancer plotline with enough care that it was well worth it to keep it intact. It really is the thing that drives the movie's premise, and without it I think a lot would have been lost. It's not so much of a presence that it turns the movie into a total downer, but it adds just the right amount of drama and heart to what is otherwise a pretty goofball comedy. As is, the mixture is just right.

I also thought the young cast was pretty cool and did a nice overall job. The principles are all fun and relatable and guys like Dan Fogler and Jay Baruchel have definite geek-cred to boot. And Kristen Bell is great as always, in a role that inevitably draws comparisons to the late great Veronica Mars. And yes, she does appear in the Princess Leia slave-girl outfit at one point. Yikes!

There are also a TON of awesome cameos. Seth Rogen is great in a dual role as a rival Star Trek nerd and a Star Wars geek / vengeful pimp (yes you read that right). Tons of notables pop up for funny roles - Craig Robinson, Will Forte, Kevin Smith, Ethan Suplee, Danny Trejo, Carrie Fischer, Billy Dee Williams, and even William Shatner show up, to name a few.

And again, to me, the humor mostly works. Sure, a few scenes are a bit clunky, but some lines are outright classics. And man, rarely has a movie done geeky humor quite so well. If you get a kick out of jokes about Star Wars, comics, the merits of Rush, et al, you will be in fanboy nirvana with Fanboys. I love that this isn't toned down to always make sense for a mainstream audience. Like I said, it feels like it was written by a bunch of geeky guys sitting around and joking about all the stuff they're into. If that sounds lame to you, then so be it, but I had a great time with Fanboys, and would urge anyone who's ever wanted to see a real comedy about pop-culture geeks to run to the theater and check it out if / while you can. This is a movie that deserves some love.

My Grade: A-



Okay, one more review:


CORALINE Review:

- One of my favorite movies is The Nightmare Before Christmas, so I of course had really been anticipating Coraline - the long-awaited stop-motion followup from director Henry Selick. Not only was this a return to big-screen stop-motion animation for Selick, but Coraline also marks one of the highest-profile screen adaptations to date of the work of acclaimed author Neil Gaiman. Now, I'm not exactly a hardcore Gaiman fan, but I do really like the work of his that I've read, particularly The Sandman, a series where I've slowly but surely been working my way through the various volumes over the last few years. So in any case, I was really excited and curious to see how the movie version of Coraline would take shape.

The great news is that Coraline is a pretty amazing movie in a lot of respects. It's been a while since I've seen a movie that is this bursting at the seams with imagination and visual artistry. And it's also been a while since I've seen a kids movie that dared to be this dark and downright creepy. I really loved that about Coraline - it's one of those classic children's stories that still has a lot of depth and intelligence to it. It's exactly the kind of stuff I loved as a kid and still go crazy for today. Essentially, it's the story of a young and spunky girl, Coraline, who moves to a new town and quickly finds that her house contains a mysterious gateway into an alternate reality - a surreal dreamscape where things are much like our world only stranger. Everyone is a fantasy-version of their real-world alternate, except all of the people, eerily, have buttons for eyes. And while this other-verse *seems* like a little kid's fantasy, there is a creepy malevolance lurking behind the button-eyes of Coraline's other-mother and other-father. Perhaps, we soon discover, all is not as it seems ...

Aside from the fun fantasy premise and amazingly detailed visuals, the voice cast really does a great job. Dakota fanning is superb as Coraline - imbuing the title character with a ton of personality and wit. Fanning's natural beyond-her-years wisdom is a perfect match for Coraline's personality, and the other voice actors are similarly well-cast. Teri Hatcher is great as Coraline's mother, Keith David is awesome as a creepy talking cat, and Ian McShane is a lot of fun as a crazy circus performer. Overall, I loved the eclectic cast of characters on display here - it was like a trip to Maniac Mansion by way of The Dreaming.

But back to those visuals for a second ... wow. Not since Nightmare have we gotten a movie quite like this done in the stop-motion medium, and Selick and co have really refined their craft. There are shots that make you wonder just how they managed to pull off the visual magic on display, and there are scenes where you hardly even need words or music because the sheer power and wonder of the visuals is a true sight to behold. I saw the movie in 3D, and the added dimension really gives the film a sense of depth - as if you could reach out and put your hand around the figures and settings. There is a slight blurriness factor that is a side effect of the 3D glasses, but mostly the movie was a visual treat. Add to that character design that was both imaginative and wholly unique, and you have a movie that just plain looks awesome.

But I also admire Coraline for daring to be methodically-paced at times, for taking the time to let us soak in the visuals and slowly go down that rabbit hole and get engrossed in the story. At times, I would actually get sleepy watching the movie - not because I was bored, per se, but just because the whole move really has a soothing, hypnotic, dreamlike quality to its pacing and presentation. The music is also extremely well done, complimenting the film's sense of mood and atmosphere to a T.

If there's anything that prevents Coraline from being a classic, it may simply be that the plot is sometimes so thin that there isn't much to it. This is really a visual journey rather than a story-driven one, and while that's cool, the movie doesleave you feeling slightly empty. The build-up is reat, but you never quite reach the dramatic high-points that one might expect. The movie doesn't have quite the sense of grandeur of Nightmare Before Christmas - and some of that may be due to time contraints -- but there are times where things feel a bit anticlimactic.

That said, Coraline is an absolute must-see. It's so unique and so imaginative that you have to admire it. This movie is a throwback in a way - it's a *real* fantasy movie - guaranteed to stir the imagination of kids and adults alike, but not watered down whatsoever. It dares to be dark and scary and disturbing and creepy. And that's why you can't help but appreciate the fact that Coraline is one cool movie.

My Grade: A-


- Alright, signing out for now. But I will be back VERY soon with Oscar picks, as well as a tribute to LATE NIGHT WITH CONAN O'BRIEN, the final episode of which airs tonight on NBC!

No comments: