Next Stop, Jesus! - Religulous (2008)

The first thing you should know about this documentary is that it was directed by Larry Charles. The same Larry Charles that directed Borat. So right off the bat, you know this isn't going to be a totally even-handed affair. The film is by no means vitriolic or demeaning, but it has its moments that are obviously skewed. I happen to agree with everything Bill Maher says in this documentary, but I also understand that it's not going to win anyone over who doesn't see things the way he does. But that's not really the reason I watched Religulous. I wasn't looking for Maher to present scientific evidence or fully construct logical arguments. Honestly, I was watching this film so I could see the crazy people and laugh at them. And in that regard, Religulous did exactly what I wanted.

The whole thing is basically Bill Maher traveling around, interviewing believers and non-believers alike, asking questions about their faith, and cracking some jokes at their expense. Before seeing the film, you might think Maher utterly trashes anyone who believes in God. But at its heart, it's not a venemous film. Maher, for the most part, respects the people he's interviewing enough to let them explain their position, and afterwards ask them serious questions. Sure, here and there he adds some off-color joke aimed at the religion his interviewee is part of, and it's funny. To me. If you're religious, probably not quite as much. But still, even if you're religious, you have to give him his overall civility. There were countless times where, if it were me, I would probably get a little rude or condescending towards some of these people. The ex-gay minister who doesn't believe anyone is really gay comes to mind. That just smacks of ignoring your own desires, but whatever.

Maher goes everywhere from Israel, to the Bible belt, to the Netherlands, and to the heart of Mormon Utah. Speaking of Utah, those fucking guys have quite a setup there. It's almost, if not just as ornate as the Vatican. In Italy. As in Europe, where their architecture is actually pleasing to stare at for more than five seconds. Yea, I was surprised to see that shit in Utah. Props on that. But besides that, you really have to be hardcore to believe the stuff they do. I'm just saying. Mormons also don't seem to be very inviting to outsiders, since just the mere sight of Maher sent the Mormon Enforcement Brigade into their midst to drive them away. An even more amusing fact was that Maher actually tried to get an interview with the Pope. He failed, but still. However, he did find an actual Vatican priest who holds some pretty unconventional views about his own faith. I'll put up a little clip of him below. He deserves it. Among the other colorful characters is a dude who believes he is the second coming of Christ, a weed-smoking spiritualist who doesn't really know what the fuck he believes in, and a Jewish guy who invents(or cheats, IMO) his way around restrictions on the Sabbath. If nothing else, you could say Religulous asks the same basic questions of every religion, and it doesn't come off as picking on anyone more than the rest.

All in all, your mind is already made up whether or not you believe one word that comes out of Bill Maher's mouth when it comes to religion. You either believe or you don't. So it's armed with that knowledge that I ask you to just watch it for fun. Regardless of your personal beliefs, at least watch it and form an opinion afterward, not the other way around. If nothing else, it can serve as a nice jumping-off point for a serious discussion with those you know of differing faiths. Or, if you agree, it's a great film to pop in and have some laughs while still engaging your brain a tad bit.

Christian Bale's Skeletal Structure, as Seen in The Machinist (2004)

I guess I can't avoid starting out by mentioning Christian Bale. More specifically, the things he's willing to do for a part. Apparently, the list includes what I can only imagine as starving yourself for a very long time. He looks absolutely emaciated. It's hard to look at him for any set amount of time, and I couldn't help but marvel at what it takes to do that to yourself in the name of your craft. And if he was going to starve himself, The Machinist was a good reason to do it.

There is something I've noticed with every Brad Anderson film, and the best way to describe it is there being a creeping tension and foreboding in all the atmospheric conditions he creates. It's almost identical in Session 9, and Transsiberian definitely has elements of it. Anderson is astutely aware of his characters' surroundings, and he populates them with people and things that can make you a little bit uneasy. And in The Machinist, everything is off somehow, but it's hard to pinpoint. Trevor Reznik(Bale) doesn't live in a super-creepy apartment building, there's nothing terribly upsetting about his job, and everybody else around him seems normal enough. Yet and still, something doesn't feel right. There's an inate quality that pushes the film more in the direction of horror, but without any of the genre conventions.

Bale plays a guy working at some kind of machine factory, and he's been there for, as far as I know, at least a little over a year. When the film starts, he's already a full-on bag of bones, so there's no real transformation happening. But the point isn't to see him transform; instead, it's about what he's become. What exactly that is, and why it's happened are two of the questions the film digs into.


And that's all I can safely divulge about the film without going into spoiler territory. I'll say this: if you're in any way interested in films about or pertaining to tragedies(Greek or otherwise) or the human condition, then give The Machinist a shot. As is also the case with Anderson's other films, it's not one you'll be popping in the DVD player once a month to get your fix. Rather, it's an experience that slowly makes its way around your brain and simmers a while, letting you soak up all the little details and nuances until you've taken away any and everything possible. That's not to say it's difficult to watch or hard to understand. It's quite the opposite, actually. It's a simple story, but the layers it has and the humanity it shows are both integral parts to the success of the actual storytelling. And to me, it succeeded greatly.

But how can a film successfully portray a character without making him well-rounded or at least showing more than one side of them? Apparently, very easily. If that's a genuine question of yours, then I can answer it by saying that not all great characters in film history are well-rounded, or even good people. The Machinist is a shining example of a talented filmmaker taking one aspect of the human psyche and putting it on full display for feature length. Not all of it is pretty, and not all of it is safe. The point, at least the way I saw it, was to take stock of yourself and understand how events have shaped the person you've become. Whether it comes from external forces or something inside yourself, if you can't recognize it you have no chance of overcoming it or living with it. Such is the dilemma facing Trevor Reznik, and it's one I think everyone should experience at least once.

The O.G. "Public Enemies" of cinema's past

It seems a bit unusual to have a depression era gangster flick like "Public Enemies" making its debut during a season usually dominated by Optimus Prime and Captain Kirk, but I'll take a huge helping of Michael Mann cops and robbers any time it's offered to me and gladly ask for seconds. As "Enemies" hits screens to mostly positive buzz, I thought I'd look back at some of Hollywood's "original gangstas" and their exploits that have influenced filmmakers for several generations of celluloid crime.

The term "Public Enemy" was coined back in 1930 by the chairman of the Chicago crime commision to publicly denounce guys like Al Capone and other infamous gangsters of the era. Later, J. Edgar Hoover and the FBI used it when they named various fugitives they were tracking down. Guys like Dillinger, Baby Face Nelson, and Bonnie & Clyde were all outlaws that made this famous list during what became known as "The Public Enemy Era." There is no doubt about it....these were THE bad guys that the law had to bring down for being a blight on society. For some strange reason, people love the stories about bad boys and eventually, Tinseltown would be all too eager to oblige.

The Public Enemy (1931)

Back in the day, this guy defined cinema bad-assery. James Cagney was his name and he was not the man with whom to fuck. Just ask his nagging girlfriend how she likes her grapefruit. Named after the era it represents "The Public Enemy" is the story of Tom Powers, as he makes his way to the top......and eventually the bottom of the bootlegging underworld. This was one of the first pictures to attempt to portray the mob world in a realistic fashion. They didn't glorify it, and they wanted audiences to know that "crime does not pay!" The main character meets his fate in what can still be considered by today's standards somewhat grisly fashion. Just thinking about the last scene gives me chills.

a fistful of fruit for the whiney woman...

Angels With Dirty Faces (1938)

Don't let the silly name fool you. This film is as endearing as it is tragic. Cagney takes center stage again this time as the former gangster Rocky Sullivan. Rocky has been in prison for several years and after being released, decides to finally walk the straight path. He gets a little help from his best friend and former thug turned priest Father Connolly.( played by real life pal
Pat O' Brien) Unfortunately, an old nemesis (none other than Humphrey Bogart) who owes Rocky some money turns up and makes it difficult for him to adjust to life outside of prison. Throw in the comedy stylings of the Dead End Kids, and you have yourself a stick of pure movie dynamite!

White Heat (1949)

Yes, Cagney makes the list for the third time in a row. His wallet is the one that actually says "Bad Mother Fucker" not Sam Jackson's!!!! Cagney took a break from the tough guy roles to prove he could do other things. He won an Oscar as the singing dancing playwright George M. Cohan in the 1942 musical "Yankee Doodle Dandy," but everybody really just wanted to see him come back and kick some ass again.........did he ever.

Cody Jarret is not a nice man. He steals, has no problem murdering his own crew or anybody else that pisses him off, and the only woman he loves is his mother. After Jarret goes to prison, the police send in an undercover agent posing as his cellmate to find out who on the outside launders his cash because if they get that guy....it will go a long way into shutting down the whole ring. We get jailbreaks, double crosses, and a truly explosive ending that will have you screaming....."made it ma.....top of the world!!!!!!!"

Bonnie and Clyde (1967)

What can you say.......but.....Faye.....Faye....Dunaway! She was a knockout in this picture, and combined with the talents of Warren Beatty and a young Gene Hackman......you have yourself one of the very best the genre has to offer. It's a tale of young lovers who blaze a path of robbery and murder across the midwest and into the history books as they inevitably meet their bullet riddled destiny. At the time, the violence in this film was quite jarring. "The Public Enemy" tried to show mob life in a realistic way...."Bonnie & Clyde" showed what those bullets actually do when they hit their mark and critics were not initially impressed. Time has been kind to "Bonnie" and it's still a hell of a film. It marked a change in filmmaking style. No longer would a guy just get shot and fall down.......we'd get to see those exploding squibs in all their gooey glory! Contemporary Hollywood gunfights owe a huge debt to "Bonnie & Clyde." Clyde Barrow just wanted to be remembered.....well.....believe me Clyde........we remember.

Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen (2009)

Hot on the heels of his mega-hit from 2007, Michael Bay follows up Transformers with a sequel that promises bigger explosions, bigger robots, and a lot more mayhem and bang for your buck. Does it surpass or even equal his earlier work? Let's find out.



Haha, fooled you. I didn't see that shit.

The Taking of Pelham One Two Three Remake, or...God Dammit, Tony Scott. (2009)

Son of a bitch, someone needs to give Tony Scott a tri-pod. You know, that thing cameras sit on top of. To keep it still. So you your movie doesn't look like a YouTube video that's having trouble loading. Also, at one point early on in the movie, I counted the seconds between cuts. Want to guess the length of the longest one? I'll give you four seconds. Why? Because that's the answer. So what did we learn from this information? Basically, when Tony Scott is on, he's fucking ON. But when he's off, you're pretty much wasting your money and time. It's a shame, really.

The more I think about this fucking thing, the more unnecessary it becomes. Why remake this? If the filmmaker has nothing over and above to add to the experience, then he/she has no business even attempting it. It's only cheapened, and in the case of Pelham, the cheapening comes in two different flavors. The first being Scott's stubborn reliance on jump-cuts and dizzying 360-degree panning shots of someone talking. Do I really need to see all around someone when they're just standing there speaking? No, I don't and neither does anyone else. I can think of maybe a handful of times when it would be appropriate. None of those scenarios rear their heads in this movie, so it just comes off as stupid. The second being the addition of truly sappy situations that only served to make me secretly throw up behind my stadium seating, and then proceed to look at my puke dribbling down the steps. It's more entertaining than the shit that was added in the film, so in my book, that was a bonus. I'll even give you the most glaring example. It's a spoiler, but if you've seen the original, you already know how the movie turns out. ****SPOILER**** THE BAD GUYS LOSE. So with that out of the way, I can describe this lame shit for you.

Denzel is a transit guy, and you'll have to excuse me if I can't remember his job title. I don't work for public transit, so I don't really give a shit. He's the guy that talks to trains on a microphone. Or at least he is when the movie starts because he's under investigation for taking bribes. He's fallen on the totem pole, and we as an audience are made painfully aware of this. Of course, when he gets the call from the hijackers, you automatically know at some point he'll be offered a bribe. Does Denzel take it? Fuck no. You're an idiot if you thought otherwise. Or slow. Either way, he has to allow the hostage negotiator to send a team of FBI agents or whatever the fuck to his house to search it and make sure he's not in league with the criminals. Denzel then gets a call from his wife, wondering what the hell is going on. He tells her it's just part of the process, and that he's talking to the terrorists. Later on, he tells her that he has to go meet them in person, to which his wife's reply is, and I'm paraphrasing, but this shit is really in there, "you better come home, because we need milk. Don't forget the milk." The object of the conversation being Denzel making it out alive and bringing home the milk to his poor, distraught wife. BOO-FUCKING-HOO. Guess what the last scene in the god damn movie is? HE BRINGS HOME THE FUCKING MILK. That's how you chart suspense if you're a movie exec. Oh, and fuck you, movie exec.

If you've read this far, you'll have noticed I'm not going too much into the nuts and bolts of the film, save for a couple of items. That's because all you need to see is the original with Robert Shaw and Walter Matthau. Really, that's all you need. It's superior in every conceivable way. The beauty of the original is its simplicity. It's pretty much just Matthau and Shaw talking. Sure, things happen around them, but they're the crux of the story. It's sort of the same in the remake, but the extraneous bullshit really takes the shine away from the stars. Case in point - Travolta. He excels at hamming it up as a bad guy. Broken Arrow and Face/Off come to mind. In Pelham, he does ham it up quite a bit, but it's restrained when compared to the two films I just mentioned. He's a little more nuanced, and more convincing as an actual person. The hamminess is still present, but he strikes a great balance between believability and bad guy over-the-top evil.

Denzel is good, as per usual, and I did think it was a nice touch to make him more of an every-man instead of the cop or negotiator. In one scene, a cop asks him if he's ever handled a gun, to which Denzel answers "no." That doesn't happen very often in a Denzel movie. At least not in most of them. And with that, my praise ends. I guess I don't really need to rail on it any more, since my stance is pretty rock solid at this point. There's nothing else to talk about, really, except for my insistance that you do NOT go see this. Buy the original on DVD instead. It's an old version, and I doubt there will be any new ones made because of the remake, but it's still worth it. You might have to mess around with your settings to get a widescreen presentation, and then you'll notice the image being stretched a tad, but it's totally watchable. Much more so than this pile of trash.

No trailer for this one. Watch Walter and Robert. My colleague talked about it once.

I'll Stay Awake, Thanks - Long Dream (2000)

You know, there are some directors out there who I think would greatly benefit from sitting down and watching this movie. I check the budgets on a lot of movies, and most of the time I wonder to myself how the fuck $100 million can be blown through so easily. Higuchinsky, the director of Long Dream, would laugh at the people responsible for spending that much money. All of his movies were really low budget, but guess what? They don't need the money (granted, I haven't seen his last film, but I seriously doubt anything has changed in that regard). The sad thing, however, isn't how much money he has or doesn't have for his films. Believe it or not, he's only made 3 films.....ever. I'm pretty sure this qualifies as a national emergency, but I haven't seen any reports about it on the news yet.

Long Dream is about just that: a long dream. It takes place in a very dark and claustrophobic mental hospital, where two doctors are studying a curious patient. He came to them with a pretty fucked up problem. Every time he sleeps, his dreams seem to last longer and longer. In the span of, say, eight hours, he experiences days in his mind. At first. What starts out as a few days of experiences increases exponentially every time he sleeps. You'd be forgiven if you didn't realize the ramifications of this. He explains it best himself when he tells the doctors that one of his dreams was about him frantically searching for a bathroom for eight years. That's fucked. What if it's a horrible nightmare? It might end up being twenty years of swimming away from a gigantic shark, or god knows what. If that's not a scary premise for a horror/sci-fi flick, then I don't know what is. One thing I guess I should mention is the length of the film. It's only an hour long, so if you're looking for any kind of character development or complex plot, you'll have to look elsewhere. It's as straightforward as can be, and it doesn't bother with anything except being really weird. And I mean that in an exceptionally good way.

Higuchinsky is a very visual director, despite the low budgets he works with. Everything about his films, from the sets to the lighting and camera angles, is bizarre and other-worldly. Long Dream is no exception, and the green-tinted, narrow hallways of the mental hospital are foreboding enough, never mind what's happening in that dude's head every night. Also, Higuchinsky doesn't usually work with a lot of CGI. In Long Dream, it's practical all the way. I won't go into what kind of effects are used, but I'll let you imagine what might happen to a mind and body that experiences hundreds of years of existence. It's a crazy-ass concept, and it takes a crazy-ass director to pull it off with this kind of twisted confidence. To me, it's a must-see for any horror or sci-fi fan, regardless if you watch foreign films or not. It's just so fucking weird and creepy. I love it for the same reasons I love his other film, Uzumaki, but I'll save my comments on that one for another day. Instead, I'll leave you with this thought: a 100 year dream consisting solely of having sex with Naomi Watts. Or whoever, it's your call. Your wife, even.

This scene isn't very exciting, but it's the only one I could find that didn't show too much. When he wakes up, the doctor basically asks him if he was dreaming. He says yes, and the doctor asks how long it lasted. He says a year and a half.

Taking of Pelham One Two Three

I was aware that the June 12th release of Denzel Washington and John Travolta action-fest "The Taking of Pelham One Two Three" was in fact a remake. I had never seen the 1974 original until by chance it was on one of my cable channels and it hooked me in big time! Walter Matthau plays a transit cop in charge of taking down the men responsible for hijacking a subway car and demanding a one million dollar ransom for the passengers on board. The main baddie is played by the late great Robert Shaw and it goes without saying......he's awesome in the flick. I'm not going into a full throttle review of this one, but I will say to check it out if you can.



The first thing you'll notice if you are a Tarantino fan is that the bad guys refer to themselves as Mr. Green, Mr. Blue, and so on....hmmmmmmmm....does that sound familiar? No disrespect to Quentin, I just thought it was neat to be able to connect the dots to his tribute in "Dogs." It was also interesting seeing Matthau playing the action guy role, and his portrayal of Lieutenant Garber sits right next to Coach Buttermaker as my favorite Walter performance.



I am curious to see if the Tony Scott remake will keep the playful tone of the first one. Judging by the trailers it seems to be going for a more serious balls to the wall action approach. I do think that sometimes film stories need to be re-told for new audiences to appreciate. There's no doubt that the old "Pelham" still packs quite a cinematic punch....it's just that it may be hard to convince a younger generation of movie goers to check out a movie with two dead lead actors they have never heard of. Sad but true. I am anxious to see what Scott can do so he will definately be holding my ten bucks for ransom this summer.

I Come in Peace- The checklist for 80's & 90's action!

Ah.....the crap-tacular action films of the 80's and 90's ruled the school! But, to truly qualify as a fine slice of upper echelon era gorgonzola, certain criteria must be met without fail. Let's go over the list shall we?

1) Everybody knows that a big action story must take place around Christmas. Spoiling holiday cheer is a bonus for bad guys, and it gives some random character a chance to say "one hell of a way to spend Christmas!"

2) The villains must be either drug dealers or terrorists.

3) The main hero is usually a cop that plays by his own rules and his partner must be killed early on so that he can take revenge.

4) The captain has just about had it with his loose cannon shenanigans and requests that the hero take some vacation.

5) He must have a new partner that he initially hates, but comes to appreciate as they combine their talents to vanquish evil.

6) At some point, there must be a clever catch phrase worked in by the hero in a situation where it makes the most sense. For example, if it is an older cop, he might be running while a building explodes behind him and he would shout something like "I'm getting too old for this shit." Or even better, when the hero inevitibly defeats his nemesis he might say "yippie-kai-yay-motherfucker!" It is important that whenever the master villain's plan is foiled, the last thing he hears is a smart-ass remark by the protagonist before meeting his grisly fate.

7) Stuntman Al Leong must cameo and die as a henchman. Most notable blow the shit out of the world flicks had Al henching for the bad guys at some point. (Lethal Weapon, Die Hard, Big Trouble in Little China)

8) This is probably the most important. A major character, whether it be the good guy or one of the bad guys, must have a mullet. This shows that on top they are all nut stomping business, but in back they know how to be bad and party. Whew......now that we have that out of the way I can present to you 1990's "I Come in Peace." An action era gem with a sci-fi twist that includes everything on my commandmant list.

Al Leong in Die Hard and Lethal Weapon

What makes this movie stick out in my memory is the villain. He's a drug dealer, but from outer space! On his planet, endorphins are the addicting drug of choice and he can only get his supply on Earth from human brains. So basically he goes to L.A. and kills a bunch of drug dealers to get their heroin. He then catches a person, injects them with an overdose of heroin to stimulate endorphin production, and sucks it out with a spike to the head. Whenever he approaches a victim he tells them "I come in peace" hence the title.

B-level action meister Dolph Lundgren plays cop on the edge Jack Caine. (as in he raises cain throughout) He gets involved because he was working a case against a yuppie group of drug dealers called "The White Boyz." The White Boyz killed his partner during an undercover sting (big mistake) and he wants them to pay. But many of the White Boyz were slaughtered along with his partner by an unknown third party. Now he must break in a new partner and trust an alien cop who has come to bring the endorphin dealer to justice on his home planet. Failure to do so will have the population on another world become addicts while Earth becomes a target for other would be galactic drug runners.

even alien drug dealers had mullets in the 80's

The alien drug dealer is just plain bad-ass! He's 8ft tall and has a platinum blonde mullet. He also has all kinds of nifty gadgets to help him do his dirty work. There's a remote controlled hose that he shoots into the victim's heart and fills with heroin. He's got this razor sharp CD that ricochets all over the place and is only vulnerable to stereo speakers. The dealer is also equipped with an enormous hand cannon that gives Dolph a headache and Dirty Harry a hard-on.

the whirling disc of death metal....

I've never much cared for Dolph except for when he played Drago in Rocky. In that movie he only had to say a couple of lines though. He's basically a big wooden turd with no personality or acting skills to carry a lead role. At least guys like Van Damme and the Schwartz had charisma to help them with their dramatic shortcomings, but Dolph doesn't. Despite the absence of a likeable hero, "I Come in Peace" is a worthy walk down the ole action memory lane. Check it out!

Dolph about to deliver a catchphrase....



 

Around and Around We Go - Izo (2004)

Izo is a strange one. Then again, Takashi Mike is infinitely strange, so I’m not sure what I was expecting. If you’ve read about this film before, you know what you’re getting into. If you haven’t, then my advice would be to not expect a traditional vengeance/sword fighting film. Izo has both vengeance and sword fighting in spades, but goddamn, it’s bizarre. I think that’s what I like about Mike – he turns otherwise straightforward stories into something twisted and unique. There are plenty of films about violence and swords and all that, but when films like Izo come along, they make you go “what the hell?” Then you end up watching it two or three more times before you’re finally satisfied with the experience.

From what I could gather in a single viewing, Izo is about a man who is killed and becomes doomed to wander the space-time continuum; he’s a vengeful spirit out for the blood of anyone he comes across. At seemingly random intervals, he instantly transports between eras and locations, and everywhere he goes he leaves a bloody mess behind him. All the while, there is a group of men, who I think are some kind of keepers of the afterlife, and who Izo is ultimately seeking. They act more like a board of directors, which is why I wasn’t sure who the hell they were for about half the film. But once I figured that out, I thought it was an interesting depiction of the way things work out there in the infinite space and time beyond death. Izo, however, doesn’t think it’s so interesting. All he really wants is to kill everyone and be spared his fate of aimlessly wandering around. What makes Izo different from other vengeance films is the way he fights. He’s not a martial arts master, and neither are most of the people he fights with. Instead of gracefully slicing through foes, it sometimes takes him a long time to get the job done. His style communicates anger and frustration, and a lot of the time it entails just flailing and hacking at someone until they drop. He’s not very efficient, and since he’s an immortal spirit, he can’t be killed. That means he takes a lot of punishment over and over again, and he simply outlasts everyone else. I’m not even sure who “everyone else” really is. They might only exist in Izo’s demented hell of an afterlife as punishment for whatever he did while he was alive. But I don’t really know, and I think the film works better that way. Not knowing makes it that much more strange to behold, and I think a definite narrative structure would have ultimately lessened the impact. It’s a little like a David Lynch film, in that you sort of know what’s going on, but at the same time, you have no fucking idea what the hell is happening. It just so happens I like Lynch, and Izo strokes the same muscles in my head that long for this kind of mental exercise.


Make no mistake, this is a fairly bloody film, but I was actually expecting a bit more. That said, there are some rather gory bits, but I actually liked the more normal sword-stabbing and fighting better than the times when something totally over the top happened. For instance, he slices someone in half, and the guy freezes for a few seconds while his upper torso slowly slides down to the floor. I’ve seen that exact thing at least three times before, so it wasn’t too interesting to me. But the fighting itself is really cool, mainly because of what I mentioned before – Izo isn’t interested in looking good while he’s running people through. He’s pissed off and full of futile rage, and no matter what ere he’s in, the outcome is always the same. He gets stabbed and shot about a thousand times before the film is over, but still he struggles on, repeating his actions, I guess, forever. There are also frequent acoustic guitar solos by this weird musician who pops up every now and then, and his songs always have something prescient to say about Izo’s situation. His songs are pretty fucking bad ass, though, because he doesn’t really sing them. He just kind of yells and chokes a lot and gets really emotional. You’ll have to watch it to understand what I mean, but trust me, he’s great. I think I’ll get a better understanding of this film with every viewing, and once really isn’t enough. I’d guess a deeper view of what’s going on only comes from understanding small things here and there, and honestly, I can’t wait to piece this crazy ass puzzle together.

And, no, I don't know why there is a S.W.A.T. team.

The NeverEnding Story Remake, and My Newfound Hatred of Life.

It’s no secret: I complain a lot about remakes, and rightly so, I think. But a lot of the time, I’m more opposed to the general principle of remaking a film instead of the quality of the original film itself. However, the news of The NeverEnding Story possibly being remade has re-ignited my inner nerd rage to previously unseen heights. Let me make this as crystal-clear as I possibly can: YOU DON’T FUCKING REMAKE THE NEVERENDING STORY, YOU FUCKING EVIL ASSHOLES. I mean, what improvements could conceivably be made? It sure as shit doesn’t have to do with the dark material (I haven’t read the book, and I never plan on doing so), and the animatronics are, to this day, fucking awesome.

I'm not sure how you can get any more amazing-looking than this.

The story is just beginning.

The NeverEnding Story is one of my all-time favorite fantasy movies, and I watched it a shit-ton as a kid. It excited me, it scared the holy hell out of me, and it was breathtaking in every possible way. The story has a really, really dark element to it, and every time I would watch it, I was totally creeped the fuck out by the Nothing. G’mork, on the other hand, wasn’t just creepy – he genuinely scared me. But it wasn’t all horror, all the time. Quite the opposite, actually. There are a lot of wondrous elements to the film, including the snail racing, the rock biter, and, of fucking course, Falkor the luck dragon. Let’s stop here for a moment, and ponder how these characters would most likely be treated in a remake. My best guess puts animatronics out of the question, and with it one of the most striking aspects of the film. The visuals have stayed with me since the first time I saw it in the late 80s, and just from taking these screen caps, it’s obvious it wasn’t my retarded child-mind turning shitty special effects into something more awesome. Every fantastical creature in this film still looks goddamn impressive, and using CGI for the new versions will instantly deflate any lasting impression they might have had otherwise. I mean, seriously - a CGI Falkor? Kindly get the fuck out of my face with that horeshit nonsense. And I bet Atreyu will look like Prince Caspian, Bastian will be obnoxious as hell, and I’ll end up wanting to punch him in his face. Dammit, I’m getting pissed just thinking about this.

This is what animatronics you don't fuck with look like. You know...good.

If you saw the film as a kid, these glowing eyes should be enough to make you check your pants.

Have you ever wondered why there haven’t been too many quality family films recently? It’s because they’ve taken out everything that made those movies great for the whole family, and now simply cater to the 10-and-under crowd. I did enjoy Matthew Vaughn’s last film, Stardust, but that’s about it. Golden Compass was alright, but holy shit – neither of these films are a hair on The NeverEnding Story’s humongous nutsack. Since when do family films have to just be for children? Look at this list and weep: The NeverEnding Story, Labyrinth, Legend, Dragonslayer, The Dark Crystal, Return to Oz (yes), and The Princess Bride. All from the 80s, and all fan-fucking-tastic. So my question to Hollywood is this: what have you done for me lately? Remaking one of the greatest fantasy films ever isn’t going to qualify, so fuck you. On a side note, the production company in talks to do The NeverEnding Story is also apparently planning to rape Akira by doing a live-action remake. Puke.

If you’ve never seen The NeverEnding Story, I envy you. You still get to experience it for the first time, and I couldn’t be more adamant that you should do it as soon as possible. Just looking at the DVD cover makes me want to call in to work tomorrow and have an all-80s fantasy day. I would dress up and shit, too – a robe and a wand should be enough, I think. Even if you suck and wouldn’t do the same, you still need to buy this movie and watch the shit out of it. It’ll amaze you every time.



There are so many great moments in The NeverEnding Story, and I thought it worth including a screen-dump of some of my favorite parts:

The duel Sphinxes, and a place I don't want to have to pass through.

That shit all over the screen? It's called atmosphere. Look it up.

A really creepy, yet cool scene where two destinies meet.

Another one of the many memorable characters. He'll probably be totally fucked up and retarded if this remake gets green-lit. Enter ANGRY NERD RAGE.

/end rage.