By Dale Nauertz

Well, friends and neighbors, it’s that time o’ the year again. It’s, um, fall? Yup, Fall. That’s what it is. And there’s a whole slate of flicks coming out in the last couple months here that are jockeying for your entertainment dollar. And some of these films don’t even look to suck. So, as I have done for the past couple of years, I’d like to shine the harsh light of day onto these flicks and let you know which movies I am most anxiously awaiting and, in short, look like they might actually be worth a damn. But, this year, there aren’t as many films that have me champing at the bit. There aren’t quite as many films this fall/winter that have me jumping up and down and clapping my hands like a little girl in anticipation. But oh well. There’s still a few of them lurking out there.

I think.

1. “Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King”

“Fellowship of the Ring” was awesome! Seriously, just plain amazing. I loved every second of it and still watch it repeatedly. It’s probably already one of my favorite films of all time and, in retrospect, is the greatest movie of 2001. (”Moulin Rouge” is good and all but…) “The Two Towers” is a solid, even excellent film, but not quite as good as “Fellowship” and they changed a couple characters from the book and stuff like that which might not seem like much, but still occasionally pisses me off. Still, it’s a great movie and one of last year’s best. So, at the very least, “Return of the King” should shape up to be a great movie and provide some very breathtaking spectacle. At the best, it could leave “Fellowship” in the dust and make me ruin a perfectly good pair of pants come December 17th. So, you know, hooray!

2. “Kill Bill: Volume One”

Quentin Tarantino, I think I speak for an entire nation of film geeks when I say: “Where the hell have you been?” I loved “Pulp Fiction” and “Jackie Brown” (oh, right, and “Reservoir Dogs” which I’m not so huge on, but it’s still damn good) so I’ve been wanting more films from the Q Man. The only down side is that this is a balls to the wall kung fu flick, the plot of which sounds like “Charlie’s Angels” if Charlie screwed over one of the Angels and earned her hellish wrath. I claim that as a down side because I’d sorta like to see another movie with criminals and smart, witty dialogue and an occasional bloodbath. But it’ll be nice to see Quentin bring his witty touch to the whole kung fu genre and, hopefully, he will be able to inject it with the sense of flair and coolness that it’s sort of been losing lately thanks to the fact that there seems to be kung fu in every third film being made nowadays and they just keep getting more outlandish. (Thanks, “Matrix”!) But it’s been six years, so it’ll be nice to see the words “A Quentin Tarantino Film” splashed all over the big screen.

3. “Love Actually”

I like British people. Particularly, I like British comedians. They’re usually sharper and more sophisticated than American comedians and there’s just this indefinable something about them. I’m not sure what it is. Maybe it’s the fact that thirty years of Bond films have conditioned me to see them as dapper and debonair and seeing them as anything less is just somehow hilarious. This movie is just stocked with such people: Hugh Grant, Rowan Atkinson, Alan Rickman, Emma Thompson, Colin Firth, Liam Neeson, the gorgeous Keira Knightley and even a couple of Americans- Laura Linney and Denise Richards. Plus, the whole concoction is a romantic comedy brewed up by a master of the form: Richard Curtis who, since writing the “Black Adder” and “Mr. Bean” television series has gone on to pen the scripts for “Four Weddings and a Funeral” and “Notting Hill” as well as co-writing “Bridget Jones’s Diary”. And this one is a sprawling romantic comedy of epic proportions about sixteen separate people all falling in love or something like that. The trailer was funny and the movie looks highly intriguing, which is more than I can say about most of the movies set to release in the coming months…

4. “Intolerable Cruelty”

The Coen Brothers are back, and they have once again made an alliance with George Clooney. The trailer looks fun, despite the fact that Catherine Zeta Jones is in this…which can go either way. Billy Bob Thornton seems to be providing laughs simply by showing up, which is admirable, and the whole thing looks like a breezy good time. The reason it’s not higher on this list is because the screenplay appears to be written by two other guys and the Coens seem content merely to direct. This causes me concern, but if the Coens have devoted themselves to filming someone else’s work, then that work must be worth something. Looks amusing.

5. “Mystic River”

There is one main reason to see this movie: CLINT! CLINT! The hand of God is on the tiller of this film. He’s not in it, but he’s controlling every aspect of it, and that makes it worth at least a look. The buzz is pretty good on this one as well, and it’s got a great cast that includes Kevin Bacon, Sean Penn and Laurence Fishburne, who looks relieved not to be in another damn “Matrix” movie for once. But, if you’re wavering about seeing it, I have something else to say: CLINT! CLINT! CLINT!

6. “Runaway Jury”

I usually have no interest in seeing courtroom movies, or movies based on John Grisham books, but the trailer for this movie is a breathless marvel and if the movie is the same way, well, then it should be an intense experience. Cusack is in it, and so is “Mummy” beauty Rachel Weisz, as well as veteran folk like Gene Hackman and Dustin Hoffman. The cast is cool, the concept (scrambling to decide which side of a trial controls the jury of a billion-dollar trial) is cool and the whole thing just oozes a breathless, top-notch thriller sort of attitude. So count me in.

7. “Big Fish”

I like Tim Burton and have never disliked anything he’s done. He directs this and it stars Ewan McGregor, who is, in my belief, one of the finest young actors in Hollywood today. Plus, Danny Devito is running around, and that’s usually a good thing. Add all that up, and you’ve got my ass firmly planted in a seat. The whole plot of a man investigating the tall tales of his dying father, also sounds promising.

8. “The Singing Detective”

Robert Downey Jr. and Mel Gibson are among the players of this strange musical based on a British miniseries about a delusional detective. Songs, dance, delusions, a recovering drug addict (Downey) and Mel. Even if it doesn’t work at all, it should be fun to watch.

9. “The Matrix Revolutions”

I guess I have some desire to see this movie. I should have more, though, and that’s what bothers me. The original “Matrix” is, in my opinion, one of the best science fiction films of all time. The second is alright, I guess, and fun to watch, but not a whole lot more than that. I hope that “Matrix Revolutions” is more like the original, but since I am a realist, I believe it will be more like the latter. And if it isn’t at least a hell of a lot better than “Reloaded” and explains what the fuck was going ON in “Reloaded”, then I am officially disappointed. I’m sure I will be going on opening day anyway, but I will be sitting in the theater with my arms folded over my chest, waiting for the film to have made the trip worth my while.

10. “Timeline”

Unfortunately, Paul Walker is in this. But the trailer I have seen makes it look like a good time. It’s based on a Micheal Crichton novel, and those are usually entertaining. Plus the plot involves both time travel and medieval times, which are two things that I enjoy. So I’m going to go and hopefully have a lot of fun. That’s really all I expect.

Other than that, there really isn’t much I care to see. I’d like to see Tom kick some ass in “The Last Samurai” and I am looking forward to seeing Jack Nicholson play himself once again in “Something’s Gotta Give” and I can’t really say no to a movie entitled “Bad Santa” but these ten are the ones that I am most hankering for and, frankly, I could probably do without seeing a couple of them. So there you have it. It doesn’t look like that great of a year, and it hasn’t been so far. Unless “Return of the King” completely floors me, “Pirates of the Caribbean” will probably emerge as my favorite film of 2003. And that would be just a little weird.

Share on Facebook

By Dale Nauertz

“The Horror, the horror….”
-Colonel Kurtz (Marlon Brando) in “Apocalypse Now”

Christmas is a time for good cheer. Thanksgiving is a time to give thanks for what you have been given and think about how fortunate you are. New Years is a time to reflect on the passing year and think about how to improve the one ahead.

But Halloween. That’s a whole different beast altogether. No such thoughtful holiday is Halloween. It’s a time to dress in costumes, eat candy, and watch a movie that will scare the bejesus out of you. Needless to say, it’s my favorite holiday. Much more fun than most other holidays. Much less commercialized (well, the whole holiday was started by commercialism anyway) and the commercialization that has set in is just about having fun. No treacly pap about brotherly love here covering an attempt to sell you everything from diapers to beer. There’s something I can get behind.

And since horror movies are what this holiday is all about, let me give you some handy hints about the good ones. Many of the films that try to pass themselves off as “scary” are just gory, or stupid, or lame. Some of them mistake blood for fear, which it isn’t, if you ask me. Fear is something more sneaky. Fear is about the half-glimpsed thing hiding in the woods. Fear is about what you can’t see more than what you can. I prefer something that achieves eerieness, something that makes my flesh crawl. Something that might even rob me of some sleep.

Which brings us to Number One on my top-five, all-time scary movie list:

1. “The Exorcist”

The only movie that has made me frightened before I even saw it. Just the idea is creepy. The devil taking control of your body. Well, the idea is pretty creepy as it is executed in THIS movie. Not in movies like “Lost Souls”. The turning of the head. The message that rises out of the little girl’s stomach. The overall tone of the movie. Those harrowing last twenty minutes. The phrases that come out of the poor girl’s mouth. I have never seen any horror movie that had such an impact on me. Easily still as horrifying and shocking today as it was twenty-seven years ago. Some have said that since this movie was made, it no longer retains its ability to shock. Some say that audiences have been too jaded since then. I say that’s all bullshit. This is still the creepiest thing ever to come down the pike.

2. “Texas Chainsaw Massacre”

The original, mind you. Not the sequels, not the crappy remake (which is, however, almost worth seeing just to see a young Matthew McConaughey as a sicko tow-truck driver, at least it does have one genuinely unsettling moment…and Rene Zellweger is in it too) I am talking about the first “Texas Chainsaw Massacre”. This movie is truly shocking and unsettling. Like all master horror films, it does nothing to prepare you for the first scare. Suddenly, out of nowhere….well, I’ll let you see it for yourself. Despite its title, this movie is a triumph of eerie atmosphere and true horror, not of sheer gore for gore’s sake. Leatherface is a genuinely terrifying foe, unlike most of his horror movie ilk (he would literally have Freddy Krueger and Jason for dinner) and a force to be reckoned with. It also is sorta like the original “Blair Witch Project”. It’s so low-budget that it actually looks like it is really happening, or like something that actually did happen. Therefore, all the dark humor in the world (incredibly dark humor) cannot dilute the fear that is reaching out of the screen and seizing you by the throat. Not only that, but it’s a one-movie argument against picking up hitchhikers.

3. “Night of the Living Dead”

Unsettling and disturbing are also two great words to describe this, the mother of all zombie movies. Black and white and bringing new definition to the word “stark”, this movie works mainly because of its unpredictability and the claustrophobic aura it creates. Racism and other tensions run high between a group of people as they fight against an army of flesh-eating zombies baying at their door. You don’t know who will live and who will die. The movie also wins bonus points for its unique casting of a black man as the hero. Very creepy stuff, with a dark human commentary at its center.

4. “Evil Dead”

The other “Evil Dead” movies are just plain fun, but this one is harrowing to its icy core. The humor that made the others palattable is not in evidence here, or rather it is of a much darker strain than that of the other films. It is also the one time that gore actually works for a film. The movie succeeds mainly due to its goosebump-causing tone and its unique and ground-breaking bag of cinematic tricks. Not to mention the solid work of an impossibly fresh-faced Bruce Campbell. Sam Raimi’s Hollywood calling card.

5. “Poltergeist”

Tobe Hooper has two movies on this list. What a man. No one does horror any better than him. “Salem’s Lot” is pretty darn good too, although not quite good enough to eek its way onto this list. Anyway, this story of a young girl and mysterious forces in the most haunted house I have ever seen has more scares on it than you can ask of a movie (with the exception of “The Exorcist”). Good performances, creepy moments coming one after another, and many other virtues. A wild, twisted, and eerie ride.

5 1/2. “Scream”

The rest of the movie is nothing but an exercise in hip self-awareness, although a much more fun and involving exercise in hip self-awareness than its two successors and the endless list of clones that it inspired, but the first scene is truly terrifying. Poor, beautiful Drew Barrymore: alone in the house and called by a man who starts out rather sexy and interesting and then turns a lot more scary. The shocking part? SPOILER ALERT: Drew is the biggest star in the movie, and she ends up gutted by the time the opening credits roll. Yikes. That is creepy.

If you don’t want something terrifying on Halloween, however, well, there are some alternatives that are just plain fun.

“Sleepy Hollow”

Beautiful cinematography, decapitations, a dense and wonderful visual style and a hilarious and droll performance by Johnny Depp.

“Evil Dead 2″

For sheer fun and inventive gore, accept no substitutes. Bruce Campbell’s physical comedy here deserves favorable comparison to Buster Keaton and the effects are remarkable. Pure bloodthirsty fun from beginning to end.

“Ghostbusters”

Ghosts, Bill Murray, best comedy in the history of time. Nuff said.

“An American Werewolf in London”

A remarkable eerie tone, the best werewolf transformation in history (all on camera and all stunningly realistic) and some very funny moments of dark comedy. Also includes the funniest rotting corpse in cinematic history.

“Dead Alive”

Dark, violent, often hilarious, very sickening. A good time all around.

That should be enough to make your Halloween a good time. Just pick up some candy and popcorn, put on a costume, and let the fun (and maybe lack of sleep) begin. Enjoy.

Share on Facebook

By Dale Nauertz

Yes, friends and neighbors, it is once more that time of year. Summer has blown its wad like an impatient prom date and now we are left with Fall and Winter. A great many of the studios’ true show ponies and Oscar contenders will be trotted out for our amusement in the coming months. I have analyzed the Fall Preview Issues of both Premiere AND Entertainment Weekly and, as I have the past couple of years, I have made a list of the films that look the least likely to suck. These are the films I will be viewing for sure in the next few months. And I thought you might like a heads up on them as well. So here they are, in order of enthusiasm.

1. “Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers”

I wasn’t that jacked up to see the first installment of this series, “Fellowship of the Ring”. But then I saw the movie and it began a love affair with a film such as I have not been treated to in quite some time. The film enthralled me. It riveted me. It got me addicted. I saw it more times in the theater than any other film. Does that mean it’s my favorite film ever? No. Does it mean that it would be one of my ten favorite films of all time? Probably not. But the film did hook me. So the prospect of another one, right on the heels of that one, made at the same time and before any of the greatness of the first one and creative gusto of the first film could dissipate on the part of the filmmakers involved has me drooling, quite frankly. I can guarantee you that this man will be there opening day to see “The Two Towers”. I want to see the continuation of this magnificent quest. I want to see the battle of Helm’s Deep. I want to see the Ents. I want to see more of Gollum. And, of course, I want to see SARUMAN! I cannot friggin’ wait. That’s all there is to it. Needless to say, I am taking the day off of work, and seeing the film at least once opening day.

2. “The Gangs of New York”

You may remember that this film was on my list last year (it was number one, in fact, with a bullet or two). Well, it never came out, it’s supposed to come out this year, and I am still burning to see it. My Scorsese mania has passed (or has gone into hibernation, at least) but the concept of a new film by this master of cinema, one involving elements of both the western and gangster genres and with Daniel Day Lewis running around like a badass in a tophat and the sort of moustache that went out of style in the 1910’s has me galvanized with excitement. Also, we get to see Leonardo DiCaprio work again, which is an exciting concept to those of us who like him (and screw the rest of you idiots). Oh, and the trailer kicks some major ass. This movie looks like a hell of a time.

3. “Catch Me if You Can”

Speaking of DiCaprio, he’s also in this film, playing the most successful con man in U.S. history. This film is based on the true story of a man who defrauded banks, airlines and universities and got a ton of money in the process. The man then went on to become a respected member of the U.S. security community. If that isn’t enough to entice you, the movie is directed by Steven Spielberg (who masterfully guided many awesome films, but proved he’s still got it with this year’s “Minority Report”) and stars, aside from Leo, Tom Hanks, Martin Sheen, Jennifer Garner and Christopher Walken. It can’t help but be good.

4. “Confessions of a Dangerous Mind”

According to this film, and the man’s own autobiography, Chuck Barris was not only the host of the infamous Gong Show, but he was also a top secret agent of the U.S. government and an assassin. George Clooney is directing this oddball would-be gem and Sam Rockwell, one of the finest of modern character actors, gets his chance to carry the movie as the afore-mentioned Barris. Drew Barrymore and the irritatingly ubiquitous Julia Roberts are also in evidence. And the whole madcap romp is written by Charlie Kauffman, one of the absurd geniuses who pulled the strings on “Being John Malkovich”. I just have a really good, weird feeling about this one.

5. “Adaptation”

Contrary to popular opinion, I do not hate Nicolas Cage. When he’s good, he’s DAMN good. When he’s not, however, he’s (as my friend Ben describes him) A sleeping pill. He really sucks, and he has shown a real shitty aptitude for picking material lately (not to mention wives…. Lisa Marie PRESLEY? The Hell?). I didn’t have to see “Captain Corelli’s Mandolin” or “Family Man” to smell the odor of crap hanging about them. He hasn’t had a worthwhile film behind him since “Bringing Out the Dead”. And that was three years ago (well, it seems longer). But “Adaptation” is the sort of bizarre thing that Nic can bat right out of the park. It’s by the writer and director of “Being John Malkovich” and it requires him to (A) be fat (B) be twins (C) obsess over Meryl Streep and (D) do all sorts of weird things. This might be the sort of thing that can redeem Nic’s sorry ass and make me respect him again. Well, here’s hoping, anyway.

6. “Die Another Day”

Bond, James Bond. Pierce Brosnan is back. He beds a couple women, blows up a few things, drinks a few martinis, and saves the world again. And all is right with the world. Sure, “The World is Not Enough” was not my favorite Bond movie (it was my least favorite of all Brosnan’s films, though it did have a lot of good moments). But it was still damn entertaining. And aside from “The Man With the Golden Gun”, no Bond movie has been outright bad. They’re always a lot of fun. Where else can you get such a guarantee? Sure, I thought “XXX” had its charms. But it will be nice to kick back with the one secret agent you can most rely on. Nobody does it better, you know.

7. “Punch Drunk Love”

Adam Sandler and P.T. Anderson. There is no way in hell that these two names should be in the same sentence. And yet, P.T. Anderson, the man behind “Magnolia” and “Boogie Nights” has decided to make a film starring Adam Sandler, the desperate man-child imp and darling of stupid movie aficionados everywhere. Is Anderson finally making a misstep? Or does he see something that the rest of us don’t? This will either be a revelation or a trainwreck. Either way, I can’t wait to see it.

8. “Femme Fatale”

DE PALMA! I rest my case.

9. “Rules of Attraction”

A weird, dark little movie about teenagers and their various problems by the co-writer of “Pulp Fiction” (Roger Avery). I have a good feeling about this movie. It looks nice and twisted. Could be a good, bitter time.

10.”Solaris”

Clooney and Soderbergh together once more. This time in space. With James Cameron producing. It sounds like a meditation on life and death set in the cosmos: the sort of thing that movies like “2001: A Space Odyssey” have done before, but few others have attempted. This could really be something. And, whatever it is, I’m sure it won’t suck.

Well, there you have it: the ten films that I most have a hankering to check out. I don’t think any of them will really disappoint me (but I have been wrong before) and I’m not ruling out any dark horses that might sneak into the race. All in all, this year has been a good one and it should be interesting to see what lies ahead.

Share on Facebook

By Dale Nauertz

Tonight I had the great pleasure of meeting an honest-to-God famous person. Well, a famous person that you may not know. Bruce Campbell: American cinema’s best kept secret.

For the uninitiated out there: Bruce Campbell is the star of the “Evil Dead” film trilogy. He is the man with the chainsaw hand. The guy who says things like “Groovy” and “Gimme some sugar, baby”. He is the epitome of cool in a zombie crisis situation. But the great thing about him in these movies is that he isn’t the brightest of guys. He’s just the only guy who is around to deal with the problem. He isn’t the greatest of heroes. He’s just the only person around. A bit of a jerk, really, but he has to rise to the challenge. Therein lies the greatness of Bruce Campbell. He’s a fearless actor.

Sure, he isn’t the greatest thespian ever to appear on film, but he has a real charm to him. There’s just something great about him. He’s not afraid to do anything on film. He’s genuinely funny, with a slapstick air about him and a technique with physical comedy that makes him a bit of an heir to the throne of Buster Keaton (look no further than the scene where his hand becomes possessed in “Evil Dead 2″, it’s a gutbuster). He also is a master of what I like to call “eyebrow acting”. “Eyebrow acting” is just how it sounds: it’s conveying emotions with the eyebrows. But some people just don’t know how to use eyebrows properly. They don’t know the delicate range of emotions that a great flick of the eyebrows can convey. It’s an art that a lot of actors just don’t make use of. I only notice it because, in my few cinematic roles (videos shot by Ben Heckendorn) I have been told that I am very good at using my eyebrows. Therefore, I tend to notice it in other actors. But that isn’t all that he does well. Like Kurt Russell at his best (though better than Kurt) he has mastered the art of underplaying in a crisis situation. He has mastered the art of the one-liner.

In short: he rules.

But enough of eyebrows and other things. During a fifteen minute Q and A session, Bruce answered many questions that even those who are not interested in zombie flicks might find interesting. One of Bruce’s upcoming roles, for example, is that of a wrestling announcer in his friend Sam Raimi’s new movie. A little movie called “Spider Man”. Perhaps you’ve heard about it. Anyways, Bruce has the pivotal role of the man who names Spider Man. Really! He’s the announcer of a wrestling match between Tobey Maguire’s Spider-Man and “Macho Man” Randy Savage. Tobey tells Bruce that he is “The Human Spider” and Bruce shakes his head. He then announces him as “The Amazing Spider Man”. “So, without me, the movie would be called ‘The Human Spider’.”

Bruce also told us a little something about a film called “Bubba Ho Tep”. Now, get a load of the plot of this one: Bruce plays Elvis Presley at age 68, now living in a retirement home. Ossie Davis is also in the film, as an elderly man who believes that he is JFK. See, Ossie thinks that he was painted black and put in the retirement home and that part of his brain is still being kept alive in the White House somewhere. He also believes that there is an ancient Aztec mummy roaming the halls of the retirement home sucking the souls out of the patrons through their assholes. I could not make this shit up. But I am glad someone has. It sounds like the most gonzo premise since “Being John Malkovich” and I, for one, hope that it doesn’t go straight to video the way that some sacreligious fan suggested this evening.

He also said that he will not be involved in the fifth “Phantasm” movie. But I don’t think anyone really gave a shit about that one anyway. Though, if Bruce were in it…..

Anyway, Bruce is the most personable and fun guy you could ever hope to meet. He’s a wonderful guy who actually seems a lot less conceited than most average people I have met. He allowed me to have my picture taken with him and signed a copy of his book, which, by the way, is the reason that he was in town. It’s called “If Chins Could Kill: Confessions of a B-Movie Actor” and, unlike most books about celebrities, this one is about the harsh reality of working in Hollywood as told by one of those people who slave away at it for years without achieving super-stardom. Think about it for a second and you’ll realize just how cool a concept that is. We all know what life is like for the Bruce Willises and Steven Spielbergs of the world. But what about the, well, the Bruce Campbells? If this intrigues you, then I whole-heartedly urge you to rush out and pick up a copy of his book. It’s twenty-five bucks well spent, from what I read while waiting in line to shake hands with the man. That’s right, I actually SHOOK HANDS with the guy who played Brisco County Jr.

All this may not mean anything to you, but to the true movie nuts like me…well, it’s just plain awesome. I will never forget the night I met Bruce Campbell and I will always be able to look at what he wrote me in the front of his book and smile.

“Dale-

Hail to the King.

Bruce.”

Cool. I’m still giddy about it!

Share on Facebook

By Dale Nauertz

This year has sucked, as far as movies are concerned. Oh sure, we’ve had a couple decent flicks. We’ve had “Moulin Rouge”, which was an amazing movie and probably would have been head and shoulders above all others in ANY film year. We’ve had “The Tailor of Panama”, my second favorite film of this year, which was remarkably witty, powerful and daring. But for the most part, it’s been tough going at the cineplex. Even the other great stuff has been fairly overrated: “Shrek” was cute and pretty funny, but I am officially sick of hearing about it. “Memento” was a neat trick, but I still think that far too many people have been jizzing over it. It’s not bad, but it’s not as amazing as everyone else seems to think. And the great critical response to “A.I.” just proves how weak this year has been. Until the last twenty minutes, this is Spielberg (Kubrick?) at his best. But then you’ve got those last twenty minutes, which shoot the entire, intelligent and fascinating film directly in the foot.

So I eagerly anticipate the rest of the year. There is some promising stuff yet to come. Thank God. Perhaps, like last year, the greatest films of the year are still ahead of us. I sincerely hope so. I am getting tired of disappointment. These are the films that I have the most hope for. They are the ones that I am keeping my eye on with anxious anticipation.

So, without any further ado, here it is.

1. “The Gangs of New York”

Scorsese has been passionate about making this movie for years. That gives me hope. I mean, come on. When the man responsible for “Raging Bull” and “Taxi Driver” is passionate about something, it’s worth your time. Scorsese is one of the legends and it will be nice to see what he does with this story: the story of warring factions on the streets of New York City as it is born in the 1860’s. The cast is also worthy of note: Leonardo DiCaprio (who I believe is one of the best actors of his generation), Daniel Day Lewis, Liam Neeson, and Cameron Diaz. My highest hopes are riding on this film. Should be interesting, to say the least.

2. “Vanilla Sky”

I would line up to see anything that Cameron Crowe does. He has never disappointed me. In fact, the opposite is true. Each time he crafts a film, he puts such a wealth of heart, soul, humor and brains into it that it just reminds you how hollow eighty percent of other films are. This is said to be a departure for Crowe. It is Crowe’s stab at a Hitchcock type of movie, from what I hear. It stars Tom Cruise (who was never better than in Crowe’s amazing “Jerry Maguire”: “Magnolia” be damned!), Jason Lee, Cameron Diaz, Penelope Cruz (not so thrilled about that) and Kurt Russell. In fact, early word that I have heard claims that Russell is so good in this that an Oscar might be in order. Don’t know about you, but any movie that might get Snake Plissken an award is definitely worthy of my time.

3. “From Hell”

London, 1890’s. Fog. Dark, cobblestone streets. Shadows. Gaslights. Jack the Ripper. Stylish direction. Johnny Depp. Sounds fine to me. I’m a sucker for Victorian England movies. Anything involving Sherlock Holmes, for example. So I’m waiting eagerly for this one. Plus, it had a cool trailer.

4. “The Majestic”

It’s by Frank Darabont, who batted his last two films (”The Shawshank Redemption” and “The Green Mile”) out of the park. So it should be interesting to see what he does with something that is not only not a Stephen King adaptation but is also a Capraesque comedy involving McCarthyism and amnesia. Plus, BRUCE CAMPBELL is in it! Yay! Oh, and Jim Carrey is the star of the piece. Martin Landau is here too, which is worth noting. But, uh, BRUCE CAMPBELL is in it! Would be higher on the list if not for the fact that Carrey looks like he’s trying to wrangle an Oscar again. It’s still got me excited.

5. “The Man Who Wasn’t There”

It’s by the Coen Brothers, two of the most original voices in modern cinema. It’s their return to their film noir roots. It’s got a laconic barber played by Billy Bob Thornton in it. Also on hand are James Gandolfini, Frances McDormand and Tony Shalhoub. Outta be fun.

6. “Monsters Inc.”

Pixar is back. Since Pixar have made movies that are both innovative and funny as hell with the “Toy Story” flicks and “A Bug’s Life”, I’ll see anything they have to offer. It also has the voices of Billy Crystal and John Goodman. I could use a good laugh, and this looks like the best chance for it.

7. “The Royal Tenenbaums”

It’s by the guys who made “Rushmore”! It’s got Bill Murray, Gene Hackman and Luke Wilson in it! It should be sharp and hilarious. Hell, “Bottle Rocket” was even excellent!

8. “K-Pax”

Jeff Bridges, meet Kevin Spacey. Kevin Spacey, meet Jeff Bridges. You two play nice now. Two of my favorite actors, one of them may be an alien. No, that’s the premise of the film. Though, you never can tell…..

9. “Heist”

David Mamet (”The Untouchables”, “State and Main”) wrote and directed this heist film starring the likes of Danny DeVito, Gene Hackman, Ricky Jay, Sam Rockwell, and Delroy Lindo. I’m a sucker for a heist flick, and this one certainly sounds promising.

10. “The Fellowship of the Ring”

Read the book, guess it was good. May as well see the movie. I just love it when a small, independent film like this gets a chance. If you can’t tell, I’m being sarcastic. I suppose I have to see this movie. May as well get it over with.

So there you are. Though something tells me that none of these movies is going to top “Moulin Rouge”. I don’t know, man, I just don’t see myself going to any of the ones I have just listed six times. But I do hope that I’m wrong. I just wanna be knocked off my feet by a movie the way that “Moulin Rouge” did. But I will settle for being marvelously entertained.

Share on Facebook

By Dale Nauertz

There seems to be a lot of confusion over the ending of the new film “Planet of the Apes”. Mostly, I believe, because people hate to think. They want everything wrapped neatly up with a little bow. Poor dears. Personally, I like a movie that challenges my mind, if only to fuck with it a little. How else can I explain the number of times that I’ve seen “Total Recall” just to figure out if it’s a dream or not. (I never figured that out, but I think that’s the whole point. And I think that’s cool.) The net is swarming with theories about the ending. Every day, it seems a new one pops up. Again, I think that’s great. It’s like a sort of puzzle! Burton respects your intelligence enough to give you something to puzzle about afterward, something to mull over around the water cooler.

So I decided to offer my own, somewhat less convoluted than most, explanation of the ending of “Planet of the Apes”. If you haven’t seen the film, then don’t read this, like a dumb ass, and then bitch at me for giving things away. I mean, Duh! They’re your eyes, you choose what you look at with them. I’m not going to take responsibility for that. You screwed your own pooch. Though I don’t think it’s a major worry. If you haven’t seen the film, you probably won’t know what I’m talking about anyway.

Okay, I saw it again the other night and here it goes. My friend Adam and I saw it and, on the way home in a massive rain storm, we think we may have figured out the end of the movie.

Get a load of this:

When the Oberon crashed, wouldn’t Earth send a rescue mission? Wouldn’t they send a ship to find the Oberon and find out what happened? And, if so, wouldn’t they use that same tracker device that Wahlberg had to find the Oberon wreckage. Once they did, they would find our old buddy Thade!

Thinking “WOW, look at that monkey!” they would let him go. And when they did, he would kill them all off….except for one man who could guide him back to Earth. I mean, he would want to settle his hash with Wahlberg, would he not? And it’s not unreasonable to believe that there would be a faction of apes that would still be loyal to Thade and follow him on his quest (hey, there are still neo-Nazis). So, with their captive human, they would arrive on Earth and, taking the planet by surprise, kill off a lot of humans and take over. Sure, the humans have guns, but look how much good that did Wahlberg at the end of the film. I think if an army of pissed off apes wanted to take over the planet, they could do a pretty damn good job of it.

Therefore, when Wahlberg arrives a hundred years after the start of the movie, the apes would have had a hundred years to take over and kick a lot of ass. They could have wiped out a pretty good segment of the human population by then.

At least, that was the theory that Adam and I hammered out and it’s the best theory I have figured out so far. The apes may have even got to Earth before the events of the film began, giving them more time to start some ape carnage. And they wouldn’t have gotten time to change the town of Washington D.C. over yet because they just settled into the culture that was already started by their cousins on the primate food chain: the humans. Why not? Worked for us, didn’t it? But they would have had plenty of time to kill all the humans, making them pretty flabbergasted when Wahlberg shows up.

So there you go. What do you think? It’s just a theory, mind you. And, if you find logic problems, just remember the “Mystery Science Theater 3000″ theme song: “Repeat to yourself, it’s just a show, I should really just relax.”

And, if you still are whining about the ending’s lack of sense, let me quote Russell Crowe in last year’s overrated “Gladiator”:

“Were you not entertained?”

Share on Facebook

By Dale Nauertz

It happens every year. Every year there is that BIG SUMMER ACTION MOVIE. You know what I’m talking about: the one that everyone and their brother is supposed to flock to. The one that is WHAT SUMMER is all about. And, invariably, it burns you. Because it is usually shit.

Oh, you doubt me? Hmmm, well, think it over. What did we have last year? “Mission: Impossible 2″. No wonder everyone thought last year was such a shitty movie year. It had this right smack dab in the middle of it. It wasn’t as horrible as I initially thought. No, I will confess. The plot is actually pretty solid. But it’s too long, its action scenes are way over the top, and Tom takes a major career backstep in it as far as acting is concerned. So it wasn’t as awful as I thought at first, but it was still a far cry from great. So they filled it full of explosions and put a lot of hype behind it. You can see almost anything with a lot of hype and explosions. If we learned anything from that Piece of Shit “Independence Day”, that should have been it. But I can’t just pick on “MI-2″. No, no. That’s not why I am sitting at my computer and communicating with all you fine people in cyberspace.

No. I am here to pick on “Pearl Harbor”.

If “Mission Impossible 2″ was the only example, we could just forget all about it. A fluke, you would say. Not even that awful of a movie, really. No big deal. Well, did you take stupid pills? Have you forgotten the awful dreck we have swallowed in the past few years? The shit that was supposed to be “Entertainment”? I sure as shit have not.

The following is a list of shitty movies that were forced down our throats in the summer moviegoing season:

“Independence Day”
“Batman Forever”
“Batman and Robin”
“Battlefield Earth”
“Armageddon” (or as Ben Heckendorn calls it: “I’m armageddon-a-headache”)
“Scary Movie”
“The Perfect Storm”
“Austin Powers 2″

And, lest ye forget, “The Phantom Menace”. Each of these movies could qualify as a crime against humanity itself. Each of these movies robbed me of hours I could have better spent clipping my toenails or masturbating or picking up cans along the roadside or WORKING. Any of those activities would be preferable. Oh, I even got conned into enjoying “The Phantom Menace” somehow. Deep down inside of me there was a small child who still loved anything Star Wars and refused to accept that the movie was not so great. Deep down inside, I was in denial. The THX and the nostalgia and the memories of better movies actually led to me being entertained. I apologize. I see now the error of my ways. But each of these movies was bad. But they each made money. Well, okay, “Battlefield Earth” didn’t make money, but it only proves there’s only so much shit that even AMERICANS will swallow.

My point? Each year there is a new, shitty movie with incredible hype and a well-cut trailer that makes anyone who has ever gone to a movie come out of hiding and salivate and get their butts into the seat. Sometimes, be it the air conditioning or the THX or the popcorn smells emanating from the lobby, the movie actually is somewhat enjoyable. And some of those movies are good. Some. But most of them, the ones with the most hype, suck. Suck big, in fact. Hype is usually a good indication that a movie is going to blow, and blow big time. It was the tremendous hype on “Men in Black” that killed it for me the first time I saw it. But that movie actually was good. It was the exception that proved the rule. It had style, it had class, it had wit. Something every movie on that list could have benefited from. Hype is another tool Hollywood uses when it realizes it has a dead dog on its hands. It’s a way to make their money back. Hell, they’re in business to make money. Any Hollywood executive who tells you he’s in it for the art, they’re bullshitting you. They’re making money. And when they put as much cash into a sick cow as they did “Pearl Harbor”, of course they are going to lure you into the theater any way they know how. They are going to hype this bitch up like it’s the second coming of Christ.

A good movie, you see, doesn’t need the hype. It relies on reviews and word of mouth. It relies on people who have seen the movie and will tell you that it is worthwhile. Example? “Titanic”. There was no hype on “Titanic”. Now you’re probably thinking: “Bullshit! I saw hype!” No, you didn’t you ignorant fool. You saw a couple ads. After that, it was just your friends harping on how great it was (it was great, just admit defeat right now) and urging you to go to the theater. If you went and it didn’t live up to those expectations, well, that was your friends making this thing sound impossibly great. Hollywood didn’t need to rub your face in the shit. They did that later, when “Titanic” was doing gangbusters and the studio realized they could make a little extra off it. That was reverse hype, not Hype. Hype is when, two weeks before the movie comes out, you see a print ad every time you open the newspaper, you are bombarded with music videos, you are firebombed and blitzkrieged by television commercials whenever you mistakenly pass by a television. Hype is what got us all into “Independence Day”. Hype is what lured you into “Godzilla”. Hype is what made “Armageddon” a hit. (God Help Us All!)

And that was the problem, dear friends. “Armageddon” was SHIT. Oh, yes it was. Don’t dispute it, you’re fighting a battle you cannot possibly win. It had a shitty romance, it had a lame ending, it had some fun stuff toward the front of the movie and then slowly turned to shit later on. It was patriotic, dumb bullshit with a hot chick in it (what would one of these retard movies be without a hot chick?) and it made a shitload of money because our brains seem to rust when it’s hot. “Armageddon” made money, so Micheal Bay and Jerry Bruckheimer were able to profit and go on to RAPE AMERICAN HISTORY by using their immense hype talents on-

“PEARL HARBOR”!

It’s a “Titanic” wannabe. Look at it! Look it right in the eyes! Two attractive people (Sorry, THREE, this is what’s known in Hollywood as ORIGINALITY) and a big disaster. “Titanic” worked, because it had characters we cared about and its effects were excellent and it had a heart and a soul. This is a clone of that. And we all know that clones have no soul. The original of something has a life to it. The clone of that same thing is just that thing warmed over. It’s like those guys who want to be black and turn their hat backwards. It doesn’t work, because everyone can see through it. Well, if you can’t see through it, “Pearl Harbor” is going to work. “Titanic” made money so Bay and ShitHeimer thought “Hell, WE can do that!” But they can’t. Neither of them is James Cameron. Want proof? Before “Titanic”, Cameron made “Terminator 2″, “Aliens” and “True Lies”. Before “Pearl Harbor” Bay has made “Armageddon”, “The Rock” (an entertaining flick, yes, but it does not prove he can do anything serious) and “Bad Boys”. You remember what a pile of shit “Bad Boys” was, don’t you? I sure as hell do. Ugh! I rest my case. Cameron cares about his characters. All evidence proves that Bay does not.

So if there are no characters to care about (one of them is Ben Affleck, so I’m pretty sure there aren’t), what do we care when the bombing happens? Yes, it was a terrible tragedy, but if we don’t like any of the people, it becomes nothing more than a bunch of “Cool” explosions, and that is entirely against the point. The battle stuff in “Saving Private Ryan” was harrowing. Harrowing. It was cool in that it was effective. But if we see people who could have been our grandparents being blown apart and think “Cool Explosion”, well, the movie is NOT doing its job. That’s my point. If this movie were being made by Spielberg or Cameron, I would be there opening night. If Coppola or Aronofsky or David Lean were making this movie, I would be first in line. Those are filmmakers who understand human drama, and know how to put us through the wringer. They know how to stage an explosion that has a point, that MEANS something. Bay does not. Nor does Bruckheimer.

Need more reasons to stay home? Okay. Here ya go.

A) There is a shitty Faith Hill song in it.

B) It WILL be as rapidly edited as a music video. No thanks. “Gladiator” was good despite that, but it’s a trick that won’t work too often.

C) It’s only PG-13. How the fuck can an effective War movie be PG-13? Huh? Tell me that!

D) The most intriguing stories in it are the real-life stories (from what I’ve read). So why not make the movie more true to life? Why not ditch the sappy love story (I’ve heard some of the lines of dialogue. One of them is “I’m going to give Danny my whole heart, but I’ll never see another sunset without thinking of you”. CLUNK. Remember this was the guy who brought you that fucking animal crackers scene!) and concentrate on the stuff that, oh, I don’t know, ACTUALLY HAPPENED!!???

E) The animal crackers scene in “Armageddon”.

I rest my case. If you go see this movie, you will just encourage this sort of stupid shit to keep going on. Movies in the summer (and every other time) will just keep getting worse and worse. They will just keep making shit this bad. Summer movies used to not suck. Remember “Ghostbusters”? “Jaws”? “Raiders of the Lost Ark”? These were summer films! Movies can be that good again, we just have to raise the bar. We must draw a line in the sand and say “No more of this bullshit! Respect my intelligence!” Women demand a certain amount of respect before they will allow a man to get into their pants. Why can’t we demand the same thing of a movie before it can worm it’s way into our wallet? We can! We should! Stand up! In the immortal words of Twisted Sister, just say “We’re Not Gonna Take It!”

If you must see a good love story about Pearl Harbor, rent “From Here to Eternity”. If you want to see the bombing done magnificently, rent “Tora, Tora, Tora”. You can make a difference. Voting is difference. That requires filling out a piece of paper. This requires not giving up your money. People actually LISTEN to that. Stop bitching about movies and put your money where your mouth is. It’s the only way these greedy Hollywood pricks are gonna learn.

(And, yes, I have been reading a lot of Carlin lately. This one’s for you, George, I’m sure you’d agree.)

Share on Facebook

By Dale Nauertz

Yes, it’s that time of year again. Time for everyone in Hollywood to tell us that they actually make uplifting and/or “important” films all year by selecting the four or five films of the year that actually made a difference. Well, most years anyway. But, apparently, not this year. The year 2000 was not as bad a year as most people say it was, but you would never know that from the damn Oscars.

Yes, I loved “Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon”. I thought “Traffic” and “Erin Brockovich” were both fine films. And I thought “Gladiator” was pretty good. But “pretty good” is nowhere near “Best Picture”, folks.

I mean, come on! Hey, Academy! Get your dick out of “Gladiator”’s ass already! Jeez! It was only a few notches above a Bruckheimer film! In fact, if you had Jerry Bruckheimer produce “Ben-Hur” and morph it with “Spartacus” the results would be not unlike “Gladiator”. It has the same “world through a pair of shades” tone to it. It has the same rapid, concentration-deficit editing style. The only difference is that it has a fairly compelling story and some great acting. But that does NOT make it the best film of the year.

The Best Film of the Year? It was possibly “Quills” or “Almost Famous” or “Cast Away”. But guess what? None of those films were even NOMINATED!!!!! Horse shit, I say! How anyone can look me in the eye and tell me that “Gladiator” was better than any of these films is beyond me. IT is a crock. Easily the least great picture to win Best Picture in the past ten years. Ridley Scott is an overrated windbag of a director, too, by the way. All style. All the same style since “Blade Runner” and none of them all that hot. I liked “Gladiator”, I liked “Thelma and Louise” and I liked “Hannibal” fairly well. But based on the strength of these films, I would rate him as nothing more than a competent hack. That’s it.

“Gladiator” is not even as good as “Charlie’s Angels” for the love of Christ!

Anyway, aside from their lavishing awards on “Gladiator” I thought the awards were fairly competent. Oh, and the oversight of “Almost Famous”, “Cast Away” and “Quills” that is. Oh, and “Nurse Betty”. Steve Martin was a breath of fresh air. He was much funnier than just about anyone ever to host the Awards, and lightyears better than Whoopi (couldn’t even sit through the 1998 awards thanks to her). Ernest Lehman deserves his recognition (Better late than never, I suppose). For writing “North by Northwest” and “Sabrina” alone he deserves an award. Dino has produced more movies than God and was worthy of his award as well.

Glad to see Benicio get recognized. He is awesome in just about anything. Thank God Cameron Crowe and Steven Soderbergh were recognized (the least the fucking Academy can do after mainly stiffing Crowe’s film) and the awards given to “Crouching Tiger” were nice to see also. I thought Ellen Burstyn deserved Best Actress, but Julia was my second choice and her acceptance speech dissolved my skepticism as I watched. However, how the Academy can stiff both Tom and Geoffrey for their best performances ever (Make it a tie) and give it to the utterly humorless Russell Crowe (thought he was gonna kill Steve Martin) is a travesty. Russell is a good actor, true, but not as good as either of those other men. Or Ed Harris, for that matter. Based on his work in that CLIP from “Pollock” I would almost be tempted to give him the award.

Vincent Price, oops, Bob Dylan deserved his award for Best Song (just listen to the songs and tell me he didn’t). And Bjork? What the hell is that woman on? I wanna know someday. A Swan dress? Uh, no comment. And it was nice to see Marcia Gay Harden even get mentioned! I have been interested by her work since I saw her in “Miller’s Crossing”. I didn’t see “Pollock” but it looks like a powerful work and she is always very good in anything. See her in “Space Cowboys” in fact.

So, in summary, the night was a sham and a travesty and a real pain in the ass. But it usually is and at least Steve Martin made everything worth sitting through. Nice to see someone funny aside from Billy (and funnier than Crystal, come on) hosting the things for a change.

Hope he’s back next year. And I hope that next year the Oscars award something of higher quality that tackles more important issues and comments upon the human condition in a refreshing and compelling manner.

Something like, oh, I don’t know, “Charlie’s Angels”.

Share on Facebook

By Jason Jones

I should have known. I really should have. When was the last time the Oscars got it right anyway? I don’t know, but it’s been awhile. Maybe with “Titanic”, but who knows. This year seemed like they were going to screw it up again, but then events towards the end of the show made it seem as if the Academy voters were going to extract themselves from the rectal cavity of “Gladiator” and do the right thing after all.

Boy was I wrong! The false hope came in the form of Stephen Gaghan winning adapted screenplay for “Traffic”, Cameron Crowe taking original screenplay honors for “Almost Famous” and the biggest shock of the night, Steven Soderbergh taking home a much deserved best director award for “Traffic”. I couldn’t believe it. They had gotten three in a row right! When was the last time this happened?!? After Soderbergh’s win, I had high hopes that they were going to actually give the best picture to a deserving film such as “Traffic”. Boy was I in another world. We’re going to give it to “Gladiator” instead of giving it to a film that has an important message behind it.

Don’t get me wrong. I like “Gladiator”. I really do. It’s a well done popcorn film with some wonderful performances (but not that wonderful). It is a pretty good film that had no right being anywhere near the stage on Oscar night. I can name at least ten films that were better this past year and I think I will. “Quills”, “Wonder Boys”, “Requiem For a Dream”, “Traffic”, “Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon”, “Almost Famous”, “Space Cowboys”, “Dr. T. & The Women”, “Erin Brockovich”, “The Patriot” are just ten of the many that were better films than “Gladiator”.

The crowning of “Gladiator” as the best picture of 2000 is the lone reason why people will look back on the body of films from 2000 as nothing more than a joke. This is totally unfounded and something I have been thinking about a bit lately. I actually think, hang onto your butts, that 2000 may have been a better year than 1999, but that salvo will be held back until I unleash my best of 2000 list, which will be arriving before too long.

I guess there were some other awards handed out on Oscar night, which felt more like career recognition night than rewarding the best of the best. I figure I will go through each of the major categories and tell you who won and who I thought should have won. That sounds like fun.

BEST ACTOR

Javier Bardem (”Before Night Falls”)
Russell Crowe (”Gladiator”)
Tom Hanks (”Cast Away”)
Ed Harris (”Pollock”)
Geoffrey Rush (”Quills”)

This one really irritated me. Somehow the Academy, in their infinite wisdom, bestowed this award on Crowe. WHY?!?!? The only reason I can think of is that this is the Academy’s way of saying, “Sorry Russell. We screwed up last year by not giving you the award for your performance in “The Insider” (which was an Oscar worthy performance).” That is the only notion I have as to why and how they could give it to some fool going around saying “I am Maximus. Hear me roar!” over the likes of the other nominees in the category. Rush was nothing short of brilliant in “Quills”. He is the Marquis De Sade, but maybe he was a little too much for the academy in terms of his running about in little to no clothing for a large portion of the film. Piss on them! Rush rules!!! Hanks also delivered a fine performance that was augmented by the back and forth he had with a mere volleyball that took on a life of it’s own through Hanks’ grounded acting. The other two performances (by Bardem and Harris) I have not had the privilege of seeing yet, but I need to. Just based on the clips I saw of their performances on Oscar night I would have handed either of them the little gold guy over Crowe.

BEST ACTRESS

Joan Allen (”The Contender”)
Juliette Binoche (”Chocolat”)
Ellen Burstyn (”Requiem For a Dream”)
Laura Linney (”You Can Count On Me”)
Julia Roberts (”Erin Brockovich”)

This category was the only sure thing of the evening, but the sure thing was not the right thing. Julia was great in “Erin Brockovich”. Hell, I even championed her cause for the better part of last year. That was before I saw Ellen Burstyn wither away before my very eyes in “Requiem For a Dream”. It was then that I knew I had seen the BEST PERFORMANCE of 2000. There is not a flaw to be found in her performance. She takes what has to be one of the most difficult, demanding, and degrading roles ever assumed by a woman of her stature and makes it into something that is beautiful to behold, but horrifying to watch. Aside from Ellen, Joan Allen also gave her usual brilliant performance in “The Contender”. If it were not for Ellen, Joan would have been the most deserving in my eyes. Laura Linney is always great and although I haven’t seen “You Can Count On Me” yet, after seeing a clip of her performance I think I can justify saying that she deserved to be among the nominees. That is something I cannot say for Juliette Binoche, the Miramax ice princess who was here for reasons unbeknownst to myself and the majority of the cinematic world for her performance in the Oscar bait fairy tale that is “Chocolat”. Lastly, Julia, the next time you win an award could you not be quite so longwinded? As you droned on it seemed as if you were saying “I make $20 million for every movie I make, so you will listen to everything I have to say.” I think that anybody else, with the possible exception of Tom Hanks, would have had the music cued on them after about a minute and a half, but she managed to ramble for three and a half! Plus, if Tom had won, I’m thinking he would have had the class to wrap it up within an appropriate amount of time. Not good Julia, not good.

BEST DIRECTOR

Stephen Daldry (”Billy Elliot”)
Ang Lee (”Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon”)
Ridley Scott (”Gladiator”)
Steven Soderbergh (”Erin Brockovich”)
Steven Soderbergh (”Traffic”)

This one floored me. I couldn’t believe they got it right. I expected another Ang Lee win, which wouldn’t have been a bad thing, but it wouldn’t have been the right thing. This was Soderbergh’s year and I was very happy to see him rightfully rewarded for his directorial masterpiece, “Traffic”. It was also fun to watch Ridley Scott sink in his chair and look constipated, after Soderbergh’s name was announced, due to his realization that he was not going to walk on stage. I bet he was wishing that he had been a producer at that point. Oh yeah, there was that Stephen Daldry clown who made that manipulative jingoist piece of crap that goes by the name of “Billy Elliot”. I don’t care about your movie and I don’t plan on ever having to put myself through seeing it. Make something I give a shit about next time.

BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR

Jeff Bridges (”The Contender”)
Willem Dafoe (”Shadow of the Vampire”)
Albert Finney (”Erin Brockovich”)
Joaquin Phoenix (”Gladiator”)
Benicio Del Toro (”Traffic”)

I have no complaints about the selection of Del Toro in this category. I was slightly pulling for Dafoe to win, but I would have been more than happy with any one of these distinguished gentlemen taking home the award.

BEST SUPPORTING ACTRESS

Judi Dench (”Chocolat”)
Marcia Gay Harden (”Pollock”)
Kate Hudson (”Almost Famous”)
Frances McDormand (”Almost Famous”)
Julie Walters (”Billy Elliot”)

This was probably the biggest shocker of the night. Oscar pundits had been proclaiming Kate Hudson the winner for weeks in advance. This I could not understand. I thought “Almost Famous” was great, but not because of Kate. I thought she merely held her own and I can’t say that she would have been on my list of nominees for the past year. Thankfully the Academy stepped up and gave it to a fine actress, in a little known film, by the name of Marcia Gay Harden. I haven’t seen “Pollock” yet, but judging by the clips I’ve seen I’m sure she’s great in it and well deserving of the award. I was pulling for Frances McDormand in this category, but I have no complaints with the outcome. I’m just happy that the Academy brushed aside the pretentious Oscar-bait performances of Julie Walters and Judi Dench. The way things have gone in recent years I think Judi Dench could garner a nomination for taking a shit. Watch for her next year in “The Outhouse Rules”. If only the next Miramax turd in the pipe were so aptly named.

Other things that didn’t completely piss me off, but irritated me nonetheless include:

1. “Gladiator” beating out “Quills” for costume design.

2. “Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon” beating out “Quills” for art direction.

3. “Gladiator” losing the one category I felt it should win, best score, to “Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon”.

4. “Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon” beating out the often overlooked Mel Gibson revolutionary war drama “The Patriot” for best cinematography.

5. “The Grinch” beating out “The Cell” and “Shadow of the Vampire” for best makeup.

6. “Gladiator” by some stretch of the imagination taking the visual effects award from “Hollow Man”.

7. Last, but certainly not least, “U-571″ beating “Space Cowboys” for sound editing. This violates the first rule of Oscar balloting “Thou shalt not vote against Clint!”

Well, that’s about it. Once again the Oscars have irritated me in untold ways, but at least they got a few things right this year. Maybe this is a trend that will continue in years to come. I hope that is so, but I am not going to hold my breath. Instead it is much more likely that I will be impersonating Colonel Kurtz from “Apocalypse Now” come Oscar night next year. I can hear him, as “Gladiator” was announced as the best picture winner, saying those words that are his and his alone.

“The horror.”

Share on Facebook

By Dale Nauertz

Well here it is, already two months deep into the year 2001 and nary a space odyssey in evidence. The last of the big movies has finally been released in the Madison, Wisconsin area, which is the place where people like Jones and myself go to see anything of substance. The last of the Oscar bait films has been allowed to run rampant in the multiplexes (the last being “Shadow of the Vampire”, a movie that I was waiting to see before compiling this list but, despite having moments of greatness, poses no threat to fine fare like “Chicken Run”) and so it is high time that I pen this little letter of praise to the films that moved me. None of them made me cry, as far as I can remember. So right there we have a year that does not measure up to its predecessor. Sure, it is a rare thing to make me cry. There are only five films at the most that have achieved this honor. But one or two of them did rear their beautiful heads in 1999.

Contrary to popular consensus, however, this year was not the horrorshow of cinema that is reputed to be. This was not a tremendously shitty year in motion pictures. However, it wasn’t exactly a wonderful one either. The last month or so has had a wealth of fine pictures. Tis a pity they could not have been more evenly distributed throughout the course of the year. With one or two exceptions, months like June and September were arid wastelands at the local theater. December (and January of 2001, by the time most theaters got a hold of the films) were a great time to be a connoiseur of cinema, with a good number of films worthy of seeing. One weekend, in particular, ranks among my finest moviegoing experiences. And, thus, one of the most fun times I have had in my life.

Yes, I am aware that I need to get out more.

So now, without further adieu, here it comes……

THE WORST OF 2000

Hey, before I start waxing the cars of the movies I liked, it’s time to get one last shot at the ones I didn’t. The ones that I REALLY didn’t.

1. (The Worst) “How The Grinch Stole Christmas”

The cinematic equivalent of a lump of coal or even a turd in one’s stocking. Egads, this movie sucks in every conceivable way. This was one of those movies that was so bad that I left the theater in a rage. The movie takes a beloved and great Christmas special and a great Dr. Seuss book and drags it through the mud. The fact that I cannot remember a movie having this much cross merchandising should give you a sign of what is wrong here. Things are not right in Whoville. It subverts the purpose of the source material and whores it out for its own crass commercial motives. Sure, crap like “Battlefield Earth” sucks, but it didn’t piss me off quite this much.

2. “Battlefield Earth”

Oh dear. John Travolta in dreadlocks with a snot runner hanging from his nose. Forest Whitaker, taking career slump to all new lows. Rat-eating, pastel planets, godawful dialogue that offends the ear like a wrong musical note. As Marlon Brando might have said: “The horror!” Why is the camera tilting? Why so many wipes? Ugh. New lows in filmmaking ineptitude are hit here. Not every year has its own “Hudson Hawk” which, by the way, was leaps and bounds better than this sorry fiasco.

3. “American Psycho”

Pretentious crap. Nothing but. Christian Bale plays this guy so broad it’s like a cartoon. An alleged comedy that has no idea how to poke fun at American excess other than killing people. This is what passes for clever in this day and age?

Other than these, I can’t think of anything I really, flat-out hated. “The Perfect Storm” was kinda embarrassing and “Scary Movie” was overrated, though it had its moments, and “Road Trip” actually gets better the more I think about it. But these were just average, not abysmal.

WINNER OF THE 2000 “FIGHT CLUB” AWARD

This honor goes to the movie that I hated the most that has grown the most on me since my first viewing of it. “Fight Club” did this last year, as did “Eyes Wide Shut” to some extent. This year it was nothing as revolutionary as these, though it DID involve Tom Cruise.

“Mission: Impossible 2″

If you watch it again, you begin to appreciate it. It does have a solid plot and, at the very least, the action sequences do manage to stir the blood. And they are impossible and absurd, but they are addictively watchable.

Now, onto the good stuff.

THE BEST OF 2000

1. “Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon”

A beautiful, soul-stirring marriage of plot, action sequences, and lyrical beauty. It’s the most wonderful thing I’ve seen this year. A truly daring and whole-heartedly romantic film that dares you to dream. It dares you to forget the world you know and welcome one of old. One that, in fact, never existed at all. It is a tonic for the world-weary, uncynical soul. Even a cynical soul will find themselves wrapped in this intoxicating poem if they allow themselves to be. Chow Yun Fat, Zhang Ziyi, Michelle Yeoh- I commend you all. And thank you, Ang Lee, for committing your boyhood dreams to celluloid. It was truly worth it.

2. “Quills”

The most important message movie of the year, and the one that works the best. This film has the best script of the year. The dialogue is the best I have heard in a long while, and the actors all give one hundred percent. The costumes, the passion, the sterling direction and the nice ironic flourishes. All of them make this a vital movie and so much more than an average costume drama. And it has a playful, deliciously dark sense of comedy as well. a real treat and a magnificent find. You owe it to yourself to run to the theater for this one. A more important film you will not find at the current time. Or at much of any time. Bold, brilliant stuff.

3. “Cast Away”

Like “Scent of a Woman” this is one of those movies that depends completely on the strength of its leading man. It’s basically a one-man show. Great, then, that the one man in question is Tom Hanks: my favorite actor of the generation. He is riveting here. Alone on an island and nothing short of fascinating. Though the movie itself is also a marvel. Bold in its choice to forego music and voiceover narration and let the images speak for themselves. How often does that happen these days? Not very. When he gets back to land and you see the effect of his time on those around him, well, it’s even relevant. Tom astounds me yet again. And Zemeckis proves that he is still worthy of my praise.

4. “Almost Famous”

Beautifully written. A true labor of love. And the love passes onto the audience. I saw this movie more often at the theater than any other. Why? Because I love William Miller. I love Penny Lane. I want to be on tour with Stillwater. I want to be with these people. I want to be on that bus singing “Tiny Dancer” with everyone. I don’t want my heart broken. But this movie contains one of the most beautiful, truthful scenes of heartbreak that I have ever seen. And the acting is fabulous. Patrick Fugit: I look forward to seeing you in anything else. Billy Crudup, Phillip Seymour Hoffman, Frances McDormand, Jason Lee..hell, everyone. And Cameron Crowe, buddy, thanks you from the bottom of my heart.

5. “Chicken Run”

God, this movie is still great. I still love it. I still care way too much about the fates of those clay-animated chickens. This is one of those rare animated films that seems to have a soul. Don’t tell me that these chickens aren’t real. For an hour and a half, I believe in them and everything they do.

6. “Nurse Betty”

Rene Zellweger, you have stolen my heart. If you want to return it, email me and I will give you my address. Rene is the reason this movie is as high as it is. She is enchanting, incandescent in this movie. I dare you not to fall in love with her. And the rest of the movie is awesome as well. Everything works. Morgan Freeman and Chris Rock have marvelous chemistry as yin/yang hit men pursuing a plucky dreamer to her fictional lost love. A quirky, darling, dark masterpiece.

7. “High Fidelity”

Truer than you might think. Sharply written, wryly observed, and honest. Crawls inside men’s minds and gives you a surprisingly accurate description of what’s inside. John Cusack is his usual magnificent self, Stephen Frears is a great director, and Jack Black is an unruly force of nature. Dynamite stuff. Sure to be on anyone’s Top Five Romantic Comedies of All Time. And the only romantic comedy I have ever seen with a truly male slant.

8. “Requiem For a Dream”

Anyone who sees this movie and does drugs is nothing less than a fucking idiot. This is bold, daring and immensely creepy stuff. Gripping, raw and nearly sick. It pulls no punches and disturbs even the most undisturbable of moviegoers. Not exactly a treat, and no one’s idea of a fun time at the movies, but it still demands to be seen. Recommend it to a friend on drugs.

9. “Traffic”

A drug epic focusing on every facet of the drug trade. Fascinating and exhilarating. Not quite as raw as “Requiem” but also more subtle and with a wider scope. You get to know the dealers, the smugglers, the cops, the kingpins, the witnesses, the government officials and the addicts and you get to know them up close and sometimes a little too personally. Look it up on the Internet Movie Database. See the names of everyone involved? Each and every one of them did a fabulous job and is worthy of praise. And in charge of all of them, bringing all their talents together for one common goal, is Steven Soderbergh. A true man and a wonder of a director.

10. “Unbreakable”

Unfairly dismissed by both critics and audiences, this is a thinking person’s comic book. Great characters, nice twists and hairpin turns, and a darker film than you might think. The sort of popcorn movie that actually sticks to the ribs.

HONORABLE MENTIONS

“Charlie’s Angels” (Fun)

“Space Cowboys” (Fun from a master)

“The Replacements” (probably the only time you’ll see this movie so close to the top ten, but I loved it)

“You Can Count On Me” (Well done)

“Erin Brockovich” (Julia rules! So does Soderbergh!)

“The Patriot” (Exquisite to look at, well acted and worth your time)

“O Brother Where Art Thou” (Rambunctious, delightful)

MOST OVERRATED

“Gladiator” - Yes, it is good. But “Best Picture” at the Golden Globes? Not quite. Though Russell and Joaquin both rule.

“Shadow of the Vampire” - How this ended up on so many top ten lists is beyond me.

BEST SONG

“Fever Dog”- “Almost Famous”

BEST COSTUMES

“Quills” (except for Geoffrey Rush in a couple of scenes)

BEST CINEMATOGRAPHY

“The Patriot”/”Unbreakable”

BEST SCORE

“Gladiator” - Hans Zimmer does something spectacular here.

BEST VISUAL EFFECTS

“Hollow Man” - The only thing about this movie that’s worth mentioning.

BEST ACTOR

Tom Hanks (”Cast Away”)- a spellbinding performance that I think I have raved about for long enough.

Geoffrey Rush (”Quills”)- fiendishly brilliant

Russell Crowe (”Gladiator”)- Yes, Hollywood, he has finally arrived. Now try not to piss him off.

Mike White (”Chuck and Buck”)- most unnerving male performance of the year.

Mel Gibson (”The Patriot”/”What Women Want”/”Chicken Run”)-charming, angry, devastated and devastating. And he can do them all in the course of a single scene!

BEST ACTRESS

Ellen Burstyn (”Requiem For a Dream”)- Most devastating female performance of the year. She wastes away before your very eyes. If, that is, you can dare to look.

Renee Zellweger (”Nurse Betty”)- the most enchanting female performance in a good, long time.

Julia Roberts (”Erin Brockovich”)- the most unflinching heroine in years. You don’t want to cross this woman, but you are glad she’s on your side. What’s more: she’s actually human. Julia never reduces her to sainthood.

BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR

Joaquin Phoenix (”Quills”)- Wow. That’s all I can say.

Morgan Freeman (”Nurse Betty”)- Take notes, folks: THIS is class.

BEST SUPPORTING ACTRESS

Zhang Ziyi (”Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon”)- A truly stunning debut. She acts AND she can kick your ass. Even if you don’t know what she’s saying, you know she is a talent to watch out for.

Erika Christensen (”Traffic”)- Watching her descent into drugs is like watching the cutest girl in school turn into a pitiful monster.

BEST SCREENPLAY

Doug Wright (”Quills”)- Sheer brilliance.

Cameron Crowe (”Almost Famous”)- Overwhelming and wonderful at once. Frank Capra, you have been bested.

BEST DIRECTOR

Steven Soderbergh (”Traffic”/”Erin Brockovich”)-This guy is really taking charge. Either of these movies are enough to get him a nomination. Put them both together and he’s a force to be reckoned with.

Philip Kaufman (”Quills”)

Ang Lee (”Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon”)

M. Night Shyamalan (”Unbreakable”)- for proving that he can do better than “The Sixth Sense”, and that he’s no one-hit wonder.

Well, there you have it. I’m probably leaving something out. After all, I picked “American Beauty” as best film this time last year, but now I would likely give that honor to “The Straight Story” (much more moving, and infinitely beautiful). But this is the way I see it as of now. And I don’t think anything will arise to challenge any of these. If so, well, I won’t be complaining. No, 2000 wasn’t the year of Greatness that 1999 was, but if you look at the films here, I am sure you will find that it wasn’t as bad as it looked either.

Share on Facebook