Saturday, November 18, 2006
Trailer Park Handjob: 11/18/06
Watching films that change shot every third of a second, last two minutes, consist of nothing but people shouting and are only 3 inches wide is a great way to prepare for the future of cinema. Here are this week's trailers!
How about a brief snippet of the trailer for Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix? The whole thing is being played theatrically with the penguin movie Happy Feet this weekend but hunky/sexy studs/lolitas like yourselves will be watching Daniel Craig in a tiny pair of swimming trunks this weekend, right? I don't get the appeal of the penguin movie, but I am quite amused by having a trailer for a trailer. Plus points include Professor Snape being heavily featured. Minus points include everything being very blue. Digital compression makes almost any lighting effect look a bit cheap, but having Snape's office be lit by neon does seem an odd choice. Anyway, what can be said about 10 seconds of footage? Check it out here.
Here's the trailer for Zodiac, the new film from David Fincher. The question is whether this is another 'one for the studio' or another 'one for him'. It tells the story of the Zodiac killer who terrorised San Fransisco in the 70's and was never caught. The film is three hours long, which does suggest a 'doing it for the art' though I'm sure they could get the running time down if they cut out the brontosaurus stampede through Haight-Ashbury. Then again it is about a serial killer - a mini- (and crappy-) genre Fincher all but created with Se7en (Fincher, it should be noted, is also therefore responsible for the Saw franchise. Think about that). Filmed entirely on digital, it does look very nice indeed, though the differences and qualities are not really going to show up on our diddy computer screens. The cast is full of the cream of Hollywood's Serious Male Actors. The funky music (as opposed to Dun Dun DUUUUHHHNN! Orchestral stabs) suggests an overview of a city at a particular time rather than just a straight scary killer movie. All those things sound great. Bad things include a few moments of very stock character and plot work - there's the nice but peripheral female character, and there's her being put into danger by one man's increasing obsession with catching the killer. He's breaking all the rules! It's not even his case! Wooo! I'm going to watch it. Aren't you? Watch the trailer here
Two films about nerds now - Darkon and Fanboyz. One of them looks really good. Darkon is a documentary about a real life role playing game (called Darkon) where not-as-young-as-they-used-to-be men (and a few women, honest) dress up in cod-medieval armour and fight each other in fields using wooden swords with foam padding on the end. The style of the trailer is that of a serious historical epic, is excellently edited and doesn't ever wink at the audience or mock its subjects. The people involved take the game very seriously and put immense amounts of time and effort into their roles, their armour and their tactics. The trailer gets marks for not ever mocking the level of care the players have for the game. This doesn't stop you from screaming 'Lightning Bolt! Lightning Bolt!' at the screen though. Definitely one to look out for. Watch the trailer here.
Fanboyz, on the other hand, looks like the bits Kevin Smith cut out of Jay And Silent Bob Strike Back. Only Scooby Doo's erection is funnier. The film tells the story of some incredible nerds who try and watch Star Wars: Episode 1 early by sneaking into Skywalker Ranch. I think one of them might be dying of cancer and it might be based on a real story but all of this is rendered irrelevant by the very first shots of them walking into a frat party in professional quality Darth Vader gear and (in professionally modulated Vader voice) asking a girl of unlikely hotness if those are pigs in blankets. This has no relation to reality. This is just another teen comedy but with added nerd references. Only the comedy isn't funny and the nerd references are out of date. Dudes, the Star Wars/Star Trek wars officially ended when Enterprise was canceled and Revenge Of The Sith achieved adequateness last year. Everyone woke up late that summer and realised they just didn't give a fuck anymore, so reducing the audience for this film to exactly those hardcore loons that this film is mocking. Clever. This is a film several people reading this could actually make, except we'd probably cut most of the jokes here for being too lame. Points, I guess, for not switching to some emotional music towards the end while the characters show how much they care for each other while hugging, crying and learning life lessons and I will give the film a pass if the final scene consists of them walking away from Skywalker Ranch and the fat one says 'that sucked' and it cuts to the credits. Otherwise: Pffh. Watch the trailer here
We covered the After Dark Horrorfest (8 Films To Die For!) in an earlier hand-job, but they've updated their website to include trailers for the individual films. The horror fest is this weekend, which means you've all already missed it. But never mind, the screenings were full, the fest, it seems, was a success, so there'll be more chances to see films too extreme (!) for a general audience. Several titans of the film industry have personally recommended The Gravedancers to me so check out the trailer here. The conceit is that some people get cursed by ghosts because they dance on some graves. Even though the trailer has Tcheky Karyo explaining the conceit in his most gravely of voices, it still sounds a bit daft. You see they went to a part of the graveyard that was reserved for evil people, so they each get a uniquely horrible ghost chasing after them depending on which grave they dance on. It looks professional enough. The acting seems better than in most of the Elm Street sequels and the ladies seem quite pretty. The scares from the trailer consist of some fire effects, a ghosts wearing an oversized mask (looking a bit like the Aphex Twin in those Carl Cunningham videos. Only not nearly so disturbing) and a big CGI hand leaping out of a grave. Slightly better is the idea that these hauntings will get stronger over the course of the month (the curse last exactly a month, don't you know), which will give the film a juicy sense of escalation over it's running time. Also, having four separate ghosts will at least mix the action up a bit.
Yes, I'm not that excited. The tone seems too serious for the film to be a giggle, but the conceit is too daft to be taken seriously. I will duly trust those who know more than me and are excited about the film. I will also direct you to this page which has all the other trailers.
Reincarnation was directed by the guy who did The Grudge, The Hamiltons carries the promise of some dark fun with families and suburbia and The Unrest (a terrible title) is set in a gross anatomy class, and autopsy scenes are always great. The story for that involves a haunted body, includes the line "I have to find out what my cadaver wants!" and carries the claim that this is the first horror film with 'real human bodies'. Classy. I want to watch it though.
There's no guarantee that any of these low-budget horror movies that failed to get major distribution deals will be any good, but I just really like the idea of this fest. See you at the next one? Official website here.
Rocky Balboa: The final trailer for this week is Sylvester Stallone's last gasp as a movie star. He's got the money together to film sequels to his biggest franchises (Rambo and Rocky) in the hope that he can go out on a high (not DTV) note. Check out here. I grew up with that theme music too, and those training montages, but this still does nothing for me. Good luck Stallone, and I hope Rambo 4 is as obscenely violent and politically suspect as the other 3. Call me when you get the trailer out for that one.
Source: VariousDiscuss this and other Fakery on our message boards! Continue reading Trailer Park Handjob: 11/18/06
Friday, November 17, 2006
Geek Pin-Up #16: Moneypenny
There are lots of bond girls that are worth covering here: Jane Seymour's Solitaire, who had mystical powers as long as she stayed a virgin... or how about Grace Jones' Mayday who had the nerve to go on top, or how about Eva Green's Vesper Lynd, who I would turn into dribble in my shoes if I ever met. But the subject of the last of our Bond themed pin up girls is M's secretary, Moneypenny. No this is not a cop-out.
Most Bond girls turn up wearing a ball gown, run about a bit and then are either killed by a bad person or shagged by Bond. The films suggest they are similar fates, as they never turn up in the franchise again. Moneypenny, however, is a constant in Bond's life, always there in the office to scold, inform and flirt with him while always holding a secret love for him that is, importantly, never requited. While Bond almost always acts a predatory cad around her, seemingly playing with her affections, he never actually beds her, suggesting that he feels differently about her than about the other girls. If M is Bond's father, Moneypenny is his mum, which raises all sorts of juicy Oedipal interpretations to those who haven't figured out by the end of the credits that these films are best watched with the brain turned decidedly off.
Lois Maxwell is by far the most famous of the various Moneypennys, playing her from the first film Dr. No all the way through to A View to a Kill.She had the stern look and sometimes frumpy dress of a headmistress but also the style and worldly-wiseness of the maiden aunt who would smoke and drink gin at the family christmas dinner, sharing stories you didn't quite understand but your mum didn't want you to hear. Also her big featured face suggested a more old fashioned sensuality than the sharp featured young hotties of later decades.
But she got old (though she aged a lot better than Roger Moore) and was pensioned off in the 80's when Timothy Dalton took over the tuxedo of Bond. Moneypenny was then played by Caroline Bliss, a young, blonde, sharp-featured hottie.
Yes she was hot, but she was basically another Bond-bimbo hiding behind a sensible blouse and big glasses. Her 80's glamour also didn't seem to fit right with Dalton's rather dour take on Bond. Dalton only lasted two films, and Caroline went with him. Bye!
Then came the Brosnan years and the role of Moneypenny was given to Samantha Bond. Maybe she only won the role because of her last name, but she was a great fit.
She had the school-teacher looks and the sharp tongue that could knock James down a peg or two if he got a bit too 'old fashioned' in his attitude towards women. She also had the button-down, slightly mousy demeanour that suggested a passion that would go off like a rocket if you got her out of her sensible shoes. She also looks a bit like dominating she-wolf Anne Robinson from The Weakest Link (or Points of View for our English readers), which plays into the slightly ambiguous relationship the usually strong, dominating Bond has with her.
She was also played by Barbara Bouchet for the unofficial Bond movie Casino Royale, who looked like a 60's go-go dancer (though technically she was Moneypenny's daughter) and by Pamela Salem in the equally unnoffical Never Say Never Again who was fine but basically a not-quite-as-good version of Lois Maxwell.
So my vote has to go to Lois Maxwell, mostly for the way she could fit motherly-care, teenage-yearning and husky-desire all into the simple 'Oh, James' line that became the character's trademark.
The 2006 version of Casino Royale is distinctly missing Moneypenny, though Judi Dench's 'M' character seems to be filling that motherly role quite nicely. Perhaps we shall get her back in the next film. For casting, I suggest Stephen Fry.
Discuss this and other Fakery on our message boards! Continue reading Geek Pin-Up #16: Moneypenny
Things To Come?
I'm well known to be a grumpy gus around here when it comes to remakes, so when it involves one of my favourite movies being rejiggered, I naturally usually get a bit up in arms. Especially when that movie happens to be John Carpenter's The Thing.
According to Variety, Universal and Strike Entertainment (who also did the fun but overrated Dawn of the Dead redux) will be behind this new version of the classic SF horror, known throughout the world as one of the scariest movies ever made. Most people will know that Carpenter's was also a remake, of Howard Hawks/Christian Nyby's The Thing From Another World, which was based on John W. Campbell's short story "Who Goes There?".
Probably the most interesting thing about this new version is that it'll be written by Ronald D. Moore, ex-Star Trek writer and the guy behind the absolutely stunning Battlestar Galactica retake. While this is promising, I'm still left to ponder what the point is. According to Variety's article, Universal and Strike "consider the new film to be more 'a companion piece' to the Carpenter film than a note-for-note remake," which is considerably vague. The ideas of a possible continuation of the story always interested me, with the concept of the infection reaching actual population centres.
However, the intimacy of the original movie was always more appealing. After all, it's not an easy job to do a movie based on mistrust when you're dealing with hundreds of people without resulting to staging huge fights in the streets. Who knows what Moore will do with this one, but I guess whatever he does, there's a good chance it'll be interesting. Keep watching the skiis!
Source: VarietyDiscuss this and other Fakery on our message boards! Continue reading Things To Come?
Thursday, November 16, 2006
Review: Casino Royale
Well, the next relaunch of the Bond franchise is here, the hype is in full swing and the trailer, it has to be said, was awesome. And the verdict is: It's all right, with an hour in the middle that is absolutely loads of fun, Daniel Craig holds the screen in his big beefy grip as 007 and Eva Green is the best Bond girl in ages (and I'm in love with her). Disclaimer: This review has been written by someone who likes Die Another Day.
The idea behind this relaunch is to strip away the silliness of the Bond franchise, as typified by the invisible cars and ice palaces of Die Another Day (which is why it is awesome, dammit), and replace it with a grittier, more ground level, depiction of professional killers. This movie actually does attempt what so many action movies pretend to do, which is focus on character.
It starts in black and white as Bond earns his '00' status by killing two people. It is not quite as clever, as atmospheric or as brutal as it thinks it is, but it makes a change to union jack parachutes and ends with his target turning his gun on Bond and Bond swinging round to shoot him first - turning into the signature opening shot of Bond through the scope of a gun shooting at the camera.
This recontextualising of all the Bond trademarks - his tuxedo, his drinks, his car, his banter - goes on through the film and sometimes they work, showing the man behind the suit trying to fill the role of a '00' agent as opposed to just the slick surface image which has become so iconic. When it doesn't work - when a waiter asks him if he wants his martini shaken or stirred and he replies 'do I look like I care?' - it is no less cheesy or cringeworthy than Bond business as usual. But then it did get a laugh in the cinema I was in so maybe I was just being grumpy.
So we have a young Bond, highly trained but still green, full of aggression and testosterone and the thrill-chasing, rule-breaking, lone-hero attitude of the sort of man who actually does join the SAS. Of course, lots of men join the SAS and act like that because they want to be James Bond so exactly what reality is mirroring what art is up for grabs.
What is most exciting here is that the scriptwriters don't have him showing weakness or doubt as to the rightness of his actions to express his humanity (as those communist liberal scriptwriters are to do), but express his humanity through his mistakes, his lack of slickness and his brutishness. It's not exactly deep or particularly realistic characterisation but it does contrast with the male-model Bond of Brosnan and Moore, and it is at its best when expressed wordlessly though Craig's knife-sharp bright blue eyes in the centre of his ugly, thug face.
Eva Green, as accountant (!) Vesper Lynd, is absolutely a match for him. She doesn't have the glamour of classic Bond Girls, nor does she do the tough girl actioning of more recent leading ladies. Instead she has intelligence and personality. And yes I do mean it when I say she isn't glamourous. Her nose is actually a little too big and pointy for that over-made-up perfect glamour look. Glamour is actually the blanding out of individuality to create an ideal, standardised sexy look. This is why glossy magazine covers and playboy spreads are always so heavily airbushed. Eva's personality shines through too strongly for it ever to work. In the scenes of her looking 'natural' (and of course, these shots too were no doubt carefully controlled) she is breathtakingly beautiful, which probably explains why I have written such a long paragraph about her beauty. The scenes where she verbally spars with Bond are great and the scenes where she is reacting to the death going on around her are the highlights of the movie.
There are quite a few deaths here and, in the spirit of the reinvention, they are painful, messy, long (at least in movie terms) and usually end in a close up on Bond or Vesper, showing their reactions. It's not Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer, but it's effective stuff and emotionally resonant. To say this of a Bond film can only be saying good things.
But the reinvention has affected the story too, and not all of it is good. The usual formula is Bond being sent on a mission, he discovers the big baddie and his scheme and things escalate to a huge climax, usually at the baddie's lair. Then things explode.
This one starts out with Bond business as usual, with him tracking a possible terrorist bomber around the world. This all lasts maybe 45 minutes, beginning with at least ten minutes of almost wordless action (involving the free running and building site from the trailer) and ending with another long chase sequence at an airport (with the bus being smashed in half). It's OK, but there's a sinking feeling of watching all the old, tired Bond cliches trotted out in good order, making you think the 'reinvention' was just another bit of hype. Right after the gritty opening comes possibly the twee-est credits sequence in Bond history, revolving around the suits of playing cards and featuring animated men exploding into hearts. Then the film turns into a product placement heaven with Bond driving a new Ford, using Sony phones and wielding Omega watches, all while in an exotic locale (or a rich, white enclave thereof). The pacing is slow (see Charlie's article here) and nothing is that great. Passable and familiar but not silly enough to be funny nor realistic enough to be exciting.
But then this sequence ends, with almost all the plot strands tied up. It could almost be a movie by itself. It could almost be a statement of 'this is how Bond movies were. Now look'. The idea of the poker game at the titular Casino Royale is finally introduced, Vesper Lynd turns up and then we have a different film - an hour or so of great entertainment featuring all the good stuff I mentioned above. There are twists and turns, double crosses and bluffs and then the game ends, again with almost all the plot strands tied up so it is almost a film in itself. It's good stuff, setting up a lot of character and emotion to be played off of in the final act.
And then we get to the final act and it turns out to be only half an act. You know the happy endings of Bond films when he ends up with the girl at some beautiful location? Well this happens, but then it carries on. And on. It seems to go on for half an hour. Double crosses, chases and things finally happen (some of them are really great, but there will be no spoilers here) but, just as we have the real villains revealed, the film ends. It ends on a very iconic moment but still, it just ends. I wanted my big climax. I wanted my show down. I didn't really get it.
Now it is a good thing that I was ready for more from a film that was already nearly two and a half hours long, but this does reveal the final part of the reinvention - this is going to be a trilogy. There will be some evil organistion (called SPECTRE? Who is to say?) and Bond will fight them. Having an over-arching storyline is certainly fashionable these days, and I guess it gives the audience enough reason to watch another two Bond movies, but it leaves this installment flapping in the wind.
The good stuff here is good, but the work done, especially to Bond's character, in the second act suddenly feels a lot more flimsy without a proper conclusion. Suddenly it's possible that the real person I thought I saw emerging from the suit was just a lot of close-ups of Craig looking inscrutable and some slightly rawer fight scenes. Certainly his final emergence as Bond, James Bond felt more like a reversion to cliche rather than a natural conclusion of character development.
All that said, it probably says good things about this movie that I can even discuss things like character development and believability in a Bond film.
So it's all right, the film in the middle is excellent and Eva Green is the most beautiful woman on the planet. If they can keep up the idea of Bond not just being a suave model in a suit or, even better, if Craig is really allowed to get his teeth into this trained killer character in danger of losing his soul, then the next couple of films could be genuinely worth looking forward too. Then again, maybe with the introduction of a SPECTRE like organisation, perhaps we'll get the Bond gadgets and invisible cars again. But then I like Die Another Day. I'd be happy with that too.
007 out of 0010
Discuss this and other Fakery on our message boards! Continue reading Review: Casino Royale
News Round-Up: 11/16/06
The new Harry Potter teaser poster has hit the net, soon to be followed by a teaser trailer set to run with Happy Feet this weekend. And guess what? It's dark! No really, things are getting dark for Harry Potter. And I know we said that about the dark third movie, and the oh so darker fourth movie, but we really mean it this time. No seriously! Things are like getting really totally darker for sure now. PG-13 dark! Wolverine Vs. Punisher dark! Hold me. -- Doug Slack
Second Opinion: Don't mind Doug, he hates children. -- Brad Millette
Source: Warner Bros.
MGM wants to bring in a half a billion dollars in cash flow and studio head Harry Sloan dropped some science on how he plans to do that. Aside from cutting staff and budgets like any good American CEO and using independent producers, they will also rely heavily on two or three major productions (read: remakes and/or sequels) a year. The ones going into production next year inspire a mix of horror, interest and suspense. There will be a new Pink Panther movie, proof I suppose that Steve Martin has just stopped trying or REALLY wants that one house in Malibu. Also, The Thomas Crown Affair will finally get its sequel. I enjoyed the first well enough so count me interested. Finally, I'm all aflutter to see how Daniel Craig will do in Casino Royale (read Andrew's take here) and it looks like the studio has confidence that he'll be good for two at least.
Better than that though is the news that Hobbit talks are progressing. A lawsuit between Peter Jackson and New Line Cinema may hold it up, but if that clears, he may make not one, but two movies based on the first Middle Earth book (non-plural). The second would likely be a bridge to The Lord of the Rings using "footnotes and source material".
And even better still is the news that there will be no more Rocky. -- Scott Roche
Source: Variety
In a bid to get something an Oscar look this year, Clint Eastwood has convinced Warner Bros. to move the release date for Letters from Iwo Jima up to Dec. 20th from Feb. 9th (though it will be only in limited release both in Los Angeles and New York, and possibly San Francisco). His companion piece to Flags of Our Fathers, Letters is the story of the famous battle from the Japanese perspective. It has apparently received raves in Japan. Flags, on the other hand, is currently bombing here in America. -- Scott Roche
Source: Variety
Damn Cinematical for thinking of this before us! If you head on over there, you'll be treated to ALL of the 007 trailers, from Dr. No, Thunderball, and Live and Let Die, to Andrew Clarke's favorite movie of all time, Die Another Day. -- George Merchan
Source: CinematicalDiscuss this and other Fakery on our message boards! Continue reading News Round-Up: 11/16/06
Wednesday, November 15, 2006
Geek Pin-Up #15: The Ones With Dirty Names
There's something magical about the Bond theme music that makes you forget all good sense. Maybe it's the tuxedo or the gun or Shirley Bassey honking over shots of naked ladies for five minutes, but when a Bond girl introduces herself as Holly Goodhead, it seems incredibly cool. There's no point fighting, so you might as well enjoy it.
The most famous is Honor Blackman's feisty bi-sexual villain in Goldfinger who went by the name of Pussy Galore. A mother must have some fairly firm plans for your career if she gives you that name. Pussy had the benefit of being in one of the few genuinely good Bond films, but also benefited from Honor's 50 a day voice (and she smoked a lot! Woo!). Her brother, Whiskey, is also good fun.
While I couldn't believe it when I heard Ms. Galore's name when I was a kid, I still blush today at 1983's Octopussy. I tried to work out the pun or the double meaning, but there really isn't one. It's the sort of one-and-a-half-entendre that Bond excels in - saying something basically fairly crude but saying it with an elegant smirk that suggests something much more refined and witty.
Plenty O'Toole was in Diamonds Are Forever. She isn't much more than a joke character, trying to woo James Bond in a casino while sporting cleavage so precipitous there is snow on her nipples. So proving the pointlessness of Bond pastiches like Austin Powers. How can you mock this name without having a character called 'I Like To Bend Over And Get Fucked Up The Arse Like A Bitch'? Austin Powers 4 is apparently in development.
Mary Goodnight and Holly Goodhead appear in The Man with the Golden Gun and Moonraker respectively, and offer up obvious if unimaginative opportunities for Bond to make jokes while getting into their knickers.
Much better are the slightly more surreal names that are not literally dirty but drip with a slightly bizarre naughtiness. Kissy Suzuki, Sylvia Trench, Honey Ryder, Lisl Von Shlaf (it sounds dirty to me) are all great names, though special mention to Serena Scott Thomas, a real actor who's won awards and stuff, having a character in The World is Not Enough who labours under the name of Dr. Molly Warmflash.
Moving into the 90's with Pierce Brosnan offering a more sensitive, modern Bond, we were assured the old misogyny and schoolboy snickering would be gone. Goldeneye features a baddie bond girl called Xenia Onatopp. You see she's a predatory sexual animal who likes to be on top. You see. Bonus points for her preferred method of killing being her thighs, just after sex. Extra bonus points for being played by Famke Janssen.
Discuss this and other Fakery on our message boards! Continue reading Geek Pin-Up #15: The Ones With Dirty Names
Review: Red Road
Red Road is the feature debut of British director Andrea Arnold, who accepted an Oscar for her short film Wasp by saying winning was 'the dog's bollocks' (which is good). She has followed it up with a film about a CCTV camera operator in Glasgow, watching the streets for crime. It's just won a bunch of Scottish Baftas and, comments about exactly how stiff the opposition could be aside, deserved them.
What's most interesting about the film is to compare it to how an American film would handle the subject. The operator is a very closed off woman, lonely and showing signs of not having dealt with a very traumatic moment in her past. She still wears a wedding ring despite being obviously without a husband. One day she sees a man on one of her monitors who she thought was still in prison. She checks the image against newspaper clippings she keeps in her house, strongly suggesting that he is responsible for that traumatic incident. She then becomes increasingly obsessed with him, to the point of ignoring the duties of her job and the film follows her increasingly extreme actions though, importantly, never telling us what this incident actually was that obviously drives them.
An American film, I think, would lay on the paranoid thriller elements. It would play up the voyeuristic, not to mention the technological, aspects of the surveillance and the obsessive aspects of the character. It would also make the dark and dirty streets of the city far more nightmarish. As it is, this film, from it's first moments, plays up the very human aspects of this situation, with her following the ongoing health problems of a local dog with a empathetic care. Her job, rather than being a big brother, is just to try and help people in trouble, as much as can be done.
The CCTV elements, which feature heavily in the mostly wordless first third, serve to contextualise the world, so giving us a relationship to it when she starts moving through the streets for real. Thankfully any heavy handed symbolism about her dislocation or separation from life is underplayed and they mostly play as a framing device and as a depiction of the routines of a very sad woman, not really living her own life.
This more human approach is representative of the film's intelligence, rather than clever-cleverness or intellectualism, and the film is more light of touch than it first appears. Her obsession leads her to the monolithic tower blocks of Red Road where this newly released criminal lives, to spy on him and, eventually to enter his life, and these scenes are played to create a fear of this possibly violent man and this extremely rough and run-down area.
These scenes are certainly tense, but I had a let-down feeling where I thought that this is what the film was finally about - the terror of an ordinary woman vulnerable in a dangerous world of criminals. Gone was the humanity, to be replaced with a very grimy, realist horror story.
Thankfully it turns out this was exactly what the film wanted you to think. It was playing on the middle-class, suburban and educated (the sorts of people who, tragically, are the ones most likely to watch this sort of film) fears of those living on the very edges of society. The film then shifts almost imperceptibly in tone, shading all of these characters to give a much less black and white view of the situation. And this is not done with a big shocking twist or revelation, but only with the subtlest of changes of point of view. The film has no exposition, little dialogue, and very few moments of great incident, so the the shift is done only by a slow accumulation of history and by behaviour. It is excellently done.
The last forty minutes are amazingly compelling and ultimately very satisfying. The tears and explanations that finally come are completely earned. The problem is that the lack of exposition in the first two thirds (we follow the woman, but have no idea why she is doing the things she is doing) makes that middle section incredibly annoying. It is too long to keep an audience waiting for some explanation, especially when you are misleading them slightly in tone. The overall structure is great to look back on, but it is really annoying to sit through.
Another, albeit slight, problem is that, as we are simply following the behaviour of a very depressed woman, the film can come over as a little glum. Too many film-makers (and artists are a moody fucking bunch at the best of times) often mistake depictions of depression with simply making a depressing film.
The film looks excellent, though the grotty areas it is shot in obviously effect its 'slickness', it is edited well, acted naturally and convincingly and the locations sound accurate too. Estate pubs do sound slightly echoey and uninviting - they get this right, even if it is not all that pleasant a sound environment to be in.
What I was wondering was whether it would have any cross-over potential. The advertising over herr did emphasise the thriller and mystery aspects of the film. The answer is a resounding no. This is an 'arthouse' film through and through and absolutely a small scale character study. It is slow, lacking in obvious incident and concerned with behaviour rather than plot. Trainspotting this is not. For all that, if these are the sorts of films you go to, this really is an excellent example.
8 whiskeys out of 10
Discuss this and other Fakery on our message boards! Continue reading Review: Red Road
Bond’s Tool Chest
One thing that has stuck in the collective pop-culture subconscious concerning Britain’s greatest secret agent is the seemingly ever present Bond gadget. And while they are in fact not present in every movie, it’s worth looking at what he used to get the job done besides his charm, rapier wit, and dry martini.
The Walther PPK: While not a gadget per se, this is the tool that I most associate with Bond. He carries it from Dr. No to Goldeneye and only trades it in because it is a bit outdated. It’s an excellent pistol, being both very reliable and easy to conceal. This gun will be returned to Bond’s hand in the newest Bond flick Casino Royale. As a nod to the book, this may very be the only gadget of any sort that he carries.
The Watch: In several movies Q gives James a timepiece. In fact John Cleese’s version of Q indicates that he’s been given twenty, and there’s always more to it than meets the eye. My favorite wasn’t actually given to him by Q at all and it’s the only Bond gadget in the film. It’s the one that Moneypenny gives him in Live and Let Die and contains a very powerful mini-magnet and a buzzsaw. Many a day I’ve had that that would come in handy let me tell you. Other watches have included teletypes, mini televisions, and garrotes.
The Cigarette and Lighter: Drinking to excess, casual sex, and an abundance of smoking all speak to the era that the Bond films came from. Only in these movies would you see a spy using these innocuous items as weapons. You Only Live Twice gives him a cancer stick that shoots a mini-rocket. A car cigarette lighter has a built-in radio in Live and Let Die. Scaramanga’s titular golden gun breaks down into a lighter and cigarette case as does a micro-film reader in The Spy Who Loved Me.
The Mini-Camera: A spy couldn’t very well do his job without something to take pictures of maps, secret hideouts, and the really hot women he sleeps with. He is issued one in From Russia With Love where it also has a built in reel-to-reel tape recorder. He also has one in On Her Majesty’s Secret Service and Moonraker. The more modern Bonds use camera phones (Die Another Day).
"Cutting Edge" Stuff: There are a few instances were Bond and Q Branch used things that at the time seemed ultra-cool or amazing and are now commonplace. In From Russia with Love he has both a pager and a car phone. He uses a personal watercraft in The Spy Who Loved Me long before jet skis were widely known. Police and other forensic experts use software similar to the Identigraph seen in For Your Eyes Only to replace the police sketch artist in facial reconstruction. The one that hasn’t come to pass yet that seems realistic enough to come true just about any day now is the mini-rebreather from Thunderball.
Finally, we come to the Hall of Shame, reserved for the lamest Bond gadgets most of which we only saw in the Q Branch vignettes being demonstrated by lab assistants. The worst gadget on the list has to be the radioactive pocket lint from On Her Majesty’s Secret Service. It would be used to track someone surreptitiously. Pocket lint. Wow. And while the last is certainly effectual, it does date the film with a horrible pun. Yes I’m referring to the ghetto blaster, a personal stereo/rocket launcher.
“Wait”, you say, “what about the cars? Chicks dig the cars.” Well fearless reader, that’s another can of worms and we’ll no doubt take a look at those as we lead up to the premier of Casino Royale.
Discuss this and other Fakery on our message boards! Continue reading Bond’s Tool Chest
Tuesday, November 14, 2006
The Spy Who Bored Me
A couple of weekends ago, I went to a wedding, and as is usual amongst my group of friends, the topic of conversation turned to movies, or more accurately, Casino Royale. Of course, we took the predicted course and began debating Bond movies and then, even more predictably, listing our favourite Bond girls. We were all happy discussing the merits of Daniella Bianchi and Caroline Munro, but then we were struck by a crushing blow as our girlfriends both said in unison "We hate Bond movies."
The arguments were the same ones we've had a thousand times before. Girls: "They're completely misogynistic." Boys: "You say that like it's a bad thing." But a couple of days after I thought about it a bit more, and why I was actually defending Bond movies. I think it's partly the nostalgia factor, and that I grew up with them, but also because I'm sure there's some wayward gene inside every British male that rears into defensive mode whenever Bond flicks are attacked. But then it hit me even more. Beyond the nostalgia and the inherent stubbornness where 007 is concerned, do these movies really deserve defending?
I should probably say now as a disclaimer that I'm not including Goldfinger in this argument because it really is the one major exception, but more on that later. In any case, I thought about my point a little more and sat down to watch what people consider one of - if not the - best Bond movies, From Russia With Love. Unfortunately, it just proved my point, as I turned it off after forty minutes. Why? Because I was really bored.
This is the thing. I'm never really turned off by the whole misogynistic deal in 007 flicks, because I think it is a whole part of the wish fulfillment thing that Ian Fleming had in mind when he was writing the original novels. And really, the movies have a lot of pretty strong female characters, even if a high percentage of them do end up having the living daylights shagged out of them and being given seven double-Os. What bothers me is that most of them have a real languid pace, and as such are more kind of a travelogue than a well-structured flowing story.
In a way, I can understand it. After all, tying into the wish fulfillment again, Bond has always been about travelling to exotic locations and the likes. I appreciate that. But they only seem exotic for a very short time before the lack of interesting photography and pacing has choked the spirit out of the location and the picture. In Russia, Bond travels to Istanbul, and there are some great locations, the coolest of which is the underground reservoir. But then they go to this gypsy camp to hideout, they get attacked, and it's all really dull, taking twenty minutes or so to establish that a Russian is trying to kill a Turk. These guys obviously never took story economy 101.
A good comparison to make is Indiana Jones, or rather, Raiders of the Lost Ark. The Indy movies are almost proto-Bond, arising no doubt from the fact that Spielberg had desired to direct a Bond flick until Uncle George stepped up and said "I'll do you one better." They have the excitement, the exotic locations, even the teaser action sequence before the story begins. But they also have a very well-written structure, and make sure that the locations and actions are driven only by the needs of the story.
As I said before, Goldfinger is the big exception. It's an incredible film, and is fun in every sense of the word without ever being dull. There are Bonds which also manage to keep at least a portion of consistent fun before giving way to the strain of the structure, but these are few and far between, and like Ben said in his DVD review, they tend to be more of the weird ones.
The one thing I'll say about Bond movies is that they're amazing if you have the ability to skip chapters. They truly do have a lot of memorable stunts, great action scenes, and a lot of hot women and funky gadgets. It's just a shame you have to sit through a lot of chaff to get to them.
Discuss this and other Fakery on our message boards! Continue reading The Spy Who Bored Me
Geek Pin-Up #14: Barbara Bach
Casino Royale is being released at the end of this week and, to celebrate, we'll be discussing Bond's impact on British international policy since the 1960's and drooling over the women he's had it away with over the years. First up, Agent XXX from The Spy Who Loved Me.
Agent XXX was designed to be the female Bond, a match for our deadly and dashing secret agent but Soviet and with tits. It failed miserably because, despite bieng portrayed as a killer, a mercenary lover and an intelligent spy, she still ends up running away from things, getting captured, getting rescued by Bond and giving up the poon to him, despite promising to kill him earlier on. It also failed because, to be the female equivalent of the increasingly daft Roger Moore, she would have had to be a pancake make-upped granny tottering around on heels and a quart of vodka.
Thankfully she was played by Barbara Bach, who is absolutely gorgeous. The producers of Bond always played lip service to having their Bond girls be strong and independent, usually shown by the actresses having dark hair, but they have always tended to slip back into blonde bimbo playboy bunny types when nobody was looking. Barbara's very dark long straight hair fits her neatly into the 'strong, intelligent' end of the Bond girl spectrum, but her fierce, piercing eyes gave her a more malevolently sexy presence than most of the blonde bond girls could ever imagine too. In looks she is similar to previous pin-up Soledad Miranda, who I waxed lyrical about here.
It is a shame, then, that her presence was mostly wasted in this film stuck slightly behind Roger Moore's eyebrows or lost in the middle of some fancy wide shot of Egypt. Also a shame is that, for a film where the evil madman lives underwater, there really isn't enough of Barbara being wet (and let's look at that above photo. It may be a lovely, revealing evening gown with excellent cleavage but the heavy, dark material doesn't work at all well wet and makes her bum shapeless. Light colours are good or, even better, a very thin material like silk. Disappointing).This is especially sad as other films (and a Google image search) have proven that, if there is a good enough artistic reason, she is completely willing to get them out.
The Bond girl syndrome of not having much of a career after shagging Bond is true of Barbara, but she did marry Ringo Starr which proves that she truly married for love or that her gaze was so intense only because her eyesight was so bad.
Discuss this and other Fakery on our message boards! Continue reading Geek Pin-Up #14: Barbara Bach
DVD Review: James Bond Ultimate Collection - Vol. 1
The most successful (longevity-wise, Darth Jerk) franchise re-invents itself again this week with its 21st entry, Casino Royale. A “Year One” style reboot of an increasingly predictable formula was much needed. To commemorate and capitalize, Sony has graciously (re)re-released the entire oeuvre in 4 handsome new sets. In completely random assortments similar to a sampler platter at Benningan’s (Lazenby = fried mushrooms) each volume gives you a nibble of each era. The films gets two discs in thinpaks (handsome, but cheap) with restored video and DTS, while the 2nd disc carries the motherlode of extras.
GOLDFINGER (1964)
The third film in the series became the die from which the majority of the series was cut. Goldfinger is fantastic. Breathlessly paced. And Connery earns his distinction as being the best of the Bonds with his effortless cool. The plot concerns a greedy fatfuck, Goldfinger, trying to break into Fort Knox. Bond is swept along to exotic locales such as Baltimore and is almost castrated by laser. Director Guy Hamilton brought a lot to the series, keeping the action coming while maintaining a light, frothy atmosphere. It’s masterful entertainment.
DIAMONDS ARE FOREVER (1971)
Diamonds Are Forever marks Sean Connery’s first return to Bond after George Lazenby replaced him (and he’d be back again only puffier). It’s essentially Bond in Vegas with Blofeld building a space laser with diamonds. I lost track of the plot on this one. There’s a ton of buildup with diamond smuggling and then James Bond is in in a lunar lander being chased across the Nevada desert? Sausage King Jimmy Dean plays Howard Hughes? Ok.
The series seems to be spinning its wheels here. On the upside, we have a Bond girl called Plenty O’Toole (Natalie Wood's little sister!) and a pair of gymnast/interpretative dancers/henchwomen called Bambi and Thumper that fuck James Bond up. We’re also treated to the murderous stylings of Mr. Wint (OMG, that’s Crispin Glover's dad!) and Mr. Kidd, a couple of gay assassins (they leave a job holding hands!).
THE MAN WITH THE GOLDEN GUN (1971)
Holy shit, kids… this is possibly the weirdest Bond yet. I’m thinking it may have something to do with dropping acid being a British middleclass leisure activity. The pre-credit sequence is the best of the series. Instead of focusing on Bond, we get the villain (Christopher Lee) Scaramanga and his diminutive manservant Tattoo, er, Nick Nack brushing up on their assassin skills with a mob hitman. Oh, and this all happens in a funhouse on Scaramanga’s fantasy island lair. It it awesome, sirs.
The plot veers into the familiar comic book-y world of 007 with something called a “Solex Agitator” that harnesses the power of the sun so Scaramanga can make a killing (ho!) during the energy crisis. I believe this may be the first time the Bond films have touched on real world global crisis (like the all too real possibility of a microchip shortage in A View to a Kill). The real treat is Lee as Scaramanaga (a name so great I will continue typing it all out in lieu of common pronouns). Finally, a villain that’s not a paunchy Euroslob! Scaramanga is the world’s highest priced assassin ($1 million bucks!) and he’s got three nipples too. See? Acid.
The 70’s Bond flicks are just so weird and great. Giving themselves over to the pulp nature of their origins instead of keeping it real is my preferred vintage of Bond.
THE LIVING DAYLIGHTS (1987)
Oh man, if this isn’t a much needed palette cleanser after A View to a Kill… Bond returns again. And he’s not a geriatric! He’s also entirely humorless and a flop with the chicks! Timothy Dalton takes on the role in the 1st of his 2 outings. He’s great even though the film's kind of aren’t. A holdover from the Moore run, John Glen directs with all the style and panache of an A-Team episode. The flick is overly long and short on the playfulness that separates Bond from DTV pap.
I do have to point out how hilariously dated it is. Bond teams with the noble Mujahiddeen in Afghanistan during the Afghan/Soviet war. An Osama Bin Laden figure plays ally to Bond in his fight against a rogue Soviet jerkoff. I love it.
THE WORLD IS NOT ENOUGH (1999)
This is one of two of the Bond films I hadn’t seen before this review. I was never really a fan of Pierce Brosnan after Goldeneye and Tomorrow Never Dies so I ignored his last two outings. Thing with Brosnan is he always seemed like my mom's idea of Bond, charming in a cover to a Harlequin Romance kind of way and totally unthreatening. But I have to have give credit, he’s the very best part of The World is Not Enough.
Surprise, another ludicrous plot! The villains are bores. Which is a shame since Robert Carlyle is a better than decent actor and the backstory of his Renard is kind of cool, yet nothing comes of it. Denise Richards as a nuclear physicist is greatness, however.
The familiarity of a film series into it’s 20th movie, doesn’t help. We’ve got a skiing bit, a submarine bit… shit, this is like the 3rd time I’ve seen the inside of a pipeline! It’s not at all unreasonable to see how necessary a reboot was.
Special mention of the nature of the AV presentation must be made. It’s not something that’s usually a dealbreaker for me. I’m a film lover, not a DVD lover. But this is a goddamn gorgeous, resplendent restoration job. I am positive the team at Lowry Digital has sworn their souls to Satan. The oldest film in the set, Goldfinger, looks like it was released yesterday. You have never seen Gert Fröbe projected on a gilded woman’s ass in more stunning clarity.
The DTS isn’t to be fucked with either. One thing I hate is when they remix an older film and throw random jarring sound effects out of the rears to impress and/or vacate your bowels. This is more like they just opened up the field. Great work. The Dolby Digital is, I’m sure, quite serviceable.
There are more extras on board than I was willing to watch (I know, I’m dedicated). From a quick perusal of all the internets, some stuff was ported over from the old sets and some stuff is new. I will say that if you haven’t yet purchased the 007 movies, this is really a no-brainer. If you have, well Mr. Drummond, what are you waiting for? NEW TRANSFERS AND DTS!
Ben Miro Will Return in “DVD REVIEW: JAMES BOND ULTIMATE COLLECTION - VOL. 2”
Discuss this and other Fakery on our message boards! Continue reading DVD Review: James Bond Ultimate Collection - Vol. 1
News Round-Up: 11/14/06
To: Eva Green
From: The Fake Life
Message: Call us?
Newest Bond Girl Eva Green will be starring in Alejandro Chomski's Country of Last Things. Adapted from Paul Auster’s novel, it's a future where the "masses are homeless, theft is so rampant it is no longer a crime, and death — by arranging either suicide or assassination — is the only way out. Buildings collapse daily, driving huge numbers of citizens into the streets, where they starve or die of exposure — if they aren’t murdered by other vagrants first". Sounds like good times. Green's character is looking for her lost brother. I think in a world like that I'd just shoot him an email. -- Scott Roche
Source: Production Weekly
Peter Cullen says that he owes his role as Optimus Prime in the new Transformers movie to the fans. "They did start to consider the original voice actors because of the enthusiasm and the... stubbornness of the fan base. God, I'm grateful for those guys." When he went in to audition it was a scene between Optimus and Ironside. Cullen played both and ended up reading both for Michael Bay. In the interview he says that his eyes were opened (regarding his popularity) when he first went to a Transformers convention and was told that he was a father figure. Boy, that's more than just a little sad. Anyway, it's good to see that flaming paint job or not the uber-fans will get something that they want, and it's cool that Cullen wants to deliver. Note: Michael Ironside is not now nor will he ever be associated with Transformers. -- Scott Roche
Source: The Oklahoman
Looks like Jigsaw is this generation's Freddy/Jason. Lionsgate is fast tracking Saw IV, no surprise considering the amount of profit I-III made. The writers of Feast, Patrick Melton and Marcus Dunstan, will be turning in a script, as will Thomas Fenton (Striking Point) and an as yet unnamed person. No matter who wins the contest this just goes to show that studios continue to hate original ideas until they find one that they can mine for five or six movies. -- Scott Roche
Source: Fangoria
Joel Silver will be working with Orson Scott Card and Chair Entertainment Group on a movie called Empire. The project will actually span multiple mediums, starting as a book followed by a comic, the movie, and then a video game. They won't all tell the same story but will be set in the same universe. A world "where the country has plunged into civil war after the White House is bombed and the president is assassinated". The whole thing seems incredibly ambitious and will no doubt be just as expensive. -- Scott Roche
Source: The Hollywood Reporter
Looks like Singer might be getting tapped for the Wolverine movie. He hasn't read the script and can't do anything until he's finished the next Superman movie, so certainly nothing is set in stone. Still, Jackman told IESB that Singer is the preferred director. On the other hand, Hugh said that his sheep rancher movie might get in the way timing wise. So there you go, a definite rumor that may happen sometime next year or the year after. Or the year after. -- Scott Roche
Source: Dark Horizons, IESB.netDiscuss this and other Fakery on our message boards! Continue reading News Round-Up: 11/14/06
Monday, November 13, 2006
OMG SPIDEY! Now With Extra Venom!
Edit! Sony has removed the trailer from youtube, leaving only a million or so fan made copies and stills clagging up fileshare sites the web over. This is a victory for something. First person to e-mail me with a working link gets to do my work for me. End Edit!
We're still in the golden era of Internet freedom! And by freedom I mean copyright infringement, stolen intellectual property, lying stealing and a general lack of trustworthiness. Someone has posted an alternate version of the new Spider-Man 3 trailer on YouTube!
A lot of the special effects aren't complete (as opposed to the final trailer... cough), but there are different scenes shown and, best of all, the final ten seconds show Eddie Brock turning into Venom. Woo!
Watch, get excited, feel slightly dirty, and all in under two minutes:
Source: YouTubeDiscuss this and other Fakery on our message boards! Continue reading OMG SPIDEY! Now With Extra Venom!
Trailer: The Simpsons Movie
Until such time as I get bored, I'll round up the new trailers every week, expressing my opinion about them and attempting to find a relevant knob gag about them. But, too important to be dumped in with the rest of the round up, the latest trailer for The Simpsons Movie has just been released!
It starts with a faux-Bambi-era-Disney forest scene prettily rendered in CGI with a cute bunny dancing and smelling flowers. Mr Voiceover says that in a world where CGI makes incredibly beautiful worlds, one film dares to be ugly: The Simpsons Movie! Oh dear. First up, that woodland scene is exactly the sort of thing that has been lampooned in most 'digimations' (a horrible neologism, but one I only just heard yesterday) like Shrek for years. This makes the claim that this film is cool because it bucks trends, is 'more real' or 'more relatable' total guff. Equally, anyone with eyes and the ability to use them (less people than you'd think) know that hand-drawn animation (Miyazaki and Bambi-Era Disney, for example) is just as capable of beauty as CGI. What this means is that the claim only works for those moronic souls who think, impressed by sheer horsepower and 3-dimensional objects moving, that 'digimation' represents progress. Complexity is not beauty, and neither is specular lighting effects! Dammit! Finally, the first shot of the actual Simpsons movie shown is a computer-rendered moving camera shot of a crane, making the claim bogus on yet another level.
You could be kind and say this is a trailer aimed squarely at the mass-market but, no, this is a trailer aimed at the incredibly stupid.
Moving on to the actual footage, we have Homer Simpson trying to save his family with a wrecking ball and then getting hit by the wrecking ball. So, we have the later-season formula of Homer as a 'good dad' who really cares but is just so hilariously stupid that midly surreal slapstick ensues. What we don't have is even the tiniest hint at the pointed satire, or even the vague relation to the reality of modern American life, of early-season Simpsons.
The actual gag, involving Homer getting hit a lot and saying 'D'oh!' is well done and excellently timed, but is a rip-off of endless Simpsons episodes where Homer gets hurt, most famously perhaps when he tried to jump the gorge on a skateboard. I laughed at 'the rock and a hard place' gag, though whether the gag is anything more than 'Hey look! A reference to a popular phrase or saying! Recognise it! Feel clever and laugh!' we'll have to wait and see. I'm not counting on it though.
So, it's only another teaser trailer, and the meat could still be hidden away. Marketing departments, when creating teasers, like to keep things comfortable and familiar, so audiences feel that warm glow of seeing something they already have a handle on while they are told a movie is coming. But, judging from this trailer alone, as someone who doesn't find Homer saying 'D'oh!' enough to make me laugh by itself anymore, th film looks like it will be a much slicker version of a good episode from, say, season 11. Hardly a ringing endorsement.
Get your trailer here!
Or in HD here!
Source: AppleDiscuss this and other Fakery on our message boards! Continue reading Trailer: The Simpsons Movie
Sunday, November 12, 2006
Weekend Box Office: Everyone's Favorite Kazakh Inches Ever Closer To Becoming Completely Played Out
I totally loved Borat (and it really is great - meeting if not surpassing the hype), but man, if I hear anymore about ideas being stolen, lawsuits over "loss of reputation", or simply morons claiming to "liiiike" every little thing they see, it'll be too damn soon.
Fox must be SO happy.
1.) Borat - $29,000,000 (Weekend), $67,840,000 (Total)
2.) The Santa Clause 3 - $16,893,000 (Weekend), $41,052,000 (Total)
3.) Flushed Away - $16,710,000 (Weekend), $39,931,000 (Total)
4.) Stranger Than Fiction - $14,100,000 (Weekend), $14,100,000 (Total)
5.) Saw III - $6,600,000 (Weekend), $69,879,000 (Total)
6.) Babel - $5,651,000 (Weekend), $7,488,000 (Total)
7.) The Departed - $5,240,000 (Weekend), $109,778,000 (Total)
8.) The Return - $4,776,000 (Weekend), $4,776,000 (Total)
9.) The Prestige - $4,630,000 (Weekend), $46,037,000 (Total)
10.) A Good Year - $3,775,000 (Weekend), $3,775,000 (Total)
So yeah, Borat expanded wide this weekend and Fox continued to reap the rewards and indulge in the sweet sweet innards of Sacha Cohen's Jew-hating creation. Is it really getting played out? Oh yes. But it still remains the best comedy of the year and perhaps one of the top ten best films of the year period. So if you haven't seen it yet, please do. Before the media spoils every last frame.
For the second week in a row, Tim Allen's Santa Clause 3 barely out-performed Aardman's Flushed Away. To those responsible: Fuck you.
As for Stranger Than Fiction, let me just provide you with a blurb from Sean Burns' review over at Philadelphia Weekly (Thanks to Doug Slack for the linkage!): "Finally, a Charlie Kaufman movie for people who are too stupid to understand Charlie Kaufman movies." Awesome.
Next week brings us the apparently great 007 reboot Casino Royale, the apparently "gonna make a lotta monies" Happy Feet, inmate hi-jinks with Dax Shepard and Gob in Let's Go to Prison, and Richard Linklater's Fast Food Nation, which will make you swear off Big Macs for two weeks until you find out the McRib is back.
Source: Box Office MojoDiscuss this and other Fakery on our message boards! Continue reading Weekend Box Office: Everyone's Favorite Kazakh Inches Ever Closer To Becoming Completely Played Out
