From which I've stolen...

This would be the Pauline Kael book from which I stole my show's title. Excellent read, as is most of the late Ms. Kael's criticism. If you can find it, read it.

Here at "Reeling," I use the four-star rating system (what I think is the easiest and fairest of the rating systems; five-star is bogus which ever way you look at it - I don't mind letter-grading, though).

Watched Scott Frank's directorial debut THE LOOKOUT last weekend. Well photographed and sometimes sharply written, it all feels a bit like a screenwriter made it (ahem, David Koepp). Joseph Gordon-Levitt continues to show promise as a younger leading man with this and the superior BRICK, but once you jump on his bandwagon, his protagonists become extremely unlikable. Strong supporting performance from MATCH POINT's Matthew Goode as bad guy bankrobber Gary Spargo. Sad they wasted a good Jeff Daniels beard, and what purpose has the seemingly talented Isla Fisher (flashes in WEDDING CRASHERS) really served in any movie at this point? - ***

Will the Fresh Prince finally fail?

Will the Fresh Prince finally fail?
By Ben Flanagan
Ben Around
July 4, 2006

Can Will Smith do anything wrong? We as a moviegoing public have tapped him the most reliably bankable Hollywood superstar in contemporary film, which may surprise a few of you.

Consider the journey this guy has taken so far. The guy whose credit fell after DJ Jazzy Jeff in a Grammy-winning rap duo (you remember 'Summertime,' don't you?) flew to the forefront of the prime-time spotlight, making cameo appearances on NBC's smash series 'Blossom' as the lovable Fresh Prince. In retrospect, maybe 'Blossom' wasn't what provided the boost.

Smith appealed to nearly all demographics and quickly made his transition into feature films, where he'd not only reign supreme as the unlikely face of Hollywood, but have little competition while doing it.

To date, Smith's total domestic earnings at the domestic box office add up to just more than $2.2 billion, with an average opening weekend of more than $36 million, confirming our country's crush on the guy. Sans a pair of ambitious clunkers helmed by two directors any actor would want to work with (Robert Redford's 'The Legend of Bagger Vance' and Michael Mann's 'Ali'), Smith racked up eleven straight feature films grossing more than $100 million.

In between the flicks, his 'Fresh Prince' status never faltered, as he rapped his way to the top of the pop charts on a few occasions, be it on his films' soundtracks or on his own ('Gettin' Jiggy With It,' 'Just the Two of Us,' 'Switch').

Smith's Midas touch remains unchallenged — unless you count funnyman Adam Sandler, who poses the only threat to Smith's reign as an individual whose face and name alone plants butts in the seats. After all, the 'SNL' alum has a hit about an Israeli hairdresser in New York City.

Smith's pal Tom Cruise, who ruled the town many years ago, can't salvage audiences' bucks or trust since his off-screen antics became such fodder for online and television news outlets. Dependable names like Julia Roberts, Harrison Ford, Eddie Murphy and Tom Hanks haven't brought Smith's kind of consistency in years.

Even 'stars' whose popularity never runs thin in the tabloids, such as George Clooney and Brad Pitt, rarely boast any substantial numbers that would challenge Smith.

Further making the argument that the man's face and name sells a product as big as a multi-million dollar film is the performance of Smith's most recent movie, 'I Am Legend,' where patrons weren't even sure what the thriller was about ('Oh! Zombies!'), earning the sixth highest domestic gross of last year.

This past Wednesday saw the opening of what might prove to be Smith's greatest leap yet. His postmodern superhero action yarn 'Hancock' has had its fair share of viewers scratching their heads at the premise alone, but Sony ought not fret — their golden boy will come through. Won't he?

Early buzz on 'Hancock' suggests the titular character will be Smith's most unlikable of his career so far. Unlikable? Will Smith? When studying for the GED, this would fall into the 'antonyms' section.

Smith's charisma never fails to show up and follow through as movie studios' meal ticket, yet the actor who has all but owned the Fourth of July holiday weekend whenever he touches it has traded in the pearly white smile for a bottle of whiskey (Hancock tends to hit the hard stuff). At this point in his career, one might think Smith can get away with murder on screen and finish number one at the box office, and I'd probably agree. In addition to the natural charisma he exudes, Smith can act.

We've seen his comedic abilities as early as the aforementioned 'Fresh Prince of Bel-Air', followed by successful work in 'Men in Black' and 'Hitch,' but his dramatic flair was evident in 2006's 'The Pursuit of Happyness,' which earned him a second Oscar nomination (after 'Ali').

What's most impressive about Smith's creative output is how carefully he picks his roles. Contrary to the previously mentioned actors, seldom does he quickly churn out role after role, making each of his releases a major Hollywood event. At this point, Smith has only starred in about fourteen movies, give or take a franchise or ensemble feature, which might suggest why his batting average is so high.

Even if 'Hancock' introduces a new detestable side to the actor we love so much, it wouldn't be a July 4th movie weekend without him.

July Jubilee tonight at Sokol Park - Fireworks! The Dexateens! Are you kidding? Where else would I go celebrate the red, white and blueness our forefathers struggled so desperately to protect and ensure so many years ago? Too bad the festivity's location changed from Tuscaloosa's scenic downtown area, but Sokol Park certainly ain't too shabby. PARA couldn't have picked a better band for the occasion — just don't go screaming Lynyrd Skynyrd requests at them — or maybe you should; I'd like to see what happens. See Page 10D for more.

Mr. Smith Goes to Washington on DVD - Still feeling patriotic? Pop in Frank Capra's 1939 classic starring James Stewart as a naive U.S. senator whose plans promptly collide with political corruption in Washington, opening his eyes to the rotten happenings on Capitol Hill that lead to his heroic efforts to restore decency to America's government. An Oscar-winner for best screenplay (and nominated for just about everything else), Capra's film shrewdly mixes comedy and drama to tell a great American story with arguably this country's favorite everyman (pre-Tom Hanks).

Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Contest on ESPN - You can't call yourself a true American until you've watched the world-famous eating competition where gluttons unite to watch the most dominate crammers around the globe stuff hot dogs into their faces. Longtime champion Takeru 'Tsunami' Kobayashi looks to win the Mustard Belt back after U.S. native Joey Chesnut stripped the hot dog king of his title last year. Witness history being made at 11 a.m. today on ESPN.

In Pixar We Trust

In Pixar We Trust
Ben Around
June 27, 2008

Let's lay some confusion to rest. 'Shrek,' 'Over the Hedge,' 'Barnyard,' 'Shark Tale,' 'Chicken Little,' 'Happy Feet,' 'Madagascar,' 'Ice Age' or 'Bee Movie' — none of the aforementioned titles fall into the nearly flawless category of what we know as Pixar movies.

To clarify, the Disney/Pixar feature collaborations include 'Toy Story,' 'A Bug's Life,' 'Toy Story 2,' 'Monsters, Inc.,' 'Finding Nemo,' 'The Incredibles,' 'Cars' and 'Ratatouille.'

Last summer, while steamrolling through movie trailers online, I came upon a teaser that struck me as peculiar and effective. It opened with a live single shot of a filmmaker named Andrew Stanton (writer, director, brainchild behind 'Finding Nemo') telling the story of the original Pixar creative team discussing future projects after wrapping its first feature, 'Toy Story.'

After listing one bullseye after the other, Stanton introduced the final idea they conceived, about a robot named Wall-E.

What struck me about the trailer was Stanton's haunting appearance set to mystical Thomas Newman notes. I can't recall another time where a filmmaker appeared in a trailer for his own movie let alone pulled it off with imposing gusto, the way Stanton did last summer.

In 2003, when the 'Finding Nemo' DVD hit the shelves, I took a week or so to not only watch the entire film eleven times (literally) but to also explore the special features documenting just how much sweat Stanton poured into this art child he'd conceived years before. From the initial pitch to putting the finishing touches on whale effects, he saw that every last hair was neatly trimmed prior to its summer release.

Viewing Stanton's work ethic left a lasting impression, reassuring me that the creators of what we see on the silver screen sometimes put more into the product than we deserve. This red-haired, bespectacled, clean-shaven director even looked different in his introduction. This time, he was long-haired and bearded; his eyes had aged what looked to be ten years (double the time since his last film), suggesting he'd again been up to something big.

So seeing Stanton appear in his trailer pledged to me that Pixar's next might not just top his first movie, but perhaps be the film to top 'Nemo' and last year's best movie, Brad Bird's 'Ratatouille.' The only filmmaker who could pull off what Stanton did may be Steven Spielberg.

Maybe one thing audiences have learned in the last 13 years is they can trust this seemingly perfect collaboration between Disney and Pixar with every release — even the short films that precede the features stand as milestone achievements in animation and storytelling. With only eight features released, Pixar's total domestic gross rounds out at just under $2 billion, with no single film falling below $162 million.

What sets this studio apart creatively, aside from the fact that their animation presents a 3-D experience, the stories and characters themselves are just as three-dimensional, offering memorable experiences that contend with heralded live-action features at the highest level.

Is this to say that Pixar has an undefeated track record both financially and artistically? Financially, maybe, but I've spotted just one blemish regarding the quality of their creative achievements. 2006's 'Cars' felt a bit underwhelming even during the opening credits where we suffered through a Sheryl Crow song accompanying a NASCAR-like race. Some might argue that even with the narrative flaws that film had, the overall experience oozed enough Pixar magic to keep things satisfactory. I wish I could say the same, but when you're batting 7½ for eight on this playing field, complaints cower in a lonely corner.

While some of the previously mentioned, non-Pixar computer animated films possess their fair share of laughs, thrills and artistic merits, they'll sadly always have to bow to the empire that might have saved Disney's creative persona.

Today, I'll see 'Wall-E,' which is said to stress physical behavior and performance in its characters as opposed to the overload of pop culture-ridden, innuendo-filled dialogue you'll find in the quasi-hip 'Shrek' movies. While its praises can't officially be sung because I haven't seen the film, its release only reminds me how thankful I am for Pixar's output of excellence for more than a decade.

Along with 'Iron Man' and 'Pineapple Express,' this marks one of my 'surefire' bets for the summer; and we know now where I stand on the first of the three. I'm sure I'll see you there. All hail Pixar.

Other things to do this weekend:

'Wanted' at the Cobb Hollywood 16 - Once the kiddies get tucked in and start dreaming little dreams about 'Wall-E,' grown folks can kick things into fifth gear with this high-octane, ultra-violent action yarn starring Angelina Jolie, Morgan Freeman and 'Atonement' heartthrob James McAvoy as a gang of assassins who can manipulate the movement of bullets and look really cool while doing it! Early trailers suggested this would reach new heights of ridiculousness at the movies, and the latest buzz doesn't dispute that. But it seems most critics who have caught early screenings dig the stylish shoot-em-up atmosphere offered by Russian director Timur Bekmambetov.

Josh Kavanaugh and friends at Mugshots, Saturday - While his brothers Kris and Kevin tore things up in and around The Booth in the band Reaux Jam Beau, Black Warrior native and jazz guitarist Josh Kavanaugh has evolved into a virtuoso guitarist in his own right. Tomorrow, he and two other local artists, Landis Lee (drums) and Tim Davis (keyboards) will provide the shuffleboarders with plenty of background jazz and funk that'll find its way to the forefront with plenty of plucking and pounding.

Ashfest at Egan's tonight - Catch the final leg of this festival of local bands celebrating the bar's preeminent employee. You're in for a tonal treat tonight when Shake It Like a Caveman, Ham Bagby & the Siege, The Cancers, Silver Lions 20/20 and Baak Gwai hit the back of the room. Always offering a comfortable and welcoming atmosphere, this venue puts the spotlight on local bands who take chances.

Shyamalan sees dead people again

Shyamalan sees dead people again
By Ben Flanagan
BEN AROUND

Nearly twenty years passed before Steven Spielberg ventured into R-rated territory with his 1993 masterpiece “Schindler’s List.” With it, the wide-eyed storyteller who dazzled all of America with spectacular event films for kids and adults (“Close Encounters,” “E.T.,” “Raiders of the Lost Ark”), film’s wonderboy grew into an adult whose storytelling evolved into a more poetic “for adults only” realm.

In a 2002 issue, Newsweek tapped writer/director wunderkind M. Night Shyamalan as “The Next Spielberg” (on its cover, no less). While the kind title came after only his third film – or second that anyone knew about – and right before his fourth (“Signs”), the magazine described the newbie as “more akin to the young Spielberg in his careful rippling of the heartstrings, his deft touch with child actors, his fascination with the middle-class American family and his desperate desire to keep pleasing the same demographic over and over: people between the ages of 10 and 100.”

In the article, they stress a “young” Spielberg; but does Newsweek still stand by its claim just seven years ago before Shyamalan’s notoriously debated films “The Village” and “Lady in the Water” were released to underwhelming box office numbers and mixed critical responses?

Sometimes, members of the media rush to judge new faces both in front of and behind the camera, which is unfair. Remember a few years ago when writers helmed Tom Hanks as the next Jimmy Stewart? Or more recently with George Clooney as the next Cary Grant? With the ladies, folks want to determine just who will be the next Julia Roberts: Amy Adams or Anne Hathaway. Didn’t work out with Reese Witherspoon, so they’ve moved on apparently.

The same thing happens in politics and sports, too. Barack Obama as the next John F. Kennedy. Kobe Bryant as the next Michael Jordan. To the contemporary figures whose achievements have led them to this point, I’d say the comparisons are certainly justified in some cases to a certain extent, but most of the time they stretch towards insulting. Never will these people accomplish on any level specifically what their predecessors did in their own respectively incompatible eras. They may hope to meet some sort of equivalent or even transcend what’s already been attained, but don’t look for carbon copies.

Such comparisons can potentially damage careers like Shyamalan’s. If he must live up to the likeness of an icon like Spielberg, he’ll never make it. Instead, he’ll be pressured into become more imaginative and different from his own contemporaries, and he’ll squirt out unforgivable drivel like “Lady in the Water” which convinced Disney the man may have hit a creative brick wall and needed more time to develop his thoughts. Personally, I find his underrated, beautifully shot and paced film, “The Village,” to be Shyamalan’s masterpiece, which could raise the eyebrows of the many “Sixth Sense” and “Unbreakable” loyalists who’d laugh at the notion of anything else surpassing those gems.

At this point, it’s safe to declare Shyamalan a unique talent among most of today’s offerings in Tinseltown. As a filmmaker, the guy has almost seamlessly developed his own style for the craft that most of us immediately recognize when we see a new trailer of his without even seeing his name attached – something we can only do with a select few today (Wes Anderson maybe?).

And so we don’t fall behind in our unfair comparisons, let us acknowledge that, like Spielberg back in 1993, M. Night Shyamalan will release his first ever R-rated feature film today with “The Happening.”

Those who have seen advertisements for the thriller may notice the heavy emphasis the marketing puts on the mature rating, highlighting the ‘R’ in bright-red coloring. The Motion Picture Association of America ratings board’s official justification for the rating says the film contains “violent and disturbing images,” and if you’ve seen the red-band trailer online, you get the idea that Shyamalan ain’t messing around this time. The violence shown in these clips emphasizes that this director whose childlike sensibilities told unconventional stories for everyone in the recent past has shifted gears toward a much more mature audience.

Skeptics claim that the film’s box office numbers could hurt from the notion that audiences are unfamiliar with just what “The Happening” is all about. To clarify, the story follows a family on the run from an inexplicable and relentless event that threatens humankind. Some say that Shyamalan’s getting all environmental on us, suggesting that the threat could be something toxic in order to scare us into going green. Reckon we’ll see.

After the disappointing “Lady in the Water,” I found it hard to defend Shyamalan after his “bedtime story” that most assuredly put his children (along with those of us who saw it) to sleep. But I’m a believer in second chances, and I especially believe in a filmmaker who’s willing to take chances. Perhaps the R-rating will negatively affect the film’s box office (against “The Incredible Hulk” today), but I see it as an opportunity for the guy to grow a little...or just experiment with some gory makeup effects.


The Incredible Hulk at the Cobb Hollywood 16 - Not sure what to think about Marvel's re-do on the not-so jolly green giant? Perhaps you're asking yourself, "Haven't I already seen a 'Hulk' movie? Like 5 years ago? And didn't it stink?" If that's how you feel, then Marvel Studios might agree with you. Virtually spitting in the creative faces of Ang Lee and others involved with the first disappointing go-around with 2003's "Hulk," Marvel has teamed up with Universal Pictures, French director Louis Letterier (The Transporter movies) and Edward Norton (who co-wrote) to try and get it right this time. Judging from the initial trailer released several months ago, the revamped version felt silly and overcharged with obvious CGI effects (especially when compared to Lee's superior work in the first film). But since a few clips have hit the web, buzz has grown much stronger thanks to what look to be strong action set pieces, which Lee's version sorely lacked from beginning to end. Norton, Tim Roth, Liv Tyler and William Hurt co-star; and if you liked Marvel's first summer foray with "Iron Man" this summer, rumors flying around suggesting some key character crossover action should only help matters.

Funny Games on DVD - What happens when we see a remake before the original version of a film, TV show or song? Do we always prefer which ever we've seen first, even if someone had the idea and executed it with success before? For instance, most of us remember indie hero Gus Van Sant's failed experiment with his shot-for-shot remake of Alfred Hitchcock's "Psycho," but I don't hold it against the guy. Either way, how bad can a shot-for-shot remake of that movie actually be? Casting's always the issue, it seems - and color, for that matter. German filmmaker Michael Haneke has done something similar to what Van Sant did, only he's done it with his own movie, called "Funny Games," previously released in 1997. This week, his remake, starring Naomi Watts, Tim Roth and Michael Pitt, hit the streets - and I'll be seeing it before I see the original. I can't offer any kind of substantial rationale other than I saw the new edition's trailer before I heard of the first, and it immediately piqued my interest. Said to be highly disturbing by most critics, as the story follows two psychotic young men who take a family hostage in their home, the brilliant trailer promises what could be a dark comedy that takes things the extra mile. While most may not have the stomach for it, the real cinephiles ought to latch on to either version.

Reeling - INDY 4 reviewed, Benjamin Button trailer, The Happening red-band trailer, 'W' cast, etc.

Reeling - May 22, 2008
Hosted by Ben Flanagan
Guests: Matt Scalici, Corey Craft, Ben Stark

LISTEN TO THE SHOW!!! Click below:
http://www.thecapstone.ua.edu/Podcast/reelindiana.mp3

1. INDIANA JONES AND THE KINGDOM OF THE CRYSTAL SKULL.

MY THOUGHTS (SOME SPOILERS):
Steven Spielberg's latest entry into one of film's most celebrated trilogy opens nationwide today. I stayed up past my wimpy bedtime and caught last night's midnight show, which saw a nearly packed house in the Cobb Hollywood 16 here in Tuscaloosa. Let me preface this review by saying that I'm an Indiana Jones fan of the most loyal kind. Prior to even seeing RAIDERS OF THE LOST ARK, I grew up watching TEMPLE OF DOOM over and over until the tracking button couldn't even help my full screen VHS copy. I popped the second movie in yesterday and watched the terrific opening Shanghai nightclub sequence and relished it just like I used to. Having watched all three films a few times every year, RAIDERS being my favorite by a hair at the moment, my affinity for the trilogy remains as strong as ever. As I've mentioned here before, upon just hearing that a fourth Indiana Jones installment would be made, I was skeptical even though Spielberg and Ford would be involved. Maybe I just thought THE LAST CRUSADE might actually be the last time we'd see Dr. Jones, but I guess we should have learned our lesson after FRIDAY THE 13th Part 4: The Final Chapter, which was followed by FRIDAY THE 13th: A New Beginning. Either way, the movie would be made and growing anticipation corraled internet among movie nerds, which slightly outweighed mine and others skepticism about what we thought died in 1989. News that George Lucas's involvement meant he had strict approval over story and script ideas only bruised what excitement I had about the project. Upon hearing scripts from both M. Night Shyamalan and Frank Darabont, among others, had been vetoed by Lucas, I saw the first few warning signs that this would be a tricky endeavor. Whose hand did they tap to put the finishing touches on a story they'd finally compromised on? That would be Hollywood's most inconsistent screenwriter and partycrasher, David Koepp, whose writing hasn't satisfied me since JURASSIC PARK and the first MISSION: IMPOSSIBLE. Rumors that this adventure would somehow include the unusual presence of extraterrestrial creatures were all but confirmed with the teaser trailer where a crate that read "Roswell" could be seen and a crystal skull resembling none other than an alien could be seen on the movie's poster. After plenty of online naysaying and trashtalking among skeptics and fanboys, the movie is here and I, along with others on this show, have seen it.

And what's my initial reaction? Ladies and gentlemen, if I'm being totally honest with myself as someone studied in the field of all things Indiana Jones, the fourth installment KINGDOM OF THE CRYSTAL SKULL is a nightmare, plain and simple. I should say, that midnight these days is past my bedtime, so there's a slight (VERY SLIGHT) chance that my judgment could have been impaired. But I don't think so. What we have here is as much an Indiana Jones film as the PG-13 LIVE FREE OR DIE HARD was a real DIE HARD movie. Indy-lite, in fact. Without getting too specific and spoiler-crazy, the film's central problem is its weak, exposition-driven, silly script that introduces content not fit for the Indiana Jones universe we've grown accustomed to. As some have said before, this adventure travels moreso at the speed of a NATIONAL TREASURE entry, rather than the superior trilogy. Spielberg, along with Lucas who wouldn't leave the set, relied far too heavily on CGI-heavy action sequences where green screens were used instead of authentic locations or detailed sets. While we were all excited to see Harrison Ford back in the fedora, we also know that the man hasn't made a good movie since the mid to late 90s (sorry WHAT LIES BENEATH fans). Based on what I watched last night, Ford's forgotten how to act and only phones in what feels like a parody of his rough and tough, charming archaeologist. Underdeveloped and unnecessary characters couldn't flesh out this ultra-thin story that felt nothing like any one of the previous three films. Even the look of it, while shot by the great Janusz Kaminski, couldn't recall Douglas Slocombe's lush photography from the 1980s. Perhaps Kaminski's task was just too daunting. Honestly, the photography, compositions and lighting, was generic, reminding me more so of THE LOST WORLD - not THE LAST CRUSADE. To put it simply, it just didn't feel right, and it wasn't just the CG prairie dogs and monkeys that told me that.

- What kind of box office numbers should we expect? Nikki Finke suggests the following on her blog: "Indy 4 debuts for a full 5-day holiday weekend, among the best of all circumstances. Which is why informed guesstimates from my box office gurus are ranging from a low of $142 million to a high of $175 million for the well-reviewed PG-13 adventure pic. I think the answer lies somewhere inbetween -- around $160M."

2. THE CURIOUS CASE OF BENJAMIN BUTTON trailer was attached to INDY 4 last night. Those two minutes or so were better than all three hours of ZODIAC, which I actually re-watched recently.

3. M. Night goes Red-Band with THE HAPPENING trailer, and I think it's the right move. Personally, I'm more excited about this movie than I already was. I won't say I was sweating with anticipation, but I've had a feeling he's capable of redeeming himself after LADY IN THE WATER. The guy is still batting over .500 in my opinion. This will be his first R-rated effort, and it apparently earned it's rating for Violent and Disturbing Images. From the looks of the trailer, there will be violence indeed. Find it on YouTube.

4. SPEED RACER FLOPS! Warner Bros. inflates box office figures for temporary second place finish.
- The movie's production budget alone was $120m, and its current cumulative worldwide gross is $56m. For Warner Bros. sake, THE DARK KNIGHT better be packing HEAT.
- Who saw this disaster coming?
- Should there be major repercussions for this kind of report on the studio's behalf? What could be done?
- Corey liked the movie. Was IRON MAN just too strong of a release a week before this?
- Don't you think a cartoon adaptation might have been a bit of a step down for the Wachowski's right after the MATRIX movies?
- Casting a nobody in the lead a bad move? I don't care what some might say, Emile Hirsch is still an unknown to mainstream audiences. I guess Shia Lebeouf can't be in everything

5. Casting news regarding Oliver Stone's latest presidential piece, W - Richard Dreyfuss tapped as vice president Dick Cheney. Will this portrayal stray far from his role in The American President? Who cares? Good casting, I think. Matt? I'd just like to know how you feel about this project in general?

6. Ain't It Cool reports, It's been known that Christian Bale is playing John Connor in McG's now-in-production TERMINATOR film. Now early indications suggest Bale will appear throughout a proposed trilogy of films, though no deals had been struck. Now comes confirmation that Bale has formally signed on to play Connor in three TERMINATOR movies. Based on the awful third movie along with the Sarah Connor Chronicles, do we really want more Terminator movies even if Bale and McG are involved?

7. DVD picks: The ORIGINAL INDIANA JONES Trilogy - new editions avaliable; Robert Altman's SHORT CUTS (on Criterion), The Wire, Battlestar Galactica season three

Reeling - Iron Man, Speed Racer, Standard Operating Procedure

Reeling - May 1, 2008
Hosted by Ben Flanagan
Guests: Been Stark, Graham Flanagan

LISTEN TO THE SHOW!!! Click below:
http://www.thecapstone.ua.edu/Podcast/reeliron.mp3

Television director Tom Cherones has been back on campus advising eleven TCF students during the production of another film helmed by the upper-level course tonight at the Bama Theatre downtown on Greensboro Avenue. Some thoughts on its playing second fiddle to this Deadstring Brothers concert DVD tonight.

MOVING ON:

Our first guest: Been Stark discussing his latest filmmaking adventures, Preston Sturges, Forgetting Sarah Marshall and baking.


Next guest: Graham Flanagan


1. IRON MAN - Graham has seen it. Here's his take.

2. SPEED RACER - Graham has seen it (jeez). Here's his take.

3. Errol Morris' STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURE - Graham has seen it (gah!). Here's his take.

4. In industry news, it's now official, Guillermo Del Toro has been tapped to direct THE HOBBIT, the prequel to JRR Tolkein's Lord of the Rings trilogy. Early word is that Ian McKellan has been approached to reprise his role as Gandalf the wizard and that McKellan is likely to accept. What do we think about this?

4. Our thoughts on the Tom Cherones film production course.

6. DVD recommendations: THE SAVAGES, IN THE VALLEY OF ELAH, JOHN CARPENTER'S ASSAULT ON PRECINCT 13, THE WRONG MAN, ROPE

I'll be back next week to let you know what I think of IRON MAN, which I'll be catching tonight. Thanks for tuning in.

Reeling - Most Overrated Films???

Reeling - April 17, 2008
Hosted by Ben Flanagan
Guests: Matt Scalici, Phil Owen

LISTEN TO THE SHOW!!! Click below:
http://www.thecapstone.ua.edu/Podcast/reeloverrated.mp3


While I'd thought not to do the show today, thanks to several distractions, I decided to try something anyway and call past guests for their impromptu thoughts on what they felt were overrated movies.

Matt Scalici and Phil Owen both offered the SAME movie as their first selection? Are they in cahoots? And what was their selection??? A CLOCKWORK ORANGE!

Are they insane? To give them the benefit of the doubt, it sounds like neither of the two has actually seen the film. I mean I did put them on the spot, so they could have thought, "What would make me sound cool and smarmy?"

If you ask me, both come across similarly to the name of the character you see above. But they are certainly entitled to their weird opinions. And I guess we should respect them.

Either way, thanks to them for appearing on such short notice.

There is a long songbreak between guests (but the music's not bad), so skip ahead or enjoy the tunes.

While on the subject, what are the most overrated movies you've come across?