Reviews

Being a fan of the original UK Top Gear, it was a difficult transition to the US version. I was expecting the original format... a couple of test drives, some couch time, a celebrity to do a lap in a crappy subcompact and the inevitable appearance by the almighty Stig to really put the featured car through it's paces.

I mean if it's not broke.. why fix it.. right?

The ever cheery Richard Hammond, the frumpy Captain Slow, and the vitriolic Jeremy Clarkson are bona-fide UK television icons and to a lesser degree in America albeit mostly among the auto enthusiast crowd. A solid cast with chemistry that really should not be such a huge success but one that has truly stood the test of time. I love these guys, not necessarily individually but as a group.

Enter the US version.

As I said earlier.. this is not your father's Top Gear. The format of the US version is a departure from the UK version. Gone is the star in the reasonably priced car. I don't miss it but I imagine some probably do. The US version is more of a variety format. Sometimes they do a show that resembles the UK version's popular specials, or perhaps they will do a show that works to dispel (or prove) some well-known urban auto legends, or maybe just put a series of cars through their paces... whatever the task at hand is there are usually various challenges to be won or lost along the way. Perhaps they will have to modify their cars to ford a river, turn their auto into a limousine, or win a race with a full punch bowl on top of their heads.. it can be pretty much anything. This is one aspect of the show I especially enjoy because all the hosts are pretty competitive with one another and trade barbs the entire time. At any rate, whoever wins the most challenges is usually rewarded with a ride in a special car like the Bugatti Veyron or some other ridiculously cool ride.

There are also three hosts of the US version. Tanner Foust is a professional race car driver (rally and drift) with a list of world records and world championships. Foust is also a professional stunt driver having appeared in movies such as the Dukes of Hazzard, Fast & Furious, Iron Man 2, and several others. The next host is Rutledge Wood who is a self-stated lifelong car enthusiast and is an auto-racing analysis for Fox Sports 1 and also appears on the SPEED's NASCAR Raceday and hosts Trackside Live. The final host is comedian Adam Ferrara who is best known for his role on "Rescue Me". Although funny, Ferrara seems to lack the automotive pedigrees of Foust and Wood making him (at least on paper) something of an odd choice as a host for this particular show.

There is pretty good chemistry on the show, mostly between Foust and Wood. Foust is the professional speed freak, Wood is the lovable hipster doofus, and Ferrara provides quite a bit of the comic relief.. albeit frequently seems out of his depth in some of the car challenges. Once in a while, Ferrara seems like the odd man out. I believe that Foust and Wood are genuine friends but I'm not sure if their friendship with Ferrara is as genuine. At times I feel his relationship with the other two hosts is manufactured for the show but at other times, they all seem to get along great. This may be entirely my imagination but that's the way it seems to me. This is not to say that Ferrara is not an asset to the show, he is a clever guy and is the originator of some of the funnier dialog on the show.

As I said, this is not the UK's Top Gear and many fans of the original will not like this version just because it does depart from the original's formula, has different hosts obviously, and focuses less on the technical merits of the featured vehicles in exchange for more shenanigans and tomfoolery. Overall though I do like it, after all this does not replace the UK's Top Gear so that version is still there to enjoy as well. My car enthusiast friends generally prefer the UK version but my kids love the US version and can't stand the UK version. I like both but if I had to pick one, I'd definitely go with the US version as I find it more entertaining albeit less educational.

I deduct one star for not having enough Stig in the US version.

I went to this movie today with my daughter, not expecting a whole lot. I saw the trailers and although it looked interesting I was afraid the story would be paper-thin but covered by a glaze of shiny goo.

I used to watch Speed Racer as a kid, I loved the Mach-5 and frankly seeing all those previews with the newer styled cars did turn me off somewhat.. this was blasphemy I thought, those Hollywood jerks always think they know what we like more than we do. I thought this would be another one of those re-imagined "updated" travesties cooked up to make a few bucks by sacrificing yet another beloved pop culture icon...

Right?

uh... no. I guess I have to eat my words. To be fair, this movie is not perfect and does tend to drag in places... and there is definite sensory overload at times with too many special-effects and overly artsy presentation... elements which should have been used a bit more sparingly because after a while they tend to lose impact and leaves you wondering if it was really necessary in the first place.

But that side... This movie is really terrific.

It nails every one of those old Speed Racer nuances... the complete arsenal of Mach-5 gadgetry and the Speed's costuming from the 1960s cartoon is well represented right down to Speed's snappy blue polo shirt and red neckerchief. The middle of the movie features a brilliant cross-country race segment that is ripped right out of the cartoon. Listen closely and you'll even hear all of Speed's trademark "Ohhs and Ahhhs" and that unmistakable soundtrack pops up exactly where it needs to. In my opinion, this movie grabs you in the middle and does not let go until the last checkered flag drops.

One other thing to mention is that this movie is perfectly cast and the acting was really well done within the context of being a live-action cartoon. Despite my earlier reservations, and thanks to my daughter's instance to go see it, this movie really won me over and I will surely own it on Blu-Ray when it becomes available.

Good job, Speed!

Rambo is an 80s-style action movie with modern sensibilities. Stallone is not a one-man army as in previous movies but rather a dogged old soldier that comes to terms with what he actually is while racking up a body count that would make Tarintino proud. In many ways, this movie parallels Rocky Balboa as a mature ending to a series of sometimes over-the-top but fun action movies. John Rambo in this movie is an aging but potent killing machine that for the first time since First Blood accomplishes his mission in a very believable manner. The action is visceral and downright gory at times surpassing the hard-core scenes of Omaha Beach in Saving Private Ryan. The film pulls no punches when showing exactly what a Barret .50 caliber sniper rifle can do to a human body. Stallone mutters only a very few lines of dialog in this movie... there's no speeches or patriotic flag waving going on here but there is a clear lesson on how well liberal idealism holds up under barbaric realities amid genocide and war.

A must see but not one for the kiddies.

After seeing Cloverfield, I have to wonder if this movie is popular because it is a really that good of a movie or because it's been a while since Hollywood has been able to produce a movie this creative and unique. I believe it is more the latter than the former. Besides the hand-held camera effect, I think the real appeal of this movie lies in it's ability to lull you into a state of vulnerability... meaning that there are these intense action sequences then nothing.. and the nothing goes on to the point where you know something is going to happen but are worn down so much by the time it finally does happen that you are genuinely startled. It's a neat trick and I think a lot of people like that sort of thing but as for me, I find it a bit irritating at times.

The acting was actually very good and the special effects were also very well done... pretty much what we expect from Hollywood these days. The story is very basic and ultimately in my opinion is pointless. I left the theater fairly entertained but had I not gone, I don't feel I would have really missed anything. I know there have been many comparisons to this and Blair Witch, many people saying this is a better movie and it probably is... today, however after all the Blair Witch hype was over you ended up with a so-so movie that tips the IMDb meter at a mere 6.1 today but when it came out, it was THE movie to see.. kinda like Cloverfield.

In the end, it's a good movie but for me it's a case of style over substance and a movie I will probably forget about by tomorrow morning.

I never really understood the fascination with Transformer toys. I always thought they were kinda stupid the way they transformed into inane things like cars, boom boxes, and ugh.. dinosaurs. I have friends that love them... but even they could not make me sit though the 80s cartoon movie. Never was a fan.

So, in my inbox pops the invite from this same pack of friends to their outing to see the Transformers movie. I was not interested and declined this particular fanboy cinemaplex Pilgrimage but the next invitation was not so easy to decline, my kids asked me... repeatedly... to take them. I finally relented as I have sat through everything from Chicken Little to The Santa Clause so why not Transformers? After all, I am a veteran of sitting through crappy kids movies.

The next 2.5 hours would be a blur of unanticipated cinematic goodness. As much as I love the Spiderman franchise and counted the days until SM3, there were times during that movie that I wanted to hang myself from the nearest thing that would be high enough to hang myself from. This movie on the other hand had me wanting more... 2.5 hours can seem like half that amount of time when a movie succeeds in captivating you like this one does. The movie moves along at a good clip with action to spare, very good acting, and even a decent storyline thrown in for good measure.

There are some parallels you can draw between this movie and Independence Day. ID4 was a good movie but it didn't grab ahold of me and refuse to let go like this one did. This movie is perhaps one of the finest action movies made... finally, an action movie with style AND substance.

If you don't like this movie, then check your pulse my friend because you are probably dead.

I've never been a fan of the Fantastic Four and frankly did not give this movie much of a thought back when I heard a movie was being made about them. Having been a comic book fan for 30 years, I have always enjoyed the Human Torch and the Thing in their own adventures or when teamed up with another character but the Fantastic Four itself always left me flat. I have read many issues over the years but it has never really hooked me in. My kids actually wanted to see this movie more than I did (apparently there is a newer cartoon series around that got them excited about it) and so I took them on opening day to sort of get it over with.

I was pleasantly surprised.

The movie loosely follows the origin of the team and does well to illustrate the relationship between the characters. The love/hate relationship between Ben Grimm and Johnny Storm, Ben's role as Reed's protector while at the same time blaming him for his situation, Sue Storm's unreturned affection for Reed, Reed's reluctant role as leader and analytical but naive reasoning. Reed's relationship with Victor Von Doom. It's all in here. There are many little things tossed in for comic fans as well... Doom's return to Latvia (presumably as ruler), Ben's raincoat and fedora, Johnny sky-writing the flaming F4 signal in the sky (which goes way back to the 1960s comic books), and a few other nice touches.

Although the story is flawed in parts... the whole Ben Grimm/Doom transformation part was not very well thought out. But other parts are very well done... I really like the way the relationship between Reed and Doom was explained and how the Doom character developed. Although in this movie does take it's fair share of artistic license such as Doom being with the F4 when exposed to the cosmic storm (which was not the case in the comics). I usually don't like when they fundamentally change things like this in comic-to-movie adaptations but here it actually works very well and helps explain why the relationship between Reed Richards and Dr. Doom is so venomous.

The acting ranges from acceptable to pretty good. Michael Chiklis was very good in both the Ben Grimm/Thing roles running the gauntlet of emotions from self-pity to reluctant hero pretty well. Jessica Alba was good but it was a little hard to believe that she would be chasing Ioan Gruffudd but did give this movie much needed sex appeal. Ioan Gruffudd did an acceptable job as Reed Richards albeit a bit bland which I'm not sure if Gruffudd's acting or the character itself is just bland. Chris Evans also did a very good job providing the humor elements and reckless nature of Johnny Storm. Julian McMahon did a splendid job as crazy old Dr. Doom and his fall from grace was well portrayed if a bit hurried. Limited screen time kept me from fully enjoying the Dr. Doom character.

All in all, while not perfect, this movie is a great way to spend a lazy summer afternoon. It's a fun movie with great visual effects, a decent story, and generally good acting that keeps the action humming along at a good clip. The movie plays very well for kids.. both my kids liked it very much. If I had to judge this movie against other Marvel movies I would put it above the Hulk and a little behind the first Spiderman movie and of course far above Daredevil and the Punisher.

I wasn't quite sure what to make of this movie from the previews.. was it suppose to be a Spoof? Reunion show? Remake? Well, I am happy to say that it encompasses all three of these plot lines.

The story surrounds Adam West and Burt Ward being mysteriously invited to a car show for the benefit of orphaned children. On display (of course) is the legendary modified Ford Futura Batmobile from the original series. The lights are switched off and the Batmobile speeds away. Adam West, eager to relive some of the "Bat-Magic" of his youth whisks Burt Ward away for a little adventure to recover the Batmobile. The story then takes a funny and clever path through the past while the actors relive their ealier days on and off the set.

There are some truly funny moments, especially in the flashback scenes. Burt Ward getting shocked, burnt, and battered while his stunt double looks on drinking coffee. The battles with the censors, Burt Ward's near-fatal liason with a sexy female co-star, the "Legion of Decency's" issues with Burt Ward's costume, and Adam West's real-life playboy antics all make for some very funny moments.

All in all, the movie is well done and very enjoyable. Although Batman fans will already know most of the "inside information" presented in the flashback scenes, the acting is pretty good and the dialog is well written. An enjoyable look into the campy TV world of the original Caped Crusader and the Boy Wonder.

Let me first say that I am a huge fan of the original series and a big fan of Owen Wilson and Ben Stiller. I was not quite sure how to feel about one of my favorite old TV dramas being lampooned by Stiller and Wilson. I am happy to say that this is not really a parody but rather a light-hearted but sentimental salute to the original series.

The movie is made to look like a 70s made-for-TV movie and is rife with 70s pop culture references and goofy situations. One clever moment had Owen Wilson belting out a cover of Davids Soul's 70s hit love song "Don't give up on us baby" which was not a Starsky and Hutch reference but rather a David Soul singing career reference which was very, very cool... the audience didn't seem to make the connection but I did and I thought it was very funny.

Stiller's Starsky is sort of an angry guy that is not very well liked by the other cops. Wilson's Hutch is a carefree but mildly corrupt cop who strings along a poor neighbor kid for $20 he owes him until the kid is nearly blown up in one of the funniest moments of the movie. Snoop Dogg does very well as the streetwise stoolie Huggy Bear. The 1976 Ford Torino is also there, however it does not get much screentime.

Stiller and Wilson do a passable job in this movie. They may have been better suited to a Dukes of Hazzard remake (which was a comedy). If the casting department needed buddies then perhaps they should have knocked on Ben Aflek and Matt Damon's door.

Don't expect to see a remake of the original but a fun movie that stands pretty well on it's own two feet.

Chad Michael Murray just didn't have the screen presence to really pull this off. He just isn't very believable in the role and frankly, the Lone Ranger is a man to be feared and respected... Chad Michael Murray might be a teen heart throb but is not somebody that is the least bit intimidating. I thought that Nathaniel Arcand's rendition of Tonto was interesting, he does have more screen presence than Chad Michael Murray although he was a little heavy on the angst to be a very likeable character. If this ever becomes a series then hopefully he will tone it down a few notches. The brief romance angle between Tonto's sister and Luke Hartman was okay, the bath scene and explicit sexual overtones may have been a little over the top though as younger kids should be able to watch a show like this. I did like the mystical elements introduced, it adds an interesting angle to the character although the silly power-jumping stuff reminded me of an old show called Manimal for some odd reason.

The background elements of the plot were loosely based on the established story... you know the one that has been established from the books, comics, TV show, and movies for 60 or so years. The writers apparently thought they could do better and decided to make changes that really didn't need to be made. I am not sure why they changed his name to Luke Hartman from Dan Reid.. again, a fact that has been established for over 60 years. I wonder if the copyright holder insisted that these name changes be made so that this is some type of "parallel-universe" version of the Lone Ranger and not the real thing. The overall design of the sets were good, whoever did the technical advising for the movie did a pretty good job. The hip hop music was P*A*I*N*F*U*L... in fact, most of the music was extremely inappropriate and instead of making the scenes hip, they made them awkward and confused. They did give a half-hearted nod to the real Lone Ranger by playing the William Tell Overture at the end and although the rendition was pretty good, the cinematics should have been better... it just looked silly, this skinny guy riding along with this giant Indian guy riding next to him... just who is the sidekick here anyway?

The Lone Ranger's costume was pretty lousy, bearing zero continuity to the actual character and much more like a reject from the Village people. I know they are trying to make him look hip and cool but in doing so have made the character very undistinctive, average, and boring. Gone were all the trademarks elements that are part of the character. It seems to me that when you take a character as well known as the Lone Ranger, you should at least get people to make the film that have some granual of respect for the character itself and include at least some of the elements that make the character as enduring as it has been. When you change as much as these people have then you have a totally different product... this was not the Lone Ranger but rather a cheap knockoff masquerading as the Lone Ranger.

Overall, the movie reminded me of Sony's Godzilla remake.. and is once again proof positive that completely re-inventing a classic icon is foolish and stupid because you automatically alienate any real fan base out there. Most males over the age of 30 probably grew up watching the real Lone Ranger on TV or listening to Radio shows when they were kids. I was hoping for a semi-mature effort from WB but instead we ended up with their usual, predictable attempt to lure in the young, hip crowd with a product that is cliche' and an insult to anybody that knows anything about the character. If this is going to be a series (ugh) , the only hope will be to grow this lame character into more of what it is traditionally suppose to be and introduce those elements that make the Lone Ranger special, but then again it seems some people feel that anything that rebels against tradition is the right thing to do.. how sad. The only redeeming value of this movie is that it made the 1981 flop "The Legend of the Lone Ranger" movie look much better. It was universally disliked because most people felt it strayed too far from the original but after watching it again and comparing it to this lame duck, it is about 100 times better than I remember it. If this ever becomes a series could it be saved? yes, but will it be saved? Probably not and that's a shame.