Showing posts with label reviews. Show all posts
Showing posts with label reviews. Show all posts

Monday, March 31, 2014

A Yellow Umbrella and a Blue French Horn: My Spoiler Filled Review of the HIMYM Finale

Way back in the beginning of this very blog (although it was hosted at a much different place, and I was very different myself!), a new comedy premiered: How I Met Your Mother.

Usually, sitcoms take some time to find their stride.  That wasn't the case with HIMYM.  The pilot was perfect.  It introduced the five characters that we would fall in love with over the next nine years, and set up a perfect couple that it then took away from us: Ted Mosby and Robin Scherbatsky.  At the end of that pilot, Ted, who is telling his kids the story of how he met their mother, tells his children, "And that's the story of how I met your Aunt Robin."

Through the years, people tried to come up with ways that the mother would somehow actually be Robin, but no, the creators had taken that off the table right at the beginning.

It was kind of brilliant, when you think about it.  The beauty of sexual tension for television is that wanting the couple to get together is so much more enjoyable to watch than the couple actually getting together.

The show, especially in its early years, did an outstanding job of making you want Ted and Robin to get together, and yet we knew it couldn't happen.

There came a time, however, when the show couldn't really play that card anymore, because even sexual tension, the will they won't they (especially when we know that they won't) just can't carry a show anymore.  (Smallville worked with this through Clark and Lana for a long time, but ultimately, they had to bring in Lois.)  You can only keep the couple apart in a "will they or won't they" state for so long before they either do or don't!

HIMYM hit a bit of a lull when they reached that point.

And like Friends before it, the show was in danger of becoming more of a soap opera than the genius comedy that it had been.

Enter the Robin and Barney relationship, which seemed way out of place when it first happened.

I thought for a bit there that the show I loved so much was in danger of losing everything which made it so great.

But then Marshall's dad died.

That moment recharged the show.  (It was also around this time that the show finally was off the year in/year out bubble.  Nearly every year in the beginning, the creators were writing possible series finales, which incidentally would have ended in much the same way that the show would ultimately end.  Now, however, they knew they were going to be able to end on their own terms)  With the death of Marshall's dad, the show pointed itself towards its end, and in my opinion has been  phenomenal ever since.

The one thing that annoyed me was that the show still wouldn't give up on Robin and Ted even though it was obvious that they weren't going to end up together.

Even though we still didn't know who the mother was, there was no way it was Robin, and we had enough clues to let us know that she was going to be perfect for him (much as Robin, in many ways, was, although Robin had a lot of issues to work through to get her there.  Robin's parents really messed her up.)

Plus, as much as I didn't like the idea of Robin and Barney at first, I thought that there actually was something there, and continuing to hint at the lingering feelings between Ted and Robin just weakened the Barney and Robin relationship!

In fact, it pointed out to me all the reasons that Barney and Robin would really never work.

If the show wanted me to buy Robin and Barney together, the show needed to quit with the underlying Ted and Robin stuff!

But they never did, and finally as the last season was in process, I understood why.

No Robin wasn't the mother, but everyone who wanted them to be together after their perfect first date and the awesome moment of Ted stealing the Blue French Horn, were ultimately going to get their wish.



We started to get clues that the mother wasn't long for the world a month or so ago.  They were celebrating a weekend together away from the kids at the hotel and retelling stories that each had heard way too many times, when Ted tells the story of Robin's mom showing up for the wedding.

He says, "What kind of mother wouldn't be there for her daughter's wedding?"  Then he and the mother both tear up (Ted a little more, of course, he's "a certain delicate flower" as Marshall would later describe himself to Ted in the finale).  Immediately it became clear that the mother was sick, probably dying.

Then I understood.

Why is Ted telling this story?  That part never really made sense.  Unless, of course, the mother was gone and had been for a while.

And, as we've seen throughout the entirety of the show, Ted tells stories in a way that usually ends up with him telling a story about something other than what he says he is telling a story about.

He said he was telling the kids a story about how he met their mother, but that was never what he was actually telling a story about.

Yes, Ted loved their mother.  It was a great love at first sight story that almost seemed like destiny, keeping them apart until the moment that they could actually be together.  But that wasn't really the story that he was telling.

It was in there, for sure, but only as support for the story that he was really telling.

The story about the other great love of his life, the one that seemed to get away.

The kids understood.  The story was really about the fact that no matter how great their mother was, and how perfect their time together had been, Ted was in love with Robin.

And Robin was in love with Ted.

And even though it seemed like any chance of Ted and Robin ending up together was past, it is never too late for true love.

"It's been six years, it's time to move on, Dad," his kids say to him.

The story, from the beginning, was about Ted and Robin.  It just took them a really long time to realize it.

Ted needed to meet the mother and have kids.  That was something Ted needed that Robin couldn't provide him.

Robin needed to have an amazing career and prove to herself that she was a capable person that could survive without someone else.  She'd always said it, but I don't think she believed it until she realized that she and Barney wouldn't work, and that life on her own really would be a fulfilling one.  She didn't need a man or kids to fulfill her dreams.  And traveling the world, becoming the face of World Wide News, was something that she couldn't have done if she was with Ted.

Ted and Robin, in order to live the lives they wanted, couldn't live them together when they were pursuing those dreams.

At the same time, they were in love with one another, and they never stopped loving one another.  And once they had each achieved their dreams, Robin's face on a bus and Ted's Yellow Umbrella,






it was time for the two of them to finally realize what we all saw way back in the beginning.  And there was really only one way that Ted could let Robin know he was ready.

By stealing a blue french horn.

From the beginning, the show knew how it would end.

It wasn't a story about the mother.  She was barely in it.

Ted was telling the story about how he came to realize that he was in love still with Robin Scherbatsky and that Robin Scherbatsky knew she was always supposed to end up with Ted.

Until Next Time, there is a large hole in my heart where a perfect television show used to be.  Thank you, How I Met Your Mother.  Thank you for everything.
Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , , , , , , ,

Saturday, March 15, 2014

Marshmellow's Rejoice: My Spoiler Free Review of Veronica Mars, the Movie

A Long Time Ago, We Used to Be Friends...

Truer words for this film couldn't have been spoken.

Everytime I think I'm out, they pull me back in... - Veronica Mars

Picking up 9 years after the series finale, Veronica has quit the private eye biz cold turkey and been snoop free for the last 9 years, but old flame Logan Echolls finds himself in trouble once more and there's only one person to call.

The film manages to fit in almost everyone you want to see from the show, and does it in a completely natural way that fits the story.  There are also a couple other classic cameos, the best being Dax Shephard, the real life husband of star Kristen Bell.

The movie works essentially as a new pilot, setting up for further adventures of Veronica Mars, and I truly believe that we're going to get more, either through further films or if we're really lucky as a shortened season on Amazon or Netflix.

Like the first two seasons of the show (and the first season is one of the best seasons of any show ever and came in second to LOST in the very first Josh's Choice for the Best New Series of the Season award all the way back in 2005, look, here's the post to prove it), the film follows one major mystery with a few other cases popping up, although on a much more truncated schedule than even the third season (which had two overarching mysteries each taking up half the season).  Although part of what I loved about the show was the way the mystery was stretched out over the season, giving us a huge cast of suspects, a ton of red herrings, and at least a couple huge twists along the way.  The movie tries to do the same thing on a much smaller scale time wise (as there is under two hours as opposed to over 20 episodes of 40+ minutes each), while at the same time feeling bigger than most of the episodes due to its big screen presence.

The time and budget constraints, however, don't hinder the film's ability to produce a great mystery in the time allotted (that still has a few different suspects, a few perfect red herrings, and at least one great twist that you don't see coming), and what is most amazing is that it totally feels like Veronica Mars.

Everyone, despite being away from the show for nearly 8 years, steps right back into their characters.

Sometimes, you just have those friends in your life that even when you haven't seen them in forever, you just fit right back into your old roles and it seems like your friendship hasn't missed a beat.

That's just how it is with Veronica Mars.  A long time ago, we used to be friends...  It's good to have you back.

Long story short, if you loved the show, you'll love the movie.  It's perfect.

Until Next Time, Go see Veronica Mars! In Theaters! And buy it on your favorite digital device through your favorite digital medium! I'm watching it again as I write this!  We have a legitimate shot at more movies or episodes! Let's make that happen (after all, it worked once, it could work again!)
Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , ,

Tuesday, June 28, 2011

Archive Files #5: Less Than Meets the Eye

While many people I know, and sadly many of readers as well, will probably be out this weekend furthering the career of my least favorite director of all time, I will be avoiding the movie theater (at least where Transformers 3 is concerned) so that when Transformers 4 is announced absolutely no blame can be placed on me.

Seeing as though I was a huge fan of the original cartoon, and as a child when the animated movie was released, not only did I see it in theaters, but (SPOILER ALERT) I cried when Optimist Prime died!  Literally cried.  It was all any of us could talk about when school resumed that fall.

I am the primary audience for this type of film, and yet the horrendous job done by Michael Bay previously has made me swear off the franchise until it is in more capable hands.

Seeing as though I have a responsibility, however, to review big films, I feel that I need something posted to mark the occasion of this inevitable trashing of my childhood.

To that, therefore, I offer a new Archive Files, wherein I will repost my most negative review ever (still not as artfully negative as Ebert's review of Battle: Los Angeles, but he's been doing this a lot longer than I have), my review of Transformers 2, the worst movie I have seen in my entire life...


Transformers 2, Less Than Meets the Eye

Growing up, along with Voltron, my favorite cartoon was Transformers.  When the reigns for the inevitable film franchise were handed to Michael Bay, I was worried.  First off, I knew that there would be little chance to have a clue on what was happening in any fight scene due to the camera shaking as if it were being pummeled rather then just trying to document robots pummeling each other.  On that count I was most certainly correct, but overall the first Transformers film was actually enjoyable and it was cool to see the robots I had loved so much as a kid so awesomely recreated on the big screen.

Well, while the first time out he got it mostly right, Michael Bay seemed to prove all the original naysayers right with his second go round.

I really didn't think that I would see a film this year that I disliked more then Terminator, but lo and behold, just a few weeks later, I did.

Transformers 2 is without a doubt one of the worst films ever made.

Look, obviously it isn't supposed to be an Oscar contender, and really it is a film that is probably meant to be enjoyed more by kids then adults.  I understand that.  But it isn't too much to ask a popcorn movie to be, I don't know, enjoyable.  This film is anything but.

Michael Bay makes every fight scene pretty much impossible to comprehend as it is nearly impossible to tell which robots are fighting, much less what they are doing to one another, and really, the giant fighting robots was about all this film really could have hoped to have going for it.

As for everything else, it is really just embarrassing.  There is a somewhat cool idea for a movie hidden amongst all of the extremely juvenile humor, but it is overshadowed and made pretty much moot by the majority of the film.

In just the first thirty minutes we are treated to two dogs having repeated sex in various places and the wonderful comedy cliche of the clueless mother getting stoned unintentionally on pot brownies.  What is funny on an episode of That 70's Show probably doesn't belong in a supposed blockbuster summer action movie.

Throughout the film we are also treated to a giant robot's testicles (seriously) and a tiny robot humping Megan Fox's leg for well over a minute.  I would think that perhaps this film was meant for the 8 year old boy market if not for the fact that it is a hard PG-13.  There are almost as many cuss words in this movie as there are in The Hangover (although Transformers 2 does avoid the F-bomb.  Good for it, I guess?)

Personally, I don't understand how any actress could agree to be in a Michael Bay movie as he is up to his usual misogyny in this film.  Not only are all of the females given short shift, like the poor mother of Shia LaBouf's character, but they are generally treated like objects.  Megan Fox is pretty much only around to look sexy.  (Not that she isn't very good at it, because she is).  But this film even goes so far to blatantly make the comparison of hot co-ed = evil robot.  Literally.

The worst transgression, however, and the one that you are likely to hear the most about is the unbelievably racist stereotypes played out by the Twins, two Autobots that are portrayed as black youth and voiced in tacky hip-hop-esque dialogue.  There sole purpose in the film is to beat each other up and call each other derogatory names for female genitalia.  Also each of them are given a gold tooth and a joke is made at their expense pointing out the fact that they are illiterate.  It is embarrassing and honestly made the movie a painful experience.  There was literally no reason for these characters to exist other then the supposed "comic relief" that they were meant to provide.

And to top it off, Michael Bay actually includes an homage... TO HIMSELF!  Unbelievable.

This movie is not worth your time and definitely not deserving of your money.  Please do yourself a favor and miss it.
Until Next Time, the last line of this review probably encapsulates exactly what I would think of the third installment.  STOP DESTROYING MY CHILDHOOD, MICHAEL BAY! (And learn some respect for women while you're at it)
Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , , , , , ,

Saturday, June 25, 2011

Summer Television: Falling Skies

Recent films have taken this supposition, aliens have invaded/are invading and humanities hopes for survival are few and far between.

Skyline and Battle: Los Angeles both quickly come to mind.

But Falling Skies, the new summer series executive produced by Steven Spielberg and airing on TNT, remembers something that neither of those movies did:

It's about character and story, stupid.

Neither Skyline nor Battle: Los Angeles focused on character and story, they were both all about the spectacle.

It is certainly early, but it appears that Falling Skies won't be making the same mistake.

While Skyline and Battle: LA began before their respective invasions and then showed us the resulting entanglements, Falling Skies starts months after the battle is lost.

Humanity is in dire straits.

Adults are being killed by the aliens, known as skitters and mechs, but for some reason, children are being fitted with a "harness" and kept alive, although in a hypnotized state.

Our hero, played by ER's Noah Wyle, is a former history professor with three sons, two of whom are with him, but his middle son is missing, presumed taken by the aliens.

By beginning where it did, character and story take center stage, but the spectacle is good as well.

At the end of the first episode there is a particular potent look at one of the skitters.  Despite being on television, I think that Falling Skies actually has better effects than either of the two films previously mentioned.

Cable shows of late have been fantastic, much better than the recent slate of network shows, and Falling Skies seems to continue that trend.

Until Next Time, If you are a fan of sci-fi, this is a show worth checking out.
Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , ,

Wednesday, June 22, 2011

Where Has This Woody Allen Been?

Midnight in Paris is simply magical.

Over the last week and a half I have seen three fantastic movies, and each one has rated above the last for me.

To be fair, if it weren't for the lens flares, I probably would have kept Super 8 above Green Lantern, but the lens flares were there and they were super (no pun intended) annoying.

Tonight I saw Woody Allen's latest film, Midnight in Paris, starring Owen Wilson as neurotic writer Gil Pender.

My friend Caitlin (who I would have to describe as relevant, revelatory, and paradoxically juxtaposed) and I went to see the film, not at all sure what to expect, and honestly, that is the way to view this film.

The less you know going in, the more magical and delightful the film will be, so I'm not going to say too much.

I will say this, however.

I loved Super 8, and part of the reason was that it inspired a sense of nostalgia for film-making that we don't see as often anymore, particularly the innocence and wonder that Spielberg's films used to inspire.

Woody Allen was a similar filmmaker once upon a time.

His movies were imbibed with a magic and realism (another paradoxical juxtaposition I suppose) that could transport you into the film you were watching, and that experience is rare in films these days.

And, honestly, it has been rare in a Woody Allen movie in quite some time.

This movie, however, brings back that feeling, and recaptures a magic that Woody Allen hasn't, in my opinion, provided in quite some time.

Both this film, Midnight in Paris, and Super 8 provide a nostalgia for the way that movies used to be, both center on an idea of a time period passed that we long to revisit and want to try to connect with in some way.

If anything negative can be said about Super 8 (besides the annoying lens flares), it would be that while that nostalgia is present and magical, there isn't really anything that original beyond it.  It hearkens back beautifully to films and themes of the past, without having anything new or original to say, which is saying something in and of itself, and I really don't mean to disparage Super 8 in anyway.  What it did worked for me and I truly loved the film.

Midnight in Paris, on the other hand, embraces the nostalgia, and recalls the feeling of the golden ages of the past and makes you remember the way film (and Woody Allen films in particular) used to be, but at the same time it is a completely original movie that feels like something new and refreshing.

If you categorize it as romantic comedy (and I'm not really sure that is the classification I would use, I would rather refuse to try to box it in to any one genre) then it is unquestionably the best romantic comedy I have ever seen.

Ultimately, I think it will be placed amongst my favorite films of all time, and I find it hard to imagine that it will be topped by any other film this year as it is the best film that I have seen since 2006 when The Fountain and The Children of Men came out.

Interestingly enough, Woody Allen apparently tried to get this film made in 2006, but was unable to do it cost effectively.

Until Next Time, I believe it was worth the wait, as it makes the present more pleasant while acknowledging the nostalgia of the past.
Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , , ,

Monday, June 20, 2011

In Brightest Day, my review of Green Lantern

First of all, Ryan Reynolds is Hal Jordan.  I really wanted his old "Two Guys, a Girl, and a Pizza Place" co-star, Nathan Fillion (Captain Mal on Firefly, Captain Hammer in Dr. Horrible, and Frank Castle, not a Captain, in Castle) to be Hal Jordan, but Ryan Reynolds encapsulated the character quite succinctly in my opinion.

The acting and characterization was one of the (many) strengths of this film.

The effects were more than adequate; sure, you could tell they were cg effects, but that's almost always the case, and they didn't get in the way at all, but did assist in the story.  As cg continues to improve, the Green Lantern franchise will no doubt benefit.

The action and story were stellar, and the movie overall is engaging and a hell of a lot of fun.

The only negative thing I have to say about the film is that it flies by far to fast.  Seriously, the story and action are heading at speeds unknown to all by Green Lanterns flying from far flung sectors back to Oa at the center of the universe.  I wish that the film had been longer and taken a little more time to breathe, but even that complaint really didn't hinder my enjoyment of the film at all.

In fact, and I recognize my incredible love of the characters of the Green Lantern Corp might have some play in this reaction, but it was instantly among my favorite comic book movies of all time, and is currently at the top of the list for 2011 films so far.

Sorry, Super 8, your run as top film of the year was pretty short.

If you have any love of the character, I can guarantee that you will love this movie.  If you don't know anything about the Green Lantern Corp or Hal Jordan, I still think you will be in for an enjoyable ride.

I honestly don't understand why the film is getting the negative reviews that it is getting, because other than the fact that it was over way too fast, I can't say a single negative thing about it.

Until Next Time, In brightest day, in blackest night, no evil shall escape my sight.  Let those who worship evil's might beware my power, Green Lantern's light!
Posted by at 1 comment:
Labels: , , , ,

Friday, June 10, 2011

With Production Value and Story, My Review of Super 8

I admit to being a big fan of J.J. Abrams.

I loved the new Star Trek.

You know how I feel about LOST.

I watched Felicity up until she cut her hair, was obsessed with Alias, and am currently loving every second of Fringe.

Spielberg, especially the Spielberg that this movie evokes, also holds a special place in my heart.

So it shouldn't be a surprise that I was a big fan of this movie.

I wish that J.J. would lay off of the lens flares a little, but other than that there isn't really anything negative that I can say about this movie.

Even in this summer of sequels (Hangover 2, Kung Fu Panda 2, Fast Five, Harry Potter 8, Transformers 3, etc.) and prequels (X-Men:First Class, Pirates of the Caribbean, Rise of the Planet of the Apes, Puss in Boots, etc.) I can't really claim that this movie is all that original.

Because it definitely does evoke Spielberg from the 80's, ET, Close Encounters Spielberg.

But it also evokes Stand By Me.

And Judd Apatow's Freaks and Geeks came to mind a lot as well as I watched the middle school protagonists.



No, there is a lot that we've seen before in this movie, but it is the fantastic melding of Spielbergian concepts and themes with the coming of age/adolescence adventure of Stand By Me and the realistic 80's aura and reality of the teenagers that Apatow had captured so brilliantly that helps make Super 8 as fantastic as it is.

And it is a very good story as well.

It is a tad predictable, but it works, on an emotional level and with the pulse pounding excitement of a good monster movie as well.

It isn't original, per se, but it is original in the fact that we don't get this type of film, as full of heart as it is thrills, as often as we used to when Spielberg made them regularly.

Until Next Time, Take some time out of your busy summer to catch this movie and remember the way that summer blockbusters used to be made, before Michael Bay blew them up.

If you can get past the lens flares (J.J. Abrams weakness, much as a shaky camera and lack of story haunt Bay) you won't regret it.
Posted by at 1 comment:
Labels: , , ,

Friday, May 6, 2011

And By Hammer I Mean...

Marvel has done it again.

Along with Iron Man, Marvel Productions has proven that a hero doesn't have to be well known in order to be successful, because I guarentee you this movie will be successful.

The hero just needs to be in a fantastic film.

Like in Iron Man before it (and following in the footsteps of Sam Raimi's Spider-Man and Christopher Nolan's Batman), the characters and the story matters.

This isn't a Michael Bay film tied together from Special Effect to Special Effect.  The plot and characters are well thought out and superbly drawn.

Part of what I wondered about Iron Man before it came out was how the character of Tony Stark would be received by a movie going audience.

Part of the strength of Marvel is in their character's weaknesses.  Unlike in DC where the weakness is often tied to the character's power, in Marvel the character's weaknesses are actually tied to their character.  Tony Stark is a womanizing, egotistical drunk.

Robert Downey Jr. portrays those traits while at the same time walking a fine line (that is more difficult than he makes it appear) keeping the character extremely likable despite his faults.

In Chris Hemsworth, Marvel has again found a perfect actor for a part.  Hemsworth (basically an unknown before Joss Whedon helped him land this role, and Hemsworth has paid him back by getting Cabin in the Woods released due to his sudden popularity) is able to make the arrogant, all powerful Norse God Thor completely charming and likable without losing the arrogance and power.  Like Downey Jr., it is an amazing performance, but where we might have expected it from Downey Jr., it is an incredible surprise from Hemsworth.  He has quite a future ahead of him.  He can flat act.

Everyone else in the film is spot on as well.

And as we should have expected, Brannagh's direction is flawless.

The visuals are amazing, and the 3D incredibly natural.

A friend pointed out that there are a few cliched moments in the story, but they didn't bother me at all, perhaps because they felt more archetypal to me rather than cliched.  After all, Thor is quite an archetypal character.  I will just say that I feel like the moments work.

Like Iron Man, this is a film first, a comic book movie second (something that is harder to achieve than you might think, Iron Man 2 did not achieve the same success, it was a wonderful Comic Book movie, but not a great film). 

If Marvel continues to focus on story and character, while also remaining able to pander to the hardcore comic book fans, things are only going to get better as this world (nay, this universe) continues to come together.

Until Next Time, it is clear that my Top Ten Comic Book Super Hero Movies of All Time list has a new occupant.
Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , , , ,

Monday, April 11, 2011

You Have, As Always, Eight Minutes (My Review of Source Code)


The sophomore effort of Duncan Jones (son of David Bowie) does not disappoint.  While not as perfect as Moon, Source Code is still one of the best time travel movies of all time.  Unlike the recent Denzel Washington thriller with a similar premise, Deja Vu, Source Code sticks to rules that it sets up and has a far more believable science in its science fiction, sticking to a multi-verse view that is really the only plausible way that time travel could exist.

Duncan Jones shows off, yet again, his ability to do a lot with a little.  Although this isn't as small budget as Moon (which amazingly was made for just 5 million dollars), Source Code looks like it was made for much more than just 32 million dollars.  Jones is able to use special effects to great effect, and handles the story, visuals, and characters with precision that belies the fact that this is only his second feature film.  Especially considering that this is a fairly complex and potentially convoluted story.  Yet the direction of Jones, script by Ben Ripley, and performances by Jake Gyllennhaal, Michele Monaghan, Vera Farmiga, and Jeffery Wright, all combine to keep the plot understandable, but also intriguing and sufficiently full of twists and turns.

The film certainly has a similar idea to Deja Vu, but, like I said, works far better.  There are also traces of the old television show Quantum Leap (which the movie acknowledges through a nice cameo from Sam Beckett himself, Scott Bakula) and the classic repetitious plot film, Groundhog Day.  Like Groundhog Day, Source Code manages to keep repeating the same time period over and over again fresh and interesting, and in the case of Source Code it is only eight minutes being repeated as opposed to an entire day.

Ultimately, Duncan Jones continues to impress me and has added himself to a list of directors whose films I will go see immediately upon release, a list that includes the Coen Brothers, Christopher Nolan, Darren Aronofsky, David Fincher, Alfonso Cuaron, and Guillermo Del Toro.

Until Next Time, do yourself a favor and go see what I consider to be the best film of 2011 so far, Source Code.
Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , , , ,

Friday, March 25, 2011

Sucker Punch is What Happens to the Audience



The visuals are amazing, you can't expect anything else from Zach Snyder, the soundtrack is pretty freakin' fantastic, but for some reason the movie just doesn't work.

There is a good movie in there, it is just surrounded by a very poor attempt at a cool idea.

Any drama or pathos or suspense is removed the second we go into an imagined reality, but the problem is we travel from that imagined reality into even more imagined realities.

Some scenes that we see take place have absolutely no bearing on the real world of the film, they flat didn't happen, in fact something completely different must have taken place, but we have no clue what since we only see the film from in the somewhat deluded minds of the characters.

Something is happening in the real world of the film, and it even somewhat (probably) relates to what we are seeing on the screen, but not enough for any of the action on the screen to really concern you, or to ever really allow you to get connected to the characters.

I don't mind that the main characters have created an alternate reality for themselves in order to protect themselves from the hell that they are in, I think that that is an interesting idea, but the implementation of the idea just doesn't really work.

The thing is, working with multiple fake realities upon fake realities is not the best way to make a film.  It just doesn't work too often.  (Of course, when it does, you get Inception.)

My friend Justin (from good old Cavemen Go) saw the movie with me and described it as multiple music videos put together.

That's about what the sequences boil down to.

Look, the movie looks amazing, but it isn't a very good film.

Sure, it is hard to argue when a film introduces you to Nazi Steampunk Zombies (yeah.  I know.  Awesome) no matter how imaginary they are.

But sadly, a music video featuring Nazi Steampunk Zombies (really, I would watch an entire movie about Nazi Steampunk Zombies) surrounded by other music videos only loosely tied together story wise by hot chicks kicking ass probably isn't worth the exorbitant amount of money that theaters are charging these days.

Your time and money is probably best spent elsewhere.

Until Next Time, it really is starting to seem that Zach Snyder is capable of making a film under only one visual style (see 300, Watchmen, and Sucker Punch) and it is a visual style that I do not think fits Superman at all.  I really am not excited that he is the person bringing the Man of Steel back into theaters, but that is probably best saved for another post.
Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , , ,

Friday, March 18, 2011

In Paul We Trust

Simon Pegg and Nick Frost return together (this time without Edgar Wright) for the third film that they are responsible for (after their fan-freaking-tastic television show Spaced).

As much as I loved Shawn of the Dead (a Zombie movie spoof/satire) and Hot Fuzz (a buddy cop movie spoof/satire), I think that Paul is the best movie (or thing, really, as much as I also loved Spaced) that Simon Pegg and Nick Frost have ever done.

The love that people generally have for Sean of the Dead comes from the love that people have for the Zombie movies that it patterned itself after, similarly for the love that people had for Hot Fuzz, so it really shouldn't surprise anyone that Paul would become my favorite of the three.

As a huge, huge, huge, fan of science-fiction, the homages thrown out in this film delighted the crap out of me.

More films and tv shows than I could count were referenced (and lovingly referenced, I must point out) throughout the film, and not all of them strictly sci-fi.

There are tons of Steven Spielberg references, including to some non-sci-fi stuff (although ET and Close Encounters are among the most referenced along, of course, with Star Wars), such as tons of Indiana Jones (which isn't that surprising considering the love that Spielberg and Lucas are getting do to their sci-fi stuff), but also a movie theater marquee in the background is featuring Duel, Spielberg's directorial debut.

Those are the types of references (along with obvious direct quotations) that this movie delivers.  It is working on numerous levels.  And if you aren't a huge nerd (like me) and miss the millions (or possibly trillions) of references, the movie works as a fantastic sci-fi/road-trip/action-comedy as well.

In fact, it is clearly inspired by another fantastic road-trip/action-comedy (that wasn't really sci-fi, but still frakking awesome), The Blues Brothers.

I was catching the Blues Brothers Vibe long before the film itself finally admitted the connection with the line

I'm on a mission... from God!

I felt very vindicated when that line occured.

There are also a couple of other awesome movie quotes that Paul fits in perfectly, but the best "quotation" if you will is a musical number.

You'll know it when you hear it.  I don't want to spoil it for you, so let's just say that you will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy than one bar that they go to.

There are some great cameos and tons of great performances, and there are even more laughs.

I know that we are often told to "Trust No One" (and yes, there are quite a few X-Files references, including Blythe Danner who played Jana Cassidy in the first X-Files movie), but you can trust me, if you are at all a fan of Sci-Fi, you must go see this film!

Until Next Time, As for me, it is much like John Locke once said, "I'm going to have to see that again."
Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , , , , , , , ,

Wednesday, March 16, 2011

Bad Movie Reviews: Spring Break Shark Week

It is Spring Break this week.  And there is only one way to make Spring Break better....

Spring Break Shark Week.

But not the good type of shark week, like one would see on Discovery, but bad movies featuring megalodons.  Prehistoric Sharks.

We first watched Mega Shark vs. Giant Octopus.



Yes, that is a picture of a shark taking a bite out of the Golden Gate Bridge, and it can tell you pretty much what the movie is like.

For the most part the acting is terrible and the story has a few holes in it.

The real problem with the movie was the ridiculous editing techniques.  Everything on the entire screen would randomly go white, without really even cutting away.  I'm not sure what was going on there.

Overall, it could have been worse, and there is a scene where Mega Shark eats an airplane out of the air, so at least there is that.


The third movie we watched was the sequel to Mega Shark vs. Giant Octopus, Mega Shark vs. Crocosaurus.






It was worse in every way.  Even though it starred Jaleel "Urkel" White and Robert Picardo (the Doctor on Star Trek Voyager), it was literally unwatchable.

Could it have had to do with the fact that it was the third straight movie about megalodons that we watched?

I don't know.  We were pretty pumped for more megalogons, I feel like the movie was just flat terrible.

The plot made little to no sense, or at least didn't in the first fifteen or so minutes, because at that point we all pretty much stopped paying attention and Mega Shark vs. Crocosaurus became just background noise.

And the only thing worse than a film that already makes no sense is a movie that makes no sense that you are barely paying attention to.

There wasn't even a fun shark attacking a plane scene to add anything to the terribleness.

The middle movie we watched was actually pretty good.


I know, the poster looks terrible, but it was actually very entertaining, and not just in a bad movie type way either.  If this movie had some money put into it, it probably would have been fantastic.

The special effects weren't great, and there is a pretty terrible line (but it gets the girl, so you can't knock it too much), but the story is actually pretty good.

There is some terrible acting, (like really, really terrible) but there is also some great acting.

Two of the main characters are Ryan Cutrona, who was grandpa Gene on Mad Men


and Captain Jack Harkness (aka John Barrowman).


From Doctor Who and Torchwood.

There is also a fantastic shot down a waterslide, far better than any shot that you would expect out of a movie called Shark Attack 3.

Until Next Time, beware of prehistoric sharks.
Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , , , , , , ,

Friday, February 25, 2011

Top Ten of 2010

All year long I have been upset at the lack of good films this year.

My joke for much of the year was that the year in movies was so poor that Hot Tub Time Machine had a legitimate shot to make my Top Ten.  (Thankfully, it didn't turn out that poorly, although I did enjoy the movie, it shouldn't ever be in a year ending Top Ten.)

Last year, I did a Top Twenty (any of the films in it, incidentally, probably would have made the Top Ten this year) due to the fact that the Oscars had upped their nominations to ten.

I won't be doing a Top Twenty this year.

There also won't be any honorable mentions.

On to the list...

10. The American


George Clooney is fantastic in this slower paced action/thriller that is far more character driven then the typical spy/assassin film.  It is beautifully shot and keeps your attention despite the slower pace.  Thanks to the interesting story, the fantastic acting, and the beautiful cinematography, this is one of the better films of the genre in quite some time.  It reminded me of another movie to make one of my Top Tens, The Constant Gardner.

9. Shutter Island


Leonardo DiCaprio has become one of our generations most fantastic actors, due in large part to his relationship with one of the greatest directors of all time, Martin Scorsese.  In any other filmmaker's hands, this might have been a convoluted mess, but Scorsese makes it a masterpiece.  Twists and turns that are completely character and story driven rather than just for the sake of twists and turns makes this a film that stays with you long after it is over.

8. Toy Story 3


Each successive Toy Story film has been better than the ones that came before, and this is no exception.  Chronicling the painful yet inevitable end of the toy and kid relationship, while keeping the door open for future instalments, Toy Story 3, like the two films that preceded it, mixes laughter, tears, joy, sadness, and excitement in equal parts.  A beautiful and moving film, but what else can you expect from PIXAR?

7. 127 Hours


Driven largely by the unbelievable performance of the star (and this year's Oscar co-host) James Franco, 127 Hours manages to captivate despite the close quarters of most of the films setting and the fact that it focuses on only one character.  It is a harrowing experience and the film puts the viewer directly into that experience.  This is a powerful movie, and proof that James Franco is an undeniable talent.

6. The King's Speech


While the film is overly emotionally manipulative, and it often feels more like a stage play than a film in terms of camera movement, it is still a moving story and an overall good film.  Like 127 Hours, the film is definitely strengthen by the performances, and it will probably be rewarded by Oscars for Firth and Bonham Carter.

5. Exit Through the Gift Shop


One of the most original films I have ever seen, and by far the best documentary this year, Exit Through the Gift Shop is a movie that defies explanation.  When you find someone else who has seen it, however, I guarantee that you will have tons of lively discussion about the film. 

4. Social Network


A movie that by all rights should have been terrible was handled by the exact right creative team.  Ultimately, this is a story of the times in which we live, and it is a story that desperately needed to be told.  I am glad that it was Aaron Sorkin and David Fincher who told it.

3. Black Swan


One of the most disturbing films of all time, definitely on a level with the very disturbing Requiem For a Dream (also directed by Aronofsky).  Natalie Portman is unbelievable, and Mila Kunis continues to surprise me and shed the image of Jackie from That 70's Show.  Almost a horror film at times, the movie manages to make you live with obsession and desire while also showing the dangers of wanting something too much.

2. Inception


Christopher Nolan continues to make unbelievable films.  While I'm not entirely sure that he is the right fit for producing and writing the new Superman film, I can't deny that his films are always fantastic.  Again, DiCaprio performs flawlessly as the troubled protagonist, and the rest of the cast is terrific as well.  The whole movie works on every level, as this is a movie that you have to watch more than once.

And the number one movie (and the "Should Win" for Best Picture from my Preview and Prediction Post) is...

1. True Grit

Rarely are remakes far and away better than the original, but rarely are remakes handled by Joel and Ethan Coen.  Jeff Bridges continues his unbelievable run, and Hailee Steinfeld steals every second of the film (making it quite a crime that she is nominated as a supporting actress instead of as a lead actress).  While I am not a huge Matt Damon fan, he is incredible in this movie.  I always used to say that Matt Damon was only good in The Talented Mr. Ripley, now I have to add True Grit to that list.  Roger Deakins does an amazing job as always, as he is, in my opinion, the best cinematographer working today.  The script is perfect, and the Coen brothers' direction is impeccable.  Not only is this the best film of the year, but it also is among the best films of the entirety of the last decade.  While 2010 was a down year, this film certainly keeps it from being a total disappointment.  I also might put this as the best Coen brothers' movie ever, and that is certainly saying something.

Until Next Time, I hope that you enjoy the Oscars on Sunday!
Posted by at 3 comments:
Labels: , , ,

Monday, February 21, 2011

Oscars Preview and Prediction Post! The 2010 Edition!

The nominations are out and the 27th of February is fast approaching!  Time for us to look a little deeper at the categories and look at who will win (as well as who the winner should be) in the annual Oscars Preview and Prediction Post!

ACTOR IN A LEADING ROLE

While I am a huge fan of most of the actors on this list, and I would love another Dude-like acceptance speech from the Dude (aka Jeff Bridges), it seems like this Oscar is going to go to Collin Firth for The King's Speech.  The only question is, does he stutter while giving his acceptance speech?  James Franco is probably the most deserving, his performance in 127 Hours literally makes the movie what it is, but his time will certainly come.  It's not as if he won't be getting lots of exposure considering he's hosting these very Oscars!

Will Win- Colin Firth
Should Win- James Franco

ACTRESS IN A LEADING ROLE

Natalie Portman should and will win for her amazing, gritty, and disturbing performance in Black Swan.  I'm okay with that since I love Portman.  But part of me is rooting for Michele Williams, since she is starring in a movie produced by a friend of mine's brother.

Will Win- Natalie Portman
Should Win- Natalie Portman

ACTOR IN A SUPPORTING ROLE

As much as my admiration and appreciation for Christian Bale has waned over the last few years, partly because of his over the top gravelly Batman voice which was the only negative thing in the entirety of The Dark Knight, and especially because of his Trashing Your Lights tirade, his dedication to his craft (that being acting) has never been questionable, and the way he disappeared into this role will probably reward him with an Oscar.  Of course, that will probably only make him more difficult to work with, but what can you do?  The only other possibility in this category is that Geoffrey Rush wins for his performance in The King's Speech.  Ultimately, I think that the statue will go to Bale, however, because his performance was much more challenging than Rush's, even though Rush was fantastic in this film.  John Hawkes is one of my favorite actors, I absolutely love him in Eastbound and Down, and he was very good in Winter's Bone, a film that I really didn't like that much, but the acting is terrific.  Mark Ruffalo was probably the very best part of the very good The Kid's are All Right, and I'm looking forward to him as Bruce Banner in The Avengers.  I'm also glad that Jeremy Renner is getting more and more notoriety.  On a side note, I think that Justin Timberlake probably deserved a nomination here for his portrayal of the creator of Napster in The Social Network.  But again, what can you do?

Will Win- Christian Bale
Should Win- Christian Bale

ACTRESS IN A SUPPORTING ROLE

Without question, this award needs to go to Hailee Steinfeld.  In fact, she should have recieved a Best Actress in a Leading Role nomination.  She was definitely in a leading role, as her character was without a doubt the main character in the piece.  However, she had to settle for a supporting nomination.  Unfortunately, I doubt that she will win, even though she deserves to.  I think that Helena Bonham Carter will probably walk away with the award, and were Steinfeld in the Lead Actress category where she belongs, I'd probably agree with Helena winning here.

Will Win- Helena Bonham Carter
Should Win- Hailee Steinfeld

 

ART DIRECTION


These technical categories always give us a sense of where we'll end up at the end of the night.  If True Grit is going to give the Coen's the second best picture win in four years, they'll start by taking this one away from The King's Speech.  It wouldn't shock me if it happened, especially because even with all the nominations, I don't think that The King's Speech is going to be the big winner tonight.  That being said, safe money is on The King's Speech taking this award.

Will Win- The King's Speech
Should Win- True Grit

COSTUME DESIGN


Again, a category where the two Best Picture faves, The Social Network and The King's Speech aren't going against each other, so no clues on who will come out on top there, but if an interloper is going to enter the fray, we could get a clue here, and again that possible entrant is True Grit.  The award will probably go to The King's Speech, but it wouldn't be a shocker if True Grit pulls off the win, since the film probably deserves the win anyway.

Will Win- The King's Speech
Should Win- True Grit

 

SOUND EDITING


SOUND MIXING

Usually the winner of these awards is a genre picture.  Most of the time that genre picture isn't nominated for Best Picture.  I'm not sure that you would really call Inception a genre picture, but in reality, it is science fiction.  It is also an action pic on many levels, and it will win both of these awards while also being up for Best Picture.

Will Win- Inception
Should Win- Inception

 

VISUAL EFFECTS

The same pretty much goes for this category.  It is hard to deny the amazing effects in Nolan's masterful film.  A possibility here, however, is Hereafter.  The Academy loves them some Clint Eastwood, and the effects of the opening Tsunami is pretty much the only praise worthy thing in this film, so it wouldn't surprise me too much if it won here.

Will Win- Inception
Should Win- Inception

FILM EDITING

It's a shame that True Grit isn't up for this award.  I always hope that Roderick Jaynes will win this Oscar since he doesn't exist, but is actually the pseudonym of Joel and Ethan Coen.  Of those nominated, I think that The Social Network is going to win the award, but it probably should go to Weisblum for his work in Black Swan.  The frenetic feel of that film, the confusion and horror were due in large part to the editing.

Will Win- The Social Network
Should Win- Black Swan

 

MUSIC (ORIGINAL SCORE)

The two scores I enjoyed the most of those nominated this year are Inception and The Social Network, but I really felt that Clint Mansell's score for Black Swan should have been nominated.  I'm actually a big fan of Alexandre Desplat, as I think his score for The Fantastic Mr. Fox was among the best scores last year.  HP7 was great this year as well, so Desplat definitely is deserving of winning an Oscar, but I don't think he should win for The King's Speech.  The score, as beautiful as it was, was a little too on the nose, leading the audience toward the obvious emotion that they were supposed to feel, rather than simply subtly setting the mood the way an Oscar winning score should, in my opinion.  So, as it is, I think that Trent Reznor is going to be an Oscar winner.

Will Win- The Social Network
Should Win- The Social Network

 

MUSIC (ORIGINAL SONG)

There is no runaway favorite this year, and there isn't a movie that has multiple songs up for this award either.  I think the award will go to Tangled.  It's a good song, and a lot of voters felt the film should have received more nominations then it did.

Will Win-"I See the Light" Tangled
Should Win- "I See the Light" Tangled

ANIMATED FEATURE FILM

I still think that it is a shame that MegaMind and Despicable Me weren't nominated in this spot, and a lot of others feel the same way about Tangled.  As it is, it wouldn't really have mattered much in the grand scheme of things, since Toy Story 3 will win this hands down.

Will Win- Toy Story 3
Should Win- Toy Story 3

DOCUMENTARY FEATURE

A lot of people are shocked that Waiting For Superman didn't end up getting a nomination, myself among them, but I think the best documentary of the year ended up being nominated.  Exit Through the Gift Shop is a very odd film, however, so I am not sure that it will actually win.  I'm definitely hoping it does, but seeing as this award usually goes to the political film, I doubt that a movie about such odd characters and such an odd subject like street artists fits that mold.  It is the best film of the bunch though, so I'm holding out hope.

Will Win- Inside Job
Should Win- Exit Through the Gift Shop

CINEMATOGRAPHY

Without question, the best Cinematography this year was that of Roger Deakins in True Grit.  It is an utter crime that he hasn't already won an Oscar.  He certainly deserved it a couple of years ago for No Country For Old Men if not for The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford that same year.  He was also the DP for recent Best Picture nominees Doubt, The Reader, and A Serious Man.  I can't believe he hasn't won an Oscar already.  Thankfully, I think that drought ends this year.

Will Win- True Grit
Should Win- True Grit

WRITING (ADAPTED SCREENPLAY)


WRITING (ORIGINAL SCREENPLAY)

The winner of the Best Picture almost always wins for its Screenplay as well.  The two overwhelming favorites for Best Picture this year are in separate categories for Screenplay, so no clues here this year.  We'll have to wait for Director.  That being said, I would probably pick different winners than the two that will win this year, but I can't complain about Aaron Sorkin, creator of The West Wing and Sports Night, winning an Oscar!

Will Win Adapted- The Social Network
Should Win Adapted- True Grit

Will Win Original- The King's Speech
Should Win Original- Inception


DIRECTING

Most years, the winner of this award also directed the film that wins Best Picture.  The only time that doesn't happen is when the votes are very close between the top two films for Best Picture.  In those cases you can sometimes see a split.  A split wouldn't shock me this year, but I'm not going to pick the split.  I feel very confident that I'm right on the Best Director, so if there is a split, I think it will be because I'm wrong on Best Picture.  Of course, I think that Darren Aronofsky actually did the best directing job this year with the dark and troubling Black Swan.

Will Win- David Fincher
Should Win- Darren Aronofsky

BEST PICTURE

Black Swan

Although the themes in this film and Aronofsky's last, The Wrestler, were very similar, this film was far better than that one.  The characters were much more intriguing to me, and the story was exhilarating, heartbreaking, and quite scary all at the same time.  Definitely worthy of the nomination. 

The Fighter
I'm not really a fan of sports movies in general, and boxing movies are often the worst of the lot.  There really aren't that many stories you can do with boxing, and most of the time they are only attempting to recapture the magic of Raging Bull when we don't need another Raging Bull. This film was fine, I enjoyed it, but it certainly isn't best picture worthy.  Bale's performance is unbelievable, but the story is as predictable as you might expect from a sports movie.  Most of the problems are overcome a little too easily, and the only character arc I really bought in the entire film is Bale's.  Plus, it is pretty annoying for a film that takes place in the 90s to have a car with a 2011 registration sticker being driven by the main character.  Those sorts of things shouldn't happen in films that get best picture nominations.

Inception
For most of the year, this movie topped my Top Ten.  (Whether it ultimately finished there or not, you will have to wait until later this week when my Top Ten is released to find out).  It is an incredibly imaginative film and has a "I need to see that again" quality that is rare in cinema these days.  Christopher Nolan is unquestionably a genius, and once again Leo proves that he is far more than just a pretty face.  The beautiful ending moment that left everyone talking was just icing on an already scrumptious cake.  (That last sentence was primarily written because I really wanted to write the word scrumptious, but the point stands.  Even though the ending got a lot of the notice, the film was brilliant long before that moment.)

The Kids Are All Right
This film was very well made.  The performances are fantastic and the story is great.  I was very disappointed with where Mark Ruffalo's character ends this film (especially since his character and his performance as that character really make the movie as strong as it is).  Upon thinking about it though, I think that it makes sense to leave his character where the film does, and that maybe we aren't supposed to like it.  I find the film very believable, even with the unsettled feeling I have at the end where Mark Ruffalo's character is concerned.

The King's Speech
It's a very good film, and if it does end up winning the night, which it very well might, I won't feel as bad about it as I have some other recent winners.  The reason that it wouldn't be my choice is primarily the fact that it force feeds the sentimentality a little too much in my opinion.  The score in particular is working overtime to pull your heartstrings at the "appropriate" moments.  It's, as I said, a very good film, and in a year where there aren't too many very good films, it certainly stands out.  Had it been a little less heavy handed in its use of emotional manipulators and been more subtle instead, I probably would have liked it a lot more.  While I do believe that this has a very good chance of being named the best picture of the year, I think that Tom Hooper has a much smaller chance of taking Best Director in some part because of this very issue.

127 Hours
While Danny Boyle can be hit (Trainspotting, Sunshine) or miss (Slumdog Millionaire) with me, and honestly, there are a few things that missed in this film for me, primarily the overabundance of the use of video (although some of that worked fine, especially in the cavern when Aron is filming himself believing he is about to die) and the crazy editing throughout the film, ultimately the performance that Franco gives vaults this movie into new heights.  Even though for much of the film it is just Franco, you never fail to stay connected to the film and the plight of the character.  This is even more impressive when you consider that most people know the outcome of the situation before they ever see the movie!

The Social Network
Much like I said when I reviewed the film, I was very wary of the idea of this movie when I heard about it, but began to be excited when I heard the names attached.  Ultimately, the pedigree of Fincher and Sorkin won out.  This was a story that needed to be told, and it was told by exactly the people who could best tell it.  I think this film is going to win Best Picture this year, and while it wasn't my choice for the best film of the year, it is definitely a deserving film, and there weren't many films that could make that claim this year, so I won't complain if this film wins.

Toy Story 3
With each successive Toy Story film, PIXAR outdoes themselves.  As much as I loved the first, the second was even better.  Then as good as the second was, this one blows it out of the water.  It has been a privilege to grow up with these films and these characters and to know that an entirely new generation is falling in love with Buzz and Woody the way that I once did.  It amazes me that computer animated pixels of toys can bring such emotion to the screen, and out of me as well.

True Grit
The Coen Brothers are among my favorite filmmakers.  They have never made a film that I didn't enjoy, and a majority of their films are brilliant.  As much as I love their entire filmography, this might be the best movie that they have ever made, and that is saying something.  Even though this film won't win Best Picture, I am very glad that the Coen Brothers are finally getting the recognition year in year out that they deserve.

Winter's Bone
I honestly don't know how this film got nominated.  The acting in this film are top notch, as was the music, but that is about it.  The pacing in this film was terrible, the story is basically the same as the story in True Grit, but not handled nearly as superbly, and it all wraps up a little too neatly for me (unlike True Grit, which makes everyone pay heavily for getting their desired results).  Ultimately, this was a year that the Academy was probably hurt for its decision to have ten best picture nominees, as there probably weren't ten movies that really deserved the honor.  This film certainly didn't, in my opinion.


Since, as I said, I am not predicting the split in this category and the category of best director, it should be clear that I am picking Social Network to win.  Again, however, I must make clear that I wouldn't be at all astonished if The King's Speech manages to win instead here giving us a Best Picture winner from a different director than the winner of Best Director.  I suppose we'll know in a week!

Will Win- The Social Network
Should Win- read my upcoming Top Ten to find out!

Until Next Time, shortly after the Oscars are completed, it will be time for my 6th Annual My Thoughts As I Had Them During The Oscars Post!  So make sure and tune in for that!
Posted by at 1 comment:
Labels: , , , ,
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)