Send As SMS

Thursday, April 19, 2007

MOVIE REVIEW: Spider-Man 3

Enjoy my two week early review of...

Spider-Man 3
While it does at times tiptoe on the line of being an epic and brilliant work of cinema, SPIDER-MAN 3 is also a big case of overkill. There's way too much going on, and it just seems to keep on coming.

After a somewhat shaky series of opening scenes (with that voiceover narration by Maguire still being as lame as always), the movie quickly finds its balance. It isn't until the symbiote subplot (involving the black Spidey suit) gets into full swing that things become a little too hectic. Director Sam Raimi pulls off an incredible feat by making the never-ending onslaught of subplots balance as well as they do, but the pieces still don't fit to the extent that you'd hope. There's enough plot here for two or three different movies, with plenty of obstacles for Peter to overcome and an ample amount of baddies for him to fight. But in putting the four main plotlines together (i.e., revenge against Sandman, Peter's relationship with Harry, the symbiote suit/Venom, and problems with MJ), the whole experience becomes overwhelming. There's not nearly enough time to absorb all the intertwining threads, no matter how hard the filmmakers obviously try to make it work.

That's not to say this is a bad movie. Far from it. In fact, despite its shortcomings, this picture still marks one of the most fun times I've had at the movies. It wasn't even until after I left the screening that I started to realize how many problems it had. I bet a large percentage of moviegoers will feel the same, being so taken aback by the constant action sequences and stream of storylines that they never even get a chance to notice the film's problems. That's the good news. Bad news is, there's no way these issues will go unnoticed upon repeat viewings. While SPIDER-MAN 2 seems to just keep getting better with each consecutive viewing, I see this one coming up short. It's still less problematic than the first film (which already feels a bit dated), but it just can't compete with the damn near flawless second.

One of the few complaints I had with SPIDEY 2 was the "raindrops are falling on my head" sequence. It was silly and awkward, not fitting well with the rest of the film's style... Well, this sequel tops it. After the symbiote takes over Parker, there's a lengthy montage sequence of him (now turned emo) strutting down the street, dancing around and pelvic thrusting at women. It's basically him hopping about to music while looking like a jackass. And it gets worse. He goes with Gwen Stacy (a hot but disappointingly extraneous character) to a club, where MJ is currently working, and basically reenacts the scene from ANCHORMAN where Will Ferrell starts randomly playing the trumpet and hopping across tables. There are slight differences, of course; this one involves a piano and groovy dance moves. But the outcome is the same, leaving audience member's mouths agape at the uncomfortable hilarity. They really should've saved that scene for the DVD outtakes. Then it'd at least be fitting.

Fortunately, the whole movie isn't plagued by scenes like these. It's only rarely that things start getting ridiculous or cheesy to the point where you can't help but roll your eyes. The other problem comes in the way of bits of awkward dialogue and rushed character development. There's about an 80% hit rate where everything in the script is as smooth as can be, but that last 20% block does hurt the a few vital aspects of the storytelling. Particularly when it comes to fleshing out character motives and emotional conflicts (something that was given almost complete focus in the first two movies).

At least the action sequences stand strong as some of the most spectacular since... well, SPIDER-MAN 2. They take full advantage of the characters' abilities and surroundings, and then fuse the two together to create a number of downright breathtaking moments. The CGI isn't quite flawless yet, but it's still a visual feast for the eyes. The only disappointment is the use of Venom. He does get some time to shine in the movie's third act (or possibly ninth, taking into account how many different stories overlap), but Topher Grace removes all of the character's menace. It really hurts me to write that, considering how wonderfully handled everything was concerning Brock's character before that point. But alas, despite Grace's strong and amiable efforts, his voice is just too awkward coming out of Venom's mouth. And all they needed was some slight voice alteration to fix the problem. Drats.

It's hard to cast this third (and possibly final) installment of the SPIDEY franchise in a more positive light, because frankly, there's nowhere to go but down. SPIDER-MAN 2 is a masterpiece! It created a perfect blend of action, story, and just good ol' comic book fun. SPIDER-MAN 3 does its best to follow through on this unreachable standard, and surprisingly enough, it comes very close to succeeding. Sure, the problems it has stand out like a sore thumb, but that doesn't stop the movie from sharing that same wonderful energy that was so very evident in the first two films.

It may not be a flawless endeavor, but it's certainly epic. Raimi and company reach for the stars, and instead end up making it halfway across the universe. It's one bumpy and crazy ride getting there, but when things go well, they go really damn well. And while some movie trilogies end on a note that make you yearn for one last installment to redeem the series (I'm looking at you, X3!), we should be so lucky to get a conclusive finish to the SPIDER-MAN series. Almost brings a tear to my eye.

8 out of 10

Spider-Man - 7 out of 10
Spider-Man 2 - 9 out of 10


You can find my thoughts on other movies through my Flixster account, here:


Tuesday, April 17, 2007


OK, lets get the standard stuff out of the way first. DISTURBIA's a blatant ripoff of REAR WINDOW. It's unoriginal, predictable, and formulaic. So on and so forth.

But hey, if you're going to rip something off, might as well do it well. And DISTURBIA does. Very well, in fact. It's formula at its best.

Acting as the film's main highlight, the underrated Shia LaBeouf once again proves how capable he is as a leading man. His character could've so easily crossed the line from likable to obnoxious, but Shia makes sure to avoid hitting that point. Props!

The supporting work is pretty solid, too. Aaron Yoo plays the obvious Asian comic relief, but he adds enough charm to the role to surpass the cliche (even if it's just a little). Sara Roemer is hot as hell as Shia's love interest. A few of their scenes together were a little too cheesy/sappy for my liking, but I'm sure many teen audiences appreciate them. At times it feels almost like the first act to a really high-budget porno. Or at the very least, it's a pretty standard teen male fantasy. It probably wouldn't have bugged me if I hadn't already seen it handled so well in THE GIRL NEXT DOOR.

Something in particular that really impressed me was the build-up to the third act. For a movie that steals so blatantly from Hitchcock, at least they were smart enough to also incorporate a style of filmmaking he pioneered. The film takes its time to get to the suspense. It builds and builds until the characters have been developed enough to make you care what happens to them, and then the thrilling 3rd act kicks into play. And man, what a rush it is. If any audience member starts getting ancy watching what seems almost like a goofy teen comedy for the first hour, the movie's intense climax should leave them satisfied. It certainly made me a happy camper.

On a final note, I just want to comment how distracting some of the product placements were. I did appreciate how they incorporated technology to various aspects of the plot (making it feel more "updated"), but there were a number of times where it just stood out too much. Particularly the opening scene, which feels like it could stand alone as a commercial for Coca-Cola. And the stuff with the Xbox 360, iTunes, PSP, YouTube, etc. - it felt like the movie was trying too hard to be hip. Sort of annoying.

7 out of 10

You can find my thoughts on other movies through my Flixster account, here:


MOVIE REVIEW: Perfect Stranger

Perfect Stranger
This movie's about as generic and lame as the trailer made it look, if just a tad bit better. Maybe the fact that I had zero expectations helped me to "kinda" enjoy it. Or maybe it was my respect for Giovanni Ribisi. Or maybe it was my love for Halle Berry's gorgeous body. Well whatever the case, the movie's a dumb, by-the-numbers thriller that should keep easily satisfied fans happy. That's all there really is to it.

Every piece of dialogue feels very manufactured. It's almost cringe worthy at times. I laughed out loud at a couple of the scenes.

Giovanni is great though, so he's able to make his stuff work. Without him in the film, I would've disliked it much more. Bruce Willis hardly feels like he's in the movie. Whatever. Halle Berry is fine, and by that I mean she is both decent in her role and SMOKIN' HOT! Yowza!


Sorry about that.

This movie doesn't deserve much attention. It's fairly dull. The big twist ending is stupid. It feels like there are some plot holes too, but I'm too lazy to think back and actually figure out where (I'm sure others can do it for me). Halle Berry doesn't even go completely nude - just some side boob action (but on the other hand, that was some stellar side boob action!).

Meh. Unless you thought the trailer made the movie look amazing, you should definitely skip it. It's a little bit better than THE NUMBER 23, but not by much. Both of them feel surprisingly similar in that they're tedious R-rated thrillers that might've benefited by by cutting down to a PG-13 and opening up to teenage audiences. Not saying that would've actually made them better, but at least they'd have a better chance at the box office.

4 out of 10

You can find my thoughts on other movies through my Flixster account, here:


MOVIE REVIEW(S): Introduction

In the future I'll probably spend a lot more time working on my reviews for theatrical movies, but for now I'm just jotting down my quick thoughts on them. If you're looking for something with more of an in-depth analysis, check out my DVD reviews at

Below you can find my comments on some of the more recent films to hit cinemas...

While PLANET TERROR delivers an awesome heaping of pure schlock, DEATH PROOF adds a whole new meaning the word. Both are kickass flicks, with their own separate pros and cons.

PLANET TERROR is a blast. It's messy, lively, and completely ridiculous. At times it feels like it's a parody of camp more than actual camp, but that didn't stop me from having fun.

I loved it in the same way I loved FEAST.

DEATH PROOF would've easily surpassed TERROR if it hadn't been for some of the dialogue. I've raved about Tarantino's writing in the past, but here it seemed to hinder the experience more than help. However, once the actual car chases come into play, it became a balls-to-the-walls ride. It was also interesting how Tarantino played with conventions by basically restarting the film halfway through with a new set of characters. And from that point on, there's a very different tone set. The final frame of the movie certainly confirms that notion. In this sense, the first half of the film is pure throwback, while the second completely defies expectations - nothing quite as fitting for a grindhouse film than that!

If it weren't for the incessant inane banter, I'd probably be giving DEATH PROOF a much higher score. Plus, it needed more of Kurt Russell being a badass. While I did like how Tarantino changed gears during the final third of the film, I really would've liked to enjoy Stuntman Mike's awesomeness for a few more scenes (as opposed to what he devolves into later on).

No matter how much you love or hate these films, there's no denying what a creative and unique experience has been created. It doesn't quite bring back the grindhouse experience (not that I'd know), but it's fun. And a LOT of it.

The faux trailers are awesome, too.

MACHETE - The whole priest-with-guns thing was hilarious. I can't wait to pick up the real thing when it hits DVD.

WEREWOLF WOMEN OF THE S.S. - The idea behind this is hilarious, but the trailer as a whole is nothing special. Nicolas Cage' appearance was a riot though.

DON'T - Funny as hell. It actually feels like a movie that could've been made a long time back. If it were real, I'd totally watch it.

THANKSGIVING - Awesomely hilarious. The killer f*cking the turkey/head was the perfect way to end the fake trailers and kick-start DEATH PROOF.

Final Ratings:
PLANET TERROR - 8 out of 10
DEATH PROOF - 7 out of 10


Blades of Glory
This isn't the type of movie you need to analyze too deeply, so I'm not going to. That said, it's hilarious. It's not going to make your sides hurt or anything, but if you like Ferrell's brand of comedy, it will definitely keep you laughing.

Both Heder and Ferrell do a great job as the leads, and the supporting stars are also very funny (Poehler and Arnett). As for Jenna Fischer... she's so goddamn hot. Rawr.

The only person that actually surprised me was Heder. Not because he does an amazing job or anything, but because I was appalled by his performance in SCHOOL FOR SCOUNDRELS. But he does a very solid job here. He certainly helps to keep the laughs coming, almost even as much as Ferrell does. I honestly believe if they had cast somebody else, the movie wouldn't be as enjoyable as it turned out.

There's a TON of sexual humor, much of it homosexual-based (as the movie's plot implies), but it's handled well. They work in some gags. Also, the ice skating moves they do are a riot. There are numerous moments of obvious CGI and wirework, but it actually fits in with the ridiculously over-the-top style of the film.

Great cast, great gags, and lots o' laughs. If you watch the trailer and get the feeling the movie's something you might enjoy, then I can pretty much guarantee you will. If not, stay away.

7 out of 10


Meet the Robinsons
A goofy, entertaining family film. There are a few clever moments of humor, some great looking CGI, and a solid message (that gets repeated endlessly).

I did get a little frustrated at how frantic and rushed everything became as soon as the Robinson family was introduced (especially with how they immediately acted like they were Lewis' family), but those are relatively minor quibbles.

As far as CGI films go, this one's above average.

6 out of 10


Fun, fun movie. The plot takes a bit too long to get going, but the action sequences keep things interesting.

The CGI looks terrific. I was little disappointed at the lack of monster battles, but the other fight scenes were choreographed/animated so well that I didn't really mind in the long run. The visuals and action sequences are easily the two main highlights of the film.

The writing is sub-par and generic, but it's a kid flick, so I can't really complain. The awful humor has always been present with TMNT, so that aspect of the bad writing was actually very welcome to me.

Mikey and Don are shortchanged in the film, with much of the story focusing on the rivalry between Raph and Leo. If there's a sequel, hopefully they get a bit more to do.

All in all, a great piece of nostalgia. Takes a bit from everything - the comics, cartoons, live-action films - so fans should be pleased. I know I was.

7 out of 10


Well, I'd love to hop on the 10/10 bandwagon (alongside all my movie buff friends), but I think I'm leaning more toward an 8 out of 10.

I didn't get completely hooked until past the 20 minute mark, which is due in part to there not being much REAL plot to go along with the basic story. Maybe that's a good thing though, because the story isn't all that interesting. The acting helps to pick up the plot somewhat, but I never really felt myself "enthralled" by it. It's the visuals that make the movie epic, not the story. Which is weird, because the story really should feel epic as well. The climax was also a bit underwhelming (it's cool, but it certainly doesn't make the movie go out with a bang).

That said, as soon as the first action sequence graced the screen, I was blown away. Some of the most masterful choreography, cinematography, and direction I've seen in quite some time. Absolutely stunning. This movie really is style over substance, and in this particular case, that's a very good thing.

The majority of the film is actually a ton of fun, and I think I would've actually liked it to be longer (didn't feel even close to two hours - went by really fast). I think the reason for that was that it took me awhile to become immersed in the film, and by the time I did, the movie was already past the halfway mark. When it was over, I was left wanting more.

I wouldn't say the movie was a disappointment by any means, as I can't honestly think of how they might've improved anything... Mostly I think I built myself up for something that wouldn't logically be delivered. The trailers were amazing, but I didn't really stop to think about how the story would go along with all those awesome pieces of action.

EDIT: After having just seen the movie again, I found myself able to appreciate it a lot more. Pretty awesome flick.

8 out of 10

You can find my thoughts on other movies through my Flixster account, here:


DVD REVIEW(S): Introduction

Here is a small collection of my most recent DVD reviews for Links to my future DVD reviews can be found here regularly. I'll post them as soon as they are made available on the site. Stay tuned.

You can find the rest of my DVD reviews at:

Charlotte's Web Going to Pieces The Holiday

The Dukes of Hazzard: The Beginning 13 Tzameti The Return

South Park (Season 9) Open Water 2 The Departed

And once again, don't forget to check out the rest of my DVD reviews at:


INTERVIEWS: Perfect Stranger

Here are my interviews with Halle Berry, Giovanni Ribisi and director James Foley from the Perfect Stranger junket.

You took journalism at school...

Very briefly, must I say.

What kind of journalism did you want to do? Anything like your character in 'Perfect Stranger'?

I wanted to do this hard-core stuff you guys do. [Laughs] Well, unfortunately because I didn’t study it long enough, I hadn’t really decided that yet. So I really don’t know, but I knew that I was a good writer in high school and won awards, and I was the editor of my school newspaper. So I knew that I was a good writer and I wanted to somehow capitalize and sort of utilize a talent that I thought I had. How it would have manifested, I don’t really know.

The producer and director were singing their praises about how into the character you were – what made you so passionate about playing this role?

Well, you know, I love a character that gives me a chance to grow and do something different, and Row was so multifaceted. I've never played a character who played a character who played a character, and that gave me a chance as an artist to sort of stretch my limits and to challenge myself. When I read the movie and I got to the end, I thought, 'Wow, I don’t know how I’m going to pull this off [or] if I can, but I’m going to go down trying,' because that’s how impassioned I was about it.

Read the rest of the interview by clicking the link below...


You tend to play a lot of quirky characters with an evil side to them. Do you seek out those types of characters?

I dunno... I looked on IMDB recently and I was like, 'Wow, there's like 40 movies.' Maybe it's just a coincidence that people haven't seen the other films. I have another film coming out after this called 'The Dog Problem', and it's sort of a lighter romantic comedy. And yeah, I think that he's troubled to a greater or lesser degree. But I think that the problem exists in storytelling. You know, if you just saw a guy who was just happy the whole time, that wouldn't be a really interesting movie. But I think at the same time, a lot of people ask me – the word that I hate – 'Quirky.' You know, 'Why am I playing these quirky characters?' I don't look at them [like that]. It's not about that. It's more about being interested in the breadth of human emotion and doing something that's dynamic.

Having a personality.

Yeah, exactly. I think that anybody to a greater or lesser degree has a dark side. But there's a part of me that's quite the opposite now, because so many people have been saying it. I'm not interested in that anymore. And it's got me thinking, because I get that question a lot – especially today – about, 'Why?' And I think it's because it's a challenge and there's something enticing about that.

Read the rest of the interview by clicking the link below...


Did it feel good, finishing the movie?

I went out and splurged right when I got back, because when you direct a movie you feel rich for like one day. Because, you know, you've gotten all your money, but then you realize that you get your monthly statement from your business manager and every month it goes down and down. And you're unemployed and you have no idea if you'll ever get a job again. So you don't know if you're rich or not, because if you get paid a million bucks and you do your next movie right away – the next year – then you're making a million bucks a year. But if you wait three years, you're only getting $300,000 a year.

So does that make you less selective about your movie choices?

I'm extremely selective. I learned early on that if I didn't find myself in the project, I didn't want to do it. And by that I mean, 'Where is myself?' And it's in Halle 's character. I feel in many ways – I can be psychoanalyzed why – I just feel a kinship with her character. And I love her. And I don't care what she does, and I understand her behavior no matter what she does. I understand the twisted logic of why she takes a certain action. And it's the best performance of any movie I've ever made. There's a layer that's so interesting because Halle Berry is playing a character, [and] that character is acting she's a different character, so you have to [make] people believe this new character she invented – that the character is acting – but you can't let the audience see that this character is acting. But she has to be. And that was a real magic trick.

And when you see it, there are – people say this too often sometimes – but I really think there's reason to see this movie a second time, because there are millions of little moments that could be interpreted one way or another. I purposely left things ambiguous. Something as simple as Halle coming in with Giovanni to Halle's kitchen and Halle's in one room and Giovanni's in another, and Halle's taking off her hat and she stops, and she starts thinking about something. And we have no idea what she's thinking about. But it's a long pause. And then she blurts out a question to Giovanni, and then Halle can't see Giovanni, but Giovanni's reaction is like, 'Uh oh. This is complicated.' And you have no idea at the point why it's complicated, but you know that something more is at hand and what the first level of reality is. There are secrets.

Read the rest of the interview by clicking the link below...


Friday, April 13, 2007

INTERVIEWS: Blades of Glory

Here are my interviews with Will Ferrell, Jon Heder, Jenna Fischer, Will Arnett, and Amy Poehler from the Blades of Glory junket.

Ferrell: [To Heder] What's up homes? This is our first time seeing each other today. After spending the entire day yesterday together...

Heder: I was watching '300.'

Ferrell: You saw '300?'

Heder: Yeah. There were about three hundred people in the theater. All the soldiers were there to watch themselves.

So I take it this was an irresistible opportunity, the two of you on ice, looking like fools?

Heder: No. To make ourselves look quite cool. Not fools.

Ferrell: Yeah, this was not a foolish endeavor. We were finally able to fulfill our dreams and aspirations of becoming figure skaters which I know that we all have.

Heder: There's a little bit of watching that and then wanting to get out there in each and every one of us, in that Lycra.

Ferrell: And express yourself.

Heder: It's all about expression.

Read the rest of the interview by clicking the link below...


This is pretty much your first big movie out of the gate, after the huge success of 'The Office.' How did it come about?

Well, it kind of goes like this - your agent calls you up and they're like, 'So there's this movie with Will Ferrell, Will Arnett, Amy Poehler, Jon Heder... Would you like to read the script?' And you say, 'I don’t think I need to read that script. I think I know already that I want to be in that movie.' Kinda went like that. You know, when I was offered the part to be in this movie, 'The Office' wasn’t really 'The Office' yet. I just felt lucky to be included.

So 'The Office' hadn’t come out yet?

It had come out but it didn’t have all the ratings, it didn’t have the popularity, it didn’t have the Emmy... it didn’t have any of that stuff yet. So this was a big exciting gig for me. It still is. I mean, I'm still the new girl in town.

So you're getting a lot of offers now for other movies?

Now, I'm getting more offers. Yeah. Now it's been really good.

Is it hard to find time though?

Yeah, because I work on 'The Office' eight months out of the year. Twelve hours a day. Five days a week. And then on the weekends, you do stuff like this. So there's not a lot of extra time to mess around. But, you know, we get a good four months off in the summer, and then we all just fight to get a good movie deal.

Read the rest of the interview by clicking the link below...


How did you get this movie together, and were you excited when you heard who else was in it?

Arnett: I almost dropped out. When I heard that [Will] Ferrell was in it, I almost dropped out... because he comes in with a lot of attitude. He's clearly all roided out and I don't endorse that. We have to think about kids who are our future.

Poehler: He was juicing the whole time. We would get these threatening letters - cut out letters in the mail that said, 'Do this or else.' Then it would be signed Will Ferrell.

Arnett: Why cut out all the stuff and then sign your name on it? Also, it said, 'This is a DNA sample, just approved.'

You've worked with Will Ferrell before, right?

Poehler: Oh, Will and I loved working with each other on 'SNL.' I had a blast working with him when he was there. So in all honesty I was super psyched to be able to work with him again. It was because we don't work together a lot and so we like the idea of doing a creepy version of working together, which is fun.

Is this close to your real relationship?

Arnett: Well, we're not brother and sister.

Poehler: We're actually not. We checked before we started filming.

Arnett: We're not. Again.

Read the rest of the interview by clicking the link below...



Here are my interviews with Nicolas Cage, Eva Mendes, and director Mark Steven Johnson from the Ghost Rider junket.

Nicolas Cage: Anybody here from Entertainment Weekly? Because I hate that magazine. [Laughter]

What did Entertainment Weekly do to you?

Cage: Entertainment Weekly hasn't done anything to me. Somebody asked me a question about, "Do you think comic book movies get a bad rap?" And someone mentioned to me that there was a blurb in Entertainment Weekly, very condescendingly, "We get a kick out of watching Academy Award winners being in movies they have no business being seen in." And I thought, "Well, that's really shallow thinking, because they can't get outside their own box."

They don't understand the concept of what I would say is art. You have different styles and you can choose to be photo realistic like World Trade Center , or you can be pop art illustrative. Why limit yourself to one style of acting? And especially when you look at Ghost Rider you see a comic book story structure that digs a little deeper. It doesn't take itself too seriously, of course, it's funny, but it's coming from classic themes like Faust with Gerta or Thomas Mann or then Beauty and the Beast and it's fascinating to take those story structures and reintroduce people to it in a pop art, contemporary manner.

In a comic book especially, which is fun and reaches a lot of people. Entertainment Weekly is the kind of magazine that is very condescending and they think in a very narrow box and they always have. So that's why I would recommend that if you really want to really get your information and know what movies to go see, I wouldn't resort to that particular publication, because they are pretty shallow.

Read the rest of the interview by clicking the link below...


The trailer says, "He made a deal to save somebody he loved." And it looks like they're talking about Eva Mendes even though it's not her. Why not just say, "He made a deal to save his father?"

Avi Arad: I think that those who are from the uber-geek universe will immediately know that he did it to save his dad. When we make movies like this the idea is to get more people initiated. If you remember when this Marvel journey started, there were only three of us watching these movies. So in order to get to where we are today, at least from a marketing and advertising standpoint, we want to open it. And of course, Roxanne is part of his love and part of his aspirations and part of his pain, so it all makes sense.

So it's intentionally vague?

Mark Steven Johnson: Yeah.

Gary Foster: Yes.

Arad : Whenever it's vague, it's intentional. [Laughter]

As far as the evolution of comic book movies, what's gotten better?

Johnson: The CGI. You know, its one of those things where there's so much negativity on the internet, and that's for any filmmaker or any musician or any artist at all... But the great thing is that, for me, is that I go onto a site like Superhero Hype or some of the comic sites and you read about what people say and sometimes they're right. It's like a free test screening in a way. So we put up the skull a year and half a year ago at the earliest stage, and everybody was like, "Skull looks fake. It looks terrible." You know, that’s our lead character. If he doesn’t look good, you're sunk, from the very beginning. Because at least you gotta get that right. So that was the hardest thing, was getting that skull and that CG fire to look right, and the time really helped.

Read the rest of the interview by clicking the link below...


A Smokin' event...!!

Included in this article are a rundown of the event, my adventures meeting some of the cast/crew, pics with me and actor Jeremy Piven/director Joe Carnahan, and my review of the film. Check it out.


DVD: Best of 2006 had their yearly DVD "Best of..." list put up awhile back, as usual compiled by schmoe extraordinaire Johnny Moreno. And being part of the DVD Clinic crew, I got to contribute some picks of my own...

Oldboy (Three Disc Special Edition)
Dazed & Confused (Criterion Edition)
Clerks 2 (Special Edition)

The Wicker Man
X-Men: The Last Stand

Be sure to read the article to find out the reasons behind my choices, and of course to learn what the rest of the DVD Clinic's top picks were as well.

Labels: ,