One for the Ages...

Believe the hype about The Dark Knight. It IS that good.

I'm gonna keep this spoiler free out of respect for those of you who haven't seen it, cause I would never want to ruin for you what I experienced last night.

I love event movies. There is nothing like experiencing a movie like Indy 4 or TDK at midnight as soon as it becomes release day with a bunch of superfans just like you (many of whom are in costume) who view the movie with the utmost respect. These are the people who burst into applause at the right moments. The people who were so quiet once it started you could hear a pin drop in a massive theatre on 42nd Street (a rarity if you have ever seen a movie there). Not one cell phone went off during the movie. No one talked in inappropriate places. We were all at the church of movie going, and no one wanted to ruin the experience for any of their fellow congregants...

The Dark Knight is a movie that transcends all definitions of genre. It is just an excellent movie. My only minor quibble with it is that after the opening set piece, the exposition and set up takes a wee bit too long in my opinion. But really, it's a MINOR problem, cause said exposition was still enjoyable. The script, penned by director Christopher Nolan and his brother, is excellent. It's dark and twisty. It takes you to places you don't really expect it to. It shocks and it awes. The direction (with the exception of the very beginning) is taut and has you on the edge of your seat.

The cast is excellent as can be expected. Christian Bale once again turns in a fantastic (and understated) performance as Bruce Wayne/Batman. What makes him so good is that he is good at playing both Hero and alter Ego, whereas previous actors have been good at one or the other (like Michael Keaton was an excellent Batman, he wasn't as good as Bruce. The very opposite was true with George Clooney). Excellent support comes from Michael Caine, Morgan Freeman and Gary Oldman, perfectly cast in their roles. Maggie Gyllenhaal is a vast improvement over Katie Holmes, even though the role of Rachel Dawes is still a pretty thankless one. Aaron Eckhart was excellent as Harvey Dent...his golden boy looks and chiseled features perfectly embodying the potential white knight DA of Gotham. He was also a great foil for Bale looks wise, All American Blondie vs. Dark and Brooding. Well done.

But the movie belongs to the late Heath Ledger, who truly does give a performance for the ages. The performance has been hyped ever since his tragic passing, so it had alot to live up to...and it surpassed my expectations. I was prepared to be upset and think about his death when he showed up on screen, but Heath so fully embodied the character that you forgot about it. He was just so ALIVE in the Joker...a performance that oozed out of every pore of his being, one so fully and terrifyingly realized I couldn't get enough of it. He was both comic and evil, a ticking time bomb of a character that fills you with a visceral dread anytime he comes on screen. Only when the screen went dark, and the "In Memory of our friend Heath Ledger" screen came up, was I jolted back into the reality that he is no longer with us.

It breaks my heart that he is not here to see the reception and accolades this performance has been given (although it probably would have made him uncomfortable). It hurts me that we will never again see what else this immensely talented man had up his sleeve. Because I feel like he was only beginning to really come into himself as an actor. But what a swan song he gave us...

Rest in Peace, Heath. You are missed already.

All Style, No Substance

Yesterday, I doubled up on Wanted and Hancock. I found myself underwhelmed by both. Now, I know it's the summer, and the movies TEND to be mindless ventures chock full of explosions and car chases, but I found both of these movies to be so lacking in substance I was hungry afterwards.

Now Wanted at least was pretty to look at. This is what I took away from it: James McAvoy is hot. Angelina Jolie is breathtakingly hot (for real, there was a collective gasp in the theatre the first time she came on screen). And despite the fact that she weighs about 90 pounds soaking wet (seriously, Angie, don't lose all that baby weight, you look better with some meat on you), she can totally kick anyone's ass.

Now, I will admit that the action scenes looked really cool and were shot very well. But anyone who knows me, knows that I have a low tolerance for crazy ass action sequences where said characters fighting should have been dead from the very start (see why I was not a fan of the Pierce Brosnan Bond flicks). Well, that was a good bit of the action scenes in Wanted. While there is a SPECTACULAR sequence with a train crossing a bridge and going off the rails, I found myself going "REALLY?! Come on!!". But maybe that is just me. I also think I was unable to suspend my disbelief because I just didn't care too much about anyone in the movie. If there is substance to the story, then I am willing to go with them where ever the movie takes me (e.g. Iron Man). But with Wanted it was ALL style, and no substance, so I left the movie and forgot all about it 10 minutes later. Except for how hot Angie is. And congratulations to her, as her twins were born yesterday...AND she gave them normal names, Knox and Vivienne. Well done.

I had been hesitant to see Hancock from the beginning. The previews were never really to appealing to me and I was always like "What is this story here?". Well, my instincts turned out to be right on. Sadly, I also knew the major twist going into the movie (thanks alot EW!), so there was alos no "Aha!!" 'moment for me. However, the planting of the twist was so blatantly obvious, I would have guessed ten minutes in.

Let me set this straight. I like Will Smith. I find him very enjoyable as an Actor, and I tend to really enjoy all his films. He is one of the few universal movie stars left in this flash in a pan era of celebrity. And that is why I was disappointed in this movie, cause to me it seemed he was blatantly phoning this performance in, Maybe it was the script (which among other things, gave zero insight into why Hancock was such an "asshole"), maybe it was the direction, but I haven't seen such a one note performance from Smith in a long time. Jason Bateman delivered more of the same for him recently. I think he's great, and I am really glad he's made such a comeback, but I am leering on the side of wanting more from him, cause I know he is capable of it. We all saw it in Juno, so go there, Jason, go there! Again, I really think it was the combination of the script and directing. If it was the directing, I find it odd, cause the director was Peter Berg, creator of the wonderful Friday Night Lights television show...and that show has deeply layered characters. So I am blaming the script for this one. It was really bad. It had little to no driving force or conflict, and it was incredibly heavy handed and lacked subtlety.

I guess movies like Iron Man, and the upcoming Dark Knight (omg can't waaaaaaaait) have raised my expectations for summer popcorn flicks. Yes, they are fun, and don't expect you to put too much into them, but I find I like my blockbusters with a side of substance.

Skadoosh and Smash

My name is Kim and I am a pop culture junkie.

Whew. It's good to say that outloud. Many of you know, I used to regularly maintain a blog on myspace that revolved around various entertainment related top tens, thoughts on TV shows, and celebrity gossip in general. After a few months of silence I started getting the questions of "Why don't you blog anymore?". Well, I guess I got a bit burned out...not that I didn't have anything to say (cause I always have an opinion on everything), I just ran out of the energy to actually say them on a blog. Well, no more my friends. I am back and back with a vengeance. So look forward to my thoughts on Movies, TV, Music, Books, Celebrities...basically anything entertainment related :-) I hope you enjoy it. I know I do.

What is a better thing to do on a Sunday where scattered storms are predicted than to go to the movies? And what is better, I had a free movie pass from my Regal Crown Club rewards...and the Kaufman Astoria theatre is one of the easiest theatres to movie hop in, so I decided to catch up on some of my summer movie blockbusters by double featuring Kung Fu Panda and The Incredible Hulk. For Free. Hey, I see enough movies, I am owed some free ones every once in awhile!!

Kung Fu Panda is just delightful. The animation is top notch, and some of the fight sequences are more thrilling than many live action sequences I have seen this year (please refer to the second movie I saw today). Stand out sections include villain Tai Lung's escape from prison and when the Five battle Tai Lung on a suspended bridge. Truly breathtaking, and right on par with Pixar level animation.

The trend with many animated flicks these days is to rely on celebrity voice casting. This isn't always a good thing, as while a celebrity voice may be recognizable, it may not be a good animated character voice. This is not the case in Kung Fu Panda. Great voicing all around. Jack Black is made for this kind of thing. He infuses Po with both great humor and great empathy. But the real standout voice to me was the inspired casting choice of Dustin Hoffman as Kung Fu Master Shifu. He's gruff and cantankerous, yet lovable and hilarious. The sequences with Shifu training Po are great.

The story itself has a great message of self acceptance and the importance of believing in yourself. The only thing I would say negatively about this movie is that unlike Pixar films like Finding Nemo and The Incredibles, it lacked some of the sophisticated wit that made those movies enjoyable for both the kids and adults. But that is a minor quibble, considering that it has what may possibly be the catchphrase of the summer in "Skadoosh". All in all I really enjoyed it, and highly recommend it. A-

As soon as the credits rolled, I scurried into an adjourning theatre to check out The Incredible Hulk. I will admit that I never saw the much maligned first film, and have never really cared for the Hulk as a character in general, so I may be a bit biased. I found the movie to be mediocre at best. Now, I love me some Ed Norton, but I wasn't buying what he was selling in this role. I know Bruce Banner is supposed to be a mild mannered scientist, but Norton lacked all of his usual charisma in this role. And there is just something about how he looks that doesn't gel with being a comic book character. Perhaps it's the soft jawline and chin and his sloping eyes? (Don't get me wrong, I think Norton is attractive just not really for this movie. I like him better circa "Keeping the Faith") He just didn't work for me...and when your lead doesn't work, you know you are in trouble. Liv Tyler has never been more beautiful, but she had little more to do in the movie than whisper "Bruce" and gaze up at the Hulk with tears in her eyes. But I am very glad to see her back up on the screen again after she took a few years off to start a family.

What I disliked most about Hulk was the fact that it lacked most (if not all) of the gravitas, heart and wry humor of good comic book movies like Iron Man and the first two Spidermans (I prefer to think the third Spidey never happened). I just didn't care as much. Sure there were lots of things blowing up and being Hulk smashed, but what is that without some heart behind it? Just a bunch of explosions. So if that is your game, you'll love it. Perhaps it was the director? Would it have been different in the hands of a Jon Favreau, Sam Raimi, or Bryan Singer? I think so. Or was it the script? It was known that Norton contributed heavily to the script (but was not given credit for it) and also clashed heavily with the Studio as to whether to focus more on character development or action. The studio won, resulting in Norton doing little to no publicity for the film. Would Norton's version have been better? We'll never know.

I also feel that in the era of Gollum in Lord of the Rings, Davy Jones in Pirates, and Kong in Peter Jackson's King Kong, the CGI character of Hulk was very lacking. Unlike Gollum and Davy Jones, where you can clearly see the actor behind the CGI, I saw very little of Norton in the Hulk. Yes, yes most of the time you aren't supposed to see any of Bruce in Hulk, but in those moments when we are supposed to see Bruce coming through, I just didn't see any of Norton's emotion in the animation. And like I said, we know that there are CGI characters capable of that. Plus there was a shot of Hulk and Betty on a cliff that was a clear ripoff of a shot in Jackson's King Kong.

It's really sad when the highlight for me was the short cameo by Robert Downey Jr's Tony Stark is the highlight of the movie. Now THAT, my friends, was inspired casting. Maybe it is just because Stark is a more enjoyable character, but Downey had more charisma in 2 minutes than Norton did for the whole film. And MAN, he looks hot in those power suits.

Clearly, they leave the movie open-ended for a Hulk 2 (or is it 3? or are we just pretending Ang Lee's version didn't exist?). Will I go see? Maybe...for free. C-

That's all for today. We've got a big movie weekend coming up: Wanted and Wall-E. I want to see them both...