More eBay nonsense...

It's one thing when someone doesn't know what they're selling and it's an entirely different set of circumstances when the seller knows damn well that their item is not 100% authentic. Such is the case with eBay seller "glamore451".

This seller has listed a photo reprint of a cast signed laserdisc of JAWS. The following is their brief description:
A FABULOUS REPRINT. GUARANTEED NOT TO BE A FORGERY.

My message to the seller:
"GUARANTEED NOT TO BE A FORGERY." Interesting, considering the photo is of a 1987 pressed laserdisc and Robert Shaw died in 1978. Oh, and Murray Hamilton, he died in 1986.

Such a shame to see this type of thing going on and sadly, I've seen it a lot with JAWS-related memorabilia. I'll never forget the JAWS THE REVENGE poster signed posthumously by Robert Shaw. Which is worse: the fact that he didn't appear in the fourth film in the franchise because his character died in the first film, or... the fact that he wouldn't have appeared in the film anyhow since he passed away nine years before it was made?



Yes, I reported that one.

"There's grapes in my sands box!"

Someone call the Warlocksmith!

From eBay:
1989 "WARLOCK" MOVIE STILL PHOTO JULIAN SANDS?

WOW! WHAT A FIND!!!!!!!!!!!!!! HERE IS A 1989 MOVIE STILL PHOTO OF "WARLOCK" WITH JULIAN SANDS (I THINK)!! IT IS IN EXCELLENT CONDITION, HOWEVER, PLEASE LOOK AT THE SCAN TO DETERMINE THE CONDITION FOR YOURSELF. PLEASE NOTE THAT EVEN THOUGH THE TITLE MAY APPEAR SIMILAR TO OTHER TITLES, IT IS A COMPLETELY DIFFERENT AUCTION ALL TOGETHER. THIS CAN BE A GREAT GIFT FOR ALL FANS AND COLLECTORS!!!



Of course, that's not Julian Sands, rather HENRY FONDA(!!!) from another film entitled WARLOCK. How can one specialize in selling movie memorabilia and NOT KNOW what Henry Fonda looks like?! Not to mention, if one were to understand Roman numerals, the year is printed on the still... which translates as 1959, not 1989.

"Ugh" to the "Duh".

Tiger Of The Month!

(Drumroll)
Survey says... Henry Winkler!

Ladies... ladies... control yo'selves!
(Pinch)

Oscars 2010: Best & Worst Dressed

No, I haven't sold out and joined the dark side. I feel the need to comment, in written form this time, on the best dressed vs. worst dressed crap. Honestly, who cares about these things? It's all about status and "who" are you wearing. Many moons ago, Conan O'Brien was asked this question at a red carpet event, by Joan Rivers, to which he replied, "I'm wearing Sears, Joan." Perfect.

Anyhow, my point is, as much as I say I don't care about any of it, whenever I see these lists, I nearly always disagree with something or someone. Critics love to bash on celebs, but they always seem to make the pity play when it comes to people who probably aren't used to this sort of thing. I don't mean to be a jerk, but let's be brutally honest: Does Oscar nominee Gabourey Sidibe truly belong on the "best dressed" list? I think not. I know that's harsh and I would have left her alone had it not been for her making it a point to continually flaunt herself any chance the camera focused on her. It was seriously cringe-inducing at the beginning of the show, when the best actress and actor nominees stood on stage together. Everyone kept it cool and smiled when the camera got to them, but not Sidibe. Someone needs to tell this girl that this is not an audition for America's Next Top Model. Unless she's trying to secure a spokesperson gig with the Michelin Tire Co., I'd suggest a little more... make that a lot more restraint and elegance. Real women may have curves, but this one needs a reality check. That is all.

The Year In Ticket Stubs (thus far)...

January 9th, 2010:
IT'S COMPLICATED

I enjoyed this one, but mostly because of the company I had to see it with. And, poking smot can be quite entertaining.


January 22nd:
THE LOVELY BONES

I really wanted to like this film, but ultimately there was no satisfaction, particularly with the climax. Felt like a '70s-era hybrid of WHAT DREAMS MAY COME and STIR OF ECHOES. An interesting concept at first, proving tedious along the way, and afterwards, I wondered why I cared about these characters for two hours. Good to see Michael Imperioli in a period film, though. I couldn't quite place what '70s film I could see him in, but DOG DAY AFTERNOON continually went through my mind.


January 23rd:
YOUTH IN REVOLT

Fun and highly inventive coming-of-age story. This one deserves another chance, simply because of the non-perky mood I was in that day and the carbon-copy lame duck sitting a few seats away (decked in an oversized suit, David Byrne-wannabe style) who seemed to chuckle annoyingly at nearly every screen direction. Takes the wind out of the sails a bit when I legitimately think something is funny and want to laugh aloud.


February 3rd:
EDGE OF DARKNESS

Mel Gibson makes a welcome return to form in this slow burn of an action drama, which could easily round out an unofficial Gibson trilogy with RANSOM and PAYBACK. I was excited about this film once I saw the leaked trailer months ago. With Martin Campbell directing, Gibson's return to the screen couldn't have been in better hands. The opportunist at heart makes me wish there had been a tie-in "got milk" ad campaign featuring Danny Huston.


February 7th:
CRAZY HEART

Traditionally, every Super Bowl Sunday, I take in a showing of some film, knowing the crowd will be virtually non-existent, and also because I care nothing about sports. (Someone asked me that day who I was rooting for, to which I replied, "The Who.") Anyhow, I've always admired Jeff Bridges and I enjoyed this film as much as I thought I would. Bridges gives off that Kristofferson vibe and through all of his character's hang-ups, shines as someone you truly care about. The soundtrack is no slouch either and definitely worth picking up.


February 10th:
FROM PARIS WITH LOVE

When I initially saw the trailer for this film, and later the poster and T.V. spots, I wasn't impressed at all. The title didn't win me over, either. But, for some reason, I felt like seeing it. Maybe because I was in the mood for some type of John Travolta fix or maybe it was because I also like Jonathan Rhys-Meyers, or, maybe, just maybe, it had more to do with the fact that I was willing to switch my mind off and settle in for a balls-to-the-wall action film. I'm glad I decided to see this film. I really enjoyed it, perhaps because I truly didn't have big expectations for it. In any case, the film works due to Travolta's performance. He's having so much fun on-screen that the vibe seems infectious. The blink-and-you-might-miss-it pseudo-cameo of Kelly Preston sitting in the background in one scene and, also, Travolta's PULP FICTION reference (think Europe) were nice touches.


February 12th (and 17th):
THE WOLFMAN (2010)

Anyone who knows me knows I've always been obsessed by movie monsters and it all started with the Universal monsters of yesteryear. While I'm not generally a fan of remakes, films like this make me giddy like a 5-year-old kid. Once I read an interview with Rick Baker mentioning how he signed on because it was important to him that the werewolf not be some CG-rendered creature, I was already sold. AN AMERICAN WEREWOLF IN LONDON is one of my all-time faves and this felt like a nod in that direction, in addition to paying tribute to the original WOLF MAN. Of course, I'm a bit biased when it comes to werewolf fare (the practical effects variety) and it doesn't take much more to persuade me once I know that Baker is in his element and two actors that I'm obsessed with (Benencio Del Toro and the growl-inducing Emily Blunt) are in tow. I will admit that I wasn't crazy with the plot changes from the original, sort of takes the focus away from THE wolf man that this film is about, but I really can't complain. The film reminded me a lot of John Badham's DRACULA, including Danny Elfman's music, which seemed to echo the underrated John Williams score. Nice also to catch Baker's cameo in addition to a brief appearance by another AMERICAN WEREWOLF alum, David Schofield. Hugo Weaving brought great scene-chewing flair to his role and he came off here reminding me very much of Sam Neill (and that's a good thing). It took a long time getting here but, to me, THE WOLFMAN was worth the wait.


March 3rd:
AVATAR

When James Cameron made the speech at the Golden Globes, something to the effect of "If you haven't seen AVATAR already, you must be the only one," I felt as if he was speaking directly to me. Okay, so I waited to see this one for a good while, simply because it didn't interest me. But, after learning more about the film (i.e. Giovanni Ribisi is in it), I felt like maybe I was missing out. The mystery was there and it seemed like anyone who told me about it, spouted nothing other than "You've just got to see it. It's amazing." I usually don't lean towards the hype, in fact, such constant accolade makes me wait even longer to see something, and also, an empty theater never hurts. On the eve of another big-scale 3-D film's release (Tim Burton's ALICE IN WONDERLAND), I figured I should finally see AVATAR in 3-D before it's too late. I'm not one to bash films, at least in review form, since I feel it's a waste of my time to speak about something I don't care for, but I really tried to like AVATAR. Honest, I did. But, I just couldn't. Maybe it's because I'm so anti-CG, but with Cameron's films, that has never been a problem since his work has always been devoted to furthering the creative form. I really like Sam Worthington and I found the human story intriguing, but I couldn't sustain my interest beyond that. I'd liken it to a fireworks display. Most people love them, because of the "ooh and ahhh" factor, but I've never been big on flash alone. The film is certainly a visual feast, which is beautiful to look at, but after a while, I just didn't care anymore. And, if I don't care about that story, then it's going to be a long, long road to closing in on that approximate 160 minute running time. No disrespect to Cameron as the film is obviously well-made, but it just wasn't my bag. I made it to the 2-hour mark, went to the restroom and never went back. Sorry, folks. I realize it's me against the world on this one, but I'm quite used to that.


END SCENE

Way of the Irritating Fist

I'm constantly entertained by the inane observations of IMDB user "fistoffury". Whether he's trolling threads and spouting filth about any actor named Jessica or Kristen, simply because he doesn't like "Jessicas" or "Kristens," or coming up with ridiculous crossovers like how he could take Michael Myers if he were a Ghostbuster or simply talking up Ferris Bueller whenever it's irrelevant to do so. This fool is beyond ridiculous.

I have his history bookmarked, so I can chime in on whatever moronic threads he might be posting. Here are some of my recent jabs. Enjoy!

fistoffury on Kristen Alderson:
Ordinarily I would say that Kristen Alderson is great, the problem is, though, I don't like Kristens. From my own observations I can say that Kristens are messed up.

My response:
Yet another immature, unintelligent, unfounded and completely misguided observation from "fistoffury," ladies and gentlemen. It's as if you have a "Generate Idiocy" button on your keyboard. Truly amazing.

fistoffury on General George S. Patton:
Patton was one of the best generals in the history of the USA. It was Patton who struck fear into the Nazis and stopped them cold. People need to stop putting Patton down, he was one of the best military leaders you could ask for. If he was a bit over the top, thats what war is all about. This is the U.S military we're talking about, not a daycare service. We were fighting the Nazis, a ruthless opponent. Its times like this when we must fight fire with fire. To stop an Adolf Hitler, you need a General Patton.

My response:
At first, I thought you were talking about a daycare service, but now I realize where you're going. Don't forget how Patton Oswalt stood up against Blue Collar comedy!

fistoffury on "A Christmas Carol" (1984):
So who makes a better Mr. Scrooge, General Patton (George C. Scott) or Captain Picard (Patrick Stewart). Both actors played the role in different versions of A Christmas Carol, so who was better?

My response:
That's a tough one. I think there should be a battle royale of all the Ebenezers in one ring. Last Scrooge standing towers over all. A ninth plan is in the works to resurrect the dead, so that no gravestone will be left unturned and no Ebenezer left out. Will Albert Finney be able to defeat a zombified, flesh-eating Seymour Hicks? Will Kelsey Grammer pass the preliminaries? Will Scrooge McDuck's Irishness reign supreme? Will Rich Little be billed as himself or W.C. Fields? Will the final round impress the Dickens out of me? I can't wait to find out!

fistoffury on "Humongous":
They should make a remake of this movie. This is who should play the various roles.

Sandy- Kristen Stewart
Eric- Robert Pattenson
Donna- Scout-Taylor Compton
Nick- Dyllan Christopher
Carla- Dakota Fanning
Bert- Jesse Eisenburg
The Killer- Paul Donald Wight, Jr

My response:
No.

Stop Eco Box Petition

Stop Eco Box Petition

Don't know about you, but I despise these things. Initially, it appeared that only studios like Fox and Lionsgate were utilizing these cases, but the epidemic has since spread. (My noted appreciation to giants like Universal & Paramount for not yet jumping on the band wagon.)

As a collector, I dunno, I guess I'd like to pay for a case that is, dare I say, durable?!
If you agree, then please sign my petition!

A Powder Keg Of Black Fury!

I cannot wait for Scott Sanders' BLACK DYNAMITE, an amazing love letter to black action films of the 1970s, to arrive.

Having recently viewed the trailer, I can honestly say that no one has gotten a retrospective take on that genre right... until now.



I've always liked Michael Jai White. Whether he's portraying Mike Tyson in an HBO biopic, trying desperately to salvage the unsalvagable SPAWN, hamming it up and getting the intended tone of UNIVERSAL SOLDIER: THE RETURN, showing up in bit parts like GETTING PLAYED, or doing battle with David Carradine in a deleted scene of KILL BILL, VOL. 2... the guy's got great talent and I've always felt that he hasn't been given the best opportunity to excell.

That is, until BLACK DYNAMITE came around.



The trailer is so much fun that I don't know how I'll be able to take the sheer righteousness of the actual feature-length film. The trailer is that good and, along with all the promotional materials, absolutely nails that era. BLACK DYNAMITE has the same devotion to detail to it's genre as Mel Brooks' YOUNG FRANKENSTEIN had to the Univesal monster classics of the '30s and '40s.



If you take Rudy Ray Moore's DOLEMITE and it's sequel, THE HUMAN TORNADO, coupled with Greydon Clark's BLACK SHAMPOO (Jai White's look is reminiscent of John Daniels, complete with a Thalmus Rasulala-style mustache) and a dash of FOXY BROWN smoothness... you've got a pretty good idea just how right on the vibe of BLACK DYNAMITE is. The only thing missing here is an AIP/Dimension Pictures co-production logo. (Not a realistic feat, I realize, but a boy can dream can't he?!)



I haven't even seen this film yet and I already want more.
Sequel upon sequel, please!

The Boon They Call SEVENTH MOON

I've been waiting for this one to release for quite some time.
I loved the teaser trailer, particularly that final shot of Amy Smart running from a horde of the demonic dead.



This is Eduardo Sánchez's third film. His first, THE BLAIR WITCH PROJECT (which he co-directed with Daniel Myrick) caused quite a stir. Either you loved or hated that film and there seemed to be no indifference amongst audiences. Well, I loved that film and I expect that the same love/hate relationship could be said about his latest, SEVENTH MOON. For the most part, I've seen some pretty negative reviews. I don't know what these people are expecting from an extremely low budget horror film elaborating on a myth.

Sounds a bit harsh, but rarely do I see films that I don't like. If a film interests me, I'll see it and enjoy it. If one doesn't strike my fancy, I'll avoid it and stay happy. It's that simple. I don't let reviews sway me like most people do. In fact, I don't believe a review is worth reading until you've already seen the film in question. People fall for that shit constantly. "Well, Leonard Maltin didn't care for it, so I won't bother." WHAT?! Are people that ignorant? Yes. Yes, they are. The other popular thing to do is to talk shit about films, which, again, I don't really see the point. If they're not worth my attention, I won't devote time to complaining about it.

Okay, lost my train of thought...
Ah, yes...
Some folks don't dig SEVENTH MOON.
I did.

I won't go into details but I found the Chinese myth concept intriguing. As described at the beginning of the film and on the film's poster: On the full moon of the seventh lunar month, the gates of hell open and the spirits of the dead are freed to roam among the living.



The principle cast consists of Amy Smart, whom I seem to like more and more, newcomer Tim Chiou and Dennis Chan (of the Van Damme films, KICKBOXER and KNOCK OFF).

Overall, this is a creepy little film. I bitch not!