Things are STILL so slow in the DVD world that once again I have to combine two weeks into one post.
Daybreakers: A vampire movie, only without the young kids the other young kids are drooling over. As a result, you probably have no recollection of this one's theatrical release whatsoever.
Legion: Some kind of goofy action/adventure flick. I want to talk about Paul Bettany. Remember when his career seemed red-hot? Lately, though, he has a succession of low-profile roles and misfires, and I think there was some kind of gentleman's agreement to forget that he was even in "The DaVinci Code."
The Messenger: Acclaimed film with Woody Harrelson as a soldier who informs families their loved ones have been killed in action. This premise is so serious that, especially given the upcoming holiday, I am not making any hemp jokes.
The Spy Next Door: I don't know about you, but everybody's kind of close together in my neighborhood, so this title makes me uncomfortable.
Extraordinary Measures: I made the "This looks like a TV movie" comments when it hit theaters, and not much has changed my mind since then. I want Harrison Ford movies to be a big deal again.
Daria The Complete Series: It took MTV long enough to get this out. It can't be due to a struggle to get music cleared since, from what I read, virtually all of the original contemporary tunes are excised from this set. Hey, remember when MTV used to be good? It wasn't always stellar even as far back as the nineties, but this animated series is an example of the channel doing something good with its original programming.
I confess, though, I never watched "Daria" much back in the day, and I am afraid to consider why because I think on a subconscious level--I'm not proud to admit this even with that qualifier--I resented her because she was condescending to Beavis and Butt-head.
The Monster and the Ape, The Navy and the Night Monsters: I looked the other way when Netflix refused to carry Warner Archives titles. I accepted that the company's policy was to stock few "upgrades" of previously released titles. But when Netflix carries neither "The Monster and the Ape" NOR "The Navy and the Night Monsters," something is seriously wrong!
Thursday, May 20, 2010
Wednesday, May 19, 2010
The Virginian: Bruce Dern makes Ken Berry look like a slacker
Thanks to a Starz/Encore Networks free preview weekend, I was able to watch my first ever episode of "The Virginian" via Encore Westerns. A momentous occasion, to be sure, yet somehow I forgot to alert the media.
This is one of those TV oaters that aired in a 90-minute slot, and even taking out commercial breaks, you get 75 minutes plus of western adventure/drama, which can result in a rather leisurely pace. I tend to really appreciate those half-hour shows like "Have Gun Will Travel," and my limited exposure to programs like "Virginian" and "Cimarron Strip" doesn't give me much spark for the 90-minute western.
But "Virginian" seems solid enough. From one episode, though--admittedly a minuscule sample size--it doesn't appear to offer too much to distinguish itself from other horse operas. Not to offend any Clu Gulager fans, but the regulars just don't thrill me (Lee J. Cobb isn't in the one installment I saw). This episode, "A Little Learnin'," is well written, though, with a rather unsettling ending that really takes the shine off the apparent happy ending the story offers. I'd watch the show again.
The thing that made me laugh when watching this episode was the sight of Bruce Dern at the beginning. "It shouldn't be a surprise Dern is in this one," I thought, "since he's in EVERYTHING." I wrote about the perceived ubiquity of Ken Berry recently; well, as I say in the title of this post, Bruce Dern makes Ken Berry look like a slacker.
I wasn't even around in the sixties to enjoy Bruce Dern as he happened, but I've seen enough TV from that decade and the early to mid seventies to make a confident if unscientific declaration that the man was indeed in every single television show of the era. At first I thought it was just westerns, but I remember him in "Alfred Hitchcock" and "Fugitive," so there you go. You've heard of the Golden Age of Television? When that ended, the industry went straight into the Dern Age.
Not only is Dern on the guest roster (and not even billed in the opening credits despite playing--this can't be a spoiler if you know Bruce Dern--the lead creep heavy in the episode), but we also see the likes of Harry Townes, Susan Oliver, and Albert Salmi, none of whom are wallflowers in old-school TV drama (actually, each probably has a longer resume than Dern, but I think it's funnier to compare DERN to Ken Berry, so I stand by my original focus).
So not only does "The Virginian" look an awful lot like all the other westerns of the era; throw in the illustrious guest stars, and it looks like every other TV drama, period! Believe me, I don't mean this as a slam. This is a solid episode, and the familiar faces add to the show's appeal, especially if you're underwhelmed by first impressions of the regulars.
This is one of those TV oaters that aired in a 90-minute slot, and even taking out commercial breaks, you get 75 minutes plus of western adventure/drama, which can result in a rather leisurely pace. I tend to really appreciate those half-hour shows like "Have Gun Will Travel," and my limited exposure to programs like "Virginian" and "Cimarron Strip" doesn't give me much spark for the 90-minute western.
But "Virginian" seems solid enough. From one episode, though--admittedly a minuscule sample size--it doesn't appear to offer too much to distinguish itself from other horse operas. Not to offend any Clu Gulager fans, but the regulars just don't thrill me (Lee J. Cobb isn't in the one installment I saw). This episode, "A Little Learnin'," is well written, though, with a rather unsettling ending that really takes the shine off the apparent happy ending the story offers. I'd watch the show again.
The thing that made me laugh when watching this episode was the sight of Bruce Dern at the beginning. "It shouldn't be a surprise Dern is in this one," I thought, "since he's in EVERYTHING." I wrote about the perceived ubiquity of Ken Berry recently; well, as I say in the title of this post, Bruce Dern makes Ken Berry look like a slacker.
I wasn't even around in the sixties to enjoy Bruce Dern as he happened, but I've seen enough TV from that decade and the early to mid seventies to make a confident if unscientific declaration that the man was indeed in every single television show of the era. At first I thought it was just westerns, but I remember him in "Alfred Hitchcock" and "Fugitive," so there you go. You've heard of the Golden Age of Television? When that ended, the industry went straight into the Dern Age.
Not only is Dern on the guest roster (and not even billed in the opening credits despite playing--this can't be a spoiler if you know Bruce Dern--the lead creep heavy in the episode), but we also see the likes of Harry Townes, Susan Oliver, and Albert Salmi, none of whom are wallflowers in old-school TV drama (actually, each probably has a longer resume than Dern, but I think it's funnier to compare DERN to Ken Berry, so I stand by my original focus).
So not only does "The Virginian" look an awful lot like all the other westerns of the era; throw in the illustrious guest stars, and it looks like every other TV drama, period! Believe me, I don't mean this as a slam. This is a solid episode, and the familiar faces add to the show's appeal, especially if you're underwhelmed by first impressions of the regulars.
Tuesday, May 18, 2010
Every silver lining has a dark cloud: The dark side of recent DVD news
Even in the face of a troubled economy and a deteriorating DVD landscape, we've seen some positive news in recent months about future video releases.
Well, I'm here to point out the dark side. Why not? I am not saying these news items aren't worthy of a smile, a mild celebration, maybe even a weekend bender fueled by copious amounts of Rick and Cokes. But the contrarian side of me (I like to think of it as the realistic side, but I'm giving everyone else the benefit of the doubt) can't help but ponder the flip side (and, hey, at least most studios aren't still cramming episodes on the flip sides of individual discs--see, I can be positive, too).
ITEM: Shout Select brings numerous TV on DVD releases direct to the fans!
FLIP SIDE: I think it's great that this company is at least sort of committed to continuing to release series like "Room 222" and "The Bill Cosby Show." But TV Shows on DVD mentioned the other day that Shout is going the website-only route because "the brick-and-mortar store chains have began declining lately to pick up certain 'retro TV' titles, such as this one."This is true, and as someone who used to enjoy not just shopping for DVDs but looking at them in brick and mortar store chains, I think it stinks. But it's not like this is a new phenomenon. And what about those numerous online storefronts? I'm sure Amazon and Deep Discount would be glad to carry those releases. I just have a hard time believing Shout has to go this route, which makes the sets about 30%-40% more expensive for the fans.
ITEM: Infinity resumes the long-stalled "The Real McCoys" with a season 4 set this summer, at a reasonable price, no less. I don't own any of the 3 previously released seasons, but I enjoyed sampling one of my father's sets of the Walter Brennan comedy show--in fact, I enjoyed it way more than I expected--and I'm glad to see the show still has life on video.
FLIP SIDE: The episodes are presumably still hacked up, a la ones on previous releases. I think I could like "McCoys" enough to support DVD sets done right...but there's no indication yet that Infinity is suddenly gonna roll out uncut shows halfway through the series run. It's a shame to think this is all we're gonna get and that we can like it or lump it.
ITEM: Warner Brothers continues releasing classic Looney Tunes with individual discs dedicated to Bugs Bunny and Daffy Duck.
FLIP SIDE: Has anyone seen the price on these things? I have, as I added them to my wish list. 20 bucks for 15 cartoons. Maybe I was spoiled by the late, lamented Golden Collection box sets--OK, I know I was--but this seems steep considering the lack of bonuses. WB has a pretty good strategy, I'll admit--for many buyers, a cheaper single disc will be an easier purchase than a multi-disc set--but relatively speaking, this isn't as "cheaper" as I hoped.
And, yeah, I know it's cheaper than 20 bucks everywhere, yada, yada, yada. I see a lot of backlash whenever someone points out a high MSRP of an upcoming DVD, with people chiming in that "it won't actually go for that," or, "shop around and you can find deals. Well, duh. But the deals would be much better if the MSRP weren't so high in the first place!
ITEM: CBS/Paramount Video finally announces Season 1 of "The Phil Silvers Show" (AKA "Sgt. Bilko")
FLIP SIDE: What can I possibly find to complain about in a news item about the DVD release of the first season of one of the all-time best TV sitcoms--nay, TV shows--ever? And the company even managed to throw in some of the bonus material from the 50th Anniversary set. AND it's not even a split-season set.I feel bad about complaining; I really do. But look how they have us trained to celebrate the packaging of a whole season of a TV show, as if it were a special treat for the fans. What really troubles the back of my humble mind, though, is there is no guarantee the remaining seasons are forthcoming.
I know, I know, even if they aren't, so what? I still have an opportunity to upgrade my *ahem* editions with good-looking, uncut episodes of what is arguably the show's best run, anyway. But Mama Shark's blue-eyed boy has a completist strain inside him that cringes at the prospect of waiting 8 years to get the whole run of "Bilko," or worse yet, never getting that run.
Yeah, if I can worry about THIS one, there may be no hope for me. But, hey, somebody's gotta say these things sometimes. I'll try to put on a happy face, but I still have my concerns...
Monday, May 17, 2010
Brooks on Books: RIchard Belzer on Conspiracies
Lest you think I'm leaving out the fill title of the book as part of a CIA-driven conspiracy to discredit it, let me give you the actual name: "UFOs, JFK, and Elvis: Conspiracies You Don't Have to Be Crazy to Believe." Richard Belzer's 2000 book is a funny, fast-moving look at conspiracies, with a heavy emphasis in the UFOs and JFK (Elvis fans will be disappointed). It's neither scholarly nor encyclopedic in its approach, but the Belz himself admits he's not trying to produce a comprehensive survey of conspiracy theories, but rather open some eyes and get people interested in pursuing some of these ideas.
Belzer goes pretty much from JFK to UFOs and alien abductions in a series of short chapters with tidbits and sidebars galore. It's not laid out as a coherent narrative, but certain threads do run through the entire text. The approach creates a fun read, but hardcore or even semi-hardcore buffs will find little new info here. For those buffs, though, Belzer's style and presentation of the material might make it worthwhile for entertainment value. The biggest drawback for all readers is a disappointing lack of pictures (it's frustrating to read so many references to photographic evidence that isn't reproduced here) and a lack of "helpful websites" in the endnotes, though Belzer promises it several times (or was it just removed from the edition I read? Hmm...).
I'll tell you what Belzer does do to me, and I'm kind of ticked off at him for it: He almost wants me to get back "into" the JFK assassination mess. Oh, I'm still resisting, but damned if he makes it all interesting enough to tempt me into edging closer to that rabbit hole. I remember when Oliver Stone's "JFK" stimulated interest in me and some friends. We were excited enough to get into some of the reading, and I gobbled up some of the big conspiracy books. Eventually I became just too exasperated by it all. This is a field in which conspiracy theorists often "call out" other conspiracy theorists for being part of the conspiracy, and it gets too difficult to sort out who's a CIA plant and who's not, so I don't want to get back into that, even on that same casual basis, and find my head spinning again.
That said, Belzer provides an entertaining summary of the big issues, and he succeeds in getting you going. Oh, I guess I should mention: He is 100% convinced that there was all kinds of shady stuff going on with JFK, and he's on the "pro" side of UFOs, too. Me, I think something HAD to have gone on besides just Lee Harvey Oswald shooting the prez, and I find it hard to believe we're the only intelligent beings in the universe (I find it hard to believe we're intelligent beings), but I'm not so sure about a lot of the ideas thrown out in this book.
But of course, that's just what the Parallelogram Commission that secretly funds Cultureshark would WANT me to say...or would it? Or is this post just a way to throw you off the trail? Or put you on it, only to be lulled away from the real truth by a dupe/plant/actor? Or is it possible that I'm not even on it, but I'm writing this while under mind control? Or maybe I AM in on it, but I'm only writing about the book because...
Belzer goes pretty much from JFK to UFOs and alien abductions in a series of short chapters with tidbits and sidebars galore. It's not laid out as a coherent narrative, but certain threads do run through the entire text. The approach creates a fun read, but hardcore or even semi-hardcore buffs will find little new info here. For those buffs, though, Belzer's style and presentation of the material might make it worthwhile for entertainment value. The biggest drawback for all readers is a disappointing lack of pictures (it's frustrating to read so many references to photographic evidence that isn't reproduced here) and a lack of "helpful websites" in the endnotes, though Belzer promises it several times (or was it just removed from the edition I read? Hmm...).
I'll tell you what Belzer does do to me, and I'm kind of ticked off at him for it: He almost wants me to get back "into" the JFK assassination mess. Oh, I'm still resisting, but damned if he makes it all interesting enough to tempt me into edging closer to that rabbit hole. I remember when Oliver Stone's "JFK" stimulated interest in me and some friends. We were excited enough to get into some of the reading, and I gobbled up some of the big conspiracy books. Eventually I became just too exasperated by it all. This is a field in which conspiracy theorists often "call out" other conspiracy theorists for being part of the conspiracy, and it gets too difficult to sort out who's a CIA plant and who's not, so I don't want to get back into that, even on that same casual basis, and find my head spinning again.
That said, Belzer provides an entertaining summary of the big issues, and he succeeds in getting you going. Oh, I guess I should mention: He is 100% convinced that there was all kinds of shady stuff going on with JFK, and he's on the "pro" side of UFOs, too. Me, I think something HAD to have gone on besides just Lee Harvey Oswald shooting the prez, and I find it hard to believe we're the only intelligent beings in the universe (I find it hard to believe we're intelligent beings), but I'm not so sure about a lot of the ideas thrown out in this book.
But of course, that's just what the Parallelogram Commission that secretly funds Cultureshark would WANT me to say...or would it? Or is this post just a way to throw you off the trail? Or put you on it, only to be lulled away from the real truth by a dupe/plant/actor? Or is it possible that I'm not even on it, but I'm writing this while under mind control? Or maybe I AM in on it, but I'm only writing about the book because...
Sunday, May 16, 2010
Words of Wisdom from the Bowery Boys
I'm watching "Smuggler's Cove" Saturday, the latest installment in TCM's ongoing "hopefully running all the way through to the end" Bowery Boys series, and this exchange cracks me up:
Sach sees a tigerskin rug on the floor and gasps a bit, exclaiming, "Ooh! A bagel tiger!"
To which Slip retorts, "It's not BAGEL tiger, it's BEAGLE tiger, you moron!"
And then, of course, he takes a swat at him.
I don't know how it plays in print--it makes me laugh because I already saw it--but it's hilarious on screen, just one of the many goofy moments that amuse me each week in this series. There's just something about the way Huntz Hall and Leo Gorcey interact that gets me.
The Greatest Channel Known to Mankind didn't earn its reputation by playing "Some Like It Hot" every two weeks, but rather by playing the gems (and not gems) that aren't as widely circulated in the culture today. I'm loving these Bowery Boys films, to the extent that I usually watch each Saturday's offering the same day. That may not be a big deal to normal folk, but I have unwatched movies from last summer on my DVR.
The Boys take a break for Memorial Day weekend, but let's hope Turner Classic Movies continues the series.
Sach sees a tigerskin rug on the floor and gasps a bit, exclaiming, "Ooh! A bagel tiger!"
To which Slip retorts, "It's not BAGEL tiger, it's BEAGLE tiger, you moron!"
And then, of course, he takes a swat at him.
I don't know how it plays in print--it makes me laugh because I already saw it--but it's hilarious on screen, just one of the many goofy moments that amuse me each week in this series. There's just something about the way Huntz Hall and Leo Gorcey interact that gets me.
The Greatest Channel Known to Mankind didn't earn its reputation by playing "Some Like It Hot" every two weeks, but rather by playing the gems (and not gems) that aren't as widely circulated in the culture today. I'm loving these Bowery Boys films, to the extent that I usually watch each Saturday's offering the same day. That may not be a big deal to normal folk, but I have unwatched movies from last summer on my DVR.
The Boys take a break for Memorial Day weekend, but let's hope Turner Classic Movies continues the series.
Friday, May 14, 2010
Summer Movie Preview: May (Part 2)
Continuing my look at the big summer movies of May...
Shrek 4: Forever Ever After (May 21): Hey, don't look at me. I thought the franchise was spent after the third one. Apparently Mike Myers' titular ogre is tired of being happy and wants to be an ogre like he was before, even if for just one day. Look, I know it's hard to tell good stories AFTER the "Happily Ever After," but why does this series seem to be all about Shrek bitching about what should be a great life?
Nevertheless, this one rates on the high side of a yellow light, and I may even see it a lot sooner than I should, because of one man: Puss in Boots, the best new movie character of the millennium. I have a bad feeling about the fourth installment of any series, but Puss in Boots is almost enough.
MacGruber (May 21): A movie based on a comedy sketch is dubious enough, but a movie based on a sketch I never find all that funny is grounds for a red light. That Toonces movie would have excited me more. I mean, even today that Toonces movie would have excited me more.
Sex and the City 2 (May 28): I was willing to tolerate the existence of the first movie--well, not really, I wasn't, but it came and went without my having to see it, and so I was not entirely upset with its existence. Now along comes a sequel that looks even less essential than "Shrek 4." I thought the whole point of the show was the New York setting, but this film transplants them to the desert. Just the other night, I saw a commercial that revealed that somehow John Corbett's character just happens to be wherever the "girls" end up.
I couldn't limit myself to my normal eye rolling; I had to make a wise-ass comment. When I turned to my wife to ask why the hell John Corbett was...wherever he was supposed to be, she could only say she didn't know. She clearly had no interest whatsoever in defending the creative choices made for "Sex and the City 2." And she WATCHED the first one! I guess what I'm trying to say here, folks, is, how in the world did Arli$ last as long as it did?
Need I mention I give this one a rock-solid red light? And, no, I don't care if it clashes with Carrie's Manolo Blahniks or whatever, a red light it is.
Prince of Persia (May 27): All it took was one look at Jake Gyllenhaal playing action hero in the trailer to make my sides ache. This really does look a helluva lot funnier than "MacGruber." You know, I had these feelings even before I learned it was based on a video game. This could show up in some Flop of the Year lists, so maybe it has some historical significance. Me, I give it a red light, and I urge Jake to limit his big-time movie heroics to starring in rumors that he's replacing Tobey Maguire as Spider-Man.
Shrek 4: Forever Ever After (May 21): Hey, don't look at me. I thought the franchise was spent after the third one. Apparently Mike Myers' titular ogre is tired of being happy and wants to be an ogre like he was before, even if for just one day. Look, I know it's hard to tell good stories AFTER the "Happily Ever After," but why does this series seem to be all about Shrek bitching about what should be a great life?
Nevertheless, this one rates on the high side of a yellow light, and I may even see it a lot sooner than I should, because of one man: Puss in Boots, the best new movie character of the millennium. I have a bad feeling about the fourth installment of any series, but Puss in Boots is almost enough.
MacGruber (May 21): A movie based on a comedy sketch is dubious enough, but a movie based on a sketch I never find all that funny is grounds for a red light. That Toonces movie would have excited me more. I mean, even today that Toonces movie would have excited me more.
Sex and the City 2 (May 28): I was willing to tolerate the existence of the first movie--well, not really, I wasn't, but it came and went without my having to see it, and so I was not entirely upset with its existence. Now along comes a sequel that looks even less essential than "Shrek 4." I thought the whole point of the show was the New York setting, but this film transplants them to the desert. Just the other night, I saw a commercial that revealed that somehow John Corbett's character just happens to be wherever the "girls" end up.
I couldn't limit myself to my normal eye rolling; I had to make a wise-ass comment. When I turned to my wife to ask why the hell John Corbett was...wherever he was supposed to be, she could only say she didn't know. She clearly had no interest whatsoever in defending the creative choices made for "Sex and the City 2." And she WATCHED the first one! I guess what I'm trying to say here, folks, is, how in the world did Arli$ last as long as it did?
Need I mention I give this one a rock-solid red light? And, no, I don't care if it clashes with Carrie's Manolo Blahniks or whatever, a red light it is.
Prince of Persia (May 27): All it took was one look at Jake Gyllenhaal playing action hero in the trailer to make my sides ache. This really does look a helluva lot funnier than "MacGruber." You know, I had these feelings even before I learned it was based on a video game. This could show up in some Flop of the Year lists, so maybe it has some historical significance. Me, I give it a red light, and I urge Jake to limit his big-time movie heroics to starring in rumors that he's replacing Tobey Maguire as Spider-Man.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
