Knight and Day: 7/10

Knight and Day (2010)
A collage of mayhem, action, flaws, and charm, Knight and Day is saved by the leads and unique summer freshness, 23 June 2010

Jump-starting the Mysterious Plot Summer Season (Knight and Day, Salt, Inception, Piranha 3-D), Knight and Day is quite an interesting thrill ride that's very fresh in the midst of a summer season with very little originality. With the two leads delivering charismatic, fun, and great performances, this movie is propelled by star power, intrigue, and never allowing the audience to be one step ahead of the flick. The twists and turns may have been a little unnerving, and the movie does suffer from being quite vague at times, the overall package is a fun one. Unlike most summer clunkers (there was some robot movie last year that was dismally pathetic, if only I remember the name) this one is forgivable for its flaws because of its style, loose direction, and freshness.

Without revealing too much (trust me, predicting the movie from the trailer will do you no good), Knight and Day follows a secret agent (Tom Cruise) that accidentally involves a bystander (Cameron Diaz) in the middle of a crazy fight spanning multiple agencies and multiple countries. Written by Patrick O'Neal, this script is very unique, very refreshing, and at times quite off-the-wall. The story moves very fast, but has time for some character development and character revelations—even if they become little blurbs here and there. The only issue is that characters are revealed in such quick and awkward manners, but it might be more an editing issue rather than a writing issue.

Cameron Diaz and Tom Cruise were perfect for their leading roles here. Cameron Diaz has an undeniable charm that has made her not only a major box office draw over the years, but one of the few actresses that can carry any movie past mediocrity. At the same time, Tom Cruise also has the ability to propel movies with his impeccable charm and subtle timing. So, naturally, with these two together, movie magic is accomplished. Just like in Vanilla Sky (even if the editing and obscurity allowed the movie to collapse), Knight and Day is jump-started and propelled by Diaz and Cruise acting together. Their comic timing is great, and can still deliver the emotions when you need them to. Everyone else did a respectable job, but they consisted of dozens of small roles.

The movie however suffers from one major flaw: potential. This movie could have been something very special if it had been given a little more love, a bit more budget, and better editing. James Mangold is heavily varied in his directing resume (Cop Land, Walk the Line, Identity, 3:10 to Yuma) so he has the ability to run an action film (unlike the indie-director of the last James Bond flick). But, the movie does this mildly irritating thing in which it sets up potential action sequences, but skips them entirely. While the movie does offer plenty of action, this irritating directing/editing blunder was done at least three times. The fact that it could have done so much more doesn't distract from the overall quality, but does unveil its potential. With a budget of over $120 million, Knight and Day looks like an action movie that was running out of cash.

The action that we do get to see is plentiful, and fun. Plausibility and realism takes a timeout as we get insane chases, dozens of explosions, and plenty of fights. There is very little slowdown, very little time for the audience to breathe. The CGI is sometimes a bit much, but doesn't distract too much from the movie. Adding to the mayhem is the dozens of plot twists and turns, which range from small, to changing the flick entirely. Unfortunately, it seems like it was edited by someone with a samurai sword and too much sugar in his blood.

Bottom Line: While it could have been so much more, and could have really been something truly special, Knight and Day is still an admirable movie thanks to its leads---even if age is starting to catch up to them. With a crazy script edited in a crazy manner, this movie is far from your average summer movie, and is a mildly refreshing visual trip around the world. No sequel or remake connections here, as the plot is unique, even if the action is your usual CGI-heavy fare. The directing, editing, and content choices however keep it from truly hitting the big leagues. But if you want something different and sequel-free to watch this summer (without screaming for mercy as the movie continues), then Knight and Day is your flick. Unique concept, unique movie, unique flaws.

Interleague Baseball: Fair or Foul?

Once again interleague baseball is underway, and once again the complaints are flying left and right over scheduling issues. From the so-called experts at ESPN to some of the managers in the ballclubs, for another year the appeal of interleague play is dying amongst the players, although the fans never seem to get enough of it. Attendance always goes up during these matches, because they offer something out of the ordinary in the year. For example, instead of the Yankees playing the same division rivals, they now get to play the Los Angeles Dodgers of the National League for a couple of games. But the scheduling complaints continue.

Directly from ESPN’s Jayson Stark:
1) The Dodgers play 12 of their 15 interleague games against teams that made the playoffs last year (Yankees, Red Sox, Angels) -- and the other three games against a team (the Tigers) that didn't get knocked out until the 163rd game. Some fun.

2) The Red Sox play home-and-home with the Phillies, make trips to Colorado and San Francisco, and play 12 games against last year's playoff field.

3) The Phillies play 12 games against last year's playoff teams, 15 games against teams that currently have a winning record and nine games against the Red Sox (six) and Yankees (three), while three of the other four teams in their division play no games against those two juggernauts.

4) The Reds dodge the entire 2009 playoff field, and their five interleague series are against teams (Cleveland, Kansas City, Seattle, Oakland) that are currently a combined 42 games under .500.

5) The Rangers also play zero games against last year's playoff teams and zero games against teams that currently have a winning record -- a significantly easier schedule than either the Angels or A's.

6) Besides series with the Blue Jays and Rays, the Padres' other nine interleague games are against Seattle and Baltimore (46 games under .500). Compare that to the current record of the interleague opponents of the Rockies (23 over) and Dodgers (40 over). And the Giants have to play 12 of their 15 interleague games against the Red Sox, Blue Jays and A's.

I shall admit this now, Mr. Stark has a few good points. However, here’s my counter-argument. The season (despite complaints) is 162 games. Check that again, 162 games a season. This isn’t the NFL and their meager 16 games or the NBA and their better-done 82 games. A mere one-tenth of their season involves interleague play. And here is the other kicker, the teams with tougher schedules are higher-profile, high-winning teams. When you are the top, the schedule becomes tougher, and this is truth with every single professional sport, and extends to the NCAA. Of course the recent champs of their division and/or league is going to have it a bit tougher than lower-profile teams with mediocre records the season before (Sorry Reds). It has always been this way.

Interleague play has never destroyed a team’s chances of making the postseason since its so early in the year. After interleague play is done for example, there is still an entire half of baseball to play to catch up in the standings. So, even if some teams get a little more shafted in interleague, guess what, there is still a lot more baseball to play. Nonetheless, I am going to make a proposal to Major League Baseball that they are never going to read. For starters, the inter-state rivalries should continue, because the biggest numbers are drawn from those games (Yankees/Mets, Marlins/Rays, White Sox/Cubs, Athletics/Giants, Reds/Indians, Dodgers/Angels).

Here is where the schedule is going to differ. 12 games out of the year, we should run on a totally random lottery system exactly like the NBA Draft, except removing all the odds. In my opinion, with this random lottery, the playing field is totally level and gives everyone an equal shot for a decent schedule. All the small market teams have an equal chance of taking on the Yankees. Two ways to maneuver this lottery:
1) One team moves to the American League, so each league has 15 teams each (I propose the Milwaukee Brewers, which I am not mistaken has history in the American League. They would move to the American League Central)
2) We draw from each side, and the two remaining teams in the National League We draw three lottery series, as each team in the series gets two games at home each.

So I decided to do a mock lottery system to pick out the first Lottery Series of the 2012 Baseball Season. This is exciting. Here we go:

1) Red Sox vs. Giants
2) Rays vs. Pirates
3) Angels vs. Diamondbacks
4) Indians vs. Astros
5) Blue Jays vs. Brewers
6) Royals vs. Dodgers
7) Mariners vs. Reds
8) Athletics vs. Marlins
9) Twins vs. Nationals
10) Yankees vs. Braves
11) Rangers vs. Rockies
12) Tigers vs. Mets
13) Cubs vs. White Sox (oops)
14) Padres vs. Orioles
15) Non-Interleague: Phillies vs. Cardinals

Repeat process three times. Now, each team gets two home games against the opponent. That’s 4 games a series, and 12 games total. Add the inter-state rivalries, team rivalries, and World Series rematch and we have nearly the whole bulk of the interleague schedule without much potential of unfairness. And, extra Cubs/White Sox games. We all win, right?

Round 2
1) Mariners vs. Cubs
2) Nationals vs. Rangers
3) Indians vs. Diamondbacks (Funny story, originally it was Yankees vs. Braves again)
4) Padres vs. Angels
5) Braves vs. As
6) Orioles vs. Brewers
7) Dodgers vs. White Sox
8) Mets vs. Rays
9) Yankees vs. Giants
10) Royals vs. Phillies
11) Tigers vs. Rockies
12) Blue Jays vs. Reds
13) Twins vs. Marlins
14) Red Sox vs. Cardinals
15) Astros vs. Pirates

Now for those complaining that these series are no good, guess what, the solution would be for MLB to construct the schedules, which would lead to better-looking games, but back to the unfairness that was the original basis for complaining in the very beginning of the article. So your pick is this: do you allow the tougher teams to gain their tougher schedules, or do you revert to a lottery system? Or, do you ultimately destroy interleague play altogether? Me, personally, I prefer a lottery system mixed in with some scheduled rivalry games made by MLB. But hey, what do I know? I just watch the game.

Bottom Line: Schedule complainers, shut up. As long as the attendance numbers remain high, we shall keep the interleague play. While some complain over the loss of magic concerning the AL not meeting the NL until the All-Star Game and the World Series; this inter-league competition happens in the NFL all the time and look how well they are doing. Interleague was a great idea, and can become even better and more unpredictable with a lottery system. And with this lottery system, the smaller market teams all have an even shot at gaining home games against America’s favorite teams like the Yankees, Red Sox, Phillies, Dodgers, and Cubbies. The tough schedules occur not just in baseball, but in allllllll professional leagues.

With my idea, the Nationals one day can actually host the Yankees and the Royals could host the Phillies in the same exact year.

Just a suggestion though.

Sources:
Wikipedia
ESPN.com

Time to fix Florida baseball!

While watching the latest installment of the Rays-Marlins series, I can only look in shame as to what is taking place. What should be a big series that’s the talk of all Florida sports news is just a blurb in the pages. The attendance in this ballgame was 23,000, which actually is a little bit higher than usual Florida games. By comparison, we have the Pirates nabbing 38,000 fans in their homestand, and they are by no means a decent ballclub. No need to insult the Pirates, but the Marlins and the Rays are thick in the playoff hunt, with the Rays remaining the best team in all of baseball. And plus this is supposed to be a statewide rivalry, similar to the popular Subway Series up north. The last Rays home game reached 25,000 and a week before that against the Blue Jays, the attendance was a meager 16,000. Why such low numbers? And in the state of Florida too.

We are in Florida, which (for the most part) is prime baseball country. This is a state that most likely contains more Hispanics than any other state that isn’t California or Texas, and is a state that has more diversity amongst the Hispanics mixed in. How can a state have two baseball clubs with weak attendance numbers when the sport is chock full of Dominicans, Puerto Ricans, and other Hispanics all over the field? And, amongst old-timers, baseball is a favorite. Florida is full of retired folks and veterans, and Hispanics---two big demographics in baseball viewing. Why aren’t they in the games? Currently in 2010, Tampa Bay is 23rd in attendance, and Florida is dead last. Keep in mind; we are in the Sunshine State, a place with year-round warm weather, plenty of land and space, and plenty of people to watch these ballgames.

Major League Baseball isn’t as much to blame as the people that jump-started the two franchises, and the owners that follow. Let’s start with the Marlins. The Marlins were included in 1993, and to this day have yet to really find a massive audience. Oh, the team plays in Miami, a city with nearly 6 million people, and 65% of them being of Hispanic descent. Now why would the Florida Marlins, a team with two championships under its belt still have problems maintaining a decent audience?

We can start with the name. Florida Marlins? They are one of only two teams representing a state, when there’s another ballclub within the state (Texas Rangers and Houston Astros---15th and 16th in attendance). The Tampa Bay Rays were included in the late 90s, so why not give the team a bit more local pride and flavor by changing them to the Miami Marlins? Miami isn’t exactly a niche area, with it being the fourth largest metropolitan area in the country. Miami Marlins, has a nice ring to it. Then it would add to the so-called rivalry that it has against the Rays. The merchandise will definitely go up in sales, as the Marlins finally represent a city rather than a state. The Citrus Series would finally be an East Coast vs. West Coast series.

The owners truly don’t care down South, this is the sad truth. In both instances when Florida actually went all the way with good management and a good young squad, the owners dismantle the team the very next year because of low attendance and no attempts to maintain the team. It happens once, shame on them, it happens twice, why would Miami want to continue their support? In recent times however, Florida has been running on a good scouting and farm system that Tampa Bay is running on. But, the fans still aren’t there. The other reason is because of sharing stadiums with the Miami Dolphins. Argue all you want, but a football field should never be transformed into a baseball stadium, never ever. Can you imagine the Yankees playing in Giants stadium? Supposedly Miami is getting a new ballpark for the Marlins, so there is hope. But for now, a name change would be the best solution to the sluggish numbers.



The Tampa Bay Rays are in a terrible location, are in a terrible ballpark, and for the longest time had owners that simply didn’t care. At one point, even Lou Pinella couldn’t strip them away from last place, and even worse a team of groundskeepers left the team because they couldn’t take it anymore. Tampa Bay represents St. Petersburg, Clearwater, Ybor City, Treasure Island, amongst other little spots next to Tampa. However, they chose a more secluded and uglier part of St. Petersburg for the home team. If you’ve ever driven around there, the location is very tricky and somewhat confusing to reach. The surrounding area isn’t exactly the best area, and it takes 10 minutes of driving to even find the highway. The first thing that should happen is that the Rays get another ballpark, one more accessible and perhaps closer to the beach.

The name change was an excellent idea that should be adopted by more teams that aren’t doing so hot. Their entire image changed, and while the attendance numbers did change (17,000 to 22,000 from 2007 to 2008), their attendance has dropped lately. Why? I think the secret reason is that the fans are sick of playing in an indoor, lights-heavy, crammy ballpark. The Rays are 18-15 at home, far from the best home record in baseball. I am sure the sluggish numbers, the amount of empty seats, and lack of support (especially when the Yankees and Red Sox come into town) contributes to their weaker play in Tampa. In comparison, here are the home records of the teams with extremely high attendance: Yankees (24-10), Phillies (17-14), Dodgers (23-13), Cardinals (23-11), Twins (23-13). See the difference (unless you are the Phillies)?

I am writing this because I want to improve the state of baseball in Florida. Florida is a beautiful state with beautiful scenery, amazing beaches, lovely parks (theme, and non-themed), and so much more potential. But my choices to see a baseball game involves whether driving two hours to an aging baseball park or travel four hours to go to a football field to see baseball. While my solutions are a bit costly, I know in the long run Tampa and Miami can turn into the next New York or Los Angeles in terms of baseball fever with the right changes. Tampa needs a new ballpark, and Florida needs a name change and a new ballpark as well. To top it all, we need a consistent team of owners and general managers that actually care.

Finally, its time that Florida gets another baseball team. There is only one state with so many baseball clubs (California with five). I’ve said for years (before the Devil Rays became the Rays) that moving the team to Orlando would improve the franchise exponentially. Before the Rays made it to the World Series, I thought moving the team to the Disney area and naming them the Orlando Devil Rays/Orlando Rays would improve attendance, and deliver some more sport into a city begging for more outside the basketball season.



Picture this: right off of I-4 and the 417 into Disney territory, a big baseball park next to all the Disney scenery. Disney has enough space for more theme parks, but seeing current management that may not be in the near future (or far future for that matter). So, why not sell some of the land to the City of Orlando, and allow for a nice ballpark to be built? Disney is easy to maneuver around, its not next to any ghetto areas, and isn’t too far from the beaches either. Its me dreaming, but you can’t deny the attendance boost if you craft a team in Central Florida, an area that is second place in the amount of Puerto Ricans and easily amongst the top 10 cities with other Spanish country-descendants like Dominicans, Cubans, Mexicans, amongst others. If I had any power in politics, I would do three things: expand I-4, try to bring the World Cup to Orlando in 2018 or 2022, and bring a baseball team to Central Florida by any means necessary. Just think what you can accomplish if you offer Cast Member and UCF discounts.

Bottom Line:


Tampa: new ballpark, in a better location


Florida: Become the Miami Marlins, actually give a sith, and build them a new ballpark


Orlando: Get a baseball team



This might be me just grumbling and mouthing off for no reason, but being in the state of Florida, its disappointing to see a sport that was seemingly designed for our sort of weather (neglecting the thunderstorms, but that can be fixed with multiple Skydone-like parks) not become as popular as it should be. Major League Baseball, unlike the weakening NBA and the No Fun League (stole that joke from ESPN), has remained highly entertaining with very few flaws. And our teams in Florida deserve more support, more respect, and more admiration. The Rays are the best team in baseball for crying out loud, its time we should reward them for this.

But like I said before, this article may be just a bunch of grumbling. Now if you’ll excuse me, I’m going to save up money for the 2019 expansion ballclub the Orlando Chimichangas.

Source: ESPN.com

How Mario Kart can improve Mario Kart

The Mario Kart franchise has become a major success story, which each installment outselling the previous entry in both the handheld and in the console department (with the exception of Double Dash, but let’s all pretend that didn’t happen). Mario Kart Wii has now become one of the top-selling games of all-time, and the top racing game in history. Mario Kart DS has been on the best-seller list for over 230 weeks, raking in over 18 million in sales. So yea, Nintendo will not be going bankrupt anytime soon. However, I am still keen on my Mario Kart 64. To this day, I still prefer this version to all the other ones, with Mario Kart DS literally inches away at second place. The only reason Mario Kart 64 still wins is because of the superior battle mode and track design. This article is now dedicated to all the reasons why I personally (despite all the critics disagreeing from second one) prefer the N64 installment, and how the Mario Kart saga can improve by taking notes from this article (and from the amazing racing game of 1997).



The very first and ultimate reason for Mario Kart 64’s surprise success back in the day was the simple, yet engrossing Battle Mode. Revolutionizing multi-player for years to come, Mario Kart 64 showed the world that four players can play at the same time and indeed have an excellent time. All it took was four stages, items, and a decent frame rate, and our Friday nights were set. But starting from Mario Kart Double Dash and on, they complicated things, they slowed things down, and tried expanding upon perfection. Mario Kart DS required for you to blow on the balloons, and allowed you to steal balloons (limiting the suspense and turning it into a big game of tag). Then there is Mario Kart Wii and it requiring for you to work on teams. Really? Just make a bunch of stages, allow a bunch of items, don’t expand the options, and we are set. Mario Kart 64 was simple, which made it is accessible to beginners and veterans. The Battle Mode should be the same way. There is yet to be a single battle mode in any game that can top the infamous Block Fort---and that stage was simplistic brilliance.



An interesting aspect about Mario Kart Wii is that none of their courses were that lengthy. In Mario Kart 64, we had Wario’s Stadium, Royal Raceway, Rainbow Road, and DK’s Jungle Course. These four levels were not only entertaining, but they were an amazing test of your endurance. These courses also guaranteed that if you are last at the halfway mark, you can still manage to catch up to the top (without the use of infinite cheap items, but that’s another tale). The next Mario Kart should benefit from more of these nice long courses. While a race that takes 24-hours would be exaggeration (Gran Taurismo 4 anyone?) I’d love to see more Wario Stadium-like levels.



Continuing in the conversation about courses, we need more levels that does not contain any actual silly obstacles (like baddies, pipes, moles, etc), instead be courses that test your true abilities as a driver. Yes, Mario Kart is about the items, but I propose that some levels (the tougher ones) mix things up a bit by not offering items; just offer some nasty curves, crazy turns, and tricky routines. Mario Kart 64 did not contain item-free levels, but did contain some nice obstacle-free-it-requires-true-racing-skill-to-conquer tracks like Mario’s Raceway, which used to be the basis of a time trial contest back in the day. Sometimes, we just want a nice race, similar to how Mario Golf sometimes offered actual golf courses as opposed to those that are obstacle-ridden. Finally, the Yoshi’s Valley course design should be used much more often. While it was frustrating, the fact that you don’t know who is leading the race until the finish line is actually crossed was quite a clever maneuver by the producing team, and it’s a shame we don’t see it occur in Mario Kart Wii.




The biggest current issue we have is the item chaos that has occurred in the later installments. No longer does skill win races, a major dosage of luck has overwhelmed the franchise. Back in Mario Kart 64, the AI was faster than you, but didn’t have the overhaul of items that the AI in the Wii version have. In Mario Kart 64, you never saw the purple shell, and never saw the top 4 opponents with super stars or red shells up the wazoo. In the Wii however, you can be first and second place suddenly has a lightning bolt. You can be in first and for some odd reason everyone behind you has a red shell or a blue shell, ready for usage. You can drop from first to last in a matter of seconds, and it makes things extremely frustrating. Mario Kart 64 did rely on some luck, but you needed skill to muscle past the 150cc class. And what about Super Mario Kart? Even harder, and the opponents used nothing more than bananas, feathers, and green shells.



Mario Kart 64 was the most balanced in terms of items and what you can receive. This balance needs to be restored. The first four positions should be limited to the smaller and weaker items, and this should apply to the AI. And then we should remove some of the totally unfair items, like the bullet bill and the blue shell. The purple shell back in the Mario Kart 64 days was indeed avoidable with luck and pure skill---the blue shell offers you no hope, and then blows you up. You lose five to seven seconds of driving thanks to the item that you can never avoid. And for goodness sakes, can we please bring back the disguise bombs? The red bombs are too obvious and stand out like a sore thumb. I missed the Mario Kart 64 block bombs, in which anyone can secretly plant in a cluster of item blocks.

As a matter of fact, I missed the effects of the items in Mario Kart 64. Mario Kart 64 was the only MK version in which when a person gets hit with a red shell, they don’t do the nearly pointless flip over; they blow up. Games with more explosions are more exciting, this is a hypothesis away from being scientific fact. The green shells used to be more devastating too, with you flipping over multiple times rather than once. The purple shell dethrones the blue shell because it can take out more than one racer on its way to first place, adding some more mayhem. Finally, block bombs are BOMBS and should be treated as such. The super star used to allow you to mow through people. Not so much now, its limited to mere flipping over. The lightning used to cause more havoc back then, because you can run over people, turning them into Warner Brothers-like caricatures.



In the chaos that is Mario Kart 64, one of the most essential skills you can develop is when to hold items, and when to throw those items. However, in Mario Kart Wii, you can no longer hold green shells, or red shells, or bananas for that matter (unless it’s a bunch---and the bunch is a smaller number than it used to be). The next Mario Kart needs to come back with this. Part of the unfair cheapness of Mario Kart Wii is that there’s no way you can defend an incoming red shell attack. Back then, holding your green shell or banana saves you for just a little bit longer. All of this may seem trivial, but if it were all pointless banter, than I wouldn’t be preferring to play from the 1992-2000 Mario Kart saga (Super Mario Kart, Mario Kart 64, Super Circuit) over the 2001-Now Mario Kart generation (Mario Kart: Double Dash, Mario Kart DS, Mario Kart Wii).

Bottom Line: Mario Kart is a huge success, but can be so much better if they bring back all the little whimsical fun details that made Mario Kart 64 a runaway smash hit and a part of Multi-player Hall of Fame. I miss the longer courses, I miss the insane explosions, and I miss the simplicity of it all. All these extra vehicles, extra statistics is peeling away at the arcade appeal of the entire franchise. Nintendo in my opinion should go back to the basics, before they tried adding depth to a series that will never be as deep as your modern-day racers. Yes Mario Kart Wii and (especially) Mario Kart DS have their high points and qualities, but (in my humble opinion) they still lack when compared to the N64 version. Remove the cheapness, being back the devastation of our items, and up the ante on the course design, then I am sure the next Mario Kart will be a great one as well as become a successful entry.

Toy Story 3: 10/10

Toy Story 3 (2010)
By delivering an amazing finale to an amazing trilogy, all we can do is bow and thank Pixar once again., 18 June 2010

Star Wars. Indiana Jones. Fistful of Dollars. Bourne. These are all incredible trilogies that can, will, and should stand the test of time. Yes, I am neglecting the fourth Indiana Jones. Upon the mention of the third Toy Story, I was deathly afraid. Afraid because it has some major, major shoes to fill. The original is a masterpiece that changed animation forever, and the sequel is among the best in the history of film (I mean that). The first two Toy Story films are among the best movies of all-time and to this day entire animation studios have failed to duplicate an ounce of the magic contained in Toy Story. Could part 3 even come close to the original two? My friends, I am very happy to say, the answer is a resounding yes.

Toy Story 3 does exactly what the first two did, delivered on all cylinders, all aspects of film-making and entertainment. The humor is back, the heart is back, the delightful cast of characters is back. This time, thanks to an incredible script, there's more suspense, more drama, and many more surprises. Like any spectacular trilogy, it wraps up all loose ends. It literally is difficult to find any flaw or any slow moment in this movie, and even if there is, it will immediately be forgiven by the next major laugh or the next major revelation. The predictability factor in this movie is low, and the payoff to all the suspense is extremely high. Guys, this is the go-to movie of the summer, and makes up for any disappointment you have seen this year or last.

Just like Toy Story 2's subtle and underlying themes, Toy Story 3 revolves around the group of toys and their latest adventure, but dwells far deeper than that. On the surface, this movie is about the toys in a series of circumstances, winding up in a daycare center that isn't all it seems. At the same time, Andy is heading for college, but Woody isn't quite ready to let go of his owner and the memories that follow. The deeper aspects involve aging, growing up, and moving on. Michael Arndt, the Oscar winner that wrote Little Miss Sunshine, was behind the spectacular screenplay in this third trip in the world of toys. Then with the help of John Lasseter and Lee Unkrich (who serves as the director), we see plenty of references to Pixar, other movies, the previous Toy Story installments, and even we even see nods to the influences of the entire animation studio (Miyazaki).

The writing wasn't the only thing that was on par with the first two Toy Story movies. The voice acting cast was once again phenomenal, with popular actors, underrated talent, and great character actors filling the bill. Come on now, just read em': Tim Allen, Tom Hanks, John Cusack, Wallace Shawn, Jody Benson, Estelle Harris, Blake Clark, John Ratzenburger, Ned Beatty, Jeff Garlin, and Michael Keaton. Unlike what Dreamworks pulls off on a yearly basis, Pixar carefully chooses their voice cast in terms of pulling off the best performances, not to generate more money. Because honestly, was there even a point to Angelina Jolie voicing the tiger in Kung Fu Panda? On the other hand, very few can pull an authentic Barbie like Jody Benson (a.k.a. Ariel in the Little Mermaid). It takes reliable and authentic acting to pull at the heartstrings, and everyone definitely was on their A-game.

Lee Unkrich directed this movie with incredible pacing and just as much heart and dedication as Lasseter, who was in charge of the first two. The truth is, Pixar directs the movie together, as they share ideas and suggestions amongst each other. This fact can be traced to the similar pacing and directing styles seen in Pixar's better works like Ratatoille, Finding Nemo, and Up. They all have the similar technique of incorporating just as many tears as laughs. But unlike all the other Pixar movies (with the exception of The Incredibles), Toy Story 3 has a heave dosage of suspense and peril, which is climaxed by one of the most exciting animated sequences this side of Castle in the Sky (a Miyazaki adventure masterpiece). Other reviewers have noted this before me, but this Toy Story is quite scary in depth and in imagery at some instances, so be wary of this while watching this with the kids. With so much time invested with these toys, the drama runs a bit high.

Bottom Line: Toy Story 3 secures its place in cinema brilliance by becoming the best third installment since Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade, the best sequel since Kill Bill Vol. 2, and the best movie we've seen this year. This movie is usually hilarious, sometimes thrilling, and sometimes downright tear-jerking. And yes, just like Up's opening 10 minutes, there is that one major sequence in which Pixar will pull at your heartstrings like Eric Clapton. If you enjoyed the first two Toy Stories, there's no need to worry about the third and hopefully final chapter in the quality-filled saga. How Pixar manages to deliver yet again is absolutely beyond me.

Walt Disney may not be one-hundred percent proud of his company if he were alive to see it now, but he would be absolutely delighted at seeing what beautiful art Pixar has delivered ever since 1995. Pixar has re-created Walt Disney 's magical methods of storytelling and movie-making, and arguably has taken it a step even further by adding depth to the characters and depth to the overall stories presented. The direction was fantastic, the writing was Oscar-worthy, and the overall production is Best Picture caliber. This is Pixar's best work since Finding Nemo, and a must see by any means necessary. Despite my cynical nature, there's no way I can grade this any less than perfect. Just no way.

P.S. Prepare to cry. It will happen. Oh, the ending.........my goodness.........

My nomination for the 2011 Honorary Oscar

The Karate Kid remake featuring Jaden Smith, the son of the rather-famous Will Smith, makes its debut very soon. Loosely remaking the 1980s family classic, this film is trying to reach out to a new generation of audiences that had missed out on the underrated hit---despite it lacking in karate altogether. But, this article is not focusing on the movie coming out, but instead focusing on one of the actors featured in it. This actor has appeared and/or worked in over 100 films, has directed over 15 movies, has done stunts in every single one of them, and even has writing credits in 12 of them. This man’s movies have made nearly a billion dollars in the box office in America alone, and who knows how much more overseas. He has the highest-grossing martial arts movie in the history of American film and is featured in the three next highest-grossing martial arts American films. But this man doesn’t have a single Academy Award.

Jackie Chan is one of the biggest stars in the history of film to not have an Oscar. Naming an actor with a career as successful as Chan’s to not have an ounce of Oscar gold is very tough to come by (Harrison Ford, Samuel L. Jackson are a couple of the extremely rare examples). Yes, Chan has done his share of bad movies, but considering all that he has accomplished and introduced to the world, we can easily erase those little quality blurbs. Come on Academy, Jackie Chan introduced an entire world of filmmaking into the United States. Finishing what Bruce Lee started; Asian martial arts cinema was making its way to American audiences. Along with Kurosawa and Miyazaki, Chan is one of the biggest names of Asian film to distribute their work to a wide audience extending far past its country of origin. Where is his Oscar? It is about time that Jackie Chan receives his Honorary Academy Award for all his amazing work.



If you want to discuss quality as well as quantity, then let’s begin. Legend of Drunken Master is the greatest martial arts film in history, and yes, I am including Bruce Lee films. Name a single film that contains a fight that lasts over ten minutes, involves the main actor actually suffer second-degree burns for the sake of entertainment, and feature chorography so complex, so perfect, that it required over four months to film. And that was the final fight, I didn’t even mention the opening fight, which features some of the best swordplay in film history, nor did I mention the multiple fights in between, which never last less than two minutes. You want to see one of the 100 greatest films of all-time, look no further than the crazy, insane, energetic, and highly-entertaining mayhem of Jui Kuen II. Three-Six Mafia and Eminem: 1 Oscar. Jackie Chan: 0.




That was just one film. The original Drunken Master was also a martial arts classic. And then there’s Police Story, which features two of among the most dangerous yet thrilling stunts ever recorded on film (The umbrella/bus sequence, and the entire final fight scene). Let’s not also forget Operation Condor (Fei ying gai wak), which is another stunt-heavy movie that features stuntwork that tops anything we’ve witnessed over the last 20 years. Now let’s add Police Story 2, Police Story 3: Supercop, Operation Condor 2, Dragons Forever, Project A, Project A2, Rumble in the Bronx (Jackie Chan’s first major American hit, featuring him leaping from a parking lot to a building across the street), and Wheels on Meals as other examples of great movies with great stunts and great fights. To continue this list, let’s mention his lesser-quality movies that still contain incredible fight scenes like First Strike (the insane ladder fight), Dragon Lord (featuring a 12-minute fighting marathon), Who am I, Gorgeous (10-minute boxing fight), New Police Story, Shanghai Noon, and the recent Forbidden Kingdom. Buster Keaton, Jackie Chan’s biggest influence: 1 Oscar. Jackie: 0.

If dedication to grand filmmaking gets you an Oscar, then Jackie Chan should have gotten it a long time ago. He does nearly all his stunts (even when some of them don’t even make the final cut), which has resulted in him breaking his nose, his ankle, his fingers, his skull, his cheekbones, and much more. Why he’s still alive is a mystery to me. Action stars in Hollywood just don’t have the dedication that he has, it does not happen anymore. And it isn’t just the fights either. He does car chases, on-foot chases, roller skate chases, and even bicycle chases. Name someone in Hollywood today that does everything that Jackie Chan did in his prime. There are Youtube videos listing his best stunts. Did you get that? Listing them! The biggest stars of today can barely bill 5 stunts at the most and here we see people listing 10 of Jackie’s best moments out of a possible several dozen.




What hurts the most is that each of Chan’s best abilities is not Oscar categories, hence leaving him out of Oscar victory ever since the 70s when his cinematic career took off. The Jackie Chan Stunt Team (featuring Chan and anyone who has the guts to do what he does) excels in stunts and chorography, two categories that does not give you awards. Whatever the reason, movies with incredible stunts and/or incredible fight/dance/lovemaking (don’t laugh) chorography do not get the highest honor of recognition. Otherwise, the Jackie Chan Stunt Team would have won at least seven of them. Personally, I believe that what Chan does is much more difficult than some of the smaller categories that do create Oscars (makeup, costume design anyone?) What is harder: dressing up someone to resemble the Romantic period of the early 18th century, or crafting an action scene that involves an actor to dangle above the ground hundreds of feet by hanging on to a ladder connected to a helicopter? You take the pick. Sandy Powell: 3 Oscars, Jackie Chan has none.





Bottom Line: This is a movie lover’s plea to make things right in the world of film. Jackie Chan is the top talent in the current film industry today that has yet to get an Oscar, and it is about time we fix this. If we can forgive Sandra Bullock for making All about Steve and (especially) Speed 2, why can’t we forgive Jackie Chan for making The Tuxedo and The Spy Next Door? Why hasn’t a man who has broken nearly every bone in his body in the name of entertainment gotten his Oscar? He has starred, co-starred, written, directed, choreographed, produced and even sang in movies, what more do you want from him? Just how much more must he accomplish before the Academy can recognize his commitment to the world of cinema? I believe he has hit the peak of quality, the peak of contribution, and the peak of effort in order to get the one statue that most actors/actresses/filmmakers around the world would hope to have at the palm of their hand.

We can agree and disagree on the Oscar winners of past and present. But denying that Jackie Chan deserves an Oscar is simply denying the 100+ movies and decades of work he has delivered to us. You would be denying his undeniable impact in the world of moviemaking. Without Jackie Chan, the entire realm of motion pictures would be drastically different. Imagine a world without Chan and his influential kung fu movies popping up here in Hollywood. I can guarantee you The Matrix, action blockbusters, and the wire-fu flicks would be drastically different.

So Academy, I beg of you, give him his well-deserved Oscar next year. Have one (or more) movie stars that were touched by Chan’s work to talk about him for a few moments, share a few jokes, and have it followed by an extensive montage of everything he has achieved, followed by all the stunts and moments that cement Jackie Chan into film immortality. And finally, after the montage, turn on the lights, and have Chan walk to the stage to finally receive that Oscar. He deserves the highest honor, and it is about time you all realize this too. While I have no say in the Academy Awards, I nonetheless nominate Jackie Chan as the next recipient of the Honorary Academy Award for his incredible, amazing, jaw-dropping, and influential contributions to film.

Sincerely,
Movie Lover, Bitter Critic, and aspiring Contributor to the Wild World of Film,

Milton Malespin

Sources: IMDB, BoxOfficeMojo


Post Article: This article was actually sent to the Academys. If they will reply (or even read this) is anyone's guess. But hey, I tried.

Into the Wild: 8/10 (Minor Spoilers)

The best stories are those that even the greatest novelists couldn’t make up. Real life, the real world creates some incredible adventures led by incredible characters. In this film, we follow one of the most amazing true stories ever captured on film. Into the Wild is a very deep and engaging one-man trip through the unknown portions of the United States. Based off the best-seller written by John Krakauer, Into the Wild is about a man that gives up all his material possessions and life altogether in search of purpose, in search of happiness, and in search of a direction to head towards in his life. Written and directed by Sean Penn with a lot of love and detail, this movie is beautifully shot, beautifully edited, and even though the third act drags quite a bit, you’ll remain hooked on Christopher McCandless’ travels up until the bitter end.

In case you had not read the startling true story, Christopher McCandless was a very gifted athlete and student with high marks and an extremely bright future. But, spiritually, he was extremely lost; emotionally, he was empty. Upon this, he donates all his money to charity and runs away from his family, his college, everything he had worked for. Now, whatever your stance is on his decision-making, we can all agree he was clearly a man that was lost, and needed to be found. You can be unhappy for only so long before you decide to do something drastic. Some move to another city, some pursue a new career, some search for love. In his case, he chose to become one with nature. Like I said, you can question his common sense and decisions, but don’t question his desire for something more. Sean Penn and John Krakeuer clearly admired the emotional strength and bravery of our main character, as they infused his story with a lot of love, a lot of content, and a lot of overall emotion.

The main core and best element in this film is the overall acting. While not one performance stood out, everyone did an exceptional job. Emile Hirsch does a spectacular job portraying a strong-willed yet spiritually lost man hellbent on achieving true happiness. The smaller roles (people Christopher meets during his journey) added charm to the overall flick, including Vince Vaughn, Kristen Stewart, Hal Halbrook, and Catherine Keener. The writing supported the acting, as not one line sounds forced or shoved upon, and it adds an added layer of realism to the already-true story.

The directing however is a bit of a mixed bag. Sean Penn really loved this story and definitely displayed it with the elongated running time, insistence on shooting every scene on location, and the artsy final moments; but sometimes the French-style directing was a bit too much. There are instances in which the characters look at the camera and make faces or pose, and that totally breaks down the fourth wall and throws you away from the main structure of the film. You realize it’s a movie and not a story when the main character glares at the camera for a few split seconds. Then the final act, when the climax drags, hinders the overall quality of the movie. Approximately ten minutes could have been cut from the last third and it would have been fine.

Finally, we have the controversial element of morality. Sometimes, moral codes amongst each of us prevent us from sympathizing with the main character, leading to some issues. A recent example is Sex and the City’s first movie’s final act, which results in us totally losing sympathy for the main four (with the exception of one, but avoiding spoilers). Into the Wild also suffers from this. While we can clearly understand and see the frustrations of Christopher against the world we live in, his actions are heavily on the selfish side, despite what he’s gone through.

Instead of seeing a man that has suffered through the childhood and teenage years and needed to escape everything, we see a person so closed-minded on his journey that he shuts off all the people that cared about him throughout his trip. All the offers of help he received, and he practically shuns them all (especially the final human encounter, in an especially gut-wrenching scene). Upon seeing this, the viewer knows how he is going to end up. And whether or not you’ll feel sorry for him is entirely up to you, the witness to all his decisions.

Bottom Line: Enjoy the journey, even if the destination and bumps on the road is going to create some discussions and disagreeing points. Into the Wild is a wonderful film that is beautifully shot, despite the direction being misguided at some instances. Once you get past the questionable directing though, prepare for a visually stimulating trip chronicling the adventures of a man on a self-discovery expedition like nothing else seen before on film. While this movie will not convince you to do what he did, it will lead you to questions concerning fulfillment, love, faith, and happiness. Into the Wild is about a journey in search of answers, and despite it being a beautifully flawed (mildly) flick, it does lead to more questions. Great movie to emotionally digest, just do it slowly.


P.S. Where on earth is Eddie Vedder’s Oscar for his musical contribution?

Y Tu Mama Tambien: 8/10

Y tu mamá también (2001)
A benchmark in Mexican cinema, and a bookmark for Mexican culture, youth, and politics

Decades from now, if there is a movie to show to describe how youth life in Mexico is life at the turn of the millennium, this one would be it. Re-launching the career of director Alfonso Cuaron, Y Tu Mama Tambien is an explicit film full of politics, subtle commentary, and sex. This movie is also a tough pill to swallow, as it showcases rough emotions, rough dialogue, tough moments of truth, and an overwhelming amount of sexual tension and material. If you can get past the intensity and frank content, then it's a good film to watch. But, this movie is not for the shy, not for the easily-embarrassed, and not for those that lack an open mind. View at your own risk. Don't let it scare you too much though, because this movie is full of heart, humor, and beautiful drama.

Everyone has that one major moment in their life when they realize they must grow up, they must do something different in their life. Every person (that eventually matures) goes through that one period of time when ugly realizations open up, leading to them drastically changing. Before jumping to the mature stage, the edge or blockade to leap from must occur. In Y Tu Mama Tambien, we follow a road trip led by three people that deflowers into a plethora of emotions, ugly truths, and sudden realization of mortality. Two young horny teenagers (Diego Luna, Gael Garcia Bernal) with nothing better to do in their lives attempt to convince a beautiful older woman (Maribel Verdu) to accompany them on a trip to the beach. What starts as a harmless attempt to have sex with this woman winds up opening up deep dark secrets that threaten the extremely strong friendship and bond between the two boys.

Written by the director and his brother Carlos Curaon, this film not only feels very realistic and close to the heart, but also gets meshed in with the political turmoil happening at the time and taps into what was going on in Mexican youth culture. With Mexico having problems in its government for years, very few realize that those most affected are the next generation of leaders and movers, the young adults. The splitting class systems and constant political turmoil was leaving the Mexican youth in a Generation-X state of mind. This movie reveals all this in a matter of 105 minutes, and for that reason this is one of the better original scripts released in a decade.

It is not just the writing that's very gritty; the acting is fantastic as well. I personally believe some of the toughest scenes you could possibly act in are sex scenes, and especially when there are no clothes and no camera tricks to hide the action. A lesser group of actors would have trouble delivering a decent performance when having to reveal it all and engage in graphic sexual scenes, but the three main actors were flawless in their performance. You can feel their tension, you can feel their rage, and sympathize with them when they are at their absolute lowest. The chemistry amongst the three is impressively strong, giving the movie a near documentary feel. Road trip movies always require that the audience can remain interested and invested in the characters involved at all times, and Y Tu Mama Tambien definitely delivers.

After a stint of failures, Alfonso Curaon went back to the basics with this movie, ultimately delivering the best directing performance of his career. No shot is ever too long or too short, as he does a superb job visually showing the beauty of Mexico within its fragile status. His directing of the sex scenes were most impressive, as they hold nothing back in a physical scene, while at the same time still deliver the emotions. Sex scenes rarely deliver drama and reveal character traits (usually…its to make the men happy inside), but Y Tu Mama Tambien's assortment of explicit scenes happen for a reason—they are not used for show. While some of the dialogue could have been cut, making this a shorter film, Curaon did a fantastic job directing his script.

Bottom Line: An amazing look at turn-of-the-century Mexico, Y Tu Mama Tambien is an emotionally-driven road trip through a beautiful country marred by politics, reputation, and ugly stereotypes. There's so much more to Mexico then just Hispanics angry at their government and trying to head to the States; here is a country rich with culture, history, beauty, and unfortunate uncertainty. Few movies can represent their city well, and fewer movies can accurately portray entire countries well. But, Y Tu Mama Tambien accomplishes just that with a blend of fantastic writing, excellent acting, and great directing. One of the best road trip movies you'll ever see, I recommend this Mexican cinematic modern classic as long as your eyes can tolerate graphic sexual content and graphic nudity. Otherwise, you'll be missing out on a good film that's rough along the artistic edges.

Shrek Forever After: 6/10

Shrek Forever After (2010)
Makes you forget and forgive the existence of the third Shrek, even when it still falters against the original
4 June 2010

The Shrek franchise has risen from a good competitor against Disney and Pixar to a mere joke that still makes money because it appeals to the kids. By the time the third Shrek rolled around, the green ogre went from a clever family comedy with subtle adult humor to an unfunny kiddie flick with very little entertainment whatsoever. This is why I was prepared to shun and practically avoid the fourth and final installment beyond any means necessary. Unfortunately for us moviegoers though, the month of May offered practically nothing outside the Iron Man (and maybe Prince of Persia…maybe) realm. And with the next major major release not happening until mid-June, Shrek Goes Fourth was the final option.

Now, there are some good news and bad news with the final installment. The good news is this film redeems itself for the rather mediocre sequel and the repulsive third one. The bad news is, the film still is weaker than anything Pixar (and quiet third party Blue Sky) has produced, and even weaker then some of Dreamworks' greatest hits. At least the sentimental value and heart of the original is duplicated here, even if the wit and nonstop humor disappeared. The pop culture references aren't as rampant but aren't as good either, while the random musical numbers and dances just don't cut it like they used to. Despite all that griping, it still remains a ho-hum ending to a ho-hum quadrilogy.

In Shrek Forever After or whatever it is called nowadays, we follow Shrek (Mike Myers) as he is becoming quite bored of his watered-down lifestyle of being a father, husband, and town hero. In the midst of the frustrations, he makes a deal with Rumpelstilskin, resulting in him creating a world in which he was never born---resulting in Rumpelstilskin being king of the land. In this alternate universe, he must win the heart of Fiona (Cameron Diaz) all over again before his existence begins to deteriorate. One funny note though, there is no mention of Artie and his new reign of king.

The script is a small retread of the original, mixed in with It's a Wonderful Life and even unexpected parallels to Beauty and the Beast. In other words, the script isn't very original, but does offer a chance to inject some heart into a franchise that lost all of it a couple of years ago. Written by John Klausner (Shrek the Third) and Darren Lemke (Lost), this final chapter has a lot of references to the original Shrek and its sequel, while avoiding all the Disney-bashing the first three were known for. Sadly though, outside the Disney bashing, Shrek didn't have a lot of humor, which makes this Shrek one of the weaker ones in terms of humor. The laughs are mildly there, but mostly coming from the supporting cast (Once again, Antonio Banderas as Puss in Boots stealing the show).

With Shrek losing his main love and struggling to win her again, the heartstrings are tugged a bit. Director Mike Mitchell paces the movie well by quickly showing the source of Rumpilstilskin's rage as well as the source of Shrek's troubles. While American Beauty jump-started the middle aged-crisis thing to holy heaven back in 1999, Shrek Forever After still remains a bit fresh by giving us a little time and alternate universe travel. While I was never a fan of Dreamworks trying to infuse heart into any of their movies (I see them more as the antidepressant of Pixar's excellent but heart-destroying films), Shrek is a definite exception. The core of the four films has been the characters and their love for each other, so when the climax approaches, expect to be a bit moved, even when you haven't been laughing.

Bottom Line: Shrek's final trip into the movie theaters was better than I had expected, but still wasn't as funny as the first two, which is what I did expect. You can run on competitive bashing and pop culture humor for so long before you quickly run out of steam. While I believe this fairy tale ran two movies too long, the finale is definitely worthy of a viewing if you love the green ogre and all his friends. The supporting cast provided the laughs, while the main characters provided the heart. This is by no means a triumph, but isn't a total toad wreck either. Dreamworks however really needs to lay off the pace-breaking and unfunny and uninteresting musical bits. Let the spin-offs begin!