This really has been a hell of a ride.

I started this Movie Blogging thing on the aptly named The Movie Blog with John Campea, and after about 6 years of that I wanted to strike out on my own. Thus, The Stub was born. The original plan I had with John was to build some content here with my posts, and eventually we would announce the spinoff and see what happened.

But then John started expanding into other ventures, and as always I was in full support mode and stepped up my involvement on the site from a few posts a day to becoming pretty much the only person to write on the site for the last year. The Movie Blog had “guest appearances” by John until he found himself named the Senior Editor over at AMC’s Script to Screen. John chose to move on exclusively with that venture leaving The Movie Blog in the hands of the financial owners.

The official launch of The Stub came sooner than I hoped and I was thrilled to see some of the loyal TMB crowd make the leap to join me here. But my grand opening was short lived as the owners of The Movie Blog contacted me and offered me the role as Senior Editor.

At first I was conflicted. I had this new site all up and running, all excited to be moving forward. And then here I was being handed the keys to the site I helped create and sustain for 6 years. It was a brief conflict and a new era for The Movie Blog has arrived as I accepted the title.

For the last few weeks I have been mirroring my content from The Movie Blog here, but things are moving forward with solid effort. We are making changes to the site and building TMB up to become the ultimate spot for your movie news and sharing opinions.

And that brings us to today. The Stub is mine and she only had a short presence online, and The Movie Blog will be my new home now.

From now on I will be at The Movie Blog

Thanks for being around. Come join me there!

Yesterday I posted an article about AskMen.com’s 2010 99 Most Desirable Women feature, which received 6million votes to tally up the list of the women with the most desirable qualities. Their list encompassed all of entertainment, while I was mostly sticking with movie stars and a couple tv stars.

Well today AskMen.com has the results of their list!

Rounding out the top three for 2010 are Victoria’s Secret model Marisa Miller and British actress Kate Beckinsale, respectively. Readers can also view the full “Top 99 Most Desirable Women” list, including profiles of each honoree, at www.AskMen.com. The top 99 most desirable women for 2010, in order, are:

1. Emmanuelle Chriqui
2. Marisa Miller
3. Kate Beckinsale
4. Alessandra Ambrosio
5. Jessica Alba
6. Beyonce
7. Penelope Cruz
8. Cheryl Cole
9. Eva Mendes
10. Miranda Kerr

Now I only posted the top 10, so if you want to see the rest you can go to AskMen.com and check out where your favourite hotties ranked.

I was surprised that only ONE of my Top 10 was the same as theirs, and that was my first runner up Kate Beckinsale.

There is a storm brewing that Todd McFarlane just doesn’t look like he is going to win. Seems his Twisted World of Oz treatment that has been rumoured to be made into a feature film is contending against another treatment written by Oscar nominated Josh Olson.

RamaScreen has Olson’s take:

It’s a modern-day sequel. The story centers on Dorothy Neil, a bright and ambitious young lawyer for a prestigious law firm in Chicago. Neil is the grand-daughter of Dorothy Gale, who is now an old woman living in Kansas and telling her tales about her time in the land of Oz to a new generation of kids. However, trouble is afoot in Oz, as a new witch is destroying the magic that keeps the entire place running. While babysitting her boss’ kid, the kid and Dorothy Neil are brought back to Oz and united with the Cowardly Lion, the Tin Man, and the Scarecrow and tasked with killing an evil witch and restoring order in Oz.

Josh Olson wrote this pitch that would be his own works and that is contending for the job. If the WB goes family friendly (like Olson’s treatment) then they will not be working with Todd McFarlane at all.

So clearly McFarlane doesn’t want that to happen!

Personally I would like to see both, but maybe not back to back. Let Olson get it on with the WB and put out a family friendly version so they can rake in the duckets. But I would really like to see McFarlane’s version too.

Unfortunately thats now how its going to work and we know it. WB won’t make two Oz films, and money will always win the day. Family Friendly will get the job.

Remember the squash

What a crazy ride today was.

Yes International Friends, the news of The Movie Blog demise was greatly exaggerated!

After a great chat with my new cohorts in crime we have a vision and a direction for the future of The Movie Blog and despite getting all cozy here in my new home, the first act my esteemed councillors commited themselves to was to name me Senior Editor of The Movie Blog.

For a while now, the better part of the site was already being written by me, and that will continue. In our chat tonight we addressed a number of topics and shared some ideas for the direction of the site.

I know I appeared to be dropping our luggage and running for the hills, but after a VERY interesting chat, I have been convinced to step in and run the site, to continue the spirit of The Movie Blog and to support the community and people we have grown to love there no matter how much we disagree.

I promise this will be a whole new ball game, and a whole new adventure. The Stub will run mirror to that site until all the new features are implimented, so you are free to come by here as well.

This site leans toward my personal vision for The Movie Blog, and you will see the lines blur very soon as I take over the Legacy I helped create.

Thank you all for your support by coming here, and I hope you return to The Movie Blog as we enter a new chapter.

You know when you sneak food into theaters because you think you are being so badass and sticking it to the man not buying their overpriced concession stand prices?

Yeah, its like stealing free samples. Theaters don’t actually ban you from bringing in outside foods. This was news to me too. But it seems that the AMC Theater chain is now enforcing such policies with a stern hand, putting in place a new rule that patrons would be forbidden to bring in their own goodies.

FirstShowing says:

This month AMC Theatres, the second-largest cinema chain in North America, officially instituted a ban on all outside food, and apparently they’re enforcing it pretty good. The company seems to have made the decision after a bad financial quarter partially due to decreased concession sales.

Reportedly, AMC will be offering more concession options as part of its “rethinking” its concession policies.

While offering a wider selection of food is always a good thing, I think banning the food entirely was already assumed anyways so people will just carry on as normal, sneaking their smuggled goods in their purses and oversized jackets.

I did find that a wider selection of food does encourage me more to buy there. Back when the first Collesium Silver City Theater was built, I was fascinated that the consessions included a Taco Bell, Pizza Hut and a Burger King which surrounded the standard concession options of candybars, soda and popcorn.

But I think that cutting down the prices would actually encourage MORE sales. People bring in their own food to avoid those prices. Why should a candybar cost $4 when the 7-11 across the road sells the same ones for $1.50? Granted the profit margins would not be as high as their rediculous $4 bar, which they likely bought wholesale for the same price as 7-11, however the increased volume would more than compensate for it.

I would wager that they could sell more candy and snack foods if they offered more competitive prices. Even if they were slightly higher, the convenience of buying it there would be worth it. But what you pay to snack in your theater seat is just silly.

Now we know that theaters make most of their profits from the concessions so I see their motivation. (Studios take the better part of ticket sales - thats very secondary to theater owners) But if they made these more appealing by selection and price, they would see their profits rise.

I actually liked Nanny McPhee. It was a throwback to the bedtime storybook tales I recall in my wee years. The story was well laid out and taught a solid lesson. My children also loved the film.

And new we get news of a sequel in the form of a poster for Nanny McPhee and the Big Bang

The original film is based on a children’s book series Nurse Matilda, however there are little comparisons past that.

Nanny McPhee is a supernatural figure that teaches increasingly naughty children to behave, and her presence is summed up with her stating “When you don’t want me but need me, I will be here. When you don’t need me but want me, I must go.” And all the while her awkwardly ugly appearance changes through the movie as the kids become better behaved. Eventually they learn to respect their Nanny and love her, but then she must leave.

Presumably the sequel will pick up with the next family with naughty children who need her help.

Via

One of the joys of fandom is collecting, and while my wife keeps me on a short leash with the “toys” I buy (They are COLLECTIBLES woman!!) there is a new book out by a guy who took collecting to a whole new level.

GeekTyrant quotes the release:

The book by Stephen Sansweet with Anne Neumann is the book Star Wars collectors have been waiting for — a 568-page virtual exhibit of Sansweet’s personal Star Wars collectibles museum — called “Rancho Obi-Wan” — showcasing 1,000 hand-picked items from the world’s largest Star Wars collection. Accompanying each image — and there are over 1,000 — are historical tidbits, little-known facts, and personal stories drawing the reader into the rich universe of Star Wars collecting. It’s a sugar rush of eye-catching imagery and quirky commentary matched with an engrossing account of one collector’s mission to preserve the merchandising legacy of Star Wars for generations to come.

I wrote about Gus Lopez’s home (they have dubbed The Bobacabana) which is entirely a shrine to Star Wars showcasing his very impressive collection and managed to form an online aquaintance with his wife (an avid Lilo and Stitch collector).

When I asked her about this collection (naively thinking they would be offended by this guy’s claim to having the largest private collection) Pam gushed about Sansweet’s influence on the super insane world of Star Wars Collectibles. I was rebuked in thinking their entire home’s worth of collectables was the epitome of their pasttime. Pam says:

Rancho Obi-Wan is Steve Sansweet, dude! He has the most awesome-tacular Star Wars collection in the known galaxy! It’s not even in his house - he had to build a special collecting barn to hold it all! And THEN he has ANOTHER building to hold the overflow!

The guys has *parade floats*!! No, I am NOT kidding! And he even hired a full time person just to keep track of his stuff. Pam set me straight, and as insane as Gus’ collection is the real inspiration behind it comes from Stephen Sansweet!

This book is on my Amazon wishlist (ahem.. hint hint)

Seems the barrels of those guns are still aimed at Twilight as it takes the #1 spot two weeks in a row, just edging out $2million ahead of Sandra Bullock’s $40m opening of The Blind Side.

Over the last week since the film’s release there have been a number of movie mistakes discovered about the film. A staggering 22 of them in fact.

io9.com has shared some of them:

here are a few of the problems the fans have identified:

When Jacob first shows off his tattoo, it is up at the top of his shoulder. Then when he is in the forest at the end with Bella and Edward, his tattoo is about 2 inches further down his arm.

When Bella is flying to Italy they show a Virgin America airplane. Virgin America only flies within certain cities in the US. Virgin Atlantic flies from the US to Europe.

Just as Jacob enters Bella’s room through the window, a stunt prop - white band on his right wrist - is briefly visible.

In the montage scenes where we see Bella’s depression, when the camera is circling her, the camera man is shown in the mirror (twice) behind her.

The rims of the vampires contacts can be spotted occasionally during the film, especially the Volturi’s during the ending scenes — e.g., Jane’s in the elevator.

In the main title when the giant new moon appears on the screen the shadow fades over the moon from right to left when it should actually fade from left to right. The moon travels around the earth clockwise. The waning moon should turn to a new moon, not the waxing which is shown.

Interestingly enough in the original article, the writer speculates on a number of flaws that just reveal she has never read the books or knows anything about Twilight. She ponders on how its possible that Jacob could transform into a wolf 4 times his size (uh… magic has to follow the laws of physics now?) and where they keep getting clothes after they shred their outfits(the book spells out how they deal with this too)

But still I am sure that the twhaters will be trying to use this as Ammo for proving how flawed Twilight is, keep in mind that according to Movie Mistakes, Star Wars has 139 recorded mistakes (259 reported - 120 corrections). Who knows if they will find as many in New Moon.

I am sure more will be found and nit picked over. But spotting these little slip ups in any film is always fun.

Halloween is likely my favourite holiday of the year. Frankly I think we deserve a stat holiday for it but someone felt that celebrating the founding fathers discovering America was more important and Halloween lies right between them.

Part of what makes me love Halloween is that its the only time of year a woman can dress like a whore and not be judged for it! A man can wear a dress and not be judged! Someone can dress like Zombie Michael Jackson and it has new meaning! Its a Halloween Miracle!

That’s what the holiday is all about. Expression and Understanding!! The compassion for your fellow man (or woman - slutty men just don’t work as well but still amusing!)

So this week instead of a Forgotten Friday I wanted to introduce a contest.

A Costume Contest!!

EMail Me a picture of your costume from any one of the 36 parties you were invited to this weekend.

It can be a group shot, a posed action scene or just you out getting dirty looks for being too old to go door to door.

On Monday I will review all the submissions and post the best picking out a winner.

And what does that winner get?

Respect! Fame and your picture right here on The Stub!

So send in your shots, just for kicks! I will be posting my costume. Share your joy of this festive season. After this we just get snow and guilt laden family dinners under the guise of goodwill. This is the real holiday!

So what are you planning on wearing? Is it clever or just lame like the image at the top of this post!

With an action flick like Surrogates and Bruce Willis for insurance, I was certain that it would hold the number one spot at the boxoffice this weekend. But it would seem the forecast is still showing those looming meatballs holding their own adding another $24million to the pot and taking the top spot.

Collider

1 - Cloudy w/a Chance of Meatballs $24,600,000 (Total:$60,036,000)
2 - Surrogates $15,000,000
3 - Fame $10,000,000

Third on the list is the remake of Fame, which although I was interested to see, I was not surprised to see it wasn’t on top.

I never underestimate a family film, but I did overestimate the broad appeal of a Willis’ action flick.

With The Invention of Lying, Zombieland and the re-release of Toy Story and Toy Story 2 in 3D scheduled for this coming week, could Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs hold the pole position again?

I wanted to throw my own two cents worth into the ring when talking about all this Disney Marvel thing.

Oh, the comments about “Don’t let them Disney the fuck out of my X-Men” and cries that “Marvel Films will now all star Miley Cyrus” are just plain over reacting. It’s fun to speculate on what it might be like if Marvel published stories like Disney does for folklore characters and fairytales. Heck, I am even anticipating a line of DTV animated features based on Marvel properties much like WB has been churning out over the last few years. Disney is now poised to make that happen.

I want to share a comic I read today that sums up some of the reaction I have been seeing online.

So people think that Disney buying Marvel is a MERGER. That they are somehow becoming one company and one property. Well maybe I am not reading the same news sources as they are, but I saw NOTHING saying that Disney was suddenly going to integrate their characters into the pages of Marvel comics popular titles. Nor did I see anything implying that Marvel Films will now be farting out Disney Channel kid stars in their films.

Disney owns Pixar, yet Pixar has a very distinctly different feel than Disney films do. Disney owns ABC, but I don’t see Zach Efron making guest appearances on Grey’s Anatomy, and the Jonas Brothers have yet to appear on Lost. Disney also owns Miramax, which has properties and distrubution of films that have NOTHING in common with Disney properties.

So while others are over reacting and freaking out because Disney bought themselves a comic book publishing company, that suddenly Mickey Mouse has a shot at becoming an X-Man.

What is likely to happen is that if Disney wants to make kids comics featuring their characters, or make a line of merchandize of Mickey Mouse toys in Spiderman Pajamas, they now have a direct line to do so.

Marvel will still be Marvel. I have no doubt in this.

It was a smart move for Disney to acquire the property and add it to its empire, but like the other kingdoms that have joined the House of Mouse, each has retained its own identity.

Disney didn’t buy it to change it. They bought it so they could keep the money they make.

Thanks for checking out our Forgotten Fridays feature. This is a feature to review some older films that maybe you have forgotten about or maybe never got around to seeing that we just want to share. They may not be old, maybe not forgotten, but they are not new. Just fun to share.

Today’s review is My Cousin Vinny

One of the funniest movies of this generation, and I am continually surprised to find people who haven’t seen this gem. So if you have, enjoy the reminder. If you haven’t… this review is aimed at you.

Release: March 13, 1992
Genre: Comedy
Director: Jonathan Lynn
Staring: Joe Pesci, Ralph Macchio, Marisa Tomei, Mitchell Whitfield, Fred Gwynne, Lane Smith

THE GENERAL IDEA

Bill and Stan are mistaken for murderers while on a roadtrip vacation before heading to college, and Bill’s family sends his street smart cousin who finally passed the bar and is now a lawyer to defend them for his first case as a lawyer.

THE GOOD

The cast in this is incredible and after one viewing you will be convinced Marisa Tomei was deserving of her Best Supporting Actress Oscar. She steals every scene she is in. Especially her hypothetical “deer by the water” scenario she shares with Vinny. This was also the last theatrical role for Fred Gwynne, most famous as the Frankenstein-like Herman on the Munsters.

The laughs are non-stop. Joe Pesci, fresh off the set of Goodfellas makes a convincing badass New Yorker and the accent that he and Tomei put on is just delightfully accurate.

While Ralph Maccio is 31 at the time of this film, he plays the eager and somewhat niave college student caught in a bad situation very well. His role is relatively minor - he is the unfortunate guy for which there needs to be a titular cousin named Vinny, but still important to the movie. Yet no one outshines Vinny, and his interactions with long time fiance Mona (Tomei) and the Judge make the whole film.

THE BAD

Your sides will likely be tender after viewing this. I still laugh heartily even with repeat viewings. You are warned.

OVERALL

The film delivers the laughs, which is all you can ask for in a comedy. But this does more. It has heart, and it keeps you drawn in. It even gives you some light hearted scenes to recover your breath before making you laugh again.

Typically this is where we would write a “Out of 10″ rating, but since all of these Forgotten Friday reviews are going to be what I would already give a high rating to, I have made my own rating system.

TV - Make a point of watching it if you see it listed on TV.
Rent - Good enough to go out of your way to see it, but not enough to buy it.
Buy - So good. You will watch it again and again. Buy it!

So on a scale of TV, Rent or Buy I suggest BUY! The movie makes its BluRay debut this week, so hit up your big box store and grab a copy!

The Secret of Nihm is getting another adaptation. Not remaking the animated classic, but adapting the original children’s book Mrs Frisby and the Rats of Nihm.

Yahoo reports:

As rodents prove surprisingly likable on the big screen, the studio [Paramount] is developing a feature version of the Newbery Medal-winning children’s book “Mrs. Frisby and the Rats of NIMH.”

Director Neil Burger (”The Illusionist”) is in talks to write the screenplay.

The new “NIMH” likely will combine live action and animation in the manner of “Alvin and the Chipmunks” and other kiddie hybrids.

The Secret of Nihm by Don Bluth was one of my favourite animated films when I was younger. It was different from the other kiddie flicks and dealt with a more mature subject matter. It was the first time I saw animation that COULD be serious and opened up doors for me that I didn’t know were possible.

I am a little more encouraged that they wouldn’t be trying this as another animated feature, but very discouraged that they are trying to make it a “kiddie hybrid” and liken it to Alvin and the Chipmunks and G-Force which clearly cater specifically to a younger crowd.

My kids get bored at parts of Nihm, and mostly because it isn’t really a kiddie film, so for them to kiddie-fy the movie to be live action hybrid worries me.

ComicCon offered a number of great moments and announcements that every site is currently blogging their asses off with, so while we liked to share some of that too, we wanted to also share something that ISN’T happening.

But I wish it was.

This fake trailer is genius, and with a little polish, I would LOVE to see that movie come to pass.

Some concept art was released that will showcase the inner world of Tron for the upcoming sequel Tron Legacy and its just making my pants not fit right.

The images are wonderfully updated, while still staying true enough to the previous film’s dated image. I am loving it.

Via

There has been a lot of comparisons of the current Transformers Film Franchise to its source material, and for obvious reasons. Half of what makes these Transformers films a big draw to people my age is that we were brought up on the original cartoon. We are all waiting to see if our favourite bots will make the roster and see what they would look like re-imagined on the big screen for live action.

I still want to see a HotRod (or Hotshot) as he was always my favourite. (I like the care free hotshot turned underdog leader burdened with more self doubt than responsibility. Builds character)

Anyways, there are a few things that people want to see in a Transformers film that I just don’t see happening. I thought I would make a post for that discussion here.

Over a year ago I posted an April Fool’s joke that hinted at some of these characters being present in a gag announcing we knew which bots would be on the roster. and while some were predictions, they were an effective gag because they were plausible. It COULD have happened even though it was totally made up. So when I bring up these issues remember that I am not totally against it, just that I don’t predict it will happen for a reason.

Grimlock

Its not that I don’t think Grimlock would be a bad choice, I think he would be awesome. He was easily near the top of my list in favourite personalities. “Me Grimlock! Strongest leader!!” Damn that guy is great. But I honestly don’t see them bringing him in, at least not the way people would want.

The Autobots tend to still be living the whole “robots in disguise” thing and laying low among earth’s motorpool despite the Decepticons picking Earth Modes when it suits them and Transforming into whatever they want. So a bot that changes into a Dino just doesn’t seem plausible with the current trends. If anything I would love to see a Hummer or something that changes into a Grimlock bot (maybe with a dino triple changer mode) but at the core of it, I just want to see the personality show up. Have him unwittingly challenging Prime for leadership, Prime outmatched physically has to outsmart him to keep him in line. Good fun.

Galvatron

Despite a lot of the viewership knowing the history of the cartoon, we have to remember. THIS IS NOT THE CARTOON. With Megatron’s short lived screentime before his “death” some fans presume that his “rebirth” in Revenge of the Fallen should come with a name change as well. Clearly there is a parallel with Megatron getting his servos handed to him, is discarded but then ressurected.

But a name change won’t matter here. First off, it would JUST be a name, and that would just confuse things, so why change it?? Galvatron was not Megatron. He only has shadows of Megatron’s memories after the upgrade by Unicron, and is different in personality. Megatron was an evil opportunist and feirce leader over the Decepticons forged in his timeless war against the Autobots and dominance over his planet Cybertron. His only purpose is the expansion of his empire and wants to rule all of the galaxy. Galvatron is a focal point of power and madness given form. He is irrational and rage driven and would shoot an ally to get a clear shot.

I would suspect that since the first film introduced us to Megatron only in the closing battle, this film will serve to further use the character. Personally I had hoped the rumours that Megatron wasn’t in this at all would ring true and I was disappointed to find out he was going to be in this. Not because I didn’t like the character, but because I felt that Megatron’s triumphant return would be better served as the focal point of a third movie.

Unicron

Speaking of Galvatron, we can’t overlook his maker Unicron. And a lot of people seem to think this would be epic to have Unicron in this film. I disagree. Remember Galactus??

The one thing people seem to gripe about the most is the presence of these feeble fleshbags in a film about Giant Fucking Robots fighting. Oh they whine about the vapid Megan Fox getting more screen time to show cleavage or a sweaty midriff or Shia getting a chance to be all too human and genuine that we moan about their presence. Why have humans at all?

Its a common sci-fi element to tie it into reality by using familiar ground. It binds you emotionally to the film. Instead of watching giant robots kick each other around, you can see their epic battles through the eyes of the human lives it affects. I know people will want to disagree with this, but consider what Star Wars would have been like if it was all aliens that were not at all human like? We find ourselves sucked into that world as the humans among the aliens. And you can name dozens of other sci-fi stuff that features a Human among the strange and wonderful, and it is typically through that character that we experience the wonder of the unfamiliar. There are exceptions to this idea, but this is why I feel that Transformers NEEDS humans.

Now what does that have to do with Unicron? Just that I feel the “world eater” who could defeat Earth just by parking next to it is just a dumb thing to see in a Transformers live action film. I get the whole “David and Goliath” motif they are building in these films. The Autobots are seriously outclassed and by no way should be able to win the battle, but we know they will inch out ahead and win the day. With Unicron, I see no reason for them to concievably beat him. And every conceivable scenario that does result in victory excludes any humans and requires a leadership matrix.

Most of the fascination of Unicron would be simply in seeing that visualized with the live action styling. The visuals would be amazing, and a battle withing the innards of a transforming planetoid would be a staggering achievement. But that is where it would end. Unicron is a flat personality that simply presents an insurmountable opposition. To me, Unicron is not nearly as interesting a character as he is a cool visual.

I will take an interesting complex badguy any day of the week over a moon that salivates when it sees a planet.

Overall

So in closing let me repeat that I do relate to why people want to see these things, and in many cases I agree that some things they itch to see in the movie. I just don’t see a lot of them happening. At least not the way that some people think.

Is there anything else you would LOVE to see in the movies that you are sure wouldn’t happen?

I love the subjectivity of film. The best part of films was that they were completely subjective. In a nutshell, “You don’t have to like what I like”

I bring this up, as in a recent review I gave a poor rating to Terminator Salvation. In the comment section I was not met with discussion as much as I was challenged telling me I was “wrong” or incorrect in my evaluation. Unfortunately, my views on the film cannot be wrong unless you are suggesting that I am going out of my way to bad mouth a film I secretly found entertaining.

This is where a thin line is drawn between giving a review and giving an opinion. A review simply is at its core, an opinion. More importantly it is MY opinion. The difference in a review is that instead of just saying “I liked it” or “I didn’t like it”, I give a brief explanation about what bothered me.

I can’t go into a deep deconstruction of the film without offering up lots of spoilers, so my points (good and bad) will be spelled out as generally as I can. For those checking the review, I want to share my feelings without exposing too much of the film. But in that review I might say “It was all mindless potty humour” and that might be a negative to me, but then sharing that detail may be a positive to you. Maybe you LOVE a mindless potty humour spoof film. Great. You have gained something by my review despite my personal feelings on it.

But regardless of whehter my personal review of the film differs or lines up with other reviews online, the discussion then turned to you to disagree or agree with my assesment applying your own personal tastes and appreciation to the same subject. Discussion on the topic won’t change my review, you are simply sharing your own feelings on it.

Then there are those who feel that in some cases reviews have some ulterior motive. That’s the beauty of being a blogger and not a media journalist. I am a regular guy who gets the wonderful privilege of writing for you guys to talk about movies. I get a lot of perks that regular guys don’t get, but I am still just a regular movie patron with my own love of movies.

There is no ulterior motive. There can’t be. There is nothing to be benefited by us personally giving a positive or negative review. If I was asked or offered money by a studio to spin my review, you can be sure I would write a story exposing THAT instead.

Today I read an article of a person who’s review integrity I do question. New York Critic Armond White either has the most discriminating and random pallet for film, or he is making a name for himself by simply standing out of the crowd. Today he puts his accreditation on the line and gives a poor review of Up! previously holding a 100% at Rotten Tomatoes

Worst Previews shares:

The man that’s about to ruin the perfect score is New York critic Armond White, who just finished writing his negative review for “Up.” And this guy is no stranger to negative reviews, he previously trashed “The Wrestler,” “Star Trek,” “Milk,” “Slumdog Millionaire,” “The Dark Knight,” “Iron Man,” “There Will be Blood” and “Zodiac.” But “Bedtime Stories” got a thumbs up from him.

Now I am not saying that he HAS to agree with my assessment of those films, but it does seem suspect that he offers up negative reviews on the specific films that are getting attention for getting positive reviews.

I am not saying he couldn’t find those films unappealing. No film is ever perfect. Perfect for YOU maybe, but still not perfect. And I didn’t hate Bedtime Stories. Just convenient that every critically acclaimed film, he hates.

It sounds like he just wants to stand out as “the one guy” in these scenarios. I admit it is possible that he didn’t like those movies, but unlikely that NONE of them live up to the reviews they were getting in his eyes. This is why I presume that he has an ulterior motive. I am sure the publications that print his reviews get attention because of the controversy he offers up.

The one guy in the crowd that says “No” while hundreds say “Yes” will get attention.

One thing you can count on with our reviews here is that we are going to offer up our honest opinion. If John rates Wanted higher than Dark Knight, there is a reason. We will even tell you why. I won’t tell you that you are wrong for liking one film over another.

Recently there is a new trend about the remakes of beloved 80s franchises. Like the recently announced Footloose and Karate Kid

Clearly everyone from our generation is going to see these remakes as a bad idea and are universally hating the idea. Oh they will scream “Why are they ruining my childhood” and think this is a personal attack against anyone who dared to have a personal emotional attachment to these films.

They are not making these films for me/you.

Yup. They hired the High School Musical guy to do a Footloose remake KNOWING that it wouldn’t appeal to 30 somethings that had that film engraved on their very souls. They don’t care if you want it to happen. They don’t care that you have already decided its a bad idea.

Will Smith is going to remake Karate Kid with his offspring KNOWING that people who learned Karate could be learned by doing yard chores and waxing on could care less about it.

This is pure business, and I understand it.

They are attempting to bring these heartfelt franchises to a new generation. Sure we might look upon them as cheap imitations but remember that 20 years from now my kids and other current preteens are going to talk about how cheesy High School Musical was, and how weird that metrosexual pretty boy was but remember how cool they always thought they were.

Don’t believe me? Go watch Footloose. The dancing is hokey, try that today and you might be in an alternative lifestyle club. The music is poppy and prozak happy, and that love interest that you thought was so hot in those red cowboy boots just isn’t appealing anymore. She’s not all that pretty.

But the movie WAS full of hot girls, and WAS full of super cool music and hot dancing and hip fashions. Honestly they were. I dressed like Ren McCormack all through highschool. And my parents couldn’t comprehend me liking that music and dancing like a fool and wearing a hot pink skinny tie to my grade eight grad.

Our youngest generation who will be exposed to these films will remember this generations most inspiring films, but to us they may not seem inspiring. Footloose was a big part of my teenage years, as was Karate Kid, Star Wars and Indiana Jones. They all played their part in my evolution to who I am, just like my friends and family. The pop culture of my time will always have its special place.

Hollywood can’t try to create those moments. No one made Footloose and said, “I hope this movie MEANS SOMETHING to someone out there” They just wanted to make a movie about fun, and dancing.

Everything can change someone even if it is just a tiny bit. For me the movies, music and books I read were important, but at the time they had no idea that it would be.

So like it or not, these remakes are not for you. They are hoping to bring these stories to a new generation. Will they impact them the same way? Maybe they will.

I know my kids will remember that Charlie and the Chocolate Factory movie with the same fondness I recall watching Willy Wonka as a kid. And I know my kids are completely obsessed with the Star Wars prequels and the heaps of Clone Wars era stuff, which will likely stick with them for a long time too.

There is a lot to be said by the titles we allow to label ourselves. Many of which revolve around a fandom. This is what I want to take a look at today, and how the New Star Trek fits in to it all.

The very word fandom is a relatively new term that Wikipedia describes as: a term used to refer to a subculture composed of fans characterized by a feeling of sympathy and camaraderie with others who share a common interest.

This general term has been the label to describe the phenomenon that is most famously recognized by Star Trek fans. These fans are commonly called Trekkies or Trekkers

The distinction between the two titles vary, the more derrogatory split indicating that a Trekker is a Trekkie without the social stigma attached to the more awkward stereotype, while others describe Trekkies as Original Series fans, while Trekkers are fans of the Next Generation. It is possible to be a fan of the show, and not earn either of these titles, as they tend to refer to the real diehards.

So this brings me to the meat of my discussion. Those labels were interchangeable but identified you as a particularily devoted fan of Star Trek. And now this weekend, Star Trek is about to be changed forever.

In the new film, a time travelling badguy (Nero) will be followed by an aged Spock to their earlier days, and the future timeline will be forever altered. We are not just seeing a prequel, but rather a sequel that has a time travel element that will reboot the franchise and clean the slate. Anything is possible now.

So presuming this starts a whole new franchise and revives a sleeping following, what do we call the new breed of fans? After International Friend Kristina was raving about how she was not a fan and far from a Trekkie, she eloquently stated this new film “owned her ass” to which another TMB regular said she was doomed to be called a Trekkie now!

Will there be a new varient of the fan title? New Trekker? Trekatonian? I know, lets just call them Trekites!!

But have we transcended the need for fan titles here? Now that comic book movies and possibly Star Trek are treading on the mainstream, would there even be an evolved title, or has our little Star Trek fandom grown up and thrown off the need for nicknames?

Adaptations are hardly new to Hollywood, and a lot of great stories come from adapting other mediums to the big screen. I would love to see the numbers just to see how many movies are adaptations of novels, comics, shortstories, or tv shows versus original screenplays written specifically to be movies.

But there seems to be a lot of confusion going on about adaptations. Most times, instead of just judging a movie by the movie, there are always people who criticize the film because it was CHANGED from the source material.

Lets take a moment to consider a few things. When something already exists in some medium, whether it be a book, comic, cartoon etc. When they make it into a movie they call it an Adaptation. So lets get real technical

Dictionary.com says:

Adapt:
–verb (used with object)
1. to make suitable to requirements or conditions; adjust or modify fittingly: They adapted themselves to the change quickly. He adapted the novel for movies.
–verb (used without object)
2. to adjust oneself to different conditions, environment, etc.: to adapt easily to all circumstances.

Just so we are on the same page.

An Adaption means that things are being changed to suit the new medium. So right off the bat you should anticipate change.

Now before I carry on, if this sounds like I am targeting you then understand this. I am not. If it feels that way then you were likely just like I was. I WAS ONE OF YOU!! I am not writing this in some effort to bash people who form their opinions in this manner, I just wish to share why I feel this is not as big of a deal for me. I used to jump at any change to hang the label of “flaw” on it and then that sign was so glaringly obvious that I failed to see past it.

That being said, I believe there is merit in how some adaptations change too much from the source material and it becomes detrimental to the film. I am not discrediting this, I just feel that some people sabatoge themselves into not enjoying a movie over something they already know is going to happen. They are going to change stuff.

I am reminded of a discussion that John and I had a few months before the release of Transformers. John was all for Transformers and I was groaning and complaining because I had heard that Bumblebee wasn’t going to be a VW Beetle, and that Optimus Prime was going to be a Conventional Rig instead of Cab-Over. UNACCEPTABLE!!! (John and I disagree on more than people think)

But then John shared something with me that gave me pause. Allowed me to rethink my stance. It went something like this:

Ok, What is the original Transformers cartoon about?

A warring alien race of robots bring their battle to earth and befriend some humans. And at its core we have some really cool robots that transform into vehicles and get into fights, right?

How is Bumblebee being a Camero change any of that? As long as they get the essence of the orignal material, I don’t care what colour the robots are or what they transform into. As long as we get big robots fighting and transforming into cars and stuff.

John didn’t say I was wrong to care that Bumblebee wasn’t a VW. But he didn’t want me to ruin the whole experience over it. Relax. View the film as a film. Try to enjoy it. If it still fails to entertain, then it won’t be because I was trying to dislike it. Transformers had its flaws, and it wasn’t perfect, but I enjoyed myself.

If you go into a movie EXPECTING to hate it and determined to, no matter how good it is, you will hate it. You are trying to.

But adaptations mean that there will be changes. When attempting to make these changes, the screenwriters and producers will make their very best efforts to make changes for a reason. Believe me, they don’t take something out and giggle to each other over beers how THAT thing will just make the fanboys rabid. Each change is carefully calculated and thought out. Sometimes these changes are required (Bumblebee couldnt be a Beetle because VW wouldnt let them) but I have faith that changes made are done with the best interests at heart.

In X-Men, despite the insane following Gambit had among comic book fans, they chose not to have him as a member of the X-Men as his archetype was too similar to Wolverine (Loner, rebel, mysterious hidden past) and the choice to include Rogue lead them to leave out Kitty Pryde (as a core character). Wolverine and Kitty always had a father figure crush going on, so instead they made Rogue and Logan have this dynamic. As the series grew, they made room for other characters. But they had their reasons for all the changes they made.

Sometimes I hear people dwelling on the changes that they fail to see what is similar. “They ignored everything about the book/cartoon/novel”, well if they had, then I could understand the distaste. But with a number of little changes the nose turns up and there is potential to overlook the core essence of the source material.

More recently there seems to be a shitstorm rallying around the Dragonball film. It is deserving of the poor reviews it got as it is a terrible movie. But as an adaptation I don’t think their decisions were poor in adapting the film, but rather they failed to make the film a good film. The characters acted similar to their cartoon counterparts, almost to a flaw. And the premise was at its core the same. A struggle over the collection of the mystical Dragonballs.

However, without considering any of the Dragonball history, the film still fails. Was it because Goku went to highschool? Was it because they left out minor characters like Krillin? No. It failed because it was a bad movie. Unconvincing drama, mediocre action, and poor acting. The film didn’t suffer because of the changes they made from the original source material.

If the movie was entertaining as hell, people would say “I didn’t like that Goku went to highschool or didn’t have a tail. It was still a fun movie”

See the difference there? I didn’t say you couldn’t notice the differences, but at least call it what it was. The movie was bad, and it had nothing to do with the changes.

Accept that there will be changes with any Adaptation. Try to see past them. Hope they don’t ruin your movie going experience.

This is what I try to do, and its worked out ok for me so far.