The festival will open on Thursday April 18th in New Orleans with a screening of the Morgan Neville Documentary Twenty Feet From Stardom and run through Sunday April 21st. LIFF will feature over 50 narrative feature films, documentaries and shorts to be screened in multiple venues throughout Baton Rouge. The films have been carefully selected to include new films, festival favorites, recent releases and a few cult classics. LIFF Programming Director Ian Birnie explains, “The LIFF line-up spotlights three themes that reflect the cultural and social history of Louisiana: Francophone films - namely films from France, Quebec and the Middle East; films that deal with environmental issues - both to honor Louisiana Earth Day (April 21st) and to reflect Louisiana’s activist interest in its own habitat; and music films that encompass musical styles ranging from doo wop and jazz to Italian opera.”

Opening day in Baton Rouge will feature a free Producers’ Conference & Industry Expo at the Celtic Media Centre. The festival will also give guests a chance to attend a variety of workshops on acting, music, development, production incentives and film financing hosted by industry professionals. For a full schedule of workshops and more information please visit http://liff2013.com/workshops.

I can’t tell you how excited I am about the festival. I can think of no better break from the monotony of my end of the semester grind than checking out some new movies and attending workshops that will help me finally figure out whether or not I have what it takes to write a screenplay! Looking at the lineup, I’ve already determined a few “must see” films for myself. The first is Twenty Feet from Stardom. As mentioned above, Twenty Feet From Stardom opens the festival in New Orleans on Thursday April 18th.

The film is a documentary that focuses on the life of a back up singer. While documentaries might not be everyone’s thing, I feel fairly confident that everyone loves music. Twenty Feet From Stardom seems to be a nice showcase of musical talent and the unseen, less glamourous side of music stardom. In the film’s trailer on LIFF’s website the film’s director, Morgan Neville, hints at the struggle between “We and I” that is found in our society. This struggle particularly manifests itself amongst back up singers as they have to put any individual aspirations they might have aside to ensure that the entire group functions cohesively (i.e. put your aspirations aside to ensure the star looks good).

A second film I’m excited to see is A Hijacking. This Danish film is about a commercial ship that is hijacked by Somali pirates and held for ransom. The trailer is only a minute long but it does a wonderful job of building up tension. I can’t wait to be stuck to the edge of my seat as the deadly chess game between the pirates and the corporation that owns the ship plays out.

As mentioned previously, I’m working on my PhD in Political Theory, so my third pick, Hannah Arendt, shouldn’t be a big surprise to anyone who is familiar with the field. The film focuses on Ms. Arendt’s controversial work for The New Yorker during the war crimes trial of Nazi Adolf Eichmann. The film will be even more interesting for me since I’m due to write a paper on totalitarianism in just a few weeks and will be confronting the “banality of evil” along with the role of individual citizens in resisting tyranny.

The final film on my “must see” list is Starbuck. The movie is about a man who through his donating sperm years early has fathered over 500 children, with 142 of them filing a lawsuit to find out who their father is. Of course the comedy of this comes not only from the fact one man has fathered so many children, but that “Starbuck” aka David Wozniak is the last person you’d want to father your child. If the trailer is any indication, many of Wozniak’s children are doing better than he is. From the looks of it, the film seems to have an “Apatow-esque” element to it; the laughs are a vehicle to deliver life truths.

Don’t let my parents know, but it seems next weekend I’ll be busy shirking my school duties in favor of watching movies (what else is new?). I invite you to join me in showing your support for the fine men and women who have worked so hard to bring us the inaugural Louisiana International Film Festival by attending a workshop or checking out a movie or two. With workshops to attend and over 50 movies to choose from there’s something for everyone.

Check out the list of films and schedule online at www.liff2013.com.

I was never a big fan to begin with, but after the past week, I've decided that I will no longer put up with their poor business model. "What do you expect for around $1?" I expect the company to deliver on its biggest selling point, convenience. Redbox says it has kiosks located all over the country and you can rent a movie and return it to any kiosk! Sounds wonderful, until you get stuck trying to return a movie to a kiosk that is full. Now you're left with having to trek to another location to return the movie or eating the cost of an additional night. Of course, Redbox will gladly make things right, but to them, "making it right" isn't removing the additional cost from your credit card, but rewarding you with a free night rental (in the case of Blu-ray, a discount). Of course, at first glance a promo code and removing the charges might seem like the same thing, but they're not. A promo code has an expiration date and forces me to rent another movie in order to obtain my benefit. Taking the charge off my card keeps me from having to waste time and money finding another Redbox. Basically we have a role reversal on our hands. Someone is going to lose time and money and for Redbox, they'd rather that be you. 

Of course, this decision to stop filling the coffers of Redbox didn't come about randomly, so here's a little context: The reason I am done with Redbox is my experience with them in the past week. I am currently enrolled in school at LSU, working on my PhD and from time to time I like to take a break from school and studying by watching a movie. There's a Redbox kiosk located in the LSU Student Union, so it's convenient for me to swing by after class and grab a movie, watch it that night and return it the next day to the exact same kiosk. Last Tuesday I rented The Amazing Spider-Man and The Dark Knight Rises on Blu-ray. When I went to return them Wednesday I received a notification that the kiosk couldn't accept my return and was given a number to call. I called the number and spoke with a gentleman at Redbox who apologized for the inconvenience and who assured me they'd work with me to solve my problem. He mentioned a nearby kiosk that just so happens to be off campus and out of my way. I was sick on Wednesday, heading to the doctor that afternoon, so I wasn't feeling well enough to trek all over Baton Rouge to return a movie. Thankfully, while I was speaking with the Redbox employee another student rented a movie, so I was able to return one of my films. Having been assured that the problem could be easily remedied if I called Redbox once I both movies, I proceeded to go to the doctor and go home to rest up.

Needless to say, I was so sick that I couldn't do much over the next few days, so I wasn't able to return my movie until a few days after initially trying to do so. I was able to return my 2nd movie to the kiosk in the student center without any problems after a few days of resting at home. I fully expected that I wouldn't get credit for every day it was late, as the problem was technically only present on Wednesday and the additional days were due to my being sick. That was fine, I was the one who got sick, not the machine. I contacted Redbox after the kiosk processed my return and the agent was helpful, but I was upset to learn that I wouldn't be getting credit put back on my card for the extra night, instead I'd receive three promo codes. I was still appreciative that they acknowledged my plight, so I willingly accepted three promo codes. 

After class on Monday I decided to grab a movie from Redbox because I had a promo code that expired Tuesday from a text message they'd sent me. I went to return the movie on Tuesday and once again, the kiosk couldn't accept my return because it was full.* I was obviously frustrated, but I perused the kiosk's selection and found another movie that I'd like to rent and decided I could utilize one of my three promo codes to free up room for my one return. I did a "one for one" (rental for return) trade if you will. Frustrated with the situation I decided to contact Redbox to request their technician check the kiosk more often. It was Tuesday evening after all and the kiosk should have had room since new releases came out that day. The representative offered to send me more promo codes, but I already had two more to use and I was just giving them a suggestion to improve their service. 

Wednesday morning rolls around and I decide to get on to campus early to grab some breakfast. I make sure I bring my movie as I want to be sure to return it so I don't incur any late fees. Unsurprisingly, the kiosk is too full to accept my return, but chalking it up to the fact the technician couldn't have made it to the kiosk at such an early time, I went ahead and decided to return the movie after class (which ends at noon). When I returned to the student union after class I once again found the kiosk full. I couldn't believe it. Sure, it had only been a few hours, but you'd think that someone complaining about a kiosk being full would result in some sort of action. It was at this point that I had reached my breaking point, I would no longer deal with Redbox. Yesterday afternoon I returned my final Redbox rental, Expendables 2, to a kiosk outside of my local CVS pharmacy.  

I know I'm not the only one who has experienced the frustration of a full kiosk, but the fact that the way the company makes things "right" is by having me spend more money on rentals (because promo codes don't cover the entire cost of Blu-ray rentals) is infuriating. Sure there are multiple locations to return films to, but the student union kiosk is convenient to me, especially since I walk to class. Thankfully I have access to an automobile to drive to a kiosk, so I'm not trapped by late fees due to a full kiosk, but not everyone has that luxury. Besides, isn't the point of the Redbox kiosk supposed to be convenience? I fail to see the convenience of having to waste gas money just to return a movie to a red cube outside a gas station or grocery store when the most conveniently located kiosk was full because the company was not smart enough to notice that the volume of sales was so low the machine was accepting more returns than doling out rentals. I'm tired of playing Redbox's nickel and dime game. The fees for extra days and gas money wasted on returns is not worth it. 

I stopped receiving Netflix rentals because I was trying to save money, but I'm now reconsidering that stance. Am I really saving money if I have to make unecessary trips to a kiosk outside of a store exclusively to return a rental? I don't think so. Between late fees and gas money I guarantee I'm close to spending the $10 a month it'd cost me to have movies shipped right to me and that doesn't even take in to consideration the fact that Redbox's selection is extremely limited compared to Netflix. 

Maybe it is because I'm old school, but I really do miss having an actual video store in town. In Auburn, we had a store called Hastings (it's still there). They rented movies and games. They also sold them in addition to music and books. Sure you had to make a car trip to rent a movie, but when you went in to the store they had multiple copies of new releases in addition to thousands of older films. They also offered rental credit which brought the cost in line with Redbox. With Redbox, you do not have the same level of assurance of the newest releases being in stock and when you go to return it, the kiosk might be full. At rental stores you don't have this problem. The stores take all returns and process them. All you do is drop them off. 

I lament the rise of Redbox kiosks because they helped to run video stores out of existence. We traded convenience for customer service. Now we're stuck in towns without a competitor for the kiosk, subject to the tyranny of someone who will never look us in the eye and will only offer us more opportunities to line their pockets instead of making sure they make things right by their customer. It's a sad state of affairs and I've had enough of it. 

*Note: Until last week I'd never encountered a full kiosk

I think it's important to mention a few things before getting down to the nitty-gritty. First off, I tweeted during the Golden Globes I'd have things shake out this way, Best Director: Ben Affleck for Argo and Django Unchained as Best Picture. Surprisingly, the Academy snubbed both Affleck and Tarantino in the Best Director category. I absolutely loved Django Unchained, as it is immensely entertaining but still has an emotional core to it, but I give Affleck major kudos for making me feel tons of suspense in a movie where a lot of folks were aware of the outcome. That's why I felt he deserved a lot of credit and the Best Director Award. Making you feel emotion in a situation where you probably shouldn't is a special thing and Mr. Affleck did a wonderful job creating tension and putting you into the uncertainty of a hostage situation.

Who should lose their spot as a Best Director Nominee to allow room for Affleck? Since I haven't seen Amour or Life of Pi I don't think it fair to automatically dismiss their directors, so my vote goes for Benh Zeitlin. I just didn't enjoy Beasts of the Southern Wild. I think this is a case of an amazing performance by a young actress causing people to overestimate the overall quality of a film. Quvenzhane Wallis was great as Hushpuppy in Beasts of the Southern Wild, but overall the film left me with an overwhelming sense of "meh" and a general amazement that so many could proclaim the film one of the years best (even the Academy put it on their list).

Once again, awards time gets me worked up on whether or not people can tell the difference between a boring movie that is artistic and a boring movie. Boring does not equal artistic. I was worried The Master would be mistaken for profound when it was actually just a couple of great performances by its lead actors that gave the film any sort of redeeming qualities. I think The Master is a great example of a boring movie that somehow takes on a transcendent quality because folks get bored by it and they instantly know that because it is boring it's profound and award-worthy. It's not. It's just a shit movie with some great acting. This again raises the question of whether or not a movie is worth watching strictly for performances and I must say that in some cases the performances are good enough to warrant that, but The Master was really terrible and even the strong performances don't make me feel like it's worth another couple hours of my time.

Ok, on to the real task at hand, discussing who I think should win and who will probably win. Let's start with Best Original Screenplay: My heart wants to go with Django because I absolutely loved the movie and Tarantino was snubbed for directing, but I must say, Zero Dark Thirty is impressive in that they seemingly pieced a movie together out of news stories and possibly classified documents. Sure, it's a dramatization, but the story seems plausible, if not accurate, and I hope Mark Boal is rewarded for the great work he did at creating order out of chaos.

Best Adapted Screenplay could get interesting. Life of Pi seems like it would have been one of those books that was too imaginative to properly translate to the big screen and they seem to have done a good job of doing that. Argo also deserves credit because a lot of folks knew the outcome of the story, but we still became invested in the characters and their plight. For me though, the best adapted screenplay award should go to Lincoln. Spielberg's film was great because it wasn't a movie about slavery, it was a movie about the American political process. Sure, slavery is involved, but the movie speaks as much about our nation's history as it does its present.

Speaking of Lincoln, throughout the entire movie I couldn't help but think, "Man, Tommy Lee Jones might be stealing this movie from Daniel Day-Lewis". Of course, Daniel Day-Lewis is a chameleon, blending into his role as Lincoln so perfectly that you don't think, "This is an actor realistically portraying Lincoln"; instead, you think, "That's President Lincoln, let's watch what he does next". Initially I figured Tommy Lee Jones was a lock for Best Supporting Actor, but now that I've seen Django Unchained and Silver Linings Playbook I'm not so sure. Christoph Waltz is wonderful as Dr. King Schultz in Tarantino's "Southern" and Robert De Niro finally returns to dramatic form. Hell, even Alan Arkin is great in Argo. This might be the strongest group, because the last nominee is Philip Seymour Hoffman who put in a solid performance in The Master. For what it's worth, I'll be cheering for Tommy Lee.

If Best Supporting Actor is the most competitive race, Best Supporting Actress is most likely the least competitive category. Anne Hathaway will most likely win for her performance in Les Miserables and I have no problems with that. Ms. Hathaway really nails her limited role in the film. The only potential competition I see for Ms. Hathaway is Helen Hunt. I haven't seen The Sessions, but it seems like an intriguing film and if I've learned anything about The Academy it's they like it when ladies get naked. Nudity aside, I think Anne's got this one in the bag.

If you'd have asked me when I first saw Flight if there'd be a better performance this year than Denzel's I'd have said "no". Unfortunately, the year kept moving forward and Oscars are judged on the entire performance, not roughly 10-15 minutes. Mr. Washington's performance in Flight during the plane crash is some of the best acting I've seen in a while. I almost wrote a review of Flight precisely because I wondered if anyone had ever won an Oscar in a few minutes of screen time: I'd say Denzel came pretty damn close. I think the real battle in this category is Daniel Day-Lewis as Lincoln vs Hugh Jackman as Jean Valjean from Les Miserables.

I know a lot of folks want to go ahead and give the Oscar to Daniel Day-Lewis, but Hugh Jackman really brought his "A-game" in Les Miserables. I don't know how these things usually shake out post Golden Globes, but Day-Lewis won Best Actor in a Drama for Lincoln while Jackman won Best Actor in a Comedy or Musical for Les Miserables. Something has to give and it'll be fun to see how The Academy voted. I'm cool with either winning although I was really impressed with how well Daniel Day-Lewis "was" Abraham Lincoln, not some over the top caricature of The 16th President of the United States. Then again, Hugh Jackman sang every line of dialogue and did a wonderful job of emoting. Well done gentlemen.

Having never seen Amour I can only say, "If Hushpuppy doesn't win, we riot". The performance Quvenzhane Wallis gave in Beasts of the Southern Wild is the only thing I really care to remember from the film. Sure there are some other redeeming qualities to the film, like its portrayal of life in Louisiana (where I'm attending school), but young Miss Wallis' performance makes the movie. If she doesn't win, I'll be upset. As much as I like Jessica Chastain, I just don't think her performance in Zero Dark Thirty was the best by a female in a lead role this year. Jennifer Lawrence was also good in Silver Linings Playbook, but let's not let the fact she's beautiful and charming get in the way of Miss Wallis winning her Oscar. (Full disclosure: I haven't seen The Impossible, so I can't make any snarky remarks about Naomi Watts' performance)

Before moving on to Best Director and Best Picture, it's important to note that Leonardo DiCaprio was most likely snubbed for his portrayal of Calvin Candie in Django Unchained. They could have easily left Joaquin Phoenix off the list (The Master) and made room for Mr. DiCaprio, but I'm starting to perceive a selection bias towards past winners (i.e. Ang Lee, Phoenix, Meryl Streep) from The Academy. I'm not saying these individuals are undeserving, but it almost feels like half of those voting didn't see some of the films and just go with the name they know will put in a solid performance (it's the college football "tradition" effect that plagues poll voting).

Since Ben Affleck isn't included in the Best Director category, I think it's safe to say Spielberg wins this one. Again, I haven't seen Amour, but I think Mr. Spielberg deserves a lot of credit for making a movie that could have easily become a preachy diatribe about the ills of slavery and Lincoln's heroic salvaging of our union much more about the realities of the political process and how real change, as painful as it is to wait for, must occur piecemeal.

Prevailing wisdom seems to be that since Affleck was snubbed for Best Director, Argo will win Best Picture. This predicament is why I hate the potential for selection bias within The Academy. Had they not possibly played favorites with Ang Lee (Life of Pi) or let their love of Hushpuppy's fine performance elevate Benh Zeitlin's stature, we could have had a true vote for Best Picture and not a make up award. I enjoyed Argo, but I don't think it was the best movie of the year. As I already mentioned, my choice for Best Picture is Django Unchained, but I doubt it will get as much consideration as it should simply because voters feel they should act to right the wrong done to Mr. Affleck. I'm not saying Django Unchained would have won Best Picture, but I simply worry there's no chance it or any of the other nominees got a fair shot after The Academy snubbed Mr. Affleck.

*Note: Pretty excited to see what Mr. MacFarlane does as host. I'm personally a fan of a Muppet Oscars, but if Mr. MacFarlane was given creative input and could use some of his circle to write jokes, it should be a fun show. If they made him use the past Oscar writers, it'll be another "so-so" show.

Feel free to comment and rub it in my face how wrong I am! Enjoy the show!

So, what have I been up to? Well, I had to leave my home on the Plains of Auburn, Alabama in order to begin working on my PhD at Louisiana State University (LSU). Believe it or not, I was accepted into the LSU Department of Political Science's PhD program to pursue my degree, specializing in Political Theory. Due to the fact that this huge shake up in my life occurred within a matter of a month or so, my work on the blog had to take a backseat to getting everything in order for the move. I'm settling in nicely, even having found a cool movie theater in town to watch films (check out the picture below of the outside)! I can't wait to get back to writing for the blog, but right now I'm working on making sure I stay afloat in school. It's been a few years since I was last in school, so I'm having to readjust to all the reading...and more importantly the monotony of it. 

Anyways, you might not care, but I thought it'd be better to explain to everyone why the page hasn't been updated. I haven't given up on making this the best movie blog on the internet, I've just been busy improving myself, which I believe will, in turn, make my site better. Please don't give up on me...I'm still here and I still love movies. I'm just having a hard time finding time to tell you about them right now. Thanks for understanding!

The Mentors. 

I must admit, I wasn’t particularly impressed with Team Giada. No one on her team had the “it” factor in my mind. The only one I thought might have a chance was the Hawaiian Hunk Ippy. It turns out I was almost right as Ippy was one of the final two on Team Giada, barely missing out on the chance to shoot a pilot episode to be shown to the viewing audience who are the ones making the final decision this season. 

I also picked the first runner up from Team Bobby, Nikki Martin. From the beginning I thought Nikki had star potential, but as the weeks went on and the tweets were analyzed it appeared Bob and Susie, along with other viewers didn’t like her very much. In Nikki I see a confident young woman. Others see an arrogant young woman. Regardless, she persevered week after week making it to the final elimination, losing the chance to shoot a pilot in favor of Michele Ragussis.

From the beginning I found more folks on Team Alton who I felt had star potential. From week one I thought Justin or Emily could make it to the finals. I was right about Justin, but Emily was eliminated in one of the more controversial eliminations I can remember. Bob and Susie reamed Emily for not telling a personal story, instead opting to keep Martita who had in the same episode botched a promo, leaving 30 seconds of dead air. Emily’s elimination had me thinking, "here we go again"; they keep someone on the show that will shoot a program no one will watch beyond the first season and let someone with a fun and interesting personality go. 

As mentioned above, Justin made it to the finals for Team Alton. Joining Justin in the finals was fellow Team Alton member Martie. I must say Martie’s start to the competition was less than stellar. I actually thought she’d be eliminated early in the competition, but her Southern Charm is endearing and she has proven herself worthy of a spot in the finals alongside Ivan, Michele and Justin. 

Now that you know a little about how we got to this point, it’s time for my predictions! I’ll go through each finalist talking about what I like or dislike and will give reasons why I think they’ll win. 

Yvan Lemoine has really won me over as the weeks have gone by. Initially Ippy was the only person I saw as a potential star from Team Giada and even then it was only out of trying to find someone I thought could represent the team in a final. Over the weeks Yvan began to surge, finally learning to open up on camera and winning people over with his charm. For his pilot, Yvan chose to go with the title, Family Style.

For Yvan, cooking is a great way to bring your family together. I like that. For me, food has a wonderful social component. From tailgating to family reunions food serves as a fun way to gather together and spend time with friends and loved ones. I appreciate what Yvan is trying to do, but I feel like Food Network already has shows catering toward family. Off the top of my head I can think of Ten Dollar Dinners (with Food Network Star winner Melissa d’Arabian) and The Pioneer Woman as shows that have a cooking for family theme. 

Yvan’s saving grace could be two things. One is the poor economy. In his pilot he made a cost effective mac and cheese. In a down economy, people will be looking for ways to feed their families on a tight budget. Although he’s shooting for “family style” Yvan could stretch his concept into a meals on a budget show, but again he’s veering toward Semi-Homemade or Ten Dollar Dinner territory. The 2nd thing I think might help Yvan is the fan vote. Coming from Team Giada he might get the backing of Martita fans. In fan voting Martita was always near the top. After her elmination you have to wonder where her fan votes would go. My guess, they don’t all go to Yvan, but a lot will. Team Alton has two finalists so any potential gain of Martitia votes Justin might have gotten could be divided with Martie.

Team Bobby’s finalist was Michele Ragussis. I have never been a big fan of Michele. It’s nothing personal, I just feel like the network already has a Michele Ragussis in Anne Burrell. Another concern I have about Michele is her culinary point of view, My New England. How diverse is the regional cuisine of New England? I just don’t really see an entire series being created out of the point of view. If she does try different cuisines and the show is called My New England I’ll be frustrated because one thing we’ve continually seen contestants badgered about is a consistent point of view. With Michele fans might be voting more for her personality than her point of view. 

Team Alton’s finalists will have the toughest hill to climb in my opinion. Fan favorite Justin might have run away with the votes, but the addition of Martie to the mix really makes things interesting. Justin’s point of view is Rebel with a Culinary Cause. Throughout the competition I’ve really enjoyed watching Justin because you can definitely see him as a young Alton Brown and can’t help but get excited about the possibilities of the two working together on a show. One potential pitfall I see for Justin is him being too weird for viewers. Some might also think he’s arrogant, a “culinary know it all” if you will. 

Last, but not least, we have Martie. As I mentioned she really rounded into shape as the competition went on and set herself up for a shot at becoming a Food Network Star by getting herself to the finals. Martie’s pilot was called Martie with the Party. Her culinary point of view is more or less helping you create a fun party environment featuring good food and accompaniments, all on a budget. Martie’s biggest problem will not be with her personality, but her point of view. Sure, the Food Network already has a charming Southern woman on their roster in Paula Deen, but more-so I think the  problem Martie will face is whether or not her point of view is unique enough for her to earn a spot as a Food Network Star. Sandra Lee’s Semi-Homemade has a similar theme, party planning that is easy and budget friendly. There’s also the problem of Martha Stewart. She’s not on Food Network, but how many ladies do we need to be taking party planning tips from? If the network is looking for someone to build a brand around, Martie is the clear choice. She’s got a great personality so you can rest assured she’ll have fans who’ll buy products bearing her name. The big question is whether or not fans are looking for someone to sell them cookware or who can teach them how to get the most out of the cookware they already have.

To quote Captain Planet, "The power is yours!!"

So who will win? The answer isn’t very simple I’m afraid. Based solely on the pilots, I would go with Michele. She cooked a clam dish. I’ve never really eaten clams, but the way she prepared them made me want to and made me believe I could easily do so. For me the Food Network is about making home cooks look like professionals. I think everyone wants something different from the network, but for me, it’s learning how to make food at home that is big on flavor, but small on complexity.

I must say I felt like Justin dropped the ball with his pilot. He took a traditional Caesar salad and jazzed it up with some fancy gelatin trickery. I appreciate thinking out of the box, but doing so on a salad seems like overkill. I’d rather Justin help me learn about exotic foods or use traditional foods in a new way than overly complicate classic dishes for the purpose of being different. It’s fun to watch, but difficult and time consuming to replicate. 

Yvan and Martie both turned in decent performances in their pilots, really showing their point of view, but not really “wowing” me. As I mentioned before I think Yvan might be saved by the poor economy. Families on a budget will be willing to watch his show to find out ways to cook good food without breaking the bank. Martie could also benefit from the down economy. She will be showing folks how to throw a party without spending too much time or money on things. Overall though, I think both of their pilots were pretty pedestrian. Michele had by far the best pilot in my opinion. 

Unfortunately for Michele, I believe the pilots alone won’t determine the winner. The fan vote decides the winner, so basically this thing boils down to a glorified popularity contest. Justin seems to have been winning the fan vote over the past few weeks. As mentioned above though, I think the big question is where the Martita vote goes. I could honestly see Yvan winning as some back away from Justin and his complicated Caesar salad and the Martita block votes for her Team Giada teammate. I’m actually going to predict Yvan in an upset. On a personal level though, I want Justin to win. I loved Good Eats because it taught me about food while teaching me how to prepare good food. Justin, working with Alton Brown as producer, could recapture this magic and teach America how to use exotic ingredients in fun and interesting, yet practical ways. We’ll find out tomorrow night!!

Review:

Friday afternoon Auditorium 9 at the Wynnsong 16 in Auburn was transformed into a dark den of cougars waiting to feast their eyes on a whole bunch of man meat. I’m not kidding when I say I was one of two guys in the entire theater. The other guy’s wife made him go, I just wanted to see a bunch of dudes shake their asses (eye roll)...I must say I really was concerned I had made a mistake and would be in for two hours of nude dudes, but thankfully there weren’t any bare penises (peni?) to be found in the film. 

I think what really attracted me to the movie was how director Steven Soderbergh had managed to put a fresh spin on the familiar “stripper with a heart of gold” story. Make no mistake, Mike is a man with a dream. He wants to give up his life of manual labor and stripping to start his own custom furniture business. His custom furniture business is equivalent to Candy or Destiny’s medical school education...each does what they have to in order to make their dream a reality. Not all roads to The American Dream are paved in gold; some take twists & turns through dark alleys and down lonely back roads. 

Perhaps the biggest surprise many people will have watching the movie is Channing Tatum. He seems to be “the man” right now. After the success of 21 Jump Street, Paramount allegedly decided to push back G.I. Joe: Retaliation in order to reshoot the movie in order to capitalize on Tatum’s rising star. I’m annoyed Paramount would do such a thing as I don’t think it fair to the director to make them change their vision, but there’s no denying Tatum is proving to be a big box office draw. His performance in Magic Mike proves he’s capable of being a leading man in a more serious movie, so Paramount could be laughing all the way to the bank. 

Tatum’s performance as “Magic Mike” isn’t exactly Oscar worthy, but I think it’s a step in the right direction toward proving he’s more than another pretty face. Tatum’s performance shows depth and never once was I thinking, “Man this goofball is terrible”. In fact on my drive home I was amazed at how invested I was in the movie for the first half or so. I almost felt as if I was watching a documentary portraying a day in the life of a male stripper. 

Tatum is charming as Mike. If I’m being honest, I could imagine a male stripper with a chiseled body and killer dance moves to be a bit of an asshole, but that’s not Mike. He’s just a regular guy trying to save enough money to start his own business. He does what he does because it helps him toward his longer term goals. Sure there are perks (such as women) to his job but he doesn’t ever let the excesses surrounding his lifestyle to become a distraction. 

Channing Tatum is fun to watch as Mike, but Matthew McConaughey might be more fun to watch as Dallas. More or less, Dallas is the old timer who serves as a mentor for Mike and the other dancers when it comes to the “Dance Revue”. McConaughey really brings it as Dallas. I’ve never been to a strip club, male or female, but I venture to say that choreographed group numbers aren't done on the regular. The absurdity of this cracks me up. The man behind the madness is Dallas. Watching McConaughey coach up a new dancer in his skimpy outfit gave me a couple big laughs. 

One of the great things about the movie for me is that the film develops the minor characters enough that we get insight into their personalities without wasting too much time on them in favor of the main characters. The supporting cast is really good. Kevin Nash is a personal favorite as Tarzan, mainly because I grew up watching him as a wrestler so seeing him in a major Hollywood movie is funny to me. All of the other male strippers are unique and the actors portraying them do a good job of fleshing out their characters with limited screen time and dialogue. 

Although my thoughts so far would indicate otherwise, Magic Mike is not a perfect film. I found my interest in the film waning towards the end. It seemed the movie hit a bit of a rut and began to drag along without much happening. Perhaps this was intentional as being stuck in a rut is a theme to be found in the movie, but my guess is the story just lulls just past the half-way point. Thankfully, this is forgivable and the movie finishes fairly strong.

Rating: Pretty Good

Verdict: I really doubt there are many people on the fence about this movie. A lot of people are going to want to see it for the guys; others will avoid it for this reason. Maybe I was imagining things, but it seemed the energy level in the theater dropped as the movie went along...many seemed to come in expecting two hours of naked guys only to find a pretty good story and movie. I think a lot of people will be surprised at how human the story is. Magic Mike is much more a story about people who strip than stripping people. Mike even says as much in the trailer when he tells Brooke, “I’m not my lifestyle”. Is the movie a groundbreaking character study? No, but it also doesn’t sacrifice characters at the expense of excessive nudity and male thrusting (though there’s plenty of thrusting)...Bottom line, I think folks shouldn’t pass up the movie due to preconceived notions. If you’re feeling adventurous, check it out!

Notes:

Rising Stars: I already mentioned how good Channing Tatum is, but there are a few others who might be names to look out for. Alex Pettyfer is good as Alex. I enjoyed his performance in Magic Mike and really enjoyed watching him in last year’s I Am Number Four. He could be poised for a big break after Magic Mike. 

Olivia Munn is also one to keep an eye out for. Geeks already know her from her stint on G4, but I was impressed with her acting skills after seeing her in more than a small bit part like the ones she played in Iron Man 2 and Date Night. In Magic Mike she proved to me she has the talent to be more than another pretty face. She’s also has a role in the new HBO hit, The Newsroom.

Finally, Cody Horn is good as Alex’s older sister, Brooke. Miss Horn’s Brooke serves as the audience’s voice of reason in the film. She questions the career choices of Mike and Alex, asking the questions most of us would have for someone who takes their clothes off for a living. She does all of this without coming across as “high and mighty”. Miss Horn has a nice, down-home charm to her. I’m interested in seeing how her career pans out. 

Who Comes Up With This Stuff?: I was really impressed with Magic Mike's writing, from the way the potentially larger than life characters were humanized to the way the personalities of the smaller characters were portrayed in a few lines of dialogue. If IMDb is to be believed, this is the first feature that Reid Carolin has written. His only other writing credit being that of a documentary...told you it felt like a documentary!

Rock of Ages:

History: Started as a stage musical around 2006. Hit Broadway in 2009. Now a movie.

Story:

-Fairly straight forward. Young girl heads west seeking fortune and fame. Girl meets boy. Reminds me of Tom Petty’s "Into the Great Wide Open". Young kids with world at their feet...

What you might not like:

-It is a musical. Some folks might be turned off by all of the singing, but let’s face it, a lot of Disney animation we watched as kids had a fair number of songs. Plus these tunes are some of the biggest hits from the 80s.

-The stage production was known for breaking the fourth wall. The movie tends to get a bit silly at times, not sure if that’s due to problems with the script or a nod to its stage roots and how lighthearted that production was compared to others. In a way, I’d rather them pick a tone and stick with it. Not too up and down, but some outlandish bits tend to cheapen some of the more serious bits. 

-Julianne Hough and Diego Boneta. They aren’t bad, but they are outshined by their co-stars. Katherine Zeta-Jones is beautiful and a lot of fun to watch. Russel Brand is good for laughs without being too annoying. 

What Works:

-I know in Team America Matt Stone and Trey Parker teased about Alec Baldwin being the greatest actor of all time, but he’s probably one of the best character actors working today. He’s great as the owner of the night club where Drew and Sherrie work. 

-Malin Akerman is also good. The main reason to see the movie is because of Tom Cruise. I know a lot of folks can’t stand the guy, but I like him well enough. Sure, he acted crazy on Oprah’s couch, but he never gets too political and doesn’t seem to be a creeper, I find that refreshing. 

-Cruise's performance as Stacey Jaxx is excellent. I’d consider it one of the best performances I’ve seen this year. Big departure from Ethan Hunt from Mission Impossible. If Robert Downey Jr. received a Golden Globe nomination for Tropic Thunder, I don’t see why Cruise couldn’t get one for Rock of Ages. He’s that good. 

-Outside of the acting I also enjoyed it because it captures spirit of rock & roll in being true to yourself and finding where you belong. 

Verdict:

-If you don’t like musicals but love good 80s music, perhaps this is the movie that’ll make you appreciate musicals a bit more. If you hate musicals, you might still walk away disappointed, so don’t go expecting any sort of genre-redefining movie. If you enjoy musicals you’ll probably like this one. If even remotely interested in the film, check it out. I think Cruise’s performance is worth the price of admission.

Prometheus:

Really hard to write a spoiler free review of Prometheus. Basically even hard to talk about the movie without spoiling any parts. So basically here are a few reasons why I think you might want to see it:

Visually, the movie looks great. I didn’t see it in 3D, but am hoping to. Some of the visuals are pretty incredible and Ridley Scott actually filmed it for 3D, instead of doing a conversion. Conversion from 2D, to me, is one thing keeping 3D from being widely accepted. That and 3D films are dim. 

Performances: 

-Noomi Rapace is really good. As the movie is related to Alien it’s nice to see another strong female character in a leading role. Sigourney Weaver is an icon and I didn’t spend any time thinking, man I wish Sigourney was here instead of this girl. 

-Michael Fassbender is phenomenal as David. His performance is a lot of fun to watch. Can’t really say much about him without spoiling parts of the movie, but I’m curious to see if everyone else enjoyed watching him as much as I did. 

Verdict:

If you enjoy sci-fi check it out. Also keep in mind it isn’t a true prequel to Alien. Keep those in mind and you should have a good time. 

**Note: I want to see it again. For me, Sci-fi is a fun genre because it allows us to look at ourselves critically, without making any real relevant political or social comments, although they could be made. For me good sci-fi is broad enough that it won’t be limited to speaking to the human condition during a certain time, but through all of our history. 

Review:

If you’ve seen a trailer for the film you already know all you need to know. An evil queen, consumed with vanity, is on a quest to be the “fairest” woman “of them all”. On her quest, the queen learns she only need to consume the heart of Snow White to live forever. 

My positive experience with Grimm and how they’ve updated classic stories really had me excited for Snow White and the Huntsman. After seeing Snow White and the Huntsman I must say it is only a “fair” movie. It’s by no means the worst film I’ve seen, but it’s not one I’m dying to see again either. Snow White and the Huntsman is one of those movies that you mildly enjoy and will watch when it comes on cable and you've got a little time to kill. To clarify this point, it’s best to start with what works in the movie.

Any fairy tale worth its salt needs a good villain. Fortunately for us, Charlize Theron is very good as the evil queen, Ravenna. Theron’s performance as Ravenna won’t win her another Oscar, but it does it’s job, making us despise and fear the evil queen. There is no element of camp in Ms. Theron's performance. As the film wore on I worried they wouldn’t be able to keep Ravenna's "menace level" up, but they were able to, with Theron delivering a solid heel performance all the way until the movie's end. 

Bow to your evil queen in all her glory...

Snow White and the Huntsman really kind of drug along in the middle, only picking up the pace in the last 15 minutes or so. As the film continued to drag along, I worried the filmmakers would end up (unintentionally) putting some cringe-inducing dialogue into the film. To their credit, the screenwriters didn’t drop the ball in this respect. 

Theron’s performance is by far the strongest in the film. It’s a shame that Kristen Stewart was chosen to be the "yang" to Theron's "yin". Stewart isn’t terrible, but I have trouble believing she could inspire someone to eat their vegetables, yet alone inspire an entire kingdom to rebel against their ruthless queen. Stewart's performance could be the most flat and soulless I’ve seen since January Jones' as Emma Frost in X-Men: First Class. At least Jones' performance could be defended by the fact Frost was supposed to be a cold-blooded character. 

Thankfully, Stewart’s lack of charisma didn’t derail the entire movie. While on the subject of disappointing performances, I must mention Thor himself, Chris Hemsworth. Perhaps Hemsworth is just a victim of circumstance, but I couldn’t shake the feeling that I was just watching a powerless Thor in Snow White and the Huntsman, not an entirely different character. Hemsworth’s performance is really uneven. There were moments where I felt he was going to shake off the Thor mold, but inevitably he fell back into it. In fairness, this could be a personal hangup of my own as I’ve recently watched Hemsworth as Thor in The Avengers, but the accent is the same, the mannerisms similar, so he wasn’t really pushing the envelope with his performance.

Even though Stewart and Hemsworth both turn in less than stellar performances, I think Snow White and the Huntsman’s ultimate downfall is the fact that it lacks “heart”. It is by no means a bad movie; in fact, it’s much closer to being a good movie than being a bad one. The film just seems to lack the “it factor” that makes me care about what I’m watching. Perhaps this lack of heart was compounded by the films length, but overall I think Snow White and the Huntsman is just missing that little spark that makes you care for the characters and their plight. 

Rating: Fair

Verdict: If you’re a big fan of Kristen Stewart you’ll enjoy the film. If you want to see Chris Hemsworth run around scruffy and dirty, you’ll find plenty to like. If you like good movies, you should probably look elsewhere.

Notes: 

Girl Power: It’s a shame they botched this film. They had an opportunity to present young women with a strong heroine who was extremely strong and independent, only to betray that with an uncharismatic lead in a heartless production. Watching the movie I couldn’t help thinking how much better the film might’ve been with Amanda Seyfried or Rachel McAdams opposite Charlize Theron.  

Don’t Bring the Kids: Although the film is only rated PG-13, I think parents should think twice about taking their younger kids to the film. It’s pretty dark.  

Fool Me Once (Shame on You): A fair word of warning, the movie has less action than the trailers would lead you to believe. There are a decent number of action scenes, but I felt the trailer portrayed the film as an action film, but it’s definitely more of a drama. 

Review:

Unfortunately, I’ve never seen any of Cohen’s previous “character” movies in their entirety. As such, I can’t say how The Dictator stands up against the likes of Borat and Brüno. I can tell you that I have conflicting emotions about The Dictator. Let’s start with the good. The movie has plenty of laughs and thankfully, not all of them have been featured in promotional materials. 

The movie is also intriguing because it’s a mainstream release with underpinnings of satire. I don’t expect many to go to see The Dictator for these reasons, but I was pleasantly surprised to see that Cohen wasn’t playing things entirely for laughs. The film points out several of the absurdities found in our world today, all without beating viewers over the head with a “message”. 

Cohen's genius is on full display over New York.

The Dictator has a lot going for it. It is funny and pretty smart, but The Dictator is not a perfect film. One question is at the heart of my conflict over whether or not The Dictator is worth a watch: Does a comedy have to work as a “whole” or can the individual parts add up to a satisfying experience? For me The Dictator is a series of funny bits revolving around a tyrant loosely connected by a simple story. I’m not arguing that all comedies must have intricate plots, it’s just I feel like Cohen came up with a lot of funny skits involving Admiral General Aladeen and since he no longer has a tv show, he packaged these skits together as an hour and twenty-three minute movie. 

In general, I don’t know if I can truly recommend The Dictator. I think readers need to ask themselves this question: Were the trailers funny or stupid? If you think they were funny, check out the movie. If you thought the film looked stupid, wait for the DVD, as there are some good laughs to be enjoyed (especially the helicopter tour) but I don’t know if they will add up to a product you’ll feel was worth your money. 

Rating: Decent

Verdict: If you enjoy absurdist humor you’ll find some nice laughs in The Dictator. If you’re on the fence, take the trailer test outlined above to decide whether or not you want to spend an hour and a half with Admiral General Aladeen.

Notes:

Stay “Crassy” San Diego: The teaser trailer for Anchorman 2 premiered with The Dictator. Cohen’s humor is anything but “classy”. Be on the lookout for some lowbrow humor and fun camera shots, especially a particularly creative, but disturbing point of view shot. 

Straight Outta Wadiya: The Dictator might feature one of the coolest soundtracks of the year. The movie not only does a wonderful job of pairing songs with the action on screen, but it does so by utilizing covers of popular songs in Arabic. Bravo.

Cohen for the Win?: I think Sacha Baron Cohen is a talented individual. Sure, he’s a bit edgy at times, but the guy sure can create some fun characters and put them in hilarious situations. I’m hoping we’ll eventually get to see Cohen take on more serious roles. The diversity of his characters leads me to believe he could win some acting awards if given the right “serious” role. It looks like he’s supposed to play Freddy Mercury in the upcoming biopic, Mercury. We shall see if Cohen has what it takes to win an Oscar...in 2014.

As the title implies, I'm planning on letting you know whether or not a movie is a piece of garbage or hidden gem. The fun aspect of this is I'll be hunting for bargain movies in a variety of places; Wal-Mart, Hastings, pawn shops and even yard sales. The idea is to see if the movies you can pick up for $1 are even worth the cheap plastic they were built on. I was lucky enough to find two DVDs for $1 at Hastings last weekend. Stay tuned for my look at whether or not Chuck Norris' Breaker! Breaker! and Stallone's Eye Can See You are "trash" or "treasures"....