<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Scott&#039;s Blog of Doom &#187; Cinema</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.rspwfaq.com/tag/cinema/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.rspwfaq.com</link>
	<description>Dungeon of Death: Chris Benoit and the Hart Family Curse is available NOW!</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 14 Mar 2010 23:30:44 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>I did!</title>
		<link>http://www.rspwfaq.com/2009/03/07/i-did/</link>
		<comments>http://www.rspwfaq.com/2009/03/07/i-did/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 08 Mar 2009 04:17:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Scott Keith</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Rants]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Cinema]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Watchmen]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.rspwfaq.com/2009/03/i-did/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The question of course, is &#34;Who watches the Watchmen?&#34;
I was so completely blown away by this, not just because it was a perfect adaptation, but because it was such an amazing comment on superhero movies in general.&#160; The people involved acted like ADULTS, complete with consequences for violence and people getting hot and bothered because [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The question of course, is &quot;Who watches the Watchmen?&quot;</p>
<p>I was so completely blown away by this, not just because it was a perfect adaptation, but because it was such an amazing comment on superhero movies in general.&#160; The people involved acted like ADULTS, complete with consequences for violence and people getting hot and bothered because of an adrenaline rush.&#160; Rorschach was PERFECT and even though I knew what was coming, it was still very sad when it happened.&#160; Comedian was also very much badass and felt more developed than in the comics, even though he wasn't a character you WANTED to root for or anything.&#160; </p>
<p>My only gripes, protected by spoiler vagueness:</p>
<p>- The eventual villain is pretty much telegraphed if you've read the original comics.</p>
<p>- Too much big blue schlong, although it was balanced out by Malin Akerman getting naked, seemingly as per her contract.</p>
<p>- Patrick Wilson probably should have been a bit paunchier, but he nailed the role as well.&#160; </p>
<p>Basically once we hit the Rorschach prison sequence my friend turned to me and said &quot;This is EPIC!&quot; and I'm inclined to agree.&#160; Probably won't be for all tastes, but it was definitely for mine.&#160; Highest recommendation!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.rspwfaq.com/2009/03/07/i-did/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>11</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>More on the Wrestler</title>
		<link>http://www.rspwfaq.com/2009/01/25/more-on-the-wrestler/</link>
		<comments>http://www.rspwfaq.com/2009/01/25/more-on-the-wrestler/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 25 Jan 2009 20:59:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Scott Keith</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Rants]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Cinema]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Interweb plugs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[The Wrestler]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.rspwfaq.com/2009/01/more-on-the-wrestler/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Great review from John Orquiola, making a lot of points I had in mind while doing my quickie review...
http://www.backofthehead.com/entertainment/2009-01-01.thewrestler.html
I especially liked his observation about how Randy puts forth a pro wrestling mentality to mundane things like playing Nintendo with a kid.&#160; So very true.&#160; 
]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Great review from John Orquiola, making a lot of points I had in mind while doing my quickie review...</p>
<p><a href="http://www.backofthehead.com/entertainment/2009-01-01.thewrestler.html">http://www.backofthehead.com/entertainment/2009-01-01.thewrestler.html</a></p>
<p>I especially liked his observation about how Randy puts forth a pro wrestling mentality to mundane things like playing Nintendo with a kid.&#160; So very true.&#160; </p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.rspwfaq.com/2009/01/25/more-on-the-wrestler/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>3</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Wrestler</title>
		<link>http://www.rspwfaq.com/2009/01/24/the-wrestler/</link>
		<comments>http://www.rspwfaq.com/2009/01/24/the-wrestler/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 25 Jan 2009 00:12:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Scott Keith</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Rants]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Cinema]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Mickey Rourke]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[The Wrestler]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.rspwfaq.com/2009/01/the-wrestler/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Wow.&#160; Finally opened here in Saskatoon, and Mickey Rourke is so very deserving of the acting accolades being given to him.&#160; Yeah, the wrestling stuff isn't a huge shock if you already know about the staple guns and blades and such (although don't they usually leave the staples out of the gun?), but man what [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Wow.&#160; Finally opened here in Saskatoon, and Mickey Rourke is so very deserving of the acting accolades being given to him.&#160; Yeah, the wrestling stuff isn't a huge shock if you already know about the staple guns and blades and such (although don't they usually leave the staples out of the gun?), but man what a tragic story on so many levels.&#160; It just feels so sadly true to the business, and the parallels with Cassidy (Yowza, Marissa has aged quite well!) and her fall from the peak of her profession are well done as well.&#160; And hey, there's even another level, as the 80s hair metal that permeates the soundtrack (the awesomest soundtrack ever, I might add) is made up of bands who are still trying to milk their own former glory and doing the same drugs and ringrats that Randy was.&#160; I think, for me, the best piece of acting was the brief period when Randy was working the deli counter and seemed to be so legitimately happy doing such a mundane job, and I think that was even worse for him than his fall from grace in wrestling was. </p>
<p>Just a brilliant piece of cinema.&#160; Highest recommendation.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.rspwfaq.com/2009/01/24/the-wrestler/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>4</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Fred Claus</title>
		<link>http://www.rspwfaq.com/2008/12/15/fred-claus/</link>
		<comments>http://www.rspwfaq.com/2008/12/15/fred-claus/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 15 Dec 2008 06:15:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Scott Keith</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Rants]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Christmas]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Cinema]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[DVD on TV Reviews]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Frank Stallone]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fred Claus]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[John Michael Higgins]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Paul Giamatti]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Santa Claus]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SmarK Rants]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Vince Vaughn]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.rspwfaq.com/2008/12/fred-claus/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The SmarK DVD Rant for Fred Claus
How's this for a high concept Christmas movie: Santa Claus has a ne'er-do-well brother named Fred (played by Vince Vaughn, as Vince Vaughn) and a nebulous &#34;board&#34; is trying to shut down the North Pole for cost-cutting reasons.
 

Now, this was a movie that kind of bugged me because [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The SmarK DVD Rant for <i>Fred Claus</i></p>
<p>How's this for a high concept Christmas movie: Santa Claus has a ne'er-do-well brother named Fred (played by Vince Vaughn, as Vince Vaughn) and a nebulous &quot;board&quot; is trying to shut down the North Pole for cost-cutting reasons.</p>
<p> <span id="more-1314"></span>
</p>
<p>Now, this was a movie that kind of bugged me because it provoked all sorts of questions in me without any kind of payoff for them, but then I doubt I'm really the target audience anyway. <i>Fred Claus</i> introduces the Claus family in flashback, with a family scenario that many can relate to, as older brother Fred constantly gets overshadowed by do-gooder Nicholas (a real saint, he is), causing much resentment in him later on. Now, this raises the first question I had: Are they all immortal or what? The movie basically notes that Santa has been around for over 200 years, but does that mean Fred has been around for that long, too? Wouldn't dating get pretty boring for him after that length of time, watching any potential long-term relationship wither away and die because of the normal passage of time that he's immune to?</p>
<p>OK, I'm thinking too much about this, I'll get back to the review. In the present, Fred is dating a meter maid (played by Rachel Weisz with an accent right out of <i>Supernanny</i>) and running a scam charity that results in a funny chase through the streets of the city between himself and twenty Salvation Army Santa Clauses. Kind of an obvious set piece, but I laughed. Using his one phone call in jail, he gets brother Santa to bail him out, but Santa has a counter-offer for him: Come work at the North Pole and all his money issues will be solved. However, since you need a villain, even in silly Christmas movies, we get Kevin Spacey as a slimy bureaucrat, who gives Santa &quot;three strikes&quot; to shape up or &quot;the board&quot; will shut down his operation. Who is this board? What authority does Spacey have? It's never addressed, which is another thing that kind of bugged me. Can Fred stop being such a goof-off and help to save Christmas for his brother while learning valuable life lessons along the way? I'm sure you don't need to see the movie to figure out the answer.</p>
<p>Luckily, there are many more bright spots than cloying Christmas moments, like John Michael Higgins as the head elf, the always tremendous ninja elf battle, Paul Giamatti playing it as understated as possible in the role of Santa Claus, and my favorite bit in the movie: A support group for overlooked brothers, featuring Steven Baldwin, Frank Stallone and Roger Clinton. Stuff like that shows that the movie has little touches of humor for grown-ups as well as kids. But mostly the movie is for kids, as evidenced by director David Dobkin actually including a scene where Fred Claus gives a puppy to his little black orphan friend as a Christmas gift. I nearly barfed up my milk and cookies when that one actually made it through the cutting room process.</p>
<p>Still, while not as effective as Vaughn's last effort with Dobkin (the hilarious <i>Wedding Crashers</i>), overall the movie works and works well, delivering some laughs and Christmas spirit, even if it's not as laugh-out-loud funny as something like <i>Elf</i>. There was actually a lot of potential movies lurking under the surface here (an <i>Office Space</i> style North Pole movie, or &quot;the board&quot; trying to shut down other beloved traditional holidays) but this isn't the type of movie to explore any of them in detail. <b>(Rating: ***)</b></p>
<p><b>Audio &amp; Video</b></p>
<p>Warner presents <i>Fred Claus</i> on a flipper disc, with one side full-screen (useful for resting your cup of egg nog on) and the other side the proper widescreen aspect ratio. I was not particularly impressed with the transfer here, as the picture was overly soft and grainy. I think studios are paying less and less attention to the DVD transfers as they try to force everyone into Blu Ray, and I don't particularly appreciate it. The soundtrack, although Dolby 5.1, as little more than glorified stereo with the occasional bit of surround usage like in the snowball fight or the musical numbers. Dialog was clear and the mix wasn't overwhelmed by the music, so it was fine for what it was. Plus there's lots of Elvis on the soundtrack, always a plus. <b>(Ratings: *** for Video, *** for Audio)</b></p>
<p><b>Bonus Features</b></p>
<p>Not much effort here, either. David Dobkin has a nice, laid back commentary track, and there's about 20 deleted and extended scenes (most of which didn't work and well served to be cut out of an already long movie), and that's it. On the bright side, I don't think anyone would have been wanting to sit through &quot;The Making of <i>Fred Claus&quot; </i>for 20 minutes anyways. <b>(Rating: **)</b></p>
<p><b>The Pulse</b></p>
<p>A thoroughly bland and inoffensive Christmas movie that is funny enough to warrant a watch on DVD but won't replace <i>A Christmas Story</i> in your collection or anything. Mildly recommended.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.rspwfaq.com/2008/12/15/fred-claus/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Punisher</title>
		<link>http://www.rspwfaq.com/2008/12/06/punisher/</link>
		<comments>http://www.rspwfaq.com/2008/12/06/punisher/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 06 Dec 2008 06:51:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Scott Keith</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Rants]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Cinema]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Punisher]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.rspwfaq.com/2008/12/punisher/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Via Facebook...
Subject: Punisher?     Scott,      Any intention of seeing the new Punisher movie?&#160; I'd recommend it, if only on a comic book study basis.&#160; The violence is awesome and so ridiculously over-the-top that you can't help but enjoy it.&#160; I thought Stevenson was a great Castle, and [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Via Facebook...</p>
<blockquote><p>Subject: Punisher?     <br />Scott,      <br />Any intention of seeing the new Punisher movie?&#160; I'd recommend it, if only on a comic book study basis.&#160; The violence is awesome and so ridiculously over-the-top that you can't help but enjoy it.&#160; I thought Stevenson was a great Castle, and far more believable as the grizzled war vet out for revenge than Janey was (and I actually sort of enjoyed Janey's performance).&#160; Also, if you get around to seeing it...see if you notice the same thing I did:&#160; that Dominic West plays Jigsaw almost as an homage to Nicholson's Joker, switching from sadistic to slapstick in the blink of an eye.&#160; It's not an offensive performance, but it's also not really who Jigsaw was.&#160; That said, outside of Stevenson's performance, the acting is pretty fucking terrible, but the violence is so satisfying that you don't really care.&#160; Besides, since when has the Punisher been about dialogue?&#160; Just curious on your thoughts.      <br />-Donnie</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Saw it tonight, in fact, and I thought it was pretty awesome for what it was -- an over the top stupid and violent tribute to 80s action hero movies.&#160; I think once you're in on the joke it becomes a lot more entertaining than someone going in expecting a slick movie like the 2004 version, because really you need a certain sense of humor to appreciate Punisher punching someone THROUGH the face and blowing someone's head off with a shotgun as a punchline.&#160; Julie Benz gets sucked into yet another helpless female role (her new specialty when she's not showing her goods on Dexter) and appears to be the only one not having fun with it.&#160; I actually enjoyed Loony Bin Jim as a villain more than Jigsaw (who went from Mafia caricature to goofy Dick Tracy villain way too easily) and found the climactic battle the most disappointing thing about the movie.&#160; Plus all the squishy sound effects got a little silly and tiresome after a while.&#160; </p>
<p>But really, if you can find a better and more hilarious death scene than the idiotic Irish parkour guys and their run-in with Frank Castle's big gun,&#160; please feel free to share.</p>
<p>I still liked the Tom Jane version better because I'm not a slave to the comics and found it more charming and witty than this brainless gorefest, but I enjoyed the brainless gorefest quite a lot on its own merits, too.&#160; The theatre was maybe 10% full, if that, though, so look for another bomb in the franchise.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.rspwfaq.com/2008/12/06/punisher/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>5</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Twilight</title>
		<link>http://www.rspwfaq.com/2008/11/29/twilight/</link>
		<comments>http://www.rspwfaq.com/2008/11/29/twilight/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 29 Nov 2008 06:22:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Scott Keith</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Rants]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Cinema]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.rspwfaq.com/2008/11/twilight/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[OK, I know I probably have to turn in my heterosexual membership card for saying this, but Twilight was kinda pretty good.&#160; Yeah, I didn't LOOOOOOOOVE it as much as Jodi did or the army of 14-year old girls in the audience did, but it far exceeded my low expectations and actually had a lot [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>OK, I know I probably have to turn in my heterosexual membership card for saying this, but <em>Twilight</em> was kinda pretty good.&#160; Yeah, I didn't LOOOOOOOOVE it as much as Jodi did or the army of 14-year old girls in the audience did, but it far exceeded my low expectations and actually had a lot of redeeming value.&#160; They took their time with the story and didn't pack a whole &quot;vampires v. werewolves&quot; battle arc into the first movie like they were teasing, and it was basically a teenage love story instead of a boring fanwank like <em>Underworld</em> or <em>Underworld:&#160; The Even More Incredibly Fucking Boring Sequel</em>.&#160; Plus the teenagers were written to act and talk like TEENAGERS instead of adults, which I liked.&#160; People were awkward and gawky and said the wrong stuff at the wrong time, just like actual people do.&#160; As long as you take the bad dialogue and budget special effects on the deliberately cheesy level that the movie seems to support, getting dragged to it isn't the worst thing in the world.&#160; Thumbs up!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.rspwfaq.com/2008/11/29/twilight/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>9</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Clone Wars</title>
		<link>http://www.rspwfaq.com/2008/11/25/the-clone-wars/</link>
		<comments>http://www.rspwfaq.com/2008/11/25/the-clone-wars/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 26 Nov 2008 05:11:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Scott Keith</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Cinema]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[DVD Reviews]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.rspwfaq.com/2008/11/the-clone-wars/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The SmarK DVD Rant for Star Wars: The Clone Wars
You know, never let it be said that George Lucas is shy about marketing opportunities or self-promotion. A few years after running his prize franchise into the ground with the prequels, now we get The Clone Wars (which should have been the title of Episode II), [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The SmarK DVD Rant for <i>Star Wars: The Clone Wars</i></p>
<p>You know, never let it be said that George Lucas is shy about marketing opportunities or self-promotion. A few years after running his prize franchise into the ground with the prequels, now we get <i>The Clone Wars</i> (which should have been the title of Episode II), which further mines territory that no one cares about any longer except for pre-teens who are seeing the movies for the first time. Really, do we NEED further examination of the time period between episodes II and III? Isn't the fanbase far more interested in what happened to Anakin AFTER he became Darth Vader?</p>
<p>Technically, this is a sequel to the <i>Clone Wars</i> mini-series from Cartoon Network a few years back, rather than a proper re-interpretation of characters who don't need any further interpretation. And really, it's a franchise for kids now, which I think generates a lot of the bitterness and cynicism among the older fans who grew up and watched Lucas take their movies away from them. But is it at least worth watching?</p>
<p> <span id="more-1279"></span>
</p>
<p><b>The Film</b></p>
<p>As noted, this is one of the seemingly endless &quot;untold stories&quot; of the Clone Wars, with Generals Obi-Wan Kenobi and Anakin Skywalker fighting on behalf of the Republic against the evil Separatists (kind of like the Bloc Quebecois but with less French), although the politics in these movies are so convoluted and dull that you might as well just call one side &quot;the good guys&quot; and the other &quot;the bad guys&quot; and be done with it. The important thing is you've got the Jedi on one side and Dooku and his robots on the other side. The twist this time around is that Anakin has been tricked into training a Padawan learner named Ahsoka, and boy is she spunky and adventurous! She'd probably be played by Miley Cyrus or one of the chicks from <i>High School Musical</i> in a live action movie, which is another source of the backlash against this thing, as they're pretty obvious in their attempts to pander to a certain chunk of the population.</p>
<p>The movie itself breaks down into three fairly distinct parts (because it was originally intended as a backdoor pilot for the current TV series, naturally) which have just enough connection to each other to hold together as one movie, if nothing else. The first part sees Anakin (or &quot;Skyguy&quot; as too-cute-to-live Ahsoka dubs him) getting his new student while engaged in a life-or-death struggle against Dooku's troops on some planet for some reason or another. I'm finding it harder to care at this point in the franchise, to be honest. It's also harder to invest anything emotionally when one side is a nameless and faceless horde of clones and the other is a group of wise-cracking cannon fodder androids, and I think that's also due to the new younger demographic. The stakes are much lower when you know nothing truly bad is going to happen. Not to say there weren't some good bits here, as the giant battle was kind of cool and Obi-Wan's &quot;surrender&quot; to the apparently-Scottish enemy leader provided a couple of chuckles, but essentially it added up to 30 minutes of exposition and meaningless action.</p>
<p>Part two sees Jabba the Hutt's son captured by unknown forces (the answer is no great shock, fear not), resulting in Anakin and his new Mary Sue, er, student, going on a rescue mission. And wouldn't you know that Jabba Jr. is just the cutest little thing ever and triggers Ahsoka's mother instincts? Apparently this mission is of vital importance because of vague &quot;supply routes&quot; on the &quot;outer rim&quot; as they struggle to find high stakes without doing anything offend to the family friendly nature of the movie. The villainous wasn't particularly menacing here, either, and could have really used a good slaughtering by Anakin to reinforce his continuing change instead of the GI Joe &quot;last second escape&quot; they went with instead. The final part of the movie sees them journeying to Tattooine to deliver the baby Hutt to Jabba while Dooku attempts to flim-flam Jabba (who would have to be the stupidest gangster in the galaxy to buy any of the crap being fed to him here) into siding with the bad guys instead of the good guys. That was all fine, but then they went and shoe-horned Padme Amidala into the movie by making her into a hero as well, introducing us to (and I wish I was making this up) Jabba's flamboyantly gay uncle Ziro the Hutt. Like, seriously, you could have just taken that entire side-story and just dumped it into the trash, but then the movie would only run 70 minutes, if that.</p>
<p>But really, story problems and stupid new characters aside, the biggest issue I have with this thing is that after 100 minutes, NOTHING HAPPENS. Even if it was just a cynical ad for a TV show, you'd at least like to have your time rewarded with some interesting new bit of information about the Star Wars universe or resolution for the characters, but it just kind of ends and immediately fades from your mind. The movie itself is shot much more theatrically than the previous animated series, but with none of the heart, as all the character models seem plastic and almost like action figures brought to life. Just in time to sell action figures, I'm sure. Commander Cody and Commander Rex are pretty cool and might have been a more interesting way to explore the franchise with, but mining the shallow depths of Obi-Wan and Anakin: The Early Years yet again is only good for a minor distraction. However, pre-teen boys will eat this up with a spoon, so I'll give them full marks for hitting their new target audience dead on. <b>(Rating: **1/2)</b></p>
<p><b>Audio &amp; Video</b></p>
<p>Quality of the movie aside, you can't fault the DVD transfer. Digitally animated and transferred in anamorphic 2.40:1 widescreen, this is a beautiful DVD with no signs of flaw in the picture and lots of brightly colored environments to show off the TV you're watching it on. Things like facial details are very well done as well and make this an impressive disc. The audio is presented in Lucas' standard Dolby Digital 5.1 EX, and again I have no complaints to offer here. Laser fights and space battles whiz around in the surrounds and the subwoofer booms at exactly the right times without being overpowering. A treat for the eyes and ears. <b>(Ratings: ***** Video, ***** Audio)</b></p>
<p><b>Bonus Features</b></p>
<p>The studio only sent me the single-disc edition, which has nothing but the audio commentary from the producers on it. And again, it sounds like it was done for young viewers, talking about nothing more in-depth than how George Lucas came up with the idea of having Anakin's nickname be &quot;Skyguy&quot; before I got sick of it and switched it off for good. <b>(Rating: **)</b></p>
<p><b>The Pulse:</b></p>
<p>This was never really intended as a theatrical release and it shows -- absolutely the least of the <i>Star Wars</i> movies, had it been a different franchise intended for kids only it would have been an OK piece of throwaway sci-fi, but as something carrying this brand name, it's unacceptably mediocre. Only recommended for kids.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.rspwfaq.com/2008/11/25/the-clone-wars/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>14</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Wrestler Trailer</title>
		<link>http://www.rspwfaq.com/2008/11/22/the-wrestler-trailer/</link>
		<comments>http://www.rspwfaq.com/2008/11/22/the-wrestler-trailer/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 22 Nov 2008 06:41:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Scott Keith</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Cinema]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.rspwfaq.com/2008/11/the-wrestler-trailer/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[http://www.worstpreviews.com/trailer.php?id=1207&#38;item=0
Looks pretty good!&#160; Rourke kind of has that Kevin Nash thing going on and it looks like it takes the subject more seriously than the cheesy predecessors do.&#160; I still think there's more potential in a Sopranos-style backstage politics thing with the McMahons (or composites thereof) but that's apparently coming to HBO next year too.&#160; [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.worstpreviews.com/trailer.php?id=1207&amp;item=0">http://www.worstpreviews.com/trailer.php?id=1207&amp;item=0</a></p>
<p>Looks pretty good!&nbsp; Rourke kind of has that Kevin Nash thing going on and it looks like it takes the subject more seriously than the cheesy predecessors do.&nbsp; I still think there's more potential in a Sopranos-style backstage politics thing with the McMahons (or composites thereof) but that's apparently coming to HBO next year too.&nbsp; Now whether this movie ever plays in Saskatoon is another thing entirely.&nbsp; </p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.rspwfaq.com/2008/11/22/the-wrestler-trailer/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>5</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The SmarK DVD Rant for Forgetting Sarah Marshall</title>
		<link>http://www.rspwfaq.com/2008/10/19/the-smark-dvd-rant-for-forgetting-sarah-marshall/</link>
		<comments>http://www.rspwfaq.com/2008/10/19/the-smark-dvd-rant-for-forgetting-sarah-marshall/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 20 Oct 2008 04:07:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Scott Keith</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Cinema]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[DVD Reviews]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.rspwfaq.com/2008/10/the-smark-dvd-rant-for-forgetting-sarah-marshall/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The SmarK DVD Rant for Forgetting Sarah Marshall: Unrated Collector's Edition
&#34;Did you listen to my demo?&#34;
&#34;Yeah, I was going to, but then I decided to keep on living my life instead.&#34;     
Judd Apatow has of course been on a hot streak as a producer ever since Anchorman debuted in 2004, and [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The SmarK DVD Rant for <u>Forgetting Sarah Marshall</u>: Unrated Collector's Edition</p>
<p><i>&quot;Did you listen to my demo?&quot;</i></p>
<p><i>&quot;Yeah, I was going to, but then I decided to keep on living my life instead.&quot;     <br /></i></p>
<p>Judd Apatow has of course been on a hot streak as a producer ever since <u>Anchorman</u> debuted in 2004, and particularly with a genre that he has mostly mastered now -- the romantic-comedy as done from the perspective of the male. Despite the occasional commercial misstep (<u>Walk Hard</u> and <u>Drillbit Taylor</u> immediately spring to mind), Judd has been consistently successful because he's able to make the audience connect with the wacky characters who inhabit his movies by actually giving them human qualities instead of cartoon character personalities. Or at the very least, in ADDITION to the cartoon character personalities.</p>
<p><span id="more-1220"></span></p>
<p><b>The Film</b></p>
<p>The problem with romantic comedies for the past, oh, 30 or 40 years or so, is that they're made for women and generally have very little to offer to the men of the audience. Like really, who gives a good goddamn if suave ladies' man Hugh Grant is unable to score the woman of his dreams? OK, I like Hugh, actually, let's try another example. Matthew McConaughey has built a career out of playing douchebags who only the women in the audience have any vested interest in seeing get with the leading lady. That's great for 50% of the population, but I have no desire to see this guy get the girl. That's the brilliance behind Apatow's formula in turning the rom-com on its head: Peter Bretter (played by Apatow alumnus Jason Segal) is a just a normal looking guy who's a big loser and happens to be dating an incredibly hot actress who is obviously way out of his league. Despite working as a composer on her hit show <i>Crime Scene: Scene of the Crime</i> he's obviously not part of the Hollywood scene and he still buys his sweatpants from Costco like everyone else in the world. Then one day, she (not surprisingly) dumps him for a preening egomaniac rock star who is obviously more well-equipped to deal with her high-maintenance lifestyle than Peter is. Peter goes to Hawaii to forget about Sarah Marshall (hence the title) and not surprisingly, discovers that she is also there on vacation with new boyfriend Aldous Snow (British comedian Russell Brand, who steals every scene so thoroughly that they're spinning him off into his own movie as we speak).</p>
<p>Now the easy way to go would to be make Snow into the devil and Sarah into a huge bitch, but this movie doesn't take the easy way and that's why it works so well. I can actually relate to losing a girlfriend to someone almost exactly like Snow (not as rich, obviously, but similar in personality and mannerism) and the thing that really got me (and gets Peter as well) is that clearly Snow is a cool guy who never really does anything with malice of forethought. He's pretentious, yeah, but he's well-meaning and seems perfectly willing to accept Peter as a friend without the slightest bit of hard feelings, despite Peter coming across as a stalker at the best of times. And yeah, Sarah was cheating on him, but as she explains to him during one of their few moments of honest conversation with each other, Peter wasn't making any real effort to better his life and you can only stick by someone who's unwilling to leave the couch for so long. Obviously this was a movie written by someone who has had the same conversation in real life, and that's why despite all the shock-comedy moments and wacky situations, it's very grounded in real characters who act like real people much of the time.</p>
<p>As usual with Apatow movies, much of the comic heavy-lifting is done by faithful Apatow minions Jonah Hill (&quot;I just went from six to midnight&quot;) and Paul Rudd (&quot;I wonder if the carpet matches her pubes?&quot;), leaving the rest of the cast to fill in the emotional edges themselves. And they do it wonderfully, showing chemistry with each other that few movies in this genre ever display. Does anyone in real life actually buy Matthew McConaughey and Kate Hudson as a couple together? However, Segal is not only believable with love interest Mila Kunis (acting as the calming presence to his manic desperation) but also would have been equally likely to end up back with Kristen Bill again had the script gone that way.</p>
<p>I should note that this one falls more into the &quot;awkward humor&quot; category, generating laughs from Peter's problems relating to humanity, rather than the &quot;big laugh from a wacky situation&quot; type of humor derived in the <u>Knocked Up/Superbad</u> one-two combo from 2007, and as such some people might be disappointed with it. However, for those who have had their heart broken and didn't know what to do about it (but not necessarily finding the answer in writing a Dracula musical), <u>Forgetting Sarah Marshall</u> will prove to be a very funny and very welcome answer to the rom-com crap pumped out by Hollywood, indeed. Easily one of my favorite movies of the year and one that I found several things to relate to with. <b>(Rating: ****1/2)</b></p>
<p><b>Audio and Video</b></p>
<p>As usual in the high-def era, this is an excellent transfer by Universal, featuring no errors that I could see (aside from a GIANT layer change at the one hour mark) and all the bright colors of the Hawaiian setting rendered in fine form. Audio is also good, although it's a mainly a dialogue movie so not much outside of the center channel gets any kind of workout. Ambient sounds pop up in the surrounds and sound impressive, and the surfing and musical sequences both jump across the speakers, so it works when it needs to. <b>(Ratings: Video ****, Audio ***1/2)</b></p>
<p><b>Bonus Features</b></p>
<p>As usual with the Apatow crew, the disc is loaded with extra stuff and a great commentary. But first, let me get off my chest another beef with the movie studios, as they've taken to releasing &quot;3 disc special editions&quot; comprised of two discs of actual content and a third disc containing the &quot;digital copy&quot; of the movie, which is a load of crap. Better to put another hundred million discs of worthless plastic into the environment instead of just taking the copy protection off the movie so people can view their legally purchased films in the format they want, I guess. OK, rant over.</p>
<p>Anyway, as noted this is an absolutely packed set otherwise, featuring a great commentary track from pretty much everyone involved in the movie and having lots of fun with it. The first disc alone also features&#8230;</p>
<p>- 18 minutes of deleted scenes, many of which are REALLY funny and could have easily slid into the movie, like Aldous and Sarah fighting about a broken lamp.</p>
<p>- The &quot;Line-O-Rama&quot; extra with alternate takes of different lines, showing everyone improvising like crazy. Brand's rant about being stung by wasps is another one worthy of inclusion in the movie.</p>
<p>- A gag reel.</p>
<p>- The full video for &quot;We've Got To Do Something&quot;, which god help me is actually a catchy song that I'd listen to on my MP3 player.</p>
<p>- The table read for Peter's &quot;Dracula Lament&quot; song, showing that he really can play the piano.</p>
<p>- &quot;A Taste For Love&quot;, which is a quick featurette talking about Segal wrote the Dracula musical long before this movie and then worked it into the script.</p>
<p>- The unedited footage of the video chats between Peter and his brother.</p>
<p>- The trailer, of course.</p>
<p>That would be enough in most cases, but there's ANOTHER disc as well. The second disc produces&#8230;</p>
<p>- MORE deleted scenes</p>
<p>- An alternate version of Peter singing &quot;Dracula's Lament&quot; to Sarah</p>
<p>- A deleted scene with the Dracula puppets acting out the initial breakup scene.</p>
<p>- &quot;Sex-O-Rama&quot;: A montage of extended sex scenes. How much footage did they SHOOT for this movie?</p>
<p>- &quot;Drunk-O-Rama&quot;: A montage of takes of Peter sitting in the bar and ordering crazy drinks.</p>
<p>- A featurette about Russell Brand and his turn as Aldous Snow.</p>
<p>- A segment with Aldous Snow on a children's show that goes horribly.</p>
<p>- Alternate versions of the <i>Crime Scene </i>cutaways, plus alternate versions of Sarah's new show coming to NBC.</p>
<p>- Plus auditions, video diaries, and a 15-minute Cinemax special about the movie.</p>
<p>Whew. Definitely everything you could possibly need to know about the movie and then some. <b>(Rating: *****)</b></p>
<p><b>Final Thoughts</b>:</p>
<p>The ultimate compromise of raunchy comedy and chick flick, it works spectacularly well on both levels and is one of the funniest movies of the year to boot. Highly recommended.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.rspwfaq.com/2008/10/19/the-smark-dvd-rant-for-forgetting-sarah-marshall/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>7</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Frighteners Redux</title>
		<link>http://www.rspwfaq.com/2008/10/12/frighteners-redux/</link>
		<comments>http://www.rspwfaq.com/2008/10/12/frighteners-redux/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 13 Oct 2008 05:12:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Scott Keith</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Cinema]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[DVD Reviews]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.rspwfaq.com/2008/10/frighteners-redux/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Speaking of movies I haven't watched in a while, I got The Frighteners for free with my HD-DVD player way back when and it's been sitting on my shelf since then.&#160; So I figured that I'd get into the Halloween spirit with some scary movies and watched it again for the first time in 10 [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Speaking of movies I haven't watched in a while, I got The Frighteners for free with my HD-DVD player way back when and it's been sitting on my shelf since then.&#160; So I figured that I'd get into the Halloween spirit with some scary movies and watched it again for the first time in 10 years.&#160; And amazingly, it was pretty great!&#160; I remembered it the first time as something of a cross between Ghostbusters and Evil Dead or something, and that the shift in tone halfway through the movie was really off-putting.&#160; Well I don't know if the extra 16 minutes in the Director's Cut fixed that or what, but I thought it moved pretty smoothly from the goofy con artist set up into the &quot;Jake Busey trying for the serial killer record&quot; payoff this time around and I had a blast all the way through.&#160; Maybe it's because I knew the change in tone was coming this time, I dunno.&#160; </p>
<p>Of course, there's still major problems with it.&#160; The opening scene makes absolutely no sense in the context of the rest of the movie now (Why would the Reaper be haunting that house?) and overall it feels like he could have very easily made two very good movies out of the concepts presented here instead of smooshing them together into one big idea.&#160; However, the awesome Jeffrey Combs is so much fun as the weird FBI agent and the later scenes with Frank shifting in and out of the hospital flashbacks are powerful stuff, even if the comic relief ghosts at the beginning feel like they're from a different movie by the time you get to the end.&#160; </p>
<p>Definitely deserving of the &quot;cult classic&quot; label and a clear sign that Peter Jackson was ready for bigger and better things at that point.&#160; Check this one out if you're never given it a chance due to the crap reviews it originally got.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.rspwfaq.com/2008/10/12/frighteners-redux/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
