If you were planning to make a space in your upcoming holiday season to see two rather high profile movies, it would be wise to consider changing them or you will be waiting a LOOONG time in line. A few weeks ago, the reboot of Star Trek by Lost head guy, JJ Abrams has been shoved from Christmas Day to May 8, 2009. More recently, Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince has been rescheduled for a July release. Not entirely sure why but articles suggest that the writer’s strike from earlier this year may have something to do with it. However, producers claim that the sixth installment of the cinematic adventures of the boy wizard is in the can ready to roll. Some speculate that changing the release date will help in the long run as Warner Bros. previously had no big releases set for midsummer.

As far as the latest franchise to get a face lift, I say ENOUGH already. We will probably be subjected to a totally new interpretation, with an entirely new cast, and be asked to forget everything that came before. Leonard Nimoy is set to make an appearance as an aged Mr. Spock. Of course, Mr. Shatner is bitter because he was not offered a spot in the role that made him famous. However like every good captain, Kirk DIED in Generations (although Bill in his profound wisdom did revive him in a series of spin-off novels… talk about ego). And we will again ask the question, when exactly DID Chekov come aboard the Enterprise. Another sign that this will be an entire relaunch of the series (only the names are the same to not protect the innocent?), it is simply entitled Star Trek (no bloody A, B, C, or D; but wait, they dropped the number after 6, I think).

Not so fun.  Every once in a while our local movie rental place calls us up and tells us we’ve won a free rental.  It happened just this week, so we made a stop there yesterday, and since we had all the kids with us, my husband just ran in and tried to be quick.  He came out with a direct-to-video horror movie called The Fun Park.  It actually sounded pretty intriguing since it’s about some teens who were murdered by the ghost of a clown at an abandoned amusement park.  We know of an abandoned amusement park that we’ve visited, so we thought the movie would be extra scary.  But we were wrong.  It was awful – the 3.5 rating it got on imdb.com was no lie.  Free movie = boring clown.  For the first, I don’t know, about 30 minutes of the movie, they’re not even in the fun park.  The movie wastes time setting up the characters’ back stories – and who cares about that?  So finally they get to the fun park, and it’s not even scary.  The movie has no suspense.  There aren’t any chase scenes, basically the movie is the clown cutting off people’s faces.  I think.  The movie was so slow, I was dozing constantly.  But I don’t think I missed anything…  It was awful.  I would put it on my movie stinker list, but maybe it’s not fair because I wasn’t fully awake…  never mind, who cares, it was that bad.  At least it was a free rental.  And as far as my worries about being scared of clowns the next time we go to that abandoned amusement park, no problem – that movie was not scary at all.  The only thing scary about it was the idea that all the people involved in making it thought it was a good idea!

So here’s my updated stinker list of the worst movies I’ve ever seen:

The Devil’s Rejects
Doomsday
The Night Listener
The Love Guru
The Fun Park

I actually hadn’t heard much about this movie before I saw it, but it happened to be playing at the time we needed in order to be able to see a movie that day.  Having 4 kids = a hectic life.  Our weekly date night has become a date day (still weekly though, YAY!), partly because my husband is in a show and we have rehearsal or meetings most nights, and partly because the baby still has his days and nights mixed up, thus guaranteeing that he sleeps during the date if it’s during the day.  But anyway, back to the Pineapple Express.  The movie is all about marijuana.  I did read the plot synopsis before I went, but I didn’t realize exactly how much drug content there would be – the characters smoke pot constantly!  It tells the tale of a stoner (Seth Rogen – does he smoke pot in every movie he’s in?) who witnesses a murder committed by a cop.  The whole movie has him fleeing the bad guys – while smoking marijuana, of course – with his drug dealer, who he didn’t know all that well before they fled together.  Seth Rogen wrote the screenplay for this film, and I like his natural way of delivering lines.  He’s not a very diverse actor, but his characters seem like real people because of the way he delivers his dialogue.

The movie entertained me; some parts were funny; although it did get pretty violent.  I missed some of the violence though because I fell asleep…  just tired, I wouldn’t call the movie terrible or anything like that.  It’s not one of my favorites, though, and I’m not sure if it even has replay value.  But if you read my blog regularly, you’ll know that my husband and I see LOTS of movies, so this was just another theater experience, and those are always fun!

One of the first truly interactive movies to hit theatres is being remade. My experience with The Rocky Horror Picture Show began while I was in college. Every weekend the Cla-Zel theatre in Bowling Green, OH had a midnight showing of the 1975 cult classic. I went once or twice a year ALWAYS on Halloween which was always a sell out.. For those of you who have experienced the phenomenon, you know all about the craziness, the kits handed out as you enter the theatre, the costumed audience members who look like they stepped out of some freaky side-show. For those of you who have never experienced it, mere words nor watching the DVD at home cannot do it justice. However, the movie was initially a stage production that began in 1973 and was incidentally staged a few years ago by our local community theatre. The original movie starred Tim Curry, future Oscar winner Susan Sarandon, and rock star Meat Loaf.

Try Blockbuster FREE for Two Weeks, then plans as low as $3.99 per month.

Well… at least Mr. Lucas has done something right. He recently acknowledged the fact that any future adventures of Indiana Jones MUST have Harrison Ford in the titular role. There will be no passing of the fedora and whip to his son “Mutt” Williams in the near future. The final scene of Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull alluded to that when THE hat was seen blowing into the church and Dr. Jones snatched it away from the young upstart. Of course I would say that as much bad press as Shia LaBoeuf has been getting as of late, he may find it difficult to find work if he continues on what seems to be a downward spiral.

In this article, Mr. Lucas also speculates on the future of his other cinematic series of films including the opening of Star Wars: Clone Wars this weekend.

Enter to win free movie tickets for an entire year on Fandango!

…according to the movies, anyway.  Not one but two well-known movie franchises have plots revolving around adventure-seeking archaeologists, Indiana Jones and The Mummy.  I couldn’t resist the hype of the new Indiana Jones movie and made that my first experience with Indiana Jones earlier this year.  It was entertaining, though I still don’t really get what all the fuss is about, although I’m told the latest (and last, supposedly) Indiana Jones movie is not the best one by far.  So for date night last week, we decided to give the latest Mummy movie, Tomb of the Dragon Emperor a try, and again, I don’t see what all the fuss is about.  I did like it better than Hellboy 2, but I really think that has more to do with how sick I was when I saw Hellboy 2 because I just wanted to leave the theater.  My husband liked Hellboy 2 better.  I’m comparing the two because they are somewhat similiar movies; both action-fantasies involving the raising of ancient asian things.  But anyway, back to the latest Mummy movie…  Archaeology is dangerous in the movies!

Brendan Fraser plays an archaeologist who is hired to guard a precious artifact as it makes its journey to become a gift.  There’s a guy who is trying to raise this emperor from the dead; it has something to do with a curse.  So the emperor is raised, and that’s what I really liked about the movie.  The emperor was made out of what looked like metal and fire, and I really enjoyed these special effects.  When they were coupled with the emperor’s voice, it made for a nice scary villian – I hope you appreciate the oxymoron of nice scary villian 😉  The one thing I didn’t understand about the movie is why they threw in the random yetis.  You’ll have to see it to know what I’m talking about, I guess, but let’s just say that there were some yetis all of a sudden and they didn’t seem to have much to do with the rest of the plot.  As far as the plot goes, it wasn’t really my kind of movie, but it was a $3 matinee, buy one get one free, so for that price, I was thoroughly entertained.  Three random notes I have are:  1.  I didn’t realize the Mummy movies take place in the past, in the 1940’s.  2.  Is it a requirement for sequels to have extremely cheesy references to the original movie?  This movie is no exception.  3.  Anyone visiting Universal Studios in Orlando, Florida should definitely try the Mummy ride.  It is a thrill ride with special effects; a haunted house roller coaster, and it’s unlike any other roller coaster I’ve ever experienced – totally awesome!

While playing a game, the question was asked: “What is the saddest movie you have ever seen?” I said the first thing that came to mind: E.T. – The Extra-Terrestrial No fooling. It still gets to me. Then we went farther and started naming movies that were so bad they were sad. Titanic being one of them. I actually laughed when the ship slit in two, and the people slid to their doom. Forgive me if I give any SPOLIERS, but the ship crashes into an iceberg and sinks. The lovey-dovey story between the young artist in third-class who chances upon his aristocratic muse was added to give some dramatic oomph. It also added about 90 minutes to the already 2 hour long movie (and some people say that Dark Knight
was too long). Myself included, but, eh… whatever.

Two of the original cast Star Trek movies fall into the so terrible they are sad. I will save the first feature-length film for another post.Star Trek V – The Final Frontier is the WORST film in the 10 movie franchise. It features the crew of the good starship Enterprise being hi-jacked by a renegade Vulcan who is on a quest to literally “find God” on a planet that lies beyond what is known as the great barrier. The Vulcan, Sybok’s, connection to Mr. Spock is entirely ludicrous. His ability to relieve his “followers” pain by simply touching them is laughable. Sybok even manages to convince most of the Enterprise crew to “see the light.”

The only plausible excuse I can come up with for this mess is the fact that it tried to follow up one of the most lucrative and entertaining films (and in fact, one of the best moments) in Star Trek history. It also may have had something to do with William Shatner’s much publicized ego. The previous 2 installments had been directed by Leonard Nimoy and of course the captain could not allow his first officer to become more powerful than himself. Bill directed this pitiful excuse for a movie and also was credited as a contributor to the screenplay. Of course, the star has placed blame on everyone else and has frequently stated that the finished product was not “his vision.” Ok, Bill …. twenty years from now, you can go back and find your missing footage and attempt to redeem yourself. But, for anyone who has seen only the best of the series, you need not bother with this debacle. Also…. check out the ridiculous poster promoting the movie. And, I almost forgot about the dispenser that Spock used to toast “marshmelons” with while on shore leave at Yosemite with Captain Kirk and Dr. McCoy. If I had collected one more proof of purchase from Kraft Marshmallows, I would have had my very dispenser. Would that have been something to say that I was embarrassed to own? Or is the DVD enough?  “Life is a dream.”

If you are like me, one of the biggest critiques of the mega-million dollar making movie The Dark Knight is the vocal gymnastics of Christian Bale as Bruce Wayne/Batman. As the billionaire playboy, his voice is smooth and dare I say, normal. However once he slips on the cape and cowl, his voice becomes low, gruff, and at times hard to nearly impossible to understand. It is almost as if he is trying to channel his inner Clint Eastwood, aka “Dirty” Harry Callahan. Although most actors have found it necessary to slightly alter their intonation for the duel role, I think Mr. Bale has gone a bit overboard. It is one thing to sound menacing, but to make it such that it is incomprehensible? Makes you wonder what the nogoodnicks the Caped Crusader apprehends think when they are growled at.

Though “The Dark Knight” has been a bona fide cultural event, boasting rave reviews and boffo box office, it hasn’t been immune to criticism. Some have quibbled with its political undercurrents, and others have criticized a muddled theme.
But here’s the critique most widely held: Why does Batman talk like the offspring of Clint Eastwood and a grizzly bear?
Donning the costume for the second time, Christian Bale has delved deeper into the lower registers. As Bruce Wayne, his voice is as smooth as his finely pressed suits. But once he puts the cape on, the transformation of his vocal chords is just as dramatic as his costume change.

Particularly when his rage boils over, Bale’s Batman growls in an almost beastly fashion, reflecting how close he teeters between do-gooder and vengeance-crazed crusader.
“The Dark Knight” hauled in $43.8 million to rank as Hollywood’s top movie for the third straight weekend, fending off “The Mummy: Tomb of the Dragon Emperor” which opened a close second with $42.5 million. It has earned $394.9 million in just 17 days, according to studio estimates Sunday.
Though much of the voice effect is Bale’s own doing, under the guidance of director Christopher Nolan and supervising sound editor Richard King, the frequency of his Batman voice was modulated to exaggerate the effect.
Critics and fans have noticed.
“His Batman rasps his lines in a voice that’s deeper and hammier than ever,” said NPR’s David Edelstein.
The New Yorker’s David Denby praised the urgency of Bale’s Batman, but lamented that he “delivers his lines in a hoarse voice with an unvarying inflection.”
Reviewing the film for MSNBC, Alonso Duralde wrote that Bale’s Batman in “Batman Begins” “sounded absurdly deep, like a 10-year-old putting on an `adult’ voice to make prank phone calls. This time, Bale affects an eerie rasp, somewhat akin to Brenda Vaccaro doing a Miles Davis impression.”
Before the similes run too far afield, it’s worth considering where the concept of a throaty Batman comes from.
In his portrayal on the `60s “Batman” TV series, Adam West didn’t alter his voice between Bruce Wayne and Batman. Decades later when Tim Burton brought “Batman” to the big screen in a much darker incarnation, Michael Keaton’s inflection was notably but not considerably different from one to the other.
But it was a lesser-known actor who, a few years after Burton’s film, made perhaps the most distinct imprint on Batman’s voice. Kevin Conroy, as the voice of the animated Batman in various projects from 1992’s Batman – The Animated Series right up until this year’s Batman Gotham Knight, brought a darker, raspier vocalization to Batman.
Conroy has inhabit the role longer than anyone else and though animated voice-over work doesn’t have the same cachet as feature film acting, there are quarters where Conroy is viewed as the best Batman of them all certainly superior to Val Kilmer or George Clooney.
The animated series are notable because they drew on the DC Comics of Batman as envisioned by Frank Miller, whose work heavily informs “Batman Begins” and “The Dark Knight.” (Bale and Nolan were unavailable to comment for this story.)
As Batman has gotten darker, his voice has gotten deeper. As some critics suggest, Bale and “The Dark Knight” may have reached a threshold, at least audibly.

Indeed, I agree with the article. Kevin Conroy best characterizes the difference in the characters. Possibly because he was trained in voice-over work.

Some of the most fascinating parts of a Bond film are the opening credits. All but the original movie opens with an action packed opening scene follow by what could be considered a pre-cursor to the music video. Most of them feature tantalizing, scantily-clad (or less) beauties often in silhouette. Accompanying these scenes are 21 songs by artists of today or others who have gone by the wayside. While some of the songs have been more popular than others, only one has topped the US singles charts and two have been Academy Award nominees. In the opening to For Your Eyes Only, singer Sheena Easton became the first performer to actually appear in the video. This marked the first time the performer appeared in the credits video. One singer has performed two memorable themes. In one of the latest films, a singer/actress had a brief (THANK YOU) cameo.

After troubled performer Amy Winehouse was deemed incapable to record and Paul McCartney could not create a rhyme for the word “solace,” Alicia Keys and Jack White (?… is he the twin brother of Jack BLACK who was accidentally switched at birth?) are recording the first duet to be used as a Bond theme.

By clicking on the link, you can test your knowledge (whatever it may be) of just 10 of the 21 themes. I had to brilliantly guess on a few of them; however, I did slightly better than Dr. “Oh” No ranking. Or you can reminisce by posting your favorite Bond theme, for those who like such things. Mine is the instrumental theme to On Her Majesty’s Secret Service which is very underrated as is the movie (unfortunately… as I find it one of the best and different from most).

Sunday morning while in the car with my brothers children (aged 12, 9, and 3), the song “Live and Let Die” came on the radio. I asked the three where the song by ex-Beatle Paul McCartney and his group Wings originated. The THREE-YEAR OLD quickly answered “Shrek the 3rd.” I was utterly amazed and had totally forgotten. I informed them that I am as old as the song itself to which my precocious 12 year old nephew chimed, “How do you know? Are you sure?” Roger Moore made his debut as 007, James Bond in the film Live and Let Die in 1973. I could not state the exact date of the movie’s release (I was either in diapers or still waiting to be introduced to the world myself).

The Bond film is interesting for various reasons. Like so many others in the series, LALD reflected the world around it at the time of its release. Images of the occult are used throughout much of this James Bond feature. Tarot reading, virginal sacrifices, and supernatural characters (like Baron Samedi) are on display as 007 tracks a mysterious heroin-dealer from the Caribbean to New Orleans. Jane Seymour made her major film debut as Solitaire who (as one may guess) is the fortune-telling mystic that reads tarot cards to see into the future until the suave, debonair secret agent uses a bit of his own magic.

So… like many items of popular culture, a song that was around thirty odd years ago has had a re-emergence of sorts. Funny how a three-year-old can make that clear. Once again, I am humbled… the movie Live and Let Die was released a mere 13 days prior to my birth. I wonder if my parents saw it in the theatre.

Rent James Bond, Shrek, and Thousands of other films at Blockbuster.com