How much is too much?

Based on common sense and experience, it’s not unreasonable to believe we have a pretty good grasp of what “too much” means. Between you, me and every other reader out there, we can attach a reasonable answer to the question in pretty short order.

Take common sense for example: We know when there is too much salt on our food, when it’s too cold to go outside without a jacket, when you’re too tired to concentrate on something. Pretty basic stuff.

On the flip side, the concept of “too much” is not so easy to discern when it comes to some of our television preferences … and especially so with our favorite shows.

Already in The Walking Dead‘s current season’s second half, there’s been a bevy of examples of excess. And many of them have elicited its fans’ displeasure. (This isn’t exactly news to anyone; the show has been doing so from its inception, a big part of its draw and watchability.)

Recent events have caused fans (read “angry villagers”) to wield their pitchforks and lit torches on a vocal little stroll down Main Street, U.S.A.

Too Much Immediacy

With the series leaving us last year mourning Beth’s untimely demise, the writers immediately offered an interesting episode (“What Happened And What’s Going On”) to start the second half of the season with yet another death, this time fan-favorite Tyreese. Coming so quickly on the heels of Beth’s exit, you could practically hear fans gnashing their teeth. Was this too much too soon? Are the writers that heartless? Do they get their rocks off pegging us with multiple deaths back-to-back, barely giving us time to breathe?

No, not at all. It was the perfect time. It kept things flowing and interesting and it keeps us on the edge of our seats. Not to mention it makes for good drama. And it’s not as if it hasn’t been done before — Dale and Shane were “offed” in consecutive episodes during season 2. The show’s Powers That Be aren’t setting any precedents.

But still … too much too soon? That’s what a lot of fans harped about on social media, blogs and other forums concerning Tyreese’s downfall. Just goes to show you can’t please everyone all of the time.

As far as I’m concerned, it’s those gut punches and their ramifications that keep the show’s comfortabilities at bay and our senses tuned. Me? I didn’t have a problem with it. It’s part of what The Walking Dead is. If you’re a fan, you come to expect the unexpected. So, no … it wasn’t too much.

Too Much Monotony

This is one of my pet peeves. And not about the show itself, but of the fans’ attitudes toward it.

To many, last week’s “Them” was filled with plodding and tiresome nothingness. Some of the things I read and heard? “Not much action.” “Boring.” “Little story.” “It’s as if the group was doing nothing but huffing it on down a highway aimlessly.”

And therein lies my peeve. Because there was so much more to the episode.

The group was fresh from a confrontation at Grady Memorial where they successfully won back Carol but lost Beth in the process. They were still reeling from Bob’s fate at the hands of the Terminans not to mention the ruckus of that particular house of horrors. And now? Tyreese is gone. The group, as a whole, is woefully affected on deeply personal levels, particularly so in the cases of Daryl, Maggie and Sasha whose feelings have been especially riven and rent raw as a result of the loss of their loved ones. But wait, there’s more: Throw in everyone’s depletion from lack of food and water and you have yourself a real party going on. Each person is spent to their cores. Does the situation cry for a splatter-fest fracas with the undead?

No. It calls for introspection and understanding of the characters, some healing of those frayed nerves, sometimes in the form of emotional outlet. In whatever form that outlet might take. And, again, that’s just what the writers gave us. They slowed the pace of the show for the greater part of an episode and, as an audience, got us to take a step backward and evaluate the position these emotionally crippled and physically exhausted folks are feeling.

It’s called character study. I applaud it. And I’m certain I’m in the minority.

Most fans want the action, the splatter, the danger … every single episode. And I get that to a degree. It’s all well and fine to get caught up in a show. I do it all the time. But in something like The Walking Dead there’s a whole lot more going on then just the blood and guts, which is my least favorite part. Getting to the heart of the characters and their interactions with others as well as the ramifications of their actions … that’s where the real meat and potatoes of the series is for me. As example, Rick’s introspection and decisions. Glenn’s lay-it-on-the-line common sense. Michonne’s rare, in-your-face sensibility. (We saw example of this big time in Sunday’s episode during her discussions with Rick.) Daryl’s seeming off-the-cuff outbursts which, when you dissect them, can often reveal more wisdom than knee-jerk reaction.

So is there too much monotony when an episode like “Them” comes along to slow down the pace? Hell no. It’s completely necessary to the story.

(This post contains 2 pages. Please visit the website to continue reading. Thank you.)

Valentine’s Day is once more upon us, and I can’t think of a better way to celebrate than with a classic romantic comedy starring the legendary Clark Gable and Doris Day as this week’s Throwback Thursday. Courtesy of the Warner Archive Collection, Teacher’s Pet (1958) is an enjoyable rom-com about Erica Stone (Day), who is an effervescent journalism professor, and James Gannon (Gable), a hardboiled city newspaper editor who doesn’t believe a good journalist needs to be educated in the classroom.

In the grand tradition of all rom-coms that have come before and since, there is a meet-cute (boy and girl meet in a memorable way), followed by boy deceives girl and girl finds out and resents him for it, and then in the end, the two are able to forget about their misunderstanding because they realize they’re crazy about one another. In the case of Teacher’s Pet, the meet-cute occurs when Stone sends a letter to Gannon asking him if he would be a guest speaker in her classroom to inspire her students. Gannon scoffs at the letter and sends a rather scathing reply saying that he doesn’t subscribe to the concept of teaching journalism when individuals who want to be reporters should be knocking about as hangers-on in the newsroom, learning from seasoned veterans such as himself as they go.

However, not all newspapermen seem to agree. When the managing editor gets wind of the letter, he encourages Gannon to go and help Stone, but when Gannon arrives to the classroom, Stone mistakes him for a new student. I guess it’s his instant attraction to her/his desire to prove her wrong that causes him not to correct her and one can hardly blame him for not wanting to after she reads aloud his letter mocking him in front of the class. If this film had taken place in modern times, she probably would’ve recognized him as Gannon thanks to his social media profile photos, but back in the ‘50s, I guess it’s plausible she didn’t recognize a city editor she’d never met in person before.

The rest of the film pans out about as you’d expect it would. He of course continues to pose as a student and she sees “promise” in him as a budding journalist despite his age (which brings me to another key point). When the film first came out, critics didn’t like the 20-year age gap between Day and Gable, saying he was miscast in the role due to his age. Why would she be attracted to him as a student protege when he was obviously closer to retirement age? I read some fascinating trivia via IMDb that said both Cary Grant and Jimmy Stewart turned down the role because they felt they were too old for it, and the film was shot in black-and-white to try to make Gable appear younger. While the gap is definitely noticeable, he seemed so spry in the role that it’s actually hard for me to believe that he died a few years later in 1960.

Teacher’s Pet also features some other familiar faces among its supporting cast, including fan favorite Gig Young as Dr. Hugo Pine (Gable’s adversary in pursuit of Day); Mamie Van Doren as a singer/casual love interest for Gable; Jack Albertson (Grandpa Joe from Willy Wonka & the Chocolate Factory) as a newspaper plant tour guide; Charles Lane (What isn’t that man in? He guest-starred in numerous television programs and films over his long-spanning career but I recognized him mostly as Potter’s right-hand man in It’s a Wonderful Life); and Marion Ross from Happy Days fame.

Being a former journalism student myself, this film interested me for more reasons than one. I semi-agree with Gable’s character’s belief system that the only way one can learn to become a good reporter is to be thrown into a fast-paced newsroom environment. I know I, for one, learned so much more being active in multiple publications than I did in the majority of my journalism classes during my four years of college. The semester I served as editor-in-chief of our weekly campus newspaper opened my eyes to the world around me more than half of my lectures did. You can spend a lifetime in the classroom discussing technique, writing tips, ethics and the like, but until you’re actually hands-on in that field, I’m not sure how much that education means. There’s a great one-liner in Teacher’s Pet stating, “To me, journalism is, ah, like a hangover. You can read about it for years, but until you’ve actually experienced it, you have no conception of what it’s really like.”

I also believe a reporter’s basic instincts as a captivating storyteller are something an individual is born with and not something that can be successfully taught. You can learn the techniques all you want, but if you’re not good at connecting with a reader, all those fancy techniques are in vain. Crafting an article is so much more than the “who, what, where, when and why.” It’s hard to believe that the wise gem “Newspapers can’t compete in reporting what happened any more, but they can and should tell the public why it happened.” comes courtesy of a film all the way from 1958 because that seems so relevant in today’s world!

I found Teacher’s Pet to be a hidden gem that I’d never heard of, let alone seen before. Poor Gig Young just never seems to get Doris Day. Another of my favorite classic rom-coms also pairs the two stars as a couple that’s never meant to be (Young at Heart) because another leading man (Frank Sinatra) sweeps in and takes her away from him. I guess his role is to be the affable, intelligent, handsome but nonetheless forever second-best man in Doris’ life – a role that does suit him to an admirable tee. While Gig shines in his supporting role, I guess if a girl can land a man like Clark Gable – whether he’s aging or not – she’s gotta go for it! Despite what the critics said, Gable still oozes charm from every pore in this film and proves he still had what it took to be a handsome leading man.

The Wachowski’s have had a varied and checkered career, bursting onto the cinema landscape with the groundbreaking The Matrix and then nearly crashing and burning with two Matrix sequels and Speed Racer. The siblings redeemed themselves (or not) with the outstanding Cloud Atlas, and now they are back with another stunning piece of work, Jupiter Ascending.

The question is, are viewers going to be stunned in a good or bad way? The film is definitely taking its hits already from critics and advance screening audiences, but I’m not going to be quite as harsh on the film as many people are.

The story itself goes something like this: Chicago resident Jupiter Jones (Mila Kunis) finds herself in the middle of an intergalactic tug of war when the Abrasax siblings squabble over which of them has the rights to harvest the Earth (and by harvest, they mean humans not crops). It turns out, however, that Jupiter is somehow genetically related to the Abrasax family, a reincarnation of the siblings’ mother. This “recurrance” gives her the rights to Earth and each of the siblings woo her in such a way as to trick her out of her property, with Balem (Eddie Redmayne) going so far as marrying her … so he can kill her and inherit the planet. But why do these people actually need to harvest humans?

The plot sounds very straightforward, but the film is defiantly not so, throwing everything AND the kitchen sink into the works. Jupiter’s protector is a human/wolf “splice” named Caine Wise (Channing Tatum), who may be unwittingly helping the bad guys. The film is also filled to the brim with other spliced humanimals, from a rat man to an absurd elephant man creature. And there are the big talking lizards as well as the tiny grey aliens. It seems that they’ve spent so much time on making each creature different that the story got lost amidst all the spectacle.

While they get so much wrong in the storytelling, the Wachowskis can always be counted on to do something right and that is definitely in the spectacle, the minute details on all of the space vehicles and planets, the kingdom hidden behind the clouds of Jupiter, and all of the various makeups and costumes. A few of the CGI shots are not quite up to snuff, but 99% of what’s on screen is just mind-blowing.

As your senses are about to overload, you start thinking about the story again and realize you have no idea at all what is going on. Most of the scenes are filled with exposition, with characters trying mightily to tell us what’s happening but in most cases it’s all for naught. Jupiter is first taken to the Abrasax sister Kalique (Tuppence Middleton in some cringe-worthy middle-aged makeup) who shows her the wonders of a special mineral bath, then she’s whisked off to meet younger brother Titus (Douglas Booth), who explains more about his nefarious siblings (but he’s still not quite coming clean with her about why Earth is so important to them).

By the time she gets to Balem and discovers the truth, you’ve pretty much given up on really understanding anything, especially as Jupiter seems to switch from one emotion to another within the same scene. One minute she’s talking to Caine, the next minute she’s got dreamy eyes and wants to make out with him. Like, out of the blue. No lead up, no banter, no sexual tension. And ignoring the fact that he’s half dog. It was very odd. And speaking of odd, I don’t know whose idea it was for Freddie to whisper all of his lines, except for when he got VERY ANGRY, but it was a very weird, unintentionally hilarious character trait. Freddie is nominated for an Oscar this year as Best Actor (The Theory of Everything) and he could very well get a Razzie nomination next year for this.

Much has been said about Tatum’s performance, that he looks bored or just disinterested but I didn’t find him to be that way at all. I think he might have been thinking he had some ridiculous dialog to recite, but he carries himself well in the big action scenes. Kunis seems too restrained, like she really should be in another movie, and in fact that other movie is actually contained within Jupiter Ascending. The Wachowski’s are huge fans of Terry Gilliam’s Brazil, so much so that there is an entire, elaborate sequence that pays homage to the bureaucracy that Brazil pokes fun at. This one sequence is a comedy set-piece capped with a cameo by Gilliam himself, and it shows that the rest of the movie is taking itself way too seriously. Had the entire film been an absurd satire, I think Kunis and Tatum would have been able to loosen up more.

As it is, Jupiter Ascending is just a mish-mash of other, better (or just plain campy) sci-fi flicks like The Fifth Element, The Chronicles of Riddick and Flash Gordon, and it desperately needed more cohesion and more camp to make it something really special. We’re left wondering if the long release delay was truly to hone the effects, or if perhaps the studio imposed a lot of editing that left a potentially great movie on the cutting room floor.

You have what you think is a pretty good gimmick. And a horror/slasher story to showcase it in. So you make a film to exploit the gimmick with the intent of capitalizing on it.

Wouldn’t you think the film you make be a reasonably decent one, one with legs to stand on? At least a little bit?

That’s not what writer/director/producer Richard L. Bare and executive producer William T. Orr decided to do. They took a budget of $1.5 million, set up camp for 48 days at the Hotel Del Coronado across the bay from San Diego and proceeded to shoot a film with the ploy of “Duo-Vision” (better known as split-screen) and churned out a piece of schlock that’s barely watchable. Actually, calling it schlock is giving it more credit than its due; this is 90+ minutes of drivel. (Note: They actually came in under budget on the film. I doubt utilizing the entire amount would have made it any better.)

At a sprawling California hotel, a killer is on the loose targeting comely single blonds. The action starts off promisingly enough with the demise of one guest shortly after checking in. And it’s here we have the pinnacle of the film’s “Duo-Vision” process. Because nearly everything hereafter goes downhill.

Duo-Vision loses steam quickly. In fact it does the equivalent of a plunge off a 500′ cliff. As the story unfolds (such that it is), the device becomes tedious. It detracts from the story in big, steaming heaps … but that isn’t necessarily a bad thing. If not for its contrived clicheness, you just might tune this turkey out all together.

It would be an entirely different matter if what was shown in Duo-Vision drew interest, engaged the viewer. But there are so many lackluster, unremarkable scenes on either side of the screen – and at precisely the same moments – the split-screen hype wears thin in short order. You become exhausted trying to keep up with the “nothing going on” constantly going on. Yes … it’s that bad.

Additionally, wouldn’t you think a film with so many familiar faces would have something redeeming? Edd Byrnes (Kookie of 77 Sunset Strip), David Bailey of the popular-at-the-time Mitchum deodorant commercial, the very familiar Arthur O’Connell (Fantastic Voyage, The Poseidon Adventure) and actor/novelist/co-founder of Second City comedy Roger Bowen (M*A*S*H, All In The Family) are all present in Wicked, Wicked, each and every one of them recognizable to some degree. So it had that going for it … right?

Nope. Casting didn’t work either. Try as he might (and it didn’t appear he tried in the least) Bare’s direction, plain and simple, was barely direction at all. Combine his efforts with a limp script to begin with, a dull hook incapable of sustaining interest, snooze-worthy dialog, film-making lacking fundamentals and enough drollness to cure insomnia and Wicked, Wicked flounders utterly.

The kicker is this, though: I’ve seen other reviews of the film and I’m convinced those who wrote about it saw a completely different movie than what I saw. Or they were wearing rose colored glasses. Of course, that automatically made me question what I’d seen … and then, almost instantly, I came back to the real world and to common sense. Yes, I’m sometimes delusional … but not so much I don’t know what a bad film looks like. And this? This is a bad film.

Still, there are a few items of note. Not enough to make you sit up straight though. Just little asides to induce a chuckle or two.

There’s an organist in the film who Bare thought, inexplicably, needed to make multiple appearances for effect. Why? I haven’t the slightest idea. But her wide-eyed, comical look is a welcome distraction to the story, if nothing more than to call out the dippy tunes she plays as background fare.

Plus there are a couple cringe-worthy lines of dialog. As example, late in the film after singer Lisa James (Tiffany Bolling) is swamped by reporters after being rescued from the killer, this gem crops up:

“What does it feel like to have your throat cut?” – Reporter
“It hurts …” – Lisa James

And then there’s James’ singing itself:

“Wicked, wicked that’s my ticket … you make me feel so wicked
Let me do what I love to do … make wicked, wicked love to you …”

Yeah. Really.

I’ll give the film two positives, however. 1) Randolph Roberts, who plays killer Jason Gant, does manage to convey a strange, child-like naivete on the one hand while doling out his inner knifing-bearing, evil cad on the other. And 2) the disc offers a trailer for the film. And believe me when I say it is infinitely more engaging than the actual product itself.

Technical information: 16 X 9 letterboxed edition with the original aspect ratio 2.40:1. Stereo sound is evident, but there is no back up information verifying what type of enhancements to the sound were involved. Was there noise reduction? Rerecording? And what kind of stereo sound is involved with the print? I have no clue. Nor is there any information regarding restoration either. The print is rumored to be restored (with some sources stating there was a process encompassing a couple year’s worth of effort) and I’m certain it is but I didn’t find any concrete evidence to back it up. Viewing the disc certainly doesn’t reveal anything indicating such.

I wanted something to come out of Wicked, Wicked. Something camp … something guffaw-worthy … something worth the effort of giving up an hour and a half of my time. Instead, I was left with a viewing void, time spent I will never, ever get back. And that, dear reader, is the truly wicked, wicked thing about this sad vehicle …

Wicked, Wicked was generously offered to CliqueClack for review by the fine folks (who obviously have a wicked, wicked sense of humor) at Warner Bros.

[easyazon_image add_to_cart=”default” align=”none” asin=”B00P8RUMJO” cloaking=”default” height=”160″ localization=”default” locale=”US” nofollow=”default” new_window=”default” src=”https://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51KWMH5fleL._SL160_.jpg” tag=”cliqueclack-20″ width=”112″]

The atrocities of war are ugly, but the resiliency of the human spirit to survive against all odds is nothing short of beautiful. Based upon the remarkable true story of Louis Zamperini, Universal Pictures’ Unbroken has taught me these life truths. If you ask me, it couldn’t have come at a better time than Christmas, a time of the year when we’re supposed to care about the plight of our fellow man – even if that plight and suffering occurred some 70 years ago.

Directed by Angelina Jolie, Unbroken is based upon the 2010 bestseller Unbroken: A World War II Story of Survival, Resilience, and Redemption, which was written by Laura Hillenbrand (who also penned the bestseller about Seabiscuit). Although Louis Zamperini died this past summer at the ripe old age of 97, his spirit lives on – reaching an almost legendary status – thanks to the book and film about his life.

The film begins up in the puffy, white clouds over the vast Pacific Ocean, where we’re first introduced to Louis: a young, charismatic World War II bombardier (portrayed by Jack O’Connell). One of the strongest attributes about Unbroken that I observed from its beginning is its convincing realism. It’s as if you’re actually right there in the cockpit with Louis and crew, part of the dizzying action of the war, wondering if (or when) this rickety plane is going to finally be submerged into the watery depths waiting below. In fact, the effects were so good at the beginning that if this film had been shown in 3D, I’ve no doubts I might have thrown up in my theater seat.

While Louis’ fate in the plane hangs precariously in the balance, we’re given flashbacks from his youth, which are designed to give you insights about his character and the likely causes for his unbroken spirit in the film’s latter half. The son of Italian immigrants, it seems Louis led a troubled youth full of thievery, underage drinking and fighting because he was constantly being bullied due to his immigrant status. However, his older brother Pete was always looking out for him. After observing how fast he is able to run away from the bullies, it’s Pete who encourages him to try out for the school’s track team. A natural athlete, Louis sets all kinds of records for running and is deemed good enough to represent the United States in the 1936 Olympic Games in Berlin. He was slated to return to the 1940 Olympics in Tokyo, but of course, World War II cancelled those and caused Louis’ life to take a different direction. Enlisting in the war was what most able-bodied, patriotic young men of the 1940s did, and Louis was no exception.

This brings us back to the surmounting action on the plane. After Louis’ plane goes down in the Pacific, he spends 47 days in a raft in shark-infested waters, only to be rescued by the Japanese. Considered an enemy of Japan, Louis is sent to a prisoner-of-war camp. It’s hard to say which is a worse fate: the days spent starving, dehydrated, sunburned and almost stark-raving mad while drifting aimlessly about on the tiny raft with two of his fellow survivors (Domhnall Gleeson and  Finn Wittrock) or the days spent freezing, malnourished and beaten – either for information about the Allies or just for the seeming sheer fun of it – while he’s a prisoner in the camp. One thing I didn’t enjoy was the seemingly endless torture/beatings. It felt like Louis was never going to get a break.

Because of his “celebrity status” as a former Olympic athlete, Louis is quickly singled out by the camp’s ruthless leader, Mutsushiro “The Bird” Watanabe (portrayed by musician Miyavi), to endure additional hardships on his cruel whims. It seems “The Bird” is angry because he comes from a life of privilege and he feels it is beneath him to be the commander of a lowly prison camp (he wants to be promoted). I’d never heard of the musician Miyavi, but he gives an amazing performance as the film’s villain. You will truly grow to hate him by the climax. I didn’t read the book, but I overheard some women discussing it after the film ended. While they enjoyed the film, they felt that the character of “The Bird” didn’t come across as clearly from the book to the film adaptation. It seems they were left wanting more. If that’s the case, perhaps I’ll be reading the book next year.

My personal take on “The Bird” is that he is oddly fascinated by – and begrudgingly respectful of – the resiliency of Louis’ spirit. He attempts to break him because I think he perceives that Japan is losing the war and Louis has become a sort of twisted symbol of his hatred for the Allies at-large. In a weird way, I think “The Bird” almost feels like the two of them are equals or friends, and perhaps he secretly wishes he possessed more of Louis’ inner strengths. While he gets frustrated that he cannot break him, I think inwardly he respects that. If he were to break him, I think it would expose fragilities about himself and the rest of mankind that he is not willing to face.

While undergoing the routine tortures of “The Bird” and his men, Louis becomes almost a mascot to his fellow prisoners. As long as he remains strong of character in the unrelenting face of adversity, it gives them a flicker of hope. His mantra, “If I can take it, I can make it,” resonates true for all of the prisoners in the camp. While it’s not really fair to expect one individual to be that brave, it’s a fact of life that sometimes we all need a hero to cling to so that we do not give up and lose all hope in the darkest of times. Louis is remembered as a hero to many in his generation, and his inspirational story has introduced him to millions of people in a new one. Perhaps “A minute of pain is worth a lifetime of glory.” However, I can’t say that with any unwavering certainty.

What I found most remarkable about this film is the fact that it hadn’t already been made. I read on IMDb that Universal secured the rights to Louis’ story for a film all the way back in 1957, when they were eyeing Tony Curtis to possibly portray him. Imagine what that film would have been like!

Unbroken is probably the best film I watched in a theater in 2014 (although at times it can be cringe-worthy). I’m sure it’s not perfect, and if you read the book, you might not feel it deserves quite as much praise. But I think it’s beautiful to watch for the scenery and the overall message about not giving up, and the musical score is equally alluring. What I found most interesting about Louis is the fact that he was able to eventually forgive his captors and go back to Japan to be a torch-bearer in a later Olympics ceremony. I’m sad knowing he passed away this year before the film came out. It would have been nice to have seen him at the premiere being celebrated for being such an extraordinary human being.

Editor’s note: Zamperini was able to see the film privately before he died. He and Jolie became very close friends and she downloaded a copy of the film to her laptop and drove to the hospital to watch with him.

[easyazon_image add_to_cart=”default” align=”none” asin=”0812974492″ cloaking=”default” height=”160″ localization=”default” locale=”US” nofollow=”default” new_window=”default” src=”https://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51m7P%2BbJfAL._SL160_.jpg” tag=”cliqueclack-20″ width=”106″] [easyazon_image add_to_cart=”default” align=”none” asin=”B00PTJGMIQ” cloaking=”default” height=”160″ localization=”default” locale=”US” nofollow=”default” new_window=”default” src=”https://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51LYgnJ%2BPlL._SL160_.jpg” tag=”cliqueclack-20″ width=”159″]

There is probably just as much folly in trying to review The Hobbit: The Battle of the Five Armies as there was in making three movies out of a very slim volume of a book. If you’re a fan of the films, you’ll see it no matter what some critic says, and if you’re not a fan there’s nothing I or anyone else could say to convince you to see it (and who would go see the third part of a trilogy without seeing the first two parts anyway?).

The plot, in a nutshell, picks up exactly where we left off in The Desolation of Smaug. The fearsome dragon is launching an all-out attack on Laketown, Gandalf is still imprisoned somewhere, and Thorin and his compatriots are hoping to reclaim their land, their home, their birthright once Smaug is dispatched. Once that happens, everyone in Middle-earth shows up to claim the land (and the treasure) for themselves. There’s bloodshed, there is death, there are tears, but in the end can this trilogy stand up next to The Lord of the Rings? In a word, no. Think Star Wars Episodes I-III compared to Episodes IV-VI (but maybe not quite that bad).

The Good

• The best thing in this movie is Richard Armitage’s performance as Thorin. He grieves for the lives lost in Laketown, then succumbs to the madness of Smaug’s treasure, turning on his friends whom he believes may have stolen the Arkenstone, and descends further into madness before coming to his senses and joining the battle to save his homeland. Armitage gets to run the gamut of emotions here and it is some fine work indeed.
• Martin Freeman is also very good in what little he has to do. His big moment really comes as he tries to talk Thorin down from his madness, but even though the movie is called The Hobbit, it’s really not about our friend Bilbo by this point.
• The destruction of Laketown is a harrowing, dramatic, thrilling moment of filmmaking that will have you on the edge of your seat.
• During Gandalf’s rescue, the moment Galadriel shows that she can kick everyone’s asses if she really wanted to, the psychedelic showdown between she and Sauron, and Saruman’s own kick-ass moves.
• The beautifully edited final descent into madness of Thorin before snapping back to reality, and his battle on the ice with Azog.
• Billy Connolly’s late arrival as Thorin’s cousin.
• The closing theme sung by original Hobbit Billy Boyd.

The Bad

• Almost every plot thread left dangling at the end of part two is pretty much wrapped up within the first half hour or so of part three. Smaug is dispatched rather quickly, Gandalf is rescued and I’m still not even quite sure why he was caged in the first place (or by who), elves show up and a name is dropped just to connect these films to the LOTR trilogy. There is very little plot leading up to the titular event outside of Thorin’s madness.
• After Smaug is killed (is that a spoiler?), it seems that everyone in Middle-earth just shows up at Thorin’s doorstep to collect what they believe is theirs. How did the elves, the orcs and all the others know so quickly that the Lonely Mountain was now vacant? I remember that sweeping scene of fire signals being lit across the mountaintops in one of the original LOTR movies, but there’s nothing like that here. It’s like everyone got a text that read “Ding-dong the dragon’s dead.”
• Five armies is really too many to keep track of during a battle, which takes up way too much of the movie’s running time. It’s easy enough to keep track of the characters we know, but who they’re fighting most of the time is just a jumble.
• Again, too little plot, too much fighting. And some of the CGI looks almost unfinished.

In my humble opinion, The Desolation of Smaug was the best entry in the trilogy because it moved the story along after the deadly dull meandering of the first movie. This one drops the ball a bit because we know many of the characters do survive into the next/original trilogy. There are, however, three surprising deaths (at least to those who haven’t read the book, and may not even be in the book) that do hit hard emotionally. Outside of Armitage’s terrific performance, it’s these moments that give the movie the heart and emotion it desperately needs.

And as you deal with those tragedies, the film closes with a hauntingly beautiful but sad song that really feels like we’re saying goodbye to a group of characters and a world we’ve come to know over these last fourteen years. It’s those moments that I wish the rest of the movie would have had (and perhaps it will in the inevitable extended edition) because it was those moments that had me nearly sobbing as the credits rolled past. Saying goodbye to Middle-earth was more emotional than most of the movie, and I almost feel that the movie didn’t earn that reaction (but I’m a softy).

The Battle of the Five Armies isn’t the worst of the trilogy and it isn’t the best. It certainly demonstrates the folly of stretching a single book into three films, but I suppose we should applaud Peter Jackson’s tenacity in getting these films made. Now here’s hoping he focuses on something a little smaller in scale to recharge his creative batteries.

[easyazon_image add_to_cart=”default” align=”none” asin=”B00E8S2JZ4″ cloaking=”default” height=”160″ localization=”default” locale=”US” nofollow=”default” new_window=”default” src=”https://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/5110IK4qnbL._SL160_.jpg” tag=”cliqueclack-20″ width=”127″] [easyazon_image add_to_cart=”default” align=”none” asin=”B00MG4RIXU” cloaking=”default” height=”160″ localization=”default” locale=”US” nofollow=”default” new_window=”default” src=”https://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51AtQ8W0XlL._SL160_.jpg” tag=”cliqueclack-20″ width=”127″] [easyazon_image add_to_cart=”default” align=”none” asin=”B007ZQAKHU” cloaking=”default” height=”160″ localization=”default” locale=”US” nofollow=”default” new_window=”default” src=”https://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/61cYwSIajyL._SL160_.jpg” tag=”cliqueclack-20″ width=”142″] [easyazon_image add_to_cart=”default” align=”none” asin=”054792822X” cloaking=”default” height=”160″ localization=”default” locale=”US” nofollow=”default” new_window=”default” src=”https://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41aQPTCmeVL._SL160_.jpg” tag=”cliqueclack-20″ width=”107″]

I’ve seen one Hercules movie this year, the Kellan Lutz starrer The Legend of Hercules, so I wasn’t really sure if I was ready for another one. The earlier one was a bit of a chore to sit through, leaning more to the juvenile spectrum than even the 1950s versions that are seen as pure camp today (granted, most US audiences have never seen the original versions of those Italian sword and sandal epics, just choppily edited versions). Lutz looked the part, to be sure, but he really had nothing to work with.

But we knew then that there was another take on the legend coming, this time starring Dwayne Johnson and simply titled Hercules. The only real drawback at the time was that the film was being directed by the almost universally reviled Brett Ratner, who hasn’t made a good film in about as long as the other Herc movie’s director Renny Harlin has. But Johnson oozes enough charm out of every pore to make audiences like just about anything he’s in. Could he actually save this Hercules?

The answer is a surprising yes! We probably know, or vaguely know, the legend of Hercules from movies, TV shows, cartoons and even comic books. The half-god son of Zeus and a mortal woman, embued with amazing strength, set upon with twelve labors that include killing various mythological creatures. That word is key to this Hercules because it treats the character as a real human and the legend surrounding him is nothing put pure myth that he uses for monetary gain (with the help of his band of mercenaries and a silver-tongued nephew who spins his amazing tales).

The story is simple: a kingdom on the verge of attack hires Hercules and his mercenaries to use his legend to scare off the invading army. Of course, there is a twist or two, including one that posits Hercules may have murdered his own family, but the real meat of the film comes from the interaction between Hercules and his “family.” The film is full of big action set-pieces, but some of the quiter moments between characters and getting a glimpse into their loyalty to each other sets this film apart from some of the others. Ratner also handles the action scenes with great skill, actually allowing the audience to see the battles full frame, not in maddening, hand-held close-ups. Dante Spinotti’s cinematography is also gorgeous, and even though there is quite a bit of CGI, it’s used mostly to add scenery and bodies for scale rather than to be the main focus of a shot.

Hercules is a much better film than I expected, and I would have to say I enjoyed it more than my colleague Jeremy Fogelman, who reviewed the film upon its theatrical release. And now that the movie is available on home video, more people who didn’t want to risk a waste of time and money at the movies can enjoy the film in the comfort of their living rooms. And if you have a Blu-ray player, the experience will be even better (and I have to say that seeing this in 3D is the ultimate experience). The movie itself may not be great — although it is entertaining — but the Blu-ray presentation is simply spectacular.

After looking at two other films on Blu-ray this week, Paramount’s Hercules is the hands down winner for visual clarity (and the win comes over two titles from the usually reliable Warner Home Video). The Blu-ray captures Spinotti’s breath-taking visuals and when you watch the deleted scenes, you realize how much work went into the film’s overall look. It is stunning. The video image is sharp with no hint of graininess, even in the film’s many dark scenes. The movie was obviously shot with digital cameras but it always retains a film-like look. The disk’s 7.1 HD Master Audio is also extremely well-balanced. Even during the battle scenes, any dialog is still clearly audible. The music and sound effects never overpower the center channel. As Blu-rays go, this is one of the best as far as presentation. If you have a 3D set-up, the image is just as sharp and the 3D process is one of the best I’ve seen for a home video presentation, bringing depth to the screen and having many objects, from spears and arrows to drifting ash, extend far beyond the edge of the screen.

The Blu-ray also contains a host of bonus material:

• Commentary by Brett Ratner and Beau Flynn (theatrical version only)
• Brett Ratner and Dwayne Johnson: An Introduction (5:32) — The director and actor discuss their long-held desires to make a Hercules movie, and how a serious injury to Johnson nearly derailed the production.
• Hercules and His Mercenaries (11:07) — A behind the scenes look at the cast, rehearsals, training and production of the film.
• Weapons! (5:24) — A brief look at the various weapons used in the film. Fun fact: several actors refused to carry the rubber versions, preferring to feel the weight of the weapon while carrying them.
• The Bessi Battle (11:54) — In-depth look at all aspects of shooting the first battle scene from construction of the set (and most of the sets on screen are real with CGI augmentation) to training extras and applying full body makeup and tattoos to hundreds of extras. (Although they never discuss hiding Johnson’s massive tattoos.)
• The Effects of Hercules (12:28) — A look at how the visual effects artists combined on-set practical effects with their CGI magic.
• Deleted/Extended Scenes (14:38) — A collection of extended and deleted scenes, some unfinished and not color timed, that actually don’t seem superfluous.

The Blu-ray also contains the theatrical and extended versions of the film. I do have a slight complaint about these releases now that are calling themselves “extended.” Peter Jackson adding 25 minutes to his Hobbit and Lord of the Rings movies is an extended edition. Adding three minutes of footage is pushing the boundaries of what one could call “extended.” Hercules only contains about three minutes so the impact on the film overall is negligible. Aside from that, Hercules on Blu-ray is well-worth the purchase price if you enjoyed the movie on the big screen, and is certainly worth checking out if you had your doubts.

The Hercules Blu-ray was provided to CliqueClack by The Karpel Group/Paramount Home video for purpose of review.

[easyazon_image add_to_cart=”default” align=”none” asin=”B00M265CSU” cloaking=”default” height=”160″ localization=”default” locale=”US” nofollow=”default” new_window=”default” src=”https://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/61pnC0vmNJL._SL160_.jpg” tag=”cliqueclack-20″ width=”127″] [easyazon_image add_to_cart=”default” align=”none” asin=”B00M263SFE” cloaking=”default” height=”160″ localization=”default” locale=”US” nofollow=”default” new_window=”default” src=”https://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/61zOpZJKK3L._SL160_.jpg” tag=”cliqueclack-20″ width=”128″] [easyazon_image add_to_cart=”default” align=”none” asin=”B00M262IEG” cloaking=”default” height=”160″ localization=”default” locale=”US” nofollow=”default” new_window=”default” src=”https://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51fLaycnLaL._SL160_.jpg” tag=”cliqueclack-20″ width=”112″] [easyazon_image add_to_cart=”default” align=”none” asin=”B00M3UMZCQ” cloaking=”default” height=”160″ localization=”default” locale=”US” nofollow=”default” new_window=”default” src=”https://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51OxZFTWpTL._SL160_.jpg” tag=”cliqueclack-20″ width=”120″]

I like sci-fi movies in theory, by which I mean many of them aren’t very good. But the concepts of science fiction are filled with potential, using ideas about far off technologies and futures that tell stories about how humanity is in the present. These days, we’ve seen a lot of dystopian movies or ones without much in the way of “hope.” And even when you do have that, there’s usually a very strong element of “evil science” in such films.

Of course, anytime you have an “evil empire,” they always have the best tech, like in The Hunger Games or the recent Maze Runner. So the good guys have to take down the system using wit and gumption. Rarely is science seen as what it truly is — objective. Luckily, we have a new movie where science is hero and villain alike, where humanity can doom or save itself by action, not due to evil. From my perspective, it’s about time science had something positive in its portrayal in popular media beyond the propensity for people to use computers as magic.

Interstellar is the latest from acclaimed film director Christopher Nolan and it’s already getting very mixed reviews (mostly positive, but a few very angry outliers). I stand in the camp of liking the movie, but that doesn’t mean it’s the best I’ve seen this month, year, or from Nolan. The movie takes place in the “not too distant future,” where humanity is running out of food so everything else becomes less important. Cooper (played by Matthew McConaughey) is a corn farmer raising two kids, his son Tom who plans to become a farmer after his father, and his daughter Murph (played by Mackenzie Foy of that last Twilight movie) who is more of the scientific nerd/genius type.

But ah, you see, Cooper was actually trained as an engineer and NASA test pilot, but when food became an international priority, he stopped doing what he “was good at.” The first hour or so of the movie does a few things, and is mostly uniformly interesting. After a dust storm, Murph and Cooper find mysterious lines in her room that lead them on a new adventure. Soon enough, they discover a secret NASA program that’s seeking new planets that might support human life. You may be thinking, wait, there aren’t any nearby!

Which is true, the nearest planet that might be habitable is many light years away from Earth. But in the movie, they have discovered a mysterious wormhole near Saturn that is connected to a distant galaxy near several possibly useful planets. So this is the final two intersecting points of the first part of the movie. Setting up the critical relationship between father and daughter, Cooper to Murph and vice versa, showing parallels obvious and subtle, and trying to get the audience to be invested in their future. And this relationship is the trigger to get Cooper to decide to go on the mission (because otherwise there wouldn’t be a movie). Assisted by Cooper’s old professor, Professor Michael Caine (technically it’s “Brand,” but … you know) and the professor’s daughter Amelia (Anne Hathaway) as a fellow astronaut, the team leaves on their mission. But due to science stuff (general relativity, where time moves slower as you move closer to the speed of light), Cooper may not be back for years. Or ever, because space is dangerous.

The second hour of the movie is the adventure in space, action pieces and thrills, with a few snuck in character moments. This is the best part of the movie, the part I was most emotionally connected to and thought was the most exciting. The visuals were superb and wondrous, from the bizarre wormhole to the practical effects of the spaceship. We are also introduced to a few corollary characters, including the wonderfully funny robot TARS (voice of Bill Irwin), but they aren’t as important. Back on Earth, Tom and Murph have grown up into Casey Affleck and Jessica Chastain respectively, and have done what was expected. Tom’s running the farm with a wife and child, while Murph is working with Professor Michael Caine on the secret equation that could move people off the Earth en masse and save humanity. This is when things get a bit … muddled, though, as we finish off in our third hour of the movie (49 minutes, but c’mon!). The final hour of the movie gets a bit weird and the themes a bit simplistic. In terms of enjoyment, the movie started strong, got really strong, and kinda petered out. Was it a terrible ending?

No, it was not a terrible ending, but a bit overly sentimental and obvious. I expected better from the guy behind Memento and Inception, two great movies that expand your mind. This one tries to be clever but it doesn’t quite pull off that cleverness. Although at some points I gripped my seat in suspense and other times I felt affected by the emotions on display, in the end I was more along the lines of “I enjoyed that, but didn’t love it.” But that’s just one piece of it. How about the acting? It’s great! Matthew McConaughey is, of course, great as the self-assured cowboy astronaut farmer engineer pilot rationalist father who cares about his kids and humanity too, if he has time for them. This is not a shlocky performance, but it’s a bit hammy in places. That’s the script though, not him.

Similarly I enjoyed Anne Hathaway as a reasonably interesting character and Michael Caine did his Michael Caine impression to a tee. Mackenzie Foy was excellent as the young Murph, so wipe those worries of Twilight away! Jessica Chastain is great when she gets a chance to be subtle, which is about half the time. The rest of the time, her character gets a bit “exposition” heavy, which is a problem many other characters have as well. I tend to like dialogue and explanations, although I don’t need everything spelled out precisely. This movie is nearly three hours long, and it didn’t need to be as currently written and edited. There are certainly concepts and ideas enough to find in that length of film, but this one felt like it dragged a bit, especially near the end. This won’t be the most memorable space movie of all time, but one thing you can’t deny is that majesty of those visuals.

See this one on a big screen or IMAX, and any quibbles you may have with the story or script will probably just fade away, at least until you leave the theater. But as for me, I liked it well enough that I’m more than okay with seeing it again, and considering the length, that’s saying something. Maybe about me.

[easyazon_image add_to_cart=”default” align=”none” asin=”B0085D3I3K” cloaking=”default” height=”160″ localization=”default” locale=”US” nofollow=”default” new_window=”default” src=”https://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51onjkUIZzL._SL160_.jpg” tag=”cliqueclack-20″ width=”147″][easyazon_image add_to_cart=”default” align=”none” asin=”B00EUYKRZA” cloaking=”default” height=”160″ localization=”default” locale=”US” nofollow=”default” new_window=”default” src=”https://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/510sVkkSCsL._SL160_.jpg” tag=”cliqueclack-20″ width=”127″][easyazon_image add_to_cart=”default” align=”none” asin=”B002ZG981E” cloaking=”default” height=”160″ localization=”default” locale=”US” nofollow=”default” new_window=”default” src=”https://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51m6s%2BHRt8L._SL160_.jpg” tag=”cliqueclack-20″ width=”127″]

There was a mixed bag of TV releases on DVD and Blu-ray this week with past seasons of shows soon to return — 2 Broke Girls, Two and a Half Men — and shows that recently ended and are either returning next year — Penny Dreadful, Fargo — or have ended their runs — Dracula, The Honorable Woman. Reality TV is featured heavily this week with either season sets or special episodes, including Here Comes Honey Boo Boo, Alaska State Troopers, Jackass and Pawn Stars, and shows the entire family can enjoy — Mr. Peabody and Sherman (the classic cartoons to tie in with the movie release), Marvel Knights, Star Wars Rebels and Yo Gabba Gabba. To see all of the highlights from October 14, have a look at our alphabetical shopper’s guide and click on a link to get more information or to make a purchase.

Step right up, come one, come all to Fraulein Elsa’s Cabinet of Curiosities. Otherwise known as season four of the FX hit American Horror Story (this time subtitled Freak Show). AHS is really like nothing else on TV today, and its closest antecedents were the anthology shows popular back in the 1950s and 1960s (and those had different casts and stories each week).

Season three, Coven, brought an even wider audience to the show and the anticipation for season four has been at a fever pitch since tidbits about the story and characters began to “leak” out not long after the last season concluded. So far we’ve had a modern day haunted house in Los Angeles, a New England asylum (with demons and aliens!) in 1964, and a New Orleans based coven of witches that bounced around between two eras of witchcraft.

Season four takes us to Jupiter, FL, 1952, the site of Elsa Mars’ Freak Show (and also historically a place know for its circus background). But like any town on American Horror Story, Jupiter has more than a few dark secrets to reveal. As the season starts, Jupiter is beset by a series of gruesome murders perpetrated by one of the most frightening clowns in TV history (sorry, Pennywise). But why the clown (we’ll come to know him as Twisty) is killing people and kidnapping children remains to be seen … as does what he hides behind his half mask that covers his mouth.

Elsewhere, we meet Dot and Bette, conjoined twins are responsible for the murder of their mother (and a self-inflicted wound) which they hope to pin on the town serial killer … except no one is buying it since their wound was too fresh. But to the rescue comes Fraulein Elsa who spirits the girls out of the hospital and into her show, hoping their oddity and notoriety will bring audiences flocking to her failing show (unfortunately, the banners heralding their arrival also bring the police).

There is an entire cavalcade of characters to meet throughout the first 90 minutes, including Elsa’s right hand, Ethel Darling (Kathy Bates), a bearded lady, her son Jimmy (Lobster Boy) and a host of real-life oddities with impressive acting skills. And then there’s everyone’s favorite character from season two – Pepper! Yes, this marks the first time any character has crossed from one season to another, and with Freak Show taking place 12 years before Asylum, we can assume we know where Pepper will end up by the end of the season.

In addition to the horror and general weirdness, the first episode also had some heart as well and really portrayed the “freaks” as a family (the season’s overarching theme). Elsa may not be the world’s best mother, but she has brought all of society’s rejects together and given them a sense of worth … at least that’s what they think. Elsa may have ulterior motives, and her obsession with the movies and putting herself center stage tells a lot about her true character. The question is, does she really care for the family she created, or is she just using them for her own fame? Whatever her motives, Jessica Lange once again gives a bravura performance.

Kathy Bates, who won an Emmy for season three, gives the warmest performance in the episode, showing how much she truly cares for Elsa and the “family” even when she knows Elsa’s true colors. I think maybe she thinks Elsa will redeem herself. The role also shows her fearlessness, sporting a fuzzy beard and what can only be described as a “butch” haircut, and a less than flattering wardrobe (except for when she’s on stage). And, to my delight, she also imbues her character with a thick, classic Baltimore accent, hon! (Not Cajun, as some reviews have suggested.)

But even with conjoined twins, a Lobster Boy, a bearded lady and a killer clown, the episode’s most stunningly bizarre moment came when Elsa took to the stage to perform for a “sold out” audience (a local millionaire bought out the show for her son and they were the only two in the audience). In a scene right out of Moulin Rouge, Else took center stage and belted out David Bowie’s “Life on Mars” … which wasn’t released until 1971. It was actually a beautifully staged scene and even heartbreaking at the end when Elsa realized there was really no one watching her. And then as she sulked in her tent, she revealed another secret … she’s not as different from her “family” as we thought she was.

Ryan Murphy packed a lot into the first 90 minute episode of the season, and despite some earlier reviews which called the first two episodes lackluster, I am totally looking forward to what comes next as we meet new characters and more secrets are revealed. What did you think of the premiere?

[easyazon_image add_to_cart=”default” align=”none” asin=”B005LAJ1PE” cloaking=”default” height=”160″ localization=”default” locale=”US” nofollow=”default” new_window=”default” src=”https://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51liUri1zpL._SL160_.jpg” tag=”cliqueclack-20″ width=”135″] [easyazon_image add_to_cart=”default” align=”none” asin=”B00ADQPA38″ cloaking=”default” height=”160″ localization=”default” locale=”US” nofollow=”default” new_window=”default” src=”https://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51xVvuBgI-L._SL160_.jpg” tag=”cliqueclack-20″ width=”122″] [easyazon_image add_to_cart=”default” align=”none” asin=”B00MMVA3FM” cloaking=”default” height=”160″ localization=”default” locale=”US” nofollow=”default” new_window=”default” src=”https://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51TH7Qf0XHL._SL160_.jpg” tag=”cliqueclack-20″ width=”127″]