After months of hype, viral videos and endless quotes from director Alex Aja referring to the Spring Breakers as “meat,” Piranha 3D finally hit screens this past weekend. And while no one was expecting high art from a movie about killer fish, reactions were largely positive, scoring an impressive 81 percent on Rotten Tomatoes (read our Piranha review here). Piranha 3D follows the B-movie tradition in terms of storyline (or lack thereof) and gratuitous titillation. But unlike the shoestring budget of the 1978 Roger Corman production directed by a young Joe Dante, Weinstein Company did spend some dollars on the production, marketing and 3D conversion, albeit still on a relatively low budget scale by studio standards.

So how do these new, enhanced killer fish stack up against the Corman cult classic? Will Aja’s re-imagining have the midnight movie staying power or will it be yet another barely remembered remake blip? Here are five reasons we liked Piranha 3D more than the original and five more why we still prefer the original Piranha (1978).

Read on at FEARnet…

Bookmark to:

You can only resist a phenomenon so long in this business without having to partake in some fashion. At this point, it’s less about whether the Twilight movies are good or bad and more about keeping up with this pop cultural phenomenon that has, like it or not, become a yearly event.

The third film in the Mormon Vamp series, Twilight Eclipse, hits screens June 30th and, as such, I was on hand to speak with the cast live and in person this past weekend. I was even able to shoot some amateur video from the press conferences, which you’ll find the first few of below. You can check out the full interviews with Stewart, Pattinson and Lautner by clicking over to my YouTube Page.

Bookmark to:

In the sweltering heat of a typical Louisiana summer, we walk down a dirt road to get a better look at the action. On the edge of a big, muddy swamp, surrounded by the ever-present bugs, a giant Civil War ship sits docked, looking very out of place. The look of the sets and costumes is part Civil War, part old west. In the buggy, sweltering June heat in a remote area outside of New Orleans, Jimmy Hayward (HORTON HEARS A WHO!) directs John Malkovich, who as the deadly Turnbull, commands his troops with a rebel rousing speech full of fiery bluster.

“This is Turnbull’s boat and he’s going to take it to Washington to blow up the White House,” an enthusiastic Hayward tells a group of press.

Read the full story on Bloody-Disgusting.com

Additional Jonah Hex Set Report on Dark Horizons

Bookmark to:

Seriously, is this really news? Will anyone even notice Megan Fox isn’t in Transformers 3? Aren’t there plenty of equally hot innocuous women wandering around Tinseltown ready to jump into that role? Or blow whichever executive makes that decision? Perhaps there are even a few with some shred of actual acting talent. And besides, we’re talking about Transformers here. She’s the fucking girl, no more, no less. Insert any other hot chick amongst Michael Bay’s mindless parade of big explosions and giant clinking robots and that should do the trick just fine. Hell, replace Shia while you’re at it. Humans are just background in a movie like that anyway.

And in a semi-related story, Megan Fox has reportedly threatened physical harm to whoever distributed the latest batch of nudie photos of her on the interweb. Um, physical harm? Riiiiggghhhttt. Really Megan? Now that I’d love to see. You’re in the public eye and you’ve made a career out of selling your body. This is a surprise. Really? She goes on to try to defend herself as a serious actress just trying to do her job. That may be, but we aren’t exactly talking about Oscar material here, honey. Transformers, Jennifer’s Body, Jonah Hex… These are geek movies populated by an audience that drools over you and rarely gets laid. Of course they are looking for naked pictures of you. They’re looking for naked pictures of everybody. They’re also smarter than you and good with computers. Either get over it or stop profiting off them.

Bookmark to:

Where do I begin? Well, to preface my review, I must admit that I am a longtime Elm Street lover and a pretty big fan of the entire series. Sure, I know the sequels aren’t great, but I truly believe the first film is a masterpiece of the genre and Part 3: Dream Warriors, Part 4: Dream Master and Wes Craven’s New Nightmare have their merits. Heck, I even enjoy Freddy Vs. Jason for what it is. Still, I’ve always wondered what might happen if the series were to return to its roots, less of the game show host Freddy and more of the dark, mysterious, demonic boogeyman that had audiences of the edge of their seats in 1984.

I was understandably skeptical of the inconsistent Platinum Dunes’ involvement, but I liked their original Texas Chainsaw and thought last year’s Friday the 13th was, at the very least, silly good fun. I was extremely impressed by the casting of Jackie Earle Haley. He was my choice in a Bloody-Disgusting article a while back and seemed like a natural for the part. The script wasn’t bad and the rest of the cast seemed generally solid. Samuel Bayer’s music videos have always had inventive visuals, which would at the very least make for some eye-popping dream sequences.

As I sat in the darkening theater at last night’s screening, eager with anticipation and careful to avoid early reviews or the reactions of fellow critics, I returned to the giddy little boy of years past, popcorn and Wild Cherry Icee in hand ready for a good time at the movies. I tried and tried to go with the images that were unraveling before my eyes. I tried to ignore the terrible opening, the lack of character development or the undeniable fact that Jackie Earle Haley just isn’t that frightening as Freddy. I tried to like something, anything, about this new Nightmare. But as the credits rolled, I only sat in my seat in a bit of a daze, trying to come to terms with the fact that 2010’s Nightmare isn’t just flawed, but without any merit whatsoever, amongst the worst of Platinum Dunes’ cinematic abortions (Texas Chainsaw: The Beginning, Amityville Horror) and as bad, if not worse, than the truly terrible Nightmare on Elm Street Part 2: Freddy’s Revenge and part six, Freddy’s Dead: The Final Nightmare.

The film opens with all the subtlety of a frying pan to the face. Where the original slowly and effectively built to Freddy’s first on-screen kill, the classic and unforgettable death of Tina (Amanda Wyss), blood is shed only moments into Nightmare 2010. In the original, the characters and audience alike sweated through the subtle reveals, learning little by little just what atrocities Krueger was capable of unleashing on his victims in the helplessness of sleep. Here, one scene in, you know Freddy can kill you if you sleep. Characters have already stopped sleeping and Freddy is picking off victims at a breakneck pace. Character development? Nah, we’ll pass. Here’s a bunch of sleep-deprived kids wearing dark clothing and looking like drug addicts. Mr. Krueger, here’s your buffet. Enjoy!

Samuel Bayer should go back to music videos and never look back. With few exceptions, the visuals aren’t terribly impressive and far less compelling than the original film, shot 25 years ago with the budget that this new film probably spent on Craft Services. The pacing is a mess, the acting is wooden and any sense of drama or character dimensionality is noticeably absent. Instead of the goodie two shoes Nancy Heather Langenkamp perfected, we get Rooney Mara’s brooding Nancy, an outsider who sits in her room listening to her iPod and staring into space or painting pictures that belong on the covers of ’80s heavy metal albums. How do you know Quentin (Kyle Gallner in the Johnny Depp role) is troubled and dark? By his Joy Division t-shirt, of course.

And Jackie Earle Haley? Well, he tries. Many of the reasons Freddy isn’t so scary this time around aren’t really his fault. First, he’s in the light almost from the beginning. While Dunes was ridiculously careful to avoid revealing Krueger’s new look prior to release, in the actual movie he’s practically in a spotlight from his first appearance. Haley’s height is quickly and inexplicably apparent. I mean, no one knows Tom Cruise is five feet tall when you see him on screen. Couldn’t they afford platforms or a step stool? The flashbacks only further serve to lessen Freddy’s intimidation factor. He’s less mysterious, less frightening and more pervy and creepy.

In a day and age where we’ve come full circle on the slasher genre, from the early days where Michael Myers, Freddy and Jason were first born to the self-referential fun of the Scream series and back again, Nightmare 2010 is surprisingly humorless. No ones really having a good time, including the audience and Freddy himself. Scream’s killer mocks his victim saying, “You might as well come outside to investigate a strange noise of something.” In this movie, Kris (the Tina role from the original) actually does just that before a rehash of the levitation ceiling kill, albeit without the flair or brutality or visual stylization Craven pulled off 25 years prior. Scares are cheap and obvious. Loud sounds, screeches and Freddy constantly popping up behind or beside characters in a series of lame peekaboo scares.

A Nightmare on Elm Street (2010) is a disappointing from start to finish. It takes everything that set the Elm Street series apart from the standard slasher and pisses it away. The result is a snooze-inducing, run-of-the-mill remake that furthers the argument that more times than not Hollywood should leave well enough alone.

(Score: 1 out of 10)

Bookmark to:

I’m tired of hearing people who know nothing of boxing history talk about Mike Tyson being one of the greatest fighters of all time. Some even have the audacity to to put him up there with Ali, which is an insult to Ali, to be sure. Tyson was an exciting fighter who brought popularity to the sport and attracted bloodthirsty laymen eager to watch him lay waste to opponent after opponent, racking up knockouts in his first 19 fights and becoming the youngest heavyweight champion of all time. The question remains, who exactly was young Mike knocking out before he met a determined Buster Douglas on that fateful night in 1990? Was Buster really that good that night, or was he just the first person to stand up to the fearsome Tyson and prove that’s Mikes muscles may have been “Iron,” but his ability to stand up to a game opponent was suspect at best?

When you ask one of these Tyson “fans” to name the great fighters he beat, you get a blank stare. I mean, seriously, let’s name them. His best win was probably against Michael Spinks, a cruiserweight who was too small to tangle with the heavyweights. He beat a past-his-prime Larry Holmes who admits his heart wasn’t in the sport at the time and he barely trained. He twice beat the promising but ultimately disappointing Donovan “Razor” Ruddock. What all time great heavyweights did he beat in their prime? Tony Tubbs? Frank Bruno? Trevor Berbick? Come on! The answer is nobody.

I’ve also heard the argument that had Tyson fought Holyfield in his prime, he would have “mopped the floor with him,” a preposterous statement if there ever was one. While the argument could certainly be made that Tyson was a better fighter before he went to prison in 1992 than when he was defeated by Holyfield in 1996, Tyson was 31 years old at the time of their first fight. Holyfield was 34. And for the record, they also met as amateurs and Holyfield beat Iron Mike then too. And yes, there are the dirty tactic stories people like to pin on Holyfield to excuse away Tyson’s inferiority. As any true boxing pundit will surely notate, Holyfield has always fought in a style with his head down that leads to head clashes. It’s just his style, unfortunate though it may be. But as to who was the better of the two leaders of the heavyweight division during that time period, there really is not contest.

Mike Tyson was a good fight. There’s no doubt about that. He brought excitement to the Heavyweight division at a time where the middle weight classes were dominating and the heavies had fallen out of the limelight. Lord knows we could use someone like Mike to come along and bring some interest to the sleep-inducing Heavyweight ranks of current times. But in the end, Tyson just never achieved the “greatness” his early career would have promised. If he’d had his head on straight, then who knows? But history tells the tale and Tyson never proved himself as an all-time great. End of story.

Bookmark to:

In title and premise alone, Hot Tub Time Machine sounds like a turkey or, at best, some lame direct-to-video teen comedy. But if you dig a little deeper, its credentials beg further investigation. Set in the 1980’s, it stars two icons of the decade, John Cusack in the lead and Crispin Glover in a hilarious supporting role. Added to the pitch-perfect mix are The Office’s Craig Robinson and Daily Show’s Rob Corrdy along with comedy star-on-the-rise Clark Duke (Sex Drive, Kick Ass). The icing on the cake is director Steve Pink, a regular collaborator with Cusack and the pen behind High Fidelity and Grosse Point Blank, the latter being one of my top comedy picks of the past two decades.

The premise is just as ridiculous as it sounds. And thankfully, Hot Tub owns its silliness. Three longtime friends, Adam (Cusack), Nick (Robinson) and Lou (Corddry) decide to go on vacation to the Spring Break destination of their youth in desperate attempt to recapture past glories and escape their humdrum, failed adult existence. Adam’s nephew, Jacob (Duke), tags along for the fun. When they arrive, they are greeted by a one-armed bellhop named Phil (Glover) who begrudgingly leads them to their dilapidated room. Seems father time has not been kind to their beloved resort over the past quarter century either. Thankfully a helpful repairman (Chevy Chase) fixes up the hot tub, so the day isn’t a total loss. One thing leads to another and after a night of drinking and debauchery in the suds and bubbles, the boys awaken in 1986.

Taking little shame in overt cultural references, Hot Tub front loads the entrance into the mid ’80s with a colorful kaleidoscope of nostalgia – everything from leg warmers to Walkmans, ALF, Reagan, hair metal and, finally, affirmation as to the current skin color of Michael Jackson. From there the story speeds off and the laughs come rapid fire, ofttimes fast enough that you may miss a line while the audience recovers from the last humdinger. Thankfully, the lewd humor is timeless rather than derived entirely from “We’re in the past” jokes.

Cusack is the ideal connection to the “Me” decade, but the actor leaves the bulk of the humor to his supporting players. Craig Robinson’s Nick is still in love with his wife despite a recent indiscretion and more concerned with fidelity than enjoying the party atmosphere. While sitting in a tub with a bare-breasted and ready party girl (Jessica Pare) atop him, a tearful Nick can only think of his marriage. He later drunk dials the 9-year-old version of his wife. Corddy’s Lou is exactly the opposite, more than ready to hump anything that moves. It is Corrdry, in fact, who is the breakout star of Hot Tub, willing to go to Ferrell-esque lengths for a laugh (Naked? Check. Blowing a Dude? Well, possibly.) and devoid of any moralistic hang-ups or concern of future ramifications. While the rest of the group is worried about avoiding disruption of the space time continuum, Lou could care less. Little by little Corddy runs away with the film and steps to the forefront. He is absolutely hysterical.

Clark Duke has more of a supporting role as the youngest of the group whose only attachment to the ’80s is being born during the decade. He runs into his mom and chases down Chevy Chase for the answers to the Hot Tub Time Machine and getting back to present day. Bellman Phil again surfaces in the ’80s, but this time with two working appendages. At first the inevitable arm loss scene feels like a one-note joke, but Pink and team relentlessly tease the forthcoming brutality, a joke that gets better and better each time it plays.

Hot Tub Time Machine falls just a notch short of last year’s comedy classic, The Hangover, but it’s not far off. A few of the jokes don’t work and the pacing feels a little uneven here and there. Cusack’s romance with Lizzy Kaplan is contrived and unnecessary. That being said, those moments are minor distractions from the fun. Hot Tub is pure escapism and a great time at the movies. Like the comedies of the decade it returns to, it is a balls-to-the-wall Hard-R comedy complete with tasteless humor, nudity and foul, foul language. And thank God. It’s about time we put those pussified, lame-ass PG-13 teen comedies to bed once and for all.

8.0 (out of 10)

Watch Craig Robinson Perform “Jessie’s Girl” at the Hot Tub Time Machine Party!

Quickie Review: Alice in Wonderland

Quickie Review: The Crazies

Quickie Review: The Wolfman

Quickie Review: Crazy Heart

Quickie Review: World’s Greatest Dad

Bookmark to:

I’m not sure why everyone seems so surprised that the Oscars were a little lifeless. After all, wasn’t this the second year on a row that the Academy promised a completely new, bigger, better Oscars? Or did we already block those images of Hugh Jackson prancing across stage and doing one of his many salutes to Broadway?

I thought this year was okay. The opening dual host monologue was pretty good. It was a little edgy and a little mean-spirited, which is always a refreshing change from the ego-stroking that goes on for the rest of the show. It reminded me of Chris Rock’s controversial hosting job a few years back. Still one of the most entertaining Oscar hosts they’ve ever had, at least for my money.

Since the Academy already had Steve and Alec, they should have used them more. Less presenters, more seasoned comedy veterans. As usual, the Oscars needed to lose the corny dance numbers. Combining all the best song nominees into a single dance montage was an interesting idea in theory, but it wound up being just as bad (if not worse) than the usual individual performances. Did you see that guy doing the robot during the Hurt Locker song? Seriously? The other lowlight for me was having the former Best Actor/Actress winners intro the new nominees. Again, good idea in theory but it mostly came off like one gigantic Hollywood ego stroke session.

For next year, I’d say limit the show to a tight two hours and 30 minutes. Instead of worrying about a speech going on too long, worry about all the moments where people generally take a bathroom break, such as the aforementioned dance numbers, the tributes, the dull as hell presenter “comedy” banter. Give the host some freedom and let them run wild a bit with their material. Worry less about offending someone and more about putting on a highly entertaining show that is representative of the industry this is supposed to be promoting. That’s my two cents anyway.

Bookmark to:

Floyd “Money” Mayweather is a talented fighter. There’s no doubt about that. He’s also a generally boring fighter to watch who has ducked many credible potential opponents over the years. He’s great, but he’s nowhere near as great as he thinks he is. And as far as the trash talking skills he refers to in the video below, “Money” may talk a lot, but he lacks the verbal wit and intelligence of the G.O.A.T., Mr. Ali.

Here’s a video of Mayweather’s recent promotional interview followed by a classic two-part radio interview where RA The Rugged Man takes Floyd to task leading with the question, “Floyd, when are you going to fight someone your own size in the top two? To Floyd’s credit, he is finally doing that by taking on Mosley.

Radio Interview Part 1

Radio Interview Part 2

Bookmark to:

The first thing you should know about Alice in Wonderland going into the theater is this is not the Alice you’ve known from the past. Not exactly. Tim Burton’s new twist on Alice is indeed based in Lewis Carroll’s imaginative creations from Alice in Wonderland and Through the Looking Glass, but this is an entirely new sequel of sorts in which we find a 19 year-old Alice (Mia Wasikowski) returning to Wonderland 12 years after her first adventure there. She doesn’t remember the first visit and the inhabitants of this strange land aren’t entirely sure she’s the same Alice.

Burton’s new twisty, trippy take on Carroll’s writings features a motley crew cast list that includes Johnny Depp as the Mad Hatter; Helena Bonham Carter as the Red Queen; Anne Hathaway as the White Queen; Crispin Glover as the Knave of Hearts; Alan Rickman as the Blue Caterpillar; Michael Sheen as the White Rabbit and Stephen Fry as that cat with the infamous shit-eating grin, the Cheshire Cat. It’s hard to imagine a more perfect group to fill this wild world and Tim Burton seems like the ideal choice to bring a live action Alice to the silver screen.

The story first teases Wonderland with a dull opening where the daydreaming Alice is being primped to accept a proposal of marriage from the dorky Lord Ascot (Tim Pigott-Smith). Thankfully, it doesn’t last long. As soon as the Lord gets down on one knee, Alice flees the scene and jumps down a rabbit hole. Wouldn’t hold your breath there, Lord.

The early exploration of Wonderland is colorful, movie magical fun. It’s entertaining to see the director’s take on the world, a sort of Burton-ized version of the iconic imagery from book illustrations and the classic Disney animated film. CG characters abound, as is to be expected these days, but mostly the work is strong enough to avoid distracting you too much from the fantastical world.

Johnny Depp’s turn as Mad Hatter has drawn the biggest anticipation from fans and, now that I’ve seen it, I’m sad to report that it’s pretty underwhelming. Much like the crazy smiling lunatic Depp already played in Charlie in the Chocalate Factory, the Hatter is weird for weird’s sake. And that’s not to say that is always necessarily a bad thing, but here it just feels like déjà vu. My favorite performance by far is Bonham Carter as the crater-headed Red Queen. The actress really dives into the character, ahem, head first. It looks like she had a blast in the role and her energy really shines through. From the voice to the facial expressions, Bonham Carter really puts her own mark on the role, out-crazying even Depp, shocking as that may be. And as excited as I was to hear Crispin Glover would be joining the cast list, he’s kinda so-so as well. There’s only so many times you can see Glover’s creepy look before it gets more than a little tiresome. Dare I say he needed to be even weirder?

And what about Alice? Well, she’s the least interesting part of this story. Washikowski is perfectly okay in the role, but a little flat and one-dimensional at times. Either way, Burton’s focus was clearly never on Alice, so it’s hard to blame the young actress. She’s in a pretty unenviable position.

It’s kind of hard to figure why Burton and co. felt the need to offer their own interpretation on such a beloved work. It’s an ill-advised move that rarely leads positive result. While Burton and screenwriter Linda Wollverton’s script is competent enough and holds interest through most of the story, it often feels a little short-sighted and unclear, especially as the movie draws towards an unnecessary climax. At best, this new Alice is uneven. The pacing is all over the map and the laughs are almost always followed by gags that land with a sound thud. Burton may be a good director and Wolverton, who also penned The Lion King, is a good screenwriter, but neither is the storyteller Lewis Carroll was.

As much as the world of Wonderland seems perfectly-suited to 3-D, it really adds nothing at all to the movie. Of course, Alice wasn’t actually filmed in 3-D and the post work feels haphazard at best. It isn’t terribly immersive and the image is darkened by the glasses, giving viewers the feeling of wearing sunglasses throughout the movie. I tipped my glasses up more than once to see the brighter, more colorful Alice originally intended.

Tim Burton is the master of weird material, but it almost seems as Alice was just a bit too obvious for him. Did he get bored in Wonderland? It kinda seems that way by the end, which feels more than a little phoned in. The end result is a movie that is decently enjoyable escapism, but entirely forgettable in the long run.

Quickie Score: 6.5 (out of 10)

Quickie Review: The Crazies

Quickie Review: The Wolfman

Quickie Review: Crazy Heart

Quickie Review: World’s Greatest Dad

Bookmark to: