Today’s strip makes me laugh. If I’m a dork for admitting that, then crown me King Dork of The Land of Dork.
I’ve always been a fan of Tex Avery-style slapstick violence. I get a good chuckle out of the idea putting someone in a situation they are completely oblivious to, and nonsensical violence is their comeuppance.
Regardless, Al Pacino’s new flick Simone left the door wide open to a strip like this one. At least in my brain — where “one + B = elephant.”
I don’t know if any of you have seen the trailers or commercials for Simone, but basically, Pacino creates a computer-generated movie star when his flesh and blood lead walks out of the picture he’s directing. Of course, Simone goes on to super-stardom and is internationally loved. Pacino is then left to deal with the repercussions of his lie which that grown beyond his control.
This movie doesn’t just wear its intentions on it’s sleeve, it shoves them in your fucking face. “ARE YOU LEARNING ANYTHING FROM THIS EXPERIENCE?! DO YOU HEED OUR WARNING?!” It should have the words “A MORAL DRAMA” printed out in big, bold letters at the base of the poster.
Maybe I’m jumping the gun. After all, I haven’t actually seen the film. But once my B.S. alarm sounds, it’s a loud li’l bugger and hard to ignore. I’d rather a film sneak in the back door with it’s message rather than beat me over the head with it. As pretentious as it was American Beauty did a good job of this.
Maybe I’m just too sensitive.
Just so everyone is on the same page, the third panel is supposed to be Robin Williams from his Mork & Mindy days. I only bring it up because I know some of the other readers probably can’t figure out why Robin Williams would have a mullet and wear suspenders.
To be honest, back then, neither did we.
With that out of the way, I need to report that I just got done watching The Soprano’s season premier and I can’t stress enough how nice it is to have television that isn’t insulting.
Unless of course, you’re Italian-American. Certain associations claim they propagate negative stereotypes. This open letter to HBO, for example.
You know, I don’t remember any association for idiots knocking down Norm MacDonald’s door back when he had a TV show. Then again, they probably couldn’t find his house.
My point is this: I cannot for the life of me understand why any organization that would try to silence programming that is by far superior to any other piece of tripe the slap on the screen. These are the people who tell the teacher they forgot to assign homework at the end of the day. They’re ruining it for the rest of us.
Does this mean I support unfair stereotypes or generalizations? Of course not. But if I was going to do a TV show about overweight housewives, there would be certain stereotypes built into that. Conversely, a show that revolves around something as ingrained into our culture as the Mafia may have some associations already attached to it. To cut a swath too far outside the box may render the show beyond the realm of suspended belief. What? Are we supposed to assume that mob guys sit around eating fine cheese and discussing the annotated works of Shakespeare? I think finding them at a nudie bar is much closer to the truth.
For those of you who don’t get The Soprano’s, I highly recommend buying the first two seasons on DVD. You’re really missing out.
What this has to do with Robin Williams or One Hour Photo, I don’t know. Kinda got off on a rant there
I didn’t see The Recruit this weekend and doubt I probably ever will. My reasons are outlined pretty fairly in the topic of today’s strip.
I know you’re thinking “If you didn’t see the movie, then how do you know Al Pacino’s character is the villian?” C’mon. Have you seen the trailer? It’s pretty obvious when they spout lines like, “You can’t trust anybody. Not even the people that recruit you.” and they show a big close up on Pacino. For all intents and purposes, they might as well had slung a big sign around his neck.
Of course, just to be double-sure, I visited a few forums and gather the reviews of people who had seen it, and my estimation was proven true.
Personally, I think it’s a sad statement on Hollywood a fairs when a movie about ESPIONAGE cannot keep secret who the villain is in their picture. A potentially good film is undone by sloppy trailers. Don’t act like you haven’t been victimized by something like this before.
I had more comments about the art of trailer-making, but it’s all stuff you are familiar with. Comedies show all the funniest parts in theirs. Dramatic films bore you to tears with the impassioned delivery of dialogue. I don’t know. It just seems like there should be a system of check and balances that establishes what goes in a trailer. Maybe directors could pass along little notes to the editors who put these things together…
“Yeah, the part where Pacino is revealed to the bad guy? Please leave that out. Everything else is fair game.”
I dunno.
I’m all ranted out at the moment. It’s hard to keep finding things about the industry that piss me off. Okay… no it’s not.
I saw The Hours over the weekend starring Nicole Kidman, Julianne Moore and Meryl Streep. I thought it was okay, but depressing – if that makes sense. I might put together a review of it later on. I have some thoughts about it. A good sign that the movie struck a chord somewhere.
“You’re analog players in a digital world.”
The line, delivered by Eddie Izzard’s character in reference to the suave criminal masterminds played by George Clooney and Brad Pitt. It is a declaration made by screenwriters Brian Koppleman and David Levien that is meant to crystallize the air of mythic cool surrounding Danny Ocean and his gang as a preface the third installment of what like to call “The Franchise That Should Not Be” – Ocean’s Thirteen.
I refer to the “Ocean’s” films as the franchise that should not be due to the fact that the original Ocean’s Eleven was a remake of a Rat Pack film from 1960 that wasn’t particularly well received. That is, not until decades later by people in denial over the Disney-fication of Las Vegas and who mourned the loss of brass balls cool in the era of free love. Yet, somehow, director Steven Soderberg brought something fresh to the screen and found cunning cipher’s to deliver his message of relaxed new millennium machismo in Clooney and Pitt. His take was an effervescent affair, mostly glossy, but entertainingly written with enough switchbacks to keep audiences engaged.
The cast’s affinity for one another showed up on screen – which I think is a large part of what pushed the first film over the fence. Inevitably, a sequel would be made. And while cast and crew took a few hits on the chin for having more fun making the movie than the audience watching it, I still found it a welcome addition.
But it’s almost beyond reason that a third film should be made. Each of the actors involved is too popular. Soderberg’s credibility as an indie-house darling stretched too thin. Could spending 4 months together on a set really be this much fun? Apparently so.
This time the crew is back to their own stomping grounds in Vegas. They’ve arrived to turn the screws on a land developer played with slithering tanorexic glee by Al Pacino. He’s muscled out his development partner, played by Elliott Gould, sending him into shock. The crew, gathered to his bed side, vow revenge. Instead of stealing huge sums of money or priceless pieces of art, it’s the crew’s goal to put enough of a sizable dent in Pacino’s grand opening that he’ll be forced off the board of his own corporation. I know – You haven’t heard about a plot this exciting since it turned out Episode I: The Phantom Menace was about the taxation of trade routes.
There are scams being run on this side where the crew is also trying to prevent Pacino from earning another Five Diamond hotel rating while also stealing a set of real diamonds Pacino buys for his wife each time one of his hotels reaches that milestone worth in excess of $250 million.
Like many of the “threequels” this summer, this is where Ocean’s Thirteen begins to fall apart. Too many plot points, too many scams, too many characters running around in what appears to be too short of a time frame and too many lingering questions that take you out of the action. Don’t even stop to think for a minute how much money it would take to cover all the travel, bribes and equipment Danny and his crew would need to run these scams and CERTAINLY don’t question where the crew could have gotten their hands on not one, but TWO of the drilling rigs that carved out The Chunnel. C’mon – it wouldn’t be cool…
It’s understandable why the filmmakers went this route. To combat the law of diminishing returns, you have to heap on the glamor, heap on the spectacle and heap on the courageousness. Ocean’s Thirteen does this spectacularly well. In fact, hats off to the art department on this film who created a fully-functional three story casino within a sound stage on the Warner Bros. lot. It looked perfectly in-step with modern Vegas with it’s aggressive use of red twinkling promise. Sets representing the different villas and suites within the hotel looked plush and decadent. The film looks amazing – bar none.
The performances, too, were well done. I still find myself wishing I could roll with the punches as well as Clooney does or wear a suit as sharply as Pitt. However, the boy’s club atmosphere is pervasive and the film could have benefited from the balance of a woman’s touch. Neither Julia Roberts’s or Catherine Zeta Jones’s characters make an appearance in the film and their lack of inclusion is treated almost dismissively. Ellen Barkin cuts a dramatic silhouette as Pacino’s right hand woman, but her role is quickly reduced to sexpot comic relief when Matt Damon, in character as the translator of a high roller, seduces her in the third act using powerful pheromones.
An alternate point of intrigue could have been explored when Vincent Cassel, the smarmy French cat burglar from the second film is introduced. But he’s wasted here, given almost no opportunity for dialogue and acting completely out of character for the sake of tying the two films together.
While Ocean’s Thirteen does a better job of tying up some of it’s more eliptical plot points than some of the other summer offerings, the final heist comes off feeling somewhat unfulfilling. There never really appears to be any threat of failure either from Pacino catching on, Cassel as the wild card, the authorities or even Andy Garcia’s character from the first movie who the crew turns to him for financing when they’ve run out of cash. More than anything, the biggest threat to the con are small management details. While the unintentional labor dispute Casey Affleck’s character instigates after infiltrating a dice manufacturer in Mexico is funny, is the any level of tension in whether or not the crew can reprogram a blackjack card shuffler?
Watching Ocean’s Thirteen, I was entertained. But afterwords, it felt strangely hollow – like I had been conned myself. The fact of the matter is without a sufficient villain for Ocean and his team to match wits against, there’s not much to admire in their adherence to the old “analog” ways of thievery. Like the actors and producers of the film, Danny’s crew has been in the game too long. They know all the angles and there aren’t any challenges left.
I’d be lying if I said I wasn’t thinking about this comic from the old days of my buddy Mitch Clem’s strip, San Antonio Rock City. Whenever I think of Al Pacino doing his thing from Scent of a Woman, that’s the visual I imagine.
I’m not really as critical of Righteous Kill as I depict myself to be in this comic. In fact, I’m kind of excited to see it and will probably sneak out of the house Saturday night to catch a late showing (Cami has no interest in seeing it).
But one can’t help but feel that at the age of 65 and 68 respectively, Robert DeNiro and Al Pacino might be a little long in the tooth for this kind of gritty crime drama. I mean, this movie co-stars 50 Cent. What’s up with that? Was DMX busy, or something?
I need to admit to the resentment I feel after watching Heat, which promised great things from the duo in their first on-screen meeting. I’m sorry, but a five minute exchange in a diner is not the great meeting of the minds I had hoped for. Heat’s a great movie, though. So you can’t be too mad.
My friend Joe Dunn had a good point about DeNiro and Pacino. They should have been making movies together every 5 years since 1977. But he also reserves judgment and points out the reason DeNiro and Pacino have managed to stay relevant is because they’re damn good actors.
Righteous Kill probably won’t be the movie we want it to be and it certainly won’t tarnish the careers of either actor. But it’s frustrating that the stars didn’t align earlier so audiences could enjoy these two bouncing off of each other in more movies. It’s not right that DeNiro has shared the screen with Pacino the same number of times as he has with Billy Crystal. It’s just not right.
Short blog post from me today, guys. Have a good weekend and I’ll see you here on Monday!
Writing the comic, I became kind of paranoid and thought to myself “I hope people don’t think I’m making fun of cancer.” I’m not. I’m making fun of the “cancer movie” as a trope.
Cancer sucks. That much is clear. I’ve lost people I’ve loved to cancer. It’s not fun. But I kind of roll my eyes at the way Hollywood treats cancer. As if having cancer gives you some kind of wisdom or clarity that will help you resolve your personal shortcomings and interpersonal relationships.
I haven’t seen 50/50 yet, but based off the reviews I’ve read, it seems to do a good job of deflating everything that is serious and self-important about the cancer trope in mainstream entertainment. Frankly, I think that’s a good thing.
Yeah, cancer is scary and should be considered seriously. But it also doesn’t make you a mystical wizard with extra-sensory perception about the fragile nature of our being. It’s more than one thing, you know?
Lemme get off my soapbox and talk about something else for a second. If you follow the Theater Hopper Facebook page, you already know what it is. (So maybe now you’ll click that “Like” button?) But for the rest of you, here it is:
I AM NOW SELLING PRINTS OF ALL MY COMICS!
Here’s how it works…
- Comb the archive for your absolute FAVORITE Theater Hopper comic or comics. Use the search box if you’re having trouble finding it.
- Look at the navigation just below the comic, you’ll see a little dollar sign that says "Buy Print" below it.
- Click on the link and it will take you to a page with the comic in question on it and a PayPal link that you can use to send me money in exchange for goods and/or services.
- Incidentally, you don’t need a PayPal account to purchase a print. You can use a credit card as well.
- I will send you a copy of the comic printed on a sheet of 8.5 x 11" high quality card stock in full-color from the original digital file. It’s gonna look SHARP. And – because I love you – I’m gonna sign it as well.
- I’m going to mail it flat in a reinforced envelope and stamp it "DO NOT BEND" so the Post Office doesn’t muck up your investment.
- When it arrives, you are then free to frame it and admire it longingly.
This is something that I’ve wanted to do for a while and thanks to the magic of Comicpress, is now possible. Big thanks to Philip Hofer for making it possible.
Since this is a new feature, it’s going to take some work to get the kinks out. I think I still have to figure out shipping on this bad boy as well, so bear with me.
But, yeah… I have almost 10 years of comics in the archive and I know you guys have some favorites. I knew it was time to open up the flood gates and make them available to you. So have at them! Order away – and thank you for your support.
Have a great week, everyone!