Posts Tagged ‘James Marsden’
3 items.
27 Dresses comes out this weekend and I’m probably going to end up seeing it. The film has been on Cami’s radar for a while.
I actually remember kind of being excited about it when I frist heard about it sometimes last fall. At that point, Katherine Heigl could do no wrong. I thought she was awesome in Knocked Up and I was looking forward to seeing her in another movie.
Of course, since then, she’s been talking a lot of smack and saying stupid things like how Knocked Up was sexist and how her character on Grey’s Anatomy has been written so poorly this season (yours and everyone else’s, sister!) It all comes off like a bunch of whining to me. It’s not professional and it makes me kind of dislike her. I know that’s superficial, but when you only have so much time over any given weekend and only so much money in your wallet, you’ll leverage any decision making you can wrap your mind around. I mean, what actress wouldn’t kill to trade places with her at this stage in her career.
I guess it will be interesting to see if she can carry a picture by herself. She may have been the female lead in Knocked Up, but that movie was most certainly not about her. I guess even if she sucks, I’m looking forward to seeing James Marsden on screen again so soon after knocking it out of the park in Enchanted. That dude was the best thing about that movie.
I’ve always liked Marsden even if he comes off like the thinking-man’s Casper Van Dien. I don’t particularly hold him accountable to the fact that he’s always the guy being dumped in movies. After all, there are actors who seemingly die in every other role they take. It’s just jarring to see him in this different context. I hope it pans out for him. He deserves more.
Actually, the fact that he’s always getting dumped in the movies might be the one great thing that will instantly draw audiences to him – sympathize with him. I mean, for once, shouldn’t the guy get the girl?
On thing’s for sure – they’ve been running advanaced screenings of this movie for a while now trying to build word of mouth. I think it screened once in December before the holidays and it was screened again for general audiences last Saturday. My sister-in-law went and she said she liked it. My good friend Joe Dunn from Joe Loves Crappy Movies saw it and liked it, too.
Joe made the point that the movie was formulaic, but that it didn’t count as a strike against it because it’s been very compitently arranged. Not every movie has to deliver a brand new experience. Some films take a tried and true formula and do great things with it by telling a story in simple terms. There’s nothing wrong with it. In fact, that’s what makes these formulas tried and true to begin with. Done right, they simply work.
27 Dresses has that vernier going into the film. I’ll be eager to see if it delivers on that promise.
That’s it for me today. I’m sneaking out of the house later tonight to see Cloverfiled. Actually, all three members of The Triple Feature are planning on seeing Cloverfield this weekend, so we’ll have plenty to talk about on next Monday’s show.
Have a great weekend and I’ll see you here on Monday!
[ No Comments ]
The Box, starring Cameron Diaz and James Marsden comes out this weekend and the plot is built around a delicious ethical dilemma. If someone said they would give you $1,000,000 and the only repercussion is the death of a stranger, would you take it? Strangers die all the time, right? What’s one more?
Of course, in science fiction morality plays like this one, things never end up as tidy as one might hope for. Usually in these scenarios, the button-presser ends up killing an automobile driver mid-journey. His car hops the curb and crushes their only son. Or they end up inadvertently killing the person who had just figured out a way to cure cancer.
The Box is based off an episode of The Twilight Zone from 1986 called “Button, Button.” I won’t tell you how that one ends because I don’t know how closely the movie follows the plot. I know it deviates somewhat – it has to if it’s going to support a longer running time. But I don’t know how much of the original story it uses as a springboard.
All I know is that I can’t imagine a reference to The Twilight Zone without thinking of the parody Futurama made of it with their similarly eerie show-within-a-show “The Scary Door.” Invariably, every episode Fry or Bender watched would end with the zinger “IT WAS MAN!”
My question about The Box is why they chose to set it in the mid 70’s? That doesn’t appear to be an era any filmmaker wants to revist anymore – even ironically. Aside from Zodiac, I can’t think of a recent movie that tried to do a period piece in the 70’s.
It’s not like The Box’s story is time-sensitive, or anything. It’s a morality play. A representation of human weakness. It could be told in ANY time period?
I dunno. Studios always seem transfixed on modernizing everything (if the litany of remakes is any indication). Seems like a bizarre choice to set things up during a time of bad hair and bell bottom pants.
We talked about The Box a little bit on Monday’s Triple Feature. Joe is excited for it because it’s directed by Richard Kelly – the same guy who directed Donnie Darko and Southland Tales – and Joe is a fan.
I don’t know if Kelly’s directorial history is enough to get me in the theaters this weekend, but I admit to being curious about the film. It’ll probably be a rental for me.
What about the rest of you? Are you curious to see what happens after the button is pressed? Who here is seeing The Box this weekend and what is attracting you to the movie? Leave your comments below!
[ 24 Comments ]
It’s dangerous to ponder out loud sometimes. Your questions can come back to haunt you in weird ways…
After being forced to endure relentless and uninspired marketing “synergy” for Hop during NBC’s Thursday night line-up of comedies, I knew I wanted to do a comic about Universal’s holiday-themed cinematic offering.
That’s when I remembered this comic of mine from 2008, where I questioned why there weren’t any Easter-themed movies (aside from the obvious Biblical ones, of course). There seemed to be an opportunity for a secular family movie in this realm. Why hadn’t it happened before.
As and you shall receive, I guess. Considering it takes about three or four years to produce a computer-animated film, I’m kind of weirded-out by the coincidence.
The fact that the movie is produced by the team that brought us last year’s Despicable Me gives me a scintilla of hope. Based on the trailers, I was convinced that Despicable Me was a complete waste of time. But I was wonderfully surprised when I finally sat down to watch the film.
Hop suffers from a similar problem. There is literally nothing about the plot that I can tell you except that baby chicks apparently want to take over Easter and that the lead character poops jelly beans. In fact, considering the film comes out on April Fool’s Day, I’m still not completely convinced we aren’t all being punk’d.
Any time a movie’s marketing campaign leads with the scatological, you know right away you’re in deep doo-doo.
What I find weird is how they roped James Marsden into it? Was Marsden perhaps annoyed that Jason Lee snagged the lead in Alvin and The Chipmunks and figured this was the next best thing? This, combined with Marsden’s voice work on Cats & Dogs: The Revenge of Kitty Galore last year really has me worried about a lead actor that is otherwise very winning. All this kiddie flick stuff makes me think he has a niece somewhere that he’s trying to impress.
At least Russell Brand has some culpability from this thing. Although why you’d want a former heroin addict like Russell Brand to voice the lead character in your family movie is a decision only Hollywood could make. I guess giving the Easter Bunny a vaguely sneering English accent makes him more exotic? Not sure what the logic is behind that one.
I’m giving Hop a hard time and probably unjustly so. I actually hope that the movie is more than the sum of its parts because we’re actually considering taking Henry to it this weekend. I don’t know if it’s because I’m desperate to some movie – ANY movie – that I’m willing to line up for this abuse or if it’s I’m morbidly curious, or both. But if we end up going, I’ll let you know how it turns out.
In the meantime, if you want my thoughts on some more traditional family entertainment, be sure to swing by the Bonus Materials blog. I posted a review of Bambi: Diamond Edition on Blu-ray over the weekend that people have been very complimentary of. I was surprised how much I enjoyed the film considering that the only thing I remember of it is the cutesy stuff. If you haven’t seen Bambi in a while, read my review and see if you don’t fit into that category as well.
Be sure to leave comments about this comic as well. Is anyone else anticipating Hop this weekend? Do you think we’ll see more secular Easter holiday offerings at the movie theater in the future? Do my pre-cognitive abilities suggest a potential career in solving murders? Let us know in the comments below!
In the m
[ 20 Comments ]
