Posts Tagged ‘Taco Bell’
3 items.
Cami and I were able to catch an early matinee of National Treasure this weekend. An enjoyable ride, but very much a by-the-book action adventure film. Rouge hero? Check. A villain who betrays his confidence? Check. Mousy techno-geek who interjects glib one-liners for comedic effect? Check. Hot girl who tags along mid-way through the action? Check.
There isn’t anything in National Treasure that you haven’t seen a million times before. The “clues imbedded in American history” approach was an interesting device, but they’re so transparently lifting their inspiration from The Da Vinci Code, you keep thinking the film version of THAT script would be so much better to watch.
Something else that was very transparent to me was the several awkward product placements crammed into this movie. A lot of them appear after the film’s main set piece – The abduction of The Declaration of Independence.
While on the run, Nicholas Cage’s character stops to see his father Jon Voight. With the FBI hot on their tail, they tie up Voight to make it look like there were there to steal something from him and protect him from any guilt-by-association. As the Feds are questioning him, they inform him that his car has been stolen. Voight laments “My Cadillac STS!” Cut to the next scene and a big close up of the Cadillac emblem on the hood of the car. “You’re Dad has a sweet ride,” says the mousy techno-geek.
Dressed in formal wear – gowns and tuxes – Cage’s character suggests they go buy some less conspicuous clothes. Cut to an external shot of an Urban Outfitters! Ooo! Look at all those cool clothes they’re trying on! Don’t forget to pay with your Visa card (which gets another prominent close-up.)
Later in the movie when Cage is caught by the authorities, he’s called by the villainous treasure hunter Sean Bean to arrange a transfer of a valuable artifact. Of course he attempts to reach him on his Motorola cell phone. Before handing it to him, make sure the logo is PLAINLY VISIBLE!
I don’t know if I’m off my rocker and I’m the only person who notices this, but these kinds of product placements were screamingly obvious to me at several points in the movie. It distracted me from what little story there was.
I’m not saying anything that hasn’t been addressed by more competent essayists, but the amount of advertising we’re subjected to at the movies is becoming increasingly alarming. If there aren’t commercials in front of the trailers before the movie, they’re on the packaging of the popcorn and soda we buy. Now they’re inserting sponsorship into the plots of the VERY FILM you’re watching! This kind of cross-promotion is what advertising executives call “penetration”. This is ironic since I get the distinct impression that someone on Madison Avenue is trying to bend me over and have their way with me.
Hey, I understand it must be difficult being an advertising executive. Audiences are savvier to your techniques now than they have ever been in history. You have to CONSTANTLY find new and interesting ways to get your message out there and cut through the clutter. Heck, if you could tattoo the inside of our eyelids while we were sleeping, I’m sure you’d give it a shot.
But to paraphrase the late comedian Bill Hicks… “If you’re in advertising, do me a favor. Just… kill yourself. Get it over with right now. Kill yourself.” Because I don’t think I can tolerate any more commercials when I’m paying to be entertained and to be transported to a realm where these kinds of daily annoyances shouldn’t exist.
[ No Comments ]
Today’s comic is based on a real-life conversation over 3:10 to Yuma. I had made plans to see the film late Friday night after we put Henry down to sleep. Cami had no interest in the film and asked half-heartedly, “So, when does ’21 to Chalupa’ start?”
I can understand if she was confused. After all 3:10 to Yuma is a western and a chalupa is… well, kind of Tex-Mex? Odds are she was just yanking my chain. Either way, it was too cute not to include in the comic. Of course, Cami getting the titles to movies wrong isn’t anything new.
Incidentally, the little double-barrell pose I put Cami in for the second panel is now my new favorite rendition of her.
So, anyway. What did I think of 3:10 to Yuma? I’d have to say overall that I liked it, but I had a few problems with the ending that left a slightly bitter taste in my mouth. You know how it is with endings. You could watch a two-hour suck-fest, but if the ending is killer that’s all you end up talking about. The opposite holds true. You can watch the best movie on two-legs, but if the ending falls flat, it’s going to leave an unfavorable impression. At the movies, last impressions count for a lot. That’s certainly the case with 3:10 to Yuma.
The move does more than a few things right. The casting is top notch. Russell Crowe and Christian Bale deliver excellent performances, as always. But the supporting cast is just as good. Peter Fonda as a Pinkerton agent Crowe’s character shoots in the gut after a stagecoach robbery is all flinty determination. Ben Foster as Crowe’s mad dog right hand gun commands the screen with scrappy, stylish authority. They even put Luke WIlson to good use in a brief cameo. All of the performances save for Logan Lerman as Bale’s impatient, hateful son hit all of the right notes.
The fact that the movie is a western is almost beside the point. The horses and the dust, the saloons and the bar maids are all dressing for what otherwise would have worked as effectively as a modern-day police procedural. The plot is simple: Russell Crowe plays the outlaw Ben Wade. He and his gang knock over an armored stagecoach. Later, while celebrating in town, Wade missteps by staying too long to bed the local bar maid. Now it’s up to an unlikely group of men to transport him to the nearest railroad station to put him on a train to a nearby prision – the 3:10 to Yuma. Bale’s Dan Evans is a rancher who lost his leg in the Civil War. He needs money to help pay off the last of his mortgage and protect his way of life. For him, the journey is as much about money and ensuring his family’s survival as it is reclaiming the dignity taken from him.
Any of this could have been easily updated to the present day. Where the movie shines is in the psychological conflict between Wade and his captors. When Crowe and Bale match wits on screen, it’s electric.
Things come down to the wire as Wade’s gang catches up to the group as they wait for the train to arrive. But as members of the posse peel away under the threat of certain death, only Bale sticks to his convictions. He has much more to lose than just his life. As the train approaches and captor and prisioner race toward the train, Crowe’s character beings to show signs of respect to the tenacious Bale.
Unfortunately, it’s at this part that the movie begins to fall apart for me. Obviously I won’t spoil the ending for you. But there are decisions that Crowe’s character makes that feels inconsistent with all of the behavior he exhibited in the first two hours. The end of the movie felt thrown together to me or at least not as well thought out as the rest of it. When it ends, it just
Based on the performances, it’s hard to discount 3:10 to Yuma for it’s short comings. I enjoyed the film and would encourage others to see it. I guess there were just too many times during the last act where I felt I was being tweaked and it stuck with me. I certainly don’t think that the people who have claimed 3:10 to Yuma as the best western since Unforgiven know what they’re talking about. But if you’re looking for a few sharp action pieces, this film has it. If you want a little psychological drama thrown in for shading, it’s got that, too. And most of all, it’s got great performances. So see it and judge for youself.
We’ll be talking about 3:10 to Yuma tonight on The Triple Feature talkcast over at TalkShoe. We broadcast live at 9:00 CST, so be there will bells on. We’ll also be talking about Shoot ‘Em Up – another movie I saw this weekend (and one I’ll have a comic for on Wednesday). Who knows what else will come up.
So be sure to tune in live! We’ll see you then!
[ No Comments ]
The original idea of this comic was to do a riff on Groundhog’s Day and the tradition if the groundhog sees his shadow, it’s another 6 weeks of winter. In this case, if the North American Fanboy sees his shadow… we’ll you probably get the idea.
This time of year I truly do feel like hibernating. Not much is happening in pop culture that’s captured my interest. Well, except for Lost coming back to the airwaves. Thank goodness for that!
Much as if you say the words “Bloddy Mary” into a mirror three time and a ghostly woman appears to slit your throat, I’m reluctant to give too much attention to Paris Hilton in fear that saying her name aloud might make her real. I fear that by making fun of her upcoming movie The Hottie and The Nottie, I’ve already given more attention to this film than it rightly deserves. Clearly the marketing Svengali who dreamed up the film’s title should be strung up by their thumbs. I mean, I get that it’s cashing in on Hilton’s trademarked, half-lidded “That’s hot.” catchphrase, but what the hell is a “Nottie?”
Whatever it is, can we PLEASE assume that Paris Hilton is the “Nottie?”
That’s about all I have for you today. I could probably go on for a few more paragraphs about how much I hate Paris Hilton. But really, why share the obvious? It’s not like there are that many people in the world left to convince about Paris’ sub-par worth as a human being, right?
Incidentally, if anyone is trying to figure out the significance of the date in the last panel, click on this link. I promise nothing will jump out at you. But you may find this site has the power… to move you.
LATERZ!
[ No Comments ]
