Top 3: Movies To Watch Anytime (Part 2)

A little over a year ago I posted an article I had published in my college newspaper listing the top three movies to watch anytime. The criteria was that these were most likely movies the viewer had seen before, therefore making it easy to pick up with the movie no matter what point it was at. It also left the viewer free to leave the movie at any point because they already knew the ending. The movie also had to be readily available on cable, meaning that on any weekend you would likely stumble across one of these films.

After spending a fair amount of my time this weekend watching TV, I have decided to add to the initial list with three more entries. These entries are not as frequently aired as the movies listed in part one, but they are still pretty easy to find. The main difference with this list is that each of the movies listed is attached to a specific time period during the day when they are more likely to be aired (morning, primetime and late-night).

1. Encino Man
If you are looking for the perfect movie to lay in bed and watch while you are still half-asleep and nursing a hangover, look no further. This early 1990's gem is a bit of cult classic. Originally intended for an immature audience, this movie features Brendan Fraser early in his career in an inspired bit of casting as a cavemen dug up in suburban Los Angeles by two high school losers played by Sean Astin and Pauly Shore. The movie was never that good to begin with, but it is a nice piece of 90's nostalgia. Fraser goes full caveman, and the jokes, while simple, still hold-up better than you might expect. Look for this one on Saturday or Sunday mornings on Comedy Central.

2. Walking Tall
For those looking for something to tune into later in the day, check out this Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson classic often found playing repeatedly on Spike. The Rock plays a man who returns to his hometown only to find it has been corrupted by a local casino. The owner of the casino, an old friend, is also pushing drugs while paying off the local police. After a brutal attack by casino security, The Rock take sit upon himself to take back his town. The premise is hokey, but the acting is surprisingly good. The Rock brings a certain amount of chemistry to every project he's in, no more evident here where he grabs your attention with every cold hearted stare. Throw in Johnny Knoxville for comic relief and Neil McDonough playing the villainous casino owner and you've got a recipe for some solid mindless entertainment.

3. Starship Troopers
I covered what you should watch when you wake up after a night out at the bars, but what about when you get home from the bar? This sci-fi cult classic is often on in the wee hours of the morning on stations as diverse as Syfy, USA, and even Bravo. The movie follows a group of space marines who go off to war against a planet full of bugs. When put like that, the movie sounds pretty lame. However, this movie was intentionally made to be over the top. It soars to amazing heights of ridiculousness not only in premise, but in dialogue and action. This film has a quality that is hard to describe, but something about it grabs you and pulls you in when you watch it. The special effects aren't bad for the mid 90's either. Not to mention you get Neil Patrick Harris post-Doogie Howser, but pre-Barney Stinson, playing some kind of weird scientist. And who doesn't love a little NPH?

As always feel free to hit the comments with your own suggestions.

An Open Invitation to Readers

I'm looking to diversify the content of this blog and I thought who better to ask for help than my own readers. I know this blog reaches a limited audience, but I am hoping that by offering a wider variety of issues, topics, and writing styles, I will attract more people.

I know many people out there are bloggers themselves, attempted bloggers or potential bloggers, so I offer you a chance to publish your opinions here. If you already have a blog, it never hurts to do a little cross promotion. If you've started a blog and stopped either because you're too busy or couldn't think of enough ideas to sustain writing everyday, think of this as a way to get back into it without the pressure. If you've never blogged before and want to give it a shot, here's the opportunity.

My main problem is there are a limited number of topics I can write about intelligently. Therefore, I need people who have the knowledge of other areas of interests, like sports, politics and well, quite a few others. Plus, it never hurts to have a second opinion on the things I normally comment on anyway.

If you're interested, contact me by leaving a comment at the bottom of this post. Otherwise, leave me a message on Facebook or Twitter. If I can get enough people contributing regularly I'll probably even change the name of this blog to make it more inclusive.

So let me know if you're interested, even of its just a one off piece, I'm more than happy to publish it here.

The State of Fall TV So Far

We are getting very close to the beginning of the new television season, and I for one could not be more excited. Not only are my favorite shows coming back on the air with new episodes, there are some brand new shows that look very promising.

The trend in recent years has been to offer the pilot of new series online before their broadcast date. The idea being that this strategy will generate positive buzz before the show airs and draw more people into watching.

There have been six new shows that have premiered online already, and I have watched them all. Here my first impressions listed in order of favorite to least favorite.

"Ben and Kate" - Premieres Tuesday, September 25 at 7:30 p.m. central on FOX
The strongest of the sitcoms, and the strongest of all the shows I have seen so far, is this new FOX show about two siblings (can you guess there names?). Kate is the young single mom looking for love. Ben is her older brother that has never gotten his life together. Each is supported by a best friend and the cast is rounded out by Kate's daughter, in the stereotypical kid-who-seems-to-be-more-mature-than-the-adults role. The pilot featured everything a good first episode of any series should do. It established a story, showed off the talents and chemistry of the actors, and demonstrated an ability to be laugh-out-loud funny and heartwarming to watch. As someone who lives with a similar sibling dynamic (meaning  I have sister, and we're white, and that's about it) I liked how grounded the show was. It dealt with the relationships between siblings and the lengths they go to help each other out. Plus, the small cast keeps the show focused, whereas a show like "Modern Family" can almost feel too big for the 22 minutes it has to tell a story. Definitely check this one out on Hulu.

"Go On"- Premieres Tuesday, September 11 at 8 p.m. central on NBC
I've already devoted a blog post about this back when the pilot premiered during the Olympics, so I won't rehash what I've already said. Here's the link. The short version is: fans of Matthew Perry and shows like "Community" will not be displeased with this new sitcom.

"Revolution" - Premieres Monday, September 17 at 9 p.m. central on NBC
One of two shows this season aiming for the title of being the next "Lost," "Revolution" picks up fifteen years after a mysterious global blackout puts an end to anything remotely related to electricity.
The main problem with many shows that have looked to be the next "Lost" is that they put the mystery before the story telling. There is too much focus on creating something that will draw viewers in that characters are never fully developed. That is one of the things that is an issue in the pilot of "Revolution." The viewer is expected to understand the characters through singular qualities, like "Bow and Arrow Girl" or "Former Google Millionaire" or "Kid With Asthma" (btw, asthma is apparently a pretty serious problem when you don't have modern medicine to rely on). The other issues include a mystery that never seems that intriguing, action scenes that are underwhelming even by broadcast TV standards, and the fact that I never was on the edge of my seat the way I was when I watched the "Lost" pilot. That being said, there is also nothing actively bad happening in "Revolution," and the show has a lot of potential to grow into something more than the first episode offers.

"The Mindy Project" - Premieres Tuesday, September 25 at 8:30 central central on FOX
This season's attempt to replicate the success of "New Girl," "The Mindy Project" focuses on, you guessed it, Mindy (played by Mindy Kalig of "The Office"), a young doctor trying to manage life, love and her career. While last year FOX was all about "adorkable" this season seems to be about "abrashable." Kalig's humor is much more in your face than Zooey Deschanel, which may delight some and repulse others. There were plenty of instances where I laughed during the premiere, but I don't know that I would keep coming back every week. While "New Girl" was established as a vehicle for Zooey Deschanel, her supporting male counterparts let the audience know they were an important part of the show from the very beginning. I tuned in for Deschanel but I stuck around for the ensemble. In "The Mindy Project" the story is less about the female lead interacting with other characters, and much more about how they simply revolve around her.

"The New Normal" - Premieres Tuesday, September 11 at 8:30 p.m. central on NBC
This new sitcom from "Glee" creator Ryan Murphy portrays the lives of gay couple looking for a surrogate mother. The surrogate they choose has already had a child, but is looking for money and the chance to provide a loving couple with a child. Her mother (played by Ellen Barkin) is the type who says she is fine with gays, but clearly isn't. Oh, and for some reason a "Real Housewife from Who-the-hell-cares" is also on, but I could never figure out why. Sounds like hilarity ensues, right? Well, no actually. The main issue with this show is that it doesn't know what it wants to be yet. It doesn't seem edgy or fresh, especially when most of the concerns in the pilot have already been dealt with on shows like "Modern Family." And unlike "Modern Family" though, this show isn't funny. I can't recall laughing a single time during the episode, and there wasn't even anything offensive about the jokes they were trying to make that might help explain why. It simply wasn't funny. I would be surprised if this made it past its initial 13 episode order.

"Animal Practice" - Premieres Wednesday, September 26 at 7 p.m. central on NBC
I can't say much about this show because I turned it off halfway through. Again, there just wasn't anything interesting or funny happening to keep me watching. Now, clearly, as a person who isn't a fan of pets, a sitcom set at a veterinary hospital is not for me. Also, I rarely find animal humor funny. What frustrated me about this show though was the unfortunate circumstances the cast has found themselves in, because by all accounts this should be a good show, if only it had a different premise. I like Justin Kirk, Tyler Labine and Bobby Lee. They are talented, funny actors who I normally enjoy, and were pretty much the only reason I attempted to choke down this show in the first place. However, it just wasn't enough.

Other premieres I am looking forward to:
The CWs "Arrow," an adaptation of the origin of DC Comics superhero Green Arrow a la "Smallville," has been getting positive early buzz. The decision to set it in a world absent of superpowers is an interesting choice, but one that just might work out.

ABC's "Last Resort"is the other show vying for the next "Lost" title. This show is centered on a U.S. nuclear submarine that refuses orders to fire a warhead at Pakistan and takes up residence on a tropical island, declaring itself a sovereign nation in the process. I'm very interested to see how this show plays out and am pulling for it to grab me more than "Revolution" did.

Who can deny the glamour and appeal of Las Vegas? CBS is counting on "not many" with their new drama "Vegas" set in the early days of Sin City. The period setting and big name cast that includes Dennis Quaid as a sheriff, and Michael Chiklis as a mob boss, have the potential to be a winning combination.

I'll come back with my verdicts on these shows and any others as soon as I see them.

Hit the comments and let me know what you're most looking forward to this TV season

The Deeper Meaning of Haircuts

In literature, film and television many characters undergo a symbolic rebirth. The symbol most associated rebirth is water. A character is dunked in a pool, takes a shower  or swims in the ocean only to emerge a completely changed person.

This is a perfectly fine metaphor. It relates to baptism where those being baptized are washed clean of their original sin. But the whole water aspect is a little overdone. It's old hat; cliche. Even the most remedial English student can see what it symbolizes from a mile away.

However, there is another symbol of rebirth and change that is less frequently used, and even less frequently used well: the haircut. It is a physical change on the outside that represents a greater change taking place inside.

I love this symbolic action because it's one I personally relate to. Each time I go and get a haircut I feel the potential to come out as an entirely new person. I like growing my hair out and then getting it cut really short. I like getting my haircut after I've had a series of bad things happen to me. It's like a snake shedding its skin. I get rid of the bad stuff and grow something new and hopefully better.

The problem is that this too is fairly obvious. Television is most guilty of relying too much on the haircut to show change in a character. They often depict over dramatic scenes where the character, in a bout of frustration, angrily takes a pair of scissors to their hair. Then they emerge from the bathroom with a wildly different attitude because their hair is different, get it?

Here's a great example from an episode of "Scrubs":

Film usually does a better job of actually building the haircut into the plot. It seems less like a rash decision and more like a gradual progression of the plot as it relates to the character. One of the most notable examples of this is when Richie Tenebaum cuts off his hair (SPOILER ALERT) before attempting suicide in "The Royal Tenebaums."

An even better example of this is a movie I watched today on Netflix, and recommend to anyone with 90 minutes to spare. The movie is called "Meet Dave" starring Aaron Eckhart, Elizabeth Banks, Jessica Alba and a surprisingly well rounded supporting cast.

The movie has a fairly typical midlife crisis plot focused on Aaron Eckhart's Dave, but I liked the way it incorporated cutting hair to show the change in Dave over the course of the movie. One of the hobbies Dave takes up to work through his problems is swimming laps. This leads him to begin shaving his body hair, but he doesn't shave it all at once. It happens in stages as the movie progresses, with him finally cutting his hair in the last 10-15 minutes of the movie.

I can't think of any specific instances in literature where this happens, but I'm sure they're out there somewhere.

Hit the comments with your favorite scenes of rebirth.

Writing Sci-Fi and Fantasy

Doing any kind of long-form writing is hard. Writing science-fiction is particularly difficult, because both are restricted by the rules the author puts in place for the world to exist.

Both genres need to exist in believable worlds to be successful. Readers need to believe that even though the world this story is taking place in doesn't exist, it certainly could because of the way the author is describing it.

Science-fiction is confined by the rules of science. Whether the story is about time travel or is set in the distant future, there needs to be science behind what the author is writing about. Sure, there is still a lot of room for the author to be creative, but they need to work within the confines of the world they create.

Fantasy works the same way, except the rules in a fantasy world need to come almost wholly from the authors imagination (or taken from established fantastical sources, i.e. vampires are killed by driving a stake through their heart).

This issue is not only coming up with the rules, but the expectation from the reader for those rules to exist. They need to know how the world functions. They need to know what is allowed or plausible, and what is outside the realm of possibility.

On top of all that is the challenge of incorporating these rules into the plot of the story, and not just simply laying them out in a long monologue. Readers don't want to have to sit through a long amount of exposition about what can and cannot happen in the world they are reading about. They want to understand the rules by experiencing them through the actions of the characters as they interact with the world the reader is reading about.

Time travel is particularly difficult in science fiction. If a character is traveling to the past, the author needs to do a heavy amount of research to get all the details right to make the world authentic. If the character travels to the future, the author needs to create a world that can trace its progression back to the character's present in a plausible way.

My issue with time travel stories that focus on going to the past is that they are simply rehashing problems that have already been dealt with. It takes a certain amount of skill to draw the connection to the importance of that story in the present. That is why I like fantasy. It allows for a story to be told in a way where the fantastical elements can be seen as parallels to issues people are dealing with in our world.

Sorry if this piece was a little ramble-y.

Watch It Twice

Recently, I've begun to see the merit in watching a film twice before coming to a solid judgment on whether or not it is good. I had always heard that most movie reviewers see a film twice before writing their review to make sure they comment on everything that is important in the movie.

I have always been more of a snap judgment kind of person in this regard. I see a movie, and by the time I leave the theater, I know whether or not I'm going to be spending more money to buy it on DVD.

But lately I've found that my opinions coming out of films have been a little wishy-washy. My default response when someone asks me how a movie is, is "It was alright." The movie had some good parts but didn't really wow me. This kind of response isn't really helpful to anyone.

I think part of the problem is that I have a lot of anticipation when seeing a film for the first time. I've stopped reading reviews of films before seeing them because I want to make up my own mind. I don't want to know what to expect going in, I just want to make sure it's worth my money to go see it.

The problem with anticipation is that it can be just as distracting as reading those reviews. I become so focused on seeing the movie, and being able to say that I've seen it, I lose track of whether or not the film is any good.

For example, I started this summer off by going to see "The Avengers" on opening night. I didn't go at midnight (I've grown out of that) but the Friday it was released, my butt was in a seat. I came out of the movie having enjoyed it, but again not really thinking it was as good as most people were claiming.

Later, I went and saw the movie a second time and really enjoyed it. I took it all in and came out wondering why I had been so hesitant to embrace it the first time I saw it.

This problem goes beyond blockbusters though. Today I watched a film called "Charlie Bartlett" on Netflix. It was only the second time I had seen the film, the first being four years ago in my friend's dorm room. I remember walking away from that movie with a hollow feeling. I felt that it hadn't delivered on whatever I was expecting it to be. After watching it today, I found that it really was a solid film.

I think that is where the second coming viewing comes in handy. It diminishes expectations and simply allows for the film to be enjoyed for what it is.

Things I Bought Recently: Baby Names Book

As I mentioned previously, I am reading a book about how to write a novel in 26 days. The book includes a series of exercises to help prep for what it describes as a "writing marathon."

Some of the sections was devoted entirely to the tools I would need to write my book. Most of these exercises have involved writing lists or figuring out resources from the internet to utilize. One section, however, explicitly states that I should go out an purchase certain items to be successful.

Being unemployed the idea of being told to go buy more things that weren't really in my budget did not directly appeal to me. But, I did say I was going to commit myself to this program and follow the instructions of the book to see if it could be done. So, off to the bookstore I went.

Among the books I was supposed to have at my disposal were a dictionary (which I had), a thesaurus (again, something I had) and a book on Chicago Manual Style (I cheated slightly on this with a pocket style guide). The only book I did not have was a baby names book.

I could have ordered this off Amazon, but with shipping it would take several days to get to my house. I wanted to keep moving forward with the exercises in the book, so, instead, I decided to reserve a copy down at Barnes & Noble. I figured reserving a copy online was the least embarrassing way to purchase a book like this. I didn't want to have to deal with a lot of questions from people about why I was buying it.

My friend came along with me and we decided to stop at a bookstore closer to my house just to see if they would had it in stock before driving the 20 minutes to the closest Barnes & Noble. Unfortunately, that bookstore closed at 7 o'clock, which is kind of absurd, but there wasn't anything we could do about it. Getting back on the freeway we went down Barnes & Noble.

We browsed around a bit before picking up my book, which is always dangerous because I didn't want to spend anymore money on this trip than I had too. When I went to the checkout to pick up the book, the cashier inevitably asked me if I was expecting. I had to politely explain to her that, no, I simply needed it for a writing tool, which she seemed to accept.

When I got home, I found the book actually had a lot of useful information in it. The book wasn't simply a list of names. It also gave country or culture of origin and the meaning. I was able to look up the top five boys and girls names in each state, and names that were rising in popularity due to exposure in popular culture.

There are some really terrible name out there, I won't mention any lest I offend someone, but next time you're browsing your local bookstore stop by the baby book section and leaf through copy. You might be surprised at what you find.

Stop and Say Hello

I have a very terrible habit that manifests itself wherever I am somewhere that is not my home. My head whips back and forth and up and down in a perpetual exercise to see if I recognize anyone. It doesn't matter if I'm in a restaurant, at a ball game or in a foreign airport. I am always on the lookout to see people I know.

I'm not really sure what it stems from. I think it may be related to something from childhood that I never grew out of. For example, the uninhibited excitement of running into a friend outside of school or a scheduled playdate.

I'm almost 23 and I still get excited when I see run into someone I wasn't expecting to. I've talked about this with some friends and they don't really seem to have that same feeling.

My one friend and I were talking about running into people from grade school when we are home around Christmas. He was of the opinion that it was exhausting to have to put up with false pleasantries and small talk with people you hadn't seen for years. I on the other hand am genuinely interested to stop and talk with someone I haven't seen in a few years to find out how their lives are going.

This past weekend I ran into two guys I knew in high school that I had seen only once or twice (if at all) since we had graduated. We swapped stories about our own lives and people we still kept in touch with. It was great to see that many people are still connected with each other in some way or another.

Often the world can feel like a cold and lonely place, and I think I am just like looking for ways to make it a little bit smaller and friendlier.

So, if you see me out and about say hi, because I'll be looking out for you.

My New Best Friend: Family Video

Before the advent of Netflix, most of us went to our local video rental store to pick up the latest movie release. Be it a local store or a chain like Blockbluster, it was the place to go for that one movie you missed seeing in theaters or that one movie you couldn't wait to see again.

I lived very close to my local Blockbuster. Many times during the summer I would ride my bike over and grab a few movies I had never seen before. As I developed an interest in film, it was my go to source to catch up on films I had missed either because they came out before I was born, or because I wasn't old enough to see them upon their initial release.

I watched many James Bond movies for the first time after renting them at Blockbuster, and I watched the first film by Wes Anderson when I rented The Life Aquatic with Steve Zissou (Anderson would become one of my favorite directors, and it was after watching this film that I actually started to pay attention to who directed movies, not just who starred in them).

Then in college, I signed up for Netflix when it was still primarily delivering DVDs by mail. Netflix was a godsend for a developing cinephile like myself, offering a wider selections of movies than Blockbuster could ever hope to carry. 

As Netflix switched a streaming only service, I started using a Redbox located close to my college to rent newer releases that I know could take months or years to show up on Netflix. The price and convenience were right, so who cared if I needed to wait an extra 30 days?

My local Blockbuster, like most other Blockbusters, shut down this past spring, but in its place came Family Video. I had always looked down on Family Video as a lower end of the video rental chain. Something about it just always seemed outdated.

However, since I found myself with a lot of time on my hands this summer, I decided to go in and check out what they had to offer. I was pleasantly surprised by what they did with the space. Blockbuster was defined by the glaring white shelves and harsh fluorescent lighting. Family Video had renovated the space, painting the walls and letting in more natural light, giving the store a homier feel. 

I had forgotten the pleasure of taking my time and walking through the new releases to see what was out. I picked out a few films that had been released in theaters back in January-February. This is a time period for notoriously bad films, but I always like to see if there are any surprises among the duds.

The films I rented were a mixed bag, some better than I expected, others worse, but what really surprised me was the deals. As a new member I received half-off of all my rentals for a month, plus, they were running a promotion that was two movies for one dollar. That meant I could actually rent four movies for one dollar. Try getting that deal at a Redbox.

Not to mention that while the people who worked at the Blockbuster always seemed a little strange and creepy, the Family Video employees are friendly and helpful, which is a rare find in any retail business nowadays.

Many people think that the storefront rental business is dead, but Family Video seems to have a formula that works. And, if the number of cars parked outside each day is any indication, they will be around for a while.

The State of Summer Films: August Edition

At the beginning of August I posted a list with mini-reviews of all the films I had seen so far this summer. Here are three more I saw this past month. I should also note that while this is the "August Edition," this list is based on films I saw in August, not (necessarily) films that were released in August.

The Watch
I was originally supposed to go see an early screening of The Campaign, but arrived at the theater too late. So my fiend and I saw went and saw this movie instead.

The film was generating good buzz before the Travon Martin case came into the national spotlight. It had a good comedic cast with new take on the classic alien invasion plot line. The reviews for this movie were pretty brutal, but I liked all of the actors that were starring in it, so I decided to give it a shot.

The film is nothing revelatory. The jokes are solid if not entirely innovative, and the plot comes with a twist most people should be able to figure out about a quarter of the way through the movie.

That being said, if you like these actors you'll like this movie. If you don't, you won't. Ben Stiller is surprisingly restrained, which pairs nicely with the insane energy Vince Vaughan brings to his performance. Vaughan plays most of the movie in his hyper speed talk, but that's the way I like him. Jonah Hill tags along as a 20-something that still lives at home who comes off as slightly creepy. But that's one of things I like about Jonah Hill: he has a very distinct brand of humor, but each performance is tweaked to prevent that brand from becoming stale.

Ted
Seth MacFarlane's directorial debut played out like an episode of anyone of his TV shows, not that that is a bad thing.

MacFarlane's type of humor is no longer as fresh as it once was. His ability to shock the audience and push boundaries has become limited by being forced to do it every week on three different shows. But this movie succeeds because it is a movie.

The live action format, the extended run time and the freedom to not have to worry about censors helps free up and give a new perspective on this type of humor.

Great turns by Mark Walhberg and Mila Kunis, help keep the movie from getting too out of hand.

Plus, any movie that heavily references "Flash Gordon" is ok by me.

Expendables 2
As I mentioned in my last movie post, my dad and I go see about two movies each summer. This was the second one.

This was perhaps the most uneven movie I had seen in a long time. I don't think anyone goes into this type of movie expecting it to be good, but I was surprised by the moments of true brilliance that popped up throughout.

This movie was made up almost entirely of one liners and meta-jokes to the actors' past performances. Anytime it could break away from that, the movie showed it could be something more than what people were expecting.

The problem with movies that have a cast size as large as this is that there is never enough time to devote to any one character. I was surprised at the great chemistry between Stallone and Statham, but there was never enough time to fully develop that relationship.

The biggest surprise was Liam Hemsworth, who had a much better chance to display his acting prowess in this film than in "The Hunger Games." He lent a heart and soul to this film that it was otherwise sorely lacking.

Verdicts
You may notice I didn't follow any of these mini-reviews with a final declaration of whether or not I was IMPRESSED or UNIMPRESSED by these films. I went into these films pretty much knowing what to expect and each one delivered, so I'll just say each one SATISFIED. The comedies were funny and the action film brought the action.

What's to come
I still want to see The Bourne Legacy and Premium Rush, after that, I probably won't hit the cinema again until Taken 2.