Michael Bay is a horrid director. The only movie he's made that I would consider enjoyable is "The Island." Even then, he tried his damndest to Michael Bay it up. Thankfully the story was solid and Scarlett Johansson looked so hot that she was able to distract from the movie's shortcomings. That being said, Michael Bay films have been a none stop shit parade.
I want to start by telling a story that happened while I was attending a bachelor party on Put-In Bay (I'll tie it all together, don't worry, readers). My friends and I were staying in a hotel on the island. In the hotel was a Subway that made late night snacking convenient. Around 1:30 or 2 a.m. one day I was waiting in line to get a sub. I had ordered my sub and was merely waiting to request the toppings. Next to me was a man who had clearly had too much to drink. He swayed lightly back and forth much like an evergreen tree in a strong breeze. This is the conversation that took place between himself and the Subway employee which I will shorten to SE for brevity's sake:
SE: "Would you like lettuce and tomato on your sub?"
Drunk: "Yeah."
SE: "What else would you like on your sub?"
Drunk: "How about a little tomato?"
(I'm officially interested, is he not aware there are already tomatoes on the sub)
SE: (adds nothing to the sub and asks) "What else?"
Drunk: "How about a little onion?"
(Ok, he had a little slip up, things are back on track)
SE: (adds the onions) "What else?"
Drunk: "How about a little tomato?"
(Wait, what? I'm back in, this guy is clueless!)
SE: (adds nothing) "What else?"
Drunk: "How about a little onion?"
(At this point I'm openly staring in amazement at the travesty taking place right next to me)
SE: (adds nothing) "What else?"
Drunk: "How about a little tomato?"
(Holy hell! This guy has derailed. My brain has officially turned into some kind of useless paste. I'm too transfixed to laugh, or smile, or even feel happiness. This poor bastard has frozen me in some kind of confused, amused, numb state where all I can do is stare at him with a stupid half smirk on my face and wait for his mouth to spew more nonsense!)
SE: (wraps up the sub and passes it to the register)
(The spell is broken and I go on living my life)
I can't explain how that drunk bastard never noticed he was repeatedly ordering the same topping. Maybe he's a comedic genius and he was just having a laugh at the poor Subway employees expense. That is highly doubtful. It may be important to point out that while all of this was going on the drunk had his cell phone out. What is interesting to note, however, is that he wasn't really looking at his cell phone. He wasn't really looking at his sub either. All I can hypothesize is that he was staring intently into some sort of new dimension where tomatoes and onions don't exist.
How does this relate to Michael Bay? I assume that shooting a movie with Bay is very similar, a typical scene probably plays out like this:
Bay: "Let's shoot the scene where the tank blows up."
Producer: "Alright."
Bay: Action! (tank blows up, scene goes off without a hitch) "Cut!"
Producer: "What scene should we shoot next?"
Bay: "Let's shoot the scene where the tank blows up."
Producer: (stares blankly at bay then looks at the crew, who are also baffled) "....alright. What scene should we shoot next?"
Bay: "Let's shoot the scene where the tank blows up."
Producer: (rubs his forehead in confusion and disgust) "Seriously, what scene should we shoot next?"
Bay: "Let's shoot the scene where the tank blows up."
Producer: (mimes shooting himself in the head then turns to the crew) "Let's shoot the scene where the helicopter blows up."
Bay: "Action!"
Michael Bay movies are essentially just a series of loud, aggressive explosions. His lust for explosions cannot be sated with one simple bomb blast. He tries his hardest to jam as many explosions into 120 minutes as he can. After all, heaven forbid you fill that time with plot and character development. Which, by the way, if you say the words plot and character to Michael Bay he giggles like a 12 year old girl and runs away. The guy could fill any movie with explosions and loud noises and shitty action no matter how mundane the movie. I'm fairly certain the next movie he's making is titled "Transformers: Optimus Prime Does His Taxes." The first scene probably goes something like this:
Camera swoops over a large desk where Prime sits filling out piles of paperwork. Bumblebee enters.
BB: "Here's those W2s you wanted."
Prime: "Thanks, hey, take a look at this."
BB: "We're being audited? How?"
Prime: "I don't know, it doesn't add up, autobots are notorious for always staying on top of there taxes."
(An explosion blasts a hole in the wall and Starscream comes roaring in)
SS: "Enjoying your audit, Prime?"
Prime: "Decepticons, I should have known." (hurls his calculator at Starscream. It misses but causes an enormous blast that knocks both Bumblebee and Prime to the floor)
SS: "Nice try, Prime, but you can't stop us that easily. Back taxes! Back taxes!" (Starscream flees leaving Prime and Bumblebee in the now decimated room)
Prime: "MEGATRON!!!!!!"
Actually, that would be about 100 times better than anything Michael Bay has ever done and I came up with that in 5 minutes. I literally can't try to be that untalented. I guess the moral of the story is, if your name is Michael Bay, don't ever direct a film. It will be absolute garbage.
Tuesday, April 10, 2012
Monday, April 2, 2012
Cleveland Rocks.......I guess
I have been a Cleveland sports fan for virtually my entire life. Well, since I can remember being legitimately into sports. For a while, in the 90's anyhow, being an Indians fan was pretty great. The teams were consistently strong and even made the World Series a few times (yeah they lost but getting there means something right?). Ever since the 90's, however, being a Cleveland sports fan has been a dismal affair. I'll break it down sport by sport.
The Cavaliers have been one of the only bright spots in Cleveland sports in the past decade. It seems hard to remember that because Lebron felt the need to rip out our collective hearts and take a steaming dump on them. Things were abysmal before he got there, improved greatly to make the Cavs a relevant team with the addition of Lebron, then collapsed faster than James Gandolfini in a marathon after Lebron left. Once again, the Cavs are barely treading water in a pool of mediocrity. The Cavs did garner the first overall pick in the draft following the first season without Lebron, so it wasn't all bad. Kyrie Irving has had an awesome rookie season and is going to be a stud and Tristan Thompson has been decent as well. As a realistic Cavs fan, I was hoping the team would be competitive, but still be just bad enough to garner another early pick in the draft. Early in the season the Cavs were surprisingly competitive, going so far as to stay in the hunt for a low seed in the playoffs. Much like a zombie apocalypse, this was both thrilling and terrifying. Logic prevailed, however, and the Cavs exploded like the Death Star at the end of "A New Hope". We should be looking at another early pick in the draft. Hope on, Cavs fans, hope on! There's always next year!
Next we have the Indians. After falling into irrelevancy in the early 2000's, the Indians managed to sneak in a stellar run in 2007, I mean, "the year the must not be named." Sorry, I know saying that year out loud is taboo. There isn't a lot to say here. I love the Tribe and they have kept a steady routine of building up great players in the farm system, having them for a few years and then being forced to get rid of them for salary cap reasons. Not everyone can buy good teams, Yankees. As usual, a small glimmer of promise was shown last year when the Indians were in the hunt for the division for most of the season. That was until the Tigers decided they were done fucking around and hulk-smashed the division into a fine powder and then snorted said powder just to prove their dominance. Despite this, their is hope...and next year.
Finally, there is the pile of terrible named the Cleveland Browns. They are by far the most frustrating of the Cleveland franchises. They've had one playoff season (and one near playoff season) since their return in '99. Yet, every year, myself and other Browns fans cling to the foolish belief that the Browns will have a great draft or smart free agent acquisitions or trades to make the team better than awful. And every season ends the same. The Browns crash a freight train of disappointment directly into the fans hearts causing us to slowly, methodically, shit out bits and pieces of our soul until we're left as nothing but hollow shells that can only utter the words 'next year' upon seeing our vacant, dead eyes in the mirror. Fortunately, Browns fans have adapted the ability to slowly summon their souls back to their bodies through astoundingly blind optimism in the off-season. Speaking of which, I will say that Joe Haden has been a promising player and it looks as if the Browns are at least making an attempt to draft better (but after Butch Davis it's not that hard). I also can't help but feel the Browns will be better than they were last year. They have to be right?
It isn't easy being a Cleveland sports fan. The failures far outweigh the successes, but something keeps me coming back for more. Hey, I can see my reflection in the computer screen. Next year, baby!
The Cavaliers have been one of the only bright spots in Cleveland sports in the past decade. It seems hard to remember that because Lebron felt the need to rip out our collective hearts and take a steaming dump on them. Things were abysmal before he got there, improved greatly to make the Cavs a relevant team with the addition of Lebron, then collapsed faster than James Gandolfini in a marathon after Lebron left. Once again, the Cavs are barely treading water in a pool of mediocrity. The Cavs did garner the first overall pick in the draft following the first season without Lebron, so it wasn't all bad. Kyrie Irving has had an awesome rookie season and is going to be a stud and Tristan Thompson has been decent as well. As a realistic Cavs fan, I was hoping the team would be competitive, but still be just bad enough to garner another early pick in the draft. Early in the season the Cavs were surprisingly competitive, going so far as to stay in the hunt for a low seed in the playoffs. Much like a zombie apocalypse, this was both thrilling and terrifying. Logic prevailed, however, and the Cavs exploded like the Death Star at the end of "A New Hope". We should be looking at another early pick in the draft. Hope on, Cavs fans, hope on! There's always next year!
Next we have the Indians. After falling into irrelevancy in the early 2000's, the Indians managed to sneak in a stellar run in 2007, I mean, "the year the must not be named." Sorry, I know saying that year out loud is taboo. There isn't a lot to say here. I love the Tribe and they have kept a steady routine of building up great players in the farm system, having them for a few years and then being forced to get rid of them for salary cap reasons. Not everyone can buy good teams, Yankees. As usual, a small glimmer of promise was shown last year when the Indians were in the hunt for the division for most of the season. That was until the Tigers decided they were done fucking around and hulk-smashed the division into a fine powder and then snorted said powder just to prove their dominance. Despite this, their is hope...and next year.
Finally, there is the pile of terrible named the Cleveland Browns. They are by far the most frustrating of the Cleveland franchises. They've had one playoff season (and one near playoff season) since their return in '99. Yet, every year, myself and other Browns fans cling to the foolish belief that the Browns will have a great draft or smart free agent acquisitions or trades to make the team better than awful. And every season ends the same. The Browns crash a freight train of disappointment directly into the fans hearts causing us to slowly, methodically, shit out bits and pieces of our soul until we're left as nothing but hollow shells that can only utter the words 'next year' upon seeing our vacant, dead eyes in the mirror. Fortunately, Browns fans have adapted the ability to slowly summon their souls back to their bodies through astoundingly blind optimism in the off-season. Speaking of which, I will say that Joe Haden has been a promising player and it looks as if the Browns are at least making an attempt to draft better (but after Butch Davis it's not that hard). I also can't help but feel the Browns will be better than they were last year. They have to be right?
It isn't easy being a Cleveland sports fan. The failures far outweigh the successes, but something keeps me coming back for more. Hey, I can see my reflection in the computer screen. Next year, baby!
Monday, March 26, 2012
Game of Thrones: Season 1 Review
Winter is coming. You're damn right it is, Ned Stark. The words of House Stark ring all too true in HBO's "Game of Thrones," adapted from George R.R. Martin's popular series A Song of Ice and Fire (with Game of Thrones being the title of book 1). Season 1 is essentially tackling material exclusively from the first book. Going forward this may change but that's a topic for another day when I'm bored and have 2 another hours to kill in the computer lab.
Here is the plot in a nutshell (without spoilers for the few people who are not aware of the events of season 1 or book 1). In the fictional land of Westeros, the seven kingdoms are in a constant struggle for power. Robert Baratheon sits the iron throne (it's a throne made of melted swords, is that bad ass enough for you) after overthrowing the "Mad King" Aerys Targaryen. All is not well in the reign of King Robert. The hand of the king, John Arryn has died under mysterious circumstances and Robert travels north to Winterfell to ask his loyal subject and friend Eddard "Ned" Stark to take up the position of hand. Ned soon finds out that the politics of King's Landing have him a little out of his element. Meanwhile, across the narrow sea, Daenerys and Viserys Targaryen plot to take back the throne from the "Usurper," Robert. This comes as a blow to King Robert who believed all the Targaryen children to be dead (after all, when overthrowing a King it's natural to order all the children to be killed regardless of age). Despite the massive power struggle in the seven kingdoms, the true threat may lie north of the wall, where the men of the night's watch keep constant vigilance. An ancient threat, thought to be no more than a children's tale, has awakened in the frigid north. The white walkers have returned sowing death and destruction north of the wall. All that stands between the walkers and the south is the magical wall and the night's watch, with ever shrinking numbers.
The Baratheons, Lannisters, and Starks are at the center of the power struggle, but who will win out? Could the Targaryen's return and claim the kingdom for themselves? Will the white walkers make their way south of the wall and plunge Westeros into never ending winter? These are the questions the series seeks to answer and begins to answer in season 1.
What is my take on season 1 of the HBO series? I personally loved D.B. Weiss and David Benioff's adaption of Martin's novels. Having read all the books that have been released to date, there are five in case you were wondering, I am happy to say that the show is an extremely faithful adaptation. This is not surprising as Martin was a producer on the show and even wrote an episode for season 1, something he wants to do for each season. The look of the show is incredible, it is the best looking HBO show I have seen to date. A lot of credit goes to the behind the scenes people for an amazing attention to detail. Locations, costumes and buildings all look fantastic and truly faithful to Martin's world. The cast is also fantastic, this is saying something for a show that has almost too many characters to keep track of (yes, they are that numerous in the books as well). This could really become a hindrance in lesser hands. Having read the books I have a bit of an upper hand, and talking to friends who watch the show they did have a bit of trouble keeping all the character's names sorted out. In addition, I have to give a lot of credit to the child actors they cast for the show as they were an integral part of the story. The children are thrown into difficult situations and the actors handled them extremely well.
I would be remiss if I didn't highlight my favorite performances. Sean Bean is pitch perfect as the hardened northerner Ned Stark. Bean, an underrated actor, makes Ned an extremely likable but complex man. In Martin's world, Ned is about as close to cut and dried "good" as you can get. Don't let that fool you into thinking he's a static character. Ned is an extremely loyal man, loyal to a fault in fact. When these loyalties begin to conflict, it begins to break Ned down. The anguish of remaining loyal to the kindgom or keeping his family safe is readily apparent in the pained eyes of Bean, who's able to express just as much with his eyes as with his dialogue. It is an incredible performance and I feel Bean was snubbed during awards season (not even a nomination, c'mon!).
Peter Dinklage one a Golden Globe and an emmy for his turn as Tyrion Lannister, the dwarf son of Tywin Lannister. Stuck in the shadow of his warrior brother Jaime and utterly loathed by his father, Tyrion relies on wit and intelligence to make his way in life (that and a love for wine and whores). Dinklage was more than deserving of the awards he garnered. He really has a gift for playing the mouthy imp, who despite his crass behavior is an extremely likable character. At the same time, Dinklage makes it clear that their is real emotion and pain behind the joking facade.
Kit Harrington excels as Jon Snow, Ned Stark's bastard son who chooses to join the night's watch and Lena Headey is fantastic as Cersei Lannister, a woman who will do anything to protect her children. I also have to give a lot of credit to Mark Addy, who I was initially skeptical about, for his turn as King Robert. While Addy was great as the boisterous, often drunk King Robert, he surprised me with his ability to show a tender side to Robert. Just watch his scene with Lena Headey in which Robert and Cersei discuss their marriage and don't have your ass blown off. It's a knockout scene!
Finally, I have to mention Emilia Clarke. Wow, what a role for an actress fresh out of film school to tackle. Daenarys is an extremely complex character that goes through a drastic change in book one. Clarke is excellent at changing from the timid Dany to the 'blood of the dragon,' fully embracing her destiny. She has an interesting chemistry with Khal Drogo (played by Jason Momao intimidating even wearing eyeliner) that matures right before our eyes. It is a star making role.
So far this has been all positives, of which there are many, but I do have to mention a few things that didn't quite do it for me. The casting choice of Catelyne Stark never quite did it for me. Don't get me wrong, Michelle Fairley does a fine job, but I simply had such a different view of Catelyn in my mind. She is described as extremely beautiful, although careworn. Fairley, while not ugly, is not exactly a head turner. I believe they were more focused on making her look more careworn and aged to match the stern look of Ned. In this regard, I guess I can see the reason for the decision. Next, I didn't like them shoving Renly's homosexuality down the viewer's throats (no pun intended). This is something that is only ever hinted at in the books, and while I have no problem with him being a gay character, I don't believe you have to show a guy going down on him to drive that point home. Subtlety is apparently something they didn't have time for.
Overall, season 1 of "Game of Thrones" was amazing. The cast and crew did an incredible job of bringing Martin's world to life. D.B. Weiss and David Benioff deserve a ton of credit for transitioning the very difficult source material to screen and I'm glad they chose HBO because they didn't want to tone down the material (which would have really ruined the show) for network TV. While it wasn't absolutely perfect, it was damn close. Sure, I'm a little biased as a massive fan of the books, but at the same time, that made my expectations for the show that much higher. Let's hope that season 2 can reach the bar set by season 1. After all, when you play the game of thrones, you win or you die.
Score: 10/10
Here is the plot in a nutshell (without spoilers for the few people who are not aware of the events of season 1 or book 1). In the fictional land of Westeros, the seven kingdoms are in a constant struggle for power. Robert Baratheon sits the iron throne (it's a throne made of melted swords, is that bad ass enough for you) after overthrowing the "Mad King" Aerys Targaryen. All is not well in the reign of King Robert. The hand of the king, John Arryn has died under mysterious circumstances and Robert travels north to Winterfell to ask his loyal subject and friend Eddard "Ned" Stark to take up the position of hand. Ned soon finds out that the politics of King's Landing have him a little out of his element. Meanwhile, across the narrow sea, Daenerys and Viserys Targaryen plot to take back the throne from the "Usurper," Robert. This comes as a blow to King Robert who believed all the Targaryen children to be dead (after all, when overthrowing a King it's natural to order all the children to be killed regardless of age). Despite the massive power struggle in the seven kingdoms, the true threat may lie north of the wall, where the men of the night's watch keep constant vigilance. An ancient threat, thought to be no more than a children's tale, has awakened in the frigid north. The white walkers have returned sowing death and destruction north of the wall. All that stands between the walkers and the south is the magical wall and the night's watch, with ever shrinking numbers.
The Baratheons, Lannisters, and Starks are at the center of the power struggle, but who will win out? Could the Targaryen's return and claim the kingdom for themselves? Will the white walkers make their way south of the wall and plunge Westeros into never ending winter? These are the questions the series seeks to answer and begins to answer in season 1.
What is my take on season 1 of the HBO series? I personally loved D.B. Weiss and David Benioff's adaption of Martin's novels. Having read all the books that have been released to date, there are five in case you were wondering, I am happy to say that the show is an extremely faithful adaptation. This is not surprising as Martin was a producer on the show and even wrote an episode for season 1, something he wants to do for each season. The look of the show is incredible, it is the best looking HBO show I have seen to date. A lot of credit goes to the behind the scenes people for an amazing attention to detail. Locations, costumes and buildings all look fantastic and truly faithful to Martin's world. The cast is also fantastic, this is saying something for a show that has almost too many characters to keep track of (yes, they are that numerous in the books as well). This could really become a hindrance in lesser hands. Having read the books I have a bit of an upper hand, and talking to friends who watch the show they did have a bit of trouble keeping all the character's names sorted out. In addition, I have to give a lot of credit to the child actors they cast for the show as they were an integral part of the story. The children are thrown into difficult situations and the actors handled them extremely well.
I would be remiss if I didn't highlight my favorite performances. Sean Bean is pitch perfect as the hardened northerner Ned Stark. Bean, an underrated actor, makes Ned an extremely likable but complex man. In Martin's world, Ned is about as close to cut and dried "good" as you can get. Don't let that fool you into thinking he's a static character. Ned is an extremely loyal man, loyal to a fault in fact. When these loyalties begin to conflict, it begins to break Ned down. The anguish of remaining loyal to the kindgom or keeping his family safe is readily apparent in the pained eyes of Bean, who's able to express just as much with his eyes as with his dialogue. It is an incredible performance and I feel Bean was snubbed during awards season (not even a nomination, c'mon!).
Peter Dinklage one a Golden Globe and an emmy for his turn as Tyrion Lannister, the dwarf son of Tywin Lannister. Stuck in the shadow of his warrior brother Jaime and utterly loathed by his father, Tyrion relies on wit and intelligence to make his way in life (that and a love for wine and whores). Dinklage was more than deserving of the awards he garnered. He really has a gift for playing the mouthy imp, who despite his crass behavior is an extremely likable character. At the same time, Dinklage makes it clear that their is real emotion and pain behind the joking facade.
Kit Harrington excels as Jon Snow, Ned Stark's bastard son who chooses to join the night's watch and Lena Headey is fantastic as Cersei Lannister, a woman who will do anything to protect her children. I also have to give a lot of credit to Mark Addy, who I was initially skeptical about, for his turn as King Robert. While Addy was great as the boisterous, often drunk King Robert, he surprised me with his ability to show a tender side to Robert. Just watch his scene with Lena Headey in which Robert and Cersei discuss their marriage and don't have your ass blown off. It's a knockout scene!
Finally, I have to mention Emilia Clarke. Wow, what a role for an actress fresh out of film school to tackle. Daenarys is an extremely complex character that goes through a drastic change in book one. Clarke is excellent at changing from the timid Dany to the 'blood of the dragon,' fully embracing her destiny. She has an interesting chemistry with Khal Drogo (played by Jason Momao intimidating even wearing eyeliner) that matures right before our eyes. It is a star making role.
So far this has been all positives, of which there are many, but I do have to mention a few things that didn't quite do it for me. The casting choice of Catelyne Stark never quite did it for me. Don't get me wrong, Michelle Fairley does a fine job, but I simply had such a different view of Catelyn in my mind. She is described as extremely beautiful, although careworn. Fairley, while not ugly, is not exactly a head turner. I believe they were more focused on making her look more careworn and aged to match the stern look of Ned. In this regard, I guess I can see the reason for the decision. Next, I didn't like them shoving Renly's homosexuality down the viewer's throats (no pun intended). This is something that is only ever hinted at in the books, and while I have no problem with him being a gay character, I don't believe you have to show a guy going down on him to drive that point home. Subtlety is apparently something they didn't have time for.
Overall, season 1 of "Game of Thrones" was amazing. The cast and crew did an incredible job of bringing Martin's world to life. D.B. Weiss and David Benioff deserve a ton of credit for transitioning the very difficult source material to screen and I'm glad they chose HBO because they didn't want to tone down the material (which would have really ruined the show) for network TV. While it wasn't absolutely perfect, it was damn close. Sure, I'm a little biased as a massive fan of the books, but at the same time, that made my expectations for the show that much higher. Let's hope that season 2 can reach the bar set by season 1. After all, when you play the game of thrones, you win or you die.
Score: 10/10
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
