I did not expect to enjoy G-Force at all. That style of opening is often followed by something akin to "I'm shocked, shocked to admit right here in front of God and all the world that I loved it!", but that's not what I think of it. Months ago, when G-Force was in first run theatrically and I was busy not supporting it by buying a ticket or going to a press screening by choice, I had a short chat with a good friend. In college, I spent most of my time working with FSU's campus movie theater. My first student manager, mentor, and friend there was Nicholas Ware, who is now a grad student in Northwest Ohio after an extended stint attempting to conquer the country of Japan. Nick and I would routinely find ourselves in the minority of a group that swelled in size and popularity such that we'd lose out trying to program midnight movies like El Topo and instead get stuck with The Neverending Story (which is in no way a Midnight Movie). I wanted to preface our chat with that bit of trivia, because as soon as I asked what he thought of G-Force, he said, "G-Force is a better action movie than Transformers 2". I jokingly opened a chat with "do you reckon G-Force is better than Transformers 2?" Below is the chat, largely unedited and messily joined together (but such is online communication). Nick: BETTER. GIANT. ROBOTS. MC: I haven't seen either movie. [this was months ago. still haven't seen TF2.] Nick: TF2 robots are just these sharp, ugly metal shapes that vaguely resemble humanoids. At least the robots in G-Force look like what they're supposed to look like! The thing that was awesome about the transformers toys is that they WORKED. They turned from robot-man into truck and back. None of the Transformers in the Transformers movies look like the would actually turn into a truck! It's just a slippery CGI fuckfest with photoshop filters. Makes my cock soft. MC: Basing all my thoughts off the trailers (since I haven't seen either), I think G-Force one-ups TF2 with a better cartoonish villain too. Nick: Well, except there's a TWIST! The real villain isn't Nighy. MC: "It's not easy, trying to take over the world" coming out of Bill Nighy's mouth made me almost choke laughing. Nick: All of it worked better, though. The characters are more believable and they're TALKING GUINEA PIGS. The humans don't have much to do, but I was surprised how much I liked (and how well rounded) the animal characters (were). I mean, I don't think G-Force is amazing. But it's a really good sort of segue kids film. The level of action gets them ready for stuff like Iron Man and other soft PG-13s. MC: Gateway Toy Movie Nick: My brother's 7-year-old will probably love it. It's tight. Every scene is needed, and works, and it all comes to a head, everything pays off. MC: I know people whose kids think it's the best movie they're ever seen Nick: There's no excess. TF2 is nothing BUT excess. It's good storytelling. MC: The host of NPR's "Wait, Wait, Don't Tell Me!" said said something along the lines of "you can leave a half hour in, come back two hours later for the credits, and not miss anything. Seen CGI Joe yet? Nick: Naw. But I will. Because I'm a fucking idiot. I thought Transformers 1 was boring. However, I thought Transformers 2 was boring and racist. Which is a much larger crime. Nick: You and Devin both. MC: You should have seen the ridiculous fights people picked with him "reading in racism that wasn't there" in TF2. Nick: Isn't there? ISN'T THERE? If this had been a Disney movie, and they were animals, they would have gotten EVISCERATED for it. Those two robots are supposed to be DUMB BLACK GUYS. There is NO OTHER READING. That is THE READING. It's not a matter of reading something into it, it's a matter of READING IT. MC: I've found there's a wave of new and relatively-new web critics who are into helping studio P.R. departments defend hilariously indefensible things like this. Nick: And you know, I wouldn't have minded how racist Mudflap and Skidz were if they were FUNNY. They were SO... FUCKING... GRATING. Every attempt at humor in TF2 fell so completely flat. It's like if someone kicks you in the balls and expects it to be funny TO YOU. MC: I must have imagined all of my black friends in the office coming in and asking me how "Hollywood" thought the Step'n'fetchit Bots were ok and appropriate and hilarious. Of course, it was a bunch of white film critics on either side arguing with each other, which made the whole thing more ridiculous. Nick: They are very appropriate in Hollywood... if Hollywood is still doing minstrel shows. MC: Speaking of racism, any to be found in G-Force? Nick: The Tracy Morgan character was surprisingly "jive turkey" free. Though his (and Penelope Cruz') ethnicities are pretty clear, I don't remember any obvious cheap racial jokes MC: A kids' gerbil movie with Tracy Morgan in it avoided race humor entirely? I'm asking you to think real hard. Nick: I think he might of said stuff like crack-a-lackin' that kind of thing that's the extent of it MC: I might pay to see G-Force just to see the 3D version. Nick: I kept hoping that he'd talk about taking the Steve Buscemi gerbil out behind the plastic house and getting it pregnant. There is some anti-ferret humor, though. I really liked the angry Buscemi hamster MC: What if anything did you like about TF2? Nick: I mean, it's technically proficient, there's no doubting that, but to no end. The "old man" Decepticon farting a parachute? Devastator having testicles? I liked the voice work for the most part. Most of the Transformers have really nice, raspy voices. They SOUND like Giant Robots From Outer Space. ------------------------------------ The Blu-ray set comes with a pile of extras that are all aimed at a younger audience. A friend with kids tell me they played it through on repeat four times the first day they had it. The Blu-exclusive "enhanced commentary" includes a couple of the rodents plus Zach Galifianakis in-character. Other Blu exclusives include a featurette dedicated solely to Bruckheimer's work in CG (which someone could write a book about) and another that takes you behind-the-scenes in the 3D animation lab. The quality of modeling, rendering, and animation is really quite impressive. Extras that appear on the DVD also include the gag reel, deleted scenes, a few music videos, and some in-character featurettes for the kids. Disney was wise to start packing all their Blus with a DVD and a Digital Copy. This hit the street back in December, but I've only recently gotten to it due to the overwhelming pile of stuff I had hit at the end of the year. Never in a million years did I expect to be charmed by this.

I sang and acted off and on growing up in suburban Dallas, and if there is a sucker audience for last year's remake of Fame, I'm elbowing for center seating about halfway back. The extreme widescreen aspect ratio (2.40:1) and earth-toned palette are additional incentive for me to give it a shot, and I'm glad I did, if only to see it fail. The "believe in yourself" and "do what you love" themes are as needed in the lives of kids today as they ever have been. The fatal flaw of the movie is that its characters are spread too thin and the narrative is not as engaging or interesting as Glee or High School Musical are in style. I had a voucher to see this movie at no cost. The movie wasn't in first run long enough for me to use it, so I never saw the theatrical cut, just this DVD-only "Extended Dance" version that runs 16 minutes longer. The runtime (123 minutes) is closer to the 1980 original's 133 minutes. That doesn't change the fact that the movie is still kind of uninteresting for a while. Once the pace picks up it's not really half bad, but it's not all the way to half good either. The 15-minute auditioning prologue is like dead air. I don't remember a lick of it. No one in these arts fields enjoys sitting through that process in real life. This isn't stagey American Idol comedy hour stuff, so there's nothing to it aside from "these are the archetypes and stereotypes with which we will paint for two hours". The following quarter hour makes all the difference in the world when it comes to development. I have a feeling that's what the theatrical cut was most lacking overall: character investment and development. Remaking a movie that was rated R and ending up with a PG can only be chalked up to an inconsistent ratings standard board or merciless watering down. The sanitization of New York City itself since 1980 mirrors the transformation that the Fame "property" went through here. I'd wager it's as edgy as a dull butter knife as a PG, but the rating-free Extended Cut is full of plenty of suggestive material and more authentic high schooler credibility. The initial group jam session in the cafeteria was rolling along fine until some blonde girl started singing all street-style. Again, on assumption, the Extended version isn't exclusively dedicated to more dance footage. My gut is telling me the Dance branding is trying to subconsciously tie it to So You Think You Can Dance in the minds of viewers. I'm sure the target audience will take something away from this if they actually sit down to watch it. Unfortunately, the spectacular failure at the box office makes that less likely. As imperfect, manufactured, and fake as it is, Fame (2009) is better than most teen-aimed stuff. The Blu-ray hit last Tuesday (12 Jan 2009) and includes some deleted scenes, a "Fame" music video, character profiles, and a couple of featurettes: one on the dance sequences and another on the nationwide casting call to fill the mostly-unknown cast. The included Digital Copy is of the Extended Dance Cut (which I assume is superior based on first-run reviews).

Whether it becomes some sort of mini-franchise from here, we'll know one way or another in time. District 9 certainly put a fair amount of fresh talent on the market, from director Neil Blomkamp to star Sharlto Copley. On top of that, it became one of the more profitable movies of last year on one of the smallest budgets (excluding Paranormal Activity as an outlier). I was going to hold off on writing about Sony's rather excellent Blu-ray of the movie, but then word seeped out that they're making the next Spider-Man movie with director Marc Webb for $80 million. I started tapping away at this just after a brief and pointless argument with HitFix's Drew McWeeny on Twitter that began when I misquoted D9's budget as "$40 million" (it was actually closer to 30, or to have Drew tell you, exactly $30 million dollars according to "PJ"). Said argument appears to have been more about Drew getting the final word than what I was initially talking about in the first place: You could make two District 9's with an $80 million bank account. My biggest beef with the first Spider-movie was that they spent a lot of money and ended up with not-so-great effects overall (it got worse through the series). The leaping from roof to roof bit comes to mind most immediately. The approach D9 took was "what do we have to show, how do we make that happen the most effectively, and how cheap can we do it?" I'm very pleased by the idea that this approach is now appealing to studios that will hopefully greenlight more and more movies like this. When you consider that Guillermo del Toro made Hellboy 2 for $60 million and could have done yet more with another $20 mill, things are encouraging rather than pessimistic ("they're cheaping out on Spidey!"). Pouring mountains of money into Spider-Man 3 only made things worse. Splice out the Sandman stuff and you basically have the only part of the movie I cared for at all. Months ago, I stepped out of the Austin press screening and said to an esteemed acquaintance that I was most thrilled that what I'd just seen was "real Sci-Fi" done for $30 million. I spent five minutes promising and assuring him that it only cost 30. He was blown away by that number more than the movie. His initial "eh, it was pretty good, I suppose" morphed into "it was pretty good, but if it cost 30, that's going to change how the studios make these things." We're already seeing that change going rapidly into motion. My only fear is that the studios will shave things down so lean that veteran directors will just drop off the radar for years at a time. The extras on the Blu-ray don't try too hard to squeeze more minutes out of the same info as the vast majority of new releases. That isn't to say that I don't expect a second edition of this to come along at some point. Knowing Peter Jackson's outfit from the Lord of the Rings sets, they are aware that fans don't want to be bled dry and they pack in reasonable added value for people already disposed to re-buy the same movie. Blomkamp goes solo on the commentary, which is extremely fulfilling and without useless crap to fill dead air nor much dead air either. If I were to peg something for the theoretical Collector's or 5th Anniversary Edition, it'd be a group track with Blomkamp, co-writer Terri Tatchell, and star Copley. Having gone through it all now, the commentary plays best after having gone through the three-part doc, deleted scenes, and featurettes. The deleted scenes are a testament to movies truly being made in the editing, as a lot of fat got wisely trimmed off. The doc and featurettes get their business done and over with pretty expeditiously. The Blu-ray exclusives include an interactive satellite map of the staging area for the movie, which I skipped, the Sony Blu-standard movieIQ trivia/info track, and useless to me and other non-gamers (I'm retired, back off) is a God of War III demo for the Playstation 3 that keeps Sony's vertical integration standard in check. All told, this is one of the very few new releases from last year that I can actually recommend buying as not only a "vote" for the movie and what it represents creatively, but as an entertainment package. The disc hit the street nearly a month ago, but I expect we'll see another resurgence in awareness once Oscar nominations come out. I think this first "ten pictures" year in a long while could see D9 nominated for Best Picture along with Avatar and Star Trek as a Sci-Fi trifecta. Hugh Jackman declared that the musical was "back" last year, so I expect a Sci-Fi dance number this year. Break out the blue body paint, miniskirts, and most importantly, the shellfish costumes.

I received my first Universal Blu-ray/DVD "flipper" discs for review the other day: The Bourne flicks Identity & Supremacy (hitting the street today, 19 Jan, along with Ultimatum). I hate the idea in theory thanks to an irrational anxiety about disc layer bonding. In execution, however, they work quite well and feel sturdy. Showing them to coworkers produced exclamations of "that's awesome, I'm gonna start buying Blu-rays". I'm sure that's precisely the reaction Universal was hoping for: people start buying software before they have Blu-capable hardware. These folks like the idea of going to Blu-ray, but they don't have the home theater to back it up just yet. Consider this my eating crow (for now) on these things.

I very much enjoyed skimming a DVR'd version of The Ricky Gervais HBO Show/Invention of Lying Promo Show (also known as The 67th Annual Golden Globes) from the other night. Just a couple of days before, I'd watched Invention of Lying and been transported back to when writing and concept were integral parts of studio comedies. The movie is a grinner (not a laugher) until Gervais' character of Andy invents the concept of God and the afterlife. I greatly prefer the original title, The Other Side of the Truth. The Blu-ray is lacking a Gervais commentary, which is disappointing. It does include the original opening (The Dawn of Lying, narrated by Patrick Stewart), set in prehistoric times. On top of that are some more deleted scenes, outtakes, a making-of featurette, some video podcasts, and a 20-minute piece called Meet Karl Pilkington. It follows a friend of Gervais' flying to the US to be an extra in the (now-cut) opening. I'm assuming it's put-on at least in part. Buying it is a vote in favor of the style of screenwriting, not the movie's quality as a comedy classic (which it is not).

(While I was drafting this piece, I noticed that Jeff posted something with similar sentiments, but I'm going further and pitching the "win" situation for both The Chin and The Hair.) I find the "Team Conan" or "I'm With Coco" or whatever movement patently absurd...not in spirit mind you, but in productive potential. It sprang out of nowhere after seven months of many not paying attention to The Tonight Show even though these people love Conan and what he represents. If you consider Jay Leno the bad guy because a) you don't find him entertaining, b) because he's trying to salvage a job out of self-preservation, or c) you love Conan O'Brien...you're missing the point. Frankly, I prefer Conan's style and subtance better by far, but Jay isn't the bad guy because he's trying to hang on to his job or, for that matter, because you may not like him. This isn't a populist revolution being lead by El Conan. This is a network turning its talent on one another to avoid being classified as the bad guy (which they are in this case). It's "Conan versus Jay" because that what NBC wants everyone to think that it is. It's "just business, you understand" as usual, where "the needs of the company" are the fall-back for why NBC has botched what they've botched. The calculated decision at the top is that either one of these guys, left to their own devices when outright fired, could destroy them and raise the stock of another network. If they cut Jay loose, he takes the longest track record in late night, a self-righteous audience, and a ratings bleed with him. If they snip Conan, he takes $60 million, a self-righteous audience, and a ratings bleed with him. The situation is a net negative no matter what happens, so why not set the talent and their followings against one another to offset whatever ratings the "bad guy" who leaves takes with him? Neither one of them was going to be happy with The Jay Leno Half-Hour Comedy Hour and The Midnight Show with Conan O'Brien. That solution was a push tactic on NBC's part. If you put the burden of decision on the talent with their jobs and reputations on the line, they'll inevitably get petty. That started to happen last night as both hosts diverted their bull's eyes more directly on one another instead of NBC. Jeff Zucker couldn't possibly hope for more than Conan and Jay damaging their own brands enough that whichever one leaves or stays doesn't matter. The trump card for O'Brien and Leno, both wronged by NBC, is to both dump NBC and go somewhere else. There should be a big musical number starring them and their teams uploaded to Funny Or Die or YouTube. It should spoof "The Farmer and The Cowman Should Be Friends" from the Fox-owned Oklahoma! and be the ultimate "Fuck you!" to NBC, who's screwed them both. Conan would announce he's going to Fox and Jay that he's going to ABC, who would move Nightline for him. It's known that there is or has been interest for them respectively at both networks. NBC needs Leno much more than he needs them, and I don't know that he's as on-board with being the destruction of the brand as Jimmy Kimmel alleged two nights ago. That would leave NBC with the option of rebuilding The Tonight Show with Jimmy Fallon or Carson Daly and a massive talent boycott. That's the only possible win-win for both "rivals" who could be stronger allies. Conan's entire staff uprooted and moved coasts. Jay got pushed out of late night entirely and can't be happy that NBC's allowed him to be pitched as the perceived bad guy. They've both been used and abused, and they need to get on the same page. Together, they could re-shape late night TV on their terms, not those of NBC.