Showing posts with label steven. Show all posts
Showing posts with label steven. Show all posts

Friday, February 15, 2013

EPISODE 41 - MAXIMUM CONVICTION



SHOW SYNOPSIS: This week the crew reviews the "epic" team-up of Steven Segal and Steve Austin in Maximum Conviction and spend most of the episode laughing about how truly terrible it is. Plus John makes  Jumanji reference, Steven brings up the even creepier side of Segal, and The Flick-Off finally makes its return to the show!


QUOTABLE QUOTES:

"No one has asked him to stretch his legs and I don't think he could. The way he walks, I think his knees are pretty much done for. " - Steven

"Every thing Segal says is somewhere between a whisper and exasperation. ” - John

"He fights like a blind man reads." - John

"Voltage Pictures, good luck with this."  - Steven


THE FLICK-OFF

Cars Vs. Talladega Nights
Jumanji Vs. Seven
Air Force One Vs. 8 Mile


ON THE NEXT EPISODE:  The Entire Die Hard Series





HAVING TROUBLE LISTENING? Try the direct link HERE

Saturday, December 29, 2012

EPISODE 37 - THE NIGHTMARE BEFORE CHRISTMAS




SHOW SYNOPSIS: In this special holiday episode the crew digs into the classic stop-motion, Tim Burton produced holiday film, The Nightmare Before Christmas. Everything from their favorite Jack Skellington song to Tim Butron's days as a Disney animator are discussed. Also there's some porn talk. And a few mentions of Hulk Hogan. And the Hulk Hogan sex tape. Happy holidays, loyal listeners!

RATINGS:

STEVEN SAYS, SEE IT
JOHN SAYS, SEE IT


QUOTABLE QUOTES:

"This is exactly like our first podcast, in reverse." - Steven

"When you look at Kermit The Frog's legs you're like, what are they?” - John

"What else do you associate with St. Patrick's Day other than a bunch of fucking drunks?" - Steven

"I'll get my Festivus pole."  - John


THE FLICK-OFF:

Planes, Trains and Automobiles Vs. Christmas With the Kranks
Inglorious Basterds Vs. Gremlins
Casablanca Vs. Pulp Fiction
30 Days of Night Vs. L.A. Confidential


ON THE NEXT EPISODE:  The Nightmare Before Christmas





HAVING TROUBLE LISTENING? Try the direct link HERE

Friday, December 7, 2012

EPISODE 36: PROMETHEUS




SHOW SYNOPSIS: This week the crew tries to make some sense of Ridley Scott's return to the franchise that gave him a career, Prometheus. Does it live up to expectations? Is it even any good? Why were the giant blue men walking around in diapers? During a particulary long edition of the Flick-Off they discuss the Coen Brothers, Kevin Smith, Lara Croft, and Steven admits to bawling like a little girl at the end of The Professional. Good stuff.

RATINGS:

STEVEN SAYS, SEE IT (?)
JOHN SAYS, SKIP IT


QUOTABLE QUOTES:

"Guy Pearce is unrecognizable as old man testicle head.“ - Steven

"Then why don't you put your helmet back on?” - John

"I like the surgery pod. It's nice to see that in the future surgery is basically the claw game.“ - John

"weep, sob, cry...she was his only friend!”  - Steven


THE FLICK-OFF:

Ransom Vs. No Country For Old Men
The Nightmare Before Christmas Vs. Fargo
Blade Runner Vs. The Waterboy
Predator Vs. The Professional
Lethal Weapon Vs. Watchmen
Chasing Amy Vs. Young Frankenstein
Primal Fear Vs. Scarface
Aliens Vs. Saw
Gangs of New York Vs. Platoon
Laura Croft: Tomb Raider Vs. Happy Gilmore


ON THE NEXT EPISODE:  The Nightmare Before Christmas





HAVING TROUBLE LISTENING? Try the direct link HERE

Wednesday, November 28, 2012

EPISODE 35 - TWILIGHT: BREAKING DAWN PART ONE




SHOW SYNOPSIS: Twivember officially comes to a close! This week the boys are once again joined by resident Twilight expert, Nina Perez, as they attempt to find some semblance of sense in the utter nonsense that is New Moon Part One. Everything from weddings, to vampire sex, and "imprinting" on toddlers is discussed. Tom Cruise also makes an appearance, and he's wearing his placenta bib.


RATINGS:

STEVEN SAYS, SKIP IT
JOHN SAYS, SKIP IT
NINA SAYS, SEE IT


QUOTABLE QUOTES:

"If these people don't have to be there, why do I?“ - John

"She had a vampire penis in her mouth. She's past the point of worrying about chicken.” - Steven

"I actually said to myself, what the fuck am I doing here?“ - Nina

"Jacob wants to get all up in dem diapers.”  - Steven


ON THE NEXT EPISODE:  Prometheus





HAVING TROUBLE LISTENING? Try the direct link HERE

Friday, September 14, 2012

REVIEW - THE RAID: REDEMPTION




Let’s be perfectly honest, almost everything that can be done when it comes to action movies has already been done, numerous times. There are only so many ways you can see one dude punch another dude in the face. There are only so many ways to kick a guy, or put a bullet in a guy’s head, or do all three of them and fling a witty little quip afterward.

I generally don’t expect too much from my action films. If the action is cool, I’m usually a happy man. A decent story and passable acting is icing on the cake. It’s delicious, but not all expected. It’s a buy one get one free sale. It’s oral sex on the first date.

 While action flicks are always going to be fun for the people who enjoy them, like myself for example, it’s pretty rare that anything fresh and/or new is brought to the genre. Die Hard blew me away. Hard Boiled made me lose my mind. Ong-Bak: The Thai Warrior made me soil my britches. The Raid: Redemption isn’t as good as any of those movies, but it’s pretty damn good.

The plot for is fairly straightforward. A swat team gets trapped in a tenement building controlled by a crazy mobster and his two slightly less crazy underlings.  The team spends the next 101 minutes stabbing thugs in the chest, slicing open the necks of various street toughs, and shooting a bunch of dudes in the face. That’s pretty much it. It’s simple. It knows what the audience is there to see and it delivers. There’s also some stuff about brotherhood, and allegiances, and family, but truthfully none of that really matters in the grand scheme of things. Some of it is good. Some of it is bad. It’s a hand job on the first date.

It’s not quite good enough to be a blowjob, but you’re certainly not going to turn it down.

Stuff gets blown up, people get shot, buckets of bloos are spilled, and for the most part, it all ooks pretty damn spectacular.

There’s a fantastic visual flair to The Raid: Redemption that, while not exactly new, certainly feels fresh in its own particular way. Every shot is energetic. There’s a little extra oomph in every kick. There’s a huzzah in every trachea chop. There’s a bit of wooza whuzza in the blood splatters. If you’re into action movies and you’re looking to see some shit get blown up and some dudes get stabbed, the movie delivers. No bones about it. Writer/Director Gareth Evans has brought a kinetic energy to the movie that’s undeniable. Even if you’re annoyed with the story, you’ll feel it. You won’t be able to help it.

It’s also really, really gory.

If you’re into gore it’ll probably give you a boner.

A bloody boner, but a boner nonetheless.

If The Raid: Redemption is bringing anything new to the genre it’s in the gore. There are parts of the movie that feel a bit like a slasher film from the 80’s.  Jason Voorhees would have fit in great with this swat team. If the damn thing wasn’t shot so well it might have put me off. The gore works though. It doesn’t feel at all out of place. It works. Don’t get me wrong, you’ll cringe more than once over the course of the film, but it’ll be a good cringe. If you put your hands over your eyes, you’ll peek through the cracks in your fingers. Moments that should feel over-the-top instead feel earned, which isn’t the easiest thing in the world to pull off.

The Raid: Redemption is a well-made action flick. That’s all there is to it. Is it one of the best action films of all time? Probably not. Is it one of the best in recent memory? Probably so.

If nothing else, it’s an experience and it’s worth seeing. In a genre where everything has mostly been done experiences are a rare find and any self-respecting action connoisseur would be silly to let one pass them by.

-Steven 

Wednesday, September 12, 2012

Sunday, August 26, 2012

REVIEW - THE HUNGER GAMES




Before I get into this I feel like I should make it clear that I’ve never read any of the Hunger Games trilogy from Suzanne Collins, and honestly, I don’t have any plans to in the future. Maybe those books are awesome. Maybe they answer every nitpicky thing I found annoying about the movie in a way that would blow my damn mind. Maybe they have everything I felt the movie was lacking and then some. Maybe they’re the absolute greatest books in the history of books. I dunno. It’s possible. I guess? This isn’t a review of the books. Nor is it a review of the fantastic multi-media book/movie experience. It’s just a review of the movie. That’s all. Nothing more.

Basically what I’m saying is don’t come back at me with the “well, if you’d read the books you would know…” thing. I hate that thing. The movie should stand on it’s own as an experience. Tossing that line my way will get you stitches, sucka.  It’ll get you a sandwich of the knuckle variety. It’ll get you a Katniss arrow in the butt cheek. It’ll get you a magic fireball in the face. It’ll get you a Peeta…

Um…

Actually it won’t get you anything Peeta related because Peeta is basically an ineffectual doofus.

I don’t hate The Hunger Games.

There’s a sentence I never expected to write.

Actually, I think it’s a pretty decent flick.

There’s another one.

It’s not the greatest movie I’ve ever seen. There are still a few frustrating plot holes and there are things that bugged me. It doesn’t have the conviction to really sink its teeth into any of the ideas it brings up, and instead settles for a glossed over, obvious, and mostly silly solution, but it’s certainly nowhere near what I would call a bad movie.

Set in a future where a single boy and girl from twelve “districts” are chosen to battle to the death on live television, the film tells the story of a girl named Katniss Everdeen who takes her sisters spot in the latest version of the “Hunger Games” and does her damndest to not only make it out alive, but shake up the system as well. It’s fairly straightforward. The class warfare stuff is laid on pretty thick. The voyeuristic reality television stuff is even thicker. I don’t mind any of that. In fact, I was really sort of digging the movie early on. Sure, it’s obvious, but so what? Obvious doesn’t have to be a bad thing. It’s corny, but at least it has a point. I actually enjoyed that the wealthy elite all looked like they’d been digging through Lady Gaga’s wardrobe. It makes sense.

In fact, now that I think about it an obviously talented, yet oversimplified and unfortunately polished for mass consumption mess of a performer like Gaga has a lot in common with this movie.  But I’ll get to that later.

I’ve read some complaints about the way Gary Ross directed this thing, and honestly, I don’t understand them. Truthfully, I think he might have been the only thing keeping the movie together. If nothing else the man understands pacing – mostly. He does an adequate job of building tension where tension needs to be built and despite a few notable flubs and eye-rollingly poor CGI sequences here and there, visually the movie looks solid. Jennifer Lawrence is decent in the lead as well.

She’s a puffy-faced dynamo that one.

I can’t really say the same about the rest of the cast. I’m looking at you Liam Hemsworth. Bigger role in the sequel? That’s gonna be rough.

The character of Peeta was not only a letdown, but might be the most worthless, wimpy sack of nothing in the history of the movies. Dude was essentially a futuristic version of Mr. Magoo. His biggest win was confusingly convincing some of the other contestants to “wait her out” when Katniss was up in a tree for the fifteenth time. Good job, kiddo. Ten minutes later he’s about to chug back some poison berries with an idiotic grin, literally turning himself into a rock in order to hide, and falling ass-backward in love with a girl that is mostly into him because the situation calls for it. If future movies decide to take the “love triangle” route I’ll be sad. Enough with the love triangles, people. I’d rather have seen the hapless dork chug back those berries and choke on a mouth full of poison.

The magic fireballs, super mosquitoes, and hologram dogs didn’t exactly fall into the column of “awesome stuff” either, but whatever. They were goofy, the whole thing was goofy, so what? Even if it was difficult to take the technology or the…ug…training sequences seriously at least they worked within the framework of the film. 

At it’s most basic I suppose my biggest issue with The Hunger Games is one of missed opportunities. It’s a hodgepodge of ideas that have been done before and done better. It’s watered down. It’s simple. It tackles significantly complex issues through the eyes of a twelve year old. That doesn’t make it a bad movie though. It is what it is and it’s not really anything more. Which is fine. I guess.

I’d love to have seen an adult version of The Hunger Games. I won’t get to, but it would have been nice. As it stands this is a kid’s movie. Everything is delivered in easily digestible bites. It’s a gateway drug for youngsters who might one day, hopefully, be interested in seeking out films with similar themes that also have a bit more depth to them.

I actually think the world needs more movies like The Hunger Games.

This movie is certainly a hell of a lot better than the other big thing the kids and the soccer moms galore seem to be drooling over these days. Twilight is a movie for dunderhead, boy-obsessed nincompoops who want to leave their brain in the car when they head into the theater. You’ll need your brain for The Hunger Games. You don’t necessarily have to bring put it in your head, but you’ll have to buy it a ticket and you’ll need to bring it in with you. You can keep it on you lap.

Maybe you can set your drink on it.

-STEVEN

For a second opinion check out John's HUNGER GAMES REVIEW

Saturday, August 25, 2012

REVIEW - NUDE NUNS WITH BIG GUNS




It’s not as easy as you might think it is to make an exploitation flick.

Wait, scratch that and revise.

It’s not as easy as you might think it is to make a decent exploitation flick.

Making an exploitation flick is probably pretty simple if you’ve got fifty bucks, a camera, and an actress willing to take her shirt off.

The reason the 70’s exploitation stuff works so well (some of it anyway) is because it’s a direct sign of the time in which it was created. When you settle in for an afternoon viewing of Coffy or Foxy Brow, or The Mack or The Warriors or The Big Bird Cage or even, arguably, Enter The Dragon you’re immersing yourself in a very specific time and place. You’re drenching yourself in the sweaty, bushy-crotched, feathered-hat celluloid of the 60’s and the 70’s at its most extreme. Even if you weren’t alive in the 70’s and nostalgia isn’t necessarily possible by the definition of the word, those moves feel nostalgic. It’s sort of like watching a John Hughes flick from the 80’s, if John Hughes had liked boobs and pimps a bit more. It’s difficult for a modern day exploitation flick to match that feeling. It just is. It’s always going to be.

Plus, if all you’re looking for is bare-chested women, it’s a heck of a lot easier to find them these days.

Believe it or not, Nude Nuns With Big Guns is a real move. It’s a real movie that was available for free though Netflix and I actually took an hour and a half out of my day to watch it. Apparently my time means very little to me.

Released in 2010 Nude Nuns With Big Guns tells the story of a nun named Sister Sarah (Asun Ortega) who gets dealt a raw deal by a corrupt clergy, pumped with drugs and raped repeatedly. As you can imagine, this pisses her off just a smidge. She tosses aside her bra, gets her hands on some guns, and sets out for a little ultra violence and lesbian smooching. It’s pretty basic stuff and even that stuff barely passes for anything I’d really consider a story. In fact, I feel a little silly even attempting to summarize it - almost as silly as I feel bothering to review it.

Why am I writing this again?

In any case, the movie is just bad. (No surprise there.) Don’t go thinking that I’m the sort of person who’s offended by this stuff, because I’m not. I’m not that guy at all. In fact, sexy lesbian nun smooches might actually make it onto my list of one hundred favorite things.  When I say that Nude Nuns with Big Guns is a bad movie it’s because I really think it’s a bad movie. It’s poorly made. I’m fully aware of the fact that the words poorly made are par for the course when it comes to these sort of films, and arguably part of the charm. There’s no charm to be had here though. None.

The lesbian nun smooches aren’t even all that great.

The movie is boring. I found myself struggling to keep my eyes open fifteen minutes in. The first half hour felt like an hour. The first hour felt like three. By the time the movie mercifully came to a conclusion I may as well have sat through an unrated directors cut of Das Boot.

Nude Nuns with Big Guns was an annoying endeavor. While there are indeed a few nude nuns only one of them really wields a gun and that gun seemed mostly standard issue.

Her other guns weren’t all that big either.

Just saying.

There are much better exploitation films out there than this one and if you’re in the mood for boobs and guns, and terrible acting and terrible music, my suggestion is to go to the source. Find an old Pam Grier movie and put that on. No one has the charisma of a Pam Grier in this pile of nothing. Heck, no one even has the charisma of Richard Roundtree. Every second of Nude Nuns with Big Guns is uninteresting. Every minute is dull.  They tricked me with that catchy title. They reeled me in slapped me in the face with boredom. Believe it or not, I’ve seen a penis’ get blown off by a handgun in a movie before and I’ve seen it get blown off better.

Yep, I just typed that sentence.

-STEVEN 

Monday, August 20, 2012

REVIEW - MOONRISE KINGDOM





Moonrise Kingdom is without a doubt one of the best movies I’ve seen this year.

Is it perfect? Far from it.

Did I see the ending coming a mile away? Yep.

Is it Wes Anderson’s best film? Nope.

Is it even in the top three? Probably not.

The plot of Moonrise Kingdom is fairly straightforward. A troubled youth played interestingly by Jared Gilman, in a debut role, goes AWOL from his scout troop, hooks up an equally troubled local girl and the pair takes off into the woods on a journey of young love.

I’ve been a fan of Wes Anderson’s work for a long time now and everything you might expect from a movie with his name above the title is on display. While that’s certainly a good thing, it’s also a bit of a determent.

Before I go on a bit of mini-rant, let me just preface the whole thing by once again making it abundantly clear that I am a massive fan of Wes Anderson and his work. I am. Really. Massively. The guy is talented, no bones about it. He has an original voice, a unique outlook, a talent for mixing drama and comedy, and in my humble opinion the guy hasn’t yet made what I would consider under any circumstance to be a bad film.

Dude’s bonkers great.

At the same time, I can’t help but feel like he’s beginning to repeat himself.

As much as I enjoyed Moonrise Kingdom and its lovably wacky characters, and as much as I loved the performances of Edward Norton and Bill Murray, and Kara Hayward as Suzy, it’s tough not to feel like I’ve seen it all before. With every film Anderson’s backgrounds get more stylized and his camera movements more predictable. He’s moving in the wrong direction and he needs very badly to loosen up just a smidge before it goes too far. Things didn’t feel this neat and tidy, and properly packaged with a cute little bow in Rushmore and they certainly didn’t in Bottle Rocket. There was a roughness to those films. Every shot wasn’t set up to look like a little girl’s tea service. When Max walked down and alley in Rushmore he was mostly just walking down an alley. He wasn’t dancing down an out of place cobblestone road painted by a dude with a twirly Salvador Dali mustache. Very slowly Wes Anderson seems like he’s becoming a slave to his own visual style, and that worries me just a little bit.

I still liked this movie though.

Despite my gripes and the sour hints of what might become of the career of its director, Moonrise Kingdom is an extremely solid, well-made piece of work. Most of the jokes land, the majority of the emotional moments work splendidly, and the sweetness of it all is just off kilter enough to satisfy the art house crowd and keep the rabble-rousers away.

It’s good stuff.

Also, “I love you but you have no idea what you’re talking about” – that line plays so amazingly well.

If you’re a fan of Wes Anderson’s previous work you’ll like this one as well. I don’t see how you couldn’t. If you’ve always hated the guy and you can’t make sense of his weirdo characters and even more weirdo sense of humor, you should probably just keep the line moving because there’s nothing for you to see here.

I think Tyler Perry might be dressing up like Madea again three theaters over.

Give that one a try.

-Steven

Thursday, August 16, 2012

THE LAST STAND - TRAILER

While it's pretty great to see Arnold back in a leading role, and speaking as a resident of California, doing what he clearly does best, unfortunately this trailer for The Last Stand doesn't really have me itching to see plunk down my money for a ticket.

I mean, come on... Johnny Knoxville?

Really?

Ug.

Take a look at the trailer and see what you think.

Steven


Synopsis: Sheriff Owens is a man who has resigned himself to a life of fighting what little crime takes place in sleepy border town Sommerton Junction after leaving his LAPD post following a bungled operation that left him wracked with failure and defeat after his partner was crippled. After a spectacular escape from an FBI prisoner convoy, the most notorious, wanted drug kingpin in the hemisphere is hurtling toward the border at 200 mph in a specially outfitted car with a hostage and a fierce army of gang members. He is headed, it turns out, straight for Summerton Junction, where the whole of U.S. law enforcement will have their last opportunity to make a stand and intercept him before he slips across the border forever. At first reluctant to become involved, and then counted out because of the perceived ineptitude of his small town force, Owens ultimately accepts responsibility for the face off.

Thursday, August 2, 2012

REVIEW - LOCKOUT





I’m a Guy Pearce fan.

There’s a sentence I can’t imagine is uttered all too much outside of the Pearce family living room.

I don’t care though. I like the guy. He’s an underrated talent. Memento was great. The Proposition was a well-made piece of work. L.A. Confidential was fantastic, and Ravenous remains one of the more underrated horror flicks of all time. The dude brings an air of legitimacy to almost anything he’s cast in.

Like I said, I’m a Guy Pearce fan.

Deal with it you sons of bitches.

Because of my card card-carrying status as a member of the Guy Pearce Fan Club I was willing to give Lockout the benefit of the doubt. I even paid three bucks for it through Amazon OnDemand.

That was stupid of me.

Those bucks could have bought me a candy bar – two of them.

Lockout is basically about falsely convicted government agent (Pearce) who is sent on a mission to a prison in space to save the life of the president’s daughter. Yeah, I know, that sounds an awful lot like Escape From New York, right? Yep, it sure does. The entire film is a hodgepodge of stuff that has come before and stuff that was done much better the first time around.  It stealsborrowspayshomageto more genre flicks than I can name and Pearce’s character is somewhatmostlybasically Snake Plissken without an eye patch and feathered 80’s hair.

Still, on the rare occasions that the movie actually works, it works because of Guy Pearce. Plisskin 2 has a fair amount of charisma. He’s mostly fun to watch, he’s relatively easy to like, and you find yourself basically rooting for him to pull off the impossible. Those are all positives when it comes to this kind of movie.

It’s just too bad that everything else sucks.

Maggie Grace is a mess. The inmates are annoying. The supporting cast is more of a mess than Maggie Grace. And the inmates are still annoying. Also, here’s a tip to all the aspiring filmmakers out there: if you don’t have the budget to pull off an effects shot, come up with a workaround. Really terrible digital effects are far worse than no digital effects at all. There’s a motorcycle “chase” within the first ten minutes of the movie that made some of the fine work in Sharktopus seem like it deserved an Academy Award.

Lockout was directed by a pair of guys named James Mather and Stephen St. Leger, and Luc Besson apparently helped them write it. Despite the many claims of orgy-porn throughout the years, two heads aren’t always better than one, and three heads is just awkward and uncomfortable.

I’m a fan of Guy Pearce.

I still can’t recommend this movie.

It’s not fun enough to be a stupid-fun action flick and it makes no attempt to be anything else. It’s also a waste of a damn fine performer, which might be the most frustrating thing of all.

Sorry, Guy Pearce.

-STEVEN