Alarming News: I like Morgan Freeberg. A lot.
American Digest: And I like this from "The Blog That Nobody Reads", because it is -- mostly -- about me. What can I say? I'm on an ego trip today. It won't last.
Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler: We were following a trackback and thinking "hmmm... this is a bloody excellent post!", and then we realized that it was just part III of, well, three...Damn. I wish I'd written those.
Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler: ...I just remembered that I found a new blog a short while ago, House of Eratosthenes, that I really like. I like his common sense approach and his curiosity when it comes to why people believe what they believe rather than just what they believe.
Brutally Honest: Morgan Freeberg is brilliant.
Dr. Melissa Clouthier: Morgan Freeberg at House of Eratosthenes (pftthats a mouthful) honors big boned women in skimpy clothing. The picture there is priceless--keep scrolling down.
Exile in Portales: Via Gerard: Morgan Freeberg, a guy with a lot to say. And he speaks The Truth...and it's fascinating stuff. Worth a read, or three. Or six.
Just Muttering: Two nice pieces at House of Eratosthenes, one about a perhaps unintended effect of the Enron mess, and one on the Gore-y environ-movie.
Mein Blogovault: Make "the Blog that No One Reads" one of your daily reads.
The Virginian: I know this post will offend some people, but the author makes some good points.
Poetic Justice: Cletus! Ah gots a laiv one fer yew...
Memo For File XV
Saw V for Vendetta (2005). Saw Ultraviolet (2006). Emmm…this is kind of weird. It’s the same movie.
Yeah they have different backstories and so forth. But the plotlines, event-by-event, character-by-character, it’s exactly the same thing happening. Only difference is, in V for Vendetta it’s up to the girl to be confused, worried, sad, mad, hopeful, angry, to cry, and most importantly to figure out what’s going on; it’s up to the guy to do all the ass kicking. In Ultraviolet, these two roles have been combined into one person.
Apart from that, somebody should have been litigating against somebody else for intellectual property theft. Which is which, I dunno. Let them work that out. I’m just glad I didn’t pay full price.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Two questions:
Are either of them worth seeing?
Which is better?
- Duffy | 07/19/2006 @ 05:11I would say they’re both good enough, that some effort put into actually avoiding either one, would be better spent somewhere else. Neither one actually stunk.
The point that I was making, and I was probably too cutesy and subtle about it, is this is all getting a little too formulaic. Dystopian society is run by evil guy, the 21st-century Robin Hood uses martial arts to drill through the dystopian society one faceless “stormtrooper” soldier at a time, then he faces off against the evil guy. Vive la revolucion, and the teeming masses throw off their shackles.
Nothing new about the overall story. Errol Flynn’s version of Robin Hood incorporates all of the above, as does Tyrone Power’s Zorro. What’s new is the cookie-cutter-ness of it. Scene to scene to scene. Minute to minute. Character to character. Whooshing sound to whooshing sound. Identical. So to answer your question, rental/matinee on one, but once you’ve done that, certainly not one dime to be spent on the other.
And the level of creativity involved has descended to a level somewhat beneath what audiences should be tolerating, IMHO.
- mkfreeberg | 07/19/2006 @ 06:05Blame the Wachowski brothers. The Matrix made a gazillion dollars so clones were inevitable.
Hollywood is, indeed a herd that follows the one or two innovators that get to make movies.
Someone makes a disaster movie and a whole slate follows. Someone makes ‘Scream’ and the herd follows.
It seems to me that their monopoly is not going to last. I predict we’ll see the subscriber level pushed down to individual channels and then the shows themselves. Then the viewers will really be in charge of what stays and what goes.
- Duffy | 07/19/2006 @ 07:06