<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Cineblog.us &#187; Comedy</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.cineblog.us/category/genre/comedy/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.cineblog.us</link>
	<description>...because it&#039;s not about the popcorn.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 28 Aug 2010 23:30:55 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>&#8216;Up&#8217;* (2009)</title>
		<link>http://www.cineblog.us/2009/06/up-2009/</link>
		<comments>http://www.cineblog.us/2009/06/up-2009/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Jun 2009 21:55:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Anne Dougherty</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Animation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Comedy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fantasy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Film]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sci-Fi]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Disney]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Pixar]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cineblog.us/?p=353</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Pixar&#8217;s tenth film in 15 years, &#8216;Up&#8217; charms with its tale of Carl Fredricksen (Ed Asner (voice)), an old man befuddled and disgusted by the changes around him, and Russell (Jordan Nagai (voice)), a wilderness scout bent on earning his last badge for &#8220;assisting the elderly.&#8221; Threatened with the forcible removal from his house, the [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.cineblog.us/wp-content/uploads/2009/06/Up_2009.jpg"><img title="up_poster1" src="http://www.cineblog.us/wp-content/uploads/2009/06/Up_2009.jpg" alt="up_poster1" width="154" height="228" align="right" /></a> Pixar&#8217;s tenth film in 15 years, &#8216;Up&#8217; charms with its tale of Carl Fredricksen (Ed Asner (voice)), an old man befuddled and disgusted by the changes around him, and Russell (Jordan Nagai (voice)), a wilderness scout bent on earning his last badge for &#8220;assisting the elderly.&#8221;</p>
<p>Threatened with the forcible removal from his house, the last remaining one in the midst of a high-rise construction zone, Carl takes the drastic step of attaching thousands of helium balloons to his house so he can fly off in search of the adventure he and his beloved departed wife Ellie never got to take, the journey to Paradise Falls<span id="more-353"></span> in the footsteps, or should I say dirigible trail, of famed explorer Charles Munz (Christopher Plummer (voice)).  Munz, disgraced after he returned with the skeleton of a bird that scientists later accused him of assembling from unrelated  bones set off for Paradise Falls when Carl and Ellie were just kids vowing to prove he was not a fraud.</p>
<p>After discovering unintentional stowaway Russell, whom Carl had previously sent literally on a snipe hunt, and some encounters with dangerous weather, Carl and Russell find themselves in Paradise Falls and towing Carl&#8217;s house to just the point Ellie had envisioned.</p>
<p>During the course of their journey, the mismatched pair runs into Doug (Bob Peterson (voice)), one of Munz&#8217; dogs outfitted with a collar that translates his thoughts, as well as a specimen of the  bird, whom Russell names Kevin, Munz has been hunting all these years.</p>
<p>The core of this film isn&#8217;t Pixar&#8217;s stunning, as usual, animation, nor is it the plot.  No, what makes &#8216;Up&#8217; a good film is character development.  Both Carl and Russell unintentionally end up on a journey that brings them more connection with the world around them and with a way of living that makes them happy rather than the way of living that has become accustomed (Carl) or what is seen as expected (Russell).</p>
<p><strong>Rating:</strong> 4 out of 5 stars</p>
<p>* Note: While Pixar released this film in 3-D the showing I saw was standard projection.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.cineblog.us/2009/06/up-2009/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>&#8216;Yes Man&#8217; (2008)</title>
		<link>http://www.cineblog.us/2008/12/yes-man-2008/</link>
		<comments>http://www.cineblog.us/2008/12/yes-man-2008/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 24 Dec 2008 14:59:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Anne Dougherty</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Comedy]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cineblog.us/?p=308</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Let me say up front that I don&#8217;t normally like Jim Carrey movies. He&#8217;s like a less funny, flatulent version of Buster Keaton. Despite this, I was intrigued enough by the premise of Carrey&#8217;s new film &#8216;Yes Man&#8217; to plunk down $10 and spend an hour and 45 minutes of my life. Carl Allen (Carrey) [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.cineblog.us/wp-content/uploads/2008/12/Yes_Man_2008.jpg"><img class="alignright size-full wp-image-483" title="Yes_Man_2008" src="http://www.cineblog.us/wp-content/uploads/2008/12/Yes_Man_2008.jpg" alt="" width="185" height="273" /></a>Let me say up front that I don&#8217;t normally like Jim Carrey movies.  He&#8217;s like a less funny, flatulent version of <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DlkdtS8OFlA">Buster Keaton</a>.  Despite this, I was intrigued enough by the premise of Carrey&#8217;s new film &#8216;Yes Man&#8217; to plunk down $10 and spend an hour and 45 minutes of my life.</p>
<p>Carl Allen (Carrey) is the definition of a drone.  His life is a well-worn path consisting of work, the video store, and falling asleep on his couch.  His wife left him over a year ago, his job as a junior loan officer is a dead end that only encourages his tendency to say no to life.  A chance meeting with Nick (John Michael Higgins), whom we are given little information about and are meant to assume is &#8220;an old friend,&#8221; and Nick&#8217;s raves about how the power of yes changed his life push Carl to attend a motivational seminar by Terrence Bundley (Terence Stamp) during which he is singled out.<span id="more-308"></span></p>
<p>Bundley pushes Carl into making &#8220;a covenant&#8221; with himself: say yes to every opportunity that comes along.  What follows is a series of experiences some absurd &#8211; like the homeless man who ends up stranding Carl with no working cell phone, no cash, and a car with no gas in a park nowhere near Carl&#8217;s house &#8211; some plausible and rewarding &#8211; the aforementioned stranding connects Carl with Allison (Zooey Deschanel) who, in truth, is the film&#8217;s moral and spiritual center to the pliable Carl.</p>
<p>Carl&#8217;s embrace of Bundley&#8217;s theory of life, open yourself to yes, embrace the possibilities, leads implausibly to an encounter with the FBI as Carl&#8217;s activities &#8211; learning to fly, to speak Korean, spontaneously taking a trip to Lincoln Nebraska with Allison &#8211; seem to suggest a pattern of terrorist activities.  This implausible encounter is the movie&#8217;s linchpin, the one on which its thematic lesson turns, and it&#8217;s the most egregious example of the film violating its own internal logic.  Yes, people can change but how likely to motivate you out of stupor is an encounter with someone you haven&#8217;t seen for a number of years, particularly when that person closes out your meeting by throwing a rock through the front window at your place of employment and running from security?</p>
<p>The premise of &#8216;Yes Man&#8217; is more than timely in this era of hope and &#8220;yes, we can&#8221; political change.  Unfortunately, a thin script, strange casting (Carrey looks every minute of 46 which makes his romance with the 28 year-old Deschanel a tad bit creepy) and direction (Danny Masterson as one of Carl&#8217;s friends goes from over-grown party boy to slime ball in less than 20 minutes of screen time), and what is basically a walk-on by Jim Carrey squander what could have been a great teaching-through-pop-culture moment.</p>
<p><strong>Rating:</strong> 2 out of 5 stars</p>
<p><strong>Resources</strong></p>
<ul>
<li><a href="http://www.apple.com/trailers/wb/yesman/">Trailer</a></li>
<li><a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000120/">Jim Carrey on IMBD</a></li>
</ul>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.cineblog.us/2008/12/yes-man-2008/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>&#8220;The Middleman&#8221; (2008)</title>
		<link>http://www.cineblog.us/2008/07/the-middleman-2008/</link>
		<comments>http://www.cineblog.us/2008/07/the-middleman-2008/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 13 Jul 2008 16:15:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Victor Sparrow</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Adaptation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Comedy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Comic Book]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Meta-fiction]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sci-Fi]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Television]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA["The Middleman" (2008)]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA['Get Smart'-meets-'Hellboy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ABC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ABC Family]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Brit Morgan]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Jake Smollett]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Javier Grillo-Marxuach]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Matt Keeslarr]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Natalie Morales]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cineblog.us/?p=145</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<em>The Middleman</em> isn't just some dime-store comic book property, it's a fun, literate and self-conscious treatment of semi-secret agents, superheroes, villains and pop-culture that rivals anything Joss Whedon and the <em>Gilmore Girls</em> ever offered up given it's fast-paced summary referencing.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.cineblog.us/wp-content/uploads/2008/07/middleman2.jpg"><img class="alignright size-full wp-image-491" title="middleman2" src="http://www.cineblog.us/wp-content/uploads/2008/07/middleman2.jpg" alt="" width="229" height="144" /></a>During a summer that&#8217;s seen an effort of recycling everybody&#8217;s syndicated childhood programming &#8212; <em>Get Smart</em><em>, </em><em>Speed Racer</em><em>, </em>live-action versions of &#8216;The Hulk&#8217; and &#8216;Iron Man&#8217; &#8212; some of the good stuff is getting lost over at ABC Family. &#8220;<a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1122770/">The Middleman</a>&#8221; is <a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0342057/">Javier Grillo-Marxuach</a>&#8216;s television adaptation of his eponymous <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Middleman">series of graphic novels</a>.</p>
<p>But <em>The Middleman</em> isn&#8217;t just some dime-store comic book property, it&#8217;s a fun, literate and self-conscious treatment of semi-secret agents, superheroes and villains, a pop-culture <em>c<a title="A confection, preserve, or jam" href="http://www.thefreedictionary.com/confiture">onfiture</a></em> that rivals anything Joss Whedon and the Gilmore Girls ever offered up in zither&#8217;s fast-paced talk-fests. While I&#8217;ve not read the <a href="http://www.amazon.com/dp/0980238544?tag=cineblogus-20&amp;camp=0&amp;creative=0&amp;linkCode=as1&amp;creativeASIN=0980238544&amp;adid=1C0FDEDGHPG5JV2XYFCN&amp;" target="_blank">comic book</a>, it is said to be ingenious.<br />
<span id="more-145"></span></p>
<p>Grillo-Marxuach is also the creator and veteran producer of such shows as &#8220;Medium&#8221; (2005), &#8220;Lost&#8221; (2004), and the short-lived &#8220;Boomtown&#8221; (2002). Middleman is probably best characterized as a reprise of the original Patrick McNee iteration of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Avengers_(TV_series)"><em>The Avengers</em></a>, but updated and self-deconstructing as Grillo-Marxuach and his team name drop cult memes as varied as <a title="Director, 'Re-Animator', 'Castle Freak', 'From Beyond'" href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0002340/">Stuart Gordon</a> and <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Janice_Dickinson_Modeling_Agency">The Janice Dickinson Modeling Agency</a><em> </em>without skipping a beat. <em>Middleman</em> is admirably tongue-in-cheek fare for an audience that can appreciate the absurdity of modern &#8216;reality&#8217; television as well as the buddy-dramedy Secret Agent shows of yesteryear, from &#8216;Wild, Wild West&#8217; to , yes, &#8216;Get Smart&#8217;.</p>
<p><a href="http://cineblog.us/wp-content/uploads/2008/07/middleman2.jpg"><a href="http://www.cineblog.us/wp-content/uploads/2008/07/middleman.jpg"><img class="alignright size-full wp-image-492" title="middleman" src="http://www.cineblog.us/wp-content/uploads/2008/07/middleman.jpg" alt="" width="176" height="120" /></a></a>Though the parent network, ABC has picked-up a few similarly quirk-filled shows during the past several years (&#8216;<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dirty_Sexy_Money">Dirty Sexy Money</a>&#8216;, &#8216;Lost&#8217; and &#8216;<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pushing_Daisies">Pushing Daisies</a>&#8216; come to mind) it has chosen to bury <em>Middleman</em> on ABC Family along with the provocative &#8216;Kyle XY&#8217;. One would think that clones, robots and <em>The 700 Club</em> wouldn&#8217;t mix well, yet ABC Family has chosen to program all of these shows on the same network.</p>
<p>Why ABC Family would relegate an ambitious new genre show to a para-religous network is anyone&#8217;s guess, but the results of moving an engaging, family-friendly show from 8 p.m. to 10 p.m. on in the gulag of para-religious basic cable can only be interpreted as willful sabotage.</p>
<p>Fact of the matter is that the real audience for this show would be the comic-book savvy Buffistas, Browncoats and former Farscape fans, if not the fans of SciFi Channel&#8217;s &#8216;<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eureka_%28TV_series%29">Eureka</a>&#8216;.</p>
<p><em>Middleman</em> stars Matt Keeslar in the titular role as a gadget-wielding superhero of sorts who is out to defend the world from mad scientists, criminal organizations and rogue daytime television hosts with the assistance of his able lieutenant, Wendy Watson (Natalie Morales).</p>
<p>In the first episode, Wendy and the Middleman go up against a PG-rated tentacled Hentai monster and cybernetically enhanced apes, in that order. Subsequent episodes feature Lucha Libre Wresters, Prada-wearing Succubi, Jewelery-eating aliens and evil daytime talk-show hosts. The dialogue is fast and pithy.</p>
<p><!-- Along the way, <i>Middleman touches on some thoughtful and lighthearted details often missed by more serious attempts to capture the lives of creatives and young people alike, specifically when the show&#8217;s caption make note of the illegal sublet that Wendy shares with her &#8216;photogenic&#8217; roommate, Lacey Thomfield (Brit Morgan). &#8211;></p>
<p>ABC Family has made a mistake by moving Middleman fromthe 8pm to the 10 o&#8217;c'clock slot because at that hour they&#8217;re making it <em>more</em> inaccessible. It&#8217;s note enough that the show is at the obscure end of television dial, competing with The Weather Channel and QVC. Now it&#8217;s got to compete with Showtime&#8217;s &#8216;Californication&#8217; and NBC&#8217;s &#8216;Meduim&#8217; &#8212; tough comptition by standard. The unofficial word was that ABC Family moved the show because of its ;mature; content, but &#8216;Middleman&#8217; is so well written and executed that if there&#8217;s any racy content, it&#8217;s so well obscured by credo and generational disposition as to make it unintelligible to younger viewers.</p>
<p>If the show has one shortcoming, it&#8217;s the special effects. Unless Grillo-Marxuach is trying to get a laugh out of some subpar CGI effects, ABC might think of tapping in-house <em>Pixar</em> for a small bump on the quality of the special FX.</p>
<p><em>The Middleman</em> &#8212; catch it now, while it&#8217;s fresh and new or catch in in 5 years when it resurfaces in syndication on the SciFi Channel. But honestly, this is such a clever and inventive show that it deserves to stick around for a couple of years, so watch it NOW. It&#8217;s the best new show of the summer season.<br />
<strong>Rating:</strong> 4.5 out of 5 stars</p>
<p>The Middleman, 10 p.m.EST/9 p.m. CST, Monday night s on ABC Family. The <a href="http://ax.phobos.apple.com.edgesuite.net/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/browserRedirect?url=itms%253A%252F%252Fax.phobos.apple.com.edgesuite.net%252FWebObjects%252FMZStore.woa%252Fwa%252FviewTVSeason%253Fid%253D281177395%2526s%253D143441">first 4 episodes</a> are available now on iTunes.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.cineblog.us/2008/07/the-middleman-2008/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>&#8216;Hancock&#8217; (2008)</title>
		<link>http://www.cineblog.us/2008/07/hancock-2008/</link>
		<comments>http://www.cineblog.us/2008/07/hancock-2008/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 10 Jul 2008 21:37:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Victor Sparrow</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Action]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Comedy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Comic Book]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Drama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Film]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Meta-fiction]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sci-Fi]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA["Tonight He Comes"]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA['Hancock'  (2008)]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Akiva Goldsman]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Charlize Theron]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Jason Bateman]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[John August]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Michael Mann]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Peter Berg]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Vy Vincent Ngo]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Will Smith]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cineblog.us/?p=140</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&#8216;Hancock&#8216; started it&#8217;s journey to the screen 12 years ago as a spec-screenplay by first-timer Ny Vincent Ngo, titled &#8216;Tonight He Comes&#8217;. I first learned about Ngo&#8217;s screenplay through some fanboy site like Harry Knowles&#8217; AintItCool.com. Ngo&#8217;s script created something of an uproar in Hollywood despite comic book properties being at a fallow moment after [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.cineblog.us/wp-content/uploads/2008/07/Hancock.jpg"></a><a href="http://www.cineblog.us/wp-content/uploads/2008/07/hancock2008.jpg"><img class="alignright size-full wp-image-493" title="hancock2008" src="http://www.cineblog.us/wp-content/uploads/2008/07/hancock2008.jpg" alt="" width="200" height="294" /></a>&#8216;<a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0448157/">Hancock</a>&#8216; started it&#8217;s journey to the screen 12 years ago as a spec-screenplay by first-timer Ny Vincent Ngo, titled &#8216;Tonight He Comes&#8217;.</p>
<p>I first learned about Ngo&#8217;s screenplay through some fanboy site like Harry Knowles&#8217; AintItCool.com. Ngo&#8217;s script created something of an uproar in Hollywood despite comic book properties being at a fallow moment after Joel Schumacher&#8217;s assumption of the <em>Batman</em> franchise with &#8216;s &#8216;<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Batman_Forever" target="_blank">Batman Forever</a>&#8216; (1995) and the revolving door that the title role became after the departure of Tim Burton and Michael Keaton.</p>
<p>&#8216;Tonight&#8217; launched a bidding war and got Ngo signed by CAA, jump-starting Ngo&#8217;s <a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1378206/">screenwriting career</a> and several premium-cable writing gigs. But along the way, the script also got the attention of Writer-Producer Akiva Goldsman who bought the script and subsequently doctored it to fit his number one screen-doctoring client, Will Smith. <span id="more-140"></span></p>
<p>Out of circulation for a good while, a copy of Ngo&#8217;s original script has resurfaced <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/tag/tonight+he+comes/">here</a>, but without, apparently a final page, as the script has, a decade later, come out of the backside of Hollywood&#8217;s Assistant and Gopher Army, Xeroxed to death before the advent of scanner-copier combos.</p>
<p>Having not yet read the entirety of the script, this much is true: &#8216;Tonight&#8217; was intended as a sort of post-Tarantino, post-<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_Knight_Returns" target="_blank"><em>Dark Knight Returns</em></a> play on Superman, though the script never mentions the protagonist by that name™:Instead, Hancock is just named by the script as a generic superhero who wears a red cape and blue outfit though this goes uncapitalized in the movie.</p>
<p><em>DKR</em> (1986) and <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Watchmen" target="_blank"><em>Watchmen</em></a> (1986) of course heralded a new age of darker, grittier comic book fare that culminated in Frank Miller&#8217;s <em><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sin_City" target="_blank">Sin City</a> </em>(1992). But the other thing that re-characterizes Hancock-the-Movie from the original race-neutral (and presumably Caucasian) disposition of the screenplay is the working-class aspect of the Charlize Theron and Jason Bateman characters. In the original screenplay,  Ray Embrey (<em>née </em><a href="http://www.latinoreview.com/scriptreview.php?id=61" target="_blank">Horus Longfellow</a> ) is depicted as a Brooklyn Security Guard and his wife Mary is a housewife short on everything but but disappointment. By moving the story from Sheepshead Bay, New York to Beverly Hills script doctors Vince Gilligan and John August have eliminated whatever class and racial friction that might had remained between the Embreys and Hancock as depicted by Will Smith.</p>
<p>For the first 2/3rds of its running time, <em>Hancock</em> proceeds like one of those awful genre-parody movies that gets released every 6-8 months &#8212; it is &#8216;Sky High 2&#8242; and &#8216;Superhero Movie 0&#8242; but with A-list performers, rather than has-beens and actors you&#8217;ve never heard of before.</p>
<p>Why anyone would think that a movie about a jaded, alcoholic super-hero would qualify as &#8216;entertainment&#8217;, much less &#8216;comedy&#8217; is anyone&#8217;s guess, but it&#8217;s <strong>A WILL SMITH MOVIE</strong> and everything he touches turns to <span style="color: orange;">action-movie comedy gold</span> &#8212; <em>that&#8217;s</em> what Akiva Goldsman is there to ensure. But after the first hour of the movie&#8217;s 91 minute running-time, the spoof collides with some sort of strange ::<a title="romantic comedy">SPOILER</a>::  and never quite recovers its footing. That&#8217;s the twist; if you haven&#8217;t seen it, swipe the spoiler-text at your own peril.</p>
<p>Far from fulfilling the promise of either Frank Miller&#8217;s revisionist <em>Batman</em> or Alan Moore&#8217;s &#8216;Silver Age&#8217; <em>Watchmen</em> stumbles when the script fails to properly characterize the place of Superheroes within modern culture. For a moment, the movie seems to want to go for an <a title="Modern Language Association">MLA</a> equivalence pointing out that Hancock and his ilk may have once walked the world as gods. But that description fails when <em>Hancock</em> is considered as a proper reflection of American culture rather than one of the pan-cultural musings of someone like Joseph Campbell and his  &#8216;Hero of A Thousand Faces&#8217; mythos. Super-heroes are a product of the Industrial and Atomic age: Typically the products of science and ingenuity rather than elemental forces like Earth, Wind, Fire and Water.</p>
<p>Written in 1996, &#8216;Tonight&#8217; seems to have been a meditation on the irreconcilable worlds of superheroes and mere mortals, &#8216;Hancock&#8217; <a href="http://www.alwayswatching.org/features/truth-about-hancock">has been reduced to a mere Will Smith vehicle</a>. While the efforts of Peter Berg, Vince Gilligan and John August are to be admired for continuity, I feel that Mr. Ngo&#8217;s intentions &#8212; whatever they were &#8212;  got lost during the 3rd draft or the 2nd trip to the editing room. Six weeks before the opening, there were reports of Columbia/Sony <a href="http://www.virtualaftershock.com/?q=node/444" target="_blank">ordering Berg to reshoot portions of the story for a PG-13 rating</a>, which might explain the plot-holes and uneven nature of the final product.</p>
<p>The story is a mess, but it&#8217;s a spirited and entertaining mess.</p>
<p>I wish that someone had tried to publish it as a comic book.</p>
<p><strong>Rating:</strong> 2.5 out of 5 stars</p>
<dl>
<dt>Further reading:</dt>
<dd><strong><a href="http://www.alwayswatching.org/features/truth-about-hancock">“Hancock”, A Movie Ruined By 10 Years In Development Hell</a></strong></dd>
<dd><strong><a href="tp://obensonreport.blogspot.com/2008/07/script-review-tonight-he-comes-aka.html?ext-ref=comm-sub-email">Script Review, &#8216;Tonight, He Comes&#8217; <em>aka</em> &#8216;Hancock&#8217;</a></strong></dd>
<dd><strong>Note:</strong>&#8216;Tonight, He Comes&#8217; by Vincent Ngo is widely available via<strong> <a href="http://www.google.com/search?num=30&amp;hl=en&amp;safe=off&amp;client=googlet&amp;q=%27Tonight%2C+He+Comes%27+by+Vincent+Ngo%2C+screenplay&amp;btnG=Search&amp;aq=f&amp;aqi=&amp;aql=&amp;oq=&amp;gs_rfai=">Google</a><br />
</strong></dd>
</dl>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.cineblog.us/2008/07/hancock-2008/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>&#8216;Juno&#8217; (2007)</title>
		<link>http://www.cineblog.us/2008/02/juno-2007/</link>
		<comments>http://www.cineblog.us/2008/02/juno-2007/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 14 Feb 2008 02:02:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Anne Dougherty</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Comedy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA['Juno' (2007)]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Diablo Cody]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ellen Page]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Jason Reitman]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Jennifer Garner]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Michael Cera]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cineblog.us/2008/02/13/juno-2007/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Was this worth $10 and my 2 hours? Whenever someone tells me that a movie is just the best thing ever I nod and smile politely and ask what, specifically, justifies this characterization. When several someones, including a blitz advertising campaign and reviewer after reviewer tell me that a movie is the best thing ever [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.cineblog.us/wp-content/uploads/2008/02/Juno.2007.jpg"><img class="alignright size-full wp-image-515" title="Juno.2007" src="http://www.cineblog.us/wp-content/uploads/2008/02/Juno.2007.jpg" alt="" width="180" height="280" /></a><strong>Was this worth $10 and my 2 hours?</strong></p>
<p>Whenever someone tells me that a movie is just the best thing ever I nod and smile politely and ask what, specifically, justifies this characterization.  When several someones, including a blitz advertising campaign and reviewer after reviewer tell me that a movie is the best thing ever I start to resist.  I immediately begin to look for the infamous man behind the curtain, to wonder just how long it will be after I bite before I find that while the confection may have looked good in the pastry case inside it is nothing but air.  It&#8217;s for this reason that I waited more than a month to see &#8216;Juno.&#8217;  And while this film certainly isn&#8217;t all it has been hyped to be, neither is it to be reviled with the passion some critics have devoted to said reviling.<br />
<span id="more-105"></span><br />
Juno Macguff (Ellen Page) finds herself pregnant after a one-afternoon-stand with band mate/friend Paulie Bleeker (Michael Cera) a boy so geeky that when she reveals her pregnancy to her father Mac (J.K. Simmons) and her step-mother Bren (Allison Janney) they both agree that they didn&#8217;t think Paulie had it in him.</p>
<p>Thus begins a standard teen-pregnancy movie in which the choices faced by the main character &#8211; to have the baby or not, to keep the baby or not &#8211; are standard, afterschool special fare.  What makes &#8216;Juno&#8217; interesting is that in spite of the precious dialogue (who in their right mind would actually utter the phrase &#8220;This is one doodle that can&#8217;t be undid, Homeskillet.&#8221; ?  the answer is no one; this is a bit of dialogue so obviously crafted by someone trying to be clever it makes your teeth hurt), the purposefully retro &#8217;70s styling (please, someone tell me that harvest gold isn&#8217;t back in fashion) and the references to &#8217;70s punk music and splatter films that would likely be out of orbit for all but the most self-consciously hipster teenager (and doesn&#8217;t being self-conscious about your hipness sort of negate the ability to be hip?) there is actually a story here worth seeing.</p>
<p>It gives nothing of the plot away to say that Juno chooses to both have her baby and give it up for adoption.  As Mark and Vanessa Loring, a couple Juno finds in the Pennysaver, Jason Bateman and Jennifer Garner are saddled with possibly the most difficult task: showing character growth in the smallest breathing space.  It is through her interactions with Mark and Vanessa that Juno learns that her view of the world, while not fixed, isn&#8217;t exactly accurate.  People change, circumstances change, and people don&#8217;t always know how they&#8217;ll react when faced with a set of circumstances.</p>
<p>There is a lot to like about Juno as a character.  Ellen Page manages to pull off a portrayal of the 17 year-old girl many of us wished we could be &#8211; smart, sassy, and self-aware enough to not let anyone push us around.  Indeed, Juno&#8217;s remark to her father that she &#8220;doesn&#8217;t know what kind of girl I am&#8221; when he tells her he thought she was a girl who knew when to say when exposes both a wisdom and an innocence that it&#8217;s probably impossible to have coexist in a real person.</p>
<p>The disappointment of this film lies in the fact that it touches on several important themes, chief among them what it means to find your identity, but doesn&#8217;t explore these conflicts with any depth.  Juno&#8217;s decision not to have an abortion is based on the flimsiest of reasons, but then again, her decision to have sex with Paulie was also based on the flimsiest of reasons.  It is this coupling of major themes with facile resolutions that prevents &#8216;Juno&#8217; from being excellent.</p>
<p>Given that &#8216;Juno&#8217; gained popularity from a blitz of critical love and advertising, that there has been backlash against the film in the form of the aforementioned critical revilement, and that there is now backlash against the backlash (<a href="http://www.slate.com/id/2183937">read a history</a>), it&#8217;s likely that you&#8217;ll find &#8216;Juno&#8217; to be either a light piece of entertainment that doesn&#8217;t quite live up to the hype or you&#8217;ll find it to be something that is so hopelessly twee it makes you want to do something  mean just to balance out your soul.</p>
<p><strong>What&#8217;s good about this film?</strong></p>
<ul>
<li>Ellen Page embodying everything the self-aware, vaguely feminist teenage girl should want to be, minus the unplanned pregnancy of course.</li>
<li>Jennifer Garner&#8217;s restrained but moving performance.</li>
<li>And yeah, the fact that someone would not only put an entire living room set out on the lawn for the taking but also that it would be taken and used to recreate said living room on someone else&#8217;s lawn.</li>
</ul>
<p><strong>For fans of:</strong></p>
<ul>
<li>&#8220;That &#8217;70s show&#8221;</li>
<li>&#8216;Thank You For Smoking&#8217;</li>
</ul>
<p><strong>Rating:</strong> 2.5 out of 5 stars</p>
<p><strong>I went to film school for this.</strong></p>
<p><strong>Note: This section contains plot spoilers. Read no further if you don’t wish to have the story revealed.</strong></p>
<p>Thematically &#8216;Juno&#8217; is a bit of nightmare.  From a feminist perspective &#8216;Juno&#8217; simply wads up 40+ years of political struggle like so much used facial tissue.  Yes, &#8216;Juno&#8217; takes responsibility for her behavior, and yes, control of her body is hers and hers alone &#8211; in this respect the movie is a triumph; what she wants to do about the baby is left her and at no time does an authority figure pressure her to do anything &#8211; but her decisions are made as if the rights she takes for granted were, in fact, guaranteed to her when they really are not.</p>
<p>Too, the pseudo sub-plot, the hinting at a sexual attraction to the husband of the couple Juno has pledged to give her baby to smacks of movie-of-the-week pandering.  Obviously a &#8220;fallen girl&#8221; can&#8217;t be trusted alone with the pledged adoptive father of her child.  And it&#8217;s not that Juno is the cause of this sexual attraction, her interest in Mark Loring is purely geek-to-geek, but the way it&#8217;s played she&#8217;s somehow given the blame for it, and for his ultimate decision to leave his wife.</p>
<p>The biggest discontinuity, though, is that &#8216;Juno&#8217; is shot like a comedy &#8211; high key lighting, open spaces, heavy use of musical cues &#8211; yet its plot and themes all belong squarely in the realm of drama.  None of the reactions of the characters go along with the cultural seriousness with which American&#8217;s have come to regard unplanned pregnancy.</p>
<p>The film itself creates a sort of cognitive dissonance in the viewer with part of you enjoying some of the clever dialogue and the matter-of-factness of the characters and part of you wondering if the entire thing isn&#8217;t just one big joke to gauge your reaction for appropriateness.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.cineblog.us/2008/02/juno-2007/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>&#8216;Charlie Wilson&#8217;s War&#8217; (2007)</title>
		<link>http://www.cineblog.us/2008/02/charlie-wilsons-war-2007/</link>
		<comments>http://www.cineblog.us/2008/02/charlie-wilsons-war-2007/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 05 Feb 2008 22:22:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Victor Sparrow</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Adaptation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Biopic]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Comedy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Drama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Film]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[War]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA['Charlie Wilson's War' (2007)]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Aaron Sorkin]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Julia Robrts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Mike Nichols]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Philip Seymour Hoffman]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Yom Hanks]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cineblog.us/2008/02/05/charlie-wilsons-war-2007/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&#8216;Charlie Wilson&#8217;s War&#8217; is a tricky film to write on, because I have both a Proustian relationship with the material and a more generalized, historical appreciation for the the effort that writer Aaron Sorkin and director Mike Nichols have accomplished. The week before I saw &#8216;Charlie Wilson&#8217;, I had watched &#8216;Nineteen Eighty-Four&#8216; again, only to [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.cineblog.us/wp-content/uploads/2008/02/CharlieWilsonsWar.jpg"><img class="alignright size-full wp-image-517" title="'Charlie Wilson's War' (2007)" src="http://www.cineblog.us/wp-content/uploads/2008/02/CharlieWilsonsWar.jpg" alt="" width="184" height="273" /></a>&#8216;<a href="http://imdb.com/title/tt0472062/" target="_blank">Charlie Wilson&#8217;s War&#8217;</a> is a tricky film to write on, because I have both a Proustian relationship with the material and a more generalized, historical appreciation for the the effort that writer Aaron Sorkin and director Mike Nichols have accomplished.</p>
<p>The week before I saw &#8216;Charlie Wilson&#8217;, I had watched &#8216;<a title="'Nineteen Eighty-Four' @ IMDb.com" href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0087803/">Nineteen Eighty-Four</a>&#8216; again, only to discover what seemed to be a waterboarding  administered to Winston by O&#8217;Brien.</p>
<p>The past is prologue. <span id="more-103"></span></p>
<p>Imagine then, my synesthetic confusion when 1983&#8242;s chart-topper &#8220;Let&#8217;s Dance&#8221; came over the speakers &#8212; all of the props were in place &#8212; &#8216;Charlie Wilson&#8217; is the story of an un-person, Democratic Congressman left out of the public record even as the Republican Party has claimed proprietary ownership of Communism&#8217;s defeat. Based on the eponymously titled book by former <em>60 Minutes</em> producer George Crile, &#8216;Charlie Wilson&#8217;s War&#8217; recounts Mr. Wilson&#8217;s effort to defeat the Soviets in Afghanistan.</p>
<p>In 1984, I was also a junior in high school, choking down Orwell&#8217;s complete body of work and fair measure of dystopian British fiction &#8211; Anthony Burgess&#8217; <em>A Clockwork Orange</em>, Aldous Huxley&#8217;s <em>Brave New World</em> and a good few Philip K. Dick novels. Even as the year 1984 came and went I wondered if the world that Orwell decribed had, in fact, arrived unbeknownst to everybody alive at that moment.</p>
<p>Lo, and behold, history was re-written before our eyes as it was Ronald Reagan that took credit for ending the Cold War by outspending the Soviet military budget. What has been left out of the &#8216;official&#8217; history is Charlie Wilson&#8217;s role on the front-line of that conflict.</p>
<p>Based on the eponymous <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Crile_III#Charlie_Wilson.27s_War">George Crile book</a>, &#8216;Charlie Wilson&#8217;s War&#8217; recounts the political career of the Honorable Charles Nesbitt Wilson (1933- ), who served in the U.S. Congress for 24 years, spanning the Carter, Reagan, Bush 41 and Clinton Administrations, and served 16 of those years on the Defense Appropriations Subcommittee, earmarking funds for the CIA&#8217;s &#8216;black bag operations throughout Central America and the Middle East.</p>
<p>No stranger to fast-living, liquor and controvery, Wilson apparently had an epiphany while sitting in a Vegas hot-tub with a pair of showgirls. A consummate public servant, Wilson was distracted from his hot-tub by a <em>60 Minutes </em>segment , where Dan Rather reported on Russian incursions into Afghanistan. As a fervent anti-Communist,<span class="Apple-converted-space"> and a member of the Defense Appropriations Subcommittee, Wilson saw a funding opportunity in the Afghani Mujahideen.</span></p>
<p>&lt;iframe src=&#8221;http://rcm.amazon.com/e/cm?t=cineblogus-20&amp;o=1&amp;p=8&amp;l=as1&amp;asins=0802141242&amp;fc1=000000&amp;IS2=1&amp;lt1=_blank&amp;lc1=0000FF&amp;bc1=FFFFFF&amp;bg1=FFFFFF&amp;f=ifr&#8221; style=&#8221;width:120px;height:240px;&#8221; scrolling=&#8221;no&#8221; marginwidth=&#8221;0&#8243; marginheight=&#8221;0&#8243; frameborder=&#8221;0&#8243; align=&#8221;right&#8221;&gt;&lt;/iframe&gt;Of course, the Mujahideen were absorbed by the forces of light, once Ronald Reagan heard of them, but by that time <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Wilson_%28Texas_politician%29" target="_blank">Wilson</a> (played by Tom Hanks) and his CIA attaché, <span class="s2"><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gust_Avrakotos" target="_blank">Gust Avrokotos</a> (Philip Seymour Hoffman) increased foreign appropriations for the Afghani &#8216;freedom fighters&#8217; from $5 million to $750 million a year during the &#8217;80&#8242;s. Through Wilson and the efforts of his sometime-mistress, Texas Socialite <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joanne_Herring">Joanne Herring </a>(Julia Roberts), the US funneled weapons to Afghanistan, creating a Vietnam-like quagmire for the Soviets on the other side of the Black Sea. The billions of dollars that the Russians sank into Afghanistan invariably helped collapse of the Berlin Wall and the end of the Cold War in 1989.</span></p>
<p>Politics aside, there is actual entertainment to be found in &#8216;Charlie Wilson&#8217;s War&#8217;. Rather that take the easy route and lampoon the <em>New World Order</em> pontifications of the Republican Administrations that Wilson served, Sorkin uses the opportunity to make art. Between the progress of the Mujahideen and Wilson&#8217;s back-room deals, Sorkin and Nichols have fashioned an old-fashioned <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frank_Capra" target="_blank">Capra</a>-esque movie.</p>
<p>Hanks&#8217; Wilson is a fairly serviceable imitation of <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0031679/">Jimmy Stewart</a> , while Roberts seems to channel Barbara Stanwyck in either &#8216;<a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0046963/">Executive Suite</a>&#8216; or &#8216;<a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0033891/">Meet John Doe</a>&#8216;. And just to make sure you know what kind of movie you&#8217;re watching, Sorkin and Nichols have peppered their film with numerous door gags, rapid-fire dialogue and a few trademark Sorkin walk-and-talks.</p>
<p>The productive ingredients here are Hanks&#8217; and Roberts&#8217; willingness to play character roles, rather than the soppy, Libtard heroism stuff that they&#8217;ve become accustomed to.</p>
<p>This one gets five stars for the willingness to tell a relevant story and the effort they&#8217;ve taken to tell it as an old-fashioned Hollywood yarn. Usually such efforts make me suspicious, but in Sorkin&#8217;s hands it&#8217;s a<span class="Apple-converted-space"> marvelous<span class="Apple-converted-space"> piece of restraint.</span></span></p>
<p>It&#8217;s not always the guy on the white horse that&#8217;s the hero &#8212; sometimes it&#8217;s just the paper-pusher who makes the funds available for the revolution.</p>
<p>Unfortunately, Universal chose to dump &#8216;Charlie Wilson&#8217; into release four days before Christmas, denying it the attention of the broadest possible audience. But it *is* on the Oscar, Bafta and Golden Globe short-lists and remains in theaters 6 weeks after it opened. Try to see it while it&#8217;s still in theaters!</p>
<p><strong>Rating:</strong> 5 out of 5 stars</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.cineblog.us/2008/02/charlie-wilsons-war-2007/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>&#8220;Dirty Sexy Money&#8221; (2007)</title>
		<link>http://www.cineblog.us/2007/01/dirty-sexy-money-2007/</link>
		<comments>http://www.cineblog.us/2007/01/dirty-sexy-money-2007/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 07 Jan 2007 22:01:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Victor Sparrow</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Comedy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Drama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Television]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cineblog.us/2007/01/07/dirty-sexy-money-2007/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ABC&#8217;s &#8216;Dirty Sexy Money&#8216; is &#8216;The Royal Tenenbaums&#8216; meets &#8216;Six Feet Under&#8216; by way of &#8216;Californication&#8216;, but with a cast 2x as large as any of its predecessors. Money is a bright, new turn for Peter Krause, who was about to be eclipsed by his former co-star, Michael C. Hal and his triumph in Showtime&#8217;s [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.cineblog.us/wp-content/uploads/2007/01/Dirty_Sexy_Money.jpg"><img class="alignright size-full wp-image-525" title="Dirty_Sexy_Money" src="http://www.cineblog.us/wp-content/uploads/2007/01/Dirty_Sexy_Money.jpg" alt="" width="255" height="139" /></a>ABC&#8217;s &#8216;<a href="http://abc.go.com/primetime/dirtysexymoney/index">Dirty Sexy Money</a>&#8216; is &#8216;<a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0265666/%22%22">The Royal Tenenbaums</a>&#8216; meets &#8216;<a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0248654/">Six Feet Under</a>&#8216; by way of &#8216;<a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0904208/">Californication</a>&#8216;, but with a cast 2x as large as any of its predecessors.</p>
<p><em>Money</em> is a bright, new turn for Peter Krause, who was about to be eclipsed by his former co-star, Michael C. Hal and his triumph in Showtime&#8217;s &#8216;Dexter&#8217;. <em>Money</em> is the kind of comedy that wouldn&#8217;t have made it to network television as little as 4 years ago –there are &#8216;too many&#8217; characters, the show is &#8216;too high concept&#8217; and and the only audience it could entertain is the well-educated and firmly middle- to upper-class people familiar with the idea of middle-aged trust fund babies.<span id="more-73"></span></p>
<p><em>Money</em> has all of the tack of a late &#8217;90&#8242;s made-for-cable show, specifically, Showtime&#8217;s &#8216;<a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0199356">Beggars and Choosers</a>&#8216;. In this case the object of criticism is not network television executives, but a too-wealthy family living on Manhattan&#8217;s Upper East Side, somewhere near 5th Ave. below 79th but above 54th</p>
<p>Donald Sutherland stars as the patriarch of the fabulously wealthy Darling clan, Jill Clayburgh is the matriarch, Letitia, while  William Baldwin, Natalie Zea, Glenn Fitzgerald, Seth Gabel and Samaire Armstrong play the 5 adult Darling chilren, pursuing a variety of &#8216;careers&#8217; subsidized by the Darling Pére.</p>
<p>Baldwin plays the oldest son, a &#8216;happily&#8217; married political up-and-comer who&#8217;s got a transgender lover on the side; Armstrong plays the talentless, would-be actress; Fitzgerald is the priest with an out-of-wedlock child; Zea is the roundheels serial-matrimonist while Sabel and Armstrong are the fraternal Peter Pan twins, bleeding Manhattan for the delights of its youth culture.</p>
<p>With all of these plumb roles taken, Krause plays the family attorney,Nick George, a role he&#8217;s inherited from his recently departed father, who lost his family to the Darlings, who are incapable of paying a parking ticket without the assistance of a retainered attorney.</p>
<p>Despite the many delights in the first two episodes, the writers laid it on a bit too thick with an added subplot – the mystery of his father&#8217;s death.  The show could have done fine as a character study for it&#8217;s first year without this arc, but I suppose the programmers wanted to throw the show into high-relief for maximum audience retention. Should the show survive until next year, the father&#8217;s will be one less issue for them to explore.</p>
<p><strong>Rating:</strong> 4 out of 5 stars</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.cineblog.us/2007/01/dirty-sexy-money-2007/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>&#8220;Hustle&#8221; (2004)</title>
		<link>http://www.cineblog.us/2006/01/hustle-2004/</link>
		<comments>http://www.cineblog.us/2006/01/hustle-2004/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 18 Jan 2006 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Victor Sparrow</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Action]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Comedy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Crime]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Television]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Thriller]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA["Hustle" (2004)]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Adrian Lester]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[AMC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[BBC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Jaime Murray]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Marc Warren]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Robert Vaughn]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tony Jordan]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cineblog.us/2006/01/18/hustle-2004/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The best new show of 2006 is on AMC. &#8220;WTF?!&#8221;, you say? AMC, the home of endless Charles Bronson repeats and forgettable PG-13 80&#8242;s crap? Yes, THAT AMC. Hustle stars Adrian Lester (&#8216;Primary Colors&#8216;), Robert Vaughn (&#8216;The Man from U.N.C.L.E.&#8217;) and Marc Warren (&#8216;The Vice&#8217;) in a hip, new British caper-show that resembles &#8216;Mission Impossible&#8217; [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.cineblog.us/wp-content/uploads/2006/01/Hustle.jpg"><img class="alignright size-full wp-image-534" title="Hustle" src="http://www.cineblog.us/wp-content/uploads/2006/01/Hustle.jpg" alt="" width="187" height="269" /></a>The best new show of 2006 is on AMC.</p>
<p>&#8220;WTF?!&#8221;, you say? AMC, the home of endless Charles Bronson repeats and forgettable PG-13 80&#8242;s crap?</p>
<p>Yes, THAT AMC.</p>
<p><em><a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0379632/">Hustle</a></em> stars Adrian Lester (&#8216;<a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0119942/">Primary Colors</a>&#8216;), Robert Vaughn (&#8216;<a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0057765/">The Man from U.N.C.L.E.&#8217;</a>) and Marc Warren (&#8216;The Vice&#8217;) in a hip, new British caper-show that resembles &#8216;Mission Impossible&#8217; by way of &#8216;The Avengers&#8217;. In this case though, the protagonists are con-men.</p>
<p>Lester is the ringleader, while Warren and Vaughn provide support and newcomer <a title="Jaime Murray @ IMDb.coom" href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1444665/" target="_blank">Jaime Murray</a> provides distraction as resident <em>femme fatale</em> Stacie Monroe.</p>
<p>In many ways <em>Hustle</em> is a throwback to those stealthy <em>policiers</em> of yesteryear, when we&#8217;d dally with Mrs. Peel and John Steed as roguish British agents. But unlike the craptacular tv-show remakes of the late &#8217;90&#8242;s, <em>Hustle</em> is all about the writing. <span id="more-91"></span></p>
<p><em><a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0379632/">Hustle</a></em> is a BBC show brought to us from KUDOS Entertainment, the same people responsible for A&amp;E&#8217;s catch-it-when-you-can spy drama &#8216;<a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0160904/">Spooks</a>&#8216; (known here as &#8216;MI-5&#8242;).</p>
<p>As Albany&#8217;s <a href="http://timesunion.com/AspStories/story.asp?storyID=439652&amp;category=LIFE&amp;BCCode=&amp;newsdate=1/14/2006">Times-Union</a> says, &#8220;Viewers will probably think they&#8217;re watching PBS, A&amp;E, BBC America or even Bravo. This hip British series is not American, it&#8217;s yet to be a classic and it&#8217;s definitely not a movie. AMC has lost its way. Will its audience follow?&#8221;. One would hope. As a recovering BBC Americaholic and a &#8216;Mystery!&#8217; enthusiast, I can only hope.</p>
<p>Last week&#8217;s 2-hour premiere repeats this Friday, 01/20 at 7pm and episodes 1 and 2 repeat at some unholy hour (~1am) between now and Friday. Given the current state of American television, you&#8217;ll thank me, later, for the sleep that you lost.</p>
<p>Check it out!</p>
<p>(clips available @ Hustle&#8217;s BBC <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/drama/hustle/">web page</a> &#8211; see &#8216;Episodes&#8217;.)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.cineblog.us/2006/01/hustle-2004/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
