Zodiac

This like many movies was on my Netflix list for a long time. I kept seeing preview snapshots from the film and saying, I need a time to watch this movie with my complete attention.

Well if luck would have it, I got sick this weekend and didn't really have much to do besides watch Netflix. And since I seem to be on a serial killer flix spree with shows like The Following and Dexter. I thought this would fit that bill perfectly.

I suppose a little bit of background is needed for this review as it is a historical drama. The Zodiac killer was a serial killer who was mostly known for the cryptic messages he sent to local California newspapers giving cryptic clues in a strange attempt to see who could discover who he was.

The messages were posted for about a year as the killings continued. After a couple years, the Zodiac killer was just forgotten as the papers no longer published his messages and to this day, the case still remains an open case.

Now, in 2014, the case is about 46 years old. I'm just going to go on a hunch that it will never be solved.

Now I'm going to feel old saying this but this movie came out 7 years ago in 2007. But even then the case had been open for a while and I don't think anybody thought it would magically be solved any time soon.

But this movie isn't so much about the case being solved, though it does have its own theories about who the Zodiac killer is, its more about the men who were key actors in the case and how it affected their daily lives.

The movie mainly focuses on the people working at the San Francisco Chronicle. These characters are Robert Graysmith (played by Jake Gyllenhaal) and Paul Avery (played by Robert Downey Jr., a year before he became Iron Man)

Gyllenhaal really takes a backseat to Downey in the first half of this movie as Paul Avery becomes main decoder as it were of the Zodiac codes. But the two pair up and work to uncover clues around this case.

Its not really until almost a half hour in that we're introduced to our third main character. Inspector David Toschi who is put on the Zodiac killer case. And he stays there... for a LONG time.

Mark Ruffalo plays the Inspector and you can see the strain this case has on him throughout the movie, especially as the years start to stack up and there is still no sign of finding out who this killer is.

This happens with all three of these characters. Gyllenhaal doesn't really get into the investigating until the last act of the movie and by that point, Downey and Ruffalos characters are already burnt out. Paul Avery had a letter sent straight to him and carried a gun with him for the rest of his life because he believed his life was at risk from this killer. And Toschi is so burnt out on this case that it ruins his life. By the time Gyllenhaal starts doing a lot of investigating, the trial is very cold, and Toschi is not the only one telling Robert Graysmith that it's time for him to let it go.

So the movie goes from 1968 to 1983 in a span of three hours, chronicling the different murders that can be confirmed as Zodiac murders and those he just claimed to have committed. But the movie goes on past the point where the Zodiac is big news. By the end, the Zodiac killer is just an urban myth, an unsolved crime. But the impressive part about the movie is that you see how it wears down the different characters.

Personally, my favorite parts of the movie were the parts where you actually saw the murders occur. Not only that but you saw the police work and investigation going into responding to these crimes, as well as the response the chronicle has to it.

However, as time goes by, the Chronicle stops publishing codes, the police lose the trail and the movie slows down. A LOT.

And for a nearly three hour movie, it was hard not to have the movie kind of in the background. Now that's not the best idea because it is a complex movie and if you're not paying attention, you may miss some twist and turn of the investigation. But in the end, there's a couple scenes that you could probably forego and it wouldn't take that much out of the movie, in fact it would make it a shorter movie, which, if you can do a movie just as good in a shorter time, why not do it?

But what about different performances in the movie?

I think the most notable is that of Robert Downey Jr. He of course is playing the typical cocky, but incredible talent of the group and he knows it. Its kind of hard watching movies with Downey that isn't Iron Man because I had the misfortune (or fortune?) of never really seeing his work during his drug use years and this is probably the earliest work I've seen him in.

I kind of had the same problem with Mark Ruffalo in Now You See Me... for the first five minutes. But in this movie I had problems the entire time. Now that isn't really fair because I know this movie came out first but its just kind of funny. I will definitely have to look into other Downey movies because he's a tremendous actor and while Iron Man is a great role, I think he's bigger than that role. Especially since I've seen him in Sherlock Holmes as well.

Speaking of Ruffalo, he was good. I won't say he stole the show because he didn't. As I've stated before, the theme throughout the movie is how this case ruins the life for all three. And while I saw the ways his life was being ruined, I never really got to see Ruffalo react. And even at the end when there's a sense of closure, its very brief and not really fulfilling for me.

And Gyllenhaal its kind of the same.

I mean you can see Gyllenhaal make this an obsession and there's actually a point where his wife straight up asks him, where does it stop? Does it stop when you arrest this guy?

And he doesn't really give a straight answer. And I think that was pretty cool. With Ruffalo its more of an internal thing and Gyllenhaal you can definitely see the struggle.

But that's the part of the movie that I'm kind of ehh about. When I first heard about this movie, I thought it was going to be a little bit more about the actual clues and investigation, trying to uncover the truth about this mystery that had been going on for years.

Instead it was a drama mostly about the people involved, and while the final product was pretty good, it was just kind of slow. I think I was expecting a little bit more of a psychological thriller and what I got was alright.

The fact of the matter is, the Zodiac killer isn't that fascinating.

I think Hollywood and urban myths overdramatizes, not only the Zodiac killer and a lot of serial killers. But unfortunately, this movie really kind of made the Zodiac killer seem very insignificant. Halfway through the movie, I kind of just said, this is just a sad depraved mind that wants attention, not really a brilliantly evil personality. And I think we get too much of that with characters like Dexter, Patrick Bateman, and Joe Carroll. The fact of the matter is, those serial killers are few and far between. The other ones dress up in silly costumes like the one to my left.

I think in the past I may have thought this looked cryptic or creepy but when I saw it in the film, it just looked kind of stupid.

Now I don't want to belittle the innocent lives taken by this killer but in the end, the impact really doesn't feel that big in this movie. In reality, they can only confirm the Zodiac killer killed 3 or 4 people and in the big picture, even if they caught the killer in the movie, I don't know if I would have felt really satisfied.

But since this is a historical drama, they couldn't add that in there so the movie just kind of ends. They find a person they believe is the killer but nobody really gets caught. There's just a little bit of closure for Ruffalo and Gyllenhaal and the movie closes out with historical facts how any movie claiming to be based on true events ends.

 So in the end, Zodiac is really a mediocre film in my opinion. I think the performances are very well done but in the end, its not really memorable.

I think I went into this movie thinking that Zodiac was nominated for an Oscar in something. Now Oscar nominations doesn't always necessary to be good but for all the hype this movie had I think it was overhyped. It wasn't really a movie I plan on watching again. Not really worth recommending and kind of forgettable.

Now that's just my opinion, have you seen Zodiac? What did you think? Comment below and discuss.

I'll leave you with this. So apparently Robert Downey Jr. can sing. Who knew? Enjoy.

Pilot: The Following

You've probably read my sentiment on primetime television. I've been a little spoiled with shows like Breaking Bad, Game of Thrones, and (while I don't really love it, I'll include it) Dexter, that dramas that come out on major networks like FOX just seem generic and trying to be more than they actually are.

Before I get too hipster on you, I think there are the exceptions. 24, Lost, Prison Break, the first season of Heroes. Granted all these shows came out in the early 2000s but I do still believe that prime time television has the ability to make good television.

This show is a glimmer of hope for that sentiment.

So The Following follows the story of Kevin Bacon's character, Ryan Hardy. Ryan is a former FBI agent who devoted his career to bringing down a serial killer by the name of Joe Carroll. Carroll made his trade by killing college women and drew a lot of his inspiration from the work of Edgar Allen Poe.

At the very beginning, Carroll escapes prison and Kevin Bacon is brought in. I know the character has a name but I'm just going to call him Kevin Bacon.

Its funny because he was the main reason this show got so much hype. The small screen is slowly becoming a place for big movie actors to develop their characters more and really hone their acting ability... at least that's what I read somewhere in a piece about Matthew Mcconaughey and Woody Harrelson in True Detective.

Unfortunately, with Bacon, he just seems bored. He's suppose to be playing this alcoholic former FBI agent. And while I'll give him some credit that you see how attached he is to this case, he basically has the same expression on his face and just looks like he's waiting around for the paycheck at the end of the show.

The pilot is mainly the manhunt for Carroll. As the episode develops, it is discovered that Carroll has gained a following or cult from prison and has a bunch of people who for one reason or another will do anything for him and, in some cases, are willing to die for him.

And that brings up a little bit of a problem, at least for the pilot.

James Purefoy plays this serial killer who gains this Charles Manson-like cult. But all these people are placed very conveniently in these specific places in order to follow through with Carroll's agenda. And I'm guessing that'll be a recurring twist in the show, characters, reoccurring and new will suddenly appear as cult members.

As cool as it sounds... I just don't buy it.

For example, Carroll solicits the help of the prison guard who spent the most time with him to help him escape and in return he would teach him to be a serial killer. But what would have happened if that guy wasn't imbalanced like that? That would kind of throw a wrench in his plan wouldn't it? But its through that guy that he's able to go on the internet and gain more members to his cult. Pretty convenient isn't it?

And then we get to the performance of James Purefoy. While he kind of looks like the poor man's Hugh Jackman, Purefoy actually does a pretty good job for the little time that he is onscreen in the pilot. He pulls of the batshit crazy, the kind you can't reason with at all, you just have to outsmart and he really does become the antithesis of Bacon which is the most important part of creating a setup like this. The ending is really the moment that made me think, maybe I should keep watching, see where they go with this.

The call to action really comes at the end when Carroll says, everything has been orchestrated so him and Bacon will go on manhunts for serial killers for the entire show. Its just that classic scene with the chaotic evil guy and the neutral good guy sitting down on opposite ends of the interrogation table and making a deal for how the rest of the season is going to go.

It reminded me of the scene from The Dark Knight where Batman and the Joker are finally face to face.

Is it generic? Yes. A lot of this show is. The whole scene where they bring Kevin Bacon out of retirement is the most stereotypical worn out cop coming out of retirement scene in the book. The other cops in the show are the most generic cops in the world, I don't even know their names. Chances are one of them will turn out to be a cult member or die and the other will get replaced. So I don't really care about those guys. And you shouldn't either, because the main focus is the chemistry between Bacon and Purefoy.

Is it the best pilot I've seen? Not at all. But its intriguing.

If you were wondering what I was saying when I said neutral good and chaotic evil, this is what I was talking about.

Its a great, fun little chart that categorizes characters of popular culture. I think the fun thing about this chart is considering the possibilities that could happen with each of them and their interactions with each other. And that's exactly what happens in The Following.

Is it a perfect pilot? No. Will I continue watching it? I'm not quite sure. I think they have a little bit of a broad definition of the psychology behind a serial killer. Again, while they're not my favorite, Dexter and American Psycho do a really good job at representing serial killers. I think I would love to see Kevin Bacon go toe to toe with Dexter. But we get a british guy, which is okay I guess.

So that's my thoughts on The Following. A decent enough pilot that got me intrigued.

Have you seen The Following? What do you think? What's your recommendation?

I'll leave you with this. Here's Kevin Bacon on Conan talking about this beginnings in Footloose, apparently the head of the studio didn't want him on the movie because he wasn't fuckable. Check it out.

Top 10 of January

This may be kind of strange, as we are almost half way through February, but I haven't really had time to sit down and actually blog in a week or so. I was originally going to take all the TV and movies that I watched over the course of January and rank them.

And while I have seen a couple movies since February started, the school year is back on track and its going to be hard to sit down and watch movies till I get into a flow of things. So I decided to at least give the loyal readers (if you exist) my top ten movies of January, just to give you an overview of what I did over my January instead of other more important things.

So lets start off the countdown at number 10.

10. Now You See Me

It seems like a long time since I've seen this movie when really it was only a few weeks ago. This movie is just fun. Its a great cast in a movie about Magicians. Basically any movie that you've heard of about magicians, (I think) has to be at least a fun watch or otherwise you probably haven't heard of it. Its got a lot of twists and turns and while the plot may be a little too complex for it to be believable, its still a lot of fun. The ending isn't my favorite, but I didn't see it coming. I wasn't wild about Jesse Eisenberg in it but Isla Fisher makes up for that totally. Now You See Me is definitely worth at least a rental and will no doubt give you a fun watch.

9. Love Actually

I never thought I'd put one of these thousand people cast movies on a top ten list, but Love Actually does it right. Is it a cheesy rom com at some times? Yes of course it is. But I think those kinda silly and sometimes stupid moments can be overlooked by the actually legitimate stories and struggles of some of these characters.

That and the cast is phenomenal. Liam Neeson, Hugh Grant, Emma Thompson, Colin Firth, Laura Linney, Alan Rickman. The list goes on and I don't really think anybody was awful in this movie.

The movie made me crack up a lot and gave me a fantastic movie to watch with my girlfriend.

The movie does get bogged down with the billion characters and some of the stories that didn't really need to be in there or weren't developed enough. But again, a lot of that can be forgiven with the writing and characters. I think its definitely one of my favorite, if not my top, romantic comedy.

8. Fargo

I think the more I think about this movie, the more I really do like it. I'm still not incredibly wild about the main character but in the analysis' I've read about this movie, I understand why the Coen Brothers went the direction they went with Marge.

Putting that aside, the dialogue and characters in this movie are a great combination with the story just in general. Its a great crime drama with a lot of dark humor and some great moments. Steve Buscemi is great in it and so are a lot of the other characters.

The only huge problem I have with this movie is the accents. And its something that puts the movie apart. It may just be a personal annoyance I have with that accent, but I wouldn't say it totally takes away from the how good of a movie Fargo really is. Definitely check it out. Its great.

7. Jack Reacher

I didn't really think I was going to like this movie. I was kind of worn out of Tom Cruise and didn't think he could pull off the action hero anymore. Man I was wrong. While the story isn't really the most original or incredibly creative, the charisma and performance of Tom Cruise really makes this movie just fun and a great action, crime thriller.

It feels a little weird putting this before Fargo but not only did this movie not have that stupid mid western accent, it also reignited my faith in Tom Cruise. The movie just had a fun vibe to it, kind of like an old 80's crime thriller. The plot wasn't a big conspiracy or over the top, it was just fun and kind of simple. Sure it has its problems, like what the hell Robert Duvall? But it was good and definitely worth a watch, if not worth buying.

6. Flight

I love Denzil Washington, I love Robert Zemeckis, and I love the movie Flight.

Flight is a story about a pilot who is an alcoholic. One of the planes he flies crashes and the rest is him dealing with the legal repercussions of the crash and his alcoholism. It gives (in my opinion) one of the best representations of alcoholism I've seen in a long time.

Denzil brings the same awesome performance he always does and the movie really is a great drama. Like I said in my review, I have mixed feelings about the ending but I think it really did tie up the movie really well. Overall, its a great film. Now one of my favorites.

5. Batman Begins

I think this made my top 10 for two reasons. The first, its a great film. It was a great reintroduction to Batman and really made DC comics come back into the light and begin to start making better movies. (I'm not saying they're 100% up and running but its a start)

But not only that, it gave us a different look at comic book movies. Yes we can do them how they've been done for the past 20 or so years but at the same time, they can be grounded. Seen from a different angle, and that's exactly what Batman Begins did. It created a universe where Batman could (with some slight embellishments) could exist.

And that kind of brings me to my next reason. Its good to look at the past and see what works for this movie and what could work for the future. I love speculating. I love wondering what Ben Affleck's Batman is going to be like when that movie finally comes out and I want it to be good. I think this movie got into my top 10 list because it got me thinking about what worked for this movie and what Zack Snyder could learn from to make Ben Affleck prove me and a lot of people wrong about him. Granted this is all speculation but I put this movie here because, not only is it a spectacular movie, its given me something new to look at and think about.

4. 12 Years a Slave

We're getting into my top 4 movies of the month and really, these are movies that made the month fun. I think all the movies I watched have affected me as a movie viewer but I think we're getting into movies that may take a rank as some of my favorite movies of all time. So while fourth place may seem odd for a movie that could very well win Best Picture, its still a phenomenal movie.

12 years a slave is just gritty and real. It shows the South and slavery as it probably actually. People viewed black people as property. It just shows the terror and atrocities of slavery and just leaves you feeling like absolute shit because of what you just watched. I think Django Unchained had elements of that but that movie had the opportunity to kind of make it better with humor and satirize it with the dark humor.

12 Years a Slave is no satire. I called it, The Schindler's List of American slavery (a term I picked up from someone else) and it really is. Its hard to watch and you just feel depressed at the end of it. It does have a great ending and I think I will eventually see it again, but I think that's why I put it as number 4. I recognize, its a phenomenal movie. But, like Schindler's List, I don't really feel the need to watch it again unless someone asks me to. Its not really a bad thing. Schindler's List is a fantastic movie and maybe the fact that I only need to see that movie and this movie once says something about its impact.

3. Cloud Atlas

The first time I saw this movie, I had kind of mixed feelings about it. I felt it was really long and overly complicated. However, there's something about it that keeps bringing me back.

Is it a flawless movie? Absolutely not. But it is a movie that keeps me thinking. Its kind of like Lord of the Rings in that I need to be in the mood to sit down and just enjoy this movie. This probably means I won't watch that often but when I do I really enjoy it more and more every time I see it.

Besides that, the acting is really great. The movie takes a lot of risks with reusing characters in different periods of time and I think I enjoy that element of the movie a lot even though sometimes it looks silly.

It kind of reminds me of Doctor Who if it was put in a movie form. It makes me think and I begin to really enjoy the characters and I can really overlook the flaws the movie has.

I don't think this rank really reflects the review I gave the movie but it really is a complex and interesting movie. Worth checking out and bending your mind for a little bit.

2. The Desolation of Smaug

Now I may be a little bias as The Hobbit was, and is, one of my favorite books of all time. I've said it before and I'll say it again, The Hobbit and Lord of the Rings was to me what Harry Potter was to a lot of people my age. Just a clear icon of nostalgia that a film adaptation was something that I would love immediately if they did it right.

And they did.

Now its hard because The Desolation of Smaug is adapting the middle of a 300 page book and that kind of means the movie doesn't have a definitive beginning or end. Its just the middle of the book. It's also only adapting about 100 pages of that 300 page book. So the movie needs to have some additions onto it.

And they did that too.

It took me a while to get into this movie because I kept on thinking, "That's not in the book" "Neither is that" and while some of that got to me. I do realize that a lot of the additions are really good. I wasn't wild about Evangeline Lily's character but Gandalf fighting the Necromancer was awesome. I hated that they split up the dwarves but I loved expanding on the character of Bard. Even Legolas, the part I was sure was just a way to give Orlando Bloom another chance at a career, didn't bother me. It made sense and it was thought out. Every choice, whether it was in the book or not was considered carefully and most choices worked. Even the ones that didn't were minor enough that it didn't ruin the movie for me.

And by god. Smaug was wonderfully brilliant. I think the movie did what it could and while it wasn't as tear jerking for me as An Unexpected Journey was, it was still a great adaptation of 100 pages.

1. American Hustle

Now you may be saying, I guess this means Connor wants American Hustle to win Best Picture. And while I wouldn't mind that, at this point. That's not what this means.

The fact of the matter is that this movie is really damn entertaining. Its amazing that the plot of this movie is not a plot that you would think would win or is nominated to win an Oscar. And yet, the main focus is actually on individual performances. Everyone brings it in this movie and with those performances, it just comes together to make this really fun and really well made movie. Bale is awesome, Adams is amazing. Cooper is brilliant, Lawrence is awesome. I just don't really know what it is about this movie but I immediately put it on the top of this list.

Its unexpected, its fun, its sexy, its just an all around good time. I will be buying this cause its just a movie I want in my collection.

So that's my top ten. What do you think? Do you agree? Let me know, comment and discuss below.

Mitt

When I saw that there was a documentary about Mitt Romney and his campaign for President of the United States both in 2008 and in 2012, I just had to ask myself... why?

I'll be honest, I voted for Mitt Romney. I could go into the whole perception I had of the 2012 election and how I really wasn't satisfied with either candidate. There's a lot I could talk about but that's getting a little more political than I want, and really more political than this movie was.

The purpose of this movie was to "pull back the curtain" show Mitt Romney as a human being and give him a real touching image as opposed to the stone cold, Republican, big business, 47% hating, as John Oliver once said, "The man who just fired your dad" image he often had during the campaign.

And I'll give the movie its credit.

The movie does show a side of Mitt Romney I don't think a lot of people got to see or chose not to see.

There is a sense of the importance of family to him and there is a humorous side that Ann Romney insisted that he had during the election but never really came out.

I also think there's a lot of things that portray Romney as an incredibly intelligent, honest, and down to earth guy in this movie. And there's a lot of pressure that gets him down.

But unfortunately, I didn't really feel as though the entire movie was 100% honest about some of the glaring issues with Mitt Romney as a candidate. You can tell the guy, Greg Whiteley really likes the Romney's and decides to put in what makes them look good. Also, I read he only had access to the family, not the campaign meetings or planning. So that's what he put in. And I think for the purposes of this film, the film accomplishes what it was meant to accomplish.

The movie is very one sided and therefore puts Romney in a much better light than any other documentary might. But it does give kind of a personal touch to a guy who actually got a lot of shit during the 2012 election and that's fair.

There's a great documentary that was made by PBS called Taking on the Kennedys. It followed the campaign of a relatively unknown doctor by the name of Kevin Vigilante who ran against Patrick Kennedy in the Congressional election of 1994. That documentary was more focused on the Vigilante's campaign strategy and how name recognition and campaigns fund play an intricate role in the results of an election.

And these documentaries are very similar because they're the story of the losers. You know from the beginning that both these candidates lose.

I think what Taking on the Kennedys did right was that they really didn't portray the Kennedy family in a great light. In that documentary, it was kind of hard to see Kevin Vigilante as anything but the obvious choice for Congress, and yet Patrick Kennedy won.

With Mitt, I feel they were trying to just give Mitt Romney a human side. Give him some kind of relatable situations that more poses it as a pity party. Taking on the Kennedys is pointing at a flaw in our election process and the attention span of voters. Mitt is just giving a look into the failures of a Presidential candidate. And when it comes to a close, you just have to ask yourself, so what?

Why did I just sit there for an hour and a half watching a movie that I know is not a happy ending for the main characters? Am I suppose to say, its sad because he should have won? I would hope Republicans wouldn't even say that. Unless Barrack Obama drops a nuke on Alabama for opposing Health care or something comes up that we can definitely say, that wouldn't have happened if Mitt had been President, I just don't know what I was suppose to get out of this movie.

Like I said before, I voted for Romney. I knew he wasn't just a Republican robot, I knew he probably had a human side to him, I knew he loved his family, I knew he had times where he was vulnerable and I really liked those scenes in this movie.

But again I ask, what's the point?

If you're telling me Romney should have been President because he was a nice guy, you haven't shown me anything saying Barrack Obama isn't a nice guy.

So I'm kind just kind of bummed out by Mitt. They make a bunch of jokes about how the people who lose Presidential races are just mocked as losers for the rest of their lives. And unfortunately, that's kind of the case with Mitt Romney. At least a year later, yeah people just kind of see him as a joke. Its sad.

I think this documentary would have been better had it given the audience a little bit more than and they lived happily ever after even though they lost. If this was to make Romney seem like this great guy, they should have held off, waited until he did something great despite losing the election. That would have been a great story, and it would have given the subject of the documentary a little more dignity.

So Mitt is an interesting watch. Probably not the greatest documentary you've ever seen but if you just wanted to see Mitt Romney interact with his family, and watch a film telling us how great he is, then this is the movie for you. For me, I want the guy I voted for to get a little bit more credit than this mope fest.

So that's my review of Mitt. Have you seen this documentary? If you have comment below and discuss.

I'll leave you with this. I need something to pick me up so here's Mitt Romney and Barrack Obama rapping.

Flight

I don't know if I've ever seen a Denzil Washington movie I didn't like.

He's kind of like Tom Hanks in that he has distinguished himself as an actor and he's able to choose the movies he does. Not only that but he's able to do big movies that are really good. It almost seems like his characters are very similar but at the same time incredibly different. And even if he does the same performance for different characters, he just too damn entertaining for me to care.

Denzil Washington plays Whip Whitaker, a commercial jet pilot. As the movie begins, he wakes up with a hooker, takes a snort of coke and then goes to fly a plane.

From the very beginning, Washington just gives off the vibe that he's a great pilot. He doesn't even need to fly the plane but he just has a confidence and an air about him that just bodes confidence. At the same time he gives off the air of cockiness and a devil may care attitude.

I won't describe the entire first scene of the movie but in short, the plane begins a nose dive and  is crashing. Even in the chaos, when everyone is freaking out, Whip is calm and collected the entire time. He brings the plane down and only 6 people die because of the crash. That is the first fifteen minutes of the movie. The rest of the movie is Whip dealing with the following investigation and it is discovered that not only did he snort cocaine before the flight but he was still drunk with a BAC of .24.

Washington gives just a brilliant performance of a man who is a straight up alcoholic. I cannot believe all the circumstances he's in where he's got a beer, in his hand, where he's drinking alcohol out of a water bottle. There's a scene where he buys a huge bottle of vodka and just chugs it in his car right outside the liquor store.

In the hospital after the crash, Washington meets a woman who is recovering from a heroin overdose. She is played by Kelly Reilly. I liked her character but I don't know if she was completely necessary for the plot. Her main point is to show how Whip will go to great lengths to lie about his alcoholism but so do a lot of characters in this film so I don't really know if she was necessary. She did an alright job in the scenes she was in but for the most part, this was Denzil Washington's movie.

The great part about the movie is that it really makes you feel for an incredibly irresponsible and sometimes just down right stupid character. There are times when all he needs to do to succeed is just not drink. But he'll drink anyway.

Its possibly one of the best films about alcoholism that I've ever seen and its not surprising that Washington was nominated for a Best Actor performance last year for this role.

It also brings up a lot of debate on the responsibility thrown onto Washington's character.

The first ever episode of Law and Order was about a surgeon who often went into surgery drunk. Nobody could tell almost ever but he was and he was prosecuted for the death of a woman on the operating table.

The interesting thing about this movie is that the crash of the plane really isn't Washington's fault. There is evidence to show that there was technical problems with the plane and yet there is an underlying theme that it doesn't matter. It was unethical for Whitaker to be drunk when he was flying that plane. It is kind of a great story about integrity and honor. Qualities I admire and sometimes fall short of in my own life.

I have mixed feelings about the ending. I thought it may have been too simple and a little contrived but it served its purpose. I really enjoyed the movie and I loved Washington's performance.

So have you seen Flight? What did you think? Comment and discuss below!

I'll leave you with this. One of my favorite movies with Denzil Washington is Training Day. Washington just gives a brilliant speech at the end of that movie and it just shows his ability to act. Here it is, Enjoy!

The New Lex Luthor

I was having a good day. A very good day. And then this happened.

Now until now I've been really really excited for Man of Steel 2. Sure, I had my doubts about Ben Affleck being Batman but if you've seen my post about that, you'll know I'm cool with it. I'm waiting for it to happen. I'm also warming up to the idea very much so I'm cool with that news now.

And then there was the news about Gal Gadot.

Gal Gadot being Wonder Woman is sort of a situation where I don't know anything about her and I'm putting a lot of faith into the casting decisions of Zack Snyder.

Also the reason I didn't get too mad about Gal Gadot being Wonder Woman is because I hope she's not a huge role in a movie about Batman and Superman.

Go and read my post on Wonder Woman and you'll hear my theories on how they should do this correctly.

In short, its not the decision I would have made but I'll put my faith in Zack Snyder to make us a movie and character worth watching.

And then there was the news that the movie was being pushed back 10 months.

I was going to do a post on this but I delayed it enough to realize that its not that huge of a deal. Am I bummed that the movie isn't coming out till 2016? Yes I am.

They've made several statements about it. The first one was to make sure the vision was done correctly, it depends on if you want to take that on face value but the more likely explanation is that they need to make some changes, rework the script, need more time to make sure everything is in place, and they felt it wasn't fully ready to debut in 2015.

I get that.

I'm not happy about it but I understand it. As long as Man of Steel 2 is a great film it won't matter if it came out of in 2015 or 2016. If it works, it works.

And then Warner Brothers comes out with some new information today.

Jesse Eisenberg is officially confirmed as Lex Luthor in the sequel to Man of Steel.

This is just... strange to me.

It was just out of left field and just down right strange. There were a bunch of rumors about Lex Luthor being played by Bryan Cranston, Mark Strong, even Joaquin Phoenix was in the mix when he was confirmed for a D/C project. I had kind of assumed that he was on board for that role it was just a matter of time till it was announced. I guess looking back it seems silly to think they would announce Phoenix's involvement and not announce that he's Lex Luthor.

So when Eisenberg was announced I just kind of thought. What the fuck?

I would almost say this is worth a "Daa Fuck?" Montage, but not quite.

If you read my "Now You See Me" review, you may remember that I mentioned that Jesse Eisenberg is good at two things. Being awkward and being an awkward asshole. And his character wasn't exactly a good guy in Now You See Me. That movie has shown that Eisenberg can be a diabolical "mastermind" and I suppose he can be charismatic. I just don't want to see Eisenberg's character from Now You See Me as Lex Luthor. I didn't like that character and I see Lex Luthor as a villain you love to hate.

And I think this casting decision is a little bit different from Batfleck and Gal Gadot. Ben Affleck is an established actor and while he wasn't my first choice for the role, I have seen him in enough to know that he's able to do the role and along with the faith I have in Zack Snyder, I think this will be a good choice of a role. Gal Gadot, I don't know anything about so that's totally on my faith in Snyder.

With Eisenberg it just makes me ask Snyder.

I'm not saying it couldn't work, I think I'm just put off by the performances I've seen Eisenberg in.

I don't want to be the kind of person that says they're not going to see this movie because a casting choice has been made because I'm going to. The point of this is this.

I DON'T WANT TO SEE MARK ZUCKERBERG AS LEX LUTHOR.

Okay that was the only out burst I was planning on having in this post. I'm writing this right after I heard about it so I may be a little bit emotional. Hopefully I warm up to the idea but its making me kind question how this movie is going to turn out. I suppose I'll give the same thing I said about Gal Gadot in response to this.

You're on thin ice Snyder. You are asking me to put a lot of faith into a movie that is already a risk. And it better pay off.

But all my doubts and disapprovals aside, what does this mean for the series if Lex Luthor is played by a young actor. Eisenberg may be 30 but he still looks like he is maybe in his late twenties. He's young, very young.

I can guess that they're going to build him up as a boy genius, someone who graduated school very early and made a living for himself at a very young age. Putting aside the casting, I like this direction. Its very different and I think a great way to reinvent the character.

I suppose there will be questions on whether or not Eisenberg will shave his head. I personally think he should but I won't be heart broken if he doesn't. I think if they're not going to have him shave his head, there should be a pretty damn good reason.

Now does this say anything about Lex Luthor's role in the movie?

When it comes to theories of how Lex Luthor will be involved in the movie, I believe that he should not be the villain in Man of Steel 2. At least not the main villain. I want him to be more of a political villain in the first movie, publicly denouncing Superman and saying he's dangerous to the Earth.

If you didn't catch my earlier posts, my theory was that perhaps Luthor and Bruce Wayne are rebuilding Metropolis after the destruction of the first movie (This needs to be addressed). They create an alliance because they both are millionaires looking to rebuild the city and they both have a distrust of Superman. But while Bruce Wayne's fear comes from actual distrust, Lex Luthor's distrust comes from Superman's possible disruption of his illegal businesses.

That's my old theory. I felt like it worked for a Bryan Cranston Lex Luthor because Luthor and Wayne could be allies at first. This would create a rigid relationship with Batman and Superman from the beginning. While I feel it could maybe work for a young Lex Luther, here is my new theory.

Lex is a symbol of earned wealth, capitalism, and new ways of doing things. He's really into developing new technology, possibly similar to a very young Tony Stark. Bruce Wayne on the other hand represents an old wealth he procured from inheritance. While Wayne has made a name for himself on his own merits, his wealth is something he received from his father. Lex's wealth was built. He has more humble beginnings but is incredibly intelligent that he's able to mass a huge wealth at a very young age. That creates a rivalry between Wayne Enterprises and Lex Corp. These two are going to have to have some close connection with each other in this movie, its just too perfect for both characters to appear here.

I think the distrust between Wayne and Kal-El must still be there but for Luthor it should be different. A part of me thinks he should initially think of Superman as a new toy. Maybe something he can buy and control. Where Bruce Wayne believes Superman should be casted out, Lex Luthor may at first see Superman as a weapon. But when Superman refuses that's when they become enemies, rivals even. Lex deduces that if he can't control Superman, Superman must be eliminated.

And Jesse Eisenberg's Superman can't be a wimp. He has to be charismatic, cunning, and always having plans up his sleeve. I see a way this vision I have of Luthor could be tarnished by him hiding behind his money for his power but he needs to have earned it. This will reinforce his intelligence and make a formidable foe for Superman... in later movies.

Thinking about it now, I actually see a lot of potential for Lex Luthor being younger. I'm still not wild about Jesse Eisenberg getting the part but I guess if there's a deliberate choice in going with a younger actor, he's not the worst choice...

I will now speak directly to Jesse Eisenberg.

Mr. Eisenberg, you are about to embark on playing one of mine and many Superman fan's favorite villain.

I don't really like a lot of what you do. I liked Zombieland, I thought your part made sense. I didn't like you in Now You See Me. For the longest time I got you confused with Michael Cera.

At least he is funny.

But I'm going to go along with this only on the fact that I like where this could potentially go.

But you have to sell it to me.

You have the potential to make me very very wrong about you. I hope that you do. Best of luck. And don't fuck this up. Get rid of your stupid curly hair and don't fuck this up.

That's kind of the end of my rant towards Eisenberg being Lex Luthor.

I will end this post on a happy note. Along with Eisenberg, they announced another casting. A casting I'm really happy about.

Jeremy Irons is going to be Bruce Wayne's butler, Alfred Pennyworth.

I will not go on a huge rant about this mainly because there's not much to rant about. I love the casting choice.

I love Jeremy Irons as an actor. I think he'll be a great Alfred.

I mean this probably was a difficult decision just because he will be following in the footsteps of Michael "freaking" Caine.

Michael Caine was just a brilliant Alfred Pennyworth. He brought a lot of heart to the role and always made me cry.

Anybody who got this role was kind of screwed from the beginning. Nobody is going to do a better job at Alfred Pennyworth than Michael Caine. I think Jeremy Irons will do a good job and it opens up opportunities for a new way of looking at the character.

Its definitely not a role that gives me enough confidence to overlook the Eisenberg casting but its a good choice.

So I've talked long enough and I have some other movies to watch and review. Those are my thoughts on the new casting news for Man of Steel 2. I know I'll be doing more in the months to come.

Let me know your thoughts on the casting. Comment and discuss below.

I'll leave you with this. I couldn't really find anything about Lex Luthor worth putting up here so instead I'll mention that DC needs to create a villain in Lex Luthor as one that we love. A good example of a villain we love is Loki from the Marvel universe. But Tom Hiddleston wanted to be Thor initially. Here's a clip of a bonus feature about Loki and how he started up.

Drinking Buddies

If there's anything we can learn from this movie, its that you should not go on double dates. Bad idea.

This movie describes itself as A comedy about knowing when to say when... this movie wasn't funny. I'm just gonna put i out there, if you're looking for a rom com, this one is not it. This movie is just uncomfortable.

So what's it about?

The movie mainly follows Olivia Wilde. She works at a Brewery and is good friends with one of the brewers played by Jake Johnson.

Johnson's character has a girlfriend played by Anna Kendrick. Olivia Wilde has a boyfriend played by Ron Livingston.

The initial set up is alright showing the relationship between Johnson and Wilde. Its the kind of relationship that people always say are like the brother and sister relationship but secretly one of them or both of them really like the other one. And then they show the relationships between Johnson and Kendrick and Wilde and Livingston. While they look like good relationships, they're very similar in the fact that both Livingston and Kendrick don't really feel like their girlfriend or boyfriend are really into them.

Well then all four of them go to Ron Livingston's cabin for a weekend away just the four of them. You can pretty much guess what is going to happen. For those who can't I won't give it away but those who do, it happens.

The rest of the movie is a will they or won't they "romantic" movie. It has its cute moments but for me, it just felt very strange.

Its strange because nobody in this movie is made out to be the bad guy. Anna Kendrick is really sweet in this movie and she's not made out to be the bitch. Ron Livingston, as limited as his role is, is not really an asshole. They're all very well written characters and you don't want to see any of them get hurt.

The problem with that is that the instinct is that they're just going to switch, cheating on the other one. And like I said, you don't really want that to happen.

As much as you want to see Wilde and Johnson get together in the end, you know it will hurt Kendrick. And lets be honest, nobody wants that.

So it creates a lot of tension that is kind of uncomfortable at times because you're saying, "Yes that's cute, but he/she's in a relationship".

And maybe that's how the movie wanted me to feel and maybe they were trying to pull some comedy out of that but it didn't really strike me as a funny movie.

I just learned that all the dialogue in the movie was improvised which makes a lot of sense now for the why the dialogue was so disjointed and strangely delivered by everyone.

The actors were given an outline of the major plot points and what needed to happen in each scene, however beyond that, all the dialogue was improvised.

I suppose knowing that now I have a little bit more respect for the writing of this movie (or lack there of) because thats an incredibly risky and creative move to do for an entire movie.

But despite that knowledge, I still don't think this movie was funny at all, which is okay I wasn't sad that I wasn't laughing during the movie, I just thought it was strange and kind of awkward.

While the movie seems predictable, the way it turns out is a pretty good resolution though not what you expect with a movie with a premise like this.

So while I think the movie was strange, awkward, not funny, and not really a movie I would recommend, I do have to give it credit for the improvised lines, the unexpected ending, and the acting. There are people that will watch this movie and relate to it right away. They will love it. I think the majority of people will relate to some aspects of it but be uncomfortable and probably not laugh. And then there are people that will hate this movie. I fall into the middle category. My girlfriend fell into the hated it category so I don't know what to think about that. She's doesn't sit and analyze movies so maybe that's saying something for the average viewer.

So that's my review of Drinking Buddies. Have you seen it? Did you like it? Comment below and let me know because it just gave me mixed feelings.

I'll leave you with this. Its not totally related... really at all but I think its funny. Frankly, I don't really know a video that would relate to this movie unless I put something from Pitch Perfect with Anna Kendrick... I'm not going to do that. So I'll leave you with a Long Story Short video. Enjoy!