Obviously it’s ironic to criticize a critic so aggressively, but that’s just what people love to do to infamously contrarian New York Press film critic Armond White, who seems to be getting his worst scrutiny yet over his negative review of District 9. The comments and campaigns against him have been going on all week, but now that Roger Ebert has gotten himself involved, it’s a bigger deal. Especially since Ebert first defended White and then took it back. Yet his initial statement that White is “the ideal critic” who “is often valuable because [his opinion] is outside the mainstream” remains on Roger Ebert’s Journal to contractrict the change of mind.

It’s also a bit ironic that this is all because of a movie about creatures who’ve been segregated against. Would District 9’s fanbase prefer to ghettoize critics who disagree with them? Should there be websites and free weeklies that have “Populist Critics Only” guidelines? I don’t want to side with or against White, becuase there’s no need to, what with freedom of speech and press and everything. I will admit that when I began writing film reviews many years ago, I looked up to White more than anyone and even gave myself the nickname “The Film Cynic” (which I still use for my Twitter moniker at least), because I was a more negative and cynical person back then, and also, I honestly admit, because I thought it’d help get me controversially noticed.

Certainly White gets a lot of notice and publicity for his opinions, too, but the important thing is that he’s an interesting read, and not just for how against-the-grain he is. Even if he is ever intentionally anti-majority just to be anti-majority, he presents reasonable arguments and raises necessary points while doing so. Besides, does anyone really want to live in a world where everybody likes District 9 or Up or The Dark Knight and where nobody has anything fresh, smart and positive to say about Transformers 2? How boring that world would be.

That’s my two cents. Check out a few other film blog responses to the White blackballing after the jump:

…Read more

For a movie with no stars and no built-in audience, Neill Blomkatt’s District 9 is buzzing incredibly well. Sure, the Peter Jackson connection may have something to do with the interest and excitement, but I’d bet a lot of the traffic and talk being devoted to the film today is more due to how awesome it looks. And how well it’s being marketed, of course. But with the latest trailer, which arrived online yesterday, heating up the exposure and anticipation so immensely so quickly, could there be room for overkill? I actually don’t think so. This won’t be another disappointment a la Snakes on a Plane or Cloverfield, because it’s a more interesting premise, not just some cheap genre pic with heavy viral promotion.

Maybe I’m just allowing my expectations to get higher than usual, but I’m truly optimistic that this will actually be good. It’s dangerous territory for me to be getting in, and the film and its campaign are probably going to blow up in my face like that “can” of toxic material in the trailer. Oh well, what else do I have to look forward to next month? G.I. Joe? Inglourious Basterds? I gave up on my excitement for both of those long ago, and I want to be surprised by something out of nowhere. Unfortunately, modern movie distribution doesn’t allow for such complete surprises anymore, so this may be the closest thing I’ve got.

Let’s see what kind of buzz or buzzkill the blogs are inciting after the jump:
…Read more

I understand that we were all watching the Michael Jackson memorial today, but did one of the most blogged about movie-related story have to involve Megan Fox? Again? Really? Wasn’t it enough that we devoted yesterday’s post to that derivative and divisive Jennifer’s Body movie? And that neither Fox nor Michael Bay nor their Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen movie needs anymore publicity?

Allegedly, Fox had to wash Bay’s Ferrari as part of her audition for the first Transformers. And he supposedly filmed the whole thing, though there’s no proof of this (online at least, which is where it’d be if it existed). Did it really happen? I guess it doesn’t matter, because it’s already in the consciousness of boys and men everywhere to help them sleep better tonight.

True or not, check out the responses to this non-news after the jump:
…Read more

Everyone’s talking about the new R-rated trailer for Jennifer’s Body, a horror comedy starring Megan Fox as a possessed cheerleader. My first impression was that it seems too much like last year’s Teeth, only with less interesting subtext. Alison Willmore of The Independent Eye instead finds the movie reminiscent of 2000’s Ginger Snaps, though she doesn’t think that’s a bad thing. Either way, coming from screenwriter Diablo Cody, Jennifer’s Body doesn’t appear original in any way except for its forced, writerly dialogue (”You need a mani bad. You should find a Chinese chick to buff your situation.”). And interestingly (coincidentally?) enough, her Oscar-winning movie, Juno, just so happens to feature actress Emily Perkins, costar of the Ginger Snaps trilogy.

Originality aside (it’s also being likened to Heathers and Species), Jennifer’s Body is being celebrated as low culture, criticized for being worse than low culture and otherwise dividing the bloggers up as only Cody’s feature follow-up to Juno could. Meanwhile, the truly important people (i.e. the teen boys looking at blogs) probably won’t care about what’s a good screenplay or what films this may have ripped off, because they’re probably only paying attention to all the teased Megan Fox nudity (including plenty of footage of that “topless” scene we saw “leaked” photos of last year).

By the way, my second impression of the trailer was that it’s cool they used a Runaways song so that this Bloggery can be linked to last Friday’s posting, in a way. Shows how bored I was with the plot/dialogue/visuals. Also, because you probably won’t see her acknowledged on most posts about this movie, Jennifer’s Body is directed by Karyn Kusama, of Girlfight and Æon Flux.

Now, on to the film blog reactions, after the jump:

…Read more

Leave it to Michael Bay to turn something already big into something bigger. No, I’m not talking about the “life-size” IMAX version of Optimus Prime. I’m referring to the gap between critic and general audience tastes, often referred to as the “critic-audience divide.” We’ve already seen it get worse this year via terrible yet popular movies like Paul Blart: Mall Cop, but given the $201.2 million grossed by Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen over its first five days, we film writers are feeling the coming apocalypse soooo much more. Remember how last year we thought The Dark Knight made so much money so quickly due to the fact that reviews were so great? Eh, that probably wasn’t the truth after all.

Of course, a success like Transformers 2’s doesn’t exactly prove critics are worthless, only those who function simply as a thumbs up/thumbs down sort of recommendatory guide. Plenty of critics should continue to be worth reading if they’re otherwise good reads and create or allow for discussion without merely saying a film is good or bad. One of my favorite kinds of critic, for instance, is the kind that may turn me onto a film despite him/her having disliked it, as some scathing reviews of Transformers 2 have almost done.

A reader commented on my previous post about Transformers 2 with the claim that all our negative reviews helped the movie be so successful. If that’s the truth, maybe we should start using negative psychology and trash the great little films we really love. Or, we can just stop worrying about the majority audience liking different things as us and enjoy all the death threats we get from mainstream moviegoers when we disagree with them. Isn’t it often better for our sites’ traffic to stir up contention anyway?

Oh well, here’s another crop of critical whinery after the jump:
…Read more

Another blockbuster, another record broken. What’s the big deal? Well, the biggest deal might be that film critics are wasting their time reviewing movies like Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen, because a billion trillion negative words written about the blockbuster sequel couldn’t have kept it from breaking the Wednesday opening record. Grossing $60.6 million over a day and two nights (the figure includes Tuesday’s midnight show tally of $16 million), Transformers 2 knocked Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix off the throne.

I haven’t heard of anyone liking the sequel, so it’s very possible that word of mouth will keep the movie from making too much more over the weekend. But then again, if another one of my weekends is completely rained out, I’ll probably go see the thing just to see how godawful it is (this Best Week Ever post makes me masochistically curious to see it). The first Transformers was a total bore, so I’d be happier with elements as ridiculously terrible as racially offensive robots and parachute farts, as long as there was something interesting going on.

The only thing keeping me from rounding up a large posse for a MST3K-inspired viewing is the idea that buying the tickets will only encourage Paramount and Michael Bay more (how about a group of us goes and buys Star Trek tickets and then sneak into Transformers? Paramount can’t complain, since they’ll still get the money, only for a better film).

Check out the film blogs’ response to the record breakage after the jump:
…Read more

Michael Bay is apparently a big fan of the 1986 animated cult classic Transformers: The Movie. Last month, he revealed his desire to get Leonard Nimoy, voice of “Galvatron” in the cartoon film, to voice a robot character in his latest live-action installment, Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen. And awhile back it was revealed that the sequel might have a new version of Stan Bush’s terrible ’80s anthem “The Touch” on its soundtrack. But are these the correct ways to pay homage to the old series/movie? Wouldn’t we rather actually have Transformers that look like the Transformers characters we remember from our childhood? And wouldn’t we rather have a good script and competent directing/editing? Okay, these last things might not be totally relevant to the 80s cartoon, but regardless they are elements that should be more attended to than any lame winks at members of the cult audience.

Anyway, I bring all this up because a music video for the remake of “The Touch” (titled “The Touch: Sam’s Theme”) has popped up online. Featuring both Bush and a Linkin Park-wannabe rapper in the recording and video, the new version — which still hasn’t been confirmed as being in the new film (don’t do it MB) — is undeniably worse than the original somehow. But it makes me wonder: in 10 years or so, when Boogie Nights is remade and reset in the 2000s, should this be the version of the song covered by Dirk and Reed?

A few other bloggers and commenters agree that it’s a downgrade after the jump:

…Read more

I know what brings traffic to movie blogs: Megan Fox wearing as little as possible. Case in point: Movie Gab debuted some paparazzi pics of Fox on the set of Jonah Hex a few weeks ago, but she was wearing a robe, and not surprisingly I heard nothing of the photos. Today the same site presents more images, this time of Fox in an Old West Prostitute costume (i.e. corset, stockings, boots, gloves) and the internerds explode with posts. Sure, it’s also yet another slow news day in terms of stuff that excites the collective film bloggery, but I’m sure these shots would still have shown up on every movie and gossip site on a much busier day. Why? Because Megan Fox pays our bills, of course.

Not that I understand the attraction. I don’t mean to insult Fox, who is indeed an attractive woman. But I don’t get what she’s got that at least a thousand other hot young actresses don’t have. Aside from the fact that she’s sold on sex, be it through cleavage-exposing publicity photos or that recent Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen footage of her stripping, what is it about her that makes her the Clara Bow of the late 2000’s? (Confession: Bow never did “It” for me either, so maybe I’m just out of touch). Anyway, I am noticing that these new Fox photos are garnering some criticism for how skinny her corset makes her look, and I do appreciate that not everyone is positively spellbound by her.

Anyway, check out what other bloggers are saying about the images after the jump. Meanwhile, I’ll be checking out that sexier wet, tattooed back shot of Sandra Bullock that Mark Graham has posted over at Vulture.

…Read more

One thing you have to love about the fanboys, they’re always a glass-half-full kind of people. Whenever one of their beloved movies gets ripped apart by critics, they point to the box office results with pride. Critics are meaningless, they remind us, because Transformers and the Pirates of the Caribbean sequels and the Star Wars prequels made so much money. And now, with their Watchmen having received both mixed reviews and a relatively disappointing opening weekend, they’re still defending its success to the end. Drew McWeeny of HitFix said it best in a Tweet this morning: “Box-office talk is absolute death to me. I just don’t care. It got made. I liked it. I win.”

McWeeny may not exactly be the king of the geeks, but he does inadvertently represent them today. Because whether or not Watchmen has technically underperformed (or “failed” in any way) should not be their concern any more than the negative reviews (or our list of reasons claiming the comic adaptation is unnecessary). But if they are going to use the defense that the box office doesn’t matter, they aren’t allowed to celebrate grosses this summer when Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen receives bad reviews yet still has a strong opening.

More on the debate on the topic of Watchmen’s success or failure after the jump.

…Read more

I have always tried to maintain low expectations for Hollywood product in general. But when it comes to highly anticipated movies, particularly blockbuster sequels to popular sci-fi action franchises, my excitement can get the best of me. Whenever I need to calm down my expectations, though, I simply recall all the disappointments of 1997 (Alien Resurrection, The Lost World, the Star Wars Special Edition), and I can get through the hype pretty safely. Considering I’m one of the few who actually loved both Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines and (yes, even) McG’s Charlie’s Angels movies, it’s hard for me to believe that I’m also one of the few who isn’t now expecting Terminator Salvation to be the second coming of Christ The Terminator after watching the new trailer (embedded below).

Sure, Christian Bale could very well be a lucky charm to franchise reboots (though does anyone believe this will be even a tenth as good as Batman Begins?) and T4 could easily be better than rival summer blockbuster Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen (though “easily” is an understatement, because Transformer 2 will suck just as bad as Transformers 1). But with two and a half months left until the movie opens, it’s just too early for us to be going so ga-ga over one piece of marketing. The only thing left to happen now is a backlash, which I guess I’m sort of starting right now?

Here’s a sample of the most extreme gushing to hit the blogosphere since the trailer’s premiere last night:

…Read more

Among the movie promos screened during the Super Bowl, there were teasers for predictable blockbusters-to-be, such as multi-million dollar toy commercials Transformers 2 and G.I. Joe, and nostalgic ’70s TV throw-back, The Land of the Lost. But there was also a teaser for a new comedy from a much rarer sub-genre, the historical comedy. The Year One, set to release in June 19, is an Apatow-produced buddy comedy starring Jack Black and Michael Cera. They play Zed and Oh, two lovable losers encountering various characters from Biblical history, including Adam and Eve, Cain and Abel, and Abraham. It’s not yet clear how they can meet all these people in a single lifetime (is this a time travel movie?)

But two things are clear: One, Judd Apatow seems to be looking to change-up his formula, at least to a degree. I’m not sure how long I want to watch the aging cast of Freaks and Geeks sit around a bong and talk about sex. Even if The Year One is just Superbad with togas, he’s at least trying to keep things fresh. And two, this film marks the return of a rare breed of comedy. Until now, it looked like historical comedies reached their apex decades ago with the work of Mel Brooks and Monty Python. Now, with the comedy auteur du jour producing a movie set in the distant past, the historical comedy sub-genre could become vogue once more. Or it could just be terrible. There are precedents for both.

Here’s our list of seven notable historical comedies — some great, some utterly forgettable.

…Read more