Reviews by Matt

Having seen my final movie of 2007 and the need to put something up on my blog, I thought it would be a good idea to list my top 10 movies of 2007. It was a lot harder than I thought. I have seen some real stinkers and a lot were just O.K. There was only a handful that left an impression on me. Movies that made me glad that I paid the movie theaters an obscene amount of money this past year. What I have done is forgone the usual plot synopsis and just jotted down a few things that I liked about the movie.

With out further ado, I present my list.

1) “Juno.” The review of this is pending, but in short; it was the easiest to place. It is funny, smart, dramatic, sweet, touching and simply the most original movie I saw all year (and it only took me 364.5 days). It is so rare to find a movie where every single actor delivers such great performances.

2) “The Bourne Ultimatum.” This is one of the rare examples of a sequel that is as good, if not better then the original. The trilogy is my absolute favorite, even if it went away from the books.

3) “Grindhouse.” The most fun I have ever had in a movie theater. If more directors had as much passion as Quentin Tarantino and Robert Rodriguez had then this list would have been much easier to make.

4) “3:10 to Yuma.” Christian Bale and Russell Crowe are two of the best actors and this movie shows why. Their star power alone is enough reason to see this.

5) “Michael Clayton.” This is another of those performance driven movies. George Clooney shows that he knows how to act beyond being Danny Ocean. He plays the reluctant hero. He wanted nothing more then to sit back and do his job. He is thrust into a position where he must act and Clooney makes it all believable.

6) “Hot Fuzz.” The funniest straight up comedy of the year, with out a doubt. Simon Pegg who starred as the title character in the zombie-comedy, “Shaun of the Dead” is as funny as ever. Sergeant Angel is a by the book cop who takes his job very seriously. He gets transferred to a town where there is no crime and has to make that adjustment. Pegg is brilliant in this role. He delivers a performance that is so straight-laced that it becomes funny.

7) “Waitress.” This year marked the year that I fell in love with Keri Russell as an actress. She blew me away in this movie. She plays a character who loves her husband despite the fact that he is a complete jerk and treats her like crap. The other notable performance in this is Nathan Fillion, who plays Russell’s doctor. The two have great chemistry and it shines on screen.

8) “American Gangster.” Russell Crowe pops up again on my list. In this one he plays a cop going after the bad guy. Crowe is an actor who seems to play every role he can and is good at it. There are very few times he completely fails to impress.

9) “Eastern Promises.” Besides begin the most brutally violent movie I saw this year, it was also a interesting story and I thought the acting was especially good.

10) “Live Free or Die Hard.” This one was the toughest pick. The first nine were going on, it was just a matter of where. This one I put on because it was one that I liked a lot more than I thought I was going to.

I scare like a 5-year-old. I have said it before and I will stand by it until the day that I do not jump at the smallest of things. I was faced with a problem the other day, I really wanted to see “I Am Legend,” but it was going to be one of those movies that made the night a little tougher to get through. I had hoped to go to an afternoon showing so as to give myself a chance to push it to the back of my mind by the time I went to bed. Then through a series of incidents, namely the heat mysteriously stopping in my apartment, I went to the 10:30 p.m. showing. It was PG-13, so I figured I would be fine as far scary images went, I was wrong on that note, but right on another, unexpected one.

Robert Neville (Will Smith) is the last man on earth. A deadly virus has wiped out the majority of the world’s population and turned others into creatures that live on blood. Yea, kinda like vampires, but they never say it in the movie. He is determined to find a cure and save those who have been infected. He and his dog roam the streets of New York City during the day farming and hunting for food, but at night must be locked inside to stay safe from the creatures.

Will Smith was awesome in “I Am Legend.” In fact he was much better than Tom Hanks in “Castaway.” He had to act to green screen, mannequins and a dog. Not much to work with, it is safe to say that he delivers the best performance of any in the movie. His performance is very powerful. He is both funny and dramatic. He has conversations with the “owner” of the video store as he rents a different movie each day. He is determined to find the cure and even captures one of the creatures in order to experiment on it.

Here is why I slept relatively soundly that night. The creatures were all done digitally. It was obvious that they were digital characters, hence, not scary. There were multiple times when what would have been a tense moment was marked by the realization that it was all fake.

This movie had so much potential. I was expecting great things and could not help but feel slightly disappointed at the end. The way things unfolded was interesting and more than enough to hold my interest, but when it was all said and done, I wanted more. There needed to be a little more background on the virus, the discovery of what it was doing and the reaction to it. All we get for background is mention of using nature to cure sickness and then NYC being closed off and an attack by the infected. The story focused on Neville and his day-to-day struggle to cure the virus while surviving alone.

With the exception of waking up to my neighbor shoveling his walkway at 5 a.m, I slept soundly that night. There were a few moments of jump out and scare you, but the creatures were far from frightening. The movie was worth seeing, but was not what I was expecting. I enjoyed it a lot, but was disappointed by how things turned out.

7 out of 10
Rated PG-13 for intense sequences of sci-fi action and violence.
101 min

I like to think of myself as an easy-going guy. I am easy to please. Heck, I am a breeze to shop for when Christmas rolls around, buy me a DVD and I will be happy. There are a few things out there that really annoy me. The biggest is stupid people. When certain movies are released, there are groups who boycott it for one reason or another. They worry that the movie is offensive to whatever their viewpoint is.

“The Golden Compass” is one of those movies.

Lyra Belacqua (Dakota Blue Richards) lives in a parallel universe where humans have animal counterparts called daemons. Lyra has grown up on a campus where she has been taught from a very young age. There has been talk of Dust, small particles that could be used to unite all the worlds together. The Magisterium, who rule this alternate world, want to stop this at any cost. Her uncle, Lord Asriel (Daniel Craig) heads north to study the Dust, and Layra learns that the Magisterium is after him. She is given an alethiometer, a golden compass that can tell the truth to use on her trip.

In a time where these grand epic adventures at the movie theater are commonplace, this is nothing special. If you want amazing and spectacular movies watch “The Lord of the Rings Trilogy” or “The Chronicles of Narnia.” It is still a good movie, the visuals are stunning and it is a nice escape from the run-of-the-mill action dramas.

As far as performances go, the lead, Dakota Blue Richards, is not as strong as it could be, but she delivers a good performance for being only 13. With actors like Daniel Craig and Nicole Kidman, she holds her own.

The visuals are really good. The landscapes are beautifully done and the computer-animated animals look great. The daemons look real, but at the same time they are very obviously not real.

Here is the real reason I am writing this. I need to vent. I did this in my DaVinci Code review I feel that the outrage is completely ridiculous. It is only a movie, or a book (my feelings are the same in regards for the book too).

I understand that the author is an atheist and that there are apparent anti-religion overtones in the later books. I do not care what the guy believes anymore than I care what he ate for breakfast on the morning he decided to write the book. Whatever he believes is his business and he can do whatever he wants.

Here is where I take issue. There are people who are boycotting the movie because of the supposed overtones. People are worried that the movie/book is teaching or encouraging atheism. Pardon my frankness here, but if you are stupid enough to have your beliefs changed because of a movie or even a novel, then you deserve it. If you want your religious views changed then you are the one to change them, if you do not, then there is no movie, book or person who can. It is all about the strength of your own beliefs. If a movie changes what you believe then maybe you did not believe it that strongly in the first place.

What I am trying to say is, do not let anything or anyone tell you what to believe. If you want to believe that little gremlins are responsible for making a light turn on, good for you. As long as you do not hurt anyone else you can believe and do whatever you want.

7 out of 10
Rated PG-13 for sequences of fantasy violence.
113 min

This past semester, as many of you know, I was the entertainment editor for the school paper. I went to at least one movie a week in order to insure that I could fill the two pages required by my new position. I had a “movie buddy” who would, without fail see any movie with me. Last weekend there was no need for me to go see a movie. I saw two. The first movie will be reviewed later; this is about the second one I saw on my first weekend off.

I had not planned on seeing two movies that weekend, but when I was asked to help my friend, Matt, out by going to a movie with him, I was happy to return the favor. Even if it was a movie I did not really want to see.

“Awake” is about the phenomena of “anesthetic awareness” where someone under anesthesia is fully aware of everything going on. Clay Beresford (Hayden Christiansen) is one of those people. He is completely paralyzed and he cannot alert the doctors to it.

But before we get to that we have to find out that he is a young successful businessman who is in love with a beautiful woman Sam (Jessica Alba). His life is great except for one thing, he has some kind of heart condition that requires him to have a heart transplant. Finally one day he gets the heart he has been waiting for and soon goes into surgery.

Now back to the awake during surgery thing. He hears that his doctors have a plan to kill him and that is new wife is in on it.

I know that no one reading this is going to see it, but I still cannot reveal the ending, I have a feeling that there is something about journalistic ethics involved.

Overall, it was an intriguing movie, but not enough to hold my attention for very long. The acting was bland, the story was mildly interesting and it was not as suspenseful as it tried to be.

Christiansen, known for playing Ankin Skywalker/Darth Vader in the last two “Star Wars” prequels, showed me that it was the bad writing by George Lucas that made him seem so bland. The acting is a little better in “Awake,” but not by much. He still shows the emotional rage of a potato, but at least the writing was better this time.

For being a former Oscar nominee and an actor who picks really good roles, Terrence Howard was disappointing in the role of Dr. Jack Harper. Harper has been sued for malpractice at least five times and he decided to set this entire thing up to help him get out of financial trouble. He is desperate and will even kill a supposed friend to make his life easier.

I had absolutely no intention of seeing this movie. Ever. I owed Matt big time. He was the one guy I could get to go to a movie every weekend. The upside is I did not hate this movie. I enjoyed myself, but it is not a movie I ever need to see again.

5 out of 10
Rated R for language, an intense disturbing situation, and brief drug use.
84 min

The history of videogame movie adaptations is long and full of complete and utter disasters. Every now and then a “Tomb Raider” will emerge and the studios will think that it is a good idea to make more videogame-based movies. Most end up as a waste of time and fail. “Hitman” is one of them.

Agent 47 (Timothy Olyphant) is a Hitman for “The Agency” who one day finds himself the target. He is determined to find out why and to want ends he is involved it a larger conspiracy.

That is really all it is and to see the plot as anything more, is to give this movie more credit than it deserves.

Having never played the game on which the movie is based, I do not know how true to the game it stayed.

What I do know is that Olyphant either delivers the worst performance ever, or the most brilliant in movie history. He is so unemotional, so cold and so dull. He was good in “The Girl Next Door” and “Live Free or Die Hard” and showed some emotion, but here the choice may be to keep Agent 47 the cold killer he is supposed to be, but it is not good for a movie.

The movie is all about the hits and the uncovering of the conspiracy. Hit by hit 47 starts to put together what is really going on. He begins to kill his way to the answer. He kills who he has to in order to get to the one person pulling the strings. During all of this he has to avoid being caught by Interpol, who have been alerted to his part in multiple murders.

The movie is not overly violent despite the source material. The kills made by Agent 47 are no more violent or brutal than any other movie where people are killed. The movie is truly a series of kills with a story between. Even then the story is weak at best and relies on the hits way to much. It is good for pure escapism purposes. You are not required to think at all and it is easy just to sit back and enjoy the ride.

5 out of 10
Rated R for strong bloody violence, language and some sexuality/nudity.
100 min

In any discussion of great movies there is always that one person who just has to disagree. That one guy who says “No way that belongs on the list.” or “That is no where near as good as everyone says it is.”

Today I shall play the part of “that guy.”

There are a ton of movies out there that I think are overrated. The criteria I used for this list are the movies I have heard good things about. These movies range from Oscar winners to movies that everyone seems to like to movies that became ingrained in popular culture. All these movies have a huge amount of hype behind them and with the exception of the number five on the list this hype is without merit.

Bring on the outrage.

Bring on the debate.

Bring on my list of the top five most overrated movies.



#5) “American Beauty”

Lester Burnham (Kevin Spacey) is unhappy with his life. After developing a crush on his daughter’s best friend (Mena Suvari), he decides to turn his life around. He quits his dead-end job and decides to do what he wants and be happier. There is some other story with the creepy kid, who moves in next-door, and Lester’s daughter, but it has been about 3 years since I have seen it, I do not remember it that well.

Why people like it: It is loved and adored by millions. It must have been good if it won five Oscars. The performances are good, especially on Spacey’s part.

Why it is overrated: I however have never seen what the hype was about. I agree Spacey is at his best in this, but other then that, it is a dull movie.

Do not get my wrong, I am not one of those people who needs explosions and special effects to keep me interested in a movie, in fact some of my favorite movies are exactly like this; story, character development and great dialogue.
Nothing could keep me interested in the movie. It took two separate sittings about a week apart to finish it. I found myself not caring and checking to see when the movie was over.




#4 “Bad Santa”

Every holiday season Willie (Billy Bob Thornton) and Marcus (Tony Cox) pose as Santa and an elf at a mall then, on Christmas Eve, proceed to rob the mall blind. Each season they move on to a different mall and cash in. Then Willie meets some kid and his heart softens, or something.

Why people like it: Apparently it is funny.

Why it is overrated: It is not funny. It is stupid, and only a fifth grader who snuck it out of their older siblings DVD collection would laugh at it.



#3 Any M. Night Shyamalan movie made after “The Sixth Sense.”

Not a movie, I know, but I just have this deep seeded hatred of this “director” that I had to make room for him.

Why people like it: For some odd reason he is seen as a master of suspense. He has these amazing twists and is original.

Why it is overrated: Shyam-lama-ding dong is the most overrated director ever. He had one mediocre hit with “The Sixth Sense” and suddenly he gets crowned the new Alfred Hitchcock. I refuse to believe that. Hitchcock was original and movie after movie, he delivered some of the most suspenseful and mysterious movies ever made. Night is a hack. Every movie he has made since has been predictable and poorly made.

The plot of “Signs” has plot hole so big you could build a new dorm in them. Case and point: the aliens have these super powerful legs and can jump over a house yet they cannot kick down a door or better yet, the aliens are harmed by water yet they are taking over a planet that is 71 percent water.

You want another example. I never saw “The Village,” but my sister did. To see if is was as predictable as I thought I gave her what I thought was the ending, the elders are the monsters and the village is in the present day. She said that was it. Talk about a “surprise” ending.



#2 “Titanic”

Jack (Leonardo DiCaprio) is some kind of rapscallion who gets a ticket on the doomed Titanic voyage across the Atlantic. He meets Rose (Kate Winslet) a fancy lady who is also on the ship.

The two fall in love.

He draws her naked.

Her boyfriend does not like her crush.

The ship hits an iceberg.

Biggest surprise in movie history-the boat sinks.

Jack dies (sorry for the spoiler, but if you have not seen it by now then you have no right to complain).

Rose carries a torch for her dead love until she is old.

Movie ends.

Roll credits.

Rack up 11 Oscar wins.

Why people like it: My best guess; the love story. Something about Jack the lower class man getting Rose, the rich upper class woman to fall in love with him, people seem to love. It is the unlikely love story that people gravitate to.
Some like the special effects. For 1997, this was a big deal. The ship sinking is impressive to watch even today when you think about how special effects have changed since the movie was released. It was a huge undertaking in the late 90s. Today with movies like “The Matrix” and “The Lord of the Rings,” “Titanic” look like claymation.

Why it is overrated: It really feels like two different movies. One is a love story and one is a disaster movie. The first half focuses on getting the audience to care about the characters, which I just could not do. They are supposed to be seen as these people we want to see survive and live a long and happy life. When Jack died I breathed a sigh of relief because the death was way too drawn out and it meant the movie was almost over.



#1 “Napoleon Dynamite”

Some loser who has a strange infatuation with Tater Tots (the pigeonholed Jon Heder, not that I am complaining) acts like a loser for 99 percent of the movie. The last one percent he dances and finally talks to the girl he has a crush on.

Why people like it: Because they are stoned or in middle school.

Why it is overrated: It is not funny. Plain and simple it is not funny. Anyone can be Napoleon and because this movie became so popular everyone did. The sign I got that showed me this movie was way out of hand was one day in depression central-Wal Mart. I was looking to feed my DVD addiction and was browsing the cheap DVD bin. I over heard some middle school aged kid saying “gosh” in that annoying Napoleon Dynamite voice. I just about punched the little twerp in the face.

Bring on the hate mail all you “Napoleon Dynamite” lovers. I will defend this choice above all others until the day I die. The others, minus the M. Night rant, I am willing to reconsider.

We all have seen “The Wizard of Oz.”

If you have not, I feel sorry for you because you missed out on one of the fundamental childhood experiences. It is a movie that has transcended time. “Over the Rainbow” was named the best song from a movie by the American Film Institute a few years ago. It is one of the few movies I can remember watching as a kid.

This past week, the SciFi channel, aired what can only be described as a science fiction version of “The Wizard of Oz” called “Tin Man.”

DG (Zooey Deschanel) no longer feels at home on the farm in, what I can only guess to be is, Kansas. She longs to get out.

In the O.Z. an evil sorceress, Azkadellia (Kathleen Robertson) rules through fear. She learns that someone is coming from the outside that will pose a threat to her. She sends her henchmen to retrieve whoever it is.

It happens to be DG. When the man come out of a tornado to get her, her parents know what is happening and save her by sending her into the tornado and into the O.Z. There she is captured by the Munchkins because she is seen as a spy for the evil sorceress. In her captivity she meets Glitch (Alan Cumming) and man who has had his brain removed. When DG and Glitch escape they try to find DG’s parents. Along the way they rescue Cain (Neal McDonough) from an iron box where he was forced to watch the murder of his wife and son over and over. He used to be a cop, or tin Man, in Central City, but when he was discovered to be part of the resistance against Azkadellia, he was imprisoned and his family was killed. The trio saves Raw (Raoul Trujillo) a lion like creature that possesses physic powers.

This group seems to be destined to over throw the evil Azkadellia and bring peace back to the O.Z.

The Internet Movie Database is my homepage so every time I start up my web browser I see the main page. For a few weeks a prominent advertisement was for “Tin Man” on SciFi. I investigated it further and saw that it was a version of “The Wizard of Oz.” I am not a huge science fiction fan. There are a couple things I like, but most I ignore. This looked like it had potential to be interesting.

I really cannot consider this a remake of “The Wizard of Oz.” There are elements that relate to the original. Glith is literally brainless, Cain is a “tin man” and heartless because he had to watch the death of his family over and over. There are little things that relate to the original, but for the most part, this has nothing to do with the 1939 movie.

Of everyone in the cast, Neal McDonough does the best job. He is one of the best actors you have never heard of. He has been in numerous movies, television series and miniseries. He is an amazing actor who has had steady work for many years.

In “Tin Man,” he plays a tin man in many ways. Not only is it another name for a cop, but it is also his manner. He has become emotionless and cold since he was imprisoned. Early on he is content to leave DG and find the men who killed his family, but something inside him does not allow him.
As of writing this I have only watched the first episode, but the other two are, or will be on the DVR and I will be finishing the miniseries as soon as I can.

It may be a little out there. Maybe it was so unlike the original that I hesitate to call it a remake or even a re-imagining. It is not even an alternate look. It is a miniseries that uses imagery from “The Wizard of Oz” to tell a new story. It is interesting nonetheless and I intend to see where this story ends up.

I hate movie critics.

It may be hard to believe since it is what I do for the paper, but it is true nonetheless. Call me self-loathing, but it is the way I feel.

What bothers me is how the majority of them seem to have lost whatever it was about movies that made them choose it as their profession. Most are cynical jackasses who like films and hate movies.

Pauline Kael, considered one of the best movie critics, once said,

“Movies are so rarely great art that if we cannot appreciate great trash, we have very little reason to be interested in them.”

It has become my philosophy on movies. It is fine to like the great movies, but if you cannot see the good in the bad ones then you cannot truly like any movie.

All this ranting brings me to “August Rush” and the subsequent reviews from the professional critics, not just some dope using what little free time he has writing for a college paper.

Concert cellist Lyla Novacek (Keri Russell) just finished performing at a concert in New York City and goes to a party to celebrate her success. There she meets Louis Connelly (Jonathan Rhys Meyers) an Irish guitar player. They spend the night together on a rooftop talking about music. They get separated the next day and each thinks the other is lost for good. Lyla soon discovers she is pregnant and her father (William Sadler) thinks it will ruin her career. When a car hits Lyla he gives the baby up for adoption without her knowledge.

August Rush (Freddie Highmore,) her child, dreams of finding his parents. He has an innate gift for music and hopes to learn to play so his parents will hear it and find him. He runs away from the orphanage where he lives and makes his way to New York City. He meets “Wizard” (Robin Williams), a street performer who teaches children to play music.

Cheesy? Yes.

Predictable? You betcha.

Improbable? Well, it is a movie.

Original? Hell no. Then again these days is anything?

None of these make a movie any less enjoyable.

I will agree that “August Rush” was nothing special. It is another in a long line of movies that fall in the middle of the pack. It has been done better and it has been done worse before. The performances are all underwhelming and no one even comes close to standing out as the star.

Though, Robin Williams does stand out in a bad way. He continues to try to show that he is a dramatic actor and not just the coked up hyper-persona we see on television.

When “Wizard” first meets August, he is a mentor. When he sees the pure and amazing talent the boy has, he uses him. He begins to make deals for him. When he does not get his way, he gets angry and yells. He uses August to make himself more money.

This is hammered home over and over again when we see “Wizard” try to make deals. We do not need six scenes showing this. It is understood after the first two.

Even with the excessive amounts of “dramatic” Williams, the movie is still very enjoyable. It may try to be more then it is and fail miserably, but that does not make it a waste of time. It is a touching story of a young boy trying to find his place in the world.

The main problem many of the critics have with the movie is that it is unrealistic and too sentential. It is a movie. Sometimes a feel good movie is a good thing. So what if the plot is a stretch, it is a movie. It is fiction. All you need to do is sit back and enjoy.

6 out of 10
Rated PG for some thematic elements, mild violence and language.
1 hr 53 min

I guess I should have seen this coming. Animation has come a long way since the first Mickey Mouse cartoon, “Steamboat Willie,” in 1928. Where old cartoons used to be drawn painstakingly frame by frame and all by hand, today computers have replaced the artist’s pencil.

Over the past few years there have been leaps in animation. Forgettable movies like “The Wild” and “TMNT” have shown that animation has come a very long way. While these two movies were children’s movies and used animals as main characters, they looked very close to real life. I should have been expecting that day when humans were rendered perfectly in an animated movie.

Thus we have “Beowulf.”

For those, like me, who went to a high school where this was not required reading, the movie’s plot is as follows; Beowulf (voiced by Ray Winstone) comes to King Hrothgar’s (voiced by Anthony Hopkins) kingdom to rid them of Grendel (voiced by Crispin Glover). He volunteers to kill Grendel’s mother (voiced by Angelina Jolie), but because of her beauty cannot and ends up “giving her a son” instead. When he returns, Hrothgar names him the heir. The king decides that Beowulf is to be king sooner rather then later and jumps off his castle wall, Beowulf takes the throne. Years later his past comes back to haunt him when a dragon that turns out to be his son attacks the countryside.

When I walked of the theater after the movie, my friend said, “The only thing that had in common with the book was the title.” He told me that the second half of the movie never happened in the epic poem.

If you are going to see this hoping for an intriguing story and great characters, do not bother. The animation is the only reason to see this. It is simply breathtaking. In some instances it looks almost real. It does retain that cartoon feel and quality of other computer animated movies, but this takes it to a whole new level. It is better than anything to come before it and looks to become commonplace in the future.

Having a movie completely computer animated allows for freedom to do things with the camera that could not be done otherwise.

When King Hrothgar throws himself off the castle wall, the crown is placed on Beowulf’s head. The camera focuses on the
details of the crown. It starts at the back of the new king’s head and pans around showing the story of the former king and his rise to power. When it reaches what is the front of the crown is tilts down and reveals that 50 years have past and the one young Beowulf is now an aged king. It is a simple shot that can only be accomplished in a digital world.

I did see this in a regular theater, but I have heard that the best way to see it is in an IMAX 3-D theater. If I liked the plot a little more and felt like shelling out the $11 to see it, I would, but I do not have the time or the money. The movie may have a horrible story that strays from the original source material, but the animation is something to behold.

6 out of 10
PG-13 for intense sequences of violence including disturbing images, some sexual material and nudity.
1 hr 54 min

Last week, whether you noticed or not, the writers of Hollywood went on strike. That means that no new scripts for movies or television will be written until the studios and the Writers Guild of America reach an agreement. As of Tuesday night, no agreement has been reached and no further talks are scheduled for the immediate future.

What the writers want, as with most strikes, is more money. Truth be told, the amount they are asking for is relatively small.
Way back when VHS tapes were in their infancy, the writers took a pay cut to allow the studios to help build the market. In the past 20 plus years, the pay has remained the same. That means that for every DVD sold at $19.99, the writers get four cents. In the age of the Internet, the writers are also paid four cents for downloads from stores like Amazon and iTunes. They get absolutely no money for their work is for the episodes shown on the web.

All the major networks have entire episodes of certain shows that can be viewed online. They post advertisements and get revenue for it. The writers get nothing even though it is their work that is being shown.

So what exactly do the writers want? They want the original contract honored; giving them eight cents for every DVD sold. They want more per download and residuals for the online episodes. That is all they want and at least from my standpoint it seems reasonable.

There is an issue that no one seems to be looking at; the effect a prolonged strike would have on the viewing public. In 1988 the WGA went on strike for 22 weeks and the studios lost $55 million. That is not my problem. I think the studios make way too much for doing nothing anyway.

My problem is lies with what could happen should this last as long as the previous strike. How are the viewers going to respond to a long, drawn out span with no new scripted television?

Dozens of shows are going into reruns soon. Most will not make it that far into 2008 and many more will not return once the strike is over. If the strike continues longer then three months no new pilots will be filmed meaning that there will be no new television for the fall 2008 season. Infact there would be no brand new shows until January of 2009. You read that right; 2009.Who knows how many viewers will not return if that happens.

Television is an escape for millions of people. I know that I look forward to watching TV when I get home from school every day. It is a time to relax, put your feet up and zone out for however long you want.
Soon that release will not be there. It will be all reality shows and reruns. Nothing new until the studios and the writers can reach an agreement. That leaves us, the viewing public, with a void. We are the ones who are feeling the effect of this strike, not the writers and certainly not the studios.

Millions could feel betrayed if they lose their primetime dramas and comedies. It is nice to come home and watch Michael Scott from “The Office” be the complete dope of a boss. Watch Grissom solve the case on “CSI”. Watch House be a jerk while he solves the most complex medical mysteries. Watch those with special powers on “Heroes” discover just what they can do and save the world. All of these are escapes from reality. It is a reality that every day looks bleaker without new television.

That is what is really at stake. Not only could millions be lost in revenue during the strike, but also billions are at stake if the viewers decide not to return. Our trust has been tested and our patience is running out. If the studios want us to watch what they air and the writers want us to watch what they write, they had better figure this out before it is too late.

Why do you go to movies?

I go, not just because I have two pages to fill every week, but to escape. There is a lot to worry about between politics, war, environmental crises, classes and the endless stream of general crap that happens everyday. I pay the ridiculous amount of a movie ticket, walk along the sticky floors and sit in seats that smell like old popcorn to get away from real life.

I do not go to get reminded of what I am trying to escape. I do not go to get preached to. I do not go to feel bad about myself. I do not go to want to better myself afterward. I do not go to see “Lions for Lambs”

The movie focuses on three different stories taking place over the course of 88 minuets (hence the running time). Senator Jasper Irving (Tom Cruise) is in a meeting with journalist Janine Roth (Meryl Streep). They discuss Irving’s new plan for the war in Afghanistan. The second focuses on soldiers Arian Finch (Derek Luke) and Ernest Rodriguez (Michel Peña) who are a part of the team that is implementing the new plan when they are shot at. Finch and Rodriguez fall out of the helicopter and are trapped on a snowy mountain as the Taliban move in. Lastly, at an unnamed California university, Professor Stephen Malley (Robert Redford) is meeting with one of his students, Todd Haynes (Andrew Garfield). Todd has been missing class and Malley talks to him about two other students he had, Ernest Rodriguez and Arian Finch and the choices they made while in college.

Damn, do I hate being preached at. I hate it even more when it leads nowhere. I felt like I was at a political debate, not a movie. It does not point a finger at one group; it points a finger at everybody. That is right, we are all to blame for the war. Conservatives, Liberals, Professors, Students, Parents, Congress, Journalists, even your sweet 80-year-old grandmother. It is our fault and shame on you for being apathetic, enlisting, or agreeing with the war. Way to go America, you really messed up this time.

Were it not for Tom “I Heart Xenu” Cruise, there may have been a small chance I would have returned to my apartment and tried to better myself. Thankfully, I guess, the “ball o’ crazy” that is the poster boy of Scientology just makes me want to vomit. I used to like Cruise. He picked some great and memorable roles and always seemed to be a genuinely good guy. That changed the day he jumped on couch of the equally self-righteous Oprah followed quickly by declaring that he knew all there is to know about medicine because he read a few books. The man is a completely self-absorbed jackass.
I may not like Tom Cruise the man, but I do still respect Tom Cruise the actor. He may be a whack job, but he can still act and does it well. Just not here. What begins as a Senator defending the war on terror quickly becomes a crazy man talking in circles.

I expect more from Redford and Streep than what I got. They just sleep walk through the movie. These two are fantastic performers and have proved it over and over again. Why stoop to this? I can forgive actors who make bad movies. Hell, I even expect it from them after a long sting of great, Oscar worthy roles. Sometimes they need a vacation and pick a fun movie that may flop at the box office, but they really do not care. I can forgive that. What I cannot forgive is a movie like this. It is trying way to hard to be a serious Oscar contender and just becomes overly dramatic.

If there is one thing I hate more than a preachy movie, it is a pompous one. Get over yourself. The purpose of a movie is to entertain, not to guilt trip the viewer. If I wanted that I would have watched a propaganda film. At least then I would have know what I was getting in to.

4 out of 10
R, for some war violence and language
88 min

Normally I start each review with some snappy observation. I use this vary paragraph to complain or praise something related to the movie I am about to review. Something happened to me when I sat down to do this review. I drew a blank. I tried so many different openings. I went with the humorous, the philosophical, the serious even the dry opening and nothing worked. It was after 15 long minutes of typing and deleting that I realized something. Some movies transcend the movie going experience.

Set in the 1970s during the Vietnam War, “American Gangster” follows Frank Lucas (Denzel Washington) as he rises to become one of the top heroin dealers in New York. He delivers the highest quality drug at Wal-Mart prices. As more and more product floods the street, Richie Roberts(Russell Crowe), an out cast cop, is picked to head up a police force whose sole aim is finding the biggest drug dealers in the city. As Lucas gets more and more powerful, Richards comes closer and closer to busting him.

You really cannot go wrong with Denzel Washington. He is one of the greatest actors of this generation. He continues to raise the bar of what to expect from a lead actor. Lucas is a horrible person. In the first three seconds, and I am not exaggerating that at all, he lights a man on fire and then shoots him. Instantly we know he is not a man to mess with. Yet, you cannot hate him. He is so charming and so charismatic that you cannot hate him.
I know that in “The Godfather” and “Scarface” you like the gangster. The difference between those classics and “American Gangster” is this gangster is being perused by a cop who happens to be the other main character.

Crowe is another one of those actors who finds roles that show off this talent. Roberts became an outcast when he turned in some dirty cops who were taking money. He is picked to head up the narcotics enforcement team because he is seen as a clean guy. He begins to piece together that Lucas is working with powerful mafia members and even has them working for him. Roberts is a good guy who is surrounded by corruption. He handpicked his crew for the narcotics unit because he had to trust them. When he makes his way to New York City, Roberts, who works out of New Jersey, has to work with cops who he knows are dirty. He has to make a few compromises to get Lucas.

The movie almost lost me at one point. The police are making raids on some of Frank’s places as he sits in church. At first I thought that it was going to resemble the final scene in “The Godfather” where Michael attends his son’s baptism while the hits he ordered are carried out. Luckily it was not edited with quick cuts between the two scenes. They saved themselves from ripping off another movie by keeping the action on the raids and simply establishing that Frank was in church.

This is up there with other gangster movies like “Goodfellas” and “The Godfather.” Crowe and Washington are fantastic, as usual, in their roles. The story was riveting and the characters were intriguing. The performances were amazing and even the directing was awesome. When the Academy Award nominations come out in the next few months look for Washington and maybe even Crowe on the ballot for Best Actor. I even predict the movie getting the nod for Best Picture. There are so few movies out there worth seeing, but this is one of them.

9 our of 10
Rated R for violence, pervasive drug content and language, nudity and sexuality
2 hrs 37 mins

It may not have been the best idea to go see a movie while as tired as I was, but sometimes “you gotta do what you gotta do.” Though if you are reading this thinking “Well, he was tired, so he could not have liked it.” You would be wrong, and that is a testament to “Michael Clayton.” It is a movie that fought through my haze and really impressed despite a lack of sleep.

Michael Clayton (George Clooney) is a “fixer” for one of the most powerful law firms in the world. When the firm needs something covered up or handled carefully, they call in Clayton. For the past seven years, they have been working on a case between farmers and a pesticide company. When one of the firm’s best lawyers, Arthur Edens (Tom Wilkinson) strips naked during a deposition, Clayton is called into fix things. What he uncovers could break the case for the prosecution and the firm would end up losing the case. The firm will stop at nothing to keep the information from being made public.

I have always been on the opinion that to play crazy is a hard thing to do. To do it right takes something more than just spewing gibberish and wearing shoes on your hands and pants on your head. Arthur is a manic-depressive and was on medication for it, but decided to stop taking it just as the big case gets underway. He finds out that the pesticide company knowingly killed 500 people with their product he becomes racked with guilt. Wilkinson does an amazing job playing crazy. Most of the time it is subtle and never way over the top. When he is once again on medication, you can see him for the brilliant lawyer he is. He knows what he has to do and does it despite what may happen to him.

Cooney has always been an amazing actor. He delivers in even when the rest of the movie does not. Here he has both a strong story and strong supporting cast to help him carry the movie. Clayton is a character who is used to cleaning up the messes of clients. He knows how to spin the truth in their favor. Now he is faced with the truth that hundreds have been killed and the company knew about it and did nothing. It is a complete role reversal for him. Now, instead of covering up the truth, he is forced to expose it.

Along with the job, Clayton is forced to deal with being a divorced dad and being in debt after the business he tried to start goes under before it opens. In the hands of Clooney, this goes from generic plot device used to gain sympathy to making the character more human. Clooney makes Clayton’s personal life matter to the viewer. No longer is he the man who spins the truth for the rich, instead he comes a man who is looking for a way out and a way to make his life better. This makes the fact that he takes on Arthur’s cause all the more dramatic.

Even through the haze of no sleep, “Michael Clayton” is a riveting and intriguing drama. In a big-budget special effect ruled Hollywood, it is refreshing to see a movie that takes the time to develop characters and make the story interesting instead of worrying about the box office business.

8 out of 10
R for language including some sexual dialogue.
2 hrs

Halloween is right around the corner and soon costume stores will be flooded with children looking for whatever the hot costume is this year. Another sequel to the mediocre “Saw” will be released keeping up the lame and pointless tradition that has made me want to punch a hole in the wall the past four years. Look at any news medium and you can find a list of the top horror movies of all time. Seeing as that is way to cliché and, more importantly, that I scare like a five year old, I bring you the top five horror/comedies of all time.

5-“Gremlins”



After Randall Peltzer (Hoyt Axton) brings his son Billy (Zach Galligan) a Mogwai named Gizmo for a gift, things turn bad when he breaks the three rules (do not get it wet, no bright lights, and absolutely no food after midnight) things turn bad. When Gizmo gets wet, he multiplies and when the new gremlins eat after midnight, they turn evil. The town is over run with evil gremlins causing all sorts of problems and reeking havoc. Now it is up to Zach, his friend Kate (Phoebe Cates) and cute little Gizmo to stop them before they take over.

What makes “Gremlins” so good is that it is a horror movie that the entire family can watch. Cute little monsters turn into green troublemakers when the rules get broken. Take out Gizmo’s cute and fluffiness and make the offspring a little meaner and this could have been a classic 80s horror movie. The movie has a lot of very funny moments, the best of which take place in the toy store near the end of the movie. Watch it, you will see what I mean.

4-“Evil Dead” and “Evil Dead 2”





I combine these two because they are essentially the same movie. Both plots boil down to the same thing. In “Evil Dead,” five friends travel to a cabin in the woods. There they discover the Book of the Dead. When one of them finds and plays a tape of the professor who lived in the cabin speaking the Candarian resurrection passages from the book, one by one the friends begin to turn into demons. Soon Ash (Bruce Campbell) is the only one left and finds that the only way to kill a Candarian demon is total body dismemberment. Blood and gore ensue.

“Evil Dead II” is the same thing except this time Ash and his girlfriend are in the cabin the same thing happens. Hilarity along with blood and gore ensue.

If you have not seen these movies yet, then I just have one question. Why? These were the movies that gave the world the B-movie god, Bruce Campbell. “Evil Dead” is the more serious of the two. It is as if Sam Rami was trying to make a real horror movie. “Evil Dead II” is flat out hilarious. In one of the most memorable scenes, Ash’s hand becomes possessed and fights with it. After cutting it off and trapping it in a bucket, he replaces it with a chainsaw. (Now you know you are watching a great B-movie.)

3-“Shaun of the Dead”


Shaun (Simon Pegg) is a 29-year old store clerk who has nothing going in this life. His girlfriend, Liz (Kate Ashford) has just left him because she wants more then he is giving her. His best friend Ed (Nick Frost,) is a slacker who spends his days on the couch playing video games. The day he decides to get his life back together is the same day as the living dead invade. He must now fight off zombies and save Liz and his mother (Penelope Wilton) form the undead.

“A romantic comedy. With zombies” is how the poster describes it and there is really in no better way to describe it. The movie is just flat out hilarious. Shaun goes around killing zombies with a cricket bat, pool cues and even throws records at a few zombies. There is one scene that best sums up the craziness of the movie. Shaun and Ed are throwing records at two zombies. Shaun tells Ed to be careful, some of the records are rare. Ed begins to flip through and has to ask Shaun about every record "Purple Rain"? “No.” "Sign o' the Times?" “Definitely not.” “The "Batman" soundtrack?” “Throw it.” All the while the zombies are getting closer and closer. Zombie movie king, George Romero, was so impressed that he gave Pegg and director, Edgar Wright, roles as zombies in “Land of the Dead.”

2-“Grindhouse”



This is another two-movie entry. Thought this time, the movies were released at the same time and were shown back to back.

“Planet Terror” is first up on the bill. In a small town in Texas, after a deal gone wrong, zombie like creatures called “Sickos” get loose and begin infecting the rest of the town. Now those not infected, including El Wray (Freddy Rodriguez) and Cherry Darling (Rose McGowaen), must fight their way out of town and to safety.

In the stronger, “Death Proof,” Kurt Russell plays Stuntman Mike. He is a man with a car that is death proof. The only problem is you have to be sitting in his seat to get the full effect. He stalks and kills attractive women with his car.

America, I have to say, you missed the boat on this one. This was the most fun I have had at a movie in my entire life. These are a tribute to the 70s B-movies. They are supposed to be stupid, funny, gross and outrageous. The two movies combined for over three hours and not once did I check the time that is how much fun these movies are. Cannot say that about some 90-minute movies.

No. 1 is-DRUM ROLL PLEASE-

1-“Army of Darkness”


In the end of “Evil Dead II,” Ash is sucked into a time vortex and ends up in the 1300s. He is captured because he is thought to be a spy for a rival kingdom and as punishment he is thrown into a pit at the bottom of which lives a Candarian demon. After Ash kills the demon and escapes, he is seen as the one to find the Book of the Dead and save the kingdom from the Deadites.

This had to be my No. 1. It was the movie that got me into “Evil Dead” and the horror/comedy genre. The movie keeps the humor of the second alive and delivers claymation that is so bad, it is good. It is the classic example of a 80s B-movie. If you have seen the first two, then chances are you have seen this one and know just how awesome it is. How many other movies are there where the hero is responsible for raising the dead? “Shop smart. Shop S Mart.”

It takes almost noting to scare people. There have been tried and true methods that have been used since MGM’s monster movies in the 1930s. To make someone laugh takes real talent. This Halloween put down your copy of “Friday the 13th” or “Nightmare on Elm Street” and take a look at some of the best horror/comedies of all time.

Drew Carey replaced Bob Barker as the host of “The Price is Right” on Monday. I am here to say to all the “haters,” you need to give Drew a chance to prove that he is a worthy host.

I know you have fond memories of staying home sick from school and getting to watch Barker give away big money and fabulous prizes in fun pricing games. While getting to miss school is every child’s dream, being sick is not. Sitting in your favorite chair in front of the television watching “The Price is Right” was the best remedy for everything from a simple cold to chickenpox. For that one, glorious hour you got to forget your worries and that your throat was sore and you have had nothing to eat but saltine crackers for the past 12 hours. There is no way to replace what effect “America’s host” had on a sick child.

Even when you went to college, you still watched “The Price is Right” whenever classes would allow it. You would even plan your classes so that none fell between 11 a.m. and 12 p.m. Just so you could watch the best game show in television history. You may have even wanted to plan a trip to California just to get on the show and hear “(Your name) come on down! You’re the next contestant on ‘The Price is Right!’” Admit it, it has always been your dream.

Heck, you probably had your pets spayed or neutered just because Bob Barker told you too.

You, like much of America, were saddened to hear that Bob Barker would be retiring from the show after 35 years. It was then that the speculation of who would replace him and how they would stack up to Barker.

I am sure you that you were confused to hear that Drew Carey was picked to host “The Price is Right” in season 36 of the show. With Carey taking over earlier this week, his time to be fairly judged has finally come.

Carey will never be as loved as Barker was and still is. Carey looks to be a more comedic role as host. He will take slight jabs at the contestants and their overzealous nature. Assuming they can hear him through their screaming, they will see that the shots he takes will all be in good fun. Carey will need a little time to learn how all the games work, but soon her will get over the initial pressure of taking over for one of the most beloved Americans ever and find his stride as host.

Carey has said that he will not be changing the show and has kept the 1970s-looking sets, and music. He will stay loyal to the Barker show that has helped rise generations of children. He even will keep Bob Barker’s famous closing line about controlling the pet population.

So, please give Drew a chance. He, no doubt, will do his best to keep the show the same way that millions have remembered it. He may not be as successful as Bob Barker, but then again, who could be?
I will end as Bob did for 36 years. Do not forget to help control the pet population, have your pets spayed and neutered.

One of the perks of my job here at the paper is that every so often, I am given the chance to see an advanced screenings. Last week dozens of, what I can only assume were radio contest winners, and I were treated to “Elizabeth: The Golden Age.”

“Elizabeth: The Golden Age” is a sequel to the 1998’s “Elizabeth,” this time the movie looks at the life of Queen Elizabeth (Cate Blanchett) when Spain was threatening to take over the English throne. Elizabeth was a Protestant and much of England was Catholic, so the threats on her life were very real. King Phillip II of Spain (Jordi Mollà) planned to have Elizabeth assassinated and put Mary Stuart aka Mary Queen of Scots (Samantha Morton) in her place.

Elizabeth is also feeling the pressure to get married. The rumors of her infertility are hurting her reputation so she begins to see suitors from kingdoms all over the world, but she has an eye for the charming (not Sir yet) Walter Raleigh (Clive Owen).

The story in the movie is not that strong. It seemed to drag on and the climax happens in the last 15 minutes and even then, it is not that thrilling.

What to should look for are the strong performances from Blanchett and Owen. They deliver the performances that save the movie from dragging on and remaining ultimately uninteresting.

Blanchett reprises her star-making role in “Elizabeth.” She plays Elizabeth with the strength and conviction that a queen needs. She refuses to be pushed around and if you cross her you will pay the price. She seems almost untouchable, but in the scenes with Raleigh we see a more human side of her. She is sweet and kind to him. She is interested in him not only because he is charming, but also because he has traveled to the “new world” and is an adventurer. She is presented with any number of rich and powerful suitors who, should she marry, would provide powerful alliances with other counties. This is not what she wants and that is why she gravitates to Raleigh. He represents the “everyman” and someone she could love for their personality and not because of the result would be a powerful alliance.

Owen, as far as I am concerned, makes a star turn with his performance. I have always liked Owen because he is such an amazing actor, be even I was impressed with this performance. He has shown that he can do “period pieces” as well as movies like “Sin City” and “Children of Men.” He plays Raleigh with such charm and charisma. He flashes a smile and is instantly liked. He is, in essence, The Fonz for the 1500s. He treats Elizabeth both with the reverence of a queen and familiarity of an equal.

“Elizabeth: The Golden Age” suffers from a weakly written story and a plot that seems somewhat rushed as the movie closes. The saving graces are two stellar performances from Owen and Blanchett. They alone are worth giving this one a try should nothing else in the theaters seem worth it.

6 out of 10
Rated PG-13for violence, some sexuality and nudity.
1 hr 54 mins

I need to confess something to you dear reader; I have been putting this one off for a while. For the past few weeks I have been giving you reviews of television shows, not just because it is a lot cheaper than a movie, but because the movie climate of the past few weeks has, well, sucked. There was only one movie that I really wanted to see that was worth the price of admission. So instead of going out and wasting a review, I waited. Now that, beginning tomorrow, the movies get better, or at least more interesting, I decided it was time to step back into a theater, pay close to four dollars for a bottle of water (first and last time I will do that) and see one of those moving pictures I have heard so much about.

In “Eastern Promises,” Anna (Naomi Watts) is a midwife at a hospital. When a young pregnant girl dies during childbirth, Anna takes her diary to find out if she has any relatives. This leads her to a restaurant where she worked, which is run by Semyon (Armin Mueller-Stahl) a member of the Vory V Zakone, a powerful Russian gang living in England. Semyon says he will translate the diary, which is in Russian, and if he finds a name or address, he will let her know. As the movie progresses, Anna’s life becomes intertwined with Nikolai (Viggo Mortensen), a driver for the gang and man who seems to be a gangster with a heart.

I have always liked Naomi Watts. She has done an amazing job in just about every movie she has ever been in. She and the monkey made “King Kong” good. She is an incredible actress and has found success in both big budget movies and in smaller, independent movies. In this movie she plays a woman who is very caring. She puts herself and her aunt and uncle in danger as she peruses finding out more about the mother of the baby. She knows that if the family is not found that the baby will end up in the foster care system and she would be stuck there all her life. Anna takes it upon herself to give this baby a better life.

Mortensen is an actor who throws himself into his character. For this role, he traveled to Moscow alone without a translator, read books on the Vory V Zakone, visited Russian prisons and even learned all his lines in English, Ukrainian and Russian. He does not just act, he becomes. He puts everything into his roles and it shows on screen. His character is a mystery. He is a murderer, but he also has a softer side he shows to Anna.

The violence in this movie is brutal. None of the gang members carry guns. As I found out the gun laws in Britain are stricter than the laws in the United States. All the villains use knives to kill. One scene in particular sticks out. Nikoali is in a bathhouse when two men attack him with knives. Besides being unarmed he is also completely naked. He is forced to fight them off with nothing to protect himself with. This scene is full of pure, raw and, pardon the pun, naked violence. He is cut multiple times, thrown all over the rooms and gets beaten within an inch of his life before the scene is over.
“Eastern Promises” was worth holding out for. It is well done in every aspect, both in front of the camera and all the behind the scenes work as well.

It exposes the lack of concern for releasing movies with heart and starring more than flash in the pan actors who are nothing more than tabloid fodder and will be gone as soon as the hype subsides. With nothing more than time wasting filler being released over the past few weeks, it was nice to finally get to a movie that is well done and worth the time. Thankfully we are out of the bottom of the barrel movies and finally we seem to be getting into quality movies.

8/10
R, for strong brutal and bloody violence, some graphic sexuality, language and nudity.
1 hr 40 mins

Last year there was a television show that was critically acclaimed, but was, mostly ignored by the general public. The show was “Friday Night Lights” and the five people who watched it loved it. In an unprecedented move, NBC renewed the show for a second season despite the low ratings.

At the end of last season the hometown football team, the Dillion Panthers, had won the state championship. Coach Eric Taylor (Kyle Chandler) had gotten and accepted a college head-coaching job in Austin. Tami (Connie Britton), his pregnant wife, and his daughter Julie (Aimee Teegarden) stayed behind so Julie could finish high school. Meanwhile the team got a new coach and ex-quarterback Jason Street (Scott Porter), who suffered severe spinal injury in the first game of the previous season, has become an assistant. Quarterback Matt Saracen (Zach Gilford), star running back “Smash” Williams (Gaius Charles) and tight end Tim Riggins (Taylor Kitsch) are looking to repeat last year’s success.

What I loved about this show last year was the fact that it was a show about a football team and not about football. It was more about the team and the people around them. Dillon is a small town and football means everything. When Coach Taylor lost one game last year, the town was calling for him to be fired. Then, when he accepts a job elsewhere, they are angry that he was so successful and just left them after they had won a championship. Football is everything in Dillon and the town rallies around the Panthers every Friday night as they play.

Last year the show focused a lot on Coach Taylor and his family as they dealt with the pressures of his job. This year, the show looks to focus on more than just the Taylors. The first episode of this season centered on Tyra (Adrianne Palicki). Someone who attacked her earlier is stalking her and she fears for her safety. Landry (Jesse Plemons) is her tutor and also has a crush on her. The two have become friends since he began helping her with her schoolwork and he hopes to take the relationship even further. When they go out to get some snacks, Tyra is approached by her stalker and he gets attacker her. When Landry comes out of the store he tries to fight off her attacker and smacks him in the back of the head with a piece of wood. The attacker falls to the ground dead. The next few episodes look to deal with this event affecting Trya and Landry.

From a few interviews I have read, I got the impression that they were going to stray from the formula of last year. The show will be moving away from football and focusing more on the personal struggles of the players and Dillon residents. It seems they are doing this because the show received no Emmy nominations and that if they do it this way, next year they will get some. This could turn out to be a really bad idea. Much of the charm of the show was the football and the players. It was interesting to see the practices and than at the end to the show see the game and how the personal struggles were left off the field and they came together for those two hours on a Friday night.

Even with these changes, the show is still one of the best on television. The critics love it yet no one is watching. I think that if given the chance, this show could be very successful. Like a “Melrose Place” or “Beverly Hills 90210” for the new minimum. The drama is there. The great cast is there. All it needs is you to start watching.

“Friday Night Lights” airs every Friday at 9 p.m. on NBC.

Sometimes I wonder who is making the decisions at the networks. Some of the shows are horrible, but nothing perplexed me as much as when, last year, ABC announced that they were developing a show based on a commercial. The buzz was immediate and opinions were made before the show had even started filming. Tuesday was the day that America got to find out if this is either the greatest idea for a show, or a really lame publicity stunt.

“Cavemen” is based on the popular Geico commercials (there is a sentence I never thought I would write). Joel (Bill English) Nick (Nick Kroll) and Andy (Sam Huntington) are three cavemen living in modern day Virginia (I think, judging by a weather map). The pilot revolves around Joel trying to get permission to marry Kate (Kaitlin Doubleday). He is invited to a country club for a Forth of July celebration and he uses this time to try to get her father to like him.

I give ABC credit; they tried something new. No one has ever used a commercial as source material for a television show before. The only problem is the commercial is a one-note joke about cavemen being stereotyped as stupid works for the short time span. You would think that the show would try to be different. You would be wrong. In fact, it relies on a single joke way too much. The cavemen have become a race and not just less evolved humans. There is a lot of use or plays on black stereotypes. They are better at sports (at least horse shoes) that the modern humans and are suspected of stealing the tip jar. They can dance better and are “wild” in bed. There is even a derogatory term for cavemen; “Cro-Maggers.” It is the same thing over and over again.

Despite the original source material, it is unoriginal in every other aspect. The cavemen themselves fall into sitcom stereotypes. Joel is the straight laced one, Nick is the hip slacker and Andy is the loveable dope. Kate loves Joel even though he is different and hairy. The three cavemen are out of place in the world of the county club. It is all the same and it has all been done before.

Even with all this show has going against it; there were some funny moments. Nick is proud of his primitive heritage. He is constantly mocking the upper class county club crowd that Joel seems desperate to become a part of. Nick even takes a few hundred bucks off the club members in a game of horseshoes and when he loses it, makes it a “racial” issue.

That is not enough to make this show good. The concept is interesting at best and the raciest overtones are hard to ignore. The show, much like the commercials it is based on, is a one-joke wonder and burns out quickly. Basing a show on a commercial dooms it from the start. A joke in a commercial works because it is between 15-60 seconds long. After that it is over. A show cannot sustain a single joke for 21 minuets (including the actual commercials) and be successful. I guess I should be glad that they did not base a show around the Aflac duck.

“Cavemen” airs every Tuesday at 8 p.m. on ABC