A semi-regular attempt to address some of life’s minutiae that might otherwise be overlooked…..
Word on the street is that Harrison Ford is in for the Star Wars sequels. That’s good news. I can’t imagine that Carrie Fisher and Mark Hamill wouldn’t be up for it as well. Surprisingly I’ve never read any of the dozens of Star Wars books but I can imagine that the new sequels will pick up three decades after Return of the Jedi and the focus would be on the offspring of our legendary
triumvirate. I assume Han Solo & Princess Leia got married, had a couple kids, and now hold elder statesmen roles within The New Republic. Luke Skywalker is a Jedi master…kind of the new Obi-wan Kenobi…got married, and had a few children as well. Darth Vader is obviously dead so we’ll see a new bad guy. The key question is which actors & actresses will be cast as the new generation. I hope director JJ Abrams goes for good actors versus movie stars…there is a difference. This new trilogy has to be a cut above the mindless action rubbish that the movie going public has become anesthetized by. Star Wars deserves better. I pray that Abrams stays away from people like Shia LaBeouf, Zac Efron, Channing Tatum, and…God help us…Justin Bieber & Selena Gomez. There are decent young performers out there that could bring a level of gravitas to the story…folks like Paul Dano, Abigail Breslin, Jennifer Lawrence, Shailene Woodley, Emile Hirsch, Hunter Parrish, Josh Hutcherson, and Kate Mara. Abrams did an excellent job in casting the Star Trek reboot so I trust that he will do the same for Star Wars.
So I guess the new trend is to equate gay rights with civil rights and homosexuals with other minorities. I could go into a long diatribe about my particular feelings on the issue, but I will refrain. Suffice to say that I disagree 
with the philosophy and think that women & blacks…who fought long & hard for equal rights and still must to a certain degree…should be immensely offended about the equivocation. That doesn’t mean that those who choose a particular lifestyle should be made to endure discrimination & abuse because at the end of the day we should all be about human rights and stop trying to divide & conquer, but it does mean that some people need to stop demanding to be celebrated or given special treatment for their choices.
I love Al Pacino. He is one of the finest actors to ever grace a stage, TV screen, or movie set. But what is the deal with him doing all these biopics of 
controversial dudes?? First he played “Dr. Death” Jack Kevorkian for HBO in 2010. Then came word that he will be playing Joe Paterno in a future film. And now he’s playing wildhaired music producer & convicted murderer Phil Spector…again for HBO. I don’t know…these kinds of roles just somehow seem beneath a performer the caliber of Pacino.
Conversely…..
I hear that Robin Williams is headed back to TV in a new sitcom. Now THAT is something to be excited about!!
Speaking of civil rights…..
I recently saw an ad on TV for a dating site called BlackPeopleMeet.com. I must admit that I was somewhat taken aback at first until I gave it some thought. Upon further ponderation I recalled that there is still an NAACP, a Congressional Black Caucus, and black colleges (well okay…now they say predominantly or historically black colleges) like Grambling, Howard, & Southern University, all of which were necessary at one time but seem 
somewhat anachronistic now. I was born way after the civil rights era of the 60’s with Rosa Parks refusing to sit in the back of the bus & Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. leading the fight for justice & freedom. However, it strikes me as odd that a group of folks whose forefathers fought so hard for and in some cases gave their lives for equality & integration continue to willingly segregate themselves on some level. If I started any kind of exclusive “whites only” organization in 2013 I would immediately be labeled a racist and be (rightly so) ostracized, belittled, & condemned. It seems like that’s a one way street though. Dr. King expressed faith that one day we would all be able to “work together, to pray together, to struggle together, to go to jail together, to stand up for freedom together” and hope that “all of God’s children, black men and white men, Jews and Gentiles, Protestants and Catholics, will be able to join hands and sing”. I am not sure how BlackPeopleMeet.com helps achieve that goal.
I have discovered a new hobby. Events like The Super Bowl & The Grammys…among others…are much more entertaining if I utilize Twitter to express my smartass thoughts the entire time. I am actually looking forward to The Oscars for the first time in…well…ever.
I didn’t watch Obama’s State of the Union because I would rather stick my head in a pizza oven for an hour than hear that man spew his nonsense, but I hear that he wants to raise the minimum wage. That’s a nice idea in theory, but I wonder about the unintended negative consequences. What good does raising wages do when prices seem to rise correspondingly?? How many 
people would lose jobs and how many small businesses would go under?? Why are we concentrating on artificially raising the lowest standard instead of increasing opportunities for better jobs?? Will more people just end up on government assistance?? What about the people already making $10-15/hr….will their wages increase?? I am not an economist and I’m not really in the mood to get into anything in depth at the moment, but these are questions that need to be addressed & answered.
Related articles
- ‘Star Wars: Episode VII’: Harrison Ford Will Return To Star As Han Solo (screencrave.com)
- ‘Offically on board’: Harrison Ford ‘to return as Han Solo’ for new Star Wars films (mirror.co.uk)
- Harrison Ford to Reprise Han Solo in Star Wars Reboot? (manolith.com)
- Star Wars Alert! Harrison Ford Confirmed To Return In Episode 7! (perezhilton.com)
- HBO Releases An Insanely Terrifying Photo of Al Pacino as Phil Spector (observer.com)
- HBO releases video tease of Al Pacino as Phil Spector (brooklynvegan.com)
- Al Pacino’s Phil Spector moment: HBO’s film still deconstructed (guardian.co.uk)
through the prism of the viewing public it is difficult to not fall into the trap of being lazy, repetitive, and uninspired. Too often we see sequels that are just retreads of the original…same stunts, same gags, same jokes, same effects. Or worse yet, the powers-that-be try to make a sequel where few of the original actors or characters remain and they are only borrowing a broad concept or theme with very loose ties to its predecessor. The Godfather Part II is not a victim of any of these issues. It is quite possibly the greatest sequel ever made. It was the first sequel to win the 
Robert Duval, and Diane Keaton returning from the first film and acting legend Lee Strasberg coming out of retirement to portray Hyman Roth. My favorite character though might be Frank Pentangeli, a Corleone family caporegime who replaces Clemenza, a development dictated by a dispute with the actor who played Clemenza. Frankie Five Angels is just tremendous…funny, ham-handed, erratic, and most of all unique. I am not sure Part II would have been quite as good with Clemenza as it ends up being with Pentageli. The flashback sequences with the younger Vito are done completely in Italian, a risky move by director 
I know I have said it before but it bears repeating…I am not an action flick aficionado. Most anything starring Stallone, Schwarzenegger, Van Damme, Seagal, or Chuck Norris just doesn’t frost my cupcake. I have never seen a James Bond film in its entirety. Indiana Jones has never graced a screen big or small in my presence. But as with any rule there are exceptions, and this is the biggest one of them all. 1988’s Die Hard finds Bruce Willis starring as John McClane, a NY City cop whose marriage is on the rocks because his wife took a corporate gig in Los Angeles and now lives there with the kids, estranged from her husband. She invites him out to the Left Coast for Christmas to visit the children and maybe smooth things out. However, upon arriving at the wife’s company Christmas bash near the top of an unfinished skyscraper McClane finds himself the lone wolf fighting against a contingent of foreign terrorists who invade the party, kill the CEO, and hold everyone else hostage. The bad guys are unaware of McClane’s presence and even when he does make himself known he does not reveal that he has the skills to fight back. Soon enough the LAPD and the FBI are involved. There is lots of shooting and explosions, but thankfully they are accompanied by a good story and surprising levity for an action movie. I think maybe that’s why I like it…the humor sets Die Hard apart from others in the genre, who tend to take themselves too seriously. Don’t misunderstand…Die Hard is a serious movie about terrorism and one man’s battle to save the life of his beloved wife, but along the way we get airheaded FBI agents (agent Johnson and Special Agent Johnson), a limo driver that personifies the generation gap between himself and McClane, and the Dad from Family Matters, an 80’s sitcom best known for its nerdy star Urkel, who bonds with McClane over the two-way radio. We also get Hans Gruber, one of the most memorable villains in movie history. Gruber is portrayed by Alan Rickman, who is widely known today as Professor Snape in the Harry Potter films. But in 1988 he was an unknown who ended up creating such a great character. It is implied that Gruber is a ticked off German who has taken over Nakatomi Plaza for political reasons. However, we eventually learn that he is nothing more than a thief whose goal is to steal a half billion dollars worth of bonds, destroy the building making everyone think the terrorists perished as well, and escape with the loot. It is an ingenious plan, and Gruber seems to know everything that will happen. He especially knows the playbook of the police and the feds, who are portrayed as predictable buffoons. But what he and his men don’t plan on is the “fly in 
the ointment” named John McClane. Willis was a television star at the time, coming into our living rooms each week alongside Cybill Shepherd in the detective rom-com Moonlighting. He had done a few forgettable films, but it was Die Hard that made him a star and he has continued to ride the wave for over 20 years. Die Hard, in my opinion, is the gold standard of action movies. It has just the right mix of drama, action, humor, suspense, good writing, and excellent performances. It is not gratuitously bloody, and it is just plausible enough for the viewer to suspend disbelief and become engrossed in the story and characters. 1988 was, of course, long before the tragic events of September 11, 2001, and for that I am thankful if only because Die Hard would likely never get made in a post-9/11 world. McClane has resurfaced in three sequels with plans for yet another, but those efforts have been hit & miss. I keep using the phrase “lightning in a bottle”, and it applies here as well. Countless films have borrowed elements of Die Hard in the last two decades, and I suppose imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. But I have yet to stumble upon a knockoff that comes anywhere close to being as good as the original.
Yes, I know…I am kinda sorta cheating just one more time. In pondering the three original 
anticipation reached a fever pitch. People waited in line days in advance for tickets. Unfortunately the prequels did not live up to their predecessors, but honestly how could they?? They aren’t really bad films, especially the third, but there was no way they could possibly approach the greatness of the original trilogy. Every new generation that is introduced to The 
This is what NFL scouts might call at quick riser, a movie that has improved its stock the most in the shortest amount of time. Released in 1995 and based on the true story of NASA’s 1970 “successful failure”, Apollo 13 is a film that I honestly didn’t pay that much attention to when it first came out. Looking back I have to assume that is due to the timing. June of 1995 was a bad month, one that I look back on almost daily as a negative turning point in my life. So I guess I was engrossed in my own drama and didn’t make it a priority to go to the theater and pay money to watch tragic events of others’ lives. But over the course of the past 10 years I have discovered its greatness and become familiar with the real life situation. Directed by Ron Howard and starring Tom Hanks, Kevin Bacon, and Bill Paxton as astronauts whose planned mission to land on the moon goes horribly awry, Apollo 13 is just the sort of movie I can truly embrace. It is beautifully written, has understated, moving performances, and the direction by Ron Howard is magnificent. I don’t usually recognize the function of the director because honestly I am not familiar enough with what a director really does and what his/her role is in the final product. But here one can easily see that this story, in the hands of someone else…maybe James Cameron (Terminator, Titanic), Renny Harlin (Cliffhanger, Die Hard 2), Ridley Scott (Blade Runner, Gladiator), Quentin Tarantino (Pulp Fiction, Reservoir Dogs), or God forbid as a Michael Bay/Jerry Bruckheimer production (Bad Boys, Pearl Harbor)…would have been completely different and likely lacked the 
subtlety and class brought into the mix by Howard, aka Lil Opie Cunningham, who turns it into something better than a cookie cutter action flick. Two supporting performances, Ed Harris as flight director Gene Kranz and Kathleen Quinlan as astronaut wife Marilyn Lovell, were nominated for Academy Awards. The film itself was nominated for Best Picture and Howard for Best Director. Somehow all four of these awards went to others. Braveheart won Best Picture and its director, Mel Gibson, won that award. Kevin Spacey was Best Supporting Actor for his role as Keyser Soze/Verbal Kint in The Usual Suspects. And Mira Sorvino was Best Supporting Actress in some movie no one remembers. I suppose many may disagree, but it is my contention that Apollo 13 was robbed and should have won atleast 3 of these 4 awards. Harris’ performance is especially exceptional and cemented his status as one of Hollywood’s most underappreciated actors. Various television stations show Apollo 13 quite often, and I almost always stop whatever I am doing to watch, which in my mind is the mark of a really good movie. There is a scene near the end of the film where the fate of the astronauts is in question for about 3 minutes. This plays out in real time and is very dramatic. Since this is a true story I know what happens, and even if it wasn’t a true story I have seen it enough times that I know how everything plays out…yet every single time I watch I get goosebumps and am on the edge of my seat. Now THAT is a great movie.
The Griswold Clan, is the best in the series. But by now loyal readers know of my fierce passion for Christmas movies, and that is why Christmas Vacation ranks higher than its parent film, which is 13th on this list. Clark, Ellen, Rusty, and Audrey don’t actually go anywhere this time. They stay home to host a good old-fashioned Christmas for the extended family, which includes Clark’s parents, Ellen’s parents, and the elderly Uncle Lewis & Aunt Bethany, though their exact relationship is never explained. Showing up unexpectedly is cousin Catherine and her redneck husband Eddie, along with two of their small children. Fans of the Vacation series will recall that Catherine & Eddie and their brood make a memorable appearance in the original, and Eddie turns out to be the big star of this film. There is too much goodness for me to go into detail here, but suffice to say that Clark proves himself to be as big of a buffoon as usual, all the grandparents are nuts in that special grandparent way, and Eddie’s antics are the icing on the cake. Virtually every scene in this move has become legendary, from the oversized Christmas tree that Clark stubbornly determines is going in the living room, to Eddie cleaning out his RV’s toilet in his bathrobe, to the 25,000 lights with which Clark 
adorns the house. As a matter of fact, every December channels like HGTV and The Travel Channel have shows featuring wacky, over-the-top, gaudy Christmas light displays from across the country, and I’d be curious to know whether those kinds of garish exhibits were always around or if Christmas Vacation was the impetus for an odd new holiday tradition. I remember the first time I ever saw this movie, and there is a scene where Clark crashes a saucer sled oiled up with some sort of food varnish that he supposedly invented straight into a WalMart. At the time we did not have a WalMart in my hometown and it was just becoming a big deal. I remember thinking “Man, I wish we had a WalMart”. I laugh at that thought now since WalMart has become such a ubiquitous part of every day life. At any rate, Christmas Vacation has quickly become part of the pantheon of great Christmas movies, one of the half-dozen or so that everyone watches annually. It isn’t high art and it isn’t supposed to be. It is fairly innocuous entertainment, and that’s just fine by me.
expensive restaurant, stay at a luxury hotel, visit his big brother, make love to a beautiful woman, and then blow his brains out”. The Colonel apparently wants to go out in a blaze of glory, and has a few fun adventures, like doing the tango with a lovely and accommodating stranger, test driving a Ferrari (getting pulled over by a clueless policeman…who doesn’t catch on that Slade is blind…in the process), and ambushing his unsuspecting brother’s family on Turkey Day. Meanwhile, Charlie has his own issues. He and a buddy witnessed a few of their classmates vandalizing school property, and the school’s headmaster has bribed a reluctant Charlie to snitch on the perps by guaranteeing that he can singlehandedly get Charlie into Harvard. Maybe it says a lot about my moral fiber or lack thereof, but I’d take that deal in a heartbeat. But Charlie doesn’t want to be THAT guy, so he is conflicted. It is rather weakly constructed drama and definitely takes a backseat to the main story, that of Colonel Slade. Pacino plays Slade in such a way that one dislikes him, feels sympathy for him, and is kind of rooting for him all at the same time. I especially enjoy when Charlie and the Colonel visit Slade’s brother’s family on Thanksgiving. We learn more about Slade’s backstory and how he ended up blind. We begin to understand why he acts the way he does, and somehow we end up cheering him on as he faces off with his prickly nephew (played by a pre-West Wing Bradley Whitford). Gradually Charlie and Colonel Slade form a respectful bond, and the movie culminates with the Colonel defending Charlie against a disciplinary committee at his stuffy prep school. Pacino’s soliloquy rivals anything Shakespeare ever wrote and is one of my favorite movie scenes of all time. He won the Oscar for his role in Scent of A Woman, and rightly so. Sometimes I think maybe it would have been a better movie if someone else besides O’Donnell would have portrayed Charlie, but I suppose it was necessary for Charlie to fade to the background so Colonel Slade could be what anyone who watches this film will remember.
Made in 1964, A Shot in the Dark is the second in the series, and in my opinion the best. Clouseau is charged with solving the murder of a chauffeur in a very wealthy and large household. The prime suspect is one of the maids, Maria Gambrelli, who was sleeping with the chauffeur. Despite the fact that all the evidence undeniably points to Maria, Clouseau will not arrest her because he has instantly become smitten with the undeniably beautiful woman. He bumbles his way through the investigation, getting himself arrested several times and driving his boss, Commissioner Dreyfus, absolutely mad. Several more murders are committed as well, but Clouseau refuses to believe Maria is guilty. A subplot involves Clouseau’s servant, Cato, whom the inept detective orders to attack him “whenever and wherever he least expects it”, a command that Cato follows in hysterical fashion. The relationships between Inspector Clouseau and the Commissioner and Cato, respectively, are laugh-out-loud funny, the very best parts of the film. Those relationships and the antics of Clouseau in general make the particulars of the whodunit plot relatively insignificant. Like any film series The Pink Panther became more and more ridiculous as the powers-that-be tried to squeeze more money out of the franchise, but A Shot in the Dark is a true gem and not to be missed.
& Robin) in an era where most movies are gone within a month or two…so somebody watched the damn movie, and the law of averages would point to just about anyone and everyone. Personally I believe Titanic is a very well written movie with great performances and tremendous effects. I had been fascinated with the tragic story of the Titanic long before the movie was made, and I think the tale is told well. Some may say that real life, historically accurate characters should have been the focus and the movie about them. I understand that point, but I also see what James Cameron was trying to do and why he did it. The characters of Jack and Rose, as well as some of the other supporting roles, were meant as tributes to all 1500 passengers that perished. The “rich girl falls for a guy from the wrong side of the tracks” motif may be a bit cliché, but it works. The framing plot of the old lady who essentially tells the story as a flashback allowed Cameron to use actual footage captured on a dive in a submersible to the actual wreckage, which is pretty ingenious. If you really are one of the handful of people who has never seen Titanic, quit being a stubborn jackass and rent it. It’s a timeless narrative that I believe will stand up well for decades to come.
machine and went back in it himself to once more alter 1985 so that he is a wealthy and powerful tyrant that has killed George and forced Marty’s mother, Lorraine, into marriage. So Marty and Doc have to go back to 1955 one more time to fix the damage. They do and all is well…for a brief moment. Lightning strikes the DeLorean, Doc disappears, and Marty is stuck in 1955. We have a cliffhanger. The third film has Marty, stuck in 1955, receive a letter from Doc, who has been transported back to 1885. Marty finds a way to have 1955 Doc get him to 1885, where he meets up with Doc and some of his own ancestors as well as forebearers of the Tannen clan. Marty saves Doc’s life, which is the reason he went back to 1885. He then finds a way, with the help of a steam locomotive, to get back to 1985. Doc is once again inadvertently left behind trying to get to his 1885 girlfriend Clara. At the end though, Doc and Clara arrive in 1985 via a wicked cool souped up train that has been converted into a time machine. The first Back to the Future is the best, and the third film the weakest. But it’s another case where a trilogy really needs to be treated as one entity. Time travel is almost always an awesome movie device, and these movies do it really well. We see what was at the time modern day, the 1980’s…go back to the 1950’s…go forward to a technologically advanced future in 2015…and go back to the 19th century Old West. It is the very definition of escapism. I haven’t done it for awhile, but it is a lot of fun to spend a rainy day watching all three movies consecutively. I have heard rumors for years about plans to revive the franchise, and I am sure at some point it shall be so, albeit with a whole new cast and likely nothing more than a cameo from Michael J. Fox. If and when that day comes I will judge the new film appropriately, but I will say this much…it’d have to be pretty special to live up to the original trilogy.
money. Unfortunately they get caught in a “perfect storm”, the convergence of three storms in the same place. I am not usually a fan of action films, but in this case the action is so well done…plus it’s unique, i.e. not the usual guns ablazing and mindless explosions but instead a fishing boat and its crew fighting horrendous weather. Even if considered alongside natural disaster flicks like Twister, Deep Impact, and Dante’s Peak, The Perfect Storm stands out due to excellent performances and good writing. The first time I ever watched the film I was not aware that it was based on a true story. I kept waiting for the heroic rescue and the happy ending. When it did not happen and I realized that it was a factual account, I almost cried because it was so sad. Subsequent viewings, with full knowledge of the real life tale, has only deepened my appreciation.
acquired taste and I have to admit I’m not a huge fan. Thrillers and old style “horror” just aren’t my cup o’ tea. However, ol’ Al did produce a few films that weren’t so palpably creepy but were more subtly, subversively strange. That’s a variety of freaky that can entice my sensibilities. North by Northwest is an ideal case in point. Cary Grant stars as a man who is the victim of mistaken identity. Some thugs think he is someone else and that he is in possession of an item they want. The details aren’t really important at all. The chase is the thing. North by Northwest is a thrill ride that takes us from New York City to Mount Rushmore and contains some of the most iconic scenes in movie history. I think I watched it on TV back in junior high thinking it was just one of those movies everyone needs to see. I’m not so much of a follower now and don’t really care what anyone else thinks most of the time, but I’m glad I was back then, otherwise I may have cheated myself out of a truly enjoyable “popcorn” experience and a film I enjoy to this day.
alongside Porky’s, Fast Times At Ridgemont High, and Risky Business. This isn’t high art we’re talking about folks. But you know what? Funny is funny. I appreciate films that are well written, make me think, and have some sort of valuable lesson. On the other hand, sometimes it’s okay to just relax and have fun. I believe a huge part of the success of American Pie is that the characters are pretty realistic. We’ve all known horndog teens like these guys. Some of us have BEEN teenage horndogs like these guys. We laugh because we understand their point-of-view. And even if we’ve grown older and have taken on the inherent responsibilities of adulthood, part of us always hearkens back to those carefree school days. American Pie is fun without being senselessly offensive (for the most part), and on a certain level it is even a bit heartwarming and poignant.
since it was his final role before his untimely death one can understand the commotion. But for me, when I reflect on Ledger’s all too short career, I instantly think of his role in The Patriot. Mel Gibson stars as a widower who just wants to raise his children and desires to stay out of the Revolutionary War. But tragic circumstances pull him into the conflict against his will. Gibson is outstanding in one of his most underappreciated roles, and Ledger was launched into instant stardom. Jason Isaacs (known to audiences now as Lucius Malfoy, malevolent foe of Harry Potter) makes a chilling villain, and restrained yet evocative supporting characters are played by Tom Wilkinson, Donal Logue, and a host of other unheralded performers. As I’ve mentioned previously in this series, I’m not usually a big war film kind of guy. However, I am a history buff so stories about The Revolution or The Civil War atleast get a look. Gibson’s choice of roles outside Braveheart and the Mad Max & Lethal Weapon series has been somewhat shaky (Air America, Man Without A Face, Maverick…all clunkers, and not ones that the government will give you money for), but he hit a home run with The Patriot.
just not a big fan. I prefer to laugh rather than do the whole blood and guts thing. But Saving Private Ryan is so powerful, so raw, so realistic in its portrayal of the World War II D-Day Invasion that it simply cannot be overlooked. The cast is stunning…..Hanks, Matt Damon, Ed Burns, Tom Sizemore, Vin Diesel (showing that he has legit acting chops), and Adam Golberg star, and small cameos are made by Ted Danson, Dennis Farina, Paul Giamatti, and Bryan Cranston. And oh, by the way, the film is directed by Steven Spielberg. The opening scene hits you like a sledgehammer to the nether region, and things don’t really let up after that. The conclusion is so potently memorable and emotional that it takes the movie to another level. Irrespective of the war motif, Saving Private Ryan forces a self evaluation of one’s life, making a person really examine if they’ve made a difference and earned the right to take up space on this planet.
win at the end of the second was a brilliant idea. I’m not privy to inside information, but I suspect that unlike how things work today, back in 1979 a sequel was not assumed or planned. So one can make an educated guess that the whole moral victory angle was Stallone’s original intent. After the enormous success of the first movie a sequel was demanded, and there’s no way on earth the audience would have stood for the underdog losing again. It is somewhat surprising that this foregone conclusion does not diminish Rocky II’s quality, which I suppose can be attributed to the fine writing and performances. Unlike The Godfather films I do not believe a third (or 4th, 5th, & 6th) movie was necessary to elaborate on Rocky Balboa’s saga. I would have been okay with forever remembering him as the imaginary World Heavyweight Champion and skip seeing him lose everything, fight the Russians, and not-so-gracefully grow old. I suppose we can blame George Foreman for the last two sequels and the Cold War for one of its predecessors. I can think of no logical reason why anyone thought Rocky III was a good idea.
The Manofesto 