YEAR ONE When a couple of lazy hunter-gatherers (Jack Black and Michael Cera) are banished from their primitive village, they set off on an epic journey through the ancient world in Columbia Pictures' comedy "Year One." Harold Ramis directs. The screenplay is by Harold Ramis & Gene Stupnitsky & Lee Eisenberg ("The Office") from a story by Harold Ramis. The film is produced by Judd Apatow, Harold Ramis, and Clayton Townsend. In theaters June 19, 2009.
FAST & FURIOUS When a crime brings them back to L.A., fugitive ex-con Dom Toretto (Diesel) reignites his feud with agent Brian O'Conner (Walker). But as they are forced to confront a shared enemy, Dom and Brian must give in to an uncertain new trust if they hope to outmanuever him. And from convoy heists to precision tunnel crawls across international lines, two men will find the best way to get revenge: push the limits of what's possible behind the wheel. In theaters April 3, 2009.
RACE TO WITCH MOUNTAIN A UFO expert enlists the help of a cabbie to protect two siblings with paranormal powers from the clutches of an organization that wants to use the kids for their nefarious plans. Starring Dwayne Johnson and Carla Gugino. In theaters March 13, 2009.
On YouTube and Google Video you can find all sorts of interesting videos and clever animations, short films and student films of real worth and merit. There's also a tremendous amount of crap. It's rare, I think, to discover an artist on these sites who has matured and developed both as an artist and in both technique and style, in the time since these sites started over two years ago. One such artist is takena, a clay-mation animator (he uses the lower case t to spell his name online.)
takena's latest and best films are presented below. The first, Chainsaw Maid, is a colorful zombie gore fest that pays homage in equal parts to Raimi and Romero, with a small tip of the hat to David Lynch's favorite composer Angelo Badalamenti. What I really like about Chainsaw Maid is the small bits of character takena manages to squeeze out of his (mostly) silent characters. We are witness to a small family, Dad and Daughter, faithfully served by an attractive, anime-like maid. We learn that the Dad and the maid are lovers, only to be interrupted by the sudden appearance of Mom, who has been infected by a terrible plague. Mom bursts in, pukes her guts out, and dies. Dad and the Maid are horrified, but not as much as the daughter, who has left her bed to witness her mother's gruesome death.
Though characterization is slight, and often played for comic effect, it goes a long way towards creating the charm of this short film. The Maid's ability to deal with the zombie plague is nicely contrasted to Dad's complete inability. We get a short version here of J.M. Barries's play, "The Admirable Chrichton," in which a lowly butler is elevated to stalwart hero when a crew of high born aristocrats are stranded on a deserted island. The resilience and ability of the common worker is shown in both works to be more than equal to the preening helplessness of the bourgeois.
A step backwards in subtlety but still an interesting exercise is takena's Pussycat. Switching gears from zombie's to serial killers means leaving the visceral thrills of Evil Dead behind and entering a more psychological The Silence of the Lambs territory. Casting anthropomorphic animals instead of humans has the effect of making the short feel like a medieval morality play, or a fairy tale (there are intentional shades of The Three Little Pigs) but with modern, 1940's Warner Brothers cartoon sensibilities. There is plenty of violence and more overt sexiness (with a hint of rape) that makes this a much darker film than Chainsaw Maid. It lacks the characterization and manic fun, but is still a solid piece of work.
You can check of takena's website here. It's in Japanese, but it pays to look around and check out some of his earlier animations. His earliest stuff, cruder, but still violent and funny, can also be seen on YouTube, here.
After missing it the first go-round, I was able to catch The Dark Knight: The IMAX Experience today in Dallas. Whenever a big “event film” makes the leap to IMAX, I try to make the trip; the bigger the experience, the better, I say. I’ve caught plenty of movies this way, from Beauty and the Beast to the Harry Potter films to, now, the latest Batman flick.
The Dark Knight features several sequences (around 30 minutes total) shot with an actual IMAX camera, which utilizes 65mm film and a projected 1.44:1 aspect ratio. However, every other minute of the film is displayed on the IMAX screen in its normal ratio of 2.35:1, originally shot on 35mm. This means that when the movie switches to an IMAX-shot sequence, the film will go from essentially a letterboxed format to filling up the entire screen. During darker sequences, this can go unnoticed, but there were times in the film when it would switch between 35mm and IMAX, back and forth, in the daytime. It was a bit jarring to start with a fullscreen aerial shot, cut to a letterboxed shot of a conversation, then back to the full aerial.
Not only that, but because IMAX film is significantly larger than 35mm, the IMAX picture is noticeably crisper than the remastered regular footage. The normal film looks great until you watch an IMAX sequence, which looks really great. When you switch back to the regular film, it doesn’t look so hot anymore. It’s like switching from Blu-ray back to DVD; once you see what’s possible, everything else pales in comparison.
Which brings me to the concept of entertainment features in IMAX. The technology has existed since the ‘70s, but it was only in the late ‘90s that we started seeing content other than documentaries and educational pieces on those giant IMAX screens (though 35mm to 70mm blowups are nothing new). As mentioned, “normal” films are shot at a much smaller resolution, so they must be remastered, or upscaled, to look halfway decent on an IMAX screen (sometimes very decent). Again, with a side-by-side comparison, it’s easy to tell that the 65mm IMAX film looks much better than the remastered 35mm film. However, when you’re watching a film shot solely on 35mm, you don’t really realize what you’re missing. The image looks pretty darn good, as far as you can tell -- more than acceptable.
It’s like my father and his home media center. He has an upscaling DVD player as well as a PS3 (which also has upscaling capabilities). He’s a smart, observant tech-savvy man, so he knows that Blu-ray beats out even an upscaled DVD, especially in side-by-side comparisons. But when he does watch an upscaled DVD, he’s more than happy with it on his 52” DLP HDTV. He thinks it looks fantastic; so good that he’s in no rush to replace his DVD collection with Blu-ray discs. Why spend more money when what he already has looks pretty darn good?
I think this is one of the inherent obstacles with the whole IMAX/feature entertainment films situation. A filmmaker has a couple of options. He can either shoot with what he knows, whether it be 35mm film or even a RED 4K camera. He knows the equipment, uses the lenses and aspect ratio that he wants, and when it comes time to get that sucker on IMAX, there’s this fantastic upscaling remastering process that makes it look killer on that giant screen. Or, he can choose to use the IMAX equipment. More expensive, very heavy and cumbersome, and, oh yeah, you have to shoot it in a 1.44:1 aspect ratio. Not the end of the world, but when you’re used to shooting things with a wider scope, 1.44:1 feels like you’re squeezing talking heads into an uncomfortable space. I suppose they could slap a wider anamorphic lens onto the IMAX camera, but then you’re essentially “letterboxing” your movie on that big IMAX screen. If you’re going through the pains of shooting in that format, you’re going to want to use all that real estate.
So I wonder if IMAX will ever reach its full potential. It’s had great success in recent years (The Polar Express 3D and The Dark Knight specifically have done extremely well), but because of the cost, limitations, and technology, will it ever be fully embraced? It’s hard to see it having a major stake in the film industry beyond documentaries, CG animation films, and the occasional blowup of “event” movies. I mean, set designers and builders are already panicking because the detailed images of HD are capturing and exposing the flaws in their constructed sets, forcing them to build better sets and spend more money. Imagine what IMAX would do!
I fear that IMAX will remain a bit of a niche product; maybe that was always the intention. Fortunately, the films that do dip into the IMAX pool happen to be of the geek ilk (Speed Racer, The Matrix, Star Wars, Watchmen, and the like). That’s one for our side, I suppose.
I'm no kind of Luddite. If anything, I tend to consider myself an "early adopter" but when it comes to Blu-ray, I'm sitting tight.
I don't have anything against the Blu-ray technology. I'm not licking my woulds after an errant HD DVD purchase or hoping against all odds that VHS will make a triumphant return. Instead, I'm putting my money on streaming media.
Since the earliest days of satellite and cable television (anyone remember ON TV?), there's been a notion of calling up any movie or TV show your heart desired with the push of a button. That day has yet to dawn but we're closer than ever these days and getting closer all the time.
Video on demand services are plentiful. Meanwhile, Netflix has forged a strategic partnership with Roku, a nifty little gadget that connects your television set to your LAN via WIFI (or ethernet cable) and allows a user access to Netflix's Instant Watch service (included with all Netflix plans). The selection leaves a little to be desired at time (full list here) but it's increasing all the time. Plus, Roku is branching out to include Amazon Video On Demand in the near future.
Roku may not end climb to the top of the heap but it's getting us all closer to the Promised Land. Other devices such as the XBox 360, TiVo HD, etc, can do the same. Eventually, other services like Hulu may be absorbed in this same operation or they may land under another umbrella (such as PS3). Regardless, making the move to yet another format like Blu-ray feels like an unnecessary interim step along the path to a service-oriented future.
Logline: An old cowboy goes on a mission to recover his money after a million dollar sweepstakes scam cleans out his entire bank account.
This screenplay by Michael Gilio garnered 42 mentions on the 2008 Black List, placing it firmly in the number four slot. Not familiar with Gilio? Neither was I. The bio on his website states: Born and raised in Chicago, Gilio began directing and acting in short films and stage plays as a teenager. After being cast by Peter Bogdanovich opposite Sidney Poitier in the television movie To Sir with Love II, Gilio made the predictable trek to Los Angeles. Once settled, he starred in the critically-acclaimed Only in America: The Life & Crimes of Don King with Ving Rhames, Love & Action in Chicago with Kathleen Turner, as well as guest roles on Chicago Hope, CSI: NY, and Early Edition. During his tenure in L.A., Gilio embarked on writing his third screenplay Kwik Stop and enlisted his hometown theatre and film community to help produce what would be his directorial debut. For those interested, Kwik Stop is available as a VoD rental or purchase on Amazon.com.
On January 14, 2009 it was reported by themovingpicture.net that the project is being set up under Gore Verbinski’s Blind Wink Productions banner and that Verbinski will direct as well as produce with Scott Aversano, the former head of Nickelodeon and MTV Films.
WARNING: Mild spoilers, so turn away now if you don't want to ruin it for youself.
The story has been described as Falling Down meets No Country for Old Men, but after reading the screenplay I would have to say that it's more Falling Down than No Country. And even then I don't think those comparisons are truly fair, because while it does share some of the sensibilities of Falling Down and the sparse wide-open, modern day Western-like atmosphere of No Country, what Gilio has crafted here is an interesting character study that seems to echo a loss of values and an ever-changing way of life seen in films such as Hud. In fact, as I read this script I couldn't help but picture our protagonist, Francis Lee Sr., being portrayed by none other than the great Melvyn Douglas à la Hud, but since that bit of casting is sort of an impossibility these days, I think Robert Duvall would be an interesting choice for the role (think Tender Mercies or possibly Open Range).
And although the script does feature firearms prominently within the second half, it doesn't share the same sentiments on violence that the aforementioned films depict. It's almost as if a shotgun in the hands of Francis Lee Sr. isn't supposed to be viewed as a weapon, but an extension - a representation - of his anger and frustration. When he's not being heard, he allows the shotgun to "speak" because it's a little more concise and to the point... obviously. And it's in this way that story doesn't seem violent, but I'm sure there are some who would disagree with me on that subject.
What hooked me was the script's first page (like any good script should). The way Gilio has chosen to begin the story is a rather simple bit of genius. He delivers vital clues and kick-starts the plot all in a few short lines and in less than half a page:
The basics of our protagonist are given there, right at the beginning of the story: Bam! Now, moving on... Genius. From there we learn that Francis Sr. has an old horse named Flick, a parakeet named Duke, and a hired maid, Maya, that drops by every so often to take care of things around the house and to also take Francis into town for a routine haircut on the first of every month, followed by a trip to the bank and the grocery store. Francis Sr. is a man of routine. He's set in his ways.
We also learn that there's a reason for the Sr. in his name. That's right, there's a Jr. who goes by the name of Heck and he just happens to be a Sheriff. And for reasons that remain unclear until the very end of the film, Heck and his dear ole dad aren't on speaking terms. So, this is Francis Sr.'s life, and as lonely and desolate as it may seem, he's okay with it. Or so it seems. That is until our second act when everything starts a-changin'.
And our story really begins when Francis receives a phone call and the voice on the other end informs him that he's just become the proud recipient of a million dollars - right after the voice can get Francis' bank account information, so that the sweepstakes company can deposit the money in thirty to sixty days. Obviously, you can see where the story goes from there.
Now, I won't spoil the rest of the story by giving away exactly how Francis goes about trying to recover his money and what he ultimately discovers in the process, but let's talk a little bit more about what I liked and didn't like.
I really like the atmosphere that Gilio has created with his sparse action descriptions and minimal dialogue, although I do think that at times some of Francis' dialogue could have been minimized even more. So much can be said with a simple look or with body language, and at times I felt something like that was all that we needed from Francis. As the saying goes: less is more. And that character is truly an actor's playground, so I think it would be interesting to take away some of the rather unnecessary lines and allow the actor to express the meaning of those words indirectly with action.
Another aspect of the story that definitely needs a little tweaking is the dynamic between father and son. And I only say this because of the way the story ends. The way Gilio has chosen to end it demands that there be more backstory/story to the relationship between Francis and Heck, which is an interesting problem to solve because the two never actually exchange words, so most of it would have the be incorporated into Heck's detective work in trying to unravel just what his father is up to. And while there is some of their backstory revealed, I don't think it's enough to justify the end.
Visually though, Gilio has created something with lots of breathing room. And given that it is a seemingly modern day Western, I can't help but picture the exterior scenes framed with two-thirds sky and wide open like a Sergio Leone spaghetti western. Those visuals would help give the story an interesting juxtaposition: a small personal story being told in a world as big as the sky.
All in all, I'm anxious to see how much this project evolves under Gore Verbinski's tutelage. It's definitely an interesting screenplay, and with some alterations to the story and the right actor in the lead role, I'd think it safe to bet that we're looking at some kind of award contender here. Here's hoping that it's done right.
I'll be back next month with a review of Brian K. Vaughn's feel-good geek-romp Roundtable, which is a film that, if made, is sure to be a genuine crowd-pleaser. And while you wait, we'll--
”The only way to the top is killing and greed. Okay, I’m kidding. But killing helps.”
JPod has been out for a while—first published in 2006 it has attracted something of a cult following despite having been made into a (cancelled) Canadian television series. It’s something of a revisit to the sort of world he created in his 1995 book Microserfs, but updated for the current generation of tech-heads. The JPod refers to a team of six programmers at a Vancouver game design company that all have last names starting with the letter J. On one level, their grouping could be the result of a malicious Human Resources person, or weird coincidence, or computer glitch, or (more likely) the caprice of the author, Douglas Coupland, best known perhaps for having popularized the terms “Generation X” and “McJob.”
Leading up this team is our hero Ethan Jarlewski. Ethan is a pretty normal guy (for a geek) who happens to live in a very weird world. His mother runs a lucrative marijuana growing and distrubtion operation. His father is a frustrated bit actor and professional-level ballroom dancer. His brother is an amoral real estate agent. His co-workers possess a wide gamut of quirky personality traits and obsessions from sexual addiction to heroin. Into Ethan’s orbit arrives Kam Fong, a mysterious Chinese businessman with his fingers in many pies—none of which wholesome. Rounding out the dramatis personae is author Douglas Coupland himself.
Yeah, the author inserts himself as a character. Wicked post-modern, innit? Wait...don’t dismiss it yet.
The format of the book is a combination of first-person narrative from our man Ethan and a series of essays, e-mails, and correspondences with the other characters. Interspersed are odd little pages featuring explosive layouts of Chinese characters, numbers, random words, stream-of-consciousness, and buzzwords. There are some interesting challenges as well such as trying to identify a non-prime number hidden amidst a range of over 8,000 prime numbers, or identifying the lone capital O in place of the zero (0) in over ten pages of binary numbers. Skip over these if you wish. The answers aren’t included, nor seem to be important to the story. They serve more as examples of the sort of work environment of the JPodders where real work is avoided at all costs. The JPodders priorities take first place, and there is a constant struggle to maintain sharpness of mind and perhaps outgeek each other. As for the bosses—well, who’s surprised to learn that departmental meetings are spiritual and mental death—nothing good ever comes from them.
The plot isn’t as important as the characters. This is definitely a character-driven novel. Ethan and company bumble along their little adventures to the end. Nothing much changes, and lessons aren’t really learned—except perhaps that geeks suffer from a form of micro-autism.
So why bother? Because it’s fun. There are some good laughs along the way. It’s a light, airy novel for the geek-leaning reader. It took about a full day to read—it moves pretty fast.
JPod has been called “ultra-post-modern” which I suppose is accurate enough, although it’s usually used as a negative description. I can totally understand why Coupland’s inserting himself into he novel would turn people off. I also hate that sort of self-indulgence in authors. (Clive Cussler ruins every book of his by inserting himself in as a deus ex machina.) In Coupland’s case, with this book, I seriously believe he pulled it off well. Not mere self-indulgence or tired literary device, his presence in the novel serves as yet another surreal facet of Ethans’s life. It comes off well.
The ending? That’s a toughie. Something was lacking, but at the same time, I can’t blame the author for this. I think maybe it was me. How weird is that? It’s not so much that the author failed to deliver to my expectations, but rather that the author didn’t care what I thought. He was going to end it the way he thought it should end and who was I to question it?
But like I said, the plot isn’t nearly as important as the characters.
Big question. Is it a recommendation? That’s an emphatic yes with a but. Yes, read it. But don’t pay a lot for it. Now that it’s available in paperback, hardcover editions sometimes show up in remainder piles in the box bookstores for less than $8. Or buy a used copy someplace. The real treat is other books by Coupland.
For information on how to get your book reviewed on Falling Off the Shelf, or to send hate mail, feel free to contact me at john (at) johnteehan (dot) com.
So last weekend, I was flipping the channels. I stumbled across one of the MTV variants and came across LL Cool J performing at the 2008 MTV Video Music Awards. He was performing "Going Back To The Cali" accompanied by Blink-182's Travis Barker on the drums and DJ AM on the turntables. Essentially, here's the clip I saw. (The version I saw was from a different angle.)
My initial thought was that the crowd was thinking "Hey, it's DJ AM and Travis Barker...and that guy from Any Given Sunday." No one seemed to care or even get excited. Not even "pretend excited" like a good live MTV crowd is supposed to. He might as well have been up there reading his grocery list. I think this was the final straw. LL Cool J needs to hang up the mic.
That said, I'm a fan. I know this sounds like the rant of a salty hater, but it's not. (Everyone who dares to have an opinion is a "hater." But that's a whole other ball of wax.)Mama Said Knock You Out is one of my favorite albums from my high school years. I remember listening to that tape when I mowed lawns. And this isn't even the argument that hip-hop is a young man's game. (Nas, Jay-Z, Ghostface: all still making not just quality, but good music into their 30s).
Let's look at LL's good points (before I send him to the glue factory):
one of the first artists to sign to Def Jam.
engaged in several battles with various other rappers (my favorite was the Kool Moe Dee. I'm a sucker for a good battle.)
along with Ice-T, one of the first raptors [rappers who act] (c) Dallas Penn.
an unprecedented three decade career (even though he dropped more deuces than a pigeon in the new millennium.
gave us two of the better posse cuts of the 90s, "4,3,2,1" and "I Shot Ya" where he was smart enough to collaborate with up and coming rappers in order to keep himself relevant.
pulled off a cover strike by wearing a FUBU hat in a Gap ad. (This was before FUBU was everywhere.)
These are the good points.
Solid catalog. Long career. An icon.
Frankly, after "4, 3, 2, 1" and "I Shot Ya (Remix)," he should have called it a day. He had nothing left to prove. But there he was, still making music...sort of.
Deep Blue Sea, Halloween H20: 20 Years Later and scores of other really lame movies. (Sure, Ice-T has made some less than stellar flicks but you can't really front on New Jack City.)
Exit 13, a meh effort all the way through was his last album on Def Jam. It exemplified what I refer to as the Favre Effect. The Favre effect, named after the former Green Bay/current NY Jets quarterback is where a former great tries to live up to their own legacy but fails miserably. The opposite of this effect would be the Montana Effect where expectations are always met and occasionally exceeded.
Gave birth to the shirtless rappers doing love songs phenomenon (Ja Rule, 50 Cent).
Then.
Now.
The moral of the story: leave with some dignity. Don't tarnish your legacy. To paraphrase Chris Rock, "no one wants to be the old guy in the club." LL is officially the old guy in the club. It's alright to sit back and rest on the laurels of a strong catalog. It is not okay to keep making music when it's straight crap.
I try not to buy into the hype for anything, but when I do, I'd like to think it's because there's some sort of unique hook or appeal that grabs me to such an extent, or because everyone I trust is saying, "Oh my God, have you seen this? It is seriously amazing."
In many of the circles in which I run, those recommendations only seem to accompany genre work (for example, Firefly/Serenity), low-budget fringe productions (Jesus Christ Vampire Hunter), and international films, mostly Asian. Word of mouth buzz is generally easier to trust; I remember hearing from everyone, "You have to watch Returner." I purchased the DVD, and found it incredibly derivative of every major sci-fi/action movie of the last twenty-five years, but at the same time, so deliriously alive.
That's one thing about Asian filmmakers: even when they're working from absolutely rote and already-trod ideas, the best of them manage to inject a sense of play and joy into their work that easily sweeps the viewer up. There are some Western filmmakers who share that talent: Robert Rodriguez paid deference to Sergio Leone in his Mexico trilogy, while Quentin Tarantino's Kill Bill Volume 1 was an exuberant love letter to the '70s: a pastiche of kung fu movies, chambara films, anime, and most importantly, the female revenge subgenre, a category often overlooked by the mainstream.
It isn't not rare to see a movie about a woman who takes revenge on men for wrongdoings. After all, Pam Grier made her name avenging herself in Coffy and Foxy Brown, but in the '70s, you wouldn't just see Foxy fighting gangsters and pimps, you'd also run into films like Thriller: A Cruel Picture and I Spit On Your Grave, about women brutalized beyond reason who brought fatal and horrific retribution upon their assailants. Those latter movies were decried by critics as amoral and exploitative, but they made an impact on filmmakers like Tarantino and Rodriguez, whose Grindhouse collaboration followed suit with Rose McGowan's character in Planet Terror. Here, Robert Rodriguez married the zombie and revenge genres together, creating Cherry Darling, a stripper who loses a leg in a zombie attack and has a machine gun attached in its place.
But in this age of cannibalization, even the homages are paid homage, and last year, a fair bit of internet buzz centered on The Machine Girl, a Japanese action/splatter release that was actually intended more for the American audience (it's co-produced by American distributor Media Blasters, under their Tokyo Shock imprint). It received a very limited theatrical release in the states in June, then went to DVD before receiving its Japanese theatrical release in August. Off the bat, there's something strange about it: the cast and director seem vastly inexperienced for this sort of movie. Writer/helmer Noburo Iguchi comes from a porn background, as does co-star Asami. It seems sort of tame, then, that star Minase Yashiro is mainly known for swimsuit modeling; it's also somewhat conventional, as some Japanese actresses known for genre work (examples include former Cutie Honeys Eriko Sato and Mikie Hara, as well as Gransazer's Sayaka Isoyama) first gained fame as pinups (or gravure idols, as they're called). Given the background mentioned above, a viewer could expect one (or both) of two things: a watered down, Americanized attempt at shock cinema, or a sex-filled romp with just enough spurts of violence to fill a quota. I'm happy to report The Machine Girl is neither of these things. In fact, it is so garish and disquieting that I had to ask myself during the first act if I really wanted to go ahead and finish this movie. I'm glad I did, because by the end, I was convinced I watched a modern classic.
Minase Yashiro plays Ami Hyuga, a schoolgirl with a tough streak. When we first see her, she is already the hardcore, take no prisoners title character, blasting away at high school bullies with a heavy machine gun attached to the remainder of her arm. And when I say "blasting away," I mean "totally obliterating into skull fragments coated in a fine paste." From the beginning, the audience is assured of extreme violence in liberal doses.
Flash back six months, and Ami is little like the embittered amputee she'll become. Rather, she is a friendly, athletic young woman, close to her best friend and doting on her younger brother Yu. The Hyuga siblings are orphans, left on their own when their parents committed suicide after facing murder accusations. While this has made the kids pariahs to a degree, Ami doesn't let it bother her very much, instead focusing on raising Yu as best as she is able. What she doesn't know is that Yu and his best friend Takeshi are targets of a gang of bullies, led b y Sho Kimura, the son of a Yakuza family descended from legendary ninja Hattori Hanzo himself. One day, Yu and Takeshi finally stand up for themselves against the sadistic Sho and his entourage. It ends horribly, and the two boys wind up dead, made to look like suicides.
Ami doesn't buy it one bit, but with her parents' disgrace ruining her reputation, she is unable to get even the support of Takeshi's fiery mother (Asami). Undaunted, she sets out on her own investigation, which leads her to one of the bullies and his family. After she pleads with them for any information they can offer in her hunt, they respond as logically as they know how, by taking great offense and trying to murder Ami. At this point, the movie starts jumping off the rails in the best way possible. Ami escapes, but snaps and returns, killing the boy and his mother, then leaving the father alive (though giving him a literal bloodbath). She then tracks Sho to his family's estate, seeking the same violent revenge. Unfortunately, she is overpowered and captured, then tortured--Sho's father cuts off her fingers, before his overzealous wife exhorts her to lop off her arm.
Somehow, Ami escapes and manages to make it all the way to Takeshi's parents, who finally take pity and nurse her back to health. Ami and Takeshi's mom bond over their need for vengeance, and the mechanics build Ami a means to achieve that revenge. Thus, the Machine Girl is born!
From that point on, it's almost constant chaos and dismemberment, as Ami and Takeshi's mom cut a swath through a ninja hit squad, the vengeful parents of the dead bullies, and the yakuza. Weapons go flying around including swords, chainsaws, and a drill bra. Amidst the cacophony of carnage, Asami and Yashiro give standout performances as two strong women determined to seek justice. Yashiro is particularly amazing in the scene following Ami's first kills. She handles the transition well from traumatized panic to bloodlust, and remains believable, even when everything else isn't. Asami, meanwhile, is a marvelous spitfire.
The rest of the movie is an unabashed free-for-all, a hardcore comedy on the order of Dead Alive or Evil Dead II, but the two leads have a sincerity that grounds the story, transcending parody. The Machine Girl may be campy and cartoonish much of the time, but on the whole, it's a marvelous girl-powered splatter-fantasy with style and humor to spare. It's earned its place in the vault and deserves a spin in your DVD player.
Seriously, a drill bra.
No wonder this was one of my favorites of 2008.
Not convinced yet? Take a gander at the first 5 minutes of The Machine Girl below!
The common wisdom is that "They don't make them like they used to" but the truth is that sometimes they do. Case in point, Donnie Yen's Ip Man, a 2008 Hong Kong kung fu biopic that serves as a hagiography of the first man to openly teach Wing Chun and the teacher of the legendary Bruce Lee. Wong Fei Hung, Fong Sai Yuk, and Bruce Lee have all been celebrated and mythologized in film, but no film had ever been based on the life of this renowned yet little understood martial artist.
Donnie Yen, who serves as a sort of bridge between the glory days of Jackie Chan and John Woo and the new Hong Kong action cinema typified by films such as Flash Point and Killzone, plays Ip Man as a supremely capable martial artist and very caring family man. Such duality is common in such films; we witness a man made more complete, and hence more powerful, by embracing the entirety of his duties. Yen reportedly spent months preparing for the role of Ip Man. He changed his diet, spent time with the surviving children, and even stayed in character after the days shooting was done. His mastery of Wing Chun, under the choreography of Sammo Hung, is both awesome and believable. (I use the word awesome in the literal sense of awe.)
As the Japanese arrive to become the films central villains, and we see some of the deprivations the Chinese suffered under occupation, the film shapes itself into standard kung ku action fare, but rises above it through deft characterization, inspired martial arts, and a veneer of realism that keeps the film grounded and real. It can't be called a biopic because the movie ends long before Ip Man's life. What we see here is the beginning of what will hopefully become a long and enduring series of films. I do know that a search is on for the perfect actor to play Ip Man's most celebrated student, Bruce Lee.
I don’t read books and I don’t read magazines. (Nowhere other than here would I also need to say that I don’t read comics either.) I read scripts and I watch films – sometimes together. I read scripts by famous writers that I’ve found on the net and I read scripts by people I’ve just met who press them into my hand in the pub or at dinner parties.
I’m good at reading scripts, I think, and I can generally see why something is wrong and work out how it might be fixed as I’m going along. The biggest problem with the scripts that are given to me by folk who don’t write scripts for a living is that the people who populate their stories aren’t real. I don’t mean that they aren’t real in the sense that they aren’t flesh and blood, but that they aren’t real people – I don’t recognise them and they don’t intrigue me; I can’t feel what they are feeling. And if I can’t feel what they’re feeling, then I’m not interested in their story. In this column, I’m going to talk about character and characterisation in screenwriting, in the hope that the person with a script that I will next meet in a pub might read it first.
If we take film as visual storytelling, then any film can be pretty well summed-up by; ‘Something happens to someone and they react against that thing until they overcome it and in the process learn more about themselves’. When we construct our step outline, as we did last time, we are writing down what happens in our story, beat by beat. We know – or we should know – what happens to our characters and when. We know what (external) journey they’ll take and what they’re looking for – so we’ll know the physical, but not the emotional. It is the next step that humanises our story. It is only when the audience emphasises with our character; they can see and feel their pain and their love and his joy that the story can fully connect with them.
Until it does, it is just a series of events.
If you’re writing a feature script, you have to tell an involving and satisfying story in which people are in crisis and come through whatever challenges they face having somehow grown. If, god help you, you are writing a romantic comedy, then you have to introduce two people, give them each a world populated by disparate friends, throw them together in a situation where they REALLY don’t get on, make them do stuff together until they start to become attracted to each other (even though they both fight against this attraction,) chuck in a surprise which leads one of them – probably the female – to run a mile from the other one – probably the chap – and then provide a satisfying and emotionally fulfilling ending where they finally become a couple, probably until the end of days. You have to fulfil the audience’s genre expectations and yet still surprise them, and you have ninety pages or so in which to do this.
Ninety pages.
I mean you might go, perhaps, to one-ten. But even that isn’t much time in which to build a world and tell a gripping and fulfilling story. Luckily, characterisation isn’t difficult, or onerous – although it is essential for every one of your speaking characters. These are the few rules that I can think up on the spot;
1) Every speaking character that impacts, however slightly, on the story will need at the very least a personality clue. If we don't know who they are then they won't speak to us - or perhaps they will and we won't properly listen.
2) You’ll need to give them their colour either when we meet them, or soon after. Even if you are writing a thriller and want to mislead the audience about a character’s personality, you'll need to sell them the ‘fake’ one early on.
3) Lightness of touch is important. Psychology studies indicate that we generally form our opinions about someone’s character within the first fifteen seconds – and that is real life, and thus much more important. So give the audience the benefit of the doubt – give them the clues so they’ll understand who you’re selling them. If you are building a main character then you’ll need a little more, but even then it is consistency that will win the battle. Once you’ve made them into something then they can grow, but they must remain in character - unless it is a facet of your story, your character must remain consistent. Film is shorthand and no-one really has time to reassess.
Let’s have a squint at a couple of films; In BUTCH CASSIDY AND THE SUNDANCE KID, we open on Sundance playing cards, being called a thief and choosing to defend his honour when he doesn’t have to. In the opening two minutes, because everything that happens is so well-drawn and light of touch, we learn that he is proud, self-assured and confident and we learn that Butch is weaker, more flexible and that he uses his chat to survive, rather than any skills or his physique. Two minutes in and we know who our leads are, and although there is plenty going on throughout (although rather less than the writer would get away with today, I think) we learn a lot more as we flee the posse with them. (Incidentally, in the few minutes that follow, we learn everything we need to about Butch to persuade us to go with him on his journey.)
In ABOUT SCHMIDT, we learn at the get-go that Schmidt is organised, structured, unemotional... bored. At the retirement party, the new guy (sorry – he doesn’t give his name) stands up and makes a short speech, supposedly about Schmidt and by the end of it we know exactly what sort of a guy he is as well, and when Schmidt’s old pal then gets up and says a few words, we learn all we need to about his character - even though his speech is also supposed to be all about Schmidt. It’s worth pointing out that some of this information comes from visual cues rather than dialogue – a look from a wife here, a sip too little of wine there. Either way, it exposes character and is thus crucial, both to the telling of our story and the setting up of context to your world.
These were the first two films off my shelf and they are both perfect examples of how to set up character nice and fast without labouring the point. On the page, the scenes would have read something like; SUNDANCE PLAYS CARDS AND IS ACCUSED OF CHEATING BEFORE BUTCH MENTIONS HIS NAME AND THE OTHER GUY BACKS DOWN and ON HIS LAST DAY, SCHMIDT GOES TO HIS RETIREMENT PARTY AND LISTENS TO SPEECHES FROM SOME OF HIS WORKMATES. In practise, they tell us much of what we’ll need to know about our main characters and what their internal dynamics - as opposed to the external dynamics (what happens to them) might be.
The external will be driven by plot, the internal will be revealed by the understanding and exposure of character.
The step outline that I discussed last week can be added to with just this in mind – simply mark down when it is we first meet one of your characters and what it is we’re going to learn about them. If you ensure that most of our learning will take place early in our association with them - that we subsequently learn something new every time we encounter them and that what we learn in some way drives them towards their objective in your story, you’ll be fine.
The next time you’re about to read a book – or, god forbid, a comic - don’t. Watch the first ten minutes of a great DVD, or read a wonderful script and highlight every line that exposes character. Then go out for a coffee and see how fast you’ll make assessments of the people you meet and what information you base those assessments on. Listen to what you say to others and see how they respond to it – that’s them rationalising your character from the signals you’re giving them. These are the things that you can use to make your story work – the structure is the building and the characterisation is the decoration. In the real world, without real character, you won’t get a good job, make cool friends or find a great person to have sex with. On the page, if your characters don’t have character, then what’s their point?
Shout! Factory has released a dynamite package for a not so dynamite film that's of interest solely for its historical and prurient value. Released in 1969, and enormously profitable, The Stewardesses is softcore exploitation, which packed houses with promises of naked women in full color 3D. Three years later porn would go mainstream with Deep Throat, but in 1969, outside of some very special theaters in New York and San Francisco, this movie was as racy as it gets.
Originally released in a version of 3D that uses the polarized glasses similar to what we see in the IMAX today, the DVD has rendered the film using the old fashioned red/blue system that was popular in comic books. There are three "versions" of the film in the set, 3D color, 3D black& white, and 2D color. I watched in 3d black & white and found it to be rather unengaging, until the sex scenes and the final, "shocking" ending.
As the characters "acted" in the foreground I found myself taking in the details of the background, like the Superman and Incredible Hulk posters hanging in the underground bar, (chapter 5) or the scenes set at the carnival (chapter 11.) The movie concerns a night in the lives of some stewardesses, and we follow their various adventures. One girl drops acid and makes love to a lamp. (No kidding.) One girl goes on a pity date with a soldier about to do a second tour in Vietnam. There's the mandatory lesbian sex scene (which writer/director Bill Condos manages to call a "comedy classic" in the documentary "How the Stewardesses Took Off...")
The main plot was filmed later and inserted into The Stewardesses when the producers realized that they needed something of socially redeeming value to not be branded pornography when they took their movie out of San Francisco. This makes The Stewardesses that rare film that was being continually "improved" and edited even as it was in release. There are estimated to be as many as four different versions of the film. Christina Hart plays a stewardess who goes out on a date with an ad executive who doesn't realize that she's mentally disturbed. Socially redeeming, see?
In an interview, Ms. Hart says, "The movie was appallingly bad." She's right, of course.
One of the funniest things to consider is that in 1969, when they were making this film, it was possible for Bill Condos, an actor, dressed as a pilot, to walk up a ramp and onto an airplane, and no security stopped him. He got permission from the flight crew to duty to film scenes and fool around in the cockpit, manipulating controls, and pretending to be a pilot. Maybe airline security these days is onerous, but I might prefer it to practically nonexistent.
Rounding out the discs are some extras, a documentary about the history of 3D films which starts off covering familiar ground, but does expel some of the myths surrounding the rise and fall of 3D film in 1953. It turns out that it wasn't the glasses that killed it, it was Cinemascope, a widescreen being easier for theaters to accommodate than 3d systems. Another documentary reveals what was so different about the 3D process used on The Stewardesses. There's a theatrical trailer and the SCTV sketch “Dr. Tongue’s House of Stewardesses,” which only went to show me how badly SCTV has aged.
Also included is all the 3D test footage shot, which shows a woman surrounded by balloons throwing things into the camera for way too long. Lacking is a commentary track or input from real film historians. They assembled many people involved with making this film, and even a sub-par commentary track would have been better than none. What are the chances that a movie like this will ever get another chance at a release this big?
Take this one with a grain of salt, but Cinema Blend is one of several sources online to have pointed out the existence and probable fakeness of...BATMAN 3: The Screenplay (pages 1-8)
This show is only two episodes in and believe it or not, already amazingly crazy and eye opening. If you watched the last edition of Celebrity Rehab, you should remember Gary Busey and his antics.
It was extra nutty because he thought that he was there to be a counselor, NOT A PATIENT! It took a few days for him to get what he was there for, after Steven Adler set him straight and told him that he was just as fucked up as the rest of them were. The rest of them being Rodney King, Nikki McKibbin, Amber Smith, Mary Carey, and Seth “Shifty” Binzer. They all have big problems with pills, booze, smack, and other psychological baggage.
In this show the aforementioned people have successfully made it through rehab, and have now elected to go to a “sober house” so that they can learn to live drug free for the rest of their lives. I’m kind of shocked to learn that the former “Supermodel” Amber Smith has been on pills for almost TWENTY YEARS! Her mother is an addict, so there you go. She admitted in Celebrity Rehab that she prostituted herself for drugs. Wow.
The Sober House is run by the “house mother,” Jennifer Gimenez (former model and now an actress) who is two or three years sober and runs a tight ship. She gets help from Dr. Drew Pinsky (a board certified addictionologist) who runs the rehab center, and counselor Bob Forrest and program assistant William Smith (he looks like a missing Baldwin brother).
Now the episode I’m ranting about is focused on Steven Adler. He is REALLY fucked up. At one time in his life he was the drummer in the biggest band in the world (Guns ‘N Roses) and had it all – you know, the usual story. Good looks, girls, money, blah, blah, blah…then he became hooked on booze and in 1987 he got drunk and punched out a street light while the band was on tour. At the 1989 American Music Awards, Don Henley filled in for him on the broadcast. The official excuse was that he “had the flu” but he was in rehab! He was eventually fired from GNR in the summer of 1990 after promising to quit using, but couldn’t. In 1996, he suffered a stroke and was in a brief coma after shooting up a potent “speedball” (a mix of heroin and cocaine); he suffered a second stroke later. Both strokes messed up his face and he has a severe speech impediment.
In this episode, the gang enters the sober house and begins to settle in. They have to have their bags checked, and Jenny finds needles and heroin in his pants (that he said he had not worn in 10 years). He’s skittish, squirrley, and cranky. The next day the group has a therapy session in which everyone says they’re concerned about what Steven did and that they’re afraid they will relapse. Then Jenny decides to have a BBQ the day after and the residents can invite their friends which winds up being a bad idea.
At first they’re grilling stuff, having fun, Steven’s wife Carolina shows up, all is swell. Mary Carey’s boyfriend/manager and their friend Tiny Lister (HUGE Black guy, character actor) show up and immediately break the rule of wondering through the house. All of a sudden, Steven starts acting weird and squirrely again. He’s agitated, running around, and getting mad that the cameras are following him around. He’s in and out of rooms, slamming doors. Everyone knows he’s jacked up. Steven’s wife is told that they found needles on him the night before. Then all of a sudden, THERE IS A BLACKOUT! Steven is on the move to the bathroom, where he smokes heroin in a rolled up piece of foil. Will (another guy in recovery who helps out Jennifer) notices the smell of heroin and finds the “pipe” still caked with heroin. This is all caught on tape mind you, and it gets very disturbing as the episode goes on. They capture him nodding out, getting dressed and undressed, falling down, thrashing around, having seizures – it is CRAZY! I have seen my share of alcoholics and junkies in my day, but NOTHING like this. For a second I thought he was in the middle of another stroke. You have to see this to believe it. It should be shown to ANYBODY thinking about doing drugs. This is amazing stuff to watch, because it really shows the power of drugs and what addiction is.
What I really find incredible is that VH1 has already shown “Shifty” actually SMOKING CRACK ON CAMERA and he was not arrested. How is this possible?
Eventually Jennifer calls the cops and Steven is arrested. Gotta watch the next episode to see what happens. PLEASE watch it!
Burn Notice is one of my favorite shows currently airing on television and our inaugural contest will give you a chance to discover it for yourself!
BURN NOTICE, the hottest show last summer returns for its second season continuation with seven all new episodes on Thursday, January 22, 2009 at 10/9c. BURN NOTICE is a sexy action-packed series starring Jeffrey Donovan ("Changeling") as Michael Westen, a blacklisted spy who finds himself stranded in sun-soaked Miami without money, resources, or a clue as to who burned him, or why. The only tools at his disposal are his wits, his charm, his special ops training and his "friends:" Fiona (Gabrielle Anwar - "The Tudors"), a beautiful ex-IRA operative who also happens to be Michael's ex-girlfriend, and Sam (Bruce Campbell – "Evil Dead"), a washed-up military intelligence contact who works as Michael's sidekick, and his mother (Emmy Award-winner Sharon Gless – "Queer as Folk"), who Michael has spent most of his adult life trying to avoid. Visit the official site at www.burnnotice.usanetwork.com or join other fans on Facebook at http://www.facebook.com/pages/Burn-Notice/7750605107?ref=ts
3 Winners will receive: -Burn Notice Season 1 DVD -Burn Notice Mini-Football
To enter, please send an email with the subject header "BURN NOTICE CONTEST" to forcesofgeek@gmail.com. Please include your name, address (U.S. and Canada only) and answer the following question. (hint: use imdb!) Only one entry per person and winners will be chosen at random. Contest ends at midnight on February 28th, 2009.
Burn Notice star Jeffrey Donovan starred as David Creegan in this remake of a British television series. What was the name of the series?
If this wasn't cool enough, the USA Network announced today that its digital team will continue its aggressive push into the online gaming world with the launch of COVERT OPS 2.0, an alternate reality game (www.burnnoticeops.com) themed to the #1 scripted series on cable, BURN NOTICE. Developed in conjunction with the show’s creator Matt Nix, USA Network is once again partnering with GM’s Saab USA around the second installment of the most successful online game in the channel’s history. The game enables the show’s fans to get more involved with the franchise by turning users into spies and challenging them to conduct surveillance, clone a phone and plant evidence, all while behind the wheel of a Saab 9-3 Convertible.
It's Wednesday, so that means we'll be linking to several FREE comics that you can either download or read online (depending on the company distributing them) after you play bingo at williamhillbingo.
Let's look at the pull list:
Half Dead #1 (Written by Barb Lien-Cooper and Park Cooper; Art by Jimmy Bott) Combining the chills of modern horror with the excitement of cinematic action, HALF DEAD is the story of two conspiracies, human and vampire, fighting for control of London in the present day. Using gas attacks, soldiers, suicide options, religious icons, and inhuman science, both sides struggle to keep their pawns alive and fighting whether they want to or not. One of these pawns, a ballerina named Romany, comes back from certain death in a form that is almost certainly worse than a clean and easy death. But what’s worse, she and the others like her learn that in this war they’re fighting, working for the “good guys” is almost as bad as aligning with the forces of evil.
Suburban Glamour #1 (Written & Illustrated by Jamie McKelvie) Astrid and Dave are teenagers stuck in a dead-end suburban town living uneventful lives – until Astrid gets a visit from her childhood imaginary friends, who tell her something big is about to happen. Are they real or is she crazy? Life is about to get a lot more interesting for the pair – interesting and very, very dangerous. From the co-creator of PHONOGRAM comes this tale of magic, mystery and underage drinking.
Girl Genius (ongoing) (Written by Phil and Kaja Foglio; illustrated by Phil Foglio) Adventure, Romance, Mad Science! Meet Agatha Clay—Transylvania Polygnostic University student with the drive to create and the worst luck in the world.
Fantastic Four: Isla De La Muerte! (Written by Forces of Geek's own beloved Tom Beland; Illustrated by Juan Doe) Puerto Rico...island of beauty, intrigue and, for one ever-lovin', blue-eyed visitor…a pile full of danger! Ben Grimm has been keeping a secret from his teammates for years. But when Reed, Sue and Johnny investigate, the mystery brings them to the tropics, face-to-face with an old nemesis and a monstrous creature known as…EL CHUPACABRAS!! All we can say is, "¡¡QUE EL MÍO SEA MARVEL!!"
GEEK: How would you describe this interpretation of Batman as opposed to the previous two animated series or his other live action or comic book incarnations?
WAYNE: It's dark-and-gritty taken to its extreme: It's light and lively. Just like the cartoon. We've seen so many versions of "Troubled" Batman, "Young" Batman, "Future" Batman, et cetera in cartoons, this time they went for "Batman" Batman.
The Caped Crusader.
You are also one of the writers of the Batman: The Brave and The Bold animated series. What are the main differences in writing for animation vs. comic books?
I find comics a lot less of a group effort and more of a joint effort between two or three main creative people. Animation is fine; it reaches a bigger audience, the money's good and the people are mostly great, but when I'm in sync with a single artist on a comic and we're making each other look good, it's like nothing else.
You've been an animation writer for years, and have also recently written several episodes of the Spectacular Spider-Man cartoon. Growing up were you a DC or Marvel guy?
I didn't read too many as a kid, never was a read-everything kind of guy. I found Howard the Duck in the 80s and went back and got them all, and the rest kind of spread from there. Steve Gerber is still my hero. I was a Marvel guy in college for a couple years, until John Byrne's Superman: The Man of Steel mini-series, and then The Watchmen. But after that I read stuff from both companies.
Most people aren't aware that you had a guiding hand with the formation of the Milestone Media Universe as both an editor and writer. Now that the characters have been integrated into the DC Universe, do you have any plans or interest in working on them?
Actually, I've just been asked to do a stand-alone DCU story that combines DC and Milestone characters. I'm real happy to do it, and it'll solicit in coming months. In Batman: The Brave and The Bold, we're probably doing a few DCU characters that the show won't be doing. It remains to be seen whether we can do Milestone characters. I would love to write a couple old Milestone faves in the Batman: The Brave and The Bold world.
Are there any "wish list" characters that you'd like to have appear in Batman: The Brave and The Bold ?
Besides Superman, Batman and Wonder Woman, each of whom I love like a Milestone character? The Challengers of the Unknown, the Sea-Devils, the Newsboy Legion... but it's not easy to guest a team in a single issue!
What else do you have coming up?
An episode of Batman: The Brave and The Bold on Jan. 30; another one later this year; and I'm story editing a super hero cartoon I can't mention for another month or so.
What are you currently geeking out over?
Ancient pictures of myself that my friends keep finding and posting online. That, and Johnny Burnette and the Rock and Roll Trio. I was hooked on Doctor Who and Torchwood, and will be again, but right now it's DVDs of Mad About You.
Too honest?
Batman: The Brave and The Bold #1 by Matt Wayne and Andy Suriano & Dan Davis is available today (Wednesday, January 28) at fine comic book stores everywhere or contact 1-888-COMIC-BOOK to find a location near you.
After decades of innovation and evolution, is the "home" computer about to have the shackles thrown back on it and dragged kicking and screaming back to the dark ages of mainframes and dumb terminals?
Imagine running all of your computer's applications in a web interface, with all of your documents stored online, and only a minimal operating system installed on your actual physical computer, with minimal storage of it's own. No thanks! I've waited decades to be able to have the computer I have now! The power, memory, and storage capabilities to do just about anything, and store just about anything is empowering, useful, and a way of life.
But the temptation of having everything hosted online in a virtual paradise is a powerful idea that companies likes Google, Microsoft, Adobe, and possibly (probably) Apple are investing in. Google Apps, Microsoft's Office Live, and Adobe's Photoshop Express are just the beginning. Imagine using anyone's computer anywhere to log in to a website, and in the web browser, have full access to one of your favorite desktop apps, with full capabilities. Companies could charge by the hour. Or a subscription. Which, theoretically could make apps that are currently very expensive, accessible to more people who could afford cheaper access to limited use. But you never own the app. Yikes.
Another idea is to log in to a website, and see a virtual OS with a desktop, virtual drives for storage, apps, etc. All hosted in the "cloud" instead of stored on whatever computer you're using. Would it be great to use any computer anywhere and log into a website and see all of my stuff and be able to use all of my apps? Maybe. But what happens when the internet goes down? Sure, these days, connectivity seems ubiquitous, but with the price of RAM and storage plummeting, why give all that up now in favor of blind faith in the cloud?
I think some of the things that will come out of the "cloud" revolution will be innovative, fun, interesting, and useful. But if you want me to give up my cheap RAM, and even cheaper storage, you will have to pry those memory sticks and hard drives from my cold dead hands!
Donkey Punch is so full of unlikeable people wallowing in self-indulgent hedonism that by the time they start getting killed off, it's almost a mercy. I've never seen a film with so many people that I don't care about. These "characters" are so undeveloped that we could call them simply "Obvious Villain," "Sole Survivor," and "Victims 1-5." That would almost constitute a spoiler, if it weren't so obvious at the outset.
The movie takes it's title from a particularly repellent sex act, an act that was probably an urban myth until people saw this movie an tried it out on each other. For the record, the act concerns punching your partner in the back of the head during sex, to cause a pleasurable contraction for the puncher. (The Punchee is presumably unconscious or (spoiler alert) dead.) Looking this up, I learned from Dr. Dan Savage that not only is it wrong to sucker punch your sex partner, but that it won't work anyway.
Anyway, stranded out in the middle of the Mediterranean, a sex and drugs pleasure cruise goes south when the British Spring Break cast start getting offed one-by-one. There's never any doubt as to who the killer is. There's never any doubt who's going to survive. Our job is to simply wait and watch, to see how each murder is to be done.
After missing it the first go-round, I was able to catch 
