A few months ago I saw some discussion of a rather obscure and bizarre 1983 movie from Australia called The Return of Captain Invincible, starring two big names - the Academy Award winning Alan Arkin, and the classic character actor villain Christopher Lee. (He was Count Dooku in Star Wars and Saruman in Lord of the Rings!)

I of course added it to our Netflix queue, not sure what to expect.

I did NOT expect a musical!

This song should give you a taste of the movie:

Captain Invincible is Nazi-fighting, flying, magnetic, indestructible All American hero of World War II, driven into hiding after being being accused of being un-American during a McCarthy-like trial in the 50's...

"You claim to be a Captain, but we have no records of you serving in the US Military. Who do you report to? Your cape is red. RED! You fly, but you do not have a pilot's license!" And so on...

The movie then jumps forward to the 80's (and from B&W to Color), and we find Captain Invincible a washed up drunk living in hiding in Australia. It is there that a desperate US President finds him, and begs him to try and recover his powers to save the world one more time.

Christopher Lee is the villain, Mr. Midnight. His evil plot? He is using a hypno ray to convince all the minorities in NYC to buy houses in posh subdivisions located on peninsulas jutting out from Manhattan.

Yes. It really is that bizarre.

And don't forget, this is a MUSICAL!!!

It reminded me a lot of The Rocky Horror Picture Show, but not nearly as well acted, directed, written, or sung. The creator's of Captain Invincible seem to be trying to follow the Rocky Horror formula, but they end up falling way short.

But still - a fun and bizarre outing.

If you ever fantasized about seeing Saruman crooning about the joys of cocktails, this is the movie for you... *grin*

"There is nothing sicker in society than a lack of liquor, and sobriety."

Rating: 3 Stars

I think the Internet is the main reason I seem to rarely finish reading books anymore. It is just way too distracting.

But - for better or worse, the Internet was out most of the day yesterday here at Sunshine's place. And while waiting for it to bounce back up, I got sucked into reading Isaac Asimov's & Robert Silverberg's novel The Positronic Man.

I read it through in one long sitting.

The story is interesting enough - it is the 200-year long quest of a robot who wants nothing more than to become a "naturalized" human. (The same way that an immigrant to America can become a naturalized citizen....) To that end, the robot Andrew pushes the boundaries of the law and science - slowly becoming legally and physically more and more human, until in the end "he pays the ultimate price" to realize his dream.

I'm not particularly fond of "ultimate price" stories. Particularly when an immortal robot has all the time in the world to work through the obstacles and find another path forward. Really - what is the rush? There has got to be a better way.

But - there is a lot of good thought-provoking ideas in raised in this book around what it means to be human, and there is some other good stuff derived from Asimov's three laws of robotics.

The characters however are pretty flat and one-dimensional, and the main character (the robot Andrew) is surprisingly unchanging despite the whole focus of the book being the 200 year long story of his evolution.

This book was made into a movie - Bicentennial Man starring Robin Williams as Andrew.

Both the book and the movie are good, but could have been either more action packed and fun, or deep and thought provoking.

In the end I was left feeling a bit frustrated and wishing for more.

Rating: 3 stars.

This week's movie night was all about Jackie Chan.

First up was Jackie Chan's 1978 classic, Drunken Master - only his second starring role.

Jackie Chan is a master of martial arts, choreography, and physical comedy. And the unique style of "Drunken Boxing" that he portrays in this movie pushes the limits of all three - and it is mesmerizing to watch.

Drunken Master is the story of a trouble-making but noble young boy who shames his father, and who is then sent to train with his cruel uncle - who teaches him the secret art of Drunken Boxing. Drunken Boxing is a style of fighting where you look (and often are) drunk - using wine to gain strength, flexibility, and an immunity to pain.

The film quality is abysmally poor, the plot is cheesy kung-fu drama, and the acting and production value is totally low-budget Hong Kong.

But - despite all that, there is something magical about this movie. Jackie Chan is in the midst of discovering his signature style of kung-fu comedy and amazing stunts (he does nearly all of them himself), and there is something that feels totally fresh and new about Drunken Master - even though the movie is nearly 30 years old now.

It truly is a classic.

Rating: 4+ stars...


Next up was the "sequel" Legend of Drunken Master, made 16 years later in 1994.

Whereas Drunken Master felt raw fresh and new, Legend of Drunken Master felt like "yet another Jackie Chan movie". By this point in his career Jackie Chan was a big international star famous for his trademark style of action and comedy and insane stunts. And though this formula is a good one, The Legend of Drunken Master feels overly polished and formulaic. Some of the magic is lost, and the story has become little more than an excuse to string together amazingly elaborate stunts.

The plot this time around is shallow and I found it rather offensive in how it portrayed the colonial british ambassador so one dimensionally. The evil British ambassador is smuggling priceless historic artifacts out of China, and Jackie must fight back. *yawn*

And despite the title - in this movie there is less focus on the Drunken Boxing fighting style than in the first, and it is treated more for comedic effect than as a serious and beautiful martial art.

The stunts and fight choreography are stunning though. Jackie Chan moves with a grace that rivals Fred Astaire and Gene Kelly.

But I wish there was more to the movie as a whole than just an excuse to string together some action scenes.

Worthwhile - but it could have been so much more.

Rating: 3 stars.

The Monday Night Movie this week was The Adventures of Priscilla, Queen of the Desert - the story of three drag queens who set off across the Australian outback from Sydney to Alice Springs in a glammed-out bus named Priscilla.

I have heard many people gushing fondly about this movie being a classic for years, and it was good to at last see it.

It was also good to see The Matrix's Agent Smith (Hugo Weaving) in drag.

But while this is a fun road movie, the "fish WAY out of water" story is fairly predictable, with good measures of intolerance and hate found in the expected places, and equal measures of surprising acceptance and support found in some very unexpected places.

The music is good. The costumes are over the top (WAY over the top). And Priscilla would make a great bus to drive to Burning Man.

But - for whatever reason, drag queens just don't fascinate me.

Ah well.

Rating: 3+ stars.

Last Thursday I canceled Netflix after having been a member since early 2001. Netflix stock probably dropped a few dollars on the news - I have been their dream customer. I tend to hold onto the movies they send me for a few months (even more than a year on one occasion!) before watching them, all the while paying the monthly fee...

One movie that has been sitting in my Netflix inbox for at least a month or two has been Titus. I finally got around to watching it last Thursday night.

I knew that Titus was based upon Shakespeare, but I did not realize in advance that the movie sticks to Shakespeare's script and dialog. But the setting has been updated to a stylistic blend between ancient Rome and fascist WW 2 Italy. Chariots and motorcycles share the streets, and ancient and modern architecture flow together.

It is weird, but effective.

The plot has not been updated though - it is still classic Shakespeare full of melodrama and tragedy. Pretty much everyone ends up dead, and lots of hands and heads get cut off along the way.

Anthony Hopkins does a great job as Titus, but most of the rest of the cast seems to struggle with the demanding material.

It has been a long while since I have seen or read any Shakespeare, and I had forgotten how clever and sharp his dialog could be. That was the joy of this movie - and by the end I was fairly transfixed.

Overall enjoyable, if a bit dated and hard to watch at times.

Rating: 3+ stars...

Yesterday's main movie night feature was supposed to be Priscilla - Queen of the Desert, but Rebekah ended up swamped with homework and couldn't make it (and she had the DVD). The second choice was Napoleon Dynamite, a bizarre little low-budget movie that makes me certain that I never ever ever want to live in Idaho.

Jon Heder's character Napoleon is indeed memorable - it is easy to see how Napoleon Dynamite has crept so far into MTV/pop culture this past year. He is a nerd who would be nerdy even to the nerdiest of other nerds. And he isn't even all that likable. Neither is his friend Pedro. Nor his uncle Rico who is trapped in the past. Nor pretty much anyone else in this movie.

But somehow the whole thing still ends up being fairly entertaining to watch.

I may have liked it better if I hadn't been exposed to so many bad Napoleon Dynamite impressions over the past year. Now, rather than this film being a chance to see a new unique character brought to life - John Heder just seemed to be doing yet another bad impression.

Ah well...

Rating: 3 stars.

This Monday's movie night was an animation double feature. First up was the bizarre French film The Triplets of Belleville.

Uhm. Oww. Brain hurts.

There is essentially no dialog in this movie. But there is an amazing amount of animal cruelty. I now have an entirely new concept of "dog tired" - that poor puppy. Not to mention those poor frogs.

The story follows an old grandmother and her overly-loyal dog as they journey to America (the statue of liberty is holding a cheeseburger?!??) to try and find her grandson, who was kidnapped (and enslaved) by the French mafia while mid-race in the Tour de France. While on her quest, she joins up with the triplets - three old sisters who sing, smile a lot, and play their household appliances as instruments.

The animation is good, funky, and has a very unique style. The music (particularly when the triplets are singing) is fun, weird and catchy. And the plot... Well it will leave you scratching your head. Enjoyable, yes. But...

This is a VERY French movie.

To really hurt your brain, be sure to watch the music video special feature on the DVD.

Rating: 3 stars...

Monday Night movies this week ended up being a small gathering - just Rebekah and Mom.

Since Rebekah had already seen The Aviator, we flipped through my movie collection until we found something that seemed to fit the mood and which my mom was eager to see. The choice: Star Wars: Episode III - Revenge of the Sith.

The joy of a Star Wars movie isn't the story, and certainly isn't the acting. But rather - it is the incredibly rich and beautiful and deep fantasy world that your imagination gets to play in for a few hours. And here Episode III delivers - with some great new playgrounds for the mind.

But for some reason - none of the scenes in Episode III struck me as particularly iconic. Episode I had the Pod Race and the dual vs Darth Maul. Episode II had the surprise of yoda kicking ass. Episode IV, V, and VI are full of iconic moments. But I can't really think of anything in Episode III that is seared into my memory the same way. The ultimate final duel between Anakien and Obi Wan that we have been waiting years to see ends after 12 unremarkable minutes (longest duel ever filmed!) with Obi Wan winning by jumping onto a riverbank and gaining slightly higher ground.... Uh.... Yeah. That's it???

But - it is Star Wars, and fun regardless. The opening chord of the John William's score will always blow me away and get me excited.

*grin*

Rating: 3 stars.

I went to see Walk The Line with dawnd last night at the Parkway Theater in Oakland.

The movie, about the life of Johnny Cash, was good - though it often felt forced and formulaic. I guess it is pretty hard to distill a complex life down into two hours of dramatic snapshots. But this particular take on the biopic formula felt particularly unoriginal - I kep thinking that I was rewatching Ray. Roger Ebert nails the formula:

"Walk the Line" follows the story arc of many other musical biopics, maybe because many careers are the same: Hard times, obscurity, success, stardom, too much money, romantic adventures, drugs or booze, and then (if they survive) beating the addiction, finding love and reaching a more lasting stardom. That more or less describes last year's "Ray" but every time we see this story the characters change and so does the music, and that makes it new.

Even the dead brother as inspiration angle seemed the same.

One key difference from Ray is that in Walk The Line Joaquin Phoenix and Reese Witherspoon did their own singing. And they do an AMAZING job. The plot may be formula, but the acting in this movie is great. Particularly Reese Witherspoon. She completely stole the show as Johnny's love and eventual wife - June Carter. She is amazing - definitely an Oscar-worthy performance.

But even better than the movie - the Parkway Theater blew me away. I've heard about the place for years, but have never been. Now that I have, I am hooked. Movies, pizza, wine, beer, couch seating (real sofas!), and cool funky personality galore. I love how the owners of the theater have a little monthly video update they broadcast before the movie of them cracking bad jokes, talking about new recipes they are serving in the restaurant (eat at your couch seat!), and what upcoming movies and events they are planning. It feels so real - the exact opposite of a generic AMC.

The Parkway is the BEST venue I have ever seen a movie in. I'd be happy to go back with anyone for any reason - just ask and I'm there. $5.00 tickets too - wow!

Rating: 3+ Stars. (Walk The Line)
Rating: 5+ Stars. (The Parkway Theater!)

Watched this on DVD at Lindsay's Tuesday night, on her recommendation.

Matchstick Men is a clever movie about an OCD con artist (Nicolas Cage) whose 14 year old daughter suddenly shows up in his life and soon becomes involved in learning his trade.

It's not stealing after all if they willingly give you their money, right?

Nicolas Cage does an awesome job acting out such a complex character, but the sheer amount of smoking he does ended up really turning me off. That many closeups of cigarettes was starting to make me feel sick through the screen. *ugh*

The plot-twists in this movie are clever, and almost make it worth watching a second time to see the foreshadowing.

Rating: 3 stars.

Speaking of Seth, last Sunday night was our first night hanging out together at home...

We decided to watch a movie, and Seth picked out Collateral from the free offerings on Comcast OnDemand.

I had never heard of it, but it ended up being a mildly enjoyable ride. The movie is a fairly predictable and brainless action movie that pretends to be a lot deeper and darker than it actually is. Tom Cruise plays an assassin who hires/hijaks a cab driven by Jamie Foxx to take him around on an all-night killing spree in LA.

The movie relies way too heavily on "what-are-the-odds-of-that" miracle coincidences. I hate that, and the movie would have been better without them.

But overall, the movie was fun - and the dark LA-by-night styling was actually pretty cool.

Rating: 3 stars.

After spending the entire weekend mostly indoors first preparing for, then hosting, and finally cleaning up from my birthday party - I very much needed to get out by Sunday night.

I went for an evening bike ride, and ended up at the Van Ness AMC to use the last of my free movie passes to see the new Harry Potter.

Uhm - it was pretty. And fun. And certainly worth watching.

But it felt like at least half the movie was missing.

Having not (yet) read the book - the movie felt to me like a series of "favorite" snipits rendered beautifully on the screen, but with only minimal bits of character development and connecting story to tie them all together.

I can't really say that I was disappointed - I love the characters and the overall style of the movie and it was fun to watch them play. But I wished for much more.

Peter Jackson andLord of the Rings has set the standard on how to turn loved fantasy books into movies. I am sad to say that the Goblet of Fire fell pretty far short.

On the other hand - because it seemed like so much potentially good stuff was missing, now I am itching to buy and read the books. So, I guess if selling more books was the goal - perhaps this movie succeeded dramatically.

Rating: 3 stars. (Revised up from 2 after further thought...)

I saw Charlie and the Chocolate factory Sunday night with Sean and Lindsay.

It is a good movie, and worth seeing - particularly if you are a Tim Burton fan. It was indeed dark, and beautiful. It is a very different movie than the original, and in many ways not comparable.

But - it is not a classic. Not in the same way as the original. It doesn't have that same sense of magic and wonder, and though Johny Depp is great, for me Gene Wilder will forever be the perfect Willy Wonka.

( *mild spoilers* )
Rating: 3 stars.