Welcome to the latest installment of Flickchart Road Trip, in which I’m starting in Los Angeles and “driving” across country, watching one movie from each state and posting about it once a week. The new movie I watch will go up against five movies from that state I’ve already seen, chosen from five distinct spots on my own Flickchart. Although I won’t tell you where the new movie actually lands in my chart (I don’t like to add new movies until I’ve had a month to think about them), I’ll let you know how it fared among the five I’ve chosen. Thanks for riding shotgun!
There was a little game on the radio show Loveline called “Germany or Florida?”, in which host Adam Carrolla would have callers guess whether some bizarre human interest story, usually involving gruesome or idiotic behavior, had taken place in Germany or Florida. That should give you some indication how this state is viewed by non-Floridians.
I find it disconcerting how hated Nicolas Cage is. It’s not an uncommon occurrence to hear people say that they avoid Nicolas Cage movies because he is in it. Are there any other Oscar winners that that have that same problem? Make no mistake, I’m not saying he hasn’t been in bad films, but there is no actor who has been in over 50 films who can say they haven’t made a few mistakes. Yet these same people who damn him will forgive Al Pacino for doing Two For the Money, and are completely willing to ignore The Tourist from both Johnny Depp and Angelia Jolie‘s resumes. So why do people only take Ghost Rider, The Wicker Man, and Season of the Witch into consideration whether they should go see the newest Cage film? I have no illusions that this blog will make these Cage haters think he’s a master of the craft, but hopefully it will keep them from writing a movie off just because he is in it. Read the rest of this entry »
Since the early twentieth century, greed has been a subject to fascinate filmmakers and movie audiences alike. It is a vice that can turn normal men into monsters. Like a plague, it spreads ever so easily to destroy the Host and the Innocent. The most notable starting point of greed on film is in Erich von Stroheim’s silent work Greed (1924). Famous for its original ten-hour length, which was obliterated much to the director’s chagrin by over seven hours worth of cuts, Greed explored in much detail how destructive the abstract can be. In this week’s Reel Rumbles, the wages of greed are examined further by two modern classics, adaptations of the literary works of Upton Sinclair (Oil!) and Cormac McCarthy. Lie to friends, horde your wealth, and steal from family members – it’s time for No Country for Old Men vs. There Will Be Blood.
What if someone you never met, someone you never saw, someone you never knew, was the only someone for you? That’s the question asked by Nora Ephron’s 1993 hit Sleepless in Seattle, which climbs into the Reel Rumbles ring this week to do battle with 2004’s The Notebook, a film that claims that behind every great love is a great story. Are these films promising chick flick classics, or just heavy-handed weepy tear-jerkers going for cheap shots over quality storytelling? Find out as the bell rings for The Notebook vs. Sleepless in Seattle.