Bryce Zabel's MOVIE SMACKDOWN!

Twilight (2008) -vs- Edward Scissorhands (1990)

Edwardian Romance

The Smackdown. Teenaged girls are a force to be reckoned with. Like tsunamis and hurricanes. Oh sure, industry wisdom has it that teenaged boys go to the movies; they're the prime target audience. Anyone who ventures into the multiplex in the heat of summer knows that. But never underestimate the awesome power that is a teenaged girl with a crush...for that crush can easily become an obsession...and that obsession can turn into some serious cash. Witness last weekend's seventy million dollar box office take for the eminently crushworthy vampire teen romance, "Twilight."  For almost twenty years, "Edward Scissorhands" has been my uncontested poster boy for doomed Gothic-tinged star-crossed romance. Can Edward Cullen, Twilight's fangless undead hunk unseat Tim Burton's most memorable creation? It's the Battle of the Edwards...a Battle to the Death. And beyond.

The Challenger. Well, she was just seventeen. You know what I mean. Bella Swan. Barely enough blood in her brooding body to bring a blush to those perfectly smooth cheeks. Listless. Lifeless. Secretive. So deeply sensitive that the slightest of smiles might overstate any case for happiness. A child of divorce shuttled between dry hot Arizona and cold damp Washington State. Phoenix to Forks. Frying pan into the fire.

"Twilight" is the blue-hued film that perfectly captures all the angst, ennui and bliss of being a teenager in love. Based on the incredibly hot series of novels by Stephenie Meyer and brought to the big screen by director Catherine ("Thirteen") Hardwicke and screenwriter Melissa Rosenberg, what we have here is a chick-let flick of impeccable pedigree. 

The Wackness (2008) -vs- Running with Scissors (2006)

Therapists Who Need Therapists

The Smackdown.  Hollywood loves to write about therapists who are more screwed up than their patients.  Maybe that's because most Hollywood writers and directors are in therapy and want to feel better about themselves, I don't know.  Anyway, both of these films from Sony Pictures and from writer/directors put their coming-of-age male leads in therapy with people who are, shall we say, practicing "out of the box."  In "The Wackness," Luke Shapiro (Josh Peck) trades marijuana for shrink sessions in New York in 1994 and in "Running with Scissors," Augusten Burroughs (Joseph Cross) moves in with his family’s therapist in the 1970s.  Have these movies pushed the boundaries of therapy too far to seem believable?  If therapy was this messed up in the recent past, how bad is it now?  And our Smackdown question:  If you have to see a shrink, do you want a referral from someone who runs drugs or runs with scissors?

The Challenger. The title of the film comes from a line that "Juno" darling, Olivia Thirlby, says to Josh Peck, “You’re the wackness and I’m the dopeness,” which is basically an overly cool way to say that Peck's a pessimist.  (Not as much as the film's cinematographer, who lit the film like he couldn't afford a lighting package.)  Anyway, "The Wackness" gives us Luke Shapiro in the summer before he goes away to college who has a lot to be pessimistic about.  In this film, writer/director Jonathan Levine lingers of the fact that he's masturbating seven times a day dreaming about real sex and dealing drugs out of an ice cream cart in New York City to make some coin.  Oh, yeah, he's looking for love, too. Shapiro is trying to get a grip on life because his parents are fighting over losing their apartment and he never made any friends in high school. Shapiro finds solace in his pot client and therapist, Doctor Squires (Ben Kingsley), who gives a string of unusual advice that probably goes beyond the Hippocratic Oath.  In any case, Shapiro follows Squires' advice about losing his virginity, only does it with Dr. Squires' step-daughter, Stephanie (Olivia Thirlby). Kingsley and Peck give stellar performances as men with no coping skills to deal with the matters of life and love besides escaping through drug use.  It might even be enlightening if it hadn't been shot so damned dark.

Smart People (2008) -vs- Wonder Boys (2000)

The Awful Plight of Pittsburg College Professors

The Smackdown. Why is it that actors who have made a decent living as leading men want to take roles where they look like crap, struggle with books in serious need of editing and, worse, have to live in Pittsburg? I mean no offense to the place, mind you, although they did support Clinton in that recent political Smackdown, but I digress... the point is that the movies that Dennis Quaid and Michael Douglas chose for their post-hunk lives want us to believe that they're really smart guys who, basically, can't quite seem to dress themselves after their wives have gone. My wife is still sticking with me so far but I think maybe, after seeing these movies, she's just worried that if she leaves I'll trash her reputation with my fashion choices.

The Challenger. "Smart People" gives us Dennis Quaid as a really grumpy professor who, after the death of his wife (yes, that again) is trying not-so-successfully to hold his family together. He plays Lawrence Wetherhold who specializes in Victorian literature and being a pretentious, arrogant and pompous pain-in-the-ass -- and he's very good at that, I should say. Fortunately, Quaid is surrounded by a great ensemble of actors that includes Thomas Haden Church, Sarah Jessica Parker and Ellen Page. All of them play seriously messed up people, too, but only Church pulls it off spectacularly. His stoner "adopted" brother is so damn funny without trying -- it's his best role since "Sideways."  The plot, such as it is, moves erratically along a path that is not very surprising -- Quaid's Wetherhold will try to get over his lost wife, his kids will be damaged and say mean things to him and each other, the loser brother will prove invaluable, and the girl who can't possibly replace the wife, naturally, will.

The Defending Champion. You have to hand it to Michael Douglas for having the guts to play Grady Trip in "Wonder Boys." After a series of movies where he was actually reported to have a 28-inch waist, Douglas shows off his shabby side here and actually is seen more than once in a fuzzy pink woman's bathrobe. Now that's acting! This film was based on a book by Michael Chabon (great) and was adapted by Steve Kloves and directed by Curtis Hanson coming off "L.A. Confidential." It's a shambling affair that moves in surprising ways, never quite letting you know what's going to happen next. Another great set of actors pass through this film: notably, Robert Downey Jr., Tobey Maguire, Frances McDormand and, even, Mrs. Tom Cruise. The plot involves a long-overdue novel, the accidental murder of a dog, a gay book agent who preys on transexuals or college boys with equal abandon, and all the insecurities of writing and trying to live up to people's expectations.

The Scorecard. The first five minutes of "Smart People" rank as among the worst first five minutes of any movie I've seen in years. Every character seems lame and hateful. It was so bad that my wife bolted from the theater and sat this one out and snuck into "Baby Mama" across the cineplex. Dennis Quaid's character is such an a-hole in so many ways that my wife's despair was completely reasonable. If I didn't have this Smackdown in the back of my mind, I'd probably have joined her. The film, although predictable, does rally as it continues and even though it doesn't surprise, on more than a few levels it still manages to satisfy, sorta.

Both "Wonder Boys" and "Smart People" have marijuana scenes in them and the way they are handled tells you a lot about the tone of the two films. In "Smart People," Church's character gets his 17-year-old niece played by Page stoned. Nothing much comes of it, except that it is shorthand for his "let it roll" persona and allows her "Young Republican" to relax a little. We've seen it before in dozens of films. In "Wonder Boys," however, Michael Douglas's Grady Trip actually has a marijuana problem. He's getting high all the time, using it to hide from truths that need to be faced, and it's interfering with his life. It means something beside a quick smile.

Another thing that both films have in common are performances by the supporting actors that steal the oxygen from the scenes they're in. Church's stoner and Downy's gay lech both compel your attention every time they are on screen.

Yes, both films are strongly acted to be sure. Still, praising a film because it has good actors is a little like praising a film because it has good cinematography. It's important and powerful if the film justifies it, but good emoting and pretty pictures have to happen in the service of a greater cause to really mean something.

Forgetting Sarah Marshall (2008) -vs- Knocked Up (2007)

Reality on the Side

The Smackdown. Goofy. Human. Hilarious with a large serving of sex. Using that recipe Judd Apatow produced or wrote a bucket of consistently engaging comedies the past ten years: Knocked Up, Freaks and Geeks, The 40 Year Old Virgin, Superbad, Anchorman: The Legend of Ron Burgundy and Walk Hard: The Dewey Cox Story. Each delivers human-scaled stories about quirky, imperfect men and women dealing with personal issues that assume oversize comic dimensions. Each is separately memorable, but Knocked Up may lead the pack. This movie is, by turns, silly and dead serious in telling us about a career woman, her unlikely boyfriend and the baby she's having. Knocked Up strongly connected with audiences: Its six-month box office approached $150 million and its DVD enjoys a strong rental life.

Now, a new comedy bearing Judd Apatow's fingerprints hits the big screen: Forgetting Sarah Marshall. That's our Smackdown! Does it offer the same mix of oddly endearing gifts that make Knocked Up so distinctive? Has the recipe gone stale?

The Challenger.  We  see  a lot  of  songwriter  Peter  Bretter (Jason Segel) and  Bretter's  peter in the first few minutes. He's just out of the shower when his TV-actress girlfriend Sarah (Kristen Bell) shows up to end the relationship with Peter. She's found someone else. It's funny and uncomfortable as Peter struggles with the aftermath, cruising the bars and melting down at work. He can't make any progress on his side-project: a Dracula musical featuring puppets. At this point Peter takes a trip to Hawaii to get over Sarah, only you-know-who is checked into the same resort with Mr. Someone Else (Russell Brand). Along the way Peter connects with members of the Apatow Repertory Players (Paul Rudd, Jonas Hill, Bill Hader) and resort hostess Rachel Jansen (Mila Kunis). All these recipe ingredients complicate the process of forgetting Sarah Marshall. The script Jason Segel wrote and Judd Apatow produced ties the loose ends plausibly while showing Count Dracula has a future in musical theatre.

The Defending Champion. Knocked Up plays on the notion that opposites attract, but need a lot of work to stay attracted. Alison Scott (Katherine Heigl) and Ben Stone (Seth Rogan) move in very different orbits:  She works in TV and he's hanging out with slacker pals and not doing much else. They meet the night Alison celebrates her promotion and she gets pregnant after their one-night stand. That's when the drama in this comedy evolves: Ben has to grow up, Alison faces the big questions about life and her relatives must learn to trust and accept this bearded addition to the family circle. This transition is propelled by lots of raunchy humor. Judd Apatow directed his screenplay.

The Scorecard. Both films are similar in approach and reach. Many of the creative players worked on both movies and they look for more than laughs. Make no mistake: You'll laugh, even at the crude stuff  --  and there's plenty of that.

Strong  --  and familiar  --  casts interact nicely. Their eccentric characters provide texture and dimension. Knocked Up made Katherine Heigl a movie star. Seth Rogan is loopy and earnest as her unlikely love interest. Leslie Mann is funny and touching as Alison's anxious sister. Mila Kunis, Kristen Bell and Russell Brand handle their spots especially well in Sarah Marshall. The movie would not have held together without Jason Segel's lumpy collection of doubts and desires.

There's a difference in tone between the two films. Both deliver a mix of laughs reined in by serious undertones, but Sarah Marshall spends more time mining its protagonist's uncertainties and foibles.

Two very likable movies with similar strengths. Which one offers the more  nourishing serving of comedy with a side of reality? Read on.

21 (2008) -vs- Lucky You (2007)

The Smackdown. Movies offer the risky pleasure of transporting us someplace beyond our regular lives. Often they touch down in Las Vegas. It's a neon backdrop for stories that are fun (Oceans 11), quirky and redemptive (The Cooler) or just silly (Honeymoon in Vegas), but always a little fantastic. Sometimes the fantasy falls flat (One from the Heart, Next). Last year, Lucky You looked for personal meaning at the gaming tables and came up largely empty handed. Now, another gambling drama hits the cineplex, 21. That's our Smackdown: Which of these Las Vegas movies has the stronger story about holding the hot hand.

The Challenger. Ben Campbell (Jim Sturgess) has the sort of problem we'd all love to have: He's a straight-A student at MIT with the grades to get into the Harvard Medical School, but not the money. What to do? What to do? In 21 the answer appears in the form of Ben's math instructor, Mickey Rosa (Kevin Spacey). He induces Ben to join his "team" for extracurricular activity in Sin City. They count cards and use that skill to sweeten their odds at the blackjack tables. The group cleans up until jealousy, naked greed and security agent Cole Williams (Laurence Fishburne) catches up with the  players' elaborate disguises, signals and passwords. Along the way, Ben gains a girlfriend, Jill (Kate Bosworth), loses his stash and earns a measure of revenge. Robert Luketic directed 21 from a screenplay by Peter Steinfield and Allan Loeb based  --  very loosely based  --  on Ben Mezrich's non-fiction
"Bringing Down The House."

 The Champion. Lucky You gives us Huck Cheever (Eric Bana) who just doesn't know when to hold 'em at the poker table. As a result, he's often broke and routinely hocks his dead mother's ring and steals money from his girlfriend, Billie (Drew Barrymore). Huck has trouble measuring up to his poker champion dad, L.C. Cheever (Robert Duvall). Along the way the movie serves up assorted oddball characters and almost-funny sight gags. Lucky You suggests Huck can settle his accounts and regain his girlfriend if he can rustle up enough scratch to buy his way into the World Poker Championship.  Of course. Curtis Hanson directed the screenplay he co-wrote with Eric Roth.

The Scorecard. Lucky You has a hole in the middle: Not enough story to make you care. Huck Cheever is overly self-absorbed and Eric Bana's performance recedes into the background when he shares the screen with Duvall and Barrymore. Huck's commitment problems are not very compelling. More interesting are the poker lingo and the card play. Lucky You never let the poker playing look dull.

21 has different issues. It captures the high-wattage hedonism almost completely absent from Lucky You, but it doesn't feel very original. Haven't we seen those overhead shots of money and chips and lights in other movies? Casting is not one of its problems. Sturgess and Bosworth interact believably, Laurence Fishburne is appropriately menacing and Kevin Spacey commands the screen so well it nearly papers over 21's  unappetizing message: Greed is good and more is better. Ben Campbell offers a tinny justification for his actions; his fellow card counters don't even bother.

Does either movie tell us much about Las Vegas, human motivation or  gambling? Do you sense a winning hand being played? Sure.