Bryce Zabel's MOVIE SMACKDOWN!

The Taking of Pelham 123 (2009) -vs- Crimson Tide (1995)

The Smackdown.  People trapped inside the cold steel of big machines. Check. Ticking clocks relentlessly counting down to disaster. Check. Battles of will between A-list actors. Check again. Director Tony Scott must have known he had a good thing in 1995's "Crimson Tide" and was looking to repeat it with this year's re-make of the classic "The Taking of Pelham 123."  As far as action directors go, Scott (brother of Ridley) is in the very elite. He makes movies that are almost always worth the price of a ticket at the cineplex. The best are tense, scary, hard-edged ones where his screenwriters give him high stakes and the dialogue to support them (often for Denzel Washington) and then he paces the hell out of the film itself. We have a real fight on our hands with some Scott-on-Scott violence.

The Challenger. The 2009 "The Taking of Pelham 1 2 3" takes its inspiration from the 1974 film "The Taking of Pelham One Two Three" which took its inspiration from the same novel written by John Godey. In the hands of current screenwriter Brian Helgeland, the central idea -- bad guys board a New York subway and take the passengers hostage while demanding a huge ransom -- remains the same. He's given us a few new twists, like the lead hijacker, Ryder (John Travolta) is now an ex-con and the negotiator, Walter Garber (Denzel Washington) is now a transit executive. Then director Scott bends and twists it through pacing, tone and special effects. In this film, Travolta drives the action but it's Washington who gets put on the spot in one particularly tough moment when, without benefit of waterboarding or other enhanced interrogation techniques, the hijacker gets the negotiator to confess to a crime of his own. It's one of those "what would you do" moments and particularly effective as played by Washington.

The Hangover (2009) -vs- My Life In Ruins (2009)

The Smackdown. It’s a battle of the sexes for the ages. The balls-out edgy Men-Will-Be-Boys comedy takes on the watching-paint-dry-by-numbers My Not So Fat Any More Greek Tour Guide. Hardly a fair fight, there’s no intersection in the Venn diagram of viewers who might enjoy both outings.   One’s ostensibly for the ladies -- and by ladies I mean strictly Red Hat Society folks, the ones who talk in the theaters non-stop, moviegoers surprised by plot turns telegraphed so clearly that you wonder how these clueless souls found their way to the theater without assistance. “The Hangover” aims for a demographic blessed with a lowbrow sense of humor and no sense of decorum. It’s Dumb versus Dumber. Chicks versus Dudes. Old versus Young. Grab yourself a Jaegermeister or a giant bottle of Ouzo. You’re gonna need to get a little liquored up to make it through this double feature.

In This Corner. Imagine “Mamma Mia” without ABBA. Nia Vardalos plays a second rate tour guide in Greece surrounded by a bunch of hopelessly corny tourists and stereotypical locals. If touring Greece by bus is something you might consider actually doing at some point in your life, you might enjoy watching “My Life In Ruins.” I’ll just sit over there in the corner, doing just about anything else in the world if you don’t mind. But, as they say, those who like this sort of thing will likely like it. (Send your parents.)

The Mummy: Tomb of the Dragon Emperor (2008) -vs- The Mummy (1999)

EDITOR'S NOTE: Ten years ago, "The Mummy" was packing the theaters with its re-imagining of the classic creature-feature. It went on to take $155-million at the box office here in the U.S. and a whopping $416-million worldwide. Given its budget of $80-million, its producers made a pretty tidy profit. In honor of that achievement, we present Tyger Torrez's 2008 Smackdown that put the original in the ring with the latest incarnation (pardon the pun).

 Who's Your Mummy Dearest? 

The Smackdown.  For years, everyone knew the Big Three of Classic Horror: Dracula, The Wolf Man, and Frankenstein.  That other Undead Dude, The Mummy was second-tier, a guy with a few flicks but not the endorsements ('Count Chocula', anyone)?   It's like he was the forgotten step-child.  All that changed, of course, when Universal decided to dust off the title to remake (sorry, 're-imagine') and cast Brendan Fraser (Link from the classic  'Encino Man') in the 1999 version of "The Mummy."  The re-boot made a load of dough.  Money means more Mummy Mayhem, namely: "The Mummy Returns", a sequel of-sorts; "The Mummy: The Scorpion King;" and recently, "The Mummy: Tomb of the Dragon Emperor."  Four films in less than a decade.  Let's see how the original (well, the new original) holds up against the upstart, or our latest installment.  Let the mummification begin!

The Challenger.  The prologue to "The Mummy: Tomb of the Dragon Emperor" starts in Ancient China where an Evil Emperor, Han (Jet Li) is conquering the known world.  He has a vast army and his priests have shown him how to shape shift and control the elements.  But that's not enough: he wants Immortality!  It just so happens there's a Witch (Michelle Yeoh) who knows the Secret. The Emperor wants her for himself but she's in love with his general.  She gets the point (literally) that Han's not a nice man and puts a curse on him and his army, turning them in Terra Cotta statues (because, apparently, in the Far East they didn't believe in wrapping their mummies in bandages).  The proverbial sands of time pass and Alex O'Connell, the grown Son of Rick (Fraser), finds the Tomb of the Dragon Emperor.  When bad guys awaken him, Alex is joined by his parents Rick and Evelyn (here played by Maria Bello) who are all too eager to quit their boring retirement and kick some mummy ass.   Rick goes three-for-three by putting down the Emperor with the requisite magic blade and saving the world (again).

Terminator Salvation (2009) -vs- The Terminator (1984)

 Before (and After) Arnold Came Back 

The Smackdown. Movies, like much in life, reinforce the notion that more isn't always better, just more. For every "Godfather II," you get "Teen Wolf Too," "Dumb and Dumberer," and "Jaws: The Revenge." With some ideas, better to cut your losses.

That question comes to mind with the new release of "Terminator Salvation." Has the basic idea worn out its welcome? "The Terminator" came out in 1984 and became a world wide hit that propelled director James Cameron into a distinguished career. Arnold Schwarzenegger graduated from curiosity to movie star.

It's now a bankable franchise. The basic idea of mechanized death traveling through time to alter the future carried three feature films and a now-canceled TV series. All rework the storyline to emphasize different aspects of a familiar fable. They succeed to varying degrees and set a high bar for whatever follows.

"Terminator Salvation" faces tall tasks in this Smackdown!: Does it succeed as a film on its own merits, while advancing the memorable elements set forth in "The Terminator?" Will you hear "I'll be back" and wonder why?

Angels & Demons (2009) -vs- The Da Vinci Code (2006)

 Church Vestments, Murderous Hearts 

The Smackdown. Nothing succeeds like excess, no question. Translated to movies: Bigger violence, mightier superheroes, escalating hype. If the box office roars, the basic material will be sequeled, prequeled, reimagined until the legs fall off.

"The Da Vinci Code" hit all the marks in 2006: An international cast, well known locales and a wildly controversial premise to inflame a global audience. The Catholic Church condemned the production, partisans -for and against- lined up long before the book-to-movie reached the screen. Even now, the background noise obscures the relative merits of the film. All that buzz was an answered prayer for the film makers: "The Da Vinci Code" earned upwards of $750 million and author Dan Brown found an audience even larger than his popular book did.

Now, the production team is back: Director Ron Howard, screenwriters Akiva Goldsman, David Koepp and Columbia Pictures mining gold from an earlier Dan Brown novel now presented as a sequel: "Angels & Demons."

This sets up an irresistible Smackdown! but let's understand a few ground rules: These films are works of dramatic fiction, not documentary in nature. As such I view neither one as an attack on the Catholic Church or the nature of Jesus. As a lifelong observant Catholic I rest easy knowing my faith is not assailed by historical misstatements and preposterous notions offered as plot devices in these movies. I live with the reality, positive and accepting of human frailty, reinforced over a lifetime. Hey, even the Vatican newspaper, L'Osservatore Romano describes "Angels & Demons" as harmless entertainment.

As a basis for judgment, that works for me.