• Thc_sidebar

Support Our Facebook Campaign!

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner


Teens

Superbad (2007) -vs- American Pie (1999)

BryceZabel Boys Just Wanna Have Fun, Too

The Smackdown. Over the recent Thanksgiving holiday, I had a chance to screen the "Superbad" Blu-ray for some friends and remember just what a raunchy, funny and emotionally accurate film it is.  I was reminded that you're never too old to relive the total humiliation of your teenage years, nor to remember (if you're a guy) just how much you wanted to get in the Club and to realize it might just be out of reach. ClassicSmack3 Both "Superbad" and "American Pie" give us groups of horny high school guys who would really like to have shed their virginity so they can truly relax and enjoy graduation, knowing that they will not have to spend the rest of their lives lying about what they did and did not do by the end of that fateful senior year. They know, apparently, that a diploma for merely passing classes is so not what it's about. Both of these films -- released eight years apart -- hit the gold with audiences of all ages and theaters during both releases were filled with actual screams of laughter. This ain't gonna be easy...

Superbad

The Challenger. When our family returned from a 2007 vacation, it seemed that everyone we knew had seen "Superbad" except us. This really bothered my teenager, Jared, so we went as soon as we got back, jet-lagged or not. As it turns out, this film is so entertaining and outrageous that the last thing you will ever do while watching it is go to sleep. The film starts with dick-jokes and similar raunch and never stops but, the thing is, the dialogue all feels very fluid and confident, even if underneath it all, it's also just a little sad. The point is, most reviews will now tell you, it's really not about the sex-jokes, it's about the friendship between Seth (Jonah Hill) and Evan (Michael Cera). Well, yeah, and the sex-jokes. A third-wheel friend, Fogell, played by new kid Christopher Mintz-Plasse pretty much steals the show and the moniker "McLovin" has probably forever entered the nation's vocabulary.

Continue reading "Superbad (2007) -vs- American Pie (1999)" »

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

Sherry Coben 2 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.

Twilight

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. 

Continue reading "Twilight (2008) -vs- Edward Scissorhands (1990)" »

High School Musical 3: Senior Year (2008) -vs- The Godfather: Part III (1990)

Sherry_coben_2 Third One's The Charm(er)

The Smackdown. Sequels rarely top the original. Some are downright soul-scarringly wretched. Most leave the viewer vaguely aware that they've had their pockets picked by a large corporation's greedy stab at recapturing movie magic by revisiting a lucrative well once or twice too often. Then there are the sacred franchises - all those Jedi knights and boy wizards and hobbits and pirates standing tall as lighthouses, inspiring a thousand ill-conceived sequels. Legions of diehard fans can't get enough of these perennial box office champions, marking their calendars for the next installments and collecting tiny plastic effigies, posters, and other placeholders to tide them over in the meanwhile. Merchandising provides another kind of sequel; Disney, the empire built by a shirtless rodent, knows best how to milk a cash cow.

So now, dancing blithely into the theaters comes the third entry in a mega-successful Disney Channel telemovie franchise, this time direct not to video but direct to the even-bigger screen. Worthy of the upgrade or no, the multiplexes will be packed with squealing teenyboppers.

Coppola didn't disappoint with his "Godfather Part II". Hardly. More than a decade later, he sailed once more into the breech, trying to recapture lightning in a bottle, a complicated story in hand and much (but sadly not all) of his creative team intact. Too old for wizards and hobbits, we Godfather groupies waved bon voyage from the shore and waited, fingers crossed, to see if his third trip would prove worthy of the family.

So. It's Gangsters versus Grads. If part two's for the company, is part three the charm?

Continue reading "High School Musical 3: Senior Year (2008) -vs- The Godfather: Part III (1990)" »

Harold & Kumar Escape from Guantanamo Bay (2008) -vs- Harold & Kumar Go to White Castle (2004)

Sanchez_icon

The Search for the Perfect Buzz

The Smackdown. Every generation needs its stoner buddy comedy where the plot is more smoke than fire. The sixties gave us Cheech and Chong and now we've got another multi-cultural duo looking for some killer weed and trippin' good fun with Harold and Kumar. Back in 2004 when John Kerry was getting swiftboated, Harold and Kumar Go to the White Castle gave us our updated comedy of stoners in search of burgers and sex. Since then, as the Bush administration has wheezed its way to its endgame, that first H&K film found a specialized audience and a welcome home in many DVD collections. Now, the sequel -- Harold and Kumar Escape from Guantanamo Bay -- picks up where White Castle left off and shows up just in time to give the comic finger to hard-ass security types and terrorists in orange jump suits. Does Guantanamo Bay build on the loopy charm of White Castle, or is it just blowing smoke?

Guantanamobay

The Challenger. Escape from Guanatamo Bay picks up where Go to White Castle leaves off, although it's hardly crucial knowing that. Harold (John Cho) thinks he has a chance with Maria (Paula Garces) from his apartment building, only she's leaving for Amsterdam for ten days. He decides to find Maria there and Kumar (Kal Penn) tags along because marijuana is legal in the Netherlands. Strong premise, huh?

The road to love (or a good high, apparently) is never direct, and certainly not for Harold or Kumar. In the airport we meet Kumar's old flame Vanessa (Danneel Harris) headed to Texas and her oily fiance with White House connections, Colton (Eric Winter). The flight to Amsterdam is turned back after Kumar's fumbling attempt to light a bong on board has them sent to Guantanamo Bay as suspected terrorists. H & K escape and from this point on the rain of potty language, potty humor and stereotyping comes down heavy. They enlist unlikely allies in their quest to clear their names. One pal in Florida offers a view of full frontal nudity that will make you think "Osama Bin Laden." Neil Patrick Harris appears for no reason  --  as he did in White Castle  --  to inch the plot forward. Harold and Kumar wind up in Texas, where a different George W. Bush steps up to help. More information than this will spoil your appreciation, if that's possible. Jon Hurwitz and Hayden Schlossberg wrote and directed.

Whitecastle

The Defending Champion. White Castle introduces us to Harold, Kumar and their vacation from convention. Harold works in financial services, Kumar half-heartedly aims for medical school. Both prefer getting high and that's what happens. Now they have the munchies and only White Castle burgers will satisfy. During their wrong way road trip Harold and Kumar encounter  punks, racist cops, religious sex freaks, an enraged raccoon and Neil Patrick Harris. Harold and Kumar reach their goal, but in view of the abuse and toilet humor they witness it's hard to imagine they still had an appetite. Danny Leiner directed Hurwitz and Schlossberg's script. Watching it the first time, thinking about its lineage to Cheech and Chong, you have to wonder about when special interest groups call for more diversity in acting roles in Hollywood films, is this really what they were thinking of?

The Scorecard. This is not Masterpiece Theatre and both movies would be easy to dismiss if not for Harold and Kumar's chemistry and quirky humanity. Socially they are miles beyond Cheech and Chong, but not so far ahead we lose track. H & K question the lives they've laid out and challenge the cruelty and intolerance they see in the convenience store and station house. Harold loves Maria and Kumar loves something other than sensemilla. Cho and Penn are well suited and several familiar faces are effective in minor roles (Christopher Meloni in White Castle; Beverly D'Angelo and Rob Corddry in Guantanamo Bay; Neil Patrick Harris in both).

There are distinct differences. White Castle has stronger production values and comic pacing, although Guantanamo Bay takes some mild pokes at homeland security and President Bush. If you were not kindly disposed to Harold & Kumar's first adventure, the second one won't change your mind.

Does one entry emerge from the smoke? Yup.

Continue reading "Harold & Kumar Escape from Guantanamo Bay (2008) -vs- Harold & Kumar Go to White Castle (2004)" »

The Simpsons Movie (2007) -vs- South Park: Bigger Longer & Uncut (1999)

LakranaReview by Lak Rana

The Smackdown.  After nearly 400 episodes and 18 years spent entertaining viewers of all ages on the small screen, America's favorite dysfunctional family finally gets the big-screen treatment in the aptly titled "The Simpsons Movie."  In an industry dominated by flashy special effects and high-tech computer-generated animation, "Simpsons" nevertheless spares us the frills and keeps its animation style ever so simple--opting instead to deliver satirical storylines laden with witty pop-culture references.  However, "Simpsons" is not the only clever, crudely animated television series to make the leap onto the big screen.  Another little, bare bones animated series by the name of "South Park" paved the way to theaters with "South Park: Bigger Longer & Uncut" almost 10 years ago--only two years after first premiering on television screens across America.  So which series made a stronger transition from television to big screen?  You'll find out in a few minutes...so... just don't have a cow, Man!

Simpsons2
"Keep moving forward and narrowly escape death from the hands of an angry mob, or go back and fry up some nice bacon...Marge, I'll be right back!"

The Challenger.  The town of Springfield is in a state of environmental chaos after somebody illegally dumped toxic pig droppings into Lake Springfield.  EPA Chief Russ Cargill cunningly convinces president Arnold Schwarzenegger to quarantine the town in a giant glass dome to contain the problem.  When the town residents discover that their beloved Homer J. Simpson is the one to blame for all their troubles, they form a mob and force the Simpson family to flee from the bubble and become fugitives.  While the Simpsons are trying to start a new life in Alaska they discover that the EPA and the president have one last plan of action for the Springfield situation--eradicate the town by blowing it up!  Marge, Bart, Lisa, and Maggie decide to abandon Alaska immediately and return to save Springfield.  However, stubborn Homer is still preoccupied with his selfish rituals and refuses to leave the comforts of Alaska.  When he later realizes that he is nothing without his family and friends he charges back to Springfield and saves the town from its calamitious fate.  The one draw back is that there sadly isn't enough time in this fast paced movie to explore the many characters and places that audiences have come to admire from the television series.

Sthpark
Holy Cow! The MPAA is really serious about its rating system. Kids, don't sneak into R-rated movies or the world will come to an end!

The Defending Champion.  "South Park: Bigger Longer & Uncut" takes us to the tiny little suburb of South Park where a group of parents are in an uproar because "the boys" sneaked into an R-rated movie (starring their favorite Canadian comics Terrance and Phillip) and emerged with potty mouths that quickly infect all the other kids in town.  The parents launch a wild protest against the morally corrupt movie and eventually the United States is forced to declare war on Canada.  The plot gets even sillier as we intercut to lovers Saddam Hussein and Satan in the underworld as they scheme to take over the planet.  "Park" takes full advantage of its R-rating by bombarding the audience with the rich, over-the-top, no holds barred raunchiness that we'd naturally expect from gifted writers Trey Parker and Matt Stone.

The Scorecard.  It's no secret that the the writing for "The Simpsons" television show has gone a little stale since the famed family first hit the airwaves. For God's sake...the series has had almost 400 episodes so I understand why it would be tough to keep coming up with original show ideas at this point.  Maybe that's why the plot of "The Simpsons Movie" came across as somewhat unoriginal:  Homer does something really terrible, sees the error of his ways, and saves the day in the end. 

The movie did have a strong opening sequence and first act, however the writers appeared to run out of ideas during the lazy second act and they definitely just threw some things together in the haphazard third act in a weak attempt to give the audience some semblance of closure.  Though "Simpsons" was well written overall, it still did not manage to capture the color and energy of the early television series.  This is not to say that the film was not entertaining because it did dish out bountiful servings of the sophisticated social and political humor that has made the television series a household name.

Not to be outdone, "Park" weighed in with it's own original satirical social and political humor which, because of its R-rating, it had the liberty to take further than "Simpsons."  "Park" attacked everybody and everything and did so using an unbelievable barrage of profane words and musical numbers.  The storyline was completely ridiculous and severly keen at the same time.  Writers Parker and Stone skillfully satirized an issue that is undoubtedly near and dear to their own hearts--censorship.  However, the film was not without problems as the story did get a tad bit bogged down by the more than 12 musical sequences.

And the winner is...

Continue reading "The Simpsons Movie (2007) -vs- South Park: Bigger Longer & Uncut (1999)" »

Search This Site

  • Custom Search

Smack-Poll of the Month

December 2008

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
  1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 30 31      

Smacked Around Good

Banner Design