Are You Screening?

SyFy’s Warehouse 13 – TV Review

Marc Eastman — Sun, 05 Jul 2009 17:41:54 +0000

Warehouse 13, the latest series on the SciFi channel (which is helping kick off the network’s change to SyFy), looks to be an attempt to bring some mainstream fans to the channel while fulfilling the desires of its core audience. The 2-hour pilot, which airs July 7th from 9 – 11 ET/PT, plays out a little bit Bones, and a little bit X-Files, with dashes of new-spin Doctor Who thrown in.

SCI FI Channel Photo: Philippe Bosse

The show stars Eddie McClintock and Joanne Kelly who start off as two very different Secret Service agents. McClintock plays Pete Lattimer, an easy-going but effective agent who gets “feelings” when things are going wrong, and has learned to trust them the hard way. Kelly is agent Myka Bering. More or less Lattimer’s polar opposite, Myka is uptight, by-the-book, and (supposedly) very good at her job.

When a routine Presidential visit to the Capitol Museum of Natural History takes an odd turn, our two stars find themselves reassigned and given orders to make their way to South Dakota. There they learn that they have been assigned to Warehouse 13, a giant storehouse of artifacts with supernatural powers.

They also meet agent Artie Nielsen (Saul Rubinek) who is the keeper of Warehouse 13, which he lovingly refers to as the nation’s attic. Pete and Myka find out that they are meant to be permanently assigned to the warehouse, and their job will be to hunt down and retrieve all manner of paranormal objects. While Myka immediately tries everything she can to get out of the assignment, Pete thinks the whole thing sounds very cool.

SCI FI Channel Photo: Justin Stephens

The pilot delivers a solid effort at introduction to a complicated road, and the series obviously sets a stage which opens future episodes to every conceivable possibility. There’s a bit more drama to the dramedy than viewers might expect, and it’s hard to tell if the air of seriousness is going to mesh with the truly bizarre. Much like the friction between viewpoints of the two main characters, the show itself seems to be attempting to shove two angles together in a way rather untested.

I have to admit to a certain bias on this one, because this is just my kind of wacky, but this is a tricky show. It doesn’t quite go all the way to a serious side that might make it a no-brainer for fans of something like X-Files or Battlestar Galactica, but it certainly has those fans in mind.

It does have a quirky charm to it, which is aided tremendously by Saul Rubinek’s Artie. The hermit-like overseer of all things mystical is hard to resist. On the other side of that coin, “witchy” Myka is liable to alienate a few viewers before they get to the end and discover that the show aims to soften her up a little as we progress.

The ultimate verdict is going to come down in a similar fashion to something like Bones, which is incredibly difficult to avoid mentioning, because its just a matter of the degree to which audiences feel they can invest in, and feed off, Pete and Myka. That’s a question that will be held in limbo until we get five or six episodes in, and everyone settles into their new home at the warehouse. The trouble is that it’s awfully hard to tell how that’s going from the pilot, and how much likability Myka is going to manage.

SCI FI Channel Photo: Philippe Bosse

The show is probably going to have to hope the sci-fi holds people long enough to put Myka through the tenderizer, and we do seem to have solid enough suggestion that she’s heading there (including some interesting apparel in episode two). Adding to our hope for a dynamic cast mix is young Allison Scagliotti coming to the show in episode four, and a host of interesting guest stars throughout the first season.

It’s the kind of show, just in theory, that I’m going to stick with at least for a while, and it’s got potential. The cast is an interesting mix, but let’s hope the show stabilizes more towards bouncing its characters off each other and slightly less on the side of overly playing the mumbo jumbo.

Below find some press release info on the guest stars we’ll be seeing, and a video player with the latest Hulu has to offer on the show. Also, check out the Warehouse 13 homepage here. It’s a pretty nice site actually, and has a lot of information as well as a fair number of gimmicky doodads to expose you to the show and characters.

Are You Screening?

Guest roles in season one -

Ivan Sergei (Crossing Jordan, Charmed) is “Ross” an EMT from Unionville, New York. Ross and some of the other townspeople begin to display bizarre behavioral symptoms — involuntary (and potentially dangerous) expressions of their subconscious desires.

Tricia Helfer (Battlestar Galactica, Burn Notice) stars as FBI Agent “Bonnie Belski” who clashes with Pete and Myka when they interfere with a case on her Chicago turf. But after the third inexplicable bank takeover, she finds herself willing to make use of their expertise.

Joe Flanigan (Stargate Atlantis, First Monday) portrays the handsome, wealthy “Jeff Weaver” whose charm captures Myka’s interest, but he finds himself under Pete and Myka’s scrutiny when a sculpture on which he bid, vanishes in an impossible heist.

James Naughton (Ally McBeal, Gossip Girl) is “Gilbert Radburn,” the well-tailored, Trump-esque high-profile entrepreneur. When a competitor threatens his intended acquisition, Radburn’s suspicious behavior brings him under Pete and Myka’s scrutiny.

Roger Rees (Cheers, The West Wing) is “MacPherson” one of Artie’s former Warehouse colleagues, who has gone rogue and is now competing with the team to gather dangerous and powerful objects for his own use.

Erica Cerra (Eureka, The L Word) and Niall Matter (Eureka, The Best Years) portray “Jillian and Gary Whitman,” small-time thieves on the Las Vegas strip, whose fortunes, twisted by the strange power of luck-inducing artifact, take a fantastic turn.

Joe Morton (Eureka, Terminator 2) stars as “John HIll” a charismatic prison inmate and an extremist religious leader in a Florida prison.

Mark Sheppard (24, Battlestar Galactica) is “Mr. Valda” the enigmatic representative of the Regents, the mysterious organization that controls Warehouse 13. He disapproves of Artie’s methods as the team leader of the Warehouse, and isn’t afraid to let him know it.

Michael Hogan (Battlestar Galactica, The L Word) portrays Myka’s father “Warren Bering,” who receives a dangerous object anonymously in the mail which puts his life in jeopardy.

Sci-Fi’s New Show: Warehouse 13 (screenrant.com)
Sci-Fi Morphs Into SyFy – Are You Ready? (screenrant.com)
So what is Warehouse 13 all about, anyway? (tvsquad.com)
Flanigan, Helfer Guest on Warehouse 13 (sfuniverse.com)
Nick teen joins cast of SyFy’s Warehouse 13 (tvsquad.com)

Real World 22 Cancun – MTV Has Finally Managed To Completely Lose Me In Only One Episode

Marc Eastman — Sat, 04 Jul 2009 15:28:39 +0000

If you’ve been following along with me, you probably know that I have a strange love/hate relationship with reality television. It’s a story that started with the first Real World (how could it not?), and I can’t help but wish that someone would make that show again.

In the beginning, the idea was that we would take a bunch of twenty year-olds (give or take a few years) who come from a wide range of life circumstances, and put them together in a house to see what happens. People who are just getting their bearings in life thrown together with people who are very different from themselves, and people they might not spend a lot of time with otherwise. By-and-large normal people, just a variety of kinds of normal people.

It was good television. People and personalities clashed, but everyone more or less found ways to get along, and found out that the very different people weren’t really all that different. More importantly, the theory is good television. That’s the show I’d like someone to make again.

But, as we all know, the show we actually get has devloved over the seasons into the bringing together of people who are less and less real, from the same segment of “culture,” and basically interchangeable. Of course, there are one or two people thrown in each season who somehow serve a diversity function, but at this point they are ultimately being insulted by being asked on the show.

The qualifications for entry now have nothing to do with possessing interesting qualities and life experiences (or being able to form a sentence), but pretty much come down to being fairly attractive and unstable. Rather than gaining anything in the realm of worthwhile life experiences, the thing plays out as though the producers are offering up cash bonuses to the first person to pass out drunk.

Despite the annoying uselessness of the road the show has decided to travel, there usually ends up being one or two people that at least make it bearable to check in once in a while. Instead of a group of interesting, normal people learning about life from each other, it’s more like one fairly normal person struggling to survive the asylum, but you can tolerate small doses.

The latest venture to Cancun, however, has so cemented its position, that the show may as well play with the corner overlay “You’re so stupid, you’ll actually watch this.”

Oddly, given that statement, the episode itself wasn’t all that horrible, though I clearly understand the people involved so little that there would be no real point watching the show beyond mocking them… except, I don’t know that I understand them enough to mock them.

Enter CJ. CJ, 24, has a girlfriend at home. When events lead to CJ being semi-forced out of his bed, he climbs into bed with roommate Emilee. Nothing really happens, apart from some spooning of a variety that would result in marriage in some cultures, and the next morning we go about our business.

When CJ talks to his girlfriend, he tells her about the sharing of the bed scenario. Girlfriend is not pleased, and she follows up that conversation with an email that says, basically, maybe the two should put things in a holding pattern while he’s away. CJ’s reply is, “Well, nice knowing you. Bye.”

???

There are so many pieces that don’t register there that it’s hard to differentiate the chain from a set of random events. Even more bizarre is roommate Jonna, 20, who has a boyfriend back home and swears she’ll remain true. That she swears she’ll remain true is slightly odd from the get go, but the way in which she does so furrows the brow. As she says during the show, “I really think I can make it through this.”

This? What this? Spending time in close proximity to other humans without having sex with them? Is this the running of the gauntlet for the new generation? Has our society come to a point now where this is something people wonder if they can “make it through?” And, she doesn’t even have the mental fortitude to present the idea as though she’s sure. How would you like to be that boyfriend? Well, I mean, I’m going to be near other men for a certain amount of time… you want me to be sure I won’t have sex with them?

Of course, given the downward spiral that is this show, this is par for the course. It’s a show that now lives off its ability to call people stupid who will take it as a compliment, and has the admirable goal of teaching its participants that other people really are just like they always thought they were.

The killer was at the end of the show when we got the clip reel of what’s to come this season. Flash-flash-flash, and all the show has to say for itself is that there will be many times that people are too drunk to stand, several fights, a lot of screaming, and generally a lot of twenty-somethings acting like they are ten (sorry ten year-olds).

On the other hand, there are a lot of advertisers who would really like to target drunk, useless people who are around twenty (or wish they were), so fair play to you MTV.

Are You Screening?

Real World Cancun debuts as Washington bars ban, welcome Real World DC’s drunks (realityblurred.com)
Interview: Ayiiia, MTV’s ‘Real World: Cancun’ (laist.com)

9 Movie Poster Images And Character Descriptions

Marc Eastman — Fri, 03 Jul 2009 02:41:04 +0000

I finally got something else for the movie 9, and it’s rather after everyone else this time around. At any rate, here are some very cool images of posters for the 9 characters, and descriptions. Click for rockin large version images.

1

Voiced by one of the world’s most respected actors, Christopher Plummer, 1 is the Scientist’s first creation.

As the elder, he is the self-declared leader of the group.

He is clever and sly, but also domineering, quick-tempered, and threatened by the new arrival of 9, whose higher intellect leads him to question authority.

2

Voiced by Academy Award Winner Martin Landau, 2 is a kindly but now frail inventor and explorer who embodies the Scientist’s strong creative spirit.

An inquisitive personality, 2 is fearless.

Director Shane Acker affectionately describes him as a ’salty old dog’.

3/4

Communicating visually, not verbally, 3 and 4 are the scholarly twins.

They voraciously catalogue everything they can see and find, recording and building a massive database for the group of the world that surrounds them and the history that led up to their creation.

5

Voiced by Academy Award nominee John C. Reilly, 5 is a caring, nurturing engineer

– the loyal, big-hearted ‘common man’ who always tries to play the peacemaker.

He is also an apprentice of 2, with whom he shares a special bond.

6

6, the group’s visionary is voiced by Crispin Glover.

Although reclusive and eccentric,

his bursts of artistic inspiration through drawings made from his pen nib hands may be keys to help his fellow stitchpunk beings navigate their darkest hours.

7

A brave and self-sufficient warrior, 7, voiced by Oscar winner Jennifer Connelly, is the group’s sole female.

A fiercely independent adventuress she has been out patrolling the wasteland. To survive, she has adapted, finding the bones of a deceased bird and crafting her signature skull helmet.

8

Armed with a giant kitchen cleaver and half a scissor blade,

the none-too-bright muscle and enforcer of the group,

8, is created to help the others physically

survive the dangerous post-apocalyptic world.

9

To voice the lead role of the newly born — and aborning hero — 9, Acker couldn’t help but have in mind an actor who was so central to the film set he had worked on years earlier in New Zealand — The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King star Elijah Wood.

Are You Screening?

Green Lantern: First Flight Connecting On Facebook And Offering Great Prizes!

Marc Eastman — Thu, 02 Jul 2009 00:18:05 +0000

From June 30 – August 11, 2009, Green Lantern Fans Can Enter to Win a PlayStation 3, 40″ LCD HDTV, a Copy of Green Lantern: First Flight on Blu-ray and Much More

To promote the Blu-ray and DVD release of Green Lantern: First Flight on July 28, a sweepstakes has been created to get fans involved and give them a chance to win cool prizes. Green Lantern fans can enter the sweepstakes and learn more about the fifth entry in the popular DVD series of DC Universe Animated Originals through a Facebook Power Ring widget.

Once the Facebook Power Ring Widget has been added to a fan’s page, they can “recharge their ring” continuously to keep it powered to 100% and automatically submit additional entries in the sweepstakes. Additional features of the widget include a Personality Quiz, Green Lantern IQ Test, Video, News and Updates, Downloads and Links.

Are You Screening?

Big Brother 11 Exclusive “Get To Know” Feature At TV.com

Marc Eastman — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 22:37:14 +0000

It’s that time again, Big Brother is back.

What group did you fit into in high school? That is the question 12 strangers will face on the season premiere of BIG BROTHER, Thursday, July 9 (8:00-9:00 PM, ET/PT) on the CBS Television Network.

12 strangers will move into the Big Brother house and learn that they will be ‘kickin it old school’ this summer, high school to be exact. The House Guests will be shocked to learn that they will be playing the game in one of four familiar high school cliques – popular, athletes, brainiacs and off beats. They will compete for food, safety from eviction and luxury prizes as part of their clique.

They will also be surprised to discover that a mystery 13th Houseguest is coming to the BIG BROTHER house, to join the game and give an advantage to one of the cliques.

TV.com has an exclusive feature with the scoop on all the contestants which you can find by following the link below.

Get to Know the New Big Brother 11 Contestants

Are You Screening?

Big Brother 11 news and rumors: two tribes and two houses? cliques? a $0 prize? (realityblurred.com)
Big Brother Returns July 9th! (realityexploits.com)
Big Brother 11’s house revealed: a green theme with a swimming pool room (realityblurred.com)

Web Therapy – Lisa Kudrow’s Webshow Now Available At iTunes – Win The First Season Here!

Marc Eastman — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 21:19:53 +0000

Lisa Kudrow’s quirky webshow comedy about a misguided therapist is available now on iTunes, so I thought it was about time I visited the show here. The show stars Kudrow as Fiona Wallice, a therapist who has had just about enough of patients who go on and on at her about themselves and all their little problems.

The theory behind things is that Fiona has decided to cut to the chase by providing therapy via three-minute video chat sessions. Unfortunately for her clients, she can hardly manage to track a conversation, much less provide any helpful counseling.

Easily bored, self-interested, and with questionable credentials, Fiona nevertheless hopes to eventually spin her idea into a franchise-worthy web presence.

Here’s a rundown of what we get in season one -

In season one, we’re introduced to Richard Pratt (Tim Bagley). Fiona is surprised to learn her new client is a fondly remembered old-flame. Next we’re introduced to Jerome Sokoloff (Dan Bucatinsky), a 35-year-old neurotic, hypochondriac jingle writer who’s a carry-over from Fiona’s former in-person practice. Haley (Rashida Jones), much more sane, is Jerome’s girlfriend who joins in the second and third sessions.

Jerome is followed by client Ted Mitchell (Bob Balaban), a well known, respected and highly skilled psychiatrist. Ted is almost as politely condescending as Fiona herself. He’s brought on by Fiona’s potential investor, a former client of Lachman Bros., to “test-drive” Fiona’s concept.

Following Ted Mitchell, we’re introduced to Clare Dudek (Jane Lynch), a tightly wound, confrontational advertising executive who’s been ordered by her company to undergo counseling after she threw a stapler at an underling. The season wraps up with clients Bryn (Patty Guggenheim) and Justin (Drew Sherman), a young, hip couple in their twenties who come in — ostensibly — for couples counseling.

The show is hilarious, and during its run so far the patients/victims have included: Courteney Cox, Victor Garber, Alan Cumming, Steven Weber, Julie Claire and Dan Bucatinsky. Beginning June 30th, Web Therapy will be exclusively available on iTunes for $1.99 per episode. Each episode includes five, three-minute webisodes and additional narrative from Lisa Kudrow’s character, Fiona. Also available is a free download of the series premiere and behind-the-scenes featurettes from each season.

Check out the show’s iTunes page through the link below.

I am happy to be able to offer a free download of the entire first season to one lucky winner. Just leave a comment here, and you are automatically entered to win. There are a few rules to this one though. Due to the nature of the giveaway, only U.S. residents are eligible. You must also have an iTunes account in order to win (or create one), and you must provide the email address that is connected with your iTunes account. The winner will be randomly selected on July 31st.

Are You Screening?

Lisa Kudrow’s Web Therapy Gets Second Season (shoppingblog.com)

Royal Pains – TV Review

Marc Eastman — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 17:19:12 +0000

USA’s newest series focusing on a brilliant doctor and his run-in with the Hamptons is slow to get moving, and it seems that might be mainly a result of having no clear destination in mind. Like an ever-expanding list of other recent shows, the general affair seems better suited to something that would become a mildly entertaining movie rather than something that must theoretically go on forever.

USA p/c Justin Stephens

The recent trend seems to be to come up with a vaguely amusing situation and then decide if there is somewhere that situation might ultimately lead. If yes, it’s a movie. If no, work it into a series. The real trouble in this case is that we’re working a fairly limited gag, and it isn’t clear what we’re building around “kooky rich people” to hold interest.

Dr. Hank Lawson (Mark Feuerstein) seems to have everything going for him, but when he doesn’t babysit an old VIP (and he dies) in favor of saving another patient, his career is suddenly cut short. When he finds he’s been blackballed, and can’t find another hospital to take him, he soon becomes attached to his comfy chair… and loses his girlfriend.

Enter Hank’s brother Evan (Paulo Costanzo). Armed with the knowledge of a party in the Hamptons, and little else, Evan tries to get Hank out of his house, and his funk. As luck would have it, a medical emergency arises, and Hank has the opportunity to come to the rescue. One thing leads to another, and fabulously rich Boris installs Hank as concierge doctor. Though Hank hates the idea, Evan loves it, and Hank doesn’t really have many other options.

USA p/c Barbara Nitke

The show synchs its gears as Hank discovers that every uber-rich Hampton resident instantly has his phone number, and when he meets the administrator of the local hospital who is trying to help those in the area who can’t quite buy their own doctor. Hank slowly meanders his way toward something of a medical Robin Hood, taking fat checks from the rich so he can treat the poor.

Hank is likable enough to work in the role, and Evan is loose, wild, and moderately comedic enough to provide balance and interplay, but like many dynamics of the show, you have to wonder how long it will play well.

The show is a decent bit of fun, even if it seems to drag a bit, but it doesn’t have a definite pull. As I said, it looks like that stems from the fact that the show can’t tell you where it stabilizes, because it doesn’t know. Sure, we’re working a decent gag with characters who might as well all be named Nick (because Nick’s your buddy, Nick’s your pal), but what does episode twenty look like? Is it just the next in the line of rich non-people Hank deals with like Dr. Buddha while Evan hatches yet another scheme in an attempt to parlay his brother’s degree into a chance to get laid?

It’s up in the air. Also up in the air is how the show deals with the end of summer. The next few episodes are going to be the key, and despite the show’s relatively strong performance thus far, if it doesn’t find its footing the joke may get old. That may leave a second season run relegated to “if nothing else is on” status.

As it is now, it has a lot of potential, but is beginning to flounder in that safe, un-spicy mix of ingredients that makes up the recipe of countless shows which are lovingly referred to as, “Awww… I used to really like that show.” The potential can be capitalized on, but we’re running out of time if we want to round that corner.

What do you think? Is it a hit, does it need work, or is it a complete miss?

Below you can watch clips, interviews, and full episodes courtesy of Hulu.

Are You Screening?

TV Review: Royal Pains (cinemablend.com)
Royal pains and extra extras (cultureby.com)
Royal Pains Set Visit Part 3: Jill Flint And Jace Alexander Interviews (cinemablend.com)
Royal Pains Set Visit Part 2: Paulo Costanzo And Reshma Shetty Interview (cinemablend.com)
The Three Strike Rule: “Royal Pains,” “Nurse Jackie” and “Hawthorne” (popdose.com)
Royal Pains Set Visit Part 1: Mark Feuerstein Interview (cinemablend.com)
Win the Royal Pains Summer Tote Giveaway at New to TV! (newtotv.com)

Waking The Dead – Movie Review

Marc Eastman — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 12:36:05 +0000

Waking the Dead opens with Fielding Pierce (Billy Crudup) watching a newscast in which he learns that the love of his life has been killed in a car-bombing that targeted Chilean activists (she was with them). We flash to a few years earlier when he met his love, Sarah Williams (Jennifer Connelly), for the first time.

We soon see that perhaps things are not quite all fun and games for our young lovers. She, the idealist, lefter-than-left, wanna-be activist. He, the man in the uniform, who wants to be a politician.

The movie jumps us back and forth between their fairly rocky relationship of the early seventies, to Fielding’s life (now ten years after Sarah died) in the early eighties. We watch them fall in love. We watch them have great difficulty with their relationship. Then we watch Fielding as his eighties version tries to cope with his family and a stressful campaign for Congress, while suddenly being haunted by visions of Sarah. He thinks he sees her in a crowd. He hears her voice. He gets a phone call.

And that’s about all you need to know about the plot (even though I’m going to spoil it for you). We simply go back and forth, learning pieces of these lives. We witness the politically-pointed convictions these two people have, and we see how that plays havoc with their love affair. Or, perhaps more precisely, how they let it do so.

That is really the movie in a nutshell. Two youngish people whose lives are directed toward powerful goals and ideals. Two people whose ideas of what is right clash dramatically. Two people who are too strong-willed and filled with ‘cause’ to find a way toward a political middle-ground. They are also two people who ask themselves the time-honored question, “Is love enough?”, and in the end get to find out (at least one of them does, possibly both, you be the judge) that it is a question they have answered poorly.

They are two people perhaps too young, and too focused, to be in a position to answer the question at all. So filled are they with their intended goals, and perhaps unable to comprehend their own love. A love, that they (each in their own way, and for their own reasons) perhaps see as that normal, everyday love. The love, that is so special and wonderful that half the marriages in America end in divorce.

Unfortunately, they cannot see their love as we do…, for what it is. Not until it is too late anyway.

They ask the question, “Is love enough?”, and we see them asking it of themselves over and over. But, they are asking it from the point of view of the five year-old asking why the sky is blue, who gets his answer from a physicist. They don’t have the requisite experience with the concepts life is using to answer them.

Many critics (the best-known name in movie criticism among them) denounce this movie because it doesn’t decide. Is Fielding seeing Sarah, or is it all in his mind? Is he hallucinating? Is he going crazy? Or, is Sarah actually still alive? The movie, as I say, doesn’t commit. It doesn’t decide.

There are numerous ways of criticizing a movie that I can accept. Far too many to mention. I find it very difficult however, to take it seriously when anyone criticizes a movie based on what is actually the whole point of the thing. At least, not unless I’m given a reason that the movie’s entire purpose is one that is invalid. The movie doesn’t decide, because Fielding can’t decide, and it doesn’t need to decide. It isn’t supposed to decide. It’s the far lesser movie that would decide things at us.

Waking the Dead isn’t a romance. It isn’t a movie that tells the story of the love of these two people. It is a movie that is talking about love. In general.

At the end of the movie, Fielding ‘considers’. He now has his realization. A realization about life, that perhaps makes him now a ‘more real’ person, or maybe a ‘more person’ person. He has had his time in office. He did less good than he hoped, but more than he feared. He has realized his goal of being a politician. He has lived according to his ideals and convictions, and he did his job a little differently for having been exposed to Sarah. But, there is only one thing that was ever of any importance in his life. There is only one thing that is now of any importance in his life. He got to love her.

That he can now look out his window with a smiling calm, and face the lessons his life has given him is his decision. He decides it doesn’t matter. Were the visions of Sarah ‘real’? Was it all in my mind? Or, is what is in my mind, in fact, the most ‘real’? Indeed, is all this talk of Sarah as somehow ‘separate’ simply drawing a distinction where there is none. Maybe Sarah really was still alive, and came to visit me. Maybe I imagined it. But, maybe, just maybe, there is actually no difference.

“Is love enough?”, he pointedly does not ask himself (and asks all the more by not asking). He smiles. He sighs. He feels the sun on his face. Ahh…, love is all there is.

Waking the Dead is an extremely intelligent look at something that isn’t terribly intelligent. It is a look at two intelligent idealists forced into a realm that doesn’t conform well to ideals. It is also a movie that gets better the more time that passes after it ends, and that’s why it’s brilliant.

There is a scene in Waking the Dead which is absolutely perfect. That makes it a part of about ten scenes in the entire realm of film. It is a short, direct scene in which Fielding arrives at a restaurant after winning his election. His family is there already waiting for him, and this is to be the celebration dinner. Fielding suddenly breaks down and begins, basically, not explaining that he thinks he might be going crazy. There are stunned looks all around the table, and at the end, Fielding is suddenly ‘all better’. It is a scene almost realer than real, and half-way into his romp through insanity, you are half trying to decide how you are supposed to react to his saying all this. I mean literally, thinking of what you are supposed to say to him.

It reminded me (just by the way) of a scene in American Psycho which aimed at something like the same goal, but didn’t quite get there.

There is much more to it than just this scene. Crudup gives one of the best performances of the year.

If we work on the theory that Jennifer Connelly deserved to be recognized for A Beautiful Mind (and she was not bad there by any means), it is a peculiar theory indeed that also says she didn’t deserve to be recognized for her work here. She gives an excellent performance with only the most minor of snags in a few scenes.

Perhaps most importantly, the movie makes us yearn for a Best Couple award. Simply stated, the two of them together just deliver. They display the intelligence of the characters. They show us extreme idealists who are nevertheless real enough to, at times, be fun and alive. They are sharp, spirited, dignified (and yes, even somewhat saucy) characters that do not ask you to suspend disbelief, they defy disbelief.

As a couple, they simply spill over with what they cannot themselves see, and that is the toughest trick you’ll ever see in acting. They have a passion that tears your heart out, because you already know that wherever they’re going, it’s nowhere you want to be. You know, long before things really get ‘interesting’, that they are almost magically in love, and you know they don’t really realize it. You know that they don’t really know what they’re doing at all.

Waking the Dead is a movie that, like A Man and a Woman, you aren’t going to watch over and over (unless you are really weird), but is nevertheless not only a great movie, but one that you are ‘better’, or perhaps simply ‘more’, for having watched it.

There is a perfectly legitimate question that is often asked of me (and I often ask it of myself) regarding movies, and that question is, ‘What does the viewer ‘get’ out of it?’

There is a scene in Grand Prix where someone ask James Garner’s amateur race-car driver character, in all seriousness, “What do you get if you win?” to which Garner’s character replies, as though confused by the question, “You get to win.”

What do you get out of watching Waking the Dead?

You get to win.

Rating: ★★★★★

Are You Screening?

Lovely By Surprise – Movie Review

Marc Eastman — Mon, 29 Jun 2009 17:52:34 +0000

There are those who would argue that the general category of fantasy/sci-fi, or even more generally “that which cannot really happen,” is indeed the best and purest category of fiction there is. Sure, it has everything from meaningless fluff to masterpieces just like every category, but when it’s done right, it somehow has more to say about reality than reality as a framework can manage. Whether telling a joke, using a hypothetical, or having your characters interact with mind-reading aliens, those who know how to play the game tell the truth better by lying than the truth, on its own, can be told.

Whatever you may think of such a theory, it is a theory that Lovely by Surprise not only understands, but masters utterly. The story of a woman’s struggle to finish a novel, Lovely by Surprise spins the surreal to dizzying new heights in its effort to relate, not merely its characters and their view, but the human condition in general. It succeeds in a way that few films in history can match.

Marian (Carrie Preston – recently of True Blood) has come to a deadlock in her novel, and seeks the aid of her one-time professor/mentor/person she had an affair with, Jackson (veteran character actor Austin Pendleton). It seems that mousy Marian is writing a truly bizarre novel which follows the unique existence of two men who live on a houseboat sitting in the middle of a barren field. These two exist as never-developed children with virtually no contact with the outside world, sustaining themselves on deliveries of milk and cereal. Add to that strange enough scene the fact that the main character, Humkin, knows he’s a character in a book.

As Marian battles her writer’s block, we move back and forth to the story of failing car salesman Bob. Bob, played to perfection by Reg Rogers, recently lost his wife, and can’t quite muster up the spirit to convince people to buy a car. In fact, his disconnected dolefulness largely finds him talking people out of buying.

Unfortunately, Bob can’t completely check out, because he has six year-old daughter Mimi at home. Mimi, perhaps feeding off of her father’s reaction, has withdrawn since mom’s death and has stopped speaking.

Back in our other world, mentor Jackson, unsure how to approach advising Marian with her bizarre novel, tells her to kill off protagonist Humkin. After struggling mightily with the idea (and a failed first attempt), Marian succumbs to the literary theory suggestion and destroys the character she so loves, who knows she’s doing it by the way. She instantly regrets her decision.

Then things get a little weird.

Watching Lovely by Surprise is at times an uncomfortable, almost taxing experience. It strikes out with its oddity, even in the opening minutes, and has no reliable viewpoint. The lines between reality and fantasy are blurred, and even the reality may only be “sort of real.”

The film breaks every rule there is when it comes to enlisting the participation of the audience, and it might easily feel like it is defying you to watch. It might be actually, but there is no snobbery involved. It is simply an honest statement about the world. This is not a game for everyone, so let’s be upfront about what game it is. It will suck you in, or spit you out, and it is brave enough to be ok with that.

Light, and nearly whimsical, in its dissection of the human psyche, the film guides you gently to places you’ve already been, and it manages the feat not despite the fact that you never lose the feeling that you’re trying to pull away, but because of it. It is ultimately not so much the things we don’t know that we need to learn, but the things we know and deny.

Smashing walls with the subtle touch of a frail woman where sledgehammers would leave no mark, Lovely by Surprise is a film that realizes the true possibilities of storytelling like few others, and therefore knows that it cannot “do to you” in a way more compelling than it can “humbly suggest you do to yourself.”

Written and directed by Kirt Gunn, Lovely by Surprise offers up the tightest, most strategically crafted script of anything you’ll see all year. A key test of direction lies in conversation (and this is a “talky” film), and they are so spot on here it is difficult to describe, because I’m at a loss to deliver a meaningful comparison. You could throw $100 million at the thing and pick any director you like, and you wouldn’t improve it. And yet, there is all the while a certain humility that bleeds through every frame, like Mr. Gunn is not really quite so sure he wants to say the story is all that good… it’s just the story he’s got.

The brilliance of a truly great book is that at the end you are simply a different person. There are four movies that have made me feel something similar, though movies simply cannot really match the experience, and Lovely by Surprise is one of them.

Rating: ★★★★★

After running numerous film festivals for two years, Lovely by Surprise will be available on DVD July 7th. Don’t miss it. The trailer is included below.

Are You Screening?

Rent or Buy July 7th

Netflix

At Amazon.com

Lovely by Surprise

Nature’s Most Amazing Events – DVD Review

Marc Eastman — Sun, 28 Jun 2009 17:06:54 +0000

If you liked the feature film Earth, or the television series Planet Earth it was built from, you’re going to love the BBC follow-up to that series, Nature’s Most Amazing Events. Narrated by David Attenborough, these six, hour-long presentations focus on wonders of the natural world, and their effects on the natural world.

The gorgeous cinematography returns and is coupled with a more focused (and more interesting to me) approach to storytelling.

The Great Melt will feel familiar to those who have seen either version Planet Earth, as we revisit the arctic and polar bears. We get a broader view here, exploring a greater variety of animal life (the narwhals are brilliant), but it may suffer slightly by being a trip we’ve been on.

The Great Salmon Run follows the course of the salmon to their spawning ground and the Grizzlies who are fans of the event. The breadth of information, and far-reaching effects may surprise.

The Great Migration may again feel familiar as the Serengeti rains bring together unbelievable numbers of large animals, but there is amazing new footage, and again, a broader scope.

The Great Tide follows the yearly feeding frenzy along South Africa’s east coast as billions of sardines flood the waters. One of the most interesting parts of the series, the chain of events is staggering.

Click for larger version

The Great Flood is a somewhat similar theory to The Great Migration, as thousands of animals journey to the flood of Botswana’s Okavango Delta which is their only chance of survival.

The Great Feast delivers some of the most breathtaking footage in the set, as we see the annual plankton surge near Alaska draw in humpback whales, sea lions, and secondary effect killer whales.

Even knowing the level of product to expect based on the previous series, these are simply amazing television productions. From birds diving several feet into the water for fish, to humpbacks “jumping”, it’s impossible to describe the visual displays. Filmed with absolutely state-of-the-art cameras, the experience is hard to believe.

Click for larger version

As wonderful as the first series is, this sequel seems to have learned from that first effort, and turned toward a more interesting and serious educational approach.

Nature documentaries may not be everyone’s cup of tea, but I can’t imagine anyone not having fun, and being thoroughly impressed with this set. The whole concept of something on film making you feel like you’re right there is taken to a new level.

Check out the official site

Own it on DVD and Blu-Ray Today!

Are You Screening?

Television Review | ‘Nature’s Most Amazing Events’: Pretty Clouds, Vistas and Sardines, Too (nytimes.com)

The Box Trailer – Richard Kelly And Richard Matheson Make Bizarre Pair

Marc Eastman — Sat, 27 Jun 2009 02:10:56 +0000

Richard Matheson is one of the strangest writers associated with Hollywood. I don’t say that because of the myriad horror efforts, Twilight Zone episodes, or things like What Dreams May Come that have his name attached. I say it because so many things he’s written just won’t go away.

Matheson has credits going back to things like 1957’s The Incredible Shrinking Man, based on his novel The Shrinking Man, and it’s exactly the movie you think it might be based on knowing nothing more than the year and title.

He wrote a lot of television back in the day, and then in 1964 we got a movie known as The Last Man on Earth based on a little novel he wrote called I Am Legend. In 1971 we get Omega Man, based on I Am Legend. In 2007 we got both I Am Omega and I Am Legend, also based on the same work.

In 1981 we had The Incredible Shrinking Woman, and in 2010 we’re getting The Incredible Shrinking Man again. At some stage of development there is even theoretically an untitled I Am Legend prequel.

He also wrote an segment of The Twilight Zone titled Button, Button, which was spun into a horror short in 2006, and is now coming out as a feature length film called The Box.

Adding to the oddity here is that Richard Kelly of Donnie Darko fame is directing, and the whole combination is confusing as hell. The story behind The Box was in a sense too short even for a segment of The Twilight Zone. It’s like a joke you barely start telling and everyone already knows where you’re going. It’s good for a few seconds of mutual appreciation of the idea behind things, but that’s it.

Now we’re going to spin that into 115 minutes?

The premise, which will be explained in the trailer below, is that a couple is given a mysterious box with a giant button on it. The box is explained to them by an even more mysterious visitor. Push the button, and two things will happen – 1) Someone you don’t know will die 2) You will receive $1 million in cash.

There is obviously a world of stuff thrown into the film version to expand it from the few minutes of Twilight Zone segment, but I ask you, what do you not know about this movie already?

I’m completely lost myself, but not in a way anyone was hoping for.

Are You Screening?

Donnie Darko Meets Richard Matheson (mediabistro.com)

The Sims 3 – iPhone App Game Review

Marc Eastman — Sat, 27 Jun 2009 01:00:54 +0000

For fans of The Sims, the newest release is an automatic purchase that won’t disappoint. The Sims 3 offers amazingly powerful updates to the theory, and everyone from the uninitiated to the die-hard will find themselves with limitless entertainment.

EA has a new trick up its sleeve for The Sims 3, because you can now get the companion iPhone App version of the game as well. The game offers surprising functionality for an iPhone App, and a level of complexity and richness that makes it an App game you’ll be playing for countless hours.

The App version uses the same “personality traits” system and features an entire town just like the PC version. Your Sims are fully customizable, get jobs, gain skills, and have goals, leading you through infinite possibilities.

The graphics and controls are great, taking advantage of the furthest reaches of the iPhone capabilities.

Go fishing, make your Sim evil, fall in love, or smack someone around until you’ve got an enemy, your Sim can be and do anything you want. You’ve also got a full line of options to turn your house into a party spot, or just the perfect place to hatch your schemes.

But, in the grand scheme of things, selling The Sims is something you almost don’t have to do anymore… for the PC. What I wanted to know was how was an App going to look to me after a few weeks. I run through a lot of App games, and a lot of them are really great for a week or so, and then I never bother with them again. How was this going to fare?

The answer is that it does very well. I’ve been running through a somewhat crazy approach to the game in order to get exposure to a lot of variations on things in a short amount of time. It’s a version of playing a game that often gives you a good feel for things, but takes away whatever addictiveness a game might be aiming for. That wasn’t the case here. Even when repeatedly starting new games with increasingly bizarre trait combinations, and going through Sim life with impulse control shut off completely, the game still sucked me in.

How fun is it really to just be a complete jerk, or on a career path for which you have no valuable skills? Well, pretty fun actually.

So, the question then becomes whether or not that “replayability” really pans out. There are a lot of games that really hype their “openness” as a selling point, and sure, you can play a lot of different ways and have various careers… but, will you? You’ve taken your Sim all the way to final ranks of your career, played chess countless times, and had parties galore… are you really going to start over? About 90% of the time, my answer is no. It’s great that I have the options inherent in the open gameplay, but by the time I go through the whole game there are other fish to fry. For the full experience PC game, I want it to suck me in so much that I really will want to play again, but I was ready to forgive an App version if it didn’t quite manage that tricky feat. But, I think most people will find that they’ll take a few different roads here.

While the App version is obviously a slimmed translation of the PC release, I think you’ll be surprised by how feature-rich it really is, and by how much addiction you can pack into an App. The developers really did a great job at tweaking things with the App play experience in mind, and I think this is one I will be coming back to again and again for a long time.

Check out the trailer for the game below, and visit the Sims 3 App page here.

Are You Screening?

TUAW at E3: The Sims 3 for iPhone (tuaw.com)
Sims 3 “light” on your iPhone (everyjoe.com)
Sims 3 Sells 1.4 Million In A Week (cinemablend.com)
Hands on with the Sims 3 for iPhone and iPod touch (macworld.com)

TV Land’s She’s Got The Look Contestant Flips, Then Responds

Marc Eastman — Thu, 25 Jun 2009 21:05:14 +0000

If you haven’t been keeping up with TV Land’s She’s Got the Look, you’ve been missing a fairly interesting show. The beauty show that focuses on… less young women, plays a slightly different game, and if nothing else avoids 17 year-olds who think the fashion industry is, “Like, Oh my God, Wow.”

Whether you’ve been keeping tabs on the show or not, you’ve probably heard about the bizarre moment that raised the bar for reality television flip outs. That’s a bar that was doing okay where it was, by the way.

In what might fairly legitimately be referred to as a “psychotic episode,” contestant Laurie goes wild, and then in a sense that makes use of pop culture quotes “goes wild.”

She’s off on one hell of a rant at just about everything to do with the show, but there’s a bit of snag on the communication skills front, because it’s rather tricky to figure what she’s mad at exactly.

Here’s the clip of her rant.

In a move that I initially thought might be a worthwhile, Laurie responded to the incident. I’m thinking, hey, you know what, fair enough, being on a reality show is a crazier exercise than you probably think it is, and I lost my mind. But, that’s not the sort of response we got. If you can’t really wrap your mind around the initial incident, try your luck with this response.

Think that’s all? Oh no. There are three more response clips.

So, what’s the reaction?

Are You Screening?

Stripping She’s Got the Look model Laurie says God told her to take off her clothes (realityblurred.com)

Transformers: Revenge Of The Fallen – Movie Review – Win the DVD!

Marc Eastman — Thu, 25 Jun 2009 16:00:06 +0000

Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen is one of those exceedingly rare movies that will cause a great stir in the film criticism community to no purpose whatsoever. As well meticulously belabor the merits of Judge Judy, and its position on the spectrum of quality television. On the other hand, once in a while a movie surfaces in just the right way, and makes you take a look at just what it is you’re supposed to be doing by delivering critique. Ultimately, how different a game is being played when you visit Gosford Park vs. Transformers vs. (let’s say) Bad Boys 2? Is there, in the final analysis, five-star fast food?

Revenge of the Fallen delivers us two years beyond the end of the first movie, and gives us to understand that the Autobots and the U.S. government have spent their time hunting down the remnants of the Decepticons. Our hero Sam is largely out of that picture, except insofar as Bumblebee still lives with him. He is also going off to college. A short jaunt through this plot vehicle allows for relationship spins as Sam and Mikaela will attempt to continue their romance long-distance, even while wrangling with interpersonal roadblock “who will say I love you first.”

Back at the ranch, in a move that is much like a woman tripping in a horror film, a government suit wearing a sign that reads, “I am crunchy and taste good with ketchup,” throws his lack of weight around. The government is apparently not very pleased with how the Autobots are handling their clean-up missions.

At this point a semi-vague, but more or less workable excuse for the action comes together, and a sort of “destruction orgy” ensues.

There are a lot of negative things I might point out about this film, but the question is really whether or not any of them serve a real purpose in being mentioned. It seems to me that an overwhelming majority of them provide for only a solidifying of the initial viewpoint for those who were never going to see it anyway. Those not moved to action, even theoretically, by the call of robots smashing each other (or hot shots of Megan Fox) are not enlightened by my detailing the myriad ways in which they will not enjoy this movie, and to work such an angle is to in some sense neuter myself.

There are a great many criticisms to make (which will be made by many) about Revenge of the Fallen which are to my mind more “by definition” than they are a true evaluation of the result, and I dismiss them all out of hand.

That said, the movie could shave a full hour off its 150-minute runtime and you’d never miss it. Much of the humor is juvenile, but there is at least not that much of it. There is, even for what it is, rather a lack of creative effort, and that was not so much the case in first film. There is also the continuation, and worsening, of the fairly irritating feeling that Michael Bay never saw a Transformer before getting involved with the movies. If the little toy cars, trucks, and planes transformed into the bizarrely complex monstrosities we see here, you’d never have heard of them in the first place. It makes for a nagging disconnect when you’re trying to give yourself over to a movie, and can’t figure out what the hell you’re looking at. Three robots fighting each other become one giant mass of wriggling metal with no discernible point at which one begins and the other ends, and I concede the point of visual masturbation to the nay-sayers.

The problem is that I had fun. So did at least the vast majority of people in the theater with me. I even laughed… out loud… twice. I had to really think about that, because I don’t… ever. Sure, there’s a lot of mindless humor, but it’s a sort of innocuous mindlessness. Even the twins seem to me mostly harmless, because they appear actually to be referencing less than intelligent people in general, and I don’t know that they’ve become a class we aren’t allowed to mock yet. But, I laughed at John Turturro, who was a nice balance, and (God help me) at a certain taser incident, which I suppose I can claim caught me off guard.

I can’t give it a higher rating, because someone with directing sensibilities beyond wondering at which point he gets to spin the camera around people’s heads until the audience gets dizzy might have been in charge, and there would have been a much better version to deal with. There might have been some character development, and we might have explored our plot instead of just running full sprint through it as though we feared someone might notice how cursory our 2+ hour exposition really is.

I can’t give it a lower rating, because if it fooled you, you deserve to be fooled. I can’t find a way to argue against claims that the movie is stupid, not because I can’t put them together, but because I can’t be bothered to put them forward. I’m not afraid to go one better and have done, because the thing is conceptually stupid. I see your “here’s why it’s stupid,” and raise you, “I knew it was stupid before I started watching it.” The key is that, unlike something like Bad Boys 2, I didn’t get the impression that the film was calling me stupid.

I can’t get past the fact that I had fun. I could have had more fun, and it’s goofy, guilty pleasure fun, but it’s still fun. There is five-star fast food, this just isn’t quite it, but it isn’t that bad either.

I do feel obligated to mention that Michael Bay should not direct films. There are no films which owe any of their positive qualities to Bay’s direction, and few that have many besides.

Rating: ★★★½☆

Are You Screening?

Leave a comment on this review, and you are entered to win the standard version DVD upon release. The winner will be randomly selected on the day the DVD releases.

Transformers 2 Review (themovieblog.com)
Review: Transformers Revenge of the Fallen (canada.com)
“Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen” Review (time.com)
Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen Review (screenrant.com)
Movie Review | ‘Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen’: Invasion of the Robot Toys From Space, Redux (movies.nytimes.com)
Exclusive: ‘Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen’ Images! (cinematical.com)
“Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen” (salon.com)
8 Spoilerific Reasons To Avoid Transformers 2 (cinemablend.com)
Review: ‘Transformers’ lands with giant thud (cnn.com)
Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen … On a Scale of 1-10 (cinematical.com)
Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen review (telegraph.co.uk)

The Philanthropist – TV Review

Marc Eastman — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 17:22:09 +0000

NBC is pulling out a lot of tricks in order to capture the summer, and one of them is eight-part series The Philanthropist which starts Wednesday, June 24th. Billionaire Teddy Rist finds himself caught in a flood in Nigeria, and rescues a small boy during the effort to escape his flooded hotel. The event triggers something in Purefoy, mostly a great deal of emotional baggage left over from his son’s death a year ago.

NBC Photo: Kelly Walsh

When he returns to New York, Rist finds that something just feels wrong about his entire life, and he returns to Nigeria to try to help, and find the boy he saved. He discovers that not all things are easy, even for billionaires, but he is determined to make a difference… somehow.

The first episode comes to us by way of Rist telling his story to a waitress in a Nigerian bar. It’s frankly a somewhat silly version of the old “yeah sure, you’re a billionaire” trick, but we aren’t forced to overly focus on it.

As you’d expect from something with a predetermined end, it play rather like a movie. Surprisingly, it looks like one as well. Shot in South Africa, Mozambique, and Prague, the show takes advantage of some great location shooting, and apparently spares little in production quality.

NBC Photo: Kelly Walsh

The show draws out the setup in a fun and engaging way, with Rist explaining his life, business partner, and history to the barmaid, but much of the initial episode may prove too sappy for many viewers. There is a certain sense that we’re racing to the conversion (what with our eight episode limit), and it might have wanted to reel the audience in at a somewhat slow-and-steadier pace.

On the other hand, if you make it through the rush of the first episode, you’re thoroughly settled for what’s to come. What follows are trips to Burma, Pakistan, Paris, and more, as Rist sets out to restructure the course of his life.

The show looks solid, but it’s a tricky game. The writing could easily go far afield of truly worthwhile entertainment in any number of ways, and that makes one very hesitant about predicting how things are going to play in subsequent episodes. There is the impression of solid effort within the show’s beginnings, mainly via the Nigerian doctor’s distrust, but it is balanced against dangerous-looking cheap plays ala ‘a harrowing experience had I.’

Reservations aside, the cast is pretty strong and performs well. James Purefoy, of HBO’s Rome fame, is a good choice, and manages a nice affect throughout his “inner turmoil” turns. Law & Order’s Jesse L. Martin plays his business partner, and though he isn’t given a lot of time at first, he’s a solid actor. Neve Campbell rounds out the major players. Thus far, she’s really only had the opportunity to look good, and she’s pulled it off.

The Philanthropist is solid, and is likely to spur a strong hopefulness, but it doesn’t quite shoot out as the next best thing… it might get there though.

Following are a clip and an interview with James Purefoy from NBC’s press release.

Are You Screening?

Why does Teddy become a philanthropist?

At the start of the series Teddy’s your average

billionaire who goes on a trip to Nigeria. There’s

been a major storm and devastation is all

around. He wakes up to find he is in three feet of

water and is about to be taken away from his

hotel in a boat when he sees a small, shivering,

child. Teddy puts the kid onto the boat but a

greedy man tries to get in; it capsizes and the kid

falls into the water. Teddy dives in and saves

the child which then becomes a turning point in

his life; he realises he wants to help people.

Teddy finds that helping others fills a vacuum which has been left by the death of his six year old son.

Teddy has been trying to fill the void with parties, alcohol and women, but he finds that doing things for

others makes him feel good. It’s altruism and complete selfishness. He does it because of the way it

makes him feel, but the by-product is that other people are helped enormously by it.

What’s it like playing a character like Teddy with so many different layers?

When I was first asked to do this job I didn’t believe the character for a second. I thought; ‘This is

preposterous, I don’t believe someone like this exists’. I was told I would meet the guy who inspired

the series and I was introduced to a real life philanthropist. As soon as I met him it all clicked into

place. He is the most extraordinary liver of life I have ever come across; with an appetite for all

aspects of life, one of them being philanthropy. He goes around the world on a jet with his family and

helps people. It’s great because I know now that if anyone ever says ‘I don’t believe a billionaire would

do this kind of thing’ I have evidence to disprove them.

Do you feel you learned a lot from this role?

Absolutely. We deal with very serious international issues throughout the series. Each episode takes

place in a different country and more often than not the issue addressed is endemic to that country. I

did a lot of research for each country and met people from many different cultures. For example, the

Paris episode is all about sex trafficking in France so I read articles and books and spoke to people

about it. We were careful to make sure we got things right.

Did filming this bring to light how much poverty and devastation there is in the world?

It did, although I am an ambassador of Action Aid and I have spent time in Africa before so it’s

something I was already very aware of. I’d like to do more but I’m just an actor! Whatever I do will be

quiet and subtle.

Teddy gets himself into all sorts of scrapes. What is it that draws Teddy to these types of

situations?

One of the great things about playing Teddy is that he is so multi faceted. He does lots of good things

for people but his personal morals are highly questionable. He drinks a lot, he probably does drugs,

and he is a man full of contradictions which makes him very interesting to play. He can be one thing

one minute and something very different the next. He certainly gets himself into scrapes, for example

in the first episode he is trying to get a vaccine to a village because he quite fancies the doctor, but he

has to navigate his way through the jungle to get there!

What kind of stunts have you done?

I’m not stupid; I won’t do things that threaten my life so I leave it to the highly talented stunt men to do

the difficult things! I did have to ride a motor cycle across a beach and fall off it, and I had to walk

through the jungle with bare feet which wasn’t particularly amusing. When you look at the jungle floor

in South Africa it is crawling with poisonous stuff. One of the assistant directors was bitten by a spider

and the whole left side of his body went completely numb!

Teddy is a real ladies’ man. Does he use his money to pull women, or just his charm?

Sometimes he blatantly uses his money to pull women. In the first episode his plane has broken down

in Florida and he’s having drinks in a bar. When the bar girl he’s talking to goes to serve another

customer, he writes her a cheque for $1000 so that she stays with him. He’s very blatant but he does it

with panache, style, charm and mischievousness!

How does the partnership between Teddy and Philip work?

Philip is cautious and conservative and is constantly trying to put the brakes on Teddy, but he can’t

argue that Teddy’s philanthropy and his compassion sometimes gets a better profit for the company.

They’ve known each other for a long time and the company is doing incredibly well, but Teddy does go

off-piste every once in a while!

What kind of relationship does Teddy have with Olivia?

There is a spark between them; as far as we are aware, Olivia and Teddy had a relationship and at

that time he was very bad and was unfaithful. Olivia later got together with Teddy’s business partner,

Philip. Teddy is fine with the situation but he can never quite get it out of his brain that she might be

the one who got away. It causes interesting tension and conflict between the three of them.

What’s it like being a Brit playing the lead in a US show surrounded by American actors?

I’m surrounded by really top actors. Not only are the regulars really good actors but the guest stars are

fantastic as well. I couldn’t be having a better time with the people I’m working with. I said from the

start that I didn’t want to do an American accent, so luckily I don’t have to worry about that. I’m

basically playing me but with a billion dollars in the bank! I think I’m quite similar to Teddy. We have a

similar sense of humour and a similar outlook on life.

Why does Teddy become a philanthropist?

At the start of the series Teddy’s your average billionaire who goes on a trip to Nigeria. There’s been a major storm and devastation is all around. He wakes up to find he is in three feet of water and is about to be taken away from his hotel in a boat when he sees a small, shivering, child. Teddy puts the kid onto the boat but a greedy man tries to get in; it capsizes and the kid falls into the water. Teddy dives in and saves the child which then becomes a turning point in his life; he realises he wants to help people.

Teddy finds that helping others fills a vacuum which has been left by the death of his six year old son. Teddy has been trying to fill the void with parties, alcohol and women, but he finds that doing things for others makes him feel good. It’s altruism and complete selfishness. He does it because of the way it makes him feel, but the by-product is that other people are helped enormously by it.

What’s it like playing a character like Teddy with so many different layers?

When I was first asked to do this job I didn’t believe the character for a second. I thought; ‘This is preposterous, I don’t believe someone like this exists’. I was told I would meet the guy who inspired the series and I was introduced to a real life philanthropist. As soon as I met him it all clicked into place. He is the most extraordinary liver of life I have ever come across; with an appetite for all aspects of life, one of them being philanthropy. He goes around the world on a jet with his family and helps people. It’s great because I know now that if anyone ever says ‘I don’t believe a billionaire would do this kind of thing’ I have evidence to disprove them.

Do you feel you learned a lot from this role?

Absolutely. We deal with very serious international issues throughout the series. Each episode takes place in a different country and more often than not the issue addressed is endemic to that country. I did a lot of research for each country and met people from many different cultures. For example, the Paris episode is all about sex trafficking in France so I read articles and books and spoke to people about it. We were careful to make sure we got things right.

Did filming this bring to light how much poverty and devastation there is in the world?

It did, although I am an ambassador of Action Aid and I have spent time in Africa before so it’s something I was already very aware of. I’d like to do more but I’m just an actor! Whatever I do will be quiet and subtle.

Teddy gets himself into all sorts of scrapes. What is it that draws Teddy to these types of situations?

One of the great things about playing Teddy is that he is so multi faceted. He does lots of good things for people but his personal morals are highly questionable. He drinks a lot, he probably does drugs, and he is a man full of contradictions which makes him very interesting to play. He can be one thing one minute and something very different the next. He certainly gets himself into scrapes, for example in the first episode he is trying to get a vaccine to a village because he quite fancies the doctor, but he has to navigate his way through the jungle to get there!

What kind of stunts have you done?

I’m not stupid; I won’t do things that threaten my life so I leave it to the highly talented stunt men to do the difficult things! I did have to ride a motor cycle across a beach and fall off it, and I had to walk through the jungle with bare feet which wasn’t particularly amusing. When you look at the jungle floor in South Africa it is crawling with poisonous stuff. One of the assistant directors was bitten by a spider and the whole left side of his body went completely numb!

Teddy is a real ladies’ man. Does he use his money to pull women, or just his charm?

Sometimes he blatantly uses his money to pull women. In the first episode his plane has broken down in Florida and he’s having drinks in a bar. When the bar girl he’s talking to goes to serve another customer, he writes her a cheque for $1000 so that she stays with him. He’s very blatant but he does it with panache, style, charm and mischievousness!

How does the partnership between Teddy and Philip work?

Philip is cautious and conservative and is constantly trying to put the brakes on Teddy, but he can’t argue that Teddy’s philanthropy and his compassion sometimes gets a better profit for the company. They’ve known each other for a long time and the company is doing incredibly well, but Teddy does go off-piste every once in a while!

What kind of relationship does Teddy have with Olivia?

There is a spark between them; as far as we are aware, Olivia and Teddy had a relationship and at that time he was very bad and was unfaithful. Olivia later got together with Teddy’s business partner, Philip. Teddy is fine with the situation but he can never quite get it out of his brain that she might be the one who got away. It causes interesting tension and conflict between the three of them.

What’s it like being a Brit playing the lead in a US show surrounded by American actors?

I’m surrounded by really top actors. Not only are the regulars really good actors but the guest stars are fantastic as well. I couldn’t be having a better time with the people I’m working with. I said from the start that I didn’t want to do an American accent, so luckily I don’t have to worry about that. I’m basically playing me but with a billion dollars in the bank! I think I’m quite similar to Teddy. We have a similar sense of humour and a similar outlook on life.

Jon And Kate Plus 8 – Sneak Peek From Tonight’s Announcement Episode

Marc Eastman — Mon, 22 Jun 2009 21:38:44 +0000

By now everyone knows that Jon and Kate are set to make a big announcement tonight, and most everyone is about 95% sure what that announcement is going to be. The story everywhere is about the couple being apart at this or that time, and generally things not being at all well for the marriage. The only possible surprise at this point would be some positive announcement.

At any rate, here’s a clip from tonight’s show courtesy of TV.com. Enjoy.

Are You Screening?

Jon & Kate leave us to speculate: What will they announce tonight? (thestar.com)

Inkheart – DVD Review

Marc Eastman — Mon, 22 Jun 2009 15:37:17 +0000

Inkheart, based on the novel by Cornelia Funke, is the story of a man who has the power to bring books to life simply by reading them aloud. While the possibilities there already stagger the imagination, this is the tale of the magical talent gone somewhat wrong, and the struggle with the unhappier side of getting too close to fairy tales.

Mo Folchart (Brendan Fraser) is scouring the world for books, and his teen daughter has caught onto the fact that it is one particular book he’s after. The movie begins when, after about a decade of searching, Mo finally finds another copy of Inkheart. He hardly makes it out of the bookshop before being confronted by Dustfinger, who wants the book, and warns Mo that Capricorn knows where Mo is. As we just left Mo, his wife, and daughter Meggie in the intro sequence ten years earlier, we have no idea what’s going on.

It turns out that Mo had no idea he had the power to pull characters (and other things) out of any book he read until he was reading Inkheart to his daughter. Capricorn, the despicable villain of said story, and one of his chief henchmen were brought out of the story. Along for the ride as well was Dustfinger, a semi-magical entertainer, and more or less good guy. Unfortunately, the rule seems to be that when you bring something out of a book, something goes in, and in this case it was Mo’s wife.

Fast-forward to the present, and while Mo has been searching the world for a copy of the obscure book in order to get his wife back out, Capricorn has been destroying them and building his power. Capricorn has found another Silvertongue, as those with this power are called, but he isn’t very good at it, and more than anything Capricorn wants Mo under his control.

What follows is rather a jumble of adventure as we run headlong through capture, escape, attack, retreat, capture, all while trying to get a copy of this damned book. There are unicorns, minotaurs, chases, and a giant smoke monster, and all of it is thrown at you with reckless abandon like flights of fancy gone wild to the point of their own destruction.

But, analysis of Inkheart is not an easy affair, even if its subject, manner, an demographic make it seem so. Much like the heavily-referenced Wizard of Oz (which let’s face it, under the wrong lens is a stupid mess of disconnected nonsense filled to bursting with plot holes), Inkheart is only in the loosest possible sense about what happens. It is instead about what fantasy means as a general idea, and it is about what characters are… even if they’re us.

Inkheart is a story that can’t go five minutes without telling you that it not only loves books, but has an almost fanatic appreciation for what it believes books are. It is not a story that has Mo’s wife in some state of pseudo-death, or otherwise non-existence by being trapped in the book. As we see with other characters, whoever goes in a book remains as alive as you or I, just in another world. It is a story that defies you to produce the legitimate argument that what happens in my mind because I imagine it is less “real” than what happens in my mind as the theoretical result of some external source.

In the end, the story is a bit of a trick anyway, because it isn’t about our Silvertongue and his family, or heroes, or nogoodniks, or magical creatures. It’s about Dustfinger. A character made real who was written as mostly goodish, and wanting desperately to do the right thing, but is ultimately a serious coward at heart. As, I suppose, a real man, Dustfinger comes very close to doing the good deed several times, but his cowardice and general meekness win out, because… what can he do? It’s how he was written.

PAUL BETTANY stars as Dustfinger

Just before the end of the film Dustfinger performs perhaps the most noble deed ever put down on paper, and if you blink you’ll miss it. And, if he can do it…

Inkheart is convoluted, crazy, and possibly internally inconsistent, but if you say it like it’s a bad thing, you’re playing top trumps silliness against a fairy tale. This, as though saying something like, “human hair could not withstand the weight of a person climbing it,” were a legitimate turn of discourse rather than becoming more foolish than thing itself.

At the very end, we are left with a lot of very strange questions. How can you go back into a book and find yourself in that world and in a situation that clearly doesn’t happen in the book? Does the book suddenly read differently? How can the characters go on “existing” in this branch of happenstance that no longer has anything to do with the events of the book they’re in?

It doesn’t make a damn bit of sense. Nothing magical does.

Rating: ★★★★☆

DVD

Own it on Blu-Ray, DVD, and On Demand June 23rd! Also – Inkheart available through iTunes here!

The Blu-Ray package is a nice one, but it isn’t exactly brimming with special features. It includes the standard DVD disc of the film as well, which struck me as odd initially, but is actually rather useful to me.

There are nine additional scenes included, few of which make much difference to the end result. One of them is an alternate opening sequence, and it is interesting to see how the film would have started with a very different feel to it.

Eliza Reads to Us has co-star Eliza Bennett reading one of her favorite passages in the book, which did not become part of the movie, and the reading is accompanied by illustrations by author Cornelia Funke. It’s an interesting, if not meaty, addition which my child thought was just brilliant.

A Story from the Cast and Crew is a video montage of the story game played by just about everyone involved in the film. Everyone picks up the story where the last person left off, and the result is rather a wild adventure. Sort of a cute and harmless special feature, it’s probably something the younger viewers will find entertaining.

From Imagination to the Page: How Writers Write finds Cornelia Funke explaining the process of creating this and other stories, with a good deal of attention given to what sorts of things in life spark the imagination.

Below you’ll find the trailer and several other clips.

Visit the Official Inkheart site here

Are You Screening?

Mo finally tells the story of that fateful night.

Click here to view the embedded video.

Mo calls up the twister from The Wizard of Oz

Click here to view the embedded video.

A clip from the special features with Cornelia Funke talking about characters

Click here to view the embedded video.

Movie Review: Inkheart (writer.fitzhome.com)
Inkheart Movie Review: A Beautiful Read Beautifully Written (screenhead.com)

Wizard 101 – An Online Adventure Game For The Whole Family

Marc Eastman — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 16:24:36 +0000

If you’re familiar with online, multi-user games such as World of Warcraft, Wizard 101 is a lot easier to explain. It’s like that, only aimed at a younger crowd… and everyone is a wizard. The main page of Wizard 101 is here, and you can watch several videos at their site here.

The game is specifically designed for the gap between games for the very young and those that are too mature in theme. It’s ESRB rated at 10+.

Upon entering the world, players create their characters, and are given a school of magic (fire, earth, etc.) based on answers to a series of questions. Players then begin their quest as new students at Ravenwood school of magic. Along the way you learn new spells, solve puzzles, collect artifacts, adopt pets, and much more.

Features include:

 Extensive magical 3D world where players team up with friends and carry out quests to save Wizard City

from the forces of Evil.

 Collectible card-style duels that come to cinematic life as players cast spells alongside fellow and rival

students.

 More than 101 collectible spells that summon zany creatures such as Humongofrog, Evil Snowman and

Stormzilla.

 Seven different schools of magic, each with its own unique style and spells.

 Many witty scenarios and characters based on history, mythology and pop culture.

 The ability to adopt magical pets, like a tiny dragon or a flying pig.

 Puzzles and mini-games that challenge players.

 New outfits and accessories to earn or purchase for endlessly customizable Wizard avatars.

Features include:

 Extensive magical 3D world where players team up with friends and carry out quests to save Wizard City from the forces of Evil.

 Collectible card-style duels that come to cinematic life as players cast spells alongside fellow and rival students.

 More than 101 collectible spells that summon zany creatures such as Humongofrog, Evil Snowman and Stormzilla.

 Seven different schools of magic, each with its own unique style and spells.

 Many witty scenarios and characters based on history, mythology and pop culture.

 The ability to adopt magical pets, like a tiny dragon or a flying pig.

 Puzzles and mini-games that challenge players.

 New outfits and accessories to earn or purchase for endlessly customizable Wizard avatars.

The gameplay is really fun, and the quests carrying advenurers along through interesting storylines (and I have eight year-old confirmation on that). The people behind the game have put together a great combination of options to work with the families entering their world. Part of the fun of such a game is the interaction with other players, but at this age-range, that’s potentially a lot of the problem as well. Parents have easy access to controlling the experience through filters that can limit what will be seen in the game. From free chat to conversations via only selected responses, parents are in charge of what their kids will see in the game.

Another great way Wizard 101 has families in mind is with the payment options. The game has a perpetual free trial to start things off. You can play forever without ever handing over even payment information, and you can get more out of that than you expect. Instead of payment for time, the game works on a payment for “area” theory. The full game payment option is $9.95 per month, which opens everything in the game. There are options there too though, with discounts if you buy a full year, or if you are buying a second account so two people in the family can play together (which is really cool, by the way).

But, Wizard 101 takes things up a notch with another option that I find brilliant. You also have the option to pay-as-you-go and unlock areas one at a time. For as little as $1 (and up to not that much more) you can unlock an area, and that area will stay open to you forever. Take your time exploring that area as much as you want without having to pay more until you’re ready. This theory opens a lot of possibility for a family-friendly awareness of a game. Do a certain number of chores, earn a new area.

It’s a very fun treatment, and the battle system is filled with cinematic treats. It’s also tuned in wonderfully to a mix that is fun for the age-range, but avoids actual violence to the greatest degree possible. The option to play together is great, and the in-game system for joining other in fights is built to work well while maintaining an easy of play that will keep younger players from getting frustrated.

I recommend the game, and it costs you nothing to check it out… ever.

Are You Screening?

KingsIsle’s Wizard 101 hits 2 million users and sells gift cards in 7-Eleven stores (venturebeat.com)

Pumpkin – Movie Review

Marc Eastman — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 11:50:15 +0000

There are a lot of ways you can tell a story (especially in film) that are very dangerous. There are even some that are extremely dangerous. Basically, you are putting yourself in a situation where there could not possibly be more ways for it to go wrong. But, if you take one of these roads and make it work, you usually end up with something special.

One of the most dangerous is to tell a story completely by use of hyperbole. I mean completely.

Those in the know will be aware that I have a special fondness for bouncy, happy-sounding songs that are about death, murder, etc. And, if we’re paying attention so far, we’ll all realize that this is because most of these songs are stories told through hyperbole. The Woman in the Wall by The Beautiful South, is not (actually) a story about a drunk who kills his wife and walls her up in the house. Though those are the words. It’s a story (and I won’t go into it really) about – life sucks, the way the world is sucks, and generally crying freedom in a whole other way. There’s your fairly obscure reference for the day. Throw it around and act hip.

Pumpkin is a story told completely through hyperbole and metaphor, and it is incredibly dangerous. You couldn’t find a way to put more ‘this movie isn’t for everyone’ into a single film. It usually takes three or four movies put together to be aiming at less people.

Pumpkin (Hank Harris) is a pretty simple guy really. He’s something of a non-traditional hero, and has his share of problems. He hasn’t (somewhere in his mid-ish to late-ish teens) really found any direction in his life yet. His mother, upon the death of her husband, coddles Pumpkin a little too closely, setting him up for a pretty heavy dose of lack of self-esteem. He is particularly shy around beautiful women, and he isn’t the most coordinated guy you ever met.

Then one day, Pumpkin meets Carolyn McDuffy (Christina Ricci) and falls instantly in love with her. Once smitten, our young lad finds a purpose. He struggles valiantly against life and whatever problems it may throw at him in the pursuit of not only ‘making himself worthy’, but also of simply making himself better, and even more simply, just making himself.

Sounds just like your typical, movie-version everyman, doesn’t it? Of course it does. That’s exactly who he is. But, if you’re telling the story through hyperbole, then Pumpkin naturally becomes a ‘special’ young lad, instead of just a special young lad.

In a normal movie, Carolyn McDuffy would be played by Jennifer Connelly, and would be the somehow amazingly beautiful everywoman, that is out of Pumpkin’s reach for at least a few good reasons, but only slightly out of reach. The movie will get him up on his tiptoes, or lend him a step-stool, or whatever is required.

In this movie, Carolyn is not only a sorority sister, she is the cheeriest of the cheery. She is also from a smashingly rich family, is dating the all-time biggest of the BMOCs, and gets the willies at the thought of ‘special needs’ people to boot.

And so the story goes on. Carolyn, living in the world where she is actually confused when people talk about pain and sorrow, and wonders why everything can’t be beautiful, finds to her dismay that Pumpkin is having some sort of effect on her. She responds much as she would to any other sort of rash or similar, but this one is ‘doing things’ to her life, and she is greatly perturbed.

Carolyn slowly allows herself to succumb. And why does she succumb? Because the everyman has a certain charm of sincerity, and Carolyn lives in a world that is like a sincerity black hole. He is the only person in her life that has ever really looked at her, and the only one that truly cared that she exists. You should be familiar with it, it’s the same in all the everyman movies. It’s the same reason the guy gets the girl in your standard movie (and hopefully it’s the actual reason the guy gets the girl… you know, in life), this is just the bigger than big version, or in the case of this aspect of the movie, you might say more simple than simple.

We follow along as all the standard issue things happen to Carolyn and Pumpkin, they just happen bigger, more, and/or less realistically. The scene were Carolyn is shunned for her expeditions into unworthy lands, is an extravagant-ish sorority ritual. The scene where Pumpkin confronts his mother (or the world) and asserts that he is a man, has him climbing to the top of a ladder and perching himself (on top) and refusing to be moved. The scene where Carolyn’s father gives her a lecture on his disapproval is a five-second shot where he walks in the room, looks down at the floor (sort of ‘at her’), and walks out. The scene where Carolyn, in what is nothing more than a bid for attention, attempts to kill herself in such a way that she will have to be found and saved, is a scene where she (in incredibly dramatic fashion) empties the medicine cabinet, eats some pills, some contact lens solution, washes it down with a bottle of Pepto, promptly throws up, and crawls into bed. We’ve skipped the middle-man.

The climax isn’t, the characters aren’t, and at the (magnificent) end Carolyn asks Pumpkin a question that he doesn’t understand, possibly leading her toward the idea that the whole thing was merely a matter of projection all along, and she looks back (at you) as if suddenly stricken by the most intense doubt.

And the extreme danger is that this all probably sounds (and hyperbole almost is by definition) pretty stupid. That’s probably going to be open for debate for a long time (assuming anyone ever sees the thing).

As for me, I found it very moving. It’s a tricky way to go, but it has a great many advantages. As Carolyn says when her ‘fight the system’ poetry teacher starts talking about the rules that must be conformed to, “it’s all a bunch of bullshit”. By going the road of hyperbole, and never letting go, you walk a fine line between brilliance and stupidity, but you cut out all the bullshit either way. You leave the warm, and fuzzy bunnies to someone else, and you just say “this is what sucks”, and “this is how things should be instead”, and have done.

If nothing else, Pumpkin is a movie that dares, and a movie that tries like mad. Whatever faults the movie might have (and whatever faults Pumpkin himself may have) they aren’t for lack of trying. It’s a comedy so black Prizzi’s Honor looks over and says, “Ummm… psst…ixnay on the ackblay”, and yet it is somehow a bit light and easy. It also leaves no stone unturned. From the fact that Carolyn is the only blonde in the brunette sorority whose competition is the blonde sorority, to the car that blows up almost before it goes over the cliff (nevermind before there is any reason it would blow up… if cars blew up) resulting in the driver of that car looking like he just stepped out of a toothpaste commercial. From the manhood wisecrack where the guy actually peeks, to the poetry professor going down to one knee when Carolyn leaves school.

The acting is incredible all the way around. You can’t have characters this far beyond stereotype without some pretty decent acting. At times it even makes you smile. The often stageplay version of acting rearing its head, where people smile bigger than a person can humanly smile, movements are larger than life, and you can hardly bare to call it acting, in some sense, because its really just “making it so people in the back row can see what I’m doing”.

Pumpkin takes issues (discrimination, elitism, love, and I suppose ‘rich people suck’) apart, filets them, works them over with a tenderizing mallet, chops them up into tiny pieces, and then just leaves them sit there, and walks away. And, isn’t that how it should be? Or am I just…

Rating: ★★★★½

Are You Screening?

Christina Ricci Calls Off Engagement To Owen Benjamin (socialitelife.celebuzz.com)
He’s Just Not That Into You [Blu-ray] (cinemablend.com)
Christina Ricci is Adam Sandler’s ‘Star’ (movieblips.dailyradar.com)

It’s Emmy Season – Make Your Picks Now At TV.com

Marc Eastman — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 21:14:26 +0000

Whenever an award season rolls around, you can’t help but run into everyone under the sun throwing their list of who should win at you. I’m usually as guilty as anyone. Well, TV.com has a nifty little Emmy Nominee Game going at their site which lets you put together the list of nominees. Check it out here.

(ABC/MARIO PEREZ)

You’ve got three categories to choose from – Best Drama, Best Comedy, and Best Animated Show. Once you pick, you’re taken to a pretty snazzy little tool that lets you drag-and-drop your picks. If nothing else you can get a glimpse of the extensive list of shows that are even remotely in contention.

You’ve got plenty of time before the announcement on July 16th, so head over and see how well you can pick the nominees and the winners.

Are You Screening?

NBC’s Merlin – TV Review

Marc Eastman — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 20:03:06 +0000

NBC is rolling out Merlin this Sunday, June 21st, and it’s opening the Sunday night schedule. While it’s a pretty decent bit of fun, it’s a tricky game for a primetime spot. It’s even trickier because the show looks to be playing out in a manner that is going to require at least six or seven episodes to get settled into itself. That’s a tough game in today’s world of ratings demands.

NBC Photo: Nick Briggs

The treatment of Arthurian legend this time around finds Arthur and Merlin as approaching mid-twenties-ish youngsters. Arthur is trying to deal with the pressures of being Prince under the high expectations of father Uther. Merlin comes to Camelot as basically a peasant under the shelter of the court physician. Other favorites show themselves in the regular cast as well. Morgana is Uther’s ward, and Gwen is her maid.

Our twisty entrance to this spin on the affair is that Uther outlawed all forms of magic when he took things over twenty years ago. Not only does Merlin have to figure out what to do with his life, he has to conceal his magical abilities along the way.

We throw into the mix the fact that Arthur is basically a complete ass, and that a dragon tells Merlin he is destined to aid Arthur throughout his life. The entire fate of the kingdom rests on Arthur becoming a great King, and Merlin more or less making it happen.

NBC Photo: Mike Hogan

Though the first couple of episodes play out unnervingly similar to any number of syndicated shows that will be called to mind merely by mentioning “fantasy,” there is some potential here. It’s establishing efforts are largely weak, and aim too much at lowest common denominators (Arthur is supposed to be a jerk, so clearly we must have him bully the helpless), but there is the hint that it could evolve well. Move along several episodes to a point where we can feature two young men working together to overcome their unique burdens, and forging a friendship despite their mutual lack of interest in one, and we may put together something pretty interesting to go with the hack, slash, and flash.
There are also any number of other avenues to creativity available to the effort. Uther, for a start, seems to be a right bastard, which opens several doors. We’ve also got to wonder just how Morgana and Gwen will start figuring into the grand scheme at this stage of the game.

Even without having to speak to potential, the show does have some good things going for it. Colin Morgan’s Merlin is fantastically likable, and Bradley James’ Arthur works quite well once we move past the ludicrously villainous paste he’s asked to cover himself in. Richard Wilson’s Gaius is rock-solid in the role of the physician/grandfather figure who watches out for Merlin.

NBC Photo: Shine Limited

The standout at the moment is Anthony Head (Buffy the Vampire Slayer’s Rupert), though it may be uncomfortable for some to watch him being not only rather tough, but just plain mean.

It’s one of those shows, like the entertaining Leged of the Seeker, that will probably work for you if the you find the theory at all appealing. It might have some trouble winning over those that don’t jump at the idea though, especially when there’s a giant, friendly, talking dragon in the first episode. That may turn out to be rather a shame, because if the show winds around to where I think it’s going, it may end up a little gem of television viewing. Don’t expect it to fly out of the gates at you, but it’s worth checking out.

NBC’s Merlin homepage is rather interesting, and has some tie-in bonuses.

TV.com has a video clip from the first episode here.

Video below is cast interview footage.

Are You Screening?

ScreenTime – Better Off Ted’s Jay Harrington – Exclusive Interview

Marc Eastman — Thu, 18 Jun 2009 23:05:46 +0000

Welcome to ScreenTime!

If you haven’t had a chance to catch Better Off Ted yet, I really suggest you get acquainted with it. New episodes are returning for a summer run, and the show is slated in ABC’s fall schedule. You can catch up on what you’ve missed at ABC’s Better Off Ted page here, and new episodes start this coming Tuesday 6/23. Catch my review of the show here.

(ABC/RON TOM) JAY HARRINGTON

I managed to catch that upcoming episode, and it’s brilliantly Ted. The crew of the show play out two different versions of getting a little too friendly with your boss, and when world’s collide it isn’t often a pretty picture.

If you haven’t caught him as Ted yet, you may know Jay Harrington from a recent run on Private Practice. Or, if you’re like me, you may remember him as Steve on the attempted Americanization of Coupling.

I got a chance to interview Jay recently, and it was one of the best interviews I’ve been involved with, mainly because the whole affair kept losing its footing as something actually “interviewish.” That makes it great for me naturally, but trickier than normal to turn into something to relay to others. I’ll give it a shot though.

Here we go.

1. Better Off Ted is obviously a quirky, unusual comedy, would you say that falls to your tastes? And/Or what sort of comedies, movie or TV are among your favorites?

You’ll see where we’re going right off the bat here, because the “answer” in the sense that I managed to write something down is – “Yes. Arrested Development.” Jay broke out so eloquently on the merits of comedy that is somewhat over the edge, and so shocked me by predicting my next question, that I just wanted to listen to him. He went into how Ted is the semi-normal center of the show, and how the craziness happens around him, but it’s a crazy that is guided by real life. The real corporate workplace taken to ridiculous extremes to make your jokes and your point (that’s a lot more interpretation than it is quote). He said that sort of wacky skew carried along by a grounded center was the sort of comedy he gravitated toward, and that’s how we got onto Arrested Development. He did mention that there’s a sort of “comfort food” quality to a good old, multi-camera sitcom, but generally he prefers a show that’s a little “out there.”

(ABC/BOB D'AMICO)

2. Ted is a character that is kind of an update of an old school straight-man that we don’t see much these days… are there any particular actors or characters that you use as inspiration for Ted?

You can see how I felt like a fool asking that question at this point. While this sent us right around to talking about Arrested Development a bit more, Jay had some great responses. He was pretty quick to point out that Paul Rudd, from Clueless on, has been working an on point update of a straight-man, though I’m not sure if we nailed down the idea that he was using Paul for inspiration. He also mentioned Jack Lemmon in Some Like it Hot, though he was quick to point out that he wasn’t sure if you would call his character a straight-man precisely. He also mentioned Cary Grant, who he said was, “dashing, but funny.” At this point I immediately buried my next question which started out, “So… you’re dashing, but funny….” I wasn’t falling for that again.

3. 4. You’ve done a variety of roles, even very recently, that run from comedy to drama, if you could pick one role from a show and take it over, what would it be, and would you lean towards comedies or more serious roles looking for a choice?

Here we lost touch with each other slightly. His answer was that he’d love to do a sort of Rob Petrie meets Sam Malone character, which is rather informative actually, but somewhat confusing. He said those are two characters he really loves. I’ll leave fusing those characters to your imagination. The second part of the question sent us off on rather a long road, but at the end of the trip we arrived at a bit of a preference for doing comedy. This was mostly by way of having the most fun doing it, and getting immediate response. When you’re doing something serious, he said, you think you’ve got it, but you kind of have to wait around and see if it turned out well. There isn’t an equivalent really to having everyone on the set cracking up when comedy is working. One of the brief stops on this road was Jay mentioning that he recently did an episode of Burn Notice in which he played a villain. That may or may not be a scoop, but it was news to me.

5. Since Better Off Ted is a new show, are there any new shows from the past season that hooked you?

Jay was pretty quick with True Blood, and after a bit he added Damages. Now sure, Damages has been on since ‘07, but I like the answer. He pointed out himself that the show had been on for a while, but you never know how things are working with those cable seasons. More importantly, I just think those are answers that fit my purposes. If you’re hoping to get to know something about who Jay Harrington is, those answers work. You’re saying something a little extra by saying you’re a fan of True Blood. He also mentioned that he tended to steer clear of reality shows, but he watched American Idol and was even at a taping (live-ing?). He also professed to be a big Amy Poehler fan, and was eagerly awaiting more Parks and Recreation.

At this point the interview/ conversation line got up and stormed out, and I didn’t even call out to it frankly. Our main topic was the fact that so many shows don’t ever get the chance to really find their footing, a subject I can’t resist, but we went at it from every angle. Jay mentioned his many and varied positive feelings toward ABC for sticking with Ted and giving it a fair shake, and that the summer run was great. I have to agree actually, especially when I was a bit nervous for a while when ABC wasn’t telling anyone anything. Fair play to you ABC.

At a certain point we were moving into the neighborhood of actors, and I threw out my next question almost as a reflex reaction.

6. Suppose there is a new character on Better Off Ted who runs a very “Green” company that Veridian Dynamics was trying to take over (and likely ruin). Ted’s job is to court the seriously earth-conscious owner of the company, thereby giving us our moral struggle. If you could pick, what actor or actress would you love to work with in that role?

Now, Jay flew into this one. Right at the beginning he may or may not have said a name. I’m not sure we ever established if he didn’t say it, or I didn’t catch it, but man he was off. He had this one down. While many people might pick a famous actor that he loved or such, Jay wanted to work with a friend of his in college. It seems he had this friend in college, and they were even recently talking about working together in roles of some sort of adversarial nature. In fact, they ran into each other near where Better Off Ted is filmed and it came up how fun it would be to work together on the show. It even turns out that one of them was rather liberal in college, while the other was rather conservative, but they seem to have switched now, and wouldn’t that be a fun twist to work out given the particular scenario I created for the question. All the while it was “my friend from college” this, and “when I was in college with him” that, and it was rather a long bit of explanation of his choice. Then Jay mentioned working with this friend, and having one scene together, on Private Practice. So, now I had to ask for name, and it turns out we were talking about Taye Diggs, but you see how that’s a whole different conversation if you get to start with the name.

7. Best Movie Ever?

In order to close things out, and limit the potential for our wandering off, I shot out the standby closer question. This took a bit longer to answer than you might expect, and it seemed Jay was hesitant to take on the responsibility of bestowing this kind of status on anything. In a move that I think gave me some insight into who Jay Harrington is (and clearly violated several major articles of interview), he first lamented that in ten minutes he would think of the perfect answer and kick himself, and then (hoping to have distracted me) asked me to “throw a few out” to jog his memory. We finally settled on Goodfellas, not so much as an answer, but as a kind of “fact about Jay,” because if he found it on at any point he just had to watch it, even if he were coming into it in the middle. He wouldn’t really commit to any sort of “best” title though, I suspect because he was sure he was going to find a DVD at home giving him a very serious look.

I think I got a pretty good feel for Jay Harrington, and I hope you have as well. Please make sure to check out Better Off Ted, if you haven’t already, and tune in Tuesdays all summer. Also, check out a clip from the show below.

Many sincere thanks to Jay for the time.

Are You Screening?

Better Off Ted – TV Review (areyouscreening.com)
“Better Off Ted” Gets a Summer Extension (geeksaresexy.net)
Linda Gets Dosed Tonight On Better Off Ted (cinemablend.com)
Better Off Ted — An early look (tvsquad.com)
‘Better Off Ted’ Welcomes You to Veridian Dynamics (comedycentric.com)

Tom And Jerry – The Chuck Jones Collection – DVD Review

Marc Eastman — Thu, 18 Jun 2009 14:11:09 +0000

On July 23rd you can own not just another DVD, but a real piece of history. Tom and Jerry The Chuck Jones Collection brings together all 34 cinematic release shorts created when Jones took over the duo. It also includes two 30-minute special features that are a great treat for fans.

The remastered, roughly seven-minute cartoons feature not only some of the greatest moments of Tom and Jerry or animation, but some of the most treasured moments in the history of cinema as well. From classic pop culture parodies, to Mel Blanc voicework, to iconic bits of chase, these are some of the most recognizable moments of film around. An especially brilliant feature of this set is that they are now available in widescreen format so they can be viewed as they were originally seen in theaters.

Serious fans will recognize that this is the post Hanna & Barbera original version, which means Tom is not so fluffy, Jerry is pudgier, and both have miles of added facial expression.

Just a few of the classic episodes are:

The Cat Above, The Mouse Below – Possibly the most well-known, this is the episode with Tom as opera singer, and Jerry just trying to get some sleep beneath the floorboards.

Tom-ic Energy – which introduces the oft-repeated theme of Jerry managing to enlist a dog as protector.

Of Feline Bondage – A popular classic in which Jerry turns invisible with the help of a fairy godmouse.

The Cat’s Me-Ouch – Jerry mail orders his dog protector, but when it arrives it is smaller than Jerry… but still gets the job done.

Jerry-Go-Round – which spins the protector theme when the pair find themselves at the circus and Jerry befriends an elephant.

Matinee Mouse – directed by Hanna & Barbera, Tom and Jerry call a truce and go to the movies where Tom and Jerry cartoons are playing.

As I said, the 2-disc set comes with two really superb features. I’m not often very interested in special features anymore, as they’re so often the same old things by now, but these are worthwhile. The first is Tom and Jerry… and Chuck, which is a retrospective of the entire history of Tom and Jerry, and Jones’ involvement with them. With a good deal of interview footage of the man himself, the feature lays out the entire world of cinema Tom and Jerry was part of, and how they evolved.

The second feature is Chuck Jones: Memories of a Childhood, which is Jones telling a curious tale of his early childhood and how he got involved with animation. You might have to be a fan for this one, but it’s quite interesting.

I had a surprisingly good time rewatching these classics, and recommend the set very highly.

Check out the official site, and a clip below.

Own it on DVD June 23rd!

Are You Screening?

Man Overboard – Movie Review

Marc Eastman — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 14:08:52 +0000

There’s a pretty good underlying gimmick to Man Overboard, a low-budget semi-comedy about boat salesmen. Take a small, honest boat dealer who is having trouble doing enough business, and throw in a new guy who sells like hell, but turns out to be a sociopath, and watch the fireworks. It also has a backstory complex enough to be workable, and grounded enough to relay a fair believability. What it doesn’t quite have is the necessary finesse built into the script that can pull the two together in a way that makes an interesting and worthwhile whole.

Our story follows C.J. Mason of Mason Marine, and his used boat lot. C.J. comes from a long line of boat lovers, and he’s managed to turn the unglorious past of his ancestors into, if nothing more, a respectable living. Unfortunately, C.J.’s misfitish crew of salesmen are a lot more interested in an easy gig than in helping C.J. build his empire. When C.J.’s father-in-law hazes him about how much money he doesn’t make, C.J. (in a fit of nonsensical “being a guy”ness) puts down an offer on a house wildly out of his price range just to prove he can.

Manning his lot with new motivation which he needs to pass on to his crew, C.J. suddenly finds the real estate agent from his home purchase sauntering into his dealership. Johnny Cross apparently wants to get into boat sales, and C.J. needs someone who can convert.

Once you know Johnny is a sociopath (and you get it in the trailer), things play out in rather a straightforward manner. Johnny threatens, blackmails, and bullies the rest of C.J.’s crew into selling more, when he isn’t ripping off customers and/or the business. Things escalate. Things come to a head. In the end, C.J. realizes that he somehow slipped into salesman, when he wanted to be “boat guy” who can do what he loves and spend time with his family.

The movie actually has a lot of things in the positive column, though that may sound surprising at this point. For a start, Oliver Robins (who I am forced to say is the kid with Scraps the dog in Airplane II: The Sequel) does a fine job of directing. A lot of people won’t pay attention to that in a really small-budget film (that isn’t trying to scream its direction at you), but give Spielberg $20,000 and “here’s the parking lot you can use,” and see if he impresses you. Robins may not have much to work with, but he does a good turn at filming conversations, and clearly has the sensibility to work with something richer.

The acting isn’t at all bad either, even if it is a bit stilted at times. Matthew Kaminsky, who has been on your favorite show whatever that may be, carries things along as well as is probably possible, and Mel Fair (who has probably been on your favorite, but it isn’t quite a sure thing) is supremely solid as evilish Johnny. The supporting actors might have been reigned in somewhat from their character bios and thus been given more shading, but they are certainly passable. Graham Norris in particular (who I remember from Gilmore Girls) is quite good, but was close to a truly memorable performance of a throwaway character.

The problem is that the treatment of the somewhat intriguing concept aims so dead at the average that you don’t quite get anything to pull you in. It’s the kind of script theory that you could throw around $40 million at, get a few decent names, and someone like Chris Columbus would direct. Then you walk away with a nice profit and a thoroughly average movie. Think Mrs. Doubtfire. You’ve got basically the same story as every other movie, but you throw your shtick at it, get some name actors, and go. Sure, it’s enjoyable enough, but it’s ultimately boring. Man Overboard’s problem is that it seems to run the same line, but it isn’t funny enough to be comedy, and isn’t dark or serious enough to be anything else.

The end result is that the film is really shackled to its budget, and that is going to be trying for much of its potential audience. If this were a mid-scale theatrical release with a few names (and minor script adjustments), you’d rent the hell out of it, and it would probably get play for years to come as it popped up every now and again on HBO and such. But, when you’re delving into the low-budget realm, you’ve got to have something to say, not just a slightly different spin on the averages of the industry.

I’d like to give this a better rating, because it tries like hell and has some things going for it, but I just can’t.

Rating: ☆☆☆☆☆

Are You Screening?

The Fashion Show, True Blood, Next Food Network Star, I’m A Celebrity…, Heidi And Spencer And Roker… Oh My, And Josiah Leming… Google That

Marc Eastman — Tue, 16 Jun 2009 17:55:57 +0000

Bravo’s The Fashion Show has enough episodes under its belt now that I think I can truly appreciate Project Runway. How a show managed to get me to the point of actually missing Tim Gunn & co. I’ll never know, but the laughably similar Fashion Show has pulled it off. It makes you wonder about all those delays in the Project Runway’s move, and the little wrinkles in the deal that had to be ironed out. Well, Bravo kept saying they wanted to do a similar show, and that’s not going to fly. Finally, Lifetime saw the show, and let it go. You want to put that show on brother, knock yourself out.

It goes pretty much without saying that none of these contestants had the slightest hope of getting of Runway, and that’s not necessarily a bad thing actually. Runway is getting a little too odd in the direction of people who don’t exactly need Runway being the only people who can get on, but Fashion Show overcompensated a wee bit. But, the real problem with the show are the host/judges.

Bravo Photo: Barbara Nitke

Now, Fern Mallis seems to know what’s what actually, so I’ll leave her alone. Isaac Mizrahi, on the other hand, solidified his ability to contribute last week when he went after Johnny – the more normal of the pictured contestants (take a shot).

I gained a lot of respect for Johnny when his design ended up in the bottom two (and fair enough, it looked ridiculous). The ruling came from the audience vote that suggested 90% said they wouldn’t buy Johnny’s outfit. Johnny stood his ground, and if the thing didn’t look so awful, I’d have really been with him. Basically, he said he aimed to design for the 10%. Mizrahi looked like he was about to flip his lid completely, which on a normal scale means he looked mildly agitated. Mizrahi went on and on about how fashion is a business and you have to sell. Not only did he throw out the point, but he was rather condescending about the whole thing. I mean, duh, for God’s sake, you have to sell the stuff you design… moron.

While we should all probably thank Mr. Target for his arrogant little jaunt down obvious lane, I have a couple of non-strenuous objections. 1) There does exist the odd designer here and there who aims to go a slightly different route than “Oooo, if only I get a line at Target,” and nevertheless is able to manage a modicum of success. Donkey. 2) Only a week or two ago (because, come on, it’s a blur) Mr. Mizrahi slapped down a design for being too boring, despite the guest judge saying he thought it looked great and he could sell it all day long, and Isaac quickly shot back, basically, that it wasn’t about selling, ala some fashion is art theory or other.

That leaves us with our other host/judge Kelly Rowland. In an only slightly modified universe, I’d leave her alone completely, but in the universe we’re in she keeps talking. A founding member of Destiny’s Child, and generally attractive person, her relevance on a fashion show is… the same as yours. In general, fair enough really, because who cares? You got a person with some kind of celebrity status to agree to your show, so run with it. But, when she went off on the B-girl designer last week it was too much. The designers were challenged to update and age High School stereotypes (or something), and the jocks, and nerds, and most everything else you’d check off that list was represented. When it came to the B-girl design, Kelly was offended. Of course, it’s not absolutely clear if she was offended by the design itself, or the designer’s defense that she didn’t really know what a B-girl was, or B-girl fashion. Keep in mind that there was much discussion by the contestants on this subject along the lines of, “Uhhh… I dunno, what do you think it means?” The other judges ran to Kelly’s aide, scoffing at the very idea of not being familiar with B-girl culture, as it is, of course, absolutely pervasive in our society.

I’m horribly inclined toward some route of asking about all the B-girls you went to High School with, and throwing a really wicked tone of mockery in while I do so, because I want to stare blankly at you, but I’m also inclined to think that route is all for nought despite whatever efforts I may put forward (staring at you will be tricky see). I’ll leave it to you to count the number of times you thought, “What the furious expletive is a B-girl,” during the course of that last paragraph.

Bravo Photo: Virginia Sherwood

If only the people involved were the only problem. Alas… In order to distinguish themselves somewhat, The Fashion Show has the designs narrowed down by the audience of the fashion show. The result there is that the only design that wasn’t practically a part of the mockumentary show didn’t even get a mention.

What’s painful is that I’m really a fan of reality television, especially these sorts of shows. The last series of Project Runway left a bad taste in my mouth, because “Dude takes break from cush job with Martha Stewart to take part in reality show,” doesn’t quite keep me interested. ”Now I can quit my day job,” loses some of its appeal at a certain point. As a general rule though, I like the opportunity for exposure offered by such shows. No one who ever wins American Idol will put out a better song than This Cigar by Josiah Leming (and most couldn’t even appreciate it), but he needed the show and I’m glad it was there.

People are going to watch The Fashion Show, mostly because it’s there, but it’s on the road to becoming a sad joke.

In other recent Screening news, True Blood shot out of the gates on its return. The crazed, yet interesting, vampire show laid a solid foundation for the upcoming season. After playing around a bit during the first season with varying levels of “Oh my God!” things seem to have a place to reside, and the show looks as if it is solidifying its understanding of itself. While I liked the first season fairly well, there were several episodes which felt like weird for weird’s sake, and the whole didn’t seem as comfortable with itself as it wanted to pretend. The question often seemed more, “How long and how graphic can we get away with making this sex scene?” rather than anything about what actually served the purpose. The major sex scene in this episode worked well, and largely because it felt like we were trying to figure out how much was enough, and not how much is possible.

Next Food Network Star is already making me very nervous, and you may be familiar with my general misgivings about the entire history of the show. If you’re watching Big Daddy’s House… well, I’d love to hear about which TV/Food media outlet you work for. I do admit to liking Will Work for Food though. Already this season I’m having to deal with Katie here still being on the show. I’m very, very nervous. The show she’s apparently aiming for, “Oh My God! Health Food Sucks!” is somehow keeping her on the show, and I’m having trouble understanding the judges.

Finally, Janice Dickinson had health issues of a “being freakishly thin and monkeying with your diet” variety to go along with her display of sociopathic behavior on I’m a Celebrity… Get Me Out of Here! In related news, Speidi went on Today, but were only worthy of Al Roker’s time. A clip of the show is in the sideblog if you haven’t caught it yet. Roker went after Heidi and Spencer like a rabid dog, and only managed to make himself look exactly as competent as you’d expect. Speidi promptly went on the radio with Ryan Seacrest and complained about Roker’s harsh treatment. For the life of me I can’t imagine why, because as much as it pains me for Speidi to not look like fools, they completely pwned Roker.

Well… what have you been watching?

Are You Screening?

Bravo’s Project Runway knock-off The Fashion Show debuts tonight (realityblurred.com)
Kelly Rowland on “The Fashion Show” (beyonce-k.com)
Welcome to The Fashion Show (sporkfashion.com)
Television Review | ‘The Fashion Show’: Contestants Are Sewing, but the Hosts Are Cutting (nytimes.com)

Are You Screening?

SyFy’s Warehouse 13 – TV Review

Are You Screening?

Related articles by Zemanta

Real World 22 Cancun – MTV Has Finally Managed To Completely Lose Me In Only One Episode

Are You Screening?

Related articles by Zemanta

9 Movie Poster Images And Character Descriptions

1

2

3/4

5

6

7

8

9

Are You Screening?

Green Lantern: First Flight Connecting On Facebook And Offering Great Prizes!

Are You Screening?

Big Brother 11 Exclusive “Get To Know” Feature At TV.com

Get to Know the New Big Brother 11 Contestants

Are You Screening?

Related articles by Zemanta

Web Therapy – Lisa Kudrow’s Webshow Now Available At iTunes – Win The First Season Here!

Are You Screening?

Related articles by Zemanta

Royal Pains – TV Review

Are You Screening?

Related articles by Zemanta

Waking The Dead – Movie Review

Are You Screening?

Lovely By Surprise – Movie Review

Are You Screening?

Nature’s Most Amazing Events – DVD Review

Are You Screening?

Related articles by Zemanta

The Box Trailer – Richard Kelly And Richard Matheson Make Bizarre Pair

Are You Screening?

Related articles by Zemanta

The Sims 3 – iPhone App Game Review

Are You Screening?

Related articles by Zemanta

TV Land’s She’s Got The Look Contestant Flips, Then Responds

Are You Screening?

Related articles by Zemanta

Transformers: Revenge Of The Fallen – Movie Review – Win the DVD!

Are You Screening?

Related articles by Zemanta

The Philanthropist – TV Review

Are You Screening?

Jon And Kate Plus 8 – Sneak Peek From Tonight’s Announcement Episode

Are You Screening?

Related articles by Zemanta

Inkheart – DVD Review

DVD

Are You Screening?

Related articles by Zemanta

Wizard 101 – An Online Adventure Game For The Whole Family

Are You Screening?

Related articles by Zemanta

Pumpkin – Movie Review

Are You Screening?

Related articles by Zemanta

It’s Emmy Season – Make Your Picks Now At TV.com

Are You Screening?

NBC’s Merlin – TV Review

Are You Screening?

ScreenTime – Better Off Ted’s Jay Harrington – Exclusive Interview

Are You Screening?

Related articles by Zemanta

Tom And Jerry – The Chuck Jones Collection – DVD Review

Are You Screening?

Man Overboard – Movie Review

Are You Screening?

The Fashion Show, True Blood, Next Food Network Star, I’m A Celebrity…, Heidi And Spencer And Roker… Oh My, And Josiah Leming… Google That

Are You Screening?

Related articles by Zemanta