Welcome
to the middle of the second week of the daily Piss &
Vinegar column! It’s funny, I find that the time of
day I write the column drastically affects the content in
the column. Those late night or early morning sessions find
me rambling on and on about some random thing about the
business that pisses me off and the ones I do while the
sun is shining lead to more straightforward, focused columns.
Since it’s a daily thing, mixing it up is vital. I don’t
want these to ever get boring. I also don’t always need
to gripe about stuff. Sometimes it’s good to just talk.
No piss today. Just a little chatter.

Name
My CNN Column

Hey
look at this, I’m moving up in the world. In addition to
the weekly live appearances on CNN Headline News it appears
I’ll be adding my opinion and words to the CNN.com website
in a brand new weekly column [every Tuesday] and focus on
making movies, the world of independent movies (independent
filmmakers who want to talk to me, now’s the time) and
other assorted minutia. It’ll be a great way to reach out
to new people, spread the word of CHUD.com and also challenge
me to provide information in a concise new way.

I’m sure
it’ll be fun.

They
asked me what I’d like to call it, and the wheels started
turning. Then they stopped. Why not allow CHUD’s readers
a chance to come up with a name that’s cool and concise
and reflects what I hope my opinion will offer the CNN readership?
So, I leave it to you folks. Brainstorm with me and I’m
sure we’ll come up with a perfectly kickin’ name for the
column. The winner gets bragging rights as well as a CHUD.com
prize package which will include a CHUD.com T-Shirt, a Pulp
Fiction DVD, and a few fun assorted bits of movie
swag that happens to fit in the package I mail it in.

Are
you up to the task? Some of the existing columns have names
like HOTWIRED, Fitness Friday, and Hit
Play. Let’s make ours special.

If
you’d like, SEND
A LETTER with your ideas for a good name for the column.

Looking Good, Hellboy!

Let
me first begin with an apology to people who are tired of
seeing the word Hellboy
on this site. It’s going to get worse before it gets better
for you folks.

For
a while there it seemed like Hellboy might
be under a little pressure. A lot of questions rise when
the character is brought up. How do you market it? Can a
film with ‘Hell’ in the title become a blockbuster? Is a
red, horned character something that kids will see? Does
a cult favorite comic book have enough juice to grab people?
Is Sony able to devote fair attention to TWO comic superhero
characters in one summer season or is Spider-Man 2
all that matters? Is Ron Perlman able to carry a film?Is
there enough opportunity for merchandising?

Those
are all really legitimate questions.

Hopefully
Guillermo doesn’t mind me saying this, but apparently those
concerns have become a lot less of a worry. Apparently,
the studio is THRILLED with the way the film has turned
out. Thrilled. Sometimes when you talk to someone who’s
in the process of getting a movie finished you can hear
the strain and stress in their voice like a potato chip
lodged in their throat. Sometimes in my conversations with
Guillermo of late, he’s seemed a little weary. Last night,
I’ve never heard him as happy about the state of things.
On my way out of the screening for The Butterfly Effect
(my review for that arrives late tomorrow), my phone rang
and Guillermo was on the other end and he sounded super
juiced. Apparently, the film was shown to some bigwigs and
they REALLY dug it.

See,
that’s why I think a lot of the Hellboy skeptics
will be pleased when they see the film. Nothing can really
sell the film, but the film itself. Granted, the new banners
popping up in theaters (download the sexy desktops HERE
and HERE)
go a long way towards conveying the coolness and attention
to detail in the characters, but the heart and intelligence
is not the kind of stuff that you can show in a trailer.

Judging
from his response, the film is over the hump.

One
of these days I hope we can all talk about how weird the
behind-the-scenes lives of these films can be, but for today
let me just say that if you are excited about Hellboy,
get a little more excited and if you’re not excited… maybe
it’s freakin’ time to start.

If you’d like, SEND
A LETTER about your expectations for Hellboy.

Why
Spend the Money, Studios?

I
got a box of Gas-X in the mail from Walt Disney Pictures
today.

Why?
It was some weird promotion for the upcoming Lion King
sequel. In the past, I’ve gotten spaghetti and maple syrup
for Elf, gummy animals of every shape and
size, CD openers, and all sorts of other stuff that either
has no bearing on the film or any value in human life. There
are exceptions, but sometimes it’s just weird. Worse yet,
the studios send these things under the auspices that they’re
doing us some great service or rewarding us for all the
free publicity we give their films.

You
know what I see? Money wasted.

These
are the same folks who cry poverty when we ask if they’d
consider running an ad campaign or a few posters for films
that our readers would love to hang on their walls. The
same ones who take forever to get us artwork for the magazine
(which is hyping their product). The same ones who ask us
to come to the set of their film but only if we can afford
to book our own travel for the visit two or three days beforehand
when it’s only slightly less expensive than shooting our
own goddamn movie. The same folks who repeatedly lose invoices
and forget about the ads they owe us for.

If
a box of ass salve or a rubber ball emblazoned with the
Jeepers Creepers logo is worth spending thousands
and thousands of dollars to make, ship, and package… and
outlets that actually deliver viewers should be worth considerably
more. Do studios think that a critic is going to hate their
film but then look over to the One Night at McCool’s
leather whip he/she has and change that "D" to
a "B"?

If
you ever wonder why the business is so freaking lost at
sea sometimes, rest easy and know that it’s not just the
marketing, distribution, test screening, and home video
folks that seem to think using their spleens half the time.

It
goes all the way up and down the line.

If you’d like, SEND
A LETTER about the silliest bit of movie swag you’ve
ever seen.

Mailbag
Kendricks:

I
hope you guys dig the evolution of the daily letters column.
Our unofficial ‘Mascot’ Uncle Mitch is now overseeing things
on every letter, so keep an eye on his fat, drunk ass. I’m
really enjoying the comments you’re sending in, and I really
would like to see a good bit of variety coming from you
guys, so feel free to ask my opinion or comments on WHATEVER.
Also, I think we may have a guest letter every once in a
while for a piece of fan or hate mail that Devin or SJR
or Dave or Andrew gets sent. Variety is the spice of life,
so they say. If you’re a member of our message boards, the
discussion for The Steady Leak is RIGHT
HERE.

The
Death of Ambition:

These
letters are a response to this
Leak.

Henry
Writes: Nick, first of all I just read your reply on
my e-mail, and I am glad that you took a moment to clarify
the situation, and gave your own explanation about it. I
did understand that you had no bad intentions at all, and
understand that the mention of the Koreans was just something
random. I hear you, as it is hard to call someone ‘black’
instead of African American these days. Keep it up.

On
response to your most recent leak, I’d have to say Gary
Oldman. While it is not as if he is killing his own career,
but in my opinion he is one of the few character actors
in Hollywood, and is arguably one of the most versatile
actors of all times. He is one of the few who defines himself
every time a new role is offered, yet he is not in a lot
of films. I’d love to see this talented actor a lot more.
He is a good choice to have in the latest Harry Potter though.

Lance
Henriksen. A terrific actor, but his recent films are not
the best choices for him.

Nick’s
Reply: Lance Henrickson? I love him, but he’s never
been an A-list or top tier actor. Gary Oldman… I have
no idea what his deal is. He’s almost always great, I just
question his choices of late. Thanks for being understanding
about the ‘Korean’ thing. There was no harm intended. Just
don’t put your kid on a school bus anytime soon. I’ll be
watching. With matches.

Scott
Writes: I’ve been enjoying your STEADY LEAK column for
the last week or so, or however long it’s been out. Sometimes
I agree, sometimes I disagree, but up until today I’ve never
felt strongly enough, one way or another, to bother writing.

I’m referring to your comment about DIRTY, ROTTEN SCOUNDRELS.
Your piece is on comedians who have, for lack of a better
term (okay, actually because I’m just lazily profane), lost
their shit. I agree wholeheartedly that Eddie Murphy, Mike
Myers, and Ben Stiller are going the way of the Dodo (and
especially Murphy. Do you realize the guy wasn’t even twenty
when he started on SNL? He was a genius, a comedic national
treasure, and now…well, now he’s fucking PLUTO NASH and
DADDY DAY CARE.) What a waste of talent these guys are turning
out to be!

I have to disagree about something you said about Steve
Martin, though. I do agree that BRINGING DOWN THE HOUSE
and CHEAPER BY THE DOZEN are such toothless, non-edgy comedies
that it’s enough to make you forget that this is the same
man who made the brilliant THE JERK, but I strongly, fervently
disagree with your comment about DIRTY, ROTTEN SCOUNDRELS.
You don’t say so directly, but you’ve implied that it’s
one of his lesser affairs. Have you seen this movie lately?
I usually agree with ya, Nick, but this film was fucking
fantastic. The lengths that Martin and Caine’s characters
go to to con that broad from DICK TRACY and PAPERHOUSE out
of her money are nothing short of brilliant. And, yes, I
know I’ve used that term twice in the same paragraph, but
I think it applies to both THE JERK and SCOUNDRELS.

I hadn’t seen SCOUNDRELS in years until very recently, and
I only rented it because I felt like some good Steve Martin
action in the wake of seeing those posters for CHEAPER.
I was really surprised at how well the film held up, and
even more surprised that I seemed to like it more now than
I did when I saw it…whenever it was that I saw it last.
Two scenes worth the price of rental (Hell, worth the price
of buying the damn thing): The scene where Martin tries
to remember Caine’s character’s name while in jail, a totally
impovised bit that just reeks of comic gold; And, secondly,
the scene where Martin describes to Glenne Headley why he’s
in a wheelchair and unable to use his legs. Oh, also, the
Ruprecht scenes. And the twist ending I wasn’t expecting.
Oh, yeah, and the scene with the Navy guys that Martin turns
against Caine. And, and, and…

I could go on, but instead I urge you and your readers to
check this film out again. It’s largely unrecognized for
being the greatness that it is (something I feel also applies
to one of my favorite comedies: FLETCH), and I hope you’ll
publish this in your feedback section to give some CHUD
readers a push in the right direction.

I write reviews online for fun, just some practice for the
journalism degree I’m working on, and you can find more
of my stuff at http://fwb.proboards18.com.
I don’t know if you’ll include that shameless self promotion
in your post, but I hope you do. I want people to read my
stuff, that’s why I’m a writer, and I think I’m informed
enough to provide a valid opinion.

I hope you use this, and thanks if you do. Keep on keepin’
on, Nick, your column is now a daily ritual for me, and
I look forward to it each afternoon! Thanks!

Nick’s
Reply: I’m with you on Fletch. One of
the best comedies ever. As far as Dirty Rotten Scoundrels
goes, I was never a fan and part of the reason was because
I felt that the Ruprecht stuff was a little "too"
clever. Almost like mugging for the camera. The film’s good,
as good as a Frank Oz film can be, I suppose. I just don’t
find it brilliant. Plus, I think double-crossing doesn’t
lend itself to repeat viewings. I love Steve Martin, though.
The Spanish Prisoner, LA Story,
and Planes, Trains, and Automobiles are probably
my favorites of his.

Vince
Writes: Robert Deniro hasn’t made a good film since
Cape Fear! What a waste of talent.

Nick’s
Reply: Lay off the absinthe, Vince. Casino.
A Bronx Tale. Heat. Copland.
Jackie Brown. Sleepers. Ronin.
I’d take that as my entire filmography and die a happy man.
Deniro’s certainly made some bad choices along the way since
1991 but to say he hasn’t made a good film is alternately
foolish and a detriment to your film diet. Casino
is a decent little brother to Goodfellas.
A Bronx Tale is a really solid little film.
Heat is one of my very favorites of the 90’s.
Copland is way underappreciated. Jackie Brown‘s
friggin’ great. Sleepers got the shaft when
it came out but I absolutely love that film. Ronin
is a classic. Help me, Jesus.

A
Little Passion:

These
letters are a response to this
Leak.

Rob
Writes: Been there. Seen the movie…or a rough cut
of it…a week ago this past Sunday. I agree with you about
the "need" to cultivate some good will from the
religious community after the withering attacks Gibson’s
caught for this. But ultimately Gibson won’t need the Pope’s
thumbs up. Or James Dobson’s. Or little Jimmy Falwell….or
any of those guys.

My thoughts: none of those things will matter once the movie’s
out. The "faithful Christian" percentage of the
populace who dutifully see everything they’re told will
grow their faith will do just that – dutifully see the movie.
Those of us who live inside that same "faith community"
but have irritatingly rebellious attitudes of non-conformity
to the lemmings (that would be me and those like me) will
also see it. Those who live outside the boundaries of that
same somewhat vaguely defined faith community (the atheists,
agnostics, etc) will also see it out of curiousity or in
search of knowledge with which to tear at the foundations
of the faith of their opponents in the great debate over
the reality of God. Then there will be those who’ll gripe,
moan and complain about something they’ve never seen (much
in the same way the Christian right did over Scorcese’s
Last Temptation)…and they won’t ever see it. That’s just
plain wrong.

However…..the movie is moving beyond explanation. It’s
been 9 days and I can’t get the images of the scourging
out of my mind. It colors everything I think about life
and reality. If Jesus was real and this is what he went
through…then damn, I’ve got to reconsider everything.
I believe that most people who see this movie will experience
similar feelings…not that we’ll have some mass revival,
but that people will come to the same conclusion I did:
If Jesus was real and this is what he went through…then
damn, I’ve got to reconsider everything.

I think the buzz on this movie will be big. Really big.
And as much polarizing passion as it has generated so far,
the real battle of opinion has yet to begin. I believe this
will be one of the "cover of Time/Newsweek/Rolling
Stone" kind of issues that engage the vast majority
of Americans. Yah just gotta know that Bill O’Reilly, Rush
Limbaugh, Bill Maher, Jon Stewart, et al are just lickin’
their chops.

Other than that…it was just another day at the movies.
I’ve emailed my friends more "movie specific"
thoughts. If you’re interested, I’ll send it to you guys.

Nick’s
Reply: That sounds pretty cool. It’s good to hear from
someone who’s seen the flick. As far as the ‘belief’ thing,
I’d like to think that people’s faith or lack thereof isn’t
so fragile that a movie would do much to sway it.

Von
Writes: I will go to the THE PASSION because it sounds
groovy to me…but I would imagine that the Pope would illicit
hate from movie goers if he were to view the film publicly.>>>
i would think that his big silly hat might block part of
the screen. and forget about sitting behind him!

Nick’s
Reply: Pope hat humor, eh? That’s a bit too easy of
a joke, isn’t it? Anyway, I think you’d have his legions
of bodyguards to worry about, not his screen blocking hat.
Oh, and his Rosary Smashing Action™.

Jamie
Writes: I just have to say that "Papal Pull-Quote"
is just about the best thing ever. I forwarded a link to
your Steady Link to my entire office and we spent our breakroom
time talking about how great the column is and how many
nuggets of comedy gold are in there. I’m a Catholic, but
I could care fuck-all about what the Pope thinks of the
movie. It’s a movie. See you at Comic Con!

Nick’s
Reply: Steady Link? What am I, a sausage manufacturer?
Thanks for the nice comments, though. I enjoying making
Pope jokes, but who doesn’t? As far as this year’s San Diego
Comic Con, expect a huge chunk of CHUD.com writers and longtime
readers to take the city by force. Make sure you check out
our Movie Webmasters Panel, provided I’m invited back after
calling a few of the guys out on their shenanigans.

A
Little of Everything:

Alex
Writes: Hey there. Nubile college junior up in Sewanee,
Tn here. 🙂

I’ve been reading your site daily for about a year now.
I love it. I started reading online reviews in 1999 with
AICN and since last year I’ve found myself coming to CHUD
more often. Okay usual ass kissing is done. Now with the
questions. Here I am a junior in college awaiting a degree
in political science. I write for the tiny school paper
and review films sometimes. I have to say I love it. I love
reviewing. I’ve done games and comics and movies and I absolutely
adore it. I’ve been thinking of late that I would like to
work in the review industry, but I’ve really no idea how
to go about it. I felt you were perhaps the most accessible.
So I am asking. What would you suggest, as a professional
in the industry, for me to do? Are there internships for
this sort of thing?

Thanks
for any help you can give a girl in college.

I
appreciate it and I look forward to the next daily leak
or DVD review.

PS
The Teletubbies DVD review is probably the best thing I’ve
read in
sometime.

Nick’s
Reply: Not enough nubile college girls write in to CHUD.
Probably because we tend to be a site geared towards dismemberment
and the exposing of nubile breasts and ass. Still, it’s
good to hear that there’s a chunk of you ladies who see
through our layer of Neanderthal humor to the stuff that’s
beneath. Which is often more Neanderthal humor. As far as
reviewing goes, and this is the topic of about 70% of the
mail I get that’s not spam or requests for passes or prizes…
I have the belief that "If you build it, they will
come". Whenever some upstart website hits and they
ask me for the contact info of industry folks or local reps
for studios I say the same thing: "Do your job to the
best of your ability and keep at it. Establish some semblance
of consistency and quality and eventually you will be attractive
to them as a viable member of the press.". In your
case, coming out of a college where you’ve been given the
chance to plant the seeds of film criticism and whatnot,
you’re already on your way. I think it’d be wise to take
classes in journalism, film theory, and the like but also
find someone to hook with to do a sort of internship in
the business. If that means writing for a website (like
Adam McAllister did with us during his college years), helping
out at a newspaper, or whatever… just keep honing your
tools. By the time you’re a nubile graduate you should be
ready to make a decision as to where you’re going with your
life.

Barry
Writes: First off i love your site i read it everyday.But
i got a problem with your taste in movies.U seem on point
most of the time but then u knock stiller’s performance
in zoolander and state that the trailer to starksy and hutch
doesnt look promising?.U got to be kiddin me i was laughin
out loud at the pics alone.Also by sayin that u would dread
seein meet the faulkers made is way off since the original
was easily one of the funniest movies i have seen in a long
long long time.But hey everyone has different tastes and
are entitled to there own opinion but i just hope u were
not the guy that gave the transporter a good review.

Nick’s
Reply: You don’t like my taste in movies? Well, I don’t
like your taste in grammar! Seriously, I think Ben Stiller
was insanely annoying in Zoolander. Insanely
so. That’s a really one-note character that doesn’t lend
itself to feature films all that well. The fact he had Owen
Wilson in top form, a great Billy Zane sequence, and the
sometimes fun and sometimes annoying Will Ferrell saved
it from being a waste of time. As far as Starsky and
Hutch‘s trailer is concerned, I’m sorry if I don’t
fall over laughing just at the mere sight of kitsch. I grew
up with that stuff. I’m not impressed. For people born in
1980 and forward, maybe big hair and silly clothes is all
it takes. I think a little WRITING helps. Also, I get really
tired of Snoop Dogg’s presence in a film being the joke
instead of him having anything to offer. We’ll see. I want
the film to be good. As far as Meet the Fokkers
goes, the fact that Meet the Parents was good is the very
reason I don’t want a sequel. They hit the target once and
it’s really a stretch to expect them to do it again. I don’t
need another comedy being lessened by a crappy sequel ala
Analyze That.

William
Writes: I think you are right on with the Matrix sequels.
The Wachowski brothers have fallen to the Soprano Syndrome.
The Soprano Syndrome is when a successful movie, television
show, or musician recieves too many awards and positive
press and falls apart trying to surpass previous success.
The Wachowski brothers took themselves too seriously and
lost what made the original Matrix such a breath of fresh
air. On a side note, do you know of any plans to bring HBO’s
‘The Wire’ to dvd? This is the best crime drama ever on
television in my opinion.

Nick’s
Reply: I heard that The Wire will be out sometime
this summer. If I remember correctly, our comic maestro
Sean Fahey thinks that show’s the greatest thing on the
tube. As far as your ‘Soprano Syndrome’ is concerned, I
think that David Chase’s show is still utterly classic even
though the fourth season may have lacked a little of the
warmth and ensemble magic the others had (I attribute that
to the mishandling of the Paulie Walnuts character). I find
the whole ‘Jump the Shark’ mentality a bit annoying, but
the show still hasn’t screwed itself into mediocrity.

Sean
Writes: I actually had more of a question on the comic
book you’re writing. I have an idea for a comic book/movie
type thing. It’s kind of out there. I’m not an artist and
I am extremely unfamiliar with the comic book medium. I’ve
fleshed out somewhat what the main characters back-story
is as well as some of his "enemies" would be,
but I have no idea where to go from there. What would your
recommendation be?

Nick’s
Reply: Well, the simple and most logical solution would
be to interest an artist in your idea and get some pages
done or some conceptual work accomplished. The more tangible
work you get done on your idea, the easier it is to convey
the value of it to a publisher or studio. There’s no real
easy way to do it unless you find a really unique or polished
artist. That’s a bitch because so many artists simply ape
the style of another or have their own projects that take
precedence. Then there’s the financial issues. It’s not
a quick process, and artists have to eat. So do writers.
If it’s something you’re truly passionate about I’d say
to devote a certain part of your week to it and try to really
know it backwards and forwards. Then, when you’re at a convention
and you want to talk to a publisher or artist about it,
your enthusiasm and knowledge will be infectious. Regarding
my project, it’s kind of in midair. There was some considerable
interest in it and it’s something that’d work as easily
as a CGI movie as it would a 2D animation. My artist is
torn in several directions and has a family to feed so I’m
currently taking it in a new direction in movie script form.
I’m about sixty pages into the 2nd draft. For what it’s
worth, a picture of our Medusa character is to the above
left for your Chewing pleasure.

Darga
Writes: Hey, great site! I’ve only just discovered
CHUD in November, but I read the news and reviews daily.
Over the holidays I was under the weather and stuck at home
for a couple weeks, so I rented some movies based on the
reviews here. Equilibrium and a few others were things I
wouldn’t have bothered with if not for having read
the reviews here, so thanks for that.

Your
comment about filmmakers not getting the money they deserve
from studios is as good a sequitur as I’m likely to
get for a question I’ve been wanting to ask: How to
all these huge film profits get divvied up? As a rule, do
actors and directors get paid more money for a show that
nets huge profits such as Return of the King, perhaps by
percentage or some other form of bonus? I’m sure it’s
different from case to case, but I just wonder whether contracts
for a Peter Jackson or a Bruckheimer might tend to have
some sort of royalty clause in their contract to anticipate
a big hit. (That question aside, I do agree with you that
there is too much focus on the box office take these days.)

PS:
My favorite joke on the site is the “ride you like
Rohan” caption from The Faculty. That image cracks
me up every time.

PPS:
Poor (rich) Michael Crichton. Timeline is one of my favorite
books of his. I think he’s finally just resigned himself
to the fact that his brilliant books are going to be dumbed
down and turned into movies. When I read his last book,
Prey, it definitely felt like a movie script already (and
I think it’s no coincidence that he wrote it at a time
when Hollywood has perfected particle system effects). I
just hope there aren’t a bunch of readers missing out
on his work because they think the crap movies must have
been based on crap books.

Anyways,
take care and thanks!

Nick’s
Reply: A while back, there was a bit of publicity about
how the actors from The Lord of the Rings banded
together to get a pay increase. A lot of times the studios
will cry poverty even with a big hit. I just finished the
book I mentioned in
the second Steady Leak by Peter Biskind, and
there’s a lot of info about how Miramax covered their profits
under a pile of paperwork so that people couldn’t get their
back-end cuts. It’s a weird, amorphous side of the business.
Thanks on the ‘Rohan’ comment. As far as Timeline
goes, it wasn’t one of my favorites and I thought Prey
was totally preposterous and lacking in both tension and
character development. Jurassic Park was the beginning
of the end for one of the most compelling mainstream writers
around.

Ed
Writes: Hello, I wrote you a few days back, I was the
one from the projects who’s friends are idiots, and I just
read your response on the new "Piss" an I just
wanted to say thank you. Your words encouraged me to better
myself (a little corny but kinda true). You said I should
write a screenplay and while I’ve wanted to I fear turning
into one of those guys who are always pushing their scripts
under the bathroom stall door. Besides I think that if I
ever met one if my idols like Paul Thomas Anderson or Peter
Jackson I would totally forget about my script and babble
incoherently and they would mace me and run away. But I
would like to direct, I figure that if they give guys like
Uwe Boll and Paul Anderson the money to make movies then
I stand a chance the get something funded and then through
a process of trial and error learn ways not to scare off
the celebrities I want to star in it. I know I’ll never
get who I want like William H. Macy, Brian Cox, Julianne
Moore or Scarlett Johansson. The studios would most likely
force me to put Ashton Kutcher or Jennifer Lopez in it.
That would be a disaster since I would become the first
filmmaker to bitch-slap Jennifer Lopez which will either
win me awards or get me fired. I would love to make a movie
but eventually I’ll get to that point where the studios
are in total control and want to provide notes for every
single thing I do. I’ve listened to every commentary that
I own on dvd, especially the ones by Robert Rodriguez who
is kind of a hero to me, and I’ve learned a lot from those
so I know most of the basics of how to make a movie. Like
where to place a camera, how to light and how never to let
Ben Affleck improvise. Who knows? I might get into it knowing
the troubles that lie ahead and maybe make something that’s
not a total piece of crap. Thanks for the positive response,
you really gave me hope for the future.

Nick’s
Reply: Good for you. You should never let your surroundings
dictate your future, unless your surroundings are high class
whores and stacks of cash.

Jack
Writes: About the Korean (or any other ethnicity/ability/gender)
kids (or any other group), you’re both right, Grasshoppers.

Nick’s
Reply: Yeah. There’s no right answer. Either people
get smothered under the blanket of political correctness
or they’re called out for being a racist, homophobe, intolerant,
or ignorant. The bottom line to me is that people need to
know who they can trust. I think there’s pretty much nothing
that’s taboo for a joke, provided that it’s not malicious.
People who read the site for any period of time or know
me in the real world know what to expect. We’ll crack jokes
about a lot of stuff. There will always people who look
to get offended and there will always be people who find
those jokes funny because they’re racists or homophobes
or whatever. I think I sometimes walk the line a little
carelessly, but the intent is never cruel. But, once again…
if I think something’s funny I’ll probably say it.

If
you’d like, SEND
A LETTER about anything your shorts desire.

Handy
new CHUD.COM Slang:

Each
installment of The Steady Leak will feature a few
new slang terms for a dictionary that will never be published.
Ignore, enjoy, or shake your head in disgust:

Pacino Throat
– An
ailment where one becomes unable to maintain control of
the volume of their voice.

Sonic
Deathtrap X – The
tendency to use the Stargate music in a trailer.

C-Mount
– An
80’s fad employed by aspiring starlets to catch onto the
wave of Mr. Thomas Howell’s rising stardom.

Overcrank
– James
Woods. In a sentence: ‘I’ve got a nice sized pants patroller,
but Jimmy’s the original Overcrank’.

Dutch
Angle – To
steal a camera move from Predator.

Nunziata’s
Paparazzi –
A
coin operated photo booth.

Rack
Focus – The
motto of the WB.

Pulling
a Savini – To
not know where your bread is buttered and alienating your
destiny.

2nd
Unit – Doing
yardwork while your spouse relaxes.

3rd
Unit – Doing
yardwork while your spouse screws Jason Bateman.

Craig
Tiberius Nelson – The
coach of the Starship Poltergeist.

Shameless
Self-Promotion Dept:

Since
so few of you read the message boards, I’m going to pop
in a few self promotional tidbits here from time to time.
The great thing is: You can avoid this section if it bothers
you.

This
weekend we are recording the latest batch of CHUD Radio
demos. The first mp3’s of the sessions are available HERE.
If all goes according to plans, you just might be hearing
us on a weekly syndicated movie radio show. Cross your fingers.

I’m
going to pop a link to an mp3 of one of my band’s tunes
here and hopefully a few of you will dig them and comment
on them either through email or on the message boards. We
have two bands, PKG and The Lucky Nightsticks,
both of which cover a wide variety of music. Do you like
old fashioned piano driven doo wop? Try I
Like Spikes. Music by Steve Murphy, Micah Robinson,
and Nick Nunziata. It’s the best song you’ll ever hear about
people who enjoy impaling themselves. Comment here
if compelled.

‘IF
CHUD Ran the Movies’, by Nick Nunziata

See
you tomorrow!

I
hope your weekend was splendid and you found love, earned
a ton of cash, and saved the lives of Korean schoolkids
trapped in a burning bus. We’re now in the second week of
daily Piss & Vinegar (weekdays only) and I’m hoping
it’s becoming a daily ritual for you guys like it is for
me. The only major thing that happened this weekend for
me was that I went to a church service for the first time
since the funeral of one of my wife’s relatives. Worse yet,
I was involved in the service as it was for the Christening
of my daughter. Weird. I’m not really good at the whole
church thing but I’m recovering. I did manage to knock a
pamphlet into the holy water right before the baptism, something
that would have irked me if I gave a hoot about the strangers
all around us. I have nothing against religion, but I really
cannot stand church services. Just a bit too ritualistic
for me, I guess. Too much singing. Too much audience participation.
Too much forced fellowship. Not enough ninjas. To each their
own I guess. What matters is that my wife enjoyed it and
her family dug it.

Now,
if it was the three sirens from O’ Brother, Where
Art Thou? I might have gotten a little more involved,
But alas. I’m the guy who has a fake dead body on the rocking
chair in my office so take these comments with a shaker
of salt. The sad and scary thing about the weekend is that
although I planned to see either Torque or
Along Came Polly, I never had a chance to
see either. I still haven’t seen a 2004 film yet. I feel
so friggin’ useless!

Pulp
Friction

There’s
at least three instances I can think of in recent memory
where someone’s reaction to a trailer, poster, or conversation
about one of the comic book movies in the pipeline was met
with a "Oh God, ANOTHER one", as if all films
based on comic books were the same. If that’s the case,
they might as well just package Blade II,
American Splendor, and Men in Black
together on DVD together. Still,
the nearly nonstop stream since the first Blade
movie has been rather breathless and the whole comic book
to film surge is showing no signs of abating even though
there’s been a few failures of late.

Are
you tired of comic book movies? Is there a reason that the
public might be weary?

Personally,
I think it’s a crock of shit. Unless you’re comparing apples
to apples or Man-Things to Swamp Things it’s a totally pointless
argument. Comic book movies can be as diverse as films based
on books, television shows, or even that fertile source…
theme park rides. Comics are action, sci-fi, drama, comedy,
adult, horror, adventure, and some of them defy definition.
Just like films. Also, some of the people writing comics
are as talented as those in film if not more so. Greg Rucka.
Grant Morrison. Brian Azzarello. Peter Milligan. These guys
kick all sorts of ass.

Yet
still, people are starting to lose that buzz about "Finally
seeing THIS character or finally seeing THIS comic realized".
We believe a man can fly. We see it done seamlessly in everything
from films to music videos to car commercials. The whole
sense of wonder thing is dying.

With
great technology comes a lot less responsibility.

So
let’s see this year’s main six and see where the genre will
be in 2005:

Spider-Man
2: It’s a lock. It’s an easy 250 million bucks in
the bank of Sony Pictures and if the film’s better than
the first it could reach or exceed the 400 million mark.
This will be the year’s most heavily marketed film and the
one most labeled as the "Must See" film of the
year. Spider-Man’s so big now that everyone in the world
can stop buying comics and the films would still finish
in the top three every year they were released.

Consensus:
This will be a welcome part of most moviegoer’s year.

The
Punisher: If the budget is the rumored 35 million
bucks, it’ll be tough for this film not to at least make
its budget back and crest the 50 million dollar mark. If
it’s even remotely worth seeing, whether it be in a car
crash fashion like LXG or a "Damn, they
tried and almost figured it out but didn’t" fashion
of Daredevil, it could reach 70. If it somehow
rises above the 80’s feel the trailers convey and the truly
deserving Tom Jane has his big role, who knows? The great
thing about The Punisher is that the films
never have to cost 100 million dollars. They’re films about
a guy with guns killing other guys with guns. The low tech
aspects of the film and the franchise are its strength.
There’s no sense of disbelief to be suspended. At least
not any more than when we’d pony up for a Die Hard
movie. Regardless, this doesn’t scream "Comic Book
Movie".

Consensus:
Kind of a "No Lose" situation for audiences.

The
Mask 2: Other than the involved participants, who
the hell wants to see this movie? I’ve seen NO ONE even
show a modicum of interest in this film and I bet that if
people were to ask what their five favorite Jim Carrey movies
were, the first film would get virtually no play. It’s a
non-factor. A non entity. The sequel no one wanted and it
comes way after the residual memory of the original hit
has faded. The only good thing is that few people remember
these are based on a comic book.

Consensus:
A kid’s movie. Irrelevant.

Hellboy:
Yawn. We’re dying for it to come out. We know it’s great.
We love the comic. We love Guillermo. Blahblahblahblah.
This film is the "Cool" comic movie choice of
2004. It doesn’t have the budget or name recognition of
some of the others, but it’s got heart and a great source
material to spring from. The only thing that would hurt
this film would be if the marketing was bad or if Sony was
too preoccupied with Spider-Man 2 to remember this little
gem waiting to come out in April. Or a name change. That
would negate whatever built in audience the film would have.
Hellboy’s not an easy sell on audiences but it has the benefit
of being less expensive and being more like a gothic thriller
than a superhero film. It’s the most unique of the 2004
crop of comic book features for sure.

Consensus:
We KNOW it’s good. Will it be great though? Maybe.

Catwoman:
Well, if the Catwoman people have done one
thing right, it’s been in showing off their title character.
There’s no shortage of pictures of Halle Berry looking all
sultry in her tattered leather duds. What there is a shortage
of is everything else. Apparently, the film cost over 100
million clams and there’s not much I can see that warrants
it. Halle Berry, Sharon Stone, Benjamin Bratt, and Lambert
Wilson? An A-List cast this is not. Because it shows no
allegiance to the comics, is awfully expensive, and seems
to have gotten in the bad graces of a lot of its potential
audience, this could be a black eye to comic book flicks
for sure.

Consensus:
I’m kind of trembling in fear over this one.

Man-Thing:
The fact there’s going to be a theatrical Man-Thing movie
is worth risking the entire craze on. It’s too perfect how
silly of an idea this is. I would have LOVED to have written
and directed this one. Man-Thing is a fun character and
so few people know or care about the character that it’s
almost impossible for the film to be a disappointment. A
weird looking thing in the swamp that senses fear? Come
on, you know this’ll be fun.

Consensus:
Another "No Lose" situation. It’s Man-Thing!

No
two of these movies are alike. I don’t see how people can
write off the whole idea of a comic book film because they
got tired of the Hulk frenzy or the fact that their coveted
Edward Furlong Crow film got retitled and put into the ether.
Regardless, I fear for the larger collective of comic titles
ripe for feature adaptations because of sheer oversaturation.
Is it time to market these films based on the talent alone
and lose the comic connection in the marketing like some
of the Stephen King films have dropped his name?

I
don’t know for sure, but it’s weird how the business tends
to work.

A
friend and I have a really sound concept for a comic book
as well as the movie and/or cartoon that would follow. Mythopolis.
We took it to a few folks in Hollywood who publish comics
and make movies and cartoons and they liked it and one of
the things we learned is that even if you only print one
issue it has more merit to studios than an intangible idea.
We even put together a six page demo comic, a huge document
about the greater story arc, and a bunch of artwork. Now,
I wonder if we should keep it to ourselves. The boat for
comic movies might be away soon and crushing anyone not
wearing a bat, an "S" or "X", or a spider
on their chest.

If
you’d like, SEND
A LETTER about the comic movie craze.

Recommending
Movies

I
recommend movies for a living, but I’m strangely hesitant
when doing so for relatives or friends of the family whose
film tastes are either in question or the person is cut
from a different cloth.

For
example, today one of my wife’s aunts was over and said
she was really into suspense films and thrillers. I went
over to my DVD shelf to name a few she might want to look
into and as I did she asked if I had any like A Perfect
Murder with Michael Douglas and Gwyneth Paltrow.

I
froze. I like that movie, but as far as the genre goes it’s
not one of the first I’d recommend. I was going to mention
a few Hitchcock films and perhaps Seven but
then I wondered if I should just play it super safe with
stuff like Kiss the Girls and Along
Came a Spider. Mainstream stuff. Stuff that is easy
to recommend but stuff that’s guaranteed to rouse no interest
in how it was made, why it was made, and where to buy their
own copy. Whenever someone comes through I have a little
checklist of stuff they need to see if they haven’t. Stuff
like Fight Club, Donnie Brasco,
Rounders, Deterrence, Interview
With the Assassin, Super Troopers,
Dead Alive, Searching for Bobby Fischer,
and Glengarry Glen Ross. Stuff like that.
Films that are familiar but ones that a lot of people who
consider themselves film fans have missed over the past
few years.

It’s
weird to know where to draw the line. On one hand, the fun
of film is to share them with other people but on the other
there’s the disappointment that you’re wasting their time
on something too abrasive or abstract or challenging for
them to enjoy. Hell, I have a couple of friends who cannot
watch a film if there’s subtitles. Another that won’t even
give a chance to an anime.

Lately,
aside from my day (and night) job I’ve kind of decided to
not recommend movies to people anymore. It’s like a computer
tech doesn’t like helping people with their computers when
they’re off or how doctors don’t want to deal with Uncle
Dave’s knee problem at the family picnic. Sometimes it just
isn’t worth it.

Especially
when you’re gauging a person’s tastes and they unfold the
way too common recent belief that Old School
is the funniest comedy ever. That’s the mentality you’re
deaing with! I’m so tired of that crock of dolphin tits.

If you’d like, SEND
A LETTER about when you’ve been burned in the ass by
a recommendation.

Mailbag
Yarborough:

The
mail keeps coming and it’s a beautiful thing. In case you
didn’t know, THIS
THREAD on our message boards is devoted to this
column and feedback in that form is always appreciated.
I hope that a few more letters come that are unrelated to
the topics at hand, just fun stuff that can keep this little
bastard moving quickly. A good batch of letters (for the
most part) await, so let’s get going…

Killin’
Responses:

These
letters are a response to this
Leak.

Bradley
Writes: I’m a 17 yr old college Student from a place
called Farnham near London in England. I read ure site daily,
and i’m by no means trying to suck up here, but i find it
to be one of the more opinionated, and therefore enjoyable
film sites on the internet. For my Film Studies Course,
the coursework is to make the opening of a documentary,
and i have decided to do mine on Screen Violence and whether
it makes people violent. I am arguing that a if a person
is going to be violent, they will do it anyway, that perhaps
a movie may give them an idea, but it’s not going to make
someone go out and kill. On this note i was readin Friday’s
daily piss and vinegar (great column) and came upon your
‘Killin’ in the Name oF…’ article. I was wondering if
possible, if i could use what u said about Irreversible
in my documentary opening as that just so happens to be
one of the films i am discussing, and found your point to
be exactly where i was coming from. Of course credit would
be given where credit is due 🙂 and i was wondering if you
would allow me to use it.

Nick’s
Reply: You are welcome to do so, provided you do me
two big favors:

1.
Make sure that you credit it correctly.

2.
If you fancy yourself a writer, give a shot to excising
the simile 🙂 in anything you write to someone you
respect. It makes all the difference.

Dan
Writes: I completely agree with you about your comments
about violence in the media. There is however one videogame
that I think crossed the line. If you have ever heard about
a game called Manhunt you know what I’m talking about. In
Manhunt you play a character called Cash and to make a long
story short, there is a man who speaks into an earpiece
in your ear and tells you what to do. You are forced to
kill people and the more violently you kill people the more
you are rewarded. The thing that bothers me about this game
is that the everyone you kill is videorecorded to make smut
films, like in 8mm. I think that this went over the line,
violence has never bothered me, and I don’t think it effects
someone who doesn’t already have something fucked up in
their head already. I just think that there is something
wrong when your mission is to kill someone in the most violent
way possible so it can be taped and sold as, and while doing
this, the guy talking in your ear is saying stuff like "Your
really getting me off Cash." I just found it pretty
disgusting. And do not consider this being an arguement
agiainst violence, this is just against this game.

Nick’s
Reply: I have that game! That’s not just anyone speaking
into your ear. It’s ubiquitous character actor Brian Cox!
The way I see it with games like these is that it’s the
retailers who need to make sure they’re sold to adults (adulthood
isn’t really acheived by time spent on Earth but rather
experience, though I guess the age of 17 is what the government
finds acceptible) and the parents who need to both educate
their kids about violence and not create an environment
where their kid would go out of their way to obtain a game
like this to spite them. The game is harmless in and of
itself. I’m all for games stretching the boundaries and
limitations of their medium, just like film. There was a
time when there was no science fiction genre. No horror
genre. Yes, there are branches of EXTREME horror now and
they offend people but their existence isn’t doing anyone
any harm. Now, if you buy Manhunt simply because
it’s controversial then you’re a sheep to Rockstar’s marketing.
If you buy it because of good reviews, subject matter that
interests you, or loyalty to the company (though State
of Emergency stung mine to Rockstar), then I’d assume
you’ll enjoy the [admittedly dark and repulsive at times]
game and not be transformed into a homicidal maniac.

Simon
Writes: Thanks for the great site, it never fails to
break through the monotony of work, as well as provide a
laugh or two.

As for the issue of "Violence in the Media", my
take on it is not that it’s about the supposed corrupting
impact that it has on our impressionable youth, but rather
about scapegoating. The self-appointed morality police always
seem to find something to latch onto, whether it’s comics,
rock n’ roll, or movies. Looking back at some of these "moral
crusades", it’s pretty evident. Burning records because
of Elvis swaying his hips on national TV is utterly ludicrous.
Yes, morals have changed somewhat in the last 50 years.
but I don’t believe that seeing him cavorting onstage was
ever enough to turn a generation of kids into sex-crazed
hooligans. But he did provide a convenient target for those
frustrated with society’s shortcomings. It’s the same thing
today. Rather than addressing poverty, violence, lack of
education, let’s blame moves and TV. Those willing to hurt
others, for whatever reasons, will always find inspiration
somewhere. Take aways movies, television, books, comics,
games, and music, and people will still keep killing each
other. A quick perusal of a history book will attest to
that.

If anything, I think it’s the sensationalist media that
contributes to the glamour of violence. Anytime there’s
a school shooting it makes the front pages of newspapers,
and it’s all over the news. A messed up kid desperate for
attention may see that as his one chance to become a superstar.
People will talk about him for years. His picture will be
on the cover of Time and Newsweek. He gets to go out in
a blaze of glory and everyone will know about it. Who knows,
maybe they’ll even get live footage of it.

There’s a big difference between escapist entertainment
and realistic violence. I love playing online against my
friends and blowing them to bits with rocket launchers.
That’s escapist fun. But watching the opening scene of Saving
Private Ryan for the first time left me shell-shocked. It
still disturbs me. Most people can tell the difference.
With those that can’t, the problem lies elsewhere.

Nick’s
Reply: Agreed. It’s like blaming McDonald’s for allowing
their coffee to burn you when you drove with it between
your legs. People’s boneheaded actions are their own fault.
Not a dog who spoke to them, Catcher in the Rye,
The Matrix, or the backwards message on a
Tori Amos song. Humanity loves to point the finger elsewhere,
especially if it’ll instigate the government into spending
money it doesn’t have on a study of some sort. Anything
to prolong the process. Anything to give 60 Minutes something
to create a hard-hitting piece of journalism about. There’s
also this tiny factor that people tend to overlook: We are
all just animals with shoes and cell phones. Fancy apes.
Just a few years separated from smashing our cavemates with
rocks. There’s violence encoded into our DNA, a trait that
surfaces oh, EVERY DAY in murders, rapes, and mass destruction
conducted in the name of religion, race, and finance. Humanity
is flawed. People are going to snap no matter what media,
weapons, food, drugs, or dental products they’re surrounded
with. Life goes on.

Mike
Writes: I have yet to see Irreversible (I keep hemming
and hawing with it at the video store), but the most affecting
death I’ve on screen has to be Alfonso Ribeiro’s immortal
exit from Ticks, when his face makes like the Red Sea and
splits to reveal an insect more dangerous than Rick Schroder.
Okay, okay, that was a lame attempt at comedy.

In
all seriousness, the most heinous death I’ve ever seen wasn’t
even on the big screen. In one harrowing scene on HBO’s
OZ, a con was pinned to the ground and repeatedly invaded
with a small box cutter. The sequence went onfor many minutes,
as the guy was writhing in agony. It was worse than Marge
Schott’s last MLK Day party. As far as most people go I’m
fairly desensitized to extreme violence, but this scene
was so relentlessly unflinching (and therefore more proactively
visceral) that I didn’t need to see the whole episode (which
I didn’t) for it to affect me for the next few days. I played

it over in my head again and again. I could still hear the
guy screaming.

I
think most deaths in movies these days are either too impersonal
or too
perverse. They’re easy to shake because they’re either too
glossed over or too glossed up. And most are edited in such
a way, with cutaways or quick takes, that the finality of
death never has a chance to enter your mind. When the camera
ceases to be an observer and becomes a willing manipulator,
the impact of death on screen lessens. That’s why the killing
on OZ (much like Adam Goldberg’s exit from Saving Private
Ryan) is so resonant. I imagine it’s the same way with Irreversible.
The camera simply documents. It’s up to the viewer to cut
away.

Nick’s
Reply: Yep. One need only watch the nightly news for
a collection of depressing statements and ideas that’d make
Hollywood blush. Or reach for their notepad.

Blockbusters?:

These
letters are a response to this
Leak.

James
Writes: I completely agree with you over the "100
Million Dollar Club" arguement. It’s the saddest thing
to see films spend a shit load on advertising just to breach
that mark and worse still when they don’t deserve it (Charlie’s
Angels 2, SWAT etc). I think the whole thing about it is,
like many things, is that its not new. It would have been
amazing when Jaws broke the barrier back in the 70’s (the
first to do it domestically I think) and when Titianic pulled
in a billion worldwide, but now there’s little a film can
do in terms of box office that’s new. Can you see the first
billion dollar US Box office film for a good few decades?
I guess you guys are gonna have to fuck like rabbits if
you wanna break that one.

And
you say that films should be measured on tickets sold, but
I don’t see that as any better. It’s just the same thing,
it implies a popularity of the film, but does so without
monetary figures, which you could work out pretty quickly
anyway.

Nick’s
Reply: Well, regardless of whether it’s healthy or not,
all films are judged by their popularity. At least at first.
Over time, the reputation and creative impact a film has
will have a much larger foothold in film history. The whole
"Box Office" infatuation does piss me off in that

I often will support a film with my dollars if I love it
and if I want my favorite filmmakers and talents to prosper…
and then I hear about how rarely they ever see a taste of
the profits. The studios seem to bury all of that under
a maelstrom of ink and paper. As far as my "Tickets
Sold" idea, it’s a lot more valuable than simple box
office tallies. Adjusting for inflation’s imperfect but
comparing the number of people who physically SAW Star
Wars in a theater compared to Bad Boys
or Deep Blue Sea seems like something that’d
gauge how much it means in the grand scheme. There are tons
more screens these days, more films released, and more marketing
being done than the 70’s, 80’s or whenever. There are also
a lot more distractions now. I think it evens out, and there
has to be some form of tracking done on the fiscal success
of films, I just figured it’d be better to humanize it.

Aaron
Writes: You’re right, $100 million dollars should
not be blockbuster material, and here’s why. It’s
inaccurate to compare $100 million dollars thirty years
ago to $100 million dollars today because of inflation.
You have to adjust for inflation to see what a $100 million
blockbuster from the 1970s would be worth today.

According
to the website for the Jaws DVD, Jaws was the first film
to pass $100 million and grossed $260 million. The index
number to convert 1975 dollars to 2002 dollars (latest available)
is 0.3824. Divide $100 million by 0.3824 and it comes to
$261,506,276.15 in 2002. If we use Jaws as our benchmark,
then $262 million is the new Mendoza line (good analogy),
and the blockbuster standard is $260 million/0.3824 which
equals $679,916,317.99. So if a movie wants to be a blockbuster
on the level of Jaws, it needs to gross $680 million dollars.
Here endeth the lesson (knew that doctorate would come in
handy sometime).

Personally,
I like your idea of counting movie tickets. But it could
turn out like women’s basketball attendance at my alma
mater where they announced attendance as 1,300, but when
you took out my mates and me in the pep band, actual attendance
was more like 130.

Nick’s
Reply: Look at all that math! I’m a bit aroused. As
far as your women’s basketball team is concerned, I think
you’d have seen a much better turnout had your team not
been called The Fighting Sewn-Up Vaginas.

A
Little of Everything:

Tom
Writes: First off I have been enjoying your website
for a few years now and commend you on the quality of reporting/humor.
It’s the first thing I check when I get into work. Plus
people think I’m a movie genius when I drop knowledge gleamed
from your website.

Secondly
I just wanted to drop a topic off for discussion- Great
performances in sub-par films, like Tim Roth in Planet of
the Apes or agent Smith in the Matrix series. These performances
keep me from hating these flawed films. Just thought it
would be interest to see your take on that angle.

Thirdly
I have been watching film for years and I understand why
you think film has lost it’s fun. You’ve seen too much.
Understand how they are made and what could have been. It
used to be a lot easier for me to
enjoy movies when I hadn’t seen to many of verying quality.
Shit I used

to love Night of the Comet(which spawned my love of Zombie
films) but I
am afraid to watch it now and realize it may be bad. This
seems to
happen ever once in a while when I recommend a movie to
rent to my
friends and realize I have made a mistake that will cause
me to lose
face as "the Movie Guy". Have you done any thing
like that? Tell me a
funny story funny guy.

Lastly
thanks for giving us a venue to ask/complain/congratulate
you on you mastery of the the internet movie website. I
have seen many films(Bubba Hotep, 28 Days) on you recommendations
and bought a couple of books(Zombie Survival Guide, Jennifer
Government), and I hate to read. Hey I even caught you on
Cnn before they cut my cable off.

Nick’s
Reply: As far as your comment on recommending movies,
read the article in this very Leak. As far as catching me
on CNN and the nice comments about the site, thank you!
As far as great performances in subpar films, there are
many. I think American History X would have
been total shit without Edward Norton. I think Dark
Blue would have been a punch to the softness without
Kurt Russell. The same goes for Jack Nicholson and The
Shining. The Silence of the Lambs
without Hopkins [I’m just asking for hate mail with that
one]. Broderick Crawford in All the King’s Men.
It goes on and on. As far as the argument that I/we’ve seen
too many films and know too much about the process to enjoy
films, I have to disagree. Super Troopers.
I watched it twice this weekend, once to show it to a friend
and once in the background while I was working. That film
is not made well at all. Editing. Music. Shot composition.
All of that stuff, not too great. Still. the movie KILLS
me. All of the stuff we learn about the process should allow
us to appreciate amazingly rendered films ever more so and
for those that miss the technical boat, it should allow
us to find the stuff in the margins that make films so special.
Of course, when films like Timeline arrive
and do everything wrong, you can only sigh and go home and
burn a small effigy of Michael Crichton.

J.V.
Writes: You aren’t gonna get off the hook that easy,
my friend. Your response to Randy about the Matrix Trilogy
was quite vague. You believe that the first film has more
of an actual story than the sequels? Prove it. Show us loyal
readers why you feel this way.

And as for suggesting that the Wachowski Bros. should have
viewed sequels they enjoyed in order to make Reloaded and
Revolutions, that’s just plain dumb. I hope you were joking
when you made that comment. I don’t think we want to see
another Empire Strikes Back rehash. We’ve already had too
many of those. C’mon Nick…you’re smarter than this.

And, honestly, how many times have you watched Revolutions?

Nick’s
Reply: I’ve seen The Matrix Revolutions
twice, and I’ll be the guy reviewing the DVD here when it
arrives. As far as the comment about the Wachowski Brothers
watching sequels, I think you’re being ignorant. Everything
that’s wrong about the business of THE SEQUEL in Hollywood
can be found in your local video store. All of the reference
material of WHAT NOT TO DO is right there in stunning Technicolor.
The Matrix took a big bite into the rather
stagnant sci-fi genre when it came out. It gave the audience
[Yes you Asian film purists, I know your argument. They
took a lot of existing ideas and presented them to a larger
audience. I know, Relax and go wire-fu into your fridge
and have a soda.] another franchise to crave. The first
film exploded with ideas and story possibilities and ended
with a majestic superhero moment that made the eventual
sequels something to drool over. While the special effects
got most of the attention, there was fertile territory to
sustain a whole handful of sequels, provided the brothers
played their cards right. There was a certain amount of
philosophy and cyberpunk rumination going on, but it was
hardwired to the story in a way that didn’t bring attention
to itself and allowed the characters to exist and function
without making the whole affair a stop and go affair of
action and discussions. There’s a reason that so many people
lashed out against the sequels. It wasn’t because they weren’t
The Matrix all over again. It wasn’t because
they were so heavily hyped. It wasn’t because the majority
of the fans of The Matrix were simply not
intelligent enough to grasp the "Meaty Text" of
the sequels. It was because The Wachowski’s dropped the
ball in delivering the next 2001: A Space Odyssey
to audiences. They decided to take their cachet and create
something much larger than before. Something that reflected
its place and time like the Kubrick did its. I’m not saying
that they wanted to BE that film, but I do think that they
had aspirations to deliver something deeper and more informed
than what people would haqve expected from them. Their hearts
were in the right place, but I think their filmmaking failed
them. So, instead of picking up where the first film set
the franchise up on a tee to hit out of the park, they tried
to create something that’d be mentioned with the work of
Arthur C. Clarke. Of Neil Stephenson. Of William Gibson.
Of Stephen Hawking. A very literate and significant work
in the guise of an action sequel. That’s my take. I really
don’t think these two sequels are going to be the kind that
people look at in twenty years and say "I remember
that these were misunderstood back in ’03 when they came
out and only now are they considered classics". On
the contrary, I think in twenty years I’ll think back to
the franchise that could have been and then pick up my then
tattered copy of Snow Crash and sip some darjeeling.

Mark
Writes: Hey, love the site think it is great. I love
the way you guys mix news with intelligent witty analyzation,
and you guys are most of the time right on target. But what
I want to ask you guys is why do rappers get so much filmwork?.
I like some rap but most of the guys they get for these
movies are either the hacks or the flavors of the month.And
always for the same roles of the comic relief, or the "gangsta,"
or the grunting tough guy. You could say that because they
are popular and whats hip(or at least what they want us
to believe is hip) that they are in movies.Back when rock
was the dominat form of music(and arguably still is) there
wasnt a oversaturation to this degree. When you really think
about it only Mick Jagger,David Bowie, and Elvis are really
the only rockstars that were in alot of movies and Bowie
and Jagger werent in that many(and in Jaggers case not that
many good ones). But I cant turn on the television with
out seeing every rapper in the business being in every movie
made. I mean there has to be more Black actors out there
than this. How many black actors do you think are looking
for a break who cant find work because all the parts for
them are taken by Redman and Ludacrious. Am I the only one
who thinks this is oversaturation? That they are overused
and rarely used to any affect? Did you see the previews
for "My Babys Daddy" ? I felt like I was getting
impaled byThulsa Doom. Sorry for being wordy. Thanks again
and keep up the good work.

Nick’s
Reply: What about the overrated Jack White in the overrated
Cold Mountain? Jon Bon Jovi’s rather steady
little career? Mike Patton’s upcoming gig in Firecracker?
Gene Simmons? Harry Connick Jr? Mandy Moore? It’s not just
rap stars. It’s rockers, crooners, athletes, poets, and
people who operate movie websites. Movies are about money.
What’s more profitable: Picking some fresh face off an audition
tape or hiring someone with a built-in audience? It makes
sense. Plus, most rappers have been appearing in music videos
that’s make some filmmakers jealous as hell. Do I like it?
Not really. I think that a lot of these guys are a dime
a dozen and personally wouldn’t frown upon a rap star who
went by his name and nothing else. No "Z", no
hyphen. No "Killa". As long as he was good. I
really dug rap music for about half a year, scooping up
all the tapes (CD’s weren’t as common then) I could of Schooly
D, The D.O.C. (who’s still good), Slick Rick, Public Enemy
(who’s still good), NWA, and King Tee. It passed, probably
because I mainlined on it. That said, I wish there were
more people of the quality of Ice Cube or even Ice-T in
films these days. The majority of the guys who segue from
hip-hop to film are forgettable. Who can forget Treach?
Chino XL? 4-Zone? Nas? Cam’Ron? ME! I think the main problem
is the oversaturation of "Gangsta" films. If these
guys are in fact talented, then it’s really hard to rise
up from the chaff of a genre that hit its peak in the 90’s.
So, the crossover virus isn’t limited to rap. It’s widespread.

Tim
Writes: I agree with your take on Equilibrium. I knew
someone who went to a press screening and was raving about
it. I ignored it when it was released, or maybe I forgot.
I think it was in less than 400 theaters in the US. Anyway,
I rented the DVD and was ready to turn it off after ten
minutes. I just wasn’t tracking with it, but my wife (of
all people who hates Science Fiction) was kind of into it
so I stuck with it. About an hour into it I turned to my
wife and said, "This could still be good." By
the end, I was really into it. When it was done I went back
and watched a few scenes again. A few day later, I went
and bought it. It’s a great film that you want to like because
it feels like the underdog (budgetwise, etc.) and though
on the surface it may seem derivative, it actually has quite
an original voice. Plus, I didn’t see the Taye Diggs death
coming at all. I’m rarely surprised by movies, so that was
great. Great performances by Christian Bale (He deserves
Batman and the recognition that will come from it) and Emily
Watson. Seeing what Kurt Wimmer can do with a tiny budget
proves that he could be the next Joe Johnston. I know I’m
in the minority when I admit that I liked "Sphere,"
but I’m not too concerned. I thought Kurt did a great job
on the script by sticking to what worked from the book and
streamlining it for film. "Sphere" is one of my
favorite Crichton books, and the movie is probably the most
faithful film adaptation of a Crichton book to date. Of
course, I didn’t see Timeline, and it doesn’t look like
anyone else did either. I’ll be interested to see Kurt’s
next project.

Well that’s it. No swear words, no clever pop-culture analogies,
etc. I do check the site everyday, and I enjoy the daily
P&V. I’m also a big fan of "If CHUD Ran the Movies"
section. Armed with an insane amount of film knowledge,
time, and Photoshop, who knows what damage can be done.

One
more thing, all I here is that The Rock is the next Arnold
Schwartzenegger? What is your opinion? I personally think
he is trying to avoid that route by doing movies like "Be
Coll" and "Walking Tall."

Nick’s
Reply: I think Sphere was hurt by The
Abyss. While not the same story, the similar subject
matter resulted in the Cameron film stealing the thunder
of the Crichton adaptation. On top of that, I thought Sphere
was about as memorable as a meal at Waffle House. The book
was great, but the film was too little too late. I’m sorry,
but I had to to laugh at the "Next Joe Johnston"
comment. That’s a compliment? To me that’s like saying a
baseball prospect might be the next Rob Deer and hit thirty
homeruns while batting .198 and striking out 130 times.
I think if Kurt Wimmer had been told he might eventually
be the next Joe Johnston before Equilibrium
wa