BUY IT AT AMAZON: CLICK HERE!
STUDIO: Universal
MSRP: $22.98
RATED: R
RUNNING TIME: 133 Minutes
SPECIAL FEATURES:
• Making of documentary
• Introduction of the film by Dan Aykroyd
• A Day on the Blues Brothers tour
• Transporting the music documentary
• Remembering John
• Musical Highlights

Growing up as a kid in Chicago there was only one movie that seemed to define the city –The Blues Brothers. I was only 6 when the Blues Brothers came out, but I knew of its existence. It dominated the conversation of adults and the lucky kids that had gotten to see it during its theatrical release (I was not one of those kids).

I remember when I did finally see the movie. I was still a kid living in Chicago and the movie was on VHS. I remember my sisters and me begging our parents to let us watch it. They did their parental research and discovered it was rated R solely for language. And, as John Landis and Devin chatted during their interview (here) – there isn’t anything in there you wouldn’t let an 8 year old see.

Unless that 8 year old was me.

I remember at one point my dad paused the movie, my sister needed to use the bathroom. During the unscheduled break, my mom asked me to go get her a Coke from the kitchen. My response (in my new lexicon the movie had granted me) was “Fuck you, bitch.”

The only thing I really remember about the next few years of my life is that I loved that f’n movie.

Scene from Ray 2: Collateral Ray.

The Flick

Jake and Elwood are icons. Plain and simple. They are giants that are larger than life. What keeps these characters appealing after 25 years? For the most part, people could care less about Noah – so why do we still care about Jake and Elwood’s “mission from God”?

If you don’t know what this film is about… you probably shouldn’t be reading this site. It is the best musical/comedy/car chase movie you’ll ever see. In a nutshell – the brothers try and unite their band to raise money to save an orphanage.

As I watched the movie this time I was trying to figure out what it is about it that makes it work. What I noticed was that the movie plays with size a lot (and I’m not talking about Aretha Franklin’s ass). It is size, and how the movie deals with it, that makes this movie.

“It’s a shame John. I knew you wanted to come back as Brad Pitt in the afterlife."

John Landis says something similar on the documentary included with this release. He pinpoints one scene where Jake and Elwood are standing in front of this huge door. I think the issue of size, however, goes far beyond some of the shots that Landis used.

The characters are larger than life and so is everything about the movie. At its center are Jake and Elwood – John Belushi and Dan Aykroyd. They are perfect in the roles. Belushi is funny whether silent (like when he takes off the sunglasses to look at Carrie Fisher) or boisterous (doing cartwheels down the church after seeing The Light) and Aykroyd is at his understated best (checking out toaster ovens in the pawn shop before Ray Charles comes out).

They are the coolest cats in room every time, and they know it. Many actors couldn’t pull this over-the-top audacity and sincerity off (after all, even if they do something bad you feel for them – they are on a mission from God). It doesn’t matter if they are ordering lunch (four fried chickens and a coke for Jake and dry, white toast for Elwood), trying to buy children at an upscale restaurant (“How much for your women? The little girl, how much for the little girl?”) or getting on stage for the first time after they’ve united the band. The characters are always larger than life.

Five minutes later, Steven’s sandwich had seen things no sandwich should ever have to see.

It isn’t just the characters that are overblown; everything is amplified in ways that most films don’t exaggerate. It isn’t just the plot that’s exaggerated, but everything about it. However, it is important to note, that no matter how overblown the situations get, the characters are still the heart of it. Landis doesn’t demean his characters for a bigger joke. He creates the big joke and then makes the characters bigger still.

For instance, even by 1980, the car chase had become somewhat clichéd. That’s a problem when the movie you are shooting calls for two colossal car chases.

This man is ready. He better be ready to, be ready to jump. Down on Jump Street.

The first chase needed to be “bigger” than anything the audience had ever seen. However, this posed a problem – by the time the 80s had rolled around, audiences had seen car chases for years in every shape and size. The car chase was also a TV plot device then too. How do you make it big enough that people take notice and don’t use the time as a bathroom break?

You stage it inside of a Mall. Instantly memorable and “bigger” than any other car chase the audience had seen. And, it was funnier than hell. (Also, was Landis commentating on the consumer culture that would soon dominate the 80s? Probably not.)

Landis keeps the characters fundamentally involved, however. He doesn’t leave his characters to focus on the mayhem. He doesn’t only show reaction shots of Jake and Elwood (or their stunt doubles through dirty glass). He constantly goes back to the brothers as they banter and chat and destroy the mall.

That presents a new challenge by the end of the movie. Another chase scene is due and you can’t call upon a gimmick two chases in a row. How do you make this one even bigger and maintain the emphasis on the lead duo? You increase the size of the chasers and their relation to the principles.

The brothers aren’t just being chased by a foe. No. They aren’t being chased just by a sole cop. No. They’re being chased by the entire City of Chicago police force. But, that’s not it. They are also being chased by a jilted bride who’s trying to kill them. And a country band from Nashville. And Illinois Nazis.

In hindsight, Drivers Education Day at the Helen Keller School for the Blind was not the best of ideas.

Now that’s a chase. It seems that, quite literally, everyone is after them because so many people are. Better yet – it makes sense that all these groups are chasing them. The movie’s plot weaves the story together so well that the fact that Illinois Nazis want them dead just seems normal.

Aykroyd and Landis deserve special praise for the script work. In this day and age it is hard to remember that Aykroyd was once a really funny guy. His creation of the script and bringing these characters to life is a lot of fun to watch. Landis gives him special props in the documentary too. To think, that’s the same guy who now stars in dreg like Christmas with the Kranks.

Another thing the script does so well is not become too campy. It is big and slapsticky through and through and it never tries to be anything different. It could easily have teetered out of control into a deranged, over-the-top comedy (ala the Naked Gun). Now, I have nothing against the Naked Gun. I think it is hysterical in its own right. But its style of humor wouldn’t play well with the Blues Brothers.

For instance – in the beginning there is a scene with Frank Oz in the Prison (Oz… prison… this movie was so ahead of its time). Oz is giving Jake back his belongings as Jake is released. Among the items is a used condom. The scene is sold by Oz and his facial expressions – as well as the gag of the used condom. A different movie may have pandered by going too far with the joke. The condom may have still been wet or a “slushy” sound effect could have been added when Oz pulled it out.

“Hmmm…wrinkly and a bit green…this gives me an idea for a Star Wars character."

However, the two styles are closely related. Had the Blues Brother pushed their jokes a bit more – become outrageously huge – it would have wound up like the Naked Gun. And the result wouldn’t have been nearly as much fun.

The result also would have damaged the characters the movie builds up so well. Had the jokes become over the top (instead of just the characters) the jokes would have taken center stage. The characters would have been relegated to back up. That would have destroyed the inherent icon-ness of the characters. The movie would have suffered (in the long run) both ways.

Take a trip back to “Sweet Home, Chicago” and watch this again. The movie holds up well and you may find yourself cussing out your parents all over again.

9 out of 10

Joey, have you ever been to a Roman bath?

The Look

The movie looks like the suits Jake and Elwood wear when they wake up. Perfectly pressed and looking stylish. And, you wouldn’t expect it.

The movie looks great for 25 years old. Universal obviously found a good source for the transfer material. Even the new added scenes look great and blend into the movie perfectly.

9 out of 10

The Noise

A musical better have good sound. Particularly one that boasts the legendary performances that are in the Blues Brothers. The sound doesn’t disappoint. The musical sequences contain performances by Cab Calloway, Aretha Franklin, James Brown, Ray Charles, John Lee Hooker and, of course, the “good ole Blues Brothers band, from Chicago.”

The film is presented in Dolby Digital 5.1 (extended cut. The theatrical cut is in Dolby 2.0). The songs come through fantastic and will have you swaying on your sofa. Also, it does not run into the technical problem of the dialogue being drowned out or at a different level as the music. The witty banter and classic lines the actors deliver come through perfectly.

9 out of 10

With Batman out of town, city officials have no choice but to light the Blues Signal!

The Goodies

This disc comes stacked with extras. Some of the extras are apparently the same as the extras that appeared on the 20^th Anniversary edition. I don’t have that version, so (for the rating below) I’m approaching them all as new (to me).

– Theatrical and Extended cuts of the film. Both sides of the disc come with a version of the film. One side as the theatrical cut and the other side has the longer extended version. Is there anything in the extended version that’s overly impressive? Not really. If you are a die hard fan, you’ll want to see the footage. Beyond that, it is passable – nothing that really brings anything new to the film.

– Making Of documentary. Landis has mentioned that this documentary was made for the 20^th Anniversary. I can see why they include it again – it’s fantastic. It is a series of interviews spliced together on a variety of topics relating to the movie. Everyone tells interesting anecdotes about the making of the movie. It is really interesting to hear some of the tales Landis tells about the logistical hassles they encountered. They did the hard way what is done today with CGI and camera tricks. His stories about actually dropping a car from the air to film its fall and the stunt drivers really driving 100+ on Wacker Drive

– Remembering John. This feels like more of the same after the Making of documentary. It is also interviews with the cast (feels like they even pulled from the same stock footage at times) and spliced together. A nice piece, but it could have been encompassed above just as well.

– Introduction of the film. This is really bad. I don’t get the film “introduction.” It was just Aykroyd saying “I hope you like it.” It really served no point. The funny thing was it looked like he didn’t know if he should be serious or make jokes. So, he does the entire thing straight while seemingly holding down a joke or two. It comes off very odd.

– Musical Highlights. If there’s a scene from the movie with singing, it is pretty much repeated here.

– Blues Brothers on Stage. This was a great extra to include on the disc. It was something different, but yet in tune with the movie. Plus, I’ve always wanted to see the Blues Brothers on stage. I think the show would be a blast. After seeing the 15 minutes or so included on this disk, however, I’m no longer too sure. It came across as a poser (Jim Belushi) and an old guy (Aykroyd) trying to act hip. I’m sure I’d still go in a second, if given the chance, but my enthusiasm level definitely dipped a bit.

– Transporting the Music. This documentary talks about the music and the musicians that made the Blues Brothers. Good stuff.

9.5 out of 10

The Artwork

This is almost perfect. This is one of the few times I think having only an actor or two on the cover and more or less nothing else is needed. Jake and Elwood (in complete garb – sunglasses, hats and suits) need to be front and center, and they are.

9 out of 10

Despite the involvement of the Broken Lizard guys, I haven’t bothered to see the Dukes of Hazzard movie yet (Devin was brutally bounced off the General Lee’s hood HERE), but I know it’s made a fair amount of legal tender.

Speaking of legal and tender, no doubt part of the movie’s success is due to the magnificent rack of Jessica Simpson, who has apparently become spokesperson for all things Duke.  It seems that Simpson recently told England’s Sky News (where all the best movie news comes from) that the inevitable sequel could bring hillbilly appeal to the UK, with the Duke boys potentially peeling around London in their orange Charger tooting their Dixie horn and blowing up stuff proper with dynamite arrows.  And can you just imagine what hilarity will ensue when they meet those Buckingham Palace guards?  The mind reels.

Besides the fact that a similar culture clash was recently done in Shanghai Knights, having two moonshine-loving yokels travel to England makes about as much sense as Jessica Simpson having a successful singing career.  And while I’m certain there’s little actual merit to her remarks regarding the direction of the Dukes franchise, it was a good excuse for me to post a picture of Jessica Simpson.

Like this one:

Transporter 2 may be the most gleefully
unrealistic action film in the past decade. It also may be one of the most fun,
something that tells me that audiences might have room in their hearts for both
the new wave of postmodern gritty scaled down crowd pleasers as well as the
carefree 1980’s style where bullets could be dodged and people could walk away
from massive explosions. The knowing coolness and proficiency of today’s Bourne-again love for action married to
the winking playfulness of Remo Williams, now THAT is an idea I can get behind and this film straddles the line between styles like a champion.

Though
the first film wasn’t a major hit theatrically, it did well [spurred on by
CHUD.com’s glowing pullquote?] and was a big success on video and though films
of that ilk rarely get theatrical sequels, this one arrives with swagger and
the assumption that everyone is not only aware of who Jason Statham’s Frank
Martin is but that they’ve been waiting for his return like some latter day
action Jesus Christ.

Of
course, I have been anxiously awaiting his return with such zeal so the trip
wasn’t too much a stretch.

The
premise for this film is so thin that Lane Bryant patrons are picketing against
it. Frank Martin is a driver. Employing Swiss precision to his work and
treating his car like the true love of his life, he is the picture of
efficiency and doesn’t like when other people get in his way. He also has a
little of the Jackie Chan bloodline in him as he hates fighting with just his
hands when he can showcase his skills as a black belt in oil-fu, hose-fu, and
whatever other household items he can add the “fu” suffix to. In fact, Martin’s
car is his katana. Using it as an extension of himself, the action hero does
stuff with his ride that harkens back to when boys are young and treating their
Matchbox cars like little wheeled spaceships defying physics and reality as it
suited their needs.

You’ve
heard the term “Car Porn”? This is the maturing of that fetish into a mutual loving
relationship. I wouldn’t be surprised if Transporter 3 is pitched as “The Love Bug meets The Last Tango in Paris”. There’s a
moment, one I won’t spoil, where Mr. Statham has to deal with a bomb attached
to his car, the results of which had the audience I saw the film applauding.
After a moment like that a viewer’s brain either kickstarts and they can’t
enjoy the film or they realize that brains are a useless commodity in the
theater and have a blast.

I had a
blast.

The crux
of Martin’s plight this time centers around is a small boy. No, there’s isn’t a
Powder lawsuit in Statham’s future
but rather a dilemma where he gave his word and then has to destroy many things
to keep it. The son of a politician [Matthew Modine, the wrong actor for a film
like this] is kidnapped on Martin’s watch and there’s some pointless
gobbedlygook about a virus and jibberjabber about some drug kingpins protecting
their interest resulting in Martin doing what he does best. And what he does is
quite pretty. One of the joys of The Transporter was the closed
quarters combat where the combination of Stathams’s athleticism and Cory Yuen’s
choreography was allowed to flourish. It was rough around the edges as a film,
had weird music, and was uneven but it created a lovely Euro playground. With this film,
Yuen is simply the choreographer and the more polished Louis [Danny the Dog/Unleashed] Leterrier is behind the lens and the result is a seriously glossy and polished movie. Aside from some CGI moments where the film shows its smaller origins [it’s another of Luc Besson’s productions, and honestly I love the guy more as a producer than a director], it is a big league action film and as fun and aggressive as Bad Boys 2 but nowhere near as bloated.

If you like cool, stoic indestructible heroes and crave ludicrously over the top action, this is the film for you. If you love villains who love being villains so much it hurts, this is the film for you. If you love the direct to video action flicks and wish they had some quality people working on them and theatrical dollars, this is the film for you. If you like shiny, fast cars and the thrill of the chase, this is the film for you.

Transporter 2 is dumber than a bucket of lotion and proud of it. Pay the cashier this weekend whatever they’re asking for, grab a huge bucket of popcorn and tell the diet soda to piss off and drink the regular stuff. You deserve it, because this movie is just plain fun and the perfect way to cap a scattershot summer and to help forget that it’s going to cost you $55 to fill your gas tank up afterwards for your own Staham-inspired drive home.

7.7 out of 10

It’s already been shooting for a while now, but Tom Cruise’s next international blockbuster Mission: Impossible 3 is still adding players to its main cast.

Angular actor Billy Crudup, who is mystifyingly not a major star, has joined the flick, currently being shot by Alias architect JJ Abrams.  It’s unknown whether Crudup will be an IMF agent or a villain, or if it’s a significant or minor role, since nobody even really knows what the movie’s about (and we probably still won’t after we see it if the previous films are any indication) other than it has Tom and his team (but mostly Tom) trying to stop Philip Seymour Hoffman, a task that apparently will take them to a number of exotic European locales.

Crudup is currently working with another ridiculously high-profile cast on The Good Shepherd (that one has Matt Damon, Robert DeNiro, Angelina Jolie and Alec Baldwin) before he’ll reunite with Lester Bangs and join Ving Rhames, Laurence Fishburne, Keri Russell, Jonathan Rhys Meyers, Michelle Monaghan and Maggie Q on the list of people whose presence will be suppressed by the exaggerated heroics of Cruise.

Be a golden god on our message boards!

When Ben Stiller and Jim Carrey get into a mug-a-thon, will anyone survive? We will find out as it looks like the two will be co-starring in Used Men, a futuristic comedy directed by Meet the Director Jay Roach.

Here’s the concept – it’s the future. Men are extinct and women rule the world. Carrey and Stiller are clones who have been bred to be sex toys, but they find themselves obsolete because new models with better listening skills are on the market. Together they go on the run, trying to find the mythical Mantopia.

What’s perhaps most impressive about the concept, which Stiller and Roach have been kicking around for years, is how much it sounds like a Saturday Night Live sketch making fun of 1970s high concept social issue sci fi movies. It would be one of those skits that just goes on too long.

It feels like it’s been a while since Carrey’s been in a comedy. Same with Ben Stiller (oh, snap!). The two of them together frighten me – neither have ever met a joke that was too broad, a caricature that was too lazy or a joke that was too easy for them. It’s now been four years since Stiller starred (starred, not appeared) in a movie I actually liked enough to get on DVD. And this doesn’t sound to me like it’s going to break that cycle.

Carrey, who has actually made a couple of movies that I like lately, was the force that got this film someplace. When he became interested the movie suddenly gained a bunch of forward momentum. Now if it could gain a better premise.

Please make another good movie on our message board.

Somebody slow Terence Malick down! He’s just finishing up post on his last film, The New World, and he’s already getting ready for his next one! Don’t you want to take a decade there, buddy?

The new movie will be called The Tree of Life, and as of now it looks like Terry liked his New World star Colin Farrell so much that he’s bringing him back for the next round. The idea of the quiet, nature-loving recluse filmmaker hanging out with the drunken Irish partyboy is, honestly, just too awesome. It’s like a sitcom waiting to happen.

The story of The Tree of Life is being kept a secret, but it is known that some of the movie will be shot in India. Pre-production would begin in January, with Malick not just directing but also writing.

If this pans out it’s an amazing boost for Farrell. The guy’s famous and keeps making movies, but it seems like no one sees them. I have a sinking suspicion that no matter what the quality of The New World is, it’s not going to be a blockbuster (it probably also won’t bomb like Alexander), so it’s good that he has a major filmmaker – who can weather a less than stellar showing for the film – on his side.

Kill people with Spacek on our message board!

Roadhouse 2: Last Call is, apparently, really happening. It feels like a fever dream, but you have to remember that I live in a town where there’s an off-Broadway Roadhouse: The Musical. Anything can happen, people.

Somehow it seems that Roadhouse 2 can’t secure Patrick Swayze, who seemed poised to return to the screen after Donnie Darko, to return as Dalton. Guess playing a pedo wasn’t as good a career move as we all thought. Instead Treat Williams will be playing Nate Tannen, Dalton’s brother, who is having trouble with some local goons. He is either killed or left for dead by these guys and Shane, Dalton’s son, shows up to bring the ruckus.

Director Scott Ziehl will be bringing his sequel knowledge to this one – he directed Cruel Intentions 3.

In a time when the supposedly liberal media just rolls over and accepts everything that the current administration tells them, it’s almost impossible to imagine someone with the balls of Edward R Murrow going on the air and specifically denouncing the witch hunt tactics of Senator Joe McCarthy.

It’s an amazing story, and now it’s a movie – the second directorial effort from George Clooney. David Strathairn stars as the legendary newsman and Clooney is his producer Fred Friendly. The movie is called Good Night, and Good Luck, and I have to tell you that the buzz is HUGE. I had to beg to get into a screening that is happening tonight (I won’t be able to review it yet, but I’ll drop hints!), and the trailer that just came out should tell you why.

You have to give Clooney props for making his film in black and white. As if a drama about a newsman taking on a senator in the 50s wasn’t a tough enough sell, he removes the color. But it looks great. And the film looks like it’s not going to shy away from tackling parallels between America today and the America that shook under the gaze of the House UnAmerican Activities Committee.

Click here to check out the trailer. The film opens in limited release on October 7, after premiering at the New York Film Festival.

Get blacklisted like a real man on our message board!

Don’t tell me you didn’t notice that Joe Pesci has been gone from movie screens since 1998’s Lethal Weapon 4. And hey, being in that movie would have sent me into hiding as well. But it looked like he was done with acting, especially after all those bribes to the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences ended up in the wrong hands and Tomei got the Oscar.

But now he’s coming back, playing a small role in The Good Shepherd, a movie about the early days of the CIA. Apparently buddy Robert DeNiro has coaxed him out of hiding, perhaps using a small piece of chicken or a Pounce! Cube, which is what I do when one of my cats is hiding.

Matt Damon will be playing James Wilson, a character based on the fascinating real life guy James Jesus Angleton, and we’ll follow him from a membership in Skull & Bones through OSS and into the founding of the CIA. DeNiro will be Bill Sullivan, the General who brought Wilson in to the OSS. Pesci will have a small role – a mob boss named Palmi. It’s possible that this will play into how the OSS teamed with the mob to protect American docks from sabotage. Or maybe it will be somehow tied in to the CIA’s partnership with the mob to get rid of Castro.

Team up to kill Kennedy on our message board!