My Best Director of the 21st Century (or shall we call it decade?) debate

I love Christopher Nolan.

The guy has never made a bad film. Even his weakest piece of work, Insomnia, which Justin failed to mention, was still a very good flick that launched Nolan into the world of studio pictures. Plus it grossed a respectable $67 million dollars, which actually ranks it as the 780th highest grossing movie ever. Sure, Nolan now makes $67 million in a weekend, but for your first studio picture, a $67 million gross is not bad.

Memento, Batman Begins, The Prestige, The Dark Knight and Inception are some of my favorite movies. If Nolan keeps up this pace, we'll be talking about him as one of the greatest directors ever - he might already be on the fringe of that discussion even with his brief resume. His ability to make high-concept films box office successes (even if two of them came in the form of a popular comic book franchise adaptation) is quite remarkable.

But I'm not ready to call him the best director of the 21st Century just yet. (Although I'm a lot closer to saying it after seeing Inception. Justin and I actually started this debate before the movie released.)

For me, I still think it is Martin Scorsese. He's made four theatrical movies, a documentary, a concert film/documentary, and a short film. Of the four theatrical films (what the focus of this debate is really on), three have been nominated for Best Picture: Gangs of New York, The Aviator, and The Departed. The Departed won the award, and is one of the top films produced since 2000. Gangs of New York could have easily won - Chicago won that year, and The Aviator was right in the mix, losing out to Million Dollar Baby.

And to Justin, have you seen Shine A Light? Shine A Light documents a Rolling Stones concert with some interviews mixed in. For what it is, it's pretty impressive. I've seen a lot of concert DVDs (they are pretty much all my father watches), and Shine A Light is very, very well done. And while it frustrates me a little bit to see a talent like Scorsese do things other than theatrical films, he's still damn good at the other stuff.

Added to Scorsese's post-1999 resume is Shutter Island, a film I personally loved. It could continue Scorsese's run of Best Picture nominations with the field now expanded to 10, but it isn't a serious contender. Still a great movie to me.

I was kind of an Eastwood hater from the director side of things until I finally sat down and watched Mystic River. That movie is incredible. His resume since the turn of the century is phenomenal, and in many circles people would probably call him the best of the 21st Century.

A couple of other names to take a closer look at for this title.

1) Steven Spielberg. While his best work was probably done in the 1990s with films like Schindler's List, Saving Private Ryan, Jurassic Park and even Hook - the re-imagining of Peter Pan - or in the 1980s with the first three Indiana Jones films, and E.T., Spielberg still put out some great films since 2000.

Munich, Catch Me If You Can, and Minority Report are all phenomenal films. If you don't believe me on Minority Report, go back and watch it again. I watched it about three months ago for the first time since it was in theaters and I was blown away. It is a spectacular film.

Even two of his critically panned films - War of the Worlds and Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull - were still commercial blockbusters and further demonstrated Spielberg's ability to work with a vast amount of special effects in a film.

2) Lee Unkrich. I know what you just said....who?!?!?! Nolan, Scorsese, Eastwood, Spielberg, Unkrich?

Well, have you ever heard of Monsters, Inc., Finding Nemo and Toy Story 3? This guy directed those animated gems out of Pixar Studios. Sure it is a lot different because they are animated movies and none of us civilians are really sure what the directoral process is like in an animated film, but the director is still responsible for the overall vision of a film, even if it is animated. And those three films are all impressive in their visions.

Just give him some slight consideration for this title. And there looks like there could be a strong chance of Toy Story 3 being named the Best Picture of 2010.

3) Ron Howard. Howard has a great mix of commercial and critical successes since 2000. He has How the Grinch Stole Christmas, The DaVinci Code and Angels and Demons on the commercial end of things; and A Beautiful Mind, Cinderella Man and Frost/Nixon on the critical end of things.

His other film since 2000 is 2003's The Missing, which I haven't seen, and haven't heard much about.

That is an impressive list of films, and if you haven't seen Frost/Nixon, check it out. It's a great motion picture.

4)Ridley Scott. Scott has put out Gladiator, Black Hawk Down, Matchstick Men and American Gangster. All great films to me, even though I haven't seen all of Black Hawk Down yet - but some movies you just know are good from the bits you catch on TV.

He also put out Hannibal, Kingdom of Heaven, A Good Year, Body of Lies and Robin Hood.

Scott had the un-envied task of taking on Hannibal. How can you live up to or surpass Silence of the Lambs when there was as long a break as there was between films? Plus, if you've ever read Thomas Harris' novels, Hannibal is a much tougher subject matter to tackle. Silence of the Lambs reads like a screenplay, and it checks in under 400 pages in paperback form. Hannibal is a 562-page monster that takes you all over the world and has entire chapters take place inside Hannibal Lecter's mind. I would not want to be the one responsible for adapting that story.

The only other film of this second list I saw was Body of Lies, which I thoroughly enjoyed. Scott obviously deserves to be in the discussion.

5) Quentin Tarantino. I think he must be mentioned sheerly for the genius of Inglorious Basterds. I didn't see that movie until after the Academy Awards were announced, and I was stunned it wasn't recognized for more than Christoph Waltz's turn as Hanz Landa.

Sure people say Tarantino rips off other directors. I've never seen the work they say is ripped off so I don't know how accurate that is. I know it isn't the dialogue in his films, which is still the most original dialogue being produced in Hollywood. The Kill Bill films are great too, not quite on the same level as Basterds, though. My only wish with Tarantino is that he would work a little more, but I understand the difficulties in writing and directing everything you do.

Best Director of the 21st Century

Ok so it has been way too long since anyone has wrote anything on this blog.  But that's gonna change, because after Bryan bitched me out for not writing anything, I am gonna pass on that bitching to Jet and make him write something too.  So with that in mind, I figured the best thing to do was to start with a little friendly debate....

When you think of the best director of our generation, who comes to mind? Spielberg? Scorsese? Tarantino? Eastwood? Nolan? Mendes? Cohen Brothers? Aronofsky? McG? Haha well, maybe not the last one.  And maybe not Tarantino either, since personally I think he is a hack director who came to fame through ripping off other directors' works.  But I suppose most directors do this at some time or another, right?

I propose that of the directors that have been major players (meaning consistently make great films) since 2000 (we can debate greatest director of all time another day!), Christopher Nolan is the one director who has consistently shown he can bridge the gap between commercial success without selling out in areas of originality and creativity (e.g. Inception). Since 2000, Nolan has racked up an impressive resume of movies, including Memento (2000), Batman Begins (2005), The Prestige (2006), The Dark Knight (2008), and of course his aforementioned masterpiece Inception (2010). 

Who else has a resume of such magnitude in this century? One might say Scorsese, but personally I think that although he has produced some great films (e.g. The Departed), I think movies like Shine a Light support my assumption that Scorsese is not the director of the century.

Perhaps Eastwood? Well, of the ones I listed, I think that Eastwood could have a run for director of the century, with movies such as Mystic River (2003), Million Dollar Baby (2004), Flags of Our Fathers (2006), Letters from Iwo Jima (2006), Changeling (2008), Gran Torino (2008), and Invictus (2010).  Although not all of these movies are the most influential of movies as perhaps Christopher Nolan's films, I would argue that these movies are monumental achievements in filmmaking.  For a director like Clint, aka Dirty Harry, to make a movie such as Letters from Iwo Jima, a film entirely in another language, and offered as another side to the bloody WWII story, is something that many filmmakers would not have the courage to do.  Even Mystic River, a movie that is arguably one of the most emotional and intense movies around, has to be recognized as a stroke of genius by Eastwood. 

Who is the best of the 21st century?  I look forward to your suggestions and comments.

1-2-3.... DEBATE!!

Batman 3 Release Date Announced!

Since Jet is dropping the ball on this (even though he was the one who informed me of this), I figured it best that the four faithful readers of this blog actually know a very exciting bit of info.  As the title implies, Christopher Nolan is up to direct a new Batman movie, and guess what? It has been tentatively set for July 20, 2012.  Like me, Jet is a huge Batman fan too, and I know he'd want you to know this very exciting bit of news!

Robin Hood=New Gladiator??

The new Robin Hood movie looks awesome.  FINALLY. We finally have something more to add to the Robin Hood franchise other than the Kevin Costner version (which is not necessarily bad, but I am sick of hearing Bryan Adams sing his song in that movie). Anyway, back to the point.  Ridley Scott and Russell Crowe.  This director/actor combo you may remember from the monumental success that was Gladiator (2000), which was too great, albeit if you suspended historical accuracy of the Roman Empire.

Robin Hood looks like it is taking the story of Robin Hood and making it less of a Middle Age/Crusade myth and more of a realistic twist to how he became the man who stole from the rich and gave to the poor.  For starters, he didn't return from the Middle East fighting the Crusades, as the story would have led us to believe.  Instead, he returns from fighting the French and finds Maid Marian (played by Cate Blanchett) as a widow among other unfortunate citizens of a little village called Nottingham.  I feel that this movie will bring a fresher, more realistic, and grittier side to the Robin Hood saga, which frankly I think it is about time for that. 

Gladiator was made in 2000.  It is now 2010 and ten years later.  Could potentially be the new Gladiator?

Tony Stark and The Avengers: As Awesome as it Seems?

Welp folks, it looks like it's that time of the year again.  The time of year when all the blockbuster movies come out of their winter hibernation and dazzle us over the summer months.  One of these, undoubtedly seen and heard about by just about everyone, is Iron Man 2.  A quick preface on the buzz behind IM2 says that there is already Oscar rumors going around, and that this movie actually puts more of the back story to the Tony Stark mystery.  Where did he come from? What is he REALLY like? Sure, we all know he is filthy rich and incredibly smart, but what else do we know?  Nevertheless, this second movie opens up a darker side to Stark, and with Robert Downey, Jr. reprising his role I have high hopes for this sequel.  Not only do the effects and story not disappoint, but the acting (yes, you heard right, ACTING) in this movie is what makes it amazing.  From the buzz I have heard, this is going to be right up there with the all time greats in superhero movies. 

But for nowwwww... what is this I hear about a little movie called The Avengers?  Yes, from the Hollywood rumor mill comes speculation that the new Avenger movie, tentatively set to be released in 2012, will include the likes of Tony Stark (Robert Downey, Jr.), Bruce Banner (Edward Norton), Nick Fury (Sam Jackson) and the newly appointed Captain America (Chris Evans).  To explain more on the last character, there is a little movie coming out in 2011 that features the new Captain America in The First Avenger: Captain America.  There is even a rumor that the last clip after the credits of Iron Man 2 could even see a first glimpse into the look of Captain America, or even the rest of the Avengers. 

Ok, but you may be wondering how many of these powerhouse franchises could come together and make a coherent story.  Apparently, there is another rumor that Hulk (Bruce Banner) is actually one of the bad guys.  How can you beat Hulk?  This movie is getting me very excited, and I am also grateful to the likes of Christopher Nolan who actually took the time to validate quality superhero movies with The Dark Knight.  Now it seems like everyone wants a piece of the action, and I don't blame them. 

Check back for more updates!

Kick Ass

How is it possible to top superhero movies that have come out recently with the likes of Dark Knight, Spiderman trilogy (somewhat bad but still a money maker), and yeah I'll even put in Avatar.  Well, it doesn't do that, but the truth is, it wasn't trying to.  I felt this movie was more of a mix between Watchmen and Zombieland.  Weird combo right? Yeah, the truth is, even a day after seeing it I still am trying to figure out the central theme of the movie.  Was it a comedy? Was it an action movie? Was it an overly dramatic sentimental piece about father and daughter? To be honest, this movie tries to be all of these, and yet, it tries to be none of these in the way it is depicted.  You may be asking, "But Justin, how is this possible?" Well I'll feed you baby birds.  The fact is that this movie tries to revamp the style of superhero movies in a geeky perspective.  It poses the question of what would come of a normal comic book nerd putting on a scuba suit who tried to fight crime in his spare time.  Well in the words of Nicholas Cage, his name should be more like "Ass-Kick" than "Kick-Ass." To find out why, you will need to see the movie.

This movie really does have unpredictable parts, and after hearing about the controversial nature of the film while being made (children smoking, cussing, 10 year old girls killing people), I knew I at least was in for something somewhat original.  Well, points for originality, that's for sure.  Seeing the daughter of Nicholas Cage's character Big Daddy, the pint-size "Hit Girl" literally makes you think of something out of Jackie Chan's Hong Kong days.  It is surreal, unexpected, and absolutely entertaining.  "Big Daddy" played by none other than the seemingly desperate for roles Nick Cage, actually does a great job as a loner father hell-bent on revenge but who immerses his daughter in the darkness of revenge as well. Cage also does a great job as a really creepy father who seems (and looks) like a serial killer, with his plaid shirts and cardigans, and creepy 70's mustache.  But the fact of the matter is: it works.

Move on to D'Amico.  The villain.  The bad guy.  Mark Strong, after making his name in the terrific Sherlock Holmes (see Jet's earlier posts), shows his versatility in this movie as a tough New York drug-dealer (who did a fantastic job on the accent, hard to believe he's a Brit).  His son, the nerdy "McLovin" from the movie Superbad, shows his layers as the lonely geeky son of this powerful guy who just wants to be included and be an equal in his father's eyes.  Meet "Red Mist." The costume alone is hilarious.

Move on to the relationship between the lovely Lyndsey Fonseca (who played the love interest in Hot Tub Time Machine), who plays the love interest here as Katie Demeaux, and Kick-Ass.  Kick-Ass, or Dave, has a huge crush on Katie, but like most nerds, thinks she's way out of his league.  Not until a certain fateful day however, when Katie approaches him and asks him to coffee.  The reasoning is absolutely hilarious, and I am not gonna spill here.

All in all, this movie was entertaining.  Repeat ENTERTAINING.  But I agree with my friend when she said, "One second it is trying to be funny and hilarious, and the next is really serious and overly melodramatic."  This is the only downfall of the movie in my opinion.  It's like the levels of comedy and hilarity come in waves, with serious dark aspects of the movie (sometimes reminding me of the darkness of the Dark Knight even at times) filling in the gaps.  Overall, funny movie with a refreshing look on the superhero movie, but just a forewarning, do NOT take any children to see this.  I saw a parent or two take their kid out of the theater during the movie.  It is raunchy, very gory, and action packed. See it just to see "Hit-Girl" annihilate like 30 guys.  That's more than worth it.  My main question is, why weren't we seeing a movie entitled "Hit-Girl"? Now she was the one who kicked ass.

7.8/10.

Bond 23's indefinite delay

Well, MGM is in some financial trouble and looking to sell itself.

MGM owns the rights to make James Bond movies.

Therefore, Bond 23 (the yet to be made, yet to be titled new James Bond film) is on hold indefinitely according to this Reuters article.

Don't get too worried Bond fans (especially you, Justin). Bond 23 will happen. Why? Because it's James Bond. They have made 22 other films about the character. Can you name another character that has starred in 22 films? I'll wait.

The answer is no, you can't.

James Bond isn't going away. He's just going to be put on hold for a little while.

Unfortunately, a movie we thought we might see in 2011 might not show up until 2013.

Holmes and Warner Brothers Blu-Ray

Watched Sherlock Holmes for the first time last night. The film was awesome. How could it not be with Guy Ritchie at the helm and Robert Downey, Jr. and Jude Law getting most of the screen time?

I also love that there is an opportunity for more Holmes films. Even if they don't make more, at least it's true to the original Holmes stories, of which there are several.

Sherlock Holmes is a Warner Brothers film and the Blu-Ray version utilizes a very cool feature. It's called Maximum Movie Mode. Holmes is the second movie I've seen with the feature, Watchmen being the first, and it has been a very cool experience both times.

Now, Maximum Movie Mode isn't something you use when watching the film for the first time. It is an enhanced director/actor/anybody commentary track. You will be watching the film when the camera will rotate to the director of the film while he discusses some aspect of the scene you are seeing. In addition to that, video will pop up and overlay the film at times with actors, set designers, etc. talking about various set and costume aspects.

Basically, instead of watching 14 bonus features, it presents it all to you at once and each one talks about specific parts of the film. The only two versions I've seen of Maximum Movie Mode also incorporate a timeline of the characters. In Holmes it laid out pieces of the detectives fictional past while in Watchmen the timeline depicted the differences between the actual events of 1985 and the fictional events created by Alan Moore in his skewed version of 1985.

Maximum Movie Mode is the coolest feature I've seen used with Blu-Ray discs. In addition to enhanced picture and sound quality the big excitement about Blu-Ray was the ability to put more data on the disc, allowing for things like Maximum Movie Mode.

I hope this kind of feature expands within the Warner Brothers family and beyond. I'd love to see a maximum movie mode with directors like Christopher Nolan (part of the Warner Bros. family, so fingers crossed for the Blu-Ray version of Inception), Martin Scorsese, Quentin Tarantino, Judd Apatow, Steven Spielberg, James Cameron, Sam Mendes, Robert Zemeckis, and many, many, many more.

If you're a big movie fan, invest in a Blu-Ray player and check out a film with Maximum Movie Mode. It won't disappoint you.




Zack Snyder in a still from Watchmen's Maximum Movie Mode.

Hello.....and Sherlock Holmes

Well it looks like Justin has been fast at work getting things set up and moving here with the blog. I don't know if he has a format set up about what we are doing yet, but I'll probably rebel against that format regardless because, well, I tend to give Justin a hard time. Plus, I'm the writer and he's the doctor (or soon to be) in this tag-team effort.

Regardless, we both love movies to death, and we figured we'd battle each other to death discussing them.

I see he's done some snappy reviews on a couple of films he saw recently (Date Night and Clash of the Titans). I didn't check either of them out. Titans didn't look like something I wanted to see, and I just didn't get the chance to check out Date Night.

No battling to the death there. But don't you all worry, soon enough Justin and I will check out the same film in theaters and have some hot and spicy discussions on here.

Also, I think Mendes would make a great Bond film. Why? Because Mendes makes great films.

I recently purchased the Blu-Ray version of Sherlock Holmes (didn't see it in theaters either), and I plan on checking that out tonight. I'll give you all a rundown of the features and all that good stuff, and a few comments on the film. Why not, right?

So welcome, all (something Justin didn't do either, and he's supposed to be the one with the Southern hospitality). I hope you enjoy Justin and I (and maybe a little Bryan tossed in for some additional flavoring) as we delve into films.

Sam Mendes to Direct Bond 23?

As of April 2010, it is still up in the air whether or not the Academy Award-winning director will direct the 23rd installment of the 007 franchise.  Mendes, who made a name for himself directing American Beauty, would be the first Academy Award winning director to direct a Bond movie ever.  Let me say that again.  EVER.  Words can't describe how excited I am at the prospect of someone with the resume of Mendes directing a 007 flick.

In other updates, there are rumors that the new Bond movie will be based off the Ian Fleming story 007 in New York which means that the movie would take place in New York, another huge first for the Bond franchise.  Also, rumor has it that the story of how Moneypenny and Q came into Bond's life will be revealed.  If this is all true, which rumors are usually based on some level of fact, then I can safely say I haven't been this excited over a Bond film since first hearing about Casino Royale some 4-5 years ago.

                                                                   New York

                                                                          +

                                                                       Q

                                                                        +

                                                                    Daniel Craig (007)

                                                                     = AWESOMENESS

Check back with more updates on "Bond 23"