Breakthrough Thinking Broadcasting Network, in conjunction with Phoenix Movie Examiner, is giving its listeners an opportunity to see a free screening of the new crime thriller “Parker” as well as a chance to win one of five pairs of VIP seats at said screening.
In “Parker,” Jason Statham plays a thief with a unique code of professional ethics who is double-crossed by his crew and left for dead. Assuming a new disguise and forming an unlikely alliance with a woman (Jennifer Lopez) on the inside, he looks to hijack the score of the crew’s latest heist.
“Parker” opens Friday, Jan. 25 at movie theaters throughout the Valley. However, Breakthrough Thinking Broadcasting Network listeners who visit Gofobo.com can print passes for themselves and a guest to see an advance screening of the film for free 7:30 p.m. Thursday, Jan. 24 at Harkins Arizona Mills. Seating at the screening will be first-come, first-served.
In addition, five fortunate Phoenix Movie Examiner readers will have pairs of VIP seats reserved for them at the screening. For your chance to win one of said pairs, first subscribe to the Phoenix Movie Examiner e-newsletter (if you have not already done so).
Then call 206-309-9823 and leave a voicemail message with your full name and e-mail address and recite a line from your favorite Jason Statham movie in your best English accent. Five winners will be selected amongst the most creative voicemail messages received by 11:59 p.m. Tuesday, Jan. 22 and notified the next morning.
Finally, tune in to “Breakthrough Thinking: The Magazine” 2-3 p.m. Thursday, Jan. 31 on KXXT 1010 AM and streaming live on www.BreakRadioShow.com to hear some of said voicemail messages played on the air alongside a review of the film. (Don’t worry, last names and e-mail addresses will remain confidential.)
1. Brooklyn Nets (19-15) at Philadelphia 76ers (15-20)
Predicted Winner: Brooklyn
2. Miami Heat (23-9) at Indiana Pacers (20-14)
Predicted Winner: Miami
3. Phoenix Suns (12-23) at Milwaukee Bucks (16-16)
Predicted Winner: Milwaukee
4. Los Angeles Lakers (15-18) at Houston Rockets (20-14)
Predicted Winner: Los Angeles Lakers
Despite playing without their bigs (Dwight Howard, Pau Gasol, Jordan Hill), the Lakers will begin their turnaround.
5. Atlanta Hawks (20-12) at Minnesota Timberwolves (15-15)
Predicted Winner: Atlanta
Podcast: Play in new window | Download
Podcast: Play in new window | Download
1. Oklahoma City Thunder (26-7) at Washington Wizards (4-28)
Predicted Winner: Oklahoma City
2. Boston Celtics (16-17) at New York Knicks (23-10)
Predicted Winner: New York
3. Cleveland Cavaliers (8-27) at Chicago Bulls (18-13)
Predicted Winner: Chicago
4. San Antonio Spurs (27-9) at New Orleans Hornets (8-25)
Predicted Winner: San Antonio
5. Dallas Mavericks (13-21) at Utah Jazz (17-18)
Predicted Winner: Utah
6. Memphis Grizzlies (21-10) at Sacramento Kings (13-21)
Predicted Winner: Memphis
7. Orlando Magic (12-21) at Portland Trail Blazers (18-15)
Predicted Winner: Portland
With the NHL and NHLPA agreeing to a tentative deal over the weekend that is expected to be ratified later this week and finalized by Saturday, we will be taking a look around the league with previews/predictions for the upcoming season.
The official schedule of course has not been determined yet, but that should come by mid-week. It is expected that we will see a 48-game season that begins January 19th, with training camps opening this weekend.
With the great parity around the league, every game is critical even in a normal 82-game season. So that makes a 48-game season even more crucial in terms of avoiding any pro-long slumps/losing streaks.
As a die hard fan for basically my whole life I am extremely excited that the puck is about to drop. While the lockout does leave a bad taste in many mouths, it will certainly be a distant memory in the near future. For some, including myself, it already is!
Any given movie speaks to each and every person differently.
The way that they do is often dictated by all of the experiences he or she has had in life leading up to that precise moment in time that they see that particular motion picture. Granted, sometimes entertainment value alone rules the day but even that is entirely subjective, governed by an individual’s background and, in many cases, immediate mood.
Whatever the circumstances, these are the 12 movies that meant the most to me in 2013. In some way, shape or form, they spoke to me. Again, they may or may not affect you but, between identifying with their themes of love, fear, heartache and enchantment and simply being emotionally and intellectually open to their delineated rides, these will be the films with which I associate the past year.
12. ‘The Wolf of Wall Street’
“The Wolf of Wall Street” is epic in every conceivable way, coming across as some sort of crazy party during which revelers go through every experience imaginable. In fact, it is easily and without a doubt director Martin Scorsese’s best work to date, featuring a performance that runs the gamut by star Leonardo DiCaprio.
11. ‘Nebraska’
“Nebraska” is an extremely simple but exceptionally special feature film, rewarding patient viewers with an enjoyable journey that includes a vociferously hilarious misunderstanding involving an air compressor and an emotionally resonant destination that delivers one of the most life-affirming movie moments of the year.
10. ‘The Purge’
“The Purge,” which could effectively be categorized as a “what-if white knuckler,” is as thought-provoking as it is hair-raising. Inciting questions about everything from mankind’s necessity for release of pent-up anger to society’s desire for economic equilibrium, it leaves viewers unsettled and uncertain about civilization’s foreboding future.
9. ‘Disconnect’
“Disconnect” is deeply disturbing, packing a punch that is so powerful that viewers may be unnerved enough to essentially do exactly what the title insinuates as it says something strikingly significant about alienation in a way that will leave you incredibly captivated and extremely engaged from beginning to end.
8. ‘Before Midnight’
“Before Midnight” is deep, meaningful and realistically romantic. The melancholic insights and revelations about time’s impact on true love are devastating, hitting viewers in their guts like a ton of bricks. But because they are reflections of reality rather than some fairy tale, they culminate in this franchise’s most emboldened ending yet.
7. ‘Inside Llewyn Davis’
Moving viewers through melancholy, the Coen brothers’ latest effort “Inside Llewyn Davis” is not only a poetic observation of how struggle inspires art but also an extremely entertaining satire of folk music history, filled with wry laughs and a soundtrack that you will want to own the moment that you leave the movie theater.
6. ‘Captain Phillips’
“Captain Phillips’s” relentless intensity causes you to dig your fingernails deep into your seat’s armrests as you sit as close to the edge of it as you can without falling off. The nonstop nature of it all will leave you feeling just as horribly discombobulated and emotionally exhausted as star Tom Hanks’s title character is in the film’s final moments.
5. ‘Snitch’
“Snitch” provokes intellectual thought while also stimulating extremely sharp. It exhilarates viewers not with action but with cleverly calculated suspense. You will not emerge with your nerves unfrayed from this tension, your spirit unbroken by this social injustice or your heart unaffected by this father’s defiant dedication to his son.
4. ‘Blancanieves’
“Blancanieves” is a celebration of cinema, Spanish culture and the fairy tales that shaped not only our childhood but also the fine art of storytelling in general. It keeps you enthralled, enchanted and entranced. It is bold, it is beautiful and it is a bona fide masterpiece of a motion picture that will take your breath away.
3. ‘You’re Next’
“You’re Next” will not only scare the living daylights out of you but it will also afford you one of the most frighteningly fun times that you will have while watching a movie all year. It does so by geniusly toying with the horror genre’s contrivances (of which there are many). The end-result is a uniquely engaging experience.
2. ‘Frozen’
“Frozen” is fantastic. In fact, Disney’s new film is not only the best animated adventure of the year but also a remarkably triumphant return to form for the studio as it stuns with breathtakingly beautiful visuals, magnificent musical numbers, wonderfully fun characters and a simple-yet-engaging story with a universally meaningful message.
1. ‘Thanks for Sharing’
“Thanks for Sharing” is real, honest and heartfelt, taking viewers through a remarkable range of emotions, affecting anyone and everyone who has ever struggled to open their self up to love, relinquish all control or face life’s hardest truths. Packed with sincere poignancy and impressive performances, it is undoubtedly my favorite flick of 2013.
1. Sacramento Kings (12-20) at Toronto Raptors (12-20)
Predicted Winner: Toronto
2. Brooklyn Nets (17-15) at Washington Wizards (4-26)
Predicted Winner: Brooklyn
3. Cleveland Cavaliers (7-26) at Charlotte Bobcats (8-23)
Predicted Winner: Cleveland
4. Atlanta Hawks (20-10) at Detroit Pistons (12-22)
Predicted Winner: Atlanta
5. Chicago Bulls (17-13) at Miami Heat (22-8)
Predicted Winner: Miami
6. Indiana Pacers (19-13) at Boston Celtics (14-17)
Predicted Winner: Indiana
7. Portland Trail Blazers (16-15) at Memphis Grizzlies (20-9)
Predicted Winner: Memphis
8. Philadelphia 76rs (15-18) at Oklahoma City Thunder (24-7)
Predicted Winner: Oklahoma City
9. Houston Rockets (18-14) at Milwaukee Bucks (16-14)
Predicted Winner: Houston
10. Utah Jazz (16-17) at Phoenix Suns (12-21)
Predicted Winner: Phoenix
The game of the night will feature both of the NBA’s Staples Center occupants.
11. Los Angeles Lakers (15-16) at Los Angeles Clippers (25-8)
The Clippers have lost two in a row, but before that had won a franchise record 17 in a row. They are looking to get back into their winning ways against their rivals from down the hall.
The Lakers want to prove that despite their early season struggles, that they are going to find their game at some point and what better time then against the Clippers.
Predicted Winner: Los Angeles Lakers
Podcast: Play in new window | Download
Podcast: Play in new window | Download
Of the new movies that I reviewed during the Jan. 3, 2013, edition of “Breakthrough Thinking: The Magazine,” the one that I would most recommend seeing as soon as possible is “Any Day Now,” which is a drama starring Alan Cumming and Garret Dillahunt. However, so long as you avoid “Citadal” – a socio-political message movie masquerading as a horror flick – you should start the new year well entertained.
‘Any Day Now’*
Alan Cumming and Garret Dillahunt play a gay couple who, in the 1970s, fights a biased legal system to keep custody of the abandoned mentally handicapped teenager (Isaac Leyva) that comes to live under their roof. (R – 97 minutes)
“Any Day Now” is a harrowing yet heartbreaking motion picture that is accented by a pair of powerful performances from actors Alan Cumming and Garret Dillahunt. The new drama from writer/director Travis Fine demonstrates with emotional sincerity the tragic extent to which social injustices are capable of going. There are times when the film feels just a bit too sentimental but, for the most part, the movie’s message and its dramatic resonance combine to make for a piece of entertainment that is as affecting as it is important. The last scene’s many meanings are sure to stay with you. (Grade: B)
*Playing exclusively at Harkins Camelview 5.
‘Citadel’*
Aneurin Barnard plays an agoraphobic father who teams up with a renegade priest (James Cosmo) to save his daughter from the clutches of a gang of twisted feral children who committed an act of violence against his family years earlier. (R – 84 minutes)
Is “Citadel” a supernatural horror flick or one that merely finds its fright from real life? Or is really just a socio-political message movie masquerading as a horror flick? I do not even know for certain and I have watched this muddled mess that makes nary a lick of sense. But regardless of which definitive genre writer/director Ciaran Foy’s Irish import belongs in, it misleads moviegoers and makes them feel nothing but complete and utter disappointment over having to watch something that starts off so excruciatingly slow before eventually evolving into something devoid of any surprises whatsoever. (Grade: F)
*Playing exclusively at Harkins Valley Art.
‘Parental Guidance’
Billy Crystal and Bette Midler play people who agree to look after their three grandkids when their type-A helicopter parents (Tom Everett Scott and Marisa Tomei) need to leave town for work. Problems arise when the kids’ 21st-century behaviors collide with the grandparents’ old-school methods. (PG – 104 minutes)
“Parental Guidance” is a movie for grandparents. And I do not mean that it is a movie for grandparents to enjoy with their grandchildren. I mean that it is a movie strictly for grandparents because they are the only demographic that will be so smitten with director Andy Fickman’s flick’s sweet, good-intentioned nature that they will not mind that it is over the top in almost all aspects – be it its jokes, its sentimentality or its suggestion that a game of “kick the can” will produce profound bonding. Having said that, it is still a feel-good family film with some surprisingly hearty laughs. (Grade: C)
“Breakthrough Thinking: The Magazine” is giving its listeners a chance to win one of four promotional prize packs in celebration of the release of the new installment in the “Texas Chainsaw Massacre” horror flick franchise.
In “Texas Chainsaw 3D,” which opens Friday, Jan. 4 at movie theaters throughout the Valley, Alexandra Daddario plays a young woman who travels to Texas with her friends to collect an inheritance. Little does she know that an encounter with a chainsaw-wielding killer is part of the reward.
Each prize pack includes a ticket for two to see the movie through the end of its theatrical engagement, a promotional t-shirt, a mini-poster and more. For your chance to win one, first subscribe to the Phoenix Movie Examiner e-newsletter (if you have not already done so).
Then call (206) 309-9823 and leave a voicemail with your name and e-mail address as well as your best chainsaw impression. Extra points will be given for including an evil laugh or a bloodcurdling scream. Four winners will be selected amongst the most creative voicemails received by 11:59 p.m. Wednesday, Jan. 9.
The United States is set to take on Canada, in what should be an epic battle for a shot at advancing to the World Junior Hockey Championship final.
The match up will take place early Thursday morning at 3:30 et/12:30 pt on the NHL Network.
Team USA, fresh off a 7-0 victory over the Czech Republic, is going to be looking for revenge after falling to Canada 2-1 earlier in the tournament.
This game will feature two of hockey’s better goaltending prospects, as John Gibson has been stellar for the Americans and Malcolm Subban has also been up to the task for team Canada. Gibson is a member of theAnaheim Ducks organization, while Subban was selected in the first round, 24th overall by the Boston Bruins in the 2012 NHL Entry Draft.
While the goaltending match up will be a huge key, the play of both teams other top young stars will also be pivotal.
Canada, of course is led by NHL star Ryan Nugent-Hopkins of the Edmonton Oilers. The team in general has a ton of offensive talent. Team USA will be expecting a big offensive performance from Montreal Canadiens prospectAlex Galchenyuk, who was the third overall pick in the 2012 NHL Entry draft.
Another player to keep an eye on for team USA is New York Rangers prospect J.T. Miller. While Miller doesn’t possess world class offensive skill like Nugent-Hopkins and Galchenyuk, he is a hard-nosed player that you can expect to come up big in a huge game like this.
1. Portland Trail Blazers (16-14) at Toronto Raptors (11-20)
Predicted Winner: Portland
2. Chicago Bulls (16-13) at Orlando Magic (12-19)
Predicted Winner: Chicago
3. Sacramento Kings (11-20) at Cleveland Cavaliers (7-25)
Predicted Winner: Sacramento
4. Washington Wizards (4-25) at Indiana Pacers (18-13)
Predicted Winner: Indiana
5. Memphis Grizzlies (19-9) at Boston Celtics (14-16)
Predicted Winner: Memphis
6. Dallas Mavericks (13-19) at Miami Heat (21-8)
Predicted Winner: Miami
7. San Antonio Spurs (25-8) at Milwaukee Bucks (16-13)
Predicted Winner: San Antonio
8. New Orleans Hornets (7-24) at Houston Rockets (17-14)
Predicted Winner: Houston
9. Brooklyn Nets (16-15) at Oklahoma City Thunder (24-6)
Predicted Winner: Oklahoma City
10. Minnesota Timberwolves (14-13) at Utah Jazz (15-17)
Predicted Winner: Utah
11. Philadelphia 76ers (15-17) at Phoenix Suns (11-21)
Predicted Winner: Philadelphia
12. Los Angeles Clippers (25-7) at Golden State Warriors (21-10)
Predicted Winner: Golden State
Podcast: Play in new window | Download
Podcast: Play in new window | Download
Personalities are, at the same time, both very simple and very complex. There are some six billion of us on this planet and no two are the same and yet we all have many things in common.
One thing we all have in common is the perception of who we are. There is that personality that other people perceive you as being. Then there is that person that you perceive you are. And then there is the person that you really are. And the one that usually has it wrong is you.
You see, the easiest person to fool is often you. It’s kind of like a fish in water. He doesn’t realize that he’s in water and it’s hard to see that you are the fool from the inside out. From the outside it’s usually pretty blatant what’s going on, but not so easy when it’s you.
Likewise, people on the outside can’t see, feel and experience what’s going on in your mind, so at best they only have half the answer. Some people are better at observation than others and many times they will surprise you with their insight. How many times have you seen someone make a very unwise choice and all you could do was stand by and let them do it only to have them say “Why did you let me do that?” You know why. Warning them would not have done any good because it made perfect sense to them at the time.
All of this comes down to two words—awareness and connection. The closer you can come to making these three viewpoints merge, the better off you, those around you and your quality of life will become. You won’t have any effect on how other people perceive you, but you can become more transparent to them. “What you see (and hear) is what you get.”
Strive to bring down the walls that exist between you and that other person. Vow to have a “no drama” rule, particularly with that special someone. Listen to yourself and your own body. They can speak very loudly if you will only listen.
The 2013 IIHF World Junior Hockey Championship is underway and the United States kicked things off Thursday with a commanding 8-0 victory over Germany.
Anaheim Ducks prospect John Gibson led the way in goal playing 40 minutes of shutout hockey, while backup goaltender Jon Gillies also put up a big zero in 20 minutes of play.
The Americans were led offensively by Montreal Canadiens 2012 first round pick/3rd overall Alex Galchenyuk, who had a goal and two assists. Washington Capitals forward prospect Riley Barber also added a goal and two assists.
The United States dominated from the beginning of play, scoring three 1st period goals. They also outshot the Germans by a wide margin of 46-26 and controlled the play for most of the game.
The Americans will face their first big test on Friday, when they take on Russia.
In a bit of a surprising move, the struggling Brooklyn Nets fired head coach Avery Johnson on Thursday. In his place, the club named assistant coach P.J. Carlesimo as the interim head coach.
While the Nets have cooled off as evident by their 14-14 record, after beginning the season 11-4, the move still seems like it came a bit too soon. Johnson was named Coach of the Month for November and while the team has dipped and fallen below expectations, over a long season teams will have their ups and downs.
In this case it appears that Nets ownership doesn’t believe this is part of an up and down start, but more of a downward spiral that needed a drastic change to get the team going again.
As has been the case every other year, few films on my top ten list for 2012 would be considered “best” by most critics’ qualifications. Instead, it is filled with flicks that affected me in some way, shape or form – be it moving me on an exceptionally emotional level, touching me in an intensely spiritual fashion or simply succeeding in spreading a smile across my face. Granted, you are unlikely to find many of these movies nominated for Academy Awards. But each one of them achieved something even more spectacular – they had a memorable and lasting impact on my year.
10. “The Impossible”
Rewards those who brave the uncomfortable waters with a heightened hope that tides can turn even in the seemingly grimmest of circumstances.
9. “Robot and Frank”
One of the year’s most human movies, using visionary ideas about technology to not only stimulate your brain but also touch your heart.
8. “Frankenweenie”
An unconventional, creative and cordial celebration of cinema that is as rare as lightning striking twice in precisely the same place.
7. “Mother’s Day”
Seriously shocking, spectacularly suspenseful and utterly unsettling from its creative vision of violence to its constant sense of danger.
6. “Detention”
With a pace that could outrun a cheetah and an attention span the size of a fairyfly, makes Mars look like your next door neighbor’s house.
5. “Killer Joe”
Dark, demented, distressing and guaranteed to turn you off fried chicken for the foreseeable future with a menacing Matthew McConaughey.
4. “Compliance”
Deeply disturbing, leaving you both emotionally and intellectually shaken. If this is not the stuff of nightmares, then nothing is.
3. “Safety Not Guaranteed”
The epitome of a small movie with a big idea and an even bigger heart, giving viewers a very valid reason to believe in fairy tales.
2. “Life of Pi”
Takes viewers on a majestic journey that is breathtakingly beautiful, extremely exotic and incredibly immersive. It may forever change you.
1. “Jeff, Who Lives at Home”
Goofy, hopeful, honest, intimate, whimsical, funny, poignant, sweet, smart and spiritual. This movie makes you feel fantastic to be alive.
All around us, people are hustling and bustling through their holiday rituals – shopping, eating, attending parties, spending time with loved ones, caroling, decorating – and the list goes on. But what if you just aren’t in the mood?
Maybe your loved ones aren’t close by, or you don’t subscribe to the rituals of shopping, eating, over-consuming on many levels. Some of you may have lost loved ones this past year. Some may be wondering about the world in general with current events around us that tell us folks aren’t getting along so well. Maybe your health isn’t so good, and it’s gotten you worried.
But come on! It’s Christmas! Or Hanukkah, or Kwanzaa, or Festivus! Get in the spirit for Pete’s Sake!
Well, I don’t want to. And maybe you don’t as well.
For me, I’ve been like this for several years now. It’s a combination of things – a grown-up son rather than little ones that love the presents(with a birthday the day after Christmas!), family that is now far away, a couple years of studying Eastern philosophies and a belief that all is impermanent, a dislike of consumerism and all who have to have the newest toys.
And finally, a belief that I HAVE ENOUGH! Here are the things I’m grateful for:
So please, buy me no gifts – I want for nothing. It would thrill me if we could all walk the path of peace, love, and happiness. If we laid down our weapons, whether they were of metal or plastic, or sharp tongues. If we worked to get along. My father used to tell me he didn’t want anything for Christmas, and I just didn’t get it. Well, now I do.
Merry Christmas and Season’s Greetings to all!
As we head into the stretch run before Santa makes his rounds, here are some tidbits around MLB.
The Chicago Cubs made a decent sized free agent splash, agreeing to a four-year, $52 million deal with right-hander Edwin Jackson. While the 29-year-old doesn’t quite get around as much as many of my ex-girlfriends, Jackson will be joining his eighth organization since making his debut at age 19. Jackson has been particularly productive the past four seasons or so and should be a nice fit with the Cubs. While he is not the top of the rotation starter that he was originally projected to become, he is a still a solid mid to backend option.
The Miami Marlins agreed to a one-year, $2.75 million deal with veteran infielder Placido Polanco. While the 37-year-old may not be the hitter he once was, Polanco is still solid and will provide much needed veteran leadership for the young Marlins.
The Texas Rangers have had a tough offseason to date, as they have lost out on many of the top names that they were pursuing. To ease a bit of the loss of both Josh Hamilton and Mike Napoli, the Rangers have agreed to a one-year, $7.5 million deal with free agent catcher A.J. Pierzynski. The 35-year-old (turns 36 on December 30th) hit a career high 27 home runs last season for the Chicago White Sox.
Among the 10 – yes, 10 as in T-E-N – new movies that I reviewed during the Dec. 20, 2012, edition of “Breakthrough Thinking: The Magazine,” the one that I recommend rushing out to see this weekend is “The Impossible.” Then, make a Christmas Day double feature your new holiday tradition this year by seeing “Django Unchained” and “Les Misérables.” With these three motion pictures, your Christmas is guaranteed to be merry!
‘Cirque du Soleil: Worlds Away 3D’
Two young people journey through the dreamlike worlds of Cirque du Soleil to find each other. (NR – 97 minutes)
James Cameron really ought to focus on his follow-ups to “Avatar” and stop wasting his time and talent serving as executive producer for 3D spectacles like “Cirque du Soleil: Worlds Away 3D.” Director Andrew Adamson’s new motion picture that brings several pieces of the popular entertainment company’s shows to the big screen features a few mesmerizing moments, such as those from “Love” set to Beatles songs. However, watching said shows in a movie theater does not compare to seeing them in real life. After all, having grown accustomed to Hollywood’s special effects, one cannot fully appreciate the performers’ risky routines. (Grade: D)
‘Django Unchained’
Jamie Foxx plays a slave-turned-bounty hunter who, with the help of his mentor (Christoph Waltz), sets out to rescue his wife (Kerry Washington) from a brutal Mississippi plantation owner (Leonardo DiCaprio). (R – 165 minutes)
“Django Unchained” is really raw, extremely edgy and entertaining in an all-encompassing kind of way. But then, honestly, did anyone truly expect anything less from writer/director Quentin Tarantino? The constantly groundbreaking filmmaker’s latest motion picture – which is best described as a grindhouse western – is a bloody blast (literally) from beginning to end, featuring audacious action and lionhearted laughs at each and every turn. Moreover, it includes some of the year’s positively finest performances – especially from actors Leonardo DiCaprio and Christoph Waltz who essentially switch characters and succeed in playing against type with sincerely spectacular results. (Grade: A)
‘The Guilt Trip’
Seth Rogen plays an inventor who is guilted into bringing his mother (Barbra Steisand) along on a roadtrip as he tries to sell his invention. Across 3,000 miles, he is constantly aggravated by her antics. But over time he comes to realize that their lives have more in common than he originally thought. (PG-13 – 95 minutes)
“The Guilt Trip” takes its viewers on an enjoyable little journey but it only occasionally hits on sincere sentiments with which mothers or their sons can relate. Most moments in the movie feel forced, suggesting that screenwriter Dan Fogelman was satisfied with creating a broad, all-encompassing comedy that merely skims the surface of its subject than the kind that digs deeper and therefore has more meaning. However, that and star Barbra Steisand’s nails-on-a-chalkboard performance aside, director Anne Fletcher’s flick has enough laughs and heart to afford each member of the audience both a fun time and a renewed appreciation for their own well-meaning mom. (Grade: C)
‘Hyde Park on Hudson’*
Bill Murray plays President Franklin Delano Roosevelt who, in June 1939, hosts the King and Queen of England only to find that international affairs must be juggled with the complexities of his domestic establishment – as wife, mother and mistresses all conspire to make the royal weekend an unforgettable one. (R – 95 minutes)
There is just something that feels a bit off about “Hyde Park on Hudson.” The new biographical dramedy about President Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s romantic life from director Roger Michell and screenwriter Richard Nelson is simply not substantial enough to be even remotely important yet it is not nearly colorful or lively enough to be entertaining, either. Instead, it sits squarely in the mundane and monotonous middle, coming across as some sort of vapid soap opera. Save for a charming performance from star Bill Murray whose story sadly takes a backseat to costar Laura Linney’s character, there really is nothing to see here. (Grade: D)
*Playing exclusively at Harkins Camelview 5.
‘The Impossible’*
Naomi Watts and Ewan McGregor play parents who, with their three sons, are relaxing around a pool during a winter vacation in Thailand when a terrifying roar rises up from the center of the earth and a huge wall of black water races toward them. (PG-13 – 107 minutes)
“The Impossible” is one of the most emotionally electrifying cinematic experiences of 2012. Director Juan Antonio Bayona has crafted a motion picture that is extremely difficult to witness yet, strangely, rewards those who brave the uncomfortable waters with a renewed sense of spirituality and a heightened hope that the tides can turn even in the seemingly grimmest of circumstances. Whether it is dragging you around like a rag-doll to demonstrate the intense torment of this true tragedy or sending you to the edge of your seat in response to narrowly missed encounters, this movie will deeply and permanently affect you. (Grade: A)
*Playing exclusively at Harkins Camelview 5.
‘Jack Reacher’
Tom Cruise plays a homicide investigator who digs deeper into a case involving a trained military sniper who shot five random victims. (PG-13 – 130 minutes)
“Jack Reacher” is smart, suspenseful and surprising. Writer/director Christopher McQuarrie’s new crime drama based on Lee Child’s novel “One Shot” is as intelligent as it is intense – which is a remarkably rare combination. Granted, some of its sense of humor seems slightly out of place and star Tom Cruise comes off as somewhat of a superhero (then again, name one movie in which he does not), yet the flick is so slick that you simply cannot help but be entertained and engaged as you watch the puzzle pieces come together in an un questionably clever fashion. (Grade: B)
‘Les Misérables’
Hugh Jackman plays ex-prisoner, hunted for decades by a ruthless policeman (Russell Crowe) after he breaks parole. When he agrees to care for a factory worker (Anne Hathaway) young daughter (Amanda Seyfried), their lives change forever. (PG-13 – 157 minutes)
“Les Misérables” is a sweeping cinematic spectacle that, despite its distinctly depressing themes, leaves viewers feeling rejuvenated, uplifted and ready to take on the world. Director Tom Hooper has created a massive movie musical – make that an enormous entertainment extravaganza – that is unlike anything else you have ever seen on the big screen. And somehow, be it the grandeur of it all or the plethora of passionate performances that draw you deep into the drama, the fact that this story plays out entirely through song is a curiously camouflaged quality as the audience becomes absolutely absorbed by this fantastic film. (Grade: A)
‘Rust and Bone’*
Matthias Schoenaerts plays a father who, having been put in charge of his young son, leaves Belgium to live with his sister and her husband in Antibes. His bond with a killer whale trainer (Marion Cotillard) grows deeper after she suffers a horrible accident. (R – 118 minutes)
“Rust and Bone” appears to have everything going for it – a pair of greatly gifted actors in Matthias Schoenaerts and Marion Cotillard, a dramatically devastating plot point on which it can hang its hat and some CGI to make it all that much more believable. However, writer/director Jacques Audiard’s French import injects so much misery into its two characters’ lives that the film is on the fringe of farce – especially given the impossibly favorable outcomes of certain scary scenes and its unwarrantedly happy ending. Audiard should have focused solely on Cotillard’s character’s struggle to emotionally overcome the loss of her legs. (Grade: D)
*Playing exclusively at Harkins Camelview 5.
‘Save the Date’*
Lizzy Caplan plays a woman who begins to confront her shortcomings after she rejects her boyfriend’s (Geoffrey Arend) hasty proposal and soon finds herself in a rebound romance. Meanwhile, her sister (Alison Brie) is immersed in the details of her wedding. (R – 98 minutes)
On the downside, writer/director Michael Mohan’s new dramedy “Save the Date” is an utterly unfocused flick with a collection of characters that lack the color required to carry even a 30-minute sitcom much less a feature-length film. However, on the upside, you can safely free up a 2-hour block in your appointment book. Having said that, It is still an unfortunate shame that the motion picture is not better considering its two tremendously talented leading ladies – Lizzy Caplan and “Community’s” Alison Brie – of whom the project is undeserving. Even they cannot make a movie this generic engrossing. (Grade: D)
*Playing exclusively at Phoenix FilmBar.
‘This is 40’
Paul Rudd and Leslie Mann plays a man and wife who, upon turning 40 years old, must figure out how to forgive, forget and enjoy the rest of their lives – before they kill each other. (R – 134 minutes)
Anyone who is nearing a milestone age – whether it be 30, 40 or what have you – will relate to the simple theme of growing older (and all of the things that come with it) in “This is 40.” Writer/director Judd Apatow deals with that theme in such as way that is both brutally honest and comfortably compassionate, which has become the filmmaker’s forte. However, his new spinoff of “Knocked Up” feels much more closer in tone to “Funny People” than “The 40-Year-Old Virgin,” aiming for drama over comedy. Moreover, the film features too much bickering and not enough narrative. (Grade: C)
1. Orlando Magic (12-13) at Toronto Raptors (8-19)
Predicted Winner: Orlando
2. Atlanta Hawks (15-8) at Philadelphia 76ers (12-14)
Predicted Winner: Atlanta
3. Milwaukee Bucks (13-11) at Boston Celtics (13-12)
Predicted Winner: Boston
4. Chicago Bulls (14-10) at New York Knicks (19-6)
Predicted Winner: New York
5. Washington Wizards (3-20) at Detroit Pistons (7-21)
Predicted Winner: Detroit
6. Indiana Pacers (14-12) at Cleveland Cavaliers (5-22)
Predicted Winner: Indiana
7. Dallas Mavericks (12-14) at Memphis Grizzlies (17-6)
Predicted Winner: Memphis
8. New Orleans Hornets (5-20) at San Antonio Spurs (19-8)
Predicted Winner: San Antonio
9. Sacramento Kings (8-17) at Los Angeles Clippers (19-6)
Predicted Winner: Los Angeles Clippers
10. Charlotte Bobcats (7-18) at Golden State Warriors (17-9)
Predicted Winner: Golden State
Podcast: Play in new window | Download
In “This is 40,” a spinoff of his 2007 comedy “Knocked Up,” Paul Rudd and Leslie Mann plays a man and wife who, upon turning 40 years old, must figure out how to forgive, forget and enjoy the rest of their lives – before they kill each other. The Dec. 20, 2012, edition of “Breakthrough Thinking: The Magazine” featured several soundbites from the film’s writer/director Judd Apatow, whose filmography includes “The 40-Year-Old Virgin” and “Funny People.” The following is my full exclusive interview with him from which said soundbites were pulled.
Question: First of all, what was it like to revisit these characters that you introduced 5 years ago?
Answer: It was really fun. As soon as I got the idea, I became really excited by the prospect because I like tracking people’s lives. I love television. When a show is on for a long time, we really get to see people’s evolution. To me, there is nothing more fun than that. And I thought that this was a rare opportunity to tell a story with a family that actually is three-quarters of a real family. So when they fight or look like they are in love with each other, they really are having those feelings and the shorthand between them would be accurate in a way that you cannot do if you just hire some kids to pretend that person is their mom. I wanted to get to some deeper truths that are only possible with this kind of collaboration. Everyone in the movie is collaborating on what the movie is. We are doing rehearsals and we are talking about it. It is not just a script that they are performing. It it is a collaboration between everybody.
Q: Are there any other characters from previous projects of yours that you would like to revisit?
A: I really loved “Get Him to the Greek.” Nick Stoller, who directed “Forgetting Sarah Marshall,” thought that we should make a whole movie about that Aldous Snow character and I think that he did a fantastic job. That was a lot of the inspiration for attempting to do this. Seth [Rogen] has, in the past, talked about whether or not he should do a whole movie about the cops from “Pineapple Express.” I think all of those are good ideas. It is just a matter of how much time it takes to do them. Anytime you decide to make a movie, it is going to take 3 years so I am very careful about making those choices. But I could follow any of the characters from any of the movies and I think that it would be fun.
Q: This is a very relatable film. The same can be said about any of your projects. How do you achieve that? Where do your ideas come from?
A: Some of it is made up. Some of it is from our lives. Some of it is things we notice our friends going through. We try to talk about how overwhelmed we feel by modern life. You become obsessed with trying to be the perfect parent or the perfect husband. You want your kids to be happy and healthy but you also want them to do well in school. And you don’t know what to do about technology and the media. And you want to be healthy. It just starts caving in. I could spend my whole day just worrying about if I am flossing enough or exercising enough or should I be eating gluten or not and the pace of my hair falling out. There are so many different things. Then I have to pick up my kids from school. And my kids have activities at different times and it really doesn’t time out and Leslie can’t pick them up. You just wonder how anyone gets anything accomplished well. That is part of what this movie is about – this meltdown we are all having because we are expected to be perfect and we all fail miserably all of the time.
Q: So why is it that Seth Rogen’s Ben and Katherine Heigl’s Alison from “Knocked Up” are absent from this film? Why wouldn’t they show up – even once – to offer some advice to Paul Rudd’s Pete and Leslie Mann’s Debbie?
A: I think they are so funny and charismatic that you can’t just walk them through the movie and have them leave. You would want to stay with them. There was a moment where I thought, “Maybe I should have the main story be about Pete and Debbie and the smaller story be about Ben and Alison.” But I didn’t have an idea for it. And the funny thing is that, in my head, those two couples are the same couple. I always meant for Pete and Debbie to be the Ghosts of Christmas Future so that [Ben and Alison] would see what is going to happen and that is what freaks them out in “Knocked Up.” You can’t get along and your wife will try to control you or she will criticize you and you will have to deal with intimacy issues and problems being a parent. So in doing the movie about Pete and Debbie, I am kind of also doing the movie about Ben and Alison.
Q: What was it like to work with your daughters Maude and Iris?
A: Sometimes I am annoying to my kids. It is really more about sugar crashes and things like that. Sometimes my kids were just tired and I would have to give them a hard time and say, “Guys, we are filming this and it is going to be in the movie forever. Do you want it to be good or bad?” And they would say, “You’re being so mean!” And I’m like, “Come on! You’re professionals!” I would tease them a lot to wake them up because they would be so relaxed that they were almost sleeping at times and other days they were ready to go. But they are kids. They are not professionals. They really know what they are doing now but I don’t want them to feel any pressure. So it is a funny balance of trying to make this feel like no big deal while getting them to really focus.
Q: And working your wife Leslie Mann?
A: She is a real collaborator. When I have an idea, I instantly tell her and she starts pitching me ideas for it. By the time we have the script, it is something that we came up with together. It is not just an acting job. She is the one who said, “Maybe you should show what it is like when I get into a dance club. In “Knocked Up,” I couldn’t get in so, this time, show what happens when I do get in.” She is always willing to do whatever it takes to get to the truth of a scene. She inspires me to be brave about going all the way. She is about total commitment. It is definitely tense at times because we both know every day that we only have one shot at a scene and we both want it to be great but we both might see it slightly differently so we usually shoot things both ways to have whatever we need in editing. We wanted it to be balanced so that both Pete and Debbie are equally good and flawed. That is what we debated. That is where the tension occurred because we are both trying to stand up for the point of view of the other character. And, in some ways, we are talking to each other about our relationship when we talk about our characters. I say, “I don’t think Pete would think that was fair,” when I am really talking about myself.
Q: Speaking of shooting a scene two different ways, your projects are known for having an awful lot of funny material that can be seen in commercials or eventually on the Blu-ray/DVD but did not make the final cut of the film. What is your favorite scene that you shot for “This is 40” that did not make the final cut?
A: There was a great scene where Leslie and Paul were having dinner with Robert Smigel and Annie Mumolo. They were talking about what their parenting styles were and, in the middle of the scene, Robert and Annie’s son comes up to the table and asks to go to the bathroom. They keep saying, “Give us a second,” and he finally says, “I just pooped. I pooped it.” They say, “Is it soft? Is it hard? Is it a ball? Is it wet?” And they start having a fight about who will take him to the bathroom. It was a really funny scene but it didn’t serve any story purpose and I had to make some hard choices.
Q: The television series “Lost” is mentioned many times in the movie. Why is that? Where did that material come from?
A: That is something that is very truthful. Maude watched the entire series of “Lost” in about 2 months. She would be crying and emotional after certain episodes. She would listen to the score in the car and that would make her cry. She was like, “This is the song that plays when people die.” And I thought that was something that I haven’t seen commented on. People watch television series in a weekend now. People will watch “Undeclared” in a day. As parents, we don’t know what to make of that. “Is it bad for my daughter to watch seven episodes of ‘Breaking Bad’ in one day?” And I am a big fan of J.J. Abrams’ work. He is a friend of mine. So i just thought that it would be a realistic way of showing what is happening right now with kids and technology.
Q: What did you learn about life as a result of writing and directing “This is 40?”
A: I learned a lot about the mistakes you make in communicating with somebody and also how much of your own stuff you project onto them. That is a lot of what the movie is about. If you have some unresolved issue with your own parents, you are probably going to tell your wife that they are doing it, too, whether they are or not. You become sensitive. They say that whatever you didn’t get as a kid is the thing you are looking for more as an adult. And that is something that was fun to explore because people get in some big fights but really they are fighting against things from their past – not against the person they are talking to.
Q: Finally, as a fan of “Pee-wee’s Playhouse” and a friend of Paul Reubens, I could not be more excited about your collaboration with him on a “Pee-wee” movie. What is the latest news on that project?
A: He wrote a fantastic script for “Pee-wee.” We are trying to get somebody to pay to make it but he wrote a really funny “Pee-wee” movie. And he is one of the nicest men I have ever met. I really enjoyed working on that part of the process with him and I hope that we get a chance to do it.
As we head towards the end of December, there are still some solid free agents that remain unsigned. Lets take a look at some of these players and where they could possibly wind up.
1) Michael Bourn – Many of the potential top suitors for the speedy outfielder have gone different directions. Teams that may still be in the mix for Bourn include the Seattle Mariners, Texas Rangers, Chicago Cubs and Cleveland Indians. While the Marines are reluctant to give up their first round pick in 2013 (which would be the compensation for signing Bourn), perhaps they would re-consider knowing Bourn can help to jump start their dismal lineup. The Indians would rather sign Nick Swisher, but if they miss out on the power hitting outfielder, then they may turn their sights to Bourn. The Rangers and Cubs are looking to make a splash as well. It has been a disappointing offseason for the Rangers after losing out on Zack Greinke and Josh Hamilton on the free agent market, as well as coming up short on trade attempts for James Shields and perhaps Justin Upton.
2) Nick Swisher– As mentioned above, the Indians have a ton of interest in Swisher. The Rangers are also looking for a big bat to help ease the loss of Hamilton. While Swisher wants to play for the Los Angeles Dodgers, it is very unlikely that will happen as the Dodgers are set in their outfield. Perhaps the Philadelphia Phillies could also come in with a strong push for the 32-year-old switch hitter.
3) Edwin Jackson– While the San Diego Padres have had a ton of interest in the 29-year-old right-hander, it appears that the club will not offer Jackson more than a three-year deal. Reports have indicated that the Rangers and Cubs appear to be the front runners and perhaps the only two teams left in the Jackson sweepstakes.
4) Kyle Lohse– The 34-year-old had a terrific 2012 season for the St. Louis Cardinals. Some may question whether he can duplicate his numbers or if he’ll begin to decline due to age. He will cost the team that signs him (unless it’s the Cardinals of course) a draft pick so that has turned some teams away to look at other options. Due to the reasons listed, I expect Lohse to re-sign with the Cardinals.
5) Adam LaRoche– The power hitting first baseman had a huge 2012 season for the Washington Nationals. The 33-year-old hit 33 home runs and also had 100 RBIs. The Nationals remain very interested in bringing him back, although at the moment they still don’t appear willing to offer LaRoche the three-year deal he is looking for. Like Lohse, due to draft pick compensation and age, the suitors aren’t coming as strongly towards LaRoche as one might think.
1. Detroit Pistons (7-20) at Toronto Raptors (7-19)
Predicted Winner: Toronto
2. Brooklyn Nets (13-11) at New York Knicks (18-6)
Predicted Winner: New York
3. Washington Wizards (3-19) at Orlando Magic (11-13)
Predicted Winner: Orlando
4. Utah Jazz (14-12) at Indiana Pacers (13-12)
Predicted Winner: Utah
5. Cleveland Cavaliers (5-21) at Boston Celtics (12-12)
Predicted Winner: Boston
6. Oklahoma City Thunder (20-4) at Atlanta Hawks (15-7)
Predicted Winner: Oklahoma City
7. Philadelphia 76ers (12-13) at Houston Rockets (12-12)
Predicted Winner: Houston
8. Charlotte Bobcats (7-17) at Phoenix Suns (10-15)
Predicted Winner: Phoenix
9. Milwaukee Bucks (13-10) at Memphis Grizzlies (16-6)
Predicted Winner: Memphis
10. Golden State Warriors (17-8) at Sacramento Kings (7-17)
Predicted Winner: Golden State
11. New Orleans Hornets (5-19) at Los Angeles Clippers (18-6)
Predicted Winner: Los Angeles Clippers
Podcast: Play in new window | Download
Podcast: Play in new window | Download
There really were not any new movies among those I reviewed during the Dec. 13, 2012, edition of “Breakthrough Thinking: The Magazine” that I would recommend seeing – no, not even “The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey.” However, if I had to choose one that was the least loathsome, it would have to be “Playing for Keeps.” Whatever you do, just be sure to steer clear of “Killing Them Softly” or you will merely be spending money to take a 90-minute nap.
‘Hitchcock’
A love story about one of the most influential filmmakers of the last century, Alfred Hitchcock (Anthony Hopkins), and his wife and partner Alma Reville (Helen Mirren). The film takes place during the making of Hitchcock’s seminal movie “Psycho.” (PG-13 – 98 minutes)
If influential filmmaker Alfred Hitchcock had been alive today to direct his own biopic, it is safe to assume that it would be much more interesting than “Hitchcock.” Director Sacha Gervasi’s new movie based on author Stephen Rebello’s book “Alfred Hitchcock and the Making of Psycho” is jam-packed with excellent performances – especially that of Anthony Hopkins as the Master of Suspense himself – but it suffers from a sometimes simplistic and often too technical tone. In other words, it is not the least bit consistent much less lively enough to live up to its intriguing star subject. (Grade: D)
‘The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey’
Martin Freeman plays a hobbit named Bilbo Baggins who is swept into an epic quest to reclaim the lost Dwarf Kingdom of Erebor, which was long ago conquered by the dragon Smaug. (PG-13 – 170 minutes)
Forget “unexpected.” The journey that writer/director Peter Jackson takes viewers on with his first installment of his new prequel to “The Lord of the Rings” would be more accurately be described as “unbearable,” “undesirable” and “unendurable.” “The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey” simply stretches author J.R.R. Tolkien’s story too thin – covering roughly 100 pages in close to 3 hours. As a result, the film features a tortuously tortoiselike pace. Gollum is the movie’s only saving grace, giving an otherwise mundane migration through Middle Earth some much needed energy. Making matters worse, Jackson’s new 48-frames-per-second technology makes everyone look like they are hopped-up cartoon characters. (Grade: D)
‘Killing Them Softly’
Three dumb guys who think they are smart rob a Mob protected card game, causing the local criminal economy to collapse. Brad Pitt plays the enforcer hired to track them down and restore order. Richard Jenkins, James Gandolfini, Ray Liotta and Sam Shepard also star. (R – 97 minutes)
“Killing Them Softly” tells a story in about an hour and a half that could have been told in less than 10 minutes. Writer/director Andrew Dominik, working from George V. Higgins’ novel, spaces the major plot points at least 20 minutes apart from one another and fills the rest of the runtime with long-winded conversations about nothing. If seeing several slow-motion sequences in which actor Ray Liotta gets used as a human punching bag/shooting target in between naps is your idea of hard-hitting entertainment, then this movie is most definitely for you. Everyone else would do best to avoid this atrocity at all costs. (Grade: F)
‘Playing for Keeps’
Gerard Butler plays a former sports star who, having fallen on hard times, starts coaching his son’s soccer team as a way to get his life together. His attempts to become an adult are met with challenges from the attractive soccer moms (Uma Thurman, Catherine Zeta-Jones and Judy Greer) who pursue him at every turn. (PG-13 – 95 minutes)
“Playing for Keeps” is in desperate need of a curve ball. Oops, wrong sport. Regardless, the new romantic comedy plays out in a formulaic fashion, preventing director Gabriele Muccino and screenwriter Robbie Fox from kicking even a single ball into the goal as the audience will always be able to predict their next move. Granted, star Gerard Butler is an incredibly charming actor and it is amusing to watch these wacky women fall over themselves as though he is this holiday season’s hottest Black Friday deal but, beyond that, it is all a little too black and white. Get it? Like a soccer ball… (Grade: D)
The Toronto Blue Jays have taken the baseball world by storm this offseason. They kicked things off with their huge blockbuster trade with the Miami Marlins back in November. That trade on paper turned the Blue Jays into a legitimate contender to win the AL East.
Now the Blue Jays have turned things up another notch by acquiring NL Cy Young winner R.A. Dickey from the New York Mets. The trade was agreed to on Sunday and was contingent on the Blue Jays agreeing to a contract extension with Dickey, in which they did on Monday as well as Dickey passing his physical, which he is scheduled to take on Monday as well.
While the Blue Jays gave up a ton in the deal, with the centerpiece being top catching prospect Travis d’Arnaud, they have created true excitement in the city of Toronto for their baseball club, for the first time in nearly 20 years. While games are never won on paper, this team will be a force as things fall into place. The AL East will be very entertaining as usual in 2013, with the Blue Jays, New York Yankees, Baltimore Orioles and Tampa Bay Rays as clubs that are all very competitive. The Boston Red Sox should be much better in 2013, but they are still at least a year away from getting back to contender status.
Speaking of the Red Sox, they have agreed to a one-year deal with free agent shortstop Stephen Drew. The club is hoping that the 29-year-old can bounce back offensively after having a down year in 2012. This is a good signing for the Red Sox, as it is low risk/high reward in regards to only giving Drew a one-year deal and add the fact that he was coming off a major ankle injury last season. A healthy Drew should put up solid numbers for the Red Sox.
The San Diego Padres continue to search for starting pitching and have their sights set on Edwin Jackson. The 29-year-old right-hander is coming off a very solid 2012 season with the Washington Nationals and is seeking a multi-year deal. While Jackson is garnering plenty of interest on the free agent market, the Padres seem a good fit as he would be playing his home games in the very pitcher friendly Petco Park.
The Dec. 13, 2012, edition of “Breakthrough Thinking: The Magazine” featured several soundbites from filmmaker Kevin Smith, whose filmography includes “Clerks,” “Clerks II,” “Mallrats” and “Chasing Amy.” The following is my full exclusive interview with him from which said soundbites were pulled.
Question: I want to touch on a potentially sensitive subject. You said some pretty nasty things about film critics like myself during your last EPIX comedy special “Kevin Smith: Burn in Hell.” Can you tell me where those comments came from?
Answer: I love “Red State.” Like, when I wrote it, I was like, “This is the movie I was born to make!” And I knew that I was onto something artistic in a way that I hadn’t been since “Clerks.” But the problem was that I had such a toxic relationship with critics. And not like, “I don’t like critics and they don’t like me.” It was this sick kind of dependency. I was brought into a world, with “Clerks,” at a time where what critics said mattered. You needed critics to kind of bolster your movie and even get noticed. Through my whole film career, that has always been driven into my head. And that always sat weird with me. The critics are just part of the audience and I am working for the audience – not just one specific group of the audience. And, at that point, “Cop Out” had gotten cut and slashed by critics – which never made me feel bad because I didn’t write it. I was solely the director. Thank God I didn’t write it because I would have taken that stuff to heart. I did think that it was unfair though.
Q: So then you were cutting your ties with film critics to help your focus on the film itself instead of what critics might think of it?
A: Heading into “Red State,” I said to myself, “I am falling all over myself, constantly worried about what the critics are going to say. Are they going to see that I was going for Quentin Tarantino by way of the Coen brothers with a soupçon of Kevin Smith? Or am I going to have my heart broken when they say, “This is another piece of [crap] by Kevin Smith?” I could not make the movie under those conditions. When I made “Clerks,” I was never thinking about what the critics were going to say just like I was never thinking about how much money it was going to make or who was going to pick it up. But I knew that I could not make the movie under the same conditions that I made “Clerks” because that time was gone. There I was, nearly 20 years later. I had done it a few times so, at that point, it was a different beast altogether. So I said to myself, “If you want to make this in the head-space that you made “Clerks,” you have got to burn down the village to save it. You have got to do something that is going to ensure that you don’t care what anybody says about the movie – particularly critics.” I was very fear-based. I was trained to fear the critical community because they can hurt your movie.
Q: So then how, exactly, did you move beyond that fear?
A: I said, “Look, if fear is what is holding me back from making a great art film, I have got to go fearless.” I pitted one fear against another – the fear of banality vs. the fear of not being liked. I figured, in terms of not being liked, maybe they will hear what I am doing and understand that it is not an individual attack. But I could not think about how they were gong to react. All I knew is what I needed to do so I went out there and was like, “I don’t care if critics even see the movie. Critics are useless.” You go out and say stuff like that and guess what that means. There is a good chance that every criticism of the next movie you make is going to tear you to shreds. And I suddenly felt calmed by that. If I could guarantee myself that everybody was going to hate the movie – critically speaking – then I would never have to worry about whether they were going to like the movie or not and I could just make the movie without second guessing the flick. It sucks to go out there and do it, man, but that was the only way that I was going to grow. And it sucks because I had a lot of friends who were critics. Some of them mostly understood what I was going for but then there are a bunch of cats who don’t know you from Adam and just see you blasting what they do and are like, “Who are you? You are Hitler! We used to support you!” I get it. I understand how people would take issue with it. But, at the end of the day, I needed to do that.
Q: And why is that?
A: As an artist, I needed to divorce myself from the dependency that I had grown accustomed to when it came to critics. It was kind of like being in a bad relationship with someone you love but you are just toxic for each other. So I said to myself, “Somebody has got to break up with somebody first.” I could do that and guarantee that I was going to be able to make “Red State” in this purely artistic head-space that was about as close as it would be to the making of “Clerks” – not so much the exact surroundings but the similar spirit and sensibility that went into making it. I weighed certainty against doubt. The certainty was, “If I am worried about what the critics are going to say about ‘Red State,’ this movie is going to blow. The doubt was, “Well, I doubt that they will ever return if I say i don’t believe in critics anymore so I am going to lose out there but I might be free-er because of it.” And, of course, you don’t want to hurt anyone’s feelings. I really don’t. Contrary to what anyone may believe, I don’t want to make anybody think that I was saying that what they do isn’t cool or something like that. But part of my process was to just dig it out like a tick. And it sucked, dude, because I loved being liked. I mean, everybody does to some degree. And they particularly want to be liked by people who write about their field. But the artist in my heart was just like, “Burn the boat and see what happens.”
Q: Do you have any regrets about that? And if you were to do it all again, would you change anything about it?
A: Even though I regret hurt feelings that people may have, I can’t regret what I did because I love “Red State” so much. Like, it was better than I ever imagined it could possibly be and that was because I was divested of all of that worry and fear. I took fear out of the equation for myself. So I apologize to critics – even the ones I can’t stand – because I never want to make someone feel bad about what they do. But that was part of my process and, at the end of the day, they have made me feel bad about what I do plenty of times so they can take this one on the chin. That was the most interesting thing. Critics are used to saying mean stuff about my movies and the moment I turned around and was like, “I think critics suck,” oh my God, there was an emo-bomb that exploded, proving that nobody likes to be criticized. If I had to do it again, I would probably still do the same thing but I might be a bit more gentle about it. But I had to kind of pull myself out of that relationship to move forward. It is one of those things, like, life is not always clean. Sometimes it is messy in an omelets and eggs kind of way.
Q: To be quite honest, I am – as a film critic – relieved to know that Kevin Smith does not hate me after all.
A: Don’t you lose any sleep over that. What you are doing is expressing your love for cinema. I express it by making movies. Right now, you are expressing it by writing about them. In 10 years, you are going to be making them yourself because you are going to come to a point where you are like, “I can’t write about this stuff anymore. I can do this.” You are going to watch enough stuff where you are going to be like, “If this counts, why am I writing about other people’s movies? I’ll do it myself.” I would be the same person if it were not for “Clerks.” I would be the guy who was writing about it because I am passionate about it. Because I love it. Because it speaks to me. Because film makes life worth living.
Podcast: Play in new window | Download
‘S Wonderful, the new musical featuring over 42 songs by the Gershwin Brothers is Wonderful with a big “S” which stands for sensational. If you appreciate award winning songs performed by super talented singers, who can dance and act, then this is the musical for you.
‘S Wonderful takes the audience on a journey through time bringing to life the great songs that the Gershwin brothers wrote. This musical starts in present day and sets the tone for what was about to come. A journey of love through the ages, with 5 mini-musicals and each having its own unique story about love.
The journey of love expressed by music and story took us to New York in the 1920’s, to Paris in the 30’s, to Hollywood in the 40’s, to New Orleans in the 50’s and to present day. The many faces of love included such mini-themes as: Boy falls for girl, to ” happily ever after”, boy leaves girl, romantic fantasy and healing that most people can relate to at one point or another in their life. Although each mini story line was great, it was the music and dancing that deeply engaged the audience and created a multitude of sensations.
There were so many things that were exceptional about this musical. It is so refreshing to see simple, yet a profound use of the stage and instruments. No high tech, only great live music and visually supportive sets on stage.
I can’t say enough about the acting company (Kaitlynn Kleinman, Kyle Erickson Hewitt, Jenny Hintze, Jenn Taber, Toby Yatso) who dazzled the audience with one great performance after another singing such great songs as I Got Rhythm, Summertime, It Ain’t Necessarily So, Strike Up The Band, Let’s Call the Whole Thing Off, Love is Here To Stay, plus many others.
This is a musical that all ages can enjoy: from the great music of George and Ira Gershwin to the appreciation of the fabulous singing, dancing and acting, to the universal language for all of us – LOVE.
Phoenix Theatre:
‘S Wonderful’
When: December 12 through Sunday January 6.
Where: Phoenix Theatre, 100 East McDowell
Admission: $25.00 – $70.00
Details: 602-254-2152, phoenixtheatre.com
Podcast: Play in new window | Download
Podcast: Play in new window | Download
Podcast: Play in new window | Download
Podcast: Play in new window | Download
Podcast: Play in new window | Download
Everyone knows the famous statue that was sculpted by Michelangelo called “The David.” There is a story that says that when the block of marble that was intended for the statue of was brought from the quarry, there was tremendous concern that a visible flaw on the outside of this block would make it unusable. When Michelangelo came to inspect it, he said something to the effect “not to worry, I see him in there and I will release him.”
Michelangelo was a genius who created great masterpieces. “The David” is one of those great masterpieces. Carved out of a single massive block marble, it is a one of the great artistic wonders of the world. The story above may or may not be true, but modern analysis shows that this amazing work of art was in fact carved from an inferior block of marble. However this does not take anything away from the aesthetic value of this moving piece of work.
In the same way, our brains are very much like that block of marble. Our brains are composed of countless neurons that can be programmed by our conscious and subconscious in ways that will improve our mental abilities, give us focus, and direct us to achieve our goals and own personal potential. In other words, as Michelangelo chiseled, polished and worked the marble to create The David, we too can do the same with our minds to create a better self.
The good news is that we can use our conscious thoughts to shape our beliefs, in order to change our behaviors, in order to help us achieve goals that we have always wanted but may not have thought possible. In other words, we can use be our own inner Michelangelo to create our own version of The David. In fact, just as Michelangelo saw “The David” in that Block of Marble, you can see your own vision the person you want to be and transform yourself to create your own masterpiece of your life.
You can learn to be your own Michelangelo and find the tools you need to create your own David through meditation, visualization, goal setting, prioritization, and other techniques that you can learn about through Neural Linguistic Programming (NLP), books, seminars, etc that will be presented in these blogs. Of course, you can also listen to “Breaking Murphy’s Law” on “Breakthrough Thinking Broadcasting Network” hosted by David Isaac.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_(Michelangelo)
s time your friend, or is it a foe? Do you do battle with it every day trying to jam as much into it as possible or do you see it as gentle friend that grants you the ability to do those things that make you happy?
I got to thinking about time in this way while watching a Star Trek movie where the villain “Soran” says that time is a predator because it stalks you your whole life until finally it says “time’s up” and then it’s over. Star Trek Captain Picard likens it to a companion that accompanies you on your life’s journey.
If you have read my past blogs, you know that I have been obsessed with time to the point that I have made a sizable investment in clocks. I attribute this to seeing too many people’s lives cut a bit too short for my way of thinking. That and I demand to live to at least 300 years old. Yes, I hear you, “Good luck with that.” I am still holding out for rejuvenation.
Time is an odd commodity. Much like air, you take it for granted until it’s all used up and then you wish you’d had much more. You can see the time you have on earth as being on parole from an impending death sentence or you can see it as a wonderful gift granted to you to live any way you wish.
For the longest time I viewed time in that negative sense. Rushing around, fretting about lost seconds and wishing I had done this or that another way. I have come to a point in my life where I realize that it’s all good; all the mistakes in my life, all the missed opportunities are all part of living. The hard times and the good times are what life is made of. I only wish I had been able to see time, my life, in this way much earlier. Oh, I had glimpses of it in my twenties, but life got in the way and I misplaced the lesson.
So now I firmly believe that there are no mistakes in life, only lessons. I believe in stopping and smelling the roses at every opportunity. I believe that love really is the answer and that if you don’t believe that, you don’t understand the question. Whenever I start to wander from thinking that way I stop and remember what Bob Dylan said so many years ago. “Ah, but I was so much older then, I’m younger than that now.”
If time is your friend, make it an intimate lover. If time is a foe, it’s high time you invited that demon into your heart and embraced it.
In “The Collection,” Josh Stewart plays a man who, having escaped the vicious grips of a serial killer, is blackmailed to rescue an innocent girl (Emma Fitzpatrick) from a booby-trapped warehouse. The Dec. 6, 2012, edition of “Breakthrough Thinking: The Magazine” featured several soundbites from the film’s writer/director Marcus Dunstan and co-writer Patrick Melton. The following is my full exclusive interview with them from which said soundbites were pulled.
Question: How did it feel to be back on set with these characters and this story that seemingly mean so much to you two?
Marcus Dunstan: It was thrilling! We had left our character Arkin in such a moment of despair – we yanked him out of the world, we took him away from his family, we had left nothing but the hint of further mayhem on an epic scale – so it was nice to be able to come back to that and be like, “What if this gifted criminal had a second shot and what if there was an element of vengeance?” Now he is closer to becoming a horror villain than he ever was in the first film. He now knows that his down and dirty skill set was not down or dirty enough. So when he goes face to face with that killer one more time, not only is he terrified – as a normal person would be – but he now knows how deadly this opponent is and he learns a little bit along the way about how far he will have to go to be a formidable opponent.
Patrick Melton: It was exciting! It was fun! The first one was purposefully very brief. It was fast and frenetic because it was supposed to be this very focused, small world in this crazy moment. Now we had a little more time to make something a little bit bigger and flesh out the world a little bit more.
Q: So how did you two go about topping yourselves? In other words, how did you out-do the original?
MD: We both challenged ourselves to earn the opportunity to make this movie even after we had it in the sense that this film had to stand side to side with every other film on the marquee and earn its place. We wanted to justify its existence to even the hardest of hardcore horror fans and movie fans. It had to stand on its own two legs. It could not just be that endless middle that most sequels feel like. It had to have its own element of bloody satisfaction. The fuel that Patrick and I used to light this one up was the adrenaline of seeing a bully get his [butt] kicked. And we had toys this time to depict that. We had a budget that was so much bigger than the first one – which never happens with horror sequels. They are usually cut into fractions until they are that pale direct to video dump whereas with this one we jumped up in scale. Our director of photography was given 35mm anamorphic film. Who would have thought that that would be a rarity but there it is. We had machine guns, we had fire, we had explosions, we had packs of dogs, we had everything we wanted to make sure this stood head and shoulders of anything else that we had ever been a part of but also so far away from that first film that you did not really need that experience. We are giving you twice as much of everything so we had better give it to you twice as good.
Q: Can you tell me a little bit about the characters and your intentions for them this time around?
MD: We have Josh Stewart returning as Arkin, who is marvelous and has a full character arc. He has a full cycle of fear, desperation and anger. It is the circle of life that we have plugged into that character. Then we have Emma Fitzpatrick, who plays the female counterpart to Arkin. She starts out hobbled in comparison to any other character in this movie – under-armed, chafed and terrorized – but she is not a typical under-dressed heroine who runs up to the top floor instead of out the front door. She is going to save herself. She is not depending on anybody. She knows how rough the world is. That excited me to go to work every day – to trap characters from other genres in a horror film. The horror movie villain simply wins. He dominates and sets out to destroy. The action movie, the thriller and the drama all have safety nets under them. But not the horror film. The horror film can sink to an abyss far darker than the imagination can ever reach. And that was a wonderful opponent to drag these characters across.
Q: That opening was just… wow. Without saying anything that spoils it for anyone, what was up with that?
PM: We wanted to do an opening that was kind of a misdirect and one that arrives with a huge boom that is going to set itself aside from a lot of the horror movies that have been done lately. This movie starts out as a movie you will not quite be expecting and then it sort of blows up into this massive set piece that gives the “Ghost Ships” of the world a run for their money for best horror opening.
Q: So what scares you?
PM: We are aware of what is out in the world and what happens. To be scared, just watch the evening news. It is terrifying. We may just be more aware of it than the regular person out there because a lot of the ideas we come up with are drawn from real life scenarios, stories we have seen on the news or have heard about before. Most of those are reality based because if you want to see scary you can just walk around. There is scariness in darkness and stillness because your mind starts to wander and you start to remember things from the past or whatever and you will see things that are not there. In your bed tonight, turn off all of the lights and make sure that there is no noise. There is something that you will hear. It is probably that branch slapping the window but you better believe that your mind is going to go to some sick individual tapping on the glass because he wants to get your attention to come to the window for when you do you will be grabbed through it and pulled outside. That happens to me all of the time. I try to tell myself that it is not real. But you know what? Sometimes it is.
Q: And hat lessons did you learn while making “The Collector” that benefited “The Collection?”
MD: Making “The Collector” as a first-time director, I was scared throughout the entire production and I was hoping to imbue that in the viewer. On the second to last day of shooting, when we had come out the other side and knew that we had enough movie there to make something special, I finally felt like I had a little more marrow in my bones. This time, I walked around with confidence and it took that in order to push the resources we had. I knew those resources and how to push them to the limit so that every single dollar on screen felt like a hundred. We had every obstacle thrown at us – from ice storms and floods to locusts and you name it – but there was always this vision before us of making this movie the very best and the very biggest it could be because you do not see this type of movie anymore. Most of time, we have just got to settle for the found footage something, the shakey cam something or the modestly budgeted give-a-few-scares show. We were missing that vintage New Line feel, where you had something like “Blade” or “The Fog” come out and it was supported, it was glossy and it had sheen. We wanted to contribute to that.
Q: Finally, this is being released on a day that LD Entertainment is promoting as “the real Black Friday.” They could have just called it Red Friday because even the phrase “buckets of blood” does not do this movie justice. Do you have any general comments about the gore factor this time around?
MD: We had fun with the first movie in that there was exactly one drop of blood yet it is known as a bloody movie. It was a CGI droplet on the forehead of Andrea Roth’s character when she pricks her forehead with her homemade Bolshevism set to do a little bit of Botox. This one we started out with 55 gallons of the red stuff pumping from every different direction. The idea was to wipe an entire stereotype out of this movie completely and with vengeance. It took that massive currant of red to wash it out to sea. So gobble, gobble. This Nov. 30, hang on to your guts.
Among the new movies that I reviewed during the Dec. 6, 2012, edition of “Breakthrough Thinking: The Magazine,” horrorholics and action-junkies alike would do best to put their money down for “The Collection” while those seeking something a bit tamer – not to mention inspiring – might prefer “Waiting for Lightning.” However, do not be drawn in by “Lay the Favorite’s” stellar cast. It is just not worth the gamble.
‘The Collection’
Josh Stewart plays a man who, having escaped the vicious grips of a serial killer, is blackmailed to rescue an innocent girl (Emma Fitzpatrick) from a booby-trapped warehouse. (R – 81 minutes)
“The Collection” sucks you in, chews you into a bloody pulp and then spits you out with complete abandon. In other words, it is – without a doubt – the best horror movie of 2012. Marcus Dunstan and Patrick Melton’s sequel to 2009’s “The Collector” is much more massive (not to mention messy) than its tightly contained predecessor. In fact, you have not likely ever seen a film that is this gritty, gruesome and ruthlessly gripping. The level of energy and the extent of its depravity make for one hell of an entertaining roller-coaster ride. Hold on to your guts, indeed. (Grade: A)
‘Lay the Favorite’*
Rebecca Hall plays a Las Vegas cocktail waitress who falls in with a sports gambler (Bruce Willis) who swoons for her as she proves to be something of a gambling prodigy, earning the initial ire of his wife (Catherine Zeta Jones). (R – 94 minutes)
After having seen “Lay the Favorite,” the question that will most likely come to your mind might be, “How in the world did so many talented actors become involved in such a tedious, obnoxious and unfunny comedy?” The most logical answer is that somebody must have lost a bet. The new motion picture – an adaptation of Beth Raymer’s memoir – from director Stephen Frears is a largely lifeless affair. The worst thing about it, though, is the performance given by actress Rebecca Hall, who appears to be aiming for an impersonation of Kathryn Heigl doing an impression of Minnie Mouse. (Grade: D)
*Playing exclusively at Harkins Shea 14.
‘Waiting for Lightning’*
Filmmaker Jacob Rosenberg tells the story of Danny Way, a young man whose dream was to jump China’s Great Wall on a skateboard. In his quest for greatness, Way continues to shape the very sport which helped save his own life. (PG-13 – 80 minutes)
Anytime a filmmaker decides to focus on a single human being for a documentary – especially when said human being is a celebrity or, in the case of “Waiting for Lightning,” a sports star, the result can come across as somewhat isolating in that it will appeal primarily to people who are fans of or at least familiar with that individual. Jacob Rosenberg begins to break away at that seemingly inevitable outcome with his look at skateboarder Danny Way’s life by giving it to us in a way that is universally uplifting. The uninitiated are likely to still get a bit restless, though. (Grade: C)
*Playing exclusively at Harkins Valley Art.
“When the pain of staying the same outweighs the pain of changing, change occurs.” That’s what they told us in coach training class. Are you buying it? Is your pain deep enough to make you change your life, your career, or your relationships? Or are you just comfortable enough to remain right where you are, maybe complaining to your friends or anyone who will listen, as you stay stuck in the place you are now?
It was about twenty years ago when I began to realize that I was in a marriage that no longer worked for me. It had its ups and downs, and often the good outweighed the bad. And then something shifted in me, and what was “good enough” for years was no longer good enough.
It was two years ago when I had to make a tough career decision – stay with a company that I thought I’d work for until I was ready for full-time entrepreneurship, certify myself and then leave and jump fulltime into coaching, or find a different job that fulfilled me while I worked on building our coaching practice. My job had progressed to the point where I was trapped in a job I didn’t love, working for a boss I didn’t love, at a company that no longer met my needs. And even knowing all that, it was hard to go. I was there more than twelve years and had many friends and colleagues that I respected.
I made the decision to seek other fulltime employment and it was the best thing I could have done for myself career-wise. I was able to find a role that I love, working for someone who’s the best boss I’ve had in my 34 year career, at a company that is strong and supportive of where I am in my life and career. I’ve been able to heal some wounds from past jobs and companies; I’ve gotten several do-overs.
As usual, I had to be in such pain that it was impossible to ignore. Like so many other people, I’m willing to put up and shut up long after I should go. I like to say that my Guides and Angels conspired to get me to leave by making daily life a giant energy suck. I was exhausted just showing up at work. I couldn’t ignore the pain any longer. In corporate speak, I became the “actively disengaged,” there in name only.
How did I make the move? I very carefully considered exactly what it was I was looking for. I knew what my strengths were, and I knew where my weaknesses are. I asked a lot of questions that I wouldn’t have asked earlier in my career. I knew that if the open position didn’t result in an offer, then it wasn’t meant to be. Something else would show up at the right time and place.
In the end, they chose me and I chose them. When we take on a new job, or a new relationship, or a new life, we choose. Sometimes we make our choice by not actively choosing, but waiting to see what happens. For me, I believe that if I’m not working my own plan, I’m part of someone else’s. I prefer my own choices.
What is it that needs to change in your life? Why aren’t you moving ahead, making active choices? How much pain will you need to be in, before you can see the light of change shining at the end of the tunnel, up ahead? I wish for you the courage to choose, to make the choices that will lead to your best life yet.
