This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.

2008 Oscars Preview

Best Picture
Nominees:
1. Tedious English War/Romance Book Adaptation Mangled Into Unrecognizable Slop (Atonement)
2. Quirky, Socially Relevant Indy Comedy (Juno)
3. Hollywood Royalty Vehicle/Corporate Greed-Crusading Lawyer (Michael Clayton)
4. Daniel Day Lewis Decides to Act Instead of Cobbling Shoes, All Mortals Tremble At His Talents (There Will Be Blood)
5. Coen Brothers Stay Inside the Lines (No Country For Old Men)
-Will Win: No Country For Old Men
-Should Win: Juno
-Essentially what the competition is: Keira Knightly Does the English Patient vs. Better Little Miss Sunshine vs. George Clooney Obligatory Nomination does A Civil Action vs. Gangs of New York Minus Pointless Non-DDL Scenes vs. a dark Fargo set in the desert.
Commentary: This year is pretty open - Atonement has no business being here as it is a complete muddle; Michael Clayton has little business being here except that apparently Hollywood grovels at George Clooney's feet. Michael Clayton is a solid, unspectacular film. That leaves us with three viable candidates - Daniel Day Lewis in an ok drama to me just isn't enough to win 'best picture' when he should win his own prize, if not have it re-named after him. Old Country is impressive, but truth be told, I think the Coens have made better films. Ultimately, Juno was great, if flawed by the at-times overly cavalier lines of the lead. It was positive, well-paced, well-written, created memorable images, had a great soundtrack, never preached, and never took sides.
- Biggest Snubs: (Again realistic snubs only) American Gangster, Charlie Wilson's War, Sweeney Todd. Though none of these should win, they're all better than Michael Clayton and Atonement.

Best Director:
- Nominees
1. Julian Schneibel directs something about human suffering that no one saw
2. Jason Reitman rocks it out with Juno
3. George Clooney rolled out of bed
4. The Coen Brothers played nice
5. Paul Thomas Anderson was graced by DDL's presence
Will Win: Coens
Should Win: Coens
I mark this as a lifetime achievement award.

Best Actor:
- Nominees - Quick comment - is anyone here other than Viggo Mortensen really playing someone that far off from their real personality?
1. George Clooney as a conflicted crusading lawyer, including a great ending gotcha scene in which Clooney drinks Tilda Swinton's milk shake, followed by an inexplicable portrayal of a cab ride. Since you haven't seen this movie, I'll just tell you - after the climactic scene, George Clooney takes a cab, and you watch him smile smugly for 5 minutes while the credits role. It's like...hey, I'm f-ing George Clooney. I made this f-ing movie. I ride in a cab and you watch it. (Michael Clayton)
2. Daniel Day Lewis as a sociopath oil wildcatter. DDL outdoes Clooney's gotcha scene with the incredible 'bastard in a box' and 'I drank your milkshake' combo. Game-set-match. (TWBB)
3. Johnny Depp as a singing demon barber/murderer. Really, is he acting? (Sweeney Todd)
4. Tommie Lee Jones is chagrined by the Iraq war (In the Valley of Elah)
5. Viggo Mortensen is a Russian mobster/spy who spends a surprising amount of this movie naked. (sorry for the spoiler. Kevin Spacey is Kaiser Soze. Get over it.) (Eastern Promises)
Will Win: DDL
Should Win: DDL. Landslide. Honorable mention to Viggo Mortensen for actually creating a character.
Biggest Snub: Tom Hanks - Charlie Wilson's War, Tommie Lee Jones in a vastly superior movie to In the Valley of Elah

Best Actress:
COMMENT: Notice that all of the men were in somewhat relevant movies whereas almost none of the women are. What is with women's roles and female stars that every year this category is essentially meaningless? Is it the writers? The producers? Or us?
Nominees:
1. Cate Blanchett plays Queen Elizabeth AGAIN!!! Can we get Helen Mirren back and they can just play the Queen of England every year for the rest of their lives and have a permanent nomination?
2. Julie Christie is old and hasn't got an Oscar yet.
3. Whodat in a movie no one saw (WORST NOMINATION NOMINEE)
4. Laura Linney in The Savages
5. Ellen Page in Juno
I haven't seen The Savages so I can't really fairly appraise Laura Linney. My guess, however, is that as always she plays Laura Linney, which, if you haven't seen her, is like an American version of Julianne Moore playing Julianne Moore.
Will Win: Julie Christie (for being old)
Should Win: Ellen Page (carries a teenage part)
Biggest Snubs: Helena Bonham Carter outshines Johnny Depp in Sweeney Todd, Angelina Jolie does an accent in A Mighty Heart. Honestly, why on earth would you diss two good performances by your biggest stars in favor of Marion Cotillard (Aforementioned Whodat playing a French singer raised in a brothel)? You risk Angelina skipping the walk-in when half of America is only waiting to see who she'll make out with this year. It can't possible be Brad...I'm betting on the Cambodian kid.

Best Supporting Actor:
1. Casey Affleck as a pezzonovante who shoots Brad Pitt. (Impossible to judge this performance as there is an unbelievably poor voiceover. Think of Jerrod the Subway guy reading you a cowboy outlaw script-on-tape and giving away you every character motivation, stage direction and the latest on Brangelina. Ruined the movie.)
2. Javier Bardem is the scariest movie serial killer ever.
3. Philip Seymour Hoffman hams it up in a role that acts itself in Charlie Wilson's War
4. Whodat in a film no one watched
5. Tom Wilkinson is an off-meds lawyer in George Clooney's annual nomination filler. (WORST NOMINATION NOMINEE)
Will Win: Javier Bardem
Should Win: Javier Bardem
Biggest Snub: Russell Crowe outacting Denzel in American Gangster. (Surprise of the year)

Best Supporting Actress:
1. Cate Blanchett plays Bob Dylan in the same movie as like 10 dudes...and is better than all of them because she looks JUST LIKE HIM.
2. Ruby Dee is the year's token black nominee, and perhaps has 10 lines concentrated in 3 scenes in the course of the whole film (WORST NOMINATION NOMINEE)
3. Soarise Ronan in Atonement - a kid can't be a Whodat. Besides, her name is like a lost commandment.
4. Whodat in a movie no one saw
5. Tilda Swinton does a great job in Michael Clayton
Will Win: Cate Blanchett (Law of averages)
Should Win: Torn, but I'll go with Swinton, just to be ornery.
Biggest Snub: Jennifer Garner, who should have won for a terrific turn in Juno.

Best Animated Film:
Ratatouille is going to win even though it wasn't THAT good. My question is this - there are 3 nominated films, whereas several animated films were NOT nominated. Is there a maximum of 3 possible nominees? If not, why is Surf's Up here and not Bee Movie? They're not going to win, but honestly, if I'm Seinfeld, I'm asking myself, 'What's the deal with that?'

Art/Visuals:
I didn't see Golden Compass, but the polar bears looked cool so they get my vote. Incidentally, no one who saw Pirates 3 (WORST NOMINATION NOMINEE) can take this one seriously...the part with the giant Calypso was laughably bad. It looked like something from the 80's. I think I saw a giant ant scrambling around the tiny-town models. Anyway, the big question is WHERE IS THE 300? This movie revolutionized film art/visuals. I don't care if it's a comic book and a transparently pro-war one at that. Incredible work.

Cinematography:
I'll go with The Assassination of Jesse James By the Coward Robert Ford. Obviously the voice over obliterated the movie by treating its audience like it was 7 years-old, but if you turn off the sound, it is a gorgeously filmed movie, really a clinic in image creation.

Adapted Screenplay:
I think the Coens should bag this one, but they really didn't change much. TWBB conversely totally changed the book, for the better, since Upton Sinclair is a tedious socialist blowhard. Something tells me, thought, that without DDL, that's kind of what TWBB would be. Atonement was a complete mess, an abysmal adaptation (WORST NOMINATION NOMINEE). I'd be OK with one of the 2 no one watched winning.

Original Screenplay:
Have to go with Juno - bursting with originality and love of language. Michael Clayton is tightly written and Ratatouille is apparently richly researched and steeped in culinary culture. But if Juno doesn't win here, it would be the biggest travesty possible at these Oscars.

THIS YEAR'S NOT SO SNUB-ISH SNUBS:
We're very short on snubs that you would usually expect of the academy...American Gangster should have been better, so I can't even tell if it's a snub. There is one glaring exception:
ALL ANTI-WAR FILMS!!! Wow, they got hosed at the box office, panned by the critics, and ignored by the academy. I don't even know what to make of this. Maybe Hollywood got the point - it's irrelevant. They can lighten up a little.

WORST NOMINATION OF THE YEAR:
Nominees:
1. Female actress who is not Angelina Jolie or Helena Bonham Carter, thereby risking that they don't show up
2. Tom Wilkinson in a role that simply isn't believable; he always comes across as acting and kind of pulls the movie apart.
3. Ruby Dee, as an afterthought token nomination with almost no actual part.
4. Pirates 3 visuals, for the ludicrous giant Calypso gaffe
5. Atonement's adapted script, which butchers what I'm told is a decent book. (I don't do fiction).
WINNER: Tom Wilkson. Ruby Dee was merely barely present and Pirates 3 had one CGI error, perhaps lost amidst it's copious scripting errors. Tom Wilkinson pulled down an otherwise tight, if forgettable film so he gets the nod.

THIS YEAR'S UNINTENTIONAL BEST PORN MOVIE TITLE:
NOMINEES (Black Snake Moan was disqualified for already being borderline porn, Daddy's Little Girls was disqualified because it's just wrong. Seriously, what's wrong with you?):
1. Hot Fuzz
2. There Will Be Blood
3. No Country For Old Men
4. Breach
5. Amazing Grace
6. Once
7. Because I Said So
8. Hannibal Rising
9. The Ultimate Gift
10. Reign Over Me
11. Are We Done Yet?
12. I Am Legend
13. Perfect Stranger
14. Live Free Or Die Hard
15. No End In Sight

An impressive list. Even here No Country and Blood are competing. Hard not to go with There Will Be Blood.

10 BEST FILMS OF THE YEAR REGARDLESS OF GENRE AND/OR RELEVANCE:
This was a strong year for stupid comedies. Honorable Mentions go to Ocean's 13 and Michael Clayton.
10 Superbad
9. Charlie Wilson's War
8. The Bourne Ultimatum
7. Live Free or Die Hard
6. There Will Be Blood
5. No Country For Old Men
4. Once
3. Knocked Up
2. Juno
1. Hot Fuzz

Bourne III: Return of the Clones Report

1) Return of the Kings Factor for extreme length - a solid 2 hour movie but it rarely drags. 3.
2) World' End Factor For Excess Exposition - Well, there are hints to excess exposition, but they merely rely on knowledge of current events and an implicit political outlook. Those who disapprove can easily ignore a line here and there and enjoy the action. 3.
3) Nice Neat Package Rating: A little too much trying to catch up with the headlines to be 'relevant' but the film successfully attacks its foes (white men), giving them stern media justice. 5.
4) X-Men X Factor for Clear Openings for Future Films: Nobody of consequence dies, the movie outright cheats to pretend they're actually going to wrap things up for about 6 seconds. I almost got mad sitting there for those 6 seconds thinking, "They want me to think he's dead. Come on, no way they have the balls to kill him. Money matters too..." but apparently I'm too verbose and it was clear he was alive before I could finish my rant. 9.
5) Harried Writer Syndrome - Not so much. Some legit action sequences and plenty of globe trotting. Not wildly original, and clearly straining to give Julia Stiles something to do, but the other female character was interesting and "we'd be having this conversation face-to-face" was a legit all-time level line. 3.
6) Bored Writer Syndrome - ripping from the headlines is a clear sign of either unoriginality or boredom. I decided to spread the writing points out. Deal. Anyways, "Look at what they make you give?" I hate when a well-placed speech moves people who don't care what gets said. Hollywood once again trades potential depth for a chintzy moral. 4.
7) Kirsten Dunst Syndrome for Bad Original Casting - Damon and the nameless senior CIA female are good casting. The Julia Stiles problem is elegantly avoided by giving her as few lines as possible. Well-played sirs. 2.
8) Johnny Depp Syndrome (Bored Original Casting) - I don't think Matt Damon is deep enough to get bored with a role and I don't think anyone else who is a recurring figure in these films has enough going for them to worry about their only meal ticket. 0.
9) Ewok Syndrome for Shameless Marketing - I don't think there are any Bourne action figures or bourne video games. But this movie was laden with conspicuous product placement. For an adult movie, it was pretty blunt. 4.
10) George Lucas Disease - The Bourne films are all good but they don't get pretentious. They're always better than you think they'll be and you remember them being. Low expectations plus strong films equals a clean bill of sale here. Except for the 'relevant' turn. 2.

Return of the Clones factor:
35 - Displaying elements of sequel fatigue, but not burdened by anything more than its own triteness. If anything, in the hands of a great writer, this series could be everything that DeNiro albatross wasn't.

Incidentally, watch the American Gangster preview. Finally the movie Denzell was meant to be in. Haven't had expectations for a movie like this ever. Honestly. I'm expecting the Godfather.

Return of the Clones Standings w/ 1 movie left to go:
1. Pirates of the Caribbean 3 - 66
2. Shrek 3 - 59
3. Spiderman 3 - 53
4. Generic Pasty-Guy Almighty -52
5. Fantastic 42 - 42.5
6. Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix 42
7. Bourne 3 - 35
8. Ocean's 13 - 28
9. Die Hard 4 - 19

The world waits with breathless anticipation: where will Rush Hour 3 end up?

Harry Potter V: Return of the Clones Report

Having not read the books, I have to say that I just don't have any emotional attachment to this series. Every movie is the same...fairly interesting, nice artistic flourishes, watchable, occasionally funny, but critically flawed (more later).

1) Return of the Kings Factor for extreme length: Well, it's clear that there's WAAAYYY more in the book that just gets sprinkled in to the movie purely for fan interests. But it's for kids and it can't be too long. 4.
2) World's End Factor for Excess Exposition: See above. They do their best, but they have to race for the sake of the kids' bladders. 8.
3) Nice Neat Package Rating: Since this is truly a series, and based on a book, the school year format is largely eschewed in favor of what has clearly become a series building to a finale. 3.
4) X-Men X Factor for Clear Openings for Future Sequels: There's already a book. I can't give it a hard time. 6.
5) Harried Writer Syndrome - This is probably more of a book review, but I don't much care for making the book/film socially relevant. But maybe it helps frame the world the kids are coming into. 5.
6) Bored Writer Syndrome - I don't think this is at all the case. I think the writer very much likes the characters and enjoys writing these books. 1.
7) Kirsten Dunst Syndrome for bad original casting - My ambivalence couldn't be deeper here. The professional adults are all perfectly cast. Honestly, brilliant performances abound in this and the other films. But the kids...so uneven. Most of the second-tier kids are pretty good, although Harry Potter's girlfriend ought to be a lot hotter to be commanding all that attention. The basic problem is that Harry Potter and Hermione are just not that good. They're not terrible, but they're just not commanding attention, respect, or sympathy. 5.
8) Johnny Depp Syndrome (Bored Original Casting) - I think everyone likes the film series well enough. Harry Potter decided to get naked with a horse before jumping back into the breech. Apparently that commands respect in England? It worked for Elizabeth Berkeley. 1.
9) Ewok syndrome for shameless marketing - They're already selling Hermione Granger diamond wands...on my freaking credit card insert. I can only imagine how many Luna Lovegood neck charms are being snapped up. At least the owl purchasing is probably at an end. Still, I don't think it's shameless. I think it's a response to real demand, not wholly ewok-esque. 6.
10) George Lucas Disease - I don't bring huge expectations to the series and the movie was exactly what I thought it should be. I just can't rate this film the way a fan would. 3.

Return of the Clones Factor: 42. A solidly average sequel to a non-fan such as myself. I'm left with a dilemma - how to break the tie between Harry Potter and Fantastic Four? I think that the film with the longer title should be the bigger disappointment. Unfortunately, both have verbose titles of nearly equal length, depending largely on how one adds articles and spells out numbers. I'm going to give the nod to FF4:RotSS over HPatOotP, mostly because Potter is just a better movie.

The standings:
1. Pirates of the Caribean 3 - 66
2. Shrek 3 - 59
3. Spiderman 3 - 53
4. Generic Pasty-Guy Almighty - 52
5. The Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer - 42.5
6. Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix 42
7. Ocean's 13 - 28
8. Die Hard 4 - 19

Fantastic 42: Return of the Clones Report

This is a doubleheader, as I caught this and Harry Potter V for Vendetta. Let's start with the extremely non-anticipated Fantastic 4: 2 - Rise of the Silver Surfer.

What's most notable about this film is the fantasy world that's created, pitching bluntly to comic fans: apparently the Fantastic Four live in a world where chicks dig smart guys. In fact, how do you impress a girl at a party? Explain the big bang! Try that one out this coming Friday guys, watch the hotties blush and say, "Wow, you're really smart." Except the blushing is from sarcasm. Other than that, it's just like the movie.

1) Return of the Kings Factor for extreme length: At a lean 90 minutes, finally a comic book movie series that realizes it's just a comic book. Well done. 0.
2) World's End Factor for Excess Exposition: Again, well-done. Sure there's some ridiculous addition of somehow figuring out that there are a) alien planets and b) they've been eaten by a giant space monster. But all the exposition is safely jogged through for the sake of the 90 minutes. Well done. 3.
3) Nice Neat Package Rating: a giant space monster wraps it's mouth halfway around the planet, yet strangely earth's orbit is unaffected by the massive gravitational displacement that a larger-than earth body would create. Everyone gets hooked up w/ a lady, everyone gets their just desserts. Comic book fare: 9.
4) X-Men X Factor - Well, the bad guy survives and the Silver Surfer is clearly OK. All that's missing is a preview for the next movie. 9.
5) Harried Writer Syndrome - I'll charitably suggest that the giant plot holes (the Fantastic 4 can randomly acquire and swap each other's powers based largely on plot requirements) and silly nerd world were explained in the missing 30 minutes of this movie. 5.
6) Bored Writer Syndrome - Not at all. A very deliberate and professional attempt to make a movie series in true comic book format, minus all the weightiness that makes Spiderman 2 a success and Spiderman 3 a failure. Still, I wouldn't say the movie was imaginative. 3.
7) Kirsten Dunst Syndrome for bad original casting - Mr. Fantastic is supposed to impress with his dance moves as part of his 'nerd-becomes-cool' schtick. Unfortunately, the non-descript actor headlining this film can't dance to save his life, and just waits for the CGI to take over. His acting is not much better. Jessica Alba is fine and everyone is wise enough to realize that if you employ Jessica Alba to play a character who can turn invisible, she shouldn't do it too often, and the comic relief half of the 4 are both good. Even the perpetual bad guy is pretty good. But Mr. Fantastic is as bland and featureless as possible, perhaps as another pitch to the nerdy comic fan, letting him imagine himself as the nerd with cool friends and a hot fiance. 4.
8) Johnny Depp Syndrome for bored original casting - It's hard to say any of them are bored...I'm not sure anyone but Alba has an ongoing career outside this film. Besides, given the shortness of the film, I can't imagine the movie being any more work than a glorified animated pic. Nevertheless, I can't see Michael Chiclis drooling over stomping around in the Syracuse Orangemen's mascot outfit and saying, "Oops. My bad."3.
9) Ewok syndrome for shameless marketing - A nice gimmick to feature the product placement ans product placement on the uni. The problem here is that most of the guys have super powers that don't translate well into toy format. It would be amusing to imagine a kid stuffing Mr. Fantastic into a silly puddy tray, burning themself w/ the human torch, and losing Susan Storm. Still, this was a rampant Silver Surfer feature. 4.
10) George Lucas Disease - I can't say anyone could expect much from this movie. I certainly didn't and I got exactly what I expected. 2.

Return of the Clones Factor: 42. This is the sort of movie series that is a shameless money maker from the start. In that it succeeds. Hopefully the people making money off of films like this are using it for something worthwhile, like a Wes Anderson pic or wage increases for set crews.

The standings, pre-Potter:
1. Pirates of the Caribean 3 - 66
2. Shrek 3 - 59
3. Spiderman 3 - 53
4. Generic Pasty-Guy Almighty 2 - 52
5. Fantastic Four 2 - 42
6. Ocean's 13 - 28
7. Die Hard 4 - 19

Evan Almighty: Return of the Clones Report

You might have heard this is a bad movie. It is. Who is the producer who is deciding, "Hey, let's take Jim Carey movies, make a sequel, but not have Jim Carey." At least this time they tried harder to find someone funny to replace Carey's character. Unfortunately, Steve Carell's long televised emotional breakdown seems to be reaching it's peak and he refuses to tell us any jokes in this film.

The formula here seems to have been even more eggregiously flawed in the sense that they replaced Jennifer Aniston with Generic Actress Blank and Molly Shannon. I knew the rumors were true when Molly Shannon popped her head in. She's a poison pill. I don't know how Talladega Nights survived.

Without further ado:
1) Return of the Kings Factor for extreme length: Ok, so it's not overlong. 4.
2) World's End Factor for Excess Exposition: Again, not a problem. This is a comedy, there doesn't need to be a plot. 2.
3) Nice Neat Package Rating: Well, the flood carries the ark to the capital at the very moment the evil congressman is about to pound the gavel on his corrupt deal. Tied up in a bow. 10.
4) X-Men X Factor for Setting up the Next Sequel: Unless John Goodman is being tapped for Congressman Almighty, I think that this financial dud is safely the last of this forgettable series. That or Wanda Almighty or That Other Daily Show Guy Almighty. 3.
5) Harried Writer Syndrome - Honestly, you've got all the animals at the zoo and most of the jokes are about being unable to shave, get a haircut, or wear normal clothes? Don't you trivialize the Bible by making 'Biblical' equal to gray hair, a beard, and robes? I want 2 hours of animal jokes. You've even got Morgan Freeman there to narrate it. 7.
6) Bored Writer Syndrome - I can't say they were bored. I'm just curious as to whether they were Christian or not. I mean, there was a lot of potential to work with here and it's totally untapped, humor-wise and bible-wise. 5.
7) Kirsten Dunst Syndrome for bad original casting - Well, even taking Carey and Aniston out, they lucked out to have a previously hot ticket like Carell around. But I have to take points off for dropping the stars. 5.
8) Johnny Depp Syndrome for bored actors - Pretty sure Carell mailed this one in. Either that or he's not really funny. Word to Wanda Sykes, the guy who played Letterman in the Lateshift, and the Daily Show Guy for working hard w/ nowhere to go. 5.
9) Ewok syndrome - I guess they can't sell bibles given how churches give them away and all, but the animals were a desparate plea for kids. 6.
10) George Lucas Disease for Letdown Factor - My expectation were aroused but not high, and after the review, they were very low. And still unmet. Am I wrong that Steve Carell and animals should have been funnier? 5.

Return of the Clones Factor: 52 - saved only by low expectations and non-sequelyness.
Most Disappointing:
1. Pirates of the Caribbean 3 - 66
2. Shrek 3 - 59
3. Spiderman 3 - 53
4. Bruce Almighty 2 - 52
5. Ocean's 13 - 28
6. Die Hard 4 - 19

So I've been re-miss. I didn't see Fantastic 42 yet because I have minimal interest and I haven't seen Evan A)lmighty yet because of the crushing reviews. And I've been busy.

But my roommates are in love with Die Hard, and I've been nursing a suspicion that the stars might align for Die Hard to earn the coveted least-disappointing sequel award. So I went on opening night. I can sum up this movie for you based on my roommate's description, "There was no part of that that didn't rock." To me, Die Hard movies were always entertaining, then you forget about them. But then you think about them later and you think, 'wait a minute, that sort of rocked.' And rock Live Free or Die Hard did.

1) Return of the King Factor for extreme length: I didn't notice the movie dragging too much. It's a solid 2 hours, but it never drags. 3.
2) Worlds' End Factor for Excess Exposition: Sure, there's some random characters who pop in, but they're charmingly empty on backstory. Exposition is at the right pitch, we only really need 1 scene for McClane's daughter, only 1 scene of the non FBI dudes, etc. Die Hard's good about that - the bad guys always have some backstory, but really, Bruce Willis doesn't care. So the bad guys have their exposition scenes, and then Bruce Willis takes his licks and keeps on ticking. In fact, I think Die Hard 5 will probably be Die Hard: Still Ticking, with the S in Still turned around to make a 5. 2.
3) Nice Neat Package Rating: Again, Die Hard only relies on one recurring character, so it never matters what gets left open or tied up. The bad guys are going down, the family members will sruvive, and other people mill about and collect pay checks. 3.
4) X-Men X Factor for Setting Up the Next Sequel - Honestly, there's nothing to set up. McClane will magically drift into obscurity after blowing up Baltimore and saving the day for a 4th time. His wounds will heal, his family will be in a bit of a tiff, but still essentially family once the bad guys show up. Nothing needs setting up. 2.
5) Harried Writer Syndrome - No symptoms. A) Baltimore gets blown up, B) The Mac Guy is a PC hacker, C) Random freerunning and kung fu bad guys/gals w/ no back story(!) C) A helicopter taken out by a fire hydrant and a car(!!) D) Baltimore gets blown up (To quote a Baltimore city cop who used to be an MP in Sadr City, "I'd rather be in Sadr City.") E) Harrier-esque jet blows up mixing bowl, commuters rejoice because IT'S NEVER GOING TO GET FINISHED ANYWAY. No need to continue, 1.
6) Bored Writer Syndrome - I have to give a little bit of this just because A) There was never that Die Hard bad guy twist and B) We've seen a lot of the cool stuff above before in other movies (Casino Royale and True Lies come to mind). 4.
7) Kirsten Dunst Syndrome for bad original casting - Not a problem. With one returning character perfectly cast, there are no problems. 0.
8) Johnny Depp Syndrome for bored original casting - Willis isn't really that bored since he already spent a long time between sequels. Anyhow, to both signal his boredness and still give tghe audience a smile, he just starts laughing after killing just about everyone. It's a good response. 3.
9) Ewok syndrome for shameless marketing - Not much market, unless someone's coming out w/ a destructible Baltimore set akin to my old Castle Grayskull, in which case thousdands of Baltimore expatriates (also known as 'escapees') will be lining up. 1.
10) George Lucase Disease - Die Hard sneaks up on you - your expectations aren't that high, so it can't disappoint that much. Then it rocks for 2 hours of action, and you feel you got your money's worth. 1.

Return of the Clones Factor: 19. Live Free or Die Hard makes a strong case for least disappointing sequel of the summer. Let's look at the rankings:

Most Disappointing:
1. Pirates of the Caribbean 3 - 66
2. Shrek 3 - 59
3. Spiderman 3 - 53
4. Ocean's 13 - 28
5. Die Hard 4 - 19

I promise to get caught up with the mediocre contenders in time for Harry Potter.

Summer Sequel Square-Off:Ocean's 13

I gave Ocean's 13 a spin on the Return of the Clones Ratings. Before we get started, given the Soprano's ending leaving frayed ends in every direction, we're going to have to change the 'too much tying-up of loose ends' category to the blander Nice Neat Package category.

1) Return of the King Factor for extreme length: If anything, it was too short. Rating: Solid 1.
2) Worlds' End Factor for excess exposition: There's definitely a few too many characters with strange things going on. What's the idea w/ the Basher notes? Why was Ellen Barkin in this movie other than to be taken advantage of and to look hot? Ocean might consider a prequel next time, say Ocean's 5. Drop the excess baggage and leave yourself room to build up to 11. Rating: 4.
3) Nice Neat Package rating: Very low. These guys are just going to keep pulling jobs and acquiring enemies. Rating: 1.
4) X-Men X Factor for Setting Up the Next Sequel: This is where things get hairy. We've got abandoned wives to think about, an angry Al Pacino itching for that Godfather 2 sentiment; Ellen Barkin's just kind of turning in the air, there's the one European dude, there are at least 5 more Vegas locations that need to have a little classical music victory stand. Even Saul seems healthier than ever. The only thing is, Clooney and Pitt don't seem to care much. The ending is more like, "Sure, we'll do another sequel if we feel like it." Rating: 7.
5) Harried Writer Syndrome: No fun. This movie has a little fun, especially in Mexico, but the main characters are missing their oomph and Eddie Izzard seems woefully misused. Rating: 4.
6) Bored Writer Syndrome: I'll say this, they definitely went outside the box. Really nothing too much to complain about here. Rating: 2.
7) Kirsten Dunst Syndrome for bad original casting: This is the series' strength. These dudes rock, plus they got Don Cheadle before he was anything. Rating: 0.
8) Johnny Depp Syndrome for bored w/ role leads: This is a little bit of a problem. It's too easy, and with all the extra characters, we're not getting enough Clooney and Pitt, plus we're minus the ladies. Rating: 6.
9) Ewok Syndrome for shameless marketing: Unless someone's building the impossible "Bank" Casino, nothing to get upset about here. Unless it's marketing the stars themselves. So: 2.
10) George Lucas Disease for complete let-down vis-a-vis expectations: Some symptoms, but not a full-blown case. This movie was pretty good, but just doesn't come together. Too many characters make it feel rushed, and I could have used more fleshing out of the scheme. I don't even know what Pacino and Clooney agreed to at the sumo match. Rating: 5.

Return of the Clones Factor: 28...a pretty strong effort making Ocean's 13 the least disappointing sequel so far this summer by quite a ways. It'll be interesting to see how a #2 of a bad original movie (Fantastic Four Two) ends up playing out.

Next Price Is Right Host: Bill Clinton

Bob Barker just retired and endorsed Rosie O'Donnell as his successor. This is a wildly bad idea given that 3 critical elements of the show are:
1) A likable old man for old women to kiss
2) Bob's beauties for him to creepily hit on
3) Bob's joking w/ the crowd during commercial breaks to keep their spirits up.
Rosie O'Donnell is not going to make old women want to come to the show and her politics might cause a riot at the local convalescence home, or as close as the old folks could come to it. I don't think America's primed either for Rosie to creepily hit on Bob's beauties. And if you haven't seen the Youtube video, Rosie likes to entertain the crowd during breaks, but not with good natured ribbing - she entertains it with hackneyed 9/11 conspiracy theories.

In short, I couldn't think of someone worse for the job and the endorsement has tainted Bob in my mind, if only briefly. Maybe it's one of those endorsements where he wants his successor to fail, just to prove Bob's greatness.

In picking a successor, a lot of names have been bandied about, Mario Lopez being a good laughable candidate. Jean Claude Van Damme crossed my mind. But then it hit me -

BILL CLINTON!!!!

Old women would love to come kiss Bubba. Bill would be perfect for the oggling and fondling the beauties bit. And Bill is just the affable sort to keep the crowd going in between breaks. I bet Bill would pull off, shamelessly, ripping off Bob's, "Have your pets spaid or neutered."

The question, I guess, is how good is Bill's short game. If you can't sink that putt, you can't have that job.

Amongst Lindsey Lohan, Paris Hilton, Britney Spears, and Jessica Simpson, I'm taking odds:

In 15 years, who is most likely to still be successful?
In 15 years, who is most likely to still be attractive?
In 15 years, who is most likely to be dead/done/Courtney Love?

Successful:
Simpson 3-2
Lohan 4-1
Spears 6-1
Hilton (Never has been successful)
Lohan is determined to be Courtney Love at best, Spears is, much like Christ Eliot, surviving on pity at this point, and Hilton isn't even very good at being a felon. Simpson by default. Plus she's soulless, she seems like she'd take up ska if it made her money. I can picture being like SNL - it makes too much money to cancel.

Attractive:
Lohan 3-1
Simpson 3-1
Hilton 4-1
Spears 30-1
I'm torn, Jessica's prettiest now, but Lohan should age better if she's not torn up by the steady booze/drugs diet. Hilton is not currently attractive, but she's legit skinny and should age well. Britney's waging war w/ her Elvis pounds; it's a matter of time.

Done/Dead/Courtney Love:
Lohan 5-4
Spears 3-2
Hilton 2-1
Simpson 4-1
Lohan behaves as though she already made this bet on herself. That and she doesn't understand the bet and thinks she's in the hole if she doesn't get there fast enough. I can't see how Spears could hold it together another decade with the pounds on their way. I don't know how Hilton could keep herself in the news without actually doing anything. Simpson has two ways to get here: 1) she just gets enough money that she doesn't need to stay in the game, or 2) she randomly has a complete breakdown.

Incidentally, Tara Reid tried to get in on this bet but didn't make the cut:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q3bRrKqo2jQ