Quad Blogs

Random Musings from the Entertainment Desk

Buy the ticket, take the ride- Dr. Hunter S. Thompson

           Welcome, dear readers, to a very special edition of “Tales from the Cineplex.” Over the weekend I was finally able to check out “Adventureland” and I wanted to share with you my thoughts. So, without further hesitation, here is my review of “Adventureland.”

www.cealagar.com

           “Adventureland,” the new film from “Superbad” director Greg Motolla, is an interesting, and occasionally funny coming-of-age tale set inside an amusement park.

           Whatever you do, don’t enter “Adventureland” expecting another “Superbad.” The two films couldn’t be further apart in many aspects, while still being oddly similar in others.

            To start with, the humor in “Adventureland” is much less direct and in-your-face. There is no Jonah Hill-type character and the script is devoid of any catchphrases capable of overtaking “I am McLovin.”

            What it does have is plenty of growing pains and more then enough post teenage angst to spare, with a light sprinkling of comedy thrown in for good measure.

            The film follows Jim Brennan (Jesse Eisenberg), who graduates from college, only to realize that his formerly well-to-do parents can’t afford to send him to grad school. If he wants to go, he’ll have to pay his own way, which means he’ll need to get his first job. After being turned down by nearly every employer in his home town, he finally gives up and takes a job working the games at “Adventureland,” a local theme park.

            The park is essentially a summer-long purgatory for those poor souls stuck between school and the real world. It’s run by a bizarre husband and wife team (Bill Hader and Kristen Wiig, respectively), who seem to take their jobs a bit too seriously.

            The rest of the park’s crew consists of the lovely but troubled Em (Kristen Steward), the super-nerdy but loyal Joel (Martin Starr) and the too-cool-for-school repairman Connell (Ryan Reynolds) among others.

            Soon young love is abloom between Em and Jim, but all is not as it seems inside the gates of “Adventureland.”

            For starters, the film barely qualifies as a comedy. Sure it has funny moments, but it won’t have audiences rolling in the aisles. The film is just a very well written take on a time in life that has been largely ignored by Hollywood to this point.    
             Most movies tend to focus on the childhood years, high school years, the college years or the adult years. But what of those years between doing keg stand and changing diapers? Those few years when, to the rest of the world, you’re an adult, but you’re not ready to give up being a kid quite yet.       

            “Adventureland” manages to capture that time perfectly, treating its character’s rapidly fading youths like the last vestiges of summer before fall creeps back in.

            That being said, it is still very strange to see the lead characters in this type of movie hitting up a bar after work or going home and pouring themselves a drink in front of their parents. You just keep thinking: “Whoa! You can’t do that! You’re not 21! Oh wait…”

            Maybe it’s a testament to Mottola as a story teller, or simply how stagnant Hollywood is, but it seems wrong that this transitional and fascinating period of life has been left largely unexplored to this point.

            Eisenberg is as far from a traditional leading man as you can get, but that type seems to be the trend in comedies these days. His character is essentially a take on Michael Cera’s character from “Superbad,” which is strange because while Mottola wrote and directed “Adventureland,” he only directed “Superbad.” That film was written by Seth Rogen and Evan Goldberg, and Cera’s character was based on Goldberg. In any case, Eisenberg is perfect for the role and excels as the likable yet shy guy with a heart of gold.

            A lot has been said about Kristen Stewart’s acting ability. Mostly in regards to her lack thereof. She’s been criticized for her blank stares and her inability to convey any sort of human emotion whatsoever. All of that is true in “Adventureland,” however in this film it actually kind of works. Stewart’s weird sort of repressed acting method is completely in-step with her character’s inner-turmoil. Now all she needs to do is keep her hands away from her hair for an entire scene and she just might be in line for a Kid’s Choice Award. In her defense though, Stewart is only 19 years-old and has plenty of time to find herself as an actress and she already has a fairly impressive resume built up.

            As for Ryan Reynolds, well… he is basically replaying his character from “Waiting.” He’s the older guy with a ton of experience and more cool then he knows what to do with. Here though, he’s not quite as likable as he was in “Waiting.” His antics don’t play for laughs as much as they make you think: “Huh… that guy is kind of a jerk.” Which, when you think about it, is exactly how that kind of character is usually looked at in real life. The guy works at a job with mostly kids, hangs out with them in his spare time and gets them to worship the ground that he walks on. In reality just how cool is that guy?

            The real fun in “Adventureland” comes with supporting players Hader and Starr. Hader steals nearly every scene that he’s in as the clueless theme park manager, who might just be insane. Starr, on the other hand, gets some of the film’s biggest laughs playing an even dorkier version of Eisenberg’s character.

            The film’s weaker moments come towards its climax, when Mottola incorporates a few plot elements that didn’t quite work out in “Superbad” either. Both films take a few of the same totally unbelievable twists and turns.

            In the end, “Adventureland” probably has more in common with “Garden State” then “Superbad.” It’s funny at times, but more so the movie just has an interesting story to tell about a time in life that doesn’t get bought up all that much. Despite a few missteps towards its conclusion, “Adventureland” is definitely worth the trip.

            That’s it. Thanks so much for stopping by! Check back on Wednesday for updates. Vaya con dios.

lostpedia.com

‘Dead Is Dead’ is one of the most important episodes in the series. I know this. You know this. People who don’t watch the show know this. It’s one of those episodes which will begin to make sense in the sixth season. It has to be. The final scene alone, with Ben walking underneath The Temple in what seems to be another Temple, has so much in it that I’ll advise you, dear readers, to read Doc Jensen’s recap of the episode. I do think we saw the four-toed statue carved into the rock facing what has to be the image of the smoke monster. But Doc Jensen will offer interesting theories into that final scene with Ben. And, of course, AS ALWAYS, you must trust in LOST itself because LOST will explain EVERYTHING (well…mostly everything) by May 2010.

With that said, I have a lot to write about this episode. There’s no better character to begin with than the man the episode centered around: Benjamin Linus. The episode did a fantastic job of adding layers to an already fantastically layered character. There’s no character on television as complex as Benjamin Linus. The added layers involved children and Ben. Ben has a soft spot for children. It’s that simple. His soft spot for children is what saves Penny’s life. Once he sees little Charlie, he drops the gun. He was supposed to ‘exterminate’ Danielle but he found Alex, and decided to save her. When Widmore described Alex as an ‘it,’ Ben responded with: “She’s not an ‘it,’ Charlies. She’s a child.” My theory of Ben being devastated by a childbirth he experienced, which is actually the story of Ethan, was dashed. But the episode explained why Ben was so focused on children, of fixing the problem of pregnant mothers and their unborn children dying on the Island, of kidnapping children like Zach, Emma, Walt, and Aaron. Yes, I know Juliet said Ethan acted alone but I’ll elaborate on my inclusion of Aaron in the list of kidnappings ordered by Ben later on. Ben’s soft spot for children helps humanize him but I’m sure I didn’t even need to write that sentence. Framing the story around Ben’s relationship with Alex and, subsequently, the history with Widmore created a whole picture for this particularly poignant story in Ben’s life. 

Ben kidnapped Alex because he figured leaving her with Rousseau would result in the child’s death. Widmore insists that the Island wanted her dead. In the beginning of the episode, while 12 year old Ben recovers from his gunshot wound, Widmore and Richard have an exchange in which Widmore believes the child was meant to die. A major component of this episode is the idea of what the Island wants. But what, in fact, does the Island want? It seems clear that the fate of Alex was to die on the Island, and Ben simply did what he did not do nineteen years ago: he let Alex die. I write this only because Ben lived to tell the tale of his judgment with the Monster. We’ve seen what the Monster does to those who are acting against It, as in the case of Mr. Eko. The difference between Eko and Ben’s judgment was: Eko pled his case to the Monster’s manifestation of Yemi, and the Monster manifested as Alex AFTER the judgment of Ben but It issued a warning to Ben: to follow every word Locke says, and to not kill him. Yes, Locke is important. And I’ll be addressing Locke soon. But back to Widmore, Ben, and daughters. The rule Widmore broke, as we know, was killing an Other. Regardless of his banishment, Widmore IS a banished Other. Therefore, the rule still applied. As we saw in ‘The Shape of Things To Come,’ Ben was absolutely broken, and we saw this in ‘Dead Is Dead.’ In that season four episode, Ben tells Widmore that he will kill his daughter. We see this in ‘Dead Is Dead,’ and for the second time, other than the remorse he felt for what he did to Alex, Ben expresses remose to Sun over his attempted murder of Penny. He tells Sun to tell Desmond that he’s sorry. Ben says this because he thinks he is going to be punished by death by the Monster, and that’s something for Ben. I felt like, unlike his apology to Locke in the Orchid, that he’s genuinely sorry for what he did to Desmond. It was all over his face. Speaking of Locke though…

‘What’s dead is dead,’ Ben tells Sun on the porch. And I think Locke is different despite what he says to Sun about being the same. I don’t want to say that Locke is like Christian but he is like Christian. They both died, and they both were resurrected on the Island, and by the Island presumably. Ben fears Locke because Locke is special. ‘The Man From Tallahasse’ is one of the finest LOST episodes produced. There’s a particular exchange worth noting. Ben is still wheelchair bound, and they have an exchange about the Island, and being special. Locke, the man once paralyzed but healed by the Island, remarks to Ben that Ben is in a wheelchair and he is not. It is that episode which sets up everything Ben does to Locke in future episodes such as shooting him at the end of ‘The Man Behind The Curtain’ and killing him, and there should be no confusion of why Ben plans/planned to kill Locke again. Locke is a threat to Ben, and what Ben thinks he is. Ben never believed the words he said to Locke in the Orchid about accepting what the Island wants. Locke will always be a threat. And even more so now because of his resurrection. Ben was also healed by the Island. He doesn’t want to lose the communion he had with the Island. To repeat myself: Locke will always be a threat to Ben. But, perhaps, things have changed now that Smokey let Ben live. As for Locke himself, he is in the Island zone. It’s awesome. But I don’t want to write too much about Locke alone yet. I do want to write this: John Locke is JABOY. Charlie will prove to be right: John Locke will save them all.

As for Ethan and Aaron, I just think Ben ordered Ethan to kidnap Claire in private. Ethan was with Ben before. So, there’s not much to it other than Ben is not the most honest person, and it would not be surprising if he AND Ethan acted alone in Claire’s abduction. And by Aaron, I mean Claire’s abduction because they planned to keep Aaron. So, in essence: kidnapping.

I suppose I’ll move on to my other thoughts on ‘Dead Is Dead’:

–Obviously, Ben was lying to John about his believing and seeing. Ben did not expect Locke to resurrect. Ben is a tricky fellow.

–Lapidus made the wrong decision going back to Alcatraz Island. Walt’s dream of Locke being surrounded by people who want to hurt him looks like it will come to be. Ilana’s leading a pack to avenge Cesar’s death presumably. 

–I’m loving Sun again. She’s so much cooler searching for Jin. And I love the atmosphere of New Otherton in 2008. It’s so cool. I really dig this separation of time. And I wonder what ideas Locke has for finding Jin and the rest of the castaways. Locke will get it done though. 

–I’m really glad Penny is not dead, and glad we saw Desmond again. I hope Desmond comes back to the Island again. The entire scene with Ben and Our Mutual Friend (Dickens/Season 2 Finale/Desmond callback!)

–I’ve got to comment on the name given to the Monster on Radzinky’s map. The name is Cerberus: the creature from Greek mythology with an alligator’s body and three dog heads. He guarded Hades. Obviously, the Monster is guarding The Temple. However, Cerberus is a name given to the Monster by a character on LOST. It is not an official name for the Smoke Monster. Radzinsky named the Monster Ceberus because of the knowledge of the Monster guarding The Temple. That’s all I have to say about that.

–Did not expect Cesar to die so quickly. I figured he’d play more of an important role. Lindelof and Cuse are tricky fellas.

–’Who is the Shadow underneath the statue?’ Very interesting. Code word or no?

–I really felt for Rousseau when Ben took Alice. What a character Rousseau is. 

–I mine as well write it now: will we learn Amy is an Other? Her son is Ethan after all. 

–Widmore was banished for having a child with an outside, breaking the rules. Widmore should’ve been smarter.

–Richard’s awesome. He didn’t seem to like Widmore very much. It was more evident this week than last week.

–Overall, I loved the episode. Absolutely terrific. Stephen Williams directed the hell out of this, and Brian K. Vaugh and Elizabeth Sarnoff did a great job with the script.

That’s about it for ‘Dead Is Dead.’ Next week’s episode looks awesome. TO THE RANKINGS!

THE OFFICIAL LOST RANKINGS!

An exciting week for the rankings I dare say. STEVE has a new number one. There’s movement in both of our rankings. Here’s some clarification: For STEVE, characters he doesn’t care about begins at 12. Characters I dont care about begins at 16. Enjoy.

AFTER EPISODE 12

RANKED: 4/8/09

CHRIS

1. Locke

2. Desmond

3. Sayid

4. Sawyer

5. Kate

6. Jack

7. Ben

8. Jin

9. Richard

10. Juliet

11. Hurley

12. Sun

13. Daniel

14. Miles

15. Frank

16. Widmore

STEVE

1. Desmond

2. Sayid

3. Sawyer

4. Kate

5. Locke

6. Ben

7. Jack

8. Jin

9. Frank

10. Richard

11. Miles

12. Sun

13. Juliet

14. Widmore

15. Daniel

16. Hurley

www.lostpedia.com

Quite possibly the best Kate episode the show has ever produced. Actually, no, scratch that: it is the best Kate episode ever produced. Gone is Kate the fugitive and all of the breaking-into-the-bank-to-find-an-airplane fun that we got in episode 22 of season one. I’ll be honest with you all, my excitement for the episode took a hit when I saw the Cassidy stuff in the previously. I don’t know why. Perhaps it is still my unresolved feelings for aspects of season two. But I’m of the opinion that “Left Behind” from Season Three is Kate’s second best episode, and it featured Cassidy. I digress though. This episode showed the new side of Kate in all of its glory. The big picture is not about Jack and it is not about Sawyer. It is about Aaron.

I didn’t buy, and I don’t buy, what Cassidy said to Kate about needing Aaron because Sawyer broke her heart. It was always about Aaron for Kate. “The Little Prince” reminded the viewers that Kate delivered Claire’s child. Those two will always be connected because of that. And those two refers to both Kate and Claire AND Kate and Aaron. ‘Destiny Calls’ is the tagline of season five. Destiny once again showed its face in the scene at the super market. After losing Aaron, she found him with, basically, Claire’s twin. Evangeline Lilly played the reaction to the woman perfectly: relieved to have found Aaron but aware of Claire always. Claire visited her in a dream, telling Kate to never bring Aaron back. So now, Kate is going to bring Aaron his mother to him because Claire and Aaron are supposed to be together. It’s destiny. There’s a beautiful scene at the end of season two’s episode ‘Maternity Leave.’ It is a Claire episode. In the episode, Aaron has is sick so Claire treks into the jungle with Rousseau and Kate (of course it’s Kate. Always connected.) When she returns, Aaron is better. There’s a scene with Claire putting a sock she knitted for him while she was with the Others and drugged in The Arrow on Aaron’s foot, and she says, with tears: “You know, I wanted them to take you. But now I know — I know that we’re supposed to be together, you and me. We’re supposed to take care of each other, okay. — You’re mine and I love you. I love you so much.”

Here are some other thoughts:

–Lindelof and Cuse wrote this one, and they did a great job (which is expected). They know their fans so well. I could hear Cuse and Lindelof in the scenes between Hurley and Miles. Cuse would be Miles and Lindelof would be Hurley. I’ve been listening to their podcast since 2006 so I know the minds of Lindelof and Cuse in regards to this show obviously. I knew they wouldn’t kill Ben because WHATEVER HAPPENED, HAPPENED! HE COULD NOT DIE! Hopefully, the fans of the show will finally understand that very simple concept. Pierre Chang, in the premiere, says to a construction worker, when the worker jokingly asks if time-travel means a person can travel back in time and kill Hitley: “Don’t be absured! There are rules! Rules that cannot be broken!” It’s been there since the premiere. Whatever happened, happened.

–This episode did a solid job of advancing the plot. Jack understood that Ben would not die. Don’t mistake that for Jack being a so and so, folks. He’s supposed to be on the Island. He knows this, and he’s content waiting until the Island tells him what to do.

–There’s no way Kate, Sawyer, and little Ben disappear without any Dharma catching wind of it. There’s still the key issue. It shall be interesting.

–I loved the scenes between Hurley and Miles. Miles said what I was thinking about the time travel business in 1977 that I had trouble putting into words. It is the past but it is the Losties present. 

–We saw a new, gentler side to Roger. That moment explains the difference between how Roger was when Ben was 8 in ‘The Man Behind The Curtain” and how Roger was with Ben before Ben killed him in The Purge. It is also worth noting that Kate is involved in key moments in the Linus history. As soon as Roger realizes how far away he is from the father he wanted to be when Ben was born, Ben will never be the same again after Richard saves his life.

–The scene between Kate and Mrs. Littleton was fantastic. Scenes like that are why I love the show as much as I do. It got a bit dusty in the 619. I won’t lie. I’ve been waiting a long time to hear Claire’s name again, and for her story to be brought back, and how they are doing it is great. Kate’s goodbye to Aaron was very touching. The music was quintessential LOST. Definitely my favorite part of the episode.

–Did I see a bright light as Richard entered the Temple? I missed a name the one Other said. I heard Ellie but I missed the other name. I still think Ellie is Ms. Hawking. 

–And last but not least: Locke and Ben are finally back! Locke was the last thing Ben wanted to wake up to. 

And that’s about it. Next week’s episode looks awesome.

THE OFFICIAL LOST RANKINGS!

Exciting rankings. Kate makes a huge jump in me and STEVE’s rankings. The rankings are tough though. I really like every character and sometimes characters have to be low because it is a harsh numbers game. It is very tough. Anywho, here are the rankings:

AFTER EPISODE 11

RANKED: 4/1/09

CHRIS

1. Locke

2. Desmond

3. Sayid

4. Sawyer

5. Kate

6. Jack

7. Jin

8. Ben

9. Juliet

10. Hurley

11. Daniel

12. Sun

13. Richard

14. Miles

15. Frank

16. Widmore

STEVE

1. Sayid

2. Desmond

3. Sawyer

4. Kate

5. Locke

6. Jack

7. Jin

8. Richard

9. Ben

10. Miles

11. Frank

12. Juliet

13. Sun

14. Widmore

15. Hurley

16. Daniel

            Random Musings from the Entertainment Desk

            Guess Who’s Coming Back to Theaters?

           “Scarface” fans had better get ready to say hello to Tony Montana all over again.

            After laboring through a 25- plus year development process, director Brian DePalma is ready to bring his beloved gangster back to the big screen; with a little help from West Chester University that is. Drake Stone, who graduated from WCU in 1988 with a degree in film and video production, is serving as a producer on the project and recently spoke with “The Quad” via conference call to give his alma mater an exclusive inside scoop on the highly anticipated film.

            The sequel is set to begin production this summer in Los Angles, with the studio eyeing December 2010 as a possible release date. It will reteam DePalma with original “Scarface” scribe Oliver Stone, no relation to Drake, and is to be released by Universal Pictures.

            The plot, which has been kept under wraps so far, is said to follow Tony Montana’s son and his rise to power as a drug smuggler in 1990’s Miami. Tony Jr. follows in his father’s footsteps, while trying to avoid succumbing to the same grim fate. Drake Stone calls the script “in step with things like ‘The Godfather Part 2’ and, more recently, ‘The Departed.’” Stone also stated that the sequel would be much funnier then the original in order to make it “more accessible.”

            Fans might be troubled to learn that the filmmakers are aiming to get a PG-13 rating to help achieve this. Stone said that while “the first film happily crossed the line, this one will toe that line respectfully.”

            In order to make this happen, the foul language and violence that were staples of the first film had to be greatly reduced. Stone pointed to a scripted chainsaw duel between Tony Jr. and a rival gangster as an example of a scene that had to be altered slightly. “We just changed it so instead of fighting with chainsaws, Tony Jr. went to a library and read a book. You really can’t tell the difference at all I think.”

            The foul language of the first one was also something that needed to be addressed for the new film. “We obviously can’t have Tony Jr. running around dropping f-bombs like his father did, and still get that coveted PG-13 rating” Stone said. “Tony Jr. will have a much less colorful vocabulary then Tony Sr. did.” 

Casting rumors abound but word is that Al Pacino will be appearing in the film in a huge role. “Who better to play Tony’s son then Tony himself?” Stone noted. He went on to reveal that CGI effects would be used to alter Pacino to appear 21, the correct age of Tony Jr. “If Andy Serkis can be King Kong, why can’t Al Pacino be 21 again?” Stone asked.

The supporting cast is also filling out, with “Waiting” star Justin Long in talks to play an enemy gangster and Seth Rogan (“Knocked Up”) seeking a role as Tony’s closest friend. Michelle Pfeiffer has officially signed on to reprise her role as Elvira Hancock, Tony Sr.’s wife from the first film which would make her Tony Jr.’s mother. Stone claims to not be worried about the potential confusion this may cause with both Pacino and Pfeiffer returning, but with Pacino playing Pfeiffer’s son. “With the magic of CGI, I’m confident it won’t be an issue,” Stone said flatly. 

Stone feels strongly that this new “Scarface” will “appeal to a whole new generation of moviegoers, especially those who love good clean family entertainment.” He went on to hint at the possibility of a prequel if this one is well received. “We would love to do one where Tony Sr. is a little kid in Cuba, just dealing with average kid stuff like bullies and homework.” That is another story for another day, however. “Scarface 2 the Max,” produced by West Chester’s own Drake Stone is scheduled to hit theaters worldwide never.

April Fools!!!

            Surely you, dear readers, won’t begrudge me a small April Fool’s joke, would you? No, I didn’t think you would.

            Now, in the spirit of full disclosure, I must confess that this story appeared in last year’s April Fool’s edition of “The Quad.” That being said, I think it is still as timely and relevant as it ever was.

            Also, how relieved are you right now that this movie isn’t being made? Not just because it sounds like pure profiteering on the studio’s part, but mostly because the last thing the world needs is more “Scarface.”

            One day I’m going to make a list of the most overrated movies of all-time and I’m next-to-certain that “Scarface” will hold the top three spots… at least. One for every hour that the film stole from me that I will never get back.

            It’s a bloated, sloppy and unnecessarily crude take on the gangster genre, yet for whatever reason; “Scarface” has remained in America’s pantry long after its shelf life said to throw it out.

            Just take a look at the cottage industry that has sprung up around it. There are Tony Montana videogames, lunch pails, night lights, deodorant, ect. A film that makes this much money is sure to eventually spawn a remake, at the very least a re-imagining, right?

            On second thought, maybe a good “Scarface” remake is just the kick in the pants that America’s economy needs. I wonder if President Obama would be willing to send some of those stimulus dollars over to remake king Michael Bay’s house? Get him working on that project just after he finishes up his work on the “Armageddon” remake due out next summer.

Hitting the silver screen

            This week sees the release of one highly anticipated film and one not so much.

            That’s right America; “Adventureland” will be hitting theaters near you! The film stars Bill Hader, Ryan Reynolds and the girl from “Twilight.” If you haven’t seen the trailers, “Adventureland” looks like “Waiting” but with roller coasters. In addition to that, it was directed by Greg Mottola of “Superbad” fame. Take an extremely talented cast (and the girl from “Twilight”), add in roller coasters and the guy who directed “Superbad” and what do you get? I’m not great at math but the result should be hilarious.

            And then there was “Fast and Furious.” Has it really come to this Paul Walker, star of such great (and diverse) films as “Eight Below” and “Running Scared?” This is what you’ve been reduced to? So it ain’t so! Oh yeah and Vin Diesel is back too. Fast cars, scantily clad women, explosions… seriously how did they keep Michael Bay away from the set of this movie? They probably had to hire extra security just to keep him from trying to direct it. And what’s the deal with the title? Are we completely out of ideas people? Wait, we’re talking about the THIRD sequel to “The Fast and the Furious,” so yes, yes we are.

Top O’ The Quad Contest

            Since no one got last week’s correct, we’re still playing for the “Hot Fuzz” soundtrack!! There is no caricature on top of this week’s section, but there is a picture up there. The first person who can name the last actor who played a character that was associated with this picture will receive the disc. Your hint is that he recently won Felix’s roommate. Remember, WCU student’s only. Send all answers to quadentertainmentsection@wcupa.edu 

            Come to a Quad meeting and you can pick up your prize. Meeting times will be emailed to the winner.

            That’s all everybody. My apologies to Michael Bay. Check back next week for updates. Thanks for reading and until next time: vaya con dios.