Does this mean you could poke Aaron Sorkin?

You know, its funny. I've been on a major Sorkin kick this summer. First I finally saw Charlie Wilson's War on dvd finally (which I loved) then I bought and watched the first four seasons of the West Wing, and currently I drudged up my bootleg copies of Sports Night that I'm enjoying on my computer every night. By the way, Sports Night will release a 10th anniversary dvd edition Sept 30. Expect me to review it then. And as always I was sad to see Studio 60 go.

So yeah, I can say I'm a big Sorkin fan.


News comes today that Sorkin has signed a deal to write a screenplay about, of all things, the founding of Facebook. That's right, Facebook. Like go on there and write on your friends wall and poke them, Facebook.

While I can't say how intriguing said funding is, I will say that if I had to pick someone to elevate such material that I wasn't vomiting at the mere mention of it, it's Sorkin. I have often stated that Sorkin could write about characters reading the phone book and I would watch it. I guess this is tantamount to that.

For more info, check out the story here.

And the facebook group here.

Sidenote: If you go on facebook and search Aaron Sorkin you will actually find the profile he used to announce it. Sadly you cannot become his friend.

In My Headphones: Post-Modern Musical Pop Art

Review: Girl Talk- “Feed the Animals”

So I know, for someone who claims to run a film, music and literature site, I’m very heavy on the film and not so much on the lit and music. Well allow me to start to mend that fence.

Welcome to my latest obsession, Girl Talk. Girl Talk is actually one guy, DJ Gregg Gillis, whose eclectic taste for modern music leads him to blend divergent sources ranging from Public Enemy, Kanye West, Metallica, The Police, Jackson 5, and Kelly Clarkson into interesting and unbelievably catchy packages. Gillis uses tons of illegal samples creating beats, and melding material in ways not usually evident (who knew mixing Elton John’s Tiny Dancer and Notorious B.I.G’s Juicy would be so delicious, ie Smash Your Head). Girl Talk often uses something close to thirty samples per song, sometimes three or four at once. So if your not digging a track, give it thirty seconds, you might hear a well known hook that gets you right back in.

Sampling isn’t new. It’s been used heavily to great effect in rap music for years. But the multiple and often antithetical sources create inspiring tracks (if you had told me a month ago that I’d be jamming to Kelly Clarkson mixed with NIN, I’d have said you were sniffing glue). On his newest album, Feed the Animals, Gillis has continued his mix happiness, bringing not only stellar tracks, but an overall album. This is the self contained DJ album for the Ipod generation. Throw this on at a party. It will definitely get things jumping. Feed the Animals ebbs and flows not only within individual tracks but across whole the album, making a complete seamless package that other mash-up artist don’t provide with their individual mp3-ready-for-myspace one-offs.

Take this little tidbit. On tracks 4, What’s it all about, Gillis mixes Michael singing with the Jackson 5 “ABC” backbeated to Vanilla Ice’s “Havin a Roni” that kicks into a backbeat of Queen’s “Bohemian Rhapsody” during Michael’s chorus. It’s a euphorically transcendent ending to a song. Not only does it play into my love of ABC but then puts it against the universally loved Queen, Gillis is playing on your love and recognition of the source material to draw you into his world. You like the source, you like the mash, you like the Girl Talk song.


Good for him. My boys sent me Girl Talk’s way after catching him burning it up over in Chi-town at Lollapalooza. Feed the Animals is provided In Rainbows style for pick-your-price payed download at his site. You can get the album as one whole mix or separated tracks. And paying certain prices get you better files and hardcopies. Smart move considering the legal hurdles he’d have to jump through with all his samples. It’s a quick and effective way to bring fans into his flock. Count me among them, I’m sold. After listening to Feed the Animals hardcore for at last two weeks I’m already trying to get a hold of his previous three albums especially his previous Night Ripper (what I’ve heard so far, I love). I’m also happily holding tickets for his sold out November show here in New York at Terminal 5.

Girl Talk walks the walk. If your looking for a great summer party mix to end the summer, get it now. Be glad you did.

Check out his Myspace page to get a feel.

That's the man behind the music folks, Gregg Gillis. No seriously, I got that off his wikipeida page.

Temp Bastard

BJ Novak (Ryan the former temp now jailed boss on The Office) has officially confirmed that he will staring in Quentin Tarantino's Inglorious Bastards. He signed the contract Friday. That makes him join the ranks of Eli Roth, Brad Pitt, and Mike Myers. I'm interested to see Novak in this role, something totally different than taking abuse from Michael Scott. Novak is also a writer and producer on The Office. He says that he's really excited for the upcoming season and that he and Toby will be in the first episode. Oh The Office, how far away are yea.

And apparently Novak did a solo show with a puppet. I'd like to see that.



Sidenote: Unfortunately Simon Pegg won't be able to be in Inglorious Bastards to to scheduling issues. In response to the miss opportunity he apparently said, "It's like Tom Selick saying, oh well, who the fuck is Indiana Jones?"

New York, I Love You trailer

So here's the trailer for the next installment of the city love stories, New York, I Love You. I absolutely love the first film, PARIS JE T'AIME. Honestly its one of the best anthology films in recent memory. New York, much like Paris Je T'aime revolves around multiple short films by a plethora of directors that sometimes overlap one another. Check out the list of talent attached here. And the trialer below.




For some reason I just expected to hear LCD Soundsystem- "New York, I Love You But You're Bringing Me Down"

Crazy Fanboy Dark Knight Sequel Wet Dreams!

Spoiler note: For you three people who haven't seen the Dark Knight yet, you might not want to read this as it does devulge plot information.

You know what the mark of a good franchise is? When people are already dreaming of the third one before they exit the theatre. Dark Knight has definitely wetted the appetite of fanboys (and they have big appetites) around the word. Now the fan theories have been floating around the Internet for weeks, accompanied by some great fan art, my favorite of which is this


I almost ran this stuff awhile ago but decide against it, but after the following artwork I just felt compelled to. (Note, the following fan work is created by a different artist than the previous. His work can be found here)

I never thought of Harley Quinn as a viable option, but god if that pic isn't sweet. I could dig that.

Never thought of Dr. Who for Riddler, but I could go for it.

I think this Catwoman is too manish. But Marion Cotillard as the Cat is a way to go.

Which brings me to actual plot theories. Here's mine (that has been refined through help of friends).

Dark Knight leaves Batman in a very dark place. Rachel is dead. Harvey is gone. And he's on the run from an ally (Gordon and the cops). Thematically speaking Batman has to work his way into the light, which is a pretty tall task. Right now Bruce Wayne has a gaping whole in his heart, one that could easily played with and filled by Catwoman. Now Tim Burton's Catwoman is near and dear to many fans heart, including my own. Much like Ledger's Joker, whomever inherits the Catwoman mantle would have to forge there own image. This would be fine because a more realistic jewel thief Catwoman has never been explored on film and that would probably be the way Nolan would go. Selina Kyle would be an interesting choice as a villain. With the lost of Rachel, Bruce could definitely find Catwoman an attractive package; a woman that also deals with a hidden identity, someone like him, a soulmate. Throwing himself completely into a Batman persona after Rachel's death and his fight with Joker, a relationship with Catwoman could bring him back to his much needed humanity. However in the end Selina will cross lines Bruce will not, leaving him alone once again, but back from the edge of the abyss and a better Batman.

For this arc to work though, Catwoman and Batman have to team up against a common foe, and that's the Riddler. Now the thing about the amazing world Nolan has created is that it's very realistically based. Therefore villains that could use some proper treatment, chief of which Mr. Freeze, fit awkwardly into the created universe. The Riddler plays right into the established rules, especially if you follow the trend of the Joker now inspiring other villains. Combine that with a Zodiac like Riddler who manipulates the media(something clearly established by the Dark Knight) you can have quite an explosive film. With the Riddler battling the dark knight detective's brain while Catwoman captures his heart, these externalized struggles could make for a great capper of the trilogy.

So what are your thoughts?

Sidenote: Jude Law for Riddler anyone? Watch Road to Perdition again. Tell me he can't match the egotistical Riddler for menace and aloofness.

Righteous (or ILL) Kill?

Pacino. DeNiro. I should be on this. I'm not. Early word on the street was that its a major let down. That's really a shame. I'll still see it for myself. Probably on DVD.


What's up with the "ripping off the Departed" Rolling Stones usage? Does not score points in my book.



The gold standard.

Frost/ Nixon & Bush

Here's the international trailer for Frost /Nixon, the new Ron Howard film that I had no clue about until today. The film revolves around Nixon's interview post-resignation with the British talk show host David Frost. Frank Langella plays Nixon. Color me interested. Or maybe I'm just a sucker for 70's recreations. Check it out below.


Any films that has the man who played Skeletor in it is fine by me.





And secondly we have Oliver Stone's (who previously made a Nixon film himself with Sir Anthony Hopkins) Bush film W. The following clip is behind the scenes footage from Access Hollywood. Not much to get excited about really other then this is, as least my first extended viewing of Brolin's Bush outside of ther trailer. Honestly I don't really know how to feel about this one folks. I know there's going to be a resurgence of debate once it gets closer to its Oct release date (and a little something called the Elections) but overall I have a tentative "meh." Stone is a talented filmmaker, but he's hit or miss for me. I do remember enjoying his Nixon, though that was quite awhile ago. I just hope W. gives Bush some depth instead of just playing him as some cheap joke. Cause honestly, a fifth grader can make a Bush joke.

Soapbox: What the hell is Fox smoking?

It must be crack. Must be.

I'm sorry folks, I don't like to get on my soapbox and pontificate, but on this i feel I must. Fox studios (specifically head Tom Rothman) is making colossal blunders today. I can't keep silent.

First news of the day was Fox filing an injunction to stop the release of WB's Watchmen due to rights that stretch back to the 80's. Yeah, okay. You and I both know they are not going to let the Watchmen be delayed. Not in a post-Dark Knight climate. Watchmen has potential to be big. So don't worry, I don't think anything short of Alan Moore being granted the power of God himself could stop Watchmen's March release date. So it comes down to settlement. Meaning money. Now I am not a naive fool. Hollywood is business. Business is about money. Fox will probably likely drop this whole thing for a nice tidy sum that will make them say " Who watches the Watchmen?" They couldn't give two shits. But its low ball, that's all. Where was this injunction when it was being film? I mean it wasn't like the weren't posting VIDEO BLOGS about the making of the damn thing! Or that it had a trailer in front of the Dark Knight? Maybe all the Fox Execs finally decided to check out Batman and realized they could make a dime without lifting a finger. Whatever.

Secondly comes news that Rothman is taking control of X-Men Origins: Wolverine from director Gavin Hood because it was "too dark" and they wanted to make it more "family friendly." Now excuse me, but when did a guy with essentially three knives sticking out of his hands become Barney? Honestly! I think all comic fans would support the idea of a family friendly Wolvie. NOT! But then again this a studio that decided making such franchises such as Alien vs Predator & Die Hard, (two adult rated R properties by the way) and turn them into more "family friendly" pg-13 fair. Right, cause that worked out so well for them. Jesus Christ, did you watch the Dark Knight? The average comic book geek audience is 18 and above, not kiddies! In fact the comic book industry can attest to the fact that it doesn't have a replenishing younger readership, hence the art form is suffering! Trust me, a hardcore Wolverine is what the doctor ordered. And Gavin Hood is a good director. He won the Oscar for Best Foreign Film for Tsotsi! A dark and gritty film by the way. AN OSCAR!

So hopefully they just had bad sushi or something and they will get their collective heads out of said asses. Other than that... shame Fox. Shame.

Wolverine is not happy with Fox, not one bit.

Vicky Cristina Woody Allen

Review: Vicky Cristina Barcelona

I am a huge Woody Allen fan.

I've practically written a thesis on him, The Six Types of Woody Allen. The basic gist of it is that Woody films fit into Six basic categories:

1) The Early Funny Ones (pure comedy's): Sleeper, Bananas, Annie Hall, Bullets over Broadway, Hollywood Endings

2) Bergmanesque (hardcore dramas): Interiors, September, Husbands & Wives

3) Felliniesque (Surreal existential pieces/autobiograpichal pieces): Stardust Memories, Deconstructing Harry, Celebrity, Radio Days, Mighty Aphrodite

4) Psuedocumentary (Mockumentaries/ narratives include documentary devices): Take the Money and Run, Zelig, Sweet and Lowdown

5) Magical/Fantastical(those that feature supernatural or out there elements): Alice, Scoop, Everyone Says I Love You, Purple Rose of Cairo and his New York Stories segment Oedipus Wrecks

And finally something I like to call 6) Pure Woody Allen (dramatic stories featuring humor whose homages are less outright and are often novelistic in narrative): Manhattan, Hannah and her Sisters, Crimes and Misdemeanors

The thing about critiquing a Woody Allen film is that you inevitably compare it to his other works (Match Point is the dramatic narrative echo of Crimes and Misdemeanors minus the Woody part). This is both a hobby of Woody fans as well as a sometime unfair standpoint(oh it was good, but it was no Annie Hal, etc). Unfortunately it's bound to happen, and while that may lay undue criticism on works that would be hailed by other artist, it's just bound to happen for a man who puts out a film per year and has such a large oeuvre as Woody.

This leads us to Woody's latest flick, Vicky Cristina Barcelona. I'm gonna try to make this review as non-Woody Allen fan friendly as possible while still being a Woody Allen fan.

To put it simply, Vicky Cristina is simply charming. Allen has taken the invitation from Spain for financing and fashioned a little story that is fill with beautiful people in a beautiful place trying to figure out who they are. It's a postcard to Barcelona. It's a forties travelogue film(right down to the iris ins and outs, where you lose yourself for 90 minutes a visit another country from the comfort of your movie theatre seat. It has all the Woody staples. The Title cards. The Great music. The existential dialogue. It's quite pretty. So are its stars. Bardem and Cruz have a sizzling hot energy to them and their interaction (fights alternating between Spanish and English, subtle physical movements that mark them as former lover) are fun to behold. Scarlett, while also pretty to look at, doesn't need to do much and plays what she is dealt (her highlight being beguiled by Bardem's Juan Antonio when he invites her and her friend for a threesome). Rebecca Hall also impressed with her woman finding less and less satisfaction with her marriage after being not but. Her storyline was unexpected for me and she had some nice points. She also is the current film bearer of the "Woody Allen tick" torch (for those not in the know, in films Allen doesn't star in there is inevitably an actor who carries his mannerism. Whether this is there way of speaking his dialogue or something Allen imposes himself, I am quite curious about.) Patricia Clark also has a nice, albeit protracted arc, but she puts the most into it. But while this is all well and good, Vicky Cristina is not without its problems.

The chief of which is the omniscience narrator whose voice over guides us through the film. While literary and useful at first to set the stage of the film, the voice over's continued use through only robs the film of actual growth. Why see Cristina's dissatisfaction when we can be told about it. It's the cardinal sin of telling, not showing that keeps the film from being great. We are told about things that we should see onscreen, things that would bring us closer to the characters and help us empathize. Instead the narration keeps us at arms length and shorts the characters development that is sorely needed. Instead of complete characters we get sketches. The brooding mysterious artist, the woman in search for herself, the crazy ex wife, etc.) The storylines of Vicky Cristina are ripe with possibilities not fully explored because of unrounded characters. I just invented a word.

Penelope might not get naked, but she's still smoking.

Also, fair warning, I know Vicky Cristina has gotten a lot of buzz because of its storyline and the potential threesome and Scarlett and Cruz's spit swapping. If that is what your looking for in this film, you came to the wrong theatre. It's there, but in a restrained tasteful way. Gratuitous isn't in the film's vocabulary, and that's probably want you want when you think of Johansson and Cruz making out in a darkroom. Could the sex scenes be hotter or even existent? I guess, but that's not what the film was about. I will say the Johansson Bardem sex scene, while not even remotely graphic, is shot absolutely beautiful for a way the gives you the sex without showing anything and resorting to the "pan to fireworks" sort of cliche. Vicky Cristina really isn't about sex. In fact, sex in the film is quite empty or simple just enjoyable for sex sake. The film is actually about relationships and finding fulfillment in them( including sex, artistic inspiration, friendship, relationship stability, self fulfillment).

Anyway, for those Allen fans out there, I stick it in the Pure Woody Allen category. Its like a more serious Midsummer's Night Sex Comedy. A Barcelona Night Sex Drama. Ironically enough Midnight in Barcelona was a working title. Its charming and pleasant and pretty to look at. Allen directs it well and the story has novelistic echos (Vicky's storyline echoing Judy's, Cristina's and Vicky's playing off one another) however, when put into perspective with the likes of Hannah and Manhattan, Vicky invariably falls short.

But its not supposed to be a masterwork, its simply a good film. It's better than most out there. Unfortunately Woody's worst enemy is himself.

Here's looking at you Woody.

Sidenote: Personal Top 10 Woody Allen Films
1) Stardust Memories
2) Interiors
3) Crimes and Misdemeanors
4) Sleepers
5) Hannah and her Sisters
6) Husbands and Wives
7) Zelig
8) Purples Rose of Cairo
9) Manhattan
10) Match Point

Fly Like Paper, Get High Like Planes

Review: Pineapple Express

I’m gonna keep this one short and sweet. I’ve seen Pineapple twice now, and I still feel the same way. It’s okay. Don’t get me wrong, I had a good time. I laughed a little. Enjoyed Franco’s Saul a shit ton. Found Danny McBride hilarious. And there were some lines that I found very quotable. I love David Gordon Green and Tim Orr, and they did bang up job. I hope this opens a lot of doors for Green. Its just at the end of the day, I found it enjoyable but forgettable, and I guess I wanted more. That might be my own personal problem, not the film’s fault. I wanted to love it. Instead I enjoyed it.

But that trailer for it was dope.