At least this is what I gather from every uppity political paper out there that has reviewed it. Apparently, they all expected the movie to feature feminine men in tights having grab ass parties instead of Russel Crowe kicking ass.

First clue that this was going to be different should have been when Disney wasn’t making it, and Russel Crowe was playing Robin Hood.

Yes, every title I have seen mentions the “Tea Party” when talking about this movie. I just look at it as their new favorite catch phrase and look to see how EPIC the movie probably is. I want Gladiator 2 with guys doing atv riding, not Errol Flynne snapping towels with other guys in tights.

The funny thing is, that I get the impression most of these people never even viewed the movie yet. They just “heard” about some of the plot elements and decided that it was a great time to bash some political party, or movement.

I’ll wait until people that aren’t political whiners decide to start telling me about it. You know actual movie goers who don’t want to spew political opinions while they review things. I certainly haven’t been able to find anything that actually talks about it as a movie yet anyways.

Related Posts:

• No Related Posts

Say what you want about Lohan and her messed up life lately, but she certainly should be able to pull off this role. I mean to play someone that was even more F’d up than you are? Has to be good therapy don’t you think? Hopefully she will at least be in shape because I imagine there will be a lot of nudity in this one while she is destroying mattresses.

Lindsay Lohan will portray a porn star, according to Wali Razaqi, Linda Lovelace, the Deep Throat superstar who later became a feminist crusader against pornography. Razaqi confirmed to EW.com that “Lindsay Lohan has been cast as Linda Lovelace” in Inferno, and also told The Los Angeles Times that “We’ve all thought that Lindsay would be a great choice for a while now, and we’re all convinced that she is going to do it.”

Related Posts:

• No Related Posts

Let me first say that A nightmare on Elm Street (ANOES) was my favorite horror movie as a kid. It scared the crap out of me. When I saw it was being remade like the Friday the 13th movies I was sort of intrigued, but I am very skeptical that it can live up to my memories. Robert Englund is a horror master, and played Freddy like nobody else can. The pictures I’ve seen of Freddy now just look stupid, and from the review I read here at MTV.com I am pretty sure I won’t be impressed.

The original ANOES was frightening, and it felt original to my young mind. Sure it was another teen slasher, but Freddy was a real wisecracking badass. We probably would have looked for some online life insurance after we got home today because we were afraid to sleep.

Just hearing the rehash from that review makes me long to see the original again though. So many great scenes even though it is quite cheesy now. I know I’ve seen all the N”Nightmare” movies, but I think instead of getting this one at the theater I may just find myself a weekend to watch the classics once again and wait for this to come out on DVD. I have to watch it eventually I guess, but I don’t feel optimistic.

Related Posts:

• No Related Posts

As the 3D market becomes more and more prevalent, there are as many critics, as there are of people that want it. The main concern for most is the jump in ticket prices as more and more films are either being converted, or made in 3D. This is only a temporary thing I would guess. These films won’t do that well forever I don’t think anyways, although ticket prices will go up regardless.

Of course a lot of people are in the mode of: “3-D is just a stupid gimmick”, so the increased prices are even more of a reason to dismiss the quality. From the talk of getting 3-D on everything from cell phones to digital cameras in the future this isn’t going anywhere anytime soon.

Overall, the reaction to the conversions has been pretty good from everything I have read. I don’t think the average viewer can tell the difference at this point. “clash of the Titans”, (A childhood favorite of mine), was a conversion after the remake was already completed. Most say that it looks good, and that the computer generated stuff you can’t tell the difference.

Who knows how many have actually seen a 3-D movie before this in the new styles though.

Related Posts:

• No Related Posts

There are a few, but not many reviews that have panned Hot Tub Time Machine. Unless you are really dense, you should be pretty much expecting a screwball comedy here. If the title alone doesn’t give it away…well you might need to learn words better.

You should be expecting a few guys to find out that they found a hot tub that can take them back in time. Absurdly obvious from the title. With hot tubs, and guys you know they will be looking to get drunk, hook up with women, and do insane activities. It’s jsut how things are. They aren’t going back in time to find a Mesothelioma treatment that’s for sure. They are going back to 1986 to party their asses off.

Here are just a few snippets from the critics:

“Hot Tub Time Machine,” which wants nothing more than to be a screwball farce, succeeds beyond any expectations suggested by the title and extends John Cusack’s remarkable run: Since 1983, in 55 films, he’s hardly ever made a bad one. Roger Ebert of The Chicago Sun Times

Lifting the time-travel logic from Back to the Future, the seminal decade-busting film, the guys decide they must re-enact everything exactly as it was 24 years earlier %u2014 or risk altering the future in damaging ways. With Glover on hand and Chevy Chase as a time-portal repairman in a modified Christopher Lloyd role, all that’s missing is the DeLorean.Claudia Puig of USA TODAY

With sharp riffs on the intersection of ’80s pop culture (ALF, Kid ‘N Play, Ronald Reagan!) and 21st-century culture (Twitter, Viagra, Second Life!), this Time Machine is a fun dip into a pool of memories that are best forgotten again once the booze wears off. Lisa Schwarzbaum of Entertainment Weekly

“Hot Tub Time Machine” – a silly title for a movie that often lives up to it – is a blowzy, rowdy sci-fi sex comedy about three discontented buddies, sick of their current lives, who try to relive their 1980s youth on a ski lodge vacation. Michael Wilmington of the Daily Herald

Related Posts:

• No Related Posts

If you think back over all the years, and all the gimmick 3-D events you have ever seen, can you honestly say that you felt that much more entertained because of it even once? I know I can’t. Would I pay more for it? No, I would probably be less likely to even watch it if it were in 3-D. I’d rather look for an insurance quote.

There are those that are coming where you don’t need the 3-D glasses anymore. So? 3-D is a giant gimmick. It doesn’t really add much to anything.

The more this has been in the news that studios are adding 3-d, or converting many 2-D films I have heard more and more people say that 3-D actually makes them nauseous. Literally. I had never thought about this before, but it makes sense. You all know a guy that can’t watch Cloverfield for a shaky camera. Probably the same guy has a problem with 3-D. The media isn’t going to talk about it a lot because this is the new “Big thing”, but I bet there are a lot of people out there that can’t handle it.

I have seen a 3-D television from Samsung being advertised almost every commercial break I see the past week. The family is sitting there with glasses on. Really? Who thinks this has any chance of staying power?

People will say “OMG you are afraid of change!!1!!SHIFT1″. People will be wrong. I spend almost every dime I have on technological toys. iPhones, Blu-Ray players, Playstation 3s and XBox 360s. It has nothing to do with this. 3-D is becoming an epidemic, and it doesn’t enhance anything as far as I’m concerned. They tried this in the 80s and 90s. It hasn’t even advanced that far since then from a viewer’s point of view. There are just more people willing to jump on the bandwagon that make media now.

Related Posts:

• No Related Posts

When you think that movies can’t stay on top for more than a week anymore it seems like those such as Avatar and Alice in Wonderland like to buck the trend. While Avatar was easy to figure, I didn’t think that Alice would stay a loft the charts for more than a week, or two.

These charts shift faster than a list of car insurance companies offering a new deal. Alice in Wonderland that topped the charts, showing continued strength on its third weekend, particularly overseas. Director Tim Burton’s 3-D blockbuster hit dropped 45 percent domestically to $34.5 million and 41 percent internationally to $47 million, bringing its worldwide ticket sales total to a massive $565.8 million.

The strong overall weekend boosted total box office receipts this year 10 percent higher than at the same point last year, according to Hollywood.com.

Related Posts:

• No Related Posts

The Avatar part in the title is more of a joke than anything. You will see why I said it after you read further.

One of the most creepy, and wonderful stories ever written is obviously getting about its 1 millionth adaption this year. Ig you ever wondered what Tim Burton could do with this story you don’t have much longer to wait. Burton is certainly one director that I would peg as perfect for an Alice and Wonderland story. Add to that he has Johnny Depp in the movie and you have to assume this is a classic in the making.

Also, let me say I haven’t watched this movie yet, and that I have no ulterior motive. It could suck ass for all I know, but I do want to see it because I like the story, and want to see what Burton does with it. He makes some dark movies, and it will be interesting to see his interpretation of this story to me. I wasn’t actually planning to go on a rant until I read a review that kind of forced me to.

One review I read just flat out annoyed me to no end. Well…to the point I stopped reading it. Take a look at this excerpt from a review by Kenneth Turan for the La Times:

Through no fault of its own, “Alice” also has the misfortune of being the first major 3-D release to come out after the “Avatar” revolution, and when you add in that Burton chose to shoot in 2-D and have the footage converted, it inevitably plays like one of the last gasps of the old-fashioned ways of doing things.

I literally just stopped reading it after I saw that and skimmed through the rest without even thinking about it. Stuff like this makes me wish this guy did rv repair instead of reviewing movies.

Why does this annoy me? Well…simply put Avatar as a movie sucked. It was ALL about the CGI and the new tech. Any awards it won for best picture were completely wrong. It just re-enforces the idea that CGI and special effects are more important than anything to some people. Special effects aren’t a movie. They have never been something I walked out of a theater and was like: “Hey that movie was amzing because of the special effects…ME LIKE THING GO BOOM….HURR DURR DURR”.

Anyways, I will go see this, and if the movie sucks I will say it sucks because it was a horrible movie, not because the special effects weren’t as good as friggin’ Avatar.

Related Posts:

• No Related Posts

I have seen the traditional “Worst movie ever” ones, and then the ones where the person thinks they are some sort of great author with tons of big words. Almost all of the bad reviews I have seen though tend to have comments that the reviewer is completely clueless.

I really don’t know a lto about what this movie is about. All I do know is that Leo DiCaprio is awesome and that is enough for me to go see it. I get the feeling that the movie has some parts you need to pay attention to though, which generally accounts for mixed reviews. You know how a lot of movie goers are rather stupid. If they don’t basically hold your hand and walk you through it step by step people consider it bad. Then you get the standard “you just don’t get it” line going on. I have seen this so many times I can’t even count it on movie discussions. May as well be talkign about face moisturizers because at least that is useful.

So…basically from the reviews I have read it sounds like the DUMB people are giving it bad movies, while most legit reviewers seem to either love it, or at least consider it worth our time. This makes me pretty confident I am in for a good show .

Related Posts:

• No Related Posts

On the heels of a couple Golden Globe Awards, it is only natural to keep pounding Avatar into the ground.

Already streaking to well over $1 Billion in worldwide box office sales, Avatar has actually remained on top of the box office charts for an astounding 5th straight week with $41.3 Million in sales for the week. IF you pay attention to this stuff at all, that isn’t a very common occurrence. It really isn’t even that common to see a movie on top for more than a week usually with so many new movies coming every week.

Denzel Washington’s “Book of Eli” settled for the #2 spot for the weekend, opening with $31.6 million. It is a post-apocalyptic tale, in which a lone man fights his way across America in order to protect a sacred book that holds the secrets to saving humankind and probably finding amazing ways of rheumatoid arthritis relief.

At #3 was Peter Jackson’s “The Lovely Bones”, earning $17.1 million after expanding nationwide in its sixth weekend showing.

Avatar now has box office receipts of $491 Million in the U.S. placing it 3rd all time behind The Dark Knight ($533 Mil), and Titanic (Another Russel Crowe film that ended at $600.8 Mil). It passed Star Wars to slide into the top 3.

Avatar has amassed $1.606 Billion globally and will surely overtake Titanic’s $1.842 Billion worldwide tally within two weeks to become the highest grossing release in history (unadjusted for inflation).

Related Posts:

• No Related Posts