Insert Clever "Beck" Reference Here!

I'm not a big fan of "The Losers".

I admit that I wasn't in the best mood when I sat down in the theatre with my brother and my cousin to view the film. I was very tired, and I had a splitting headache. I was somewhat conflicted, anyway.

I had never read the comic books on which the film is based, and my reactions to the marketing materials were generally positive. But I also understood that the comic book was more of a "mature readers" affair, being published by DC's Vertigo imprint, and that director Sylvain White had made a more family-friendly affair.

That stuff always bothers me, I can't help it. Knowing that an adaptation has been purposefully toned-down from its source material to appeal to a wider audience always strikes me as selling out.

I read an interview with White where he explicitly stated that Warner Bros. was completely open to an R-rated "Losers" film, but White decided to shoot a PG-13 movie, "so the 13 and 14 year-olds could see it". That rubs me the wrong way. Why would you de-claw a story like this?

I've seen Sylvain White's "Stomp The Yard". I generally disliked it, although it was certainly competently made. I've also seen the direct-to-video "I'll Always Know What You Did Last Summer", the film that turned the mediocre (and very much alive) villain "the fisherman" from the previous two films into a fucking zombie.

The film seriously tried to Jason Vorhees the "I Know What You Did Last Summer" franchise. God, what a fucking waste.

I guess I'm trying to say that I don't think much of Sylvain White. Sure, he's probably a nice fellow. And it's difficult to really blame the "I'll Always Know" movie on the man. He was just getting started in the business with that movie, and he didn't write the dreadful screenplay. Besides, his visual style did improve between this and "Stomp The Yard".

And "The Losers" is very slickly made, with nice shot compositions, and a very stylish look. But I can't get over the fact that it was White's decision to turn an R-rated comic book into a PG-13 movie.

To be fair, the comic book may be terrible. "Kick-Ass" was based on a dreadful comic book with a good premise, and it turned out pretty great. So maybe Sylvain White was just doing his best with mediocre source material.

Either way, I wasn't terribly impressed.

The basic plot: a US Special Forces team is on assignment in Bolivia. Their basic job is to paint a target with a laser for a bombing run. The target: the compound of some warlord named Fadhil. I don't know exactly what this Fadhil character has done to earn flaming death from above, and the reasons are never explained. It's all so nebulous.

While waiting for the jets to rain hell on Fadhil's house of pain, team member Cougar (Oscar Jaenada) spots a busload of children arriving in the compound via his sniper scope. Team leader Clay (Jeffrey Dean Morgan) decides to send the team in to rescue the children before the jungle becomes a wall of fire.

The team escapes with the children, loading them onto the evac chopper in their stead, opting to wait on-site for another ride. Once in the air, the chopper is struck with a missle, and all the poor kiddies die. The chopper was blown to kingdom come on the orders of some shadowy puppet master called Max (Jason Patric), who had some kind of relationship with Fadhil.

So apparently Max ordered the destruction of Fadhil's compound, although once again, it is never explained how Max has the kind of authority to order a US Special Forces team to do his dirty work.

There's never even any attempt at an explanation. It's frustrating. The film gives its audience the bare bones of a story, and never bothers to fill in any of the details.

Now if you're, for example, a guy like David Mamet, you can get away with this kind of trick, because your stripped-down story is strong enough to allow your audience to read between the lines. The details seem to be there, although they are never explicitly stated.

Take "Spartan", for example. Val Kilmer's character is obviously a former marine, but we never learn exactly who he is currently working for. CIA? NSA? It's never clear. We don't even learn that the kidnapped politician's daughter is, in fact, the daughter of the President until late in the game, and if you're not paying attention, you'll miss that fact completely.

Does this make "Spartan" hard to follow, or a hollow film? Absolutely not. Because David Mamet is a master when it comes to streamlined storytelling. You know what you need to know.

Sylvain White, on the other hand, is not David Mamet.

We understand that this Max character, whoever the hell he is, wanted Fadhil dead, and decided to kill Clay and his team because they chose to save a group of children from a firey demise.

Why? Fadhil still died. It's not like Max's goals were not accomplished. His target was eliminated. So why complicate matters by killing a Special Forces unit that still essentially accomplished his/their mission? To tie up loose ends? That doesn't hold water. The team didn't explicitly disobey orders. The people that needed to get dead got dead.

Their sin was mercy. Some cute little kids who didn't deserve to die got saved. And for their trouble, Clay's team had to watch in horror as the kids got blown up, anyway. Of course, Max thinks that Clay and his team were onboard the chopper went it exploded, so he thinks they're dead.

The team spends an indeterminate amount of time in Bolivia, working odd jobs in attempt to earn enough money to get back to the United States. I'm not sure why, exactly. I know that one of the team members, Pooch (Columbus Short) has a pregnant wife back home, and he wants to get back to her. I understand that. But if these guys resurface, aren't they targets for Max's wrath? I mean, he wanted them dead for some fucking reason, right?

Clay and Roque (Idris Elba) seem to understand this. Roque wants to disappear, but Clay wants revenge. And the opportunity presents itself in the form of Aisha (Zoe Saldana), an enigmatic figure (sensing a pattern, here...) who claims she can get "The Losers" back to the US and get their revenge on the evil Max.

Aisha is another character that doesn't really make sense to me. She has a secret (spoiler alert! she's the daughter of deceased warlord Fadhil, and wants revenge against Max for ordering his death), and she also has a lot of money. She manages to smuggle the team back into the country in coffins (love the symbolism, there), supplies them with a lot of hardware and intel, and even shows up with a rocket launcher at one point to save the day.

I'm not sure where all of this money came from, but being the daughter of a shadowy South American warlord, perhaps she inherited a large sum of blood money. Who can say?

So the stage is set for a big confrontation with eeeeevil Max. The Losers want revenge. Max wants to set off some completely implausible super weapon in Los Angeles Harbor, which will apparently start a war with somebody.

Once again, it's all vague. I suppose Max is one of those people who believes that war is good for business, but it never really sticks. By the end of the movie, you're apt to forget that little detail, anyway.

In "The Fifth Element", weapons dealer Zorg, played with maniacal charm by Gary Oldman, gives a speech about how his business is essentially good for humanity.

He justifies his existence by explaining how his weapons manufacturing plants employ countless people, who each depend on the continued use of these weapons for their jobs. If these weapons were no longer needed, then the economy could very well collapse, and all of these countless employees would be jobless, homeless, and hopeless.

Zorg sees himself as a champion of life. It's a very good moment, and it sums up the character of Zorg perfectly. Or maybe not, considering he's working for an entity that intends to extinguish all life in the Universe. Hmm...

Anyway, that's not the point. The point is that Max doesn't have a moment like that in "The Losers". He never really justifies what he's doing, beyond the vague "start a war, make money" implication. We never really learn a damn thing about Max, which is incredibly frustrating.

He's a bad guy, sure. But what else is there? Nothing. He's just a bad guy. It's so one-dimensional.

Which I suppose is a bad thing, except for the fact that Jason Patric is the single best thing about this movie. He plays Max like... well, I'm not sure. There seem to be elements of Christopher Walken at his scenery-chewing best in there, but that's not all.

There's some bizarre quality to his performance that I found utterly amazing. It's in his line delivery, his mannerisms, his general attitude. Jason Patric is acting in a completely different movie from the rest of the cast. I'm not even sure I can rightly call what he's doing "acting". It's something else. Something fantastic.

There's a scene with Max talking to his right hand man Wade, where he requests his henchman to recruit an 18 man fire squad that would have been completely mundane with anybody else. But with Jason Patric's performance, it became one of the funniest things I've seen in a movie for a while.

His repeated insistence on an "18 man fire squad!" produced a protracted laughing fit from me. I laughed for so long, I'm sure the other people in the theatre were wondering what the fuck was wrong with me.

As Jason Patric continued to exist onscreen, I couldn't stop laughing. From Max's amazement when he realizes he's standing next to a very short man, to his deadpan reaction when he realizes he's playing Go Fish with a thug who doesn't understand the game, I loved this character.

I've liked Jason Patric since the first time I saw "The Lost Boys", although he never really played any of his characters in a comedic fashion. In the wrong role, Patric can be more wooden than the titular Wicker Man, and even in the right role, he doesn't really stand out to a general audience. He's always been an odd duck.

But when he hosted Saturday Night Live in 1994, I became a fan of Jason Patric.

In one sketch, he played a hand model who lost the tip of one of his fingers in an automobile accident, and descended into alcoholism and misery. Until a one-eyed menswear catalogue model played by Phil Hartman shows him that just because he's disfigured doesn't mean that his career is over.

The sketch is burned into my memory. It's a classic. And for years afterward, I lamented the fact that nobody in Hollywood would attempt to cast Jason Patric in a comedic role. He clearly had it in him to be really funny. But nobody would give him a chance.

And then I saw "The Losers".

I suppose I should thank Sylvain White for putting Jason Patric in his film. But I have a feeling that White was in no way responsible for Patric's performance. I wouldn't be surprised if most of Max's dialogue was improvised on Patric's part.

Every aspect of his performance in this film completely clicked with me. When I left the theatre, I wondered if I just hallucinated his entire role. Nobody else in that auditorium seemed to care. In fact, I'm sure most people just found him annoying.

I've read online in several reviews that Jason Patric's performance nearly ruins the film. What fucking movie did these people see? He single-handedly saves the film. He picks up this mediocre motion picture and carries it to the finish line on his insane shoulders.

If Jason Patric were not in this movie, I would have hated it. So Jason Patric wins.

That's not to say that everyone else in the cast sucks. They don't. They just don't bring anything new to the table. Jeffrey Dean Morgan does a fine job as Clay. He's likeable enough, but I just don't buy him as the team leader of an elite military unit.

Chris Evans is often quite funny as the team nerd, Jensen, although he tends to wear a lot of annoying t-shirts. The audience thought this was funny. I just thought it was boring.

Columbus Short's Pooch is really just "the other black guy". He's a competent actor, but when he shares the screen with a guy like Idris Elba, he's always gonna be the second fiddle.

After he gets shot in both legs, Jensen drags him around, calling him "Legless Pooch". It's funny, but it's also a metaphor for his character. The other, more charismatic actors are just kinda dragging him along throughout the movie.

Oscar Jaenada doesn't have many lines, which makes sense because this is one of his first english language roles, but he does manage to have one or two standout moments as a mostly silent badass sniper.

Zoe Saldana is attractive. But she doesn't bring anything else to her performance. The director was more interested in lingering shots of her ass in tight jeans than in asking her to actually attempt to act. She did a good job in "Star Trek", but maybe that's because J.J. Abrams is a more actor-focused director.

Idris Elba is just a damn good actor. You can tell because he manages to make a one-note character like Roque likeable. He's supposed to be more of a pragmatist than the other Losers, having no family members and no real friends aside from his other team members. He likes knives, and he argues with Clay. That's all Roque is.

But Elba takes this sketch of a character and imbues him with the spark of life. Roque inexplicably betrays the team in the final act, creating unnecessary drama. I understand that this follows the plot of the comic book, but also that his character in the book is more of a cold-blooded individual, so that his betrayal doesn't feel out of place.

In the film, Roque is much more buddy-buddy with his teammates, and his eventual betrayal is completely out of character. After Roque starts working for Max, the character becomes more of a moustache-twirling villain, and Idris Elba deserved better.

In the climax, the Losers confront Max and attempt to disarm his superweapon, called a "snuke". Now it's not particularly intelligent to name your film's ultimate weapon after a plot device in an episode of South Park. Especially when that plot device happens to be a nuclear weapon smuggled inside of of Hilary Clinton's vagina.

Every time I heard the word "snuke", I just snickered and thought of how much better that South Park episode was in comparison to this movie.

Roque gets blown up in a plane full of stolen CIA money, Clay disarms the "snuke" (chortle), and... that's it. There's no real resolution to the film. Max escapes to fight another day, and the Losers are still wanted men (although I'm sure exactly why). The movie just stops. It's infuriating.

Clearly, the director had a franchise in mind when he made this film. Unfortunately, "The Losers" is not exactly setting the box office on fire, so I highly doubt a sequel is forthcoming.

There are a few cutesy epilogues that exist simply for comedic value and fail in that regard, but the main plot of the film just ends in an abrupt cut. Bullshit, I say.

As I sat in the car on the way back from the cinema on Sunday afternoon, I kept thinking to myself, "I woke up for this?" I don't like this movie. It's completely disposable. The only really good thing about it was Jason Patric, but I would almost have preferred to discover his lunatic performance on DVD, because I was clearly the only person in that theatre who appreciated it.

I know that Peter Berg was developing this film for quite a while before he parted ways with it, so much so that he even has a co-screenwriter credit. I just wish that he had stayed on and directed the film. The property seems right up his alley.

I have to believe that he would have made a better film that Sylvain "I'll Always Know What You Did This Spring" White. Boo.

Stoner Filmmakers In Love!

In 1998, I believe, my friends and I tried to make a movie. We were nerdy high school kids who tended to skip class more often than not to go smoke pot, which seemed a more worthwhile endeavor at the time. We tended to watch a lot of movies in those days, as well.

This was in the days when the DVD was newborn, and we were still slaves to those glorious analog wonders, the VHS cassette. I prided myself on my vast collection of tapes, some bought new, but most picked up second-hand from various video stores and supermakets.

I had a lot of hard-to-find movies, which I thought was cool. Of course, nobody else seemed to care. It was difficult in those days to find somebody to watch a well-worn copy of "Street Trash" with me.

Come to think of it, that hasn't really gotten any easier.

I remember when Anchor Bay released "The Evil Dead" on VHS, digitally remastered, packaged in a sleek clamshell, with liner notes from Bruce Campbell. I skipped school that day to fetch it. I missed an important Driver's Ed lesson, that day. In retrospect, I believe I made the right choice.

One day, I had a conversation with my best pal, Scott. I'm not quite sure how it happened, but by the time we parted ways, we had agreed to make a movie. We decided that a slasher film would be an easy place to start.

We hashed out a story, involving a lonely, damaged young man who likes to butcher young children near a secluded creek. We called the story "Jonathan", and we wrote a script and everything. We even gave our "studio" a name: Taint Films.

We felt pretty good about ourselves when we printed multiple copies of our masterpiece and began passing them out to folks around school we thought might be interested in contributing.

Scott had a hi-8 camera, and my cousin Ky let me borrow his mother's RCA camcorder, so we had the tools we needed to film our opus. We found our titular slasher in my friend JD, a rather big fellow with sunken eyes who basically looked the part; we were in no position to be picky.

He even had a girlfriend who had agreed to play the female lead, a quiet young lady who likes to jog late at night (always a bad idea in slasher flicks).

We didn't know any young kids to play Jonathan's victims, but we were determined to figure something out. We didn't really do much planning, aside from a single location scouting trip around the neighborhood near our high school. But we weren't going to let our inexperience and ineptitude stop us.

We were going to shoot this fucking movie.

One bitterly cold and icy Saturday in December, we got together to begin shooting "Jonathan".

Then everything fell apart.

We all forgot to bring our scripts, so immediately we were in great shape. Neither JD nor his girlfriend seemed terribly interested in cooperating with their directors. Scott paid some random child we had never met five dollars to appear in our movie.

We managed to shoot one scene with the kid. In the script, Jonathan creeps up behind the kid as he plays on a swingset, coming from behind and smothering him with an ether soaked rag until the kid goes limp.

We didn't have any rags. So instead we just told JD to grab the kid and struggle with him for a minute until the little bastard stops squiggling. As we shot this scene, the kid's mother was calling his name, over and over again (this is audible on the tape). My cousin Ky walked into the shot. And JD started laughing.

As soon as Scott called cut, the kid bolted for home. We had nothing we could use. JD and his special lady went to Dillon's to buy some Chinese food. We went to my grandmother's house for no immediately clear reason, then just drove around for a while.

My cousin's car had a working 8 track player, and there just so happened to be an 8 track tape in the car. It was labeled "Seagull - WSU Sessions". Apparently, Seagull was a band Ky's father jammed with in the 1970's, and Ky somehow came into possession of their legendary "WSU Sessions" 8 track tape.

We popped the tape in, and grooved to the mellow sounds of Seagull for a few minutes, until the player ate the tape. This was the first time this music had been heard by human ears in at least 20 years, and we captured it on tape with Ky's RCA camcorder. Honestly, the music wasn't bad.

Suffice to say, "Jonathan" never got made. I did manage to edit together all of the footage we shot on that fateful day, cutting it into a "documentary" I called "Fiasco! The Musical". It ran nearly an hour, and it was atrocious. But it was technically a documentary about a movie that never got made. And we did it two years before "Lost In La Mancha".

So Terry Gilliam can suck it.

On New Year's Eve, 2000, we shot two very, very short films in the snow, called "Death Car!" and "Pig Fucker".

"Death Car!" concerned two young lads on a late night walk who get abducted by aliens. I had the brilliant idea of shining a keychain flashlight at my actors, to signify the presence of the alien menace. I also began the short with an ambitious tracking shot, following my actors (Scott & Ky) up the spiralling ramp leading to the overpass that crosses the highway near my house.

I fancied myself the new Alfred Hitchcock, I suppose.

"Death Car!" was disposable. Just a goof. But "Pig Fucker"... that was something special.

It couldn't be simpler. "Pig Fucker" was nothing more than 60 seconds of Scott dry humping a ceramic pig, set to Tool's "Aenima". We couldn't stop laughing. To us, it was the most hilarious thing we had ever seen. Our laughter is clearly audible in the footage. I have no idea how Scott managed to keep a straight face.

A year later, I got inspired, and told Scott and Ky that I wanted to shoot more footage, creating a "director's cut" of our beloved "Pig Fucker". In the extended version, Scott's character, named "Mr. Skool" for reasons I won't go into, carries on an illicit affair with a pig named Betsy. This disturbing sexual relationship creates great tension between Mr. Skool and his roommates, played by Ky (Joey Balls) and my brother Matt (Vinnie the Hardcase).

We shot the new footage over two weekends in the Summer. To be fair, we spent most of those weekends getting stoned and watching "Mr. Show", but we did manage to shoot some footage. It took forever to edit, because my only means of editing involved rigging two VCRs together and recording footage from the master tapes, it took forever and looked like shit.

I also inserted some random footage of Scott wearing a Halloween mask, wandering around with a butcher knife. I tried getting creative, rewinding some of this footage and recording it onto tape. I wasn't successful.

In the end, "Pig Fucker: The Director's Cut" ran 24 minutes, not counting the interviews and outtakes I tacked onto the end of the tape. It was too long, confusing, the footage looked terrible and sounded worse, and I was fucking proud of it. I had actually made something, and I didn't give a damn if it sucked.

We captured something on tape during the "Pig Fucker Sessions" that I still find haunting and hilarious in equal measure. There's a small snippet of this hallucinatory nightmare in the final film, but the full sequence is the stuff of legend in my admittedly small circle of friends. But I will discuss this no further.

We tried to make a few more projects in the intervening years, but nothing really came together. Our dreams of becoming a bizarre, stoner-filmmaker collective finally died some time around 2004.

I still use the name "Taint Films" for the photoplays I put together these days, but things will never be the way they were. We were young, idealistic weirdos who certainly tried, but never quite managed to get the job done. Except for "Pig Fucker", of course.

And that brings me to the reason for all this drivel.

I finally decided to post "Pig Fucker" to my YouTube channel earlier this week. It's not the nightmarishly boring "director's cut" from 2002. I managed to trim it down to 7 minutes, 16 seconds. It's leaner and more concise.

The footage still looks godawful, but there's nothing I can do about that. After all, "Pig Fucker" was filmed with a VHS camcorder that was antiquated in 1998.

The YouTube incarnation of "Pig Fucker" is simply as good as it's going to get. I'm finally at peace with this monster, and I'm moving on.

Move on with me by visiting my YouTube channel here: http://www.youtube.com/user/uncleoflies

Maybe one long, introspective night I'll share the rest of the sad tale of Taint Films with you, Dear Imaginary Reader. But not tonight. Tonight, I'm going to listen to Hank Williams and cry.

I saw "The Losers" yesterday, so I'll probably pop up with another lengthy, bitter post in a day or two. You've been warned.

Let's Smash Some Melons!

I uploaded a new photoplay to my delightful YouTube account, this evening. I'm really excited about this one. It's called "Rich Mexican Watermelon", and it's a spiritual successor to the original "Rich Mexican Vampire" that I posted last October.

There's no real connection between the two, aside from their vague setting of "somewhere in Mexico...". It's really more of a parody of the original photoplay. Although I don't know how I could even call it that, considering "Rich Mexican Watermelon" doesn't even follow the same basic plot of "Rich Mexican Vampire".

Honestly, I'm pretty sure the whole affair was to use the name "John Cougar Meloncampire". Do you get it? It's a play on words. John Mellencamp used to call himself John Cougar Mellencamp, and I thought it would be funny to call an undead watermelon "John Cougar Meloncampire".

Christ. It wasn't even really funny when I came up with it three years ago. But I don't care about "funny", which is clearly evident if you have seen any of my previous photoplays.

"Rich Mexican Vampire" managed to snag 28 views before it completely burned out. Of course, my last posted photoplay, "Card Sharks", only managed to be viewed 8 times in 2 months, so I'm not expecting much.

I don't really worry about the views, anyway. I never made these photoplays for any real audience, aside from my closest friends, who usually star in the photoplays, anyway. Posting them on YouTube is basically just a goof.

I'm surprised whenever one of my videos gets posted. I wonder who the hell these people are. I have noticed that most of my photoplays have at least one regular viewer in Sweden, of all places. That's cool, right? Some dude in Sweden watches my mediocre attempts at comedy.

Nobody who watches my videos ever posts any comments, so I'm guessing the viewers must really hate them.

Except that guy in Sweden. Literally every one of my photoplays has been viewed at least once in Sweden. So maybe I'm doing something right, according to this guy.

Anyway, "Rich Mexican Watermelon" is available at my YouTube channel here: http://www.youtube.com/user/uncleoflies

So watch it. Maybe leave a comment, or rate it. It's not too difficult. Just click the "Thumbs Up" or "Thumbs Down" icon. It's a lot easier than the old "5 stars" system. Man, remember how difficult that shit was? What a fucking hassle.

Watch my videos, Internet!!!! Share my pain!!!!!

Nicolas Cage Kicks Ass

So last week, I nearly lost my mind while writing a blog entry. I don't know what went wrong, exactly.

Sure, "Date Night" was mediocre, but it wasn't an abomination. A lot of bad elements in the film just came together, creating a perfect storm of anger inside my head.

Luckily, I don't have that problem, this week. Because this week, I saw "Kick-Ass".

For those of you who aren't "in the know", as the cool kids like to say, "Kick-Ass" is a film directed by Matthew Vaughn, based on the comic book written by Mark Millar.

The comic book sucks. But that's par for the course with Mark Millar. Maybe there's something wrong with me (heh, heh), but I just don't get the fanboy love for this guy.

He's good with premises, I'll give him that.

"Kick-Ass" is about a teenager inspired by comic book superheroics who decides to become a costumed vigilante, and repeatedly gets beaten half to death for his trouble.

"Wanted" takes place in a world where the supervillains have won, killed all of the heroes, and have literally rewritten history, making the people of the world believe that the superheroes and villains never really existed. They rule the fucking world.

"Wolverine: Old Man Logan" is basically "Unforgiven" with everyone's favorite over-exposed Canadian mutant.

The problem Millar has is with the execution of these concepts. Instead of doing anything worthwhile with his stories, time and time again he descends into shock value and gross-out humor that serves no real purpose. His act has grown tiresome.

For me, anyway. The man has a rabid fanbase, and they hate it when people disagree with their opinion that Mark Millar is a fucking genius. They're the juggalos of the comic book community.

I read "Kick-Ass" when the series was finally released in a hardcover collection a few months ago. This collection was originally slated for release around Christmas, 2008. Obviously, it was delayed. Issue #1 was released in February, 2008. Issue #7 wasn't released until October, 2009, I believe.

That's one hell of a delay, right there.

Long story short, I hated it. The only real saving grace to the whole fiasco was John Romita, Jr's artwork. He's a talented guy, and he should be working with better writers. After reading the source material, I was a little worried about the film.

I'm a big fan of this Matthew Vaughn fella, and my hero, Nicolas Cage was playing "Big Daddy", but it was based on a rather tepid graphic novel by Mark "Tunk" Millar. But CHUD's Devin Faraci gave it a perfect 10 out of 10, and I tend to agree with his opinions more often than not.

"Ambivalence" is the word of the day, children.

My worries were unfounded. "Kick-Ass" the film stabs "Kick-Ass" the comic in the face with a switchblade, tosses it in an alleyway dumpster, douses it with gasoline, and sets it on fire.

Matthew Vaughn and his co-writer Jane Goldman, have taken the great premise of the comic, and they have made it into a great movie, while removing all of the elements that made the comic so terrible.

In the comic, the main character, Dave Lizewski, is a creep. He's an unlikeable, sexually frustrated douchebag who wants to be a superhero because he thinks it's cool. His two best (only) friends are non-entities who really only exist at the beginning of the narrative to make up a new swear word (don't get me started on that pointless garbage.).

He likes the fucking Goo Goo Dolls, for pity's sake! What fucking teenager, in this day and age, likes the fucking Goo Goo Dolls?!

The film manages to make Dave relatable. Aaron Johnson plays Dave as a sexually frustrated loser who wants to become a superhero because he thinks it's cool, but also because he genuinely wants to help people.

Dave knows people are being victimized out there, and nobody lifts a finger to help the victims. He's been the target of muggers, and he's seen people turn their heads when they could stand up for their fellow man.

Sure, Dave likes all the attention he gets after Kick-Ass becomes an internet sensation. He's got more MySpace friends than God, and his local comic book shop is festooned with Kick-Ass memorabilia. He feels like a rock star.

He doesn't do much crime-fighting, though. After a video of Kick-Ass fighting off a trio of thugs becomes the biggest video ever on YouTube, Dave spends most of his time searching for a lost cat. This leads to one of my favorite lines of the movie: "Fuck you, Mister Bitey!"

Things get much more serious for our hero, later on. He makes new superhero friends, gets betrayed, then brutally beaten and tortured. After Hit Girl saves him, he could walk away. He could go home, toss his costume in the garbage and move on with his life.

But he doesn't. Dave throws himself into harm's way, because it's the right thing to do. He steps up and becomes a hero. Aaron Johnson sells this transformation brilliantly. Staring at his bloodied, bruised face in a bathroom mirror, Johnson's eyes tell the whole story.

This isn't his fight, but he's not running away.

And when Kick-Ass rises over the terrace of Frank D'Amico's luxurious highrise apartment, strapped to a jet pack with equipped twin gatling guns, while Elvis Presley's rendition of "Battle Hymn Of The Republic" plays, I couldn't keep my goofy smile from spreading.

Speaking of Frank D'Amico, Mark Strong is fantastic. He takes a one-note mob boss caricature from the book and turns him into a real human being. Strong's Frank D'Amico is a loving father, a ruthless son of a bitch, and a surprisingly funny man.

Some of the film's best laughs are all thanks to Mark Strong. He has fantastic comedic timing.

There's a scene late in the game when the D'Amico home is under siege by Hit Girl. She's basically wiped out his entire crew. Frank's personal bodyguard enters his office, telling the boss that everything's under control, as he inches toward the bazooka leaning aganst the wall.

When his bodyguard grabs the bazooka, he looks at Frank, silently asking for permission to use this badass weapon and cause serious structural damage to his house. You can see the conflict in Mark Strong's face as he weighs the pros and cons of using the bazooka in his home. He clearly thinks it's a bad idea, but eventually relents with a silent nod.

It's a small moment, but it's hilarious.

Strong also sells the relationship between Frank and his nerdy son, Chris, played by Christopher Mintz-Plasse. In the book, there's no connection. Sure, we're told that Chris is Frank D'Amico's son, but there's never any real relationship between the two until the final issue, when Red Mist's plan comes to fruition, making his daddy proud.

In the film, father and son actually spend time together. He takes his son to the movies, he watches The Late Late Show With Craig Ferguson with his family, and he generally feels like a real father. He clearly loves his son, he just doesn't think the kid is cut out for his line of work.

Mintz-Plasse is great as Chris D'Amico. He's a lonely nerd who has no real friends because all of his classmates are too afraid to talk to him. With his father's reputation, it's difficult to find a kid with the balls to be Chris' friend.

He has a serious chip on his shoulder, and he wants his father to take him seriously. When his father's interests are attacked by Big Daddy and Hit Girl, Chris comes up with a plan to serve them up to his father on a silver platter.

And so he invents Red Mist as a flashy new crime fighter on the scene, befriending Kick-Ass so that he can lead Red Mist to Big Daddy and Hit Girl. Chris just wants his father to see him as the heir to his criminal empire, and by the climax of the film, he does.

He finally gets his father's respect, only to have his father get blown the fuck up with a bazooka. Thus, a true supervillain is born. Mintz-Plasse might be overlooked by most people who see the film, but he really is turning in a great performance.

But Chloe Moretz is turning in an iconic performance as Hit Girl. One moment, she's the cutest little girl in the world, playing with a knife and begging for her father's attention. The next moment, she's cutting through a room full of thugs, shredding them with disturbing precision.

I can't stress enough how amazing Chloe Moretz is in this film. She manages to make an eleven year-old girl in a silly costume a credible threat against a small army of heavily armed mob goons. Hit Girl is dangerous.

She asks for knives as a birthday present, and her dad shoots her then takes her out for ice cream. When Kick-Ass asks how he can contact Hit Girl, she sarcastically replies that the mayor has a special signal he shines in the sky, shaped like a giant cock.

She is efficient with all manner of guns and blades, she swears like a sailor, and she can take a punch like a man. You do not want to fuck with Hit Girl.

And Chloe Moretz effortlessly plays this character. Her body language, her insanely expressive eyes, and her trademarked "Hit Girl Sneer", coupled with her natural, relaxed line delivery, make Hit Girl the most memorable character in this film.

She is a revelation.

I'm a huge fan of the swedish vampire film, "Let The Right One In". It's essentially about a little boy who becomes friends with a little girl who happens to be a vampire, but it is so much more than that. It's a masterpiece. And it deserves to be seen.

So of course, Hollywood decided to remake it. I had absolutely no interest in this remake. Until I learned that Chloe Moretz was cast as the vampire "Eli", renamed "Abby" in the remake, now titled "Let Me In".

Now, much to my surprise, I am actually excited to see "Let Me In". That's how good Chloe Moretz was in "Kick-Ass". She has made me want to see a film that I reject on principle. Congratulations.

But what about Nicolas Cage?

Well, he's Nicolas Fucking Cage, and I love the man.

I first saw Cage in "Vampire's Kiss", when I was 8 years old. At the time, I thought that a camera crew was just following a crazy person who thought he was a vampire. I couldn't tear my eyes away from his utterly committed performance. He had my fragile young mind entranced.

I've been a fan ever since. From "Raising Arizona", "Wild At Heart", "Kiss Of Death", "Face/Off", Leaving Las Vegas", "8mm", "Bringing Out The Dead"... I could go on and on.

Bottom line: I have never seen a Nicolas Cage performance that I didn't enjoy. Don't get me wrong. He's been in plenty of bad films. And he's been bad in plenty of films. But even his bad performances have an energy to them, a slightly mad quality that makes them endlessly watchable.

Take "Trapped In Paradise". It's not a good film. Far from it. But Nicolas Cage adopts a bizarre, uneven drawl that never even approaches a genuine Brooklyn accent, and it works for me. It's so weird, that I couldn't help but be entertained.

What about "Ghost Rider"? His Johnny Blaze is a faux-southern lunatic who eats jellybeans out of a martini glass and watches chimpanzees practice their kung-fu skills to unwind after smashing his face in a motorcycle jump gone horribly wrong. The movie sucks, but dammit, he keeps me watching.

And his cameo as Fu Manchu in Rob Zombie's "Werewolf Women Of The S.S." trailer is fucking awesome.

I am an unabashed, eternal Nicolas Cage fan.

He's probably my favorite element to "Kick-Ass". His Big Daddy is a revenge-driven ex-cop, a man who had his life torn away from him by Frank D'Amico, and he has dedicated himself to destroying the man, piece by piece.

He has also dedicated his daughter to this cause. Training her to become a ruthless killer, Big Daddy has essentially brainwashed his little girl, and this behavior is beyond morally questionable. She could have lived some semblance of a normal life with Big Daddy's ex-partner on the police force, but instead, he has drafted her to fight his war against Frank D'Amico.

It's difficult to like the character of Big Daddy, knowing what he has done to his daughter. But Nicolas Cage makes you like him. You see his position. He feels like he doesn't have a choice. Frank D'Amico destroyed their family, and destroying Frank D'Amico should be a family affair.

The relationship between Big Daddy and Hit Girl is very touching. They feel like a real family. He loves his daughter, and she loves him. You might take your kids to the park, but their idea of "Quality Time" just happens to be killing mobsters.

Cage infuses his role with a collection of awkward body language, goofy laughter and an awesome moustache. At first glance, he looks like a bit of a pushover. He's a nice guy, even a little playful, if old-fashioned.

But when he's Big Daddy, he's all business, a killing machine. Yet he speaks in the halting tones of Adam West's Batman, completely at odds with his out-of-costume persona. It's a brilliant choice by Nicolas Cage, and it's a very inventive way to disguise his voice.

Much more effective than Christian Bale's off-putting, sore-throated vocal affectation in Chris Nolan's Batman films.

There's a sequence where Big Daddy infiltrates one of Frank D'Amico's legitimate business fronts, and he executes all of D'Amico's goons with brutal efficiency, before burning the place down.

It's a fantastic scene, with very tight choreography, and it's my favorite part of the film. This is the scene that made me fall in love with "Kick-Ass".

Despite my irrational love for Nicolas Cage, and the fact that I would probably follow the man off a fucking cliff, between "Kick-Ass" and "Bad Lieutenant: Port Of Call New Orleans", it's nice to see the man in genuinely great films, again.

For the first time in years, I can like a Nicolas Cage performance without feeling slightly ashamed.

So "Kick-Ass" is an amazing fucking movie. If you don't see it in theatres, then you are an asshole.

And God Bless Nicolas Cage.

My Mind Is Eating Itself!

"I met him six years ago. I was told there was nothing left. No reason, no conscience, no understanding; even the most rudimentary sense of screen presence, or talent.

I met this 34 year-old man, with this blank, emotionless face and the blackest eyes... the devil's eyes.

I spent two years trying to watch him act, and then another four trying to avoid him because I realized what was living behind that man's eyes was purely and simply... evil."

Anyway. "Date Night" is a movie...

It's a movie. It stars Steve Carell, Tina Fey, and it's... a movie.

Shit. I was complaining last week about how completely unmemorable "Clash Of The Titans" was, and then I saw this fucking movie. I don't remember it. The plot simply doesn't exist in my head.

Let me try and piece it together, here...

So Tina Fey and Steve Carell are a married couple named Foster, and they have at least one child. Maybe two. I'm not sure. Probably two. Let's say more than one, and less than three. That's fair.

They're in what the experts call "a rut". Trapped in nearly fetishistic routines, even leaving the kids with a babysitter every week to have their regular "date night" at a lame, local restaurant where the waiter knows them by name. It's a shame, really.

Fey and Carell learn that another couple they know are getting divorced. The husband is played by Mark Ruffalo, who just pops up with a mighty beard, says a few things, then gets the fuck out of the movie while he still can.

Carell realizes that their married life is getting stale, and doesn't want his marriage to fall apart, so he decides that this week, they'll forego their regular setting and have their date night at a fancy restaurant in New York City called "Claw".

When they arrive, they can't make a reservation because the place is packed to the gills. So Carell chooses to take a reservation from a no-show couple called "the Tripplehorns".

Oh Christ, I don't care. I just don't care.

You've seen the trailer, you know what happens. Mobsters confuse the Fosters with the Tripplehorns, and they want the flash drive. What flash drive? The flash drive that belongs to mobster Joe Miletto, played by the ghost of Ray Liotta.

What the fuck happened to Ray Liotta? He used to be somebody!

He was in "Goodfellas", "Field of Dreams", and "Copland", dammit! What gives?

I mean sure, he's starred in plenty of films that most respected film critics would call "crap", but at least in the 1990's, those crap films were entertaining. He gave a shit about his performances.

Look at "No Escape". It is by no means a "good movie", but it's never boring. And at least Liotta fucking acts in the damn movie.

"Unlawful Entry"? Not a masterpiece. But he plays a good psycho. Ditto in "Turbulence". Memorable lunatic. That was his niche. And dammit, it was a respectable one.

Then came "Heartbreakers". Remember that one? Sigourney Weaver and Jennifer Love-Hewitt playing mother-daughter con artists? That movie is fucking pointless. I don't know why it exists. And sure enough, Liotta is there. And you can see the spark of life in his eyes go dark.

He dies creatively in that movie.

Then "Narc" comes along, and I believe for one brief moment that Ray Liotta is back. He's gonna make smarter choices, work with hungry directors with talent to spare and write a killer third act for the story of his life.

Alas, that was not to be. His filmography throughout the first decade of this century just depresses me. He's purely on auto-pilot, and it shows.

Aside from an oddly inspired gimmick that works Liotta into the underrated "Bee Movie", the only recent films I even enjoyed him in were "Observe and Report" and "Youth In Revolt".

He was good in "Observe". I won't argue that. But his part in that film was hardly a creative stretch. The hard-ass cop role is in his comfort zone.

Liotta is barely in "Youth In Revolt". And surprise, surprise, he plays a hard-ass cop! Nothing new, there.

I mean, "In The Name Of The King: A Dungeon Siege Tale"? Are you fucking kidding me? "Wild Hogs"? Holy shit.

Did Liotta lose a lot of money to the wrong people in the late '90's? Does he owe millions in back taxes to the IRS? I know a lot of actors take the occassional role for a paycheck, but for the love of God, how many paychecks do you need, Ray Liotta?!

Is he supporting an insane cocaine habit, or something? What's the excuse for starring in a film by Dr. Uwe Boll? Does he have incriminating photos? What's the deal?

That brings me back to "Date Night". Liotta plays a mobster. Yeah, it's difficult to imagine, I know.

So the Tripplehorns stole a flash drive from his character, Joe Miletto, and Miletto sends his goons, played by Jimmi Simpson and Common, to get it back.

Now I like Jimmi Simpson. He was great in his semi-regular appearances on The Late Show With David Letterman a few years back as shady intern Lyle. He had a good rapport with Letterman, and he was very funny.

He's also great as recurring character Liam McPoyle on "It's Always Sunny In Philadelphia", one of my favorite shows on television. The McPoyles are a greasy, milk-obsessed, incestuous clan of inbred felons. Simpson plays brother Liam as an insanely self-confident malcontent, all sweat and swagger.

He's actually hilarious on "It's Always Sunny".

He doesn't really do much of anything in "Date Night". He's a crooked cop in Miletto's pocket, and that's it. He's perfectly serviceable in the role, but he brings nothing to it. It was surprising. I don't know what went wrong.

Maybe I do. Director Adam Shankman paired Simpson with fucking Common!

I swear, Common is fucking hollow. He has to be some kind of golem, sculpted from clay by a brain-damaged wizard with a chip on his shoulder. When Common has to do anything, his handlers write it down on a slip of paper and shove it down his throat.

"play soldier in Terminator sequel" *gulp*

"make lame rap album" *gulp*

"play pretend cop in shitty comedy" *gulp*

I simply do not understand the appeal of this man. He has no screen presence. He has no charisma. He has nothing going on for him, as an actor. Am I missing something?

He also has Michael Myers eyes. Common's eyes perfectly match the description Quint gives about the tiger sharks that attacked the survivors of the USS Indianapolis in "Jaws".

"He's got lifeless eyes. Black eyes. Like a doll's eyes."

That's Common. His ancestors were sharks! Big, dumb sharks with no talent! That's the only explanation.

Or maybe he's kin to Michael Myers. We may never know. I just know that I never want to see him act again.

I lost track, again. But I don't really care. After all, I am talking about "Date Night". Who honestly gives a damn, at this point? It's a mediocre comedy about mediocre people doing mediocre things.

Sigh. So the crooked cops are after the Fosters, because they think the Fosters have Mobster Miletto's flash drive. The Fosters go see Marky Mark, because he's some kind of big-time "security consultant" who can help them out of this jam.

The whole point of Marky Mark's character is that he doesn't wear a shirt. He's physically fit, and he never wears a shirt. Tina Fey ogles his shirtless torso, and Steve Carell is perpetually uncomfortable. Uproarious!

This joke's big pay-off arives near the end of the movie, when Steve Carell uses the film's PG-13-mandated single use of the word "fuck" to tell Marky Mark to put on a shirt. Is it worth it?

No. Hell no. Fuck no. Motherfuck no.

At some point, the Foster return to CLAW to retrieve a phone number from the reservation book, and are involved in a positively wacky scene with Olivia Munn. Who is Olivia Munn, you may ask?

She's a talentless void in a generic "sexy" body who is popular among many geek circles because she occassionally panders to them by dressing up as Wonder Woman on TV's equivalent to AXE bodyspray, Attack Of The Show.

I guess I understand why so many nerds think she's "hawt". She pretends to be interested in comic books and video games, and likes to "interact" with her fans by endlessly updating her Twitter feed with pointless drivel puncuated by pointless photos of her adventures in celebrity.

Nerds are easy marks, after all.

She even appeared in Playboy! That's gotta count for something, right? Wait, she didn't pose naked? Not even topless? Then what, may I ask, is the point? You mean you get to see her in her underwear? In Playboy magazine? That's less than nothing, I say.

I don't even know why that upsets me. I don't even find her attractive. Maybe it's just the principle of the thing. Posing for Playboy, yet refusing to be nude. It's fucking Playboy, not Maxim!

You don't get points for covering your boobs with your arms in Playboy magazine, for pity's sake!

I just don't see the point of Olivia Munn. She's not really that attractive. She's not terribly bright. And she has an obnoxious personality. Maybe that's why she's so popular. She fits the criteria for most of the hot, young talent in Hollywood, these days.

I suppose the only question is: why is she not more popular?

I was at Best Buy, today. I saw that Broken Lizard's latest comedy, "The Slammin' Salmon", was available on DVD. I love Broken Lizard. "Super Troopers", "Club Dread", and "Beerfest" are all hilarious movies.

Bill Paxton's "Coconut Pete" is brilliant in "Club Dread". I lose it every time I watch him try to explain the secret ingredient to his paella dish to a dim-bulb chef. And the line "You think Eddie Money has to put up with this shit!?" has become a favorite between me and my brother.

So I figured I'd buy "The Slammin' Salmon" when I saw it on display at Best Buy. So I picked up the DVD, and looked at the case. I read the plot synopsis, glanced at the special features list, and thought to myself "self, this is right up my alley".

Then my eyes wandered down to the film credits on the back of the case. I noticed that Olivia Munn was listed in the cast.

Now I know she had a small role in the film. I've seen the trailers, and noticed her in maybe one shot. But I didn't know her role was substantial enough to actually get listed with the cast on the back of the DVD case.

So I put the DVD down, and bought "Defendor", instead. Sure, "Film Expert" Chris Gore told me to pass on "Defendor" on Attack Of The Show, but fuck Chris Gore!

He recommended "Gentlemen Broncos" for purchase on Attack Of The Show, last month. And told people to pass on "Where The Wild Things Are". What the fuck kind of mind operates like that?!

He also produced and co-wrote "My Big Fat Independent Movie", one of the worst so-called "comedies" I have ever seen in my life. So Chris Gore is a moron.

Anyway, I actually declined to purchase a new comedy from some of my favorite comedians working today, because Olivia Munn has a somewhat prominent role in the film.

Is that irrational? I think that may be irrational.

So... "Date Night"...

I honestly don't have it in me to talk about this movie, anymore. It's not worth it. I didn't like the film, and if anyone out there reads this piss-poor excuse for a blog, don't go see it. Just wait until Friday and see "Kick-Ass", instead.

I'm going to go get really drunk, now. Wish me luck.

Clash Of The... ZZZZZZ

Medusa had a really shit life.

She was a vey beautiful woman. So beautiful in fact, that some people said she was more beautiful than the goddess Athena, herself. So beautiful, that Poseidon wanted a piece of that action.

As Greek gods were wont to do, old Poseidon decided to get his rape on with poor, unsuspecting Medusa. After the deed was done, Poseidon awkwardly crept away, back to the ocean depths, secure in his supreme dickery.

Meanwhile, distraught and victimized Medusa flees to Athena's temple, begging for help. So what does kind, thoughtful Athena do?

Why, she does what any deity in her position would do: she turns Medusa into a nightmarish abomination, part woman and part snake, with a face so ugly that it will turn all men who gaze upon it into stone.

Athena does this because she is a jealous bitch. This is par for the course with the Greek pantheon. For the longest time, I thought the word Olympus was Greek for "asshole".

But what would you expect from a group of immortals shat out of the loins of the decidedly barbaric Titans, swallowed whole by their father Cronus, who feared that they would one day rise up against him and his kind, casting them into Tartarus for all time.

Not an ideal childhood.

Most of the Greek gods spent the majority of their time murdering, raping, and generally fucking with mortals for their own amusement. Zeus himself especially loved transforming into various animals and forcing himself upon multitudes of young women. It was his gimmick.

Now try to picture mighty Zeus in the form of a golden swan raping a young virgin in Crete while her family looks on, shrugging their shoulders and mumbling impotently about the will of the gods.

Zeus had his divine fingers in many pies, and consequently, he sired many bastard children. And Zeus's wife (and sister) Hera hated them.

The most famous of Zeus's half-mortal spawn, Heracles, was relentlessly tormented by Hera. As an infant, she dispatched two deadly serpents to kill the young demi-god in his crib. Badass Heracles strangled the serpents, one in each hand, foiling Hera's plans.

Years later, Heracles married and had two children. Wrathful Hera drove Heracles mad in his sleep, and in his madness he brutally murdered his two precious children. Great job.

In his grief, Heracles sought the wisdom of the Oracle of Delphi. The Oracle, manipulated by Hera, led Heracles to Eurystheus, king of Tiryns and supreme dickhead. Eurystheus forced Heracles to perform the legendary Twelve Labors.

Long story short, Heracles spent the rest of his life in Hera-induced misery, with only brief moments of respite. Only in death did Zeus intervene, raising his son up to Mt. Olympus to join the Green pantheon.

In short, Zeus is a terrible father.

I suppose this brings me to "Clash Of The Titans", directed by Louis Leterrier, which I believe is French for "the terrier".

I was not really looking forward to writing this entry in my online journal of solitude and self-loathing. Not necessarily because the film is bad, but because I find it so difficult to recall much of the film.

I saw it on Saturday afternoon, and by Saturday evening, the events of the film had almost completely escaped me. It didn't leave much of an impression on me, which I find more disturbing than simply being bad.

If a film is bad, then you usually take something away from that film. You remember how bad it is, you crack jokes about it, you ridicule it. It's memorable. Not in the way the filmmakers intended, but memorable, nonetheless.

If a film is mediocre, it tends to evaporate. People might ask you about the film, and you don't really have anything to say about it. It just exists. I hate mediocrity.

Tim Burton's "Alice In Wonderland" is a bad movie. No question about it. But I fucking remember it. Sometimes I wish I could forget it, but it remains burned in my memory, somewhere between vague recollections of the first time I smoked marijuana and getting bitten by a brown recluse spider on election day, 2000.

It was simply too close to call!

"Clash Of The Titans" is mediocre. From beginning to end, top to bottom, a middle-of-the-road exercise in "meh".

I remember the original, 1981 "Clash Of The Titans", directed by Desmond Davis, but guided by the gentle hand of stop-motion effects master Ray Harryhausen.

I first saw 1981's "Clash" when I was a young boy. The effects obviously left a big impression on me, but I also loved the story. Perseus falls in love with Andromeda, wins her hand in marriage, and slays the gorgon Medusa to save Andromeda from becoming dinner for the monstrous Kraken.

It's a simple story, and it still works. Sure, it's not a great movie, and it has its share of problems. Harry Hamlin, for one. Bless him for trying, but he's just not a very good actor. The movie also gets a tad boring, at times.

I still don't hate Bubo, though. A whole lot of people do, and that's fine. I can see why Bubo might not be everyone's cup of tea. But against all logic, I find that dumb clockwork owl endearing.

The '81 "Clash" also gave me my first tasteful glimpse of nudity, which I still appreciate.

I love how the movie begins:

Zeus knocks up Danae, locked up by her father, King Acrisius of Argos, hoping to avoid a prophecy that he would die if his daughter produced a son.

After Acrisius learns of his daughter's pregnancy, he places his daughter and her newborn son Perseus in a wooden coffin and sets them adrift. Zeus gets pissed off, kills Acrisius, and has Poseidon summon the Kraken to completely annihilate Argos, killing thousands of people.

So the prophecy was fulfilled, but only because Acrisius decided to be a dick and kill his grandson. If he'd just left well enough alone and actually tried to be a grandpa, everything would have been fine.

I find that very funny.

What do we get in the remake? Danae, wife of Acrisius, gets fucked by Zeus (who looks like Acrisius at the time), so Acrisius decides to pack his wife and newborn step-son into a gilded coffin and toss them into the sea.

Zeus tosses a thunderbolt down, disfiguring Acrisius... and that's it. Eeehh...

In the original "Clash", Perseus was always aware of his divine heritage, and even embraced it. In the new "Clash", Perseus finds out about his divine deadbeat dad as an adult, and shuns his father and his gifts, to the detriment of his fellow travelers.

Lots of people get killed simply because Perseus wants to prove to his father that he, a simple fisherman's son, can save the day without big daddy's help. Asshole.

Early on, Zeus gives Perseus a cool Greek Lightsaber, a weapon that only works in the hands of Perseus. But Perseus gives his old man the finger, because obviously he doesn't need any help to slay Medusa and save Andromeda-- I mean the city of Argos, from the Kraken.

I forgot, in the remake, Perseus may not even be aware that Andromeda exists. He's not even really out to slay the Kraken as much as get revenge on Hades, who killed his adopted mother and father for no reason.

In this version, the Kraken is the creation of Hades, and not Poseidon, and it was used by the Greek gods to overthrow their tyrannical ancestors, the Titans. Yeah...

Poseidon, played by Danny "I played a retarded vampire in '30 Days Of Night'" Huston, has maybe two lines in the film. And he has more lines than any of the other gods, save Zeus and Hades.

On IMDB, I see that Izabella Miko played Athena. I don't recall seeing her in the film, which is a good thing. Because she's awful. Just awful. Watch "The Forsaken" and tell me she's not the worst.

Where was I?

Shit. I'm still rambling about this fucking movie.

In this modern epic, the gods of Olympus need prayers to retain their power over mortals. I don't recall that little wrinkle ever being mentioned in Greek mythology, but this movie just runs with it.

Hades hates Zeus because Zeus rules the world of men, while Hades rules the underworld. This, at least, is accurate. Hades was the first-born of Cronus, and felt ruling the mortal realm was his birthright, and that younger sibling Zeus cheated him.

So Hades has a plan to use the Kraken to make the men and women of the world fear him, empowering him to overthrow Zeus and become king of the gods.

Hades is played by Ralph Fiennes, and he sounds exactly like his Voldemort in the "Harry Potter" films. He also has a shitty wig and a shitty beard. He transforms into a pack of harpies from time to time, just to fuck with people. And he's eeeeviiiilll.

Liam Neeson plays Zeus, and he also has a shitty wig with matching shitty beard. He also likes to turn into a bald eagle and fly around. I have no idea why.

I wonder if Ralph and Liam were ever hanging around the set of the film, in full make-up and costume, trying not to make eye-contact with each other as they try to forget that they were once in "Schindler's List".

An irregular plank of oakwood with a buzzcut named Sam Worthington plays Perseus. I don't know how he did it, but Worthington somehow managed in his "performance" to make Harry Hamlin look like a gifted actor.

I've seen "Terminator: Salvation". I've seen "Avatar". And now I have seen "Clash Of The Titans". Can someone please tell me why this surfboard with hair has a career? I don't get it.

Gemma Arterton plays Io, cursed with immortality for some reason that escapes me. She has been watching Perseus since the day he was born, which makes things a little creepy when the plot makes it clear that these two are destined to fuck.

This character does not appear in the 1981 film. In fact, the only Io I recall from Greek mythology was a priestess of Hera who Zeus fucked.

To spare her the wrath of jealous Hera, Zeus then turned her into a cow, and she wandered the world, eventually finding herself in Egypt, of all places.

The Io in The Terrier's "Clash" is very old and very wise, although she looks like Gemma Arterton, which is a lovely consolation prize. She follows Perseus and his band of god fodder on their quest, although I'm never quite sure why.

I suppose because the plot demands it.

Arterton played Strawberry Fields in "Quantum Of Solace". She showed up, said a few things, then died naked in her hotel room, covered in oil. Sexiest corpse of 2008.

She's fine in this film. Her accent helps sell a lot of awful dialogue, and her looks sometimes made me forget that I was watching such a non-movie. As far as I'm concerned, she's the best part of the film.

Sure, her character is almost completely superfluous, but if Io was not in this version of "Clash", I probably would have fallen asleep or wandered into the men's room to cry in the handicapped stall, because I was so bored.

I'm a sucker for a pretty face.

Anyway, Perseus befriends a Djinn, although I think the screenwriters were confused as to what a mythological Djinn actually is.

Traditionally, the Djinn were beings composed of fire that were sometimes considered lesser angels, that either lived in remote locations or in a parallel dimension. They possessed great power and were natural tricksters.

In "Clash", Djinn are wooden people who can ride giant scorpions and summon blue fire. They're also apparently suicide bombers. The Djinn character in the film is grabbed by Medusa, says something incomprehensible in an over-processed voice, then blows himself up.

That seems a tad insensitive to me, the Djinn being the only vaguely arabic character in the film. But whatever.

Io dies, somehow. I don't quite remember how, but it happens. She turns into fairy dust, then blows away. It's very sad.

Mads Mikkelson, who played the villain that cried blood in "Casino Royale", plays a veteran soldier named Draco who joins Perseus on his quest. He looks like The Rock's older brother in this film. He's "The Boulder", I guess.

It's like he wandered off a deleted scene from "The Scorpion King", and found himself in this movie. I found his appearance bizarre, but he's the best actor in the film. He keeps telling Perseus to embrace his divine heritage, in order to preserve the lives of his soldiers.

He gets killed by Medusa. Naturally.

So does that kid from "About A Boy". He popped up as "Greek Soldier #6", I believe.

Medusa in the new "Clash" is a digital creation, of course. She moves too damned fast, and the effects wizards decided to give her the face of a Russian supermodel, which seems like an odd choice.

I still felt a little sorry for her when Perseus lopped off her head, because poor Medusa got royally screwed by the gods. I guess it was a mercy killing.

The Kraken takes forever and a day to rise out of the waters in the harbor of Argos. Pegasus shows up to take Perseus back to Argos, who is now all by himself thanks to ignoring his divinity and getting his entire party killed.

Andromeda is all tied up, about to be devoured by the decidedly Lovecraftian version of the Kraken in this film, and Perseus turns the big prick to stone in the nick of time.

Hades shows up, and tells Perseus that being a god, it's impossible to kill him. Perseus tosses his Greek Lightsaber at the evil one, and he is banished back to the underworld.

So Andromeda is saved, and Perseus couldn't care less. He's brooding on a beach when Zeus pops up again, his beard practically falling off of his face. Perseus says something stupid that my mind refused to remember, then Zeus resurrects Io, because he wants his son to get laid.

That's how the story ends. Perseus rejects his father's gifts until he decides not to, using said gifts to save the day. What a hypocrite.

Polly Walker showed up to play Cassiopeia, Queen of Argos and mother to Andromeda. She says one thing, then Hades ages her to death. She was great as Atia in HBO's excellent series "Rome", but she's completely wasted here in her two minute walk-on role.

I just wanted to mention Polly Walker before I wrapped this mess up. She's pretty.

So Lou Terrier's "Clash Of The Titans" is a big, boring waste of two hours. I will likely never see this film again. In a few days, I will likely forget I ever saw it, in the first place.

That's for the best.